AP4225
SUPPLEMENT NO. 5
FOR
COMPILATION
OF AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION FACTORS
SECOND EDITION
VS. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
December 1975
-------
NOTICE TO USERS OF SUPPLEMENT 5 PREPRINT
Several users of AP42 motor vehicle emission factors received an early draft version (dated April 16, 1975) of this
Supplement 5 for Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. The following listing indicates the changes in
emission factors that have occurred since April. The user, therefore, can update, with a minimum of effort, any
calculations based on the preprint information. Individuals who did not receive the preprint should simply disregard
the changes listed here.
Preprint
Page
78
D-11
D-12
D-14
D-16
D-18
D-20
D-22
D-24
D-25
D-26
D-28
D-50
D-83
D-102
Value
0.3 g/km
0.3 g/km
24.2 g/km
3.1 g/mi
1.9 g/km
3.3 g/mi
2.0F g/km
3.5 g/mi
2. 17 g/km
2.05 g/mi
1.27 g/km
57.8 g/km
3.7 g/mi
2.3 g/km
2.0 g/mi
1 .24 g/km
3.9 g/mi
2.42 g/km
2.06 g/mi
1.28 g/km
4.1 g/mi
2.5 g/km
2. 18 g/mi
1.35 g/km
4.3 g/mi
2.67 g/km
2. 18 g/mi
1.35 g/km
18.0 g/mi
11.2 g/km
10.4 g/mi
6.5 g/km
9.9 g/mi
6.1 g/km
5.0 g/mi
3.1 g/km
2.6 g/mi
1.6 g/km
2.5 g/mi
1.6 g/km
2.48 g/mi
1.54 g/km
2.6 g/mi
1.6 g/km
45.0 g/mi
25.2 g/km
Post 1972
13.9 g/km
11.7 g/km
5.9 g/km
Entry
City bus emissions. Aldehydes and
and Organic acids
CO-- Low altitude, 1974
NOX-1974
NOX-1974
NOX--1974
NOX-1975
CO- 1966
NOX-1974
NOX»1977
NOX-1974
NOX-1977
NOX--1974
NOX-1977
NOX-1974
NOX-1977
N0x--Low altitude, 1976
CO--1975
CO--1976
NOX-1974
NOX--1975
NOX-1976
NOX--1977
NOX-1977
CO--1976
CO and HC
CO-- 1979
CO-- 1980
Final edition
Page
3.1.5-2
D.1-3
D.1-3
D.1-4
D.1-5
D.1-6
D.1-7
D.1-8
D.1-9
D.1-10
0.1-10
D.1-11
D.2-6
D.5-2
D.7-1
Table
3.1.5-1
D.1-3
D.1-4
D.1-6
D.1-8
D.1-10
D.1-12
D.1-14
D.1-16
D.1-17
D.1-18
D.1-20
D.2-9
D.5-1
D.7-1
Value
0.2 g/km
0.2 g/km
23.0 g/km
2.0 g/mi
1.2 g/km
2.06 g/mi
1 .28 g/km
2.1 2 g/mi
1.32 g/km
2.06 g/mi
1.28 g/km
52.8 g/km
2.1 8 g/mi
1.35 g/km
1.5 g/mi
0.93 g/km
2.24 g/mi
1 .39 g/km
1.56 g/mi
0.97 g/km
2.3 g/mi
1 .43 g/km
1.62 g/mi
1.01 g/km
2.36 g/mi
1.47 g/km
1.68 g/mi
1 .04 g/km
17.1 g/mi
10.6 g/km
10.8 g/mi
6.7 g/km
10.3 g/mi
6.4 g/km
2.60 g/mi
1.61 g/km
2.60 g/mi
1.61 g/km
2.54 g/mi
1.58 g/km
1.98 g/mi
1.23 g/km
2. 10 g/mi
1 .30 g/km
40.5 g/mi
25.1 g/km
All •
22.9 g/km
19.3 g/km
9.8 g/km
11
-------
PREFACE
This document reports data available on those atmospheric emissions for which sufficient informa-
tion exists to establish realistic emission factors. The information contained herein is based on
Public Health Service Publication 999-AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, by
R. L. Duprey, and on a revised and expanded version of Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Fac-
tors that was published by the Environmental Protection Agency in February 1972. The scope of this
second edition has been broadened to reflect expanding knowledge of emissions.
Chapters and sections of this document have been arranged in a format that permits easy and con-
venient replacement of material as information reflecting more accurate and refined emission factors
is published and distributed. To speed dissemination of emission information, chapters or sections
that contain new data will be issued—separate from the parent report—whenever they are revised.
To facilitate the addition of future materials, the punched, loose-leaf format was selected. This
approach permits the document to be placed in a three-ring binder or to be secured by rings, rivets, or
other fasteners; future supplements or revisions can then be easily inserted. The lower left- or right-
hand corner of each page of the document bears a notation that indicates the date the information was
issued.
NOTE: Those who obtained AP-42 by purchase or through special order and completed the request
for future supplements are hereby advised of a change in the distribution procedure. The availability
of these supplements will now be indicated in the publication Air Pollution Technical Publications of
the Environmental Protection Agency, which is available from the Air Pollution Technical Information
Center, Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711. This listing of publications, normally published in
January and July, contains instructions for obtaining the desired documents.
Comments and suggestions regarding this document should be directed to the attention of Director,
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR INSERTING SUPPLEMENT NO. 5
INTO COMPILATION OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION FACTORS
1. Replace page iii/iv with new page iii/iv.
2. Replace page v/vi with new page v/vi.
3. Replace pages xiii through xvi with new pages xiii through xviii.
4. Insert new pages 1.7-1 through 1.7-3 dated 12/75 after page 1.6-3.
5. Replace pages 3.1.1-1 through 3.1.5-2 with new pages 3.1.1-1 through 3.1.5-3 dated 12/75.
6. Replace page 5.6-1/5.6-2 with new pages 5.6-1 through 5.6-6 dated 12/75.
7. Replace page 6.9-3/6.9-4 with corrected page 6.9-3/6.9A
8. Replace page 8.20-1/8.20-2 with corrected page 8.20-1/8.20-2.
9. Insert pages 11.2-1 through 11.2.4-1 dated 12/75 after page 11.1-5.
10. Replace pages C-l through C-22 with new pages C-l through C-26 dated 12/75.
11. Insert pages D-l through D.7-2 dated 12/75 after page C-26.
Ill
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Because this document is a product of the efforts of many individuals, it is impossible to acknowledge each
person who has contributed. Special recognition is given to Environmental Protection Agency employees in the
Technical Development Section, National Air Data Branch, Monitoring and Data Analysis Division, for their efforts
in the production of this work. Bylines identify the contributions of individual authors who revised specific
sections and chapters.
Issuance
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (second edition)
Supplement No. 1
Section 4.3 Storage of Petroleum Products
Section 4.4 Marketing and Transportation of Petroleum Products
Supplement No. 2
Introduction
Section 3.1.1 Average Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles
Section 3.1.2 Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles
Supplement No.
Introduction
Section 1.4
Section 1.5
Section 1.6
Section 2.5
Section 7.6
Section 7.11
Section 10.1
Section 10.2
Section 10.3
Supplement No. •
Section 3.2.3
Section 3.2.5
Section 3.2.6
Section 3.2.7
Section 3.2.8
Section 3.3.1
Section 3.3.3
Chapter 11
Appendix B
Appendix C
Supplement No.
Section 1.7
Section 3.1.1
Section 3.1.2
Section 3.1.3
Section 3.1.4
Section 3.1.5
Section 5.6
Section 11.2
Appendix C
Appendix D
Release Date
4/73
7/73
9/73
7/74
Natural Gas Combustion
Liquified Petroleum Gas Consumption
Wood/Bark Waste Combustion in Boilers
Sewage Sludge Incineration
Lead Smelting
Secondary Lead Smelting
Chemical Wood Pulping
Pulpboard
Plywood Veneer and Layout Operations
Inboard-Powered Vessels
Small, General Utility Engines
Agricultural Equipment
Heavy-Duty Construction Equipment
Snowmobiles
Stationary Gas Turbines for Electric Utility Power Plants
Gasoline and Diesel Industrial Engines
Miscellaneous Sources
Emission Factors and New Source Performance Standards
NEDS Source Classification Codes and Emission Factor Listing
Lignite Combustion
Average Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles
Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles (Automobiles)
Light-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles
Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks and Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles
Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles
Explosives
Fugitive Dust Sources
NEDS Source Classification Codes and Emission Factor Listing
Projected Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles
1/75
10/75
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES , xiv
LIST OF FIGURES xvii
ABSTRACT xviii
INTRODUCTION 1
1. EXTERNAL COMBUSTION SOURCES 1.1-1
1.1 BITUMINOUS COAL COMBUSTION 1.1-1
1.1.1 General 1.1-1
1.1.2 Emissions and Controls 1.1-1
References for Section 1.1 1.1-4
1.2 ANTHRACITE COAL COMBUSTION . 1.2-1
1.2.1 General 1.2-1
1.2.2 Emissions and Controls 1.2-1
References for Section 1.2 1.2-3
1.3 FUEL OIL COMBUSTION 1.3-1
1.3.1 General 1.3-1
1.3.2 Emissions 1.3-1
References for Section 1.3 1.3-3
1.4 NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION 1.4-1
1.4.1 General 1.4-1
1.4.2 Emissions and Controls 1.4-1
References for Section 1.4 14-3
1.5 LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS CONSUMPTION l'.5-l
1.5.1 General 1.5-1
1.5.2 Emissions 1.5-1
References for Section 1.5 1.5.]
1.6 WOOD WASTE COMBUSTION IN BOILERS
1.6.1 General
1.6.2 Firing Practices
1.6.3 Emissions . . .
References for Section 1.6
1.7 LIGNITE COMBUSTION
1.7.1 General
.6-1
.6-1
.6-1
.6-1
.6-2
.7-1
.7-1
1.7.2 Emissions and Controls 1.7-]
References for Section 1.7 1.7-2
2. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 2.1-1
2.1 REFUSE INCINERATION 2.1-2
2.1.1 Process Description 2.1-2
2.1.2 Definitions of Incinerator Categories 2.1-2
2.1.3 Emissions and Controls 2.1-4
References for Section 2.1 2.1-5
2.2 AUTOMOBILE BODY INCINERATION 2.2-1
2.2.1 Process Description 2.2-1
2.2.2 Emissions and Controls 2.2-1
References for Section 2.2 2.2-2
2.3 CONICAL BURNERS 2.3-1
2.3.1 Process Description 2.3-1
2.3.2 Emissions and Controls 2.3-1
References for Section 2.3 2.3-3
-------
CONTENTS-(Continued)
2.4 OPEN BURNING 2.4-1
2.4.1 General 2.4-1
2.4.2 Emissions 2.4-1
References for Section 2.4 2.4-2
2.5 SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATION 2^5-1
2.5.1 Process Description 2.5-1
2.5.2 Emissions and Controls 2.5-1
References for Section 2.5 2.5-2
3. INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE SOURCES 3.1.1-1
DEFINITIONS USED IN CHAPTER 3 3.1.1-1
3.1 HIGHWAY VEHICLES 3.1.1-2
3.1.1 Average Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles 3.1.1-3
3.1.2 Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles (Automobiles) 3.1.2-1
3.1.3 Light-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles 3.1.3-1
3.1.4 Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks and Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles .... 3.1.4-1
3.1.5 Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles 3.1.5-1
3.1.6 Gaseous-Fueled Vehicles 3.1.6-1
3.1.7 Motorcycles 1.1.7-
3.2 OFF-HIGHWAY, MOBILE SOURCES 3.2.1-
3.2.1 Aircraft 3.2.1-
3.2.2 Locomotives 3.2.2-
3.2.3 Inboard-Powered Vessels 3.2.3-
3.2.4 Outboard-Powered Vessels 3.2.4-
3.2.5 Small, General Utility Engines 3.2.5-
3.2.6 Agricultural Equipment 3.2.6-
3.2.7 Heavy-Duty Construction Equipment 3.2.7-
3.2.8 Snowmobiles 3.2.8-
3.3 OFF-HIGHWAY STATIONARY SOURCES 3.3.1-
3.3.1 Stationary Gas Turbines for Electric Utility Power Plants 3.3.1-
3.3.2 Heavy-Duty, General Utility,Gaseous-Fueled Engines 3.3.2-1
3.3.3 Gasoline and Diesel Industrial Engines 3.3.3-1
4. EVAPORATION LOSS SOURCES 4.1-1
4.1 DRY CLEANING 4.1-1
4.1.1 General 4.1-1
4.1.2 Emissions and Controls 4.1-1
References for Section 4.1 4.1-2
4.2 SURFACE COATING 4.2-1
4.2.1 Process Description 4.2-1
4.2.2 Emissions and Controls 4.2-1
References for Section 4.2 4.2-2
4.3 PETROLEUM STORAGE 4.3-1
4.3.1 General 4.3-1
4.3.2 Emissions 4.3-1
References for Section 4.3 4.3-1
4.4 GASOLINE MARKETING 4.4-1
4.4.1 General 4.4-1
4.4.2 Emissions and Controls 4.4-1
References for Section 4.4 4.4-2
5. CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY 5.1-1
5.1 ADIPIC ACID 5.1-1
5.1.1 Process Description 5.1-1
5.1.2 Emissions 5.1-1
References for Section 5.1 5.1-2
VI
-------
CONTENTS-(Continued)
10.3 PLYWOOD VENEER AND LAYOUT OPERATIONS 10.3-1
10.3.1 Process Descriptions 10.3-1
10.3.2 Emissions 10.3-2
References for Section 10.3 10.3-2
11. MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES 11.1-1
11.1 FOREST WILDFIRES 11.1-1
11.1.1 General 11.1-1
11.1.2 Emissions and Controls 11.1-2
11.2 FUGITIVE DUST SOURCES 11.2-1
11.2.1 Unpaved Roads (Dirt and Gravel) 11.2-1
11.2.2 Agricultural Tilling 11.2.2-1
11.2.3 Aggregate Storage Piles 11.2.3-1
11.2.4 Heavy Construction Operations 11.2.4-1
APPENDIX A, MISCELLANEOUS DATA A-l
APPENDIX B. EMISSION FACTORS AND NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FOR STATIONARY SOURCES B-l
APPENDIX C. NEDS SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING C-l
APPENDIX D. PROJECTED EMISSION FACTORS FOR HIGHWAY VEHICLES D-l
xiu
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1.1-1 Range of Collection Efficiencies for Common Types of Fly-Ash Control Equipment 1.1-2
1.1-2 Emission Factors for Bituminous Coal Combustion without Control Equipment 1.1-3
1.2-1 Emissions from Anthracite Coal Combustion without Control Equipment 1.2-2
1.3-1 Emission Factors for Fuel Oil Combustion 1.3-2
1.4-1 Emission Factors for Natural-Gas Combustion 1.4-2
1.5-1 Emission Factors for LPG Combustion 1.5-2
1.6-1 Emission Factors for Wood and Bark Combustion in Boilers with No Reinjection 1.6-2
1.7-1 Emissions from Lignite Combustion without Control Equipment 1.7-2
2.1-1 Emission Factors for Refuse Incinerators without Controls 2.1-3
2.1-2 Collection Efficiencies for Various Types of Municipal Incineration Particulate Control Systems . . 2.1-4
2.2-1 Emission Factors for Auto Body Incineration 2.2-1
2.3-1 Emission Factors for Waste Incineration in Conical Burners without Controls 2.3-2
2.4-1 Emission Factors for Open Burning 2.4-1
2.5-1 Emission Factors for Sewage Sludge Incinerators 2.5-2
3.1.1-1 Average Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles, Calendar Year 1972 3.1.1-4
3.1.2-1 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emission Factors for Light-Duty
Vehicles—Excluding California—for Calendar Year 1971 3.1.2-2
3.1.2-2 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emission Factors for Light-Duty
Vehicles-State of California Only-for Calendar Year 1971 3.1.2-3
3.1.2-3 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emission Factors for Light-Duty
Vehicles-Excluding California-far Calendar Year 1972 3.1.2-3
3.1.2-4 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emission Factors for Light-Duty
Vehicles-State of California Only-for Calendar Year 1972 3.1.24
3.1.2-5 Sample Calculation of Fraction of Light-Duty Vehicle Annual Travel by Model Year 3.1.24
3.1.2-6 Coefficients for Speed Correction Factors for Light-Duty Vehicles 3.1.2-5
3.1.2-7 Low Average Speed Correction Factors for Light-Duty Vehicles 3.1.2-6
3.1.2-8 Light-Duty Vehicle Temperature Correction Factors and Hot/Cold Vehicle Operation Correction
Factors for FTP Emission Factors 3.1.2-6
3.1.2-9 Light-Duty Vehicle Modal Emission Model Correction Factors for Temperature and Cold/Hot
Start Weighting 3.1.2-10
3.1.2-10 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Emission Factors for Light-Duty Vehicles
in Warmed-up Idle Mode 3.1.2-11
3.1.2-11 Crankcase Hydrocarbon Emissions by Model Year for Light-Duty Vehicles 3.1.2-12
.2-12 Hydrocarbon Emission Factors by Model Year for Light-Duty Vehicles 3.1.2-13
.2-13 Particulate and Sulfur Oxides Emission Factors for Light-Duty Vehicles 3.1.2-14
.3-1 Emission Factors for Light-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles 3.1.3-1
.4-1 Exhaust Emission Factors for Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks for Calendar Year 1972 .... 3.1.4-2
.4-2 Coefficients for Speed Adjustment Curves for Light-Duty Trucks 3.1.4-2
.4-3 Low Average Speed Correction Factors for Light-Duty Trucks 3J.4-3
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.1.4-4 Sample Calculation of Fraction of Annual Light-Duty Truck Travel by Model Year 3.1.4-3
3.1.4-5 Light-Duty Truck Temperature Correction Factors and Hot/Cold Vehicle Operation Correction
Factors for FTP Emission Factors 3.1.4-4
3.1.4-6 Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors for Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered
Trucks 3.1.4-6
3.1.4-7 Particulate and Sulfur Oxides Emission Factors Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks 3.1.4-6
3.1.4-8 Exhaust Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks for Calendar Year 1972 ... 3.1.4-7
3.1.4-9 Sample Calculation of Fraction of Gasoline-Powered, Heavy-Duty Vehicle Annual Travel by Model
Year 3.1.4-8
3.1.4-10 Speed Correction Factors for Heavy-Duty Vehicles 3.1.4-9
3.1.4-11 Low Average Speed Correction Factors for Heavy-Duty Vehicles 3.1.4-10
3.1.4-12 Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered
Vehicles 3.1.4-10
3.1.4-13 Particulate and Sulfur Oxides Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty Gasoline-Powered Vehicles 3.1.4-11
3.1.5-1 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles (All Pre-1973 Model Years) for
Calendar Year 1972 3.1.5-2
3.1.5-2 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles under Different Operating Conditions . 3.1.5-3
xiv
-------
LIST OF TABLES-(Continued)
Table Pag£
3.1.6-1 Emission Factors by Model Year for Light-Duty Vehicles Using LPG, LPG/Dual Fuel, or
CNG/Dual Fuel 3.1.6-2
3.1.6-2 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty Vehicles Using LPG or CNG/Duel Fuel 3.1.6-2
3.1.7-1 Emission Factors for Motorcycles 3.1.7-2
3.2.1-1 Aircraft Classification 3.2.1-2
3.2.1-2 Typical Time in Mode for Landing-Takeoff Cycle 3.2.1-3
3.2.1-3 Emission Factors per Aircraft Landing-Takeoff Cycle 3.2.1-4
3.2.1-4 Modal Emission Factors 3.2.1-6
3.2.2-1 Average Locomotive Emission Factors Based on Nationwide Statistics 3.2.2-1
3.2.2-2 Emission Factors by Locomotive Engine Category 3.2.2-2
3.2.3-1 Average Emission Factors for Commercial Motorships by Waterway Classification 3.2.3-2
3.2.3-2 Emission Factors for Commercial Steamships—All Geographic Areas 3.2.3-3
3.2.3-3 Diesel Vessel Emission Factors by Operating Mode 3.2.3-4
3.2.3-4 Average Emission Factors for Diesel-Powered Electrical Generators in Vessels 3.2.3-5
3.2.3-5 Average Emission Factors for Inboard Pleasure Craft 3.2.3-6
3.2.4-1 Average Emission Factors for Outboard Motors 3.2.4-1
3.2.5-1 Emission Factors for Small, General Utility Engines 3.2.5-2
3.2.6-1 Service Characteristics of Farm Equipment (Other than Tractors) 3.2.6-1
3.2.6-2 Emission Factors for Wheeled Farm Tractors and Non-Tractor Agricultural Equipment 3.2.6-2
3.2.7-1 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Construction Equipment 3.2.7-2
3.2.7-2 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Construction Equipment 3.2.7-4
3.2.8-1 Emission Factors for Snowmobiles 3.2.8-2
3.3.1-1 Typical Operating Cycle for Electric Utility Turbines 3.3.1-2
3.3.1-2 Composite Emission Factors for 1971 Population of Electric Utility Turbines 3.3.1-2
3.3.2-1 Emission Factors for Heavy-Duty, General Utility, Stationary Engines Using Gaseous Fuels . . . 3.3.2-1
3.3.3-1 Emission Factors for Gasoline-and Diesel-Powered Industrial Equipment 3.3.3-1
4.1-1 Hydrocarbon Emission Factors for Dry-Cleaning Operations 4.1-2
4.2-1 Gaseous Hydrocarbon Emission Factors for Surface-Coating Applications 4.2-1
4.3-1 Hydrocarbon Emission Factors for Evaporation Losses from the Storage of Petroleum Products 4.3-2
4.4-1 Emission Factors for Evaporation Losses from Gasoline Marketing 4.4-2
5.1-1 Emission Factors for an Adipic Acid Plant without Control Equipment 5.1-1
5.2-1 Emission Factors for Ammonia Manufacturing without Control Equipment 5.2-2
5.3-1 Emission Factors for Carbon Black Manufacturing 5.3-2
5.4-1 Emission Factors for Charcoal Manufacturing 5.4-1
5.5-1 Emission Factors for Chlor-Alkali Plants 5.5-2
5.6-1 Emission Factors for Explosives Manufacturing 5 5.4
5.7-1 Emission Factors for Hydrochloric Acid Manufacturing 5 j.\
5.8-1 Emission Factors for Hydrofluoric Acid Manufacturing 5.8-1
5.9-1 Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Nitric Acid Plants 5.9-3
5.10-1 Emission Factors for Paint and Varnish Manufacturing without Control Equipment 5.10-2
5.11-1 Emission Factors for Phosphoric Acid Production 5.11-2
5.12-1 Emission Factors for Phthalic Anhydride Plants 5.12-1
5.13-1 Emission Factors for Plastics Manufacturing without Controls 5.13-1
5.14-1 Emission Factors for Printing Ink Manufacturing 5.14-2
5.15-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Spray-Drying Detergents 5.15-1
5.16-1 Emission Factors for Soda-Ash Plants without Control 5.16-1
5.17-1 Emission Factors for Sulfuric Acid Plants 5.17-5
5.17-2 Acid Mist Emission Factors for Sulfuric Acid Plants without Controls 5.17-7
5.17-3 Collection Efficiency and Emissions Comparison of Typical Electrostatic Precipitator and Fiber
Mist Eliminator 5.17-8
5.18-1 Emission Factors for Modified Claus Sulfur Plants 5.18-2
5.19-1 Emission Factors for Synthetic Fibers Manufacturing 5.19-1
5.20-1 Emission Factors for Synthetic Rubber Plants: Butadiene-Acrylonitrile and Butadiene-Styrene . 5.20-1
5.21-1 Nitrogen Oxides Emission Factors for Terephthalic Acid Plants 5.21-1
6.1-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Alfalfa Dehydration 6.1-1
xv
-------
LIST OF TABLES-(Continued)
Table Page
6.2-1 Emission Factors for Coffee Roasting Processes without Controls 6.2-1
6.3-1 Emission Factors for Cotton Ginning Operations without Controls 6.3-1
6.4-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Grain Handling and Processing 6.4-2
6.5-1 Emission Factors for Fermentation Processes 6.5-2
6.6-1 Emission Factors for Fish Meal Processing 66-1
6.7-1 Emission Factors for Meat Smoking 6.7-1
6.8-1 Emission Factors for Nitrate Fertilizer Manufacturing without Controls 6.8-2
6.9-1 Emission Factors for Orchard Heaters 6 9-4
6.10-1 Emission Factors for Production of Phosphate Fertilizers 6 10-1
6.11-1 Emission Factors for Starch Manufacturing 611-1
6.12-1 Emission Factors for Sugar Cane Processing 6.12-1
7.1-1 Raw Material and Energy Requirements for Aluminum Production 71-2
7.1-2 Representative Particle Size Distributions of Uncontrolled Effluents from Prebake and
Horizontal-Stud Soderberg Cells 71-4
7.1-3 Emission Factors for Primary Aluminum Production Processes 7.1-5
7.2-1 Emission Factors for Metallurgical Coke Manufacture without Controls 1.2-2
7.3-1 Emission Factors for Primary Copper Smelters without Controls 7.3-2
7.4-1 Emission Factors for Ferroalloy Production in Electric Smelting Furnaces 7.4-2
7.5-1 Emission Factors for Iron and Steel Mills 7.5-4
7.6-1 Emission Factors for Primary Lead Smelting Processes without Controls 7.6-4
7.6-2 Efficiencies of Representative Control Devices Used with Primary Lead Smelting Operations . . 7.6-5
7.7-1 Emission Factors for Primary Zinc Smelting without Controls 7.7-1
7.8-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Secondary Aluminum Operations 7.8-1
7.9-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Brass and Bronze Melting Furnaces without Controls 7.9-2
7.10-1 Emission Factors for Gray Iron Foundries 7.10-1
7.11-1 Emission Factors for Secondary Lead Smelting Furnaces without Controls 7.11-2
7.11-2 Efficiencies of Particulate Control Equipment Associated with Secondary Lead Smelting
Furnaces 7.11-3
7.11-3 Representative Particle Size Distribution from Combined Blast and Reverberatory Fumace Gas
Stream 7.11-3
7.12-1 Emission Factors for Magnesium Smelting 7.12-1
7.13-1 Emission Factors for Steel Foundries 7.13-2
7.14-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Secondary Zinc Smelting 7.14-2
8.1-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Asphaltic Concrete Plants 8.1-4
8.2-1 Emission Factors for Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing without Controls 8.2-1
8.3-1 Emission Factors for Brick Manufacturing without Controls 8.3-3
8.4-1 Emission Factors for Calcium Carbide Plants 8.4-1
8.5-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Castable Refractories Manufacturing 8.5-1
8.6-1 Emission Factors for Cement Manufacturing without Controls 8.6-3
8.6-2 Size Distribution of Dust Emitted from Kiln Operations without Controls 8.6-4
8.7-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Ceramic Clay Manufacturing 8.7-1
8.8-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Sintering Operations 8.8-2
8.9-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Thermal Coal Dryers 8.9-1
8.10-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Concrete Batching 8.10-1
8.11-
8.12-
8.13-
8.14-
8.15-
8.16-
8.17-
Emission Factors for Fiber Glass Manufacturing without Controls 8.11-3
Emission Factors for Frit Smelters without Controls 8.12-2
Emission Factors for Glass Melting 8.13-1
Particulate Emission Factors for Gypsum Processing 8.14-1
Particulate Emission Factors for Lime Manufacturing without Controls 8.15-1
Emission Factors for Mineral Wool Processing without Controls 8.16-2
Particulate Emission Factors for Perlite Expansion Furnaces without Controls 8.17-1
8.18-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Phosphate Rock Processing without Controls 8.18-1
8.20-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Rock-Handling Processes 8.20-1
9.1-1 Emission Factors for Petroleum Refineries 9.1-3
10.1.2-1 Emission Factors for Sulfate Pulping 10.1-5
10.2-1 Particulate Emission Factors for Pulpboard Manufacturing 10.2-1
XVI
-------
LIST OF TABLES-(Continucd)
Table ' Page
10.3-1 Emission Factors tor Plywood Manufacturing 10.3-1
11.1-1 Summary of Estimated Fuel Consumed by Forest Fires 11.1-2
11.1-2 Summary of Emissions and Emission Factors for Forest Wildfires 11.1-4
11.2.1-1 Control Methods for Unpaved Roads 11.2-4
11.2.3-1 Aggregate Storage Emissions 11.2.3-1
A-l Nationwide Emissions for 1971 A-2
A-2 Distribution by Particle Size of Average Collection Efficiencies for Various Paniculate Control
Equipment ^.3
A-3 Thermal Equivalents for Various Fuels A-4
A-4 Weights of Selected Substances A-4
A-5 General Conversion Factors A-5
B-l Promulgated New Source Performance Standards—Group I Sources B-2
B-2 Promulgated New Source Performance Standards—Group II Sources 3.4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1.4-1 Lead Reduction Coefficient as Function of Boiler Load 1.4-2
3.3.2-1 Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Internal Combustion Engines 3.3.2-2
4.3-1 Fixed Roof Storage Tank 4.3-1
4.3-2 Double-deck Floating Roof Storage Tank 4.3-2
4.3-3 Variable Vapor Storage Tank 4.3-3
4.3-4 Adjustment Factor for Small-diameter Fixed Roof Tanks 4.3-5
4.4-1 Flowsheet of Petroleum Production, Refining, and Distribution Systems 4.4-3
4.4-2 Underground Storage Tank Vapor-recovery System 4.4-5
5.6-1 Flow Diagram of Typical Batch Process TNT Plant 56-°
5.9-1 Flow Diagram of Typical Nitric Acid Plant Using Pressure Process 59-2
5.17-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Contact-Process Sulfuric Acid Plant Burning Elemental Sulfur 5 57.2
5.17-2 Basic Flow Diagram of Contact-Process Sulfuric Acid Plant Burning Spent Acid 5 ]y_3
5.17-3 Sulfuric Acid Plant Feedstock Sulfur Conversion Versus Volumetric and Mass S02 Emissions at
Various Inlet S02 Concentrations by Volume 5.17-6
5.18-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Modified Claus Process with Two Converter Stages Used in Manufacturing
Sulfur 5 18.2
6.9-1 Types of Orchard Heaters 6.9-2
6.9-2 Particulate Emissions from Orchard Heaters 6.9-3
7.1-1 Schematic Diagram of Primary Aluminum Production Process 7.1-3
7.5-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Iron and Steel Processes 7.5-2
7.6-1 Typical Flowsheet of Pyrometallurgical Lead Smelting 7.6-2
7.11-1 Secondary Lead Smelter Processes 7.11-2
8.1-1 Batch Hot-Mix Asphalt Plant 8.1-2
8.1-2 Continuous Hot-Mix Asphalt Plant ' . '. 8.1-3
8.3-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Brick Manufacturing Process 8.3-2
8.6-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Portland Cement Manufacturing Process 8.6-2
8.11-1 Typical Flow Diagram of Textile-Type Glass Fiber Production Process 8.11-2
8.11-2 Typical Flow Diagram of Wool-Type Glass Fiber Production Process 8.11-2
9.1-1 Basic Flow Diagram of Petroleum Refinery 9.1-2
10.1.2-1 Typical Kraft Sulfate Pulping and Recovery Process 10.1-2
11.1-1 Forest Areas and U.S. Forest Service Regions 1,.1-S
11.2-1 Mean Number of Days with 0.01 inch or more of Annual Precipitation in United States 11.2-3
11.2-2 Map of Thornthwaites Precipitation-Evaporation Index Values for State Climatic Divisions 11.2.2-3
xvii
-------
ABSTRACT
Emission data obtained from source tests, material balance studies, engineering estimates, etc., have been
compiled for use by individuals and groups responsible for conducting air pollution emission inventories.
Emission factors given in this document, the result of the expansion and continuation of earlier work, cover most
of the common emission categories: fuel combustion by stationary and mobile sources; combustion of solid wastes;
evaporation of fuels, solvents, and other volatile substances; various industrial processes; and miscellaneous sources.
When no source-test data are available, these factors can be used to estimate the quantities of primary pollutants
(particulates, CO, SC>2, NOX, and hydrocarbons) being released from a source or source group.
Key words: fuel combustion, stationary sources, mobile sources, industrial processes, evaporative losses, emissions,
emission data, emission inventories, primary pollutants, emission factors.
xviu
-------
1.7 LIGNITE COMBUSTION by Thomas Lahre
1.7.1 General1"4
Lignite is a geologically young coal whose properties are intermediate to those of bituminous coal and peat. It
has a high moisture content (35 to 40 percent, by weight) and a low heating value (6000 to 7500 Btu/lb, wet
basis) and is generally only burned close to where it is mined, that is, in the midwestern States centered about
North Dakota and in Texas. Although a small amount is used in industrial and domestic situations, lignite is
mainly used for steam-electric production in power plants. In the past, lignite was mainly burned in small stokers;
today the trend is toward use in much larger pulverized-coal-fired or cyclone-fired boilers.
The major advantage to firing lignite is that, in certain geographical areas, it is plentiful, relatively low in cost,
and low in sulfur content (0.4 to 1 percent by weight, wet basis). Disadvantages are that more fuel and larger
facilities are necessary to generate each megawatt of power than is the case with bituminous coal. There are
several reasons for this. First, the higher moisture content of lignite means that more energy is lost in the gaseous
products of combustion, which reduces boiler efficiency. Second, more energy is required to grind lignite to the
specified size needed for combustion, especially in pulverized coal-fired units. Third, greater tube spacing and
additional soot blowing are required because of the higher ash-fouling tendencies of lignite. Fourth, because of its
lower heating value, more fuel must be handled to produce a given amount of power because lignite is not
generally cleaned or dried prior to combustion (except for some drying that may occur in the crusher or
pulverizer and during subsequent transfer to the burner). Generally, no major problems exist with the handling or
combustion of lignite when its unique characteristics are taken into account.
1.7.2 Emissions and Controls 2'8
The major pollutants of concern when firing lignite, as with any coal, are particulates, sulfur oxides, and
nitrogen oxides. Hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions are usually quite low under normal operating
conditions.
Particulate emissions appear most dependent on the firing configuration in the boiler. Pulverized-coal-fired
units and spreader stokers, which fire all or much of the lignite in suspension, emit the greatest quantity of flyash
per unit of fuel burned. Both cyclones, which collect much of the ash as molten slag in the furnace itself, and
stokers (other than spreader stokers), which retain a large fraction of the ash in the fuel bed, emit less particulate
matter. In general, the higher sodium content of lignite, relative to other coals, lowers particulate emissions by
causing much of the resulting flyash to deposit on the boiler tubes. This is especially the case in
pulverized-coal-fired units wherein a high fraction of the ash is suspended in the combustion gases and can readily
come into contact with the boiler surfaces.
Nitrogen oxides emissions are mainly a function of the boiler firing configuration and excess air. Cyclones
produce the highest NOX levels, primarily because of the high heat-release rates and temperatures reached in the
small furnace sections of the boiler. Pulverized-coal-fired boilers produce less NOX than cyclones because
combustion occurs over a larger volume, which results in lower peak flame temperatures. Tangentially fired
boilers produce the lowest NO levels in this category. Stokers produce the lowest NO levels mainly because
most existing units are mucn smaller than the other firing types. In most boilers, regardless of firing
configuration, lower excess air during combustion results m lower NO emissions.
.X
Sulfur oxide emissions are a function of the alkali (especially sodium) content of the lignite ash. Unlike most
fossil fuel combustion, in which over 90 percent of the fuel sulfur is emitted as SO2, a significant fraction of
the sulfur in lignite reacts with the ash components during combustion and is retained in the boiler ash deposits and
flyash. Tests have shown that less than 50 percent of the available sulfur may be emitted as S02 when a
high-sodium lignite is burned, whereas, more than 90 percent may be emitted with low-sodium lignite. As a rough
average, about 75 percent of the fuel sulfur will be emitted as SO2, with the remainder being converted to various
sulfate salts.
12/75 External Combustion Sources 1.7-1
-------
Air pollution controls on lignite-fired boilers in the United States have mainly been limited to cyclone
collectors, which typically achieve 60 to 75 percent collection efficiency on lignite flyash. Electrostatic
precipitators, which are widely utilized in Europe on lignitic coals and can effect 99+ percent particulate control,
have seen only limited application in the United States to date although their use will probably become
widespread on newer units in the future.
Nitrogen oxides reduction (up to 40 percent) has been demonstrated using low excess air firing and staged
combustion (see section 1.4 for a discussion of these techniques); it is not yet known, however, whether these
teclmiques can be continuously employed on lignite combustion units without incurring operational problems.
Sulfur oxides reduction (up to 50 percent) and some particulate control can be achieved through the use of high
sodium lignite. This is not generally considered a desirable practice, however, because of the increased ash fouling
that may result.
Emission factors for lignite combustion are presented in Table 1.7-1.
Table 1.7-1. EMISSIONS FROM LIGNITE COMBUSTION WITHOUT CONTROL EQUIPMENT3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulateb
Sulfur oxides6
Nitrogen
oxides^
Hydrocarbons'
Carbon
monoxide1
Type of boiler
Pulverized -coal
Ib/ton
7.0AC
SOS
14(8)9."
<1.0
1.0
kg/MT
3.5AC
15S
7(4)9.h
<0.5
0.5
Cyclone
Ib/ton
6A
SOS
17
<1.0
1.0
kg/MT
3A
15S
8.5
<0.5
0.5
Spreaker stoker
Ib/ton
7.0Ad
SOS
6
1.0
2
kg/MT
3.5Ad
15S
3
0.5
1
Other stokers
Ib/ton
3.0A
SOS
6
1.0
2
kg/MT
1.5A
15S
3
0.5
1
aAII emission factors are expressed in terms of pounds of pollutant per ton (kilograms of pollutant per metric ton) of lignite burned,
wet basis (35 to 40 percent moisture, by weight)
^A is the ash content of the lignite by weight, wet basis Factors based on References 5 and 6.
cThis factor is based on data for dry-bottom, pulvenzed-coal-f ired units only. It is expected that this factor would be lower for wet-
bottom units.
d Limited data preclude any determination of the effect of flyash remjection. It is expected that particulate emissions would be
greater when remjection is employed.
eS is the sulfur content of the lignite by weight, wet basis. For a high sodium-ash lignite (Na2O > 8 percent) use 17S Ib/ton (8.5S
kg/MT); for a low sodium-ash lignite (Na2O < 2 percent), use 35S Ib/ton (17.5S kg/MT). For intermediate sodium-ash lignite, or
when the sodium-ash content is unknown, use 305 Ib/ton (15S kg/MT)). Factors based on References 2, 5, and 6.
f Expressed as NC>2. Factors based on References 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9.
9Use 14 Ib/ton (7 kg/MT) for front-wall-fired and horizontally opposed wall-fired units and 8 Ib/ton (4 kg/MT) for tangentially
fired units.
"Nitrogen oxide emissions may be reduced by 20 to 40 percent with low excess air firing and/or staged combustion in front-fired
and opposed-wall-fired units and cyclones.
'These factors are based on the similarity of lignite combustion to bituminous coal combustion and on limited data in Reference 7.
References for Section 1.7
1. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. 2nd Ed. Vol. 12. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1967.
p. 381-413.
2. Gronhovd, G. H. et al. Some Studies on Stack Emissions from Lignite-Fired Powerplants. (Presented at the
1973 Lignite Symposium. Grand Forks, North Dakota. May 9-10, 1973.)
3. Study to Support Standards of Performance for New Lignite-Fired Steam Generators. Summary Report.
Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. under contract No. 68-02-1332. July 1974.
1.7-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
4. 1965 Keystone Coal Buyers Manual. New York, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1965. p. 364-365.
5. Source test data on lignite-fired power plants. Supplied by North Dakota State Department of Health,
Bismark, N.D. December 1973.
6. Gronhovd, G.H. et al. Comparison of Ash Fouling Tendencies of High and Low-Sodium Lignite from a North
Dakota Mine. In: Proceedings of the American Power Conference. Vol. XXVIII. 1966. p. 632-642.
7. Crawford, A. R. et al. Field Testing: Application of Combustion Modifications to Control NOX Emissions
from Utility Boilers. Exxon Research and Engineering Co.', Linden, N.J. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0227. Publication Number
EPA-650/2-74-066. June 1974.
8. Engelbrecht, H. L. Electrostatic Precipitators in Thermal Power Stations Using Low Grade Coal. (Presented at
28th Annual Meeting of the American Power Conference. April 26-28, 1966.)
9. Source test data from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 1974.
12/75 External Combustion Sources 1.7-3
-------
-------
3. INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE SOURCES
The internal combustion engine in both mobile and stationary applications is a major source of air pollutant
emissions. Internal combustion engines were responsible for approximately 73 percent of the carbon monoxide,
56 percent of the hydrocarbons, and 50 percent of the nitrogen oxides (NOX as NO2) emitted during 1970 in the
United States.1 These sources, however, are relatively minor contributors of total particulate and sulfur oxides
emissions. In 1970, nationwide, internal combustion sources accounted for only about 2.5 percent of the total
particulate and 3.4 percent of the sulfur oxides.1
The three major uses for internal combustion engines are: to propel highway vehicles, to propel off-highway
vehicles, and to provide power from a stationary position. Associated '"ith each of these uses are engine duty
cycles that have a profound effect on the resulting air pollutant emissions from the engine. The following sections
describe the many applications of internal combustion engines, the engine duty cycles, and the resulting
emissions.
DEFINITIONS USED IN CHAPTER 3
Calendar year — A cycle in the Gregorian calendar of 365 or 366 days divided into 12 months beginning with
January and ending with December.
Catalytic device — A piece of emission control equipment that is anticipated to be the major component used in
post 1974 light-duty vehicles to meet the Federal emission standards.
Cold vehicle operation — The first 505 seconds of vehicle operation following a 4-hour engine-off period, (for
catalyst vehicles a 1-hour engine-off period).
Composite emission factor (highway vehicle) — The emissions of a vehicle in gram/mi (g/km) that results from the
product of the calendar year emission rate, the speed correction factor, the temperature correction factor, and
the hot/cold weighting correction factor.
Crankcase emissions - Airborne substance emitted to the atmosphere from any portion of the crankcase
ventilation or lubrication systems of a motor vehicle engine.
7975 Federal Test Procecure (FTP) — The Federal motor vehicle emission test as described in the Federal
Register, Vol. 36, Number 128, July 2, 1971.
Fuel evaporative emissions - Vaporized fuel emitted into the atmosphere from the fuel system of a motor
vehicle.
Heavy-duty vehicle — A motor vehicle designated primarily for transportation of property and rated at more than
8500 pounds (3856 kilograms) gross vehicle weight (GVW) or designed primarily for transportation of persons
and having a capacity of more than 12 persons.
High-altitude emission factors — Substantial changes in emission factors from gasoline-powered vehicles occur as
altitude increases. These changes are caused by fuel metering enrichment because of decreasing air density. No
relationship between mass emissions and altitude has been developed. Tests have been conducted at near sea
level and at approximately 5000 feet (1524 meters) above sea level, however. Because most major U.S. urban
areas at high altitude are close to 5000 feet (1524 meters), an arbitrary value of 3500 ft (1067 m) and above is
used to define high-altitude cities.
Horsepower-hours — A unit of work.
Hot/cold weighting correction factor - The ratio of pollutant exhaust emissions for a given percentage of cold
operation (w) to pollutant exhaust emissions measured on the 1975 Federal Test Procedure (20 percent cold
operation) at ambient temperature (t).
Light-duty truck — Any motor vehicle designated primarily for transportation of property and rated at 8500
pounds (3856 kilograms) GVW or less. Although light-duty trucks have a load carrying capability that exceeds
that of passenger cars, they are typically used primarily for personal transportation as passenger car
substitutes.
Light-duty vehicle (passenger car) — Any motor vehicle designated primarily for transportation of persons and
having a capacity of 12 persons or less.
3.1.1-1
-------
Modal emission model — A mathematical model that can be used to predict the warmed-up exhaust emissions for
groups of light-duty vehicles over arbitrary driving sequences.
Model year — A motor vehicle manufacturer's annual production period. If a manufacturer has no annual
production period, the term "model year" means a calendar year.
Model year mix — The distribution of vehicles registered by model year expressed as a fraction of the total vehicle
population.
Nitrogen oxides — The sum of the nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide contaminants in a gas sample expressed as if
the nitric oxide were in the form of nitrogen dioxide. All nitrogen oxides values in this chapter are corrected
for relative humidity.
Speed correction factor ~ The ratio of the pollutant (p) exhaust emission factor at speed "x" to the pollutant (p)
exhaust emission factor as determined by the 1975 Federal Test Procedure at 19.6 miles per hour (31.6
kilometers per hour).
Temperature correction factor - The ratio of pollutant exhaust emissions measured over the 1975 Federal Test
Procedure at ambient temperature (t) to pollutant exhaust emissions measured over the 1975 Federal Test
Procedure at standard temperature conditions (68 to 86°F).
Reference
1. Cavender, J., D. S. Kircher, and J. R. Hammerle. Nationwide Air Pollutant Trends (1940-1970). U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Water Programs. Research Triangle Park, N.C. Publication
Number AP-115. April 1973.
3.1 HIGHWAY VEHICLES
Passenger cars, light trucks, heavy trucks, and motorcycles comprise the four main categories of highway
vehicles. Within each of these categories, powerplant and fuel variations result in significantly different emission
characteristics. For example, heavy trucks may be powered by gasoline or diesel fuel or operate on a gaseous fuel
such as compressed natural gas (CNG).
It is important to note that highway vehicle emission factors change with time and, therefore, must be
calculated for a specific time period, normally one calendar year. The major reason for this time dependence is
the gradual replacement of vehicles without emission control equipment by vehicles with control equipment, as
well as the gradual deterioration of vehicles with control equipment as they accumulate age and mileage. The
emission factors presented in this chapter cover only calendar years 1971 and 1972 and are based on analyses of
actual tests of existing sources and control systems. Projected emission factors for future calendar years are no
longer presented in this chapter because projections are "best guesses" and are best presented independently of
analytical results. The authors are aware of the necessity for forecasting emissions; therefore, projected emission
factors are available in Appendix D of this document.
Highway vehicle emission factors are presented in two forms in this chapter. Section 3.1.1 contains average
emission factors for calendar year 1972 for selected values of vehicle miles traveled by vehicle type (passenger
cars, light trucks, and heavy trucks), ambient temperature, cold/hot weighting, and average vehicle speed. The
section includes one case that represents the average national emission factors as well as thirteen other scenarios
that can be used to assess the sensitivity of the composite emission factor to changing input conditions. All
emission factors are given in grams of pollutant per kilometer traveled (and in grams of pollutant per mile
traveled).
The emission factors given in sections 3.1.2 through 3.1.7 are for individual classes of highway vehicles and
their application is encouraged if specific statistical data are available for the area under study. The statistical data
required include vehicle registrations by model year and vehicle type, annual vehicle travel in miles or kilometers
by vehicle type and age, average ambient temperature, percentage of cold-engine operation by vehicle type, and
average vehicle speed. When regional inputs are not available, national values (which are discussed) may be
applied.
3.1.1-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
3.1.1 Average Emission Factors for Highway Vehicles revised by David S. Kircher
and Marcia E. Williams
3.1.1.1 General—Emission factors presented in this section are intended to assist those individuals interested in
compiling approximate mobile source emission estimates for large areas, such as an individual air quality region or
the entire nation, for calendar year 1972. Projected mobile source emission factors for future years are no longer
presented in this section. This change in presentation was made to assure consistency with the remainder of this
publication, which contains emission factors based on actual test results on currently controlled sources and
pollutants. Projected average emission factors for vehicles are available, however, in Appendix D of this
publication.
