Environmental Performance Assessment of Alcohol Industry in Uttar Pradesh

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

Lucknow,India
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...
2
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.
3
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
4
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
5
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
6
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 TRIBUNAL ACT, 1995
• THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY ACT,
1997
• NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2002
7
•INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM
- CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
- STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDS
• INCENTIVES / DISINCENTIVES
- FINES
- BANK GUARANTEES
- CESS REBATE
- CONSENT VALIDITY
- LOCATION
- CLOSURES
- PROSECUTION
8
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.
9
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.
10
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…….)
11
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.
12
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
13
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…...)
14
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…...)
15
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…...)
16
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”
17
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…..)
18
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…..)
19
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)
20
Environmental Performance Evaluation
Plant Level Performance
Capacity Utilisation
• Minimum - 2.90% No. of Units with negative
performance compared to modal
• Maximum - 105.15% value – 19
• Average - 64.56%
• Mode - 73.50
Capacity Utilisation,%
9
8
8
7
7
6
6
No. of Units
5
5
4
3
3
2
2
1 1
1
0
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
21
Capacity Utilisation – The Top & Bottom Five Units
The Top Five (5) units are:
Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

(Performance + Trend)
Value (%)
1 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli, 100.30 2.994
Muzaffarnagar
2 Rampur Distillery, Rampur 103.82 2.924
3 UDBL, Shekhpur, Unnao 105.15 2.897
4 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, 92.25 2.845
Ghaziabad
5 Shadilal Distly. & Chem. Works, 90.40 2.808
Muzaffarnagar
The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Value (%)
29 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 46.74 0.935
30 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala, 46.52 0.930
Meerut
31 Bajpur Coop. Sugar Factory, Bajpur, 39.94 0.799
U.S.Nagar
32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut 34.96 0.699
Cantt.
33 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., Kayamganj, 02.90 0.058
Farrukhbad
22
Molasses Consumption, MT/KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 4.53
• No. of Units with negative
Maximum - 6.28 performance compared to modal
• Average - 4.97 value – 14
• Mode - 4.97
Molasses, MT /KL Alcohol
12
10 10
10 9
No. of Units
2 1 1 1 1
0
0
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
23
Molasses Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units

Value (MT/KL) (Performance + Trend)
2 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 4.53 3.984
3 Bajaj Hindustan Ltd., Gola Gokaran Nath, 4.57 3.817
Kheri
4 UP State Sugar Coop. Fed. Ltd. Nanauta, 4.62 3.596
Saharanpur
5 Kisan Sahakari hini Mills Ltd. (Distly.), 4.63 3.543
Ghosi, Mau

Value (MT/KL) (Performance + Trend)
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.
Farrukhbad
24
Recovery of Alcohol in Ltrs./MT. TRS
• Minimum - 379.40 No. of Units with negative

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

Value (Ltrs./MT) (Performance + Trend)
1 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola, 536.78 3.372
Pilibhit
Kheri
5 India Glycols Ltd., Kashipur, U.S.Nagar 482.36 1.613

Value (Ltrs./MT) (Performance + Trend)
29 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 435.73 0.963
32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, 387.88 0.295
Meerut Cantt.
33 Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd., 379.40 0.177
Kayamganj, Farrukhbad
26
Water Consumption, KL / KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 14.69
• Mode - 94.75
Water Consumption,KL /KL Alcohol
16
14
14
12
10
No. of Units
10
6
4
4 3
2 1 1
0 0
0
14.69 - 76.96 76.96 - 139.24 139.24 - 201.51 - 263.79 - 326.06 - 388.33 - 450.61 -
201.51 263.79 326.06 388.33 450.61 512.88
Range
27
Water Consumption- The Top & Bottom Five Units

Value (KL/KL) (Performance + Trend)
1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics), 14.69 8.027
Gajraula
2 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, 32.61 7.454
Simbhaoli, Ghaziabad
3 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 31.99 6.508
5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, 52.11 5.742
Ghaziabad

Value (KL/KL) (Performance + Trend)
30 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 206.08 0.000
Meerut
Cantt.
28
Total Energy Consumption in GJ/KL Alcohol
• Mode - 18.32
Total Energy Consumption, GJ /KL Alcohol
25 23
20
No. of Units
15
10
6
5
1 1 1 1
0 0
0
10.17 - 24.34 - 38.51 - 52.69 - 66.86 - 81.04 - 95.21 - 109.38 -
24.34 38.51 52.69 66.86 81.04 95.21 109.38 123.56
Range
29
Total Energy Consumption - The Top & Bottom Five Units

Value (GJ/KL) (Performance + Trend)
Meerut
3 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 13.37 3.414

