Environmental Assessment of Thomas Hedley Detergent Company - Essay Example

Environmental Assessment of Thomas Hedley Detergent Company Semester/Year of Study: Submitted; Likely Environmental and Health Effects Based on the nature and type of activities of Thomas Hedley Detergent Company, its environmental effects would most likely come from residues and emissions. The importance to minimize if not avoid these effects is given an impetus owing to the fact that the firm borders a densely populated residential area. This is further enhanced by the fact that the company is contemplating striking the golden balance between the use of automated mode of production and the conventional manual production from an economic standpoint. In this regard, it is imperative to note that safety is bound to be compromised in terms of the overall environmental effects within the local region. Although this decision might have been informed from the principle of Best Available Techniques Not Entailing Excessive Cost (BATNEEC), it is noteworthy that this concept carries with it potential environmental impacts in all their forms. In terms of emissions, the company is likely to emit toxic or harmful gases as by products in the overall process of manufacturing the various detergents. This is attributed to the fact that the company has opted to integrate both automated mode of production and manual one in which case there is bound to an increase in the air pollution when using the latter. As is outlined by Environmental Protection Act 1990 and 1995, this company is therefore tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that its production activities do not interfere with the overall air quality according to RTPI, (2002). In this regard, the best practicable environmental option is through the use of appropriate technology which reduces the emission of any toxic gases to its bordering community. In particular there is the danger of Sulphur dioxide being released since the company uses Sulphate as one of the ingredients for making its detergents. This is also enshrined in the aforementioned acts based on the principle of producer responsibility. On the other hand, the company structures have a negative visual impact owing to their height with its effects on the aviation industry. With respect to the issue of water discharge options, Thomas Hedley Company shall have integrated its water disposal into the city’s sewage system. However, the company shall be tasked with the responsibility of treating its effluents before they are discharged into the city’s sewage disposal system. The other feasible option available to this company is the option of recycling its waste water for use in the production process. The third option available to this firm involves it having to develop its own waste water disposal site within its premises to avoid discharging toxic chemical which might find their way into the food chain in the event that it is discharged in the city’s domestic sewage system. With respect to the third option, it is important to note that this company shall have to see to it that it sterilizes this waste water to prevent it from having negative effects on the adjacent residential community. In particular, such measures would prevent the production of fowl smell to this community. Regarding the aspect of human health, Thomas Hedley Detergent Company is a health hazard. This is attributed to the fact that it shall be producing toxic sulphur gases to the surrounding community especially when using the manual method of production. This likelihood is further increased since its proposed site of location is in close proximity to a residential area. The continued exposure to such gases by these persons increases their predisposition to developing health complications later on. Other than the production of toxic suplhur dioxide gases, there is a high possibility of increased exposure by the adjacent community to its toxic waste water in the event that it does not comply with the principle of Best Practicable Environmental Practices by making sure that such wastes are treated before being disposed. This further implies that the neighboring community shall be at the risk of developing health complications from the chemicals contained in this waste water. In the overall, there is a looming risk of exposure to the harmful Sulphur dioxide gases both in water and air since the company has opted to incorporate a manual type of production method. This method is usually associated with increased inefficiency as far as treatment of by-products and waste is concerned. At the same time, the local area’s fauna and flora is greatly at risk due to the production of both toxic waste compounds and gases. It should be noted that Sulphur dioxide is soluble in water which thus implies that the local area fauna is at risk of being exposed to this toxic gases. The bio-accumulation of this gas carries the potential effect of killing such organisms. To add to that, the accumulation of this gas in the atmosphere is likely to cause micro-climatic effect in terms of changes in the temperature due to its effect on the ozone layer. Such sudden variation in the temperature has the effect of negatively affecting the overall metabolic and physiological process to the flora which would ultimately result to their death. Also, the possibility of there being toxic chemical compounds especially when the firm reverts to the manual mode of operation implies that both fauna and flora are at the risk of being exposed to toxic water downstream. The most feasible and practical method of reducing these risks and impacts is through the company using environmental friendly production technology that would guarantee for the treatment of its wastes before discharging them into the surrounding ecosystem according to Chopra, (2005). Site Operation analysis Thomas Hedley’s location within a residential area in the South West England carries potential operation related risks. The first risk is associated with the aspect of its plant operation. The neighboring community is greatly exposed to the danger of detergent powder being blown to their residential areas during the normal plant operation. In this way, the community is exposed to the risk of dust pollution which might lead to the possibility of individuals developing health complications in the long run. Secondly, this community faces the constant risk of noise pollution subject to their close proximity to the said detergent manufacturing company. According to Dossey and Lynn, (2008), noise pollution is also a health risk due to its impact on the auditory system. Within the medical fraternity, the impacts of constant exposure to noise have been documented to affect everyone irrespective of the age group. At the same time, noise has been cited to be a source of stress which in turn sets in motion various health complications. The other risk associated with the location of this company in the residential area is in the event of operation or system failure during normal operations. During such incidences, there is bound to be fire accidents with far reaching consequences to the local community. Closely related to this is the element of site operations is the issue of traffic flow to and from the company. The location of this firm within the residential area shall bring with it resultant effects of heavy traffic within this area. Of particular concern is the aspect of the heavy traffic flow of goods from the company throughout the day and night. This also shall increase noise pollution within this area and thereby being a source of discomfort to them. In addition, there is the increased risk of accidents within this community due to the heavy flow of traffic to and from Thomas Hedley Detergent Company in the event that this site location is approved. This is further compounded by the fact that the company does not have the financial resources to construct a special route to and from premises. This can be inferred from its decision to bring on board manual method of production at the expense of purely using an automated production method citing economic reasons or concerns. Socio-Economic Impacts The establishment of this company within this region in no doubt presents this area with economic benefits. One of the ways through which this shall be realized is in terms of providing a range of employment opportunities to the local community. It is therefore justified to note that the existence of this firm in South West shall be source of livelihood to the nearby community in terms of job opportunities. The other possible benefit shall be through the provision of an investment platform in this region. Such establishment shall bring together different investors which in turn translate to an improvement in investment within South West of England. However, the location of the firm in this residential area carries with it the possible consequence of displacing the natives. In this regard, this amounts to disruption of the social fabric of this community. Furthermore, there is the possibility of displacing the adjoining industries owing to its demand of a larger operational area. Hence, there is the potential of jobs being lost as well. On a different note, it is evidently clear that the location of this company is not in conformity to the traditional use of this land. In a nutshell, its establishment in this region translates to the overall conversion of this area into a highly industrial center from being a residential area. According to the local government development plans, this area was designated to be used as a residential place. The only exception to this plan was made to less established industries which would not change or transform this form in any way. Therefore, the establishment of this proposed company in this area negates the very cultural heritage for which this area was established. A company of this magnitude shall result into significant transformation of this area since it is not compatible to be used as an industrial area. The cost of such transformation is grave than the expected benefits from the establishment of such a company. This situation is further complicated by the fact that such changes cannot be reversed in future due the enormous cost implications. References Chopra, KR 2005, Ecosystems and human well-being: policy responses, Island Press, New York. Dossey, BM & Lynn, K 2008, Holistic Nursing: A Handbook for Practice, Jones & Bartlett Publishers, New York. Royal Town Planning Institute, 2002, Introductory guide to planning and environmental Protection, Thomas Telford, London. Read More