United States      Office of Air Quality       EPA-450/3-80-026
Environmental Protection  Planning and Standards      December 1980
Agency        Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Air
Organic Chemical
Manufacturing
Volume 4:  Combustion
Control Devices

-------
                                  EPA-450/3-80-026
Organic Chemical  Manufacturing
      Volume 4:   Combustion
            Control Devices
           Emission Standards and Engineering Division
          U S. Environmental Protection A«wc»
          Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
          77 West Jackson Boulevard, 1201 rHMi
          Chicago. IL  60604-3590

           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              Office of Air, Noise, and Radiation
           Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
           Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

                    December 1980

-------
U,S. Environmental Protection Agency

-------
                                    Ill
    This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by IT Enviro-
    science, 9041 Executive Park Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37923, in fulfillment
    of Contract No. 68-02-2577.  The contents of this report are reproduced herein
    as received from IT Enviroscience.  The opinions, findings, and conclusions
    expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Environmen-
    tal Protection Agency.  Mention of trade names or commercial products is not
    intended to constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.  Copies of this
    report  are available, as supplies permit, through the Library Services Office
    (MD-35), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
    Carolina  27711, or from National Technical Information Services, 5285 Port
    Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
D124R

-------
                                    V
                                CONTENTS

                                                             Page


     INTRODUCTION                                             vl1


                                                             Page
     Report


1.    CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION THERMAL OXIDATION              1-i


2.    CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION THERMAL OXIDATION

     SUPPLEMENT                                               2~i


3.    CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION CATALYTIC OXIDATION            3-i


4.    CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION FLARES AND THE USE

     OF EMISSIONS AS FUELS                                    4~1

-------
                                       VI1
                                    INTRODUCTION
A.   SOCMI PROGRAM
     Concern over widespread violation of the national ambient air quality standard
     for ozone (formerly photochemical oxidants) and over the presence of a number
     of toxic and potentially toxic chemicals in the atmosphere led the Environ-
     mental Protection Agency to initiate standards development programs for the
     control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions.  The program goals were
     to reduce emissions through three mechanisms:  (1) publication of Control Tech-
     niques Guidelines to be used by state and local air pollution control agencies
     in developing and revising regulations for existing sources; (2) promulgation
     of New Source Performance Standards according to Section lll(b) of the Clean
     Air Act; and (3) promulgation, as appropriate, of National Emission Standards
     for Hazardous Air Pollutants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.  Most of
     the effort was to center on the development of New Source Performance Stan-
     dards .

     One program in particular focused on the synthetic organic chemical manufactur-
     ing  industry (SOCMI), that is, the industry consisting of those facilities
     primarily producing basic and intermediate organics from petroleum feedstock
     meterials.  The potentially broad program  scope was reduced by concentrating on
     the  production of the nearly 400 higher volume, higher volatility chemicals
     estimated to account for a great majority  of overall industry emissions.  EPA
     anticipated developing  generic regulations, applicable across chemical and
     process  lines, since it would be practically impossible to develop separate
     regulations for 400 chemicals within a  reasonable time frame.

     To handle the considerable task  of gathering,  assembling, and analyzing  data to
     support  standards  for  this diverse and  complex industry,  EPA solicited  the
     technical assistance of IT Enviroscience,  Inc.,  of  Knoxville, Tennessee  (EPA
     Contract No. 68-02-2577).  IT Enviroscience was  asked  to  investigate  emissions
     and  emission controls  for  a wide range  of important organic  chemicals.   Their
     efforts  focused  on the  four major  chemical plant emission areas:   process
     vents,  storage  tanks,  fugitive  sources,  and  secondary  sources  (i.e.,  liquid,
      solid,  and  aqueous waste  treatment facilities  that  can emit VOC).

 121F

-------
                                      IX
REPORTS
To develop reasonable support for regulations,  IT Enviroscience gathered data
on about 150 major chemicals and studied in-depth the manufacture of about
40 chemical products and product families.   These chemicals were chosen consid-
ering their total VOC emissions from production, the potential toxicity of
emissions, and to encompass the significant unit processes and operations used
by the industry.  From the in-depth studies and related investigations, IT
Enviroscience prepared 53 individual reports that were assembled into 10 vol-
umes.  These ten volumes are listed below:
     Volume 1
     Volume 2
     Volume 3
     Volume 4
     Volume 5
     Volume 6-10
Study Summary
Process Sources
Storage, Fugitive, and Secondary Sources
Combustion Control Devices
Adsorption, Condensation, and Absorption Devices
Selected Processes
Volumes 4 and 5 are dedicated to the evaluation of control devices used as add-
on controls to reduce VOC emissions.  These add-on controls are discussed general-
ly in Volumes 2 and 3 as emission control options for the control of VOC emis-
sions from generic sources.  The use of these add-on controls in specific applica-
tions is demonstrated in the process studies covered in Volumes 6 through 10.

This volume covers the  application  of combustion devices as add-on VOC emission
control devices.  Separate  reports  are presented covering control device evalua-
tions for thermal oxidation, special thermal oxidation requirements for VOC
containing halogens and sulfur, catalytic oxidation, flares, and the use of
emissions as  fuels.  These  reports  discuss  the practical use of each control
device, describe  the systems, and discuss key design considerations.  Data,
tables, and curves are  presented to enable  preliminary cost and energy impacts
to be determined  for a  wide range of potential applications.  These control
device  evaluation reports were  used to  develop the  cost  effectiveness and
 energy  impact determinations presented  in  the process  reports of Volumes 6
 through 10.   The  focus  of  these reports is  on control  of new  sources  rather
 than on existing  sources  in keeping with the main  program objective  of  develop-
 ing new source performance  standards  for the  industry.   The  reports  do  not

-------
                                     XI
outline regulations and are not intended for that purpose,  but they do provide
a data base for regulation development by the EPA.

-------
                                        REPORT  1
                                CONTROL DEVICE  EVALUATION
                                    THERMAL OXIDATION

                                     J. W.  Blackburn

                                    IT Enviroscience
                                9041 Executive  Park Drive
                               Knoxville, Tennessee  37923
                                      Prepared for
                       Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                      Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                         Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
                                     July  1980
D75G

-------
                                CONTENTS OF REPORT 1

                                                                              Page

  I.   INTRODUCTION                                                             I~1
 II.   THERMAL OXIDIZER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS                                  II~l
      A.   Residence  Time  and Temperature                                      II~1
      B.   VOC Destruction Efficiency                                          I]C~3
      C.   Flame Stability                                                     11-10
      D.   Liquid Organic  Wastes                                               11-12
      E.   Heat Recovery                                                       11-12
III.   BASIS FOR THERMAL OXIDIZER DESIGN                                      III-l
      A.   Effect of Sensitive Design Variables on Cost and Energy            III-l
      B.   Procedure Used for Designing Thermal Oxidizer System               III-7
      C.   Combustion Alternatives                                            111-23
 IV.   CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLING THERMAL OXIDATION CONTROL EQUIPMENT       IV-1
  V.   COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF THERMAL OXIDIZERS                             V-l
      A.   Cost Basis                                                           v~-'-
      B.   Capital Costs                                                        v"3
      C.   Annual Costs                                                         v~22
      D.   Cost Effectiveness and Energy Effectiveness                          V-37
      E.   Other Impacts                                                        v~37
 VI.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                                 VI"1
VII.   REFERENCES                                                             VII-1


                                APPENDICES OF REPORT 1
      APPENDIX A.  PURCHASE COSTS FOR THERMAL OXIDATION COMBUSTION CHAMBERS,   A-l
                   RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGERS, AND WASTE HEAT BOILERS
      APPENDIX B.  ANNUAL COST DATA                                            B-l

-------
                                          1-v

                                 TABLES OF REPORT  1


Number                                                                        Pa9e

 II-l     Results from Actual Thermal Oxidizer Tests                           II-5

 II-2     Combustion Temperature,  Residence Time,  and VOC Destruction         II-7
          Relationships

III-l     VOC Molar Heats of Combustion                                      III-4

III-2     Summary of Organic Compound Components Surveyed                    III-5

III-3     Ratio of Combustion Air to Waste Gas Flow Rate vs Waste Gas        111-13
          Heat Content

III-4     Thermal Oxidizer Size Reduction Factor for  Recuperative Heat       111-15
          Recovery Systems

III-5     Fuel Reduction Factors for Recuperative  Heat Recovery Systems      111-16

III-6     Fuel Gas Exhaust Temperature After Heat  Recovery                   111-22

  V-l     Factors Used for Estimating Total Installed Costs                    V-2

  V-2     Annual Cost Parameters                                               V-22

  V-3     Cost Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation                               V-38

  V-4     Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation                       V-39

  V-5     Typical Thermal Oxidizer Flue Gas Composition                        V-43

-------
                                         1-vii

                                  FIGURES OF  REPORT  1

Number                                                                        Page

 II-l     Feed Configurations for Thermal Oxidizers Burning Low-,  Medium-,     II-2
          and High-Heat-Content Waste Gases

 II-2     Relationship Between Total VOC Destuction Efficiency Based on       11-11
          Waste Gas,  Fuel Destruction Efficiency,  and Waste Gas Destruction
          Efficiency for a 2-Btu/scf-Heat-Content  Waste Gas

III-l     Relationship Between Waste Gas Heat Content, VOC Composition,      III-3
          and VOC Molar Heat of Combustion

III-2     Supplementary Fuel Usage vs Waste Gas Heat Content                 III-8

III-3     Ratio of Thermal Oxidizer Flue Gas Flow  to Waste Gas Flow vs       III-9
          Waste Gas Heat Content

III-4     Relationship Between Actual Flow Rates and Flue Gas Temperature    111-10

III-5     Flue Gas Heat Content                                              111-12

III-6     Recuperative Heat Exchanger Design at 1400°F Combustion             111-17
          Temperature

III-7     Recuperative Heat Exchanger Design at 1600°F Combustion             111-18
          Temperature

III-8     Maximum Heat Recovery from a Waste  Heat  Boiler                     111-20

III-9     Ratio of Waste Heat Boiler Heat Exchange Surface to Flue Gas       111-21
          Flow vs Flue Gas Temperature

  V-l     Total Installed Capital Cost for  Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-4
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf,  Residence Time =0.5 sec,
          and Combustion Temperature - 1400°F

  V-2     Total Installed Capital Cost for  Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-5
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf,  Residence Time =0.75 sec,
          and Combustion Temperature = 1400°F

  V-3     Total Installed Capital Cost for  Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-6
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf,  Residence Time =0.5 sec,  and
          Combustion  Temperature = 1600°F

  V-4     Total Installed Capital Cost for  Thermal Oxidation Systems with     V-7
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf,  Residence Time =0.75 sec,
          Combustion  Temperature = 1600°F

  V-5     Total Installed Capital Cost for  Thermal Oxidation Systems with     V-S
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 100 Btu/scf  and Combustion Tempera-
          ture = 1875°F

-------
                                        1-ix


                                    FIGURES (Continued)

Number

  V-6     Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-9
          Waste-Gas Heat Content = 200 Btu/scf and Combustion Tempera-
          ture = 2200°F

  V-7     Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion Chamber with Waste-Gas     V-10
          Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf, Residence Time = 0.5 sec, and Combus-
          tion Temperature = 1400°F

  V-8     Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion Chamber with Waste-Gas     V-ll
          Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf, Residence Time =0.75 sec and Combus-
          tion Temperature = 1400°F

  V-9     Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion Chamber with Waste-Gas     V-12
          Heat Contents = 10 and 100 Btu/scf,  Residence Time = 0.5 sec,  and
          Combustion Temperature = 1600°F

  V-10    Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion Chamber with Waste-Gas     V-13
          Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf, Residence Time = 0.75 sec, and Combus-
          tion Temperature = 1600°F

  V-ll    Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion Chamber with Waste-Gas     V-14
          Heat Contents = 100 and 200 Btu/scf and Various Residence Times
          and Combustion Temperatures

  V-12    Installed Capital Cost for Recuperative-Type Heat Exchangers with    V-16
          the Waste-Gas Heat Content - 10 Btu/scf

  V-13    Installed Capital Cost for Waste Heat Boilers  (250 psi)              V-17

  V-14    Installed Capital Cost for Waste Heat Boilers  (400 psi)              V-18

  V-15    Installed Capital Costs for Inlet Ducts, Waste Gas, and Combustion   V-19
          Air Fans and Stack for System with No Heat Recovery

  V-16    Installed Capital Costs for Inlet Ducts, Waste Gas, and Combustion   V-20
          Air Fans and Stack with Recuperative Heat Recovery

  V-17    Installed Capital for  Inlet Ducts, Waste Gas,  and Combustion Air     V-21
          Fans and Stack with Waste Heat Boilers

  V-18    Net Annual  Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers Using  V-23
          No Heat Recovery, 1400°F  Combustion Temperature, 0.5  sec Residence
          Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-19    Net Annual  Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers        V-24
          Using  No Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.75 sec
          Residence Time, and Heat  Contents from  1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-20    Net Annual  Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers        V-25
          Using  No Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec
          Residence Time, and Heat  Contents from  1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
                                        1-xi


                                    FIGURES (Continued)

Number                                                                        Pa9e

  V-21    Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers        V-26
          Using No Heat Recovery,  1600°F Combustion Temperature,  0.75 sec
          Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-22    Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers        V-27
          Using Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion Temperature,
          0.5 sec Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

  V-23    Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer         V-28
          Using Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion Temperature,
          0.75 sec Residence Time, and Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

  V-24    Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer         V-29
          Using Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature,
          0.5 sec Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

  V-25    Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer         V-30
          Using Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature,
          0.75 sec Residence Time, and Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

  V-26    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer          V-31
          Using Waste Heat Boiler, 1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec
          Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-27    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer          V-32
          Using Waste Heat Boiler, 1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.75 sec
          Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-28    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer          V-33
          Using Waste Heat Boiler, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec
          Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-29    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer          V-34
          Using Waste Heat Boiler, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.75 sec
          Residence Time,  and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

  V-30    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer with No      V-35
          Heat Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler; Heat Content =
          100 Btu/scf

  V-31    Net Annual Cost vs Waste Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer with No      V-36
          Heat Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler; Heat Content =
          200 Btu/scf

  V-32    Cost Effectiveness vs VOC Destruction Efficiency for Waste Gases     V-40
          with 1 Btu/scf Heat Content

  V-33    Cost Effectiveness vs VOC Destruction Efficiency for Thermal         V-41
          Oxidizer with No Heat Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler,-
          Heat Contents = Between  1 and 50 Btu/scf and Waste Gas
          Flows = 700 cfm

-------
                                       1-xiii


                                    FIGURES (Continued)

Number                                                                        Page

  V-34    Cost Effectiveness vs VOC Destruction Efficiency for Thermal         V-42
          Oxidizer with No Heat Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler;
          Heat Contents = Between 1 and 50 Btu/scf and Waste Gas
          Flows = 50,000 scfm

  A-l     Purchase Costs for Thermal Oxidation Combustion Chambers             A-3

  A-2     Purchase Costs for Thermal Oxidation Recuperative Heat Exchangers    A-4

  A-3     Purchase Costs for Thermal Oxidation Waste Heat Boilers              A-5

-------
                                     1-xv
                      ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVERSION FACTORS
EPA policy is to express all measurements used in agency documents in metric
units.  Listed below are the International System of Units (SI) abbreviations
and conversion factors for this report.
  To Convert From
Pascal (Pa)
Joule (J)
Degree Celsius (°C)
Meter (m)
Cubic meter (m3)
Cubic meter (m3)
Cubic meter (m3)
Cubic meter/second
   (m3/s)
Watt  (W)
Meter (m)
Pascal  (Pa)
Kilogram  (kg)
Joule (J)
                                           To
    Atmosphere  (760 mm Hg)
    British  thermal unit  (Btu)
    Degree Fahrenheit  (°F)
    Feet  (ft)
    Cubic feet  (ft3)
    Barrel  (oil)  (bbl)
    Gallon  (U.S.  liquid)  (gal)
    Gallon  (U.S.  liquid)/rain
       (gpm)
    Horsepower  (electric)  (hp)
    Inch  (in.)
    Pound-force/inch2  (psi)
    Pound-mass  (Ib)
    Watt-hour (Wh)

      Standard Conditions
          68°F = 20°C
1 atmosphere = 101,325  Pascals
  Multiply By
9.870 X 10~6
9.480 X 10~4
(°C X 9/5) + 32
3.28
3.531 X 101
6.290
2.643 X 102
1.585 X 104

1.340 X 10~3
3.937 X 101
1.450 X 10~4
2.205
2.778 X 10"4
                                     PREFIXES

Prefix
T
G
M
k
m
M

Symbol
tera
giga
mega
kilo
milli
micro
Multiplication
Factor
1012
109
106
103
io~3
io"6


1 Tg =
1 Gg =
1 Mg =
1 km =
1 mV =
1 jjg =

Example
1 X IO12 grams
1 X IO9 grams
1 X IO6 grams
1 X IO3 meters
1 X 10~3 volt
1 X IO"6 gram

-------
                                     1-1

                                I.  INTRODUCTION

Thermal oxidation is a control technology whereby organic vapors are oxidized
at high temperatures in the presence of air.  Thermal oxidation units have been
constructed to control a wide variety of waste gases, the design of the unit
depending on the composition and flow rate of the waste gas.  The concentration
of the volatile organic compounds (VOC) can be converted to the heat generated
by the waste gas (heat content) if the specific components and their heats of
combustion are known or can be calculated.  The heat content range, together
with the waste-gas flow rate, determines the design and auxiliary fuel usage.

Three categories of heat contents are used in this report:  low (<50 Btu/scf),
moderate (50 to 100 Btu/scf), and high (>100 Btu/scf).  For waste gases with
low heat contents, auxiliary fuel such as natural gas or fuel oil must be added
to maintain the combustion temperatures.  Heat contents of approximately 13
and 20 Btu/scf in air correspond to 25 and 40% of the lower explosive limit
(LEL).  Waste gases with heat contents of 20 to 50 Btu/scf (40 to 100% of the
LEL) must be diluted with inert gases or be enriched with auxiliary fuel because
they exceed the flammable safety limits imposed by insurance companies.  Moderate-
heat-content waste gases have sufficient heat content for burning but need auxili-
ary fuel for flame stability.

When the heat content is higher than ~100 Btu/scf, the waste gas possesses enough
heat value to support a flame by itself and can be considered for use as a fuel
gas or boiler feed gas.  When flame temperatures resulting from incineration of
this type of waste exceed 2200°F, a considerable amount of excess air must be used
to cool the unit to 2200°F.  Oxidation equipment such as water-wall boilers and
high-temperature specialty oxidizers has been successfully designed and operated
for temperatures in excess of 2200°F, but is beyond the scope of this study.
In many cases the waste gas creating excessive temperatures has been a candidate
for flaring.

Conventional thermal oxidizers range in size from a unit capable of controlling
several hundred scfm of waste gas to single or multiple units controlling waste
gas in excess of 100,000 scfm.  Few single  thermal oxidizers exist that are

-------
                                      1-2
sized for more than 200,000 scfm of flue gas.   For a combustion chamber tempera-
ture of 1400°F and a waste gas with a heat content of less than 50 Btu/scf and
no oxygen, a thermal oxidizer sized for 195,000 scfm of flue gas would handle a
waste-gas feed rate of 100,000 scfm.  To provide a 1/2-sec residence time for the
actual flow rate of 737,000 cfm would require a combustion chamber volume of
6140 ft3.  With the length-to-diameter ratio assumed to be 2, this volume would
require a refractory-lined cylinder that has an internal diameter of at least
16 ft and that is 32 ft long.  Because of shipping size restrictions, larger
single units would require field fabrication, which would make the cost much
higher.  A limit of 100,000 scfm of waste gas was used for this study.  Vendors
have shop fabricated units up to that size as single units and as multiple
 units.x—4
 Waste  gases  containing  sulfur  or halogens  require  flue gas  scrubbing after  ther-
 mal  oxidation to  remove the  noxious  gases  that were  formed  during  oxidation.
 The  scrubbing equipment requires additional  capital  investment.  This  analysis
 is included  in the  Control Device  Evaluation, Thermal Oxidation  Supplement
 (VOC containing halogens or  sulfur).

 Halogens in  the waste gas require  high-temperature oxidation to  convert the
 combustion product  to a form that  can most easily be recovered by  scrubbing.
 For instance chloride-containing waste gases are burned at  high  temperature to
 convert the  chloride to HCl  instead of to C12,  since HC1 is the  more easily
 scrubbed.  The analysis of thermal oxidation of halogenated and sulfonated VOC
 is also included in the above mentioned report.
*See Sect. VII for all references cited in this report.

-------
                                           II-l
                        II.  THERMAL OXIDIZER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

     A variety of considerations affect the design and selection of the various com-
     ponents comprising a thermal oxidizer system for the control of waste gases:
     the combustion chamber residence time and temperature, which, in turn, affect
     the destruction efficiency of the VOC; the auxiliary heat required for flame
     stability; and the method to be used for heat recovery.

A.   RESIDENCE TIME AND TEMPERATURE
     Probably the most important considerations in the design of thermal oxidizers
     are the combustion chamber temperature and residence time.  These design variables
     usually have an impact on both the destruction efficiency and the capital and
     operating costs of thermal oxidizers.

     The combustion temperatures of waste gases vary with the waste-gas heat content.
     Waste gases with low heat contents will normally have combustion temperatures
     of 1200 to 1600°F.  The thermal oxidizer designer has the option of controlling
     the combustion temperature by specifying additional auxiliary fuel.  Waste gases
     with moderate heat contents use less auxiliary fuel to support combustion, and
     the combustion chamber will normally operate in the range of 1600 to 2200°F.

     Waste gases with high heat contents determine their own combustion temperatures.
    , The combustion temperatures of these gases can exceed 2200°F, and they are usually
     satisfactory for use as fuel gases.  Figure II-l shows the feed configurations
     of thermal oxidizers burning waste gases with low,  medium, and high heat contents.

     The residence time in the combustion chamber is a design variable specified by
     the system designer.  The combustion chamber is a chemical reactor, and the
     residence time is the time available for the reaction (oxidation) to occur.
     Residence times as low as 0.3 sec to several seconds have been utilized in thermal
     oxidizer designs.  Different vendors have defined residence times in different
     ways.  Some include all the available volume of the combustion chamber.  Others,
     however, consider only the volume in which the flue gas is at the combustion
     temperature, an approach that results in the combustion chamber being larger
     than it would be if the entire internal volume were used in the calculation of
     residence time.  The fraction of the total volume that is at the combustion

-------
 WASTE  GAS

 AUX.  FUEL -
             AIR
                              II-2
                                        1200- 1600° F
                      BURNER
                          LOW HEAT CONTENT  WASTE GAS
WASTE GAS

AUX. FUEL-
             AIR
                                        1400-2200° F
                      BURNER
                        MEDIUM HEAT CONTENT  WASTE  GAS
  WASTE GAS
AUX. FUEL
               AIR
                                           OVER 2200°F
                       BURNER
                           HIGH HEAT CONTENT  WASTE  GAS
    Fig  II-1-  Feed Configurations for Thermal Oxidizers Burning
          Low-, Medium-, and High-Heat-Content Waste Gases

-------
                                          II-3
     temperature  depends  on the  configuration and design of the  flame burner.   A
     burner  generating a  short  flame  implies  that the  waste gas  reaches  it's  combustion
     temperature  very  rapidly and that  nearly the entire internal volume is available
     for  oxidation.  A burner developing a  long flame  has considerably less volume
     at the  combustion temperature than the total internal volume.

     Although a design engineer  should  be quite concerned with the actual burner
     design  and residence time  at the combustion temperature,  in this control-device
     evaluation study  it  is assumed that the  entire combustion chamber volume is at
     the  combustion temperature.  This  is justified since later  in this report it is
     shown that differences as  high as  50%  in residence time do  not significantly
     affect  the annual cost, including  capital charges, of thermal oxidation  control.

B.   VOC  DESTRUCTION EFFICIENCY

1.   Achievable Destruction Efficiency
     The  temperatures  and residence times of combustion for thermal oxidizers have
     historically been determined by thermal oxidizer designers using rules of thumb.
     It is often assumed that thermal oxidizers achieve "complete organic destruction."
     When specific feed streams required specific destruction data, the chemical
     manufacturers, their consultants,  or the equipment manufacturers would operate
     pilot units  to test burn the real  waste in order to determine actual destruction
     efficiency.   This, however, was a costly procedure and was avoided unless there
     were unusual circumstances.  Therefore, except for special cases, VOC destruc-
     tion efficiency has rarely been measured.

     Some vendors have claimed  that combustion temperatures several hundred degrees
     higher  than the compound's autoignition temperature  should be employed.   To
     date the  correlation  to destruction efficiencies by  this rule of thumb has not
     been established.5

     Several other  factors  are  important in  determining the destruction efficiency.
     Residence time at temperature,  axial  and  longitudinal temperature  profile, gas
     density changes  in  the combustion chamber,  and specific  component  reaction rate
      (as  a  function of temperature)  all must be  known to determine the  destruction
     efficiency,  the  most  important  parameter.   This  requirement implies that for

-------
                                      II-4
the thermal oxidizer the combustion chemistry of each component and the physical
design of the unit must be known in order to determine the VOC destruction effi-
ciency.  Multicomponent oxidation equilibria further complicate the problem.

Recently, some studies have been performed to evaluate this problem.  Barnes  et
al.6 have begun a study of the specific kinetics of organic oxidations, but it
is theoretical in nature.  Followup experimental studies were planned but were
cancelled.  Lee et al.7 have presented a simplified experimental approach to
investigate the oxidation kinetics and have given case studies of the destruction
relationships of four compounds.  In another publication these data are expanded
to develop a predictive relationship of VOC destruction.  A review of these and
other  technical resources in this complex area has led to the conclusion that
further  experimental data are required to ensure that the time, temperature,
VOC efficiency relationship is established, which will aid future thermal oxidizer
designers.  This review has been summarized as a research recommendation for
thermal  oxidizers and has been submitted to the EPA.9

Table  II-l presents the results  from tests on five different  operating  thermal
oxidizers and one boiler  adapted to burn a waste gas.  Some of these  tests were
run by EPA and some were  run by  the individual companies who  have  submitted
their  data to EPA.10'11

Despite  the  complexity  of the VOC  efficiency  issue and  the need  for further
work,  some estimate of  the  time, temperature, VOC  efficiency  relationship  is
 required to  design  and evaluate  thermal  oxidizers  for this study.   Given this
 need,  IT Enviroscience  has  developed  the thermal  oxidizer  design criteria  shown
 in Table II-2.   These criteria  are based on engineering experience with a  number
 of VOC applications and the data in Table  II-l.   In addition, these criteria  are
 based on designing the thermal  oxidizer  for the specific waste gas under considera-
 tion and may involve  test burns and pilot unit  work with the actual waste stream.
 Based on these assumptions, it  was concluded that a properly operated and individ-
 ually designed thermal oxidizer would achieve,  as a minimum, the stated destruc-
 tion  efficiencies for waste gases with VOC concentration greater than 400 ppmv.

 Some  of the field unit test data in Table Il-i do not meet the criteria in
 Table II-2.  Analysis of the data lead to the conclusion that insufficient

-------
                                             II-5
                 Table II-l.  Results  from Actual Thermal  Oxidizer Tests
Company
	 v-' c J- 	
Union
Carbide
Rohm &
Haas





Denka
Mons anto



Koppers6

Petro-tex


Residence
Time/Inlet Temperature
Flow (SCFM) (F°)
2 to 3 sec/ 1160
20,600 1475
1 sec/tank 1425
farm vent,
(TFV)-12,500
Oxidizer 1510
vent, (OXV)-
40,000 1545

0.6 sec/33,000 1400
(Unit size)- Confidential
18' dia. X
36' (outlet
flow) 75,000
0.6 sec/30,000 1800

0.6 sec/14,400 1400


Number of
Test Runs
6C
3C
3C


4c

lc

3C
Unit l-6d
Unit 2-8d


Inlet-4c
Outlet-6c
N/A


Inlet
VOC
(ppmv) a
11,900
11,900
TFV 2580
OXV 11,600

TFV 2600
OXV 12,800
TFV 2410
OXV 12,200
950
Confidential
Confidential


850

(Set 1) 10,300
(Set 2) 10,650
(Set 3) 10,300
VOC
Outlet Destruction
VOC Efficiency
(ppmv) (%)
243
10
1330


150

25

13
25
47


(Set 1) 7
(Set 2)11
1000
215
10
96.
99.
82.


98.

99.

