|
| Common
Effluent Treatment Plants |
The concept of common effluent treatment plant in itself is in the phase of development. As regards conceptualization of project, construction, operation and achieving the required treatment efficiency the entire mechanism has to be viewed in totality. Moreover the CETP for all practical and techno-economic consideration is a viable treatment option for small scale industrial units, wherein the member units and CETP management share equal responsibilities for achieving desired efficacy.
The proposal from project proponents may be sent to the State Pollution Control Board and the State Govt. for their approval and State subsidy and to Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India for the Central Subsidy. The project proponent for CETP (company) may also obtain loan from any nationalised bank.
Criteria
for Assistance
The company will obtain loan from the IDBI or any other financial institutions. The project proponent for CETP (company) will approach the State Govt./Central Govt. for their contribution of their subsidy. The subsidy would be released into the account of the company opened in the IDBI (or any other financial institutions).
The Chrome tanning of hides is carried out by employing
Basic Chrome sulphate (BCS) as the tanning agent. The quantity of BCS employed
is 60-80 kg per 1000 kg hide processed. This BCS quantity on average contains
9.04 kg chromium as metal. The chronology of the chrome
recovery is summarised in the following text.
It is established that in case of conventional process, even after the chrome
tanning is complete wherein the chrome absorption by the hide is only 60%, the
spent tan liquor still contains a significant concentration (upto 40%) of chromium
which can be recovered by the mechanism described below.
Step 2. Maintenance of pH of spent liquor at 8 to 8.2 by adding MgO(0.5% of spent liquor) to optimize the precipitation of chrome(in sludge).
Step 3. The mixture is stirred and allowed to settle down for few hours. The chrome in the form of chrome hydroxide gets settled.
Step
4. The supernatant containing insignificant
quantity of chromium concentration is liable
to be
discarded.
Step 5. The chrome sludge is dissolved in 98% concentration sulphuric acid (quantity of which is 0.1% of spent liquor). This mixture is worth of blending with freshly made chrome tan liquor.
Step 6. It is generally believed that recovery of chromium in a properly designed and operated recovery plant could be somewhere around 98% of the chromium in the spent tanned liquor.
|
|
| |
| |
| Government Incentives through its subsidiary Institutions provide much needed financial inputs, a significant boost, especially for small scale sector.
|
|
|
|
|
| E |
| Establishment of individual treatment plants become unacceptable by SSIs due to extreme characteristics of untreated effluent and high qualitative variance therein. A skilled operational staff becomes an affordable option in CETP, wherein all the member units can identify a management group from within, for its effective operation.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Source specific effluent quality( extreme pH , BOD, colour, nutritive value & metals etc. )which would otherwise render their treatment ac costly preposition, becomes homogenized in CETP and significantly reduce the treatment cost. |
|
|
| |
| P |
| Performance evaluation and its surveillance for implementation of qualitative measures in large nos. of individual plants, at times become a difficult task for regulatory authorities. All this become easily manageable in case of CETP. |
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM OF TYPICAL CHROME RECOVERY PLANT
It is an observed fact that the desired efficacy of the CETP depends on simulated efforts on the part of the CETP management, entrusted with the task of operation and maintenance, as well as, on the member-industrial-units. Although there are stipulated standards prescribed for effluent quality for inlet to and outlet from CETPs, much is required for regulatory provisions by making them more comprehensive which in-turn shall help ensuring effective implementation of stipulated recommendations besides making all the member units equally accountable for any aberrations.
OPTION I : THE CASE WHERE
CETP MANAGEMENT IS EXCLUSIVELY
CONSTITUTED BY REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE CONCERNED INDUSTRIES.
RECOMMENDATION
Considering the nature of job and prevailing mode of effluent disposal, the concerned individual industries be given prescribed effluent standards, to be complied by them either at their outlet or at the final outlet of the CETP concerned. In this case seeking consent be made obligatory only for the individual industry and the CETP management be kept free from such obligation.
OPTION II : WHERE
THE CETP MANAGEMENT IS AN INDEPENDENT BODY AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY REPRESENTATION
OF THE INDUSTRIES CONCERNED.
RECOMMENDATION "A"
Two separate standards be prescribed,
the PRIMARY STANDARDS in terms of pH,SS and/or Chromium
be stipulated for the individual units and
the SECONDARY STANDARDS (Comprehensive) in terms
of all the relevant parameters, be prescribed for the CETP management. In
this case, seeking consent be made obligatory on the part of the
Individual industries, as well as for the CETP
management. Moreover, there should be
an agreement among the individual industries and the CETP management for achieving
the prescribed characteristics of the treated effluent.The modalities of agreement
should be such that in the event of any aberrations, at least the levying of equity
contribution from member units for operation and maintenance of CETP are rendered
liable to be reviewed under intimation to the apex authority.
RECOMMENDATION "B"
Although the Primary and Secondary Standards be prescribed as mentioned in Recommendation "A", the compliance only of the Secondary Standards be adjudged at the final outlet of the CETP , and only the CETP management be held responsible for any aberrations in (Secondary) standard compliance. Moreover, seeking consent in this case be made obligatory only for the CETP management. However, in the event the CETP management feels that the individual unit fails to comply the Primary Standards, it may,under intimation to the concerned appellate authority, discontinue accepting effluent from that defaulting unit,and the unit henceforth be treated as operating without the valid consent.