U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
VOLUME II
DETAILED ANALYSES
-------
Publications in "The Cost of Clean Water" Series
Volume I
Volume II
Volume III
Volume IV
Summary Report
Detailed Analyses
Industrial Waste Profiles:
1. Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills
2. Motor Vehicles and Parts
3. Paper Mills except Building
4. Textile Mill Products
5. Petroleum Refining
6. Canned and Frozen Fruits and Vegetables
7. Leather Tanning and Finishing
8. Meat Products
9. Dairies
10. Plastics Materials and Resins
State and Major River
Basin Municipal Tables
-------
THE COST OF
CLEAN WATER
Volume II
Detailed Analyses
U. S. Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
January 10, 1968
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.50
-------
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20240
MAR 1 3 1368
Dear Mr. President:
This transmits Volume II of our first report to the Congress on the national
requirements and costs of water pollution control.
Section 16(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, directs
the Secretary of the Interior to conduct three studies - one, a study of the
cost of carrying out the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended;
another, a study of the economic impact on affected units of government of
the cost of installing waste treatment facilities; and the third, a study of
which Volume II is a part, of the national requirements for and the cost of
treating municipal, industrial, and other effluent to attain water quality
standards established pursuant to the Act or applicable State law. These
studies are required to cover the five-year period beginning July 1, 1968,
and to be updated each year thereafter.
Volume If a summary of the major findings and conclusions reached in the
study, was transmitted to the Congress on January 10, 1968. Volume III,
Industrial Waste Profiles, a description of the source and quantity of pol-
lutants produced by each of ten industries, has also been transmitted.
This report (Volume II) is a detailed analysis supporting the major findings
and conclusions reported in Volume I of what, in our view, is the most ambi-
tious cost analysis on this subject yet undertaken. Volume IV, State and
Major River Basin Municipal Tables will follow shortly.
As I have indicated, the attached study is one of several related studies
mandated by the Congress by Section 16(a). The studies of the economic im-
pact on affected units of government and the cost of carrying out the Act
were transmitted to the Congress on March 7, 1968, in company with a study
of possible methods for providing incentives designed to assist in the con-
struction by industry of water pollution control facilities. The incentives
-------
study was authorized by Section 18 of the Act. Together/ these studies
represent a major step toward improving our understanding of the costs and
related economic problems of water pollution control*
Sincerely yours,
Secretary of the Interior
Hon. Hubert H. Humphrey
President of the Senate
Washington, D. C. 20510
Enclosure
-------
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
Dear Mr. Speaker:
!
This transmits Volume II of our first report to the Congress on the national
requirements and costs of water pollution control.
Section 16(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, directs
the Secretary of the Interior to conduct three studies - one, a study of the
cost of carrying out the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended;
another, a study of the economic impact on affected units of government of
the cost of installing waste treatment facilities; and the third, a study of
which Volume II is a part, of the national requirements for and the cost of
treating municipal, industrial, and other effluent to attain water quality
standards established pursuant to the Act or applicable State law. These
studies are required to cover the five-year period beginning July 1, 1968,
and to be updated each year thereafter.
Volume I, a summary of the major findings and conclusions reached in the
study, was transmitted to the Congress on January 10, 1968. Volume III,
Industrial Waste Profiles, a description of the source and quantity of pol-
lutants produced by each of ten industries, has also been transmitted.
This report (Volume II) is a detailed analysis supporting the major findings
and conclusions reported in Volume I of what, in our view, is the most ambi-
tious cost analysis on this subject yet undertaken. Volume IV, State and
Major River Basin Municipal Tables will follow shortly.
As I have indicated, the attached study is one of several related studies
mandated by the Congress by Section 16(a). The studies of the economic im-
pact on affected units of government and the cost of carrying out the Act
were transmitted to the Congress on March 7, 1968, in company with a study
of possible methods for providing incentives designed to assist in the con-
struction by industry of water pollution control facilities. The incentives
-------
study was authorized by Section 18 of the Act. Together, these studies
represent a major step toward improving our understanding of the costs and
related economic problems of water pollution control.
Sincerely yours
Secretary of the Interior
Hon. John W. McCormack
Speaker of the House of
Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
Enclosure
-------
PREFACE
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Section 16(a)) directs the Secretary
of the Interior to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the national require-
ments for, and the cost of, treating municipal, industrial, and other waste-
water effluents to attain water quality standards established under the Act.
This first analysis is required to be submitted to the Congress by January 10,
1968, to cover Fiscal Years 1969-1973, inclusive, and to be updated each year
thereafter.
This study is extremely important because there are no firm estimates of the
national costs of achieving satisfactory water pollution abatement levels.
However, there is widespread agreement that water pollution is a significant
and growing national problem that must be solved. Over the past two years,
estimates of municipal requirements and the costs involved have been made by
the U. S. Senate Committee on Public Works, the Conference of State Sanitary
Engineers, and the Business and Defense Services Administration of the De-
partment of Commerce. These prior estimates have been based, at least in
part, on different facility requirements, more extended time projections, di-
verse cost criteria, and dissimilar geographical coverage. Thus, while these
estimates have been informative, they have not been sufficiently comprehen-
sive to serve as a basis for determining national requirements and cost of
attaining water quality standards.
Even more varied estimates of the industrial waste treatment costs have come
from still other sources. While these studies too have contributed useful
information, they have not provided a generally acceptable estimate of the
national costs of industrial water pollution control.
It is generally recognized that effluents other than from municipal and in-
dustrial sources also have a tremendous influence on the total problem of wa-
ter pollution control, but here again no satisfactory overall estimate has
been made of what it will cost to control'them. Because of the great diver-
sity of these other effluents, calculating such costs is immensely complicat-
ed.
The present study initiates what will be a continuing evaluation, aimed at
estimating water pollution control costs with increasing accuracy. Although
it has not been possible to arrive at a completely definitive estimate of re-
quired costs, the present study is believed to be the most comprehensive cost
estimate ever developed, as well as a sound base of information upon which to
build future analyses.
This is the Detailed Analyses of the national requirements and costs of water
pollution control (Volume II). A summary (Volume I) of the major findings
and conclusions was transmitted to the Congress on January 10, 1968. Further
vii
-------
detailed information to support the findings and conclusions is contained in
two additional volumes. Volume III (Industrial Waste Profiles) consists of
10 studies of major water-using industries which describe the costs and ef-
fectiveness of alternative methods of reducing industrial wastes. Volume IV
(State and Major River Basin Municipal Tables) contains a tabular breakdown
of municipal treatment works and sanitary sewer construction costs and the
operation and maintenance costs of treatment works for each of the 50 States
and the Nation's major river basins as described by the Water Resources Coun-
cil.
Commissioner
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
viii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Part I - Municipal Requirements and Cost
Estimates xi
Table of Contents xiii
List of Tables xiv
List of Figures xv
Introduction 1
Bibliography 44
Part II - Industrial Requirements and Cost
Estimates 49
Table of Contents 51
List of Tables 53
List of Figures 56
Introduction 57
Bibliography 153
Part III - Other Effluent Requirements and
Cost Estimates 165
Table of Contents 167
List of Tables 170
Introduction 17 3
Bibliography 242
ix
-------
MUNICIPAL REQUIREMENTS
AND COST ESTIMATES
Volume II
Part I
U. S. Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
January 10, 1968
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I
Page
Introduction 1
Assumptions of the Study 3
Cost Methodology 8
Municipal Waste Treatment Construction Costs
For 1969-1973 12
Operation and Maintenance Costs of Municipal
Waste Treatment Plants 19
Combined Sewers 26
Partial or Complete Separation 26
Holding Tanks 30
Separate Sanitary Sewers 35
Industrial Discharge to Public Sewers 39
Summary 43
Appendix I
Bibliography 44
xiii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Part I
Table Title Page
I-l U. S. Population and Industry Served By Existing
Municipal Facilities and Estimated Annual Require-
ments and Capital Outlays, Fiscal Years 1969-1973. 6
1-2 Sewage Treatment Works Construction Per Capita
Costs (Total Plant, Interceptors and Outfalls). 9
I-3A Capital Outlays Needed to Obtain Adequate Municipal
Waste Treatment For The U. S. Urban Population,
1969-1973. (States) 13
I-3B Capital Outlays Needed to Obtain Adequate Municipal
Waste Treatment For the U. S. Urban Population,
1969-1973. (Water Resource Regions) 14
1-4 Urban Population Served By Adequate and Less Than
Adequate Municipal Waste Treatment Facilities and
Urban Population Not Served, By State: FY 1968. 16
1-5 Operation and Maintenance Costs of Existing Munici-
pal Treatment Facilities and Estimated Operation
and Maintenance Costs, Projected Facilities, 1969-
1973. 20
1-6 Annual Sewage Treatment Plant Operation and Mainte-
nance Per Capita Costs. 23
1-7 Relative Efficiencies of Sewage-Treatment Oper-
ations and Processes. 25
1-8 Reported Cost of Separation By Region. 29
1-9 Estimated Cost of Separation of Combined Sewers
and The Alternative of Holding Tanks. 31
I-10A Capital Outlays Needed For Construction of Sani-
tary Sewers For the U. S. Urban Population, 1969-
1973. (States) 37
xiv
-------
Table
Title
Page
I-10B Capital Outlays Needed For Construction of Sani-
tary Sewers For the U. S. Urban Population, 1969-
1973. (Water Resource Regions)
1-11 Industrial Water Discharged To Public Sewers Pro-
jected For 1968 and 1973, By Water Resource Re-
gion.
38
41
LIST OF FIGURES
Part I
Figure
Title
Page
I-l Five-Year Capital Outlays Required to Obtain
Adequate Municipal Waste Treatment for the U. S.
Urban Population (1969-1973).
1-2 Water Resource Regions Proposed By Water Resource
Council for Type I Comprehensive Surveys.
1-3 Municipal Waste Treatment Facilities Operation
and Maintenance Costs.
15
22
xv
-------
INTRODUCTION
Part I of Volume II sets forth the requirements for, and the cost of, treat-
ing municipal waste effluents to attain water quality standards during Fiscal
Years 1969-1973, by State and Water Resource Region. The five-year period
projected parallels that set as a national goal for achieving compliance with
water quality standards. The Part I estimates include the requirements and
costs of controlling water pollution emanating from unsewered urban popula-
tions and from combined sewer overflows, since these, too, are related to the
total problem. Assuming that waste treatment works construction needed to
attain water quality standards occurs as projected to 1973, operation and
maintenance costs will increase considerably. Estimates of these costs are
also included for each State and Water Resource Region.
A number of assessments of waste treatment needs nationally have been made in
recent years. They vary as to cost criteria, years projected, geographical
coverage, and type of facilities considered.
A report to the Committee on Public Works, U. S. Senate, showed present and
additional needs through 1972 as amounting to $3.9 billion. The population
covered was approximately 48 million. The facilities included were treatment
plants, interceptor sewers and, for some cities, sanitary sewers and control
of combined sewer overflows.
Another report by the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers estimated the
cost of eliminating the backlog for waste treatment facilities as $2.6 bil-
lion. When provision is made for population growth and obsolescence, the to-
tal need is estimated by CSSE to require an average annual expenditure of
$961 million through 1972 or $6.7 billion over the seven-year period (1966-
1972).2
A third study provides historical data of construction put in place in actual
dollars from 1955 through 1966, and a projection of requirements from 1967
through 1980, in constant 1966 dollars. This report estimates that an ex-
penditure of $3.7 billion will be needed by 1980 to eliminate the deficien-
cies in waste treatment facilities. Further, it estimates that the total
volume of construction needed to offset obsolescence and depreciation for the
"Sewage Tnnatrnznt Weed* ojj the. 100 Longest Cities Ln ttie. Unitzd States
Neecfi and TutuAe, Weecii Through 1972," Step* Towasid Clean
to the. Committee, on Pufa&tc WoJikA, Un& -------
14-year period would amount to approximately $4.3 billion. Population
growth during the period would require the expenditure of an additional $6.4
billion. This is an estimated expenditure of $14.4 billion for wastewater
utilities by 1980. These cost estimates are for treatment plants only and
do not include the cost of interceptor sewers.
This report has estimated the costs of providing waste treatment to the to-
tal urban population of the U. S. by 1973 (162.6 million) at appropriate
treatment levels to comply with water quality standards. In order to meet
the standards by 1973, it is estimated that 90% of the urban population will
require secondary treatment facilities and 10% primary treatment facilities.
The urban population in 1973 will be 75% of the total U. S. population. Cur-
rently, only 55% of the urban population is served by adequate waste treat-
ment facilities.
This study of the national municipal sewage treatment plant requirements is
based on the 1962 Inventory of Municipal Waste Treatment Facilities,4 updated
to January 1, 1967, by reference to the FWPCA records of Federal grants for
sewage treatment works. An estimated 60% (by total dollar value) of munici-
pal sewage treatment works construction from 1962 to 1967, received Federal.
grants. Large metropolitan treatment works constructed without Federal funds
were also included. This procedure was employed in lieu of a completely new
Inventory which would have required extensive work by the State water pollu-
tion control agencies at a time when they were under prior heavy demands to
develop water quality standards for interstate waters.
3
"Regionat Con&&iuction Reqattemen^A fan WateA and
J955 - 1967 - 1980," U. S. Dzpamtmewt otf Commence, Bui-ateA* and
Mmini&tMuUon, October 1967.
Amfoew C. and Kenneth. H. Je.nkin&, Statistical Swmcuiy o& 7962
Municipal. Wa&te. FaacfcctcfcA .in the. United States, p4.epaA.fcd bj
the, VivJAJjon ojj Water. SuppJLy and Pollution Con&ial, U. 5. Ve,pafubne.n£
ojj Health., Education and Negate, Pubtic HzaJtth SeAutce, U. S. Govern
ment Planting OjJ^ce, Wa&kington, V. C., 1964.
-------
ASSUMPTIONS OF THE STUDY
It was necessary to make a number of assumptions and to develop a methodology
to assess the State and Water Resource Region needs for and costs of munici-
pal waste treatment. The assumptions and the reasons therefore, are explain-
ed as follows:
(1) Adequate treatment to attain water quality standards is re-
quired for the total urban population of the United States.
The total waste treatment service provided to the U. S. pop-
ulation as shown in the 1962 Inventory of Municipal Waste
Treatment Facilities (the latest complete inventory) and
the needs in facilities construction for untreated wastes
reported by the 1962 Annual Survey of Municipal Waste
Treatment Needs closely approximate the total urban popula-
tion in that year.
The Bureau of the Census defines urbanized areas in part as,
"... incorporated places with 2,500 inhabitants or more, in-
corporated places with less than 2,500 inhabitants, provided
each has a closely settled area of 100 dwelling units or
more, unincorporated territory with a population density of
1,000 inhabitants or more per square mile..."5 An unincor-
porated community with a population density of less than
1,000 inhabitants per square acre would normally be unable
to finance a community waste treatment works unless it be-
came a part of a special district. Incorporated places of
less than 100 dwelling units would not generally exceed a
population of approximately 400 persons based on the Census
average of 3.3 persons per dwelling unit. Such communities
would tend not to have the financing capability to construct
a waste treatment works. Therefore, non-urban or rural com-
munities are not considered for the purposes of this study
to have significant requirements in terms of overall cost
requirements.
This study has estimated urban population in the U. S. in
1968 as 146 million, with the total U. S. population amount-
ing to 200 million. The 54 million persons residing in ru-
ral areas were .considered as administratively or economical-
ly incapable of constructing waste treatment works solely
within their own community for purposes of these estimates.
"United State* Summony - Wumfae/i orf Inhabitants," U. S. Cmua o$ Popula-
tion: I960, U. S. PepoA#nen£ otf Commence, Bureau ofi Vie. Census, U. 5.
Printing 0tf£ece, WaAhinQton, V. C., 1961.
-------
(2) Adequate treatment is defined as at least secondary type of
waste treatment, except for those areas where primary waste
treatment has been or is likely to be approved as conforming
to water quality standards.
To estimate the costs of carrying out waste treatment re-
quirements embodied in standards still being negotiated, it
was necessary to assume a given level of treatment as gener-
ally representative of that contained in the standards. It
was assumed that a conventional secondary treatment level
(at least 85% effective removal of five-day biochemical oxy-
gen demand for domestic sewage) would prevail for treating
municipal wastes with some exceptions as described later.
This conforms with the policy reflected in the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration's "Guidelines for Establish-
ing WATER QUALITY STANDARDS for Interstate Waters" issued in
May 1966. Guideline No. 8 reads:
No standard will be approved which allows any
wastes amenable to treatment or control to be
discharged into any interstate water without
treatment or control regardless of the water
quality criteria and water use or uses adopt-
ed. Further, no standard will be approved
which does not require all wastes, prior to
discharge into any interstate water, to re-
ceive the best practicable treatment or con-
trol unless it can be demonstrated that a
lesser degree of treatment or control will
provide for water quality enhancement commen-
surate with proposed present and future water
uses.
Lending validity to this assumption was the provision in
all the 10 states whose standards were approved as of Decem-
ber 1, 1967, for secondary treatment for all discharges to
fresh water. Nevertheless, the basic assumption of second-
ary treatment of municipal wastes was made in full recogni-
tion that in some states primary treatment may be adequate
and in others secondary treatment may be inadequate during
the period FY 1969-1973.
Cost estimates presented here are adjusted to reflect stand-
ards and plans currently under review which may reasonably
be expected to require less than secondary treatment for
certain major municipalities during the FY 1969-1973 period
and which, accordingly, lowered cost requirements signifi-
cantly.
-------
Some areas may find it necessary to provide treatment ex-
ceeding or supplementing the secondary level. For example,
treatment for phosphate removal may be required at some fa-
cilities in the Lake Erie sub-basin and in New Jersey ter-
tiary waste treatment of municipal effluent may be required
where shellfish contamination has occurred. In New Jersey,
this could take the form of treatment by stabilization
ponds after secondary treatment or possibly advanced waste
treatment. However, it has not been possible, at this time,
to estimate the cost increases which would attend such
treatment.
(3) Municipal waste treatment essential for the standards will
be attained nationally by the end of FY 1973.
Table 1-1 shows the cost of projected needs phased propor-
tionately over the five-year period, FY 1969-1973. This is
consistent with implementation plans of most state standards
approved or approaching approval. The procedure is also
useful to illustrate annual increments, to estimate annual
depreciation and annual construction cost increases, and to
obtain associated operation and maintenance cost estimates.
It is recognized that, as a practical matter, achievement of
the 1969-1973 goals will not occur at a fixed rate. There
are lags from the time Federal construction grants are ap-
proved until construction is actually in place and financing
the estimated level of construction may present difficulties.
-------
TABLE 1-1
U. S. POPULATION AND INDUSTRY SERVED BY EXISTING MUNICIPAL FACILITIES AND ESTIMATED
ANNUAL REQUIREMENTS AND CAPITAL OUTLAYS, FISCAL YEARS 1969-1973
Municipal Service
1968
Projected Years
1969
1970
197T
.1
1972
1973
Total
1969-1973
Adequate treatment demand byi
Urban population of U. S. (thousands) 145,602 148,661 151,640 155,252 158,693 162,555
Industrial discharge to public sewers (bil. gal.) 1,338.5 1,386.3 1,437.0 1,490.3 1,550.1 1,612.2
Smmary of need for adequate treatment i
Urban population, total (thousands) 145,6021
With adequate treatment 81,703
Less than adequate treatment 31,865
Mo treatment 32,293
Projected needs, total (thousands) 16,222 16,222 16,222 16,222 16,222 81,110
Upgrading of treatment 6,373 6,373 6,373 6,373 6,373 31,865
Constructing facilities for untreated wastes 6,459 6,459 6,459 6,459 6,459 32,293
Increases in urban population 3,390 3,390 3,390 3,390 3,390 16.950
Industrial discharge to public sewers, total (bil. gal.) 1,336.5
With adequate municipal treatment 826.2
Less than adequate municipal treatment 512.3
Projected needs, total (bil. gal.) 150.3 153.2 155.8 162.3 164.6 766.0
Upgrading of treatment 102.5 102.5 102.S 102.5 102.5 512.3
Increases to public .ewers 47.8 50.7 53.3 59.8 62.1 273.7
Investment and capital outlays needed (mil. dol.):
Investment in place, total (mil. dol.) $5,714.8 $7,066.5 $8,418.2 $9,769.9 $11,121.6 $12,473.3
Adequate treatment 4,148.2 5,813.2 7,478.2 9,143.2 10,808.2 12,473.3
Less than adequate treatment 1,566.6 1,253.3 940.0 626.7 313.4
Capital outlay* needed, total (mil. dol.) 1,517.7 1,558.2 1,598.8 1,639.4 1,679.9 $7,994.0
Upgrading less than adequate facilities 373.7 373.7 373.7 373.7 373.7 1,868.5
Constructing facilities for untreated wastes 541.5 541.5 541.5 541.5 541.5 2,707.5
increases, population and industry2 436.5 436.5 436.5 436.5 436.5 2,182.5
Allowances for depreciation 166.0 206.5 247.1 287.7 328.2 1,235.5
' Subtotal* exceed -the total bu 259,000 pe*4onA located in. e>t\»tnaJL ttatu whe/ie the. population teAved by treatment woxki exceed* the unban population.
2 Include* CjonttAuatijon 004*4 \on. additional capacity fa*. fc.ve ytaM oi population, gwwth Jut tach ttote. beyond the. /969-I973 peAtod o< the. csu>t utunate.
o nitdt.
Notes Tne co4< orf municipal tootle. t/uaXment conttHuatLon wonkt wot phated proportionately ovvi the. „.._ „...
men£4 and to 4 five 04 a batit jot estimating annual deprecation and incAtuu in conttnuction cattA.
>6 at4oci&te.d operation and maintenance.
peAiod to illuttftate. pottible. annual
Thit p-tocedu/ie tww alto tue^ul (,01
Sou*ce» Bated on 1962 Tnu
?963 Cen4at oj
oj Hun4.cJ.pal Watte, fazilitiu, updated; Cen4u4 o^ Popadatton,
Itoe -en Manu^aetu/u>tg"; Fft/PCA ConitAuation Gxanit.
I960; Bu/ieau o& Cwuu4 Population Utunatu, $e*iu P-25;
-------
FIGURE 1-1
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL OUTLAYS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ADEQUATE MUNICIPAL
WASTE TREATMENT FOR THE U.S. URBAN POPULATION (1969-1973)
UPGRADING LESS
THAN ADEQUATE
FACILITIES
(FOR WATER QUALITY STANDARDS)
CONSTRUCTING
FACILITIES FOR
UNTREATED WASTES
16%
REPLACEMENT
INCREASES IN
POPULATION AND
INDUSTRY
TOTAL $8.0 BILLION
-------
COST METHODOLOGY
Estimates of construction costs are based on total costs eligible for Federal
grants assistance. These are costs incurred in new sewage treatment works
construction or additions, extensions, alterations, acquisitions, and improve-
ments to, by, or of existing treatment works; costs for necessary intercep-
ting sewers, outfall sewers, pumping, power, and other equipment; costs for
preliminary planning and such other actions necessary to sewage treatment
construction such as engineering, legal and fiscal investigations, studies
and designs, including the supervision and inspection of construction.
Costs may be incurred in waste treatment construction which are ineligible
for inclusion in the total project cost upon which Federal aid is based.
Such costs may pose a considerable burden upon the community, particularly in
large metropolitan areas where land is costly. Items ineligible for FWPCA
construction grants include land acquisition (for treatment plant site), sew-
age collection systems or any part thereof (intercepting and outfall sewers
are not considered to be part of the collection system), and any work not in-
cluded in the project as approved by the Department of the Interior.
When it is not possible to isolate treatment works from homes and businesses,
the project cost is increased by the need to landscape, beautify, and even
condemn or relocate public and private structures. New streets, viaducts and
acquisition of rights-of-way add to the ineligible costs. The extent of such
landscaping, beautification and relocation by a community depends upon its
financial capability, esthetic needs, and opportunities to shift or delay at-
tendant costs.
In this study, municipal waste treatment capital costs are based upon per
capita costs for activated sludge-type plants. The costs of trickling filter
treatment works constructed under the PL-660 program approximate those for
activated sludge construction. Another secondary type of waste treatment,
stabilization ponds, has much lower construction costs. However, in terms of
percentage of population served, only a few states show significant trends
toward stabilization ponds. The per capita costs used to calculate total
costs of providing waste treatment service are based upon design and cost in-
formation for treatment works constructed under the PL-660 Federal construc-
tion grants program (Table 1-2). Projects representing all sections of the
Nation are included.
Since a mean of the per capita costs of all projects was used to calculate
total costs of needed treatment works, the costs for sections of the Nation
may be over or underestimated. For example, there are indications that treat-
ment works projects in the northeast have higher estimated per capita costs
than those of some other regions. The FWPCA Northeast Regional Office has
submitted some State estimates (New York, New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine)
8
-------
TABLE 1-2
SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS CONSTRUCTION PER CAPITA COSTS1
(TOTAL PLANT, INTERCEPTORS AND OUTFALLS)
(1968 dollars)
Design Population
0 - 999
1,000 - 4,999 .....
5,000 - 9,999
10,000 - 24,999
25,000 - 49,999
50,000 - 99,999
100,000 and up
Primary Types
of Treatment
$148
96
68
54
43
35
30
Secondary Types of
Treatment
Activated Stabillza-
Sludge tion Ponds*
$175 $85
117 57
86 29
69 14
56
45
40
' Poe& not include, land
Z /,„;/„*„, yjtt State*: Wat/t/i Canotcna,, South CaSLotLna,
Alabama, Kan&a&, Washington.
Source •* Baaed upon the, design and actu/ai co*t j.nfio'uncuti.on o£
tt&atmejnt p/u>/ec£4 c.on&ttiu.cte.d und&i PL 84-660.
-------
that are two to three times the estimates developed by the Cost Estimate Study
here reported.
Future annual Cost Estimate Studies must evaluate these differences. The
higher costs may be attributable to several factors - inclusion of ineligible
costs, joint municipal-industrial projects in which the industrial discharges
predominate, projects planned primarily for storm water overflow, or projects
which include trunk and collecting sewers, thus exceeding the typical treat-
ment piant-interceptor cost ratio of approximately 55% to 45%.
Sewage treatment plants are normally designed for sufficient capacity to ac-
commodate additional quantities of sewage resulting from population and in-
dustrial growth. According to Fair and Geyer6 many factors are considered in
deciding upon a period of design. Among these factors are obsolescence and
depreciation, influence of a location upon plant expansion, anticipated
growth rate of population and industry, interest rate to be paid on bonded
indebtedness, future construction cost changes, and the performance of the
works during early years when operated below capacity. Water quality stand-
ards compliance will be a major consideration in future sewage treatment
plant designs. Fair and Geyer have noted that when growth and interest rates
are high, the design periods for treatment works may amount to 10-15 years.
Because of the many variables involved in arriving at average excess treat-
ment plant capacity included in plant designs and the unavailability of cur-
rent excess capacity data, this analysis is based conservatively on a minimum
plant design period for growth of five years and a maximum of 10 years.
Therefore, projected construction of waste treatment plants in the period
1969-1973 would be assumed to include the cost of additional capacity for pop-
ulation growth estimated to occur by 1978 or an average of 7-1/2 years excess
capacity for population growth.
The cost of upgrading primary treatment plants to secondary treatment was de-
termined by applying per capita costs for upgrading to the population served
by present primary waste treatment plants in each State. The per capita
costs were derived from actual costs for such projects contained in Federal
construction grant records correlated with design populations.
The cost of constructing facilities for untreated wastes was obtained by pro-
jecting the urban population of each State to 1968 by population size range.
The total population served by primary and secondary treatment works, in each
population size range, in each State, was compared to the total projected ur-
ban population in each size range. The population difference was considered
as lacking any type of waste treatment, and the need defined accordingly.
Fact, Gordon M. and John C. GzyeA., Wcut&i Supply and
John MZty 6 Son&, Inc., Wew Vo*k, Nw) Yolk, tvpuJL 7963.
10
-------
This population was classified according to size range for the purpose of ap-
plying appropriate per capita costs of constructing secondary waste treatment
works. These costs in 1968 were totaled for each State. The per capita
costs of constructing secondary waste treatment works were derived from ac-
tual costs of such projects contained in Federal construction grant records
correlated with design populations.
The cost of providing secondary waste treatment works for urban population
growth and increase in industrial discharges to public sewers was obtained
by projecting urban population growth in each State by population size range
from 1968 to 1973. Per capita costs of constructing secondary waste treat-
ment works for each population size range were applied to the projected popu-
lations and total cost was computed for each State.
Allowances for depreciation were obtained by using an estimated annual depre-
ciation rate of 3% of accumulated invested capital. The assumption is that
waste treatment plants have an average effective life of 25 years and inter-
ceptor and outfall sewers, 50 years. Annual replacement needs then would be
4% for the plants and 2% for the interceptor and outfall sewers. Therefore,
an average annual rate of 3% was used for calculating depreciation based on
the total cost of waste treatment works averaging 55% plant and 45% intercep-
tors and outfalls, according to Federal construction grant records.
Because of the aggregative analytical techniques used, it was not possible
to confine these cost estimates to interstate and coastal waters to which
the Act applies; therefore, the cost estimates presented in this report are
state-wide and national in scope.
The total costs by State and Water Resource Region are expressed in both
"constant" and "current" dollars. Constant 1968 dollars were obtained by
using July 1967, the beginning of FY 1968, as the base. Current dollars
were obtained by multiplying the 1968 constant dollar estimates for each
year of the FY 1969-1973 period by cost indexes projected for these years.
11
-------
MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR 1969-1973
On the basis of the assumptions and methodology described, waste treatment
works construction to attain water quality standards in the five-year period,
1969-1973, will require the expenditure of an estimated $8.0 billion in con-
stant 1968 dollars. Increasing construction costs during the period could
expand the total national cost to $8.7 billion. It is estimated that sewage
treatment plant construction costs will increase about 3.3% annually during
this period.
The urban population of the U. S. is estimated as 146 million in FY 1968, in-
creasing to approximately 163 million by 1973 and 188 million by 1978. Thus,
17 million more people will become urban area residents within these next
five years and an additional 25 million by 1978. If these increases follow
the same pattern of urbanization, by size of community, that took place in
the decade, 1950-1960, capital outlays of about $2.2 billion will be needed
for adequate waste treatment facilities in the period 1969-1973. These out-
lays would provide additional capacity for population growth expected to oc-
cur by 1978. (Tables 1-3 and 1-4.)
Primary facilities serve 43 million persons or 30% of the Nation's 1968 urban
population. Facilities serving 32 million of this population must be upgrad-
ed to secondary waste treatment. Such upgrading will require, in the five-
year period, approximately $1.9 billion. (Tables 1-3 and 1-4.)
Adequate waste treatment facilities will need to be constructed to serve the
country's 32 million urban area residents that at present have no waste treat-
ment facilities. Providing adequate treatment facilities for these 32 million
persons in the 1969-1973 period will require capital outlays of about $2.7
billion. (Tables 1-3 and 1-4.)
Depreciation of plant and equipment is a continuing expense. During this
five years, it will amount to $1.2 billion, assuming the schedule of construc-
tion for providing for urban population increases, upgrading of facilities
and construction of facilities for untreated wastes is systematically follow-
ed in the five-year period. (Table 1-3.)
In summary, to provide for population growth, upgrade primary treatment works,
construct works for urban populations presently unserved, and replace depreci-
ated plant and equipment, will cost an estimated $8.0 billion during the peri-
od 1969-1973. Construction cost increases could raise this estimate to $8.7
billion.
The 10 highest ranking States in capital outlay required to attain adequate
waste treatment by 1973 are, in order: New York - $963.6 million, Califor-
nia - $645.2 million, Michigan - $535.8 million. New Jersey - $505.0 million,
12
-------
TABLE I-3A
CAPITAL OUTLAYS NEEDED TO OBTAIN ADEQUATE MUNICIPAL WASTE
TREATMENT FOR THE U. S. URBAN POPULATION, 1969-1973
($ Millions)
State
Total
(Current
Dollars)
Total
(Constant
Dollars)
Upgrading
of
Facilities
Constructing
Facilities For
Untreated Wastes
Increases
In Urban
Population1
Allowances
For
Depreciat1on
Onited States $8,693.1 87,994.0 51,868.7
Alabama "7.0 131.0 33.0
Alaska2 14.5 12.8
Arizona 90.0 84.0 4.0
Arkansas • • «-5 «.5 12.0
California2 '32.2 645.2 2.0
Colorado , 103.6 97.6 26.0
Connecticut 188.3 175.8 69.5
Delaware 31.5 30.1 13.0
District of Colunbia3 23.0 21.4
Florida2 369.6 347.0 46.0
Georgia 223.1 209.6 53.5
Hawaii2 40-1 35.5
Id«ho 24-5 23.0 10'5
Illinois 399.4 367.0 48.0
Indiana I'6-! 162-1 39'5
Iowa2 36.0 34.7
Kaunas 52.5 49.6 14.5
Kentucky "0.0 120.8 39.0
I^uisiana 195.0 182.1 21.0
Maine "7.0 «•» 6-°
Maryland 136-1 I™-* "-°
Massachusetts2 200.0 186.3 64.0
Michigan 592.6 535.8 223.0
Minnesota 186.0 172.4 64.5
Mississippi 57.0 54.1 3.0
Missouri2 137-6 126.8 13.0
Montana 27.0 25-s I6'0
Nebraska2 30.5 29.0 9.9
Nevada 19-5 18.1 1-0
New Hampshire 35.0 32.6 7.5
Dew Jersey 561.1 505.0 167.0
New Mexico 40.5 37.6 1.0
New York 1,070.2 963.6 266.0
North Carolina 101.5 95.6 16.0
North Dakota 13.0 11.3 2.5
Ohio 500.7 461.7 122.0
Oklahoma 60.5 57.4 10.5
Oregon 1*5.3 130.2 29.5
Pennsylvania 331.6 310.9 149.5
Rhode island 41.5 38.3 9.5
South Carolina 100.0 93.9 19.0
South Dakota "-0 12-5 5.0
Tennessee 154.6 147.8 19.5
TexaB 342.5 323.6 17.0
Utah 136-0 127.4 2.0
Vermont 19-0 17.7 10.0
Virginia3 206.6 194.7 65.0
Washington2 "3.3 155.3 33.0
West Virginia 55.0 50.4 25.0
Wisconsin 133.3 122.4 47.0
Wyoming2 9.7 9.0 2.3
$2,707.4
39.0
7.0
25.5
4.5
370.5
18.0
50.0
4.5
191.5
60.5
27.5
2.5
102.0
45.5
.5
24.5
80.5
31.5
45.5
78.5
144.5
32.5
24.0
45.4
.5
16.0
161.0
5.5
390.5
22.5
4.0
134.5
6.0
41.5
27.5
17.5
35.5
68.0
81.0
88.0
3.0
47.0
84.5
13.5
3.5
.5
$2,182.5
42.0
5.0
44.0
20.0
150.5
40.5
36.5
9.5
8.0
68.0
69.0
4,5
6.5
136.0
45.0
15.5
22.5
40.5
63.0
3.0
53.0
10.0
103.5
49.5
22.0
50.5
6.0
11.5
13.0
6.0
113.5
23.5
204.0
36.0
2.5
131.5
25.5
44.0
5-3.5
5.5
27.0
4.0
43.5
155.5
26.0
2.5
59.0
19.0
5.5
42.0
4.5
$1,235.4
17,0
.8
10.5
9.0
122.2
13.1
19.8
3.1
13.4
41.5
26.6
3.5
3.5
81.0
32.1
19.2
12.1
16.8
17.6
3.4
18.9
33.8
64.8
25.9
5.1
17.9
3.5
7.6
3.6
3.1
63.5
7.6
103.1
21.1
2.3
73.7
15.4
15.2
80.4
5.8
12.4
3.5
16.8
70.1
11.4
2.2
23.7
18.8
6,4
29.9
1.7
' iMJUtdU, ceiUfuMUon eoiii fo* additional capacity fo* five ytM& of population growth in each State
beyond tke T969-1973 peJtiod of tkt colt u-Conate of needi.
2 tfatw. ouatitu 4i«ndflA(i4 adopted call fl Couu* Population UtiiMtU, S«*te* F-zs.
13
-------
TABLE I-38
CAPITAL OUTLAYS NEEDED TO OBTAIN ADEQUATE MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT
FOR THE U. S. URBAN POPULATION, 1969-1973 (CONT'D.)
($ Millions)
Water Resource Region
1
Total
(Current
Dollars)
Total
(Constant
Dollars)
Upgrading
of
Facilities
Constructing
Facilities For
Untreated Wastes
Increases
In Urban
Population'
Allowances
For
Depredation
United States
Alaska
Arkansas-White-Red
California
Columbia-North Pacific
Great Basin
Great Lakes ,
Hawaii ,
Lower Colorado ..,
Lower Mississippi
Missouri ,
North Atlantic
Ohio
Rio Grande
Souris-Red-Rainy ...
South Atlantic-Gulf
Tennessee
Texas-Gulf .,
Upper Colorado ..,
Upper Mississippi
$8,693.1 $7,994.0 $1,868.7
14.5
229.9
735.2
349.1
130.8
1,164.3
40.1
108.0
232.9
250.4
2,611.0
728.3
64.7
10.2
978.6
62.9
295.7
14.7
671.8
12.8
216.5
647.8
314.4
122.4
1,059.2
35.5
100.8
219.1
234.0
2,392.2
674.6
60.5
9.0
921.9
60.1
279.3
13.8
620.1
41.9
2.6
77.6
2.3
376.3
4.7
25.4
61.5
746.6
205.8
2.6
2.5
172.5
8.9
14.6
1.3
121.6
$2,707.4
7.0
39.4
371.3
127.7
79.4
285.7
27.5
29.5
97.7
38.0
801.6
172.3
11.9
2.6
367.7
25.5
69.5
6.2
146.9
$2,182.5
5.0
92.2
151.4
70.7
28.9
246.0
4.5
53.3
73.7
91.8
512.1
180.7
33.4
2.2
259.3
18.3
134.8
4.6
219.6
$1,235.4
.8
43.0
122.5
38.4
11.8
151.2
3.5
13.3
22.3
42.7
331.9
115.8
12.6
1.7
122.4
7.4
60.4
1.7
132.0
WoteA. Re6ouA.ce Reg-con6 p/iopoaed by WctCeA Reaootce Counc/cd
to i&timate. cap^tat ouutJLa.y& needed &on the Puerto
Type. I Compie/iena-tve Su/u/e«/4.
U£andA Region.
Vata. not
Sou/ice; Boied on 7962 Invento^/ o£ Municipal Wa&te. T/ieaftnett-t, updated; Ce.n&u& of> Population; 1960 Bateau
o& Ceniui Population tltimatu, SeMu P-25.
-------
FIGURE 1-2
WATER RESOURCE REGIONS
PROPOSED BY WATER RESOURCE COUNCIL FOR TYPE I COMPREHENSIVE SURVEYS
COLUMBIA-
NORTH PACIFIC
NORT
ATLANTIC
GREAT
LAKES
UPPER
MISSISSIPPI
GREAT BASIN
UPPER
COLORADO
ARKANSAS-WHITE -RED
LOWER
COLORADO
SOUTH ATLANTIC
GULF
TEXAS-GULF
PUERTO RICO &
VIRGIN ISLANDS
-------
TABLE 1-4
URBAN POPULATION SERVED BY ADEQUATE AND LESS THAN ADEQUATE MUNICIPAL WASTE
TREATMENT FACILITIES AND URBAN POPULATION NOT SERVED, BY STATE: FY 1968
(In thousands, except percent)
State
Total
Urban
Popu-
lation
Population With
Adequate Treat-
ment Facilities
Population With
Less Than Ade-
quate Treatment
•Facilities
Urban Popula-
tion With No
Treatment
Facilities
Percent of Urban
Population With Less
Than Adequate Or No
Treatment Facilities
United states1 145,602
Alabama 2,140
Alaska2 121
Arizona 1,411
Arkansas 937
California2 17,651
Colorado 1,602
Connecticut 2,342
Delaware 356
District of Columbia 632
Florida2 4,860
Georgia 2,727
Hawaii2 591
Idaho 349
Illinois 8,923
Indiana 3,182
Iowa1 2 1,526
Kansas2 1,475
Kentucky 1,539
Louisiana 2,479
Maine 509
Maryland 2,785
Massachusetts2 4,563
Michigan 6,377
Minnesota 2,370
Mississippi 988
Missouri2 3,141
Montana1 379
Nebraska1 2 846
Nevada 376
Hew Banpshira 414
New Jersey 6,444
New Mexico 764
New York 16,003
North Carolina 2,138
North Dakota1 254
Ohio 7,870
Oklahoma 1,694
Oregon 1,320
Pennsylvania 8,428
Rhode Island ... 793
South Carolina 1,134
South Dakota.1 287
Tennessee 2,214
Texas 8,874
Utah 825
Vermont 162
Virginia 2.756
Washington2 2,139
West Virginia 710
Wisconsin 2,804
Wyoming1 2 198
81,703
819
19
711
684
12,766
854
312
9
832
1,741
1,081
162
160
7,410
2,286
1,590
1,267
536
818
37
2,119
1,729
1,340
769
460
2,522
123
833
366
43
1,629
671
8,017
1,447
278
4,591
1,332
SS2
5,325
395
540
29O
750
6,819
500
9
1,092
681
149
2.049
189
31,865
678
34
156
36
593
1,286
267
864
1.003
134
586
529
192
792
515
60
162
1.173
4.223
1,324
23
183
263
100
6
102
3,179
5
3,733
125
15
2,071
199
504
2,916
190
178
39
319
130
19
121
1,328
444
348
689
29
32,293
643
102
666
97
4,849-
155
744
80
2,255
643
429
55
927
367
16
211
1,146
412
504
1,661
814
277
505
436
4
269
1,636
88
4,253
566
1,208
163
264
187
208
416
1.145
1,925
306
32
336
1.014
213
66
44.1%
61.7
84.2
49.6
27.0
27.7
46.7
86.7
97.5
64.2
60.4
72.6
54.2
17.0
28.2
14.1
65.2
67.0
92.7
23.9
62.1
79.0
67.6
53.4
19-.7
69.4
11.8
2.7
89.6
74.7
12.2
49.9
32.3
5.9
41.7
21.4
58.2
36.8
50.2
52.4
13.6
66.1
23.2
39.4
94.4
60.4
68.2
79.0
26.9
14.6
' Population *e*»ed by treatment iaulitie* exceeds total uKban population o< the*e State* by 259,000 peuoiu.
Thu* the. detail add* to 259,000 molt, than the total U. S. uftban population.
Standard*
ttatefi quality ttatdarid* aA^ff^ call {04 ffuatejuj axute. tMotuent in *ome unban a/tea* of, State..
adopted {04 otht*. State* calt ion at tea*t tecondafui uotte treatment.
1961 Inventory, Municipal Matte, facilitie* in the. United State*, updated by FWPCA Con*tiutction
Awomu; ouaan population e*timate* bated on U. S. Ceium o< Population, I960; Bureau oi Cento* Popula-
tion fttimatet, Sviie* P-Z5.
16
-------
Ohio - $461.7 million, Illinois - $367.0 million, Florida - $347.0 million,
Texas - $323.6 million, Pennsylvania - $310.9 million, and Georgia - $209.6
million.
The five highest ranking Water Resource Council Regions (proposed for Type I
Comprehensive Surveys) in capital outlays required to attain adequate waste
treatment by 1973 are, in order: North Atlantic - $2,392.2, Great Lakes -
$1,059.2, South Atlantic/Gulf - $921.9, Ohio - $674.6, and California -
$647.8.
Table 1-2 shows the per capita construction costs of primary and secondary
sewage treatment plants. These data are based on design and cost informa-
tion for sewage treatment projects constructed in all parts of the Nation
under PL-660. The costs of treatment plant, interceptor, and outfall sewers
are included; land costs are excluded because of the great variability. The
per capita costs are shown in 1968 dollars arrived at by use of the FWPCA
Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index.
It is evident from these data that it is more economical in terms of cost
per person served to construct a large rather than a small plant, assuming
other things are equal. This conclusion assumes excessive sewering costs
are not incurred, the topography is suitable for the extension of sewers,
and the economics of scale available by constructing a larger or an intermu-
nicipal plant are not offset by financing or operating costs.
Treatment works construction cost totals in a particular area may be reduced
on a per capita basis when it is possible and desirable to serve many commu-
nities with a single or a few large treatment works. Economies of scale may
also be available when industries and communities jointly construct treatment
works to serve their needs.
The chief feature of sewage service in the large cities is centralized sewer
lines and treatment.8 Such systems can often provide waste treatment service
to fringe communities at a lower overall cost than the communities would in-
cur in constructing and operating individual systems. However, individuals
and communities outside the central city contracting for service almost al-
ways pay a higher rate than customers within the city boundaries.
Sewage TJie.atme.nt. Plant ConA&w&tLon Co&t lnde.K , p/tepoted by the. Fede/io£
Pollution Con&tol AcfrrUju^-ttotccw, Ut.v-c4.ton ojj ConA-ttuatton G/uuttA,
n, V. C.
jjo/t Wote* Supply and Sewage Uapo-
in MvUiopotitan A/tea*," A CommL&^ion Repo/tt, Adv
-------
Conmunities without plaints may be served by some form of special district,
authority, or other arrangement including tie-ins with a central city. Econ-
omies of scale - the lower costs per unit of scale or design attributable to
large scale plants - therefore, are not necessarily restricted to or solely
available to the larger communities. Scale advantages can often be obtained
through inter-community arrangement or through the legal establishment of new
service area jurisdictions.
The larger inter-community and service area jurisdictions not only allow econ-
omies of scale in the construction of treatment plants, but attain an enlarg-
ed financial base as well. The latter may considerably alleviate, financing
difficulties. In addition, the broader financial base offers the opportunity
for higher quality operation through the acquisition of a larger and more com-
petent staff.
The greatest offset to the economies of scale approach to sewage treatment
construction for inter-community and new area service is the cost of the
large trunk or interceptor sewers involved. These sewers are necessary to
carry the wastes from the several collection points or from new and relative-
ly distant area services to the treatment plant. Depending on the density of
development and the nature of the terrain, the trunk sewer costs may be con-
siderable, and at some point sufficiently high to offset any savings in treat-
ment plant size. This factor looms large in the central city's determining
whether extending sewerage service to adjacent communities is financially
feasible. Also, the apportionment of trunk sewer costs poses a major diffi-
culty.
18
-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS OF MUNICIPAL
WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
This report has estimated the capital costs of municipal waste treatment
works construction needed to attain water quality standards at approximately
$8.0 billion during the period 1969-1973, or as much as $8.7 billion because
of increasing construction costs. Operating and maintaining these and the
existing facilities will cost another $1.4 billion in this same period
(Table 1-5).If expected increases in labor costs during the period 1969-
1973 are taken into consideration, these costs nationally could amount to
$1.7 billion. Thus operation and maintenance costs for the five-year peri-
od and capital outlays for new facilities would total $9.4 billion in con-
stant 1968 dollars or $10.4 billion because of expected cost increases. Op-
eration and maintenance totals nationally are estimated as $201.5 million in
1968 (Table 1-5). These annual costs would rise to $334.5 billion in 1973
under the projected construction schedule.
Table 1-6 shows the operation and maintenance costs per capita for primary
and secondary types of treatment. For design populations of 25,000 and more,
the representative secondary type of treatment - activated sludge - is approx-
imately twice the per capita cost of the representative primary type. These
operation and maintenance costs are based upon the actual costs directly asso-
ciated with plant operation and maintenance, excluding costs for central ad-
ministration, billing and collection of sewer charges, and expenditures for
capital maintenance according to Federal construction grant records.
The types of costs included are salaries and wages, electricity, chemicals
and other supplies. The data for these costs were obtained from approximate-
ly 1,000 individual plants and were correlated with population served. Ad-
mittedly, these cost estimates lack precision. First, they are adversely af-
fected by differences among plants in chlorination and sludge disposal prac-
tices. Second, they would be more meaningful if they could be compared
against a standard of operation efficiency or some other performance index.
Since the data merely show the relationship between cost and plant size ob-
tained from experience of the audited plants, they also may not be represent-
ative of the most efficient plants. In short, these per capita costs are
probably conservative. Nevertheless, they reflect the considerable burden
incumbent upon units of government which must construct or expand treatment
facilities as well as provide for their operation. The expected annual oper-
ating costs, in some cases, could exert a greater deterrent upon a local unit
9
"Indexes o£ Output Pe/i Man-Hoot, HounZy Compensation, and Unit Labon
-at tke. Manufacturing Sector, 1947-1966," (1. S. Vapasitment o&
, Bateau, otf labofi StatutLcA, Washington, V. C., June. 7967.
19
-------
TABLE 1-5
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS OF EXISTING MUNICIPAL TREATMENT
FACILITIES AND ESTIMATED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS, PROJECTED FACILITIES, 1969-1973
(In millions of 1968 dollars)
Total
State 1968 1969-19731
United States $201.5 $1,390.0
Alabama 3.1 22.2
Alaska 1.8 9.5
Arizona .8 8.6
Arkansas 1.7 8.8
California 11.2 99.5
Colorado 2.5 16.3
Connecticut 3.2 25.1
Delaware .5 3.5
District of Columbia 3.3 27.8
Florida 6.1 52.5
Georgia 3.6 26.7
Hawaii .5 4.6
Idaho 1.1 5.6
Illinois 16.5 91.4
Indiana 7.1 40.8
Iowa 4.2 21.0
Kansas 3.4 17.6
Kentucky 3.1 20.0
Louisiana 2.8 24.7
Maine .4 4.9
Maryland 2.7 18.1
Massachusetts 2.8 30.4
Michigan 7.2 62.0
Minnesota 4.2 28.2
Mississippi 1.1 10.5
Missouri 3.2 34.0
Montana .8 4.3
Nebraska 2.2 9.4
Nevada .5 2.5
New Hampshire .4 3.8
20
-------
TABLE 1-5 (CONT'D.)
