Full text of "Study of the Ontario environmental protection industry : report"

See other formats

FILE CCTT

STUDY OF THE

ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION INDUSTRY

JUNE 1992

Environment
Environnement

Ontario

ISBN 0-7729-9932-5

STUDY OF THE ONTARIO

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

INDUSTRY

Report Prepared By:
Ernst and Young

Report Prepared For:
Ontario Ministry of the Environment

JUNE 1992

PRINTED OH
RECYCLED PAPER
IMPRIMÉ SUB

DU PAPIER RECYCLE

Cette publication technique
n'est disponible qu'en anglais.

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes

with appropriate attribution.

PIBS 1966E

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment as
part of a Ministry funded project. The views and ideas expressed in
this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the Ministry of the Environment, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.

Citation of this report is requested.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary 1

1. Introduction 5

2. Methodology 9

3. Ontario's Environmental Protection Industry 15

4. Trends in Ontario and Canadian Demand for Environmental Protection .... 51

5. International Environmental Protection Markets 133

6. Competitiveness of the Ontario Environmental Protection

Industry and Government Policy 155

7. Environmental Protection Impact Model 191

APPENDIX 1 - Detailed Description of Environmental Protection Impact

Model 207

APPENDIX 2 - Utilizing the Statistics Canada Input/Output Model 221

APPENDIX 3 - Report By M.M. Dillon Limited 245

APPENDIX 4 - (Industry Questionnaire)

References

Executive Summary

• This report presents an extensive examination of the Ontario
environmental protection industry, including a review of industry
size, growth prospects, export market opportunities and
competitiveness. A model for estimating the Ontario economic
impact of selected environmental projects is also provided.

• The environmental protection industry includes firms that provide
specialized goods and services used to prevent or clean-up damage
to terrestrial, aquatic and atmospheric environments. Major
elements of the industry include manufacturing and on-site
construction and assembly of environmental equipment, consulting
engineering, solid and hazardous waste management and recycling
services, and laboratory and other consulting services.

• The 470 firms that responded to our mail survey reported revenues
from Ontario operations of over $1 billion in 1990.

• In total, using survey results, interviews and other sources of data,
we estimate that the Ontario environmental protection industry had
annual revenues of roughly $2.5 billion in 1990 and about 30,000
employees, in 1 ,500 to 2,000 firms across the province.

• An earlier Ernst & Young (Woods Gordon) study conducted in
1988-89 estimated that the industry had annual revenues of about
$2 billion in 1987. The changes since 1987 reflect both industry
growth and new information sources that have enabled us to refine
the estimate of industry size. Areas of growth over the 1987-90
period included municipal water and sewage treatment plants,
laboratory services, recycling, and hazardous waste treatment.

• Future demand growth will be generated by regulations and the
increasing environmental consciousness of businesses and
consumers.

• Both the Canadian and Ontario governments continue to tighten
regulations on environmental discharges. The Ontario government
has undertaken major initiatives aimed at toxic discharges and
waste management. Current policy themes include the principle of
pollution prevention, a multi-media approach to environmental
regulation, a target of virtual elimination of toxic discharges, and

the potential use of economic instruments for environmental
protection.

Air pollution control firms expect annual growth of 9-13% over
the next five years, although a major surge in spending may occur
later in the upcoming five years. Steel mills, metal platers, and
chemical firms will be involved in process change measures to
control emissions. Air pollution control problems targetted for
abatement measures include Ontario Hydro sulphur dioxide
control, and adoption of low NOx burners, solvent substitution
and other measures to control ground level ozone.

Water pollution control firms expect a more rapid growth of 10-
15% per year, triggered by the demands posed by tighter
regulations in Canada and abroad. Closed-loop systems, process
enhancement in water separation systems, and methods of
reducing water usage will be active markets in view of the
emphasis on pollution prevention and virtual elimination of toxins.
The pulp and paper, mining and chemicals industries, municipal
sewage treatment, and Great Lakes site clean-up will be among the
areas of increased activity according to purchasers in this market.
Spending by metal platers, food processors and other industries
discharging into municipal sewers will also be on the increase.

Ontario solid and hazardous waste firms expect a very rapid
growth of 15%-21% per annum, with waste reduction and
recycling consulting, material recovery facilities, site
decommissioning and hazardous waste destruction expected to be
the areas of growth. The forecast growth rate of individual
respondents could also include their expectations for mergers,
gains in market share, or shifts from public to private sector
hauling. Several industries report efforts at process change to
reduce their landfill costs and hazardous waste generation. Some
municipalities expect to expand blue-box programs recycling to
"new materials. The provincial government is placing greater
emphasis on waste reduction efforts.

Changes in the environmental protection industry and market since
our 1988-89 study include: a stronger emphasis on waste
reduction, a delay in some air pollution control spending relative to
what had been previously anticipated, the emergence of new
markets in eastern Europe, and examination of closed-loop

systems for wastewaters. Governments have also responded to
some of the problems reported in our previous study, with
significant new federal and provincial initiatives in support of
technological development in the environmental protection
industry. Worldwide, the industry continues to consolidate
slowly, with mergers, technology licenses and other linkages
between firms growing over time.

Ontario environmental protection firms responding to our survey
forecast an annual average growth rate of 14% over the next five
years. Solid and hazardous waste management firms predict the
fastest growth, focussed on such areas as materials recovery,
hazardous waste destruction and site decommissioning.

Future demand for environmental products and services is
examined in three foreign markets: the U.S., Europe (including
emerging markets in Eastern Europe) and Mexico. The U.S.
environmental market is worth about $130 billion annually.
Eastern Europe and Mexico have major environmental problems,
but future demand will be restrained by the availability of funding.

The Ontario environmental protection industry is quite competitive
in domestic and foreign markets. For projects in Ontario, in-
province suppliers (including branches of foreign-owned firms)
reap most of the services demand (engineering and on-site
construction) and about three-quarters of the purchases of
materials and equipment. A number of key environmental
equipment components have a significant import content, ranging
as high as 100%. Ontario firms are also quite active in export
markets and in other provinces, accounting for in the order of one-
quarter of goods producers' sales. Many environmental services
firms are also very active outside the province, primarily using
branch office personnel.

The environmental protection industry is reasonably well-served
by educational institutions in the province. However, there are
shortages of certain specialists, such as hydrogeologists. Canadian
engineering graduation rates may not keep pace with future
demand, and there is still a need to encourage more women to
enter the environmental professions. In order to meet the human
resource needs of the environmental protection industry, there will
need to be closer linkages between the industry, regulators, and

universities and colleges. In-house training will also remain
important for key scientific and technical skills.

The report reviews a number of suggestions made by industry
participants for future government policies to improve industry
competitiveness. Two major themes in these comments are the
need for consistency and stringency in regulatory policies and their
enforcement, and general concerns regarding the economic and
business climate in Ontario and the rest of Canada.

Ontario Environmental Protection Industry 1990
Summary Statistics

Revenues: $2.5 billion

Expected growth rate: 1 4% per annum for next 5 years
Employment: 30,000

Number of firms: 1 ,500 to 2,000

Exports from Ont.: 25% of products sales*

10-15% of services sales*
Imports into Ont.: less than 10% of Ontario market for services
about 1/4 of Ontario market for goods

Excluding sales by out-of-province branch offices. Includes exports and out-of-province
Canadian sales. We caution that these figures are approximations based on limited data.

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

The market for environmental protection products and services is in
the midst of a considerable period of change, both in Canada and
around the world. In Ontario, major new legislative initiatives will
require billions of dollars in expenditures in such areas as municipal
and industrial wastewater treatment, solid and hazardous waste
management, recycling, remedial action plans on the Great Lakes,
flue-gas desulphurization and the control of ground-level ozone.

While these expenditures will impose costs for industries,
municipalities and utilities, they will also represent enormous business
opportunities for well-placed suppliers of equipment and services. At
the same time, Ontario firms face a tough competitive challenge from
equipment imports in their home market, but are also increasingly
showing interest in opportunities for exports of both products and
services related to environmental protection.

The Province of Ontario has an interest in fostering the further
development of the environmental protection industry, to ensure that it
can effectively meet the needs of Ontario industries and municipalities,
and to enable Ontario residents to benefit from employment
opportunities generated in and outside the province as a result of
environmental protection spending.

1.2 Purpose of this Study

A 1988-89 study (largely conducted in 1988) by Ernst & Young (then
known as Woods Gordon) estimated that environmental protection
represented a $2 billion industry in Ontario. Due to the scale and
diversity of this industry, and the lack of information that existed at
the time, our 1988-89 study was only able to scratch the surface of
some important issues relating to the prospects for environmental
protection firms in the province.

This report, prepared for the Ministry of the Environment with the
cooperation of the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Technology, is
aimed at meeting four, broad objectives:

• to update our 1988-89 Study of the Ontario Environmental
Protection Industry (hereafter referred to as the 1989 study)1. This
included developing a user-friendly, computer database on nearly
550 firms in the Ontario industry, their exports and used
equipment sales, categorized by product/service and the nature of
technologies employed;

• to develop an understanding of the present trends and future
oudook for the Ontario environmental protection industry;

• to investigate the effects of various international trade
developments in North America and Europe on the environmental
protection industry including the Canada-U.S. Free Trade
Agreement and the EC 1992 process. This also includes an
analysis of the current competitive position of the Ontario industry
and the measures that governments can take to improve this
position;

• to develop a model that would allow the Ministry to assess the
effects of various environmental control programs and policies on
the Ontario environmental protection industry and its contribution
to the provincial economy.

1.3 Organization of this Report

Including this Introduction, this report comprises nine Chapters and
and Executive Summary. Chapter 2 reviews the methodology
followed by the study team. Chapter 3 presents a description of the
current structure and scale of the environmental protection industry in
Ontario. Trends in legislation and the market demand for
environmental products in Canada and selected foreign markets are
reviewed in the subsequent two chapters, while Chapter 6
incorporates our findings on government policy impacts on the
environmental protection industry. Our economic impact model
comprises Chapter 7. Details on the environmental protection impact

1 The study was prepared in 1988, and subsquently released by the Ministry in 1989.

model and the derivation of coefficients used in the model (by M.M.
Dillon) are appended.

2. Methodology
2.1 Overview

This study is based upon a multi-faceted workplan that drew upon
previous research, interviews, mail surveys and engineering analysis
to reach the findings reported herein. The following seven study
elements made up the core of our woikplan:

1. A review of relevant Canadian, U.S. and European literature on
trends in environmental protection markets, including drawing
upon the findings of other recent studies undertaken by Ernst &
Young;

2. An extensive mail survey (with telephone follow-up) sent to all
firms identified as participants in the Ontario environmental
protection industry, and the production of a computer database on
the industry;

3. Interviews with a sample of 50 firms in a diverse range of
segments of the environmental protection industry;

4. Interviews with representatives from a sample of manufacturing
industries, utilities, and municipalities that purchase environmental
products and services in Ontario;

5. Research by environmental engineers at M.M. Dillon on the nature
of inputs into a sample of typical environmental projects in water
pollution control, air pollution control, solid waste management
and hazardous waste management;

6. Interviews with educators, over 20 additional industry
participants, and professional associations on the state of human
resource skills in the province, and the requirements of the
environmental protection industry2;

2 Subsequent to the awarding of the contract for this study for the Ministry of the
Environment, Ernst & Young was selected to conduct a major study on human resource
needs for the environmental industries on behalf of Employment and Immigration Canada.
This report incorporates some of the results of this additional reserarch into this issue.

7. Development of an economic impact model, using data from
Statistics Canada and the engineering work conducted by M.M.
Dillon.

In the next sections, we provide further details on the methodology
used in our mail survey of the environmental protection industry, and
the breakdown of our interview respondents. Details on the
methodology for developing the impact model are in Chapter 7 and
related appendixes.

2.2 Mail Survey

Our mail survey used a two-part, detailed questionnaire designed to
expand upon the survey used in our 1989 study. The questionnaire
was developed in July and August of 1991 following extensive
consultation with Ernst & Young and the Ministries of the
Environment and Industry, Trade and Technology.

Part A of the questionnaire was designed to elicit company specific
data in order to build a directory of Ontario environmental protection
firms. Part B was intended to aggregate confidential business data on
a non company-specific basis to allow insights into the size, markets,
employment, sales, technology, and other aspects of the industry.

Candidate mailing lists for this survey were assembled from several
sources, including: a list from the Canadian Environmental Industries
Association (CEIA) that had been assembled by Corporation House;
the Department of Industry, Science and Technology; the Canadian
Environmental Almanac; various MITT lists; and those supplied by
trade associations such as the Association of Consulting Engineers of
Ontario. In addition, national associations in the mining, electrical,
chemical and petroleum industries were contacted to determine which
members would likely be in the environmental protection business,
and.those identified in this manner were added to our mailing list.

A mail-out to 2,133 firms was completed between the months of
September and November of 1991 after a delay due to postal strikes.
The mailing indicated that they survey was being completed on behalf
of the Ontario government by Corporation House with the
participation of the Canadian Environmental Industries Association.
Included in the mailing were Parts A and B of the questionnaire and
two return envelopes for each Part to ensure maximum confidentiality
on sensitive business information.

This mail-out generated 400 completed Part A questionnaires, 327
completed Part B's, and 118 responses from firms which are not in
the environmental protection industry for a total 518 completed
questionnaires. The response rate for Part B was lower than for Part A
because it was considerably longer and more complex, as well as
containing highly sensitive data which many firms were unwilling to
divulge under any circumstances. A further 85 survey forms with
incorrect addresses were returned.

If 1 18 out of 518 completed questionnaires were from firms not in the
environmental business, it is assumed that the same proportion (23%)
of the total 2,133 were also not in the environmental business. This
suggests that the original list of 2,133 should have been reduced by
about one quarter to 1,650. Furthermore, if some of the 85 wrong
addresses are interpreted to mean that those firms are no longer in the
business, then the universe would be further reduced to perhaps
1,600. On this basis, the completed questionnaire response rate for the
initial mailing of Part A was about 25% (400/1600).

A telephone follow-up, reaching all' non-respondents for which
telephone numbers were available from the original source lists, was
undertaken in December, 1991, by the Institute for Social Research at
York University and by the Statistical Consulting Centre at Carleton
University to encourage additional responses. Of the 1,530
questionnaires not returned (for Part A, where the name of the firm
was identified), telephone calls were made to 1,187 or 77% of the
eligible firms across Ontario. In each case, two calls were made and
messages left at each number in the event that the appropriate
individual was unavailable.

A second partial mail-out to 512 firms was undertaken following the
telephone campaign between late December, 1991 and early January,
1992 to reach firms that reported that they no longer had the form
available from the first mailing or had failed to receive it due to an
address change. Finally, faxes or couriered surveys were sent to
about 50 important firms that had not responded by the end of
February, and 12 of the largest of these firms were telephoned in a
final effort to obtain responses to the survey.

The telephone follow-ups, second mail-out and faxed surveys resulted
in a combined total of 549 completed Part A questionnaires, 470
completed Part B's, and 154 responses from firms which are not in
the environmental protection industry, from both waves of the survey.

ÏT

Thus, the response to Part B was roughly 30% of the estimated 1 ,600
environmental protection industry firms on our original list, and the
response rate to part A was roughly 34%.

The responses to the non-confidential part of the survey were used to
develop a computer database of Ontario environmental protection
industry participants. The database provides the government with the
ability to collect, retrieve and assess the data.

2.3 Interview Program

Three sets of formal interviews were conducted for this study, in
addition to discussions on individual issues with environmental
market participants and observers.

The first set of interviews included personal and telephone discussions
with a sample of 50 firms in the Ontario environmental protection
industry. The following was the breakdown of respondents by sector:

Air pollution control equipment 7

Water and wastewater treatment equipment 8

Solid/hazardous waste and recycling equipment 6

Sampling and monitoring equipment 6

Laboratory services 5

Engineering, waste management, other services 18

TOTAL 50

Additional, shorter interviews were conducted with other firms in the
environmental protection industry on human resource issues and
various other issues discussed in this report.

A second interview program involved discussions, largely by
telephone, with a samplcof 40 purchasers of environmental products
and services. The following is a breakdown of these interviews by
sector:

Industrial minerals

Inorganic chemicals

Iron and steel

Metal casting

Metal mining and refining

Metal plating

Municipalities

Organic chemicals

Petroleum refining

Pulp and paper

Utilities (Ont. Hydro)

Other

TOTAL 40

3. Ontario's Environmental Protection Industry:
Structure and Size

3.1 Industry Definition

Firms in the environmental protection industry, unlike those in
traditionally-defined industries, produce a very wide array of products
and services, serve different types of customers, and often are not in
competition with each other. The firms in this sector are linked only
in the sense that their activities are generated by purchasers' efforts to
clean-up or prevent damage to the environment.

We define the environmental protection industry as including suppliers
of specialized products and services used in avoiding or clean-up
damage to land, water and air. The following major segments are
included in this definition: 1) suppliers of equipment, instruments and
supplies for pollution abatement, clean-up and resource preservation
2) construction and assembly of environmental systems on site; 3)
suppliers of environmental engineering and consulting services; 4)
suppliers of laboratory services; 5) suppliers of solid and hazardous
waste management services, including recycling and 6) suppliers of
sampling and monitoring equipment and instrumentation. Potable
water treatment systems are included in our definition. As in our
1988-89 study, various equipment and services relating to indoor air
quality (including asbestos removal), nuclear waste, and noise control
are not included.

The various studies that have examined the environmental protection
industry in Canada, the U.S. or Europe have adopted quite different
definitions of the range of activities that constitute this sector. Our
view is that an appropriate definition is one that includes firms that
would generally view themselves as being environmental businesses,
and one that avoids double counting where possible. For example,
suppliers of intermediate goods such as pipes, structural steel and
concrete used in a sewage treatment plant would not be included in the
environmental protection industry. The value of these firms' output
will likely be captured in the revenues of the final equipment supplier,
and these intermediate suppliers would not generally perceive
themselves as parts of the environmental protection industry. These
firms would find it difficult to segment their output into that destined
for environmental projects and other general industrial uses.

A second distinction that we draw is one between expenditures for
environmental improvements and the output of the environmental
protection industry. Many expenditures that yield environmental
benefits do not generate demand for a well-defined environmental
protection industry. For example, energy conservation may be an
important element of addressing such problems as the greenhouse
effect. However, spending on energy efficient motors or building
insulation for this purpose generates demand for the motor and
building materials sectors rather than the environmental protection
industry. Indeed, some environmental expenditures (e.g. a redesign
of a package that reduces its size) actually reduce the demand for the
environmental clean-up or waste management products and services
supplied by the environmental protection industry.

Many firms appear to have entered the industry since our previous
study in 1988-89, reflecting the changing nature of the industry and
the immature stage of its evolution. Many firms specialize in
providing goods and services to one of three subsectors identified in
the study, namely air pollution prevention, control and monitoring;
water pollution prevention, control and monitoring; and solid waste
reduction, disposal, treatment and site remediation. A significant
number of firms are in two or more of these subsectors.

3.2 Numbers of Firms by Product / Service

Our mail survey3 enabled us to obtain a picture of the range of
environmental products and services. Firms were asked to indicate
their type or types of environmental products or services by checking
off individual items from an attached list.4

Seven product classifications were provided: natural resource
conservation; air pollution control; water pollution control; waste
management; chemicals for pollution control; measuring, monitoring,
instrumentation and controls; and scientific, research and laboratory.
Each of these classifications included an average of nine sub-
categories from which to choose.

3 A review of the methodology and response rate is provided in Chapter 2.

4 The classifications used were developed in consultation with MOE and MUT. making
use of the CIS Services Database Questionnaire and MITTs environmental products
classification.

Many of the mail survey respondents are diversified in their
environmental activities (see Chart 3.1). Approximately one-third of
the surveyed firms, are multi-market firms, operating in more than one
environmental business subsector (e.g. in both air and water pollution
control), and one-quarter of the firms supply both products and
services. Not surprisingly, these combined products-services firms,
are larger than the average, and employ almost half (46%) of the
people in our total survey sample.

The data also indicate that, at least in terms of the numbers of firms (if
not necessarily in terms of market shares), the various segments of the
environmental protection industry in Ontario are still quite fragmented,
with 10 or more suppliers in nearly all of the product or service
categories. This indicates that there is a healthy degree of competition
in the industry at present. As we discuss below, there is evidence
that, internationally, some consolidation has been taking place, with
mergers and entry by large firms leading to greater concentration in
output. Even so, studies of other countries, including the U.S.,
continue to show that there are a large number of environmental
protection firms competing in most market niches.

Table 3.1 indicates the number of responding firms that supply
products in each category. The product area where the most firms in
our industry sample (169) are active is the water pollution control
market. Some 50 to 59 firms supply products to each of the water
purification, sewage treatment, oil/water separation, filters and potable
water treatment markets.

Although waste management is generally thought of as a service
business, solid waste management products also accounted for a large
number of responding firms, and the second most responses overall in
terms of products. Within this category, the greatest number of survey
respondents is in recycling products, where 60 firms are active. We
suspect that firms selecting this category include both suppliers of
equipment for recycling as well as firms involved in the wholesaling
of scrap and waste materials. This product category was followed in
terms of the numbers of firms by waste handling, waste separation,
waste disposal products and control systems.

TABLE 3.1

FIRMS BY PRODUCT CATEGORY

NUMBER OF FIRMS

NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION 51

AGRICULTURE 16

FISHERIES 11

FORESTRY 12

WATER/COASTAL AREAS 18

PARKS/WILDUFE 8

OCEANOGRAPHY/HYDROLOGY 16

METEREOROLOGY/CUMATOLOGY 10

MAPPING/GEO INFOR SYSTEMS 16

OTHER 10

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 126

ABSORPTION/ADSORPTION 30

AIR HANDLING 53 ■

CATALYTIC CONVERTERS 1 1

CHEMICAL RECOVERY 17

DUST COLLECTORS 46

ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS 20

FABRIC FILTERS/MEDIA 37

FILTER ACCESSORIES 28

INCINERATORS 21

SCRUBBERS-DRY 18

SCRUBBERS-WET 33

CONTROL SYSTEMS 60

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 169

AERATION SYSTEMS 29

BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT 30

CENTRIFUGES 13

CHEMICAL FEEDING/MIXING 42

CHEMICAL RECOVERY 28

FILTERS 50

GRAVITY SEDIMENTATION SYS 23

ION EXCHANGE 21

OIL/WATER SEPARATION 55

POTABLE WATER TREATMENT 51

SCREENS/STRAINERS 20

SEWAGE TREATMENT 59

WATER HANDLING 33

WATER PURIFICATION 57

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYS 169

WASTE MANAGEMENT 142

INCINERATION 24

RECYCLING 60

WASTE COLLECTION-UQUID 41

WASTE COLLECTION-SOUD 26

WASTE DISPOSAL 36

WASTE HANDLING 45

WASTE SEPARATION 44

CONTROL SYSTEMS 36

CHEMICALS FOR POLLUTION CONTROL 74

ABSORBENTS/ADSORBENTS 26

AGGLOMERATION/PELLETIZING 10

BACTERIA/ENZYMES 14

CLEANING

CORROSION/SCALE CONTROL
DUST CONTROL
WATER TREATMENT

MEASURING, MONITORING, INSTRUMENTATION

INSTRUMENTS

SAMPLING EQUIPMENT

CONTROL EQUIPMENT

DATA ACQUISITION EQUIPMENT

ELECTRICAL DRIVE & CONTROL EQUIP

SCIENTIFIC, RESEARCH AND LABORATORY

ANALYTICAL INSTURMENTS
BACTERIOLOGICAL SUPPLIES
CALIBRATION EQUIPMENT
LABORATORY CHEMICALS
LABORATORY DATA ACQUISITION SYS
LABORATORY EQUPMENT-OTHER

19
19
15
39

89
41
57
57
25

41
8
18
16
13
27

119

TOTAL NUMBER OF REPORTING FIRMS

335

The third largest number of products firms (126) in our sample are in
the air pollution control market. The greatest number of respondents
are in control systems, air handling equipment and dust collectors (46
to 60 each), followed by fabric filters/media, wet scrubbers and
absorption/adsorption products.

A significant number of firms (1 19) in our sample offer measuring,
monitoring and instrumentation products , mainly in the instrument
market, followed by control equipment and data acquisition
equipment. Relatively fewer companies supply chemicals for
pollution control, scientific research and laboratory products, or
natural resource equipment .

Table 3.2 provides an overview of the services categories. Eight
classifications were offered in the questionnaire: natural resources,
conservation and protection; consulting engineering services;
environmental consulting services; waste management consulting
services; pollution assessment and control; construction; waste
handling operations; and laboratory/field services. Each classification
included an average of six sub-categories from which to choose.

The two most popular service areas are closely inter-related:
environmental consulting and consulting engineering services. There
were large numbers of competitors in each of the major consulting and
engineering service categories. Most of the firms in this sector,
particularly the large engineering firms, offer a wide range of
environmental services (often in addition to other engineering
consulting work).

There were also a large number of waste management consulting
services firms among the survey responses. Two emerging service
areas, recycling and energy-from-waste, showed a surprisingly large
number of responses.

There were 160 respondents that were active in the pollution
assessment and control services market. Water pollution control and
water quality assessment services are the most active markets in terms
of the number of respondents. This sector also includes firms in waste
management pollution control, waste surveys and characterization,
and firms in the air sector, namely air pollution control and air quality
assessments.

TABLE 3.2
FIRMS BY SERVICE CATEGORY
CATEGORY NUMBER OF FIRMS

NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION 100

AGRICULTURE/SOIL/WATER 46

FISHERIES 34

FORESTRY 29

WATER/COASTAL 41

PARKS/WILDUFE 25

METEOROLOGY/CLIMATOLOGY 16

OCEANOGRAPHY/HYDROLOGY 33

MAPPING/GEO INFO SYSTEMS 40

OTHER 21

CONSULTING ENGINEERING 210

PROCESS EVALUATION 122

PROJECT MANAGEMENT 141

SITE RECLAMATION/REMEDIATION 105

ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 86

COMPUTER SYSTEMS 69

FINANCIAL/MARKET ANALYSES 55

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STUDIES 55

TRAINING 73

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 213

ENVIRONMENTAL AUDITS 129

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 131

ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING 79

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 108

RISK MANAGEMENT 71

SPILLS CLEAN-UP 84

OTHER 53

WASTE MANAGEMENT CONSULTING 163

MUNICIPAL SOUD WASTE 82

SEWAGE 69

HAZARDOUS/TOXIC WASTE 82

RADIOACTIVE WASTE 33

ENERGY FROM WASTE 64

RECYCLING 78

OTHER 32

POLLUTION ASSESSMENT & CONTROL 1 60

ATMOSPHERIC MODEUNG 29

AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 68

WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT 81

WASTE SURVEYS/CHARACTERIZATION 67

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 67

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 93

WASTE MANAGEMENT CONTROL 80

CONSTRUCTION 59

WASTE HAN DUNG OPERATIONS 146

WASTE COLLECTION 43

WASTE HANDUNG/SORTING/TRANSPORT 49

COMPOSTING 35

WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS 54

LANDFILLS 44

INCINERATORS 38

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS 52

SEPTIC TANK SERVICES 38

POTABLE WATER 38

RECYCUNG 59

LABORATORY/FIELD SERVICES 138

ANALYTICAL SERVICES 73

SAMPLING, MONITORING, MEASUREMENT 112

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH 86

TOTAL NUMBER OF REPORTING FIRMS 346

Waste handling operations generated responses from 146 firms,
including waste treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, recycling,
waste handling, sorting, transport and collecting. Based on
interviews with industry participants, we suspect that our original
survey list understated the number of small waste haulers in the
province. Despite the presence of a few large firms, the greatest
number of competitors in the environmental protection industry is
likely to be found in the waste hauling industry, although water
pollution control firms were more numerous in our survey sample.

There were 138 firms offering laboratory and field services, primarily
sampling, monitoring and measurement services. These included both
independent labs and branches of engineering firms that offer
laboratory services. A smaller number of firms offer natural resource
and conservation services and construction services , although we
expect that many small construction firms have some activities relating
to environmental projects.

3.3 Markets for Ontario EP Firms

Geographic Markets

Nearly all environmental protection firms with operations in Ontario
sell their products and services in the Ontario market (see Chart 3.2).
Over half of the surveyed firms also sell to the rest of Canada, with
the most common markets being Quebec and the West.

A substantial number of Ontario firms export at least some of their
goods and services. The most commonly tapped export market is the
United States, particularly the Northeast. A relatively small percentage
(generally less than one in ten) of the firms sell beyond North
America. The most popular overseas markets for our survey sample
are in Western Europe.

Respondents were also asked to estimate the percentage of their
Ontario-produced products and services sold to Ontario, rest-of-
Canada, and export markets. Our knowledge of the industry, based
on our previous study in 1988-89 as well as on interviews for this •
study, suggests that the responses received to this question
significantly overstate actual exports from Ontario, with firms

LU
CE

CM
CO

I-

>
CE

-1

3
Q

_i
<

2»

<
DC

Z
O

>
Z

CE Q.

£ O

^ — »

Mi UJ

CO
LE

»- 9

CO LL <

UJ O Z

CE <

apparently including activities of branch offices elsewhere.5 Our
interview responses and other information suggest that about one-
quarter of equipment sales are outside the province, and that 85-90%
of services sales using Ontario-based personnel are within the
province6. Within the equipment category, exports are more important
for suppliers of instruments and specialized environmental equipment
than for larger scale treatment systems that are largely constructed on-
site. In instruments and smaller equipment items, some firms export
the vast majority of their Ontario production.

Sectoral Markets

The largest market for Ontario surveyed firms is the manufacturing
sector, to which nearly two-thirds (62%) of our survey sell (see Chart
3.3). Within the manufacturing sector, the chemical sector is the most
frequently served market, followed by the petroleum refining and iron
and steel industries.

Over half of the respondents sell to each of the local or
federal/provincial governments (5 1 %). Large numbers of firms also
compete for the demand from utilities and resource industries.

Planned Markets

Our survey also asked respondents about their future market plans.7
Many firms now active in Ontario expect to expand into the rest of
Canada or the U.S. Although few firms currently export to Eastern
Europe, almost one-quarter of firms report an interest in expanding
into this region in the future.

5 The responses suggest that only half of the Ontario-produced products and services
remain in the province.

6 Our 1989 study, with a differently worded question, found that exports to other countries
from Ontario were only 13.5% of sales. Statistics Canada data on engineering consulting
firms in Ontario report that exports from Canada account for less than 5% of their
revenues.

7 The intent of the survey question on planned markets was to elicit plans for entry into
markets not currently served by the firm. A small share of respondents appeared to have
interpreted "planned" markets as indicating those that they either planned to enter or that
they planned to continue to sell in.

CO CC
CO* <

l- s

g °=

LU
V)

Z
LU

LU
CL

z
o

>
Z
LU

O
ce
<

I-
z
O

In contrast to new geographic markets where there were wide
variations between current and planned sales, the ratio between current
participants and planned entrants was relatively constant in terms of
sectoral markets served. The institutional sector is one area where the
number of firms interested in entering the market significantly exceeds
the typical ratio.

3.4 Employment

The 470 firms that responded to a question on Ontario employment
reported a total of 1 1 ,730 employees in their environmental protection
operations. As Chart 3.4 indicates, the water subsector employed the
largest proportion of Ontarians in our sample, followed by waste
management. As in the case of the number of firms, we suspect that
the relative share in waste management is somewhat understated.

Growth in employment in our sample firms in the environmental
protection industry in the latter 1980s was brisk (see Chart 3.5). The
majority of firms (62%) and most of the jobs (85%) are in firms that
have been in business since 1986 or earlier. Their employment
increased by an average of 8% annually over 1986-90. Firms that
started up after 1986 have generated much higher employment growth
rates, although the number of surveyed firms falling into this category
is statistically too small to provide a reliable sample.

By far the fastest growth in employment in our sample was registered
in the waste management subsector (25% per annum) followed by
multi-sector firms (9%), water (6%) and virtually no increases in air
or "other". We believe that some of the growth in the waste
management field is attributable to the consolidation of sales through
acquisitions by respondents rather than to market demand growth,
since the reported growth appears to be far in excess with the likely
growth in waste generation.8 Some firms may also have included
growth in sales by operations acquired abroad.

8 While waste management respondents may have gained market share through merger or
growth, we are not in position to assess the extent to which this has resulted in an overall
consolidation in the industry.

CHART 3.4
EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR

ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRY, SURVEY RESPONDENTS

10.2%

18.3%

41 .3%

30.2%

D
1

WATER

WASTE

AIR

OTHER

'Note: Excludes firms that failed to specify industry segment.

1—

Q.
CO

>■

-1

>
CE

>-"

IO Z

-J

Z
Z

çç

>
z

>
<

»-
z

CO
LU

— F-

h LU

2 <

*ï

£•

3
O

o
ce

û.

X
LU

The larger firms (i.e., those with annual worldwide sales over $2
million) provided 60% of the employment in our sample of the
environmental protection industry even though they only represented
25% of the survey. Moreover, their employment grew at twice the rate
reported by small and medium sized firms (with less than $2 million in
sales).

3.5 Sales Revenues

The 450 firms that provided responses to the sales question in our
survey reported combined 1990 revenues of $1,068 million from
Ontario environmental operations (see Table 3.3). As shown in Chart
3.6, the largest grouping of companies were those in the waste
management subsector at $502 million (47%), followed by water at
$302 million (28%).

Three-quarters of the sales revenues in our survey sample are from
services and one-quarter are from the sale of products, a split nearly
identical to that estimated in our 1988-89 study for 1987. Within the
products segment, water-related products is the largest segment in our
sample, followed by air pollution products. Within the services
segment, however, waste management is by far the largest area of
activity in our sample.

Table 3.3

1990 Sales by Environmental Subsector: Survey Results

(thousands of dollars)

Product Value

Air 90,894

Water 113,708

Waste 55,635

Other 15,770

Unspecified 6,929

Total Products 282,936

Service Value

Air 68,565

Water 188,580

Waste 446,152

Other 66,923

Unspecified 14,934

Total Services 785,153

Total $1,068,089

The sales growth rates for responding firms that have been in business
since 1986 or before grew at a compound average rate of 32% per
year over 1986-1990 (see Chart 3.7).9 We strongly suspect that this
exceeds the growth in total industry sales, perhaps due to the impacts
of mergers and acquisitions on reported sales, or to some
understatement in estimates of 1 986 sales that were not made by the
respondent through examination of actual company data. For firms
starting up after 1986, the annual growth rates are significantly higher,
although these results should again be used with considerable caution
because of the statistically small sample. Services firms tended to
outpace others in annual sales growth.

Within the environmental subsectors, the highest annual sales growth
rates were reported by firms in the waste management business,
followed closely by multi-sector firms. This may again reflect the
impact of mergers, the growth in such areas as recycling and
hazardous waste management, and perhaps the continuation of the
trend to shift waste haulage from the public to the private sector.

9 All growth rates in this section are based on calculating a compound annual growth rate
for the sum of all firms' sales over the period. Thus, the growth of larger firms would be
given more weight in this sample growth rate.

3
CO

-J

. <

!?z

i- —

x >

Z
_l

<
1-
z

The environmental protection industry has a very large number of
small firms, and a much smaller number of major players that hold a
significant share of the market (see Table 3.4). Only 25% of the firms
in our sample reported annual worldwide sales of $2 million or more,
but they accounted for 87% of total sales. In contrast, 29% of the
firms reported annual sales of between $500,000 - $2 million, but
they accounted for 10% of sales. Some 46% of firms reported annual
sales of less than $500,000, but they accounted for only 3% of total
reported sales. These firms likely include larger firms for whom
environmental sales represent a modest portion of their total output, as
well as a number of small consulting and service operations. The large
firms also reported faster growth rates than the smaller firms in our
sample.

Table 3.4
Distribution of Environment Protection Industry
(Mail Survey Respondents)

Firms by Size

1990 Sales
(Worldwide)

of Firms

% of Sales
from Ont.

$2 million or more
$500,000 to $2 million
Less than $500,000

25%
29%
46%

87%
10%

The surveyed firms forecast an annual average growth rate of 14%
over the next five years, which is considerably more modest than over
the past five years, perhaps reflecting an expected continuation of the
recent economic slowdown. Products manufacturers forecast an
annual average 21% growth rate compared to 12% for services firms.
We discuss responses to growth rates by sector (air, water, etc.) in
Chapter 4.

Approximately 1% of respondents stated that they planned to leave the
environmental business. Major reasons cited for leaving included:
"Technology to produce our product not available in Canada", and
high levels of frustration with current government policies. However,
a further 10% of firms suggested that their commitment to Ontario was
either under active reconsideration or wavering. A variety of sharp
criticisms of current government policies toward business were made,

along with expressions of concern about high costs of doing business
in Ontario compared to the United States.

3.6 Technology

The majority of surveyed firms (60%) use "standard" technologies or
equipment, which were defined in the questionnaire as items such as
pipes and valves and commodity chemicals. This compares to those
which use "advanced" technologies (40%) geared specifically to
environmental prevention, treatment, clean-up or remediation. Among
the industry's subsectors, 71% of air and waste management firms
use standard technologies compared to 50 - 60% in other subsectors.
Among the technological developments in use by respondents are: the
development of more efficient backyard composters; a microwave
process for disposing of used tires; increased use of microprocessors
in environmental monitoring; ultraviolet disinfection; computer
modelling; chemiluminescence-based air monitors; and tunable diode
laser spectroscopy.

The technologies used by the majority of firms (58%) are applied to
remedial problems compared to those geared toward preventing
problems (42%). The most pronounced user of remedial technologies
(83%) is the solid waste subsector.

A small proportion of firms, approximately 15%, sell or lease used
environmental equipment, but our interviews with suppliers suggest
that such sales likely account for a small share of these firms' total
revenues. Indeed, purchasers interviewed for this study reported that
used equipment accounted for none or a very small percentage of their
environmental assets.

With respect to technology development, firms invested an average of
1 1-12% of their sales in R&D. This ranged from a low of 8% for
multi-sector firms and 9.5% for air pollution firms to a high of almost
21 % for waste management firms. These high, unweighted averages
are heavily influenced by the presence of small firms that are still in
the product development stage. In some cases such firms are
investing more than 100% of their sales revenues in R&D. Research
activity appears to be relatively stable as a share of revenue; three-
quarters of the surveyed firms reported no change in the percentage of
sales allocated to R&D over the last five years.

3.7 Input Costs

Respondents reported that input cost increases roughly matched
inflation over the past few years, rising at an annual rate of 5-6%. For
over half (55%) of the surveyed firms, the spread between input
costs, namely materials, labour and other components, and final sales
prices has tended to narrow slightly, suggesting increasing
competition in the environmental market. For 37% of the firms, the
gap has remained constant whereas it has widened for only 8% of the
surveyed firms. This trend is similar across all industry subsectors
except for the water subsector where fewer (48%) of the firms
experienced a closing of the gap between costs and revenues.

3.8 Estimating the Size of the EP Industry

Our survey responses suggest that the environmental protection
industry is a major contributor to the provincial economy, and that
industry revenues run in the billions of dollars annually. Ernst &
Young (1989), based on a less extensive sample of the industry and
other available studies, estimated that the environmental protection
industry in the province had revenues of $1.5 to $2.5 billion as of
1987. In this section, we use the results of our new survey, the
reported gTowth rates of firms in this industry, and other studies of the
market for environmental products and services, to update and refine
our estimate of the size of the Ontario environmental sector.

As in our 1989 study, we caution that our estimates must be regarded
as order-of-magnitude measures, as was clear from the wide range we
quoted in the 1989 study. Even in the U.S., where extensive research
has been conducted on the environmental protection industry,
estimates of its size vary widely. The Environmental Business
Journal (1991) produced a widely-cited estimate of $132 billion
(U.S.) for the American environmental protection industry; the
consulting firm Farkas and Berkowitz put EP industry revenues at
only $60 billion (U.S.)10.

There are several reasons for the high degree of uncertainty in such
estimates:

10 As cited in Environmental Business Journal (1991)

" 37

• the absence of census data from official statistical agencies, due to
the fact that environmental services and products are aggregated
within several industry categories. Statistics Canada has made
some efforts in recent years to remedy this difficulty, and some
key results are expected to be released only later this spring;11

• the lack of a clear boundary line between the environmental
protection industry and other sectors. Previous studies for Canada
and the U.S. have differed on whether such activities as
silviculture, asbestos removal, radioactive waste handling, indoor
air quality, residential water filtering systems, water mains, and
potable water treatment are included or excluded in the
"environmental protection industry." There are also increasing
difficulties in dealing with process change expenditures that are
only partially for environmental purposes;

• the potential for double-counting revenues (e.g. equipment
components being counted separately and as part of an overall
system).

Because of these problems, we caution that differences between our
estimates in this report for 1990 environmental protection industry
activity and our previous estimates for 1987 cannot be strictly
interpreted as measuring EP industry growth over the intervening
period. Rather, these differences are due to both growth and
refinements in our estimation procedure as new information has come
to light.

In the following sections, we estimate activity in the Ontario
environmental protection industry in the following segments:

• construction of environmental systems, undertaken by engineering
construction firms as well as by equipment suppliers that assemble
systems on site;

• materials, equipment, instruments and supplies;

1 1 These pertain to a survey of the waste management industry, which we understand may
be released shortly, and a survey of municipal waste management practices, currently in
the field. A recent analysis of pollution abatement and control costs (Statistics Canada
1992) does provide some valuable new insights into the Canadian market.

• environmental engineering and other environmental consulting
services;

• laboratory and analytical services; and

• solid and hazardous waste management services, including
recycling.

The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 3.5. In total, we
estimate that the Ontario environmental protection industry had
revenues of roughly $2.5 billion in 1990. Based on the employment
to sales ratios reported by survey respondents, and the analysis of
employment to sales incorporated in our 1989 study, we estimate
industry employment at about 30,000 Ontarians.

Table 3.5

Estimated 1990 Revenues of the Ontario

Environmental Protection Industry

Commodity 1990 Revenue

Construction of env. systems $250 to 300 million

Materials, equipment, instr., supplies $550-$600 million

Engineering and other consulting $175-$200 million

Laboratory and analytical services $50-$75 million

Solid, hazardous waste management

(incl. recycling) $ 1 ,300 to $ 1 ,500 million

TOTAL $2,325 to $2,675 million

Note: Excludes services provided directly by governments. Does not
include the finished values of products made from recycled materials.

Construction of Environmental Systems

Newly-developed surveys by Statistics Canada data provide fresh
insights into Ontario spending on environmental goods and services.

We estimate that environmental construction is a $250-$300
million industry in Ontario, based on the following data.

Table 3.6 shows selected results from a survey of 1989 pollution
abatement and control expenditures. These data exclude expenditures
by municipal governments. The data also exclude expenditures on
process changes that have environmental benefits.

Table 3.6
Ontario Expenditures on Pollution Abatement and Control 1989

($ Millions)

Reported Adjusted for

Expenditures Non-response and

Non-sampled Firms

Capital Expenditures by Type of Spending

Construction 211.2 N.A.

Machinery and Equipment 117.0 N.A.

TOTAL CAPITAL EXP. 328.2 434.7

Capital Expenditures by Type of Pollutant

Air pollutants 107.0 N.A.

Water pollutants 173.0 N.A.

Contained liquids 28.6 N.A.

Solid Wastes 19.7 N.A.

TOTAL CAPITAL EXP. 328.2 434.7

Operating Expenditures

Materials & Supplies* 96.7 130**

Purchased Services 99.5 N.A.

TOTAL EXTERNAL OPERATING (excl. fuel, electricity)

196.2 N.A.

TOTAL SPENDING ON GOODS AND SERVICES

524.4 N.A.

Source: Statistics Canada (1992)
♦Excludes fuel and electricity
** Estimated by Emst & Young

Municipal capital spending for the environment is captured in the
results of another Statistics Canada survey. As shown in Table 3.7,

1990 capital expenditures on such projects totalled close to $400
million in Ontario.

Value of Selected

Table 3.7
Construction

($ Millions)

in Ontario

1989-91

1989

1990

1991

Sewage systems, disposal
plants, and connections

225.7

274.1

339.1

Water pumping stations and
| filtration plants

93.4

115.6

144.6

9 Incinerators

TOTAL

319.1

389.7

483.7

1 Source: Statistics Canada (64-201)

Unfortunately, results from a survey of municipalities on solid waste
issues are not yet available. Capital expenditures on solid waste
management by municipalities are in the order of $50 million,
according to interview respondents.

We therefore estimate that total 1990 capital expenditures on
environmental protection in Ontario were in the order of $850 million,
about equally split between municipalities and other purchasers.

Based on data provided by M.M. Dillon, we estimate that about $400
million of this $850 million was for construction and engineering and
$450 million was for machinery, equipment and other materials.12

Of the roughly $400 million in construction and engineering, we judge
that about $125 million was for engineering design and project
management services, based on the typical fee to total project cost ratio
reported by Dillon. Therefore the construction activity associated with
environmental projects was about $275 million, or in the range of

12 Our 1989 study attributed a larger fraction to construction than we currently believe is
warranted, based on new information from M.M. Dillon and a re-analysis of Statistics
Canada construction data.

$250-$300 million. Exports and imports of such construction
services are likely to be quite small, so this is also a reasonable
estimate for the size of the environmental construction industry in the
province. Note that these construction services are in part supplied by
major environmental equipment and systems manufacturers, as well as
by engineering construction contractors.

Materials, Equipment, Instruments and Supplies

Materials, equipment and supplies are used in both capital projects and
in operating environmental protection systems. We estimate that
Ontario environmental protection industry sales of such products total
$550-$600 million, based on the following data.

As noted above, for capital projects, about $450 million in
expenditures are for environmental products (as opposed to
construction and engineering). Our interviews and Dillon's estimates
suggest that Ontario firms on average supply about 3/4 of the materials
and equipment in environmental projects. This would suggest that
the Ontario environmental protection industry supplies about $300 to
$350 million in environmental equipment and related materials for
Ontario capital projects.

Materials and supplies are also used for operating environmental
systems. Unfortunately, very scanty data are available on this category
of spending. Using Statistics Canada data, we estimate that such
expenditures are about $130 million after allowing for non-responses
and non-surveyed firms. This estimate excludes spending by
municipalities, which we judge adds about $50 million in spending on
materials and supplies for municipal sewage treatment plants.13 No
estimates are available for materials and supplies purchased for
municipal solid waste and potable water treatment. Thus, in total,
goods producers supply about $180 million for the operations of
environmental systems.14 Assuming the same 75% share as allocated
for capital costs, this would suggest a further Ontario output of $135
million in goods for operating environmental facilities in the province.

13 A total of roughly $100 million in goods and services is purchased for operating
municipal sewage treatment facilities, based on a $20 million estimate provided in Ernst
& Young (1990b) for Metropolitan Toronto. We allocate half of this total to materials
and supplies.

14 Excluding fuel and electricity.

Adding the goods production for capital projects and operations, the
total Ontario production of equipment and materials for sales in the
province is about $435-485 million.

Exports of environmental products to other provinces and abroad,
conservatively estimated at 20-25% of goods producer's sales based
on our interviews and 1989 study, would add at least a further $115
million, bringing our total estimate for Ontario environmental
machinery, equipment, instrument and supplies to $550 to $600
million.

Engineering and scientific consulting services

Engineering and scientific consulting services are supplied in
conjunction with capital projects, environmental impact assessments
and other services. We estimate the annual sales of Ontario firms
(excluding work performed by non-Ontario residents at branch
offices) at $175-$200 million.

Statistics Canada has attempted to measure the environmental
component of some service sector activities. 1988 revenues for
Ontario consulting engineers were estimated at over $1 .6 billion.15 Of
this total, 5.2% or $85.5 million, was for "environmental systems".
A further 18.3%, or $300 million, was for "municipal systems",
which includes both water and wastewater projects as well as
municipal roads. We estimate that perhaps $40 million of this total
was for water and sewage treatment plants based on the typical ratio of
fees to project cost. This would suggest environmental engineering
revenues of about $125 million in 1988, including exports. Using the
average annual growth rate reported for environmental services in our
mail survey (10% per annum), the 1990 revenues of this sector would
be in the order of $150 million.16

As a check on this estimate, we noted in our estimates for construction
that engineering and design fees associated with Ontario
environmental capital projects would be in the order of $125 million.

15 In Statistics Canada publication no. 63-234.

16 Note that this estimate is significantly lower on a per capita basis than the 12.2 billion
allocated by EBJ to U.S. "environmental engineering / consulting" firms. The U.S.
estimate includes a significant component of what we have allocated to construction (e.g.
in the nearly $1 billion attributed to the Bechtel Group, for example).

Ontario engineers would reap nearly all of this revenue, based on our
interview responses. Export revenue, plus fees earned for services
unrelated to capital projects, could account for the remaining $25
million in the estimate above. Thus, $150 million appears to be a
reasonable estimate for the environmental revenues of Ontario
consulting engineers.

A wide range of other types of firms are engaged in providing
scientific consulting services for environmental purposes, including
environmental audits, meteorological services, hydrogeological
services and so on. Statistics Canada reports that 1988 revenues of
the "scientific and technical services industry" in Ontario for
environmental services were only $36 million. This was intended to
include oceanography, meteorology, climatology, pollution and other
research, and other environmental services, including laboratory
services (which we estimate elsewhere at over $50 million). Only 23
firms were reported for Canada in this service category by Statistics
Canada. We know this figure to significantly underestimate the size of
this sector (which should include roughly 100 environmental labs
alone), perhaps due to the exclusion of many small firms from the
sample. In addition, we expect that environmental laboratories may be
included in the $889.9 million reported for firms specializing in
"laboratory testing and research services".

We conservatively estimate this subsector at $25-$50 million in 1990,
including exports, based on interviews and some data on selected
services (such as groundwater consulting), which, when added to our
engineering estimate, accounts for our estimate of engineering and
consulting services.

Laboratory and analytical services

Environmental labs have grown considerably in the last few years,
although Ontario demand may have reached a peak in 1 990 due to the
MISA monitoring and testing program. We estimate that the Ontario
environmental laboratory industry had 1990 revenues of roughly
$50-$75 million. This estimate is based on interviews, estimates
of the U.S. analytical sales per capita, and Statistics Canada data. We
expect that export activity in this sector (in the sense of testing by
Ontario labs of samples drawn elsewhere) would be very small.

Solid and hazardous waste management

The waste management sector, including recycling, includes several
very large firms and many small waste haulers.

As noted above, the first Statistics Canada survey of this sector is still
in process. Statistics Canada data suggest that total expenditures on
purchased services for solid and contained liquid wastes was only
$30-40 million in Ontario in 1989, an estimate that appears to be
implausibly low, and which excludes the major segment associated
with municipal spending on private sector solid waste services.

Based on industry interviews, we estimate that solid and hazardous
waste management firms earn revenues of about $1.1 billion in
Ontario, of which about 10% is for hazardous waste. A considerable
fraction of the recycling industry is included in this figure, since
hauling and sorting of materials for recycling and some materials
recovery facilities are owned by waste management companies.

Little data is available on specialized materials recovery firms not
linked to general waste management companies. In total, including
their activities, we estimate the solid and hazardous waste management
industry at about $1.3 to $1.5 billion. On a per capita basis, this
is roughly half the size of the U.S. solid and hazardous waste and
materials recovery sector as estimated by the Environmental Business
Journal (1991), reflecting the greater role played by municipal
governments in supplying municipal waste management services and
the smaller market for hazardous waste treatment.

CH2M Hill (1991) data tend to provide some support for our estimate,
at least in terms of its order of magnitude. They reported sales
(presumably in 1989, although this is not clear in the report) of close
to $700 million in Ontario recycling and waste hauling. Only very
partial coverage of the sector was available in the data sources used,
and materials recycling facilities and hazardous waste management
revenues are not included.

While firms in the solid and hazardous waste field reported "export"
activity in other jurisdictions in our mail survey, our interviews
suggest that the vast majority of this activity is conducted by branch
offices using resident employees in the applicable jurisdiction. We
have therefore not included this activity as part of the Ontario industry.

Comparison of Estimates with Survey Results and U.S. Data

As a check on the reasonableness of our estimate of $2.5 billion in
sales, we compare this figure with the results of our mail survey and
with U.S. industry estimates.

Our survey results reported total revenues of more than $1 billion for
1990, with a roughly 25% response rate to the sales question. To
understand the relationship between this sample result and the total
industry size, we undertook a careful examination of the list of
respondents and non-respondents.

We believe that the reported revenues are likely to be well in excess of
1/4 of the environmental sales of all firms on the original survey list,
since it appears that about one-third of what we know to be large firms
have responded. We also expect that the non-response rate from firms
that are not in the environmental business was somewhat higher than
the non-response rate for true environmental firms. On the other
hand, the small firm response rate may be less than one in four.
Assuming our response rate was 1/3 of the large firms (those with
more than $2 million in sales) and 1/6 of smaller firms, we arrive at an
estimate for sales of all firms on our original survey list of roughly
$2.5 billion, with a total employment of 29,000.

This may overstate actual sales to the extent that respondents included
some revenues in foreign and out-of-province markets not actually
earned from Ontario operations. We note, however, that our original
survey list cannot be assumed to be the universe of all environmental
firms in the province. First, we likely excluded a large number of
small waste management, recycling and consulting firms that were not
included on the lists used to assemble our sample frame. Second, the
rapid pace of entry of new equipment and services firms makes it
unlikely that we captured all such firms on our list. Third, some firms
present in 1990 have since ceased operation, and therefore could not
be surveyed.

The best available U.S. estimates, scaled down for relative population
size and for differences in environmental markets, provide an upper
bound on activity in Ontario. Environmental Business Journal (1991)
put the U.S. industry revenues at $132 billion (US) for 1990 (or $154
billion in Canadian dollars at 1 990 exchange rates), as shown in Table
5.2, in Chapter 5. This appears to be reasonably consistent with an

EPA estimate of $115 billion (US) for American expenditures on
protecting and restoring air, water and land.

There are three elements of the industry definition used by EBJ that
we exclude from our definition for the Ontario industry. Our definition
excludes asbestos removal and what EBJ terms "environmental energy
sources" (i.e. geothermal, biomass, wind solar, cogeneration and
small scale hydroelectric). Private sector U.S. water utilities are
included in the EBJ study, but would not be a factor in Ontario.
Deducting the revenues for these sectors yields an estimate for the
U.S. of $133.6 billion in Canadian dollars. If the Ontario industry
was similarly sized on a per capita basis, it would have revenues of
about $5 billion.

This, however, is likely to be an upper bound on the size of the
Ontario industry, and perhaps a considerable overestimate of its size in
1990. First, as we discuss in Chapter 6, Ontario imports a significant
share (roughly 1/4 of in-province demand) of pollution control
equipment and instruments, and the U.S. is probably a net exporter of
such items. Second, the U.S. market for hazardous waste
management, estimated at $13.3 billion, is likely to be significantly
larger on a per capita basis than the comparable market in Canada, due
to the large expenditures by the Superfund, the Defence Department,
and other government agencies on site remediation. Third, some of
EBJ' s other categories include sales of products that we would not
view as part of the environmental protection industry, such as gas
masks and protective suits. Fourth, the U.S. data appear to include
the worldwide activities of major environmental engineering
construction firms, including the value of work performed by non-
U.S. residents, while our estimates attempt to exclude such activities.
Finally, our understanding is that private sector firms play a larger role
in municipal solid waste management in the U.S. than would be the
case in Ontario.

Comparison with 1987 Estimates

Our 1988-89 study used the much more limited data available at that
time, and a smaller sample mail survey, to arrive at an estimate for the
1987 revenues of the Ontario environmental protection industry. At
that time, we reached an order-of-magnitude estimate for industry
revenues of $1.5-$2.5 billion.

We caution that one cannot simply compare the midpoint of our
previous estimate for 1987 (i.e. $2 billion) with the new estimate for
1990 ($2.5 billion) to assess the growth in the industry over the 3 year
period. The changes in our estimate reflect the combination of growth
in the industry as well as refinements in our estimating procedure.
Much more extensive data are currently available on business
environmental spending than was previously the case, owing to very
useful initial efforts by Statistics Canada to track environmental
activity. In other areas, such as in the breakdown of overall project
data into engineering, construction and materials and the import
content in materials, we have benefitted from the new estimates on
sample projects developed for this study by M.M Dillon. Finally, in
both studies, there is still a considerable degree of uncertainty on the
final estimates, particularly in the area of waste management and
recycling which Statistics Canada is now in the process of
investigating.

There are a number of indications that this sector has been growing
over the period under study, if not quite at the growth rates reported
in the sales of our survey respondents over 1986-90. First, Ontario
construction expenditures on environmental municipal works (sewage
systems, water filtration, disposal plants, etc.) grew from $195.5
million in 1987 to $389.6 million in 1990, or 25.8% per annum
(including inflation). Second, there was a major upturn in laboratory
and analysis work associated with the monitoring phase of the MISA
program, and a significant growth in expenditures under the
Countdown Acid Rain program took place over this period. Third,
the Ontario economy grew at an average annual rate of 2.6% in real
terms in the three year period 1987-90, and we would expect that
industrial waste generation would have roughly tracked this growth.

Comparison with Other Industries

As shown in Table 3.8, the Ontario environmental protection industry
is of similar scale to a number of other key industries in terms of its
contribution to total employment in the province.

Table 3.8
Ontario Employment by Industry 1990

Industry

1990

Average Employment

Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories

49,900

Motor Vehicle Assembly

34,500

Environmental Protection

30,000

Machinery

26,000

Chemicals

24,000

Iron and Steel

20,000

Pulp and Paper

14,400

Source: Statistics Canada, Employment, Earnings and Hours, Ernst & Young

4. Trends in Ontario and Canadian Demand for
Environmental Protection

4.1 Highlights

In this Chapter we explore the outlook for environmental protection
expenditures in Ontario and the rest of Canada, and its implications for
the Ontario EP industry.

The outlook is presented in considerable detail, by market segment
(air water, solid waste), industry segment (products, services) and by
consuming industry. Most readers will find only some of what
follows to be relevant to their activities. For the general reader, we
therefore begin with a brief summary of the most important trends
documented in this Chapter.

Much of the future shape of the Ontario environmental protection
industry will be determined by trends in federal and provincial
regulations. The following are some of the highlights of these trends:

1. Increasing tightening of environmental standards.
Among the areas being addressed in the near term are
water pollution control, control of emissions
contributing to ground-level ozone, solid waste
reduction, and hazardous waste clean-up.

2. An emphasis on pollution prevention through process
change rather than end-of-pipe controls.

3. Increased support for environmental technology
development.

The environmental protection industry is expected to grow most
rapidly where these regulations and other forces are having their
greatest impact on industry and households.

Air pollution control firms expect annual growth of 9-13% over the
next five years, although a major surge in spending in the market may
be a few years off. Steel mills, metal platers, and chemical firms will
be involved in process change measures to control emissions. Air
pollution control problems targetted for abatement measures include
Ontario Hydro sulphur dioxide control, and adoption of low NOx

burners, solvent substitution and other measures to control ground
level ozone.

Water pollution control firms expect a more rapid growth of 10-15%
per year, triggered by the demands posed by tighter regulations in
Canada and abroad. Closed-loop systems, process enhancement in
water separation systems, and methods of reducing water usage will
be active markets in view of the emphasis on pollution prevention and
virtual elimination of toxins. The pulp and paper, mining and
chemicals industries, municipal sewage treatment, and Great Lakes
site clean-up will be among the areas of increased activity according to
purchasers in this market. Spending by metal platers, food
processors and other industries discharging into municipal sewers will
also be on the increase.

Ontario solid and hazardous waste firms expect a very rapid growth of
15%-21% per annum, with waste reduction and recycling consulting,
material recovery facilities, site decommissioning and hazardous waste
destruction expected to be the areas of growth. The forecast growth
rate of individual respondents could also include their expectations for
mergers, gains in market share, or shifts from public to private sector
hauling. Several industries report efforts at process change to reduce
their landfill costs and hazardous waste generation. Some
municipalities expect to expand blue-box programs recycling to new
materials. The provincial government is placing greater emphasis on
waste reduction efforts.

Monitoring and analysis spending is likely to decline as the peak of the
MISA monitoring efforts is passed. Growing environmental service
opportunities include environmental assessments, laboratory and
analysis services relating to site decommissioning, and industrial
water treatment engineering. Trends in instrument markets include
growth in ground water monitoring, real-time monitoring, and remote
sensing imaging.

