AP4239
Supplement 9
C. \
SUPPLEMENT NO. 9
FOR
COMPILATION
OF AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION FACTORS,
THIRD EDITION (INCLUDING
SUPPLEMENTS 1-7)
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
UT«. ?" ' -
July 1979;
-------
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1.
2.
3.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION SOURCES
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
BITUMINOUS COAL COMBUSTION
ANTHRACITE COAL COMBUSTION
FUEL OIL COMBUSTION
NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
LIQUIFIED PETROLEUM GAS COMBUSTION
WOOD WASTE COMBUSTION IN BOILERS
LIGNITE COMBUSTION
BAGASSE COMBUSTION IN SUGAR MILLS
RESIDENTIAL FIREPLACES
WOOD STOVES
WASTE OIL DISPOSAL
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
REFUSE INCINERATION
AUTOMOBILE BODY INCINERATION
CONICAL BURNERS
OPEN BURNING
SEWAGE SLUDGE INCINERATION
INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE SOURCES
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
4.
5.
3.1
3.2
3.3
HIGHWAY VEHICLES
OFF-HIGHWAY MOBILE SOURCES
OFF-HIGHWAY STATIONARY SOURCES
EVAPORATION LOSS SOURCES
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
DRY CLEANING
SURFACE COATING
STORAGE OF PETROLEUM LIQUIDS
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETING OF PETROLEUM LIQUIDS
CUTBACK ASPHALT, EMULSIFIED ASPHALT AND ASPHALT CEMENT
SOLVENT DECREASING
CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
5.17
5.18
5.19
5.20
5.21
5.22
ADIPIC ACID
SYNTHETIC AMMONIA
CARBON BLACK
CHARCOAL
CHLOR-ALKALI
EXPLOSIVES
HYDROCHLORIC ACID
HYDROFLUORIC ACID
NITRIC ACID
PAINT AND VARNISH
PHOSPHORIC ACID
PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE
PLASTICS
PRINTING INK
SOAP AND DETERGENTS
SODIUM CARBONATE
SULFURIC ACID
SULFUR
SYNTHETIC FIBERS
SYNTHETIC RUBBER
TEREPHTHALIC ACID
LEAD ALKYL
Page
1
1.1-
... 1.1-
. . . 1.2-
1.3-
. . . 1.4-
1.5-
. . . 1.6-
. . . 1.7-1
. . . 1.8-1
. . . 1.9-1
. . . 1.10-1
... 1.11-1
. . . 2.0-1
... 2.1-1
. . . 2.2-1
. . . 2.3-1
. . . 2.4-1
. . . 2.5-1
. . . 3.0-1
. . . 3.0-1
. . . 3.1-1
. . . 3.2-1
. . . 3.3-1
. . . 4.1-1
. . . 4.1-1
. . . 4.2-1
. . . 4.3-1
. . . 4.4-1
. . . 4.5-1
. . . 4.6-1
. . . 5.1-1
. . . 5.1-1
. . . 5.2-1
. . . 5.3-1
. . . 5.4-1
. . . 5.5-1
. . . 5.6-1
. . . 5.7-1
. . . 5.8-1
. . . 5.9-1
. . . 5.10-1
... 5.11-1
. . . 5.12-1
. . . 5.13-1
. . . 5.14-1
. . . 5.15-1
. . . 5.16-1
. . . 5.17-1
. . . 5.18-1
. . . 5.19-1
. . . 5.20-1
. . . 5.21-1
. . . 5.22-1
111
-------
Page
6. FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY 6.1-1
6.1 ALFALFA DEHYDRATING ' 6.1-1
6.2 COFFEE ROASTING 6.2-1
6.3 COTTON GINNING 6.3-1
6.4 FEED AND GRAIN MILLS AND ELEVATORS 6.4-1
6.5 FERMENTATION 6.5-1
6.6 FISH PROCESSING 6.6-1
6.7 MEAT SMOKEHOUSES 6.7-1
6.8 AMMONIUM NITRATE FERTILIZERS 6.8-1
6.9 ORCHARD HEATERS 6.9-1
6.10 PHOSPHATE FERTILIZERS 6.10-1
6.11 STARCH MANUFACTURING 6.11-1
6.12 SUGAR CANE PROCESSING 6.12-1
6.13 BREAD BAKING 6.13-1
6.14 UREA 6.14-1
6.15 BEEF CATTLE FEEDLOTS 6.15-1
6.16 DEFOLIATION AND HARVESTING OF COTTON 6.16-1
7. METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY 7.1-1
7.1 PRIMARY ALUMINUM PRODUCTION 7.1-1
7.2 METALLURGICAL COKE PRODUCTION 7.2-1
7.3 PRIMARY COPPER SMELTING 7.3-1
7.4 FERROALLOY PRODUCTION 7.4-1
7.5 IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTION 7.5-1
7.6 PRIMARY LEAD SMELTING 7.6-1
7.7 ZINC SMELTING 7.7-1
7.8 SECONDARY ALUMINUM OPERATIONS 7.8-1
7.9 SECONDARY COPPER SMELTING AND ALLOYING 7.9-1
7.10 GRAY IRON FOUNDRIES .__ . . 7.10-1
7.11 SECONDARY LEAD'SMELTING 7 " 7.11-1
7.12 SECONDARY MAGNESIUM SMELTING 7.12-1
7.13 STEEL FOUNDRIES 7.13-1
7.14 SECONDARY ZINC PROCESSING 7.14-1
7.15 STORAGE BATTERY PRODUCTION 7.15-1
7.16 LEAD OXIDE AND PIGMENT PRODUCTION 7.16-1
7.17 MISCELLANEOUS LEAD PRODUCTS 7.17-1
7.18 LEADBEARING ORE CRUSHING AND GRINDING 7.18-1
8. MINERAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY 8.1-1
8.1 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PLANTS 8.1-1
8.2 ASPHALT ROOFING 8.2-1
8.3 BRICKS AND RELATED CLAY PRODUCTS 8.3-1
8.4 CALCIUM CARBIDE MANUFACTURING 8.4-1
8.5 CASTABLE REFRACTORIES 8.5-1
8.6 PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING 8.6-1
8.7 CERAMIC CLAY MANUFACTURING 8.7-1
8.8 CLAY AND FLY ASH SINTERING 8.8-1
8.9 COAL CLEANING 8.9-1
8.10 CONCRETE BATCHING 8.10-1
8.11 FIBER GLASS MANUFACTURING 8.11-1
8.12 FRIT MANUFACTURING 8.12-1
8.13 GLASS MANUFACTURING 8.13-1
8.14 GYPSUM MANUFACTURING 8.14-1
8.15 LIME MANUFACTURING 8.15-1
8.16 MINERAL WOOL MANUFACTURING 8.16-1
8.17 PERLITE MANUFACTURING 8.17-1
8.18 PHOSPHATE ROCK PROCESSING 8.18-1
8.19 SAND AND GRAVEL PROCESSING 8.19-1
8.20 STONE QUARRYING AND PROCESSING 8.20-1
9. PETROLEUM INDUSTRY 9.1-1
9.1 PETROLEUM REFINING 9.1-1
9.2 NATURAL GAS PROCESSING 9.2-1
IV
-------
Page
10. WOOD PRODUCTS INDUSTRY 10.1-1
10.1 CHEMICAL WOOD PULPING 10.1-1
10.2 PULPBOARD 10.2-1
103 PLYWOOD VENEER AND LAYQUTOPERATIONS 10.3-1
10_.4 WOODWORKING OPERATIONS ,, 10.4-i
11. MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES 11.1-1
11.1 FOREST WILDFIRES 11.1-1
11.2 FUGITIVE DUST SOURCES 11.2-1
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
FACTORLISTING C-l
APPENDIX D. PROJECTED EMISSION FACTORS FOR HIGHWAY VEHICLES D-l
APPENDIX E. TABLE OF LEAD EMISSION FACTORS E-l
-------
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR INSERTING SUPPLEMENT 9
INTO
AP-42
New pages iii through v replace pp. v through xxii. New Table of
Contents.
New pages 1 and 2 replace pp. 1 and 2. Editorial changes.
New pages 1.10-1 and 1.10-2 replace pp. 1.10-1 and 1.10-2. Editorial
changes.
Add new pages 1.11-1 and 1.11-2. New Section.
New page 2.0-1 replaces p. 2-1. Editorial changes.
New pages 2.1-1 through 2.1-5 replace pp. 2.1-1 through 2.1-5.
Editorial changes.
New page 3.0-1 replaces p. 3.0-1. Editorial changes.
New page 3.1-1 replaces p. 3.1.1-2. Editorial changes.
New pages 3.1.1-1 through 3.1.1-3 replace pp. 3.1.1-3 through
3.1.1-5. Editorial changes.
New pages 4.4-1 through 4.4-13 replace pp. 4.4-1 through 4.4-12.
Minor revision.
Add new pages 4.5-1 through 4.5-4. New Section.
Add new pages 4.6-1 through 4.6-5. New Section.
New pages 5.2-1 through 5.2-3 replace pp. 5.2-1 and 5.2-2. Major
revision.
New pages 5.3-1 through 5.3-8 replace pp. 5.3-1 through 5.3-5.
Major revision.
New page 5.5-2 replaces p. 5.5-2. Editorial changes.
New pages 5.17-5 and 5.17-7 replace pp. 5.17-5 and 5.17-7. Minor
revision.
Add new pages 5.22-1 and 5.22-2. New Section.
New page 6.9-4 replaces p. 6.9-4. Minor revision.
Add new page 6.13. New Section.
Add new pages 6.14-1 and 6.14-2. New Section.
Add new pages 6.15-1 through 6.15-3. New Section.
Add new pages 6.16-1 through 6.16-3. New Section.
Add new pages 7.3-7 and 7.3-8. New data for Section.
(over)
-------
(continued)
New page 7.5-1 replaces p. 7.5-1. Editorial changes.
New page 7.6-1 replaces p. 7.6-1. Editorial changes.
New page 7.9-5 replaces 7.9-5. Editorial changes.
Add new pages 7.9-7 and 7.9-8. New data for Section.
New page 7.10-1 replaces p. 7.10-1. Editorial changes.
Add new pages 7.15-1 through 7.15-3. New Section.
Add new pages 7.16-1 through 7.16-3. New Section.
Add new pages 7.17-1 through 7.17-3. New Section.
Add new pages 7.18-1 and 7.18-2. New Section.
Add new page 8.10-3. New data for Section.
New pages 10.1-1, -3, -5, -7, -9 replace pages with same numbers.
Editorial changes.
New pages 10.2-1 and 10.2-2 replace pp. 10.2-1 and 10.2-2. Editorial
changes.
New pages 10.3-1 and 10.3-2 replace pp. 10.3-1 and 10.3-2. Editorial
changes.
New page 10.4-1 replaces p. 10.4-1. Editorial changes.
Add new page 10.4-3. New data for Section.
New page 11.2.5-3 replaces p. 11.2.5-3. Minor revision.
New Appendix C, pages C-i through C- , replaces pp. C-l through
C-26. Major revision.
Add Appendix E, pages E-l through E-9. New Appendix.
New page a-1 replaces p. E-l. Editorial changes.
NOTE:
Any AP-42 pages contained in this supplement but not listed above are
reproduced only because they are the reverse side of a page that is
listed. Such unlisted pages are not changed in any way.
-------
COMPILATION
OF
AIR POLLUTION EMISSION FACTORS
INTRODUCTION
In the assessment of community air pollution, there is a critical need for accurate data on the
quantity and characteristics of emissions from the numerous sources that contribute to the problem.
The large number of individual sources and the diversity of source types make conducting field
measurements of emissions on a source-by-source basis at the point of release impractical. The only
feasible method of determining pollutant emissions for a given community is to make generalized
estimates of typical emissions from each of the source types.
One of the most useful (and logical) tools for estimating typical emissions is the "emission factor",
which is an estimate of the rate at which a pollutant is released to the atmosphere as a result of some
activity, such as combustion or industrial production, divided by the level of that activity (also
expressed in terms of a temporal rate). In other words, the emission factor relates the quantity of
pollutants emitted to some indicator (activity level) such as production capacity, quantity of fuel
burned, or vehicle miles traveled. In most cases, these factors are simply given as statistical or estimated
averages. That is, no empirical information on the various process parameters (temperature, reactant
concentrations, etc.) is considered in their calculation. However, for a few cases, such as in the
estimation of hydrocarbon emissions from petroleum storage tanks, precise empirical formulas
relating emissions to such variables as tank diameter, liquid storage temperature, and wind velocity
have been developed. Because of their superior precision, emission factors based on empirical formulas
are more desirable to obtain and can usually be given the highest accuracy rating. Factors derived from
statistical averages, however, if based on an adequate number of field measurements ("source tests"),
can also be both precise and accurate within practical and useful limits.
An example should illustrate how the factors are to be used:
Suppose a sulfuric acid plant, with a production rate of 200 tons/day of 100 percent acid, operates at
an overall SCh to SO3 conversion efficiency of 97 percent. Using the formula given as a footnote to Table
5.17-1 of this publication, the uncontrolled sulfur dioxide emissions can be calculated:
SO emissions = [-13.65 (% conversion efficiency) + 1365] * production rate
= [-13.65 (97%) + 1365] Ib/ton acid * 200 tons acid/day
= 40 Ib/ton acid * 200 tons acid/day
= 8000 Ib/day (3632 kg/day)
The emission factors presented in this report have been estimated using a wide spectrum of
techniques available for their determination. The preparation/revision of each factor section involves,
first of all, locating and obtaining all the known written information on that source category from such
sources as available literature, Environmental Protection Agency technical reports (including emission
test reports), and the National Emissions Data System point source file. After these data are reviewed,
organized, and analyzed, the process descriptions, process flowsheets, and other background portions
of the section are prepared. Then, using the compiled information, representative emission factors are
12/77 1
-------
developed for each pollutant emitted by each point source of the process category. As stated above,
these factors are usually obtained by simply averaging the respective numerical data obtained. When
feasible, the ranges in the factors are presented for further clarity. Occasionally, enough data exist to
permit the development of either empirical or theoretical formulas (or graphs) relating emission
factors to various process parameters such as stream temperature, sulfur content, or catalyst. In these
cases, representative values of these process parameters are selected and substituted into the formulas
or graphs to obtain representative emission factors, which are then tabulated. The pertinent formulas
and graphical data are also included in the section to allow the estimation of emission factors when the
process conditions differ from those selected as representative.
After the draft of a section is completed, it is circulated for technical review to various personnel
routinely familiar with the emission aspects of the particular activity. After these review comments are
obtained and evaluated, the final draft is written and submitted for editing and publication.
The limitations and applicability of emission factors must be understood. To give some notion of the
accuracy of the factors for a specific process, each set of factors has been ranked according to the
available data upon which it is based. Each rank is based on the weighting of the various
information categories used to obtain the factor(s). These categories and associated numerical values
are:
Measured emission data: 20 points maximum.
Process data: 10 points maximum.
Engineering analysis: 10 points maximum.
The emission data category rates the amount of measured (source test) data available for the
development of the factor. The process data category involves such considerations as the variability of
the process and its resultant effect on emissions, as well as the amount of available data on these
variables. Finally, the engineering analysis category is concerned with the available data upon which
a material balance or related calculation can be made.
Depending on which information categories were employed to develop it, each set of factors was
assigned a numerical score, ranging from 5 to 40. For example, if the factors developed for a certain
process were based on a large number of source tests, a moderate amount of process data, and no
engineering analysis work, the assigned score would be 20 + 5 = 25.
Each numerical score was, in turn, converted to a letter rank as follows:
Numerical Rank Letter Rank
5 or less E (Poor)
6 to 15 D (Below average)
16 to 25 C (Average)
26 to 35 B (Above average)
36 to 40 A (Excellent)
These rankings are presented on the tables throughout this publication.
The reader must be cautioned not to use these emission factors indiscriminately. That is, the
factors generally will not permit the calculation of accurate emissions measurements from an
individual installation. Only an on-site source test can provide data sufficiently accurate and precise to
use in such undertakings as design and purchase of control equipment or initiation of a legal action.
Factors are more valid when applied to a large number of processes, as, for example, when emission
inventories are conducted as part of community or areawide air pollution studies.
2 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
1.10 WOOD STOVES
1.10.1 General1
Small wood stoves are used primarily as domestic space heaters to supplement conventional heating systems,
particularly in the Northeastern United States. The common availability of wood and the increased cost of
conventional heating fuels has led to wider use of this type of residential heating unit. Wood combustion
produces significant emissions of particulates and carbon monoxide and an array of chemicals, aerosols, and tar,
depending upon the type of wood burned.
1.10.2 Process Description
Small wood stoves are usually box-shaped, made of cast iron, and have a flue that carries smoke from the
room. An adjustable intake vent controls the quantity of air available for combustion. Exhaust gases are removed
via the exhaust flue, which contains an adjustable damper. The rate of combustion is controlled by both the
damper and the intake vent. Wood is supported on grates, and ashes collect below for easy removal. Figure 1.10-1
illustrates a typical small wood stove.
EXHAUST FLUE
DAMPER
WOOD CHARGING DOOR
AIR INTAKE VENT
ASH REMOVAL DOOR
Figure 1.10-1. Small wood stove.
1.10.3 Emissions
Particulate emissions from wood are very sensitive to the amount of fuel added at one time, draft setting, fuel
moisture, and type of stove. Emission factors for wood stoves are presented in Table 1.10-1.
12/77
External Combustion Sources
1.10-1
-------
Table 1.10-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR
SMALL WOOD STOVES8
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: D
Pollutant
Particulate0
Carbon monoxide d
Emission factors'5
Ib/ton
4-30
260
kg/MT
2-15
130
aSmall wood stoves burning oak, pine, and birch wood.
''Emission factors expressed as pounds (kilograms)_of_po^lutant per
ton [metric ton (MT)] of wood burned. Wood tested ranged from 8 to
48% moisture content.
°Figures at the low end of this range are appropriate for small loads of
dry wood with abundant air. Figures at the upper end of the range re-
present common firing practices. Based on References 1 and 3.
Based on References 2 and 4.
References for Section 1.10
1. Butcher, S. S. and D. I. Buckley. A. Preliminary Study of Particulate Emissions from Small Wood Stoves.
J. Air Pollut. Contr. Ass. 27: 346-348, April 1977.
2. Shelton, J. W., T. Black, M. Chaffee, and M. Schwartz. Williams College, Williamstown, Ma. Wood Stove
Testing Methods and Some Preliminary Experimental Results. (Presented at American Society of Heating,
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Symposium, Atlanta, Ga. January 1978.)
3. Butcher, S. S. Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Me. Private communication to Pacific Environmental Services,
Santa Monica, Ca. E*ecember 9, 1977.
4. Shelton, J. W. Williams College, Williamstown, Ma. Private communication to Pacific Environmental
Services, Santa Monica, Ca. December 8, 1977.
1.10-2 EMISSION FACTORS 12/77
-------
1.11 WASTE OIL COMBUSTION
1.11.1 General
by Jake Summers, EPA
and Pacific Environmental Services
The largest source of waste oil is used automotive crankcase oil, originating mostly from automo-
bile service stations, and usually being found with small amounts of other automotive fluids. Other
sources of waste oil include metal working lubricants, heavy hydrocarbon fuels, animal and v egetable
oils and fats, and industrial oil materials.
In 1975, 57 percent of waste crankcase oil was consumed as alternative fuel in conventional boiler
equipment (Section 1.3). The remainder was refined (15 percent), blended into road oil or asphalt
(15 percent), or used for other nonfuel purposes (13 percent).1
1.11.2 Emissions and Controls
Lead emissions from burning waste oil depend on the lead content of the oil and on operating
conditions. Lead content may vary from 800 to 11,200 ppm.2 Average concentrations have been sug-
gested as 6,000' and as 10,000 ppm3. During normal operation, about 50 percent of the lead is emitted
as paniculate with flue gas.2.4 Combustion of fuel containing 10 percent waste oil gives paniculate
ranging from 14 to 19 percent lead. Ash content from combustion of fuels containing waste oil is higher
than that for distillate or residual fuel oil, ranging from 0.03 to 3.78 weight percent, and lead accounts
for about 35 percent of the ash produced in such combustion.2
Currently, controls are not usually applied to oil fired combustion sources. An exception is utility
boilers, especially in the northeastern United States. Pretreatment by vacuum distillation, solvent
extraction, settling and/or centrifuging minimizes lead emissions but may make waste oil use uneco-
nomical.2 High efficiency particulate control by means of properly operated and maintained fabric
filters is 99 percent effective for 0.5-1 urn diameter lead and other submicron-sized particulate, but
such a degree of control is infrequently used.2
Table 1.11-1. WASTE OIL COMBUSTION EMISSION FACTORS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Pollutant
Particulate3
Leadb
Emission factor
(kg/m3)
9.0 (A)
9.0 (P)
(lb/103gal)
75 (A)
75 (P)
References
6
1,2,3,5
letter A is for weight % of ash in the waste oil. To calculate the
particulate emission factor, multiply the ash in the oil by 9.0 to get
kilograms of particulate emitted per m3 waste oil burned. Example:
ash of waste oil is 0.5% the emission factor is 0.5 x 9.0 = 4.5 kg
particulate per m3 waste oil burned.
'The letter P indicates that the percent lead in the waste oil being pro-
cessed should be multiplied by the value given in the table in order to
obtain the emission factor. Average P= 1.0% (10,000 ppm). Refer to
Reference 6.
7/79
External Combustion Sources
1.11-1
-------
References for Section 1.11
1. S. Wyatt, et al., Preferred Standards Path Analysis on Lead Emissions from Stationary Sources,
Office -of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, September 1974.
2. S. Chansky, et al., Waste Automotive Lubricating Oil Reuse as a Fuel, EPA-600/5-74-032, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, September 1974.
3. Final Report of the API Task Force on Oil Disposal, American Petroleum Institute, New York,
NY, Ma> 1970.
4. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the
Lead Additive Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc.,
Cincinnati, OH, January 1976
5. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
1.11-2 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
2. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Revised by Robert Rosensteel
As defined in the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, the term "solid waste" means garbage, refuse, and other
discarded solid materials, including solid waste materials resulting from industrial, commercial, and agricultural
operations, and from community activities. It includes both combustibles and noncombustibles.
Solid wastes may be classified into four general categories: urban, industrial, mineral, and agricultural.
Although urban wastes represent only a relatively small part of the total solid wastes produced, this category has
a large potential for air pollution since in heavily populated areas solid waste is often burned to reduce the bulk
of material requiring final disposal.1 The following discussion will be limited to the urban and industrial waste
categories.
An average of 5.5 pounds (2.5 kilograms) of urban refuse and garbage is collected per capita per day in the
United States.2 This figure does not include uncollected urban and industrial wastes that are disposed of by other
means. Together, uncollected urban and industrial wastes contribute at least 4.5 pounds (2.0 kilograms) per
capita per day. The total gives a conservative per capita generation rate of 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) per day of
urban and industrial wastes. Approximately 50 percent of all the urban and industrial waste generated in the
United States is burned, using a wide variety of combustion methods with both enclosed and open
burning.3 Atmospheric emissions, both gaseous and particulate, result from refuse disposal operations that use
combustion to reduce the quantity of refuse. Emissions from these combustion processes cover a wide range
because of their dependence upon the refuse burned, the method of combustion or incineration, and other
factors. Because of the large number of variables involved, it is not possible, in general, to delineate when a higher
or lower emission factor, or an intermediate value should be used. For this reason, an average emission factor has
been presented.
References
1. Solid Waste - It Will Not Go Away. League of Women Voters of the United States. Publication Number 675.
April 1971.
2. Black, R.J., H.L. Hickman, Jr., A.J. Klee, A.J. Muchick, and R.D. Vaughan. The National Solid Waste
Survey: An Interim Report. Public Health Service, Environmental Control Administration. Rockville, Md.
1968.
3. Nationwide Inventory of Air Pollutant Emissions, 1968. U.S. DHEW, PHS, EHS, National Air Pollution
Control Administration. Raleigh, N.C. Publication Number AP-73. August 1970.
4/73 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 2.0-J
-------
-------
2.1 REFUSE INCINERATION Revised by R obert R osensteel
2.1.1 Process Description1 "4
The most common types of incinerators consist of a refractory-lined chamber with a grate upon which refuse
is burned. In some newer incinerators water-walled furnaces are used. Combustion products are formed by
heating and burning of refuse on the grate. In most cases, since insufficient underfire (undergrate) air is provided
to enable complete combustion, additional over-fire air is admitted above the burning waste to promote complete
gas-phase combustion. In multiple-chamber incinerators, gases from the primary chamber flow to a small
secondary mixing chamber where more air is admitted, and more complete oxidation occurs. As much as 300
percent excess air may be supplied in order to promote oxidation of combustibles. Auxiliary burners are
sometimes installed in the mixing chamber to increase the combustion temperature. Many small-size incinerators
are single-chamber units in which gases are vented from the primary combustion chamber directly into the
exhaust stack. Single-chamber incinerators of this type do not meet modern air pollution codes.
2.1.2 Definitions of Incinerator Categories1
No exact definitions of incinerator size categories exist, but for this report the following general categories and
descriptions have been selected:
1. Municipal incinerators - Multiple-chamber units often have capacities greater than 50 tons (45.3 MT)
per r'ay and are usually equipped with automatic charging mechanisms, temperature controls, and
movable grate systems. Municipal incinerators are also usually equipped with some type of particulate
control device, such as a spray chamber or electrostatic precipitator.
2. Industrial/commercial incinerators The capacities of these units cover a wide range, generally between
50 and 4,000 pounds (22.7 and 1,800 kilograms) per hour. Of either single- or multiple-chamber design,
these units are often manually charged and intermittently operated. Some industrial incinerators are
similar to municipal incinerators in size and design. Better designed emission control systems include
gas-fired afterburners or scrubbing, or both.
3. Trench incinerators - A trench incinerator is designed for the combustion of wastes having relatively high
heat content and low ash content. The design of the unit is simple: a U-shaped combustion chamber is
formed by the sides and bottom of the pit and air is supplied from nozzles along the top of the pit. The
nozzles are directed at an angle below the horizontal to provide a curtain of air across the top of the pit
and to provide air for combustion in the pit. The trench incinerator is not as efficient for burning wastes
as the municipal multiple-chamber unit, except where careful precautions are taken to use it for disposal
of low-ash, high-heat-content refuse, and where special attention is paid to proper operation. Low
construction and operating costs have resulted in the use of this incinerator to dispose of materials other
than those for which it was originally designed. Emission factors for trench incinerators used to burn
three such materials7 are included in Table 2.1-1.
4. Domestic incinerators This category includes incinerators marketed for residential use. Fairly simple in
design, they may have single or multiple chambers and usually are equipped with an auxiliary burner to
aid combustion.
2.1-1 EMISSION FACTORS 4/73
-------
CD
V)
O
CC
h"
z
0
o
1-
D
O
I
1-
§
CO
CC
e<
DC CJ
z -
1 cc
LU CC
co O
Dl_
1^
LL, (J
LU <
CC Z
0 0
II
00
co co
CC =
o
u.
2
g
i
LU
T
_a>
ra
1-
o
c/1
CD
-T3
X
O
c
0)
Ol
O
£j
2
o
|
O
O
i_
"D
i
QJ
^3
C
O
c
0
fe
°
J3
c/>
'x
o
d
CO
*
S
_t
l»
Q.
-
S
O)
-^
c
o
5
~
^
13)
j<:
c
o
1
^
S
o
L
r
-^
c
o
o
&
cn
"*
c
~i^
CD
Q.
>
H-»
O
4-1
O3
CD
C
o
c
LO
CO
LO
r-»
d
LO
"'
LO
r~.'
LO
CO
LO
CN
LO
CN
LO
«
O
CO
1
o
o
o
c
3
i_
5
E
CO
.c
u
0, «
15 .9-
Q. J-;
'y D
'E S
1
LO
CO
LO
rv
d
LO
LO
r^
LO
CO
LO
CN
LO
CN
r--
^j-
CO
i_u_
11
CO
C^*C '+^CCrofl,-
o o (u CM "~ u ~5) o
|ro.9-_cu "oOD^ 2 ^ ~
to "5 c E o **" "*"
= 2 w 1- 0 % J
£ LL. LL
LO
d «-
>- CN
o <-
LO
O CN
0 g>
T- 2
o S"
CO 2
LO LO
CN CN
0 O
d d
LO LO
P*.' CO
»
LO r»
CO
QJ
0) i- '~L
c*) 3 QJ
E -o £
aj E >
^5i '^- ro
C! Q_ C
|||
cu .t; .t;
o
Q
LO
,-J
CO
Q)
2
D)
CU
g>
2
S1
2
S1
~z.
Dl
CD
Z
^>
00
(rt
CO
o
'01
"5
"s
o.
c
I
3
J3
^
0
1
CD
O)
ro
CD
<£
CO
0)
'x
O
5
S-
3
3
essed a
a
x
LU
.fl
03
C
CO
£
a>
essed a
a
x
UJ
o
CD
-g
x
0
c
03
O)
O
c
ro
T3
03
03
a
x
LU
"D
_C
Ol
Q
.C
4--
CO
c
ro
in
rences !
QJ
CD
DC
03
'quipped with at li
QJ
CD
tors ar
CO
03
C
'G
c
"ro
a
munic
to
O
^
-*-
O
c
0
CJ
CD
O
o
CD
icienc
03
CD
CO
£
a
o
a
Q.
ro
o
CN
CN
-
-a
c
CO
o"
^
in"
m"
rences i
03
03
CC
O)
co
ro
T3
0
ro
O)
o
c
"(0
Q.
'o
'c
1
c
o
"O
CD
CO
00
-C
in
r
C
CO
0
in"
en
rences '
CD
tu
DC
_
4/73
Solid Waste Disposal
2.1-2
-------
5. Flue-fed incinerators - These units, commonly found in large apartment houses, are characterized by
the charging method of dropping refuse down the incinerator flue and into the combustion chamber.
Modified flue-fed incinerators utilize afterburners and draft controls to improve combustion efficiency
and reduce emissions.
6. Pathological incinerators - These are incinerators used to dispose of animal remains and other organic
material of high moisture content. Generally, these units are in a size range of 50 to 100 pounds (22.7 to
45.4 kilograms) per hour. Wastes are burned on a hearth in the combustion chamber. The units are
equipped with combustion controls and afterburners to ensure good combustion and minimal emissions.
7. Controlled air incinerators - These units operate on a controlled combustion principle in which the
waste is burned in the absence of sufficient oxygen for complete combustion in the main chamber. This
process generates a highly combustible gas mixture that is then burned with excess air in a secondary
chamber, resulting in efficient combustion. These units are usually equipped with automatic charging
mechanisms and are characterized by the high effluent temperatures reached at the exit of the
incinerators.
2.1.3 Emissions and Controls1
Operating conditions, refuse composition, and basic incinerator design have a pronounced effect on
emissions. The manner in which air is supplied to the combustion chamber or chambers has, among all the
parameters, the greatest effect on the quantity of particulate emissions. Air may be introduced from beneath the
chamber, from the side, or from the top of the combustion area. As underfire air is increased, an increase in
fly-ash emissions occurs. Erratic refuse charging causes a disruption of the combustion bed and a subsequent
release of large quantities of particulates. Large quantities of uncombusted particulate matter and carbon
monoxide are also emitted for an extended period after charging of batch-fed units because of interruptions in
the combustion process. In continuously fed units, furnace particulate emissions are strongly dependent upon
grate type. The use of rotary kiln and reciprocating grates results in higher particulate emissions than the use of
rocking or traveling grates.14 Emissions of oxides of sulfur are dependent on the sulfur content of the refuse.
Carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbon emissions may be significant and are caused by poor combustion
resulting from improper incinerator design or operating conditions. Nitrogen oxide emissions increase with an
increase in the temperature of the combustion zone, an increase in the residence time in the combustion zone
before quenching, and an increase in the excess air rates to the point where dilution cooling overcomes the effect
of increased oxygen concentration.14
Table 2.1-2 lists the relative collection efficiencies of particulate control equipment used for municipal
incinerators. This control equipment has little effect on gaseous emissions. Table 2.1-1 summarizes the
uncontrolled emission factors for the various types of incinerators previously discussed.
Table 2.1-2. COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF
MUNICIPAL INCINERATION PARTICULATE CONTROL SYSTEMS3
Type of system
Settling chamber
Settling chamber and water spray
Wetted baffles
Mechanical collector
Scrubber
Electrostatic precipitator
Fabric filter
Efficiency,
0 to 30
30 to 60
60
30 to 80
80 to 95
90 to 96
97 to 99
References 3, 5, 6, and 17 through 21.
2.1-3 EMISSION FACTORS 4/73
-------
References for Section 2.1
1. Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Final Report. Resources Research Incorporated, Reston, Virginia. Prepared
for National Air Pollution Control Administration, Durham, N.C., under Contract Number CPA-22-69-119.
April 1970.
2. Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources. U.S. DHEW, PHS, EHS,
National Air Pollution Control Administration. Washington, D.C. Publication Number AP-65. March 197u.
3. Danielson, J.A. (ed.). Air Pollution Engineering Manual. U.S. DHEW, PHS National Center for Air Pollution
Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Publication Number 999-AP-40. 1967. p. 413-503.
4. De Marco, J. et al. Incinerator Guidelines 1969. U.S. DHEW, Public Health Service. Cincinnati, Ohio.
SW-13TS. 1969. p. 176.
5. Kanter, C. V., R. G. Lunche, and A.P. Fururich. Techniques for Testing for Air Contaminants from
Combustion Sources. J. Air Pol. Control Assoc. 6^:191-199. February 1957.
6. Jens. W. and F.R. Rehm. Municipal Incineration and Air Pollution Control. 1966 National Incinerator
Conference, American Society of Mechnical Engineers. New York, May 1966.
7. Burkle, J.O., J. A. Dorsey, and B. T. Riley. The Effects of Operating Variables and Refuse Types on
Emissions from a Pilot-Scale Trench Incinerator. Proceedings of the 1968 Incinerator Conference, American
Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York. May 1968. p. 34-41.
8. Fernandas, J. H. Incinerator Air Pollution Control. Proceedings of 1968 National Incinerator Conference,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York. May 1968. p. 111.
9. Unpublished data on incinerator testing. U.S. DHEW, PHS, EHS, National Air Pollution Control
Administration. Durham, N.C. 1970.
10. Stear, J. L. Municipal Incineration: A Review of Literature. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Programs. Research Triangle Park, N.C. OAP Publication Number AP-79. June 1971.
11. Kaiser, E.R. et al. Modifications to Reduce Emissions from a Flue-fed Incinerator. New York University.
College of Engineering. Report Number 552.2. June 1959. p. 40 and 49.
12. Unpublished data on incinerator emissions. U.S. DHEW, PHS, Bureau of Solid Waste Management.
Cincinnati, Ohio. 1969.
13. Kaiser, E.R. Refuse Reduction Processes in Proceedings of Surgeon General's Conference on Solid Waste
Management. Public Health Service. Washington, D.C. PHS Report Number 1729. July 10-20, 1967.
14. Nissen, Walter R. Systems Study of Air Pollution from Municipal Incineration. Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Cambridge, Mass. Prepared for National Air Pollution Control Administration, Durham, N.C., under Contract
Number CPA-22-69-23. March 1970.
4/73 Solid Waste Disposal 2.1 -4
-------
15. Unpublished source test data on incinerators. Resources Research, Incorporated. Reston, Virginia.
1966-1969.
16. Communication between Resources Research, Incorporated, Reston, Virginia, and Maryland State
Department of Health, Division of Air Quality Control, Baltimore, Md. 1969.
17. Rehm, F.R. Incinerator Testing and Test Results. J. Air Pol. Control Assoc. 6:199-204. February 1957.
18. Stenburg, R.L. et al. Field Evaluation of Combustion Air Effects on Atmospheric Emissions from Municipal
Incinerations. J. Air Pol. Control Assoc. 72:83-89. February 1962.
19. Smauder, E.E. Problems of Municipal Incineration. (Presented at First Meeting of Air Pollution Control
Association, West Coast Section, Los Angeles, California. March 1957.)
20. Gerstle, R. W. Unpublished data: revision of emission factors based on recent stack tests. U.S. DHEW, PHS,
National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
21. A Field Study of Performance of Three Municipal Incinerators. University of California, Berkeley, Technical
Bulletin. 6:41, November 1957.
EMISSION FACTORS 4/73
-------
-------
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 NO?) 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 with 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.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
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.
1975 Federal Test Procedure (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.
12/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.0-1
-------
-------
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 contiol 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 calendai 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 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 GeneralEmission 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 NOX 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
42/75 Internal Combustion Engine Sources 3.1.1 - J ,
-------
CM
r-.
O>
T
DC
<
LU
Q
Z
LU
O
V)
LU
LU CQ
x<
CDQC
COLL
II
OC/5
O
<
cc
LU
CO
_QJ
J3
ra
.0
.c
CD
to
.S"
£
o
»+-
y
$.
o
H-
c
o
"E
LJJ
CO
c
o
c
cS
*- "O
CO g
CD
"5
4-<
u.
ro
8-S
o S
12
c
o
ra
Q
-^-
c S
O X
o n
-C £
3|
Cold
operation
01
Is
< t
01 a> -D
2-50
l|
> 5
E
O)
E
01
E
en
E
O)
F
01
F
J
en
O)
S?
U_
o
1
i
X
E
,-,-,-,- OOOO «- £i «- .-
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
corococo cocococo oooo co
CMCMCMCM «-»-«-i- CMCMCMCM CM
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
ro co co co cocococo ro co co fo co
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
§OOO "S-^-f^- OOOO O
CD CD CD LO LO LO LO CD 'CJ to CD CD
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
o^cncn CD o> «* f ococooo o
CO CO CM CM CMCMCMCM COCOCMCM LO
CTJ^CDCD CNr^OOCO COCOLOLO O
r)-LO^^^«a-COCO^LO^^ 00
^^^OTOOtO^O^^f,, o.
COOOC53CO CDI^COCO r^OOOJLO CM
COOCOrfCDCOCO^CMr^CDLO P-
LO co p ^ oq r- r- ^ cq r~ CD ^ LO
K o ci i *t co' r~-' o' ^r oo CM LO' LO co"
w. "-. LO oo
I^O5r-CM r^O3'~CM P^» r CM CM
OOOO OOOO OOOO O
CMCMOO CMOJOO CMCMOO
CM>-CM'- CM^-CM>- CM i- CM «- CM
LOOLOO LOOLOO LOOlflO LO
CO CO CD LO
«-' «-' r-' CM'
co co co r^
CD CO CO
O3 o) o^ LO
it in it i!
to to O QJ co
z. 12. a z
3.1.1-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
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 3.1.1-3
-------
-------
4.4 TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETING Chad
OF PETROLEUM LIQUIDS1
Audrt
4.4.1 Process Description
As Figure 4.4.1 indicates, the transportation and marketing of petroleum liquids involves many distinct
operations, each of which represents a potential source of hydrocarbon evaporation loss. Crude oil is trans-
ported from production operations to the refinery by tankers, barges, tank cars, tank trucks, and pipelines.
In the same manner, refined petroleum products are conveyed to fuel marketing terminals and
petrochemical industries by tankers, barges, tank cars, tank trucks, and pipelines. From the fuel
marketing terminals, the fuels are delivered by tank trucks to service stations, commercial accounts, and
local bulk storage plants. The final destination for gasoline is usually a motor vehicle gasoline tank. A
similar distribution path may also be developed for fuel oils and other petroleum products.
4.4.2 Emissions and Controls
Evaporate hydrocarbon emissions from the transportation and marketing of petroleum liquids may be
separated into four categories, depending on the storage equipment and mode of transportation used:
1. Large storage tanks: Breathing, working, and standing storage losses.
2. Marine vessels, tank cars, and tank trucks: Loading, transit, and ballasting losses.
3. Service stations: Bulk fuel drop losses and underground tank breathing losses.
4. Motor vehicle tanks: Refueling losses.
(In addition, evaporative and exhaust emissions are also associated with motor vehicle operation. These
topics are discussed in Chapter 3.)
4.4.2.1 Large Storage Tanks Losses from storage tanks are thoroughly discussed in Section 4.3.
4.4.2.2 Marine Vessels, Tank Cars, and Tank Trucks Losses from marine vessels, tank cars, and tank
trucks can be categorized into loading losses, transit losses, and ballasting losses.
Loading losses are the primary source of evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from marine vessel,
tank car, and tank truck operations. Loading losses occur as hydrocarbon vapors residing in empty cargo
tanks are displaced to the atmosphere by the liquid being loaded into the cargo tanks. The hydrocarbon
vapors displaced from the cargo tanks are a composite of (1) hydrocarbon vapors formed in the empty
tank by evaporation of residual product from previous hauls and (2) hydrocarbon vapors generated in
the tank as the new product is being loaded. The quantity of hydrocarbon losses from loading opera-
tions is, therefore, a function of the following parameters.
Physical and chemical characteristics of the previous cargo.
Method of unloading the previous cargo.
Operations during the transport of the empty carrier to the loading terminal.
Method of loading the new cargo.
Physical and chemical characteristics of the new cargo.
7/79 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-1
-------
CD
O
D.
CD
£
O
'c
CD
O)
^
O
M
O
o
in
O
T3
c
CD
d5
c
'c
c
o
o
E S
St
Q. 0}
M- >
O >
u. c
^2
1 CD
^ «
t.l
= 8
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
The principal methods of loading cargo carriers are presented in Figures 4.4-2, 4.4-3 and 4.4-4. In the
splash loading method, the fill pipe dispensing the cargo is only partially lowered into the cargo tank. Signif-
icant turbulence and vapor/liquid contact occur during the splash loading operation, resulting in high
levels of vapor generation and loss. If the turbulence is high enough, liquid droplets will be entrained in the
vented vapors.
FILL PIPE
VAPOR EMISSIONS
-HATCH COVER
$ CARGO TANK
Figure 4.4-2. Splash loading method.
VAPOR EMISSIONS
FILL PIPE
HATCH COVER
=,-_-= CARGO TANK
Figure 4.4-3. Submerged fill pipe.
A second method of loading is submerged loading. The two types of submerged loading are the
submerged fill pipe method and the bottom loading method. In the submerged fill pipe method, the fill pipe
descends almost to the bottom of the cargo tank. In the bottom loading method, the fill pipe enters the cargo
tank from the bottom. During the major portion of both methods of submerged loading, the fill pipe
opening is positioned below the liquid level. The submerged loading method significantly reduces liquid
turbulence and vapor/liquid contact, thereby resulting in much lower hydrocarbon losses than en-
countered during splash loading methods.
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.4-3
-------
VAPOR VENT
TO RECOVERY
OR ATMOSPHERE
HATCH CLOSED
VAPORS
CARGO TANK
FILL PIPE
Figure 4.4-4. Bottom loading.
The history of a cargo carrier is just as important a factor in loading losses as the method of loading. If the
carrier has just been cleaned or has carried a nonvolatile liquid such as fuel oil, it will be full of clean air
immediately prior to loading. If it has just carried gasoline and has not been vented, the carrier will be full of
air saturated with hydrocarbon vapor. In the latter case, the residual vapors are expelled along with newly
generated vapors during the subsequent loading operation.