The emission factor calculation techniques presented in sections 3.1.2 through 3.1.5 of this chapter are
strongly recommended for the formulation of localized emission estimates required for air quality modeling or
for the evaluation of air pollutant control strategies. Many factors, which vary with geographic location and
estimation situation, can affect emission estimates considerably. The factors of concern include average vehicle
speed, percentage of cold vehicle operation, percentage of travel by vehicle category (automobiles, light trucks,
heavy trucks), and ambient temperature. Clearly, the infinite variations in these factors make it impossible to
present composite mobile source emission factors for each application. An effort has been made, therefore, to
present average emission factors for a range of conditions. The following conditions are considered for each of
these cases:
Average vehicle speed - Two vehicle speeds are considered. The first is an average speed of 19.6 mi/hr (31.6
km/hr), which should be typical of a large percentage of urban vehicle operation. The second is an average speed
of 45 mi/hr (72 km/hr), which should be typical of highway or rural operation.
Percentage of cold operation — Three percentages of cold operation are considered. The first (at 31.6 km/hr)
assumes that 20 percent of the automobiles and light trucks are operating in a cold condition (representative of
vehicle start-up after a long engine-off period) and that 80 percent of the automobiles and light trucks are
operating in a hot condition (warmed-up vehicle operation). This condition can be expected to assess the engine
temperature situation over a large area for an entire day. The second situation assumes that 100 percent of the
automobiles and light trucks are operating in a hot condition (at 72 km/hr). This might be applicable to rural or
highway operation. The third situation (at 31.6 km/hr) assumes that 100 percent of the automobiles and light
trucks are operating in a cold condition. This might be a worst-case situation around an indirect source such as a
sports stadium after an event lets out. In all three situations, heavy-duty vehicles are assumed to be operating in a
hot condition.
Percentage of travel by vehicle type — Three situations are considered. The first (at both 31.6 km/hr and 72
km/hr) involves a nationwide mix of vehicle miles traveled by automobiles, light trucks, heavy gasoline trucks,
and heavy diesel trucks. The specific numbers are 80.4, 11.8, 4.6, and 3.2 percent of total vehicle miles traveled,
respectively.1' 2 The second (at 31.6 km/hr) examines a mix of vehicle miles traveled that might be found in a
central city area. The specific numbers are 63, 32, 2.5, and 2.5 percent, respectively. The third (31.6 km/hr)
examines a mix of vehicles that might be found in a suburban location or near a localized indirect source where
no heavy truck operation exist. The specific numbers are 88.2, 11.8, 0, and 0 percent, respectively.
Ambient temperature - Two situations at 31.6 km/hr are considered: an average ambient temperature of 24°C
(75°F) and an average ambient temperature of 10°C (50°F).
Table 3.1.1-1 presents composite CO, HC, and N0;v factors for the 13 cases discussed above for calendar year
1972. Because particulate emissions and sulfur oxides emissions are not assumed to be functions of the factors
discussed above, these emission factors are the same for all scenarios and are also presented in the table. The table
entries were calculated using the techniques described and data presented in sections 3.1.2, 3.1.4, and 3.1.5 of
this chapter. Examination of Table 3.1.1-1 can indicate the sensitivity of the composite emission factor to various
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.1-3
-------
CN
r».
en
DC
<
UJ
>
CO
DO
IE
g
V)
O
4-»
O
*f-
0
in
w
E
UJ
cenario
CO
*- V)
D Q)
•*- ~o
D X
00 o
«2
_ro
z>
•»-<
i_
<£
m c/)
01 ®
0 2
IS
(/)
c
o
.0
(0
0
•a
>
i
0)
c S
0 X
_Q O
» §
o 1
Cold
operation.
df
+- i=
.11
n
< E
O)
•*-•
CD
O5 OJ -r-T
2 1i «
|*t
O> +j
|i
ll
E
^
O)
I
D)
E
_y
O)
E
O)
F
Js!
O)
.__
^
O)
F
.*:
o>
E
_*
0)
1
O)
vp
3^
U
)
LL
O
1—
€
E
.*:
i_
.c
1
X
E
'S-'Sj-^r'* OOOOO3CO CNCNCNCN 'J-
t-r-^-^ OOOO «- i- «- t- <-
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
ncococ'o cororoco oooo co
OMCMCNCM r-r-T-r- CNCNCNCN CN
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
i^r~r^r~ rj-^-ij-^' i^r^i^r^ i^
rocococo coconro nnnro ro
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
OOOO ^rl-^^- OOOO O
CD CD CD CD LD LO LD ID CD CD CD CD CO
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
o^rojcn t •— «— O5 oocor~ oinr^cN os
cDcooiro coi^ooro 1^-000110 CN
ooocfl^- corooo<- CNr^com r~
OOOTfCN C35'-CV5CN «-P01T)^- t
inroo^ oq r^ r>; m COI^CD^ LO
r~ d i CD i * co r- o' «* oo CN tri LO oo
^•CDCJ)-- ^LOC3><- '*tDO5'- «-
^ "~. in oo ^ °? to * CN«-^-LO °°
CDP^.'^CN OCN<-00 OOOLO't O)
r~cn<-cN r^cn<-CN pvt-^cN CM
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
CNCNOO CNCNOO CNCNOO
«*o'ro ^•o'i-o ^-o^-o •*
CXIr-CN«- CN--CNT- CNr-CN>- CN
IOOLOO LOOLOO Looino in
r-ini^m r^ini^m r^LOr^m r~-
tp <0 CD in
«-' «-' «-' CN
n n co r^
CO CD CO
en oi a> in
T- ^- r- Tfr
ll 3 >.g I5>'c!2
1 te £ * § £ g 1 §
S £ 0"°^ g° IS™
Z 2 O Z
3.1.1-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
conditions. A user who has specific data on the input factors should calculate a composite factor to fit the exact
scenario. When specific input factor data are not available, however, it is hoped that the range of values presented
in the table will cover the majority of applications. The user should be sure, however, that the appropriate
scenario is chosen to fit the situation under analysis. In many cases, it is not necessary to apply the various
temperature, vehicle speed, and cold/hot operation correction factors because the basic emission factors (24°C,
31.6 km/hr, 20 percent cold operation, nationwide mix of travel by vehicle category) are reasonably accurate
predictors of motor vehicle emissions on a regionwide (urban) basis.
References for Section 3.1.1
1. Highway Statistics 1971. U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Washington,
D.C. 1972. p. 81.
2. 1972 Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of
the Census. Washington, D.C. 1974.
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.1-5
-------
-------
3.1.2 Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles (Automobiles) by David S. Kircher,
Marcia E. Williams,
and Charles C. Masser
3.1.2.1 General — Because of their widespread use, light-duty vehicles (automobiles) are responsible for a large
share of air pollutant emissions in many areas of the United States. Substantial effort has been expended recently
to accurately characterize emissions from these vehicles.1'2 The methods used to determined composite
automobile emission factors have been the subject of continuing EPA research, and, as a result, two different
techniques for estimating CO, HC, and NOX exhaust emission factors are discussed in this section.
The first method, based on the Federal Test Procedure (FTP),3'4 is a modification of the procedure that was
discussed in this chapter in earlier editions of AP-42. The second and newer procedure, "modal" emissions
analysis, enables the user to input a specific driving pattern (or driving "cycle") and to arrive at an emissions
rate.5 The modal technique driving "modes", which include idle, steady-speed cruise, acceleration, and
deceleration, are of sufficient complexity that computerization was required. Because of space limitations, the
computer program and documentation are not provided in this section but are available elsewhere.5
In addition to the methodologies presented for calculating CO, HC, and NOX exhaust emissions, data are given
later in this section for emissions in the idle mode, for crankcase and evaporative hydrocarbon emissions, and for
particulate and sulfur oxides emissions.
3.1.2.2 FTP Method for Estimating Carbon Monoxide, Exhaust Hydrocarbons and Nitrogen Oxides Emission
Factors — This discussion is begun with a note of caution. At the outset, many former users of this method may
be somewhat surprised by the organizational and methodological changes that have occurred. Cause for concern
may stem from: (1) the apparent disappearance of "deterioration" factors and (2) the apparent loss of the
much-needed capability to project future emission levels. There are, however, substantive reasons for the changes
implemented herein.
Results from EPA's annual surveillance programs (Fiscal Years 1971 and 1972) are not yet sufficient to yield a
statistically meaningful relationship between emissions and accumulated mileage. Contrary to the previous
assumption, emission deterioration can be convincingly related not only to vehicle mileage but also to vehicle age.
This relationship may not come as a surprise to many people, but the complications are significant. Attempts to
determine a functional relationship between only emissions and accumulated mileage have indicated that the data
can fit a linear form as well as a non-linear (log) form. Rather than attempting to force the data into a
mathematical mold, the authors have chosen to present emission factors by both model year and calendar year.
The deterioration factors are, therefore, "built in" to the emission factors. This change simplifies the calculations
and represents a realistic, sound use of emission surveillance data.
The second change is organizational: emission factors projected to future years are no longer presented in this
section. This is in keeping with other sections of the publication, which contains emission factors only for
existing sources based on analyses of test results. As mentioned earlier, projections are "best guesses" and are best
presented independently of analytical results (see Appendix D).
The calculation of composite exhaust emission factors using the FTP method is given by:
n
enpstw ~~ 2^i Cipn min Vips z'Pt riptw (31 2-1)
i=n-12
where. enpstw = Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), average
speed (s), ambient temperature (t), and percentage cold operation (w)
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.2-1
-------
vips
zipt
'iptw
= The FTP (1975 Federal Test Procedure) mean emission factor for the ith model year
light-duty vehicles during calendar year (n) and for pollutant (p)
= The fraction of annual travel by the i ' model year light-duty vehicles during calendar year
(n)
= The speed correction factor for the i l model year light-duty vehicles for pollutant (p) and
average speed (s)
= The temperature correction factor for the i model year light-duty vehicles for pollutant
(p) ind ambient temperature (t)
= The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor for the i model year light-duty vehicles
for pollutant (p), ambient temperature (t), and percentage cold operation (w)
The data necessary to complete this calculation for any geographic area are presented in Tables 3.1.2-1
through 3.1.2-8. Each of the variables in equation 3.1.2-1 is described in greater detail below, after which the
technique is illustrated by an example.
Table 3.1.2-1. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
-EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1971a-b
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location
and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
Carbon
monoxide
9/mi
86.5
67.8
61.7
47.6
39.6
126.9
109.2
76.4
94.8
88.0
g/km
53.7
42.1
38.3
29.6
24.6
78.8
67.8
47.4
58.9
54.6
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.74
5.54
5.19
3.77
3.07
10.16
7.34
6.31
6.71
5.6
g/km
5.43
3.44
3.22
2.34
1.91
6.31
4.59
3.91
4.17
3.48
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.54
4.34
5.45
5.15
5.06
1.87
2.20
2.59
2.78
3.05
g/km
2.20
2.70
3.38
3.20
3.14
1.17
1.37
1.61
1.73
1.89
al\lote: The values in this table can be used to estimate emissions only for calendar year 1971. This reflects a substantial change
over past presentation of data in this chapter (see text for details).
References 1 and 2. These references summarize and analyze the results of emission tests of light-duty vehicles in several U.S.
cities.
3.1.2-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table 3.1.2-2. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES-STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 1971a-b
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
-MISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location
and
model year
California
Pre-1966c
1966
1967
1968C
1969C
1970C
1971
Carbon
mojTpxide
g/mi
86.5
65.2
67.2
67.8
61.7
50.8
42.3
g/km
53.7
40.5
41.7
42.1
38.3
31.5
26.3
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.74
7.84
5.33
5.54
5.19
4.45
3.02
g/km
5.43
4.87
3.31
3.44
3.22
2.76
1.88
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.54
3.40
3.42
4.34
5.45
4.62
3.83
g/km
2.20
2.11
2.12
2.70
3.38
2.87
2.38
aNote: The values in this table can be used to estimate emissions only for calendar year 1971. This reflects a substantial change
past presentations of data in this chapter (see text for details).
bReferences 1 .This reference summarizes and analyzes the results of emission tests of light-duty vehicles in Los Angeles as well
as five other U.S. cities during 1971-1972.
cData for these model years are mean emission test values for the five low altitude test cities summarized in Reference 1.
Table 3.1.2.-3. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES-EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 1972a-b
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location
and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
93.5
63.7
64.2
53.2
51.1
36.9
141.0
101.4
97.8
87.5
80.3
80.4
g/km
58.1
39.6
39.9
33.0
31.7
22.9
87.6
63.0
60.7
54.3
49.9
50.0
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.67
6.33
4.95
4.89
3.94
3.02
11.9
6.89
5.97
5.56
5.19
4.75
g/km
5.38
3.93
3.07
3.04
2.45
1.88
7.39
4.26
3.71
3.45
3.22
2.94
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
4.44
5.00
4.35
4.30
4.55
2.03
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
g/km
2.07
2.76
3.10
2.70
2.67
2.83
.26
.78
.82
2.06
.70
.91
aNote: The values in this table can be used to estimate emissions only for calendar year 1972. This reflects a substantial change
over past presentation of data in this chapter (see text for details).
Reference 2. This reference summarizes and analyzes the results of emission tests of light-duty vehicles in six U.S. metropolitan
areas during 1972-1973.
12/75
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
3.1.2-3
-------
Table 3.1.2-4. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES-STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 1972a'b
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location
and
model year
California
Pre-1966c
1966
1967
1968C
1969C
1970
1971
1972
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
93.5
86.9
75.4
63.7
64.2
78.5
59.7
46.7
g/km
58.1
54.0
46.8
39.6
39.9
48.7
37.1
29.0
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.67
7.46
5.36
6.33
4.95
6.64
3.98
3.56
g/km
5.38
4.63
3.33
3.93
3.07
4.12
2.47
2.21
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
3.43
3.77
4.44
5.00
4.46
3.83
3.81
g/krn
2.07
2.13
2.34
2.76
3.10
2.77
2.38
2.37
aNote: The values in this table can be used to estimate emissions only for calendar year 1972. This repre'sents a substantial change
over past presentation of data in this chapter (see text for details).
''Reference 2. This reference summarizes and analyzes the results of emission tests of light-duty vehicles in Los Angeles as well as
in five other U.S. cities during 1972-1973.
cData for these model years are mean emission test values for the five low altitude test cities summarized in Reference 2.
Table 3.1.2-5. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF LIGHT-DUTY
VEHICLE ANNUAL TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR3
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
1972
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)*3
0.083
0.103
0.102
0.106
0.099
0.087
0.092
0.088
0.068
0.055
0.039
0.021
0.057
Average annual
miles driven (b)c
15,900
15,000
14,000
13,100
12,200
1 1 ,300
10,300
9,400
8,500
7,600
6,700
6,700
6,700
a x b
1,320
1,545
1,428
1,389
1,208
983
948
827
578
418
261
141
382
1972
Fraction
of annual
travel (rn)d
0.116
0.135
0.125
0.122
0.106
0.086
0.083
0.072
0.051
0.037
0.023
0.012
0.033
aReferences 6 and 7.
''These data are for July 1, 1972, from Reference 7 and represent the U.S. population of light-duty vehicles by model year for that
year only.
cMileage values are the results of at least squares analysis of data in Reference 6.
dm=ab/2ab.
3.1.2-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
.£)_
to"
V)
LU
0
E
LU
>
i-
D
Q
h-
X
u
_i
cc
o
LL
00
CC
o
0
<
LL
Z
O
O
LU
CC
cc
o
0
LU
HI
a.
CO
oc
o
CO
2
LU
O
LL
LL.
LU
O
0
CD
CN
CO
S
CO
i
I
I CO
! m
i +
<
n
a
>~
|
CM
C/3
O
+
CO
CD
+
<£
~~a>
II
trt
>
w
;O
X
O
c
OOJO5O3
LO cdcbcDCDcb't'd-'t'*'*
CN CNCNCMOJCNCNCNCMCNOJ
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 I
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
1^ CNCMCNCNCNr^n«3-^|-^-
o CMLnr-r^LnLOCNiOCNiLn
co CD CD r-~ ' r^-' r>.' ^ icDOr-
LD inr-ootoocNOtoo
C7> o)ooo^o^oor^r^.coi —
o o*— ^-ooooooo
r- r-- csj r-- CN
CD CD r~~ CD r-~
en cnooajomcnoocnoa)
<— •— cDcor-i— «— cocor^-*—
,< y^OTcnoj^p^cncncR^
LD co'~'~'~r--Ln'~'~'~r-~
O) C7> O) O5 en
CD
CD
2 t
01 "ro
01 C O (D W
B ^ o O> C '+j '*J
co X - o co ro
5— - § •=
> ^^ — > rn
0 CO 0 •-
_J 0 _J I
2 i g
"i ™ 1
03 o £
£ -5 c
co "°
1 E S
cl o S
g Q) 0
I a-D
— O cu
+- •*-' CLJ
TO i- Q.
(rt CD w
i !§
J £ O
1 "il
5 1
3 ^S
B «o
1 1 !.
o t; >
" i-i
i -S-
"E "Si =
.2 co
OJ -C
CN *- i_
o S^
; E s
CN 0> -
^ E2
~^ "° -r.
LO " "
* a§
O X C
^ cu o
in a, "
-~ CO «
co ^ ^r
co .Q aj
-a n ^ «
£ 2 5 E
*- ^ ^ u
° c ^ C
(!) ~ H) 4^
g « £ ^
i- C QJ 01
a) ^ ^ £
-C CD c w
i fif
i 111
"S 1 -g I
c o S s
CD _ 0) J3
xr^ c g c
0 CN ro = S
s -: § = ^
*- n 2 ^ §
i S ™ " S
S D " —
1,2 J|g
£8 S*8
aReference 8 Equations s
mi/hr; 8 and 1 6 km/hr) s
The speed correction fac
using the metric system <
are determined, all other
12/75
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
3.1.2-5
-------
Table 3.1.2-7. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION
FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES3
Location
Low altitude
(Excluding 1966-
1967 Calif.)
California
Low altitude
High altitude
Model
year
1957-1967
1966-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
Carbon monoxide
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
1.79
3.06
3.57
3.60
4.15
2.29
2.43
2.47
2.84
3.00
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.00
1.75
1.86
1.88
2.23
1.48
1.54
1.61
1.72
1.83
Hydrocarbons
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
1.87
2.96
2.95
2.51
2.75
2.34
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.12
1.66
1.65
1.51
1.63
1.37
2.10 1.27
2.04
1.22
2.35 ' 1.36
2.17 1.35
Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.16
1.04
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.09
1.00
1 .08 1 .05
1.13 1.05
1.15 1.03
1.33 1.20
1.22 1.18
1.22 1.08
1.19 1.11
1.06 1.02
aDnvmg patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 9) were input to the modal emission analysis model
(see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 5 and 10 mi/hr; 8 and 16 km/hr) were divided by FTP
emission factors for hot operation to obtain the above results. The above data are approximate and represent the best currently
available information.
Table 3.1.2-8. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTORS
AND HOT/COLD VEHICLE OPERATION CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR FTP EMISSION FACTORS3
Pollutant
Caibon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
Temperature correction
b
-0.0127t + 1.95
-0.01131+ 1.81
-0.0046 t + 1 .36
Hot/Cold operation
correction |f(t)]b
0.0045 t + 0.02
0.0079 t + 0.03
-0.0068t + 1.64
'"F.eference 10. Temperature (t) is expressed in F. In order to apply these equations, C must be first converted to F. The ap-
propriate conversion formula is: F=(9/5)C + 32. For temperatures expressed on the Kelvin (K) scale: F=9/5(K-273.16) + 32.
'•'The formulae for z. enable the correction of the FTP emission factors for ambient temperature effects only. The amount of
cold/hot operation is not affected The formulae for f(t), on the other hand, are part of equation 3.1.2-2 for calculating r, tw.
The variable r|ptw corrects for cold/hot operation as well as ambient temperature.
Note: z can be applied without rjptw, but not vica versa.
3.1.2-6
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
FTP emission factor (qpn). The results of the first two EPA annual light-duty vehicle surveillance programs are
summarized in Tables 3.1.2-1 through 3.1.24. These data for calendar years 1971 and 1972 are divided by
geographic area into: low altitude (excluding California), high altitude (excluding California), and California only.
California emission factors are presented separately because, for several model years, California vehicles have been
subject to emission standards that differ from standards applicable to vehicles under the Federal emission control
program. For those model year vehicles for which California did. not have separate emission standards, the
national emission factors are assumed to apply in California as well. Emissions at high altitude are differentiated
from those at low altitude to account for the effect that altitude has on air-fuel ratios and concomitant emissions.
Tiie tabulated values are applicable to calendar years 1971 and 1972 for each model yea;.
Fraction of annual travel by model year (nij). A sample calculation of this variable is presented in Table 3.1.2-5.
In the example, nationwide statistics are used, and the fraction of in-use vehicles by model year (vehicle age) is
weighted on the basis of the annual miles driven. The calculation may be "localized" to reflect local (county,
state, etc.) vehicle age mix, annual miles driven, or both. Otherwise, the national data can be used. The data
presented in Table 3.1.2-5 are for calendar year 1972 only; for later calendar years, see Appendix D.
Speed Correction Factors (vjps). Speed correction factors enable the "adjustment'' of FTP emission factors to
account for differences in average route speed. Because the implicit average route speed of the FTP is 19.6 mi/hr
(31.6 km/hr), estimates of emissions at higher or lower average speeds require a correction.
It is important to note the difference between "average route speed"' and "steady speed". Average route speed
is trip-related and based on a composite of the driving modes (idle, cruise, acceleration, deceleration)
encountered, for example, during a typical home-to-work trip. Steady speed is highway facility-oriented. For
instance, a group of vehicles traveling over an uncongested freeway link (with a volume to capacity ratio of 0.1,
for example) might be traveling at a steady speed of about 55 mi/hr (89 km/hr). Note, however, that steady
speeds, even at the link level, are unlikely to occur where lesistance to traffic flow occurs (unsynchromzed traffic
signaling, congested flow, etc.)
In previous revisions to this section, the limited data available for correcting for average speed were presented
graphically. Recent research, however, has resulted in revised speed relationships by model year/' To facilitate the
presentation, the data are given as equations and appropriate coefficients in Table 3.1.2-6. These relationships
were developed by performing five major tasks. First, urban driving pattern data collected during the CAPE-10
Vehicle Operations Survey1' were processed by city and time of day into freeway, non-freeway, and composite
speed-mode matrices. Second, a large number of driving patterns were computer-generated for a range of average
speeds (15 to 45 mi/hr; 24 to 72 km/mi) using weighted combinations of freeway and non-freeway matrices.
Each of these patterns was filtered for "representativeness." Third, the 88 resulting patterns were input
(second-by-second speeds) to the EPA modal emission analysis model (see sections 3.1.2.3). The output of the
model was estimated emissions for each pattern of 11 vehicle groups (see Table 3.1.2.6 for a listing of these
groups). Fourth, a regression analysis was performed to relate estimated emissions to average route speed for each
of the 11 vehicle groups. Fifth, these relationships were normalized to 19.6 mi/hr (31.6 km/hr) and summarized
in Table 3.1.2-6.
The equations in Table 3.1.2-6 apply only for the range of the data — from 15 to 45 mi/hr (24 to 72 km/hr).
Because there is a need, in some situations, to estimate emissions at very low average speeds, correction factors
for 5 and 10 mi/hr (8 and 16 km/hr) presented in Table 3.1.2-7 were developed using a method somewhat like
that described above, again using the modal emission model. The modal emission model predicts emissions from
warmed-up vehicles. The use of this model to develop speed correction factors makes the assumption that a given
speed correction factor applies equally well to hot and cold vehicle operation. Estimation of warmed-up idle
emissions are presented in section 3.1.2.4 on a gram per minute basis.
Temperature Correction Factor (Z[p{). The 1975 FTP requires that emissions measurements be made within the
limits of a relatively narrow temperature band (68 to 86°F). Such a band facilitates uniform testing in
laboratories without requiring extreme ranges of temperature control. Present emission factors for motor vehicles
are based on data from the standard Federal test (assumed to be at 75°F). Recently, EPA and the Bureau of
Mines undertook a test program to evaluate the effect of ambient temperature on motor vehicle exhaust emission
levels.1 ° The study indicates that changes in ambient temperature result in significant changes in emissions during
cold start-up operation. Because many Air Quality Control Regions have temperature characteristics differing
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.2-7
-------
considerably from the 68 to 86°F range, the temperature correction factor should be applied. These correction
factors, which can be applied between 20 and 80°F, are presented in Table 3.1.2-8. For temperatures oulside this
range, the appropriate endpoint correction factor should be applied.
Hot/Cold Vehicle Operation Correction Factor (rjptw)- The 1975 FTP measures emissions during a cold
transient phase (representative of vehicle start-up after a long engine-off period), a hot transient phase
(representative of vehicle start-up after a short engine-off period), and a stabilized phase (representative of
warmed-up vehicle operation). The weighting factors used in the 1975 FTP are 20 percent, 27 percent, and 53
percent of total miles (time) in each of the three phases, respectively. Thus, when the 1975 FTP emission factors
are applied to a given region for the purpose of accessing air quality, 20 percent of the light-duty vehicles in the
area of interest are assumed to be operating in a cold condition, 27 percent in a hot start-up condition, and 53
percent in a hot stabilized condition. For non-catalyst equipped vehicles (all pre-1975 model year vehicles),
emissions in the two hot phases are essentially equivalent on a grams per mile (grams per kilometer basis).
Therefore, the 1975 FTP emission factor represents 20 percent cold operation and 80 percent hot operation.
Many situations exist in which the application of these particular weighting factors may be inappropriate. For
example, light-duty vehicle operation in the center city may have a much higher percentage of cold operation
during the afternoon peak when work-to-home trips are at a maximum and vehicles have been standing for 8
hours. The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor allows the cold operation phase to range from 0 to 100
percent of total light-duty vehicle operations. This correction factor is a function of the percentage of cold
operation (w) and the ambient temperature (t). The correction factor is:
w + (100-w) f(t)
Vw = 20 + 80f(t) (3-L2'2)
where: f(t) is given in Table 3.1.2-8.
Sample Calculation. As a means of further describing the application of equation 3.1.2-1, calculation of the
carbon monoxide composite emission factor is provided as an example. To perform this calculation (or any
calculation using this procedure), the following questions must be answered:
1. What calendar year is being considered?
2. What is the average vehicle speed in the area of concern?
3. Is the area at low altitude (non-California), in California, or at high altitude?
4. Are localized vehicle mix and/or annual travel data available?
5. Which pollutant is to be estimated? (For non-exhaust hydrocarbons see section 3.1.2.5).
6. What is the ambient temperature (if it does not fall within the 68 to 86°F Federal Test Procedure range)?
7. What percentage of vehicle operation is cold operation (first 500 seconds of operation after an engine-off
period of at least 4 hours)?
For this example, the composite carbon monoxide emission factor for 1972 will be estimated for a hypothetical
county. Average vehicle speed for the county is assumed to be 30 mi/hr. The county is at low altitude
(non-California), and localized vehicle mix/annual travel data are unavailable (nationwide statistics are to be
used). The ambient temperature is assumed to be 50°F and the percentage of cold vehicle operation is assumed to
be 40 percent. To simplify the presentation, the appropriate variables are entered in the following tabulation.
3.1.2-8 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
Model
year(s)
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
cipn
58.1
39.6
39.9
33.0
31.7
22.9
min
0.396
0.106
0.122
0.125
0.135
0.116
Variables, a
vips
0.72
0.69
0.63
0.62
0.63
0.63
zipt
1.315
1.315
1.315
1.315
1.315
1.315
riptw
1.39
1.39
1.39
1.39
1.39
1.39
(cipn)(min)(vjps)
*zipt'(riptw'
30.3
5.3
5.6
4.7
4.9
3.1
enpstw = 53.9 g/km
aThe variable clf>n above is from Table 3.1.2-3, and the variable m|n was taken from the sample calculation based on nationwide
data, Table 3.1.2-5. The fraction of travel for pre-1968 (6 years old and older) vehicles is the sum of the last eight values in the
far right-hand column of the table. The speed correction factor (v ) was calculated from the appropriate equations in Table
3.1.2-6. The variable Zj t was calculated from the appropriate equation in Table 3.1.2-8. The variable r-t tw was calculated using
an equation from Table 3.1.2-8 and equation 3.1.2-2.
The resultant composite carbon monoxide emission factor for 1972 for the hypothetical county is 53.9 g/km.
3.1.2.3 Modal Emission Model for Estimating Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbons, and Nitrogen Oxides Emission
Factors — The modal emission model and allied computer programs permit an analyst to calculate mass emission
quantities of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides emitted by individual vehicles or groups of
vehicles over any specified driving sequence or pattern. The complexity of the model and accompanying
computer programs makes presentation of the entire procedure in this publication impractical. Instead, the
capabilities and limitations of the model are briefly described in the following paragraphs with the details to be
found in a separate report, Automobile Exhaust Emission Modal Analysis Model.5
The modal emission model was developed because of the well-established fact that emission rates for a
particular vehicle depend upon the manner in which it is operated. Stated another way, the emissions from a
particular vehicle are a function of the time it spends in each of four general operating modes (idle, cruise,
deceleration, acceleration) as well as specific operation within each of the four modes. In many situations, use of
the basic FTP emission factors may be sufficient. Certainly, nationwide, statewide, and county-wide emission
estimates that involve spatial aggregation of vehicular travel data lend themselves to the FTP method (section
3.1.2.2). There are, however, a relatively large number of circumstances for which an analyst may require
emission estimates at a zonal or link level of aggregation. The analyst, for example, may be faced with providing
inputs to a carbon monoxide dispersion model, estimating the impact of an indirect source (sports complex,
shopping center, etc.), or preparing a highway impact statement. In such instances, the resources may be available
to determine the necessary inputs to the modal model either by estimation or field studies. These data are input
to the modal model and emission estimates are output.
Although the computer software package is sufficiently flexible to accept any set of input modal emission
data, EPA data based on tests of 1020 individual light-duty vehicles (automobiles) that represent variations in
model year, manufacture, engine and drive train equipment, accumulated mileage, state of maintenance, attached
pollution abatement devices, and geographic location are a part of the package. The user, therefore, need not
input any modal emission data. He inputs the driving sequence desired as speed (mi/hr) versus time (sec) in
1-second intervals and specifies the vehicle mix for which emission estimates are desired (vehicles are grouped by
model year and geographic location). The output of the model can then be combined with the appropriate traffic
volume for the desired time period to yield an emission estimate. The use of the modal emission model to
estimate a composite emission factor does not, however, eliminate the need for temperature and cold/hot
weighting correction factors. The model predicts emissions from warmed-up vehicles at an ambient temperature
of approximately 75°F. The estimate of composite exhaust emission factors using the modal emission model is
given by:
eptw = cp apt bptw (3.1.2-3)
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.2-9
-------
where: 6ptw = Composite emission factor in grams per mile (g/km) for calendar year 1971, pollutant (p),
ambient temperature (t), percentage cold operation (w), and the specific driving sequence and
vehicle mix specified
Cp = The mean emission factor for pollutant (p) for the specified vehicle mix and driving sequence
apt = The temperature correction factor for pollutant (p) and temperature (t) for warmed-up
operation
bptw = The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor for pollutant (p), temperature (t), and
percentage cold operation (w)
The data necessary to compute apt and bptw are given in Table 3.1.2-9. The modal analysis computer program
is necessary to compute C.5
Table 3.1.2-9. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE MODAL EMISSION
MODEL CORRECTION FACTORS FOR TEMPERATURE
AND COLD/HOT START WEIGHTING3
Pollutant
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
Temperature correction
(^pt)
1.0
1.0
-0.0065 t+ 1.49
Hot/cold temperature
correction [f(t)]
0.0045 t + 0.02
0.0079 t + 0.03
-0.0068 t + 1 .64
aReference 10. Temperature is expressed in F In order to apply these equations, convert C to F (F=9/5C + 32); or K to F
(F=9/5(K-273.16)+ 32).
Temperature Correction Factor (apt). The modal analysis model predicts emissions at approximately 75° F. The
temperature correction factors are expressed in equational form and presented in Table 3.1.2-9.
Hot/Cold Vehicle Operation Correction Factor (bptw)- The modal analysis model predicls emissions during
warmed-up vehicle operation, but there are many urban situations for which this assumption is not appropriate.
The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor allows for the inclusion of a specific percentage of cold
operation. This correction factor is a function of the percentage of cold operation (w) and the ambient
temperature (t). The correction factor is:
w + (100-w)f(t)
C3-
100 f(t)
where: fj(t) is given in Table 3.1.2-9.
It is important that potential users of modal analysis recognize of the important limitations of the model.
Although the model provides the capability of predicting emission estimates for any driving pattern, it can only
predict emissions for the vehicle groups that have been tested. Presently this capability is limited to 1971 and
older light-duty vehicles. Efforts are underway to add additional model years (1972-1974), and new models will
be tested as they become available. Although the model is not directly amenable to projecting future year
emissions, it can predict "base" year emissions. Future year emissions can be estimated using the ratio of future
year to base year emissions based on FTP composite emission factors. Finally, the technique requires the input of
a driving sequence and the use of a computer, and is therefore, more complex and more costly to use than the
simple FTP technique (section 3.1.2.1).
3.1.2-10 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
The modal procedure discussion in this section is recommended when the user is interested in comparing
emissions over several different specific driving scenarios. Such an application will result in more accurate
comparisons than can be obtained by the method given in section 3.1.2.2. For other applications where average
speed is all that is known or when calendar year to calendar year comparisons are required, the method in section
3.1.2.2 is recommended.
3.1.2.4 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Idle Emission Factors - Estimates of emissions
during a vehicles' idle operating mode may be appropriate at trip attractions such as shopping centers, airports,
sports complexes, etc. Because idle emission factors are expressed (by necessity) in terms of elapsed time,
emissions at idle can be estimated using vehicle operating minutes rather than the conventional vehicle miles of
travel.
Application of the idle values (Table 3.1.2-10) requires calculation of a composite idle emission factor (cp)
through the use of the variable mjn(see section 3.1.2.2) and ijD (idle pollutant p emission factor for the jth model
year). The temperature and hot/cold weighting factors presented in Table 3.1.2-9 apply to idle emissions. The
tabulated values are based on warmed-up emissions. (For a -., see Table 3.1.2-9; for b tw, see Table 3.1.2-9 and
equation 3.1.2-4.)
Table 3.1.2-10. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY
VEHICLES IN WARMED-UP IDLE MODE3
(grams/minute)
Location and
model year(s)
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
High' altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
California only
(low altitude)
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
Carbon monoxide
16.9
15.8
17.1
13.1
13.0
18.6
16.8
16.6
16.6
16.9
16.9
18.7
18.7
15.8
17.1
19.3
13.3
Exhaust hydrocarbons
1.63
1.32
1.17
0.73
0.63
1.83
1.09
0.90
1.13
0.80
1.63
1.27
1.27
1.32
1.17
0.76
0.78
Nitrogen oxides
0.08
0.12
0.12
0.13
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.10
0.11
0.16
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.12
0.12
0.28
0.18
a Reference 12.
12/75
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
3.1.2-11
-------
The mathematical expression is simply:
=n-12
ip min "pt uptw
(3.1.2-5)
Because the idle data are from the same data base used to develop the modal analysis procedure, Ihey are
subject to the same limitations. Most importantly, idle values cannot be directly used to estimate future
emissions.
3.1.2.5 Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors — In addition to exhaust emission factors, the
calculation of hydrocarbon emission from gasoline motor vehicles involves evaporative and crankcase
hydrocarbon emission factors. Composite crankcase emissions can be determined using:
fn=
hi mi
in
(3.1.2-6)
where. l
n
i = n-12
= The composite crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
hj = The crankcase emission factor for the i^1 model year
mm = The weighted annual travel of the i"1 year during calendar year (n)
Crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor by model year are summarized in Table 3.1.2-11.
The two major sources of evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from light-duty vehicles are the fuel tank and the
carburetor system. Diurnal changes in ambient temperature result in expansion of the air-fuel mixture in a
partially filled fuel tank. As a result, gasoline vapor is expelled to the atmosphere. Running losses from the fuel
tank occur as the fuel is heated by the road surface during driving, and hot-soak losses from the carburetor system
occur after engine shut down at the end of a trip. These carburetor losses are from locations such as: the
Table 3.1.2-11. CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON
EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Model year
California only
Pre-1961
1961 through 1963
1964 through 1967
Post- 1967
All areas except
California
Pre-1963
1963 through 1967
Post- 1967
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
4.1
0.8
0.0
0.0
4.1
0.8
0.0
g/km
2.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.5
0.0
Reference 13.
3.1.2-12
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
carburetor vents, the float bowl, and the gaps around the throttle and choke shafts. Because evaporative emissions
are a function of the diurnal variation in ambient temperature and the number of trips per day, emissions are
best calculated in terms of evaporative emissions per day per vehicle. Emissions per day can be converted to
emissions per mile (if necessary) by dividing by an average daily miles per vehicle value. This value is likely to vary
from location to location, however. The composite evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor is given by:
i=n-12
kjd)
(3.1.2-7)
where: e,
m;
= The composite evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n) in Ib/day
(g/day)
= The diurnal evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor for model year (i) in Ib/day (g/day)
= The hot soak evaporative emission factor in Ib/trip (g/trip) for the i"1 model year
= The number of daily trips per vehicle (3.3 trips/vehicle-day is the nationwide average)
= The fraction of annual travel by the ith model year during calendar year n
The variables gj and kj are presented in Table 3.1.2-12 by model year.
Table 3.1.2-12. EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970 (Calif.)
1970 (non-Calif.)
1971
1972
High altituded
Pre-1971
1971-1972
By source"
Diurnal, g/day
26.0
16.3
26.0
16.3
12.1
37.4
17.4
Hot soak, g/trip
14.7
10.9
14.7
10.9
12.0
17.4
14.2
Composite emissions0
g/day
74.5
52.3
74.5
52.3
51.7
94.8
64.3
g/mi
2.53
1.78
2.53
1.78
1.76
3.22
2.19
g/km
1,57
1.11
1.57
1.11
1.09
2.00
1.36
aReferences 1,14 and 15.
See text for explanation.
cGram per day values are diurnal emissions plus hot soak emisssions multiplied by the average number of trips per day. Nationwide
data from References 16 and 17 indicate that the average vehicle is used for 3.3 trips per day. Gram per mile values were deter-
mined by dividing average g/day by the average nationwide travel per vehicle (29.4 mi/day) from Reference 16.
Vehicles without evaporative control were not tested at high altitude. Values presented here are the product of the ratio of pre-
1971 (low altitude) evaporative emissions to 1972 evaporative emissions and 1971-1972 high altitude emissions.
3.1.2.6 Particulate and Sulfur Oxide Emissions - Light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles emit relatively small
quantities of particulate and sulfur oxides in comparison with the emissions of the three pollutants discussed
above. For this reason, average rather than composite emission factors should be sufficiently accurate for
approximating particulate and sulfur oxide emissions from light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles. Average
emission factors for these pollutants are presented in Table 3.1.2-13. No Federal standards for these two
pollutants are presently in effect, although many areas do have opacity (antismoke) regulations applicable to
motor vehicles.
12/75
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
3.1.2-13
-------
Table 3.1.2-13. PARTICULATE AND SULFUR OXIDES
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Pollutant
Paniculate3
Exhaust
Tire wear
Sulfur oxides
(SOX asS02)
Emissions for Pre-1973 vehicles
g/mi
0.34
0.20
0.13
g/km
0.21
0.12
0.08
References 18, 19, and 20.
'-'Based on an average fuel consumption of 13.6 mi/gal (5.8 km/liter) from
Reference 21 and on the use of a fuel with a 0.032 percent sulfur content
from References 22 through 24 and a density of 6.1 Ib/gal (0.73 kg/liter)
from References 22 and 23.
References for Section 3.1.2
1. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N.Y. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. APTD-1544. March
1973.
2. Williams, M. E., J. T. White, L. A. Platte, and C. J. Domke. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance -
Analysis of the FY 72 Program. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No.
EPA460/2-74-001. February 1974.
3. Title 40-Protection of Environment. Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New Motor
Vehicle Engines. Federal Register. Part II. 35 (219): 17288-17313, November 10,1970.
4. Title 40-Protection of Environment. Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures. Federal Register. Part
II. 36(128): 12652-12664, July 2, 1971.
5. Kunselman, P., H. T. McAdams, C. J. Domke, and M. Williams. Automobile Exhaust Emission Modal
Analysis Model. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N. Y. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Mich. Under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. EPA-460/3-74-005. January 1974.
6. Strate, H. E. Nationwide Personal Transportation Study - Annual Miles of Automobile Travel. Report
Number 2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. April
1972.
7. 1973/74 Automobile Facts and Figures. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1974.
8. Smith, M. Development of Representative Driving Patterns at Various Average Route Speeds. Scott Research
Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, N.C. February 1974. (Unpublished report.)
9. Heavy-duty vehicle operation data. Collected by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Columbia, S.C. under contract
to Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. December 1974.
10. Ashby, H. A., R. C. Stahman, B. H. Eccleston, and R. W. Hum. Vehicle Emissions - Summer to Winter.
(Presented at Society of Automotive Engineers meeting. Warrendale, Pa. October 1974. Paper No. 741053.)
3.1.2-14 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
11. Vehicle Operations Survey. Scott Research Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared under contract
for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich, and Coordinating Research Council, New York,
N.Y. December 1971. (unpublished report.)
12. A Study of Emissions From Light Duty Vehicles in Six Cities. Automotive Environmental Systems, Inc.,
Westminister, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Under Contract No.
68-04-0042. Publication No. APTD-1497. March 1973.
13. Sigworth, H. W., Jr. Estimates of Motor Vehicle Emission Rates. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, N.C. March 1971. (Unpublished report.)
14. Liljedahl, D. R. A Study of Emissions from Light Duty Vehicles in Denver, Houston, and Chicago. Fiscal
Year 1972. Automobile Testing Laboratories, Inc., Aurora, Colo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No. APTD-1504. July 1973.
15. A Study of Emissions from 1966-1972 Light Duty Vehicles in Los Angeles and St. Louis. Automotive
Environmental Systems, Inc., Westminister, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Mich. Under Contract No. 68-01-0455. Publication No. APTD-1505. August 1973.
16. Goley, B. T., G. Brown, and E. Samson. Nationwide Personal Transportation Study. Household Travel in the
United States. Report No.7., U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington, D.C. December 1972.
17. 1971 Automobile Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association. Detroit, Mich. 1972.
18. Control Techniques for Particulate Air Pollutants. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
National Air Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D.C. Publication Number AP-51. January 1969.
19. Ter Haar, G. L., D. L. Lenare, J. N. Hu, and M. Brandt. Composition Size and Control of Automotive
Exhaust Particulates. J. Air Pol. Control Assoc. 22:39-46, January 1972.
20. Subramani, J. P. Particulate Air Pollution from Automobile Tire Tread Wear. Ph. D. Dissertation. University
of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. May 1971.
21. 1970 Automobile Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association. Detroit, Mich. 1972.
22. Shelton, E. M. and C. M. McKinney. Motor Gasolines, Winter 1970-1971. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines, Bartlesville, Okla. June 1971.
23. Shelton, E. M. Motor Gasolines, Summer 1971. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Bartlesville, Okla. January 1972.
24. Automotive Fuels and Air Pollution. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. March 1971.
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.2-15
-------
-------
3.1.3 Light-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles
by David S. Kircher
3.1.3.1 General - In comparison with the conventional, "uncontrolled," gasoline-powered, spark-ignited,
automotive engine, the uncontrolled diesel automotive engine is a low pollution powerplant. In its uncontrolled
form, the diesel engine emits (in grams per mile) considerably less carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons and
somewhat less nitrogen oxides than a comparable uncontrolled gasoline engine. A relatively small number of
light-duty diesels are in use in the United States.
3.1.3.2 Emissions — Carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides emission factors for the light-duty,
diesel-powered vehicle are shown in Table 3.1.3-1. These factors are based on tests of several Mercedes 220D
automobiles using a slightly modified version of the Federal light-duty vehicle test procedure.1 '2 Available
automotive diesel test data are limited to these results. No data are available on emissions versus average speed.
Emissions from light-duty diesel vehicles during a calendar year (n) and for a pollutant (p) can be approximately
calculated using:
c
i=n-12
ipn u'm
(3.1.2-1)
where: eno = Composite emission factor in grams per vehicle mile for calendar year (n) and pollutant (p)
cnp
c
ipn
The 1975 Federal test procedure emission rate for pollutant (p) in grams/mile for the i™1
model year at calendar year (n) (Table 3.1.3-1)
min = The fraction of total light-duty diesel vehicle miles driven by the
light-duty vehicles
Details of this calculation technique are discussed in section 3.1 .2.
model year diesel
The emission factors in Table 3.1.3-1 for particulates and sulfur oxides were developed using an average sulfur
content fuel in the case of sulfur oxides and the Dow Measuring Procedure on the 1975 Federal test cycle for
participate.1'6
Table 3.1.3-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY,
DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Carbon monoxide3
Exhaust hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides8'"
(NOxasNO2)
Particulateb
Sulfur oxides0
Emission factors.
Pre-1973 model years
g/mi
1.7
0.46
1.6
0.73
0.54
g/km
1.1
0.29
0.99
0.45
0.34
a Estimates are arithmetic mean of tests of vehicles, References 3 through
5 and 7.
bReference 4.
cCalculated using the fuel consumption rate reported in Reference 7 and
assuming the use of a diesel fuel containing 0.20 percent sulfur.
12/75
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
3.1.3-1
-------
References for Section 3.1.3
1. Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures. Federal Register, Part II. 56(128): 12652-12664, July 2,
1971.
2. Control of Air Pollution from Light Duty Diesel Motor Vehicles. Federal Register. Part II. 57(193):
20914-20923, October 4, 1972.
3. Springer, K. J. Emissions from a Gasoline - and Diesel-Powered Mercedes 220 Passenger Car. Southwest
Research Institute. San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, N.C., under Contract Number CPA 7044. June 1971.
4. Ashby, H. A. Final Report: Exhaust Emissions from a Mercedes-Benz Diesel Sedan. Environmental Protection
Agency. Ann Arbor, Mich. July 1972.
5. Test Results from the Last 9 Months — MB220D. Mercedes-Benz of North America. Fort Lee, New Jersey.
Report El 0472. March 1972.
6. Hare, C. T. and K. J. Springer. Evaluation of the Federal Clean Car Incentive Program Vehicle Test Plan.
Southwest Research Institute. San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Weiner Associates, Incorporated.,
Cockeysville, Md. October 1971.
7. Exhaust Emissions From Thiee Diesel-Powered Passenger Cars. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor,
Mich. March 1973. (unpublished report.)
3.1.3-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
3.1.4 Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Trucks by David S. Kircher
and Heavy-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles and Marcia E. Williams
3.1.4.1 General - This vehicle category consists of trucks and buses powered by gasoline-fueled, spark-ignited
internal combustion engines that are used both for commercial purposes (heavy trucks and buses) and personal
transportation (light trucks). In addition to the use classification, the categories cover different gross vehicle
weight (GVW) ranges. Light trucks range from 0 to 8500 pounds GVW (0 to 3856 kg GVW); heavy-duty vehicles
have GVWs of 8501 pounds (3856 kg) and over. The light-duty truck, because of its unique characteristics and
usage, is treated in a separate category in this revision to AP-42. Previously, light trucks with a GVW of 6000
pounds (2722 kg) or less were included in section 3.1.2 (Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles), and light trucks
with a GVW of between 6001 and 8500 pounds (2722-3855 kg) were included in section 3.1.4 (Heavy-Duty,
Gasoline-Powered Vehicles).
3.1.4.2 Light-Duty Truck Emissions - Because of many similarities to the automobile, light truck emission
factor calculations are very similar to those presented in section 3.1.2. The most significant difference is in the
Federal Test Procedure emission rate.
