industrial pollution, european solutions...life focus i industrial pollution, european solutions:...

European Commission

L I F E I I I

Industrial pollution, European solutions:clean technologies

LIFE and the Directive on integrated pollution prevention

and control (IPPC Directive)

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int).

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004

ISBN 92-894-6020-2ISSN 1725-5619

© European Communities, 2004Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Belgium

Printed on recycled paper

European Commission

LIFE FOCUS / Industrial pollution, European solutions: clean technologiesLIFE and the Directive on integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC Directive)

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

2003 — 32 p. — 21 x 28 cm

ISBN 92-894-6020-2

European CommissionDirectorate-General Environment

LIFE Focus is the twice-yearly journal of the LIFE III programme (2000-2006).

LIFE ("L'Instrument Financier pour l'Environnement"/the financing instrument for the Environment) is an EU programmecoordinated by the Environment Directorate-General (LIFE Unit).

The contents of LIFE FOCUS do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions of the European Union.

Editorial Department: SOGES/AEIDL a/s Jean-Pierre Vercruysse – Managing Editor: Bruno Julien, European Commission,Environment DG, LIFE Unit - BU-9 02/1, 200 rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels - Journalism: Pierre Ergo, Jean-Luc Janot –The following people worked on this issue: Peter Vissers, Jean-Pierre Vercruysse - Photos: Hulshof Tanneries,Interuniversity Microelectronics Center (IMEC), Mr Thorsten Schneiker, LIFE projects – Production coordinator: Christine Charlier – Graphic design: Kaligram, Anita Cortés – This issue of LIFE FOCUS is published in English with a print-run of 3 800 copies and is available online in two languages (French, English).

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questionsabout the European UnionNew freephone number: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

Clean technologies:proof through LIFE . . . . . . . . p.2

The IPPC Directive – A keystone of European environment policy . . . . . . . . . . . p.6

"Every project is important and significant" (interview) . . . . . p.10

Ten exmples of LIFE projects:

Semiconductor industry:innovation moves ahead . . . . . . .p.12

Ecology and margarine: they are compatible . . . . . . . . . . p.13

Cleaner digital printing in the textile industry . . . . . . . . . .p.14

Manufacture of diodes: less molybdenum along the Danube . p.15

High-speed cutting without cooling for cleaner metalworking: cutting-edge technology . . . . . . p.16

The pharmaceutical industry looksafter the environment . . . . . . . . . p.18

Industrial paint for shock absorbers:environmental impact largelyabsorbed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p.20

An oil industry that smells less of sulphur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p.22

A new environmental law for Russia and its application in four pilot companies . . . . . . . . p.24

Steel goes green: a cleaner steel industry thanks to electrodialysis . p.26

No-one doubts that industrial activity is essential for the economy, citizens’ well-

being and maintenance of employment. However, data from the European

Environment Agency1 show that the state of the environment continues to deteri-

orate in various fields. Despite remarkable progress made in recent decades in

virtually all industrial sectors in terms of ecological efficiency of production

processes, a great deal remains to be done before we will have reached a sus-

tainable standards. We need to reduce substantially atmospheric emissions - in

particular those contributing to climate change - and water pollution, water and

energy consumption, the use of toxic substances, the quantity of non-recyclable

waste, etc.

One of the key methods for meeting this challenge is through technological devel-

opment. This involves improving the capacity of industry to innovate. In order to

stimulate this preventive approach, the European Union’s policy combines legisla-

tive requirements, R&D and financial support for innovative projects, in particular

LIFE-Environment projects.

At the legislative level, every operator of a major industrial installation must apply

the "best available techniques" (BAT) to prevent or substantially reduce adverse

effects on the environment. This obligation – soon to be applicable throughout the

Europe of the Twenty-Five – is laid down in the integrated pollution prevention and

control directive. The European Commission recently published a communication

on its implementation. It called upon the Member States to enhance their efforts

and has organised large-scale consultation2.

LIFE provides industrial innovators with support that may be decisive, in particular

within small and medium-sized industries, in demonstrating the feasibility of

promising technologies and ensuring dissemination of positive results. Several

LIFE projects in various sectors have already contributed to improving manufac-

turing processes and others are in progress. This brochure highlights examples of

the role which LIFE plays in stimulating clean technologies. This role will be fur-

ther strengthened through the LIFE-Environment projects selected in 2003. There

are twice as many projects focusing on such technologies and on reducing the

greenhouse effect as in 2002, representing more than 16% of the total.

LIFE Focus I Industrial pollution, European solutions: clean technologies I p. 1

Herbert AichingerHead of Industry Unit,

European Commission,

Directorate-General Environment

1 http://www.eea.eu.int2 See page 8: “For more information and for contact”.

Action at source, and in particular atproduction sites, is an essential con-dition for the success of endeavoursto reduce the environmental impact ofeconomic activities. Priority should begiven to choosing innovative tech-niques that are geared to prevention.It is also important not to considerproblems separately but from anoverall environmental point of view:air, water, soil, natural resources, etc.This two-pronged approach, bothinnovative and integrated, is charac-teristic of LIFE projects. Many of themcontribute to the development ofclean technologies in a wide rangeof industrial sectors.

Clean technologies, LIFE and the IPPC Directive

Clean technologies are new industrialprocesses or modifications of existingones intended to reduce the impact ofproduction activities on the environ-ment, including reducing the use ofenergy and raw materials. LIFE fundsprojects most frequently submitted bysmall – and medium – sized enter-prises (SME) from various industrialsectors which need assistance toovercome technical and financialobstacles to developing non-pollutingtechnologies.

One series of LIFE projects is directlylinked to the implementation of theintegrated pollution prevention andcontrol directive (IPPC1). The IPPCDirective makes provision for anauthorisation system which encour-ages industries in the most pollutingsectors to prevent or reduce pollutantemissions by complying with criteriabased on "best available tech-niques" (BAT). These techniques aredescribed for each sector in BAT reference documents ”BREF” (seepages 8 and 9).

LIFE-Environment projects operate attwo levels depending on the state ofprogress of the BREF documents:

> In sectors for which BREF docu-ments have already been adopted,projects must describe the envis-aged degree of innovation in relationto techniques defined as BAT. Theaim of these projects is therefore toproduce substantial innovations inorder to improve the BREFs.

> In sectors where BREF documentsare not yet available, projectsshould provide information makingit possible to determine BAT in thelight of the indications contained inthe Directive (Annex IV).

In this way, the role of LIFE is alwaysto make an innovative contribution todeveloping BAT. The most promisingprojects encompass a wide range ofenvironmental aspects (integratedapproach), give priority to prevention,including the prevention of waste dis-posal, make an innovative contribu-tion and present a sound overall balance.

Some projects may benefit from LIFEfunding in order to optimise the appli-cation of existing BAT to specificlocal situations. A condition is thatthe project should serve demonstra-tion purposes and enable an exten-sion of experience in implementingBAT in view of the wide variety of sit-uations in the Member States and dif-ferent regions.

Another type of project involvescapacity building. This applies toLIFE-Environment projects pursued inacceding or applicant countrieswhere, for instance, information cen-tres for clean technologies and BATare set up. LIFE-Third countries pro-jects focusing on such technologiesare intended to make it clear to thesecountries that the European experi-ence may help them to move towardssustainable industrial development.

Clean technologies: proof through LIFEMany LIFE projects embrace the development of clean technologies in industry. More than thirty of

these have specifically contributed to establishing «best available techniques», a key element of the

integrated pollution prevention and control directive which is one of the main legislative instruments

of the Union ensuring sustainable development.

Well-established presence,leverage role

Of the total of about 1 200 LIFE-Envir-onment projects implemented since1992, some 17% relate to 20 industrialsectors out of a total of 30 covered by the IPPC Directive (see page 6).Approximately 10% of all projectsconcern clean technologies. Morethan 30 are directly linked with theapplication of the Directive, i.e. theyexplicitly have to do with developmentof BAT.

In 2003, out of a total of 104 LIFE-Environment projects selected2, 17were devoted to reducing the impactof economic activities on the environ-ments, i.e. twice as many as in 2002.Twelve of these projects were in the"clean technologies" category and fivecame under "reduction of greenhousegas emission".

The place of clean technologies inLIFE projects is therefore significant.Because of its innovatory character,the search for a sound cost/benefitratio and the wish to make the resultstransferable, LIFE is an appropriatetool to establish BAT, in particularthrough demonstration of ”emergingtechnologies” (see page 9) that arelikely to open the way for new BAT.LIFE-Environment projects are partic-ularly significant in providing leverageas they are not simply pilot projectsbut are implemented prior to full-scaleindustrial projects.

Proof through LIFE: ten examples

The ten examples of projects pre-sented in this brochure, nine for LIFE-Environment and one for LIFE-Thirdcountries, illustrate this leverage role.The beneficiaries are SMEs as well asbranches of large concerns in varioussectors. The main results obtained interms of protection of the environ-ment, often also involving major sav-ings, are as follows:

> In Belgium (p. 12), a research cen-tre has been successful in prevent-ing the use of sulphuric acid in themanufacture of semiconductors andreducing deionised water con-sumption by 90%.

> In Spain (p. 13), a manufacturer ofmargarine has met the challenge ofexcluding from its productionprocess all chemical treatment,waste disposal and pollutant emis-sions.

> In Italy (p. 14), a textile SME has re-duced ink surpluses by 100% andwaste water by 60% by developingdigital fabric printing techniques atindustrial level.

> In Austria (p. 15), one of the world’sleading diode manufacturers hasdrastically reduced the level ofmolybdenum in residual water dis-charged into the Danube and hastransferred the process used to aHungarian site.

> In Germany (p. 16), an SME has in-troduced, with major benefits to theenvironment and worker health, adry sawing technique for metal tubesand profiles which is likely to berecognised as BAT.

> In France (p. 18), a plant of a majorpharmaceutical concern has con-siderably improved its managementof water resources by developing aset of new techniques applicable tomany other sectors.

> In the Netherlands (p. 20), a majormanufacturer of shock absorbersand a company specialising in in-dustrial coatings have designed avarnish which contains hardly anyvolatile solvents, thereby putting anend to a conflict with the local pop-ulation.


1 IPPC: Integrated Pollution Preventionand Control.2 For more information on LIFE-Environment projects of the 2003selection, see press release IP/03/1200of 5 September 2003 on the Europawebsite: http://www.europa.eu.int/rapid/

Digital printing on fabric (p. 14). The aim of the IPPC Directive is to offer in each industrial sector

a range of technological solutions to pollution problems.

> In Italy (p. 22), the first results of anongoing project in a refinery of a ma-jor oil company have already shownthe efficacy of a process designedto greatly reduce sulphur dioxideemission by improving a BAT.

> In Russia (p. 24), a LIFE–Third coun-tries project has enabled the adoptionof a law on operating authorisationsbased on BAT which has already beenapplied to four pilot companies in St Petersburg and the surroundingregion.

> In Sweden (p. 26), one of Europe’smajor steel manufacturers has at alakeside steel plant developed apromising process - a future BAT? –for deacidification of waste waterthrough electrodialysis.

Case study: LIFE in the tanningsector

Tanning involves a series of activities rang-ing from treating raw hides to finishingproducts. The main impact on the environ-ment results from the generation of wasteand waste water and the use of chemicals.As the world’s leading supplier of leather,the Union comprises about 3 000 compa-nies in this sector, mostly SMEs. Theexchange of information on BAT, which arethe basis for implementing the Directive(see page 9), started in 1998 and wasrounded off in 2001 with the compilation ofthe BREF document for this sector adopt-ed by the Commission in 2003.

Twenty-five LIFE-Environment projects,involving 21 different beneficiaries, relatedto activities in the tanning sector between1993 and 2002. Their spread over 8 coun-tries of the European Union (B, D, E, F, IT,NL, S, UK) largely reflects the distribution ofthese activities in the sector. In this period,the sector received virtually continuousfunding from LIFE. While not all of theseprojects were linked with the implementa-tion of the IPPC Directive based on BATwhich the sector embarked upon only in1998, they have nevertheless played innov-ative and exemplary roles with regard toclean technologies.

The total amount invested by the sector inthese projects was EUR 35.5 million andthe Union’s contribution amounted to EUR 9.2 million, a ratio of 3.9 to 1. Withoutthis contribution, which is not merely finan-cial, many of these projects would not haveseen the light of day or would not haveattained the same level of quality.

The BAT worked out for the tanning indus-try in the BREF document covers fiveareas: management and good housekeep-ing, substitute chemical products, process-integrated BAT measures, effluent andwater management and treatment, andwaste management and treatment. Foreach of these areas, LIFE projects havebeen implemented in 1993-2002, whetheror not they were linked with the IPPCDirective.

LIFE has had a genuine impact in the tan-ning sector:

> The 25 projects concern all the areas cov-ered by the BAT and a wide range ofMember States;

> The BREF document of the sector refersto one LIFE project (LIFE94 ENV/UK/000494: Demonstration project for the ex-tensive introduction of clean technologies,conservation of raw materials and opti-misation of production processes in thetanning industry);

> In addition to the direct impact, a muchwider indirect impact is expected;

> Finally, the projects selected for 2002 and2003 in this sector are clearly linked withthe BREF document. They reflect its rec-ommendations and seek to provide a realadded value in BAT terms.

Draining dyed hides before drying.

Findings and recommendations

On the basis of experience gainedwith LIFE projects, the EnvironmentDG of the European Commission andthe European IPPC Bureau (see page8) have drawn up a number of findingsand recommendations.

Findings:

> A large number of LIFE projects havebeen implemented in sectors cov-ered by the IPPC Directive. Their di-rect or indirect impact on its imple-mentation have been substantial, inparticular in SMEs. LIFE stimulatesexchange of information and innov-ative experiments and highlights therelevance of emerging technologiesincluding those that are insuffic-iently developed or implemented.Several LIFE projects in various sectors are referred to in the BREFdocuments.

> This impact is borne out by the factseven though the role which LIFE hasplayed is not always apparent. Somepartners know and utilise the resultsof successful projects without nec-essarily linking them with the LIFEprogramme.

> LIFE’s impact is bound to increasein the near future. Currently, theBREF documents provide guidelinesfor research activity and for demon-stration projects which include LIFE-Environment projects. The relevantprojects in the 2002 and 2003 se-lections are clearly linked to BREFand only those projects that are like-ly to improve the BREF documen-tation are being funded.

Recommendations:

> To secure a more systematic ap-proach to internal exchange of infor-mation and the sharing of evaluationprocedures between the IPPC Unitand DG Environment, the LIFE Unitand the European IPPC Bureau.

> Secondly, to make the dissemina-tion of results by beneficiaries of LIFEprojects more systematic. This is ofcrucial importance particularly in en-suring comparison, validation andrecording of results in the informa-tion process on BAT. This requiresthat this objective should form partof the content of projects. In partic-ular, results should be disseminatedvia the international sectorial pressand on Internet.

> In LIFE projects use should be madeof the "improving BREF documents"option, in which account is takenonly of truly innovatory projects, with-out disregarding the "local BAT op-timisation and experimentation" op-tion. These two options are neces-sary and complementary to fullyensure the implementation of BAT inall countries participating in their development.


LIFE demonstrates the relevance of emerging or insufficiently developedtechniques. The picture shows the new regeneration unit of the Sanazzaro refinery (p. 22).

The aim of the Directive on integratedpollution prevention and control (IPPCDirective1) is to prevent or, if thisproves impossible, reduce to a mini-mum: i) pollutant emissions into theair, water or the soil and ii) waste dis-posal and other adverse effects on theenvironment caused by industrialinstallations so as to reconcile theiractivities with a high level of protec-tion of the environment as a whole.The operation of industrial installationsis subject to authorisation whichinvolves a full investigation of the environmental status of each of themand must be based in particular on the"best available techniques" (BAT) inthe different industrial sectors.

Wide field of application

The sectors currently covered, listedin Annex I to the Directive, includeactivities with a high pollution risksuch as the energy industries, pro-duction and processing of metals,mineral industry, chemical industry,pulp and paper industry pre-treatmentand dyeing of textiles, tanning,slaughterhouses and food processing,treatment of animal waste, intensiverearing of poultry or pigs, surfacetreatment involving the use of organicsolvents, and carbon or electro-graphite production. Annex I to theDirective also lays down from whatthreshold values, generally relating toproduction capacity and output, theinstallations in these sectors fall withinthe scope of the Directive.

Since October 1999, the Directive hasapplied to all new installations in thesesectors and to installations alreadytaken into service earlier to whichchanges are to be made that are likelyto have an adverse effect on healthand the environment. Provision ismade for a transitional period up toOctober 2007 to bring other existinginstallations into line with the require-ments of the Directive, given the costof the adaptations required.

The IPPC Directive – A keystone of European environment policyIndustrial plants are among the principal sources of pollution. The Directive on integrated pollution

prevention and control is therefore a keystone of the Union's environment policy. Its implementation

is based on a flexible and dynamic system.

Pollution prevention mainly involves preventing the discharge of hazardous waste. In the SwedishMercOx project (LIFE99 ENV/S/000626), a process has been tried out in which mercury can be reused in the productionprocess at a chemical plant.

… focussed on productionprocesses

While the Directive has a wide scope,it is nevertheless limited to environ-mental damage caused in the production process (see graph onpage 9). In addition to recourse toclean technologies, it includes therational use of raw materials, energyand water, disposal or recycling ofunavoidable waste, accident preven-tion, risk management to preventmajor pollution, and restoring sitesafter cessation of activities. However,it does not cover environmental inci-dents occurring at any time during aproduct's lifecycle, which are cov-ered by "integrated products policy".

Flexible authorisation procedure

The Directive lays down the minimumrequirements for operation authori-sations. Granting authorisation fallswithin the purview of the MemberStates or of local authorities, as thecase may be. They are also respons-ible for laying down specific condi-tions for authorisation on the basis ofBAT, taking account of the technicalcharacteristics of the installation, itsage, its location and local environ-mental conditions. Apart from particu-lar cases the IPPC Directive does notestablish any binding standards,. Thisdecentralised approach, althoughcarrying a risk of unequal applicationof the Directive, takes account of thewide diversity of situations and isconducive to "soft harmonisation" ofenvironmental standards in Europeanindustry.

However, where necessary theCommission has the possibility ofproposing "Community emissionlimit values" to the Council (mini-mum criteria applicable throughoutthe Union). On the one hand thesevalues are fixed for emissions frominstallations covered by the IPPCDirective and are on the other handbased on a list of polluting sub-stances in Annex III. To this must beadded emission limit values laiddown by fifteen other directives con-cerning the environment, listed inAnnex II.


The IPPC Directive specifically deals with the following forms of environmental pollution:

• Acidification resulting from emissions into the air;

• Soil and water eutrophisation resulting from emissions to air or water;

• Diminution of oxygen in water;

• Global warming;

• Depletion of the ozone layer;

• Emission of particles into the air, especially microparticles and metals;

• Formation of photochemical ozone;

• Discharge of persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic substances into water or into the soil;

• Generation of waste, in particular hazardous waste;

• Vibrations, noise and odours;

• Over-exploitation of raw material and water resources.

1 IPPC: Integrated Pollution Prevention andControl.

be reviewed in the not too distantfuture. For sectors where no BREF isas yet available, the criteria to betaken into account to determine BATsare specified in Annex IV to theDirective.

Any scheme for implementing the IPPCDirective which has the advantage ofbeing flexible, requires respons-ible participation by all concerned andtransparency of the process. TheDirective makes provision for publicaccess to authorisation applications,authorisations, monitoring reports andthe European Pollutant EmissionRegister (EPER3) published by theCommission. The Commission hasalso set up the European Union Net-work for the Implementation andEnforcement of Environmental Law(IMPEL4), an informal network whichbrings together the competent author-ities of the Member States and theacceding countries.

European legislation and IPPCDirective: the context in brief

When the IPPC Directive1 came intoforce in October 1996 it alreadyreflected the wish, reaffirmed in theSixth environment action pro-gramme of the European Commu-nity2, to lay greater emphasis on pre-vention in environmental protectionand to move towards sustainabledevelopment. It obviously interactswith other legislation and policies con-cerning the environment, as indicatedin the list of 15 directives included inAnnex II. The Commission strives foran optimum combination of environ-mental policy instruments, includingthe LIFE programme. Moreover, two-way links are established between theBATs developed under the IPPC Direc-tive and R&D action undertaken underthe Sixth Framework Programmefor Research, Technological Devel-opment and Demonstration3.

Continuous exchange of information

To facilitate implementation of theDirective, the European Commissionorganises information exchangeamong the various parties involved:experts from the Member States orfrom acceding countries, industry,research institutes, environmentalorganisations, etc., coordinated bythe European IPPC Bureau which isestablished in Seville (hence the ref-erence to the "Seville process").Working parties compile preparatorydocuments for each sector which arethen discussed in meetings fromamong the stakeholders referred toabove. They are also represented onan information exchange forumwhich supervises the process andensures ongoing dialogue. The out-come of this exchange and in partic-ular the compilation of BAT are pub-lished in sectorial technical referencedocuments, known as "BREF2" docu-ments. The whole process is spreadover a period of two to three years.

The BATs presented in these docu-ments must then be adopted by theCommission. While the BREFs do notlay down legally binding standards,the environmental authorities of theMember States are obliged to takethem into account in processingauthorisation applications. To date,15 BREF documents have beenmade available. All of the 30 docu-ments are due to be published beforethe end of 2005. The first BREFs will

2 BREF: BAT (best available techniques)Reference document3 EPER: European Pollutant EmissionRegister.4 IMPEL: Implementation and Enforcementof Environmental Law

1 Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996.2 Decision 1600/2002/EC of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002.3 Decision 1513/2002/EC of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002.

For more information and for contact:

IPPC Directive (text, information, links, e-mail, EPER register):http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/index.htm

Commission Communication: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2003/com2003_0354en01.pdfand press release: http://www.europa.eu.int/rapid

Consultation campaign:http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/ippc_consultation.htm

European IPPC Bureau and access to BREF documents: http://eippcb.jrc.es and e-mail: [email protected]

IMPEL network: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/impel


Which "best available techniques"?

• Best: the most efficient ones to attaina high general level of protecting the environment as a whole;

• Available: established on a scale en-abling their widespread applicationwithin a given sector, under conditionswhich are sustainable from a technicaland economic point of view in termsof costs and benefits and ensuring rea-sonable access for operators in anyMember State;

• Techniques: this includes productiontechniques and the way in which in-stallations are designed, constructed,maintained, operated and closed down.

The choice of BAT may vary from oneinstallation to another in that the spec-ific situations, costs and benefits arevariable. BATs are those techniques thatmake it possible to reconcile industrialproduction and environmental protec-tion, particularly if they can be operatedwith economic and strategic benefits to

the companies concerned. Particulartechniques which are superior from anenvironmental angle but deemed to betoo costly for a sector as a whole maynot meet the BAT defining criteria.

As technologies, industrial context andenvironmental requirements are con-stantly changing, the concept of BAT isessentially dynamic; the implementingconditions of the IPPC Directive are suf-ficiently flexible to enable authorities andoperators to make appropriate choiceswithin a sound cost/benefit ratio.

What do "BREF" documents contain?

Each BREF document is dedicated tothe overall and integrated approachwithin an industrial sector. They areextensive documents containing thefollowing chapters:

• Preface (legislative context, sources ofinformation, how the document shouldbe used) and executive summary;

• General information about the sector;

• Brief description of current processesand techniques within the sector;

• Data on recent levels of pollutingemissions and on raw material, ener-gy and water consumption in thesector;

• Inventory of techniques taken intoaccount in selecting BAT in the sector;

• Presentation, with proper justifica-tion, of the techniques considered tobe the best available techniques;

• Information on emerging tech-niques concerning the sector, i.e.innovative technologies for prevent-ing and reducing pollution currently inthe experimental stage;

• Conclusions concerning particularlythe quality of information exchange,the level of consensus attained and recommendations for follow-up including the need for research, de-velopment and demonstration.

A - Raw materials and energy

B - Industry in a particular sector

C - Life cycle of products andexternal recycling of wastes(not covered by IPPCDirective)

1 - Emission to air

2 - Emission to water

3 - Emission to soil

4 - Prevention and recovery of waste and waste water

5 - Energy efficiency and choiceof raw materials

6 - Accident prevention and control

7 - Noise, vibration, heat, odour.

River

Groundwaterlevel

A B C

Scope of the IPPC DirectiveIntegrated approach to all environmental aspects of the production process

7

1

4

5 6

3

2

Liquid effluentsand solidwaste

Mr Litten, as the Commission'srecent Communication1 shows,implementing the IPPC Directive isa complex task. What are the weakpoints and how can LIFE help toovercome them?

> Rather than talking of weaknesses,I would say that the Directive pre-sents a major administrative chal-lenge to the Member States as it isbased on an integrated approachwhich must be applied in a widerange of sectors. The Directivemakes it necessary to take accountin a coordinated manner of all ques-tions regarding the environmentwhich have historically been re-sponsibilities shared between local,regional and national authorities,which poses a political difficulty.However, this cannot be overcomethrough blanket European pro-grammes because of specific na-tional realities.

An important problem relates to theapplication of the "threshold crite-ria" laid down in the list of activities(Annex 1) covered by the Directive.For instance, what are the thresholdcriteria for finished products in thetanning sector? If one talks of 12tonnes of finished products, doesthis refer to any product produced bya tanning plant, which may be part-processed leather intended for sub-sequent treatment elsewhere (butwhich is "finished" as far as the firstsite is concerned), or a dry product("finished" in that it is ready for usein a shoe or furniture factory, for in-stance)?

There is a wide scope for potentialresearch on the application of vari-ous thresholds in the real life of in-dustries and this is where LIFE canplay an experimental role, as thisbrochure shows. The question is alsohow to change the thresholds in cas-es where, for example, a thresholdproves to be a source of competi-tive disadvantages. The thresholdhas been determined to reflect to acertain degree the pollutant poten-tial of an installation and this meansit covers some SMEs. However, theDirective does not cover all Euro-pean industries and even for thoseit does cover it applies to existing in-dustries in the framework of nation-al plans for implementation: it pro-vides that all existing installationsmust be in conformity with its provi-sions not later than by October 2007.The exact timetable depends on thepolitical decision of each MemberState.

As for the question whether a tech-nique meets the definition of "bestavailable techniques" (BAT), evidenceis needed that it is technically andeconomically viable in the sectorconcerned. In the cement industry,for instance, there has been a de-bate on the viability of reducing thelevel of nitrogen oxide (NOx) for BATpurposes.

In this instance, a pilot project hadproduced promising results in se-lective catalytic reduction. Such re-sults may stimulate the application ofa technique on a wider scale toprove, for instance, the viability ofcatalytic converters at full-scale op-eration. An equally important crite-rion is the ability of write-off of envi-ronmental investment. If you investin clean technology with an expect-ed return over five years and it is superseded after two years by clean-er technology, changing over to thenew technology is then a very cost-ly exercise.

What can LIFE do in areas wherethere are as yet no BREF docu-ments? Do you think that LIFEshould support projects whoseinnovative character consists aboveall in trying out local formulae forimplementing the Directive?

> Work on revising the first BREFs willstart shortly. The Commission's Research Directorate-General specif-ically intends to indicate in severalBREFs the known areas in which in-formation is poor and inadequate,and the LIFE projects likely to pro-vide new information that may betaken into consideration.

"Every project is important and significant"LIFE and the challenges of the IPPC Directive

Mr Don Litten heads the European IPPC Bureau in Seville which coordinates exchange

of information to determine the "best available techniques" (BAT).

Over and above purely technologi-cal aspects, LIFE may certainly playa key role in encouraging collabora-tion among public authorities, in-dustry and NGOs. Relations betweenindustry and the authorities gener-ally consist of negotiations and mayeven by polemical. If within a pilotproject a commitment is made to ex-change information, to establish apartnership, this creates the possi-bility of working together and under-standing the other's point of view.

What ways are there to improve theprocess of validating BAT linkedwith LIFE projects, their incorpora-tion in BREF and the visibility of thislink?

> In cases in which industry itself en-gages in R&D, it often happens thatno detailed information is dissemi-nated for public use. In such cases,it is very difficult to claim validationof promising environmental perfor-mance. LIFE can provide a clear andtransparent information flow betweeneach project and our work on BAT. Todate, particular questions such as theuse of energy have not often beendealt with in such a way that the datacan be extrapolated from one com-pany or one installation to another. A LIFE project may include an infor-mation exercise geared to such ques-tions which may prove to be of con-siderable interest to us and others.

What do you think of the linkbetween LIFE and research anddevelopment (R&D)?

> It is excellent. Where industry under-takes R&D activities, it too often keepsthe results secret in order to retaincontrol over applications. LIFE, on theother hand, is a public programmeand as such must make results avail-able and open up the debate.

The IPPC Directive mainly concernslarge companies. Do you think thatLIFE has a role to play vis-à-visSMEs?

> I do. Industry is structured at variouslevels and, for example, a large con-cern like Solvay has its own researchdepartment, as it has the means tofund it. On the other hand, SMEshave neither sufficient resources forresearch nor easy access to infor-mation. Hence the importance ofprogrammes encouraging exchangeof information. One aim of LIFE is tofoster research applications forSMEs in order to enhance theirknowledge capital.

The 104 LIFE-Environment projectsselected in 2003 include 12 cleantechnology projects and five green-house gas reduction projects. Doyou consider these figures signifi-cant?

> One single project would be signifi-cant! Each project is important andsignificant. Any information madepublic in the field of R&D is signifi-cant. When research results aremade public, industry faces the chal-lenge to respond, communicate andcompare technologies.

What are your views on a "moreharmonised approach" conduciveto fixing "emission limit values" atCommunity level?

> The Directive makes clear provision(Article 18) for the possibility of set-ting Community limit values. I believe

that if this approach were adoptedthroughout, the Member Stateswould not be prepared to accept themost ambitious performances andthis would lead to negotiations even-tually producing the lowest commondenominator. The idea behind theBAT approach is to be able to findsolutions geared to specific casesand circumstances. It is necessaryto take account of actual conditions,in particular geographic realities. Togive an example concerning slaugh-terhouses: pigs raised in Italy weightwice as much as in the Netherlandsor Denmark. An installation current-ly in use in the Netherlands would notsupport the weight of Italian pigs. An-other example: in Sweden or Finland,the temperature may drop to –50°Cand in the south of Spain it may riseto +50°: how can one hope to es-tablish the same processes with thesame energy efficiency? Apart fromthe variety of situations obtaining ineach country, account should alsobe taken of the distinctive features ofproducts which have their roots intraditions and regions: a Rioja is a Rioja, a Palermo is a Palermo.

What do you think of the situation inthe future Member States?

> With regard to the IPPC Directive, itwould be wrong to believe that thesecountries are special cases. For everycurrent Member State, its imple-mentation is a challenge, the BATare a challenge, and this challengeis connected with the complexity ofprocesses in each country. Accord-ingly, the new Member States willnot be at a disadvantage and LIFEshould be accessible to them ac-cording to the same criteria as forthe other countries.


1 http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/cnc/2003/com2003_0354en01.pdf

About 30% of the operations involvedin manufacturing semiconductorsconsists of cleaning silicon wafers bymeans of large quantities of aggres-sive chemical solutions such as sulphuric acid. This is harmful to theenvironment, to which must be addedthe high costs involved, in particularbecause of the considerable quanti-ties of de-ionised water (DI) needed.One of the main applications of theprocess is photoresist stripping. TheInteruniversity Microelectronics Cen-ter (IMEC), a Flemish associationwhich has become one of the world'sleading independent microelectronicsresearch centres, has developed anoriginal alternative to photoresist strip-ping in partnership with a private German company of the Texas Instru-ments group.

The new technique combines the useof ozone (O3) with a DI boundary layercontrolled process at the wafer sur-face. Its superiority over the conven-tional O3/DI technique is due to astronger concentration of reactiveozone near the surface. The IMECprocess avoids the use of sulphuricacid and reduces de-ionised waterconsumption by 90%. For a medium-sized company, this is tantamount tosavings of 2 200 litres of sulphuric acidand 500 000 litres of DI water a week.

The possible integration of the requi-site hardware in existing equipment,moreover, limits the investmentrequired.

The process has initially been incor-porated in IMEC's semi-industrial pro-duction line before moving on to full-scale integrated circuit productionunits of Texas Instruments in Freising(Germany). The many changes madeto the conventional system include theinstallation of an ozone generator.Because of the safety problem ofreleasing a large quantity of this gasinto the air, initial experiments werecarried out with an ozone-destroyingcatalyst conversion system, which hasin the meantime been replaced by athermal system operating at 90% effi-ciency. Experimenting with such sys-

tems under conditions of high steamconcentrations in the exhaust circuithas been a "first" in this domain.Moreover, a secured ozone detectorensures protection of workers.

While the project could not be com-pleted within the LIFE frameworkbecause of technical restructuring atTexas Instruments, the results aremore than promising. The newprocess, which is attractive and trans-ferable, has a promising future inEurope's integrated circuit industry.

Reference: LIFE99 ENV/B/000649Eligible total cost: EUR 1 571 753.03 LIFE contribution: EUR 675 509.11Beneficiary: IMEC, Kapeldreef 75, B-3001 Leuven

Contact: Mr Jan van HoeymissenTel.: +32 (0)16 28 12 11Fax: +32 (0)16 22 94 40E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]: www.imec.be

Duration: from 1 February 1999 to 1 February 2001

Semiconductor industry: innovation moves ahead

By avoiding the use of sulphuric acid in the manufacture of semiconductors, the process worked

out by a research centre with LIFE funding spares the environment while ensuring substantial

savings for industry.

LIFE-Environment project in Belgium

Ten

exa

mp

les

of L

IFE

pro

jec

ts

From the lab to industry – the contribution of a LIFE project to clean technologies.

© IM

EC


Manufacturing margarine normallygenerates considerable amounts ofpolluting waste. Refining fats bymeans of sodium hydroxide leads tothe formation of sodium soap whichhas to be eliminated by rinsing andthrough treatment with chlorohydricacid. This leads to large quantities ofhighly polluting waste water which hasto be purified. The hardening of oilsand fats through hydrogenationinvolves hydrogen emission into theair. Emulsifiers and other chemicaladditives complete this brief overview.

Lasem Alimentación1 used to applythese processes themselves until theydecided to switch to sustainablegrowth and to develop a line of eco-logical products. They received LIFEfunding for their project to produceecological margarine manufacturedwith raw materials which were likewiseecological, using only clean technol-ogy without any chemical treatmentand without generating any solid orliquid waste or pollutant emission.

Fats are refined in a physical processunder vacuum at high temperature.After mixing, natural colouring andflavouring agents are added and themixture is emulsified with water. Theemulsion is then subjected to crys-tallisation and crystal maturation andstabilisation, followed by plastification(high-pressure cooling). Hydrogena-tion and a number of other stages areeliminated. The new equipment usedwards off risks of contamination andfacilitates cleaning.

The raw materials used are coconutfat from coconut palms abundantlygrowing in the wild in the Philippines.One difficulty is to secure a regularsupply of a product from untreatedtrees, extracted without solvents.Another raw material is sunflower oilwhich is available in Spain where theplants are cultivated without chemicaltreatment.

In spite of the higher cost of the rawmaterials, the process consumes lessenergy and obviates the need for highexpenditure on water purification andsludge treatment. It benefits fromsound opportunities on a marketwhich is increasingly open to ecolog-ical products. Highly innovative, thisLIFE project also applies strategicplanning which may be of interest toother agrifood producers and otherindustrial sectors.

Ecology and margarine: they are compatible

Producing margarine by using only clean technology without any polluting waste and still

remaining economically viable? It's possible, as this LIFE project has shown.

LIFE-Environment project in Spain

Reference: LIFE98 ENV/E/000366Eligible total cost: EUR 1 550 793.06LIFE contribution: EUR 214 679.13Beneficiary: Lasem Alimentación (Vandemoortele Iberica), Frederic Monpou, 5,1°4a, E-08960 Sant Just Desvern

Contact: Mr Jan MilleTel.: +34 93 499 98 00Fax: +34 93 499 98 11E-mail: [email protected]: www.vandemoortele.com

Duration: from 1 April 1998 to 1 July 2000

Packing, the last stage of a wholly ecological manufacturing process.

1 After the LIFE project, LasemAlimentación was taken over byVandemoortele Iberica. For legal reasonsconnected with questions of real estate,the Lasem site has been closed downand the production of ecological mar-garine in accordance with the techniquesdeveloped with LIFE funding has beenrelocated to an existing site in Belgium.

In the Italian province of Como, print-ing on silk is a centuries-old tradition.However, it has inevitably had animpact on the environment, with largequantities of waste colouring agentsand rinsing water, high energy con-sumption for drying, and noise. TheLIFE Tieprint project arose from theidea of combining this tradition andmodern digital printing techniques toreduce these drawbacks and thecosts involved. For this purpose, anSME, Stamperia di Lipomo, formed apartnership with other local compa-nies and with the AssociazioneImpresa Politecnico, which is spe-cialised in management of new tech-nology.

Digital printing on fabric had beenregarded as applicable only to smallsamples and had not moved beyondthe experimental stage. With this LIFEproject, the aim was to work out aninnovative technique which couldensure regular production in a variedrange of fabrics, responding to thegrowing interest in the textile sectoramong computer equipment manu-facturers and software producers.

After taking stock of the activities,costs and resources of the three com-panies, benchmarking digital ink jetprinting techniques and trials with themodel chosen (ENCAD/SOPHIS), thenext step was to improve perfor-mance. For instance, the use of aspectrophotometer makes it possibleto determine parameters on the basisof a fabric sample submitted by a cus-tomer and then print in the samecolours, with savings in time, dye andenergy.

The results are highly illustrative: dyesavings because of a 100% reductionin excess dyestuff, 60% reduction ofwaste water, 80% savings of thermalenergy and 30% savings of electricity,60% noise reduction and 60% reduc-tion of production space required, andan overall reduction of costs. In addi-tion to these benefits for the environ-ment, there has been a major improve-ment in working conditions, withpositive socio-economic effects. A challenge for the future is to ensurecontinuity of this activity and successin marketing the products.

Modernity in traditional colours.

Cleaner digital printing in the textile industry

This LIFE project supported the development of the innovative, economical and low-polluting

technology of digital printing on fabric which is likely to lead to a breakthrough in

the textile sector with positive socio-economic effects.

LIFE-Environment project in Italy

Reference: LIFE99 ENV/IT/000122Eligible total cost: EUR 1 415 091. 90LIFE contribution: EUR 368 130.48Beneficiary: Stamperia Lipomo SpA, Via Statale per Lecco, 7, IT-22030 Lipomo

Contact: Mr Gianluca BrennaTel.: +39 031 55 91 26Fax: +39 031 55 92 26 E-mail: [email protected]: www.tieprint.com

Duration: from 20 November 1999 to 20 March 2002


At its ultramodern Vöcklabruck site,one of the major production units interms of volume and quality, theVishay Semiconductor Austria com-pany, which forms part of the VishayIntertechnology Inc. group, manufac-tures about 200 million diodes a year.The diodes are used as fast rectifiersin a wide range of applications in theelectronics industry, e.g. in switchingcircuits, fluorescent tubes, computers,monitors and TV sets and as elec-tronic components in cars.

Production of the diodes involves theuse of sintered molybdenum (Mo)pins. Before being used in the pro-duction process, the oxide film has tobe removed from these pins. In thepast, they had to be etched with nitric,sulphuric and hydrochloric acid forthis purpose and then rinsed withwater. The result was a very high con-centration of Mo in the waste waterdischarged into the Vöckla river whicheventually flowed into the Danube.

Both because of its desire to protectthe environment and on account ofnew environmental legislation in Austria, Vishay has with LIFE fundingdeveloped a project based on theindustrial application of an entirelynew technology to remove the oxidefilm through a mechanical process,barrel polishing, which acts throughfriction. A new soldering technique toassemble components has been intro-duced and a new soldering oven witha high precision control system hasbeen installed.

The result of the LIFE project has beena drastic reduction of molybdenum in waste water: 0.6 mg/l instead of 18 mg/l at full production capacity. Theresidual rate is due to the fact that abrief leeching stage is still necessary inproducing the pins. In addition to thisremarkable result, which also benefitsother countries along the Danube,there have been substantial reductionsin costs: lower cost of waste watertreatment, less acid used and fewerdiode rejects. The new process is eas-ily transferable, and a second diodeproduction line has been establishedat another Vishay production site, inGyöngyös (Hungary).

Loading carbon forms into the prototype oven (3 000 diodes per mould).

Left: chemical treatment of molybdenum pins. The LIFE projectwas launched to work out an alternative to this process.

Manufacture of diodes:less molybdenum along the Danube

The Vöcklabruck site owes its competitive position to its advanced technology and the quality of

its products but nowadays also to a high level of protection of the river environment: a new

process introduced under this LIFE project has made it possible to almost completely eliminate

pollution of residual waters.

LIFE-Environment project in Austria

Reference: LIFE99 ENV/A/000391Eligible total cost: EUR 400 085.90LIFE contribution: EUR 118 973.53Beneficiary: Vishay Semiconductor Austria Ges.m.b.H, Telefunkenstraße 5, A-4840 Vöcklabruck

Contact: Franz Mathe, Dietmar ParzerTel.: +43 (0)7672/72451 - 135Fax: +49 (0)7672/72451 - 450E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]: www.vishay.com

Duration: from 1 September 1999 to 30 November 2002

A cutting technique which gives offsparks on the metal tubes and profilesmarket.

High-speed cutting without cooling for cleaner metalworking:cutting-edge technology

A technique for cutting tubes and profiles that avoids environmental problems and safeguards

workers' health: the Dry Tech process, developed by an SME with LIFE funding, is about to

conquer the market and establish a standard.

LIFE-Environment project in Germany

the lubricant cause air, water and soilpollution. There are also hazards forthe health of workers: skin irritations,eczema, respiratory problems and ofcourse the risk of chemical accidentsand accidents due to the many oper-ations required in the process.

At ITEC GmbH, a well known SMEspecialised in the manufacture of cir-cular saws, this new idea was inspiredby experience gained in the use in thebuilding trade of portable carbide-tipped circular saws. Why not emulatethis technique in industry? With LIFEfunding, this led to a project in whicha high-speed Dry Tech circular sawwas developed which requires nocooling lubricant.

Dry cutting technology is based on theextreme thinness of the saw bladecombined with load-dependent feedregulation. In comparison with con-ventional saws, Dry Tech saws requireless energy leading to less energyconverted into heat. Cutting speedsare very high, from 1 000 to 1 500m/min, increasing output by 65% andreducing burr and noise. Equipmentcosts are reduced because bladescan be ground up to five times. Thewhole process leaves no lubricantresidues, producing savings on vari-ous items of expenditure and in termsof operating time. Additionally, there isan inestimable benefit in terms ofhuman health, working conditions andconservation of the environment.

The Dry Tech saw is mainly applied tothin-section metalworking such as themanufacture of tubes and profiles invarious materials, ventilation and air-conditioning equipment and car com-ponents. The useful life of the blades,comparable to or exceeding that of

In the metalworking industry, virtuallyall cutting operations currently requirethe use of cooling lubricants. Byreducing the friction heat between thecutter and the workpiece, the lubri-cants minimise tool wear.

In spite of the technological benefits,the use of these lubricants posesmajor problems. After use the lubri-cants have to be recovered from themachines before other operations canbe started, and they cannot be dis-posed of without prior treatment. Theuse of lubricants involves costs ofchecks, maintenance, recovery, trans-port, energy, etc. Leakage from theproduct, rinsing of the equipment anddisposal of offcuts contaminated with


conventional saws, is shorter for high-grade non-corroding steel for whichthe new technique is competitive onlyin particular areas such as the foodindustry, requiring further develop-ment.

On the basis of an overall designworked out by ITEC, the new processhas been intensively tested to checkits technical and environmental per-formance and its economic viabilitybefore moving on to pre-mass pro-duction. The tools are adapted to theneeds of all potential users and com-panies of all sizes, from small work-shops to large industrial plants. Threeseries of models are produced: man-ual, semi-automatic and fully auto-matic. The marketing of the machineshas been launched and they appear tobe doing well, given the very promis-ing results of trials and the growinginterest in this technology.

There is no doubt that high-speed drycutting is a promising technology forthe tube and profile manufacturingindustry for which it is likely to recog-nised as the "best available tech-nique". In more general terms, it is astep towards the development of envi-ronmentally friendly cutting tech-niques. In addition to implementingthe IPPC Directive, the LIFE projecthas contributed to implementingEuropean legislation on hazardouswaste, volatile organic componentsand worker

No chemical fumes, fewer manipulations: the Dry Tech cuttersspare workers' health and safety.

Reference: LIFE99 ENV/D/000435Eligible total cost: EUR 400 085.90LIFE contribution: EUR 118 973.53Beneficiary: ITEC GmbH, Ernst-Abbe Str. 5, D-52249 Eschweiler

Contact: Mrs Nikola NestlerTel.: +49 2403 5044 0Fax: +49 2403 5044 44 E-mail: [email protected]: www.drytech.de

Duration: from 1 January 1999 to 1 January 2003

2. Recycling of heated process watersin a closed-loop refrigeration sys-tem with a pool for waste water dis-charged by existing workshops (70%of plant discharge). The water is keptat a constant temperature of 18°Cwith the aid of heat exchanges: cool-ing towers in winter, refrigerant unitsin summer. This system, called PEGASE, uses technology that is al-ready applied on a large scale butnever before in existing buildings.From the outset, it led to 50% (3 000m3) daily savings in water. Anothersystem, based on monofluid (see be-low) in a closed watertight circuit,i.e. without a pool as a source of bac-terial proliferation, was subsequent-ly installed in new workshops for allcooling/heating operations.

3. The introduction of two new cleantechnologies. The first, using "dry"vacuum pumps (with no oil added),offers various advantages: thesepumps do not consume water ex-cept for cooling, do not pollute, donot corrode, have low servicing costsand a longer life, and make it possi-ble to attain a vacuum that is lower

The pharmaceutical industry looks after the environment

The innovative techniques applied at the Aramon plant through this LIFE project have led to a

drastic reduction in water consumption and a major improvement of the quality of treated water.

They are applicable to various sectors.

LIFE-Environment project in France

Left: new non-polluting and more efficient "dry" vacuum pumps.

Right: cooling tower and hot waterrecycling.

The SANOFI-SYNTHELABO com-pany, which forms part of one of theworld's leading pharmaceutical con-cerns, produces active pharmaceuti-cal ingredients at its Aramon site. In1997 it started increasing its capacitywhile setting up installations protect-ing the environment and improving itsoverall use of water resources. Toachieve this with account being takenof the pollution caused by the plant,use had to be made of various innov-ative technologies. The project, co-financed by LIFE, comprised fourmain components:

1. Building the new NEPTUNE watertreatment plant which uses state-of-the-art membrane bioreactor (MBR)technology, in partnership with thespecialised Degremont company.MBR combines biological treatmentwith membrane filtration. It reducespollution due to suspended matters(SM), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)and chemical oxygen demand(COD). The Aramon MBR occupiesa leading position because of its lim-itation of waste discharge and thetreated organic load.

Upon completion of the project, thevolume of water treated had dou-bled from 450 to 900m3 a day. CODinput may be as much as 11 000 mg/lwhile output is reduced to 400 in-stead of 450 mg/l. SM discharge hasdropped from 205 to 8 mg/l and thatof TKN has been reduced by 75%.The quantity of excess sludge di-minished from 3 000 to 1 000 tonnesa year. The improvements havebrought about better treated waterquality, operational flexibility to dealwith a variable pollutant load, andenhanced reliability. However, MBRrequires careful prior filtration to pro-tect the membranes, resulting in a15 to 20% increase in electricity con-sumption. Overall, however, the LIFEproject has demonstrated the highoutput, economic viability and trans-ferability of MBR, which has in themeantime also been introduced inother sectors: cosmetics industry,paper manufacturing, agrifood sec-tor, waste treatment and urban wa-ter treatment.


(< 1 mbar) and more stable for chem-ical reactions. As the project hasdemonstrated, their superiority forcontrolling reactions compensatesfor their high extra cost. They are in-tended in particular for use in chem-ical industry, heavy industry and theoil industry.

The second of these technologiesuses a coolant monofluid based onmonoethylene glycol. Distributed bythree closed loops, it is maintainedin each of these at constant tem-perature with the aid of control valvesin accordance with the temperaturerange appropriate for each type ofchemical reaction inside reactorsduring synthesis operations (rang-ing from –25 to +130°C). Thisprocess, which replaces the use ofthree different fluids, removes therisks of mixing and corrosion and vir-tually eliminates glycol leaks. Twiceas powerful as PEGASE, the processuses up hardly any more energy andits operating costs are lower, whichoffsets investment costs. Theprocess also enables better control.While the monofluid can virtually beused only in new installations, it istantamount to a revolution for manyindustries in sectors such as thechemical, microelectronics and agri-food industries.

4. A study of the re-use of water treat-ed by the inverse osmosis processconcluded that its costs/benefit ra-tio would not be worthwhile exceptpossibly in regions with very limitedor precarious water resources. How-ever, the idea of such re-use has notbeen given up but its realisation is outside the scope of the LIFE project.

Overall, the project has made it possi-ble to drastically reduce water con-sumption: 1 440 000 m3 a year insteadof 2 490 000, in spite of increased pro-duction. The technologies have sincethen been transferred to anotherSANOFI site in Sisteron and are due tobe applied also to the company'sother sites worldwide.

New biologic basins at the Aramon site.

The bioreactor membranes.

The NEPTUNE treatment plant underconstruction.

Reference: LIFE97 ENV/F/000176Eligible total cost: EUR 6 575 911.22 LIFE contribution: EUR 789 949.11 Beneficiary: SANOFI Chimie, Usine d'Aramon, Route d'Avignon, F-30390Aramon

Contact: Patrick HornyTel.: +33 (0)4 66 57 72 95Fax: +33 (0)4 66 57 73 62E-mail: [email protected]: www.sanofi-synthelabo.com

Duration: from 17 February 1997 to 17 August 1999

The village of Oud-Beijerland is theheadquarters of the Koni company,one of the world's leading manufac-turers of shock absorbers: 1.5 millionshock absorbers a year for cars –including formula 1 racing cars – trainsand lorries. The production unit islocated on an industrial estate aroundwhich an increasing number of houseshave been built. To protect the shockabsorbers against corrosion and atthe same time improve their appear-ance, they are coated in a spray paint-ing line. The paint formerly used con-tained up to 85% solvents which emitvolatile organic compounds (VOC)such as hydrocarbons into the air.

VOCs contain carcinogenic, mutagenicor toxic substances. Moreover, theytrigger the formation of ozone whoseexcessive concentration at groundlevel is hazardous to human health. Anadditional nuisance at production sitessuch as Koni's is unpleasant odours

about which people living in the sur-rounding area have lodged frequentcomplaints. Various measures taken inthe past to overcome this problemproved ineffective.

Reducing the use of VOCs in industryis one of the main challenges facingEurope's environment policy1. In orderto comply with this obligation while atthe same time meeting the concern oflocal residents, and simultaneouslygain a comparative advantage, Konidecided in 1998 to invest in a whollyinnovative approach.

After various possible options hadbeen judged unsatisfactory becauseof the specific technical requirementsof painting shock absorbers, it wasdecided to develop a tri-componentepoxy paint based on water ratherthan solvents which met the highlyspecific needs of the metal industryand was compatible with modern

spray-painting equipment. The objec-tive pursued by Koni was to immedi-ately improve the environmental per-formance of its paint shops: 100%reduction of VOC emission and 50%reduction of other chemical sub-stances. At the same time, Konisought to substantially improve work-ing conditions and, of course, elimi-nate offensive odours.

To achieve this ambitious project, Konientered into partnership with the DutchHasco Lakfabrieken company whichspecialises in coatings for industrialapplications. The project was grantedsupport by LIFE-Environment in viewof the quality of the dossier, the impor-tance of the objective at Europeanlevel and because of the fact that thiswas the first application of a water-based tri-component paint to surfacetreatment in the metal industry.

Industrial paint for shock absorbers:environmental impact largely absorbed

Zero emission of volatile solvents: this was the objective and, falling only 1% short, it has been

achieved in this LIFE project which has opened the way for eliminating these substances from

industrial paints. At the same time, local residents can at last breathe cleaner air without any

unpleasant odours.

LIFE-Environment project in the Netherlands


After various unsatisfactory trials,Hasco had to develop an entirely newproduct which with truly minimal (1%)VOC content almost entirely meets therequirement. The three componentsare the base paint, the mixing paintand water. The distinctive feature isthe unconventional ratio of ingredientsin the first two components. InHasco's base paint the pigment iscombined with the hardener and notwith the resin. In the mixing paint,epoxy resin is the main component.As the mixing paint is not water solu-ble, a good mix of the first two com-ponents is indispensable.

The use of the product has made itnecessary to rearrange the workshopsand build a new installation. At the endof 2002, the new process was readyto go ahead. The shock absorbers areconveyed in a 420m chain along thefull length of the spray-painting line.After various pre-treatment stages, thepaint is vaporised by a fast-rotatingvertical disc at 7 000 to 10 000 rpm.The shock absorbers form an omega(Ω) loop around the disc and also turnaround their own axis. Manual paint-ing units are provided for areas withdifficult access and for small batches.

This is followed by rinsing and evapo-ration, between 20 and 50°C. At theend of the line, an 80° oven ensuresrapid hardening of the paint.

However, there have been a few tech-nical hitches. When the chain was firststarted up, the viscosity of the painttriggered unexpected pressure whichcaused the pipes to explode. Thisproblem was solved by fitting moreresistant pipes and changing the typeof pumps used. Moreover, the 1%glycolated water used for rinsingproved ineffective and was replacedby demineralised water at 40°C. It took three months before the sys-tem was finally operational.

The LIFE project, whose results havebeen widely disseminated, undoubt-edly opens the way to eliminatingVOCs from industrial paintingprocesses in Europe. It has also pre-vented the relocation of the site whichwas under consideration because ofthe olfactory hazards to the local pop-ulation. In fact the number of com-plaints from local residents has dimin-ished by 100%.

Reference: LIFE00 ENV/NL/000794Total eligible cost: EUR 1 974 731LIFE contribution: EUR 354 185Beneficiary: Koni BV, Langeweg 1, PO Box 1014, NL-3260 AA Oud-Beijerland

Contact: Bert OverwegTel.: +31 186 635 500Fax: +31 186 635 544E-mail: [email protected]: www.koni.com

Duration: from 1 July 2001 to 1 July 2003

Shock absorbers undergo a series of operations along the full length of a 420 m line.

The new water-based industrial paintembellishes without polluting (left: paint container).

1 Council Directive 1999/13/EC of 11March 1999.

"The Sanazzaro refinery in the Po valley forms part of the Refining & Mar-keting division of ENI SpA (formerlyAgip Petroli). With a production capac-ity of 160 000 barrels a day, it is one ofthe most modern refineries in Europe.It uses the highly advanced fluid cat-alytic cracking (FCC) process whichconverts the heavy products from thefirst distillation of oil into high-gradelight products. Currently, however,application of the FCC process hasadverse effects on the environment. Inorder to contribute to reducing theseeffects, the LIFE REFINARS projectwas launched in Sanazzaro; it is due tobe completed in September 2004.

"In the FCC process, carbon depositsare formed at the catalyser surface. Itsregeneration for re-use requires burn-ing the residue. As the carbon depositcontains sulphur, burning it converts itinto sulphur dioxide (SO2) which isemitted together with the flue gas. TheSO2 is a powerful pollutant and one ofthe main causes of air pollution andacid rain affecting ecosystems, biodi-versity, forest growth, agriculture andhuman health.

"The overall objective of REFINARS isto demonstrate the applicability andimprove the performance of a "bestavailable technique" (BAT). By this itis intended to desulphurise flue gasthrough a patented system (Belco/Labsorb) based on a solution contain-ing an absorbing agent with which the sulphur can be recovered for re-utilisation.

"The project involves various objec-tives: reducing sulphur oxide (SOx)emission by about one-third of thelegal limit; no impact on the soilbecause of a negligible quantity of

An oil industry that smells less of sulphur

The LIFE REFINARS project, currently in progress, is intended to demonstrate the applicability

of a highly innovative technology to many oil refineries. The challenge is formidable: reducing

emissions of the notorious sulphur dioxide. Testimony from Andrea Amoroso who is responsible

for the project.

LIFE-Environment project in Italy


solid waste to be disposed of; noimpact from waste transport; veryminor impact on water because ofexclusion of sulphate and sulphitewaste. These objectives are tanta-mount to a markedly reduced overallenvironmental impact compared withthat of the familiar desulphurisationtechniques. Finally, the aim is also toreduce, in relation to the recognisedBAT, the costs of sulphur absorptionin terms of energy and chemicalagents used.

"Currently available flue gas treatmentprocesses enable sulphur dioxide tobe absorbed via alkaline sodiumhydroxide (NaOH) or calcium hydrox-ide (CaOH) solutions, but these aggra-vate the impact on water (sulphate andsulphite) and the soil (solid waste). Thisis why flue gas treatment is rarely prac-tised. The method normally used inEurope to remain below the legal SO2

emission limit involves the use of lowsulphur content feeds. The processtested by REFINARS can be applied toall refineries using FCC without firstreducing the sulphur content of feeds.

"Application of the process has madeit necessary to build a buffer regener-ation plant (recycling the absorbingsolution) linked to an existing FCCsite. Data on its performance will becollected for comparison with those ofBAT currently applied in refineries aslaid down in the BREF document forthis sector (see pages 5 to 7). All thenecessary chemical and environmen-tal analyses will be carried out. Theplant was successfully started up inAugust 2003. The tests will lead to a

comparative report on the newprocess focusing on technical, eco-nomic and ecological aspects andincluding an analysis of its overallimpact on the environment.

"As for the final results, we expect toreduce sulphur dioxide emission toless than 550 mg/Nm3 in the flue gas1.We estimate that we will be able toattain an efficiency level of over 85%in removing SO2 originating from theflue gas with a corresponding recoveryof marketable sulphur. The maximumvolume of solid waste is expected tobe 500 kg/day and sulphate and sul-phite concentration in the waste waterwill be minimal. It is expected thatthere will be savings of 95% forabsorbing solution replacement and25% for energy compared with theexisting BATs which use NaOH. Finally,we count on an overall reduction of40% of FCC operating costs com-pared with these same BATs.

"The first results recorded to datehave been very encouraging andshow that the process works well.They confirm the forecasts regardingthe efficiency of SOx removal and thenegligible amount of solid waste gen-erated. At the next stage of the pro-ject, the regeneration unit will beadapted so as to ensure its continu-ous and stable operation under vari-ous operating conditions. Eventually,the results should be validated on thebasis of a cost/benefit analysis toascertain the economic viability andenvironmental significance of theprocess and, of course, to ensure thatthese results are widely disseminated.

"LIFE REFINARS may bring realprogress in preventing pollution in oilrefineries and in industries facing sim-ilar pollution problems such as themetal industry and sulphuric acid pro-duction plants. In the oil refinery sec-tor alone, it may have a direct impacton 54 cracking units and 49 sulphurrecovery units throughout the Union."

Reference: LIFE00 ENV/IT/000012Total eligible costs: EUR 8 765 105LIFE contribution: EUR 1 274 432Beneficiary: ENI SpA, Via Laurentina, 449, IT-00142 Rome

Contact: Mr Andrea AmorosoTel.: +39 0382 900289Fax: +39 0982 997189E-mail: [email protected]: www.eni.it/refinars_projects/index.html

Duration: from 1 October 2001 to 30 September 2004

1 Nm3: normal cubic metres at 0°C, 1 bar.

Below: desulphurised flue gas stack.

Previous page: buffer solution loadingfacilities.

The basin of the Baltic Sea is one of theworld's largest brackish ecosystemsand also one of its most vulnerable.Any disturbance of the environmentmay have serious consequences. Sur-rounded by large coastal cities andcriss-crossed by very busy shippingroutes, it is currently under threat. St. Petersburg and its region, animportant industrial area, greatly con-tribute to the problem.

The Helsinki Convention1 (1992), rati-fied by the Russian Federation in1998, established a framework forcooperation to reduce pollution gen-erated in particular by large cities. Themanagement body of the Conventionis the Helsinki Commission (HEL-COM), which has presented recom-mendations on "best available tech-niques" (BAT) and, based upon these,

authorised levels for the disposal ofthe main pollutants.

In the Russian Federation, environ-mental legislation is based on federalmaximum allowable concentration(MAC) standards. A tax schemeaccording to the "the polluter pays"principle was introduced in 1991. Dur-ing the years of economic transition,the scheme has often been perceivedas an obstacle to the growth of com-panies which have been constrainedto making major investment in orderto comply with the standards. As aresult, they often prefer to simplydestroy waste, which is less costly.Based on the effects of pollution, theMAC system therefore differs funda-mentally from the BAT principle whichis focused on production processesas such and on prevention.

It is in this context that the city of St. Petersburg and the Leningradregion (State Duma) have receivedsupport from LIFE–Third Countries fora joint project with Finland and Sweden. The aim is to work out a BAT-based system for fixing limits of polluting waste in accordance withHELCOM's recommendations, whichshould serve as a basis for improvingenvironmental conditions.

Initially there was no legal basis fortechnological standardisation of pro-duction processes. In parallel withcooperation with federal and regionalauthorities to adopt a BAT-based lawon operating authorisation, the LIFEproject therefore included experimen-tal action in pilot companies repre-sentative of major activities in theregion.

A new environmental law for Russia and its application in four pilot companies

A special feature of this LIFE project was its objective to introduce a new law in Russian

legislation and have it applied to specific situations in four pilot companies in St. Petersburg

and its region. Its results make a notable contribution to protecting the environment, in particular

in the Baltic basin.

LIFE-Third Countries project in Russia

The Russian working party on a studyvisit to the Uppsala municipal watertreatment plant (Uppsala, Sweden).


After 100 companies had been evalu-ated, four were selected: the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) of thecity of Pushkin, a fish processing plant(ROK-1), a tanning company (KHOZA)and the St. Petersburg cardboard andprinting plant (KPK).

The project was led by a working partycomposed of experts representing allthe bodies responsible for environ-mental matters and a group of scien-tists. The project included pollutionprevention training, follow-up, verifi-cation and evaluation of waste water,implementation of specific environ-mental measures after approval by thecompetent authorities, and assess-ment and dissemination of results. Inaddition to conferences, seminars andworkshops, on-site visits were organ-ised in the two partner countries.

An environmental audit was carriedout in each pilot company. They weresupplied with a list of controllable pol-lutants and a timetable for BAT imple-mentation. They benefited from aspecial reduction of pollution tax, andthe difference could be devoted toBAT. The rule was that they shoulduse their own resources to implementthe measures.

For example, WWTP launched a pro-gramme for nutrient recovery fromwaste water, mainly intended toreduce maximum total nitrogen con-centration from the initial 14 mg/l to 13mg/l in 2004 and 10 mg/l in 2006.ROK-1 laid a system of pipes to chan-

nel hot water for cleaning installationsand reuse the water afterwards; wastewas reduced by 50% for waste waterand 10% for chemical or biologicaloxygen requirement. In the KHOZAtanning company, the annual volumeof waste, expressed in tonnes of rawmaterial, dropped from 42.5 to 33.8m3, and the company compiled plansfor building a modern water treatmentplant. At KPK, fresh water consump-tion dropped from 60 to 80% and thequantity of residual water dischargedinto the Izora river is now between 1.6and 2.4 million m3/year compared with6 to 7.6 million previously. Two pilotcompanies received operating author-isation in accordance with the BAT criteria upon completion of the project.

With regard to legislation, the amend-ments drawn up by the working partyon operating licences are now incor-porated into Russian law. Although theamendments relating to a new systemfor paying pollution tax have not yetbeen adopted, this is a major step for-ward, which is further enhanced bythe example set by the LIFE project.

Reference: LIFE99 TCY/ROS/022Total eligible cost: EUR 200 425Contribution LIFE: EUR 141 000Beneficiary: Scientific Ecology Research Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences,18 Korpusnaja ul., RU-194110 St. Petersburg

Contact: Michael V. BegakTel.: +7 (812) 230 78 94Fax: +7 (812) 230 78 94E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

Duration: from 1 January 2001 to 30 June 2002

At the KHOZA tanning plant.

Mr Valery Zaytsev, head of the LIFEworking party and of the Baltic SpecialMaritime Inspectorate.

1 http://www.helcom.fi/helcom.com/convention.html#Article2

The Nyby plant is specialised in coldrolling of flat stainless steel products.The blast furnaces and hot rolling millsare installed at Avesta, 120 km to thenorth. Steel coils are transported bytrain or lorry from Avesta to Nyby wherethey are cold rolled into high-gradestainless steel. Every week the plantproduces 3 500 tonnes of stainlesssteel, 70% of which is exported. It isused for plating high-speed trains,cladding buildings and telephonebooths and to manufacture food equip-ment in accordance with Europeanstandards.

The AvestaPolarit steel plant of Nyby/Torshälla is difficult to find, surroundedby nature and located some 100 kilo-metres west of Stockholm, not farfrom the attractive town of Eskilstunawhich is renowned for its old forges.This comes as a surprise in particularto people who believe that steel pro-duction is inevitably associated withsmoky industrial areas. But this isSweden, a country with vast spaceswhere great care is taken to ensurethat factories fit in with the landscapeand the environment. At Nyby/Torshälla, high trees surround the site,largely screening off the steel works.

Steel goes green - A cleaner steel industry thanks to electrodialysisThe AvestaPolarit steelworks has with LIFE funding set up a process for deacidification of its

waste water through electrodialysis. The results are very encouraging: the plant's discharge

of nitrates diminished by 55% and, thanks to the recycling enabled by the system, the amount

of hydrofluoric acid and lime used has diminished by a quarter. A new "best available technique"

(BAT) within the meaning of the IPPC Directive?

The Nyby/Torshälla steelworks at the shore of Lake Mälaren.

Stainless steel coils awaiting loading.

LIFE-Environment project in Sweden


Nitrate

Cold rolling involves quenching thesteel in nitric and hydrofluoric acidbaths to remove all traces of oxidationfrom the steel sheet. Acid waste isneutralised with lime which reduces itsmetal and fluoride content. However, ithas hitherto not been possible to effi-ciently treat the nitrate generated bythe nitric acid which was conse-quently wholly discharged into LakeMälaren on whose shores the steel-works is situated.

This lake, the third largest in Sweden,is linked to the Baltic Sea near Stock-holm. In the middle of the 1990s, theSwedish Parliament required industryto help reduce nitrates in the Baltic(20% reduction in relation to levelsrecorded in 1990). AvestaPolarit,which at the time discharged 250tonnes of nitrogen in the form of nitricacid, was identified as being the singlemost polluting site at Lake Mälaren.

Accordingly, the firm decided in 1998to undertake research in collaborationwith the Swedish EnvironmentalResearch Institute (IVL) to find ways ofoptimally recycling its waste water."We already knew that electrodialysiswas the most efficient technique totreat nitric acid: in the laboratory, 45gnitrate can be reduced to 4g throughthis process. But there was no full-scale system in steelmaking."

What is electrodialysis?

Electrodialysis (ED) is an electro-chemical process through which ionscontained in an aqueous solution canbe extracted. For this extraction, ionsare passed through selective (anionicand cationic) membranes under elec-tric potential.

In this way, only anions can passthrough an anionic membrane andonly cations through a cationic mem-brane. By combining several mem-branes which alternately let throughpositive and negative ions, particularions can be eliminated from the water.In some columns, there is a concen-tration of ions and in others the ionsare removed. Non-charged particlesare not eliminated.

Electrodialysis is used in particular indesalinating sea water. At the end ofthe process, fresh water and brine arerecovered.

Source: Lenntech B.V., NL-2629 HH Delft.

From the research to the pilot stagethe project was coordinated byThorsten Schneiker, a young Germanchemical engineer who has becomeSwedish by adoption. He adds: "Ittook two years, from 1999 to 2000,before the system was stable. Themain difficulty was to find the properbalance and the right materials for themembranes and electrodes. Forinstance, the electrodes used to erodevery quickly but nowadays they needto be changed only every threemonths."

Membranes and electrodes are thetwo key components in electrodialy-sis (see box and graph). Briefly, thistechnique consists of passing wasteaqueous solutions – acidic and metal-charged – through an electric field anda series of polystyrene membranes(several hundred). In addition to recov-ering part of the acids (55% of nitricacid and 25% of hydrofluoric acid),the process makes it possible to vir-tually eliminate metals and reduce theamount of residual sludge.

The electrodialysis process applied to cold rolling as set up under

the LIFE project.

H

HNOF

+

3-

-

HNOF

+

3-

-

Mey+ Mey+

H+

+

H2

-

+++++

-----

++++++

------

------

OH-

O2

+

+-

feed: HF, HNO3, Me

anode

electrode rinse

concentrate acid: HNO3, HFdiluted acid with metal ions

electrode rinse

cathode

Recognition

Once the system had been developedin the laboratory, it had to be con-structed at full scale. AvestaPolaritdecided to move ahead. "The invest-ment was risky and we were compet-ing with other investments within thegroup but in the end it was our projectwhich obtained financing", PerNymark, Quality and EnvironmentDirector at the Nyby/Torshälla siteexplains.

To the question whether obtainingLIFE co-financing in 2000 had influ-enced the steelworks' decision, PerNymark replies without hesitation:"The decision to invest had alreadybeen taken before LIFE. Of course, wewere very happy to obtain this co-financing but what LIFE has con-tributed is first and foremost externalrecognition." Thorsten Schneiker con-firms: "When the local press talked ofobtaining LIFE funding, public opinionthroughout the region was dulyimpressed."

Between 2000 and 2002, LIFE willhave contributed 19% (about EUR367 000) of the costs of the project,the remainder (EUR 1.6 million) beingprovided by the steel concern itself.An adjacent building has been addedto the waste water treatment unit. Ithouses the dialysis equipment, involv-ing EUR 1 281 million investment. Andit has been working since January2002; from an ecological point of view,by reducing pollution due to acid andresidual sludge through electrodialy-sis, "but also from an economic pointof view", as Per Nymark emphasises:"Thanks to recycling, our annual pur-chase of nitric acid has diminishedfrom 2 100 to 1 000 tonnes and hydro-fluoric acid from 1 000 to 750 tonnes.We have also greatly reduced our useof lime."

The analysis carried out by theSwedish Environmental Research Insti-tute has shown that there has been anotable reduction of eutrophying pollu-tants in Lake Mälaren, in particularthrough a reduction in nitrate waste.

The installation also makes it possibleto reduce consumption of non-renew-able energy. The quantity of electricityused in the recycling process is lessthan the quantity of energy that wouldbe required for the production andtransport of fresh acid, as was exclu-sively the case before the installationwas set up. In terms of financial amor-tisation, it is currently estimated thatthe process generates a yield oninvestment of about 10% a year.

"The aim is to achieve closed-looprecycling", adds Per Nymark. "Wehave not yet found the ideal solution:we still discharge 100 tonnes of nitro-gen a year but 50 tonnes is a realistictarget which we can achieve in the rel-atively short term. We want absolutelyto minimise and in particular to reuti-lise our waste. In this regard, our pro-ject forms part of the wider plan of thewhole group, i.e. to strive to work in aclosed loop, not only with the wastebut also the energy and everythingthat enables us to harmonise ecologyand economy."

Thorsten Schneiker and Per Nymark,who are in charge of the project, in theelectrodialysis room at Nyby/Torshälla.


AvestaPolarit and European steel research

Together with other leading representa-tives of the European steel industrybrought together within Eurofer (Arcelor,ThyssenKrupp Steel, Corus and Riva),AvestaPolarit is involved in a dialogueinitiated by the Research DG of theEuropean Commission to establish atechnological platform, a strategicagenda and an action plan to give anew impetus to steel research inEurope in a more long-term perspec-tive1. In addition to industrialists, thisdialogue is open to steelworkers' tradeunions, partner industries, universities,public and private research institutes,users and other European institutionsand representatives of the MemberStates. Presentation of the techno-logical platform is planned for spring2004. For steel research, the EuropeanUnion has earmarked EUR 43 million for

2003 and 2004 to meet the challengesof the coming decades:

• Enhancing competitiveness of the European steel industry at global level;

• Improving working conditions (riskcontrol, safety, reduced work inten-sity) in the framework of a social dia-logue, and also training;

• Continuing endeavours to protect theenvironment, preserve raw materialsand control energy consumption, inparticular for a substantial reductionof CO2 emission under post-Kyotocommitments.

Future LIFE-Environment demonstrationprojects will play a role in this context.

1 For more information: press releaseIP/03/1074 of 23 July 2003 athttp://europa.eu.int/rapid andhttp://www.cordis.u/callsteel-rtd/home.html

Monitoring rolling operations.

Transferability

In the meantime, the innovators ofNyby appreciate the interest enkindledby their project. Nitric acid recyclingthrough electrodialysis will soon beadopted in other units of the steelgroup, particularly as the Swedishgovernment encourages steel pro-ducers to adopt the process in theirindustrial installations. Also a majorGerman producer has expressed aninterest in the process.

Thorsten Schneiker has had variousopportunities to present the project atseminars and other international gath-erings. "The process is eminentlytransferable, not only in the steelindustry. Over and above the technical

success, I am proud of the repercus-sions we seem to have, in particularthanks to LIFE. Electrodialysis willform part of a new edition of the"BREF"1 devoted to the ferrous metalprocessing industry in accordancewith the European IPPC Directive. In the fight against industrial nitrates,the process is in fact a new reference,i.e. what the Directive calls a "bestavailable technique."

1 ) BREF: reference document for technolo-gies covered by the IPPC Directive (seepages 6 to 9). For each sector of activity, itpresents the "best available techniques" forintegrated pollution prevention and control.The BREF devoted to ferrous metal pro-cessing goes back to December 2001.Referring to electrodialysis, it is noted thatthe technique is not yet fully developed andis proving to be costly, in particular becauseof short membrane life: "Acid regenerationprocesses such as electrodialysis (…) areunder development or being tested. Thistechnology (…) is much too young / notproven / too expensive. From analogy withmore traditional membrane processes, ashort membrane life is expected." As thisstatement is now contradicted by theTorshälla experience (e.g. membranes arechanged only twice a year), a revision of BREF 2001 has been recommended for 2005.

Reference: LIFE00 ENV/S/000853Eligible total cost: EUR 1 933 484LIFE contribution: EUR 367 158Beneficiary: AvestaPolarit AB, Cold Rolled Nyby, SE-644 80 Torshälla

Contact: Mr Per NymarkTel.: +46 16 349 000Fax: +46 16 349 013E-mail: [email protected]: www.nyby.avestapolarit.com/ed

Duration: from 1 December 2000 to 31 August 2002

Name Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE)

Type of funding cofinancing of actions benefiting the environment in the European Union, countries of Central andEastern Europe acceding to the European Union and certain third countries.

LIFE covers three areas: "LIFE-Nature", "LIFE-Environment" and "LIFE – Third countries".

Aims> with a view to achieving sustainable development in the European Union, to contribute to working out, implementing

and updating EU environment policy and legislation; > studying new solutions to EU-wide environmental problems.

Beneficiaries any natural or legal person, provided that the funded projects meet the following general criteria:> the projects must be in line with EU priorities and contribute to the above-mentioned objectives;> they must be presented by financially and technically reliable participants;> they must be feasible in terms of technology, timetable and budget, and have a sound cost/benefit ratio.

Types of projects eligible> LIFE-Nature covers projects for nature conservation which contribute to maintaining or restoring natural habitats

and/or species populations to favourable conservation status within the meaning of Directive 92/43/EEC.> LIFE-Environment covers exemplary projects which include concern for the environment and sustainable development

in land-use management, promote sustainable water and waste management or reduce the environmental impact ofeconomic activities. Five areas are given priority for funding: land-use development and planning, water management,impact of economic activities, waste management, and integrated product policy.

> LIFE – Third Countries covers projects which contribute to establishing management capacity and structures in respectof the environment, and to developing policies and action programmes in this domain in countries bordering the Balticor the Mediterranean other than the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that are candidates for accession.

Implementation Member States or third countries submit proposals to the Commission for projects to be co-financed.Each year, the Commission fixes the date for submission of proposals and takes a decision on the proposals received.It monitors the financing operations and the implementation of LIFE actions. Projects are monitored on site throughaccompanying measures and, in the case of LIFE-Nature, forms of cooperation among similar projects are encouraged("Co-op" measure).

Duration of funding 5 years (2000-2004).

Allocation from the EU budget about EUR 638 million, divided as follows: EUR 300 million for LIFE-Nature, EUR 300 million for LIFE-Environment and EUR 38 million for LIFE – Third countries.

ContactEuropean Commission – Directorate-General for the Environment LIFE Unit – BU-9 02/1 - 200 rue de la Loi - B-1049 Brussels – Fax: +32 2 296 95 56Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/life/home.htm

14

ISSN 1725-5619

KH

-53-03-895-EN

-C

industrial pollution, european solutions...life focus i industrial pollution, european solutions:...

Documents