State
1968
Total
1969-1973
1
New Jersey $ 7.3
New Mexico 1.1
New York 20.2
North Carolina 4.4
North Dakota .4
Ohio 13.3
Oklahoma 3.1
Oregon 2.6
Pennsylvania 12.3
Rhode Island 1.2
South Carolina 2.0
South Dakota .9
Tennessee 2.5
Texas 11.2
Utah 1.2
Vermont .5
Virginia 3.3
Washington 3.0
West Virginia 1.4
Wisconsin 7.2
Wyoming .4
60.9
6.4
143.8
25.1
2.1
84.2
17.2
16.9
73.3
7.9
13.3
4.3
21.7
72.2
8.9
2.5
25.2
22.8
8.5
36.5
2.0
1
TotaJt Operation and Maintenance co&tb ^ofi &ie,atme.nt wo-tfe4
4MQ and needed during the. ^tve-t/eor. period, 1969-1973.
Sootce-' Baaed on 1962 Inventory o& Municipal Wa&te. Facititcea,
updated; Cenaoi o
-------
FIGURE I -3
MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT FACILITIES
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
EXISTING
AND
REQUIRED
MUNICIPAL
TREATMENT
WORKS
EXISTING
MUNICIPAL
TREATMENT
WORKS
22
-------
TABLE 1-6
ANNUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE PER CAPITA COST1
(1968 Dollars)
0
5,000
10,000
25,000
50,000
100,000
Primary Types of Tr
Design Population ment (Separate Sli
Digestion
— 4
- 9
- 24
- 49
- 99
and
,999 $3.00
,999 2.33
,999 1.84
,999 1.47
,999 1.29
up 1.22
•eat- Secondary Types of Treatment
idge Activated Stabilization
Sludge Ponds
$3.92 $.50
3.43 .34
3.06
2.75
2.51
2.45
to
W
Vote not IncJtude. c.o&tt> £0/1 ce.n&iat adnu.nl&&ia£ion , bitting and cotte.vti.on. o& &ewesi change* ,
and &x.pe.ndLtuSL&t, ^ofi capitat mainte.nanc.e..
Soot.ce: Boiecf upon ptant auditb otf actaat operation and maintznanze. c.o&t& o<5 sewage
me.n£ pttoje.cti> con&&uu.c£e.d undeA PL 84-660.
-------
of government initiating construction of a treatment plant than the con-
struction cost.
Any evaluation of the effectiveness of water pollution control efforts will,
in large part, be based upon the effectiveness and efficiency of the plants.
In approving treatment works projects for Federal financial aid, FWPCA gives
consideration to the adequacy of provisions for assuring proper and efficient
operation and maintenance of the treatment works after construction. When
this responsibility is not clearly understood or only tacit compliance given,
water pollution increases because of poor plant maintenance, inadequately
trained operators, inadequate operating supplies, and even cost reduction
practices such as shutting down chlorination or chemical treatment equipment.
Identifying these deficiencies requires expert appraisal. At present, water
pollution control agencies at all levels of government lack adequate techni-
cal staffs to provide consultation services to the approximately 11,000
plants in operation. Operating inefficiencies must be identified, quantified
and appropriate measures taken to obtain efficient sewage treatment plant op-
erations if prescribed treatment levels are to be attained.
The Federal government provides no funds for operating, and only a few States
either now provide such grants or are planning to do so. Such grants usually
serve to improve operating efficiency of treatment facilities. New York
State, for example, provides grants for one-third of the annual operating
cost of municipal facilities, and requires the facilities to report regularly
on operating efficiency. This type of state aid to local units of government
may set the stage for increased efficiency by stimulating better control pro-
cedures, manpower training, and improved utilization of existing equipment.
Operating treatment plants more efficiently has been advanced as one way of
increasing available capacity. However, an activated sludge plant, for exam-
ple, operating at less than 85-95% 8005 (five-day biochemical oxygen demand)
removal may nevertheless be utilizing its total hydraulic capacity. A plant
designed for "x" mgd (million gallons per day) cannot accept a substantially
greater volume of wastewater whether or not it is efficiently removing 6005.
Table 1-7 reflects BOD^ removal efficiencies of various types of waste treat-
ment facilities.
Bypassing and peak hour hydraulic loads imposed on a facility often adversely
affect average hourly efficiency. Many facilities operating at 85-95% 8005
removal in non-peak hours fall to less than 60% 6005 removal during the peak
noon hours. Although some plants may operate below capacity at night, the
unused capacity is usually not readily available to more distant communities.
In some situations, however, an industry discharging to public sewers can
advantageously limit its waste discharges to these off-peak periods at muni-
cipal treatment plants.
24
-------
TABLE 1-7
RELATIVE EFFICIENCIES OF SEWAGE-TREATMENT
OPERATIONS AND PROCESSES
(Percentage Removal)
Treatment Operation or Process
Five-day
20 C
BOD
ro
tn
1. Fine screening
2. Chlorination of raw or settled sewage
3. Plain sedimentation
4. Chemical precipitation
5. Trickling filtration preceded and followed by
plain sedimentation
6. Activated-sludge treatment preceded and followed
by plain sedimentation
7. Intermittent sand filtration
5-10
15-30
25-40
50-85
80-95
85-95
90-95
Source: Ftew£eA. ViApo&aJi, Sth ed-ctuw, 7963,
Jokn MJbuj & SOFIA, Table. 21-11.
-------
COMBINED SEWERS
The control of pollution from municipal wastes is frequently complicated by
the use of a single system to carry both sewage and surface storm runoff, re-
ferred to as a combined sewer system. Combined sewers carry sanitary sewage
with its component commercial and industrial wastes at all times and, during
storm or thaw periods, serve as collectors and transporters of storm water
from streets and other sources thus serving a "combined" purpose. These com-
bined systems are designed to carry many times the dry weather flow, because
of the storm water. It has not been considered economically feasible to
build intercepting sewers and treatment plants to handle the entire runoff
along with the sewage flows. Therefore, combined sewers make provision for
the transport of excess amounts of flow from the combined system directly to
the stream, bypassing the treatment plant.
Separation of combined sewers into sanitary sewers and storm sewers has been
considered the principal method of controlling pollution from this source.
However, the cost of separating sewers completely would be enormous - recent
estimates say $49 billion nationally. Moreover, this is not feasible, either
economically or for effectively solving the problem. Sewer separation would
involve major and prolonged disruptions to traffic and other street activi-
ties, and in the use of other utilities where electric conduits, water and
gas mains, telephone and telegraph conduits, etc., are installed beneath the
streets. Further, studies have shown that urban storm water itself, even
when separated, carries serious pollution. It is clear, therefore, that sew-
er separation in itself provides no complete answer to the combined sewer
overflow problem.
The solutions of pollutional problems caused by combined sewer systems may be
as varied as the circumstances involved. In some situations, partial or com-
plete separation may be the most feasible alternative. In other cases, the
solution may be the construction of holding tanks or additional treatment fa-
cilities for handling such overflows.
PARTIAL OR COMPLETE SEPARATION
Separating a large combined sewer system into a dual system is a project of
vast proportions. In some cases, new sanitary sewers would be required,
leaving the existing sewers for storm water only. The converse may apply in
other cases. To effect "total" separation of combined sewers, the plumbing
within each building also would have to be rearranged so that roof leaders,
areaway, depressed driveway and cellar drains would all discharge through a
building connection into the storm drain. The sanitary sewage would dis-
charge to another connection leading to the sanitary sewer.
26
-------
A recent survey was made of the problems of combined sewer facilities and
overflows in U. S. communities, by the American Public Works Association Re-
search Foundation under contract with the Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration.10 Its purpose was to determine the national extent and effects
of such overflows and report on the treatment measures or other controls, ex-
isting or planned, for abating the problem. All communities of 25,000 or
greater population and 30% of those under 25,000 were interviewed. National
totals were projected.
In the surveyed communities, 51 million people are served by partially or
wholly combined sewers. Extrapolation by the survey indicates that in the
total United States, 54 million people live in such municipalities. A 1964
appraisal11 reported 59 million people in communities served by combined sew-
ers. Because of the greater detail collected by the survey, the lower figure
of 54 million would seem more precise. Excluding the appropriate portions of
those communities served by separate sewers, an estimated 36 million people
in the United States are actually served by combined sewer systems.
In addition to treatment plant overflows caused by storm water, other types
of overflows may also be considerable in community sewer systems. Insuffi-
cient treatment plant capacity, infiltration, malfunctioning, poor mainte-
nance of control devices, and pumping station bypasses are definite factors
in the overflow problem.
According to the Survey, engineers have preferred to provide separate con-
duits for sanitary sewage and storm water rather than to enlarge or improve
combined sewer systems.
Of the 641 jurisdictions surveyed, approximately one-half reported that engi-
neering studies to correct pollution problems resulting from combined sewers
or storm water overflows had been completed. Of these, 71% had prepared cost
estimates. Of those with current plans, 71% planned to undertake some degree
of sewer separation and the remaining 29% had plans for alternate corrective
measures. This probably indicates that adequate information on the cost and
effectiveness of alternates to sewer separation is not available.
10 ptu>blem& o& Combined SeweA facilUieA and OveAjlow - 1967
by tke. Ame/u-con Pab^x.c wotui& MAoc/totton, vecembeA l, 7967.
"Potlu£iona£ E^ecti ojj &£o/un WoteA and Oversow* FAom Combined
Sterna, A P/tetmtnoA{f App*acaa£," p*epo/ied by ike. ViviA-ion o&
Supply and Pollution Con&wt, Pubtic. HeaJUh SeAvx.ce, U. S. Government
Printing O^ce, Wo4fung>Con, V. C., 1964.
27
-------
To facilitate cost evaluation, the 49 states (Hawaii reported no combined
sewers) and the District of Columbia were grouped into seven geographic re-
gions :
(1) New England; Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont
(2) Middle Atlantic; Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Pennsyl-
vania
(3) South Atlantic: District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia,
West Virginia
(4) Southern; Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Ken-
tucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
(5) Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Da-
kota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin
(6) West: Alaska, California, Colorado, Idaho, Mon-
tana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington,
Wyoming
(7) Southwest; Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas
The cost evaluations as developed utilized information from the survey forms,
supplemented by additional information obtained from surveyed communities.
Area and population data were extracted and dollar-per-capita and dollar-per-
acre ratios were developed for each community for the combined-sewer area and
population affected.
Regional and national figures developed show the range of costs for complete
separation (Table 1-8). Mean and median values are also determined on the
bases of dollars-per-capita and dollars-per-acre. The cost estimates for
"complete separation" refer to separating the entire combined sewer system,
but do not include the necessary plumbing changes on private property to ef-
fect "total" separation. As expected, there were large variations in the
costs reported. Most ranges, however, confirmed the reasonableness of the
values ascribed to complete separation. It is important to note that many
metropolitan communities, such as Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, New York,
Portland, and Rochester, submitted no separation cost data in this survey,
perhaps because the probability of such work is remote. These cities have
high population densities and are heavily industrialized. In many large
cities, conventional separation is all but impossible because of existing
tremendous under-street development - pipes, subways, and other utilities.
28
-------
TABLE 1-8
REPORTED COST OF SEPARATION BY REGION
Area
New England
Middle Atlantic
South Atlantic
Southern
Midwest
West
United States
Complete Separation'
Cost
Range
$5,800-55,800
4,550-42,900
6,700-27,500
1,420-27,500
100-29,000
290-16,700
$ 100-55,800
Per Acre
Mean
$19,000
13,000
13,100
8,930
5,720
4,940
$ 6,740
Medi an
$10,000
11,000
7,300
5,450
3,590
1,700
$ 4,500
Cost
Range
$480-1,160
430-2,720
415-1,250
445-1,220
25-2,660
60-5,000
$ 25-5,000
Per Capi
I Mean
$ 700
1,125
790
670
630
600
$ 670
ta
I Median
$630
640
750
510
415
280
$470
to
VO
"Complete. Separatum" mean* tkz elimination o<5 combined &touu> rfoi. tne,
by providing -two 4epcfui£e pubtic. AeweA &y&tw& in &&ie.&U> and oth&i pubtic. oAea6, but not
including any &e.pasiat4.on wo/ife on p>u.vate.
Source: Ptwbtem& o & Combine.d SeweA
and
the. American Public Wo/tfe4 MAoc*atLon, Table, IX-B, 1967.
- 1 96 7 , ptepated (JoA. FWFCA by
-------
The absence of cost data from these metropolitan areas may have resulted in a
lower cost range because of the predominance of less costly procedures in
less developed and less concentrated urban areas.
The only reliable cost information on separating plumbing to private and com-
mercial buildings was in the Washington, D. C. data. The District of Colum-
bia, for several years, has had an intensive program of working on a volun-
tary basis with property owners in selected areas to disconnect, from the
sanitary system, downspouts, roof drains, foundation drains, areaway drains,
air conditioning and cooling system drains, yard drains, catch basin drains
and other connections not receiving sanitary sewage. Unit costs developed
for various single family type dwellings vary from $890 for a row house to
$3,480 for homes on one-half acre lots. Limited experience has been gained
in separating commercial and apartment buildings. Costs to date range from
$100 to $50,000 per unit. For the purpose of cost projections, the figures
of $1,700 for a single-family dwelling and $3,400 for an apartment building
or commercial structure were selected. These costs were adjusted for each
area on the basis of the Engineering News Record cost index for sewer con-
struction as of September 1967.
Projections of cost were made for each state. Only limited data were avail-
able for many of the states, and it was necessary to base projections for
these on national cost figures and housing data. Table 1-9 shows the cost
estimates for separation of the public and private portions of combined sew-
ers. For the United states, "total" separation of combined sewers would cost
an estimated $48.8 billion; separation of only the public part would cost
$30.4 billion.
HOLDING TANKS
There are wide variations in the extent and characteristics of holding tank
projects. No uniformity in design criteria is apparent. Some tanks may be
designed for short-time balancing to control surcharging while others are de-
signed for partial treatment of the overflow by settling and chlorination.
In 1964 the Public Health Service published available cost information for
holding tanks for temporary impoundment of storm water discharges and/or com-
bined sewers overflows.12 The per capita cost of these projects, $318, was
used to estimate cost of holding tanks as an alternative to combined sewer
separation. These estimated costs are listed by State in Table 1-9, with the
total cost for the United States estimated at $11.6 billion.
" Pollution E^ectA o& Stottn Wotet and 0ve*rf£0W6 F/wm Combined
A PJie&imin&ty Appn&i&al," lac, cct.
30
-------
TABLE 1-9
ESTIMATED COST OF SEPARATION OF COMBINED SEWERS
AND THE ALTERNATIVE OF HOLDING TANKS
State
Population
Served By
Combined
Sewers'
(Thousands)
COST OF SEPARATION*
($ Million)
Separation of
Public Part of
Combined SewersJ
Plumbing
Charges to
Affected
Buildings4
Total
Cost of
Holding
Tanks5
($ Million)
United States ..
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
36,394
10
31
654
42
447
97
400
4
379
19
5,101
2,038
390
131
587
293
23
1,707
2,913
506
2
1,166
25
314
40
236
1,185
8,519
8
77
2,880
445
2,757
277
20
207
83
$30,391.6
8.3
25.7
712.0
35.4
373.0
81.3
334.0
3.7
317.0
15.8
4,270.0
1,710.0
326.0
109.5
490.0
243.0
19.5
1,425.0
2,430.0
423.0
1.3
972.0
21.0
263.0
33.0
196.0
990.0
7,100.0
6.3
64.3
2,410.0
372.0
2,300.0
231.0
16.6
173.0
69.0
$18,378.3 $48,769.9 $11,573.3
4.0
23.3
547.0
17.0
146.0
52.6
119.0
1.5
191.9
.3
2,420.0
872.4
188.8
46.0
264.4
116.5
4.5
926.3
1,548.5
189.6
.1
605.0
7.4
96.7
6.8
106.4
753.5
4,366.0
1.4
17.4
1,532.8
219.0
1,396.5
204.7
8.2
111.7
42.8
12.3
49.0
1,259.0
52.4
519.0
133.9
453.0
S.2
508.9
16.1
6,690.0
2,582.4
514.8
155.5
754.4
359.5
24.0
2,351.3
3,978.5
612.6
1.4
1,577.0
28.4
359.7
39.8
302.4
1,743.5
11,466.0
7.7
81.7
3,942.8
591.0
3,696.5
435.7
24.8
284.7
111.8
3.2
9.8
271.6
13.5
142.1
30.9
127.2
1.4
120.6
6.0
1,622.9
648.2
124.0
41.6
186.7
93.2
7.4
542.9
926.2
161.0
.5
370.7
8.0
100.0
12.6
74.9
376.9
2,708.9
2.4
24.5
915.7
141.5
876. B
88.1
6.3
66.0
26.3
31
-------
TABLE 1-9 (CONT'O.)
Stat*
Virginia
Hathl noton
H«st Virginia
Population
Served By
Combined
Sewers'
(Thousands)
COST OF SEPARATION2
($ Million )
Separation of
Public Part of ,
Combined Sewers3
139 116.5
273 228.0
730 610.0
335 280.0
700 585. 0
2 1.4
Plumbing
Charges to
Affected M
Buildings4
26.2
128.4
478.0
179.1
408.0
.6
Total
Cost of
Holding
Tanks5
($ Million)
144.7 44.4
356.4 86.7
1,088.0 232.2
459.1 106.4
993.0 222.6
2.0 .5
Population «e*ved by combined 4 emeu -in conmunitie* aith vompttttty combined 4 ewe* tytttnu and popula-
tion actually tvwta by the combined portion o{ tootu tytttM in communities with both combined and
separate
Estimated by American Public Woxkt Association.
Complete AtptvuitLon of combintd tanitafLy and ttox* Hem by p/ioviding too Aeptvutte. pufatit toot*,
in ttuttt and othm public aueutVL andOwMaM fium Combined SeiyeA Systems, Public Healtn
>bUMS oj Combined Seuvi fa&uittu and OveAfCouis - 1967, p>iepaud
-------
Based on the limited data available in the 1967 national survey ^ it was es-
timated that the alternate means of control and/or treatment other than sewer
separation would cost approximately $15 billion.
The holding tank estimate should be used with extreme caution. Data reported
in the recent survey* were insufficient to substantiate or refute the per
capita cost of $318 estimated for holding tanks; however, the reported costs
ranged from $62 to $1,300 per capita. It should be noted that holding tanks
have been used only in areas of low land costs, while 44% of the combined
sewer outfalls are located in heavily commercial and/or industrial areas
where land costs would be prohibitive.
Chicago is presently constructing approximately five miles of concrete-lined
underground tunnel at a depth of 200 to 250 feet for storage of combined sew-
er overflows. Such a system has special application in highly developed ur-
ban areas where surface storage is uneconomical and public inconvenience must
be minimized. The present estimated cost is $96 per capita or $3,975 per
acre.
In contrast, the stabilization pond being used by Springfield, Illinois is
much smaller in total magnitude than Chicago's deep tunnel. In Springfield,
with land readily available, the estimated cost of the pond is $7 per capita
or $96 per acre.
New York City has released information on plans to approach the storm over-
flow problem by constructing a series of specialized overflow treatment fa-
cilities located at critical points throughout the city which would process
the large amounts of combined sewer overflows resulting from rainstorms.
Construction of 30 such small treatment plants is estimated to cost about
$460 million. Construction is scheduled to begin in 1968 on the first of
these auxiliary water pollution control plants at Spring Creek on Jamaica
Bay. The present estimated cost for this first plant is $69 per capita or
$3,220 per acre. Additional small plants will be constructed if the Jamaica
Bay unit proves successful.
Pollution from the discharges of sewers carrying storm water and sewage or
other wastes, has been recognized as a significant problem in attaining water
quality standards. Congress, late in 1965, authorized FWPCA to assist demon-
strations and studies which will provide a better understanding of the prob-
lems of combined sewers through detailed engineering evaluations embodying
complete economic analyses. The authorization was amended by the Clean Water
Restoration Act of 1966. Section 6a(l) of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
o£ Combined SetueA Facctctcea and Oue/t££ou»A - 7967, £oc. act.
14
"Pollution Effect* o£ Stoton WateA and Ovesifiloub thorn Combined SeweA
Sytteiu, A PtieJUjninasiy AppMi&at," toe., cct.
33
294-046 O - 68 - 4
-------
trol Act, as amended, authorizes grants to any state, municipality, or inter-
municipal or interstate agency for the purpose of assisting in the develop-
ment of any project which will demonstrate a new or improved method of con-
trolling the discharge into any waters of untreated or inadequately treated
sewage or other waste from sewers which carry storm water or both storm water
and sewage or other wastes. Contract research and development in this tech-
nical area are also authorized. The principal objective is to provide funds
to develop engineering and economic data on the alternative methods for con-
trol and/or treatment of these forms of pollution. Projects thus funded are
expected to demonstrate a variety of new or improved methods and to stimulate
industry-wide application of the demonstrated facilities.
In summary, nationwide elimination of combined sewers by means of separation
would be very costly and impose heavy burdens on local and State governments.
"Total" separation would cost $48.8'billion;, separation of only the public
part would cost $30.4 billion, and would not include the rearrangement of
plumbing to affected buildings and homes. As an alternate solution, a com-
plete system of holding tanks is estimated to cost $11.6 billion. Without
delineating the various types, the 1967 survey estimated that alternate meth-
ods would cost approximately $15 million. Alternatives to separation for the
control and/or treatment of combined sewer overflows, such as holding tanks,
treatment facilities or other control means, may reduce the pollution effects
of the problem to acceptable levels. Still other alternatives may be discov-
ered to the methods presently being investigated by FWPCA's Storm and Combin-
ed Sewer Pollution Control Program, designed to develop engineering evalu-
ations and economic analyses of new and improved methods for the control and/
or treatment of combined sewer overflows.
The final solution will no doubt be a combination of various control and/or
treatment methods, including sewer separation, resulting from detailed engi-
neering and socio-economic studies for individual problem areas.
34
-------
SEPARATE SANITARY SEWERS
The cost of providing separate sanitary sewers for the unsewered urban popu-
lation and the cost of sewering increases in urban population has been esti-
mated by this study for the period 1969-1973, in order to relate these re-
quirements to waste treatment works requirements. Estimates of the capital
costs of these needs have been included because of their basic relation to
municipal waste treatment needs.
Separate sanitary sewers are needed by a large number of communities present-
ly without sewers, and existing separate sanitary sewers must also be expand-
ed in the next five years in order to serve increasing population and urbani-
zation .
Interceptor sewer requirements are included as part of waste treatment works
needs because these sewers are an integral aspect of waste treatment systems
and therefore eligible for FWPCA construction grants. However, the distinc-
tion between interceptor and a trunk collecting sewers must be made on almost
a case-by-case basis to determine their eligibility for Federal grant funds.
The inclusion of collection sewer requirements can lead to over-estimates of
treatment needs.
Separate sanitary sewers carry wastewater but are designed to exclude storm
and surface waters. Such sewers are single-purpose systems for collecting
and transporting all of a community's waterborne wastes to the treatment
plant via a collector or interceptor sewer before the treated effluent is
discharged to a receiving waterbody. Separate storm sewer systems collect,
convey, channel and transport all storm water runoff directly to a stream or
other receiving waterbody.
This study assumes that the national need for sanitary sewers is based upon
the total urban population in each State and Water Resource Region. The cost
of constructing sanitary sewers varies widely throughout the United states.
In 1963 the sewering of unsewered areas served by public water systems, was
estimated by FWPCA at $125 per capita. This cost figure, adjusted for inter-
im construction cost changes by States, was used to calculate the total costs
for sewering the unsewered urban population for each State, and for sewering
projected urban population growth during the period 1969-1973. An estimated
28.4 million persons presently live in unsewered urban communities.
The cost for new sanitary sewers would total $6.2 billion. Of this amount,
$3.9 billion would be required to sewer the presently unsewered urban popula-
tion, and $2.3 billion for sewering urban population increases in the period
1969-1973. Table 1-10 is a summary of capital outlay needs by State and Wa-
ter Resource Regions.
35
-------
This study makes no attempt to calculate the capital costs of storm sewers
required for U. S. urban areas. The American Public Works Association has
estimated such capital outlays at $25 billion to finance the storm water fa-
cilities needed in new and expanding urban areas and to overcome present ur-
ban area deficiencies during the decade 1966-1975.
"Uxban Vtuiinage. Piac£lc.£&, PwceduSieA and Neexk," piepoted by the.
American Pubtlc. Uottk& Association. Wiban Utaoiage Coimcttee, Pecem-
be/t 1966.
36
-------
TABLE I-IDA
CAPITAL OUTLAYS NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY
SEWERS FOR THE U. S. URBAN POPULATION. 1969-1973
{$ Millions)
Total
State Capital
Outlays
United States $6,160.5
Alaska 8.0
Arizona 133. S
Arkansas 24.5
California .- 1,174.5
Colorado 52.0
Connecticut 125.0
District of Columbia 53.5
Florida 368.5
Georgia 104.0
Hawaii 73.0
Idaho 9.0
Illinois 210.5
Indiana f>7.0
Iowa 12.5
Kansas 20.5
Kentucky 48.5
Louisiana 143.0
Haine 4.0
Maryland 115.5
Massachusetts 200.5
Michigan 192.0
Minnesota ' 75.0
Mississippi 41.5
Missouri 293.0
Montana 5.5
Nebraska 17.5
Nevada 16.0
Hew Hampshire 19.0
New Jersey 386 .5
New Mexico 33 .0
Mew York 637.0
North Carolina 76 .0
North Dakota 5.0
Ohio 247.0
Oklahoma 42.5
Oregon 67.0
Pennsylvania 46.0
Rhode Island 33.0
South Carolina 34.5
South Dakota 4.0
Vermont 2.0
Washington 186.5
West Virginia 13.5
Wisconsin 45.0
Wyoming 4.5
Capital Outlays
Reduce Cur- Increases
rent Unmet In Urban
Need Population
$3,867.0 $2,293.5
37.5 27.5
3.0 5.0
81.5 52.0
6.5 18.0
718.0 456.5
17.0 35.0
94.5 30.5
11.5 8.0
53.5
252.5 116.0
48.5 55.5
62.0 11.0
4.5 4.5
118.0 92.5
34.5 32.5
12.5
20.5
24.5 24.0
95.0 48.0
2.0 2.0
65.5 50.0
173.5 27.0
118.5 73.5
36.5 38.5
27.5 14.0
257.5 35.5
5.5
7.0 10.5
16.0
13.5 5.5
273.0 113.5
11.5 21.5
466.5 170.5
40.5 35.5
5.0
159.0 88.0
17,0 25.5
37.5 29.5
46.0
27.5 5.5
18.5 16.0
4.0
42.0 24.5
211.0 167.5
32.5 18.5
2.0
47.5 62.5
154.5 32.0
9.5 4.0
8.5 36.5
4.5
Soutee.:
Based on 1962
Sjuuth. KnxuaLSuMty 0$ Munt&ipat
January 1966.
oj Municipal Watte. ^axJUJitinit, updated;
\utvLcjUpaiL ba&te. TueJuCment NelSt by CSSf,
37
-------
TABLE I-10B
CAPITAL OUTLAYS NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY
SEWERS FOR THE U. S. URBAN POPULATION, 1969-1973
($ Millions)
Water Resource Region
1
Total
Capital
Outl ays
Capital Outlays
Reduce Cur-
rent Unmet
Need
Increases
In Urban
Population
Alaska 8.0 3.0
Arkansas-White-Red 164.2 79.7
California 1,175.8 718.7
Columbia-North Pacific 263.1 195.7
Great Basin 52.7 29.2
Great Lakes 464.1 282.5
Hawaii 73.0 62.0
Lower Colorado 145.8 83.1
Lower Mississippi 155.8 103.9
Missouri 220.3 141.3
North Atlantic 1,632.9 1,101.2
Ohio 281.2 159.7
Rio Grande 61.3 28.5
Souris-Red-Rainy 4.0 .7
South Atlantic-Gulf 680.9 418.1
Tennessee 29.0 17.8
Texas-Gulf 325.4 180.7
Upper Colorado 6.9 3^0
Opper Mississippi 416.1 258.2
5
84
457
67.4
23.5
181.6
11.0
62.7
51.9
79.0
531.7
121.5
32.8
3.3
262.8
11.2
144.7
3.9
157.9
Wote* Reaou*c£ Reg-tona p/iopaAe
-------
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE TO PUBLIC SEWERS
Industrial wastewater discharged to public sewers may increase substantially
in the next few years as water quality standards are implemented. Industries
which are required to upgrade waste treatment may find it economically desir-
able to enter into joint agreements with municipalities to construct treat-
ment facilities. Such combined industrial-municipal treatment could yield
savings in capital and operating costs to both community and industry.
The mosct recent detailed data on industrial discharges to public sewers are
contained in the 1964 Census of Manufactures, "Water Use in Manufacturing".
The census shows water intake for establishments reporting annual water in-
take of 20 million or more gallons and the amount of wastewater they dis-
charge to public utility sewers, as well as the water intake for the estab-
lishments reporting water intake of under 20 million gallons annually. Dis-
charges to public sewers by the latter establishments were not reported by
the census.
Water discharged to public sewers by those establishments using more than 20
million gallons decreased from 997 billion gallons in the 1959 Census to 987
billion gallons in the 1964 Census, a drop of 1%. However, if present trends,
state-by-state continue, the national aggregate will increase. This is ex-
plained by the upward trends in some States that have large industrial dis-
charges to public sewers. Extrapolating these trends to 1968 shows the large-
user discharges to public sewers increasing to 1,029.0 billion gallons. Con-
tinuing the trend to 1973 would raise this discharge to 1,157.2 billion gal-
lons.
Although the 1964 Census of Manufactures did not show the amount of wastewa-
ter discharged to public sewers by those industrial establishments using un-
der 20 million gallons of water annually, it was assumed that this water was
discharged to public sewers. This assumption was made because 80% of the
119,714 establishments in this category actually used under one million gal-
lons each per year, and only 4% used from 10-20 million gallons. Furthermore,
an establishment with an intake of one million gallons would be using only
about 2,740 gallons per day, roughly equal to the water used daily by 34
people. In view of the small amount of water use by 80% of these establish-
ments, it is unlikely that they have installed their own wastewater treatment
equipment. Even a factory using more than 10 million gallons annually (the
4% group) would be using only about the same amount of water daily as 500 per-
sons. Some, though certainly not all, of this latter group may have wastewa-
6 "Wote* Uae Jun. Monurfactuytuig," 7963 Cw&ut, o& Manafria£a*EA, p*epa/ted by
tke. Bureau o& the. Cen^uA, U. S. yepa^tment o& commence, u. S. Govern-
ment P/tuttaig flrf^tce, Waikuig-ton, V. C., T966.
39
-------
ter treatment equipment. Also, a few are probably discharging wastewaters
directly to streams. Overall, it seems reasonable for purposes of this
study, to consider that all wastewater discharged by establishments using
less than 20 million gallons of water annually goes to public sewers.
The annual water intake for the under-20-million-gallon users was extrapolat-
ed to 1968 by using the average annual value added by manufacture for estab-
lishments in each State. The data were further extrapolated to 1973 by the
trend in value added by manufacture in each State. By this method it was
estimated that the under-20-million-gallon users will discharge an estimated
310 billion gallons of wastewaters to public sewers in 1968, with an expected
rise to 455 billion gallons in 1973.
By 1973, the total discharges are projected to increase 20%, the discharges
of the over-20-million-gallon users by 12%, and those of the under-20-million-
gallon group by 47%.
Table 1-11 shows the industrial water discharged to public sewers by Water
Resource Regions. Ranking first is the North Atlantic Region, discharging
336.1 billion gallons in 1968; second is the Great Lakes Region, discharging
244.9 billion gallons; third is the Upper Mississippi Region, discharging
200.7 billion gallons; and fourth the Ohio Region, discharging 177.9 billion
gallons. From 1968 to 1973 the increases are fairly consistent from Region
to Region except for the Columbia-North Pacific Region which shows a decrease
of 0.3%. It is probably that industrial wastewater discharged to public sew-
ers will increase substantially under pressures for water quality standards
compliance because this could offer economies to a manufacturer otherwise
faced with installing or expanding his own water pollution control facilities.
Waste treatment service provided by local governments for industrial concerns
is feasible and desirable when based on equitable payment arrangements. The
advantages to industry include avoidance of capital investments, the econo-
mies of scale, and the convenience. There are advantages to local govern-
ments in strengthened financial bases of operation, in the economies of scale,
and in increased opportunity for pollution surveillance and monitoring of
waste discharges for pollution control. The additional revenues to the local
government, as a result of full-cost pricing of the service, could be used
for improved operations and for participating in basinwide management systems.
Moreover, a user-charge not only achieves more equitable prices and waste con-
trols but also provides revenues which otherwise would have to be raised by
taxes.
Many factors will influence the trend toward joint municipal-industrial waste
treatment in the next few years. In individual cases, legal questions will
have to be resolved concerning facility ownership, how the construction costs
will be allocated, how operation and maintenance costs will be borne, and
types and quantities of wastes treated.
40
-------
TABLE I-11
INDUSTRIAL WATER DISCHARGED TO PUBLIC SEWERS PROJECTED
FOR 1968 AND 1973, BY WATER RESOURCE REGION
(Billion Gallons)
Water Resource Region
1
1968
1973
Percentage
Change
United States .................. 1,338.5 1,612.2 20.4%
Alaska .............................. 7.2 11.3 56.9
Arkansas-White-Red .................. 33.8 46.7 38.2
California .......................... 80.3 99.6 24.0
Columbia-North Pacific .............. 35 . 5 35 . 4 - .3
Great Basin ......................... 3.3 4.2 27.3
Great Lakes ......................... 244.9 296.3 21.0
Hawaii .............................. 3.5 5.5 57.1
Lower Colorado ...................... 1.6 2.6 62.5
Lower Mississippi ................... 14.9 16.4 10.1
Missouri ............................ 60.1 77.0 28.1
North Atlantic ...................... 336.1 388.2 15.5
Ohio ................................ 177.9 218.0 22.5
Rio Grande ................. . ........ 4.0 6.3 57.5
Souris-Red-Rainy .................... 3.5 4.0 14.3
South Atlantic-Gulf ................. 87.9 111.6 27.0
Tennessee ........................... 10-8 11.5 6.5
Texas-Gulf .......................... 31.7 51.7 63.1
Upper Colorado ...................... -9 1 • 2 33 • 3
Upper Mississippi ................... 200.7 224.7 12.0
Wote/i Ra6ou/ice Re.gion& p/ujpo^ed by WateA RaiouAce Council jjo-t Type. I Com-
p*efienA-u;e Sifivet/4. Vata UJC/LC not available. to estimate, capital outlay
need6 fax. the. Puerto Kico-Vi*gin Uland* Region.
Sou/ice: Pto/ected on bom o£ ttend* te&£ec£ecf in Cuteu* oj
"U/a£e* Uie in Manufacturing", 1959 and 1964, and tiendA
added by maniL^actu^e. in the. MApzctive. &tat&&.
value,
41
-------
An actual contract between an industry and a municipality illustrates the na-
ture of these agreements: an equitable distribution of initial capital sav-
ings as well as savings in operation costs; assurance by the city that oper-
ation of the treatment works would be separated from political appointments ;
agreement by the city that it would accept the company's wastewaters for
treatment; agreement by the company that it would deliver its wastes to the
city for treatment, and a guarantee by the company that it would not build a
competitive plant; agreement by the company to furnish its pilot plant data
to the city to use for the design basis; agreement by the city to hire the
newly formed Sewage Treatment Company, a company subsidiary, to operate the
city's sewage treatment works, reserving to the company the right to control
employment; and specifications of financial details including cost-sharing
and the establishment of service rates.17
Not all industrial wastes are amenable to the municipal waste treatment pro-
cesses regardless of the willingness of communities and industry to cooperate
in their joint waste treatment problems. Another factor to be considered is
that some receiving streams may not be able to assimilate adequately the dis-
charges from a large single treatment source. Part II of this Volume con-
tains a detailed analysis of joint municipal-industrial waste treatment on
an industry-by-industry basis.
Gaudy, A. F., fct o£. , Symposium on 3oint UA. Separate T*ea^men£
and TnSM&tiat u/aUeA pmefttect at .the 1$tk CkMioma In
Convenience at Oklahoma. State
Oklahoma, November ZS-29, J966.
42
-------
SUMMARY
Providing waste treatment facilities for population growth, upgrading primary
treatment works, constructing treatment works for the urban population pres-
ently unserved and replacing depreciated plants and equipment will cost $8.0
billion during the period FY 1969-1973. This cost could increase to $8.7
billion based upon the rising construction costs of recent years.
The waste treatment facilities, existing and projected, required to attain
water quality standards over the next five years, will place substantial fi-
nancial demands upon communities for operation and maintenance. These costs
are estimated at $1.4 billion in the period FY 1969-1973. Labor cost in-
creases could raise this amount to $1.7 billion.
In order to meet the standards by 1973, it is estimated that 90% of the urban
population will require secondary treatment facilities and 10% primary treat-
ment facilities.
Substantial additional costs will be incurred during the 1969-1973 period for
the control of overflows from combined sewers. It is anticipated that a va-
riety of control methods will be initiated, depending upon individual circum-
stances, and as a result, the full extent of these costs cannot be estimated
at this time.
New sanitary sewers for the U. S. urban population projected to 1973 will
cost $6.2 billion. This study has not attempted to calculate the capital
needs for urban drainage improvements in the U. S. However, the American
Public Works Association has estimated these capital needs at $25 billion
for the period 1966-1975.
Future trends in industrial wastewater discharges to public sewers will be
influenced greatly by the extent to which municipalities and industries can
jointly and feasibly solve their waste treatment problems. Industry, spurred
by requirements to comply with water quality standards, may find such a joint
waste treatment operation advantageous. Economies of scale may also be avail-
able through municipal-industrial sharing of the construction costs of joint
treatment works.
43
-------
APPENDIX I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Advisory Conmission on Intergovernmental Relations. A Commission Report,
Intergovernmental Responsibilities for Water Supply and Sewage Disposal
in Metropolitan Areas, Washington, D. C., October 1962.
American Public Works Association. The Problems of Combined Sewer Facilities
and Overflows, 1947. A report prepared by the American Public Works
Association, 1967 for the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
U. S. Department of the Interior.
American Public Works Association, Urban Drainage Committee. Urban Drainage
Practices, Procedures, and Needs. Project 119. Chicago, Illinois:
December 1966.
Byrd, J. Floyd. Combined Treatment - A Coast-to-Coast Coverage. Paper pre-
sented at the 39th Annual Conference of the Water Pollution Control
Federation in Kansas City, Missouri, September 25-30, 1966.
Conference of State Sanitary Engineers. Second Annual Report on Municipal
Waste Treatment Needs. Conference of State Sanitary Engineers, Janu-
ary 1, 1962.
Conference of State Sanitary Engineers. Sixth Annual Survey of Municipal
Waste Treatment Needs, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
Public Health Service, Washington, D. C., January 1966.
Fair, G. M. and J. C. Geyer. Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal, John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., Fifth Printing, New York, New York, April 1963.
Gaudy, A. F., et al. Symposium on Joint vs. Separate Treatment of Municipal
and Industrial Waste. Symposium was presented at the 13th Oklahoma In-
dustrial Wastes Conference at Oklahoma State University, Stillwater,
Oklahoma, November 28-29, 1966.
Glass, Andrew C. and Kenneth H. Jenkins. Statistical Summary of 1962 Inven-
tory Municipal Waste Facilities in the United States. Division of Water
Supply and Pollution Control, U. S. Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, Public Health Service. Washington 1964.
Haseltine, T. R. "A Rational Approach to the Design of Activated Sludge
Plants." Sewage Treatment. Pages 257-270.
44
-------
Howells, D. H. and D. P. Dubois. "The Design and Cost of Stabilization Ponds
in the Midwest." Sewage and Industrial Wastes. Volume 31, No. 7, July
1959.
Kanmerer, J. C. and K. A. Mackichan. Estimated Use of Water in the United
States, 1960. U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Geo-
logical Survey Circular 456, Washington, 1961.
Reefer, C. E. Sewage Treatment - How It Is Accomplished. From the Smithso-
nian Report for 1956. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 1957.
Pages 363-389.
Koenig, Louis. The Cost of Water Quality Control. Talk for Presentation at
ASTM National Meeting on the Control of Water Quality. Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, May 13, 1965.
. Studies Relating to Market Projections for Advanced Waste Treat-
ment. For The Advanced Waste Treatment Research Activities, Research
and Development, Cincinnati Water Research Laboratory, U. S. Department
of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Cin-
cinnati, December 1966.
Logan, John A., W. D. Hat field, George S. Russell, and Walter R. Lynn. "An
Analysis of the Economies of Wastewater Treatment." Journal Water Pol-
lution Control Federation. Volume 34, No. 9. September 1962. Pages
860-882.
National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council. Waste Management
and Control. A Report to the Federal Council for Science and Technology
by the Committee on Pollution, National Academy of Sciences. Washington,
1966.
National Association of Counties/Research Foundation. Community Action Pro-
gram for Water Pollution Control. Washington, 1965.
National Association of Home Builders, Research Institute, in Cooperation
With U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health
Service* Small Sewage Treatment Systems. Washington, 1959.
President's Science Advisory Committee, Restoring the Quality of Our Environ-
ment, A Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel, The White House,
1965.
Rafuse, Jr., Robert W. Water-Supply and Sanitation Expenditures of State and
Local Governments; Projections to 1970. In cooperation with the Nation-
al Association of Cojnties, the National League of Cities, the U. S. Con-
ference of Mayors, The George Washington University. Chicago: The Coun-
cil of State Governments , 1966.
45
-------
Rowan, P. P., K. L. Jenkins, and D. H. Howells. Division of Water Supply and
Pollution Control, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Public Health Service. "Estimating Sewage Treatment Plant Operation and
Maintenance Costs." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation. Febru-
ary 1961. Volume 33, No. 2.
State of Michigan, Joint Legislative Committee on Water Resources Planning.
Study on Needs for Water Pollution Control Works. December 31, 1966.
Swanson, C. L. Unit Process Operating and Maintenance Costs for Conventional
Sewage Treatment Processes, (unpublished memorandum) August 1, 1966.
U. S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Population; 1960, Volume I.
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961.
. 1963 Census of Manufactures, Water Use in Manufacturing. Washing-
ton: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
U. S. Congress, House, Joint Economic Committee, State and Local Public Fa-
cility Needs and Financing, 89th Congress, 2nd Session, Volumes 1 and 2,
1966.
U. S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee on National Water Resources. Water
Resources Activities in the United States, Pollution Abatement. Commit-
tee Print No. 9. 89th Congress, 2nd Session, 1960.
U. S. Congress, Senate, Steps Toward Clean Water. Washington, D. C. Janu-
ary 1966.
U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Public Works, Hearings Before a Special
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, 89th Congress, 1st Session,
Parts 1, 2 and 3, 1965.
U. S. Department of Commerce. Regional Construction Requirements for Water
and Wastewater Facilities, 1955-1967-1980. Business and Defense Ser-
vices Administration. Washington, 1967.
D. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service.
Modern Sewage Treatment Plants - How Much Do They Cost? Division of
Water Supply and Pollution Control. Washington, 1965.
• Pollutional Effects of Storm Water and Overflows From Combined
Sewer Systems, A Preliminary Appraisal. Division of Water Supply and
Pollution Control. Washington, 1964.
• Proceedings the National Conference on Water Pollution. Washing-
ton, D. C.December 12-14, 1960.~
46
-------
. Waste Stabilization Lagoons^. Proceedings of a Symposium at Kansas
City, Missouri, August 1-5, 1960. Division of Water Supply and Pollu-
tion Control, Region VI, Kansas City, Missouri, 1961.
. Problems in Financing Sewage Treatment Facilities. Division of
Water Supply and Pollution Control. Washington, 1964.
U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion. Manpower and Training Needs in Water Pollution Control. Report
to the Congress of the United States, Document No. 49. 90th Congress,
1st Session, 1967.
. Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index. Division of Con-
struction Grants.
Sewer Construction Cost Index. Division of Construction Grants.
U. S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D. C., 1964.
. Sewage and Water Works Construction, 1965. Washington, 1966.
U. S. Department of Labor. Indexes of Output Per Man-Hour, Hourly Compensa-
tion, and Unit Labor Costs in the Manufacturing Sector, 1947-1966.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. Washington. June 1967,
Water Pollution Federation. Design and Construction of Sanitary and Storm
Sewers, WPCF Manual of Practice No. 9. Prepared by a Joint Committee
of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 1960.
. Sewage Treatment Plant Design, WPCF Manual of Practice No. 8.
Prepared by a Joint Committee of WPCF and the American Society of Civil
Engineers. Washington: Water Pollution Control Federation, 1957.
. Uniform System of Accounts for Waterwater Utilities. Prepared by
WPCF Committee on Sewage and Industrial Wastes Practice, Subcommittee
on Sewage Works Finance. Washington: Water Pollution Control Feder-
ation, 1961.
47
-------
INDUSTRIAL REQUIREMENTS
AND COST ESTIMATES
Volume II
Part II
U. S. Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
January 10, 1968
294-046 O - 6« - 5
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part II
Introduction 57
Volume of Industrial Wastes 59
Methods and Prevalence of Industrial Waste Control 67
Volume of Waste and Degree of Treatment 67
Industry-Operated Waste Treatment Plants 68
Treatment of Industrial Wastes by Municipal
Treatment Plants 70
Ground Disposal of Liquid Industrial Wastes 76
Technological Advance as an Industrial Waste
Control Measure 77
Cost Standards and Investment Requirements 91
Analysis of Unit Costs 91
Method of Assessment 94
Total Required Investment for Industrial Waste
Treatment 98
Marginal Efficiency and Hidden Costs 105
Other Sources of Cost 108
Annual Costs of Industrial Waste Treatment 110
Regional Incidence of Industrial Waste Treatment
Costs 115
Industrial Wastewater Cooling Requirements 119
Conclusions 137
Appendix I
Effect of Potential Cost Increases 140
51
-------
Page
Appendix II
Procedure Followed in Development of the Waste
Treatment Cost Model 151
Appendix III
Bibliography 153
52
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Part II
Table Title Page
II-l Currently Reported Wastewater Characteristics, By
Industry Groups. 60
11-2 Estimated volume of Industrial Waste Before Treat-
ment, 1964. 63
II-3 Regional Incidence of Industrial Waste Discharge,
By Major Industrial Sectors, 1964. 65
II-4 Waste Controlling Techniques, By Major Industrial
Sectors, 1964. 69
II-5 Relative Increase in Output and Treatment of Liquid
Wastes By Major Industrial Sectors, 1954-1964. 71
II-6 Growth of Municipal Sewer and Waste Treatment Facil-
ities, 1949-1962. 72
II-7 Total Discharge and Sewered Discharge Trends, 1959-
1964 (1959 = 100%) . 74
II-8 Trend of Ground Disposal in Industrial Liquid Waste
Handling, 1959-1964. 78
II-9 Relative Change in Output, Water Use, and Wastewa-
ter Discharge, By Major Industrial Sectors. 83
11-10 Relative Increase in Water Use Efficiency and in
Water Reuse, By Major Industrial Sectors. 84
11-11 Coefficients of Liquid Wastes Generated, By Indus-
try Category. 89
11-12 Estimated Value of Investment, Industrial Waste
Treatment Requirements, 1968. 99
11-13 Comparison of Estimated 1968 Waste Treatment Re-
quirements Under Two Methods of Calculation. 101
53
-------
Table Title Page
11-14 Annual Investment Required to Reduce the Existing
Industrial Waste Treatment Deficiency in Five
Years. 103
11-15 Capital Costs Associated With Varying Levels of
Industrial Waste Treatment Efficiency for 1968
Discharges. 107
11-16 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs as a Per-
centage of Value of Treatment Plants. Ill
11-17 Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs, 1968-1973. 112
11-18 Annual Cash Outlays Associated With the Projected
Industrial Waste Treatment System, 1969-1973. 114
11-19 Regional Distribution of Waste Treatment Require-
ments, 1968, By Wastewater Profiles and Estimates. 116
II-2O Relative Regional Prevalence of Industrial waste
Treatment, 1964. 118
11-21 Waste Heat - Comparison of New Generating Units
Coming on Stream in 1965 With Plant Retirements,
1961-1965. - 122
11-22 Nuclear-Fueled Generating Capacity Operational
in Year, 1957-1973. 124
11-23 Regional Distribution of Thermal Generating
Plants and Cooling Facilities, 1965. 127
11-24 Cooling Facilities Required, Steam-Electric Gen-
erating, By Region, 1965. 129
11-25 Manufacturers' Capital Requirements for Cooling
Facilities, By Industry, 1964. 130
11-26 Regional Distribution of Cooling Facilities Re-
quirements in Manufacturing, 1964. 132
H-27 Indicated Annual Investment Required to Provide
Complete Cooling for Major Industrial Establish-
ments By 1973. 133
54
-------
Table Title Page
11-28 Annual Cash Outlays for Cooling, 1969-1973. 136
II-A Construction Cost Increase, As Measured By the
Engineering News Record Index. 142
II-B Effect on Investment Requirements of Continuing
the Current (1958-1968) Rate of Increase in Con-
struction Costs. 143
II-C Value of Plant In-Place, 1973, Under Alternative
Evaluation Procedures. 145
II-D Cash Flow Deficiencies Associated With Continuing
the Current Rate of Increase in Construction
Costs. 146
II-E Effect on Operating and Maintenance Charges of
Continuing the Current (1958-1967) Rate of In-
crease in Cost. 148
II-F Summary of Total Impact of Projected Cost In-
creases, 1969-1973. 150
55
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Part II
Figure Title Page.
