LaGrega
- Thread starter jritter58
- Start date
Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:
RIP - VTEnviro
His Memory Eternal
That book r0xx0rz.
GulfCoastCivil
Don't Mess With My Oatmeal!
What's the full title?
FLBuff PE
Multi-disciplinary engineer
Hazardous Waste Management by LaGrega/Buckingham/Evans. If you are in any way involved in environmental engineering, it is a MUST. Saved my a$$ on at LEAST five questions on the Environmental PE Exam in October.
Sschell
Dude?
LaGrega sounds like it could be a kick ass mexican restaurant
klk
Well-known member
hmm, mexican food . . .
FLBuff PE
Multi-disciplinary engineer
Not if you read what's in the book. Remember the story about what some Toxic Hell employees put in their tacos? :mf_followthroughfart:
Sschell
Dude?
hmmm... hazardous waste management may be appropiate...
I buckled and just bought the book too, and it finally arrived today.
I don't think I'll have time to really review and tab this one, but from a quick glance, I like the fairly extensive index and the useful table in Appendix B with the alphabetical list of pollutants and key properties.
Without too many specifics, what kinds of questions did you use it for, FL Buff? More qualitative/regulatory questions or more so for looking up a formula or value for a calculated problem? I'm curious if I should take the time to review some of the text's example problems, such as in treatment/disposal methods or soil remediation.
If you've gone through all the PPI and NCEES sample problems so far, you don't need to go through the problems in LaGrega.
For me, LaGrega was most useful for the non-quantitative questions on the exam, in the areas of hazardous waste laws, fate and transport type stuff, remediation methods & equipment, incineration,and general chemistry. I have maybe 15 tabs on the whole book, mostly related to the larger topics like those.
At work, I frequently make use of the tab to the TCLP table - it's so much easier for me to find that in LaGrega than in my CFRs.
For me, LaGrega was most useful for the non-quantitative questions on the exam, in the areas of hazardous waste laws, fate and transport type stuff, remediation methods & equipment, incineration,and general chemistry. I have maybe 15 tabs on the whole book, mostly related to the larger topics like those.
At work, I frequently make use of the tab to the TCLP table - it's so much easier for me to find that in LaGrega than in my CFRs.
FLBuff PE
Multi-disciplinary engineer
What he said. I have 3 tabs in my LaGrega, and more like several hundred in the ENVRM. I found most of the formulas that I needed in the ENVRM. I have one formula tabbed in LaGrega, on pg. 775, to convert to 7% O2. I had trouble with air in my first two iterations, and the 7% O2 seemed to come up quite a bit. I also have Appendices A and B tabbed, but only at the beginning of the Appendices. I used the Index and TOCs of my references extensively. I tried not to worry about the time I might be 'wasting' looking things up in the indexes during the exam. I stayed calm, looked up where to find formulas, qualitative info, etc. in my references, went to the page, and got what I needed.
That's actually one thing I was thinking about over the weekend. When (in a problem) would we need to convert to 7% O2 ( or 12% CO2) other than when it says "convert the following...". I have the equation already flagged but was trying to figure out when I would need to remember to use that and do the conversion as part of a larger problem...any advice?
I can't remember any specifics, except that in the real test, the problem statement is usually pretty clear, and gives you everything you need to answer the question (and more, of course!). Including all constants, usually, and probably whether or not you need to convert to 7% O2.
At this point in time, you need to start thinking more about test-taking strategy, and less about the actual content. For example, if you are unsure of a problem like you stated above, try both and see how the answers line up with the choices given to you. If only one matches, then chances are that's the right question.
Also, don't forget units analysis. There were a couple of questions I was able to answer entirely based on analyzing the units they were asking for, and just simple conversion (and elimination of answers with wrong units)
At this point in time, you need to start thinking more about test-taking strategy, and less about the actual content. For example, if you are unsure of a problem like you stated above, try both and see how the answers line up with the choices given to you. If only one matches, then chances are that's the right question.
Also, don't forget units analysis. There were a couple of questions I was able to answer entirely based on analyzing the units they were asking for, and just simple conversion (and elimination of answers with wrong units)
RIP - VTEnviro
His Memory Eternal
I completely agree. And remember, units are not given in the possible answers, rather in the problem statement, so you know what you need to solve for unit wise. There were questions where you didn't need a fancy equation, just common sense.
And remember to get it in the units that the exam is calling for. Sometimes, the distracter answers can be the right asnwer in the wrong units. If it asks for kg/day but the problem is in Imperial units, the answer in lb/day may be shown.
It's not out of the question to have an entire problem in one set of units, then a little throwaway sentence in the problem asking for the answer in the opposite unit system.
FYI - I think I was able to answer a couple problems with this book. So glad I bought it!
It's possible the information may have been in one of my other references, but this book really does have a very good index (so I am able to actually find things!), and also it covers some topics with sufficient depth, which the ENVRM usually fails to do for Haz Waste topics. Interestingly enough, I found the RCRA Orientation Manual useful for the exam. Good thing I printed and brought that too. I think I saw that recommendation somewhere on this board, so thank you to whoever said it first!