31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, 31.56 0.000
Ghaziabad
Cantt.
U.S.Nagar
30
Total Renewable Energy % of Total Energy
• Minimum - 7.92
• Mode - 93.42
Renewable Energy %
25
20
20
No. of Units
15
10
5
5
2 2 2
1 1
0
0
7.92 - 19.43 - 30.94 - 42.45 - 53.96 - 65.47 - 76.98 - 88.49 -
19.43 30.94 42.45 53.96 65.47 76.98 88.49 100.00
Range
31
Total Renewable Energy- The Top & Bottom Five Units

Value (%)
1 Narang Industries, Nawabgunj, Gonda 100.00 4.999
Gajraula
4 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 96.23 4.312
Kheri

Value (%)
29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, Gorakhpur 77.86 0.000
30 Lords Distillery Ltd., Nandganj, Ghazipur 76.74 0.000
Meerut
Cantt.
32
Net External Energy in GJ / KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 0.00
• Mode - 9.44
External Energy Consumption,GJ / KL Alcohol

25
22
20
No. of Units
15
10 8
5
1 1 1
0 0 0
0
0.00 - 15.44 - 30.89 - 46.33 - 61.78 - 77.22 - 92.67 - 108.11 -

15.44 30.89 46.33 61.78 77.22 92.67 108.11 123.56
Range
33
Net External Energy - The Top & Bottom Five Units

Gajraula
3 Shamli Distly. & Chem. Works, Shamli, 4.01 4.725
Muzaffarnagar
4 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar, 4.05 4.713
Faizabad

Farrukhbad
Cantt.
U.S.Nagar
34
Regulatory Compliance
Consent Water Molasses Grain
Based Based
• Consent Granted - 17 02
• Consent Not Granted - 16 -
Water Consent
20 19
18 16
16
No. of Units
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Granted Not Granted
35
Regulatory Compliance
Default Status (without dilution)
• Heavy Default - 22
• Marginal Default - 11
• Zero Discharge - 02
Default Status (without dillution)
25 22
No. of Units
20
15 11
10
5 2
0
Heavy Default Marginal Default Zero Discharge
36
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
37
Spent Wash Generation in KL/KL Alcohol
• Minimum - 10.87
• Mode - 14.92
Spent Wash,KL / KL Alcohol
18
16
16
14 13
12
No. of Units
10
8
6
4
2
2 1
0 0 0 0
0
10.87 - 14.31 - 17.74 - 21.17 - 24.61 - 28.04 - 31.47 - 34.90 -
14.31 17.74 21.17 24.61 28.04 31.47 34.90 38.34
Range
38
Spent Wash Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted
Value (KL/KL) Score
Cantt.
3 KM Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), Motinagar, 11.93 6.948
Faizabad
5 Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd. (Distly.), 12.66 6.233
Seohara, Bijnor

Value (KL/KL) Score
28 UPCSFF Ltd, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar 16.13 2.800
U.S.Nagar
31 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 20.58 0.000
39
Biogas Generation in Nm3 /KL Spent Wash
• Minimum - 7.26
No. of Units with negative
• Mode - 32.38
Biogas, Nm 3 / KL Spent Wash

10
9
9
8
7
No. of Units
6
6
5
4
3 3
3
2
2
1 1 1
1
0
7.26 - 13.14 - 19.02 - 24.90 - 30.78 - 36.66 - 42.54 - 48.42 -
13.14 19.02 24.90 30.78 36.66 42.54 48.42 54.30
Range
40
Biogas Generation - The Top & Bottom Five Units
Value (Nm3/KL) Score
Gajraula
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) Score
Meerut
Kheri
25 Majhola Distly. & Chem. Works, Majhola, 18.95 3.291
Pilibhit
41
Dilution Ratio – KL Water/KL Treated Effluent

• Mode - 5.50
Dilution Ratio
16
14
14 13
12
10
No. of Units
8
6
4
2 2
2 1
0 0 0
0
0.31 - 5.87 5.87 - 11.44 - 17.00 - 22.56 - 28.12 - 33.69 - 39.25 -
11.44 17.00 22.56 28.12 33.69 39.25 44.81
Range
42
Dilution Ratio – The Top & Bottom Five Units

Value Score
Gajraula
2 Somaiya Organics Ltd, Kushinagar 1.18 -2.000
3 Simbhaoli Sugar Mills Ltd., Distlly, Simbhaoli, 1.49 -2.000
Ghaziabad
4 Doon Valley Distly., Kuanwala, Dehradun 1.51 -2.000
5 Mohan Meakins Ltd, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad 1.62 -2.000

