New Emission Regulations for the Textile Dyeing Industry Issued
Release time:
2021-11-09
Recently, with the promulgation and implementation of China’s “Emission Standards for Water Pollutants from the Textile Dyeing and Finishing Industry,” domestic stakeholders in the dyeing and finishing sector and related enterprises have expressed mixed views. For a time, the dyeing and finishing industry has become a hot topic within the environmental protection sector. So what exactly is driving such keen interest among the heads of these environmental protection companies? Our editor will now provide a detailed overview.
Recently, with the promulgation and implementation of China’s “Emission Standards for Water Pollutants from the Textile Dyeing and Finishing Industry,” domestic stakeholders in the dyeing and finishing sector and related enterprises have expressed mixed views. For a time, the dyeing and finishing industry has become a hot topic within the environmental protection sector. So what exactly is driving such keen interest among the leaders of these environmental protection firms? Our editor will now provide a detailed overview.
First, the period between the promulgation and the implementation of the new emission standards left enterprises with virtually no adequate time to prepare. Taking Shaoxing’s dyeing and finishing enterprises as an example, the introduction of the new standards raised the existing COD discharge limit for these firms from the previous standard of 200 mg/L—effective since 2013—to a uniform limit of 100 mg/L for direct discharges into the environment. Moreover, starting January 1, 2015, this limit was further tightened to 80 mg/L. As a result, following the release and implementation of the “Emission Standard of Water Pollutants for the Textile Dyeing and Finishing Industry” (GB 4287–2012), Shaoxing’s already highly competitive dyeing and finishing sector has faced even greater environmental compliance pressure.
As a pillar industry in Shaoxing, the textile printing and dyeing sector has for many years generated substantial tax revenues for the local economy. It is not merely a traditional industry; rather, it has developed into a well-established industrial system that spans the entire value chain, from raw materials to sales. Consequently, while the sector has been actively expanding, it has also inevitably given rise to environmental pollution in the region.
Today, water treatment technology is advancing at a breathtaking pace. With the accelerating implementation of stronger domestic policies, achieving technological breakthroughs should no longer be a challenge. However, virtually all technical debates ultimately boil down to one fundamental issue: cost. Decades of distorted development in China—characterized by low standards, low prices, and poor quality—have created a vicious cycle of low-cost emissions for enterprises. While local governments’ “win-win” policy approach to capacity expansion is well-intentioned, when the necessary technological capabilities are lacking, it is undeniable that, in some cases and under certain circumstances, this so-called “win-win” strategy simply does not work.
Of course, thanks to measures such as “graded quality enhancement and centralized pre-treatment” implemented by the local government, Shaoxing’s printing and dyeing industry has achieved positive results, leading the Ministry of Environmental Protection to designate Shaoxing as the nation’s sole pilot city for the “implementation of new standards by textile printing and dyeing enterprises within industrial clusters.” However, industrial clusters like Shaoxing are far from rare in China; as an official from the Shaoxing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau put it, “If we were to rigidly enforce the standards, there would be only one option: shut down all printing and dyeing enterprises.”
“Given the current state of water pollution, upgrading standards is a measure of last resort; however, during the process of such upgrades, several critical gaps remain—namely, sludge disposal, emergency wastewater treatment, and environmental oversight,” said Xue Tao, Deputy Director of the Research Center for Environmental Protection Industries at the School of Environment of Tsinghua University and a director of China General Consulting & Investment Co., Ltd., in an interview.
The tightening of pollutant discharge standards will, while advancing environmental governance, undoubtedly stimulate the growth of the environmental protection industry. Given our dwindling environmental carrying capacity and the near-collapse of our aquatic ecosystems, the introduction of new discharge standards for dyeing and finishing enterprises is both reasonable and inevitable. Notably, as industrial technologies become increasingly sophisticated, the demand for specialized operations will continue to rise, thereby creating lucrative business opportunities for domestic, specialized third-party service providers. Under these circumstances, for enterprises to thrive, they must progressively and fully integrate environmental costs into their product pricing. The example of Shaoxing, in this regard, clearly points the way forward for industries in other regions.
On this basis, at times, the one-size-fits-all approach of imposing uniform standards and immediately rolling out policies can seem rather abrupt. As a uniquely Chinese system of centralized governance with decentralized local administration, the central government has long relied on clear, well-defined standards to ensure effective policy implementation—this remains the most reliable and readily adopted method. However, the same challenge persists: the tension between policy mandates and on-the-ground realities. How best to reconcile this tension and transform it into a mutually beneficial relationship that serves policy objectives is a question that merits careful consideration by every policymaker.
