Sequencing batch reactor technology: the key to a BP refinery (Bulwer Island) upgraded environmental protection system - a low cost lagoon based retro-fit

BP Refinery (Bulwer Island) Ltd (BP) located on the eastern Australian coast is currently undergoing a major expansion as a part of the Queensland Clean Fuels Project. The associated wastewater treatment plant upgrade will provide a better quality of treated effluent than is currently possible with the existing infrastructure, and which will be of a sufficiently high standard to meet not only the requirements of imposed environmental legislation but also BP's environmental objectives. A number of challenges were faced when considering the upgrade, particularly; cost constraints and limited plot space, highly variable wastewater, toxicity issues, and limited available hydraulic head. Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) Technology was chosen for the lagoon upgrade based on the following; SBR technology allowed a retro-fit of the existing earthen lagoon without the need for any additional substantial concrete structures, a dual lagoon system allowed partial treatment of wastewaters during construction, SBRs give substantial process flexibility, SBRs have the ability to easily modify process parameters without any physical modifications, and significant cost benefits. This paper presents the background to this application, an outline of laboratory studies carried out on the wastewater and details the full scale design issues and methods for providing a cost effective, efficient treatment system using the existing lagoon system.

Science-policy in environmental and health risk assessment: if we cannot do without, can we do better?

How can empirical evidence of adverse effects from exposure to noxious agents, which is often incomplete and uncertain, be used most appropriately to protect human health? We examine several important questions on the best uses of empirical evidence in regulatory risk management decision-making raised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s science-policy concerning uncertainty and variability in human health risk assessment. In our view, the US EPA (and other agencies that have adopted similar views of risk management) can often improve decision-making by decreasing reliance on default values and assumptions, particularly when causation is uncertain. This can be achieved by more fully exploiting decision-theoretic methods and criteria that explicitly account for uncertain, possibly conflicting scientific beliefs and that can be fully studied by advocates and adversaries of a policy choice, in administrative decision-making involving risk assessment. The substitution of decision-theoretic frameworks for default assumption-driven policies also allows stakeholder attitudes toward risk to be incorporated into policy debates, so that the public and risk managers can more explicitly identify the roles of risk-aversion or other attitudes toward risk and uncertainty in policy recommendations. Decision theory provides a sound scientific way explicitly to account for new knowledge and its effects on eventual policy choices. Although these improvements can complicate regulatory analyses, simplifying default assumptions can create substantial costs to society and can prematurely cut off consideration of new scientific insights (e.g., possible beneficial health effects from exposure to sufficiently low 'hormetic' doses of some agents). In many cases, the administrative burden of applying decision-analytic methods is likely to be more than offset by improved effectiveness of regulations in achieving desired goals. Because many foreign jurisdictions adopt US EPA reasoning and methods of risk analysis, it may be especially valuable to incorporate decision-theoretic principles that transcend local differences among jurisdictions.