HH62/1/M-LOTH/21

Transcription

[Page] 20

posing of the water which has been used in the
manufacturing processes, and of that derived from
the shale, both of which are highly impregnated with
various chemical products and tarry matters, is to let
it run into the nearest stream - of course polluting it.
This is practically how some of the works solve the
question of their liquid, if not solid refuse disposal.
At one work I visited, the whole of the water -
excepting a quantity pumped on to the spent shale
bing for cooling - is filtered through an old refuse
bing, and falls into an adjoining burn. The Manager
informed me that there they have a plentiful water
supply, and that about 300,000 gallons of water pass
into the works daily. About three-fourths of this
quantity pass out, carrying with it the various
impurities.

In some works a portion of the dirty water is
passed to a pond, through which the truck loads of
hot spent shale are drawn to be cooled; or, as at
Champfleurie, near Linlithgow (not in the Almond
district), an automatic arrangement may be put in
operation, whereby a quantity of dirty water falls
upon each hot shale truck on its passage to the bing.
In both of these ways the water is got rid of by rapid
evaporation. The former method is to be seen at
Addiewell, although here water from the separators
(restricted, however, as to degree of impurity) goes
out from the work, and ultimately reaches the
Almond.

In works of recent construction the whole of the
dirty water is used up, and almost nothing escapes
into the streams, except occasional surface drainage.
As examples of such works, we have Champfleurie
and Broxburn. In these works the tarry matters are

[Page] 21

consumed as fuel, and the dirty water is partly
evaporated in slaking hot shale, and partly collected
to cooling ponds to be cooled down, and used over
and over again for the condensers. In none of the
works have I seen any method of catching bing
drainage and outside surface drainage, and satisfac-
torily disposing of them. But it is to be noted that
works' surface drainage, in works collecting their
ordinary surface drainage to a dirty water tank,
mainly goes into streams in any quantity when
they are in flood, and the impurities are at once
largely diluted. This cannot be said of bing soakage,
which might, by the way, be drained to catch pits, and
pumped to the dirty water tank. But bing soakage
need not pollute to any great extent, if dirty water
be not pumped on to the bings, as at some works.

The degree of pollution of the water of any stream
by a paraffin oil work varies according to the size of
the stream, but mainly, of course, to the method in
use in disposing of the dirty water and tarry refuse.
At one small crude work which I examined, the dirty
water pond contents were supposed to be pumped on
to the refuse bing, but at the time of my visit the
pumping gear was all out of order, and apparently
had not been used for some time, and evidence was
clear to me that the contents were let off by a pipe
leading into a ditch, which showed unequivocal signs
of such method having been adopted.

Now, can this pollution of the Almond and its
tributaries by paraffin oil works be completely pre-
vented, or can it, at all events, be minimised at com-
paratively little cost to such an extent as to allow of
the streams to remain so pure that no offensive smell
or taste is perceptible in their waters? I think both