3.1.4.2.1. Carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides emissions - The calculation of composite exhaust
emission factors using the FTP method is given by:
enpstw = cipn min vips zipt riptw (3.1.4-1)
i=n-12
where: enpstw = Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), average
speed (s), ambient temperature (t), and percentage cold operation (w)
Cjpn = The FTP (1975 Federal Test Procedure) mean emission factor for the ith model year
light-duty trucks during calendar year (n) and for pollutant (p)
min = The fraction of annual travel by the i"1 model year light-duty trucks during calendar year
(n)
vips = The speed correction factor for the itn model year light-duty trucks for pollutant (p) and
average speed (s)
zipt = The temperature correction for the itn model year light-duty trucks for pollutant (p) and
ambient temperature (t)
riptw = The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor for the im model year light-duty trucks
for pollutant (p), ambient temperature (t), and percentage of cold operation (w)
The data necessary to complete this calculation for any geographic area are presented in Tables 3.1.4-1
through 3.1.4-5. Each of the variables in equation 3.1.4-1 is described in greater detail below. The technique is
illustrated, by example, in section 3.1.2.
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.4-1
-------
Table 3.1.4-1. EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY,
GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1972
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
All areas except
high altitude and
California3
High altitude0
Model
year
Pre-19683
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
125
66.5
64.3
53.5
53.5
42.8
189
106
98.0
88.0
84.1
84.1
g/km
77.6
41.3
39.9
33.2
33.2
26.6
117
65.8
60.9
54.6
52.2
52.2
Exhaust
hydrocarbons
g/mi
17.0
7.1
5.3
4.8
4.2
3.4
23.3
9.7
6.4
5.5
5.5
5.3
g/km
10.6
4.4
3.3
3.0
2.6
2.1
14.5
6.0
4.0
3.4
3.4
3.3
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
2.6
3.2
3.1
4.0
3.3
3.6
g/km
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
1.6
2.0
1.9
2.5
2.0
2.2
aReferences 1 through 4. California emission factors can be estimated as follows:
1. Use pre-1968 factors for all pre-1966 California light trucks.
2. Use 1968 factors for all 1966-1968 California light trucks.
3. For 1969-1972, use the above values multiplied by the ratio of California LDV emission factors to low altitude LDV emis-
sion factors (see section 3.1 2).
'-'Based on light-duty emission factors at high altitude compared with light-duty emission factors at low altitude (section 3.1.2).
Table 3.1.4-2. COEFFICIENTS FOR SPEED ADJUSTMENT CURVES FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS3
Location
Low altitude
(Excluding 1966-
1967 Calif. I
California
Low altitude
High altitude
Model
year
1957-1967
1966-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
v =e(A + BS + CS2I
vlps e
Hydrocarbons
A
0.953
0.957
1 070
1 005
0.901
0,943
0.883
0722
0.706
0840
0.787
B
-600x 1C-2
-5.98 x 10-2
-6.63 x 10-2
-627x ID'2
-5 70 x TO-2
-5.92 x TO"2
-5.58 x 10~2
-4.63x 10-2
-455x 10-2
-5.33 x TO"2
-499x 10-2
C
5.81 x 10-"
5.63 x 10-4
5.98 x 10 -4
5.80 x 10 ~4
5.59 x 10-"
5 67 x 10 ~*
5.52 x 10-"
480x 10 -4
4 84 x 10 ~4
5.33 x 10 ~4
4 99 x 10 ~4
Carbon monoxide
A
0967
0981
1.047
1.259
1.267
1 241
0.721
0.662
0.628
0.835
0.894
B
-607x ID"2
-6.22 x 10-2
-652x 10-2
-7 72 x 1C-2
-7.72 x 10~2
-7 52 x TO-2
-457 x TO-2
-4.23 x TO-2
-404x TO-2
-5.24 x 10-2
-5 54 x 10~2
C
5.78 x 10 -«
6 19 x 10 -4
6.01 x 10 "4
660x 10 -4
640x 10 -4
6 09 x 10 -*
4.56 x 10 -4
4.33 x 10 -4
4.26 x 10~4
498x 10 -4
4.99 x 10-"
v,ps = A + BS
Nitrogen oxides
A
0808
0.844
0.888
0.915
0.843
0843
0.602
0.642
0.726
0614
0697
B
0980 x 10 "2
0.798 x 10 -2
0569x ID-2
0.432 x 10 - 2
0.798 x ID-2
0804x TO-2
2.027 x ID"2
1.835x TO-2
1.403x 10 "2
1 978 x 10 ~2
1.553x TO-2
3Reference 5 Equations should not be extended beyond the range of data (15 to 45 mi/hr) These data are for light-duty vehicles and are assumed applicable to light-
duty trucks
3.1.4-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table 3.1.4-3. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION
FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS3
Location
Low altitude
(Excluding 1966-
1967 Calif.)
California
Low altitude
High altitude
Model
year
1957-1967
1966-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
1971-1972
Carbon monoxide
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
1.79
3.06
3.57
3.60
4.15
2.29
2.43
2.47
2.84
3.00
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.00
1.75
1.86
1.88
2.23
1.48
1.54
1.61
1.72
1.83
Hydrocarbons
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
1.87
2.96
2.95
2.51
2.75
2.34
2.10
2.04
2.35
2.17
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.12
1.66
1.65
1.51
1.63
1.37
1.27
1.22
1.36
1.35
Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.16
1.04
1.08
1.13
1.15
1.33
1.22
1.22
1.19
1.06
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.09
1.00
1.05
1.05
1.03
1.20
1.18
1.08
1.11
1.02
aDnving patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 6) were input to the modal emission analysis model
(see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 5 and 10 mi/hr; 8 and 16 km/hr) were divided by FTP
emission factors for hot operation to obtain the above results. The above data are approximate and represent tiie best currently
available information.
Table 3.1.4-4. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR8
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)D
0.061
0.095
0.094
0.103
0.083
0.076
0.076
0.063
0.054
0.043
0.036
0.024
0.185
Average annual
miles driven (b)
15,900
15,000
14,000
13,100
12,200
1 1 ,300
10,300
9,400
8,500
7,600
6,700
a x b
970
1,425
1,316
1,349
1,013
859
783
592
459
327
241
6,700 161
4,500 ; 832
Fraction
of annual
travel (m)c
0.094
0.138
0.127
0.131
0.098
0.083
0.076
0.057
0.044
0.032
0.023
0.016
0.081
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1972 (Reference 7).
bReferences 7 and 8.
Cm=ab/Sab.
12/75
EMISSION FACTORS
3.1.4-3
-------
Table 3.1.4-5. LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTORS AND
HOT/COLD VEHICLE OPERATION CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR FTP EMISSION FACTORS8
Pollutant
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
Temperature correction
b
-0.0127 t+ 1.95
-0.0113t+ 1.81
-0.0046 t + 1 .36
Hot/cold operation
correction [f(tj] ^
0.0045 t + 0.02
0.0079 t + 0.03
-0.0068 t+ 1.64
aReference 9. Temperature (t) is expressed in F In order to apply these equations, C must be first converted to F. The appro-
priate conversion formula is F=(9/5)C + 32. For temperatures expressed on the Kelvin (K) scale: F=9/5 (K-273.16) +32.
The formulae for z. enable the correction of the FTP emission factors for ambient temperature effects only. The amount of
cold/hot operation is not attected. The formulae for f (t), on the other hand, are part of equation 3 1.4-2 for calculating rlptw.
The variable r|ptw corrects for cold/hot operation as well as ambient temperature. Note: z( t can be applied without i|ptw, but
not vice versa.
FTP Emission Factor (Cjpn). The results of the EPA light-duty truck surveillance programs are summarized in
Table 3.1.4-1. These data are divided by geographic area into: low altitude (non-California), high altitude, and
California only. California emission factors are presented separately (as a footnote) because light-duty trucks
operated in California have been, in the case of several model years, subject to emission standards that differ from
those standards applicable to light trucks under the Federal emission control program. Emissions at high altitude
are differentiated from those at low altitude to account for the effect that altitude has on air-fuel ratios and
concomitant emissions. The tabulated values are applicable to calendar year 1972 for each model year.
Fraction of Annual Travel by Model Year (mm). A sample calculation of this variable is presented n Table
3.1.4-4. In the example, nationwide statistics are used and the fraction of in-use vehicles by model year (vehicle
age) are weighted on the basis of the annual miles driven (again, nationwide data are used). The calculation may
be "localized" to reflect local (county, state, etc.) vehicle age mix, annual miles driven, or both. Otherwise, the
national data can be used. The data presented in Table 3.1.4-3 are for calendar year 1972 only; for later calendar
years, see Appendix D.
Speed Correction Factors (vjps). Speed correction factors enable the "adjustment" of FTP emission factors to
account for differences in average route speed. Because the implicit average route speed of the FTP is 19,6 mi/hr
(31.6 km/hr), estimates of emissions at higher or lower average speeds require a correction.
It is important to note the difference between "average route speed" and "steady speed." Average route speed
is trip-related and based on a composite of the driving modes (idle, cruise, acceleration, deceleration) encountered
during a typical home-to-work trip, for example. Steady speed is highway-facility-onented. For instance, a group
of vehicles traveling over an uncongested freeway link (with a volume to capacity ratio of 0.1, for example) might
be traveling at a steady speed of about 55 mi/hr (89 km/hr). Note, however, that steady speeds, even at the link
level, are unlikely to occur where resistance to faffic flow occurs (unsynchronized traffic signaling, congested
flow, etc.).
In previous revisions to this section, the limited data available for correcting for average speed were pr3sented
graphically. Recent research however, resulted in revised speed relationships by model year.5 To facilitate the
presentation, the data are given as equations and appropriate coefficients in Table 3.1.4-2. These relationships
were developed by performing five major tasks. First, urban driving pattern data collected during the CAPE-10
Vehicle Operation Survey10 were processed by city and time of day into freeway, non-freeway, and composite
speed-mode matrices. Second, a large number of driving patterns were computer-generated for a range of average
speeds (15 to 45 mi/hr; 24 to 72 km/hr) using weighted combinations of freeway and non-freeway matrices. Each
of these patterns was filtered for "representativeness." Third, the 88 resulting patterns were input (second by
second speeds) to the EPA modal emission analysis model (see 3.1.2.3).11 The output of the model was
estimated emissions for each of 11 vehicle groups (see Table 3.1.4-2 for a listing of these groups). Fourth, a
regression analysis was performed to relate estimated emissions to average route speed for each of the 11 vehicle
groups. Fifth, these relationships were normalized to 19.6 mi/hr (31.6 km/hr) and summarized in Table 3 1.4-2.
3.1.4-4 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 12/75
-------
The equations in Table 3.1.4-2 apply only for the range of the data — from 15 to 45 mi/hr (24 to 72 km/hr).
Because of the need, in some situations, to estimate emissions at very low average speeds, correction factors have
been developed for this purpose. The speed correction factors for 5 and 10 mi/hr (8 and 16 km/hr) presented in
Table 3.1.4-3 were developed using a method somewhat like that described above, again using the modal emission
model. Because the modal emission model predicts warmed-up vehicle emissions, the use of this model to develop
speed correction factors makes the assumption that a given speed correction factor applies equally well to hot and
cold vehicle operation.
Temperature Correction Factor (zjp()- The 1975 FTP requires that emission measurements be made within the
limits of a relatively narrow temperature band (68 to 86°F). Such a band facilitates uniform testing in
laboratories without requiring extreme ranges of temperature control. Present emission factors for motor vehicle
are based on data from the standard Federal test (assumed to be at 75°F). Recently, EPA and the Bureau of
Mines undertook a test program to evaluate the effect of ambient temperatures on motor vehicle exhaust
emissions levels.9 The study indicates that changes in ambient temperature result in significant changes in
emissions during cold start-up operation. Because many Air Quality Control Regions have temperature
characteristics differing considerably from the 68 to 86°F range, the temperature correction factor should be
applied. The corrections factors are expressed in equational form and presented in Table 3.1.4-5 and can be
applied between 20 and 80°F. For temperatures outside this range, the appropriate endpoint correction factor
should be applied.
Hot/Cold Vehicle Operation Correction Factor (rjptw). The 1975 FTP measures emissions over three types of
driving: a cold transient phase (representative of vehicle slart-up after a long engine-off period), a hot transient
phase (representative of vehicle start-up after a short engine-off period), and a stabilized phase (representative of
warmed-up vehicle operation). The weighting factors used in the 1975 FTP are 20 percent, 27 percent, and 53
percent of total miles (time) in each of the three phases, respectively. Thus, when the 1975 FTP emission factors
are applied to a given region for the purpose of assessing air quality, 20 percent of the light-duty trucks in the
area of interest are assumed to be operating in a cold condition, 27 percent in a hot start-up condition, and 53
percent in a hot stabilized condition. For non-catalyst equipped vehicles (all pre-1975 model year vehicles),
emission in the two hot phases are essentially equivalent on a grams per mile (g/km) basis. Therefore, the 1975
FTP emission factor represents 20 percent cold operation and 80 percent hot operation.
Many situations exist in which the application of these particular weighting factors may be inappropriate. For
example, light-duty truck operation in center city areas may have a much higher percentage of cold operation
during the afternoon pollutant emissions peak when work-to-home trips are at a maximum and vehicles have
been standing for 8 hours. The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor allows the cold operation phase to
range from 0 to 100 percent of total light-duty truck operations. This correction factor is a function of the
percentage of cold operation (w) and the ambient temperature (t). The correction factor is:
w+(100-w)f(t)
rjptw = (3 • 1 -4-2)
20+80f(t)
where: f(t) is given in Table 3.1.4-5.
3.1.4.2.2 Crankcase and evaporative hydrocarbon emissions — Evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emissions
are determined using:
fn = L, hjmin (3.1.4-3)
i=n-12
where: fn = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
hj = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission rate for the im model year.
Emission factors for this source are reported in Table 3.1.4-6. The crankcase and evaporative
emissions reported in the table are added together to arrive at this variable.
weighted annual travel of the i1 model year vehicle during calendar year (n)
12/75 EMISSION FACTORS 3.1.4-5
-------
Table 3.1.4-6. CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS FOR
LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
All areas
except high
altitude and
California0
High altitude
Model
years
Pre-1963
1963-1967
1968-1970
1971
1972
Pre-1963
1963-1967
1968-1970
1971-1972
Crankcase
g/mi
4.6
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.6
2.4
0.0
0.0
emissions3
g/km
2.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
Evaporative
g/mi
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.1
3.1
4.6
4.6
4.6
3.9
emissions
g/km
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.9
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.4
aReference 12. Tabulated values were determined by assuming that two-thirds of the light-duty trucks are 6000 Ibs GVW (2700 kg)
and under and that one-third are 6001 to 8500 Ibs GVW (2700 to 3860 kg).
Light-duty vehicle evaporative data (section 3.1.2) and heavy-duty vehicle evaporative data (Table 3.1.4-8) were used to estimate
the values.
GFor California: Evaporative emissions for the 1970 model year are 1.9 g/km (3.1 g/mi). All other model years are the same as
those reported as "All areas except high altitude and California." Crankcase emissions for the pre-1961 California light-duty trucks
are4.6g/mi (2.9 g/km) and 1961-1963 models years are 2.4 g/mi (1.5 g/km) all post-1963 model year vehicles are 0.0 g/mi (0.0
g/km).
3.1.4.2.3 Sulfur oxide and particulate emissions — Sulfur oxide and particulate emission factors for all model
year light trucks are presented in Table 3.1.4-7. Sulfur oxides factors are based on fuel sulfur content arid fuel
consumption. Tire-wear particulate factors are based on automobile test results, a premise necessary because of
the lack of data. Light truck tire wear is likely to result in greater particulate emissions than automobiles because
of larger tires and heavier loads on tires.
Table 3.1.4-7. PARTICULATE AND SULFUR OXIDES
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY,
GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Pollutant
Particulate3
Exhaust
Tire wear'3
Sulfur oxides0
(SOxasSO2)
Emissions, Pre-1973 vehicles
9/mi
0.34
0.20
0.18
g/km
0.21
0.12
0.11
aReferences 13 and 14. Based on tests of automobiles.
Reference 14 summarized tests of automotive tire wear particulate. It is
assumed that light-duty truck emissions are similar. The automotive tests
assume a four-tire vehicle. If corrections for vehicles with a greater num-
ber of tires are needed, multiply the above value by the number of tires
and divide by four.
cBased on an average fuel consumption 10.0 mi/gal (4.3 km/liter) from
Reference 15 and on the use of a fuel with a 0.032 percent sulfur content
from References 17 and 18 and a density of 6.1 Ib/gal (0.73 kg/liter)
from References 17 and 18.
3.1.4-6
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
12/75
-------
3.1.4.3 Heavy-Duty Vehicle Emissions — Emissions research on heavy-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles has been
limited in contrast to that for light-duty vehicles and b'ght-duty trucks. As a result, cold operation correction
factors, temperature correction factors, speed correction factors, idle emission rates, etc. are not available for
heavy-duty vehicles. For some of these variables, however, light-duty vehicle data can be applied to heavy-duty
vehicles. In instances in which light-duty vehicle data are not appropriate, a value of unity if assumed.
3.1.4.3.1 Carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxides emissions — The calculation of heavy-duty,
gasoline-powered vehicle exhaust emission factors can be accomplished using:
cnps
n
= v
i=n-12
cipn min vips
(3.1.4-4)
where: enpS = Composite emission factor in grams per mile (grams per kilometer) for calendar year (n) and
pollutant (p) and average speed(s)
Lipn
= The test procedure emission rate (Table 3.1.4-8) for pollutant (p) in g/mi (g/km) for the i"1
model year in calendar year (n)
min ~ The weighted annual travel of the i"1 model year vehicles during calendar year (n). The
determination of this variable involves the use of the vehicle year distribution.
vips = The speed correction factor for the i^1 model year vehicles for pollutant (p) and average
speed(s)
Table 3.1.4-8. EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY,
GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1972a
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
All areas except
high altitude
High altitude
onlyb
Model
year
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
238
188
188
188
359
299
299
299
g/km
148
117
117
117
223
186
186
186
Exhaust
hydrocarbons
g/mi
35.4
13.8
13.7
13.6
48.6
15.0
14.9
14.8
g/km
22.0
8.6
8.5
8.4
30.2
9.3
9.3
9.2
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.8
12.6
12.6
12.5
4.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
g/km
4.2
7.8
7.8
7.8
2.5
5.0
5.0
5.0
aData from References 19 and 20.
"Based on light-duty emissions at high altitude compared with light-duty emissions at low altitudes.
A brief discussion of the variables presented in the above equation is necessary to help clarify their
formulation and use. The following paragraphs further describe the variables cjpn, min, an(^ vips as they apply to
heavy-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles.
Test procedure emission factor (qpn). The emission factors for heavy-duty vehicles (Table 3.1.4-8) for all areas
are based on tests of vehicles operated on-the-road over the San Antonio Road Route (SARR). The SARR,
located in San Antonio, Texas, is 7.24 miles long and includes freeway, arterial, and local/collector highway
segments. A constant volume sampler is carried on board each of the test vehicles for collection of a
12/75
EMISSION FACTORS
3.1.4-7
-------
proportional part of the exhaust gas from the vehicle. This sample is later analyzed to yield mass emission rates.
Because the SARR is an actual road route, the average speed varies depending on traffic conditions at 1he time of
the test. The average speed tends to be around 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr) with about 20 percent of the time spent at
idle. The test procedure emission factor is composed entirely of warmed-up vehicle operation. Based on
preliminary analysis of vehicle operation data6, almost all heavy-duty vehicle operation is under warmed-up
conditions.
Weighted annual mileage (mjn). The determination of this variable is illustrated in Table 3.1.4-9. For purposes of
this illustration, nation-wide statistics have been used. Localized data, if available, should be substituted when
calculating the variable mjn for a specific area under study.
Table 3.1.4-9. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF GASOLINE-POWERED,
HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLE ANNUAL TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR3
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)b
0.037
0.070
0.078
0.086
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.068
0.059
0.053
0.044
0.032
0.247
Average annual
miles driven (b)
19,000
18,000
17,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
9,500
9,000
8,500
8,000
7,500
7,000
a x b
703
1,260
1,326
1,376
1,050
900
750
646
531
451
352
240
1,729
f-raction
of annual
travel (m)c
0.062
0.111
0.117
0.122
0.093
0.080
0.066
0.057
0.047
0.040
0.031
0.021
0.153
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1972 (Reference 7).
bReference 7.
cm = ab/Sab.
Speed correction factor (vjps). Data based on tests of heavy-duty emissions versus average speed are unavailable.
In the absence of these data, light-duty vehicle speed correction factors are recommended. The data presented in
Tables 3.1.4-10 and Table 3.1.4-11 should be considered as interim heavy-duty vehicle speed correction factors
until appropriate data become available.
3.1.4-8
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
12/75
-------
a
GO
UJ
o
I
in
^^
1-
0
HEAVY-
EC
O
u.
CO
oc
0
0
^^
u.
z
o
fr
U
in
cc
EC
O
U
0
UJ
UJ
f\
CO
o
r™
CO
CU
JQ
CO
CO
CO
+
<
II
to
Q.
CN
CO
+
CO
CD
+
II
VI
Q.
c/j
u>
|O
X
O
c
O)
2
..
2
CD
73
'x
O
c
o
c
o
-e
CO
O
C
E
k.
CO
o
2
1
CD
^
CO
^
o
00
<
0
CQ
<
CO
CD
C
CO
3
CM CN CM CM
1 II 1
o o cb o
< — * — r— r—
X X X X
o en r^ in
00 CO CM CO
ffl LO o cq
O C> CM <-'
00 00 CM CM
o oo o «*
CO CO CO CO
o ci o o
1 1 1 1
o o o o
X X X X
CO «- CD CO
r>; p in cq
LO CD ^J- Tt
CN CM CM CN
1 1 1 1
o o o o
X X X X
r~. CM r^ co
O LO m CN
CO CD ^" ^~
1)1 1
r^~ r>- «— CN
CO 't CM CO
O) o r~ CD
CD «-' d d
T T T T
o o o o
^— T^ ^— ^—
X X X X
«- 00 CM O
cq as in oq
in in in ^~
CN CM CN CN
1 1 1 1
o o o o
*~ r— T— T—
X X X X
O CO CO CO
o CD. in co
co CD in Tt
1 1 1 1
CO O CO CM
LO r~ oo CM
OJ O 00 !•>•
d «-' d d
CM CM
f*» r** ,— . r^-
fi O5 ° O5
O) T C35 T
«- O «- O
2 o5 S S5
0-^0.^
CD 0)
+-* -t-1
^ X
•D
8
E
in
o
*j
in
-o
c
o —:
> !:
•o «-
C CD
o Q.
l"1?-
0 .
DC 2 W
12/75
EMISSION FACTORS
3.1.4-9
-------
Table 3.1.4-11. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES3
Location
Low
altitude
High
altitude
Model
year
Pre-1970
1970-1972
Pre-1970
1970-1972
Carbon
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
3.06
2.29
monoxide
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.75
1.48
2.43 | 1.54
i •-••-•
Hydrocarbons | Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
2.96
2.34
2.10
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.66
1.37
1.27
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.04
1.33
1.22
10 mi/hr)
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.00
1.20
1.18
aDriving patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 6) were input to the modal emission analysis model
(see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 5 and 10 mi/hr; 8 and 16 km/hr) were divided by FTP
emission factors for hot operation to obtain the above results. The above data represent the best currently available information
for light-duty vehicles. These data are assumed applicable to heavy-duty vehicles given the lack of better information.
For an explanation of the derivation of these factors, see section 3.1.4.2.1.
In addition to exhaust emission factors, the calculation of evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emissions
are determined using:
= £
i=n-12
himi
'in
(3.1.4-5)
where: fn = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
h, = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission rate for the i"-1 model year.
Emission factors for this source are reported in Table 3.1.4-12.
= The weighted annual travel of the i*n model year vehicle during calendar year (n)
'in
Table 3.1.4-12. CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION
FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
All areas except
high altitude
and California
California only
High altitude
Model
years
Pre-1968
1968-1972
Pre-1964
1964-1972
Pre-1968
1968-1972
Crankcase hydrocarbon3
g/mi
5.7
0.0
5.7
0.0
5.7
0.0
g/km
3.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
Evaporative hydrocarbons'3
g/mi
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
7.4
7.4
g/km
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
4.6
4.6
aCrankcase factors are from Reference 12.
''References 1,21, and 22 were used to estimate evaporative emission factors for heavy-duty vehicles. Equation 3.1.2-6 was used to
calculate g/mi (g/km) values. (Evaporative emission factor = g + kd). The heavy-duty vehicle diurnal evaporative emissions (g) were
assumed to be three times the light-duty vehicle value to account for the larger size fuel tanks used on heavy-duty vehicles. Nine
trips per day (d = number of trips per day) from Reference 6 were used in conjunction with the light-duty vehicle hot soak emis-
sions (k) to yield a total evaporative emission rate in grams per day. This value was divided by 36.2 mi/day (58.3 km/day) from
Reference 7 to obtain the per mile (per kilometer) rate.
3.1.4-10
Internal Combustion Engine Sources
12/75
-------
3.1.4.3.2 Sulfur oxide and particulate emissions — Sulfur oxide and particulate emission factors for all model
year heavy-duty vehicles are presented in Table 3.1.4-13. Sulfur oxides factors are based on fuel sulfur content
and fuel consumption. Tire-wear particulate factors are based on automobile test results — a premise necessary
because of the lack of data. Truck tire wear is likely to result in greater particulate emissions than automobiles
because of larger tires, heavier loads on tires, and more tires per vehicle. Although the factors presented in Table
3.1.4-13 can be adjusted for the number of tires per vehicle, adjustments cannot be made to account for the other
differences.
Table 3.1.4-13. PARTICULATE AND SULFUR OXIDES
EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY,
GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulate
Exhaust3
Tire wearb
Sulfur oxides0
(SOX asSO2)
Emissions
g/mi
0.91
0.20T
0.36
g/km
0.56
0.1 2T
0.22
aCalculated from the Reference 13 value of 12lb/103 gal (1.46 g/liter)
gasoline. A 6.0 mi/gal (2.6 km/liter) value from Reference 23 was used
to convert to a per kilometer (per mile) emission factor.
Reference 14. The data from this reference are for passenger cars. In the
absence of specific data for heavy-duty vehicles, they are assumed to be
representative of truck-tire-wear particulate. An adjustment is made for
trucks with more than four tires. T equals the number of tires divided by
four.
cBased on an average fuel consumption of 6.0 mi/gal (2.6 km/liter) from
Reference 23, on a 0.04 percent sulfur content from Reference 16 and
17, and on a density of 6.1 Ib/gal (0.73 kg/liter) from References 16 and
17.
References for Section 3.1.4
1. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N.Y. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. APTD-1544. March
1973.
2. Williams, M. E., J. T. White, L. A. Platte, and C. J. Domke. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance -
Analysis of the FY 72 Program. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No.
EPA-460/2-74-001. February 1974.
3. A Study of Baseline Emissions on 6,000 to 14,000 Pound Gross Vehicle Weight Trucks. Automobile
Environmental Systems, Inc., Westminister, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Mich. June 1973.
4. Ingalls, M. N. Baseline Emissions on 6,000 to 14,000 Pound Gross Vehicle Weight Trucks. Southwest
Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich.
under Contract No. 68-01-0467. Publication No. APTD-1571. June 1973.
5. Smith, M. Development of Representative Driving Patterns at Various Average Route Speeds. Scott Research
Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, N.C. February 1974. (Unpublished report.)
2/75 EMISSION FACTORS
3.1.4-11
-------
6. Heavy-duty vehicle operation data (CAPE-21) collected by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Columbia, S.C.,
under contract to Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. December 1974.
7. 1972 Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Washington, D.C. 1974.
8. Strate, H. E. Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — Annual Miles of Automobile Travel. Report
Number 2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. April
1972.
9. Ashby, H. A., R. C. Stahman, B. H. Eccleston, and R. W. Hum. Vehicle Emissions — Summer to Winter.
(Presented at Society of Automotive Engineers meeting. Warrendale, Pa. October 1974. Paper No. 741053.)
10. Vehicle Operations Survey. Scott Research Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared under contract
for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich., and Coordinating Research Council, New York,
N.Y. December 1971. (unpublished report.)
11. Kunselman, P., H. T. McAdams, C. J. Domke, and M. Williams. Automobile Exhaust Emission Modal
Analysis Model. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N.Y. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. EPA-460/3-74-005. January 1974.
12. Sigworth, H. W., Jr. Estimates of Motor Vehicle Emission Rates. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, N.C. March 1971. (Unpublished report.)
13. Control Techniques for Particulate Air Pollutants. U.S. DHEW, National Air Pollution Control Administra-
tion, Washington, D.C. Publication Number AP-51. January 1969.
14. Subramani, J. P. Parliculate Air Pollution from Automobile Tire Tread Wear. Ph.D. Dissertation. University
of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. May 1971.
15. Automobile Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association. Washington, D.C. 1971.
16. Shelton, E. M. and C. M. McKinney. Motor Gasolines, Winter 1970-1971. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines, Bartlesville, Okla. June 1971.
17. Shelton, E. M. Motor Gasolines, Summer 1971. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Bartlesville, Okla. January 1972.
18. Automotive Fuels and Air Pollution. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.March 1971.
19. Ingalls, M. N. and K. J. Springer. In-Use Heavy Duty Gasoline Truck Emissions. Southwest Research
Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. December
1974. (Unpublished report.)
20. Ingalls, M. N. and K. J. Springer. In-Use Heavy Duty Gasoline Truck Emissions, Part 1. Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NX., under Contract No. EHS 70-113.
Publication No. EPA-460/3-73-002-a. February 1973.
21. Liljedahl, D. R. A Study of Emissions from Light Duty Vehicles in Denver, Houston, and Chicago. Fiscal
Year 1972. Automotive Testing Laboratories, Inc., Aurora, Colo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No. APTD 1504.
22. A Study of Emissions from 1966-1972 Light Duty Vehicles in Los Angeles and St. Louis. Automotive
Environmental Systems, Inc., Westminister, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann
Arbor, Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0455. Publication No. APTD-1505. August 1973.
23. 1973 Motor Truck Facts. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C. 1973.
3 i 4.12 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 12/75
-------
3.1.5 Heavy-Duty, Diesel-Powered Vehicles revised by David S Kircher
and Marcia E. Williams
3.1.5.1 General1'2 - On the highway, heavy-duty diesel engines are primarily used in trucks and buses. Diesel
engines in any application demonstrate operating principles that are significantly different from those of the
gasoline engine.
3.1.5.2 Emissions — Diesel trucks and buses emit pollutants from the same sources as gasoline-powered vehicles:
exhaust, crankcase blow-by, and fuel evaporation. Blow-by is practically eliminated in the diesel, however,
because only air is in the cylinder during the compression stroke. The low volatility of diesel fuel along with the
use of closed injection systems essentially eliminates evaporation losses in diesel systems.
Exhaust emissions from diesel engines have the same general characteristics of auto exhausts. Concentrations
of some of the pollutants, however, may vary considerably. Emissions of sulfur dioxide are a direct function of
the fuel composition. Thus, because of the higher average sulfur content of diesel fuel (0.20 percent S) as
compared with gasoline (0.035 percent S), sulfur dioxide emissions are relatively higher from diesel exhausts.3'4
Because diesel engines allow more complete combustion and use less volatile fuels than spark-ignited engines,
their hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions are relatively low. Because hydrocarbons in diesel exhaust
represent largely unburned diesel fuel, their emissions are related to the volume of fuel sprayed into the
combustion chamber. Both the high temperature and the large excesses of oxygen involved in diesel combustion
are conducive to high nitrogen oxide emission, however.6
Particulates from diesel exhaust are in two major forms — black smoke and white smoke. White smoke is
emitted when the fuel droplets are kept cool in an environment abundant in oxygen (cold starts). Black smoke is
emitted when the fuel droplets are subjected to high temperatures in an environment lacking in oxygen (road
conditions).
Emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles during a calendar year (n) and for a pollutant (p) can be
approximately calculated using:
e = > c- v- ("31 5-H
enps /-< cipnvips v.j.i.j i)
i=n-12
where: enpS = Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), and average
speed (s)
cipn = The emission rate in g/mi (g/km) for the i"1 model year vehicles in calendar year (n) over a
transient urban driving schedule with an average speed of approximately 18 mi/hr (29
km/hr)
VjpS = The speed correction factor for the i"1 model year heavy-duty diesel vehicles for pollutant
(p) and average speed (s)
Values for Cjpn are given in Table 3.1.5-1. These emission factors are based on tests of vehicles on-the-road
over the San Antonio Road Route (SARR). The SARR, located in San Antonio, Texas, is 7.24 miles long and
includes freeway, arterial, and local/collector highway segments.7 A constant volume sampler is carried on board
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.5-1
-------
each test vehicle for collection of a proportional part of the vehicle's exhaust. This sample is later analyzed to
yield mass emission rates. Because the SARR is an actual road route, the average speed varies depending on traffic
conditions at the time of the test. The average speed, however, tends to be around 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), with
about 20 percent of the time spent at idle. The test procedure emission factor is composed entirely of warmed-up
vehicle operation. Based on a preliminary analysis of vehicle operation data, heavy-duty vehicles operate primarily
(about 95 percent) in a warmed-up condition.
Table 3.1.5-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
(ALL PRE-1973 MODEL YEARS) FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1972
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulatec
Sulfur oxides0-0'
(SOxasSO2)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
(NOxasN02)
Aldehydes0
(as HCHO)
Organic acids0
Truck emissions3
g/mi
1.3
2.8
28.7
4.6
20.9
0.3
0.3
g/km
0.81
1.7
17.8
2.9
13.0
0.2
City bus emissions'3
g/mi
1.3
2.8
21.3
4.0
21.5
0.3
0.2 0.3
g/km
0.81
1.7
13.2
2.5
13.4
0.2
0.2
aTruck emissions are based on over-the-road sampling of diesel trucks by Reference 7. Sampling took place on the San XXntonio
(Texas) Road Route (SARR), which is 7.24 miles (11.7 kilometers) long and includes freeway, arterial, and local/collector high-
way segments. Vehicles average about 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr) over this road route.
''Bus emission factors are also based on the SARR. 13-Mode emission data from Reference 6 were converted to SARR values using
cycle-to-cycle conversion factors from Reference 8.
cReference 6. Tire wear paniculate not included in above particulate emission factors. See tire wear paniculate, heavy-duty gaso-
line section.
Data based on assumed fuel sulfur content of 0.20 percent. A fuel economy of 4.6 mi/gal (2.0 km/liter) was used from Reference
9.
The speed correction factor, vjps, can be computed using data in Table 3.1.5-2. Table 3.1.5-2 gives heavy-duty
diesel HC, CO, and NOX emission factors in grams per minute for the idle mode, an urban transient mode with
average speed of 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), and an over-the-road mode with an average speed of approximately 60
mi/hr (97 km/hr). For average speeds less than 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), the correction factor is:
vips
Urban + (-^ - 1) Idle
Urban
(3.1.5-2)
where: s is the average speed of interest (in mi/hr), and the urban and idle values (in g/min) are obtained from
Table 3.1.5-2. For average speeds above 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), the correction factor is:
18
42S [(60-S) Urban + (S-18) Over the Road]
vips =
(3.1.5-3)
Urban
Where: S is the average speed (in mi/hr) of interest. Urban and over-the-road values (in g/min) are obtained from
Table 3.1.5-2. Emission factors for heavy-duty diesel vehicles assume all operation to be under warmed-up vehicle
conditions. Temperature correction factors, therefore, are not included because ambient temperature has minimal
effects on warmed-up operation.
3.1.5-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table 3.1.5-2. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL VEHICLES
UNDER DIFFERENT OPERATING CONDITIONS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
1 Emission factors? g/min
| ; ! Over-the-road
Pollutant !
Carbon monoxide !
Hydrocarbons 1
Nitrogen oxides \
(NOxasNO2)
Idle
0.64
0.32
1.03
Urban [18 mi/hr (29 km/hr)]
8.61
1.38 ;
6.27
[60 mi/hr (97
5.40
2.25
28.3
km/hr]
a Reference 7. Computed from data contained in the reference.
References for Section 3.1.5
1. The Automobile and Air Pollution: A Program for Progress. Part II. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. December 1967. p. 34.
2. Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Hydrocarbons from Mobile Sources. U.S.
DHEW, PHS, EHS, National Air Pollution Control Administration. Washington, D.C. Publication Number
AP-66. March 1970. p. 2-9 through 2-11.
3. McConnel, G. and H. E. Howels. Diesel Fuel Properties and Exhaust Gas-Distant Relations? Society of
Automotive Engineers. New York, N.Y. Publication Number 670091. January 1967.
4. Motor Gasolines, Summer 1969. Mineral Industry Surveys. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines.
Washington, D.C. Petroleum Products Survey Number 63.1970. p. 5.
5. Burn, R. W. The Diesel Fuel Involvement in Air Pollution. (Presented at the National Fuels and Lubricants
Meeting, New York, N.Y. September 17-18, 1969).
6. Young, T, C. Unpublished emission factor data on diesel engines. Engine Manufacturers Association Emission
Standards Committee, Chicago, 111. October 16, 1974.
7. Ingalls, M. N. and K. J. Springer. Mass Emissions from Diesel Trucks Operated over a Road Course. Southwest
Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich.
under Contract No. 68-01-2113. Publication No. EPA-460/3-74-017. August 1974.
8. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Interim Standards Position Paper. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Control
Technology Division, Ann Arbor, Mich. January 1975.
9. Truck and Bus Fuel Economy. U.S. Department of Transportation, Cambridge, Mass, and Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Report No. 7 of seven panel reports. January 10, 1975.
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.5-3
-------
-------
3.3 OFF-HIGHWAY, STATIONARY SOURCES by David S. Kircher and
Charles C. Masser
In general, engines included in this category are internal combustion engines used in applications similar to those
associated with external combustion sources (see Chapter 1). The major engines within this category are gas
turbines and large, heavy-duty, general utility reciprocating engines. Emission data currently available for these
engines are limited to gas turbines and natural-gas-fired, heavy-duty, general utility engines. Most stationary
internal combustion engines are used to generate electric power, to pump gas or other fluids, or to compress air for
pneumatic machinery.
3.3.1 Stationary Gas Turbines for Electric Utility Power Plants
3.3.1.1 General — Stationary gas turbines find application in electric power generators, in gas pipeline pump and
compressor drives, and in various process industries. The majority of these engines are used in electrical generation
for continuous, peaking, or standby power.1 The primary fuels used are natural gas and No. 2 (distillate) fuel oil,
although residual oil is used in a few applications.
3.3.1.2 Emissions — Data on gas turbines were gathered and summarized under an EPA contract.^ The contractor
found that several investigators had reported data on emissions from gas turbines used in electrical generation but
that little agreement existed among the investigators regarding the terms in which the emissions were expressed.
The efforts represented by this section include acquisition of the data and their conversion to uniform terms.
Because many sets of measurements reported by the contractor were not complete, this conversion often involved
assumptions on engine air flow or fuel flow rates (based on manufacturers' data). Another shortcoming of the
available information was that relatively few data were obtained at loads below maximum rated (or base) load.
Available data on the population and usage of gas turbines in electric utility power plants are fairly extensive,
and information from the various sources appears to be in substantial agreement. The source providing the most
complete information is the Federal Power Commission, which requires major utilities (electric revenues of $1
million or more) to submit operating and financial data on an annual basis. Sawyer and Farmer^ employed these
data to develop statistics on the use of gas turbines for electric generation in 1971. Although their report involved
only the major, publicly owned utilities (not the private or investor-owned companies), the statistics do appear to
include about 87 percent of the gas turbine power used for electric generation in 1971.
Of the 253 generating stations listed by Sawyer and Farmer, 137 have more than one turbine-generator unit.
From the available data, it is not possible to know how many hours each turbine was operated during 1971 for
these multiple-turbine plants. The remaining 116 (single-turbine) units, however, were operated an average of 1196
hours during 1971 (or 13.7 percent of the time), and their average load factor (percent of rated load) during
operation was 86.8 percent. This information alone is not adequate for determining a representative operating
pattern for electric utility turbines, but it should help prevent serious errors.
Using 1196 hours of operation per year and 250 starts per year as normal, the resulting average operating day is
about 4.8 hours long. One hour of no-load time per day would represent about 21 percent of operating time, which
is considered somewhat excessive. For economy considerations, turbines are not run at off-design conditions any
longer than necessary, so time spent at intermediate power points is probably minimal. The bulk of turbine
operation must be at base or peak load to achieve the high load factor already mentioned.
If it is assumed that time spent at off-design conditions includes 15 percent at zero load and 2 percent each at
25 percent, 50 percent, and 75 percent load, then the percentages of operating time at rated load (100 percent)
and peak load (assumed to be 125 percent of rated) can be calculated to produce an 86.8 percent load factor.
These percentages turn out to be 19 percent at peak load and 60 percent at rated load; the postulated cycle based
on this line of reasoning is summarized in Table 3.3.1-1.
1/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.3.1-1
-------
Table 3.3.1-1. TYPICAL OPERATING CYCLE FOR ELECTRIC
UTILITY TURBINES
Condition,
% of rated
power
0
25
50
75
100 (base)
125 (peak)
Percent operating
time spent
at condition
15
2
2
2
60
19
Time at condition
based on 4.8-hr day
hours
0.72
0.10
0.10
0.10
2.88
0.91
4.81
minutes
43
6
6
6
173
55
289
Contribution to load
factor at condition
0.00x0.15 = 0.0
0.25 x 0.02 = 0.005
0.50x0.02 = 0.010
0.75x0.02 = 0.015
1.0 x 0.60 = 0.60
1.25x0.19 = 0.238
Load factor = 0.8(58
The operating cycle in Table 3.3.1-1 is used to compute emission factors, although it is only an estimate of actual
operating patterns.
Table 3.3.1-2. COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS FOR 1971
POPULATION OF ELECTRIC UTILITY TURBINES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Time basis
Entire population
Ib/hr rated loada
kg/hr rated load
Gas-fired only
Ib/hr rated load
kg/hr rated load
Oil-fired only
Ib/hr rated load
kg/hr rated load
Fuel basis
Gas-fired only
Ib/I06ft3gas
kg/106m3 gas
Oil-fired only
lb/103galoil
kg/103 liter oil
N itrogen
oxides
8.84
4.01
7.81
3.54
9.60
4.35
413.
6615.
67.8
8.13
Hydro-
carbons
0.79
0.36
0.79
0.36
0.79
0.36
42.
673.
5.57
0.668
Carbon
Monoxide
2.18
0.99
2.18
0.99
2.18
0.99
115.
1842.
15.4
1.85
Partic-
ulate
0.52
0.24
0.27
0.12
0.71
0.32
14.
224.
5.0
0.60
Sulfur
oxides
0.33
0.15
0.098
0.044
0.50
0.23
940Sb
15,0005
140S
16.8S
Rated load expressed in megawatts.
If the factor is 940 and the sulfur content is 0.01 percent, the sulfur oxides emitted would
S is the percentage sulfur. Example: If <
be 940 times 0.01, or 9.4 lb/106 ft3 gas.
Table 3.3.1-2 is the resultant composite emission factors based on the operating cycle of Table 3.3.1-1 and the
1971 population of electric utility turbines.
3.3.1-2
EMISSION FACTORS
1/75
-------
5.6 EXPLOSIVES by Charles Mann
5.6.1 General1
An explosive is a material that, under the influence of thermal or mechanical shock, decomposes rapidly and
spontaneously with the evolution of large amounts of heat and gas. Explosives fall into two major categories:
high explosives and low explosives. High explosives are further subdivided into initiating or primary high
explosives and secondary high explosives. Initiating high explosives are very sensitive and are generally used in
small quantities in detonators and percussion caps to set off larger quantities of secondary high explosives.
Secondary high explosives, chiefly nitrates, nitro compounds, and nitramines, are much less sensitive to
mechanical or thermal shock, but explode with great violence when set off by an initiating explosive. The chief
secondary high explosives manufactured for commercial and military use are ammonium nitrate blasting agents
and 2.4. 6,-trinitrotoluene (TNT). Low explosives, such as black powder and nitrocellulose, undergo relatively
slow autocombustion when set off and evolve large volumes of gas in a definite and controllable manner. A
multitude of different types of explosives are manufactured. As examples of the production of a high explosive
and a low explosive, the production of TNT and nitrocellulose are discussed in this section.
5.6.2 TNT Production ^
TNT may be prepared by either a continuous process or a batch, three-stage nitration process using toluene,
nitric acid, and sulfuric acid as raw materials. In the batch process, a mixture of oleum (fuming sulfuric acid) and
nitric acid that has been concentrated to a 97 percent solution is used as the nitrating agent. The overall reaction
may be expressed as:
CH,
CH3 + 3HONO2 + H2SO4—>O2N | O | N02 + 3 H20 + H2SO4 (1)
(O) N02
Toluene Nitric Sulfuric TNT Water Sulfuric
acid acid acid
Spent acid from the nitration vessels is fortified with make-up 60 percent nitric acid before entering the next
nitrator. Fumes from the nitration vessels are collected and removed from the exhaust by an oxidation-
absorption system. Spent acid from the primary nitrator is sent to the acid recovery system in which the sulfuric
and nitric acid are separated. The nitric acid is recovered as a 60 percent solution, which is used for
refortification of spent acid from the second and third nitrators. Sulfuric acid is concentrated in a drum
concentrator by boiling water out of the dilute acid. The product from the third nitration vessel is sent to the
wash house at which point asymmetrical isomers and incompletely nitrated compounds are removed by washing
with a solution of sodium sulfite and sodium hydrogen sulfite (Sellite). The wash waste (commonly called red
water) from the purification process is discharged directly as a liquid waste stream, is collected and sold, or is
concentrated to a slurry and incinerated in rotary kilns. The purified TNT is solidified, granulated, and moved to
the packing house for shipment or storage. A schematic diagram of TNT production by the batch process is
shown in Figure 5.6-1.
12/75 Chemical Process Industry 5.6-1
-------
O
CO
c
"o.
I-
Z
I-
o>
o
o
Q.
CO
-Q
15
o
'o.
o
E
CD
l_
135
_CD
_0
u.
CD
IT)
CD
M
oc 2:
H- CJ
U Ul
1U OC
—' Q.
LU
f
Q 0=
- 0
" K
< <
|H
= =
2^
= i
«og
CO
-------
5.6.3 Nitrocellulose Production l
Nitrocellulose is prepared by the batch-type "mechanical dipper" process. Cellulose, in the form of cotton
linters, fibers, or specially prepared wood pulp, is purified, bleached, dried, and sent to a reactor (niter pot)
containing a mixture of concentrated nitric acid and a dehydrating agent such as sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid,
or magnesium nitrate. The overall reaction may be expressed as:
C6H702(OH)3 + 3HONO2 + H2S04 > C6H702(ON02)3 + 3 H20 + H2SO4 (2)
Cellulose Nitric Sulfuric Nitrocellulose Water Sulfuric
acid acid acid
When nitration is complete, the reaction mixtures are centrifuged to remove most of the spent acid. The spent
acid is fortified and reused or otherwise disposed of. The centrifuged nitrocellulose undergoes a series of water
washings and boiling treatments for purification of the final product.
5.6.4 Emissions and Controls2'3'5
The major emissions from the manufacture of explosives are nitrogen oxides and acid mists, but smaller
amounts of sulfuric oxides and particulates may also be emitted. Emissions of nitrobodies (nitrated organic
compounds) may also occur from many of the TNT process units. These compounds cause objectionable odor
problems and act to increase the concentration of acid mists. Emissions of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides from
the production of nitric acid and sulfuric acid used for explosives manufacturing can be considerable. It is
imperative to identify all processes that may take place at an explosives plant in order to account for all sources
of emissions. Emissions from the manufacture of nitric and sulfuric acid are discussed in other sections of this
publication.
