ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF ALCOHOL INDUSTRY IN UTTAR PRADESH DR. YASHPAL SINGH CHIEF...

ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF ALCOHOL

INDUSTRY IN UTTAR PRADESH

DR. YASHPAL SINGHCHIEF ENVIRONMENT OFFICER

U.P. Pollution Control BoardLucknow,India

2

The Study TeamA. Coordination:

1. Dr. C.S.Bhatt, Member Secretary, UPPCB

2. Dr. Yashpal Singh, Chief Environment Officer, UPPCB

3. Er. Pradeep Sharma, Asstt. Environment Engr., UPPCB.

B. Study Executed by:

ENV Developmental Assistance Systems (INDIA) Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow.

Experts:1. Er. T.N.Chaturvedi,

Professional & Chartered Engineer

2. Er. R.K.Bajaj,Environmental Engineer

C. Data Analysis & DTP1. Mr. T.Wilson, Data Analyst & DTP, DAS India.2. Mr. R.K.Bajpai, Data Entry Operator, UPPCB . Contd...

3

The Study Team (… contd.)

Our gratitude to:

Sri Pradeep Kumar The then Principal Secretary Environment and

Chairman UP Pollution Control Board

For conceiving and designing the study and for his inspiring leadership and guidance.

Excise DepartmentGovt. of Uttar Pradesh.

For providing valuable data

Senior Officers of the U.P. Pollution Control Board

For their valuable inputs.

4

EVOLUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION• FIRST WAVE – THE TRADITIONAL REGULATORY APPROACH

• SECOND WAVE – MARKET BASED INSTRUMENTS

- POLLUTION CHARGES

- PRODUCT CHARGES

- USER FEE

- PERFORMANCE BONDS

- LIABILITY PAYMENTS

- NON COMPLIANCE FEES

- DEPOSIT REFUND SCHEME

- TRADEABLE PERMITS

• THIRD WAVE – PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

5

BENEFITS OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

• CREATION OF MARKET OPPORTUNITIES

• IMPROVEMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

• INCREASED CONFIDENCE OF INVESTORS, INSURERS AND

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

• IMPROVED RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES,

REGULATORS AND NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIIONS

•GREATER CONTROL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE

•INCREASED STAFF COMMITTMENT

6

PRACTICED AS• Involuntary – Media Exposures, Notices, PIL Etc.

• Mandatory – The Regulatory Mechanism like consents

• Voluntary – Press Release, Public Reports Etc.

DRIVERS• Transparency

- Society Wants To Be Told What Is Going On

• Accountability

- Fear Of Losing Significant Economic Value Of

Good Corporate Reputation

• Synergy Between Economic And Environmental

Performance

7

ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION• THE WATER (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION )

ACT, 1974 AS AMENDED IN 1988.

• THE WATER ( PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION)

CESS ACT, 1977 AS AMENDED IN 1991.

• THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT,

1981 AS AMENDED IN 1987.

• THE ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT, 1986

• THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991

• THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRIBUNAL ACT, 1995

• THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY ACT,

1997

• NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2002

8

•INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM

- CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

- STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDS

• INCENTIVES / DISINCENTIVES

- FINES

- BANK GUARANTEES

- CESS REBATE

- CONSENT VALIDITY

- LOCATION

- CLOSURES

- PROSECUTION

9

Environmental Performance Rating A Pioneering Initiative

U.P. Pollution Control Board, in a pioneering initiative is making efforts to change the paradigm of the way Pollution Control is commonly understood.

Dispel the notion that, Pollution Control is an end of process, cost-intensive, loss-making effort.

Rather, environmental management and pollution control means harmonizing resources, process and outputs.

10

Objectives of this Study

To place a Mirror before the industry in the form of Environmental Performance Rating to make them aware about their strengths and weaknesses as also the opportunities & threats, so as to enable self-correction and continual improvement in their environmental performance.

To encourage pro-active role by the Industry to improve its Environmental Performance through benchmarking.

