waste water emerging from packing plants was routed to municipal
ment facilities; by 1977, 85 percent of meat packing waste water is expected
to receive this treatment. In poultry pr essing, hich includes the slaughter—
ing, dressing, and packing of chickens,
turkeys, waste discharges
are decreasing due to more efcient processing
ethods, increased use of by—
products, greater utilization of on—site biological treatment of wastes, and
Wider use of municipal treatment facilities (anticipated for 80 percent of
poultry waste water by 1977 as opposed to 50 percent in 1950).
Point of Decision.
As exemplied by the dairy and meat packing in—
dustries, however, more efcient, cleaner processing operations have been
prompted as much by nancial considerations as by concern for environmen—
tal side eects. The result is a relative improvement in environmental condi—
tions, but only because
and environmental considerations happen
to be parallel.
cannot be relied upon
in all in—
dustries. As we have seenin the steel
canning industries, new technology
introduced on» the basis of
can
more polluting than
.
older production methods. TheÏpointis that‘ifthere 1s to be a true balancebeÏ
tween
then an analySîs of the costsof
continued pollutronversus the benets of the technology causing that pollu—
'
tion mustplay an1ntegral part in the
wh10hresultmthe
“»
’
therw1se,wemay eVer be franücallylookmgfornew waste control
,
’
smcetheor1gmalproductwasœeated
with marketing potential in mind…rather_thanwiiganeyetoenv1ronmental
demands. An example is the creatiOn of synthetic orgamc chemica1sïfvÿhièh;xas
observed earlier, sometimes cannot even be identied by their creat0rs and
which pass intact through conventional waste treatment facilities. The lack. of
consideration for the environmental impact of manufacturing processes and
the related failure to establish tailor—made pollution control devices for spe—
cic products has forced us to fall back to a large degree on broad-scale, con—
ventional waste treatment methods such as land disposal, deep—well injection,
incineration, and biological treatment.Each of these methods, in turn, pro—
duces environmental problems of its own in the form of further water or air
pollution.
These ditculties need to be kept in mind since they are not reected in
the otherwise encouraging trends anticipated in organic wastes discharged to
waterways from the ve industries just discussed. These trends, in millions of
pounds afterindustrial or municipal treatment, are shown on the next page in
the comparison between high—organic waste discharges from these industries
to waterwayS in 1963 and as projected for 1977 [25].
‘
Pulp and Paper Industry. One major pollung enterprise quite well ad—
vanced in the…‘development of pollution controls is the pulp and paper in—
duStry.
the controls has varied, however. A study published in
'
'
…
_
Controls
103
ment facilities; by 1977, 85 percent of meat packing waste water is expected
to receive this treatment. In poultry pr essing, hich includes the slaughter—
ing, dressing, and packing of chickens,
turkeys, waste discharges
are decreasing due to more efcient processing
ethods, increased use of by—
products, greater utilization of on—site biological treatment of wastes, and
Wider use of municipal treatment facilities (anticipated for 80 percent of
poultry waste water by 1977 as opposed to 50 percent in 1950).
Point of Decision.
As exemplied by the dairy and meat packing in—
dustries, however, more efcient, cleaner processing operations have been
prompted as much by nancial considerations as by concern for environmen—
tal side eects. The result is a relative improvement in environmental condi—
tions, but only because
and environmental considerations happen
to be parallel.
cannot be relied upon
in all in—
dustries. As we have seenin the steel
canning industries, new technology
introduced on» the basis of
can
more polluting than
.
older production methods. TheÏpointis that‘ifthere 1s to be a true balancebeÏ
tween
then an analySîs of the costsof
continued pollutronversus the benets of the technology causing that pollu—
'
tion mustplay an1ntegral part in the
wh10hresultmthe
“»
’
therw1se,wemay eVer be franücallylookmgfornew waste control
,
’
smcetheor1gmalproductwasœeated
with marketing potential in mind…rather_thanwiiganeyetoenv1ronmental
demands. An example is the creatiOn of synthetic orgamc chemica1sïfvÿhièh;xas
observed earlier, sometimes cannot even be identied by their creat0rs and
which pass intact through conventional waste treatment facilities. The lack. of
consideration for the environmental impact of manufacturing processes and
the related failure to establish tailor—made pollution control devices for spe—
cic products has forced us to fall back to a large degree on broad-scale, con—
ventional waste treatment methods such as land disposal, deep—well injection,
incineration, and biological treatment.Each of these methods, in turn, pro—
duces environmental problems of its own in the form of further water or air
pollution.
These ditculties need to be kept in mind since they are not reected in
the otherwise encouraging trends anticipated in organic wastes discharged to
waterways from the ve industries just discussed. These trends, in millions of
pounds afterindustrial or municipal treatment, are shown on the next page in
the comparison between high—organic waste discharges from these industries
to waterwayS in 1963 and as projected for 1977 [25].
‘
Pulp and Paper Industry. One major pollung enterprise quite well ad—
vanced in the…‘development of pollution controls is the pulp and paper in—
duStry.
the controls has varied, however. A study published in
'
'
…
_
Controls
103