34079509.ppt

ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
ASSESSMENT OF ALCOHOL
INDUSTRY
IN UTTAR PRADESH
DR. YASHPAL SINGH
CHIEF ENVIRONMENT OFFICER
U.P. Pollution Control Board
Lucknow,India

2
The Study Team
A. Coordination:
1. Dr. C.S.Bhatt, Member Secretary, UPPCB
2. Dr. Yashpal Singh, Chief Environment Officer, UPPCB
3. Er. Pradeep Sharma, Asstt. Environment Engr., UPPCB.
B. Study Executed by:
ENV Developmental Assistance Systems (INDIA) Pvt. Ltd.,
Lucknow.
Experts:
1. Er. T.N.Chaturvedi,
Professional & Chartered Engineer
2. Er. R.K.Bajaj,
Environmental Engineer
C. Data Analysis & DTP
1. Mr. T.Wilson, Data Analyst & DTP, DAS India.
2. Mr. R.K.Bajpai, Data Entry Operator, UPPCB . Contd...

3
The Study Team (… contd.)
Our gratitude to:
Sri Pradeep Kumar
The then Principal Secretary Environment and
Chairman UP Pollution Control Board
For conceiving and designing the study and for his
inspiring leadership and guidance.
Excise Department
Govt. of Uttar Pradesh.
For providing valuable data
Senior Officers of the U.P. Pollution Control Board
For their valuable inputs.

4
EVOLUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATION
• FIRST WAVE – THE TRADITIONAL REGULATORY APPROACH
• SECOND WAVE – MARKET BASED INSTRUMENTS
- POLLUTION CHARGES
- PRODUCT CHARGES
- USER FEE
- PERFORMANCE BONDS
- LIABILITY PAYMENTS
- NON COMPLIANCE FEES
- DEPOSIT REFUND SCHEME
- TRADEABLE PERMITS
• THIRD WAVE – PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

5
BENEFITS OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
• CREATION OF MARKET OPPORTUNITIES
• IMPROVEMENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
• INCREASED CONFIDENCE OF INVESTORS, INSURERS AND
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
• IMPROVED RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES,
REGULATORS AND NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIIONS
•GREATER CONTROL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DISCLOSURE
•INCREASED STAFF COMMITTMENT

6
PRACTICED AS
• Involuntary – Media Exposures, Notices, PIL Etc.
• Mandatory – The Regulatory Mechanism like consents
• Voluntary – Press Release, Public Reports Etc.
DRIVERS
• Transparency
- Society Wants To Be Told What Is Going On
• Accountability
- Fear Of Losing Significant Economic Value Of
Good Corporate Reputation
• Synergy Between Economic And Environmental
Performance

7
ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION
• THE WATER (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION )
ACT, 1974 AS AMENDED IN 1988.
• THE WATER ( PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION)
CESS ACT, 1977 AS AMENDED IN 1991.
• THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT,
1981 AS AMENDED IN 1987.
• THE ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT, 1986
• THE PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE ACT, 1991
• THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRIBUNALACT, 1995
• THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITYACT,
1997
• NATIONAL BIODIVERSITYACT, 2002

8
•INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM
- CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
- STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDS
• INCENTIVES / DISINCENTIVES
- FINES
- BANK GUARANTEES
- CESS REBATE
- CONSENT VALIDITY
- LOCATION
- CLOSURES
- PROSECUTION

9
Environmental Performance Rating
A Pioneering Initiative
 U.P. Pollution Control Board, in a pioneering
initiative is making efforts to change the paradigm of
the way Pollution Control is commonly understood.
 Dispel the notion that, Pollution Control is an end of
process, cost-intensive, loss-making effort.
 Rather, environmental management and pollution
control means harmonizing resources, process and
outputs.

10
Objectives of this Study
 To place a Mirror before the industry in the
form of Environmental Performance Rating
to make them aware about their strengths
and weaknesses as also the opportunities &
threats, so as to enable self-correction and
continual improvement in their
environmental performance.
 To encourage pro-active role by the Industry
to improve its Environmental Performance
through benchmarking.

