Читать книгу Pollutants and Water Management - Группа авторов - Страница 73

Industrial pollution management in many developing countries is complicated by the fact that a large number of small‐scale units lack the capacity to mitigate emissions and follow regulations properly (Bansal 2018). Not only are these units restricted by their size, they often have inadequate technological expertise, face financial bottlenecks, and have limited managerial capacities. These features mean that effluent treatment is not feasible by individual units (Kathuria 2001). In addition, the costs associated with individual care will be prohibitive, thus making it impractical. Effluent treatment plants (ETPs) and common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) have been advocated as a cost‐effective alternative for meeting the requirements for small‐scale polluting units in industrial estates/sectors (Bansal 2018). A list of operational CETPs, with an online continuous effluent monitoring system (OCEMS) and zero liquid discharge (ZLD) units in India are listed in Table 3.3.

The first big move toward regulating industrial discharges was implemented in India in 1993–1994 with a priority action plan to classify polluting industries along rivers; they were ordered to install ETPs within three months or face closure (Rajaram and Das 2008). The outcome of this program was believed to be a considerable success.

Different bodies with different functions were also created at a central and state level related to groundwater for the conservation and management of water (Garg 2012). These included:

 MoWR

 River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation

 Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)

 Central Water Commission (CWC)

 Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA)

 CGWB

 Ministry of Industry (MoI)

Table 3.3 Lists of operational effluent treatment plants, with an online continuous effluent monitoring system and zero liquid discharge units in some states.

Source: https://cpcbenvis.nic.in/cpcb_newsletters/PollutingIndustries.pdf.

S. no.	State	Operational CETPs	OCEMS connectivity with CPCB	No. of CETPs with ZLD
1)	Andhra Pradesh	0	0	0
2)	Delhi	6	6	0
3)	Gujarat	0	0	0
4)	Haryana	0	0	0
5)	Himachal Pradesh	0	0	0
6)	Jammu and Kashmir	0	0	0
7)	Jharkhand	0	0	0
8)	Karnataka	0	0	0
9)	Kerala	0	0	0
10)	Madhya Pradesh	13	4	9
11)	Maharashtra	0	0	0
12)	Punjab	33	16	17
13)	Rajasthan	19	15	4
14)	Tamil Nadu	1	0	1
15)	Telangana	2	0	2
16)	Tripura	1	1	0
17)	Uttar Pradesh	10	9	1
18)	Uttarakhand	6	4	2
19)	West Bengal	0	0	0
	Total	191	127	63

However, it must be understood that the mere installation of ETPs in medium or large units without regular monitoring of millions of small‐scale units does not guarantee clean discharges. This is evident from the pollution of surface and groundwater around industrial areas. Specific factors including both legal and illegal processes that are responsible for the pollution of water bodies, even after ETPs and CETPs were installed (Maheshwari 2016), are shown in Figure 3.3.

In order to prevent these dangerous circumstances, it is advised that the authorities take legal or collective action on defaulters or handle drainage using creative approaches. To improve water resources quality, there are some legal actions and steps for enhancing existing treatment systems as follows (Afzal et al. 2018; Maheshwari 2016; Sharma et al. 2016):

 Strict enforcement – closure or warning of units that do not meet the requirements or norms.

 Restriction of water consumption/restriction of wastewater production.

 Upgrade of individual ETPs.Figure 3.3 Factors responsible for the contamination of water resources.(Source: Based on Maheshwari 2016.)

 Updating of CETPs and stricter CETP inlet/outlet specifications.

 Most importantly, ETPs and CETPs should be operated by technicians or professionals.

 National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS) should be strictly enforced for industrial effluents.

 Avoiding malpractice by authorities.

 Periodic monitoring and evaluation processes should be there to ensure the proper functioning of CETPs and ETPs.