The impact of government legislation on industrial effluent treatment

0361-365X/X5$3.l,lO + O.IWl Pergamon PressLtd.

THE

IMPACT

ON

OF GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL

EFFLUENT

G. Swiss

Federal

CH-8600

for

Water

Pollution

Federal

TREATMENT

Hamer

Institute Water

Swiss

LEGISLATION

and

Control

Institutes

Diibendorf

Resources

of

Technology

/ Switzerland

ABSTRACT

General the

environmental

attitudes

enacted

for

of the

is contrasted The

cussed. penalties

industry abatement

and

its

effect

of

for

technology

pollution

problems

to problems of water

impact

on

coupling

non-compliance

resulting

of water

pollution

industrial stringent

on

from

pollution in

discharge in

are

and

Holland

their

standards

industrial

activity

discussed.

Switzerland,

polluters

innovation

industrial

Legis.Lation

and

policies

with

Britain is dis-

severe

wastewater

and

economic

treatment

is considered.

KEYWORDS

Water

pollution

economic

water

industry;

penalties;

quality

technological

objectives;

innovation;

legislation;

resource

enforcement;

development.

INTRODUCTION

Until few, and

recent if

any,

after

industrial lation

times,

industry

countries

have

industrialization. development

never

precedes

as

and

pollution

avoided

concomitant

Because a means

development;

were

of

of

the

national

rather

it

essentially

synonymous

environmental

desire

of

prosperity, involves

pollution

governments

very

during

to promote

environmental

remedial

and

action

legisafter

the

26

G. Hamer

effects of

of

their

trol

but

can

be

Although

concerned be

created

primarily

industrial

with

industries

include

tar

coal

sands,

processing

any

to

and,

processing

develop

by

that

or

trade

resource

in the

increasing

much

point

of

scale

of

in-

of

opera-

of what

sources

the

industries

is

of

crude

bulk

said

and

pollution oil,

raw

shale

material

involving

agricultural

be

Large-scale

including

generation,

scale,

con-

contribution,

activities.

as major

resources

throes

of

in this

operations,

power

because

pollution

legislation.

exploitations,

extraction,

countries,

enacted

irrespective

processing

identifiable

an

are

will,

industrial

renewable

developed have

environmental

industry

small-scale

on

of

Most

development,

countries,

to

clearly

ore

control.

industry

natural

and

industries

of

large-scale

are

Such

have

pollution

applicable

oil,

out

industrial

developing

by on

operations

centralized

of

still

comment

equally

already

many

development,

Pollution tion.

are history

legislation,

dustrial

will

pollution

extensive

the

forestry

ori-

gins.

Pollution

from

industrial

activities

( 1)

Air

pollution;

(2)

Noise

pollution;

(3)

Water

pollution

resulting

in discharged Water

(4)

(5)

As

far

that

Dumping

of

the

manufacturing "chemical"

and

slurries,

employed

and from

Industries located or

sufficient effluent

obvious

rain

climatic

in close One

such

as

a result

or

dust

waters

it

of of

on

dissolved

water

and

content

chemicals

run-off;

of

discharged

the In

water

much

the

air

and

the

waste,

in ground

water

proximity

chemicals

land

discussed

addition, of

immediate

both

However,

surface

nature

result

of

problems.

both either

the

in the

is discharges

and

pollution remote

dumping the

of

mode

pollution

frefrom

phenomena

of

solid

of

of

heat

the

"acid" wastes

dumping

by

leachates

wastes.

the

proximity

to

historical

that

heat

(receiving)

conditions,

to

the

categories:

and

wash

wastes.

deposition.

with

magnitude

and

from

environmental

dumped

suspended

semi-solid

pollution

depending

can,

such

and

surface

in the

concerned

harbours.

solid

several

water:

is concerned,

plant

and

derived

most

results

from

into

process,

resulting

process

of

activity

are

quently

and

as pollution

industrial

cooling,

pollution

cooling

falls

navigable

reason

allow

effects

processing

the

were

for

of

bulk

waters, this

unrestricted

significantly

raw such

approach

materials as rivers, was

discharge reduced

are

as

the of

frequently

canals,

need

for

untreated

a result

of

estuaries a sink aqueous

effluent

of

The Impact of Government

dilution,

For

the

many

America

that

agencies

of

the

bilities

to

of

the

costs

in world

down on

the

the

drain,

basis

designed

of

to

at

In fact,

until

operation

of

and

in some

the

pollutant

eliminate

only

been

regions usually

a few

during

of

the to

the

in its

years

enaction

ago,

it is only

view,

much

of

for with

years, response'

and

enforcePollution

less

competitive

industry

regarded

as money

charging

has

heat

their

industry,

licencing

that

discharges,

North

and

twenty

facilities

systems

together

and

pollution.

own

treatment

last

accept

environmental

discharged, noxious

Europe chemical

because

effluent

countries,

result

Western

started

industry,

only

would

to both

have

concerning

aqueous

particularly

both

it has

makes

load

of

respect

laws and

treatment

mechanisms.

with

large,

money

that

action

in these

stringent

industry

in and

industries

and

waters,

community

markets.

investment

processing

industries

hope

self-purifications

appropriate

receiving

increasingly

control

natural

bulk

to take

process

the

optimistically,

of

the

years, failed

pollution

ment

somewhat

and,

through

27

Legislation

systems

forces

changes

in

attitudes.