II-1 Major Drainage Regions, Industrial Definition. 66
II-2 Comparative Index of Annual Wood Pulp Production
and Volume of Pulping Wastes, 1920-1960 (1920 -
100). 80
II-3 Decline in Heat Wasted in Steam-Electric Power
Production. 81
II-4 Index of Unit Wastewater and Pollutant Concentra-
tions Associated With Current Production Technolo-
gies (Old Technology » 100). 87
II-5 Effect of Reduction in Initial Waste Loading on
Treatment Plant Cost. 88
II-6 Comparative Construction Costs Per Unit of Flow,
Secondary Waste Treatment Plants. 92
II-7 Generalized Relationship Between Waste Treatment
Costs and Intensity of Treatment. 106
II-A Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index,
(1913-1967) Projected to 1973. 141
56
-------
INTRODUCTION
Waste controls and wastewater cooling facilities having a current replacement
value of from over $5 billion to more than $6 billion must be utilized to
achieve by FY 1973 the level of industrial waste reduction and temperature
control assumed to be necessary to provide adequate protection against water
pollution. Roughly half of the value of the necessary investment is present-
ly provided by industrial waste treatment and cooling plants in place, or by
municipal facilities which treat industrial wastes. But an investment of
from almost $2 billion to almost $3.5 billion will be required to overcome
the accumulated deficiency in industrial waste treatment and cooling facili-
ties that exists in 1968, another $.5 billion to $1 billion will be required
to keep pace with industrial growth between 1968 and 1973. The annual cost
of operating and maintaining the system is expected to rise from $550 million
at the inadequate 1968 level of operations to over $1 billion, exclusive of
depreciation, by 1973.
The costs indicated are those associated with assigned levels of efficiency:
85% removal of standard BOD and of settleable and suspended solids contents
of waterbome industrial wastes and achievement of a 13° average temperature
reduction. It must be recognized that the values have no application to spe-
cific situations - greater or lesser efficiencies may be required to maintain
water quality standards at any point. The requirement is expressed in aver-
age terms. Similarly, attainment of the requirement is evaluated in terms of
prevailing approaches and technology and average costs. There are many al-
ternative methods of meeting the waste reduction and the cooling requirement.
The combination of decisions regarding adoption of the alternatives will have
a profound impact on realized costs.
The ultimate cost to industry and to the economy of providing a degree of
waste treatment sufficient to maintain water quality standards for interstate
waters will depend on the interweaving of a complex set of variables that in-
cludes (but is probably not limited to) industrial location, water use tech-
nology, regulatory policy, rate of increase in industrial output, the compo-
sition of industrial output, waste treatment technology, development of coop-
erative institutional arrangements, and the speed with which obsolete indus-
trial plant is replaced.
The critical nature of industrial pollution control is indicated by the as-
sessment of gross volume of industrial waste production presented in this re-
port. While no national inventory of industrial waste sources has yet been
assembled, it has been possible to gather reasonably reliable information re-
garding both the volume of industrial wastewater and of industrial production,
Engineering studies of the waste handling requirements of a wide variety of
industrial processes have produced data which permit waste-to-product ratios
to be calculated for many processes and products. Application of these ra-
57
-------
tios to published estimates of output, then, provides a gross sizing of con-
stituents of the industrial wasteload.
While the obvious weaknesses of an attempt to quantify the industrial waste
problem on the basis of limited data must be recognized, it is apparent that
industrial wastes are a much larger potential source of water pollution than
are the wastes of the nation's municipal populations. Estimated production
of standard BOD by industry is almost three times that of municipalities;
production of suspended solids is between two and three times that of munici-
palities. In addition, polluting increases in temperature, alkalinity, acid-
ity, color, metals, and toxicants in our nation's waters as a result of the
wastes of industrial processes are significant and growing.
In evaluating this assessment of wasteloads and treatment costs, two factors
must be kept in mind. First, the industrial waste problem is greater than a
simple comparison with municipal wastes would indicate. The variety of pol-
lutants other than heat, standard BOD, and suspended solids, the gaps in the
data, the unreliability of the standard BOD test for non-human waste pro-
ducts - all suggest strongly that an assessment of industrial wasteload quan-
tities made with the present state of information must, of necessity, be an
under-evaluation. Second, technological improvements which advance the cost-
effectiveness of waste treatment, opportunities for modification of produc-
tion processes to reduce unit waste production, and cooperative waste han-
dling procedures should be utilized fully to lessen costs, in order to offset
the cost-increasing effects of industrial concentration and hard-to-treat
wastes.
58
-------
VOLUME OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
Definition of treatment requirements and costs associated with the nation's
production of industrial wastes has, as a preliminary condition, required an
assessment of the volume and pollutional characteristics of industrial wastes.
No such assessment has ever been made before. Evaluations of industrial
wastes to this time have occurred in connection with localized problems.
In order to provide the required quantitative framework for this study, the
FWPCA undertook to correlate the results of an extensive search of the tech-
nical literature of industrial wastewater characteristics with the data on
industrial water use presented in The 1963 Census of Manufactures, "Water Use
in Manufacturing." Efforts were bent to development of three pieces of in-
formation: (1) characteristic waste products of major water using industrial
processes, (2) normal volume relationships for industrial processes between
unit material outputs or inputs and pollutants, and (3) relationships between
total output, total water use, and wastes for industrial sectors in the cen-
sus year.
The investigation of wastewater characteristics produced a large number of
estimates of characteristic kinds of waterborne wastes generated by specific
industries. But though the list, presented in Table II-l, is extensive, only
a few pollutants have been reported in meaningful detail.
Five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) was reported most frequently.
Other parameters for which considerable data are available are suspended sol-
ids, total solids, and pH (a measure of alkalinity or acidity).
The deficiency of data with regard to many industrial pollutants symptomizes
a deficiency in the general approach to pollution control. There has been a
tendency to view and evaluate all pollutants in terms of their analogy with
sanitary wastes. Thus waste treatment efficiency is almost universally ex-
pressed in terms of percentage BOD removal, although it is recognized that,
in the case of industrial pollutants, the effectiveness of control will often
depend on removal of specific compounds that may or may not contribute to
standard BOD measured in the waste stream.
The shift from qualitative analysis - identification of the kinds of materi-
als found in various industrial wastewaters - to quantitative description in-
volved enormous difficulties, due largely to data deficiencies. It was found
that the concentrations of given pollutants per unit of product for any in-
dustry varied greatly from one plant to another. Lack of information regard-
ing other pollutants required the analysis to be expressed largely in terms
of standard BOD and suspended solids. Moreover, the census data on water use
are in many cases inconsistent, incomplete, and inexact. These deficiencies
appear to be due, in large part, to industry's limited accounting for water
59
-------
TABLE II-l
CURRENTLY REPORTED WASTEHATER CHARACTERISTICS BY INDUSTRY GROUPS
SIC Code
Liquid Waste
Characteristic
Unit Volume
pH
Acidity
Alkalinity
Color
Odor
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Temperature
BODj/BQDultimate
COO
Oil « Grease
Detergents
(Surfacants)
Chloride
Heavy Metals:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Zinc
Nitrogen:
Ammonia
Nitrate
Nitrite
Organic
Total
Phosphorus
Phenols
Sulfide
Turbidity
Sulfate
Thiosulfate
Hercaptans
Lignins
Sulfur
Phosphates
Potassium,
Calcium
Polysaccharides
Tannin
Sodium
Fluorides
Silica
Toxicity
Magnesium
Ammonia
Cyanide
Thiocyanate
Ferrous Iron
Sulfite
Aluminum
201 202 203 204 206 208 22
Canned
& Textile
Heat Frozen Grain Mill
Products Dairies Foods Mills Sugar Beverages Products
X ) X X XX X X
XX X X X X
XXX
X XXX
X
X
XX X X X X
X X X X X X X
X
X X X X X X X
X X
XX X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X XX
X
X
XX X
x x
X
X
X
X
X
X
26
Paper
&
Allied
Products
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
281
Basic
Chemicals
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
60
-------
TABLE II-l
CURRENTLY REPORTED WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS BY INDUSTRY GROUPS
(CONT'D.)
SIC Code
Liquid Waste
Characteristic
ttoit Volume
PH
Acidity
Alkalinity
Color
Odor
Total Solids
Suspended Solids
Temperature
BODj/BOOultimate
COO
Oil t Grease
Detergents
(Surfacants)
Chloride
Heavy Metals:
Cadmium
Chronium
Copper
Iron
lead
Kanganese
Nickel
Zinc
nitrogen:
Ammonia
Nitrate
Nitrite
Organic
Total
Phosphorus
Phenols
Snlflde
Turbidity
Sulfata
Thiosulfate
Hercaptans
Lignins
Sulfur
Phosphates
Potassium
Calcium
Polysaccharides
Tannin
Sodium
Fluorides
Silica
Tmdcity
Magnetic
Ammonia
Cyanide
Thiocyanate
Ferrous Iron
Snlfite
282 2871 291 1
Fibers
Plastics Petro-
& leum
Rubbers Fertilizer Refining
XX X
XX X
X X
X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
k
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
3111
Leather
Tanni ng
&
Finishing
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
331
Steel
Rol 1 1 ng
&
Finishing
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3334 3717
Motor
Vehicles
Primary &
Aluminum Parts
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3722
Aircraft
Engines
&
Parts
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
61
-------
as a raw material. Extension of the disclosure rule to water, where its rel-
evance is doubtful, must bear a considerable responsibility for the weakness-
es of the census of water use as an analytical tool.
While the weaknesses in precision of the assessment of waste volumes must be
admitted, its utility can scarcely be questioned. The data - presented in
Table II-21 - indicate that manufacturing is not, as has often been suggested,
roughly equal in pollutional effect to municipal populations. It is, in fact,
a far more significant source of pollutants, and probably of pollution, than
is the nation's sewered population. In terms of gross quantities alone,
prior to treatment manufacturing wastes have an estimated BOD more than
three times that of all sewered municipalities and contain more than twice
the suspended solids content of municipal wastes. Moreover, increasing per
capita output, and degree of processing involved in that output, indicates
that industrial waste volumes are growing at a much more rapid rate than are
domestic waste volumes.
Perhaps more significant than the gross quantity of industrial waste is its
concentration. A few industries - paper and allied products, the chemicals
group, petroleum refining, sugar refining, primary metals - which are typi-
cally composed of a relatively few, relatively large plants, use most of the
nation's industrial water and produce most of the nation's wastes. Wherever
one of these big, high pollutant-producing plants is located, the potential
for pollution is high. Because industries tend to be concentrated at points
of demand or of raw material availability, and because industrial concentra-
tions create or are attracted to concentrations of population, the environ-
mental effects of such industries are magnified beyond the level that their
gross production of pollutants would suggest.
The tendency to industrial concentration has a tremendous impact on the re-
gional prevalence of industrial water pollutants. The great preponderance of
American industrial water use, as measured by wastewater discharge, occurs in
the northeast - the North Atlantic, Great Lakes, and Ohio River Drainage
areas.2 While volume of water discharge is in no sense a direct index of
The. data, a* pM&ented in tlie. table. f ha& been Jueiaotiked to &it the. btioad
indu&tAAol cla^&ifxLcation& utilized in tiilb tepoxt. The. original fatun
o$ the. table. - to be. found Jin National Indu&tfiial Waltz te&u&mejit,
T. J. PowertA, III, et. at. - i& con&ideAjably mo*e detailed, and organ-
ized in a ^a&hion mote amenable, to conventional engine.esiing U6e than i&
the. material in thii tepoJit, which ib dUutcted to the. economic aipec-tfi
natheA than the. engineering tfunattorw involved in pollution control.
2
Throughout tiiu> du>cui>Aion, the. geagtiaphic. friame. o£ *ejfe*ence i& the.
ma/04 drainage. a/iea4 de,^uted by the. Wa£e/i Reiotw.ce Council. Vata, fiow-
eve*, OJUL tupoHted by Bureau o^ Cenaua1 "Indu&tAial Watest U&e. Region*."
The**, a/te Alight di^eJimcju between the. regional boundasiiu a& de.£ine.d
62
-------
TABLE II-2
ESTIMATED VOLUME OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
BEFORE TREATMENT, 19641/
Was
wat
Industry Vol
(Bil
Gal
Food & Kindred Products
Heat Products
Dairy Products
Canned & Frozen Food
Sugar Refining
All Other
Textile Mill Products
Paper & Allied Products 1,
Chemical & Allied Products 3,
Petroleum & Coal 1,
Rubber & Plastics
Primary Metals 4,
Blast Furnaces & Steel Mills 3,
All Other
Machinery
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other Manufacturing
All Manufacturing 13,
For comparison:
Sewered Population of U. S. 5,
te- Process
er Water
ume Intake
1 i on ( Bi 11 i on
Ions) Gallons}
690 260
99 52
58 13
87 51
220 110
220 43
140 110
900 1,300
700 560
300 88
160 19
300 1,000
600 870
740 130
150 23
91 28
240 58
450 190
100 3,700
30oi/
BOD5
(Million
Pounds)
4,300
640
400
1,200
1,400
670
890
5,900
9,700
500
40
480
160
320
60
70
120
390
22,000
7,3001'
Suspended
Solids
(Million
Pounds)
6,600
640
230
600
5,000
110
N. E.
3,000
1,900
460
50
4,700
4,300
430
50
20
N. E.
930
18,000
8,800^
-' Column* may not add, due, to Bounding
91
- 120,000,000 pon& x 120 QO££JOH& x 365 cfcu/4
3/
- 120,000,000
x 1/6 pound* x 365 day*
- 120,000,000 pdA*on& x 0.2 pound* x 365 day*
63
-------
pollutants produced by industry, it provides a good scaling of relative mag-
nitude. It is clear, from reference to Table 11-3 and Figure II-l, that in-
dustrial-originating pollution control requirements cluster overwhelmingly in
the Northern United States, between the Mississippi River and the Atlantic
Ocean.
by the. two agencies, the. bo&^6 fion the. boundaJiy being physical, -in the.
one coae, political in the. otheA. However, the. combination orf the.
CenAuA' New England, VelaioaAe. and Hudson, and Chesapeake. Say t&Qi.on&
accofuU ve*y closely with the. WRC'i Month Atlantic. Region; the. combi-
nation o$ the. Cianbesi&wd and Ohio \flateji U&e. Regions cowt.eApond& we£t
with the. WRC Ohio Vtiainage. M&a; the. Rio Gnande. plu& the. Texoi-GuZ^
WRC ti&Qion& one. u&entiaJULy the. &ame. a& tlie. Census' WuteAn Gutfi; the.
MiAAousu. Region o£ the. Cen&u& contain* mo&t o£ the. SoutiA-Recf-Roou/
dJioAJMLQe. o/iea; and the. two Gieat Lake* Indu&fUat Mate*. U&e. Reg-con*
ate, together., macn tike. the. Gfieat Lake* VnainoQe. M.ea. It wa& found
ne.c.eA*any, toot to add toyetheJi the. Gxeat Ba&in and Cotonado Sa&in to
fa>*m a tingle. anaJLyticaJL unit limiton. to the. combination o£ the.
(IppeA Colorado, LoweA Colorado, and Gieat Ba&in.
64
-------
TABLE U-3
REGIONAL INCIDENCE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE, BY MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SECTORS, 1964
Percent of Discharge of Industry's Wastewater
Industry Reg Ion a
Assigns
Dlschar
ITy
ble North- South-
•ge east east
Heat Products 90.6 5.0 7.0
Dairy Products 64.0 10.3 3.4
Canned t Frozen Foods 68,8 1.4 18.4
Great
Lakes
4.0
22.4
8.0
Ohio
6.0
3,4
-
Ten-
nessee
-
-
Upper
Missis-
sippi
32.3
7.2
3.4
Sugar Refining 56.7 6.3
All Other Food Products 95.1 21.0 4.3
Textile Hill Product! 98.4 31.1 55.6
Paper b Allied Product* 98.3 23.5 26.4
Chemical fi Allied Products 100.0 12.8 5.0
Petroleua & Coal 97.6 26.8 .4
Rubber 1 Plastics, n.e.c. 76.8 22.6 3.9
Primary Metals 87.8 7.4 1.0
Machinery 100.0 49.6 .7
Electrical Machinery 99.0 35.2 3.3
Transportation Equipment 98.2 31.2 1.7
All Other (plus
Unassignable)
Total industrial
Discharge
95.7 4.0
19.9 6.9
15.5
1.5
12.4
13.0
19.7
36.8
38.4
16.8
19.8
46.8
18.1
23.4
7.1
.6
2.6
19.7
1.8
5.8
33.4
8.1
28.6
5.9
8.7
18.2
.9
8.1
3.4
6.7
-
-
.5
-
1.1
-
8.1
2.4
20.1
-
5.6
1.6
.8
2.6
2.3
22.8
6.6
2.1
11.9
3,5
Lower
Missis-
sippi
1.0
-
-
36.4
4.3
1.5
1.6
5.4
9.1
2.6
-
-
-
"•
35.6
3.7
Missouri
23.2
5.2
-
10.4
4.9
-
.1
.4
1.6
1.9
.3
-
1.1
-
1.7
1.2
Arkansas
White -
Red
4.0
-
-
-
1.0
-
3,4
1.3
1.1
-
_
-
1.1
.8
6.6
1.4
Western
Gulf
2.0
-
-
-
1.5
•
1.4
32.0
25.5
-
3.2
.7
-
-
4.3
12.2
Colorado'
and
Great
.
-
-
-
1.5
-
-
.1
.2
-
.2
.7
-
-
7.2
.3
[Pacific
North,-.
west!/
5.1
5.2
14.9
-
5.0
-
16.7
1.2
.2
-
.9
-
-
1.7
18.8
4.1
Cali-
fornia!/
1.0
6.9
20.7
3.6
7.1
-
1.2
.8
10.5
.6
.2
.7
2.2
8.0
8.1
2.7
I/I
A&ufca
-
2 /
- Intiudu Hawaii
-------
FIGURE n- 1
MAJOR DRAINAGE REGIONS, INDUSTRIAL DEFINITION
i "
ARKANSAS-WHITE ANDRED
* INCLUDES ALASKA
# INCLUDES HAWAII
-------
METHODS AND PREVALENCE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE CONTROL
VOLUME OF WASTE AND DEGREE OF TREATMENT
While there is no comprehensive inventory of industrial waste sources, the
Census of Manufactures includes a survey of "Water Use in Manufacturing"
that provides the raw data for a generalized assessment of industry's waste
handling practices. A reported total of 13,157 billion gallons of wastewa-
ter was discharged in 1964, the date of the most recent survey, by manufac-
turing establishments that used 20 million gallons or more of water during
that year.
Of the more than 13 trillion gallons of wastewater, some indeterminate part
may be considered to have required treatment because of its pollutional
characteristics. Total water intake of the surveyed establishments included
3,703 billion gallons of process water, all of which might be expected to re-
quire treatment prior to discharge, and 959 billion gallons of water for mis-
cellaneous uses, of which at least the component utilized for sanitary ser-
vices would require waste treatment. The largest category of water use,
cooling water, accounted for 9,385 billion gallons of intake. Under many
circumstances cooling water would not require treatment other than tempera-
ture stabilization. But where recycling involves the mixture of process and
cooling waters or the diversion of used cooling waters to process applica-
tion, then waters brought into a plant primarily for cooling would also be
expected to require treatment in addition to temperature stabilization prior
to discharge.
Industry, faced with the task of limiting the polluting effects of its waste-
waters, may apply at least four techniques. The obvious approach is to add
conventional waste treatment to the list of processes routinely performed by
the manufacturing establishment. An alternative is to discharge liquid
wastes to public sewers, delegating the task of treatment to municipal waste
treatment plants. Effective protection of streams against polluting waste
discharges may also be achieved by discharging wastewaters to the ground -
either spreading them for irrigation on suitably sized tracts or inserting
them into deep, sealed wells. Theoretically more attractive than any of the
other three methods, a fourth approach to liquid waste handling is to modify
processes to limit polluting discharges by segregating wastes, recycling wa-
ters, and reclaiming waste materials. In practice the methods are compati-
ble and interchangeable with one another. It is not unusual for a manufac-
turing plant to use a combination of all four waste handling expedients.
67
-------
INDUSTRY-OPERATED WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
Although the Bureau of Census data indicate that the majority of manufactur-
ing establishments depend on municipal waste treatment plants for satisfac-
tion of their treatment requirements, the data also indicate that treatment
facilities operated by industry treat a far greater volume of water. (Table
11-4.) The industries which account for the major portion of manufacturers'
water use are not generally suited, by reason of the volume or nature of
their waste discharges, to use of municipal facilities.
The 10,600 manufacturing establishments that used 20 million gallons or more
of water in 1964 operated some 3,700 reported waste treatment facilities,
whose purpose and characteristic efficiency may be defined in a general fash-
ion. The majority of plants did not report waste treatment. (Though a num-
ber of the same plants were connected to municipal facilities.)
The absence of a comprehensive inventory of industrial waste sources becomes
crippling when one attempts to evaluate Bureau of Census data on liquid in-
dustrial wastes. It is obvious that a majority of American manufacturing
plants do not treat their wastes - or did not in 1964. it is also clear that
there is no straightforward relationship between number of treatment plants,
level of waste discharge, and level of treated waste discharge that will al-
low an adequate judgment to be made about the relative adequacy of industrial
waste treatment. (For example, there is no method to indicate what portion
of the industrial waste stream receives: (1) primary treatment, (2) second-
ary treatment, (3) treatment beyond the secondary level, and/or (4) pretreat-
ment that falls short of the primary level.)
An obvious problem with the data is the fact that the number of establish-
ments providing definable levels of waste treatment is known to be less than
the number of treatment facilities. A good portion of the primary treatment
plants are operated in conjunction with secondary treatment plants; and there
are instances in which several types of secondary waste treatment may be uti-
lized for different portions of the waste stream of a single plant. Cumula-
tive totals, then, do nothing to indicate the number of establishments that
have attained a definite level of treatment efficiency.
Nor do the data do more than hint at the proportion of the waste stream that
may be treated to a degree associated with primary or secondary standards.
There are known to be instances in which regulatory authorities have insist-
ed on treatment of sanitary wastes of a factory, while its industrial wastes
are allowed to continue to be discharged untreated or partially treated; so
that the proportionate presence of secondary waste treatment plants is an un-
certain guide to the volume of wastewater receiving secondary treatment.
While the available data are only sufficient to provide hints as to its de-
gree, they substantiate an already recognized deficiency in treatment of in-
dustrial wastes. Over half of the significantly sized manufacturing estab-
68
-------
TABLE II-4
WASTh CONTROLLING TECHNIQUES, BY MAJOR
INDUSTRIAL SECTORS, 1964
Industry
Food & Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Paper & Allied Products
Chemical & Allied Products
Petroleum & Coal Products
Rubber & Plastics
Primary Metals
Machinery, except
electrical
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other
All Manufacturing
Waste-
water,
Billion
Gallons
688
135
1,947
3,662
1,317
155
4,312
149
91
237
464
13,157
Treated Discharge
to Surface Waters
Billion
Gallons
92
20
689
568
941
7
1,147
11
7
58
87
3,607
% Total
13.3
14.8
35.4
15.5
71.4
4.5
26.6
7.3
7.6
24.4
18.7
27.4
Discharge to
Sewers
Billion
Gallons
241
44
81
153
31
24
157
40
49
79
88
987
% Total
35.0
32.5
4.1
4.1
2.3
15.4
3.6
26.8
53.8
33.3
18.9
7.5
Discharge to
Ground
Billion
Gallons
79
5
11
38
5
2
20
2
3
5
25
195
% Total
11.4
3.7
.5
1.0
.3
1.2
.4
1.3
3.2
2.1
5.3
1.5
-------
lishments in the nation reported no waste treatment in 1964, and the number
of secondary waste treatment facilities reported by significant industrial
plants amounted to less than 20% of the number of establishments.
Industry has, however, been adding to its inventory of waste treatment facil-
ities - or at least to the volume of water passed through such facilities -
at impressive rates. The level of in-plant treatment of industrial wastewa-
ters has been climbing about three times as fast as the value of industrial
output, with the trend apparent in every industrial sector. (Table 11-5.)
TREATMENT OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES BY MUNICIPAL
TREATMENT PLANTS
Discharge of industrial wastes to community sewers is probably the best es-
tablished method of providing for industrial waste disposal. Table II-4 in-
dicates that while only 7.5% of the wastewaters of establishments using over
20 million gallons of water a year are so disposed, sewering provides the
principal waste handling expedient of seven of the 11 industrial sectors:
food processing, textiles, rubber and plastics, machinery, electrical machin-
ery, transportation equipment, and miscellaneous manufacturing.
Though industrial use of public sewer and waste treatment facilities is sanc-
tioned by custom, there has been a relative decline in discharge of industri-
al wastes to public sewers during the 1960's. The recorded volume of such
discharges dropped 10 billion gallons - 10% - between 1959 and 1964. At the
same time, the total volume of discharged industrial wastewater increased 1.7
trillion gallons, or about 15%.
There are some good reasons for the decline in the use of public sewers for
the discharge of industrial wastes. Unless these are evaluated, it is possi-
ble to misinterpret the evolving relationship between municipal treatment fa-
cilities and industrial waste discharges by projecting a decline in municipal
treatment of industrial wastes; when, in fact, the trend to combined waste
treatment is strong in many industries.
There has been a rapid increase in municipal waste treatment capabilities
since World War II. Both the number of treatment plants and the average lev-
el of treatment have been rising steadily, the growth being most marked since
the inauguration of Federal grants for construction of waste treatment plants.
As recently as 1949, almost 40% of the nation's sewered communities and popu-
lation did not have waste treatment provided to them. By 1962, less than 20%
of the total number of sewered communities and 14% of the sewered population
of the United States were without waste treatment - and well over half of the
sewered communities and sewered population were provided with secondary waste
treatment. (Table I1-6.)
70
-------
TABLE 11-5
RELATIVE INCREASE IN OUTPUT AND TREATMENT OF
LIQUID WASTES BY MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SECTORS, 1954-1964
Industry
Food & Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Paper & Allied Products
Chemical & Allied Products
Petroleum & Coal Products
Rubber & Plastics, n.e.c.
Primary Metals
Machinery, except electrical
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other
All Manufacturing
Values Added,
in Millions of
Constant (1954)
Dollars
1954 1964
13,398 18,513
4,709 5,409
4,630 6,267
9,547 15,364
2,241 3,031
1,954 4,002
9,772 13,436
12,333 15,870
7,300 14,486
13,428 19,241
37,720 49,769
117,032 165,388
Annual Rate
of Increase
3.3
1.4
3.0
4.9
3.0
7.4
3.2
2.6
7.1
3.7
2.8
3.5
Treated Waste
Discharge
Billion Gallons
1954 1964
38 158
13 35
199 707
338 580
458 1,006
1 9
270 1,178
3 12
6 15
9 24
53 101
1,388 3,825
Annual Rate
of Increase
15.3
10.4
13.5
5.6
8.2
24.1
15.9
14.9
9.6
10.3
6.7
10.7
-------
TABLE 11-6
GROWTH OF MUNICIPAL SEWER AND WASTE TREATMENT
FACILITIES, 1949-1962
Number of Sewered Communities
Sewered Communities Not
Treating Wastes
Communities With Primary
Waste Treatment Plants
Communities With Secondary
Waste Treatment Plants
Estimated Population Served
By Sewers Alone
By Primary Treatment
By Secondary Treatment
Source: Glau, A. C. and Jenkou
Inventory orf Muitcctpot (
7i — A n ' ii — ** 1.1 . t "
1949 1957 1962
N. A. 11,131 11,420
3,718 3,165 2,249
3,019 2,730 2,672
3,050 4,647 6,584
28,067,000 21,918,000 14,687,000
17,218,000 25,667,000 32,734,000
26,090,000 43,326,000 61,191,000
S, K. H., Stati&tlcaJt Swmany 0(J 7962
wM.ce racAJU&LU -en tkn Unitad Stotu.
72
-------
The addition of a waste treatment plant at the end of the sewer system inter-
poses significant complications into the relationship between the manufactur-
er who uses the public sewer and the municipality which provides the sewer.
The plant and its operation must be paid for; and the usual arrangement is to
levy sewer charges based on volume and/or strength of wastes. Obviously such
charges give the manufacturer a distinct incentive to utilize his water as
fully as possible prior to discharge, and to segregate, for separate dis-
charge, cooling water and other portions of his waste stream which do not re-
quire treatment.3 Thus, a decline in volume of industrial waste discharges
to public sewers is not incompatible with an increase in treatment of indus-
trial wastes by municipal plants. Indeed, there is reason for supposing that
this incentive to efficiency extends to waste production, and that the reduc-
tions achieved by many factories upon connection with municipal treatment
systems apply to the strength as well as to the volume of discharges.
The distinction between municipal and industrial wastes becomes critical when
the municipality begins to provide secondary waste treatment, as more than
3,500 communities have done since 1949. Factories whose wastewater dis-
charges are characterized by inorganic materials or by presence of toxic ma-
terials that interfere with operation of biological systems are not suited to
use of conventional secondary waste treatment. Extreme segregation - limit-
ing the sewered discharge to sanitary and other organic wastes - or pretreat-
nent are required by such manufacturing plants. The decline in manufacturers'
use of public sewers between 1959 and 1964 occurred almost entirely in such
industries. The primary metals and transportation equipment industries, to-
gether with metal fabricating components of miscellaneous manufacturing, re-
duced their discharges to public sewers by an estimated total of 126 billion
gallons during the five-year period. (Table II-7.)
Another consideration acts to limit the use of municipal waste treatment fa-
cilities by manufacturers. The scale of water use in some industries is so
great as to impose a completely different order of magnitude in the design of
waste treatment works. The pulp and paper, chemical, petroleum refining, and
primary metals industries account for only 27% of the number of manufacturing
establishments using 20 million gallons of water or more per year, but ac-
count for more than 85% of their total water intake. Even when the wastes of
such factories are suited to treatment in municipal facilities, the volume of
water to be handled far exceeds the capacities of most municipal systems.
It &kou£d be no-ted thcut artAangejne.ntt> o& thit> Aoit *We, on
involved tunaJL £6iowc£o£ h.asidt>lvip& j$ot c.onmunJM.eA to/i/tcA 4eA ckasigeA on die. ba& o& an anat-
A-C& OjJ diafiacteAAAtic woAtejwateA licicAa/igei, onty to ^ind. tkat contri-
buting induA&iieA we/te abte. to e.^e.&tu&te. ec.ouonu.ea 4.n wateA tide and
x.n volume OjJ waAte, dibckasigeA on a tcate. gieei£ enough to
tiie.
73
-------
I
.1.
INDUSTRY
TABLE n-7
TOTAL DISCHARGE AND SEWERED DISCHARGE TRENDS 1959-1964(1959=100%)
1964 AS A PERCENT OF 1959
60 80 100% 120 140
I I i L _j_ _L i. J
FOOD & KINDRED PRODUCTS
TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS
PAPER & ALLIED PRODUCTS
CHEMICAL & ALLIED PRODUCTS
PETROLEUM & COAL PRODUCTS
RUBBER & PLASTICS, N.E.C.
PRIMARY METALS
MACHINERY, EXCEPT ELECTRICAL
ELECTRICAL MACHINERY
TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT
ALL OTHER MANUFACTURING
ALL MANUFACTURING
ALL MANUFACTURING, EXCLUDING
PRIMARY METALS AND TRANS-
PORTATION EQUIPMENT
TOTAL
DISCHARGE
120
113
107
120
109
130
121
•,,
103
103
115
NG 112
SEWERED
DISCHARGE
H5
116
100
143
282
104
60
108
120
114
160
I
180
TOTAL DISCHARGE
SEWERED DISCHARGE
-------
Such plants usually discharge wastes separately rather than into public sew-
ers.
There are, however, indications that the situation is shifting with respect
to cooperative municipal-industrial waste treatment plants that are scaled to
handle organic wastes of the pulp and paper, chemical, and other large water
using industries. In Bound Brook, New Jersey, a chemical plant treats muni-
cipal wastes, reversing the usual relationship between factory and community.
In Kalamazoo, Michigan, three good sized paper mills and a chemical plant use
a modern municipal sewage treatment plant. Metropolitan Chicago and Metro-
politan Seattle have adopted ambitious programs to provide a high level of
treatment for all liquid wastes - whether of domestic, commercial, or indus-
trial origin - that occur within extended areas of jurisdiction. It would
appear that technology is overcoming the lag that excluded large industrial
waste sources from municipal treatment plants in the past; and that modern
engineering competence is extending to the construction of efficient and very
large treatment plants that are designed to handle wastes from a variety of
sources. Since the trend, if apparent, is of recent origin, it is not re-
flected in the 1963 Census of Manufactures. Its nature and its effect on fi-
nancial requirements of municipalities and industries probably cannot be
evaluated prior to the appearance of the 1968 census of water use in manufac-
tures. The possible impact on municipal waste treatment requirements of a
large scale shift to joint treatment by the chemical, oil refining, or pulp
and paper industries might be huge. Certainly regional dislocations would
occur. Projections of joint treatment presented in Part I assumed consistent
industry practice, so do not reflect the possibility of a change of this na-
ture.
It would seem, from review of available information, that the availability of
Federal construction grants may have promoted the use of combined municipal
and industrial waste treatment facilities. The grants, for construction of
interceptor sewers and waste treatment plants, are made only to public bod-
ies; and their potential availability makes a pronounced difference among the
cost variables that plant management must consider in coming to a solution of
its waste treatment problem. If his wastes are to be treated in a municipal
plant, the manufacturer, in effect, can secure Federal financing of a varying
but substantial portion of his construction costs. The economies of scale
resulting from construction and operation of larger plants, and the ability
to delegate problems of operation to waste treatment specialists also argue
for the cooperative method in providing for industrial waste treatment needs.
The practical result is that a number of communities - at the instance of lo-
cal industries - are replacing existing treatment facilities in order to ac-
conmodate a larger portion of the total wasteload that is produced by facto-
ries, with the cost of the construction shared by community, industry, and
Federal Government. (The effects are sometimes surprising. Two of the
largest municipal waste treatment plants in the nation are operated by the
tiny community of Monsanto, Illinois, and by little Nampa, Idaho. In each
75
-------
case, plant size and operating characteristics are dictated by the need of a
local factory, a chemical plant in the one situation and a group of food pro-
cessors in the other.)
GROUND DISPOSAL OF LIQUID INDUSTRIAL WASTES
Discharge of liquid industrial wastes to the ground is a rather specialized
technique of waste treatment that is of interest because of the rapid growth
in its use, the high degree of protection of stream quality that it may af-
ford, and its value as an example of the development of effective, low cost
waste treatment practices. Use of the method is limited by availability of
safe and suitable sites and by climatic conditions, however.
Table 11-4 indicates that while ground discharge is used in disposal of lit-
tle more than one percent of the total industrial waste flow, the technique
has attained particular relevance in the handling of food processing wastes.
The reasons for the association are easily understandable. Food processing
tends to be a non-urban occupation, with plants located in food-producing
areas. In many cases processing plants are located among the fields that
provide raw materials. This circumstance provides many opportunities to uti-
lize the liquid wastes of food processing - after very limited treatment such
as solids removal - for irrigation, without incurring serious transmission
costs. When such conditions exist, it is usually considerably less costly to
use spent process water for irrigation than to treat it. The method makes
for effective and economic use of water, while often providing a higher de-
gree of stream protection than some forms of advanced waste treatment.
Distinctly different in concept from use of industrial wastes for irrigation
is deep well disposal of such liquids. This method has been employed exten-
sively for at least a decade in oil drilling to dispose of the great volume
of brackish water brought up in petroleum production, and has been adopted by
industries that deal with radioactive or toxic materials which normally can-
not be released to the environment. Deep well injection seems particularly
suitable for such liquid waste materials; and is often less costly than other
waste controlling procedures. Its use is being extended to elements of the
steel, chemical, and other industries. Technical difficulties, potential for
Becouae no e^o/it hoa been made, to document and categorize, the. induA-
tniat watte* and watte, treatment situation be.yond the. grot* -i^xtrnj ap-
proach attempted in thi& report, there. i& no compre.hen&ive. ti&ting o£
relative, uae orf public, and in-hou&e. tre.atme.nt methods by industry. A
guide, to the. incre,asing pre.valence. o£ municipal tre.atme.nt otf watte* 0(J
industrial origin, kowe.ver, it the. &act that nine, out ojj 10 applica-
tion* by municipalities ior federal demonstration Quanta during the.
&M>t six. month* o$ 1967 centered upon development o& methods to han-
dle, industrial waste*.
76
-------
groundwater contamination, and streamflow depletion all indicate, however,
that deep well disposal must necessarily be considered a very specialized and
limited waste handling method.
There is a definite pattern to the geography of ground disposal of wastes.
Use of the method is pronounced in the far west, particularly in the arid re-
gions of the Southwest and California, where irrigated agriculture underpins
the economic base, and where water is in short supply. Conversely, ground
disposal is least used in humid regions: New England, the Great Lakes area,
the Ohio River Basin, the lower Mississippi area, and the western Gulf area.
Acceptance of one form or another of ground disposal for liquid industrial
wastes seems to be growing in most regions, and at rates well above those
achieved by alternate methods of disposal. (Table II-8.)
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCE AS AN INDUSTRIAL WASTE CONTROL MEASURE
While in-plant waste treatment, use of public utility sewers, and ground dis-
posal are generally recognized to be legitimate and effective methods of con-
trolling industrial wastes, their combined effect in reducing the strength of
industrial waste discharges may be less than that occurring as a result of
process changes and advances in water use technology.
It is difficult to evaluate the waste-reducing effect of technological shifts,
or to predict their influence on cost. It is true, too, that improved tech-
nology does not always act to limit waterborne wastes.5 But, in the main,
greater efficiency means reduction in waste relative to product; and such re-
ductions extend to liquid wastes.
Waste reductions that come from process changes may involve not percentages
but orders of magnitude. The most often cited example occurs in the pulp and
paper industry, where the production of a ton of wood pulp by the older sul-
fite process results in 20 to 40 times the waste strength of a similar amount
of pulp produced by the now dominant sulfate process. Since about 1940, most
of the expansion that has occurred in the pulp and paper industry has taken
the form of growth of sulfate production. As a result, pulp output has in-
creased roughly two and a half times as fast as have wastes of pulp manufac-
Fo* example., fault and ve.g&tabte. p>ioc.tLt>t>ofU> today pfiodace. many
the. unit wai>te£oadi> o& the^ui p^edeceAAo-w o& a couple o kandting ptcceduAeA , the. aie o&
wate/t OA a &ian&miA&ion medium, the. fLe.ptac.eme.ifit o& me.chanu.cjnX, pe.e£-
-019 u)itk Liquid cau&tic, on 4-team pe.eJUlng age.nt& , and blancJiing picce-
in £teez>6uj. Simi£aA£y, wa&te. va£ume& in 4>te,eJL p^ocfuctcon have
i&Uh -cnc/ieaied p/u>ce44-auj, vthJUU. the. te.chnotoQij tiiat al&ow u&e.
eA glade, o^ei thsuougliout the. me£at& 4.nd(it>tAA.eA JA, by
tlon, 'rugn -in tieJiative. unit u)a&tej>.
77
-------
TABLE II-8
TREND OF GROUND DISPOSAL IN INDUSTRIAL LIQUID
WASTE HANDLING, 1959-1964
Major Drainage
Basins
North Atlantic
Southeast
Great Lakes
Tennessee
Ohio
Upper Mississippi
Lower Mississippi
Missouri
Arkansas -White-Red
Western Gulf
Colorado-Great
California
Pacific Northwest
U. S.
Total Industrial
Waste Discharge
to Ground
(Billion Gallons)
1959 1964
22 29
7 12
14 17
1 10
13 15
7 6
1 3
1 2
2 3
3 2
2 3
13 19
10 20
98 195
Annual Rate
of Increase
in Ground
Disposal
5.7
11.3
3.9
69.2
2.9
- 3.0
25.0
14.9
8.5
- 8.5
8.5
7.9
14.9
14.7
Percent of
Regional Indus-
trial Wastes
Discharged to
Ground
1959 1964
1.0 1.2
1.2 1.3
.5 .5
.4 2.4
.6 .6
1.7 1.2
.3 .5
.9 1.5
1.7 1.7
.2 .1
4.9 6.7
4.9 6.0
2.5 3.7
.9 1.5
Sou/ice: Adopted frum *963 CenauA o&
tr
"Wat&t u&e.
78
-------
tore. To put the matter in another perspective, if all pulp now produced by
the sulfate process were being produced with sulfite pulping, BOD of the pulp
and paper industry at current production levels would exceed 20 trillion
pounds per year - or just about as much as is now produced by all manufactur-
ing. (Figure II-2.)
toother example of the effect of technological improvement on production of
pollutants can be found in the electrical power industry which has constantly
reduced the amount of heat required to generate a given amount of thermally-
produced power. The lower heat requirement - and that requirement has been
declining steadily for over 40 years - means less wasting of heat to cooling
water, thus proportionately less discharge of heated cooling waters. The av-
erage plant in 1965 is as efficient as was the best plant in 1945, two and a
half times as efficient as the average plant of 1925. By using heat more ef-
fectively, the electrical power industry has achieved the same results in re-
ducing heat loads to streams that it might have obtained from widespread in-
stallation of cooling towers and cooling ponds. (Figure II-3.)
Numerous examples of process changes that are more effective than treatment
in reducing wastes might be considered - substitution of reclaimable pickling
liquors for sulphuric acid by the steel and metal fabricating industries,
complete recycling of process waters in the beet sugar refining industry, and
use of solid waste material of various sorts as cattle feed by food proces-
sors. A number of such opportunities and trends are examined in profiles of
specific industries, which are being published separately in Volume III of
this report.
These discussions tend to indicate that improved technology does not ordinar-
ily take the form of a major alteration in process, such as the shift from
sulfite to sulfate pulping; it is more apt to involve a number of minor
shifts in practice, a tightening of operations, or attention to engineering
aspects of use of water as an industrial raw material. There are, in general,
three considerations that lead the manufacturer to make the necessary invest-
ments and procedural changes to achieve such efficiencies:
(1) Water shortages, or increases in the price of water, consti-
tute constraints on production or limit unit profitability.
Water shortage is a general condition in much of the western
U. S., and intermittent droughts or increased demands on a
water system have created similar localized conditions
throughout the nation.
(2) Opportunities to reclaim materials, and thus to increase vol-
ume of production with a constant raw material input, are im-
proved with control of water, or reuse of water in the same
or sequential process.
79
-------
FIGURE n-2
COMPARATIVE INDEX OF ANNUAL WOOD PULP PRODUCTION
AND VOLUME OF PULPING WASTES, 1920-1960(1920= 100)
1925
1930
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
80
-------
FIGURE H-3
DECLINE IN HEAT WASTED IN STEAM-ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCTION
HEAT
£" WASTE D~%>
4 —
Ol
1925
1930
HEAT CONVERTED TO ELECTRIC ENERGY
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
-------
(3) Increasingly stringent enforcement of pollution control
regulations has made it necessary for more and more estab-
lishments to provide waste treatment, either in-house or
through available municipal works. In either case, limit-
ing hydraulic loadings by segregation of waste streams and
by reducing water use lessens required treatment plant ca-
pacity, and the consequent cost of waste treatment.
There is an indication that reduction in volume of wastewater is often accom-
panied by a reduction in the volume of pollutants discharged. While concen-
trations of pollutants might, in the normal order of things, be expected to
rise in direct proportion to the decline in the volume of the carrying liquid,
this is simply not the case for industry as a whole. The reason is that op-
erating practices - "good housekeeping" - have a high degree of influence on
the volume of wastes produced in a factory; and when hydraulic controls are
tightened there is a corollary reduction in materials losses. In addition to
this influence on waste volume, there are direct reductions attributable to
engineering improvements specifically aimed at materials reclamation.
Some indication in quantitative terms of the magnitude of changes in the ef-
ficiency of water use is provided by the data from the Census of Water Use in
Manufactures that is summarized in Table II-9. Two trends are immediately
apparent. First, less water, including recycled water, is being used per
dollar of value added by manufacture than in the past. Second, water is be-
ing used more intensively. The second trend is not surprising. It has long
been recognized that there is a tendency to increased water reuse in manufac-
turing processes. Thus, total water use in 1964 of 30.6 trillion gallons was
derived from an intake of 14.1 trillion gallons, indicating an average recir-
culation ratio for all manufacturing establishments of 2.2 to 1. In compar-
ison, the reported 1954 intake of 11.6 trillion gallons was used an average
of 1.8 times, providing a use equivalence of 21 trillion gallons. The 51%
increase in values added by manufacture between 1954 and 1964 was achieved
with only a 22% increase in water intake, in good part because of a 20% in-
crease in the recirculation ratio.
The importance of "good housekeeping", careful water use controls, and im-
proved process engineering becomes apparent when the relative increase in wa-
ter use within the plant (i.e., including recirculation) is compared to the
increase in value of physical output. Total water use in most industrial
sectors increased at a far lower rate than did values added. Not only did
the typical industrial plant of 1964 take in less water than it did in 1954,
it used less water for each dollar's worth of output.
The relative significance of reuse of water and more efficient application of
water per unit of product is made clearer by reference to Table 11-10. The
table describes the relationship between increased output and increased water
use, dividing the index of growth of values added for the ten-year period
1954 to 1964 by the index of growth of water use, to express relative unit
82
-------
TABLE 11-9
RELATIVE CHANGE IN OUTPUT, WATER USE, AND WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE, BY MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SECTORS
Industry
Food & Kindred Products
Jbxtile Mill Products
Paper & Allied Products
Chemical & Allied
Robber & Plastics
Petroleum, fi Coal
Primary Metals
Machinery
(Machinery, other
Electrical)
Products
, n.e. c.
Products
than
(Electrical Machinery)
Transportation Equipment
All Other
All Manufacturing
1964 as a Percent of 1954
Values Added
in Constant
Dollars
134
137
162
224
203
138
141
160
N. A.
N. A.
156
144
151
Total Water
Use, Including
Redrculation
97
147
142
176
160
148
117
128
(195)
(205)
204
86
145
Water
Discharge
125
92
120
144
125
116
117
128
(117)
(101)
110
83
122
83
-------
TABLE 11-10
RELATIVE INCREASE IN WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND
WATER REUSE, BY MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SECTORS
IN
Industry
Coefficients of Efficiency
Index of Increase
in Value Added
Per Unit Water
Application
Index of Increase
in Value Added
Per Unit Water
Intake
Food & Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Paper & Allied Products
Chemical & Allied Products
Rubber & Plastics, n.e.c.
Petroleum & Coal Products
Primary Metals
Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other
All Manufacturing
138
93
114
127
127
93
121
125
76
167
104
107
149
135
156
162
119
121
125
142
173
124
84
-------
efficiency of a volume of water, and by the index of growth of water dis-
diarge, to express relative effect of recycling. It is apparent that in many
industries efficient use, in terms of volume of water applied per unit of pro-
duct, was almost as significant in reducing water intake as was recycling.
Hhile no general principles may be offered to quantify the potential effect
of technological modifications on industrial waste treatment requirements and
costs, there is adequate documentation to indicate that production technology
nay have enormous impacts. For example, a study of "The Economics of Poor
Housekeeping in the Meat-Packing Industry"7 conducted by W. J. Fullen and
1C. V. Hill revealed that the industry - based on an investigation of 28
plants - produced an average standard BOD concentration of 14.7 pounds per
1,000 pounds liveweight of animals slaughtered, with individual plant concen-
trations ranging from 6.5 pounds to 23.5 pounds per 1,000 pound animal. The
difference between the high and the low BOD loads (17 pounds) could very well
be viewed as equivalent to waste treatment efficiency of almost 73%.
There are other dramatic examples. The major drop in unit waste production
in the papermaking industry that has occurred with the transition to the sul-
fate pulping process has been cited, but should not be construed to have end-
ed the processing opportunities to reduce wastes that are available to the
industry. For example, while an efficient integrated kraft plant can produce
a ton of paperboard with a waste production of 45 pounds of BOD (including
the wastes of pulping) , two Willamette Valley (Oregon) producers have lowered
waste production to nine or 10 pounds of BOD per ton of paperboard through
use of tight process controls and the recycling of evaporator condensates.
Very simple management techniques can have major impacts on waste production.
For example, a pulp and paper plant operated by Crown-Zellerbach Corporation
schedules production of low grade, high-yield products during summer low
flows to obtain a 70% reduction in strength of final effluent - from 29
pounds of BOD per ton of production to nine pounds per ton - without perform-
ing treatment additional to that normally provided.
FOA nwiu.factusu.ng a* a. whole., the. 4.ncne.at>e -in value* added and .in
uie had almost a. one.-to-one. relationship. Thi* may be. traced in tange.
nteoAuAe, howe,vesi, to material tliifrt* quite di^efient faom tliat
oi 1954.
iASCE, Joatnal o& the. Sanitary tnQJ.ne.esu,ng faviAion, Volume 59, Wo. 4.
85
-------
Some waste reducing effects of technological improvements can be foreseen for
any industry, since their adoption is a function of the rate of capital in-
vestment in the industry. Figure II-4 depicts graphically the unit waste
production and wastewater discharge associated with a group of industrial
processes in terms of levels of technology. The figures, adapted from the
industrial Waste Profiles, indicate the effects of three levels of current
technology on waste production in the affected industries. It is clear, for
example, that as old plants are phased out or modernized and new plants are
built, waste reduction will become an increasingly critical problem in the
steel industry •- where the new technology incorporates both a higher degree
of processing and a lower grade of raw material - but less of a problem in
seme other industries.
