page 22 |
Previous | 1 of 7 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
Industry and Pollution-Abatement in the Ohio River Valley Edward J. Cleary Executive Director and Chief Engineer Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Cincinnati, Ohio Some people are saying that the pollution-abatement program in the Ohio River Basin is destined to call a halt to further industrial expan¬ sion. This statement is a startling one, but that is exactly what was said a few weeks ago by a delegation of industrial-promotion men who called upon the Commission. It seemed, therefore, that it might be useful to relate what tran¬ spired at that meeting. In so doing it is hoped that questions that may arise regarding the objectives and operations of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission may be clarified. Shortly after the Commission had been organized, a major chemical concern, called Company "X" sought a permit from one of the states in the valley to dispose of wastes from a proposed new plant. In its application the company furnished an analysis indicating that these wastes would be large in volume and would contribute a substantial amount of hardness to the water of the Ohio River; furthermore no method of disposal other than controlled dilution was offered. Obviously, here was a potential pollution situation of concern to more than one state. The Commission placed the matter before the chief sanitary engineers of the states affected. This led to a study, following which unanimous agreement was reached that a permit for this operation should be denied. Backed with such support, the health authorities in the state wherein the "X" Company sought to locate, refused to sanction operation of the plant without adequate provisions for waste disposal. As a conse¬ quence, the company decided it would not go ahead with its building program. Many people had worked hard to attract this industry to consider their particular state. You can be sure that they had a lot of questions to ask when the project was stymied because of pollution-abatement requirements. Thus it was that the state director of commerce and top 22
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC194903 |
Title | Industry and pollution-abatement in the Ohio River valley |
Author | Cleary, Edward J. |
Date of Original | 1949 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the fifth Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/engext&CISOPTR=10924&REC=14 |
Extent of Original | p. 22-28 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2008-05-18 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650c |
Capture Details | ScandAll21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page 22 |
Date of Original | 1949 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650c |
Capture Details | ScandAll21 |
Transcript | Industry and Pollution-Abatement in the Ohio River Valley Edward J. Cleary Executive Director and Chief Engineer Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Cincinnati, Ohio Some people are saying that the pollution-abatement program in the Ohio River Basin is destined to call a halt to further industrial expan¬ sion. This statement is a startling one, but that is exactly what was said a few weeks ago by a delegation of industrial-promotion men who called upon the Commission. It seemed, therefore, that it might be useful to relate what tran¬ spired at that meeting. In so doing it is hoped that questions that may arise regarding the objectives and operations of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission may be clarified. Shortly after the Commission had been organized, a major chemical concern, called Company "X" sought a permit from one of the states in the valley to dispose of wastes from a proposed new plant. In its application the company furnished an analysis indicating that these wastes would be large in volume and would contribute a substantial amount of hardness to the water of the Ohio River; furthermore no method of disposal other than controlled dilution was offered. Obviously, here was a potential pollution situation of concern to more than one state. The Commission placed the matter before the chief sanitary engineers of the states affected. This led to a study, following which unanimous agreement was reached that a permit for this operation should be denied. Backed with such support, the health authorities in the state wherein the "X" Company sought to locate, refused to sanction operation of the plant without adequate provisions for waste disposal. As a conse¬ quence, the company decided it would not go ahead with its building program. Many people had worked hard to attract this industry to consider their particular state. You can be sure that they had a lot of questions to ask when the project was stymied because of pollution-abatement requirements. Thus it was that the state director of commerce and top 22 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page 22