4.2 Legislative Trends in Ontario and the Rest of
Canada

4.2.1 Introduction

Several factors drive the demand for environmental products and
services in Canada and internationally:

• economic growth, which creates the need for
environmental products and services at new industrial
facilities to ensure that these meet existing and proposed
standards;

• population growth, which generates a one-time demand
for the necessary environmental infrastructure (water
and wastewater treatment and solid waste management
facilities) as well as the ongoing services associated with
household water and waste management;

• government legislation and regulations, enforced
through standards or discharge taxes and fees, that have
been growing more stringent over time;

• the increasing demand by consumers for
environmentally-friendly "green" products, which in
turn leads to demands placed by consumer product
makers and distributors on their suppliers; and

• increased corporate environmental consciousness,
linked to the growing public relations value of a strong
record on environmental matters.

Most of the projections for rapid demand growth in the environmental
protection industry are attributable to the need for additional pollution
abatement expenditures by existing industrial and municipal facilities.
These needs will be largely determined by the development and
enforcement of tougher legislation and standards by federal, provincial
and municipal governments. However, it is clear that the these
legislative trends are influenced in turn by the environmental
consciousness of both the general public and the business community.

4.2.2 Trends in Federal and Federal-Provincial

Regulations and Other Policies

Major elements of existing federal environmental legislation include
the following Acts17:

17 Drawn from Lawyers Weekly (1991).

• the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which
regulates the manufacture and use of a range of toxic
substances. These include, among others, vinyl
chloride, chlorinated dioxins and furans, ozone
depleting substances, PCB waste storage, lead
emissions from secondary lead smelters and chlor-alkali
mercury emissions.

• the Environmental Assessment and Review Process
order, which sets the criteria for evaluating certain
private and public sector projects for their environmental
impact, the result of which is a recommendation to
Cabinet on whether the project should proceed. A
recent Supreme Court of Canada18 ruling established
that EARP applies to projects that either require a federal
permit (e.g. under the Navigable Waters Protection
Act), or are located on federal land, or that receive
federal funding or that are undertaken by the federal
government.

• the Fisheries Act provisions relating to the protection of
fish habitats;

• regulations relating to transportation in the
Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act and the
Canadian Shipping Act.

A number of national initiatives are expected to influence the demand
for the output of the Ontario environmental protection industry in
Ontario and other provinces. The following is a description of
selected federal or federal-provincial programs enacted or under
discussion. This is not intended to be an exhaustive listing of current
environmental regulations in Canada. Rather, our focus is on areas of
prominent change over the last two or three years, since it is changes
in regulation that promote the greatest volume of expenditures.

The Green Plan

The federal government's Green Plan, released in December 1990,
presents a phased action plan to address a wide range of

18 In Friends of the Oldman v. Canada. See Ross (1992) for a review of this decision.

environmental concerns, supported by $3 billion in federal funding.
The following are the highlights of the planned initiatives:

• a clean-up of coastal and inland waterways, an Ocean
Dumping Action Plan, and a Great Lakes Pollution
Prevention Centre;

• a National Regulatory Action Plan aimed at virtual
elimination of toxics (including new CEP A regulations
for paper mills)

• progress on NOx-VOCs plans with the provinces;
tighter emission controls on vehicles and transportation
fuels, new air quality modelling, development of steps
to meet air quality management obligations with the
U.S. and other international agreements, and
assessment of emissions trading options;

• a National Waste Reduction Plan that includes
regulations on packaging (should the voluntary targets
under the National Packaging Protocol be missed),
standards and support for 3R activity, expanding the
National Waste Exchange program, a new Office of
Waste Management, and reductions in waste generation
by the federal government.

• programs to clean up hazardous waste sites, including
federal "orphan sites," and Great Lakes sediments,
destruction of PCB wastes, establishment of mobile
hazardous waste incinerators, regulations on
transboundary waste shipments, and cooperation with
the provinces on developing regulations for hazardous
waste management.

• efforts at enhancing global environmental security,
including extension of the Acid Rain Control Program to
the year 2000, the phase-out of CFCs and other selected
ozone depleting chemicals in advance of international
agreements, and federal-provincial cooperation in
promoting control of greenhouse gas emissions.

• cooperation with other countries and international
organizations to foster demonstrations projects and

technology transfer, as well as increased funding for
environment research and technology development in
Canada, including a $100 million Technologies for
Solutions initiative announced in October 1991 and a
$20 million Environmental Innovations Fund;

• measures directed at sustaining renewable resources,
environmental management in government operations,
emergency preparedness, parks and wildlife protection,
and Arctic clean-up and protection.

Control of Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents

The federal government is moving to control certain organochlorine
effluents from Canadian pulp and paper mills. The federal
government recently confirmed that, at least in the near term,
standards requiring the virtual elimination of effluents would apply
only on the most toxic of these effluents - dioxins and furans -
although they could be extended as other problems were identified.
The federal government has also proposed changes to the Fisheries
Act which would set new limits on effluent discharges and make all
mills subject to regulations governing the discharge of suspended
solids, oxygen-depleting substances, and acutely lethal effluents.

Management Plan for NOx and VOCs

The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment is in the
process of developing a national Management Plan to address
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) aimed at controlling ground level ozone problems. Canada is
also a signatory to international agreements calling for the control of
these emissions.

A three phase approach was outlined in CCME (1990) The plan, to be
implemented over 1990-2005, will place particular emphasis on
reducing emissions in three areas with high ozone concentrations: the
Lower Fraser Valley in B.C., the Windsor-Quebec corridor, and the
Southern Atlantic Region near Saint John.

At present, most of the specific regulatory steps to be taken are still
under study. A Multi-stakeholder NOx/VOCs Science Program
Management Group is directing a series of monitoring and modelling
studies that will be used to set final emissions targets.

Most of the control expenditures may not occur until after 1994, in
Phases II and III. The immediate demand for the environmental
protection industry will be affected by the 31 initiatives included in the
Phase I "National Prevention Program", and the modelling and
consulting work that is included in the Phase I plan to develop further
steps and targets for subsequent phases. Regulations may be
supplemented by the use of an emissions trading system, which, if
implemented, could result in the creation of opportunities for firms to
provide brokerage services in emissions permits.

National Packaging Protocol

The Council of Ministers of the Environment adopted this protocol in
April 1990, as a part of an earlier agreement to aim for a 50%
reduction in waste generation by the year 2000. The agreement on
packaging establishes a target of a 50% reduction in packaging wastes
based on 1988 levels.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Bill C-13)

This Act would supplant the existing environmental assessment
process, to clarify federal jurisdiction and process issues. According
to Lawyers Weekly (1991), the result would be a reduction in the
stringency of reviews provided to some projects (e.g. those of
harbour commissions).

4.2.3 Trends in Ontario Regulations

Ontario has traditionally been a leader among Canadian provinces in
promulgating environmental legislation and regulations. Thus, not
only will Ontario policies influence the EP industry demand in the
province, they will also tend to presage regulatory developments and
EP industry demand in the rest of Canada.

The province's Environmental Protection Act is the primary source of
authority for the Ministry of the Environment. It grants the Ministry
with the power to issue approvals for processes that create discharges
or emissions and for waste disposal operations. It allows the Ministry
to issue clean-up orders, and makes it an offence to discharge
contaminants into the environment unlawfully.

A number of key principles are currently guiding the development of
regulatory policies and other measures by the Ministry of the

Environment. These principles will have an important influence on
future demand for environmental protection products and services in
the provinces:

• Pollution Prevention. The Ministry will be seeking to
promote the prevention of pollution at its source, rather
than end-of-pipe controls. This includes the use of
process modifications, closed loop processes, substitute
raw materials and product redesign to reduce or
eliminate waste bi-products. This could actually reduce
future demand for some segments of the environmental
protection industry that are linked to the supply of end-
of-pipe equipment.

• Multi-Media Approach. The Ministry will take a unified
look at air, water and terrestrial consequences of
activities in issuing permits and designing regulatory
approaches. This will preclude the use of strategies to
protect one medium that merely transfer problems to a
second medium. It will therefore tend to add emphasis
to the pollution prevention concept.

• Promoting the Development of Green Industries. The
Ontario government will be using the promotion of clean
technologies and innovations in pollution prevention and
waste reduction to position Ontario as a leader in these
areas.

• Economic Instruments. The Province, along with the
federal government, is exploring the potential for the
increased use of economic instruments (e.g., pollution
taxes, tradeable discharge permits) as a supplement to
command and control regulations. Among the areas
where economic instruments are already being applied
are in charges for sewer usage and increased tipping
fees for solid waste dumping. Future applications could
include tradeable permits for certain air emissions, such
as nitrogen oxides.

Water Pollution Control

MISA

The Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA) is the
cornerstone of the province's efforts to control discharges into Ontario
waterways. MISA is arguably the most comprehensive environmental
legislation in Canada. The objective of the legislation is the "...virtual
elimination of toxic contaminants in municipal and industrial
discharges into provincial waterways." Initially, the program has
targeted direct dischargers including municipal sewage treatment
plants and the following nine industrial sectors:

petroleum refining;
organic chemicals;
pulp and paper,
iron and steel;
metal mining and refining;
industrial minerals;
electric power generation;
inorganic chemicals; and
metal castings.

In the first phase, completed in August 1991, individual companies
monitored their effluent streams according to Ontario Ministry of the
Environment regulations. In the second phase, the Ministry will
determine the Best Available Technology Economically Achievable to
limit discharges. In the third phase, the Ministry will promulgate
regulations with specific limits for effluent discharge based on the data
collected from this testing and the ability of available technology to
remove toxics or other elements from water. The final regulations,
which will set effluent limits on each sector or subsector, are expected
to be implemented over the next few years.

Recent announcements by the Minister of the Environment19 suggest
that the final effluent limits will consider additional factors in addition
to the availability of technology. The Ministry will be emphasizing the
pollution prevention, process change, and multi-media considerations
noted above. It will also stress the virtual elimination of persistent
toxic chemicals, and the prohibition of effluents shown to be lethal to
fish. The multi-media approach will tend to increase the market
demand for systems and approaches that do not generate sludges that
pose problems for land pollution.

19Grier(1991)

Although the MISA program has been in place since 1985, its full
impact on the demand for environmental products and services will
not likely be felt until the regulations for each of these nine sectors are
finalized some time over the next two years. It is expected that the
Ministry will allow industry some time to meet the new standards,
probably in the order of three to five years from the date when the
regulations are finalized. Both of these factors will lessen the impact
which MISA will have on spending in any one year.

Municipal Sewer Use By-Laws 20

Municipalities in Ontario establish by-laws that set limits on industrial
discharges into their sewer systems. The Ministry of the
Environment has a model by-law, first set out in 1964 and then
updated in August 1988, that it has recommended for adoption by
municipalities. Collins and Dahme (1989) cite studies that showed
that the earlier model by-law was not adopted by many municipalities,
and that there were inconsistencies in its use by others.

The new by-law sets limits for a number of discharges into municipal
sewers. The Sewer Use Control Program, as proposed in a 1990
discussion paper, would make the adoption of this by-law mandatory.
Initially, the Ministry would target all municipalities with one sewage
treatment plant and a minimum population of 10,000. A total of 22
industry sectors would be required to monitor and control their
effluent discharges, comprising:

the 9 MISA sectors listed above;

textile mills;

leather tanning and products;

timber products, including wood preserving;

industrial laundries, including dry cleaning;

rubber and rubber products manufacturing;

hospitals, clinics and funeral services;

food processing;

integrated automobile manufacturing facilities;

equipment manufacturing and assembly;

stone, clay and cement industry;

20 This section draws on Collins, S and H. Dahmc (1989) and on Ernst & Young (1990).
60

• service industries (agricultural services,
photographie processing, warehousing and
disinfection and extermination services);

• printing and publications industry; and

• the transportation industry.

Under the proposed by-law, all industrial dischargers will be required
to sample and test water emissions entering into municipal sewer
systems. The cost of this testing to industry is estimated at some $100
million per year. This is based on an estimated municipal cost of $20
to $30 million annually to audit water emissions, and an EPA
calculation that total industrial monitoring costs are 4 to 5 times total
municipal auditing costs. The Ministry of the Environment estimates
that between 3,000 and 5,000 industrial dischargers will be covered
by this law, according to interviews conducted for Ernst & Young
(1990b).

The 1988 by-law sets limits on discharges of contaminants into
municipal sewers, based on maximum levels for temperature,
alkalinity, acidity, and suspended solids, and restricts emissions that
would alter the colour of the water or create a surface film or sheen.
There are also specific limits on metals, fuels, oils, toxic materials and
hazardous wastes. Fines for violations are also significantly
increased.

Along with restrictions on emissions to sanitary sewers, the municipal
by-law will increase the amount which municipalities charge to
industry for sewage treatment. Based on a survey of 4 large
municipalities by the Ministry of the Environment, it is estimated that
the revenue from current surcharges to industry covers about 67% of
the operating costs of sewage treatment plants associated with industry
flows. The Ministry wishes to increase this amount to cover 100% of
operating costs and a percentage of the capital costs equal to the cost
of financing. The Ministry estimates that these additional costs would
double the fees which industry is now paying to municipalities for
sewage treatment. More importantly for the environmental protection
industry, it will create an incentive for industry to recycle or re-use its
water in order to reduce these fees, thereby creating a demand for both
engineering services and technology.21

21 The three preceding paragraphs are based on interviews with Ministry officials
conducted for Emst & Young (1990b).

As part of the regulations, industry will be required to implement a
Best Management Practices plan for contaminated surface runoff. The
plan will address items such as materials storage, housekeeping
practices, preventative maintenance procedures, safety programs and
employee training.

Those companies with a reasonable potential for chemicals spills or
batch discharges that could have adverse environmental impacts will
also be required to implement an Industrial Discharger Management
Practices plan. This plan will address items such as spill prevention
methods, materials storage, preventative maintenance procedures,
housekeeping practices, safety programs and employee training. Both
of these programs will create significant opportunities for consulting
services to design and implement these plans for individual
companies. The largest segment to be covered by this legislation is
the machinery manufacturing segment (e.g. aerospace, consumer
durables, etc.). In addition, the new legislation will likely include
industries such as service stations, transportation companies and
warehouses. Most of the emissions from these companies are from
cleaning water and runoff which may contain contaminants such as
grease, oil and solvents.

Other Initiatives

Other initiatives in water and wastewater treatment include plans for
legislation on safe drinking water standards and groundwater
protection. This could further increase the pressures to address runoff
emissions from industrial and agricultural activities in the province.

Remedial Action Plans are also being developed to address 17
previously contaminated sites along the Great Lakes, such as the
Hamilton harbour area. The financing of these plans, expected to be
very costly, remains under discussion.

Air Pollution Control

Clean Air Program

We understand that the Clean Air Program, announced by the
previous Ontario government, is currently under review by the
province. It is likely that the specifics of the original CAP program
will be altered. However, we believe that the original draft proposal is

indicative of some of the longer-term directions that air quality
legislation will take in the province.

The Clean Air Program would regulate stationary air emissions in the
province of Ontario. The program proposed that all significant air
pollution sources be required to install appropriate control equipment
and meet specific emissions limits.

It also stipulated that the level of pollution controls be matched to the
degree to which the contaminant is hazardous, based on a division of
substances into three "levels of concern". The most serious
carcinogens or bioaccumulating contaminants would be subject to
requirements for "virtual elimination". Other pollutants implicated in
genetic changes, long-range transport and atmospheric impacts would
be controlled using best available technologies. Emissions causing
nuisance impacts would be regulated to an extent that reflected
economic considerations as well as environmental impacts. The
program also left open the possible use of economic instrument
approaches to achieving its ambient quality objectives.

As with MISA, the first stages of the Clean Air Program were to have
involved a major effort to monitor emissions. This would have
included requirements for source testing, continuous monitoring of
major source, ambient monitoring and visible emission monitoring.
As with MISA, individual companies would be responsible for
monitoring air emissions.

Even if CAP is extensively modified, we believe that the overall
direction in air quality legislation will be to broaden the scope of
existing air pollution control measures, and extend it to smaller point
sources that had previously been treated more leniently.

Acid Rain Program

Ontario's Countdown Acid Rain program is designed to meet
Ontario's commitment to Canada's overall target reductions in sulphur
dioxide emissions.

Earlier regulations were successful in reducing ground level
concentrations. Regulation 308 placed a prohibition on a source that
contributed to an ambient concentration greater than 830 micrograms
per cubic metre of air, a level chosen with reference to health effects
above such levels. Inco was ordered to build a "superstack" in 1970,

and a series of control orders were issued that by 1983 reduced its
emissions by more than 60% from those allowed in 1972. Hydro
took steps on its own to reduce the sulphur content of its coal, while
Falconbridge had control orders postponed due to failures in the
control methods installed.

In 1980, the federal government and the seven eastern provinces
began the process of establishing reduction standards for sulphur
dioxide in Canada using both scientific and economic rationale. The
total level of reduction chosen was based on a calculation that the
environment could withstand deposition rates equal to approximately
half of those in 1980. Each province was asked to become
responsible for achieving a share of the total required reduction
tonnage and to reduce its emissions based upon total emissions in the
province in 1980 (allowance was made for variances in annual
production), with some consideration for the ability of the province to
make reductions (for example, Nova Scotia's almost total reliance on
coal fired generating stations was taken into account) and the impact
on the province's economy. The model for reduction was based upon
Ontario's model. The emission goals were set in 1984, and
companies were given 10 years to comply. Countdown Acid Rain
was announced at the end of 1985.

In Ontario, four companies (Inco, Ontario Hydro, Algoma, and
Falconbridge) are expected to make all of the cuts required to meet the
province's 1994 quota. Together these companies account for some
80% of sulphur dioxide emissions in the province. The metals
companies have already taken many of the steps necessary to meet
their control requirements. Algoma is controlling its emissions
through controls on its level of production. Thus, most of the
remaining expenditures are likely to be undertaken by Ontario Hydro.

Solid and Hazardous Waste Management

The major solid waste management problems facing the province are
the decreasing capacity of existing landfill sites, the shortage of
publicly acceptable locations for additional landfills, and the intention
of the government to avoid incineration as an alternative to landfills.
The Ministry has therefore focussed its efforts on supporting or
requiring waste reduction, reuse and recycling (3R) activities.

OMMRI

Ontario Multi-Material Recycling Inc. (OMMRI) was originally
established in 1986 as a cooperative effort by soft drink companies
and suppliers of containers and container materials. The Ministry of
the Environment, OMMRI, and municipalities participate on an equal
cost-share basis to establish blue-box recycling programs in Ontario
communities. This program and other support by MOE to
municipalities has led to a rapid expansion of curbside pick-up and
recycling in the province.

In February 1990 this concept was extended under an agreement
between the Ministry and the following industry sectors22:

• newspaper publishers, printers and their suppliers;

• grocery products distributors, manufacturers and their
suppliers;

• plastic products and packaging materials;

• other packaging materials; and

• soft drink manufacturers and their container suppliers.

According to Flemington (1990), OMMRI's new mandate
encompasses four core elements:

1 . Research, Development and Demonstration - OMMRI
will support research into markets for recyclable
materials; total waste management system needs, and

22 Flemington (1990),

demonstration projects in the areas of composting and
commercial / institutional recycling;

2. Capital Grants - OMMRI will provide grants to help
cover the capital costs associated with extending the blue
box program to 80% of Ontario households and
expanding the types and volumes of materials that are
recycled;

3. Local Assistance - OMMRI will provide funds and
expertise to municipalities starting or extending blue box
programs;

4. Communications - OMMRI will fund a program to
communicate waste management solutions in Ontario.

At present, the major difficulty facing OMMRI is the lack of
economical markets for waste materials collected. Low prices for the
materials (particularly newspaper and PET) has resulted in financial
problems that could jeopardize the program in the long run.
Municipalities are complaining that they are forced to finance an
increasing cost of curbside programs, and additional resources have
come from soft drink companies and the province to cover some of the
escalation in costs.

Waste Reduction Action Plan

Ontario's Waste Reduction Action Plan is targeted at limiting the flow
of wastes into the depleting supply of landfill sites. The Ministry aims
to have at least 25% of such flows diverted from landfills and
incineration through waste reduction, recycling and reuse by 1992,
and 50% by the year 2000. Elements of this plan could include:

• regulations compelling source separation by industry of
metals, glass, paper and other recyclable materials;

• the production of waste audits and workplans for waste
reduction by solid waste generators and packaging
users;

• expansion of the blue box program to apartment
building and rural areas, including mandatory use of the
program by large municipalities;

• establishment of central composting facilities; and

• a review of strategies to promote markets for secondary
materials.

Bill 143, the Waste Management Act, was brought before the
legislature in 1991. The bill would enhance the power of the Ministry
of the Environment to issue regulations that require recycling and re-
use. The Act is significant in its emphasis on voluntary compliance by
industry as the first option in meeting objectives for waste
minimization.

Extended Liability for Clean-up

Amendments to provisions of the Environmental Protection Act,
through the enactment of Bill 220 in June 1990, enhanced the
government's ability to order clean-ups (contaminated property, spills,
discharges) expeditiously and efficiently. As part of these
amendments, the scope and extent of liability for clean-up was
broadened. Administrative orders can now be issued to a wider range
of parties (including previous owners and lenders) regardless of
whether they are responsible for the damage.

This direction is also reinforced by the recent ruling of the Alberta
Court of Appeal in the "Northern Badger" case, which held that clean-
up costs had priority over a secured creditor in the event of a
bankruptcy.23

Environmental Bill of Rights

The Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) is a proposed initiative of the
provincial government that is intended to significantly expand the
public's role in defining and enforcing environmental standards. This
will likely serve to broaden the scope of activities coming under
environmental regulations, tighten standards, and enhance
enforcement efforts, particularly against smaller sources that
previously were not the focus of government attention.

While the final draft of the legislation is not yet available, the elements
of the EBR are likely to be similar in intent to those incorporated in a

23 Onyshko (1991)

proposal made by the current Minister of the Environment while she
served as an opposition M.P.P. The proposal would allow for a
variety of forms of public participation in protecting the environment,
including:

• participation in the design of new standards and
regulations, through written briefs and / or public
hearings;

• legislated requirements on how the government
responds to public complaints concerning suspected
environmental contamination, including standards for
investigations, response to the complainant, and
possible use of public hearings;

• creation of a new cause of action for suits brought by
citizen groups to protect the environment. Both
governments and industry organizations could be
defendants in such suits, which would not require that
the plaintiffs demonstrate that they have been personally
damaged by the actions of the defendant. This
provision would be similar to the types of suits that are
available in certain U.S. states and under U.S. federal
environmental laws (e.g. the Clean Water Act).

Provincial Funding Programs

The Province of Ontario also provides support for environmental
improvements through a number of funding programs. These include
grant programs to support 3R initiatives, accelerated capital cost
allowances for eligible investments in environmental protection assets,
grants to municipalities for water and sewer investments, and support
for research and development of environmental technologies. The
government has also announced that the support of green industries
will-form an important part of its industrial development strategy for
Ontario.

4.3

Trends in
Control

Canadian and Ontario Air Pollution

4.3.1 Introduction

Several segments of the Canadian market for air pollution control
equipment have the potential for demand growth, with the timing

being determined by the pace of regulatory development and
enforcement. Some of the regulatory developments reviewed above
have the potential for creating demand for air pollution control
equipment, including:

• the steps still to be undertaken to control sulphur dioxide
emissions from major point sources, particularly from
power plant utilities;

• control of NOx and VOCs under the Management Plan,
particularly in central Canada and B.C.;

• control of various toxic emissions under the Clean Air
Program or a replacement initiative.

In Ontario, new air quality initiatives are likely to be phased-in over
the next decade. With the CAP estimated to entail capital costs of over
$2.5 billion in one scenario ("Scenario A" in Hickling, 1991),
industries would likely be given a significant time period in which to
phase in the required equipment and process changes. Furthermore,
there would be considerable demands placed on Ministry of the
Environment resources in developing the detailed control plans.

Thus, in the medium term, much of the demand increase attributable to
a broadening and tightening of air quality regulations may be related to
monitoring, testing and engineering design work, rather than the
actual installation of equipment. Similarly, the phase-in of the NOx-
VOCs control plan could leave major control expenditures several
years away.

Table 4.1, drawn from Ernst & Young (1990b), shows the estimated
annual expenditures on air pollution control for major industry
sectors. These were rough, order-of-magnitude estimates based on a
limited survey of major firms across Canada. Municipal spending on
air pollution control at landfills and solid waste incinerators was
included in solid waste management spending, while controls on
sludge burning processes were incorporated into wastewater treatment
costs. Note that these expenditure estimates represent the demand for
all goods and services used in air pollution control, including basic
industrial equipment (pumps, valves, pipes) and supplies. This
would significantly exceed the demand for specialty products supplied
by the environmental protection industry.

Table

4.1

Estimated 1990 Expenditures

on i

\ir Pollution Control in

Canada

(Millions

of 1990

Dollars)

Industry

Annual Expenditures

Pulp and Paper

$150-175

Chemical Mfg

$100-130

Utilities

$230-250

Mining

$80-125

Oil and Gas

$50-100

Other MfcL

$10-20

Iron and Steel

$10-20

Industrial Minerals

$5-10

Other

$50-100

Total

$685-980

Source: Ernst & Young (1990b)

4.3.2 Supplier Outlook

Our mail survey air pollution control equipment suppliers expect to see
a 13% annual growth rate in sales over the next five years, while
suppliers of related services anticipate a 9% growth rate. Firms
supplying a mix of air quality goods and services forecast a 12%
growth rate for the next five years.

Equipment suppliers interviewed by by Ernst & Young generally
expected relatively modest growth from domestic demand sources in
the very near term. Their view is that major steps in NOx and VOCs
control are still several years away, and some other areas of demand
are viewed as having had their capital equipment needs met. For
example, one firm felt that most of the demand for basic ash handling
and gas movement equipment had been met. Another that supplied the
mining industry noted that the slow growth in their client sector would
impede their own equipment sales. Overall, equipment suppliers
generally perceived greater demand growth in foreign markets,
including the U.S., Mexico and South America.

4.3.3 Purchaser Outlook and Literature Review

In order to add to the perceptions of suppliers, we spoke with a
sample of 40 purchasers of environmental products and services.
These purchasers appeared to be better able to pin down the types of
equipment and services that will be used to address future regulatory
requirements. We also drew upon the results of two earlier studies on
the environmental equipment market in Canada by Ernst & Young
(1990b) and Dun &Bradstreet Canada (D&B) (l^l).*4

D&B (1991) surveyed 2,393 Canadian companies, of which 556 had
more than 50 employees, on current and future environmental
spending. Firms reported expenditures data only on an aggregated
basis for air, water, solid waste and land management problems.
However, some indications of future trends in air pollution control
equipment is provided by respondents' projections for the types of
equipment they intend to install.

The survey results suggest that large firms were better able to respond
to questions on future equipment purchases. Just over half of the
large (50+ employee) companies surveyed report that they deal with
air pollution problems. Of these, close to half predicted some
installations of air pollution control equipment over the next three
years, and 57% expected installations in the next decade. As would
be expected, the greatest number of installations will be of basic air
handling, filtering and dust collecting equipment. Relative to the
installed base, there are significant expansions projected for
installations of incinerators, wet scrubbers and chemical recovery
systems.

24 Where sources are not cited, the material in this section is based on interviews with
purchasers.

Table 4.2

Current / Expected Installations of Air Pollution Control

Equipment in Canada

(As a % of 295 Companies Currently Dealing with Air Pollution Control)

Currently
Installed

New
Installation in
Next 3 Years*

New
Installation in
4-10 Years*

Ab / Adsorption Systems

14%

Air Handling Equipment

Chemical Recovery System

Computer soft / hardware

Dust Collectors

Electrostatic Precipitators

Fabric Filters

Incinerators

Scrubbers - dry

Scrubbers - wet

includes some firms with current installations that expect to
additional or replacement equipment.
Source: Adapted from D&B 1991.25

install

Sector Analysis

Iron and Steel Industry

Steel operations currently deal with a number of environmental
protection issues related to air quality, including control of emissions
of particulates, acid fumes, SO2, fluoride, NOx, VOCs, and toxics.
According to the two major firms surveyed for this study, particulates

25 D&B (1991) reported the results addiiively - they added the percentage of firms
expecting an installation in the next 3 years to those with a current installaUon, and
reported this as the percentage that will have an installation 3 years from now. This
ignored the possibility that some of the expected installations were at firms with existing
installations.

are dealt with using three main approaches: electrostatic precipitators;
baghouses; and, wet scrubbers. Hydrochloric acid fumes are handled
by a "packed" scrubber system. Scrubbers are also used to control
SO2 and fluoride emissions. Nitrous oxides (NOx) are minimized in
the operations of one company by employing low NOx burners in
boilers and soaking pits. Catalytic oxidation is also used in the
industry to control NOx emissions. Volatile organic compounds are
sometimes dealt with using catalytic incineration techniques. One
surveyed firm noted two methods for control of toxics emissions,
most notably benzene: proper maintenance to prevent door and lid
leaks from coke ovens; and, a process known as 'gas blanketing',
where an inert gas is placed into tanks to keep benzene from escaping.

Smaller mills that use electric arc furnaces generally have fewer air
emissions to control, and the original systems installed in these newer
plants may be able to meet future air quality requirements.

Ernst & Young (1990b) found that Canada's steel companies have
already invested considerable amounts in the past on air quality
management. In view of these accomplishments, the industry
believes that it is reasonably well-prepared to meet some of the
requirements from a future Clean Air Program.

Recovery of metals from dust collected from scrubbers, as well as
from dry dust collected in the process area, is one aspect of air
management at steel mills that will generate future expenditures. The
Steel Council of Canada, representing the steel industry, has identified
this as an area of future improvement by the industry. Fine
particulates less than 10 microns are also likely to be addressed by the
industry in the near future using either "absolute filters" (high
efficiency fabric filters) or an improvement in the collection
capabilities of dry scrubbers. Another source of improvement will be
in dry gas cleaning for basic oxygen furnace and blast furnace
emissions.

Meeting the anticipated guidelines of the Clean Air Program (CAP)
was mentioned by both firms interviewed for this study as the most
important factor for change in approaches to air protection. However,
limited increases in air spending were anticipated because the Ontario
steel industry is experiencing difficult business conditions. Once CAP
or some alternative is implemented, the industry expects to face
increased monitoring requirements as firms and the MOE investigate
current emission levels.

In order to meet future air quality regulations, a number of changes
were identified. One firm noted that end-of-pipe particulate control
efforts are likely to move to greater use of baghouses rather than wet
scrubbers, since its experience has been that the former offers superior
performance in this application and eliminates the contamination of
water that occurs in wet scrubbing systems. Process changes and
shifting material usage were also noted by the firms to deal with some
items, notably polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Several
end-of-pipe technological approaches to PAH control were also
identified, including scrubbers, catalytic incineration, and adsorption
using carbon, activated alumina, or other substances.

Toxics may be dealt with by greater use of gas blanketing. One
respondent indicated that toxics are not readily controlled at end-of-
pipe, and process or raw material changes would also not be effective.
However, two end-of-pipe techniques are in use in the United States:
dry or wet scrubbers, for toxics in both gaseous and particulate forms;
and, fabric filters (baghouses) for toxic particulates.

The CCME Management Plan for NOx-VOCs control includes a
number of initiatives that will require expenditures - internal or
external - by the iron and steel industry. In Phase I, the following
measures will apply:

• development of energy efficiency performance standards
and guidance documents for new iron and steel plants
by December 1992;

• voluntary energy audits;

• new source performance standards for NOx from
industrial boilers effective in 1994

• retrofit 50% of boilers in Lower Fraser Valley and
Windsor-Quebec areas to these 1994 new source
standards by 1997;

• new source performance standards (1995) and retrofit
(1997) to meet these standards for emissions of NOx
from sintering, coking and other iron and steel
processes, aimed at reducing 2005 emissions by 50%.

Several options are available for the control of NOx emissions from
the iron and steel sector. Industry participants interviewed by Ernst &
Young cited substitution from bunker sea oil to natural gas, and
altering the burning configuration within boilers. Flue gas emissions
control systems , such as selective catalytic reduction, noncatalytic
reduction, or staged air combustion, are among the options cited by
CCME (1990) and Mclnnes and Van Wormer (1990).

Electric Power Utilities

Four utilities account for 80-90% of the generating capacity in
Canada. The three utilities outside Ontario - Quebec Hydro, B.C.
Hydro and Power, and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - rely
extensively upon water as their main source of generating power. By
contrast, Ontario Hydro uses a combination of water, nuclear power
and fossil fuel generating stations. Since air quality problems are
largely related to fossil fuel combustion, most of the demand for air
management products and services in this sector is from Ontario
Hydro.

Ernst & Young (1990b) reported that Ontario Hydro's environmental
budget was targetted to increase from $125 million in 1990, to $220
million in 1991, $370 million in 1992 and $410 million in 1993,
largely related to controlling air emissions. Total spending by Ontario
Hydro to reduce air emissions over the next decade is estimated at
some $2.8 billion.

Conventional fuel operations are currently trying to control three main
substances - particulates, SO2, and NOx. Particulates are addressed
using precipitators. Hydro is currently upgrading their precipitators,
and using lower sulphur fuels to improve precipitator efficiency. The
lower sulphur fuels also reduce sulphur dioxide emissions.
Additionally, the utility is "washing" fuel to eliminate some modest
amounts of sulphur. Flue gas scrubbers are also being built at some
facilities to reduce SO2 in line with regulatory targets. NOx control is
achieved with high-efficiency burners on boilers. As well, an
engineering study commissioned by Hydro has suggested
modifications to combustion that should produce some further
reduction. A "selective catalytic reduction (SCR) unit" could be used
as an end-of-pipe technique for NOx.

The nuclear plants are dealing with radioactive emissions through
high-efficiency filters and intensive monitoring programs. The utility

can afford to undertake most services needs internally, although
limited amounts are spent on external servicing and design for new
technologies.

Much of the planned spending over the next few years will be directed
at meeting targets for the reduction of SO2 emissions. For newer
generation units, this will be achieved in part by the of use low
sulphur fuel. Older facilities will have to rely on added end-of-pipe
controls, with eight 500 MW units slated for flue gas desulphurization
retrofits by the year 2000. According to a Hydro official, high-
efficiency wet scrubbers - which use a lime spray dryer where
lime(stone) and soda ash are mixed with water and then sprayed
through flue gas - are likely to be used at Hydro facilities, since the
technology has been shown to be effective. As well, injection of
lime(stone) or other chemicals into boilers (sorbent furnace injection)
may be used, although, according to Burnham (1989), it creates the
need for special waste handling for high lime content wastes.

Power generation is a major source of NOx emissions, accounting for
over 16% of emissions in the Windsor-Quebec corridor according to
the CCME (1990).

Hydro has already installed low NOx burners at Nanticoke. Hydro
views its purchases of other major technologies for NOx control as
being at least 10 years away. Our Hydro interview respondent
believed that further research was needed to develop flue gas emission
control (such as SCR or selective noncatalytic reduction), which was
also the Hydro view reported in Burnham (1989).

CCME (1990) argues that SCR has already been proven effective in
Europe. The Management Plan for NOx-VOCs will require new
coal, oil and gas power plants to meet NOx targets of 100 ng/J, 90
ng/J, and 40 ng/J (expressed in terms of N02 per unit of heat input)
respectively by the year 2000, a level that will require SCR or other
flue gas clean up technologies. These new facilities are likely to be
outside Ontario. The target for existing plants, at 200 ng/J for the
plant as a whole by 1995, could be met with less costly methods
(perhaps depending on whether or not it is set as an annual average
with some peak-day shutdowns or a daily limit) or by installing SCR
on some of the units of a multi-unit plant.

Despite being at about one percent of allowable limits of radioactive air
emissions, Hydro believes that it is likely to expend some effort to
assess the possibility of further reductions.

Metal Casting

Metal casting firms in Ontario currendy use scrubbers, dust collectors,
and baghouses to control particulates, which are their main air
pollution problem. One firm also requires scrubbers to handle SO2
produced from its mould-making process.

Few substantive changes in air protection needs are anticipated by
metal casting respondents. The Clean Air Program (CAP) or its
replacement may necessitate some increased monitoring efforts, which
the firms tend to contract out. One firm conceded that this monitoring
may uncover other contaminants requiring control. The firms were
split on whether air spending will rise over the next five years - one
operation had recendy installed a costly scrubber system, and expected
spending to fall as a result.

Non-ferrous Metal Mining and Smelting

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions are a significant concern for metals
firms, including all three of the firms interviewed. The companies are
required to meet sizeable targets for reductions in their emissions by
1994, and all the firms are involved in process changes to deal with
SO2. Inco, for example, was required to reduce its emissions from its
1990 level of 685,000 tons per year to 265,000 tons per year. For the
most part, the company has developed its own solutions to the
problem, based on a new milling technology and replacement of
existing smelters with oxygen smelting furnaces. The cost of the
changes is estimated at more than $400 million. The company will
also have to make changes at its Thompson, Manitoba operation,
although the cost there is expected to be significantly less than at
Sudbury. Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting has announced spending
plans of some $70 million to reduce its sulphur dioxide emissions.

Two companies surveyed also operate plants that turn sulphur dioxide
gases into sulphuric acid which is subsequently sold to users. One
firm sells most of the sulphuric acid produced on the export market.
Additionally, end-of-pipe techniques are used to control SO2
emissions, notably baghouses and electrostatic precipitators.

Particulates were the other main air issue mentioned by metals firms.
Wet scrubbing of acid gases and electrostatic precipitators are used to
control particulates. As well, a gold mining operation noted that
electrostatic precipitators are used to deal with particulates from
arsenic trioxide generated in their roaster.

Surveyed operations in Ontario were doubtful that any major changes
in substances controlled, or technology used, are likely over the next
five years due to the substantial recent and ongoing investments in air
protection. The Clean Air Program (CAP) is anticipated to require
only small efforts on the part of mining and smelting firms.
Particulates may need to be controlled to a greater extent under CAP,
although firms were uncertain as to what technology is likely to be
used. One firm noted that dealing with NOx from underground
equipment may involve the retrofitting of better catalytic converters.
Surveyed firms also expected that new air quality regulations in
Ontario will likely require increased monitoring efforts.

Metal Plating

Environmental protection purchases were discussed with two Ontario
metal plating firms. The main air concern for metal plating companies
is emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) caused by
solvent-based products used in spraying systems. Control of VOCs
prompts purchases of filters and chemical coatings for stacks (which
help to control emissions). Otherwise, goods and services purchases
in the air segment are not currently a major expenditure for firms
interviewed.

The environmental problem associated with solvent-based items is
likely to decline in importance as the industry moves toward water-
based spraying products. One firm surveyed is currently considering
switching to these environmentally safer products. If difficulties are
encountered, then the firm sees possible use of water scrubbers or
incinerators to further deal with VOCs until water-based items become
viable.

Chemical Industry

Organic chemical producers interviewed for this study currently use
air-related control for several substances, including VOCs (such as
benzene, toluene, xylene, and solvents), ammonia, and various other
organic chemicals. Methods of end-of-pipe control mentioned by

respondents are scrubbers, incineration, and absorbers. Scrubbers are
often bought as "off-the-shelf' systems, although one large firm noted
that it is able to design and build simpler types of scrubbers internally.
Incineration is often used with combustible pollutants. Blowers,
pipes, and flow meters are purchased to operate the incinerator.
Adsorbers with activated charcoal are used by one firm to capture
solvents from vapour streams.

The inorganic chemical industry faces a variety of air concerns, with
wide variations depending on the product mix in a particular facility.
The two firms interviewed for this study have concerns regarding a
wide range of substances, including particulates, organic materials,
mercury, SO2, ammonia, chlorine, and hydrogen sulphide.
Baghouses are employed to control particulates produced at one
respondent facility. This same operation deals with some organic
materials through incineration, and the remainder are handled by a
thermal oxidizer stack that oxidizes the organics. Scrubbers are used
to handle SO2, chlorine, ammonia, and hydrogen sulphide at another
respondent operation. Recovery of chlorine from its air streams also
takes place at this second facility in order to maximize their production
of saleable product.

The chemical industry will play an important role in new efforts to
control emissions of NOx and VOCs as a part of the CCME
Management Plan (1990). NOx emissions are created in combustion
processes. Final standards for NOx emissions from industrial boilers
will be set on new sources by 1994, and half of existing boilers in
sensitive regions of Canada are to be retrofitted to these standards by
1997. Whether lower cost options, (such as low NOx burners, flue
gas recirculation, or fuel reburning) or higher cost add-on approaches
(SRC, SNR) will be required will depend upon the standards that are
developed.

VOC control has been described as the chemical process industry's
"single largest environmental challenge."26 Controlling these
emissions will involve reducing discharges from both point sources
and fugitive sources, and will effect both the processes used, and the
products manufactured, by the chemical industry.

26 Mclnnes, Jelinek and Putsche (1990)

' 79

Reformulations are likely in paints, varnishes, adhesives, and various
household chemical products to reduce the VOCs emitted in their use.
For processes, new source performance standards are to be
implemented by 1994, and extended to existing plants in the lower
Fraser valley and the Windsor-Quebec corridor by 1996. Fugitive
emissions reductions programs are to be in place by 1993 at all new
plants and existing plants in the lower Fraser valley and the Windsor-
Quebec corridor.

VOC control methods for point sources could include thermal or
catalytic incineration, carbon adsorption, condensation or absorption,
with the appropriate technology being dependent on the properties of
the waste stream.27 Fugitive emission control is a very difficult
process. Firms interviewed by Ernst & Young are using double seals,
and continually tightening pipe connections to address some of these
sources. Further steps will likely involve new monitoring efforts and
equipment, enhanced maintenance programs, and the purchase of leak
resistant pumps and valves.28 Containment of leaks in an enclosure is
another possibility in some cases.

Firms surveyed by Ernst & Young for this study expect a significant
increase in their spending on air pollution control over the next five
years. One firm noted that this increase might not take place until the
mid-1990s depending on the timing of CAP and other regulatory
developments, although it also suggested that the industry's own
internal standards were having an impact. Changes will involve both
end-of-pipe equipment and process improvement. Envisaged areas of
expenditures include:

• monitoring equipment and services to meet new MOE
requirements;

• process changes to increase output yield in order to save
on materials costs, reduce waste, and meet tougher
standards for mercury emissions;

• significant efforts to control fugitive emissions of VOCs
and hydrogen sulphide. One respondent noted that they
have a major opportunity for a cost-effective solution to

27 Mclnnes, Jelinek and Putschc ( 1 990)
28Suprenant(1990)

this problem, but would not elaborate. The other
operation expects roughly 60% of air spending over the
next five to seven years to be targeted toward fugitive
emissions.

• controls to be added for chlorides;

• additional baghouse capacity to control particulates;

• scrubbers for ammonia and for a thermal oxidizer stack ;

• phasing out systems that require the use of CFCs.

In the long term, the chemical industry, along with other sectors using
combustion processes, may be required to seek methods of reducing
CO2 emissions as a part of efforts to control global warming. The
chemical industry produces CO2 fr°m fuel combustion in furnaces and
from 'crackers'. Ernst & Young (1990) found that in some cases the
carbon can be collected and, when mixed with minerals such as lime,
can be used to make calcium carbonate. If widely applied, however,
this process would generate these byproducts in amounts that would
far exceed the demand for them. As a result, there is a need to find
methods to either reduce the CO2 emissions from plants or to find
alternative uses for the carbon.

Petroleum Refining

Refineries in Canada generally have well established processes
installed for cleaning air emissions such as scrubbers, electrostatic
precipitators, cyclones and sulphur recovery plants.

Petroleum refineries in Ontario interviewed for this study are currently
dealing with several air pollution control problems, including SO2,
NOx, VOCs, and hydrocarbons. Some have sulphur plants that
reduce SO2 to elemental sulphur from refinery gases. One firm noted
that it is able to sell this sulphur to fertilizer and explosives
manufacturers. NOx is created in furnaces in refineries, and both
respondent operations are converting to high-efficiency burners or
newer furnaces. Hydrocarbons result from non-optimized
combustion; one operation is trying to monitor the amount of oxygen
put into the combustion area in order to maximize burning of
hydrocarbons. Fugitive emissions of hydrocarbons and VOCs are
also concerns for petroleum refineries. Surveyed firms are increasing

maintenance efforts to try to reduce this pollution source, with mixed
success. One firm reported particulate concerns generated by their
catalytic cracker. "Cyclone" centrifuges are used to separate
particulates from the rest of stack gases.

The Clean Air Program, even if amended, is expected by refiners to
have a strong impact on the air protection efforts of this industry,
causing total expenditures to increase strongly during the next five
years as compared with the last five years. Tougher regulations under
discussion in other provinces, including Alberta, and regulatory
developments under the federal-provincial NOx-VOCs plan, will also
contribute to demand growth. Respondents anticipate added controls
on ground-level ozone, NOx, hydrocarbons, and benzene.

In the near term, respondents suggested that fugitive emission
containment will be a major focus of their air quality efforts. Added
controls, double seals, and internal floating roofs with vapour
recovery are being considered for storage tanks. Vapour recovery in
product loading facilities is also planned by one firm. Increased
maintenance, new valves and pumps are likely approaches to address
other sources of fugitive emissions.

In order to eliminate hydrocarbons, one firm may try to introduce
more oxygen in its burners to permit complete combustion.
Continuous stack analysis, increased user of air pollution modelling,
and greater consulting requirements when designing major processes
are also anticipated.

Pulp and Paper

Particulates and total reduced sulphur (typically linked to kraft pulp
mills using sodium sulfide in the process) are the main air
environmental control problems currently being dealt with by pulp and
paper firms in Ontario. Particulates tend to be handled with scrubbers
and electrostatic precipitators. The precipitators are the more effective
of the two technologies in use. One firm noted that it would soon be
moving from scrubbers to precipitators in anticipation of regulations
requiring precipitators. Oxidizers are employed to reduce sulphur
emissions. One respondent noted that the firm was planning to use
pure oxygen rather than air in the oxidization process, which should
result in greater efficiency.

The Clean Air Program (CAP) and federal initiatives on VOCs and
NOx are likely to cause some changes for pulp and paper operations in
Ontario. Particulates are anticipated to have a lower priority in terms
of new regulatory measures, according to one firm. Total air
spending is likely to rise moderately, if our sample is representative of
the industry in the province. However, one respondent noted that
CAP (or its replacement) will have a 10-year phase in period, so that
the company would not be making any equipment purchases during
the next five years. Expected changes as a result of new government
regulations are:

• the aforementioned shift to precipitators from scrubbers
due to water control problems resulting from droplets
created in scrubbers;

• increased need for monitoring and analysis services to
understand what substances are emitted and to monitor
once new control equipment has been purchased;

• more efficient burners and better combustion
temperature control in boilers.

Industrial Minerals

Dust is currently the main air concern in the industrial minerals
industry with several methods of control being used:

• baghouses;

• electrostatic precipitators; and,

• chemical and water spraying of roadways, fuel piles,
and raw material piles.

Another control issue facing some firms is flue gas containing fluoride
which necessitates the use of scrubbers. One cement-making firm
also noted that it has begun to analyze its stack gases, in advance of
CAP monitoring requirements, in order to better understand the extent
of their emissions, particularly of SO2 and NOx. Another company
noted that air modelling is currently done in advance of all new capital
investments, while the lime-producing firm is also monitoring its stack
emissions.

Discussions revealed that firms - except for the lime and aggregates
company - expect significant additions over the next several years to
the list of substances that they will have to control. Notable mentions
included possible Ontario and federal regulations regarding SO2,
NOx, VOCs, and CO2. According to cement firms, the production of
CO2 is inherent in the process of making cement, and no method
presently exists to make cement in another fashion. Firms were
generally not aware of which specific technologies are likely to be
used to address these various emissions. At the very least, monitoring
and analyzing requirements are expected to rise as a result of new
government initiatives.

Municipalities

Surveyed municipalities indicated air pollution concerns originating
from two sources - landfills and sewage treatment plants. Several air
problems are created by landfills, including methane gas, odours
caused by sulphur gas, and dust from access roads. One municipality
handles methane and sulphur with underground trenches in the landfill
containing perforated pipe. The pipes are connected to a vacuum fan
that moves the gas to an incinerator. Dust control is usually achieved
through watering and calcium chloride application on roadways, and
grassing unused areas. Occasionally, polycide spray is applied to the
edge of landfills or when trenches are being constructed. Monitoring
instruments are required, and consulting services are used for landfill
analysis and design as well as dust control.

Air problems may increase as a landfill site expands. An expansion of
the aforementioned collection system for methane and sulphur gases in
anticipated, and capping of the landfill with clay may occur.

Air quality concerns at sewage plants are generated by the incineration
of sludge from the water treatment process. One municipality
interviewed is looking at several alternatives to incineration. The
sludge from water treatment could be used as fertilizer. However,
toxic materials are currently left in the sludge, and additional
equipment would be needed to further treat any sludge destined to
become fertilizer. A second possibility is higher efficiency burning of
sludge, which would permit sludge to be more fully burned. The
city's sewage plant is investigating "fluidized bed incinerators" that
may burn more efficiently. Lastly, the facility is evaluating the
possibility of producing oil from sludge. The advantage of this
approach is that no waste ash would remain to be hauled.

Other Industries

A number of other sectors will potentially require expenditures to
address air pollution control issues over the next decade. Dry
cleaners, paint sprayers, degreasing processes, gas stations, printers
and plastics manufacturers will be involved in efforts to control VOC
emissions, particularly in sensitive areas such as the Lower Fraser
Valley and the Windsor-Quebec corridor. Efforts to control both
NOx-VOCs and greenhouse gas emissions could ultimately involve a
very wide range of energy-consuming industries. Finally, urban
growth in some regions will place pressures on various industries to
deal with difficult-to-control odour problems.

4.4 Trends in Canadian and Ontario Water and
Wastewater Treatment

4.4.1 Introduction

Urban development (and the need for municipal water and sewage
systems) and regulatory change will be the driving forces in the
market for water and wastewater treatment goods and services. In the
regulatory field, the following will be the most significant forces in
determining the market demand:

• Ontario's MISA program targetted at municipal and
industrial discharges into provincial waterways;

• Federal government measures to control dioxins and
furans from pulp and paper mills;

• The federal St. Lawrence cleanup program;

• Adoption of the model municipal sewer use by-law by
Ontario communities and the resulting requirements for
industry to control discharges into municipal sewer
systems;

• Remedial action plans to clean up Great Lakes sites;

• Efforts by other provinces to address water pollution
problems, including Quebec's St. Lawrence Action
Plan.

Table 4.3, drawn from Ernst & Young (1990b), shows order-of-
magnitude estimates for annual expenditures on water and wastewater
treatment in major Canadian industry sectors. These were rough,
order-of-magnitude estimates based on a limited survey of major firms
across Canada. These estimates include products supplied by the
environmental protection industry as well as the pumps, valves, pipes
and other basic products installed as a part of environmental control
measures.

Table 4.3

Estimated Expenditures on

Water Pollution Control in

Canada

($ Million!

Industry

Annual Expenditures

Municipalities
Pulp and Paper
Chemical Mfg.
Utilities

$1,700-1,900

$500-600

$100-130

$25-30

Mining
Oil and Gas

$80-125
$50-100

Other Manufacturing
Iron and Steel

$50-60
$30-60

Industrial Minerals

$5-10
$50-150

Other

Total

$2,590-3,165

Source: Ernst & Young (1990b)

4.4.2 Supplier Outlook

Our mail survey respondents in water pollution control equipment
forecast an annual growth in sales of 15% over the next five years.
Related service suppliers expect a growth rate of 10%, while firms
supplying a mix of products and services for water and wastewater
treatment predicted a 15% growth rate.

Firms interviewed by Ernst & Young noted a number of specific
market areas expected to see significant growth in the next 5-10 years.

Responses to a question asking for anticipated areas of growth
included:

• automated testing equipment that provides real-time
computing power on-site;

• "closed loop systems" (as opposed to end of pipe
solutions) motivated by cost saving and government
emphasis on pollution prevention approaches;

• water separation technology will grow at a strong pace
in the world market. There will be a demand for
process enhancement in water separation systems in
order to improve the costs for the end-user, and
opportunities in the recycling of the effluent within the
production process. This is linked to the new emphasis
on pollution prevention strategies;

• water filtration systems for the petrochemical industry
and municipalities;

• mobile systems that can pre-treat water before final
disposal because of the cost of moving liquid waste;

• a broadening of applications of water treatment systems
to other domains such as the treatment of run-off from
mall parking lots;

• solvent reclaiming - on-site recovery of chemicals is
very cost effective; and spill remediation - the treatment
of small spills (under 50 gallons) by removing
contaminant, treating the water and disposing of it into
the municipal sewer system;

• UV treatment of water is expected to grow, largely
outside Canada, as an alternative to chlorine - the
growth markets for this technology are New Zealand,
Australia, the UK, France and Germany. Ontario has
proven to be competitive internationally in the supply of
this equipment, but it has not yet gained wide acceptance
in Canada;

• water treatment services and membrane treatment are
expected to be strong growth areas, especially in the
export arena.

Only a minority of firms mentioned any major impacts on their
business as a result of the Ministry's announced emphasis on
pollution prevention as opposed to end-of-pipe controls. This would
appear to be surprising, since the shift could have significant impacts
on equipment suppliers, and potentially reduce the demand for various
end-of-pipe approaches and sludge management services. It may be
that suppliers find it difficult to anticipate the impacts of the pollution
prevention approach at present, since the final MISA regulations
remain to be promulgated. VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) noted the
lack of information on process changes that might be used as
substitutes for end-of-pipe controls.29

4.4.3 Purchaser Outlook and Literature Review

As in air pollution control, we supplemented the perceptions of
suppliers with purchasers of environmental products and services.
We also drew upon the results of two earlier studies on the
environmental equipment market in Canada by Ernst & Young
(1990b) and Dun & Bradstreet Canada (1991) (hereafter cited as
D&B), and on the review of MISA technologies by VHB and CH2M
Hill (1991). In this section, where references are not provided, the
views are those of our interview respondents.

D&B (1991) surveyed 2,393 Canadian companies, of which 556 had
more than 50 employees, on current and future environmental
spending. Firms reported expenditure data only on an aggregated
basis for air, water, solid waste and land management problems.
However, some indications of future trends in water pollution control
equipment is provided by respondents' projections for the types of
equipment they intend to install.

The survey results suggest that large firms were better able to respond
to questions on future equipment purchases. Table 4.4 provides the
responses of the 286 firms (just over half of the 50+ employee
companies surveyed) that reported that they deal with water pollution
problems.

29 VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) p 1-11.

The most commonly installed items of equipment are methods of
physical separation such as filters, screens and strainers, and gravity
sedimentation systems. Relative to the installed base, the most
significant increases are expected in such areas as biological treatment
systems, oil / water separation systems and water treatment systems.

Table 4.4

Current / Expected Installations of Water Pollution

Control Equipment in Canada

(As a % of 286 Companies Currently Dealing with Water Pollution

Control)

Currently
Installed

New
Installation in
Next 3 Years*

New
Installation in
4-10 Years*

Aeration systems

Biological treatment systems

Centrifuges

Chemical feed/mix equip.

Chemical recovery systems

Computer soft / hardware

Filters

Gravity sedimentation system;

Ion exchange systems

Oil / water separation equip

Potable water treatment

Screens / strainers

Sewage treatment systems

Water handling products

Water purification systems

* Includes some firms that have current install;
additional or replacement equipment.
Source: Adapted from D&B 1991.30

irions who expt

:ct to install

30 D&B (1991) reported the results additively - they added the percentage of firms
expecting an installation in the next 3 years to those with a current installation, and
reported this as the percentage that will have an installation 3 years from now. This
ignored the possibility that some of the expected installations were at firms with cxisung
installations.

Sector Analysis

Iron and Steel Industry

Steel companies interviewed for this study deal with a wide range of
potential contaminants in their liquid effluents, including metals,
suspended solids, phenolics, cyanide, ammonia, oil, and dissolved
hydrochloric acid. MISA's development document for the iron and
steel industry in Ontario indicates that all of the larger steel mills in the
province have wastewater treatment systems installed. As a result, we
would expect that the industry in Ontario is reasonably well prepared
to meet any new standards under MISA. Firms interviewed for this
study expected only moderate growth in environmental spending
related to water pollution control.

Clarifiers, filters, and ion exchange systems are currently used to
handle metals in wastewater. Suspended solids are settled out in
sedimentation basins. Biological treatment in the plant or a settling
basin is applied to water contaminated with phenols and cyanide,
although one firm noted that the local municipality treats some of the
firm's phenols and cyanide under a contract with this firm. Ammonia
is controlled in stills using steam stripping and chemicals to split the
ammonia into nitrogen and hydrogen. Oil contamination is
approached with clarifiers, filters, and "dissolved air flotation" where
pressurized air is injected into the water to separate the oil and water.
Water containing hydrochloric acid is evaporated in order to separate
out dirt and iron oxides; the acid is reabsorbed into water and reused.

A number of trends in water protection were noted in our discussions.
Recirculating water in a closed-loop system is the primary change
identified by respondents. This approach to water protection would
involve minimizing chemical use in steel-making processes, greater
use of pumps, tanks, cooling towers, ion exchangers to prevent
settling, and evaporators, according to the surveyed firms. One
company noted that a recently built process that recycled and reused
water has only 10% of the water requirement of its other facilities.
Apogee et al (1990) estimate that recycling blast furnace gas cleaning
water at Stelco and Dofasco as part of the RAP plan for Hamilton
Harbour would entail capital costs of over $14 million, and also
suggest a further $25 million in costs to bring the two plants to BAT
standards.

Several other technological changes were anticipated that would affect
water protection. Dry gas cleaning involves direct removal of
contaminants, rather than cleaning steel-making gases with water.
One surveyed firm is currently using this method while another firm
intends to adopt the technique in the near future. Non-recovery coke-
making, being newly utilized in the United States, would not generate
any wastewater but would instead result in gases that are fully
combusted.

VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) cite several possible treatment
technologies that could be added as a part of a response to MISA
standards, depending on their stringency. These include primary (e.g.
sedimentation with chemical addition), secondary (e.g. activated
sludge with nitrification and denitrification) and tertiary (e.g. chemical
oxidation, activated carbon adsorption, ion exchange) treatment
systems. For a large, integrated steel mill with 1 million cubic metres
per day of wastewater, the costs of alternative treatment system
additions would range from $117 million (sedimentation with lime
addition, nitrification and denitrification) to $645 million (all of the
above plus chemical oxidation, granular media filtration and granular
activated carbon adsorption).

Longer term changes mentioned by interview respondents included
eliminating coke-making (currently done in South Africa) and perhaps
even doing away with iron-making in the manufacturing of steel.
However, other industry experts note that virgin iron will always be
required in steel-making for quality reasons.

The Steel Council of Canada, representing the steel industry, has
identified a number of areas of future improvements in water pollution
control in the industry, including:

1) oxides in the wastewater stream;
. 2) storm water runoff from plant sites; and
3) treatment of chrome-based solutions for reuse.

Electric Power Utilities

Ontario Hydro has a wide range of water protection needs occurring at
fossil fuel generation sites, nuclear generation operations, transformer
stations, and hydraulic stations. While air pollution control is
Hydro's primary area of concern, some additional expenditures will

be required to meet tougher water pollution control regulations over
the next few years.

Fossil fuel generation facilities currently treat water for chemicals used
in operating and cleaning boilers, run-off from stored waste ash, flue
gas scrubber discharges, and metals. Treatment to restore pH balance
counteracts chemical imbalances. Ash water run-off is handled in
lagoons, although a switch is presently underway to dry storage.
Metals are controlled with ultra-fine filtration systems.

VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) cite a number of potential additions to
existing treatment facilities at fossil fuel plants, including ammonia
removal (e.g. through air stripping), neutralization and granular media
filtration for effluents from water treatment neutralization sump, and
lime sedimentation and filtration for other streams. For a typical
thermal station (e.g. Lakeview) the costs for such systems would
range from $9 million (for neutralization only) to $103 million (for
neutralization, sedimentation with chemical addition, granular media
filtration, air stripping, steam stripping, chemical oxidation and ion
exchange).

Process changes cited in the same study could include changes in the
chemicals used to control cooling system fouling, recirculating
systems for bottom ash transport streams, separation of drains used
for oily effluents from other effluent streams, and various methods of
avoiding contamination in building and stormwater effluents.

With the exception of ash handling or coal drainage wastes, nuclear
plants face similar water treatment issues as fossil fuel generating
stations. Nuclear operations currently emit less than one percent of
the regulatory limits of radioactivity, according to our respondent from
Hydro. Dangerous levels of contamination are internally treated and
retained. No chemicals are used in the nuclear power generating
process, and no treatment for such pollutants is required.31

Transformer stations are primarily concerned with leaks of insulating
materials due to transformer failure. Secondary containments such as
liners and spray-on materials have been installed around equipment
containing sizable amounts of insulating liquid. As well, detectors to

31 Nuclear plant waste management issues associated with spent fuel was not considered
to be pan of the environmental industry for the purpose of this study.

monitor for the presence of insulating liquids in both water and
oil/water separators are purchased. Services used include soil removal
and clean-up, and disposal for solid and liquid hazardous wastes. In
the near future, transformer stations are likely to purchase new types
of liners and spray-on materials. Total spending in the transformer
station area is expected to rise over the next five years, in order to
meet more demanding environmental regulations.