Industries

concerned

in remote

regions

most

total

such

industries

of

both

enaction

of

tions, welfare both

the

and

of man,

fossil

and

However, waste

and

frequently stations,

from

frequently

close

the

must

the

concentrations

of power

termed

as

a myriad

elimination

and/or

which

biocidal they

in cooling

action,

are

factors of

from

large

pollution

to heat

pollution chemical

control

of

which

process

treatment

but

fail

nevertheless,

water

discharges

an

in-

pollution.

of of

low-grade

waters

surface

etc.: with

as

source

pollution

fouling,

often

Clearl.y, context.

of both

surface

chemicals

locathe

pollution

quantities

of of

to

recognized

original

be-

in remote

in this

associated

for-

partially

distruction.

importance

the

because

ecosystems

is clearly and

today, to

responsible

available

wanton

al-

Even

partially

natural

of

stations,

of water

create.

and

and

with

legislation

legislation

from

heat

they

subjected,

intensional

employed,

and

that

located

population,

undertaken

governments

industry

resultant

of

strong for

and

been

are

are

pollution remote

In addition

be

use

air

human

the

dilution

protection

frequently

environmental

importance

generation

proximity

discharged

to

operations

environments

encountered. what

hibition,

function

are

for

based

power

of

appropriate

discharge

significant

aqua-tic

in the

heat

results

based

of

have

problems

industries

are

indigenous

industries

importance

need

any

rigours

undoubted

marine

produces

terrestrial

large

their

and

fuel

that

the

enforcement

the

exploitation of

environmental

avoid

economic

ignoring

terrestrial

dustry

the

such

manufacturing

and

apparently

thereby

devoid

in many

for

and

resource

largely

frequently

strategic

the

cause

The

disregard

processing

their

natural

are

operations

traditionally,

which

with

that

waters also

for

by power

occurs.

corrosion

chemicals

respect

is

to

are

present

from

power

This in-

with the in

control signif~tcant

stations.

28

G. Hamer

Many

industries

The

largest,

coal

and

other

dustries,

All

but

ground

water

Legal

political

and

country

with

legislation

within

Where

regions. The

ly,

is based

on

the

tively,

the

country

or

future.

By way

populated

not

and

is both

an

is an

importer

economic rienced shore

other

alliance, the

crude

adjacent

extensive

development oil

and

based

on

of

european dense

but

a massive gas

Community

resource

production

flow

surface

in

production, of

(EEC),

and

exploitation the

but

North

neqligable

countries, of and

the

surface

sea.

Sea.

gas

re-

and

is

Holland

waters.

Britain

England,

history and

of

Wale!

indu-

attendent water

regional has

but

highly

natural

surface

of the

in the

is densely

comprising a long

flows

and

alliances,

into

mainland,

no

and

quantitathe

countries,

exporter

economic

member

and

time

other

coal

polluted

coal

recent

Economic

and

Clear-

resources

either

populated

population,

indiqneous

is a more

European

natural

the of

of

exist

protection

water

present

is a net

rivers

seriously

agriculture,

countries, the

to

political

the

also

effectiveness.

agriculture,

densely

agriculture,

european

of

centres

and

is also

regional

exporter

originally

problems,

of

for

by

and

geographical

contrasting

surrounded

vary

sometimes

Switzerland

intensive

and

specific

qualitatively

at the

considered. an

between

its

in three

alliances,

Holland

polluted

many

be

has

extensive

member

and

It has

into

an

industrially

country,

or

will

political

both

island

from

enacted

in

waters in air

of

improve

both

on

result

non-uniformity

requirements both

legislation,

is completely

countries.

Scotland.

pollution

the

satisfying,

legislation

and

cases,

agriculture

industrialized,

has

strialization,

in many

of

and

are

spread

enforcement,

legislation

and

and

its

are

precipitation.

countries

protect,

Britain,

regional

examine

or

surface

effectiveness

region within

sludges

results

in both

and

enforcement

resources,

is a founder where

is to

and

results

its

to

and

surrounding

located

and

subject

legislation

stringency

and

inevitably

by

inlarge

operations

sites

sludges

ore,

processing

both

pollution

industry,

industrial

example,

methods

and

water

geographical

contribution

slurries

metal

produce

mining

land-fill

quantities.

the

bulking

pollute

slurries

varations

exist,

objective

mineral

industrialized, sources,

particular

by

disposal

inevitably the

ultimate

highly

of

hence,

to both

at

large

are

industry, from

other

commonly

surface

this

to

of

of

and

and

designed

Holland

a member to

this

region

exploitable

water

any

domestic,

Switzerland,

and

systems,

pollution

legislation

waste

all

waste

wastes,

leachates

land

respect

of

fr,m

solid

Incineration

federations

objective

of water

semi-solid these

almost

Solid

in

residues

treatment

frequency,

with

residues

solid

but

sludges.

and

to country,

semi-solid

wastewater

increasing

subseqrlent

a gradation

and

and

resources.

and

and

together

solid

pollution

from

with

production,

or

producing

industries,

sewage

slurries

buried,

such

leachate

solid

industries

mining

the

of waste

being

land.

mineral

tipped,

either

either

the

including

quantities usually

produce

amongst

either

political/

recently

industry,

i.e.,

expeoff-

The Impact of Government Legislation

SWISS

Switzerland

LEGISLATION

is particularly

throughout

this

and

has

occured

discharges

and

agricultural

dominantly

in the

rivers

development cite

of

produced

the

of

thermal

by

protection

sammlung

der

The

( 2)

To either

law

charge

the

eliminate

existing

preserve

depending

quality

effluent

for

and

with

pounded

river from

the

law,

mitted,

and

from

respect

industry that

can

fifty-two

general

parameters,

for

specified

in

and into

ordinance,

This quality

water,

both

all

are

used

others, the

ordinance

unpolluted

more are

the

some or

summarized

for

decreed

in an

water

Bundesrat, general

surface

waters,

process

under

with

dis-

standards

were

cooling

of which

less

wide,

flows.

and

liquid

utili-

quality

to making

as wastewaters

to describe

water

Schweizerische

flowing

wastewaters

waters.

quality

cooling

the

1982;

country

sewers

(Der

for

concentrated

effluents, either

public

that

with

of both

other

the

in addition

objectives indicates

discharge

both

in 1975

be considered

discharged

and

and

of wastewaters

the

parameters

standards

waters

by

since

of

of water

discharge

into

Bundesver-

enforced

health,

is one

the

flow

water

(Die

objectives

appropriate,

which

1976.

of virtually

quality

waters

into

public

electri-

exportation

been

natural

the

either

they

discharges

basis

of

concerning

has

quality

of

issued

lake

dilution

prohibits and

surface

and

of

located

in 1971

original

on

its

discharges

to water

wa-ter and

and

establishment sink

where

law

pr-e-

countries.

singificant

polluting

good

other

points

Swiss

The

protection

grounds

surface

wastewater

effective

visions

centrations

into

water

the

for

1957.