98.
>99
>99


99.
97.
70.
94.
99.
1
9
6


3

7

5




0
2
3
1
6
     does not include methane or ethane.
     destruction efficiency is weight percent.

GSampling conducted with integrated bags.

^Sampling conducted with grab sample bombs or syringes.
eThe data in Set 1 and 2 for Koppers were  taken during different time periods.

flnlet and outlet VOC for Petro-tex reported as ppmv methane.  This case involves
 the use of an existing boiler to control  a process fume.  The data in set one were taken
 prior to adjustment of the boiler; the data in sets two and three, after adiustment.
 The specific alterations made by Petro-tex involve changes in mixing induced by retrofit
 baffles.

-------
                                      II-6
mixing or other design deficiency was the most likely cause.  In addition, indivi-
dualized designing with test burns and pilot units adds to costs.  In some cases,
the costs of this design procedure may be judged too high and the lower efficients
of units designed for more general application may be acceptable.

As shown by Table II-2, a longer residence time is required to complete combustion
when  the thermal oxidizer feed contains more  than 200 PPm carbon monoxide.
This  is  related to  the difficulty encountered in the combustion  of carbon monoxide
and the  tendency for  it to  disrupt the VOC conversion.

The  relationships  in  Table  II-2  show the  effect of  increased  combustion  tempera-
 tures at similar  residence  times.  They  do not  show  the  effect  of  longer residence
 times at lower temperatures.   As can be  seen in Table  II-l, excellent destruction
 efficiencies can be obtained at  lower temperatures  and longer residence  times.
 Halogenated compounds may be destroyed by using combustion temperatures  on the
 order of those shown in Table II-2 at a residence time of 1 sec or at much
 elevated temperatures (approaching 3000°F)  and shorter residence times.   Chemical
 equilibria between the halogenated compounds, the free halogen, the halogen
 acid and the oxygen are functions of the combustion temperatures.*  Since costs
 are  strongly  influenced by operating at temperatures in excess of 2200°F, haloge-
 nated hydrocarbons need to be handled separately and are discussed in a  separate
 control device evaluation.

 The  criterion in  Table II-2  is  based on  the  assumption  that  the combustion air
  fed to  the  combustion chamber is  sufficient  to produce  3  mole  % 02  in the  flue
  gas.
  The criteria just described are not the only ones for achieving VOC destruction
  at high levels.  For instance, it may be possible to burn waste gases longer
  (longer residence times) at lower temperatures to achieve the same ^ructxon
  efficiency   Also, for some easily oxidized compounds, oxidation at, say, 1400 F
  and 0.5-sec retention time could develop destruction efficiencies above 99«.

  Even  with the  attendant  variations this  approach is  justified  for  two  reasons.
  First  this criterion  is comparable  to that used in  design  and operation  of
  many  existing thermal  oxidizers  and  generally represents a  conservative  design.

-------
                                         II-7
             Table 11-2.  Combustion Temperature,  Residence Time,  and
                          VOC Destruction Relationships

Combustion
Temperature
1400
1500
1600
1400
1500
1600

Residence
Time
(sec)
Waste Gas with <2000 ppm Carbon Monoxide
0.5
0.5
0.5
Waste Gas with >2000 ppm Carbon Monoxide
0.75
0.75
0.75
VOC
Destruction
Efficiency3
^90
>98
>99
>90
>98
>99
aWith waste  gas  feeds  >400  ppm  VOC.
bThe design  of thermal oxidizers to  achieve these  efficiencies may  require
 test burns  and  pilot-plant work.  In  some cases,  the  costs  for this design
 work may be judged too high  and the lower efficiencies  of thermal  oxidizers
 designed for less stringent  criteria  may be  acceptable.

-------
                                          II-8
2.
Second, the variations of this criterion (that is,  different destruction effi-
ciencies at the stated temperatures and residence times) have a small effect on
cost effectiveness (cost/lb of VOC destroyed).  The major component of the annual
cost and energy impact will be related to the combustion temperature and the
auxiliary fuel used to achieve that temperature.  If a unit is designed to operate
at, say, 1600°F and can be shown to achieve a greater VOC destruction than that
required by a standard, whether 99% or otherwise, the combustion temperature
and the auxiliary fuel usage can be reduced.  This conservative design philosophy
is similar to the design of most new facilities in the synthetic organic chemicals
industry, and the cost impact of any regulations arising from this control device
evaluation will almost certainly be conservative.  The actual annual cost, cost
effectiveness, or energy effectiveness experienced by companies using thermal
oxidation  for VOC control  should be lower  than  those shown  in this report.

Calculation of Destruction Efficiency
A secondary problem  in the determination of VOC destruction efficiency  concerns
the method of  calculation. VOC destruction efficiency  is  often calculated by
the so-called  volumetric  efficiency equation:
          Volumetric efficiency = 1 -
                                     ppm  in the flue  gas
                                  ppm  in the waste-gas feed
     which is close to the mass-based destruction efficiency only if the average
     molecular weight of the VOC in the waste gas is equal to the average molecular
     weight in the flue gas and if the waste-gas-feed flow is the same as the flue
     gas  flow.

     Since these  assumptions exist in only a few cases, volumetric efficiencies can
     be misleading.  Mass-based efficiencies are much more desirable.  There are,
     however,  some problems  in describing thermal oxidation  efficiencies  in terms  of
     mass flow rates.  A  thermal oxidizer for VOC destruction  receives contaminated
     VOC  gases (sometimes with liquids  and  solids)  and  supplementary fuels  (natural
      gas, fuel oils,  or  high-heat-content waste organic)  and burns  them  with  enough
      air'for specified levels  of  excess or  unused oxygen to  be achieved  in the flue
      gas.  The unburned VOC from  both the  fuels and the waste  gas contribute  to the
      VOC in the flue gas.

-------
                                      II-9
In order to establish an efficiency equation to account for the VOC from both
sources of flue gas (i.e.,  the waste gas and the fuel), it would be tempting to
define the efficiency as follows:

     Total VOC destruction efficiency =
                           	lb of VOC in the flue gas	
                       1 " Ib of VOC in the waste gas + lb of VOC in the fuel
This approach is attractive in that it permits any VOC contribution of the unburned
fuel to be assessed directly.  It is unacceptable, however, because it does not
allow for the evaluation of the degree of destruction of the waste gas.  In
other words, with VOC destruction efficiencies based on the above equation, it
would not be recognized that the thermal oxidizer might burn fuel extremely
well but not destroy the waste gas.

When the waste-gas heat content is low, the fuel requirements are high (say,
10 lb of fuel to 1 lb of waste gas VOC).  In the above equation the VOC in the
flue gas could come from either unburned fuel or waste gas.  If the total effi-
ciency required was 90% and the fuel could be burned at 99% (which is easily
obtained),  then the waste gas could pass through the oxidizer unchanged and the
oxidizer would be in compliance with the 90% efficiency requirement.  Obviously
this approach thwarts the underlying reasons for VOC regulation.  A second defini-
tion of VOC destruction efficiency therefore must be utilized that bases the
efficiency  calculation on the waste gas alone:

                                           VOCf,    (lb ov VOC in the flue gas)
Ot(total VOC destruction efficiency) =  1 - voc  "ib -Qf VOC in the waste gas)     '
                                              w
The VOC in the flue gas is comprised of the unburned VOC from the waste gas and
the unburned VOC from the fuel, each of which may be expressed  in terms of the
VOC fed to the thermal oxidizer and destruction  efficiency, where the efficiencies
of destruction of  fuel and VOC in  the waste gas  are qfuel and nw, respectively:

                 vocflue = vocw (i - nw) + vocfuel  (i  - nfuel)   -

-------
                                         11-10
    Therefore  the VOC destruction efficiency  in  terms of  the waste gas  is
                                voc(i  -  n) +  vQCfuei*1  - nfuei>   .
                                   w      w
                                             voc
                                                w
    The  relationship  between nw,  Hfuel-  and nt  is  shown  in  Fig.  II-2  for  the  case
    where  a waste  gas has  21 Ib  of VOC per  hour and 560  Ib  of fuel  per  hour is  required.
    This relates to a heat content of about 2 Btu/scf.   Also  shown  on Fig.  II-2 is
    the  burner efficiency  (nfuel) based  on  the  EPA emission factor  for  burnin9  natural
    gas  or fuel oil in power plants,  industrial boilers,  and commercial systems.12

    The  conclusions from Fig. II-l are  that if, say, 99% total efficiency is  required
    and if the EPA fuel oil boiler efficiency  is used for the burner  efficiency
    (99.983%), then about 99.4% VOC destruction of the waste gas must be achieved.

    Similarly, if for any reason the burner efficiency drops from 99.983% to  99.960%,
    then the 99% total efficiency could not be achieved by using the  above definition
    of efficiency.  This is particularly significant in view of the qualifications
    in the EPA emission factor table12 indicating that surges, upsets,  turndown, or
    poor design or maintainance could increase the  emission factors significantly.
    From these statements it could be concluded that the 99.960% fuel efficiency
    level  would be difficult to maintain on a  continuous basis.  Overall efficiency
    levels approaching 99%  based  on  the waste  gas demand the best  fuel burner  designs
    and the  smoothest possible operation.

    A final consideration  is that, by present  definition,  methane  (natural gas) is
    not considered to be  a  VOC.   The VOC destruction  efficiency based  on the waste
    gas is independent of  burner efficiency if the  fuel  is natural gas.  It  has
    become apparent  that  for a  variety  of  reasons natural  gas may  not  be the depend-
    able  choice for  supplementary fuel.

C.   FLAME STABILITY
     An  auxiliary- fuel minimum  of 5 Btu/scf of  waste gas for medium-heat-content
     waste gases is assumed in  this study.   For medium-  to high-heat-content  waste
     gases, auxiliary fuel amounting to 10% of the waste-gas heat content is  added
     for flame stability.   A waste gas with a heat content of 100 Btu/scf thus requires
     10 Btu/scf of auxiliary fuel.  Obviously,  for very high heat content waste gases

-------
                              11-11
   1 0000
  0.0001
                         TOTAL VOC DESTRUCTION  EFFICIENCY
                         BASED ON WASTE GAS
                                            NATURAL GAS
                                            DOMESTIC-
                                            COMMERCIAL-
                                                 OIL
                                            ALL BOILERS
                                         I^-NATURAL GAS
                                         	INDUSTRIAL

                                          ^-NATURAL GAS
                                            POWER  PLANT
                                         r-90%
       0.1               10               100             100.0
                  UNBURNED WASTE GAS  VOC (%)
                                OR
          100-WASTE GAS  DESTRUCTION EFFICIENCY (%)
Fig.  II-2.  Relationship Between Total VOC Destruction Efficiency
 Based on Waste Gas,  Fuel Destruction Efficiency, and Waste Gas
  Destruction Efficiency for a 2-Btu/scf-Heat-Content Waste Gas

-------
                                          11-12
     (>400  Btu/scf)  the  auxiliary  fuel  requirements  for  flame  stability  diminish.
     The  actual  selection of auxiliary  fuel  for  specific thermal  oxidizer  designs  is
     highly judgmental and requires  consideration of several factors  specific  to the
     application.   The inclusion of  the 10%  auxiliary fuel  in  this  evaluation  is
     intended to offer some credibility to the design although the  actual  auxiliary
     fuel added  may vary and may be  reduced  if operating experience demonstrates
     good efficiency and flame stability with less auxiliary fuel.

D.   LIQUID ORGANIC WASTES
     Liquid organic wastes from a  process may be a source of auxiliary fuel for thermal
     oxidation.   However, combustion of liquid waste streams in thermal oxidation
     equipment can complicate the  design.  Inorganic compounds present in  the  liquids
     can create  very difficult particulate problems, which will require additional
     equipment to solve.  Since the  total capital cost to deal with these  factors
     can be significantly higher than for conventional fume thermal oxidation, this
     study does  not address the complexities of  feeding liquid organic wastes.  "Clean"
     liquids are assumed to be similar to fuel oil and using them for auxiliary fuel
     will not have a significant impact on capital or annual costs.

E.   HEAT RECOVERY
     This report includes evaluations of thermal oxidizers without heat recovery,
     with means for recuperative heat recovery such as preheating the waste gas and
     combustion air to  reduce auxiliary  fuel usage, and with waste heat boilers for
     steam generation.   When heat recovery is desired,  temperature considerations
     could determine whether recuperative heating or waste heat boilers apply.  Com-
     bustion  temperatures  exceeding  1600°F rule  out  the use of recuperative heat
     exchangers because of  problems  with materials  of construction and with secondary
     factors, such  as precombustion  occurring in the exchangers.  Waste heat  boilers,
     however, are  alternatives in this  range.

     Recuperative  heating is possible  with  temperatures between  1500 and  1600°F only
      if  the  part  of the exchanger closest to the flame  is  manufactured  from special
     materials  (nickel  alloys,  etc).  Temperatures  less than  1500°F  are compatible
     with standard recuperative heater designs.   Waste  heat boilers  may be considered
      throughout all ranges.  For  waste gases with moderate or high heat contents,
      recuperative heating is not  an option  since it is  of value  only when used to
      reduce the auxiliary-fuel requirement.   Waste heat boilers  may  not be installed
      at those production locations  where additional process steam cannot  be used.

-------
                                          III-l
                          III.   BASIS FOR THERMAL OXIDIZER DESIGN

     After the design considerations described in the preceding section were evaluated,
     those sensitive design variables that would have an effect on cost and energy
     were identified and are described below.

A.   EFFECT OF SENSITIVE DESIGN VARIABLES ON COST AND ENERGY
     A distinction must be made between those design variables which, if changed by
     a small amount, would cause significant changes in capital annual or energy
     costs.  These are called sensitive variables, and the cost curves given later
     in the report generally include them as parameters.  Other variables may be
     quite important for an individual system design but have minor effects on economic
     or energy impact conclusions.

     The approach used in this study was to determine the sensitivity of certain
     variables by means of computerized heat and material balance calculations.
     Through this process, estimates of the relationships between the variables and
     equipment design and operating costs may be derived.  Primary variables that
     are a function of the waste gas are the waste gas temperature, pressure, flow
     rate, VOC composition and VOC average molecular weight, VOC carbon, oxygen, and
     hydrogen  (and other component) ratios, VOC heats of combustion, and the nitrogen
     (and other inert gases), oxygen, and water contents, and the presence of special
     contaminants (particulates, halogens, high levels of sulfur).

     The waste gas temperature is assumed to be 100°F for the base case, but an increase
     or  decrease within reasonable boundaries will have little effect upon the capital
     or  operating costs and it is therefore not a significant variable.  Sensible
     heat carried by  the waste gas  is small compared  to that required to raise its
     temperature to  the combustion  conditions.  About 3.5 Btu/scf is required to
     increase  the temperature of nitrogen from 80°F  to  260°F.  This  compares with
     fuel heat requirements on the  order  of 60 to 80  Btu/scf to  raise the waste gas
     to  combustion  temperatures.  Waste  gas temperature differences  within  this range
     could not change the  total heat  requirements by more than about 6%.  Waste gas
     pressure  is assumed  to be 1.5  psig.  Pressure  changes  within  reasonable  limits
     of  1.5  psig also will have no  significant effect on  capital or  operating costs.

-------
                                      III-2
Flow rate is a very significant variable for both capital and operating costs.
The waste gas flows shown in the figures throughout this report are translated
to scfm of waste gas to the thermal oxidizer.

Heat content of the waste gas is a significant variable.  VOC molar concentra-
tion; average molecular weight; carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen ratios; and heats
of combustion (Btu/lb of VOC) are all expressed in the variable of the heat
content of the waste gas (Btu/scf).  By assessing the heat of combustion of the
VOC being destroyed and the mole % VOC concentration in the waste gas, the heat
content can be determined (Btu/scf) as shown by the family of compound lines on
Fig. III-l.  Multicomponent VOC systems may be described when the mole fractions
of each component are known.  The contribution of carbon monoxide to the total
heat content may also be analyzed in this way.  Table III-l gives VOC molar
heats of combustion.13

If the actual flue gas composition is needed, a component material balance must
be performed, for which carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen ratios are required.  In
order to estimate "typical" values for those ratios, 219 organic compounds con-
taining C, H, 0, N, and Cl were surveyed.14  Table III-2 summarizes this informa-
tion based on groupings of different classes.  The VOC component averages of
68.3% carbon, 11.4% hydrogen, and 20.3% oxygen were used to establish heat value
plus heat and material balance  for this evaluation.  Compounds containing chlorine
or sulfur are not included in the impact assessment of this study but covered
in the Control Device Evaluation, Thermal Oxidation Supplement (VOC containing
halogens or  sulfur).

The  level of oxygen in the waste gas is important because compounds containing
high amounts of oxygen lessen  the  level of  combustion air required  and reduce
the  total thermal oxidizer  flue gas, which  affect both  capital and  operating
costs.  No  additional combustion air is required when the oxygen  in the  flue
gas  exceeds  3 mole  %.  This  leads  to a smaller unit and lower  capital and operating
costs.   Although  some designers will use various levels  of  oxygen to  determine
combustion  requirements,  the value  of  3 mole % is based on  accepted practice
and will be constant  for all the  design calculations  in this  evaluation.   In
order  to generate a conservative  design and impact  analysis,  the  waste  gas  in
 this report is  assumed  to have no  oxygen.   Maximum  combustion air is  therefore

-------
                                       WASTE  GAS HEAT CONTENT (Btu/SCF)
O H
  H
O  I
O H
O
w »
H- ro
rt M
H- CD
0 rt
3 H-
>  O
  3
0> W
3 ff
0- h"
O
O
H1 CO
0) 3
H
  s
ffi p)
fD en
O CD
HI fu
  w
O
O K
C ft
Ul
ft O
H- O
O 3
3 rt
  (D

  ft
I
U>

-------
                               III-4
          Table III-l-  VOC  Molar  Heats  of  Combustion*
      Compound
Methane
Ethane
Hexane
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylene
Propylene
Acetylene
Methanol
Ethanol
 Acetic acid
 Phenol
 Methyl chloride
 Methylene chloride
 Chloroform
 Carbon tetrachloride
 Ethyl chloride
 Hexachloroethane
 Dichlorobenzene
 Hexachlorobenzene
 Carbon  disulfide
 Carbonyl  sulfide
  Thiophene
  Methyl amine
  Aniline
  Urea
  Uric acid
  Ammonia
  Nitromethane
  Nitrobenzene
  Trinitrobenzene
	 	 	 	 	 • 	 	
r.v^cc r,r- Hi ah-Heat of Combustion
Molecular
Weight
16
30
86
78
92
28
42
26
32
46
60
94
50.5
85
119.5
154
64.5
237
111.5
285
76
60
84
31
93
60
168
17
61
123
213
	 	 . 	 - 	
_ (Btu/lb)
23,900
22,400
20,800
18,000
18,300
21,700
21,000
21,500
9,770
12,800
6,270
14,000
5,850
2,260
1,340
436
8,840
835
8,230
3,220
5,840
3,920
14,400
14,700
15,700
4,530
4,930
8,300
5,000
10,800
5,610
_ 	
(Btu/lb -mole)
382,400
672,000
1,788,800
1,404,000
1,683,600
607,600
882,000
559,000
312,600
588,800
376,200
1,316,000
295,400
192,100
160,100
67,140
570,200
197,900
917,600
917,700
443,800
235,200
1,209,600
455,700
1,460,100
271,800
828,200
141,100
305,000
1,328,400
1,194,900
   *See ref  12.

-------
                                    III-5
       Table III-2.   Summary of Organic Compound Components Surveyed
_.__ — _ 	 . 	 • —

Class
Carbon, hydrogen
compounds only

Carbon, hydrogen com-
pounds and carbon,
hydrogen, oxygen
compounds
Carbon, hydrogen, and
chlorine compounds
only
Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen,
and nitrogen compounds
and carbon, hydrogen, and
nitrogen compounds
All compounds


	 	 	 	
Amount (wt %)

. 	 — •
Low value*
Mean
High value*
Low value
Mean
High value
Low value
Mean
High value
Low value
Mean
High value
Low value
Mean
High value
C
79.9
85.8
92.3
27.0
68.3
92.3
7.8
34.3
64.0
26.1
60.1
78.5
7.8
62.5
92.3
H
7.7
14.2
20.1
2.1
11.4
20.4
0
4.7
9.8
3.7
11.3
15.4
0
10.4
20.1
O



0
20.3
7



0
3.6
52.0
0
17.3
20.1
N Cl
. 	 — 	 — — 	






31.5
60.6
92.2
13. C
25.0
60.8
0 0
3.9 5.9
60.8 92.2
*Low and high values correspond to the compound with the lowest and highest
 percertaae of each element (e.g., carbon).   Different compounds apply to
 different elements; therefore the values shown will not be addrtxve.

-------
                                      III-6
assumed.  When ample oxygen in a low or medium heat content waste gas is avail-
able, the size of the combustion chamber to control the waste gas may be as low
as one-half the volume as shown in this report.

At 1600°F and 14.7 psia the heat capacity of water vapor is about 11.8 Btu/
(lb-mole)(°F).  The heat capacity  of air under the same conditions is 7.7 Btu/
(lb-mole)(°F).15  Since saturated conditions are assumed for the waste gas in
calculations in this report, the water content in the flue gas is at a maximum
unless entrained liquid water droplets enter with the feed.  Auxiliary-fuel
requirements can increase significantly in this case since the heat capacity of
the flue gas increase and the heat of vaporization for water, 18,000 Btu/lb-mole
of water, must be supplied.  However, this can normally be avoided with proper
design.

The presence of special contaminants can have significant effects on capital
and operating costs.  A different design criterion is required with halogenated
feeds.  Other contaminants, such as sulfur, could require the addition of absor-
bers to the control device.  Investigation of these special cases are assessed
in the Control Device Evaluation, Thermal Oxidation Supplement.

A second group of significant variables relates to the design criterion of thermal
oxidation.  Combustion chamber temperature and residence time must be specified
as functions  of the feed components and VOC destruction efficiency.  Combustion
chamber temperature has a  significant effect on fuel costs for feeds with low
heat contents.  Feeds with  moderate heat contents determine  their own combustion
temperature,  whereas  feeds  of high heat content will markedly increase the size
of the  equipment  if the combustion chamber must be controlled at levels much
below  their normal combustion temperatures.  The  addition  of excess  air or water
to reduce  the combustion temperature  results in a  larger flue gas  flow and larger
equipment  to  maintain the  same  residence time.  Residence  time has  a major effect
on capital costs  but  a  relatively small  effect  on operating  costs.   Even  though
a larger unit has a  larger heat  loss  by  radiation,  it  is normally  on the  order
of a few percent  and does  not materially increase the  operating  cost.

The  significant variables  investigated in  this report  are  waste  gas flow,  heat
 content (encompassing a variety of  composition-related variables),  combustion

-------
                                           III-7
     temperature,  residence times,  and destruction efficiencies.   Evaluation of these
     parameters using generally worst-case or conservative assumptions will lead to
     economic and energy impact conclusions that will equal or exceed actual operating
     costs and energy impacts for the applicable cases.  This approach, then, leads
     to conservative economic and energy costs on which to base future regulations.

B.   PROCEDURE USED FOR DESIGNING THERMAL OXIDIZER SYSTEM
     The design procedure that was used for the thermal oxidizer unit of this study
     was developed based on the above variables.

1.   Combustion Chamber
     The volume and composition of the waste gas were first determined.  The heat
     content of the gas was determined by the identification of the VOC components
     (including CH4 and CO) and the use of Table III-l (plus other molar heats of
     combustion data) and Fig. III-l.  The minimum combustion temperature and resi-
     dence times were taken from Table II-2, depending on the presence of carbon
     monoxide.  Supplementary fuel is required for low-heat-content waste gas to
     maintain the desired combustion chamber temperature and flame stability.  The
     supplementary fuel requirement as a function of waste-gas heat content  is shown
     by Fig. III-2.  The waste gas is assumed to have no oxygen and therefore the
     combustion air required is at a maximum.  With these data the total combustion
     flue gas  (in scfm) from all sources, including the waste gas, auxiliary fuel,
     combustion air, and combustion products, was calculated for the waste-gas heat
     content range  (Btu/scf) displayed in Fig. III-2-.  To correlate with the following
     design, size, and cost projections for  the full range of waste gas rates, the
     flue gas  flow of Fig. i'il-4 is expressed as a ratio of flue gas to waste gas  as
     a  function of waste-gas heat content.   In waste gases with high levels  of oxygen
     the  ratio of flue gas to waste gas approaches 1.  The more conservative case  of
     a  waste gas with no oxygen as shown  in  Fig. III-3 is used in  this evaluation.

     Conversion of  scfm to actual cubic feet per minute  (acfm) is  necessary  for  sizing
     of the  combustion chamber.  Figure III-4  shows  this  relationship  (based on  the
     ideal  gas law).  Standard conditions  assumed  throughout  this  report are 32°F
     and 760 mm Hg  and  their  equivalents.   The  ratio of  acfm  to scfm  is read from
     Fig.  III-4  and is multiplied by  the  combustion  chamber  flue  gas  in scfm.  Until

-------
              SUPPLEMENTARY FUEL  USAGE (Btu/SCF  WASTE GAS)
H
H
I
CD


3
rt
G
0)
pi
DJ
0)
rf
(D
ffi
(B
0)
rt

O
O
3
rt
(D
3
rt
                                  8-III

-------
19
                                                        -LINEAR ONLY IF   4-
                                                          SUPPLEMENTARY
                                                          FUEL IS ADDED
                                                          PROPORTIONALLY
                                                          TO THE  CONTENT
                                                          PER  DESIGN
                                                          CRITERIA
       COMBUSTION
       TEMPERA fURE  	-*- -
        -1600°F 2200°F
         1400°F 1875°F
       , ,\
   0  20 40  6(' 80100    200    300   400    500    600   700
                       WASTE  GAS HEAT CONTENT (Btu/SCF)
800    900  1000
        Fig. III-3.   Ratio of Thermal Oxidizer Flue Gas Flow to Waste Gas Flow vs
                               Waste Gas Heat Content

-------
                                                                                         I
                                                                                        t->
                                                                                        o
                          1200    1400    1600     1800     2000    2200


                     COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE (°F)
Fig.  IH-4.  Relationship Between
                               Actual Flow Rates and Flue Gas Temperature

-------
                                           III-ll
     this point in the report,  the term heat content has referred to the energy gen-
     erated by combustion of compounds in the waste gas.  Heat content when used in
     relation to the flue gas in this report refers to the energy contained by the
     hot gases because of their temperature.  The basis used for the heat recovery
     calculations is the heat content of the flue gas as a function of temperature,
     as shown in Fig.  III-5.  The dotted lines in Fig. III-5 correspond to a reason-
     able variation in specific heats or heat capacities of the flue gas.

     Residence times (sec) from Table II-2 are used to calculate the combustion chamber
     internal volume.   The combustion chamber flue gas flow (in acfm) is converted
     to actual cubic feet per second and then multiplied by the residence time (in
     sec) to determine the combustion chamber internal volume in cubic feet.

2.    Fans
     Fans for the waste gas and combustion air are both specified.  The flow rates
     of the waste gas and combustion air and the pressure drops of the thermal oxidizers
     are used to calculate fan sizes.  Pressures drops of 6 in. of water were assumed
     for the thermal oxidizer with 0 to 30% heat recovery; 8 in. was assumed for
     thermal oxidizers with 50% heat recovery; and 10 in. was assumed for thermal
     oxidizers with 70% heat recovery or waste heat boilers.  The waste-gas fan
     capacity is based on the waste-gas flow rate.  Table III-3 gives the combustion
     air flow/waste gas ratio as a function of waste-gas heat content.  The relation-
     ship is based on desired combustion temperatures, as previously discussed, and
     is used to size the combustion air fan.  The combustion air volume and fan size
     may be determined by the use of this ratio multiplied by the volume of waste
     gas.  Waste gases containing significant levels of oxygen reduce the combustion
     air required and reduce the size of the combustion air fan.  Waste gases generated
     at higher pressure often need no fan.

3.    Recuperative Heat Recovery
     A recuperative heat recovery system transfers heat from the flue gas into the
     waste gas and combustion air, thus lowering the requirements for auxiliary fuel.
     However, since less fuel is required for a given volume of waste gas, less com-
     bustion air is also needed to burn the fuel and the resulting flue gas volume
     is less than that of a thermal oxidizer without recuperative heat recovery.
     Since the flue gas volume is lower, the amount of recoverable heat is also lower.