Some cargo carriers are designated to transport only one product. In this situation, tanks are not cleaned
between trips and so return for loading containing air fully or partially saturated with vapor. The extent of
this situation differs for marine vessels, tank cars, large and small tank trucks. It also varies with ownership
of the carrier, petroleum liquid being transported, geographic location, season of the year, and control
measure employed.
Gasoline tank trucks may be in "dedicated balance service", where the truck picks up the vapors
displaced during unloading operations and transports them in the tank back to the loading terminal. Figure
4.4-5 shows a tank truck in dedicated vapor balance service unloading gasoline to an underground service
station tank and filling up with displaced gasoline vapors to be returned to the truck loading terminal.
The vapors in an "empty" gasoline tank truck in dedicated balance service are normally saturated with
hydrocarbons. Dedicated balance service is not usually practiced with marine vessels.
Emissions from loading hydrocarbon liquid can be estimated (within 30 percent) using the following
expression:
LL = 12.46
SPM
(1)
where:
M
P
T
S
Loading loss, lb/103 gal of liquid loaded.
Molecular weight of vapors, Ib/lb-mole (see Table 4.3-1).
True vapor pressure of liquid loading, psia (see Figures 4.3-8 and 4.3-9, and Table 4.3-1).
Bulk temperature of liquid loaded, °R.
A saturation factor (see Table 4.4-1).
4.4-4
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
MANIFOLD FOR RETURNING VAPORS
VAPOR VENT LINE
TRUCKSTORAG
COMPARTMENTS
PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES
X
/llll\ltlltltl/7r;V
1
\ u
v\Mitmm\
UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANK
Figure 4.4-5. Tank truck unloading into an underground service station storage tank.
Tank truck is practicing "vapor balance" form of vapor control.
The saturation factor (S) represents the expelled vapor's fractional approach to saturation, and it accounts
for the variations observed in emission rates from the different unloading and loading methods. Table
4.4-1 lists suggested saturation factors (S).
Ballasting operations are a major source of hydrocarbon emissions associated with unloading petroleum
liquids at marine terminals. It is common practice for large tankers to fill several cargo tanks with water
after unloading their cargo. This water, termed ballast, improves the stability of the empty tanker on rough
seas during the subsequent return voyage. Ballasting emissions occur as hydrocarbon laden air in the
empty cargo tank is displaced to the atmosphere by ballast water being pumped into the empty cargo
tank. Although ballasting practices vary quite a bit, individual cargo tanks are ballasted about 80 percent,
and the total vessel is ballasted approximately 40 percent, of capacity. Ballasting emissions from gasoline
and crude oil tankers are approximately 0.8 and 0.6 lb/103 gal., respectively, based on total tanker capacity.
These estimates are for motor gasolines and medium volatility crudes (RVP5 psia).2 Upon arrival in port,
this ballast water is pumped from the cargo tanks before loading the new cargo. The ballasting of cargo
tanks reduces the quantity of vapor returning in the "empty" tanker, thereby reducing the quantity of
vapors emitted during subsequent tanker loading operations.
Recent studies on gasoline loading losses from ships and barges have led to the development of more
accurate emission factors for these specific loading operations. These factors are presented in Table 4.4-2
and should be used instead of Equation (1) for gasoline loading operations at marine terminals.2
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.4-5
-------
Table 4.4-1. S FACTORS FOR CALCULATING PETROLEUM
LOADING LOSSES
Cargo carrier
Tank trucks and tank cars
Marine vessels3
Mode of operation
Submerged loading of aclean
cargo tank
Splash loading of a clean
cargo tank
Submerged loading: normal
dedicated service
Splash loading: normal
dedicated service
Submerged loading: dedicated
vapor balance service
Splash loading: dedicated
vapor balance service
Submerged loading:ships
Submerged loading: barges
S factor
0.50
1.45
0.60
1.45
1.00
1.00
0.2
0.5
aTo be used for products other than gasoline: use factors from Table 4.4-2 for marine load-
ing of gasoline.
Sample Calculation - Loading losses from a gasoline tank in dedicated balance service and practicing
vapor recovery would be calculated as follows, using Equation (1).
Design basis:
Tank truck volume is 8000 gallons
Gasoline RVP is 9 psia
Dispensing temperature is 80° F
Vapor recovery efficiency is 95%
Loading loss equation:
LL = 12.46
SPM
/, eff \
I1 - Too)
where: S = Saturation factor (see Table 4.4-1) = 1.0
P = True vapor pressure of gasoline (see Figure 4.3-8) = 6.6 psia
M= Molecular weight of gasoline vapors (see Table 4.3-1) ~ 66
4.4-6
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
T = Temperature of gasoline = 540° R
eff= The control efficiency = 95%
LL = 12.46 d-Q (564.6j_
= 0.50 lb/103 gal
Total loading losses are
(0.50 lb/103 gal) (8.0 x 103 gal) = 4.0 Ib of hydrocarbon
95 \
TOO"/
Table 4.4-2. HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS FOR GASOLINE LOADING OPERATIONS
Vessel tank condition
Cleaned and vapor
free
lb/103 gal
transferred
kg/103 liter
transferred
Ballasted
lb/103 gal
transferred
kg/103 liter
transferred
Uncleaned - dedicated
service
lb/103 gal
transferred
kg/103 liter
transferred
Average cargo tank
condition
lb/103 gal
transferred
kg/103 liter
transferred
Hydrocarbon emission factors
Ships
Range
0 to 2.3
0 to 0.28
0.4 to 3
0.05 to 0.36
0.4 to 4
0.05 to 0.48
a
Average
1.0
0.12
1.6
0.19
2.4
0.29
1.4
0.17
Ocean barges
Range
0 to 3
0 to 0.36
0.5 to 3
0.06 to 0.36
0.5 to 5
0.06 to 0.60
a
Average
1.3
0.16
2.1
0.25
3.3
0.40
a
Barges
Range
a
b
1.4 to 9
0.17 to 1.08
a
Average
1.2
0.14
b
4.0
0.48
4.0
0.48
aThese values are not available.
bBarges are not normally ballasted.
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.4-7
-------
Control measures for reducing loading emissions include the application of alternate loading methods
producing lower emissions and the application of vapor recovery equipment. Vapor recovery equipment
captures hydrocarbon vapors displaced during loading and ballasting operations and recovers the hydro-
carbon vapors by the use of refrigeration, absorption, adsorption, and/or compression. Figure 4.4-6 demon-
strates the recovery of gasoline vapors from tank trucks during loading operation at bulk terminals. Control
efficiencies range from 90 to 98 percent, depending on the nature of the vapors and on the type of recovery
equipment employed.4
VAPOR RETURN LINE
VAPOR FREE
AIR VENTED TO
ATMOSPHERE
TRUCK ^
STORAGE \
COMPARTMENTS\
PRODUCT FROM
LOADING TERMINAL
STORAGE TANK
Figure 4.4-6. Tank truck loading with vapor recovery.
Emissions from controlled loading operations can be calculated by multiplying the uncontrolled
emission rate calculated in Equations (1) and (2) by the control efficiency term:
r n _ efficiency ]
L 1 inn J
In addition to loading and ballasting losses, losses occur while the cargo is in transit. Transit losses are
similar in many ways to breathing losses associated with petroleum storage (refer to Section 4.3). Experi-
mental tests on tankers and barges have indicated that transit losses can be calculated using Equation (2):3
LT = 0.1 PW
(2)
where: L-p
P
W
Transit loss, lb/week-103 gal transported.
True vapor pressure of the transported liquid, psia (see Figures 4.3-8 and 4.3-9, and
Table 4.3-1).
Density of the condensed vapors, Ib/gal (see Table 4.3-1).
In the absence of specific inputs for Equations (1) and (2), typical evaporative hydrocarbon emissions
from loading operations are presented in Table 4.4-3. It should be noted that, although the crude oil used to
calculate the emission values presented in Table 4.4-3 has an RVP of 5, the RVP of crude oils can range
from less than 1 to 10. In areas where loading and transportation sources are major factors affecting
the air quality, it is advisable to obtain the necessary parameters and to calculate emission estimates from
Equations (1) and (2).
4.4-8
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Emissions from gasoline trucks have been studied by a combination of theoretical and experimental
techniques, and typical emission values are presented in Table 4.4-S.7'8 Emissions depend upon the extent
of venting from the tank truck during transit, which in turn depends on the tightness of the truck, the pres-
sure relief valve settings, the pressure in the tank at the start of the trip, the vapor pressure of the fuel being
transported, and the degree of saturation (with fuel vapor) of the vapor space in the tank. The emissions are
not directly proportional to the time spent in transit. As the leakage rate of the truck increases, emissions
increase up to a point and then level off as other factors take over in determining the rate. Tank trucks
in dedicated vapor balance service typically contain saturated vapors, and this leads to lower emissions
during transit, because no additional fuel evaporates to raise the pressure in the tank to cause venting.
Table 4.4-3 lists "typical" values for emissions and "extreme" values which could occur in the unlikely
event that all determining factors combined to cause maximum emissions.
Table 4.4-3. HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM LIQUID
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETING SOURCES
Emission source
Tank cars/trucks
Submerged loading - normal
service
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Splash loading - normal
service
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Submerged loading - balance
service
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Splash loading - balance service
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Transit - loaded with fuel
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Product emission factors3
Gasolineb
5
0.6
12
1.4
8
1.0
8
1.0
0-0.1
typical
0-0.08
extreme
0-0.001
typical
0-0.009
extreme
Crude
oilc
3
0.4
7
0.8
5
0.6
5
0.6
e
e
e
e
Jet
naphtha
(JP-4)
1.5
0.18
4
0.5
2.5
0.3
2.5
0.3
e
e
e
e
Jet
kerosene
0.02
0.002
0.04
0.005
d
d
e
e
e
e
Distillate
oil
No. 2
0.01
0.001
0.03
0.004
d
d
e
e
e
e
Residual
oil
No. 6
0.0001
0.00001
0.0003
0.00004
d
d
e
e
e
e
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.4-9
-------
Table 4.4-3 (continued). HYDROCARBON EMISSION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM LIQUID
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETING SOURCES
Emission source
Transit - return with vapor
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Marine vessels
Loading tankers
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Loading barges
lb/103 gal transferred
kg/103 liters transferred
Tanker ballasting
lb/103 gal cargo capacity
kg/103 liters cargo capacity
Transit
Ib/week - 1 03 gal transported
kg/week - 103 liters
transported
Product emission factors3
Gasoline13
0-0.11
typical
0-0.37
extreme
0-0.013
typical
0-0.44
extreme
f
f
f
0.8
0.10
3
0.4
Crude
oilc
e
e
e
e
0.07
0.08
1.7
0.20
0.6
0.07
0
0.1
Jet
naphtha
(JP-4)
e
e
e
e
0.05
0.06
1.2
0.14
e
0.7
0.08
Jet
kerosene
e
e
e
e
0.005
0.0006
0.0013
0.0016
e
0.005
0.0006
Distillate
oil
No. 2
e
e
e
e
0.005
0.0006
0.012
0.0014
e
0.005
0.0006
Residual
oil
No. 6
e
e
e
e
0.00004
5 x 10-6
0.00009
1.1 x10~5
e
3 x 10-5
4 x 10~6
Emission factors are calculated for dispensed fuel temperature of 60°F.
'The example gasoline has an RVP of 10 psia.
The example crude oil has an RVP of 5 psia.
dNot normally used.
eNot available.
'See Table 4.4-2 for these emission factors.
4.4.2.3 Service Stations - Another major source of evaporative hydrocarbon emissions is the filling of
underground gasoline storage tanks at service stations. Normally, gasoline is delivered to service stations
in large (8000 gallon) tank trucks. Emissions are generated when hydrocarbon vapors in the underground
storage tank are displaced to the atmosphere by the gasoline being loaded into the tank. As with other
4.4-10
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
loading losses, the quantity of the service station tank loading loss depends on several variables, including
the size and length of the fill pipe, the method of filling, the tank configuration and the gasoline temperature,
vapor pressure, and composition. An average hydrocarbon emission rate for submerged filling is 7.3 lb/103
gallons of transferred gasoline, and the rate for splash filling is 11.5 lb/103 gallons of transferred gasoline
(Table 4.4-4).4
Table 4.4-4. HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM GASOLINE
SERVICE STATION OPERATIONS
Emission source
Filling underground tank
Submerged filling
Splash filling
Balanced submerged filling
Underground tank breathing
and emptyings
Vehicle refueling operations
Displacement losses
(uncontrolled)
Displacement losses
(controlled)
Spillage
Emission rate
lb/103 gal
throughput
7.3
11.5
0.3
1
9
0.9
0.7
kg/103 liters
throughput
0.88
1.38
0.04
0.12
1.08
0.11
0.084
Emissions include any vapor loss from the underground tank to the gas pump.
Emissions from underground tank filling operations at service stations can be reduced by the use of the
vapor balance system (Figure 4.4-5). The vapor balance system employs a vapor return hose which returns
gasoline vapors displaced from the underground tank to the tank truck storage compartments being
emptied. The control efficiency of the balance system ranges from 93 to 100 percent. Hydrocarbon emis-
sions from underground tank filling operations at a service station employing the vapor balance system and
submerged filling are not expected to exceed 0.3 lb/103 gallons of transferred gasoline.
A second source of hydrocarbon emissions from service stations is underground tank breathing. Breath-
ing losses occur daily and are attributed to temperature changes, barometric pressure changes, and
gasoline evaporation. The type of service station operation also has a large impact on breathing losses. An
average breathing emission rate is 1 lb/103 gallons throughput.5
4.4.2.4 Motor Vehicle Refueling - An additional source of evaporative hydrocarbon emissions at service
stations is vehicle refueling operations. Vehicle refueling emissions are attributable to vapors displaced
from the automobile tank by dispensed gasoline and to spillage. The quantity of displaced vapors is de-
pendent on gasoline temperature, auto tank temperature, gasoline RVP, and dispensing rates. Although
several correlations have been developed to estimate losses due to displaced vapors, significant contro-
versy exists concerning these correlations. It is estimated that the hydrocarbon emissions due to vapors
displaced during vehicle refueling average 9 lb/103 gallons of dispensed gasoline.4'5
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources?
4.4-11
-------
The quantity of spillage loss is a function of the type of service station, vehicle tank configuration,
operator technique, and operation discomfort indices. An overall average spillage loss is 0.7 lb/103 gallons
of dispensed gasoline.6
Control methods for vehicle refueling emissions are based on conveying the vapors displaced from the
vehicle fuel tank to the underground storage tank vapor space through the use of a special hose and nozzle
(Figure 4.4-7). In the "balance" vapor control system, the vapors are conveyed by natural pressure dif-
ferentials established during refueling. In "vacuum assist" vapor control systems, the conveyance of
vapors from the auto fuel tank to the underground fuel tank is assisted by a vacuum pump. The overall
control efficiency of vapor control systems for vehicle refueling emissions is estimated to be 88 to 92
percent.4
SERVICE
STATION
PUMP
Figure 4.4-7. Automobile refueling vapor recovery system.
References for Section 4.4
1. C. E. Burklin and R. L. Honercamp, Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors, EPA-450/3-76-
039, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1976.
2. C. E. Burklin, et al., Background Information on Hydrocarbon Emissions from Marine Terminal Operations,
2 Vols., EPA-450/3-76-038a and -038b, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
November 1976.
3. Evaporation Loss from Tank Cars, Tank Trucks and Marine Vessels, Bulletin No. 2514, American Petroleum
Institute, Washington, DC, 1959.
4. C.E. Burklin, et al., A Study of Vapor Con trol Methods for Gasoline Marketing Operations, 2 Vols., EPA-450-
3-75-046A and -046B. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1975.
4.4-12
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
5. Investigation of Passenger Car Refueling Losses: Final Report, 2nd year Program, APTD-1453, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1972.
6. Mathematical Expressions Relating Evaporative Emissions from Motor Vehicles to Gasoline Volatility, Bulletin
No. 4077, American Petroleum Institute, Plumsteadville, PA, March 1971.
7. R. A. Nichols, Analytical Calculation of Fuel Transit Breathing Loss, Chevron USA, Inc., San Francisco, CA,
March 21, 1977.
8. R. A. Nichols, Tank Truck Leakage Measurements, Chevron USA, Inc., San Francisco, CA, June 7, 1977.
9. Delivery Tank Field Results, Staff Report 77-5-1, Attachment 2, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento,
CA, March 15, 1977.
7/79 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.4-13
-------
-------
4.5 CUTBACK ASPHALT, EMULSIFIED ASPHALT AND ASPHALT Tom Lahre
CEMENT
4.5.1 Generall-3
Asphalt surfaces and pavements are composed of compacted aggregate and an asphalt binder. Aggregate
materials are produced from rock quarries as manufactured stone or are obtained from natural gravel or soil
deposits. Metal ore refining processes produce artificial aggregates as a byproduct. In asphalt, the
aggregate performs three functions. It transmits the load from the surface to the base course, takes the
abrasive wear of traffic, and provides a nonskid surface. The asphalt binder holds the aggregate together,
preventing displacement and loss of aggregate and providing a waterproof cover for the base.
Asphalt binders take the form of asphalt cement (the residue of the distillation of crude oils) and liquified
asphalts. To be used for pavement, asphalt cement, which is semisolid, must be heated prior to mixing with
aggregate. The resulting hot mix asphalt concrete is generally applied in thicknesses of from two to six
inches. Liquified asphalts are (1) asphalt cutbacks (asphalt cement thinned or "cutback" with volatile
petroleum distillates such as naptha, kerosene, etc.) and (2) asphalt emulsions (nonflammable liquids pro-
duced by combining asphalt and water with an emulsifying agent, such as soap). Liquified asphalts are used
in tack and seal operations, in priming roadbeds for hot mix application, and for paving operations up to
several inches thick.
Cutback asphalts fall into three broad categories: rapid cure (RC), medium cure (MC), and slow cure
(SC) road oils. SC, MC and RC cutbacks are prepared by blending asphalt cement with heavy residual oils,
kerosene-type solvents, or naptha and gasoline solvents, respectively. Depending on the viscosity desired,
the proportions of solvent added generally range from 25 to 45 percent by volume.
Emulsified asphalts are of two basic types. One type relies on water evaporation to cure. The other type
(cationic emulsions) relies on ionic bonding of the emulsion and the aggregate surface. Emulsified asphalt
can substitute for cutback in almost any application. Emulsified asphalts are gaining in popularity, because
of the energy and environmental problems associated with the use of cutback asphalts.
4.5.2 Emissions!^
The primary pollutants of concern from asphalts and asphalt paving operations are volatile organic
compounds (VOC). Of the three types of asphalts, the major source of VOC is cutback. Only minor
amounts of VOC are emitted from emulsified asphalts ?nd asphalt cement.
VOC emissions from cutback asphalts result from the evaporation of the petroleum distillate solvent, or
diluent, used to liquify the asphalt cement. Emissions occur at both the job site and the mixing plant. At the
job site, VOCs are emitted from the equipment used to apply the asphaltic product and from the road
surface. At the mixing plant, VOCs are released during mixing and stockpiling. The largest source of
emissions, however, is the road surface itself.
For any given amount of cutback asphalt, total emissions are believed to be the same, regardless of
stockpiling, mixing and application times. The two major variables affecting both the quantity of VOC
emitted and the time over which emissions occur are the type and the quantity of petroleum distillate used
as a diluent. As an approximation, long term emissions from cutback asphalts can be estimated by
assuming that 95 percent of the diluent evaporates from rapid cure (RC) cutback asphalts, 70 percent from
medium cure (MC) cutbacks, and about 25 percent from slow cure (SC) asphalts, by weight percent. Some
of the diluent appears to be retained permanently in the road surface after application. Limited test data
suggest that, from rapid cure (RC) asphalt, 75 percent of the total diluent loss occurs on the first day after
7/79 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.5-1
-------
application, 90 percent occurs within the first month, and 95 percent in three to four months. Evaporation
takes place more slowly from medium cure (MC) asphalts, with roughly 20 percent of the diluent being
emitted during the first day, 50 percent during the first week, and 70 percent after three to four months. No
measured data are available for slow cure (SC) asphalts, although the quantity emitted is believed to be
considerably less than with either rapid or medium cure asphalts, and the time during which emissions take
place is expected to be considerably longer (Figure 4.5-1). An example calculation for determining VOC
emissions from cutback asphalts is given below:
Example: Local records indicate that 10,000 kg of RC cutback asphalt (containing 45 percent
diluent, by volume) was applied in a given area during the year. Calculate the mass of VOC
emitted during the year from this application.
To determine VOC emissions, the volume of diluent present in the cutback asphalt must
first be determined. Because of density of naptha (0.7 kg/1) differs from that of asphalt
cement (1.1 kg/1), the following equations should be solved to determine the volume of
diluent (x) and the volume of asphalt cement (y) in the cutback asphalt:
(0 7 ke\
fei
liter
+ (y liter, asphalt cement) .
and
x = 0.45, (%, by volume, of diluent)
y = 0.55 (%, by volume of asphalt cement)
From these equations, the volume of diluent present in the cutback asphalt is determined
to be about 4900 liters, or about 3400 kg. Assuming that 95 percent of this is evaporative
VOC, emissions are then: 3400 kg x 0.95 = 3200 kg (i.e., 32%, by weight, of the cutback
asphalt eventually evaporates).
These equations can be used for medium cure and slow cure asphalts by assuming typical diluent densities
of 0.8 and 0.9 kg/liter, respectively. Of course, if actual density values are known from local records, they
should be used in the above equations rather than typical values. Also, if different diluent contents are
used, they should also be reflected in the above calculations. If actual diluent contents are not known, a
typical value of 35 percent may be assumed for inventory purposes.
In lieu of solving the equations in the above example, Table 4.5-1 may be used to estimate long term
emissions from cutback asphalts. Table 4.5-1 directly yields long term emissions as a function of the
volume of diluent added to the cutback and of the density of the diluents and asphalt cement used in the
cutback asphalt. If short term emissions are to be estimated, Figure 4.5-1 should be used in conjunction
with Table 4.5-1.
No control devices are employed to reduce evaporative emissions from cutback asphalts. Asphalt
emulsions are typically used in place of cutback asphalts to eliminate VOC emissions.
4.5-2 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
Figure 4.5-1. Percent of diluent evaporated
from cutback asphalt over time.
TABLE 4.5-1. EVAPORATIVE VOC
EMISSIONS FROM CUTBACK ASPHALTS
AS A FUNCTION OF DILUENT CONTENT
AND CUTBACK ASPHALT TYPE3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Type of Cutback13
Rapid cure
Medium cure
Slow cure
Percent, by Volume,
of Diluent in Cutback0
25%
17
14
5
35%
24
20
8
45%
32
26
10
aThese numbers represent the percent, by weight, of
cutback asphalt evaporated. Factors are based on
References 1 and 2.
bTypical densities assumed for diluents used in RC, MC
and SC cutbacks are 0.7, 0.8 and 0 9 kg/liter,
respectively.
cDiluent contents typically range between 24-45%, by
volume. Emissions may be linearly interpolated for any
given type of cutback between these values.
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.5-3
-------
References for Section 4.5
1. R. Keller and R. Bohn, Nonmethane Volatile Organic Emissions from Asphalt Cement and Liquified
Asphalts, EPA-450/3-78-124, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
December 1978.
2. F. Kirwan and C. Maday, Air Quality and Energy Conservation Benefits from Using Emulsions To
Replace Asphalt Cutbacks in Certain Paving Operations, EPA-450/2-78-004, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, January 1978.
3. David W. Markwordt, Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Use of Cutback Asphalt, EPA-
450/2-77-037, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
4.5-4 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
4.6 SOLVENT DECREASING Audrey McBath
4.6.1 Process Description!^
Solvent degreasing (or solvent cleaning) is the physical process of using organic solvents to remove
grease, fats, oils, wax or soil from various metal, glass or plastic items. The types of equipment used in this
method are categorized as cold cleaners, open top vapor degreasers or conveyorized degreasers. Non-
aqueous solvents such as petroleum distillates, chlorinated hydrocarbons, ketones and alcohols are used.
Solvent selection is based on the solubility of the substance to be removed and on the toxicity, flammability,
flash point, evaporation rate, boiling point, cost and several other properties of the solvent.
The metalworking industries are the major users of solvent degreasing, i.e., automotive, electronics,
plumbing, aircraft, refrigeration and business machine industries. Solvent cleaning is also used in in-
dustries such as printing, chemicals, plastics, rubber, textiles, glass, paper and electric power. Most
repair stations for transportation vehicles and electric tools utilize solvent cleaning at least part of the time.
Many industries use water based alkaline wash systems for degreasing, and since these systems emit no
solvent vapors to the atmosphere, they are not included in this discussion.
4.6.1.1 Cold Cleaners The two basic types of cold cleaners are maintenance and manufacturing.
Cold cleaners are batch loaded, nonboiling solvent degreasers, usually providing the simplest and least ex-
pensive method of metal cleaning. Maintenance cold cleaners are more numerous and smaller, generally
using petroleum solvents such as mineral spirits (petroleum distillates and Stoddard solvents). Manufactur-
ing cold cleaners use a wide variety of solvents, which perform higher quality cleaning, are more
specialized, and have about twice the average emission rate of maintenance cold cleaners. Some cold
cleaners can serve both purposes.
Cold cleaner operations include spraying, brushing, flushing and immersion. In a typical maintenance
cleaner (Figure 4.6-1), dirty parts are cleaned manually by spraying and then soaking in the tank. After
cleaning, the parts are either suspended over the tank to drain or are placed on an external rack that
routes the drained solvent back into the cleaner. The cover is intended to be closed whenever parts are not
being handled in the cleaner. Manufacturing cold cleaners vary widely in design, but there are two basic
tank designs: the simple spray sink and the dip tank. Of these, the dip tank provides more thorough
cleaning through immersion, and often is made to improve cleaning efficiency by agitation.
4.6.1.2 Open Top Vapor Systems Open top vapor degreasers are batch loaded boiling degreasers that
clean using condensation of hot solvent vapor on colder metal parts. Vapor degreasing uses halogenated
solvents (usually perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, or 1, 1, 1-trichloroethane), because they are not
flammable, and their vapors are much heavier than air.
A typical vapor degreaser (Figure 4.6-1) is a sump containing a heater that boils the solvent to generate vapors.
The upper level of these pure vapors is controlled by condenser coils and/or a water jacket encircling the device.
Solvent and moisture condensed on the coils are directed to a water separator, where the heavier solvent is drawn
off the bottom and is returned to the vapor degreaser. A "freeboard" extends above the top of the vapor zone to
minimize vapor escape. Parts to be cleaned are immersed in the vapor zone, and condensation continues until
they are heated to the vapor temperature. Residual liquid solvent on the parts rapidly evaporates as they are
slowly removed from the vapor zone. Lip mounted exhaust systems capture solvent vapors and carry them away
from operating personnel. Cleaning action is often increased by spraying the parts with solvent below the vapor
level or by immersing them in the liquid solvent bath. Nearly all vapor degreasers are equipped with a water sep-
arator which allows the solvent to flow back into the degreaser.
Emission rates are usually estimated from solvent consumption data for the particular degreasing opera-
tion under consideration. Solvents are often purchased specifically for use in degreasing and are not used in
7/79 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.6-1
-------
S3
LU
OC
o
LU
a
oc
o
a.
<
©
c
'o
a.
E
0)
CD
0}
i_
O5
CU
Q
CD
a)
i-L
o
o
o
u
4.6-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
any other plant operations. In these cases, purchase records provide the necessary information, and an
emission factor of 1,000 kg of volatile organic emissions per metric ton of solvent purchased can be applied
(Table 4.6-1). This factor is based on the assumption that all solvent purchased is eventually emitted. When
information on solvent consumption is not available, emission rates can be estimated if the number and
type of degreasing units are known. The factors in Table 4.6-1 are based on the number of degreasers
and emissions produced nationwide and may be considerably in error when applied to one particular unit.
The expected effectiveness of various control devices and procedures is listed in Table 4.6-2. As a first
approximation, this efficiency can be applied without regard for the specific solvent being used. However,
efficiencies are generally higher for more volatile solvents. These solvents also result in higher emission
rates than those computed from the "average" factors listed in Table 4.6-1.
Table 4.6-1. SOLVENT LOSS EMISSION FACTORS FOR DEGREASING OPERATIONS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Type of degreasing
Allb
Cold cleaner
Entire unitc
Waste solvent loss
Solvent carryout
Bath and spray evaporation
Entire unit
Open top vapor
Entire unit
Entire unit
Conveyorized, vapor
Entire unit
Conveyorized, nonboiling
Entire unit
Activity measure
Solvent consumed
Units in operation
Surface area and duty
cycled
Units in operation
Surface area and duty
cyclee
Units in operation
Units in operation
Uncontrolled organic
emission factor3
2,000 Ib/ton
0.33 tons/yr-unit
0.18 tons/yr-unit
0.08 tons/yr-unit
0.07 tons/yr-unit
0.08 Ib/hr-ft2
10.5 tons/yr-unit
0.15 Ib/hr-ft2
26 tons/yr-unit
52 tons/yr-unit
1,000 kg/MT
0.30 MT/yr-unit
0.165 MT/yr-unit
0.075 MT/yr-unit
0.060 MT/yr-unit
0.4 kg/hr-m2
9.5 MT/yr-unit
0.7 kg/hr-m2
24 MT/yr-unit
47 MT/yr-unit
a100% nonmethane hydrocarbons or volatile organic compounds.
bSolvent consumption data will provide much more accurate emission estimates than any of the other factors presented
Emissions would generally be higher for manufacturing units and lower for maintenance units
dFor trichloroethane degreaser. From Reference 3, Appendix C-6.
eFor trichloroethane degreaser. Does not include waste solvent losses.
7/79
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.6-3
-------
Table 4.6-2. PROJECTED EMISSION REDUCTION FACTORS FOR SOLVENT DECREASING8
System
Control devices
Cover or enclosed design
Drainage facility
Water cover, refrigerated chiller, carbon
adsorption or high freeboard13
Solid, fluid spray streams
Safety switches and thermostats
Emission reduction from control devices (%)
Operating procedures
Proper use of equipment
Use of high volatility solvent
Waste solvent reclamation
Reduced exhaust ventilation
Reduced conveyor or entry speed
Emission reduction from operating
procedures (%)
Total emission reduction (percentage)
Cold
cleaner
A
X
X
13-38
X
X
15-45
28-83d
B
X
X
X
NAe
X
X
X
NAe
55-69f
Vapor
degreaser
C
X
X
20-40
X
X
X
X
15-35
30-60
D
X
X
X
30-60
X
X
X
X
20-40
45-75
Conveyorized
degreaser
E
X
X
X
X
X
20-30
20-30
F
X
X
X
X
40-60
X
X
X
X
20-30
50-70
aReference 2. Ranges of emission reduction present poor to excellent compliance. X indicates devices or procedures
which will effect the given reductions.
bOnly one of these major control devices would be used in any degreasing system. System B could employ any of them;
system D could employ any except water cover; system F could employ any except water cover and high freeboard.
clf agitation by spraying is used, the spray should not be a shower type.
dA manual or mechanically assisted cover would contribute 6-18% reduction; draining parts 15 seconds within the
degreaser, 7-20%; and storing waste solvent in containers, an additional 15-45%.
eBreakout between control equipment and operating procedures is not available.
'Percentages represent average compliance.
4.6.1.3 Conveyorized Degreasers Conveyorized degreasers may operate with either cold or vaporized
solvent, but they merit separate consideration because they are continuously loaded and are almost
always hooded or enclosed. About 85 percent are vapor types, and 15 percent are nonboiling.
4.6.2 Emissions and Controls1^^
Emissions from cold cleaners occur through (1) waste solvent evaporation, (2) solvent carry-out
(evaporation from wet parts), (3) solvent bath evaporation, (4) spray evaporation, and (5) agitation (Figure
4.6-1). Waste solvent loss, cold cleaning's greatest emission source, can be minimized through distillation
4.6-4
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
and sending waste solvent to special incineration plants. Draining cleaned parts for at least 15 seconds
reduces carry-out emissions. Bath evaporation can be controlled by regularly using a cover, allowing an
adequate freeboard height and avoiding excessive drafts in the workshop. If the solvent used is insoluble in,
and heavier than, water, a layer of water about two to four inches thick covering the halogenated solvent
can also reduce bath evaporation. This is known as a "water cover". Spraying at low pressure helps to
reduce solvent loss from this part of the process. Agitation emissions can be controlled by using a cover,
agitating no longer than necessary, and avoiding the use of agitation with low volatility solvents. Emissions
of low volatility solvents increase significantly with agitation. However, contrary to what one might expect,
agitation causes only a small increase in emissions of high volatility solvents. Solvent type, particularly
its volatility at the operating temperature, is the variable which most affects cold cleaner emission rates.
As with cold cleaning, open top vapor degreasing emissions relate heavily to proper operating methods.
Most emissions are due to (6) diffusion and convection, which can be minimized by using an automated
cover, regularly using a manual cover, spraying below the vapor level, optimizing work loads, or using a
refrigerated freeboard chiller (for which a carbon adsorption unit would be substituted on larger units).
Safety switches and thermostats that prevent emissions during malfunctions and abnormal operation also
reduce diffusion and convection from the vaporized solvent. Additional sources are (7) solvent carry-out, (8)
exhaust systems and (9) waste solvent evaporation (Figure 4.6-1). Carry-out is directly affected by the size
and shape of the workload, racking of parts, and cleaning and drying time. Exhaust emissions can be nearly
eliminated by a carbon adsorber that collects the solvent vapors for reuse. Waste solvent evaporation is not
so much a problem with vapor degreasers as it is with cold cleaners, because the halogenated solvents used
are often distilled and recycled by solvent recovery systems.
Because of their large workload capacity and the fact that they are usually enclosed, conveyorized
degreasers emit less solvent per part cleaned than either of the other two types of degreaser. Compared to
operating practices, design and adjustment are major factors affecting emissions, the main source of which
is carry-out of vapor and liquid solvents.
References for Section 4.6
1. PJ. Marn, etal., Source Assessment: Solvent Evaporation -Degreasing, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1874. Monsanto
Research Corporation, Dayton, OH, January 1977.
2. Jeffrey Shumaker, Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning, EPA-450/2-77-022,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, November 1977.
3. K.S. Suprenant and D.W. Richards, Study To Support New Source Performance Standards for Solvent Metal
Cleaning Operations, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1329, Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, June 1976.
7/79 Evaporation Loss Sources 4.6-5
-------
-------
5.2 SYNTHETIC AMMONIA
5.2.1 General
Frank Noonan
Anhydrous ammonia is synthesized by reacting hydrogen with nitrogen at a molar ratio of 3:1, then
compressing the gas and cooling it to 33°C. Nitrogen is obtained from the air, while hydrogen is obtained
from either the catalytic steam reforming of natural gas (methane) or naphtha, or the electrolysis of brine at
chlorine plants. In the United States, about 98 percent of synthetic ammonia is produced by catalytic
steam reforming of natural gas (Figure 5.2-1).
NATURAL GAS
STEAM
FUEL
AIR
EMISSIONS
STEAM EFFLUENT
FEEDSTOCK
DESULFURIZATION
PRIMARY
REFORMER
SECONDARY
REFORMER
HIGH TEMP SHIFT
LOW TEMP. SHIFT
co2
ABSORBER
METHANATION
AMMONIA
SYNTHESIS
EMISSIONS DURING
REGENERATION
EMISSIONS
EMISSIONS
CO2SOLUTION
REGENERATION
STEAM
PURGE GAS VENTED
TO PRIMARY REFORMER
FOR FUEL
Figure 5.2-1. General process flow diagram of a typical ammonia plant.
Seven process steps are required to produce synthetic ammonia by the catalytic steam reforming
method:
Natural gas desulfurization
Primary reforming with steam
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.2-1
-------
Secondary reforming with air
Carbon monoxide shift
Carbon dioxide removal
Methanation
Ammonia synthesis
The first, fourth, fifth and sixth steps are to remove impurities such as sulfur, CO, CO2 and water from the
feedstock, hydrogen and synthesis gas streams. In the second step, hydrogen is manufactured, and in the
third step, additional hydrogen is manufactured and nitrogen is introduced into the process. The seventh
step produces anhydrous ammonia from the synthetic gas. While all ammonia plants use this basic process,
details such as pressures, temperatures and quantities of feedstock will vary from plant to plant.
5.2.2 Emissions
Pollutants from the manufacture of synthetic anhydrous ammonia are emitted from four process steps:
Regeneration of the desulfurization bed
Heating of the primary reformer
Regeneration of carbon dioxide scrubbing solution
Steam stripping of process condensate
More than 95 percent of the ammonia plants in the U. S. use activated carbon fortified with metallic oxide
additives for feedstock desulfurization. The desulfurization bed must be regenerated about once every
30 days for a 10 hour period. Vented regeneration steam contains sulfur oxides and/or hydrogen sulfide,
depending on the amount of oxygen in the steam. Regeneration also emits hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide. The primary reformer, heated with natural gas or fuel oil, emits the combustion products
NOX, CO, SOX, HC and particulates.
Carbon dioxide is removed from the synthesis gas by scrubbing with monoethanolamine or hot potas-
sium carbonate solution. Regeneration of this C(>2 scrubbing solution with steam produces emissions of
HC, NH3> CO, CO2 and monoethanolamine.
Cooling the synthesis gas after low temperature shift conversion forms a condensate containing quanti-
ties of NH3, CO2, methanol and trace metals. Condensate steam strippers are used to remove NH3 and
methanol from the water, and steam from this is vented to the atmosphere, emitting NHs, CO2 and
methanol.
Table 5.2-1 presents emission factors for the typical ammonia plant. Control devices are not used at
such plants, so the values in Table 5.2-1 represent uncontrolled emissions.
5.2.3 Controls
Add-on air pollution control devices are not used at synthetic ammonia plants, because their emissions
are below state standards. Some processes have been modified to reduce emissions and to improve utility
of raw materials and energy. Some plants are considering techniques to eliminate emissions from the
condensate steam stripper, one such being the injection of the overheads into the reformer stack along
with the combustion gases.
5.2-2 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
Table 5.2-1. UNCONTROLLED EMISSION FACTORS FOR TYPICAL AMMONIA PLANT
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Emission point
Desulfurizationa
Primary reformer
Natural gas
Fuel oil
Carbon dioxide regenerator
Condensate stripper
Emission species
Total sulfurb.c
COc
HCc
NOX
SOX
CO
TSP
HCd
NOX
SOX
CO
TSP
HC
Ammonia
CO
C02
HC
Monoethanolamine
Ammonia
CO2
Methanol
Ib/ton
0.019
13.8
7.2
5.8
0.0048
0.136
0.144
0.024
5.4
2.6
0.24
0.90
0.30
2.0
2.0
2440.0
0.94
0.1
2.2
6.8
1.2
kg/MT
0.0096
6.9
3.6
2.9
0.0024
0.068
0.072
0.012
2.7
1.3
0.12
0.45
0.15
1.0
1.0
1220.0
0.47
0.05
1.1
3.4
0.6
alntermittent source, average 10 hours once every 30 days.
bWorst case assumption, that all sulfur entering tank is emitted during regeneration.
cNormalized to a 24 hour emission factor.
dTotal HC in methane equivalents, species undetermined. Expected emissions are methane (Reference 1, p. 13).
Reference for Section 5.2
1. G. D. Rawlings and R. B. Reznik, Source Assessment: Synthetic Ammonia Production, EPA-600/2-77-107m,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, November 1977.
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.2-3
-------
-------
5.3 CARBON BLACK Audrey McBath
5.3.1 Process Description
Carbon black is produced by the reaction of a hydrocarbon fuel such as oil or gas with a limited supply
of combustion air at temperatures of 2400 to 2800T (1320 to 1540°C). The unburned carbon is collected as
an extremely fine, black, fluffy particle, 10 to 500 nm diameter. The principal uses of carbon black are as a
reinforcing agent in rubber compounds (especially tires) and as a black pigment in printing inks, surface
coatings, paper and plastics. Two major processes are presently used in the United States to manufacture
carbon blackthe oil furnace process and the thermal process. The oil furnace process accounts for about
90 percent of production, and the thermal about 10 percent. Two others, the lamp process for production of
lamp black and the cracking of acetylene to produce acetylene black, are each used at one plant in the U. S.
However, these are small volume specialty black operations which constitute less than 1 percent of total
production in this country. The gas furnace process is being phased out, and the last channel black plant in
the U. S. was closed in 1976.
5.3.1.1 Oil Furnace Process In the oil furnace process (Figure 5.3-1 and Table 5.3-1), an aromatic liquid
hydrocarbon feedstock is preheated and injected continuously into the combustion zone of a natural gas
fired furnace, where it is decomposed to form carbon black. Primary quench water cools the gases to
1000°F (540°C) to stop the cracking. The exhaust gases entraining the carbon particles are further cooled
to about 450°F (230°C) by passage through heat exchangers and direct water sprays. The black is then
separated from the gas stream, usually by a fabric filter. A cyclone for primary collection and particle
agglomeration may precede the filter. A single collection system often serves several manifolded furnaces.
The recovered carbon black is finished to a marketable product by pulverizing and wet pelletizing to
increase bulk density. Water from the wet pelletizer is driven off in a gas fired rotary dryer. Oil or process
gas can be used. From 35 to 70 percent of the dryer combustion gas is charged directly to the interior of the
dryer, and the remainder acts as an indirect heat source for the dryer. The dried pellets are then conveyed
to bulk storage. Process yields range from 35 to 65 percent, depending on the feed composition and the
grade of black produced. Furnace designs and operating conditions determine the particle size and the
other physical and chemical properties of the black. Generally, yields are highest for large particle blacks
and lowest for small particle blacks.
5.3.1.2 Thermal Process The thermal process is a cyclic operation in which natural gas is thermally de-
composed (cracked) into carbon particles, hydrogen and a mixture of other organics. Two furnaces are
used in normal operation. The first cracks natural gas and makes carbon black and hydrogen. The efflu-
ent gas from the first reactor is cooled by water sprays to about 250°F (125°C), and the black is collected
in a fabric filter. The filtered gas (90 percent hydrogen, 6 percent methane and 4 percent higher hydro-
carbons) is used as a fuel to heat a second reactor. When the first reactor becomes too cool to crack the
natural gas feed, the positions of the reactors are reversed, and the second reactor is used to crack the gas
while the first is heated. Normally, more than enough hydrogen is produced to make the thermal black
process self-sustaining, and the surplus hydrogen is used to fire boilers that supply process steam and elec-
tric power.
The collected thermal black is pulverized and pelletized to a final product in much the same manner as
is furnace black. Thermal process yields are generally high (35 to 60 percent), but the relatively coarse
particles produced, 180 to 470 nm, do not have the strong reinforcing properties required for rubber prod-
ucts.