In the manufacture of TNT, vents from the fume recovery system, sulfuric acid concentrators, and nitric acid
concentrators are the principal sources of emissions. If open burning or incineration of waste explosives is
practiced, considerable emissions may result. Emissions may also result from the production of Sellite solution
and the incineration of red water. Many plants, however, now sell the red water to the paper industry where it is
of economic importance.
Principal sources of emissions from nitrocellulose manufacture are from the reactor pots and centrifuges,
spent acid concentrators, and boiling tubs used for purification.
The most important factor affecting emissions from explosives manufacture is the type and efficiency of the
manufacturing process. The efficiency of the acid and fume recovery systems for TNT manufacture will directly
affect the atmospheric emissions. In addition, the degree to which acids are exposed to the atmosphere during
the manufacturing process affects the NOX and SOX emissions. For nitrocellulose production, emissions are
influenced by the nitrogen content and the desired quality of the final product. Operating conditions will also
affect emissions. Both TNT and nitrocellulose are produced in batch processes. Consequently, the processes may
never reach steady state and emission concentrations may vary considerably with time. Such fluctuations in
emissions will influence the efficiency of control methods. Several measures may be taken to reduce emissions
from explosives manufacturing. The effects of various control devices and process changes upon emissions, along
with emission factors for explosives manufacturing, are shown in Table 5.6-1. The emission factors are all related
to the amount of product produced and are appropriate for estimating long-term emissions or for evaluating
plant operation at full production conditions. For short time periods or for plants with intermittent operating
schedules, the emission factors in Table 5.6-1 should be used with caution, because processes not associated with
the nitration step are often not in operation at the same time as the nitration reactor.
12/75 Chemical Process Industry 5.6-3
-------
Table 5.6-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR
EMISSION FACTOR
Type of process
TNT - batch process'3
Nitration reactors
Fume recovery
Acid recovery
Nitric acid concentrators
Su If uric acid concentratorsc
Electrostatic
precipitator (exit)
Electrostatic precipitator
with scrubber"
Red water incinerator
Uncontrolled6
Wet scrubber
Sellite exhaust
TNT - continuous processQ
Nitration reactors
Fume recovery
Acid recovery
Red water incinerator
NitrocelluloseS
Nitration reactors"
Nitric acid concentrator
Sulfuric acid concentrator
Boiling tubs
Participates
Ib/ton
-
-
-
-
—
25(0.03-126)
1
-
-
-
0.25(0.03-0.05)
—
—
—
—
kg/MT
—
—
-
-
—
12.5(0.015-63)
0.5
-
-
-
0.13(0.015-0.025)
—
—
—
—
Sulfur oxides
(S02)
Ib/ton
—
—
-
14(4-40)
Neg.
2(0.05-3.5)
2(0.05-3.5)
59(0.01-177)
-
-
0.24(0.05-0.43)
1.4(0.8-2)
—
68(0.4-135)
—
kg/MT
—
-
-
7(2-20)
Neg.
1(0.025-1.75)
1(0.025-1.75)
29.5(0.00588)
-
—
0.12(0.025-0.22)
0.7(0.4-1)
—
34(0.2-67)
—
aFor some processes considerable variations in emissions have been reported. The average of the values reported is shown first,
with the ranges given in parentheses. Where only one number is given, only one source test was available.
bReference 5.
cAcid mist emissions influenced by nitrobody levels and type of fuel used in furnace.
'-'NO data available for NO,, emissions after the scrubber. It is assumed that NOV emissions are unaffected by the scrubber.
X A
5.6-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
EXPLOSIVES MANUFACTURING3
RATING: C
Nitrogen oxides
(N02)
Ib/ton
25(6-38)
55(1-136)
37(16-72)
40(2-80)
40(2-80)
26(1.5-101)
5
-
8(6.7-10)
3(1-4.5)
7(6.1-8.4)
14(3.7-34)
14(10-18)
2
kg/MT
12.5(3-19)
27.5(0.5-68)
18.5(8-36)
20(1-40)
20(1-40)
13(0.75-50)
2.5
-
4(3.35-5)
1.5(0.5-2.25)
3.5(3-4.2)
7(1.85-17)
7(5-9)
1
Nitric acid mist
(100%HNO3)
Ib/ton
1(0.3-1.9)
92(0.01-275)
-
-
-
-
-
1(0.3-1.9)
0.02(0.01-0.03)
-
19(0.5-36)
-
—
-
kg/MT
0.5(0.5-0.95)
46(0.005-137)
-
-
-
-
—
0.5(0.15-0.95)
0.01(0.005-0.015)
-
9.5(0.25-18)
-
_
-
...
Sulfuric acid mist
(100%H2SO4)
Ib/ton
-
9(0.3-27)
65(1-188)
5(4-6)
-
6(0.6-16)
-
-
-
0.3
—
kg/MT
—
4.5(0.15-13.5)
32.5(0.5-94)
2.5(2-3)
-
3(0.3-8)
—
-
-
0.3
-
eUse low end of range for modern, efficient units and high end of range for older, less efficient units.
Apparent reductions in I\IOX and particulate after control may not be significant because these values are based on only one
test result.
9 Reference 4.
"For product with low nitrogen content (12 percent), use high end of range. For products with higher nitrogen content, use lower
end of range.
12/75
Chemical Process Industry
5.6-5
-------
References for Section 5.6
1. Shreve, R.N. Chemical Process Industries, 3rd Ed. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967. p. 383-395.
2. Unpublished data on emissions from explosives manufacturing, National Air Pollution Control Administration,
Office of Criteria and Standards, Durham, N.C. June 1970.
3. Higgins, F.B., Jr., et al. Control of Air Pollution From TNT Manufacturing. (Presented at 60th annual meeting
of Air Pollution Control Association. Cleveland. June 1967. Paper 67-111.)
4. Air Pollution Engineering Source Sampling Surveys, Radford Army Ammunition Plant. U.S. Army
Environmental Hygiene Agency, Edgewood Arsenal, Md.
5. Air Pollution Engineering Source Sampling Surveys, Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant and Joliel Army
Ammunition Plant. U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, Edgewood Arsenal, Md.
5.6-6 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
CD
CO
CO
0>
CO
CD
"O
CO
o
1_
o
E
o
in
o
CO
0)
CD
-!-•
_CO
13
O
CO
D.
CM
CD
CD
D)
LL
0001-Jq/qi 'SNOISSI1N3
12/75
Food and Agricultural Industry
6.9-3
-------
Table 6.9-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR ORCHARD HEATERS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Pollutant
Part icu late
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Sulfur oxides
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Carbon monoxide
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Hydrocarbons*
Ib/htr-yr
kg/htr-yr
Nitrogen oxidesh
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Type of heater
Pipeline
b
b
0.1 3Sd
0.06S
6.2
2.8
Neg9
Meg
Neg
Neg
' Lazy
flame
b
b
0.1 1S
0.05S
NA
NA
16.0
7.3
Neg
Neg
Return
stack
b
b
0.1 4S
0.06S
NA
NA
16.0
7.3
Neg
Neg
Cone
b
b
0.1 4S
0.06S
NA
NA
16.0
7.3
Neg
Neg
Solid
fuel
0.05
0.023
NAe
NA
NA
NA
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
aReferences 1, 3, 4,and 6.
bParticulate emissions for pipeline, lazy flame, return stack, and cone heaters are
shown in Figure 6.9-2.
cBased on emission factors for foe) oil combustion in Section 1.3.
dS=sulfur content.
eNot available.
fBased on emission factors for fuel oil combustion in Section 1.3. Evaporative
losses only. Hydrocarbon emissions from combustion are considered negligible.
Evaporative hydrocarbon losses for units that are part of a pipeline system are
negligible.
Negligible.
hl_ittle nitrogen oxide is formed because of the relatively low combustion
temperatures.
References for Section 6.9
1. Air Pollution in Ventura County. County of Ventura Health Department, Santa Paula, Calif. June 1966.
2. Frost Protection in Citrus. Agricultural Extension Service, University of California, Ventura. November
1967.
3. Personal communication with Mr. Wesley Snowden. Valentine, Fisher, and Tomlinson, Consulting Engineers,
Seattle, Washington. May 1971.
4. Communication with the Smith Energy Company, Los Angeles, Calif. January 1968.
5. Communication with Agricultural Extension Service, University of California, Ventura, Calif. October 1969.
6. Personal communication with Mr. Ted Wakai. Air Pollution Control District, County of Ventura, Ojai, Calif.
May 1972.
6.9-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
J3 111
n G
w ^
—i X
-I O
i 2
_, o
ffii
1- O
00 ffl
Q CC
z <
< °
H Q
CC <
— oo
EC UJ
O £ —
UL < 00
... _J 111
S = Q
Jr cj —
H f- o
< < D
U- Q. LL,
§ < 0
52 o
2 2
LU P
•s a
3 CC
!e
j<
IV
K O
o> OO
1 -
*~ LU
O
Li-
ra
O
CD
•° o
S tx
O
D
U_ u.
I
o
VI
C7
CO
^
X
o
c
o
E
c
E
CU
O
en
QJ
•M
CU
o
•H1
a
"co
S
r-
s
o>
c
o
+-J
5
r-
^
c
O
s
h-
*TT)
^
C
o
+-*
i
H
^
§
^
of operation
S
>.
H
ooco LO LO CM LO LO CM
oo o t— «— o o to LO *— en LO LO *—
oo o oo ro r- oo o <- o o 0111
oo «- oo o r- oo o <- o o o ' ' '
oo o oo o o oo o ooo o
LO tO "3" ^~
<- O O CM CM O 00 "-i- CN 00 <- ^- CN
§o o oo to co >— «— o co *— «— o i i i
O CM OO O CM OO O CMOO O
OO O OO O O OO O OOO O
LO en en to
gg S1 | , , 8 88 S 888 8 i , i
00 Z 0 00 0 0 0 d 0
do dddddd d
00 00
«- O 0) CM'-CMCMCMv-CMCM
o>- z o oo o ooo o
o' d o' o' d d d d d o'
.
LO
CO
'*'•'" cncncncncncnrocn
I I *5 o 1 1 1 III
vD ^.j
O
CM
LO
f^
CO
en CM cooooooocooooooo
II J2 2 1 1 1 *~ *~ ^ "~ '-<-*- '"ill
s
~
- ^ 5
ff\ CO OO ".
LO LO ^- LO LO LO" d LO ^ LO
oo P"* LO LO LO O) ^j~ * — o LO co * —
O «~ LO O CN O»J CD (D O O O O LO *— +^ O LO O O
do LO £ d d r^' •*" in °" «h ° to d LO d c> d d
^ - ro 2. - VIVIVI
^" " -— " (O
— ^° r^ oo
r^io co'-'- o'oodSEJ CMd'~SCNI
«— CO LOli5 CO CM "— >— O CM «— OO
do' t-Sdd LO oiod° d >-dS d«-dd
^ & " o go "~ ?o VIVIVI
~ ^ d d
15 c ^
*- 3 4-1
C -" fe o> TJ -S
s §s ^Si-cTjS-^'.e-
-Q C -Q r: c -iOO coj"-rUO Oui_
^oo^ ^oo^ « § s S 8 = § g S S S _»
^- '4-* "m (—" ^- '+J "m E (~ V) iB .ti OJ C iLCoS.1*"' Q) ^ ^-"^
&B*^S SraSro^oUTJ-c^s— Cao =
3^00 •M-fccug-.ygSSoo.g'^cgcuQ.'^1"3-''' —
cyt ^ojo^-t^i'**J ^5* rn rYi ^" ^ *^ 1 1 1 ^n c £ ~i
•S = jiSS
CO
ference
£
OJ .
-O
U
u
"O
2
Q
*Q
m
1
'c
D
0)
Q.
»
*^
'c
S
I
actors expres:
aEmission f
s of sulfur dioxide per ton (0. 15 kg/MT) of sintei
c
o
a
n
d
CO
proxim
a
<
03
1
c
o
O
ui
O)
2
£
re
V)
QJ
3
5
i
0
c
o
o
c
1
CD
in parenthese
bN umbers
X
5
•o
c
i
eo
(!)
O
-s
o
a
CD
i
"o
_
c
ro
v>
B
u
"^
u
0
3
1
0)
CD
D)
c
'%
e calculated
CO
i/i
0
1
co
c
CO
LO
co"
CM"
ference
CD
or
t efficiencies.
equipmem
C)
.G
O)
^
CN
erences
CD
CC
— ' .
cReference
e electric arc furnaces. For alloy type furnaces,
D.
C
O
.a
CO
0
CD
CO
CD
"co
^
CD
0>
CD
_
U
CJ
CO
a.
CO
O
c
T3
1
0)
15
•D
s
(N
(U
3
CD
C
'ro
>
Q.
1
iri
•D
C
CO
co"
CN
(ft
6 Reference
LO
*
3
o
-C
CM
ference
CD
DC
1
O
§
C
o
1
O
1
CD
j
1
S
F
1
Q
1
3
a)
,0
-O
1
•S
1
o
§
t'
I
co
erences
CD
-------
References for Section 7.5
1. Bramer, Henry C. Pollution Control in the Steel Industry. Environmental Science and Technology, p.
1004-1008, October 1971.
2. Celenza. CJ. Air Pollution Problems Faced by the Iron and Steel Industry. Plant Engineering, p. 60-63, April
30, 1970.
3. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (Revised). Environmental Protection Agency, Offi:e of Air
Programs. Research Triangle Park, N.C. Publication Number AP-42. 1972.
4. Personal communication between Ernest Kirkendall, American Iron and Steel Institute, and John McGinnity,
Environmental Protection Agency, Durham, N.C. September 1970.
5. Particulate Pollutant Systems Study, Vol. I. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract
Number CPA 22-69-104. May 1971.
6. Walker, A.B. and R.F. Brown. Statistics on Utilization, Performance, and Economics of Electrostatic
Precipitation for Control of Particulate Air Pollution. (Presented at 2nd International Clean Air Congress,
International Union of Air Pollution Prevention Association, Washington, D.C. December 1970.)
7. Source Testing Report - EPA Task 2. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Program, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract Number
68-02-0228. February 1972.
8. Source Testing Report - EPA Test 71-MM-24. Engineering Science, Inc., Washington, D.C. Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract
Number 68-02-0225. March 1972.
9. Source Testing Report - EPA Task 2. Rust Engineering Co., Birmingham, Ala. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Program, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract Number CPA
70-132. April 1972.
10. Source Testing Report - EPA Task 4. Roy F. Weston, Inc., West Chester, Pa. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract Number
68-02-0231.
7.5-6 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
8.20 STONE QUARRYING AND PROCESSING
8.20.1 Process Description1
Rock and crushed stone products are loosened by drilling and blasting them from their deposit beds and are
removed with the use of heavy earth-moving equipment. This mining of rock is done primarily in open pits. The
use of pneumatic drilling and cutting, as well as blasting and transferring, causes considerable dust formation.
Further processing includes crushing, regrinding, and retrieval of fines.2 Dust emissions can occur from all of
these operations, as well as from quarrying, transferring, loading, and storage operations. Drying operations, when
used, can also be a source of dust emissions.
8.20.2 Emissions1
As enumerated above, dust emissions occur from many operations in stone quarrying and processing. Although
a big portion of these emissions is heavy particles that settle out within the plant, an attempt has been made to
estimate the suspended particulates. These emission factors are shown in Table 8.20-1. Factors affecting emissions
include the amount of rock processed; the method of transfer of the rock; the moisture content of the raw
material; the degree of enclosure of the transferring, processing, and storage areas; and the degree to which
control equipment is used on the processes.
Table 8.20-1. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR ROCK-HANDLING PROCESSES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Type of process
Dry crushing operationsb-c
Primary crushing
Secondary crushing and screening
Tertiary crushing and
screening (if used)
Recrushing and screening
Fines mill
Miscellaneous operationsd
Screening, conveying.
and handling6
Storage pile losses'
Uncontrolled
total3
Ib/ton
0.5
1.5
6
5
6
2
kg/MT
0.25
0.75
3
2.5
3
1
Settled out
in plant,
%
80
60
40
50
25
Suspended
emission
Ib/ton
0.1
0.6
3.6
2.5
4.5
kg/MT
0.05
0.3
1.8
1.25
2.25
aTypical collection efficiencies' cyclone, 70 to 85 percent; fabric filter, 99 percent.
All values are based on raw material entering primary crusher, except those for recrushmg and screening, which are based on
throughput for that operation.
cReference 3.
dBased on units of stored product.
eReference 4.
f See section 11.2.3.
12/75
Mineral Products Industry
8.20-1
-------
References for Section 8.20
1. Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Final Report. Resources Research, Inc. Reston, Va. Prepared for National
Air Pollution Control Administration, Durham, N.C., under Contract Number CPA-22-69-119. April 1970.
2. Communication between Resources Research, Incorporated, Reston, Virginia, and the National Crushed
Stone Association. September 1969.
3. Culver, P. Memorandum to files. U.S. DHEW, PHS, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Division
of Abatement, Durham, N.C. January 6, 1968.
4. Unpublished data on storage and handling of rock products. U.S. DHEW, PHS, National Air Pollution
Control Administration, Division of Abatement, Durham, N.C. May 1967.
5. Stern, A. (ed.) In: Air Pollution, Vol. Ill, 2nd Ed. Sources of Air Pollution and Their Control. New York,
Academic Press. 1968. p. 123-127.
8.20-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
11.2 FUGITIVE DUST SOURCES by Charles O. Mann, EPA,
and Chatten C. Cowherd, Jr.,
Midwest Research Institute
Significant sources of atmospheric dust arise from the mechanical disturbance of granular material exposed to
the air. Dust generated from these open sources is termed "fugitive" because it is not discharged to the
atmosphere in a confined flow stream. Common sources of fugitive dust include: (1) unpaved roads, (2)
agricultural tilling operations, (3) aggregate storage piles, and (4) heavy construction operations.
For the above categories of fugitive dust sources, the dust generation process is caused by two basic physical
phenomena:
1. Pulverization and abrasion of surface materials by application of mechanical force through implements
(wheels, blades, etc.).
2. Entrainment of dust particles by the action of turbulent air currents. Airborne dust may also be generated
independently by wind erosion of an exposed surface if the wind speed exceeds about 12 mi/hr (19 km/hr).
The air pollution impact of a fugitive dust source depends on the quantity and drift potential of the dust
particles injected into the atmosphere. In addition to large dust particles that settle out near the source (often
creating a localized nuisance problem), considerable amounts of fine particles are also emitted and dispersed over
much greater distances from the source.
Control techniques for fugitive dust sources generally involve watering, chemical stabilization, or reduction of
surface wind speed using windbreaks or source enclosures. Watering, the most common and generally least
expensive method, provides only temporary dust control. The use of chemicals to treat exposed surfaces provides
longer term dust suppression but may be costly, have adverse impacts on plant and animal life, or contaminate
the treated material. Windbreaks and source enclosures are often impractical because of the size of fugitive dust
sources. At present, too few data are available to permit estimation of the control efficiencies of these methods.
11.2.1 Unpaved Roads (Dirt and Gravel)
11.2.1.1 General—Dust plumes trailing behind vehicles traveling on unpaved roads are a familiar sight in rural
areas of the United States. When a vehicle travels over an unpaved road, the force of the wheels on the road
surface cause pulverization of surface material. Particles are lifted and dropped from the rolling wheels, and the
road surface is exposed to strong air currents in turbulent shear with the surface. The turbulent wake behind the
vehicle continues to act on the road surface after the vehicle has passed.
11.2.1.2 Emissions and Correction Parameters — The quantity of dust emissions from a given segment of
unpaved road varies linearly with the volume of traffic. In addition, emissions depend on correction parameters
(average vehicle speed, vehicle mix, surface texture, and surface moisture) that characterize the condition of a
particular road and the associated vehicular traffic.
In the typical speed range on unpaved roads, that is, 30-50 mi/hr (48-80 km/hr), the results of field
measurements indicate that emissions are directly proportional to vehicle speed.1"3 Limited field measurements
further indicate that vehicles produce dust from an unpaved road in proportion to the number of wheels.1 For
roads with a significant volume of vehicles with six or more wheels, the traffic volume should be adjusted to the
equivalent volume of four-wheeled vehicles.
Dust emissions from unpaved roads have been found to vary in direct proportion to the fraction of silt (that is,
particles smaller than 75 jum in diameter-as defined by American Association of State Highway Officials) in the
road surface material.1 The silt fraction is determined by measuring the proportion of loose, dry, surface dust
12/75 Miscellaneous Sources 11.2-1
-------
that passes a 200-mesh screen. The silt content of gravel roads averages about 12 percent, and the silt content of a
dirt road may be approximated by the silt content of the parent soil in the area.1
Unpaved roads have a hard, nonporous surface that dries quickly after a rainfall. The temporary reduction in
emissions because of rainfall may be accounted for by neglecting emissions on "wet" days, that is, days with
more than 0.01 in. (0.254 mm) of rainfall.
11.2.1.3 Corrected Emission Factor - The quantity of fugitive dust emissions from an unpaved road, per
vehicle-mile of travel, may be estimated (within ± 20 percent) using the following empirical expression1:
E=
(1)
where: E = Emission factor, pounds per vehicle-mile
s = Silt content of road surface material, percent
S = Average vehicle speed, miles per hour
w = Mean annual number of days with 0.01 in. (0.254 mm) or more of rainfall (see Figure 11.2-1)
The equation is valid for vehicle speeds in the range of 30-50 mi/hr (48-80 km/hr).
On the average, dust emissions from unpaved roads, as given by equation 1, have the following particle size
characteristics:1
Particle size Weight percent
< 30 jum 60
> 30 urn 40
The 30 jum value was determined1 to be the effective aerodynamic cutoff diameter for the capture of road dust by
a standard high-volume filtration sampler, based on a particle density of 2.0-2.5 g/cm3. On this basis, road dust
emissions of particles larger than 30-40 /urn in diameter are not likely to be captured by high-volume samplers
remote from unpaved roads. Furthermore, the potential drift distance of particles is governed by the initial
injection height of the particle, the particle's terminal settling velocity, and the degree of atmospheric turbulence.
Theoretical drift distances, as a function of particle diameter and mean wind speed, have been computed for
unpaved road emissions.1 These results indicate that, for a typical mean wind speed of 10 mi/hr (16 km/hr),
particles larger than about 100 iim are likely to settle out within 20-30 feet (6-9 m) from the edge of the road.
Dust that settles within this distance is not included in equation 1. Particles that are 30-100 /urn in diameter are
likely to undergo impeded settling. These particles, depending upon the extent of atmospheric turbulence, are
likely to settle within a few hundred feet from the road. Smaller particles, particularly those less than 10-15 /im
in diameter, have much slower gravitational settling velocities and are much more likely to have their settling rate
retarded by atmospheric turbulence. Thus, based on the presently available data, it appears appropriate to report
only those particles smaller than 30 ^m (60 percent of the emissions predicted by Equation 1) as emissions that
may remain indefinitely suspended.
11.2.1.4 Control Methods - Common control techniques for unpaved roads are paving, surface treating with
penetration chemicals, working of soil stabilization chemicals into the roadbed, watering, and traffic control
regulations. Paving as a control technique is often not practical because of its high cost. Surface chemical
treatments and watering can be accomplished with moderate to low costs, but frequent retreatments are required
for such techniques to be effective. Traffic controls, such as speed limits and traffic volume restrictions, provide
moderate emission reductions, but such regulations may be difficult to enforce. Table 11.2.1-1 shows
11.2-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
12/75
Miscellaneous Sources
11.2-3
-------
approximate control efficiencies achievable for each method. Watering, because of the frequency of treatments
required, is generally not feasible for public roads and is effectively used only where watering equipment is
readily available and roads are confined to a single site, such as a construction location.
Table 11.2.1-1 CONTROL METHODS FOR UNPAVED ROADS
Control method
Approximate control efficiency.
Paving
Treating surface with penetrating chemicals
Working soil stabilizing chemicals into roadbed
Speed control3
30 mi/hr
20 mi/hr
15 mi/hr
85
50
50
25
65
80
aBased on the assumption that "uncontrolled" speed is typically 40 mi/hr. Between 30-50 mi/hr emissions are linearly
proportional to vehicle speed. Below 30 mi/hr, however, emissions appear to be proportional to the square of the vehicle speed.'
References for Section 11.2.1
1. Cowherd, C., Jr., K. Axetell, Jr., C. M. Guenther, and G. A. Jutze. Development of Emission Factors for
Fugitive Dust Sources, Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0619. Publication No. 450/3-74-037. June
1974.
2. Roberts, J. W., A. T. Rossano, P. T. Bosserman, G. C. Hofer, and H. A. Watters. The Measurement, Cost and
Control of Traffic Dust and Gravel Roads in Seattle's Duwamish Valley. (Presented at Annual Meeting of
Pacific Northwest International Section of Air Pollution Control Association. Eugene. November 1972. Paper
No. AP-72-5.)
3. Sehmel, G. A. Particle Resuspension from an Asphalt Road Caused by Car and Truck Traffic. Atmos. Environ.
7: 291-309, July 1973.
4. Climatic Atlas of the United States. U. S. Department of Commerce, Environmental Sciences Services
Administration, Environmental Data Service, Washington, D. C. June 1968.
5. Jutze, G. A., K. Axetell, Jr., and W. Parker. Investigation of Fugitive Dust-Sources Emissions and Control.
PEDCo Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0044. Task No. 4. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-
036a. June 1974.
11.2-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
1 1 .2.2 Agricultural Tilling
11.2.2.1 General — The two universal objectives of agricultural tilling are the creation of the desired soil
structure to be used as the crop seedbed and the eradication of weeds. Plowing, the most common method of
tillage, consists of some form of cutting loose, granulating, and inverting the soil and turning under the organic
litter. Implements that loosen the soil and cut off the weeds but leave the surface trash in place, have recently
become more popular for tilling in dryland farming areas.
During a tilling operation, dust particles from the loosening and pulverization of the soil are injected into the
atmosphere as the soil is dropped to the surface. Dust emissions are greatest when the soil is dry and during final
seedbed preparation.
11.2.2.2 Emissions and Correction Parameters -- The quantity of dust emissions from agricultural tilling is
proportional to the area of land tilled. In addition, emissions depend on the following correction parameters,
which characterize the condition of a particular field being tilled: (1) surface soil texture, and (2) surface soil
moisture content.
Dust emissions from agricultural tilling have been found to vary in direct proportion to the silt content (that
is, particles between 2 pm and 50 jum in diameter-as defined by U.S. Department of Agriculture) of the surface
soil (0-10 cm depth).1 The soil silt content is commonly determined by the Buoyocous hydrometer method.2
Field measurements indicate that dust emissions from agricultural tilling are inversely proportional to the
square of the surface soil moisture (0-10 cm depth).1 Thornthwaite's precipitation-evaporation (PE) index3 is a
useful approximate measure of average surface soil moisture. The PE index is determined from total annual
rainfall and mean annual temperature; rainfall amounts must be corrected for irrigation.
Available test data indicate no substantial dependence of emissions on the type of tillage implement when
operating at a typical speed (for example, 8-10 km/hr).1
11.2.2.3 Corrected Emission Factor — The quantity of dust emissions from agricultural tilling, per acre of land
tilled, may be estimated (within ± 20 percent) using the following empirical expression1 :
1.4s (2)
PE2
50J
where: E = Emission factor, pounds per acre
s = Silt content of surface soil, percent
PE = Thornthwaite's precipitation-evaporation index (Figure 1 1.2-2)
Equation 2, which was derived from field measurements, excludes dust that settles out within 20-30 ft (6-9 m) of
the tillage path.
On the average, the dust emissions from agricultural tilling, as given by Equation 2, have the following particle
size characteristics1 :
12/75 Miscellaneous Sources 11.2.2-1
-------
Particle size Weigh t percen t
< 30 urn 80
> 30 Aim 20
The 30 jum value was determined1 to be the effective aerodynamic cutoff diameter for capture of tillage dust by a
standard high-volume filtration sampler, based on a particle density of 2.0-2.5 g/cm3. As discussed in section
11.2.1.3, only particles smaller than about 30 jum have the potential for long range transport. Thus, for
agricultural tilling about 80 percent of the emissions predicted by Equation 2 are likely to remain suspended
indefinitely.
11.2.2.4 Control Methods4 - In general, control methods are not applied to reduce emissions from agricultural
tilling. Irrigation of fields prior to plowing will reduce emissions, but in many cases this practice would make the
soil unworkable and adversely affect the plowed soil's characteristics. Control methods for agricultural activities
are aimed primarily at reduction of emissions from wind erosion through such practices as continuous cropping,
stubble mulching, strip cropping, applying limited irrigation to fallow fields, building windbreaks, and using
chemical stabilizers. No data are available to indicate the effects of these or other control methods on agricultural
tilling, but as a practical matter it may be assumed that emission reductions are not significant.
References for Section 11.2.2.
1. Cowherd, C., Jr., K. Axetell, Jr., C. M. Guenther, and G. A. Jutze. Development of Emission Factors for
Fugitive Dust Sources. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0619. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-037.
June 1974.
2. Buoyocous, G. J. Recalibration of the Hydrometer Method for Making Mechanical Analyses of Soils. Agron. J.
43: 434-438,1951.
3. Thornthwaite, C. W. Climates of North America According to a New Classification. Geograph. Rev. 21:
633-655, 1931.
4. Jutze, G. A., K. Axetell, Jr., and W. Parker. Investigation of Fugitive Dust-Sources Emissions and Control.
PEDCo Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0044. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-036a. June 1974.
11.2.2-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
c
o
O
'•*-•
CD
|
"o
0>
+-•
03
-H»
CO
0)
CD
00
X
0>
-a
o
o
Q.
5
c
o
o
(U
1
o
Q.
CD
CN
CN
a>
12/75
Miscellaneous Sources
11.2.2-3
-------
-------
11.2.3 Aggregate Storage Piles
11.2.3.1 General - An inherent part of the operation of plants that utilize minerals in aggregate form is the
maintenance of outdoor storage piles. Storage piles are usually left uncovered, partially because of the necessity
for frequent transfer of material into or out of storage.
Dust emissions occur at several points in the storage cycle—during loading of material onto the pile, during
disturbances by strong wind currents, and during loadout of material from the pile. The movement of trucks and
loading equipment in the storage pile area is also a substantial source of dust emissions.
11.2.3.2 Emissions and Correction Parameters - The quantity of dust emissions from aggregate storage
operations varies linearly with the volume of aggregate passing through the storage cycle. In addition, emissions
depend on the following correction parameters that characterize the condition of a particular storage pile: (1) age
of the pile, (2) moisture content, and (3) proportion of aggregate fines.
When freshly processed aggregate is loaded onto a storage pile, its potential for dust emissions is at a
maximum. Fines are easily disaggregated and released to the atmosphere upon exposure to air currents resulting
from aggregate transfer or high winds. As the aggregate weathers, however, the potential for dust emissions is
greatly reduced. Moisture causes aggregation and cementation of fines to the surfaces of larger particles. Any
significant rainfall soaks the interior of the pile, and the drying process is very slow.
11.2.3.3 Corrected Emission Factor - Total dust emissions from aggregate storage piles can be divided into the
contributions of several distinct source activities that occur within the storage cycle:
1. Loading of aggregate onto storage piles.
2. Equipment traffic in storage area.
3. Wind erosion.
4. Loadout of aggregate for shipment.
Table 11.2.3-1 shows the emissions contribution of each source activity, based on field tests of suspended dust
emissions from crushed stone and sand and gravel storage piles.1 A 3-month storage cycle was assumed in the
calculations.
Table 11.2.3-1 AGGREGATE STORAGE EMISSIONS
Source activity
Loading onto piles
Vehicular traffic
Wind erosion
Loadout from piles
Correction
parameter
; PE index3
Rainfall frequency
Climatic factor
: PE index3
Approximate
percentage of total
12
40
33
15
Total 100
aThornthwaite's precipitation-evaporation index.
12/75 Miscellaneous Sources 11.2.3-1
-------
Also shown in Table ] 1.2.3-1 are the climatic correction parameters that differentiate the emissions potential
of one aggregate storage area from another. Overall, Thornthwaite's precipitation-evaporation index2 best
characterizes the variability of total emissions from aggregate storage piles.
The quantity of suspended dust emissions from aggregate storage piles, per ton of aggregate placed in storage,
may be estimated using the following empirical expression1:
P 0.33
PE \2 (3)
where: E = Emission factor, pounds per ton placed in storage
PE = Thornthwaite's precipitation-evaporation index (see Figure 11.2-2)
Equation 3 describes the emissions of particles less than 30 ^um in diameter. This particle size was determined1 to
be the effective cutoff diameter for the capture of aggregate dust by a standard high-volume filtration sampler,
based on a particle density of 2.0-2.5 g/cm3 . Because only particles smaller than 30jum are included, equation 3
expresses the total emissions likely to remain indefinitely suspended. (See section 11.2.1.3).
11.2.3.4 Control Methods — Watering and use of chemical wetting agents are the principal means for control of
aggregate storage pile emissions. Enclosure or covering of inactive piles to reduce wind erosion can also reduce
emissions. Watering is useful mainly to reduce emissions from vehicular traffic in the storage pile area Frequent
watering can, based on the breakdowns shown in Table 11.2-3, reduce total emission by about 40 percent.
Watering of the storage piles themselves typically has only a very temporary, minimal effect on total emissions. A
much more effective technique is to apply chemical wetting agents to provide better wetting of fines and longer
retention of the moisture film. Continuous chemical treatment of material loaded onto piles, coupled with
watering or treatment of roadways, can reduce total particulate emissions from aggregate storage operations by
up to 90 percent.3
References for Section 11.2.3
1. Cowherd, C., Jr., K. Axetell, Jr., C. M. Guenther, and G. A. Jutze. Development of Emission Factors for
Fugitive Dust Sources. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0619. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-037.
June 1974.
2. Thornthwaite, C. W. Climates of North America According to a New Classification. Geograph. Rev. 21:
633-655, 1931.
3. Jutze, G. A., K. Axetell, Jr., and W. Parker. Investigation of Fugitive Dust-Sources Emissions and Control.
PEDCo Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0044. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-036a. June 1974.
11.2.3-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
11.2.4 Heavy Construction Operations
11.2.4.1 General — Heavy construction is a source of dust emissions that may have substantial temporary impact
on local air quality. Building and road construction ane the prevalent construction categories with the highest
emissions potential. Emissions during the construction of a building or road are associated with land clearing,
blasting, ground excavation, cut and fill operations, and the construction of the particular facility itself. Dust
emissions vary substantially from day to day depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and the
prevailing weather. A large portion of the emissions result from equipment traffic over temporary roads at the
construction site.
11.2.4.2 Emissions and Correction Parameters — The quantity of dust emissions from construction operations
are proportional to the area of land being worked and the level of construction activity. Also, by analogy to the
parameter dependence observed for other similar fugitive dust sources,1 it is probable that emissions from heavy
construction operations are directly proportional to the silt content of the soil (that is, particles smaller than 75
jum in diameter) and inversely proportional to the square of the soil moisture, as represented by Thornthwaite's
precipitation-evaporation (PE) index.2
11.2.4.3 Emission Factor — Based on field measurements of suspended dust emissions from apartment and
shopping center construction projects, an approximate emission factor for construction operations is:
1.2 tons per acre of construction per month of activity
This value applies to construction operations with: (1) medium activity level, (2) moderate silt content ('vSO
percent), and (3) semiarid climate (PE 'vSO; see Figure 11.2-2). Test data are not sufficient to derive the specific
dependence of dust emissions on correction parameters.
The above emission factor applies to particles less than about 30 /im in diameter, which is the effective cut-off
size for the capture of construction dust by a standard high-volume filtration sampler1, based on a particle
density of 2.0-2.5 g/cm3.
11.2.4.4 Control Methods — Watering is most often selected as a control method because water and necessary
equipment are usually available at construction sites. The effectiveness of watering for control depends greatly on
the frequency of application. An effective watering program (that is, twice daily watering with complete
coverage) is estimated to reduce dust emissions by up to 50 percent.3 Chemical stabilization is not effective in
reducing the large portion of construction emissions caused by equipment traffic or active excavation and cut and
fill operations. Chemical stabilizers are useful primarily for application on completed cuts and fills at the
construction site. Wind erosion emissions from inactive portions of the construction site can be reduced by about
80 percent in this manner, but this represents a fairly minor reduction in total emissions compared with emissions
occurring during a period of high activity.
References for Section 11.2.4
1. Cowherd, C., Jr., K. Axetell, Jr., C. M. Guenther, and G. A. Jutze. Development of Emissions Factors for
Fugitive Dust Sources. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. under Contract No. 68-02-0619. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-037.
June 1974.
2. Thornthwaite, C. W. Climates of North America According to a New Classification. Geograph. Rev. 21'
633-655,1931.
3. Jutze, G. A., K. Axetell, Jr., and W. Parker. Investigation of Fugitive Dust-Sources Emissions and Control,
PEDCo Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C. undur Contract No. 68-02-0044. Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-036a. June 1974.
12/75 Miscellaneous Sources 11.2.4-1
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
NEDS SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND
EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
The Source Classification Codes (SCC's) presented herein comprise the basic "building blocks" upon which the
National Emissions Data System (NEDS) is structured. Each SCC represents a process or function within a source
category logically associated with a point of air pollution emissions. In NEDS, any operation that causes air
pollution can be represented by one or more of these SCC's.
Also presented herein are emission factors for the five NEDS pollutants (particulates, sulfur oxides, nitrogen
oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide) that correspond to each SCC. These factors are utilized in NEDS to
automatically compute estimates of air pollutant emissions associated with a process when a more accurate
estimate is not supplied to the system. These factors are, for the most part, taken directly from AP-42. In certain
cases, however, they may be derived from better information not yet incorporated into AP-42 or be based merely
on the similarity of one process to another for which emissions information does exist.
Because these emission factors are merely single representative values taken, in many cases, from a broad range
of possible values and because they do not reflect all of the variables affecting emissions that are described in detail
in this document, the user is cautioned not to use the factors listed in Appendix C out of context to estimate the
emissions from any given source. Instead, if emission factors must be used to estimate emissions, the appropriate
section of this document should be consulted to obtain the most applicable factor for the source in question. The
factors presented in Appendix C are reliable only when applied to numerous sources as they are in NEDS.
NOTE: The Source Classification Code and emission factor listing presented in Appendix C was created on Octo-
ber 21, 1975, to replace the listing dated June 20,1974. The listing has been updated to include several new
Source Classification Codes as well as several new or revised emission factors that are considered necessary for the
improvement of NEDS. The listing will be updated periodically as better source and emission factor information
becomes available. Any comments regarding this listing, especially those pertaining to the need for additional
SCC's, should be directed to:
Chief, Emission Factor Section (MD-14)
National Air Data Branch
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
C-l
-------
FILF CREATED ON 10/21/75
EKTCOHR BOILER
ANTHRACITE COAL
l -n i -oo i -n i
i-nt-oni-o2
1-01-001-03
i -n i -on 1-01
l-oi-nni-os
1-01-001-04
1 -0 1 -00 | -99
BITUMINOUS COAL
1-01-002-01
1-01-002-02
1-01-002-03
1-01-002-05
1-0 1-002-04
1-01-002-07
1 -0 1 -002-08
1-01-002-0'
1 -0 1 -002- 1 0
1-01-002-1 1
1-01-002-12
1-01-002-99
LIGNITE
1-01-003-01
1-01-003-02
1-01-003-03
1-01-003-01
1-01-003-05
1-01-003-0*
].Dl-»03-n7
1-01-003-0"
1-01-003-n?
1-01-003-10
1-0| -003-1 1
1-01 -003-1 2
1—01—003-13
1-01-003-11
1-01-003-15
RESIDUAL OIL
1 -0 1 -001-n I
1-01 -001-02
1-01 -001-03
PISTILLATE OIL
1-01-005-01
NATURAL GAS
1-01-004-01
1-01-006-02
1 -0 1 -006-03
PROCESS C.AS
1-01 -007-01
1-01 -007-02
1-01-007-03
COKE
1-01 -009-01
HOOD/BARK WASTI
1-01-009-01
1-01 -009-02
1-01-009-03
BAGASSE
i-ni-ol i-ni
l -n i -o l 1-02
1-01-01 1-03
s
-ELECTRIC GENERATN
MOOMMflTU PULV12D
MOOMHBTU STOKERS
10-|nOMMBTU PULVO
10-tOOMMRTu STOKR
<10MMRTu PULVlZED
IOOMMBTH PULVORY
>IOOMM6TU CYCLONF
MOOMMBTU/HR 0 F 5 K
10-IOOMMBTU PULWT
IO-IOOMWRTU PULOY
10-IOOMnBTU OFSTK
10-IOOMM8TU UFSTK
<10MMBTu OFSTOKEH
<10MMRTu UFSTOKER
IOO*MRTU PULVWET
>100*MBTU PULVDRY
>100MMBTU CYCLONE
>IOO«MBTU OF 5TKR
>100MMBTU UF STKR
>IOOMMBTU SPOSTKR
10-IOOMMBTII DYPUL
IO-100MMRTU WTPUL
10-IOOMMRTu 0 F S T K
10-IOOMuBTU UFSTK
1 0*1 nOMMBTuspnsYK
< 1 0 M * B T u Pt'LV DRY
<10»MBTu UF STOKR
<10MMBTu SPDSTOKR
> IOOMMRYU/HR GENL
1 0- 1 nOMf BTU/HP-GNL
> I OOWMPTU/HR
1 0- 1 OOMMBTU/HR
1 00M*BTU/HR
10- 1 nOMMBTU/Mff
100MMBTU/HR
E
BARK BOILER
WOOD/BARK 83ILER
WOOD BOILER
>IOOMMBTU/HR
1 0- 1 nOMMRTU /HR
IQO MwnTU/Hp
i-nj-ni7-n2 10-ion MMRTII/H
l7,o MILLION CUBIC FEET RUR^ED
i?,n MILLION CUBIC FEET PURNFD
]7.n MILLION CUBIC FFET RU^NCD
i .no TONS BURNED
2.10 TONS BURNED
2,on TONS FHJRNFO
1 0 ,n TONS BURNfD
2.no TONS BUBNED
2.no TONS BU«NEO
2.DO TONS BUPNED
TONSBU»NED
INDICATES THF »SH CONTENT,
INDIC*TES THE SULFUR CONTENT Op THE FUFL ON A prRCFNT RAstS (*Y WEIGHT)
C-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
-ELECTRIC
SOURCE
0 U N 0 5
PART
EMISSION 0 A
TWITTED PEP
SOX NO*
LlO WASTE-SPEC!TY
l-Ol-nM-01 MOO MHRTU/HR
i-Pi-oi3-o2 io-ino «HBTU/W
ICTO GALLONS R U P N F ?
lOOn GALLONS BURN£0
1-P1-PI3-P3 <10 NMBTU/HR
1-01-997-99
ANTHRACITE COAL.
1-D7-OOI-01
1-02-001-02
1—02—001—03
r-02-ooi-oH
1-02-001-05
I-02-OOJ-04
]-02-001"07
1 -P2-00 1 -99
BITUMINOUS COAL
1-02-002-01
1-02-002-02
1-02-002-03
1 -02-007-0*
1 -0* -nC 7-05
I-02-P07-04
1-02-007-07
1-07-002-08
1-P2-002-07
I-02-002-IO
1-02-007-1 1
I-C7-CP2-12
1-02-002-13
1-02-002-11
1-02-002-99
LIGNITE
1-02-003-01
1-02-003-02
1-07-003-03
1-02-003-0"
I-02-P03-P5
t-02-003-04
1-02-001-07
1-02-003-08
1-02-003-"'
1-07-003-10
1-07-003-1 1
1 -02-003-1 2
1-02-00 3 -13
I-02-003-I1)
1-P2-003-15
1-02-003-1*
SPfCIFY IN RFMARX
SPECIFY IN REMARK
INDUSTRIAL
> 1 OOMMBTU/HH PULV
>100NM8TU/HR ST R
10— lOOMMBTu PUL n
10-IOOHMBTu STK
<10M«BTU/HR PUL 0
<10MMBTu/HR STK
<10MMBTu/HR HNOFR
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
>100»MBTU PULVWET
>100NMBTU PULVORY
MOOMM8TU CYCLONE
>IOO»HBTU 5P05TKR
10-lOOMMBTu OFSTK
10-100MH8TU UF5TK
10-100MMPTU PULWT
t 0- I HOMMBTu PULDY
10-1 OOMMfiTUSPOSTK
<10HMBTu OFO 5TKR
<10MMBTu UFO STKR
100MMBTU PULVORY
>1PO»*MRTU CYCLONE
>IOOM«BTU OFSTKR
>100HMBTU UFSTKR
>IOO*MPTU SPDSTJfR
IQ-IOOMHBTU OYPUL
IO-1POMM8TU wTPUL
10-lOOM-BTu OFSTK
10-lOOMHPTu UFSTK
1 0- 1 OOMMBTUSPDSTK
OOMMBTu PULV ORY
BURNE3
BURN£0
BL'RNED
BURNrO
Rl'RNE H
BUPNfD
BUHNEQ
BUPNEO
BU»NED
BUPNED
B U R N F D
BURNED
PUNNED
BURNED
BURNED
BU^NFO
BURNED
BORNEO
BURNED
BURNE D
BU°NEF>
PUNNED
BU"NEO
BURNE 0
PU«*NFO
PU'^E D
BlIONED
rU"?NEO
RESIDUAL OIL
1-P2-OOM-01
1-C2-004-02
1-02-OOM-03
DISTILLATE OIL
1-02-005-01
1-02-005-02
I-02-005-1J
NATURAL GAS
1-02-006-01
1-02-006-02
1-02-004-03
PROCESS r,A5
> 1 OOMHBTU/HR
I 0-1OOMwBTu/HR
IOOHMBTU/HR
10-IOOMMBTU/HR
>IOOHMBTU/HR
10-1OOM"BTu/HR
23.0
23.0
23.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
157. S
157. 5
157. S
]*2. S
112. S
>*?. S
0.60
0.40
0.60
60.0
60.0
so.n
60.0
60.0
60.0
600.
J30.
120.
3.an
3.0C
3,00
3,00
3.or
3,00
3.OP
3.00
3.Op
**.PP 1000 GALLONS BURNED
**.00 1000 GALLONS B'JRNEO
t.OO IDOP GALLONS BL'RNFD
•4.00 1000 GALLONS pHRNED
1."0 IDOO GALLONS pUnNED
*4.PO 1000 GALLONS PU3NFD
17.P MILLION CUBIC FEET PuR-FO
I'.O MILLION CU8IC FEET B'jR'lEO
|7.n MILLION CUBIC FFFT PuR"FO
1-02-007-^1
1-02-007-H2
1 -02-007-nj
1 -o?-n37-ni
1 -07-007-05
I -n?-OT7-Oi
I ND 1 C ATFS T*F
PET I NEB Y
RfF I NFR V
*EF I NFRY
BLAST FNC
BLAST FNC
BLAST F'lC
6SM eONTFM?
>100
io-ion
>ioo
10-100
<10
i '5*
THE SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FU^L ON ft
MILLION CUBIC FEET PUR-IF.O
MILLION CUBIC FEET BURNFD
MILLION CUBIC FFET BURNED
MILLION CUBIC FFET PUKNFO
MILLION CUBIC FEET BURNED
MILLION CUBIC FFET BURNFO
"FRCFMT OASIS (BY WEIGHT)
12/75
Appendix C
C-3
-------
- 1NDUSTRJ AL
A T ! 0 N A
SOURCE
OU N D
PART
E
CI-
1 5 5
S 5 !
ION OAT
S Y S T
! 0 M COD
PROCESS G*S
CONTINUED
I-02-OD7-07 COKE OVfN > 1 f)0
i-n2-oo7.n8 COKE OVFN 10-100
1-02-007-09 COKE OVFN 100 HMRTU/HR 22.0
1-02-01 1-Q2 10-100MMBTU/H* 22.0
1-02-01 1-03 <1QMMBTU/HR' 22.0
SID wA5TC-SPfCI^v
i-o?-ni?-oi >ioo M*ieTU/H9
i-n2-Pi7'-^2 ion-joe MMBTU/HR
1-02-012-03 7 SPECIFY IN PEMAR<
3S.O
3K.O
1.5o
1.10
1.50
84.5
64,1
0.