-------
                                                                                            H
                                                                                            H
200     400
600     800 ~  1000     1200    1400     1600     1800    2000    2200

           FLUE  GAS TEMPERATURE (°F)
                       Fig. III-5.   Flue Gas Heat Content

-------
                          111-13
   Table  III-3.   Ratio of Combustion Air to Waste
       Gas  Flow Rate  vs Waste Gas Heat Content
Waste Gas
Heat Content
(Btu/scf)
2
2
100
200
400
Combustion
Temperature
(°F)
1400
1600
1875
2200
2200
Combustion Air to
Waste Gas Flow Ratio*
/ scf of combustion air\
\ scf of waste gas
0.87
1.1
1.4
3.1
7.3
1




*Thermal oxidizer conditions:
      No oxygen in waste gas.
      VOC molar heat of combustion = 730,250 Btu/lb-mole-
      VOC molecular weight = 50.
      VOC C, H, 0 fraction = 68.3 wt % C, 11.4 wt
        % H, 20.3 wt % 0.
      Average waste gas molecular weight = 29.
      Water content of combustion air = 1.0 wt %.
      3 mole % O0 in flue gas after oxidation.

-------
                                      111-14
The combustion chamber, combustion air fan,  recuperative heat exchanger area,
and stack all vary directly with flue gas volume.  Recuperative heat recovery
has the effect of shrinking the entire system, depending on the level of heat
recovery.  Table III-4 gives the factors that describe this variation of system
size with various levels of recuperative heat recovery.  The factors were developed
with the computerized heat and material balance for 1400°F and 1600°F combustion
temperatures and a waste gas with no oxygen.  When the waste gas contains signifi-
cant levels of oxygen, the size-reduction effect as related to recuperative
heating diminishes.  Although some size reduction is still seen, the factors in
Table III-4 approach 1.

The fuel used per volume of waste gas is reduced when recuperative heat recovery
is used compared to that when no heat recovery or waste heat boilers are used.
Table III-5 gives the  fuel reduction factor for various heat contents, combustion
temperatures, and levels of recuperative heat recovery.  These factors, multiplied
times the fuel usage values from Fig. III-2, give the actual fuel usage when
recuperative heat recovery is used.  A minimum of 5 Btu/scf of fuel was used
for this evaluation.

The heat content of the flue gas from the combustion chamber is essentially  a
function of  temperature.  Thermal oxidation flue gases  from waste-gas  incineration
will have similar compositions  of N2, 02, H20, and  C02  and therefore  similar
specific heats.  The  level of heat  recovery is defined as

                    heat  content of flue  gas  after  heat recovery
                  " heat content of  flue  gas before  heat recovery

With  it assumed that  the  temperature rise in  the waste gases plus  the combustion
 air in a recuperative exchanger is  equal to the  temperature drop  of the  flue
 gases  in the exchangers,  a design  relationship may be  developed relating the
 heat  exchanger surface area to the  level of heat recovery.  This  assumption is
 normally a realistic  one  since the  mass flows and heat capacities of the waste
 gas plus air and those of the flue  gas are normally similar.   Any amount of
 heat recovery is possible up to the point where  the temperature of the preheated
 combustion feed gas approaches the flue gas temperature.  This point represents
 the maximum possible heat recovery for a combustion chamber at a given tempera-
 ture.  The heat content of the flue gas is shown in Fig.  III-5.  Figures III-6

-------
                              111-15
  Table III-4.  Thermal Oxidizer Size Reduction Factor for
             Recuperative Heat Recovery Systems
Level of Recuperative
    Heat Recovery
  Size Reduction Factor
                                  1400°F
                                                     1600°F
          30

          50

          70
0.850

0.770

0.701
0.830

0.744

0.667

-------
                    111-16
Table III-5.  Fuel Reduction Factors for
   Recuperative Heat Recovery Systems
Level of Recupera
Heat Recovery
(%)
Fuel Reduction for Various
tive Waste Gas Heat Contents
1 Btu/scf
10 Btu/scf 13
Combustion Temperature = 1400
30
50
70
30
50
70
0.635 0.525
0.420 0.260
0.240 0.044
Combustion Temperature = 1600
0.590
0.393
0.212
0.530
0.297
0.083
Btu/scf
op
0.490
0.210
°F
0.501
0.260
0.034
20 Btu/scf
0.400
0.061
0.380
0.134

-------
                                111-17
   1000
                  U=OVERALL  HEAT TRANS-ER COEFFICIENT
cr
   001
       10
30       40      50       60
   HEAT RECOVERY (%)
Fig.  III-6.  Recuperative Heat Exchanger Design at 1400°F Combustion
        Temperature  (100°F Feed Gas,  Constant Specific Heat)

-------
                                  111-18
   1000
 0
 CO
oh

 Lu
 O
 en  1.00
 UJ


 u_
 UJ
 a:
  UJ
  O
  o:
  tr
  u
  o
  I
  o
  X
  UJ
  UJ
  i

  U-
  o

  Q
  H
  <
  (T
0.10
      0.01
                    OVERALL HEAT TRANSFER  COEFFICIENT
                     30       40       50

                        HEAT  RECOVERY (%)
         Fig.
      Combustion Temperature

-------
                                           111-19
     and 7  show the ratio of the heat exchanger surface to the flue-gas flow rate as
     functions of the percent heat recovery and the overall heat transfer coefficient
     (U) for a recuperative exchanger for 1400°F and 1600°F flue gases.

     Overall heat transfer coefficients of these heat exchangers depend on the type of
     design.  Cross-flow exchangers tend to have overall heat transfer coefficients
     around 2 to 5,2'3 whereas U-tube exchangers are reported to have coefficients of
     6 to 8.4  Design calculations leading to cost estimates in this report assume
     an overall heat transfer coefficient of about 4.

     Once a value for the area-to-flow ratio is determined, the heat exchanger area
     is calculated by multiplying the flue gas flow (in scfm) by the ratio.

4.   Waste Heat Steam-Generation Boiler Heat Recovery
     The maximum heat recovery by a waste heat steam-generation boiler depends on
     the temperature of the exhaust gas after it exits the boiler.  Although flue
     gas temperatures can be reduced to the condensation temperatures of the compon-
     ents in the flue gas, in this study it is assumed that the flue gas exhaust
     temperature is 500°F.  Since more heat could be recovered, this is a more con-
     servative but more universal assumption.  With the flue gas exhaust temperature
     specified, the maximum heat recovery is established.  This relationship is shown
     in Fig. III-8.  The dotted lines in this figure relate to a reasonable range of
     heat capacities or specific heats of the flue gas.  Figure III-9  relates the
     ratio  of boiler-tube surface area to the flue-gas flow rate and the flue gas
     temperature, steam temperature, and overall heat transfer coefficient.  The
     surface area of the waste heat boiler is determined by multiplying the flue-gas
     flow rate by the ratio from Fig. III-9.  The flue-gas flow rate from  a thermal
     oxidizer employing a waste heat boiler is the same as that from a thermal oxidizer
     using  no heat recovery.  Unlike the recuperative heat recovery case,  no reduction
     in system size or fuel use is seen when a waste heat boiler is used.

 5.   Stack
     The cross-sectional  area of  the stack is determined by  assuming a superficial
      linear velocity  (3000  fpm) and  dividing into  the  actual  flow  rate of  the flue
      gas or exhaust  gas  (with or  without heat  recovery).   Figure  III-4 can be used
      to convert  the  scfm  to acfm  when  the  temperature  is  known.   Table III-6  lists

-------
                          MAXIMUM  HEAT RECOVERY (%)
I
00
s
PJ
X
H-
3
(D
PJ
rt
 o
 o

 CD
 1-1
 Ml
 K
 g
 rt
 (D

 ffi
 (D
  CO
  O
  H-
  M
  U)
  rt

  t-3
  CD
  PJ
  rt
  CD


   II

  Ul
  O
  O
                                 02-111

-------
      100
X V> 0.50
             8, STEAM 450 °F
                                                    U = 8, STEAM 250 °F
           U=12, STEAM 450°F
              1	


              ,  STEAM 450
                                                     , STEAM 250 °F
                                                  U=20, STEAM 250 °F
                                            U=OVERALL HEAT
                                            TRANSFER COEFFICIENT
     0.05
       1200     1400     1600    1800     2000    2200    2400    26  0

                         FLUE GAS TEMPERATURE (°F)
                                                                                             i
                                                                                            N)
Fig.  Hl-9.  Ratio of Waste Heat Boiler
                                     Heat Exchange  Surface to Flue Gas  Flow vs
                            Flue Gas Temperature

-------
                                          111-22
     the  temperatures of  the gases after they are exhausted from the recuperative
     heat exchangers or from the waste heat boiler.  A waste heat boiler operating
     at maximum heat recovery will have an exhaust gas temperature of 500°F.

            Table  III-6.  Flue Gas Exhaust Temperature After Heat Recovery
      Combustion
       Chamber
     Temperature         	Temperature  (°F) After Heat Recoveries of
        (°F)	30%	50%	70%
        1400             1040                      760                   510
        1600             1160                      860                   570
     The height of the  stack is  based either  on  its proximity  to  tall  structures  or
     on the maximum exhaust  gas  component  concentrations  at  certain  linear  distances
     from the stack.  The latter requires  air dispersion  calculations  and component
     criteria.   For convenience  in this  study a  constant  stack height  of  80 ft  is
     assumed.  Little effect on  total capital costs,  annual  costs, or  cost  effective-
     ness is expected if the stack height  is  changed  within  reasonable limits.

6.   Other Equipment
     The amount of piping or ducting required for installation of a  thermal oxidizer
     is dependent on site considerations and  the proximity of  the thermal oxidizer
     to the waste gas source. This system design includes 150 ft of round-steel
     inlet ductwork with four ells, one  expansion joint,  and one  damper with control.
     Considerably more  ducting may be required for special cases; however,  since  the
     ducting included comprises  only 2 to 8%  of the  total capital costs,  a  great
     deal of extra ducting would be required  to significantly change the total capital
     cost.

     Some special waste gases may contain components that form noxious gases during
     combustion,  for example, sulfur-containing and halogen-containing waste gases.
     Flue gas  scrubbers are  required to reduce the level of these noxious gases  in
     the exhaust  gas.  The Control Device Evaluation, Thermal Oxidation Supplement
     addresses  the incremental  capital  increase when this option is required.

-------
                                           111-23
C.   COMBUSTION ALTERNATIVES
     An alternative technology that is used for incineration of waste gases with low
     heat contents is catalytic oxidation, in which a catalyst is used to increase
     the oxidation rate of the gases at lower temperatures.  This is discussed in
     the Control Device Evaluation, Catalytic Oxidation.

     Waste gases with high heat contents are often candidates for use as fuel gas to
     a boiler or are controlled by flaring.  A control device evaluation report for
     this technology is also in preparation.

-------
                                      IV-1
     IV.  CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLING THERMAL OXIDATION CONTROL EQUIPMENT

Thermal oxidizers can be large process units, depending on the volume of waste
gas to be controlled, and could require a plot of land as large as  300 ft by
300 ft for installation.

Since thermal oxidizers utilize combustion with a flame for achieving VOC destruc-
tion, the unit must be located at a safe distance from process equipment using
flammable chemicals or special designs must be employed to minimize the risk of
explosion.

Thermal oxidizers require natural gas or fuel oil, electrical power, and instru-
ment air and, if scrubbing is needed, water at the site.  If steam is generated
from waste heat, then it is useful to minimize the distance from the waste heat
boiler to the steam consuming site.  No special utilities are needed.

Retrofitting thermal oxidizers into existing plants requires careful considera-
tion of site location since all the above considerations apply and sufficient
space in an existing plant may not be available.  The unit may have to be located
at longer distances from the waste gas source than would be required for a new
plant.

-------
                                          V-l
                     V.   COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF THERMAL OXIDIZERS

A.   COST BASIS
     The estimated capital costs for total systems combinations and for various com-
     ponents are presented in this section.  These estimated costs represent the
     total investment, including all indirect costs such as engineering and contractors'
     fees and overheads, required for purchase and installation of all equipment and
     material to provide a facility as described.  These are "battery limit" costs
     and do not include the provisions for bringing utilities, services, or roads to
     the site, the backup facilities, the land, the research and development required,
     or the process piping and instrumentation interconnections that may be required
     within the process generating the waste gas feed to the thermal oxidizer.

     The estimated costs are based on a new plant  installation; no retrofit cost
     considerations are included.  Those costs are usually higher than  the cost for
     a  new  site installation for  the same  system and include,  for example, demolition,
     crowded  construction working conditions,  scheduling construction activities
     with production  activities,  and longer  interconnecting piping.  Since these
     thermal  oxidizer systems  require a relatively large land  area and  the safety
     aspects  of an open flame  are an important factor,  the longer interconnecting
     piping will  probably be  the  most significant  of these retrofit  cost  factors.
     These  factors are  so site specific that no  attempt has been made  to  provide
     costs.   For  specific retrofit  cases,  rough costs  can  be  obtained by  using the
     new site data and  adding as  required for a defined specific  retrofit situation.

      The method used to develop these estimated capital costs  was based on preliminary
      vendor quotes  for  the  purchase of  major equipment items  or from such sources  as
      Richardson Engineering Co.  data, and factoring up to  installed costs based on
      the factors  presented  in Table V-l.   The expected accuracy of  the total installed
      cost with this  degree  of engineering detail using this factor  method is ±30%.

      This method of obtaining estimated total installed capital costs is suitable
      for a cost study or for screening estimates.  Table V-l lists the factor ranges
      used for various cost components and is based on historical data of IT Enviro-
      science Process Engineering.

-------
                                              V-2
               Table V-l.   Factors  Used  for  Estimating Total  Installed Costs
A = Major Equipment Purchase Cost

    Installation Costs

      Foundations

      Structures
      Equipment Erection

      Piping
      Insulation


      Paint
      Fire Protection

       Instruments


       Electrical
         i
 B = Base Cost
     Sales Tax
     Freight
     Contractor's Fees
 C = Total Contract
                a
     Engineering
                .  b
     Contingencies
Plus 0.1 to 0.35 Allowance


0.06A + $100 X number of pumps
0.15A  (no structures) to 0.30A  (multideck structures)

0.15A to 0.30A  (depending on complexity)

0.40A  (package units) to 1.10A  (rat's nest)
0.06A or 0.15 X piping  (normal) to 0.30 X piping
   (bulk hot or cold)

0.05A
0.01A  to 0.06A  (depending on  requirements)

0.10A  to 0.30A  or  0.01A to  0.25A  +  $50,000  to
   $300,000  for  process  control  computer

0.15A  or 0.05A  + $500 per motor

.  _	•—	
A + Sum of Installation Costs

0.025A + 0.025B

 0.16A

 0.30  (B-A)

 B + Taxes, Freight,  and Fees

 0.01C to 0.20C

 0.15C
  D  = Process Unit  Installed Cost   C + Engineering + Contingencies
  E = Total  Subestimates
  F = Total Project Cost
  Sum  of  semidetailed subestimates  (buildings,  site
    development,  cooling towers,  etc.).   Each subesti-
    mate  should include taxes,  freight,  fees, engi-
    neering and contingency,  and should  be escalated
    to date of expenditure for  that cost component.
    Engineering costs, contingencies, and escalation
    factors for these subestimates will vary according
    to the type of job.

  D + E
                                            , process engineering, engineering,
              , and other support groups.
               snould not oe appiiea to anv cost component tnat nas ceen c=~«-
    either  purchase order or contract.

-------
                                           V-3
     The estimate is based on the purchase cost of major equipment A,  including a 10
     to 35% allowance for other equipment and an assessment of the quality of vendor
     quotes.   A 10% allowance is used for project definition that includes process
     flow sheets and specific budget quotes and a 35% allowance flow sheet for block
     flow sheet definition and generalized equipment quotes or prices.

B.   CAPITAL COSTS

1.   Thermal Oxidizer Complete Systems
     Figures V-l through V-6 show the total estimated capital costs that were obtained
     for various system combinations and operating conditions, such as  various waste-
     gas heat contents, residence times, operating temperatures,  etc.   Combinations
     and conditions are as defined on each figure.  The method for estimating the
     total system costs consisted of combining appropriate costs  for components estab-
     lished as described below and of adding minimum site development,  estimating
     allowance, and nominal vendor startup costs.  The total added costs for site
     development, estimating allowance,  and vendor startup were then prorated back
     to each individual component.  The  individual component cost curves can therefore
     be combined to build up the total cost for any complete system desired.  Since
     the component cost curves include a portion of the costs norally assigned for
     final complete system installations, they are quite specific for use in estimating
     thermal oxidizer systems and therefore should not be used indiscriminately as a
     general cost estimating reference for the individual components.   Curves showing
     purchase costs of combustion chambers, recuperative heat exchangers, and waste
     heat boilers are presented in Appendix A.

2.   Combustion Chamber
     Preliminary purchase quotes for thermal oxidizer combustion  chambers were obtained
     from vendors.  Six vendors were contacted by telephone and letter  and three of
     them were visited to clarify details and costs:  Combustion  Engineering Air
     Preheater, Peabody Engineering, and Hirt Combustion Engineers.  The installed
     costs shown in Fig. V-7 through V-ll were obtained by factoring the preliminary
     quotes as described above.

     The information furnished by vendors included thermal oxidizer purchase cost vs
     capacity for several of their standard units.  The units were quoted as being

-------
               DECEMBER 1979 TOTAL  INSTALLED CAPITAL ($1,000)
  •n
§ <
rt l
CD H"

ft


 " §
 I-1 ft
CD
  w
  rt
   CD
 ?a a.

 ui O
 H- PJ
 CL T)
 m H-
 3 rt
 O (D
 (t) I-1
 H- O
 g en
 fl> rt


  11 S1
 O H
 03 (0
 CD H
 n 3
 , pj
   O
  & X
   H-
  O Q-
  O 0)
  g §
  o
  3
  CD «
  H H-
  p) ft
  rt JT
    en

   11 sr
   M  I
   >fc O
   O p)
   o cn
   o
   *i rc
    CD
    PJ
    ft

-------
   7000
O
O
O
g
Q_
 Q
 LLJ
 _1
 _J
 CO
 O
 h-
 tr
 LJ
 m
 ^
 LLJ
 O
 LU
 Q
    1000
                         INSTALLED CAPITAL
                   OXIDATION SYSTEMS TOTAI
                      10 Btu/scf, 0.75 sec, 1400 °F
      No Heat Recovery
   2. 30% Recup. Heat Recovery
   3. Boiler 250 psi Steam
   4. Boiler 400 psi Steam
   5. 50% Recup. Heat Recovery
      70% Recup. Heat Recovery
1.0
                                           5.0        100

                                 WASTE GAS FLOW  (1,000 SCFM)
                                                                             50.0
                                                                    100.0

-------
n •

3 <
rt I
CD OJ
3 •
ft
(-• rt
O »)
  h-1
td
rf H
e 3
^ en
en rt
O &
Hi M
 ra
 tn  o
 H- 9>
 Cu *0
 (0  P-
 3  rt
 n  o>
 (D  M

 ^ n
 H- O
 g en
 Ui 1-3

 in co
 n> g
3 O
& X
  H-
o o.
o u>
i. <*

  8
  en

  en
  rt
  ro
  rt
  H-
  (D 3
  g en

  ro i

  0) rt
  rt V
    0>
    en
    rt
    (D
     I
    O
   o
   o
     cu
     rt
                 DECEMBER 1979 TOTAL  INSTALLED  CAPITAL ($1,000)
                                                                           -J
                                                                           o
                                                                           o
                                                                           o
                                       9-A

-------
7,000
i—i—r
       - THERMAL OXIDATION SYSTEMS TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL L
                      10 Btu/scf, 0.75 sec, 1600 °F
                      1. No Heat Recovery
                      2. 30% Recup. Heat Recovery
                      3. Boiler 250 psi Steam
                      4. Boiler 400 psi Steam
                      5. 50%  Recup.  Heat Recovery
                     _6. 70%  Recup.  Heat Recovery
                                         5.0       10.0
                               WASTE GAS FLOW (1,000 SCFM)
                           50.0
100.0
   Fig.  V-4.  Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with Waste-Gas Heat
            = 10 Btu/scf, Residence Time =0.75 sec, and Combustion Temperature = 1600°F

-------
   10,000
           >HERMALQXIDAIIQ^SIEMSJD^ INSTALLED CAPIJAL
o
o
CD
_J
<

CL
<
o

Q
Ld
_J
 <£   1,000
 I1
                      100 Btu/scf, 1875°F

                  1. 0.5  sec, No Heat Recovery

                  2. 0.75 sec, No Heat Recovery

                  3. 0.5  sec, Boiler 250 psi Steam

                  4. 0.5  sec, Boiler 400 psi Steam

                  5. 0.75 sec, Boiler  250 psi Steam

                  6. 0.75 sec, Boiler  400 psi Steam
 cr
 LL)
 CD

 Ld

 a
 Q
                                                                                            a>
                                              5.0        10.0

                                   WASTE  GAS FLOW (1,000  SCFM)
                                                                        50.0
                                                                                          1000
Fig. V-5.
                  Total installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with Waste-Gas Heat

                      Content = 100 Btu/scf and Combustion Temperature = 1875 F

-------
8,000
       THERMAL OXIDATION SYSTEMS TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL
                        200 Btu/scf, 2200 °F
                    1.  0.5 sec, No Heat Recovery
                    2.  0.75 sec, No Heat Recovery
                    3.  0.5 sec, Boiler 250 psi  Steam
                    4.  0.5 sec, Boiler 400 psi  Steam
                    5.  0.75  sec, Boiler 250  psi Steam
                    6.  0.75  sec, Boiler 400 psi Steam
    100
                                         5.0        10.0
                         WASTE. GAS FLOW (1,000  SCFM)
50.0
Fia  V-6   Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with Waste-Gas Heat
Fig.  V b.  iuta         = 2QO Btu/scf and Combustion Temperature = 2200 F

-------
   4,000
o
o.
 0-
 
-------
                    DECEMBER  1979  INSTALLED  CAPITAL ($1,000)
o
o «d
3 p-
rt ifl
ro •

rt- <

II 03
O
  H
W 3
rf (fl
e rt
--> PJ
en H1
o pj
5d O
CD 0)
to >O
H- P-
DJ ft
0) 01
3 M
O
(D O
  O
i-3 cn
p- rt
3
  hh
  O
 (D

 tn O
 (D O
 O 3

   C
 0) w
 3 rt
 Cb p-
   0
 O 3

 i o
 cr s-
 c PJ
 w 3
 rt tT
 P- ft)
 0 Hi

 3 c
 B p-
 (D rt
 3 S4
 t) _
 (D S
 hi PJ
 pi cn
 rt rt
 c n>
 hi  I
 fD O
 *> O
 O CD
 O rt
                                       TI-A

-------
       10,000
     O
     o
     Q.
     g
     a.
     <
     o

     Q
     UJ
     _J
        1,000
     CD
     cr
     UJ
     CD
     S
     LU
     CJ
     UJ
     o
          100

— COMBUSTION CHA
_ 10

—






i— —
n P;
10







0
1.
E
2
3
4
c



—
••— '
•^

Bt
ItL
_




^*-
•^

u>
N
B
B
/
N
B
B
3
5
7





•— •
~~
1
'set, 0.5 se
D Heat Rec
Diler 250 p
Diler 400 p
scf, 0.5 se<
o Heat Rec
oiler 250 p
oiler 400 p
0% Recup.
0% Recup.
0% Recup.





^
• • — —

MBER
c., 187
overy
si Stet
si Ste
:., 160
overy
si Ste
>si Ste
Heat
Heat
Heat





^
^

INS'

FAL

LE
5°F
3m
am
D°F
3m
3m
Recovery
Recovery
Recovery





^-^
^^
~





--^
^
--=




X
a»**
^
^-*
_^ — . —
D CA










X
-"^


PITAL — 	






2~V
., .X

'' .x5^
''^/x
^^*X\_ 4









^
X— ;
j\X>
'X!x
X5











x
Xp;
XX^
x












/
X
^













/
7^














X















x^














/
\/







n 50 10.0 50.0 100.0
                                WASTE  GAS FLOW (1,000 SCFM)
      Fia v-9.  Installed Capital Cost for the Combustion  Chamber with Waste-Gas Heat

Contents - 10  and 100 Btu/scf,  Residence Time = 0.5 sec,  and Combustion Temperature - 1600 F

-------
n
o

rt H-
 iQ


" <
II I
DECEMBER  1979 INSTALLED CAPITAL ($1,000)
          ei-A

-------
         DECEMBER  1979 INSTALLED CAPITAL ($1,000)
CO
H
m

o
>
CO
o
O
O
O

CO
O
~n

-------
                                           V-15
     prepiped and prewired with burners, refractory, etc., all loaded on trucks at
     the f.o.b. point.  Where available and applicable, these vendors also furnished
     costs for the fan, for heat exchanger/crossover, for the boiler for three steam
     pressure levels, and for stacks constructed of both refractory and Corten steel.
     The costs are based on natural-gas auxiliary fuel and include the necessary
     controls for use of the fuel.

     For ease of evaluating system component combinations, all components are presented
     as a factor of the total waste gas flow in standard cubic feet per minute (scfm).

3.    Recuperative Heat Exchangers
     Preliminary purchase quotes were obtained from the thermal oxidizer vendors and
     estimated installed costs were obtained by applying installation factors as
     previously described.  The cost curves of Fig. V-12 for recuperative heat exchangers
     were developed by the same procedure as that described for combustion chamber
     cost development.

4.    Boiler
     Preliminary purchase quotes for steam-generating waste heat boilers were obtained
     from thermal oxidizer vendors for operation at various steam pressure levels
     and various proportions of heat recovery.  The estimated installed costs were
     then obtained by applying installation factors to these purchase costs as previously
     described.  The cost curves, shown in Figs. V-13 and 14 for the boilers, were
     developed as described previously.

5.    Fans,  Ductwork, and Stacks
     The installed capital costs for the fans, ducts, and stacks are plotted in
     Figs.  V-15,  16, and 17 for systems with no heat recovery,  with recuperative
     heat recovery, and with waste-heat boilers respectively.

a.    Ducts	Each system is assumed to require 150 ft of round-steel inlet ductwork
     with four ells, one expansion joint,  and one damper with an actuator.   The cost
     data source is a report by CARD,  Inc.,15 which was prepared for the EPA and
     includes total installed costs.

-------
                                    V-16
           10,000
         o
         o
         Q.
          _J


          cZ

          o

          Q
          LJ
          _J
          _l

          h-
          fc
          rr
          LL)
          CD
          S
          UJ
          o
          UJ
          Q
 1,000
   10O
                1O
RECUPEP/TIVE-TYPF "PAT FXCHANGER INSTALLED CAPITAL
10'Bfu/scf 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 1400 °F S 1600 °F
1. 30% Recup. Heat Recov
2. 50% Recup. Heat Recov
3. 70% Recup. Heat Recov



4-

]•»
-•
	



> LL_L


.