7/79 Chemical Process Industry 5.3-1
-------
5.3-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Table 5.3-1 STREAM CODE FOR THE
OIL FURNACE PROCESS (Figure 5.3-1)
Stream
Identification
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Oil feed
Natural gas feed
Air to reactor
Quench water
Reactor effluent
Gas to oil preheater
Water to quench tower
Quench tower effluent
Bag filter effluent
Vent gas purge for dryer fuel
Mam process vent gas
Vent gas to incinerator
Incinerator stack gas
Recovered carbon black
Carbon black to micropulverizer
Pneumatic conveyor system
Cyclone vent gas recycle
Cyclone vent gas
Pneumatic system vent gas
Carbon black from bag filter
Carbon black from cyclone
Surge bin vent
Carbon black to pelletizer
Water to pelletizer
Pelletizer effluent
Dryer direct heat source vent
Dryer bag filter vent
Carbon black from dryer bag filter
Dryer indirect heat source vent
Hot gases to dryer
Dried carbon black
Screened carbon black
Carbon black recycle
Storage bin vent gas
Bagging system vent gas
Vacuum cleanup system vent gas
Dryer vent gas
Fugitive emissions
Oil storage tank vent gas
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.3-3
-------
5.3.2 Emissions and Controls
5.3.2.1 Oil Furnace Process - Emissions from carbon black manufacture include paniculate matter,
carbon monoxide, organics, nitrogen oxides, sulfur compounds, polycyclic organic matter (POM) and trace
elements.
The principal source of emissions in the oil furnace process is the main process vent. The vent stream
consists of the reactor effluent and the quench water vapor vented from the carbon black recovery system.
Gaseous emissions may vary considerably, according to the grade of carbon black being produced. Organic
and CO emissions tend to be higher for small particle production, corresponding with the lower yields ob-
tained. Sulfur compound emissions are a function of the feed sulfur content. Tables 5.3-2 and 5.3-3 show
the normal emission ranges to be expected, with typical average values.
Particulates, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides are also emitted from the dryer vent. The oil feedstock
storage tanks are a source of organic emissions. Carbon black emissions also occur from the pneumatic
transport system vent, the plantwide vacuum cleanup system vent, and from cleaning, spills and leaks
(fugitive emissions).
Gaseous emissions from the main process vent may be controlled with CO boilers, incinerators or
flares. The pellet dryer combustion furnace, which is, in essence, a thermal incinerator, may also be
employed in a control system. CO boilers, thermal incinerators or combinations of these devices can
achieve essentially complete oxidation of organics and can oxidize sulfur compounds in the process flue
gas. Combustion efficiencies of 99.6 percent for hydrogen sulfide and 99.8 percent for carbon monoxide
have been measured for a flare on a carbon black plant. Particulate emissions may also be reduced by
combustion of some of the carbon black particles, but emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are
thereby increased.
5.3.2.2 Thermal Process - A comparison between the thermal and oil furnace processes reveals that
emissions from the former are less severe. Nitrogen oxides and particulates are emitted from the furnaces
during the heating part of the cycle. Particulate matter is emitted when carbon black deposited on the
furnace checkerbrick is released to the atmosphere in puffs, which occur when a furnace is switched from
carbon black production to the heating part of the cycle.
Emissions from the dryer vent, the pneumatic transport system vent, the vacuum cleanup system vent,
and fugitive sources are similar to those for the oil furnace process, since the operations which give rise to
these emissions in the two processes are similar. There is no emission point in the thermal process which
corresponds to the oil storage tank vents in the oil furnace process. Also in the thermal process, sulfur
compounds, POM, trace elements and organic compound emissions are minimal, because low sulfur
natural gas is used, and the process off-gas is burned as fuel.
5.3-4 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
LU
DC
U
(O
Ul
o
^o£
OC 00 O
2(3
CO S
OC H
O <
U) Z
12
UJ (/)
10
a
j
5 5
1 1
W
c
01
O c
D £
£ 2
i i
X
o
3
3 £
co S
h-
2> 5
S ra
x -*
o
§
Ol
fe o
* %
-° 5
co ^
o
^ 1
co 'S.
"5 ra
X JC
o
c
o
f:
c
o
S c
re o
0 i
H-
£ 3>
JO
u
1 1
CO
1 o
s
2
£
O)
O f- t- *~
to . d
Ln
en
-H__ CN C\J
Si C\J C\J
CO o
M-KT W if) y} dSi ~
O
S^ sr
jn V 2> CM
St^- co 1*^ oi r-*
O ^ T- CJ 0
sf-fs ?
-§"«-
(U O Is*
g °i cy ^2 g
*-" 8 ^ § °
^^
O ' '
Q) rf "J
0 ^ 10 CM g
O i ^ i ^*
CO O CM CD ,_'
"5 5
~ o cS o" o"
"Din'. ..^ oi-
CO J3, *~ ^ »~ °003°O °0
^ o o o o
^
os~ Siff m?
sfe5s » «;! a «# P T 8 T
(o^cvi^cxi d°ogog °5)
o o o o
4 c , 1
S > -tfn -c 51 ^
ow cfc? w c"O
a£ Zl. | - - ^ . f|
S° S| 1 | £ £ H g ||
"2Q.J: o.E> £ = J3 *j: c 2 £
Ecff-QofeSraS f £ 01 og
3 '5 n O = ? 5 5 ,9 «»5 "-5
r2uroQD:D
CO
Z
f a>
O 0}
o -z.
CM Ol
0 B
0 Z
C
>
s I
° 1
c
§ I
o J*:
=
1~ OT
O (p
0 Z
S g>
o Z
5 S1
0 Z
CM Ol
0 a;
0 Z
s
CO o 0 CM 01
d 5 d o Z
o.
§1 s s I
c^
_£.
I's 1 -^ ~«
(0 1 1, 1 1 E
H
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.3-5
-------
Ui
IT
O
<
LL
13
y: uj , ,
o o
< O <"
-J CCUJ
00 Q. O
o 3
go
o z
z a:
o oc
(A O
LU UL
3 W
C W
O UJ
,0,
CM
n
in
(D
.*
CJ
CO
5
c
o
.a
CO
u
matte
The particulate
CO
ual organic species are included in Table 5.3-3.
Tl
'$
£
W
C
0
drocarb
>
_c
0)
c
CD
Total nonmeth
.Q
se bag filters on all process trains for product recovery except solid waste incineration.
3
C
CD
"5L
<
lissions.
E
CU
O
c
Blanks indicate
o
in References 4 and 5. Uncontrolled.
C
CD
a
"o
>
cu
Z3
c
o
T3
CU
V)
CD
XI
Average values
TD
sampling runs conducted by Monsanto Research Corporation at a representative plant with the industry mean productioi
ranges of values are based on a survey of fifteen plants in Reference 4. Controlled by bag filter.
X CD
. ^
"H
o _.
* >
11
£ £
CT
0 0
D "~
CU X
CO CO
° in
CU -^
CO t
Average values
5.1 x 104MTA
CU i
E
Q.
a
5
*-*
'E
c.
o
CJ
cu
cu
*D
Not detected at
4-
"S
cu
cu
cu
£1
c
3
3
w
t-J
percen
£
O)
0)
.c
(rt
to
0) ,
ges of values are based on a survey of plants in Reference 4 and on the public fifes of Louisiana Air Control Commissiom,
c
CD
TO
c
^
C
o
a
e corres
_c
a
c
TO
Average values
^
Not available.
correlations for petrochemical losses from storage tanks (vapor pressure - 0.7 kPa).
e National Emissions Data System. All plants do not use solid waste incineration. See Section 2.1.
nissions are believed to be negligible.
(D
U
a
cu
i
'w
D
a
cu
CO
3
u
S
Emission factor
.c
o
Q
cu
c
S
.a
o
ut
03
+-
CD
C
£
c/i
'E
cu
c
0
a
cu
CO
oa
^
k_
cu
"co
3
JD
J?
: availab
are not
Emissions data i
5.3-6 EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Table 5.3-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR CHEMICAL
SUBSTANCES FOR OIL FURNACE CARBON
BLACK MANUFACTURE
Chemical substance
Carbon disulfide
Carbonyl sulfide
Methane
Acetylene
Ethane
Ethylene
Propylene
Propane
Isobutane
n-Butane
n-Pentane
POM
Trace elements0
Main process vent gasa
Ib/ton
60
20
50
(20-120)
90
(10-260)
Ob
3.2
Ob
0.46
0.20
0.54
Ob
0.004
<0.50
kg/MT
30
10
25
(10-60)
45
(5-130)
Ob
1.6
Ob
0.23
0.10
0.27
Ob
0.002
<0.25
These chemical substances are emitted only from the mam process vent. Average
values are based on six sampling runs made at a representative plant given in
Reference 1. The ranges given in parentheses are based on results of a survey of
operating plants given in Reference 4.
bNot detected at detection limit of 1 ppm.
Included are beryllium, lead, and mercury, among several others.
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.3-7
-------
References for Section 5.3
1. R. W. Serth and T. W. Hughes, Source Assessment: Carbon Black Manufacture, EPA-600/2-77-107k, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1977.
2. Air Pollutant Emission Factors, NAPCA Contract No. CPA-22-69-119, Resources Research, Inc., Reston, VA,
April 1970.
3. I. Drogin, "Carbon Black", Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, J!8:216-228, April 1968.
4. Engineering and Cost Study of Air Pollution Control for the Petrochemical Industry, Vol. 1: Carbon Black
Manufacture by the Furnace Process, EPA-450/3-73-006a, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, June 1974.
5. Kent C. Hustvedt and Leslie B. Evans, Standards Support and Emission Impact Statement: An Investigation
of the Best Systems of Emission Reduction for Furnace Process Carbon Black Plants in the Carbon Black Industry
(Draft), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1976.
6. Source Testing of a Waste Heat Boiler, EPA-75-CBK-3, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, January 1975.
5.3-8 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
-------
Table 5.5-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR CHLOR-ALKALI PLANTS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Type of source
Liquefaction blow gases
Diaphragm cell
Mercury cell'3
Water absorber0
Caustic or lime scrubberc
Loading of chlorine
Tank car vents
Storage tank vents
Air blowing of mercury cell brine
Chlorine gas
lb/100 tons
2,000 to 10,000
4,000 to 16,000
25 to 1,000
1
450
1,200
500
kg/100MT
1,000 to 5, 000
2,000 to 8,000
12.5 to 500
0.5
225
600
250
References 1 and 2.
"Mercury cells lose about 1.5 pounds mercury per 100 tons (0.75 kg/100 MT) of chlorine liquefied.
cControl devices.
5.5-2
EMISSION FACTORS
2/72
-------
Table 5.17-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR SULFURIC
ACID PLANTS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Conversion of SO2
to SO3, %
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
99.5
99.7
100
S02 emissions
Ib/tonof 100%
H2S04
96
82
70
55
40
26
14
7
4
0
kg/MT of 100%
H2S04
48.0
41.0
35.0
27.5
20.0
13.0
7.0
3.5
2.0
0.0
Reference 1.
"The following linear interpolation formula can be used for
calculating emission factors for conversion efficiencies between 93
and 100 percent: emission factor (Ib/ton acid) =-13.65 (percent
conversion efficiency) + 1365.
In the dual absorption process, the 863 gas formed in the primary converter stages is sent to a primary
absorption tower where F^SC^ is formed. The remaining unconverted sulfur dioxide is forwarded to the final
stages in the converter, from whence it is sent to the secondary absorber for final sulfur trioxide removal. The
result is the conversion of a much higher fraction of SC>2 to 863 (a conversion of 99.7 percent or higher, on the
average, which meets the performance standard). Furthermore, dual absorption permits higher converter inlet
sulfur dioxide concentrations than are used in single absorption plants because the secondary conversion stages
effectively remove any residual sulfur dioxide from the primary absorber.
Where dual absorption reduces sulfur dioxide emissions by increasing the overall conversion efficiency, the
sodium sulfite -bisulfite scrubbing process removes sulfur dioxide directly from the absorber exit gases. In one
version of this process, the sulfur dioxide in the waste gas is absorbed in a sodium sulfite solution, separated, and
recycled to the plant. Test results from a 750 ton (680 MT) per day plant equipped with a sulfite scrubbing
system indicated an average emission factor of 2.7 pounds per ton (1 .35 kg/MT).
15.17.2.2 Acid Mist1"3 - Nearly all the acid mist emitted from sulfuric acid manufacturing can be traced to the
absorber exit gases. Acid mist is created when sulfur trioxide combines with water vapor at a temperature below
the dew point of sulfur trioxide. Once formed within the process system, this mist is so stable that only a small
quantity can be removed in the absorber.
In general, the quantity and particle size distribution of acid mist are dependent on the type of sulfur
feedstock used, the strength of acid produced, and the conditions in the absorber. Because it contains virtually no
water vapor, bright elemental sulfur produces little acid mist when burned; however, the hydrocarbon impurities
in other feedstocks - dark sulfur, spent acid, and hydrogen sulfide - oxidize to water vapor during combustion.
The water vapor, in turn, combines with sulfur trioxide as the gas cools in the system.
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.17-5
-------
99.92
10,000
SULFUR CONVERSION, % feedstock sulfur
99.7 99.0
97.0 96.0 95.0 92.9
2 2.5 3
40 50 60 70 80 90100
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 25 30
S02EMISSIONS, Ib/ton of 100% H2S04 produced
Figure 5.17-3. Sulfuric acid plant feedstock sulfur conversion versus volumetric and
mass S02 emissions at various inlet SC>2 concentrations by volume.
5.17-6
EMISSION FACTORS
4/73
-------
The strength of acid produced-whether oleum or 99 percent sulfuric acidalso affects mist emissions. Oleum
plants produce greater quantities of finer, more stable mist. For example, uncontrolled mist emissions from
oleum plants burning spent acid range from 1.0 to 10.0 pounds per ton (0.5 to 5.0 kg/MT), while those from 98
percent acid plants burning elemental sulfur range from 0.4 to 4.0 pounds per ton (0.2 to 2.0 kg/MT).
Furthermore, 85 to 95 v/eight percent of the mist particles from oleum plants are less than 2 microns in diam-
eter, compared with only 30 weight percent that are less than 2 microns in diameter from 98 percent acid plants.
The operating temperature of the absorption column directly affects sulfur trioxide absorption and,
accordingly, the quality of acid mist formed after exit gases leave the stack. The optimum absorber operating
temperature is dependent on the strength of the acid produced, throughput rates, inlet sulfur trioxide
concentrations, and other variables peculiar to each individual plant. Finally, it should be emphasized that the
percentage conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfur trioxide has no direct effect on acid mist emissions. In Table
5.17-2 uncontrolled acid mist emissions are presented for various sulfuric acid plants.
Two basic types of devices, electrostatic precipitators and fiber mist eliminators, effectively reduce Hie acid
mist concentration from contact plants to less than the EPA new-source performance standard, which is 0.15
pound per ton (0.075 kg/MT) of acid. Precipitators, if properly maintained, are effective in collecting the mist
particles at efficiencies up to 99 percent (see Table 5.17-3).
The three most commonly used fiber mist eliminators are the vertical tube, vertical panel, and horizontal
dual-pad types. They differ from one another in the arrangement of the fiber elements, which are composed of
either chemically resistant glass or fluorocarbon, and in the means employed to collect the trapped liquid. The
operating characteristics of these three types are compared with electrostatic precipitators in Table 5.17-3.
Table 5.17-2. ACID MIST EMISSION FACTORS FOR SULFURIC
ACID PLANTS WITHOUT CONTROLS8
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Raw material
Recovered sulfur
Bright virgin sulfur
Dark virgin sulfur
Sulfide ores
Spent acid
Oleum produced,
% total output
Oto43
0
33 to 100
Oto25
Oto77
Emissions'3
Ib/ton acid
0.35 to 0.8
1.7
0.32 to 6.3
1.2 to 7.4
2.2 to 2.7
kg/MT acid
0.1 75 to 0.4
0.85
0.16 to 3.15
0.6 to 3.7
1.1 to 1.35
Reference 1.
bEmissi /ns are proportional to the percentage of oleum in the total product. Use
the low end of ranges for low oleum percentage and high end of ranges for high
oleum percentage.
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.17-7
-------
Table 5.17-3. EMISSION COMPARISON AND COLLECTION EFFICIENCY OF TYPICAL
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR AND FIBER MIST ELIMINATORS'
Control device
Electrostatic
precipitator
Fiber mist eliminator
Tubular
Panel
Dual pad
Particle size
collection efficiency, %
>3jum
gg
100
100
100
<3/im
100
95 to gg
go to 98
93 to gg
Acid mist emissions
98% acid plants'3
Ib/ton
0.10
0.02
0.10
0.11
kg/MT
0.05
0.01
0.05
0.055
oleum plants
Ib/ton
0.12
0.02
0.10
0.11
kg/MT
0.06
0.01
0.05
0.055
Reference 2.
Based on manufacturers' generally expected results; calculated for 8 percent sulfur dioxide
concentration in gas converter.
References for Section 5.17
1. Atmospheric Emissions from Sulfuric Acid Manufacturing Processes. U.S. DHEW, PHS, National Air
Pollution Control Administration. Washington, D.C. Publication Number 999-AP-13. 1966.
2. Unpublished report on control of air pollution from sulfuric acid plants. Environmental Protection Agency.
Research Triangle Park, N.C. August 1971.
3. Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C.
Federal Register. 36(241): December 23, 197'1.
5.17-8
EMISSION FACTORS
4/73
-------
5.22 LEAD ALKYL
5.22.1 Process Description1
by Jake Summers, EPA,
and Pacific Environmental Services
Two alkyl lead compounds, tetraethyl lead (TEL) and tetramethyl lead (TML), are used as antiknock
gasoline additives. Over 75 percent of the 1973 additive production was TEL, more than 90 percent of
which was made by alkylation of sodium/lead alloy.
Lead alkyl is produced in autoclaves by the reaction of sodium/lead alloy with an excess of either ethyl
(for TEL) or methyl (for TML) chloride in the presence of acetone catalyst. The reaction mass is distilled
to separate the product, which is then purified, filtered and mixed with chloride/bromide additives.
Residue is sluiced to a sludge pit, from which the bottoms are sent to an indirect steam dryer, and the
dried sludge is fed to a reverberatory furnace to recover lead.
Gasoline additives are also manufactured by the electrolytic process, in which a solution of ethyl (or
methyl) magnesium chloride and ethyl (or methyl) chloride is electrolyzed, with lead metal as the anode.
5.22.2 Emissions and Controls1
Lead emissions from the sodium/lead alloy process consist of particulate lead oxide from the recovery
furnace (and, to a lesser extent, from the melting furnace and alloy reactor), alkyl lead vapor from process
vents, and fugitive emissions from the sludge pit.
Emissions from the lead recovery furnace are controlled by fabric filters or wet scrubbers. Vapor
streams rich in lead alkyl can either be incinerated and passed through a fabric filter or be scrubbed with
water prior to incinerating.
Emissions from electrolytic process vents are controlled by using an elevated flare and a liquid in-
cinerator, while a scrubber with toluene as the scrubbing medium controls emissions from the blending
and tank car loading/unloading systems.
Table 5.22-1. LEAD ALKYL MANUFACTURE LEAD EMISSION FACTORS8
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Process
Electrolytic process
Sodium/lead alloy process
Recovery furnace
Process vents, TEL
Process vents, TML
Sludge pits
Lead emission factor
kg/103 kg
produced
0.5
28
2
75
0.6
Ib/ton
produced
1.0
55
4
150
1.2
References
1,2,3
1,2,4
1
1
1
aNo other pollutant factors available
7/79
Chemical Process Industry
5.22-1
-------
Table 5.22-2. LEAD ALKYL MANUFACTURE CONTROL EFFICIENCIES8
Process
Sodium/lead alloy
process
Control
Fabric filter
Low energy wet scrubber
High energy wet scrubber
Percent reduction
99 +
80-85
95-99
aReference
References for Section 5.22
1. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead Additive Industry,
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, January 1976.
2. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
3. W.E. Davis, Emissions Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants, 1970, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0271,
W.E. Davis and Associates, Leawood, KS, April 1973.
4. R.P. Betz, et al., Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0611, Battelle
Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH, August 1973.
5.22-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
-------
Table 6.9-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR ORCHARD HEATERS8
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Pollutant
Participate
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Sulfur oxides0
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Carbon monoxide
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Hydrocarbons*
Ib/htr-yr
kg/htr-yr
Nitrogen oxides'1
Ib/htr-hr
kg/htr-hr
Type of heater
Pipeline
b
b
0.1 3Sd
0.06S
6.2
2.8
Neg9
Neg
Neg
Neg
Lazy
flame
b
b
0.11S
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
References 1, 3, 4, and 6.
Participate emissions for pipeline, lazy flame, return stack, and cone heaters are
shown in Figure 6.9-2.
Based on emission factors for fuel oil combustion in Section 1.3.
dS=sulfur content.
eNot available.
Keference 1. Evaporative losses only Hydrocarbon emissions from combustion
are considered negligible. Evaporative hydrocarbon losses for units that are
part of a pipeline system are negligible ~ ~
9i\legligible.
hLittle 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, CA, June 1966.
2. Frost Protection in Citrus. Agricultural Extension Service, University of California, Ventura, CA, November
1967.
3. Personal communication with Mr. Wesley Snowden. Valentine, Fisher, and Tomlinson, Consulting Engineers,
Seattle, WA, May 1971.
4. Communication with the Smith Energy Company, Los Angeles, CA, January 1968.
5. Communication with Agricultural Extension Service, University of California, Ventura, CA, October 1969.
6. Personal communication with Mr. Ted Wakai. Air Pollution Control District, County of Ventura, Ojai, CA,
May 1972.
6.9-4
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
6.13 BREAD BAKING Tom Lahre
6.13.1 General1'2
Bakery products generally can be divided into two groupsproducts leavened by yeast and products
chemically leavened by baking powder. Other than yeast bread, which comprises the largest fraction of
all yeast leavened baking production, leavened products include sweet rolls, crackers, pretzels, etc.
Examples of chemically leavened baking products are cakes, cookies, cake doughnuts, corn bread and
baking powder biscuits.
Bread is generally produced by either the straight-dough process or the sponge-dough process. In the
straight-dough process, the ingredients are mixed, allowed to ferment, and then baked. In the sponge-
dough process, only part of the ingredients are initially mixed and allowed to ferment, with the remainder
added to the mix and fermented just prior to baking. The sponge-dough process is more often used by
commercial bakeries.
In a commercial bakery, bread dough is fermented from two to four hours prior to baking at about
450T (232°C). The temperature inside the bread does not exceed 212T (100°C). The ovens used are pre-
dominately direct fired by natural gas. In such ovens, any vapors driven off the bread and any combustion
product gases are removed through the same exhaust vent.
6.13.2 Emissions1'2
In the leavening process, yeast metabolizes the sugars and starches in the bread dough. During this
fermentation stage, various chemical reactions take place, with the end products being primarily carbon
dioxide (CO^ and ethanol (C2H5OH). The carbon dioxide is necessary to leaven the dough, thereby in-
creasing its volume. The byproduct ethanol, however, evaporates and leaves the dough. The rate of ethanol
production depends on dough temperature, quantity of sweetner and type of yeast.
Laboratory experiments1 and theoretical estimates2 suggest that ethanol emissions from the sponge-
dough process may range from 5 to 8 pounds per 1000 pounds of bread produced, whereas ethanol
emissions from the straight-dough process are only 0.5 pounds per 1000 pounds produced. These factors
include ethanol evaporation from all phases of bread production, although most of the emissions occur
during baking. Negligible quantities of ethanol remain in the bread following baking. Several other non-
methane volatile organic compounds are also emitted from bread production, but in much smaller amounts.
The reader should consult References 1 and 2 for detai'? on how these emission factors are derived.
No controls or process modifications are employed to reduce ethanol emissions from bakeries. Some
fraction of the ethanol emitted during baking could potentially be destroyed in the direct fired gas ovens,
but since the ethanol does not come into contact with the flame zone, this fraction is thought to be in-
significant.
References for Section 6.13
1. R.M. Keller, Nonmethane Organic Emissions from Bread Producing Operations, EPA-450/4-79-001, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 1978.
2. D.C. Henderson, "Commercial Bakeries as a Major Source of Reactive Volatile Organic Gases", Emission
Inventory IF actor Workshop: Volume I, EPA-450/3-78-042a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, August 1978.
«'«9 Food and Agricultural Industry 6.13-1
-------
-------
6.14 UREA Frank Noonan
6.14.1 General1
Urea (CO[NH2]2) is produced by reacting ammonia and carbon dioxide to form ammonium carbamate
(NH2CO2NH4), which is then dehydrated to form urea. There are over fifteen production methods which
can carry out these reactions. While the basics of the processes are the same, variations occur in vessel
design, operating conditions, and type and quantity of recycle of unreacted material. The aqueous solu-
tion produced by these processes contains approximately 70 percent urea, and the solution may be sold as is
or in solid form.
In the solidification procedure, urea solution is first concentrated in crystallizer or evaporator and
then solidified. If in a crystallizer, the crystals are melted and then formed into a solid. If an evaporator
is used, it produces a concentrate which is then solidified. In either case, solid urea is formed by prilling
or granulation. Additional granular strength and packing resistance are obtained by two methods. In the
first, used by about 50 percent of the plants and involving about 9 percent of all solid urea produced,
formaldehyde or a phosphate based additive is injected into the fluid material before solid formation.
In the second, the sized solid particles are coated with a clay substance. The finished product is usually
stored in bulk, shipped in railroad hoppers or trucks, or bagged in 20.4 kg or 36.3 kg sacks. In addition,
some urea solution may be transported by pipeline, and some solid by river barge.
Figure 6.14-1 is a flow diagram of the solid urea production process.
6.14.2 Emissions1
Emissions from urea manufacture consist of ammonia and particles of solid urea. In solution production,
they issue from the bulk loading of the product, and in solid production, they come from the evaporator,
prilling tower, granulator, product finishing, bagging and loading, and bulk loading points. The prilling
tower and granulator are both emission points, but are alternate, not sequential, steps in the process.
6.14.3 Controls1
Applied control technology for the urea industry varies from plant to plant. In the concentration section,
emissions are controlled by condensing the evaporator overheads and sewering or selling the product,
or by passing the stream through a scrubber. In the solid formation section, control technology depends
on the formation process used. In granulation processes, scrubbers are used to control emissions and to
recover entrained product. In prilling processes, about 50 percent of the industry uses some form of
packed scrubber for control. The others exhaust emissions to the atmosphere. Further technology has not
been widely proven. At least six companies are currently trying to develop or to test technology which will
reduce prilling tower emissions effectively.
7/79 Food and Agricultural Industry 6.14-1
-------
Table 6.14-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR UREA PRODUCTION"*"
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: A
Emitting operation
Solution concentration
(controlled)
Prilling (uncontrolled)
Granulation
Solid product finishing
Solution product bulk
loading
Solid product bagging
and bulk loading
Emission factor
Ammonia
Ib/ton kg/MT
3.46 (±64%) 1.73
0.80 (±84%) 0.40
0.50 (±48%) 0.25
- -
0.24 0.12
- -
Particulate
Ib/ton
0.214 (±28%)
3.20 (±17%)
0.168 (±29%)
to
0.40 (±25%)
<4.00
-
<0.30
kg/MT
0.107
1.60
0.084
to
0.20
<2.00
-
<0.15
"Dashes indicate no emissions from operation.
bPercentages represent 95% confidence interval.
Reference for Section 6.14
1. W. J. Search and R. B. Resnik, Source Assessment: Urea Manufacture, EPA-600/2-77-1071, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, November 1977.
6.14-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
6.15 BEEF CATTLE FEEDLOTS Tom Lahre
6.15.1 General1
A beef cattle feedlot is an area in which beef animals are confined for fattening prior to marketing.
This fattening, or finish feeding, typically lasts four to five months, during which time the cattle are fed
a high energy ration of feed grains and/or forage.
Cattle feedlots range in capacity from several head up to 100,000 cattle. Of the 146,000 beef cattle feed-
lots in the U.S. in 1973, 2,040 feedlots had a capacity of more than 1,000 head, marketing 65 percent of all
finish fed beef cattle. Animal density in feedlots is generally in the range of 12,500 to 125,000 head/km2.
During its stay in a feedlot, a beef animal will produce over 450 kg of manure (dry weight). Wet manure
production is typically about 27 kg per day per head, usually deposited on less than 20 m2 of surface.
Because of the prodigious quantity of manure produced in a feedlot, periodic removal is necessary to
prevent unacceptable accumulations. Most cattle manure is applied to nearby land as fertilizer for feed
grain production, while some is lagooned, dumped on wastelands, or disposed of through incineration,
liming, or pitting. Manure removal frequencies are dictated in part by climatic conditions, animal comfort,
labor scheduling, and air and water pollution control potentials. Typically, manure removal is conducted
from one to three times per year. When disposal is not immediately possible after removal, the manure may
be stockpiled on a nearby open site.
The leading states in the industry are Texas, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Colorado, California, and
Illinois. These states contribute 75 percent of all feed cattle marketed and contain 72 percent of the feedlots
greater than 1000 head capacity. Feedlots are generally located in low population density regions with
access to major transportation routes.
6.15.2 Emissions and Controls1
Air pollution from feedlots originates from several points in a feedlot operation, including the holding
pens, runoff holding ponds, and alleyways among pens. Major pollutants of concern include fugitive par-
ticulate, ammonia and various malodorous gases.
Fugitive particulate is generated several ways. Cattle movement within the holding pens is a primary
source. Dust is also generated by wind acting on the dried surfaces and by vehicular traffic on alleyways
among the pens. Fugitive particulate emissions from feedlots are composed largely of soil dust and dried
manure. The potential for dust generation is greatly increased during prolonged dry periods (e.g., from late
spring to midsummer in the Southwest), and when a loose, dry pad of soil and manure is allowed to build
up in the pens.
Ammonia is the predominant gaseous pollutant emitted from feedlots. Ammonia is a result of anaerobic
decomposition of feedlot surfaces as well as volatilization from urine. Ammonia emissions are generally
increased when conditions favor anaerobic decay. For example, although 25 to 40 percent moisture levels
are necessary on feedlot surfaces for aerobic decomposition (which is odorless), too much rain or
watering, resulting in puddling and wet spots, can trigger increased ammonia production. Ammonia forma-
tion may also occur when anaerobic conditions exist in the manure stockpiles and runoff holding ponds.
In general, higher ammonia emissions are associated with higher temperatures and humidity, overly wet
conditions, and feedlot disturbances such as mounding or manure removal.
A number of extremely odorous compounds (amines, sulfides, mercaptans) may also result from
anaerobic decomposition of solid manure beneath the feedlot surface as well as in the runoff holding ponds.
7/79 Food and Agricultural Industry 6.15-1
-------
Generally, the same conditions that favor ammonia production will enhance the evolution of these other
gases, as well.
No air pollutant control devices are applied to feedlots because of the fugitive nature of the emissions.
The most effective controls involve various housekeeping measures designed to eliminate conditions that
favor the generation of dust and odors. For example, measures that help to maintain sufficient moisture
levels in the feedlot surface areas and manure stockpiles will reduce the generation of dust. One of the most
effective dust control techniques is periodic application of water to the dry feedlot surface, by either per-
manent sprinkling systems or mobile tank trucks. However, care must be taken to avoid overwatering,
which can cause wet spots conducive to anaerobic decay and subsequent malodors. Increasing the cattle
density in the pens may also help maintain high enough moisture levels to limit paniculate generation.
In addition, some dust control is effected by minimizing the accumulation of dry and pulverized manure on
the surfaces of the feedlots. A maximum depth of 2 to 8 cm of loose, dry manure is recommended for
increasing the effectiveness of dust control procedures.
Odor and ammonia control are best effected by housekeeping measures that enhance aerobic rather
than anaerobic decomposition of the cattle wastes. For example, besides reducing dust emissions,
sprinkling provides moisture for aerobic biodegradation of the manure. Good drainage must be provided,
however, and overwatering must be avoided. Deep accumulations of manure of slurry consistency can
optimize anaerobic conditions. Hence, feedlot surfaces should be periodically scraped to remove such
accumulations. Scraping should be done carefully, so that only the surface layer is disturbed. Manure
stockpiles should not be allowed to get too large, too wet, or encrusted, and they should be disposed of
within four or five days. If the stockpiles are composted, the manure should be piled in long narrow win-
drows to allow access for turning the piles to promote aerobic conditions and to enable rapid control of
spontaneous combustion fires. Anaerobic conditions can be reduced in runoff holding ponds by removing
solids from the runoff, by adding more water to the ponds to dilute the nutrient content, and by aeration
of the surface. Runoff water also may be treated chemically to suppress the release of malodorous gases.
Emission factors for feedlot operations are shown in Table 6.15-1. These factors should be considered
at best to be crude estimates of potential emissions from feedlots where no measures are employed to
control dust or odors. The limitations of these factors are more fully discussed in the footnote to Table
6.15-1. The reader should consult Reference 1 for a detailed discussion of the emissions and control
information available on beef cattle feedlots.
6.15-2 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
Table 6.15-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR BEEF CATTLE FEEDLOTS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: E
Pollutant
Particulateb
Ammonia0
Amines0
Total sulfur compounds0
Feedlot capacity basis
Ib (kg) per day per
1000 head capacity
280 (130)
11 (5)
0.4 (0.2)
1.7(0.8)
Feedlot throughput basis
ton (metric ton) per
1000 head throughput
27 (25)
1.1 (1)
0.044 (0.04)
0.15 (0.14)
aThese factors represent general feedlot operations with no housekeeping measures for air pollution control.
Because of the limited data available on emissions and the nature of the techniques utilized to develop emission
factors, Table 6.15-1 should only be used to develop order-of-magnitude estimates of feedlot emissions. All factors
are based on information compiled in Reference 1.
bThese factors represent emissions during a dry season at a feedlot where watering as a dust control measure would
not be a common practice. No data are available to estimate emission factors for feedlots during periods of abundant
precipitation or where watering and other housekeeping measures are employed for dust control.
cThese factors represent emission factors for feedlots that have not been chemically treated and where no special
housekeeping measures are employed for odor control
Reference for Section 6.15
1. J.A. Peters and T.R. Blackwood, Source Assessment: Beef Cattle Feedlots, EPA-600/2-77-107, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 1977.
7/79
Food and Agricultural Industry
6.15-3
-------
-------
6.16 DEFOLIATION AND HARVESTING OF COTTON Rob McConnell
6.16.1 General
Wherever it is grown in the U.S., cotton is defoliated or disiccated prior to harvest. Defoliants are used
on the taller varieties of cotton which are machine picked for lint and seed cotton, while desiccants usually
are used on short, stormproof cotton varieties of lower yield that are harvested by mechanical stripper
equipment. More than 99 percent of the national cotton area is harvested mechanically. The two principal
harvest methods are machine picking, with 70 percent of the harvest from 61 percent of the area, and
machine stripping, with 29 percent of the harvest from 39 percent of the area. Picking is practiced through-
out the cotton regions of the U.S., while stripping is limited chiefly to the dry plains of Texas and Oklahoma.
Defoliation may be defined as the process by which leaves are abscised from the plant. The process may
be initiated by drought stress, low temperatures or disease, or it may be chemically induced by topically
applied defoliant agents or by overfertilization. The process helps lodged plants to return to an erect posi-
tion, removes the leaves which can clog the spindles of the picking machine and strain the fiber, accelerates
the opening of mature bolls, and reduces boll rots. Desiccation by chemicals is the drying or rapid killing
of the leaf blades and petioles, with the leaves remaining in a withered state on the plant. Harvest-aid
chemicals are applied to cotton as water-based spray, either by aircraft or by a ground machine.
Mechanical cotton pickers, as the name implies, pick locks of seed cotton from open cotton bolls and
leave the empty burs and unopened bolls on the plant. Requiring only one operator, typical modern pickers
are self propelled and can simultaneously harvest two rows of cotton at a speed of 1.1 to 1.6 meters per
second (2.5 - 3.6 mph). When the picker basket gets filled with seed cotton, the machine is driven to a
cotton trailer at the edge of the field. As the basket is hydraulically raised and tilted, the top swings open,
allowing the cotton to fall into the trailer. When the trailer is full, it is pulled from the field, usually by pick-
up truck, and taken to a cotton gin.
Mechanical cotton strippers remove open and unopened bolls, along with burs, leaves and stems from
cotton plants, leaving only bare branches. Tractor-mounted, tractor-pulled or self propelled, strippers
require only one operator. They harvest from one to four rows of cotton at speeds of 1.8 to 2.7 m/s (4.0 -
6.0 mph). After the cotton is stripped, it enters a conveying system that carries it from the stripping unit to
an elevator. Most conveyers utilize either augers or a series of rotating spike-toothed cylinders to move the
cotton, accomplishing some cleaning by moving the cotton over perforated, slotted or wire mesh screen.
Dry plant material (burs, stems and leaves) is crushed and dropped through openings to the ground. Blown
air is sometimes used to assist cleaning.
6.16.2 Emissions and Controls
Emission factors for the drifting of major chemicals applied to cotton are compiled from literature and
reported in Reference 1. In addition, drift losses from arsenic acid spraying were developed by field
testing. Two off-target collection stations, with six air samplers each, were located downwind from the
ground spraying operations. The measured concentration was applied to an infinite line source atmosphere
diffusion model (in reverse) to calculate the drift emission rate. This was in turn used for the final emission
factor calculation. The emissions occur from July to October, preceding by two weeks the period of harvest
in each cotton producing region. The drift emission factor for arsenic acid is eight times lower than pre-
viously estimated, since Reference 1 used a ground rig rather than an airplane, and because of the low vola-
tility of arsenic acid. Various methods of controlling drop size, proper timing of application, and modifica-
tion of equipment are practices which can reduce drift hazards. Fluid additives have been used that in-
crease the viscosity of the spray formulation, and thus decrease the number of fine droplets (<100 /u,m).
7/79 Food and Agricultural Industry 6.16-1
-------
Spray nozzle design and orientation also control the droplet size spectrum. Drift emission factors for the
defoliation of desiccation of cotton are listed in Table 6.16-1.
Table 6.16-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR
DEFOLIATION OR DESICCATION OF COTTON3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Pollutant
Sodium chlorate
DEF
Arsenic acid
Paraquat
Emission factor5
Ib/ton
20.0
20.0
12.2
20.0
9/kg
10.0
10.0
6.1
10.0
Reference 1
bFactor is in terms of quantity of drift per quantity applied.
Three unit operations are involved in mechanical harvesting of cotton: harvesting, trailer loading (basket
dumping) and transport of trailers in the field. Emissions from these operations are in the form of solid
particulates. Paniculate emissions (<7 /urn mean aerodynamic diameter) from these operations were de-
veloped in Reference 2. The particulates are composed mainly of raw cotton dust and solid dust, which
contains free silica. Minor emissions include small quantities of pesticide, defoliant and desiccant residues
that are present in the emitted particulates. Dust concentrations from harvesting were measured by
following each harvesting machine through the field at a constant distance directly downwind from the
machine, while staying in the visible plume centerline. The procedure for trailer loading was the same,
but since the trailer is stationary while being loaded, it was necessary only to stand a fixed distance
directly downwind from the trailer while the plume or puff passed over. Readings were taken upwind of all
field activity to get background concentrations. Paniculate emission factors for the principal types of
cotton harvesting operations in the U.S. are shown in Table 6.16-2. The factors are based on average
machine speed of 1.34 m/s (3.0 mph) for pickers and 2.25 m/s (5.03 mph) for strippers, on a basket capacity
of 109 kg(2401b), on a trailer capacity of 6 baskets, on a lint cotton yield of 63.0 metric tons/km2 (1.17 bale/
acre) for pickers and 41.2 metric tons/km2 (.77 bale/acre) for strippers, and on a transport speed of 4.47 m/s
(10.0 mph). Analysis of paniculate samples showed average free silica content of 7.9 percent for mechan-
ical cotton picking and 2.3 percent for mechanical cotton stripping. Estimated maximum percentages for
pesticides, defoliants and desiccants from harvesting are also noted in Table 6.16-2. No current cotton
harvesting equipment or practices provide for control of emissions. In fact, equipment design and operat-
ing practices tend to maximize emissions. Preharvest treatment (defoliation and desiccation) and harvest
practices are timed to minimize moisture and trash content, so they also tend to maximize emissions. Soil
dust emissions from field transport can be reduced by lowering vehicle speed.
6.16-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Table 6.16-2. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR COTTON HARVESTING OPERATIONS8
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Type of harvester
Picker0
Two-row, with basket
Stripper*1
Two-row, pulled trailer
Two-row, with basket
Four-row, with basket
Weighted average6
Harvesting
kg
km2
.46
7.4
2.3
2.3
4.3
Ib
ml2
2.6
42
13
13
24
Trailer
loading
Jsa.
km2
.070
_b
.092
.092
.056
Ib
ml2
.40
-
.52
.52
.32
Transport
kg
km2
.43
.28
.28
.28
.28
Ib
ml2
2.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
Total
kg
km2
.96
7.7
2.7
2.7
4.6
Ib
mF
5.4
44
15
15
26
"Emission factors are from Reference 2 for participate of <7 ^m mean aerodynamic diameter.
bNot applicable
cFree silica content is 7.9%; maximum content of pesticides and defoliants is 0.02%.
dFree silica content is 2.3%; maximum content of pesticides and desiccants is 0.2%.
The weighted average stripping factors are based on estimates that 2% of all strippers are four-row models with
baskets, and of the remainder, 40% are two-row models pulling trailers and 60% are two-row models with mounted
baskets.
References for Section 6.16
1. J. A. Peters and T. R. Blackwood, Source Assessment: Defoliation of Cotton-State of the Art, EPA-600/2-77-l()7g,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 1977.
2. J. W. Snyder and T. R. Blackwood, Source Assessment: Mechanical Harvesting of Cotton-State of the Art, EPA-
600/2-77-107d, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 1977.
7/79
Food and Agricultural Industry
6.16-3
-------
-------
7.3 PRIMARY COPPER SMELTING
Charles Masser
7.3.3 Fugitive Emission Factors
Potential sources of fugitive particulate emissions in the copper industry are roasting, smelting, convert-
ing and fire refining. Table 7.3-3 shows the potential uncontrolled fugitive emission factors from these
sources.
Fifteen percent of the particulate emissions from roasting are less than 10 /j.m, and 50 percent of those
from reverberatory furnaces are less than 37 jum.10'11 The mean particulate diameter of converter emrs-
sions is 44 p,m. Sixteen percent of pouring and casting emissions are less than 10 /am, and 46 percent are
less than 74 /xm.11
Table 7.3-3. POTENTIAL FUGITIVE EMISSION FACTORS
FOR UNCONTROLLED PRIMARY COPPER SMELTERS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: E
Type of operation
Roastingb
Reverberatory smelting furnace0
Converterb'd
Fire refining furnace (anode
furnace and casting)d'e
Particulates3
Ib/ton
23.00
8.50
10.50
1.90
kg/MT
11.50
4.25
5.25
0.95
aFactors expressed as units per units of end product.
bBased on material balance, using same percentage estimated for SO2 from
Reference 12
cReference 13
Reference 14.
"Reference 15.
Additional References for Section 7.3
10. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, January 1978.
11. L.J. Shannon and P.G. Gorman, Particulate Pollutant System Study, Vol. Ill: Emission Characteristics,
EPA Contract No. 22-69-104, Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, 1971.
12. Evaluation of the Controllability of Copper Smelters in the United States, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1354,
Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Santa Monica, CA, November 1974.
7/79
Metallurgical Industry
7.3-7
-------
13. A Study of Fugitive Emissions from Metallurgical Processes, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2120, Midwest Research
Institute, Kansas City, MO, November 1976.