The impact of technological advances on total waste production has occurred
largely without reference to their benefits in terms of pollution control.
Advanced technological processes have been adopted because they were more
profitable, and resulting waste reduction results have been incidental bene-
fits. Development of specific waste-limiting process modifications as an end
in itself remains to be realized.
More rapid utilization of the prospective waste reducing efficiency of pro-
cess modification would seem to be a likely result of the new element in the
profit equation introduced by the increasing attention given to environmental
protection and pollution control. The manufacturer who considers waste con-
trol to be an integral portion of the production process will attempt to de-
sign and modify his plant in order to obtain the required reduction efficien-
cies at lowest cost - including the combined cost of in-plant reduction of
loadings and of final treatment. Complete control of wastes within the plant
is not an unrealistic goal in some industries. In most cases, however, such
efficiencies are not,attainable. In all cases, steps taken by plant manage-
ment to reduce the volume of wastewater or the strength of waste loadings
lessen the cost of constructing;and operating waste treatment facilities.
Thus, the engineering of an in-plant waste control system, as opposed to the
addition of a waste treatment plant to an otherwise unrelated production sys-
tem, offers the prospect of optimum control of all waste-associated costs of
production. (Figure II-5.)
The effectiveness of process modifications in reducing wastes is given some
quantitative dimensions in Table 11-11, provided by Mr. Blair Bower, an asso-
ciate of Resources for the Future. : While the unit waste load quantities in
this table may differ in detail from those quoted elsewhere in this report,
the concept of major waste reduction from process or other in-house modifica-
tions is shown clearly.
If it is assumed that, on the average, newer technology generates less waste
per production unit, it also must be recognized that the adoption of such
technology probably will take place because of its overall effect on profits
rather than its contribution to pollution abatement. The newer technology's
86
-------
FIGURE H-4
INDEX OF UNIT WASTEWATER AND POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS ASSOCIATED
WITH CURRENT PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES (OLD TECHNOLOGY = 100)
BOD
PER UNIT PRODUCT
WOOLEN
MILLS
COTTON
MILLS
STEEL
MILLS
EESI
OIL
REFINING
MEAT
PACKING
POULTRY
PACKING
100
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
PER UNIT PRODUCT
WASTEWATER
PER UNIT PRODUCT
100
OLD TECHNOLOGY
PREVALENT TECHNOLOGY
NEW TECHNOLOGY
260
* Source: Industrial Waste Profiles.
87
-------
FIGURE H-5
EFFECT OF REDUCTION IN INITIAL WASTE LOADING
ON TREATMENT PLANT COST
_
s
-
7
_
~
at
—
—
20 30 40
PERCENT REDUCTION IN WASTE DISCHARGE
Adopted From: Petroleum Refining Industry Wastewater Profile (Roy F. Weston)
88
-------
TABLE 11-11
COEFFICIENTS OF LIQUID WASTES GENERATED, BY INDUSTRY CATEGORY
Industry Category
Hot-Packing
Fluid Milk
Canned and Frozen Foods
Cane Sugar
Beet Sugar
Distilled Spirits
Cotton Finishing
Synthetic Textiles
Finishing
Paper Mill*
Paperboard Mills
Paper Coating and
Glazing
PAper Containers
Petroleum Refining
Leather Tanning and
Finishing
Present
121 BOD/1,000* Of live
weight
1.2» BOD/1, 000# intake
30* BOD/ton of raw pro-
duct processed
41 BOD/ton of product
2* BOD/ton of pjroduct
0.51 BCD/bushel of
grain processed
SOt BOO/1,000 linear
yards
20* BOD/1,000 linear
yards
SCI BOD/ton of product
50* BOD/ton of product
30* BOD/ton processed
301 BOD/ton processed
100« BCD/barrel of
crude processed
150* BOD/1,000 square
f«et tanned
Waste
load Generated, 1n Pounds (#) of BOD5
Future: With No External Stimulus
Coeffi-
cient
12*
1.2*
30*
4*
2*
0.5*
70*
25*
100*
60*
50*
50#
110*
ISO*
Assumptions
No reason to increase;
product mix not adverse
No apparent reasons for
change
Predominance of vegeta-
bles in area; product
mix not adverse
Relatively straight-
forward production pro-
cess; essentially one
product
Same as above
No change foreseeable
Product proliferation,
coatings, etc.
Product proliferation
More emphasis on fire
and specialty papers
Proliferation of coat-
ings, colored product
Product proliferation
Product proliferation,
coatings
Greater jet fuel, gaso-
line per barrel of crude;
increase in average com-
plexity
No change foreseeable
Future: With External Stimulus
Coeffi-
cient
10*
1.0*
20*
2*
1*
0.5*
30*
10*
40*
25*
20*
20*
75*
100*
Assumptions
Better utilization
likely
Better housekeeping
possible
Improved raw mater-
ials; better inter-
nal utilization
Assume changes possi-
ble as in beet sugar
industry
Same as above
No change foresee-
able
Process modifica-
tion possible
Process modifica-
tion
Process modifica-
tion; materials
recovery
Process modifica-
tion, materials
recovery
Process modifica-
tion
Process modifica-
tion
Process modifica-
tion; better house-
keeping
Better utilization;
no adverse product
mix
Source(s)
Eckenfelder
Eckenfelder
Bower
Gurnham
Gurnham
Gurnham
Gurnham,
Bonem
Gurnham ,
Bower
Gurnham ,
Bower
Gurnham,
Bower
Gurnham,
Bower
Gurnham,
Bower
Stormont
Gurnham,
Bonem
oo
-------
effect in reducing unit wasteloads is reduced to a considerable extent by the
persistence of profitable manufacturing plants still using outmoded processes
and procedures. New plants generally produce less wastes than old plants and
are more efficient in their use of water. Therefore, they are better able to
deal with the financial and engineering problems of waste treatment. But
many old plants continue to operate. The pulp and paper industry again pro-
vides an example. In 1920, nine tons of sulfite pulp were produced for every
ton of sulfate pulp; today, five tons of sulfate pulp are produced for every
ton of sulfite pulp. No new sulfite mill has been built for over 10 years
and at least two have been closed; yet sulfite pulp production amounts to
twice what it was in 1920. Apparently many old plants are sufficiently pro-
fitable to remain in operation; they continue to expand their output; and it
is not always practical to modify them to incorporate newer, waste-reducing
technology.
It is important to recognize that technological improvements have had the ef-
fect of slowing the rate of growth of pollution by providing constantly
greater efficiency. But the average age of the American manufacturing estab-
lishment is about 20 years - among the oldest among highly industrialized na-
tions - and older, high-pollution technology will not be phased out so long
as it is profitable.
90
-------
COST STANDARDS AND INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS
ANALYSIS OF UNIT COSTS
Ibere are neither general rules with regard to the cost of treating a given
•aunt of the waste of a given industrial process to a desired effluent stand-
aid, nor sufficient information to formulate such rules. Obviously, the area
is one in which a great deal of data accumulation and statistical analysis
OS required. Because of prevailing deficiencies in information exchange, it
is not unusual to find that professionals who specialize in industrial waste
treatment systems disagree with respect to cost standards.
Id order to resolve some of the uncertainties with regard to cost and to pro-
vide a basis for further study, a statistical analysis of industrial waste
treatment plant construction costs was undertaken. Published articles, FWPCA
Regional Office files, and applications submitted to obtain Federal demonstra-
tion grants provided a very limited number of cases which contained suffi-
cient information about plant cost, waste reduction efficiency (at least 85%
BODs removal required for inclusion) , and design flow to be incorporated into
the sample. In the absence of adequate samples to review costs for separate
industrial sectors, the analysis considered the entire group of industrial
vaste treatment plants to compose a single sample which was analyzed for cor-
relation of two parameters, hydraulic loading and construction costs. The
analysis, presented graphically in Figure II-6, suggests some interesting
considerations.
(1) Industrial waste treatment plants are probably less costly -
per gallon of water treated, per pound of BOD, or per pound
of solids removed - to construct than are municipal plants.
This is not surprising. The industrial operation is subject
to much greater control. Flows can be equalized, unlike mu-
nicipal wastewater which operates under severely shifting in-
fluent patterns through the day. Waste concentrations can
often be altered through mixing and dilution to achieve an
optimal composition. The plant can be designed for the spe-
cific materials contained in the wastewater instead of oper-
ating to deal with a range of concentrations of differing ma-
terials, as does the small municipal plant. Greater cost con-
sciousness on the part of industrial management, too, may be
a factor acting to stimulate efficiency.
(2) Combining substantial industrial waste discharges with muni-
cipal wastes tends to move unit construction costs substan-
tially downward. Again, this is a reasonable and expected
situation, where the industrial wastes are suitable for con-
ventional waste treatment. The usual composition of munici-
91
-------
FIGURE H-6
COMPARATIVE CONSTRUCTION COSTS PER UNIT OF FLOW,
SECONDARY WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS
10,ooo,ooo a
t/1
3
:
-
-
i
~ 1,000,000
2
c
-:
100,000
.-
:
-
10,000
0.01
0.1 1 10
MILLION GALLONS PER DAY DESIGN FLOW
G
&
MUNICIPAL SECONDARY WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS (From: Figure 25,
Modern Sewage Treatment Plants-How Much do they Cost?)
24 INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS (IMPUTED TREATMENT
EFFICIENCY >85%)
5 MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS, WITH INDUSTRIAL INFLUENT >4
TIMES DOMESTIC WASTE LOADINGS
3 PETROCHEMICAL OR OIL REFINERY PLANTS
PLANT CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1960
PLANT CONSTRUCTED SINCE 1965
92
-------
pal wastes is relatively deficient in nutrients, the indus-
trial waste is often deficient in operative bacteria. High-
ly concentrated wastes of some manufacturing processes, then,
tend to bring the municipal plant closer to the efficiency
possible when an optimum loading pattern is attained, when
a significant portion of industrial wastes originate from
plants operating on a single shift, the hydraulic pattern,
too, may approach an optimum, since the normal daily loading
pattern of a municipal plant is complementary with industry's
normal day shift; or industrial discharges may be scheduled
to coincide with treatment plant operating cycles. Finally,
in many cases, the industrial waste is higher in temperature,
which tends to accelerate the life processes of the bacteria
that sustain decomposition.
(3) The unit cost of constructing industrial waste treatment sys-
tems appears to be declining. When adjustments are made for
price level changes, systems built prior to 1960 cluster
above the average cost curve while treatment systems built
since 1965 tend to fall below the curve.
(4) The cost of waste treatment probably differs significantly
among industries. This would not seem surprising, but funda-
mental waste treatment processes are similar for wastes from
most sources, while hydraulic loading is a constant sizing
factor. It would seem, however, that opportunities for seg-
regation of the components of the waste stream, pretreatment
requirements, and the rate of assimilation vary significantly
among industries. There is at least a hint in the analyzed
data that unit costs are relatively high for petroleum refin-
eries and some segments of the chemical industry, while food
processing and pulp and paper - readily adaptable to conven-
tional waste treatment procedures - tend to require lesser
investments per unit of wastewater. Industrial Waste Pro-
files support the conclusion.
(5) On the basis of the very limited data, it would appear that
unit costs tend to exhibit a sharper drop with increase in
size of plant than is characteristic of municipal waste
treatment plants. The tendency has been indicated in a
prior study of municipal waste treatment plant construction
costs, where it was found that "...the cost [per unit waste-
load] curves have a greater slope than the cost per capita
curves. This slope differential evidently is caused by the
93
-------
increasing percentage of industrial wastes with increasing
population..."
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
From the point of view of the economist attempting a gross assessment of to-
tal industrial waste treatment costs, uncertainties regarding specific costs
are largely irrelevant. Gross aggregation and consistent application of sta-
tistical method can cut through the complexities caused by the wide range of
options available within the open system of the industrial plant to produce a
generalized estimate of the cost of providing a fixed level of waste treat-
ment efficiency. If it is assumed: (1) that all of the data are equally
valid and reliable; (2) that normal cost and efficiency standards apply; and
(3) that the equivalent of secondary waste treatment (i.e., no less than 85%
removal of standard BOD and of settleable and suspended solids) provides an
adequate definition of the efficiency goal, then a normative assessment of
costs can be made. We may say that within the limits of current technology,
85% of the volume of settleable and suspended solids and of oxygen-demanding
dissolved organics contained in the wastewater of manufacturing firms using
20 million gallons or more of water per year can be reduced by an expenditure
of roughly £ dollars.
That is the form which this study takes. If the data were better, the analy-
sis more detailed, the estimate might be more precise in its formulation. It
is doubtful, however, that it would be more reliable. Only a plant-by-plant
analysis that fully considers alternatives available within the limits of
law, technology, and custom in terms of both the physical environment and lo-
cal economic developmental patterns would be wholly reliable. Lacking that
assessment, the method should prove adequate to provide preliminary cost es-
timates required for planning and budgeting purposes.
This cost assessment is based upon a specific, quantitative goal: complete
application to industrial wastewaters of waste reduction efficiencies equiva-
lent to that of secondary treatment of domestic wastes. The introduction of
a specific goal makes this analysis possible. It should be noted, however,
that in any particular situation secondary treatment may represent a distinct
Seiaage. Treatment ?ian&> -How Much Vo Thuj Co&t? , p. 25. T/ie
not pimue the. indicated conc£u6.ton. Tt~
-too, that the. -tone otf cona-tftuatton hoa on e^ect on the. data,
many o& the. taxgM. aecondafcf plants 6e*ng faac££ teJfativeJty ie,c.en£ty.
U&tunate, *e6o£utton otf qut&tion* o$ tkti 4o%t wUl have, to auxuU a
p
-------
Q
departure from actual needs. Recognizing that conditions may sometimes re-
quire higher or lower efficiencies, the analytical goal of secondary-level
removal was chosen on the basis of the technical decision that it most close-
ly approximated the condition required to satisfy water quality standards in
the aggregate.
Given the specific goal of complete secondary waste treatment, it was possi-
ble to evaluate the cost of attaining that goal. The method utilized was
consistent, rigid, but, within the limits of data reliability, it is felt
adequate to provide an approximate assessment of the magnitude of the cost
associated with the analytical goal.
Cost data were derived from the considerable body of material that has been
accumulated through the machinery of the Federal Construction Grants program
analyzed in Modern Sewage Treatment Plants - How Much Do They Cost? and up-
dated by application of the Engineering News Record Index of Construction
Costs. The data refer only to municipal plants, but it was felt that a form-
ula that related varying elements of the costing equation could be applied to
industrial plants in view of the demonstrated effectiveness of conventional
waste treatment techniques in reducing organic wastes from all sources, and
the observed general correspondence of municipal and industrial construction
costs demonstrated in Figure 11-6.
Industrial water use data were obtained from the Census of Manufactures. In-
fozmation contained in the Census covered less than 11,000 of the more than
300,000 manufacturing establishments in the nation. But the establishments
included all of those with an intake of 20 million gallons or more of water a
year, and account for about 97% of all water withdrawn for manufacturing use.
tte group, then, may be assumed to include every significant industrial
source of water pollution, as well as the entire body of manufacturers whose
waste treatment investment requirement can be calculated.
Industrial waste loadings and concentrations were derived from a previous
study conducted by FWPCA. This study, summarized in Table 11-2, attempted to
assess the total pollutional loading produced in the base year 1964 by manu-
facturing plants. While an attempt was made by the investigators to gage the
•agnitude of a broad range of pollutants, this cost analysis limited itself
o
A
The ana£t/4-c4 oj$ conven£tona£ u)cu>t& 4-t/z.e.ng-t/u aA4ocxated with ..
ing p*oce44e4 -ouUcated that tlie. average. conce.n&ia£ion& DJ$ ox.tjQe.n-de.-
aandinQ organic. wai-teA -en -the. diit>ch(ViQ o& -t/ie p/wjnaAt/ me£a&4, -inorgan-
ic. chem.cat&t and macA-cne'u/ -c.nchiA-fw.e6 £e4 ($01 -t
iee&J-'Li tti&ie. ica£ed on Uie, baA-cd o^ ptujmaAy &ie.cutn\ejvt.
95
-------
to consideration of the total annual volume of standard BOD, a key factor in
sizing secondary waste treatment plants.
Given the number of industrial plants, the average daily discharge and BOD
concentration of wastewaters, the average cost for constructing a treatment
plant of a given size, and the approximate level of waste treatment in each
industrial sector in 1964, it was possible to calculate:
(1) a total number of waste treatment plants required in each in-
dustry ,
(2) a cost for the average large plant (discharge of 100 million
gallons per year or more) and the average small plant (dis-
charge of 20 to 99 million gallons per year) in each industry,
(3) the number of waste treatment plants available in each indus-
try in 1964 and, by straight line projection, in 1968, and
(4) the deficiency in number of treatment plants, and an amount
equal to the percentage of plant value represented by the per-
centage of required plants actually available.
The figures obtained rested entirely on application of average construction
costs to numbers of plants of average size classes. The data were subsequent-
ly modified to include information obtained in "profiles" of waste treatment
requirements of 10 major water-using industries. For the most part, the out-
lines of investment requirements developed in the profiles adhered within
practical limits to the requirements developed through the analysis of the
census materials. One major exception should be noted. In almost every case
the profile suggested a higher prevalence of waste treatment than did projec-
tion of census-developed data. It would appear that either American industry
built waste treatment plants during the period 1964 to 1967 at a rate much
accelerated over that of the previous five years, that the form in which the
census data were collected and reported understated the prevalence of waste
treatment in 1964, or that some consistent bias was built into the profiles.
Accordingly, the data presented in the following pages are to be considered a
generalized model of costs associated with achieving an 85% reduction of
standard BOD and of settleable and suspended solids generated by major indus-
trial establishments. While the figures are based on the assumption of use
of conventional methods and normal cost relationships, it may be anticipated
that techniques presently available and yet to be developed will be utilized
to reduce costs below the indicated values. It must be recognized, too, that
though studies of a number of industrial segments were utilized in an attempt
to build into the model's structure an appreciation of waste treatment prob-
lems and methods peculiar to specific kinds of industries, there must inevi-
tably be great variations in detail which can change the indicated require-
ment for any industrial sector.
96
-------
In spite of these reservations, it is believed that the reported requirements
provide a useful indication of both the gross magnitude of industry's waste-
associated costsi and the inter-industry distribution of those costs.
97
-------
TOTAL REQUIRED INVESTMENT FOR INDUSTRIAL
WASTE TREATMENT
Table 11-12 summarizes, by industrial classification, the total investment re-
quired to achieve an 85% reduction in gross industrial wastes under current
(FY 1968) conditions. In view of the volume of such wastes, the amount is
surprisingly small - about $4 billion. Even more surprising is the high indi-
cated prevalence of industrial waste treatment. The analysis indicates that
the unmet requirement for industrial waste treatment plants amounts to little
more than $1 billion.
It should be noted that the values depend in large measure on data provided
in Volume III, Industrial Waste Profiles/ the waste treatment requirements of
10 major water-using industries. Calculations based entirely on census data
and municipal construction costs developed a total indicated requirement for
industrial waste treatment works of more than $5 billion - about 30% higher.
More significant, they revealed a total unmet requirement of $2,644 million,
more than twice the level reported in Table 11-12. Moreover, there were some
meaningful shifts among the requirements for specific industries when the
data of the profiles were applied. Before adjustment for such information, a
much higher total investment requirement and a proportionately lower addition-
al requirement was calculated for the chemicals industries; a higher invest-
ment requirement and a proportionately far higher unmet requirement was calcu-
lated for the paper and allied products industries; and a slightly lower to-
tal requirement combined with a much higher unmet requirement was calculated
for the primary metals industries.
The set of figures that reflect the information provided in Volume III, Indus-
trial Waste Profiles, was selected for more detailed presentation and analy-
sis on the basis that it included all of the available information. Still,
policy makers should keep in mind the fact that costs presented in this re-
port are lower than others developed for the same report (as well as much
lower than some undocumented assessments made on other occasions) and should
not, therefore, be regarded as completely reliable. To indicate the possible
range of costs involved, succeeding tabular materials will provide a summa-
tion of relationships under both sets of values, though the discussion will
be restricted, in large part, to the values obtained through application of
the profile information.
The arguments for making full use in this report of cost relationships devel-
oped by the wastewater profiles rather than the higher, census-derived, as-
sessment are these:
(1) They reflect experience and expert observation in specific
industry situations; data derived from census analysis and
municipal cost relationships do not. Thus the steep indus-
98
-------
TABLE 11-12
ESTIMATED VALUE OF INVESTMENT, INDUSTRIAL WASTE
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS, 1968
(Based on Industrial Waste Profiles)
Industry
Total Plant
Required
Food and Kindred Products 743.1
Meat Products 170.8
Dairy Products 104.0
Canned and Frozen Foods 137.0
Sugar Refining 175.2
All Other 156.1
Textile Mill Products 165.2
Paper and Allied Products 321.8
Chemical and Allied Products 379.7
Petroleum and Coal 379.4
Rubber and Plastics 41.1
Primary Metals 1,473.8
Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills 963.8
All Other 510.0
Machinery 39.0
Electrical Machinery 35.8
Transportation Equipment 216.0
All Other Manufacturing 203.7
All Manufactures 3,998.6
Millions of 1968 Dollars
Currently Currently
Provided By Provided By
Municipalities Industry
340.7 182.4
98.7 36.9
73.1 7.8
80.0 23.0
2.3 105.5
86.6 9.2
85.4 53.3
21.1 225.0
12.0 87.9
27.4 275.0
5.1 5.1
55.1 1,269.2
865.6
55.1 403.6
11.2 2.9
22.8 4.5
115.1 59.2
35.5 50.8
731.4 2,215.3
Additional
Investment
Required
220.0
35.
23.
34.
67.
60.
26.
75.
279.
77.
30.
149.
98.
51.
24.
8.
41.
117.
1,051.
2
1
0
4
3
5
7
8
0
9
5
2
3
9
5
7
4
9
ID
-------
trial waste treatment unit cost curve presented in Figure
II-6 seems to be borne out in contrasting the preliminary
$5 billion cost assessment with the amended $4 billion re-
quirement.
(2) Census data are partial and unweighted, and generalized
assumptions used to modify them may well be in error - in
greater or lesser degree - in the case of specific indus-
tries.
(3) The profiles account for cost-reducing steps customarily
taken in the plant to reduce the volume and strength of
wastes prior to treatment. Such procedures could only bo
roughly approximated in the model that utilized census
data.
(4) In the judgment of the authors of the profiles, most in-
dustries would seem to have been constructing waste treat-
ment facilities at a more rapid rate over the last four
years than during the five previous years. Thus the sim-
ple projection of 1959 to 1964 plant construction rates
used in the analysis of the census perhaps overstates the
unmet requirement.
(5) The profiles provide an insight into the peculiar waste
treatment requirements of specific industries, thus are
more precise than a general goal such as "the equivalent
of secondary treatment of domestic wastes." When speci-
fics are brought into the equation, the experience of in-
dustries that have dealt with them on the basis of mean-
ingful alternatives is reflected - and with it the weight-
ing of cost experience provided by use of optimal methods.
(6) A weakness of the profiles, as opposed to the census, as
a source of data is that they tend to be based on limited
geographical experience. Thus the waste treatment situ-
ation of a regional segment of an industry may, without
proper justification, be used to generalize the total in-
dustry's practices. It is probable, for example, that
the problem presented by the obsolescent sulfite pulping
plants of Wisconsin and the Pacific Northwest could at
least double indicated requirements for the paper and
allied products group.
Table 11-13 summarizes the differences in evaluation that occurred with the
two sets of calculations. The significant variation between the value of
plant in place as calculated by the separate methods gives further point to
the need expressed by the FWPCA, through a number of program proposals over
100
-------
TABLE 11-13
COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED 1968 WASTE TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
UNDER TWO METHODS OF CALCULATION
Industry
Food and Kindred Products
Heat Products
Dairy Products
Canned and Frozen Foods
Sugar Refining
All Other
Textile Mill Products
Paper and Allied Products
Chemical and Allied Products
Petroleum and Coal
Rubber and Plastics
Primary Metals
Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills
All Other
Machinery
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other Manufacturing
All Manufactures
Plant Currently Provided By
Industry
Plant Currently Provided By
Municipalities
Dnmet Requirement
Millions of 1968 Dollars
Basis For Estimate
Wastewater Profiles
and Estimates
743.1
170.8
104.0
137.0
175.2
156.1
165.2
321.8
379.7
379.4
41.1
1,473.8
963.8
510.0
39.0
35.8
216.0
203.7
3,998.6
2,215.3
731.4
1,051.9
Census -Municipal
Projections
669.6
128.6
69.3
155.8*
175.2
140.7
170.9
917.6
1,003.8
272.3
58.9
1,383.7
890.7
493.0
55.9
51.3
156.4
291.8
5,032.2
1,752.3
635.9
2,644.0
101
-------
the years, for an inventory of industrial waste sources and waste treatment.
For while deficiencies of the census as a source of data may explain a part
of the difference, and the high dollar efficiency of industrial waste treat-
ment investments relative to municipal investments may also provide a partial
explanation, the wide spread between the two estimates is perplexing. It is
possible that the variation in indicated investment reflects an industry-wide
deficiency in normal waste treatment capacity. If the difference between the
separate assessments of unmet requirements were proportional to incremental
industrial wasteloads reaching watercourses as a result of under capacity in
existing waste treatment, there would be clear cause for concern.
There is a hint in the Industrial Waste Profiles that some such mechanism is
actually at work. For example, the estimated efficiency with which the steel
industry operates its waste-reducing plant is, according to the profile, only
50%. Similarly, the profile of the plastics and resins industry suggests
that waste reduction efficiencies based on reduction of standard BOD are de-
ceptive. Many waste constituents are not removed by conventional treatment
processes; and removal of five-day BOD provides an ineffective yardstick for
evaluating treatment effectiveness where a large proportion of the wastes pro-
duced are of a persistent nature. Oxygen demand is asserted in such cases
well after the five-day period when 67% of the stabilization of sanitary
wastes takes place.
It is clear that, whichever set of unmet treatment requirements is utilized,
industry does not face a major investment to bring its waste treatment capa-
bilities up to the standard of removal set as a goal. But in planning to
meet industrial pollution control costs, the unmet requirement should not be
considered to be their only, or even their major, source. Substantial sums
will be needed to keep pace with removal standards as industrial output in-
creases; and large amounts will have to be expended each year to operate,
maintain, and replace elements of the waste removal system.
Table 11-14 presents an assessment of investment requirements which must be
met if industrial wastes are to be controlled within the next five years to
the average level of efficiency used as a standard for this report. The un-
derlying assumptions are that: (1) existing unmet waste treatment require-
ments will be provided equally over each of the next five years; and (2) no
additional unmet requirements will arise (i.e., all new plant construction
or other additions to capacity will include adequate waste treatment facili-
ties whose cost is assessed in the schedule).
The table indicates that industry will have to invest over a third of a bil-
lion dollars a year to keep pace with the growth of its waste treatment re-
sponsibilities and to eliminate existing deficiencies. (If the higher indi-
cated requirements and the greater preponderance of deficiency indicated by
the analysis of the census is used for a base, the total industrial invest-
ment requirement over the same five-year period would amount to over $3.6
billion.)
102
-------
TABLE 11-14
ANNUAL INVESTMENT REQUIRED TO REDUCE THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL
WASTE TREATMENT DEFICIENCY IN FIVE YEARS
(Wastewater Profiles and Estimates)
Industry
Annual Investment
To Reduce Existing
Requi rement
Millions of 1968 Dollars
Total Investment to Reduce Waste
Treatment Requirements and Meet
Growth Needs
T97T
1972 I 1973
o
U)
Food and. Kindred Products
Meat Products
Dairy Products
Canned and Frozen Foods
Sugar Refining
All Other
Textile Mill Products
Paper and Allied Products
Chemical and Allied Products
Petroleum and Coal
Rubber and Plastics, n.e.c.
Primary Metals
Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills
All Other
Machinery
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other Manufacturing
All Manufactures:
By Wastewater Profiles and Estimates
{By Census-Municipal Projections)
43.9
7.0
4.6
6.7
13.5
12.1
5.3
15.1
56.0
15.4
6.2
29.9
19.6
10.3
5.0
1.7
8.3
23.5
210.3
(528.5)
63.2
10.1
5.1
11.4
19.3
17.3
9.8
.1
.7
19.
75.
15.4
7.0
83.6
52.4
31.2
6.9
3.6
11.7
32.3
65.4
11.2
5.7
12.4
18.4
17.7
10.9
25.5
76.9
18.1
7.9
91.3
59.1
32.2
6.9
3.8
11.9
32.6
69.9
11.2
5.5
12.6
22.6
18.0
11.1
26.0
77.7
30.5
7.1
93.3
60.1
33.2
7.1
3.8
12.2
33.0
70.0
11.7
5.5
12.9
21.4
18.5
11.0
26.4
79.4
31.7
7.2
96.2
63.0
34.2
7.1
4.0
12.1
33.5
69.9
11.6
5.5
13.0
21.5
18.3
11.6
27.0
77.9
32.1
7.1
97.8
63.0
34.8
7.3
4.1
12.3
33.8
328.3 351.2 371.7 378.6 380.9
(676.9) (705.8) (731.5) (740.2) (743.1)
-------
The required increase in waste treatment that will result from growth of in-
dustrial output over the five-year period will constitute a significant sum.
Starting at over $100 million per year in 1969, the annual total adds about
$20 million in each succeeding year, on a schedule based on projections of
output provided by the Business and Defense Services Administration of the
U. S. Department of Commerce. ^
By FY 1973, it is assumed that American industry will be installing water pol-
lution control equipment for new and expanded plants at a roughly $200 mil-
lion annual rate. In addition, depreciation charges on $4.4 billion of waste
treatment plants in place (including municipal plants serving industry) will
be accruing at an annual rate of $238 million, assuming a normal 20-year
period of depreciation. Thus total annual capital requirements will exceed
half a billion dollars a year, even after indicated industrial waste treat-
ment requirements have been met.
In sum, the amount should not have a depressing effect on any industry, if
one considers that new plant and equipment expenditures in manufacturing
amount to almost $30 billion annually at existing rates of investment, the
$400 to $500 million annual waste treatment investment foreseen after the
period of catching up has ended will amount to roughly one and a half percent
of industry's annual plant and equipment investment.
The o&4ump£uM in making the. pJwje.ction 1004 that u)at>te treatment
u)ou£d incnea&e. pAopoxtionateJLy with value* addzd, adjusted
pu.ce. te.ve£ changes. In &e.vesiaJi induA&iieA - tftan&potttation
equipment, pet^oteum Ae£uioig, daJUuj product* - wa&te. treatment fie.-
quinement* weste. p*o/ec£ecf at a. leA&eSL note o£ incA.e.a&z than vodueA
added to £& (at> pieA
-------
MARGINAL EFFICIENCY AND HIDDEN COSTS
Ultimately the cost of pollution control must be measured in each drainage
basin, in terras that include the peculiar hydrologic, climatic, and economic
configurations of the river system. A national assessment, to be dependable,
tost be built painstakingly from the bottom up, to reflect water quality
standards and factors affecting water quality in each drainage area. The
generalized waste treatment goal utilized in this report must be recognized
to provide only a first effort to set the terms for detailed regional and in-
dustrial studies that take into account specialized circumstances that affect
costs.
One of the most significant of these is the extreme increase in costs that is
incurred when advanced waste treatment becomes a necessity. Figure II-7, de-
veloped by W. W. Eckenfelder of the Department of Engineering at the Univer-
sity of Texas, generalizes the cost relationships associated with progressive
levels of waste removal efficiency. The curve's shape and known relationships
between the cost of primary treatment, aerated lagooning, and activated
sludge indicate that the relationships are arithmetic rather than logarithmic.
It is obvious from the shape of the conceptualized treatment cost curve that
marginal reductions in wastes involve sharp increases in unit costs. Between
primary and secondary waste treatment, costs roughly double. From secondary
to tertiary treatment, cost increase is even more pronounced.
These relationships are critical in assessing the validity of the $4 billion
to $5 billion treatment cost estimates. Those costs are associated with a
selected point - 85% removal of the suspended solids and biochemical oxygen
demand of sewage. It is generally recognized, however, that the relation-
ships between secondary waste treatment (85% removal) and attainment of water
quality standards is not a fixed one. In some instances primary waste treat-
Bent may be adequate to maintain stream quality. On the other hand, there
are a number of instances - and that number must grow, with incremental in-
creases in waste volume - where secondary waste treatment will be inadequate
to achieve an established standard. This is particularly true of industrial
wastes. Secondary waste treatment reduces oxygen demand and settleable and
suspended solids; but in many cases, industrial wastes are characterized by
persistent rather than standard biochemical oxygen demand, by toxics, by ex-
otic compounds, by dissolved minerals. Reduction of such waste constituents
cannot be achieved with secondary waste treatment, and it is necessary to ap-
ply some form of advanced (tertiary) or specific treatment process. In view
of the sharply increased costs involved in attaining advanced treatment, it
aay be expected that industrial waste treatment costs may in fact exceed con-
siderably those presented in this report. Much of what is considered ad-
vanced waste treatment in the case of sanitary sewage or municipal wastes may
be the required form for many industrial establishments.
105
-------
FIGURE H-7
GENERALIZED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WASTE TREATMENT COSTS AND
INTENSITY OF TREATMENT
•€3
-
-
-
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
AERATED
LAGOONS
ADVANCED
WASTE
TREATMENT
DEGREE OF WASTE REDUCTION-
After W.W.Eckenfelder: Effluent Quality and Treatment Economics for Industrial
Wastewaters, October 1967
106
-------
Lacking a technical assessment of the relative significance of this circum-
stance, the analyst may still obtain some view of its potential impact on
cost. If it is assumed that the cost relationships indicated by W. W. Ecken-
felder's curve are generally valid and that the curve presents them accurate-
ly, application of the measured costs of secondary industrial waste treatment
at points along the curve provides some index of the growth in the magnitude
of the total investment requirement associated with more complete removal of
industrial wastes.
The operative assumption in preparing this report is the presumption of a
level of waste removal that correlates theoretically with point i_ along the
curve (Figure II-7) . The point is considered to represent the level of cost
that corresponds with 85% BOD removal. Point ij_ may be assumed to represent
about 90% removal of BOD. Point i^ mav be said to correspond with 95% BOD
removal, some indeterminate level of reduction of persistent organic mater-
ials and/or dissolved inorganics; point i_^ indicates a level of cost associ-
ated with removal of more than 98% of BOD and/or an increased level of remov-
al of persistent organics and dissolved inorganics.
If all industrial waste treatment investments are evaluated in terms of 85%
removal - at the primary treatment level and each of the sequence of points
indicated along the curve - relative costs may be derived at successive incre-
aental efficiences, as indicated in the following table:
TABLE 11-15
CAPITAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH VARYING LEVELS OF
INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT EFFICIENCY
FOR 1968 DISCHARGES
Type of Treatment
Assumed BOD5
Removal
Indicated Total
Investment
Wastewater
Profiles and
Estimates
Primary 35% $ 2.3 billion
Secondary 85% $ 4.0 billion
Secondary 90% $ 6.0 billion
Tertiary 95% $10.6 billion
Tertiary 98% $13.4 billion
Census-
Municipal
Projections
$ 2.9 billion
$ 5.0 billion
$ 7.5 billion
$13.3 billion
$16.8 billion
107
-------
These are, of course, approximate kinds of relationships. It is clear, how-
ever, that as we move into the actual implementation of water quality stand-
ards - where varying levels of treatment will be demanded by conditions -
diminishing returns may act to increase costs enormously.
(Not only industrial waste treatment costs will be affected. The less exotic
wastes of municipalities, by reason of their great volume at points of popu-
lation concentration, will pose an increasing need to face the costs of in-
stalling and operating advanced waste treatment procedures. Relying on the
relationships of the Eckenfelder curve, we may conclude that for every 10% of
the nation's urban population that is required to increase its waste treat-
ment efficiency to 95% BOD removal, an additional $1.3 billion investment
will be required. With more than two-thirds of the nation's population con-
centrated in 222 standard metropolitan statistical areas, it is obvious that
an increasing number of municipal areas are expanding to a point where the
volume of their waste discharges will make just such an investment decision
necessary.)
OTHER SOURCES OF COST
There are other, undefined, kinds of costs associated with treatment of in-
dustrial wastes which may have the effect of pushing total costs well above
those derived from the methods and assumptions embodied in this analysis.
Technical experts are in general agreement that reduction in standard BOD is
an inadequate guide for measuring the efficiency of waste treatment where
wastes are other than conventional sanitary sewage. There is a hidden cost
component of indeterminable magnitude in that portion of the industrial waste
treatment plant now in place which is operating in an ineffective manner.
Loss of practical efficiency of sunk capital is sometimes involved in circum-
stances where a conventional waste treatment procedure is applied to indus-
trial wastes which may have quite separate characteristics from those of san-
itary sewage. In the case of potato processing wastes, for example, there is
evidence that conventional secondary waste treatment simply serves to incu-
bate slow-stabilizing wastes, so that they are discharged to watercources
near their maximum oxygen-demanding potential.
A general problem is the fact that stabilization of organic materials in the
treatment process results in release of nitrogen and phosphorous in a mineral
form, which is swiftly utilized by aquatic biota. Given a primary level of
waste treatment, natural stabilization takes place over an extended area of
stream, where biologic productivity is regulated by rate of nutrient release.
With the introduction of secondary waste treatment, nutrients are immediately
available, production of algae and other biota is accelerated, and is some-
times attended by disagreeable slime growths. The situation is increasingly
108
-------
prevalent in many western and midwestern drainage systems, where it may force
early adoption of some form of advanced waste treatment.
toother kind of cost increment is inherent in the assumption that the pres-
ence of a treatment plant of a given description indicates a normal removal
of waste constituents. Experience has taught that this is simply not true.
Treatment plants may be undersized, under-maintained, inadequately operated.
Factories are operated for other purposes than waste reduction - in pollution-
controlling terms - so their waste treatment plant operators tend to be non-
professionals and, except in circumstances involving enforcement proceedings,
waste treatment often does not receive a high priority in allocation of man-
agement effort. In many cases, treatment plants may be said to be built sim-
ply to escape the nuisance presented by the regulatory agency. Under-
designed, under-engineered, and under-operated industrial waste treatment
plants may be very common. If one considers the South Platte River Basin,
for example, he finds that the census of water use indicates that all but one
of the sugar refineries in the area had some sort of ground disposal system
in operation in 1964, thus would be assumed to have adequate waste treatment.
Investigation of the plants in the conduct of an enforcement conference re-
vealed, however, that normal BOD removal efficiency was in the neighborhood
of 10 to 25% rather than the assigned average efficiency of 85%. Similarly,
Volume III, Industrial Waste Profiles, prepared for the standard industrial
classification "blast furnaces and steel mills" offered the judgment that,
industry-wide, waste treatment facilities are operated only at 50% of stand-
ard or expectable efficiency. To the extent that attainment of normal oper-
ating efficiency may require additional expenditure, capital requirements are
understated; and the possible effects of this mechanism remain to be evalu-
ated.
109
-------
ANNUAL COSTS OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT
The estimated Si billion to $2.6 billion that industry will have to expend
over the next five years to end the deficiency in its waste treatment capa-
bilities will be most burdensome not as an investment requirement but through
its effects on industrial cost structures. Once built, the waste treatment
system must be operated and maintained, so that as the capital investments
are made, operating costs will rise.
Analytical work on operating and maintenance costs associated with industrial
waste treatment has been extremely scarce. When, as occasionally happens,
such costs are quoted in the technical literature, they tend to be expressed
in terms of costs - including interest, depreciation, and taxes - per pound
of BOD removed. An assemblage of data prepared by W. W. Eckenfelder (Efflu-
ent Quality and^j^rejitment Economics^ for Industrial Wastewaters) cited operat-
ing and maintenance costs for more than 50 industrial waste treatment systems;
but the variation in expression of unit costs, treatment efficiency, and val-
ue of plant made it impossible to derive meaningful relationships between in-
vestment and operating costs. Volume III of this report, the Industrial
Waste Profiles, probably contain the only existing publicly available analy-
ses of operating costs for any significant segment of industrial wastewater
treatment.
Operating costs have been abstracted from the profiles, and expressed in
terms of percentage of current replacement value of investment in Table 11-16.
The cost relationships indicated in the table were used to derive estimated
annual operating and maintenance costs for all manufacturing industries for
the period 1968-1973, on the assumption that .operating costs for a total in-
dustrial sector would be similar to those for the segment of the industry
profiled, and that other industrial groups would face operating costs similar
to average costs for all of the profiled industries.
Applying the operating cost ratios to the assumed schedule of investment,
Table 11-17 presents the calculated annual cost to industry of operating the
waste treatment system assumed to be necessary to maintain water quality
standards. Operating and maintenance costs, as presented in the table, in-
clude assessment of sewer charges for municipally treated wastes at the same
rate as operating costs incurred by factory-operated treatment plants. As
the backlog of needed plants is worked off and industrial output increases
over the period, the annual cost of operating treatment plants is seen to
rise almost 60%, and to amount to almost three quarters of a billion dollars
by 1973 - or almost a billion dollars if municipal capital cost relationships
are applied.
Unlike construction costs, operating and maintenance costs tend to be higher
on a unit basis for industrial waste treatment than for municipal. The
110
-------
TABLE 11-16
ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS AS A
PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF TREATMENT PLANTS
Industry
Operating and Maintenance
Costs as Percent of
Current Replacement Value
Fibers, Plastics and Resins
Textile Mill Products
Canned and Frozen Foods
Heat Packing
Dairy Products
Motor Vehicles
Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills
Pulp and Paper
Petroleum Refining
Mean for Nine Industries
21.2
28.1
17.4
11.3
20.0
16.9
10.4
13.6
20.0
17.7
111
-------
TABLE 11-17
ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
1968-1973
Industry
Food and Kindred Products
Meat Products
Dairy Products
Canned and Frozen Foods
Sugar Refining
All Other
Textile Mill Products
Paper and Allied Products
Chemical and Allied Products
Petroleum and Coal
Rubber and Plastics, n.e.c.
Primary Metals
Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills
All Other
Machinery
Electrical Machinery
Transportation Equipment
All Other Manufacturing
All Manufactures:
By Wastewater Profiles and Estimates
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs
(Millions of 1968 Dollars)
1968 1969 I 1970
85.4 95.9 107.0
15.3 16.4 17.7
16.1 17.1 18.3
17.9 19.9 22.0
19.1 22.5 25.8
17.0 20.0 23.2
39.0 41.7 44.8
33.3 35.9 39.3
21.1 37.2 53.5
60.5 63.6 67.2
1.8 3.0 4.4
137.8 146.5 155.9
90.1 95.5 101.6
47.7 51.0 54.3
2.5 3.7 4.9
4.8 5.5 6.1
29.4 31.4 33.4
15.3 21.0 26.8
430.9 485.4 543.3
By Census-Municipal Projections (348.7) (453.6) (565.6)
I 1971
118.7
19.0
19.4
24.2
29.8
26.3
47.9
42.8
70.0
73.3
5.7
165.7
107.9
57.8
6.2
6.8
35.5
32.6
605.2
(679.9)
1972
130.4
20.3
20.5
26.5
33.5
29.6
51.0
46.4
86.8
79.6
7.0
175.7
114.4
61.3
7.5
7.5
37.5
38.5
667.9
(802.1)
I 1973
142.1
21.6
21.6
28.7
37.3
32.9
54.3
50.0
103.3
86.1
8.2
185.9
121.0
64.9
8.7
8.2
39.6
44.5
730.9
(921.7)
N>
-------
causes are functions of the same phenomena that result in high cost effec-
tiveness of the industrial waste treatment investment. More concentrated in-
dustrial wastes induce greater materials handling costs per unit of wastewa-
ter or per cubic foot of treatment capacity than is true of the municipal
plant. Similarly, the evening of the industrial flow pattern that allows a
smaller industrial treatment plant to handle the same volume of wastewater
as a larger municipal plant, with its fluctuating daily flow pattern, re-
sults in a treatment system that is operating closer to capacity, thus with
higher costs per unit of capacity. Finally, it should be noted that the in-
dustrial operating cost often includes a larger measure of pretreatment and
post-treatment operations. The typical municipal treatment system is, ex-
cept for disinfection, a continuous process. Industrial wastes often re-
quire neutralization, screening, segregation, dilution, and other ancillary
processes in addition to treatment or to sewering.
Operating and maintaining the nation's industrial waste treatment plant will
provide the major element in the sustained, rising total cost of industrial
water pollution control, once the existing deficiency in waste treatment cap-
abilities has been ended. Even if an equilibrium position is attained by
1973, with no waste treatment requirements other than those imposed by re-
placement and expansion, the total annual increment to manufacturers' cash
requirements represented by water pollution control will exceed a billion
dollars a year. Table 11-18 summarizes, for all manufacturing, the rising
requirements posed by waste treatment through the period 1969-1973. After
1973, industry will face a situation in which it must be prepared to expend
an annual investment rising from a base of about $200 million a year to pro-
vide for output growth,* pay operating and maintenance costs rising from over
$730 million a year, and face replacement costs - as measured by depreci-
ation - increasing steadily from the 1973 base rate of about $200 million
per year.
Clearly, waste treatment will occupy an increasingly significant place in de-
termining the total costs and the financial requirements of industrial oper-
ations.
%ie: The. vo£tte6 one. obtained by tubtsiacting £tom the, -cncUcoted 1973
capitat ie.qu*A<2jnwt, tliat portion needed to e£6)vcna£e
(TaMe 11-74).
113
194-046 o - 68 - 9
-------
TABLE 11-18
ANNUAL CASH OUTLAYS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECTED
INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM, 1969-1973
Source of Outlay
Millions of 1968 Dollars
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
5-Year
Total
By Wastewater Profiles & Estimates:
Depreciation/Replacement @ 5%
Operation & Maintenance
New Plant Required
Total Outlays
127.2
485.4
328.3
I/
(Replacement Value, Plant in Place)—
144.7
'543.3
351.2
163.3
605.2
371.7
182.3
667.9
378.6
201.3
730.9
380.9
940.9 1,039.2 1,140.2 T722878 1,313.1
(2,543.6) (2,894.8) (3,266.5) (3,645.1) (4,026.0)
818.8
3,032.7
1,810.7
5,662.2
By Census-Municipal Projection:
Depreciation/Replacement @ 5%
Operation & Maintenance
New Plant Required
Total Outlays
121.5
453.6
676.9
1,252.0
156.8
565.6
705.8
1,428.2
193.3
679.9
731.5
1,604.7
230.3
802.1
740.2
1,772.6
267.5
921.7
743.1
1,932.3
969.4
3,422.9
3,597.5
7,989.8
(Replacement Value, Plant in Place)!/ (2,429.2) (3,135.0) (3,866.5) (4,606.7) (5,349.8)
U Exclude* value. o£ fie.atme.nt th/iough. municipal J>yt>tejnt> in 1968. ?tioje.cti.on& oj$ the. incide.nct o(J mu-
nicipaJL ttie.at3ne.nt o& induAtniat w
-------
REGIONAL INCIDENCE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE
TREATMENT COSTS
Distribution of industrial waste treatment requirements among the regions of
the nation is affected by a variety of factors. The relative degree of in-
dustrialization, the type of manufacturing industries that characterize the
region, and the relative age of plants in various industries are the princi-
pal elements that enter into the determination of industrial waste treatment
requirements. In addition to these, scarcity or abundance of water supplies
and the vigor with which pollution control laws are enforced tend to affect
strongly the level of plant in place relative to required plant.
Regional allocations, as presented in Table 11-19, of the estimated current
industrial waste treatment investment requirement reflect only two of the
tutors that bear upon actual cost distributions. The table adequately mir-
rors degree of industrialization and manufacturing specialization among re-
gions. It fails to account for relative average age and size of plant, or
effects of regional water pollution control programs; these elements cannot
be gaged accurately in the absence of an inventory of industrial waste
sources.
fte method of distribution involved allocation of costs by industry, accord-
ing to the identifiable portion of each industrial sector's total wastewater
discharge that occurs within each of the regions. The unidentifiable por-
tion of the cost was allocated porportionately to each region's share of the
toted unidentifiable industrial water discharge.
Since the major factors influencing industrial waste treatment requirements
bomber and kind of manufacturing users of water) are the elements underly-
ing the tabulation, it should be of some value to state and regional plan-
Mrs who must consider the relative significance of waste treatment require-
lents in the total complex of regional development circumstances.
taste treatment requirements are concentrated in the industrial northeast.
The North Atlantic, Great Lakes, and Ohio drainage regions contain more than
601 of the nation's industrial waste treatment requirement, more than half
of;the indicated unmet requirement. (In view of the tendency for old, small
plants to have a disporportionate share of the total treatment needs of any
industry, there is reason to believe that this industrially mature portion
of the nation actually contains an even greater proportion of the waste
treatment requirement than the allocation indicates.) In distinction, the
vast areas of the southwest - i.e., the Colorado, Great Basin, and Califor-
nia drainage areas - contain only 4% of the indicated treatment requirement.
tot only are these areas relatively unindustrialized, they tend to contain
itttastries whose waste-producing, water-using characteristics are minor; the
115
-------
TABLE 11-19
REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF WASTE TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS,
1968, BY WASTEWATER PROFILES AND ESTIMATES
Regions
Tota
Req
North Atlantic
Southeast
Great Lakes
Ohio
Tennessee
Upper Mississippi
Lower Mississippi
Missouri
Arkansas-White-Red
Millions of 1968 Dollars
1 Plant Value of
uired Plant in Place
814.0 575.5
276.1 208.0
973.4 784.2
658.5 526.7
80.4 47.8
205.1 149.9
230.1 144.8
88.2 64.2
49.2 33.0
Western Gulf 286.8 168.9
Colorado/Great
25.9 17.0
Pacific Northwest^/ 167.6 121.1
California^ 143.3 1Q5>6
T°tal 3,998.6 2,946.7
Additional "
Investment
Requi red
238.5
68.1
189.2
131.8
32.6
55.2
85.3
24.0
16.2
117.9
8.9
46.5
37.7
1,051.9
- IncAudu Abuka.