11
Significance of Alcohol Industry
 Downstream unit of Sugar Industry- Synergy with
Sugar & Paper
 Utilising wastes (Molasses) to produce Alcohol, an
essential input of the Chemical & Pharmaceutical
Industry and a product for human consumption.
 Alcohol – great potential for use as Fuel for
automobiles – GASOHOL.
 But, also known for discharging highly polluted
effluents and is included in ‘Schedule-1’ of Water
Cess Act. An EIA is a pre-requisite before setting up
of any unit or expansion thereof.
(Contd…….)

12
Significance of Alcohol Industry
(…. Contd.)
 Significance in U.P.
 Alongwith sugar, the largest value enhancer to
agricultural produce.
 Contributes a significant part of State GDP – next
only to Trade Tax.
 Major catalyst of Employment in the Primary &
Secondary Sectors.
 Unfortunately, also amongst the most polluting
industries.
 Over 10 MT of BOD load per day into the river
systems of the State.

13
Alcohol Industry in Uttar Pradesh
and Uttaranchal – a profile
 No. of Distilleries in U.P. & Uttaranchal - 43
 No. of Operational Distilleries - 37
 No. of Molasses Based Distilleries - 35
 No. of Grain Based Distilleries - 02
 Units not operated in 2000-01 - 02
 Total Annual Production Capacity
of the Operational Distilleries - 6,79,777 KL
 Alcohol Production during 2000-01 - 4,32,489 KL

14
Analytical Framework and
Methodology
 The basic hypothesis for this environmental
performance rating exercise has been:
 Optimal resource utilisation and improved
production processes are likely to result in better
environmental performance.
 Minimal but conscious efforts can result in
achieving the environmental norms.
 Therefore, the framework of the rating has three axes:
 Plant performance
 Regulatory compliance &
 Environmental initiatives
(Contd…...)

15
Methodology ( …. Contd.)
 The study is based on data obtained from –
 The industry
 Excise Department
 U.P. Pollution Control Board
 The study is diachronic & covers a span of three (3)
years:
 1998-99, 1999-2000 & 2000-01 and includes trend
of Performance
(Contd…...)

16
Methodology (…….Contd.)
 Evaluation parameters identified.
 Basic data obtained from Industry on a customized
questionnaire.
 The Data received analyzed and clarifications obtained
from the units, as required.
 Consultants’ team visited Eight (8) Distillery units,
selected on geographical location and size, to verify
credibility of the reported data on a sample basis.
 Feedback taken from Senior Technical officers of UPPCB,
during a series of presentations.
 Authentication of the data, considered for calculating the
environmental parameters, obtained from the top
management of the distillery units.
(Contd…...)

17
Methodology (…….Contd.)
 Environmental parameters calculated for various
units from the authenticated data obtained.
 Latest (2000-01) performance & Trend analyzed.
 The two grain based units separately analyzed.
 Two (2) molasses-based units- one started in 2000-01 and
the other not worked during the year 2000-01, excluded.
 Draft Report prepared and presented to the industry
in an “Open-house (05.02.02)” for feedback, after
which the final report with ratings, prepared.
 Individual units informed about their environmental
performance scores as well as the potential for cost
savings through improvement - “Action Plans
requested”

18
The Environmental Performance
Criteria & Weightages
 Plant Level Performance (40%)
 % utilization of installed production capacity (2+1)
 Raw Material, MT per KL Alcohol(5+1)
 Alcohol Recovery, Ltrs. Per MT TRS (3+1)
 Water Consumption, KL per KL Alcohol(10+1)
 Total Energy, GJ per KL Alcohol(4+1)
 % Renewable out of the Total Energy(4+1)
 Net External Energy, GJ per KL Alcohol(5+1)
(Contd…..)

19
Criteria & Weightages (……Contd.)
 Regulatory Compliance Status (5%)
 ‘Consent’ – Water (2000) obtained from UPPCB
(5 for yes, 0 for no)
 ‘Marginal’/’Heavy’ Default (without dilution)
- UPPCB’ internal norms
- Negative Marking (Heavy –5; marginal –2)
(Contd…..)