TTI ^^
*" _-S^


"*

< r\


	


.S
j^
^^
s*^










X
'





—



S
/





	

^
/
s
/






3ry
ery
ery
I i 	
t
— -*Z-
--•-]zE.
' /
^X ^Z
tx"
xT IX
Hl 	
^ 	
j


1
i




X
/
s

/












/

/












/
/
/
/
£
/
/
r
s









. _



/

/
^
i









sn 100 50.0 100.0
                  0.5
                             WASTE  GAS  FLOW (1,000 SCFM)
Fig. V-12.
installed Capital Cost for Recuperative-Type Heat  Exchangers with the

           Waste-Gas Heat Content = 10 Btu/scf

-------
I
M
U)
H
3
01
ft
CD
0-

O
P>
ID
H-
ft
PJ
n
o
en
ft
 01
 ft
 ffi
 ro
 to
 o
 H-
 M
 CD
 h(
 01
 K)
 Ul
 O
 01
 H-
                  DECEMBER  1979  INSTALLED CAPITAL ($1,000)
                                                                                                I—'
                                                                                                ~J

-------
                                  V-18
  10,000
o
WASTE HEAT RDII ERS (4QO PSD INSTA
  1   10 Btu/scf, 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 1400 °F
  2   10 Btu/scf, 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 1600 °F
  3   100 Btu/scf, 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 1875  F
  4   200 Btu/scf, 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 2200 °F
                                5.0    10.0
                    WASTE GAS FLOW (1,000 SCFM)
                                                       50.0   100.0
 Fig. V
       -14.   installed Capital Cost for Waste Heat Boilers  (400 psi)

-------
           1,000
         o
         o
         Q.
         g
         Q.
         Q
         UJ

         l!   100
         CO
         en
         rr
         UJ
         m
         2
         UJ
         o
         UJ
         Q
              10
DUCTSL_FANS^AND STACK INSTALLED CAPITAL

No Heat  Recovery

  1.   10 Btu/scf, 0 5 or 0.75 sec., 1400°F  & 1600 °F

  2,   100 Btu/scf, 05 or 0.75 sec., 1875 °F

  3.   200 Btu/scf, 0.5 or 0.75 sec., 2200  °F
               ~0.5       1.0                   5.0      10.0

                                  WASTE  GAS FLOW (1,000 SCFM)
                                                         50.0
100.0
Fig. V-15.  Installed Capital Costs  for  Inlet Ducts, Waste Gas, and Combustion  Air Fans and Stack for

                                     System with No Heat Recovery

-------
  3
  01
  rt
  O
  PJ
  >0
  P-
  rt
  0)
  O
  O
  en
  rt
  01

  l-h
50 O
CO H
n
^ (B
O) rt

?- O
< e
n> o
  rt
K tn
(B »

ft a
  01
5d 01
(T) rt
n (D
O
< o
(D Q)
l-< 01
><
  0)
   O
   o
   w
   rt
DECEMBER 1979  INSTALLED CAPITAL  ($1,000)
   0)

   01
   n
   7?
   H-
   rt

-------
  I
  M
  -J
W
rt
0)
a.
o
p-
rt
Ml

O
h|
fa O
tn c;
rt
0>
                 DECEMBER  1979 INSTALLED CAPITAL ($1,000)
  o
  rt
  w
K -
0>
0> S
ft Cu

Cd rt
O (D
h1-
M O
fl> PJ
h( [n
en -
a.
o
o
rt
H-
O
3
M-
D
W
cn
rt
0)
o
       CO
       H
       m

       CD
       >
       CO

       ~n
       r~
       o
         o
         O
         O
         CO
         o
H-
rt
                               T3-A

-------
                                          V-22
c.
Fans	Each system is assumed to require both a process-waste-gas and combustion
air fan.  Various pressure-head requirements were assumed to match system require-
ments, such as increased pressure drop caused by incorporation of the heat recovery
device.  The cost data source is a tabulation of equipment purchase costs by
Richardson Engineering Co.16  The installed costs shown were obtained by apply-
ing installation factors as described above.

Stacks	Purchase and erection cost data were obtained from one thermal oxidizer
vendor and used as the basis for estimating the installed costs.
C.   ANNUAL COSTS
     Annual costs for various operating conditions are presented in Appendix B.   These
     costs were the basis for all the cost-effectiveness graphs included in the  report.
     The basis used in calculating these annual costs is defined in Table V-2.   It
     is necessary to fix the annual cost parameters so that costs developed in
     this report are consistent with costs developed by IT Enviroscience for
     other control devices.  The cost methodology is well documented and annual
     costs can be adjusted for future increases.

                             Table V-2.  Annual Cost Parameters

      Operating factor                                       8760 hr/yr*
      Operating labor                                        $15/man-hour
      Fixed costs
        Maintenance  labor plus materials, 6%
        Capital recovery, 18%b                               29% installed capital
        Taxes, insurances, administrative charges,  5%
      Utilities
        Electric power                                       $0.03/kWh
        Natural  gas                                          $2.00/million Btu
      Heat recovery  credit  (equals natural  gas)              $2.00/million Btu

       Process downtime is normally expected to range from 5 to 15%.   If the hourly
        rate remains  constant,  the annual production and annual VOC emissions will be
        correspondingly reduced.   Control devices will usually  operate on the same
        cycle as the  process.  From the standpoint of cost-effectiveness calculations,
        the error introduced by assuming continuous operation is negligible.
       bBased on 10-year life and 12% interest.

-------
   250
        HEAT CONTENT
        (BTU/SCF)
                 10
                 13
                 20
NET ANNUAL COSTS, NO HEAT RECOVERY
TEMPERATURE: 1400°F
RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
                                                                                                  i
                                                                                                 N)
                                                                                                 U>
UJ   —0 —
    -50
                 500     1000                5000    10,000

                              WASTE GAS FLOW RATE (SCFM)
                               50,000  100,000
      Fig.  V-18.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizers Using
       No Heat Recovery,  1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec  Residence Time, and
                          Heat Contents from  1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
250
    HEAT CONTENT
              1
                                   NET  ANNUAL COSTS, NO HEAT RECOVERY
                                   TEMPERATURE: 1400°F
                                   RESIDENCE TIME: 075 SEC
-50
             500    1000              5000    10,000
                        WASTE GAS FLOW RATE (SCFM)
                                                                 50,000  100,000

-------
    250
        HEAT CONTENT
                                          NET ANNUAL COSTS, NO HEAT RECOVERY
                                          TEMPERATURE: 1600 °F
                                          RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
                                                                                                    <

                                                                                                    tn
    -50
                  500     1000               5000   10,000
                             WASTE  GAS FLOW  RATE (SCFM)
50,000   100,000
Fig.  V-20.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for  Thermal Oxidizers  Using No Heat Recovery,
  1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec Residence Time, and Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
250
                                      NET ANNUAL COSTS, NO HEAT RECOVERY
                                      TEMPERATURE: 1600 °F
                                      RESIDENCE TIME: 0.75 SEC
  -50
               500
                                 50,000  100,000





Flow Rate  for Thermal Oxidizers Using No Heat  Recovery,
                _    .  	   , __ .	 .e	«™ 1  4~ f^ RH  TH- n /cri'F
1000               5000   10,000

   WASTE  GAS  FLOW RATE (SCFM)

-------
   250
   200
u_
u
CO
g  150


§
CO

cr
o  100
to
o
CJ

^  50
LJ
o
^4o
o
  CO
    1

   -50
     HEAT CONTENT
     (BTU/SCF)
                 1
                10
                13
                20
                                 NET ANNUAL COSTS, 50% RECUPERATIVE HEAT RECOVERY
                                 TEMPERATURE: 1400 °F
                                 RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
                 500
                                            5000    10,000

                           WASTE GAS FLOW  RATE (SCFM)
                                                                     50,000   100,000
      Fig.  V-22.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate  for Thermal Oxidizers  Using

    Recuperative Heat Recovery,  1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec Residence Time,
                         and Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

-------
   250
u_  200
O
CO
CO
cr
O
CO
O
O
    150
    100
     50
   CO
   O
      0
   CO

    -50
        HEAT CONTENT
        BTU/SCF)
                   1
              -I—Mill	1     I    I   I  T~
NET ANNUAL COSTS, 50% RECUPERATIVE HEAT RECOVERY
TEMPERATURE: 1400 °F
RESIDENCE TIME: 0.75 SEC
                                                                    <
                                                                    oo
                  500     1000                5000    10,000
                            WASTE GAS FLOW  RATE  (SCFM)
                                          50,000   100,000
        Fig  V-23   Net Annual Costs vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer Using
    Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.75 sec Residence Time and
                             Heat Contents from 1 to 20  Btu/scf

-------
   250
U.
O
CO
200
O

p  150

CO

cr
O

h-  100
CO
O
o
     50
 < H
   CO
 h- O
 UJ JrL
   CO
      0
    -50
 1

10
13
20
                             	_!	!—r  ,  |  |Tn	1     i    r—r-r-r

                              NET ANNUAL COSTS, 50%  RECUPERATIVE HEAT RECOVERY

                              TEMPERATURE: 1600 °F
                              RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
          HEAT CONTENT
          (BTU/SCF)
                                                                                               <

                                                                                               to
                  500     1000                5000   10,000

                            WASTE  GAS  FLOW  RATE (SCFM)
                                                                      50,000  100,000
   Fig. V-24.  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas  Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer Using

 Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec  Residence Time and

                        Heat Contents from  1 to 20 Btu/scf

-------
   250
                               NET ANNUAL COSTS, 50% RECUPERATIVE HEAT RECOVERY
                               TEMPERATURE: 1600 °F
                               RESIDENCE  TIME:  0.75 SEC
          HEAT CONTENT
          (BTU/SCF)
                                                                                                 LO
                                                                                                 o
     -50
                  500     1000                5000    10,000
                             WASTE GAS FLOW  RATE (SCFM)
50,000   100,000
     Fig V-25.  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas  Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer Using
Recuperative Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion  Temperature, 0.75 sec Residence Time and
                         Heat Contents from 1 to 20 Btu/scf

-------
o
   250
   200
 = 150
<
CO
cr
o
CO
o
o
   100
3   50
§   n
h- o
uj o
   CO
     •0
   -50
       HEAT  CONTENT
       (BTU/SCF)
                   1
                                       NET ANNUAL COSTS, WASTE HEAT BOILER
                                          (250 PSI STEAM)
                                       TEMPERATURE: 1400 °F
                                       RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
                                                                                                      <
                                                                                                      u>
                 500     1000                5000    10,000
                           WASTE  GAS FLOW RATE  (SCFM)
                                                                        50,000   100,000
          Fig. V-26.  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer Using
       Waste Heat Boiler, 1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5 sec Residence Time, and Heat
                                Contents from 1 to  50 Btu/scf

-------
250
     HEAT
      CONTENT
     (BTU/SCF)
  -50
              NET ANNUAL COSTS, WASTE  HEAT BOILER
                (250 Pol STEAM)
              TEMPERATURE: 1400°F
              RESIDENCE TIME:  0.75 SEC
                                                                                             <
                                                                                             to
               500
10QO               5000    10,000
    WASTE  GAS FLOW  RATE  (SCFM)
50,000   100,000
          v-27.  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer Using
          Heat Boiler,  1400°F Combustion Temperature, 0.75 sec Residence Tzme, and
                        Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
250
                                     NET  ANNUAL. COSTS, WASTE HEAT BOILER
                                        50 PSI STEAM)
                                         PERATURE: 1600°F
                                         DENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC
HEAT
 CONTENT  3
;BTU/SCF)  20
 -50
                                                                                               I
                                                                                               w
                                                                                               co
              500     1000               5000    10,000

                          WASTE  GAS FLOW  RATE  (SCFM)
                                                               50,000  100,000
     Fig. V-28.  Net Annual  Cost vs Waste  Gas Flow Rate  for Thermal Oxidizer Using
    Waste Heat Boiler, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5  sec Residence  Time, and
                         Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
250
                                     NET ANNUAL COSTS, WASTE HEAT BOILER
    HEAT        1
     CONTENT  10
    BTU/SCF)   13
                (250 PSI STEAM)
               TEMPERATURE: 1600 °F
                                     RESIDENCE TIME: 0.75 SEC
                                                                                               <
                                                                                               UJ
              500
1000               5000    10,000
     WASTE GAS FLOW  RATE (SCFM)
                                                                    50,000   100,000
     Fig  V-29  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate  for Thermal Oxidizer Using
    Waste Heat"Boiler, 1600°F Combustion Temperature,  0.75 sec Residence Time, and
                         Heat Contents from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
250
200
 150
 100
— 0
 -50
NET ANN
(250 PS
HEAT CC
TEMPER/
- RESIDEN
k
N?


UAL C(
>i STE/
NTENT
\TURE:
CE TIF

^
\

DSTS,
\M)
- 10
1875
vIE: C

^>
s
NO
0 B
0 F
).5S

^=
^
HE
TU/
5EC

sa=
^
AT
'S(
/5


==
=5:
c
R
;F
M[


=
]
EC
)(


•••.
— *.
:c
3.

r
"MM
——•
VERY AND V
75 SEC

slO HEAT RE
J 	 075 SE
=:=====
0.5 SEC
WASTE HEAT BOI
(250 PSI STEA
^laTSSEC
) 5 S^=:=:=:=::==
^ASTE


:COVER
C
LER
M)
===
HEAT


Y
i
= • —
=r 	
BC



-

ILE





R












. 1






                                                                                                 U)
                                                                                                 Cn
               500     1000               5000   10,000

                           WASTE GAS  FLOW  RATE  (SCFM)
50,000   100,000
      Fig. V-30.  Net Annual Cost vs Waste Gas Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer with

        No Heat Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler; Heat Content = 100 Btu/scf

-------
300
                           NET ANNUAL COSTS, NO HEAT RECOVERY AND WASTE HEAT BOILER
                            (250 PS1 STEAM)
                           HEAT CONTENT-200 BTU/SCF
                           TEMPERATURE: 2200° F
                           RESIDENCE TIME: 0.5 SEC AND 0.75 SEC
                                                    NO HEAT RECOVERY
                                                    '  I 0.75 SEC
                                                  WASTE HEAT BOILER
                                                   1(250 PSI STEAM)
                                                     U 0,75 SEC
                                                                                                        <
                                                                                                        U)
-300
                500     1POO                5,000     10,000
                            WASTE  GAS  FLOW RATE  (SCFM)
                                                          50,000   100,000
  Fig. V-31.
Net Annual Cost  vs Waste Flow Rate for Thermal Oxidizer with No Heat Recovery and
        with a Waste Heat Boiler; Heat Content = 200 Btu/scf

-------
                                           V-37
     Figures V-18 through V-31 present the annual cost of thermal oxidation for various
     cases.

D.   COST EFFECTIVENESS AND ENERGY EFFECTIVENESS
     The cost effectiveness and energy effectiveness are calculated by dividing the
     annual cost for a particular option (Appendix B) or the fuel usage (in Btu/yr) by
     the total annual amount of VOC destroyed, with the destruction efficiencies assumed
     as given in Table II-2.  Changes in these values with changes in destruction effi-
     ciencies owing to specific applications different from the conservative design used
     in this report are small.

     The cost effectiveness is presented in Table V-3 and the energy effectiveness is pre-
     sented in Table V-4.  Cost-effectiveness graphs are shown as a function of destruc-
     tion efficiency in Figs. V-32 through V-34.  Data on cases not shown in the above-
     mentioned tables and figures can be easily developed by use of Appendix B.

E.   OTHER IMPACTS
     Other than costs and energy consumption, other impacts of thermal oxidation
     must be related to the flue gas and the components it emits to the environment.
     A typical analysis of the flue gas with the emission ratio (Ib of component/
     1000  scf of waste gas) is given in Table V-5.

-------
                                                    V-38
                  Table V-3.   Cost Effectiveness  of Thermal  Oxidation
Cost Effectiveness ($ per Ib of VOC Destroyed)
90* VOC Destruction
Waste
Waste Gas Gas
Heat Flow
Content Rate
1 700
5,000
50,000
100,000
10 700
5,000
50,000
100,000
13 700
5,000
50,000
100,000
20 700
5,000
50,000
100,000
SO 700
5,000
50,000
100,000

100 500

5,000

50,000
100,000

200 500

5,000

50,000
vex:
Destroyed
(lb/hr)C
at 90%
2.59
18.5
184.9
369.7
25.9
184.9
1,849
3,697
33.6
240.3
2,403
4,806
51.8
369.7
3,697
7,394
129.4
924.3
9,243
18,486

e






e




VOC
Destroyed
(lb/hr)C
at 99%
2. 84
20.3
203.3
4O6.7
28.4
203.3
2,033
4,066
37.0
264.3
2,643
5,287
57.0
406.7
4,067
8,134
142.4
1,017
10,170
20,340

203.4

2,034

20,340
40,670

406. 7

4,067

40,670
Case I
No Heat
Recovery
S6.39
2.83
2.29
2.25
0.546
0.253
0.199
0.195
0.459
0.187
0.145
0.142
0.284
0.109
0.0821
0.0801
0.0944
0.0232
0.0123
0.0115













Case 11-50
50% Recu-
perative
Heat
Recovery
S6.35
2.00
1.26
1.20
0.534
0.159
0.0849
0.0794
0.452
0.114
0.0568
0.0527
0.284
0.0648
0.0277
0.0250
d
















Case III-250
Waste Heat
Boiler
250 psi
Steam
56.61
2.01
1.25
1.19
0.566
0.170
0.0950
0.0888
0.476
0.123
0.0651
0.0603
0.295
0.0679
0.0303
0.0272
0.0988
0.0067
(0.0084)
(0.0096)












	
b
99% VOC Destruction
Case I
No Heat
Recovery
$6.43
3.19
2.67
2.63
0.615
0.291
0.239
0.235
0.463
0.217
0.177
0.174
0.288
0.130
0.104
0.102
0.108
0.0334
0.0232
0.0223
0.0572

0.0123

0.0069

0.0065
0.0326

O.OOB2

0.0054

Case 11-50
50% Recu-
perative
Heat
Recovery
$6.07
2.01
1.32
1.28
D.575
0.169
0.100
0.096
0.435
0.122
0.0693
0.0662
0.266
0.0635
0.0341
0.0321
d



f






f





Case I1I-2SO
Waste Heat
Boiler
250 psi
Steam
$6.31
2.08
1.35
1.28
0.603
0.180
0.107
0.100
0.454
0.132
0.0754
0.0702
0.282
0.0747
0.0381
0.0347
0.105
0.0113
(0.0033)
(0.0046)
0.0601

(0.0057)

(0.0143)


0.0211

(0.0011)

(O.O162)

aAssuraes 1400'F combustion temperature and 0.5-sec residence time.except
bAssumes 1600'F combustion temperature and 0.5-sec residence time except
CVOC molecular weight, 50; molar heat of combustion, 730,250 Btu/lb-mole
d50% recuperative heat recovery is not applicable to heat contents of  50
Sl600°F combustion temperature assumes only  99% efficiency case.
Recuperative heat recovery is not applicable to temperatures >1600°F.
where otherwise noted.
of VOC.
Btu/scf.

-------
Table V-4.   Fuel Energy  Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation


FV
Waste Gas
Heat Content 90%
_Q3tu/scf)a D.egH!
1 63
10 54
13 51


(Btu/sc

.5
.2
.0
20 43.6
50 12-0
100
200
_ 	 — 	 "
ascf of waste gas.
Based on waste heat
C14008F and 0.5-sec
d!600°F and 0.5-sec
e>1600°F and 0.5-sec
^99% VOC destruction



b

99% vOCd 90% VOCC 99% VOCd
struction Destruction Destruction^
82.3 26.3 30.6
73.0 17.0 ^i-J
69.9 13-8 18.2
62.5 6-37 10'8
31.1 (25.2) (20.6)
13. 2e f (68.4)
in'< f (163.4)