The hydraulic generating stations deal primarily with oil containment.
Several programs are ongoing to ease this water pollution concern.
Plastic bearings lubricated with water are replacing grease-lubricated
bearings in turbines. Governor oil systems - which use oil pressure
to control for water flow - are being phased out, and electrical
actuators installed in their place. Transformers on the downstream
side of dams have the potential for failure, which would release oil
into the water course. Dyking and piping systems are being built to
take any such escaped oil away to a reservoir. Lastly, the zebra
mussel infestation threatens to clog pipes at hydroelectric plants.
Chlorination injection equipment is being purchased to defend against
this pest. The dilution of the chlorine is likely to keep the
concentration in water courses at a safe level. However, monitoring
equipment is being purchased to ensure that regulatory limits are
respected.

Environmental impact assessments will remain a major area of activity
for electric utilities in Ontario and other provinces. Major
hydroelectric power projects will continue to be subject to close
scrutiny for their impact on terrestrial and aquatic eco-systems.

Metal Casting

The metal casting firms interviewed for this study have differing needs
and approaches with regard to water pollution control. The main
concern of one company is water that is contaminated by particulates
in their air scrubber. This water is put through two clarifiers. In the
first, acid is added to precipitate iron oxides. In the second clarifier,
polymer is added to bring out heavy metals, and alkaline substances
are used to return the pH to proper levels. The water is then reused in
the scrubber. Water from casting machine spills is also treated in
these clarifiers.

The second company has a wastewater treatment plant that uses lime,
sodium metobisulphate, and other neutralizing chemicals to deal with
its water pollution problems.

The firms differed in their views regarding future water treatment
expenditures. One operation foresees spending falling, with the only
change being the use of ferrasulphate instead of acid to precipitate out
iron oxides in their clarifiers. This change would not lower the pH as
far, saving on costs of alkaline substances required to subsequently
raise the pH level. The other firm anticipates a plant upgrade using
neutralization, precipitation, filtration, and aeration to deal more fully
with metals, phenols, fluorides, and sulphates.

VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) cite a number of process changes that
could be used by firms in this sector to minimize contamination of
storm and cooling water. As reflected in our interviews, future end-
of-pipe treatment costs will vary widely in this sector, depending on
existing process in place. Options include recycling of cooling water;
additional primary treatment systems for TSS (sedimentation with or
without lime addition) and oil/grease removal (dissolved air floatation
and gravity separation); and tertiary treatment (e.g. chemical oxidation
and granular media filtration) for phenols and to further reduce TSS.
Capital costs for the various options examined ranged from less than
$300,000 for a small primary treatment system to over $100 million
for a large (90,000 M3 per day) primary and tertiary system.

Non-ferrous Metal Mining and Smelting

The waste streams from mines differ according to the metals produced
and the processes used. A summary of 67 Ontario mines and their
wastewater effluents, drawn from Ernst & Young (1990b), is
presented in Table 4.5. MISA monitoring applied to only 58 mines
due to the inclusion of only 27 active gold mines (VHB and CH2M
Hill 1991).

Table 4.5
Ontario Mines and Wastewater Components

Mining Sector

# of
Plants

Wastewater Contaminants

Copper, Nickel, Lead, Zinc
Category

Effluents can be acid; neutral-
ization commonly required.
May contain organic mine-mill
reagents. May contain metals
such as copper, nickel and zinc.

Gold Category

Effluents contain cyanide and
heavy metals. Several plants
using cyanide destruction meth-
ods including natural degra-
dation, hydrogen peroxide,
chlorine or sulphur dioxide.

Salt Category

Wastewater contains sodium
chloride.

Silver Category

Most waste flows contain
arsenic in both suspended and
dissolved forms. Effluent vol-
umes are small.

Uranium Category

Acid Mine Drainage is a com-
mon problem due to pyrite
found in the ore. Most effluents
are weakly radio-active. Am-
monia is a problem at certain
plants in this category.

Iron Category

Acid drainage.

Source: Ontario Ministry of the Environment, The Development Document for the
Effluent Monitoring Regulation for the Ontario Mineral Industry Sector: Group A.

The diversity of concerns is reflected in the wide range of measures
currently adopted by firms interviewed for this study. Effluents from
milhng and other processes are often contaminated with heavy metals.
Lime or other chemicals are generally used to assist precipitation of
these metals in settling ponds. This process raises the pH of the
effluent which must then be brought back down by the addition of
carbon dioxide or sulphuric acid. Industry observers noted that
nickel-copper mines also must control arsenic in their effluent. A gold

firm's effluent contains small amounts of cyanide which are dealt with
by natural degradation in their settling ponds.

In addition, rain or snow falling on tailings often becomes
contaminated. Acid Mine Drainage is an important issue for the
mining, and the industry currently invests substantial amounts to deal
with this problem. As of 1988, about 18 mines in Canada had
mechanical effluent treatment plants to treat mine water. The
surveyed firms collect this water in the same facilities used to treat
effluent, although one firm is spending a sizable amount of money to
cover its tailings. Monitoring equipment is required to enable firms to
properly deal with both effluent and mine drainage water. One firm
noted that it makes extensive use of hydrogeological services to
monitor effects on surrounding surface and underground water.
Environment Canada estimates that about one-third of the mines in
Canada produce acid mine water. Most acid mine water is treated with
an alkaline reagent, usually lime.

Future changes in water pollution control will depend on the outcome
of the MISA regulatory process. According to the Ontario Ministry of
the Environment, future MISA regulations will call for much lower
levels of arsenic and cyanide in mine wastewater. One firm noted that
virtual elimination or zero discharge may be a goal of MISA. This
company currently recycles 50% of its water, but any increase in this
percentage would require major process changes which would be
costly. However, this firm noted that it would prefer to alter its
processes to meet this goal rather than add end-of-pipe technologies
such as ion exchange. A gold firm mentioned that the process
changes that it anticipated as a result of MISA would yield some cost
berlefits to the firm and also would likely reduce some air emissions as
well.

Total spending on water protection goods and services could rise
substantially as the mining industry moves to meet MISA guidelines.
The proportion of spending aimed at services is likely to increase,
according to the firms, due to increased monitoring and
hydrogeological requirements as well as process design consulting
needs. VHB and CH2M Hill, based only on data for generic or
representative mines, estimated that the "minimum technically
achievable loading strategy" for TSS would entail capital costs of
close to $350 million.

The Mining Association of Canada Environment and Health
Committee has also identified several technological needs for the
mining industry:

characterization of tailings ponds and mine
water,

• cyanide recycling and control;

• control and recovery of thiosalts; and

• water recycling systems.

Metal Plating

Water protection is the greatest area of environmental spending and
effort in the metal plating industry. Settling processes are used to deal
with both of the main problems generated by the production process -
suspended solids and dissolved heavy metals (e.g. chrome, lead,
nickel, zinc, iron). Suspended solids are handled by a standard
settling technique. Chemicals are added to the effluent containing
dissolved metals which settles the metals into a sludge. However, the
addition of the chemicals to precipitate out the metals changes the pH
of the water. Firms must then readjust the pH level before
discharging the water. Some firms also use other processes
(oxidation, alkaline chlorination, hydroxide precipitation) to treat
wastewaters contaminated with cyanide or chromium. Few services
beyond a minor amount of consulting and installation of some
equipment are used by the surveyed firms.

Several new items requiring control are foreseen by one company,
most notably phosphorus and overall biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD). The firm is currently not certain how these substances will- be
handled. Phosphorus might be dealt with by the addition of calcium
chloride, although this company noted that it is difficult to monitor for
the phosphorus content of water. One metal plater mentioned that the
use of chromes and other metals may be reduced or eliminated in order
to save on the costs of treatment.

Treatment system changes were also noted by interviewed firms. The
final pH adjustment may require new end-of-pipe systems as metal
platers are faced with tighter allowable pH ranges on discharges.
Sand filtering or centrifugal processes could be added after the setding
stage for suspended solids. Substitution of chemicals used to settle
dissolved metals may occur in order to reduce the amount of sludge
that water treatment produces. Firms also have installed atomic

absorption spectrometers and other instruments to meet the
requirements for the monitoring and control of effluents.32

Spending on water protection goods is likely to decline at surveyed
firms since recent investments have been made, and since firms will
be looking to reduce the amount of substances needing to be treated.

However, we expect that other firms will be facing significant costs if
their communities adopt the model sewer-use by-law set out by the
Ministry of the Environment. VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) estimated
that there are 673 metal finishers discharging into public sewers in
Ontario, and the total cost for a "minimum technically achievable
loading strategy" for TSS was put at $9.7 million. According to the
Canadian Association of Metal Finishers, one third of its members
employ fewer than 10 people, and these small firms may find it
difficult to comply with the by-law.

Chemical Industry

Water protection needs in the inorganic chemicals sector vary
according to the types of chemicals produced by the facility.
Respondent firms are dealing with several concerns, including
nitrogen, mercury, organic chemicals, and pH imbalance.

Nitrogen is dealt with in three ways at one operation. The
manufacturing process is being tightened to reduce losses. Some
collection and reprocessing of nitrogen in wastewater streams is also
being undertaken. As well, lined sludge ponds are used to setde out
some of the nitrogen contained in the facility's effluent.

Another firm has a water treatment plant to deal with mercury, organic
chemicals, and pH difficulties. Each environmental concern has a
separate approach: 1) mercury treatment involves chemical reagents,
precipitation, settling, and filtration through several mediums,
including carbon, sand, and filter presses; 2) organic chemicals
treatment employs settling, chemical addition to treat sulphide, and pH
adjustment necessitated by the treatment process; and, 3) a separate
need exists for pH adjustment (either up or down) of effluent received
directly from the chemical plant.

32 Collins and Dahme (1989)

Suspended solids such as phosphorus, nitrogen, and carbon are key
water protection concerns for organic chemicals firms, according to
respondents. One firm uses microbiological methods for treating
chemical laden effluents, with "bugs" being placed in the water, eating
the chemicals, and subsequently dying. Another important group of
substances, dissolved organics, are currendy removed from effluent
using carbon filters and by installing solvent removal equipment at the
point of solvent use.

The MISA program should necessitate significant spending increases
for water protection, according to respondents in both organic and
inorganic chemicals. Chemical companies in Alberta expect to face a
similar increase in spending due to the Alberta government's proposed
regulations on clean air and clean water. In Quebec, 13 of the 50
companies targeted by the St. Lawrence Action Plan are chemical
manufacturers.

Inorganic chemicals firms expect to respond to MISA requirements in
part through a sharp reduction in water usage. The development of
entirely "closed-loop" water processes is thought by firms in this
sector to be extremely difficult to implement. VHB and CH2M Hill
(1991) found no zero-discharge practices in this sector in the U.S. or
Canada.

One firm noted that some relatively minor production process changes
are planned to reduce contaminant loading in effluent water. Firms do
not anticipate that any new substances will have to be controlled, but
expected that treatment of all currently regulated items will have to be
enhanced. VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) report on a range of
alternative end-of-pipe approaches (e.g. chemical reduction,
sedimentation, granular media filtration, activated carbon adsorption,
chemical oxidation) with capital costs per plant ranging as high as
$200 million. Monitoring and analysis expenditures are anticipated to
rise moderately from current levels in the near term.

Substantial amounts have been spent by organic chemicals firms on
testing and analysis under the MISA program recently. Organic
chemical companies interviewed were uncertain as to what regulatory
requirements would be put in place under MISA in the wake of this
monitoring phase. One operation suggested that handling of
suspended solids was unlikely to change a great deal, while the other
company sees the "bugs and pools" approach to suspended solids to
be a significant trend for both the firm and the industry. According to

100

one respondent, as chemical industries try to reach zero discharge,
process changes are likely to become unprofitable methods of
environmental control, and firms will have to increase their end-of-
pipe pollution control efforts.

One company plans a significant expenditure on control and
containment of accidental spills. A gravity-fed system is planned with
substantial purchases of pipe, analytical equipment, consulting, and
construction services. Before the end of the decade, this firm also
expects to install a tertiary water treatment system.

VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) examine a range of process change
(e.g.water reuse, product substitution, best management practices for
leaks) and in-plant treatment options (e.g. activated carbon adsorption
metal removal, steam stripping), and present costs for various
primary, secondary and tertiary end-of-pipe approaches. Treatment
additions cited as potentially needed at various plants include granular
activated carbon adsorption, chemical oxidation, granular media
filtration, chemical reduction, and sedimentation with chemical
addition. Capital costs range as high as $350 million for a large plant
and tertiary treatment additions. For the sector as a whole, they
estimate that the minimum technically achievable loading strategy for
TSS could cost over $750 million., based on the limited information
available.

Remedial Action Plan programs could potentially entail significant
expenditures at certain organic chemicals firms if sport fisheries are to
be restored. Apogee et al (1990) estimate that treatment programs at
four organic chemical plants on the St. Clair River would entail a total
capital cost of $143 million, and significant expenditures would may
also be required at other sites, as shown in Table 4.6. These costs
would not likely be in addition to the requirements under MISA, since
Apogee et al (1990) note that the U.S. BAT costs used in their
estimates are probably a lower bound on MISA compliance costs.

101

Table 4.6
Capital Costs for Organic Chemicals Firms to Restore
Sport Fishery at RAP Sites

Site $ Millions

Bay of Quinte $1.1

Niagara River 7.7

St. Clair River 143.1

St. Lawrence River 2.2

Source: Apogee et al (1990)

Petroleum Refining

Refineries surveyed have wastewater treatment facilities which use
physical, chemical, and biological methods of pollution control.
Physical methods are usually separators (API separators) or settling
ponds for suspended solids. Chemical adjustment of pH levels is
required at one facility. An activated sludge system is used by one
firm where micro-organisms are circulated in a closed system in order
to destroy hydrocarbons. The dissolved organic materials are then
removed before discharge.

Few water protection-related changes are anticipated during the next
five years by surveyed firms, beyond the planned end-of-pipe
installation of filtration by one operation. According to respondents in
this sector, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment does not expect
that MISA will have a significant impact upon expenditures in this
sector. Petroleum refineries in Canada have been regulated by the
federal government for some time and have, as a result, invested in the
necessary technology to control wastewater streams. Firms
interviewed for this study expected total water spending to stay
roughly constant at current levels. In the longer term (over the next 10
years), one facility intends to minimize wastewater production both
through process changes to reduce water use and through the
recycling of water required in the refinery.

VHB and CH2M Hill (1991) confirm that most refineries are in
compliance with current standards for TSS, ammonia and other
contaminants. However, they present costs for a number of potential
tertiary treatment additions (granular media filtration, granular
activated carbon adsorption, powdered activated carbon adsorption)

102

for process water, with costs per refinery ranging up to $42 million to
as low as $630,000.

Pulp and Paper

Water pollution control is the primary environmental concern for pulp
and paper corporations. Pollutants being controlled include
suspended solids, biological oxygen demand (BOD), toxins (such as
dioxins, furans and other and organochlorines), and chlorinated
phenols. Treatment is broken into two stages. Settling ponds for
solids constitutes "primary" treatment. Polymers are often added to
assist settling. The remaining sludge is also generally de-watered.
"Secondary" treatment introduces biological techniques and aeration to
neutralize contaminants. One firm mentioned that it adds nutrients at
this stage to help bugs break down certain materials.

Services for water protection are used frequently in the pulp and paper
industry, including monitoring, testing, installation, hydrogeological
studies, and maintenance. One firm also mentioned that it had
contracted a consultant to model its operations' receiving water to
understand the ecological impact of its treated effluent.

Requirements under MISA and the proposed federal regulations on
dioxins and furans will be the major driving forces for water pollution
control spending by the pulp and paper industry in Ontario. Water and
Pollution Control (1990) notes that federal regulations have been in
place for two decades, but the record of enforcement has been spotty.
The new demand for water treatment systems will come as a result of
the catch-up to previous regulatory requirements (generally relating to
the need for secondary biological treatment), as well as the response to
MISA and federal regulations on organochlorines.

The federal government commissioned a detailed Background Study
of Proposed Amendments to Pulp Industry Regulations on
Organochlorines and Dioxins to estimate the capital and operating
costs of its proposed regulation to the pulp and paper industry.33
Across Canada, the report estimates that the industry faces an
investment of over $2 billion in water treatment equipment to meet the

33 N. McCubbin Consultants Inc., Economic Impact of Proposed Regulation of Pulp and
Paper Industry BOD TSM and Toxicity Organochlorines (AOX) Dioxins and Furans,
Environment Canada, June 1990.

103

proposed federal guidelines, while other estimates have ranged up to
$3 billion. The costs may be reduced by the recent announcement that
only dioxins and furans, rather than the full range of organochlorines,
will be targetted in the first stages of the control program, with others
being added only as evidence on their specific environmental impacts
is obtained.

The cost estimates cover all costs of design and installation for the
system, including engineering costs. The federal study assumed a
variety of treatment systems would be installed, depending upon the
mill site, including:

primary clarifier,

aerated stabilization basin;

activated sludge;

sludge dewatering by twin wire press; and

anaerobic.

The high projected costs will not translate into billions of equipment
sales in any one year. Ernst & Young (1990b) projected that the
required investments will be made over a fairly extended period,
perhaps extending beyond the 1994 deadline, due to the high cost to
the industry and its current weak financial position.

In addition, according to the Council of Forest Industries, over half of
B.C. portion of the costs has already been expended.34 Alberta and
B.C. have had provincial standards on dioxins and furans in place for
some time, and nearly all mills have secondary treatment in these
provinces. For example, in its 1989 annual information form filed
with the Ontario Securities Commission, MacMillan Bloedel
announced that it planned to spend $68 million at its Alberni Pulp and
Paper, Harmac and Powell River mills to eliminate production of
dioxins and furans (all three mills are in British Columbia). Spending
will decline sharply once these investments have been made because
the company will have completed all or most of the capital
improvements necessary to meet government regulations.35

34 Ross (1991)

35 It is important to recognize that capital spending by individual companies will follow
irregular patterns. A major investment in environmental equipment over one or two years
does not necessarily mean that the company will continue to spend that amount every
succeeding year. In fact, it is more likely that the opposite will occur and the company

104

Some firms expect to use process changes to either reduce or eliminate
emissions affected by the new regulations. Donohue Inc. of Quebec
City, for example, recently announced that it would build a $25
million chlorine dioxide production plant at its St.-Félicien pulp mill.
The company indicated that the use of chlorine dioxide in the pulp-
bleaching process would reduce the amount of dioxins and furans in
the pulp and mill effluent to below detectable levels. We might also
expect to see more recycling of water to lower effluent flow rates and,
therefore, reduce the capital and operating costs of the water treatment
system.

In addition to the capital costs of water treatment systems, pulp and
paper mills in Canada will undergo a substantial increase in operating
costs as a result of the installation of these systems. The most
significant external cost would be for polymer, phosphoric acid and
other chemicals for the systems. The federal government is also
considering extensive monitoring requirements for the industry.

MISA guidelines will be the other important factor determining future
needs of Ontario pulp and paper firms. Monitoring under MISA
commenced in January 1990. MISA will impose requirements for the
best available technology economically achievable for each discharger.
Eric Hall of the Wastewater Technology Centre expects that many
firms will meet new regulatory requirements by installing secondary
treatment systems, such as an aerated lagoon.36

All three Ontario firms interviewed for this study expect to be required
to add or to expand secondary treatment facilities at some of their
Ontario operations. One company suggested that it would be
changing its processes to reduce water use over the next 2-3 years.
Another firm sees the need to either reduce chlorine use in its
processes or add new end-of-pipe control technology for chlorine.
Spill containment systems are also under investigation at one
respondent operation.

According to Eric Hall, conventional primary and secondary biological
treatment systems will handle BOD, suspended solids and acute

will reduce its spending in succeeding years. Therefore, for example, we would not
necessarily expect MacMillan Bloedel to spend a large amount on air pollution control
technology in 1990 or 1991 simply because it did so in 1989.
36 Water and Pollution Control (1990)

105

toxicity problems, but possibly not the full range of organochlorines
that might ultimately be subject to regulation. Hall, cites several
approaches on both conventional methods and innovative approaches
currendy being tested in Canada, including: chemithermomechanical
pulp mill designs able to achieve zero discharge; anaerobic pre-
treatment, mixing and aerobic treatment for kraft mill wastewater to
control chlorinated organics; membrane technologies coupled with
biological treatment; and altered activated sludge treatment.

One Ontario firm mentioned that it is looking at several innovative
control processes: reverse osmosis, (such systems exist for other
industries, but are not yet available for pulp and paper) "freeze
crystallization" utilized in the U.S., ultraviolet techniques, which the
firm believes may or may not be applicable to pulp and paper; and
biological systems other than activated sludge.

On balance, the three surveyed firms have quite differing expectations
on future changes in water pollution control spending. One company
believes that its recently purchased control technology is adequate and
that the firm's water spending will fall as a result. The others expect
significant increases in spending for water treatment.

Industrial Minerals

Testing and analysis under the MISA program has been the major area
of water pollution control expenditure for surveyed industrial minerals
firms over the last five years. Settling ponds and monitoring the
impact of landfill sites on ground water were other areas of
expenditure in this market segment.

The MISA program is expected to result in some increase in spending
on water protection - primarily on goods - over the next five years,
although two firms believed that they would not be affected to any
great extent by new regulations. Several items are expected to require
additional control such as alkalinity, total suspended solids (TSS), and
perhaps lead, arsenic, and mercury. Firms tended to be uncertain as
to how these items might be controlled, although filtering and settling
tanks were noted as the likely approach to TSS. Additionally, one
firm mentioned that their process currently involved cooling water that
is discharged at high temperatures, but was unaware of any impending
regulations to require cooling before discharge. The same company is
investigating a closed-loop process, but the temperature reached by
cooling water is presenting some difficulty.

106

Municipalities

Municipal water protection concerns are generated both at landfill sites
and sewage treatment plants. Ground water protection is the main
water-related problem at landfill sites. All municipalities interviewed
were involved in monitoring groundwater (one landfill site
interviewed analyzes 1200 samples per year) as well as conducting
hydrogeological studies surrounding their landfill sites.

One municipality surveyed for this study provides an example of the
techniques and purchases made across the province. The main landfill
site has retained a consultant on a full-time basis to analyze
groundwater. This landfill site has an engineered clay liner (other
municipalities have sites with natural clay lining) to prevent leachate
seeping into the aquifer. A consultant is retained during liner
construction to ensure quality control, and monitoring equipment is
also used to test the integrity of the liner on an ongoing basis. Water
from the landfill site is collected in polyethylene pipe and pumped into
the sanitary sewer system. This landfill site also has "purge wells"
located between the site and populated areas. If found, contaminants
are pumped out of the ground into the sanitary sewer.

Sewage treatment facilities are a major investment in water pollution
control for municipalities. Pollutants are accepted from all industries,
although municipal by-laws limit certain substances. Key pollutants
for one municipality interviewed are residential sewage, heavy metals,
organic compounds, and wastes from paint and organic chemical
manufacturing.

Total spending by municipalities in Ontario on areas such as water
treatment and sewage treatment has not grown significantly in real
terms over 1977-87, as shown in Chart 4.1.37 However, more recent
data cited in Chapter 3 for water and sewage treatement showed rapid
growth over 1987-90.

37 The publication on which this data is based is no longer being produced.

107

Chart 4.1

Municipal Environmental Capital Spending in

Ontario After Inflation

(thousands of Canadian dollars)

$100,000 ..
$50,000 ..

$0 4.

1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987

■ Sewers

O-Waier

■ Solid Waste

Source: Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Municipal Financing Information 1987.

Based on Ontario statistics, municipal spending on sewage treatment
represents about 41% of all municipal environmental capital
expenditures. While all municipalities in Ontario have some form of
sewage treatment, this ranges from very simple systems such as
lagoons to more sophisticated systems employing extended aeration
and sand filtration.

A wide range of environmental protection goods are required for
sewage treatment plants. Monitoring and testing equipment as well as
automatic samplers and flow meters are used to evaluate water quality.
Other purchases include pumps, air blowers, tanks, and filters. One
facility included on our interview list uses activator sludge to deal with
soluble and solid BOD in water. Micro-organisms create solids that
are subsequently settled in clarifiers. The settled sludge is shifted to
digestors where bacteria are removed. Then, the sludge is dewatered
and incinerated. Consulting services are often used to assist with
treatment site selection, to recommend equipment, and to design
process changes.

Sewage treatment spending grew rapidly in the late 1980s, due to
growth in Metro Toronto and the surrounding regions. However, the
recent economic slowdown is likely to affect sewage treatment

108

spending, as housing and industrial development has slowed. Future
growth will be affected by MISA which is designed to lessen the
amount of industrial sewage being treated by municipal sewage
treatment plants in the province. As such, it will counteract some of
the growth in sewage treatment systems that will be linked to
population growth in the province.

Several significant changes that will cause increases in sewage
treatment spending were mentioned by Ontario municipalities or
reported in Ernst & Young (1990b). Some 28 municipalities have
primary treatment systems only. These will all be upgraded to include
secondary treatment systems over several years (the time period has
not yet been established) at an estimated cost of some $600 million.

Interview respondents expect that future regulations will require
greater flow monitoring and sampling. As well, process changes are
foreseen in order to begin to treat ammonia, and to remove chlorine
used to disinfect effluent. Greater capacity would be required
necessitating additional tanks, blowers, and pumps, but other specific
equipment needs are not clear. Consulting assistance would
undoubtedly be required to implement these process changes.

Remedial Action Plans for Great Lakes sites could entail over $1
billion in expenditures urban runoff control and improvements at
sewage treatment plants. Table 4.7, based on Apogee et al (1990),
provides capital cost estimates for steps to restore sport fishing at RAP
sites. Sewage treatment plant improvements are largely upgrades to
secondary treatment with nutrient and phosphorous removal. Urban
runoff control includes the construction of retention basins; physical,
chemical and biological treatment; and other measures.

109

. — __

Table 4.7

Capital Costs of

Municipal Programs

to Restore Sport Fishery

in Remedial Action

Plans

($ Millions)

Site

Urban

Sewage

Runoff Control

Treatment Plant

Improvements

Detroit River

$81.7

$51.8

Hamilton Harbour

64.9

69.2

Jackfish Bay

0.4

0.0

Metro Toronto

543.8

0.0

Niagara River

23.7

35.3

Nipigon

0.5

1.7

Peninsula Harbour

0.0

0.2

St. Clair River

11.0

28.9

St. Lawrence River

9.1

22.6

St. Mary's River

11.9

20.9

Severn Sound

5.1

0.2

Spanish River

0.0

4.8

Thunder Bay

17.2

32.8

TOTAL

$769.3

$268.4

The Quebec government subsidizes all of the construction costs for
sewage treatment facilities in that province, with the budget for next
year likely to be near $500 million. Of these amounts, approximately
60% is for actual construction of the plants, 12-15% is for consulting
studies and the balance is for sewage lines to link up municipalities to
the sewage treatment plant.

Most municipalities in other parts of Canada either have some form of
sewage treatment or are in the process of adding this capacity. In
Nova Scotia, for example, 59% of the population lives in areas with
sewage treatment facilities. Another 25% are in areas which are in the
process of putting in capacity, while 9% are in the early planning
phase. The remaining 7% have no sewage treatment facilities. There
are still some major cities without complete sewage treatment facilities,
including Halifax and Sydney.

In New Brunswick, 80 of 1 17 municipalities have sewage collection
and treatment facilities. All of the three major communities

110

(Fredericton, Saint John and Moncton) are in the process of upgrading
their facilities to provide sewage treatment capability for all the sewage
generated. Saint John will have the largest investment as the current
capacity treats only 40% of the raw sewage generated. It is expected
that over a 5 year period another 15 communities will put in sewage
treatment facilities.

On the west coast, Victoria and Vancouver will likely be undergoing
major sewage treatment projects in the near future. Victoria currently
has no sewage treatment other than screening. Vancouver, like other
cities in Canada, has a problem with sanitary sewer overflow mixing
with the storm sewers. The city will be adding a system to control
this overflow. We understand that a technology has yet to be selected.
The capital costs for these projects is estimated at $100 million per
year over 5 years.

Operating costs for sewage treatment plants vary considerably by the
type of plant. Metro Toronto estimates that annual operating
expenditures for its 4 sewage treatment plants are about $20 million
for outside goods and services. This expense would include items
such as pumps, coagulants and chemicals, but not electricity or natural
gas. These expenses would also include many 'non-environmental'
products which are needed to operate and manage these facilities.

The Quebec government estimates that there are 300-400
municipalities drawing water from surface water sources without
some form of water treatment. The government in that province is
drawing up legislation to improve the quality of drinking water in
these communities. We would expect that this program, if adopted,
would be the largest increase in capital spending in Canada for
drinking water treatment. Other than this, we are not aware of any
major programs taking place in Canada to construct water treatment
facilities, although we understand that Ontario is considering the
development of new drinking water standards.

A longer term trend may be the use of disinfectant treatments to
replace chlorine in the water treatment system in the future. We
understand that some tests are taking place now in Ontario with other
treatments such as ozonation or UV, the latter being an area where
Ontario has been competitive in export markets. Because of the
danger in handling chlorine, and other considerations, there are some
advantages to finding alternatives. As a result, markets for
disinfection technologies could grow in the future. At the same time,

' ÏTT

we are aware that water treatment technology in Canada has not
changed for many years, and that change comes slowly to this
industry.

4.5 Trends in Canadian and Ontario Solid and
Hazardous Waste Management

4.5.1 Supplier Views

Solid and hazardous waste management service firms expect a 15%
annual growth in revenue over the next five years, based on our mail
survey results. Producers of equipment for waste management
forecast a 21% annual growth in sales for the same period, with firms
supplying both products and services to this market project a 1 9%
annual growth rate.

Firms interviewed by Ernst & Young expect that the solid and
hazardous waste management sector will see strong growth in some
areas, but weak growth elsewhere.

Process changes by industry, coupled with waste reduction initiatives
in both consumer and industrial product markets, will keep the solid
waste disposal industry growing at less than the growth in the
economy. Higher tipping fees are already encouraging firms to
reduce the volumes of waste they send to landfills, according to
disposal companies. Municipal landfills also reported revenue
declines associated with reductions in waste flows and diversions of
Ontario waste to lower-cost U.S. dumps. Furthermore, some waste
management firms are feeling the impact of declines in manufacturing
activity in Ontario. Incinerator manufacturers and other
manufacturers of waste management products see their primary
markets of growth to be either the United States or overseas because
of the solid waste disposal restrictions in Ontario.

Among the areas expected to see more promising growth in the future
are:

• consulting on waste management planning for
municipalities faced with a shortage of landfill sites and
a moratorium on incinerators;

• consulting relating to litigation surrounding
contaminated sites or waste management projects;

112

• sludge management;

• providing consulting services to existing waste disposal
clients relating to waste reduction, recycling
opportunities, and other waste management issues;

• chemical recovery and recycling;

• material recovery facilities;

• decommissioning of contaminated land sites;

• hazardous waste management / destruction;

• composting products and services, particularly in
overseas markets;

• incinerators for VOCs in the U.S. market, particularly
on the west coast (due to regulatory requirements there).

4.5.2 Purchaser Views and Literature Review

As in the case of air and water pollution control, we used interviews
with purchasers as well as other reports on Canadian environmental
markets to develop further insights into potential growth markets for
solid and hazardous waste management. In this section, where
references are not provided, the views are those of our interview
respondents.

D&B (1990) found that the majority of large companies surveyed dealt
with solid waste management issues. Of the 393 firms with 50 or
more employees reporting equipment installations, the most common
items of equipment were those relating to waste collection. Major
expansions are seen in several types of equipment relative to the
installed base, as shown in Table 4.8.

113

Table 4.8

Current / Expected Installations of Waste Management

Equipment in Canada

(As a % of 393 Companies Currently Dealing with Waste Management)

Currently
Installed

New
Installation in
Next 3 Years*

New
Installation in
4-10 Years*

Computer soft / hardware
Incineration

Recycling systems / equip.
Liquid waste collection
Solid waste collection
Waste disposal systems/equip
Waste handling systems/equip
Waste separation systems

6
41
49
55
33
27
20

9
18
43
11

9
10

3%
2
11
7
7
5
6
6

♦Includes some firms that have current installations who expect to install "
I additional or replacement equipment.
I Source: Adapted from D&B 1991 .^

D&B (1990) also surveyed firms on current and projected
expenditures for environmental purposes. As shown in Chart 4.2,
firms expected to spend less on "waste disposal services" in 1 990 or
1992 than in 1989, but increasing amounts for warehousing, shipping
and storage. This would appear, in our view, to reflect a growing
reliance on alternatives to disposal, such as recycling and re-use.

38 D&B (1991) reported the results additivcly - they added the percentage of firms
expecting an installation in the next 3 years to those with a current installation, and
reported this as the percentage that will have an installation 3 years from now. This
ignored the possibility that some of the expected installations were at firms with existing
installations.

114

Chart 4.2

Selected Environmental Expenditures in Canada

Average Spending by Respondents

1989

1990

1992
(projected)

Storage Containers and □ Waste Disposal
Warehousing

Source: D&B (1990)

Table 4.9, drawn from CH2M Hill (1991), provides the best current
estimate of the sources of solid wastes in the province as of 1989.
The focus of these estimates is on non-hazardous wastes disposed at
landfills and incinerators. Excluded from these estimates are the
significant waste volumes generated by construction/demolition
wastes not sent to public landfills, soil/spill decommissioning, road
construction, dredging, as well as foundry sand, blast furnace slag,
fly ash, bottom ash, compost and sewage sludge.

In contrast to air and water pollution control, heavy industries are not
the dominant business sources of solid wastes in Ontario. As shown
in Table 4.9, such sectors as construction, retailing, communications
and other services, and food and beverage industries are among the
larger sources of industrial wastes.

115

Table 4.9
Solid Waste Sources in Ontario, 1989

Source

Tonnes

Residential

4,053,200

Industrial, Commercial, Institutional (ICI)

Agriculture

75,000

Mining

no data

Food and beverage industries

468,000

Rubber, plastic and leather industries

135,000

Textile, knitting mills and clothing industries

38,000

Wood industries

25,000

Furniture and fixtures industries

74,000

Paper and allied industries

80,000

Printing and publishing industries

42,000

Primary metal industries

139,000

Metal fabricating industries

171,000

Machinery industries

49,000

Transportation equipment industries

255,000

Electrical products industries

81,000

Non-metallic minerals industries

59,000

Chemical and chemical products industries

61,000

Miscellaneous manufacturing industries

34,000

Other manufacturing industries

no data

Wholesale trade

166,000

Construction

1,601,000

Transportation

134,000

Communications and services

1,155,000

Electrical power and gas

28,000

Retail trade

397,000

Other sources (incl. government)

94,000

TOTAL ICI

5,361,000

TOTAL RESIDENTIAL AND ICI

9,414,200

Source: CH2M Hill (1991)

116

Sector Analysis

Iron & Steel Industry

Acid, chrome, and caustic soda are important hazardous waste
concerns for the Ontario iron and steel firms interviewed for this
study. Hydrochloric acid is recovered from wastewater and is reused,
avoiding the need for disposal. Chrome is recovered from wastewater
in an ion exchange process but cannot currently be reused, which is a
significant concern for the respondent firms. The Steel Council of
Canada cited the need for methods of treating chrome-based solutions
for reuse as an important item on the industries environmental agenda.
One firm mentioned that caustic soda - used to clean steel - is
neutralized with acid and hauled away by a waste disposal firm. This
firm hopes to recycle and reuse its caustic soda in the future.

An important avenue to reduce hazardous waste will be the use of
more environmentally-friendly raw materials, notably coated-free
scrap, low-sulphur coal, and, new solvents. At the end of the pipe,
one firm noted an effort to expand recycling technology for iron
oxides. As well, byproducts such as blast furnace slag, currently sold
to other users, will have to be upgraded in quality to retain customers
such as cement plants and aggregates firms.

Solid waste management does not appear to represent an area of major
concern or planned change for this industry, which is already one of
the most active users of recycled materials. Some scrap is produced
that contains lead and zinc. One firm noted that future needs to
separate out the lead and zinc were foreseeable, a view echoed by the
Steel Council of Canada. Waste from sintering plants is generally
returned to the process. One firm believed that spending on solid
waste would decline over the next five years compared to the last five
years as their recycling efforts take greater hold.

Electric Power Utilities

Electric power plants deal with both hazardous waste and solid waste
issues. Ontario Hydro generally has similar concerns with hazardous
waste as many industries in the province, including substances such
as PCBs, solvents, cleaning fluids, and lubricating oils and greases.
Hydro is gradually taking PCB-using transformers and capacitors out
of use, and the PCBs are usually collected and stored on site.
Occasionally, a capacitor fails, and soil along transmission line routes

117

is contaminated. This soil is put into barrels and stored. Hydro is
involved in both internal and external research which is investigating
PCB destruction technology. Other hazardous materials are collected
by Hydro, and hauled away by waste disposal firms.

Radioactive wastes are produced by nuclear generating stations, and
are classified as hazardous wastes. Spent fuel currently remains on
site in pools. Some low- and intermediate-level wastes are stored
centrally at the Bruce nuclear facility, including items such as paper
products, cleaning materials, ion-exchange resins from water
treatment at nuclear plants, and tools. Very low-level waste are
incinerated at Bruce.

No change is seen in the storage of spent fuel, unless a federal
depository is established. A new incinerator for low level radioactive
wastes may be built at Bruce, which would greatly reduce the need for
storage of low level waste materials. Compacting of remaining low-
level materials could reduce storage further. As well, Hydro is
involved in a project to design decontamination equipment for cleaning
materials and tools.

Hydro's solid waste concerns are standard industrial wastes and ash
from fossil fuel generating stations. Ash is wet stored in landfills, and
the nuclear operations have a landfill for regular solid wastes at the
Bruce facility. Solid waste spending is almost entirely on goods used
to manage Hydro landfill sites.

Several solid waste management changes are planned by Ontario
Hydro. Recycling of industrial wastes is underway, with a goal of
25-50% reduction in landfill usage. Scrubber sludge from new
facilities being constructed at fossil fuel generating sites will be a
concern in the future.

Engineering studies on ash utilization and landfilling are currently
underway. Under MISA, ash is likely to be dry stored. This dry
storage may permit the waste ash to be reused, which is not possible
with wet storage. Several uses may be possible, including sales to the
cement industry, backfill material for mines and quarries, and as
material for road construction.

118

Metal Casting

Hazardous wastes are not a major difficulty for metal casting firms
surveyed. All spending in this segment goes to hauling services.
Waste oils are produced, most of which is hauled by reclaimers. One
operation uses some old oils for lubrication on conveyor belts. In
addition, one firm is currently storing PCBs on its production site.
The other firm has chrome-laden sludges from its water treatment
hauled away. Few changes in hazardous waste management are seen
by either firm, other than one company's plans to reduce sludge
wastes by adding filters in the water treatment plant.

The two surveyed firms differ in their relatively minor solid waste
management needs. One operation intends to run its own landfill.
They currently are using hydrogeological consulting services, and
foresee continued use of such services. The other firm produces slag,
core sand, and other wastes that are hauled by a waste disposal
company. This respondent complained that such disposal firms had
significant market power that hurt user industries such as metal
casters. The firm further suggested that the government should take
action to prevent disposal firms from pricing abuses since such actions
may discourage industry from properly handling of solid and
hazardous wastes that are increasingly costly to have hauled away.

Non-ferrous Metal Mining and Smelting

The mining industry is not a substantial producer of hazardous
wastes. Used oils, greases, and solvents are generally collected in
drums and then hauled by waste disposal firms. Two operations
noted that they are storing PCBs. One of these firms has been able to
reuse contaminated oil after having destroyed its low level PCBs.
Another firm has a small amount of laboratory wastes that are taken
away by haulers. Little change is expected in how firms deal with
their hazardous wastes, although one company is looking at the
possibility of using waste oils for fuel.

Tailings are the predominant solid waste produced by the surveyed
mining operations. Specific areas are generally designed to handle
tailings, and one firm noted that it uses waste lime to try to neutralize
its tailings. Dams are often built to contain tailings, and these dams
are tied into the treatment of drainage water. Waste rock from mine
development is also a concern in this industry. This material is treated
similarly to tailings by the surveyed companies. Sealing or capping

119

tailings and waste rock is likely in the future. One firm noted that it is
considering establishing wetlands that may deal with acid drainage
naturally.

Increases in tipping fees at municipal dumps are encouraging mining
firms to reduce waste sent there. One company is involved in pilot
project with a municipality where the firm receives compostable
materials from the dump to use as a covering on its tailings.

Metal Plating

The surveyed firms produce some hazardous waste such as solvents,
greases, oils, and metal-laden sludges from their water treatment
processes. The increasing cost of hauling away these materials is
driving firms to consider how substances might be recycled, reduced,
or even reused. One firm is currently recycling spent paint and
solvents, and is investigating possible reuse of the metals contained in
treatment sludge. A further change tied to water protection is the
possibility for the elimination of chrome usage.

Total spending in the hazardous waste segment may not greatly
change. While haulage costs are expected to rise, metal platers are
seeking ways to reduce the volume of hazardous wastes that they
produce. Thus, the overall trend is expected to be a decrease in the
use of hazardous waste hauling services, and an increase in consulting
services and equipment used in recycling and reuse.

Interviewed firms produce few solid wastes. Some of the few items
generated are recycled, while the remainder is able to be sent to
municipal dumps. No significant changes are anticipated in this area.

Chemical Industry

In addition to the oils and greases handled by most industries,
hazardous* chemical wastes are a concern for organic chemical
manufacturers. At one operation, used oils and greases are collected,
some are subsequently cleaned and reused in processes, while
unrecoverable amounts are incinerated. Chemical wastes and sludges
are generally collected by the companies, and hauled away by waste
operators which receive almost all environmental protection spending
on hazardous wastes.

120

Surveyed firms in the organic chemicals subsector see two key
changes in the future for hazardous waste management. Process
changes will be aimed at both better yields (with less waste produced)
and reduction in the use of materials that generate hazardous wastes.
As well, increased recovery and reuse of certain substances is likely.
One firm is also considering installing an incinerator to burn waste
sludges.

Several types of hazardous wastes are generated by inorganic chemical
respondents, including mercury-contaminated sludges, oils, paints,
solvents, cyanide, and "reactive" wastes such as sulphides and carbon
tetrachloride. Most of these items are collected, and hauled by waste
management firms. However, processes are used by companies to
recover and reuse cyanide and mercury. One firm noted that its
unrecoverable cyanide is rendered non-hazardous through either
incineration of cyanide-laden dust, or chemical treatment that destroys
waste cyanide.

Process changes aimed at reducing the volume of hazardous
contaminants produced are expected to become more important in the
next few years. Respondents believe that few further opportunities
exist for recovery of hazardous substances from waste streams, except
perhaps some additional recycling of waste oil. Efforts are planned to
segregate waste more effectively in order to reduce total volumes of
contaminated material to be hauled; carbon tetrachloride and sodium
hydrosulphide were noted as examples of wastes intended to be
separated. As well, one firm intends to find ways to render
substances non-hazardous at the production facility, rather than incur
higher disposal fees.

Total spending on hazardous waste management is expected to rise
only slightly over the next five years. Haulage fees are anticipated to
rise, pushing up total disposal costs, but this will largely be offset by
declining volumes of hazardous waste.

Landfills, recycling, and haulage to municipal dumps are current
methods of solid waste management used by organic chemicals firms.
One firm noted that about half the material deposited in its landfill is
non-hazardous aqueous sludges, while the other half are dry solids.

Inorganic chemicals firms generate modest volumes of solid wastes,
from such items as office refuse, cardboard, and construction wastes.
However, one inorganic chemical company operates a moderately

121

sized, naturally lined landfill with at least 15 years of capacity
remaining. Reusable or bulk containers are being used extensively in
the industry for product shipping, and their use is expected to grow
slightly in the future. Respondent solid waste spending goes mainly
to municipal dump tipping fees.

Increased recycling is anticipated by chemical companies in order to
reduce both the amount of solid waste generated and tipping fee
payments. One organic chemicals firm is planning to de-water its
sludges to reduce the volume of materials entering the landfill.
Greater monitoring as well as the installation of a run-off water
collection system are other solid waste management changes expected
by this firm.

Total spending on solid waste management is likely to rise only
moderately over the next five years, according to respondents.
Greater recycling efforts will help to compensate for increases in
tipping fees.

Petroleum Refining

Catalysts containing metals and storage tank residuals are the main
hazardous wastes dealt with by refineries surveyed. Currently, all
these wastes are hauled away by disposal firms. One firm mentioned
some smaller concerns with caustic acid items and spills contaminated
soil. Virtually all spending on hazardous waste management goes to
hauling fees, which are expected to rise dramatically, pushing total
spending up strongly over the next five years.

Refineries do not expect any change in the way their hazardous waste
problems are handled. Firms suggested that the refinery process
generates waste sludges that are unavoidable. However, one
company thinks that recycling, reuse, or volume reduction of some
wastes may be possible.

Other than the minor concerns of recycling office wastes with blue
box programs and the shipping of other materials to municipal dumps,
refineries do not have solid waste management problems. Surveyed
operations expect to increase recycling to try to avoid growing tipping
fees at civic landfills.

Decommissioning of sites used in the downstream industry, such as
gasoline stations, will be a major concern of petroleum marketing

122

firms. One respondent estimated that cleaning up sites formerly used
as gas stations could entail hundreds of millions of dollars in Canada.

Pulp and Paper

The surveyed pulp and paper firms were not significant producers of
hazardous wastes. Any wastes generated tend to be typical industrial
concerns such as lubricating oils, old paints, solvents dyes, and
laboratory waste. Most of these substances are hauled away by waste
disposal companies. Respondents mentioned that they would like to
burn recycled oil in their power boilers for energy, but regulations
currently prohibit such practices.

PCBs are also an issue for pulp and paper operations. A number of
mills in Ontario were built before PCBs were recognized as an
environmental hazard. Surveyed firms are converting operating
components that used PCBs and storing them. Overall, few changes
are foreseen in the manner of handling hazardous wastes.

All surveyed firms operate landfill sites for bark and unusable wood
waste. Two firms deposit water treatment sludges in their landfill,
although one firm burned about half of their sludge for energy. Other
than purchasing equipment to move the waste, pumps and liners are
occasionally bought to use at the landfill sites. Most external spending
is allocated to consultants for site preparation and expansion studies as
well as hydrogeological testing.

Few changes are anticipated in solid waste management beyond
searching for new sites. One firm is making a modest waste reduction
effort to reduce cores and wrappers of paper rolls that are currently
returned by customers. Another firm is investigating the possibility of
grinding sludge otherwise destined for landfill to sell as mulch for
home gardens, but is not hopeful of the prospects. One respondent
did mention that a potential need exists for remediation at old landfill
sites.

Industrial Minerals

The industrial minerals industry is not a significant producer of
hazardous wastes. The main areas of concern are oil and grease
products used to lubricate machinery as well as solvents. Currently,
firms are recycling some items such as crankcase oils and lighter
lubricants. Some items are stored and hauled away by waste disposal

123

firms. One firm noted that it is beginning to demand that the suppliers
of heavy greases and lubricating oils collect any containers that the
firm cannot clean itself. The only trends revealed in our discussions
are potential increases in recycling of crankcase oil, other petroleum
products not now recycled, and ethylene glycol products (e.g.,
antifreeze).

Kiln dust from cement manufacturing is the main item of solid waste
that firms in the industry deal with themselves. One firm reported that
a small amount of their kiln dust is sold commercially as a soil
stabilizer. However, the vast majority of kiln dust produced by
surveyed cement makers is stored in piles or landfills owned by the
firm.

Some companies run their own landfill sites for metal and lumber
scraps. Occasional consulting services for hydrogeological testing are
required for proper landfill management. Incidental solid waste is
generally sent to municipal landfill sites. Few other external
purchases of goods or services were mentioned by surveyed firms.

Two trends were identified in our discussions - storm water control
and new sales possibilities for kiln dust produced by the cement
manufacturers. One firm that stores the dust in piles on its production
site noted that storm water runoff from the stockpiles may become a
concern in the future. Generally, a hard crust forms on top of the
piles quickly after deposition, but some areas may be exposed to rain
water. Initially, this firm sees a need for monitoring. If a problem is
found, settling ponds for the runoff are likely to be used. Another
firm is investigating several possibilities for their kiln dust: reuse of
some of the material for salable cement; sales to other companies that
can use the dust; and further sales as a soil stabilizer. However, the
extent of these possibilities was thought to be fairly limited.

Municipalities

Some cities in Ontario operate household hazardous waste programs,
either picking up such wastes on an intermittent basis or operating
permanent depots. One municipality interviewed collects hazardous
wastes and turns it over to a disposal firm, while another city contracts
out both collection and haulage. Total spending on hazardous wastes
is expected to rise significantly due to increased hauling fees and
expanded collection from residences and other small waste producers.

124

Municipalities handle solid waste produced by residential,
commercial, and industrial ratepayers through landfill and recycling,
while composting plans are in the works in some jurisdictions.
Landfills may or may not require construction of a liner. Cities and
towns with clay soils can rely on natural lining, while those with
sandy soils must construct clay liners. Standard equipment such as
trucks, compactors, earth scrapers, and bulldozers are required by to
operate landfill sites. A number of municipalities in the province are
searching for new landfill sites as existing facilities reach capacity.
Hydrogeological and other site preparation studies are normally
undertaken when investigating potential locations. Some
municipalities contract-out garbage pickup and landfill operation.

In order to reduce the need for added landfill space, many
municipalities have instituted "blue box" recycling programs. Cities
are looking to expand their efforts to include more items in the
recycling pickup such as cardboard, fine papers, mixed plastics,
magazines, and boxboard. As well, a number of jurisdictions plan to
expand service to handle recyclables produced by schools,
institutions, and businesses.

The anticipated changes over the next five years in solid waste
management generally involve expanded blue box programs.
However, a few municipalities in the province are also beginning
composting efforts. In particular, one southern Ontario city
anticipates that once a planned expansion of the blue box system and a
composting program are both in place, landfills will handle only 40%
of total solid waste generated in the jurisdiction. (Currently, blue
boxes are this municipality's sole waste diversion program, and only
about 5% of total waste produced is shifted away from landfill.)
Households in this city will be asked to separate all waste produced
into three streams: organics for composting; recyclables; and other
items. Some of these other items may be recoverable as scrap, while
the remainder will be landfilled.

The municipality interviewed with the most advanced composting
plans is in the midst of a major capital project to handle both
compostables and recyclables. After considerable consulting design
assistance, the city is constructing several major buildings and
purchasing equipment such as turning machines to agitate composting
material, bag breakers, shredders, screens, conveyors, and balers.
The compost will eventually go to municipal landscaping uses. If the

125

compost quality is high enough, the municipality thinks it may be able
to sell some to nurseries and sod farms. Another city is subsidizing
(along with the Ministry of the Environment) composters for home
use.

Few other changes in solid waste management are foreseen, although
one city intends to increase its emphasis on the collection of household
hazardous waste. Total spending on solid waste management is
expected to grow moderately over the next five years.

Other Sectors

In contrast to air and water quality management, solid waste
management needs are not concentrated in a small number of industrial
sectors. Virtually all businesses generate office refuse. A wide range
of manufacturers have wastes associated with unused materials (e.g.
lumber from furniture making, or textiles from clothing
manufacturing), damaged goods, or packaging materials from their
suppliers. Construction firms generate significant volumes of waste
from construction sites.

While we have not conducted interviews in each of these sectors, it is
likely that the general trends would be similar to those of the sectors
covered. Wastes sent to traditional disposal sites are likely to grow
less rapidly than the economy as a whole, while recycling and reuse
activity will grow much more rapidly.

Several industries are also playing an increasing role as users of waste
materials. The Ontario newsprint industry is increasingly under
pressure to increase the content of recycled fibre, and fine paper
consumers are also demanding products made from recycled paper.
Dofasco and Stelco are the largest recyclers of steel metal cans, while
Consumer's Glass is the largest recycler of used glass.

The market for innovative technologies for separating and recycling
wastes is likely to grow rapidly in response to regulatory pressures
and increased disposal costs. Resource Plastics Corp opened a
pioneering plant for recycling and upgrading soiled plastics in 1990.
Other initiatives are under examination or in process for such materials
as construction wastes (lumber), Tetra-paks, and other materials. The
LCBO recently undertook a study of options for the re-use of
alcoholic beverage containers.

126

The health care industry is another sector with important waste
management requirements. Pathological waste must be handled
separately from other waste. There are several different methods for
disposing of this waste including incineration, hammermilling and
sterilization.

According to Ernst & Young (1990b), roughly half of Ontario
hospitals (about 122 in total) operate their own incinerators, most of
which use dated technologies that are no longer acceptable to the
Ministry of the Environment and therefore in need of upgrading.
These hospitals will be examining their options for solid waste
disposal in the next few years. The Ministry is also reviewing
applications from private companies to establish centralized
incineration facilities in the province, similar to those operated by
Decom in Quebec. The time frame for implementation of waste
management changes for Ontario hospitals is anywhere from 3 to 10
years.

4.6 Trends in Canadian and Ontario Markets for
Control, Sampling and Monitoring Instruments

4.6.1 Introduction

The demand for environmental instruments will in some cases be
closely related to the changes in air, water and solid and hazardous
waste management discussed above. Some of the demand for
monitoring, testing and control instruments will be driven by the need
to control new environmental protection processes and test their
performance over time.

In other cases, specific regulatory requirements will influence the
demand for monitoring equipment. The major monitoring program
under MISA is already largely completed. Future demand may come
from various future initiatives, such as: a revised Clean Air Program,
monitoring efforts relating to refining our knowledge of NOx-VOC
sources, or testing relating to the clean-up of contaminated sites under
Remedial Action Plans in the Great Lakes.

4.6.2 Supplier Views

We also interviewed a sample of Ontario manufacturers of instruments
for their views on potential areas of demand growth. Among the areas
projected to have good growth opportunities are:

127

• robust field equipment to monitor ground water
emissions;

• real-time monitoring technologies;

• monitoring applications for large, high profile facilities
subject to tightening environmental enforcement;

• software and equipment for monitoring and analysis
relating to emerging environmental concerns, including
the determination of solid waste site locations, spill
analysis, rehabilitation of mines and other contaminated
sites.

• remote sensing imaging, as a part of the growth in
demand for geographic information systems to monitor
environmental activity.

4.6.3 Purchaser Views and Literature Review

As noted above, the results of our discussions on future air, water and
solid waste management issues with purchasers also provide some
indications of future needs for related instrumentation and monitoring
equipment. For example, several respondents noted significant
increases in monitoring requirements are likely in air pollution control,
under the CAP or some amended program. The municipal sewer use
bylaw could increase monitoring expenditures for industrial sources
that currently discharge wastes into municipal sewer systems.

D&B (1991 ) survey of 556 firms with more than 50 employees found
that many firms report current use of measuring, monitoring or
laboratory equipment and supplies relating to environmental
applications. As shown in Table 4.10, the most common items are
sampling systems, followed closely by air and water quality
instruments and sensors. Firms project a significant pace of
acquisition of control, sampling and monitoring instruments and
various laboratory equipment items over the next decade.

128

Table 4.10

Current / Expected Installations of Control, Sampling and

Monitoring Instruments in Canada

(As a % of 556 Companies with 50+ Employees)

Currendy
Installed

New
Installation in
Next 3 Years*

New
Installation in
4-10 Years*

Air quality instruments

14%

Groundwater instruments

Water quality instruments

Sampling systems

Combustion controls

Computer controls

Process controls

Sensors

Data acquisition equipment

Electrical control equipment

Analytical instruments

Bacteriological supplies

Calibration equipment

Environmental chambers

Lab data acquisition equip.

Laboratory equipment

Lab reagents and supplies

* Includes some firms that have current installations who expe
additional or replacement equipment.
Source: Adapted from D&B 1991. »

.ct to install

39 D&B (1991) reported the results additively - they added the percentage of firms
expecting an installation in the next 3 years to those with a current installation, and
reported this as the percentage that will have an installation 3 years from now. This
ignored the possibility that some of the expected installations were at firms with existing
installations.

129

4.7 Trends in Canadian and Ontario Markets for
Engineering Consulting, Laboratory and other
Services

4.7.1 Introduction

Similar to instrument demand, the demand for engineering and other
services (excluding solid and hazardous waste management) will be
closely linked to changes in the approaches to air, water and waste
management discussed above. Engineering consulting demand for
environmental projects is typically related to developing
recommendations and designs for treatment of wastes or waste
reduction initiatives, and supervision of their installation. Laboratory
services are related to both ongoing testing requirements as well as the
specific programs mandated under MISA, CAP or other regulations.

MISA demand, formerly focussed on monitoring and lab services,
will increasingly be shifted to environmental engineering, as new
control orders are developed. The demand for water quality lab
services may grow faster outside Ontario, as other provinces adopt
regulations similar to those in Ontario.

The other major factor in this area will be regulations that impose
liabilities for environmental damage on creditors of bankrupt firms and
acquirers of industrial lands. This will create a demand for auditing
the environmental condition of numerous industrial properties on
behalf of potential creditors and acquirers.

4.7.2 Supplier Views

Firms interviewed by Ernst & Young projected a number of areas in
which growth in demand will occur:

«. laboratory services related to air emission monitoring;

• laboratory services related to the decommissioning of
contaminated sites, and testing on sites for creditors and
acquirers of corporate assets;

• consulting firms using simulations models for
environmental assessments;

• other work for environmental assessments

130

• consulting to municipalities to resolve solid waste
management problems as landfill sites become more
scarce;

• consulting to industry on waste management issues;

• consulting and other services relating to sludge
management;

• expert testimony for an increasing number of
environmental hearings and court cases;

• industrial wastewater treatment engineering.

4.7.3 Purchaser Views and Literature Review

The results of our interviews with purchasers reported under the air,
water and solid / hazardous waste headings also provide insights into
future consulting and laboratory requirements. Major initiatives
relating to process changes or end-of-pipe controls will typically be
linked to external service expenditures. However, some of the larger
respondents indicated that, particularly where process change
solutions are sought, in-house engineers play an increasingly
important role, reducing the role played by the environmental
protection industry.

Ernst & Young (1990b) noted that the trend in environmental
regulations will be to increase the degree to which smaller sources are
subject to regulation. This is the case, for example, in Ontario's
MISA program and the related initiative aimed at firms currently
discharging into municipal sewers. Future regulations in such areas
as VOC control, waste reduction, and greenhouse gas emissions are
also likely to increase significantly the number of firms seeking
changes in their current environmental practices. This trend will be
important to suppliers of environmental consulting services, since
these smaller sources will generally not find it economical to employ
in-house resources to meet their environmental planning needs. At the
same time, our interviews with purchasers for this study suggest that
larger industrial sources of environmental discharges have expanded
their in-house environmental engineering skills.

131

D&B (1991) surveyed firms on their recent and projected use of
environmental consultants. The results show that, in the near term,
the number of firms that make use of environmental consultants is not
expected to increase. Of the 1,837 small firms (less than 50
employees) surveyed across Canada, only 4% had hired
environmental consultants in the past 2 years, and only 3% expected
to do so in the next 2 years. Some 28% of the 556 larger firms
surveyed used environmental consultants in the past two years, but
only 26% said they will do so in the next two years. Ontario firms
reported the greatest use of environmental consultants - 13% of firms
of all sizes used them in the last two years; 11% project doing so in
the next two year period.

132

5. International Environmental Protection Markets

5.1 Introduction

As noted in our survey results, many Ontario environmental protection
firms are now active in international markets. There is considerable
potential for future growth in this export activity. As in Canada,
increasing regulatory demands and growing public and corporate
consciousness on environmental matters will result in greater demand
for environmental products and services. International trade
liberalization will both ease market barriers and help to generate
interest in export markets among Ontario firms.

In this Chapter, we review market developments in three potential
export markets: the United States, Mexico and Europe. Since in each
case other, very recent reports have examined these markets40, we do
not undertake a full study of these markets in this report. Rather, we
report on the highlights of the findings of these previous studies, as
well as on recent developments that may affect Ontario export
demand.