20
Criteria & Weightages (……Contd.)
 Corporate & Environmental Management
Aspects (55%)
 ISO 14001 E M S (10 for yes; 0 for no)
 Completeness of ETP(10)
 Effluent Disposal Practice - Stream/Land or
Conversion into Bio-compost (10)
 Spent Wash generated, KL per KL Alcohol(10)
 Biogas generation, Nm3 per KL Spent Wash(15)
 Dilution Factor (-10)

21
Plant Level Performance
Capacity Utilisation
• Minimum - 2.90%
• Maximum - 105.15%
• Average - 64.56%
• Mode - 73.50
Environmental Performance Evaluation
Capacity Utilisation,%
1 1
5
7
2
6
8
3
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
2.90 - 15.68 15.68 - 28.46 28.46 - 41.24 41.24 - 54.03 54.03 - 66.81 66.81 - 79.59 79.59 - 92.37 92.37 -
105.15
Range
No.
of
Units
No. of Units with negative
performance compared to modal
value – 19

22
Capacity Utilisation – The Top & Bottom Five Units
The Top Five (5) units are:
Rank Name of Distillery Performance
Value (%)
Weighted Score
(Performance + Trend)
1 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli,
Muzaffarnagar
100.30 2.994
2 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 103.82 2.924
3 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 105.15 2.897
4 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli,
Ghaziabad
92.25 2.845
5 Shadilal Distly. & Chem. Works,
Muzaffarnagar
90.40 2.808
The Bottom Five (5) units are:
Value (%)
Weighted Score
29 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 46.74 0.935
30 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala,
Meerut
46.52 0.930
31 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur,
U.S.Nagar
39.94 0.799
32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut
Cantt.
34.96 0.699
33 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj,
Farrukhbad
02.90 0.058

23
Molasses Consumption, MT/KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 4.53
• Maximum - 6.28
• Average - 4.97
• Mode - 4.97
value – 14
Molasses, MT /KL Alcohol
9
10 10
1 1
0
1 1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
4.53 - 4.75 4.75 - 4.97 4.97 - 5.19 5.19 - 5.40 5.40 - 5.62 5.62 - 5.84 5.84 - 6.06 6.06 - 6.28
Range
No.
of
Units

24
Molasses Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (MT/KL)
Weighted Score
2 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 4.53 3.984
3 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath,
Kheri
4.57 3.817
4 UP State Sugar Coop. Fed. Ltd. Nanauta,
Saharanpur
4.62 3.596
5 Kisan Sahakari hini Mills Ltd. (Distly.),
Ghosi, Mau
4.63 3.543
Value (MT/KL)
Weighted Score
29 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 5.16 1.204
30 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 5.39 0.208
31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 5.59 0.000
Cantt.
6.03 0.000
Farrukhbad
6.28 0.000

25
Recovery of Alcohol in Ltrs./MT. TRS
• Minimum - 379.40
• Maximum - 536.78
• Average - 463.73
• Mode - 467.93
value – 13
Alcohol Recovery,Ltrs. /MT TRS Content
2
1
2
4
18
4
1 1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
379.40 -
399.08
399.08 -
418.75
418.75 -
438.42
438.42 -
458.09
458.09 -
477.76
477.76 -
497.43
497.43 -
517.11
517.11 -
536.78
Range
No.
of
Units

26
Recovery of Alcohol - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (Ltrs./MT)
Weighted Score
1 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola,
Pilibhit
536.78 3.372
Kheri
483.94 1.635
5 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 482.36 1.613
Value (Ltrs./MT)
Weighted Score
29 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 435.73 0.963
32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd,
Meerut Cantt.
387.88 0.295
33 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd.,
Kayamganj, Farrukhbad
379.40 0.177