fraction

is

the

lakes

industrial

because

capacity

1971)

reestablish

the

on

criteria

discharged

for

by

in

the

times,

Swiss and

operates and

in most

Government

unacceptable

or

aesthetic

achieved

to

present

Federal

enacted

need

ordinance

parameters

law

the

be

The

the

industry sectors

than

in earlier

Eidgenossenschaft,

and

standards

charges

by

emphasizes

to

close

Rhdne,

industry.

enacted

ecological

water

Some

on

two-fold:

objectives

of

manufacturing

an earlier

To

1975)

chemical

law

zation,

The

Swiss

chemical

smaller

However,

of

domestic

facilities,

of

allowing,

quality

product

generation

River

resources.

water

chemical

volume

is

was

( 1)

Swiss

water

polluted

stations

Schweizerischen

were

the

increasingly The

power

fresh in

power

replacing

present

with

intermediate

thereby

the

resource

1972,

or

of

run-off.

and

hydro-electric

Rhine

endowed

deterioration

as a result

fine

countries,

pollutions

well

marked

portion

River

adjoining

century

by

A significant on

29

high

proim-

water

dis-

the

provision

water

is not

nutrient

per-

con-

wastes.

quality can

specific in Tables

criteria

be

and

described

in character. 1,

2 and

the

as Some

3.

TABLE

SELECTED EXAMPLES

OF WATER QUALITY

WATER FL,OWS AND IMPOUNDED

Warming

up

waStewater Dlssolvod

by cooling input organic

CRITERIA

I

and/or

carbon

FOR SURFACE

RIVER WATER IN SWITZERLAND.

2

(0.45 ,, Filter)

0.05

Total hydrocarbons Phenols

volatile

0.005

volatile

?+mnonla + ammonium

TABLE ___

SELECTED

OF QUALITY

1-1

mg

carbon

0.01

cadmium

0.005

1 -1

mg

1-1

mg

FOR EFFLUENTS

IN SWITZERLAND.

waste-

3o" C

(0.45 P Filter)

10

or

15 mg 1 Total hydrocarbons

3

Phenols

I

volatile non-steam

N

1-1

mg

copper

STANDARDS

INTO SURFACE WATERS

organic

0.05

lead

Maximum Temperature for discharged water and/or cooling water Dissolved

1-1

mg

0.5 mg 1-'

(0.45 JJ Filter)

EXAMPLES

DISCHARGED

1-1

mg

0.005 mg 1-l

non-steam

Dissolved metals

3O C

-1

10 mg 1-1 0.05 mg 1

-1

-1 0.05 mg 1

volat11e I

A”mon1a

+

Dissolved

Agreed value that 1s as low as possible

a”mO”lu”

metals

(0.45 1-1Filter)

0.5

lead copper

mg

0.5

1

mg 1

-1 -1

cadmium

TABLE 3

SELECTED

EXAMPLES

DISCHARGED

OF QUALITY

INTO PUBLIC SEWERS

Maximum temperature wastewater Dissolved

STANDARDS

FOR EFFLUENTS

IN SWITZERLAND.

for discharged

organic carbon

60° c

(0.45 I-1Filter)

20 mg 1

Total hydrocarbons Phenols

Agreed value

5 mg 1-l

volatile

non-steam volatile Ammonia

Dissolved

1 mg 1

(0.45 p Filter)

-1

Agreed valu, that is as as possible

+ ammonium

metals

-1

lead

0.5 mg 1

-1 -1

copper

1

cadmium

0.1 mg 1

"g 1 -1

31

The ImpactofGovernmentLegislation

Further, a most interesting group of provisions in the ordinance allow, on the one hand, for possibilities

to relax certain discharge qualifications

in cases

either where systems are able to cope with such relaxations or where water quality objectives can be met without resort to the stipulated standards, and on the other hand, the opportunity to introduce stricter discharge standards under conditions where water quality objectives have not been achieved by the stipulated discharge standards.

However, in spite of the fact that enormous progress has been made as a result of the progressive have

legislation of 1971 and the subsequent ordinance, some problems

still only been partially solved and other new problems have emerged, parti-

cularly from the ever increasing use and application of synthetic organic chemicals for domestic, industrial and agricultural purposes. As a result of both these and other unforeseen difficulties,

full implementation of the federal law has now been

postponed until 1987.

The present situation in Switzerland is that wastewater from some 75 percent of the population is treated, by conventional mechanical-biological supplemented with chemical phosphate precipitation,

technology

in ca. 750 public, municipal

treatment plants. On a countrywide basis, it is estimated that some two thirds of the organic pollutant load in wastewaters

is derived from industrial sources.

However, because of both the relatively small or moderate size and the nature of the industries responsible for this production of wastewater, only about 15 percent of industrial wastewater

is treated, in some thirty industry owned plants,

to standards suitable for direct discharge into surface waters. Some industrial wastewater treatment plants employ extensive tertiary treatment technology. ever, the remaining 85 percent of industrially produced wastewater

How-

is treatecd,

together with domestic sewage, in public, municipal treatment plants, but for the most part it has become necessary for industries operating in this manner to pretreat their wastewater,

in order to meet prescribed sewer discharge standards.

As far as costs and cost-sharing

are concerned, industry is required to cove.c

some 60 percent of the costs of its wastewater treatment through taxes, the remainder being covered by subsidies, predominantly

from the federal government.

In Switzerland, punitive financial penalties for the discharge of industrial wastewater do not exist as a means fo coercing industry to comply with stipulated discharge standards. Progress with respect to the effective implementation of the 1971 law has been discussed in detail by Bundi and Mauch (1979) and Bundi (1983).

32

G. Hamer

DUTCH

The

Dutch

charged

legislation aqueous

ployed

al processing

Water

pollution

never

plants

lands

both

municipal

and

effective

the

ravages

The

legal the

water

Water

period

1970

state-managed

Rhine,

by

the

maritime

waters,

their

manageirent powers quality

to

(1)

and,

(1983)

That

The

basis

pollutant

the

every

jected

(2)

in

managment

control

Meijer

to

quality

That

every must

the

who

quantity

polluter-pays

for

assessing

act

charge

has

the

or

i.e.,

both

into

natural fee

be

vested

regional retained

According

features:

must

management

to

managed

become

water

effluent

so-

and

have

provinces

main

conditions

the

the

rivers,

amalgamated.

surface

effluent

between

estuaries,

have

law

the

resources

Three

two

appropriate

specify of

which

This

during

governments

have

into

the

water

provided

be

sub-

authority

with

for

respect

to

discharged;

in

aquatic

environ-

accordance

with

principle.

effluent

discharged.

boards

of wastewater

a pollution

the

by can

and

provincial

agencies.

