Inside Moves

A few recyclers have moved some or all of their processing operations under cover or inside. Should you? To help you decide, here’s a look at the pros and cons of such moves.

By Kent Kiser

Kent Kiser is an associate editor of Scrap Processing and Recycling.

In whatever ways Grossman Brothers Co. is similar to most other ferrous and nonferrous scrap recyclers, it’s different in at least one major respect: its operations are indoors, neatly tucked inside a vintage brick industrial building in West Milwaukee .

That’s quite a contrast to the U.S. industry norm of alfresco processing. It may not be so unusual in the not-too-distant future, however, as more and more recyclers look into covering or enclosing their heretofore “outside” operations.

How Things Are

Of course, certain types of scrap processing are already conducted indoors. Nonferrous scrap, for instance, is often processed indoors primarily because of its value and vulnerability to weather damage and theft. Similarly, paper recycling is typically an indoor affair because the commodity is a relatively fragile one that must be protected from moisture, wind, and arson. Plastics, glass, and tires are likewise frequently processed inside, in large part because they demand especially close quality control to be marketable and because they machinery used to process them can be intricate and designed for indoor operation only.

So the most noteworthy issue in indoor scrap recycling is that of putting ferrous processing operations under cover. A few factors have made ferrous processing a natural for the open air: steel’s relative immunity to theft and weather; the bulky, sprawling nature of ferrous scrap; and the imposing size of ferrous processing and handling equipment such as shredders, shears, balers, block breakers, grinding mills, and cable and hydraulic cranes.

And there’s another consideration: Until recently, environmental compliance concerns and costs haven’t been significant enough to prompt recyclers to cover or enclose the ferrous and other outdoor parts of their businesses. Today, however, moving these operations under cover or indoors could be less expensive--and, perhaps, more prudent--in the long run than other potential environmental strategies.

First, the Advantages

To be sure, recyclers who are considering an inside move today are doing so for one primary reason: better environmental control. If your processing operations are covered and operated on concrete, it follows that your exposure to environmental liability in certain areas--especially storm water runoff and groundwater contamination--and your environmental compliance costs could be eliminated, reduced, or at least easier to control. “If firmly think that this could be the answer to many of our environmental problems,” asserts Tom Salome, president and chief executive officer of M. Lipsitz and Co. Inc. (Waco, Texas), which is seriously considering building roofs over many of its current outdoor processing operations.

A second possible reason for making an inside move is to improve working conditions for employees. In most instances, a covered or enclosed work space is a more comfortable, more pleasant place to work--warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer, not to mention, dry, mud-free, and protected from the wind. Thus, moving processing areas indoors could be an enticing amenity to use to retain current employees, as well as attract new ones.

From an equipment standpoint, moving inside can protect machinery from exposure to and damage from the elements. "Not being exposed to extreme weather elements, especially freezing temperatures, has to add life to a piece of equipment," says Phil Bienstock, sales manager for Wendt Corp. (Tonawanda, N.Y.), an equipment manufacturer.

Indeed, moisture from rain, snow, and sleet can rust and pit some outdoor machinery, while frigid temperature can have other serious effects, especially on such cold-sensitive equipment as wet shredding systems. This equipment's water-covered conveyor belts are susceptible to freezing and cracking in frigid climates, and its process-water reservoir--which can contain 26,000 gallons--can ice up, preventing water from flowing freely through the system. As a result, many wet shredders, and especially those operating in cold regions, have most or all of their downstream systems--everything after the shredding mill--inside a building.

Moving machinery indoors can also help increase productivity by making it easier to operate equipment day in and day out, at peak efficiency, regardless of the weather. According to Bienstock, when the mercury drops below 20 degrees F, the performance of hydraulic machinery-which encompasses most scrap processing equipment-will often be impaired. "When it gets that cold, you're asking the machinery to work much harder," he asserts, pointing out that it's not unusual for recyclers who operate in cold climes to lose several days a year due to the weather.

Art Grossman, president of Grossman Brothers, can attest to that. During the formidable Wisconsin winters, he recounts, it would take his employees at least an hour to clear the snow away from some of the firm's outdoor equipment, just so it could run. And that's not even counting the dozen or so days each year the company couldn't even operate due to severe weather. This past winter, in contrast--the first since the company moved indoors--Grossman Brothers lost just one day to bad weather, and that was only because it was an inhuman 50-below outside. "That's the first time in my 25 years in the business that we had only one day of downtime in the winter," Grossman recalls. And getting machinery up-and-running in the morning is no problem anymore. "Now we just flip a switch or turn a key and go," he says.

Thanks to these and other gains, Grossman Brothers's inside move has already enabled it to meet its goal of improving its productivity 25 percent, the company's president says. "This results in the ability to process greater quantities of metal recyclables and makes the economics of recycling more attractive for all involved in the recycling chain," says Grossman.

There's also the case for moving indoors based on aesthetics--that is, covering or enclosing operations as a way to improve the visual appearance of a scrap business, as well as to reduce fugitive noise, dust, and smoke from the facility, which can help you build better community relations.

Take the Grossman Brothers plant, for example: Passersby would hardly suspect that the firm has its ferrous shears, aluminum and babbitt furnaces, torching operations, usables division, maintenance facilities, and scrap inventory--everything except its rail-breaking machinery-contained within the facility's brick walls.