In general, many of the same trends observed in Ontario are evident in
foreign jurisdictions. These include:

• The adoption by regulatory authorities of the following key
principles: sustainable development; economic instruments
(including full-cost pricing, pollution taxes, liability for site
damage; and in the U.S., emissions trading); pollution prevention
(vs. end-of-pipe control);

• A slow consolidation of the currently diffuse environmental
protection industry, with mergers of major international firms and
the entry of major industrial firms (chemical companies,
conglomerates);

• Increasing attention to 3R activities, and growth in materials
recovery facilities and waste reduction initiatives;

• Tightening regulatory requirements on toxic discharges and
municipal/industrial wastewater treatment;

40 Redma (1990), Ernst & Young (1990a) and Verut (1990).

133

• Where command and control regulations are in use, regulators are
increasingly mandating either Best Available Technology or BAT
subject to a reasonable cost constraint.41

• Efforts to address transboundary problems, including efforts
aimed at acid precipitation and the phase-out of ozone depleting
substances;

• Tighter controls on transboundary movements of hazardous
wastes and more stringent disposal and treatment regulations; and

• Recognition of previously contaminated sites and efforts and site
remediation.

The similarities in environmental problems and regulatory approaches
will mean that solutions developed in Ontario will be highly relevant in
other parts of the world. At the same time, countries that have moved
ahead of Canada on some fronts are in position to develop products
for export to Ontario.

5.2 The U.S. Market

5.2.1 Background

Trends in the U.S. market for environmental products and services
will have a major impact on Ontario suppliers in the environmental
protection industry. First, the U.S. market represents the most
important export market for many Ontario firms. Geographic
proximity, a common language, the ease of cross-border travel for
business purposes are factors linking the environmental markets of the
two countries.

Second, these links are further tightened by the presence of many
multinational environmental firms operating on both sides of the
border. For example, Laidlaw is one of the major players in the U.S.
solid and hazardous waste management industry, while the U.S.-
based WMI and BFI compete with Laidlaw in Ontario. Other
multinationals present in both countries include ABB, Westinghouse,

41 This latter requirement has been termed Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable (BATEA) in Ontario, Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive
Costs (BATNEEC) in the European Framework Directive on air pollution, and Best
Practicticable Control Technology (BPCT) in the U.S. Clean Water Act.

134

ENSR, Joy, Wheelabrator, Chemical Waste Management and
Sevenson.

Third, U.S. regulatory policies may in many cases signal
developments in Canadian jurisdictions. This is particularly the case
where U.S. environmental problems have been more severe due to
population density or other factors, leading to an earlier recognition of
the problem in environmental regulations. Examples include the steps
to address smog in Southern California and the efforts under the
Superfund program to clean up heavily contaminated sites.

Fourth, technological solutions deployed by U.S. industries provide
important indicators of potential demand in Canada. Canadian
jurisdictions adopting Best Available Technology standards will often
look at U.S. installations for evidence on the potential effectiveness of
control technologies. Furthermore, U.S. multinationals operating in
Canada may seek to duplicate solutions adopted by their parent
companies.

Although export markets and Ontario competitiveness are an important
element of this report, an examination of U.S. legislative and market
trends was not included in the Terms of Reference for this study.
This omission reflects the fact that the Ontario Ministry of Industry,
Trade and Technology (MITT) recently commissioned a study on
opportunities for Ontario exports of environmental products and
services to the U.S.

In view of the importance of U.S. markets, we felt that our report
would be incomplete without some reference to market trends south of
the border. Thus, in this Chapter, we provide a few of the highlights
from the recent study by Redma Consultants (1991) for MITT on
U.S. market opportunities for Ontario environmental goods and
services producers, and a report on environmental engineering
markets by Ernst & Young (1992a). The reader is referred to these
reports for more detailed reviews of these issues.

Our survey results showed that about one-quarter of Ontario firms
responding were active in the U.S. environmental protection market.
Firms were active in the U.S. market in a wide range of product and
service areas.

135

5.2.2 Summary of U.S. Market Demand

Total expenditures on environmental protection in the U.S. are
estimated by the U.S. EPA at $US 115 billion for 1991. W.A.
Lorenz and Co., an American consultancy, puts 1991 spending at
$130 billion, matching the estimate by NETAC (1992) for the size of
the U.S. environmental protection industry. U.S. expenditures could
significantly exceed Canadian spending in such areas as site
remediation (heavily influenced by the clean-up of Department of
Defence sites) and, in some states, wastewater treatment, where
legislation has run ahead of most Canadian provinces. The private
sector also plays a larger role in some aspects of municipal solid waste
management. Future U.S. expenditures in the area of flue gas
desulphurization will also reflect the greater reliance on high-sulphur
coal. Table 5.1 shows a breakdown of projected U.S. expenditures
for the year 2000.

136

XB==a""B*== ^^^^^

Table S.Ï

Projected U.S. Environmental Expenditu

res in

2000

(Billions of US$)

Air pollution control

Stationary sources

$29.7

Mobile sources

14.1

Other

0.2

TOTAL

$44.1

Water pollution control

Point sources

56.6

Drinking water

6.6

Non-point sources

1.0

TOTAL

64.1

J Land pollution control

Solid waste

22.1

Hazardous waste

12.1

Underground storage

tanks

3.7

Remediation

8.1

TOTAL

46.1

TOTAL

& 154.3

[Source: Redma (1991)

As in Ontario, recent legislative developments will be key driving
forces for future U.S. environmental market opportunities. Major
elements of federal legislation include:

• the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) relating to waste management and site
clean-up;

• the Clean Water Act; and

• the Clean Air Act, and recent amendments requiring significant
expenditures to address acid gas emissions and expand the scope
for emissions trading.

Redma (1991) also provides estimates of total U.S. demand for
individual EP products and services, largely based on EPA reports or
estimates derived by other consultants. Table 5.2 summarizes one

137

estimate of the 1990 sales of the U.S. environmental protection
industry.

Estimated Size of th

Table

5.2

e U.S. Environmental Protection Industry

1990

Industry

# of Public

# of Private

Sales

Companies

(US$ Billions)

Analytical Services

l.oOO

1.8

Solid Waste Mgmt

4,200

28.6

Hazardous Waste Mgmt

2,400

13.3

Asbestos Abatement

3,000

4.0

Water Infrastructure

3,100

14.0

Water Utilities

24,000

11.5

Env. Consulting/Eng.

7,600

12.2

Resource Recovery

5,100

17.2

Instrument Mfg

500

1.8

Air Pollution Control Equip 16

1,600

5.4

Waste Mgmt Equip

5,000

9.2

Env. Energy Sources

800

1.8

Diversified co's

2,000

7.0

Conglomerates

500

4.0

TOTAL

237

61,400

131.8

Source: Environmental B

usine s s Journal (1991)

Redma (1991) concluded that the following types of U.S. market
opportunities were most promising for Ontario EP firms:

• Those in water treatment where Ontario's reputation is strong;

• Markets in the Great Lakes region, particularly for new exporters;

• For air pollution control, the following industrial sectors: electrical
power- generation, chemicals, and pulp and paper,

• Supply air pollution control to small and medium sized firms that
will be new to the market (dry cleaners, auto body shops, printers,
bakeries)

• Alternative fueling systems;

138

• For water and wastewater treatment, the following industrial
sectors: municipalities, electrical power, chemicals and pulp and
paper,

• For water and wastewater treatment, the following products:
potable water systems, in-process water treatment systems for
chemicals firms (especially ion exchange systems), laboratory
water quality testing services, and consulting engineering services.

• In solid/hazardous wastes, supplying state governments, medium
sized municipalities and small to medium sized industry;

• In site remediation, sales through the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.

Ernst & Young (1992) examined the opportunities for Canadian
environmental engineering and consulting firms in the eastern U.S.
market. Many of the areas highlighted in the Redma study, including
spending associated with the revised Clean Air Act and hazardous
waste management and site remediation, are featured in this report.
The following is a sample of some of the additional areas of
opportunities for environmental services firms:

environmental audits or pre-acquisition site assessments;

contracted operation and maintenance services;

desalination;

disposal of outdated weaponry;

environmental engineering directed towards process improvements
with environmental benefits; and

the $656 million spent annually by the EPA, and $255 million
spent by other U.S. federal government agencies, on
environmental service contracts.

139

5.3 The Mexican Market

5.3.1 Introduction

The Mexican market for environmental protection products and
services will present promising opportunities for selected Ontario
environmental companies. There are several reasons why the Mexican
market may be of particular interest in the coming years:

• geographic proximity relative to markets outside North America;

• the proposed North American Free Trade Agreement could both
stimulate Mexican demand (by imposing environmental standards
in the agreement) and improve access to the Mexican market for
Ontario firms;

• economic and population growth in Mexico and their implications
for increases in waste volumes;

• absence of strong, Mexican-based competitors in some segments
(although competition from U.S.-based firms is likely).

A recent report for the Canadian Embassy in Mexico (See Verut 1990)
provides an excellent overview of Mexican environmental
opportunities for Canadian firms. In the remainder of this section, we
present highlights from this report, supplemented by updates from
more recent analyses (Fernandez, 1992) and our own recent
experience in Mexico.

5.3.2 Environmental Conditions in Mexico

As in other developing countries with a significant degree of
urbanization and industrialization, Mexico currently suffers from
horrendous environmental problems. A combination of high
population densities, lax environmental standards and inadequate
enforcement has led to serious problems in terms of air, water and
land quality.

Air Pollution

Air pollution problems are most severe in Mexico City, which is
frequently cited on the list of the world's worst locations for air
quality. The very high density of automobile operation, the use of

140

poorly maintained vehicles with no pollution control devices, and the
poor state of controls on industrial sources, have contributed to the
current crisis situation in the capital city. Table 5.3 highlights the air
conditions for some contaminants.

Table 5.3
Air Pollution in Mexico City

Pollutant

% due to
mobile
sources

% due to Average
point sources Levels

Maximum
Levels

100%

18.1 ppm

31.6 ppm

NOx

63%

27% 0.047 ppm

0.322 ppm

S02

17%

83% 0.043 ppm

0.075 ppm

Source: Verut(l

Industrial sources of air pollution include 15,000 severe polluters,
including electric power plants that burn heavy crude oil, metal
smelters and foundries, pulp and paper mills, and other
manufacturers.

Water Pollution

Water pollution in Mexico is another serious problem, with improper
or nonexistent treatment of municipal sewage and industrial wastes in
heavily populated areas being the source of the contamination.
Industrial plants in Mexico city routinely discharge untreated
wastewaters into a canal that flows through the city. Twenty rivers are
classified as being the most severely polluted, including the Lerma,
the Bravo and the Coatzacolcos.

Industrial sources of discharges include oil wells, petrochemical
plants, and other heavy industries, as well as runoff from improperly
dumped chemical wastes and agricultural pesticides. These sources
account for 38% of discharges, with the remainder attributable to
untreated municipal sewage. A total of 4,250 million cubic metres of
wastewater is generated annually, most of which is currently
untreated.

141

Solid and Hazardous Waste

Mexico has solid waste collection systems in major urban areas, but
one-quarter of the 52,000 tons of garbage generated daily is left on
streets or empty land. About two-thirds of the wastes that are
collected are merely deposited in open air piles, with only just over a
third going to landfills.

According to Fernandez (1992), Mexican industry produces some
12,000 tons of toxic wastes daily, with just under 10% being
disposed of at the one licensed dump (in Neuvo Leon). The
remainder is merely dumped in rivers, ravines, or empty land, a
situatation that has left many rivers and lakes highly contaminated.

Of particular note is the extent of contamination originating from
industrial operations located along the Mexico-U.S. border. Recent
studies have found high rates of birth defects in U.S. border cities,
which have been blamed on cross-border flows of hazardous wastes.

5.3.3 Regulatory Response and Market Opportunities

The Mexican government has been making some progress in
addressing the problems of environmental management through the
development of appropriate regulations. The following are some of
the highlights of these efforts:

• A major 1989 initiative was aimed at the air pollution crisis in
Mexico City. Steps included are measures restricting vehicle use,
mandatory vehicle maintenance, catalytic converters for public
vehicles, conversion to gas generated electricity and gas an
industrial fuel, relocation of smelters, emission controls in
industry, use of alternative fuels in vehicles, modernization/
installation of sulphur and HC recovery plants at PEMEX (the
state oil company) facilities, and HC vapour recovery at fuel
distribution facilities.

• A recently proposed program to address water pollution in the area
bordering along the U.S., under an agreement reached with the
Bush Administration;

• the 1988 Federal Law on Ecological Equilibrium, centralizing
authority within SEDUE (Ministry of Urban Development and
Ecology). It sets requirements for environmental assessments and

142

permits for new facilities as well as providing overall authorization
for the development and enforcement of environmental standards.

• A $2 million project to restore the Lerma River, Guadalupe lade
and Laguna de Zumpango.

Despite the recent measures put in place by regulators, the Mexican
environmental market is not large at present. Total equipment and
instrument demand is estimated by Verut at $217.6 million (US) in
1989, a figure which may overstate the actual applications for
environmental purposes.

Considerable growth in both goods and services demand is likely over
the next decade. This will be driven by demands placed by the U.S.
and Canada in the context of NAFTA, pressures from within Mexico
for continued improvement in air quality, and industrial and
population growth. American environmental groups have expressed
considerable dissatisfaction with the weak border measures proposed
recently by the U.S. and Mexico, and tougher measures may be
required as a part of the political process leading to free trade.

Fernandez notes that several international companies are currently
examining entry into the toxic waste field in Mexico. Chemical Waste
Management, a leading American firm, recently opened a new
incineration plant for toxic industrial oils, and has plans for four toxic
waste centres. Chemical firms in Mexico, including major U.S.-based
multinationals, are facing much more stringent requirements for
proper disposal of toxic wastes.

The government is also encouraging industry to install proper
wastewater treatment facilities, although progress is slow. SEDUE is
in the process of treatment plants along the most heavily contaminated
waterways. Overall, Fernandez forecasts a $10 billion market for
"pollution control devices" by the end of this decade.

5.4 The European Market

5.4.1 Introduction

The European market is another potential source of export revenues
for Ontario environmental protection companies. In addition,
European firms are increasingly becoming active in North American
markets, so developments in the European EP industry will ultimately

143

affect Ontario firms in their home markets. Recent acquisitions, such
as the purchase of FGD system producer Combustion Engineering by
Asea Brown Bovari, and the purchase of ENSR by the Nukem
(Germany), have signalled a gradual globalization of the environment
industries.

A much smaller share of Ontario firms are involved in Western Europe
than in U.S. environmental markets. Only 47 firms reported
environmental goods exports to Western Europe, and 45 firms had
service exports. These figures represent only one-third of the U.S.
market participation rates. Distance, language barriers, and a lack of
market knowledge are factors that may underlie the limited efforts by
Ontario firms to expand into Western Europe.

Ernst & Young (1990a) presented an overview of opportunities in the
EC environmental market, with some discussion of markets emerging
in Eastern Europe. The reader is referred to this report, prepared for
the Ontario Ministry of Industry, Trade and Technology, for details on
European regulations, market trends and Ontario export opportunities.
The following are a few of the highlights from our report:

• The European Community market for environmental protection
goods and services is estimated to be in the order of US $50
billion in 1987. Other estimates range as high as putting the total
market size at closer to US $100 billion in 1989.

. The German market is by far the largest in the EC, and is about 2-
3 times as large as the EP markets in France or the U.K.

• Potable and wastewater treatment accounts for 1/3 to 1/2 of the
total market for EP goods and services in the EC. Solid waste
issues generate about 1/3 of the total. Air quality concerns attract
1/4 to 1/3 of total expenditures. Noise pollution control and
energy conservation (included in some data sources) are modest
contributors to the overall market totals.

• In Germany and the Netherlands, the current emphasis in industry
is on changes in production processes that reduce waste
generation. The markets for traditional end-of-pipe systems in
these countries will be weakened by the new emphasis on
integrated, clean technologies. The U.K. and France are thought
to be 5-6 years behind in the use of this technology. Among these
northern European countries, municipal water treatment projects

144

frequently involve the introduction of tertiary treatments to
precipitate nitrates and phosphates. Recycling and composting of
wastes is most common in the EC in West Germany, Belgium,
and France, although Spain is an exceptional case from Southern
Europe in its high rate of recycling.

In general, Southern Europe, where controls are only now being
put in place, is still focussed on end-of-pipe solutions for industry
and introducing primary treatment systems for municipal
wastewater. Italy, Portugal and Greece have not gone far in
recycling or composting. Overall, Southern Europe is thought to
be about 15 years behind the rest of the EC in terms of its adoption
of environmental protection technologies.

The European Commission sets overall minimum guidelines for
environmental regulations in member states. EC directives will
promote spending in the following areas: flue gas
desulphurization, monitoring for municipal incinerators, catalytic
converters in vehicles, municipal wastewater treatment (especially
in the Mediterranean area) environmental impact assessments,
clean technology engineering, CFC substitutes, water quality
monitoring and testing, and municipal solid waste management.

Germany will remain the largest EC market. Italy and Spain will
grow rapidly, but not pass the U.K. or France in total market size
over the next decade.

Direct export is a viable market entry strategy only for light, high
value items such as some control equipment or instrumentation.
Licensing or joint ventures may be favoured over greenhouse
investment in manufacturing facilities for other abatement
equipment.

Aside from short-term contracts, services firms will have to look
to either investment in an EC office or a joint venture with or
acquisition of an established firm as an entry strategy. Germany
(for market size and reputation) or the U.K. (for common
language) are promising sources of partnerships or acquisitions.
Branch offices or further alliances in individual EC countries still
appear to be valuable despite the removal of trade barriers within
Europe.

145

5.4.2 Recent Developments

Since the completion of Ernst & Young (1990), there have been two
major developments in EC environmental policy that will shape future
demand. First, the EEC's Council of Environment Ministers adopted
a major Directive in the area of water treatment. Second, negotiations
have commenced on the EC's fifth environmental Action Program.42

Water Treatment Directive

The water treatment directive, adopted on March 18, 1991, commits
EC member states to significant actions to improve wastewater
treatment. This is a pathbreaking move for the EC, in that it continues
the movement beyond ambient standard setting into the prescription of
remedial courses of action.

The directive will require all cities with a population in excess of
15,000 to have a wastewater treatment plant with secondary treatment
(biological and secondary settlement) by the year 2000. Cities with
2,000 to 15,000 inhabitants will have a deadline of 2005 to comply
with the same requirements.

Exceptions could be made for cities that discharge into less sensitive
coastal areas have a population less than 150,000, in which case only
a primary treatment system would be required. In some
environmentally sensitive areas, treatment processes must also be
installed to remove nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorous.

Other measures include a ban by 1999 on the current practice of
releasing treated or untreated sludges into fresh or sea water.

Estimates of the cost of meeting this new directive vary quite widely.
The EEC put the cost at some $60 billion (Cdn), while Germany
estimated that total costs would be closer to $300 billion (Cdn).

Nitrates and phosphates in water are to be a major target in the EC and
individual member states, according to Fouhy (1990). Beyond the
legislation pertaining to municipalities, Fouhy predicts EC and
member state legislation for nitrates from industrial wastewater
treatment plants. This will place significant requirements on fertilizer

42 The four previous Action Programs were passed in 1973, 1977, 1983 and 1988.
146

and ammonia plants. Germany will also be moving to install
dephosphatization equipment (most likely involving the use of
anaerobic bacteria in sedimentation tanks to break down nitrates and
phosphates) in municipal wastewater plants.

Fifth Action Program on the Environment

The discussions now under way within the Commission are aimed at
the implementation of a fifth "Action Program" on environmental
matters, that will form the framework for EC policy for the remainder
of this decade.43 The program is based on the following core
principles:

• sustainable development;

• preventative and precautionary action (i.e. a Pollution Prevention
approach);

• integration of environmental considerations into other policy areas.

Other broad themes, are also reflected in the program. First, the EC
will make greater use of economic instruments as an approach to
environmental protection, including charges, levies, taxes and
subsidies.

Second, greater reliance will be placed on the role of the public in
promoting environmental improvements. This will include
environmentally-based labelling, and greater access to information
flowing from environmental audits.

Third, the EC will increase enforcement of environmental laws across
the Community. As we noted in Ernst & Young (1990a), the EC's
issuance of directives have often run ahead of its ability to enforce
them. The EC is now considering the establishment of a network of
inspectors and inspection bodies, in addition to the planned European
Environmental Agency.

The specific measures to be taken under the umbrella of the plan will
not likely be implemented until later in this decade, according to Ernst

43 The following review is based on Ernst & Young (1992b) and O'Riordan (1989)

147

& Young (1992b). Five sectors are specifically targeted in the plan:
manufacturing, energy, transport, agriculture and tourism.

Measures aimed at manufacturing will include eco-labelling, BAT
requirements, and strict civil liability. Energy prices could rise
considerably if a proposed carbon tax becomes the focus of efforts to
promote conservation and forestall the greenhouse effect. Transport
measures include improved fuel efficiency and the promotion of
environmentally-friendly modes of transport. The agricultural
measures will be aimed at soil conservation and surface and
groundwater contamination. Containing the damage caused by
tourism growth in the Mediterranean and other areas will include the
creation of protected sites covering 15% of the EC's territory.

5.4.3 Eastern Europe

Our earlier report only touched on the market for environmental
products and services in Eastern Europe. We noted that while the
environmental problems faced by Eastern European nations were
enormous, funding for addressing these problems would delay the
growth in these markets, which were estimated at about $5-10 billion
in total. Only 29 of our survey respondents reported involvement by
their Ontario operations in Eastern European environmental services
markets, and 33 firms reported exports of Ontario-made
environmental products to this market

In this section, drawing on Gilges et al (1991), Nichols (1989) and
Ernst & Young work in Poland and Czechoslovakia, we explore some
of the opportunities that are likely to emerge for environmental firms
that position themselves to take advantage of Eastern European
demand.

Economic pressures in the east bloc suggest that governments see
immediate" needs for economic infrastructure and capital investment,
rather than spending on environmental matters. The director of the
privatization agency in the former East Germany notes that "we must
use our capital to build new factories on new sites, and then use the
wealth created to clean the environment in a later generation."44
Similarly, Nichols (1989) quotes several U.S. experts that have
examined market prospects as having concerns about the ability of east

44 As quoted in Gilges et al, (1991)
148

bloc countries to generate sufficient hard currency to pay for
environmental clean-ups.

These clean-ups would be extremely costly for the fragile economies
of eastern Europe. Ernst & Young (1991) quoted an estimated cost of
$188 billion to bring facilities in the former GDR to West German
standards, but closures of plants could reduce this cost significantly.
Gilges et al (1991) cite an estimated cost of $4 billion for
environmental clean-ups in Leningrad alone. Furthermore, the extent
of past environmental damage is only now coming to light in some
countries.

Even if major clean-ups are several years away, there are areas of
expenditure that will be active in the near term, with Levy (1990)
citing an estimate of $16 billion in EP equipment alone in "the coming
years". First, environmental protection investments will be included
in plant upgrades undertaken as a part of modernization efforts in
resource processing industries, either before or after privatization.
This is especially the case where western investment is being sought,
and in industries such as paper or petroleum refining where the east
bloc firms earn hard currency.

Second, foreign aid coming from western Europe, the U.S. and
Canada will in part be allocated to environmental projects. Aid from
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and from the
PHARE (Poland and Hungary, Assistance to Restructing the
Economies). Individual western countries are already providing
funding for some environmental projects, particularly those that
address transboundary air and water pollution control problems.

Third, some western environmental equipment firms may use low cost
eastern European labour to manufacture products for western Europe
and thereby generate hard currency to support other activities in
eastern Europe.

Fourth, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary are all looking at
eventual membership in the EC, and would have to bring their
environmental legislation into line if they are to be given serious
consideration for membership.

Finally, there are signs that a number of eastern European countries
are moving towards the establishment of environmental regulations,
under pressure from the voting public. Environmental movements

149

have been formed in several countries in the former east bloc. Levy
(1990) notes that a poll in early 1990 showed that 83% of Czech and
Slovac citizens felt that environmental improvements should be a top
priority for the government. Both the Czech and Slovak Federal
Republic and Poland have issued tougher emission standards and
established fines for violators, but enforcement to date has been lax.

Environmental conditions across this region differ in the extent of the
damage done. Hungary and Yugoslavia have a better record of
environmental management than Poland, for example. Business
International (1990) calls Poland "one of the the most ecologically
devastated countries in the world." Overall, conditions generally are
similar to those that existed in heavily industrialized areas in the west
about two decades ago, although there are extreme cases of
environmental hazards not seen in the past in the west, particularly
those relating to toxic substances and radioactive wastes.

Air Pollution

Air pollution levels are extremely high in several countries that have
made use of soft-brown coal (the former GDR and Czechoslovakia) or
countries downwind from them (Poland). As shown in Table 5.4,
emissions per capita have been several times the current experience of
western countries.

150

Table 5.4
1988 Emissions of SO2 and NOx

(Kilograms per Capita)

S02 NOx

GDR

Czechoslovakia

Bulgaria

Romania

I Hungary
Poland
USSR (European part)
U.K.
U.S.
Sweden
France
West Germany

317

179

114

390

115

259

110

84 (all SOx)

Source: Worldwatch Institute (as quoted in Gilges et al)

Note: Data for Romania are for 1980 (for sulphur dioxide) and 1985 (for NOx)

Health effects from high levels of S02 and lead are already known to
be occuring in industrial areas of eastern Europe, such as in the Silesia
area of Poland and in industrial areas of Romania and Bulgaria.

While the technological solutions to the existing problems are well
known, funding remains the most serious constraint. Hungary's
electric plants have a total modernization budget of $25 million (US),
too little for a retrofit of even a single plant. In the former GDR,
much of the problem from industrial sources will be addressed by
shutting down some of the oldest coal burning industrial plants and
using German capital and engineering expertise to retrofit others.
Automotive emissions will be improved as the car industry in
Germany and Czechoslovakia moves to western-designed cars.

The air pollution control market in some parts of eastern Europe will
benefit from concerns in western Europe over transboundary pollution
problems. For example, Scandinavian countries are providing
financing for a $1 billion effort to revamp nickel smelting and a
chemical plant in the former USSR in order to eliminate a threat to
their forests from transboundary flows of acid gas.

151

Water and Wastewater Treatment

Water pollution is another serious environmental problem facing
Eastern Europe. Nearly all major sources of water for the region are
heavily contaminated from industrial discharges, leaching from dump
sites, agricultural runoff and municipal sewage. Gilges et al (1991)
cite the following examples of extreme contamination :

• Half of Polish cities, including Warsaw, have dumped raw
wastewater into rivers. About 65% of Poland's surface water is
unfit even for industrial use;

• Leningrad is responsible for discharging over 1.1 million m3/day
of municipal sewage and industrial waste into the Neva River and
the Bay of Finland;

• The Elbe is frequently named as the world's most polluted river,
with discharges gathered from Czechoslovakia and the former
GDR and extremely high levels of mercury, cadmium, and lead.
A single German plant formerly discharged 20 kg/day of mercury;

• Salt and heavy metal levels in the Oder are so high that a planned
investment in a desalination plant is expected to finance itself from
the sale of recovered metals;

• 70% of Czech and Slovak rivers are heavily polluted and many are
biologically dead. Half of the Baltic Sea floor and its two feeder
rivers (the Wista and Oder) are unable of supporting life;

• The Black Sea and its feeder rivers, the Danube and Dnieper, are
heavily contaminated with lead, nitrogen compounds and
petroleum products;

• 90% of the Black Sea, along with the Caspian Sea, Aral Sea and
Lake Lagoda are dead.

Addressing these concerns will largely be linked to foreign capital
inflows, both from sources of foreign aid and from investments in
plant modernization. As in air pollution, priority may be placed in
addressing transboundary problems of concern to western Europe.
Sweden is funding the construction of wastewater treatment plants in
Poland to address pollution in the Baltic, and a Swedish engineering
firm is preparing plans to clean up Poland's paper industry.

152

Solid and Hazardous Waste

Eastern Europe has also been extremely lax in disposing of solid and
hazardous waste. While large cities have municipal waste
management systems in place, many smaller areas do not. Business
International (1990) notes that only a small portion of the millions of
cubic metres of Hungarian solid wastes are safely disposed or
recycled, and over 2,000 Hungarian communities have no garbage
collection.

Hazardous wastes and groundwater contamination from unregulated
dumping is an even more pressing problem. Poland has been a major
recipient of hazardous wastes from Western Europe, much of which
has not been properly treated or disposed. Serious groundwater
contamination has been detected in studies in northeastern Hungary
and the former GDR. Cleaning up these chemical time bombs will
cost billions of dollars that will ultimately have to wait for economic
development in the east or foreign aid from the west.

153

154

6. Competitiveness of the Ontario Environmental
Protection Industry and Government Policy

6.1 Introduction and Overview

As demonstrated in the preceding chapters, there will be considerable
market opportunities in the next few years for environmental
protection firms in North America and Europe. The share of these
markets reaped by Ontario firms will in large part depend on their
competitiveness vis-a-vis firms based in the U.S., Europe and the Far
East.

Competitiveness can be defined as the ability of a firm to supply
products or services to customers in a manner that meets or exceeds
offerings of competitors while providing the firm with a sufficient
return on investment. In terms of the environmental sector, there are
several important elements of competitiveness:

• technological leadership - with many jurisdictions requiring the use
of "best available technologies", it is imperative for a firm to be
seen to be supplying products or services that meet currently
achievable performance standards;

• price competitiveness - both goods and services firms must
compete on price, particularly since many projects are subject to
competitive tendering. Achieving price competitiveness while
earning an acceptable profit margin rests on having high
productivity, highly-skilled scientific and managerial staff and
competitive wage rates;

• market identity - our previous work with firms in this sector
suggests that success often rests on making buyers in the market
aware of the skills and expertise that the firm can provide;

• local presence - related to the above, for both goods and services
firms competing outside the home market, a local presence is
often important to establishing credibility as a supplier to a
particular geographic market, and to overcoming barriers to
operating from a distance (licensing of professionals, tariffs and
transport costs for equipment).

155

In this Chapter, we discuss a number of aspects of Ontario's
competitiveness in supplying environmental products and services.
First, we examine Ontario and Canadian trade performance in
environmental products and services, a measure of the industry's
ability to compete in the recent past in domestic and foreign markets.
Second, we report on the views of industry participants on the factors
that they see as helping or impeding their ability to compete. We then
turn to a review of human resource skills, an important factor in
determining competitiveness. Finally, we review suggestions made
by industry participants for ways in which government policy can help
engender a strong environmental sector in the province.

Our research suggests that Ontario firms are highly competitive in the
supply of environmental services. Ontario is well served by major
Canadian engineering consulting firms, laboratories, waste
management companies and various other firms supplying
meteorological, hydrogeological and other scientific services. These
firms are generally perceived to be reasonably well-informed
regarding technological options for environmental protection, and
many have been quite active in foreign markets.

A number of foreign-based service firms have operations in Ontario,
but these generally use Ontario residents for much of their work here.
One engineering firm based in the province felt that profit margins had
been eroded on environmental work due to increasing competition in
the province from U.S. engineering firms.

A few purchasers, and some service firms, believe that Ontario firms
have suffered somewhat from slow regulatory progress in the
province. Some buyers feel that U.S. consultants are more
experienced in dealing with contaminants where American regulations
have preceded those in Ontario. Waste management companies in
some cases suffer from an absence of dumping sites or approved
incineration facilities in Ontario.

Purchasers of environmental equipment in Ontario are able to draw
upon a wide range of suppliers with operations in the province,
including both domestic Canadian companies and subsidiaries of
foreign-owned multinationals. The Ontario content in major
environmental projects within the province is quite high, reflecting the
customized, on-site assembly of treatment systems and the high
proportion of basic process equipment in such projects.

156

Ontario does have a number of leading edge designers and
manufacturers of pollution abatement and control equipment and
instruments. These include manufacturers of water filtration and
purification equipment, air pollution control products, and various
niches in monitors and instruments.

Nevertheless, it is clear that the environmental equipment sector is
increasingly becoming a globalized industry, with major multinational
equipment firms using research in their home country as a basis for
expansion in other markets. U.S. and European equipment firms
have a strong presence in Ontario. Although most report a significant
Ontario content in their sales in the province, these firms do much of
the key research and design work in their home countries.

As we emphasized in our 1989 study, the basis for competitiveness
internationally appears to rest primarily on regulatory and enforcement
policies in the home market. The major U.S, European and Japanese
firms that are gradually consolidating the global equipment market
have generally developed technologies in response to particular
regulatory requirements in their home market. Ontario firms will be in
the strongest position in those areas where future regulatory
requirements in the province lead those of other countries.

As the equipment industry matures, most observers [see, for example,
NETAC (1992), Mcllvaine (1990)] expect to see a further
consolidation, with larger firms supplying a greater share of the
market. The signs of a gradual consolidation are already evident:

• large, multinational conglomerates are entering the market for
environmental equipment (and services). Examples include
several major Japanese (e.g. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,
Hitachi), and U.S. (Westinghouse, Corning, Exxon) industrial
concerns, as well as many of the world's leading chemical
companies.45 Ernst & Young (1990a) chronicled the gradual
consolidation of the European market under the control of large
industrial concerns such as ABB, R.W.E. (Lahmeyer), Hoechst
(Uhde), Deutsche Babcock, Siemens, Thyssen, and
Metallgesellschaft (Liirgi) Kruger and Danisco Companie Générale
des Eaux, Société Lyonnaise des Eaux, Bouygues and privatized
British water boards.

45 See Gross (1 992) for a discussion of Japanese entrants.

157

. Mergers and acquisitions, although slowing very recently, have
linked a number of major players, often across international
boundaries;

. Joint ventures and product licensing agreements are also leading to
a further consolidation in technological offerings.

Ontario-based equipment firms will therefore succeed either by
offering advanced, niche market equipment and services or by linking
up with major international suppliers through joint venture, licensing
or acquisition.

6.2 Canadian Trade Performance

Measuring trade in environmental products and services is extremely
difficult. First, many instruments, process equipment, materials
handling machinery, chemicals and other products are used for both
environmental and non-environmental purposes. In some cases
environmental applications are a small fraction of total usage. Second,
some specialized environmental products are aggregated with other
products in the commodity classifications used to report trade flows.
Third, services trade is not well measured by type of service. Finally,
trade data at the provincial level are not particularly reliable.

Table 6.1 reports 1990 Canadian trade with the U.S., Mexico and All
Countries in commodity classes having significant environmental
applications. The water filtration equipment category shows Canada
with a modest trade surplus overall, with U.S. trade dominating our
total trade picture. The air pollution control equipment categories and
instrument categories all show significant trade deficits. Trade with
Mexico has been at very low volumes.

Our view is that these data significantly overstate the current trade
volumes In environmental products, since they include commodities
that are heavily used outside the environmental protection industry.
For example, it is likely that a significant (possibly majority) share of
the data reported for the following categories are in use outside the
environmental field:

(1) "industrial or lab furnaces, including incinerators"

(2) "centrifuges and "parts of centrifuges" which would include parts
for clothes dryers and centrifuges used in various industrial processes;

158

(3) "filtering/purifying machinery or apparatus for gases" which
would include furnace filters, filters for compressors, air conditioners,
etc.;

(4) "parts of filtering.. .etc. for liquids or gases" which would include
parts of automobile air or oil filters;

(5) each of the instrument categories would have non-environmental
uses (medical and industrial labs, surveying equipment, etc.).

Table 6.1

Canadian Trade in Environmental Products 1990
($ 000)

Commodity

Exports

Re-exports

Imports

Industrial or lab furnaces, including incinerators (non-electric) and parts
US 15,122 82

Mexico 25 0

All Countries 18,940 292

Centrifuges (excluding clothes dryers) and parts of centrifuges

Mexico

All Countries

1,773

1,936

Filtering or purifying machinery / apparatus for water
US 42,986

Mexico 5

All Countries 49,111

339
0
928

175

190

Filtering or purifying machinery / app. for liquid (excl. water, oil, bev.)
US 26,113 1,096

Mexico 4 2

All Countries 29,333 1,603

42,874

68,093

26,649

40,064

37,703

42,892

22,289

29,598

159

iFiltering or purifying mach / app for gases (excl. intake for int. comb, eng)

2 • 37'704 343 239,497

Mexico 4,709 0 3359?

All Countries 102,536 702 283^270

Parts of filtering or purifying mach / app for liquids or gases

!? • 28.9W 2,475 110.811

Mexico 53 8 *° '

All Countries 36,655 3,752 136 725
Gas or smoke analysis apparatus

"S . 3.838 228 20,463

Mexico 12 0 0

All Countries 5,524 311 27 621
Chromatographs and electrophoresis instruments

HL 6M9 212 17,632

Mexico 0 0 0

All Countries 8,100 236 19 811

Instruments for physical / chemical analysis n e s

52- U'79° ^83 66,463

Mexico 112 0 ~

All Countries 18,913 2,040 91,880

Surveying hydrographie, océanographie, meteorological or geophysical instr nes

ZT ■ 6'039 1.205 70,155

Mexico 105 15 ' ,

All Countries 18,277 2,601

1
81,580

Source: Statistics Canada

Another estimate of Canada's trade position was included in Market
Facts of Canada (1988). For 1990, the study projected total pollution
control equipment exports of only $24 million, and imports of $747
million, for a deficit of $723 million. The report does not provide a
description of the methodology used, but we believe that the export
estimate sigmficandy understates actual exports.

6.3 Performance in the Ontario Market

Ontario Purchaser Survey

More specific information on the Ontario market was obtained in our
interviews with 50 Ontario purchasers of environmental products and
services. Respondents were asked to identify the country/province of
origin for equipment and service purchases. Our interviews suggest

160

that Ontario firms (including branches of foreign companies that
manufacture goods or provide services from an Ontario base) are quite
competitive in their home market, particularly in services.

These interview responses must be treated with some caution. Firms
may incorrectly perceive some Ontario-made items supplied by
foreign-owned subsidiaries as imports. Others may consider an item
to be supplied from Ontario when in fact the item was imported by
their local equipment dealer.

As summarized below, respondents purchased a very high proportion
of their environmental services from Ontario firms. In the case of
waste management services, a firm has to be Ontario based at least in
terms of waste pickups, although some wastes are sent to U.S.
landfills. Ontario consulting and engineering firms also do well in
their home market, with licensing requirements providing a degree of
protection for engineers.

Some respondents were unable to identify the country or province of
origin for their goods purchases, since the items were purchased from
an equipment dealer or were purchased by an external project manager
(engineering contractor). Those that were able to provide information
felt that a high proportion of their purchases were from Ontario firms,
although there were some exceptions.

A few noted that a significant share of their equipment purchases in
Ontario were from foreign subsidiaries or Ontario firms that
manufacture foreign-designed products under license. Thus, while
Ontario has a high share of final assembly or manufacturing, its share
of product engineering is lower.

The following is a summary of the responses by industry:

• Industrial minerals firms purchased about 90% of the air pollution
control services from Ontario firms. One mentioned that U.S.
consulting firms are a growing presence due to aggressive
marketing and wider experience with innovative approaches gained
in the more flexible U.S. regulatory system. Water pollution
control goods and services were nearly all Ontario purchases,
except for monitoring equipment (due to a price edge of a U.S.
firm). Waste disposal services are all spent with Ontario firms.

161

Metal casting firms reported that 90% of their air pollution control
equipment was sourced in Canada, but Ontario firms only had half
of this total. Dust collectors and SO2 scrubbers were items
purchased in the U.S. Ontario averaged a 75% share of the two
respondents water pollution control products. Services were
primarily sourced in the province of operation, but one firm used a
design for water treatment originally prepared for its U.S. parent
company.

Metal mining firms reported that Ontario air pollution control firms
supplied half of their purchases. The remainder was allocated to
purchases of blowers and process equipment to convert SO2 to
acid imported from the U.S. and Europe. Ontario supplied 90-
95% of water pollution control equipment. The Ontario share of
pollution control and waste management services was also in the
order of 95%.

Metal plating firms reported that over 85% of water pollution
control equipment was sourced in Ontario, although many of these
goods are U.S. designs manufactured under license in Ontario.
One firm also constructs some of its own water pollution control
equipment. Ontario firms supply nearly all of the pollution control
services, but one firm is looking at U.S. disposal of hazardous
wastes.

Municipalities reported significant import purchases for air
quality control at landfills, including U.S. -made methane/sulphur
incinerators and monitoring instruments. Sewage treatment plants
used about 60% Ontario-made equipment, including chemicals,
piping, electrical panels, and fabricated metal products. U.S.
firms supplied much of the remainder, including pumping
equipment, and in one case, its sludge dewatering equipment.
Europe is the source for perhaps 2% of goods purchases, for
valves and pump parts. Ontario equipment accounts for about
75% of solid waste goods purchases. Ontario consultants and
waste management firms have nearly all of the municipal
environmental services market due to their local presence and
established relationships with purchasers.

Organic chemicals firms source about 90% of goods and services
purchased for air pollution control from Ontario suppliers. The
respondents also estimated Ontario's share in their water pollution
control equipment purchases at 90%, and Ontario supplies about

162

75% of their solid waste equipment. Nearly all services purchases
for water and solid wastes are sourced from Ontario firms.

Inorganic chemicals firms estimated that Ontario firms receive 80%
of their service spending for air pollution control, but less than
50% of their air protection equipment spending. Ontario firms
supply their "lower-tech" items such as baghouses, while "higher-
tech" items including incinerators, scrubbers, and thermal
oxidizers are often purchased in the U.S. or overseas. Some of
this imported equipment spending may be linked to the experience
that these multinationals have had with equipment suppliers to their
parent companies, and to the very specialized nature of their air
pollution control needs. Ontario firms receive between 70-80%
of respondents' water pollution control equipment expenditures,
and virtually all of their related services spending. Monitoring
equipment, chemical settlers, pumps, and filters are all purchased
in Ontario. Some specialized treatment products and equipment
are sourced outside the province. Ontario firms receive a small
proportion of hazardous waste goods spending, perhaps less than
25%. Respondent firms purchased major items outside Ontario,
including an incinerator in the U.S., and a mercury recovery
process in Europe. Services firms in the province appear to earn a
somewhat greater share of respondent spending, roughly 40-60%.
However, one firm noted that most of its hauling and disposal
contracts have gone to firms in other provinces.

Petroleum refineries were unable to estimate their Ontario content
for goods purchases, but noted that Ontario firms were used for
nearly all of their services requirements.

Steel companies use internal staff for many air pollution control
services tasks. For external purchases, about two-thirds of air
pollution control equipment and 85% of services purchases go to
Ontario-based firms. Most of the remaining spending is received
by U.S. companies, and a small proportion is paid to Europeans.
Roughly half of water pollution control goods purchases appear to
be made from Ontario firms. Foreign purchased items noted by
respondents include clarifiers, cooling tower equipment, both
ordinary and chemical addition pumps, and instrumentation. Most
of these goods have originated in the United States, but some
pumps and instrumentation were sourced in Europe. About 90%
of water pollution services purchases occur in Ontario; the

163

remaining 10% usually accrues to manufacturers of the foreign-
sourced goods. No estimates were available for Ontario content in
solid and hazardous waste spending.

• Pulp and paper firms reported that Ontario firms supplied about
three-quarters of their air pollution control equipment and services.
One respondent noted the existence of competitive Ontario
producers of scrubbers and precipitators but another respondent
felt Ontario's share in air quality supplies could decline in the
future. One firm used the same Quebec consultants for all its
operations in Canada. Water pollution control equipment
purchases by our respondents showed an usually high import
share; only 40% of goods were purchased in Ontario, with 15%
sourced in other provinces, 35-40% in the U.S. and 5-10% in
Europe. Chemicals, valves, pumps, tanks and other basic
equipment is sourced in Ontario. Packaged treatment systems
were sourced from American or European firms, and the pulp and
paper firms thought that these had only partial Ontario content.
Currently water pollution consultants from Ontario are used, but
one firm felt it may look to experienced U.S. firms in the future.
Ontario-based solid and hazardous waste services and consultants
are used for nearly all purchases.

Ontario Hydro intends to spend several hundred million dollars on
flue gas scrubbers during the next decade. For the initial scrubbers
being installed at the Lambton generating facility, roughly 75-80% of
the purchases involved will accrue to Ontario-based manufacturers and
services firms, 15% will flow to U.S. companies, while the remaining
5% will be spent in Europe.

The costs of the Lambton scrubbers will be split between equipment
(50-55%), construction (30-35%), and engineering (10-15%). The
scrubber technology is of German origin, but 60-80% of the
manufacturing is to be done in Ontario, 20-35% in the United States,
and less than 5% in Europe. The construction will be completed by an
Ontario firm. Trades workers from Ontario will be used on the work,
based on an agreement between Hydro and the construction unions.
The basic engineering will be done by German firms, but the detailed
design and installation work, worth 60-75% of the engineering
spending, is to be handled by Ontario consulting engineers.

In more general terms, the thermal generation area of Hydro is able to
buy most of the products necessary for environmental protection in

164

Ontario. Items mentioned by respondents as being well-made in
Ontario, were shells, steel work, tanks, electrical control, pumps, and
fans. However, any equipment involving specialized designs is
frequently purchased outside Ontario. Since Hydro may be the only
Ontario purchaser of specialized items, producers are often not located
in Ontario, but rather in the U.S. or Europe. About 80% of water
pollution control equipment spending is directed at Ontario
manufacturers, with most of the rest sourced in the U.S.

Consulting services firms south of the border were believed to be
more aware of how to meet specific Hydro needs, but knowledge in
Ontario was said to be growing. Consultants based in the province
and in the U.S. were noted as being quite proficient with industry and
technological trends for dealing with water pollution control concerns.
In contrast, American firms were believed to have greater expertise in
specific applications of technologies to air pollution control problems,
due to the large number of utilities in the U.S. However, Ontario
firms are thought to be gaining experience.

M.M. Dillon Estimates

For the purposes of the economic impact model (described in the next
chapter), Ernst & Young contracted with the engineering firm M.M.
Dillon to estimate the Ontario content in typical environmental
technologies. Dillon's pollution control engineering experts relied on
their own project management experience and discussions with
leading equipment suppliers to estimate the share of equipment and
services purchases that would be initially sourced in Ontario, and the
Ontario content of equipment sourced from Ontario suppliers.

Detailed results are provided in the appendix to this report, prepared
by M.M. Dillon. The following general conclusions are reached:

• A very high share of major equipment purchases are initially
sourced through Ontario firms. Most of the major Canadian and
foreign equipment firms have their own offices or licensees in the
province.

• Ontario also generally reaps a high share of overall project costs.
Many air and water pollution control projects entail customized
engineering and construction on the site, and the local content in
engineering, labour and basic construction materials is high.

165

• Components and parts originating in other provinces or imports of
finished equipment are a majority of the value of Ontario purchases
of air diffuser equipment, blowers, heat exchangers, mixing
systems, sludge waste pumps, some electronic and automation
equipment, dosage pumps, filter presses, transfer pumps, lamella
clarifiers, filter modules for sand filtration, tubejets, front-end
loaders, and composters. For some projects, such as sludge
dewatering systems, these imports result in a high share of non-
Ontario content in the materials portion of the project cost.

6.4 Factors Affecting Ontario Environmental Protection
Industry Competitiveness

Our 50 interview respondents in the Ontario environmental protection
industry were also asked to suggest factors that promote or impede
their competitive position in domestic and foreign markets, and to
assess the influence of trade agreements in promoting exports and
increasing import competition.

Air pollution control equipment suppliers felt that Ontario firms were
quite competitive in the segments of the equipment market they
served. The following factors were cited as providing a boost to their
competitive position:

• acceptance by the Ontario government that the Ontario supplier
meets standards for best available technology;

• Ontario technology is equal to or superior to foreign technology,
particularly in the areas of monitoring equipment, environmental
consulting, specialized laboratory work, transformers for
precipitators, and incinerators

• in some cases, Ontario firms indicated that they are more
customer-service oriented than their US competitors and this gives
them an edge;

• openness on the part of buyers in other countries to meet with
Canadian suppliers, based on a good reputation for environmental
management.

• a European preference in dealing with Canadians rather than
Americans

166

Factors cited by air pollution control firms as reducing their
competitiveness included:

• lack of knowledge on the part of Ontario-based suppliers regarding
the opportunities available to them in the international markets and
the appropriate means of addressing them;

• lagging of environmental standards in Ontario relative to American
regulations, particularly in California, which gives U.S. firms a
lead in gaining experience in the field;

• a shortage of trained engineering talent for development and
manufacturing;

• difficulties in finding good representatives or agents in foreign
jurisdictions;

• cost disadvantage relative to equipment manufacturers in low-
wage, non-union southern U.S. states;

• limited opportunities to develop a track record in Canada due to the
small domestic market and slow pace of regulatory development;

• other general business climate factors, including taxes and the high
value of the Canadian dollar.

As anticipated in our previous study of the industry, the Canada-U.S.
Free Trade Agreement has had little impact to date in the air pollution
control market. Duties prior to the trade agreements were generally
not significant, and some non-tariff trade barriers (U.S. Buy- America
provisions, licensing of professionals) were not really addressed.
One firm complained about recurring problems with delays posed by
border officials on the American side. The potential agreement with
Mexico is not expected to have a major impact on either the domestic
market or exports, although some firms felt that there would be
pressure on Mexico to enhance environmental standards.

Water pollution control equipment firms also perceive themselves to
be competitive in their market niches, although many firms expressed
frustration at the slow progress in implementing tougher regulations in
Ontario and the impact that this is having on their market
opportunities.

167

Factors cited by suppliers as contributing to their competitiveness in
water and wastewater treatment include:

• the reputation of Canadians as trustworthy businessmen,
especially in Europe

• the quality of Ontario technologies - especially those that are niche
oriented

• the assistance and financing provided by government trade offices
in international business ventures.

Firms in this area cited the following factors as inhibiting their
competitiveness

• delays or problems in completing transactions at the border,
including an inability to get information from the US customs prior
to bringing equipment to the border;

• increasing scrutiny by US customs officials at the border now that
the FTA is in effect;

• the lack of confidence on the part of Ontario and Canadian buyers
and standard-setters in Canadian technology of all kinds;

• various elements of the manufacturing environment in Ontario,
including the high Canadian dollar, high wage rates, tax policies, a
lack of worker initiative from Canadian-born workers;

• a lack of economies of scale compared to US competitors;

• restricted access to capital in Canada (resulting from lack of
confidence in Canadian enterprise by financial institutions);

• problems in dealing with language and business customs in the Far
East;

• lack of environmental standards in Ontario vis-a-vis American
regulations;

• American reluctance to use Canadian suppliers and the preference
of some European buyers for firms with a manufacturing operation
in Europe (overcome by one firm by establishing a U.K. plant);
and

168

• the high costs of conducting business offshore.

As in air pollution, water pollution firms feel that trade agreements
with the the U.S. and Mexico will have little impact on their business.
Duties on goods exports and imports have historically been low, and
in the cases of service companies they rarely face competition from
outside their jurisdiction because of the problems of offering services
across borders.

Ontario solid and hazardous waste equipment firms have been active
in export markets, but also face tough competition in Ontario. Factors
cited as contributing to competitiveness of Ontario suppliers included:

• a Canadian reputation for concern with the environment, with
Canada perceived as being leaders in environmental management;

• the quality of Ontario technology

• some of the foreign competitors (e.g. in incinerators) are using
older vintage solutions

• trade offices in foreign jurisdictions are very helpful in establishing
contacts;

Factors impeding competitiveness include:

• the inability of Canadians to exploit their good name in the
environmental field due to a lack of initiative or marketing
expertise in some firms;

• American preferences for American technology, regardless of the
terms of the FTA;

• the fact that there is no market for incinerators in Ontario;

• the high cost of doing business in Ontario (high wages, high
taxes, and so on)

• lack of environmental standards in Ontario relative to American
regulations, and the large domestic market base created by Defence
Department spending in the U.S. on hazardous waste clean-up;

• a shortage of capital to buy Canadian technology in some lower-
income foreign markets

169

• the high cost of components (i.e. parts) in Canada as compared to
in America.

The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement has had little impact,
although respondents indicated that they are meeting more competition
from the US suppliers. There is little concern that the Mexicans will
be able to compete because they do not have the technology behind
them. Firms expressed some longer-term interest in the potential
value of the Mexican market.

Environmental laboratories in Ontario are both sheltered from import
competition and blocked from export activities, due to the limitations
in providing their service across borders. A number of firms maintain
branch offices in other provinces or countries where they provide lab
services.

Factors contributing to competitiveness of Ontario lab services
suppliers include:

• Canada's good name in the world community

• the ability of labs in Ontario to deal with short-run, complex work,
since American firms prefer straightforward, longer runs;

• prices in Ontario are lower that the U.S. because of the exchange
rate, and the strict requirements that the EPA puts on the labs in the
U.S.;

• Ontario labs provide good service and good quality work using
highly skilled people.

Factors reducing competitiveness in foreign markets include the cost
of doing business across the border, administrative barriers
established at the border, a preference in the U.S. for American
technology and a Canadian aversion to Canadian technology, and the
lack of accreditation procedures in Canada for labs. One Ontario firm
complained that Ministry of the Environment purchasing standards
stressed low-cost bidding and thereby promoted the survival of the
lowest quality firms. As in other areas, firms also felt that Ontario
environmental standards were lagging those in other countries and
were therefore giving others a head start in gaining a track record in
the market

170

Since lab services are generally not exportable, trade agreements have
and will have a limited impact. Ontario firms are continuing to look
into setting up facilities outside the province to serve markets in other
jurisdictions. Firms showed neither concern for potential competition
from Mexico nor interest in the Mexican market.

Suppliers of sampling and monitoring equipment have had to compete
with imports in Ontario and in export market for some time, and those
that have been successful feel that they continue to be quite
competitive in their market niche. They attributed their competitive
strengths to the quality of their people and technology, and their track
record in Ontario. One firm noted that references from the Ministry of
the Environment were very useful in gaining international sales.

Monitoring equipment firms shared some of the same concerns about
the Ontario business climate as other environmental goods firms,
citing high taxes and the high value of the Canadian dollar. Other
factors impeding competitiveness include:

• competing against well financed American corporations, or
companies where governments are willing to finance the
purchase of their technology;

• negative American attitudes to foreign technology;

• difficulties in establishing a reliable distribution channel in
the United States;

• difficulty in commercializing the technology, and a need for
long term government support during the commercialization
process;

• not being able to get EPA accreditation;

• inability to fly US officials into Canada for demonstration
of products (US government regulations stipulating that the
representatives of the government are not allowed to be
flown out of the country by suppliers);

• lack of market experience in the US on the part of smaller
Ontario suppliers, and their limited resources to devote to
marketing programs;

• a shortage of skilled manpower in both engineering and
marketing;

171

• subsidization by countries (especially France) of their home
manufacturers in export markets, and the Canadian
government's reluctance to follow suit;

• high tariff barriers in Southeast Asia.

Firms expressed some disappointment with the impact of the Canada-
Li. S. FTA, largely related to Buy-America preferences and other
barriers that remain at the regional level. A trade agreement with
Mexico was not seen as a major market opportunity, and Mexicans do
not have the expertise to compete in this area.

Ontario consulting engineering and waste management services firms
view themselves as quite competitive in Ontario and foreign markets,
although one firm cited declining margins in Ontario due to aggressive
marketing by branches of foreign firms. These firms have been quite
active in foreign markets, although in some cases Ontario employees
play a modest role in foreign service operations. Factors contributing
to the competitiveness and international success of Ontario suppliers
include:

• integrity of Canadian suppliers;

• quality of Canadian work;

• quality of Canadian technology;

• demonstrated skills based on large projects done before;

• Canadian services are well priced;

• waste management services are restricted in shipping waste
to Canada because of Canadian political restrictions, but we
can ship our waste to U.S. sites;

• for the large consulting firms it is their ability to offer an
integrated solution to the client, not just an environmental
assessment;

• for the smaller consulting firms, they are successful when
they have developed a niche expertise that does not compete
directly with large integrated US firms, and they can partner
with the US firm;

172

• mid-sized consulting firms will have to rely on partnering in
many cases to compete, because there will be a preference
for large US firms with economies of scale and experience
in managing large projects.

Factors reducing competitiveness include:

• American preferences for their own technologies;

• inability of project developers (industrial construction
contractors) to go out and pursue business - they expect
consultants to bring in this business;

• lack of government support in pursuing export business -
too much red tape associated with getting funds for market
development;

• distance from markets;

• US regulations that are quite strict;

• experience, economies of scale, and Canadian preference
for large U.S. firms;

• shortage of skilled environmental engineers in Canada
(particularly engineers with 8 to 12 years of experience
because so few engineers were hired during the last
recession);

• interprovincial barriers regarding engineering consulting
work, particularly in Quebec and Alberta.

Trade agreements will have little impact because of the fact that
services generally are not really exported, but are provided in foreign
markets using branch offices. One responded noted that U.S .firms
have started to buy Canadian consulting firms in order to access the
Ontario market.

6.5 Human Resources and the Ontario Environmental
Protection Industry

The environmental protection industry employs a broad range of
people encompassing a wide variety of skills and occupations. Many
of those working in the industry are highly educated professionals
with skills unique to environmental protection. At the same time,

173

there are large numbers such as engineers and lab technicians whose
skills are common to other industries as well.

Government regulations and environmental concerns have resulted in
a large increase in the number of environmental specialists in recent
years. Greater demand for environmental impact assessments,
environmental modelling and audits has resulted in a requirement for
larger numbers of environmental scientists and engineers capable of
delivering these services.

At the same time, new regulations and technological innovation
require existing personnel to upgrade their skills and knowledge.

It is difficult to estimate the number of people employed in the
environmental protection industry for several reasons, including:

1) many of those who work in the environmental protection
industry also work in other industries. For example, a civil
engineer who designs sewage treatment plants may also
work on other non-environmental structures; a technician in
a laboratory may perform both environmental and non-
environmental analyses;

2) there are many small companies in the environmental
protection industry and it is difficult to account for
employment among these businesses; and

3) many manufacturers in other industries also produce goods
for the environmental protection industry and it is difficult
to estimate the number of employees or person hours
dedicated to production of environmental products.

Based upon our research, and other studies of the industry, we have
estimated -that the environmental protection industry in Ontario
employs about 30,000 workers.

In the sections below we discuss the nature of employment within
various sectors.

Services

The service sector may account for as much as 85% of total
employment in the environmental protection industry. Within the

174

service sector, the waste management industry is the largest employer.
Consulting and laboratory services are two other areas using
specialized environmental skills. The section below describes
employment in each of these three industries.

Hazardous and Solid Waste Management

The hazardous (or "special') and solid waste management industry
accounts for perhaps as much as 50% of total employment within the
environmental protection industry. Employment in the hazardous and
solid waste management industry is illustrated in Chart 6.1.

Chart 6.1

Employment in Ontario Hazardous and Solid Waste
Management, by Position

55%

B Equip./Proc. Operators
□ MgL/Admin./Sales
ES Engineers/Tech.
■ Maintenance
il Other

Source: Ernst & Young Industry Survey

More than half of the employment in hazardous and solid waste
management consists of equipment and process operators. These
include truck drivers, heavy equipment operators and process
operators at landfill sites and waste processing sites. In small
companies, the number of equipment operators as a percentage of total
company employment is even higher.

Many of the workers in hazardous waste management, including
equipment and process operators who are handling hazardous and
toxic wastes, are graduates of chemical technology courses at colleges
or may be chemistry graduates from a university. Consequently, this

175

part of the industry has a very high level of technically skilled
workers.

By contrast, equipment operators in the solid waste management
sector are less likely to have specialized training in handling waste,
other than that provided by their company.

Management and administration account for a further 20% of
employment by this segment. Maintenance mechanics who are
responsible for the repair and maintenance of equipment represent
about 10% of employment.

This industry segment also employs engineers and technologists to
perform various functions such as landfill site design and
management, lab analyses, and process operation. These skilled
workers constitute about 10% of the employment within this segment.

Those employed in the Other category include occupations such as
dispatchers, security guards, and general labour.

Environmental Consulting

Environmental consultants provide a number of services to companies
including monitoring of pollution, environmental assessments,
environmental audits, engineering design of waste treatment plants,
water treatment plants, landfill sites and other capital projects, and
project management to construct and install environmental protection
equipment and systems.

About half of those employed in this industry are either engineers or
scientists with advanced technical education at the university level. A
breakdown of employment by position is shown in Chart 6.2.

176

Chart 6.2

Employment in Ontario Environmental Consulting
Firms, by Position

10%

15%

25%

50%

■ Eng./Scientists

□ TechniciansH'echol.

□ Mgt./Admin. /Sales

■ Other

Source: Ernst & Young Industry Survey

After engineers and scientists, technicians and technologists represent
about 25% of those employed. These include primarily chemical and
engineering technologists, and lab technicians.