Pollution

issued

discharger pay

water

is made

evident.

was

1970.

international

boards,

control

of wastewater

water, and

water

some

Water

a permit

the

ment

1980,

of

in

sources

lakes,

after

clearly

late

large

in the

until

effect

big the

were

deof

co-ordinated

Netherlands

watercourses

majority

thirty

discharge

receiving

other

pollution

Surface

canals,

that

were

a highly

treatment

introduced

definition

the

but

Nether-

incidental

view

all

accor-

treat-

the

into

in the

from

and

wastewater

the

waters

or

trans-

Scheldt.

sought,

period,

1970,

not

into

clear

same

the

surface

came

was

of

treatment plants

300

entirely

were

discharges

main

The

some

and

since

the

load

and

was

and

phenomenon,

country

until

expressed

comprise

the

government.

so,

fuel

level

Meuse

Municipal some

of

fossil

high

pollution

this

pollution

Netherlands,

Scheldt,

a new

During

Dutch

either

Rhine,

onwards.

measures

by

from

an extremely

agricultural

which

which

industri.

water

Even

water

Act

em-

scale

1930's, and

1965.

on

pollution

approach

effluents

control

combatting

In the

1875

(1972)

pollution

the the

no means,

rural,

aqueous

waters,

water direct

to

country.

Pollution

and

provincial

1936

colleagues

water

1985.

Meuse

territorial

and

for

eliminate

called the

period

industrial

to

early

pollution

framework

Surface to

from

in the

industrial

Xoot

of

times,

industrial

and

and

by

dis-

from

Rivers

concerning

a predominantly

urbanized,

Netherlands

sought

the

from

is,

legislation

by

with

from

in the

resources

results derived

also,

origin

of water

markedly

clearly

feedstocks

Netherlands

recent

pollution

contrasts

and

industrial

introduced

during

changed

veloped,

until

were

constructed

of

of

that

utilizing

(1982),

enacted,

ment

effluents

resources,

in the

Brouwer

abatement

a situation

operations

pollution

to

the

industrial

agricultural

frontier

ding

for

in Switzerland,

renewable

by

LBGISLATION

The

discharge receipts

fees from

is

the total oxygen

effluent

discharge

consuming

fees

are

intended

The Impact of Government

to be

used

for

progressively

For

financing year

discharges

increased into

19.50

first

in

1971

fee

per

year

for

which

Fees

for

provincial

governments

ranged

equivalent

in

for

34.08

N.fl. ked

1982

variability clearly

fail

to

their the

treat

discharges

from

measures.

50 percent

of

As

as

the

licenses

latter

For

networks. pollutants has no

been

intrinsic

licences

tially,

applies

the

respect

to

discharges

shed

by

quality

the

best

objective

a complicated limits ment

will

agencies.

concerned, best

As

policy

practicable

the

i.e.,

as

to

the

ranqe

loads

of

to between

that

The

existing

and

the

a zero

where

this

irrespectively receiving

for

dispute

effluents pollutant

Industries

that

be

have

been

is dimini-

that

the

endangered.

non-hazardous

water Such

discharge and

enforce-

pollutants

by employment

discharging

with

impossible,

load

industries

reduced

o-E

situation

acceptable

of

Essen-

discharge

and

is not

between

containing loads

cost,

where

Act,

discharges. the

it

has

discharge

is considered

water

a situation

of

pollutant of

after

authorities

discharge

hazardous

sewer persistent

Provisions)

new

is to prohibit

cases

and/or

conferment

(General

whilst

the

licenses

management

at

for

of

discharge

arrive

allows

matter

water

The

authorities,

carcinogenic

issue

is made

systems.

as operators

toxic, only

sewer

policy

particular

aqueous

technology.

paying

reduclcion

a wide

manaqment

discharge.

provided

technology,

an obvious far

by

distinction

into

water

of both

although

obviously

is concerned,

Protection

licensing

licensed,

requires

incurred

pollution

discharges

particular

licensing

for

achieved

reduced

appropriate

the

set

to purify

by

will

to

approach become

the

to the

available

them

be

discharge

Environmental

be

realistic

can

municipalities,

the

substances, can

that

that

of

allowed be

who

technological

Obviously,

appropriate the

municipalities

substances,

such

such

and

to

objective

harzardous

the by

industries

objections

discharge

establishes

would

mar-

companies

wastewater.

discharges

water

by

ascertained

than

effluent

through

that

from

demonstrating

of

and

by

population

the

frequently

for

issued

sewers,

is subject

which

highly

issued

costs for

to

levels.

surface

are

those

into

first

1980,

are

lower

per

2.01

managed

industrial

who,

processes

industries

These

face

wastewater

discharges N.fl.

authorities,

nature

that

for

discharges,

in 1982,

companies,

fees

most

policy

into

licenses

at

original

licensing

former the

polluted

discharge

25 and

discharges

their

treatment

good-housekeeping

far

increased

equivalent

from

waters

50.00

by water

increasing

dangers

whilst

fresh

to N.fl.

equivalent

The

wastewater

discharges

44.52

population

industrial

effluent

between

have

population

such

into

managed

those

wastewater

in effluent

N.fl.

financial

appropriate

fees

increased for

discharges

waters

country.

develop

own

from

the

for

were

per

1982,

charged

the

and/or

in

fees

effluent

per

25.50

fee

equivalent

within

incentives

innovation,

to N.fl.

fresh

64.00

the

waters,

population

indicates

reduce

economic

and

to N.fl.

fees

fresh

the

1982.

Discharge

measures.

year.