	 . 	 	 	 . 	 — — 	 	
Energy Effectiveness (Btu/lb of VOC Destroyed)
	 — 	 , 	 — 	 — ' "
~~~' " c 99% VOC Destruction
90% VOC Destruction _ 	 	 	 	 	 	 ~™

P T Waste Heat Boiler Case I
Y 400-psi Steam No Hpat Recovery _
927 400 384,100 1,202,000
79,200 24,800 106,600
57,300 15,500 ™,500
31,800 4,700 45,600
3,500 (7,400) 9-100
f f 1 , 900
f 1,500

Case III-400
Waste Heat Boiler
400 psi-Stcam
446,900
31,100
20,400
7,900
(6,000)
(10,000)
(11,900)

boiler generating 400-psi steam.
residence
residence
residence
time .
time .
time .






only at >1600"F and 0.5-sec residence time.

-------
Q
LLJ

O
cr
h-
co
LJ
O

O
O
CO
CO
LJ
2
LJ
O
LJ
U_
U_
 co
 O
 O
f.(J

6.0
50
40
3.0
2 0
1 r\
i






f ~ ~ *~T ' '


HMMW

„ 	 _ 	 . 	




- NO HEAT
- 250 psi \A

___ 	 : 	 — 	 	 —

700 SCFM OFFGAS FLOW — ^

RECOVERX
/ASTE HE A"

	 — 	 —
50,000 J
|

/
r BOILER

.
sCFM OFFC




.
>AS FLOW-

sr



	 I
I


CONDITIONS
RESIDENCE
VOC MOL/
73C
VOC MOLf
••.I-—- j '••
T
~ ,

: TIME: O.J
\R HEAT C
),250 Btu/l
OCULAR W
	 • 	 — •


5 SEC.
'ONTENT:
b MOLE
rIGHT: 50
_... ~"







•


                                                                                                    4i>
                                                                                                    O
  90       91        92       93       94       95      96

                         VOC DESTRUCTION EFFICIENCY (%)


Pig.  V-32.   Cost Effectiveness vs VOC Destruction Efficiency for Waste Gases with
                             1  Btu/scf  Heat Content
                                                                                    99

-------
0.7
               NO HEAT RECOVERY
                                                                10 BTU/SCF
ft •"

.R
:A
*" ™ " '*" i , -— - -^ ^*~

y
T BOILER




_— 	 —



CONDITION
RESIDENC
VOC MOL
73(
VOC MOL
E TIME-. 0.
l\R HEAT C
3,250 Btu/
ECULAR WE

13 BTU/SCF

K err
ONTENT:
Ib MOLE
IGHT: 50




                                                                 20 BTU/SCF
                                                                                                   f
                                                                  50 BTU/SCF,
                              93      94       95       96
                           VOC DESTRUCTION  EFFICIENCY  (%)
97
                                                                         98
                 99
   Fia  V-33   cost Effectiveness vs VOC Destruction Efficiency for Thermal Oxidizer with
 No ieit Recovery and with a Waste Heat Boiler, Heat Contents = Between 1 and 50  Btu/scf and
                               Waste Gas Flows = 700 scfm

-------
0.25
             NO HEAT RECOVERY
             250 psi WASTE  HEAT BOILER
                                              CONDITIONS
                                                                    730,250 B,u/,b MOLE
                                              VOC MOLECULARWEIGHT^O
 -0.05
93      94       95       96       97
 VOC DESTRUCTION  EFFICIENCY (%)
                                                                       98
                                                                                99
                                                         100
           .M.  COS,
                                     VOC
                                                     Ucienc,
                                                                                                 f

-------
                                      V-43
         Table V-5.  Typical Thermal Oxidizer Flue Gas Composition

                                                        Emission Ratio
     	Component	Composition   (lb/1000 scf of Waste Gas)
     C02a                            4.0 vol %              2.2
     H20a                           10.0 vol %             12.2
                                    82.9 vol %             65.1
       a
     02                              3.0 vol %              2.1
     VOC and CH4b                    500 - 50 ppm     0.0022 - 0.0002
     Carbon monoxide0                 10-6 ppm       0.001 - 0.0005
     Particulates0 (as carbon)        30-3 ppm       0.001 - 0.0001
     Sulfur oxides0 (as S02)           <1 ppm        0.00005 - 0.00001
     Nitrogen oxides (as N02)C       160 - 30 ppm       0.02 - 0.004

     Calculated from thermal oxidizer heat and material balance for a low-
      to moderate-heat-content waste gas.
      Calculated for 90 and 99% total VOC destruction efficiency.
     °Calculated from natural combustion emission factors for industrial
      boilers reported in AP-42, Supplement 7 (ref. 12).  Variations relate
      to variations in factors reported and/or variations in fuel usage for
      low- to moderate-heat-content waste gases.

Carbon monoxide, particulates, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxide emissions are
small if these agents form in similar quantities to that reported for industrial
gas boilers.12  This assumption may be adequate since the fuel burner region
approximates the fuel burners in boilers.  This, however, has not been demon-
strated with experimental data.  As cautioned in AP-42,  these values are sensi-
tive to burner upsets and may increase by several orders of magnitude in a poorly
designed or operated unit.  Increases in these compounds may be caused by waste
gases containing high levels of halogens, sulfur, or nitrogen containing VOC
compounds.

This study does not quantitatively assess the relationship between the VOC destruc-
tion efficiency and the impacts of the components emitted after thermal oxidation.
However, qualitative trends do exist.  For instance, a higher VOC destruction
efficiency means a high combustion temperature (or a longer residence time).  A
higher combustion temperature may increase nitrogen oxides to an unacceptable
level.  However, increased temperatures with adequate oxygen should decrease
any particulate formation if it is carbonaceous in nature.

-------
                                     VI-1
                          VI.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Thermal oxidation is a widely used control technique for VOC emissions.  The
limits and design principles of this technique are evaluated in this report.

Design criterion and design procedures are presented that allow for a prelimi-
nary thermal oxidizer design.  Thermal oxidizers without heat recovery and with
five levels of recuperative and waste-heat steam boiler heat recovery are con-
sidered.  Capital and operating costs are developed, and the annual cost of
thermal oxidation is calculated as functions of the characteristics of the waste
gas.  Cost effectiveness and energy effectiveness of 90 and 99% VOC destruction
efficiencies are developed.

The conclusions derived from the cost evaluation are as follows:

1.   Since the thermal oxidizer design used here is quite conservative, the
     cost-related parameters actually experienced in industry are expected to
     impose a lesser economic hardship than is presented.
2.   The waste gas heat content is a highly sensitive variable in determining
     annual costs, cost effectiveness, and energy effectiveness.  In general,
     as the heat content increases, the annual costs, cost effectiveness, and
     the energy effectiveness decrease.  This leads to the general statement
     that waste gases with higher heat contents (same flow) cost less to control
     than those with lower heat contents.
3.   The waste gas flow rate is a highly sensitive variable in determining annual
     costs and cost effectiveness.  Energy effectiveness is independent of the
     flow rate.  As the waste gas flow increases (at a constant heat content),
     the annual costs increase but the annual cost per scfm of waste gas, the
     cost/feed flow ratio, decreases.  This ratio decreases drastically between
     low flows (700 scfm) and moderate flows (5000 scfm), but remains relatively
     constant between moderate (5000 scfm) to large flows (50 to 100,000 scfm).
     The increase of waste gas flow favorably decreases the cost effectiveness
     of control much like the annual cost/feed flow ratio noted above.  Energy
     effectiveness is constant with flow.
4.   Annual net costs of control decrease as the level of heat recovery increases
     for the same waste gas.

-------
                                VI-2
The annual cost of systems using no heat recovery is normally higher than
that for systems using maximum heat recovery.  This may not apply to waste
gases with low flow rates (700 scfm).
The differences in annual costs (all heat contents and flows) between recupera-
tive heat recovery at 70% and waste heat boilers generating steam at 250
and 400 psi are small.  The waste heat boiler case (250 psi) may be considered
to have the lowest possible annual cost for a given heat constant and flow
rate.
Residence time increases of from 0.5 to 0.75 sec have little effect on the
annual costs or cost effectiveness, and no effect on the energy effective-
ness.  Lower combustion temperatures, however, reduce the quantity of energy
recoverable from the system.
Increasing the VOC destruction efficiency from 90 to 99% by  raising the
combustion temperature increases the cost effectiveness and  energy effective-
ness  for  all cases except the cost  effectiveness of low flow waste gas
with  maximum heat  recovery used.  Social costs are not considered.
Increasing the VOC destruction efficiency through  increased  residence time
may be more cost  effective and energy effective  than increasing  the effi-
ciencies  by increasing the combustion temperatures.

-------
                                          VII-1
                                     VII.   REFERENCES*

1.   Personal communication between F.  D'Avanzo,  Combustion Engineering Air  Preheater,
     Atlanta, GA,  and J.  W. Blackburn and  J.  R.  Fordyce,  IT Enviroscience,
     Feb.  23, 1979.

2.   Personal communication between J.  Kirkland,  Hirt Combustion Co.,  Montebello,  CA,
     and J.  W. Blackburn  and J.  R.  Fordyce,  IT Enviroscience,  Mar.  29,  1979.

3.   Personal communication between Messers  Irrgang and Andreacola,  Trane Thermal,
     Conshohoctan, PA, and J.  W.  Blackburn and J.  R.  Fordyce,  IT Enviroscience,
     Feb.  28, 1979.

4.   Personal communication between J.  Hagan and P.  Capsis, Peabody Engineering,
     Stamford, CT, and J. W. Blackburn and J.  R.  Fordyce,  IT Enviroscience,  Mar.  1,
     1979.

5.   R. D. Ross, "Incineration of Solvent-Air Mixtures,"  Chemical Engineering Progress
     68(8),  59—64 (August 1972).

6.   R. H. Barnes, A. A.  Putnam,  and R. E. Barrett,  Battelle Columbus  Laboratories,
     Columbus, Ohio,  Topical Report on Chemical Aspects of Afterburner Systems (EPA
     Contract No.  68-02-2629)  (August 1978).

7.   K. Lee, H. J. James, and D.  C. Macauley,  "Thermal Oxidation Kinetics of Selected
     Organic Compounds,"  presented at the  71st Meeting of the Air Pollution  Control
     Association,  Houston, Texas, June 25—30, 1978.

8.   K. Lee, J. L. Hanson, and D. C. Macauley, Predictive Model of the Time-Temperature
     Requirements  for Thermal Destruction  of Dilute Organic Vapors,  Union Carbide
     Corporation,  Chemicals and Plastics Division, Research and Development  Depart-
     ment, P.O. Box 8361, South Charleston,  WV.

9.   V. Kalcevic,  IT Enviroscience, letter to D.  R.  Patrick, EPA, May  4, 1979.

10.  J. Cudahy, IT Enviroscience, Trip Report	Process and Thermal Oxidation
     Consultation  During  MRI Sampling of Union Carbide Corp.,  Acrolein and Acrylic
     Acid Process  Fume Incinerator, Taft,  LA,  Aug. 20, 1979 (on file at EPA,  ESED,
     Research Triangle Park, NC).

11.  Draft EPA memo on Incinerator Efficiency, May,  1980.

12.  T. Lahre, "Fuel Oil  Combustion," pp.  1.3-1—1.3-5, and "Natural Gas Combustion,"
     pp. 1.4-1—1.4-3 in  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, 3d ed.,  AP-42,
     Part A  (August 1977).

13.  Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 49th ed.,  pp. D-184—188, Chemical Rubber
     Co., Cleveland,  1968.

14.  R. C. Reid, J. M. Prausnitz, and T. K.  Sherwood, The Properties of Liquids  and
     Gases,  3d ed., McGraw-Hill,  New York, 1977.

15.  D. M. Himmelblau, Basic Principles and Calculations  in Chemical Engineering,
     2d ed., pp. 444—447, Prentice Hall,  New Jersey, 1967.

-------
                                          VII-2
16   M  L  Kinley and R.  B.  Neveril,  CARD  Inc.,  Capital  and Operating  Costs  of  Selected
     Air Pollution Control Systems,  EPA-450/3-76-014  (May  1976).

17.  The Richardson Rapid System,  Richardson Engineering Services,  Inc.,  Box 370,
     Solana Beach, CA, 92075.
*When a reference number is used at the end of a paragraph or on ^heading,
 it usually refers to the entire paragraph or material under the heading
       however  an additional reference is required for only a certain
       hen   owever  an a
      of the paragraph or captioned material,  the earlier reference number may not
      apply to that particular portion.

-------
                  APPENDIX A

PURCHASE COSTS FOR THERMAL OXIDATION COMBUSTION
    CHAMBERS, RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGERS,
            AND WASTE HEAT BOILERS

-------
                     DECEMBER  1979  BUDGET  PURCHASE COST  ($1,000
0)
ro

n
o
Bl
rt
en

HI
O
1-3

Sf
hi

0)
o
X
p-
rt
H-
O
n

i
tr
c
tn
ft
p-
o
3
n
tr
(D
H
en
                                  C-V

-------
   1,500
   1,000
o
o
v>
in
o
o
ui
 O
 cc

 0.


 UI
 o
 o
 3
 CD
 0)
 h-
 05
 CC
 UJ
 CQ

 UJ
 O
 ui
 Q
     100
         200
              1,000                                     10'00°

                     RECUPERATIVE  HEAT  EXCHANGER  AREA  (FT2)


Fig. A-2.  Purchase Costs for Thermal Oxidation Recuperative Heat Exchangers
                                                                                                                     100,000

-------
o
o
700
O
O

UJ
 o
 DC
 UJ
 O
 CQ

 O
 t*-
 OJ
 oc
 UJ
 CD

 UJ
 O
 UJ
 O
                      400  PSIG STEAM
                                             — 250 PSJG  STEAM
 100
                         10
                                                      50
                                                             100
                                                                                              500
                    ,HEAT RECOVERY BOILER  CAPACITY   (1,000 LBS/HR OF STEAM
             iq. A-3.  Purchase Costs for Thermal Oxidation Waste Heat Boilers
       Fig

-------
   APPENDIX B
ANNUAL COST DATA

-------
OFF GAS  HEAT CONTENT 	!	BTU/SCF
RESIDENCE TIME Q.-?  SEC.

COMB, TEMP 	L4PQ. _'F
                                                                                                                        w
                                                                                                                         I
                                                                                                                        00

-------
OFF GAS  HEAT CONTENT —
RESIDENCE  TIME  0.7$ SEC.
COMB, TEMP  	LJAOQ-'F
                               .BTU/SCP
                                                                                                                           w

-------
OFF GAS  HE/ST CONTENT    lO ..BTU/SCF.

RESIDENCE TIME O.5  5EC.

COMB, T£MP  J40Q  _'F
CASE
I
MO VJ PAT
RECOVERY
TL-30
3O% HEAT
RECOVERY
.TJ.-50
SO V. HEAT
RECOVERY
IT- TO
1O 7. HEAT
P-EOOVeRY
HUGO
WA5 i E HT.
BOILER
STM.
UJ-250
WASTE HT
BOILER.
STM.


3PF GAS
FLOW
SCFM j
CAPITAL
COST
MOOO
700 1 ^ 7-3
_SQQQ 	
-5COOO .
OOOOO
>00
_5OOO
sooccL
loocoo'

_SOOO_
100000

_50QO
_5Dooa
100 mo
7oo
scco
_50Oaa_
100 COC
7oo
.5CQQ.,_
-rrm
03CCC


359
1/05
18)0 j
3)3
477
1 4«o <
7*493
333
£27
l?6o
3V oo
33?
£13
38oo
5 133
339
£3S
1 1 "54
"38O2
3l£
5o4
l94o
, -abog


OPE
FIXED COSTS
79
/o4
320
5Q5
9/
137
42?
733
"7

5^8
Og/
?g
178 1
8)3
IHS?
?s*
l££
6^6
/I03
Q |i
111 /
i \f)
o v ^3
95?


•RATING CC
UTILITIES
4)
089
"3t879
57^6
^"2
15^
1528
3055
I/
79
7go
15 fco
^~
3/
?>/ •}
f "\ U
(^ « "
H 1
a^o
*^ O Q ^
» o / /
57?^
41

"9i89>
579.5


STS-OR- CRC
MANPOWER
^1000
19
••
' ••
• •
Q-3.

••
« 1
^7
•
«.
• •
3^
-.
•.
V 1
3£
»,
».
iDIT
RECOVERY
CREDIT
* IQOO
. 	 .
.,
	
. — .
- 	 .
. 	 .
--
	 .
. 	
- —
	 	 .
—
. —
— ,
— .
	 	
^(§
194
)95<8
3915
M
«•
••
«


18
'^6
!•?£«
3915


NET
NNUALI1ED
CO5T-OR.-
,. SAVINGS
' IODO '
13% .
H 10
32)t
6.39?
135
2>/3
J979
?>«oo
135
-^58
1375
3.573
I 3^
IN 1
I! 6 &
11 45
IH7
"3«
"3^75



c
c
^
c
c
(_
(-
c
^
c
c
c
c
c
c
r
c
c
c
c
c
c
(
c


NET COST OR
SAVING PER SCFM
*?/^)CFM c/5
197.)

6-4,3
63.o
1 92,9
£3,&
if, 6
38,0
1 93.9
Bl.t,
3>.£
iS.7
193,9
4?.7i
3i.l
i).5
3)ao
57.3
3J.8
3O.3
^64,3
55.3
3o,8
^§.§


c
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
r
c
c
c
c
r
c
c
c
c.
c,
c.
c
c


                                                                                                                        CO
                                                                                                                         I
                                                                                                                        tn

-------
               OFF GAS  HEM CONTENT
                RESIDENCE TIME 
-------
               OFF GAS  HEKT CONTENT —
                RESIDENCE TIME! Q»j2_ 5EC.
                COMB. TEMP
                                             .BTU/SCF.
                                                                                               NET COST OR
                                                                                               SAVING  PER9CFM
    NET
ANNUf\LllED
COST - OR-
   . SAVINGS
   ' \COO  '
                     OPERATING C05T5-OR- CREDIT
CAPITAL
 COST
         OFF GA5
          FLOV\
                                                                    ECOVERV
                                                                    CREDIT
                                                                     IQOO
NO MEAT
RECOVERY
RECOVERY I—5OCO —

            'OOOQ_
 5O
 RECOVERY
 HO7. MEAT
 P.ECOVERV
 WASTE HT,
   BOILER
    IH-25O
   WASTE
   BOILER
                                                         W

                                                         -J

-------
OFF GAS HEAT CONTENT
RESIDENCE  TIME O./J 5EC.
        TEMP  _ VHPQ-'F
                              BTU/SCF.
                                                                                                                 w
                                                                                                                 00

-------
OFF GAS HEAT CONTENT _^LGLBTU/5CF

RESIDENCE TIME. _O.£_SEC.
TOMB, TEMP \%OQ_'F
0
CA5 E
i
X
NO HEAT -
; RECOVERY _
FF GAS
CLOW
SCFM
700
CAPITAL '! OPERATING CO
COST ,
FIXED COSTS ! UTILITIES
J 1 ^ i i
?IOOO i ICOO ! MOOO
^7-i ! >? ~! 2>2 ^
STS-OR- CRE
MANPOWER
'fiooo
19
^OQQ__ 3^? I )04 332
_5COQO_-
ooroo
IX-30 >00
3O% MEAT
RECOVERY -
^ '
.TT.-50 i
5O '/. HEATj
RECOVERY!
IT-7O
1O7. WEAT
RECOVERY
in-^oo
I WASTE HT,
BOILER
3CQPSI.
STM.
ELT-250
WASTE HT
BOILER
S i M.


srm
_soooci '
ICDOOO
700
__soco__
Uo^ i 32o 232)
l«lo 5^5 464-3
313 i, 9/ 14 ^2

)4ee> : 42^ [ 945 - i
I ! i 1
•x \\ £j «ji ' / " ^ "x i / O Q Q **
•^ -i "i ! o y ' r* *^ "s
52> i 153 3o
)96o I! 56ff 3 02
*t
i ' 1
**k Ij *i j. I Cf {p ^ f f^ F 1 1

— •- ' • n
j
1
__LCOOOO


7oo 33? 99 i 32 "2>6>
^rra
sr-om
ICOOOC
i
j-^-
iccico:


539 156 134
2|^W 6/6 ^340
5 "bSos Uo3 46§/
*»
OIT
RECOVERY
CREDIT
* 1000
• — .
—


	
NJET
ANNUALIZED
COST - OR-
, SAYINGS
' IOOO ' c
1-^9
?i£4
265^
'/s1
^
cl
C
NET COST OK
5AVING PER SCFM
194,3 c
70,6 C
53.2 c
5/85 C SJ.9 \c
1 i>
	 2 53 I
— 1 3 96
	 . 4j_ -2.^,33
— 1 29
— 2)0
— 897
— 1 6 1 8
ili
c
)«;.v c
•5o,6 c
27,9 C

C 18^,3 c
c
C i
c
i JiO C
17,? c
) 6.3 c
i

i ' |


39
196
138


c
33o c
t. 1 £> £"G 1 ^^ *V U
1 i CJ 75 I Cx ^ T
391^
3i^ 9V 32
5o¥ 146 234
1910 563 "2340
i "b3. j C
H6,o c
20.> c
c 19-0 c
c
c
c
^.£ c


                                                                                                              w
                                                                                                              I

-------
               OFFGAS HEAT CONTENT
               RESIDENCE  TIME Q3$. 5EC.
               COMB,  TEMP    IHOO.-F
                                      "OPERATING  COSTS-OR- CREDIT
                                                                       NET
                                                                   ftNNUALIZED
                                                                    COST- OR-
                                                                      . SAVINGS
                                                                      '
MET COST OP>
SAVING PER9CPM
                  CAPITAL
                   COST
                                                                  ECOVERV
                                                                  CREDIT
                                                                   IOOO
   I
   HEAT
RECOVERY
  XL-30
30% HEAT
RECOVERY
_3COO_

 .sooocL

  IOOOOO
  .3X-5O
   •/.
RECOVERY
 V/A5TE HT.
   BOILER
    LTI-25O
  WASTE HT
   BOILER
                                                                                                                               W

                                                                                                                               H
                                                                                                                               O

-------
OFF GAS HEKT CONTENT _5LS_BTL)/SCF

RESIDENCE  TIME O.J SEC.

COMB,  TEMP    >46O	«F
C
CASE
X
RECOVERY _
TJ.-30
30% HEAT |
RECOVERY
.01:50
SO '/. HEAT
RECOVERY
«***
TX-70
~7O 7. MEAT
RECOVERY
m^oo
WA5TE HT.
BOILER
4OOPSI.
STM.
WASTE H7
BOILER
pcopsi
S t KA.


)FF GAS
PLOW
SCFM
7OC
_SDQO 	
_5COOO
IOOOOO
700
—5CQO

IOOOOO
_5OOQ_
EOCOO
inonco
>00

5OOOO

>oo
sooo
_5com
ICO OOC
7cx>
_5CZ30
\^rm
_JCD_CCC


CA P 1 TA L
COST
i
MOOO
^>Q
~~\for
18/0












33?
53 «g
-2)3 4
3 3 803
335"
Soy
I iHo
, -J30g


OPE
FIXED COSTS
>?
loH
3?o
S^S









•RATING DC
UTILITIES
*IOOO
/o
66
660
13 2o









"



156
6/6
1103
! 9V
IV6
5^3
95?




/O
69
£?9
135?


STS-OR- ORE
MANPOWER
19
•-
••
••












36
\i
:DIT
RECOVERY
CREDIT
* IOOO
• —
—
—
—












-39
\cf(.
1 ?5g
'bllS
Tig
«.
«,
••


\cl(.
116*
1>9I£


MET
ANNUALI1ED
COST - OR-
. SAVINGS
f IOOO (
/c>7 .
139
**
1H )>
!!^
5V
680
is 6;


;4
c
c
c
c












c
c
S
S
c
c
5
S


NET COST OR
SAVING PER SCF
\6?,el
7>>,4
Qo.o
18,^












!&£,>
12,8
13.5"
14. >
'io, o
lo.g
13,4
15,6
-M
C
c
c
—










c
c
S
S
c
c
£
5


                                                                                                                 CO
                                                                                                                  I

-------
               OFF GAS HEM" CONTENT _j£O_BTU/SCF
               RESIDENCE TIMEO/75_SEC.
               COMB,  TEMP  .	Ut
— 	 	 1
CAS E

r x
OFF GAS
FLOW

SCFM
*7Ga
CAPITAL
COST ','

MOOO 	
~i>o
                                       OPERATING  COSTS-OR- CREDIT
                                                     MANPOWER
RECOVERY
 CREDIT
  1000
    NET
ftNNUALHED
COST - OR-
    SAYINGS
    IOCO  '
                             MET  COST OR
                             SAVING PER
  XL-3D
30% MEAT
RECOVERY
  m-too
 WASTE HT.
  BOILER
   HI-2SO
  WASTE H7
   BOILER

-------
n
t-i

CQ

-------
  Oi-F &A5  HF/YT CONTENT	'	BTU/SCF
  WC^ilDENCfi TIMC •_?-.. SEC,
  COlvAB, TE_M P _J.Cg-Q-Q-._'_F	
     'cApTrALl           OPERATING CGSTS-OR- CREDIT

     CCX3T   II  Fi*ED COSTS  UTi'JTlCS MANPOWER   RECOVERY  jlcO5r-OK-
     ?,
      I OOP  _i
                           4
                                             'TIOGO
                              CRfiDIT
                               IOOC
                                         ?
::.:"r|.-'»-l-
                             35
     	52_3j	/_52^__:_... 2S8
        567
_/??__.   .-is...  ;	

IJ67^1_ |_./J.710_	
                                                   c!
                                                          75 ^9   ic1!
                                                                    !l"
                                                                   c I
                                            /5Z
                                                                    /5Z
                                                                    365
      I 15.7


      '2.17.1.

      .63,7
ci;    2/7. /
til. ".  73.0
        352
                                                      .!!_^Z/2_fJi_
                                                                   ci
                                                          2//.V
                                                          6/.Z
        u-.roi.^^^- __A62g_
        Vf,o    	^49	lol_...

                            9)3
VOQ _
iL.L'LUJ
          331
                            Ji?35.
                              6 a
i C;
 c.

i c i
i c
I
 c
 c

! ^ I
i C

 c. \

   I
 c i

 c i


 c

 c '•
                                               •^717
                                           IS 7o
                                                5435
      .35.0
      1 lOf D


      'SJ.'M
                                                           76,4
                                                           5o.^
                                                           47.5
                                                                                          c

                                                                                          c
                                                                                          c

-------
OFF GAS  VIE/VT  CONTENT _L
RESIDENCE T!M£ O_JL_SEC,
I-OMB,  TEMP _
.BTU/SCF
t
\
i , i III M
U.-JG
.j. i-.. ME AT
v*
1 LO V. HEAT
HIICOVERY
'If -70
I ' '.L/J/ERV
i 111 -1OO
Iwv-M-t HT.
HCilL!;R
' ' ''..I'M.
HI-2SO
'//.,'TE HT
I ,lLf:R
/'• ji >'


(.LtJV'V
SCFM
?OQ
SDGQ
SCO 00
i oo mo
7oo
_. bOCO

u^rv-D
7 oo
_hOOD
I CO CCO
7oo
r^r
icomo

scco
smm
ICO CCC
70Q
_5CQQ
s-mn



C A P I TA L
COST
MOOO
^"77
399
I bo?
^L\ 37 i
OPERATING CC
P XED COSTS j UTILITIES
^ICOO MQOO
9o
113
380
6,20
3/«? I 93
^76 ' /38
A 676
2.733
343
537
/,?9S
SjQ^I
313
592.
2,^6O
S.I87
35o
t!3
Tlt3ff
) 4465
335"
5 So
34 l>
j 4133


46&
Sf
387
3869
7736
5T5-OR- CRC
MANPOWER
19
1 i
••
,,
27 i 33
207
V
^,c6V
810 V./27
79
JSt,

LOU
^
172.

1)50^
\ol
179
7^1
1 1395
97
It?
7oJ
1199


17
1/8
1,182.
2,365
$
37
372.
7H3

389
3S99
7778
IS
2)89
388?
7779


Tk7
..
••
>•
•*>-$


^
2)6
..
IDIT
RECOVERY
CREDIT
^ 1000
, - — ,
	
	
— •
NET
ANNUALI1ED
CO5T - OR-
. SAVIMG5
' IOCO '
153.
5)8
4256
2374
— • i 1^
	 ! 3(*~7
i| '
	 . || ^/ Q^Cf
. 	 .
	 	
	 	
	 	
'•
•
. 	
	
	

c
c
c
c
c
c
MET CO5T OR
SAVING PER SO
3)8.6
103, /
95,/
83, >
205.7
73.^
5/,4
il.b
IH-3 c 2.oi3
301
1.768
3,13>2>
i
i
60.2-
35. 8
i
C« [ *~f~i *-^*
1 /36 C
7J\\
1.233
227*1.
39 )5V
373
3717
1 5435
33/
j !?<;?
367V
38 ISO
••
-



^73
•»!>
54^


i
I'j/of
3577
1
P
c
r
i
c
£
c
c
c
c


•M
c_
.£.
t
c
_£L
_C.
C

.t_
C
/?V.3 c
W.2.
2^.7
22.8
j 320, £>
^6,3
2>9,Y
3^, >
3 14,3
	 ^ u -\
t
C
r
c
c
_£_
r
3S.3 Ic
"J>^9 1 c


i
s
Ul
]

-------
      OFT-- G A5  HE AT ~COMTE.NT _JJQ_ BTU/SCF
      ur-..biDr:NCE TIMC 7_.~""
      Cni.AU, TFMP -^ —-	.		
„,  (^5|  CA^TA^ii            OPERATING
 ,-L(,W  |   COST
                                                                                                                              w
                                                                                                                              I

-------
                               10
    orFGAS  HEM" COUTENT _L2-
    RE5iDENCE TIME D..i 5EC.
                                              ..BTU/SCF
                                                    COSTS-OR- CREDIT
                                                                                   NET
                                                                    COST - oa-
                                                                         SAYINGS
                                                                       '  IOOO
                                                                                     we r COST OR
                                                                                     SAVING
                                                                   RECOVERY
                                                                    CREDIT
                                                                      IOOO
FIX.ED COSTS I UTILITIES
   I
NO HEM
RECOVERY
   XL-30
 3O% MEAT i
 RECOVERY |_5CCO —
  TOV. MEAT
  P.ECOVERV
_scoa.- I	2 I.

V/ASTEHT,
BOILER


ICC
_5Q
_^Q
o
	
                                                                                                                                       I
                                                                                                                                      \-*
                                                                                                                                      
-------
          HEAT CCniTEtNT  _1
                   L?A  SEC.
.BTU/SCF
RESIDENCE  TIME,^	
COMB. TEMP  _!GlQ-g
                                                                                                                               td

-------
KE5IC^NCE'~TIME: QnS. 5HC,
rnv,,AK TFN/1P \CpOO ,°F
OFF £A5 T
F LO W I
(_ A i £
j SCFM
'API TAL
COST
MOOO
OPE
FIXED COSTS
x L?po ^77 i So
t 1C) HEAT — '•* -
>', E£COV E.R Y 	 SOOQ
CO CX3O
JI':M -7GO
. ov, MEAT
RECOVERY _500O...
I SCQod
-„"'!'" 1 icof)co
TifO ^o<2
LO r. HEAT"
HECGVERY — SQOQ -
! IT. 70 -^QQ
!( )",'. HEAT - -• •
1 ' 1- COV E R Y i=i-v-v-\
j]^ _5OOOO
''"' ICQCXJQ
Til -ICO
Y/V/i E HT, — ^Q --
HOI t E R SncO
'VOP5I.
ICP CDC
! 'II- n"vO >oo
i/i/Of;5.L L ,3Q2CQ.
ii^r"> rpr


130? ,
113

6*0
3/9 ! y 3

I3B
Wl>
2,7?3 [ ^/<5 ^
/W7
3,3V
/
3£p
^4-iJ
4 4 6-f
33i"
59o
^4 1}
HI3}


<5^
&(o
ST^
J0JI




lot

7i/
1^9J"
*??
) 69
7o/
1199


RATING CO
JTILITIE5
46
333
^•&J4
6<^33
12
~i%/
2571
7

£0Cf
I.2I&

,
^ t

Lj ^
i to
-534
333>
6,^5
46
334.
33 3 >
66 75^


STS-OR- CRE
MANPOWER
"fiooo
19
••
..
\\
^•^
,,
.,
..
7l7
..
V 1
-




"66
1 1
D1T
RFCOVERY
CREDIT
? IOOO
— .
—
- —
—
- —
— -
—
—
— -
— -
	
— •




3«
' ^7-a
i "2OI7
5435
3"?
••
' » I
•<


^73
1717
5 43S



NIET
COST- oa-
. SAY ING 5
f ICOO
IHM •
463
b 7)4
7^7) 1
J33*-
23$.
L7
S7.&>
36.0
3^,±^
1*90.0
£A£f ^2
jFty**?
2Q3>
^f^9 £j




^o7. 1
55.^
i S,3
"2i5 7
"^01,4
53.3
i>. J
i4,^


C
c
c
c
c
c
c
^
c
c
\—
_
>-— ——
c
c:
c
C
C
C
c


tx)

-------
OFF GAS  HEAT CONTENT __?
RESIDENCE TIME  *JA SEC.
                               .BTU/SCF
0
CASE
j_
NO HEAT h
RECOVERY!
TX-30
3O% MEAT j
RECOVERY -
»•<*** \
.TL50 [
SO % HEAT
RECOVERY
TX-70
-7O 7. HEAT
RECOVERY
m^ioo
WA5TE WT.
BOILER
4OQPSI.
STM.
m-2so
WASTE HT
BOILER,
25OP5!


PF GAS
FLOW
SCFM
7oo

50000.
1 OO COO
^7/y>
^SOOOQ.
ICOOOO

_soco_
irnocG
*>/V)



CA P 1 TA L
COST
Nooo
OPE
FIXED COSTS
3S4 93
439
)£ i
321
523

34&
£&7
2311
4./Se>



"
-
O M rt
^ OO 1 v * /
SOOO_ ££•£

[CO OCX
"7O O
_5COO
_JCO_CCt


3oo?
3 5 1 Hi^
33/
C 31
•I ?OO
U <5 1 ~\
-i ~ o I J
•4 	 : 	

\1S
49/
9 /)
?5
/5Z
57?

/OO
Ibq
£71
1,209



\ 	
lo/
I9o
873
1493
96
)<2o
81^
I39J


RATING CO
UTILITIES
*!OOO
46
33^
T>3)6
C-633
17
12$
&/
2,371
7
61
6tf
l.-i-lQ




46
334
33 2>>
667^"
46
334

£675


STS-OR- CRE
MANPOWER
'hooo
IS
>.
M
<•
^^
•>
"
•>
^7
..
V,
"




DIT
RECOVERY
CREDIT
* IOOO
-— -
• 	
• 	
	
	 	
	
	 .
	 	
	 	
	 	
	
	




3^ 1 iS

•O17
5HB^
56
M
*»
"


173
i 7l >
6 42>£


NET
WNUA.LI1ED
COST - OR-
. SAVIMGS
f IOOO
146
4-75
38'i5
~?H 6$
&<+
303
1, £>?2
3,585
I31
252
A3/^
2,-V^? 1
Vs
C
C
c
C
C
c
c
c
c
c




1 H^
•a««
) 6 39
1>69
I 4o
^73
1469
7>t7/


L

C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c


slET COST OR
SAVING PER 9CF
309-6
94.9
76.5"
71*,}
11 /-1
£<9.6
37.8
^t£~ C3
/ ^? / ^J
Sb.o,6
37.)
IdO.O
5V,^
39,4
36,7
| c
c:
c
c
c
c



                                                                                                                           I
                                                                                                                           NJ
                                                                                                                           O

-------
OFF GAS  HEAT CONTENT _3_CL_BTU/SCF

RESIDENCE TIME D*}£ 5EC,

COMB,  TTMP  J-lfc
OFF GAS
CASE j
1 SCFM
I
NO HEM" r
RECOVLRY|_
IX- 30
RECOVERY
7oo__._ _
3OQQ. _
too coo

5COO
inorrr)
20 % MEATj ~- "
RECOVERY __SOCO__
1 r^T immn
H-7O
•70% HEAT
RECOVERY
WA5TE HT.
BOILER
4COPSI,
STW.
m- 200
WASTE HT
BOILER
oTM


~^-
1 r"f — 'QOQ
^O O
i_5COOO
ICO OCX

5CQO
__5OOCQ.


CAPITAL i! OPERATING CO
COST
; r i x F D cos r s i UTILITIES
_" J.3p.? |
So
113
390
"T6>

1 1
1
1

_ . . _ 	 	 - t
35o
GI3

3 44 (^
'b'bS
58o
^4 l>
, Hl3i



i
I
