Ecological Engineering 73 (2014) 421–424

Short communication

Calculation and interpretation of effluent discharge objectives of dairyindustry: Case Edough’s dairy – Annaba (Algeria)

Lamine Sayad a, Houria Kherici-Bousnoubra a, Nadjib Drouiche b,*, Moussa Houhamdi c,Nacer Kherici d

a Laboratory of Soil and Hydraulics, Faculty of Engineer Sciences, Badji Mokhtar University, Annaba, AlgeriabCentre de Recherche en Technologie des Semi-Conducteurs Pour l’Energétique (CRTSE), 2, Bd Dr. Frantz Fanon, P.O. Box 140, 7 merveilles, Alger 16038,AlgeriacDepartment of Nature and Life Sciences, University of Guelma, Algeriad Laboratory of Geology, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Badji Mokhtar University, Annaba, Algeria

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:Received 25 April 2014Received in revised form 18 August 2014Accepted 13 September 2014Available online xxx

Keywords:AlgeriaDairy dischargeEDO calculationSeybouse wadiWatershed

A B S T R A C T

Aquatic environment owns vary from depend on using and hydrodynamic conditions vulnerabilities. Thecontribution of water effluent can profoundly affect the physico-chemical composition of the receivingenvironment. These changes are strongly related to the hydrological regime of rivers. In order to limit theburden and concentrations of contaminants in the receiving environment, several methods have beendeveloped. Regarding to this study, it focuses on agro food waste (dairy) in a natural receivingenvironment (Seybouse wadi, Algeria NE). In earlier study (2011–2012), physico-chemical and organicanalyses have been used by using the calculation method (EOD) to undermine the protection of thereceiving environment. Based on release of environmental objectives calculation of each quality criteriaand water use showed major overtaking conventional chemical contaminants studied causing animmediate threat to health and or the environment.

ã 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Engineering

journal homepage: www.else vie r .com/ locat e/e coleng

1. Introduction

The environmental impact of the dairy industry is directlyhaving high impact on water resources. Large amount ofwastewater discharge from this industry is loaded with strongpollutants, such as variable pH and high concentration of organicsubstance (Castillo De Campins, 2005; Pattnaik et al., 2008; Suthar,2012). The discharged effluents by a dairy have a high PH as well asstrong biochemical oxygen demand as a result of detergents andmilk. The associated chemical oxygen demand have a sequence ofvarious tons by year for the same site and furthers the proliferationof algae, that work prevent the oxygen to dissolve and causedamages at the level of the fishes’ natural habitat. The treatment ofthese effluents by a filtration station at activated sludge isfrequently used (Ramasamy et al., 2004; Castillo De Campins,2005; Djelal et al., 2009) in action of the biodegradability of theeffluent. The presence of detergents and disinfectants do not

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +213 21433511; fax: +213 21 433511.E-mail address: nadjibdrouiche@yahoo.fr (N. Drouiche).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.09.0500925-8574/ã 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

inhibit the development of bacteria of Activated sludge (Janczu-kowicz et al., 2008).

The dairy industry of Edough is a public company of whosecapital is released actually by IGPM Group (Industrial Group ofMilk Production), the social headquarters for instance of produc-tion plant is situated in El Bouni on the national road no. 4–5 kmof Annaba city, it is located on ground of 6 ha, of which 1.692 habuilt-up/developed surface and 3.308 non developed surface. Themanufactured products are: partially pasteurized and skimmedmilk, fermented milk (ELBEN) in polyéthyléne packets andCamembert cheese (Saint Augustin brand). In the shape of arounded box of 250.0001/j. The milk bucket production consumeand throw out or reject an enormous quantity of water.Nevertheless, we know that we generally 3.6 L of used water forthe production of one liter of milk (Sachon, 1980). The great part ofthese waters (85%) is discharged as waste water. For the dairyindustry, these amounts of water are channeled in concrete pipesof 1.20 m diameter and 2 km length towards Seybouse Wadiwithout any preliminary treatment where it is necessary to treatthese discharges to preserve the receiver’s natural habitat(National Action Plan for Environment and durable Development.And the plan of environmental performance of landscaping

422 L. Sayad et al. / Ecological Engineering 73 (2014) 421–424

ministry of territory and the environment for the Edough dairyindustry (2007).