2.00

N.fl.

in

control

state-managed

waters,

the

in 1973, N.fl.

into

from

saline

by

pollution

Legislation

of

wastewater

are

the into

34

G.Hamer

state-managed

waters

biotreatment

since

facilities

1971

and

can

of

claim

investment

90 percent

towards

grants

of

60 percent

physico-chemical

towards

treatment

faci-

lities. Pollution

reduction

changing sively heavy

effluent on

the

of oxygen

must

4 for (1983)

and

Surface

the

progressively

Act

included

in

because

it

discharged together

indicate Act

increasing law.

a point

and

1980,

the

is assumed

part that

of

charges

are

based

ignore,

for

example,

the

concern

has

infringements

discharges

that

against

levels

the

deals

the

Act

are

shown

1985

by

pollution as

that

Surface with

are

for

of

exclu-

quantities

industries

primarily

that

The

projected

reduced

noted

future.

Dutch

effected,

code

the

figures

polluting be

legal

for

selected the

markedly

for

of

and

by

it should

policy

that

of

1970,

the

fact

with

the

of

charges

Finally,

the

results from

pollutants

However,

discharged

be

Pollution

original

undoubtedly

pollutant

clearly

Water

in the is

of

obviously

1969

the

fees.

demand

consuming

in Table

Netherlands

discharge

oxygen

metals,

Meijer

in the

that

a result was

embodied

Water

economic prompted

of

Pollution offences,

by

economic

motives.

/

TABLE

BRITISH

The this

industrial

LEGISLATION

revolution

is reflected

environmental quality

of

legislation in England

in the

usually

concern, surface under and

waters which

Wales

in Brrtain early

used the

preceded

enactment

of

prompted as

sources

discharge

is different

by

from

of

that

in most

environmental questions

for

drinking

polluted

that

of

public water

aqueous

applicable

other

countries,

legislation

in

and

health, supply.

and general

for

the

Traditionally

effluents

is controlled

Scotland.

However,

even

G.Hamer

though

the

legal

essentially lation

similar

enacted

legislation will

be

of

the

in Britain

the

solid

polluting

1951

blishment viously

wastes

of

of

of

to

tidal

1951.

combat

and

sewage

1961,

sewers,

pollution

is legis-

paralleled

England

by

and

Wales

Boards

and

the

the

dition

surface

appeal

to the

scope

of

of

was

with

fish

1963,

and

hands

the gave

the

local

the

Salmon

solid

or

containing

of

management them

of

brought

(Prevention

pre-

However,

either

water

1960

1893, esta-

of

mentioned,

any of

in

in the

rivers.

to put

into

Rivers

placed

Authorities,

already

Act

passed

enforcement to

and

authorities.

were

in the

an offence

waters)

the

the

surdomestic

responsibility

resulted

respect

remained

injures Tidal

less

the

noxious

The

sanitary

act

was

i.e.,

poisonous,

acts

Board

legislation

and

to

is

non-tidal

pollution,

local

Prevention

madeit

or

of

to

pollution.

1400

River

an example

pollution

only

quarries,

measures

1923,

Act

of

1936

empowered

and

the of

Act

Trade of

gave

waters were

the

fiish

discharges

Pollution)

of

certain

their

into

the

Act

river

increased

empowered

to

effluents.

However, consent

Act

of

1937

industrial

the

right,

system

powers

into

both

provisions

restrictions

public

also

charges.

into

consent

any

made

the

In order

quantity

allow

the

to

con-

discharged, restrictions

conveyance to

Act

public

and

ultimately

the

matter the

Health

by

sewers.

and

both

of

Public

employed

are

quality

were and

to

process

for

the

effluents

effluents

industry

sewers

sewers

Subsequently,

and

subject

treatment

impose

to charge

into

process.

and

treated

to construct

discharge

treatment

effluents

the

which

and

both

trade

authorities

the

the

Premises)

sewers,

discharges

against

or

industry

to discharge of

local

prohibited

sewer

discharges

fabric

authorities

their

the

works

1937

authorities,

of

the

water

applied

mining

treatment

poisons

29 River

(Drainage

industrial

of

set

enforcement

countries.

responsibility

sewage

Act

either

regulated

of

whose

Resources

Act

damage

but

Pollution

prevention

in Britain

pollution.

safeguard

to

for

practice

subsequent

types

or

and in ca.

in 1948,

under

treatment

Health

ment

been

concerning

distinct

vested

(Estuaries

of

Health

Public

Rivers

either

Water

control

to

local

water

and

which

1876,

factories

In addition

estuaries

likely

of whilst

Rivers

water

Public

on

years

legislation

european

factories,

was

sewerage

that

of

four

Act

Fisheries

The

the

local

resultant

invariably,

legislation

legislation

either

pollution

of

Clean

The

of

the

34 River

matter

under

only

other

Act

from

authorities.

the

in many

from

1961,

Freshwater

into

varies,

in recent

almost

legislation

identified

a series and

control

liquid

and

Hence,

today,

general

wastes

enacted

sanitary

than

Act

liquid

Subsequently,

and

control

has,

control

Prevention

enforcement

and

Wales

Scotland.

but

first

This

waters.

sewage,

the

pollution Britain,

and

pollution

world,

Pollution

1898,

for

water

In Britain,

for

England

enacted

stringent

face

water

discussed.

rest

Rivers

for

throughout

for

Historically, the

basis

35

and

treat-

industries

G. Hamel

36

The

British

including time

legislation its

failure

consuming

appeal

detrimental

to

distribution expertise and

the

to

of

these

ginally land

Regional sewage

Authorities,

and and

but

for

ground)

water

and

sea

from

the the

or

for

so

being

degree

of

insuffient Act

of

1973

improvements

local

the

development with

with

the

new nor

water

control

authorities,

disposal,

ten supply, of

drainage,

supply

rivers

flood

companies whilst

remained

ori-

in Eng-

under of water

and

water

duties

authorities placed

them,land

left

the

functions

associated

of

that

were

managment,

re-organiszation

and

onto

which

in

the

specified

appropriate

in

sewer

the

hands

of

to

discharges

the

matter

place,

with

the

ironical

that

the

daily

Authorities

treatment

and

In pursuance and

as

onto

Authority,

specific The

prohibited. and

maximum of

a result

rate

of

of

their

can

entries Act

of

in

either

refuse

the waste

poisonous,

requires

Britain

to the

to cover

It

discharges,

is,

are

no-

dischargers

proposed

discharge.