0.
0.
15.0
4.00
10.0.
10.0
10.0
11.7
11.7
2.00
2.10
2 .00
1 -02-099-9P
l-02-»"-»?
EXTCOMP P01LEP
ANTHRACITE COAL
l.o.i-ooi--)';
1-03-001-04
1-03-001 -07
i-03-ooi-r>»
1-03-001-11
i-nj-mi-io
I-03-101-R9
PITU-IN1US COAL
I-P5-102-05
l-03--5n?-n*
1-03-OOJ-07
l-03-10?-0«
1-03-002-19
1-03-"02-10
1-03-00?-! 1
1-13-007-12
1-03--12-13
|.n3-oi2-|«
l-03-"D2-99
LIGNITE
i-tn-orj-as
I-C3-303-04
1-03-0=3-07
1-P3-"03-1>
1-03-fO -09
l-n3--,P -i\
1-03-1" -12
1-P3-11 -13
SPECIFY IN RFMAPK
SPFCIFY IN REMARK
COMMERCL-lNSrUTNL
10- noiMSTu PULWT
10- OOHHPTU PULPY
10- OOf H&Tu5P05T<
0
1.11
2.10
1. nn
lO.i
10.1
1 .IP
2,ir
2.10
50. n
10.1
TONS BURNED
TONS BUBNE3
TONS PURNFO
TONS BURNFO
TONS PURNEO
10000ALLONS BljRNED
IOOOGSLLONS Bu*NED
TON5 BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS TURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TOW* BURNEO
1000 GALLONS pURN|:3
1000 GALLONS RURNltO
1000 GALLONS BURNrD
MILLION CUBIC FEET BUR"ED
1POO GALLON Bl'RNEn ( L I ^U I •) )
TON5 PURNEO (SOLID!
TONS BU»NEO
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BU°NED
TONS BURNED
TDNS PuRNEH
TONS RURNEO
TONS BUPNED
TONS PU^NEO
TONS PliQNrO
TON*; BURNED
TCNS RII^NEO
TcNS BUB^ED
TC*JS RU^N^D
TON'S BURNED
TO^*> B U ""' r D
TONS RU»NFO
1 3.0
3.0
t . n
3.0
1.0
3.1
3.T
3 . n
3 . n
3.1
1 ,ro
1 .00
I.CT
1 .On
1.0"
1 .rn
3.rn
3.0Q
3 , n"i
20. r>
2,10 TO^S eU°HEO
2, "0 TONS BUOYED
?. ^n TONS RU^NFD
2 . "*D TpN*^ BU'^F n
2,np TONS RUINED
10.7 TCNS a i ' P N r n
in." To^S PU^Ncrj
lP,-i TON1; Pl-o'lEO
1 n. n TONS BU^SEO
90. -< TON*; » u » N E n
•A- INDICATES Tuf ASH CONTENT, •$• I>"IC«TFS
SULFUR CONTENT PF THF FUFL ON
"'SIS [BY WEIGHT]
C-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
EKTCOMB BOILER
-COMMERCL-INSTUTNL
RESIDUAL OIL
l-03-00"*-nl MOOMHBTU/HR
1-03-001-02 10-IOOMMBTU/HR
1-03-001-03 IOOMMBTU/HR
10-IOOMMBTU/HR
IOOMMBTUHR
1-03-007-02 SENAGE 10-100
1-03-007-03 SE*AGE<10MMBTU/HR
i-03-o07-»9 OTHER/NOT
WOOD/B>RK H>STE
1-03-005-01 BARK BOILER
l-03-00»-02 WOOO/B1RK BOILER
l-03-00'-03 WOOD BOILER
LIQ PETROLEUM 5«S
1-03-010-02 lO-IOOMBBTu/MR
1-01-010-03 HOMMBTU/MR
5LO HASTE-SPECIFY
1-03-012-01 >IOO NXBTU/HR
1-03-012-02 10-ltlO MMBTU/HR
I-OJ-OI2-03 IOO MMBTU/HR
1-03-013-02 10-100 KBBTU/HR
1-03-013-13 INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT, '5' INtMCATES THf SULFUR CONTENT Or THE FUEL ON A PERCENT «AS|S (BY WEIGHT)
12/75
Appendix C
C-5
-------
INTEONLCOMBUSTION -ELECTRIC
NATIONAL E M I 5 s I o ,, DATA SY5TFM
SOtlRCF CL«SSIF|CATION CODES
P 0 U N D S EMiTTFD PER UNIT
PART SOX N Q X HC
UNITS
5I5MLL ATE OIL
2-01-001-01 TURBINE
2-OI-OCU-02 RECIPROCATING
», » T U P H G a 5
2-01-002-fM TURBINE
2-01-0.02-02 RECIPROCATING
110. 5
110. 5
910. S
91n. 5
|5,H ICPO GALLON? BURNrr*
ICOC* GALLONS P-UPNEO
"ILLIOI CUBIC FFET
MILLION CU'ilC FEE1
?-OI-?03-3I RECIPROCATING
J-fl I-003-02 TURBINE
PESIDOSL OIL
2-01-Tn>4-al TUPBINF
JET FUEL
2-01-005-01 TURBINE
csuor OIL
7-OI-OnA-ol TURBINE
PROCESS G'S
2-OI-n07--)I TURBINE
OTHER/NOT CL«SIFO
2-OI-9?9-«7 SPECIFY |N BEM
?,OI-»V»-98 SPECIFY IN RfM
INTEPNLCOMRU5T1 ON -INDUSTRIAL
13,0
5.00
110.
HO.
S 370.
S 47.
37.0 225. THOUSANDS OF GALLCMS
5.5.7 IS.H lOfn GALLONS BU»NEB
1000 GALLONS BUR
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS "UfNE
"ILL10N CU3IC FEET
MILLION CUBIC FFET B
1000 GALLONS nURNEP
DISTILLATE OIL
2-02-oni-oi
J-02-001-02
NATURAL GAS
2-02-002-01
2-02-002-02
GASOLINE
2-02-n'13-3l
DIESEL FuEL
?-02-o°i-n |
2-02-COH-12
OES1DUAL OIL
?-02-OOS-0 1
JET FUEL
2-07-004-01
C"UDf OIL
2-02-007-01
PROCESS GAS
2-02-10K-OI
?-n7-OOB-02
TURBINE 5,00 110. S 47.9
RECIPROCATING 33.5 lit. S 149.
TURBINE 11.0 910. S 113.
RECIPROCATING 910. S
RECIPROCATING 4.50 S.30 102.
RECIPROCATINr, 33.5 111. S 149.
TURBINE b.oo 110. S 47. A
TURB INF 159.5
TUtB I NE 4.20
TURBINE 114. 5
TURBINE 950. S
RECIPROCATING 950. 5
5.57 |5,t 1000 GALLONS BURNED
37.5 102. ITOO GALLONS BURNED
12.0 ll?>. "1LLIOH CUBIC FEET
MILLION CUBIC FFET
161. 3,9lD. 1000 GALLONS pllPNEC
37.5 102. 1000 GALLONS 5U1NEO
5.^7 15, tt 1000 GALLONS BURNfO
1000 GALLONS BURNED
1001 GALLONS BUPNEB
100D GALLONS BUPNer
MILLION CUBIC FEET
MILLION CUBIC FFET BURNED
OTHER/NOT CLSSIFD
2-02-9V9-97
?-02-"9-99
SPECIFY IN REMARK
SPECIFY IN REMARK
HILLIOH CUBIC FEET eusNro
1000 GALLONS RUPNfD
•A- t>l1|C»T>-s THE ASH CCHTE'lT, '5' INDICATES THE SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL ON A PERCENT BASI5 (BY WEIGHT|
C-6
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
ISTERNLCOMBUSTION -COMMTRCL-INSTUTNU
ATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
POUNDS TWITTED PER UNIT
PART SOX N ? X HC
UNITS
2-03-001-nl RECIPROCATING
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
7-03-999-97 SPECIFY IN REMARK
7-03-999-78 SPECIFY IN REMARK
INTERNLCOM9USTI ON -ENGINE TESTING
AIRCRAFT
2-01-001-01 TURBOJET
ROCKET MOTOR
2-01-007-11 SOLIO PROPELL'NT
nTHER/NOT CLASIFO
7-0*1-999-97 SPECIFY IN REMARK
2-01-999-98 SPECIFY IN REMARK
2-01-999-99 SPECIFY IN REMARK
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -CHEMICAL HFG
AOIPIC ACID PROD
3-OI-OPl-OI GENERAL-CYCLOHEX
3-01-001-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5IFD
AMMONIA W/METHNTR
3-01-002-01 PURGE GAS
3-01-002-02 STORAGE/LOADING
AMMONIA W/COA9SRB
33.5
37.5
90.0
0.
in2, THOUSANDS or GALLONS
MILLION CUBIC FEET <>>JRNEO
IfJOO GALLONS plJPNEP
.12.7 THOUSANDS OF G'LLON/FUFL
TONS OF FUEL
MILLION CUBIC FEET BURNED
1000 GALLONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS PRODUCFO
TONS PRODUCED
o. TONS PRODUCED
n. TONS PRODUCED
3-01-003-01 REGENERATOR EXIT 0.
3-01-003-02 PURGE GAS 0.
3-01-003-03 STORAGE/LOADING 0.
3-01-003-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
AMHONIUM NITRATE
3-01-001-01 GENERAL
3-01-001-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CAR90N BLACK
3-01-005-DI CHANNEL PROCESS 2,300.
3-01-005-07 THERMAL PROCESS 0.
3-01-005-03 FURNflCE PROC GAS
3-01-005-01 FURNACE PROC OIL
3-01-005-05 FURNACE W/GAS/OIL 220.
3-01-005-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
CHARCOAL MFG
3-01-004-01 PYROL/DISTIL/SENL ton,
3-OI-OOfc-99 OTHER/NOT CtASFP
0.
90.0
0.
I 1 ,SOO.
I,ROO.
too.
200. TONS PRODUCED
0, TONS PRODUCED
0. TONS PHODUCFf
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
33.500.
0
5.300.
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCT
100. 320. TONS PSOOUCCO
TONS PRODUCT
3-01-007-01
3-01-007-99
CHLOR- ALK AL 1
3-01-OOfl-Ol
3-01-006-02
3-01-001-03
3-0 l -nos-ni
3-01-008-05
3-01-008-99
GENERAL
OTHFR/N1T CLASIFO
L I <5U 1 FTN-D I APHRGM
LIOUIFTN-MFRC CEL
LOADING TNKCARVNT
LOADING STGTNKVNT
AIR-BLOW MC BRINF
OTHER/NOT CLA5IF1
0
0
0
CLEANING CHEMICLS
3-01-009-P1 SOAP/DET SPRTORYR
3-01-009-10 SPECIALTY CLrA«95
3-OI-H09-99 OTHERS/NOT CLASFO
P.
0.
0.
TONS PRODUCED
TOSS PKnDUCCO
IDO TONS CHLORINE LIQUrFlFO
100 TONS CHLORINE LIQUEFIED
100 TONS CHLORINE LIQUEFIED
100 TONS CHLORINE LMUFrlED
lOO TONS CHLORINE LIOUFFIFB
100 TONS CHLORINE LIQUEFIED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCED
•A- INDICATES THE ASH CTNTTNT, •$• IVOICATES THE SULFUR CONTFNT OF THE FUEL ON A PERCENT PASIS (BY WEIGHTI
12/75
Appendix C
C-7
-------
INCI'STRML PROCES -CHEMICAL "FG
N A T I 0 > J L E * t S S I o •" DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
POUNDS F
PART Sf
EIPLCSIVES-T'.T
3-CM-ilC-Cl
3-n i -11 r-?2
3-0 I -? lr-T3
3-n i -•) i r-i«
s-oi-oir-TS
3"r*\""i(5-i"Jfe
3-01-010-99
YDDOCHLOR 1C *C
M T R * T i o N R E A c T R s
MNO> CONCTRTHS
H250*t SE&FNFRATR
*?ED WATE* I NC IN
OPF* WA<;Tr RU**N
S^LLITE f X46UST
OTHE^/pjnT CL *S 1 m
ID
0
0
0
32, n
0
3-01-011-1)1 BYPRODUCTW/OSCRU8
3-01-111-^2 BYPRODUCT W/SC9UR
3-01-011-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
2 . n 0
o.7n
140.
<< ,no
2 . n 0
J 8 , 0
n.
3. TONS PRoOucro
r. TONS PR03UCFD
-. TONS PRODUCFD
1« TONS PRODUCED
TCNS PURGED
n. TONS PRODUCFO
TONS PRODUCED
TONS FINAL ACID
TONS FINAL ACIO
TONS FINAL ACIP
3-01-012-0! R3TRYK1L^W/5^RU8R
3-01-112-52 R3TRYK|LNW'OSCRIIB
3-01-012-03 GRIND/DRY rLOOS"R
3-01-01?-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5IFD
NITRIC ACID
3-01-0.13-01
3-01-013-T2
3-01-013-13
3-01-013-D'
3-01-113-DS
3-01-013-06
3-01-313-07
3-01-013-OH
3-01-013-99
AMHONIAO«!DATNOLO
AHMONlAOXlOATNNEW
NITACO CONCTS OLD
NITACO CONCTB NEW
UNCONTROLLED
w/CATYL/COHfluSTER
UNCONTROLLED
u/ABSORoERS
OTHEP/NOT CLASJFO
0,
0,
1,50
5.00
0,20
TONS ACIO
TONS ACID
TONS FLUORSPAR
TONS ACID
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
PURE
PURE
PU = E
PURE
PURE
PURE
PURE
PURE
PURE
ACIO
ACIO
ACID
ACIO
ACIO
ACID
ACID
ACID
ACID
llpr>UCE"
»')DuCE»
R 0 D U C E 1
RoDuCEn
RCBUCEC"
PODUCE"
p(iOufF1
P 0 D u C F 1
P(-DUCE™
3-01-OM-OI
3-f]-nli-02
3-01-311-99
3-0 1-015-01
3-01-015-02
3-01-015-03
3-01-015-05
3-01-01 5-99
GENFRAL
P 1 GHENT KILN
OTHER/NOT CLtSFO
BODYING OIL SENL
OLEOPESINDUS GFNL
ALKYO GENERAL
ACRYLIC GENERAL
OTHER/NOT CLASFD
2.T
0
0
0
0
10.0
150.
160.
20.0
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PR10UCT
TOW PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PROOUCEB
TONS PRODUCED
wETPRnc
3-OI-OI6-TI
3-01-016-32
5-OI-OK.-P3
3-01-01»-99
REACTOR.U
GYPSUK POND
CONOENSW-UNCON1LD
OTHER/NOT CLiSFD
"15-AC10 THERllL
3-01-017-01
3-OJ-OI7-99
GENERAL
OTHER/NOT CLA5FO
0.
0.
0.
TONS PHOSPHATE ROCK
TONS PHOSPHATE ROCK
TONS PH1SPHATC ROCK
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PHOSPHOROUS
TONS PRODUCED
3-01-019-01 PVC-GENF.RAL
3-01-01(1-02 POLYPROO-5ENFRAL
3-01-018-05 BAKELITF-GTNERAL
3-01-018-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
PrtTHALIC ANHYDRID
3-01-019-13 UNCONTRCLLED-6ENL
35.0
3.00
TONS PR1DUCEO
TONS PRODUCED
TOMS PRODUCT
TONS PROOUC^D
TONS PRODUCED
• »lNTi>'5 IN<
3-01-020-nl
3-CI-02T-02
3-01-020-03
3-P1-020-01
S-5l-02r-OS
3-01-020-99
SOOIU" CARBOMATE
3-01-121-11 S
3-01-021-12 5
3-01-021-10 T
3-01-121-11 T
3-01-021-20 R
3-01-021-99 0
COOKIMG-GENERAL 0.
COOKING-OILS 0.
COOK1NG-OLEORESIN 0.
COOKING-ALKYOS 0.
PIGHFNT HlxlNGGEN 2.00
OTHER/NOT CLASFD
Y-NH3 RECVRY 0,
Y-HANOLiNG 6.00
-C1LCINING
/NOT CLASFD
120.
10.0
150.
160.
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PIGNENT
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRiDUCFD
INDICATES TfE ASH CONTfNT, 'S' Innlc*TCS T"F 5ULFU" CONTFNT Or THE FUEL Or, A orRCENT SAS[5 |BY WFIGHTl
C-8
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -CHEMICAL "EG
M2S01 -CHAMBER
3-01-022-01 GENERAL
H2S01-CONTACT
i-oi-023-oi 9.7 CONVERSION
3-01-023-01 9.5 CONVERSION
3-01-023-04 9.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-08 8.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-10 7.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-12 4.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-n 5.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-14 1.0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-U 3,0 CONVERSION
3-01-023-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5FD
SYNTHETIC FIBERS
3-01-021-01 NYLON GENERAL
3-01-021-02 OACRON GENERAL
3-01-021-03 ORLON
3-01-021-01 ELASTIC
3-01-021-05 TEFLON
3-01-021-04 POLYESTER
3-01-021-08 NOHfx
3-01-021-10 ACRYLIC
3-01-021-12 TYVEX
3-01-021-11 OLEF1NS
SCHISYNTMTICFIBR
3-01-025-05 ACETATE
3-0 I -025- 10 VISCOSE
3-01-025-99 OTHERS/NOT C(.*SFO
'SYNTHETIC RUSBE"
3-01-024-01 BUTADIENE-GENERAL
3-01-024-02 METHYLPBOPENE-GNL
3-01-024-03 BUTYNE GENERAL
3-01-024-0' PENTAOIFNE-GEN9L
3-01-024-05 OIMETHHEPTNE GENL
3-01-024-04 PENTANE-GENERAL
3-01-024-07 ETHANEN1 TR | LE-GEN
3-01-024-08 ACRYLON | TR 1 LE-GEN
3-01-024-09 ACROLEIN-GENERAL
3-01-024-20 AUTO TIRES GENERL
3-01-024-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5FO
FERTILIZ AMONN1TR
3-01-027-01 PR ILTWR.NEUTRL I 2R
3-01-027-02 PRILLING TOWER
3-01-027-03 PRILTWR.ORYCOOLRS
3-01-027-01 GR ANUL AT-NEUTL I ZR
3-01-027-05 GRANULATOR
3-01-027-04 GRANULAT-OR YCOOLR
FERTIL J2-NSUPPH05
3-01-028-01 GRIND-DRY
3-01-028-02 MA|N STACK
FERTIUI2-TRP5PHOS
3-01-029-n) RUN OF PILE
3-01-029-02 GRANULAR
FERTIL1Z-OI AMPHOS
3-01-030-01 DRYER-COOLERS
3-01-030-02 AMON 1 AT.GR ANuL ATE
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
0.
0.90
12.0
0.
0.10
7.00
9,00
0.
0.
0.
80.0
2,00
TEREPTHALIC ACIO
3-01-031-01 HN03*PARAXYLENGEN
3-01-031-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5IFO
SULFUR(ELEMENTAL >
* T T o N » L EMISSION
SOURCE CL'S^iriC
POUNDS CHITTED PER
PART SOX NOX
1 .00
7.00
11.0
27.0
10.0
55.0
70.0
82.0
94.0
7.00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.15
3.00
UNITS
TONS PURE ACIO PRODUCED
3-01-052-01
3-01-032-07
3-01-032-03
3-01-032-99
MOO-CLAU5 2STAGE
MOO-CLAUS 3STAGE
MOO-CLAUS 1STAGE
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
280,
I 09,
114.
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
ran";
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
PURE ACIO
PUOE ACID
PURE ACID
PURE ACIO
PURE ACIO
PUT ACIO
PURE ACIO
PURE ACIO
PURE ACIO
PROOUCFO
FISER
FIBER
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCED
FIHER
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCT
PP.ODUC T
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PROOUCFO
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PROOUCFO
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCED
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
ROOUCEO
ROOUCEI
ROOUCEO
R&oucEn
ROOUCEI
ROOUCE1
ROOUCEP
RODUCEO
KOOUCEO
•A' INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT, -5' INDICATES THE SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL ON « PERCENT *«SI 3 I»T WEIGHT]
12/75
Appendix C
C-9
-------
*>* o c E s -CHEMICAL M F G
ATIONAL EM1SSTON DATA 5 C 5 T F. M
SOURCE CL'SSIFICATION COOES
POUNDS EMJTTFD PER UNIT
P*RT SOX NOX HC I
PEST
3-01-033-01 MALATHION
3-01-033-99 OTHFR/NOT CLA51FD
AMINES/AMIDES
3-0|-03t-0| GENERAL/OTHER
PIGMENT-INORGAN
3-01-035-01 CALCINATION
3-01-03S-99 OTHER/NOT CLAS1FD
SODIUM 5ULFATE
3-01-034-01 GENERAL/OTHER
3-01-036-02 KILNS
SODIUM SULFITE
3-01-037-nl GENERAL/OTHER
3-01-037-02 KILNS
SODIUM
-------
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -CHEMICAL "FG
NATIONAL EM1SS10N DATA SYSTEM
S 0 U R C r CLASSIFICATION COOES
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PART SOX 'Itix HC
UNITS
WASTE CAS FLARES
1-0 1 -90C-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIfn
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
3-01-999-99 SPECIFY If REMARK
INDUSTRIAL PRCCE5 -FOOD/AGRICuLTURAL
MILLION CUBIC FEET ayR«rD
TONS PRODUCT
3-92-001-11 GENERAL
3-0?-00'-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5FO
COFFEE SOASTINtt
3-02-007-01 OIRECTFIRE ROASTR
3-02-002-0? 1NDIRCTF1REROASTR
3-02-002-03 STONER/COOLER
1-02-002-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
COFFEf-lNSTANT
3-02-003-01 SPRAY DRIER
COTTON G1NNIN6
rERMENTATN.W]ME
3-07-nl|-nl GENERAL
FISH MEAL
3-0?-"l7-ni
3-07-017-0?
5-02-012-03
}-o?-ni7-99
COOKERS-FRESHFISH
COOKFRS-STALEFJSH
ORJER5
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
7.60
1.20
1 .HO
3-02-001-01 UNLOADING FAN
3-02-001-D2 CLEANER
3-0?-OOM-99 OTHE^/NOT CLASFO
FEED/GRAIN TE&MEL
3-02-005-01 SHIPING/RECEIVING
3-02-005-02 TRANSFf R/CONvFYNG
3-02-005-03 SCSEFNING/CLEANNG
3-02-005-01 DRYING
FEEO/GRAIN CNTRYF
3-02-004-01 SHIPNG/RECEIVNG
3-02-00(.-02 TRANSFER/CONVEYNS
3-02-004-13 SCREFNING/CLEANNG
3-02-00* --•" DRYING
3-02-004-i? OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
GRAIN PROCESSING
3-07-007-ni CORN MEAL
3-02-007-02 SOY BEAN
3-02-007-H3 BARLEY/wHEATCLEAN
3-02-007-fl »;LO CLEANER
3-02-007-05 SARLEYFLOUR MILL
3-C2-017-0* WET CORN MILLING
3-02-007-30 WHEAT FLOUR MILL
3-02-007-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFO
FEED MANUFACTURE
1-02-onR-1l BARLEY FEEO-GENL
3-07-OOP-99 OTHER/N«T CLASFO
F E R M E N T A T N - B E F R
3-07-109-01 GRAIN HAN1LING
3-02-009-02 DRYING SPNT GRAIN
3-07-009-03 BREWING
3-D2-009-9R OTHER/NOT CLASFD
3-02-009-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFO
FERMENTATN-WHI SKY
3-02-010-01 GRAIN HANDLING
3-02-OIC-OZ DRYING SPNT GRAIN
3-07-010-03 AGING
5.00
1 .00
1 .00
2.00
5.00
*.oo
5.00
3.00
B.OO
7 ,00
5.00
7,00
O, 20
0.10
3.00
3.00
3.00
5.00
3.00
5.00
0.
0.
0.
0, 10
0. 10
0, 10
0.
TONS MEAL PROIUCEP
TONS PRODUCT
TONS GREEN KEANS
TONS GREEN BEANS
TONS GREEN BEANS
TONS PRODUCT
TONS GREEN BEANS
BALES COTTON
BALES COTTON
BALES COTTON
SALES COTTON
TOMS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PRnCESSEP
TOMS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCES5FO
TONS GRAIN PROCESSrD
TONS GRAIfl PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSES
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
N PROCESSED
TONS GRA
TOMS GRA
N PROCESSED
N PROCESSED
ROHUCT
•A- INDICATES Ttir ASH CONTENT, -s- INDICATES THF SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL ON i p,RCFNT PASIS
TONS OF
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSEO
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
THOUSANDS OF GALLONS
GALLONS PRODUCT
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
TONS GRAIN PROCESSED
BARRELI50 SAL)
GALLONS PRODUCT
GALLONS PSOOUCT
TOMS FISH MEAL PRODUCED
TONS FISH HFAL PRODUCED
TONS FISH SCRAP
TOMS PROCESSED
(*Y HEIGHT)
12/75
Appendix C
C-ll
-------
•i A T i o N A L EMISSION DATA SYSTE
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION c o r E
POUNDS E w 1 T T F D PER UNIT
IN1U5TPJAL PRQCES -FOOD/AGRICULTURAL
UNITS
"EAT 5«OKI"!G
3-02-013-01 GENERAL 0.30
STARCH MFC
1-02-H1-01 GENERAL S.OO
SUGAR CANE PROCES
3-02-015-11 GENERAL
3-02-015-99 OTHER/ NQT CLASIF1
5UGAP BEET PROCE5
3-n2-f!U-0| DRYER ONLY
3-02-016-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
PEANUT PROCESSING
3-12-017-20 OIL/NOT CLfcSFD
3-02-017-99 OTHER/NOr CLASFD
C AND Y/CONFECTNR Y
3-02-01B-99 OTHEP/NOT CLASFD
DAIRY PRODUCTS
3-07-030-11 MILK SPRAY-DRYER 0.
3-02-030-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
OTHER/NOT CLA5IFO
3-02-999-9S SPECIFY IN REMARK
ALUMINUM OHE-flAUX
3-03-000-01 CRUSHING/HANDLING 6.00
AL ORf-ELECPOREON
3-03-001-01 PREBAKE CELLS 61.3
3-03-001-02 HORI75TD SOIE'BPS 98,1
3-03-001-13 VERT5TO SOOER^ERG 78.1
3-03-001-05 ANODE BAfE FtjRNCF. 3.00
3-03-001-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
COKE f-ET BYPROOUC
3-01-003-11 GENERAL 3.50 1.00 0.01
3-C3-003-02 OVEN CHARGING 1.50 0.02 0.03
3-03-003-01 QUENCHING 0.90
3-03-003-15 UNLOADING 0.10
3-03-013-06 UNDERFIR1NG 1.00
3-H3-003-07 COAL CRuSH/HANDL
3-O3-003-99 OTHER/NIT CLASFD
COKE HET-BEEHIVE
3-03-001-11 GENERAL 200. 0. 0.
COPPER SHELTER
3-03-005-11 TOTAL/GENERAL 135. 1,251.
3-03-005-02 ROASTING 15.0 AO.O
3-03-005-03 SMELTING 20,0 320.
3-03-005-01 CONVERTING 60,0 P70.
3-03-005-15 REFINING 10-0 0 .
3-03-005-06 ORE DRYFP
3-03-005-Ofl FINISH OPER-GENL
3-03-005-99 OTHER/ NOT CLASFD
0.07 0.40 TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TON!
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
1.20 1.27 TONS
2.50 0,60 TONS
0.20 0.07 TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
8. op I.io TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
MEAT s"0icrr
STARCH PROOUCf-
SUGAR PRODUCED
PROCESSED
RAW BEETS
RAW BEFTS
PRODUCT
PROCESSED
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PRODUCT
PROCESSED IINPUTI
PRODUCED |PINI5HEO>
OF ORE
ALUM NUH PRODUCED
ALUM NUM PRODUCED
ALUM NUM PRODUCED
ALUM NUM PRODUCED
ALUM NUM PRODUCED
ALUM NUM PRODUCED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
COAL CHARGED
CONCENTRATED ORE
CONCENTRATFB Oft
CONCENTRATED ORf.
CONCENTRATED OPF:
CONCENTPATF.D ORE
OF ORE
PRODUCED
CONCENTRATED Off
F£R*t_LOY OPEN F
3-P3-OOA-QI
3-H3-OOA-0?
3-o3-nf>6-n?
3-0 3-006-n1*
3-03-006-05
50« FESI
75« FESI
90« FESI
SILICON METAL
SlLlCOMAMGANESE
200.
315.
565.
625.
195.
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TOMS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
IN1ICATFS THE ASH CONTENT,
-ICATF
-------
SOURff CLASSIFICATION COPES
PART 5 0 X SOX H C CO UNITS
l-'iDl'STRIAL PROCE5 -PRIMARY METALS
FERROALLOY CONTINUED
3-03-OOi-in SCREENING
3-03-POS-l 1 ORE DRYER
3-0. 1-006-99 OTHER/NTT CLASFP
F E R A L 0 Y SEMCOVFNC
3-P3-007-01 FEROHANGANESE 15.0
3-03-007-02 GENERAL
IRON PRODUCTION
3-03-008-01 BLAST FNC-ORECHG 121. 0.
3-P3-008-12 BLAST FNC-AGLCHG S1.0 0.
3-03-OOP-P3 SINTFRING GENERAL H2.0
3-03-OOS-01 ORE-CRUSH/HANDLE
3-03-008-05 SCARFING 1.00 0.
3-03-008-04 SAND HANDLING ORN 0.
3-03-008-07 MOLD OVENS
3-03-008-38 SLAG CRUSH/HANDL
3-03-008-7? OTHER/NOT CLASFD
5TEEL PRODUCTION
3-03-009-nl OPNHEARTH OXLANCE 17.1
3-03-009-02 OPNHEARTH NOxLNCE ft. 30
3-03-009-P3 BOF-5ENERAL 51,0
3-03-009-C1 ELECT ARC W/LANCE 11.0
3-03-009-05 ELECT APC NOLANCE 9,20
3-03-009-10 FINISH/PICKLING
3-03-009-11 FINISH/SOAK PITS
3-C3-009-12 FINISH/GRIND, ETC
3-03-009-20 FINISH/OTHER
3-03-009-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
LEAD SMELTERS
3-03-010-01 SINTERING lit. 123.
J-03-010-02 BLAST FURNACE 278, 31.9
3-03-010-03 REVERB FURNACE 15.1 0.
3-03-010-01 ORE CRUSHING 2.00 0.
3-03-010-05 MATERIALS HANDLNG 5.00 0.
3-03-010-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
MOLYBDENUM
3-03-on-oi MINING-GENERAL
3-03-011-02 HILLING-GENERAL
3-03-011-99 PROCESS-OTHER
TITANIUM PROCESS
3-03-012-PI CHLORINAT10N STAT 0,
J-03-012-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
GOLD
3-0:3-013-01 MINING/PROCESSING
MRIUK
3-03-011-01 ORE GRIND
3-03-011-02 REDUCTN KILN
J-03-011-03 DRIERS/CALCINERS
3-03-011-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
BERYLLIUM ORE
3-03-015-11 STORAGE 0.
3-03-015-02 CRUSHING 0,
3-03-015-03 MELTING
3.03-015-01 5UENCH/HEAT TREAT 0,
3-03-015-05 GRINDING 0,
3-03-015-0* SULFA^IDN/DISSOLV
J-TJ3-OI5-07 SINTERING
3-03-015-08 VENTILATION
3-03-015-09 LEACH/FILTER 0.
3-03-015-99 OTHER/NOT CLASFD
MERCURY MINING
-03-025-01 SURFACE BLASTING 0.
-03-025-02 SURFACE DRILLING 0.
-03-025-03 SURFACE HANDLING 0,
-03-025-01 NATURAL VAPOR 0. 0,
-03-025-05 STRIPPING 0.
-03-025-0* LOADING 0,
-03-025-07 CONVFY/HAUL ING 0,
-03-025-Oft UNLOADING 0,
•A- INDICATES THE «5H CONTENT, >S' INDICATES THE SULFUR COuTFNT OF
0. TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
0. 0. 1,750. TONS PRODUCED
0. 0. 1, TONS PRODUCED
11. n TONS PRODUCED
0. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
TONS HANDLED
TONS SAND BAKED
TONS HANDLED
TONS PRODUCED
0. TONS PRODUCED
0. TONS PRODUCED
139. TONS PRODUCF.D
18.1 TONS PRODUCED
18.0 TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
1. 0. 0. TONS CONCENTRATED
0. 0. 0. TONS CONCENTRATED
0. 0. P. TONS CONCENTRATED
ORE
ORE
ORF
0. 0. 0. TONS OF ORE CRUSHED
0. 0. 0. TONS OF LEAD PRODUCT
TONS CONCENTRATED
o. HUNDREDS OF TONS
0. TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
0, TONS ORE
0. TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. 0, TONS PROCESSED
0. TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
0, 0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
0. TONS PROCESSED
0. TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
0, TONS PROCESSED
0. 0, 0. TONS OF ORE
0, 0, 0. TONS OF ORE
0. C. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0, 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. 0. TPNS REMOVED
0. 0. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. p. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. P. TONS OF ORE
THE FUEL ON A P..RCFNT OASIS (BY KEICHTI
ORE
M INFO
12/75
Appendix C
C-13
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA 5 » S T F «
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION c 0 0 F S
KDl'STIMAL P'OCES -PRIMARY HETJl.5
P 0 U N
PART
I T T F D PER UNIT
x Nq X HC
"ERCURY * IN 1 SG
3-03-025-09
3-03-025-99
CONTINUED
CONV/HAUL HASTE
OTHER/NOT CLASFD
"ERCURY ORE PROCS
3-03-026-01
3-03-026-03
3-03-026-01
3-P3-026-05
3-03-026-0*
3-03-026-99
ZINC SMELTING
1-03-030-01
3-03-030-02
3-03-030-03
3-03-030-01
3-03-030-05
3-03-030-0*
3-03-030-99
OTHER/NOT CLAST"
3-03-999-99
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -
ALUMINUM OPERATN
-01-001-01
.01-901-02
-01-00 1 -03
-01-001 -01
-01-001-10
-01-001-1 1
3-01-001-20
3-01-00 1 -50
3-01-001-99
BRASS/BRONJ MELT
3-01-002-0 1
3-01-002-02
3-01-002-03
3-01-002-0"
3-01-002-0*
GRAY IRON
3-01-003-01
3-01-003-02
3-01-003-03
3-01-003-05
3-01-033-10
3-01-001-50
LEAD SMELT SFC
3-01-001-01
3-01-001-02
3-01-001-03
3-01-OOl-m
3-0«-10l-08
3-01-001-99
LEAD BATTERY
3.01-nns-ol
3-01-005-02
3-01-005-03
3-01-005-01
3-01-005-99
MAGNESIUM SEC
3-oi-OOA-n 1
3.ri-nt>6-99
CRUSHING
RETORT FURNACE
CALCINE
BURNT OPE BIN
HOEING PROCESS
OTHER/NOT CLASFD
GENERAL
ROA5TNG/MULT-HRTH
SINTERING.
HORI? RETORTS
VERT RETORTS
ELECTROLYTIC PROC
OTHER/NOT CLftSFD
SPECIFY IN REMARK
SECONDARY MFTALS
SWEAT INGFURNACE
SMELT-CRUCIBLE
SMELT-REVERP FNC
CHLORINATN STATN
FOIL ROLL I NG
FOIL CONVERTING
CAN MANUFACTURE
ROLL-DRAW -EXTRUDE
OTHER/NOT CLASFD
BLAST Ff'C
CRUCIBLE F«C
CUPOLA FHC
ELECT INDUCTION
ROTARY FNC
CUPOLA
PEVERR F«C
ELECT IMOUCTION
ANNEALING OPF9ATN
GRINOlNG-CLEANJNG
SAND HANDL-GFNL
POT FURNACE
REVERB FNC
PLAST/CUPOLA FNC
ROTARY REVERB FNC
LEAD OXIDE MFG
OTHER/NOT CLA5]FO
TOTAL-GENERAL
CASTING FUPNACE
PASTE MIXER
THREE PRCCES OPER
OTHER/ NOT CLASIFD
POT FUP'IACE
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
120.
90.0
8.00
100.
3.00
11.5
1.90
1.30
12.5
15.0
12.0
73.0
2,00
70.0
60.0
17.0
7.0n
1 .50
0.80
117.
193.
70,0
0,90
0,01
0.21
0.61
1.0(1
0.
0.
0.
0.
en. o
53.0
0,
TONS OF ORE
TONS OF ORE
TON* P30CESSEO
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PPnCESSEO
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS HETAL PRn
TONS METAL PRODUCED
TONS METAL PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGF
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARQF
TONS PRODUCFO
TONS METAL CHA"GE
TONS METAL CHARGE
TONS METAL CHARGE
TONS METAL CHARGE
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS HANDLFfl
TONS METAL CHARGE
TONS METAL CHARGED
TONS METAL CHARGED
TONS METAL CHARGED
TONS METAL CHARGED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TOMS OF BATTERIES PRCDI'CF!
TONS OF BATTERIfS PRODUCED
TONS OF BATTFRIE5 PRODUCED
TONS OF BATTERIES PPClOUCET
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
INDICATES T^F ASH CONTENT,
INDICATES THE SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL Or. A P,RCENT BASIS
C-14
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
NATIONAL
I S S 1 0 N DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE C L • S S I F I c
T10N CODES
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -SECONDARY METALS
1-01-050.01 SPECIFY IN REMARK
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
J.0«.999-99 SPECIFY IN PF.MARK
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -MINERAL PRODUCTS
POUNDS E M I T T f 0 PER U N I T
PART SOX NOX HC
STEEL FOUNDRY
3-01-007-0 |
3-01-007-02
3-01-007-03
3-01-007-05
3-01-007-0*
3-01-007- 1 0
3-01-007-15
3-01-007-99
ZINC SEC
3-01-008-01
3-01-OOS-02
3-01-008-03
3-01-008-01
3-01-009-05
3-01-008-0*
3-01-008-07
3-01-008-08
3-01-008-99
MALLEABLE IRON
3-01-009-01
3-01-009.99
NICKEL
3-01-010-01
3-01-010-99
ZIRCONIUM
3-01-01 1-01
3-01-01 1-99
ELECTRIC ARC FNC
OPEN HEARTH FNC
INDUCTION FURNACE
SANO GR1NO/HANDL
FINISH/SOAK PITS
FINISH/NOT CLASFO
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
ffETORf FNC
HORI7, MUF'LE FNC
POT FURNACE
KETTLE. SWEAT FNC
GALVANIZING XETTL
CALCINING KILN
CONCENTRATE DRYER
REvERB-SWEAT FNC
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
ANNEAL ING OPERATN
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
FLUX FURNACE
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
OXIDE KILN
OTHER/NOT^ CLASIFO
1 3.0
11.0
10.0
0. 10
17,0
15.0
0. 10
1 1.0
5.00
89.0
1 3,0
FURNACE ELECTRODE
3-01-020-01
3-01-020-02
3-01-020-03
3.01-020-01
3-01-020-99
CALCINATION
MIXING
PITCH TREATING
BAKE FURNACES
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
MISC CASTiFABRCTN
ASPHALT ROOFING
3-05-001-01
3.05-001-02
3-05-001-03
3-05-001-01
3-05-001-99
ASPHALTIC CONCRE
3-05-002-01
3-05-002-02
3-05-OOJ-99
BLOWING OPERATION
DIPPING ONLY
SPRAYING ONLY
0 I PP 1 NG/SPR A Y 1 NG
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
T
ROTARY DRYER
OTHER SOURCES
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
2.50
1 .00
3.00
2.00
35.0
I 0 .0
BRICK MANUFACTURE
3-05-OOJ-OI
3-05-003-02
3-05-003-03
3-05-003-01
1-05-003-05
3.05-003-0*
3-05-003-99
CALCIUM C«RBIO£
3.05-001-0 I
3.05-001-02
3-05-001-03
3-05-001-99
ORY1NG-BAK MTL
GRINDING-"*" «TL
STORAGE-RAW MTL
CURING GAS FJRED
CURING OIL F|»rD
CURING COAL FIRFO
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
ELECTRIC FNC
COKF ORYER
FNC ROOM VFNTS
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
70.0
7t.O
31.0
0.07
0.07
1 .30
38.0
2.00
2 f, , 0
I .50
P.
.02
.00 5
.40 S
0.29
1 .10
|. |0
0.03
o. in
0.70
3.0Q
1.00
0.
UNITS
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS HANDLED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSEO
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCFD
TONS PRODUCFD
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS HFTAL CHARGE
TONS METAL CHARGE
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TCNS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PROCESSED
0.90 TONS SATURATED FELT PRODUCED
n. TONS SATURATED FELT PRODUCED
0. TONS SATURATED FELT PRODUCED
n. TONS SATURATED FELT PRODUCED
TONS SATURATED FELT PRODUCED
TONS PPODUCrD
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCFD
TONS PRODUCED
O.r7 TONS PRODUCED
n. TONS PRODUCFD
2.*0 TONS PRODUCFD
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PRODUCED
TOMS PRODUCFD
TONS PRODUCED
TONS PROCCSSCo
•A1 INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT, '5- INDIC'^FS T"F SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL ON A PERCENT BASIS |BY WFIGMTl
12/75
Appendix C
C-15
-------
s
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -MINERAL PRODUCTS
CASTAP-LE "EERACTY
3-05-OnS-DI RAwMATL DRrFR
1-0^-005-02 RAW"ATL C^USH/PRC
3-05-005-03 ELECTRIC ARC HfLT
3-OS-005-0*» CURING OVEN
3-05-005-05 MOLO/SHAKEOUT
3-05-005-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CEMENT MFC DRY
3-P5-004-OI KILNS
3-OS-OOA-02 DRyERS/GR I NDERE TC
3-OS-P06-03 KILNS-OIL FIRED
3-05-006-01 KILNS-GAS FIRED
3-05-006-05 KILNS-COAL FJRfO
3-05-006-9? OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
CEMENT HFC WET
3-05-n07-ni KILNS
3-05-007-02 DRTERS/GRINOERETC
3-0,5-007-03 KILNS-OIL FIRED
1-05-007-01 KILNS GAS FIRED
3-05-007-05 KILNS-CO'L F[REO
3-05-007-99 OTHER/NOT CL4SIFD
CERAMIC/CLAY MFC
3-05-008-01 DRYING
3-05-008-T2 GRINDING
3-05-008-03 STORAGE
3-05-OOR-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CLAY/FLYASH5INTER
3-05-009-01 FLYA5H
3-OC-009-02 CLAY/COKE
3-05-009-D3 NATURAL CLflY
3-05-009-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
COAL CLEANING
3-c*s-nio-oi THERH/FLUID BED
3-o^-oln-o2 THERM/FLASH
3-05-010-03 THFRH/MULT i LOUVWD
3-05-010-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
Ctf'lCRETE BATCH^.G
3-05-Oll-n| GENERAL
3-OS-OII-20 ASBEST/CEHNT PDTS
3-05-OII-2I ROAD SURFACE
3-05-nlt— 99 OTHER/HOT CLASFD
FIBERGLASS MFC
3. OS. n IJ.ni REvEKBFUC-RF-GFNFX
3-05-012-03 ELECTRIC IND FNC
3-05-012-nl FORMINf, LINE
3-05-OI2-D5 CURING TVEN
3-05-012-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
FR[T MFC
3-05-013-01 ROTARY FNC GENL
3-05-013-99 OTHER/NOT ct-ASIFD
GLASS HFG
3-05-nM-DI SODALIME; GFNL FNC
3-05-011-10 RAw MAT REc'STORG
3-05-oit-ii BATCHING/MIKING
3-05-011-12 MOLTEN HOLD TANKS
3-05-OH-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
GYPSUH HFG
1-05-015-01 Rw MTL DRYER
3-05—015-02 PRIMARY GRINDER
3-05-015-03 CALCINER
3-0^-015-01 CONVEYING
3-05-015-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
LIME "FG
1-05-nlA-fl| PRJMARY CRUSHING
3-OS-016-02 SECNDRY CRUSHING
3-05-116-03 c ALC i NNG-VERTK ILN
SOURCE CL'SSIFICATION CODES
PARY SOX Hpx HC
30.0
120.
50.0
0.20
Z5.0
16.0 3.00 0.50
18.0
215. 11.1 j.kO 0.
21|I5» 10.2 2,60 0.
21S. 73.8 2.60 P.
13.0 3.00 0.50 0.
6.00
228. |1.1 2.60 0.
228. 1C. 2 2.60 0.
229. 23.8 2.60 0.
70.0
76.0
31.0
1 10.
S5.0
21.0
20.0
16.0
25.0
0.20
n. 20 o. o. o,
0. 0. 0.
3.00
I * 00
0.
50,0
7.00
16.0
2.00
o. n. o.
0.
10.0
I • nn
90.0
0.70
31.0 0. 0. 0.
2.00 0. 1. D.
8 ,no
TONS FEED MATERIAL
TONS FEFO MATE.O|AL
TONS FEFD MATERIAL
TONS FEF.O MATERIAL
TONS FEED HATE°1AL
TONS FEFO MATF'IAL
BARRELS CEMENT >"'*ODLCE~
BARRELS CEMENT P^pDlcED
TONS CEMENT PRODUCED
TONS CEMENT PRODUCED
TONS CEMENT PRODUCED
TONS CEMENT PRODUCER
0. BABRELS CEMENT "l!ot>uCE~
BARRELS CEMENT PRODUCED
0. TONS CEMfNT PRODUCED
P. TONS CEMF.MT PRODUCED
p. TONS CEMENT PRODUCED
TONS CE-ENT PRODUCES
TONS INPUT TO P
TONS IN»UT TO PROCESS
TONS INPUT TO PROCESS
TONS PRODUCED
TONS FINISHED PRCOUCT
TONS FINISHED "OOUCT
TONS FINISHED PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCED
TONS CO«L DRIED
TONS COAL ORIE"
TONS COAL ORUO
TOMS COAL CLEANED
CUBIC TARD5 C
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PRODUCT
PDnOufE1
TONS M TERML PROCESSED
TONS n T=;RML pnorrssED
TONS M TERIAL P=0:ES5ED
TONS « TERHL PROCESSED
TONS « TTRIAL PRO^ESSE^
TONS P OCESSET
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGED
TONS 6L«SS RR"DUCIt)
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSES
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PRODUCED
TONS THROUGHPUT
TONS THROUGHPUT
TONS THROUGHPUT
TONS THROUGHPUT
TONS THROUGHPUT
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
••• INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT, 'S' INDICATES THf s»irUR CONTENT Or THE FUEL Of. t PERCENT 1ASIS (PT WflGHTI
C-16
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
P 0 U N n 5 EMITTED PER
PART six NIX
INDUSTRIAL PROCFS -MINERAL PRODUCTS
LIMt MFG CONTINUEn
3-15-014-11 CALCINNG-ROTrKILN 200.
3-05-014-15 CALCIMATIC KILN
3-05-014-P4 FLU1DIZO BED KILN
3-05-014-09 HYDRATOR
3-P5-OU-99 OTMES/NOT CIASIFD
"INERAL WOOL
3-05-017-01 CUPOLA 22.0 0.02
3-05-017-12 REVERB FNC 5.00
3-05-017-03 BLOW CHAMBER 17.0
3-05-017-01 CURING OVEN 1.00
3-05-017-15 COOLER 2.00
3-05-017-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
3-f5-nl»-ol VERTICAL FNC GEN 21.0
3-05-010-99 PTHER/NOT CLASIFO
PHOSPHATE ROCK
3-05-119-nl DRYING 15.0
3-05-019-02 GRINDING 20.0
3-05-019-03 TRANSFER/STORAGE 2.00
3-05-019-01 OPEN STORAGE 11,0
3-05-019-99 OTHER/NOT CCASIFO
STONE QUA^Y/PROC
3-C5-"20-OI PRIMARY CRUSHING 0.50 0, 0.