2. Geographical situation

The study area is located in the north eastern part of Algeria, inthe state of Annaba. It is surrounded by the Mediterranean Sea inthe north, the Tarf state in the east, skikda state in the West, andGuelma state in the South. This region is known by its vastindustrial activity with Arcelor Mittal Annaba (steel industry),Reposal Fertial Group that manage the complex of phosphatizedand azotic fertilizers and the food- processing industry bycompanies like the dairy industry of Edough (DIE). Agriculture isobserved on a set of plain with an enormous variety of truckfarming, cereals, boricultural with a surface are of 14.134 km2. Thetotal population of the state is estimated at 609,500 dwellers,both a density of 429 dwellers/km2 and a growth rate of 1.4%. Theclimate that predominates is Mediterranean marked by a heavyrainfall in the heights (Edough mountains) 2000 mm year�1 andan average rainfall of 680 mm year�1 in the plain, the averageannual temperature is of the sequence 18 �C.

The geology of the region has demonstrated the existence oftwo types of formation, the first one represented by themetamorphic massif Edough formed a base crystallophyllian.The other is sedimentary occupying almost the whole area of study(Mebarki, 2005). The hydrogeology of the study area has two typesof reservoirs; sheet of water reservoir, represented by the clayishsilt- laden alluvium at the level of phreatic table by the sands of thedune sheet groundwater; gravel groundwater reservoir, repre-sented by pebbles and inserted gravels with lenses of sand and clay.The geomorphology of the zone is characterized by a planetopography on the whole of the plain, marked by importantinclinations on the edge of the plain, on the part of the west andsouth proving that metamorphic anticline mountains of Edough,Belelietais that of Numedien chain (Débieche, 2002). Hydro-graphics is dominated by two principles Wadi that run the plain,Oued Seybouse and Oued Meboudja River. The Seybouse water-shed occupy an area of 5955 km2 and a perimeter of 330 km,following a layout approximately South–West–Nort–East,Seybouse change direction to join toward the North, theMediterranen sea, after crossing the coastal plain includedbetween Dréan and Annaba (Mebarki, 2005).

3. Materials and methods

3.1. Materials

3.1.1. Location, mode and frequency samplingIn order to display the statistic series of physico-chemical

(ANRH-1980–2010) analyses to calculate the median concen-trations of contaminants at the location called Segman Amar (inSeybousewadi) five parameters have been selected; chlorides,nitrates, nitrites, total suspended solids, biochemical oxygendemand of five days. The follow-up of the different contaminantshas been carried out in a period that started from January2011 until December 2012. All of these samples have beenpossible thanks to a manual sampler with a foldable pole (of PVC)of a 3 m length, the depth of specimen being about 50 cm. Thesamples have been transported at a low temperature (4 �C) untilthe laboratory.

3.1.2. Physico-chemical parametersThe chosen parameters are those that allow to assess the better

quality of water by knowing their potential effect on the receiver’saquatic natural habitat and the environment; the balance ofchlorides’ ions by the argentimétry method, the biochemical

oxygen demand has been determined by DbometerOxi Top/Box115, total suspended solids have been determined bycentrifugation and nitrates, nitrites by the spectrophotometer ofthe laboratory (HI83200) with the wave’s length equal to 525 nm.

3.2. Methodology

The study of the contaminant’s impact on the receiver’s naturalhabitat introduced a subject of various approaches related to thecomplexity of aquatic ecosystems (MDDEP, 2007; Younes-Barailleet al., 2005; Marmonier et al., 2013). Among these methods, wehave adopted one like MDDEP (2007) inspired by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2006) of which theconditions of applications limits came close to the ambientenvironment of the study. The effluent discharge objectives (EDO)are a value of fully loaded weight and concentration calculated foran associate parameter with an effluent that is shot on a precisepoint of the stretch of water. In order to calculate the EDO, it isnecessary to know the criterion of water quality (contaminationprevention criteria (water and fish consumption CPC(WF),contamination prevention criteria (fish only CPC(F) recreationalactivities and aesthetics criteria (RAAC), and in order to protect theliving organisms, we have the chronic aquatic life criteria (CALC),and terrestrial piscivore criteria (TPC)), the flow of the effluent, theparameters of concentration in the flow rate and, usually, thecritical low flow of the receiving environment. (MDDEP, 2007). Thecalculation of EOD is based on the report of applied loading on theportion of the stretch of water, this report is made out in a mannerin which for every contaminant, and the addition of the effluent'sload on the already present upstream load of discharge respectsthe maximal tolerable load on the limit of the restricted mixingzone. That zone is allocated, in the measurement where it does notdamage the set of the waterbody. The rate of dilution of thedischarge in the receiver’s environment becomes frequently adeterminant factor in the assessment of EDO’s preservation.