27
Water Consumption, KL / KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 14.69
• Maximum - 512.88
• Average - 125.22
• Mode - 94.75
value – 20
Water Consumption,KL /KL Alcohol
10
14
4
3
1
0 0
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
14.69 - 76.96 76.96 - 139.24 139.24 -
201.51
201.51 -
263.79
263.79 -
326.06
326.06 -
388.33
388.33 -
450.61
450.61 -
512.88
Range
No.
of
Units

28
Water Consumption- The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (KL/KL)
Weighted Score
1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics),
Gajraula
14.69 8.027
2 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly,
Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad
32.61 7.454
3 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 31.99 6.508
5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar,
Ghaziabad
52.11 5.742
Value (KL/KL)
Weighted Score
30 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 206.08 0.000
Meerut
283.79 0.000
Cantt.
512.88 0.000

29
Total Energy Consumption in GJ/KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 10.17
• Maximum - 123.56
• Average - 26.04
• Mode - 18.32
value – 18
Total Energy Consumption, GJ /KL Alcohol
23
6
1 1
0
1
0
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
10.17 -
24.34
24.34 -
38.51
38.51 -
52.69
52.69 -
66.86
66.86 -
81.04
81.04 -
95.21
95.21 -
109.38
109.38 -
123.56
Range
No.
of
Units

30
Total Energy Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (GJ/KL)
Weighted Score
Meerut
13.33 3.424
3 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 13.37 3.414
10.17 3.201
Value (GJ/KL)
Weighted Score
31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar,
Ghaziabad
31.56 0.000
Cantt.
56.02 0.000
U.S.Nagar
81.19 0.000

31
Total Renewable Energy % of Total Energy
• Minimum - 7.92
• Maximum - 100.00
• Average - 79.51
• Mode - 93.42
value – 17
Renewable Energy %
2 2
1
2
0
1
5
20
0
5
10
15
20
25
7.92 -
19.43
19.43 -
30.94
30.94 -
42.45
42.45 -
53.96
53.96 -
65.47
65.47 -
76.98
76.98 -
88.49
88.49 -
100.00
Range
No.
of
Units

32
Total Renewable Energy- The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (%)
Weighted Score
1 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 100.00 4.999
Gajraula
100.00 4.999
4 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 96.23 4.312
Kheri
99.66 3.936
Value (%)
Weighted Score
29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, Gorakhpur 77.86 0.000
30 Lords Distillery Ltd., Nandganj, Ghazipur 76.74 0.000
Meerut
52.20 0.000
Cantt.
11.31 0.000

33
Net External Energy in GJ / KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 0.00
• Maximum - 123.56
• Average - 17.70
• Mode - 9.44
value – 21
External Energy Consumption,GJ / KL Alcohol
22
8
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
0.00 -
15.44
15.44 -
30.89
30.89 -
46.33
46.33 -
61.78
61.78 -
77.22
77.22 -
92.67
92.67 -
108.11
108.11 -
123.56
Range
No.
of
Units

34
Net External Energy - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (GJ/KL)
Weighted Score
Gajraula
0.00 6.000
3 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli,
Muzaffarnagar
4.01 4.725
4 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar,
Faizabad
4.05 4.713
1.13 4.641
Value (GJ/KL)
Weighted Score
Farrukhbad
22.08 0.000
Cantt.
49.68 0.000
U.S.Nagar
81.19 0.000

35
Regulatory Compliance
Consent Water Molasses Grain
Based Based
• Consent Granted - 17 02
• Consent Not Granted - 16 -
Water Consent
19
16
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Granted Not Granted
No.
of
Units

36
Default Status (without dilution)
• Heavy Default - 22
• Marginal Default - 11
• Zero Discharge - 02
Regulatory Compliance
Default Status (without dillution)
22
11
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
Heavy Default Marginal Default Zero Discharge
No.
of
Units

37
Environmental Management
 ISO 14001/EMS not granted to any Unit
 Completeness of ETP
• In 2 Units, Primary (Biogas generation) stage
not functional. In other 3 units, biogas not
monitored & not consumed.
• 16 Units do not have the Second Aerobic Stage
of the Secondary Treatment
• 2 Units are converting the entire effluent into
Bio-manure
• 8 Units have started partly converting the
effluent into Bio-manure