11

Significance of Alcohol Industry

Downstream unit of Sugar Industry- Synergy with Sugar & Paper

Utilising wastes (Molasses) to produce Alcohol, an essential input of the Chemical & Pharmaceutical Industry and a product for human consumption.

Alcohol – great potential for use as Fuel for automobiles – GASOHOL.

But, also known for discharging highly polluted effluents and is included in ‘Schedule-1’ of Water Cess Act. An EIA is a pre-requisite before setting up of any unit or expansion thereof. (Contd…….)

12

Significance of Alcohol Industry (….

Contd.)

Significance in U.P.

Alongwith sugar, the largest value enhancer to agricultural produce.

Contributes a significant part of State GDP – next only to Trade Tax.

Major catalyst of Employment in the Primary & Secondary Sectors.

Unfortunately, also amongst the most polluting industries.

Over 10 MT of BOD load per day into the river systems of the State.

13

Alcohol Industry in Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal – a profile

No. of Distilleries in U.P. & Uttaranchal - 43

No. of Operational Distilleries - 37

No. of Molasses Based Distilleries - 35

No. of Grain Based Distilleries - 02

Units not operated in 2000-01 - 02 Total Annual Production Capacity

of the Operational Distilleries - 6,79,777 KL

Alcohol Production during 2000-01 - 4,32,489 KL

14

Analytical Framework and Methodology The basic hypothesis for this environmental

performance rating exercise has been: Optimal resource utilisation and improved

production processes are likely to result in better environmental performance.

Minimal but conscious efforts can result in achieving the environmental norms.

Therefore, the framework of the rating has three axes: Plant performance Regulatory compliance & Environmental initiatives

(Contd…...)

15

Analytical Framework and Methodology ( …. Contd.)

The study is based on data obtained from –

The industry Excise Department

U.P. Pollution Control Board

The study is diachronic & covers a span of three (3)

years:

1998-99, 1999-2000 & 2000-01 and includes trend of

Performance

(Contd…...)

16

Analytical Framework and Methodology (…….Contd.)

Evaluation parameters identified. Basic data obtained from Industry on a customized

questionnaire. The Data received analyzed and clarifications obtained

from the units, as required. Consultants’ team visited Eight (8) Distillery units,

selected on geographical location and size, to verify credibility of the reported data on a sample basis.

Feedback taken from Senior Technical officers of UPPCB, during a series of presentations.

Authentication of the data, considered for calculating the environmental parameters, obtained from the top management of the distillery units.

(Contd…...)

17

Analytical Framework and Methodology (…….Contd.)

Environmental parameters calculated for various units from the authenticated data obtained.

Latest (2000-01) performance & Trend analyzed. The two grain based units separately analyzed. Two (2) molasses-based units- one started in 2000-01 and

the other not worked during the year 2000-01, excluded.

Draft Report prepared and presented to the industry in an “Open-house (05.02.02)” for feedback, after which the final report with ratings, prepared.

Individual units informed about their environmental performance scores as well as the potential for cost savings through improvement - “Action Plans requested”

18

The Environmental Performance Criteria & Weightages

Plant Level Performance (40%)

% utilization of installed production capacity (2+1) Raw Material, MT per KL Alcohol(5+1) Alcohol Recovery, Ltrs. Per MT TRS (3+1) Water Consumption, KL per KL Alcohol(10+1) Total Energy, GJ per KL Alcohol(4+1) % Renewable out of the Total Energy(4+1) Net External Energy, GJ per KL Alcohol(5+1)

(Contd…..)

19

The Environmental Performance Criteria & Weightages (……Contd.)

Regulatory Compliance Status (5%)

‘Consent’ – Water (2000) obtained from UPPCB

(5 for yes, 0 for no)

‘Marginal’/’Heavy’ Default (without dilution)

- UPPCB’ internal norms

- Negative Marking (Heavy –5; marginal –2)

(Contd…..)

20

The Environmental Performance Criteria & Weightages (……Contd.)