3.2.1. Equation of the mass balanceFor the majority of contaminants, the mass balance is

represented by the following equation:Upstream water load + allocated load on the effluent = maximal

tolerable load at the limit of the mixing zone.

CsQs þ CeQe ¼ CcðQs þ CeÞ (1)

The allocated load on the effluent corresponds to the associateload respectfully of the quality criterion (maximal tolerable load onthe limit of the mixing zone), of which is subcontracting thealready present load in the environment (upstream load). Theseloads are defined that way:

CeQe ¼ CcðQs þ QeÞ � CsQs (2)

Qs ¼ Qr � f Qe (3)

Ce ¼ CcðQr � f Qe þ QeÞ � CsðQr � f QeÞQe

(4)

Ce (mg/L): the environmental objective of discharge in concentra-tion, Cs (mg/L): median upstream concentration in the wadi, Cc(mg/L): quality of water criterion. Qr (L s�1): flow of recurrence: Qe

effluent flow, f = fraction of effluent’s flow.From Eq. (4), we defined, the daily load allotted to the effluent

Cd (Kg d�1)

Cd ¼ Ce � Qe (5)

Table 1Results of frequency analysis of the annual flow of recurrence.

T (recurrence period) on year Restricted variables of Gumbel

(Q7 d) (Q30 d)a = 2.8173 a = 1.7806m = 0.5469 m = 0.9673Q7 d L s�1 Q30 d L s�1

Annual flow of recurrence

2 417.02 761.805 14.51 124.89

L. Sayad et al. / Ecological Engineering 73 (2014) 421–424 423

The flow of recurrence Qr, demand in Eq. (4), will be calculate onseries of observations of “n” samples with recurrence periods of2 and 5 years.

3.2.2. Return flowThe maximal flow considered for the dilution in the wadi, of a

rapid mixing is equal to half of its critical low flow for the toxiccontaminants and of the totality of the low flow for theconventional contaminants. The duration and the probability ofrecurrence of conserved of low flow having a type-effect that welook for to prevent. The associate low flows of various criteria arethe following (Table 2):

1. The minimum average flow on consecutive 30 days having aprobability of recurrence once per 5 years. (30Q5) for the CPC(WF), CPC(F) and TPC.

2. The minimum average flow on consecutive 7 days having aprobability of recurrence once per 2 days (7Q2) for the CALC ofconventional contaminants.

That methodology is applied to discharge of Edough’s dairyindustry in the receiving environment of Seybouse wadi (Table 1).

3.2.2.1. Gumbel’s law of minimum extremes for the calculation ofrecurrence flow. As part of statistic adjustment of annualminimum flows, the most appropriate laws have been chosenfirst they have been later controlled a post (Audet et al., 2000). Inorder to move apart all adjustment poorly adopted to the series ofobservations. The different applied laws by the follow through ofseries concerning the average minimum daily flows, annual andseasonal are the law of Gumbel. The recurrence period T (Time ofrecurrence) like the reverse of the frequency of no excess (F1)(Laborde, 1997)

T = 1/F (T: time of recurrence; F: probability)

P ¼ ðX � X0Þ ¼ F T ¼ 1FðX � X0Þ

T ¼ 11 � F

PðX � X0Þ ¼ F T ¼ 1F

Table 2Annual water consumption of Edough’s dairy industry, Annaba (2003–2011).

Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 20

Water consumption m3year�1 258203 242840 278780 190056 21

Gumbel’s law of minimum extremes of values FðxÞ ¼ 1 � e �eaðx�mÞ½ �

1 � FðxÞ ¼ e½�eaðx�mÞ �

�ln½1 � FðxÞ� ¼ eaðx�mÞ

ln½�ln�1 � FðxÞ� ¼ aðx � mÞ

v ¼ aðx � mÞ

x ¼ va þ m

x: Being the minimum average flow of recurrence, m and a are thereduced variables of Gumbel:

m ¼ X þ 0:577d

X : meanaverage

a ¼ 1:282d

d : differencetype

3.3. The effluent’s flow of Edough’s dairy industry

The flow of the dairy has been determined in content byDoppler ratemeter height (H)/speed (S) (Mainstream IV) the heightby measuring the pressure. The use of probe of a piézorésistivitylevel and speed: by Doppler effect. The use of a speed sensor ofDoppler effect. An ultrasound ray is transmitted by a submergedprobe, following the axe of canalization. These waves are reflectedby all the particles in suspension in the water. They are analyzed todetermine the average speed of water. (S = f(H)) and Q = S � A. Q:flow, A: area). The analysis of data has been possible using Winfluidsoftware, the flow has been measured with an average errorestimated at �1% Figs. 1 and 2.

4. Results and discussions

4.1. The statistic analysis

4.1.1. calculation of EDO for the chemical conventional contaminantsin Edough’s dairy industry

The studied EDO in the location of discharges of Edough’s dairyindustry have to respect the water quality criteria in the rear of themixing zone considered as made between the waters of thereceiving environment (Seybouse wadi) and the effluent of thedairy. We take this in order to consider the flow of the effluent, thecharacteristics of the natural receiving environment, the concen-tration of the upstream stretch in contaminants and the dilution incritical conditions.

4.1.2. The effluent’s flow of the diaryThe annual flows of recurrence 30Q5 and 7Q2 are, respectively:

124.89 L s�1and 417.02 L s�1. Edough’s dairy industry do not drawits water in the receiver’s environment (f = 0). For the studied

07 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 (January–March)

6344 264834 249204 264398 275452 70946

Fig. 1. Histogram of the minimum average flow over 7 consecutive days with aprobability of recurrence of once every 2 years.

Fig. 2. Histogram the minimum average flow over 30 consecutive days with aprobability flow of recurrence of once every 5 years.

424 L. Sayad et al. / Ecological Engineering 73 (2014) 421–424

conventional contaminants, we retain 100% of the annual low flowfor the mixing of the effluent.

4.1.3. Calculation of EDOThe EDO are calculated on the basis of the Eq. (4) of the mass

balance. According to the available data, we limit that method inorder to look for the environmental objectives of discharge,respectively, in order for the contaminant’s concentrations in thewater would allow the water consumption and the aquaticorganisms without harmful effects for the health and the highestconcentrations of these contaminants which do not result in anydangerous effect on the chronic aquatic life (chronic effect), weobtain.

4.2. Discussion of EDO calculated

The effluent discharge objectives calculated for the use of CPC(WF) are highlighting excesses (negative values) at the level ofchlorides, this is done on the high upstream concentration of thiscontaminant (355 mg/L), the dairy does not draw its water of thenatural environment (Seybouse wadi). The effluent dischargeobjective for this element is the quality criterion of this use, whichis seen as the azotic compound (NO3

� and NO2�). Occasionally, the

EOD of 23.48 mg/L for the nitrates and 23.65 mg/L for the nitriteswere recorded. None criterion is not retained for the use of CPC EOfor the total suspended solids and the biochemical oxygen demand.

On the opposite for the use of CALC (chronic effect) the excess isrecorded at the level of four contaminants (CI, NO3 TSS, BDO5) thismove back up to high upstream concentrations for these respectivecontaminants 355 mg/L, 9.50 mg/L, 1.120 mg/L and 7.65 mg/L incomparison to the imposed concentration of the criterion (MDDEP,2013) and at the important level of pollution of the natural habitat

(Débieche, 2002). The retained EDO for this use is the criteria ofquality of this usage. nitrites is the only contaminant that does notcause a major excess and a calculation of environmental objectiveof discharge giving/producing 2 mg/L.

The daily admitted load of discharge (Kg d�1) in the receiver’senvironment varies on the basis of use and the contaminant, it isthe sequence of 100 Kg d�1 for the chloride use of CPC (WF) and of92 Kg d�1 (CALC) while it is 9.39 Kg d�1 for the nitrates CPC (WF)and 1.16 Kg d�1 (CALC) for the nitrites is 0.80 kg d�1 (CALC) and9.46 Kg d�1 CPC (WF) the daily load, the TSS and the DBO5 for thesame use (CALC) respectively is of 2 kg d�1 and 1.20 Kg d�1.