14. Evaluation of Sulfur Dioxide and Arsenic Control Techniques for AS ARCO: Tacoma Copper Smelter, EPA Con-
tract No. 68-02-1321, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, September 1976.
15. Personal Communication from Herbert Z. Stuart, Phelps Dodge Corp., New York, NY, to Don R. Goodwin,
Emission Standards and Engineering Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 21 January 1977.
7.3-8 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
7.5 IKON \M) STKKL PKODl CTION Revised by William M. Vatavuk
and L. K. Felleisen
7.5.1 General1
Iron and steel manufacturing processes may be grouped into five distinct sequential operations: (1) coke
production; (2) pig iron manufacture in blast furnaces; (3) steel-making processes using basic oxygen, electric arc,
and open hearth furnaces; (4) rolling mill operations; and (5) finishing operations (see Figure 7.5-1). The first
three of these operations encompass nearly all of the air pollution sources. Coke production is discussed in detail
elsewhere in this publication.
7.5.1.1 Pig Iron Manufacture2'3-Pig iron is produced in blast furnaces, which are large refractory-lined chambers
into which iron ore, coke, and limestone are charged and allowed to react with large amounts of hot air to
produce molten iron. Slag and blast furnace gases are by-products of this operation. The production of 1 unit
weight of pig iron requires an average charge of 1.55 unit weights of iron-bearing charge, 0.55 unit weight of
coke, 0.20 unit weight of limestone, and 2.3 unit weight of air. Blast furnace by-products consist of 0.2 unit
weight of slag, 0.02 unit weight of flue dust, and 2.5 unit weights of gas per unit of pig iron produced. Most of
the coke used in the process is produced in by-product coke ovens. The flue dust and other iron ore fines from
the process are converted into useful blast furnace charge via sintering operations.
Blast furnace combustion gas and the gases that escape from bleeder openings constitute the major sources of
particulate emissions. The dust in the gas consists of 35 to 50 percent iron, 4 to 14 percent carbon, 8 to 13
percent silicon dioxide, and small amounts of aluminum oxide, manganese oxide, calcium oxide, and other
materials. Because of its high carbon monoxide content, this gas has a low heating value (about 100 Btu/ft) and is
utilized as a fuel within the steel plant. Before it can be efficiently oxidized, however, the gas must be cleaned of
particulates. Initially, the gases pass through a settling chamber or dry cyclone, where about 60 percent of the
dust is removed. Next, the gases undergo a one- or two-stage cleaning operation. The primary cleaner is normally
a wet scrubber, which removes about 90 percent of the remaining particulates. The secondary cleaner is a
high-energy wet scrubber (usually a venturi) or an electrostatic precipitator, either of which can remove up to 90
percent of the particulates that have passed through the primary cleaner. Taken together, these control devices
provide an overall dust removal efficiency of approximately 96 percent.
All of the carbon monoxide generated in the gas is normally used for fuel. Conditions such as "slips," however,
can cause instantaneous emissions of carbon monoxide. Improvements in techniques for handling blast furnace
burden have greatly reduced the occurrence of slips. In Table 7.5-1 particulate and carbon monoxide emission
factors are presented for blast furnaces.
7.5.1.2 Steel Making Processes -
7.5.1.2.1 Open Hearth Furnaces^^ In the open hearth process, a mixture of scrap iron, steel, and pig iron is
melted in a shallow rectangular basin, or "hearth," for which various liquid gaseous fuels provide the heat.
Impurities are removed in a slag.
4/73 Metallurgical Industry 7.5-1
-------
-FLUE GAS
(SINTER
OPERATION)
DUST, FINES,
AND COAL
SINTER
OPERATION
(P)
IRON ORE
GAS
PURIFICATION
COAL
COKE
OPERATION
(P)
LIMESTONE
FINISHING
OPERATIONS
SCARFING
MACHINE
Figure 7.5-1. Basic flow diagram of iron and steel processes.
"P" denotes a major source of participate emissions.
7.5-2
EMISSION FACTORS
4/73
-------
7.6 PRIMARY LEAD SMELTING Revised by William M. Vatavuk
7.6.1 Process Description 1-3
Lead is usually found in nature as a sulfide ore containing small amounts of copper, iron, zinc, and other trace
elements. It is normally concentrated at the mine from an ore of 3 to 8 percent lead to an ore concentrate of 55
to 70 percent lead, containing from 13 to 19 percent free and uncombined sulfur by weight.
Normal practice for the production of lead metal from this concentrate involves the following operations
(see Figure 7.6-1):
1. Sintering, in which the concentrate lead and sulfur are oxidized to produce lead oxide and sulfur dioxide.
(Simultaneously, the charge material, comprised of concentrates, recycle sinter, sand, and other inert materials,
is agglomerated to form a dense, permeable material called sinter.)
2. Reducing the lead oxide contained in the sinter to produce molten lead bullion.
3. Refining the lead bullion to eliminate any impurities.
Sinter is produced by means of a sinter machine, a continuous steel-pallet conveyor belt moved by gears and
sprockets. Each pallet consists of perforated or slotted grates, beneath which are situated windboxes connected
to fans that provide a draft on the moving sinter charge. Depending on the direction of this draft, the sinter ma-
chine is either of the updraft or downdraft type. Except for the draft direction, however, all machines are simi-
lar in design, construction, and operation.
The sintering reaction is autogenous and occurs at a temperature of approximately 1000°C:
2 PbS + 3 02 -» 2 PbO + 2 S02 H)
Operating experience has shown that system operation and product quality are optimum when the sulfur content
of the sinter charge is between 5 and 7 percent by weight. To maintain this desired sulfur content, sulfide-free
fluxes such as silica and limestone, plus large amounts of recycled sinter and smelter residues are added to the
mix. The quality of the product sinter is usually determined by its hardness (Ritter Index), which is inversely
proportional to the sulfur content. Hard quality sinter (low sulfur content) is preferred because it resists crushing
during discharge from the sinter machine. Conversely, undersized sinter will usually result from insufficient de-
sulfurization and is recycled for further processing.
Of the two kinds of sintering machines used, the updraft design is superior for many reasons. First, the sinter
bed height is more permeable (and, hence, can be greater) with an updraft machine, thereby permitting a higher
production rate than that of a downdraft machine of similar dimensions. Secondly, the small amounts of ele-
mental lead that form during sintering will solidify at their point of formation with updraft machines; whereas, in
downdraft operation, the metal tends to flow downward and collect on the grates or at the bottom of the sinter
charge, thus causing increased pressure drop and attendant reduced blower capacity. In addition, the updraft
system exhibits the capability of producing sinter of higher lead content and requires less maintenance than the
downdraft machine. Finally, and most important from an air pollution control standpoint, updraft sintering
can produce a single strong SO2 effluent stream from the operation, by use of weak gas re circulation. This, in
turn, permits the more efficient and economical use of such control methods as sulfuric acid recovery plants.
Lead reduction is carried out in a blast furnace, basically a water-jacketed shaft furnace supported by a re-
fractory base. Tuyeres, through which combustion air is admitted under pressure, are located near the bottom
and are evenly spaced on either side of the furnace.
The furnace is charged with a mixture of sinter (80 to 90 percent of charge), metallurgical coke (8 to 14 per-
cent of the charge), and other materials, such as limestone, silica, litharge, slag-forming constituents, and various
recycled and clean-up materials. In the furnace the sinter is reduced to lead bullion; most of the impurities are
5/74 Metallurgical Industry 7~6-l
-------
LbAU I ilLll-tUUi I UKUUt I £|NU
NCENTRATE 1 ORE* \ ORE* \ RE
IDDCCCIIBC i CAPuiun i
1 CRUDE I
ORE* \
ZINC PLANT
RESIDUE
LIMEROCK'
SLAG"
BY-PRODUCTS'
PRESSURE LEACHING
I
AUTOCLAVE
CuS04,ZnS04 SOLUTION
TO ZINC PLANT OR SOLVENT
EXTRACTION AND ELECTRO-
LYTIC COPPER RECOVERY
"THESE PRODUCTS ARE ALL CRUSHED AND
GROUND IN A ROD MILL TO 1 8 in. SIZE
1 ±-^ZVL"" "-"
r
LEADED
ZINC OXIDE
TO MARKET
DELEADED ZINC
OXIDE TO MARKET
DEZINCED GRANULATED,
SLAG TO STORAGE
SLAG TO BLAST FURNACE
FUME
CONCENTRATION FOR CADMIUM-
EXTRACTION ELECTRIC FURNACE"
BY-PRODUCT FURNACE
BULLION
(_
SLAG TO
BLAST FURNACE
\ V
MATTE SPEISS
PARKES GOLD CRUST*
PARKES SILVER CRUST
SOFTENING FURNACE
BUL
ST-»
L Z1,NC
» 1 V
DESILVERIZING
GOLD KETTLE
GRAI
MATTE
TO
ANTIMONY SKIM
FUME
BAGHOUSE
STOCK
ZINC
[RETORTS | I
RETORTS
CUPEL
CUPEL
SLAG TO
BLAST FURNACE
SLAG TO
BLAST FURNACE
H2S04
NaN03
FINE SILVER
TO MARKET
GOLD DORE
TO MARKET
CASTING
REFINED LEAD
TO MARKET
CADMIUM SPONGE TO
ELECTROLYTIC REFINING
f
CASTING
HARD LEAD
TO MARKET
F
RESIDUE
TO BLAST
FURNACE
ZnSOi
"TO MARKET
Figure 7.6-1. Typical flowsheet of pyrometallurgical lead smelting.2
7.6-2
EMISSION FACTORS
5/74
-------
Table 7.9-1. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR FURNACES USED IN SECONDARY
COPPER SMELTING AND ALLOYING PROCESSES'"
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Furnace and
charge type
Cupola
Scrap copper
Insulated copper wire
Scrap copper and brass
Reverberatory
Copper
Brass and bronze
Rotary
Brass and bronze
Crucible and pot
Brass and bronze
Electric arc
Copper
Brass and bronze
Electric induction
Copper
Brass and bronze
Control
equipment0
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
2
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
Emissions
Avg
kg/MT
0.002
120
5
35
1.2
2.6
0.2
18
1.3
150
7
11
0.5
2.5
0.5
5.5
3
3.5
0.25
10
0.35
Range
kg/MT
-
-
-
30-40
1.0-1.4
0.4-15
0.1-0.3
0.3-35
0.3-2.5
50-250
3-10
1-20
0.1-1
1-4
0.02-1.0
2-9
-
-
-
0.3-20
0.01-0.65
Avg
Ib/ton
0.003
230
10
70
2.4
5.1
0.4
36
2.6
300
13
21
1
5
1
11
6
7
0.5
20
0.7
Range
Ib/ton
-
-
-
60-80
2.0-2.8
0.8-30
0.3-0.6
0.6-70
0.05-5
100-500
6-19
2-40
0.1-2
2-8
0.04-2
4-18
-
-
-
0.5-40
0.01-1.3
« All factors given in terms of raw materials charged to unit.
b The information for Table 7.9-1 was based on unpublished data furnished by the following:
Philadelphia Air Management Services, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey.
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Metro Field Office, Springfield, New Jersey.
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Newark Field Office, Newark, New Jersey.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York, New York.
The City of New York Department of Air Resources, New York, New York.
Cook County Department of Environmental Control, Maywood, Illinois.
Wayne County Department of Health, Air Pollution Control Division, Detroit, Michigan.
City of Cleveland Department of Public Health and Welfare, Division of Air Pollution Control, Cleveland, Ohio.
State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Columbus, Ohio.
City of Chicago Department of Environmental Control, Chicago, Illinois.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles, California.
cControl equipment: 0 signifies none operated
1 indicates electrostatic precipitator
2 indicates baghouse filter system
12/77
Metallurgical Industry
7.9-5
-------
References for Section 7.9
1. Air Pollution Aspects of Brass and Bronze Smelting and Refining Industry. U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Raleigh, N. C. Publication No. AP-
58. November 1969.
2. Air Pollution Engineering Manual (2nd Ed.). John A. Danielson, Air Pollution Control District, County of
Los Angeles (ed.). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. Publication No.
AP-40. May 1973.
3. Emission Factors and Emission Source Information for Primary and Secondary Copper Smelters. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. Publication No. EPA-450/3-77-051.
December 1977.
7.9-6 EMISSION FACTORS 12/77
-------
7.9 SECONDARY COPPER SMELTING AND ALLOYING
7.9.3 Fugitive Emission Factors
Charles Masser
Potential sources of fugitive particulate emissions from secondary smelting and alloying operations are
sweating, drying, insulation burning, smelting furnaces and casting. Table 7.9-2 shows these sources and
their corresponding emission factors.
No data are presently available concerning size characteristics of the fugitive emissions.
Table 7.9-2. POTENTIAL FUGITIVE PARTICULATE EMISSION
FACTORS FOR UNCONTROLLED COPPER SMELTING AND
ALLOYING
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: E
Types of operation
Sweating furnaceb
Rotary dryerb
Insulation burning0
Electric induction furnaced
Reverberatory furnace6
Rotary furnaced
Crucible furnace6
Cupola (blast) furnace6
Casting6
Particulates3
Ib/ton
0.75
13.75
13.75
0.14
5.27
4.43
0.49
3.66
0.015
kg/MT
0.38
6.88
6.88
0.07
2.64
2.22
0.25
1.83
0.008
"Factors are expressed as units per volume of scrap processed, except casting, which is
expressed as units per volume cast.
"Engineering judgement assuming that fugitive emissions are equal to 5% of stack emis-
sions shown in Reference 4.
Engineering judgement assuming that fugitive emissions are equal to 5% of stack emis-
sion factor shown in Reference 5.
Engineering judgement assuming that fugitive emissions are equal to 5% of stack emis-
sion factor shown in Reference 1.
"Engineering judgement, average of two sets of data, assuming that fugitive emissions are
equal to 5% of stack emission factors shown in References 1 and 5.
7/79
Metallurgical Industry
7.9-7
-------
Additional References for Section 7.9
4. Multimedia Environmental Assessment of the Secondary Nonferrous Metal Industry, Volume II: Industry Profile,
EPA Contract no. 68-02-1319, Radian Corporation, Austin, TX, June 1976.
5. Paniculate Pollutant System Study, Volume III: Handbook of Emission Properties, EPA Contract No. 22-69-104,
Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, May 1971.
7.9-8 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
7.io <;
IKON HH NDHIKS
7. 1 0. 1 Process Description l
Three types of furnaces are used to produce gray iron castings: cupolas, reverberatory furnaces, and electric
induction furnaces. The cupola is the major source of molten iron for the production of castings. In operation, a
bed of coke is placed over the sand bottom in the cupola. After the bed of coke has begun to burn properly,
alternate layers of coke, flux, and metal are charged into the cupola. Combustion air is forced into the cupola,
causing the coke to burn and melt the iron. The molten iron flows out through a taphole.
Electric furnaces are commonly used where special alloys are to be made. Pig iron and scrap iron are charged
to the furnace and melted, and alloying elements and fluxes are added at specific intervals. Induction furnaces are
used where high-quality, clean metal is available for charging.
7.10.2 Emissions1
Emissions from cupola furnaces include gases, dust, fumes, and smoke and oil vapors. Dust arises from dirt on
the metal charge and from fines in the coke and limestone charge. Smoke and oil vapor arise primarily from the
partial combustion and distillation of oil from greasy scrap charged to the furnace. Also, the effluent from the
cupola furnace has a high carbon monoxide content that can be controlled by an afterburner. Emissions from
reverberatory and electric induction furnaces consist primarily of metallurgical fumes and are relatively low.
Table 7.10-1 presents emission factors for the manufacture of iron castings.
Table 7.10-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR GRAY IRON
FOUNDRIES3-11-0
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Type of furnace
Cupola
Uncontrolled
Wet cap
Impingement scrubber
High-energy scrubber
Electrostatic precipitator
Baghouse
Reverberatory
Electric induction
Particulates
Ib/ton
17
8
5
0.8
0.6
0.2
2
1.5
kg/MT
8.5
4
2.5
0.4
0.3
0.1
1
0.75
Carbon monoxide
Ib/ton
145c-d
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
kg/MT
72.5c-d
-
-
-
-
-
-
aReferences 2 through 5. Emission factors expressed as units per unit weight
of metal charged.
Approximately 85 percent of the total charge is metal. For every unit weight
of coke in the charge, 7 unit weights of gray iron are produced.
cReference 6.
A well-designed afterburner can reduce emissions to 9 pounds per ton (4.5
kg/MT) of metal charged.2
2/72
Metallurgical Industry
7.10-1
-------
References for Section 7.10
1. Hammond, W. F. and J. T. Nance. Iron Castings. In: Air Pollution Engineering Manual. Danielson, J. A. (ed.).
U.S. DREW, PHS, National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Publication Number
999-AP-40. 1967. p. 258-268.
2. Hammond, W. F. and S. M. Weiss. Unpublished report on air contaminant from emissions metallurgical
operations in Los Angeles County. Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. (Presented at Air
Pollution Control Institute, July 1964).
3. Crabaugh, H. C. et al. Dust and Fumes from Gray Iron Foundries: How They Are Controlled in Los Angeles
County. Air Repair. 4(3): November 1954.
4. Hammond, W. F., and J. T. Nance. Iron Castings. In: Air Pollution Engineering Manual. Danielson, J. A.
(ed.). U.S. DHEW, PHS. National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Publication Number
999-AP-40. 1967. p. 260.
5. Kane, J. M. Equipment for Cupola Control. American Foundryman's Society Transactions. 64:525-531.
1956.
6. Air Pollution Aspects of the Iron Foundry Industry. A. T. Kearney and Company. Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract Number CPA 22-69-106.
February 1971.
7.10-2 EMISSION FACTORS 2/72
-------
7.15 STORAGE BATTERY PRODUCTION by Jake Summers, EPA and
Pacific Environmental Services
7.15.1 Process Description
Lead/acid storage batteries are produced from lead alloy ingots and lead oxide. The latter may or may not
be manufactured at the same plant (Section 7.16).
Molten lead is pumped or flows directly from pot furnaces into the molds that form the battery grids.
Batches of lead sulfate paste are blended by mixing lead oxide, water, sulfuric acid, an organic expander
and other constituents. Pasting machines force the stiff mixture into the interstices of the grids (which
are thereafter referred to as plates).
The plates are cured and stacked in an alternating positive and negative block formation, with insulators
between them. They are then fastened together either by a burning operation (welding leads to the tabs of
each pair of positive and negative plates) or by a "cast on strip" process (in which molten lead is poured
around and between the plate tabs). Positive and negative terminals are then welded to each element,
which can go to either the wet or dry battery assembly line. Pot furnaces are used for reclaiming defective
lead parts.
7.15.2 Emissions and Controls1
Grid casting furnaces and machines, paste mixers, plate dryers, reclaim furnaces and parts casting
machines can be controlled by low- to medium-energy impingement and entrainment scrubbers. "Three
process" (element stacking, lead burning and battery casting) emissions can be controlled by pulse jet
fabric filters. Waste material caught in control systems is recycled to recover the lead.
7/79 Metallurgical Industry 7.15-1
-------
Table 7.15-1. STORAGE BATTERY PRODUCTION EMISSION FACTORS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Process
Grid casting
Paste mixing
Lead oxide mill
(baghouse outlet)
Three-process
operation13
Lead reclaim
furnace
Small parts casting
Formation
Storage battery
production (total)
Particulate emission factor
(kg/103
batteries)
0.8
1.0
0.10
13.2
0.70
0.09
14.0°
29.9
(lb/103
batteries)
1.8
2.2
0.24
29.2
1.54
0.19
32.0C
67.2
Lead emission factor
(kg/103
batteries)
0.4
0.5
0.05
6.6
0.35
0.05
N/A
8
(lb/103
batteries)
0.9
1.1
0.12
14.6
0.77
0.77
N/A
17.6
"References 2-6
bStackmg, lead burning and battery assembly
°H2S04
Table 7.15-2. STORAGE BATTERY PRODUCTION CONTROL EFFICIENCIES3
Process
Storage battery
production (total)
Control
Low- to medium-energy
impingement and
entrapment scrubbers
Pulse jet fabric filter
Percent
reduction
85 - 90 +
95 - 99 +
aReference
7.15-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
References for Section 7.15
1. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead Additive Industry,
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, January 1976.
2. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
3. Screening Study To Develop Background Information and To Determine the Significance of Emissions from the
Lead/Acid Battery Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0299, Vulcan-Cincinnati, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, December
1972.
4. Confidential test data from a major battery manufacturer, July 1973.
5. Paniculate and Lead Emission Measurements from Lead Oxide Plants, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0226, Monsanto
Research Corp., Dayton, OH, August 1973.
6. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead/Acid Battery
Industry, Interim Report, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati,
OH, December 1975.
7/79 Metallurgical Industry 7.15-3
-------
-------
7.16 LEAD OXIDE AND PIGMENT
PRODUCTION
7.16.1 General
by Jake Summers, EPA, and
Pacific Environmental Services
Lead oxide is used in the manufacture of lead/acid storage batteries (Section 7.15) and as a pigment in
paints. Black oxide, which is used exclusively in storage batteries, contains 60 to 80 percent litharge (PbO)
the remainder being finely divided metallic lead.1 The major lead pigment is red lead(Pb3O4), which is used
principally in ferrous metal protective paints. Other lead pigments include white lead and lead chromates.
Most lead oxides and many lead pigments are derived from lead monoxide (PbO) in the form of litharge,
which is produced by (1) partially oxidizing lead and milling it into a powder, which is then completely oxi-
dized in a reverberatory furnace; (2) oxidizing and stirring pig lead in a reverberatory furnace or rotary kiln;
(3) running molten lead into a cupelling furnace; or (4) atomizing molten lead in a flame. The product must
be cooled quickly to below 300°C (572°F) to avoid formation of red lead.2
Black oxide is usually produced (in the same furnace in which the litharge is made) by either the ball
mill or Barton process. Cyclones and fabric filters collect the product. Red lead is produced by oxidizing
litharge in a reverberatory furnace. Basic carbonate white lead production is based on the reaction of
litharge with acetic acid or acetate ions. White leads other than carbonates are made either by chemical
or fuming processes. Chromate pigments are generally manufactured by precipitation or calcination.
7.16.2 Emissions and Controls
Automatic shaker type fabric filters, often preceded by cyclone mechanical collectors or settling cham-
bers, are the almost universal choice for collecting lead oxides and pigments. Where fabric filters are not
appropriate, scrubbers are used, resulting in higher emissions. The ball mill and Barton processes of black
oxide manufacturing recover the lead product by these two means. Collection of dust and fumes from the
production of red lead is likewise an economic necessity, since paniculate emissions, although small, are
about 90 percent lead. Data on emissions from the production of white lead pigments are not available, but
they have been estimated because of health and safety regulations. The emissions from dryer exhaust
scrubbers account for over 50 percent of the total lead emitted in lead chromate production.
7/79
Metallurgical Industry
7.16-1
-------
Table 7.16-1. LEAD OXIDE AND PIGMENT PRODUCTION EMISSION FACTORS3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Process
Lead oxide
production:
Barton potb
Calcining
furnace
Pigment
production:
Red leadb
White leadb
Chrome
pigments:
Particulate
Ib/ton
produced
0.43-0.85
c
1.0d
c
c
kg/103 kg
produced
0.21-0.43
c
0.5d
c
c
Lead emission factor
Ib/ton
produced
0.44
14.0
0.9
0.55
0.13
kg/103 kg
produced
0.22
7.0
0.5
0.28
0.065
References
4,6,7
6
4,5
4,5
4,5
Reference 4, pp. 4-283 and 4-287.
bMeasured at baghouse outlet. Baghouse is considered process equipment.
cData not available
dOnly PbO and oxygen used in red lead production, so particulate emissions assumed to be about 90% lead.
Table 7.16-2. LEAD OXIDE AND PIGMENT PRODUCTION CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
Process
Control
Percent
reduction
Lead oxide and
pigment production
Mechanical shaker fabric
filter (preceded by dry
cyclone or settling chamber)
Scrubber
99a
70-95"
aReference 3
bReference 4
7.16-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
References for Section 7.16
1. E. J. Ritchie, Lead Oxides, Independent Battery Manufacturers Association, Inc., Largo, FL, 1974.
2. W. E. Davis, Emissions Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants, 1970, EPA Contract No.
68-02-0271, W. E. Davis and Associates, Leawood, KS, April 1973.
3. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead Addi-
tive Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH,
January 1976.
4. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
5. R. P. Betz, et al., Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0299,
Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH, December 1972.
6. Emission Test No. 74-PB-O-l, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1973.
Metallurgical Industry 7.16-3
-------
-------
7.17 MISCELLANEOUS LEAD PRODUCTS by Jake Summers, EPA, and
Pacific Environmental Services
7.17.1 Type Metal Production
7.17.1.1 General Lead type, used primarily in the letterpress segment of the printing industry, is cast
from a molten lead alloy and remelted after use. Linotype and monotype processes produce a mold, while
the stereotype process produces a plate for printing. All type metal is an alloy consisting of 60 to 85 percent
recovered lead, with antimony, tin and a small amount of virgin metal.
7.17.1.2 Emissions and Controls The melting pot is the major source of emissions, containing hydro-
carbons as well as lead particulates. Pouring the molten metal into the molds involves surface oxidation of
the metal, possibly producing oxidized fumes, while the trimming and finishing operations emit lead par-
ticles. It is estimated that 35 percent of the total emitted paniculate is lead.1
Approximately half of the current lead type operations control lead emissions, by about 80 percent. The
other operations are uncontrolled.2 The most frequently controlled sources are the main melting pots and
dressing areas. Linotype equipment does not require controls when operated properly. Devices in current
use on monotype and stereotype lines include rotoclones, wet scrubbers, fabric filters, and electrostatic
precipitators, all which can be used in various combinations.
7.17.2 Can Soldering
7.17.2.1 Process Description Side seams of cans are soldered on a machine consisting of a solder-
coated roll operating in a bath of molten solder, typically containing 98 percent lead. After soldering, excess
is wiped away by a rotating cloth buffer, which creates some dust (Table 7.17-1).3
7.17.2.2 Emissions and Controls - Hoods, exhaust ducts and mechanical cyclones (Table 7.17-2) collect
the large flakes generated at the wiping station, but some dust escapes in the form of particles 20 microns or
smaller, with a lead content of 3 to 38 percent. Maintaining a good flux cover is the most effective means
of controlling lead emissions from the solder batch. Low energy wet collectors or fabric filters can also con-
trol lead emissions from can soldering.
7.17.3 Cable Covering
7.17.3.1 Process Description About 90 percent of the lead cable covering produced in the United States
is lead cured jacketed cables, and 10 percent is on lead sheathed cables. In preparation of the former type,
an unalloyed lead cover applied in the vulcanizing treatment during the manufacture of rubber-insulated
cable must be stripped from the cable and remelted.
Lead coverings are applied to insulated cable by hydraulic extrusion of solid lead around the cable.
Molten lead is continuously fed into an extruder or screw press, where it solidifies as it progresses. A melt-
ing kettle supplies lead to the press.
7.17.3.2 Emissions and Controls The melting kettle is the only source of atmospheric lead emissions,
and it is generally uncontrolled.4 Average particle size is approximately 5 microns, with a lead content of
about 70 to 80 percent.3'5
Cable covering processes do not usually include particulate collection devices, although fabric filters,
rotoclone wet collectors and dry cyclone collectors can reduce lead emissions (Table 7.17-2). Lowering and
controlling the melt temperature, enclosing the melting unit and using fluxes to provide a cover on the melt
can also minimize emissions.
7/79 Metallurgical Industry 7.17-1
-------
Table 7.17-1 EMISSION FACTORS FOR MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Process
Type metal
production
Can soldering
Cable covering
Metallic lead
products
Ammunition
Bearing metals
Other sources
of lead
Particulate emission factor
Metric
0.4 kg/103 kg
Pb procb
0.8 x 106
baseboxes
prodc
0.3 kg/103 kg
Pb procd
e
e
e
English
0.7 Ib/ton Pb
procb
0.9 ton/106
baseboxes
prodc
0.6 Ib/ton Pb
procd
e
e
e
Lead emission factor
Metric
0.13 kg/103
kg Pb proc
160 kg/106
baseboxes
prod'
0.25 kg/103
kg Pb proc
<0.5 kg/106
kg Pb proc
negligible
0.8 kg/103 kg
Pb proc
English
0.25 Ib/ton
Pb proc
0.1 8 ton/106
baseboxes
prod
0.5 Ib/ton Pb
proc
1.0 lb/103ton
Pb proc
negligible
1.5 Ib/ton Pb
proc
References
2,7
7
3,5,7
3,7
3,7
3,7
aProc = processed; prod = produced.
Calculated on the basis of 35% of the total (Reference 1).
Reference 7, pp. 4-297 and 4-298.
dReference 7, p. 4-301.
"Data not available.
'Basebox = 20.23 m2 (217.8 ft2), standard tin plate sheet area.
Table 7.17-2. CAN SOLDERING AND CABLE COVERING
CONTROL EFFICIENCIES
Process
Can soldering
Cable covering
Control
Mechanical cyclone
Fabric filter
Rotoclone wet collector
Dry cyclone collector
Percent
reduction
75 +
99.9
75-85
45 4-
"Reference 7
7.17-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
7.17.4 Metallic Lead Products
7.17.4.1 General - Lead is consumed and emitted in the manufacture of ammunition, bearing metals
and other lead products. Lead used in the manufacture of ammunition is melted and alloyed before it is
cast, sheared, extruded, swaged or mechanically worked. Some lead is also reacted to form lead azide, a
detonating agent. Lead is used in bearing manufacture by alloying it with copper, bronze, antimony and tin.
Other lead products include terne metal (a plating alloy), weights and ballasts, caulking lead, plumbing
supplies, roofing materials, casting metal foil, collapsible metal tubes and sheet lead. Lead is also used for
galvanizing, annealing and plating. It is usually melted and cast prior to mechanical forming operations.
7.17.4.2 Emissions and Controls - Little or no air pollution control equipment is currently used by manu-
facturers of metallic lead products.6 Emissions from bearing manufacture are negligible, even without
controls.3
References for Section 7.17
1. N. J. Kulujian, Inspection Manual for the Enforcement of New Source Performance Standards:
Portland Cement Plants, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1355, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc.,
Cincinnati, OH, January 1975.
2. Atmospheric Emissions from Lead Typesetting Operation Screening Study, EPA Contract No. 68-02-
2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, January 1976.
3. W. E. Davis, Emissions Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants, 1970, EPA Contract No.
68-02-0271, W. E. Davis Associates, Leawood, KS, April 1973.
4. R. P. Betz, et al., Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0611,
Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH, August 1973.
5. E. P. Shea, Emissions from Cable Covering Facility, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Midwest Re-
search Institute, Kansas City, MO, June 1973.
6. Mineral Industry Surveys: Lead Industry in May 1976, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the
Interior, Washington, DC, August 1976.
7. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
7/79 Metallurgical Industry 7.17-3
-------
-------
7.18 LEADBEARING ORE CRUSHING by Jake Summers, EPA,
AND GRINDING and Pacific Environmental Services
7.18.1 Process Description
Lead and zinc ores are normally deep mined, whereas copper ores are open pit mined. Lead, zinc and
copper are usually found together (in varying percentages) in combination with sulfur and/or oxygen.
In underground mines, the ore is disintegrated by percussive drilling machines, run through a primary
crusher, and then conveyed to the surface. In open pit mines, ore and gangue are loosened and pulverized
by explosives, scooped up by mechanical equipment, and transported to the concentrator.
Standard crushers, screens, and rod and ball mills classify and reduce the ore to powders in the 65 to 325
mesh range. The finely divided particles are separated from the gangue and are concentrated in a liquid
medium by gravity and/or selective flotation, then cleaned, thickened and filtered. The concentrate is dried
prior to shipment to the smelter.
7.18.2 Emissions and Controls
Lead emissions are basically fugitive, caused by drilling, blasting, loading, conveying, screening,
unloading, crushing and grinding. The primary means of control are good mining techniques and equip-
ment maintenance. These practices include enclosing the truck loading operation, wetting or covering
truck loads and stored concentrates, paving the road from mine to concentrator, sprinkling the unloading
area, and preventing leaks in the crushing and griding enclosures. Cyclones and fabric filters can be used
in the milling operations.
Particulate and sulfur dioxide emission factors for lead ore crushing and materials handling operations
are given in Table 7.18-1. Lead emissions from the mining and milling of copper ores are negligible.
7/79 Metallurgical Industry 7.18-1
-------
Table 7.18-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR ORE CRUSHING AND
GRINDING
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Type of
ore
Pbc
Zn
Cu
Pb-Zn
Cu-Pb
Cu-Zn
Cu-Pb-Zn
Particulate
emission factor3
Ib/ton
processed
6.0
6.0
6.4
6.0
6.4
6.4
6.4
kg/103 kg
processed
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.0
3.2
3.2
3.2
Lead
emission factorb
Ib/ton
processed
0.3
0.012
0.012
0.12
0.12
0.012
0.12
kg/103 kg
processed
0.15
0.006
0.006
0.06
0.06
0.006
0.06
aReference 1, pp 4-39
bReferences 1-5
cRefer to Section 7.6
References for Section 7.18
1. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
search Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
2. W. E. Davis, Emissions Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants, 1970, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0271,
W. E. Davis and Associates, Leawood, KS, April 1973.
3. Environmental Assessment of the Domestic Primary Copper, Lead, and Zinc Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-
1321, PEDCO-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, September 1976.
4. Communication with Mr. J. Patrick Ryan, Bureau of Mines, U. S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC,
September 9, 1976.
5. B. G. Wixson and J. C. Jennett, "The New Lead Belt in the Forested Ozarks of Missouri", Environmental
Science and Technology, 9(13): 1128-1133, December 1975.
7.18-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
8.10 CONCRETE BATCHING
8.10.3 Fugitive Emission Factors
Charles Masser
Potential sources of fugitive particulate emissions from concrete batching are shown in Table 8.10-2,
along with the corresponding emission factors.
Particle size characteristics of the dust vary according to the grade of cement. A range of 10 to 20 percent
by weight less than 5 ju,m is typical for the various grades of cement. The dust generated from dry con-
crete batching plants has characteristics similar to those of the cement dust discussed for wet concrete
batching plants.
Table 8.10-2. POTENTIAL UNCONTROLLED FUGITIVE
EMISSION FACTORS FROM CONCRETE
BATCHING PROCESS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: E
Type of operation
Transfer of sand and aggregate
to elevated bins"
Cement unloading to elevated
storage silosc
Weight hopper loading of cement,
sand, aggregate13
Mixer loading of cement, sand,
aggregate (central mix plant)b
Loading of transit mix truckb
Loading of dry-batch truckb
Participates3
Ib/ton
0.04
0.24
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.04
kg/MT
0.02
0.12
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
"Factors expressed in units per unit of material handled.
Engineering judgement, based on observations and emission tests on
similar controlled sources.
cReference 5. From testing of mechanical unloading to hopper and subse-
quent transport of cement on enclosed bucket elevator to elevator bins with
a fabric sock over the bin vent.
Additional Reference for Section 8.10
5. Personal communication from T. R. Blackwood, Monsanto Research Corporation, Dayton, OH, to
John M. Zoller, PEDCo-Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, 18 October 1976.
7/79
Mineral Products Industry
8.10-3
-------
-------
10. WOOD PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
Wood processing involves the conversion of raw wood to either pulp, pulpboard, or one of several types of
wallboard including plywood, particleboard, or hardboard. This section presents emissions data for chemical
wood pulping, for pulpboard and plywood manufacturing, and for woodworking operations. The burning of wqo_d_
waste in boilers and conical burners is not included as it is discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 of this publication.
10.1 CHEMICAL WOOD PULPING Revised by Thomas Lahre
10.1.1 General i
Chemical wood pulping involves the extraction of cellulose from wood by dissolving the lignin that binds the
cellulose fibers together. The principal processes used in chemical pulping are the kraft, sulfite, neutral sulfite
semichemical (NSSC), dissolving, and soda; the first three of these display the greatest potential for causing air
pollution. The kraft process accounts for about 65 percent of all pulp produced in the United States; the sulfite
and NSSC processes, together, account for less than 20 percent of the total. The choice of pulping process is de-
termined by the product being made, by the type of wood species available, and by economic considerations.
10.1.2 Kraft Pulping
10.1.2.1 Process Description1^The kraft process (see Figure 10.1.2-1) involves the cooking of wood chips
under pressure in the presence of a cooking liquor in either a batch or a continuous digester. The cooking liquor,
or "white liquor," consisting of an aqueous solution of sodium sulfide and sodium hydroxide, dissolves the lignin
that binds the cellulose fibers together.
When cooking is completed, the contents of the digester are forced into the blow tank. Here the major portion
of the spent cooking liquor, which contains the dissolved lignin, is drained, and the pulp enters the initial stage of
washing. From the blow tank the pulp passes through the knotter where unreacted chunks of wood are removed.
The pulp is then washed and, in some mills, bleached before being pressed and dried into the finished product.
It is economically necessary to recover both the inorganic cooking chemicals and the heat content of the spent
"black liquor," which is separated from the cooked pulp. Recovery is accomplished by first concentrating the
liquor to a level that will support combustion and then feeding it to a furnace where burning and chemical recovery
take place.
Initial concentration of the weak black liquor, which contains about 15 percent solids, occurs in the multiple-
effect evaporator. Here process steam is passed countercurrent to the liquor in a series of evaporator tubes that
increase the solids content to 40 to 55 percent. Further concentration is then effected in the direct contact
evaporator. This is generally a scrubbing device (a cyclonic or venturi scrubber or a cascade evaporator) in which
hot combustion gases from the recovery furnace mix with the incoming black liquor to raise its solids content to
55 to 70 percent.
The black liquor concentrate is then sprayed into the recovery furnace where the organic content supports
combustion. The inorganic compounds fall to the bottom of the furnace and are discharged to the smelt dissolving
tank to form a solution called "green liquor." The green liquor is then conveyed to a causticizer where slaked
lime (calcium hydroxide) is added to convert the solution back to white liquor, which can be reused in subsequent
cooks. Residual lime sludge from the caustici/er can be recycled after being dewatered and calcined in the hot
lime kiln.
Many mills need more steam for process heating, for driving equipment, for providing electric power, etc., than
can be provided by the recovery furnace alone. Thus, conventional industrial boilers that burn coal, oil, natural
gas, and in some cases, bark and wood waste are commonly employed.
4/76 Wood Products Industry 10.1-1
-------
to
CO
0)
o
o
CD
O
CO
05
'a.
Q.
CO
H
CO
»*
CO
CO
o
O
0>
^
O)
U-
10.1-2
EMISSION FACTORS
5/74
-------
10.1.2.2. Emission and Controlsl-6 Particulate emissions from the kraft process occur primarily from the re-
covery furnace, the lime kiln, and the smelt dissolving tank. These emissions consist mainly of sodium salts but
include some calcium salts from the lime kiln. They are caused primarily by the carryover of solids plus the sub-
limation and condensation of the inorganic chemicals.
Particulate control is provided on recovery furnaces in a variety of ways. In mills where either a cyclonic
scrubber or cascade evaporator serves as the direct contact evaporator, further control is necessary as these devices
are generally only 20 to 50 percent efficient for particulates. Most often in these cases, an electrostatic precipitator
is employed after the direct contact evaporator to provide an overall particulate control efficiency of 85 to > 99
percent. In a few mills, however, a venturi scrubber is utilized as the direct contact evaporator and simultaneously
provides 80 to 90 percent particulate control. In either case auxiliary scrubbers may be included after the
precipitator or the venturi scrubber to provide additional control of particulates.
Particulate control on lime kilns is generally accomplished by scrubbers. Smelt dissolving tanks are commonly
controlled by mesh pads but employ scrubbers when further control is needed.
The characteristic odor of the kraft mill is caused in large part by the emission of hydrogen sulfide. The major
source is the direct contact evaporator in which the sodium sulfide in the black liquor reacts with the carbon
dioxide in the furnace exhaust. The lime kiln can also be a potential source as a similar reaction occurs involving
residual sodium sulfide in the lime mud. Lesser amounts of hydrogen sulfide are emitted with the noncondensible
off-gasses from the digesters and multiple-effect evaporators.
The kraft-process odor also results from an assortment of organic sulfur compounds, all of which have extremely
low odor thresholds. Methyl mercaptan and dimethyl sulfide are formed in reactions with the wood component
lignin. Dimethyl disulfide is formed through the oxidation of mercaptan groups derived from the lignin. These
compounds are emitted from many points within a mill; however, the main sources are the digester/blow tank
systems and the direct contact evaporator.
Although odor control devices, per se, are not generally employed in kraft mills, control of reduced sulfur
compounds can be accomplished by process modifications and by optimizing operating conditions. For example,
black liquor oxidation systems, which oxidize sulfides into less reactive thiosulfates, can considerably reduce
odorous sulfur emissions from the direct contact evaporator, although the vent gases from such systems become
minor odor sources themselves. Noncondensible odorous gases vented from the digester/blow tank system and
multiple-effect evaporators can be destroyed by thermal oxidation, usually by passing them through the lime
kiln. Optimum operation of the recovery furnace, by avoiding overloading and by maintaining sufficient oxygen
residual and turbulence, significantly reduces emissions of reduced sulfur compounds from this source. In addi-
tion, the use of fresh water instead of contaminated condensates in the scrubbers and pulp washers further reduces
odorous emissions. The effect of any of these modifications on a given mill's emissions will vary considerably.
Several new mills have incorporated recovery systems that eliminate the conventional direct contact evaporators.
In one system, preheated combustion air rather than flue gas provides direct contact evaporation. In the other,
the multiple-effect evaporator system is extended to replace the direct contact evaporator altogether. In both of
these systems, reduced sulfur emissions from the recovery furnace/direct contact evaporator reportedly can be
reduced by more than 95 percent from conventional uncontrolled systems.
Sulfur dioxide emissions result mainly from oxidation of reduced sulfur compounds in the recovery furnace.
It is reported that the direct contact evaporator absorbs 50 to 80 percent of these emissions; further scrubbing, if
employed, can reduce them another 10 to 20 percent.
Potential sources of carbon monoxide emissions from the kraft process include the recovery furnace and lime
kilns. The major cause of carbon monoxide emissions is furnace operation well above rated capacity, making it
impossible to maintain oxidizing conditions.
4/77 Wood Products Industry 10.1-3
-------
Some nitrogen oxides are also emitted from the recovery furnace and lime kilns although the
amounts are relatively small. Indications are that nitrogen oxides emissions from each of these sources
are on the order of 1 pound per air-dried ton (0.5 kg/air-dried MT) of pulp produced.5 6
A major source of emissions in a kraft mill is the boiler for generating auxiliary steam and power.
The fuels used are coal, oil, natural gas, or bark/wood waste. Emission factors for boilers are presented
in Chapter 1.
Table 10.1.2-1 presents emission factors for a conventional kraft mill. The most widely used
particulate controls devices are shown along with the odor reductions resulting from black liquor
oxidation and incineration of noncondensible off-gases.