3-P5-D2r-n2 SEC CRUSH/SCREEN 1.50 0. 0.
3-05-020-03 TERT CRUSH/SCREEN 4.00 P. 0.
3-05-020-01 RECRU5H/SCREENI NG 5. On nt n.
3-05-020-15 FINES MILL 4.00 1. 0.
3-05-02P-04 5CREFN/CONVY/HNDL 2.00 0. 0.
3-05-02^-07 OPEN STORAGE 10.0 0, 0.
3-05-02C-18 CUT STONE-GENES AL ". 0.
3-05-021-19 BLASTING-GENERAL 0. 0.
3-05-020-99 OTHER/NIT CLASIFD
s a L T MINING
3-05-021-11 GENERAL 0.
POTASH PRODUCT I IN
1-05-122-01 HINE-GRIND/ORY o.
3-05-122-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CALCIUM ROPA Tt
3-05-023-11 MINING/PROCESSING
3-05-023-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIrD
MG CARBONATE
3-05-12't-oi MINE/PROCESS
3-05 — 02** — 99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
SANI/GRAvEL
3-05-025-11 CRUSHING/SCREEN 1.1(1 0, 0.
3-T5-125-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
11 ATOMACOUSERTH
3-05-02A.-OI HANDLING 0. o.
3-05-024-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CERAMIC ELFCT PTS
ASBESTOS MINING
3-15-031-11 SURFACE BLASTING 0, 0.
3-05-131-12 SURFACE DRILLING n, n.
3-05-031-03 C09B1NG 0, 0.
3-05-131-01 LOADING 0. 0.
3-05-031-05 CONVEY/HAUL AS9ES 0. 0.
3-15-131-14 CONVEY/HAUL WASTE 1. 0.
3-05-031-17 UNLOADING 0. 0.
3-05-031-1B STRIPPING 0. 0.
3-15-131-09 VENTILATION 0. 0.
3-05-131-11 STOCKPILING 0. 0.
3-05-131-11 TAILINGS P. 0.
3-05-131-99 1THFR/N1T CLASFD
•»• INDICATES T«F ASH CONTENT, '5- INDICATES THE SULFUR CONTENT IF THE FUEL
12/75 Appendix C
UNIT
HC CC- C N I T S
TONS PROCESSED
TONS P^OCESTED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS HYDRATEO LIME P«0~UC'!1
TONS PROCESSED
TONS CHARSE
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGE
TONS CHARGE
TONS PROCESSED
TONS CHARGE
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PHOSPHATE ROC»
TONS PHOSPHATE "OCK
TONS PHOSPHATE ROCK
TONS PHOSPHATE ROCK
TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. TONS RA MATERIAL
0, 0. TONS PA MATERIAL
0. C. TONS RA MATERIAL
0, 0. TONS RA MATERIAL
0. D. TONS RA MATERIAL
0. 0. TONS PRODUCT
0. 0. TONS PRODUCT STORED
0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS MINED
TONS ORE
TONS PROCESSED
0. TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
P. TONS PRODUCT
0. 0. TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
0. 0. TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
0, 1. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. TONS OF ORE
P. 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. TONS OF ORE
P. n. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. TONS OF ORE
P. 0. TONS REMOVED
0. 1. TONS OF ORE
P, 0. TONS OF ORE
0. 0. T(NS OF HATEffML
TONS PROCESSED
ON A PrRCFNT ».A5IS (BY WEIGHT)
C-17
-------
INDUSTRIAL PROCE5 -
tsacsTos MILLING
l-ns-032-31
3-ni^-o 32-32
3-P5-032-D3
J-OS-rJ2-«5
3-05-032-9»
MINING-SPEC MATL
3-05-1*0-11
3-05-0*0-02
3-pS-0*P-03
3-05-0*0-10
3-PS-0*0-20
3-05-0*0-21
3-05-0*0-22
3— 05— 0*C-23
3-05-3*0-2*
3-05-0*0-25
3-05-0*0-30
3-05-0*0-32
3-05-0*0-33
3*05-0*0-3*
3-05-0*0-34
S-OS-O*?-?'
OTHER/NOT CLASIF
l-OS-"'-"
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -
PROCESS HEATER
3-04-Oni-n|
3-04-001-02
3-04-00 1 -03
3-06-001-0*
MINERAL PRODUCTS
CRUSHING
t>»t!NG
RtCRUSHI NG
SCREENING
FIBER1Z1NG
CTHFB/NOT CLASFO
OPEN PIT-BLASTING
OPEN PIT-DRILLING
OPEN PI T-C09B 1 NG
UNOERGRO-VENTIL*T
LOAOING
CONVEY/HAUL MfFR
0. 1000 BARRELS VACUUM I) I SY I LL A T I ON
0. 1000 BARRELS VACUUM DISTILLATION
i. MILLION GALLONS COOLING WATER
0. IOPP BARRELS REFINERY CAPACITY
0. ICOO BARRELS REFINES- CAPACITY
0. 1000 BARRELS RFFINER" CAPACITY
0. IOPO BARRELS REFINER- CAPACITY
0. 1000 BARRELS REFINER" CAPACITY
MILLIONS OF CUMC FEET
MILLIONS OF CUBIC Fr'"r
TONS PROCESSED
INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT,
INDICATES THf SULFUR CONTENT CF THE FUEL ON A TfRCFNT F»A$!S (BY
C-18
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
ft T 1 0 * 4 L F « ! S S I 0 N PATft 5 y c; T ^ M
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION C 0 0 E 5
p F P UNIT
P-JLT OXIDJ7E1
3-Ot--Il-"l
.ID C C * !'. G
3-04-"!Z-DI
3-06-tIJ-03
OTHER/NOT C14S [ FD
U N I T 5
Tons PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
ICOO BARRELS F°E5H FfF"
1000 BARRELS FRFSh FE'"
1000 BARRELS FRESH FEEO
100" BARRELS FRESH FEE"
?-OA-~l 3-01 G
-EB/hCT C L 6 5 I ^
SPECIFY IN
SPEC1FY IN
1010 BARRELS FRESH
TONS PROCESSrO
BARRELS-PROCES'iED
3-07
3-07
3-07-
3-07-
3-07-
3-07-
3-07-
3-07-
3-07-
-131-
BLOWTNpc ACCUHULTR
P I *.
"ULT-EFFECT FVAP
RECVY P-pLR/OCEVAP
S^ELT OJ550LV TNK
L I "IE KILNS
FLUICBEO CALCINER
LI1UOR OXION TCWR
OTHER/NOT CL1SIFO
0.
0.
0.
151.
2.
3-OT-T2-n 1 LIQUOR oECOVERy
3-07-~02-T2 S'JLFITE TOWER
3-C'-TD2-C3 01GFSTER
3-07-?0?-c* S'-ELT TA'<
3-C7-002-CS EVAPrRJTORS
3-07-^:2-06 PULP DIGESTER
3-07-002-99 OTHER/NOT CLA51FO
3-07-"0'4-'1? F I «ERBOiPD-GEN
3-C7-005--I CfiEOSOTF
3-C7-:05-«9 OTHER/NTT CLASIFD
3-C7--06-31 GENERAL
3.P7-:37-^l VENEER [)RYER
3-n7-0"7-'i2 SANDING
3-C7--07-"9 •'THER/NQT CLA51FO
Si.-ILL ?BFRiT.,5
3-07--?a-99 OTHri»/^«T CLASIFD
3-rt7-'09-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
0.
0.
n.
5.00
0.
n,
o.
o.
0.
c.
1.20
0.
o. AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PI,LP
o. AIR-DRY TONS UNPLEACHED PULP
n. AIR-DRY TONS UNPLFACHEn PuLP
(,0.n AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
1. AIR.DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
16.0 AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
o. AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
n. AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
AIB-PRY TONS UNBLEACJEO PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UNBLEACHED PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UNILEACHFI PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UNJLEACHEO PULP
AIR-DRY TONS UN»LFACHEO PULP
TONS A[P offr PULP
TONS A1P DRY PULP
TONS FINISHED PRODUCT
TONS FINISHED PRODUCT
TONS FINISHED PRODUCT
TON5 OF WOOD TREATED
TONS OF WOOD TREATED
TONS OF PRODUCT
n. TONS PROCESSED
p. TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
i.«-r.~in-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
» •. | T o " E 'EG
3-T7--20-" OTHFR/NOT CLASIFQ
.i-R/.."- CL>Sirn
1.-T- SPECIFY IN REHARK
TONS PROCESSED
70MS PROCESSED
TON5 PROCESSED
!'.~!C1TES THE ASH CONTfNT, *S' ItjnJCATFS THf SULFU° CONTENT OF THE. FUEL ON * P'RCFNT pASIS (PY WEIGHT)
12/75
Appendix C
C-19
-------
K A T I 0 N .\ L EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
INDUSTRIAL fOCtS -METAL f APR 1 C A T I ON
IRON/STEEL
3-o»-ooi-oi "isc HARDWARE
3-09-001-02 TAB" MACHINERY
3-07-001-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFP
PLATING OPERATQNS
3-09-Oln-99 OTHER/NOT CLASJFO
CAN MAKING OPRNS
3-09-020-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
MACHINING OPER
3-09-030-nl PR|LLING-SP MATL
3-09-030-0? M1LLING-SP H»TL
3-09-030-03 REAMING.SP HATL
3-09-130-01 GRJNOlNG-SP nATL
3-09-030-05 SAwING-SP MATL
3-09-030-06 HONING-5P MAIL
3-09-030-99 OTHER-5P HATL
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
3-09-999-99 SPECIFY IN REMARK
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -LEATHER P»ODUCTS
0 LI N
PART
ITTED PER
N n x
UNIT
"C
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
LI N 1 T 5
TONS OF PRODUCT
TONS OF PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PLATED
TONS PRODUCT
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
OTHFR/NOT CLAS1FO
3-20-999-99 SPECIFY IN REMARK
INDUSTRIAL PROCES -TEXTILE MFG
GENERAL FABRICS
3-30-001-01
3-30-001-02
3-30-001-99
YARN PREP/BLEACH
PRINTING
OTHER/NOT SPEC1FD
RUBBERIZED FABRIC
3-3(1-002-01
3-30-002-02
3-30-002-03
3-30-002-99
CARPET OPERATNS
3-30-003-99
INDUSTRIAL PROCC5
ANTMRACITF COAL
3-9n-on | .99
BITUMINOUS COAL
3-90-002-01
3-90-002-03
3-90-002-01
3-90-002-06
1-90-002-07
3-90-002-OB
3-90-002-09
3-90-002-99
RESIDUAL 0|L
3-90-0114-01
3-90-<50<(-02
3-90-001-03
3-90-001-01
3-90-001-05
3-9P-301-Di
3-90-001-07
3-90-TOH-OB
3-9P-001-09
3-90-004- | 0
3-90-001-I 1
3-90-00*1-30
I HPRFGNiT I ON
WET COATING
HOT MELT COATING
OTHER/NOT SPECIFO
OTHER/NOT SPECIFD
-JNPROCESS FUEL
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
CEMENT KILN/DRYER
LlME KILN
KAOLIN fILN
BRICK KILN/DRY
GYPSUM rlLN/ETc
COAL ORrERS
ROCK/GRAVEL DRYER
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
ASPHALT DRYER
CfMEMT xlLN/DRYER
LIME KI1.N
KAOLIN KILN
METAL MELTING
PRICK KILN/DRY
GYPSUM KlLh/ETc
GLASS FURNACE
POCK/GRAVEL DRYER
FRIT SMELTER
PERLITE FUPNACE
FEED/GRAIN DRYING
0
0
0
a
a
a
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0,
a.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Ot
0.
0.
n ,
0.
0.
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TOMS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSED
TONS PROCESSEP
TONS PROCESSEt
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BU»NED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS BURMEO
n .
0.
n .
0.
0 •
0.
0.
0.
Oi
n *
0.
0.
looo
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
looo
1000
1POO
icoo
1000
irno
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
BURNrD
PIIRNEO
BURNED
BURNED
BURNFD
pURNED
BURNF.P
BURNf D
BURNED
8 JPNF.D
9DRNED
BURNED
•A' INDICATES THE ASH CONTENT, '5- INDICATES THE SULFUR CONTENT OE THE FUEL OK A PERCENT "ASIS (BY WEIGHT)
C-20
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
INDUSTRIAL PXOCES -INPROCESS FUEL
RESIDUAL OIL
3-90-001-3)
3-90-OPt-32
3-90-001-SO
3-90-001-5I
3-90-OOH-52
3-90-00^-9?
DISTILLATE OIL
3-90-005-01
3-90-005-02
3-90-005-03
3-90-n05-ni
3-90-005-05
3-90-OOS-P6
3-9C-005-07
3-90-005-08
3-90-005-09
3-90-00*;- 1 o
3-90-005-1 1
3-90-005-30
3-90-005-31
3-90-005-32
3-70-005-5"
3-90-005-5 I
3-90-005-52
3-90-005-99
NATURAL GAS
3-90-006-01
3-90-004-02
3-90-004-03
3-90-006-PH
3-90-004-05
3-90-006-04
3-90-004-0?
3-90-004-08
J-90-006-09
3-90-004-m
3-90-004-1 1
3-90-004-30
3.90-006-31
3-91-006-32
3-90-004-50
3-90-004-51
3-90-006-52
1-9R-004-99
PROCESS GAS
1-90-007-01
3-90-007-02
3-90-007-99
CONTINUED
FOOO-DRY/COOK/ETC
FERTILIZER DRYING
PULPBOARD-ORYERS
PLYWOOD-DRYERS
PULP-RECOV BOILER
OTMFR/NOT CLASIFD
4SPHJLT DRYER
CEMENT KllN/DRYEI
LIME KILN
KAOLIN KILN
METAL HFLTING
BRICK KILN/DRY
GYPSUM KILN/ETC
GLASS FURNACE
ROCK/GRAVEL DRYER
FRIT SMELTER
PERLITE FURMACE
FEED/GRAIN DRYING
FOOD-DRY/COOK/ETC
FERTILIZE" ORYIN5
PULPBOARD-DRYER5
PLYWOOD-DRYERS
PULP-fECOV POlLER
OTHFP/NOT CLASIFD
ASPHALT DRYER
CEMENT KlLN/DRYFR
LIME KILN
KAOLIN KILN
METAL MFLTING
PRICK KILN/DRYS
GYPSUM KILN ETC
GLASS FURNACE
ROCK/GRAVEL DRYER
FRIT SMELTER
PERLITE FURNACE
FEED/GRAIN DRYING
FOOO-DRY/CO"K/ETC
FERTILIZED DRYING
PULPBOARO-DRYERS
PLYWOOD-DRYERS
PULP-RFCOV BOILER
OTHFR/NOT CLASIFD
CO/BLAST FURNACE
COKE OVFN GAS
OTHER/NOT CLASIF1
A T 1 n N A
5 0 I' R C E
' 0 U
PART
I S S I 0 N
S S I F I c
S Y S T F M
CODES
50X
E D
NOX
PER UNIT
UNITS
1000 GALLONS f'jONEP
1000 GALLONS BURNED
1000 GALLONS HURNE'1
1000 GALLONS BURNT?
1000 GALLONS Ml RNr5
1000 GALLONS pURNr?
0,
1.
0.
n »
n.
0.
0.
Oi
n.
0.
0.
0 «
n.
0.
0.
n.
0.
0.
0.
,
,
,
,
,
,
0.
0.
c.
0.
0,
n ,
0.
0.
0.
n*
0.
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
IDOO GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION cuaic
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
MILLION CUBIC
PU9NTD
BURNED
p URNED
B U ;> N t D
SURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNr<5
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNFD
BURNED
SURNfD
BURNfC
FEET PURGED
FEET BURIED
FEET OURNED
FEET SUR'iED
FEET BURNFD
FfET »URNEO
FFET BURNED
FfET BJRNEO
FEET BUIITO
FFET K'jR'iFD
FtFT BURNED
FFET jijR-i'-o
FEET BURTD
FEET PUR-IFD
FEFT <>'JRN£O
FEET B'JRNrO
BEET O'IRNED
FFET BiJRWfD
o. MILLION CUBIC FEET BURNED
o. MILLION CUBIC FEET ?'JRNED
n. MILLION CUBIC FFET »b»^FD
1-90-OOB-ol MINERAL WOOL FURN
3-90-008-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
WOOD
3-90-009-99 OTHER/NOT CLA5IFO
LIQ PET GAS (LPG I
3-9P-01P-99 OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
3-9H-999-97 SPECIFY IN REMARK
3-90-999-91 SPECIFY IN REMARK
3-90-999-99 SPECIFY IN REMARK
INDUSTRIAL <">ocrs -OTHER/NO^ CLASIFD
TONS BURNED
TONS
TONS BURNED
1000 GALLONS BURNED
MILLION CUBIC FEET B
lOCO GALLONS BURNED
TONS BURNED
TONS PROCESSED
'A' INnjCATFS YwF ASH CONTrNT, 'S' KMcATFS THp- t,ULFU» CO'ITFNT OF THE FUEL Ov, A PFRCfNT BASIS (BY WEIGHT!
12/75
Appendix C
C-21
-------
POINT SC FV AP
», A T I 0 N A L E H I 5 5 I 0 M D>
SOURCE CL*SSIFIC»T
-CLEANING SOLVENT
5 V S T E 1
COOES
POUNDS
PART
I T T F 0 PER UNIT
NOX HC
PRYCLEANING
1-01-001-01 PERCHLORETHYLENE
1-01-001-02 STOOOARO
1-01-001-99 SPECirr SOLVENT
DECREASING
i-oi-002-n
1-01 -002-02
1-01-002-03
1-01-002-01
1-OI-D02-95
1-01-002-0*
1-31-002-99
STODO*RO
TO ICHLOROETHANE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
METHYLENE CHLORDE
TH1CHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
OTHtP/NOT CL4SIFO
1-01-999-99 SPECIFY JN RE***
POINT SC E V A P -SURFACE COATING
210.
305.
0. TONS CLOTHES CLE*>.FO
0. TONS CLOTHES CLE'NtO
TONS CLOTHES CLEANED
TONS SOLVENT USEO
TONS SOLVENT USED
TONS SOLVENT USfB
TONS SOLVENT USEO
TONS SOLVENT USEB
TONS SOLVENT USEO
TONS SOLVENT UStO
TONS SOLVENT USfD
1-02-001-01
1-02-00[ -02
1-02-001-03
1-02-001-01
1-02-001-05
1-C2-OOI-99
VARNISH/SHELLAC
1-02-003-01
1-02-00.1-02
GENERAL
ACETONE
ETHYL AC
MEK
TOLUENE
SOLVENT
GENERAL
ACETONE
1-02-003-T3 ETHYL «CET*TE
1-02-003-01 TOLUENE
1-02-003-05 XYLENE
1-02-003-99 SOLVENT GENERAL
1i>20.
2|000>
2,000.
2.000.
2,000.
2,000.
1,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
TONS COATING
TONS SOLVENT IN COATINS
TONS SOLVENT IN COATING
TONS SOLVENT IN CO*T[NS
TONS SOLVENT IN COATIN6
TONS SOLVENT |N CO*TIN«
TONS COATING
TONS SOLVENT IN CO*
TONS SOLVENT 11 C0»
TONS SOLVENT IN COA
TONS SOLVtNT IN COA
TONS SOLVENT IN COA
INS
1-02-001-0 I
1-02-001-02
1-02-001-03
1-02-001-01
1-02-001-OS
1-02-001-04
1-02-001-07
GENERAL
ACETONE
ETHYL ACETATE
ISOPROPrL ALCOHOL
HEK
TOLUENE
XYLENE
1-02-001-99 SOLVENT GENEP«L
1-02-OOS-O 1
1-02-005-02
1-02-005-03
1-02-005-01
1-07-005-05
1-D2-OOS-99
cELLnsoivF. ACF.TJT
KEx
TOLUENC
»YLtNE
SOLVENT GENERAL
1,510.
2,000.
J,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
• 10.
2,000.
1,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
TONS COATING
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
COAT INS
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVtNT
IN
I
I
IN
1
I
I
1
1
COA \HS
CO* ING
CO" IN«
COA INC,
C0» INS
COAT INf,
COATINS
CO*T I Nf,
COATINS
COATINS
CO*T INS
COATINS
i-02-ooi-ni
1-02-004-02
1-02-004-03
1-32-O04-31
i-02-eo*-ns
1-02-004-99
•OHF5IVE
1-02-007-01
1-02-007-02
1-P2-007-03
1-02-007-01
1-0?-007-05
1-C2-007-99
GENERAL
NAPHTHA
XYLENt
nINCR»L 5PI»[T5
TOLUFNE
SOLVENT GlNER«L
GENERAL
ME*
TOLUENF
BENZENE
NAPHTHA
SOLVfNT GENERAL
I,120.
2,000.
2,BOO.
2,600.
2,000.
1,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
T8NS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TON?
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
COAT!
SOLV
SOLV
SOLV
SOLV
SOLV
5
T
T
T
T
T
COATING
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
SOLVtNT
SOLVENT
SOLVENT
I'l
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
IN
CO*
CO*
CO*
CO*
CO*
IN8
I NS
INS
INC
INK
CO«TINS
CC*T|NS
CO*TI*<
CO*
ING
IN COATIN6
t-02-iQp-n2 D» 1 E D < I'SF
^M02-nna-o3 BArtn > I'SF
H-p7-nnfl-
-------
POINT 5C EVAP
NATIONAL r M I <;
-------
POINT sc EVAP
VAR-VAPOR SPACE
-03-001-02
-03-003-03
-03-003-01
-03-003-05
-03-003-0*
-03-003-07
-03-003-08
-03-003-09
-03-003-10
-03-003-1 1
-03-003-12
-03-003-13
-03-003-11
-03-005-99
-PtTROL PROO STG
WOR
NOR
WOR
HOR
UOR
WOR
won
WOR
WOR
WOR
WOR
WOR
WOR
ING-fiASOLINE
NG-JET FUEL
NG-KEROSENE
NG-OIST FUEL
NG-BEN2ENE
NG-CTCLOHEK
NG-CYCLOPENT
NG.HEPT ANE
NG-HEXANE
NG- 1 SOOCTANE
NG-ISOPENT
NG-PENT ANE
NG-TOLUENf
WOR HG.SPECIFlr
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
1. 03-999-79
POINT sc FVAP
SPECIFY IN RE««RK
-MISC ORQANJC STOR
NATIONAL
' 0 U
PART
I S 5 I 0
s s i F i
ATION COOES
E M I
SOX
0 P
NOX
1 1
HC
0-.
0.
0.
0 •
0,
0,
n.
0,
0.
n ,
0.
n.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10
2
1
1
2
2
7
1
<*
1
17
12
0
.2
.39
.00
.on
.30
.40
.20
.10
.00
.70
.8
.0
.73
0.
n ,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
n.
0,
0.
0.
n.
0.
1 000
loon
1 000
looo
1000
looo
looo
1 000
loon
loon
1000
looo
loon
looo
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALL-ONS '
GALLONS 1
GALLONS '
GALLONS '
GALLONS '
rHROUGHPUT
rHROUCiHPUT
rHROUGHPUT
THROUGHPUT
THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THROUGHPUT
GALLONS THRUPLT
1000 GAL STORED
OTHER/NOT CLASIFO
1-OH-ooi-?' SPECIFY IN RE»ARK
POINT SC EVAP -PRINTING P»E55
TONS STORED
1-05.Q01-OI GENERAL
LETTERPRESS
1-05-002-01
1-05-002-02
1-05-002-03
1-05-002-99
FLE*OGPAPH|C
i-os-noj-oi
1-05-003-02
1-05-003-03
1-05-003-01
1-05-003-05
1-05-003-04
1-05-003-07
1.05-003-99
LITHOGRAPHIC
i-05-noi-oi
1-05-001-02
1-05-001-03
1-05-001-97
GENERAL
KEROSENE
HINESAL SPIRITS
SOLVENT GENERAL
GENERAL
CARBITOL
CELLOSOLVE
ETHYL ALCOHOL
I50PROPYL ALCOHOL
N-PROPTL ALCOHOL
NAPHTHA
SOLVENT GENCOAL
GENERAL
MINERAL SPIRITS
150PROPYL ALCOHOL
SOLVENT GENERAL
700.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
I,300.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
700.
2,000.
2,oon.
2,000.
TONS SOLVENT
TONS INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
TONS INK
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS SOLVENT
TONS INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
TONS SOLVENT IN INK
-05-005-01
-05-005-02
-05-005-03
-05-005-01
-05-005-05
-05-005-0*
-05-005-07
-05-n05-0»
•05-005-0'
-05-005-10
•05-005-99
GENERAL
D1METHYLFORHAHIOE
ETHYL ACETATE
TTHTL ALCOHOL
ISOPROPYL ALCOHOL
NEK
HI6K
HINERAL SPIRITS
N-PROPYL ALCOHOL
TOLUENE
SOLVENT GENERAL
I,300.
2,000.
2,000.
2 , 000,
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
2,000.
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
I NK
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
SOLVEN
•A1 INDICATES THf ASH CONTfNT, '5' INDICATES THr SULFUR CONTENT OF THE FUEL ON A p^CFNT BASIS |8Y HEIGHT]
C-24
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
N A T 1 n N fl L F * I S S t 0 N DATA
SOURCE CL'SSIFIC.'TIO'I
POUNDS F M 1 T T F
*: v s T e:
r 0 n F s
i_n6-no i -o i
1-06-00 I -02
1-06-001 -03
1-04-001 -ni
1-06-001 -T.5
1-06-001-26
1-06-001 -27
1-06-001-28
1-06-001-29
1-06-001 -30
1-06-001 -51
1-06-001-52
•-04-OOI -53
1-06-001-51
1-06-001 -55
1-04-00 1-97
1-06-001 -98
1-06-001-99
MARINE VESSELS
1-04-0rt2-0!
1-06-002-02
1-06-002-03
1-06-002-01
1-0*-00?-05
1-06-002-26
1-06.-002-27
1-06-002-2B
1-06-002-29
1-06-002-30
1-04-002-96
1-06-002-99
UNOERGRO GSSO 5
1-06-003-0 1
1-06-003-02
1-06-003-03
1-06-003-01
1-06-003-05
1-P6-003-99
FILL VEH GAS TA
1-04-001-0 I
1-06-OOM-02
1-06-001-99
POINT sc EVAP
LOAD | SPL ASH -GA50
LOAOISPLASH -CRUD
LOAOISPLASH -JET
LOA015PLASH -KERO
LOAOISPLASH -OIST
LOAD { SUBM 1 -GA50LN
LOAD(SUP«I-CRUOE
LOAD t SUP* 1 -JET FL
LOAO(5lMHl-rf.ff05N
LOAOtSUaMI-DlST
UNLOAO-G«SOL1NE
UNLOAD-CRVJOF OIL
UNLOAD-JET FUEL
UNLOAD-KEROS£NE
UNLOAD-D 1ST OIL
LOAOISPLSHISPECFY
LOAOISUoMlSPECIFY
UNLOAO-SPECIFY
LOADING-GASOLINE
LOADING-CRUDE OIL
LOADING-JET FUEL
LOAD i NG-KEROSENE
LOADING-DlST OIL
UNLOAO-GASOLINE
UNLOsO-cRUOE OIL
UNLOAD-JET FUEL
UNLOAO-KEROSENE
UNLOAO-DIST OIL
LOADING-SPECIFY
UNLOAD-SPEC I FY
TG
SPLASH LOADING
SUB LOsD-UNCONT
SUB LOAD-OPN SYS
5U* LO«3-CLS SYS
UNLOAD I NG
SPECIFY METHOD
MC
VAP DJSP LOSS
LIU SPILL LOSS
OTHFR LOSS
-MISC HC EVAP
12.
10.
I .
0.
s
5
0.23
0.2i
2.88
2.59
O.*0
0.27
0.29
2.52
2.25
0.52
O.JH
0.25
I I .5
7.30
o.en
o.
i .00
11.0
0.47
r .
n •
n.
C i
".
p .
n .
r *
0 .
->•
n .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
i.
0.
0.
0.
0.
n.
looo
loon
looo
ICOO
1COO
lOOn
1000
loon
1 000
1000
icon
loon
1000
1000
1000
looo
loon
looo
1000
I 000
1000
looo
looo
looo
loon
1 000
looo
1000
looo
1000
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
GALLONS
T**(WF9Prc
TR.NSFF.R'n
5
T'ANSFFRRFl
TRANSFERS':!
T»ANSFFR»FD
TRJN5FF9RFD
T R A N 5 F E 9 R r r
TRANSFERRr-,
TRANSFFRRn
TRANSFER""
T R 4 N S F F ^ P F 0
TPftNSFERR?D
T * A N 5 F t » * F 0
TRA*srr9pr0
TRANSFERRED
TR,N5PERaE[)
T R A N 5 F E » H r n
•'RANSFF'^'iO
TR4 N5FE^R£')
TR ANSFF.RR«"0
TRANSFf^RS'3
PU **PE D
PUMOj-n
PUMPED
OTHFR/KOT C L A 5 1 F n
SPECIFY IN
50LI° WASTE
MUNICIPAL INCIN
s-oi-ooi-ni
5-oi-nnj-n?
OPEN BURN I NG nu
5-01-002-n]
5-01-002-02
R-OI-002-P3
INCINERATOR
5-01-005-05
«i-OI -005-06
MULTIPLE CHAMBER
SINGLE CHAMBER
GENERAL
LANDSCAPE/PRUNING
JFT ruEL
PftTHOLOMCAL
SLUDGE
CONICAL
OTHF.P/UQT CLASIFO
3o.o
15.0
16.0
17.0
«.00
1^0.
20.0
[.00
?. HO
2.00
2.00
6.00
2.00
3.00
5. 00
5.00
I .53
15.0
31.a
20,0
35.n TONS PUot4EO
20.1 TPN5 BL'»NED
HUNDREDS OF GALLONS
n. TONS BURNED
0. TONS CBY SLUDGf
60.n TONS RU°'JEO
TONS BURftEO
5 _ fi i » 9 o n - n «+
•,-01-900-10
5-01-900-97
5-n1-9HO-99
INOICATFS T"F
RESIDUAL OIL
DISTILLATE OIL
NATURAL GAS
OTHER/MOT CLASIFO
OTH^R/NPT CtASirO
nTHtR/NOT CLAS1FD
JSH CONTFNT, 'S' IN
0.
0.
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
o.
n.
n,
o.
o.
o.
n«
o.
n.
o.
i.
o.
n.
C.
r.
lOOn GALLONS
1000 GALLONS
MILLION cunic FFFT
icon GALLONS
MILLION CUMC FEET
looo GALLONS
TONS
ATFS TWF SULFUR CONTfNT OF TMF FUCL ON B »FRCF'JT OASIS (BY WEIGHT)
12/75
Appendix C
C-25
-------
SOLID WASTE
INCl'ERATOR SFN
5.r,?.nn,-M
5-?2-C!J!-"2
5-C2-OOI-03
5-02-00 t -01
5-02-001-05
0"f. BURNING
5--2-002-?]
5-32-002-07
APARTMENT PJCIN
5-02-003-P 1
5-32-003-02
INCINERATOR
5-07-005-05
5-S2-005-04
5-02-00?-99
• :
-COMM-INST
XULTIPLF CHAMBER
SINGLE CHAHqfR
CONTROLLED «I"
CON I c AL-REFUSE
C 0 N I C A L - « ° "* n
WOOD
REFUSE
FLUE FFD
FLUE FEO-MOnjF IED
PATHOLOGICAL
SLUDGE
OTHcO/NOT CLASIFD
5 0
P
PART
7
15
1
20
7
17
30
6
B
100
.00
.0
.10
.0
.00
.0
.0
.00
.00
.
CLASS
2.50
2.50
1.50
2.00
0.10
0.50
0.50
n .
1 .no
i f i
3
2
10
5
1
2
3
10
3
5
.00
.00
.0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.0
.00
.00
lOt. CO
H C
3. On
is, r
0.
20.0
1 1 .0
i.n0
15. n
3. On
0,
1 .00
CO
10.0
20. n
p.
40. n
130.
50. r
20.0
10.0
0.
n.
TONS
TOrjS
TONS
Tc f'5
TONS
TONS
TONS
Tons
TONS-
TONS
TONS
TONS
UNITS
BURNEO
B UPNE 0
BURNEO
BURHEtl
BU1NEO
BURNED
BU»NED
8UHNEH
8 L1 » N E 0
BUPNED
DRY SLUDG'E
BUUNF-O
AUx, FUEL/NO CMSN5
5-D2-90P-11
5-n2-900-05
5-02-900-06
5-02-900-10
5-02-900-97
5-02-900-9B
5-02-900-99
SOLID WASTE
INC I N E f? A T 0 R
5-03-001-ri
5-53-001-02
5-03-00 1 -0 3
5.03-001-01
5-03-001-05
5-03-00 V-34
OPEN BURNING
S-"3-002-OI
5-33-002-02
5-03-002-03
RESIDUAL OIL
DISTILLATE OIL
NATURAL GAS
LPG
OTHER/NOT CLSSIFO
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
OTHER/NOT CLASIFD
-INDUSTRIAL
MULTIPLE CHAMBER
SINGLE CHAMBER
CONTROLLED AIR
CONICAL REFUSE
CONICAL wOOn
OPEN PIT
WOOD
REFUSE
AUTO BonY COMPfS
AUTO &OOY I N C 1 N A T
5-:3-003-02
w / AFTERBURNER
7
15
1
20
7
13
17
1*
1 00
\
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.00
.0
.10
.0
.on
. n
.0
.0
.90
!sn
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.50
2.50
1.50
2.00
0 . I 0
0. 10
0.
i .on
0.
t . 1 0
3
2
10
5
I
1
2
i
1
0
0.
0.
0.
c.
0.
0.
0.
.00
.no
.0
• no
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
. I 0
. 1 0
.02
0.
o.
o .
o 't
P,
0.
o;
3. On
15.0
0 ,
21.0
I 1 .0
0.
i .on
30.0
30. n
0 . 5 0
0,
n.
n.
p.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10. n
20.0
p.
40.0
ISO.
1.
50.0
n5,o
125.
2,50
0.
t ono
1000
GALLONS
GALLONS
MILLION CUBIC FES'T
looo
M I UL
looo
TOWS
TONS
TOWS
TONS
TONS
TOMS
TONS
TONS
TONS
TONS
GALLONS
ION CUBIC FEf'T
GALLONS
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
BURM.ED
OF WASTE
BURNED
BURNED
BURNED
AUTOS BuflNEO
OA1L C*R BUYING
s-^a-cP^-ni OPEN
JNCI4ERAT03
CARS BURNED
5-03-005-Oi
5-C3-305-99
OTHER/NOT Cl AS I FD
1 On ,
I .no
5.00
I .00 0.
TONS DRY SLUDGE
TONS BURNED
AUX. FUEL/NO EHSN5
5 - 3 3 - 9 0 r * 14
5-03-900-05
S-rj-gin-ni
5-0.1-900-17
s-D3-9nr- j o
5-03-900-97
5 -03-900-90
5-r.l-90H.99
MISCELLANEOUS
RESIDUAL OIL
DISTILLATE OIL
NATURAL GAS
PROCESS GAS
LPG
OTHER/NOT CLASIF-)
OTHER/NOT CIASIFO
OTHER/NIT CLASjrO
-FEDRL N("'EMtTTF.RS
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 ,
0.
n.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0-
0.
0.
0.
0.
n *
0.
0. 0.
0. 0.
0. 0.
0. 1.
0. 0.
0. 1.
n. p.
C, 0.
1000 GALLONS
loon GALLONS
MILLION CUB i c
MILLION CUBIC
IDOO GALLONS
MILLION CUBIC
looo GALLONS
TONS
FEET
FEET
FEET
OTHFR/MOT CLA5IFO
f,-o i -9?9-9<* SPECIFY IN REMARK
k-11-9'9-99 SPECIFY IN tfnARK
INSTALLATIONS
AREA/ACRES
I'.?IC«TE5 TMF ASH
T'T SUL^l'R CONTENT OF THE FUFL
(nr WE I GMT j
C-26
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
APPENDIX D
PROJECTED EMISSION FACTORS
FOR HIGHWAY VEHICLES
prepared by
DavidS. Kircher,
Marcia E. Williams,
INTRODUCTION and Charles C. Masser
In earlier editions of Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42), projected emission factors for
highway vehicles were integrated with actual, measured emission factors. Measured emission factors are mean
values arrived at through a testing program that involves a random statistical sample of in-use vehicles. Projected
emission factors, on the other hand, are a conglomeration of measurements of emissions from prototype vehicles,
best estimates based on applicable Federal standards, and, in some cases, outright educated guesses. In an attempt
to make the user more aware of these differences, projected emission factors are separated from the main body of
emission factors and presented as an appendix in this supplement to the report.
Measured emission estimates are updated annually at the conclusion of EPA's annual surveillance program.
Projected emission factors, however, are updated when new data become available and not necessarily on a
regular schedule. For several reasons, revisions to projected emission factors are likely to be necessary more
frequently than on an annual basis. First, current legislation allows for limited time extensions for achieving the
statutory motor vehicle emission standards. Second, Congressional action that would change the timetable for
achieving these standards, the standards themselves, or both is likely in the future. Third, new data on
catalyst-equipped (1975) automobiles are becoming available daily. As a result, the user of these data is
encouraged to keep abreast of happenings likely to affect the data presented herein. Every attempt will be made
to revise these data in a timely fashion when revisions become necessary.
This appendix contains mostly tables of data. Emission factor calculations are only briefly described because
the more detailed discussion in Chapter 3 applies in nearly all cases. Any exceptions to this are noted. The reader
is frequently referred to the text of Chapter 3; thus, it is recommended that a copy be close at hand.
Six vehicle categories encompassing all registered motor vehicles in use and projected to be in use on U.S.
highways are dealt with in this appendix. The categories in order of presentation are:
1. Light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles
2. Light-duty, gasoline-powered trucks
3. Light-duty, diesel-powered vehicles
4. Heavy-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles
5. Heavy-duty, diesel-powered vehicles
6. Motorcycles
7. All highway vehicles
D-l
-------
-------
D.I LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
D.I.I General
This vehicle category represents passenger cars, a major source of ambient levels of carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides in many areas of the United States. The reader is encouraged to become
familiar with section 3.1 .2, which discusses light-duty gasoline-powered vehicles in greater detail, before using the
data presented here.
D.I. 2 CO, HC, NOX Exhaust Emissions
The calculation of projected composite emission factors is limited in this presentation to the Federal Test
Procedure (FTP) methodology (see section 3.1.2). The modal technique is not, generally, amenable to absolute
emission projections. A user who wants to quantify the projected emissions over a specific driving sequence can
apply the modal technique to the 1972 calendar as discussed in section 3.1.2. A ratio of the 1972 calendar year
modal emissions to the 1972 calendar year FTP emissions can be obtained, and this ratio can be applied to a
projected FTP value to adjust for the specific driving cycle of interest.
The calculation of composite emission factors for light-duty vehicles using the FTP procedure is given by:
enpstwx = 2 cipn min vips zipt riptwx
i=n-12 (Dl-1)
where: enpS(WX = Composite emission factor in grams per mile (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p),
average speed (s), ambient temperature (t), percentage cold operation (w), and
percentage hot start operation (x)
cipn = The FTP mean emission factor for the jth model year light-duty vehicles during calendar
year (n) and for pollutant (p)
min = The fraction of annual travel by the jth model year light-duty vehicles during calendar
year (n)
vjps = The speed correction factor for the i*h model year light-duty vehicles for pollutant (p),
and average speed (s). This variable applies only to CO, HC, and NOX.
zjpt = The temperature correction for the ith model year light-duty vehicles for pollutant (p)
and ambient temperature (t)
riptwx = The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor for the ith model year light-duty
vehicles for pollutant (p), ambient temperature (t), percentage cold operation (w), and
percentage hot start operation (x).
The variable Cjpn is summarized in Tables D.l-1 through D.l-21, segregated by location (California,
non-California, high altitude). The input mjn is described by example in Table D.l-22. The speed correction
factors are presented in Tables D.l-23 and D.l-24.
The temperature correction and hot/cold vehicle operation correction factors, given in Table D.I -25, are
separated into non-catalyst and catalyst correction factors. Catalyst correction factors should be applied for
model years 1975-1977. For non-catalyst vehicles, the factors are the same as those presented in section 3.1.2.
12/75 Appendix D D.l-I
-------
For catalyst vehicles, emissions during the hot start phase of operation (vehicle start-up after a short—less than 1
hour-engine-off period) are greater than vehicle emissions during the hot stabilized phase. Therefore, the
correction factor is a function of the percentage of cold operation, the percentage of hot start operation, and the
ambient temperature(t).
riptw
HrttWY =
w +
20
(lOO-w)f(t)
+ 80 f(t)
xf(t)+(100-w-x)g(t)
Pre-1975
model years
Post-1974
model years
(Dl-2)
(Dl-3)
Table D.1-1. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
94.0
67.6
65.4
56.0
53.5
39.0
37.0
143
106
1969 : 101
1970 91.0
1971 84.0
1972 I 84.0
1973 80.0
g/km
58.4
420
40.6
34.8
33.2
24.2
23.0
88.8
65.8
62.7
56.5
52.2
52.2
49.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.8
6.8
5.3
5.3
4.3
3.5
3.2
12.0
7.6
6.6
6.0
5.7
5.2
4.7
g/km
5.5
4.2
3.3
3.3
2.7
2.2
2.0
7.5
4.7
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi "I
3.34
4.32
5.08
4.35
4.30
4.55
3.1
2.0
2.86
4.1 2.93
3.7 3.32
3.5 2.74
3.2 3.08
2.9 ' 3.1
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
1.9
1.2
1.77
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
1.93
Table D.1-2. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST EMISSION
FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973 (BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
94.0
81.0
81.0
67.6
65.4
1970 56.0
1971 53.5
1972 49.0
1973
37.0
g/km
58.4
50.3
50.3
42.0
40.6
34.8
33.2
30.4
23.0
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.8
6.5
6.5
6.8
5.3
5.3
4.3
3.9
3.2
g/km
5.5
4.0
4.0
4.2
3.3
3.3
Nitre
oxi<
g/mi
3.34
3.61
3.61
4.32
5.08
4.35
2.7 ! 3.83
2.4 3.81
j 2.0 3.1
>gen
des
g/km
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
1.9
D.1-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.1-3. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST EMISSION
FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 1974 (BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
h—
95.0
70.6
68.4
1970 58.5
1971 56.0
|
1972
41.0
1973 39.0
1974 37.0
I
High altitude j
Pre-1968 i 145
1968 ' 111
1969 106
1970 ; 95.0
1971 : 88.0
1972 88.0
1973 84.0
1974 80.0
g/km
~
59.0
43.8
42.5
36.3
34.8
25.5
24.2
23.0
90.0
68.9
65.8
59.0
54.6
54.6
52.2
49.7
|
Hydrocarbons '
g/mi
8.9
7.4
5.8
5.8
4.7
3.8
3.5
3.2
12.1
8.3
7.2
6.6
6.2
5.7
5.2
4.7
g/km
!