ST5-OR- CR!
\AANPOWER
19
— " —
EDIT
RFCOVERY
CREDIT
? IOOO


	 , |
	 .
— -
i. —



1
I
	

- - 	

Jo/
1-78

\^9S
\ °I1
i ) 69
7o7
1199


I
i

^
\C,q


	

(


KIET
WNUALI1ED
COST- OR-
, SAV1MGS
5 IOOO j%
1 -a^. £
"^78
^ 0^^
3 97o

- 	
C
^f;

—
1

i


-


i
. _ . . . 4 - . - -. _ —
i
[
34 ; b9 j 1^3
^"7^
J/^JS i» ^^|7
3374 >. 543S"
-aH
/ X* O'
* (p t
)&% >
33 74


39
1 W 1
••

••


^71 >
54 2)5


111
^- ;

	
_C
Q o 3 £
7 3o
1 ' 7
i Jo/
"^73
97i7

£
C
c
S


MET COST OR
SAVING PER SCPr/
174,3 C
57,4 C
41,3 C
3^,> C

i
	 j...


i
i
!
	 : .

— 'iaiH
4,7 s
7.3 £
| 	 Ijo.o c
^o.^ c
^.? ^
8.V :


                                                                                                                                  w
                                                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                                                  K)

-------
fNI
CN

-------
                OFF&/XS  HEM- CONTEST JfiS- BTU/SCF
                 RESIDENCE TIME,  .-i^  5EC.
                 COMB                 — °F
                                                                          ir. ICOO
                                                                         SAVIN
                    CAPITAL
                     COST
                                                                         RFCOVHRV
                                                                          CREDIT
                                                                            IOOO
PIKED COSTS
   TJ.-30
30'i MEAT
RECOVERY
   IL--O
 O '/.
 RECOVERY
   IT'70
 1OV. HEAT
 WASTE WT
   BOILCR
  V/A5TE HT.
   BOILER
                                                                                                               w
                                                                                                               I

-------
               OFFGA5 HEfsT CONTENT IOO«BTU/SCF
               RESIDENCE  TIME  JS. SEC.
               COMB.  "TEMP  -Lgjy^—°F
CASE
   •^      5OO
O HEM"  ---3-  -
R ECOVERY ISOQQ	

          .5.QOOO_
          I OO COO,
                                     r          ^^		
                                     "OPERATING COSTS-OR- CREDIT
   TJ.-30
30% MEAT
RECOVERY
 :.f
   .^l
 XL- 50
 i '/. H EAT
ECOVERY


 ,^
r»\
   IT-70
  OV. MEAT
 P.ECOv'ERV
 WASTE HT,
   BOILCR
 '"(OOP, -
    STM.
  WA5TEHT,
   BOILER

•

1CO.CCCL


t0y /y


                                                                                                                               tt)
                                                                                                                                I
                                                                                                                               tvJ

-------
OFFGrx5  HE/XT CONTENT ££5_BTU/SCF
 RF^lDIiMCE TIME  .."57 SEC.
rnk/\R. TEVIP -^°° °F 	 	 It-
0
CASE
I
MO HEM' -
RECOVERY _

TX-30
30% MEAT
RECOVERY
5O '/. H EAT
RECOVERY
*****
,•> \
IT- 10
~]O'l. HEAT
*"lv
^yA'
in -100
WASTE HT,
BOILER
OOOPSI.
STM.
ni-zsc
WASTE H
BOILER


~F GAS c
TLOVV
SCPM

5CO
3CXDQ 	
50000 „
oo coo
_5OO 	


SCO
_50CQ
_5CCCO
_sooo._

«--
Isoocci
_ c__ .
' 	 SCO
~*

•APITAL
COST
MOOO
jiV
:Si :

— 	 ~

* ~

	 . 	 —
	 _




—
_rfo">
ll $0
C r^"(


•
<5<~te
	 	 *?-j—x—
Y-l


OPE
FIXED CO5TS L
£1
-[%~ ~~ '
""__

BATING ^CO=
JTILITIES
^1000
u 	
1 1 2.Q


_J



*



. ._


i i ^2
[ \ V
34-2
	 r-

—
\l^>
3U
((* (l2













17.

Mll
—
i^-
in




,T5-OR- CREDIT
0
\ANPOWER RECOVERY
CREDIT
TIOOO * 1000
,__i 	 	
" i? LT: 	 1.
'"fl
• -
" ---
t



"__4_—
I 	


_J 	



___iu_—
30



^0
45"^
B>L f^^l
. 	 . ' —
3r. ^(,
3£r
	 ^j^



^Q
iS"?!




^.IET
NNUr\LllED
1O5T- OR-
SAVING5
' ICTX3 C/5
\_\(P C
J2<^3 <:-
1^09 C
—











\
$0
3,^^
_£S~fC-
• — "
75 .
3*
£~IL i.
.. - 	 —
- --


SWING ^c^ ^:PM
/ — v ' j , r-
-i^L^
S'-^yS"
3^S.^-
	
?"*
C
c

	 1 "





_

1
	 —
i ; j|-
5 	 '^lo

—


-
,5
i c
t
1
1
K)
Ul
i
> \

-------
 ,r F G A5  l !E/«-V C.O! 11 F.r IT .-PP- BTU/SCP
RESIDENCE  TIN/IF  -~7S" CiF.C.
                               F
"" 1°
CASE
I
NO HCM
RECQVLRY
RECOVERY
--iil_l
uro
ro % M EAT
RECOVERY
V*
TT-7O
"TO"'. WE AT
,-M.A
-/J'f
rEMoo
WASTE HT.
BOILCR
OCDP5V
i STM.
rn-25o
WASTE W
BOILER


LUK
-F GAS~1 C
SCFM

i oo cno
_5CCO .__
5CXTOO
lrO O^O
_H03 	
	 5CCO —
_£CCCO_
	 ICQCGW-
	 5CQ 	
Lsoco.
1 *~~"
^"^"Y") CO
ir-f) rTT"

r,
ir-r-i rr~c


IAP1TAL i
COST i
MOOO 1
3)3
OPERATING CO
IX.F.D C051S I UTILITIES ^
*- ' i
JICO3 ! MOOO
91
._3i.3i.__ i| 	 ^S" 	
i;
i

	
u
113
	 \ [ 2-<1

	

r
i



j




^ i

4JI

6'f5's
3 "~

I|J^
/ ^fl^.
"] '



112
2j£.
•201^
—
(f 1

I C *-^~ /











	 |2
in
im

(2.
in
1111



3T5-OR- CRE
AAN POWER
rioOO
\?
I1?


— 	 	









3c^
DIT
RECOVERY 1
CREDIT
* IOOO
—
—
—


j








Of
^0 12?
J>(-
—
1_^55L
3C- ^^
?^
51-
—


3 ^ i
rt ^~tf ~l
—
	
MT r
1HI HJAlJlfiD
COST- nn.-
,'V\v If K-i 5
* i(_x"O Vs
po C
325" 1C
- - Ha C

	 	 	



.




	
34 (
"2 *T 1 *
-s-SU
"7?
=?Cr3
5-$-^
—
	
t IF I CO5T Ol'.
i fAVIl K5 PER 'rCF '•'
A / , r _
/ — '*- '•
1
2 3 in
. 
-------
                                         2-i
                                     REPORT 2
                             CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION
                           THERMAL OXIDATION SUPPLEMENT
                        (VOC CONTAINING HALOGENS OR SULFUR)

                                  H. S. Basdekis

                                 IT Enviroscience
                             9041 Executive Park Drive
                            Knoxville, Tennessee  37923
                                   Prepared for
                    Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                   Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                          ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                      Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
                                   November  1980
D80K

-------
                                        2-iii


                                CONTENTS OF REPORT 2

                                                                           Page

  I.   INTRODUCTION                                                           1-1

II.    THERMAL OXIDIZER AND SCRUBBER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS                   II-l
      A.   High-Temperature Thermal Oxidation                                II-l
      B.   Flue-Gas Scrubbing for HC1 and S02 Removal                         II-4
      C.   Heat Recovery                                                     II-6

III.   BASIS FOR THERMAL OXIDIZER AND SCRUBBER DESIGN                        III-l
      A.   Indentification of Sensitive Variables for  Cost and Energy       III-l
      B.   Procedure Used for Designing a Thermal Oxidizer System with      III-5
          a Scrubber

 IV.   CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLING THERMAL OXIDATION CONTROL EQUIPMENT     IV-1

  V.   COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF THERMAL OXIDIZERS WITH SCRUBBERS            V-l
      A.   Cost Basis                                                         V-l
      B.   Capital Costs                                                      V-3
      C.   Annual Costs                                                       V-15
      D.   Cost Effectiveness and Energy Effectiveness                        V-30

 VI.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                               VI-1

VII.   REFERENCES                                                           VII-1
                                APPENDICES OF REPORT 2

      A.  ANNUAL COST DATA FOR SULFUR-CONTAINING VOC CONTROL

      B.  ANNUAL COST DATA FOR HALOGEN-CONTAINING VOC CONTROL

-------
                                          2-v
                                 TABLES OF REPORT 2
Number


III-l   VOC Heats of Combustion                                            III-4


III-2   Ratio of Combustion Air to Waste-Gas Flow Rate vs Combustion       111-12
        Temperature


  V-l   Factors Used for Estimating Total Installed Costs                    V-2


  V-2   Annual Cost Parameters                                               V-16


  V-3   Cost Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation and Scrubbing for            V-31
        Control of Sulfur-Containing VOC


  V-4   Cost Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation and Scrubbing for            V-32
        Control of Halogen-Containing VOC


  V-5   Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation for Control of        V-33
        Sulfur-Containing VOC


  V-6   Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation for Control of        V-34
        Halogen-Containing VOC

-------
                                        2-vii
                                 FIGURES OF REPORT 2
Number
  1-1   Process Flowsheet for Thermal Oxidation with a Flue-Gas Scrubber     1-3
 II-l   C12/HC1 Equilibrium Constant as a Function of Temperature           II-3
 II-2   Temperature vs Fuel Usage for a Waste Gas at a Heat Content of      II-5
        1 Btu/scf with 3 mole % 02 in the Flue Gas
III-l   Relationship Between Waste-Gas Heat Content, VOC composition,       III-3
        and VOC Molar Heat of Combustion
III-2   Supplementary Fuel Usage vs Waste-Gas Heat Content                 III-6
III-3   Ratio of Thermal Oxidizer Flue-Gas Flow to Waste-Gas Flow vs       III-8
        Waste-Gas Heat Content
III-4   Relationship Between Actual Flow Rates and Flue-Gas Temperature    III-9
III-5   Flue-Gas Heat Content                                              111-10
III-6   Maximum Heat Recovery from a Waste-Heat Boiler                     111-13
III-7   Ratio of Waste-Heat Boiler Heat Exchange Surface to Flue-Gas       111-14
        Flow vs Flue-Gas Temperature
III-8   Ratio of Quenched to Unquenched Flue-Gas Flow Rate vs Flue-Gas     111-16
        Temperature
III-9   Makeup Water Usage Rate for Quenching Chamber                      111-17
  V-l   Installed Capital Cost of the Scrubber Including Quench Chamber      V-4
  V-2   Installed Capital Cost of Thermal Oxidizer at 1800 and 2200°F         V-5
        Including Incinerator, Two Blowers, Ducts,  and Stack
  V-3   Installed Capital Cost of Thermal Oxidizer at 2600 and 3000°F,       V-6
        Including Incinerator, Two Blowers, Ducts,  and Stack
  V-4   Installed Capital Cost for Waste-Heat Boilers at 250 psi and         V-7
        1800, 2200, 2600, and 3000°F Combustion Temperatures
  V-5   Installed Capital Cost for Waste-Heat Boilers at 400 psi and         V-8
        1800, 2200, 2600, and 3000°F Combustion Temperatures
  V-6   Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems           V-9
        with a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 1400°F
  V-7   Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-10
        a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 1600°F
  V-8   Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-ll
        a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 1800°F
  V-9   Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with      V-12
        a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 2200°F

-------
                                         2-ix
                                 FIGURES (Continued)
Number
  V-10  Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with    V-13
        a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 2600°F
  V-ll  Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with    V-14
        a Scrubber at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec,  a Combustion
        Temperature of 3000°F

  V-12  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with      V-17
        a Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion,  0.5-sec
        Residence Time

  V-13  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with       V-18
        a Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 1400°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time
  V-14  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with       V-19
        a Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion
        Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-15  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with       V-20
        a Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-16  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a      V-21
        Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 1800°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time
  V-17  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a      V-22
        Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 1800°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time.

  V-18  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a      V-23
        Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 2200°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time
  V-19  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a      V-24
        Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 2200°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-20  Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizer with a      V-25
        Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 2600°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-21  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a    V-26
        Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 2600°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-22  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a    V-27
        Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 3000°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

-------
                                        2-xi



                                 FIGURES (Continued)


Number                                                                     Page


  V-23  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a    V-28
        Scrubber Using Heat Recovery, 3000°F Combustion Temperature,
        0.5-sec Residence Time

  V-24  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with      V-29
        a Scrubber Using No Heat Recovery, 0.5-sec Residence Time,
        Heat Content of 1 Btu/scf,  and a Combustion Temperature of
        1400°F to 3000°F

-------
                                    1-1
                             I.   INTRODUCTION

This report is a supplement to the control device evaluation report for thermal
oxidation* authored by J. W. Blackburn, July 1980, and describes the control
technology and costs for two additional cases.  In the first case conventional
thermal oxidation is used (combustion temperature of 1200 to 1600°F) but, due
to the presence of sulfur-containing VOC in the waste gas, flue-gas scrubbing
is required for removal of S02-   The second case is for control of halogen-con-
taining VOC In the waste, which requires high-temperature thermal oxidation
(combustion temperatures of 1800 to 3000°F) and flue-gas scrubbing.  The flue-gas
scrubber design is assumed to be similar in each application and to be an
additional cost.  The cost of the conventional thermal oxidizers for the first
case is assumed to be the same as that given in the control-device evaluation
report for thermal oxidation whereas a new set of cost data was developed for
the thermal oxidizers in the second case, which also included the cost for a
waste-heat steam-generation boiler.

Conventional thermal oxidation units for VOC control of non-sulfur-containing
and non-halogen-containing compounds normally have combustion chambers with
temperatures of 1400 or 1600°F for low-heat-content gases and temperatures in
the 2200°F range for high-heat-content (100 Btu/scf) gases.  The heat content
is a measure of how much heat is generated by the gas during combustion and is
determined by the VOC concentration and its heat of combustion.  The heat
content and the waste-gas flow determine the combustion chamber design and
auxiliary fuel usage.  The flue-gas exhaust is usually vented to the atmosphere
through a stack without further treatment, although heat recovery units such as
recuperative heaters or waste-heat steam-generation boilers are installed when
there is an economic incentive.   The technical analysis of conventional thermal
oxidizers is included in the thermal oxidation report.1*

Waste gases containing sulfur or halogen compounds require flue-gas scrubbing
after thermal oxidation to remove the noxious gases that are formed during
combustion.  The flue-gas exhaust from the combustion chamber is first sent
into a water quench chamber to be cooled to its adiabatic saturation
*See References, Sect. VII.

-------
                                     1-2
temperature and is then routed through the scrubber to remove  the  noxious
gases.   After the flue gas goes through the scrubber,  it is vented to the
atmosphere through a stack.  Waste-heat recovery units can be  installed before
the water quench chamber when heat recovery is desired.  Figure 1-1 is a flow
diagram of a typical thermal oxidation control device with a scrubber.

Thermal oxidation control of sulfur-containing VOC can be achieved with the
thermal oxidation design procedure discussed in the thermal oxidation report
for  non-sulfur-containing  and non-halogen-containing VOC control, except that a
quench chamber and  scrubber must be provided to remove  the noxious gases produced
during combustion.   In  this report the design and  cost  of  the  quench  chamber
and  scrubber unit are  given,  together with operating  costs associated with  the
control  of sulfur-containing  VOC.  The thermal  oxidation  system costs were
obtained from  the control device  evaluation report for thermal oxidation.

Thermal  oxidation control of halogen-containing VOC requires  high-temperature
 oxidation to convert the combustion  product to a form that can most easily be
 removed by scrubbing.  For instance,  chloride-containing waste gases are
 burned at high temperature to convert the chlorine to HCl instead of to C12,
 since HCl is more easily scrubbed.  In this report the design and cost of
 thermal oxidation systems for combustion  temperatures of 1800 to 3000°F are
 presented,  along with  the design and cost of the quench chamber and  scrubber
 required  in this temperature range.   The  waste-heat steam-generation boiler costs
 for high-temperature  thermal oxidation are also included.  The cost  of  a thermal
 oxidizer  and waste-heat  steam-generation  boiler for  a  combustion  temperature of
 1800 and  2200°F is  obtained  from  in  the  control device evaluation report for thermal
 oxidation.

 The heat content range of the waste  gas  used in this report  is  1 to 100 Btu/scf.
  For waste gases with heat contents  of less than 100 Btu/scf,  supplementary fuel
  must be added to maintain a combustion temperature above 2200°F.  Gases with
  heat contents above 100 Btu/scf were not considered since most sulfur-containing
  and halogen-containing compounds will not have a higher heat content unless a
  very high  concentration  is achieved.  Heat contents of 13 and 20 Btu/scf  in air
  normally correspond  for  most compounds to 25 and 40%  of  the  lower explosive
   limits  (LEL).   Waste  gases with heat contents of 20  to  50 Btu/scf  (approxi-
   mately 40  to  100% of the LEL) must  be diluted with  air  or be enriched with

-------
                                                                        VENTED TO
                                                                        ATMOSPHERE
MAKEUP WATER

WASTE GAS ^
FUEL COMBUSTIO!
* CHAMBER
AIR %

t
HEAT
\1
(optional 1
RASE Q
NEUTRALIZER "
1
QUENCH
CHAMBER
i r

1
SUMP

	 *

^
t
SCRUBBER






A

L
5~* STACK

WATER

                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    OJ
Fig.
1-1.   Process Flowsheet for Thermal Oxidation with  a  Flue-Gas Scrubber

-------
                                   1-4
auxiliary fuel because they exceed the flammable safety limits imposed by
insurance companies.

Conventional thermal oxidizers range in size from a unit capable of controlling
several hundred scfm of waste gas to single or multiple units controlling waste
gases in excess of 100,000 scfm.  For high-temperature (>2600°F) thermal
oxidation units an upper size limit of ~50,QOO scfm was considered to be reasonable
for this report since no 100,000-scfm units are known to exist.  The upper size
limit for the scrubber design used in this report is also 50,000 scfm.  Multiple
scrubbers would be required for greater flows.

-------
                                   II-l
         II.   THERMAL OXIDIZER AND SCRUBBER DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

The first report on thermal oxidation discussed the effects that the combustion
chamber residence time and temperature have on the design for thermal oxidizers
in the range of 1200 to 2200°F.  In this temperature range the residence time
and temperature affect the destruction efficiency of the VOC.  The temperature
also affects the auxiliary heat required for flame stability, the method used for
heat recovery, and the capital and operating costs of the system.  For control
of sulfur-containing VOC the same considerations and design criteria for thermal
oxidizers hold true except that a scrubber is used after the combustion chamber
to control S02 emissions.

The design considerations and assumptions used in this report are that halogen-
containing VOC are controlled by high-temperature thermal oxidation, that a
scrubbing system is used for high-temperature and conventional systems with
noxious flue gases, and that consideration must be given to heat recovery for
conventional and high-temperature systems.

HIGH-TEMPERATURE THERMAL OXIDATION
For the control of halogenated VOC a higher temperature is required to convert
the noxious combustion products to a more easily removed form.  The halogen-
containing VOC most commonly encountered is the chlorinated VOC, which is the
basis of the discussion and economics in this report.  Bromine-containing VOC
are more difficult to control  due to the more severe conditions required to
convert Br2 to HBr.  Fluorine-containing VOC are more difficult to control due
to the high corrosiveness of HF; however, high-temperatures are not required.

A combustion chamber temperature of above 1800°F for a well-designed oxidizer with
a proper residence time will have essentially 99.9% VOC destruction efficiency.2'3
The residence  time in the combustion chamber is a design variable specified by
the system designer.  The combustion chamber is a chemical reactor, and the
residence time  is  the time  available for  the reaction  (oxidation) to occur.
Residence times  as  low  as 0.3  sec  to several seconds have been  utilized in
thermal  oxidizer designs.   The fraction of  the  total chamber  volume  that  is  at
the combustion temperature  depends on  the  chamber  configuration and  the design
of the  flame  burner.

-------
                                   II-2
Although a design engineer should be quite concerned with the actual burner
design and residence time at the combustion temperature, in this control-device
evaluation study it is assumed that the entire combustion chamber volume is at
the combustion temperature.  This assumption is justified since later it is
shown that differences as high as 50% in residence time do not significantly
affect the annual cost of thermal oxidation control; however, the capital cost
is affected.

The need of going to a higher combustion temperature for chlorinated compounds
is best shown by the relationship of the reaction of C12 and water.4  Figure II-l
shows the effect of combustion temperature on the equilibrium constant for the
following reaction:

                    C12 + H20 ^     > 2HC1 + HO 2

The equilibrium constant (K ) indicates the relative concentration of C12 and
HC1 in the exhaust gas from the combustion chamber by the equation

                         K  = (HC1)2 (02)**
                          p   (C12) (H20)
The higher the value of K ,  the more HC1 will be formed, which is easier to
remove from the exhaust gas than Cl2.  At low temperatures (<2000°F) the equilib-
rium constant decreases rapidly, indicating that the C12 concentration in the
exhaust will increase appreciably.  To achieve an acceptable low C12 concentration
in the flue gas, temperatures of above 1800°F are necessary.  Another way to
increase the conversion of C12  to HCl is to inject steam into the combustion
chamber to force the equilibrium toward HCl.  The actual flue-gas concentration
of C12 will not directly follow the value indicated by Fig. II-l since the
kinetics of the reaction may prevent equilibrium from being achieved in the
residence time available.5  The reverse reaction may occur as the combustion
products are cooled.  The reverse reaction can be minimized by very rapid
cooling but this may prevent effective heat recovery.5  Selection of the
appropriate combustion temperature requires optimization of the operating costs
with the capital cost involved  for the conversion.  An optimum design will
differ for different chlorinated  feeds.  In this report it  is assumed that  the

-------
                              II-3
      200
      100-
    C
    (0
    •+-•
    en
    C
    o
    O


    £
    U
    k.
    J3

    '5
    IT
    Ul
10-
                          1800
                            2200
2600
3000
3400
                                                                       3600
                              Temperature
Fig. II-l.  Cl /HC1 Equilibrium Constant as a Function  of Temperature
               for  the  Reaction Cl
                                     2HC1
       1/20,

-------
                                        II-4
    VOC  in  the waste gas  is  100% halogenated.  When  the halogen-containing VOC  is
    actually  a small percentage of the VOC in the waste gas, the optimum combustion
    temperature will differ.

    For  thermal incinerators above 2200°F special designs and materials are  required
    to ensure proper operation and prevent corrosion.  The upper temperature range
    required  for  thermal  oxidation of halogenated organics approaches  the maximum
    achievable flame temperature of  the  fuel.  The high demand  for  auxiliary fuel
    required  to maintain  high combustion-chamber temperatures is further aggravated
    by  the  large  amounts  of  the combustion air that  must also be heated to  these
    temperatures.   For some  fuels 3000°F is  considered to be the maximum achievable
    thermal oxidation  combustion temperature.  Even  though no thermal  oxidizers
    operating at  3000°F combustion temperature are known to exist,  the vendors
    state that thermal oxidizers can be  built  to operate at a combustion tempera-
     ture of 3000°F,  Figure  II-2 shows  the effect  that temperature  has on  auxiliary
     fuel usage.   Above 2600°F  each additional  increase in  temperature  requires
     substantially larger amounts of  auxiliary  fuel.

B.   FLUE-GAS SCRUBBING FOR HC1 AND  S02  REMOVAL
     The most common method used for  removal  of both  HC1  and S02 is  scrubbing.  Many
     different equipment configurations  and various scrubbing agents are  employed.
     The key to efficient scrubbing is  to establish good  contact between  the gas and
     the liquid to effect complete  interphase diffusion.   The  other factors affecting
     scrubbing efficiency are the temperature,  pH,  and alkalinity of the  scrubbing
     agent.

     The flue-gas scrubbing  operation involves three basic steps: quenching of  the
     flue gas, contacting the flue gas with the scrubbing agent, and separating the
     scrubbed material  from  the scrubbing agent.   Quenching of  the  flue gas will
     reduce the temperature  of the flue  gas and saturate it with water.  Some of the
     S02 or HC1 will be removed from the flue gas during the quenching operation.
     The configuration arid operation of  the  flue-gas scrubbing-agent contacting
     equipment will determine the efficiency of the  S02 and HCl removal from the
     flue  gas.  The method used to separate  the SO2  or HCl from the scrubbing agent
     will  determine the final disposal of the  sulfur and chlorine compounds.  The
     methods  used range from purging the scrubbing agent and discharging it to  the
      sewer to recovery of the  scrubbing  agent  for  reuse.

-------
                               II-5
    2000
    1000'_
  ra
  O)
  a>

  in
  o
  tn
  &
  O)
  re
  ^
  Li.
     100
       10 i

        1000
    1400     1300      2200


               Temperature
2600
                                         3000
3400
Fin.
Ttraperatiiro  vs  Fuel Usage for  a Waste Gas at a Heat  Content

 of 1 Btu/scf with  3  mole
                                         O,  in the Flue Gas

-------
                                        II-6
     The efficiency achieved for S02  removal  by scrubbing is  in the  90% range.   It
     is very difficult to achieve higher removal efficiencies for  this  compound.
     However,  HCl is relatively easy  to remove  from flue  gases by  scrubbing and an
     HC1 removal efficiency approaching 99.9% may be achieved.

C.   HEAT RECOVERY
     Heat recovery offers a potential economic  advantage  by reducing fuel usage with
     a recuperative heat recovery system or by  generating steam with a  waste-heat
     boiler.  Combustion temperatures exceeding 1600°F rule out the  use of recupera-
     tive heat exchangers because of  problems with materials  of construction and
     with associated problems such as possible  precombustion occurring  in the exchangers.
     A waste-heat boiler can be used  effectively with temperatures to >3000°F.

     With sulfur-containing VOC in the low heat-content range (<50 Btu/scf) recuperative
     heat recovery can be used since  the combustion temperature does not exceed
     1600°F.  Waste-heat boilers can  be used throughout the operating temperature
     range for sulfur-containing VOC  thermal  oxidation.  Since halogen-containing
     VOC destruction always requires  high combustion temperatures, only waste-heat
     boilers can be used for heat recovery.  It is possible to use some combination
     of waste-heat boiler and recuperative-heat recovery, but this option is considered
     to be beyond the scope of this report.

     Special precautions may be needed  for the recuperative heaters and waste-heat
     boilers to prevent excessive corrosion from the corrosive products produced
     during the combustion of sulfur-containing and halogen-containing VOC.  Design
     considerations should include means of preventing condensation of corrosive
     gases.  For  this report the  flue-gas temperature after heat  recovery will not
     be  cooler  than 500°F.

     Due  to the high  heat  duties  required for waste boilers  above 2200°F there will
     be  an  upper  size limit  in  terms  of waste-gas  flow.  A waste-gas flow  of 50,000
      scfm for  2600°F  combustion,  which would require  four  large wat,te  boilers,  and  a
     waste-gas  flow of  20,000  scfm for 3000°F,  which  would require  five  large  waste
     boilers,  are considered to be the upper size  limits in  this  report.   A
      200,000,000-Btu/hr heat duty for a waste-heat boiler  is considered the upper
      size limit.   Multiple units can be used for higher  heat duties.

-------
                                    III-l
            III.  BASIS  FOR THERMAL OXIDIZER AND SCRUBBER DESIGN

A base case design based on certain assumptions was developed  for  this  study  to
generate capital and operating costs, and represents a typical thermal  oxidizer
installation for the purpose of air pollution control.  The effect that varying
the design assumptions  has on capital and operating costs is discussed.  Cost
estimates were generated as functions of sensitive design variables, and en-
compass the accepted range of operation of thermal oxidizers.

IDENTIFICATION OF SENSITIVE VARIABLES FOR COST AND ENERGY
A distinction must be made for those design variables which, if changed by a
small amount, would cause significant changes in capital cost, annual operating
cost, or energy usage.  These are called sensitive variables, and the cost
curves given in Sect. V include them as parameters.  Other variables may be
quite important for an  individual system design but have relatively minor
effects on economic or energy-impact conclusions.

The approach used in this study was to determine the sensitivity of certain
variables by means of computerized heat and material balance calculations.
Through this process, estimates of the relationships between the variables and
equipment design and operating costs may be derived.   The primary variables
that are a function of the waste gas are the waste-gas temperature, pressure,