10.1.3 Acid Sulfite Pulping by Tom Lahre
10.1.3.1 Process Description14 The production of acid sulf ite pulp proceeds similarly to kraft pulp-
ing except that different chemicals are used in the cooking liquor. In place of the caustic solution used
to dissolve the lignin in the wood, sulfurous acid is employed. To buffer the cooking solution, a bisul-
fite of sodium, magnesium, calcium, or ammonium is used. A simplified flow diagram of a magnesium-
base process is shown in Figure 10.1.3-1.
Digestion is carried out under high pressure and high temperature in either batch-mode or con-
tinuous digesters in the presence^ of a sulfurous acid-bisulfite cooking liquor. When cooking is com-
leted, the digester is either discharged at high pressure into a blow pit or its contents are pumped out
at a lower pressure into a dump tank. The spent sulfite liquor (also called red liquor) then drains
through the bottom of the tank and is either treated and disposed, incinerated, or sent to a plant for
recovery of heat and chemicals. The pulp is then washed and processed through screens and centri-
fuges for removal of knots, bundles of fibers, and other materials. It subsequently may be bleached,
pressed, and dried in paper-making operations.
Because of the variety of bases employed in the cooking liquor, numerous schemes for heat and/or
chemical recovery have evolved. In calcium-base systems, which are used mostly in older mills, chemi-
cal recovery is not practical, and the spent liquor is usually discarded or incinerated. In ammonium-
base operations, heat can be recovered from the spent liquor through combustion, but the ammonium
base is consumed in the process. In sodium- or magnesium-base operations heat, sulfur, and base
recovery are all feasible.
If recovery is practiced, the spent weak red liquor (which contains more than half of the raw
materials as dissolved organic solids) is concentrated in a multiple-effect evaporator and direct contact
evaporator to 55 to 60 percent solids. Strong liquor is sprayed into a furnace and burned, producing
steam for the digesters, evaporators, etc., and to meet the mills power requirements.
When magnesium base liquor is burned, a flue gas is produced from which magnesium oxide is
recovered in a multiple cyclone as fine white powder. The magnesium oxide is then water-slaked and
used as circulating liquor in a series of venturi scrubbers which are designed to absorb sulfur dioxide
from the flue gas and form a bisulfite solution for use in the cook cycle. When sodium-base liquor is
burned, the inorganic compounds are recovered as a molten smelt containing sodium sulfide and
sodium carbonate. This smelt may be processed further and used to absorb sulfur dioxide from the
flue gas and sulfur burner. In some sodium-base mills, however, the smelt may be sold to a nearby kraft
mill as raw material for producing green liquor.
10.1-4 EMISSION FACTORS 4/77
-------
ca
O
CC c/3
cc oc
CO
nfg
CO
oc
0
TT
C CO
fl) - *
(?"§
13 E
.X
ll
CO 8
O 0
E
0_
c^
»- S?
02
3 -0
CO -JJ
0
"O
^J,
0)
y
k-
Q.
a
H
CT
c
,^
5
5
O)
c
o
5
r-
~oi
O
|_
^>
en
*
c
o
^
1
2
5
c
o
4-1
o
4-*
c
8
0)
u
1
LO
o
LO
<-
LO
O
o
«
o
1
1
1
1
t
O)
g
4-»
CD
03
k_
'c
Z)
73
C
CD
CD
k.
03
03
Q
O
CM
O
T
O
o
CM
O
o"
I
1
LO
o
o
5
d
1
1
"S
CD
t_
C
13
o
LO
O
o"
IT-
CO
1
1
LO
o
0
o
o
o
1
1
D3
CD
03
k_
C
D
t3
i
~5_
.
1
LO~LO
O O
-""-
"co~CD
CM CM
°°
- ^
O 0
CO CD
CM CM
LO LO
CM CM
LO LO
- LO
LO OO
r^ CM
S5
sz
"S
CD ^
C 03
^ >
T3
k_ +^
CD >. C3
§. | 0
<0 Q 2_
cc
LO
O
'^~
"co
fM
C^
*~
O
CO
'
CM
LO
CM
LO
*
CO
o
'4.,
"S s
i ~
CJ QJ
OTLu
S
g_
(Q
5
LO
O
'"'-
"co
"CM
°
"~
0
CD
CM
LO
'-
OO
^
LO
r-i
LO
Kb
*
ro
i_
Q
5 >-
'_^~
£~ 3
< '
CM CM
0 0
^ ^"
0 O
CM CM
O O
0 O
^" ^"
O 0
o o
1 1
1 1
LO LO
O O
O O
r- .-
0 0
LO LO
c\i c>
LO «-
E "S "°
a CD Q.
^ C O
" D S
c?
CO
15 ^
c
CO
LO LO
CM CM LO LO
T- T- CM CM
OOO O
LO LO
CM CM LO LO
OOO O
LO
LO LO O
CM CM O 1
OOO
,-.
LO LO O
d o d '
LO LO 1 1
0 O | |
LO
r r- 1 1
d d
00 CM 1 1
d d ,
LO LO .
CM- 1 1
CM
LO CO , |
^ 1 1
"S «- "S "S
cc _Q co CD
c ^ c c
D CO D D
S
c g ^ §~W
5 c -o y
fll ^ C5 -3
P 6- O Jo O
.E 5 o - w
_i I S
r-
0
u
c
0
£
"0
oc
3
10
c
8
IA
'i
"o
(/)
£
o
^>
O
a
(/>
C
o
CD
*^
ID
D
i:-
2 r--
* S
0 U
1 £
c 0
S U
LL DC
ID A
IA
O
CD
C
k.
3
i
g
ID
O
k.
0
>
O
S
0
3
ID
>
0
£
D)
IE
b S
«- D
o>
r>" i-
r~ to
in in
0 0
U U
Sc
0
k. k.
0 0
0 0
oc oc
u -a
IA
§
k.
3
overloaded
S
**"
0)
3
{D
>
0
^
D)
IE
0
(A
D
References 6, 11.
D
ally expressed as sulfur.
§
flj
£
ID
IA
O
|
1
*
S
1
in
0
r-
H
ci
CM"
b
t
r-.
IA
u
£
0
1
Q>
0
o
disulfi
>.
0
T3
OC
CA
£
0
T3
3
10
"5.
0
7
oc
co
oc
c
ID
3 SH- methyl mercap
»4-
kiln, recovery furnace, or equivalent, the reduced sulfur compounds
0
0
£
4-1
3
^
0
I
sources are
0
10
0
5
2
10
0
IA
ID
O>
0
.0
If the noncondensi
o>
are destroyed..
ator is used for direct contact evaporation with no further controls.
Q.
ID
0
0
ID
u
IA
K-
JC
O
i
£
4-*
3
U
0
J3
C
ID
O
T3
0
>
_O
Q.
0
10
§
ID
T3
X
O
S
3
CT
.£
M
J2
1
1
1
S
J3
"5
o
u
1
rated optimally.
1
(/)
0
§
3
}
>-s
75 £
.y »
£5
" T3
0 C
(D
5)
oc
IA
?
i
o
u
3
rhese reduced sulf
ID
O
0
8
in
I
ID
D
\S
99 percent when o>
9vaporation with no further controls.
u
2
§
o
S
k.
»4-
o
IA
10
0
(\
in
3
C
0
ID
C
.C
1
ID
10
O
O
£
o
JC
k»
3(1.5) when employed after an electrostatic precipitator.
1
ID
k.
0
|
8
enturi
>
ID
10
"o
H-
i
&
3
O
it-
co
5
3
CD
0
.C
C
0
in
in
0
IA
D
oxidation is included, a factor of 0.6(0.3) should be used.
k.
o
c
0
&
o
0
c
2
8
^
u
o
ownst
.0
0>
Includes knotter ven
_
4/77
Wood Products Industry
10.1-5
-------
10.1-6
EMISSION FACTORS
4/77
-------
If recovery is not practiced, an acid plant of sufficient capacity to fulfill the mill's total sulfite
requirement is necessary. Normally, sulfur is burned in a rotary or spray burner. The gas produced is
then cooled by heat exchangers plus a water spray and then absorbed in a variety of different scrubbers
containing either limestone or a solution of the base chemical. Where recovery is practiced, fortifica-
tion is accomplished similarly, although a much smaller amount of sulfur dioxide must be produced
to make up for that lost in the process.
10.1.3.2 Emissions and Controls14 - Sulfur dioxide is ^generally considered the major pollutant of
concern from sulfite pulp mills. The characteristic "kraft" odor is not emitted because volatile re-
duced sulfur compounds are not products of the lignin-bisulfite reaction.
One of the major SO2 sources is the digester and blow pit or dump tank system. Sulfur dioxide is
present in the intermittent digester relief gases as well as in the gases given off at the end of the cook
when the digester contents are discharged into the blow pit or dump tank. The quantity of sulfur oxide
evolved and emitted to the atmosphere in these gas streams depends on the pH of the cooking liquor,
the pressure at which the digester contents are discharged, and the effectiveness of the absorption
systems employed for SO2 recovery. Scrubbers can be installed that reduce SOa from this source by as
much as 99 percent.
Another source of sulfur dioxide emissions is the recovery system. Since magnesium-, sodium-, and
ammonium-base recovery systems all utilize absorption systems to recover SO2 generated in the re-
covery furnace, acid fortification towers, multiple-effect evaporators, etc., the magnitude of SO2
emissions depends on the desired efficiency of these systems. Generally, such absorption systems
provide better than 95 percent sulfur recovery to minimize sulfur makeup needs.
The various pulp washing, screening, and cleaning operations are also potential sources of SO?.
These operations are numerous and may account for a significant fraction of a mill's SOa emissions if
not controlled.
The only significant paniculate source in the pulping and recovery process is the absorption system
handling the recovery furnace exhaust. Less paniculate is generated in ammonium-base systems than
magnesium- or sodium-base systems as the combustion productions are mostly nitrogen, water vapor,
and sulfur dioxide.
Other major sources of emissions in a sulfite pulp mill include the auxiliary power boilers. Emis-
sion factors for these boilers are presented in Chapter 1.
Emission factors for the various sulfite pulping operations are shown in Table 10.1.3-1.
10.1.4 Neutral Sulfite Semichcmical (NSSC) Pulping
10.1.4.1 Process Description1'7?15'16 - In this process, the wood chips are cooked in a neutral solution of
sodium sulfite and sodium bicarbonate. The sulfite ion reacts with the lignin in the wood, and the
sodium bicarbonate acts as a buffer to maintain a neutral solution. The major difference between this
process (as well as all semichemical techniques) and the kraft and acid sulfite processes is that only a
portion of the lignin is removed during the cook, after which the pulp is further reduced by mechani-
cal disintegration. Because of this, yields as high as 60 to 80 percent can be achieved as opposed to 50 to
55 percent for other chemical processes.
4/77 Wood Products Industry 10.1-7
-------
Table 10.1.3-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR SULFITE PULPING3
Source
Digester/blow pit or
dump tankc
Recovery system
Acid plants
Other sources'
Base
All
MgO
MgO
MgO
MgO
NHs
NH3
Na
Ca
MgO
NH3
Na
NH3
Na
Ca
All
Control
None
Process change6
Scrubber
Process change
and scrubber
All exhaust
vented through
recovery system
Process change
Process change
and scrubber
Process change
and scrubber
Unknown
Multiclone and
venturi
scrubbers
Ammonia
absorption and
mist eliminator
Sodium carbonate
scrubber
Scrubber
Unknown*1
Jenssen
scrubber
None
Emission factor^5
Participate
Ib/ADUT
Negd
Neg
Meg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
2
0.7
4
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
kg/ADUMT
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
1
0.35
2
Neg
Neg
Neg
Neg
Sulfur Dioxide
Ib/ADUT
10-70
2-6
1
0.2
0
25
0.4
2
67
9
7
2
0.3
02
8
12
kg/ADUMT
5-35
1-3
0.5
0.1
0
12.5
0.2 '
1
33.5
4.5
3.5
1
0.2
0.1
4
6
Emission
factor
rating
C
C
B
B
A
D
B
C
C
A
B
C
C
D
C
D
aAII emission factors represent long-term average emissions.
'"'Factors expressed in terms of Ib (kg) of pollutant per air dried unbleached ton (MT) of pulp. All factors are based on data
in Reference 14.
cThese factors represent emissions that occur after the cook is completed and when the digester contents are discharged in-
to the blow pit or dump tank. Some relief gases are vented from the digester during the cook cycle, but these are usually
transferred to pressure accumulators, and the SO2 therein is reabsorbed for use in the cooking liquor. These factors repre-
sent long-term average emissions; in some mills, the actual emissions will be intermittent and for short time periods.
^Negligible emissions.
eProcess changes may include such measures as raising the pH of the cooking liquor, thereby lowering the free SC>2, reliev-
ing the pressure in the digester before the contents are discharged, and pumping out the digester contents instead of blow-
ing them out.
The recovery system at most mills is a closed system that includes the recovery furnace, direct contact evaporator, multi-
ple-effect evaporator, acid fortification tower, and SOj absorption scrubbers. Generally, there will only be one emission
point for the entire recovery system. These factors are long-term averages and include the high SO2 emissions during the
periodic purging of the recovery system.
9 Acid plants are necessary in mills that have no or insufficient recovery systems.
"Control is practiced, but type of control is unknown.
1 Includes miscellaneous pulping operations such as knotters, washers, screens, etc.
10.1-8
EMISSION FACTORS
4/77
-------
The NSSC process varies from mill to mill. Some mills dispose of their spent liquor, some mills recover the
cooking chemicals, and some, which are operated in conjunction with kraft mills, mix their spent liquor with the
kraft liquor as a source of makeup chemicals. When recovery is practiced, the steps involved parallel those of the
sulfite process.
10.1.4.2 Emissions and Controls1'7*15*16 Particulate emissions are a potential problem only when recovery
systems are employed. Mills that do practice recovery, but are not operated in conjunction with kraft operations
often utilize fluidized bed reactors to burn their spent liquor. Because the flue gas contains sodium sulfate and
sodium carbonate dust, efficient particulate collection may be included to facilitate chemical recovery.
A potential gaseous pollutant is sulfur dioxide. The absorbing towers, digester/blow tank system, and recovery
furnace are the main sources of this pollutant with the amounts emitted dependent upon the capability of the
scrubbing devices installed for control and recovery.
Hydrogen sulfide can also be emitted from NSSC mills using kraft-type recovery furnaces. The main potential
source is the absorbing tower where a significant quantity of hydrogen sulfide is liberated as the cooking liquor is
made. Other possible sources include the recovery furnace, depending on the operating conditions maintained, as
well as the digester/blow tank system in mills where some green liquor is used in the cooking process. Where green
liquor is used, it is also possible that significant quantities of mercaptans will be produced. Hydrogen sulfide
emissions can be eliminated if burned to sulfur dioxide prior to entering the absorbing systems.
Because the NSSC process differs greatly from mill to mill, and because of the scarcity of adequate data, no
emission factors are presented.
References for Section 10.1
1. Hendrickson, E. R. et al. Control of Atmospheric Emissions in the Wood Pulping Industry. Vol. I. U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, PHS, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Wash-
ington, D.C. Final report under Contract No. CPA 22-69-18. March 15, 1970.
2. Britt, K. W. Handbook of Pulp and Paper Technology. New York, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1964.
p. 166-200.
' 3. Hendrickson, E. R. et al. Control of Atmospheric Emissions in the Wood Pulping Industry. Vol. III. U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, PHS, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Wash-
ington, D.C. Final report under Contract No. CPA 22-69-18. March 15, 1970.
4. Walther, J. E. and H. R. Amberg. Odor Control in the Kraft Pulp Industry. Chem. Eng. Progress. 66:73-
80, March 1970.
5. Galeano, S. F. and K. M. Leopold. A Survey of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides in the Pulp Mill. TAPPI.
56(3):74-76, March 1973.
6. Source test data from the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 1972.
7. Atmospheric Emissions from the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Industry. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. Publication No. EPA450/1-73-002. September 1973.
4/77 Wood Products Industry 10.1-9
-------
8. Blosser, R. 0. and H. B. Cooper. Particulate Matter Reduction Trends in the Kraft Industry. NCASI paper,
Corvallis, Oregon.
9. Padfield, D. H. Control of Odor from Recovery Units by Direct-Contact Evaporative Scrubbers with
Oxidized Black-Liquor. TAPP1. 56:83-86, January 1973.
10. Walther, J. E. and H. R. Amberg. Emission Control at the Kraft Recovery Furnaces. TAPPI. 55(3): 1185-
1188, August 1972.
11. Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary Sources. U.S. Department of Health
Education and Welfare, PHS, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D.C. Publication
No. AP-65. March 1970. p. 4-24 and 4-25.
12. Blosser, R. 0. et al. An Inventory of Miscellaneous Sources of Reduced Sulfur Emissions from the Kraft
Pulping Process. (Presented at the 63rd APCA Meeting. St. Louis. June 14-18, 1970.)
13. Factors Affecting Emission of Odorous Reduced Sulfur Compounds from Miscellaneous Kraft Process
Sources. NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 60. March 1972.
14. Background Document: Acid Sulfite Pulping. Prepared by Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.,
Gainesville, Fla., for Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-02-1402, Task Order No. 14.
Document No. EPA-450/3-77-005. Research Triangle Park, N.C. January 1977.
15. Benjamin, M. et al. A General Description of Commercial Wood Pulping and Bleaching Processes. J. Air
Pollution Control Assoc. 79(3): 155-161, March 1969.
16. Galeano, S. F. and B. M. Dillard. Process Modifications for Air Pollution Control in Neutral Sulfite Semi-
Chemical Mills. J. Air Pollution Control Assoc. 22(3):195-199, March 1972.
10.1-10 EMISSION FACTORS 4/77
-------
10.2 PULPBOARD
10.2.1 General"
Pulpboaul manufacturing involves the fabrication of fibrous boards from a pulp slurry. This includes two dis-
tinct types of product, papcrboard and fibcrboard. Papcrboard is a general term that describes a shecl 0.012 inch
(0.30 mm) or more in thickness made of fibrous material on a paper-forming machine.2 Fiberboard, also referred
to as particle board, is thicker than papcrboard and is made somewhat differently.
There are two distinct phases in the conversion of wood to pulpboard: (1) the manufacture of pulp from raw
wood and (2) the manufacture of pulpboard from the pulp. This section deals only with the latter as the former
is covered under the section on the wood pulping industry.
10.2.2 Process Description'
In the in ,'iufacture of paperboard, the stock is sent through screens into the head box, from which it flows
onto a mo>.' i{> screen. Approximately 15 percent of the water is removed by suction boxes located under the
screen. Another 50 to 60 percent of the moisture content is removed in the drying section. The dried board
then enters the calendar stack, which imparts the final surface to the product.
In the manufacture of fiberboard, the slurry that remains after pulping is washed and sent to the stock chests
where sizing is added. The refined fiber from the stock chests is fed to the head box of the board machine. The
stock is next fed onto the forming screens and sent to dryers, after which the dry product is finally cut and
fabricated.
10.2.3 Emissions'
Emissions from the paperboard machine consist mainly of water vapor; little or no paniculate matter is emit-
ted from the dryers.3-5 Particulatcs are emitted, however, from the fiberboard drying operation. Additional
particulate emissions occur from the cutting and sanding operations. Emission factors for these operations are
given in section 10.4. Emission factors for pulpboard manufacturing are shown in Table 10.2-1.
Table 10.2-1. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR
PULPBOARD MANUFACTURING3
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: E
Type of product
Paperboard
Fiberboardb
Emissions
Ib/ton
Neg
0.6
kg/MT
Neg
0.3
aEmission factors expressed as units per unit weight of finished product.
''Reference 1.
References for Section 10.2
1. Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Resources Research, Inc., Rcston, Virginia. Prepared for National Air
Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D.C. under Contract No. CPA-22-69-111). April 1970.
2. The Dictionary of Paper. New York, American Paper and Pulp Association, lc)40.
4/76 Wood Products Industry 10.2-1
-------
3. Hough, G. W. and L. J. Gross. Air limission Control in a Modem Pulp and Papei Mill. Aniei. I'apci Indus! ly.
51:36, February 1969.
4. Pollution Control Progress. J. Air Pollution Control Assoc. 77:410, June 1967.
5. Private communication between I. Gellman and the National Council of I he Paper Industry for Clean Air
and Stream Improvement. New York, October 28, 1469.
10.2-2 EMISSION FACTORS 4/76
-------
10.3 PLYWOOD VENEER AND LAYOUT OPERATIONS
Ky Thomas l-ahrc
10.3.1 Process Description'
Plywood is a material made of several thin wood veneers bonded together with an adhesive. Its uses are many
and include wall sidings, sheathing, roof-decking, concrete-formboards, floors, and containers.
During the manufacture of plywood, incoming logs are sawed to desired length, debarked, and then peeled
into thin, continuous veneers of uniform thickness. (Veneer thicknesses of 1/45 to 1/5 inch are common.)
These veneers are then transported to special dryers where they are subjected to high temperatures until dried to
a desired moisture content. After drying, the veneers are sorted, patched, and assembled in layers with some
type of thermosetting resin used as the adhesive. The veneer assembly is then transferred to a hot press where,
under presssure and steam heat, the plywood product is formed. Subsequently, all that remains is trimming,
sanding, and possibly some sort of finishing treatment to enhance the usefulness of the plywood.
10.3.2 Emissions2-3
The main sources of emissions from plywood manufacturing are the veneer drying and sanding operations.
A third source is the pressing operation although these emissions are considered minor.
The major pollutants emitted from veneer dryers are organics. These consist of two discernable fractions:
(1) condensibles, consisting of wood resins, resin acids, and wood sugars, which form a blue haze upon cooling
in the atmosphere, and (2) volatiles, which are comprised of terpines and unburned methane-the latter occurring
when gas-fired dryers are employed. The amounts of these compounds produced depends on the wood species
dried, the drying time, and the nature and operation of the dryer itself. In addition, negligible amounts of fine
wood fibers are also emitted during the drying process.
Sanding operations are a potential source of particulate emissions (see section 10.4). Emission factors for ply-
wood veneer dryers without controls are given in Table 10.3-1.
Table 10.3-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD MANUFACTURING
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: B
Source
Veneer dryers
Organic compound3-13
Condensible
lb/104 ft2
3.6
kg/103 m2
1.9
Volatile
Ib/104ft2
2.1
kg/103 m2
1.1
aEmission factors expressed in pounds of pollutant per 10,000 square feet of 3/8-in. plywood produced (kilograms per 1,000
square meters on a 1-cm basis).
bReferences 2 and 3.
4/76
Wood Products Industry
10.3-1
-------
References for Section 10.3
I. Hemming, C. B. Encyclopedia ol Chemical Technology. 2nd I'd Vol. 15. New Yoik. John Wiley aii'l Sons.
1968. p .896-907.
2. Monroe, F. L. et al. Investigation of Emissions from Plywood Veneer Dryers. Final Report. Washington
State University, Pullman, Washington. Piepaied foi the Plywood Reseatclt Foundation and I he US. l.n-
vnonmcntal Protection Agency. Rcscaich Triangle Park.N C. Publication No. APTD-1 144 Fehruaiy 1972
3. Mick, Allen and Dean McCargai. An Pollution Problems in Plywood, Parlicleboaid. and Haidboard Mills in
the Mid-Willamette Valley. Mid-Willamette Valley Air Pollution Authority, Salem Oicgon. Match 24, 1969.
10.3-2 EMISSION FACTORS 4/76
-------
10.4 WOODWORKING OPERATIONS by Tom Lahre
10.4.1 General 1'5
"Woodworking," as defined in this section, includes any operation that involves the generation of small wood
waste particles (shavings, sanderdust, sawdust, etc.) by any kind of mechanical manipulation of wood, bark, or
wood byproducts. Common woodworking operations include sawing, planing, chipping, shaping, moulding,
hogging, latheing, and sanding. Woodworking operations are found in numerous industries such as sawmills;
plywood, particleboard, and hardboard plants; and furniture manufacturing plants.
Most plants engaged in woodworking employ pneumatic transfer systems to remove the generated wood waste
from the immediate proximity of each woodworking operation. These systems are necessary as a housekeeping
measure to eliminate the vast quantity of waste material that would otherwise accumulate. They are also a
convenient means of transporting the waste material to common collection points for ultimate disposal. Large
diameter cyclones have historically been the primary means of separating the waste material from the airstreams
in the pneumatic transfer systems, although baghouses have recently been installed in some plants for this
purpose.
The waste material collected in the cyclones or baghouses may be burned in wood waste boilers, utilized in the
manufacture of other products (such as pulp or particleboard), or incinerated in conical (teepee/wigwam)
burners. The latter practice is declining with the advent of more stringent air pollution control regulations and
because of the economic attractiveness of utilizing wood waste as a resource.
10.4.2 Emissions1"6
The only pollutant of concern in woodworking operations is particulate matter. The major emission points are
the cyclones utilized in the pneumatic transfer systems. The quantity of particulate emissions from a given
cyclone will depend on the dimensions of the cyclone, the velocity of the airstream, and the nature of the
operation generating the waste. Typical large-diameter cyclones found in the industry will only effectively collect
particles greater than 40 micrometers in diameter. Baghouses, when employed, collect essentially all of the waste
material in the airstream.
It is difficult to describe a typical woodworking operation and the emissions resulting therefrom because of
the many types of operations that may be required to produce a given type of product and because of the many
variations that may exist in the pneumatic transfer and collection systems. For example, the waste from
numerous pieces of equipment often feed into the same cyclone, and it is common for the material collected in
one or several cyclones to be conveyed to another cyclone. It is also possible for portions of the waste generated
by a single operation to be directed to different cyclones.
Because of this complexity, it is useful when evaluating emissions from a given facility to consider the waste
handling cyclones as air pollution sources instead of the various woodworking operations that actually generate
the particulate matter. Emission factors for typical large-diameter cyclones utilized for waste collection in
woodworking operations are given in Table 10.4-1.
Emission factors for wood waste boilers, conical burners, and various drying operationsoften found in
facilities employing woodworking operationsare given in Sections 1.6, 2.3, 10.2, and 10.3.
4/76 Wood Products Industry 10.4-1
-------
Table 10.4.1. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR LARGE
DIAMETER CYCLONES8 IN WOODWORKING INDUSTRY
Types of waste handled
Sanderdustc
Otherf
Particulate emissions'3
gr/scf
0.055d
0.038
g/Njn3
0.1 26d
0.078
Ib/hr
5e
2h
kg/hr
2.3e
0.91 h
typical waste collection cyclones range from 4 to 16 feet (1.2 to 4.9 meters) in diameter
and employ airflows ranging from 2,000 to 26,000 standard cubic feet (57 to 740 normal
cubic meters) per minute. Note: if baghouses are used for waste collection, particulate
emissions will be negligible.
"Based on information in References 1 through 3.
cThese factors should be used whenever waste from sanding operations is fed directly into
the cyclone in question.
CThese factors represent the median of all values observed. The observed values range from
0.005 to 0.16 gr/scf (0.0114 to 0.37 g/Nm3).
CThese factors represent the median of all values observed. The observed values range from
0.2 to 30 Ib/hr (0.09 to 13.6 kg/hr).
These factors should be used for cyclones handling waste from all operations other than
sanding. This includes cyclones that handle waste (including sanderdust) already collected
by another cyclone.
0These factors represent the median of all values observed. The observed values range from
0.001 to 0.16 gr/scf (0.002 to 0.37 g/Nm3).
"These factors represent the median of all values observed. The observed values range from
0.03 to 24 Ib/hr (0.014 to 10.9 kg/hr).
References for Section 10.4
1. Source test data supplied by Robert Harris of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Portland,
Ore. September 1975.
2. Walton, J.W., et al. Air Pollution in the Woodworking Industry. (Presented at 68th Annual Meeting of the Air
Pollution Control Association. Boston. Paper No. 75-34-1. June 15-20, 1975.)
3. Patton, J.D. and J.W. Walton. Applying the High Volume Stack Sampler to Measure Emissions From Cotton
Gins, Woodworking Operations, and Feed and Grain Mills. (Presented at 3rd Annual Industrial Air Pollution
Control Conference. Knoxville. March 29-30,1973.)
4. Sexton, C.F. Control of Atmospheric Emissions from the Manufacturing of Furniture. (Presented at 2nd
Annual Industrial Air Pollution Control Conference. Knoxville. April 20-21,1972.)
5. Mick, A. and D. McCargar. Air Pollution Problems in Plywood, Particleboard, and Hardboard Mills in the
Mid-Willamette Valley. Mid-Willamette Valley Air Pollution Authority, Salem, Ore. March 24,1969.
6. Information supplied by the North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources, Raleigh, N.C.
December 1975.
10.4-2
EMISSION FACTORS
4/76
-------
10.4 WOODWORKING OPERATIONS
10.4.3 Fugitive Emission Factors
Charles Masser
Since most woodworking operations control emissions out of necessity, fugitive emissions are seldom a
problem. However, the wood waste storage bins are a common source of fugitive emissions. Table 10.4-2
shows these emission sources and their corresponding emission factors.
Information concerning size characteristics is very limited. Data collected in a western red cedar furni-
ture factory equipped with exhaust ventilation on most woodworking equipment showed most suspended
particles in the working environment to be less than 2 /J.m in diameter.7
Table 10.4-2. POTENTIAL UNCONTROLLED
FUGITIVE PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS
FOR WOODWORKING OPERATIONS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Type of operation
Wood waste storage bin ventb
Wood waste storage bin loadoutb
Participates3
Ib/ton
1.0
2.0
kg/MT
0.5
1.0
aFactors expressed as units per unit weight of wood waste handled
Engineering judgment based on plant visits.
Additional Reference for Section 10.4
7. Lester V. Cralley, et a/., Industrial Enivronmental Health, the Worker and the Community, Academic
Press, New York and London, 1972.
7/79
Wood Processing
10.4-3
-------
-------
Table 11.2.5-1. MEASURED EMISSION FACTORS
FOR DUST ENTRAPMENT FROM PAVED ROADWAYS
EMISSION FACTOR RATING: C
Study
Reference 3C
Reference 4d
Averaae8
Emission factors"1"
(range and average)
g/vehicle km
(2.8-5.6)4.3
(0.26-10.4)2.6
3.5
Ib/vehicle mile
(0.01-0.02)0.015
(0.0009-0.037)0.009
0.012
8Table 3.1.4-7 indicates 0.33 g/km of participate emissions from exhaust
and tire wear, which have not been excluded from the measured results
given in Table 11.2.5-1. Average emissions of entrained dust, excluding
exhaust and tire wear, would therefore be aooroximatelv 3.2 g/km.
""Emission factors reflect average "dry day" conditions. During periods of
rainfall, reentrainment of dust should be negligible. However, after rain
ends, emissions may be temporarily increased as a result of deposition of
mud on street surfaces. When this material dries, it may become entrained
by vehicle action.
"These measurements relate to the amount of material passing through a
vertical plane located approximately 5 meters downwind from the near
edge of the street. Thus, these measured results exclude any particles that
settle within 5 meters from the edge of the street. In Reference 3,
measured emission factors were also obtained for a case where streets
were artificially loaded with very high (10,000 kg/km) amounts of dirt and
gravel. Very high emissions were observed for a short period of time (up to
9.8 kg/vehicle km), but emission factors decreased rapidly as street
loadings were decreased by vehicle traffic.
dThese measurements were based on high volume sampler data taken 10
meters downwind from the street. Thus, particles settling within 10 meters
of the edge of the street are excluded from the emission factor.
Measurements were also taken 20 and 30 meters downwind. These
measurements appear to show that emission rates decrease with increasing
distance from the source, presumably by particle settling. On the average,
the emission rate calculated 20 meters downwind was 86 percent of the 10
meter value, and the emission rate 30 meters downwind was 77 percent of
the 10 meter value.
"Average determined from average results of References 3 and 4, with each
study weighted equally.
12/77
Miscellaneous Sources
11.2.5-3
-------
References for Section 11.2.5
1. Dunbar, D. R. Resuspension of Paniculate Matter. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Reasearch
Triangle Park, N.C. March 1976.
2. Abel, M. P. The Impact of Refloatation on Chicago's Total Suspended Particulate Levels. Master's Thesis,
Purdue University. August 1974.
3. Cowherd, C., Jr., C. M. Maxwell, and D. W. Nelson. Quantification of Dust Entrapment from Paved Road-
ways. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract No. 68-02-1403, Task Order 25. Publication No. EPA-
450/3-77-027. July 1977.
4. Axetell, K. and J. Zell. Control of Reentrained Dust from Paved Streets. PEDCo Environmental Specialists,
Inc., Cincinnati, Oh. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Kansas City, Mo.,
under Contract No. 68-02-1375, Task Order No. 35. July 1977.
5. Cowherd, C., Jr., K. Axetell, Jr., C. M. Guenther, and G. A. Jutze. Development of Emission Factors for Fugi-
tive Dust Sources. Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C., under Contract No. 68-02-0619. Publication No. EPA-
450/3-74-037. June 1974.
11.2.5-4 EMISSION FACTORS 12/77
-------
APPENDIX C
NEDS SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND
EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
The Source Classification Codes (SCCs) presented herein comprise the "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 SCCs. The SCC is
the most critical NEDS data item since, without an appropriate SCC, the source cannot be properly
identified for retrieval purposes, nor the source emissions properly calculated.
Also presented herein are emission factors for the five NEDS pollutants (particulates, sulfur ox-
ides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide) that correspond to each SCC. These fac-
tors are used in NEDS to compute automatically 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 infor-
mation not yet incorporated into AP-42 or based merely on the similarity of one process to another for
which emissions information does exist.
NOTE: This Source Classification Code and emission factor listing replaces the listing dated Decem-
ber 1975, which appeared in AP-42, Supplement 5. The new listing has been updated to include all
emission factor changes through AP-42, Supplement 9. The listing has also been reformatted and re-
arranged to improve readability and to facilitate cross referencing with Standard Industrial Classifi-
cation (SIC) codes. A number of new SCCs have been added to the listing. In addition, many of the
SCCs that appeared in the December 1975 edition have been deleted. A videocassette tape describing
the use of this revised listing has been prepared. To obtain the videocassette tape, or for any other
comments regarding this listing, inquiries should be directed to:
Chief, Requests and Information Section
National Air Data Branch (MD-14)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: (919) 541-5395 (FTS) 629-5395
7/79 Appendix C C-i
-------
TABLE__OF CONTOITS
PARTJ_
THESE SCC CATEGORIES ARE APPLICABLE TO A WIDE VARIETY OF PROCESSES AND THUS ARE GROUPED.
Page
External Combustion Boilers - Electric Generation C-3
External Combustion Boilers - Industrial C-4
External Combustion Boilers - Commercial/Institutional C-6
External Combustion - Space Heaters C-8
Internal Combustion Engines C-9
Solid Waste Disposal - Government C-10
Solid Waste Disposal - Commercial/Institutional C-10
Solid Waste Disposal - Industrial C-ll
In-process fuel Use C-12
Degreasing C-13
Surface Coating C-13
Thinning Solvents C-13
Miscellaneous Hydrocarbon Evaporation C-15
PART II
CODES FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
SIC Page
Fugitive Emissions from Industrial Sources
Agricultural Services
Metal Mining
Anthracite Mining and Bituminous Coal and Lign.te Minina
Oil and Gas Extraction
Mining and Quarrying of Nonmetallic Minerals, Except Fuels
Food and Kindred Products
Tobacco Manufacturers
Texti 1 e Mill Products
Lumber and Wooc1 Products, Except Furniture
Furniture and cixtures
Paper and Allied Products
Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries
Chemicals and Allied Products
Industrial Inorganic Chemicals
Plastic Materials and Synthetic Resins,
Rubbers and Fibers
Drugs
Soap, f'etergents and Cleaning Preparations, Etc.
Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers, Enamels and
Al 1 led Products
Industrial Organic Chemicals
Agricultural Chemicals
Miscellaneous Chemical Products
Petroleum Refining and Related Industries
Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Products
Leather and Leather Products
Stone, Clay, Glass and Concrete Products
Flat Glass, Container Glass and Glassware
Pressed or Blown
Cement Manufacturing
Structural Clay Products
Pottery and Related Products
Concrete, Gypsum and Plaster Products
Abrasive, Asbestos and Miscellaneous Nonmetallic
Mineral Products
Primary Metal Industries
Blast Furnaces, Steelworks and Rolling and
Fi ni shing Mills
Iron and Steel Foundries
Primary Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous Metals
Secondary Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous Metals
Fabricated Metal Products, Except Machinery and
Major Groups 02,07
Major Group 10
Major Groups 11-12
Major Group 1 3
Major Group 14
Major Group 20
Major Group 21
Major Group 22
Major Group 24
Major Group 25
Major Group 26
Major Group 27
Major Group 28
Group 281
Group 282
Group 283
Group 284
Group 285
Group 286
Group 287
Group 289
Major Group 29
Major Group 30
Major Group 31
Major Group 32
Groups 331-332
Group 324
Group 325
Group 326
Group 327
Group 329
Major Group 33
Group 331
Group 332
Group 333
Group 334
C-19
C-20
C-21
C-22
C-23
C-24
C-27
C-32
C-33
C-34
C-35
C-36
C-38
C-39
C-39
C-40
C-41
C-42
C-42
C-42
C-45
C-47
C-49
C-54
C-55
C-56
C-56
C-57
C-58
C-58
C-58
C-59
C-61
C-61
C-63
C-64
C-66
[Ifctrical ,]nd electronic Machinery, Equipment
,inrl (>u[)pl io'. Major Group 36 C-70
Wholesale Trade - Nondurable Goods Major Group 51 C-71
Pfr'.on.il Service', Major Group 72 C-77
-------
PART 1
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES
FOR
GENERAL PROCESSES
I MISSION FACTORS
C-l
-------
-------
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - ELECTRIC GENERATION
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
S0y
NOV
HC
CO
UNITS
NOTE: A. Both boiler capacities and throughputs must be reported to NEDS for all boilers.
B. Most SCC codes in the 99 categories have besn deleted in this listing because specific boiler codes are available.
C. Unless otherwise indicated, SCC's are defined to include all boiler sizes.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - ELECTRIC GENERATION - 4911
Anthracite Coal
1-01-001-01
1-01-001-02
Bituminous Coal
1-01-002-01
1-01-002-02
1-01-002-03
1-01-002-04
1-01-002-05
Pulverized coal
Travelling grate stokers
Pulverized coal: wet bottom
Pulverized coal: dry bottom
Cyclone furnace
Spreader stoker
Travelling grate (overfeed) stoker 5.00 A
Pulverized coal 7.00 A
Cyclone furnace 6.00 A
Travelling grate (overfeed) stoker 3.00 A
Spreader stokers 7.00 A
Residual Oil
1-01-004-01
1-01-004-04
1-01-004-05
1-01-004-06
Distillate Oil
1-01-005-01
1-01-005-04
1-01-005-05
Natural Gas
1-01-006-01
1-01-006-02
1-01-006-04
17.0 A
1.00 A
13.0 A
17.0 A
2.00 A
13.0 A
5.00 A
38.0 S
38.0 S
38.0 S
38.0 S
38.0 S
38.0 S
38.0 S
18.0
10.0
30.0
18.0
55.0
15.0
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.30
0.30
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Grade 6 oil: normal firing
(Normal firing includes hori-
zontally opposed and front
wall firing)
Grade 6 oil: tangential firing
Grade 5 oil: normal firing
Grade 5 oil: tangential firing
Grades 1 and 2 oil
Grade 4 oil: normal firing
Grade 4 oil: tangential firing
13.0
10.0
10.0
2.00
7.00
7.00
10.0
Boilers over 100 MMBtu/hr, except
for tangentially fired units
Boilers under 100 MMBtu/hr, except 10.0
for tangentially fired units
Tangentially fired Boilers 10.0
Process Gas (Specify Gas In Comments)
1-01-007-01 Boilers over 100 MMBtu
1-01-007-02
Coke
1-01-008-01
Boilers under 100 MMBtu
All boiler sizes
30.0 S 14.0
30.0 S 17.0
30.0 S 6.0
30.0 S 6.0
0.30 1.00
0.30 1.00
1.00 2.00
1.00 2.00
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
13.0 S' 159.0 S 105.0 1.00 5.00 1000 gallons burned
159.0 S 50.0
159.0 S 105.0
159.0 S 50.0
144.0 S 105.0
150.0 S 105.0
150.0 S 50.0
0.60 700.0
0.60 180.0
0.60 300.0
10.0 950.0 5 700.0
10.0 950.0 S 230.0
17.0 A
38.0 S
18.0
1.00 5.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 5.00
l.U' 5.00
1.00 5.00
1.00 17.0
1.00 17.0
1.00 17.0
1.00 17.0
1.00 17.0
0.03 1.00
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Mi 1?ion cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Tons burned
'A' indicates the ash content of the fuel.
'S1 indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-weight basis.
(1)
Particulate emissions from residual oil combustion can be more accurately estimated from the equation
lb/1000 gal = IDS + 3. See AP-42, page 1.3-2.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-3
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS
SCC PROCESS
PART
NOTE: A. Both boiler capacities and throughputs must be reported
B. Most SCC codes in the 99 categories have been deleted in
C. Unless otherwise indicated, SCC's are defined to include
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - ELECTRIC GENERATION (cont)
Wood/Bark Waste
1-01-009-01 Bark-fired boiler
1-01-009-02 Wood/bark-fired boilers
1-01-009-03 Wood-fired boiler
75.0
37.5
10.0
sox
EMITTED PER UNIT
NOX
HC
CO UNITS
to NLDS for all boilers.
this listing because specific
all boiler sizes.
1.50 10.0 2.00 2.
1.50 10.0 2.00 2.
1.50 10.0 2.00 2.
boiler codes are available.
00 Tons burned
00 Tons burned
00 Tons burned
All boiler sizes
16.0
0.00
1.20
2.00 2.00
Solid Waste
1-01-012-01
Liquid Waste
Specify waste material in
comment field
1-01-013-01 Specify waste material in comment
field
1-01-013-02 Haste oil
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - INDUSTRIAL
Anthracite Coal
1-02-001-01
1-02-001-04
1-02-001-07
Bituminous Coal
1-02-002-01
1-02-002-02
1-02-002-03
1-02-002-04
1-02-002-05
1-02-002-10
Lignite
1-02-003-01
1-02-003-03
1-02-003-04
1-02-003-06
Residual Oil
1-02-004-01
1-02-004-04
Pulverized coal
Travelling grate (overfeed) stoker
Hand-f i red
Pulverized coal: wet bottom
Pulverized coal: dry bottom
Cyclone furnace
Spreader stoker
Overfeed and underfeed stokers
greater than 10 W.Btu/hr
Overfeed and underfeed stokers
less than 10 MMBtu/hr
Pulverized coal
Cyclone furnace
Travelling grate (overfeed) stokes
Spreader stoker
Grade 6 oil
Grade 5 oil
19.
17
1
10
13
17
2
13
5
2
7
6
3
7
12
10
0
.0
.00
.0
.0
.0
.00
.0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
A
A
A,
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
.os1
.0
38.
38.
38.
38.
38.
38.
38.
38.
38.
30.
30.
30.
30.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
159.0
159.0
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
18.0
10.0
3.00
30.0
18.0
55.0 "
15.0
15.0
6.00
14.0
17.0
6.00
6.00
60.0
60.0
'A' indicates the ash content of the fuel.
'S1 indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-Weight basis.