Value Score
28 Modi Distly. Modinagar, Ghaziabad 11.86 -10.000
29 Saraiya Distilleries, Sardarnagar, GKP 14.59 -10.000
30 Daurala Sugar Works (Distly.), Daurala, 18.24 -10.000
Meerut
31 DSM Mills Ltd, (Distly.), Dhampur, Bijnor 19.50 -10.000
32 Central Distilleries & Breweries Ltd, Meerut 44.81 -10.000
Cantt.
43
Overall Environmental Performance
(Molasses Based Units)
• Minimum - -1.82
No. of Units with negative
• Mode - 26.17
Overall Environmental Performance
10 9
9
8
No. of Units
7
6 5 5 5
5
4 3 3 3
3
2
1
0
-1.82 - 6.18 - 14.17 - 22.17 - 30.16 - 38.16 - 46.16 -
6.18 14.17 22.17 30.16 38.16 46.16 54.15
Mode - 26.17 Range

Average - 25.27
44
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
30.00
26.47
25.61
25.00 23.55
21.14
Environmental Performance
20.00
(Average)
15.00
10.00
3 Units
6 Units
7 Units
17 Units
5.00
0.00
Eastern Central Western Uttaranchal
Region
45
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
25
20
20 18
No. of Units
15
10
6 6 6
5
5 3
1
0
Ghagra Gom ti Ganga Yam una
Total no. of Distlry.

No. discharging to River
River Catchment
46
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

35.00
29.97
30.00
24.90 25.18
25.00
(Average)
20.00
15.00
8 Units
23 Units
2 Units
10.00
5.00
0.00
Rural Semi-Urban Urban
Location
47
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
5000
4500
4000
Gross Profit/Unit
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
48
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.
49
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
50
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.
51
(Contd ……)
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 ……)
52
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
53
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 …..
54
(Molasses Based Units) …… Contd.

(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 …..
55
(Molasses Based Units) …… Contd.

(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
56
PILOT PROGRAMME FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE RATING AND PUBLIC
DISCLOSURE FOR INDUSTRIES
• PART OF WORLD BANK PROGRAMME

• SIMILAR IN DESIGN PRINCIPLES TO STUDIES IN
INDONESIA, CHINA AND PHILIPINES
• COLLECTIVE EFFORT OF CII, WORLD BANK AND
THE U.P. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD.
57
• 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
58
PILOT INCLUDES
• LOCATION SPECIFIC PROGRAMME
• INCLUDES SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISE ALSO
• INVOLVES A YES / NO
• COMPLIANCE RATING AS AGAINST PERFORMANCE
RATING
59
FUTURE OUTLOOK
• DATA ACQUISITION SUCCESSFUL ONLY IF ASSISTED
BY REGULATORY AUTHORITIES.
• SEPARATE IDENTITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RATING
PROGRAM
• INVOLVEMENT OF A 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.
60
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.
61
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
62
THANK YOU
63

Environmental Performance Assessment of Alcohol Industry in Uttar Pradesh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Performance Assessment of Alcohol Industry in Uttar Pradesh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENVIRONMENTAL

U.P. Pollution Control Board

B. Study Executed by:

ENV Developmental Assistance Systems (INDIA) Pvt. Ltd.,

C. Data Analysis & DTP

Our gratitude to:

Sri Pradeep Kumar

Senior Officers of the U.P. Pollution Control Board

• CREATION OF MARKET OPPORTUNITIES

• Voluntary – Press Release, Public Reports Etc.

- Society Wants To Be Told What Is Going On

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

Molasses, MT /KL Alcohol

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

• Minimum - 379.40 No. of Units with negative

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Top Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

External Energy Consumption,GJ / KL Alcohol

0.00 - 15.44 - 30.89 - 46.33 - 61.78 - 77.22 - 92.67 - 108.11 -

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted Score

Default Status (without dillution)

 ISO 14001/EMS not granted to any Unit

Spent Wash,KL / KL Alcohol

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted

Biogas, Nm 3 / KL Spent Wash

• Minimum - 0.31 No. of Units with negative

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted

The Bottom Five (5) units are:

Rank Name of Distillery Performance Weighted

Overall Environmental Performance

Mode - 26.17 Range

Regional Comparision of Environmental Performance

River Catchment Units Discharging Land disposal/

River Catchmentwise Comparision - No. of Distilleries

Total no. of Distlry.

Locational Comparision of Environmental Performance

• The environmental performance of Grain

4. Minimizing water consumption by maximum

8. Maximum utilization of the treated effluent for

10. Upgradation of the Management through the

Sl. Name of Distillery Total Score

1 Jubliant Organosys Ltd. (VAM Organics), Gajraula 54.153

Sl. Name of Distillery Total Score

12 Balrampur Chini Mills, Balrampur 29.728

Sl. Name of Distillery Total Score