Management, administration and sales account for some 15% of those
employed in the industry. Those in the Other category include
draftsmen, planners, surveyors, and mechanics.

Environmental Laboratories

Environmental laboratories employ some 1,000 workers. About 55%
of these are technicians and technologists who are responsible for
tasks such as gathering samples, packaging samples and sample
analysis. Chart 6.3 illustrates employment in this sector.

177

Chart 6.3

Employment in Ontario Environmental Laboratories,
by Position

20%

55%

■ Technicians

D Scientists

□ Mgt./Admin./Sales

BOther

Source: Ernst & Young Industry Survey

Some 20% of employment in this sector consists of senior scientists
who supervise testing, design testing procedures and provide
consulting advice to customers, among other responsibilities. Most of
these scientists hold doctorate degrees from universities.

Management, administration and sales represent about 20% of those
employed by the industry, while the Other category, including
occupations such as supervisors and maintenance staff, accounts for
another 5%.

Manufacturing

About 35% of those employed in manufacturing environmental
equipment are general labourers who assemble and manufacture
equipment. Smaller companies in the industry often contract some or
all of their manufacturing activities to outside companies, which
reduces the percentage of general labour in this segment when
compared with other manufacturing industries.

Management, administration and sales account for some 30% of
employment by this sector. Technicians and draftsmen represent
another 20%of employment. Engineers who design equipment and

178

supervise installation also account for about 20% of employment by
this sector.

Chart 6.4 illustrates the approximate employment by position in the
manufacturing sector.

Chart 6.4

Employment in Ontario Environmental Manufacturing,
by Position

20% .fl-

Ik 35%

B Labour

ISMAIL

D Mgt./Admin./Sales

\ /

20% \ / ^stf

□ Technicians/Draftsmen

xsiss^r y

CD Engineers

30%

Source: Ernst & Young Industry Survey

Environmental Protection Industry Demographics

On average, employees in the environmental protection industry are
younger than those in other industry sectors. There are significantly
more employees in the 20 to 45 age group than for the province as a
whole, and fewer workers over the age of 45. There are also very
few workers under the age of 20 in the environmental protection
industry.

This age distribution is likely the result of two factors:

1) much of the employment growth in the industry has
occurred in the past ten years, resulting in more workers in
younger age groups; and

179

2) many of the positions in the industry require post secondary
school education and there are relatively few openings for
those under the age of 20.

The comparison of age groups in the environmental protection
industry with the provincial average is illustrated in Chart 6.5.

Chart 6.5

Employment by Age Group

0%--"

B EP Industry
M Province

Under 20 20 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 Over 55

Source: Statistics Canada, 71-220, Labour Force Annual Averages, 1991,
and Emst & Young survey.

The large number of relatively younger workers suggests that the
industry will have a solid base of human resources for the future. As
many of those in the 20 to 34 age group mature and gain industry
experience, their knowledge and expertise will be valuable to the
industry. They will also serve as mentors to those graduates entering
the industry in future years.

At the same time, industry participants cited difficulties in recruiting
individuals with ten or more years of environmental experience. The
age profile provides some support to the notion that there is a shortage
of such individuals in the industry. Some firms cited tough
competition for such employees from government environmental
departments and from the in-house environmental departments of
major Canadian industrial firms.

180

Almost 90% of those employed in the environmental protection
industry are males. This is not altogether surprising given the
predominance of technical positions in the industry and the lack of
female graduates in science and engineering. About 50% of the
females employed in the industry work in administrative positions.
Thus, encouraging women to enter the applied science fields that are
key to the environmental protection industry will be one potential
means of meeting future human resource requirements as the industry
grows.

Education and Training

A significant percentage of the workers in the environmental
protection industry require specific education and training to perform
their jobs. Many workers have diplomas in environmental or chemical
technology from community colleges, or degrees in science or
engineering from universities. The effectiveness of the education
system and its ability to produce qualified graduates to work in the
environmental protection industry is important to the future growth of
the industry.

In the section below, we review briefly the availability of education
and training for the environmental protection industry.

Colleges and Universities

Education and training for workers in the environmental protection
industry is available from colleges and universities throughout
Ontario. Ontario, along with Alberta and B.C., is the leading
jurisdiction in Canada in terms of the stage of development of such
programs.

The types of programs available vary considerably from school to
school. Many schools now offer undergraduate courses in
environmental science or engineering as part of other degree
programs. Students can also specialize in environmental science or
engineering at the Master's level at several universities in Ontario.
Several universities also offer co-op undergraduate programs which
provide students with valuable work experience while getting their
degree.

181

Community colleges in the province provide education for both
technicians and technologists in several fields related to the
environmental protection industry. These graduates fill a number of
positions in the environmental protection industry including laboratory
technicians and lab supervisors in the laboratory industry, equipment
operators in the hazardous waste industry, and data gatherers or
samplers in the consulting industry, among other jobs.

Our discussions with industry representatives and educators suggest
that the industry is reasonably well served by Ontario's educational
system. Enrollment in environmental science and engineering courses
at the undergraduate level and community colleges has increased in
recent years as has the number of graduates with an environmental
specialization. There has been little growth in the number of masters
degrees being earned in the science and engineering fields of interest
to the environmental protection industry. Chart 6.6 illustrates the
growth in environmental studies programs in community colleges and
universities, at both the graduate and undergraduate levels.

Chart 6.6

Ontario Graduates of Environmentally-Related Science
and Engineering Programs

Comm. Coll./Masters Bachelors

1,000 t ^* t-3,100

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

O Comm. Coll.
■•" Masters
»■■ Bachelors

Source: Statistics Canada publications 81-204 and 81-222, various years.
Data for community colleges were not available for the 1990 year.

The number of environmental technicians and technologists from
Ontario community colleges has risen quite rapidly, from just under

182

150 per year in 1985 to over 220 per year in 1990. There are also
over 200 graduates per year in environmental studies programs at
community colleges.

There have been some shifts in the composition of undergraduate
degrees issued in the science and engineering fields employed in the
environmental protection industry. Chart 6.7 shows that the number
of graduates from Ontario universities in fields related to
environmental protection has increased in chemistry and biochemistry,
but has been declining in chemical engineering, a key source of talent
for the environmental protection industry.

Chart 6.7

Number of Graduates from Ontario Bachelor Programs

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989

1990

Many employers prefer to hire graduates from co-op programs. These
students, who have had a chance to work in industry while completing
their studies, are much better able to adapt to industry upon
graduation. The University of Waterloo has pioneered co-op
programs at the university level in Ontario and has a very good
reputation among employers for the quality of its graduates. With
industry support, the University has also established a Centre for
Groundwater Research which conducts research and educates future
engineers and scientists for the environmental protection industry.
Several of the employers we interviewed spoke highly of the

183

University's programs. Ontario universities and college administrators
report a shortage of funds to develop new, innovative programs in the
environmental field.

While there is a need for specific expertise to deal with environmental
problems, most employers prefer graduates who have a general
background in one of the core disciplines such as engineering,
chemistry, geography or other science. This general knowledge is
particularly useful later on in an employee's career when he or she is
promoted to a management level. Even at an early stage, the employee
may be required to work on projects outside of his or her
specialization. Those who have specialized at an early stage in their
academic career have more problems working outside of their field of
study. As a result, employers often prefer a graduate of a core
discipline who has specialized at the Master's level in university.

Internal Training

Many companies in the environmental protection industry rely heavily
upon their own training programs to upgrade the skills of new
employees. In environmental labs, for example, new employees are
taught the specific analytical techniques used by that lab (in some
cases, the lab methodology can be a source of competitive advantage
for the lab). Hazardous waste management companies provide in-
house training for their employees in areas such as occupational health
and safety, customer service and safe driving techniques. Most
environmental consultants are taught professional reporting
techniques, a valuable part of the consultant's profession, by their
employers since this type of training is usually not available in
schools.

One difficulty with the heavy reliance on internal training is that firms
are often put in a position of funding training costs for employees who
subsequently move on to other firms or to the public sector. While
this problem is not unique to the environmental sector, it does deter
high cost training by firms.

Furthermore, more extensive training needs are difficult to meet while
the employee is on the job. In the future, firms may make greater use
of contracted training programs put on by educational institutions,
particularly community colleges, on their behalf.

184

Human Resource Issues

The ability of Ontario's environment protection industry to grow will
depend to a large extent upon the availability of technically skilled
workers. The demand for employees will not affect all sectors
equally. Industry segments such as hazardous waste management, air
pollution abatement and control, and environmental assessment will
likely experience a significant increase in demand for skilled
personnel. More mature industries such as solid waste management,
which accounts for a large percentage of employment, are not
expected to experience any increase in employment in the future.

Some of the specific skills and occupations which will likely be
needed in greater numbers include:

• Hydrogeologists: instrumental in the design and
assessment of landfill sites, clean up of hazardous and toxic
waste sites, groundwater contamination, and site
decommissioning;

• Environmental Scientists: to perform environmental impact
assessments and audits as well as manage site clean up
projects; and

• Air Quality Chemists and Technicians: to gather and
analyze air samples, as well as develop methodologies for
air quality analysis.

The environmental protection industry also competes with many other
sectors for engineers. Dalcor (1990) projected that the overall demand
for engineers in Canada will grow much more rapidly than the supply
of engineers in the 1 990s, although the authors were perhaps a bit
optimistic in terms of projected demand from major energy projects.
The study concluded that the declining share of students selecting
engineering as a profession will pose problems for Canadian industry
by the end of this century, and recommended steps aimed at attracting
students to engineering (particularly women) and considering
expanded immigration for skilled engineers.

Because the environmental protection industry is growing and
changing, there is a often a lag between technological and industry
change and the skill levels and knowledge of those in the industry,
including recent graduates. Although the education system will

185

eventually adjust to changes in the industry, there is often a gap
between industry demand for skilled employees and available supply
which arises because of this lag. For example, recently the industry
experienced a strong growth in demand for hydrogeologists to deal
with issues of groundwater contamination and soil remediation.
Although universities have responded with programs to meet this
need, there is still a scarcity of experienced hydrogeologists largely
because universities did not graduate significant numbers with this
type of specialization 5 to 10 years earlier.

Industry participants with whom we spoke suggested that future
environmental scientists and engineers will need both a strong general
education as well as expertise in a specific environmental discipline.
A greater number of those working in the industry will likely possess
graduate degrees in an environmental field. While some of Ontario's
universities have developed graduate level courses in environmental
engineering and sciences, there is a concern on the part of industry
that there will be insufficient numbers of environmental specialists to
meet future demand.

Some employers would like to see the education system, particularly
the universities, playing a greater role in upgrading the skills of
engineers and scientists with bachelors degrees. University officials
believe that there are limitations to what they can provide in terms of
substituting for practical experience in the field, particularly in
engineering.

Government legislation and regulation can have a significant impact on
industry's demand for human resources. It is important for
governments to recognize this impact and design their policies
accordingly. Linkages between industry, government and academia
should be enhanced to design educational programs to meet future
environmental protection industry needs. Educational programs
should be developed in conjunction with legislation to prepare
graduates for work in the industry. All of these initiatives would help
to address the human resource issues facing the environmental
protection industry.

In the environmental products sector, other labour force issues are
similar to those in other parts of the manufacturing industry in
Ontario. These include the impact of exchange rate changes and wage
rate increases on relative wages between Ontario and the U.S.,
particularly when compared to the lower- wage southern states.

186

6.6 Industry Views on the Role of Governments

Environmental protection industry participants in Ontario, particularly
those in manufacturing equipment or instruments, share a number of
concerns with other manufacturers in the province. As noted above,
firms felt that current macroeconomic conditions, including the high
Canadian dollar, the level of business and personal taxation, and wage
rates in the province relative to those in the U.S., were making it
difficult to compete from an Ontario base. Many of our mail survey
respondents also used the "general comments" section of the survey to
offer critical views on the current business climate in the province.

Other more specific concerns related to the pace and consistency of
environmental regulation in Ontario and elsewhere in Canada, the
availability of certain specialized skills in the labour force, and the
barriers to trade across provinces and international boundaries.

Most of the firms interviewed for this study, and many of our mail
survey respondents, had specific recommendations for measures that
governments could take to improve the prospects of the Ontario
environmental protection industry. The most frequently cited
recommendation in our interviews was that Ontario should not lag
behind U.S. jurisdictions in adopting and enforcing regulations, and
that once announced, regulatory development be held to a strict
schedule. One-quarter of our mail survey respondents also expressed
similar views. Several firms in the water pollution control area
expressed frustration with the slow pace of the MISA process, for
example, and maintained that the delays they perceived in developing
and enforcing new standards created uncertainties for their businesses.

In the area of marketing support, while there was praise from some
firms for existing provincial efforts, several firms felt that the
provincial industry ministry and federal trade officials placed an undue
emphasis on some aspects of the environmental protection industry.
Several firms felt that efforts to promote exports were not well-
targetted, and that, as one respondent put it "too many taxpayer dollars
are devoted to trade missions and trade fairs that do not generate
results." In particular, one leading engineering firm noted that the
potential for exporting environmental engineering services to other
developed countries was quite limited, except where the developer of a
project is also a Canadian firm, and that most such "exports" would
ultimately involve the use of branch offices with foreign engineering
staff. Another suggested that trade fairs for equipment manufacturers

187

need to be more narrowly focussed, so that they bring together buyers
and sellers of similar technologies.

Some firms offered suggestions for other ways that the government
could assist firms in marketing and business planning. Several felt that
the Ministry of the Environment could do a better job in disseminating
information among potential suppliers, and in using its links to the
EPA to provide information on American technological developments
to Ontario firms. One respondent suggested that reports and
publications, such as the directory of firms gathered in this study,
should be sent to foreign trade offices promoting Ontario technology.
Another suggested that those manufacturers that can export their
services but do not know how need some type of education as to what
avenues and assistance are open to them.

Many firms also offered suggestions relating to the role of
governments as purchasers of environmental products and services.
Preferences in other provinces for local suppliers are a major concern
of Ontario firms in this sector, particularly those in consulting. They
suggested that the provincial government should be placing more
emphasis on negotiating an end to such interprovincial trade barriers.
One felt that as a last resort the province should threaten to implement
its own "Buy Ontario" program. A national accreditation program for
laboratories was another suggestion to improve recognition of Ontario
capabilities in other jurisdictions.

A number of interview and mail survey respondents were also critical
of governments use of in-house laboratories and consultants which
they felt was restraining the market for private sector firms and not
necessarily providing a savings to the government if all employment
overhead costs are taken into consideration.

As in our 1989 study, some equipment suppliers expressed frustration
with what "they perceived was a negative attitude regarding innovative
Canadian technologies and a preference of government buyers for
foreign technologies. One suggested that the government should be
granting "best available technology" designations to Ontario
technologies as a means of improving their marketability at home and
abroad. Several mail survey respondents felt that the approvals
process for technologies could be improved.

There were a number of suggestions relating to the role of
governments in promoting technological development. Not

188

surprisingly, there was a general call for more government assistance
or tax relief to firms in this sector. One firm noted their need for
assistance in the commercialization of the product, as opposed to the
current emphasis on providing R&D funding. A mail survey
respondent added that non-multinationals needed a greater share of
such support. Another complained that the federal government will
fund two or three suppliers in the development of the same
technology, and then force them to compete against each other for a
limited market Finally, most firms emphasized that technology
leadership in the environmental field is most dependent on being in a
jurisdiction that is committed to having the most demanding standards
for environmental performance.

189

190

7. Environmental Protection Impact Model

7.1 Introduction

The Environmental Protection Impact Model (EPIM) has been
designed for simplicity of use. An operator need only consult two
areas of the model which are located at the top of the file. Exhibit 1
shows these two areas - labelled "Input Area" and "Summary Output
Area". Data is entered in the appropriate shaded cell of the input area,
and the user engages the calculation feature of the spreadsheet
program. Then, EPIM estimates the economic impact, and displays it
in the output area, with all dollar amount being in 1991 dollars.

Since capital expenditures associated with an environmental protection
spending project are one-time in nature, the GDP, employment, and
tax revenue created by the capital spending are also one-time
occurrences. Economic and taxation impacts resulting from operating
expenditures can be seen as recurring annually for the life of the
project.

The economic impact of environmental protection spending on eleven

specific technologies can be calculated. These technologies are:

Primary aarifier

Aeration Basin and Secondary Clarifier

Anaerobic Sludge Digestion

Sludge Dewatering

Oil/Water Separator

Chemical Oxidation/Reduction and Final Clarifier

pH Control System

Sand Filtration

Baghouse (air)

Wet Scrubber (air)

Solid Waste Composter

In addition, if the specific technology involved in an environmental
spending program is not known, the model has a generic category

191

<u es

< «

u ©^

o a

« ©
< E

3 <

192

«5 .£

Ç 4,

< a
O

5 >»

» C

s e

i SJ
©* «* *-

I 1 1

O O sS

D. *©

E g

« "Q *««
a to ©s

~ u""U'
CDU

6'S'S

2 0 0

£ £ IT

s 1 1

c I fe E o 1

td o. — c/5 .— "

.2 ^

- w -à ë
8> 5 £ m c^ ï

3 ^» S X ^

CQ
§

■s

•c
y

c
o
O

for both air and water protection that will enable the user to estimate
the order of magnitude of the economic impact.

The model estimates a number of variables of interest - for both the
capital spending and the ongoing operating requirements - which are
displayed in the output area46, including:

• project cost;

• persons years of employment created by the spending program;

• gross domestic product (GDP) generated in the province of
Ontario by the project;

• the expenditures made by the environmental protection industry in
Ontario as it designs, builds, and installs the equipment; and,

• and the associated tax collections in Ontario by both the federal and
provincial governments.

7.2 Using The Model

Entering Capital Expenditure Information

To estimate the economic impact of an environmental spending
program, model users may enter either the total capital expenditure
involved in a project or the flow rate that the technology will have to
treat. However, users should not enter both the amount of capital
expenditure and the flow rate for a particular technology.

Exhibit 2 provides an example where the value of a project is known.
In this instance, the impact of a $1,500,000 purchase of an aeration
basin and, secondary clarifier is investigated. The user enters
"1500000" (no commas are necessary) in the appropriate row and in
the "capital expenditure" column. Note that any dollar values entered
into the model must be in 1991 dollars.

46 Note that the output area displays all dollar figures in thousands.

193

Entering Waste Stream Flow Rate Information

Exhibit 3 provides an example where the flow rate of the waste stream
to be handled is known. Here, a wet scrubber process is proposed
that will handle a flow rate of 500 cubic metres per hour.47 The user
enters "500" in the appropriate row and in the "flow rate" column.
Again, once the model has calculated the results, the output area
displays the economic impacts of the spending program.

Using the Model When the Specific Technology is
Unknown

Often, a model user will know what environmental media that a
spending program is designed to protect, but will not know the
specific technology to be used. In this case, the generic treatment
categories can be used. The calculations are based on the averages of
the specific technologies for that media in the model. Exhibit 4 shows
how the model can be used in this situation. If the user knew that
$600,000 was to be spent on water protection, then one would enter
"600000" in the capital expenditure column of "generic water
treatment". The output area displays the economic impact estimates.
Note that it is not possible to enter a flow rate figure when the specific
technology is not known.

47 With most of the technologies handled by this model, flow rate input should be

in cubic metres per hour. However, there are some exceptions. Please see Exhibit 6
where the proper flow rate variable for each technology is listed.

194

0s £2

c
o

c
E

« "3 "n

cou

If 'i

SOD

fc E "g

S£ s

a -5

H
3

c
O

•a

2
o

x>
S

S3
c

ft O (J
O C5 Z.

"O !> "Q

^s S

o
•a
o

C/2 °

s/i O C
3 .O O
O X) P

S «

5 «* M fi

f" Ou,

o
U

•c
o
c
o
O

° '-5

•a

•O

O
13

195

b
m

5 -t:

e « « o

» IE C -s

SOOf

fc E "2 -a

« £ o —

> 5 U

"^ oo .a

«a 4>

c w

.« c

s <

■s

■g

-a

<
w

•a

■a

B § S

5 « E

^ fa 5

0*5 — ™

P £ H

g S s

0 w 5

°- ë

196

197

Modelling Several Projects Simultaneously

The impact of several projects, or one project using several
technologies, can also be modelled. Exhibit 5 shows an analysis
involving a primary clarifier, anaerobic sludge digestion, and sludge
dewatering. Note that it is possible to input both flow rate and capital
expenditure data, as long as each input applies to a different
technology. In this instance, the user knows that the primary clarifier
will involve a capital outlay of $300,000, and is not aware of the cost
for the other two elements, knowing only that they will need to handle
420 cubic metres of waste water per hour.

Ranges of Estimation

The calculations made by the model rely in part on cost functions for
various flow rates for each technology. The cost functions have been
estimated within a certain range of both dollars and flow rates. Within
these ranges, the economic impact calculations should be good
estimates (see Exhibit 6 for the cost and flow rate ranges for each
technology). However, if the cost or flow of a project falls outside
these ranges, the accuracy of the cost estimates will be reduced.

7.3 Adapting the Model

The model makes its calculations based on average relationships
between industries, and the average market share for environmental
protection supplies held by Ontario firms. However, users may
sometimes be aware of the place of origin for the elements of a
particular project. In such a case, one may wish to override the
proportions assigned to the market share of Ontario-based
manufacturers.

For example, a user may know that the belt filter press to be used in a
sludge dewatering project is going to be manufactured in Ontario. As
the model stands, a 0% share of the Ontario market is assigned to
Ontario-based firms (see the figure "0.00" in the "Materials" column
labelled "Ont. Assembly" in Exhibit 7. Although this exhibit
reproduces the relevant portion of the model only for sludge
dewatering, the following adjustment of the model can be used with
any of the technologies.) If the user knows that an Ontario firm will
be making the belt filter press for this sludge dewatering project, the
user could input "1.00" in place of the model's entry. When the
model is run, the economic impact calculation will be made with the

198

assumption that the filter press is made in Ontario. Users should be
careful not to save the model after any such changes have been made,
because the original parameter will be lost.

199

CO
X
X

200

EXHIBIT 6

Technology

Cost Estimation Ranges

Flow Rate
Units

Flow Rate

Dollars

Primary Clarifier

m /hour

250-1,000

227,355 - 486,450

Aeration Basin

and Secondary Clarifier

kg/day

U00- 6,000

1,059,495 - 2,360,835

Anaerobic Sludge

m /hour

250-1,000

1,288,920 - 2,537,590

Sludge Dewatering

m /hour

250- 1,000

842,605 - 1,596,085

Oil/Water Separator

litres/second

5 - 110

53,760- 171,360

Chemical Oxidation, etc.

m /hour

5-25

233,220 - 572,240

pH Control System

m /hour

10-100

43,440 - 129,120

Sand Filtration

m /hour

250 - 1,000

352,015 - 1,055,700

Baghouse

m /hour

280 - 840

55,080- 119,640

Wet Scrubber

m /hour

280 - 840

41,280 - 86,280

Composter

tonnes/day

75-375

1,728,100 - 6,657,200

201

202

«J M

c c

o •<&

SI V

rr] D.

6 =1

>— i c

a. v

QJ D.

** on

</» ,4

— o — ■ — '

«n © r~ —

88888888888

v» co </* (A «/» &>

8 000>0QQQQQQ
-5 © © © © o -S -.'-,•-.' ©

8888888888S

_î _! ^ ^ © ~ — ' -I — ' « ©

8 6

c o

e fi, S? S •> SiB S M

~ S o

"o K C3

CÛ

« o
o </»

8 8

r-
rs

g S

c
O

("si

«F

U-

oooooooo

7.4 Construction of the Model

The discussion of the Environmental Protection Impact Model's
construction follows the diagrammatic presentation of Exhibit 8.

Input and Cost Functions

Two types of input are possible - dollars of capital expenditure or
flow rate of waste stream to be handled. If the flow rate (Q) is
entered, the model proceeds directly to the cost function to calculate
both the capital and operating costs. The cost functions for all
technologies have been estimated by M.M. Dillon, and begin with a
cost structure for a base case flow rate. The cost of each element of
the technology is scaled up using a particular functional form and
various "scale up coefficients". The form used for all cost functions
is:

CQ = Cq*(Q/q)s

where: Cq - cost for flow rate of Q which is under analysis

Cq - cost of base case flow rate of q
Q - flow rate of Q which is under analysis
q - base case flow rate of q
s - scale up coefficient

Each of the main elements of the technology's capital and operating
costs has a scale up coefficient (s), base case cost (Cq), and base case
flow rate (q) embodied as parameters in the model. Since the user has
entered a value for the variable Q, the model uses this equation and the
parameter values to calculate the cost of each element of the project
being analyzed (Cq).

Alternatively, the user may enter the project capital cost value (Cq).
Note that all dollar values should be in 1991 dollars. In this case, the
model uses the equation and the parameter values to calculate the flow
rate (Q) of the technology in question. This calculated flow rate is
then used by the model to estimate the cost of the individual elements
of the technology.

If the project cost value was the variable entered by the user, then an
additional adjustment is made by the model. Because of the

203

C/3

HZ
£©

«<<
O.UU

O
Z E

D.OUU

—

S
x

—

H
U

z
p
u.

1/3
O

204

1
5.

approximate nature of the cost functions, the sum of the costs
calculated by the model for the individual elements may differ from the
total capital cost entered by the user. Thus, the model has a second
stage which adjusts the costs of each element by any percentage
difference between the initial calculation of total project cost and the
entered value of the project cost.

Market Share of Ontario Suppliers

The model contains estimates of the Ontario market share held by
Ontario-based environmental protection firms for the components of
the various technologies. These proportions are used by the model to
calculate the probability-weighted value of the project that is supplied
by Ontario firms. As described in Section 1 .4, these proportions can
be changed temporarily by the user.

Multipliers and Model Outputs

The model provides analysis of the economic benefits to Ontario
created by an environmental protection spending project. Users are
able to estimate the employment generated in Ontario by a project, and
the gross domestic product (GDP) resulting from projects is also
estimated.

The revenue from the sale of the components of the various
technologies is allocated by the model to the industries48 that produce
each of the components. Each of these industries has associated two
multipliers obtained from the Statistics Canada Input-Output model .
GDP multipliers convert total dollars of revenue in a particular
industry into total dollars of GDP directly and indirectly created.
Employment multipliers convert dollars of activity into the number of
jobs created. (The employment multipliers produced by Statistics
Canada measure jobs per 1984 dollars of activity. As a result, EPIM
uses industry price indices to convert 1991 dollars of activity into
1984 dollars, before the employment calculation is made.) After the

48 Industries have been selected from the least aggregated definitions used in the

Interprovincial Input-Output model. See: Statistics Canada, System of National
Accounts, The input-output structure of the Canadian economy, Catalogue 15-510, pgs.
104-106. The components were assigned to these industries based on the list of products
produced contained in: Statistics Canada, Standard industrial classification, 1980,
Catalogue 12-501E.

205

GDP and employment impacts for each individual component are
estimated, the total impact of the environmental protection project(s) is
displayed in the output area.

Finally, to estimate tax receipts received by the federal and provincial
governments, the model multiplies the GDP estimations by the share
of Ontario GDP received in income, sales, and other taxes by each
level of government.

206

APPENDIX 1

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION IMPACT MODEL

A 1.1 Introduction

This appendix describes in detail how the Environmental Protection
Impact Model (EPIM) operates, the assumptions embodied in the
model, and the sources of the data used in the model. Readers
interested in a summary description of the model's construction
should see Section 1 .4. For instructions on how to operate the model,
see Sections 1.2 and 1.3.

A 1.2 Model Construction

EPIM has three distinct sections: the Input area, the Summary Output
area, and the cost/economic impact areas for the thirteen technologies.

Reading Entered Data

The model user enters either a capital expenditure figure in 1991
dollars or a flow rate figure in the Input area (Exhibit Al, Cells D4-
D19, E4-E19). While flow rates and capital expenditure information
can be entered at the same time for different technologies, only one or
the other can be entered for a particular technology. The model then
reproduces the entered data in the "Entries" column of the
technology(ies) under consideration (see Exhibit A2, Cells B25,
B26).49

The adjacent cells labelled "Calculations" in Exhibit A2, Cells C25-
C26) show calculated flow rates and capital expenditures. Since users
can only enter one of these items, the model calculates the other.

49 Primary Clarifier technology will be used for demonstration purposes throughout

this appendix. However, the model is based on the same principles for each technology.
Therefore, the description here applies to each technology.

207

8 8 8 8 8

o © w-> u->
© © »o v->

u~i no tt m5 «n

nû r* no en

-5

rfr ** ^" ci P-*

no r^" oC r**

69 * W W

f- On CM CM

69 — 69 CM

69 69

88888

rt ^H fH ^H ^H

—

88888

ta . ta .- m

O O O

E
u

italC
italC
italC

—

tCap
:tCap
ilCâp

88888

oo On -^ oo «n

~* y x a

121,

Dire

ndirt

en es «ri — * r-

>û « ^ w w

69 69

69 i-H

■3

0.75
0.60
1.00
1.00
1.00

«s

c
o

D.
OO

■c
S

c
O

3
E

88888

d
es

e/3
on

—

o c

— o

o -a fa

Sludge C

Pump

Construe

Piping

Elect/Ins

et o

T S

1 "S.

O fi

E S

S!
Q

S/J

,_.,

en o

r*1* ^^

5
U

o 0
o g

0\Qmw->"tcSQw->
cMNor--r-NOv->NO*-

©dodo©©©

ffl

c
LU

en
69

.S U

•S &

€

£ S

C Û0 P

'C
3

'û

low Rate (m3
xpenditurc

5 «
Su

Equipment
Construction
Piping

Elect/Instrume
Labour
Total Capital
Total Operatin
Indirect Gross-

u. u

00 0.

T-

Capital Costs

The estimation of the capital cost of a particular flow rate for a
technology, or conversely the flow rate for a particular value of
project, relies on a cost function formulation devised by M.M. Dillon.

The form of this cost function is:

Cq = Cq*(Q/qf

where: CQ - cost for flow rate of Q which is under analysis

C - cost of base case flow rate of q

Q - flow rate of Q which is under analysis

q - base case flow rate of q

s - scale up coefficient

The cost/flow rate estimation for each technology uses this functional
form, although the parameter values differ.

A cost for a base case size of each technology as calculated by M.M.
Dillon,50 are shown in two places. For the Primary Clarifier, see
Exhibit A2, Cells G26-G30 for the costs of the various components of
the clarifier, and Exhibit A2, Cells J26-J30 for the labour costs of
installing the components.51 The base case flow rate is shown in Cell
E33. The scale-up coefficient values are found in Exhibit A2, Cells
B30-B35.

If a flow rate is entered by the user, EPIM applies the cost function
and scale-up coefficients to calculate the capital cost of each
component, and the total project capital cost. Conversely, if the user
entered a capital expenditure figure, the cost function calculates an
approximate flow rate for the project.

50 For details of the base case cost breakdowns and a discussion of the cost function
estimations, see M.M. Dillon's report.

51 Note that the labour cost of installation of a particular component is on the same
row as the cost of the component itself.

210

a) Flow Rate Information Entered By User

In this instance, the cost function will ultimately estimate the total
capital cost for the project. The model uses the cost functional form,
the values of the scale-up coefficients, and the base case material and
labour costs to yield an estimate of the material and labour costs of
each component of the project under consideration. The results are
displayed in Exhibit A3, Cells M26-M30 for the component costs and
Exhibit A3, Cells N26-N30 for the labour installation costs." The
total of the material and labour costs is labelled "Direct Capital Costs",
and is displayed in Exhibit A3, Cell N33.

Engineering design and site supervision must also be considered as
part of the capital cost of a project. M.M. Dillon has estimated these
costs as a percentage of the direct capital cost for each technology.
This percentage varies depending on the technology under
consideration. The percentage for Primary Clarifiers is displayed in
Exhibit A2, Cell B37. The calculated value of the indirect capital cost
is shown in Exhibit A3, Cell N35, and the total capital cost of the
project is found in Exhibit A3, Cell N37.

b) Capital Expenditure Figure Entered By User

In this instance, the cost function will ultimately estimate the flow rate
of the project under consideration. The model will also use the cost
function, the values of the scale-up coefficients, and the base case
material and labour costs to allocate the total capital costs among the
various material components, installation labour, and indirect capital
costs.

52 This area of the model is labelled "Initial Calculation" but is equivalent to the

"Final Calculation" when a flow rate is entered by the user. The "Final Calculation"
figures differ from "Initial Calculation" only when a capital expenditure is entered by the
user, and is described below.

211

.Si o

Os O oo Tt en

Tf in Os, r-„ so

SO
(*1

» m t»" t^" *û

f§ ■§

*J CO

oo to r~ v» es

tO — tO

©»

S 3

«o

so © © so ©

S o

eS © m © »-i

so 'O o ^ r-

o\ S - 3t ■ 5

? -s

en <> «n J5

C/î

r-* ** 3" tt ci

tO O V» ^H
«O

• ^ *o o

cm 5t «o <a

i-3 o s >o

•» 3 * %

"S s
s 3

Os Q m (S ri-
se o en rt es

oo *» *• *•

1 S 5 S

5- -j -J Cj

•2 U

oo o\ os en os

Q is

O N* m m m"

^" fc— -*_ fc^

R es

oo to r- to «-h

£ a a a

"* 111

T S

to to to

1 «

1 a

Subtotal

Direct C

Indirect C

Total C

e Collector

Pump

onstruction

Piping

Elect/Instr

•g» o

Q 5

r- O O in oo
o o -h r- es

°°. "1, ^ ^ ^

od en oo* r>* s©

» » r» « n

«o — to

e»

«o

« .

S s

en Q t-» CS Tf

*i ^ «_ «_

£ -s

m Q >— i cm m

tj- o *n *n

SO S© Tt Tt r-

°° £2 "2 *T>

f* ** 3 "î «"f

tO O «^

- "^ oo rs
es JD "O S

<*5

-H O > «o

v* 22 *** 22

«o «o

Si 1

rj- q m Tf m

•rt î; t; î«

>n o Os >n r~

i — !9 3 !9

S a a a

^ J rt « a

§ 1

—* N* 't fO M
oo to r» Vï -*

«r» ,~ «„ j*

£ a a a

"• 111

«O V* V*

"S -S

-S a

s, 5

Subtotal

Indirect C
Total C

Collector
Pump

nstruction
Piping

Elect/Instr

■*- ~»

Ë:i

5.5

"»

t«-

After the initial calculation of the capital costs, an additional
adjustment is made by EPIM. Because the parameters of the cost
functions for individual components are estimates, the sum of the
costs calculated by the model for the individual components, the
installation labour, and the engineering and supervision work may
differ slightly from the total capital cost entered by the user.
EPIMreconciles the detailed estimates to the total by a relatively
straight-forward adjustment which involves multiplying the cost of
each component, the installation labour, and the indirect capital cost by
the ratio of the "Initial Calculation" of total capital cost to the actual
capital cost entered (Exhibit A3, Cell N37 divided by Exhibit A2, Cell
B26). The adjusted component (Exhibit A3, Cells R26-R30), labour
(Exhibit A3, S26-S30), and indirect capital costs (Exhibit A3, Cell
S35) appear in the area labelled "Final Calculation". The total "final"
capital cost (Exhibit A3, Cell S37) should equal the amount entered by
the user.53

Operating Costs

The same functional form is used to estimate the annual operating
costs for a project under consideration. The base case operating costs
are shown in Exhibit A4, Cells W26-W29, while the scale-up
coefficient for operating costs is displayed in Exhibit A2, Cell B26.
The "Analyzed Case" column (Exhibit A4, Cells X26-X29) uses the
cost function and the scale-up coefficient to calculate the annual
operating costs for the project.

53 This adjustment rule is not followed for certain components of several

technologies. The cost of these components does not change as the project size increases.
However, they are usually small items such as the pump for the Primary Clarifier. As a
result, the "Final Calculation" capital cost may vary slightly from the capital cost input
by the user, as it does in Exhibit A3.

213

Primary Clarifie
Analyzed

Case

$29,612

$16,451

$3,290

$49,353

es en

(S Tt

CM Tt ,.

o\ >n f>

en On en
5 en 0\

•«I- CM

en Os

en >o "n

enditut

$62
$73

en en

OMfl ij

<j 22 2 e* ■=>"

= SP

•■c

g
te

Labour
Maintenan
Power
Total

Ontario E

Equipmen
Constructi

.S t>

ex u

Installado
Engineerii
Total

«o

r»

«T

IT)

t--

«M

Expenditures in Ontario by the Environmental Protection Industry

EPIM also estimates the amount spent in Ontario by environmental
protection firms in the course of completing the project under
consideration, based on information gathered from firms by M.M.
Dillon regarding EPI firms' purchases in Ontario. The proportion of
the value of each component bought in Ontario is displayed in Exhibit
A2, Cells F26-F30. These proportions are multiplied by the estimated
cost of each component in Exhibit A3, Cells R26-R30, and the
Ontario component spending is displayed in Exhibit A4, Cells W33-
W36. As well, the installation labour costs in Exhibit A3, Cells S26-
S30 are multiplied by the Ontario-purchase proportions in Exhibit A2,
Cells I26-I30,54 and the results are totalled in Exhibit A4, Cell W37.
Lastly, the indirect capital costs for engineering are re-shown in
Exhibit A4, Cell W38 as Ontario "Engineering" purchases.55

GDP and Employment Impacts

In order to estimate the economic impact of a particular environmental
protection project, the elements of the capital and operating costs must
be allocated to the industry that produces them.56

For capital expenditures, these allocations are displayed in Exhibit A5,
Cells AC24-AC37 - the column labelled "Shipments (Capital)". In
the case of the Primary Clarifier, the following allocations have been
made:

Component Industry

Sludge Collector 98 - Miscellaneous Machinery

Pump 96 - Compressor and Turbine

54 For all technologies, the installation labour is assumed to be Ontario workers.
Thus, these proportions are always 1 .00.

55 For all technologies, the model assumes that the engineering design and site
supervision is conducted by the Ontario-based operations of engineering firms.

56 Industries have been selected from the worksheet level of the Interprovincial
Input-Output model. See: Statistics Canada, System of National Accounts, The input-
output structure of the Canadian economy, Catalogue 15-510, pgs. 104-106. The
components were assigned to industries based on the list of goods produced contained in:
Statistics Canada, Standard industrial classification. 1980, Catalogue 1 2-501 E.

215

Construction 160- Other Engineering Construction

Piping57 37 - Plastic Pipe & Fittings (50%)

78 - Steel Pipe and Tube (50%)

Electrical/Instrumentation 144- Indicating/Recording Instruments

Installation Labour 599 - Wages & Salaries (commodity)

Indirect Capital Cost 192 - Professional Business Services

57 According to M. M. Dillon, either plastic or steel piping could be used in all

water treatment technologies. The assumption of a 50-50 split of the pipe shipments
between plastic and steel is made.

216

ft,

t."

O O

OOO

O O

O O O <S

■-■H

d d

odd

d d

0 d d ~

til

si,

0 0

0 00 0

(S 0

n q (S ci

d d

odd

d d

r-i O «"H CÏ

^— -

0 0

000

0 0

°S°2

^-s,

«n 0

CN4

fvj

ri vo*

v©^

00"

*"*

0 ^-i

000

00 0

vîO-N

r~ OO On

<N-1

•»»*

«n

tt vq^ ci

r»*

r* 06" On"

«H

Tt Cl tS

VO
CN

0 es

On vo

tN O^

■O

•S-

5/3

t*$ vo*

oi
ON

^—

C7\

<tf

Cl Tt <S

r»

Cl in On

■3

OJ.

On vo^ C

~«,

^h"

C* V* On

r- Tf (s

ft,

»n

•S"

«N")

Bfl

IV*

VO v©

vO vo vo

VO T

^r (S on y-
On CM <S X IT

vO ON t^ 2 °-n
On r~ ^ 1 ^i

rj*

v© vo

VO vo vo

VO On

6, «

*-H

»-H

*-H

»-^

*— ( »-*

i-H ,-H *-^

ph vo

m ci

fl Cl Cl

C) On

€

d d

odd

d d

d d d "^ ****

•«t

Tt "S"

Tj- Tf Tt

Tt m

wi On nO

0 ci

CI CI CI

m ^

~h Cl (S Q

es on r- S
■>$ r- Tt 0

~H ("M

ci ci

C Cl Cl

Cl r+

m no

w-i u-i

m w-> m

vo r» 00 ~h

d d

odd

d d

odd

£ *»

S 2

u e

O !" «5

•a S «

M "T3

ding Instrum
Building Co

H
Z

C
C3

J3
X

— s
2 £

ining Mach

chinery

micals

ig Construe
ystems
iness Servii
s and Salari

O
-3
C

Q
Z

<*>

«a
S

•3

1/5

•a

on
ea

-s
0

u
S

Fabricated Structu
Compressor & Tu
Construction & M
Miscellaneous Ma
L) - Industrial Che

1- —

O a

0 -a

*g O

►S z

- Other Engineerir

- Electric Power S

- Professional Bus

■«

vO VO

r- 00 t-^

"T ui

Q On tS On
vO r- On On

»£

00 ON

Ov Ov Ov

•— < «— '

—. ^h ^h \n

«t

r»

T—

Factors that indicate the GDP created in Ontario per dollar of industry
shipments are shown in Exhibit A5, Cells AA24-AA37.58 Industry
shipments generated by the capital spending are multiplied by these
factors to yield the GDP that results in Ontario, which is displayed in
Exhibit A5, Cells AE24-AE37.5*

The approach to the estimation of employment created by a project is
slightly more complicated. Exhibit A5, Cells AB24-AB37 contains
factors that indicate the employment created for every $10,000 of
industry activity as measured in 1984 dollars. However, the model
must adjust the shipments figures from 1991 dollars to 1984 dollars in
order to use the employment factors properly. To this end, product
price deflators for 1984 and 1991 for each industry are displayed in
Exhibit A6, Cells AA3-AA15 and Exhibit A6, AB3-AB15.60 The
ratio of these two deflators is calculated and shown in Exhibit A6,
Cells AC3-AC15. Industry shipments are multiplied by these factors
to yield 1984 dollar value of shipments. Finally, these adjusted
shipment figures are multiplied by the employment factors to arrive at
the final estimate for employment created by the project

The installation labour employment created is determined in a different
fashion. Total labour cost (Exhibit A5, Cell AC38) is divided by an
average cost of labour in the Ontario construction industry (Exhibit
A5, Cell AB38) to yield person years of installation labour
employment (Exhibit A5, Cell AG38). The average cost of Ontario
construction labour is annual average earnings in the industry, plus
benefits.61

58 These factors are 'Total GDP per Dollar of Activity By Industry (In-Province
Effects Only)", provided by the Input/Output Division of Statistics Canada.

59 The factor applicable to labour income paid to installation labour is 1.00, and is
shown in Exhibit A5, Cell AA38.

60 Source: Statistics Canada, Industry price indexes, 62-01 1.

61 Annual average earnings in 1991 were $35,486, according to Statistics Canada,
Employment, earnings and hours, 72-002. Supplementary labour income as a share of
wages and salaries in construction in Canada in 1990 (the most recent year available) was
used as an estimate of an additional percentage of cost due to benefits to workers. This
percentage was 10.2%, according to Statistics Canada, Income and Expenditure Accounts
Division.

218

o inmor-oo(Soo«nooo<Scom

S ooavr-f~mr-Tj-\Ofom'-H»noo

es r-r~»o\v©oot--oor--ONOooov©r--

GC doooocJooooocJo

59 S£ -h K ï o! n d d n" gj n t^ « -h

ISI

ta*

VOCJOOOOONf-^OVO

O\OnOn00OnO\O\O\;_;OnOn00On

oo r-« f-j es

«ri in os «n

?8
5 1

T3 J3
t> 1)

£ O

u In 2

3 &£

H § ^

S * '

M SI

O t3

.S2 2

-a
I

CT3

on
on
U

.fa

-C B

u u

3* 2

§«

U c
o
•a

s§ "a
8 I

«2 3

1 ?
1 S

t/j c

JS o

60 _-

.g -a
■a -3

fe 3

(j -a

„ o
S 2

c
•3

O r N (<)

The items of operating costs are allocated to industries (Exhibit A5,
Cells AD24-AD38) as follows:

Item Industry

Power 179 Electric Power Systems

Chemicals62 97 (L) Industrial Chemicals
Maintenance/Labour Labour Costs

The GDP and employment effects of operating spending are then
calculated in a similar fashion to the capital expenditure impacts
(Exhibit A5, Cells AF24-AF38, Cells AH24-AH38). For the
employment created by operating labour costs, the labour cost is
divided by an average Ontario manufacturing labour cost.63

Model Outputs

The final results of applying the model are displayed in the "Summary
Output Area" (See Exhibit Al). The economic impacts of both the
one-time capital spending and the annual operating expenditures are
portrayed in Exhibit Al, Columns J and K, respectively. The figures
for project cost, person years of employment, GDP, and Ontario EPI
expenditures are the sums of the impacts of the project(s) under
consideration.

The taxation figures are calculated as proportions of the GDP created.
The share of GDP accounted for by Ontario and federal taxes in Fiscal
1990-91 are displayed in Exhibit Al, Cells L12- L1364. The Ontario
GDP created by the project(s) are multiplied by these proportions to
estimate the Ontario and federal taxes generated, and these tax revenue
estimates are presented in Exhibit Al, Cells J12-J13 and K12-K13.

62 While chemical addition is not used in the Primary Clarifier technology, several
other treatment processes do require chemicals.

63 Average annual manufacturing earnings in Ontario in 1991 were $34,584.
Supplementary labour income as a share of manufacturing wages and salaries in Canada in
1990 was 13.9%. Sources are the same as for construction earnings and supplementary
labnour income.

64 Sources: GDP - Statistics Canada, Income and Expenditure Accounts Division,
National Income and Expenditure Accounts; Ontario Ministry of Treasury and Economics,
Office of Economic Policy. Ontario Economic Accounts. Taxation - Federal and
Provinical Budgets.

220

APPENDIX 2

UTILIZING THE STATISTICS CANADA
INPUT/OUTPUT MODEL

A 2.1 Introduction

When the Ministry of the Environment is assessing the economic
impact of an environmental protection project, and when relatively
detailed information on costs is available, it would be possible to use
the Statistics Canada Interprovincial Input/Output Model (I/O model)
to conduct an analysis. This appendix outlines how the Ministry can
make use of the I/O model. Exhibit A7 illustrates the process for
utilizing the I/O model.

A 2. 2 Assembling the Data for Submission to the Model

The I/O model can accept data on project spending in two fashions: by
the industries that receive the spending, or by the commodities
that are purchased for the project. When collecting data for entry into
the model, there are several levels of aggregation (called W, M, and S,
in increasing aggregation65) available for either the industries or
commodities method. However, if data is collected using more
aggregated industry or commodity classifications (such as M or S),
Statistics Canada will allocate the spending among the various W
categories included in each aggregated industry or commodity.
Therefore, as often as possible, the Ministry should collect project
spending data at the most disaggregated (W) level.66

65 An additional grouping "L" exists for industry classification, and falls between
W and M in terms of aggregation.

66 Copies of the industry and commodity classf ications are included at the end of
this appendix. Source: Statistics Canada, The input-output structure of the Canadian
economy. Catalogue 15-510, pgs. 104-106 and 110-114 for industries and pgs. 115-123
for commodities

221

EXHIBIT A7
USE OF STATISTICS CANADA INPUT/OUTPUT MODEL

DATA COLLECTION

• by industry

at W, L, M, S levels

• by commodity
atw, M, S levé

levels

SUBMISSION OF DATA

• to Input/Output Division
of Statistics Canada

MODEL OUTPUT

• employment
•GDP

• by province

• by industry

ÉÉ.HlÉÉI..,.ÉM^É.É1

EMPLOYMENT
ADJUSTMENT

• deflate employment results by

change in industrial product

price

index between 1984 and year of

project under analysis

WAGES AND SALARIES
INCLUSION (if required)

• employment: divide wages and
salaries by average annual wage in
relevant industry and province,
or divide labour cost by average
annual wage plus benefits

GDP: add value of wages and
salaries to final GDP estimate for

relevant industry and province

222

Prior Judgement on Relevant Industry or Commodity Categories

The Ministry should review the industry or commodity groupings
before developing a request for information on a project. There are
27 1 groupings of industries and 602 groupings of commodities, and
clearly any firm or government agency would be hard pressed to go
through all groupings to determine the amount of money directed to
each one. Some judgement would be required to pare down the list of
possible spending categories to make data collection tractable.

Submitting Data at Different Levels of Aggregation

It is possible to combine spending data at different levels of
aggregation for submission to the I/O model. When the Ministry can
identify some detailed spending information, but only has a general
idea about the nature of other materials , it may be preferable to mix
levels of aggregation, and allow Statistics Canada to allocate the
general spending according to the parameters of the Input/Output
model.

as:

For example, say a particular project involves spending such

$250,000 spending on tanks (W level commodity classification 273),
$50,000 on plastic pipe (W level commodity - 135),
$100,000 on calcium chloride (W level commodity - 425), and,
$500,000 on iron & steel products (M level commodity - 45).

In this brief example, the Ministry was able to obtain detailed
spending information on tanks, plastic pipe, and calcium chloride, but
was only able to discern that the $500,000 amount would be spent on
iron and steel products of some sort. Statistics Canada would allocate
the $500,000 among the W level of all iron & steel products,
according to their usage as embodied in the model parameters. While
this mixing of level reduces the accuracy of the submission to the
model compared with collecting all data at the W level, it is preferable
to collecting all information at the more aggregated M level.

223

Wages, Salaries, and Other Labour Costs

Some labour cost information may be available on a given
environmental protection project, perhaps from either the company
installing the technology or from supplying firms. If wages and
salaries or benefits data are available, they should be entered
separately to increase the accuracy of the final estimate.67 Otherwise,
the I/O model will allocate spending to labour costs according to the
parameters embodied within it, which are based on the average
relationships in the industry and economy. However, users should be
aware that entering labour cost data as a separate category will require
some adjustments to be made by the user to the I/O model's results.68

A 2. 3 Input/Output Model Results

The model's results are provided at each level of aggregation (W, L,
M, and S) on an industry and province basis.69 The following
economic variables are displayed:

• final demand by province - demand created in Canadian provinces
by the project spending;

•final demand by industry - demand created in Canadian industries by
the project spending;

• direct GDP - first round of GDP generated by the direct project
spending itself;

• direct employment - person years of work created by the direct
project spending itself;

• gross production by province and industry (shipments) - total sales
by all businesses resulting from the project and its spin-offs;

67 Wages and salaries is represented by W level commodity classification 599,
supplementary labour income (benefits) by W level commoodity 600.

68 These adjsustments are ouUined in Section A2.4.

(9 Statistics Canada can provide both a hard copy and floppy disk copy of the

model's output. Users are advised to obtain both. The disk copy is obtainable in Lotus
format which can permit manipulation of the data. In Ernst & Young's experience with
I/O model analysis, we have frequently wanted to aggregate the results in a different
fashion than the model provides. As well, a disk copy will make the adjustments to the
output described in Section A2.4 much easier.

224

• total endogenous employment - person years of work created by
project and spin-offs;

• total endogenous GDP at factor cost - total income/GDP generated
by project and spin-offs;

• summary of intermediate trade flows - movement of goods and
services between provinces and as imports as a result of project and
spin-offs; and,

• income and expenditure account summary - breakdown of economic
impact in the categories used in the National Income and Expenditure
Accounts.

A2.4 Adjustments to the Model's Results

Employment

As noted in Section A2.2, in some instances, the Ministry may have
information on certain amounts of direct spending on labour as a result
of an environmental protection project. If the resulting person years
of work are not available, then the Ministry must make its own
calculation of the employment impact of the labour costs,70 because
the I/O model does not translate either wages and salaries or
supplementary labour income into employment.71

If only wages and salaries spending was entered into the model, the
user should divide the total amount paid in each industry and province
by average annual earnings in the relevant industry and province.72

70 As also noted in Section A2.4, the accuracy of the model's output is enhanced if
any known amounts of wages, salaries, and/or benefits are entered as such. If the
Ministry knows the accompanying person years of employment generated, these figures
can simply be added to the relevant industry and province. Therefore, the adjustment
methods outlined in this section would not be necessary.

71 While this calculation may seem bothersome to the user, in fact it increases the
accuracy of the final results. Since the data are entered as labour costs, the model is not
able to tell in what industry the associated employees worked. However, the user would
know, and can add the proper employment figure to the relevant industry and province
results.

72 This information is obtainable by taking the annual average of the monthly data
in Statistics Canada, Employment, earnings and hours. Catalogue 72-002, or from the
Labour Division of Statistics Canada.

225

The resulting number of jobs should be added to the model's total in
that industry and province (see Table Al for an example involving a
project in Ontario and Quebec).

Example Table AI
Calculating Employment Created by Wages and Salaries

Ont

Industry
A

ario

Industry
B

Ouebec

Industry Industry
A B

Total Wages and Salaries

$4,290,000

$1,700,000

$1,725,000

$2,365,000

Avg. Annual Earnings

$35,750

$42,500

$34,500

$43,000

Person Years Added to I/O
Model Employment Results

120

When information on both wages/salaries and benefits (total "labour
cost") is submitted to the I/O model, the employment adjustment
should be modified. The annual average earnings for the relevant
industry and province should still be obtained. In addition, the user
will want to estimate an additional percentage for benefits in the
relevant industry.73 With the benefits estimate added, the user has
calculated an annual average labour cost. This figure should be
divided into the total labour cost by industry and province to yield the
additional person years of employment to be added to the model's
output (see Table A2 where the previous example is extended to deal
with benefits).

73 One possible method of estimating benefits as a share of wages and salaries is to

obtain supplementary labour income (SLI) and wages and salaries Figures from Statistics
Canada, Labour Division. The data is available at some disaggregation only on a nation-
wide basis.

226

Example table A2
Calculating Employment Created by Labour Costs

Ontario

Industry Industry
A B

Quebec

Industry Industry
A B

Wages and Salaries

$4,290,000

$1,700,000

$1,725,000

$2,365,000

Benefits

$600,000

$145,000

$200,000

$160,000

Total "Labour Costs"

$4,890,000

$1,845,000

$1,925,000

$2,525,000

Avg. Annual Earnings

$35,750

$42,500

$34,500

$43,000

SLI / Wages and Salaries

12.8%

7.6%

12.8%

7.6%

Avg. Annual Labour Cost

$40,326

$45,730

$38,916

$46,268

Person Years Added to IAD
Model Employment Results

121.3

40.3

49.5

54.6

GDP

Again, because the I/O model does not know to what industry to credit
labour costs entered as wages and salaries or supplementary labour
income, the user must adjust the model's total GDP output. The
adjustment is simply to add the labour cost amount direcdy to the GDP
result for the relevant industry and province. This approach can be
understood by considering that GDP is equivalent to final income, and
all wages, salaries, and benefits are final income.

227

SNA Industry Codes at the WortuhMi Level (W) In Terms of 1960 SIC
Codes des industries du SCN au niveau de travail (W) selon la CTI de i960

MO. INDUSTRY TITLE - W
Business sector

1 Agriculture livestock

2 Agncuitu/B twdcrop

3 Fisnmg A traorxng moustnes

4 Logging 4 lorestry moustnes

5 Gold mines

6 Otner metal mines

7 Iron mines

8 Asoestos mines

9 Potasr m-nes
to Salt m.nes

it Mise- noi'-meta) mines e«c coai
'2 Coalmines

13 "Crude oerro^um s natural gas

14 Ouarry 4 sand dm .noustr.es

1 5 Service related to minerai enraci
i6 Meat A meat products <eic poultry)
1 7 Pouttry oroaucts noustry

•8 F:sn oroc.crs nCbSHy

19 F-uit ano ;ege:aoie ncustnes

20 Dairy otcclc-s ncostr es

2i Flour 4 cer?a 'oca ncusmes

22 Feeo .ndus:-y

23 vegetable c*. -n,iis .e«c com o*i>

24 Biscuit inousry

25 3'eao A oner oa«ery nrocucts nc

26 Care & Dee: suga' industry
2' Sugar con'ectiorery ircustres

28 Tea anc ccee noustfy

29 Mise 'ooc endues nousres ?:
3C Sert dr.ru rz.i:-,

3* Distillery orccucts -raussv

32 Brewery rxooucts 'fXJusiry

33 Wine industry

34 Tooacco ofooucts nousmes

35 BuBber Drcc_cis "Ousrres

36 Foamed 4 ernaroeo piastic orooucts
3' P'asuc o-oe s oare tirtinçs ,no

38 Piasuc turn à sneetmg industry

39 Plastic oag ryjusfy

40 Otner oiastc o'ooucts >ro nee

41 Learner tanneries

42 Footwear inoustry

43 Mise learner 4 allied prod md

44 Man-made «ere 4 fumant yam oa

45 Otner spun yam 4 «oven ctotn nd

46 Wool yam S woven ootn industry

47 Broad knmea fabric mousey
«8 Misc. «rue products ndustnes

Contract texsJe dyemg t
Carps*, mats rug noustry
Men's end boy's dotang

Women's (Jutfwiy nouera*
Chsdnsn's etcevng nousvy
Mac doting A apparel riduetne*

MOT) nduery

SetMivtts. pterwig A iNngte mes
Veneer end plywood nomme»
Pie-Cab. wooden txog A cebnet
Door, wmdow A Otner me»on\ «d.
Wooden ods A coffin noustnes
Parade A water board ndustnes
Misc. wood ndustnes
- Houserou furniture noustnes
Office fumnure noustnes
Otner lumnure A luiure nd
Pulp industry
Newspnnt industry
Papereoaro. otog board A oui paper
Aspnall roolmg industry
Paper oo i A bag ndustres
Otner convened paper products nc
Commercial pnntjng ndustnes
Puoksnrig noustnes
Combned pubttttwig A prmlmg rid
Pioaomatung, typeacang A bindery
Form- «toy A ssssf loundnes
Ofrter primary steel noustnes
Sleet cape A kibe nounry
'ron loundnes

Nort-terrou* sesSMftg A lehviig nd
AJumnum rotmg castjng. erf/uung
Copper roertg. casting A ertrudng
Otner met» noting, casuig etc
Power ocler A neat e«cnanger no
Pre eng metal biog leic oonaoiei
FaDrcated vj^ciurai metal ind nee

iseo sic - en nom des industries - w

On 012 021

013-017022.023

031-033

0411 0412.0511

0611

0612-0616 0619

0625

0622 X22 0629
063

1712

1713.1719

181

1829

1821

183

191.193.1991

1993-1995.1999

1992

192

243

2*4
245

2491-2493.