0.00 1.00
0.00 1.00
2.50 90.0
0.30
0.30
0.30
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
3.00 10.0
0.30 1.00
0.30 1.00
1.00 2.00
1.00 2.00
5.00
5.00
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Particulate emissions from residual oil combustion can be more accurately estimated from the equation
lb/1000 gal = 105 + 3. See AP-42, page 1.3-2.
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - INDUSTRIAL
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO.
HC CO
UNITS
NOTE: A. Both boiler capacities and throughputs must be reported to NEDS for all boilers.
6. Most SCC codes in the 99 categories have been deleted In this listing because specific boiler codes are available.
C. Unless otherwise Indicated, SCC's are defined to Include all boiler sizes.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - INDUSTRIAL (Continued)
Distillate 011
1-02-005-01 Grades 1 and 2 oil
1-02-005-04 Grade 4 oil
Natural Gas
1-02-006-01
1-02-006-02
1-02-006-03
Over 100 MMBtu/hr
10-100 MMBtu/hr
Less than 10 MMBtu/hr
1-02-007-04
1-02-007-07
1-02-007-99
Coke
1-02-008-02
Wood/Bark Waste
Blast furnace
Coke oven
Other/not classified
{Specify 1n comments)
All boiler sizes
1-02-009-01 Bark-fired boiler
1-02-009-02 Wood/bark-fired boiler
1-02-009-03 Wood-fired boiler
Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG)
1-02-010-02 All boiler sizes
All boiler sizes
2.00
7.00
10.0
10.0
10.0
Process Gas
Note: Sulfur content must be noted on NEDS form.
1-02-007-01 Petroleum refinery
1.00 A
75.0
37.5
10.0
1.75
16.0
144.0 S
150.0 S
0.60
0.60
0.60
950.0 S
950.0 S
950.0 S
950.0 S
38.0 S
1.50
1.50
1.50
86.5 S
0.00
Specify waste material in comment
field
Liquid Waste
Note: See 3-07-001-04 for recovery boilers 1n Kraft Pulp Mills.
1-02-013-01 Specify waste material 1n comment
field
1-02-013-02 Waste oil 19.0
22.0
22.0
700.0
180.0
120.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
11.5
1.20
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.00
8.00
5.00
5.00
17.0
17.0
20.0
0.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
0.30
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.55
2.00
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
'A' indicates the ash content of the fuel.
'S' indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-Weight basis.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-5
-------
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND
EMISSION FACTOR* LISTING
POUNDS
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO
X
EMITTED
NO
PER UNIT
X
HC
CO
NOTE' A. Both boiler capacities and throughputs must be reported to NEDS for all boilers.
B. Most SCC codes in the 99 categories have oeen deleted in this listing because specific
C. Unless otherwise indicated, SCC's are defined to include all boiler sizes.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION
Anthracite Coal
1-03-001-01
1-03-001-02
1-03-001-03
Bituminous Coal
1-03-002-05
1-03-002-06
1-03-002-07
1-03-002-09
1-03-002-11
Lignite
1-03-003-05
1-03-003-07
1-03-003-09
Residual Oil
1-03-004-01
1-03-004-04
Distillate Oil
1-03-005-01
1-03-005-04
flatural Gas
1-03-006-01
1-03-006-02
1-03-006-03
Process Gas
1-03-007-01
1-03-007-99
BOILERS - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
Pulverized coal
Travelling grate (overfeed) stoker
Hand-fired
Pulverized coal: wet bottom
Pulverized coal: dry bottom
Over and underfeed stokers greater
than 10 MMBtu/hr
Spreader stoker
Over and underfeed stokers less
than 10 KMBtu/hr
Pulverized coal
Travelling Crate (overfeed) stoker
Spreader stoker
Grade 6 oil
Grade 5 oil
Grades 1 and 2 oil
Grade 4 oil
Over 100 MMBtu/hr
10-100 MMBtu/hr
Less than 10 MMBtu/hr
Sewage gas
Other/not classified
(specify fuel in comiiient field)
17.0 A
1.00 A
10.0
13.0 A
17.0 A
5.00 A
13.0 A
2.00 A
7.00 A
3.00 A
7.00 A
12.0 S1
10.0
2.00
7.00
10.0
10.0
10.0
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
30
30
30
159
159
144
150
0
0
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.60
.60
.60
S 18
S 10
S 3
S 30
S 18
S 15
S 15
S 6
S 14
S 6
S 6
S 60
S 60
S 22
S 22
700
180
120
.0
.0
.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.00
.0
.00
.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
1.
1.
3.
0.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
3.
8.
00
00
50
30
30
00
00
00
30
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
1.
1.
90.
1.
1.
2.
2.
10.
1.
2.
2.
5.
5.
5.
5.
17.
17.
20.
UNITS
boiler codes are available.
00
00
0
00
00
00
00
0
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0
0
0
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
'A' indicates the ash content of the fuel.
'S' indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-Weight basis.
Particulate emissions from residual oil combustion can be more accurately estimated from the equation
lb/1000 gal = IDS «- 3. See AP-42, page 1.3-2.
LMISSION I ACTORS
11/78
-------
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NOV
HC
CO
UNITS
NOTE: A, Both boiler capacities and throughputs must be reported to NFDS for all boilers.
B. Most SCC codes In the 99 categories have been deleted In this listing because specific boiler codes are available.
C. Unless otherwise Indicated, SCC's are defined to include all boiler sizes.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION BOILERS - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
Hood/Bark Waste
1-03-009-01 Bark boiler
1-03-009-02 Wood/bark boiler
1-03-009-03 Wood boiler
Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPC)
1-03-010-02 All boiler sizes
Solid Waste
1-03-012-01
liquid Waste
1-03-013-01
1-03-013-02
Specify waste material in comment
field
Specify waste material in comment
field
Waste oil
75.0
37.5
10.0
'1.85
1.50
1.50
1.50
86.5 S
10.0
10.0
10.0
11.5
2.00
2.00
2.00
0.75
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.95
19.0
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
'S' Indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-weight basis.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-7
-------
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION SPACE HEATERS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED l>ER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SO, NOY HC CO UNITS
NOTE Most SCC codes in the 99 categories have been deleted in this listing because specific boiler codes are available.
EXTERNAL COMBUSTION. SPACE. HEATERS
Industrial Space Heaters
1-05-001-05 Distillate oil
1-05-001-06 Natural gas
1-05-001-10 Liquified petroleum gas (LPC)
Commercial Space Heaters
1-05-002-05 Distillate oil
1-05-002-06 Natural gas
1-05-002-10 Liquified petroleum gas (LPG)
'S1 indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-Weight basis.
2.50
10.0
1.85
2.50
10.0
1.85
144. S
0.6
86.5 S
144. S
0.60
86.5 S
18.0
100.
7.50
18.0
100.
7.50
1.00
8.00
0.75
1.00
8.00
0.75
5.00
20.0
1.95
5.00
20.0
1.95
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
EMISSION EACTORS
11/78
-------
INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND
EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO
X
PER UNIT
NOX
HC
CO
UNITS
INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
Internal Combustion - Electrical Generation - 4911
2-01-001-01
2-01-001-02
2-01-002-01
2-01-002-02
2-01-009-01
2-01-009-02
Distillate oil (diesel): turbine
Distillate oil (diesel):
reciprocating
Natural gas: turbine
Natural gas: reciprocating
Kerosene/naptha (jet fuel):
turbine
Kerosene/naptha (jet fuel):
reciprocating
5
33
14
0
5
33
.00
.5
.0
.00
.00
.5
140
31
940
0
6
6
.0 S
.2
.0 S
.60
.20
.20
67.
469.
413.
3400.
67.
469.
8
0
0
8
0
5.57
37.5
42.0
1400.
5.57
37.5
15.
102.
115.
430.
15.
102.
4
0
0
0
4
0
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Internal Combustion - Industrial
2-02-001-01
2-02-001-02
2-02-002-01
2-02-002-02
2-02-003-01
2-02-009-01
2-02-009-02
Distillate oil (diesel): turbine
Distillate oil (diesel):
reciprocating
Natural gas: turbine
Natural gas: reciprocating
Gasoline: reciprocating
Kerosene/naptha (jet fuel):
turbine
Kerosene/naptha (jet fuel):
reciprocating
5
33
0
0
6
5
33
.00
.5
.00
.00
.47
.00
.5
140
31
0
0
5
6
6
.0 S
.2
.60
.60
.31
.20
.20
67.
469.
300.
3400.
102.
67.
469.
8
0
0
0
8
0
5.57
37.5
23.0
1400.
161.0
5.57
37.5
15.
102.
120.
430.
3990.
15.
102.
4
0
0
0
4
0
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Internal Combustion - Commercial/Institutional
2-03-001-01
2-03-002-01
2-03-003-01
Engine Testing
2-04-001-01
Distillate oil (diesel):
reciprocating
Natural gas: reciprocating
Gasoline: reciprocating
Aircraft turbojet testing
33
0
6
11
.5
.00
.47
.8
31
0
5
13
.2
.6
.31
.0
469.
3400.
102.
14.
0
0
6
37.5
1400.
161.0
46.0
102.
430.
3990.
32.
0
0
7
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-9
-------
SOLID WASTL DISPOSAL - GOVERNMENT
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
SCC PROCESS
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: GOVERNMENT
Municipal Incineration - 4953
5-01-001-01 Multiple chamber
5-01-001-02 Single chamber
5-01-005-07 Conical design (tee-pee):
Municipal refuse
Open Burning Dunp
5-01-002-01 General refuse
5-01-002-02 Vegetation only
Other Incineration
5-01-005-05 Pathological
5-01-005-06 Sludge
5-01-005-08 Conical design (tee-pee):
Wood refuse
Auxiliary Fuel/No Emissions
5-01-900-05 Distillate oil
5-01-900-06 Natural gas
5-01-900-10 Liquified petroleum gas (LPG)
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL- COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
Incineration (Generdl)
5-02-001-01 Multiple chamber
5-02-001-02 Single chamber
5-02-001-03 Controlled air
5-02-001-04 Conical design:
Municipal refuse
5-02-001-05 Conical design:
Wood refuse
Open Burning
5-02-002-01 Wood
5-02-002-02 Refuse
Apartment Incineration
5-02-003-01 Flue fed
5-02-003-02 Flue fed (with afterburner and
draft controls)
Incineration (Special Purpose)
5-02-005-05 Pathological waste
5-02-005-06 Sludge
Auxiliary Fuel/No ^Missions
5-02-900-U5 Distillate oil
5-02-900-06 Natural gas
5-02-900-10 Liquified petroleum gas (LPG)
PART
30.0
15.0
20.0
16.0
17.0
8.00
100.0
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.00
15.0
1.40
20.0
7.00
17.0
16.0
30.0
6.00
8.00
100.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
sox
2.50
2.50
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.50
2.50
1.50
2.00
0.10
0.00
1.00
0.50
0.50
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NOX
3.00
2.00
5.00
6.00
4.00
3.00
5.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
2.00
10.0
5.00
1.00
4.00
6.00
3.00
10.0
3.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
LISTING
UNIT
HC
1.50
15.0
20.0
30.0
24.0
0.00
1.00
11.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
15.0
0.00
20.0
11.0
24.0
30.0
15.0
3.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CO
35.0
20.0
60.0
85.0
140.0
0.00
0.00
130.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.0
20.0
0.00
60.0
130.
140.0
85.0
20.0
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
UNITS
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons dry sludge
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons dry sludge
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
EMISSION FACTOR
C-10
11/78
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES
AND EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
PART
sox
NOX
LISTING
UNIT
HC CO
UNITS
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL: INDUSTRIAL
Incineration
5-03-001-01
5-03-001-02
5-03-001-03
5-03-001-04
5-03-001-05
5-03-001-06
6-03-001-08
5-03-005-06
Open Burning
5-03-002-01
5-03-002-02
5-03-002-03
5-03-002-04
>
Multiple chamber
Single chamber
Controlled air
Conical design: refuse
Conical design: wood refuse
Open pit
Auto body components
Sludge
Wood/vegetation/leaves
Refuse
Auto body components
Coal refuse piles
7.00
15.0
1.40
20.0
7.00
13.0
2.00
100.0
17.0
16.0
100.0
0.90
2.50
2.50
1.50
2.00
0.10
0.10
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.10
3.00
2.00
10.0
5.00
1.00
4.00
0.10
5.00
4.00
6.00
4.00
0.10
3.00 10.0
15.0 20.0
0.00 0.00
20.0 60.0
11.0 130.0
0.00 0.00
0.91 2.50
1.00 0.00
24.0 140.0
30.0 85.0
30.0 125.0
0.50 2.50
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons of waste
Car burned
Tons of dry sludge
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
Cubic yards of pile
Auxiliary Fuel/No Emissions
5-03-900-05
5-03-900-06
5-03-900-10
Distillate oil
Natural gas
Liquified petroleum gas (LPG)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
IN-PROCESS FUEL USE
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO.
NO,
HC
CO
UNITS
IN-PROCESS FUEL USE1'2
In-Process Fuel
Note: The process gas codes below ending in 97, 98, and 99 can be used
used in each point source. If only one process gas 1s used, any
to record up to three different process gases
of these three SCC codes 1s suitable.
3-90-001-99
3-90-003-99
3-90-003-99
3-90-004-99
3-90-005-99
3-90-006-99
Anthracite coal
Bituminous coal
Lignite
Residual oil
Distillate oil
Natural gas
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3-90-007-01 Process gas (CO or blast furnace) 0.00 0.00
<
3-90-007-02 Process gas (coke ovens) 0.00 0.00
3-90-007-97 Process gas (general) - 0.00 0.00
specify in comments field
3-90-007-98 Process gas (general) - 0.00 0.00
specify in comments field
3-90-007-99 Process gas (general) - 0.00 0.00
specify in comments field
3-90-008-99 Coke 0.00 0.00
3-90-009-99 Wood 0.00 0.00
3-90-010-99 Liquified petroleum gas (LPG) 0.00 0.00
3-90-012-99 Solid waste fuel - 0.00 0.00
specify in comments field
3-90-013-99 Liquid waste fuel - 0.00 0.00
specify in convents field
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Tons burned
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
Tons burned
0.00
0.00 0.00
1000 gallons burned
Uee Part II, SIC 3241 for specific In-process fuel codes for cement manufacturing.
^These in-process fuel codes must always be used in conjunction with the appropriate process code.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-12
11/78
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
DECREASING
4-01-002-01
4-01-002-02
4-01-002-03
4-01-002-04
4-01-002-05
4-01-002-06
4-01-002-07
4-01-002-99
SURFACE COATING
Coating
4-02-001-01
4-02-003-01
4-02-004-01
4-02-005-01
4-02-006-01
4-02-007-01
Coating Oven
4-02-008-01
Oven Heater
4-02-010-01
4-02-010-02
4-02-010-03
THINNING SOLVENTS
PROCESS
Stoddard
1.1.1-Trlchlorethane
(Methylchloroform)
Perchloroethylene
Methyl ene Chloride
TMchloroethylene
Toluene
Tr1 chlorotrl f 1 uoroethane
Other/not classified
(Specify 1n comments)
Paint, general
Varnish/shellac, general
Lacquer, general
Enamel , general
Primer, general
Adhesive, general
General
Natural gas
Distillate oil
Residual oil
NOTE: These solvents are used to thin coatings and
4-02-009-01
4-02-009-02
4-02-009-03
4-02-009-04
4-02-009-05
4-02-009-06
4-02-009-07
4-02-009-08
4-02-009-09
4-02-009-10
4-02-009-11
4-02-009-12
4-02-009-13
4-02-009-14
4-02-009-15
4-02-009-16
4-02-009-17
General - specify In comments
field
Acetone
Butyl acetate
Butyl alcohol
Carbltol
Cellosolve
Cellosolve acetate
Dimethylformamide
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl alcohol
Gasoline
Isopropyl alcohol
Isopropyl acetate
Kerosene
Lactol spirits
Methyl acetate
Methyl alcohol
PART
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OQ
thus should
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SOx
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
be coded
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NOX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
with one of
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
HC
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
1120.
1000.
1540.
840.0
1320.
CO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
the coating codes
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
2000.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
UNITS
Tons solvent used'
Tons solvent used1
Tons solvent used'
Tons solvent used1
Tons solvent used'
Tons solvent used'
Tons solvent used'
Tons solvent used1
Tons coating
Tons coating
Tons coating
Tons coating
Tons coating
Tons coating
Tons coating
Million cubic feet
burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
above.
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
Tons solvent
'These units refer to the quantity of make-up solvent used; not the quantity charged to the sump tank.
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
C-13
-------
THINNING SOLVENTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCO PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
THINNING SOLVENTS (Continued)
NOTE: These solvents are used to thin coatings and thus should be coded wUh one of the coating codes above.
4-02-009-18 MEK 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-19 MIBK 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-20 Mineral spirits 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-21 Naphtha 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-22 Toluene 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-23 Varsol -0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-24 Xylene 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-25 Benzene 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
4-02-009-26 Turpentine 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent
EMISSION hACTORS
C-14 11/78
-------
MISCELLANEOUS HYDROCARBON EVAPORATION
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MISCELLANEOUS HYDROCARBON EVAPORATION
4-90-999-99 Identify the Process and
the Solvent in comments 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons of solvent
consumed
EMISSION FACTORS
H/7B C-15
-------
-------
PART 2
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
FOR
SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES
EMISSION FACTORS
C-17
-------
-------
FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
UNITS
FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
NOTE: Fugitive emissions occur from numerous locations within Industrial facilities but, as of 1978, most of these sources
have not been fully characterized. To allow these fugitive sources to be represented 1n NEDS, comnon SCC codes have
been developed and are tabulated below. These codes should be used In addition to the main process SCC codes associ-
ated with the facility. Specific fugitive emissions that have been characterized are also contained in the text.
Chemical
3-01-888-01
Food
3-02-888-01
Specify in the comments field
Specify in the comments field
Primary Metal
3-03-888-01 Specify 1n the comments field
Secondary Metal
3-04-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Mineral Products
3-05-888-01 Specify 1n the comments field
Petroleum Industry
3-06-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Oil and Gas Extraction
3-10-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Wood Products
3-07-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Metal Fabrications
3-09-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Textile Manufacturing
3-30-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Cleaning Solvent
4-01-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Surface Coating
4-02-888-01 Specify in the comments field
Petroleum Storage
4-03-888-01 Specify in the comment field
Printing Press
4-05-888-01 Specify in the comment field
Petroleum Marketing i Transportation
4-06-888-01 Specify in the comment field
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
1000 bbls. refinery
feed
100 barrels feed
produced
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
1000 gallons storage
capacity
Tons product
1000 gallons
throughput
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-19
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC
PROCESS
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PART
SO,
NOV
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 02 - AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
Beef Cattle Feed lots - 0211
3-02-020-01 Feed lots - General
3-02-020-02
Feed lots - General
MAJOR GROUP 07 - AGRICULTURAL SERVICES
Cotton Ginning - 0724, 0131
3-02-004-01 Unloading Fan
3-02-004-02 Seed Cotton Cleaning System
3-02-004-03 Stick/Burr Machine
3-02-004-04 Miscellaneous (Lint Cleaner/
Battery Condensers; Master
Trash/Overflow/Mote Fans)
3-02-004-10 General (Entire process,
alternative to above)
102.2
54.0
5.00
0.30
0.20
1.50
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
Head of cattle
capacity
Head of cattle
throughput
Bales of cotton
Bales of cotton
Bales of cotton
Bales of cotton
Bales of cotton
EMISSION (-ACTORS
C-20
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 10 - METAL MINING
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
sec
MAJOR GROUP 10 -
Gold - 104!
3-03-013-01
Aluminum Ore
3-03-000-01
3-03-000-02
PROCESS
METAL MINING1
Mining/Processing
- Bauxite 1051
Crushing/Handling
Drying Oven
PART SOX
0.00
600.00 0.00
NOX
0.00
0.00
LISTING
UNIT
HC
0.00
0.00
CO
0.00
0.00
UNITS
Hundreds of tons
of ore
Hundreds of tons
of ore processed
Hundreds of tons
of ore processed
Holybedenum Ore Mining - 1061
3-03-011-01
3-03-011-02
3-03-011-99
Mining - General
Milling - General
Processing
(Specify in Comments)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hundreds of tons
mined
Hundreds of tons
produced
Hundreds of tons
produced
Mining - Specify Material - 1011-1099
3-05-040-01
3-05-040-02
3-05-040-03
3-05-040-10
3-05-040-20
3-05-040-21
3-05-040-22
3-05-040-23
3-05-040-24
3-05-040-25
3-05-040-30
3-05-040-31
3-05-040-32
3-05-040-33
3-05-040-34
3-05-040-36
3-05-040-99
Open Pit Blasting
Open Pit Drilling
Open Pit Cobbing
Underground Ventilation
Loading
Convey/Haul Material
Convey/Haul Haste
Unloading
Stripping
Stockpile
Primary Crusher
Secondary Crusher
Ore Concentrator
Ore Dryer
Screening
Tailing Piles
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
1
For barium ore processing, see Part II, SIC 3295.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-21
-------
MAJOR GROUPS 11 AND 12 - ANTHRACITE MINING,-
AND BITUMINOUS COAL AND LIOMTE MINING
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
sec
MAJOR GROUPS 11 and
Coal Cleaning^ -
Thermal Dryer
3-05-010-01
3-05-010-02
3-05-010-03
3-05-010-04
3-05-010-05
3-05-010-06
3-05-010-07
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
12 - ANTHRACITE MINING, AND BITUMINOUS COAL AND LIGNITE MINING
1111,1211
Fluidized Bed 20.0
Flash or Suspension 16.0
Multilouvered 25.0
Rotary
Cascade
Continuous Carrier
Screen
UNITS
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Tons coal dried
Material Handling
3-05-010-08
3-05-010-09
3-05-010-10
3-05-010-11
3-05-010-12
3-05-010-13
3-05-010-14
3-05-010-15
3-05-010-99
Unloading 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Raw Coal Storage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crushing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coal Transfer 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00
Screening 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Air Tables 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cleaned Coal Storage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Loading 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other/Not Classified 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
(Specify in Comments)
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
Tons shipped
These codes are also applicable to Coal Cleaning Operations located at power plants.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-22
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 13 - OIL AND GAS EXTRACTION
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO.
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR CROUP 13 - OIL AND GAS EXTRACTION
For Internal Combustion Engines, See Part I, SCC 2-02-XXX-XX
For Petroleum Storage Tanks, See Major Group 29
For Sulfur Recovery Plants, See Major Group 28
Crude 011 Production- 1311
3-10-001-99 Not Classified
(Specify In Comments)
Natural Gas Production - 1311
3-10-002-01 Gas Sweetening (Amire Process)
(Smokeless Flares/Tall Gas
Incinerators)
3-10-002-02 Gas Stripping Operations
3-10-002-99
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0.00
1685.Sm 0.00 0.00 0.00
1,000 Barrels
Produced
Million Cubic Feet
of Sour Gas Pro-
cessed
Million Cubic Feet
of Gas Processed
Million Cubic Feet
of Gas Processed
_' indicates the sulfur content of the fuel as H^S on a mole percent basis.
11/78
[MISSION FACTORS
C-23
-------
MAJOR GROUP 14 - MINING AND QUARRYING
Or NONHETALLIC MINERAL, EXCEPT FUELS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION
FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
sec
PROCESS PART
MAJOR GROUP 14 - MINING AND QUARRYING OF NONMETALLIC MINERAL.
Mining - Specify
3-05-040-01
3-05-040-02
3-05-040-03
3-05-040-10
3-05-040-20
3-05-040-21
3-05-040-22
3-05-040-23
3-05-040-24
3-05-040-25
3-05-040-30
3-05-040-31
3-05-040-32
3-05-040-33
3-05-040-34
3-05-040-36
3-05-040-99
Material - 1400-1499
Open Pit Blasting
Open Pit Drilling
Open Pit Cobbing
Underground Ventilation
Loading
Convey/Haul Material
Convey/Haul Waste
Unl oadi rig
Stripping
Stockpile
Primary Crusher
Secondary Crusher
Ore Concentrator
Ore Dryer
Screening
Tai 1 ing PI les
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
sox
EXCEPT FUELS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NOX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
LISTING
UNIT
HC
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
UNITS
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Hundreds of tons
of material
Stone (quarrying/Processing - 1411, 1422, 1423, 1429, 1499
3-05-020-01
3-05-020-02
3-05-020-03
3-05-020-04
3-05-020-05
3-05-020-06
3-05-020-07
3-05-02C-08
3-05-020-09
3-05-020-10
3-05-020-11
3-05-020-12
Primary Crushing 0.10
Sec. Crush/Screen 0.60
Tert. Crush/Screen 3.60
Pecrush/Screening 2.50
Fines Mill 4.bO
Miscellaneous Operation- 2.00
Screening/Conveying & Handling
Open Storage 0.331
Cut Stone - General
Blasting - General
Drilling
Haul ing
Drying
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons raw material
Tons product stored
Tons processed
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Vehicle miles
Tons stone dryed
Does not correct for the PE Index, See AP-42, Section 11.2.3.
C-24
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 14 - MINING AND QUARRYING
OF NONMETALLIC MINERAL, EXCEPT FUELS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 14 - MINING AND QUARRYING OF NONMETALLIC MINERAL, EXCEPT FUELS (Continued)
Sand/Gravel - 144?. 1446
3-05-025-0] Crushing/Screen 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons product
3-05-025-02 Aggregate Storage 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons product
3-05-025-03 Material Transfer & 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons product
Conveying
3-05-025-04 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vehicle miles
Magnesium Carbonate - 1459
3-05-024-01 Mine/Process 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons product
3-05-024-99 Other/Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
Potash Production - 1474
3-05-022-01 Mine - Grind/Dry 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons ore
3-05-022-99 Other/Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
11/78 EMISSION FACTORS
-------
MAJOR GROUP 14 - MINING AND QUARRYING
OF NONMETALLIC MINERAL, EXCEPT FUELS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND
EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
sec
MAJOR GROUP 14
PROCESS PART
SOV NO,
X A
LISTING
UNIT
HC
CO
UNITS
- MINING AND QUARRYING OF NONMETALLIC MINERAL, EXCEPT FUELS (CONTINUED)
Phosphate Rock - 1475
3-05-019-01
3-05-019-02
3-05-019-03
3-05-019-04
3-05-019-99
Salt Mining
3-05-021-01
Diatomacous
3-05-026-01
3-05-026-99
Drying 15.0
Grinding 20.0
Transfer/Storage 2.00
Open Storage 40.0
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
- 1476
Not Classified (Specify in Comments)
Earth - 1499, 3295
Handl ing
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
phosphate
phosphate
phosphate
phosphate
processed
mined
product
processed
rock
rock
rock
rock
Asbestos Mining - 1499
3-05-031-01
3-05-031-02
3-05-031-03
3-05-031-04
3-05-031-05
3-05-031-06
3-05-031-07
3-05-031-08
3-05-031-09
3-05-031-10
3-05-031-11
3-05-031-99
Surface Blasting
Surface Drilling
Cobbing
Loading
Convey/Haul Asbestos
Convey/Haul Waste
Unloading
Overburden Stripping
Ventilation of Process Operations
Stockpil ing
Tailing Piles
Other/Mot Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
of ore
of ore
of ore
of ore
of ore
of ore
of ore
removed
of ore
of ore
of material
processed
Asbestos Killing - 1499
3-05-032-01
3-05-032-02
3-05-032-03
3-05-032-04
3-05-032-05
3-05-032-06
3-05-032-99
Vermiculi te
3-05-033-01
Crushing
Drying
Recrushing
Screening
Mberizing
Bagging
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
- 1499
Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
Processed
Processed
Product
C-26
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 20 -
PROCESS
FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS1
PART
S°x
NOX
HC
CO
UNITS
Meat Smokehouses - 2012. 2013
3-02-013-01 Combined Operations
Dairy Products - 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024,
3-02-030-01
3-02-030-99
Milk Spray-Dryer
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0.30
2026
0.00
0.07
0.60
Tons meat smoked
Tons product
Tons product
Barley Milling - 2041
3-02-007-03
3-02-007-05
Milo Milling
3-02-007-04
Durum Mills -
3-02-007-11
3-02-007-12
3-02-007-13
3-02-007-14
Rye Milling -
3-02-007-21
3-02-007-22
3-02-007-23
3-02-007-24
Wheat Mills -
3-02-007-31
3-02-007-32
3-02-007-33
3-02-007-34
Barley Cleaning
Barley Flour Mill
- 2041
Milo Cleaning
2041
Grain Receiving
Precleaning/Handlitig
Cleaning House
Millhouse
2041
Grain Receiving
Precleamng/Handl i ng
Cleaning House
Millhouse2
2041
Grain Receiving
P reel can ing/Handl i ng
Cleaning House
Killhouse2
0.20
3.00
0.40
1.00
5.00
1.00
5.00
70.0
1.00
5.00
70.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons grain processed
Tons grain processed
Tons grain processed
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Dry Corn Milling - 2041
3-02-007-41
3-02-007-42
3-02-007-43
3-02-007-44
3-02-007-45
Grain Receiving
Grain Drying
Precleamng/Handl ing
Cleaning House
Degerming and Milling
Grain processing and milling are included
SIC 5153.
Tho navtinilat
1.00
0.50
5.00
6.00
in SIC's 2041, 2044,
l
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2046,
\ t ho h
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
and 2075. For
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
grai n
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
elevators,
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
see Part II,
Indicate the control device and efficiency to properly estimate the actual emissions.
EMISSION (ACTORS
11/78
C-27
-------
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND EMISSION
FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
Oat Killing - 2041
3-02-007-60 General
Rice Milling - 2044
3-02-007-71 Grain Receiving 0.64
3-02-007-72 Handling and Precleaning 5.00
3-02-007-73 Drying
3-02-007-74 Cleaning and Millhouse
Vegetable Oil Processing - 2046, 2074, 2076, 2079
3-02-019-01 Corn Oil-General (2046)
3-02-019-02 Cottonseed Oil-General (2074)
3-02-019-03 Soybean Oil-General (2075)
3-02-019-04 Coconut Oil-General (2076)
3-02-019-05 Peanut Oil-General (2076)
3-02-019-99 Other/Not Classified (2076, 2079)
(Specify in Comments)
Starch Manufacturing - 2046
3-02-014-01 Combined Operations 8.00
Corn Wet Milling - 2046
3-02-007-51 Grain Receiving 1.00
3-02-007-52 Grain Handling 5.00
3-02-007-53 Grain Cleaning 6.00
3-02-007-54 Dryers
3-02-007-55 Bulk Loading
3-02-007-56 Milling
Alfalfa Dehydrating - 2048
3-02-001-02 Primary Cyclone and Dryer 10.0
3-02-001-03 Meal Collector Cyclone 2.60
3-02-001-04 Pellet Cooler Cyclone 3.00
S0x
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NOX HC CO
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
UNITS
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons refined
oil produced
Tons starch produced
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
C-28
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC
PROCESS
PART
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SOV
NOV
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS (Continued)
Feed Manufacture - 2048
3-02-008-02 Grain Receiving
3-02-008-03 Shipping
3-02-008-04 Handling
3-02-008-05 Grinding
3-02-008-06 Pellet Coolers
Bakeries - 2051. 2052
3-02-032-01
3-02-032-02
3-02-032-99
Bread Baking
(Sponge-Dough Process)
Bread Baking
(Straight-Dough Process)
Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
1.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
Sugar Cane Processing - 2061, 2062
3-02-015-99
Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons grain received
Tons of bread
baked
Tons of bread
baked
Tons product
Tons sugar produced
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
C-29
-------
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
Sugar Beet Processing - 2063
3-02-016-01 Dryer
3-02-016-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Candy Manufacturing - 2065, 2066
3-02-018-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Soybean Mills - 2075. 2041
3-02-007-81 Grain Receiving
3-02-007-82 Grain Handling
3-02-007-83 Grain Cleaning
3-02-007-84 Drying
3-02-007-85 Cracking and Dehulling
3-02-007-86 Hull Grinding
3-02-007-87 Bean Conditioning
3-02-007-88 Flaking
3-02-007-89 Meal Dryer
3-02-007-90 Meal Cooler
3-02-007-91 Sulk Loading
Peanut Processing - 2076, 2079, 2099
3-02-017-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Fish Processing - 2077, 2091
3-02-012-01 Cookers-Fresh Fish Scrap
3-02-012-02 Cookers-Stale Fish Scrap
3-02-012-03 Dryers
3-02-012-04 Canning Cookers
Beer Production - 2082
3-02-009-01 Grain Handling
3-02-009-02 Drying Spent Grains
3-02-009-03 Brewing
Wines, Brandy, and Brandy Spirits - 2084
3-02-011-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Whiskey Fermentation - 2085
3-02-010-01 Grain Handling
3-02-010-02 Drying Spent Grains
3-02-010-03 Aging
PART
1.60
5.00
7.20
3.30
2.00
0.10
0.57
1.50
1.80
0.27
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
3.00
5.00
0.00
3.00
5.00
0.00
SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
Tons raw beets
Tons raw beets
Tons product
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain received
Tons processed
0.03 Tons fish processed
3.50 Tons fish processed
Tons fish processed
Tons fish processed
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain processed
Tons grain processed
1000 gallons
0.00 Gallons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons grain processed
Tons grain processed
0.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 Barrel-year of
stored whiskey
C-30
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 20 - FOOD AND KINDRED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
Coffee Roasting - 2095
3-02-002-01 Direct Fired Roaster 7.60 0.10 Tons green beans
3-02-002-02 Indirect Fired Roaster 4.20 0.10 Tons green beans
3-02-002-03 Stoner/Cooler 1.40 0.00 Tons green beans
3-02-002-99 Other/Not Classified Tons product
(Specify in Comments)
Instant Coffee Products - 2095
3-02-003-01 Spray Dryer 1.40 Tons green beans
Other/Not Classified - 2099
3-02-999-98 Specify in Comments Tons processed
(input)
3-02-999-99 Specify in Comments Tons produced
(finished)
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78 C-31
-------
MAJOR GROUP 21 - TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 21 - TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS
Tobacco Processing - 2111. 2121. 2131. 2141
3-02-033-99 Not Classified Tons product
(Specify Tn Comments)
EMISSION FACTORS
C-32 11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 22 - TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 22_ - TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS
General Fabrics - 2261. 2262. 2284, 2297. 2299. 2381, 2282. 2283, 2291, 2294
3-30-001-01 Yarn Prep/Bleach Tons processed
3-30-001-02 Printing (Specific Process SCC's Tons processed
are found in Major Group 27)
3-30-001-03 Polyester Thread Production Tons processed
3-30-001-04 Tenter Frames (Heat Setting) Tons processed
3-30-001-05 Carding Tons processed
3-30-001-99 Other/Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
Carpet Operations - 2271. 2272. 2279
3-30-003-99 Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
MAJOR LROUP 24 - LUMBER AND HOOD PRODUCTS,
Lxrri'T FURNITURE
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 24 - LUMBER AND WOOD PRODUCTS, EXCEPT FURNITURE1
Sawiill Operations - 2421, 2426, 2429
3-07-008-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Plywood/Particle Board - 2435, 2436, 2492
3-07-007-01 Veneer Dryers 0.00 0.00 2.10 0.00
3-07-007-02 Sand Operations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-07-007-03 Particle-Board Drying Operation 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-07-007-99 Other/tiot Classified
(Specify in Conu.ients)
Wood Pressure Treating - 2491
3-07-005-01 Creosote
3-07-005-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Conments)
Miscellaneous Woodworking Operations -
2421. 2426, 2429. 2431, 2434, 2439
3-07-030-01 Wood Waste Storage Bin Vent 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-07-030-02 Hood Waste Storage Bin Loadout 2. OP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-07-030-99 Sanding/Planning Operations
(Specify in Comi.ients)
UNITS
Tons processed
10,000 sq. ft. of
3/8 in. plywood
produced
Tons processed
Tons of finished
product
Tons processed
Tons wood treated
Tons wood treated
Tons wood waste
Tons wood waste
Tons processed
For Surface Coating Operations, see Part I, page C-I3.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-34
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 25 - FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 25 - FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
Furniture Manufacturing - 2500-25991
3-07-030-99 Sanding/Planing Operations Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
3-07-020-99 Other/Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comnents)
' For Surface Coating Operations, see Part I, page C-)3.
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78 C-35
-------
MAJOR GliOUP 26 - PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
sec
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 26 - PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
Sulfate (Kraft)
3-07-001-01
3-07-001-02
3-07-001-03
3-07-001-04
3-07-001-05
3-07-001-06
3-07-001-07
3-07-001-08
3-07-001-09
3-07-001-99
Sulfite Pulping
3-07-002-03
3-07-002-11
3-07-002-12
3-07-002-13
3-07-002-14
3-07-002-16
3-07-002-21
3-07-002-22
3-07-002-23
3-07-002-31
3-07-002-32
3-07-002-33
3-07-002-34
Pulping - 2611, 2621, 2631 (For Bark Boilers, see Part I)
Digester Relief and Blow Tank 0.00 0.00 0.00
Washers/Screens 0.00 0.01 0.00
Multi-Effect Evaporator 0.00 0.01 0.00
Recovery Furnace/Direct- 150.0 5.00 1.00 31.0
Contact Evaporator
Smelt Dissolving Tank 5.00 0.10 0.00
Line Kiln 45.0 0.30 1.00 10.0
Turpentine Condenser 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fluid Bed Calciner 72.0
Liquor Oxidation Tower
Other/Hot Classified
(Specify in Cements)
- 2611, 2621, 2631
Digester/Blow Pit/DuMp Tank 0.00 40.0
(Al 1 bases except Ca)
Digester/Blow Pit/Dump Tank 0.00 67.0
(Ca)
Digester/Blow Pit/Dur.ip Tank 0.00 0.00
{MgO with Recovery System)
Digester/Blow Pit/Dump Tank 0.00 0.20
{KgO w/Process Change and
Scrubber) '
Uigester/Elow Pit/DuMp Tank 0.00 0.40
(MH^ w/Process Change and
Scrubber)
Digester/Blow Pit/Dump Tank 0.00 2.00
(Na w/Process Change and
Scrubber)1
Recovery System (MgO)
Recovery System (NH^)
Recovery System (Na)
Acid Plant (NH3)
Acid Plant (Na)
Acid Plant (Ca)
other Misc. Sources - Knottcrs/ 0.00 12.0
Washers/Screens, etc.
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Process changes i idy include such measures as raising the pH of the cooking liquor, thereby lowering the free SOg,
rcliuvinii llio pressure in the digester before the contents are discharged, and pumping out the digester contents
instead of blowing them out.
f-3f.
LMlbSHIN I ACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR CROUP 26 - PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PCR UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SOV
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 26 - PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
Neutral Sulfite Semicheoical Pulping - 2611. 2621. 2531 (Bark Boilers Contained Elsewhere)
3-07-003-01 Digester/Dump Tank/Blow Pit
3-07-003-02 Evaporator
3-07-003-03 Fluid Bed Reactor
3-07-003-04 Sulfur Burner/Absorbers
Pulpboard Manufacture - 2631. 2661
3-07-004-01 Paperboard - General
3-07-004-02 Fiberboard - General
0.00
0.60
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Air-dry tons
unbleached pulp
Tons finished
product
Tons finished
product
11/78
LMISSION FACTORS
C-37
-------
MAJOR GROUP 27 - PRINTING, PUBLISHING
AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE
CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 27 -
Dryers - 2711
4-05-001-01
PROCESS
PRINTING, PUBLISHING, AND
thru 2782
Dryer
PART
ALLIED INDUSTRIES
0.00
sox
0.00
KOX HC
0.00
CO
o.oo
UNITS
Printing - 2751, 2752, 2754
4-05-002-01
4-05-003-01
4-05-004-01
4-05-005-01
Ink Thinning
4-05-003-02
4-05-003-03
4-05-005-02
4-05-005-03
4-05-003-04
4-05-003-05
4-05-002-02
4-05-005-06
4-05-005-07
4-05-002-03
4-05-003-07
4-05-003-06
4-05-005-10
4-OS-005-99
Typesetting
Letter Press-2751
riexographic-2751
Lithographic-2752
Gravure-2754
Solvents - These solvents
above. Thus, t
with one of the
Carbitol
Cellosolve
Dimethyl forriai.nde
Ethyl Acetate
Fthyl Alcohol
Isopropyl Alcohol
kerosene
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Mineral Spirits
Naphtha
N-Propyl Alcohol
Toluene
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Connents)
(Lead Rei.ielting) - 2791
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
are often added by the
he solvent SCC's should
printing process SCC's
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
user to
not be
above.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
o.oo
0.00
0.00 700.0
0.00 1300.0
0.00 700.0
0.00 1300.
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
Tons Ink
Tons Ink
Tons Ink
Tons Ink
the inks used in the printing processes
used alone, but rather in conjunction
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00 2000.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Sol vent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Solvent Added
Tons Melted
EMISSION I-ACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
GROUP 281 - INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC CHEMICALS1
Chi oro-Al kali Production - 2812
3-01-008-01 Liquefaction (Diaphram Cell Process) 0.00
3-01-008-02 Liquefaction (Mercury Cell Process) 0.00
3-01-008-03 Chlorine Loading: Tank Car Vents 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-01-008-04 Chlorine Loading: Storage Tank 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Vents
3-01-008-05 Air Blowing of Mercury Cell 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brine
Sodium Carbonate - 2812
3-01-021-01 Solvay Process - NH3 Recovery 0.00
3-01-021-02 Solvay - Handling 6.00
3-01-021-10 Trona Process: Calcining
3-01-021-11 Trona Process: Drying
3-01-021-20 Brine Evaporation
3-01-021-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Cements)
Inorganic Pigments - 2816
3-01-035-01 Calcination of Titanium Dioxide
3-01-035-06 Lead Oxide-Barton Pot 0.64
3-01-035-07 Lead Oxide-Calcining Furnace 15.00
3-01-035-10 Red Lead 1.00
3-01-035-15 White Lead 0.69
3-01-035-20 Lead Chromate 0.20
3-01-035-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Calcium Carbide - 2819
3-05-004-01 Electric Furnace 38.0 3.00
(Hoods 8 Main Stack)
3-05-004-02 Coke Dryer 2.00 3.00
3-05-004-03 Furnace Room Vents 26.0
Hydrochloric Acid - 2819
3-01-011-01 By-Product Process 0.00
(Without Final Scrubber)
Hydrofluoric Acid - 2819
3-01-012-02 Rotary Kiln 0.00
3-01-012-03 Fluorspar Grinding and 20.0
Drying (Controlled)
CO UNITS
100 tons chlorine
liquified
100 tons chlorine
liquified
0.00 100 tons chlorine
liquified
0.00 100 tons chlorine
liquified
0.00 100 tons chlorine
liquified
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons final acid
Tons acid
Tons flourspar
Agricultural chemicals may be found in Part II, SIC Group 287.