21
- Includu Hawaii
116
-------
regions' 4% of the industrial waste treatment requirement is generated by
plants producing 10% of national values added by manufacturers .
It should be recognized that the allocation of requirements by proportional
industrial specialization probably provides a good guide to the dimensions of
the total treatment requirement for any region, but a far less satisfactory
indication of the relative deficiency in industrial waste treatment. Experi-
ence and judgment indicate that stringency and enforcement of pollution con-
trol regulations impose a significant influence on the prevalence of indus-
trial waste treatment. Even more significant, perhaps, is the extent of the
influences of water shortage and average age of industrial plant. Although
the data do not permit quantitative expression of the effects of these inf lu-
there are approximate numerical guides to its effect.
Table 11-20 lists by region comparative percentage of total and treated in-
dustrial wastewater discharge found in the Census of Manufactures for 1964.
Obviously, it is impossible to draw specific conclusions from the listings
xhich reveal nothing about the kind or degree of treatment, relationships be-
toreen wastewater discharge that requires treatment and other discharges, pol-
lutional loading before and after treatment. Still, all things being equal,
there is good reason to infer a distinct difference in regional practice.
It may be anticipated that natural and recent historical circumstances will
affect the actual resolution of regional cost allocations in ways that the
information presently available does not allow us to measure.
117
-------
TABLE 11-20
RELATIVE REGIONAL PREVALENCE OF INDUSTRIAL
WASTE TREATMENT, 1964
Billion Gallons, 1964
Region
To
Disc
North Atlantic 2
Southeast
Great Lakes 3
Ohio 2
Tennessee
Upper Mississippi
Lower Mississippi
Missouri
Arkansas-White-Red
Western Gulf 1
Colorado/Great
California/Hawaii
Pacific Northwest/Alaska
U. S. Total 13
Treated Discharge
tal Treated
harge Discharge^/
,397 1,037
893 315
,003 955
,370 400
387 109
494 155
572 133
128 47
174 82
,700 377
45 21
420 136
575 153
,157 3,611
Sewered
Di scharge
175
48
307
167
10
104
20
36
14
14
6
50
40
987
Ground
Discharge
29
12
17
15
10
6
3
2
2
2
3
72
20
195
Treated
as %
of Total
51.7
41.9
54.0
24.6
33.3
53.6
27.3
66.4
56.3
23.1
66.7
61.4
37.0
36.3
00
— Exclude* -tteo^ed dUchange. to ground and &ie.a£e,d dL&cJiaAQZ -to -iewe/Li
-------
INDUSTRIAL WASTEUATER COOLING REQUIREMENTS
gaite apart from waste treatment requirements, industry faces a considerable
expenditure arising from the need to reduce the temperature of heated waste-
rtter discharges. Cooling water intake of thermal electric power generating
establishments in 1964 amounted to 41,938 billion gallons; and the largest
category of water intake by manufacturers is that for cooling purposes, a re-
ported 9,385 billion gallons in 1964 by users of 20 million gallons or more,
over 70% of recorded water-use by manufacturers. Combined cooling water in-
takes of major manufacturing and power generating establishments averaged
142 billion gallons per day, or almost enough to equal the 146 billion gal-
lots per day of estimated use by irrigation, the largest user of water.
Since the rate of growth of demand for power and manufactured products is
greater than that for agricultural products, industrial intake of cooling wa-
ter today probably exceeds use of water by irrigation, even conceding the ef-
ficiencies possible in recycling of cooling water.
Industrial cooling waters are a prime source of thermal pollution - the addi-
tion or removal of heat from a stream that causes water temperature to be
above or below ambient temperature. They are not the only source of thermal
pollution. Temperature changes can be induced by the presence of a dam, by
depletion of a stream through diversion, by the warming of irrigation return
waters that occurs on fields, by industrial process and municipal effluents
vhose temperature characteristics have been modified. Industrial cooling is,
however, a very significant source of thermal pollution, and the one we are
best equipped by information to evaluate and to remedy.
Teaperature modification is a significant kind of pollution in itself.
fanned waters are intolerable to many desirable aquatic life forms, and their
utility for cooling is diminished. Temperature modification also contributes
toother forms of pollution. Warming of water accelerates most of the bio-
logical and chemical processes that occur in water, sometimes to an extent
that affects the kind as well as the degree of water quality modifications.
Thus the more rapid decomposition of dissolved organics that occurs in warmed
Wter can result in oxygen depletion; and attainment of threshold temperature
levels may effect reactions that cause otherwise tolerable concentrations of
It should be. noted, however, that both manu.6a.ctusu.ng and powet. geneA.-
ation ana u&eAA thsiougkout the. yejvi, and that tlneJJi ivatesi u&e occifia
ptijicipally
-------
materials (e.g., of the sulfides of wood pulping) to become toxic to aquatic
life.
Information on waste heat discharge or on thermal pollution is limited.
Available data, primarily estimates of water intake and consumption by vari-
ous use categories, are of limited accuracy. We may estimate, but we cannot
know, the volume of water discharged and the gross increase in temperature
that occurs.
Seasonal factors bear upon the validity of estimates. The amount of water
used for cooling varies widely by season, due to the greater cooling effi-
ciency of colder winter water. Similarly, the increased temperature of cool-
ing water discharge has a less deleterious effect on receiving waters in win-
ter.
Even the prevalence of thermal pollution is difficult to assess. Volume of
water and heat transfer properties of a river basin provide no guide to the
seriousness of a temperature problem, for thermal pollution may occur on in-
dividual streams or at stream points, yet be indistinguishable and immeasur-
able above and below the affected areas. Nevertheless, it is generally rec-
ognized that heat is a significant pollutant, and the one most likely to in-
crease in seriousness in the immediate future.
Cooling requirements can most advantageously be examined through the steam-
electric generating industry, where data is readily available, heat exchange
mechanisms may most conveniently be considered, an industrially homogenous
sample is available, and, most significantly, where the preponderance of
waste heat originates. The method followed in cost development was to at-
tempt to deduce temperature stabilization requirements associated with ther-
mal generation of power, and to infer cooling requirements for manufacturing
from known relationships with waste heat of power plants.
A steam-electric generating plant consists of a boiler where water is heated
to produce steam under pressure, a turbine where the expansion of the steam
is converted to mechanical energy, which is in turn converted to electrical
energy in a generator, a condenser which further increases the pressure dif-
ference through the turbine by converting steam to water, and a feed water
pump which returns the condenser water to the boiler. Each plant has a cool-
ing system to circulate water through the condensers. With once-through
cooling - the cheapest and most convenient method if water is plentiful and
protection of the environment against heat pollution is not a consideration -
water is pumped from a source through the condenser and returned to the
source stream; otherwise, the heated cooling water may be passed through a
cooling device and recycled through the condenser, together with necessary
additional make-up water. In the latter case, only blowdown is returned to
the stream; and the thermal pollution probability is reduced or eliminated.
120
-------
The path followed by water as it is converted to steam, expands, and is con-
densed back to water determines the efficiency with which thermal energy is
converted first to mechanical energy and then to electrical energy. Inherent
in the conversion is wasted discharge of a portion of the energy to the en-
vironment as heat. Efficiency of energy conversion is limited by the capa-
bility of boilers and turbines to withstand high temperatures for extended
periods of time and of condensers to lower exhaust temperature. The higher
the generating efficiency - expressed as net heat rate, or the amount of
thermal energy required to produce a kilowatt-hour of electricity - the less
heat that is wasted to cooling waters.
Advances in generating technology have reduced the amount of heat required to
produce electricity. By increasing the size of plant, the temperature and
pressure of steam, utilization of reheat cycles and heat transfer in boilers
and condensers, preheating boiler feed with waste heat, and other operation-
al improvements, utilities have effected a reduction in their average net
heat rate from 25,000 Btu per kilowatt-hour in 1925 to 10,453 in 1965. Since
one kilowatt-hour is the energy equivalent of 3,413 Btu, the increase in ef-
ficiency has meant a drop from 21,587 Btu to 7,040 Btu of heat that is wasted
to the environment in the production of a kilowatt-hour of electricity. Ob-
viously, it is to the interest of the generating industry to utilize heat as
fully as possible, rather than wasting it. Unfortunately, we'seem to be ap-
proaching the limits of the efficiency possible with present generating meth-
ods. Current best plant heat rates are just over 8,700 Btu; and informed
opinion seems to hold that a net heat rate of 8,500 Btu represents the outer
limit of efficiency in fossil-fueled steam-generation.
More significant, the gross mathematics of the situation have created a situ-
ation in which increased demand for power has more than compensated for in-
creased efficiency. Electric power production in this country has doubled
every 10 years during this century, and most of the increase has come through
use of thermal-generating methods. The number of new plants has increased
the total production of waste heat at a rate far in excess of that with which
growing generating efficiency has reduced unit heat loss; where the net heat
rate has declined at a 2.8% annual rate over the last 40 years, steam-elec-
tric power generation has increased at a 7.2% annual rate. And because each
succeeding generation of power plants has been larger - one of the major rea-
sons for their increase in efficiency - the discharge of heated cooling water
at point locations has soared.
This may be best indicated by example. Nine new generating units, each with
a net heat rate of 10,000 Btu/kw-hr or better, were brought on stream in 1965.
Ihe average rated capacity of these plants was 308 megawatts. In the five-
year period that ended in 1965, no less than 72 generating units were retired.
Heat rates of the retired units were in the 15,000 to 20,000 BtuAw-hr range;
and average capacity of the retired units was only 22 megawatts. Thus, in
spite of an average efficiency a third to a half greater than the retired
plants, new plants coming on stream in one year - because of their much
121
-------
greater size - contribute almost as much waste heat to the environment as to-
tal retirements over a five-year period. Because the wasted heat of the new
facilities was concentrated at fewer points, potential effects on quality of
receiving waters are even greater than a simple comparison of gross magnitude
would indicate. (See Table 11-21 below.)
TABLE 11-21
WASTE HEAT - COMPARISON OF NEW GENERATING UNITS COMING
ON STREAM IN 1965 WITH PLANT RETIREMENTS
1961-1965
New I
196
Number of Plants
Average
Average
Capacity (Megawatts)
Jnits Retirements
i5 1961-1965
9 72
308 22
Net Heat Rate (BtuA«-hr) 10,000 17,500
Total Waste Heat (Btu/hr) 18,259,164 22,313,808
Average
Waste Heat/Unit (Btu/hr) 2,028,796 309,914
If the plants used in the foregoing illustration are an accurate sample, the
modern steam-generating plant is almost seven times as serious a potential
source of water pollution as the 30 to 35-year old plant that it replaces.
In point of fact, however, the modern plant is an even more serious potential
polluter than the illustration indicates. About half of the generating capa-
city currently scheduled to come on stream by 1975 will be nuclear-fueled,
and the future predominance of nuclear over fossil-fueled plants seems to be
an obvious fact. Current estimates are that half of the generating capacity
that will become operational over the next decade will be nuclear; and the
average size of nuclear plants is increasing as experience with their oper-
122
-------
ation accumulates. We have noted that the average new plant coming on stream
in 1965 had 308 megawatts of generating capacity. Presently scheduled (fall
1967) nuclear additions to capacity will, on average, be two or three times
as large. Of the seven nuclear-fueled steam generating plants presently
scheduled to go into service in 1975 and later, none will be of less than 800
megawatts, five will have a capacity of 1,000 megawatts or more. (Table II-
22.)
Bie growth of nuclear power generation is significant in terms of pollutional
effects, not just because of the great size of the units, but because of in-
herently lesser thermal efficiency and heat dissipation in the generating
process. The net heat rate of nuclear plants in operation in 1965 averaged
11,680 BtuAw-hr, 29% thermal efficiency. In distinction, the average effi-
ciency for all steam generating plants was 32.6%, and the efficiency of the
Host efficient (fossil-fueled) plant was 39.1%. where it is now generally
assumed that the average efficiency of fossil-fueled generating plants may
ultimately run into a ceiling near current "best plant" levels, expectations
for thermal efficiency of the nuclear-fueled portion of the industry do not
run much above the current average for the industry. Moreover, expenditure
of heat through incomplete combustion and losses through the stacks - which
nediate the cooling water requirements of fossil-fueled plants - will not be
a factor in reducing cooling requirements imposed on water by nuclear plants.
Thus, it will take more heat to generate a given amount of electrical energy
in the nuclear plants of the future, and more of that heat will have to be
dissipated into cooling waters.
We cannot depend on increasing thermal efficiency alone to protect our waters
from heat pollution. Fortunately, there are a number of well-developed tech-
niques of evaporative cooling which industry may apply to reduce temperature
of cooling waters. Cooling ponds allow heat to pass from a water surface to
the air immediately above. Spraying hot water into the pond or reservoir fa-
cilitates thermal exchange by allowing heat to pass from water droplets to
air as well as from pond surface to air. Natural draft cooling towers -
which operate by pumping water to the top of a structure, from whence it
flows vertically downward, exposed to air which flows horizontally through
louvers - provide heat exchange at the air/water interface. Mechanical draft
cooling towers operate in the same fashion as natural draft towers, with the
addition of fans to induce air movement through the tower. Substitutions of
iir or other coolants for water offer other methods of controlling thermal
pollution which may, in the future or under specialized conditions, be ap-
plied.
It should be noted that the presence of facilities for stabilizing the tem-
perature of cooling waters does much to relieve the generating - or other -
industry from dependence on natural water supplies. There is little point
to stabilizing the temperature of cooling water, then discharging it back to
the water course and assuming the cost of pumping in a fresh supply. Once
123
-------
TABLE 11-22
NUCLEAR-FUELED GENERATING CAPACITY
OPERATIONAL IN YEAR, 1957-1973
Period
Nimber of
Plants
Average Rated
Capaci ty
(Megawatts)
1957-1967
18
161
1968
507
1969
654
1970
606
1971
15
830
1972
14
775
1973
13
864
SouA.ce.: Atomic. Energy Coimu&ion
124
-------
cooled, the supply is again available for use, requiring only the addition of
enough water to make up for loss through evaporation.
!Ihe build-up of dissolved solids in reused water that occurs as a result of
continuous evaporation requires that the recirculated supply be exchanged for
new cooling water at intervals. But total water requirements are significant-
ly diminished by cooling facilities. To a very considerable extent, availa-
bility of cooling facilities mitigates the necessity of selecting a plant
site near a considerably sized source of dependable water supply. Economies
of location may, then, often compensate for at least a part of the cost of
cooling.
file cost of a cooling facility depends on a number of factors whose combina-
tion varies from establishment to establishment. Where land is cheap and
plentiful, a water supply dependable, and streamflow sufficient to assimilate
a moderately heated volume of wastewater, once-through cooling with use of a
simple pond might work well. Where water is scarce, mechanical draft cooling
and recirculation may be not only most economic, but absolutely essential for
operation. The size of the generating plant, its thermal efficiency, the al-
lowable temperature of receiving waters, all have a power to modify cooling
costs. Cooling efficiency, too, can be engineered into a plant. The more
heat that is transmitted to a given volume of cooling water, the less water
that is required for cooling purposes. Thus a plant that releases an efflu-
ent with a temperature 20° above influent temperatures will have to spend
less money to construct a cooling tower than will a plant where cooling water
temperature increases only 15°.
Plant efficiency* cooling requirements, land availability, and other elements
will, then, affect the resolution of costs. But within the range of affec-
tive factors, a number of sources provide guides to generalized unit costs.
The FPC's National Power Survey has provided the estimate that construction
costs for contemporary fossil-fueled power plants are about five dollars per
kilowatt-capacity greater with cooling towers than with once-through cooling.
(By implication, the added cost would be about eight dollars per kilowatt-
capacity for nuclear plants.) A consulting firm, EBASCO, has estimated that
cooling towers would add four to 10 dollars per unit of capacity to the cost
of nuclear-fueled power plants. The principal authority in the field is prob-
ably George O. G. Lflf, who has indicated that costs of constructing cooling
towers amount generally to eight dollars per kilowatt-capacity, while their
operation adds about 0.5 mills per kilowatt-hour to the cost of electricity
produced.
tecognizing that individual conditions have a great power to modify costs, it
is possible to estimate the total cost of providing cooling to all thermal
generating plants on the basis of recorded net heat rates and the use of a
125
-------
12
single cooling method. Such an estimate has been made. Utilizing a design
that assumed: (1) mechanical draft cooling towers, (2) an approach tempera-
ture of 10° F., (3) water temperature range of 10°, 15°, and 20° F., (4)
$8.00 per gallon per minute average construction cost for cooling tower and
appurtenances, and (5) summer ambient temperatures, it was calculated that to
provide cooling towers for each of the 514 plants covered in the 1965 annual
report of the Federal Power Commission would require an expenditure of:
(1) At an average cooling water temperature increase of 10° , $665
million,
(2) At an average cooling water temperature increase of 15° , $594
million,
(3) At an average cooling water temperature increase of 20°, $533
million.
While the figures indicate the general magnitude of the investment that would
be required to provide absolute stabilization of temperature from existing
steam-electric generating sources, some adjustments are required to make them
specific for existing conditions. The plants evaluated - those covered by
Steam-Electric Plant Construction Cost and Annual Production Expenses, 1965,
the most recent volume of an annual series issued by the Federal Power Com-
mission - account for 93% of thermal generating capacity in place in the per-
tinent year. Moreover, costs are those associated with a range of cooling
efficiencies, while the average reported temperature increase of the cooling
waters of documented generating plants in 1965 was 13* - suggesting a cost
very near the top of the range. Inferring the cost associated with the 13°
temperature increase ($620 million for the 514 plants) and extending it to
all plants, including those not covered by the FPC report, provides a total
cost for mechanical draft cooling towers of $705 million.
Some portion of the indicated investment is presently in place, largely in
small plants, and almost entirely in plants located west of the Mississippi.
It is very rare that coastal plants and those located on major river systems
install cooling towers or other facilities. Until very recently, availabili-
ty and dependability of a cooling water supply was a major consideration in
determining the presence or absence of cooling facilities. Large plants tend
to be located near abundant water supplies, and to be users of once-through
cooling techniques. (Table 11-23.)
Because locational considerations have played so large a part in determining
the status of cooling facilities, an attempt was made to allocate regionally
the $705 million requirement, and to estimate the current replacement value
of cooling facilities in place on the basis of the percentage of regional
n
S. P., Tkesmat Pollution Ffram S-£fcam-E£ec&u.c GeneAotoig Plant*.
126
-------
TABLE 11-23
REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF THERMAL GENERATING PLANTS
AND COOLING FACILITIES, 1965
1,0
Gen
Region No. of ing
Plants c
North Atlantic 101
Southeast 61
Great Lakes 54
Ohio 59
Tennessee 9
Upper Mississippi 49
Lower Mississippi 14
Missouri 33
Arkansas-White-Red 30
Western Gulf 51
Colorado/Great 22
California/Hawaii 31
Pacific Northwest/Alaska
00 MW
erat-
Capa- Plants With Cooling/Total PI
ants,
By Capacity
ity In Megawatts
101- 201-
100 200 400
33.7 1/11 0/26 0/35
19.8 1/10 0/12 1/24
21.1 0/11 0/8 0/12
25.6 1/6 0/5 4/21
6.8 - - 1/1
10.7 1/18 1/13 0/11
4.6 2/3 1/2 2/6
5.2 9/17 1/7 2/6
5.6 9/10 5/10 4/7
14.3 6/10 12/13 12/17
3.8 5/7 9/10 4/4
14.1 2/5 3/5 2/7
_ _ _ _
Total 514 165.5 37/108 32/111 32/151
401-
600
0/14
0/7
0/11
1/16
-
0/4
0/1
2/3
2/3
4/6
-
1/5
-
10/70
601-
900
0/13
0/5
0/7
0/3
1/6
0/2
0/2
-
-
2/5
1/1
0/2
-
4/46
900
0/2
0/3
0/5
0/8
0/2
0/1
-
-
-
-
-
1/7
-
1/28
Total
1/101
2/61
0/54
6/59
2/9
2/49
5/14
14/33
20/30
36/51
19/22
9/31
-
116/514
to
-J
-------
capacity associated with cooling facilities to total regional steam-electric
generating capacity. The assessment, presented in Table II-24, indicates
that only about $104 million of current replacement value of such facilities
is provided - assuming that all facilities provide the required degree of
stream protection.
Problems of cooling are far more complex in the case of manufacturing estab-
lishments than are those of the electric generating industry. Temperatures
may be higher, permitting more economical heat dissipation, but contamination
of heated wastewaters and generally smaller size of establishments tend to
increase costs. Assuming equal costs per unit of heat dissipation, tempera-
ture control for the volume of waste discharge by manufacturers reported in
the 1963 Census of Manufactures, "Water Use in Manufacturing", would require
an investment on the order of $300 million. (Table 11-25.) (It should be
noted that the figure represents no more than an estimate - an expert esti-
mate , it is true - of the relationships between manufacturers' wastewater
discharge, steam-generating plant cooling costs, and manufacturers' wastewa-
ter characteristics. It is, in short, a highly informed guess.)
It is possible to allocate the estimated investment requirement for cooling
facilities among industries, on the basis of their relative intake of cooling
water. It is not feasible, however, to estimate accurately what portion of
the total requirement is presently met in any industry, or to assess the ef-
fects of relative thermal and cooling efficiency. The allocation, then, must
be recognized to be extremely general.
Because regional climate and hydrology have been the major operative elements
in determining the prevalence of cooling and revise of water for manufacturers
as well as for power generating plants, it is not unreasonable to assume that
the distribution of cooling facilities among regions is similar in manufac-
turing and production of electricity. If this is so, then the current level
of investment in cooling by manufacturers is about $40 million, concentrated
in southwestern states. (Table 11-26.)
The need for cooling facilities may be expected to expand at a somewhat more
rapid rate than that for waste treatment, the reason being that demand for
electricity is expected to continue to increase at a more pronounced rate
than demand for manufactured products. The dimensions of the projected cost
increase will depend in large measure upon the prevalence of nuclear-fueled
generating plants in the future. The indicated investment schedule presented
in Table 11-27 is based on the assumptions that: (1) the need for cooling
facilities in the electric generating industry has increased at the same rate
from 1965 through 1968 as has output of electricity, while the need for cool-
ing facilities in manufacturing has increased at the same rate from 1964 to
1968 as has the output of manufactured goods, as measured by the Federal Re-
serve Board Index of production; (2) the ratio of cooling facilities required
to cooling facilities provided is the same in 1968 as that estimated for the
base year 1965 for electrical generating plants, and the base year 1964 for
128
-------
TABLE 11-24
COOLING FACILITIES REQUIRED, STEAM-ELECTRIC
GENERATING, BY REGION, 1965
Mil
Region
Investment
Requi remen
north Atlantic 143.1
Southeast 84.6
Great Lakes 89.5
Ohio 109.3
Tennessee 28.9
Djaper Mississippi 45.8
Lower Mississippi 19.7
Missouri 21.9
tekansas-White-Red 24.0
Sestern Gulf 60.6
Oolorado/Gre at 16.2
California/Hawaii 59.9
Pacific Northwest/Alaska
Total 703.5
lions of 1968 Dollars
Additional
Investment Investment
t Provided Required
0.1 143.0
1.4 83.2
89.5
7.4 101.9
4.5 24.4
.9 44.9
2.4 17.3
9.3 12.6
14.6 9.4
39.0 21.6
15.1 1.1
11.3 48.6
-
104.0 599.5
129
*MttO-68 - 10
-------
TABLE 11-25
MANUFACTURERS1 CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR COOLING FACILITIES, BY INDUSTRY, 1964
Industry
Cooling
Water
Intake
(Billions
of Gallons)
Percent of
Total
Indicated Value of
Required Cooling
Facilities
(Millions of
1968 Dollars)
Food & Kindred Products 392
Textile Mill Products 5
Paper & Allied Products 607
Chemical & Allied Products 3,120
Petroleum & Coal Products 1,212
Rubber & Plastics 128
Primary Metals 3,387
»
Machinery, except electrical 111
Electrical Machinery 53
Transportation Equipment 102
All Other 268
Total 9,385
4.2
.1
6.5
33.2
12.9
1.4
36.1
1.2
.6
1.1
2.9
12.6
19.5
99.6
38.7
4.2
108.3
3.6
1.8
3.3
8.7
300.0
130
-------
jaaufactures; (3) the deficiency in cooling facilities will be made up in
qpal annual expenditures over the period 1969-1973; (4) the requirement for
lanufacturers' cooling facilities will increase at a 4.5% annual rate over
the period 1969-1973 (the rate is based on a Department of Commerce projec-
tion for the industries whose waste treatment requirements were evaluated in
an earlier portion of this section); (5) the cooling requirements for elec-
trical power generation will increase at the 7.2% annual rate which has ap-
plied to output of electrical power in this century; (6) half of the increase
ia the cooling requirement of thermal-electric power generation will be nu-
clear, and that half will require the expenditure of 60% more for cooling fa-
cilities than an equal incremental addition to the conventional thermal gen-
eating component of the additional supply.*
fte indicated investment requirement under this set of assumptions amounts to
$1.6 billion over the five-year period. It may very safely be assumed that
the figure represents an absolute maximum, since it is based on 1965 average
thermal efficiency* and presumes complete application of cooling facilities
throughout industry under conditions of rapidly expanding output. One might
conjecture that actual requirements will prove to be considerably less, since
the imposition of additional outlays of such magnitudes upon industrial in-
vestment requirements will almost certainly prove a powerful incentive to de-
wlop and apply techniques to increase cooling efficiency. (Such incentives
light initially be expected to be operative in the case of manufacturing,
since the protected rate structure and consequent earning power of utilities
tends to insulate profits in considerable measure from the effects of cost-
increasing developments.)
Sethods to reduce cost of cooling heated discharges, or of limiting the ex-
tat of heated discharge, are numerous. This in itself argues for the proba-
bility of application of operational techniques to abate thermal pollution
rather than reliance on a single method of water treatment and recycling.
Least cost combinations of method are indicated whenever there is more than
"Problem* of, cootaig &u.pply Kaced in fat>&talle.d cjo&t peA \iitowtt,
nu.cJte.asi unit noting* have eAcalate,d to tlie. 1,000 megawatt
nange,. In addition, cunnznt JUg'nt wateA nzacton cycle* one.
not 04 e6jjx.cu.en-t as one. the. modeAn AupeAcnitical ie.ke.at cfe-
&ign& employed fan. fa^&U.-^ue£ed &isu,ng. Ton thi& tiea&on,
and because nua£eat. i$ue£ failing doe* not -uu;o£ve *.nheAe.nt
Atack ga&, oft boiJLvi Zjob&eA, ^eac/to-t station neat lejec&uw
to plant ciACJulating wateA coolant Vofik, OctobeA 1967.}
131
-------
TABLE 11-26
REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF COOLING
FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS IN MANUFACTURING, 1964
Mi
Region Facilitie
Requi red
North Atlantic 62.7
Southeast 16 . 2
Great Lakes 51.0
Ohio 67.2
Tennessee 10.5
Upper Mississippi 11.7
Lower Mississippi 16.8
Missouri 2.7
Arkansas -White-Red 2.4
Western Gulf 49.5
Colorado/Great .9
California/Hawaii 2 . 1
Pacific Northwest/Alaska 6.3
Total 300i0
Ilions of 1968 Dollars
s Facilities Investment
Provi ded Def i ci ency
.1 62.6
.3 15.9
51.0
4.6 62.6
1.6 8.9
.2 11.5
2.0 14.8
1.1 1.6
1.5 .9
31.9 17.6
.8 .1
.4 1.7
6.3
44.5 255.5
132
-------
TABLE 11-27
INDICATED ANNUAL INVESTMENT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE COMPLETE
COOLING FOR MAJOR INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISHMENTS BY 1973
Millions of 1968 Dollars
Manufacturing
Thermal Power
Total
Projected value of 1968
Cooling Required
Projected Value of Facilities
Available
Indicated Deficiency
annual Investment Required:
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
total Investment, 1969-1973
350.5
51.9
298.6
75.6
76.2
76.9
77.7
78.5
384.9
866.7
128.3
738.4
228.8
234.5
240.8
247.5
254.6
1,206.2
1,217.2
180.2
1,037.0
304.4
310.7
317.7
325.2
333.1
1,591.1
133
-------
one way to derive a desired result* The need for such development is exem-
plified in a research report issued by the Pacific Northwest Laboratories of
Battelle Memorial Institute with respect to Nuclear Power Plant Siting in the
Pacific Northwest that concluded that "the method of handling waste heat was
the single most important economic variable" affecting power plant location.
Once-through cooling with fresh water was estimated to involve an investment
per kilowatt of capacity of $3 less than once-through cooling with salt wa-
ter, and $10 per kilowatt less than use of cooling towers. Power could be
produced with once-through fresh water cooling at a total cost of 3.0289
mills per kilowatt-hour, compared to 3.1603 mills with cooling towers and
3.1069 mills with cooling ponds. Obviously, the potential significance of
the one factor indicates the necessity for deriving lower cost techniques for
dealing with it.
As with other pollution controlling costs, development of technologies that
incorporate desirable features would appear to provide the optimum long-term
approach to control. Utilization of waste heat, through further reduction in
the net heat rate or by transferring waste heat to other processes, will be-
come increasingly economic, even with utilization of relatively high cost
procedures, as pressures to assume the cost of controlling heated discharges
make once-through cooling an unacceptable procedure in a growing number of
cases.
Site selection, too, should increasingly reflect temperature control consid-
erations. By increasing the cost of once-through cooling, pollution control
needs have extended the number of locations which, on a total cost basis, are
economically acceptable. Certainly any plant that elects in the future to
choose a site in which once-through cooling is acceptable under normal hydro-
logic and climatic conditions, must realize with it the potential requirement
to reduce or eliminate operations during periods when conditions make it im-
possible to discharge heated waters without damage to the aquatic environment.
Many design or operating techniques can limit cooling costs. Outfalls that
facilitate mixing of heated discharges with normal flows, and do not result
in increases in temperature beyond that allowed by water quality standards,
are one such possibility. Another is an outfall design that results in tem-
perature stratification in a thin upper layer of the receiving stream, which,
in effect, becomes an extended cooling pond. It has been proposed, too, that
nuclear power plants be sited so that their cooling water discharges may be
utilized for irrigation rather than returned directly to the stream. The
warmed waters are thought to facilitate plant growth; and during the cold
season when irrigation is not practiced, discharge of heated waters is not
generally harmful to aquatic life. An ambitious proposal in connection with
a planned nuclear generating plant in the Pacific Northwest would have cool-
ing water taken from one watershed, pumped up over a low range of mountains
during the summer for discharge in another watershed which suffers naturally
from high temperature, due to depleted summer strearaflows. The net result
would be to eliminate heated discharges to the source stream, and improve
134
-------
stream flow and quality in the receiving stream. Use of air cooling, cur-
rently two to three times as expensive as evaporative cooling, would con-
serve water and allow reuse, if less costly designs could be developed. Im-
provements in cooling tower design, too, may be expected to result imminent-
ly from the pressure of temperature regulating requirements.
Hhat we have defined, then, is the maximum expectable cost of controlling
thermal pollution over the next five years. Technological improvements and
nanagement techniques should be able to reduce such costs.
Certainly it is desirable that every cost-reducing effort that is compatible
with maintenance of water quality standards be utilized, for the sums in-
volved in temperature stabilization are potentially huge. This is particu-
larly true in assessing cost implications of an extended time frame. Be-
cause of the high demonstrated rate of increase in utilization of electrical
energy, the cost of cooling, if provided through methods no more efficient
than complete utilization of mechanical draft cooling towers, would within
several decades exceed the cost of all other forms of wastewater treatment.
Indeed, accomplishment of complete cooling for the levels of manufacturing
output and electrical generation projected in this study would bring total
annual outlays very close to $700 million by 1973.
Table 11-28, which projects cash outlays for cooling for the five-year peri-
od, 1969-1973, rests on the assumption that mechanical draft cooling towers
are provided for all steam-electric generating plants and all manufacturing
plants using 20 million gallons or more of water per year. Replacement
costs, as measured by depreciation, are assumed to be incurred at rates
which reflect the generalized depreciation practice of manufacturing firms
and the 30-year average life of steam-generating plants. Operating and main-
tenance costs are assessed on the basis of a cooling tower charge of .14
•ills per kilowatt-hour for steam-generating plants; and the assumption that
the relationship between operating and maintenance costs in manufacturing
and in power generating are similar to the relationship between their re-
spective capital investments in cooling towers.
135
-------
TABLE 11-28
ANNUAL CASH OUTLAYS FOR COOLING
1969-1973
Millions of 1968 Dollars
Source of Outlay
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
5-Year
Total
New Plant Required:
Steam-generating
Manufacturing
Depreciation/Replacement:
Steam-generating @ 3.5%
Manufacturing @ 5%
Total Capital Outlays:
Steam-generating
Manufacturing
Operating and Maintenance:
Steam-generating
Manufacturing
Total Cash Outlays
Current Replacement Value
of Installed Plant:
Steam-generating
Manufactoring
228.8 234.5 240.8 247.5
75.6 76.2 76.9 77.7
12.5 20.7 29.1 37.8
6.4 10.2 14.0 17.9
241.3 255.2 269.9 285.3
82.0 86.4 90.9 95.6
58.0 94.8 132.4 170.9
20.7 32.6 44.8 56.7
402.0 469.0 537.8 608.5
254.6 1,206.2
78.5 384.9
46.7
21.8
146.8
70.3
301.3 1,353.0
100.3 455.2
210.3
68.8
666.4
223.4
680.7 2,698.0
357.1 591.6 832.4 1,079.9 1,334.5
127.5 203.7 280.6 358.3 436.8
136
-------
CONCLUSIONS
jeview of the volume of industrial wastes discharged to water and of the
costs associated with controlling their polluting effects provides some con-
clusions which may be useful guides in pursuing the attainment of water qual-
ity standards. In particular, it would appear that greater relative atten-
tion to industrial wastes would have the effect of accelerating progress to-
ward meeting water quality standards, yet would require lower initial invest-
nents in waste controlling facilities than are demanded by current emphasis
on municipal waste treatment. This is felt to be true because:
(1) Manufacturing activities are the largest measurable and con-
trollable sources of biochemical oxygen demand, heat, and of
settleable and suspended solids discharged to the nation's
waterways. Wastes from manufacturing are particularly con-
centrated in the northeastern quarter of the nation - the
area which has suffered most markedly from water pollution -
and are overwhelmingly associated with the chemical, pulp
and paper, food processing, steam-electric power generating,
and steel industries. These sources of waste and heat, then,
might well be made the major foci of program and research at-
tention.
(2) There are a variety of techniques for controlling industrial
waste discharges, these being for the most part applications
or adaptions of the methods used to treat sanitary sewage.
It is possible, then, to design and construct waste treat-
ment plants capable of treating wastes from both industrial
and municipal sources. Significant reductions - and in some
cases near-complete elimination - of waterborne industrial
wastes may also be provided through modifications of manufac-
turing processes. Attention may fruitfully be devoted to de-
velopment of incentives and engineering systems that result
in optimum waste reduction/cost relationships.
(3) In general, unit construction costs are less for industrial
waste treatment plants than for municipal waste treatment
plants scaled to handle an equivalent waste loading or hy-
draulic volume, and the cost advantage extends to municipal
systems handling a large component of industrial wastes.
Moreover, unit costs tend to decrease sharply with an in-
crease in the volume of wastes to be handled. It would ap-
pear that there are compelling cost advantages in coopera-
tive waste treatment arrangements that involve handling of
the wastes from a variety of sources in large municipal or
metropolitan waste treatment works.
137
-------
(4) It is estimated that facilities sufficient to provide the
equivalent of secondary waste treatment for all major water-
using manufacturing establishments would be provided by an
investment of $4 billion to $5 billion. Indications are
that a quarter to a half of that investment requirement had
not been met by the summer of 1967. Moreover, when condi-
tions require higher than secondary levels of waste treat-
ment efficiency, construction costs increase far more than
proportionately. It is clear, then, that considerable in-
vestment in waste treatment facilities - or in process modi-
fications which reduce wastes - remains to be made by Ameri-
can manufacturing.
(5) The principal impact of the waste treatment requirement on
manufacturers' costs will occur through routine and continu-
ing operating and maintenance charges rather than in the
form of construction costs. Over the next five years, manu-
facturers must expend over a billion dollars a year - the
amount rising with the growth of output and level of treat-
ment facilities in place - in order to adequately discharge
waste treatment requirements. About three quarters of the
total cash outlays will arise out of normal operating needs
rather than as a result of new investments or depreciation.
Industrial planning and research, then, might well be di-
rected to development of more economically operated waste
treatment plants; and regulatory attention may often best
be directed to monitoring the level of efficiency at which
industrial waste treatment facilities are being operated,
since their under-operation offers a convenient method of
reducing production costs.
(6) Cooling of the heated wastewaters of manufacturing and pow-
er generation will require additional large investments.
While there are a number of techniques that may be applied
to handle the polluting effects of waste heat, it is esti-
mated that universal use of mechanical draft cooling towers
by steam-generating plants and major manufacturing plants
would require $1.2 billion of facilities under current con-
ditions, and that about $1 billion of that investment re-
mains to be made. Thermal pollution is coining to be of in-
creasing significance because of the rapid rate of increase
of steam-electric power generation. In particular, the
growing prevalence of very large nuclear-fueled power plants
constitutes a distinct threat to water quality. Because of
the limited current availability of wastewater cooling fa-
cilities and the rapid rate of expansion projected for
sources of waste heat, cash outlays for cooling must in-
crease at a particularly sharp rate if thermal pollution of
138
-------
water is to be ended within five years. It is estimated
that about $1.8 billion of cooling facilities must be in
place by 1973 - by which time annual operating and mainte-
nance costs for such facilities would approach $300 million
per year - if all major industrial sources of waste heat
were to be equipped with mechanical draft cooling towers.
The magnitude of the investment requirement indicates that
development of effective means of non-polluting heat dissi-
pation should receive a high priority in research and de-
velopment programs; while the rapid rate of growth of heat
sources suggests that greater attention must be given to
temperature control if the problem of thermal pollution is
not to become a major one in the near future.
139
-------
APPENDIX I
EFFECT OF POTENTIAL COST INCREASES
A constant price level - July 1967 dollars - was assumed in developing the
cost of industrial waste treatment. Construction costs have been rising
rapidly throughout the post-war period, however; and it would seem appropri-
ate that the indicated values be reviewed in a format that accommodates the
probability of price increases. (Figure II-A.)
Exactness in assessment of the impacts of future events is, of course, not
attainable. The effects of increases in cost due to changes in price level
or interest structures depend on the direction and degree of change and upon
their distribution in time. We can, however, impose upon our static model
some of the kinds of changes that have occurred in the past, in order to
gage, in a general fashion, the results of a repetition or continuation of
such influences.
Construction costs are weighed and reported regularly by Engineering News
Record, whose "Index of Construction Costs" was applied generally in devel-
oping the report. The index has recorded a constant rise in construction
costs through the period since World War II. Over time, the steepness of
costs' ascending slope was progressively moderated until recently, when it
began again to turn sharply upward. For the purposes of this analysis, a
3.6% annual rate of increase in the cost of construction has been presumed
to apply over the next five years, that being the rate that characterized
both the recent period from FY 1965 to FY 1968 and the decade that began in
FY 1958. (Table II-A.)
The most obvious effect of an increase in construction costs will be exer-
cised on annual investments to install waste treating facilities. If a 3.6%
annual rate of increase is applied to the construction schedules presented
in Tables 11-14 and 11-27, treatment plant construction costs are calculated
to escalate in the amount of $400 million to $600 million over the five-year
period, 1969-1973 (Table II-B). Constructing required waste treatment fa-
cilities would involve the expenditure of $2 billion of current dollars
rather than $1.8 billion of constant dollars if the estimate of deficiency
based on the Industrial Waste Profiles is used, $4 billion rather than $3.6
billion if the projection of census data is used to define the treatment de-
ficiency. Estimated cooling facilities construction costs would escalate
over the five-year period from the estimate of $1.6 billion to almost $1.9
billion.
The five-year temporal matrix cannot adequately reflect the impact of in-
creasing construction costs on capital requirements. The most damaging re-
sults of rising cost occur cumulatively and over the long term, in the form
140
-------
FIGURE H-A
ENGINEERING NEWS-RECORD CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX,
(1913 TO 1967) PROJECTED TO 1973
100
: is 20
|-4
25
30
35
40
Arn IAI
45
50
65 70
PROJECTED
141
-------
TABLE II-A
CONSTRUCTION COST INCREASE, AS MEASURED BY THE
ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD INDEX
Date
(Federal
Fiscal Year)
ENR Index
Annual Rate of
Increase From
Period to
July 1967
1945
308
5.4%
1950
510
4.3%
1955
660
3.9%
1960
829
3.4%
1965
977
3.6%
1968
1,085
142
-------
TABLE II-B
EFFECT ON INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS OF CONTINUING
THE CURRENT (1958-1968) RATE OF INCREASE
IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Year
Cost Increase in Millions of Current Dollars, By Year
Waste Treatment
By Census
Projection
By Estimate
Cooling
Manufacturing
Thermal
Power
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
Total
24.4
51.7
81.9
112.5
143.7
414.2
11.8
25.7
41.6
57.5
73.7
210.3
2.7
5.6
8.9
11.8
15.2
44.2
Total Cost Increase Over Period:
By Census Projection - $597.5 Million
By Estimate - $393.6 Million
8.2
17.2
26.9
37.6
49.2
139.1
143
-------
of constant pressure on cash flow. Facilities whose costs rise at a com-
pounding rate cannot be replaced out of depreciation charges which are as-
sessed at constant rates. If 1968's hundred-thousand-dollar waste treatment
plant is to be replaced at the end of 20 years during which costs rise at a
3.6% rate, it will require almost ?203,000 to install the new facility.
The effects of this penalty may be assessed over the limited time span uti-
lized in the study. A 3.6% annual rate of increase in cost applied to the
previously utilized investment schedules and to progressively revalue facili-
ties in-place allows a comparison of constant and inflated values. (Table
II-C.) Application of appropriate depreciation rates to both estimated book
value and current replacement value indicates something of the deficiency of
normal depreciation charges to meet replacement requirements. It should be
noted, however, that the deficiency is) of necessity, considerably under-
stated, due to the built-in revaluation of value of plant in-place in 1968
that occurs because it is expressed as 1968 current replacement value.
Under the comparison, depreciation charges over the five-year period, assum-
ing current replacement value for plant in-place in 1968 and year-by-year ad-
ditions to plant in projected current dollars, fall about $90 million short
of meeting replacement needs. (Table II-D.) More significant than the gross
amount, however, is the fact that the deficiency increases with time. In
1969, estimated depreciation charges are $3.3 million to $4.1 million short
of replacement needs. By 1973, the deficiency expands to $34.5 million to
$37.1 million. (The method distorts the degree of growth, since 1969 depre-
ciation charges based on current replacement value of plant in-place in 1968
must be assumed to be estimated at levels well in excess of industry's actual
rate of accrual. Nevertheless, the principle of expanding cash flow defi-
ciencies holds true. With continuing persistence of inflation and an in-
creasing total value of waste treatment plant in-place, the gap between cash
flow from depreciation and actual replacement needs will become increasingly
greater as time passes.)
While the effects of cost increases are most immediately evident and can most
conveniently be analyzed in connection with construction costs, it must not
be supposed that construction costs rise independently. The economic en-
vironment that results in higher construction costs must be supposed to be
one in which operating costs, too, rise.
Unfortunately, we know too little about the elements of the costs of operat-
ing and maintaining industrial waste treatment plants to be able to project
the effects of price increases upon them as precisely as in the case of capi-
tal cost factors. It must be assumed, for example, that a portion of the in-
crease in costs of construction may be attributed to building into facilities
some substitution of capital for labor or other cost elements; thus higher
capital costs may be due partially to facilities which reduce operating out-
lays.
144
-------
TABLE II-C
VALUE OF PLANT IN-PLACE, 1973,
UNDER ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION PROCEDURES
Millions of Dollars
Value in
1968 Dollars
Value By
Cost of
Construction
Replacement
Value
Industrial Waste Treatment:
By Estimate 4,026.0
By Projection 5,349.8
Industrial Cooling:
Manufacturing Plants 436.8
Steam-generating 1,334.5
4,236.3
5,764.0
481.0
1,473.6
4,789.8
6,356.5
521.5
1,592.2
145
294-046 O - 68 - 11
-------
TABLE II-D
CASH FLOW DEFICIENCIES ASSOCIATED WITH CONTINUING THE CURRENT
RATE OF INCREASE IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Depreciation Charges
1n Current Dollars
Waste Treatment Cooling
By By Steam
Year Estimate Projection Manufacturing Power
Replacement Requirements
in Current Dollars
Waste Treatment
By By
Estimate Projection
Cooling
Manufacturing
Steam
Power
(Millions of Dollars)
1969 127.8 122.7 6.5 12.8
1970 146.6 160.6 10.6 21.6
1971 167.3 201.2 14.9 31.0
1972 188.4 242.5 19.2 40.6
1973 211.1 286.8 23.9 51.3
Total 841.2 1,013.8 75.1 157.3
Cumulative Deficiency in Cash Flow:
Five-Year Depreciation, by Estimate - $1,073.6
Five-Year Replacement Requirements - $1,162.9
Deficiency, By Estimate - $ 89.3
Five-Year Depreciation, By Projection - $1,246.2
Five-Year Replacement Requirements - $1,336.4
Deficiency, By Census Projection - $ 90.2
131.7 125.8
155.3 168.2
181.6 215.0
209.2 264.0
239.5 317.8
917.3 1,090.8
Million
Million
Million
Million
Million
Million
6.6
10.9
15.6
20.5
25.9
79.5
12.9
22.2
32.4
43.2
55.4
166.1
-------
Lacking a definition of elements that compose operating and maintenance costs
in industrial waste treatment, we may, for analytical purposes, fall back up-
on analogy for standards of evaluation. Waste treatment is basically a con-
tinuous flow renovation process, not unlike many industrial processes in its
elements. It may be anticipated, then, that increased costs will be reflect-
ed in much the same degree in treating industry's wastes as in other portions
of industry's activities. If this is so, then the pressure of inflation and
other cost-inereasing factors should be manifested in approximately the same
dimensions as they occur and are measured and recorded by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics "Index of Unit Production Costs." Over the past decade, labor and
non-labor unit costs of production have been increasing at almost exactly the
same rate, 1.8% a year. If the rate of increase continues unchanged over the
five-year period of study, and is mirrored in the cost of operating and main-
taining industrial waste treatment facilities, then wastewater facilities op-
erating costs for the period will be about a quarter of a billion dollars
greater than those measured in current dollars. (Table II-E.)
147
-------
TABLE II-E
EFFECT ON OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE CHARGES
OF CONTINUING THE CURRENT (1958-1967)
RATE OF INCREASE IN COST
Year
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
Total
Cost Increase in Millions of
Waste Treatment
By Census
Projection By Estimate
8
20
37
59
86
.2 8.7
.5 19.7
.4 33.3
.4 49.4
.0 68.2
211.5 179.3
Current Dollars, By Year
Cooling
Thermal
Manufacturing Power
.4 1.0
1.2 3.4
2.5 7.3
4.2 12.6
6.4 19.6
14.7 43.9
Total Cost Increase Over Period:
By Census Projection - $270.1 Million
By Estimate - $237.9 Million
148
-------
SUMMARY
Maintenance of indicated current rates of increase in costs of construction
and operation would expand outlays needed to provide proposed industrial
wastewater treatment by $700 million to $1 billion over the next five years.
The figure is not presented as a prediction, but as an illustration of the
impact of existing trends on the schedule of investments developed in the
body of the study.
While the initial force of cost increases would occur in the area of capital
investments, due to the current deficiency in industrial wastewater treat-
ment, long-term effects on operating charges and supplemental outlays for re-
placement may be presumed to be highly significant. (Table II-F.)
149
-------
TABLE II-F
SUMMARY OF TOTAL IMPACT OF PROJECTED
COST INCREASES, 1969-1973
I - By Census Projection
Cost Element
Industrial Waste Treatment:
Construction of Plant
Replacement
Operating and Maintenance
Industrial Cooling:
Construction of Plant
Replacement
Operating and Maintenance
Electric-Power Cooling:
Construction of Plant
Replacement
Operating and Maintenance
TOTAL
Millions of Dollars
Cumulative
Five- Year Cost
Constant Dollars
3,597.5
1,013.8
3,422.9
384.9
75.1
223.4
1,206.2
157.3
666.4
10,747.5
Projected
Incremental
Charges
414.2
77.0
211.5
44.2
4.4
14.7
139.1
8.8
43.9
957.8
Cumulative
Projected
Current
Dollar Cost
4,011.7
1,090.8
3,634.4
429.1
79.5
238.1
1,345.3
166.1
710.3
11,705.3
II - By Estimate
Industrial Waste
Treatment:
Construction of Plant
Replacement
Operating and Maintenance
TOTAL (including
cooling costs)
1
3
8
,810.
841.
,032.
,397.