outlets

subject

of

also

and/or

fixed

In order

waters

pollution

regular

are

some

problems,

tidal

water

all

land

temperature

effluents

either

through

which

of wastes,

dischargers

themselves,

that

conditions.

also

and

and

Britain.

run-off

from

effluents

reasonable

composition

amount

largest

perhaps,

the

responsibilities

Regional

for

sewage

disposal.

of water duties

the

are

nature,

into

legis-

(including

potential

to ensure

waters

of

inland

exempted

sewage

existing

whole

into

pipelines

sought

Water

the

of

previously

ground

as opposed polluting

land,

because

and

Regional

to

discharges

Act

to

applies

through

industrial

strengthened

all

were

subject

and

pollution.

control

discharges

terms,

sea,

considerably and

control,

mines,

of

1974

it

detail

return

on

of

accept

together

to

1400

ca.

undertakings

treatment

to

waters

In broad

of

dumping,

powers

grounds,

wrangles,

whilst

had

the Water about

industry

responsible

agents

Act

seeks

discharges

discharge

Water

brought

water

water

the

The

as

control

and

rivers,

control

to

a ridiculous frequently

of

legal

industry

However,

have

authorities,

of water

sewage

Act

coastal

legislation.

xious

disposal,

pollution

the

continuous into

and

which

duties.

1974

the

each

uses

Pollution

introduces the

of

other

and

fisheries.

of

Essentially

or

200

all

neither

control

a number

councils.

Control

lation

some

essentially but

networks, district

29 river

Water treatment

being,

the

and

prevention

and

by

statutory Act

on

extended

benefitted

authorities

re-organized

1973,

clearly

criticized allowing

defficiencies.

Wales

aquifers

The

of

shared

and

and

some

be

thus

pollution to

their

Pollution

Act

that

water

of

can

pollution

responsibility

to undertake

Water

discussed

procedures

effective

of

far

define

Control

respect

The

so to

to

flora

In cases

quality forestall and where

fauna

objectives, and of

remedy

natural

pollution

has

the

water

water waters resulted

authorities

pollution, to

the

from

on

state illegal

have the

been

one

existing discharge

given

hand,

and

prior

to

and/or

The Impactof

Government

37

Legislation

dumping, the costs for clean-up are the responsibility

of the polluter. British

legislation is primarily concerned with either preventing or controlling water pollution from the disposal of either waste or surplus materials, and as such, provides protection for those agricultural activities that are considered,

from

the agricultural viewpoint, to be good practice, but from the water pollution viewpoint, might be major causes of water pollution, either as point or as dispersed sources of pollution.

In spite of the obvious need for improved water quality standards in Britain, significant parts of the Control of Pollution Act of 1974, are only now beincg implemented by the government. Pearce (1983) explained this on three counts: the financial burden on industry in meeting proposed discharge consent conditions; the administrative burden on the Regional Water Authorities;

the general

economic difficulties of the country. Some industries, frequently those discharging into tidal waters, have taken advantage of this failure to implemen-t enacted legislation, and have continued the discharge of their polluted effluents unabated. However, in accordance with European Economic Community directives, it has become necessary for Britain to implement the more important parts of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act that have remained in abeyance, particularly with respect to the discharge of dangerous substances. Pearce (1983) reported that the consent provisions were to be implemented in mid-1983 and the offences provisions

in mid-1984. This reluctance, on the part of Britain, to implement

enacted environmental

legislation, together with an overgenerous phasing pol.icy

with respect to the introduction of controls and no plans for introducing effluent discharge fees, suggest that strategic policy seeks to promote industrial profitability even to the extent of ignoring irreversible ecological damage in natural aquatic environments

that would no longer be tolerated in most other West

European countries.

Turning briefly to the question of marine pollution from the off-shore oil production industry, one must clearly differentiate between either continuous or periodic operational discharges on the one hand, and either accidents or deliberate dumping, on the other. Obviously, no legislation can completely remove the possibility of accidents. Marine pollution can be defined as the introduction by man, either directly or indirectly, of either substances or energy into the marine environment resulting in such deleterious effects as harm to living resources, hazard to human health, hindrance to marine activities,

impairment of

quality for use of sea water and reduction of amenities. This definition distinguishes between pollution which is harmful, and supposedly harmless introductions of either substances or heat by man and the British Government considers it reasonable to utilize the natural, self purification

capacity of the marine

environment to accept and degrade many potential pollutants. Hence, thinking seems to

be

dominated by problems of major oil spills and their consequences

3x

G. Hamer

with

respect

resultant

As

far

oil

to

amenities

damage

as the

maintenance

of

as

and

differing have

Britain,

industrial

protection

the

objectives

and

vity

and

respect

the

technology

will

treatment

The

virtually than

ring mental

of all

the

the

and

(1)

(2)

any

and

several estimated

the

production

the

least

Where

the

duction

of

penalties Where

Discharge

as more

procedures

the by

realistic to

achieve

frequently

un-

industrial

cycles, as

In general,

and

standards

of

pollution

be

economic

discussed.

in view

always

and

sensible

hydrological

engaged

acti-

policies

stringent

advanced

have

can

of

investment

with

as existing

and

effective

the

during

stringent

manufacture and

to meet

be

by

punitive

required

industry,

be

in

the tend

the

least

environ-

effects:

equivafor

incurring selected;

for

the

pro-

estimated environmental

selected;

legislation standards

to be

capi-

manufactu-

available

process

similar

time,

investment

important

are

profits

one

effective

processes

incurs be

for

relatively

offering

will

any

and

costs,

is between

that

At

Where

having

will

manufacturing

generate

raised.

several

product,

products,

product

plant.

stringent

operating

penalties

product that

demand

can

processes

choice

alternative

or

with

a particular

environmental

the

a greater

result

and

bulk

plants

of

available

alternative capital

in the

operation

in countries

solutions sought

ex-

is essentially

enforcement

most

manufacturing

in and

profitability,

(3)

company

legislation

lent

off-shore

concerned.

systems

countries

of water

should

companies

Where

are

and

the

but

to change

is either

such

by

resource

standards

legal

three

regional

operate

projected

legislation,

pollution

available.

manufacturing

are

the

to offer

disputed,

subject

of

that

and

environments.