Corporate & Environmental Management Aspects (55%)

ISO 14001 E M S (10 for yes; 0 for no)

Completeness of ETP(10)

Effluent Disposal Practice - Stream/Land or

Conversion into Bio-compost (10)

Spent Wash generated, KL per KL Alcohol(10)

Biogas generation, Nm3 per KL Spent Wash(15)

Dilution Factor (-10)

21

Plant Level Performance

Capacity Utilisation• Minimum -

2.90%

• Maximum -105.15%

• Average - 64.56%

• Mode - 73.50

Environmental Performance Evaluation

Capacity Utilisation,%

1 1

5

7

2

6

8

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2.90 - 15.68 15.68 - 28.46 28.46 - 41.24 41.24 - 54.03 54.03 - 66.81 66.81 - 79.59 79.59 - 92.37 92.37 -105.15

Range

No

. of

Un

its

No. of Units with negative performance compared to modal value – 19

22

Plant Level PerformanceCapacity Utilisation – The Top & Bottom Five Units

The Top Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (%)

Weighted Score (Performance + Trend)

1 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli, Muzaffarnagar

100.30 2.994

2 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 103.82 2.924 3 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 105.15 2.897 4 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli,

Ghaziabad 92.25 2.845

5 Shadilal Distly. & Chem. Works, Muzaffarnagar

90.40 2.808

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance

Value (%) Weighted Score

(Performance + Trend)

29 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 46.74 0.935 30 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 46.52 0.930

31 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur, U.S.Nagar

39.94 0.799

32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut Cantt.

34.96 0.699

33 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj, Farrukhbad

02.90 0.058

23


Molasses Consumption, MT/KL Alcohol

• Minimum -4.53

• Maximum -6.28

• Average -4.97

• Mode - 4.97


Molasses, MT /KL Alcohol

910 10

1 10

1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

4.53 - 4.75 4.75 - 4.97 4.97 - 5.19 5.19 - 5.40 5.40 - 5.62 5.62 - 5.84 5.84 - 6.06 6.06 - 6.28

Range

No

. o

f U

nit

s

24

Plant Level PerformanceMolasses Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (MT/KL)


1 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 4.63 4.571 2 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 4.53 3.984 3 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath,

Kheri 4.57 3.817

4 UP State Sugar Coop. Fed. Ltd. Nanauta, Saharanpur

4.62 3.596

5 Kisan Sahakari hini Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Ghosi, Mau

4.63 3.543



Value (MT/KL) Weighted Score


29 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 5.16 1.204 30 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 5.39 0.208

31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 5.59 0.000 32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut

Cantt. 6.03 0.000


6.28 0.000

25


Recovery of Alcohol in Ltrs./MT. TRS

• Minimum -379.40

• Maximum -536.78

• Average -463.73

• Mode - 467.93


Alcohol Recovery,Ltrs. /MT TRS Content

21

2

4

18

4

1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

379.40 -399.08

399.08 -418.75

418.75 -438.42

438.42 -458.09

458.09 -477.76

477.76 -497.43

497.43 -517.11

517.11 -536.78

Range

No

. o

f U

nit

s

26

Plant Level PerformanceRecovery of Alcohol - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (Ltrs./MT)


1 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola, Pilibhit

536.78 3.372

2 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 509.28 1.989

3 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 490.27 1.724 4 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath,

Kheri 483.94 1.635

5 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 482.36 1.613



Value (Ltrs./MT) Weighted Score


29 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 435.73 0.963

30 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 427.44 0.847 31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 402.61 0.501 32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd,

Meerut Cantt. 387.88 0.295


379.40 0.177

27


Water Consumption, KL / KL Alcohol

• Minimum - 14.69

• Maximum -512.88

• Average -125.22

• Mode - 94.75


Water Consumption,KL /KL Alcohol

10

14

43

10 0

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

14.69 - 76.96 76.96 - 139.24 139.24 -201.51

201.51 -263.79

263.79 -326.06

326.06 -388.33

388.33 -450.61

450.61 -512.88

Range

No

. of

Un

its

28

Plant Level PerformanceWater Consumption- The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (KL/KL)