38
Spent Wash Generation in KL/KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 10.87
• Maximum - 38.34
• Average - 15.48
• Mode - 14.92
value – 16
Spent Wash,KL / KL Alcohol
13
16
2
0 0 0 0
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
10.87 -
14.31
14.31 -
17.74
17.74 -
21.17
21.17 -
24.61
24.61 -
28.04
28.04 -
31.47
31.47 -
34.90
34.90 -
38.34
Range
No.
of
Units

39
Spent Wash Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (KL/KL)
Weighted
Score
Cantt.
10.87 7.995
3 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar,
Faizabad
11.93 6.948
5 Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.),
Seohara, Bijnor
12.66 6.233
Value (KL/KL)
Weighted
Score
28 UPCSFF Ltd, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar 16.13 2.800
U.S.Nagar
19.34 0.000
31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 20.58 0.000

40
Biogas Generation in Nm3 /KL Spent Wash
• Minimum - 7.26
• Maximum - 54.30
• Average - 32.31
• Mode - 32.38
value – 16
Biogas, Nm3
/ KL Spent Wash
1 1
3
6
9
1
3
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
7.26 -
13.14
13.14 -
19.02
19.02 -
24.90
24.90 -
30.78
30.78 -
36.66
36.66 -
42.54
42.54 -
48.42
48.42 -
54.30
Range
No.
of
Units

41
Biogas Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (Nm3
/KL)
Weighted
Score
Gajraula
54.30 12.001
4 Oudh Sugar Mills (Distly.) Hargaon 45.49 9.830
The Bottom Five (5) units, excluding those not having biogas generation
facilities are:
Value (Nm3
/KL)
Weighted
Score
Meerut
23.73 4.469
Kheri
23.31 4.365
25 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola,
Pilibhit
18.95 3.291

42
Dilution Ratio – KL Water/KL Treated Effluent
• Minimum - 0.31
• Maximum - 44.81
• Average - 7.88
• Mode - 5.50
value – 18
Dilution Ratio
14
13
2 2
0 0 0
1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0.31 - 5.87 5.87 -
11.44
11.44 -
17.00
17.00 -
22.56
22.56 -
28.12
28.12 -
33.69
33.69 -
39.25
39.25 -
44.81
Range
No.
of
Units

43
Dilution Ratio – The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value
Weighted
Score
Gajraula
0.31 0.000
2 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 1.18 -2.000
3 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli,
Ghaziabad
1.49 -2.000
4 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 1.51 -2.000
5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 1.62 -2.000
Value
Weighted
Score
28 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 11.86 -10.000
29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 14.59 -10.000
Meerut
18.24 -10.000
31 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 19.50 -10.000
Cantt.
44.81 -10.000

44
• Minimum - -1.82
• Maximum - 54.15
• Average - 25.27
• Mode - 26.17
Overall Environmental Performance
(Molasses Based Units)
value – 18
Overall Environmental Performance
3
5 5
9
5
3 3
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
-1.82 -
6.18
6.18 -
14.17
14.17 -
22.17
22.17 -
30.16
30.16 -
38.16
38.16 -
46.16
46.16 -
54.15
Range
No.
of
Units
Mode - 26.17
Average - 25.27

45
Conclusion
1. Regional Comparison of Environmental Performance
Region No. of Units Performance Avg.
Eastern 06 23.55
Central 07 25.61
Western 17 26.47
Uttaranchal 03 21.14
Regional Comparision of Environmental Performance
23.55
25.61
26.47
21.14
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Eastern Central Western Uttaranchal
Region
Env
ironme
ntal
Pe
rformance
(Av
e
rage
)
6
Units
7
Units
17
Units
3
Units

