9420.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The status of treatment for plants discharging to sewer was reviewed for those located in the GVS&DD (Figure 5.3). The individual discharge permits require treatment of the effluent prior to discharge to sewer. The level of treatment ranges from the use of grease and sand interceptors to screening (30 % and 80 % of all plants, respectively). Approximately 10 % of these facilities use a combination of the two forms of treatment. The screen sizes used in plants discharging to the GVS&DD is not specified in the permit. A summary of MOELP, GVRD or City of Vancouver discharge permit requirements is presented in Table 5.1. Contaminant discharge concentration limits are generally 600 mg/L for TSS and 1000 mg/L for BOD for plants discharging to the GVRD, but to date have not been enforced. MOELP permits for the discharge of process water from fish processing plants generally do not contain BOD or TSS limits, and contain statements such as the requirement that the effluent quality should be equivalent to or better than typical fish processing plant effluent. For the purpose of calculating permit fees (which are based on the TSS and BOD loading of the effluent), effluents are assumed to exhibit a TSS concentration and BOD of 70 mg/L and 100 mg/L, respectively. Effluent concentrations generally exceed these assumed values. However, permit fees are determined by multiplying the assumed concentrations by the product of the maximum permitted daily discharge flow, by the number of days per year, by the unit fee for each parameter. Therefore, permit fees are also to be paid for days during which no processing takes place. It is probable that permit fees would be in the same order of magnitude should they be paid on actual concentrations (i.e. organic load, hydraulic load and days of operation per year). A summary of fish processing effluent discharge regulations in selected European jurisdictions is presented in Table 5.2. Experts from the Danish Institute for Fisheries Technology and Aquiculture, however, expressed the opinion that the lowest BOD level that industry could achieve is 100 -150 mg/L. They also recognized that the set limit of 15 mg/L BOD is not economically achievable by fish processors using currently available technology (NovaTec, 1993a). / 5.1.2 Water Consumption and Wastewater Management Wastewater management practices in place at fish processing facilities in the Pacific Northwest’ (B. C., Alaska, Washington, and Oregon) range from grinding and discharging 47
Table 5.1 Permit Summary ———--6-IIW- em Ows uen ua A~ Nane No. process 1 cooling BOD TSS O&G Wo:k: Discharge (m3/day) rnglL mg/L 1 rnglL WE uate rmmwa LLU. ---, ---- I-:- L-
Page 2 and 3:
Environment Canada Industrial Progr
Page 4 and 5:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was
Page 6 and 7:
TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEM’EN
Page 8 and 9:
5.4 5.5 BEST 6.1 6.2 6.3 5.3.4.2 Ot
Page 10 and 11: Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Fi
Page 12 and 13: Table 5.8 Table 5.9 Table 5.10 Tabl
Page 14 and 15: 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Terms of Referen
Page 16 and 17: 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 Genera
Page 18 and 19: 1992a). In 1990, approximately 70 %
Page 20 and 21: Development of aquiculture (husband
Page 22 and 23: REDUCTION PLANT Q \ \ PRINCE RUPERT
Page 24 and 25: 2.4 Review of Current Regulations 2
Page 26 and 27: 2.4.3 Municipal and Regional Bylaws
Page 28 and 29: Table 3.1 Water Consumption Rates -
Page 30: 3.2 Wastewater Characteristics 3.2.
Page 33 and 34: Table 3.4 Contaminant Concentration
Page 35 and 36: 3.2.2 Fish Processing Facilities in
Page 37 and 38: Table 3.7 Production-based Contamin
Page 39 and 40: which are permitted to grind and di
Page 41 and 42: 4 PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY The five ma
Page 43 and 44: ---- ,,, ,,, > “\ - Y’ I r ----
Page 45 and 46: VESSEL-HOLD WATER PACKERS AND RECIR
Page 47 and 48: && a- * I ---- ————-— --
Page 49 and 50: 4.4 Herring Processing 4.4.1 Genera
Page 51 and 52: Raw shrimp are held on ice for abou
Page 53 and 54: ~ PRODUCT — WASTEWATER ----- WATE
Page 55 and 56: -+ \ /’WATER’l \~uPPLY/ ‘T-
Page 57 and 58: 5 WATER AND WASTE MANAGEMENT 5.1 Cu
Page 59: Information Grind and Discha Coarse
Page 64 and 65: offal with wastewater, which is the
Page 66 and 67: equipment clean and to flush offal
Page 68 and 69: Table 5.4 Solid Waste Generation at
Page 70 and 71: process water. However, different r
Page 72 and 73: 5.2.4 Contaminant Reduction Several
Page 74 and 75: Fine screening is generally used as
Page 76 and 77: to coagulate proteins, cooling and
Page 78 and 79: Table 5.6 Summary of FM Proceeding
Page 80 and 81: 5.3.4.3 Enhanced Gravity Settling T
Page 82 and 83: To the knowledge of the authors, on
Page 84 and 85: To the knowledge of the authors, no
Page 86 and 87: 5.3.6.2 Hydrocyclones Hydrocyclones
Page 88 and 89: Solid wastes generated by seafood p
Page 90 and 91: Table 5.10 Results of Applications
Page 92 and 93: 5.4.9 Bone Meal Experiment conducte
Page 94 and 95: The comporting operation consists o
Page 96 and 97: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Page 98 and 99: ● / use of finer mesh screens (do
Page 100 and 101: 7 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 7.1 Review of t
Page 102 and 103: wholesale and landed values as a me
Page 104 and 105: 7.2 Processing Technology Treatment
Page 106 and 107: (~nuJ!WU Jo %) SONICINVl u) (9 I <
Page 108 and 109: conservation and the implementation
Page 110 and 111:
In-house modifications can result i
Page 112 and 113:
Table 7.3 Expected Efficiency of Wa
Page 114 and 115:
Table 7.4 Assumptions used for Econ
Page 116 and 117:
quo had been maintained. For each t
Page 118 and 119:
All cost estimates involving DAF un
Page 120 and 121:
meet toxicity limits. However, biol
Page 122 and 123:
BIBLIOGRAPHY Aegis Management Servi
Page 124 and 125:
Fukuda H. and H. Nakatani. Treatmen
Page 126 and 127:
Johnson R.A. and S.M. Gallanger. Us
Page 128 and 129:
NovaTec Consultants Inc.. Village o
Page 130:
( Takei M.. Treatment of Waste Wate
show all

9420.pdf

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?