1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics), Gajraula

14.69 8.027

2 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad

32.61 7.454

3 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 31.99 6.508 4 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 48.27 6.079 5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar,




Value (KL/KL) Weighted Score



30 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 206.08 0.000 31 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 237.84 0.000 32 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 283.79 0.000


512.88 0.000

29


Total Energy Consumption in GJ/KL Alcohol

• Minimum - 10.17

• Maximum -123.56

• Average - 26.04• Mode - 18.32


Total Energy Consumption, GJ /KL Alcohol

23

6

1 10

10

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

10.17 -24.34

24.34 -38.51

38.51 -52.69

52.69 -66.86

66.86 -81.04

81.04 -95.21

95.21 -109.38

109.38 -123.56

Range

No

. of U

nits

30

Plant Level PerformanceTotal Energy Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (GJ/KL)


1 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 11.98 3.757 2 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 13.33 3.424

3 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 13.37 3.414 4 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly,

Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad 10.17 3.201

5 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 15.18 2.971



Value (GJ/KL) Weighted Score



30 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 31.25 0.000 31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar,



56.02 0.000


81.19 0.000

31


Total Renewable Energy % of Total Energy

• Minimum - 7.92

• Maximum -100.00

• Average - 79.51

• Mode - 93.42


Renewable Energy %

2 21

20

1

5

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

7.92 -19.43

19.43 -30.94

30.94 -42.45

42.45 -53.96

53.96 -65.47

65.47 -76.98

76.98 -88.49

88.49 -100.00

Range

No

. of U

nits

32

Plant Level PerformanceTotal Renewable Energy- The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (%)


1 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 100.00 4.999 2 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 100.00 4.999 3 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics),

Gajraula 100.00 4.999

4 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 96.23 4.312 5 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath,

Kheri 99.66 3.936



Value (%) Weighted Score


29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, Gorakhpur 77.86 0.000 30 Lords Distillery Ltd., Nandganj, Ghazipur 76.74 0.000 31 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 52.20 0.000

32 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 25.59 0.000 33 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut

Cantt. 11.31 0.000

33


Net External Energy in GJ / KL Alcohol

• Minimum - 0.00

• Maximum -123.56

• Average - 17.70

• Mode - 9.44


External Energy Consumption,GJ / KL Alcohol

22

8

01

01

01

0

5

10

15

20

25

0.00 -15.44

15.44 -30.89

30.89 -46.33

46.33 -61.78

61.78 -77.22

77.22 -92.67

92.67 -108.11

108.11 -123.56

Range

No

. of

Un

its

34

Plant Level PerformanceNet External Energy - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (GJ/KL)



0.00 6.000

2 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 3.26 4.963 3 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli,

Muzaffarnagar 4.01 4.725

4 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar, Faizabad

4.05 4.713

5 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad

1.13 4.641



Value (GJ/KL) Weighted Score


29 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 17.63 0.000 30 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 19.69 0.000 31 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj,

Farrukhbad 22.08 0.000


49.68 0.000


81.19 0.000

35

Regulatory Compliance

Consent Water Molasses Grain Based Based

• Consent Granted - 17 02

• Consent Not Granted - 16 -

Water Consent

19

16

02468

101214161820

Granted Not Granted

No

. o

f U

nit

s

36

Default Status (without dilution)

• Heavy Default - 22• Marginal Default - 11• Zero Discharge - 02

Regulatory Compliance

Default Status (without dillution)

22

11

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Heavy Default Marginal Default Zero Discharge

No

. of

Un

its

37

Environmental Management

ISO 14001/EMS not granted to any Unit

Completeness of ETP

• In 2 Units, Primary (Biogas generation) stage not functional. In other 3 units, biogas not monitored & not consumed.