2495-2499

2494

251

252

2541.2542

2543.2549

256 258

2592.2593

2591.» 99

261

264

269

2711

2712

2713-2719

272

273

279

281

283

284

282

2911-2912

2919

292

294

295

296

297

299

301

3023

3021 3C22 3029

Secteur dee entreposes

Agriculture actrvne des ammaui

Aon act des grandes cultures

Ind. de la pèche el Ou c-egeaoe

Eiooiauor- toresnere

Mnes 8'or

Autres mines de metaui

Mines oe 1er

M<nes o amianie

Mmes de cotasse

Mines oe sei

Drv mines non metal saut cnaroon

Mines oe cnaroon

Petroie brut A oaz nature

Carrières A saoteres

ineustnes Oes services mm«rs

v anoe saui voiame

inaustne de la voulue

Transformation du oo-sscn

incgsns oes tru.ts 4 eç>r-es

incus;r«s laitières

ind de a lanne et oes ce-eaies

incus:rie oes aumenis pour an.mau»

Huies veoetaies isaui de ma si

mcustre oes f>scjits

Pan 4 autres prod oe oouiarge'-e

S.cre ce canne A de cer.e-a*»

Cc-'se-es

incusxe Ou me A au cate

Overs crccuits aiimenaires rca

i"Cws:.-e zes oessens ji:e.se$

Inc ces cr-xjuits ze z sni'a: on

incustne oe a o«re

Industrie du vin

industries du taoac

me oes produits en cacutc-cuc

P'cc en oiasticue mousse 4 soufe

Inc des tuyau' en oasuoue

Pencuies A teumes oiasuces

mo oes sacs en matière piasnatie

Autres oroo rnauere pjastioue nca

Tanneries

industrie de la cnaussure

Ind des onxJuts divers en cun

Fibres enrnoues Ues de hlaments

Autres fies A ksaus tisses

Filature A tissage de la lavne

ind des dssus wges a maille

ind. des produis mues divers

Tenture A kneaaga prod knstes
Tapa, carpeaesA inagueoss
Vêtements pour nommes A

inoucnwj om vessmsnts pour darnes
ind. de» «ewitiu pour entants

Onr. ndustnes de rtiabsement

ind. des piarage» A comrsptaoyes

Baamsnts oreujo. A ermor» en boa
Pones, tenet** A boa iravaae

ind. des boites A des csrcuMs
Pamsaui de perscuJe et de copeam
Orverses moustnes ou boa
industrie des msuoies de maison
industrie des meubles de bureau
Autres nd. de meuotts et article*
inoustre oes paies a papier
industrie du oaoer nurnai
Canon, panneau» A aul no paper
ind du papier toture aspnaite
Botes en canon et sacs en parw
Aut. produiis en paper transforme
Ind. de l'mpresscn cornmerc<eie
inoustros de redsion
L'irrtpreseon A Tedeon cornons**
CKtvsg*. compoaeon A rekuro
F nrro-akaoM A tonoete* daoer
Autre* ndustne* ssjarurgtoun
ind. de* use* A luyaui daoer
Fcndsns*d* ter

Foret A aAnsoe metsui non tensui
Larnneg* A moulage 0* ratumnum
Lamnao*. moulage, en. du cunm>
Lamnage A moulage d autres metaui
Cnauderes A eenangeurs de cnaieur
Bâtiments prelabrioues en matai
Faoncauon cfiarpentes en metal nca

SNA Industry Codes at the Worksheet Level (W) In Terms of 1980 SIC - Continued
Codes des industries du SCN au niveau de travail (W) selon la CTI de 1980 - suite

NO. INDUSTRY TITLE - W

Business sector - Continued

Ornamental 4 arch metal proa -nc
Stamped Dressed & coated metals
w.re and wire products industries
Maroware tool & cutlery industries
Heating eauioment industry
Macnme snoos 'noustry
Otner "letai facncating .ndustres
Agncu'ture implement ndustry
Commercial rc-fr ge-ator. Cùuicmcr:
Compressor 4 ;urcine industries
Construction s mmmg machinery
5dwm.ll 4 otne' Tiac-inery -nc nee
Aircran 4 arcrar oars .noustry
Motor venoe 'ncusiry
Truc* Dus Docv 6. trailer industry
Motor ve"'Ce engine 4 parts inc
Meter trericie wnng assemciies
Mc:cr ve-.ce ;:a-e -ei -eus:-.
Motor .e-ice steer rç 4 susoensc
Motor ver>c:e wree' 4 nra«e -re
Motor vence caste oats r-o
Motor venice 'aoric accessories
Otner motor ven.cie access 4 pans
Ban'oad ro'img stcc« ncustrv
SricOLi'Cing ane -eca ' ncus:*v
M.sc ■'arsocrato- e_u c**er- re
Sriai. eectrca. acona~.ee -o.s:-.
Maicr aecarces e-e: â 'C"-*eC
Eectr- ç-'"; r--s:-e<
Oeccre ciave's -acic 4 \ -ece ve-
Teieccmmun.cat.cr ec»'Omen: -a
E'ectronic oars 4 comoonents mo
Otner electronic eouicmert nc
Eectr-n.c eomc_ie»s 4 oernne'a'S
Msc oi:ce ousu'ess mac- -es

Msc eiecricai ro„st-a ecuic

Comr-unicaiions enercv wre 4 "ace

Bar?"/ inaustr,

M.sc e«ct'icai orcooc: nousxes

Clay tyoducts industries

Cement industry

Concrete products industries

Ready-mix concrete industry

Glass S glass products industries

Non-metal mineral insulation ind

Mise non-metallic mineral products

1 34 Refined petroleum * coal prooucts

1 35 inousinai «organe chemicals nee

136 industrial organic chemeals nee

137 Agricultural cnemcal ndustnes

138 Plastic 4 syntneuc resn ndustry

139 Pharmaceutical S meoone ndustry

'«0

145
146

147
148

149
150

155
156
157
158
159
~160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167

Pant and varrash ndustry
Soap S cleaning compounds ndustry
Towel preparabons ndustry
Otner chemcal products ndustnes
Indcamg & recording nstruments
Other scienuic 4 prol. equernara
Jewellery 4 precious metal nd
Sporting goods industry
Toys and games industry
Sign and display industry
Floor We. linoleum, coated labne
Musical instrument sound recording
Misc. manulactured products nee
Repair construction
Residential construction
Non-resiOential bidg construction
Road, highway 4 airstnp const
Gas 4 orf lacihry construction
Dams 4 irrigation protects
Railway 4 telephone telegraph const
Otner engneermg construction
Construction, other acmntjos
Air transpon & services rodent»!
Railway transport A ret. services
Waier transpon S ret serve*»
Truck transpon ndustnes
urban transit system ndustry
Interurban 4 rural transit systems

168 Taxcao industry

169 Mtsc transponation industries

170 Other services ncid to transpon

171 Highway 4 bridge maintenance .nd

&T 1980 SIC - CTI NOM OES INDUSTRIES - W

Secteur des entreprises - suite

5 303 Produits d'architecture en metai

5 304 Emboutissage 4 matneage Oes métaux

S 305 Fil métallique 4 ses produis

5 306 Articles 0e quincaillerie

5 307 industrie du materiel de chauffage

5 308 Ateners a usinage

5 309 Autres ino ae produits en metai

5 3i! --Oustne oes instruments aratoires

5 312 Eq-.e ccrnerc.ai Je réfrigération

5 31913194 mo oes compresseurs et turbines

5 3192 Machiner e de construction 4 mines

5 3193 3199 'no de -nacn.nes pour sciene 4 ~ca

5 32 ' «ce aéronefs 4 pieces 0 aerore's

5 323 moustrie oes véhicules automobiles

5 324 Carrosseries oe camions 4 remorques

5 3251 Moteurs 4 pieces oe venicuies

5 3252 Assenciages oe cables ocur vencuie

5 3253 P-eces e-.ooui.es ecu' venc/e

5 3254 DrectiC" Susoens.cn pou' venic-.c

5 3255 -loues 4 'rems oour ver.cu'e

5 3256 Peees en oiastcue oour venicue

5 325" Accessoires te"!.* oour venicuie

5 3259 A^res oieces 4 ace ocur venic^e

5 326 ire c_ ~ate"e 'eiev-aire 'cuiari

5 327 Construction -eoaraticn oe navire

5 32S 329 -e - verses eu —ate-e trarsoc-

5 33" se::s accareus e.eet-icues

5 322 ûr:s acoare s leectr.oues Ou nor

5 333 -c :es aocare-s oeca'aee

5 33- 3-:'oç'aones -ececteu's 'acio s -\

5 335 " Ee. ee~er; oe te-ecorrmurtcat et-

P-eces 4 comoosantes e*ectron«aues
Autre matériel eiectronioue
Oremateurs 4 eauic penpnenque
O.ve'ses macnires oe bureau»
-c oes rars'crmateurs e'ecmcues
D^e's mate'-e' e-ec: -naustrie'
Eis4 eaces e'ec: commuricaicr

-.5 ■'■» les accumulateurs
Due's oroouits eiectncues
'0«s:rie Jes précuits en arg.ie

lr*OuStrie du Ciment

ir^Justrics des produits en beton
industrie du oeton prepare
Verre & articles en verre
iscuart de mm non métalliques
Divers prod minéraux non metai

Prods ratlines de pétrole & enaroon
Produis ctwruques
norganques nca

Produis crwTaques orgaraQues nca

Produis ctwnques d'usage agricole
Mat ptasaoue 4 reane symrwtque
Prod, pharmaeeusques S

medeaments
Industrie des peintures 4 verras
Savons 4 composes de nettoyage
Industrie des produits de todene
Autres nd. des produits chanques
Instruments d'ndcandn, ec.
Auire soup soentiftque 4 prol
Bijouterie 4 ortevrene
Industrie des ancles de sport
industrie des ouets 4 eux
industne des enseignes 4 étalages
Danes, mxueum 4 tissus enduits
Enregistrement 4 rnstr de musique
Divers produits manufactures nca
Reparation (construction)
Construction oomoliaire
Bailments autres Que domiciliaires
Const routes 4 estes d'aner
Const nst ga^il 4 petrow
Barrages 4 protêts ovngaoon
Const en. de 1er. teleg. telepnone
Autres travaux de gene
Consarucaon. autres actvues
Transp. aénen 4 services relatifs
Transe, terroviaire 4 semees ret
Transp- par eau & servcet. rat
ndustnes du carraonnage
Ind. du transpon en commun urban
Transp. an commun nterurbany

rural
industrie du tas

Diverses industries du transoon
4592 4599.996 9991 Autres services relatifs au transp
Entretien des routes, rues 4 ponts

3352

3359

3361

3362 J369

3372 3379

5™

33E

339'

3392 3399

35-

352

354

355

356

3594

357 358.3591
3593.3599

361 369

3711

3712

103

372

373

374

100

375

101

376

102

377

103

379

108

3911

108

39123914

104

392

105

3931

105

3932

106

397

107

3993

108

3994

108

3991 3992.3999

109

401-449

110

401-449

111

401 449

112

401 449

113

401-449

114

401-449

IIS

401-449

116

401-449

117

401 449

451.452

119

453

120

454 455

121

456

122

4571

123

4572

124

4581

125

4573-4575.4589

125

4592 4599.996 9

136
137
138
139

145

146

155

156

157

164

165
166
167

168
i69

SNA ,ndu,uy Code, « - Wo**~. M (-1 » 1— - ^ "^T
,.. fcHtort- du SCN ,u n.v.au * trav... (W) Mten b CT. O I960

No. INOUSTBY TITLE - w

Business sector - Concluded

1 72 Natural gas ooenne transport .nd

1 73 Crude »! 4 oiner pipeline transe

1 7* Storage and «arenousmg industries

1 75 Raoo 4 television oroadcasting rnd

1 76 Cade television industry

1 77 Telecommunication earners 4 omer

1 78 Postai service industry

1 79 E'ecxc sewer systems industry

180 Gas oistriDutwn systems industry
18' Orner utility indusf es nee

i 82 Wholesale trade industries

183 Retail trade influsir es

184 Banns 4 om oeposit accepting nst

185 Trust, deposit accepting mortgage cc

186 Credit unions

187 Otner finance 4 real estate md

188 insurance mdusmes

1 89 Gov; royalties on nat resources

1 90 Owe- occupied openings

191 Computer 4 reiatec servces

1 92 P-otessionai Dusmess services

193 A jve^is.ng services

■ 94 v sc ousiness services

195 ç jxcai.orai se-v ce ncustr es

196 -csDi:as

,9- "-;— es 'cr oerscna 4 nursmg ca'e

>9e C"?- -earn ai"c sec a: sen/ces

199 Accommodation service moustnes

200 food 4 oeverage servce industries

201 Mcticn oicture 4 video proa dis;

202 Mct-cn oicture emionion

203 T-eai-e soons 4 rec servce?

204 Race tracks and gamdiing ope/avons

205 uaurones 4 cleaners

206 Omer personal services

207 Pnotograpners

208 Bus ass-macn car «sasing/oin serv

209 Omer repa» 4 rr^tenance services

210 Operating supplies
2ii Omce suppnes

212 Catetena supflies

213 Laoor atory supptes

214 Travel 4 enteria»iment

215 MWtWj * """"y

216 Trajisportatwi ir»njine

Non- business sactor

251 Mnng «Justnas

252 Manu<actunng «ifAistn»»

253 Forestry sstves» «**<>

254 Osier transport «dus*»*

255 Hnftway 4 ondge maintenance «*

256 fade. A Wevson brrjadcasting «>

257 Wat» sysiems ndustry

258 Insurance & otner linanc» «vjuetry

259 Business serve» industries

260 Delence services

261 Other lederal government services

262 Provincial government services

263 Local government servces

264 Educational servce induslnes

265 Hospiials

266 insMuoonal. sooal serves»

267 OSier near»i * sooal aorvees

26S Amusement i otter serve» "

260 Private huuearrsrH

270 Refcgcus organuebons

271 Otner non-proto orgamiatons

tu S*

1M0 SIC - CTl MOM DCS INDUSTRIES - W

156

159

162
163

461'

46'24619
471 479
48"-48'3

48'4

482483

484'

49'

492
499

50' 599

60' -692

70' 702.709

703.704

705

7' '-729.74' •

"13 "499 75"

-5-2:59-6'

73i.732.-33

7495

75'3

=5 --359

•3
'3

362'

E63 865 366
86"' 86-9 868
869' 8693 8699

911-914

92V922

96'

962

963 9641 9642
965969

9643 9644 966

972

97' 973.979

993

982.983.99V
992 9999 4842

994.995

Fettve

Fenve

15
16

Fenve
Fctnre

Secteur Ms entrepris»» - hn

Traiso du 942 naturel par gazoduc
Transo par wpeiines saut gaz nat
ind d entreposage 4 d'emmagasinage
irvj de ia rade 4 Wedfrtuson
inousme de la teiedismoution
T eiecommuncarjon s

transmission/aut
industrie des service postaux
incustrie 3e énergie eiectnaue
industrie de ia distncution de gaz
Autres ino de services oublies nca
industries ou commerce de gros
inousmes du commerce de detail
Banoues 4 aut intermédiaires depot
Soc de 'iOuc* 4 oe prêt nypotn
Caisses a épargne et de credit
Aut agents '.nanciers immooiliers

ncusfes oes assurances
Beoeva-ces gouv sur ressources "at
immeucies eccoes oar orcone'.a.re
Servces 0 n'ormanoue 4 conne<es
Sen orc'essionne'S au> entreors
Services ce ouunc.ie
Ove-s se-, ces au< entreprises
ne =es xr. ces : erseigperrent
hoc :a->

Ce-: ce ses ' ers * oe'S-r

a.- se^. ;e scr- ;e =a-'.e sec i->

industries 3e ii-eccgement
incustnes de la restauration
P-oc 4 3isv films 4 ma; aud'Ov
P-oiectior ae iums emena
T-eiires suons 4 serv osirs

Miccooromes 101er es 4 ieu« nasa-'

Biarenissage ei nenoyage a sec

Autres services personnels

Photograones

Ass. com 'oc. mach. auto.

aut serv
Aut serv reparatjorvaui
Moments

Fournitures d'eiptatanon

Fournitures de Dur eau

Fournitures de caleièna

Fournitures de lato atone

Depiacemsnt & represantabon

PuCÉcae 4 promotion

Marge de ïansoons

06H>92
101-399
05'
451-457

Inuustne* des rranes
Industries rnanutactunsrss
kxtustns des servees loresoers
Autres nlustnes du transport

4M, Ennnen des routas, rues & ponts

48ii-*»i3 ind rje la ra*o » téledirluson

493 inousane de la rAstnouiion d eau

7,1.743 Assurance & aut agents hnanoers

7499.7512.759.76V.
771-773.

Servces au> entree* ^es

Servces de deiense

Aut servces de 1 admm leoeraie

Servces des admm provinciales

Servces des admm locales

ind des services d'enseejnement

Hôpuaui

EiaU. de sons 6 services sociau.

775-779

811

812-817841

822 827

832-837

851-859

8622 8629.864

8672.8694

8621.863.865.

866.8671.8679.

8691-8693 8699

963.9641.9642.

911-922.971.973.

979.994.995

974

98i

212
213
214
215
216

252
253
254

255
256

257
258

262
263
264
265
266

25 964 986

Am. serves» son de same/sooau»
r>y«rtitsements 4 autres serves»

Ménage»

Orgsnsasons religieuses

Aut organsauons sans Dut kjcrael

269

270

SNA Industry Codes at the Aggregation Level (I) In Terms of Both 1980 SIC and Worksheet Level (W)
and 1970 SIC and Worksheet Level (W)

Codes des Industries du SCN au niveau d'agrégation (L) selon la CTI et les niveaux de travail (W) de
1980 et selon la CAE et les niveaux de travail (W) de 1970

No. INDUSTRY TITLE - L
Butine» sector

i Agncuftural 4 related services ma

2 Fishing & trapping industries

3 Logging & forestry industnes

4 Gold mines

5 Other metal mines

6 Iron mmes

7 Asbestos mines

8 Non-metai mines ex coai 4 asoestos

Salt mines

Coal mines

Crude peroieum & natural ;as

Quarry s sand ou mdust- es

Service reiatea to minerai extrac:

Meat & meat orod lexc. poultry i

Poultry products industry

Fish products maustry

Font and vegetable moustr es

Dairy praoucts industries

Feed maustry

vegetacie d>i mil's lexc :or- o~i

Biscun rcustry

Breac 4 ctner oaKeiy or?duCts na

Care 4 see' sugar 'Ous-,

Mise looc products rcustres

Sort Onnk industry

Distillery products indusr-v

Brewery products maustry

Wine maustry

Tobacco products industries

RuDoer prpoucts industries

Plasuc products industries

learner tanneries

Footwear industry

Misc. learner & allied prod ma

Man-made libre yam A «oven cloth

Wool yam A woven etc* ndustry

Broad knitted tabnc industry

Misc. textile products indusines

39 Contract «Mule dyemg * Snutwig

40 Carpal, mat A rug ndunry

41 Çtatang industries axe. hosery

42 Hosery industry

43 SawmAs. piarwig s srangle mils

44 Veneer and ptywood industnes

45 Sash, door a other mttwortt nd.

46 Wooden box 4 coffin ndustnes

47 Other wood industries

48 Household furniture ndustnes

49 Office furniture industries

50 Other fumrture A future nd.
Si Pulp a paper industries

52 Asphalt rooting industry

53 Paper cot A bag mdustnes

54 Other converted paper products mo

55 Pnmmg & publishing ind.

56 Platemaking. typesetting 4 bindery

57 Pnmary steel industries

58 Sleet pipe 6 lube industry

59 Iron foundries

60 Non-ferrous smelting S rehnmg md

61 Alurranum rolling casting, extruding

62 Copper roang casting 6 extrudmg

63 Other metal roâng, casting etc

64 Power boser 6 struci metal nd

65 Ornamental A arch, metal prod, nd

66 Stamped, pressed 6 OOSfSd rnatats

67 Wee and wee products ndustnes
66 Hardware, «x» 4 cutlery ndustnes

69 Heating equipment industry

70 Machine shops industry

71 Other metal fabricating industries

72 Agriculture implement industry

73 Commercial relngeration equipment

74 Other machinery 6 equipment mo

1980

1970

sic -en

W-#

SIC-CAÉ

011-23

001-021

031-033

041-047

0411.0412.

031.039

0511

0611

051-052

0612-0616.

5.7

057.059

0619

0617

058

0621

071

0622-0624

11.13

072073.

0629

0791. 0792.
0794-0799

0625

0793

063

061

3-1

064

081 082

083. oe4

091 092

Û96 398.099

104
1C53

21.

109 1051.

2225.23

105 iCE-

27-29

10521082
1083

1089

111

1091

1-2

1092

ii3

1093

1 14

1094

121 122 '

3334

151 153

l 5 1 1 59

36.37

1623 1629

36-40

161 169

165'. 2-332

1711

172

1712

35.40

1624.174

1713.1719

179

44.45

181.1829

43.45

181.183

1821

182

183

2391

191.1931991

46-50

184.1851.

1993 1995.

53-55

1852 1871.

1999

1872.1891
1893.1899

1992

1894

192

186

51 54

243-245.

41.58

175.2392.

2491-2493.

243-249

2495-2499

2494

231

251

252

58.59

2S4

254

256.258

62.63

256.258

61.62

259

261

2619

264

269

266

66-68

271

272

273

2731.2732
27331

279

274

72-74

281.283.264

286 288.289

282

287 8932

76.77

291

292

294

295

78.79

295

296

297

299

296

84-88

301-302

83.84

301.302

303

304

309

305

306

307

308

309

311

312

316

96 98

319

315

NOM DCS INDUSTRIES - L

Secteur des entreprises

Ina agricoles 8 de serv connexes
ind de la pèche et ou pegeage
Exploitation forestière

Mmes de ter

Mines d'amiante

Mmes non metal, ex enarbem amiante

Mmes de sel
Mmes de charbon
De:raie rjrut 6 gaz na:..-ei
Ca-re-es 6 sao'ieres
industries des services miniers
Vianoe sauf voiaiiie
industrie de la voiaiile
Translor-lat'On du COSSC
mousines des fruits 4 egumes
moustries ia.teres
mousse 3es aiimens oour anii,
Huiles vegetaes 'saj' 3e rr-asi
'ncusws ces piscjits
°a - 4 a-tres croo ?e :»uiançe
5u~e ce :a~-e 4 -? rererave
Procu.ts alimentaires : ve-s

industrie des bossons gawuses

inc aes oroduits 3e aistiiiation

industrie de la tuere

IncuSfie 3u vit

mousines ou tabac

mo oes proou'ts en ^acutenouc

Produits en matière piasDoue

Tanneries

inoustne de la chaussure

ind des produits divers en eu*

Fibres ctWTsques 6 essus uses

Filature & tissage de la lane

ind des tissus larges a marite

ind des produits wiMes drvers

Tenture 1 finissage prod, totales
Tapai, carpettes 6 moquaeas
Ind. de rhatjeJement saut bas

Industrie des bas A chaussettes
Scenes, rabotage A bardeaux
ind des placages A coneeplaques

Portes, chassa, autres boa ouvrés
ind des boites A des cercuets
Autres ndustnes du boa
Industrie des meubles de maison
industrie des meubles da bureau
Autres nd. de meubles A arudes
industries des pâtes et paper
Ind du paper-torture asphalte
Boites en canon et sacs an paper

AuL produits en paper transforme

Impnmere 4 edition

Clchage. compositjon A reliure

Industries sidérurgiques

Ind des tubes A tuyaux d°acer

Fonderies de ter

Fonte A affinage métaux non terreux

Laminage A moulage da ratumruum

Larranaga. moulage, est du ouvre

Lamnage A moulage d'autres métaux

Chauderes A elements de charpente

Produrts d'architecture en metal

Emboutissage A mamcage des métaux

Fi mélafsque A sas produis

Arides de qusicaaarta

inoustne du mater* de chauffage

Ateliers d'usinage

Autres nd de produits en metal

industrie des instruments aratoires

Equip commercial de 'eingeraton

Autre machinerie 4 équipement

SNA Industry Codes at th« Aggregation Lavs! (L) In Tern» of Both 1980 SIC and Worksheet Level (W)
and 1970 SIC and Worksheet Level (W) - Continued

Codes des Industries du SCN au niveau d'agrégation (L) selon la CTI et les niveaux de travail (W) de
i960 et selon la CAÉ et les niveaux de travail (W) de 1970 - suite

No. INDUSTRY TITLE - L

Business sector - Continued

75 Aircraft 4 aircraft cans industry

"6 Motor vehicle industry

7? True» ous ocoy & trailer industry

78 Mote vehicle parts 4 accessor**

79 Railroad roiling stco industry

80 Shipbuilding and repair <ndustry
8t Mise transportation ecuipment md

82 Small eiectncai aoc*ance industry

83 Maior appliances teiec a non-eiec 1

84 Record piayers radio 4 rv receiver

85 Electronic eauipment industries

86 Office stdre * Pusiness maenmes

87 Communie . energy wire 4 caote

88 Banery noustry

S9 Otner eiec: & oiecaji'-c orocjets

90 Clay o'Oducts industry

91 Cement ndustry

92 Concrete products rdustry

93 Reaov-mu concrete industry

94 Giass a 3. ass products 'noustr es

95 Non-^etaii-c -ninera. products -ec

96 Re" rec oeiroieun- & :eai orccjets
9"* inousinal cre"ica.s noustr es ^ec
96 °lastc 1 syntret: -esr- reus:-*

99 Pharmaceutical 4 ~ec cne "oust-/

100 Paint and vamisn industry

'01 Soap a cleaning comppunos md

1 02 Tp.iei preoaratipns industry

103 Chemical 4 cnemicai products nee
t04 jexrenery 4 prec.cus meta: na

105 Sporting gooas a '.Cy ncuStr-es

1 06 Sign ano display nouswy

107 F'oor me unoieun- eoa:eo 'acre

108 Otner manufacturing , no nee

109 Repair construction

110 Readentiai construction

1 1 1 Nor- resœnuai cuoq construction

112 Road n^hway 4 airstrip consi

1 1 3 Gas a on facility constructor

114 Dams & m-gaurjn protects

1 1 5 Ra*»ay S leleonone weg. const

116 Otner engineering construction

117 Crjnsructxri- other acsvmes

118 Air transport a servcea nooenuji

119 Ra*w«y transport t r* serve**

120 Water ransoort a rei serve»

121 Truck t/ansoon noustnes

1 22 Urban trans* system «oustry

123 mierurben 4 rural transit systems

124 Tajucab ndustry

125 Omar t/ansoon & serv c uansp.

1 26 Highway 6 bndge mam. md

127 Poesno transpon ndustnes

128 S or age and warehousing «J

1 29 Telecommun oroaocastrng md

130 Telecommunication earners * ither

1 3 1 Postal service industry

132 Electnc power sysiems industry

1 33 Gas dislnbution systems industry

1 34 Other utility industries nee

135 Wholesale trade ndustnes

1 36 reta* trade ndustnes

137 Banks, credit unon 4 cxh dap. «at

138 Trust, other fmance 4 re») estate

1 39 insurance industries

140 Govt royalties on nat resources

1*80

sic-cn

1970
SIC-CAÉ

102-

109

325

326
327

112

328 329

113

331

1 14

332

1 10

334

11".

335

120

121

336

12J

338

'25

3391

1.5

'22

333 33"

123 126 3392 3399

'32 133 35- 359

134 36' 369

'35 136 3":

138 3-3

372379

392

393

397

3993

391 399'

3992 3994.

3999

401-449

4S1.4U

493

454.499

496

4S71

4572

167

105

334

106

335

318

109

338

108

3391

68.107

268 333 336

110

3399

115

351

11 1

352

113

354

1 14

355

119

356

112 120

353 35" 3S9

•16-116

•2- 122

365 369

168 4981

169.170 4973-4975.
4989 4592.
«599.996
9991

171 4991

172.173 461

174 471.479

175 176 481

177 482 483

178 4841

183 601-692

184.186 701.702.709
709

185.187 703.704.
711-729
741. 743.
7499. 7911.
7512.799

149
146

147
190
149
191
193
192

194
148

196
199
197
198

159

164
169

372 379

392

393

39"

3993

39- 3991

3992- 3994

3999

404-421

404 421

404-421

901.902

503

504 909

506.907

909

908

912

917.919

916
919

524 527
943
544 949

548
572
574
579

602 629
10722.2611.
631 699
7011-7013.
7016. 7019
7014-7019.
7212 703-
719.739
7371

NOM DES INDUSTRIES • L

Secttur des entreprises - suite

ind d'aeronefs 6 peces daeronels
Industrie des véhicules automobiles
Carrosseries de camions 4 remorques
i Pieces 4 accessoires pour véhicules
Ind du materiel ferroviaire rouiant
Construction reparation de navire
ind diverses du maienei transport
Petits appareils eteetnques
Gros apparens letecmaues ou nom
Phonographes récepteurs raoo 4 rv
Industrie du matériel eiectroniQue
Ordinateurs 4 autre macn ce Bureau
F 'is 6 cables, elect communication
industrie des accumulateurs
Autres proo eiect 4 eiectronques

industrie des proou>ts en argue
industrie du ciment
industries des produits en oeton
industrie du oeton prepare
verre 4 ancles en verre

Produits m,nerau« non metai nCa

P-oos rafles de rjet-ce 4 .haroo'-
p-ocs z—~ '.eues 3 ^saçe nous: nca
va: ciastiQLe 4 'esne svr-tnetique
P'cc ona-n-aceutiCi.es 4

medicaments
industrie des peintures 4 vernis
Savons 4 composes de nettoyage
indusme des produis oe toiiene
industries enimidues nca
B'icutere 4 orievç- »
inc des articles de soc- 4 cuets
industrie des enseignes 4 étalages
Danes linoleum 4 ussus enduits
Aul industries

manufacturières nca

Reparation iconstrucucmi
ConsBuciion domoliain;
Bâtiments autres due domiciliaires
Const routes 4 osies d'aller
Const mst gajif 6 petroiil
Barrages 6 presets d vngauon
Const en de 1er. teteg telephone
Autres travaui de ganss
Conssnxreon. autres activées
Transe asnen 4 senneee relatifs
Transe terrevusr» S serve*» tel
Transpon par eau 6 aarvcaa rat
inoustnes du cantsrjftnaps)
Ind du transect an commun urban
Transe en commun nssrurbasv
rural

dut

Aul nd. & sen. ret am ransp.

116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123

124

125

Entretien des rouies, rues 4 ponts

Ind du transpon par pvetnes

Ind d'entreposage 6 d'emmagasnaoe

ind de >a diffusion des letecom

Telecommunications

transmission, aul
industrie des service postaui
industrie de l'energ* etectnque
industrie de ia distribution de g&t
Autres md de servees

puescs nca
industries du commerce de gros
tndustnes du commerce de detail

761

188

Banques, caisses d'épargne aut stst 137
Soc Ioucm aut agents (m 138

industries des assurances

Redevances gouv sur ressources

SNA Industry Codes at the Aggregation Level (L) In Terms ol Both I960 SIC and Worksheet Level (W)
and 1970 SIC and Worksheet Level (W) - Concluded

Codes des Industries du SCN au niveau d'agrégation (L) selon la CTI et les niveaux de travail (W) de
1960 et selon la CAÉ et les niveaux de travail (W) de 1970 - lin

No. INDUSTRY TITLE - L

Business sector - Concluded

141 Owner occupied dwe*ngs

1*2 Other Business service «lustres

M 3 Professional Business servees

144 Aovertising services

145 Educational service industries

146 Hosonais

147 Orner neaitn services

us Accommodation 4 lood serv ma.

149 Motion octure 4 video maustnes

1 50 Orner amusement 4 -ec-eationai se",

151 Laurcnes & ciearers

i 52 Orner oersonai services

153 Pnoiograpners

154 Mise service industries

Ooeratmg suooues
Office SLOOnes
Caféier a suodes
uaccraicv sucones
t-3vo, i e"!eia",me—
Advertising 4 oromotior
Transoortation margins

19SO

1SS0

1970

W-#

sic -en

W-#

SIC -CAÉ

190

7513

166

7373

191 194

771 772.

183

851-855.

—7 779

867 869

192

7-3776.775

176

861.863.
864.866

193

7"4

177

862

195 .

eSl-859

171

801 809

196

86 1

172

821

197 198

8621 863 865

173

822-827

666 8671.867

863 8691 8693

8699

199 200

911-922

179

881-886

201.202

961 962

174

84 1 842

203204

963 969

1-5

843845849

205

S"2

178

874 8"6

206

9-1 973 979

180

371 872.

3-7 879

207

993

181

8931

208209

982 983 991
992 994 995
9999 4842

182

391 894-899

210

Feue

184

Fove

211

F cuve

•85

Fctive

212

Fctve

136

Fci.ve

213

Fc:ve

'25

cc:ive

214

c crve

'39

cct:ve

215

Fct.ve

19C

Fctrve

216

F cive

187

F ctive

NOM DE8 INDUSTRIES - L

Secteur des entreprises - fin

Immeubles occupes par propriétaire
Aul md des serv au» entrepnses

Serv professionnels au» entrepris

Services de ouoiicite

Ind des services d"enseignemen:

Hopitaui

Aut ind des serv de soins ce santé

Heoergement 4 restauration
Ino, du cinema 4 de l'audiovisuel
Ajr-e serv ce dvert 4 de 'o-st
B ar-enissage et nertcyaçe 3 sec
Autres services oersonneis

Pioiograones

Inoustnes des services dive's

Fournitures ceioiO'taton
Fournitures ce cureau
Fournitures je caieie-a
Fournitures ce .aoo'a:o're
Dec ace~e'- i -ecese-ta1 ■;-
PjtJ.ici:e 4 O'cmoi.on
Marge ce iranspcns

Non-Business sector

Secteur non commercial

162

Mining nOuStries

251

061-092

20-

051-099

IrouSmes des m.nes

162

163

Manulactunng inoustres

252

101-399

202

101 399

moustnes manufacturières

•63

164

Forestry services inoustry

253

CSi

203

039

incustne oes services forestiers

•64

165

Other transport industries

254

451-45'7

20*

501.505

Autres industries Ou transpor

165

166

Highway 4 Bridge maim >nd.

255

4591

205

516

Enuetien des routes, rues 4 oonts

166

167

Rado 4 ieiev Broaocaswig ind

256

461 1-4813

206

5*3

ind de la raoo 4 tefediffuson

167

163

Water systems industry

257

493

207

576

Industrie de la distnouDon d eau

168

169

Insurance & other finance nd

258

711-7*3.
7499. 7512.
759.761

208

7014.7015.
721. 703-715
735-737

Assurance 6 aut agents hnanoers

169

170

Business servee industries

259

771-773.
775-779

209

851 869

Services am entrepnses

170

171

Defence service*

260

811

210

902

Servees de defense

171

172

Federal government services

261

812-817.8*1

211

909.991

Servees de radrmi. federate

172

173

Provwoe) government services

262

622-827

212

931

Services den admn. provrciaies

173

174

Local government service»

263

832-837

213

951

Serrce* des adrrm. locales

17*

175

Educaeonaj serve* rouans*

26*

851-859

214

801-809

Ind. des serves* d"«n*e<nemeni

175

178

Hoapeaj*

265

661

215

621

HopttUi

176

177

inst»ijoon*L ko* serve**

266

8622-6629.

8694.86*

8672.

216

828

Etact de son* 4 serve*» sooaut

177

178

Other hearth 4 scoal servos*

267

6621.863.865 217

822-827

Aut servees son de santérsooatu

178

886. 8671.

8679. 8691

8693 8699

179

Amusement 4 other service od

268

963.96*1.
9642 9H-.
922971.973
979.994.995

218

841-8*9.
881 886.

897 896

Divertissements & autres servees

179

180

Pmrais households

269

97*

219

873

Ménages

180

181

Refigojs organizations

270

981

220

831

Organisations religieuses

181

182

Other -non prow organuatons

271

984 966

221

891.899

Aul organisations sans but lucratif

162

SNA Industry Cod*, at m« Aggregation Laval (M) In Tarm» of 1980 and 1970 Wortcsha* Lavais
Codas das Induatrias du SCN au nlvaau d'agrégation (M) salon las nrvaaux da travail (W) da 1980 at
da 1970

NO. INDUSTRY TITLE - M

Bunnttt sector

AgncuitwaJ A rotated servces «J

F.shing & iraoo«ng industnes

Logging & •cestry industries

Mining -nduStnes

Ojae oetroteum & natural gas

Quarry & sano P't nauSUeS

Service 'e-aieu to Trierai extract.

FOOO inouStnes

Beverage noustnes
Tocacco crccocts rtXiStnes
BuDoe' orocucts inousmes
P'astic products noustnes
leatner & amed orooucts »nd

Primary «XtlM & textile P'OO md
ClOtrtinç TCuStnes

wooo >'-c-_s:r<es

Furniture 4 ''tfure nauSir es

Pace' & diiieo cocucts "-austnes
Panting cuCt'Sning & allied >no
Pnmary metai inaustnes
Facncatec meta: orcouc: industries
MacHine-v nausées
T ' a**. socrtai i cr eOuiC^e"-. .nduS'.res
Eec:r-C3 à eecc-c o^oucts
Ncr-'Tieia-c tirerai orocucs nc
Relnec oetr^ieu"*1 4 cca Z'OOuC.s
C^er-ica. 4 :^er-!ca o'?ducts re
Orner Taruiactufng naustr-es
Constructor nfluSînes
Transportation industries
Pipeline aansoort industries
Storage & *arerouSjng industries
Communication industries
Otner wi.iirv ncustr-es
wnoiesate trade industries
Retail vaoe 'noustres
F .nance A rea estate r austnes
insurance inoustries
Govt revalues on nat resources
Owner occurred dwellings
Business sennce mdusves
Educational servce industries
Heaitn services «Pusi/v
Accommodation & rood service »nd
Amusement & recreatonai services
Personal & housenoid service md
Otter servce «Jusmes
Operating, off.. caiei 4 lab. sup.
Travel, adverting A piuiiueun
Ttanapsrtaaon manjns

5-12

4 8 10-U

16-29

16-28

3033

29 32

33 34

363"

36-40

41-43

35 39.40*2

44-50

43 55.57

51-55

4 1 56.58

56 62

5964

63-65

656"

66-r-

69-2

72-75

"3-4

76-83

"5 82

34-93

33-91

94-96

92 94

99-i -2

96 102

•13 -25

58 35 103 •

■.14

152

•31

13"

'SB-

•6-

i38

146

'S?

i71

147-

154 156

172-

173

155

174

15"

1 "■>

•73

158-

160

'"9

•8i

'61

163

191194

176.177.183

195

171

196 198

172.173

199-200

179

201 204

174 175

205-206

178.180

207-209

181.182

210-213

184-186.188

214.215

189.190

218

187

NOM DES INDUSTRIES - M
Secteur dM emrapfiaes

infl agricoles 8 de serv conneies

ma de la oecne el du p*geage
Eipioiiaiion torestiere
inousmes des Times
Petroie tyut 8 gaz nature1
Carries 8 sawieres
inouSir*s oes services miniers
inoustries des awnenis
industries des ooisscms
industries du tabac
mo des produits en caoutchouc
Produits en matière r>astioue
mo du cuir 8 produits conneies
md tenues 4 txoouits ternies
moustr«s de l'haBllement
incuStries Ou oo-s
Me.oies 4 animes 3 amei-oiement
me ou oac.e- 4 oroduts conneie»
ir-pnme'ie edition 4 *nd conneies
P-eniere transformation des metau»
Paoricaton des produits en metal
'no-st-es ce 'a macninere
'nc-st'ies eu Tiatere' de 'ransoon
°-cc 5 ecr :.es 8 e-ect'or- eues
p-cc-. is t -ï'îut -en -"etan'Oues
=-:cs -3" res ie ce-rcie 4 enaroc-
i-:.s:-es :-r-c.es
■i^'es ndtstres -na'Ltactu-eres
-c.st-es :e ï -.vv-jOV
■"dustries eu trarsoon
me ou uarseen oar aipennes
ire o ei-ireccsage 4 d'emmagasinage
mc^st'es oes comi-unications
4 ~ ncusf es ee se**/ ces euC'CS
mc^sres z. cenr-e-ce ce ;rcs
ir-cusf'es cl cc-me';e ae detail
■rz 'ranec-eset rrmconeres
ircuSfies oes assurances
Beoevances gouv sur ressources nat
immeuoies occuces oar oroonetaire
ino oes services aui e"lrep»i»e>
ind des services d ense-vnemem
ind oes services de tans de santé
Heoergement 8 restauration
S«rv de orvenssements et K»*rs
ind des serv p— nrnH 6 odrmest
Autres mduatnas d» servees
Faum «ipJol. bur . ub et cal
Tounim*. pirjrnoeon « putÉot*
Margede Mmp—

Mnng rndusana*

Manufacturwig mdustma»
Forestry sermeas industry
Transportation ndustnes
RaOo 6 WWW DroadcasMig nd
W»» Systems industry
Insurance 6 otier hnance industry
Busmsss service industries
Government service industries
Educational servce industries
Hearth s social service industries
Amusement 8 oiner service «nd
Personal, nousenoid 8 otner serv

252

202

253

202

254.255

204.205

256

206

257

207

258

208

259

209

260 263

210213

264

214

265267

215217

268

218

269-271

219-221

Industries des mmes
industries manulaclunenM
industrie des services torunars
Industries du transport
ind de la rado at BaMinuson
ineostne de la astnouoon d'eau
Assurance 6 aul agents hnancars
Services am entrapnses
Ind des servess grxivernernentaui
Ind des services d'enseignement
Serv de soms de santé 6 sociaui
Orvertissements 6 autres services
Serv oerson oomesiiQues 8 autres

SNA Industry Codas at the Aggregation Laval (S) In Terms of 1980 and 1970 Worksheet Lavais
Codas des indu t trie * du SCN au nivaau d'agrégation (S) salon las niveaux da travail (W) da I960 at

Mo. INDUSTRY TITLE . S

Business tector

1 Agncunural S related services «x)

2 Fisrung & trapping ndustnes

3 Logging 4 forestry mdustnes

4 Mming. Quarrying & oil well >na

5 Manulactunng industries

6 Construction industries
Transudation 6 storage industries

3 Communication industries

9 OtHer utiiiry industries

1 0 Wnoiesaie trace industries

1 i Retail traoe moustnes

•2 Finance insurance a real est mo.

t0 Commun„y ousmess. person, sen/

1 4 Operating, on . caiei & iao sup

1 5 T'avei advertising & promotion

16 Transportation margins

5-15

4- 15

16-152

16-13'

153-161

138-146

162-174

147157

175-178

158-160

179-181

161-163

182

164

183

165

184-190

166 170

191-209

171-183

210-213

184 186-1

214.215

189 190

216

137

NOM 0ES INDUSTRIES - S

Secteur des entnapnae»

ind agricoles & te serv connexes
ino te ta pèche et du pégeage
El Dotation lores tier e
Mines, cameres a puits de pétrole
industries manufacturières
moustres de la construction
ina ou transport et entreposage
inoustnes des communications
*uL industries de services puOiics
industries du commerce de gros
■noustnes du commerce oe detail
Finances, ass & art immooii>eres
5erv socio-cuit commer a oers
Fourni, expo . Dur., lap 8. cat.
Tourisme promotion & ouOHC'te
Ma'ce oe trai-soorts

Non- Business sector

Mining iroustr es
Manufacturing industries
Forestry se-vices mcustry
T'ansocnation inoustnes
Communication industries
Wste- systems industry
•r-sj'îrce i otner fna-ce -custry
Gcre-'^er*: scvice ncust-es
Comr-iun rv à personal services

252

202

253

203

254 255

204 205

256

206

25"

20"

253

208

260-263

210-2-3

259.264 2"'

209 2'4 22

Secteur non commercial

nûLSTres des mmes
noustres manufacturières
noustre oes services roresue's
mo-_sres du transcon
'•oustres des comrr-jnicatic-s
-o-s~e -e a oistrcufon c ea^
-ss.ri-ce i aut agents hratc-ers
■c -es sendees gouve-ne~r-.au"

Serv SOC OCUtureiS i OerSCTe'S

Special aggregations - G

26 Total economy

2" Bus ness sector roost- es

23 Bus-ness sector - gcocs

29 Business sector - services

30 Non-cuSii-ess sector ndustr.es
3i Nonous-ness sector - goods

32 Non cu&ness sector - services

33 Gooos prooucing inoustnes

34 Services producing ndustnes

35 industrial production

36 Non-duraole marx/tactunng nd.

37 Durable manulactunng nousews

i 209.251 271

1-209

'■■61 179-18-

•62-178 182 209

251-2-1

251-252.257

253 256.258 2-1

1-161.179-181.

251-252.257

162-178.182 209.

253-256.258-271

5-152.179-181.

251.252.257

16-55.68- 75,

134-143

56-65.76-133.

144-152

i 183 201-221

1-183

i 146 161-163

147 160 164183

201-221

201 202.207

203 206.208 221

1146.161-163.

201.202.207

147-160.164-

183. 203-206.

208-221

4-137 161-163.

201.202.207

16-58.69-74.

121-1»

59-68.75-120.

131-137

Agrégations spécule» - G

Ensernce

Secteur oes entreonses

Secteur oes entreprises - piens

Secteur oes entreprises - sen/ices
Secteur non commercial
Secteur non commercial - Oiens

Secteur non commercial - services
inOuares productrces de Dwns

induseies productrices de servces

Producaon ndustr««e
Manulacmners - Mns non durables
Manutacwars - bone durabiee

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES)
PARAMÈTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS & SERVICES)

COMMODITY TITLE - W

TITHE HENS • SERVICES - W

CATTLE AND CALVES
SHEEP AND LAMBS
HOGS

POULTRY

OTHER LIVE ANIMALS

WHEAT.UNMILLED

BARLEY.OATS.RYE.CORN.GRAIN.NES

MILK. WHOLE. FLUID.UNPROCESSEO

EGGS IN THE SHELL

HONEY AND BEESWAX

NUTS EDIBLE. NOT SHELLEO

FRUITS. FRESH EX TROPICAL

VEGETABLES FRESH

HAY FORAGE AND STRAW

SEEDS EX OILANDSEEDGRAOES

NURSERY STOCK « RELATED MAT

OIL SEEOS.NUTS AND KERNELS

HOPS INC LUPULIN

TOBACCORAW

MINK SKINS RANCH uNORESSED

WOOL IN GREASE

SERV iNCIDEN'al TO AGR ftFORESTRY

LOGS AND BOl'S

POLES PIT PROPS FENCE-POSTS ETC

PULPWOOD

OTHER CRUDE WOOO MATERIALS

CUSTOM FORESTRY

FISH LANDINGS

HUNTING ft TRAPPING PRODUCS

GOLD ft ALLO»S 'N PRIMARY FORM

RADIO-ACTIVEORES&CONCENTRATES

iRON ORES ft CONCENTRATES

BAUXITE ♦ ALUMINA

METAL ORES . CONCENTRATES N E S

COAL

CRUDE MINERAL OILS

NATURAL GAS

SULPHUR.CRUOE ft REFINED

ASBESTOS. UNMFG .CRUDE» FIBROUS

GYPSUM

SALT

PEATMOSS

CLAYftOTHER CRUDE REFRACORY MAT

NATURAL ABRASIVESaiNOUST DIAMOND

CRUDE MINERAL NES

SAND AND GRAVEL

STONE.CRUDE

SERVICES INCIDENTAL TO MINING

BEEF VEAL MUTT » PORK FRE5HBFROZEN

HORSE MEAT FRESH.CHILLED.FROZEN

MEAT.CURED

MEAT PREP COOKED NOT CANNED

MEAT PUP CANNED

ANIMAL OILS ft FATS a LARD

MARGERINE SHORTEMNGBLIKE PROD

SAUSAGE CASINGS.NAnjRALaSYNTH.

PRIMARY TANKAGE

FEEDS OF ANIMAL ORIGIN «5

HIDES AND SKINS. RAW.NH

ANIMAL MAT FOR DRUGS a PERFUME

CUSTOM WORK MEAT ft FOOD

poui try .fresh, cm uleosrozen

POULTRY.CANNED

MILK.WWOCE.FLUIO.PROCESSED

CREAM.FRCSH

•UTTER

CHEESE.CHEDOAR a PROCESSED

MILK EVAPORATED

ICECREAM

OTHER OA1RY PRODUCTS

MUSTARD MAYONNAISE

TISH PROOUCTS

FRUIT. BERRIES.DRlEO.CRVSTALIZED

FRUITS ft PREPARATIONS CANNED

VEGET FROZEN. DRIED a PRESERVED

VEGETABLESaPREPARATIONS CANNED

SOUPS CANNED

INFANTftJUNIOR FOOOS.CANNED

PICKLES.RELISHES.OTHER SAUCES

VINEGAR

OTHER FOOD PREPARATIONS

PRIMARY OR CONCENTRATED FEEDS

FEED EC* COMMERCIAL LIVESTOCK

FEEDS. GRAIN ORIGIN. NES

FEEDS C* VEGETABLE ORKMN NES

RET FEEDS

WHEAT FLOUR

MEAiaaOUR OF OTHER CEREALS4VEG

BREAKFAST CEREAL PROOUCTS

BISCUITS

BREAD a ROLLS

OTHER BAKERY PROOUCTS

COCOA a CHOCOLATE

NUTS.KERNELS ft SEEDS PREPARED

CHOCOLATE CONFECTIONERY

OTHER CONFECTIONERY

BEET PULP

BETAIL ft VEAUX

MOUTONS a AGNEAUX

PORCS

VOLAILLE

AUTRES ANIMAUX VIVANTS

BLE NON MOULU

ORGE AVOI FAR MAIS GRAIN NCA

LAIT . ENTIER. FLUIDE. NON TRAITE

OEUFS AVEC COQUILLE

MIEl a CIRE D ABEILLE

NOIX COMESTIBLES SANS COQUILLE

FRUITS FRAIS (SAUF TROPICAUX)

LEGUMES FRAIS

FOIN FOURRAGE a PAILLE

SEMENCES (SAUF HUILE h GRAINES)

MATERIEL DE PEPIN a CONNEXE

GRAINES OLEAGIN NOIX a AMADES

HOUBLON (Y COMPRIS LUPUUN)

TABAC BRUT

PEAJX VISON RANCH. INAPRETE

LAINE EN SUINT

AUTRES AUXIL AGRlC a FOREST

BILLOTS a BOULONS

POTEAUX (FOSS CLOT (.ETAIS ETC

BO'S A PATE

AUTRES DERIVES BRUT5 Du BOiS

=ORESTAGE COMMANDE

SORTIE DE L EAU (POISSONS)

PROD DE lA CHASSE a DL P'EGEAGE

OR ft ALLIAGES FORME PR VAlRE
M NERAI ft CONCENT PAO OAC* FS
V'NERAl ft CONCENT DE FER
BAuXITE ft ALUM. NE
M NERAI ft CONCEN DE VETAl NCA

HUILES MINERALES BRUTES
GAZ NATUREL

SOuFRE BRUT ft RAFFINE

AMiANTE BRUTE a FIBRE JSE

G»PSE

SE.

TOURBE

ARGILE a AUT MAT BRUTES REFR

ABRASIFS NAT DIAMANT INDUSTRIEL

MINERAUX BRUTS NCA

SABLE a GRAVIER

PIERRE NON TAILLEE

SERVICES AUXILIAIRES AUX MINES

BO Vf AU MOUT .PORC FRAIS a CON

VIANDE DE CHEV FR REFR CONG

VIANDE SALEE

VIANDE PREP CUITE NON EN CONS

VIANDE PREPAREE EN CONSERVE

HUILES GRAISSES a LARD ANIMAUX

MARGARINE G RAIS SE • MOO CONN

EMBALL DCS SAUC NAT. • SYNTH

RESOUS OC GRAISSE PRJMABttS

AUM. POUR ANIM -ORIG ANM. NCA

CUIRS t PEAUX BRUTES NCA

MAT ANIM POUR PHAAM PAJV

TRAV VIANDE a AUM SUD COMM

VOLAILLE FRAJCHE REFK.CONGELEE

VOLAILLE EN CONSERVE

LAIT ENTIER.FLUIDE.TRAJTE

CREME FRAICHE

BEURRE

FROMAGE.CHEDOAR B LATT

LAIT EVAPORE

CREME GLACEE

AUTRES PROOUITS LAITIERS

MOUTARDE MAYONNAISE

PRODUITS DU POISSON

FRurrs.BAIES SECH .DESHYDRATEES

FRUITS a PREP EN CONSERVE

LEG CONG .SECHES a PRESERVES

LEGUMES a PREPAR EN CONSERVE

SOUPES EN CONSERVE

ALIM EN CONS BEBES a ENFANTS

CORNICH AS SAIS a AUTR SAUCES

VINAIGRE

AUTRES PREPARATIONS ALIMENTAIRES

ALIM PRIM OU CONC POUR ANIM.

ALIM POUR BETAIL DE COMMERCE

ALM ANIM OR. GRAINES NCA

AUM POUR AMI M -ORIG LEG

AUM POUR! ANIMAUX D- AGREMENT

FARINE DE lU

FARINE D AUTRES CER • LEG

CEREALES POUR LE DEJEUNE*.

BISCCOR OE CREME GLAC ETC.

RAM ft PETTTS RAMS

AUTRES PRODUITS OE BOULANGERS

CACAO a CHOCOLAT

NOIXAMANDES • GRAIN PREPAREES

CONFISERIE EN CHOCOLAT

AUTRE CONFISERIE

PULPE DE BETTERAVE

97
M

♦9

100

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES) - Continued
PARAMÉTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS & SERVICES) - suite

COMMODITY TITLE -W

TITRE BIENS 6 SERVICES -W

101 SUGAR

102 MOLASSES.SUGAR REFINERY PROO

103 OILSEED MEAL 4 CAKE

104 VEG OILS » FATS. CRUDE

105 NITROGEN FUNCTION COMPOUNDS NES

106 MALT.MALTFLOUR4WHEAT STARCH

107 MAPLE SUGARSSYRUP

108 PREPARED CAKE & SIMILAR MIXES

109 SOUPS. DRIED4SOUPMIXES4BASES

1 10 COFFEE. ROASTEDGROUND. PREPARED

111 TEA

112 POTATO CHIPS4SIMILAR PRODUCTS

113 MISC FOOD NES

114 SOFTDRINKCONCENTRATES4SYRUPS

1 15 CARBONATED BEV .SOFT DRINKS

116 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES DISTILLED

117 ALCOHOL. NATURAL. ETHYL

118 BREWERS'BDiSTILLERS'GRAINS

119 ALE BEER. STOUT 4 PORTER

120 WINES

12' TOBACCO PROCESSED UNMANUFACT

122 CGARE"ES

123 TOBACCO VFG EX C'GARETTES

124 FOOTWEAR RUBBER AND PLASTIC

125 T RES4TJBES PASSENGER CARS

126 TiRES 4 TUBES. TRuCKS 4 BUSES

127 '•iRES 4 TUBES ■» E S

128 T'RES RETREAD'NG

129 RECLAIMED RUBBER

130 RJBBERBELTS 4 COA'ED FABR'CS
13' RJBBER SmEETiNG SHOE STOCK E*C

132 HOSE 4 TuB.NG MAIN. y RUBBER

133 RJBBER WASTE 4 SCRA=

134 RUBBER END PRODUCSNES

135 PLASTIC P.PE FiTT.NGS 4 ShEE"

136 PLASTIC CONTaiNERS&BOTTlE CAPS

137 PREFAB BLDGS4STRUCTURESNES

138 PLASTIC HOSE.PAILS4END PROD NES

139 LEATHER

140 FOOTWEAR EX RUBBER S PLASTIC

141 LEATHER GLOVES4MITTENS EX SPORT

142 LEATHER BE. T.NG.SHOE STOCK

143 LUGGAGE

144 LEATHER HAND8AGS.WALLETS ETC

145 YARN. COTTON

146 YARNS MIX48LENDED4COTTON WASTE

147 FABRICS. 8ROAD WOVEN OF COTTON

148 TIRE CORD 4 TIRE FABRICS

149 NETS 4 NETTING

150 BLANKETS.BED5HEETS.TOWELS4CLOTHS

151 YARN OF WOOL AND HAIR

152 FABRICS.BROADWOVEN.WOOl HAIR4MIX

153 PAPERMAKERS' FELTS

154 MAN MAOE FIBRES

1 55 POLYAMIDE RESINS (NYLON)

1 56 YARNS. SILK. FIBREGLASS

157 TIRE YARNS

1SS FABRIC WOVEN. TEXTILE FIBRES

159 FABRlCS.iROAD WOVEN. MIX4BLEND5

160 RAGS4WASTE,COTTON4TEXTILE MAT

161 WOOL4F1NE ANIMAL HAJR.SPINNING

162 THREAD.OF COTTON FIBRES

163 THREAD. OF MAN-MADE FIBRES

164 YARN4THREAD.OTHER VEG FIBRES

165 BALER AND BINDER TWINE

166 OTHER CORDAGE. TWINE t ROPE

167 NARROW FABRICS

168 LACE FABRICS. BOBBINET 4 NET

169 FELT. CARPET CUSHION

170 CARPETING4FABRICRUGS.MAT5.ETC.

171 TEXTILE DYEING & FINISHING SER.

1 72 AWNINGS. OF CLOTH 6 PLASTIC

173 TENTS.HAMMOCKS.SLEEP BAGS4SAILS

1 74 TARPAULINS 6 OTHER COVERS

175 TEXTILE CONTAINERS

176 VEGETABLE TEXTILE FIBRES NES

1 77 MISC TEXTILE FAB MAT INC RAGS

178 HOUSEHOLD TEXTILES. NES

1 79 LACES AND TEXTILE PROO NES
ISO HOSIERY

181 FABRICS.KNITTED4NETTED.ELASTIC

182 FABRICS. KNITTEO. NES

183 KNITTED WEAR

184 CLOTHING

185 APPAREL ACCESSORIES40THER MISC.

186 FURS, DRESSED

187 FUR PLATES. MATS AND LININGS

188 FUR APPAREL

189 CUSTOM TAILORING

190 PULPWOOO CHIPS

191 LUM8ER 4 TIMBER

192 RAILWAY TIES

193 WOOD WASTE

194 CUSTOM WOOD WORKING 4 MILLWORK

195 VENEER AND PLYWOOD

196 MILLWORK (WOODWORK)

197 WOOD FABRICATED MAT.FOR STRUCT

198 PREFAB BLDGS.WOOD

199 CONTAINERS.CLOSURES4WOOD PALLETS

200 CASKETS.COFFINS40THER MORT GOODS

SUCRE

MELASSES.PROO RAFF DE SUCRE
GRAINES OLEAGI .FARINE 4 GATEAUX
HUILES 4 GRAISSES VEG BRUTES
COMPOSES FONCTO DE L AZOTE NCA
MALT.FARINE OE MALT. FECULE BLE
SUCRE 4 SIROP D'ERABLE
MELANGES A GATEAU 4 AUTRES
SOUPES (DESHYD .MELANGE BASES)
CAFE TORREFIE. MOULU. INSTANTANE
THE
CROUSTILLEES 4 PROD SIMIL

ALIMENTS DIVERS NCA

CONCEN 4SIROPSDEBOISS GAZ

BOISSONS GAZEUSES

BOISSONS ALCOOLISEES DISTILLEES

ALCOOL ETHYLIQUE NATUREL

GRAINS (BRASSEURS 4 DISTILLER )

ALE.8IERE.PORTER.STOUT

VINS DE RAISIN

TABAC *RAi~E NON MANU'F

OGARE — ES

FABR DE *A3AC SAUF CIGARETTES

CHAuSSuRESCAOUTC 4 PLASTIQUE

PNEUS 4 CH A AIR AUTOS

PNEUS CH A AIR CAMiONS AUTOBUS

PNEUS 4 CH A AIR NCA

PNEUS RECHAPES

COMPOSES Du CAOUTCHOUC

CE'N" DE CAOUT 4TSSUSE\D

STOCK Cm AuSS TOiLES CAOu- E*C

BCA-D ARR "uBESSuRT CAOu"

RE5uTSDE CAOuTCHOuC

PRODU "S ' VS DE CACTC-OLC \CA

FEUluLES.TuYAoX 4 RACCORDS DE PL

CONT PLAST COUVERC BOu": lLE

PLAST PREFAB .CONST STRUCT

BOYAU ARR SEAUX.PROD FIN NCA

CUIR

CHAUSSURES (CAOUTC .PLAST ETC )

GANTS. MITAINES CUIR SAUF SPOR"

STOCK ChAuSS 4 CEINT DEC-IIR

VALISES

SACOCHES PORTEF .ETC ENCJIR

FILES DE COTON

FILES SIMP OU MIXTES REB COT

TISSUS LARGES DE COTON TISSES

FABR PNEUS 4 CORD DE PNEUS

FILETS

DRAPS.COUV .SERVIET 8 CHIFFONS

FILATURE DE LAINE 4 DU POIL

TT5S LARG .LAINE.POIL.MEL

FEUTRES DE PAPETERIE

FIBRES SYNTHETIQUES

RESINES DE POLYAMIDE (NYLON)

FIL.SOIE.FIB VERRE

FILATURE OE PNEUS

TISS FIBRES TEXTILES

TISS LAROES JVMXTES

CHIFF .REB COTON t MAT TEXT

LAINE 4 POIL FIN/CATURE

FILFIBRES DE COTON

FIL.FIBRES SYNTHETIQUES

FILES 8 FIL. AUTRES FIB VEGET

FICELLE A EMPAQUETER 8 A LIER

AUTRES COROESjhCELLES « CABLES

TISSUS ETROITS

TISS DENTELLES è FIL

FEUTRE COUSSIN A TAPtS

TAPIS DE TISSU 6 DE CAOUTCHOUC

SERV TEINT t APPRET DES TEXT

AUVENTS DE TISSUS 4 OE PLASTIQUE

TENTES.HAM.S DE COU 4VOIL

BACHES 4 AUTRES REVETEMENTS

CONTENANTS EN MAT TEXTILE

FIBRES TEXTILES VEGETALES NCA

DIV TISS TEXT Y COMPRIS CHIFF

TEXTILES MENAGERS NCA

AUTRES PROD FINIS TEXT .LACETS

BAS 4 CHAUSSETTES

TISS TRICOT 4ENFILET.ELAST

TISSUS EN TRICOT.NCA

VETEMENTS EN TRICOT

VETEMENTS

VETEMENTSACCESSOIRES 4 DIVERS

FOURRURES APPRETEES

REVET.TAPB 4 DOUBL DE FOUR

ART .VET FOURR .FOURR SYNTH

VETEMENTS SUR MESURE

COPE AUX OE BOIS A PATE

SCIAGE 4 BOIS D'OEUVRE

TRAVERSES DE CHEMIN DE FER

REBUTS OE BOIS

TRAV BOIS FORF JOIS DO. BRUT

PLACAGES 4 CONTRE-PLAQUES

BOIS D'OEUVRE BRUT

MAT FAB EN BOIS POUR STRUCT.

