• Journal of the Korean Institute of Gas
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.74-83
• /
• 2018

Anyone who wants to install local ventilation system must obtain a permission from the Ministry of Employment and Labor even if he has permission from the Ministry of Environment. This is because not only the Atmospheric Environmental Protection Act, but also the manufacturing industry's hazardous risk prevention plan under Article 48 Clause 2 of the Industrial Safety and Health Act is to be submitted by 15 days before the construction. Under the current Environmental Protection Act, the Ministry of Environment regulates only the emission of pollutants from local exhaust ventilation systems into the atmosphere and the contents of workers' safety and health within industrial sites are managed by the Ministry of Employment and Labor. Even with the approval of the Ministry of Environment, the number of unsuccessful cases by the Ministry of Employment and Labor has increased, causing a growing discontent among the sites due to production delays and additional costs of improvement. In addition, local exhaust systems that are at greater risk of fire explosion have increased the risk of severe industrial accidents due to fire explosion. This is due to insufficient design of air volume, control speed, return speed, duct size, and risk of fire explosion. This is because the criteria and procedures for approval of local exhaust ventilation systems are similar, but the Industrial Safety and Health Act adds additional screening items for safety and safety of workers and fire and explosion. In this study, the Environment Ministry and the Employment and Labor Ministry seek to find a reasonable way to operate the system by comparing local exhaust ventilation system installation approval standards.

• Journal of Korean Society on Water Environment
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.557-565
• /
• 2010

Recently, regulations on toxic compounds in aquatic environment have been strengthened in korea due to the increasing public awareness of the water quality. Typically, these regulations include introduction of emerging toxic compounds and stricter effluent limitations for the already regulated compounds. However, too strict regulations may cause excessive burden on the industry. Therefore it is also important to assess the economic impacts when the new effluent limitation guidelines are introduced. The estimation of the additional cost for the wastewater dischargers to meet the new guidelines are based on the selected treatment technology to handle the hazardous substances and the regulatory levels for effluent limitations. To explore the procedures for cost estimation in enforcing new effluent limitations, a case study was performed specially for 1,4-dichlorobenzene. The pollutants of concern are surveyed for different industrial categories and various treatment technologies. For a given pollutant, the general performances of the treatment technologies are surveyed and a representative technology is selected. For a given technology, the capital cost and annual Operation and Maintenance (O&M) cost was calculated. The calculation of baseline costs to operate ordinary treatment technologies is also important. The ratio between the cost for introducing new treatment process and the baseline cost required for conventional technology was used to evaluate the economic impact on the industry. For 1,4-dichlorobenzene, steam stripping and activated carbon processes were selected as the specific treatment technologies. The cost effects to the regulation of the compound were found to be 6.4% and 14.5% increase in capital cost and O&M cost, respectively, at the flow rate over $2,000m^3/d$ for the categories of synthetic resin and other plastics manufacturing industry. For the case of petrochemical basic compounds manufacturing industry, the cost increases were 5.8% and 12.4%, respectively. It was suggested that cost effect analysis to evaluate the economic impacts of new effluent limitations on the industry is crucial to establish more balanced and reasonable effluent limitations to manage the industrial wastewater containing emerging toxic compounds in the wastewater.

• Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.322-333
• /
• 2018

This study was carried out to measure atmospheric environmental improvement effect and estimate its social benefit of thermal power plants through Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for quantitative analysis about operational performances of EIA. In this study, 'EIA outcome' is defined as whether or not the system is implemented, therefore, environmental standard to be followed by each project and consultation contents were compared. In total 60 cases of thermal power plant construction projects that have been consulted over the past 10 years since 2010, major air pollutants have been significantly reduced after the implementation of EIA. The $PM_{10}$ reduced annual 3,745 tons, $NO_2$ by 74,569 tons, and $SO_2$ by 37,647 tons, which were estimated at approximately 240 billion won~5 trillion 967 billion won per year for social benefit. This means the total cost of power plant operations will be cut to 7 trillion 192 billion won~178 trillion 994 billion won over a 30-year period. The reduced amount of air pollutants emitted by energy generation facilities across the country is worth 50%, and its economic value is larger than the annual Current Health Expenditure in Korea. This is meant by the fact that all projects are subject to uniform criteria under the existing relevant regulation, but that each project plans are optimized according to the characteristics of target areas and projects through the process of EIA.