46
2. River Catchment-wise – No. of Distilleries
River Catchment Units Discharging Land disposal/
to River Bio-Composting
Ghagra 06 05 01
Gomti 03 01 02
Ganga 20 18 02
Yamuna 06 06 -
(Including 2 Grain Based distilleries)
River Catchmentwise Comparision - No. of Distilleries
6
3
20
6
1
18
6
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
Ghagra Gomti Ganga Yamuna
River Catchment
No.
of
Units
Total no. of Distlry.
No. discharging to River

47
3. Locational Comparison of Environmental Performance
Location No. of Units Performance Avg.
Rural 23 24.90
Semi Urban 02 29.97
Urban 08 25.18
Locational Comparision of Environmental Performance
24.90
29.97
25.18
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
Rural Semi-Urban Urban
Location
Environmental
Performance
(Average)
23
Units
2
Units
8
Units

48
5. Environmental Performance vs Gross Profit
Gross Profit is directly proportional to Environmental
Performance. (Available data for 14 units)
Better the Environmental Performance, higher is the
Profitability.
Gross Profit/KL Alcohol vs Environmental Performance
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Environmental Performance
Gross
Profit/Unit

49
6. Better Environmental Performance of Grain Based
Distilleries
• The environmental performance of Grain
Based is better in comparison to molasses
based distilleries
• Even Though their energy requirements are
much higher.
• Notably, there is no recognition for IMFL as
Whisky by WTO.

50
Savings’ Potential in the overall industry
through improved environmental
performance
• Potential for annual cost savings on
achieving industry-best performance value:
• Molasses Consumption : Rs. 26.95 Crores
• Water Consumption : Rs. 12.04 Crores
• Biogas Utilization : Rs. 22.50 Crores
• Reduction in Total
Energy Consumption : Rs. 45.32 Crores

51
Recommendations
1. Serious thinking required in respect of the bottom
five (5) units having alarmingly poor environmental
performance with the consequent adverse
environmental impacts.
2. Mandatory installation of Primary (Biogas) stage of
effluent treatment in all the molasses-based plants
to generate & utilize biogas as also its close
monitoring and control. Retrofitting or replacement
of inefficient plants to be carried out to achieve best
performance.
3. Ensuring two stage aerobic treatment in Secondary
stage of the Effluent Treatment Plant in all
molasses-based units discharging into stream or
land.
(Contd ……)

52
Recommendations
4. Minimizing water consumption by maximum
recycling and reuse.
5. Installation of metering systems at identified
locations for monitoring the consumption of
Biogas, Water, Electricity & fuel.
6. Conversion of Spent Wash into bio-manure or
cattle feed to be preferred disposal practice.
7. Energy Conservation training programs and
periodic energy audits to identify and eliminate
energy wastage and reduce energy consumption.
(Contd ……)

53
Recommendation (…….Contd.)
8. Maximum utilization of the treated effluent for
irrigation, where bio-composting is not feasible.
9. Adoption of the best available technologies in the
following areas,
• Fermentation
• Distillation
• Co-generation of steam/power
• Effluent Treatment
10. Upgradation of the Management through the
implementation of :
• ISO 14001 Environmental Management System
• ISO 9001 Quality Management System

54
Overall Environmental Performance Rating
Sl. Name of Distillery Total Score
(Max. Marks - 100)
1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics), Gajraula 54.153
2 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad 50.667
3 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 47.981
4 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 39.460
5 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 39.349
6 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath, Kheri 38.758
7 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 37.523
8 Oudh Sugar Mills (Distly.), Hargaon 36.659
9 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 36.278
10 Pilkhani Distly. & Chemical Works, Pilkhani, Dehradun 35.182
11 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli, Muzaffarnagar 31.163
Contd …..

55
(Max. Marks - 100)
12 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 29.728
13 Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Seohara Bijnor 28.151
14 Shadilal Distly. & Chem. Works, Muzaffarnagar 27.620
15 Lords Distillery Ltd., Nandganj, Ghazipur 27.444
16 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar, Faizabad 26.070
17 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 24.731
18 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 24.528
19 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 23.943
20 Kesar Enterprises Ltd, Baheri, Bareilly 23.665
21 National Industrial Corp. Ltd., Raja-Ka-Sahaspur, Moradabad 22.120
22 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala, Meerut 21.858
Contd …..
…… Contd.