IMM 4 STRUC BOIS PREFABRIQUES

CONT .FERMETURES 4 PAL DE BOIS

CERCUEILS 4 AUTRES ART FUN

154

155

156
157
IS»
159
160

164
165
166
167
168
169

176
177
178

182
183
184
185
186
187
IBS
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES) - Continued
PARAMÈTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS « SERVICES) - suite

COMMODITY TITLE -W

TITRE BiENS 4 SERVICES-*

201 MISC WOOD

202 BARRELS» KEGS Of WOOD

203 WOOD END PRODUCTS.NES

204 HOUSEHOLD f JRN INCL CAMP4LA WN

205 OFFICE FuRN 4 v iSiBLE RECORD EQUIP

206 SPECIAL PURPOSE FURNITURE

207 MISC FURNITURE AND FIXTURES

208 PORTABLE LAMPS RESIDENTIAL TYPE

209 PULP

210 NEWSPRINT PAPER

211 OTHER PAPER FOR PRINTING

212 FINE PAPER

213 TISSUE «SANITARY PAPER

214 WRAPPING PAPER
2'S PAPER BOARD

216 BLDG PAPER

217 TOWELS. NAPKINS» TOILET PAPER

218 VANILLIN

219 MISC IND PAPER MAT BY PROD4WASTE

220 TILES VINYL-ASBESTOS

22' PA=ER CANTONS BAGS CANS&BOTTLES

222 CONvEPT£DPAP£R.GJM WAX OR PRINT

223 CONVERTED ALUMINUM FO'^

22* FAC 'A,. T'SSuES &SANITARY NAPKINS

225 PAPER CONTAINERS. NES

226 OF'iCE AND STATIONERY SUPPLIES

227 PAPES END 'RODuCTS

228 NEWSPAPERS MAGA2iNES4P£RiODiCalS

229 BOOKS. pav!PmletSMAPS&piCTjRES

230 BANKNOT:S BONDS DRAFTJ ETC
23' OT- = S=P \*£D VA"-E»

23: ADvER- S NG PRA" VEDA

233 SPEC. A. ZzO P'jBu.Sk.NO SERVC:

234 =P N- NG =".ATES SE"YPE E'C

235 ^ERRO-A^OyS

236 RON S'EEl INGOTS

237 STEEL BLOOMS. BILLETS 4 SlABS

238 STEEL CASTINGS

239 STEEL BARS AND RODS

240 STEEl PLATES. NOT FABRICATED
24' CARBON STEEL SHEETS NOT COA'ED
2i2 TINPLA-ï

243 GAtvAN.ZEDSTEELSHEE*4STR,F

244 RA.lS»Rl» TRACK MATERIALS STEEL

245 COA. TAR

246 NAT &S»N GRAPHITE4CARBON PROD

247 MECHANICAL STEEL TUBING

248 Oil COUNTRY GOODS

249 LINE PIPE.TRANS NAT GAS » OIL

250 STEEL PIPES «TUBES NES

251 GRINDING BALLS.INGOT MOULDS ETC

252 CAST»WROUGHTIRONPIPE»FITTINGS

253 NICKEL IN PRIMARY FORMS

254 COPPER4COPPERALLOYS.PRIME FORMS

255 LEAD, PRIMARY FORMS

256 ZINC4ZINC ALLOYS PRIMARY FORMS

257 ALUMINUM4ALUMINUM ALLOYS PRIME

258 TIN» TIN ALlOYS PRIMARY FORMS

259 PRECOUS METAL4ALLOYS PRIME FORM

260 OTH NON-FERROUS BASE METAIS

2(1 ALUMINUM FLUORIDES4SOOIUM ALUM

262 INORGANIC BASES4MET OXIDES.NES

263 SCRAP4WASTE MATERIALS NE5

264 ALUMINUM4ALUMINUM ALLOYS. CAST

265 COPPER PROD CAST.ROLLED»EXTRUDED

266 COPPER ALLOY PROD CAST .ROLL.EXTR

267 LE AD»LE AD ALLOY PROD CAST. R*£

268 NICKÉL4NICKEL ALLOY F AS MATERIAL

269 TIN 4 TIN ALLOY FAB MATERIALS

270 ZINC DIE CASTING 401H2INC MAT

271 SOLDERS INC SLOCK.ROOS.WIRE.ETC.

272 PLATES. STEEL. FABRICATED

273 TANKS

274 POWER (OILERS

275 " BOILERS. MARINE TYPE

276 BEAMS AND OTHER STRUCT STEEL

277 SCAFFOLDING EQUIP. DEMOUNTABLE

278 PREFAB BLDGS4STRUCT. MAINLY MET
2 79 METAL PRODUCTS NES

280 STEEL SHEET4STRIP COATED OR FAB

281 CULVERT PIPE. CORRUGATED METAL

282 METAL BASIC PROD «RANGE BOILERS

283 METAL PIPES.FITTINGS» SIDINGS

284 METAL AWNINGSASH CANS. PAILS ETC

285 KITCHEN UTENSILS

286 CONTAJNERS4BOTTLE CAPS OF METAL

287 WIRE 4 WIRE ROPE. Of STEEL

288 WIRE FENONG.SCREENING4NETT1NG

289 CHAJNJEX AUTO TIRE4POWER TRANS

290 ROD5.WIRE4ELECTROOES.WELCXNG

291 SPRINGS FOR UPHOL5TERY4MSC VEM

292 BOLTS.NUT5.SCREWS.WASHERSETC

293 BUILDERS' HARDWARE

294 FITTINCiSJURN CABINETS4CASKETS

295 BASIC H ARDWARE.NES

296 CUTTING4FORMING TOOLS

297 MEASURING. EDGING.MECHANICS TOOL

298 SCISSORS RAZOR BLADES. IND CUTLER

299 DOMESTIC EQUIPMENT. NES

300 HEATING EQ.HOTWATER4STEAM ETC

DIVERS PRODUITS DE BOIS

BARILS 4 TONNEAUX DE BOIS

PRODUITS FINIS DE BOIS.NCA

MEUB MAISON CAMPING 4 PELOUSE

MEUB BUR 4 MAT CLASS viSiB

MEUBLES SPECIAUX

MEUBLES 4 ART DAMEUB DIVERS

LAMPES PORT TYPE RESIDENTIEL

PATE DE BOIS

PAPIER JOURNAL

AUTRE PAPIER 0 IMPRIMERIE .

PAPIER FIN

TISSU 4 PAPIER HYGIENIQUES

PAPIER D'EMBALLAGE

CARTON

PAPIER CONSTRUCTION

LINGES.SERV TABLE 4 PAP HYG

VANILLINE

DIV MAT PA IND SOU-PR REB

TUILES.DALLES • VINYLE.AMIANTE

CART SACS PAP BOIT CON BOu

PAR TRANSF GOM CIRE OU D IM

PAPIER D ALUMINUM TRANSFORME

TISSU FACIAL 4 SERV SANIT

CONTENANTS DE PAPIER NCA

PAPET 4 PAPiER FOURN BUREAU

PRODUITS FINISSE PAPIER

JOURNAUX REVUES 4 PERIODOUES

LIVRES.DEPL CARTES 4 iLlUST

B!L DE BAN .BONS TRA,TES ETC

AuTRE SAP'ER'MPR.ME

°U9liC.TE JOURNAUX

SERv DEPjBl.Cat,0NS»ECA..S:S

F.AOUES D IMPRESSION COMPOS * ON

FERRO-A„LIAGES

LiNGO'S DE FER 4 D ACIER

MASSES.BILLETTES.PLAQUES D ACIER

MOULAGES D ACIER

BARRES 4 TIGES D ACIER

PLAQUES D ACIER NON FABRIQUEES

FEul DAC'ERCARB NON REVETUES

FEUILLES D'ETAIN

FEUILLES 4 BARR D ACIER GA^V

MAT D ACIER RAiLS CHEMIN DE FER

GOUDRON

PROD NAT SYNTH GRAPH CARBONE

TUYAUX D ACIER MECANIQUE

PROOUITS DOMESTIQUES DU PETROLE

PIPEL ACIER. TRANS GAZ4PETR

TUBES 4 TUYAUX D ACIER. NCA

BOULES BROY .MOULES LINGOTS ETC

TUYAUX 4 MONT .FER MOULE TORDU

NICKEL PROFILES PRIMAIRES

CUIVRE 4 ALL CUIV.PROF PRIM

PLOMB 4 ALL PLOMB. PROF PRIM

2INC 4 ALL ZINC PROF PRIM

ALUM ALL ALUM PROF PRIM

ETAIN 4 ALL ETA1N PROF PRIM

METAUX PREC ALL [AG PROF PWM.

AUTRES METAUX BASE NOM FERREUX

FLUORU ALUM ALUMINA TE SODIUM

OXYDES iNORG BASE » MET.. NCA

FERRAILLE 4 REBUTS NCA

ALUMINIUM ALL. ALUMINIUM. MOULES

PROD CUIV MOUL LAM .REFOULES

PROD ALL CUCV MOUL .LAM .RE

PROD PLOMB ALLIAGES MLR

MAT FAB NICKEL « ALLIAGES

MAT FAS. ETAIN 4 ALLIAGES

MOUL PRES 2INCAUT MAT ZINC

SOUD ,Y COM BLOCS TIG .FILS.ETC

PLAQUES ACER FABRIQUEES

RESERVOIRS

CHAUDIERES ENERGETIQUES

CHAUDIERES.TYPES MARIN

POUT AUT STRUCT ACIER

MAT ECHAFAUDAGE DEMONTABLE

MAT PREF CONS STR SURT MET

PROOUITS METALLIQUES NCA

FEUILL BARR ACIER REV OU FAB

TUYAU DEGOUT METAL ONDULE

PRO MET BASE.CHAUD A FOURNEAU

TUYAUX RACCORDS 4 PAREMENTS EN M

AUVENTS MET .CENDRIERS.SEAUX.ETC

USTENSILES DE CUISINE

CONTÉN .COUVERCLES METALL

FILS 4 CASUS D ACIER

CLOTURES.GRILLAGES.f ILET5 MET

CHAINES SAUF M AUTOSAUT VEH.

TIGE5.FILS.ELECTROOES.SOUDURE

RESSORTS REMB .DIVERS VEHICULES

SOULONS.ECROUS.VIS.RONDEL ETC

QUINCAILLERIE DE BATIMENT

GARN..MEUBLESARMCHRES 4 CERC

QUINC DE BASE. NCA

OUTILS A COUPER 4 A MODELER. ETC

OUTILS MEGAN MESURE TAILLE

CISEAUX.LAMES RAS COUT IND

MATERIEL DOMESTIQUE NCA

APP CHAUFf EAUCH .VAP.ETC

202
203
204
20S
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
226
229
230

235
236
237
238
239
240

243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
2S1
252
2S3
254
255
2S6
257
258
2S9
260
2C1
2(2
2(3
2(4
265
266
2(7
2(8
2(9
270
271
272
273
274
275
27(
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
2M
2M
290
291
292
293
294
29S
296
297
298
299
300

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES) - Continued
PARAMÉTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS & SERVICES) - suite

COMMODITY TITLE -W

TITRE BIENS t SERVICES - W

301 HEATING EQ.WARM AIR EX PlPESBETC

302 UNITBWATER TANK HEATERS NON-ELEC

303 FUEL BURNING EQUIPMENT

304 COM APPLIANCES COOKBWARMING FOOD

305 CUSTOM METAL WORKING

30* FORGINGS OF CARBONBALLOY STEEL

307 VALVES

308 PIPE FITTINGS. NOT IRON» STEEL

309 GAS METERS AND WATER METERS

310 FIRE FIGHT8TRAFFIC CONTROL EQUIP

311 TAXI8PARK METERS. BLOCKS4LADDERS

3 1 2 FIREARMS 4 MILITARY HARDWARE

313 COLLAPSIBLE TUBES, METAL

314 TRACTORS. FARM» GARDEN TYPE

315 OTHER AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY

316 MECHANICAL POWER TRANS EQUIP

317 PUMPS.COMPRESSORS4BIOWERSETC

318 CONVEYORS. ESCAl.ELEV4hOiSTMACh

319 IND TRUCKS. TRACTORS. TRAILERS ETC

320 FANS AIR CIRCULATORS&AIR UNITS

321 PKG MACH..UB EQ40TH MISC VACH

322 INDUSTRIAL F JRNACES KILNS40VENS

323 MACH IND SPEOFiEDiSPEOAL PjRP

324 POWER DRIVEN HAND TOOLS

325 METAL END PRODUCTS. NES

326 REFRIG&AIR CON EQ. EX HOUSEHOLD

327 SCALES » BALANCES

328 VENDING MACHINES

329 OFFICE MACHINES AND EQUIPMENT

330 AIRCRAFT. At. TYPES

331 AIRCRAFT ENGINES

332 SPECIALI2ED AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT

333 MODtFlCAT ONS. CONVERSIONS SERV

334 PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES» CHASSIS

335 TRACKS. CHASSIS. TRAOORS.COM

336 BUSES AND CHASSIS

337 MILITARY MOTOR VEH. MOTORCYCLES

338 MOBILE HOMES

339 OTH TRAILERSaSEMI-TRAILERS.COM

340 BODIES AND CABS FOR TRUCKS

341 MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES AND PARTS

342 AUXILIARY ELECTRIC EQUIPVENT

343 MOTOR VEH ACCESS. PARTS4ASSEMB

344 AUTOMOTIVE HARDWARE. EX SPRINGS

345 LOCOMOTIVES.CARS4TENDERS.RLY SER

346 SELF-PROPElCARS

347 PARTSaACCESS FOR RLY ROLL STOCK

348 SHIPSaBOATS.MILITARYaCOMMERCIAL

349 SUB-ASSEMBLIES.PARTS.ETC SHIPS

350 SHIP REPAIRS

351 SNOWMOBILESaMISC NON-MOTOR VEH

352 PLEASURE ft SPORTING CRAFT

353 SMALL ELEC APPLIANCES.DOMESTIC

354 SPACE HEATER.HEATING STOVES ETC

355 REFRIG.FREEZERSaCOMB DOMESTIC

356 GAS RANGES&ELEC STOVES. DOMESTIC

357 TV .RADtO.RECORD PLAYERS

358 TELâTELEG UNE APPARATUS1EQUIP

359 RAXMOaTV BROADCASTlNGaTRANS EQ.

360 RADAR EQUIP.» RELATED DEVICES
Ml ELECTUBESBSEMI-CONDUCTORS ETC

362 ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT COMPONENTS

363 INTERIOR SlGNAJ_ALARMaaOCXSVST

364 POLE UNE HARDWARE

365 WELDING MACHINERY * EQUIPMENT

366 E NG1NES. MARINE. ELECTRIC TURBINES

367 TRANSFORMERSBCONVERTERS EX.T8T
366 ELEC. EQUIP. INDUSTRIAL. NES

369 BATTERIES

370 WIRE AMD CABLE. INSULATED

371 ALUM WIRE 4CABLE.NOT INSULATED

372 ENCLOSED SAFETY SWITCHES ETC.

373 ELEC LIGHT BULBS4TUBES. ETC

374 ELECTRIC LIGHTING FIXTURES ETC

375 CEMENT

376 LIME

377 CONCRETE BASIC PRODUCTS

378 SAND LIME BRICKS AND BLOCKS

379 READY-MIX CONCRETE

380 BRICKS AND TILES, CLAY

381 INSULATORSBELEC FITTINGS.PORCELN

382 PLUMB EQ. VITREOUS CHINA.a ETC

383 REFRACTORIES

384 NATURAL STONE BASIC PROD.STRUCT

385 STONE.CLAYaCONCRETE END PROD NES

386 PLASTERSBOTH GYPSUM BASK PROD
3*7 MIN WOOL4THERMAL INSUL MAT NES
3M ASBESTOS PRODUCTS

389 NON-METALLIC MIN BASIC PROO NES

390 GLASS. PLATE. SHEET. WOOL

391 GLASS CONTAINERS

392 GLASS TABLEWRE4HOUSEWRE.END4NES

393 ABRASIVE BASK PRODUCTS

394 AVIATION GASOLINE

395 MOTOR GASOUNE

396 FUEL OH.

397 LUBRICATING OILS AND GREASES

398 BENZENE. TOLUENE AN0 XYLENE

399 BUTANE, PROPANE 40TH LiQ PET GAS

400 NAPHTHA

APP CH AIR CHAUD.SAUF TUYAUX

ELEM BRESERV EAU NON EL

MATERIEL A COMBUSTIBLE

APP COMM CUISS RECH NOUR

TRAVAUX DE METAL SUR COMMANDE

FORGE ACIER CARS BALL

SOUPAPES

ACC TUY ,AUT QUE FER a ACIER

COMPTEURS A GAZ 6 A EAU

MAT CONTRE INCEND 4 CONT, CIRC

TAXIME .PARCOM POULIES, ECHELLES

ARMES A FEU 8 INST MILITAIRES

TUBES TELESCOPiQUES. METAL

TRACTEURS TYPE FERME 4 JARDIN

AUTRES MACHINES AGRICOLES

MAT MECANIQUE DE TRANSMISSION

POMPES.COMPRESSEURS.VENTIL ETC

MACH CONV .ASCENS APP LEV

CAMIONS.TRACTEURS REMO IND ETC

VENT APP CIRC. D'AIR 4 AERAT

MACH EMBALL.GRAIS.AUT OlV

FOURNAISES. FOURNEAUX FOuRS IND

MACH INDUSTRIELLES SPECIALISEES

OUTILS A MAIN MUNIS D'UN MOTEUR

PRODUITS FINIS METALLIQUES NCA

MAT REFR CLIMAT, SAUF MAISON

BALANCES

DISTRIBUTEURS AUTOMATIQUES

MACHINES 4 MATERIEL DE BUREAU

AERONEFS TOUS GENRES

MOTEURS D AERONEFS

MATER.El AER EN SPECIALISE

SERV MODIFICATION 4 CONVERSION

VOITURES PART CUL 4 CHASSIS

CAMIONSChASSiS. TRACTEURS COMM

AUTOBUS 4 CHASSIS

VEHICULES MILIT .MOTOCYCLETTES

REMORQUE CABINE OU MAISON

AUTRES REM 4 SEMI-REM COMM

CARROSSER 4 CABINES DE CAMIONS

VEHICULES-MOTEURS 8 MORCEAUX

MATERIEL ELECTRIQUE AUXILIAIRE

ACC MORC ASSEMB VEHiC MOT

QUINC VEH MOT SAUF RESSORTS

LOC .WAGONS. TENDERS. SERV RAIL

WAGONS AUTOMOTEURS

MORCACC MAT ROUL CHEMIN FER

NAVIRES.EMBARC MILIT COMM

MONTAGES AUXIL MORC .ETC -NAV

REPARATION DE NAVIRES

MOTON 6 CUV VEHIC NON MOTOR

EMBARCATION PLAISANCE 4 SPORT

PETITS APP ELECTR DOMESTIQUES

APP CHAUFF .POELES.ETC

REFRjCONG APP COMBINES-DOMES

FOURS A GA2.POELES ELECT -DOMES

TELEV .RADIOS TOURS -DISQUES

TELEP 6 TE LEG .CABLES 4 MAT

RADIO. TELE V .MAT EMIS TRANSP

MAT RADAR 4 APP CONNEXES

TUBES ELECTKON..SEMKON0 .ETC

MATERIEL ELECTRONIQUE - MORCEAUX

SYST HT SIGN ALARM XORLOG.

QmNCAILL DE LIGNES SUR POTEAUX

APPAREILS 4 MATERIEL DE SOUDURE

MOT MARIN.TURB ELECT.

TRANSF B CONVERT SAUF TELC.

MATERIEL ELECT INDUSTRIEL NCA

PILES » BATTERIES

FILS B CABLES ISOLES

FILS B CAB ALUM NON ISOLES

INTER». SECURITE INCORPORES

AMPOULES a LAMPES ELECT ETC.

ACC ELECT ECLAIRAGE ETC

CIMENT

CHAUX

PROD BASE BETON

BRIQUES BLOCS SILICO-CALCAIRES

BETON PREPARE

BRIQUES a TUILES D'ARGILE

ISOLANTSACC ELECT PORCELAINE

MAT PLOMB .PORC VITR ETC

PRODUITS REFRACT AIRES

PROD BASE PIERRE NATUR STRUCT

PROD FIN PIER ARG BETON NCA

PLATRE B AUT PROO GYPSE

MAT LAINE MIN ISOL THERM NCA

PRODUITS BASE AMIANTE

AUT PRO BASE MIN. NON MET NCA

VE RRE-PIAQ ..FE UIL.STRUCT ..ORN

CONTENANTS DE VERRE

ART VERRE TABLE MAIS FIN NCA

PRODUITS BASE ABRASIFS

ESSENCE A AVIATION

ESSENCE A MOTEUR

MAZOUT

HUILES 4 GRAISSES LUBRIFIANTES

BENZENE.TOLUENE 4 XYLENE

BUT .PROP AUT LIQ PET ESS

HUILE DE NAPHTE

302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310

314
31S
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330

33-J
335
336
337
338
339
340

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

3S5

3S6

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES) - Continued
PARAMÈTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS « SERVICES) - suite

COMMODITY TITLE -W

TITRE BIENS 4 SERVICES -W

402
403
404
40S

40*
407

408
409

410
41 1

«12

413

414
415
416
417
418
419

420

423
424
42S
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
43S
436
437
438
439
440
44'
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
«SO
«SI
«52
«53
«54
«55
«56
«57
«58
«59
4<0
461
«62
«63
«64
«65
«66
«67
46S
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
«80
«81
482
483

484

485
466

467
486

489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
496
499
500

ASPHALT AND COAL OILS. NES

PETROCHEMICAL PEED STOCK

FERTILIZERS

PLASTIC RESINS4MAT .NOT SHAPED

FILM4SHEET, CELLULOSK PLASTIC

ETHANO LAMINES

ETHYLENE GLYCOL. MONO

PHARMACEUTICALS

PAINTS 6 RELATED PRODUCTS

VEG OILS.OTH THAN CORN OIL.REF

GLYCERIN. REFINED

OENTIf RICES. ALL KINDS

SOAPS DETERGENTS.CLEANING PRODUC

INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL PREP NES

TOILET PREPARATIONS 6 COSMETICS

CHLORINE

OXYGEN

PHOSPHORUS

CHEMICAL ELEMENTS. NES

SULPHURIC ACID

CARBON DIOXIDE (GAS AND DRY iCE)

INORGANIC ACIDS40XYGEN

AMMONIA ANHYDROUS AND AQUA

CAUSTIC SODA (SOD HYDROX.DEIDRY

CALCIUM CHLORIDE

SODIUM CHLORATE

ALUMINUM SULPHATE

SODIUM PHOSPHATES

SODIUM CARBONATE (SODA ASh;

SODIUM CYAN DE

SODIUM S. I CA":

ME*ALl C SA.ts&sEROXvSAlTS NES

=mO*OGRA5- C4.NORGAVC CHEV N :

JT-YLEN:

3U"YLE\£S

BLTADlE\E

ACETYLENE

STYRENE MONOMER

CARBON TETRACHLORIDE

VINYLCHLORIDE MONOMER

TRlCHLOROET-».ENE

PERCHLO«OE*"».ENE

'ljORINA"D HALOGEN HYDROCARBONS

hyDROCARSONS4-h£,R DERIVATIVES

METHYL AlCOhO.

PROPYL AND iSOPROPYL ALCOHOLS

BUTYL AND ISOBUTYL ALCOHOLS

PENTAERYTHRITOL

ALCOHOLS AND THEIR DERIVATIVES

PHENOLS.PHEN AICOHOLS6DERIVATVES

ETHERS ALCOHOL PEROXIDES ETC

METYl-ETHYLALDEHYDE-fUNCTtONS.N

ACETONE

ACETIC ACID

ACETK ANHYDRIDE

ADIPIC ACID

CITRIC ACIDS

STE AJOC AND ORGANIC ACIDS

HEXAMETHYLENED1AMINE

SODIUM GLUTAMATE. MONO

DKYANDI AMIDE

ORG ANO-INORGANM. COMPOUNDS ETC

ORGANIC CHEMICALS. NES

TITANIUM DIOXIDE

BLACK. ACETYLENE AND CARBON

PIGMENTS. LAKES 6 TONERS. PROPER

IRON OXIDES

FERTILIZER CHEMICALS

SYNTHETIC RUBBER

ANTIFREEZE COMPOUNDS

ADDITIVES FOR MINERAI. OILS, NES

GLYCERINE. CRUDE

RUBBER4PLASTICS COMPOUNDING AGTS

EXPLOSIVES. FUSES AND CAPS

AMMUNITION. NON-MILITARY

AMMUNITION 4 ORDNANCE. MILITARY

PYROTECHNIC ARTICLES « FIREWORKS

CRUDE VEG MATERIALS t EXTRACTS

PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE

AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS

ADHESIVES

AUTOMOTIVE CHEM EX ANTIFREEZE

CONCRETE ADDITIVES

BOILER CHEMICALS

COMPOUND CATALYSTS

METAL WORKING COMPOUNDS

PRINTING AND OTHER INKS

TEXTRJl SPECIALTY CHEMKJUS

POLrSHES.WAXES.COMPOONOS • ETC

WAXESANIMAL 6 VEGETABLE. OTHER

ESSENTIAL OILS. NATURAL OH 5YN.

TANNING MATERIALS AND DYJSTUf FS

FATS AND CHEMICAL MIXTURES

EMBALMING CHEM 6 PREPARATIONS

MATCHES

AIRCRAFT4NAUTICAL INSTRUMENTS

LAB4SCIENTIFIC APPARATUS ETC

MISC MEA5URE4CONTROL INSTRUMENTS

MEDICAL4RELATED INSTRUMENTS ETC

ASPHALTÉ. HUILES CHARB NCA

ALIMENTATION IND PETROCHIMIQUE

ENGRAIS

RESINES. MAT PLAST BRUTES

PELLICULES FE UHlES CELLULOSE

ETHANOCAMINES

ETHYLENE GLYCOL.MONO

PRODUITS PHARMACEUTIQUES

PEINTURE 4 PROOUITS CONNEXES

HUILES VEG AUTRES QUE MAIS. RAF

GLYCERINE.RAFFlNEE

DENTIFRICES TOUS GENRES

SAVONS.DETERGENTS.PROD NETT

PREP CHIM IND NCA

PRODUITS TOILETTE COSMETIQUES

CHLORE

OXIGENE

PHOSPORE

ELEMENTS CHIMIQUES NCA

ACIDE SULPHURIQUE

BiOXIDECARB (GAZ GLACE SECHE)

ACiDES INORG COMPOXYG ETC

AMMONIAQUE ANHYDRlQuE 4 AQu

SOUDE CAL.ST (HYDR SOO) SECHE

CHLORURE DE CALCIUM

CHLORATE DE SODIUM

SULPHATE D ALUMINIUM

PHOSPHATES DE SODIUM

CARBONA'E SODIUM (CENDRE SOUDE)

CYANURE DE SODIUM

SLCATEDESODIUM

SiLSME'A. 4DEPEROX NCA

PRODUITS CHIV NORC NCA

ETHYLENE

3^-YLENES

BUTADiE\E

ACETYLENE

STYRENE MONOMERE

TETRACHLORURE DE CARBONE

VINYLCHLORURE MONOMETRE

TRICHLOROETHYLENE

PERChlOROEThyL£mç

CH.OROFLJOROHYDROCAR30NES NCA

HYDROCARBONES 4 DER'VES

ALCOOL ME'HYLlQuES

ALCOOLS PROPY 4iSO°ROPYLQUES

ALCOOLS BuTYL 4ISOBUTY.-QUES

PENTAERYTHRITOL

ALCOOLS «LEURS DERIVES

phenol

PHENOLS ALCOOLS PHEN 6 OERIVES

ETHERS.PEROXYDES D ALCOOL.ETC

FONCT METHYL-ETHYLADEH NCA

ACETONE

acide acetique

anhydride acetique

acide adipique

acides citriques

acides steak «organiques

hexamethyleneotame

glutamate de sodium.mono

guanidines

comp organcmnorganiquesjetc.

produits chimiques organiques

dioxide de titanium

charbon acethylene.cartone

colorants.laques.tons.propres

colorant5.laques.tons.nca

engrais chimiques

caoutchouc synthetique

composes antigel

additifs huiles minerales nca

glycerine brute

agents comp caout plastiques

explosifs. fusees.detonateurs

munitions non militaires

munitions 4 artillerie milit

articles 4 pieces pyrotechniques

mat .extraits vegetaux 8ruts

ANHYDRIDE PHTALIQUE

PRODUITS CHIMIQUES AGRICOLES

ADHESIFS

PROD CHIM VEHIC SAUF ANTIGEL

ADDITIFS ANTI-ACIDES AU CIMENT

PRODUITS CHIMIQUES A CHAUDIERE

COMPOSE CATALYSEUR

COMPOSES POUR TRAVAILLER METAL

ENCRE D'IMPRIMERIE

PROD CHIM SPECIALISES TEXTILE

POLIS.CIRES.COM POSES.ETC.

CIRESANIM VEGET AUTRE

HUILES ESSENT .NAT OU SYNTH

MAT TANNAGE 6 TEINTURES

GRAS .MELANGES CHIMIQUES

PROD CHIM PREP EMBAUMEMENT

ALLUMETTES

INSTRUMENTS AER NAUT

APPAREILLAGE LAB SCIENT ETC.

DIV INST MESURE 4 CONTROLE

INSTR MÉOlCAUX 4 CONNEXES ETC

«02
403
404
«05
«06
407
408
409
«10
411
412
«13
«14
«15
«16
417
418
419
420
«21
422
423

424

425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434

435
436
437
438
439

440
441
442
443
444
44 S
446
447
448
449
450
451
4S2
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
«83
«84
485
«46
«87
«88
«89
«90
«91
«92
«93
«94
49$
496
497
498
499
500

AGGREGATION PARAMETERS (COMMODITIES) - Concluded
PARAMÉTRES D'AGRÉGATION (BIENS A SERVICES) - fin

COMMODITY TTTU - W

TITRE 8IÉNS» SERVICES -W

SO' IND MILITARY»OVILD€F SAFETY EQ

502 WATCHES.CLOCKS.CHRONOMETERSETC

503 PHOTOGRAPHIC EQ4SUPPL INCL FILM

504 JEWELRY FINDINGS MET «GEM STONES

505 PLATED4SILVERWARE CUTLERY. ETC

506 8ROOMS.BRUSHES.MOPS»OTH CLEAN EQ

507 BICYCLES.CHILDREWS VEH SPARTS

508 SPORTING. FISHING8HUNTING EQUIP

509 TOYS AND GAME SE*S

510 FABRICS IMPREG Ex RUBBER-COATED
51' TILING RUBBER. PLASTIC

512 ADVERTISING GOODS

513 SHADES48UNDS

SU FUR DRESSING» DYEING SERVICES

515 CUSTOM WORK. MISCELLANEOUS

516 ICE

517 ANIMAL HAIR. FEATHERS OUILLS ETC

518 MISC FAB MAT INC. BRISTLES ETC

519 BUTTONS NEEDLES. P'NSftMISC NOTION

520 PHONO RECORDS AND ARTIST MATERIA
52' HOUSEHOLD ORNAMENTAL OBJECTS&ART

522 REPAIR CONSTRUCTION

523 RESIDES*. AL CONS** JCnON

524 NON-RESOENTIAL CONSTRUCTION

525 ROAD highway AiRSTRiP CONST

526 GAS AND OIL facility CONST

527 DAMS AND IRRIGATION PROJECTS

528 RAILWAv-çlephONE TELEGRAPH CON

529 OTHER ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION

530 AIR *RANS*ORTA"ON
53- OTHER TRANSPORTATION

532 SERV NCOS N*A.*0 TRANSPORT NES

533 WA-ERTPANS^OR'ATON

534 SERV NC DE\"A_ '3 WA'ER TRANS

535 RAiLWA>'-RA\S:>0=*A"ON

536 T))uC<T,i,,s50=-A-ON

53* BUS TRANSPORT l\*ERjR8A\» RURAL

538 URBAN TRANST

539 TAJtICAB TRANSPORTATION

540 PIPELINE TRANSPORTATION

•54' HIGHWAY AND BRIDGE MAINTENANCE

542 STORAGE

543 RADIO &*E_EVlS>ON BROADCASTING

544 -E..EPHONE S TE.EGRAP'-

545 POSTA^ SERV CES

546 Electric "ower

547 GASDISTR.BJTION

548 COKE

549 WATER AND OTHER UTILITIES

550 WHOLESALING MARGINS

551 REPAIR SERVICE

552 RENTAL OF OFFICE EQUIPMENT

553 RETAILING MARGINS

554 IMPUTED SERVICE. BANKS

555 OTH REAL EST (NON-RE NT)»FIN SERV

556 INSURANCE » W C B

557 IMPUTED RENT OWNER OCPO DWEL
55B CASH RESIDENTIAL RENT

559 OTHER KENT

560 GOVT ROYALTIES ON NAT RESOURCES
SCI EDUCATION SERVICES

562 HOSPITAL SERVICES

563 HEALTH SERVICES

564 MOTION PICTURE ENTERTAINMENT

565 OTHER RECREATIONAL SERVICES

566 SERVICES TO BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
$67 ADVERTISING SERVICES

568 LAUNDR Y. CLE ANING6PRESSING SERV

$69 ACCOMMODATION SERVICES

570 MEALS

571 SERV MARG ON ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES

572 PERSONAL SERVICES

573 PHOTOGRAPHIC SERVICES

$74 SERVICES TO BLDGS «DWELLINGS

575 RENTAL DATA PROCESSING EQUIP

576 OTHER SERV TO BUSINESSEStPERSONS

577 RENTAL OF AUTOMOBILES » TRUCKS

578 TRADE ASSOCIATION DUES

579 RENTAL AOMACH4EQ INCL CONST MAC

580 SPARE PARTS8MAINTSUPPLMACH8EQ

581 OFFICE SUPPLIES

582 CAFETERIA SUPPLIES

. 583 TRANSPORTATION MARGINS

584 LABORATORY EQUIP AND SUPPLIES

585 TRAVELLING AND ENTERTAINMENT
SB6 ADVERTISING a PROMOTION

587

588 COTTON RAW » SEMI-PROCESSED

589 NATURAL RUBBER 8 ALLIED GUMS
$90 SUGAR . RAW

$91 COCOA BEANS.UNROASTED

S92 GREEN COFFEE

$93 TROPICAL FRUIT

$94 UNALLOCATED IMPORTS 8 EXPORTS

$9$ GOVERNMENT GOODS 8 SERVICES

$96 COMMODITY INDIRECT TAXES

$97 SUBSIDIES

598 OTHER INDIRECT TAXES

599 WAGES AND SALARIES

600 SUPPLEMENTARY LABOUR INCOME

601 NET INCOME UNINCORP BUSINESS

602 OTHER OPERATING SURPLUS

•3

•S

MAT INO SECUR MIL OEF CIV

MONTRES. HORLOGES.CHRONOMET .ETC

MAT FOURN PHOT Y COMP FILM

BUOUX.DEC .MET 8 PIER PREC

COUTEL RECOUV ARGENTERIE.ETC

BAL .BROSS .VADR AUT MAT NET

BICYCL POUR ENFANT5.MORCEAUX

MAT SPORT.PECHE.CHASSE

JOUETS 8 JEUX

TISSUS ENDUITS SAUF CAOUTCHOUTES

TUILES.CAOUTCHOUC.PLASTIOUE

MARCH PUBLICITE

STORES» TOILES

SERV APPRET TEINTURE FOURRURE

TRAVAUX SUR COMMANDE. DIVERS

GLACE

POILS. PLUMES.PIQUANTS AN'M. ETC

DlV MAT FAB (SOIES. ETC )

BOUTONS.AIGUIL .EPIN .DlV ART

MAT AUDIT ENR ART

DECORATIONS» OBJ ART MAISON

CONSTRUCTION DE REPARATION

CONSTRUCTION DE RESIDENCES

CONSTR AUT QUE RESIDENCE

CONST ROUTES.AUTOR .PlST ATT

CONSTR INST GA2 HUILE

BARRAGES. PROJETS D IRRIGATION

CONST CH FER.TEl TELEG

AUTRES CONSTRUCTIONS INGENIERIE

TRANSPORT AERIEN

AUTRE TRANSPORT

SERV AUXILAIR DESTRANSP NCA

"RANSPORTSPAREAU

SERV Aux. DESTRANSP PAR EAu

*RANS'OR"$ FERROVIAIRES

*RANSPOR"S PAR CAMIONS

-RANSP INTER RUR PARAUTOBJS

TRANSPORTS URBAINS

TRANSPORTS PAR TAXIS

TRANSPORTS PAR PIPE -LINE

ENTRETIEN ROUTES PONTS

ENTREPOSAGE

RADIODIFFUSION » TELEV'SION

TELEPHONE » TELEGRAPHE
SERVICES POSTAUX

ELECTRICITE

DISTRIBUTION DU GAZ

COKE

EAU «AUTRES SERVICES

MARGE COMMERCE DE GROS

SERVICES DE REPARATION

LOCATION DE MATERIEL DE BUREAU

MARGE.COMMERCE DE DETAIL

SERVICE IMPUTE BANQUES

AUT SER IMMOB (NON LOC ) FIN

ASSURANCE. IDE M ACC TRAVAIL

LOYER IMPUT LOG OCC PROPR

LOYER RESIDENTIEL COMPTANT

AUTRES LOYERS

REDEV GOUV RESS.NAT

ENSEIGNEMENT

SERVICES HOSPITALIERS

SERVICES SANITAIRES

CINEMAS

AUTRES SERVICES DE LOISIRS

SERVICES EXT. DES ENTREPRISES

PUBLICITE

SERV BLANC .NETT. PRESS

SERVICES DE LOGEMENT

REPAS

SERV LIM BOISS ALCOOL

SERVICES PERSONNELS

PHOTOGRAPHIE

DlV. SERV REP. SAUF IMM LOG

MATERIEL INFORMATIQUE LOCATION

AUT SERV AUX ENTR « PERS.

LOCATION AUTOMOBILES CAMIONS

COTISATIONS ASS. COMM

LOC AUT MACH MAT .CONS COMP

FOURN P DET » ENT MAC MAT.

FOURNITURES OE BUREAU

FOURNITURES OE CAFETERIA

MARGES OE TRANSPORTS

MATERIEL FOURN. LABORATOIRE

DEPLACEMENTS » LOISIRS

PUBLICITE 8 PROMOTION

COTON BRUT. SEMI-TRAITE
CAOUTC NAT 8 GOMMES CONNEXES
SUCRE DE CANNE BRUT

FEVES DE CACAO, NON ROTIES

CAFE VERT

FRUITS TROPICAUX

IMPORT 8 EXPORT NON REPARTIES

BIENS » SERVICES DU GOUVERNEMENT

IMPOTS INDIRECTS BIENS 8 SERV

SUBVENTIONS

AUTRES IMPOTS INDIRECTS

SALAIRES » TRAITEMENTS

REVENU SUPP DU TRAVAIL

REV NETENTREPR INOIV

AUTRE EXCEDENT 0 EXPLOITATION

502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520

524
525
526
527
528
529
530

538
539
540
54-
542
543
544
545
546
547
S48
549
S 50
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
SS8
SS9
$80
$61
$62
$63
$84
565
S66
S67
S68
S69
S70
S71
S72
S73
$74
S7S
576
577
578
S79
580
581
582
583
584
58S
S86
587

ses

$89

$90
591
$92

$93
$94
$9$

596
597
598
599
600

DEFINITION OF COMMODITY AGGREGATION - M IN TERMS OF W NUMBERS

DÉFINITION DE L'AGRÉGATION DES BIENS & SERVICES - M EN TERMES DES NUMÉROS W

COMMODITY TITLE - M

TITRE BIENS «SERVICES -M

1 GRAINS

2 LIVE ANIMALS

3 OTHER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS

4 FORESTRY PRODUCTS

5 FISH LANDINGS

6 HUNTING i TRAPPING PRODUCTS

7 IRON ORES» CONCENTRATES

8 OTHER METAL ORES» CONCENTRATES

9 COAL

10 CRUDE MINERAL OILS

It NATURAL GAS

12 NON-METALLIC MINERALS

13 SERVICES INCIDENTAL TO M'NSG

14 MEAT PRODUCTS

15 DAIRY PRODUCTS

16 FISH PRODUCTS

17 FRUITS» VEGETABLES PREPARA-lONS

18 FEEDS

19 FLOUR.WHEAT MEAL «OTHER CEREALS

20 BREAKFASTCEREAL» BAKER-» PROD
2? SUGAR

22 MISC FOOD PRODUCTS

23 SOFTDRiN<S

24 ALCOhOL.C BEVERAGES

25 TOBACCO PROCESSED UNMAN_=ACTuRED

26 CIGARETTES» TOBACCO MFG

27 TIRES 4TL9ES

28 OTHER RUBBER PRODUCTS

29 PLASTIC f ABRICA'ED PRODUCES

30 LEATHER &.EA-"ER»ROOUC-î
3' VARNS» VAWADE FIBRES

32 FA.BR.CS

33 OTHER "Ex". £ PRODUCTS

34 HOSIERY »<NITTED WEAR

35 CLOTHING» ACCESSORIES

36 LUMBER S TIMBER
3' VENEER» PLYWOOD

38 O^hER WOOD faBR'CATEDMA"ERialS

39 FURNITURE » F XToRES

40 P-,*3

41 NEWSPRIN" » OTHER PAPER S"CC<

42 "APER PRODUCTS

43 PRINTING* PUBLISHING

44 ADVERTIS.NG. PRINT MEDIA
•45 IRON» STEEL PRODUCTS

46 ALUMINUM PRODUCTS

47 COPPER » COPPER ALLOY PRODUCTS

48 NICKEL PRODUCTS

49 OTHER NON FERROUS METAL PRODUCTS

50 BOILERS TANKS » PLATES

5 1 FABRICATED STRUCTURAL METAL PROD

52 OTHER METAL FABRICATED PROOUCTS

53 AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY

54 OTHER INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY

55 MOTOR VEHICLES

56 MOTOR VEHICLE PARTS

57 OTHER TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT

SS APPLIANCES «RECEIVERS.HOUSEHOLO

59 OTHER ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS

60 CEMENT » CONCRETE PRODUCTS

61 OTHER NON-METALLIC MINERAL PROD

62 GASOLINE «FUEL OIL

63 OTHER PETROLEUM» COAL PROO

64 INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS

65 FERTILIZERS

66 PHARMACEUTICALS

67 OTHER CHEMICAL PRODUCTS

68 SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT

69 OTHER MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS

70 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION

71 NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION

72 REPAIR CONSTRUCTION

73 PIPELINE TRANSPORTATION

74 TRANSPORTATION » STORAGE

75 RADIO «TELEVISION BROADCASTING

76 TELEPHONE » TELEGRAPH

77 POSTAL SERVICES

78 ELECTRIC POWER

79 OTHER UTILITIES

80 WHOLESALE MARGINS

81 RETAIL MARGINS

82 IMPUTED RENT OWNER OCPO OW L

83 OTHER FINANCE. INS. REAL ESTAIT
M BUSINESS SERVICES

SS EDUCATION SERVICES

86 HEALTH SERVICES

87 AMUSEMENT» RECREATION SERVICE S
SS ACCOMMODATION S FOOD SERVICES

89 OTHER PERSONAL S MISC. SERVKIS

90 TRANSPORTATION MARGINS

91 SUPPLIES FOR OFFICE. LAB » CAWTERIA

92 TRAVEL, ADVERTISING» PROMOTION

93 NON-COMPETING IMPORTS

94 UNALLOCATED IMPORTS» EXPORTS

76-84

85-89 100 103.118

90-91

92-95

10'

96-99 102 104.106-1 '3

114-115

116.H9-120

121

122-123

125-128

124 129-134

135-38

•39-'44

145-146 '51 IS4-157

16' 164

147. -48 :52 -58-159

167.-68 -8---B2

149-150 153.160 162-

163 .165-166.169-' -9

180.183

184 189

191

19S

190 192 194 196-203

204-208

209

210-2-6

2'7-227

228-231 233-234

232

235 244.247-252

2S7.264

2S4.265-266

2S3.268

246.255-256.258-263

267.269-271

272-275.300

276-279

280-298.301-313

314-315

316-329

334-339

340-344

330-333.345-352

295US3-3S7

3S8-374

37SJ77-37Î

376.380-393

394-396

245J97-402.S48

117,404-407.411.416-

470.473-474.479-4S0

403

105,409-410.412-415.

471-472,475-478.481-496

497 503

S04-52 1

S23

S24-S29

522

540

530-539.541-542

543

544

54S

S46

S47.S49

550

553

SS7

5 54-556. 558 560

566-567575576

S61

562 563

564-565

569-571

SS1-552.S68.572-S74.

S77-579.S95

SS3

580-582.584

585 586

588593

594

CEREALES

ANIMAUX VIVANTS

AUTRES PRODUITS AGRICOLES

PRODUITS FORESTIERS

SORTIE DE LE AU (POISSONS)

PROD DE LA CHASSE • DU PIEGE AGE

MINERAIS & CONCENTRES DE FER

AUTRES MINER METALL 4CONCENTR

CHARBON

HUILES MINERALES BRUTES

GA2 NATUREL

MINERAUX NON METALLIQUES

SERVICES AUXILIAIRES AUX MINES

PRODUITS DE LA VIANDE

PRODUITS -AITIERS

PRODUITS DU POISSON

PREP A BASE DE FRUITS & DE LEG

ALIMENTS POUR ANIMAUX

FAR 8LE.SEMOULE » AUTRES CEREAL

CEREAL DE TABLE » PROD DE BOUL

SUCRE

produits alimentaires divers

boissons ga2euses

80ssons alcooliques

tabac traite non manufacture

Cigarettes » tabac manufactures

pnejs& chambres a air

autres produis du caoutchouc

produits plastiques manufactures

C-J R» PRODUIS Du CJJR
c LS i' BRES ChiMiQuES

"SSjS

A„TRES=ROOolTS TEXTILES

BAS » VE TE MENTS EN TRlCOT
VE'EMENTS » ACCESSOIRES
SCIAGES ET BOIS D'OEUVRE
PLACAGES » CONTRE-PLAOUES
AUTRES VA-ER EN BOlS TRAVA.LuES
VIc-BlES & AR- 0 A.VcU8lEME\_
PATES DE BO'S

PAPIER J0JR\ &AUTR PATES TRAV
PROOUlTS DU PAPIER
IMPRESS.ON» EDITION
PUBLICITE. JOURNAUX
PRODUITS DU FER » DE LACIER
PROOUlTS DE L'ALUMINIUM
PROD CUIV » ALLIAGE DE CUIVRE
PRODUITS DU NICKEL
AUTRES PROO DE MET NON FERREUX

CHAUDIERES. RESERVOIRS » PLAQUES

PRODUITS METALLIQUES

AUTRES SEMI-PROD METALLIQUES

MACHINES AGRICOLES

AUTRES MACHINES INDUSTRIELLES

VEHICULES AUTOMOBILES

PIECES. VEHICULES AUTOMOBILES

AUTRE MATERIEL DE TRANSPORT

APPAREILS S RECEPTEURS MENAGERS

AUTRES PROOUlTS ELECTRIQUES

PROOUlTS DU CIME NT E T DU BETON

AUTRES PROD MINER NON METALL

ESSENCE ET MAZOUT

AUTRES PROO PETROLE » CHARBON

PRODUITS CHIMIQUES INDUSTRIELS

ENGRAIS

PROOUlTS PHARMACEUTIQUES
AUTRES PROOUlTS CHIMIQUES

MATERIEL SCIENTIFIQUE

AUTRES PRODUITS MANUFACTURES

CONSTRUCTION DE RESIDENCES

CONSTRUCTION NON-RESIDENTIELLE

CONSTRUCTION DE REPARATION

TRANSPORTS PAR PIPE-LINE

TRANSPORT » ENTREPOSAGE

RADIODIFFUSION ET TELEVISION

TELEPHONE » TELEGRAPHE

SERVKES POSTAUX

ELECTRICITE

AUTRES SERVKES PUBLIQUES

MARGE. COMMERCE DE GROS

MARGE. COMMERCE DE DETAIL

LOYER IMPUTE. LOGEM OCC PROP

AUTRES FIN ASS .AEFAIR IMMOI,

SERVKES COMMERCIAUX

ENSEIGNEMENT

SERVKES MEDICAUX

SERVKES DE «VERT S DE LOISIRS

HEBERGEMENT S RESTAURATION

AUTRES SERV PERSONN S DIVERS

MARGE. TRANSPORTS
FOURNITURES DE BUREAU.LAS S CAFE
TOURISME. PROMOTION » PUBLICITE
IMPORTATIONS NON CONCURENTiELLES
IMPORT » EXPORT NON REPARTIES

DEFINITION OF COMMODITY AGGREGATION - M IN TERMS OF W NUMBERS - Concluded
DÉFINITION DE L'AGRÉGATION DES BIENS & SERVICES - M EN TERMES DES NUMÉROS W - fin

* COMMODITY TITLE -M 0-W TITRE BIENS 4 SERVICES -M »

95 INDIRECT TAXES S96.S98 IMPOTS INDIRECTS 95

96 SUBSIDIES S97 SUBVENTIONS 96

97 WAGES I SALARIES S99 SALAIRES * TRAITEMENTS 97

98 SUPPLMENTARY LABOUR INCOME 600 REVENU SUPP DU TRAVAIL 98

99 NET INCOME. UNINC BUSINESS 601 REVENU NET. ENTRE INDIV 99
100 OTHEROPERATING SURPLUS 602 AUTRE EXCEDENT D'EXPLOITATION 100

DEFINITION OF COMMODITY AGGREGATION - S IN TERMS OF W NUMBERS

DÉFINITION DE L'AGRÉGATION DES BIENS t SERVICES - S EN TERMES OES NUMÉROS W

I COMMODITY TITLE - S

TITRE IlENS» SERVICES -S

GRAINS

OTHER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS

FORESTRY PRODUCTS

FISHING t TRAPPING PROOUCTS

METALLIC ORES * CONCENTRATES

MINERALS FUELS

NON-METALLIC MINERALS

SERVICES INCIDENTAL TO MINING

MEAT.FISH è DAIRY PRODUCTS

FRUIT. VEG FEED ViSC FOOD PROD

BEVERAGES

TOBACCO ft TOBACCO PRODUCTS

RUBBER. LEATHER PLASTIC FAB PRO

TEXTILE PRODUCES

KNITTED PRODUCTS « CLOTHING

LUMBER SAWMILL OTHER WOOD PROD

FURNITURE « FIXTURES

PAPER S PAPE» PRODUCTS

PRINTING 6 PuB.'ShiNG

PRIMARY VETA. 3R0D JC'S

METAL FABRiCA-ED PRODlC'S

MACHINER" 6 EOU'PVEV"

AUTOS.TRlCKS OTHER TRANS» EOP

ELEC » COMMUNICATIONS PROD

NON-ME*A_l C VNERA. PRODUCTS

PETRO.E JV I COA. PRODUCTS

CmEViCA^S Ci-EV.CA. PROD

v sc van-fac'-pedprodtcs
resden- a.cdns-=^c-on
novrïs den" a.cons'r^cton

SfPA RCONS'R.CTON
TRANSPORTA" ON 4 STORAGE
COMMUNICATION SERVICES
OTHER UTILITIES
WHOLESALE MARGINS
RETA.lMARG'NS

VPuTED REN' OWNER OC°D OWEL
0--E8£i\ANC; NS REA,.EStAtE
BUS. NESS ScRvCES
PERSONA. 4 O'hER MiSC SERVICE

TRANSPORTATION MARGINS
OPERATING OFFICE.LAB 6 FOOD
TRAVEL. ADVERTISING. PROMOTION
NON-COMPETING IMPORTS
UNALLOCATED IMPORTS è EXPORTS
NET INDIRECT TAXES
LABOUR INCOME
NET INCOME UNINC BUSINESS
OTHER OPERATING SURPLUS

7-8

1-5.9-23

24-28

29-30

32-36

37-39

41-50

52-75

76-104 106-113. 118

114-116.119-120

121-123

124-144

145-179 181-182

180183-189

190-203

204-208

209-227

228-234

235-244 246-271

272298 300-313

314-329

330-352

299353-374

375393

245 394-J02.548

I0S M '403-496

49--5J-

523

524 529

s::

530-542
543 545
546-547 549

550
553
55'

554 556 558 560
566 56' 575-576
55' 552 56•.S6S.S68-
57457'-579595
583

580 582.584
585 5*é
5*8 593
594

596598
599-600
(01
602

CEREALES

AUTRES PRODUITS AGRICOLES

PROOUITS DE LA FORET

PROD DE LA PECHE à DU pie GE AGE

MINERAIS METALLIQUES • CONCENTRE
COMBUSTIBLES MINERAUX
MINERAUX NON METALLIQUES
SERVICES AUXILIAIRES AUX MINES
VIANDE.POlSSONâPROD LAITIERS
FRUITS. LEG .AJM ANIM t DIVERS
BOSSONS

TABAC 8 PRODUITS DU TABAC
PROD ENCAOUT.ENCUIR.MAT PLA
PRODUITS TEXTILES
PRODUITS EN TRICOT 4 VETEMENTS
SCIAGES PROD DE SCIERIE * DIVER
MEUBLES 6 ARTICLES D'AMEUBLEMENT
PAPIER t PRODUITS CONNEXES
IMPRESSION 6 EDITION
PRODUITS METALLIQUES PRIMAIRES
SîMi-PRODu'S METALUOUES
MACHINES» MATERIEL
vOlTuRES.CAMIONS t AUTRES
APPAREILS ELECT 8DETELECOMM
PRODUITS MINERAUX NON METALL'OUE
PRODu'TS DU PETROLE 8 DU CHARBON
PRODu'TS CHIMIQUES
pRODU *S MANUFACTURIERS OVERS
CONS-^C'ON DE RESIDENCES
CONSV^C" ON NON RESiDSN- S.lE
CONS-'uC-lON DE REPARA-ION
TRANSPOR"S 6 EN-REPOSAGÉ
SERVCES DE COMMUNICATIONS
AUTRES SERV 0 UTILITE PUBLIQUES
MARGE.COMMERCE DE GROS
MARGE.COMMERCE DE DETAIL
LO'ER.MPJTE logem occ prop

AUTRESClN ASS AFFAIR IMMOBl

SERVCES COMMERCIAUX

SERV PERSONNELS «AUTRES SERV

MARGE TRANSPORTS

FOURNI EXPLOl BUR LAB * CAF

TOuRl5ME.LOi5IRS.PROM » PUBLIC

IMPORTATIONS NON CONCUNENTIELLES

IMPOR «EXPORT NON REPARTIES

IMPOTS INDIRECTS NET

REVENU OU TRAVAIL

REVENU NET.ENTRE INOiV

AUTRE EXCEDENT D'EXPLOITATION

APPENDIX 3

REPORT BY M.M. DILLON LIMITED

Our File: J3639-01

12 March 1992

Ernst & Young
Management Consultants
Royal Trust Tower
Toronto Dominion Centre
P. 0. Box 251
TORONTO, Ontario
M5K1J7

Attention: Dr. Steve Tanny

Ontario Environmental Protection Industry
Final Report

Dear Sirs:

Enclosed are four (4) copies of our Final Report for the above project. The Report describes
the treatment technology and presents the Cost Estimate and Ontario Content for each
process. An example is included to demonstrate the use of the scale-up coefficient for a
treatment train consisting of two treatment technologies. An additional section was added
to the Report (Appendix "B") showing the Ontario Content, based on the probability that
equipment sold in Ontario is manufactured in the Province.

Yours truly,

M. M. DILLON LIMITED

LT:mts Louis Tasfi, Ph.D., P.Eng.

for Steve McMinn, P.Eng.
Project Manager

CONTENTS

1 . INTRODUCTION 2

2. TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES 4

2.1 Wastewater Treatment 4

2.2 Air Emission Control 12

2.3 Solid Waste Treatment 13

3. EXAMPLE OF TREATMENT COST CALCULATIONS 14

Appendix "A"
Appendix "B"

1. INTRODUCTION

The objective of this project was to provide basic information for Ernst and Young
Management Consultants to develop a model predicting the effect of environmental
regulations on the Environmental Protection Industry in Ontario. The model would
estimate the Ontario Content of Direct and Indirect Capital Costs and Operating Cost for
abatement technologies. These costs could be used to estimate future revenues for the
Environmental Protection Industry in Ontario. M. M. Dillon Limited (Dillon) was retained
to estimate the Direct and Indirect Capital and Operating Costs and the Ontario Content
of these costs for typical treatment technologies used for wastewater, air and solid waste
treatment.

For this application, the Direct Capital Cost is broken down into the following items:

• Equipment

• Construction

• Piping

• Electrical and Instrumentation.

The total cost is presented as material and labour costs and the Ontario Content is
estimated for each item. This estimate is based on information obtained from equipment
and material suppliers. The Ontario Content is presented in two forms. One shows the
Ontario Content based on dollar value (Appendix "A"), the other presents this value based
on the probability that equipment purchased in Ontario is manufactured or assembled in
the Province (Appendix "B").

Average Ontario Content is calculated for Material and Labour Costs and for each
abatement technology.

-2

Indirect Capital Cost is estimated as a percentage of the Direct Capital Cost.

Operating Cost includes: labour, maintenance, power and chemical costs.

The Direct Capital Cost is calculated for three flow rates for each abatement technology.
Detailed calculations are presented in Appendix "A". Cost Estimates for three different
flow rates were used to calculate a scale-up coefficient for Direct Capital, Equipment,
Construction, Piping and Electrical, and Labour Costs.

The scale-up coefficient and the cost of a treatment technology at a selected flow rate
can be used to estimate the Direct and Operating Costs for an abatement technology at
a specific flow rate. An example of the cost calculation is presented in Section 3. The
scale-up calculation is as follows:

CQ = Cq x I — j • Equation (1)

Where: CQ - Treatment technology cost for a plant-specific flow rate of Q

C - Treatment technology cost for base flow q

Q - Plant specific flow rate

q - Treatment technology base flow

e - Scale-up coefficient

At the time of this report, no specific environmental regulations have been introduced for
the Industrial and Municipal Sectors. Consequently, costs were calculated for treatment
technologies considered as Best Available Technology (BAT) for the removal of typical
contaminants. A process train, specific to an application or to a sector, can be
assembled from individual treatment technologies. Treatment technologies for the
process train could be selected to meet different levels of environmental regulations.

Cost can be calculated based on the cost of individual treatment technologies used in
the process train and scaled-up to the plant-specific flow rate. The value of merchandise
and services purchased in Ontario is calculated based on the Ontario Content of each
treatment technology.

2. TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

2.1 Wastewater Treatment

2.1.1 Primary Clarifier

The main function of the Primary Clarifier is to remove settleable solids by gravity from the
wastewater. The organic content of the wastewater can also be reduced if it is associated
with settleable solids. The clarifier can be constructed as a circular or rectangular tank.

For a rectangular clarifier, wastewater is introduced at one end through several flow
distribution ports. At the opposite end of the tank, effluent flows over a weir to the
effluent collector trough. Solids are collected at the bottom of the tank as sludge. The
sludge is moved by a sludge collector mechanism to a sump. This sump is used to
temporarily store sludge, which is pumped out for final disposal.

The Primary Clarifier used for cost estimating was designed with a two-hour hydraulic
retention time (HRT). This time is sufficient for most applications to remove 70 to 80% of
the settleable suspended solids. It is assumed that the Primary Clarifier is followed by the
Activated Sludge treatment step.

Design parameters for Primary Clarifier:

• Base Design Flow Rate: 250 m3/hour

• Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT): 2 hours

• Surface Hydraulic Load: 4 m/hour

• Minimum Water Depth: 3.5m

Cost Estimates, Scale-up Factors and the Ontario Content are presented in Table 1 , for
a Primary Clarifier designed to treat 250 m3/hour flow. Cost estimates for three different
flow rates are presented in Table A.1, Appendix "A". These cost estimates are used to
calculate the scale-up coefficient as shown in Figure A.1, Appendix "A".

