الفهرس 
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS OF THE STUDYOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 6 |  |  |
| | | from | 6 | | |
Abstract
Industrialization is essential to meet up upcoming demands of the evolution. All the industrial ity releases some amount of by-products as pollution into the environment, steel industry is one ie major heavy industries and considered as resource intensive and pollution source to air, r resources, soil. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the physiochemical environmental ids of this huge industry in Egypt by studying two different techniques for steelmaking process.
There is many tools was taken during current study to evaluate the environmental impacts such lucting some environmental measurements for some air pollutants and using the Rapid Impact jssment Matrix (RIAM) that gave a transparent and permanent record of the analysis process in a dand accurate manner, in addition environmental risk assessment was carried by using the matrix id on the aspect impact approach that is recommended by international environmental protection lorities that depend on the risk based thinking that support the industrial sectors to evaluated their ironmental risk or threat beside the opportunities toward right decisions. In addition, in this study, dels like AREMOD that was used for determination of distribution of pollutant emissions in the jient air for both studded steelmaking techniques.
As mentioned above, the study was highlighted and compared between two different lniques in steel making which are, the Consteel technique and the conventional EAF technique in using 100% scrap to produce steel. Due to the differences between Consteel and conventional EAF iniques in design, so change in pollution control or ability of heat recovery, therefore, the obtained ilts showed the following:
The results showed that, the levels of SO2, NO2 and CO at scrap yard, raw material storage is, casting areas and final product finishing areas for both conventional EAF and Consteel miques were almost similar to each other because of the similarity of nature of operation of these tivities at both techniques.
The results showed that, lower values of SO2, NO2 &CO in Consteel at least half than those in iventional EAF at meltshop area, due to contentious charging of furnace through side opening and ugh conveyor only in Consteel technique without opening the roof as in conventional EAF :hnique, leading to uncontrolled emissions of dust and gas into the atmosphere of the meltshop.
Also, The results showed lowering values of SO2, NO2 &CO in rolling area of Consteel chnique than those in conventional EAF technique may due to absence of reheating furnaces in case [continues process of production starting from melting till rolling and obtaining the final product as (1 Consteel technique.
I The results showed that, PM 10 and TSP average concentrations at raw material stores, casting,
Idling and finishing areas almost the same for both techniques. But it were decreased by about 60% t meltshop and by about 50 % at scrap yard of Consteel technique than that of conventional EAF jehnique due to the design of Consteel technique that control dust emission.
1 The results showed that, the average noise levels at all production sites for both techniques were close to each other except at Consteel meltshop area that was lower than that of conventional EAF technique due to arc stability and use of a foamy slag practice which covers the arcs in Consteel technique.