1I/7U
EMISSION FACTORS
C-39
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CMLMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 281 - INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC CHEMICALS
Elemental Sulfur Production - 28191
3-01-032-01 Mod. Clause-2-Stage v,/o 280.0
Control (92-95% Removal )
3-01-032-02 Mod. Clause-3-Stage w/o 189.0
Control (95-96% Removal)
3-01-032-03 Mod. Cl ause-4-Stage w/o 145.0
Control (96-97% Removal)
3-01-032-04 Sulfur Removal Process 4.00
(99.9% Removal)
Sulfunc Acid, Chamber Process - 2819
3-01-022-01 General 0.00
Sulfuric Acid - Contact Process - 2819
3-01-023-01 Absorber/P 99.9" Conversion 2.50 4.00
3-01-023-04 Absorber/P 99.5% Conversion 2.50 7.00
3-01-023-06 Absorber/P 99.0% Conversion 2.50 14.0
3-01-023-08 Absorber/P 98.0% Conversion 2.50 27.0
3-01-023-10 Absorber/P 97.0". Conversion 2.50 40.0
3-01-023-12 Absorber/0 96.0% Conversion 2.00 55.0
3-01-023-14 Absorber/P 95.0% Conversion 2.50 70.0
3-01-023-16 Absorber/P 94.0% Conversion 2.50 82.0
3-01-023-18 Absorber/P 93.0% Conversion 2.50 96.0
3-01-023-19 Concentrator
3-01-023-20 Tank Car and Truck Loading
3-01-023-21 Storage Tank Vents
3-01-023-22 Leaks in Process Equipment
GROUP 282 - PLASTIC MATERIALS AND SYNTHETIC RESINS, RUBBERS, AND FIBERS
Plastics Production (Manufacturing Only) - 2821
3-01-018-01 Polyvinyl Chlorides and 35.0 17.0
Copolymers
3-01-018-02 Polypropylene 8 Copolymers 3.00 0.70
3-01-018-03 Ethylene-Propylene Copolymers
3-01-018-05 Phenolic Resins
3-01-018-07 Polyethylene (high density)
3-01-018-12 Polyethylene (low density)
3-01-018-17 Polystyrene
3-01-018-22 Acryl ic Resins
3-01-018-27 Polyamde Resins
3-01-018-32 Urea formal dehyde Resins
3-01-018-37 Polyester Resins
3-01-018-42 Ki;l dim no Resins
3-01-018-47 Lpoxy Resins
3-01-018-52 Polyfluorocarbons
3-01-018-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in ( OMi'ients)
UNITS
Tons 100% sulfur
Tons 100% sulfur
Tons 100% sulfur
Tons 100% sulfur
Tons of pure acid
produced
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons 100% H2S04
loaded
Tons 100% H2S04
stored
Tons 100% H2S04
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
1 Also applies 1.0 sulfur recovery plant at petroleum refineries and natural gas production fields.
1.MISSION I ACTORS
C-40
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 282 - PLASTIC MATERIAL AND SYNTHETIC RESINS, RUBBERS. AND FIBERS
Synthetic Rubber (Manufacturing Only) - 2822
40.00 Tons product
15.0 Tons product
17.0 Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
Tons product
0.00 Tons fiber
Tons produced
Synthetic Organic Fiber Production (Manufacturing Only) - 2824
3-01-024-01 Polyamide (e.g., Nylon) 7.00 Tons fiber
3-01-024-02 Polyesters (e.g., Dacron) 0.00 Tons fiber
3-01-024-05 Polyfluorocarbons (e.g., Teflon) Tons product
3-01-024-10 Acrylics (e.g., Orion) Tons product
3-01-024-14 Polyolefins (e.g., Polypropylene) Tons product
3-01-024-15 Vinyls (e.g., Saran) Tons product
GROUP 283 - DRUGS
Pharmaceutical Preparations - 2834
3-01-060-99 Not Classified Hundreds of
(Specify in Comments) pounds produced
3-01-026-01
3-01-026-02
3-01-026-08
3-01-026-15
3-01-026-25
3-01-026-30
3-01-026-99
Cellulosic
3-01-025-01
3-01-025-05
Butadiene
Methyl Propene (IsoButylene)
Acrylomtrile
Isoprene
Chloroprene
Si 1 icone Rubber
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Fiber Production - 2823
Viscose (e.g., Rayon)
Acetate
1 MISSION I ACTORS
11/78 C-4,
-------
t-.AJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LI STING
sec
PROCESS
PART
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SOV
NO.
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
GROUP 284 - SOAP. DETERGENTS AND CLEANING PREPARATIONS. ETC.
Cleaning Cherncals - 2841. 2842
3-01-009-01 Spray Drying: Soaps and Detergents 90.0
3-01-009-02 Specialty Cleaners
3-01-009-99 Other/Not Classified
GROUP 285 - PAINTS. VARNISHES. LACQUERS, ENAMELS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
Paint Manufacture - 2851'
General Mixing and Handling
Other/Not Classified
{Specify in Comments)
Varnish Manufacture - 2851
3-01-015-01
3-01-015-02
3-01-015-03
3-01-015-05
3-01-015-99
Bodying Oil
Oleoresinous
Alkyd
Acrylic
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
CPOUP 286 - INDUSTRIAL ORGANIC CHEMICALS
Charcoal Manufacture - 2861
2.00
3-01-006-01 Charcoal Manufacture
w/o Chemical Recovery
3-01-006-02 Charcoal Manufacture
w/ Chemical Recovery
Phthalic Anhydride - 2865
3-01-019-01 0-xylene Oxidation: Main
Process Stream (Reactor
Condensers)
3-01-019-02 0-xylene Oxidation: Pre-treat-
ment
3-01-019-04 0-xylene Oxidation: Distillation
3-01-019-05 Naphthalene Oxidation: Main
Process Stream (Reactor/
Condensers)
3-01-019-06 Naphthalene Oxidation:
Pre-Treatment
3-01-019-07 Naphthalene Oxidation-
Distillation
400.0
138.0
13.0
89.0
56.0
5.00
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
30.0
40.0
150.0
160.0
20.0
Tons produced
Tons product
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons product
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
484.0 320.0 Tons produced
100.0 320.0 Tons produced
0.00 301.0 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 2.40 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 100.0 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 10.0 0.00 Tons produced
Manufacture of inorganic pigments is classified under Group 2816.
EMISSION I ACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
GROUP 286 - INDUSTRIAL ORGANIC CHEMICALS
Adiplc Acid - 2869
3-01-001-01 Entire Adipic Acid Facility 0.80 0.00 53.6 42.7 115.0
(Available as a Simplified
Alternative to Codes 02-06
Below)
3-01-001-02 Raw Material Storage 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.2 0.00
3-01-001-03 Cyclohexane Oxidation 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.0 115.0
3-01-001-04 Nitric Acid Reaction 0.00 0.00 53.0 0.00 0.00
3-01-001-05 Adipic Acid Refining 0.10 0.00 0.60 0.50 0.00
3-01-001-06 Adipic Acid Drying/Loading 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
and Storage
Terepthalic Acid Production - 2869
3-01-031-01 HN03- Paraxylene - General 13.0
3-01-031-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Amines/Amides Production - 2869
3-01-034-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Lead Alkyl Manufacture - (Sodium/Lead Alloy Process) - 2869
3-01-042-01 Recovery Furnace 63.50
3-01-042-02 Process Vents (Tetraethyl Lead) 6.25
3-01-042-03 Process Vents (Tetramethyl Lead) 193.50
3-01-042-04 Sludge Pits 1.90
Lead Alkyl Manufacture - (Electrolytic Process) - 2869
3-01-043-01 General 1.40
Ketones Production - 2869
3-01-091-01 Acetone
3-01-091-05 Methyl Ethyl Ketone
3-01-091-10 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
3-01-091-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Maleic Anhydride Production - 2869
3-01-100-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Aldehydes Production - 2869
3-01-120-01 Formaldehyde - Silver Catalyst
3-01-120-02 Formaldehyde - Mixed Oxide
Catalyst
3-01-120-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Organo Halogens Production - 2869
3-01-125-01 Ethylene Dichlonde via
Oxychlorination
3-01-125-02 Ethylene Dichlonde via
Direct Chlorination
3-01-125-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
UNITS
Tons of product
Tons of product
Tons of product
Tons of product
Tons of product
Tons of product
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-43
-------
MAJOR CROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO,
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 286 - INDUSTRIAL ORGANIC CHEMICALS (Continued)
Organic Acids Production - 2869
3-01-132-0! Acetic Acfd via Methanol
3-01-132-05 Acetic Acid via Butane
3-01-132-10 Acetic Acid via Acetaldehyde
3-01-132-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Esters Production
3-01-137-99 Acrylates - Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
3-01-167-99 Acetates - Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Olefins Production - 2869
3-01-197-01 tthylene
3-01-197-05
3-01-197-10
3-01-197-99
Propylene
Butylene
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Alcohols Production - 2869
3-01-250-01 Methanol
3-01-250-99
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Nitnles Production - 2869
3-01-254-01
3-01-254-05
3-01-254-10
3-01-254-15
3-01-254-99
Acetonitnle
Acrylomtri le
Adiponitrile via
Adipic Acid
Adiponitrile via Butadiene
Other/Hot Classified
(Specify in Coni.ients)
Aroniatics Production - 2869
3-01-258-01
3-01-258-05
3-01-258-10
3-01-258-I5
3-01-258-99
Benzene
Toluene
p-Xylenc
Mixed Xylenes
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Consents)
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
C-14
EMISSION IACTORS
H/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC PROCESS
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PART SO, NOX HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 287 - AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
Ammonia Production-2873
3-01-003-05 Foodstock Desulfurization
3-01-003-06 Primary Reformer-Natural Gas Fired
3-01-003-07 Primary Reformer-Oil Fired
3-01-003-08 Carbon Dioxide Regenerator
3-01-003-09 Condensate Stripper
Nitric Acid - 2873
3-01-013-01 Absorber Tail Gas
(Pre-1970 Facilities)
3-01-013-02 Absorber Tail Gas
(Post-1970 Facilities)
3-01-013-03 Citric Acid Concentration
(Pre-1970 Facilities)
3-01-013-04 Nitric Acid Concentration
(Post-1970 Facilities)
Amoniuni Nitrate Production (With Granulator) - 2873
3-01-027-04 Neutral izer
3-01-027-05 Granulator
3-01-027-06 Dryers and Coolers
Ammonium Nitrate Production (With Prilling Tower) -
3-01-027-09 Bulk Loading (General)
3-01-027-11 Neutral izor (High Density)
3-01-027-12 Prilling Tower (High Density)
3-01-027-13 Dryers and Coolers (High
Density)
3-01-027-17 tvaporator/Concentrator
(High Density)
3-01-027-18 Coating (High Density)
3-01-027-21 Neutral izer (Low Density)
3-01-027-22 Prilling Tower (Low Density)
3-01-027-23 Dryers and Coolers (Low Density)
3-01-027-27 tvaporator/Concentrator
(Low Density)
3-01-027-28 Coating (Low Density)
Urea Production - 2873
3-01-040-02 Solution Concentration (Controlled)
3-01-040-03 Prilling
3-01-040-04 Granulation
3-01-040-05 Solid Product Finishing
3-01-040-06 Solid Product Baqoinq/Loadimj
0.01 7.20 13.80
0.144 0.0048 5.80 0.024 0.136
0.90 2.60 5.40 0.30 0.24
0.00 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.00
(1.00 0.00 0.00 1.20
52.5
7.50
5.00
0.20
0.40 0.90
7.00 3.0D
2873
0.02
3.30
2.70
0.10
O.D4
4.00
O.OK
1.00
0.08
0.18
6.00
0.214
3.20
0.284
2.00
(1.15
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons pure acid
produced
Tons pure acid
produced
Tons pure acid
produced
Tons pure acid
produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
(MISSION FACTORS
11/7!:
C-45
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC
PROCESS
PART
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
S0y
N0y
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
GROUP 287 - AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS
Normal Superphosphate Production - 2874
3-01-028-01 Grinding and Drying 9.00
3-01-028-02 Main Stack
Triple Superphosphate Production - 2874 (Also Called Double or Concentrated Superphosphate)
3-01-029-01
3-01-029-02
"Run-of-Pile" (ROP) Product
Granular Product
Dianoniuni Phosphate Production - 2874
3-01-030-01 Dryers and Coolers
3-01-030-02 Ammoniator/Granulator
MonamnioniuEi Phosphate Production - 2874
3-01-044-01 Ansiiomator/Granulator
3-01-044-02 Dryers and Coolers
Phosphoric Acid: Met Process - 2874
3-01-016-01 Reactor
3-01-016-02 Gypsum Pond
3-01-016-03 Condensor
Phosphoric Acid: Thermal Process - 2874
3-01-017-02 Absorber
80.0
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Pesticides - 2879
3-01-033-01
3-01-033-99
Malathion
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Conments)
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons phosphate rock
Tons phosphate rock
Tons phosphate rock
Tons phosphorous
burned
Gallons of product
Tons produced
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COPES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS
PART
SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 289 - MISCELLANEOUS CHEMICAL PRODUCTS
Explosives - Trlnitro Toluene - 2892
3-01-010-11 Batch Process - Nitration
Reactors Fume Recovery
3-01-010-12 Batch Process - Nitration
Reactors Acid Recovery
3-01-010-13 Batch Process - Nitric Acid
Concentrators
3-01-010-14 Batch Process - Sulfuric Acid
Concentrators - Electrostatic
Precipitators (Exit)
3-01-010-15 Batch Process - Red Water
Incinerator
3-01-010-21 Continuous Process - Nitration
Reactors - (Fume Recovery)
3-01-010-22 Continuous Process - Nitration
Reactors (Acid Recovery)
3-01-010-23 Continuous Process -
Red Water Incinerator
Nitrocellulose - 2892
3-01-041-01 Nitration Reactors
3-01-041-02 Sulfuric Acid Concentrator
3-01-041-03 Boiling Tubs
3-01-041-04 Nitric Acid Concentrator
Printing Ink Manufacture - 2893
3-01-020-01 Vehicle Cooking: General
3-01-020-02 Vehicle Cooking: Oils
3-01-020-03 Vehicle Cooking: Oleoresin
3-01-020-04 Vehicle Cooking: Alkyds
3-01-020-05 Pigment Mixing
Carbon Black Production - 2895
3-01-005-01 Channel Process 2
3-01-005-02 Thermal Process
3-01-005-03 Gas Furnace Process
(Main Process Vent)
3-01-005-04 Oil Furnace Process
(Main Process Vent)
3-01-005-06 Transport Air Vent
3-01-005-07 Pellet Dryer
3-01-005-08 Bagging/Loading
3-01-005-09 Furnace Process Fugitive Emissions
Frit Manufacture - 2899
3-05-013-01 Rotary Furnace
3-05-013-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
25.0
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
,300.
0.00
10.0
6.53
0.58
0.45
0.06
0.20
16.0
25.0 Tons produced
55.0 Tons produced
37.0 Tons produced
14.0 40.0 Tons produced
2.00 26.0 Tons produced
8.00 Tons produced
3.00 Tons produced
0.24 7.00 Tons produced
1.40 14.0 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
68.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 14.0 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
120.0 Tons produced
40.0 Tons produced
150.0 Tons produced
160.0 Tons produced
Tons produced
0.00 0.00 11,500. 33,500. Tons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 1,800. 5,300. Tons produced
0.00 0.56 144.4 2,800.0 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.10 0.73 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons produced
Tons charged
Tons charged
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-47
-------
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEMICAL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART S0y NOV HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 28 - CHEM1CA1. AND ALLIED PRODUCTS (CONTINUED)
GROUP 289 - MISCELLANEOUS CHEMICAL PRODUCTS
Waste Gas Flares
3-01-900-99 Not Classified Million cubic
(Specify in Comments) feet burned
Chemical and Allied Products - Not Classified
3-01-999-99 Not Classified Tons produced
(Specify in Comments)
[MISSION FACTORS
C-48 11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES1
Process Heaters - 2911
3-06-001-03 Oil Fired 20.0 159.0 S 69.0 1.00 5.00
3-06-001-04 Gas Fired 20.0 830.0 S 230.0 3.00 20.0
Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCC) - 2911
3-06-002-01 Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit 242.0 493.0 71.0 220. O2 13700. 2
Moving Bed Catalytic Cracking Units (TCC) - 2911
3-06-003-01 Thermal Catalytic Cracking 17.0 60.0 5.00 87. O2 3800.
Unit
Slowdown Systems - 2911
3-06-004-01 Slowdown System with Vapor 0.00 26.9 18.90 0.80 4.30
Recovery System and Flaring
3-06-004-02 Slowdown System without 0.00 0.00 0.00 580.0 0.00
Controls
Asphalt Blowing - 2911
3-06-011-01 Asphalt Blowing 0.00 0.00 60.0 0.00
Vacuum Distillation Column Condensers - 2911
3-06-006-02 Vacuum Distillation 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.0 0.00
Column Condenser
3-06-006-03 Vacuum Distillation 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.0 0.00
Column Condenser '
Cooling Towers - 2911
3-06-007-01 Cooling Towers 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.0 0.00
3-06-007-02 Cooling Towers 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.0 0.00
Fluid Coking Units - 2911
3-06-012-01 Fluid Coking Units 523.0
Fugitive Hydrocarbon Emissions from Petroleum Refining - 2911
3-06-005-03 Process Drains and Waste Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00
Separators
3-06-005-04 Process Drains and Waste Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.0 0.00
Separators
UNITS
1000 gallons oil
burned
Million cubic feet
gas burned
1000 bbls fresh
feed
1000 bbls fresh
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
Tons of asphalt
produced
1000 bbls vacuum
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
Million gallons
cool ing water
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls fresh feed
1000 gallons waste
water
1000 bbls refinery
feed
'S1 indicates the sulfur content of the fuel on a percent-by-weight basis.
1 Several processes that routinely occur in Major Group 29 can be found under other Major Groups, Specifically, note the
following-
o waste or process gas and/or liquid fired boilers - Part I, page C-5.
o internal combustion compressor engines - Part I, page C-9.
o amine sweetening process - Part II, SIC 1311.
o sulfur recovery process - Part II, SIC 2819.
o sulfunc acid plant - Part II, SIC 2819
Represents total CO and HC generated. Report control device as 022 if CO boiler is present to properly account for
actual emissions.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-49
-------
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND
EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS
sec
MAJOR GROUP 29 -
PROCESS
PART
so
X
EMITTED PER
NOX
LISTING
UNIT
HC
CO
UNITS
PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
Fugitive Hydrocarbon Emissions from Petroleum Refining - 2911
3-06-005-05
3-06-005-06
3-06-008-01
3-06-008-02
3-06-008-03
3-06-008-06
3-06-008-04
3-06-008-05
3-06-008-07
Waste Water Treatment
Plant Excluding Separator
Waste Water Treatment
Plant Excluding Separator
Pipeline Valves and Flanges
Vessel Relief Valves
Pump Seals w/o Control
Pump Seals w/Control
Compressor Seals
Miscellaneous Sampl ing/Non-
Asphalt Blowing, Purging, etc.
Blind Changing
Storage of Petroleum Products (Refineries Oil and
Fixed Roof2
4-03-010-01
4-03-010-02
4-03-010-03
4-03-010-04
4-03-010-05
4-03-010-06
4-03-010-07
4-03-010-08
4-03-010-09
4-03-010-10
4-03-010-11
4-03-010-12
Gasoline RVP133: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP10: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP7: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP13: Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP10. Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP7- Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP13: Working Loss
(Independent of Tank Diameter)
Gasoline RVP10: Working Loss
(Independent of Tank Diameter)
Gasoline RVP7: Working Loss
(Independent of Tank Diameter)
Crude Oil RVP5: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Crude Oil RVP5: Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Crude Oil RVP5: Working Loss
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Gas Fields
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Only) -
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2911, 2992,
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0;00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
28.
11.
17.
10.
5.
10.
0.
1311,
109.
84.
58.
80.
62.
43.
10.
8.
5.
0
0
0
0
00
0
30
1321
5
0
4
3
1
,8
,0
20
.70
23.4
16.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
.8 0.00
.80
0.00
1000 gallons waste
water
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 bbls refinery
feed
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
TOOO gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1 The tank sizes of 67,000 and 250,000 bbl's specified below represent approximate size ranges. The emission factors
may be applied to tanks of approximately the same size. See AP-42, Section 4.3.3.
Emission factors for the fixed roof storage tanks breathing loss are for 'new' tank conditions only, i.e., Paint
Factor = 1.0. For 'old' tank conditions the emission factor is increased by approximately 13%.
3 RVP = Reid va|ior pressure is the absolute pressure of gasoline at 100°F in psia as determined by ASTM method 0323-72,
EMISSION FACTORS
C-50
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND
EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 29 -
PROCESS
PART
sox
NOX
HC
CO
UNITS
PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
Storage of Petroleum Products (Refineries and Oil
Fixed Roof1
4-03-010-13
4-03-010-14
4-03-010-15
4-03-010-16
4-03-010-17
4-03-010-18
4-03-010-19
4-03-010-20
4-03-010-2!
4-03-010-97
4-03-010-98
4-03-010-99
Floating Roof
4-03-011-01
4-03-011-02
4-03-011-03
4-03-011-04
4-03-011-05
4-03-011-06
4-03-011-07
4-03-011-08
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Breathing
Loss (67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Breathing
Loss (250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Working Loss
Jet Kerosene: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Kerosene: Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Kerosene: Working Loss
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Breathing
Loss (67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Breathing
Loss (250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Working
Loss
Specify Liquid: Breathing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Specify Liquid: Breathing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Specify Liquid: Working Loss
Tanks?
Gasoline RVP13: Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP10: Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP7: Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP13: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP 10: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP7: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP13: Withdrawal Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Gasoline RVP13/RVP10/RVP7:
Withdrawal Loss (250,000 bbl.
Tank Size)
and
0
0
0
t)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gas Fields
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.
0.
0.
Only) 2911, 2992
00
00
00
0.00
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
, 131U 1321
31.
22.
4
6
2.50
1.60
1.
0.
1.
1.
0.
16.
12.
8.
9.
6.
4.
0.
0.
10
03
40
02
023
1
0
40
10
90
70
023
013
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
storage
Emission factors for the fixed roof storage tank breathing loss are for 'new' tank conditions only, i.e., Paint Factor*
1.0. For 'old' tank conditions the emission factor is increased by approximately 13%.
' Emission factors for the floating roof storage tanks standing loss are for 'new' tank conditions only. For 'old' tank
conditions the emission factor is increased by approximately 229t.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-51
-------
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
Floating Roof Tanks
4-03-011-09
4-03-011-10
4-03-011-11
4-03-011-12
4-03-011-13
4-03-011-14
4-03-011-15
4-03-011-16
4-03-011-98
4-03-011-99
Variable Vapor
4-03-012-01
4-03-012-02
4-03-012-03
4-03-012-04
4-03-012-05
4-03-012-06
4-03-012-99
Crude Oil RVP5: Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Crude Oil RVP5: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Standing
Loss (67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Standing
Loss (250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Kerosene- Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Jet Kerosene: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Standing
Loss (67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Standing
Loss (250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Specify Liquid: Standing Loss
(67,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Specify Liquid: Standing Loss
(250,000 bbl. Tank Size)
Space Tanks - (10,500 bbl. Tank
Gasoline RVP13: Filling Loss
Gasoline RVP10: Filling Loss
Gasoline RVP7: Filling Loss
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Size)
0.00
0.00
0.00
Jet Naphtha (JP-4): Filling Loss 0.00
Jet Kerosene: Filling Loss
Distillate Fuel No. 2: Filling
Loss
Specify Liquid: Filling Loss
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.38
2.81
4.38
2.48
0.20
0.11
0.18
0.10
9.60
7.70
5.40
2.30
0.025
0.022
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons storage
capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
Emission factors for the floating roof storage tanks standing loss are for 'new' tank conditions only. For 'old' tank
conditions the emission factor is increased by approximately 229%.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-52
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 29 - PETROLEUM REFINING AND RELATED INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
Asphaltic Concrete - 2951
3-05-002-01
3-05-002-02
3-05-002-03
3-05-002-04
3-05-002-05
3-05-002-06
3-05-002-07
3-05-002-08
Asphalt Roofing
3-05-001-01
3-05-001-05
Rotary Dryer, Conventional Plant 45.0
Hot Elevators, Screens, Bfns S Mixer
Storage Piles
Cold Aggregate Handling
Drum, Dryer Hot Asphalt Plants 4.90
Asphalt Heater (Natural Gas)
Asphalt Heater (Residual Oil)
Asphalt Heater (Distillate 011)
Manufacture - 2952
Blowing Operations 7.30
Felt Saturation Operations 6.30
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
1.19
0.48
0.27
2.90
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons of asphalt
produced
Million cubic feet
of gas burned
1000 gallons of
oil burned
1000 Gallons of
oil burned
Tons of asphalt
produced
Tons saturated felt
produced
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
MAJOR GROUP 30 - RUBBER AND MISCELLANEOUS PLASTIC PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 30 - RUBBER AND MISCELLANEOUS PLASTIC PRODUCTS
Rubberued. Fabric - 3069. 2241
3-30-002-01 Impregnation Tons processed
3-30-002-02 Wet Coating Tons processed
3-30-002-03 Hot Melt Coating Tons processed
3-30-002-99 Other/Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
Tire Manufacturing - 3011
3-08-001-99 Not Classified ' Tons product
(Specify in Comments!
Other Fabricated Rubber Products - 3021, 3031. 3041. 30J59
3-08-006-99 Not Classified Tons product
(Specify in Comments)
Fabricated Plastic Products - 3079
3-08-007-99 Not Classified Tons product
(Specify In Comments)
EMISSION FACTORS
C-54 11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 31 - LEATHER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 31 - LEATHER AND LEATHER PRODUCTS
Leather and Leather Products - 3111 through 3199
3-20-999-99 Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78 C-55
-------
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE, CLAY, GLASS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 32
PROCESS PART SOX NOX
- STONE, CLAY, GLASS, AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
HC
CO
UNITS
GROUP 321 - 322: FLAT GLASS, CONTAINER GLASS, AND GLASSWARE PRESSED OR BLOWN
Glass Manufacture - 3211, 3221, 3229
3-05-014-02
3-05-014-03
3-05-014-04
3-05-014-06
3-05-014-07
3-05-014-08
3-05-014-10
Fiberglass I
3-05-012-01
3-05-012-02
3-05-012-03
3-05-012-04
3-05-012-05
3-05-012-06
3-05-012-11
3-05-012-12
3-05-012-13
3-05-012-14
3-05-012-15
;-|l',-;'l. - I'j
Container Glass. Melting 1.40 3.40 6.20
Furnace
Flat Glass: Melting Furnace 2.00 1.00 8.00
Pressed and Blown Glass: 17.4 8.70 8.50
Melting Furnace
Container Glass: Forming 4 0.00 0.00
Finishing
Flat Glass: Forming S 0.00 0.00
Fimshi ng
Pressed and Blown Glass: 0.00 0.00
Forming & Fimshi ng
Raw Materials Handling 0.00 0.00
{All Types of Glass)
Manufacturing) - 3229, 3296
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 21.5 10.0 5.00
Regenerative Glass Furnace
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 28.3 9.50 1.70
Recuperative Glass Furnace
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 0.60 0.04 0.27
Electric Glass Furnace
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 57.6
Forming Process
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 3.50 1.10
Curing Oven Process
Wool-Type Glass Fiber 1.30 0.20
Cool ing Process
Textile-Type Glass Fiber 16.4 29.6 9.20
Regenerative Glass Furnace
Textile-Type Glass Fiber 27.8 2.70 29.2
Recuperative Glass Furnace
Textile-Type Glass Fiber
Electric Glass Furnace
Textile-Type Glass Fiber 1.60
Forming Operation
Textile-Type Glass Fiber 1.20 2.60
Cijrinq Oven Process
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
0.20
0.10
0.30
8.70
9.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.10
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.25
0.05
1.70
0.20
1.10
0.90
1.50
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of glass
produced
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
Ton of material
processed
(MISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE, CLAY, GLASS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 32 -
PROCESS PART
STONE. CLAY, GLASS, AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
sox
(CONTINUED)
NOX
HC
CO
UNITS
GROUP 324 - CEMENT MANUFACTURING
Dry Process -
3-05-006-06
3-90-002-0]
3-90-004-02
3-90-005-02
3-90-006-02
3-05-006-07
3-05-006-08
3-05-006-09
3-05-006-10
3-05-006-11
3-05-006-12
3-05-006-13
3-05-006-14
3-05-006-15
3-05-006-16
3-05-006-17
3-05-006-18
3-05-006-19
Wet Process -
3-05-007-06
3-90-002-01
3-90-004-02
3-90-005-02
3-90-006-02
3-05-007-07
3-05-007-08
3-05-007-09
3-05-007-10
3-05-007-11
3-05-007-12
3-05-007-14
3-05-007-15
3-05-007-16
3-05-007-17
3-05-007-18
3-05-007-19
3241
Kilns1 245.0
Bituminous Coal Used in Kilns 0.00
Residual Oil Used in Kilns 0.00
Distillate Oil Used in Kilns 0.00
Natural Gas Used in Kilns 0.00
Raw Material Unloading
Raw Material Piles
Primary Crushing
Secondary Crushing
Screening
Raw Material Transfer
Raw Material Grinding and Drying
Cl inker Cooler
Clinker Piles
Clinker Transfer
Cl inker Grinding
Cement Silos
Cement Load Out
3241
Kilns1 228.0
Bituminous Coal Used in Kilns 0.00
Residual Oil Used in Kilns 0.00
Distillate Oil Used in Kilns 0.00
Natural Gas Used in Kilns 0.00
Raw Material Unloading
Raw Material Piles
Primary Crushing
Secondary Crushing
Screening
Raw Material Transfer
Clinker Cooler
Cl inker Piles
Clinker Transfer
Cl inker Grinding
Cement Silo
Cement Loadout
10.2
26.0 S
108.0 S
98.0 S
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.2
26.0 S
108.0 S
98.0 S
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons of Cement
produced
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
of gas burned
Tons of material
unloaded
Tons in piles
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons handled
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons burned
1000 gallons burned
1000 gallons burned
Million cubic feet
of gas burned
Tons of material
unloaded
Tons in piles
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons handled
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
Tons cement produced
'S' is the weight percent sulfur in the fuel.
1
Use kiln code and appropriate 3-90 code for fuel used in kilns to properly account for all SOX emissions.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-57
-------
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE, CLAY, GLASS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE. CLAY, GLASS, AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 325 - STRUCTURAL CLAY PRODUCTS
Brick Manufacturing - 3251
3-05-003-01 Raw Material Drying 70.0
3-05-003-02 Raw Material Grinding 76.0 0 00
3-05-003-03 Storage of Raw Materials 34.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-05-003-07 Process Calcining
3-05-003-08 Screening ' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-05-003-09 Process Blending and Mixing 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-05-003-11 Curing and Firing: Gas-Fired 0.05 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.04
Tunnel Kilns
3-05-003-12 Curing and Firing- Oll-Fired 0.60 4.00S 1.10 0.10 0.00
Tunnel Kilns
3-05-003-13 Curing and Firing: Coal-Fired 1.00 A 7.20 S 0.90 0.60 1.90
Tunnel Kilns
3-05-003-14 Curing and Firing- Gas-Fired 0.11 0.00 0.47 0.04 0.11
Periodic Kilns
3-05-003-15 Curing and Firing: Oil-Fired 0.90 5.90 S 1.70 0.10 0.00
Periodic Kl Ins
3-05-003-16 Curing and Firing. Coal-Fired 1.60 A 12.0 S 1.40 0.90 3.20
Periodic Kilns
Castable Refractory - 3255
3-05-005-01 Raw Material Dryer 30.0
3-05-005-02 Raw Material Crushing/ ' 120.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Processing
3-05-005-03 Electric Arc Melt 50.0
3-05-005-04 Curing Oven 0.20
3-05-005-05 Molding and Shakeout 25.0
3-05-005-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
GROUP 326 - POTTERY AND RELATED PRODUCTS
Ceramic Clay Manufacturing - 3261
3-05-008-01 Drying 70.0
3-05-008-02 Grinding 76.0
3-05-009-03 Storage 34.0
3-05-009-99 Other/Not Classified
UNITS
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Tons of material
stored
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Tons raw material
Tons produced
Tons brick produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons feed material
Tons feed material
Tons feed material
Tons feed material
Tons feed material
Tons feed material
Tons input to process
Tons input to process
Tons input to process
Tons produced
(Specify in Comments)
Ceramic Electric Parts - 3264
3-05-030-99
Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Tons processed
'A' indicates the ash content of the fuel.
'S' is the weight percent sulfur in the fuel.
C-58
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE, CLAV, GLASS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS
PART SOX
NOX
HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE. CLAY, GLASS, AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 327 - CONCRETE. GYPSUM AND PLASTER PRODUCTS
Concrete Batching - 3271, 3272, 3273. 3275, 1771
3-05-011-01 General (Non-fugitive)
Fugitive Emissions
3-05-011-06 Transfer of sand and
aggregate to elevated bins
3-05-011-07 Cement unloading to
storage silos
3-05-011-08 Weight hopper loading of
cement, sand and aggregate
3-05-011-09 Mixer loading of cement,
sand, and aggregate
3-05-011-10 Loading of transit mix truck
3-05-011-11 Loading of dry-batch truck
3-05-011-20 Asbest. /Cement Pdts,
3-05-011-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Lime Manufacture - 3274
3-05-016-01 Primary Crushing
3-05-016-02 Secondary Crushing/Screening
3-05-016-03 Calcining - Vertical Kiln
3-05-016-04 Calcining - Rotary Kiln
3-05-016-05 Calcimatic Kiln
3-05-016-06 Fluidized Bed Kiln
3-05-016-07 Raw Material
Transfer and Conveying
3-05-016-08 Raw Material Unloading
3-05-016-09 Hydrator (Atmospheric)
3-05-016-10 Raw Material Storage Piles
3-05-016-11 Product Cooler
3-05-016-12 Pressure Hydrator
3-06-016-13 Lime Silos
3-06-016-14 Packing/Shipping
3-06-016-15 Product Transfer and Conveying
3-06-016-16 Primary Screening
Gypsum Manufacture - 3275
3-05-015-01 Raw Material Dryer
3-05-015-02 Primary Grinder
3-05-015-03 Calciner
3-05-015-04 Conveying
, 3292
0.20
0.04 0.00
0.23 0.00
0.23 0.00
0.02 0.00
0.02 0.00
0.04 0.00
0.20 0.00
0.50 0.00
1.50 0.00
8.00
340.0
50.0
0.00
0.00
0.10 0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
40.0
1.00
90.0
0.70
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
Cubic yards concrete
produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons produced
Tons produced
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
Tons processed
2.00 Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
0.00 °'°° Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons hydrated lime
produced
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
0.00 0.00 Tons processed
Tons throughput
Tons throughput
Tons throughput
Tons throughput
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-59
-------
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE, CLAY, GLASS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 32 - STONE. CLAY. GLASS. AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS (Continued)
GROUP 329 - ABRASIVE. ASBESTOS. AND MISCELLANEOUS NONMETALL1C MINERAL PRODUCTS
Clay and Fly Ash Sintering (Low Density Aggregate Manufacture) - 3295
3-05-009-01 Flyash
3-05-009-02 Clay/Coke
3-05-009-03 Natural Clay
3-05-009-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Perlite Manufacture - 3295
3-05-018-01 Vertical Furnace
3-05-018-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Barium Ore Processing - 3295
3-03-014-01 Ore Grinding
3-03-014-02 Reduction Kiln
3-03-014-03 Dryers/Calciners
3-03-014-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Mineral Wool - 3296
3-05-017-01 Cupola
3-05-017-02 Reverb Furnace
3-05-017-03 Blow Chamber
3-05-017-04 Curing Oven
3-05-017-05 Cooler
3-05-017-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Other/Not Classified
3-05-999-99 Specify in Comments
110.0
55.0
24.0
21.0
0.00
22.0
5.00
17.0
4.00
2.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons finished product
Tons finished product
Tons finished product
Tons finished product
Tons charged
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons charged
Tons charged
Tons charged
Tons charged
Tons charged
Tons processed
Tons products
C-60
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NAT IONALEMISSI ON DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
GROUP 331 - BLAST FURNACES, STEELWORKS, AND ROLLING AND FINISHING MILLS
Coke Manufacturing - 3312
3-03-003-02 Oven Charging 1.50 0.02 0.03 2.50 0.60
3-03-003-03 Oven Pushing 0.60 0.20 0.07
3-03-003-04 Quenching 0.90
3-03-003-05 Coal Unloading 0.40
3-03-003-06 Oven Underfiring 4.00
3-03-003-07 Coal Crushing/Handling'
3-03-003-08 Oven/Door Leaks 0.10 0.01 1.50 0.60
3-03-003-09 Coal Conveying 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-003-10 Coal Crushing 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-003-11 Coal Screening 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-003-12 Coke Crushing/Screening/Handling 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coke Manufacture: Beehives - 3312
3-03-004-01 General 200.0 8.00 1.00
Iron Production - 3312
3-03-008-01 Blast Furnace: Ore Charge 110.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.750.2
3-03-008-02 Blast Furnace: Agglomerates 40.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.750.2
Charge
3-03-008-21 Unloading Ore, Pellets, Limestone
Into Blast Furnace
3-03-008-22 Blast Furnace Raw Materials
Stockpiles: Ore, Pellets,
Limestone, Coke, Sinter
3-03-008-23 Blast Furnace Charge Materials
Transfer/Handling
3-03-008-24 Blast Heating Stoves
3-03-008-25 Cast House
Blast Furnace Slag
3-03-008-08 Slag Crushing and Sizing
3-03-008-09 Slag Removal and Dumping
Sintering
3-03-008-11 Raw Materials Stockpiles, Coke
Breeze, Limestone, Ore Fines
3-03-008-12 Raw Materials Transfer/Handling
3-03-008-13 Windbox 20.0 44.0
3-03-008-14 Sinter Discharge End 22.0
3-03-008-15 Sinter Breaker
3-03-008-16 Sinter Hot Screening
3-03-008-17 Sinter Cooler
3-03-008-18 Sinter Cold Screening
3-03-008-19 Sinter Processing (Combined Code
Includes 15, 16, 17, and 18}
UNITS
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons coal charged
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons coal charged
Tons iron produced
Tons iron produced
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
' Codes 3-03-003-09, -10, and -11 represent individual operations within this source.
2
Represents total CO generated, report control equipment as 022 for CO Boiler or 060 for Process Gas Recovery
EMISSION FACTORS
to properly account for actual emissions.
11/78
C-61
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NOV
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (Continued)
GROUP 331 - BLAST
Steel Production
3-03-009-01
3-03-009-02
3-03-009-04
3-03-009-05
3-03-009-13
3-03-009-14
3-03-009-15
3-03-009-16
3-03-009-17
3-03-009-21
3-03-009-22
3-03-009-23
3-03-009-24
FURNACES, STEELWORKS, AND ROLLING AND FINISHING MILLS
- 3312
Open Hearth Furnace with 17.4
Oxygen Lance
Open Hearth Furnace with No 8.30
Oxygen Lance
Electric Arc Furnace with 11.0
Oxygen Lance
Electric Arc Furnace with 9.20
No Oxygen Lance
Basic Oxygen Furnace-Open 51.0
Hood
Basic Oxygen Furnace-Closed 51.0
Hood
Hot MetaT (Iron) Transfer to
Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF)
Charging BOF
Tapping BOF
Teeming
Continuous Casting
Steel Furnace Slag Tapping
and Dumpi ng
Steel Furnace Slag Processing,
Crushi ng/Sizing
Tons produced
Tons produced
18.0 Tons produced
18.0 Tons produced
139. O1 Tons produced
139. O1 Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Steel Rolling/Finishing
3-03-009-11 Soaking Pits
3-03-009-31 Hot Rolling
3-03-009-12 Grinding
3-03-009-32 Scarfing
3-03-009-33 Reheat Furnaces
3-03-009-34 Heat Treating Furnaces, Annealing
3-03-009-10 Pickling
3-03-009-35 Cold Rolling
3-03-009-36 Coating (Tin, Zinc, Etc.)
3-03-009-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
1.00
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
1 Represents total CO generated, report control device as 022 for CO Boiler or 023 for flaring to properly account
for actual emissions.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-62
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (Continued)
GROUP 331 - BLAST FURNACES, STEELWORKS, AND ROLLING AND FINISHING MILLS
Ferroalloy (Open Furnace) - 33131
3-03-006-01 50* FeSi - Electric Smelting 200.0
Furnaces
3-03-006-02 75* FeSi - Electric Smelting 315.0
Furnaces
3-03-006-03 90* FeSi - Electric Smelting 565.0
Furnaces
3-03-006-04 Silicon Metal - Electric 625.0
Smelting Furnaces
3-03-006-05 Siliconmanganese - Electric 195.0
Smelting Furnaces
3-03-006-10 Ore Screening
3-03-006-11 Ore Dryer
3-03-006-13 Raw Materials Storage
3-03-006-14 Raw Materials Transfer
3-03-006-15 Ferromanganese - Blast Furnace
3-03-006-16 Ferrosilicon - Blast Furnace
3-03-006-17 Cast House
3-03-006-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Ferroalloy (Semicovered Furnace) - 3313
3-03-007-01 Ferromanganese - Electric Arc 45.0
Furnace
3-03-007-02 Electric Arc Furnace (Other
Alloys Specify in Comments)
3-03-007-03 Ferrochromium - Electric Arc
Furnace
3-03-007-04 Ferrochromium Silicon - Electric
Arc Furnace
GROUP 332 - IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
Gray Iron Foundries - 3321
3-04-003-01 Cupola 17.0
3-04-003-02 Reverberatory Furnace 2.00
3-04-003-03 Electric Induction Furnace 1.50
3-04-003-04 Electric Arc Furnace
3-04-003-05 Annealing Operation
3-04-003-20 Pouring/Casting
3-04-003-31 Casting Shakeout
3-04-003-40 Grinding/Cleaning 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-003-50 Sand Grinding/Handling in
Mold and Core Making
3-04-003-51 Core Ovens
3-04-003-60 Castings Finishing
3-04-003-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
CO UNITS
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
145.0 Tons metal charged
0.00 Tons metal charged
0.00 Tons metal charged
0.00 Tons metal charged
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
Tons handled
Tons handled
Tons handled
Tons metal charged
The sequence of the 3-03-006 SCC's is not intended to imply that the collateral activities (ore screening, ore
dryer, raw materials storage, raw materials handling, and cast house) apply to specific furnace types.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-63
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NOV
HC
CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (Continued)
GROUP 332 - IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
Malleable Iron - 3322
3-04-009-01 Annealing
3-04-009-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Steel Foundry - 3324, 3325
3-04-007-01 Electric Arc Furnace 13.0
3-04-007-02 Open Hearth Furnace 11.0
3-04-007-03 Open Hearth Furnace with 10.0
Oxygen Lance
3-04-007-04 Heat-Treating Furnace
3-04-007-05 Electric Induction Furnace 0.10 0.00
3-04-007-06 Sand Grinding/Handling in Mold
and Core Making
3-04-007-07 Core Ovens
3-04-007-08 Pouring and Casting
3-04-007-09 Casting Shakeout
3-04-007-11 Cleaning
3-04-007-15 Finishing
(Describe in Comments)
3-04-007-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
GROUP 333 - PRIMARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Aluminum Ore: Electro-Reduction - 3334
3-03-001-01 Prebaked Reduction Cell 81.3
3-03-001-02 Horizontal Stud Soderberg Cell 98.4
3-03-001-03 Vertical Stud Soderberg Cell 78.4
3-03-001-04 Materials Handling 10.0
3-03-001-05 Anode Baking Furnace 3.00
3-03-001-06 Degassing Q 00
3-03-001-07 Roof Vents
Aluminum Hydroxide Calcininq - 3334
3-03-002-01 Overall Process 200.0
Tons metal charged
Tons metal charged
0.20 Tons processed
0.01 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
Tons processed
0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons processed
Tons handled
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
0.00 0.00 0.00 Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of molten
aluminum produced
Tons of alumina
produced
064
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
sec
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (Continued)
GROUP 333 - PRIMARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Primary Copper
3-03-005-02
3-03-005-03
3-03-005-04
3-03-005-05
3-03-005-06
3-03-005-07
3-03-005-08
3-03-005-09
3-03-005-10
3-03-005-11
3-03-005-12
3-03-005-13
3-03-005-14
3-03-005-15
3-03-005-16
Lead Smelters
3-03-010-11
3-03-010-12
3-03-010-13
3-03-010-04
3-03-010-14
3-03-010-05
3-03-010-01
3-03-010-06
3-03-010-07
3-03-010-15
3-03-010-16
3-03-010-17
3-03-010-18
3-03-010-02
3-03-010-19
3-03-010-20
3-03-010-21
Smelters - 3331
Multiple Hearth Roaster 45.0 410.0
Reverberatory Smelting Furnace 450.
