End of pipe measures

Better measurement of performance. A common frustration in PSM and ESH is that end-of-pipe measurement is all that is available and it is too late to correct a problem once the incident has occurred. Quality Management requires that we seek out in-process measures and leading indicators of performance that will warn of potential problems before they exhibit themselves as incidents. 

Measurement of performance. Quality Management requires that measures of performance be established for every activity. These measures include end-of-pipe measurement, such as amounts of material released into the environment or injury rates, and in-process measures of how efficiently you are managing, such as time to review safety improvement proposals or total resources expended on PSM. Each team should be required to identify potential performance measures for the processes they are developing and the activities these processes manage. Many of the end-of-pipe measures will already exist these should be critically examined to ensure that they truly measure performance and are not unduly influenced by other factors. For example, the number of accidents in a fleet of road vehicles is almost directly dependent on the number of miles driven with no improvement in performance, a reduction in miles driven would reduce the number of accidents. 

The team should be realistic about the time required to see improvements in end-of-pipe measures in most cases the pilot project success will be measured on efficiency improvements and other in-process measures alone. In this case it is important to demonstrate that all PSM and ESH issues are being managed. You should consider having a management systems audit (validation) conducted by a group independent of the integration project team. This may be done in conjunction with the next scheduled audit. This may be a corporate or divisional audit function or a consultant engaged specifically for this task. 

End-of-pipe measures that reflect the overall effectiveness of the integrated management system. 

End-of-pipe measures continue to be vitally important. The largest PSM and ESH management costs are accident and incident related. If you reduce the costs of managing PSM and ESH, yet accident and incident rates rise beyond any normal statistical variation, the new system is costing the company more. Near misses are a leading indicator for accidents and incidents and should not be neglected. 

Obviously, the end-of-pipe measures can fix tbe problem temporarily, but not remove tbe cause. Sometimes tbe problem is shifted or masked into another one. For this reason, an end-of-pipe solution should be examined from a plantwide viewpoint and beyond. For example, sour-gas scrubbing by chemical absorption may cut air pollution locally, but involves tbe pollution created by the manufacture of chemicals elsewhere. In this case, physical processes or using green (recyclable) solvents are more suitable. The best way is tbe reduction of acid components by changing the chemistry, such as for example using a more selective catalyst. 

End-of-pipe measures are implemented in the short term and need modest investment In contrast, production-integrated environmental protection necessitates longer-term policy committed towards sustainable development. 

Production-integrated environmental protection implies that ecological issues are included in the conceptual design at very early stages. This approach should prevail over the end-of-pipe measures, which shift but do not solve the problem. 

End-of-pipe measures could be applied when the amount of waste is rather limited, or if there is no other possibility. As examples we may mention ... 

End-of-pipe measures can fix the pollution problem, but do not remove its cause. Sometimes the problem is solved only apparently. From a systemic viewpoint, the solution might be even a disadvantage. For instance, acid-gas scrubbing may cut air pollution, but creates liquid or solid chemical pollution, without regarding the pollution associated with the manufacture of supplementary chemicals. 

Figure 1.10 illustrates the difference between the two approaches. In the integrated approach, all residues and material waste are recycled, so that finally only saleable products leave the plants. The use of energy is optimal. On the contrary, the end-of-pipe measures handle the pollution problems at the end of the manufacturing process when residues and waste cannot be recycled. 

Political support for end-of-pipe measures is short-sighted... 

This technique applies to existing installations. It is an end-of-pipe measure, applied in cases where prevention or minimisation of the mist has failed. Prevention and minimisation measures are discussed in Section 4.3.5.1. 

This chapter sets out techniques considered generally to have potential for achieving a high level of environmental protection in the industries within the scope of this document. Management systems, process-integrated techniques and end-of-pipe measures are included, but a eertain amount of overlap exists between these three when seeking the optimum results. 

The techniques to consider in the determination of BAT are grouped in a generic section and product specific sections for certain polymers. The former includes environmental management tools, equipment design and maintenance, monitoring and some generic techniques related to energy and end-of-pipe measures. 

Figure 1.1 illustrates the definition of environmental chemistry in terms of a common pollutant. What command and control regulations have been implemented in limiting this source of pollution What end-of-pipe measures have been used Suggest how the practices of green chemistry might serve as alternatives to these measures. 

In dealing with pollution and the potential for pollution, three approaches are pollution prevention, end-of-pipe measures, and remediation. What do these terms mean in terms of pollution control Which is the most desirable, and which is the least Explain. 

Years of regulation have greatly lowered releases of water pollutants from industrial operations due largely to sophisticated water treatment operations that are applied to water before it is released from a plant. Desirable as these end-of-pipe measures are, the practice of industrial ecology goes beyond such pollution control, minimizing the use of water and preventing its pollution in the first place. One way to ensure that water pollutants are not released from an industrial operation is to completely recycle the water in the system—no water out, no water pollutants. 

The conventional approach to making chemical processes less dangerous to workers and less harmful to the environment has emphasized exposure reduction in which the hazard is still present, but workers are protected from it. In the arena of worker safety, this has involved measures such as wearing protective gear to prevent contact with hazardous chemicals. For the environment as a whole, it has largely consisted of end-of-pipe measures to prevent the release of pollutants once they are generated. 

Discharges of water pollutants should be entirely eliminated wherever possible. For many decades, efficient and effective water treatment systems have been employed that minimize water pollution. However, these are end of pipe measures, and it is much more desirable to design industrial systems sueh that potential water pollutants are not even generated. 

---