56
(Max. Marks - 100)
23 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola, Pilibhit 18.258
24 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 17.266
25 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Lucknow 16.049
26 SKS Chini Mills (Distly.), Nanpara, Bahraich 13.798
27 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut Cantt. 13.124
28 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 10.208
29 UPCSFF Ltd, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar 8.445
30 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Ghosi, Mau 6.257
31 UP State Sugar Coop. Fed. Ltd. Nanauta, Saharanpur 3.845
32 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj, Farrukhbad 1.514
33 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur, U.S.Nagar -1.820
…… Contd.

57
PILOT PROGRAMME FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE RATING AND PUBLIC
DISCLOSURE FOR INDUSTRIES
• PART OF WORLD BANK PROGRAMME
• SIMILAR IN DESIGN PRINCIPLES TO STUDIES IN
INDONESIA, CHINAAND PHILIPINES
• COLLECTIVE EFFORT OF CII, WORLD BANK AND
THE U.P. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.

58
• INITIATED IN MAY 2001
• COVERED 33 INDUSTRIES OF DIFFERENT SIZES AND
DIFFERENT SECTORS AT GHAZIABAD AND NOIDA
• CLASSIFIED BLACK, RED (IMPLYING LACK OF
COMPLIANCE) AND BLUE GREEN AND GOLD
(LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE MEETING EXISTING
STANDARDS)
• 6 RATED GOLD AND GREEN
• 16 RATED BLUE
• 11 RATED BLACK AND RED

59
PILOT INCLUDES
• LOCATION SPECIFIC PROGRAMME
• INCLUDES SMALLAND MEDIUM ENTERPRISE ALSO
• INVOLVES A YES / NO
• COMPLIANCE RATING AS AGAINST PERFORMANCE
RATING

60
FUTURE OUTLOOK
• DATAACQUISITION SUCCESSFUL ONLY IF ASSISTED
BY REGULATORYAUTHORITIES.
• SEPARATE IDENTITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RATING
PROGRAM
• INVOLVEMENT OFA MULTI STAKEHOLDER PANEL FOR
RATING VERIFICATION AND OVERSEEING THE RATING
PROCESS IS MUST
• INVOLVEMENT OF TECHNICAL EXPERTS
• INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL BACKING FOR THE PROJECT
• PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE DATA GENERATED BY THE
RATING PROCESS
• COMPLETE COOPERATION OF SPCB IS MUST.

61
CHARTER FOR CORPORATE
RESPONSIBILITY 2003
BANK GUARANTEE AND ACTION PLAN TO ENSURE
COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OR COMBINATION OF
FOLLOWING MEASURES
•COMPOST MAKING WITH PRESS MUD/AGRICULTURAL
RESIDUE/MUNICIPAL WASTE
•CONCENTRATION AND DRYING / INCINERATION
•BIOMETHANATION, TWO STAGE SECONDARY TREATMENT
AND DILUTION WITH PROCESS WATER FOR USE OF EFFLUENTS
IN IRRIGATION
•BIOMETHANATION, SECONDARY TREATMENT AND
CONTROLLED DISCHARGE INTO SEA.
•ONE TIME CONTROLLED APPLICATION ON LAND. STUDY IN
THREE MONTHS.

62
ROAD MAP FOR ACHIEVING ZERO DISCHARGE IN
INLAND SURFACE WATERS
• 50 % UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY MARCH 2004
• 75% UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY MARCH 2005
• 100 % UTILIZATION OF SPENT WASH BY DECEMBER 2005
NEW DISTILLERIES AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING
DISTILLERIES
• NEW STAND ALONE DISTILLERIES AND EXPANSION OF
EXISTING DISTILLERIES WITHOUT ACHIEVING ZERO
DISCHARGE IN SURFACE/GROUND WATER NOT TO BE
CONSIDERED

34079509.ppt

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 34079509.ppt

Similar to 34079509.ppt (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

34079509.ppt