flow rate, VOC composition (molecular weight,  carbon,  oxygen,  hydrogen,  sulfur,
and chloride ratios of the VOC,  and VOC heats  of combustion) and other waste-
gas compositions (nitrogen,  other inert gases,  oxygen,  water content,  and the
presence of special contaminants).

The waste-gas temperature is  assumed to be  100°F for the base case, but an
increase or decrease within reasonable boundaries  will have little effect on
the capital or operating costs and it is therefore not considered to be a
significant variable.  Sensible  heat carried by the waste gas is small compared
to the heat required to raise  the gas to its combustion temperature.   About
3.5 Btu/scf is required to increase the temperature of nitrogen from 80°F to
260°F.  This compares with fuel  heat requirements  on the order of 60 to
80 Btu/scf to raise the waste  gas to combustion temperatures.   Waste-gas temper-
ature differences within this  range could not  change the total heat requirements

-------
                                  III-2
by more than about 6%.  Waste-gas pressure is assumed to be 1.5 psig.   Pressure
changes within reasonable limits of 1.5 psig also will have no significant
effect on capital or operating costs.  Flow rate is a very significant variable
for both capital and operating costs.  The waste-gas flows shown in the figures
throughout this report are translated to scfm of waste gas to the thermal
oxidizer.

The heat content of the waste gas is another significant variable.  VOC molar
concentration, average molecular weight, carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen ratios,
and heats of  combustion  (Btu/lb of VOC) are all expressed  in the variable of
the heat content of the waste gas  (Btu/scf) as shown by the family of compound
lines  on Fig.  III-l.  Multicomponent VOC  systems may be described when the mole
fractions of  each  component  are known.  The contribution of carbon monoxide  to
the total heat content may also be analyzed in  this way.   Table  III-l gives  VOC
molar  heats of combustion.6

 If the actual flue-gas  composition is  needed,  a component  material balance must
be performed, for which carbon,  hydrogen,  oxygen,  sulfur,  and chloride  ratios
 are required.  In order to estimate  "typical"  values for those ratios a group
 of organic compounds were surveyed.1  The chlorinated VOC component  averages of
 34.3% carbon, 4.7% hydrogen, and 61% chlorine were used to establish heat
 values plus heat and material balance for this evaluation.  The sulfur-containing
 VOC component averages used were the same as the chlorinated-VOC component
 averages except that/61%;was assumed to be sulfur instead of chlorine.  The
 component values of chlorine or sulfur used in this report may be high compared
 to actual component averages of waste gases, since the VOC in the actual waste
 gas may not  be all chlorinated or sulfur-containing VOC.

 The amount of oxygen in the waste gas or  that provided by the VOC is important
 because  it establishes  the  auxiliary  combustion  air  required and has an  impact
  on both the  capital  and operating costs  of  the  thermal  oxidizer.  In this report
  it is assumed that the waste  gas and VOC do  not contain oxygen (the  worst case)
  and that therefore maximum auxiliary combustion air is required.  The  excess oxygen
  in the flue gas is assumed to be 3 mole %,  which is based on usually accepted
  practice.

-------
  •n
  H
   I
  P>
  rt
  H-
  0
  3
P) tn
3 y
a. H-
  13

O tfl
n n>
S3  fu
(D  cn
p)  rt
rt  (D
   I
O  O
Ml  PJ
   tn
O
O  S3
g  ro
&  p)
C  rt
w
rt  n
H- 0
0  D
D  ft
   (D
   3
   O

   O
   O
   0
   w
   h1-
   ft
Waste-Gas  Heat  Content  (Btu/scf)
                    •A
                    o
                                                                                                                                              I
                                                                                                                                             u>

-------
                                   III-4
                     Table III-l.   VOC Heats  of Combustion*
Compound
_____ _r___ i _•*- _ — „ — — .- — — •-••'
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
Chloro form
Carbon tetrachloride
Ethyl chloride
Hexach] oroetnane
Dichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Carbon disulfide
Carbonyl sulfide
Methyl mercaptan
Ethyl thiocyanate
Ethyl mercaptan
Molecular
Weiqht
50.5
85
119.5
154
64.5
237
111.5
285
76
60
48
96
62
Heat
(Btu/lb)
5 , 850
2,260
1,340
436
8,840
835
8,230
3,220
5,840
3,920
11,170
11,520
13,130
of Combustion
(Btu/lb-mole)
295,400
192,100
160,100
67,140
570,200
197,900
917,600
917,700
443,800
235,200
536,200
1,105,900
814,400
"See  ref 6.

-------
                                       III-5
     Since the waste gas is assumed to be saturated with water for calculations in
     this report,  the water content in the flue gas is at a maximum.   It is also
     assumed that  no entrained liquid water droplets enter with the feed.   Entrained
     water droplets would significantly increase the auxiliary fuel requirements
     since the heat capacity of the flue gas increases and the heat of vaporization
     for water, 18,000 Btu/lb-mole, must be supplied.   Entrainment can normally be
     avoided with  proper design.

     The combustion temperature has a significant effect on fuel costs.  As is shown
     in Fig. II-2, the fuel usages increase substantially with temperature increases
     above 2200°F.  Residence time has a major effect on capital costs but a rela-
     tively small  effect on operating costs.

     The significant variables investigated in this report are waste-gas flow, heat
     content (encompassing a variety of composition-related variables), combustion
     temperature,  and residence times.  Evaluation of these parameters using generally
     worst-case or conservative assumptions will lead to economic and energy impact
     conclusions that will equal or exceed actual operating costs and energy impacts
     for the applicable cases.

B.   PROCEDURE USED FOR DESIGNING A THERMAL OXIDIZER SYSTEM WITH A SCRUBBER
     The design procedure that was used for conventional thermal oxidizer units for
     sulfur-containing VOC is the same as that given in the control-device evaluation
     report for thermal oxidation, except for the scrubbers.  The discussion of
     quench chambers and scrubbers in this section applies to conventional thermal
     oxidizers that may require the addition of flue-gas scrubbing.  The design
     procedure for high-temperature thermal oxidation is presented in this section.

1.   Combustion Chamber
     The size of the combustion chamber depends on the flow of waste gas into the
     chamber, the  fuel usage, the residence time, and the combustion temperature.
     The fuel usage is dependent on the heat content of the waste gas and the com-
     bustion temperature.  Figure III-2 shows the supplementary fuel usage of natural
     gas required to sustain the combustion temperatures of 1800, 2200, 2600, and 3000°F
     for various waste-gas heat contents.  The combustion chamber, the heat recovery

-------
                           III-6
  5000
.
w
ra
•*-
c
V
E


"a.
a.
   100
                       Combustion Temperatures


                          (a)  3000°F

                          (b)  2600°F

                          (c)  2200°F

                          (d)  1800°F


             Assumes  no   oxygen  in  the   waste   gas
                                                     (b)
                       40       60       80       100


                    Waste-Gas  Heat  Content  (Btu/scf)
                                                           120
140
 Fig..111-2.   Supplementary Fuel  Usage  vs  Waste-Gas Heat Content

-------
                                         III-7
      unit,  and  the  scrubber must be  sized  to  handle  the  flow  from all sources,
      including  that from  the waste gas,  the auxiliary  fuel, the  combustion air,  and
      the combustion products.  System designs calculated for  this report  cover  the
      waste-gas  heat content range of 1—100 Btu/scf.   Figure  III-3  shows  the  correlation
      between flue-gas flow and waste-gas flow by expressing them  as a ratio and  dis-
      playing the ratio as a function of  waste-gas heat content and  combustion tem-
      perature.  In  Fig. III-3 the 1400 and 1600°F lines  curve upward  above 80 Btu/scf
      due to the need to add excess air to keep the combustion temperature  of  1400
      and 1600°F.  The temperature would  normally be allowed to increase rather than
      excess air being added.

      Conversion of  scfm (standard cubic  feet per minute)  to acfm  (actual cubic
      feet per minute) is necessary for sizing of the combustion chamber.   Figure III-4
      shows this relationship (based  on the ideal gas law).  Standard  temperature and
     pressure conditions assumed throughout this report are 32°F  and  760 mm Hg and
      their equivalents.   The ratio of acfm to scfm is read from Fig.  III-4 and is
     multiplied by  the combustion chamber flue gas in scfm.  Until this point in the
      report the term heat content has referred to the potential energy from combustion
     of compounds in the waste gas.   Heat content when used in relation to the flue
     gas in this report refers to the energy contained by the hot gases because of
     their temperature.   The basis used  for the heat recovery calculations is the
     heat content of the flue gas as a function of temperature,  as shown in Fig. III-5.
     The dotted lines in Fig.  I1I-5  correspond to a reasonable variation in specific
     heats or heat capacities of the flue gas.

     Residence times of 1/2 and 3/4  sec  are used to calculate  the combustion chamber
     internal volume.  The combustion chamber  flue gas  flow (in acfm)  is converted
     to acfs (actual cubic feet per  second) and then multiplied by the residence
     time (in sec)  to determine the  combustion chamber  internal volume in cubic
     feet.

2.    Fans
     Fans for both the  waste gas and the combustion air are provided for in the
     systems evaluated.   The flow rates  of the waste  gas and combustion air and the
     pressure drops of  the thermal oxidizers  are used to calculate fan sizes.
     System pressure drops of 6 and  10  in.  H20 were assumed respectively for thermal

-------
                              III-8
  15 r



  14


_o
u. 13
      
      *-•
       ID

      S.  11
       2 10
       tn
       TO
       O  8
       i
       o
       3

       E  7
               Combustion Temperature

                           Assumes   no  oxygen   in   the  waste  gas


                           3000°F
                    20      40       60        80      100


                          Waste-Gas  Heat  Content (Btu/scf)
                                                         120
140
Fig. III-3.   Ratio of Thermal Oxidizer Flue-Gas Flow to Waste-Gas Flow vs

                        Waste-Gas Heat Content

-------
in
c
O
C
O
o
•a
c
a
in

-------
                                Flue-Gas  Heat Content JBtu/acf)
H
I
tn
c
(D
 I
a
ffi
(D
n
o
 rt
 ro












-n
c
0
1
O
cj
(A
H
(D
3
•o
o
o
c
-
Q i

CD ,_
O
o
_h
o -
o
0
N) "
O
0
_*
A \.
O
o




a>
0
0



_^
CO
o
o


M
O
o
o
to
10
0
0
ro
t*
O
O
M
a>
0
o
M
CD
o
o
u
Q
O
o
\
\
\
s









_






~




-—





	


H
i
[

I —



i —


i
1


                                              OT-III

-------
                                       III-ll
     oxidizers with  no  heat  recovery  and  those  with waste-heat  boilers.   A pressure
     drop  of  12  in.  H20 is assumed when a scrubber is  included.   The  waste-gas
     fan capacity  is based on the  waste-gas  flow  rate.   Table III-2 gives the  combustion
     air flow/waste-gas ratio as a function  of  combustion temperature.   The relationship
     is based on desired combustion temperatures, as previously discussed, and is
     used  to  size  the combustion air  fan. The  combustion air volume  and fan size
     may be determined  by the use  of  this ratio multiplied by the volume of waste
     gas.   Waste gases  containing  significant levels of oxygen  would  reduce the
     combustion  air  required and the  size of the  combustion air fans  used in this
     study.  When  waste gases are  generated  at  higher  pressure,  often no fan is
     needed.

3.   Waste Heat  Steam-Generation Boiler  Heat Recovery
     The  heat recovery  by a  waste-heat boiler depends  on the entrance flue-gas
     temperature and the exhaust  temperature.  The  entrance temperature is set by
     the  thermal oxidizer conditions.  For this study  the exhaust temperature is assumed
     to be 500°F,  in order  to be well above  the flue-gas dew point to prevent potential
     corrosion from acid gases.  Figure  III-6 is  a  plot of the  maximum heat and is
     based on the  percent of heat  available  from the flue gas with standard conditions
     as the reference point.  The  dotted lines in the  figure relate to a  reasonable
     range of heat capacities or specific heats of the flue gas.  Figure  III-7
     relates the ratio of boiler-tube surface area to the flue-gas flow  rate, the
     flue-gas temperature,  the steam temperature, and the overall heat transfer
     coefficient.   The surface area of the waste-heat boiler is determined by multi-
     plying the flue-gas flow rate by the ratio from Fig. III-7.  The flue-gas flow
     rate  from  a thermal oxidizer employing  a waste-heat boiler is the same as that
     from  a thermal oxidizer using no heat recovery.

 4.   Quench Chamber
     The  quench chamber  in  this study is located in the  lower part of the scrubber
     column  and has the  same  diameter as the scrubber.   The volume is based on a
     1-sec flue-gas retention time.  The quench  reduces  the flue-gas  temperature to
     the  adiabatic  saturation temperature of the scrubber  agent.  For this design
     slightly alkaline water will be used as the scrubbing agent.  To  reduce  the flue-
     gas  temperature to the adiabatic saturation temperature of water,  considerable

-------
                                  111-12
               Table III-2.   Ratio of Combustion Air to Waste-
                   Gas Flow  Rate vs Combustion Temperature
Waste-Gas
Heat Content
(Btu/scf)
2
2
50
100
100
100
Combustion
Temperature
(°F)
1400
1600
1800
2200
2600
3000
Combustion Air to
Waste-Gas Flow Rat\o*
/scf of combustion air\
V scf of waste gas 1
0.87
1.1
1.2
1.4
3.1
9.8
*Thermal oxidizer conditions:
  No oxygen in waste gas.
  VOC molar heat of combustion = 746,000 Btu/lb-mole.
  VOC molecular weight = 100
  VOC C, H,C1 fraction = 34.3 wt % C,   4.7  wt %  H,  61 wt  % Cl.
  Average waste gas  molecular weight = 29.
  Water content of combustion air = 1.0 wt  %.
  3 mole % 0  in flue gas  after oxidation.

-------
                                          Maximum Heat Recovery  (%
   T)
   3
   0)

M H-
X 3
3- C
fu 3
C
tn K
rt- ra
rt>
3  ?d
^a  CD
(t>  o
••!  o
m  <
rt  (D
C  *~1
(D


II
   Mi
   0
01 g
o
o PJ
  o
"i s;
-- pj
   0)
   rt
   0)
   l
   S
   to
   OJ
   rt

   D3
   O
   H-
                                            ei-in

-------
                                111-14
       10,
£
o
   O
   V
   ra
   in
   Cl
   e
   to
   Si
   o
   X
   tu
   CO
   a
   I
   o
   CD
   O
   u.
   (O      I
   o      !
   I       I
   «   1.0 —

   ul

   o
       L
       r
       L
       L
       0.11—
                a;  Overall  heat-transfer  coefficient = 8 ;  steam=450°F

                b  Overall  heat-transfer  coefficient =1 2; steam = 450°F

                c  Overall  heat-transfer coefficient =  8 ; steam = 250°F

               id  Overall  heat-transfer  coefficient =1 2 ; steam = 250°F

               ;e(  Overall  heat-transfer  coefficient = 20;  steam-450°F

               'fi  Overall  heat-transfer  coefficient =20; steam =250°F
    i
    o
    o

    o
    03
    cc
          h-
       0.01
         1000
                1400
1800     2200     2600    3000

Flue-Gas Temperature   (°F)
                                                              _J	J
                                                               3400    3800
Fig. III-7.   Ratio of Waste-Heat Boiler  Heat Exchange Surface to Flue-Gas
                       Flow vs Flue-Gas Temperature

-------
                                       111-15
     water will be vaporized in the quench and will increase the total gas flow
     through the scrubber.   This increased flow rate through the scrubber due to the
     vaporization of water,  which is a function of temperature,  is shown in Fig. III-8.

     The quench ratio has to be multiplied by the flue-gas rate  to obtain the flow
     rate through the scrubber.  Makeup water usage for the quench is dependent on
     the flue-gas flow rate  and temperature.   The makeup water rate is shown in
     Fig. III-9.  The quench will remove some of the noxious gases in the flue gas.
     In this study it has been assumed that 50% of HC1 is removed in the quench and
     that 10% of S02 is removed in the quench.

5.    Scrubber
     The scrubber design in  this study is based on a packed column, with slightly
     alkaline water used as  the scrubbing agent.  Different designs for the contacting
     device and its aqueous  scrubbing agent could be used, but they would not sig-
     nificantly offset the capital cost presented.  Operating cost could be signi-
     ficantly different based on the alkaline agent used to neutralize the scrubbed
     acid gases.  Acid gas removal efficiencies would also be affected by the choice
     of designs.

     The column is designed  with 36 ft of packing, which is assumed to remove 99.8%
     of HCl or 88.9% of S02  in the scrubber.   These two removal  percentages combined
     with the 50% of HCl or  10% of S02 removed in the quench give a total removal
     efficiency of 99.9% HCl or 90% S02-  The liquid-to-gas ratio (L/G) is assumed
     to be 10.  A superficial vapor velocity of 3 fps was used for determining the
     column diameter.  These assumptions are adequate for initial process designs
     leading to a preliminary cost estimate.7

     The water used as the scrubbing agent will have to be neutralized to control
     the pH of the system; in this study caustic (NaOH) is used.  The amount of
     caustic used is dependent on the concentration of sulfur or chlorine in the
     waste gas.  The caustic addition rate is 2.50 Ib of NaOH/lb of sulfur in the
     waste gas and 1.14 Ib of NaOH/lb of chlorine in the waste gas.  The salt formed
     will have to be purged  from the system and discharged.  The makeup water rate,
     based on 1% dissolved solids in the water recycle, is 46.5 gal/lb of sulfur in
     the waste gas and 19.2  gal/lb of chlorine in the waste gas  .

-------
                                                                                                     H
                                                                                                     I
       200
      600
1000     1400     1300    2200     2600

    Flue-Gas Temperature to Quench  (°F)
                                                                    3000
                                                                            3400
Fig. III-
8.  Ratio of Quenched to Unquenched Flue-Gas Flow Rate vs Flue-Gas Temperature

-------
                111-17
   100
     1000   1400
  1800     2200    2600
Flue-Gas  Temperature  (°F
3000
3400
Fig. III-9.   Makeup Water Usage  Rate  for  Quenching  Chamber

-------
                                  IV-1
  IV.  CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLING THERMAL OXIDATION CONTROL EQUIPMENT

Thermal oxidizers can be large process units, depending on the volume of waste
gas to be controlled, and could require a plot of land as large as 300 ft by
300 ft for installation.  Since thermal oxidizers utilize combustion with a
flame for achieving VOC destruction, the unit must be located at a safe distance
from process equipment in which flammable chemicals are used, or special designs
must be employed to minimize the risk of explosion or fire.

Thermal oxidizers require natural gas or fuel oil, electrical power, and instrument
air and, if scrubbing is needed, water and caustic at the site.  If steam is
generated from waste heat, then it is useful to minimize the distance from the
waste-heat boiler to the steam-consuming site.

Since a salt is formed during the scrubbing of the flue gas, proper waste dis-
posal of this material is required.  The options of disposal range from direct
wastewater discharge to recovery of the material.

Retrofitting thermal oxidizers into existing plants requires careful considera-
tion of site location since all the above factors apply and  sufficient space in
an existing plant may not be available.  The unit may have to be located further
away from the waste-gas source than would be required for a  new plant.  Because
of these associated  costs the cost of retrofitting a thermal oxidizer in an
existing plant may be appreciably greater than the cost for  a new installation.
Also, since it may be costly for some companies  to have excess steam on-site, it
may  not be practical for all companies  to utilize the heat recovery option.

-------
                                       V-l
           V.  COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF THERMAL OXIDIZERS WITH SCRUBBERS

A.   COST BASIS
     The capital costs for total systems combinations and for various components
     were estimated.   They represent the total investment,  including all indirect
     costs such as engineering and contractors'  fees and overheads,  required for
     purchase and installation of all equipment and material to provide a facility
     as described.  These are battery-limit costs and do not include the provisions
     for bringing utilities,  services,  or roads to the site, the backup facilities,
     the land,  the research and development required, or the process piping and
     instrumentation interconnections that may be required within the process
     generating the waste-gas feed to the thermal oxidizer.

     The estimated costs  are  based on installation of a new plant; no retrofit cost
     considerations are included.   Those costs are usually higher than the cost for
     a new-site installation  for the same system and include,  for example,  demolition,
     crowded construction working conditions,  scheduling construction activities
     with production  activities,  and longer interconnecting piping.   Since  the
     thermal oxidizer systems require a relatively large land area and the  safety
     aspects of an open flame are  an important factor,  the  longer interconnecting
     piping will probably be  the  most significant of these  retrofit  cost factors.
     These factors are  so site-specific that no  attempt has  been made to provide
     costs.   For specific retrofit cases rough costs can be  obtained by using the
     new-site data and  adding as  required for  a  defined specific retrofit situation.

     The method used  to develop  these estimated  capital costs  was based on
     preliminary vendor quotes for the  purchase  of major equipment items or  from
     such sources as  Richardson Engineering Co.  data,  and factoring  up to installed
     costs based on the data  in Table V-l.   The  expected accuracy of the total
     installed  cost with  this degree of engineering  detail using this factor method
     is +30%.   This method of obtaining estimated total installed capital costs  is
     suitable for a cost  study or  for screening  estimates.   The  factor ranges given
     in Table V-l for various cost components  are based on historical data
     obtained by Hydroscience Process Engineering.

-------
                                        V-2
               Table V-l.   Factors  Used for  Estimating Total  Installed Costs
A = Major Equipment Purchase

    Installation Costs

      Foundations

      Structures
      Equipment Erection

      Piping
      Insulation


      Paint
      Fire Protection

      Instruments


      Electrical
Cost Plus 0.1 to 0.35 Allowance


     0.06A + $100 X number of pumps
     0.15A  (no structures) to 0.30A  (multideck structures)

     0.15A to 0.30A  (depending on complexity)
     0.40A  (package units) to 1.10A  (rat's nest)
     0.06A or 0.15 X piping  (normal) to 0.30 X piping
        (bulk hot or cold)

     0.05A
     0.01A to 0.06A  (depending on  requirements)

     0.10A to 0.30A or 0.01A to 0.25A + $50,000 to
        $300,000  for process  control  computer

     0.15A or 0.05A  + $500 per motor
B  = Base Cost

    Sales Tax
    Freight
    Contractor's  Fees
      A  +  Sum of  Installation  Costs

      0.025A +  0.025B

      0.16A
      0.30 (B-A)
 C = Total Contract
                a
     Engineering
               .   b
     Contingencies
      B + Taxes,  Freight,  and Fees

      0.01C to 0.20C

      0.15C
 D = Process Unit Installed Cost   C + Engineering + Contingencies
 E = Total Subestimates
      Sum of semidetailed subestimates (buildings, site
        development, cooling towers, etc.).  Each subesti-
        mate should include taxes, freight, fees, engi-
        neering and contingency, and should be escalated
        to date of expenditure for that cost component.
        Engineering costs, contingencies,  and escalation
        factors for these subestimates will vary  according
        to the type of job.
                                   D + E
 F  = Total Project Cost

 Includes cost  from capital project teams, process engineering, engineering,
  purchasing,  and other  support  groups.
 Contingency  should not be applied to  any  cost  component  that  has  been  committed  by
  either purchase order  or contract.

-------
                                           V-3
      The estimate is based on the purchase cost of major equipment (A), including a 10
      to 35% allowance for other equipment and an assessment of the quality of vendor
      quotes.   A 10% allowance is used for project definition that includes process
      flow sheets and specific budget quotes and a 35% allowance for block flow sheet
      definition and generalized equipment quotes or prices.

 B.    CAPITAL  COSTS

 1-    Thermal  Oxidizer Complete  System
      The  capital  cost for  thermal oxidizer  systems  controlling  sulfur-containing VOC
      is determined  from the capital  costs estimated in the control-device  evaluation
      report for thermal oxidation* (Figs. V-l to 4).  The installed capital cost of
      the  scrubber shown in Fig. v-1  can be  added to  the installed capital  cost
      given in the cited report* to obtain the total  installed capital cost of the
      system.

     The capital cost for thermal oxidizer systems controlling halogen-containing
     VOC is determined by combining the capital cost of the  thermal oxidizer
      (Figs. V-2, 3), of the waste-heat boiler (Figs. V-4,  5), and of the scrubber
     (Fig. V-l).  At the combustion temperature of 1800 and  2200°F the capital costs
     are obtained from the control-device evaluation report  for  thermal oxidation.*
     The total installed system costs are shown in Figs.  V-6  through V-ll.   Figures V-9
     through V-ll  are based on a waste-gas heat  content of 1  Btu/scf.   An increase  in
     waste-gas heat  content will decrease the  flue-gas  flow rate,  as  shown  in
     Fig.  III-3,  and decrease  the  scrubber size.

!-    High-Temperature Thermal  Oxidizers
     Preliminary purchase quotes for  high-temperature thermal oxidizers were obtained
     from  two  vendors. S'9  The installed  costs shown  in Fig.  V-3 include  the cost of
     fans, ductwork, and stacks.  The upper  size limit for the high-temperature
     thermal oxidizers is assumed to be 20,000 cfm for a 2600°F combustion  tempera-
     ture and  to be 5000 cfm for a 3000°F combustion  temperature.  The reason for
     this limit is due to the waste stream not containing oxygen so large amounts of
     combustion air is required.

-------
         Installed  Capital  Cost,  December 1979   ($1OOO
Tl
C
3
(9

T]

O
o
c
to
3-
c
cr
cr
O
O
O

O

3

-------
 1 0,000
o
o
o
•f
V)
O
!*•
O)
0)
Si
£
a>
o
o
Q
o
o
H3
•*-"•

Q.


O
 n
 *••

 c
   1 000 —
    100
               Combustion
             Temperatures
 a-  1800°F  in  1/2-sec   residence  time

 b-  1800°F  in  3A-sec  residence   time

 c-  2200°F  in  1/S-sec residence   time

 d-  2200°F  in   3A~sec  residence   time
                                                                                 f
                                                                                 Ul
       0.5
1.0
100
                     Waste-Gas  Flow
 Fig. V-2.  Installed Capital Cost of Thermal Oxidizer at 1800 and 2200°F
          Including Incinerator, Two Blowers, Ducts, and Stack

-------
  10,000.	
o
o
o
r-
o
 o>
 a
 £
 0)
(0
o
o


«
*rf
'EL

o

•o
 (0
 e
    1,000
      10O	

         0.5
                                                                                                   <
(a)  2600° F combustion  temperature  in '/z-sec  residence  time


(b)  2600° F combustion  temperature in %-sec  residence  time


(c)  3000° F combustion temperature in '/2-sec residence time


(d)  3000° F combustion temperature in %-sec  residence time
1.0
                               10
                                                            100
                                Waste-Gas  Flow  (lOOO scfm)
Fig.  V-3.   Installed Capital Cost of Thermal Oxidizer at 2600 and 3000°F,

           Including Incinerator, Two Blowers,  Ducts,  and Stack

-------
                           V-7
  10,000
o
o
o
«  1'000
a
(0
O


•o
0)

o
Si
E
V
o
0)
a
    100
     10
(a)  1800°F


(b)  2200°F


(c)  2600°F


(d)  3000°F
       0.5    1.0                    10


                  Waste-Gas  Flow   (lOOO scfm)
                                  100
     Fig. V-4.  Installed Capital Cost  for  Waste-Heat Boilers at

   250 psi and  1800,  2200,  2600,  and 3000°F  Combustion Temperatures

-------
                          December 1979 Installed Capital j$1000)
0
o
hg M.
W LQ
p. .
s ^
H
en
0 H
0 3
in
rt
to P
K) h-1
O M
O CD
- DJ
to O
o *d
O H-
N r^~
pj
pi H
Ci O
0
0 ft
o
O Ml
o 0
n &
O P
g 1/1
U ft
c: CD
W 1
rt £G
H- CD

-J.
0°
W _
-
b ~





^
0)
U)
p^
o
0
t*
23 r
2 F
4 L
_L f
^To
o
o
0
(/) 1
0
•^1
j3__




ro o
g H-
*C) M
CD CD
H H
pj Cfl
ft
o
b
o
o
                                                                                              
-------
        10,000,—
     o
     o
     o
     a
     CJ
     O
     in
     c.
      «    1,000
     a>
      o
      o
      a
                                       (a)  No heat  recovery


                                       (bi  Heat recovery  with  a  250-psi boiler
10o— J

   500
                                                                                                        
-------
    10,000,
o
o
o
 TO
 •*-•

 '5.

 o

 •o
 ji>

 "5
 .*-•

 c
 •s   1,000
 O
 rv

 0)
  E
  
-------
   10,000
   o
   o
   o
   o
   O
   c.
   CO
   O


   •o

   £ 1000

   15
   •f*
   in
   c
   o
   H


   0>
   N
   ro
   o>
   JO
   E
   «
   o
   V
   a
      100
                    (a)   No heat  recovery



                    (b)   Heat  recovery  with  a


                        250-psi  boiler
         500
1000
                                               1 0,000



                                Waste-Gas  Flow   fscfm)
                                                        100,000
 Fig. V-8.  Total Installed Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation Systems with a

Scrubber, at a Residence Time of 0.5 sec, a Combustion Temperature of 1800°F

             and a Waste-Gas Heat Content of from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
            10,000
       o
       o
       o
       1—
       £/>
        en
        O

        O
        a
        (0
        O

        •o
        0)
        CO
        c
        o
        h-

        O)
        E
        a>
        o
        0)
        O
1,000
               100
                                                                                                        f
                                (a)  No heat recovery


                                (b)  Heat recovery with a  250-psi  boiler
                  500
            JJ	

             1,000
                                          _L
                    	L
               10,000


Waste-Gas  Flow  (scfm
                                                                                     100,000
Fig. V-9.  Total  Installed  Capital Cost for Thermal Oxidation  Systems with a Scrubber