• 16 Units do not have the Second Aerobic Stage of the Secondary Treatment

• 2 Units are converting the entire effluent into Bio-manure

• 8 Units have started partly converting the effluent into Bio-manure

38

Environmental Management Spent Wash Generation in KL/KL Alcohol

• Minimum - 10.87

• Maximum - 38.34• Average - 15.48• Mode - 14.92


Spent Wash,KL / KL Alcohol

13

16

2

0 0 0 01

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

10.87 -14.31

14.31 -17.74

17.74 -21.17

21.17 -24.61

24.61 -28.04

28.04 -31.47

31.47 -34.90

34.90 -38.34

Range

No

. of

Un

its

39

Environmental Management Spent Wash Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (KL/KL)

Weighted Score


10.87 7.995

2 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 11.36 7.517 3 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar,

Faizabad 11.93 6.948

4 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 12.65 6.242 5 Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.),

Seohara, Bijnor 12.66 6.233



Value (KL/KL) Weighted

Score 28 UPCSFF Ltd, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar 16.13 2.800 29 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 16.82 2.119 30 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur,

U.S.Nagar 19.34 0.000

31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 20.58 0.000 32 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 38.34 0.000

40


Biogas Generation in Nm3 /KL Spent Wash• Minimum - 7.26



Biogas, Nm3 / KL Spent Wash

1 1

3

6

9

1

3

2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

7.26 -13.14

13.14 -19.02

19.02 -24.90

24.90 -30.78

30.78 -36.66

36.66 -42.54

42.54 -48.42

48.42 -54.30

Range

No

. o

f U

nit

s

41

Environmental ManagementBiogas Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value (Nm3/KL)

Weighted Score


54.30 12.001

2 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 48.60 10.598 3 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 47.48 10.321 4 Oudh Sugar Mills (Distly.) Hargaon 45.49 9.830 5 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 43.81 9.416

The Bottom Five (5) units, excluding those not having biogas generation facilities are:


Value (Nm3/KL) Weighted

Score 22 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 23.73 4.469

23 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath, Kheri

23.31 4.365

24 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 23.04 4.298 25 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola,

Pilibhit 18.95 3.291

26 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 07.26 0.408

42


Dilution Ratio – KL Water/KL Treated Effluent

• Minimum - 0.31



Dilution Ratio

1413

2 2

0 0 01

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0.31 - 5.87 5.87 -11.44

11.44 -17.00

17.00 -22.56

22.56 -28.12

28.12 -33.69

33.69 -39.25

39.25 -44.81

Range

No. o

f Uni

ts

43

Environmental ManagementDilution Ratio – The Top & Bottom Five Units


Rank Name of Distillery Performance Value

Weighted Score


0.31 0.000

2 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 1.18 -2.000 3 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli,

Ghaziabad 1.49 -2.000

4 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 1.51 -2.000 5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 1.62 -2.000



Value Weighted

Score 28 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 11.86 -10.000

29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 14.59 -10.000 30 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,

Meerut 18.24 -10.000

31 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 19.50 -10.000


44.81 -10.000

44

• Minimum - -1.82


Overall Environmental Performance(Molasses Based Units)


Overall Environmental Performance

3

5 5

9

5

3 3

0123456789

10

-1.82 -6.18

6.18 -14.17

14.17 -22.17

22.17 -30.16

30.16 -38.16

38.16 -46.16

46.16 -54.15

Range

No

. of

Un

its

Mode - 26.17Average - 25.27

45

Conclusion1. Regional Comparison of Environmental Performance

Region No. of Units Performance Avg.Eastern 06 23.55Central 07 25.61Western 17 26.47Uttaranchal 03 21.14

Regional Comparision of Environmental Performance

23.5525.61 26.47

21.14

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

Eastern Central Western Uttaranchal

Region

Envi

ronm

enta

l Per

form

ance

(A

vera

ge)

6 Un

its

7 Un

its

17 U

nits

3 Un

its

46

2. River Catchment-wise – No. of Distilleries

River Catchment Units Discharging Land disposal/ to River Bio-Composting

Ghagra 06 05 01Gomti 03 01 02Ganga 20 18 02Yamuna 06 06 -(Including 2 Grain Based distilleries)

River Catchmentwise Comparision - No. of Distilleries

6

3

20

6

1

18

65

0

5

10

15

20

25

Ghagra Gomti Ganga Yamuna

River Catchment

No

. o

f U

nit

s

Total no. of Distlry.