Covering or enclosing processing operations also enables scrap recyclers to control the "daylight/darkness mode," making it a lot easier to operate machinery during the day and/or at night, notes Marlin Bills, president of Osborn Engineering Inc. (Tulsa, Okla.), an equipment and consulting firm. This, in turn, can translate to monetary advantages, Bills says, since equipment can then be run during off-peak electrical hours.

And Now for the Drawbacks

While these advantages might make an inside move sound like a fantastic idea, several drawbacks take some of the sheen off the concept, with the most notable one being cost. "The big issue is dollars," says Michael Dovichi, vice president of Robert E. Lee & Associates Inc. (Green Bay, Wis.), an environmental consulting company. To be sure, it's not cheap pouring concrete, fraternizing with architects and engineers, erecting a structure-roof or building-and moving equipment.

Just the cost of constructing a building can be significant. After all, a structure designed to house a scrap plant would likely be large and require demanding engineering and construction specs, such as 60-to-70-foot-tall ceilings to accommodate cranes, extensive clear-span widths--that is, widths not supported by columns--and special designs to withstand damage from not only wind and other weather elements, but also from scrap processing and handling machinery, especially potential explosions from shredders.

Still, some industry consultants assert that much of the gnashing of teeth over cost is a bunch of crying in the dark and that an inside move may actually be cost-effective. "Most operators haven't taken the time to put a pencil to it and see what the exact costs might be," Dovichi says.

Some recyclers may be able to save on construction costs by moving some or all of their operations into abandoned industrial buildings, which is exactly what Grossman Brothers did. After a five-year struggle to find and purchase a suitable building, obtain local government approvals, and make property improvements, the company relocated all of its operations from its former 3-acre, 5,000-squarefoot plant to a 10-acre, 100,000-square-foot existing building about 5 miles down the road.

Not that the firm's move was inexpensive--it spent more than $500,000 to prepare the site for its use--but Art Grossman also managed to save money--about 10 percent--by serving as his own general contractor. Not only did he design the facility's layout himself, but he used his firm's lowboys and employees to move all but two pieces of equipment. The move was so efficient that every machine was operational at the new building within 24 hours, Grossman notes.

Beyond cost cons, however, there are other potential drawbacks to moving some operations under cover or indoors. For example, says Todd N. Grunewald, scrap project manager for C.R. Meyer and Sons Co. (Oshkosh, Wis.), a construction services firm, "If you enclose many scrap recycling processes, you have an air quality problem to address right away, so while you may be solving one environmental problem, you could be creating another regarding indoor pollutants."

There's also the issue of noise pollution to address since covered or enclosed work areas could magnify an operation's noise to unacceptable levels. While these potential air and noise problems aren't insurmountable, they must be anticipated and addressed up front to ensure compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations.

Another downside: Recyclers fear that moving some processing operations inside could simply be too difficult or impractical. "Operators will tell you that they've got a couple 'million dollars worth of cranes and stationary equipment that just wouldn't operate within a building," Dovichi says. As one recycler, speaking for many, asserts, "Anything's easier to work with when you have blue sky above it."

Naturally, some types of equipment present more challenges to move indoors than others, especially automobile shredders due to the potential for explosions and flying objects that could damage a surrounding structure.

While it's possible to design structures to take some of this abuse, there's no way to make them invincible. One East Coast shredder, for instance, put its shredder under a roof that featured 10-foot-square explosion vents. Despite this foresight, one explosion blew these vents clear across the recycler's plant.

Miami River Recycling Inc. (Miami) has had better luck with a 200-by-600-foot structure it installed over its ferrous shredder. The steel structure, which features 50foot-tall open sides, is punctuated at the top by the shredder's cyclones, which poke through the roof and direct any explosive pressure out of the structure without damaging it.

Some recyclers also note that moving some equipment inside could constrain its capabilities or require them to make significant modifications to their equipment or plant layout. For instance, a machine that was previously fed by hydraulic crawler cranes outdoors might need to be fed indoors by an automated overhead crane. Or maybe the recycler would have to install more-elaborate infeed conveyors to allow hydraulic cranes to continue feeding the machine from outside.

And, of course, there's one final reason for not moving a scrap plant inside: "People don't want to change their operations," Dovichi observes, "and moving equipment inside would definitely require an operational change from what they're doing now." And resisting change is their prerogative, unless-or until-they're forced to move under cover or inside by local, state, or federal decree, which isn't an outlandish possibility. Currently, however, there are believed to be no laws at any governmental level requiring scrap recyclers to cover or enclose their operations. The closest existing rule is an ordinance in Dade County , Fla. , that requires recyclers to cover piles of processed scrap, though not their unprocessed material.

See You Inside?

Aside from the few adventuresome recyclers who have actually covered or enclosed their operations, the vast majority of others "are thinking about it only because they've been forced to do it for storm water rules," Marlin Bills asserts. Many recyclers say they'd like to do it, but the current deterrents make it not worth the effort or investment ... for now. As one Midwest recycler asserts, echoing the sentiments of many others: "If I had my choice, all of my operations would be under roof. I think it's something everyone would like to do, but it's very difficult to actually do it."