be

and

investment

capital

facilities

in

enforcement

becomes

quality

legislation

seem

aqueous

local

objective

and

CONTROL

consequences

and

permit

discharges

profitable

countries,

legislative

always

is to establish

a result

tal

of

on

technology

essential

industry as

effects

continuous

from

between

other

POLLUTION

abatement

will

standards

of

environment

most

objectives

non-quantifiable

to

effect

question

in contrasting

pollution

basis

the

environmental

governmental,

quality

known

WATER

resulted

environmental for

key

far

OF

by

marine

the

the

situations

specific

the

as

IMPLICATIONS

for

of

is concerned,

and

unanswered

Clearly,

than

ecosystems.

protection

production

plitation

rather

to marine

of

exists, effluent

cost

effective

treatment

will

The Impact of Government Legislation

In the

(4)

might

case be

of

legislation such

risks

effective

companies

seek

cy

are

construction

costs,

options

usually

to

within

available

the

the

to

environmental

although

financial

frequently,

instability

thus

incurring

most

responsible

and

greater

investment.

legislation

for

projects

stringent

is enforced,

greater

respect

to operate

nor

investment

where

exhibit

environmental

several

cerned,

with

exists

also

higher

companies,

to countries

neither

countries

markedly

Where

multi-national

transferred

30

exists,

law.

selection

individual

As

far

as aqueous

of

the

most

companies.

manufacturing

effluents

appropriate

Hamer

(1983)

are

con-

treatment

poli-

summarized

these

as:

Whether

(1)

the

should Whether

(2)

the

a partial Whether

(3)

plant

the

The

choice

should

be

either

prior

to

subsequent

the

depends

both

ducing

wastewater

latter and

Little

plant

that future.

can

legislation.

In be

polluters

be

of

the

with

indicate

that of

and

West

will

undoubtedly

and

wastewater,

and

in a

companies

located

operated

by either

contractor

individual

managing

companies

the

paying

subsidy,

such

when

compliance

that

for

subsidized

and of from

they

Investment

withdrawn

both

control individual

examples

only

more

can

commercial of

this,

in pollution

as

at

legislation,

offer

abate-

whereas

re-

provides

a result

pollution

pro-

it is

environmental

polluters,

legislation

companies

few

a

company and

pollution

several

with

the

by

policies

enforcement

industrial

control

which for

of

companies

and

exist. to

that

industrial

such

innnovation,

treatment

economics,

resulting

stimuli,

pollution

freedom

enforcement

to the

Germany,

and

relative

industrial

constraints,

pressure make

on

dominate

advantages of

a short-term

lation,

owned services

or

treatment; owned

several

facilities

and

attributed

as valuable

enforcement

international

of

of operating

viability

economic

or

the

owned

undoubtedly

technological

national

polluted

in a plant

with

degree

environmental

fact,

long-term

zone,

the

other;

complete

complete

in a plant

behalf

a central

to exercise

directly

in Holland

shows

laxation

to the

through

particularly

the

will

considered

opportunities

ment

exists

closures

frequently

on

in the

threatens

or or

in company

wishes

feature

evidence

legislation

other,

processes

each

provided.

contractor

this

producing on

various with

essentially

undertaken

operated

industrial

treatment

present

and

municipality

service

be

company

by

between

the

should

to each

a large

from

or mixed

treatment

by

local

streams from

pretreatment

owned

adjacent

wastewater

segregrated

treatment

operated

the

several

be either

of

control

vulnerable

local, legisto com-

G. Hamcr

petition from other companies, which because of the location of their production plants, have not been similarly subsidized by policies that encourage environmental neglect. Clearly, any country that can maintain a position as a leader in pollution control legislation opportunities

and its effective enforcement will have considerable

for the export of pollution control technology and equipment when

other countries

introduce similar pollution abatement policies, whilst in con-

trast, any country that fails in its environmental undoubtedly

protection policies, will

incur economic penalties resulting from technology and equipment

import when eventually

it is forced to conform to international

control of environmental

standards. The

pollution should not be an optional extra, but a funda-

mental component of national economic policies.

Ever since the entry of Britain into the EEC, more than ten years ago, discord between British environmental

policy and the centrally agreed policy of the EEC

has existed, and this has brought British environmental critical scrutiny. According vironmental

Pollution

(19841, pollution control law in Britain is diffuse, un-

codified and obscure to all but expert practioners. mental requirements

policy under increasingly

to a recent report by the Royal Commission on En-

Implementation of EEC environ-

is based on effective statutory measures, whereas Britain con-

tinues to emphasize extra-statutory

procedures

and voluntary codes of practice,

which require, for successful pollution control, both high degrees of mutual trust between the polluters and the control authorities control measures

and evidence that pollution

are not be markedly delayed to satisfy the short-term commercial

objectives of particular

industrial polluters. With respect to Britain, suspicion

exists that the avowed policy for pollution control by application of the best practicable

technology has degenerated

into a policy which accepts control by the

cheapest tolerable option. Hence, Britain, the country in which the most widely used secondary biological wastewater

treatment process, the activated sludge pro-

cess, was developed between 1914 and 1921, can no longer be considered as a leading innovator of novel wastewater

treatment technology, but rather a reluc-

tant operator of treatment plants based on aging concepts and low levels of process technology.

Water pollution

charging

systems, such as exist in Holland and in other continen-

tal members of the EEC, have clearly led to significant treatment technology. Without doubt the progressively

innovations in wastewater

increasing nature of charges

made on discharges have acted as major incentives for technological In Holland, one has seen the resurgence of anaerobic biotreatment highly polluted wastewaters

from various agricultural

innovation.

technology for

product processing

indu-

stries, which formally discharged massive pollutant

loads into Dutch surface wa-

ters. Recent developments

processes have been reviewed

by Bull and colleques treated wastewater

in anaerobic biotreatment

(1984). However, it must be stressed that anaerobically

invariably requires subsequent aerobic treatment

in order to

41

The Impact of Government Legislation

meet standards

for

discharge

directly

into

surface

waters.

Even so, in countries

that operate charging systems, the economic advantages of removing the bulk of the oxygen consuming pollutant load are considerable.