No. discharging to River

47

3. Locational Comparison of Environmental Performance

Location No. of Units Performance Avg.Rural 23 24.90Semi Urban 02 29.97Urban 08 25.18

Locational Comparision of Environmental Performance(Molasses Based Units)

24.90

29.97

25.18

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

Rural Semi-Urban Urban

Location

En

vir

on

me

nta

l Pe

rfo

rma

nc

e

(Av

era

ge

)

23 U

nit

s

2 U

nit

s

8 U

nit

s

48

5. Environmental Performance vs Gross Profit

Gross Profit is directly proportional to Environmental Performance. (Available data for 14 units)

Better the Environmental Performance, higher is the Profitability.

Gross Profit/KL Alcohol vs Environmental Performance(Molasses Based Units)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Environmental Performance

Gro

ss

Pro

fit/

Un

it

49

6. Better Environmental Performance of Grain Based Distilleries

• The environmental performance of Grain Based is better in comparison to molasses based distilleries

• Even Though their energy requirements are much higher.

• Notably, there is no recognition for IMFL as Whisky by WTO.

50

Savings’ Potential in the overall industry through improved environmental performance

• Potential for annual cost savings on achieving industry-best performance value:

• Molasses Consumption : Rs. 26.95 Crores

• Water Consumption : Rs. 12.04 Crores

• Biogas Utilization : Rs. 22.50 Crores

• Reduction in Total Energy Consumption : Rs. 45.32 Crores

51

Recommendations

1. Serious thinking required in respect of the bottom five (5) units having alarmingly poor environmental performance with the consequent adverse environmental impacts.

2. Mandatory installation of Primary (Biogas) stage of effluent treatment in all the molasses-based plants to generate & utilize biogas as also its close monitoring and control. Retrofitting or replacement of inefficient plants to be carried out to achieve best performance.

3. Ensuring two stage aerobic treatment in Secondary stage of the Effluent Treatment Plant in all molasses-based units discharging into stream or land.

(Contd ……)

52

Recommendations

4. Minimizing water consumption by maximum recycling and reuse.

5. Installation of metering systems at identified locations for monitoring the consumption of Biogas, Water, Electricity & fuel.

6. Conversion of Spent Wash into bio-manure or cattle feed to be preferred disposal practice.

7. Energy Conservation training programs and periodic energy audits to identify and eliminate energy wastage and reduce energy consumption.

(Contd ……)

53

Recommendation (…….Contd.)

8. Maximum utilization of the treated effluent for irrigation, where bio-composting is not feasible.

9. Adoption of the best available technologies in the following areas, • Fermentation • Distillation • Co-generation of steam/power• Effluent Treatment

10. Upgradation of the Management through the implementation of :

• ISO 14001 Environmental Management System

• ISO 9001 Quality Management System

54

Overall Environmental Performance Rating(Molasses Based Units)

Sl. Name of Distillery Total Score (Max. Marks - 100)

1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics), Gajraula 54.153

2 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad 50.667

3 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 47.981

4 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 39.460

5 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 39.349

6 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath, Kheri 38.758

7 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 37.523

8 Oudh Sugar Mills (Distly.), Hargaon 36.659

9 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 36.278

10 Pilkhani Distly. & Chemical Works, Pilkhani, Dehradun 35.182

11 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli, Muzaffarnagar 31.163

Contd …..

55



12 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 29.728

13 Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Seohara Bijnor 28.151

14 Shadilal Distly. & Chem. Works, Muzaffarnagar 27.620

15 Lords Distillery Ltd., Nandganj, Ghazipur 27.444

16 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar, Faizabad 26.070

17 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 24.731

18 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 24.528

19 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 23.943

20 Kesar Enterprises Ltd, Baheri, Bareilly 23.665

21 National Industrial Corp. Ltd., Raja-Ka-Sahaspur, Moradabad 22.120

22 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala, Meerut 21.858

Contd …..