-4

TABLE 1. COST ESTIMATE FOR PRIMARY CLARIFIER

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW
(M3/HR)

ITEM

MATERIAL LABOUR / INSTALLATION

SUBTOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

CON.

(S)

CON.

($)

(S)

f*l

(%)

250

EQUIPMENT

$66,700

100

S5.100

$71,800

CONSTRUCTION

100

$45.100

100

$61,400

$106.500

PIPING

100

$1,800

100

$2,600

$4,400

ELECTVAUTO.

100

$7,500

100

$7,500

$15,000

SUBTOTAL

$121.100

100

$76.600

$197,700

COMMEh

ITS.OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT-

0.52 PIPING/ELECTVAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

.= 0.75

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

- 0.29 LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT»

0.64

CONSTRUCTION SCALE -UP COEFF-

0.60

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S29.700

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$227,400

OPERATING COST

LABOUR (5/YEAR)

$18,000

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$10.000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$2.000

TOTAL AWNUAL OPERATING COST ($/YEAR)

$30,000

ONTARIO CONTENT

100*

SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

2.1 .2 Activated Sludge Treatment

Activated sludge treatment is used to remove soluble and suspended organic matter from
the wastewater. The system consists of two reactors; aeration tank and final/secondary
clarifier.

A biomass (mixed liquid suspended solids, or MLSS) consisting of a large variety of
bacteria and other micro-organisms is retained in the aeration tank. The biomass adsorbs
and absorbs organic matter from the wastewater. The biomass utilizes a portion of the
organic matter removed for biomass synthesis. Air required for the biological process is
supplied by mechanical aeration equipment.

The biomass is separated from the treated wastewater in the final/secondary clarifier.
Treated effluent overflows from the clarifier and the biomass is collected in the tank as
underflow sludge.

Sludge collected at the bottom of the final clarifier is returned to the aeration tank. This
ensures that the necessary biomass concentration is maintained in the aeration tank.

A portion of the sludge, representing excess biomass growth, is wasted to maintain a
constant biomass inventory in the treatment system. Excess biomass left in the system
would result in loss of solids to the treated effluent and poor effluent quality.

The biological system was sized based on the daily organic load expressed as BOD5.
This design basis was chosen so that the activated sludge system specified here could
be used for municipal and industrial wastewater treatment. The system was designed to
remove 85 to 95% of the BOD5 from the wastewater.

Design parameters for the Activated Sludge System:

Design Base BOD Load Rate: 1 ,200 kg/d

• HRT Aeration Tank: 6 hours

-5

MLSS: 2,000 to 3,500 mg/l

Food to Microorganism Ratio: 0.3

HRT Final Clarifier: 4 hours

Surface Hydraulic Load: 1 m/hour

Surface Solids Load: < 5 kg/m2 x hour

Water Depth: 4m

A summary of the Cost Estimate for an activated sludge system treating 1 ,200 kg/d BOD
is presented in Table 2. Cost estimates for these different flow rates are presented in
Table A.2, Appendix "A". These cost estimates are used to calculate the scale-up
coefficient for the Activated Sludge System as shown in Figure A.2, Appendix "A".

2.1.3 Anaerobic Sludge Digestion

Primary and waste activated sludge produced during biological wastewater treatment
have to be treated before final disposal. This is essential to stabilize sludge and to
reduce the amount of sludge to be disposed of. The most frequently used waste sludge
stabilization technology is the Anaerobic Digestion Process. During this process, about
50% of the organic content of the waste sludge is transferred to biogas. The biogas
contains about 70% methane and 30% carbon dioxide and it can be used as an energy
source.

Primary and waste activated sludges are mixed and thickened in a Gravity Sludge
Thickener before treatment in the Anaerobic Digester. This step increases the solids
concentration of sludge from 1% to 3% and reduces the volume of sludge to be treated.

The total solids content of waste sludge is reduced during anaerobic digestion as a result
of transferring organic matter to biogas. The process also stabilizes the sludge and
minimizes odour problems during disposal. The digested sludge settles better than the
raw sludge. This further reduces the volume of sludge to be disposed of. The Anaerobic
Digester used for cost estimating is designed as a two-stage system with a 20-day
combined hydraulic retention time. The first stage is mixed, while the second stage is

TABLE : COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR AERATION BASIN + FINAL CLARIFICATION

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

BOD
LOAD

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

(kg/d)

CON.

(5)

CON.

(S)

1200

EQUIPMENT

$246,700

100

$28,800

$275,500

CONSTRUCTION

100

$185,000

100

$278,000

S463.000

PIPING

100

$14.600

100

$14,600

$29,200

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$76,800

100

$76,800

$153,600

TOTAL

100

$523,100

100

$398.200

$921,300

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.57 PIPING/EQUIPVAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

= 0.67

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 037 LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT»

037

CONSTRUCTION SCALE-UP COEFF.» 0.54

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S138.200
100%

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$1,059,500

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

$80,000

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$40,000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$125,000

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST ($/YEAR)

$245,000

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

used for gas extraction, settling and sludge storage. A portion of the settled sludge is
pumped back to seed the first stage.

The operating temperature is 35CC in the digester. Raw sludge is normally heated in a
heat exchanger before entering the digester. Heat is provided by boilers utilizing biogas
generated during the digestion process, augmented as necessary by natural gas or oil.
Mixing of the digester content is provided to enhance even distribution of sludge in the
reactors and to improve the digestion process.

The following design parameters were used for the Anaerobic Digester:

• Basis of Design:

Wastewater flow to treatment plant

250 m3/hour

HRT:

20 days

• Number of Stages:

• Volatile Solids Load:

1 .6 kg/m3/d

• Operating Temperature:

35°C

• Raw Sludge Solids Content:

• Digested Sludge Solids Content:

• First Stage Mixing System:

Gas Mixers

A summary of the Cost Estimate for the base sized Anaerobic Digester for a treatment
plant treating 250 m3/hour of wastewater is presented in Table 3. Cost estimates for three
different load rates are presented in Table A.3, Appendix "A". These cost estimates are
used to calculate the scale-up coefficient for the Anaerobic Digester as shown in Figure
A.3, -Appendix "A".

2.1.4 Sludge Dewatering

Waste biological and primary sludge are dewatered after digestion and before final
disposal. This step is essential to reduce the volume of sludge. High solids content is
also the prerequisite for landfill disposal, incineration and composting. Mechanical

-7-

TABLE 3 COST ESTIMATE FOR ANAEROBIC SLUDGE DIGESTION

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

RAW
WW
FLOW

(m3/hr)

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

(S)

ONT
CON.

(%)

COST

($)

ONT COST
CON. (S)

250

EQUIPMENT
CONSTRUCTION
PIPING
ELECT./AUTO.

70
100
100

$579,000
$81,600
$82,000
$61,500

100
100
100
100

$76,000
$97200
$82,000
S61.500

S655.000

S178.800
S164.000
$123,000

TOTAL 75

$804,100

100 $316,700

$1,120,800

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT = 0.50 CONSTRUCTION SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.81
EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.45 PIPING/ELECTVAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF.= 0.35
LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.56

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S168.100
100%

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$1,288,900

OPERATING COST

LABOUR (S/YEAR)

$62,400.00

MAINTENANCE (S/YEAR)

S40.800.00

POWER (S/YEAR)

$37,400.00

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)

$140,600.00

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE -UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

equipment, such as belt filter presses, recessed filter presses and centrifuges, are
frequently used for sludge dewatering.

Belt and recessed filter presses use mechanical and hydraulic pressure to squeeze the
water out of the sludge and press it through a filter media. The remaining sludge cake
has a solids content of 20 to 25% and 40 to 50% for belt and recessed filter presses,
respectively.

A centrifuge increases the settling force on the solids particles by exposing the sludge
to a centripetal force 3,000 to 5,000 times greater than the gravity force. Solids particles
settle out in the centrifuge and are removed as a sludge cake with a mechanical scraper.
The sludge cake has a minimum 18 to 25% solids content.

A belt filter press was selected for cost estimating, since this device is used frequently in
municipal and industrial applications. The capital cost of this equipment lies between the
cost for a recessed filter press or centrifuge.

The sludge dewatering device was sized based on wastewater flow to the treatment plant.
The design basis is also shown in solids load to the dewatering equipment. This
information could be used for an industrial application, where wastewater flow is not
always related to the amount of waste sludge produced.

The Cost Estimate also includes sludge pumping and conveying and polymer dosage
systems.

Design basis for the sludge dewatering system:

Dewatering Equipment: Belt filter press

• Basis of Design: 1 . Wastewater flow to treatment plant

at 250 m3/hour

2. Waste sludge load to dewatering
equipment at 2,250 kg/d

-8

• Load Rate: 1 4 m3 sludge/m belt x h

• Solids Concentration of Feed: 4%

• Solids Concentration of Cake: 25%

A summary of the Cost Estimate for the base sized sludge dewatering device at a plant
wastewater flow of 250 m3/hour and/or a 2,250 kg/d sludge load to the dewatering device
is shown in Table 4. Calculations used to determine the scale-up coefficient for Sludge
Dewatering are presented in Table A.4 and Figure A.4, Appendix "A".

2.1 .5 Oil/Water Separator

An Oil/Water Separator is used to remove oil and grease droplets by gravity. Oil and
grease droplets are allowed to rise to the water surface in a tank, while water free of oil
is discharged from the bottom section of the tank. This system can reduce the free oil
content of the wastewater to 1 5 mg/L However, this process cannot be used to remove
emulsified oil, because the oil droplets in this mixture are too small to be separated by
gravity.

The Oil/Water Separator used for cost estimating is an underground cylindrical steel tank
equipped with baffles and piping, and is installed into the sewer system. This unit could
be used for effluent polishing before final discharge to the sewer system. The Separator
is equipped with an oil/water interface sensor which automatically activates the oil pump.
Oil is pumped out from the Separator when the volume of oil in the tank exceeds the set
point.

Design parameters for Oil/Water Separator:

• Design Basis: Wastewater flow rate at 5L/sec

• Maximum Oil Concentration in Flow: 1 50 mg/1
Oil Removal Efficiency: 90%

Oil in Effluent: <15mg/L

TABLE 4 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR SLUDGE DEWATERING

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

RAW
WW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

FLOW

CON.

(S)

CON.

(S)

(m3/hrL

(%)

250

EQUIPMENT

$414,000

100

$17,700

S431.700

CONSTRUCTION

100

$90,000

100

$95,000

$185,000

PIPING

100

$27,000

100

$27,000

$54.000

ELECT./AUTO.

$31,000

100

$31,000

$62.000

TOTAL

$562,000

100

$170,700

$732,700

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT -

0.45 CONSTRUCTION SCALE -

-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.44

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIEN

T- 0.45 PIPING/ELECT/AUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

0.38

LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT»

0.45

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S 109,900
100%

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$842,600

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

$62.400

CHEMICAL/POLYMER COST ($/YEAR)

$15.000

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$40.800

POWER ($/YEAR)

S37.400

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST ($/YEAR)

$155,600

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE -UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

A summary of the Cost Estimate for the base sized Oil/Water Separator at a 5 L/sec flow
rate is presented in Table 5. Calculations used to determine the scale-up coefficient for
oil removal are presented in Table A.5 and Figure A.5, Appendix "A".

2.1 .6 Chemical Oxidation/Reduction and Final Clarifier

This process may be used to oxidize cyanide and other metal chelators such as citric
acid, and to remove heavy metals from industrial effluents.

In the first step, the pH is adjusted to an optimum for the oxidation process and the
oxidizing reagent is added to the wastewater. The oxidizing compound considered for
this application is hydrogen peroxide or sodium sulfite. Alkaline chlorination may also be
used to oxidize cyanide in wastewater.

In the second step of the treatment process, the pH is readjusted to the optimum for
metal precipitation. The precipitated metal hydroxide floes are separated in a Lamella
Clarifier and the metal hydroxide sludge pumped to a sludge storage tank. Sludge is
dewatered in a filter press. Polymer is added to the Lamella Clarifier's inflow and to the
sludge fed to the filter press. This improves metal hydroxide floe removal in the clarifier
and sludge dewatering in the filter press.

Design Parameters for Chemical Treatment:

• Design Basis: wastewater flow rate at 5 m3/h

• HRT pH Adjustment: 1 hour

• HRT Oxidation Tank: 2 hours
Lamella Clarifier: ^201p/5S,

The Cost Estimate for the above system is shown in Table 6. Calculations used to
determine the scale-up coefficient for chemical oxidation/reduction are presented in Table
A.6 and Figure A.6, Appendix "A".

- 10-

TABLE 5 COST ESTIM ATE SUM M AR Y FOR OIL/WATER SEPERATORS

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(L/s)

CON.
<*>

($)

CON.

(%)

($)

(J)

EQUIPMENT

$15.500

100

$7.000

$22.500

CONSTRUCTION

100

S1.500

100

$3.500

$5.000

PIPING

100

$5,800

100

$6.500

$12.300

ELECT./AUTO.

100

12,500

100

$2,500

$5.000

TOTAL

S25.300

100

$19.500

$44.800

COU MEN

TS:OVERALLSCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.41 CONSTRUCTION SCALE-

UP COEFFICIENT- 0.43

EQUIPMENT SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT- 0.S3 PIPING/ELECT./AUTO. SCALE- UP COEFF

0.20

LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0,37

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPER VISION (20% OF DIRECTCOST)
ONTARIOCONTENT

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

$7.800

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$5.000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$1.000

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (l/YEAR)

$13.800

ONTARIO CONTENT

100*

SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

TABLE 6 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR CHEMICAL OX I DATION R E D UCTION A FINAL CLARIFIER

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

(S)

CON

(S)

(.,

Cm 3 hr)

{%)

(%)

EQUIPMENT

$100,500

100

$24,400

$124,900

CONSTRUCTION

100

$10.700

100

$14,700

$25.400

PIPING

100

$15.000

100 $15.000

$30.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$15.000

100 $7,500

$22.500

TOTAL

$141,200

100 $61,600

$202, S00

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT» 0.56 PIPING/EQUIP./AUTO. SCALE- UP COEFF

» 0.48

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.60 LABOUR SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT»

0.53

CONSTRUCTION SCALE- UP COEFF.» 0.48

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPER VISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)

ONTARIOCONTENT

S30.500

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

$35.100

CHEMICAL/POLYMER COST ($/Y EAR)

$25,000

MAINTENANCE (S/YEAR)

$5.000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$16.100

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)

$81,500

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

2.1 .7 pH Control System

Wastewater pH may have to be adjusted to the optimum specific to the chemical and
biological treatment processes or before final discharge to the receiving water or sewer.
The pH control system consists of a tank with a minimum of 0.5 hours hydraulic retention
time. The tank contents are thoroughly mixed with a mechanical mixer. Acid or base
addition is controlled by a pH meter. This sensor measures the pH in the mixed reactor.

The pH Control System was sized for a 1 0 m3/hour wastewater flow. The summary of the
Cost Estimate for this system is presented in Table 7. Calculations used to determine the
scale-up coefficient for the pH control system are presented in Table A. 7 and Figure A.7,
Appendix "A".

2.1.8 Sand Filtration

Sand filtration is often used to improve the quality of biological or chemical treatment
process effluents. The objective of this treatment process is to remove the suspended
solids from the effluent. This would also reduce BOD, phosphorus, and heavy metal
concentrations. It is expected that sand filtration will have to be used for many municipal
and industrial wastewater treatment plants to meet future effluent quality regulations for
these contaminants.

Solids are captured as water flows through the sand filter media. The flow rate through
the filter gradually decreases and the headloss increases as more and more solids are
accumulated in the filter media. At a preset maximum headloss, the filter is backwashed
with treated effluent to remove the accumulated solids from the media. The filter
backwash, loaded with solids, is returned to the treatment system.

Design parameters for sand filtration:

• Design Basis: Wastewater flow rate at 250 m3/hour

• Surface Hydraulic Load: 12 m/hour

• Filter: Dual media sand filter

TABLE 7 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR PH CONTROL

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

($)

CON.

(S)

($)

(m3/hr)

(%)

EQUIPMENT

$12.500

100

$2^00

$15,000

CONSTRUCTION

100

$3,600

100

$7,100

$10,700

PIPING

100

$2400

100

$2400

$5,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$3400

100

$2,000

$5400

TOTAL

$22,100

100

$14,100

$36,200

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.44 PIPING/EQUIPVAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

= 0.46

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.55 LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT-

0.38

CONSTRUCTION SCALE-UP COEFF.- 0.31

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (20% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

$7,200

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$43,400

OPERATING COST

LABOUR (S/YEAR)
CHEMICAL COST (S/YEAR)
MAINTENANCE (S/YEAR)
POWER ($/YEAR)

$11,700

$15,000

$2,000

$4,100

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)
ONTARIO CONTENT
SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT

$32,800

100%

0.6

The filtration system was sized to treat 250 m3/hour wastewater flow. The summary of the
Cost Estimate for this system is presented in Table 8. Calculations used to determine the
scale-up coefficient for the sand filtration are shown in Table A.8 and Figure A.8, Appendix
"A".

2.2 Air Emission Control

2.2.1 Dry Collectors

Baghouses were selected as typical dry collector systems. These systems use fabric or
paper cartridge filters and remove 99 to 99.9% of particles greater than 0.5 microns. Air
is introduced to the dry collector with fans. Dust particles collected on the filter media are
automatically removed by applying compressed air reversed pulses. Dust particles are
collected in a bin underneath the dust collector.

Dust collector design was based on air flow rate. The Cost Estimate shown in Table 9
was prepared for a system treating 280 m3/hour air flow. Calculations used to determine
the scale-up coefficient for dry collectors are shown in Table A.9 and Figure A.9,
Appendix "A".

2.2.2 Wet Collectors

Wet scrubbers or collectors are typically used to remove larger particles and absorb
gaseous contaminants from the air . The representative system used for Cost Estimating
has a 90% removal efficiency for particles above 5 microns and absorbs 90% of gaseous
contaminants. This system may be used as the first treatment step, removing larger
particles and most of the gaseous contaminants. Air from wet collectors may be further
treated in dry collectors to improve particulate matter removal.

The summary of a Cost Estimate for a Wet Collector System treating 280 m3/hour air flow,
is shown in Table 10. Calculations to determine the scale-up coefficient for Wet
Collectors are presented in Table A. 10 and Figure A. 10, Appendix "A".

12-

TABLE 8 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR SAND FILTRATION

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(in3/hr)

CON.

($)

CON.
(%)

(S)

250

EQUIPMENT

$198,500

100

$20,900

$219,400

CONSTRUCTION

100

S20.700

100

$23.500

$44 200

PIPING

100

$10.000

100

$10,000

S20.000

ELECTVAUTO.

100

$15.000

100

$7.500

$22.500

TOTAL

$244.200

100

$61,900

$306,100

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.81 CONSTRUCTION SCALE-

-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.60

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.90 PIPING/ELECT7AUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

- 034

LABOUR SCALE - UP COEFFICIENT- 0.48

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (15% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

$44.400

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$350,500

OPERATING COST

LABOUR (S/YEAR)

$12,000

MAINTENANCE (S/YEAR)

$10.000

POWER (S/YEAR)

$1,000

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)

$23,000

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

fABLE 9 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR DRY COLLECTORS (BAG HOUSE)

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

FLOW
(m3/hr)

ONT
CON.

COST
(S)

ONT COST
CON. (S)
(%)

COST

(S)

280

EQUIPMENT
CONSTRUCTION
PIPING
ELECT./AUTO.

25
100
100
100

S24.900
$3,000
$1,500
$1.500

100
100
100
100

S6.000
S6.000
SUOO
$1,500

S30.900

S9,000
S3.000
$3,000

TOTAL

$30,900

100

$15,000

$45,900

COMMENTS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.67 PI PING/EQUIP VAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF.= 0.44
EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT" 0.82 LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.48
CONSTRUCTION SCALE-UP COEFF.» 0.44

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (20% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$55,100

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

S3.000

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$2.000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$15,000

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST ($/YEAR)

$20,000

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

TABLE 10 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR WET COLLECTORS

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

(J)

CON.

(S)

Cm3/hrl

(%)

280

EQUIPMENT

$15,900

100

S3.500

$19,400

CONSTRUCTION

100

$3,000

100

$6,000

S9.000

PIPING

100

$1,500

100

$1,500

$3,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$1,500

100

$1,500

$3,000

TOTAL

$21,900

100

$12,500

$34,400

COMMEN1

rS: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.58 PIPING/EQUIPVAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

= 0.44

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT = 0.82 LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT =

0.55

CONSTRUCTION SCALE - UP COEFF. = 0.44

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (20% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S6.900

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$41,300

OPERATING COST

LABOUR ($/YEAR)

$3,500

MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)

$3,000

POWER ($/YEAR)

$15,000

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)

$21,500

ONTARIO CONTENT

100%

SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT

0.6

2.3 Solid Waste Treatment

2.3.1 Composting

Composting may be used to convert solid waste and waste biological sludge to a
valuable product. During composting, organic matter is oxidized by aerobic bacteria in
the presence of air. The end product of this process is a soil-like material (humus) which
can be used for gardening and soil conditioning.

The solid waste received by the composting facility is first screened to remove metal and
glass particles. After this step, waste materials from different sources are blended to
obtain an uniform raw material.

If necessary, water is added to this mixture to establish the optimum moisture content.
This mixture is introduced into one of a row of parallel composting channels. Mixing and
loading of solid waste are usually performed with a front end loader.

In the channel, which is about 6m wide, 4m deep and 60m long, the raw material is mixed
and moved toward the end of the channel with a mechanical mixer. This equipment
travels on top of the channel walls and is moved from one channel to the next as
required. Air is introduced to the bottom of the channel with blowers. Air supplies the
oxygen required for the biological oxidation of organic matter.

After 10 to 15 days, the composted material reaches the channel end. Here, compost is
collected and removed to a storage area where it is cured for several more days.

A Cost Estimate for the basic sized composting unit, treating 75 tonnes/day of solid
waste, is presented in Table 1 1 . Calculations to determine the scale-up coefficient for
composting are presented in Table A.11 and Figure A.11, Appendix "A".

13-

TABLE 11 COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY FOR SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING

DIRECT CAPITAL COST

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(«Ai)

CON.

(%)

($)

CON.

($)

(S)

EQUIPMENT

$725,000

100

$65,000

$790,000

CONSTRUCTION

100

$296,100

100

$468,900

$765,000

PIPING

100

$3,000

100

$3,000

$6,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$5,000

100

$5,000

$10,000

TOTAL

$1,029,100

100

$541,900

$1,571,000

COMMEN1

'S: OVERALL SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT- 0.88 CONSTRUCTION SCALE- UP COEFFICIENT» 0.83

EQUIPMENT SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.93 PIPING/ELECT VAUTO. SCALE-UP COEFF

0.43

LABOUR SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT» 0.76

INDIRECT CAPITAL COST

ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SITE SUPERVISION (10% OF DIRECT COST)
ONTARIO CONTENT

S157.100

TOTAL CAPITAL COST

$1,728,100

OPERATING COST

LABOUR (S/YEAR)
MAINTENANCE ($/YEAR)
POWER (S/YEAR)

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST (S/YEAR)
ONTARIO CONTENT
SCALE-UP COEFFICIENT

$75,000
$50,000
$15,000

$140,000

100%

0.6

3. EXAMPLE OF TREATMENT COST CALCULATIONS

The treatment system used for this example is a primary and secondary treatment
process, consisting of a Primary Clarifier and an Activated Sludge Process. The treatment
plant is designed for 500 m3/hour flow rate. The scale-up factors for individual treatment
technologies are used to calculate the Capital and Operating Costs.

Using Equation 1 in Section 1 , the cost of the treatment system treating 500 m3/hour can
be calculated as follows:

c -c xl500V

u500 m3/h ~ *-250 m3/h •* I 250 /

Ç500 = *-250 X '2/

Costs, scale-up coefficients and Ontario Content for these treatment technologies are
presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Tables 1 2 and 1 3 show the scale-up calculations for the Primary Clarifier and Activated
Sludge System. The combined cost of these two treatment technologies, at 500 m3/hour
flow rate, is presented in Table 14.

-.14-

TABLE 12
PRIMARY CLARIFIER

Item

Cost ($) at
250 mThour

Scale-up
Coefficient

Cost ($) at
500 m7hour

Ontario

Content

($)

Material Cost

Equipment

Construction

Piping and Electrical/
Automation

66,700

45,100

9,300

0.29
0.60
0.75

81 ,500
68,400
1 5,600

75,800
68,400
15,600

Subtotal Material Cost

121,100

1 65,500

159,800

Labour Cost

76,600

0.64

1 1 9,400

119,400

Direct Capital Cost
(Material and Labour
Costs)

284,900

279,200

Indirect Capital Cost
(1 5% of Direct Capital
Cost)

28,800

42,700

Operating Cost ($/year)

30,000

0.6

45,500

TABLE 13
ACTIVATED SLUDGE

Item

Cost r$) at
250 mThour

Scale-up
Coefficient

Cost ($) at
500 m /hour

Ontario

Content

($)

Material Cost

Equipment

Construction

Piping and
Electrical

246,700
185,000
112,100

0.37
0.54
0.67

318,800
269,000
178,400

173,400
269,000
178,400

Subtotal - Material
Cost

543,800

766,200

620,800

Labour Cost

398,200

0.57

591,100

Direct Capital Cost
(Material and Labour
Costs)

1 ,357,300

1 ,21 1 ,900

Indirect Capital Cost
(1 5% of Direct Capital
Cost)

203,600

Operating Cost
($/year)

245,000

0.6

371 ,400

TABLE 14

PRIMARY CLARIFIER WITH ACTIVATED

SLUDGE TREATMENT AT 500 M3/HR FLOW

Hem

Cost
($)

Ontario Content
($)

Material Cost
Equipment
Construction
Piping and Electrical

400,300
337,400
194,000

249,200
337,400
194,000

Subtotal - Material

931,700

780,600

Labour Cost

710,500

Direct Capital Cost (Material and
Labour Costs)

1 ,642,200

1,491,100

Indirect Capital Cost

246,300

Operating Cost ($/year)

416,900

APPENDIX "A"
DETAILED CALCULATIONS

TABLE A 1 COST ESTIMATE FOR PRIMARY C LA RIF IE RS

TANK
FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(mJ/hr)

CON.

(%)

($)

CON.

(%)

($)

250

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGE COLLECTOR

$63,800

100

$4,500

$68,300

-PUMP

$2.900

100

$600

$3.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$45,100

100

$45,200

$90,300

-EXCAVATION

100

$5,400

$5.400

-BACKFILL

100

$10,800

$10.800

PIPING

100

S1.800

100

$2,600

$4.400

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$7.500

100

$7,500

515.000

TOTAL

$121.100

100

$76,600

$197.700

500

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGE COLLECTOR

$73.900

100

$6.000

$79.900

-PUMP

$2.900

100

$600

$3.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$64.800

100

$64,700

$129,500

-EXCAVATION

100

$9,100

-BACKFILL

100

$18.000

PIPING

100

$3.100

100

$4,600

$7.700

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$12.200

100

$12,200

$24,400

TOTAL

$156,900

100

$115.200

$272,100

1000

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGECOLLECTOR

$94.300

100

$9,000

$103.300

-PUMP

$2,900

100

$600

$3.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$105,800

100

$105.700

$211.500

-EXCAVATION

100

$16.100

-BACKFILL

100

$32.200

PIPING

100

$5.600

100

$8.200

$13.800

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$21.300

100

$21.300

$42.600

TOTAL

$229.900

100

$193.100

1423.000

Figure A.1 PRIMARY CLARIFIER

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

\BLE A3.A COST ESTIMATE FOR AERATION BASIN

BOD

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

LOAD

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(kg/d)

CON.

(S)

CON.

(S)

1200

EQUIPMENT

-AIR DIFFUSER EQUIP.

$38.500

100

$8,000

$46,500

-BLOWER

$75,000

100

$7,500

$82,500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$111,000

100

$111,000

$222,000

-EXCAVATION

100

$20,000

-BACKFILL

100

$40,000

PIPING

100

S8.900

100

$8,900

S 17,800

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$42,900

100

S42.900

S85.800

TOTAL

$276300

100

S238.300

$514,600

3000

EQUIPMENT

-AIR DIFFUSER EQUIP.

$75,500

100

$15,100

$90.600

-BLOWER

SIOO.OOO

100

' $10,000

$110,000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$180.000

100

$180,000

S360.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$40,000

S40.000

-BACKFILL

100

$80,000

PIPING

100

$10300

100

$10300

$21,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$63300

100

$63300

$126,400

TOTAL

$429300

100

$398,800

$828,000

6000

EQUIPMENT

-AIR DIFFUSER EQUIP.

$110.900

100

$22300

$133.100

-BLOWER

$125,000

100

$12,500

$137,500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$225.000

100

$225,000

$450,000

-EXCAVATION

100

$60,000

-BACKFILL

100

$120.000

$120,000

PIPING

100

$11,900

100

$12,000

$23,900

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$69,400

100

$69,400

$138,800

TOTAL

$542300

100

$521,100

$1,063,300

COST ESTIMATE FOR FINAL CLARIFIERS

BOD
LOAD

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(kg/d)

CON.
(ft)

($)

CON.
(ft)

(S)

($)

1200

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGECOLLECTOR

$120.000

100

$12.000

$132.000

-PUMP

$13.200

100

$1.300

$14.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$74,000

100

$74,000

$148,000

-EXCAVATION

100

$11.000

-BACKFILL

100

$22,000

$22.000

PIPING

100

$5,700

100

$5,700

$11,400

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$33.900

100

$33.900

$67.800

TOTAL

$246.800

100

$159.900

$406.700

3000

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGE COLLECTOR

$156.500

100

$21.600

S178.100

-PUMP

$17.200

100

S2.400

$19,600

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$128.200

100

$133.000

$261.200

-EXCAVATION

100

$19,800

$19.800

-BACKFILL

100

$39.600

$39,600

PIPING

100

$11,300

100

$10,300

$21.600

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$67.400

100

$61.000

$128.400

$380.600

100

$287,700

$668.300

6000

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGECOLLECTOR

$192,000

100

$33,600

$225.600

-PUMP

$21,000

100

$3,700

$24.700

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$195,000

100

$207.300

$402.300

-EXCAVATION

100

$30.800

-BACKFILL

100

$61.600

PIPING

100

$19.600

100

$16.000

$35.600

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$114.000

100

$95.000

$209.000

TOTAL

$541.600

100

$448.000

$989.600

Figure A.2 AERATION BASIN AND
SECONDARY CLARIFIER

10-

^
<*

«5
o
o

^^*

■

BOD Load: log (Q/q) , [kg/d]/[kg/d]

TABLE A3 COST ESTIMATE FOR ANAEROBIC SLUDGE DIGESTION

RAW
WW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

FLOW

CON.

($)

CON.

($)

<$)

(m3/hr)

(*>

(*)

250

EQUIPMENT

-HEAT EXCHANGER

S50.000

100

$3.000

$53.000

-FLOATINGCOVER

100

$280,000

100

$45.000

$325.000

-MIXING SYSTEM

$189.000

100

$20.000

$209.000

-GAS SYSTEM

100

$40.000

100

$4.000

$44.000

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

$20.000

100

$4.000

$24.000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$81.600

100

$81.600

$163.200

-EXCAVATION

100

$5,400

$5.400

-BACKFILL

100

$10.200

PIPING

100

$82.000

100

$82.000

$164.000

ELECT./AUTO.

$61.500

100

$61.500

$123.000

TOTAL

$804.100

100

$J16.700

$1.120.800

500

EQUIPMENT

-HEAT EXCHANGER

$75.000

100

$6.000

$81.000

-FIXEDCOVER

100

$300.000

100

$40.000

$340.000

-FLOATINGCOVER

100

$155,000

100

$25.000

S180.000

-MIXING SYSTEM

$189.000

100

$20.000

$209.000

-GAS SYSTEM

100

$40.000

100

$4.000

$44.000

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

S 30.000

100

$6.000

$36.000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$147.000

100

$147,000

$294.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$13.200

-BACKFILL

100

$25,300

$25.300

PIPING

100

$103.900

100

$104.000

$207.900

ELECT./AUTO.

$77.900

100

$78.000

$155.900

TOTAL

$1.117,800

100

$468.500

$1.586.300

1000

EQUIPMENT

-HEAT EXCHANGER

$75.000

100

$6.000

$81.000

-FIXEDCOVER

100

$360.000

100

$50.000

$410.000

-FLOATINGCOVER

100

$180.000

100

$27.000

$207.000

-MIXINGSYSTEM

$378.000

100

$40.000

$418.000

-GASSYSTEM

100

$40.000

100

$4.000

$44.000

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

$30.000

100

$6.000

$36.000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$236.500

100

$236.500

$473.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$25.300

-BACKFILL

100

$47,300

$47.300

PIPING

100

$132.800

100

$132,900

$265.700

ELECT./AUTO.

$99.600

100

$99,700

$199.300

TOTAL

$1.531.900

100

$674,700

$2.206.600

Figure A.3 ANAEROBIC SLUDGE DIGESTION

! ! !

I !

*»
^

o
O

|
i

!
|

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A4 COST ESTIMATE FOR SLUDGE DEWaTERING

RAW
WW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

FLOW

CON.

(J)

CON.

(S)

(5)

(m3/hr)

(%)

250

EQUIPMENT

-lm3 TANKS

100

$4.000

100

$500

$4,500

-DOSAGE PUMPS

S5.000

100

$1.000

$6,000

-MIXERS

$12.000

100

$3,000

S15.000

-TRANSFER PUMPS

$2,000

100

$1,000

$3.000

-BELT FILTER PRESS

$378,000

100

$10,000

$388.000

-SLUDGE PUMPS

$6,000

100

suoo

$7,200

-STORAGE TANKS

100

$7,000

100

$1.000

$8,000

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$45.000

100

$45.000

$90,000

-CONCRETE

100

$45.000

100

$45,000

$90.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$4.500

-BACKFILL

100

S500

$500

PIPING

100

$27,000

100

S27.O0O

$54.000

ELECT./AUTO.

$31.000

100

S31.000

$62.000

TOTAL

$562.000

100

S170,700

$732,700

500

EQUIPMENT

-lm3 TANKS

100

$4,000

100

$1.000

$5,000

-DOSAGE PUMPS

$5.000

100

$1.000

S6.000

-MDCERS

$12,000

100

$3.000

$15.000

-TRANSFER PUMPS

$2.000

100

$500

S2.500

-BELT FILTER PRESS

$535.000

100

S20.000

$555.000

-SLUDGE PUMPS

$6,000

100

$U00

S7.200

-STORAGE TANKS

100

$7.000

100

$700

$7.700

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$65,000

100

$65,000

$130.000

-CONCRETE

100

$55,000

100

$55,000

$110.000

-EXCAVATION

100

S5.500

$5.500

-BACKFILL

100

$500

PIPING

100

$40.000

100

$40.000

$80.000

ELECT./AUTO.

$35.000

100

$35,000

$70.000

TOTAL

$766,000

100

$223.400

$994,400

ABLE A.4 COST ESTIMATE FOR SLUDGE DEWATERING (CONT'D)

RAW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

FLOW

CON.

(S)

CON.

(S)

(m3/hr)

(%)

1000

EQUIPMENT

-lm3 TANKS

100

$4.000

100

S1.000

$5.000

-DOSAGE PUMPS

$5,000

100

$1,000

$6,000

-MIXERS

$12,000

100

$3,000

$15,000

-TRANSFER PUMPS

$2,000

100

$500

$2.500

-BELT FILTER PRESS

$756,000

100

$40,000

$796.000

-SLUDGE PUMPS

$6,000

100

$1.200

$7200

-STORAGE TANKS

100

$7,000

100

$700

$7,700

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$90.000

100

$90,000

S180.000

-CONCRETE

100

$80.000

100

S80.000

$160.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$8.000

S8.000

-BACKFILL

100

$500

PIPING

100

$60.000

100

$60,000

$120,000

ELECT./AUTO.

$40,000

100

$40.000

$80.000

TOTAL

$1,062,000

100

$325,900

$1,387,900

Figure

A.4 SLUDGE DEWATERING

! ' !

i^--
^^i

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

ABLE A 5 COST ESTIMATE FOR OIL.WATER SEPERATORS

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

a/»)

CON.
(%)

($)

CON.

(J)

($)

EQUIPMENT

-SEPERATORS

100

S12.000

100

$6.000

$18,000

-SENSOR/ALARM

100

$2,500

100

$500

$3.000

-OIL PUMP

$1.000

100

$500

$1.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$1.400

100

$1.400

$2.800

-EXCAVATION

100

$1,000

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$100

100

$1,100

$1.200

PIPING

100

$5.800

100

$6.500

$12.300

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$2.500

100

$:,500

$5.000

TOTAL

$25.300

100

$19,500

$44.800

EQUIPMENT

-SEPERATORS

100

$22.000

100

$9.900

$31.900

-SENSOR/ALARM

100

$2.500

100

$500

$3.000

-OIL PUMP

$1.000

100

$500

SI. 500 I

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$1.500

100

$1.500

$3.000

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$200

100

$2,100

$2.300

PIPING

100

$6.300

100

$7,000

$13.300

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$3.000

100

$3.000

S6.000

TOTAL

$36.500

100

$25,500

$62,000

EQUIPMENT

-SEPERATORS

100

$40.000

100

$16.000

$56.000

-SENSOR/ALARM

100

$2.500

100

$500

$3.000

-OIL PUMP

$1.000

100

$500

$1.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$3.900

100

$3,900

$7.800

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.200

-BACKFILL

$400

100

$5.800

$6.200

PIPING

100

$7.300

100

$8.000

$15.300

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$3.500

100

$3.500

$7.000

TOTAL

$58.600

100

$39.400

$91,000

rABLE A .5 COST ESTIMATE FOR OIL/WATER SEPER ATORS (CONT'D)

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(Us)

CON.

(S)

CON.

(%)

(J)

(S)

110

EQUIPMENT

-SEPERATORS

100

S65.000

100

522.700

587.700

-SENSOR/ALARM

100

$2.500

100

5500

53.000

-OILPUMP

S 1.000

100

5500

51.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$5.200

100

55,200

510.400

-EXCAVATION

100

51.800

-BACKFILL

100

J1.000

100

58.000

59.000

PIPING

100

510.400

100

511,000

521.400

ELECT./AUTO.

100

54.000

100

54.000

58.000

TOTAL

100

589.100

100

553.700

$142.800

10-

Figure

A.5 OIL/WA

TERSE

PARAI

"OR

î»
^

«S
O
O

- — i a

é-^. — ■

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A 6 COST ESTIMATE FOR CHEMICAL OXIDATION/REDUCTION i. FIN AL CLAR [FIER

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

($)

CON.

($)

(m3/hr)

(*)

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-LAMELLA CLARIFIER

S22.500

100

$4.500

$27.000

-METERING PUMPS

112,000

100

$1.200

$13.200

-MIXING SYSTEM

S26.000

100

$5.200

$31.200

-SLUDGETH.TANK

100

SS.000

100

$10.000

$15.000

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

S10.000

100

$1.000

$11.000

-FILTER PRESS

S25.000

100

$2.500

$27.500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$10.700

100

$12.700

$23.400

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1.000

PIPING

100

115.000

100

$15.000

$30.000

ELECT/AUTO.

100

$15 000

100

$7.500

$22.500

TOTAL

$141.200

100

$61.600

$202,800

EQUIPMENT

-LAMELLACLARIFIER

$34.200

100

$6.900

$41.100

-METERING PUMPS

$12.000

100

$1.200

$13.200

-MIXING SYSTEM

$50.000

100

$10.000

$60.000

-SLUDGETH.TANK

100

$7.600

100

$15.200

$22.800

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

$10.000

100

$1.000

$11.000

-FILTER PRESS

$37,900

100

$3.800

$41.700

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$15.500

100

$17,600

$33.100

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1.000

ririNO

100

$22.500

100

$22.500

$45.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$17.500

100

$8.800

$26.300

TOTAL

$207.200

100

$89.000

$296.200

EQUIPMENT

-LAMELLA CLARIFIER

$45.300

100

$9.100

$54.400

-METERING PUMPS

$12.000

100

$1.200

$13.200

-MIXINGSYSTEM

$119.000

100

$23.800

$142.800

-SLUDGETH.TANK

100

$13.200

100

$26.400

$39 600

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

$10.000

100

$1.000

$11.000

-FILTER PRESS

$65.600

100

$6.600

$72.200

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$26.100

100

$28.100

$54.200

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1.200

PIPING

100

$39.000

100

$39.000

$78.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$20.000

100

$10.000

$30.000

TOTAL

$350.200

100

$147.400

$497.600

Figure A.6 CHEMICAL OXIDATION/REDUCTION
AND FINAL CLARIFIER

10-

1 !

i i

| i

1 ':

i .

if*

O
H*

OS
O

W
O

i
i

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A.I COST ESTIMATE FOR PH CONTROL

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

(J)

CON.

(S)

(J)

(m3/hO

(*)

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-MIXING SYSTEM

S8.000

100

$1.600

$9.600

-METERING PUMPS

$ 3,000

100

$600

$3.600

-PROBE/ANALYZERS

S 1.500

100

$300

$1.800

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

S 3,600

100

$5.100

$8.700

-EXCAVATION

100

$1,000

-BACKFILL

100

$1,000

$1.000

PIPING

100

J2.500

100

$2,500

$5.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

S3.500

100

$2.000

$5.500

TOTAL

$22.100

100

$14.100

$36.200

EQUIPMENT

-MIXING SYSTEM

{26.000

100

$5.200

$31.200

-METERING PUMPS

S3.000

100

$600

$3.600

-PROBE/ANALYZERS

$1,500

100

$300

$1.800

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$5.900

100

$7.900

$13.800

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1,000

$1.000

PIPINO

100

$5.200

100

$5.200

$10.400

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$6.000

100

$4.000

$10.000

TOTAL

$47.600

100

$25.200

$72.800

100

EQUIPMENT

-MIXING SYSTEM

$40.200

100

$8.100

$48.300

-METERING PUMPS

$3.000

100

$600

$3.600

-PROBE/ANALYZERS

$1.500

100

$300

$1.800

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$10.000

100

$12.000

$22.000

-EXCAVATION

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1.000

PIPINO

100

$7.700

100

$7.700

$15.400

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$8.500

100

$6.000

$14.500

TOTAL

$70,900

$36.700

$107.600

Figure A.7 pH CONTROL

i
I

-à

i
i

«S
o
O

^, — "i

o^—

— ■ ■

■

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , (m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A. 8 COST ESTIMATE FOR SAND FILTRATION

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(m3/hr)

CON.

(%)

{%)

CON.

(%)

($)

250

EQUIPMENT

-FILTER MODULES

S 194 ,000

100

$19,400

$213.400

-BACKWASH PUMPS

$2.500

100

$500

$3.000

-SPLITTER BOX MISC.

100

S2.000

100

$1.000

$3.000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$20,700

100

$20,700

$41.400

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.000

-BACKFILL

100

$1,800

$1.800

PIPING

100

S10.000

100

$10,000

$20.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$15.000

100

$7.500

$22.500

TOTAL

$244.200

100

$61.900

$306.100

500

EQUIPMENT

-FILTER MODULES

$372.000

100

$27,900

$399.900

-BACKWASH PUMPS

$5.000

100

$1.000

$6.000

-SPLITTER BOX MISC.

100

$2,500

100

$1,000

$3,500

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$31.200

100

$31,200

$62.400

-EXCAVATION

100

$1,200

$1.200

-BACKFILL

100

$2,400

$2.400

PIPING

100

$12.500

100

$12.500

$25.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$17,500

100

$10,000

$27.500

TOTAL

$440.700

100

$87.200

$527,900

1000

EQUIPMENT

-FILTER MODULES

$714.000

100

$35.700

$749.700

-BACKWASH PUMPS

$7.500

100

$1,000

$8.500

-SPLITTER BOX MISC.

100

$3.000

100

$1.000

$4.000

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

$43.800

100

$43.900

$87.700

-EXCAVATION

100

$1.900

-BACKFILL

100

$3.700

PIPING

100

$15.000

100

$ IS, 000

$30.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$20.000

100

$12.500

$32.500

TOTAL

$803.300

100

$114.700

$911,000

Figure A.8 SAND FILTRATION

. . : ! ; _^

/ | | |

^€!— i i i 1 1 1 1 1 '

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A 9 COST ESTIMATE FOR DRY COLLECTORS I BAG HOUSE)

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL
COST

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

(J)

CON.

($)

(m3/hr)

(%)

280

EQUIPMENT

-TUBEJET

S20.400

100

$5.000

$25.400

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$4,500

100

$1,000

$5,500

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

S3.000

100

$6,000

$9,000

PIPING

100

J1.500

100

$1,500

$3.000

ELECT. /AUTO.

100

$1.500

100

$1,500

$3,000

TOTAL

«2

$30.900

100

$15.000

$45,900

560

EQUIPMENT

-TUBEJET

$38.700

100

$6.500

$45.200

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$7,800

100

$2.500

$10.300

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

$4,500

100

$7.500

$12.000

PIPING

100

$2.000

100

$2.000

$4,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$2,000

100

$2.000

$4.000

TOTAL

$55.000

100

$20.500

$75,500

840

EQUIPMENT

-TUBEJET

$53.100

100

$8.000

$61.100

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$9.600

100

$4,000

$13.600

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

$6.000

100

$9.000

$15.000

PIPING

100

$2.500

100

S2.S00

$5.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$2.500

100

$2.500

$5.000

TOTAL

$73,700

100

$26.000

$99.700

Figure A.9 DRY COLLECTOR (BAG HOUSE)

t?
o
o

^S^ 7

^—

<j ^^

1
|

1 T

i 1

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A.10 COST ESTIMATE FOR WET COLLECTORS

FLOW

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT

COST

ONT

COST

CON.

($)

CON.

(S)

(m3/hrj

(%)

280

EQUIPMENT

-INPINJET

$12,000

100

S2.500

$14.500

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$3,900

100

$1,000

$4,900

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

$3,000

100

$6,000

$9,000

PIPING

100

$1.500

100

$1,500

S3.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$1.500

100

$1.5 00

$3,000

TOTAL

$21,900

100

$12,500

$34,400

560

EQUIPMENT

-INPINJET

$21.800

100

$4,000

$25,800

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$6.600

100

$2.500

S9.100

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

$4,500

100

$7,500

$12,000

PIPING

100

$2.000

100

$2.000

$4,000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$2,000

100

$2,000

$4.000

TOTAL

$36,900

100

$18,000

$54,900

840

EQUIPMENT

-INPINJET

$29,200

100

S5.5O0

$34.700

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

$8,200

100

$4,000

$12.200

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

$6,000

100

$9,000

$15.000

PIPING

100

$2,500

100

$2,500

$5.000

ELECT./AUTO.

100

$2.500

100

$2.500

$5.000

TOTAL

$48.400

100

$23.500

$71,900

10— i

Fi!

gure A. 10 V\.

ET COL

LECTC

\s^

8 -

«5

!
I i

I '

r - ■

Flow Rate: log (Q/q) , [m3/hr]/[m3/hr]

TABLE A 11 COST ESTIMATE FOR SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING

CAPACITY

ITEM

MATERIAL

LABOUR

TOTAL

ONT.

COST

ONT.

COST

(Tonnend)

CON.

(J)

CON.

(%)

($)

EQUIPMENT

-COMPOSTER

S650.000

100

$65.000

$715.000

-FRONT END LOADER

$75.000

$75,000

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$141.000

100

$300,000

$441.000

-CONCRETE

100

$153.100

100

$153.100

$306.200

-EXCAVATION

100

$2.700

-BACKFILL

100

$2.000

100

$13,100

$15,100

PIPING

100

$3.000

100

$3.000

$6.000

ELECT. /AUTO.

100

$5.000

100

$5.000

$10.000

TOTAL

$1.029.100

100

$541.900

$1,571.000

150

EQUIPMENT

-COMPOSTER

$1,300.000

$85.000

$1.385.000

-FRONTEND LOADER

$200.000

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$250.000

$460,000

$710.000

-CONCRETE

100

$304.200

S3O4.20O

$608.400

-EXCAVATION

$18.500

-BACKFILL

100

$3.500

$25,700

$29.200

PIPING

100

$4.500

$9.000

ELECT. /AUTO.

100

$6.500

$13.000

TOTAL

$2.068.700

$904.400

S2.973.100

375

EQUIPMENT

-COMPOSTER

$2.800.000

100

$105.000

$2.905.000

-FRONTEND LOADER

$250.000

100

$250.000

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

$310.000

100

$1.000,000

$1.310,000

-CONCRETE

100

$733.200

100

$733.300

$1.466.500

-EXCAVATION

100

$38.500

-BACKFILL

100

$5.000

100

$49.000

$54.000

PIPING

100

$6.000

100

$6.000

$12.000

ELECT. /AUTO.

100

$8.000

100

$8.000

$16.000

TOTAL

$4.112.200

100

$1.939.800

S6.0S2.000

Figure A.11 SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING

10-

ySï

Capacity: log (Q/q) , [t/d]/[t/d]

APPENDIX "B"

ONTARIO CONTENT BASED ON

THE PROBABILITY THAT EQUIPMENT

SOLD IN ONTARIO IS MANUFACTURED

IN THE PROVINCE

TABLE B 1 PRIMARY CLARIF1ERS ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (OMS)*

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-SLUDGE COLLECTOR

100

-PUMP

100

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

100

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE, AS DEFINED IN THE ADDEN DUM NO.l DESCRIPTION.

TABLE B.2 AERATION BASIN: ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (OMS)'

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

<%] !

EQUIPMENT

-AIR DIFFUSER EQUIP.

100

-BLOWER

100

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

100

OMS REFERSTO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM NO 1 DESCRIPTION

rABLE B 3 ANAEROBIC SLUDGE DIGESTION ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE lOMSl"

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*
(ft)

EQUIPMENT

-HEAT EXCHANGER

-FIXEDCOVER

-MIXINGSYSTEM

-GASSYSTEM

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

ELECT./AUTO.

100
100
100
100
100

100

100
80

OMSREFERSTO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE, AS DEFINED INTHE ADDEN DUM NO.l DESCRIPTION

TABLE B.4 SLUDGE DEWATERING ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (OMSP

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-1 m3 TANKS

100

-DOSAGEPUMPS

100

-MIXERS

100

-TRANSFER PUMPS

100

-BELT FILTER PRESS

-SLUDGE PUMPS

100

-STORAGETANKS

100

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

-CONCRETE

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

QMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM NO 1 DESCR IPTION

TABLE B S OIL WATER SEPERATORS ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (OMS)

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS'

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-SEPERATORS

100

-SENSOR/ALARM

-OIL PUMP

100

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

100

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

100

OMSREFERSTO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM N 0.1 DESCRIPTION

TABLE B 6 CHEMICAL OXIDATION R EDUCTION & FINAL CLARIFIER ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (OMSi

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-LAMELLA CLARIFIER

-METERING PUMPS

-MIXING SYSTEM

100

-SLUDGETH.TANK

100

-SLUDGE WASTE PUMP

100

-FILTER PRESS

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

.PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO M ANUFACTUR E SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM NOl DESCRIPTION

TABLE B .7 pH CONTROL: ONTARIO M ANUFACTUR E SHARE (OMS)'

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS'

f%)

EQUIPMENT

-MIXING SYSTEM

100

-METERING PUMPS

-PROBE/ANALYZERS

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

100

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM NO. 1 DESCRIPTION.

TABLE B 8 SAND FILTRATION ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (QMS)'

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-FILTER MODULES

100

-BACKWASH PUMPS

100

-SPLITTER BOX MISC.

100

CONSTRUCTION

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

OM S REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THEADDENDUM NOl DESCRIPTION

TABLE B 9 DRY COLLECTORS (BAG HOUSE): ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE (QMS)'

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS*

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-TUBEJET

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

100

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE, AS DEFINED IN THE AD DEN DUM NO.l DESCRIPTION

TABLE B 10 WET COLLECTORS. ONTARIO MAN U FACTURE SHARE (QMS)*

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS'

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-INPINJET

100

-AUXILLARY EQUIP.

100

CONSTRUCTION

-STRUCTURAL

100

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE. AS DEFINED IN THE ADDENDUM NOl DESCRIPTION

TABLE B 11 SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING ONTAR 10 M ANL FACTUR E SHARE (OMS)'

ITEM

MATERIAL

OMS'

(%)

EQUIPMENT

-COMPOSTER

100

-FRONT END LOADER

CONSTRUCTION

-BUILDING

100

-CONCRETE

100

-EXCAVATION

-BACKFILL

100

PIPING

100

ELECT./AUTO.

100

OMS REFERS TO ONTARIO MANUFACTURE SHARE, AS DEFINED IN THE ADDEN DUM DESCRIPTION.

PART A: FOR THE DIRECTORY

Products and/or Services Offered (Check all applicable items)

1 . What do you consider to be your principal line business, e.g. , production of environmental products,
smelting metal ores, turning wood pulp into paper, etc. ?

Do you consider environmental products/services

to be a significant line of business? Yes D No D

If your answer is "no", do you produce any

environmental products/services at all? Yea D No Q

If your answer is "no", do you plan to commence

the production of environmental products/services

within the next 12 months? Yes D No d

If you answered "no" to all three questions above, please RETURN THE WHOLE QUESTIONNATRL
BLANK in the large, postage-paid envelope, so that we will not follow up with you. If some of your
products/services are "environmental" as defined above, please continue with the rest of the survey,
answering questions as appropriate to you.

2 . Please identify the specific environmental products and/or services which you currently have available
for sale, by checking the appropriate items in the list enclosed. (Please check all items relevant to
you.)

3. Principal Markets for Ontario-Produced Environmental Products/Services in which you are now
active:

Ontario

Quebec a

Atlantic Canada □

Western Canada a

U.S.: Northeast

□

U.S.: Midwest a

U.S.: West D

U.S.: South D

Caribbean

Latin America a

Western Europe a

Eastern Europe 0

Middle East

Africa □

Japan n

Other Asia 0

Other Pacific RimD

4. Principal Purchaser(s) of Your Ontario-Produced Environmental Products/Services

Municipalities D Manufacturing industries:

Resource-based industries: Petroleum refining a

Mining D Iron and steel O

Oil and gas a Pulp and paper D

Agriculture D Chemicals Q

Other (Please specify) Other (Please specify):

Utilities D D Commercial/industrial building owners/managers D
Residential building owners/managers D Provincial governments D

Federal government D Hospitals D Schools, universities D

Other (Please specify)

Please describe briefly the technology which your major product/service uses or is based upon, e.g.
"separation using reverse osmosis":

ENVIRONMENTAL CLASSIFICATION

GOODS

SERVICES

Natural Resnurrp Conservation

agriculture

fisheries

forestry

water/coastal areas

parxs/wildlite

oceaography'hydrology

meteorology 'Climatology

mapping/geog. info systems

otner

Natural Resource Conservation ana Proteclio-

agreurture/soil/water

tishenes

forestry

water/coastal areas

parka/wild life

meteorology/climatology

oceanography /hydrology

mappmg/geog. info systems

other

Air Potimion Control

absorption/adsorption

air handling

catalytic converters

chemical recovery

dust collectors

electrostatic precipitators

tabre filters/media

tiller accessories

incinerators

scrubbers - dry

scrubbers - wet

air pollution control systems

Water Pollution Control

aeration systems

betogeal treatment

centrifuges

chemical feeding/mixing

cnemeal recovery

filters

gravity sedimentation systems

on exchange

on/water separaton

potable water treatment

screens/strainers

sewage treatment

water handling

water purification

water pollution control systems

Waste Management

incineration

recycling

waste collection - liquid

waste collection - solid

waste disposal

waste handling

waste separation
waste pollution control systems

Chemicals for Pollution Control

absorbents/adsorbents

agglomérat 10 n/pelletizing

bacteria/enzymes

cleaning

corrosion/ scale control

dust control

water treatment

Moasunna Monitoring. Instrumentation
and Controls

measuring and monitonng instruments

sampling equipment

control equipment

data acquisition equipment

electrical drive and control equipment

Scientific. Research and l aboratorv
analytical instruments

bacteriological supplies

calibration equipment

laboratory chemicals

laboratory data acquisition systems

laboratory equipment - other

Consulting Fnoineenno Services

procès» evaluation

protect management

site reclamation/remediation

environmental standards

computer systems

financial/market analyses

socio-economic studies

training

Environmental consulting services

envBonmental audits

environmental monitoring

envronmental permitting

impact assessments

risk management

spills clean-up

other

Waste Management Consulting Services

municipal solid waste

sewage

hazardous/toxic waste

radioactive waste

energy from waste

recycling

other

Pollution A««a«<mant and Control

atmospheric modelling

air quality assessment

water quality assessment

waste surveys/characterization

air pollution control

water pollulon control

waste management pollution control

Construction

pollution control facilities

Waste Handling Operation

waste collection

waste handling/sorting/transport

composting

waste treatment plants

landfills

incinerators

sewage treatment plants

septic tank services

potable water
recycling

I ahoratorv/Fialri Services

analytical services

sampling, monitonng/measurement

environmental research

PART B: STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL WHEN COMPLETED

Note: This portion of the survey is to be completed only if you produce environmental products and
services in Ontario. If your operation is engaged only in wholesale and retail sales of products
produced elsewhere, please return the questionnaire blank along with your response to Part A.

1. How long has your firm been in the business of producing environmental products/services in
Ontario?

We have been in the business for

years, since 19 .

2. Who are the principal purchasers) of your Ontario-produced environmental products/services, and
who would you plan to approach as markets in the future?

Now Active:

Municipalities

Resource-based industries

Manufacturing industries

Utilities

Residential/commercial

property owners/managers

Provincial/Federal governments

Institutions (e.g., hospitals)

Other (Please specify)

Interested in Developing:

D
□
D

a
a

D
D

In which geographic markets are you currently active or interested in developing for your Ontario-
produced environmental products/services?

Now

Interested in

Now

Interested in

. Active:

Developing:

Active:

Developing:

Ontario a

Quebec n

Atlantic Canada D

Western Canada D

□

U.S.: Northeast d

U.S.: Midwest D

U.S.: West n

U.S.: South □

Caribbean q

Latin America □

Western Europe D

Eastern Europe D

Middle East □

Africa □

Japan D

Other Asia Q

Other Pacific Rim □

In 1990, what approximate proportion of your firm's Ontario-produced products/services was sold
in each of the following geographic locations?:

Ontario

Rest of Canada

Outside of Canada

1 -

5. Which of the following types of technologies is/are used in your Ontario-produced products/services?
(Please check all those which are relevant to you.)

o "Standard" technologies or equipment in widespread use in both

environmental and non-environmental sectors,

e.g., pipes and valves, commodity chemicals □

o Advanced technologies geared specifically to environmental

prevention and treatment/clean-up/remediation

(e.g., biosensors, metal chelation, multi-media treatment) Q

o Technologies focused on the prevention of pollution q

o Technologies focused on the treatment; clean-up/ remediation of pollution q
o Other (Please specify)

6. Approximately what proportion of your environmental products/services is actually produced in
Ontario, taking into account imported materials, components, etc.?

0% D

l%-24% a

25% -50% a

51% -74% D

75% - 100% D

Of the Ontario-based portion, approximately what proportion is labour, and what materials?

Labour % Materials %

Of the Ontario-based portion, please estimate the dollar value for labour and materials involved
in sales within Ontario.

Labour $ in 1990 Materials: $ in 1990

7. At what average annual rate have the input costs (materials, components, labour) of your Ontario-
produced environmental products/services been growing or decreasing within the past five years, or
less, as applicable?

Input costs have been growing at % on average, each year over the last 5 years (1986-1990),

or if, less than 5 years in business, then, on average % over the last years, or

Input costs have been decreasing at % , on average, over the last yean

Has the gap between input costs and final sales prices been widening or narrowing over the time
period noted?

Widening □ Narrowing D About same D

8. Does your firm sell/lease used machinery and equipment for environmental protection purposes?
Yes O No D

If "yes", what is the approximate proportion of your total Ontario-based environmental sales
involved?

Under 1% D 196-24% D 25%-50% □ 51%-74% D 75%-100% D

Where do most of these sales take place?:

Ontario % Rest of Canada % Outside of Canada %

9. Please indicate below your total and Ontario-produced environmental sales revenues in thousands
of dollars, according to the primary problem area to which the products/services are addressed.
(Please indicate zero where appropriate.)

Total Sales
($ Thousands)

Ontario-produced Sales
(S Thousands)

Products Services

Air Pollution Prevention/
Control/Monitoring

Water Pollution Prevention/
Control/Monitoring

Solid Waste Reduction/
Disposal/Treatment/
Site Remediation

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Study of the Ontario environmental protection industry : report"

See other formats