7
2
7
9
210
76
179
720
.3
.1
.3
.8
2
3
9
,021
917
,212
,118
.0
.3
.0
.7
150
-------
APPENDIX II
PROCEDURE FOLLOWED IN DEVELOPMENT OF
THE WASTE TREATMENT COST MODEL
The summary steps performed in the costing method is presented below. The
analysis consisted of repetitive calculation of sub-processes involved in
eight steps for each of 20 major industrial groups. The steps were, sequen-
tially:
(1) Classification of industrial waste sources by 11 industrial
sectors and nine major sub-sectors;
(2) Definition of the average daily discharge by size of plant
for the average small plant (intake of 20 to 99 million gal-
lons of water in 1964) and the average large plant (intake
of 100 million gallons or more in 1964) for each industrial
classification;
(3) For each large plant class and each small plant class, cal-
culation of average daily discharge, average daily dis-
charge of process water, and average daily generation of
BOD;
(4) Determination for the appropriate discharge and BOD classi-
fications of each size of establishment of the cost of con-
structing a plant to treat: (a) the total discharge,
(b) the discharge of process waters, and (c) the population
equivalent of BOD. The arithmetic average of the three
costs was then used as the design cost for plants in that
industrial group and multiplied by the number of plants in
each size class to obtain the imputed value of the 1964
waste treatment requirement for the industry;
The -unp&ted a&tumption tuigasiding the. M&ia.c£ion o& hydnaulic load-
ing, oppoxtunLtiu tfo*. & egtegotton and advanced wateA 06-019 te.ch-
niqueA, and voa&te. concentration* -L& adm^tte.dly the, weakest paAt o&
the, analytic. It. ioa& biUJU Mo the. analytic to accommodate, the.
iM.no/tcti/ orf te.chnj.cat expeAtt who exp/ieA4ed the. opi.ni.on that i.nda&-
tiial watte. ttie,atm&nt it zx£riao>Ldinasu2y complex and co&tty w/ien
compared to mwu-ccpat watte, tsie.atme.nt. The. anaty&t'& opuu.cn ^a
that the. co&t wou£d be. moie. tsiuly exp/ieAAecf - ancf at teM>t a thiM
lovoeA - J.& bated. e.ntuie£y on volume. o& pfiocett wateA and BOP con-
cent^atcowA. Indeed, accommodation o% value* developed In Indu^-
trtial Watte. Pio&ilzA produced a total i.nveAfine.nt ^izqu^iemejfit 30%
belou) that: achieved by the. pfiocett deAcu.bed (CF pp. 5^
151
-------
(5) Adjustment of the gross value figure to account for the lev-
el of existing treatment by: (a) deducting a percentage of
the gross value equal to the percentage of flow discharged
to public sewers {on the assumption that this portion of the
industrial waste is or will be adequately treated by munici-
palities) ; (b) deducting from the total value a percentage
of that value equal to the proportion of the industrial dis-
charge that is made to the ground (on the assumption that
ground discharge constitutes adequate treatment) ; and (c) de-
ducting from the total value an amount equal to the portion
of the industrial flow to surface waters that is treated,
multiplied by the percentage that secondary waste treatment
plants operated in that industry constitute of all its waste
treatment plants. The net figure obtained is assumed to rep-
resent the value of the deficiency in industrial waste treat-
ment in 1964;
(6) Projection of requirements to June 1968, by relating total
value of treatment requirements associated with 1964 levels
of production to projected outputs, and projecting growth of
treatment by extending observed 1959-1964 shifts in relation-
ships between output, discharge, volume of treated discharge
to ground or to municipal sewers through the period, 1964-
1968;
Addition of the increase in the value of treatment require-
ments between 1964 and 1968 to 1964 treatment requirements
is assumed to represent the total value of required waste
treatment in June 1968. The combination of all values is
assumed to express the values associated with the current
unmet industrial waste treatment requirement;
(7) Subsequent modification of the derived values to incorporate
the estimates of replacement value of plant in-place and of
total requirements developed in Industrial Waste Profiles
prepared by contractors for 10 industries; unprofiled indus-
try costs were reallocated to reflect the information con-
tained in the profiles on the basis of the relationships de-
veloped by the analysis of census data; and
(8) Apportionment of the amounts derived for gross value of in-
dustrial waste treatment requirements among major drainage
basins according to each region's proportionate share of the
discharge of specific reported industrial sectors. The re-
maining, unaccounted-for portion of the values was distrib-
uted among regions according to their percentage of the to-
tal unaccounted-for industrial discharge, expressed as an
exponential value of "all other manufacturing".
152
-------
APPENDIX III
BIBLIOGRAPHY
flnbrose, T. W. and E. R. Castle. "Wastes From Potato Starch Plants." Indus-
trial and Engineering Chemistry, June 1965.
Anderson. V. A Tentative Approach to the Establishment of Engineering Guide
Lines in the Design of Treatment Facilities for Wastes Associated With
the Manufacture of Food Products From Potatoes.Idaho Department of
Health, Boise, Idaho.
An Assessment of Thermal Pollution Problems. Report of a Task Force appointed
by the Science Advisor to provide recommendations for research and appro-
priate action. Washington, D. C. July 28, 1966.
Barnes, G. E. and L. W. Weinberger. "Internal Housekeeping Cuts Waste Treat-
ment at Pickle Packing Plants." Wastes Engineering. January 1958.
Battelle-Northwest. Nuclear Power Plant Siting in the Pacific Northwest.
Bonneville Power Administration. Portland, Oregon. July 1967.
Bender, R. J. Sjbeam Generation. (A Power Special Report.) New York. June
1964.
Bendixen, T. W., R. D. Hill, F. T. Du Byne, and G. G. Robeck. "Cannery Waste
Treatment by Spray Irrigation-Runoff." Cincinnati, Ohio. FWPCA. June
1967.
Berger, H. F. "Evaluation of Water Reclamation Against Rising Costs of Water
and Effluent Treatment." TAPPI. August 1966.
Besselievre, E. B. "Pontiac Motors Treats Its Wastes." Wastes Engineering.
Black, H. H. Industrial Waste Treatment, as Varied as Industry. (Reprint
from Civil Engineering for October 1955.) Cincinnati, Ohio. 1956.
Black, H. H. and G. N. McDermott. "Industrial Waste Guide-Beet Sugar." Pro-
ceedings of American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of the Sanitary
Engineering Division. February 1952.
Bolduc, E. J. Results of NCSI Industry Survey of Investment and Cost of Ef-
fluent Treatment. National Council for Stream Improvement.
153
-------
Bower, B. Industry and the Water Environment; A Study of Water Utilization
Patterns in Selected Industries in Relation to Technologic and Economic
Factors.University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.May 1963.
Bower, B. T. "Incorporate Wastewater Handling in Plant Design." Canner/
Packer. February 1967.
Bodenheimer, V. B. "Factors to Consider in Waste Treatment Systems Evalu-
ation." Pulp and Paper Manufacturer. February 1967.
Bradakis, H. L. "A Joint Municipal-Industrial Spray Irrigation Project."
Industrial Water and Wastes. July-August 1961.
. "Largest Activated Sludge Plant for Pulp and Paper Wastes Will
Treat Sewage From Three Towns." Wastes Engineering. May 1960.
Bramer, H. C. "Economics and Water Pollution Abatement." Water and Sewage
Works. February 1966.
Bryan, E. H. "Two-State Biological Waste Treatment." Industrial Water and
Wastes. January-February 1963.
California Department of Water Resources. Water Use By Manufacturing Indus-
tries in California, 1957-1959. Sacramento, California. April 1964.
Caster, A. D. "The Municipality Looks at Industrial Wastes." Industrial
Water and Wastes, July-August 1962.
Cawley, W. A. and V. A. Minch. "The Treatment of Pulp and Paper Mill Wastes."
Industrial Water and Wastes. March-April 1963.
Columbia River Basin Project, FWPCA. Snake River Basin, Comprehensive Report.
(In open file, FWPCA, Portland, Oregon, Washington, D. C.)
Water Temperature - Influences, Effects, and Control. Proceedings
of the Twelfth Pacific Northwest Symposium on Water Pollution Research.
Corvallis, Oregon. November 7, 1963.
Cootner, P. H. and G. O. G. Lflf. Water Demand for Steam-Electric Generation.
Resources for the Future. Washington, D. C. 1965.
Coughlin, R. L. "Alternatives and Costs to Achieve 5 P.P.M. Dissolved Oxygen
in Portland Harbor." FWPCA. 1966. (Three memoranda in open file,
Portland, Oregon.)
.• Computed waste Treatment Costs Related to Puget Sound Pulp Mills.
FWPCA. 1965. (In open file, Portland, Oregon.)
154
-------
Gulp, G. L. Soybean Processing and Related Wastes. U.S.P.H.S. Cincinnati,
Ohio. January 1963.
Eckenfelder, W. A. Effluent Quality and Treatment Economics for Industrial
Wastewaters. Austin, Texas.October 1967.~~~
. "Theory of Biological Treatment of Trade Wastes." Journal of the
Water Pollution Control Federation. February 1967.
Edison Electric Institute. Historical Statistics of the Electric Utility
Industry. 1962. ~~
Eichberger, Willis. G. Industrial Water Use. U.S.P.H.S. Washington, D. C.
February 1965.
Elonka, Steve. Cooling Towers. (A Power Special Report.) New York, New
York. 1963.
Engineering News Record. Cost Indexes. "ENR 20-Cities, Construction Cost."
Pair, G. M. "Economies in Metal-Finishing Wastes Management." Proceedings
of American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of the Sanitary Engi-^~
neering Division. January 1960. ~ ~~~
Pair, G. M. and J. C. Geyer. Water Supply and Wastewater Disposal. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, New York. April 1963.
Pairall, J. M. "Industrial Waste Treatment." Presented at the New Jersey
Water Resources Conference, Rutgers University. July 12, 1966.
Pederal Power Commission. Annual Production Expenses. Washington, D. C.
Annually.
Steam-Electric Plant Construction Cost. Washington, D. C.
Annually.
. National Power Survey - 1964. Washington, D. C. 1964.
Piehn, A. V. Cooling Tower Solutions to Problems of Power Station Circulat-
ing Water System Design. ASCE. New York, New York. October 1967.
Porce, S. L. Beet Sugar Factory Wastes and Their Treatment, Primarily the
Findlay System. Great Western Suguar Company. Denver, Colorado.
Pormo, H. G. Problems and Approaches in the Treatment of Wastes From Potato
Processing Plants. Idaho Department of Health. Boise, Idaho. May 1961.
155
-------
Fullen, W. J. and K. V. Hill. "The Economics of Poor Housekeeping in the
Meat-Packing Industry." Journal of the Water Pollution Control Feder-
ation. April 1967.
FWPCA, Applications for Research and Development Grants. (In open file,
Washington, D. C. 1966-1967.)
. The Beet Sugar Industry - The Water Pollution Problem and Status
of Waste Abatement and Treatment. South Platte River Basin Project.
Denver, Colorado. June 1967.
. An Industrial Waste Guide to the Cane Sugar Industry. Government
Printing Office. 1959.
. An Industrial Waste Guide to the Fruit Processing Industry. Gov-
ernment Printing Office. 1962.
. An Industrial Waste Guide to the Meat Industry. Government Print-
ing Office. 1954.
. An Industrial Waste Guide to the Milk Processing Industry. Govern-
ment Printing Office. 1962.
. An Industrial Waste Guide to the Potato Chip Industry. Government
Printing Office. 1961.
. Kansas City Regional Office. Sewage Treatment Construction, Oper-
ation and Maintenance Costs, For Meat Packing Plants. (In open file) .
Kansas City, Missouri. June 1967.
. Technical Services Program. Temperature and^Aquatic IAfe.
August 1, 1967 (Internal Report).
Technical Advisory and Investigations Branch. Temperature and
Aquatic Life. Cincinnati, Ohio. December 1967.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 1 - Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills.
Washington, D. C. January 1968.
Industrial Waste Profile No. 2 - Motor Vehicles and Parts. Wash-
ington, D. C. January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 3 - Paper Mills, Except Building.
Washington, D. C. January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 4 - Textile Mill Products. Washing-
ton, D. C. January 1968.
156
-------
Industrial Waste Profile No. 5 - Petroleum Refining. Washington,
D. C. January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 6 - Canned Fruits and Vegetables.
Washington, D. C. January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 7 - Leather Tanning and Finishing.
Washington, D. C. January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 8 - Meat Products. Washington, D. C.
January 1968.
. Industrial Waste Profile No. 9 - Dairies. Washington, D. C.
January 1968.
Industrial Waste Profile No. 10 - Plastics Materials and Resins.
Washington, D. C. January 1968.
Gehm, H. W. "The Activated Sludge Process for Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents."
Industrial Water and Wastes. July-August 1963.
Geyer, L. C. "Industry Solves Its Own Sewage and Process Wastes Treatment
Problem." Wastes Engineering. April 1960.
Gibbs, C. V. and R. H. Boshel. Potential of Large Metropolitan Sewers for
Disposal of Industrial Wastes. Presented at 31st Meeting of the PNW
Pollution Control Assn. Spokane, Washington. October 1964.
Glass, A. C. and K. H. Jenkins. Statistical Summary of 1962 Inventory of
Municipal Waste Facilities in the United States. U.S.P.H.S. Washing-
ton, D. C. 1964.
Gloyna, E. F. and J. F. Malina. "Petrochemical Wastes Effects on Water."
Industrial Water and Wastes. September-October, November-December
1962, and January-February, March-April 1963.
Graeser, H. J. "Advice to Cities: Get Ready for Industrial Waste Loads."
Industrial Water and Wastes. May-June 1962.
Gurnham, C. F. (Editor). Industrial Wastewater Control. Academic Press.
New York, New York. 1965.
i . "Latest Developments in the Treatment of Dairy Wastes." Indus-
trial Wastes. July-August 1956.
Hampton, T. R. "Design of Industrial Waste Treatment Facilities at Washing-
ton National Airport." Water and Sewage Works. October 1966.
157
-------
Hayesr D. C. "Water Reuse, A Survey of the Pulp and Paper Industry."
TAPPI. September 1966.
"Heated Discharges.. .Their Effect on Streams." Publication No. 3. Pennsyl-
vania Department of Health. January 1962.
Hindin, E. Disposal of Potato Chip Wastes By Anaerobic Digestion. Washington
State University Bulletin 255. Pullman, Washington. 1961.
Hopkins, G. J., et al. "Evaluation of Broad Field Disposal of Sugar Beet
Wastes." Sewage and Industrial Wastes. December 1956.
Hopkins, G. J. and J. K. Neel. Raw Sewage Lagoons in the Midwest. Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference. May 15-17, 1956.
Hoppe, T. C. "Industrial Cooling Water Treatment for Minimum Pollution From
B loud own." Nalco Chemical Co. Reprint. Chicago, Illinois. 1966.
Horton, J. P., et al. "Processing of Phosphorus Furnace Wastes." Sewage and^
Industrial Wastes. January 1956.
Howe, R. H. L. "Handling Wastes From the Billion Dollar Pharmaceuticals In-
dustry." Wastes Engineering. April 1960.
Hultin, Sven. Calcium Sulphite Spent Liquor Disposal Costs. Helsinki, Fin-
land. February 1963.
Ingols, R. S. "Review of Older Methods for Treating Food Processing Wastes."
Industrial Wastes. November-December 1956.
Jaquelt, Z. and N. C. Bur bank. "American Cyanamid Simplifies Sludge Handling
From Lagoons." Industrial Water and Wastes. July-August 1953.
Kerri, K. D. "A Dynamic Model for Water Quality Control." Journal of the
Water Pollution Control Federation. May 1967.
Lamb, J. C. "$4,500,000 Wastes Treatment Plant Dedicated by American Cyana-
mid Co." Wastes Engineering. August 1958.
Landsberg, H. H., L. L. Fischman, and J. L. Fisher. Resources in America's
Future. John Hopkins Press. 1962.
Laugbein, W. B. and W. H. Durum. The Aeration Capacity of Streams. U.S.G.S.
Circular 542. Washington, D. C. 1967.
Lardieri, Nicholas Jr. "Industry Has an Important Role in Development of
Water Quality Programs." Environmental Science and Technology. May
1967. ~~~
158
-------
leidner, R. N. "Burns Harbor - Waste Treatment Planning for a New Steel
Plant." Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation. November
1966. ~ "
Lindsey, Alan M. "Filters for Dewatering Mixed Primary and Activated Sludge."
Presented at 1967 South Central Regional Meeting of the National Council
for Stream Improvement. August 1967.
Manufacturing Chemists Association, Inc. "Wastes Treatment and Water Pollu-
tion Control Facilities." Survey. 1962.
(Onus, L. J. "How to Choose an Industrial Site." Wastes Engineering. June
1957. s
___. "Are Our Pollution Parameters Reliable for Chemical Wastes."
Wastes Engineering. June 1957.
. "Should Dairy Wastes Be Converted Into By-Products or Discharged
to Sewers?" Wastes Engineering. June 1957.
Hark, R. H. Wastewater Treatment. (A Power Special Report.) New York, New
York. June 1967.
Hathur, S. P. Thermal Pollution From Steam-Electric Generating Plants.
FWPCA. Cincinnati, Ohio. September 1967.
McBeath, B. C. and R. Eliassen. Optimization of Sewage Treatment Plant Costs.
Engineering-Economic Planning Program. Department of Civil Engineering.
Stanford University. Stanford, California. July 1965.
McCarty, P. L. "Nutrient-Associated Problems in Water Quality and Treatment-
Task Group Report." Journaj^ of the jUnej:ican^Water works Association.
October 1966.
McKinney, R. E. "Biological Treatment Systems for Refinery Wastes." Journal
of the Water Pollution Control Federation. March 1967.
HcLean, J. E. "Disposal of Waste Heat-Thermal Pollution." FWPCA. Memorandum
in open file. Washington, D. C.
"Notes for Thermal Pollution." FWPCA. Memorandum in open file.
Washington, D. C.
. "Thermal Pollution." FWPCA. Memorandum in open file. Washington,
D. C.
159
-------
Mercer, W. A. "Water Supply and Waste Disposal Problems of the Food indus-
tries." Eleventh Pacific Northwest Industrial Wastes Conference. Ore-
gon State University. Corvallis, Oregon. 1963.
Meyers, N. w. "Waste Disposal in Phosphate Fertilizer Plant Operation."
Industrial Water and Wastes. September-October 1963.
. "Sew age-Wastes Treatment - By Reverse Corporation." Wastes Engi-
neering . June 1957.
Milligan, F. B. "Bethlehem Steel Improves Acid Pickling Wastes Treatment
Plant." Wastes Engineering. January 1956.
National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council. Alternatives in
Water Management. Publication 1408. Washington, D. C. 1966.
. Waste Management and Control. Publication 1400. Washington, D. C,
1966.
National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce of the
U. S. Water in Industry. New York, New York. January 1965.
National Council for Stream Improvement. Technical Bulletin 120. Appleton,
Wisconsin.
Nebolsine, R. and E. J. Donovan. "Fit Wastewater Treatment to Industrial
Process." Plant Engineering. June 1966.
Nemerow, N. L. Theories and Practices of Industrial Waste Treatment.
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Reading, Massachusetts. 1963.
NTA Committee for Water Quality Requirements for Industrial Water Supplies.
"Interim Report, June 30, 1967." FWPCA. (In open file.) Washington,
D. C.
The Oregonian. "Chemical Plant Prepares Facility for Treatment of 2, 4-D
Effluents." Portland, Oregon. February 25, 1966.
Peterson, A. T. Joint Treatment of Municipal and Beet Sugar Waste on High-
Rate Trickling Filters. Boise, Idaho. Chronic and Associates, Consult-
ing Engineers. (undated.) (Mimeographed.)
Powers, T. P. "Basic Inter-Relationships of Pollution Abatement Alternatives
to water and Wastewater Quantity and Quality Characteristics." FWPCA.
(In open file.) Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
160
-------
Powers, T. P., B. Sachs, and J. Holdaway. "National Industrial Wastewater
Assessment, Manufacturing Year, 1963." FWPCA. (In open file.) Cincin-
nati, Ohio. 1967.
porges, Ralph. "Waste Loadings From Potato Chip Plants." Sewage and Indus-
trial Wastes. Volume 8, No. 24. August 1952. Pages 1001-1004.
porges, Ralph and W. W. Towne. "Wastes From the Potato Chip Industry."
Sewage and Industrial Wastes. Volume 31. No. 1. January 1959.
Pages 53-59.
Quirk, T. P. "How Effective Is Chemical Treatment of Board Mill Process Ef-
fluents?" Industrial Water and Wastes. January-February 1963.
tend, M. C. "Eight Industries and 11 Cities 'Pay the Freight' for Authority
Plant." Wastes Engineering. June 1959.
Reid, F. "Two Major Industries Cut Their Wastes Pollution Problems by Self-
Analysis." Wastes Engineering. April 1958.
Hose, Walter W. et al. "Composting Fruit Waste Solids." Eleventh Pacific
Northwest Industrial Waste Conference. Corvallis State University.
(Circular No. 29.) Corvallis, Oregon. 1963. Pages 32-63.
towan, P. P., K. L. Jenkins, and D. H. Howells. "Estimating Sewage Treatment
Plant Operation and Maintenance Costs." Journal of theWater Pollution
Control Federation. February 1961.
Ryckman, D. W., E. D. Edgerley, and N. C. Burbank. "Evaluation and Abatement
of Industrial Waste Problems." Industrial Water and Wastes. July-August
1962.
Salbatorelli, J. J. "Aircraft Engine Wastes Treated in Continuous 'Flow-
Through1 Plant." Wastes Engineering. June 1959.
Saunders, W. F. "How to Recover Investments in Wastes Treatment Plants."
Industrial Water and Wastes. March-April 1960.
Schraufnagel, F. H. Waste Disposal By Ridge and Furrow Irrigation. Wisconsin
Committee on Water Pollution Report No. WP-108. Madison, Wisconsin.
1963.
Sercu, C. "Burning Industrial Wastes Slurries." Wastes Engineering. Janu-
ary 1959.
Skrotzki, B. C. A. Energy System Economics. (A Power Special Report.) New
York, New York. December 1961.
161
194-046 O - 68 - 12
-------
. Steam Turbines. (A Power Special Report.) New York, New York.
June 1962.
Stanonis, F. L. Subsurface Liquid Waste Disposal in the Canton, Ohio Area.
International Disposal Contractors, Inc. Evansville, Indiana.
Steffen, A. J. "The New and the Old in Slaughter House Wastes Treatment Pro-
cesses." Wastes Engineering. August 1957.
. "Refiners Make Good Use of Fresh-Water Supplies." Oil and Gas
Journal. February 25, 1963.
Stum, Werner, and James J. Morgan. "Stream Pollution By Algal Nutrients."
Reprinted from Transactions of the Twelfth Annual Conference on Sanitary
Engineering. University of Kansas. 1962.
The Sunday Oregonian. "Beaters Air River Water." Portland, Oregon. July 24,
1966.
Svore, Jerome H. "Sewage Lagoons and Man's Environment." Civil Engineering.
Volume 34. No. 9. September 1964.
Sylvester, Robert O. and Goerge C. Anderson. "A Lake's Response to Its En-
vironment." Proceedings of American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal
of the Sanitary Engineering Division. Volume 90. No. SA 1. February
1964.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. Nuclear Reactors Built, Being Built, or
Planned in the United States as of June 30,_19_67. Washington, D. C.
U. S. Congress. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, As Amended.
U. S. Department of Commerce, Business and Defense Services Administration.
1967 National Assessment. Part V. Chapter 2. "Industrial Uses."
1963, 1958, and 1954 Census of Manufactures.
Projections of Values Added for Specific Industrial Categories,
Annually for Years 1969 through 1973 (working tables in open file,
FWPCA, Washington, D. C.).
U. S. Department of the Interior. Magnitude of the Thermal Pollution Problem.
Internal document of the Interior Committee on Water Resources Research.
U. S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science and Astronautics.
Adequacy of Technology for Pollution Abatement. Government Printing
Office. Washington, D. C. 1966.
162
-------
B. S. Public Health Service. Deep-Well Injection of Liquid Waste. Cincin-
nati, Ohio. April 1965.
. Modern Sewage Treatment Plants, How Much Do They Cost? Washing-
ton, D. C. 1964.
0. S. Senate, Select Coirmittee on Natural Water Resources, Electric Power in
Relation to the Nation's Water Resources. Committee Print No. 10.
Water Resources Activities in the United States. Washington, D. C.
1960.
Tacker, D., C. H. Connell, and W. N. Wells. "Phosphate Removal Through Muni-
cipal Wastewater Treatment at San Antonio, Texas." Journal of the Water
Pollution Control Federation. May 1967.
Wei, J. J. and F. D. lannuzzi. Factors in Evaluating Sulfite Recovery Sys-
tems. A. D. Little and Co. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
tolz, C. J. and J. J. Gannon. "Forecasting Heat Loss in Ponds and Streams."
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation. April 1960.
lalden, C. C. Water Use, Reuse and Wastewater Disposal Practices in the Beet
Sugar Industry of the United States and Canada. British Columbia Re-
search Council. Vancouver, British Columbia. June 1965.
Halker, K. H. "Each Industry Has Its Own Wastes Problems." Wastes Engineer-
ing. July-August-September 1958.
_ . "'Package' and Compact Plants - What Makes Them Click?" Wastes
Engineering. March 1958.
latson, C. W. "New Developments in Dairy Waste Treatment." Industrial Water
and Wastes. March-April 1961.
"Plating Wastes Treatment Problem Solved." Water and Sewage Works.
November 1966.
. "Progress in Air and Stream Pollution Control - Nationwide."
Industrial Wastes. July-August 1956.
tetz, O. B. and C. E. Renn. Water Temperatures and Aquatic Life, Cooling
Water Studies for Edison Electric Institute. The John Hopkins Univer-
sity,
163
-------
OTHER EFFLUENT REQUIREMENTS
AND COST ESTIMATES
Volume II
Part III
U S. Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
January 10, 1968
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part III
Introduction ^7 3
Wastes From Watercraft 175
Costs 175
Radioactive Industrial Wastes 176
Uranium Milling 176
Nuclear Power 177
Treatment Costs 178
Erosion and Sedimentation 181
Damaging Effects 181
Sources of Sediment 182
Methods of Control 184
Effects of Control 185
Acid Mine Drainage 186
Costs 189
Feedlot Pollution 193
Magnitude of the Problem 193
Processes Causing Pollution From Feedlots 198
Trends in Meat Consumption, Numbers of Cattle,
Numbers of Feedlots 199
Remedies and Costs 199
Pesticides in Surface and Ground Waters 202
Use of Pesticides 202
Pesticide Levels Found in Water 204
Removal of Pesticides From Water 207
Costs 208
167
-------
Paqe
Nutrient Enrichment of Lakes and Streams 210
Land Runoff 210
Use of Fertilizer Nitrogen 212
Pho sph orus 213
Phosphorus and the Fertility of Natural Waters 213
Sources of Phosphorus 213
Phosphorus and Soil Erosion 214
The Chemistry of Phosphorus in River Water 218
Costs 221
Impact of Irrigation on Salinity of Surface Waters 222
Significance of Water Quality Degradation as the
Result of Irrigation 226
Increasing the Flow of Water With Water of Lower
Salt Concentration 230
Water Harvest 230
Import of Water 230
Increasing Precipitation By Weather Modification 231
Reduction of Evaporation and Transpiration Loss 231
Separation of Saline Water From Freshwater Flows 232
Salt Sinks 232
Desalination 234
Collecting Basins 234
Discharge Channels 234
Reducing Evapotranspiration 234
Cost Estimates for Remedial or Control Measures 235
Oil Pollution 236
The Problem 236
Waterborne Sources 236
Gasoline Service Stations 238
Tank Cleaning Facilities 238
Oily Waste Industries 238
Industrial Transfer and Storage 238
Pipelines 238
168
-------
Page
Offshore Mining 239
Treating the Problem 239
Conclusion 241
Appendix I
Bibliography 242
169
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Part III
Table Title Paae_
III-l Treatment Costs for Radioactive Wastes, 1957-1973. 180
III-2 Estimated Ranges in Sediment Yield From Drainage
Areas of 100 Square Miles or Less, By Water Re-
source Region. 183
III-3 Estimated Cost Range to Reduce Acid Mine Drainage
By 40% to 80% Over Next 20 Years. 190
III-4 Range of Pollution Control Costs in Mine Drainage
Management. 192
UI-5 Solid Wastes Produced By Livestock in the United
States, 1965. 195
III-6 Fecal Discharge From Specified Animal Types. 196
III-7 Animal Waste Equivalence to Untreated Human Waste
By Sub-Basins of the Potomac River.
197
III-8 U. S. Per Capita Consumption of Meat and Fowl,
1949-1951 to 1964 and Projections to 1980. 200
III-9 U. S. Farmers' Pesticide Expenditures By Produc-
tion Region and Type of Farm, 1964. 203
III-10 Pest Control By Type of Crop, Acreage Treated,
and Percent of Total Acreage Treated. 205
III-ll Threshold Odor Concentrations of Pesticides and
Solvents in Water. 209
111-12 U. S. Production of Phosphoric Acid in Thousand
Tons of Elemental Phosphorus. 215
111-13 U. S. Consumption of Phosphorus 216
111-14 Erosion of Soil and Phosphorus From Five Experi-
mental Plots of Differing Slopes on Dunmore Silt
Loam, Virginia 217
170
-------
Table Title Page
111-15 Phosphorus Content of Animal Manures of Various
Origins. 219
111-16 Amounts of Phosphorus Excreted Annually By 1,000
Pound Weight of Various Animals. 220
111-17 Acreage of Irrigated Land in Farms. 223
III-18 Incremental Salt Concentration Attributable to
Specific Sources, Colorado River at Hoover Dam. 224
111-19 Historic Water Quality Data From Four Western
Rivers. 225
111-20 Comparison of the Salinity in Irrigation and
Drainage Waters From Selected Irrigation Dis-
tricts. 227
IH-21 Chemical Composition of Some River Waters Used
for Irrigation in Western United States. 228
111-22 Costs Associated With Existing Desalinization
Processes. 233
111-23 Worldwide Waterborne Casualties, U. S. Vessels,
1966-1967. 237
171
-------
INTRODUCTION
Conventional waste treatment systems have been designed to accommodate only
industrial and municipal wastes. These systems do not deal with such pollu-
tional effects, as those caused by or resulting in sedimentation and erosion,
salinity from the use of irrigation water, nutrients from land runoff, mine
drainage, concentrated animal feedlot runoff, or radioactive wastes. And
there is evidence to indicate that these pollutional sources may eventually
become, if they are not now, the principal pollution problems.
Haste Management and Control, a 1966 publication of the National Academy of
Sciences and National Research Council, set forth 20 major water polluting
agents. Of these, only nine agents were considered susceptible to existing
control technology, three (suspended solids, BOD, and bacteria) by applica-
tion of conventional waste treatment methods, and the others by specific wa-
ter treatment or materials handling techniques. Significantly, the kinds of
pollutants for which there are either no controls, or for which existing con-
trols are uncertain or excessively costly, occur in large part as a result of
natural drainage. This absence of control technology makes it impossible to
calculate, and hazardous to attempt to estimate, either the timing or the
•agnitude of necessary control costs.
Despite the long-run difficulties of estimating the costs required to control
'other effluents," recognition of their tremendous influence in the water pol-
lution picture reflects the considerable progress made toward overall pollu-
tion control in the last several years. Only recently has the full pollution-
al significance of land drainage begun to be recognized; and problems associ-
ated with drainage (heretofore, largely the special concern of the hydrolo-
gist) now are being studied and acted upon by sanitary engineers and other wa-
ter pollution specialists. We are just beginning to understand how large and
how prevalent are the pollutional influences of runoff.
tot until evaluation of recent Potomac Basin studies was it generally recog-
nized that land runoff and cattle populations might well be a principal
source of coliform bacteria. Similarly, studies during the last decade of
the pollutional effects of urban runoff have demonstrated that these effects
•ay be as great or greater than those of sewered municipal wastes. Yet the
principal frame of reference for solutions to urban storm water runoff has,
until recently, continued to be the separation of storm and sanitary sewers,
4 measure that will facilitate the efficient operation of the waste treatment
plant, but which offers no direct reduction of water pollution from urban run-
off.
Hie polluting effects of land drainage are becoming more pronounced. Runoff
is a natural process but many of the conditions which have intensified munici-
pal and industrial waste problems are also magnifying runoff problems. For
173
-------
example, concentration of population in urban-suburban complexes, whose large
paved areas provide little natural stabilization of organic materials while
offering ready channels for their transmission to watercourses, have produced
large point deliveries of pollutants. Also, intensive animal husbandry in
concentrated areas is replacing broad grazing areas; an arrangement that has
facilitated the transfer of large quantities of untreated animal wastes to wa-
tercourses. Use of pesticides and herbicides has resulted in totally new and
very potent polluting materials which are washed from land into watercourses.
Another effect on land drainage is chemical fertilizers. These allow the far-
mer to synthesize new topsoil cheaply but remove much of the incentive to pre-
serve topsoil, which is allowed to erode, and contributes to turbidity and
siltation of waterbodies. And, the abandonment of strip and below-surface
mines presents a continuing problem in all types of mine drainage.
While it is impossible to precisely inventory the cost of the many pollution
control measures which lie outside the range of municipal and industrial
waste treatment, it must be anticipated that such costs will be large. For
example, an inventory of pollution control needs, compiled by the Federal Wa-
ter Pollution Control Administration for interstate drainage basins of the
Southwest and Gulf Coast, indicated the costs of controlling "other effluents"
would be more than double the estimated costs to meet municipal and industri-
al waste treatment requirements of these basins.
In summary, then, the discussion which follows should be understood to be
merely a start toward defining what may prove to be the most difficult por-
tion of the national water pollution problem. This section delineates major
problem areas and, where available, includes a description of remedial proce-
dures and the costs of carrying out these procedures.
In major problem areas for which cost estimates cannot be made because of in-
sufficient knowledge of the problem and its remedies, arrangements have been,
or will be, made with other responsible organizations for joint investigation.
The results of such studies will be made available to Congress with each year-
ly updating of this report.
Recognition of the interdisciplinary and interagency aspects of the pollution-
al problems posed by natural runoff and other effluents required the FWPCA
study group assigned to prepare this report, to enlist the assistance of ex-
perts from other agencies, both within and without the Department of the In-
terior. Data and other assistance were supplied by the U. S. Bureau of Mines,
the U. S. Geological Survey, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation,
the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Federal Power Commission. Particularly
broad, informed, and timely assistance was provided by the Department of Agri-
culture, which produced valuable background papers on animal wastes, salinity,
nutrient runoff, erosion, and pesticides through its various offices.
174
-------
WASTES FROM WATERCRAFT
Satercraft discharges contain several significant polluting agents. Sanitary
wastes, including sewage, may carry pathogenic organisms which cause a variety
of diseases such as dysentery, typhoid fever, and infectious hepatitis. Con-
centrations of such wastes make water dangerous for contact sports such as
swimming and water-skiing. Oil, bilge, and ballast waters may contaminate
waters, destroy aquatic life, and discolor vessels, piers, docks and other
structures at the water line. Bilge and ballast waters also may serve to
transfer disease-bearing organisms.
A recent report to Congress by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion^- provides some estimate of the size of the problem and its remedial cost.
the report indicates that in any given year about 110,000 commercial and fish-
ing vessels, about 1,500 Federally-owned vessels, and about 8,000,000 recre-
ational watercraft use the navigable waters of the United States. In addi-
tion, about 40,000 foreign ship entrances are recorded each year. The waste
discharges from these sources are estimated to be equal to those produced by
a city of 500,000 population. However, this estimate probably understates
the seriousness of the problem, because watercraft wastes tend to be concen-
trated in critical areas, such as those used for body-contact water sports,
drinking water supplies, shellfish beds, and the like. In addition, as men-
tioned previously, such waste discharges may present particularly serious
health problems.
COSTS
The study emphasized the difficulty involved in estimating the costs of con-
trolling pollution from watercraft. It cited, in particular, lack of treat-
ient and discharge standards and inadequately defined costs of treatment
equipment. The installed cost of onboard equipment for properly handling wa-
tercraft wastes could vary from $40 to $100,000 per vessel, depending on size,
type, mission, and other factors. Based upon the number of vessels of differ-
ent classes and the wide range of equipment costs, the total cost of bringing
all existing American watercraft into compliance with impending regulations
till be on the order of $600 million.
turn n;ata*e*a£t, Fede^ut£ WateA PoUtution Con&wt
U. S. Pepattmen-t o£ vie, lntvu.on, June. 30, 1967.
175
-------
RADIOACTIVE INDUSTRIAL WASTES
Radioactivity has such serious potentials as an environmental pollutant that
only the highest levels of control are acceptable. As a result, the manage-
ment of radioactive wastes is characterized by an extremely high level of con-
trol over very limited quantities of polluting material.
URANIUM MILLING
Nationally the uranium milling industry comprises 16 active mills and two con-
centrators. These are located as follows: New Mexico, four mills; Wyoming,
five mills/ one concentrator; Colorado, four mills; Texas, one mill; South
Dakota, one mill; and Utah, one mill, one concentrator. The plants process
approximately 16,000 tons of ore per day. Historically, activity of the in-
dustry rose to a peak, and then decreased according to military require-
ments. Rapid development of nuclear power generation, however, should pro-
vide in the future the uranium milling industry with a stable source of sus-
tained demand.
The process of uranium extraction varies among mills, but includes four basic
steps common to all mills: crushing, grinding, leaching, and uranium recov-
ery. It is the leaching process which produces liquid wastes, with the chem-
ical composition of the ores determining whether an acid or an alkali leach
is appropriate.
Thirteen of the 16 active mills utilize an acid leach. This process gener-
ates large quantities of wastewater; 500 to 1,200 gallons per ton of ore pro-
cessed. Uranium is recovered in the acid leach process by multi-stage ex-
traction processes, usually ion exchange and/or solvent extraction followed
by chemical precipitation. Alkaline leaching produces a uranium-bearing liq-
uor with few dissolved impurities. This allows uranium recovering by direct
chemical precipitation, without the need for concentration by ion exchange or
solvent extraction. The barren liquor (raffinate) of alkaline leaching is re-
cycled, and wastewater discharge averages 250 gallons per ton of ore pro-
cessed, less than a third of the wastewater quantities associated with the
acid leaching process.
Essentially all of the radium dissolved by alkaline leaching is precipitated
together with uranium, thereby leaving the plant in the uranium concentrate
product. In acid leaching, however, dissolved radium is discharged in the
waste stream, averaging about three micrograms of dissolved radium per ton of
ore processed. In either leaching process, the uranium mills discharge signi-
ficant quantities of inorganic, non-radioactive waste materials. Total dis-
solved solids range between 4,500 and 20,000 milligrams per liter in the
176
-------
vastewater, which tends to be either strongly acid or highly alkaline, de-
pending upon the process used.
The industry's standardized waste control practice involves the use of hold-
ing ponds for the retention and concentration of the liquid and solid wastes.
These ponds serve as reservoirs for water reuse, provide removal of waste
solids by sedimentation, and allow the evaporation and seepage of the liquid
wastes. During periods of high runoff, the liquid wastes may be released to
surface waters in accordance with available dilution, but evaporation and
seepage are the principal means of dispersal. Standards for design and oper-
ation of holding ponds are stringent, stressing materials' stability against
erosion from runoff, precipitation, and wind action as well as control of
liquid releases. Seepage, however, is a problem in some areas. Inspection
of uranium mill sites in the Colorado River Basin has revealed some adverse
effects on adjacent ground waters. Potential pollution from this source is
a subject for further study. An additional problem is posed by the existence
of unstabilized piles of tailings at inactive or abandoned mills. Placement
of responsibility for control, and procedure therefore, have posed problems,
but have been adjusted by cooperative State-Federal-Industry agreements.
NUCLEAR POWER
The increased generation of electrical energy through the use of nuclear pow-
er will require continuing and close control over the release of radioac-
tive effluents. Nuclear generating capacity at the close of 1967 exceeded
2,800 megawatts; by 1973, the scheduled total of 72 reactors will be generat-
ing almost 46,000 megawatts.
Hith the exception of the heat source, electrical generation in nuclear
plants is very similar to the process in conventional thermal generating
plants. Where conventional plants derive their thermal energy from combus-
tion of fossil fuels, nuclear plants utilize the controlled nuclear fission
of uranium as an energy source. One waste product, heat, is similar in the
hro types. But where conventional plants release smoke, ash, and gases to
the atmosphere, nuclear plants release small quantities of radioactive iso-
topes to the environment.
Radioactive material is produced by two processes which occur within the en-
ergy source, the reactor. The fission process itself forms a variety of iso-
topes, which remain for the most part within the matrix of the fuel material.
A high integrity material which encloses the fuel material serves to prevent
the fission fragments which escape the matrix from entering the cooling sys-
tem surrounding the reactor. Nevertheless, some quanitites of fission pro-
ducts enter the coolant as a result of defects in the covering material, by
diffusion through the covering, or by contamination on the outer surface of
the covering.
177
294-046 O - 68 - 13
-------
Neutron activation is the other possible source of radiological contamination
in a reactor system. Radioactivity is produced by exposing stable nuclides
to neutron bombardment. It is a characteristic of reactor operation that
neutron activation will occur, and that activated products will go into solu-
tion or suspension in the coolant as corrosion takes place. Removal of the
radionuclides from the coolant is necessary to prevent excessive accumulation
of radioactivity. This is accomplished by cycling a portion of the coolant
through a clean-up process, usually filtration followed by ion exchange.
Liquid radioactive wastes arise from several sources in the generating plant.
These sources include leakage of the primary coolant, effluent of the coolant
clean-up system, the fuel storage pool, laboratory operations, and laundry
drains. Such wastes are treated by batch process in specific radioactive
waste treatment systems, usually by filtration/ followed by demineralization
and/or evaporation. Treated wastes are collected and analyzed. Depending
upon the analysis and system requirements for the primary coolant, the treat-
ed wastes are reprocessed and either returned to the cooling system or dis-
charged with cooling water effluents.
Criteria for routine radioactive effluent discharges have been established by
the Atomic Energy Commission based on the recommendations of the Federal Rad-
iation Council (FRC) , National Council on Radiation Protection and Measure-
ments (NCRPM) , and the International Commission on Radiological Protection
(ICRP). As a general rule, liquid effluent radioactivity concentrations are
several orders of magnitude below levels which would result in exposures ex-
ceeding FRC guides. In no case are operations allowed which would result in
radiation exposures exceeding the guides established by the Federal Radiation
Council.
TREATMENT COSTS
Treatment costs involve projecting the level of production over the next sev-
eral years and assigning appropriate unit costs. It is necessary to assume
arbitrarily static processing and treatment technology because it is diffi-
cult, in such a rapidly developing industry, to forecast the direction and
extent of future unit cost modifications.
Uranium milling treatment costs vary from mill to mill, depending upon the
leaching process, the location of disposal areas, and neutralization require-
ments* It should be noted that it is impossible to separate, realistically,
the costs of solid and liquid waste disposal since the tailings pile which
serves as the dump for solid wastes may serve also as the settling pond for
liquid wastes.
178
-------
For uranium milling, an average cost of 80 cents per ton of ore processed
has been estimated for waste treatment measures.2 This assumes that the in-
dustry's current productive capacity is sufficient to meet the uranium de-
nand over the projected period and that the average quality of ores processed
remains constant. On this basis, an annual cost of about $3.2 million will
be required. Of this cost, about $0.6 million represents capital require-
nents, and the remainder comprises operating and maintenance costs.
Another factor in treatment costs is control measures at inactive mills. The
control of mill tailings piles will constitute a significant portion of the
treatment cost for radioactive pollution control. Control cost estimates ob-
tained for inactive mills in the Colorado River Basin have ranged from
$300,000 to $500,000 per establishment, depending upon the type of control.
Because of limited current experience, there is no extensive body of cost
data related to the control of radioactive discharges of nuclear generating
plants. There is, however, enough experience with plants which have been in
operation for a period of years to provide approximate guides to operating
and construction costs associated with building and maintaining nuclear waste
treatment plants. The experience is that installation of treatment facili-
ties for nuclear wastes amounts to about 1% to 2% of the total cost of a nu-
clear plant, and operation and maintenance of the system accounts for about
0.3% of total generating costs.
Application of these treatment cost factors to existing and planned nuclear
plants, with plant costs evaluated at $1.31 per kilowatt of capacity and gen-
erating costs of 3.024 mills per kilowatt^, provides the gross assessment of
treatment costs associated with construction and operation of nuclear gener-
ating facilities as presented in Table III-l. On this basis, capital costs
for nuclear waste treatment facilities are expected to lie within a range of
$60 million to $120 million over the five-year period ending with 1973.
Lomm&toig, M. W., Pe,deAa£. Mate* Pollution Control kdnu.nit>tMuUon wpo&
|
-------
TABLE III-l
TREATMENT COSTS FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTES,
1957-1973
Startup Date
1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
TOTAL
Reactors
Starting
Operati on
«v
2
5
7
15
14
13
72
Megawatts
of Generat-
ing Capacity
on Stream
in Year
2,810
1,015
3,272
4,241
12,455
10,853
11,186
45,832
Capital Value
of Associated
Treatment Fa-
cilities
($ Millions)
(Range)
3.68 - 7.36
1.33 - 2.66
4.29 - 8.58
5.56 - 11.12
16.31 - 32.62
14.22 - 28.44
14.65 - 29.30
60.04 - 120.08
Annual
Operating
Costs
in Year
($ Millions)
.67
1.12
1.85
3.87
7.97
11.89
16.27
— Exa£ucfeA Hattam and
4 /iat down.
A&wvcc Energy
nJja. Tut Reactor toktc/t have been
180
-------
EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
Sediments produced by erosion of the land surface are the most extensive pol-
lutants of surface waters. Suspended solids loadings reaching the Nation's
streams from surface runoff are estimated to be at least 700 times the load-
ing from domestic sewage discharge. The same estimate places the quantity of
sediment carried by streamflow and discharged to the oceans each year at some-
thing approaching one billion tons. The quantity of sediment reaching the
oceans, however, is only a fraction of the total amount effected by erosion.
OD an average, it is probable that at least four billion tons of soil are
•oved each year by water. This is roughly equivalent to removing one-half
inch of surface solids from about 50 million acres of land each year.
DAMAGING EFFECTS
tte damaging effects of sedimentation are varied. Nutrients, particularly
phosphorus adsorbed on sediment particles, may be a source of enrichment and
consequent eutrophication of lakes and other surface waters. The oxidation
of organic pollutants is hindered by sediments in streams. Both commercial
fisheries and game fish habitats are damaged by waterborne and deposited sed-
iment. Corrosion of power turbines, pumping equipment, irrigation distribu-
tion systems and other structures is caused by impact with suspended sediment.
Flood-borne sediment deposited on productive flood plains may damage crops
and, if sufficiently coarse-textured, may reduce the productivity of the
soils. Sediment deposits in stream channels reduce the stream's capacity to
convey water and sometimes seriously impair the drainage of adjacent lands.
Suspended sediment in water used for artificial recharge of underground aqui-
fers presents problems by clogging the aquifer pore spaces, and costs are in-
curred in clearing the water before it can be used.
Storage capacity of artificial reservoirs is being depleted at the rate of
about one million acre-feet each year by deposition of sediment. (Capacity
for all artificial reservoirs in the U. S. was estimated to be about 1.8 bil-
lion acre-feet in 1966.)5 This damage is reflected in the loss of storage
capacity for water supply, flood control, power generation, navigation, and
streamflow regulation for water quality control.
EwUwphJ.cati.on £& the. exce*4-u;e. AeAtitizc&ion oi algae. and otheA aquatic.
plant* \04*k nu&u.entt>, p^incA.patly phosphate* - a. common e£eme.nt faund
in muni.CA.pat Aeuoage., human uto&te., agtecu&tusiat fieAtilizzM and
aJL di&changeA, and
5 Mate* RfcAouAceA Re&eotc/i, Volume. II, Wo. 3, R. F.F. , 3id quaiteA, 1966,
pp. 323-354.
181
-------
Pollution also affects recreational areas. The deposition of sediment on
beaches reduces their utility for swimming, fishing or boating, and detracts
from their aesthetic quality. There are instances where formerly clear res-
ervoirs have experienced significant reductions in both visitor days and fish
catch because of excessive turbidity of the lake water due to sediment inflow.
The impact of stream-borne sediment upon the economy as well as the quality
of our environment is of tremendous significance. A rough estimate is that
sediment damage costs are well in excess of $500 million annually. Moreover,
the loss of soil resources by erosion is very likely several times greater
than the combined direct and indirect sediment damage costs.
The physical magnitude of the sediment problem is indicated in Table III-2.
Ranges are shown of average sediment yield in tons per square mile per year
from areas of 100 square miles or less. The figures are based largely on an
analysis of sedimentation surveys of reservoirs in Water Resource Regions
with drainage areas of 100 square miles or less. Particularly striking are
the differences in average sediment yield among regions (from 50 to 5,200
tons per square mile per year).
SOURCES OF SEDIMENT
Erosion is the major cause of sedimentation. Although erosion is recognized
as a normal geological process, its normal effect has been accelerated by
agricultural and forestry activities, construction of roads and highways, and
industrial and urban development. This accelerated erosion has increased the
production of sediment far above that experienced when the country was first
settled. It has been estimated, for example, that man-induced erosion has
increased the sediment load of streams in the humid areas of the United
States by a factor ranging from 25 to 100; and that most streams in the arid
and semi-arid areas carry two to four times their original sediment load. It
is largely this induced erosion that is susceptible to control.
The principal sources of sediment are: (1) sheet erosion by surface runoff
which does not cause conspicuous water channels; (2) gullying, or the devel-
opment of channels in soil by concentrated runoff; (3) roadside erosion or
the washing away of material from cuts, fills and surfaces of transportation
lines; (4) stream channel erosion; (5) flood erosion or the scouring of
flood-plain lands by floodflows; (6) erosion from construction activities
such as those involved in urbanization and industrial development; and (7)
mining and industrial wastes dumped into streams or left in positions suscep-
tible to erosion.