5.5
4.6
3.6
3.6
2.9
2.4
2.2
2.0
\
7.5
5.2
4.5
4.1
3.9
3.5
3.2
2.9
I g/mi
3.34
4.32
5.08
4.35
430
4.55
3.3
3.1
]
2.0
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
3.3
3.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/km
| ~r
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.0
1.9
f
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.05
1.9
Table D.1-4. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES EXHAUST EMISSION
FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1974 (BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
g/mi
95.0
82.0
82.0
70.6
68.4
58.5
56.0
1972 ! 51.0
1973 39.0
1974 37.0
Carbon j
monoxide j Hydrocarbons
g/km
59.0
50.9
g/mi
8.9
7.1
50.9 7.1
43.8 7.4
42.5
36.3
34.8
5.8
5.8
4.7
31.7 ' 4.2
24.2 3.5
23.0 ; 3.2
! g/km
5.5
4.4
4.4
g/mi
3.34
3.61
3.61
4.6 i 4.32
3.6 5.08
3.6 | 4.35
2.9
2.6
3.83
3.81
2.2 i 3.3
2.0
2.0
Nitrogen
oxides
! g/km
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
2.05
1.2
12/75
Appendix D
D.1-3
-------
Table D.1-5. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
i
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
96.0
73.6
71.4
61.0
58.5
43.0
41.0
39.0
1975 9.0
I
High altitude
Pre-1968 147
1968
116
1969 111
1970 99.0
1971
92.0
1972 ! 92.0
1973
1974
1975
88.0
84.0
19.5
g/km
59.6
45.7
44.3
37.9
36.3
26.7
25.5
24.2
f
j Nitrogen
Hydrocarbons oxides
g/mi
9.0
8.0
6.3
6.3
5.1
4.1
3.8
3.5
5.6 j 1.0
j
91.3
72.0
68.9
61.5
57.1
57.1
54.6
52.2
12.1
12.2
9.0
7.8
7.2
6.7
6.2
5.7
g/km g/mi
5.6 : 3.34
5.0 4.32
3.9 5.08
3.9 ; 4.35
3.2 4.30
2.5 4.55
2.4 : 3.5
2.2 3.3
0.6 3.1
7.6 2.0
5.6 2.86
4.8 2.93
4.5 3.32
4.2 2.74
3.9 3.08
3.5 3.5
5.2 3.2 3.3
1.46
0.91 3.1
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.17
2.05
1.9
Table D.1-6. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES -
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
i
r
i Carbon I
Location and
model year
California
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1 monoxide
i g/mi
i 96.0
! 83.0
I 83.0
73.6
i 71.4
t 61.0
! 58.5
53.0
41.0
39.0
5.4
i
g/km
59.6
51.5
51.5
45.7
44.3
37.9
36.3
32.9
25.5
24.2
3.4
1 Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.0
7.7
7.7
8.0
6.3
6.3
5.1
g/km
5.6
4.8
4.8
5.0
3.9
3.9
3.2
4.5 j 2.8
3.8
3.5
0.6
i
2.4
2.2
0.4
T
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
3.61
3.61
4.32
5.08
4.35
3.83
3.81
3.5
2.06
2.0
f
g/km
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
2.17
1.28
1.2
D.I-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.1-7. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Carbon
monoxide
I g/mi
i
i 97.0
I 76.6
j 74.4
i 63.5
| 61.0
; 45.0
: 43.0
! 41.0
i 9.9
; 9.0
'
i
: 149
• 121
! 116
103
96.0
i 96.0
92.0
88.0
21.5
19.5
g/km
60.2
47.6
46.2
39.4
37.9
27.9
26.7
25.5
6.1
5.6
92.5
75.1
72.0
64.0
59.6
59.6
57.1
54.6
13.4
12.1
I
i
; Hydrocarbons
i g/mi
]
i
i 9.1
| 8.6
! 6.8
! 6.8
! 5.5
4.4
: 4.1
; 3.8
! 1.20
j 1.0
t
i
12.3
i 9.7
8.4
7.8
7.2
6.7
6.2
5.7
1.76
1.46
g/km
5.7
5.3
4.2
4.2
3.4
2.7
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
4.32
5.08
4.35
4.30
4.55
2.5 3.7
2.4
0.75
3.5
3.2
0.6 3.1
7.6
6.0
5.2
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.5
1.09
0.91
2.0
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
g/km
2.07
2.86
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.3
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
3.7 , 2.3
3.5 2.2
3.2
3.1
2.0
1.9
Table D.1-8. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
Pie- 1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
g/km
97.0
84.0
84.0
76.6
74.4
63.5
61.0
55.0
43.0
41.0
5.9
5.4
60.2
52.2
52.2
47.6
46.2
39.4
37.9
34.2
26.7
25.5
3.7
3.4
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.1
8.3
8.3
8.6
6.8
6.8
R R
•J..J
4.8
4.1
3.8
0.7
Ni-,.x;en
<.,- 'Jes
g/km g/mi , g/km
i
i
i
5.7 3.34
5.2 3.61
5.2
3.61
5.3 4.32
4.2
5.08
4.2 ! 4.35
3.4 3.83
3.0 3.81
2.5 3.7
2.4
0.4
2.12
2.06
0.6 0.4 2.0
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.37
2.37
2.30
1.32
1.28
1.24
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-5
-------
Table D.1-9. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1977
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Carbon
Location and monoxide
model year g/mi g/km
Low altitude
Pre-1968 98.0
1968 79.6
1969 77.4
1970 , 66.0
1971 63.5
1972 47.0
1973 45.0
1974 43.0
Hydroc
g/mi
1
60.9 i 9.2
49.4 9.2
48.1 7.3
41.0 ; 7.3
39.4 '. 5.9
29.2 ; 4.7
27.9 4.4
26.7 4.1
1975 10.8 6.7 1.4
1976 9.9
1977 9.0
6.1 1.2
5.6 1.0
High altitude
Pre-1968 151 ! 93.8
12.4
1968 126 78.2 10.4
1969 ! 121 75.1
1970 107
1971 100
1972 100
1973 96.0
1974 92.0
1975 23.5
1976 21.5
1977 9.0
66.4
62.1
62.1
59.6
57.1
14.6
13.4
5.6
9.0
8.4
7.7
7.2
6.7
6.2
2.06
1.76
1.0
- - - •- --- r -•
arbons
g/km , g/mi
5.7 3.34
5.7 4.32
4.5 5.08
4.5 4.35
3.7 i 4.30
2.9 • 4.55
2.7 3.9
2.5 3.7
0.9 3.3
0.7 : 3.2
0.6 2.0
7.7 ! 2.0
|
6.5 2.86
5.6
5.2
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
1.28
1.09
0.6
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
3.9
3.7
3.3
3.2
2.0
Nitrogen
oxides
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.4
2.3
2.0
2.0
1.2
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.4
2.3
2.0
2.0
1.2
Table D.1-10. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1977
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
98.0
85.0
85.0
79.6
77.4
66.0
63.5
57.0
45.0
43.0
6.5
5.9
5'4 _,
g/km
60.9
52.8
52.8
49.4
48.1
41.0
39.4
35.4
27.9
26.7
4.0
3.7
3.4
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.2
9.0
9.0
9.2
7.3
7.3
5.9
5.1
4.4
4.1
0.8
0.7
0.6
g/km
5.7
5.6
5.6
5.7
4.5
4.5
3.7
3.2
2.7
2.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
3.61
3.61
4.32
5.08
g/km
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
4.35 j 2.70
3.83
3.81
3.9
2.18
2.12
2.06
2.38
2.37
2.4
1.35
1.32
1.28
1.5 i 0.93
D.I-6
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
Table D.1-11. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1978
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
99.0
82.6
80.4
68.5
66.0
49.0
47.0
45.0
11.7
10.8
9.9
2.8
153
131
126
111
104
104
100
96.0
25.5
23.5
9.9
2.8
g/km
61.5
51.3
49.9
42.5
41.0
30.4
29.2
27.9
7.3
6.7
6.1
1 7
95
81.4
78.2
689
64.6
64.6
62.1
59.6
15.8
14.6
6.1
1.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.3
9.3
7.8
7.8
6.3
5.0
4.7
4.4
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.27
12.5
11.1
9.6
9.0
8.2
7.7
7.2
6.7
2.36
2.06
1.2
0.27
g/km
5.8
5.8
4.8
4.8
3.9
3.1
2.9
2.7
1 0
0.9
0.7
0.17
7.8
6.9
6.0
5.6
5.1
4.8
4 5
4.2
1.47
1.28
0.6
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
4.32
5.08
4.35
4.30
4.55
4.1
3.9
3.4
3.3
2.06
0.24
2.0
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
4.1
3.9
3.4
3.3
2.06
0.24
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.5
2.4
2.1
2.0
1.3
0.15
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.5
2.4
2.1
2.0
1.3
0.15
Table D.1-12. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1978
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
Pre-1966
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
Carbon
monoxide
9/mi
99.0
85.0
85.0
82.6
804
68.5
66.0
59.0
47.0
450
70
6.5
5.9
2.8
g/km
61 5
52.8
52.8
51.3
49.9
42.5
41.0
36.6
29?
27.9
4.3
4.0
3.7
1.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.3
9.0
9.0
9.3
78
7.8
6.3
5.4
4.7
4.4
1.0
08
0.7
0.27
g/km
58
5.6
5.6
5.8
4.8
4.8
3.9
3.4
2.9
2.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
3.61
3.61
4.32
5.08
4.35
3.83
3.81
4.1
2.24
2.18
2.12
1.56
0.24
g/km
2.07
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
2.55
1.39
1.35
1.32
0.97
0.15
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-7
-------
Table D.1-13. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-i968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
99.0
82.6
83.4
71 0
68.5
51 0
490
47.0
126
11 7
10.8
3.1
28
153
131
131
115
108
108
104
100
275
25.5
10.8
3.1
28
g/km
61 5
51.3
51.8
44 1
42.5
31.7
30.4
292
7 8
7.3
6.7
1 9
1 7
95.0
81.4
81 4
71.4
67.1
67 1
64.6
62 1
17.1
15.8
6 7
1 9
1 7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.3
9.3
8.3
8.3
6.7
5.3
5.0
4.7
1 8
1.6
1.4
0.32
0.27
12.5
11 1
10.2
96
8.7
8.2
7.7
7 2
266
2.36
1.4
0.32
0.27
g/km
5.8
5.8
5.2
5.2
4.2
3.3
3.1
2.9
1.1
1 0
0.9
0.20
0.17
7.8
69
6.3
6.0
5.4
5.1
4.8
4.5
1.65
1.47
0.9
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
334
4.32
5.08
4.35
4.30
4.55
4.3
4.1
3 5
3.4
2.12
0.29
0.24
2.00
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
4.3
4.1
3.5
3.4
2.12
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.7
2.5
2.2
2 1
1.32
0.18
0.1 i5
1.20
1.78
1 .82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.7
2.5
2.2
2.1
1 32
0.18
0.15
Table D.1-14. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
85.0
850
82.6
83.4
71.0
68.5
61.0
49.0
47.0
7.6
7.0
6.5
3.1
2.8
g/km
52.8
52.8
51.3
51.8
44.1
42.5
37.9
30.4
29.2
4.7
4.3
4.0
1.9
1.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.0
9.0
9.3
8.3
8.3
6.7
5.7
50
4 7
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.32
0.27
g/km
5.6
5.6
5.8
5.2
5.2
4.2
3.5
3.1
2.9
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.61
3.61
4.32
5.08
4.35
3.83
3.81
4.30
2.30
2.24
2.18
1.62
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.24
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
2.70
1.43
1.39
1.35
1 01
0.18
0.15
D.l-8
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.1-15. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1980
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
High altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
99.0
82.6
83.4
73.5
71.0
53.0
51.0
49.0
13.5
12.6
11.7
3.4
3.1
2.8
153
131
131
119
112
112
108
104
29.5
275
11.7
3.4
3.1
2.8
g/km
61 5
51.3
51.8
45.6
44.1
32.9
31.7
30.4
84
7.8
7.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
95.0
81.4
81.4
73.9
69.6
69.6
67.1
64.6
18.3
17.1
7.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
Hydrocarbons
9/mi
9.3
9.3
8.3
8.8
7.1
5.6
5.3
5.0
2.0
1.8
1.6
0.38
0.32
0.27
12.5
11.1
10.2
10.2
9.2
87
8.2
7.7
2.96
2.66
1.6
0.38
0.32
027
g/km
5.8
5.8
5.2
5.5
4.4
3.5
3.3
3.1
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.24
0.20
0.17
7.8
6.9
6.3
6.3
5.7
5.4
5.1
4.8
1.84
1.65
1.0
0.24
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.34
4.32
5.08
4.35
4.30
4.55
4.5
4.3
3.6
3.5
2.18
0.34
0.29
0.24
2.0
2.86
2.93
3.32
2.74
3.08
4.5
4.3
3.6
3.5
2.18
0.34
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.07
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.67
2.83
2.8
2.7
2.2
2.2
1.35
0.21
0.18
0.15
1.2
1.78
1.82
2.06
1.70
1.91
2.8
2.7
2.2
2.2
1.35
0.21
0.18
0.15
Table D.1-16. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1980
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
85.0
82.6
83.4
73.5
71.0
63.0
51.0
49.0
8.1
7.6
7.0
3.4
3.1
2.8
g/km
52.8
51 3
51.8
45.6
44.1
39.1
31.7
30.4
5.0
4.7
4.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
9.0
9.3
8.3
8.8
7.1
6.0
5.3
5.0
1.2
1.1
1.0
038
0.32
0.27
g/km
5.6
5.8
5.2
5.5
4.4
3.7
3.3
3.1
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.24
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.61
4.32
5.08
4.35
3.83
3.81
4.50
2.36
2.30
2.24
1.68
0.34
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.24
2.68
3.15
2.70
2.38
2.37
2.79
1.47
1.43
1.39
1.04
0.21
0.18
0.15
12/75
Appendix D
D.I-9
-------
Table D.1-17. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1985
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
High altitude
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
57.0
57.0
57.0
18.0
17.1
16.2
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
28
120
120
120
39.5
37.5
16.2
4.8
45
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.8
g/km
35.4
35.4
354
11.2
10.6
10.1
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
21
1.9
1.7
74 5
74.5
74.5
24.5
23.3
10 1
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
6.2
6.2
6.2
3.0
2.8
2.6
0.65
0.59
0.54
0.49
0.43
0.38
0.32
0.27
9.7
9.7
9.7
3.46
3.16
2.60
0.65
059
0.54
0.49
0.43
0.38
0.32
0.27
g/km
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.9
1.7
1.6
0.40
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.24
0.20
0.17
6.0
6.0
6.0
2.15
1.96
1.60
0.40
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.24
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.55
5.0
5.0
4.1
4.0
2.48
1.1
0.90
0.73
0.56
0.40
0.34
0.29
0.24
3.08
5.0
5.0
4.1
4.0
2.4P
1.00
0.90
0.73
0.56
0.40
0.34
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.83
3.1
3.1
2.5
2.5
1.54
0.68
0.56
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.21
0.18
0.15
1.91
3.1
3.1
2.5
2.5
1.54
0.68
0.56
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.21
0.18
0.15
Table D.1-18. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1985
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
67.0
570
57.0
10.8
10.3
9.7
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.8
g/km
41.6
35.4
35.4
6.7
6.4
6.0
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.1
1.9
1 7
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
6.6
6.2
6.2
1.8
1.7
1.6
0.65
0.59
0.54
0.49
0.43
0.38
0.32
0.27
g/km
4.1
3.9
3.9
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.40
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.24
0.20
0.17
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
3.81
5.0
2.60
2.60
2.54
1.98
1.1
0.90
0.73
0.56
0.40
0.34
0.29
0.24
g/km
2.37
3.1
1.61
1.61
1.58
1.23
0.68
0.56
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.21
0.18
0.15
D.l-10
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.1-19. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
i Carbon
Location and monoxide ; Hydrocarbons
model year g/mi g/km j g/mi g/km
Low and high
altitude
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
18.0
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.3
5.0
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
1990 | 2.8
i
!
11.2 j 3.0 1.9
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.7
0.81 0.50
0.81 0.50
0.81 0.50
0.76 0.47
0.70
0.65
0.59
0.54
0.49
0.43
0.38
0.32
0.27
0.43
0.40
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.24
0.20
0.17
g/mi
2.6
1.70
1.70
1.70
1.50
1.30
1.10
0.90
0.73
0.56
0.40
0.34
, 0.29
j 0.24
Nitrogen
oxides
g/km
1.6
1.06
1.06
1.06
0.93
0.81
0.68
0.56
0.45
0.35
j 0.25
| 0.21
i 0.18
! 0.15
Table D.1-20. CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
California
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
10.8
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.3
5.0
4.8
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.4
3.1
2.8
g/km
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
6.7 | 1.8
l
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.7
0.81
0.81
0.81
0.76
0.70
0.65
0.59
0.54
0.49
0.43
0.38
0.32
0.27
g/km
1.1
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.47
0.43
0.40
0.37
0.34
0.30
0.27
0.24
0.20
0.17
Ni
o
g/mi
2.10
1.70
1.70
1.70
1.50
1.30
1.10
0.90
0.73
0.56
0.40
0.34
0.29
0.24
oxides
g/km
1.30
1.06
1.06
1.06
0.93
0.81
0.68
0.56
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.21
0.18
0.15
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-11
-------
Table D.1-21. PARTICULATE, SULFURIC ACID, AND TOTAL SULFUR OXIDES
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
Pollutant
Participate
Exhaust3
g/mi
g/km
Tire wear
g/mi
g/km
Sulfuric acid
g/mi
g/km
Total sulfur oxides
g/mi
g/km
Emission factors
Non-catalyst
(Leaded fuel)
0.34
0.21
0.20
0.12
0.001
0.001
0.13
0.08
Non-catalyst
(Unleaded fuel)
0.05
0.03
0.20
0.12
0.001
0.001
0.13
0.08
Catalyst
(Unleaded fuel)
0.05
0.03
0.20
0.12
0.02-0.06b
0.01-0.04
0.13
0.08
3 Excluding paniculate sulfate or sulfuric acid aerosol.
Sulfuric acid emission varies markedly with driving mode and fuel sulfur levels.
Table D.1-22. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR3
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)"
0.081
0.110
0.107
0.106
0.102
0.096
0.088
0.077
0.064
0.049
0.033
0.023
0.064
Average annual
miles driven (b)c
15,900
15,000
14,000
13,100
12,200
11,300
10,300
9,400
8,500
7,600
6,700
6,700
6,700
a x b
1,288
1,650
1,498
1,389
Fraction
of annual
travel (m)d
0.112
0/I43
0.130
0.121
1,244 j O.I 08
1,085
906
724
544
0.094
0.079
0.063
0.047
372 : 0.032
221 ; 0.019
154 0.013
429 0.039
aReferences 1 through 6.
''These data are for July 1. Data from References 2-6 were averaged to produce a value for m that is better suited for projections.
cMileage values are the results of at least squares analysis of data in Reference 1.
dm = ab/Sab,
D.l-12
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
ID
00
UJ
X
LU
cc
o
u.
v)
CC
o
u
u
UJ
cc
cc
o
u
a
UJ
UJ
a.
CO
cc
O
u.
CO
LU
O
o
CO
CM
a
JB
JO
OJ
to
CD
+
<
II
O.
>
CN
CO
O
+
CO
CD
~OJ
II
c/)
Q.
>~
c/>
•g
X
o
c
0)
O)
o
-t-J
z
;g
X
i mono
o
_Q
03
CJ
t/>
c
O
.0
03
0
TS
>
"oi
T3
O
5
CQ
<
0
00
<
o
CD
<
i_
tt3
ct>
>
Location
CN CNCMCNCNOJCNCNCMOJCsl
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
o cooicNco^i-i^inMooro
co o)CDMO)OCNroor~.Ln
o r^LOti^ooooo^fOiLn
O OOOOOCM'-'-'-'-
00 ^COLOCOOOCNCNCD^fr*-
O 'sroO'-'i-^fO'a-cM'-OJ
oo oococncocococor^tocQ
CD bbbbobbobo
1 •^•^^•^•^^•^^•^•tf
i 1 ' '
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
oo cn--oocncocy3cDooffl
!••» --oco^rOLncocNiOTCT)
LO COCDCOCDCD1^"1*"*'*^
£N CNr>JfMrMCNfMtNrM[NrM
b booobobboo
X XXXXXXXXXX
r* cxicNCMrMCNr^ro'^r^'*
O CNLnr^i^tnmcNOCNio
to CD CD r~ r» rv '. *f *t ' *i 'in LO
i i i i i i i i i i i
r-^ •-r^cnr--'-^csjooir5^l-
to co^-mtD^-CNjcorMno)
O> a>OCNCNJC\jr--CQtOCOCO
O O'-.-r-r-OOOOO
^ ^^•^•^•^^^•^^•^
1 . , ; : : i
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
«— cooooOTF^cMOrfna)
oo cacnoointoinooooc^OT
in LDirjLniotni^^'d-uj^-
OJ CNCNCMOJOJOJtNrMCMCM
i i < i ; i i i i i i
o o0oooooooo
x xxxxxxxxxx
O oO{vjr~-ocMoo«mna)
o ro^jCNir^oiLotoiDncn
CD LncQtoinmmf^-Ln^
1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 i 1 1 1
ro r-~OLr)-— ronrsitoor^-
LD mr^OO^tOOCNIO^OO
O5 tJsoocDOioor^i^-oor^-
o o<-<-ooooooo
r^ r^ y— j r-*- o
CD to "CD ri
2 ^cocnocn^ooaioai
V .CDCDI^'— TtOtDr^'7
r^ coo^O5CT)4^rs^O)O3O3-t-1
ir> to<— <— <— y in •— t— •— "?
m 05 0 05 °
to
to
(35
*"" H-'
CU S1 ~ 01 0)
-a .£ tro, -o -a
3 -0 U m U =
.t: D i^ ~ .i± .t:
±; "5 CD £ ±: ±;
03 x <35 o ro ^
> UJ "~ *: > -c
0 •" 15 o -21
-I O-l X
c — -
r--
o
E8
Z 28
ro w ,—.
01 O
~ E
eu —
0) '~
a
.C
1
II
2 E
E 2
CM 2
^ -o
P S
S-c
QJ ^
*J 3
J3 O
£« o
Q. (D t
C S
O c
^1 0) C
»*- O) nj
QJ C3) O
•n O
5 . S « 3
^ 5 9 'c "5
TZ ~ iJ -^ f 1
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-13
-------
Table D.1-24. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES3
Location
Low altitude
(Excluding 1966-
1967 Calif.)
California
Model
year
1957-1967
1966-1967
Low altitude 1968
1969
1970
Post-1970
High altitude 1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
Post- 1970
Carbon monoxide
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
1.79
3.06
3.57
3.60
4.15
2.29
2.43
2.47
2.84
3.00
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.00
1.75
1.86
1.88
2.23
1.48
1.54
1.61
1.72
Hydrocarbons
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
1.87
2.96
2.95
2.51
2.75
2.34
2.10
2.04
2.35
1.83 2.17
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.12
1.66
1.65
1.51
1.63
1.37
1.27
1.22
1.36
1.35
Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.16
1.04
1C) mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.09
1.00
1 .08 |1 .05
1.13 ! 1.05
1.15 1.03
1 .33 1 .20
1.22
1.22
1.18
1.08
1.19 1.11
1 .06 ; 1 .02
aDriving patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 8) were input to the modal emission analysis
model (see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 5 and 10mi/hr;8and 16 km/hr) were divided
by FTP emission factors for hot operation to obtain the above results The above data are approximate and represent the best
currently available information.
Table D.1-25. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTORS
AND HOT/COLD VEHICLE OPERATION CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR FTP EMISSION FACTORS3
Pollutant
and controls
Carbon monoxide
Non-catalyst
Catalyst
Hydrocarbons
Non-catalyst
Catalyst
Nitrogen oxides
Non-catalyst
Catalyst
Temperature cor-
rection factor (zjpt)k
-0.01 27t+ 1.95
-0.0743t + 6.58
-0.01 13t+ 1.81
-0.0304t + 3.25
-0.0046t + 1 .36
-0.0060t+ 1.52
Hot/cold vehicle operation
correction factors
g(t)
e0.035t - 5.24
0.001 8t + 0.0095
-0.001 Ot + 0.858
f(t)
0.0045t -t 0.02
e0.036t - 4.14
0.0079t 4 0.03
0.0050t - 0.0409
-0.0068t 4 1 .64
0.00 10t 4 0.835
aReference 9. Temperature (t) is expressed in F. In order to apply the above equations, C must first be converted to F (F= 9/5C
+32). Similarly °Kelvm (K) must be converted to °F (F= 9/5(K-273.16)+32).
bThe formulae for z|pt enable the correction of FTP emission factors for ambient temperature The formulae for f (t) are used in
conjunction with Equation D1-2 to calculate r|ptw If the variable rjptw is used in Equation D1-1, zipt must be used also.
D.l-14
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
where: f(t) and g(t) are given in Table D.l-25, w is the percentage of cold operation, and x is the percentage
of hot start operation. For pre-1975 model year vehicles, non-catalyst factors should be used. For
1975-1977, catalyst factors should be used.
The use of catalysts after 1978 is uncertain at present. For model years 1979 and beyond, the use of those
correction factors that produce the highest emission estimates is suggested in order that emissions are not
underestimated. The extent of use of catalysts in 1977 and 1978 will depend on the impact of the 1979 sulfuric
acid emission standard, which cannot now be predicted.
D.I.3 Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors
In addition to exhaust emission factors, the calculation of hydrocarbon emissions from gasoline motor vehicles
involves evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission factors. Composite crankcase emissions can be
determined using:
hi m
in
i=n-12
where: fn = The composite crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
hj = The crankcase emission factor for the i'h model year
nijn = The weighted annual travel of the Jth model year during calendar year (n)
Crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor by model year are summarized in Table D.l-26.
Table D. 1-26. CRANKCASE HYDROCARBON
EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Model
year
California only
Pre-1961
1961 through 1963
1964 through 1967
Post- 19 67
All areas except
California
Pre-1963
1963 through 1967
Post-1967
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
4.1
0.8
0.0
0.0
g/km
2.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
4.1 ! 2.5
0.8
0.0
0.5
0.0
(Dl-4)
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-15
-------
There are two sources, of evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from light-duty vehicles: the fuel tank and the
carburetor system. Diurnal changes in ambient temperature result in expansion of the air-fuel mixture in a
partially filled fuel tank. As a result, gasoline vapor is expelled to the atmosphere. Running losses from the fuel
tank occur as the fuel is heated by the road surface during driving, and hot soak losses from the carburetor system
occur after engine shutdown at the end of a trip. Carburetor system losses occur from such locations as the
carburetor vents, the float bowl, and the gaps around the throttle and choke shafts. Because evaporative emissions
are a function of the diurnal variation in ambient temperature and the number of trips per day, emissions are best
calculated in terms of evaporative emissions per day per vehicle. Emissions per day can be converted to emissions
per mile (if necessary) by dividing the emissions per day be an average daily miles per vehicle value. This value is
likely to vary from location to location, however. The composite evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor is
given by:
(gi + kid) (min)
(Dl-5)
i=n-12
where: en = The composite evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n) in Ibs/day (.g/day)
gi = The diurnal evaporative hydrocarbon emission factor for model year (i) in Ibs/day (g/day)
kj = The hot soak evaporative emission factor in Ibs/tnp (g/trip) for the im model year
d = The number of daily trips per vehicle (3.3 trips/vehicle-day is the nationwide average)
nijn = The weighted annual travel of the i model year during calendar year (n)
The variables gj and kj are presented in Table D.I -27 by model year.
Table D.1-27. EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970 (Calif.)
1970 (non-Calif.)
1971
1972-1979
Post-1 979d
High altitude6
Pre-1971
1971-1979
Post-19796
By source'3
Diurnal, g/day
26.0
16.3
, 26.0
16.3
12.1
37.4
17.4
-
Hot soak, g/trip
14.7
10.9
14.7
10.9
12.0
17.4
14.2
-
g/dayc
74.5
52.3
74.5
52.3
51.7
94.8
64.3
-
Composite
g/mi
2.53
1.78
2.53
1.78
1.76
0.5
3.22
2.19
0.5
g/km
1.57
1.11
1.57
1.11
1.09
0.31
2.00
1.36
0.31
References 10 and 11.
bSee text for explanation.
cGram per day values are diurnal emissions plus hot soak emissions multiplied by the average number of trips per day. Nationwide
data from References 1 and 2 indicate that the average vehicle is used for 3.3 trips per day Gram/mile values were determined by
dividing average g/day by the average nationwide travel per vehicle (29.4 mi/day) from Reference 2.
clPost-1979 evaporative emission factors are based on the assumption that existing technology can result in further control of evapo-
rative hydrocarbons. A breakdown of post-1979 emissions by source (that is, diurnal and hot soak) is not available.
eVehicles without evaporative control were not tested at high altitude. Values presented here are the product of the ratio of pre-
1971 (low altitude) evaporative emissions to 1972 evaporative emissions and 1971 -1972 high altitude emissions
D.l-16
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
D.I.4 Particulate and Sulfur Oxide Emissions
Light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles emit relatively small quantities of particulate and sulfur oxides in
comparison with emission levels of the three pollutants discussed above. For this reason, average rather than
composite emission factors should be sufficiently accurate for approximating particulate and sulfur oxide
emissions from light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles. Average emission factors for these pollutants are presented
in Table D.I-21. No Federal standards for these two pollutants are presently in effect, although many areas do
have opacity (antismoke) regulations applicable to motor vehicles.
Sulfuric acid emission from catalysts is presently receiving considerable attention. An emission standard for
that pollutant is anticipated beginning in model year 1979.
D. 1.5 Basic Assumptions
Light-duty vehicle emission standards. A critical assumption necessary in the calculation of projected composite
emission rates is the timetable for implementation of future emission standards for light- duty vehicles. The
timetable used for light-duty vehicles in this appendix is that which reflects current legislation and administrative
actions as of April 1, 1975. This schedule is:
• For hydrocarbons - 1.5 g/mi (0.93 g/km) for 1975 through 1977 model years; 0.41 g/mi (0.25 g/km) for
1978 and later model years.
• For carbon monoxide - 15 g/mi (9.3 g/km) for 1975 through 1977 model years; 3.4 g/mi (2.1 g/km) for
1978 and later model years.
• For nitrogen oxides - 3.1 g/mi (1.9 g/km) for 1975 and 1976 model years; 2.0 g/mi (1.24 g/km) for the
1977 model year; 0.4 g/mi (0.25 g/km) for 1978 and later model years.
Although the statutory standards of 0.41 g/mi for HC, 3.4 g/mi for CO, and 0.4 g/mi for NOX are legally
scheduled for implementation in 1978, consideration of increased sulfuric acid emission from catalysts, fuel
economy problems and control technology availability, and reevaluation of the level of NOX control needed to
achieve the NOj air quality standard led the EPA Administrator to recommend to Congress that the light-duty
vehicle emission control schedule be revised. The tabulated values in this appendix do not, however, reflect these
recent recommendations. If Congress accepts the proposed revisions, the appropriate tables will be revised.
Deterioration and emission factors. Although deterioration factors are no longer presented by themselves in this
publication, they are, nontheless, used implicitly to calculate calendar year emission factors for motor vehicles.
Based on an analysis of surveillance data,10'11 approximate linear deterioration rates for pre-1968 model years
were established as follows: carbon monoxide — 1 percent per calendar year, hydrocarbons—1 percent per
calendar year, and nitrogen oxides—0 percent per calendar year. For 1968-1974 model years, deterioration was
assumed to be 5 percent per calendar year for CO, 10 percent per calendar year for HC, and 7 percent per
calendar year for NOX. For all pre-1975 model years, linear deterioration was applied to the surveillance test
results to determine tabulated values.11 Vehicles of model year 1975 and later are assumed to have a
deterioration rate of 10 percent per calendar year for CO and 20 percent per calendar year for HC. For NOX , see
the following section on credit for inspection/maintenance systems. These deterioration rates are applied to new
vehicle emission factors for prototype cars.
D.I.6 Credit for Inspection/Maintenance Systems
If an Air Quality Control Region has an inspection/maintenance (1/M) program, the following credits can be
applied to light-duty vehicles:
1. A 10 percent reduction in CO and HC can be applied to all model year vehicles starting the year I/M is
introduced,
2. Deterioration following the initial 10 percent is assumed to follow the schedules below:
12/75 Appendix D D.l-17
-------
HC
CO
Pre-1975 vehicles
1975 and later vehicles
2 percent per year
12 percent per year
2 percent per year
7 percent per year
3. This deterioration rate continues until a vehicle is 10 years old and remains stable thereafter. No catalyst
replacement is assumed.
4. The NOX emission deterioration and response to I/M is highly conjectural; the estimates below are based on
the assumption of engine-out emission of 1.2 g/mi at low mileage, deterioration of engine-out emission at 4
percent per year, NOX catalyst efficiency deterioration from 80 percent to 70 percent in the first 3 years,
and a linear deterioration in average catalyst efficiency from 70 percent to zero over the next 7 years
because of catalyst failures. The response to I/M without catalyst replacement is a reduction in the
engine-out deterioration from 4 to 2 percent per year. One catalyst replacement is assumed for the catalyst
replacement scenario. Note: There is no emission reduction due to I/M for pre-1978 vehicles.
NOX EMISSION DETERIORATION
Year
g/mi
(Standard is 0.4 g/mi, 0.25 g/km)
I/M, no catalyst
No I/M replacement^
g/km g/mi g/km
I/M, one catalyst
replacement
g/mi g/km
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>10
0.24
0.29
0.34
0.40
0.56
0.73
0.90
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
0.15
0.18
0.21
0.25
0.35
0.45
0.56
0.68
0.81
0.93
1.1
0.24
0.28
0.33
0.38
0.52
0.66
0.81
0.96
1.12
1.3
1.5
0.15
0.17
0.20
0.24
0.32
0.41
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.81
0.93
0.24
0.28
0.33
0.38
0.39
0.40
0.47
0.55
0.63
0.71
0.80
0.15
0.17
0.20
0.24
0.24
0.25
0.29
0.34
0.39
0.44
0.50
aTable does not apply to pre-1978 vehicles.
D.I.7 Adjusting Emission Factor Tables for Changes in Future Light-Duty Vehicle Emission
Standards
Because it is likely that Congressional action will alter the existing light-duty emission standard schedule, a
methodology is presented here to enable modification of the emission factor tables (Tables D.l-1 through
D.l-20). The emission factor tables presented in this appendix, as stated previously, reflect statutory carbon
monoxide, hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxides exhaust emission standards. If changes in the magnitude of the
standards and/or the implementation dates occur, appropriate adjustments can be accomplished using Table
D.I-28. This table contains emission factors by vehicle age for a number of likely future emission standards.
In order to illustrate the proper use of Table 1-28, the following hypothetical example is given. Emission
standards applicable up to and including the 1977 model year are set by law, but changes in the schedule after
1977 (beginning with 1978 models) may occur. For purposes of this example, assume that the Congress changes
the existing law such that 1978-1979 model year vehicles are subject to a carbon monoxide emission standard of
9.0 g/mi, a hydrocarbon emission standard of 0.9 g/mi, and a nitrogen oxides emission standard of 2.0 g/mi.
Assume also that this scenario has no effect on 1980 and later models, which remain at present statutory levels.
D.l-18
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
UJ C/3
UJ CO
>z
> O
00 s;
CO CO
15
O LLJ
< -J
U. O
Z I
O 1AI
CO ^"
M >
< o
x^
uj O
UJ
od £
CM U
• UJ
T _l
Q UJ
. W
S oc
II:
: E
o £ E
E 1
E fe
E "2
-i; -' «-' i- r-' OJ OJ
§(OCNCO
o--^
CNOIOJCNCNCNCNtNCNtNCS
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
0600606 o'*-'<-'-;
T-T-<-T-<-CMCMCNCN(>jn
cO'-^-tootNinooococo
mcotor-rvcooooioO
o
o
E
o
1
12/75
Appendix D
D.l-19
-------
This change in the standard schedule affects the tabulated values for the 1978 and 19/9 model years presented'in
Tables D.l-11 through D.l-20. In other words, every number in every column in these tables headed with "1978
or 1979" model year must be completely changed. The appropriate replacement values are summarized in Table
D.l-28. The age of the vehicle refers to a year in a vehicle's life. For example, the 1978 model year vehicles are
assumed to be age one in calendar year 1978, age two in calendar year 1979 and so on.
To change the 1978 model year column in Table D.l-11 to reflect our hypothetical Congressional action, the
appropriate values are extracted from the first row (age one) of Table D.l-28. For a 9.0 g/mi CO standard, the age
one emission factor for both low and high altitude locations is 5.4 g/mi (3.4 g/km). This value is used to replace
the existing value [2.8 g/mi (1.7 g/km)] in the 1978 column of Table D.l-11. A similar procedure is used for
hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.
To illustrate a slightly more complicated situation, consider the revision of Table D.l-16 to reflect our
hypothetical situation. All the values in the 1978 and 1979 columns must be changed. In 1980, the 1978 model
year vehicles are age three, thus from Table D.l-28 the appropriate carbon monoxide emission factor is 6.5 g/mi
(4.0 g/km). This value replaces the existing value of 3.4 g/mi (2.1 g/km). The 1979 model year carbon monoxide
emission factor is 5.9 g/mi (3.7 g/km), replacing the existing Table D.l-16 value of 3.1 g/mi (1.9 g/km). This
procedure is followed, using Table D.l-28, for all three pollutants. The procedure is similar for other standard
schedules and other calendar year tables.
The above methodology was designed to enable the user of this document to quickly revise the tables. Any
Congressional action will result in revision of the appropriate tables by EPA. Publication of these revised tables
takes time, however, and although every effort is made by EPA to make these changes quickly, the required lead
time is such that certain users may want to perform the modifications to the tables in advance. The standards
covered in Table D.l-28 represent the most likely values Congress will adopt, but by no means represent all
possible standards.
References for Section D.I
1. Strate, H. E. Nationwide Personal Transportation Study — Annual Miles of Automobile Travel. Report
Number 2. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D. C. April
1972.
2. 1973/74 Automobile Facts and Figures. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1974.
3. 1972 Automobile Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1973.
4. 1971 Automotive Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1972.
5. 1970 Automotive Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1971.
6. 1969 Automotive Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Detroit, Mich. 1970.
7. Smith, M. Development of Representative Driving Patterns at Various Average Route Speeds. Scott Research
Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park,N. C. February 1974. (Unpublished report.)
8. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Operation Data. CAPE-21. Collected by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Columbia, S. C.,
under contract to Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. January 1975. (Unpublished.)
9. Ashby, H. A., R. C. Stahman, B. H. Eccleston, and R. W. Hum. Vehicle Emissions - Summer to Winter.
(Presented at Society of Automotive Engineers meeting. Warrendale, Pa. October 1974. Paper No. 741053.)
10. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance. Calspen Corporation, Buffalo, N. Y. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. APTD-1544. March
1973.
11. Williams, M. E., J. T. White, L. A. Platte, and C. J. Domke. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance -
Analysis of the FY 72 Program. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No.
EPA-460/2-74-001. February 1974.
D.l-20 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
D.2 LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS
D.2.1 General
This class of vehicles includes all trucks with a gross vehicle weight (GVW) of 8500 Ib (3856 kg) or less. It is
comprised of vehicles that formerly were included in the light-duty truck (6000 Ib, 2722 kg GVW and under)
and the heavy-duty vehicle (6001 Ib; 2722 kg GVW and over) classes. Generally, these trucks are used for
personal transportation as opposed to commercial use.
D.2.2 FTP Exhaust Emissions
Projected emission factors for light trucks are summarized in Tables D.2-1 through D.2-12, (For information
on projected emission factors foi vehicles operated in California and at high altitude, see sections D.2.5 and
D.2.6). The basic methodology used for projecting light-duty vehicle emission factors (section D.I of this
appendix) also applies to this class. As in section D.I, the composite emission factor for light-duty trucks is given
by:
n
npstwx
cipn min vips zipt rip£wx
(D2-1)
i=n-12
where: enpstwx = Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), average
speed (s), ambient temperature (t), percentage cold operation (w), and percentage hot
start operation (x)
cipn = The 1975 Federal Test Procedure mean emission factor for the i"1 model year light-duty
trucks during calendar year (n) and for pollutant (p)
min
vips
zipt
riptwx
= The fraction of annual travel by the it'1 model year light-duty trucks during calendar year
(n)
= The speed correction factor for the i™ model year light-duty trucks for pollutan* {?} and
average speed (s)
= The temperature correction for the i"1 model year light-duty trucks for pollutant (p) and
ambient temperature (t)
= The hot/cold vehicle operation correction factor for the i"1 model year light-duty trucks
for pollutant (p), ambient temperature (t), percentage cold operation (w), •_: -•'} percentage
hot start operation (x)
Values for nijn are given in Table D.2-11. Unless other data are available, VjpS (Tables D.2-12 an ' T ~'-13),
and rjpj-wx (Table D.2-14) are the same for this class as for light-duty vehicles.
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-1
-------
Table D.2-1. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Carbon
Location and monoxide
model year g/mi ! g/km
Low altitude
Pre-1968 125.0
1968 70.0
1969 67.8
1970 56.0
1971 56.0
1972 45.0
1973 42.8
77.6
43.5
42.1
34.8
34.8
27.9
26.6
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
g/km
17.0 i 10.6
7.9
5.9
5.4
4.7
3.8
3.6
4.9
3.7
3.4
2.9
2.4
2.2
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
4.4
g/km
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
2.7
Table D.2-2. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1974
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
Carbon
monoxide
model year ! g/mi
Low altitude
Pre-1968 125.0
1968 73.5
1969 71.3
1970 i 58.5
1971 58.5
1972
47.2
1973 j 45.0
1974 ' 42.8
^T^-T-rr-y- -l--iMJ-^*xm^.1
Hydrocarbons j
g/km
77.6
45.6
44.3
36.3
36.3
29.3
27.9
26.6
g/mi
17.0
8.7
6.5
6.0
5.2
4.2
4.0
3.6
g/km
10.6
5.4
4.0
3.7
3.2
2.6
2.5
2.2
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
4.6
4.4
Nitrogen
oxides
g/km
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
2.9
2.7
D.2-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.2-3. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Car
Location and . mon
model year g/mi
Low altitude
Pre-1968 125
1968 77.0
1969 ; 74.8
1970 61.0
1971 61.0
1972 49.4
1973 47.2
1974 ! 45.0
1975 27.0
oon
axide
g/km
77.6
47.8
46.5
37.9
37.9
30.7
29.3
27.9
16.8
Hydrocarbons
g/mi g/km
j .. ... .. ... ... . ... j.
i
| 17.0
I 9.5
i 7.1
-
10.6
5.9
4.4
6.6 4.1
i 5.7
| 4.6
j 4.4
i 4.0
\ 2.7
3.5
2.9
2.7
2.5
1.7 i
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi g/km
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
4.8
4.6
4.4
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.0
2.9
2.7
Table D.2-4. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi P g/km
125
80.5
78.3
63.5
63.5
51.6
49.4
47.2
28.5
77.6
50.0
48.6
39.4
39.4
32.0
30.7
29.3
17.7
27.0 I 16.8
" "
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
17.0
10.3
7.7
7.2
6.2
5.0
4.8
4.4
3.0
2.7
g/km
10.6
6.4
4.8
4.5
3.9
3.1
3.0
2.7
1.9
1.7
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.2
g/km
2.6
4.9 3.0
5.3 3.3
5.2 3.2
5.2 . 3.2
5.3
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.4
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.9
2.7
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-3
-------
Table D.2-5. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1977
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Carbon
Location and monoxide
model year g/mi ' g/km
Low altitude i
Pre-1968 125 77.5
1968 I 84.0 52.2
1969 | 81.8 50.8
1970 66.0 41.0
1971 j 66.0 41.0
1972 53.8 33.4
1973 51.6 32.0
1974 I 49.4 30.7
1975 30.0 18.6
1976 28.5 17.7
1977 27.0 16.8
r i
i
Hydrocarbons
g/mi ' g/km
17.0 10.6
11.1 6.9
8.3 5.2
7.8 4.8
6.7 4.2
5.4 3.4
5.2 3.2
4.8 3.0
3.3 2.0
3.0 1.9
2.7 1.7
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.4
Nitrogen
oxides
g/km
2.6
3.0
! 3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.2
3.1
3.0
2.9
I 2.7
Table D.2-6. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1978
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
i
Carbon ! Nitrogen
monoxide Hydrocarbons oxides
g/mi
125
87.5
85.3
68.5
68.5
56.0
53.8
51.6
31.5
30.0
28.5
9.8
g/km
,.,, _,,.
77.6
54.3
g/mi
17.0
11.9
53.0 i 8.9
42.5
42.5
34.8
33.4
32.0
1£.6
18.6
17.7
6.1
8.4
7.2
5.8
5.6
5.2
3.6
3.3
3.0
1.0
g/km
10.6
7.4
5.5
5.2
4.5
3.6
3.5
3.2
2.2
2.0
1.9
0.6
g/mi
g/km
4.2 2.6
4.9 3.0
5.3
3.3
5.2 3.2
5.2 3.2
5.3
5.4
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
2.3
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.1
3.0
2.9
1.4
D.2-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.2-7. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
125
87.5
88.8
71.0
71.0
58.2
56.0
53.8
33.0
31.5
30.0
10.8
9.8
g/km
77.6
54.3
55.1
44.1
44.1
36.1
34.8
33.4
20.5
19.6
18.6
6.7
6.1
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
17.0
11.9
9.5
9.0
7.7
6.2
6.0
5.6
3.9
3.6
3.3
1.2
1.0
g/km
10.6
7.4
5.9
5.6
4.8
3.9
3.7
3.5
2.4
2.2
1.4
0.7
0.6
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.0
4.8
2.35
2.3
g/km
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.1
3.0
1.46
1.4
Table D.2-8. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1980
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
125
87.5
88.8
73.5
73.5
60.4
58.2
56.0
34.5
33.0
31.5
11.8
10.8
9.8
g/km
77.6
54.3
55.1
45.6
45.6
37.5
36.1
34.8
21.4
20.5
19.6
7.3
6.7
6.1
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
17.0
11.9
9.5
9.6
8.2
6.6
6.4
6.0
4.2
3.9
3.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
g/km
10.6
7.4
5.9
6.0
5.1
4.1
4.0
3.7
2.6
2.4
2.2
0.9
0.7
0.6
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.3
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5.0
2.4
2.35
2.3
g/km
2.6
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.1
1.5
1.46
1.4
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-5
-------
Table D.2-9. PROJECTED CARBON MOIMODIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1985
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
64.8
64.8
64.8
42.0
40.5
39.0
16.8
15.8
14.8
13.8
12.8
1983 11.8
1984
10.8
1985 9.8
g/km
40.2
40.2
40.2
26.1
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
7.4
7.6
7.6
5.7
25.1 5.4
24.2 • 5.1
10.4
9.8
9.2
8.6
7.9
7.3
6.7
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
6.1 1.0
g/km
4.6
4.7
4.7
3.5
3.4
3.2
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.6
Nitr
ox
g/mi
5.3
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.2
6.0
2.65
2.6
jgen
des
g/km
3.3
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.7
1.65
1.6
2.55 1.58
2.5
2.45
2.4
2.35
2.3
1.6
1.52
1.5
1.46
1.4
D.2-6
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.2-10. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990
(BASED ON 1975 FEDERAL TESTPROCEDURE)
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
42.0
19.8
19.8
19.8
18.8
17.8
16.8
15.8
14.8
13.8
12.8
11.8
10.8
9.8
g/km
26.1
12.3
12.3
12.3
11.7
11.1
10.4
9.8
9.2
8.7
7.9
7.3
6.7
6.1
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
5.7
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
g/km
3.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.6
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.4
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.75
2.7
2.65
2.6
2.55
2.5
2.45
2.4
2.35
2.3
g/km
4.0
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.71
1.68
1.65
1.61
1.58
1.55
1.52
1.49
1.46
1.43
Table D.2-11. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
LIGHT DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCK TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)a
0.061
0.097
0.097
0.097
0.083
0.076
0.076
0.063
0.054
0.043
0.036
0.024
0.185
Average annual
miles driven (b)*3
15,900
15,000
1 4,000
13,100
12,200
1 1 ,300
10,300
9,400
8,500
7,600
6,700
6,700
4,500
a x b
970
1,455
1,358
1,270
1,013
859
783
592
459
327
241
161
832
Fraction
of annual
travel (m)c
0.094
0.141
0.132
0.123
0.098
0.083
0.076
0.057
0.044
0.032
0.023
0.016
0.081
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1972 (Reference 1 and 2)
bReference 2,
cm = ab/Sab.
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-7
-------
to
t/S
y/
O
CC
H
1-
n
x
Hi
CC
o
u.
IT
O
O
LL
O
O
LU
re
CC
O
O
u
III
UJ
0.
V)
EC
O
u.
z
3EFFICIE
U
0)
2
CO
CO
II
Q.
CM
CO
O
CO
CO
II
_a
to
-g
X
o
c
CD
D)
o
X
mono
o
.a
03
o
CO
O
•£
03
o
>
CD
-a
o
CD
<
(J
CO
<
(j
CO
<
CD
0)
Location
CN CNCNCNCNCNCNCNCMCMCN
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
O O O O O O CN «-' i-' <-' T-'
o o oooodoooo
0 OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
CO O5 *~~ ^D CO O5 CD CO CD OO O5
r^- *~~ co co ^" C? LO co CN 05 05
LO CD CD CD CD CD ^J" ^f ^f ^f ^"
CN njCNCMCNr-JCNCNCNCNCM
, i I i i i i i: I i
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
t~*i ^sj l£5 r^- r^ t^5 Li5 CN r"i CNI LO
CD CD CO f^*- r*^ r^- ^f ^f ^f LO LO
1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
r*^ ^^ r^ CJ) r^ f™ ^~ CN oo LO ^d*
CO 00 ^" LO CD '^ CN CO CNI CO CT1
O5 O5OCNCNCNF--COCDOOOO
O O'-'-'-'-OOOOO
1 I i I i T 1 1 1 i 1
O OOOOOOOOOO
X XXXXXXXXXX
00 CQ O5 00 LJ5 CO LO CO 00 C"5 O^
LO LO LO LO LO LO LO ^f ^f LO ^f
CN CNCMCNCNCNICNCMCNCNCN
1 i 1 1 i i 1 1 1 i i
o oooooooooo
X XXXXXXXXXX
f"l CQ ("5 PN. CO CM CO CO LO CO O5
C^ C7) CO CsJ r~^ O5 LO CD LO CO CD
CD LO CO CD LO LO LO ^J" *^}" LO ^f
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1
d o <-' <-' d d d d ci d d
r~^ r*> o ^ o
CD co t~- ^3 r^
O5 O5 j£ O5 (£
CD
CD
cn ,^
IIS-il 1
±; "o ^D £ — —
as x O5 o "" ro
g LLJ — t > JZ
•^ " — ' — ;? 01
O co O • —
-1 0 -I X
£
CT)
O
+-1
0)
•s
o
"a
a
CD
•D
1
i
(0
IV
(0
?
CO
v>
0
a>
>
>
3
V
+rf
J=
0)
L,
0)
CO
CO
£
TJ
a>
0)
H
.C
£
Lf)
o
ii
CO
ro
"*-
0
QJ
O
CD
cu
^
73
C
0
5
T3
a>
-a
c
V
a?
a>
n
0
c
•D
3
O
.c
i/s
3 Reference 3. Equation
duty trucks.
D.2-8
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.2-13. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS3
Location
Low altitude
(Excluding 1966-
1967 Calif.)
California
Low altitude
High altitude
Model
year
1957-1967
1966-1967
1968
1969
1970
Post-1970
1957-1967
1968
1969
1970
Post-1970
Carbon monoxide
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
1.79
3.06
3.57
3.60
4.15
2.29
2.43
2.47
2.84
3.00
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.00
1.75
1.86
1.88
2.23
1.48
1.54
1.61
1.72
1.83
Hydrocarbons
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
1.87
2.96
2.95
2.51
2.75
2.34
2.10
2.04
2.35
2.17
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.12
1.66
1.65
1.51
1.63
1.37
1.27
1.22
1.36
1.35
Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.16
1.04
1.08
1.13
1.15
1.33
1.22
1.22
1.19
1.06
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.09
1.00
1.05
1.05
1.03
1.20
1.18
1.08
1.11
1.02
a Driving patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 4) were input to the modal emission analysis model
(see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 5 and 10 mi/hr (8 and 16 km/hr) were divided by FTP
emission factors for operation to obtain the above results. The above data are approximate and represent the best currently
available information.
