Effluent limitation

Abstract: Presenting a review of the state of water quality prediction models currently available to the practitioner, this book provides a broad-based understanding of the water quality prediction process and evaluates the merits and cost effectiveness in using water quality models under field conditions. This book builds on and revises the chapter on water quality modelling from the World Bank's Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook 1998. Surface water quality is a key to life, yet in many developing countries municipal and industrial pollution continues to pervade sources due to competing demands on scarce resources. Elementary environmental controls are being applied, but the optimal allocation of limited financial resources requires sophisticated analytical approaches. This volume provides an introduction to analytical tools, specifically water quality modelling, used in determining the quality of surface waters.

Abstract: Among its many responsibilities, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with implementing the Clean Water Act established by Congress in 1972. The major objective of the Clean Water Act is to eliminate or control the discharge of pollutants, particularly toxic pollutants, into the Nation’s waterways. One of the ways EPA is meeting this objective is to develop national technology-based effluent limitations guidelines for the oil and gas exploration and production industry. The development of these effluent guidelines required first an analysis of the performance capability of wastestream pollution control technology, followed by a determination of costs and economic achievability of the implementation of such technology. The final effluent limitations developed are a result of EPA’s determination of the best available technology that is economically achievable for the industry. This paper will describe the effluent limitations regulations specifically for produced water generated by the oil and gas industry in the United States, and will include a description of the technologies that serve as a basis for the regulation, the actual effluent limitations requirements, and the costs of compliance.

Abstract: In response to effluent limitation guidelines promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, industry has developed alternatives to the water and oil-based drilling fluids used offshore. These synthetic-based muds (SBMs), enhanced mineral oils (EMOs) and purified paraffin oils have lower toxicity and smaller environmental impacts than diesel or conventional mineral oil-based muds (OBMs). EPA is developing new guidelines for the discharge of these fluids and the associated cuttings. The decision about allowing or disallowing the discharge of cuttings with small amounts of associated SBMs, EMOs and purified paraffin oils should not be based solely on potential environmental impacts, especially those such as bioaccumulation or biodegradation that may not be directly connected to effects on populations or ecosystems. Regulatory decisions about drilling fluid discharges should also consider potential impacts associated with the alternatives; including occupational accidents and chemical exposures, impacts associated with disposal, air emissions, and transportation risks. Because these new fluids are expensive, industry will not continue to use them if the cuttings cannot be discharged offshore. The alternative to allowing the discharge of these new drilling fluids is the continuing use of OBMs in difficult drilling situations. This paper develops a framework for a comparative environmental assessment for the discharge of drilling fluids, to help support a risk-based, integrated approach to regulatory decision making.

Abstract: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)’s announcement that it will revise the effluent limitation guidelines for steam electric power generating units could affect not only how power plants use water, but also how they discharge it The revised guidelines may lower discharge limits for various contaminants in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater including mercury, selenium, arsenic, and nitrate/nitrite Although the specific details of the guidelines are unknown at present, the power industry is evaluating various technologies that may address the new effluent limitation guidelines and promote water conservation Moreover, the power industry is looking for avenues to increase water usage efficiency, reuse and recycle throughout its plant processes Final rule approval is expected by the middle of 2014 and new regulations are expected to be implemented between 2017 and 2022 through 5-year NPDES permit cycles discharge limits for various contaminants including arsenic, mercury, selenium, and nitrate/nitrite [1] These pollutant limits may be below the levels achievable today with conventional treatment [2]A growing interest exists in zero liquid discharge (ZLD) facilities and processes in power plant operations Potentially stringent discharge limits along with water conservation and reuse efforts are two of the major drivers to achieve ZLD Potential pollutant levels are so low that ZLD may be the best option, if not an outright requirement [1]Thermal ZLD systems have been the subject of increased interest and discussion lately They employ evaporating processes such as ponds, evaporators and crystallizers, or spray dryers to produce a reusable water stream and a solid residue (ie waste) Evaporators and crystallizers have been employed in the power industry for a number of years However, typical A growing interest exists in zero liquid discharge (ZLD) facilities and processes in power plant operations Potentially stringent discharge limits along with water conservation and reuse efforts are two of the major drivers to achieve ZLD Potential pollutant levels are so low that ZLD may be the best option, if not an outright requirement A key disadvantage of thermal ZLD is its high capital cost One way to reduce this cost is to pre-treat the liquid stream using innovative membrane technologies and reverse osmosis (RO)Copyright © 2014 by ASME