Many examples of the importance of the several sources of sediment and how
they vary in different portions of the country can be cited. Sources of the
sediment yield presently experienced in the Middle Fork Eel River in the Cal-
182
-------
TABLE II1-2
ESTIMATED RANGES IN SEDIMENT YIELD FROM DRAINAGE AREAS
OF 100 SQUARE MILES OR LESS, BY WATER RESOURCE REGION
Water Resource Region
North Atlantic
South Atlantic
Ohio
Tennessee
Great Lakes
Upper Mississippi
Lower Mississippi
Tex as -Gulf
Rio Grande
Arkansas-White-Red
Missouri
Sour is -Red- Rainy
Upper Colorado
Lower Colorado
Great Basin
California
Columbia - North Pacific
Estimated Sediment Yield
High | Low I Average
(Tons/sq. mi./yr.)
1,210 30 250
1,850 100 800
2,110 160 850
1,560 460 700
800 10 100
3,900 10 800
8,210 1,560 5,200
3,180 90 1,800
3,340 150 1,300
8,210 260 2,200
6,700 10 1,500
470 10 50
3,340 150 1,800
1,620 150 600
1,780 100 400
5,570 80 1,300
1,100 30 400
Source: A0Ucu£tuAae R<*ea/idi Se/ivxlce, U.S.P.A.; M
JUccuUon, No. 964, 1964.
Pub-
183
-------
ifornia Water Resource Region are: (1) watershed slopes - 13.5%, (2) land-
slides - 22.5%, (3) stream banks - 63.0%, (4) major roads - 1.0%. Interest-
ingly, the 13.5% arising from watershed slopes breaks down as follows:
(1) natural causes - 42.7%, (2) logging - 7.7%, (3) burns - 3.2%, (4) graz-
ing - 24.6%, (5) deer - 19.5% (as the result of browsing and hindrance to re-
production of vegetation), and (6) temporary logging roads - 2.3%.
The Potomac River Basin in the North Atlantic Water Resource Region dis-
charges an estimated 2,500,000 tons of sediment to the Potomac estuary each
year. While agricultural lands of the basin produce the major portion of the
sediment, construction activities produce a disproportionately large share
when relative area is considered.
While the sources of sediment are similar in all parts of the country, the
preceding examples indicate that the relative importance of each source var-
ies widely. Each area of the country must be considered separately to deter-
mine the importance of each source in order to carry out effective controls.
The following control methods are expressed mainly in terms of land use, but
consideration must be given to climatic factors, soils, geology, topography
and stream channel characteristics in recommending methods of control.
METHODS OF CONTROL
Proper use of land is basic to the control of sediment originating in upland
areas. Sheet erosion on farmlands can be reduced by the application of many
available conservation measures. Such measures include conservation rota-
tions, the establishment and improvement of long-term ground cover of hay and
pasture grasses or legumes, mulching, and critical area plantings. In connec-
tion with such agronomic practices, complementary field mechanical measures
such as stripcropping, terracing, and diversions are often recommended. In
combination, these and supporting mechanical field measures can reduce sub-
stantially the movement of soil materials by erosion. Forestry measures in-
clude site preparation, the planting of trees on burned, cut-over or abandon-
ed farmlands, as well as the interplanting of existing woodlands.
Channel-type erosion, such as gullying and streambank and stream-bed erosion,
usually requires more elaborate structural measures. Grade stabilization
structures, sloping and vegetating stream banks and gullies, and construction
of debris basins and sediment detention basins are among the structural works
employed to reduce sediment yields from these channel-type sources.
Urban erosion and sedimentation stem principally from road building and con-
struction projects. Measures such as prompt reseeding of exposed areas, use
of mulches, temporary settling basins, or diversion can effect significant
reductions in sediment yield from urban erosion sources.
184
-------
EFFECTS OF CONTROL
Ihere is considerable evidence that sediment can be reduced by the measures
discussed above. Agronomic and supporting mechanical field practices have
reduced the amount of sediment that reaches reservoirs by amounts ranging
from 28% to 73%. Good conservation practices on cultivated watersheds have
reduced sediment yields by almost 90%. The protection of existing forest and
range lands indicates such measures may reduce sediment yields by 90%.
Streambank protection work on Buffalo Creek, New York, reduced sediment de-
livery to Buffalo Harbor during flood flows by 40%.
185
-------
ACID MINE DRAINAGE
Acid mine drainage is not the only pollutant being discharged by active and
abandoned mining operations. Other constituents found in mine drainage, such
as iron, sulfate, manganese, etc., sometimes have a more detrimental effect
on the quality of the receiving waters than the acid loadings. However, the
mine drainage problem has been considered largely in terms of acid production,
which is the major source of water pollution by mining. As information be-
comes available, analyses of currently less critical mine drainage problems
may be included in future reports.
Current estimates are that over four million tons of acid-equivalents are dis-
charged annually into streams by active or abandoned mining operations. When
the cumulative quantity discharged becomes great enough to exceed the natural
neutralizing capacity of the waterbody, damages occur to fish and fish food
organisms, recreational and aesthetic values, and structures and equipment ex-
posed to the water. Costs for pretreatment of water intended for municipal or
industrial supplies are also increased. It is estimated that over 4,300 miles
of stream in the U. S. are polluted significantly by acid mine drainage.
Acid mine water is associated predominantly with working of coal deposits.
Accordingly, its pollutional effects are most evident in the coal mining
states - West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, and Ohio. Acid
drainage also has been pinpointed as the largest pollution problem of the
heavily industrialized Ohio River Basin. But acid waters have been found to
occur from mining of other kinds of ores; and isolated instances of water pol-
lution caused by acid mine waters are found elsewhere throughout the Nation.
In addition to the acid problem, mining tends to be accompanied by excessive
siltation. Sediment yields from strip-mined areas average nearly 30,000 tons
per square mile annually - 10 to 60 times the yields of otherwise-worked
lands. Spoilbank surfaces from stripped areas are often too acid to re-estab-
lish the vegetation which would halt the excessive erosion. The reaction of
minerals in the eroded soils with receiving waters is a source of acid release.
Thus, strip-mining, the source of an estimated one-quarter of polluting acid
mine waters, is at the same time a major source of erosion.
Somewhat more than half of the acid production comes from abandoned mines,
both surface and underground, and the remainder from operating mines. The
three classes of mining - strip, underground above drainage, and underground
below drainage - require different control measures. Measures that are ef-
BuJUcvid, W. E., "Hationat PMatem fax. Ptevextion and Control o& Pollu-
tion Irnam Atcne WuiinaQt," in-hou&e. Aepott. Ve.pavtm&nt oX the.
FWPCA, Ap/tU 14, 1967, p. 4.
186
-------
fective in reducing acid production from abandoned mines cannot be applied to
operating mines where, in many cases, actual treatment of the mine effluent
must be initiated.
In examining the magnitude of the problem, "A Study of Surface Mining and
Our Environment" found that 3.2 million acres of land have been affected by
surface mining. More than two-thirds of this total acreage is unreclaimed.
Large amounts of this acreage will require corrective action to alleviate det-
rimental effects or to restore the land to some type of productive use. The
extension of areas disturbed by acid drainage is continuing at an estimated
150,000 acres per year, with the rate increasing as a larger population and a
larger per-capita output of goods create a greater demand for materials.
By means of enforced regulations and effective sanctions, operating mines
can utilize existing methods to control their pollutional effects in the reg-
ular course of operations. Remedial solutions to mine pollution are costly
but they minimize damages by lessening the degree of environmental exposure.
Continuous reclamation can be conducted in strip-mining operations by stock-
piling topsoil, then burying acid-producing materials at the bottom of the
strip pit, and covering it with the stockpiled topsoil. Reclamation of un-
derground mines can be accomplished by collecting infiltrating waters, pro-
viding lined drains and construction of internal seals. Flooding of abandon-
ed mine sections to reduce acid production at the source, and treating or
neutralizing the discharges before releasing them to streams or ground water
are also effective methods in controlling mine wastes. Several states re-
quire that mining be limited to areas where harmful effects can be amelio-
rated. Many states require post-operative reclamation or control of pollu-
tion damages. But a general policy of reduction of environmental damages
from mining remains to be established.
Abandoned mining operations present an entirely different abatement problem.
In such cases past generations of producers have ignored reclamation costs,
which were generally accepted to be a public responsibility. That responsi-
bility extends to about two million acres of abandoned mined lands, plus a
smaller, but significant, subsurface drainage problem. Abandoned pollution-
producing strip-mined lands must be reclaimed; pollution-producing surface
waste piles derived from underground mines must be controlled; subsidence
holes and drainage discharges must be sealed; and, in some cases, water
treatment will be needed to limit residual pollution after physical control
of acid-producing sites has been inaugurated.
Control procedures for strip-mines are governed by the condition of the aban-
doned site. Major features may include steep, crumbling, hazardous highwalls
that sometimes isolate ridgetops, pits that are often full of red acid water,
and long parallel ridges of rock and soil that overburden from above the mine
deposit. An estimated 20% of coal strip-mining spoilbanks contribute to acid
pollution of streams receiving their drainage. Nearly all of them at some
187
-------
time contribute large volumes of sediment. Because of the high acid content,
steep slopes with shifting surface layers, and the often shaly and drouthy
nature of the surface, these spoilbanks present sites hostile to the growth
of vegetation. Standard reclamation practice calls for rounding spoilbank
ridges, grading spoils to natural contours, or to traversable grades, burying
toxic spoilbank material, backfilling spoil against the highwall to cover ex-
posed pollution-producing mineral formations, rounding hazardous highwall
crests, and revegetating for stabilization of the spoil. Strip pits may be
left open and allowed to fill with water to provide recreation areas. Long
slopes may be terraced to aid erosion control, and drainage diversions and
channels may be installed for that purpose, and to keep water from leaching
pollutants from spoil. The final step of revegetation may include both a
quick cover crop of grasses and legumes for soil stabilization and tree plant-
ing. Where high acidity in the surface prevents establishment of plants, con-
tour furrowing may promote leaching and prepare the site for the existence of
the hardier, adaptable species. The addition of lime and fertilizer has been
shown to increase the success and encourage the rapid growth of vegetation.
These methods have been established, applied, and found effective.
Several methods may be sufficient to deal with problems presented by under-
ground mines below drainage. As a mine fills with water, oxidation processes
and acid production diminish and stop. But, where there is through-flow
across the body of water trapped in the mine, or where there is seasonal fluc-
tuation in the water level, there may continue to be enough acid production
to cause significant pollution. Various methods of coping with this situ-
ation have been suggested - backfilling mine galleries, injecting neutraliz-
ing agents that produce a sludge to blanket the acid-producing materials, in-
jecting chemicals to immobilize and prevent oxidation of sulfur minerals,
and sealing the surface to prevent or reduce percolation to the mines, as
well to treat the effluent. The adequacy of these methods remains to be
proved.
The most difficult problem is presented by underground mines above drainage.
Some methods have been applied successfully in several situations, notably
air-sealing and drainage diversion. The success of these methods appears to
be related to the proportion of openings which are closed and which would
otherwise permit entry of air and water to the mines. Numerous other methods
have been proposed that appear worth testing. They include injecting reac-
tive gases into mine galleries to immobilize and prevent oxidation of sulfur
minerals, grouting to make fractured layers above mineral seams impermeable,
and grouting with chemical solutions to bind sulfur.
To summarize physical solutions to the acid mine drainage pollution problem,
there are available established prevention and control methods to apply to
most strip-mined areas, to most of the underground mines below drainage, and
to the less complex situations in the underground mines above drainage. We
are on the track of economic methods for treating significant drainage resid-
uals from abandoned mines as well as effluents from operating mines. In the
188
-------
future, modified mining methods in stripping operations can be utilized for
reducing acid pollution.
COSTS
The FWPCA Acid Mine Drainage Pollution Control Demonstration Program has de-
veloped some standardized cost relationships which provide an insight into
the general magnitude of the cost requirements associated with controlling
acid mine drainage. It should be stressed that the costs, as presented here,
refer only to reclamation of abandoned sites. In the absence of adequate
controls over mining procedures, such costs would have to be projected into
the future on the assumption that remedies will continue to be borne by the
public. If adequate controls are enforced, future costs will be reflected in
total production costs and either borne by producers or passed on by them to
consumers. In either case, there are no existing estimates of the dimensions
of such costs.
This assessment is presented in terms of a minimum and a recommended solution
to the problem. The minimum solution is considered to be one which would ac-
complish significant reductions in pollution from acid drainage without re-
gard to accompanying requirements for restoration of land use capabilities or
other potential benefits, and with only a minimum of research necessary to de-
velop effective treatments for cleaning up effluents from active mines and
major pollution residuals. For strip-mined areas it would include basic rec-
lamation of 1.12 million acres at a cost of $360 per acre or a total of $400
million. Sealing underground mines would cost $225 million. Purchase of
land would cost an estimated $40 million. Program operations would cost over
$2.5 million a year for 20 years. This minimum program would thus cost about
§700 million, assuming no further pollution from current and future mining op-
erations. It is estimated that this minimum program would result in reduc-
tions of from two-fifths to three-fifths of existing acid mine drainage pollu-
tion. It would have the additional benefit of considerably reducing sediment
pollution from mine spoilbanks and wastepiles.
A more extensive solution to the acid mine drainage problem would increase ex-
penditures. It would involve work on approximately 2.2 million acres of
strip-mined land, to put the land back into uses planned and integrated with
the uses of surrounding lands and the needs of nearby metropolitan centers.
At an estimated average cost of $920 per acre, the cost would total $2 bil-
lion. For this more substantial operation, purchase of a greater percentage
of the land would be necessary - an estimated total cost of $85 million.
Sealing underground mines and treating subsidence areas would add an estimated
$900 million. Program operation would cost an estimated $4 million a year for
20 years, or $80 million. A grand total for the program is, then, $3.1 bil-
lion. (Table III-3.)
189
-------
TABLE III-3
ESTIMATED COST RANGE TO REDUCE ACID MINE DRAINAGE
BY 40% TO 80% OVER NEXT 20 YEARS
Cost Element
Range in Cost
($ Millions)
Reclaiming Abandoned Stripmine
Areas 400 - 2,000
Land Purchase 40 - 85
Sealing Underground Mines 225 - 900
Operation for 20 Years (Not
Discounted) 50 - 80
715 - 3,065
Source: In-HcuAe Pocumeitt, federal Wote/t Pollution Control
MminU&iation, U. S. VqpaAtmtnt o{ the. InteMon,
Aptul 14, 1967. (Vou not include. co&t& ol can-
A&iuction o& tteatment ptantt> and lu&vich and de-
velopment p*og>iam&.)
190
-------
This solution would bring about a reduction of at least four-fifths of the
pollution presently attributed to acid mine drainage. It would provide con-
siderable further benefits in almost complete reduction of sediment pollution
from mining activities. Enhancement of land values and land uses would ex-
tend well beyond the boundaries of the treated acres. (Table III-4.)
191
-------
TABLE 111-4
RANGE OF POLLUTION CONTROL COSTS
IN MINE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT
Item
Range or Average
Cost
(Dollars)
Sealing Underground Mines
Grouting - No data available
Surface Mine Reclamation -
Earth Moving - cubic yard
Surface Grading - per acre
Planting Costs: Trees - per acre
Trees, ground cover, fertilizing, per acre
Costs of complete reclamation including
grading and planting, per acre
Drainage Diversion, per foot
Impoundments per acre-foot
Refuse and Gob
Hauling - per ton mile
Reclamation at site per acre
Control and Treatment (mil. gal. per ft.
of pumping)
Treatment (neutralization - per thous.
gal.)
1,000
.05
71
35
125
106
6
500
600
.08
.03
2,000
.10
350
475
.10
.09
1.29
Source: Handbook o& Pollution Con&iot Co&& Jun. Hint VMLinage. Manan
-------
FEEDLOT POLLUTION
Animal wastes include liquids and solid wastes that are either excreted by
animals - farm livestock, wild animals, and pets - or arise from practices
associated with their care and utilization. This report is concerned primar-
ily with the livestock production aspects of animals used for food and fiber
Not only the excreta but the by-products of feeding and sanitation are in-
volved.
Animal wastes may contribute to water pollution in many ways. Involved are-
(1) excessive nutrients that unbalance natural ecological systems causing ex-
cessive aquatic plant growth and fish kills; (2) microorganisms that are path-
ogenic to animals, including man; (3) dissolved toxic impurities in drinking
water; (4) solids that load water filtration systems and complicate water
treatment; (5) taste and odor in water; and (6) consumption of dissolved oxy-
gen, producing stress on aquatic populations and occasionally producing sec-
tic conditions.
Animal wastes have been also associated with malodorous emissions from lakes,
rivers, streams, and other waterbodies. Methods of entry vary. Surface
drainage from cattle feedlots and other areas where animals are concentrated
in relatively large groups, has created considerable national concern. How-
ever, other problems such as seepage downward into aquifers, direct deposi-
tion of excreta by domestic and wild animals either at the edge of or in wa-
terbodies, runoff from city streets, drains from animal quarters and milking
rooms, seepage from silos, runoff from manured fields, and effluents from ani-
mal waste disposal lagoons are also significant.
Animal wastes may be the prime pollution contributor in some areas of the
country; for example, certain sections of the Midwest have feedlots on small
watersheds where animal concentrations are extremely high. Heavy storms
flush slug loadings of animal wastes into a small stream; the volume of storm-
water, however, is insufficient to provide adequate dilution along the entire
watercourse. Fish kills and lowered recreational values often result.
MAGNITUDE OF THE PROBLEM
Nearly all grain-fed cattle spend the last three to five months of their
1-1/2 to two years of life in feedlot confinement. Although feedlot drainage
can be as detrimental to a body of water as can untreated industrial and muni-
cipal wastes, very little planning has been done to curb the pollutional ef-
fect of feedlots.
Cattle feedlots are the major producer of concentrated animal wastes. How-
ever, there are other important sources of animal-related pollution which are
193
294-046 O - 68 - 14
-------
detrimental to health and the environment. These sources include multi-hun-
dred cow dairy operations, hog feedlots where many thousands of animals are
fed annually, and chicken and turkey operations feeding 100,000 or more birds
annually. Disposal of such wastes has become a problem, and economic studies
indicate that the cost of handling manures is higher than the costs of hand-
ling equivalent quantities of chemical fertilizers.
Table III-5 indicates the amount of solid wastes produced by livestock in the
United States. In addition to the wastes generated by commercial livestock,
as shown in this table, domestic animals produce over a billion tons of fecal
wastes a year. Liquid effluent amounts to over 400 million tons. Used bed-
ding, paunch manure from slaughterhouses, and dead carcasses raise the total
annual production of animal wastes to almost two billion tons. Possibly half
of this waste is produced under concentrated conditions. It also should be
noted that cattle in a feedlot for fattening, or dairy cows maintained for
high milk production, may produce double the daily amount of wastes shown in
the table.
It is of interest also to consider Table III-6 showing the population equiva-
lent of the fecal production by various kinds of livestock in terms of stand-
ard BOD. For example, a feedlot carrying 10,000 cattle has about the same
sewage disposal population equivalent problem of a city of 165,000 people.
The city will be using 8.2 million gallons of water a day to carry off its
sewage. Such amounts of water are never used and are seldom even available
at the feedlot.
Wastes carried in runoff from barnyards and feedlots may vary in BOD content
from 100 to 10,000 parts per million (ppm) depending on dilution and degree
of deterioration of wastes. Pollution control authorities object to runoff
entering a stream if it exceeds 20 ppm of BOD. Hence, the problem is a seri-
ous one in many areas.
Treatment systems using lagoons for the oxidation of animal wastes have been
tried on many feedlots. Success has not been complete. These lagoons are
plagued by problems such as overloading, floating litter, intermittent load-
ing, aquatic weeds, and sludge buildup. When a lagoon becomes overloaded,
bacteriological decomposition changes from that caused by oxygen using bac-
teria (aerobic) to that caused by bacteria which operate in the absence of
oxygen (anaerobic). During anaerobic decomposition, noxious gases and odors
are produced. Under such conditions, the lagoon becomes even more malodor-
ous than the ordinary manure pile.
To date, evaluations of river basin and watershed sources of pollution do not
provide a complete national picture of the role of animal wastes in water pol-
lution. The Potomac River Basin (more than 14,000 square miles) has been
adopted for use as a model for evaluation, and analysis of this basin will
provide some insight into the role of animal wastes. The evaluation of the
bacteriological aspects of pollution (coliforms, fecal coliforms, and fecal
194
-------
TABLE III-5
SOLID WASTES PRODUCED BY LIVESTOCK
IN THE UNITED STATES, 1965
Livestock
Cattle
Horses^/
Hogs
Sheep
Chickens
Turkeys
Ducks
ITOTAL
U. S.
Popula
tion,
1965
(millions)
107
3
53
26
375
104
11
Solid
Wastes!/
(gms./cap./
day)
23,600
16,100
2,700
1,130
182
448
336
Total Pro-
duction
Solid
Wastes
tons /year
(millions)
1,004.0
17.5
57.3
11.8
27.4
19.0
1.6
1,138.6
Liquid
Wastes
(gms./cap./
day)
9,000
3,600
1,600
680
-
-
Total Pro-
duction
Liquid
Wastes
tons/year
(millions)
390.4
4.4
33.9
7.1
-
-
435.8
•J 3owi. Mate*. PotfaUon Con&Lol Fecte/uitton 34:295
II
- Ho/iAe-6 and nuJLvt, on wo/tfe
Sou/ice: U>o6>teAjin Relotom to Ag/u.cu£tuA.e, Unpub^cified
U, S. Ve.pasiftne.nt o& Ag^LcnJUuA.n., kpnJUi 1967,
195
-------
TABLE II1-6
FECAL DISCHARGE FROM SPECIFIED ANIMAL TYPES
Animal
Han
Horse
Cow
Sheep
Hog
Hen
Fecal
Discharge
(gms./cap./day)
150
16,100
23,600
1,130
2,700
182
Relative
Discharge
Compared to
Man's Waste
(units)
1.0
107.0
157.0
7.0
18.0
1.2
Relative
BOD Per Unit
of Waste
(units)
1.000
0.105
0.105
0.325
0.105
0.115
Population
Equivalent
1.00
11.30
16.40
2.45
1.90
0.14
SouA.ce.: Wa&tu xn Relation to Ag/tccottu*e. C. H. UadLfUgh., Unpub-
mnui MonuActtpc, u. sT vvpaMmint otf Ag;u.cot£u*e,
1967.
196
-------
streptococci) revealed that animal wastes are a major source of pollution.
The ratio of fecal coliforms to fecal streptococci was used as an index of
animal/human waste contribution. Several sampling points consistently yield-
ed a ratio of less than one, an accepted indication that bacterial contamina-
tion was non-human in origin. Table III-7 provides a comparative example of
animal waste equivalence to untreated human wastes by sub-basins within the
Potomac Basin. This table takes into consideration the greater population
equivalent of animal wastes as compared to human sewage.
TABLE II1-7
ANIMAL WASTE EQUIVALENCE TO UNTREATED HUMAN
WASTE BY SUB-BASINS OF THE POTOMAC RIVER
Potomac River above Shepherdstown, W. Va. 800,000 people
Shenandoah River above Charles Town, W. Va. 1,400,000 people
Monocacy River above Frederick, Md. 700,000 people
TOTAL 2,900,000 people
The total human waste equivalence of the animal wastes is nearly six times
the human population (approximately 500,000 people) and more than 10 times
the sewered population (275,000 people) in the area.
Op to the time of the Potomac study, animal wastes were considered a pollu-
tion source only in small streams or lakes. The Potomac study has demonstrat-
ed the pollution potential of animal wastes in all river basins. The upper
limits of the animal waste problem on a national scale may be illustrated by
estimates that, in terms of standard BOD, U. S. farm animal waste production
is 10 times greater than U. S. human sewage.
Although the Potomac Basin studies provide the only currently available quan-
titative documentation of the role of animal wastes in water pollution rela-
tive to other wastes, there exists substantial evidence of the potential for
farm animal wastes to pollute water. The presence of the infectious agents
in water are always a concern, particularly in beach areas, surface waters
consumed directly by animals, and underground water supplies used by rural
dwellers. Infectious agents from animals which may pollute streams are an-
thrax, brucellosis, coccidiosis, encephalitis, erysipelas, foot rot, histo-
plasmosis, hog cholera, infectious bronchitis, nastitis, Newcastle disease,
ornithosis, transmissible gastroenteritis, salmonellosis, and leptospirosis.
Outbreaks of infections from these agents have been reported in numerous in-
stances.
197
-------
Looking at the national profile of the potential of farm animal wastes as a
source of excessive nutrients to streams, total nitrogen would average about
10 million tons, phosphorus about 2.5 million tons, and potassium about 7.5
million tons. These are substantial quantities of nutrients, but in terms of
total nutrients uniformly distributed in all water bodies, their significance
is greatly diminished.
PROCESSES CAUSING POLLUTION FROM FEEDLOTS
To meet the ever-increasing demand for high quality beef, the feedlot has
been utilized as a means of producing a high grade carcass in a relatively
short time. Cattle received in feedlots usually range in weight from 400 to
800 pounds per head. During the time cattle are in the feedlot, each animal
is expected to gain about 2-1/2 pounds per day. Therefore, over the 120 to
150-day feeding period, the animals leave the feedlot weighing from 750 to
1,200 pounds each. Indications are that the feeding period and the weight of
animals leaving the feedlot are increasing. A feedlot with a capacity of
5,000 head covers approximately 35 acres, an average of about 300 square feet
per animal. Each day cattle consume about 3% of their body weight in total
feeds. About two-thirds of this quantity is grain and protein. The other
one-third is roughage. A 1,000-pound animal consumes about 20 pounds of
grain and protein and about 10 pounds of roughage per day. Animals confined
in feedlots normally consume between 10 and 20 gallons of water daily. Ani-
mals so fed produce an average of about 64 pounds of wet manure per day; and
the nutritionally balanced feed results in a body waste having greater water
pollution potential than is found with grassland grazed cattle.
Cattle feedlots are seldom cleaned more than two to three tiroes per year;
usually manure is removed only once per year. Periodically, however, manure
on the floor of each feeding pen is mounded in a central location in the pen.
This mounding allows the animals a clean area in which to stand. Occasional-
ly, cattle feedlots have a concrete surface pen, where experimental work has
shown animals gain one-third pound per head more daily than those in muddy
pens. To minimize the mud problem, lots are normally constructed on land
having at least 2% slope, preferably underlaid with sand or gravel.
The most apparent water pollution problems from feedlot operations occur im-
mediately following rains sufficient to cause runoff from the feedlots. Cat-
tle feedlot runoff is a high strength organic waste containing large concen-
trations of nitrogen and with a high bacteria content. According to research
done at Kansas State University, one gallon of feedlot runoff is equivalent
to from two to seven gallons of average municipal sewage in terms of pollu-
tion load. Runoff from concrete feedlots was found to be approximately twice
as heavy as that from nonsurfaced feedlots, due to lack of infiltration.
198
-------
TRENDS IN MEAT CONSUMPTION, NUMBERS OF
CATTLE, NUMBERS OF FEEDLOTS
Consumption of beef and veal has been increasing. By 1980 the domestic de-
tand for beef and veal may increase by about 65% above the 1949-1951 average.
In the 1949-1951 period, total consumption of meat (excluding fowl) in the
United States amounted to about 22 billion pounds or about 145.6 pounds per
capita as shown in Table III-8. By 1964 consumption had increased to 176.2
pounds per capita; the largest increase occurred in the consumption of beef
and veal, up 50% to 106.6 pounds per capita in 1964 compared to 1949-1951.
Increases in the total number of large feedlots are sure to compound pollu-
tion control problems in the future. These increases are due to a number of
factors, the principal one being economies of scale and advantageous location.
fte potential magnitude of the problem can be realized by examining a 1964
Study made by the Crop Reporting Board, United States Department of Agricul-
ture, in 32 states.
According to this study, there were 1,635 feedlots marketing 1,000 or more
head of cattle in 1964 compared to 1,440 lots in 1962 or an increase of 14%.
the same feedlots (less than 1% of the total) marketed 6,912,000 head of cat-
tle in 1964 - 41% of the total that year and 27% more than in 1962.
As of January 1, 1967, a little over 11 million cattle were on feed in the
United States. Normally, during January, cattle feedlots are filled to with-
in 50-60% of capacity. Assuming this relationship exists, at any one time
feedlots in the United States total about 20 million head capacity. That
wuld mean that feedlot areas in the United states totaled about 138,000
acres or 215 square miles. The 11 million cattle on feed in these feedlots
nere producing about 700 million pounds of wet manure per day. On an annual
basis, this amounts to 255 billion pounds per year scattered over the 138,000
acres. That is a daily manure production of 2-1/2 tons per acre or an annual
lanure production of 925 tons per acre. About one-half of the wet manure
last be cleaned from the pens. The remainder either evaporates, runs into
ground water or into surface streams. The waste produced by cattle in feed-
lots is roughly equivalent to the organic loading of untreated wastes from
about 100 million people.
REMEDIES AND COSTS
Considerable research is under way to determine the characteristics of animal
wastes and of storm water runoff from cattle feedlots, various means of treat-
Ing animal wastes, the buildup of nitrates in ground water from feedlot seep-
age, and the engineering of structures necessary to control feedlot runoff.
tb date this research has only scratched the surface as far as research needs
199
-------
TABLE II1-8
U. S. PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF MEAT AND FOWL,
1949-1951 TO 1964 AND PROJECTIONS TO 1980i'
Type of
Meat
Beef and Veal
(Carcass Weight)
Pork
(Carcass Weight
excluding lard)
Lamb and Mutton
(Carcass Weight)
Chicken and Turkey
(Ready to Cook)
TOTAL
Per Ca
1949 to
1951
(Pounds)
71.2
70.6
3.8
24.9
170.5
)ita Consumption
1959 to
1961
(Pounds)
91.3
64.9
4.8
35.7
196.7
19£
1964 (Proje
(Pounds)
106.6 117.
65.4 58.
4.2 3.
38.5 45.
214.7 224.
Decrease or
Increase From
10 1949-1951
•cted) to 1980
(Percent)
0 64.4
0 -17.8
5 - 7.7
5 83.0
0 31.5
- Valy, R. F. and A. C. Egbe/rt, "A Look Ahead fan Pood and
(Stotu-ttca£ Suppiemwt) ERS 277, U. S. V&pa/itm&nt oj
n, V. C., Fefcttuwu/ 1966.
200
-------
are concerned. Continued research is needed to quantify water pollution stem-
ming from animal feedlots and to economically control such pollution.
Estimates of the costs of installing waste treatment facilities vary consider-
ably. The few feedlots equipped with treatment lagoons showed construction
costs ranging from $1 to $5 per head capacity, in other words, an operator
setting up a feedlot with 20,000-head capacity could possibly spend from
$20,000 to $100,000 in construction, excluding buildings. Estimated construc-
tion expenditures to control current pollution from large feedlots, with ex-
isting technology, would total over $7 million in the 32 states where feed-
lots are located. Construction includes fencing, grading lots for proper run-
off, excavating lagoons, and installing an irrigation system to distribute
the effluent to surrounding cropland.
Important factors affecting costs of waste disposal include size and loca-
tion of feedlot, soil characteristics, and the manner of disposal of solid
wastes and effluent. Information is needed on the effects and costs of efflu-
ent disposal through irrigation or runoff on ground water supplies. Treat-
ment facilities are few and their effectiveness is poorly understood. For ex-
ample, in some areas a three-lagoon system is an acceptable waste disposal
system for cattle feedlot operations. This type of operation channels the ef-
fluent into anaerobic, aerobic, and stabilization lagoons, in that order.
The few cattle feedlots using this type of system use the effluent to irri-
gate cropland. The manure is rich in nutrients, a good soil conditioner, and
is sold to surrounding farms for a nominal fee. This system has thus far
worked satisfactorily. However, it is too early to recommend this operation
for all cattle feedlots.
201
-------
PESTICIDES IN SURFACE AND GROUND WATERS
Modern pesticides are an important example of the many new synthetic organic
chemicals which have helped man to increase the efficiency and productivity
of his agricultural and horticultural operations. As would be expected with
any new synthetic compound, it is necessary to develop a thorough understand-
ing of the hazards as well as the benefits associated with the use of pesti-
cides. Currently/ there is little evidence that the levels of pesticides in
surface waters present an acute short-term hazard to man, although little is
known about the effects upon humans of long-term, low-level environmental ex-
posure to pesticides. There is, however, considerable evidence that some
species, particularly fish, are sensitive to pesticides at very low concen-
trations .
The major problems regarding pesticides in surface and ground waters relate
to their sources, nature and extent, and to the control procedures needed to
reduce or to maintain their incidence at tolerable levels.
USE OF PESTICIDES
Total U. S. sales of pesticides in 1966 amounted to an estimated 1.25 billion
pounds having a manufacturers1 value of around $800 million. Preliminary es-
timates of production of pesticidal chemicals in the United States during
1966 are:
(1) Fungicides - 177 million pounds
(2) Herbicides - 272 million pounds
(3) Insecticides, fumigants,
and rodenticides - 562 million pounds
Included under insecticides, fumigants and rodenticides is a small amount of
synthetic soil conditioners. Excluded from the fumigant category are carbon
tetrachloride, carbon disulfide, ethylene dibromide and dichloride, which
have uses other than as fumigants. The inorganic rodenticides are not in-
cluded in the rodenticide category.
The Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, con-
ducted a survey of pesticide use in 1964. Farms with sales of agricultural
products of $5,000 or more, in all areas of the United States except the
south, were surveyed. In the south (Appalachian, Southeast, and Delta
states), farms with agricultural sales of $2,500 or more were surveyed. The
farmers' pesticide expenditures by production region and type of farm are
listed in Table III-9.
202
-------
TABLE II1-9
U. S. FARMERS' PESTICIDE EXPENDITURES BY..
PRODUCTION REGION AND TYPE OF FARM, 19641/
Regi on
Expendi ture
(1,000 dollars)
Type of Farm
Expendi ture
(1,000 dollars)
Northeast
Lake States
Corn Belt
Northern Plains
Appalachian
Southeast
Delta States
Southern Plains
Mountain
Pacific
United States
28,800
42,343
87,267
20,500
52,693
52,841
54,670
33,593
21,311
62,222
456,240^
Cash grain 75,571
Tobacco 29,603
Cotton 85,923
Other field crops 15,710
Vegetable 26,023
Fruit and nut 54,782
Poultry 5,676
Dairy 34,897
Livestock 46,391
Ranches 3,675
General 71,449
Miscellaneous 6,540
United States 456,
taunt, iriOi Ao£c4 o<
rf Ae United S*o*<* except tkt SouA.
don, SoutnWt. and VlUa SCotw)
'*/ °£ ZdiiionaJL utunatzd $S&,062,000
not -included x.n
In
Sou/ice: Adapted ft*. U. S.
Seltvlce,
fax.
Econorrw.c Repo^ No.
-------
The 1964 Census of Agriculture reported the acreage treated, in the United
States, for pest control. The data are presented by crop or area, acreage
treated, and the percent of the total acreage, under the crop or area, that
was treated. In the 1964 Census only the acreage of crops harvested was re-
ported. Therefore, the calculated percentages, based on the acres actually
harvested, are likely to appear high. (Table 111-10.)
The Plant Pest Control Division, United States Department of Agriculture, co-
operates in pest control programs with individual states and with Mexico.
Treated acreages in the seven most extensive programs, for 1966-1967 were:
Imported fire ant 9,022,898 acres Witchweed 531,212 acres
Boll weevil 1,110,324 acres Gypsy moth 151,900 acres
Grasshopper 1,132,786 acres Pink bollworm 136,190 acres
Cereal leaf beetle 196,212 acres
Forest insect control projects conducted by the Forest Service, United States
Department of Agriculture, are done in cooperation with individual states and
with privately owned timber companies under certain strict conditions. Dur-
ing the years 1966 and 1967, the Forest Service was associated with the con-
trol of the following insects on the indicated number of acres:
Project and Location Acres Treated
1966 1967
Spruce budworm, Idaho, Montana and New Mexico 131,000 -
Fall canker worm, Pennsylvania 1,000 160,000
Pales weevil. North Carolina 4,000
Miscellaneous insects 23,500 6,800
Pesticide usage, other than agricultural and forestry, accounts for an unde-
termined level of potential contamination of the environment. For mosquito-
control purposes, pesticides are applied directly to the water or to adjacent
areas such as marshes, tide flats, etc. Control of aquatic weeds also in-
volves application of pesticides to water. At present the total amount used
in this manner is not available.
PESTICIDE LEVELS FOUND IN WATER
The residual properties and fate of chemicals used in pest control have been
the cause of considerable concern in recent years. Whenever pesticides are
applied, a certain part of these chemicals may remain as a residue. For pur-
poses of this discussion, we propose to limit the consideration of residues
to surface and ground waters. The residues are exposed to attacks by vari-
ous biological, chemical, and physical agents. The stability or possible
204
-------
TABLE 111-10
PEST CONTROL BY TYPE OF CROP, ACREAGE TREATED,
AND PERCENT OF TOTAL ACREAGE TREATED
Crop or Area
Acres Treated
Percent of Total
Acreage Treated
Insect and fungus control:
Grain
Cotton
Fruit and nuts
Hay crops
Vegetables for sale
Seed crops and other
TOTAL
16,620,570
8,285,994
3,296,412
2,273,438
1,972,525
6,475,406
38,924,345
42.7
21.3
8.5
5.8
5.1
16.6
100.0
Weed control:
Corn
Small grains
Cotton
Pasture and rangeland
Other
TOTAL
27,130,711
21,107,303
4,046,489
3,688,560
8,527,597
64,500,660
42.1
32.7
6.3
5.7
13.2
100.0
Sou/ice: U. S. 0epoA£nenX oi Ag/UcuttuAe >u>po*t
FWPCA.
205
-------
translocation of some pesticidal residues within soils or from soils into
plants or water, presents problems that require thorough investigation.
Since water moves on and within the soil, its potential effects on the per-
sistence and stability of pesticidal residues should be understood. While
insecticidal residues are primarily concentrated in the upper one to two
inches of the soil, it has been demonstrated that water in deeper soil strata
can be contaminated by these chemicals or their metabolites. Current data
indicate that these occurrences are infrequent. The frequency/ extent, and
duration of such occurrences need study and documentation. A large amount of
pesticide pollution of waters in rivers and ponds may occur through the trans-
port of soil particles, to which pesticidal residues are adsorbed, by irriga-
tion runoff, rainfalls or flooding. Pesticides in considerable amount are
also transported in solution in water. The fate, persistence, and distribu-
tion of pesticides once they reach water should be determined since they po-
tentially affect human and aquatic life.
The known programs for the measurement of pesticides in surface waters are
few in number and necessarily limited in scope. Extensive surveillance for
chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides as well as other synthetic organic pollu-
tants has been under way by the FWPCA for several years. In this order of
frequency, dieldrin, endrin, DDT, and DDE have been found present in all ma-
jor river basins. Heptachlor and aldrin have been less abundantly measured,
possibly because both compounds undergo chemical change to form epoxides -
aldrin changes to dieldrin and heptachlor to heptachlor epoxide.
The potential problem of biological magnification has received considerable
attention both in the scientific and lay areas. Biological magnification
occurs when organisms at the lower end of the biological scale, become con-
taminated with pesticides and then are consumed by higher organisms. As this
proceeds along the biological scale, it is possible for the pesticide content
per organism to increase to the point where intoxication takes place. At
present this problem seems to be fairly well limited to the chlorinated hydro-
carbon pesticides. There is an urgent need for more intensive investigation
of this process to provide information on which to establish water standards
in the field of pesticide contamination. The toxicity of many pesticides to
various aquatic organisms has been investigated. However, more research
needs to be done on the effects of long-term exposure at less-than-lethal
levels.
The potential problem of ground water pollution by pesticides is worthy of
serious consideration. Present recommendations for the disposal of empty
pesticide containers and unused pesticides call for burial in at least 18
inches of soil, in a place where ground water will not be contaminated. It
has been a common practice to dispose of empty containers and refuse from
manufacturing and formulation plants in this manner. In the case of manufac-
turing and formulation plants the amount of pesticide-containing refuse to be
disposed of can become a major disposal problem. Certain manufacturers have
206
-------
been using incineration techniques to dispose of refuse. Others have main-
tained "graveyards" where the material is buried.
is early as 1945 the United States Department of Agriculture cooperated with
the Fish and Wildlife Service to study some of the biological effects of for-
est insect control. This was a study of modest proportions involving more
than 20 experimental areas, using varied dosages of DDT to determine its ef-
fect on various forest types and forest pests. From this modest beginning,
•onitoring programs have increased in magnitude and sophistication. Federal,
State and private agencies cooperate in monitoring insect control programs.
Equipment unknown on the market until recent years, now is available for meas-
uring residues in parts per billion, or even parts per trillion. One might
veil ask if there were insecticide and pesticide residues in our waters a num-
ber of years ago that now could be measured but which were not detectable
»ith equipment and methods of a decade ago.
Fbrest lands comprise one-third of the total area of the United States, re-
ceive one-half of the total precipitation, and yield about two-thirds of the
streamflow. Forest lands annually receive more than twice the precipitation
falling on other lands and yield about 16 inches of runoff per year, four
times that from other lands. Thus forest lands provide most of the Nation's
Hater supply.
In 1962, 1.7 million pounds of insecticides were applied to about 1.8 million
acres of forest land. In addition, about half this amount of herbicides and
a small amount of other pesticidal chemicals were used. Insecticides used in
1962 on forest lands represented about 1% of the total poundage of insectici-
dal chemicals distributed in the United States. Thus, the rate at which pes-
ticides are used in the forest is substantially lower than in most other land
classes. Only about 5% of the Nation's forest lands have ever been treated
vith an insecticidal chemical.
tost of the studies made following forest spraying have dealt with adverse
effects of initial application on fish and wildlife. Very little is known of
toe long-term impact of forest pesticide use on water quality.
REMOVAL OF PESTICIDES FROM WATER
Bimerous studies have shown that repeated application of pesticides, particu-
larly of the chlorinated hydrocarbons, has resulted in residues of some of
these compounds being found in soil layers corresponding to plow and cultiva-
tion depths. These compounds are generally resistent to biological degradation.
Ihe extended persistence of these compounds has increased the chance of water
contamination. Current knowledge as to the extent and amount of pesticide
residues in water resources is meager, and knowledge about the significance
jof these residues and their effect on water supplies even more so. The com-
mittee which reviewed and updated the USPHS Drinking Water Standards in 1962,
207
-------
concluded that the information available at that time was not sufficient to
establish specific limits for pesticidal chemicals in drinking water. Only
the concentration that will produce a perceptible odor in water has been de-
termined for several pesticides. (Table III-ll.)
A study conducted by FWPCA personnel at the Taft Sanitary Engineering Center
assessed the effect of various treatments on concentrations of dieldrin, en-
drin, lindane, DDT, 2, 4, 5-T and parathion from water. The study indicated
that, while each part of the treatment plant may have potential for reducing
certain pesticides, no effective practical treatment is known for large vol-
umes of water containing pesticides.
COSTS
Although more needs to be done to assure long-term safeguarding of the envi-
ronment from pesticidal residues, the actions to reach these goals cannot be
defined precisely enough to assess the costs at this time.
208
-------
TABLE III-ll
THRESHOLD ODOR CONCENTRATIONS OF PESTICIDES
AND SOLVENTS IN WATER
Pesticides
Threshold Odor
Concentration
in ppm
Parathion (technical grade)
Parathion (pure)
Endrin
Lindane
Formulation components
Sulfoxide (synergist)
Aerosol OT (emulsifier)
Commercial Solvents
Deodorized Kerosene
Solvent 1
Solvent 2
Solvent 3
Sotw.ce: U. S.
FU'PCA.
.003
.036
.009
.330
.091
14.600
.082
.016
13.900
.090
209
294-046 O - 68 - 15
-------
NUTRIENT ENRICHMENT OF LAKES AND STREAMS
This section discusses the contribution of agricultural land through the pro-
cesses of runoff and deep percolation, erosion, and animal feeding to the min-
eral enrichment of water. The inadequacies of present information are noted,
and control measures that can be instituted are suggested.
LAND RUNOFF
All plant and animal life, whether on land or in water, requires mineral nu-
trients to grow and reproduce. On land, agriculture and agricultural re-
search have been concerned for centuries with providing such nutrients in
proper amount and balance for good crop yields, proportionately nutritious to
people and animals. In water, until about two decades ago, we depended on
natural runoff to supply the necessary minerals to the aquatic life that
serves as food for fish, shellfish and crustaceans harvested by man. Only re-
cently have we learned how to enrich or fertilize pond waters and lakes ar-
tificially to increase their productivity. Now we are finding that water can
be excessively and unintentionally enriched - to the point where "nuisance"
blooms of algae, noxious odors, and excess growth of water weeds degrade the
quality of the water. This water enrichment process - eutrophication - is
desirable up to a point, but carried too far becomes pollution. Nutrient ac-
cumulation is part of the natural geological process in the aging of a lake,
but accelerated by man, it leads to quick "death" of the lake.
Enrichment of stream and lake water can come from raw sewage, the effluent of
sewage treatment systems, runoff from city streets, the wastes of industry,
and the runoff, leachate, and sediments from agricultural land.
At least 12 mineral elements are needed to sustain life in a pond or lake,
but only two - nitrogen and phosphorus - receive much attention, for they are
the ones that control or limit the growth of plant life. The others are gen-
erally present in such concentrations relative to plant requirements that
they may have little or no effect on the amount of growth. Examples are
known of lakes deficient in molybdenum and iron for the optimum growth of
phytoplankton, but such instances are rare.
The problems associated with excessive nutrient accumulation in lakes and
streams are excessive growth of algae, mosses, and bottom-rooted grasses
along the shores. Growth of actinomycetes on the algae and the decomposition
of organic debris in the bottom muds produce offensive odors. Decomposing
dead algae and other water plants deprive fish of oxygen. The desirable
sport and food fish are replaced by less desirable scavenger species. The
oxygen deprivation may produce greatest loss of fish in winter when the lake
is frozen over. Fishing lines/ boat propellers, and water skiers get fouled
210
-------
up in the excessive vegetation. Shoreline properties decline in value.
Many examples of such lake deterioration can be cited - Lake Erie, Lake Wash-
ington, the Potomac estuary, to name a few.
The U. S. Department of Agriculture, as of June 30, 1965, has given technical
and/or cost-sharing assistance in constructing 1,420,733 farm ponds. The es-
timated losses in potential uses of these ponds caused by aquatic weeds for
the period 1951-1960 was $27,320,000 annually, in a farm pond, the nutrients
have to come from the land, fertilizers applied to land, the farmstead, or
excrement of migratory waterfowl.
Whether phosphorus or nitrogen is most limiting to growth depends on the lo-
cal situation. Evidence from Lake Erie indicates that there may be seasonal
variations when an element limits growth. Chemists know that they can often
obtain some growth of valve-plugging organisms even in distilled water lines.
No limit can be set for an element at which there will be no growth, for
plants have an enormous capacity to accumulate ions from extremely dilute
solutions. However, we are concerned with the levels that are associated
with objectionable growths in water. Mackenthun7 (1965), based on a review
of the literature, indicated that 0.015 ppm of total phosphorus and 0.3 ppm
inorganic nitrogen in the spring are associated with dense algae blooms later
in the season. He recognized that many considerations such as the rate of
water flow, the composition of the inflow, and the rates of decomposition and
release of nutrients in the bottom muds can modify these values.
Increasing use of fertilizers on farms has received much of the blame for ac-
celerated enrichment of surface and well waters. For example, the total
U. S. production of anhydrous ammonia in December 1966, was over one million
tons. This is more than the total nitrogen fertilizer consumption in any
year before 1948. In 1940, U. S. farmers used about 380,000 tons of nitrogen
as fertilizer. In 1966, farm use amounted to over 5-1/4 million tons, almost
a 14-fold increase. Hence, it is easy to conclude that accelerated eutrophi-
cation is a modern problem and that fertilizers are largely responsible.
However, there is considerable evidence that ground and well waters, particu-
larly in the arid and semi-arid West, contained considerable nitrate before
commercial fertilizers were used to any appreciable extent. The accumulation
of "niter" spots in the Arkansas Valley of Colorado, studied in the 1920's
and 1930's is classic. This accumulation, once blamed on nitrogen fixation,
was later shown to be a problem of accumulated nitrates, along with other sa-
lines. Unirrigated, uncropped soil in the San Joaquin Valley of California
was core-drilled to a depth of 50 feet and yielded 1,400 to 1,800 ppm nitrate-
nitrogen calculated on the basis of the soil solution. These profiles below
about four feet were dry, with soil water suctions in the range of 15 to 80
7 Macfeen-tnurt, K. M., "NwA -on Wot^r. and An Annotat&d
o£ TnexA &iotoQJ.ca£ E^eatA," USPHS Pub. 1305, 1965, p. W.
211
-------
bars. At this suction, little downward movement of nitrate could occur, but
when the soil was irrigated, nitrate moved downward with the wetting front.
An accumulation of nitrate-nitrogen was reported under dryland unfertilized
fields in northeastern Colorado. A marked zone of nitrate accumulation oc-
curred below the rooting depth of crops. Cropped profiles averaged 208
pounds of nitrate-nitrogen per acre to a depth of 22 feet, whereas dryland
native pasture land averaged only 72 pounds to the same depth.
Nitrates in water are actually a very poor measure of the enrichment of water.