Table D.2-14. LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTORS
AND HOT/COLD VEHICLE OPERATION CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR FTP EMISSION FACTORS3
Pollutant
and controls
Carbon monoxide
Non-catalyst
Catalyst
Hydrocarbons
Non -catalyst
Catalyst
Nitrogen oxides
Non-catalyst
Catalyst
Temperature cor-
rection factor (zjpt)'3
-0.01 27t+ 1.95
-0.07431 + 6.58
-0.01 13t+ 1.81
-0.0304t + 3.25
-0.0046t + 1 .36
-0.0060t + 1 .52
Hot/cold vehicle operation
correction factors
g(t)
—
e0.035t -5.24
—
0.00 18t + 0.0095
—
-0.0010t + 0.858
f(t)
0.0045t + 0.02
e0.036t -4.14
0.0079t + 0.03
0.0050t - 0.0409
-0.0068t+ 1.64
0. 00 10t + 0.835
aReference 5. Temperature (t) is expressed in F. In order to apply the above equations, °C must first be converted to °F (F=9/5C
+ 32). Similarly °Kelvm (K) must be converted to °F (F= 9/5IK - 273.16) + 32).
The formulae for z j enable the correction of FTP emission factors for ambient temperature. The formulae for f (t) are used in
conjunction with equation D.1-2 to calculate r|pw)(. If the variable r|ptwx is used in equation D.1-1, zjpt must be used also. See
section D1 for appropriate formulae for calculating r Dtwx.
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-9
-------
For pre-1975 model year vehicles, noncatalyst temperature correction factors should be used. For 1975-1977
model year vehicles, temperature-dependent correction factors should be calculated for the catalyst and
noncatalyst class, and the results weighted into an overall factor that is two-thirds catalyst, one-third noncatalyst.
For 1978 and later model year vehicles, noncatalyst temperature correction factors should be applied.
D.2.3 Evaporative and Crankcase Emissions
In addition to exhaust emission factors, evaporative crankcase hydrocarbon emissions are determined using:
n
f
mi
m
(D2-2)
i=n-12
where: fn = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
hj = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission rate for the jth model year.
Emission factors for this source are reported in Table D.2-15. The crankcase and evaporative
emissions reported in the table are added together to arrive at this variable.
'in
= The weighted annual travel of the itn model year vehicle during calendar year (n)
Table D.2-15. CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBONS
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED TRUCKS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
Alt areas
except high
altitude and
California0
High
altitude
Model
years
Pre 1963
1963-1967
1968-1970
1971
1972-1979
Post-1 979d
Pre- 1963
1963-1967
1968-1970
1971-1979
Post-1 979d
Crankcase emissions3
g/km
2.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
g/mi
4.6
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.6
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
Evaporative emissions"
g/km
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.9
0.3
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.4
0.3
g/mi
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.1
3.1
0.5
4.6
4.6
4.6
3.9
0.5
aReference 6. Tabulated values were determined by assuming that two-thirds of the light-duty trucks are 6000 Ibs GVW (2700 kg)
and under, and that one-third are 6001-8500 Ibs GVW (2700-3860 kg).
bl_ight-duty vehicle evaporative data (section 3.1 2) and heavy-duty vehicle evaporative data (section 3.1.4) were used to estimate
the listed values.
cFor California. Evaporative emissions for the 1970 model year are 1.9 g/km (3.1 g/mi) all other model years are the same as those
reported as "All area except high altitude and California" Crankcase emissions for the pre-1961 California light-duty trucks are
4.6g/mi (2.9 g/km), 1961-1963 model years are 2.4 (g/mi (1.5 g/km), all post-1963 model year vehicles are 0.0 g/mi (0.0 g/km).
^Post-1979 evaporative emission factors are based on the assumption that existing technology, when applied to the entire light
truck class, can result in further control of evaporative hydrocarbons.
D.2-10
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
D.2.4 Particulate and Sulfur Oxides Emissions _
Particulate and sulfur oxides emission factors are presented in Table D.2-1 6.
Table D.2-16. PARTICULATE, SULFURIC ACID, AND TOTAL SULFUR OXIDES
EMISSION FACTORS FOR LIGHT-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
Pollutant
Particulate
Exhaust3
g/mi
g/km
Tire wear
g/mi
g/km
Sulfuric acid
g/mi
g/km
Total sulfur oxides
g/mi
g/km
Emission factors
Non-catalyst
(Leaded fuel)
0.34
0.21
0.20
0.12
0.001
0.001
0.18
0.11
Non-catalyst
(Unleaded fuel)
0.05
0.03
0.20
0.12
0.001
0.001
0.18
0.11
Catalyst
(Unleaded fuel)
0.05
0.03
0.20
0.12
0.02-0.06b
0.01-0.04
0.18
0.11
a Excluding participate sulfate or sulfunc acid aerosol.
ric acid emission varies markedly with driving mode and fuel sulfur levels.
D.2.5 Basic Assumptions
Composition of class. For emission estimation purposes, this class is composed of trucks having a GVW of 8500
Ib (3856 kg) or less. Thus, this class includes the group of trucks previously defined in AP-42 as light-duty
vehicles (LDV) plus a group of vehicles previously defined as heavy-duty vehicles (HDV). On the basis of numbers
of vehicles nationwide, the split is two-thirds LDVs, one-third HDVs.
Standards. The pollutant standards assumed for this category are weighted averages of the standards applicable to
the various vehicle classes that were combined to create the light-duty truck class. Until 1975, those light-duty
trucks that weighed 6000 Ib (2722 kg) and under were required to meet light-duty vehicle emission standards.
Beginning in 1975, in accordance with a court order, a separate light truck class was created. This class, which
comprises two-thirds of the light-duty truck class (as defined here), is required to meet standards of 20 g/mi (12.4
g/km) of carbon monoxide, 2 g/mi (1.2 g/km) of hydrocarbons, and 3.1 g/mi (1.9 g/km) of nitrogen oxides from
1975 through 1977. The remaining one-third of the light-duty trucks are currently subject to heavy-duty vehicle
standards. Data presented in section D.2 are based on the assumption that, beginning in 1978, the light-duty
truck class of 0-8500 Ib (3856 kg) GVW will be subject to the following standards: carbon monoxide-17.9 g/mi
(11.1 g/km), hydrocarbon-1.65 g/mi (1.0 g/km), and nitrogen oxides-2.3 g/mi (1.4 g/km).
Deterioration. The same deterioration assumptions discussed in section D.I for light-duty vehicles apply except
that 1975-1977 model year vehicles weighing between 6000 and 8500 Ib (2722-3856 kg) are assumed not to be
equipped with catalytic converters. Therefore, the deterioration factors for light-duty trucks are weighted values
composed of 6000-lb (2722 kg) GVW truck deterioration values and 6001 to 8500-lb (2722-3856 kg) GVW truck
deterioration values. The weighting factors are two-thirds and one-third, respectively.
Actual emission values. For 1972 and earlier model year vehicles, emission values are those measured in the EPA
Emission Surveillance Program7'8 and the baseline study of 6,000- to 10,000-lb (2,722-4,536 kg) trucks.9'10
12/75
Appendix D
D.2-11
-------
The tabulated values are weighted two-thirds for 0-6000-lb (0-2722 kg) trucks and one-third for 6000- 1o 8500-lb
(2722-3856 kg) trucks. For 1973-1974 model year emission values, mis same weighting factor is applied to
projected 1973-1974 light-duty vehicle emissions and 1972 model year 6,000- to 10,000-lb (2,722-4,536 kg)
emission values. 1975-1977 model year emission values for 0- to 6000-lb (0 to 2722 kg) GVW trucks are based on
unpublished certification test data along with estimates of prototype-to-production differences. Post-1977 model
year emission values are based on previous relationships of low mileage in-use emission values to the standards.
California values. Projected emission factors for vehicles operated in California were not computed because of a
lack of information. The Pre-1975 California light-duty vehicle ratios can be applied to the light-duty trucks as a
best estimate (see section D.I). For 1975 and later, no difference is expected except in the value for nitrogen
oxides in 1975-1976; the California standards can be weighted two-thirds, and the truck baseline value of 7.1
g/mi (4.4 gm/km) one-third to get an estimated value for nitrogen oxides in 1975-1976.
D.2.6 High Altitude and Inspection/Maintenance Corrections
To correct for high altitude for all pollutants for light-duty trucks, the light-duty vehicle ratio of high altitude
to low altitude emission factors for the model year vehicle is applied to the calendar year in question (see section
D.I). Credit for inspection/maintenance for light-duty trucks is the same as that given for autos in section D.I. of
this appendix.
References for Section D.2
1. Strate, H. E. Nationwide Personal Transportation Study - Annual Miles of Automobile Travel. Report
Number 2. U. S, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D. C. April
1972.
2. 1972 Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Washington, D. C. 1974.
3. Smith, M. Development of Representative Driving Patterns at Various Average Route Speeds. Scott Research
Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle
Park, N. C. February 1974. (Unpublished report).
4. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Operation Data. CAPE-21. Collected by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Columbia, S. C.,
under contract to Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. January 1975. (Unpublished.)
5. Ashby, H. A., R. C. Staliman, B. H. Eccleston, and R. W. Hurn. Vehicle Emissions - Summer to Winter.
(Presented at Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. meeting. Warrendale, Pa. October 1974. Paper no.
741053.)
6. Sigworth, H. W., Jr. Estimates of Motor Vehicle Emission Rates. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, N. C. March 1971. (Unpublished report.)
7. Automobiles Exhaust Emission Surveillance. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N. Y. Prepared for Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. APTD-1544.
March 1973.
8. Williams, M. E., J. T. White, L. A. Platte, and C. J. Domke. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance -
Analysis of the FY 72 Program. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor Mich. Publication No.
EPA-460/2-74-001. February 1974.
9. A Study of Baseline Emissions on 6,000 to 14,000 Pound Gross Vehicle Weight Trucks. Automotive
Environmental Systems, Inc., Westminster, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor.
Mich, under Contract No. 68-01-0468. Publication No. APTE-1572. June 1973.
10. Ingalls, M. H. Baseline Emissions on 6,000 to 14,000 pound Gross Vehicle Weight Trucks. Southwest
Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No.
68-01-0467. June 1973.
D.2-12 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
D.3 LIGHT-DUTY, DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
D.3.1 General
Although light-duty diesels represent only a small fraction of automobiles in use, their numbers can be
expected to increase in the future. Currently, only two manufacturers produce diesel-powered automobiles for
sale in the United States, but this may change as the demand for low polluting, economical engines grows.
D.3.2 Emissions
Because of the limited data base for these vehicles, no attempt has been made to predict deterioration factors.
The composite emission factor calculation procedure involves only the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) emission
factor and the fraction of travel by model year (see main text, section 3.1.3). The values presented in Table
3.1.3-1 apply to all model years and pollutants.
D.3.3 Basic Assumptions
Standards. See section D.I, Light-Duty, Gasoline-Powered Vehicles.
Deterioration. Because of the lack of data, no deterioration factors are assumed. Diesels are expected to continue
to emit carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons at their present rates but to meet future NOX standards exactly.
12/75 Appendix D D.3-1
-------
-------
D.4 HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
D.4.1 General
This class includes vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of more than 8500 Ib (3856 kg). Most of the vehicles
are trucks; however, buses and special purpose vehicles such as motor homes are also included. As in other
sections of this appendix the reader is encouraged to refer to the main text (see section 3.1.4) for a much more
detailed presentation. The discussion presented here is brief, consisting primarily of data summaries.
D.4.2 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emissions
The composite exhaust emission factor is calculated using:
n
enps = 2-« cipn min vips
i=n-12
(D.4-1)
where: e
nDS
ipn
ID,-
Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n) pollutant (p), and average speed
(s)
The test procedure emission factor for pollutant (p) in g/mi (g/km) for the i* model year in
calendar year (n)
The weighted annual travel of the itn model year vehicles during calendar year (n). The
determination of this variable involves the use of the vehicle year distribution.
VJDS = The speed correction factor for the i1
(s)
model year vehicles for pollutant (p) and average speed
The projected test procedure emission factors (cjpn) are summarized in Tables D.4-1 through D.4-10. These
projected factors are based on the San Antonio Road Route test (see section 3.1.4) and assume 100 percent
warmed-up vehicle operation at an average speed of approximately 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr). Table D.4-11 contains a
sample calculation of the variable mjn, using nationwide statistics. Speed correction factor data are contained in
Table D.4-12 and Table D.4-13.
Table D.4-1. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1973
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
Carbon |
monoxide i Hydrocarbons
g/mi
238
188
188
188
188
g/km
148
117
117
117
117
g/mi
35.4
13.9
13.8
13.7
13.6
g/km
22.0
8.6
8.6
8.5
8.4
g/mi
6.8
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.5
Nitrogen
oxides
I
i
i
!
!
i
i
g/km
4.2
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
12/75
Appendix D
D.4-1
-------
Table D.4-2. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1974
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
238
188
188
188
188
167
g/km
148
117
117
117
117
104
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
35.4
14.0
13.9
13.8
13.7
13.1
g/km
22.0
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.5
8.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.8
12.7
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.5
g/km
4.2
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
Table D.4-3. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1975
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
238
188
188
188
188
168
167
g/km
148
117
117
117
117
104
104
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
35.4
14.1
14.0
13.9
13.8
13.2
13.1
g/km
22.0
8.8
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.2
8.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.8
12.8
12.7
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.5
g/km
4.2
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
Table D.4-4. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1976
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
238
188
188
188
188
169
168
167
g/km
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
148
117
117
117
117
35.4
14.2
14.1
14.0
13.9
105 i 13.3
104
13.2
104 13.1
g/km
22.0
8.8
8.8
8.7
8.6
8.3
8.2
8.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.8
12.8
12.8
12.7
12.7
12.6
12.6
12.5
g/km
4.2
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
D.4-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.4-5. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1977
Carbon
Location and
monoxide
model year | g/mi
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
238
188
188
188
1973 I 188
1974
1975
1976
1977
170
169
168
167
g/km
148
117
117
117
117
106
105
104
104
Nitrogen
Hydrocarbons oxides
g/mi
35.4
14.3
g/km g/mi
22.0 6.8
8.9 12.9
14.2 8.8 12.8
14.1 ! 8.8 12.8
14.0
13.4
13.3
13.2
13.1
8.7 12.7
8.3 12.7
8.3 12.6
8.2 12.6
8.1 ! 12.5
g/km
4.2
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
Table D.4-6. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1978
Location and
model year
Carbon !
monoxide j Hydrocarbons
g/mi
Low altitude i
Pre-1970
1970
1971
238
188
188
1972 188
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
188
171
170
169
168
117
g/km
148
117
117
117
g/mi
35.4
14.4
14.3
14.2
g/km
22.0
8.9
8.9
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
6.8
12.9
12.9
g/km
4.2
8.0
8.0
8.8 I 12.8 j 7.9
117 14.1 8.8
106
106
105
104
73
13.5 8.4
13.4
13.3
13.2
6.0
8.3
8.3
8.2
12.8
12.7
12.7
12.6
12.6
3.7 11.4
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.1
12/75
Appendix D
D.4-3
-------
Table D.4-7. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
Carbon
monoxide j Hydrocarbons
g/mi
238
188
188
188
188
1974 f 172
1975 171
1976 170
1977 169
1978 118
1979 117
g/km
148
117
117
117
117
107
106
106
g/mi
35.4
14.4
14.4
14.3
14.2
13.6
13.5
13.4
105 13.3
73 6.0
73 6.0
g/km
22.0
8.9
8.9
8.9
8.8
8.4
8.4
8.3
8.3
3.7
3.7
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi j g/km
6.8
13.0
12.9
12.9
12.8
12.8
12.7
12.7
12.6
11.6
11.4
4.2
8.1
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.8
7.2
7.1
Table D.4-8. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES -
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1980
Location and
model year
Carbon I
, monoxide \
. g/mi i g/km j
Hydrocarbons
g/mi j g/km
N
i
! 9/mi
Nitrogen
oxides _
g/km
Low altitude
Pre-1970
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
,
238
188
188
; 188
188
173
172
171
170
119
118
117
148
117
117
117
117
107
107
106
106
74
73
73
35.4
14.4
14.4
14.4
14.3
13.7
13.6
13.5
13.4
6.1
6.0
6.0
i
; 22.0
8.9
I 8.9
I 8.9
' 8.9
t 8.5
8.4
i 8.4
8.3
3.8
3.7
3.7
;
6.8
i 13.0
! 13.0
1 12.9
12.9
12.8
12.8
12.7
12.7
11.8
11.6
11.4
4.2
8.1
8.1
8.0
8.0
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.3
7.2
7.1
D.4-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.4-9. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1985
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
188
188
176
176
175
174
124
123
122
121
g/km
117
117
109
109
109
108
77
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
14.4
14.4
14.0
14.0
14.0
13.9
6.3
76 6.2
76 | 6.2
75 : 6.2
g/km
8.9
8.9
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
1982 120 ! 75 i 6.1 3.8
1983 119
74 | 6.1
3.8
1984 118 73 6.1 3.8
1985 • 117
73 : 6.0 3.7
' Nitrogen
| oxides
| g/mi | g/km
i i
!
I 13.0
i 13.0
j 13.0
; 13.0
; 12.9
12.9
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.0
8.0
12,8 7.9
12.6
7.8
12.4 7.7
12.2
7.6
12.0 7.5
11.8 7.3
11.6 7.2
11.4
7.1
Table D.4-10. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES-
EXCLUDING CALIFORNIA-FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
176
126
126
126
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
I g/km
i
109
78
78
78
78
78
77
Hydrocaibons
g/mi
14.0
6.3
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2
76 6.2
1 76
; 75
1 75
74
73
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.0
73 6.0
g/km
8.7
3.9
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi | g/km
13.0
13.0
3.9 i 13.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.7
8.1
8.1
8.1
13.0 8.1
13.0
13.0
12.8
8.1
8.1
7.9
12.6 7.8
12.4 . 7.7
12.2 ! 7.6
12.0 i 7.5
11.8 | 7.3
11.6 7.3
3.7 11.4 7.1
12/75
Appendix D
D.4-5
-------
Table D.4-11. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLE TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)a
0.037
0.078
0.078
0.078
0.075
0.075
0.075
0.068
0.059
0.053
0.044
0.032
0.247
Average annual
miles driven (b)'3
19,000
18,000
17,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
9,500
9,000
8,500
8,000
7,500
7,000
a x b
703
1,404
1,326
1,248
1,050
900
750
646
531
451
352
240
1,729
Fraction
o1 annual
travel (m)c
0.062
(3.124
0.117
0.110
0.093
0.080
0.066
0.057
0.047
0.040
0.031
0.021
0.153
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1972 (Reference 11
Reference 1.
cm = ab/Zab.
D.4-6
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
ja_
CO
CO
LU
J
0
X
LU
>
Q
in
CC
u
Q.
UJ
H
C
CO
^
0
>-"
^^
^
Q
>
>
<
LU
CC
o
LU
CO
CC
o
I-
0
^
u.
o
Lw
0
LU
CC
cc
o
o
Q
UJ
LU
0_
V)
CC
0
LL
£
z
LU
U
LL
LL
LU
O
u
e\i
•*!
Q
~ ^
1
OJ
•a
x
0
o
p.
0
_Q
ca
-~^ f ^
~
c/i
0
n
CO
O
o c
"D
>
X
<
"aj i_
"D n
0 1
i >
C
O
4->
CO
0
o
—I
1 CN CM CN CN
1 1 i 11
1 00 0 O
|m x x xx
I o a> r~ in
1 00 CO CM CO
[ a> in o oo
do CM •-'
CO 00 CM CM
-. o oo o *t
^ CO OO CD CO
o d do
^- •?
— cb
k.
CD
1
CO
I M
J £
\ *
>
£
.,<-<- - <- 1 =
^ X X XX
CO "— CO CO
r^ o in co
in co <* ^"
^"~~
CM CM f>| CM
1 I | 1
o o o o
en x x x x
r~- CM [^ co
o in m CNJ
co co ^r
^^
E
o
OJ
CD
CO
to
•a
(U
(U
^
^
E
m
q-
o
ta
• — •
2
CO
-o
H-
o
03
O)
C
ro
JC
•o
c
o
1 1
01 ££
~o
c T"~
a CD
x •-
CD u
s €
§ E
•D ^
3 . i-
o y 3
^^5
"* f~ i_
|1&
CO ^ CD
3 3 ~
£-9 e
. ?- .5
™ $ »
8-^
c O —
0) *-
fe « o
5« a
DC o oo
(D .Q
12/75
Appendix D
D.4-7
-------
Table D.4-13. LOW AVERAGE SPEED CORRECTION FACTORS
FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES3
Location
Low altitude
High altitude
Model
year
Pre-1970
Post- 1969
Pre-1970
Post-1969
Carbon monoxide
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.72
3.06
2.29
2.43
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.57
1.75
1.48
1.54
Hydrocarbons
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
2.50
2.96
2.34
2.10
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.45
1.66
1.37
1.27
Nitrogen oxides
5 mi/hr
(8 km/hr)
1.08
1.04
1.33
1.22
10 mi/hr
(16 km/hr)
1.03
1.00
1.20
1 18
aDriving patterns developed from CAPE-21 vehicle operation data (Reference 3) were input to the modal emission analysis model
(see section 3.1.2.3). The results predicted by the model (emissions at 8 and 16 km/hr; 5 and 10 mi/hr) were divided by FTP
emission factors for hot operation to obtain the above results. The above data represent the best currently available information
for light-duty vehicles. These data are assumed applicable to heavy-duty vehicles given the lack of better information.
D.4.3 Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbons
In addition to exhaust emission factors, the calculation of evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emissions
are determined using:
fn =
(D.4-2)
i=n-12
where: fn = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission factor for calendar year (n)
hj = The combined evaporative and crankcase hydrocarbon emission rate for the itn model year.
Emission factors for this source are reported in Table D.4-14. Crankcase and evaporative
emissions must be combined before applying equation D.4-2.
mjn = The weighted annual travel of the it'1 model year vehicle during calendar year (n)
Table D.4-14. CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION
FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Location
All areas
except high
altitude and
California
California only
High altitude
Model
years
Pre-1968
Post-1 967C
Pre-1964
Post-1963c
Pre-1968
Post-1 967C
Crankcase emissions'3
g/mi
5.7
0.0
5.7
0.0
5.7
0.0
g/km
3.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
Evaporative emissions3
g/mi
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
7.4
7.4
g/km
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
4.6
4.6
aReferences 4 through 6 were used to estimate evaporative emission factors for heavy-duty vehicles (HDV). The formula from
section 3.1.2.5 was used to calculate g/mi (g/km) values, (evaporative emission factor = g + kd). The HDV diurnal evaporative
emissions (g) were assumed to be three times the LDV value to account for the larger size fuel tanks used on HDV. Nine trips
per day (d = number of trips per day) from Reference 3 were used in conjunction with the LDV hot soak emissions (t) to yield
a total evaporative emission rate in grams per day. This value was divided by 36.2 miles per day (58.3 km/day) from Reference
1 to obtain the per mile (per kilometer) rate.
''Crankcase factors are from Reference 7.
CHDV evaporative emissions are expected to be controlled in 1978. Assume 50 percent reduction over the above post-1967 values
(post-1963 California).
D.4-8
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
D.4.4 Sulfur Oxide and Particulate Emissions
Projected sulfur oxide and particulate emission factors for all model year heavy-duty, gasoline-powered
vehicles are presented in Table D.4-15. Sulfur oxides factors are based on fuel sulfur content and fuel
consumption. (Sulfuric acid emissions are between 1 and 3 percent of sulfur oxides emissions.) Tire-wear
particulate factors are based on automobile test results, a premise necessary because of the lack of data for
heavy-duty vehicles. Truck tire wear is likely to result in greater particulate emission than that for automobiles
because of larger tires, heavier loads on tires, and more tires per vehicle. Although the factors presented in Table
D.4-15 can be adjusted for the number of tires per vehicle, adjustments cannot be made to account for the other
differences.
Table D.4-15. SULFUR OXIDES AND PARTICULATE
EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY,
GASOLINE-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulate
Exhaust3
Tire wearb
Sulfur oxides0
(SOxasSO2)
Emissions
g/mi
0.91
0.20T
0.36
g/km
0.56
0.1 2T
0.22
aCalculated from the Reference 8 value of 12 lb/103gal (1.46 g/liter)
gasoline. A 6.0 mi/gal (2.6 km/liter) value from Reference 9 was used
to convert to a per kilometer (per mile) emission factor.
Reference 10. The data from this reference are for passenger cars. In
the absence of specific data for heavy-duty vehicles, they are assumed
to be representative of truck-tire-wear particulate. An adjustment is
made for trucks with more than four tires. T equals the number of tires
divided by four.
cBased on an average fuel consumption of 6.0 mi/gal (2.6 km/literl from
Reference 9, on a 0.04 percent sulfur content from References 11 and
12, and on a density of 6.1 Ib/gal (0.73 kg/liter) from References 11
and 12.
D.4.5 Basic Assumptions
Emission factors for heavy-duty vehicles (HDV) are based on San Antonio Road Route data for controlled
(1970-1973 model years) trucks' 3 and for uncontrolled (pre-1970 model years) trucks.14 Unpublished data on
1974 trucks and technical judgment were used to estimate emission factors for post-1973 HDV. In doing so, it
was assumed that diesel trucks will take over most of the "heavy" HDV market (trucks weighing more than
13,000 kg) and that the average weight of a gasoline-powered HDV will be approximately 26,000 Ibs (11,790 kg).
It is expected that interim standards for HDV, which will result in significant HC reduction, will be implemented
in 1978.
Projected emission factors at high altitude and for the State of California are not reported in these tables;
however, they can be derived using the following methodologies. Although all pre-1975 model year HDV
emission factors for California vehicles are the same as those reported in these tables, the hydrocarbon and
nitrogen oxides values for 1975-1977 model years in California can be assumed equal to the national (tabulated)
values for the 1978 model year. Carbon monoxide levels for 1975-1977 HDV in California can be assumed to be
9 percent lower than the 1975-1977 national levels. To convert the national HDV levels for high altitude for all
pollutants in a given calendar year, the light-duty vehicle (LDV) ratio of high altitude to low altitude emission
factors (by pollutant) can be used. For pre-1970 model year trucks, the pre-1968 model year LDV ratio can be
applied. For 1970-1973 model year trucks, the 1968 model year LDV ratio can be applied. For 1974-1977
trucks, the 1970 LDV ratio can be applied. For post-1977 trucks, the 1975 model year LDV ratio can be applied.
See section D.I of this appendix to obtain the data necessary to calculate these ratios.
12/75 Appendix D D.4-9
-------
References for Section D.4
1. 1972 Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Washington, D.C. 1974.
2. Smith, M. Development of Representative Driving Patterns at Various Average Route Speeds. Scott Research
Laboratories, Inc., San Bernardino, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, N.C. February 1974. (Unpublished report.)
3. Heavy duty vehicle operation data collected by Wilbur Smith and Associates, Columbia, S.C., under contract
to Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich, December 1974.
4. Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance. Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, N.Y. Prepared for Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. Under Contract No. 68-01-0435. Publication No. AFTD-1544. March
1973.
5. Liljedahl, D. R. A Study of Emissions from Light Duty Vehicles in Denver, Houston, and Chicago. Fiscal Year
1972. Automotive Testing Laboratories, Inc., Aurora, Colo. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency,
Ann Arbor, Mich. Publication No. APTD-1504. July 1973.
6. A Study of Emissions from 1966-1972 Light Duty Vehicles in Los Angeles and St. Louis. Automotive
Environmental Systems, Inc..Westminister, Calif. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency. Ann Arbor,
Mich. Under Contract No. 68-01-0455. Publication No. APTD-1505. August 1973.
7. Sigworth, H. W., Jr. Estimates of Motor Vehicle Emission Rates. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, N.C. March 1971. (Unpublished report.)
8. Control Techniques for Particulate Air Pollutants. U.S. DHEW, National Air Pollution Control Administra-
tion, Washington, D.C. Publication No. AP-51. January 1969.
9. 1973 Motor Truck Facts. Automobile Manufacturers Association, Washington, D.C. 1973.
10. Subramani, J. P. Particulate Air Pollution from Automobile Tire Tread Wear. Ph. D. Dissertation. University
of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. May 1971.
11. Shelton, E. M. and C. M. McKinney. Motor Gasolines, Winter 1970-1971. U. S. Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines. Bartlesville, Okla. June 1971.
12.. Shelton, E. M. Motor Gasolines, Summer 1971. U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Bartlesville, Okla. January 1972.
13. Ingalls, M. N and K. J. Springer. In-Use Heavy Duty Gasoline Truck Emissions. Part 1. Southwest Research
Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
Under Contract No. EHS 70-113. Publication No. EPA-460/3-002-a. February 1973.
14. Ingalls, M.N. and K.J. Springer. In-Use Heavy Duty Gasoline Truck Emissions. Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich., December 1974.
(Unpublished report.)
D.4-10 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
D.5 HEAVY-DUTY, DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
D.5.1 General
This class of vehicles includes all diesel vehicles with a gross vehicle weight (GVW) of more than 6000 Ib
(2772 kg). On the highway, heavy-duty diesel engines are primarily used in trucks and buses. Diesel engines in any
application demonstrate operating principles that are significantly different from those of the gasoline engine.
D.5.2 Emissions of Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbons, and Nitrogen Oxides
Emissions from heavy-duty, diesel-powered vehicles during a calendar year (n) and for a pollutant (p) can be
approximately calculated using:
enps = cipnminvips 0-'1
i=n-12
where: enps = Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), and average
speed (s) r
cipn ~ The emission rate in g/mi (g/km) for the i"1 model year vehicles in calendar year (n) over a
transient urban driving schedule with average speed of approximately 18 mi/hr
mjn = The fraction of total heavy-duty diesel miles (km) driven by the i"1 model year vehicles during
calendar year (n)
vips = The speed correction factor for the i^1 model year heavy-duty diesel vehicles for pollutant (p)
and average speed (s)
Values for Cipn are given in Table D.5-1 ; values for mjn are in Table D.5-2. The speed correction factor (vips) can
be computed using data in Table D.5-3. Table D.5-3 gives heavy-duty diesel HC, CO, and NOx emission factors in
grams per minute for idle operation, for an urban route with average speed of 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), and for
operation at an over-the-road speed of 60 mi/hr (97 km/hr).
12/75 Appendix D D.5-1
-------
CO
cc
O
I—
(j
<
u_
q
V)
5
UJ £C
I- <
1>
X<
2 Q
Ol2
f2 w
9^
x o
0 >
zm
LU 00
C5 "•{
go
H- I
1>
2°
$ "J
< QC
zg
§s>
o
cc
<3«
£ "J
iS
Z 0
O u.
CO
CC
5
in
O
u
XI
(0
0)
>
(Q
T3
(D
8
>
o
U
(D
C
O
tfl
E
in
m
o>
m
a>
s
r^
r^
O)
(O
r-
01
if)
T~.
^
r~.
"5
E
E
O)
E
j*
CT>
E
-i£
O)
4
O)
^
O)
4
^)
E
j*;
ro
I
O)
E
^
O5
E
Ol
E
^£
Ol
1
O
E
^
O)
^
"S
6
-*
~Si
1
CD
^
~5>
1
O)
CD
(U
>
Pollutant
00 O QOOOOOOOOOOi^tOOCS
r* CN corococococococococooicMt-i-
"
r- CD o)05O)O5c3)O5O)O5O5a>ooo)O'-:
03 •» ocicicJcJocidcicioaicnoo
CM CNCNCNCNCMCM OOOOOO'tCOCM
f» CM COCOCOCOCOCMCN'-'-
r» to OOTcioooocnO'-
oo ^ ooooooa>o>oo
CN CNCNCNCMCMCM'-'— *-
CO O t 00 CN
p^ oi ro w «- »-
•*•. C) 00
CN CN «- r- <-
00 CJ> O 00 CN
^ CN CO ^ ^
r-. cq 01 o «-_
CO st- CD O) 00
CN CN «- •-
00 O) Q CN
r^ CN n ^
r» CO en «-
06 •* 6 oci
CN CN «-
oo o> q
r* CN co
p> CO 05
06 M- 6
CN CN
CO O) O
r^ CN CO
|-~ cp C3)
CD 'W O
CN CN
oo en o
r~ CN co
f- ; CD O)
CD "t O
CN CN
CO OJ O
p-^ CN CO
r- co a>
cci 't d
CN CN
oq o> q
r^-' CN co
r- CD en
co *• ci
CN CM
= — cooocno^-CNCO'j-incDP^oocBO
^
-------
Table D.5-2. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
HEAVY-DUTY, DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLE TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
>13
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)a
0.077
0.135
0.134
0.131
0.099
0.090
0.082
0.062
0.045
0.033
0.025
0.015
0.064
Average annual
miles driven (b)D
70,000
70,000
70,000
70,000
62,000
50,000
46,000
43,000
42,000
30,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
a x b
5,390
9,450
9,380
9,170
6,138
4,500
3,772
2,666
1,890
990
625
375
1,600
Fraction
of annual
travel (m)c
0.096
0.169
0.168
0.164
0.110
0.080
0.067
0.048
0.034
0.018
0.011
0.007
0.029
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1972 (Reference 2).
bReference 2.
cm = ab/2/ab.
Table D.5-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY, DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
UNDER DIFFERENT OPERATING CONDITIONS3
(g/min)
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen oxides
(NOxasN02)
Operating mode
I Urban
Idle j (18mi/hr;29km/hr)
0.64
0.32
1.03
8.61
1.38
6.27
Over-the-road
(60mi/hr;97km/hr)
5.40
2.25
28.3
Data are obtained by analysis of results in Reference 1.
For average speeds less (han 18 mi/hr (29 kni/hr), the correction factor is
vips
1 O
Urban + (~ -1) Idle
O
Urban
(D.5-2)
Where: s is the average speed of interest (in rm/hr), and the urban and idle values (in g/min) are obtained from
Table D.5-3. For average speeds above 18 mi/hr (29 km/hr), the correction factor is
18
42S [(60-S) Urban + (S-18) Over the Road]
vips
(D.5-3)
Urban
Where: S is the average speed (in mi/hr) of interest. Urban and over-the-road values (in g/mm) aie obtained fiom
Table D.5-3. Emission factors for heavy-duty diesel vehicles assume all operation to be undei warmed-up vehicle
conditions. Temperature correction factors, therefore, are not included because ambient temperature has minimal
effects on warmed-up operation.
12/75
Appendix D
D.5-3
-------
D.5.3 Emissions of Other Pollutants
Emissions of sulfur oxides, sulfuric acid, particulate, aldehydes, and organic acids are summarized in Table
D.5-4.
Table D.5-4. SULFUR OXIDES, PARTICULATE,
ALDEHYDES, AND ORGANIC ACIDS
EMISSION FACTORS FOR HEAVY-DUTY,
DIESEL-POWERED VEHICLES
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulate
Sulfur oxides"
(SOxasS02)
Aldehydes
(asHCHO)
Organic acids
Emissions3
g/mi
1.3
2.8
0.3
0.3
g/km
0.81
1.7
0.2
0.2
aReference 3. Particulate does not include tire wear; see heavy-duty
gasoline vehicle section for tire wear emission factors
Data based on assumed fuel sulfur content of 0.20 percent. A fuel
economy of 4.6 mi/gal (2.0 km/liter) was used from Reference 4.
Sulfuric acid emissions range from 0.5 - 3.0 percent of the sulfur
oxides emissions, with the best estimate being 1 percent. These esti-
mates are based on engineering judgment rather than measurement
data.
D.5.4 Basic Assumptions
Hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide levels for heavy-duty diesel vehicles until model year 1978 are given by
Reference 1. An interim standard for diesel HDV that will restrict nitrogen oxides levels, but not hydrocarbon or
carbon monoxide levels, is expected to be implemented in 1978. For purposes of the projections, the nitrogen
oxides standard was assumed to be 9 grams per brake horsepower per hour. Nitrogen oxide emission standards in
California for 1975-1977 model year HDV are assumed to be equivalent to the national levels in 1978;
hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide levels in California will be the same as national levels. A separate table is not
given for California, but emissions are the same at those reported in Table D.5-1, with the exception of the
1975-1977 model years. It is assumed that the effect of altitude on diesel emissions is minimal and can be
considered negligible.3
References for Section D.5
1. Ingalls, M. N. and K. J. Springer. Mass Emissions from Diesel Trucks Operated Over a Road Course. Southwest
Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Under Contract No. 68-01-2113. Publication No. EPA-460/3-74-017. August 1974.
2. Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Washington, D. C. 1974.
3. Young T. C. Unpublished emission factor data on diesel engines. Engine Manufacturers Association Emission
Standards Committee, Chicago, 111. October 16, 1974.
4. Truck and Bus Fuel Economy. U. S. Department of Transportation, Cambridge, Mass, and Environmental
Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, Mich. November 1974.
D.5-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
D.6 MOTORCYCLES
D.6.1 General
Motorcycles are becoming an increasingly popular mode of transportation as reflected by steady increases in
sales over the past few years. A detailed discussion of motorcycles may be found in section 3.1.7.
D.6.2 Carbon Monoxide, Hydrocarbon, and Nitrogen Oxides Exhaust Emissions
The composite exhaust emission factor is calculated using:
enps
/ j
i=n-12
m
in vips
(D.6-1)
where: e
nps
Lipn
vi
ips
Composite emission factor in g/mi (g/km) for calendar year (n), pollutant (p), and average
speed (s)
The test procedure emission factor for pollutant (p) in g/mi (g/km) for the i*n model year in
calendar year (n)
The weighted annual travel of the i*h model year vehicles during calendar year (n). The
determination of this variable involves the use of the vehicle year distribution.
The speed correction factor for the itn model year vehicles for pollutant (p) and average speed
(s)
The emission factor results of the Federal Test Procedure (cjpn) as modified for motorcycles are summarized in
Tables D.6-1 through D.6-6. Table D.6-7 contains a sample calculation of the variable mjn using nationwide
statistics.2 Because there are no speed correction factor data for motorcycles, the variable Vj«s will be assumed to
equal one. The emission factor for particulate, sulfur oxide, and aldehyde and for ciankcase and evaporative
hydrocarbons are presented in Table D.6-8.
Table D.6-1. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE. HYDROCARBON AND NITROGEN
OXIDES EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR PRE-1977
AND 1977 CALENDAR YEARS
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1977a-b
1977b
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
30.6
28.0
g/km
19.0
17.4
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.1
5.0
g/km
5.0
3.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
0.2
0.25
g/km
0.1
0.16
aFactors for pre-1977 calendar years.
Factors for cafencfar year 1 977.
12/75
Appendix D
D.6-1
-------
Table D.6-2. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, H\ DROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1978
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1977
1977
1978
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi g/km
30.6 19.0
29.4 18.3
28.0 17.4
, Hydrocarbons
g/mi g/km
8.1
5.5
5.0
5.0
3.4
3.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi g/km
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.1
0.16
0.16
Table D.6-3. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1977
1977
1978
1979
Carbon
I monoxide
g/mi g/km
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
! 29.4 18.3
28.0 17.4
Nitrogen
Hydrocarbons oxides
g/mi g/km g/mi g/km
: |
8.1 5.0 0.2 0.1
6.0 3.7 0.25 0.16
5.5 i 3.4 0.25 0.16
5.0 3.1 0.25 0.16
Table D.6-4. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1980
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1977
1977
1978
1979
1980
i " " """" "
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi g/km
I '
30.6 i 19.0
30.6 i 19.0
30.6 ' 19.0
29.4 ! 18.3
28.0 ; 17.4
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.1
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
g/km
5.0
4.0
3.7
3.4
3.1
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi g/km
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.1
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
Table D.6-5. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDEES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1985
.
Location and
model year
Low altitude
Pre-1977
1977
1978
1979 !
1980
1981
1982
1983 |
1984
1985
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi g/km
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
30.6 19.0
29.4 18.3
2.1 1.3
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.0
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
0.41
g/km
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.7
4.3
4.0
3.7
3.4
0.25
Nitr
oxi
g/mi
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.4
Dgen
des
g/km
0.1
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.2
D.6-2
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
Table D.6-6. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROCARBON, AND NITROGEN OXIDES
EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1990
Location and
model year
Low altitude
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
30.6
30.6
30.6
30.6
30.6
30.6
30.6
30.6
3.1
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.3
1990 2.1
g/km
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
19.0 8.1
19.0 8.1
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.3
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.0
0.81
0.73
0.65
0.57
0.49
0.41
g/km
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
g/km
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.16
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Table D.6-7. SAMPLE CALCULATION OF FRACTION OF ANNUAL
MOTORCYCLE TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR
Age,
years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
>12
Fraction of total
vehicles in use
nationwide (a)a
0.04
0.20
0.19
0.16
0.10
0.09
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.0005
0.085
Average annual
miles driven (b)b
2,500
2,100
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,100
1,000
950
900
850
800
a x b
100
420
342
256
140
108
55
30
29
18
4
68
Fraction
of annual
travel (m)c
0.064
0.268
0.218
0.163
0.089
0.069
0.035
0.019
0.019
0.011
0.003
0.043
aVehicles in use by model year as of 1974 (Reference 2).
bReference 2.
cm = ab/2ab.
12/75
Appendix D
D.6-3
-------
Table D.6-8. SULFUR OXIDE, ALDEHYDE, AND CRANKCASE AND
EVAPORATIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS FOR MOTORCYCLES8
Pollutant
Hydrocarbons
Crankcase"
Evaporative0
Particulates
Sulfur oxidesd
(SOxasS02)
Aldehydes
(RCHOasHCHO)
Emissions
2-stroke engine
g/mi
_
0.36
0.33
0.038
0.11
g/km
_
0.22
0.21
0.024
0.068
4-stroke engine
g/mi
0.60
0.36
0.046
0.022
0.047
g/km
0.37
0.22
0.029
0.014
0.029
a Reference 1.
Most 2-stroke engines use crankcase induction and produce no crankcase losses.
cEvaporative emissions were calculated assuming that carburetor losses were negligible. Diurnal breathing of the fuel tank (a func-
tion of fuel vapor pressure, vapor space in the tank, and diurnal temperature variation I was assumed to account for all the evapora-
tive losses associated with motorcycles. The value presented is based on average vapor pressure, vapor space, and temperature
variation.
Calculated using a 0.043 percent sulfur content (by weight) for regular fuel used in 2-stroke engines and 0.022 percent sulfur con-
tent (by weight) for premium fuel used in 4-stroke engines.
D.6.3 Basic Assumptions
Baseline emission data are from Reference I. The motorcycle population was assumed to be 60 percent
4-stroke and 40 percent 2-stroke.
For the interim standards, deterioration factors for 1977 through 1984 were assumed to be: 10 percent per
calendar year for hydrocarbons, 5 percent per calendar year for carbon monoxide, and 0 percent per calendar
year for nitrogen oxides. For 1985 and beyond, deterioration factors are: 20 percent per calendar year for
hydrocarbon, 10 percent per calendar year for carbon monoxide, and 0 percent per calendar year for nitrogen
oxides. Motorcycles are assumed to deteriorate until they reach uncontrolled emission values. The deterioration
rate is a fixed percentage of base year emissions.
References for Section D.6
1. Hare, C. T. and K. J. Springer. Exhaust Emissions from Uncontrolled Vehicles and Related Equipment Using
Internal Combustion Engines. Part III, Motorcycles. Final Report. Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio,
Texas. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N. C. under Contract No. FHS
70-108. Publication No. APTD-1492. March 1973.
2. Motorcycle Usage and Owner Profile Study. Hendrix, Tucker and Walder, Inc., Los Angeles, Calif. March
1974.
D.6-4
EMISSION FACTORS
12/75
-------
D.7 ALL HIGHWAY VEHICLES
D.7.1 General
Emission factors for 1972 for all major classes of highway vehicle are summarized in section 3.1.1. A number
of scenarios that embody a range of local conditions, such as different ambient temperatures and average route
speeds, are considered. Although similar data for calendar years 1973 through 1990 are presented here, only one
scenario is presented. This single scenario is presented because it is general in nature and, therefore, most
appropriate for a range of applications. The authors, however, believe that projections of any significance should
be based on the data and methodologies presented in sections D.I through D.6 of this appendix The data
presented in this section are, clearly, only approximations and are useful only for rough estimates.
The scenario considers the four major highway vehicle classes: light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles (LDV);
light-duty, gasoline-powered trucks (LOT); heavy-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles (HDV); and heavy-duty,
diesel-powered vehicles (HDD). An average route speed of approximately 19.6 mi/hr (31.6 km/hr) is assumed.
The ambient temperature is assumed to be 24°C (75°F). Twenty percent of LDV and LOT operation is
considered to be in a cold operation; all HDV and HDG operation is taken to be in warmed-up condition. The
percentage of total vehicular travel by each of the vehicle classes is based on nationwide data.1 >2 The percentage
of travel by class is assumed to be 80.4 percent by LDV, 11.8 percent by LDT, 4.6 by HDV, and 3.2 percent by
HDD.
D.7.2 Emissions
Emissions for the five pollutants for all highway vehicles are presented in Table D.7-1. The results are only an
approximate indication of how future emission-controlled vehicles will influence the overall emissions from the
fleet of vehicles on the road. These values do not apply to high altitude areas, nor do they apply to vehicles in the
State of California.
Table D.7-1. AVERAGE EMISSION FACTORS FOR HIGHWAY VEHICLES
FOR SELECTED CALENDAR YEARS
Calendar
year
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1985
1990
Carbon
monoxide
g/mi
71.5
67.5
61.1
54.6
48.3
42.7
36.8
31.0
15.7
11.3
g/km
44.4
41.9
37.9
33.9
30.0
26.5
22.9
19.3
9.8
7.0
Hydrocarbons
g/mi
10.1
9.4
8.8
8.0
7.2
6.6
6.1
5.4
2.7
1.9
g/km
6.3
5.8
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.1
3.8
3.4
1.7
1.2
Nitrogen
oxides
g/mi
4.9
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.6
4.3
3.9
3.6
2.4
g/km
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
Sulfur
oxides3
g/mi
0.23
0.23
0.23
0.22
0.22
2.7 i 0.21
2.4 | 0.21
2.2
g/km
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.20 0.12
Particulate
g/mi
0.61
0.61
0.59
0.57
0.54
0.51
0.49
0.47
1.5 0.19 ! 0.12 0.41
2.0 1.2
0.19 0.12 0.40
i I
g/km
0.38
0.38
0.37
0.35
0.34
0.32
0.30
0.29
0.25
0.25
aFuel sulfur levels may be reduced m the future If so, sulfur oxides emissions will be reduced proportionately.
12/75
Appendix D
D.7-1
-------
References for Section D.7.
1. Highway Statistics 1971. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
D.C. 1972. p. 81
2. 1972 Census of Transportation. Truck Inventory and Use Survey. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Washington, D.C. 1974.
D.7-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/75
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read liiitructions on the reverse before completing)
: NO
3 RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE .
Supplement No. 5 for Compilation of Air Pollutant
5 REPORT DATE
December 1975
Emission Factors
Second Edition
6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Supplement
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
In this supplement for Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42), revised
and updated emissions data are presented for lignite combustion sources, for various
categories of mobile sources, for explosives manufacturing sources, and for fugitive
dust sources.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Emissions
Emission Factors
Air Pollutants
Processes
Mobile Sources
b IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19 SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21 NO. OF PAGES
158
20. SECURITY CLASS (This pagej
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
F-l
-------
-------
-------
------- |