Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 472–479 | Cite as

Industrial water treatment and industrial marine outfalls: Achieving the right balance

Review Article

Abstract

Industrial water treatment and industrial marine outfalls both function together to reduce the pollutant concentrations in the effluent and mitigate the potential impact on the environment. The former uses environmental treatment technology with energy and material cost considerations, while the latter utilizes the natural assimilation potential of the coastal water environment achievable at the outfall location. Because of their synergistic nature, marine outfalls are now commonly used for the disposal of partially treated domestic and industrial effluents in many coastal cities around the world, with many successful examples of low and acceptable risks to the environment. The objective of this paper is to review their balance from both environmental and economic considerations. We also discuss the end-of-the-pipe and mixing zone approaches for industrial effluents, and give some recommendations particularly for developing countries. Finally, we emphasize that a compulsory and vigorous monitoring program is essential regardless of how the balance is achieved.

Keywords

industrial effluent treatment industrial marine outfalls economic and environmental considerations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

11705_2016_1592_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (169 kb)
Industrial water treatment and industrial marine outfalls: Achieving the right balance

References

  1. 1.
    Ferraro S P, Swartz R C, Cole F A, Schults D W. Temporal changes in the benthos along a pollution gradient: Discriminating the effect of natural phenomena from sewage-industrial effluent effects. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 1991, 33(4): 383–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grace R A. An unusual marine outfall off central California, USA. Water & Maritime Engineering, 2001, 148(3): 133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Okus E, Ozturk I, Sur H I, Yuksek A, Tas S, Aslan-Yilmaz A, Altiok H, Balkis N, Dogan E, Ovez S, Aydin A F. Critical evaluation of wastewater treatment and disposal strategies for Istanbul with regards to water quality monitoring study results. Desalination, 2008, 226(1-3): 231–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vidal-Dorsch D E, Bay S M, Maruya K, Snyder S A, Trenholm R A, Vanderford B J. Contaminants of emerging concern in municipal wastewater effluents and marine receiving water. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2012, 31(12): 2674–2682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yang L, Chang W S, Huang M N L. Natural disinfection of wastewater in marine outfall fields. Water Research, 2000, 34(3): 743–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    PUB. Singapore’s national water agency, 2015. http://www. pub. gov. sg/dtss/Pages/default. aspxGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xu J, Lee J H, Yin K, Liu H, Harrison P J. Environmental response to sewage treatment strategies: Hong Kong’s experience in long term water quality monitoring. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2011, 62(11): 2275–2287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baxter J M, Boyd I L, Cox M, Donald A E, Malcolm S J, Miles H, Miller B, Moffat C F. Scotland’s Marine Atlas: Information for the National Marine Plan. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland, 2011, 191Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nigam R, Saraswat R, Panchang R. Application of foraminifers in ecotoxicology: Retrospect, perspect and prospect. Environment International, 2006, 32(2): 273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roberts P J W, Salas H J, Reiff F M, Libhaber M, Labbe A, Thomson J C. Marine Effluent Outfalls and Treatment Systems. London: IWA publishing, 2010, 159–203Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pearce F. The unspeakable beaches of Britain. New Scientist, 1981, 91(1262): 139–142Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deng Y, Yang G. Pollution and protest in China: Environmental mobilization in context. China Quarterly, 2013, 214: 321–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grace R A. Marine Outfall Construction: Background, Techniques and Case Studies. Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers Press, 2009, 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chang N B, Wang S F. A grey nonlinear programming approach for planning coastal wastewater treatment and disposal systems. Water Science and Technology, 1995, 32(2): 19–29Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scanes P R, Philip N. Environmental impact of deepwater discharge of sewage off Sydney, NSW, Australia. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 1995, 31(4-12): 343–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Taylor D I. The Boston Harbor project and large decreases in loadings of eutrophication-related materials in Boston Harbor. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2010, 60(4): 609–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang L. Review of marine outfall systems in Taiwan. Water Science and Technology, 1995, 32(2): 257–264Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    NRC (National Research Council). Managing Wastewater in Coastal Urban Areas. Washington, DC: National Academic Press, 1993, 53–71Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tate P M, Scaturro S, Cathers B. Marine Outfall. In Dhanak M R, Xiros N, eds. Springer Handbook of Ocean Engineering. Berlin: Speringer-Verlag, 2016, 7–36Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Foley J, De Haas D, Hartley K, Lant P. Comprehensive life cycle inventories of alternative wastewater treatment systems. Water Research, 2010, 44(5): 1654–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lundie S, Peters G M, Beavis P C. Life cycle assessment for sustainable metropolitan water systems planning. Environmental Science & Technology, 2004, 38(13): 3465–3473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vigneswaran S, ed. Water and Wastewater Treatment Technologies (Volume 2). Oxford: EOLSS Publisher, 2009, 282Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pillay S D. An environmental life cycle assessment of the provision of recycled water in Durban. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Durban: University of Kwazulu-Natal, 2006, Chapter 3Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Libhaber M, Orozco-Jaramillo Á. Sustainable Treatment and Reuse of Municipal Effluent: For Decision Makers and Practicing Engineers. London: Iwa Publishing, 2012, 8–81Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rubio J, Souza M L, Smith R W. Overview of flotation as a wastewater treatment technique. Minerals Engineering, 2002, 15(3): 139–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ujang Z, Henze M. Municipal Wastewater Management in Developing Countries-Principles and Engineering. London: Taylor & Francis, 2003, 70–97Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aiyuk S, Forrez I, Lieven D K, Van Haandel A, Verstraete W. Anaerobic and complementary treatment of domestic sewage in regions with hot climates—A review. Bioresource Technology, 2006, 97(17): 2225–2241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    De la Noüe J, Lalibereté G, Proulx D. Algae and wastewater. Journal of Applied Phycology, 1992, 4(3): 247–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Verma A K, Dash R R, Bhunia P. A review on chemical coagulation/ flocculation technologies for removal of colour from textile effluents. Journal of Environmental Management, 2012, 93(1): 154–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sarayu K, Sandhya S. Current technologies for biological treatment of textile wastewater—A review. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2012, 167(3): 645–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Grace R A. Marine Outfall Systems: Planning, Design and Construction. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1978, 1–16Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wood I R, Bell R G, Wilkinson D L. Ocean Disposal of Waste. Hong Kong: World Scientific, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Roberts P J W, Ferrier A, Daviero G. Mixing in inclined dense jets. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 1997, 123(8): 693–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jiang B, Law AW K, Lee J H W. Mixing of 30° and 45° inclined dense jets in shallow coastal waters. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2014, 140(3): 241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shao D D, Law AWK. Mixing and boundary interactions of 30 and 45 degree inclined dense jets. Environmental Fluid Mechanics, 2010, 10(5): 521–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wallis J G. Ocean outfall construction cost. Water Pollution Control Federation, 1979, 51(5): 951–957Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gunnerson C G, French J A. Wastewater Management for Coastal Cities: The Ocean Disposal Option. Heidelberg: Springer, 1996, 311–339Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Frith S J, Staples K D. North Tyneside Bathing Waters’ Scheme. Water and Environment Journal, 1995, 9(1): 55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Price A C, Clark S, Roe M K, Lloyd T C. The Seaton Carew Sewerage Scheme: Design features and contractual arrangements. Water and Environment Journal, 1993, 7(1): 72–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Smith P H. Upgrading of sewerage assets to comply with new legislation: A Lothian regional viewpoint. Water and Environment Journal, 1992, 6(2): 641–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bigot L, Conand C, Amouroux J M, Frouin P, Bruggemann H, Grémare A. Effects of industrial outfalls on tropical macrobenthic sediment communities in Reunion Island (Southwest Indian Ocean). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2006, 52(8): 865–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    WHO (World Health Organization). Guidelines for safe recreational water environments 2003, 51–96Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rodgers T. Treated Sewage Waiver Signed. San Diego: Union Tribune, September 14, 2002Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Grigg R W, Dollar S J. Environmental protection misapplied: Alleged versus documented impacts of a deep ocean sewage outfall in Hawaii. Ambio, 1995, 24(2): 125–128Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    USEPA. Amended Section 301(h) Technical support document. Oceans and coastal protection div. (4504F), office of wetlands, oceans and watersheds. EPA842-B-94-007, September, 1994, 1–139Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Blackman A. Colombia’s discharge fee program: Incentives for polluters or regulators? Journal of Environmental Management, 2009, 90(1): 101–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Process Modelling Centre, Nanyang Environment and Water Research InstituteNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations