subjects to be covered
DESCRIPTION
SUBJECTS TO BE COVERED. Background information and statistics Resource sustainability and responsible fishing Pollution prevention (clean production) The INTEC/GTZ project Peruvian experience USA experience Preliminary findings in Chile Small seafood plant options Strategy for the future. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
CLEAN PRODUCTIONIN THE SEAFOOD INDUSTRY IN
CHILE
Concepcion, Chile January 30, 2002Valparaiso, Chile January 31, 2002
By
Anthony P. BimboTechnical Consultant
SUBJECTS TO BE COVERED
• Background information and statistics• Resource sustainability and responsible fishing• Pollution prevention (clean production)• The INTEC/GTZ project• Peruvian experience• USA experience• Preliminary findings in Chile• Small seafood plant options• Strategy for the future
WE WANT TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
EVENTUALLY
• Whether we like it or not OR
• Agree with it or not
• The current effluent regulations will change and will probably get more strict
• Eventually at some point in the future we will not be allowed to discharge into the Sea
ANNUAL CHILEAN FISH LANDINGS
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998
Milli
on M
etric
Ton
s
Through week 49 of 2001
Source: FAO 2002, Fisheries of the United States 2001, FIS International 2002
ANNUAL CHILEAN FISH LANDINGSBY MAJOR SPECIES
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Met
ric
Tons
Jurel Sardina sp. Anchovetta Caballa Merluza sp. Total
Source: INE (Chile) 2002
% CHILEAN LANDINGS BY SPECIESFOR DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS
10 Year Average 5 Year Average 1999
Jurel 48 46 22
Sardina sp 12 9 19
Anchoveta 24 25 36
Caballa 2 2 2
Merluza sp 4 6 7
Otros 10 12 14
Source: INE (Chile) 2002
% CHILEAN LANDINGS BY REGIONFOR DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS
10 Year Average 5 year average 1999
Region I 20.33 16.44 17.79
Region II 7.12 5.82 5.74
Region III 3.92 3.75 2.08
Region IV 2.07 2.36 2.48
Region V 6.97 8.40 5.02
Region VIII 53.23 55.17 56.87
Region X 5.06 6.51 7.90
Regions VI, VII,IX, XI, XII, M
1.30 1.62 2.12
Source: INE (Chile) 2002
% CHILEAN PRODUCTION OF FISHMEAL AND EDIBLE FISH PRODUCTS
BY REGION, 5 YEAR AVERAGE
% Fishmeal % Food ProductsRegion I 19 1
Region II 6 2
Region V 9 3
Region VIII 61 20
Region X 1 55
Region XI 0 12
Regions III, IV,VI, VII, IX, XII,RM
4 7
Source: INE (Chile) 2002
CHILEAN PRODUCTION OF FOOD FISHFROM PELAGIC SPECIES
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Met
ric
Tons
Whole Frozen Frozen Fillets Fillets Canned
Source: FAO Statistics Database 2002
CHILEAN PRODUCTION OF FOOD FISHFROM NON-PELAGIC SPECIES
0100000200000300000400000500000600000700000800000900000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Met
ric
Tons
Canned and Prepared Frozen Fillets CannedFrozen Whole Cured
Source: FAO Statistics Database 2002
Jurel
Caballa
Merluza de tres aletas
Merluza del sur
Merluza de cola
Merluza gayi (coumun)
RESOURCE SUSTAINABILITY AND RESPONSIBLE FISHING
RESOURCE SUSTAINABILITY AND RESPONSIBLE FISHING
• Insuring that the living we make from the sea will be available to our children and grandchildren
• Utilizing 100% of the catch with no waste
• Making the maximum beneficial use of the resource
ECOLOGICAL PRESSURES
• Bad publicity about pollution or waste leads to consumer pressures on customers
• Customers are reluctant to purchase products that are associated with damage to the environment
• Lending institutions are reluctant to loan money to industries or companies with poor environmental records
• Bad publicity stays on the internet forever and never goes away
POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CLEAN PRODUCTION
What Is Pollution Prevention?It is not end of pipe treatment
It• Maximizes Product Recovery
• Reduces Conditions That Cause Losses
• Increases Revenues
AndThe result will be a reduction or complete elimination of pollution.
Treatment 1
Treatment 2
Treatment 3
Treatment 4
Treatments 5, 6, 7, 8
THE END OF PIPE CONCEPT IN WASTE TREATMENT
PROBLEM WITH END OF PIPE TREATMENT
• It does not address the cause of the problem
• It only addresses today not tomorrow• It requires continuous add-on equipment as
the effluent regulations evolve• It does not offer the option of product
recovery or improving process efficiency
Protein 12 - 15%
Fat 1 - 20%
Water 60 - 79%
Minerals 5 - 8%
The composition of the fish varies by species, season, area caught, season of the year and what they are eating
FISH COMPOSITION
AS THE FISH AGE• Protein is converted by bacteria and
enzymes in the fish gut into breakdown products some of which are volatile and others water soluble
• The consistency of the fish changes from firm to soft and eventually to a liquid
• And smells develop
The Result From the Aging of the Raw Material
• Low quality products
• Smells coming from the drier stacks and plant
• More product goes with the liquid streams instead of the solid stream
• Reduced yields
• Higher production costs
• Less revenue
The Major Key to Pollution Prevention
Raw Material Quality
First Key to Reducing Waste and Enhancing Yields
• RAW MATERIAL QUALITY
• It is like money in the bank, an investment in the quality of the raw material pays dividends at each stage of the process.
• For example, reducing the storage temperature of the fish by 5-6o C extends the storage time by 100%.
• Because the biochemical reactions that cause spoilage are reduced by 50%
First Key to Reducing Waste and Enhancing Yields
• RAW MATERIAL QUALITY
• It is like money in the bank, an investment in the quality of the raw material pays dividends at each stage of the process.
• For example, reducing the storage temperature of the fish by 5-6o C extends the storage time by 100%.
• Because the biochemical reactions that cause spoilage are reduced by 50%
THE INTEC/GTZ PROJECT
THE INTEC/GTZ PROJECT• 2 Half day seminars to train local consultants in
seafood processing• Visit a variety of seafood companies in Regions
VIII and XI with local consultants• Discuss the processes and identify the potential
problem areas in the plants• Offer suggestions for more efficient and cleaner
production• Issue reports in cooperation with local consultants
THE INTEC/GTZ PROJECT
• 12 Processing facilities were visitedFish and shellfish canningFishmealFilletingFreezing both fillets and whole fishSalmon processingSeaweed
THE INTEC/GTZ PROJECT
• Reports and follow-up discussions were held with the processing plants
• Meetings were held with CPCC in Region VIII
• Two public seminars- one in Concepcion and the other in Valparaiso to discuss the observations and recommendations
• Future strategy for work to be discussed
EXPERIENCES IN PERU
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
• Similar projects were established in Peru during the period 1996-2000
• A Consortium consisting of-US AID the funding agencyMinistry of Fisheries (MIPE)CONAMSociedad Nacional de Pesqueria (SNP)Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (SPDA)
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
• Originally funded for Paracas Bay only• Later expanded to all of Peru• 85% of the fishmeal plants visited during
this period• Very little edible food products produced • The US EPA funded seminars in the major
cities to discuss waste reduction and by-product recovery from seafood processing
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
• The major problem area identified was raw material freshness
• The major impact was on the pumpwater
• The second major problem was blood water
• In a few plants, stickwater was also a problem
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
• The project secured samples for testing
• Based on the data a technology package was recommended
• New technology was transferred through the Consortium to the other companies
• Everyone benefited from this
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE I• Replace centrifugal pumps with low water/fish
ratio pumps such as Pressure Vacuum (step 1)• Install 1 mm screens for the pumpwater (step 2)• Install Dissolved Air Floatation (DAF) systems to
recover solids and oil (step 3)
RESULTI. Reduction in pumpwater volume and
recovery of valuable oil and protein
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE II• Add water return line to vessel (step 4)• Recycle the pumpwater (step 5)• Replace transport pipes with plastic (step 6)• Retrofit evaporator condensate system to
separate cooling water (seawater) from condensate (fresh water) (step 7)
• Add a cooling tower (step 8)
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
RESULT II• Different parts of the technology have been
installed but no one plant has installed all the technology
• The technology appears to have transferred to Chile since many plants have adopted as much as 75% of the technology
WE WANT TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE
• Learn from their mistakes
• Regulatory pressure forced them to purchase process technology that was inefficient
• Much of it has been replaced
PERUVIAN EXPERIENCERECOMMENDATIONS PHASE III
• Use evaporator condensate water (freshwater) as pumpwater (step 9)
• If necessary add an additional evaporator (step 10)
RESULT IIIRecycle and evaporate in a continuous closed
circuit to recover dissolved proteins
VESSEL CHATA SCREENS
1 MMSCREEN
DAF
EVAPORATOR
PUMPSCREENSSCREENS FISH
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
CONCENTRATE
COOLING TOWER
PROPOSED RECYCLING SYSTEM FOR PERUVIAN FISHMEAL INDUSTRY
OIL
PUMPWATER + FISH
WATER
RETENTION TANK
STICKWATER TANK
RETENTION TANKSPUMPWATER
CONDENSATEWATER
CUMULATIVE RECOVERY OF PROTEIN AND OIL IN PUMPWATER (DM BASIS)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
TONS
NONE SCREEN DAF EVAP.BASED ON 100,000 TONS OF
FISH/SEASON
PROTEINOIL
CUMULATIVE VALUE OF PROTEIN AND OIL RECOVERED FROM PUMPWATER
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
US$
NONE SCREEN DAF EVAP.BASED ON 100,000 TONS OF
FISH/SEASON
PROTEINOIL
Screens for solids removal
RELATIVE DAF SYSTEM EFFICIENCY
DAF SYSTEM % PROTEINRECOVERED
% OILRECOVERED
MINING INDUSTRY 58 72
DEEPRECTANGULAR
30 53
CONICAL 15 74
SHALLOWCIRCULAR
60 81
DAF Systems
TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE COSTS IN US$
FRESH WATER RETURN PIPE1 MM SCREENSDAF SYSTEMRECONFIGURE PIPINGBUFFER TANKRETENTION TANKSLOW WATER FISH PUMPPVC PIPES FOR FISHCOOLING TOWERNEW EVAPORATOR
TOTALS
$100,000$ 20,000$150,000 - $400,000$ 20,000$ 10,000$ 50,000$150,000 - $250,000 $150,000$100,000$1.0 million
$1.75 - 2.1 million
1999 price estimates
Plastic pipe for fish transport
EXPERIENCES IN THE USA
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• 1972 Clean Water Act
• US EPA met with designated members from various segments of the seafood industry
• Processes were diagramed and the best conventional technology (BCT) identified for each industry segment
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• For fishmeal, the installation of stickwater plants was considered BCT
• The industry was given a suitable amount of time to install the stickwater plants.
• Eventually several plants shut down because they could not afford the stickwater plants
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• From BCT the regulations moved to best available technology (BAT)
• BAT required that pumpwater be processed or by special permit hauled to the open sea for discharge
• BAT also required that the plants separate scrubber water and rain run-off from other liquid effluent streams
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• Regulations then shifted to the receiving body of water
• Permits to allow discharge into these bodies of water depended upon the end use of the body of water (drinking, industrial, recreation etc)
• This resulted in the retrofitting of the evaporator condensers to separate condensate water from cooling water
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• Discharge parameters were then reduced resulting in the installation of large aeration ponds or lagoons, some as large as 3 acres
• Transport of water through these lagoons took 30-45 days with a reduction in BOD5 of 90% or more
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• When plants were idle for long periods of time algae growth would push the suspended solids content of the discharge over the effluent limits
• Now, the latest regulations again deal with the receiving body of water but now they are setting TMDL total maximum daily loads for the body of water
THE USA EXPERIENCE
• This means that even if you have a clean operation and your neighbor does not you could be affected by the TMDL figure for the receiving body of water.
• The point to all this is that regulations will continue to evolve and will eventually reach the point of 0 discharge as is common in the Scandinavian countries.
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
THE WASTE LOAD GENERATED DEPENDS ON THE PROCESS
All Edible ProcessingPumpwater, unloadingBloodwater, storageBlood from salmonProcessing water
CanningHead and GutFilleting, SkinningWash-up
Water treatment residuesSolid fish waste or ShellsSolid waste transport in plant
Fishmeal ProcessingPumpwater, unloadingBloodwater, storageStickwaterCondensate waterDryer scrubber waterEvaporator cleaningsolutionsDryer exhaust gasses
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
• Because of the limited time it is not possible to go into much detail here
• All of the companies visited are conscious of the need to protect the environment
• All facets of the seafood industry in Chile were visited
• Salmon growing operations were not visited• Each type of industry and in the case of the
edible seafood industry, each type of process has unique problems
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
• Some problems are common to both industries
• For the fishmeal industry, the pumpwater is the main effluent of concern
• For the edible seafood industry, water to fish ratios are as high as 10-15:1
• There appears to be an attitude that water is free so there is no concern about excess use
• There is very little water management
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
• Solid waste (heads, tails, viscera, shells) are a major problem with the smaller plants
• For plants processing salmon, the blood is a major issue
• A number of plants recycle pumpwater to reduce the volume but then discharge it
• Some plants are using screens, and DAF systems for additional product recovery
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
• At least one plant is replacing metal pipe with plastic pipe to transport the fish
• Unlike Peru, many of the plants now have the more efficient pressure vacuum pump systems
• Plants are conscious of the possible recovery of additional product (fishmeal)
• For smaller processors without access to fishmeal plants, production of silage or compost may be the only alternative
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS IN CHILE
• A number of products of higher value were discussed with the plants on an individual basis
RELATIVE SIZE OF THE VARIOUS STREAMS AND PRODUCTS IN A FISHMEAL PLANT (50 TON/HR,
2000 HOURS)
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000
FISHMEAL + FISH OIL
RAW MATERIAL
PUMPWATER
BLOOD WATER
STICKWATER
METRIC TONS
RELATIVE SIZE OF THE VARIOUS STREAMS AND PRODUCTS IN AN EDIBLE PLANT PER 100000 TONS
OF FISH
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000
FINISHED PRODUCT
RAW MATERIAL
PUMPWATER
BLOOD WATER
PROCESS WATER HIGH
PROCESS WATER LOW
SALMON BLOOD
METRIC TONS
THE FISHMEAL PROCESS
• Reduces what you don’t want so water is removed
• And concentrates what you want (protein, minerals and oil) so oil is recovered from the water and the protein and minerals are dried to produce fishmeal
• Generates large volumes of pumpwater
Fish unloading and pumpwater pipes
SEAFOOD PROCESSING
• Removes fish parts that are not wanted (head, tail, viscera) results in 50% or less yield
• Uses large volumes of potable water to transport fish, cuttings, and edible portion
• May or may not have access to a fishmeal plant for disposal of the solid or liquid waste
SMALL SEAFOOD PLANT OPTIONS
Options for Using Fish Waste
Take solid waste to landfills. Send liquid waste to sewer system
Dispose of liquid and solid wastes in the sea
Use solid waste for fish bait or chum
Use liquid or solid waste directly as fertilizer
Use solid waste in compost productionUse solid waste in cold (crude) silage production
Use solid waste in advanced silage production
Use solid and liquid waste in fishmeal and oil productionUse solid waste in specialty sauces and other Asian products
Produce leather from skins and gelatin from skin and bones
Extract biochemicals, color additives and other pharmaceuticals
Use crushed mollusk shells for road construction
Use mollusk shells in calcium health food supplements
CRUDE SILAGE PRODUCTION
Fish Waste
Grinder
ReactorReactor Acid
Crude SilageStorage Tank
CRUDE SILAGE PRODUCTION
Fish Waste
Grinder
Reactor ReactorAcid
Crude SilageTank
Heat Exchanger
Decanter
Concentrated SilageStorage Tank
Centrifuge
Evaporator
Solids
Oil
Water
STATIC COMPOST PILE FOR FISH WASTE
COARSE GRAVEL 10 - 15 CM
PVC PIPE FOR AIR INLET, PERFORATED 10 CM DIAMETER
WASTE VEGETABLE MATTER 10 - 15 CM
FISH WASTE 10 -15 CM
WASTE VEGETABLE MATTER 10 - 15 CM
FISH WASTE 10 -15 CM
WASTE VEGETABLE MATTER 10 - 15 CM
FISH WASTE 10 -15 CM
WASTE VEGETABLE MATTER 10 - 15 CM
STRATEGY FOR THE FUTURE
STRATEGY FOR FUTURE WORK
• Clean production practices will only succeed if there is cooperation among the interested parties
• A consortium should be established to include:The seafood industry association The government regulatory groupThe ministry of fisheriesAn environmental groupParticipating laboratory
STRATEGY FOR FUTURE WORK
• The consortium should have a facilitator or coordinating group such as INTEC
• There should be agreement within the consortium that as long as the industry is adhering to an agreed timetable for improvement in their effluents there will be no regulatory actions against them
• In order to establish parameters for discharge it is necessary to have data that characterizes the various effluents from the plants
STRATEGY FOR FUTURE WORK
• Data should be collected by an independent approved laboratory to characterize the plant effluents, protein and oil should be determined as well
• This data should be submitted to INTEC as confidential information. INTEC would then compile the data and with it’s technical consultants formulate recommendations for improving the plant operations
STRATEGY FOR FUTURE WORK
• Since there will be a great deal of collected information, INTEC should seek outside funding sources to finance the work
• Since the concepts of cleaner production and resource sustainability are key issues today, lending institutions have positive attitudes towards such projects
STRATEGY FOR FUTURE WORK
• The key to the success of such a strategy is trust. All participating parties must understand this.
TIMETABLE FOR FUTURE WORK
• Form the Consortium • Develop a strategy to obtain funding• Submit proposals for funding• Develop workplan phase 1 • Sampling and testing of representative plants
at different technology levels• Evaluate data and economic feasability• Develop workplan phase 2• Select technology combinations for evaluation
TIMETABLE FOR FUTURE WORK
• Determine if selected technology combinations exist in plants now
• Sample and test technology combinations• Evaluate data and economic feasability• Develop workplan phase 3• Recommend technology package to industry• If possible secure financing base to install
technology
ONE FINAL THOUGHT: POLLUTION PREVENTION VS END OF PIPE
• ALL OF THE COSTS (US$1.75-2.1 MILLION) DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY RELATE TO TREATING PUMP WATER
• WHERE PLANTS HAVE DEEP WATER DOCKS, DRY PNEUMATIC UNLOADERS ARE AVAILABLE. TO UNLOAD 200 TONS PER HOUR THE CAPITAL COST WOULD BE ABOUT US$400,000.
Vacuum UnloadingSystems