Water Footprint in Leather Tanning and Steel Production
153
• Coal mining: 0.36 (m
3 /ton)
• Coke processing: 1.03 (m
3 /ton)
• Iron ore mining: 0.425 (m
3 /ton)
• Limestone mining: 1.09 (m
3 /ton)
• Transportation: 0.22 × 10
–3 (m
3 /km)
• Employees’ meal: 4.757 (m
3 /meal)
However, compared to the easier quantification of the virtual water footprint of
domestic use, the virtual water footprint of a steel industry is complex to evaluate.
Indeed, the information concerning the water for production inputs, internal electric
power consumption, transportation, chemicals, and domestic water consumption is
generally compulsory, but not unavailable.
It is also very important to point out that there are three major water risk
assessments based on water footprint. Those risks include.
• Regulatory risk;
• Physical risk;
• Reputation risk.
Industries generally faced physical risk which is based on water resources when
subjected to water shortage or pollution. The water footprint is an appropriate tool in
water risk assessment of water and combines three considerable elements including
water risk management, water risk assessment, and water footprint calculation.
17 Water Footprint Measurement and Recommendations
The water footprint of steel industry is very important compared to other related
industries. Their sewage discharge is generally harmful to the environment. The
components of steel industry sewage include lead, cadmium, arsenic, zinc, chloride,
chromium, nitrate, volatile phenol, petroleum, etc., which are very difficult to treat
and may negatively affect the local water quality. In steel industries, the WFA is
generally the simple summation of green water, blue water footprint, and gray water
footprint. However, the gray water affects the consideration of environmental water
footprint assessment. Also, the virtual water footprint is closely linked to risk analysis which can help manufacturers to consider gray and blue water footprints. The
recent study water footprint has shown that the total water pollution was 27 times of
blue water footprint [14], despite the wastewater treatment system plant of industries.
So, the reduction of the gray water footprint must be prioritized. In the same study,
authors have pointed out the limiting of water resources as the main drawback of steel
industry. Additionally, water risk assessment has helped to categorize risk of pollution, risk of the supply chain, risk of energy, and risk of water consumption to deal
with and enhance water management and sustainable development by steel industry.
The treatment of sewage is, therefore, a key to efficiently reduce the gray water footprint of steel industry. Also, environmental-friendly chemicals such as green agents
153
• Coal mining: 0.36 (m
3 /ton)
• Coke processing: 1.03 (m
3 /ton)
• Iron ore mining: 0.425 (m
3 /ton)
• Limestone mining: 1.09 (m
3 /ton)
• Transportation: 0.22 × 10
–3 (m
3 /km)
• Employees’ meal: 4.757 (m
3 /meal)
However, compared to the easier quantification of the virtual water footprint of
domestic use, the virtual water footprint of a steel industry is complex to evaluate.
Indeed, the information concerning the water for production inputs, internal electric
power consumption, transportation, chemicals, and domestic water consumption is
generally compulsory, but not unavailable.
It is also very important to point out that there are three major water risk
assessments based on water footprint. Those risks include.
• Regulatory risk;
• Physical risk;
• Reputation risk.
Industries generally faced physical risk which is based on water resources when
subjected to water shortage or pollution. The water footprint is an appropriate tool in
water risk assessment of water and combines three considerable elements including
water risk management, water risk assessment, and water footprint calculation.
17 Water Footprint Measurement and Recommendations
The water footprint of steel industry is very important compared to other related
industries. Their sewage discharge is generally harmful to the environment. The
components of steel industry sewage include lead, cadmium, arsenic, zinc, chloride,
chromium, nitrate, volatile phenol, petroleum, etc., which are very difficult to treat
and may negatively affect the local water quality. In steel industries, the WFA is
generally the simple summation of green water, blue water footprint, and gray water
footprint. However, the gray water affects the consideration of environmental water
footprint assessment. Also, the virtual water footprint is closely linked to risk analysis which can help manufacturers to consider gray and blue water footprints. The
recent study water footprint has shown that the total water pollution was 27 times of
blue water footprint [14], despite the wastewater treatment system plant of industries.
So, the reduction of the gray water footprint must be prioritized. In the same study,
authors have pointed out the limiting of water resources as the main drawback of steel
industry. Additionally, water risk assessment has helped to categorize risk of pollution, risk of the supply chain, risk of energy, and risk of water consumption to deal
with and enhance water management and sustainable development by steel industry.
The treatment of sewage is, therefore, a key to efficiently reduce the gray water footprint of steel industry. Also, environmental-friendly chemicals such as green agents