Converter 42.0 540.0
Fire (Furnace) Refining 10.0 0.00
Ore Concentrate Dryer
Reverberatory Smelting Furnace 36.0 390.0 0.09
with Ore Charging (w/o Roasting)
Refined Metal Finishing Operations
Fluidized-Bed Roaster 55.0 540.0
Electric Smelting Furnace 131.0
Electrolytic Refining
Flash Smelting
Roasting-Fugitive Emissions 5.75
Reverberatory Furnace- 2.125
Fugitive Emissions
Converter-Fugitive Emissions 2.625
Fire Ref ining-Fugitive Emissions 0.475
- 3332
Raw Material Unloading
Raw Material Storage Files
Raw Material Transfer
Ore Crushing 6.00
Sintering Charge Mixing
Materials Handling (Includes 5.00
11, 12, 13, 04, 14)
Sintering, Single Stream
Sintering, Feed End
Sintering, Discharge End
Sinter Crushing/Screening
Sinter Transfer
Sinter Fines Return Handling
Blast Furnace Charging
Blast Furnace Operation 361.0 45.0
Blast Furnace Tapping
(Metal and Slag)
Blast Furnace Lead Pouring
Blast Furnace Slag Pouring
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons concentrated
ore processed
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of ore crushed
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of concentrated ore
Tons of concentrated ore
Tons of concentrated ore
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of concentrated ore
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
11/78
[MISSION FACTORS
C-65
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (Continued)
GROUP 333 - PRIMARy SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Lead Smelters - 3332 (Continued)
3-03-010-08 Slag Fuming Furnace
3-03-010-09 Lead Dressing
3-03-010-24 Reverberatory or Kettle Softening
3-03-010-22 Lead Refining/Specify Operation in Comment
3-03-010-23 Lead Casting
3-03-010-03 Dross Reverberatory Furnace 20.0
Zinc Smelting - 3333
3-03-030-02 Multiple Hearth Roaster 120.0 1,100. 0.00
3-03-030-03 Sinter Strand 90.0
3-03-030-05 Vertical Retort/Electro- 100.0
thermal Furnace
3-03-030-06 Electrolytic Processor 3.00
3-03-030-07 Flash Roaster
3-03-030-08 Fluid Bed Roaster
3-03-030-09 Raw Material Handling 0.00 0.00 0.00
and Transfer
3-03-030-10 Sinter Breaking and Cooling 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-030-11 Zinc Casting 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-030-12 Raw Material Unloading 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-030-14 Crushing/Screening 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-030-15 Zinc Smelting 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-030-16 Alloying 0.00 0.00 0.00
Titanium Processing - 3339, 3369, 3356
3-03-012-01 Chlonnation 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-03-012-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Other Primary Metal Industries/Not Classified - 3339
3-03-999-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
GROUP 334 - SECONDARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Secondary Aluminum - 3341, 3353, 3354, 3355, 3361, 3411, 3497
3-04-001-01 Sweating Furnace 14.5
3-04-001-02 Smelting Furnace/Crucible 1.90
3-04-001-03 Smelting Furnace/Reverberatory 4.30
3-04-001-04 Fluxing (Chlonnation) 1,000. 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-001-05 Fluxing ( Flouridation)
3-04-001-06 Degassing 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-001-07 Hot Dross Processing 0 00 0.00 0.00
3-04-001-08 Crushing/Screening 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-001-09 Burning/Drying
CO UNITS
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of lead product
Tons of concentrated on
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
Tons product
Tons processed
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons metal produced
Tons metal produced
0.00 Tons of chlorine used
Tons metal produced
0.00 Tons metal produced
0.00 Tons metal produced
0.00 Tons metal produced
Tons metal produced
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC PROCESS
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
PART SOX NOX HC
CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
GROUP 334 - SECONDARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Secondary Aluminum - 3341, 3353, 3354, 3355, 3361
3-04-001-10 Foil Rolling
3-04-001-11 Foil Converting
3-04-001-20 Can Manufacture
3-04-001-50 Roll/Draw Extruding
, 3411, 3497
0.00 Tons produced
0.00 Tons produced
0.00 Tons produced
0.00 Tons produced
Secondary Copper Smelting and Alloying (Brass/Bronze Melt) - 3341, 3362
3-04-002-07 Scrap Dryer (Rotarv)
3-04-002-08 Wire Burning (Incinerator)
3-04-002-09 Sweating Furnace
Cupolas
3-04-002-10 Charge w/Scrap Copper
3-04-002-11 Charge w/Insulated Copper Wire
3-04-002-12 Charge w/Scrap Copper and Brass
Reverberatory Furnace
3-04-002-14 Charge w/Copper
3-04-002-15 Charge w/Brass and Bronze
Rotary Furnace
3-04-002-17 Charge w/Brass and Bronze
Crucible and Pot Furnaces
3-04-002-19 Charge w/Brass and Bronze
Electric Arc Furnace
3-04-002-20 Charge w/Copper
3-04-002-21 Charge w/Brass and Bronze
Electric Induction Furnace
3-04-002-23 Charge w/Copper
3-04-002-24 Charge w/Brass and Bronze
Fugitive Emissions
3-04-002-30 Scrap Metal Pretreatment
3-04-002-31 -Scrap Dryer
3-04-002-32 Wire Incinerator
3-04-002-33 Sweating Furnace
3-04-002-34 Cupola Furnace
3-04-002-35 Reverberatory Furnace
3-04-002-36 Rotary Furnace
3-04-002-37 Crucible Furnace
3-04-002-38 Electric Induction Furnace
3-04-002-39 Casting Operations
275.0
275.0
15.0
0.0003
230.0
70.0
5.10
36.0
300.0
21.0
5.00
11.0
7.00
20.00
13.75
13.75
0.75
3.66
5.27
4.43
0.49
0.14
0.015
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of charge
Tons of castings
produced
11 /78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-67
-------
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO
MAJOR GROUP 33 - PRIMARY METAL INDUSTRIES (CONTINUED)
GROUP 334 - SECONDARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
Secondary Zinc - 3341
3-04-008-01 Retort Furnace 47.0
3-04-008-02 Horizontal Muffle Furnace 45.0
3-04-008-03 Pot Furnace 0.10
3-04-008-14 Kettle-Sweat Furnace 0.00
(Clean Metallic Scrap)
3-04-008-24 Kettle-Sweat Furnace .11.0
(General Metallic Scrap)
3-04-008-34 Kettle-Sweat Furnace 25.0
(Residual Scrap)
3-04-008-05 Galvanizing Kettle 5.00
3-04-008-06 Calcining Kiln 89.0
3-04-008-07 Concentrate Dryer
3-04-008-18 Reverberatory Sweat Furnace 0.00
(Clean Metallic Scrap)
3-04-008-28 Reverberatory Sweat Furnace 13.0
(General Metallic Scrap)
3-04-008-38 Reverberatory Sweat Furnace 32.0
(Residual Scrap)
3-04-008-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Secondary Lead Smelting - 3341, 3369
3-04-004-01 Pot Furnace 0.8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-004-02 Reverberatory Furnace 147.0 80.0 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-004-03 Blast Furnace 193.0 53.0 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-004-04 Rotary Reverberatory Furnace 70.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
j-04-004-05 Sweating
3-04-004-06 Pot Furnace Heater: Dlst. Oil
3-04-004-07 Pot Furnace Heater: Natural Gas
3-04-004-08 Barton Process Reactor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-004-09 Castin9 °.0r 0.00 0.00 0.00
3-04-004-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Magnesium - 3341
3-04-006-01 Pot Furnace w/0 Control 4.00
3-04-006-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Nickel - 3341
3-04-010-01 Flux Furnace
3-04-010-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Miscellaneous Casting and Fabrication
3-04-050-01 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Other/Not Classified - Secondary Smelting and Ref . of Nonferrous Metals
UNITS
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons produced
Tons metal charged
Tons metal charged
Tons metal charged
Tons metal charged
Tons metal charged
1000 gallons oil
burned
Million cubic feet
burned
Tons processed
Tons metal charged
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons produced
.1-04-999-99 Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
C-68
LMIbSION FACTORS
Tons processed
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 34 - FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS, EXCEPT
MACHINERY AND TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEjj
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
N0y
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 34 - FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS. EXCEPT MACHINERY AND TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT1
Electroplating Operations - 3471
3-09-010-01 General - Entire Process Square feet of
product plated
Metallic Coating - 3479
3-09-040-01 Lead Cable Coating 0.6 Tons processed
Other/Not Classified - Fabricated Metal Products. Except Machinery and Transportation Equipment
3-09-999-99 Not Classified Tons processed
(Specify in Comments)
1
For surface coating and degreasing operations, see Part I, SCC 4-02-XXX-XX and 4-01-XXX-XX.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-69
-------
MAJOR GROUP 36 - ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC MACHINERY,
EQUIPMENT, AND SUPPLIES
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART SO,
N0y HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 36 - ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC MACHINERY. EQUIPMENT. AND SUPPLIES1
Furnace Electrode Manufacture - 3624
3-04-020-01 Calcination
3-04-020-02 Mixing .0.00 0.00
3-04-020-03 Pitch Treating 0.00 0.00
3-04-020-04 Bake Furnaces
3-04-020-99
Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
Lead Battery Manufacture - 3691
3-04-005-05 Overall Process
0.00
67.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
Tons processed
0.00 Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
Tons processed
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-06 Grid Castlnq
1.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-07 Paste Mixing
2.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-08 Lead Oxide Mill
(Baghouse outlet)
0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-09 Three Process Operation
3-04-005-10 Lead Reclaiming Furnace
29.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.54 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-11 Small Parts Casting
0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
3-04-005-12 Formation
3-04-005-99 Other/Not Classified
(Specify in Comments)
32.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1000 batteries
produced
Tons processed
For surface coating and degreasing operations, see Part I, SCC 4-02-XXX-XX and 4-01-XXX-XX.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-70
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
sec
MAJOR GROUP 51 -
PROCESS PART
WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS
sox
NOX
LISTING
UNIT
HC
CO
UNITS
Gasoline Storage at Bulk Terminals - 5171, 4226a'd
4-04-001-01
4-04-001-02
4-04-001-03
4-04-001-04
4-04-001-05
4-04-001-06
4-04-001-07
4-04-001-08
4-04-001-09
4-04-001-10
4-04-001-11
4-04-001-12
4-04-001-13
4-04-001-14
4-04-001-15
4-04-001-16
4-04-001-17
4-04-001-18
4-04-001-19
4-04-001-20
Gasoline RVp'lJ: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss" (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7- Fixed Roof Breathing 0.00
Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7- Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13: Fixed Roof Working 0.00
Loss
Gasoline RVP10: Fixed Roof Working 0.00
Loss
Gasoline RVP7: Fixed Roof Working 0.00
Loss
Gasoline RVP13: Floating Roof0 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10. Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7. Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13: Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7: Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13/10/7, Floating Roof 0.00
Withdrawal Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13/10/7, Floating Roof 0.00
Withdrawal Loss (250,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13. Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7. Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
109.5
84.0
58.4
80.3
62.1
43.8
10.0
8.20
5.70
16.1
12.0
8.40
9.10
6.90
4.70
0.023
0.013
9.60
7.70
5.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
a Emission factors for the storage of other fuels at Bulk Terminals and Bulk Plants are contained under SIC Major Group 29.
b Emission factors for the Fixed Roof Storage Tanks Breathing Loss are for "new" tank conditions only. For "old" tank
conditions, E. F. is increased by 13%.
c Similarly E. F. for Floating Roof Storage Tanks Standing Loss are for the "new" tank conditions only. For "old" tank
conditions, E. F. is increased by 127%.
d Bulk terminals are defined as facilities with daily throughputs of 20,000 gallons or more.
1 RVP = Reid Vapor Pressure is the absolute pressure of gasoline at 1000°F in psia as determined by ASTM method 0323-72.
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
SO,
NO.,
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 51 -
WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS - CONTINUED
Gasoline Storage at Bulk Plants - 5171, 4226a-c
4-04-002-01
4-04-002-02
4-04-002-03
4-04-002-04
4-04-002-05
4-04-002-06
4-04-002-07
4-04-002-08
4-04-002-09
4-04-002-10
4-04-002-11
4-04-002-12
4-04-002-13
Gasoline RVP13; Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Lossb (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7: Fixed Roof 0.00
Breathing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13: Fixed Roof 0.00
Working Loss
Gasoline RVP10: Fixed Roof 0.00
Working Loss
Gasoline RVP7: Fixed Roof 0.00
Working Loss
Gasoline RVP13: Floating Roofb 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7: Floating Roof 0.00
Standing Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13/10/7: Floating Roof 0.00
Withdrawal Loss (67,000 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP13: Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP10: Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
Gasoline RVP7: Variable Vapor 0.00
Space Filling Loss (10,500 bbl. tank)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
109.5
84.0
58.4
10.0
8.20
5.70
16.1
12.0
8.40
0.023
9.60
7.70
5.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
storage capacity
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
1000 gallons
throughput
d Emission factors for the storage of other fuels at Bulk Terminals and Bulk Plants are contained under SIC Major Group 29.
b Emission factors for the Fixed Roof Storage Tanks Breathing Loss are for 'new' tank conditions only. For 'old' tank
conditions, E. F. is increased by 13%.
c Bulk plants are defined as facilities with daily throughputs of 20,000 gallons or less.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-72
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND EMISSION FACTOR
POUNDS EMITTED PER
sec
MAJOR GROUP 51 -
PROCESS
PART
s°x
NOX
LISTING
UNIT
HC
CO
UNITS
WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS (CONTINUED)
Transportation and Marketing of Petroleum Product
Tank Cars and
4-06-001-31
4-06-001-32
4-06-001-33
4-06-001-34
4-06-001-35
4-06-001-36
4-06-001-37
4-06-001-38
4-06-001-39
4-06-001-40
4-06-001-41
4-06-001-42
4-06-001-43
4-06-001-44
4-06-001-45
4-06-001-46
4-06-001-47
4-06-001-48
4-06-001-49
4-06-001-60
4-06-001-61
4-06-001 -62
4-06-001-63
Trucks - 5161, 5171, 5172, 4582
Gasoline-Submerged Loading-Normal
Service
Crude Oil-Submerged Loading-
Normal Service
Jet Naphtha (JP-4)-Submerged
Loading-Normal Service
Jet Kerosene-Submerged Loading-
Normal Service
Distillate Oil No. 2-Submerged
Loading-Normal Service
Gasoline-Splash Loading-Normal
Service
Crude oil-Splash Loading-Normal
Service
Jet Naphtha-Splash Loading-Normal
Service
Jet Kerosene-Splash Loading-Normal
Service
Distillate oil No. 2-Splash
Loading-Normal Service
Gasoline-Submerged Loading-
Balance Service
Crude oil-Submerged Loading-
Balance Service
Jet Naphtha-Submerged Loading-
Balance
Gasoline-Splash Loading-
Balance Service
Crude oil-Splash Loading-
Balance Service
Jet Naphtha-Splash Loading
Balance Service
Gasoline-Submerged Loading of
a Clean Cargo Tank
Crude oil-Submerged Loading of
a Clean Cargo Tank
Jet Naphtha (JP-4) -Submerged
Loading of a Clean Cargo Tank
Jet Kerosene-Submerged Loading
of a Clean Cargo Tank
Distillate Oil No. 2-Submerged
Loading of a Clean Cargo Tank
Gasoline-Transit Loss-Loaded
with Fuel
Gasoline-Transit Loss-Return
with Vapor
:s
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
3.00
1.50
0.02
0.01
12.0
7.00
4.00
0.04
0.03
8.00
5.00
2.50
8.00
5.00
2.50
4.00
2.50
1.25
0.02
0.008
0.005
0.055
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-73
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES
AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
sec
MAJOR GROUP 51 -
Marine Vessels
4-06-002-31
4-06-002-32
4-06-002-33
4-06-002-34
4-06-002-35
4-06-002-36
4-06-002-37
4-06-002-38
4-06-002-39
4-06-002-40
4-06-002-41
4-06-002-42
4-06-002-43
4-06-002-44
4-06-002-45
4-06-002-46
4-06-002-48
4-06-002-49
4-06-002-50
4-06-002-51
4-06-002-53
4-06-002-54
4-06-002-55
4-06-002-56
4-06-002-57
PROCESS
PART
sox
NOX
HC
CO
UNITS
WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS - CONTINUED
- 4463
Gasoline-Ship Loading-Cleaned
and Vapor-free Tank
Gasoline-Ocean Barges Loading
Gasoline-Barges Loading-Cleaned
and Vapor-free Tank
Gasoline-Ship Loading-Ballasted
Tank
Gasoline-Ocean Barges Loading-
Ballasted Tank
Gasoline-Ship Loading-Uncleaned
Tank
Gasoline-Ocean Barges Loading-
Uncleaned Tank
Gasol ine-Barges Loading-Uncleaned
Tank
Gasoline-Ship Loading-Average
Tank Condition
Gasoline-Barges Loading-Average
Tank Condition
Gasol ine-Tanker-Bal lasting
Gasoline-Transit
Crude Oil-Loading Tankers
Jet Fuel-Loading Tankers
Kerosene-Loading Tankers
Distillate Oil No. 2 Loading
Tankers
Crude Oil-Loading Barges
Jet Fuel-Loading Barges
Kerosene-Loading Barges
Distillate Oil No. 2-Loading
Tankers
Crude Oil-Tanker Ballasting
Crude Oil-Transit-Loss
Jet Fuel-Transit-Loss
Kerosene-Transit-Loss
Distillate Oil No. 2-Transit-
Loss
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.30
1.20
1.60
2.10
2.40
3.30
4.00
1.40
4.00
0.80
156. O1
0.70
0.50
0.005
0.005
1.70
1.20
0.013
0.012
0.60
52. 01
36. 41
0.261
0.261
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons total
cargo capacity
1000 gallons
transport
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons
transferred
1000 gallons total
cargo capacity
1000 gallons
transported
1000 gallons
transported
1000 gallons
transported
1000 gallons
transported
Expressed on annual basis (52 weeks/year).
C-74
EMISSION FACTORS
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
SCC
PROCESS
PART
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SO,
NOV
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS (CONTINUED)
Gasoline Retail Operations - 5541
4-06-003-01 Splash Filling 0.00
4-06-003-02 Submerged Filling w/o Control 0.00
4-06-003-06 Balanced Submerged Filling 0.00
4-06-003-07 Underground Tank Breathing 0.00
Filling Vehicle Gas Tanks
4-06-004-01 Vapor Loss: w/o Controls 0.00
4-06-004-02 Liquid Spill Loss: w/o Controls 0.00
4-06-004-03 Vapor Loss: w/Controls 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 11.5 0.00 1000 gallons
throughput
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.30 0.00 1000 gallons
throughput
0.30 0.00 1000 gallons
throughput
1.00 0.00 1000 gallons
throughput
9.00 0.00 1000 gallons
transferred
0.70 0.00 1000 gallons
transferred
0.00 0.90 0.00 1000 gallons
transferred
11/78
EMISSION FACTORS
C-75
-------
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE - NONDURABLE GOODS
NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION CODES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC
PROCESS
PART
NO.
HC CO
UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 51 - WHOLESALE TRADE-NONDURABLE GOODS (CONTINUED)
Feed and Grain
3-02-005-03
3-02-005-04
3-02-005-05
3-02-005-06
3-02-005-07
3-02-005-08
3-02-005-09
Feed and Grain
3-02-006-03
3-02-006-04
3-02-006-05
3-02-006-06
3-02-006-07
3-02-006-08
Terminal Elevators - 5153, 4221, 4463
Cleaning
Drying
Unloading (Receiving)
Loading (Shipping)
Removal From Bins (Tunnel Belt)
Elevator Legs (Headhouse)
Tripper (Gallery Belt)
Country Elevators - 5153, 4221
Cleaning
Drying
Unloading
Loading
Removal From Bins
Elevator Legs
3
1
1
0
1
1
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
.00
.10
.00
.30
.40
.50
.00
.00
.70
.60
.30
.00
.50
0
0
0,
0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.00
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
Export Grain Elevators - 4463, 4221
3-02-031-03
3-02-031-04
3-02-031-05
3-02-031-06
3-02-031-07
3-02-031-08
3-02-031-09
Cleaning
Drying
Unloading
Loading
Removal From Bins (Tunnel Belt)
Elevator Legs
Tripper (Gallery Belt)
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
.00
.10
.00
.00
.40
.50
.00
0
, 0
0
0
0
0
0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
Tons
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
grain
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
processed
^ Units refer to amount of gram processed through each operation. If only the total amount of grain received or shipped
is known, see AP-42, Table 6.4-2 for typical ratios of tons processed to tons shipped or received.
EMISSION FACTORS
C-76
11/78
-------
MAJOR GROUP '2 - PERSONAL SERVICES
RATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION COOES AND EMISSION FACTOR LISTING
POUNDS EMITTED PER UNIT
SCC PROCESS PART SOX NOX HC CO UNITS
MAJOR GROUP 72 - PERSONAL SERVICES
Dry Cleaning - 7216
4-01-001-03 Perchloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent consumed
4-01-001-04 Stoddard 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent consumed
4-01-001-05 Trlchlorotrtfluoroethane (Freon) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000. 0.00 Tons solvent consumed
EMISSION FACTORS
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
COMPILATION OF LEAD MISSION FACTORS
INTRODUCTION
Lead was not involved as a specific pollutant in the earlier editions and supplements of AP-42. Since
a National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead has been issued, it has become necessary to determine
emission factors for lead, and these are given in Table E-l. The AP-42 Section number given in this table
for each process corresponds to the pertinant section in the body of the document.
Lead emission factors for combustion and evaporation from mobile sources require a totally different
treatment, and they are not included in this Appendix.
Table E-1. UNCONTROLLED LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
Section
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.11
2.1
2.5
Process
Bituminous coal combustion
(all furnace types)
Anthracite coal combustion
(all furnace types)
Residual fuel oil combustion
(all boiler types)
Distillate fuel oil combustion
(all boiler types)
Lignite combustion
(all boiler types)
Waste oil combustion
Refuse incineration
(municipal incinerator)
Sewage sludge incineration
(wet scrubber controlled)
Multiple hearth
Fluidized bed
Emission
Metric
0.8 (L) kg/106 kg
(Average L
0.8 (L) kg/106 kg
(Average L
0.5 (L) kg/103m3
(Average L
0.5 (L) kg/103m3
(Average L
5-6 kg/106 kg
9 (P) kg/m3
(Average P -
0.2 kg/MT chgd
.01-.02 kg/MT chgd
.0005-.002 kg/MT chgd
factor3'"
English
1.6(1) lb/103ton
= 8.3 ppm)
1.6 (L) lb/103ton
= 8.1 ppm)
4.2 (L) lb/106 gal
= 1.0 ppm)
4.2 (L) lb/106 gal
= 0.1 ppm)
10-11 lb/103 tons
75 (P) lb/103 gal
1.0 percent)
0.4 Ib/ton chgd
.02-.03 Ib/ton chgd
.001-.003 Ib/ton
References
1,4-6
1,4-6
1,7
1,7
2
18,51,52
1,3,9-11
3,12
3,12
7/79
Appendix E
E-l
-------
Table E-1 (continued). UNCONTROLLED LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
Section
5.22
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.5
Process
Lead alkyl production
Electrolytic process
Sodium-lead alloy process
Recovery furnace
Process vents, TEL
Process vents, TML
Sludge pits
Metallurgical coke
manufacturing
Primary copper smelting
Roasting
Smelting (reverberatory
furnace)
Converting
Ferroalloy production -
electric arc furnace (open)
Ferrosilicon (50%); FeSi
Silicon metal
Silico-manganese
Ferro-manganese (standard)
Ferrochrome-silicon
High carbon ferrochrome
Ferroalloy production -
blast furnace
Iron and steel production
Sintering
(windbox + vent
discharges
Blast furnace
for mixed charge)
Emission
Metric
0.5 kg/MT prod
28 kg/MT prod
2 kg/MT prod
75 kg/MT prod
0.6 kg/MT prod
.00018 kg/MT
coal chgd
1.2 (P) kg/MT cone
(Average P
0 8 kg/MT cone
1.3 kg/MT cone
0.15 kg/MT prod
00015 kg/MT prod
0 29 kg/MT prod
0.06 kg/MT prod
0.04 kg/MT prod
0.17 kg/MT prod
1 .9 kg/MT prod
0.0067 kg/MT sinter
0.062 kg/MT Fe
factor3'"
English
1.0 Ib/ton prod
55 Ib/ton prod
4 Ib/ton prod
150 Ib/ton prod
1.2 ton/ton prod
.00035 Ib/ton
coal chgd
2.3 (P) Ib/ton cone
- 0.3 percent)
1.7 Ib/ton cone
2.6 Ib/ton cone
0.29 Ib/ton prod
00031 Ib/ton prod
0 57 Ib/ton prod
0 1 1 Ib/ton prod
0.08 Ib/ton prod
0.34 Ib/ton prod
3.7 Ib/ton prod
0.013 Ib/ton sinter
0.124 Ib/ton Fe
References
1,3,53
1,53,54
1
1
1
1,13,14
1
1,15,17
1,15,16,18
20
1,19
1,21
1,3
20
20
1,3
1,23,24
1,23
E-2
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Table E-1 (continued). UNCONTROLLED LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
Section
7.6
7.7
7.9
7.10
Process
Open hearth
Lancing
No lancing
Basic oxygen furnace (BOF)
Electric arc furnace
Lancing
No lancing
Primary lead smelting
Ore crushing and grinding
Sintering
Blast furnace
Dross reverberatory furnace
Zinc smelting
Ore unloading, storage,
transfer
Sintering
Horizontal retorts
Vertical retorts
Secondary copper smelting
and alloying
Reverberatory furnace
(high lead alloy 58% Pb)
Red and yellow brass
(15% Pb)
Other alloys (7% Pb)
Gray iron foundries
Cupola
Emission
Metric
0 1 kg/MT steel
0.2 kg/MT steel
0 1 kg/MT steel
0.11 kg/MT steel
0.09 kg/MT steel
0.15 kg/MT ore
4.2-170 kg/MT Pb prod
8.7-50 kg/MT Pb prod
1 3-3.5 kg/MT Pb prod
1-2.9 kg/MT ore
13.5-25 kg/MT ore
1.2 kg/MT ore
2-2.5 kg/MT ore
25 kg/MT prod
6.6 kg/MT prod
2.5 kg/MT prod
0.05-0.6 kg/MT prod
facto r^
English
0.2 Ib/ton steel
0.5 Ib/ton steel
0.2 Ib/ton steel
0.22 Ib/ton steel
0.18 Ib/ton steel
0.3 Ib/ton ore
8.4-340 Ib/ton Pb
prod
17.5-1 00 Ib/ton Pb
prod
2.6-7.0 Ib/ton Pb
prod
2.0-5.7 Ib/ton ore
27-50 Ib/ton ore
2.4 Ib/ton ore
4-5 Ib/ton ore
50 Ib/ton prod
13.2 Ib/ton prod
5 Ib/ton prod
0.1-1.1 Ib/ton prod
References
3,26,27
3,26,27
1,23,25
1,28
1
29
1,21,22,
30-33
1,30,32,
33,35,36
1,18,30,
34,36
37
1,30,38
1,30,38
1,30,38
1,26,39-41
1,26,39-41
1,26,39-41
1,3,26,
42,43
7/77
Appendix E
E-3
-------
Table E-1 (continued). UNCONTROLLED LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
Section
7.11
7.15
7.16
7.17
Process
Reverberatory furnace
Electric induction furnace
Secondary lead smelting
Reverberatory furnace
Blast cupola furnace
Refining kettles
Storage battery production
(total)
Grid casting
Lead oxide mill (baghouse
outlet)
Three-process operations0
Lead reclaim furnace
Small parts casting
Lead oxide and pigment
production
Barton pot (baghouse
outlet)
Calcining furnace
Red lead (baghouse outlet)
White lead (baghouse
outlet)
Chrome pigments
Miscellaneous lead products
Type metal production
Can soldering
Cable covering
Emission
Metric
0.006-0.7 kg/MT prod
0.005- .05 kg/MT prod
27 kg/MT Pb prod
28 kg/MT Pb prod
0.1 kg/MT Pb prod
8 kg/103 batteries
04 kg/103 batteries
005 kg/103 batteries
6.6 kg/103 batteries
035 kg/103 batteries
0.05 kg/103 batteries
0.22 kg/MT prod
7 kg/MT prod
0.5 kg/MT prod
0.28 kg/MT prod
0.065 kg/MT prod
0.13 kg/MT Pb proc
160 kg/106 baseboxesd
prod
0.25 kg/MT proc
factor3^
English
0.012-0.14 Ib/ton
prod
0.009-0.1 Ib/ton
prod
53 Ib/ton Pb prod
56 Ib/ton Pb prod
0.21 Ib/ton Pb prod
1 7.7 lb/103 batteries
0.9 lb/103 batteries
0.1 2 lb/103 batteries
14 6 lb/103 batteries
077 lb/103 batteries
0.10 lb/103 batteries
0.44 Ib/ton prod
14 Ib/ton prod
0.9 Ib/ton prod
0.55 Ib/ton prod
0.13 Ib/ton prod
0 25 Ib/ton Pb proc
0 18 ton/106 base-
boxes prod
0 5 Ib/ton Pb proc
References
1
1
1 ,38,42-46
38,42-46
46
1 ,55-58
1,55-58
1,55-58
1,55-58
1,55-58
1,55-58
1,61,62
61
1,54
1,54
1,54
1,63
1
1,3,64
E-4
EMISSION FACTORS
7/79
-------
Table E-1 (continued). UNCONTROLLED LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
Section
7.18
8.6
8.13
11.2
Process
Metallic lead products
Ammunition
Bearing metals
Other sources of lead
Lead bearing ore crushing
and grinding
Lead ores (Section 7.6)
Zn, Cu-Zn, Cu ores
Pb-Zn, Pb-Cu, Cu-Pb-Zn
ores
Portland cement
manufacturing
Dry process (total)
Kiln/cooler
Dryer/grinder
Wet process (total)
Kiln/cooler
Dryer/grinder
Glass manufacturing (Lead
glass; 23% Pb in
participate)
Fugitive dust sources
(Re-entrained from paved
roadway)
Emission
Metric
0.5 kg/106 kg Pb proc
negligible
0.8 kg/MT Pb proc
0.15 kg/MT proc
0.006 kg/MT proc
0.06 kg/MT proc
0.08 kg/MT prod
0.06 kg/MT prod
0.02 kg/MT prod
0.06 kg/MT prod
0.05 kg/MT prod
0.01 kg/MT prod
2.5 kg/MT glass prod
0.02 g/vehicle km
factor8*
English
1.0 lb/103ton Pb
proc
negligible
1.5 Ib/ton Pb proc
0.3 Ib/ton proc.
0.012 Ib/ton proc
0.12 Ib/ton proc
0.15 Ib/ton prod
0.11 Ib/ton prod
0.04 Ib/ton prod
0.12 Ib/ton prod
0.10 Ib/ton prod
0.02 Ib/ton prod
5 Ib/ton glass prod
0.00007 Ib/
vehicle mi
References
1,3
1,3
1,3
1,3,29,
59,60
1,3,29,
59,60
1,3,29,
59,60
1,47,48
1,47,48
1 ,47,48
1,47,48
1,47,48
1,47,48
1,49
50
aThe letter L indicates that the ppm lead in the coal or fuel oil should be multiplied by the value given in order to obtain the emission factor for the fuel The letter P
similarly indicates that the percent lead in the ore being processed should be multiplied by the value given in the table m order to obtain the emission factor
bAbbreviations chgd = charged
cone = concentrate
prod = produced
proc = processed
cStack*ng, lead burning, and battery assembly
dBasebox = 20 3 m2 (217 8 ft.2), standard tin plate sheet area.
7/79
Appendix E
E-5
-------
References for Table E-1
1. Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, EPA-450/2-77-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC, December 1977.
2. Development of HATREMS Data Base and Emission Inventory Evaluation, EPA-450/3-77-011, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1977.
3. W.E. Davis, Emissions Study of Industrial Sources of Lead Air Pollutants, 1970, EPA Contract No. 68-02-027C,
W.E. Davis and Associates, Leawood, KS, April 1973.
4. R.L. Davidson, et al., "Trace Elements in Fly Ash", Environmental Science and Technology, 11: 1107-1113,
1974.
5. F.G. McSich, et al., Coal Fired Power Plant Trace Element Study, EPA Contract No. 68-01-2663, Radian
Corp., Austin, TX, September 1975.
6. N.E. Bolton, et al., Trace Element Measurements at the Coal-fired Allen Stern Plant, February 1973-July 1973,
Contract No. W-7405-Eng.-26, Atomic Energy Commission, National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, June 1974.
7. A. Levy, et al., Field Investigation of Emission from Fuel Oil Combustion for Space Heating, Battelle Columbus
Laboratories, Columbus, OH, for presentation to American Petroleum Institute (API) Committee on Air and
Water Conservation, Columbus, OH, November 1, 1971.
8. Emission Tests Nos. 71-CI-08, and 71-CI-09, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1971.
9. Emission Tests Nos. 71-CI-05 and 71-CI-ll, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1971.
10. K.J. Yost, The Environmental Flow of Cadmium and Other Trace Metals: Progress Report for July 1, 1973 to
June 30, 1974, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
11. F.L. Closs, et al., "Metal and Particulate Emissions from Incinerators Burning Sewage Sludge", Proceedings
of the 1970 National Incinerator Conference of ASME, 1970.
12. Sewage Sludge Incineration, EPA-R2-72-040, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC, August 1972.
13. R.B. Jacko, et al., By-product Coke Oven Pushing Operation: Total and Trace Metal Particulate Emissions,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, June 27, 1976.
14. Mineral Industry Surveys: Weekly Coal Report No. 3056, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, DC, undated.
15. P.L. Taylor, "Characterization of Copper Smelter Flue Dust", Presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the
Air Pollution Control Association, Portland, OR, June 1976.
16. I.J. Weisenburg and J.C. Serne, Compilation and Analysis of Design and Operating Parameters of the Phelps
Dodge Corporation, New Cornelia Branch Smelter, Aja, Arizona, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1405, Pacific En-
vironmental Services, Inc., Santa Monica, CA, January 1975.
17. K.T. Semrau, "Control of Sulfur Oxide Emissions from Primary Copper, Lead, and Zinc Smelters: A Critical
Review", Journal of Air Pollution Control Association, 21(4): 185-194, April 1979.
E-6 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
18. S. Wyatt, et al., Preferred Standards Path Analysis on Lead Emissions from Stationary Sources, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1974.
19. R.A. Pearson, "Control of Emissions from Ferroalloy Furnace Processing", Presented at the 27th Electric
Furnace Conference, Detroit, MI, December 1969.
20. J.O. Dealy and A.M. Ellin, Air Pollution Control Engineering and Cost Study of the Ferroalloy Industry,
EPA-450/2-74-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1974.
21. A.E. Vandergrift, et al., Paniculate Pollutant System Study - Mass Emissions, PB-203-128, PB-203-522 and
PB-203-521, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1971.
22. V.S. Katari, et al., Trace Pollutant Emissions from the Processing of Metallic Ores, EPA-650/2-74-115, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1974.
23. K.J. Yost, et al., Flow of Cadmium and Trace Metals, Volume /, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, June
1973.
24. V.S. Katari and R. W. Gerstle, Iron and Steel Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1321, PEDCo-Environmental
Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, December 1975.
25. P.E. Barnard, et al., Recycling of Steelmaking Dusts, Solid Waste Program Technical Progress Report No.
52, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, February 1972.
26. J.A. Danielson, ed., Air Pollution Engineering Manual, AP-40, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1973.
27. R.D. Jacko, "Industrial Source Sampling for Trace Metals", Proceedings of First Annual National Science
Foundation Contaminants Conference, Oak Ridge, TN, August 1973.
28. R.E. Lee, et al., "Concentration and Size of Trace Metal Emissions from a Power Plant, a Steel Plant, and a
Cotton Gin", Environmental Science and Technology, 9(7):643-647, July 1975.
29. Environmental Assessment of the Domestic Primary Copper, Lead, and Zinc Industry, EPA Contract No.
68-02-1321, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, September 1976.
30. H.R. Jones, Pollution Control in the Nonferrous Metals Industry, Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ,
1972.
31. L.J. Duncan and E.L. Keitz, "Hazardous Particulate Pollution from Typical Operations in the Primary Non-
ferrous Smelting Industry", Presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association,
Denver, CO, June 1974.
32. E.P. Shea, Source Sampling Report: Emissions from Lead Smelters, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Midwest
Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, 1973.
33. R.C. Hussy, Source Testing: Emissions from a Primary Lead Smelter, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Midwest
Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, 1973.
34. Emission Test No. 73-PLD-l, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1973.
35. Interim Report on Control Techniques for Lead Air Emissions, Development of Lead Emission Factors, and 1975
National Lead Emission Inventory, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1375, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc.,
Cincinnati, OH, June 1976.
7/79 Appendix E E-7
-------
36. Systems Study for Control of Emissions: Primary Nonferrous Smelting Industry, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, Washington, DC, June 1969.
37. Control Program Guideline for Industrial Process Fugitive Paniculate Emissions, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1375,
PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, December 1976.
38. G.B. Carne, Control Techniques for Leak Emissions, Draft Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC, February 1971.
39. Air Pollution Aspects of Brass and Bronze Smelting and Refining Industry, AP-58, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Raleigh, NC, November 1969.
40. H.H. Fukubayashi, et al., Recovery of Zinc and Lead from Brass Smelter Dust, Report of Investigation No.
7880, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, 1974.
41. ''Air Pollution Control in the Secondary Metal Industry", Presented at the First Annual National Associa-
tion of Secondary Materials Industries Air Pollution Control Workshop, Pittsburgh, PA, June 1967.
42. Emission Test No. 7I-CI-27, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 1972.
43. Emission Test No. 71-CI-30, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1972.
44. Emission Test No. 71-CI-76, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1972.
45. Emission Test No. 74-SLD-l, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1972.
46. Emission Tests Nos. 72-CI-7, 72-CI-8, 72-CI-29 and 72-CI-33, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1972.
47. T.E. Kreichelt,eta/., Atmospheric Emissions from the Manufacture ofPortland Cement, AP-17, U.S. Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, Washington, DC, 1967.
48. Emission Tests Nos. 71-MM-02, 71-MM-03 and 71-MM-05, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC, March-April 1972.
49. Confidential test data, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH.
50. C.M. Maxwell and D.W. Nelson, A Lead Emission Factor for Reentrained Dust from a Paved Roadway, EPA-
450/3-78-021, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1978.
51. S. Chansky, et al., Waste Automotive Lubricating Oil Reuse as a Fuel, EPA-600/5-74-032, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, September 1974.
52. Final Report of the API Task Force on Used Oil Disposal, American Petroleum Institute Committee on Air
and Water Conservation, New York, NY, May 1970.
53. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead Additive Industry,
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, January 1976.
54. R.P. Betz, et al., Economics of Lead Removal in Selected Industries, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0611, Battelle
Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH, August 1973.
E-8 EMISSION FACTORS 7/79
-------
55. Screening Study To Develop Background Information and To Determine the Significance of Emissions from the
Lead/Acid Battery Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0299, Vulcan-Cincinnati, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, December
1972.
56. Confidential test data from a major battery manufacturer, July 1973.
57. Paniculate and Lead Emission Measurements from Lead Oxide Plants, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0226,
Monsanto Research Corp., Dayton, OH, August 1973.
58. Background Information in Support of the Development of Performance Standards for the Lead/Acid Battery
Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085, PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, December
1976.
59. Communication with Mr. J. Patrick Ryan, Lead-Zinc Branch, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the In-
terior, Washington, DC, September 1976.
60. B.C. Wixson and J.C. Jennett, "The New Lead Belt in the Forested Ozarks of Missouri", Environmental
Science and Technology, 9(73;:1128-1133, December 1975.
61. Emission Test No. 74-PBO-l, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1973.
62. Private communication with Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, 1975.
63. Atmospheric Emissions from Lead Typesetting Operations Screening Study, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2085,
PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, January 1976.
64. E.P. Shea, Emissions from Cable Covering Facility, EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Midwest Research In-
stitute, Kansas City, MO, June 1973.
7/79 Appendix E E-9
-------
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
AP-42
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Third
Edition (Including Supplements 1-7)
5. REPORT DATE
August 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHORIS)
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORG'\NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
200/04
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. 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 docu-
ment, the result of the expansion and continuation of earlier work, cover most of the
common emission categories: fuel combustion by stationary and mobile sources; com-
bustion of solid wastes; evaporation of fuels, solvents, and other volatile sub-
stances; various industrial processes; and miscellaneous sources. When no specific
source-test data are available, these factors can be used to estimate the quantities
of primary pollutants (particulates, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, oxides of
nitrogen, and hydrocarbons) being released from a source or source group.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Fuel combustion
Emissions
Emission factors
Mobile sources
Stationary sources
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
477
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
a-1
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1 REPORT NO.
AP-42, Supplement 9
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Supplement No. 9 for Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, Third Edition, AP-42
5. REPORT DATE
July 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 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 waste oil disposal; transporta-
tion and marketing of petroleum liquids; cutback asphalt, emulsified asphalt and
asphalt cement; solvent degreasing; synthetic ammonia; carbon black; lead alkyl;
bread baking; urea; beef cattle feedlots; defoliation and harvesting of cotton;
primary copper smelting; secondary copper smelting and alloying; storage battery
production; lead oxide and pigment production; miscellaneous lead products;
leadbearing ore crushing and grinding; concrete batching; and woodworking
operations. There is also an updated NEDS Source Classification Code listing, and
a Table of Lead Emission Factors is included.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
DESCRIPTORS
Fuel combustion
Emissions
Emission factors
Stationary sources
Lead emissions
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
228
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
a-2
-------
-------
-------
-------
------- |