5. Conclusion

The effluent discharge objectives are not of absolute value andremain objectives. The calculation of EDO for the discharge of thedairy is not perceived as significant, the level of importantpollution of the receiver’s environment. The decontamination ofthis natural environment remains crucial and a systematicprogram of automatic supervision of all these contaminants. Thispiece of work has been completed by the measurement of toxicpotential of discharge that rests on tests of standardized toxicity.

References

Audet, D., Boucher, C., Caumartin, A., Skeene, C., 2000. Probabilités et Statistiques,2ème éd. Gaétan Morin, pp. 411.

Castillo De Campins, S., 2005. Etude d’un procédé compact de traitement biologiqueaérobie d’effluents laitiers. Thèse Institut National des Sciences Appliquées deToulouse.

Débieche, T.H., 2002. Evolution de la qualité des eaux salinité, azote et métauxlourds) sous l'effet de la pollution saline, agricole et industrielle Application à labasse plaine de la Seybouse. Nord-Est Algérien Thèse. Université FrancheCompte, pp. 235.

Djelal, H., Poignant, E., Brau, L., 2009. Mise en place d’un pilote industriel sur le sitede la station d’épuration d’une laiterie pour optimiser le traitement de leurseffluents Récents Progrès en Génie des Procédés – Numéro 98 – 20092-910239-72-1, Ed.. SFGP, Paris, France.

Janczukowicz, W., Zielinski, M., et Debowski, M., 2008. Biodegradability evaluationof dairy originated in selected sections of dairy production. Bioresour. Technol.99, 4199–4205.

Laborde, J.P., 1997. Eléments d’hydrologie de surface, cours de DEA, PAE3S de l’ENSGNancy.

Marmonier, P., Maazouzi, C., Foulquier, A., Navel, S., Francois, C., Hervant, F.,Mermillod-Blondin, F., Vieney, A., Barraud, S., Togola, A., Piscart, C., 2013. The useof crustaceans as sentinel organisms to evaluate groundwater ecologicalquality. Ecol. Eng. 57, 118–132.

Mebarki, A., 2005. Hydrologie des bassins de l’est Algérien: Ressources en eau,aménagement et environnement thèse de doctorat d’état, Université Mentouride Constantine.

Ministère Du Développement Durable, De L'environnement Et Des Parcs (MDDEP),2007. Calculation and interpretation of effluent discharge objectives forcontaminants in the aquatic environment, second ed., Quebec, Ministère duDéveloppement durable, de l'Environnement et des Parcs, Direction du suivide l'état de l'environnement, ISBN-978-2-550-49172-9 (PDF), p. 54 and4 appendices.

Ministère Du Développement Durable, De L'environnement Et Des Parcs (MDDEP),2013. Critères de qualité de l'eau de surface, Direction du suivi de l'état del'environnement, ministère du Développement durable, de l'Environnement etdes Parcs, Québec, ISBN 978-2-550-57559-7 (PDF), p. 536 et 16 annexes.

Pattnaik, R., Yost, R.S., Porter, G., Masunaga, T., Attanandana, T., 2008. Improvingmulti-soil-layer (MSL) system remediation of dairy effluent. Ecol. Eng. 32, 1–10.

Ramasamy, E.V., Gajalakshmi, S., Sanjeevi, R., Jithesh, M.N., et. Abbasi, S.A., 2004.Feasibility studies on the treatment of a dairy wastewater with upflowanaerobic sludge blanket reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 93, 209–212.

Sachon, G., 1980. L’industrie laitière et la pollution des eaux. Revue des ENIL, 1èrepartie, 49, 7–12.

Suthar, S., 2012. Vermistabilization of wastewater sludge from milk processingindustry. Ecol. Eng. 47, 115–119.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA), 2006. National RecommendedWater Quality Criteria, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology.

Younes-Baraille, Y., Garcia, X.F., Gagneur, J., 2005. Impact of longitudinal andseasonal changes of water quality on the benthic macro-invertebrateassemblages of the Andorran streams. C.R. Biol. 328, 963–976.