…… Contd.

56



23 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola, Pilibhit 18.258

24 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 17.266

25 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 16.049

26 SKS Chini Mills (Distly.), Nanpara, Bahraich 13.798

27 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut Cantt. 13.124

28 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 10.208

29 UPCSFF Ltd, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar 8.445

30 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Ghosi, Mau 6.257

31 UP State Sugar Coop. Fed. Ltd. Nanauta, Saharanpur 3.845

32 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj, Farrukhbad 1.514

33 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur, U.S.Nagar -1.820

…… Contd.

57

PILOT PROGRAMME FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE RATING AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE FOR INDUSTRIES

• PART OF WORLD BANK PROGRAMME

• SIMILAR IN DESIGN PRINCIPLES TO STUDIES IN

INDONESIA, CHINA AND PHILIPINES

• COLLECTIVE EFFORT OF CII, WORLD BANK AND

THE U.P. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.

58

• INITIATED IN MAY 2001

• COVERED 33 INDUSTRIES OF DIFFERENT SIZES AND

DIFFERENT SECTORS AT GHAZIABAD AND NOIDA

• CLASSIFIED BLACK, RED (IMPLYING LACK OF

COMPLIANCE) AND BLUE GREEN AND GOLD

(LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE MEETING EXISTING

STANDARDS)

• 6 RATED GOLD AND GREEN

• 16 RATED BLUE

• 11 RATED BLACK AND RED

59

PILOT INCLUDES• LOCATION SPECIFIC PROGRAMME

• INCLUDES SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISE ALSO

• INVOLVES A YES / NO

• COMPLIANCE RATING AS AGAINST PERFORMANCE

RATING

60

FUTURE OUTLOOK• DATA ACQUISITION SUCCESSFUL ONLY IF ASSISTED

BY REGULATORY AUTHORITIES.

• SEPARATE IDENTITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RATING

PROGRAM

• INVOLVEMENT OF A MULTI STAKEHOLDER PANEL FOR

RATING VERIFICATION AND OVERSEEING THE RATING

PROCESS IS MUST

• INVOLVEMENT OF TECHNICAL EXPERTS

• INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL BACKING FOR THE PROJECT

• PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE DATA GENERATED BY THE

RATING PROCESS

• COMPLETE COOPERATION OF SPCB IS MUST.

61

CHARTER FOR CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY 2003BANK GUARANTEE AND ACTION PLAN TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OR COMBINATION OF FOLLOWING MEASURES

•COMPOST MAKING WITH PRESS MUD/AGRICULTURAL RESIDUE/MUNICIPAL WASTE

•CONCENTRATION AND DRYING / INCINERATION

•BIOMETHANATION, TWO STAGE SECONDARY TREATMENT AND DILUTION WITH PROCESS WATER FOR USE OF EFFLUENTS IN IRRIGATION

•BIOMETHANATION, SECONDARY TREATMENT AND CONTROLLED DISCHARGE INTO SEA.

•ONE TIME CONTROLLED APPLICATION ON LAND. STUDY IN THREE MONTHS.

62

ROAD MAP FOR ACHIEVING ZERO DISCHARGE IN INLAND SURFACE WATERS

• 50 % UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY MARCH 2004

• 75% UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY MARCH 2005

• 100 % UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY DECEMBER 2005

NEW DISTILLERIES AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING DISTILLERIES

• NEW STAND ALONE DISTILLERIES AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING DISTILLERIES WITHOUT ACHIEVING ZERO DISCHARGE IN SURFACE/GROUND WATER NOT TO BE CONSIDERED

63

THANK YOU

ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF ALCOHOL INDUSTRY IN UTTAR PRADESH DR. YASHPAL SINGH CHIEF...

Documents

Transcript of ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF ALCOHOL INDUSTRY IN UTTAR PRADESH DR. YASHPAL SINGH CHIEF...