Aquatic plants readily remove nitrate from water. Depletions of nitrate in
water at successive downstream sampling stations on a given river are fre-
quently noted. High accumulations of nitrate in surface waters is good evi-
dence that some other condition, probably a limitation of phosphate, is in-
hibiting the use of nitrate by aquatic plants.
USE OF FERTILIZER NITROGEN
In 1940, total nitrogen in fertilizers applied to U. S. farms was less than
500,000 tons. In 1964, about 4.5 million tons of nitrogen were applied, and
there is no indication that the rate of increase is slowing.
There is little point in citing average uses of nitrogen for different crops
and soils because the averages for the U. S. as a whole or regionally within
the country presently represent suboptimum levels in terms of crop response.
Within each region or State, levels of nitrogen fertilizer use range from far
less than adequate to excessive. With a normal frequency distribution, one
might expect that one-third to one-half of a given crop acreage receives near-
adequate fertilization, with the remainder divided between suboptimal and ex-
cessive use.
The goal in nitrogen fertilization is to minimize the amount of nitrogen that
must be applied to achieve the desired crop response. But with low-cost ni-
trogen fertilizer, its use is being increasingly geared to producing maximum
yields in the sense of nitrogen not being a limiting factor.
Considering only the crop receiving the fertilizer, data support the conclu-
sion that the efficiency range is broad, from about 25% to 75%. A level of
40% to 50% can be expected when timing of application is coordinated with
crop demands for nitrogen.
It is well established that nitrogen fertilization for maximum yield contri-
butes an excess of nitrogen to the immediate environment. In the vast amount
of field and associated laboratory research, little specific information has
been provided regarding the fate of the excess nitrogen under conditions of
high fertilization.
212
-------
During decomposition of root residues produced under conditions of nitrogen
abundance, substantial amounts of the nitrogen may be mineralized readily,
thus augmenting the pool of fertilizer nitrogen remaining in the soil. In
well-aerated agricultural soils, most of the mineral nitrogen is converted to
nitrate, in which form it readily moves downward in percolating water. If
the oxygen level is adequate, the nitrogen persists as nitrate, and remains
mobile within and below the root zone. Studies on sources of nitrate in
ground waters have been few and not very definitive in that not all possible
sources, i.e., corrals, farmland, sewage disposal fields, and cesspools were
considered.
Under humid conditions it is known that large losses of nitrogen by leaching
can occur if nitrogen is applied in the fall and if winters are mild. Too
many studies on the recovery efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen conducted un-
der conditions where leaching losses were thought to be minimal have given in-
sufficient attention to the downward movement of nitrate below the root zone.
The low recoveries often noted were presumed due to denitrification. Unfor-
tunately, there are no direct quantitative measurements in the field of the
magnitude of denitrification.
PHOSPHORUS
Phosphorus and the Fertility of Natural Haters
Phosphorus is generally considered to be the critical element in controlling
the fertility of natural waters. The critical concentration limiting the
growth of blue-green algae, whose appearance frequently indicates any unde-
sirable increase in fertility, is about 0.01 ppm (of phosphorus). Concentra-
tions of 0.05 ppm provide an excellent medium for profuse growth, and at lev-
els above this, the population is controlled by other factors such as light
penetration. In most uncontaminated waters, phosphate concentrations are
about 0.01 to 0.03 ppm which is close to the critical level. Relatively
small increases in concentration often have noticeable effects in the growth
of both algae and aquatic weeds that cause severe water management problems.
Sources of Phosphorus
Although 70% to 80% of the phosphates produced in the United States are used
as fertilizer, they have many industrial and domestic uses, the most promi-
nent being in synthetic detergents. Between 15% and 40% of the weight of
such materials, depending upon their use, is composed of phosphate salts.
Statistics on phosphorus consumption are complex, but a reasonable estimate
of the amount used for purposes other than as fertilizers can be made from
213
-------
the data on the annual production of electric furnace phosphorus. Table III-
12 shows that close to 80% of this material has gone into uses other than
fertilizer since the mid-1950's.
Table 111-13 shows the relative amounts of phosphorus consumed in both ferti-
lizer and non-fertilizer forms in the United States since 1950. The amount
of non-fertilizer material is based upon the furnace acid figures of Table
HI-12. These data show that non-fertilizer consumption has increased more
rapidly, and is now about 23% of the total. Since 1950 there has been almost
a three-fold increase in per capita consumption of phosphorus.
Phosphorus use in detergents is particularly important because these com-
pounds are completely water soluble and pass directly into sewers and drain-
age waters where they are fully available to plants. Unless sewage treatment
specifically designed to remove phosphate is applied, urban areas will con-
tribute available phosphorus at an annual rate of about five tons per 1,000
persons in the form of sewage effluents containing concentrations up to five
ppm. The amounts of phosphorus-free water needed to dilute this to tolerable
levels are rarely available.
The fraction of fertilizer phosphorus moving directly into natural waters is
very small. Even where highly soluble salts are used, they are rapidly con-
verted to insoluble forms in the soil. In time this phosphorus becomes dis-
tributed through the topsoil, but many studies have shown that downward move-
ment below plow depth is slow. Over 95% of phosphorus applied remains per-
manently in the top six to nine inches of the soil. The strong adsorption
capacity of the subsoil reduces the phosphate content of the soil water to
0.005 ppm or less and, under normal agricultural conditions, the amount in
drainage water is insufficient to support algal growth. A notable exception
is found where large amounts of phosphorus are used on well-drainged, irri-
gated soils. Average concentrations of 0.08 ppm have been observed under
such conditions in California's San Joaquin Valley.
Phosphorus and Soil Erosion
The most direct way in which agricultural phosphorus moves into drainage wa-
ters is by erosion of the soil into which it is adsorbed. The phosphorus
content of agricultural soils varies widely, but the largest amounts, ranging
from 800 to 2,700 pounds per acre to a six-inch depth, are found in the West-
ern States. The average rate of application on cropland in the United States
is close to 20 pounds per acre, although certain crops, notably tobacco and
potatoes, average two to three times this amount.
Several studies have shown that phosphorus losses from cropland are caused
entirely by erosion. Table 111-14 shows that a loss of four tons per acre of
soil containing 1,000 ppm of phosphorus - which may occur in soils in which
cotton or corn is grown - will represent a loss of eight pounds of phosphorus
214
-------
TABLE II1-12
U. S. PRODUCTION OF PHOSPHORIC ACID IN
THOUSAND TONS OF ELEMENTAL PHOSPHORUS
Year Total
Furnace Acid
Wet Process Acid
Total
Non-
fertilizer
Total
Non-
fertilizer
1965 1,707
441
358
1,266
94
1964 1,434
440
356
994
92
1960
922
333
589
1955
556
235
207
321
52
1950
254
128
126
Soutce: Ve.panAne.nt o£ Commw.ce, Vata.
215
-------
TABLE 111-13
U. S. CONSUMPTION OF PHOSPHORUS
Year
Phosphorus Consumed as:
Fertilizer
1,000 tons
Non-
fertilizer
1,000 tons
Percent
as Non-
fertilizer
Non-fertilizer
Consumption
Ibs./person/yr.
1965 1,520
441
23
4.5
1964 1,460
440
23
4.6
1960 1,112
333
23
4.6
1955
987
235
19
2.8
1950
841
128
13
1.6
Sou/ice: Ve.paAAme.nt o£ Commence. Data
216
-------
TABLE 111-14
EROSION OF SOIL AND PHOSPHORUS FROM FIVE
EXPERIMENTAL PLOTS OF DIFFERING SLOPES
ON DUNMORE SILT LOAM, VIRGINIA
Plot
Slope
(Percent)
Average Annual
Soil and Phosphorus Loss
Over 3-Year Rotation
Soil
(tons/acre)
Total Phosphorus
(Ibs./acre)
(Ibs./ton
of soil)
Maximum
Annual Soil Loss
(tons/acre)
4.38
8
1.8
6.5
10
8.25
10
1.2
14.0
15
12.42
13
1.0
24.5
20
11.55
13
1.1
19.7
25
19.50
26
1.3
35.5
U. S.
FWPCA.
Ag4x.cu££u/ie ie.poHt
217
-------
per acre a year. Under high erosion conditions this can increase to the or-
der of 30 to 50 pounds. Since this will be largely adsorbed in the soil col-
loids, only a fraction of this will be available for plant growth. If this
fraction is assumed to be 10%, then figures indicate that fertilizer and soil
phosphorus may be contributing to available phosphorus in lakes and rivers at
about one to five pounds per acre per year. This estimate agrees substantial-
ly with measurements of the phosphorus content of surface drainage waters on
the Kaskaskia River in Illinois which showed losses ranging up to 14 pounds
per acre per year with a mean value of about 2.5.
In addition to phosphorus carried into streams by soil erosion, significant
contributions may be made by leaching or by surface erosion of animal manure
from stockyards or manure piles. The phosphorus contents of some animal ma-
nures are summarized in Table 111-15, and average amounts excreted annually
per 1,000 pounds body weight of various animals are presented in Table 111-16,
page 240. Pollution from stockyards is of particular importance because feed-
lots represent points of high local input, especially where they are situated
near streams to take advantage of the water supply. The movement of phosphor-
us from animal wastes may then be a continuous process as opposed to the spo-
radic nature of the movement of phosphorus by soil erosion. Animal input may
be highest when erosion is least, as when wastes are washed into streams over
frozen ground in the winter. It is estimated that agricultural land contri-
buted 45% of the phosphorus input to Lake Mendota, Wisconsin, and the chain
of lakes associated with Lake Mendota. Seventy-five percent of this phosphor-
us came from runoff in the spring from an area where heavy manure applica-
tions were made on frozen soil.
On the basis of the foregoing data it is possible to make some general compar-
isons. A loss of five pounds per acre from a fertile soil means that the out-
put from one square mile is about the same as that from a community of 700
people, or a stockyard containing 200 cows, each of 1,000 pound-weight.
These figures represent totals and not effective amounts, which depend upon
the chemical forms in the various cases.
The Chemistry of Phosphorus in River Water
Direct measurement of the total phosphorus concentration, including that on
the suspended mineral material, cannot be regarded as a useful measure of the
amount available for plant growth. Measurements of the rate at which equili-
brium is established between the dissolved and adsorbed forms of phosphorus
in the soil show that complete equilibrium is never reached and the bulk of
the soil phosphorus is very inert. The most reactive part, reaching equili-
brium within a few days, is usually less than 5% to 10% of all the phosphorus
present. The amount of biologically active phosphorus present in stream wa-
ter carrying a significant load of sediment is probably a small fraction of
the total. Water containing 0.01% by weight of sediment, which itself con-
tains 1,000 ppm of phosphorus, would have a minimum total concentration of
218
-------
TABLE 111-15
PHOSPHORUS CONTENT OF ANIMAL
MANURES OF VARIOUS ORIGINS
Source
Range of Phosphorus Content of
Animal Manures (% dry weight)
Total i Inorganic* I Organic
Chicken
0.73 - 2.99 0.39 - 2.42 0.34 - 0.57
Hog
0.27 - 0.77 0.19 - 0.61 0.08 - 0.16
Horse
0.26 - 0.35 0.20 - 0.24 0.06 - 0.11
Cow
0.43 - 0.73 0.26 - 0.64 0.17 - 0.09
Sheep
1.19
0.75
0.44
-on
.c deponed a& that &x&ia.c£e.d -en 10% &u.cJkto>ia.c.e£ic. acid
Sou/ice: U. S. Ve.pcwtme.nt oft
219
-------
0.1 ppra, while the amount in true solution might be 0.01 ppm or less. Little
information is available about the contribution made by suspended phosphate
to the biological activity of river water. The matter is important, because
in lakes and still streams, settling sediment will carry considerable amounts
of phosphorus that may be returned to the upper water when the sediment is
disturbed under storm conditions.
Up to 20% of the total phosphorus in a surface soil may be present in organic
forms, although this fraction may vary a good deal with the locality, type
and management history of the soil. Table 111-16 shows that considerable
amounts of phosphorus derived from animal wastes may also be organic. In un-
disturbed soil, the organic fraction does not readily reach equilibrium with
that in true solution, and is not immediately available for plant consumption,
but abrasive action of eroding materials and the stirring action in streams
may tend to increase its availability. Little information is available on
the biological activity of organic phosphates in streams, and new analytical
procedures are needed to reveal the significance of this activity.
TABLE 111-16
AMOUNTS OF PHOSPHORUS EXCRETED ANNUALLY
BY 1,000 POUND WEIGHT OF VARIOUS ANIMALS
Source Annual Excretion of Phosphorus
(Ibs. P/1,000 Ib. wt. of animal)
cow 17
Horse 19
Sheep 19
Poultry 30
Swine 45
Sou/tee: U. S. Pepo/tOnent orf Ag/ucuttote
220
-------
COSTS
No estimate has been made of the cost of providing adequate safeguards
against excessive nutrient runoff. Current procedures depend largely upon
educational programs that encourage application of nutrients to the soil on
the basis of tested need, thus avoiding the hazard of "luxury" over-fertili-
zation. As new research data identify the sources and amounts of nutrient
runoff, and as new technology provides nutrients in forms that will avoid
displacement, cost estimates can be developed.
221
-------
IMPACT OF IRRIGATION ON SALINITY OF SURFACE WATERS
Salinity of surface waters refers to their total soluble salt content, mainly
of chlorides, sulfates, and bicarbonates of calcium, magnesium, and sodium.
The amounts and proportions of these constituents vary not only from river to
river, but from reach to reach of a single river. This section discusses the
impact of irrigation agriculture on total salinity, and specific salt com-
position of rivers, and some measures for control of salt-degraded water.
Dissolved salts derive ultimately from weathering of rock and solubilization
of soil minerals. Immediate salt sources vary. Even rainfall contributes
some miniscule amount of salt to surface waters, though the contribution of
seawater salts and dust-borne salts to surface water salinity is generally
minor (probably 10% or less). Rainwater percolating through soils carries
additional salts into rivers and lakes. These salts are produced by weather-
ing of soil minerals, and the process is the principal natural source of sa-
linity in surface waters.
In some areas, salt beds or saline strata of geologic origin may contribute
especially high salt concentrations not only to percolating rainwater, but to
rivers and streams flowing across their surface.® In humid zones the salin-
ity of surface water is generally low because soils have been leached for
eons by abundant rainfall. In arid and semi-arid zones soils contain larger
amounts of salts, and surface waters generally have higher salt concentra-
tions. (The acreage of irrigated farmland is shown in Table 111-17.)
It is important, then, that irrigation, subject to mineralization, is roost
necessary in arid areas, for irrigation itself is an unvarying source of sa-
linity in waters. The well documented salinity of the Colorado River, for
example, may be traced - even as far upstream as Hoover Dam - in large part
to irrigation. (Table 111-18.)
Although not conclusive, evidence presented in Table 111-19 shows that the
salinity problems in the Colorado, North Platte, Arkansas, and Rio Grande
areas did not necessarily originate with the extensive development of irriga-
tion projects, but that salts were present in substantial amounts over 60
years ago. Analyses of various chemical constituents of single samples of
water shows the Colorado River had 833 ppm of dissolved salts at Yuma, Ari-
zona in 1893, and that the Arkansas River content ranged from about 1,100 to
1,400 ppm during September and October in 1909. It is clear, however, that
the onset of extensive irrigation has intensified the salt problem; for the
t CkapteA & JLYI
"titathvung ojj RocfeA and Utne/tafcA -en SoiJL GeneA-tA", Volume. 1 ojj Ency-
clopedia. o& SoJJi Science.
222
-------
TABLE 111-17
ACREAGE OF IRRIGATED LAND IN FARMsl/
Water Resource Region
Acres
(1,000)
North Atlantic
South Atlantic-Gulf
Great Lakes
Ohio
Tennessee
Upper Mississippi
Lower Mississippi
Souris-Red-Rainy
Missouri (Arid)
Arkansas-White-Red (Arid)
Texas-Gulf (Arid)
Rio Grande (Arid)
Upper Colorado (Arid)
Lower Colorado (Arid)
Great Basin (Arid)
Columbia-North Pacific (Semi-Arid)
California (Semi-Arid)
TOTAL
203
560
82
30
13
55
625
9
5,802
2,806
4,168
1,638
1,361
1,219
1,426
5,014
7,627
32,638
— To6u£a£ec£ by ft/oteA Reaautce Region* friom the. 1959 Cen4u6
223
-------
TABLE 111-18
INCREMENTAL SALT CONCENTRATION ATTRIBUTABLE '
TO SPECIFIC SOURCES, COLORADO RIVER AT HOOVER DAM-i-'
(1942-1961 Period of Record Adjusted to 1960 Condition)
Factor TDS* Increment, Mg/L
Natural Sources
Diffuse Sources 274
Point Sources (mineral springs,
wells, etc.) 69
Irrigation
Consumption 88
Leaching 165
Municipal and Industrial Sources 10
Water Exports 22
Evaporation and Phreatophytes 97
TOTAL 725
- Baaed on data frwm-. USGS ?io&Ui>4.onaJt Pope* 44 1 , Watet Re-
, Piog-
Kfcpo/it No. 3, QuaCLtij o& WateA, coZakado Wbtvi
Jatwuvu/ 1967; FWPCA /teco/tdA on open
* To-toC
224
-------
TABLE 111-19
HISTORIC WATER QUALITY DATA FROM
FOUR WESTERN RIVERSl/
Date
Parts
Per
Million
of
TDS
Location
1893
Colorado River
833
Yuroa, Arizona
Sept. 1906
Oct. 1906
Oct. 1906
North Platte River
262
361
265
North Platte, Nebraska
Columbus, Nebraska
Fremont, Nebraska
Sept. 1907
Sept. 1907
Oct. 1907
Arkansas River
1,079
1,105
1,418
Great Bend, Kansas
Arkansas City, Kansas
Deerfield, Kansas
1893-1894
Sept. 1905
Rio Grande River
399
746
Mesilla, New Mexico
Laredo, Texas
U CtaAk, F. W., The. Composition o& Rcve^tA and
United State*, USGS P^o^sionat Pap&i 135, 1924.
the.
225
294-046 0-68-16
-------
past six years the Colorado River at Yuma, Arizona, has averaged about 2,300
ppm (total dissolved solids). The difference between 833 and 2,300 TDS is
probably due to irrigation return water.
Table 111-20 indicates about a 40-fold variation in salt content of these
rivers. A river, such as the Rio Grande, may have low salinity in its head-
waters, but build up to a high salinity at its mouth. This increase in sa-
linity results in part from the inflow from saline tributaries, from removal
of salts from irrigated lands, and from the evaporative loss of water due to
irrigation with resultant concentration of salts in the smaller residual vol-
ume.
Data in Table 111-20 also show that irrigation and drainage waters from se-
lected irrigation districts vary in electrical conductivity, and hence salin-
ity. In all cases, the salinity of drainage water is higher than that of the
irrigation water. However, the ratio between the two concentrations is not
constant. It varies from about a twofold increase in most instances to a ten-
fold increase in the case of the tile drainage water in California's Imperial
Valley. Rate of evapotranspiration, level of reuse, degree of segregation of
saline return waters, and leaching rates all affect the ratio.
For the chemical composition of some river waters used for irrigation, see
Table 111-21.
SIGNIFICANCE OF WATER QUALITY DEGRADATION
AS THE RESULT OF IRRIGATION
Increased salinity is an inescapable consequence of irrigation. Unlike most
uses, irrigation involves actual consumption of water rather than its use and
subsequent discharge. Up to 70% of applied irrigation water is taken up by
the plant life or is evaporated. (The more efficient the application of water,
the higher the coefficient of evapotranspiration.) Little, if any, of the dis-
solved salts carried in irrigation water is used by the plant life. Each use
of water in irrigation increases the concentration of salts by reducing the
volume of the carrying liquid; (e.g., if water with 100 ppm of TDS is applied
and the rate of evapotranspiration is 50%, then half as much drainage water
returns to the stream as was diverted, but it contains the- original quantity
of salts, so that the concentration of TDS in the irrigation return water
will have been increased to 200 ppm). Increasing further the potential sa-
linity of irrigation return water is the fact that one of the functions of
irrigation is to flush excess salts away from the root zone of growing plants.
Arid soils tend to be highly mineralized requiring extensive flushing, so
that irrigation of such soils results not only in a reduction of carrying wa-
ter, but in a net increase in the gross volume of salts. (The earlier illu-
stration, where a 50% loss of water involved a 100% increase in TDS concen-
trations, assumed the most favorable situation, existence of a salt "balance"
with no pick up of soil salts during irrigation. To carry the illustration
226
-------
TABLE II1-20
COMPARISON OF THE SALINITY IN IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE
WATERS FROM SELECTED IRRIGATION DISTRICTS
Irrigation District
Salinity
(Mineralization as
Electrical Conductivity)
Irrigation Mater | Drainage Water
Middle Rio Grande Valley,
Albuquerque Division!/
Lower Rio Grande,
Rincon, Division!/
Mesilla Division!/
El Paso Division!/
Pecos River, Carlsbad Are
Colorado River Water, Meloland
Imperial Valley, California^/
Wapato Project, Washington
(Yakima River water)—'
481
834
869
1,200
4,360
1,120
137
1,070
1,480
1,410
3,680
7,800
11,770
296
U U. S. Gide., Cali-
227
-------
TABLE II1-21
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF SOME RIVER WATERS USED
FOR IRRIGATION IN WESTERN UNITED STATES!/
River
Missouri
Yellowstone
North Platte
South Platte
Platte
Arkansas
Arkansas
Canadian
Rio Grande
Rio Grande
Rio Grande
Pecos
Gila
Salt
Colorado
Sevier
Sevier
Weber
Humboldt
Sacramento
Kem
Columbia
Snake
Payette
Rogue
Locati on
Williston, North Dakota
Miles City, Montana
Wyoming-Nebraska lines
Englewood, Colorado
Aurora, Nebraska
La Junta, Colorado
Ralston, Oklahoma
Conchos Dam, New Mexico
Otowi Bridge, New Mexico
El Paso, Texas
Roma, Texas
Carlsbad, New Mexico
Florence, Arizona
Stewart Mountain Dam,
Arizona
Yuma, Arizona
Central, Utah
Delta, Utah
Ogden, Utah
Rye Patch, Nevada
Tisdale, California
Bakers field, California
Wenatchee, Washington
Minidoka, Idaho
Black Canyon, Idaho
Medford, Oregon
Date
Sampled
11/29/45
7/22/48
10/8/45
7/11/44
7/21/51
7/21/44
8/16/44
6/3/43
6/46
6/46
6/46
1945/46
4/10/34
3/8/34
3/21/43
6/5/49
6/3/49
10/7/49
8/48
8/15/47
9/28/44
11/25/35
1948/49
1948/49
9/13/32
Mineraliza-
tion as
Electrical
Conductivity
838
548
828
406
800
1,210
1,670
844
340
1,160
607
3,210
1,720
1,210
1,060
580
2,400
510
1,173
162
234
151
410
100
108
Dissolved
Solids
(ppm)
574
368
565
246
571
981
967
586
227
754
380
2,380
983
664
740
338
1,574
308
658
108
152
78
246
60
72
I/ Pota fam Table. 12, page. 77 oj
.
Improvement o& Satine. and Mkati SoW>," 1954.
Handbook 60, "Viaano&i* and
228
-------
one step further, assume that a volume of salt equal to one-half the volume
borne by the applied waters is flushed from soil and dissolved in the irriga-
tion water; then the return flow would have a TDS concentration three times
that of the originally diverted water, or - in the illustration - 300 ppm.)
When the return flow merges with the receiving river, the net result is an
increase in salinity that can affect all downstream water users. Because the
mechanism is invariable, cumulative salinity is progressively greater with
each reuse of irrigation water.
Salinity is generally regarded as excessive for domestic use when total salt
content exceeds 500 ppm, although more saline water is sometimes used. Even
salt-sensitive crops can increase the salinity of return flows to five times
this value. Dilution in the river may partially correct this effect, but re-
use of the river water for irrigation will ultimately reduce the water volume
and increase salinity.
Industrial uses of water are so varied that no single salinity limit for gen-
eral industrial use can be given. When high quality water is required, as
for boiler water, paper manufacture, or food processing, the increase in sa-
linity caused by irrigation agriculture in many cases impairs the suitability
of the river water.
Along many western rivers, water is reused by several irrigation districts
along the river. Downstream projects must generally use more saline waters
than those available to upstream users. Frequently, dilution of return flows
in the river reduces salinity sufficiently to permit repeated use of the riv-
er water. However, it should be pointed out that downstream users are not
necessarily benefited by the volume of return flow waters added to the river
by upstream irrigation districts. For example, if an upstream district has
used its irrigation water with maximum efficiency, the return flow will be as
concentrated as the particular crops grown in that district can make it with-
out damage to the crops. Only by the growth of more salt-tolerant crops can
this return flow be utilized further. If more salt-tolerant crops are not
grown in the downstream projects, the return of such intensively used water
to the river contributes no usable water to those downstream projects. This
results because the salt carried in the return flow from the upstream dis-
trict must reappear in the same water upon reuse downstream. In such cases,
downstream users are penalized because the additional volume of water with no
reuse potential must be carried through the project and drained. If, on the
other hand, crops five to ten times as salt tolerant are grown downstream,
then a correspondingly higher salt concentration compared to the upstream re-
turn flow water can be tolerated.9
a
Leon, "Rcuae o£ Ag^icultuAat WoA-tewoteAA fan lwu.gati.on
Relation -to the. SaLt To£eAanc.e. ofi Otopi", Ptoc. , Symposium on Ag>u.ca£-
aAtwxvtztA , Report Wo. J0, WcuteA Re^ouAcea Center,
Catt^u-a, 1966, pp. 1&S-1BB.
229
294-046 O - 68 - 17
-------
Three choices are available for controlling natural situations marked by ex-
cess salinity, such as those occurring in the Red River and Arkansas River
Basins: divert the flow of saline springs around the points where waters are
diverted for beneficial uses; create a head of water over the outlets of sa-
line springs to stop their flow; and cut off by diversions or by surface seal-
ants the supply of percolating water. The last procedure has a twofold ad-
vantage. Not only is the salt source avoided, but the yield of fresh water
is sustained or increased.
Areas having concentrated deposits of salts in underlying strata could be
avoided by excluding them from irrigation developments. Canal routes may be
selected to avoid such deposits or the canals can be lined.
Another possible source of salts in return flows from irrigation districts is
highly saline shallow aquifers underlying an irrigated area. A high water
table often develops in such areas because of restricted natural drainage,
and drainage systems usually are needed to discharge the extra water applied
to satisfy the leaching requirement for the system.
INCREASING THE FLOW OF WATER WITH WATER
OF LOWER SALT CONCENTRATION
Water Harvest
The feasibility of increasing runoff from salt-affected areas by reducing in-
filtration, utilizing soil surface sealants, offers one possibility of col-
lecting and releasing high quality water for control of natural salt accumu-
lations. Instead of having natural flow of poor quality from salt-contribut-
ing areas such as the extensive Mancos shale deposits in Wyoming and Colorado,
the soil surface could be sealed using chemical or physical barriers that
cause essentially 100% runoff. Sodium chloride to disperse the soil surface,
cut back asphalt emulsion as a soil sealant, and plastic membranes have been
effective on small research plots.^°
Import of Water
Attention is being given to inter-basin transfer of water to reduce salt con-
centrations by dilution during critical periods of flow and to provide water
supplies. Imported water would often permit greater flexibility in regula-
tion of stream flows and diversions, particularly as related to the water re-
Mt/e/16, L. E., "Wo&A HaAvutlng , " pieAentzd at Nevada W&teA
17th, (Cawon Ccty, Nevaaa), 1962, p. /4.
230
-------
quirements of irrigated agriculture, but only to the extent such water was
not used to provide additional irrigation.
Increasing Precipitation by Weather Modification
Weather modification to increase water supplies in arid regions has received
much research attention during the past decade. Considerable knowledge has
been gained about the physics of cloud formation, and the potential contribu-
tion that atmospheric water may provide in augmenting natural precipitation.
It appears that water supplies in mountainous areas might be increased 10% to
15% by seeding storms with silver iodide to increase snow accumulation and ul-
timate runoff.11
Proposed projects for major inter-basin transfers of water and the seeding of
clouds, however, are costly, create legal and political problems, and involve
unmeasured ecological hazards.
REDUCTION OF EVAPORATION AND TRANSPIRATION LOSS
Agriculturally nonbeneficial use of water by phreatophytes or water-loving
plants growing adjacent to river channels, canals and drains amounts to an
estimated 25 million acre-feet of water annually in the Western States.12
Salt cedar is the most common phreatophyte in the Southwest and requires from
five to nine acre-feet of water per acre annually. The obvious solution to
the problem is eradication, a practical, but costly, way to increase river
flow and thereby reduce salt concentration.
Another major loss of water in the 17 Western States occurs by evaporation
from freshwater and inland saltwater bodies. It is estimated that about 23
million acre-feet of water is lost annually through evaporation from fresh-
water areas and another 17.5 million acre-feet is lost from inland saltwater
areas.13 The flurry of research activity in the past decade to explore the
effectiveness of monomolecular films (hexadecanol and octadecanol) on water
surfaces to reduce evaporation losses has almost ceased. Though these chemi-
cals form an effective barrier to evaporation from water surfaces, weed and
algae growth and wave action limit practical utility. (Results indicate that
11 "flutcgotum o{ Ag/ix-cuttotoe Land*," Monograph No. H, 7967, pp. 45-46.
12 Rokorton, T. W. , "The PhMcutapkyte. Pwbtvn," In Sympo&ium on Vkwato-
pkyt&A, Pacific. Southwest lnteAage.nc.y Committee., J95*f pp. I-M.
Gautka OJaJUvi U. , "Evaporation and ltt> Reduc^con," Pioc. InieA
tionat Seminal on BoiJi and. Watc* U£6£tzatuw, South. Vakota State.
Co-Uege, Blocking*, South. Vakota, July 1962, p. 74.
231
-------
evaporation can be reduced by as much as one-third under ideal conditions.)
Work is continuing^4, but the use of chemicals to suppress evaporation appears
to have limited application. Exploratory work with floating plastic mem-
branes shows promise in reducing evaporation as well as controlling aquatic
growth.
It is estimated that one-fourth to one-third of all water diverted for irri-
gation purposes is lost in conveyance. U. S. Bureau of Reclamation records
for 46 projects show that 15.7 million acre-feet of water is diverted annual-
ly. That lost to seepage represents 3.9 million acre-feet and evaporation
losses from canals accounts for another 1.0% to 1.5% of the diverted water.
It is questionable whether canal seepage losses are actual losses, because of
return flow; recovery of such water for reuse is never complete, however, and
in many instances it carries a considerably heavier salt burden than the wa-
ter being transported.
SEPARATION OF SALINE WATER FROM FRESHWATER FLOWS
Increases in salt concentration can be avoided by denying entry of saline
flows (natural or from irrigation) to the river or by desalinizing before al-
lowing such waters to enter the river. Either solution requires interception.
Complete interception is virtually impossible because of the percolation of
water to and through deep strata, but conceivably at least the effluents from
artificial drains can be collected. A precondition is to maximize irrigation
efficiency/ so as to minimize the volume of saline water to be collected per
unit of salt. Desalinization, while technically feasible, involves major
problems of brine disposal and - at this time - continues to be too expensive
for irrigation or other low value per unit water application uses. (Table
111-22.)
Salt Sinks
Lagoons can be created or natural sinks such as the Salton Sea in southern
California can be utilized to confine the salt in collected waters. Within
the lagoon, or sink, solar energy removes water from the brine. The end re-
sult is an accumulation of dry salts that might themselves have economic val-
ue, or certain elements might be extracted from the brines from certain areas
during the drying process.
14
"RuzaJich-Engine.eAing Me#ioda and Ma£eAiatt>," Bateau o<$ Reodamatcon Re-
Repo-tt, U. S. Pepattwiewt orf tke. IYVLVU.OI, 1963, pp. 1-137.
232
-------
TABLE 111-22
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH EXISTING DESALINIZATION PROCESSES
Project
Method
Status
Size
(Million
Gallons/
Day)
Cost/
1,000
Gallons
MWD of Southern California Distillation
San Diego
Israel
Pilot Study
Pilot Study
Distillation
Distillation
Ion Exchange
proposed
under construction
under study
experimental
Reverse Osmosis experimental
150
1.2
100
$0.22
$1.00
$0.29
$0.40-1.00
$0.25
Seaside.: CompHad fiicm RfcAou/icea fan the. Fotu/te, and O^ce. o£ Sa&tne. WateA Repo/Lt&.
-------
Desalination
This process also could be combined with the salt sink concept. The end re-
sult could then be the salvage of a portion of the water as freshwater, in
addition to the accumulation of quantities of dry salt.
Collecting Basins
These are used as temporary storage lagoons to concentrate saline waters.
The brine, concentrated by evaporation from pond water, might be discharged
during periods of peak flows.
Discharge Channels
Channels separate from the river might be constructed to transport highly sal-
inized return flows to the ocean. An example of such a channel is the San
Joaquin Master Drain that has been approved for the San Joaquin Valley in
California.15
REDUCING EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
Obviously, the most complete and effective reduction in salinity induced by
the evapotranspiration process can be accomplished by reducing the number of
acres irrigated. Limitation of salinity increases can be most effectively
promoted by curtailing irrigation in areas where salinity is a problem. Ob-
viously the very mechanics of irrigation impose a self-regulating limitation
on the extension of irrigation. A parcel of water can be effectively reused
only so many times, the degree of recycling depending in large measure on
initial TDS concentration. At a certain level of use intensity, it must have
become too salty for additional application. Thus, either the quantity or
the quality of a stream can become the critical limiting factor in irrigation
extension. It is this phenomenon that leads to the growing desire for large
scale interbasin water transfers.
But there are other possibilities less radical than reducing irrigation to
reduce evapotranspiration by altering soil, water, and crop management prac-
tices. In particular, application of systems engineering to the irrigated
agriculture of entire drainage basins should establish the trade-offs between
water use agricultural procedures that result in optimum water use/agricul-
tural production balances. Selection of crops, timing of growth, careful use
Hurf^mon, Elmo W., "Wa&tuuatufL £t4po4o£: Son Joaqmin Valtzy,
iua", JouAnat o£ IwUQOtion and VJuLinaQe. V
-------
of water, use of proper draining and transmission precautions, determination
of desired water uses, even desalination - there is a great variety of ele-
ments to be balanced, a great number of remedies to be applied before it is
necessary to resort to extensive irrigation restriction or large scale water
transfers.
COST ESTIMATES FOR REMEDIAL OR CONTROL MEASURES
Costs of control measures for water quality related to irrigation depend upon
the degree of improvement required and are determined by physical factors in
individual drainage basins. It should be recognized that the basic remedy
for degradation of surface waters by salinity involves reducing, diluting, or
eliminating saline return flows into surface waters that serve as water
sources for other users. The cost for alternative disposal methods will vary
greatly among specific projects. Many of the possible remedial measures are
not sufficiently developed to be immediately applicable, and still others in-
volve market analysis beyond the scope of this report.
235
-------
OIL POLLUTION
Spills of oil and other hazardous materials constitute a major pollution
threat to the water resources of the nation. Both water and land-based fa-
cilities are sources of this danger to our streams and rivers. Each source,
large or small, occasional or continuous, must be taken into account.
THE PROBLEM
Much damage has already been done from accidental or indiscriminate spillage
of crude oil, petroleum and its by-products. Such spills have contaminated
water supplies, killed fish and wildlife, created fire hazards, and destroyed
or reduced the usage of recreational areas.
Waterborne Sources
World-wide waterborne casualties dropped .2%, from 2,408 in 1966 to 2,353 in
1967. (Table 111-23.) Collisions were up, however, 18% from 922 to 1,090 in
this same period.
The Torrey Canyon disaster is still fresh in many people's memories. This
vessel was carrying 119,000 tons of fuel oil when she grounded off the Cor-
nish coast of England in 1967.
There has been a steady progression in tanker capacity since World War II.
The T-2 tanker of World War II carried 16,000 tons of fuel oil. In 1965 the
average tanker had a capacity of 27,000 tons. New tankers delivered in 1966
averaged about 76,000 tons. Tankers now on order include 60 that will exceed
150,000 tons, and some will reach over 300,000 tons. Feasibility studies in-
dicate tankers of 500,000-ton-capacity may be built in the future. As the
size of vessels increases, it is obvious that the magnitude of disaster-po-
tential due to accident also increases.
Foreign tankers or tankers under foreign registry are carrying an increasing
amount of U. S. oil. Foreign ships carried about 20% of U. S. imports in
1945, 50% in 1951, and about 95% in 1964. Aspects of tanker pollution which
are readily manageable under U. S. law may not be applicable to foreign ves-
sels.
Commerce in potential pollutants is quite active on the 25,000-mile network
of U. S. inland waterways. An estimated 188 million tons of petroleum pro-
ducts and hazardous substances were moved on these waterways in 1964. The
inland fleet involves smaller vessels but they use confined water areas where
spills spread quickly and endanger shore facilities and potable water sup-
plies.
236
-------
TABLE II1-23
WORLDWIDE WATERBORNE CASUALTIES,
U. S. VESSELS, 1966-1967
FY
1966
FY 1967
Number of Casualties
Vessels over 1,000 tons
Tank Ships and Tank Barges
Locations :
U. S. Waters
Elsewhere
Total
Types of Casualties:
Collisions
Explosions
Groundings with Damages
Flounderings, Capsizings, Floodings
Total
2,408
1,310
470
1,685
723
2,408
922
175
302
315
1,714
2,353
1,343
499
1,569
784
2,353
1,090
168
282
230
1,770
Source: "Oil Potdtttcon," XJLpont to the. PieA-Ld&nt by tke.
tasiy o{ the. InteAiofi and the, Se.cA.et
-------
Gasoline Service Stations
About 350 million gallons of used motor oil must be disposed of annually by
more than 210,000 service stations operating in the U. S. The stations were
once the key suppliers for used oils sent to re-refiners. In the past five
years, however, reuse of oil has become an increasingly marginal business,
due to changes in labeling requirements and tax laws. As the demand for used
oil has diminished, the oil has had to be disposed in other ways, often by
flushing into sewers.
Tank Cleaning Facilities
Most large shipyards have tank-cleaning facilities, but not all have the
equipment to treat oily wastes.
Oily Waste Industries
According to the Bureau of the Census, over 10,000 industrial plants are ma-
jor water users. Many of these plants have significant quantities of oil in
their wastes. Untreated or inadequately treated wastes from such sources
cause a continuing oil pollution problem in receiving waters.
Industrial Transfer and Storage
The United States has an extensive system of navigable internal water com-
merce routes as well as coastal sea lanes. Extensive coastal and riverside
terminal facilities, now numbering about 6,000, have been developed for the
transfer of commodities between water and land. Products arriving at, or de-
parting from, these waterside facilities may be handled several times. Frag-
mentary information indicates that ruptured tanks, levee and dike failures,
pipeline breaks and human failures are leading causes of spills. Retention
levees around storage tanks are generally designed only for safety and fire
prevention, not pollution control.
Pipelines
About 200,000 miles of pipelines, criss-crossing the United States, carried
more than one billion tons of oil and other hazardous substances in 1965.
Many sections of this network cross navigable waterways and reservoir sys-
tems, and the lines are heavily concentrated in populous areas where the de-
mand for petroleum is great. This system exposes our watercourses, port
areas, and critical drinking water supply areas to oil pollution. There are
many spills, accidental punctures, cracked welds, and leaks from corrosion
which require alertness and technical improvement.
238
-------
Offshore Mining
Offshore oil and gas operations are being conducted in the Gulf of Mexico,
the Southern California coastal waters, Cook Inlet in Alaska, and areas of
the Great Lakes and the East Coast. These operations are a pollution threat
due to potential blowouts of wells, dumping of oil-based drilling muds and
oil-soaked cuttings, and losses of oil in production, storage, and transport.
Pipelines laid across the ocean floor from the offshore platforms to on-shore
storage facilities also pose a pollution threat. These lines are subjected
to severe stresses by storms, and may be ruptured by dragging ships' anchors.
The Gulf of Mexico is perhaps the best illustrative example of offshore drill-
ing operations. Since 1960 about 6,000 wells have been sunk in the Gulf.
Many of the structures have been damaged or destroyed by hurricanes. The in-
dustry is compelled to remove damaged structures, but in many instances it is
difficult to locate all the debris, and the larger pieces become a menace to
surface navigation. As a result, shipwrecks, portions of storm-ranged struc-
tures, and other litter exist in profusion on the Gulf's continental shelf.
The increased hazard of marine casualty has correspondingly increased the
threat of pollution in these waters.
TREATING THE PROBLEM
We know the potential causes of oil pollutants; we have no estimate of the
magnitude of pollution from these sources. Presently, there is little or no
basis for cost estimates to control oil pollution. Recommendations for con-
trolling oil pollution therefore cannot be accompanied with relevant costs.
A considerable amount of oil pollution can be controlled or reduced by re-
organizing the standards and practices of the industry affected. For exam-
ple, vessels can be built with smaller, stronger compartments in order to re-
duce the volume of oil spilled if collisions occur. Regulations should be
developed on such factors as maximum speeds in critical areas, the mainte-
nance and employment of radars, and ship control by automatic pilot in crowd-
ed or confined waters. Port safety advisory information should be available
to all vessels entering U. S. ports. The Captains of the Port maintain cur-
rent information concerning location and availability of berths, anchorage,
navigational hazards, traffic conditions (such as major movements in prog-
ress) , harbor sanitation rules and facilities, and other features of port ac-
tivity which have a bearing upon safety and pollution control. Contact with
the Captain of the Port should be mandatory for all vessels entering port.
More positive controls of the movements of hazardous cargo are necessary.
First, it is necessary to recommend expanded use of well-defined shipping
lanes. This would be a major step toward reducing the risk of collisions.
Background in this field is already available in the use of approaches to
New York and Delaware Bay, and in the area of drilling platforms in the Gulf
239
-------
of Mexico. Secondly, research is needed on the feasibility of a shore-based
guidance system to promote safe movement of shipping.
Municipal sewage systems are able to cope with only limited quantities of
waste oil. It is necessary either to expand these systems' facilities or to
reduce or eliminate the amount of waste oil entering municipal sewage plants.
Shipyards with tank cleaning facilities should be required to have either an
oil treatment installation or access to such an installation.
Oily-waste producing industries pose a more difficult problem because they
are so numerous. However, some sort of collection system might well be ini-
tiated, with holding tanks to be emptied daily or weekly and taken to a cen-
tral re-refining area.
Regarding industrial transfer, storage and pipelines, some of the most bene-
ficial results would be obtained in expanding the training programs of per-
sonnel involved in this type of work. Designs of retention levees and mate-
rials handling requirements should include provisions for pollution as well
as safety and fire prevention.
Care should be taken in laying pipelines to avoid critical drinking water
supply areas, watercourses, and port areas. Where it is necessary to extend
pipelines in such areas, extra precautionary measures should be initiated.
These would include continuing surveillance of the lines, better material
specifications, corrosion control methods, and higher welding standards.
Automatic shutdown of pumps could be used in the event of pressure drops in
the lines. Block valves could be installed at critical river crossings to
minimize drain-back should a break occur within the river segments.
It is also necessary to strengthen mining platforms in the Gulf of Mexico to
enable them to withstand violent storms. A marking device setting forth the
locations of pipelines across the ocean floor would be desirable. Establish-
ment of fairways is necessary. The situation appears to require both im-
proved coordination among agencies which have responsibility for offshore in-
stallations, and the inclusion of effective pollution control provisions in
mineral leases.
Controlling oil pollution will be a monumental task during the next few years.
We have the technology but few of the facilities to measure the amount of pol-
lution by type of polluter. Presently, there is technology to correct some
types of oil pollution, but physical facilities are lacking. It will take
time and considerable research and education to incorporate these controls
in the economy.
240
-------
CONCLUSION
In contrast to pollution caused by municipal and industrial wastes, that re-
sulting from "other effluents" is unfixed and unspecific. Some pollution con-
trol measures and their costs can be roughly defined for certain types of pol-
lutants. For others, there are no data available.
The fundamental difficulty in developing control measures for "other efflu-
ents" is that, until recently, the necessity or opportunity for such controls
was relatively unrecognized. Very little effort has been made to quantify
the pollutional effects, remedies, and control costs associated with such
problems.
Some types of pollution cannot be controlled with present technology; for
other types of pollution, controls are available but at considerable cost.
Where no other feasible controls are presently available, stringent use regu-
lations must be applied.
The "other effluent" area has no common denominator such as reduction in BOD
loads in the municipal sector. Each type of waste may have a distinct method
of control; possibly none are interchangeable.
Finally, any attempt to forecast a five-year remedial program for "other ef-
fluents" other than in terms of necessary research is difficult, if not im-
possible, at this time. Currently, it is necessary to make the best judgment
possible with the technology at hand and to apply the results of available
research. Where a pollutant is particularly harmful, and no control technol-
ogy is available, it may be necessary to curb this particular activity.
241
-------
APPENDIX I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Atomic Energy Commission. Bonnevilie Power Administration; the Portland
General Electric Co. and the Washington Water Power Co. Reviews, Re-
ports and Discussions.
Bernstein, Leon. "Reuse of Agricultural Wastewaters for Irrigation in Rela-
tion to the Salt Tolerance of Crops." Prgceedings, Symposium on Agri-
cultural Wastewaters, Report No. 10. Water Resources Center. Univer-
sity of California. 1966.
Bullard, W. E. "National Program for Prevention and Control of Pollution
From Mine Drainage." Unpublished Manuscript. April 14, 1967.
Clark, F. W. The Composition of Rivers and Waters of the United States.
USGS Professional Paper 135. 1924.
Daly, R. F. and A. C. Egbert. A Look Ahead for Food and Agriculture. USDA.
ERS. ERS-277. Washington, D. C. February 1966.
DeGreer, Myron W. "Chlorides Control - Arkansas - Red Basins." Meeting of
the American Society of Civil Engineers and International Committee on
Irrigation, Drainage, and Flood Control. El Paso, Texas. December 2,
1964.
Eliassen, Rolf. "Saline Water Conversion." Journal American Water Works
Association. October 1966.
Evans, R. K. "Nuclear Power Reactors." (A Special Report.) Reprinted from
Power. March 1965.
Garstka, Walter U. "Evaporation and Its Reduction." Proceedings Internation-
al Seminar on Soil and Water Utilization. South Dakota State College.
Brookings, South Dakota. July 1962.
House Committee Print No. 18. Acid Mine Drainage. U. S. Government Printing
Office. Washington, D. C. April 19, 1962.
Howard, C. A. "Irrigation Runoff." Journal American Water Works Association.
November 1953.
4
Huffman, Elmo W. "Wastewater Disposal: San Joaquin Valley, California."
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage. Division Proceedings. ASCE. 92
(IR-2.) 1966.
242
-------
Lammering, M. W. Uranium Milling Industry; Nuclear Electrical Power Industry.
(Drafts, reports in mimeograph, Technical Advisory and Investigations
Branch, Division of Technical Services, FWPCA.)
McNeal, B. L. and C. A. Bower. "Evaporates in Soils." Water of Rocks and
Minerals in Soil Genesis, Chapter 8. Volume 1 of the Encyclopedia of
Soil Science.
Myers, L. E. "Water Harvesting." Presented at the 17th Nevada Water Confer-
ence. Carson City, Nevada. 1962.
National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. Wa_ste_ Management
and Control. Publication 1400. Washington, D. C. 1966.
Presidents Science Advisory Committee, The White House. Restoring The Quality
of Our Environment. Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel. Novem-
ber 1965.
A Report to the President by the Secretary of the Interior. A__Survey of Strip
and Surface Mining in the United States. (Draft-Impact p. 20.)
Robinson, T. W. "The Phreatophyte Problem." In Symposium on Phreatophytes.
Pacific Southwest Interagency Committee. 1958.
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Transportation. Oil Pollution.
A Report to the President. Unpublished Report dated January 1968.
Traylor, Duane. "Cattle Feedlot Pollution." Unpublished Manuscript. U. S.
Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion. 1966.
Tsivoglou, E. C. and W. W. Towne. "Sources of Radioactive Water Pollutants."
Reprinted from Sewage and Industrial Wastes. February 1957.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. (Especially the in-house reports from the
Soil Conservation Service and the Agricultural Research Service.)
November 1967.
U. S. Department of Agriculture. Irrigation of Agricultural Lands. Mono-
graph No. 11. 1967. Pages 45-46.
Basic Statistics of the National Inventory of Soil and Water Con-
servation Needs. Statistical Bulletin No. 317. 1962.
. U. S. Census of Agriculture. 1959 and 1964.
U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Water Resources of the
Upper Colorado River Basin. Professional Paper 441.
243
-------
Quality of Water; Colorado River Basin. Progress Report No. 3.
(FWPCA records on open file.) January 1967.
. Surface Mining and Our Environment. 1967.
. Wastes From Watercraft. Senate Document No. 48. Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration. August 31, 1967.
. "Research-Engineering Methods and Materials." Bureau of Reclama-
tion Research Report. 1963. Pages 1-137.
Handbook of Pollution Control Costs in Mine Drainage Management.
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. December 1966.
Wadleigh, C. H. "Wastes in Relation to Agriculture." U. S. Department of
Agriculture. Agricultural Research Service. Unpublished Manuscript.
April 1967,
Walton, Graham. "Agricultural Wastewater - Treatment and Recycling for Agri-
cultural Use." Technical Advisory and Investigating Activities. Tech-
nical Services Program. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, R. A. Taft Sani-
tary Engineering Center. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Willrich, Mason. "International Control for Civil Nuclear Power." Bulletin
of the Atomic Scientists. March 1967.
244
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1968 O - 294-046
------- |