In West Germany, where water pollution charging policies are also employed, two large chemical companies, Hoechst AG and Bayer AG, have developed major interests in novel approaches to aerobic biotreatment, particularly with respect to the employment of high aspect ratio aeration tanks fitted with highly efficient aerators and alternative modes of microbial biomass separation that potentially maintain activity of the recycled biomass at enhanced levels compared with conventional activated sludge biotreatment processes. The merits of these advanced aerobic biotreatment processes, which were initially used by Hoechst and Bayer to solve their own internal wastewater treatment problems more economically

and

have subsequently been marketed by the companies, have been discussed by Zlokarnik (1983).

I.C.I. Ltd. in Britain also developed a novel deep-shaft aerobic biotreatment process for both their own use and for the market, but this resulted from a policy of exploiting newly developed technology on a broader base, in this case their single-cell protein process bioreactor, rather than in direct response to stringently enforced environmental

legislation in Britain, although such legis-

lation in other countries within the EEC in which

I.C.I. operate manufacturing

plants could have influenced their decision. Companies that have sought tro develop proprietory biotreatment processes have been those that undertake much of their own process engineering and plant construction. Others, such as the major multi-national oil companies, who rely, for plant construction, on the process plant contracting industry, have not become involved in novel biotreatment process development and design, preferring to rely on available technology, such as either that offered by Union Carbide's Unox process, i. e., a pure oxygen activated sludge process, or conventional those used for municipalsewage

activated sludge processes of similar design to treatment.

In Switzerland, where the water pollution control legislation is operated without any punitive fees for discharges, innovation has been largely restricted to process improvement rather than novel process development in the few industries that treat their aqueous effluents to surface waters discharge standards. However, in contrast, considerable

innovations are occurring for waste sludge

treatment, where existing processes fail to meet the requirements of the law concerning sludge disposal by spreading on agricultural

land, clearly indicating

that legislation, even without penalties for non-compliance, effective stimulus for technological innovation.

can also act as an

32

G. Hamer

CONCLUDING

REMARKS

Differing

governmental,

resulted

in contrasting

tion

abatement

objectives of

seem

natural

ves

will

fiable

the

aquatic always

and

be

legislation

and

enforcement

three

countries

the

most

Discharge in view

always

and

sensible

disputed,

but

pollution

be

subject

when

economic

procedures

realistic

standards of

the

to

industrial

for

basis

activity

as

most

effective

effective

to

quality

protection

and its

have

pollu-

specific

and

respect

more

the

unknown

with

the

water

for

achieve

frequently

situations

environmental

policies

stringent

to change

and

In general,

and

by

cycles, as

systems

discussed.

environments.

hydrological

should

permits

legal

of water

regional

enforcement

and

to offer

consequences

local

logy

in

legislative

objectinon-quanti-

effects

standards

on

and

available

techno-

becomes

availa-

technology

ble.

The

acceptance

cable

of

in one

commended.

discharge

country

Specific

assessment.

However,

ment

for

grants

effluent

the seem

to

from

industrial

pollution

is probably strategic

either

effective

from

generally

In many coal,

oil

and

relative

to

rather

ving

natural

introduction

the

economic

logical

than

of

sands

levels

and

their

the

are

major

with

on

of

more

fees,

in

depending to

grounds,

gross

subtle on

achieve objectives,

participation

political

invest-

applied

quality

governmental or

applire-

individual

unlikely

environmental

are be

ravages

effect

effluent

industries

economic

to

coupled

as widely

in reducing

Differential of

have

of

must

be

Collusion should

economies

environmental

should

and

be

be

such

between

resources,

and/or

exempted

result

of may

and

of

water any

assessed, to

either

prior

for

or

and

gauged ground

resource

industries

local

water be

programme

prevent

infrastructure and

must

surface

become

impact

governments

compromise

in massive

both

legislation the

particularly

developments

accurately

appropriate enacted

never

will

from

deterioration

national The

energy

resources, gained

serious

where

programme,

indigenous

biomass

benefits

limited.

resources

development

subjected policies

processes,

specific

of

exploitation

established.

cycles.

which

development

energy

the

or

either

consequences to

be

that cannot

legislation.

economic

resource

to water

enforcement ted

the

resources

ted,

damage

the tar

shale,

pollution,

water

applicable

countries,

marked.

objectives elsewhere

charging

effective

ownership

control

on

must

fee

discharges,althouqh

less

never,

quality

application

treatment

remarkably

industries

should

of

or

pollution

those

clearly,

involvement

much nature

water

situations

installation be

and direct

discharge

Europe,

type,

for

environmental

the

and

standards

region,

pollution

Western water

or

limiinvol-

to

the

irreversible its for

regional

effective accelera hydro-

The Impact of Government Legislation

43

REFERENCES

Bull,

R.M.

M.A.,

Bundi,

U.,

(1983).

Bundi,

U.,

and

Brouwer,

Sterritt

Engng.

Chem.

S. Mauch

W.A.H.,

Die

Bundesversammlung

A.C.J.,

Instn.

A.P.

Chem.

Pollut.

. Wat.

Pearce,

A.S.,

(1983

. Instn.

Zlokarnik,

M.,

on

Engrs.

and

(1983

Commission

der

Verminnen

H.A.,

Pollution

(1975).

Schutz

Meijer,

Royal

Quality

J.C.

Chem.

Environmental

Policy

Verordnung

and

11983).

Chem.

and

Law,

Gewasser Symp. Plas.

Engrs.

Prospects. Engng.,

gegen Ser.,

82, Symp.

27-33.

iiber Abwassereinleitungen. (1971).

Verunreinigung. 77,

(1972).

Control,

5,

7, 131-134.

Eidgenossenschaft,

Pollution,

- Experience Ger.

8, 213-218.

Bulletin,

Schweizerischen

iiber den

(1983).

(1984).

Environmental

Water

der

Lester 203-213. Bulletin,

(1979).

Bundesrat,

Bundesgesetz

Koot,

J.N. 62,

Quality

(19831.

Schweizerische

G.,

Dev.,

Water

Der

Hamer,

and

Res.

87-101.

Water.

5.

566-569.

213-223. Ser.,

(1984). H.M.S.O.,

6, 183-197.

77, 10th

71-77. Report,

London.

Tackling