       at a Residence  Time  of 0.5 sec, a Combustion Temperature  of 2200 F, and a

                          Waste-Gas Heat Content, of 1 Btu/scf

-------
     10,000
o
o
o
r-
v>
in
O
O


"5
•*-*
a

O
o
t-

o>
E
o
o
HI
O
      1,000
                                        a)
                                  (a)  No heat recovery


                                  (b)  Heat recovery  with  a 250-psi  boiler
        100

          500
                                                                                                      i
                                                                                                      M
                                                                                                      U)
                   1,000
                                                  10,000


                                  Waste-Gas  Flow    (scfm)
                                                                              100,000
                                     ***
                        oo                                                ^rubber
                        of  0.5 sec,  a Combustion Temperature of 2600°F  and a

                     Waste-Gas Heat Content of 1 Btu/scf

-------
      <
      I
I".
rf
o
I
O
(D
tn
   pj
   rt
   ju  1-3
   (D  DJ
   CO  t-1
   M-
   Qj H
     a
   3  K
   o  rt
   (D  !D
   H- ra
   3  a
   m
      n
   O rt
   •   P
   oi  o
"(DO
o  o  tf

rt
   Q;  f—p

o     o
o  n  n
3  o
rt  i  n3
o  Er  ~
3  C  K
rt  en  K
   rt  3
O  P-  &•
t-h  O  h-



   >-3  X
Cd  ro  H'
rr  3  a
C  ^0  ^
   (I)  rt
01
O
   C


   (D "<
     0!
   O rt


   ^ 3
   U) Cft
   O
   o s;
   o H-
    Ort
   fu
   3 C/2
   a o
                                      December  1979  Total  Installed  Capital  Cost ($1000j
                           o
                        01  o
                        o  r-
                        o
                                                                    o
                                                                    o
                                                                    o
o
b
o
o
                                                                                                           T1
                           r
                        o  —
                        o
                        o
                    ^
                    CJ
                    i
                    O
                       p

                       o
                       o
                       o
                   o
                   ^

                   3
                                                             I
                                                             0)
                                                             o
                                                            o
                                                            o
                                                            o
                                                                 z
                                                                 o
                                                                 ra
                                                                 o
                                                                 o
                                                                 <
                                                            Cfl
                                                            O
                                                             I
                                                            •o
                                                            CA


                                                            cr
                                                            o
                        O
                        O
                        o
                        o
                        o

-------
                                        V-15
 3.   Waste-Heat Boiler
     Preliminary purchase quotes  for steam-generating waste-heat boilers were  obtained
     from vendors for operation at various steam pressure levels and various proportions
     of heat recovery.  The installed costs were then estimated by applying installation
     factors to these purchase costs as previously described.  The installed cost of
     the 2600°F unit was assumed  to be 10% greater than that of the 2200°F unit of
     the same heat duty, and the  cost of the 3000°F was assumed to be 20% greater than
     that of the 2200°F unit.  Multiple units were used when the capacity was  in excess
     of 200,000 Ib/hr of steam, or 240,000,000 Btu/hr.  The cost curves shown  in Figs. V-4
     and V-5 for the boilers were developed as described previously.

4.   Scrubbers
     The estimated installed costs were obtained by applying installation factors to
     the purchase cost of the column as previously described.  The scrubber cost
     curve shown in Fig. V-l includes the cost of the quench chamber and the recycle
     water pump and the additional capital cost involved with a larger fan to overcome
     the pressure drop across the scrubber.

     For ease in evaluating system component  combinations,  all components except the
     scrubber are presented as a factor of the total  waste-gas flow in scfm.   The
     scrubber flow rate is determined by multiplying  the waste-gas  flow by the
     flue-gas ratio  (Fig.  III-3)  and the quench flow  ratio  (Fig.  III-8).

C.   ANNUAL COSTS
     Annual costs for various  operating conditions  are presented  in Appendix  A for
     sulfur-containing VOC and in  Appendix B  for halogen-containing VOC.   The  heat
     recovery case refers  to a 250-psi  waste-heat boiler.  These  costs  are  the  basis
     for all the  cost-effectiveness  graphs included in the report.   The  basis  used  in
     calculating  these annual  costs  is  defined in Table  V-2.

     Figures V-12  through  V-15 show  the annual cost of thermal  oxidation for various
     sulfur-containing VOC cases.  Figures V-16 through  V-23  show the  annual  cost of
     thermal oxidation for various halogen-containing VOC cases.  The  annual  cost
     increases  for higher  waste-gas  heat  contents are due to  the use of  larger
     amounts of caustic.   Figure V-24  shows the annual cost of  thermal oxidation for
     various combustion temperatures.

-------
                                 V-16
                    Table V-2.  Annual Cost Parameters
Operating factor

Operating labor

Fixed costs
  Maintenance labor plus materials, at 6%

  Capital recovery, at 18%
  Taxes, insurances, administrative charges, at 5%j

Utilities

  Electric power

  Natural gas
Heat recovery credit  (equals natural gas)

Caustic  (50% NaOH)

Makeup water
8760 hr/yr

$15/man-hr
29% installed capital
$0.03/kWh
$2. 00 /million Btu
25<£/1000 gal
aProcess downtime is normally expected to range from 5 to 15%.  If the hourly
 rate remains constant, the annual production and annual VOC emissions will
 be correspondingly reduced.  Control devices will usually operate on the
 same cycle as the process.  From the standpoint of cost-effectiveness cal-
 culations, the error introduced by assuming continuous operation is
 negligible.
j>
 Based on 10-year life and 12% interest.

-------
 1000
  800
       Heat Content  (Btu/scf'
                     *       i
                           50
o
in
*-  600
en
O
O
"to

c  400
  200
                                                                                                          f
     100
                                  1,000

                                     Waste-Gas  Flow  Rate
   10,000

SCflV
100,000
 Fig.  V-12.   Net Annual  Costs vs Waste-Gas  Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber Using
        No  Heat Recovery,  1400  F Combustion Temperature,  0.5-sec Residence Time,and a
                            Heat Content of from 1 to 50  Btu/scf

-------
1000
     100
                                                                                                        M
                                                                                                        oo
                                 1,000
                                                              10,000
                                                                                        100,000
                                       Waste-Gas  Flow Rate   (scfm)
         H
                           Heat Content of from
                                                     50 Btu/scf

-------
1000
                                                                                                        f
    100
1,000



  Waste-Gas  Flow Rate
100,000
Fiq. V-14.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber Using
                            o
      No Heat Recovery, 1600 F Combustion Temperature,  0.5-sec Residence Time, and a

                           Heat Content of from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
 1000
  800
 o
 in


^600
 .**
 in
 o
 O
 c400
   20(
         Heat  Content
                                                                                                 ho
                                                                                                 O
      100
                                  1,000
                                                  10,000
                                                                                           100,000
                                          Waste-Gas Flow
                                             scfm
      Fig. V-15.
n   Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with  a  Scrubber  Using

Heat Recovery, 1600°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence Time,  and a
                                 Heat Content of from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
1200
     100
1000                         10,000

        Waste-Gas  Flow   (scfm)
                                                                                       100,000
         Fig. V-16.  Net Annual Cost vs  Waste-Gas  Flow  for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber
    Using No Heat Recovery,  1800°F Combustion  Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence Time, and a Heat
                                  Content  of from  1 to  100 Btu/scf

-------
1200
              Heat  Content  (etu/scf)

                  100
      200
                                                                                                     f
1000                         10,000

        Waste-Gas  Flow  (scfm)
                                                                               100,000
     Fig.  V-17.   Net Annual Cost vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber
     Using Heat  Recovery, 1800°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence Time, and a
                           Heat Content of from 1 to 100 Btu/scf

-------
 1000r
  800
o
in
  600
o
o

«  400
3
C
C
   200
        Heat  Content ( Btu/scf
                            100
                                                                                                              f
      100
                             1,000                         10,000


                                 Waste-Gas Flow Rate  (scfm:
                                                                                          .J_LLJ
                                                                                           100,000
                  Net Annual  Costs  vs  Waste-Gas  Flow for  Thermal  Oxidizcrs with a Scrubber Using

                                2200°F Combustion Temperature,  0.5-sec Residence Time, and  a

                                  Heat Content of from 1 to 100 Btu/scf
Fig. V-18.

        No Heat Recovery,

-------
 1000
  800
E
*•
u
  600
 in
 O
O
          Heat  Content  (etu/scf
   400
 c
   200
    0  I	

      100
                               100
                                                                                                            to
                                                                                                            -P-
1,000                        10,000

    Waste-Gas Flow Rate  (scfm)
100,000
      Fin  V-19   Net Annual  Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber Using

              Heat Recovery,  2200°F Combustion Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence  Time, and a

                                 Heat Content of from 1 to 100 Btu/scf

-------
     o
     V)
     tn
     o
    O
     3
     C
     C
       1400
       1200
       1000
        800
        600
        400
        200
                        Heat  Content   (etu/scf


                                 100
            100
                                                                                                          NJ
                                                                                                          U1
     1000                        10,000

Waste-Gas  Flow  Rate   (scfm)
                                                                                    40,000
Fig. V-20 .   Net Annual CostsQVs  Waste-Gas  Flow for  Thermal Oxidizers with  a  Scrubber  Using
      No Heat Recovery,  2600  F Combustion  Temperature, 0.5-sec  Residence Time, and a
                           Heat  Content of from 1 to  100 Btu/scf

-------
            1200
            1000
          E
          •»-
          o
             800
           in
           o   600
          o
      c
      c

      <  400

      4-»
      O
      z




         200
                        Heat Content [stu/scf)
                         100
                                                                                                         f
                                                                                                         ho
                 200
                                1000                        10,000


                               Waste-Gas  Flow  Rate   fscfmj
                                                                                   50,000
Fig.
V-21.   Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow for Thermal Oxidizers with a Scrubber Using

   Heat Recovery, 2600 F Combustion Temperature, 0.5-sec Residence Time, and a

                      Heat Content of from 1 to 100 Btu/scf

-------
   2400
   2200
 c

 S  2000
 VI


O  1800
c
c
OJ
z
   1600
   1400
  1200
       100
               Heat  Content   (Btu/scf
                             100
                                                                                               Ki
                                    1000


                        Waste-Gag  Flov;  Rate   (scfm
10,000
              Heat Content of from 1 to 50 Btu/scf

-------
   ffi
   CD
   P)
   rt
   n
   o
   <
      2
      n>
      rt
      3
      C




CD
5D
ft

O
O
3
U)
0
O
o
r
^

n
o

&*
c
0
0
en
rt
Wn
' UJ
<
01

S
01
tn
rt en  rt
(D  rt (D
3  H-  i
rt O  
o
3
I-1 rt O
   C  M
rt H
O  fD  1-3
   »  y
M    (D
O O H
O •  3
   un DJ
tn  i
   to
   (D
rt
C  CD O
\  O X
en    H-
n  5d &
Hi  CD I-1-
    en N
    H- CD
    Qj h!
    CD 01

    n s:
    CD H-
      rt

    H-
    3 0)
    CD
   ••  cn
      n
    0) h
    3 c
    G> O*
      cr
    o> CD
      G
      cn
      H-
                                                Net   Annual   Cost     $/  scfm
                             o
                             o
                                          CO
                                          o
                                          o
                             o
                             o
                             o
to
o
o
o
o
cn
o
o
CO
o
o
                          o
                          o
                     D
                     ta
                      o
                      Q>
                      33
                      o"
                      30
                      o
                      (I)
                      o
o
o
o
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    <0
                                                                                                    Cl
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                     3
                                                                                                     (A
                                                                                                     o
                                                           8Z-A

-------
                                                         Net  Annual  Cost   (S/scfmj

   2  t-o
   O  ,t>
   CD
   CD  2
   rt  (D
       rt

   ro  >
   o  3

   9  3
   
       t-3

    rt  0)
o n  g
O O  fa
   O  O
rt 3  X
O rt  H-
       Cu
U> O  H-
O H,  N
O     (D
O l->  h
 o     01
^ cd
   rt  s:
   C  H-
   ^v  rt

   S  *
   HI  ftl

       en
   PJ  n
    PJ  cr
       (D
       l-l


       G
       0)
       H-
       3
§ § § s
o
o
i






                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                               o
                                                                                                               o
                                                                                                            O)
                                                                                                            o
                                                                                                            o
                (D
                 1

                O
                T]

                O
CJ
f*

CD
                 0>
                 o
                                                                -A

-------
                                  V-30
COST EFFECTIVENESS AND ENERGY EFFECTIVENESS
The cost effectiveness and energy effectiveness are calculated by dividing the
annual cost for a particular option or the fuel usage (in Btu/yr) by the total
annual amount of VOC destroyed.  The cost effectiveness is presented in Table V-3
for sulfur-containing VOC and in Table V-4 for halogen-containing VOC.   The
energy effectiveness is given in Table V-5 for sulfur-containing VOC and in
Table V-6 for halogen-containing VOC.  Data on cases not shown in the cited
tables and figures can be easily developed by use of Appendices A and B.

-------
                       V-31
Table V-3,   Cost Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation
and Scrubbing for Control of Sulfur-Containing VOC
Cost Effectiveness (per Ib of VOC Destroyed)
Waste-Gas Waste- VOC
Heat Gas Flow Destroyed
Content Rate (lb/hr)°
(Btu/scf) (scfm) at 90%
1 700
5,000
20,000
50,000
100,000
10 700
5,000
20,000
50,000
100,000
13 700
5,000
70,000
50,000
100,000
20 700
5,000
20,000
50,000
100,000
50 700
5,000
20, ODD
50,000
100,000
aBased on 1400°F combustion
Based on 1600°F combustion
CVOC molecular weight = 300;
5.06
36.2
144.7
361.8
723.4
50.6
362
1,447
3,618
7,234
65.8
471
1,881
4,703
9,404
101.2
724
2,894
7,236
14,472
253
1,810
7,235
18,060
36,170
temperature
temperature
molar heat
VOC
Destroyed
(lb/hr)C
at 99%
5.57
39.8
159.2
398.0
796.0
55.7
398
1,592
3,980
7,960
72.4
517
2,070
5,174
10,348
111.4
796
3,184
7,960
15,920
278.5
1,990
7,960
19,900
39,800
and 0.5-sec
and 0.5-sec
90% VOC Destruction3
Waste Heat
No Heat Boiler 250-
Recovery psi Steam
$5.35
2.24
1.73
1.58
1.50
0.67
0.36
0.31
0.30
0.29
0.56
0.32
0.28
0.26
0.26
0.42
0.26
0.23
0.23
0.22
0.26
0.20
0.19
0.18
0.18
residence time.
residence time.
of combustion = 746,000 Btu/lb-mole
$5.26
1.73
1.20
1.00
0.92
0.66
0.31
0.26
0.24
0.23
0.55
0.28
0.24
0.22
0.21
0.41
0.23
0.21
0.20
0.19
0.26
0.19
0.1S
0.17
0.17

of VOC.
99% VOC Destruction
No Heat
Recovery
$5.27
2.39
1.99
1.76
1.68
0.65
0.37
0.33
0.30
0.30
0.54
0.31
0.28
0.27
0.26
0.40
0.25
0.23
0.22
0.22
0.24
0.19
0.10
0.17
0.17


Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
$4.90
1.73
1.24
1.03
0.95
0.61
0.30
0.25
0.23
0.22
0.51
0.26
0.23
0.21
0.20
0.38
0.22
0.20
0.19
0.18
0.24
0.17
0.16
0.16
0.16



-------
                                           V-32
                    Table  V-4.  Cost Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation
                    and  Scrubbing for Control of Halogen-Containing VOC
Co-t Effectivpp"" (per Ib of VOC Destroyed)
Combustion Temperature
1 ROOT
Waste-Gas
Heat
Content
1



10



13



20



50



100


Waste-
Gas Flow
Rate
700
5,000
20,000
50,000
700
5,000
20,000
50,000
700
5,000
20,000
50,000
700
5,000
20,000
50,000
700
5,000
20,000
50,000
700
500
20,000
50,000
VOC
Destroyed
(lb/hr)a
at °9.9
5.62
40.2
160.8
402
56.2
402
1,608
4,020
73.1
523
2,090
5,230
112.4
804
3,216
8,040
281
2,010
8,040
20 , 100
562
4,020
16,080
40,200
No Heat
Recovery
• ' "•"
$6.03
2.73
2.22
2.06
0.65
0.32
0.27
0.26
0.51
0.26
0.22
0.21
0.35
0.19
0.16
0.16
0.17
0.11
0.10
0.10
0.12
0.08
0.08
0.08
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
55.53
1.81
1.22
1.07
0.60
0.23
0.17
0.16
0.48
0.19
0.15
0.13
0.33
0.14
0.11
0.11
0.17
0.10
0.08
0.08
0.11
0.07
0.07
0.07
Combustion Temperature
2200°F
No Heat
Recovery
$7.41
3.95
3.43
3.24
0.78
0.44
0.39
0.37
0.61
0.35
0.31
0.29
0.42
0.24
0.22
0.21
0.20
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.09
0.08
0.08
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
$6.30
2.54
1.97
1.66
0.67
0.30
0.24
0.21
0.53
0.24
0.20
0.17
0.36
0.17
0.14
0.13
0.17
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.11
0.07
0.07
0.06
Combustion Temperature
2600 °F
No Heat
Recovery
$12.50
7.35
6.33

1.29
0.78
0.68

1.00
0.61
0.53

0.67
0.41
0.36

0.30
0.19
0.17

0.17
0.12
0.11

Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi steam
9.46
4.11
3.13

0.99
0.45
0.36

0.77
0.36
0.28

0.52
0.25
0.20

0.23
0.19
0.17

0.14
0.09
0.08


aVOC molecular weight = 100; molar heat of combustion = 746,000

-------
                              Table  V-5.  Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation
                                          for Control of Sulfur-Containing VOC
Fuel Energy Usage
(Btu/scf)
Waste-Gas
Heat Content
(Btu/scf)
1
10
13
20
50
90% VOCb
Destruction
63.5
54.2
51.0
43.6
12.0
99% VOCC
Destruction
82.3
73.0
69.9
62.5
31.1
Net Energy Usagea
(Btu/scf)
90% VOCb
Destruction
26.3
17.0
13.8
6.37
(25.2)
99% VOCC
Destruction
30.6
21.3
18.2
10.8
(20.6)
Energy Effectiveness
(Btu/lb of VOC Destroyed)
90% VOC
No Heat
Recovery
527,100
45,000
32,600
18,100
2,000
Destruction
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
218,300
14,100
8,800
2,600
(4,200)
99% VOC
No Heat
Recovery
620,600
55,000
40,500
23,600
4,700
d
c
Destruction
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
230,700
16,100
10,600
4,100
(3,100)
 Based on a waste heat boiler generating 250-psi  steam.
 Based on 1400°F combustion temperature and 0.5-sec  residence  time.
CBased on 1600°F combustion temperature and 0.5-sec  residence  time.
dVOC molecular weight = 100; molar heat of combustion  = 746,400  Btu/lb-mole of VOC.
                                                                                                                          w
                                                                                                                          w

-------
                              Table V-6.   Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Thermal Oxidation
                                         for Control of  Halogen-Containing VOC
' 	 ~ Fnerov Effectiveness (Btu/lb of VOC Destroyed) 	 _ 	 _ 	
Waste-Gas
Heat Content
(Btu/scf)
1
10
13
20
50
100
Combustion T
1800
No Heat
Recovery
777,200
71,000
52,800
31,800
8,200
400
emperature
op
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
247,900
18,100
12,200
5,300
(2,400)
(4,900)
Combustion Temperature
2200 °F
Heat
Recovery
1,225,600
115,800
85,700
53,100
14,000
1,700
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
306,400
23,900
14,900
7,100
(4,300)
(7,500)
Combustion Temperature
2600 °F
No Heat
Recovery
2,466,200
246,600
175,900
112,100
36,800
12,600
Waste Heat
Boiler 250-
psi Steam
739,900
62,800
43,100
25,800
2,200
(4,700)
aVOC molecular weight = 100;  molar heat of combustion =  746,400 Btu/lb-mole of VOC.

-------
                                  VI-1
                       VI.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Thermal oxidation is a widely used control technique for control of sulfur-
containing and halogen-containing VOC.  This evaluation describes the limits
and design principles of this technique.  Design criterion and design procedures
are presented that allow for the preliminary design of high-temperature thermal
oxidizers and flue-gas scrubbing for both conventional and high-temperature
thermal oxidizers.  Thermal oxidizers without heat recovery and with waste-heat
steam-boiler heat recovery are considered.  Capital and operating costs are
developed and the annual cost of thermal oxidation is calculated as a function
of the characteristics of the waste gas.

The conclusions derived from the cost evaluation are as follows:

1.   Since the thermal oxidizer design used here is quite conservative, the
control costs actually experienced in industry are expected to be less than the
costs presented in this report.

2.   The waste-gas heat content (VOC content) is a highly sensitive variable in
determining annual costs, cost effectiveness, and energy effectiveness.  As the
heat content of the waste gas increases, the annual cost and the cost per scf
increase, whereas the energy effectiveness and the cost effectiveness sharply
improve.  The increase in annual cost and cost per cfm is due to the increased
amounts of caustic and water required to control the S02 or HCl in the flue
gas.  This is largely the result of the assumption that the VOC in the waste
gas is 100% sulfonated or halogenated.  When the sulfur-containing or halogen-
containing VOC is actually a small percentage of the VOC in the waste gas, the
caustic and water requirements will be less than those presented in this report.

3.   The waste-gas flow rate is a highly sensitive variable in determining
annual costs and cost effectiveness; energy effectiveness is independent of the
flow rate.  As the waste gas flow increases  (at a constant heat content), the
annual costs increase but the annual cost per scfm of waste gas and the cost per Ib
of VOC decrease.  This ratio decreases drastically between low flows  (700 scfm)

-------
                                  VI-2
and moderate flows (5000 scfm),  but remains relatively constant between moderate
(5000 scfm) to large flows (50,000 to 100,,000 scfm).  Energy effectiveness per
scf is constant with flow.

4.   Net annual costs for controlling the VOC decrease when heat recovery is
included, provided that there is a use for the steam generated.

S.   For high-temperature thermal oxidation (1800 to 3000°F) the annual cost,
cost effectiveness, and energy effectiveness increase exponentially with an
increase in combustion temperature.

6.   The effects of residence time, VOC destruction efficiency for conventional
thermal oxidation, and different heat recovery systems on annual costs, cost
effectiveness, and energy effectiveness can be found in the control-device
evaluation report for thermal oxidation1.

-------
                                        VII-1
                                  VII.   REFERENCES

1.    J.  W.  Blackburn,  IT Enviroscience,  Inc.,  Control  Device  Evaluation	
     Thermal Oxidation (July 1980) (EPA/ESED  report. Research Triangle Park,  NC).

2.    K.  Lee, H.  J.  Jahnes,  and D.  C.  Macauley,  Thermal Oxidation  Kinetics  of
     Selected Organic  Compounds, presented at the 71st Meeting of the Air  Pollution
     Control Association, Houston, Texas,  June 25—30, 1978.

3.    K.  Lee, J.  L.  Hanson,  and D.  C.  Macauley,  Predictive  Model of the Time-Temperature
     Requirements for  Thermal Destruction of  Dilute Organic Vapors,  Union  Carbide
     Corp., South Charleston, WV.

4.    J.  J.  Santoleri,  "Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Waste Recovery and Pollution
     Abatement"  pp. 66—74 in Proceedings of  1972 National Incinerator Conference,
     The American Society of Mechanical Engineers,  New York,  1972.

5.    D.  L.  Ulrichson and Yu-sung Yeh, Thermochemical Water Splitting: The  Reverse
     Deacon Reaction and Alternatives,  IS-M-63 (NTIS)  1975).

6.    Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, pp. D-184-188, 49th ed.,  edited  by R. C. Weast,
     Chemical Rubber Co., Cleveland,  1968.

7.    J.  Happel and D.  G. Jordan,  Chemical Process  Economics,  2d ed,  Marcel Dekker,
     Inc.,  New York City, 1975.

8.    Personal communication between J.  Kirkland, Hirt  Combustion Co., Montebello,  CA,
     and J. R. Fordyce, IT Enviroscience, Inc., July 25, 1979.

9.   Personal communication between S.  Korn and P.  Capsis, Peabody Engineering,
     Stamford, CT, and J. R. Fordyce, IT Enviroscience, Inc., July 19,  1979.

-------
                    APPENDIX A
ANNUAL COST DATA FOR SULFUR-CONTAINING VOC CONTROL

-------
                                      A-3
                         Annual Cost Data Calculations
                         (Applies to Appendices A and B)

The annual costs of thermal oxidation systems are presented in Tables A-5  to
A-14 and B-3 to B-20.  Each table shows the costs at a specific offgas heat content
and combustion temperature at various flow rates, residence time, and with and
without heat recovery.  The heat recovery case includes a 250-psi waste heat
boiler.

The following sample calculation is for a stream with an offgas heat content  of
10 Btu/scf, a combustion temperature of 2600°F, a residence time of 0.5 sec,  a
flow rate of 5000 scfm, and with heat recovery.

Capital cost = thermal oxidizer ($1,250,000) + waste heat boiler  ($734,000) +

  scrubber  ($912,000) = $2,896,000


     Thermal oxidizer = $1,250,000 — from Fig. V-3 at 5000 scfm, 0.5 sec

       resistance, and 2600°F


     Waste heat boiler = $734,000 — from Fig. V-5 at 5000 scfm,  250 psi,  and

       2600°F


     Scrubber = $912,000 — from Fig. V-l at 5000 scfm X 5.1  (from Fig. Ill-3) X

       1.07  (from Fig. III-8)


Fixed cost = $2,896,000 X 0.29*) = $840,000/yr


Operating cost = fuel  ($1,660,000) + electricity ($23,100) + makeup water  quench
   ($1,300) + makeup water scrubber ($10,200) + caustic ($243,200) + labor  ($36,000)  =
  $l,974,000/yr


     Fuel =  (315.8 Btu/scf (from figure III-2)) X  (5000 scfm) X  ($2.00/million Btu*)  X

        (60 min/hr) X  (8,760 hr/yr) = $l,660,000/yr


     Electricity =  (22 in HJD) X  (.000157 —- ) X  (I/.60 efficiency) X  (.746  kWh)  X
                           ^          an. H_u
        (5000 scfm) X  ($0.03/kWh*) X  (8760 hr/yr) = $5,640/yr plus electricity for

       combustion air blower = 3.1 (from table III-3) X $5,640/yr = $17,500/yr +

       $5,640/yr = $23,100/yr

  See table V-2.

-------
                                     A-4
     Makeup water quench =  (2 gal/1000 scf  (from Fig. III-9))  X  (5000  scfm)  X

       ($0.25/1000 gal*) X  (60 min/hr) X  (8,760 hr/yr) =  $l,300/yr

     Makeup water scrubber = [19.2 gal/lb of chlorine  (from  text  III-B-5)]  X

       (0.0487 Ib/hr of chlorine/scfm) X  (5000 scfm) X  ($0.25/1000 gal*)  X

       (8,760 hr/yr) = $10,200/yr


     Caustic = [1.14 Ib/lb of chlorine  (from text III-B-5)]  X  (0.0487  Ib/hr of

       chlorine/scfm) X (5000 scfm) X  ($0.10/lb of  100% caustic*)  X (8,760 hr/yr)  =

       $243,200/yr



     Labor = $36,000/yr (from ref 1); the labor cost for  a system without heat

       recovery is $18,000/yr.



Credit =  (13,900 Btu/hr/scfm) X  (5000 scfm) X  ($2.0/million  Btu*)  X (8,760 hr/yr)  =

  $l,218,000/yr



Annual cost = fixed cost  ($840,000) + operating cost  ($1,974,000)  - credit  ($1,218,00

  $1,596,000


Net cost = ^nual cost  ($1 596,000/yr) =  ^^ $/scfm
              Flow rate (5000 scfm)

-------
           OF t- (V s  HI <•>
                    row
                         l"n;>TF,-|T   I .00   BTH/
                        IF n P F R f> IIJ R E  1 •? 0 0  F
      l, A S F
                      01- F G A S
                       FLOW

                      SCFh
CAP I 1 <;
 rnsi
                                                         COST
                                                         (0)00)
OFERf.TTNd  I Hi. I  -Ok-CKI-rn T                 NFT
        DPHKATING          RFCOVFRY     ANNUALT7ED
            COST            CREDIT      COST  OR  P
           (000)             (000)            (000)
 NFT  t,0?T
OR s.'iui ;i"j:
 PFR  son
  i/:-;cFn
      FMCf  TIME
U.T.OSEC
NO  HFAT  F.ECGVERr





RESTHFH,: 1 TnE
0.50PEC
HEAT RECOVERY





700 .
5000.
.'OO'.'O .
5 0 ' ) 0 0 .
J 00000.



700.
5000.
.? 0000.
50000.
10COOO.
rj67 ,
1 o ?, 9 .
2080 ,
,5 "'OS.
575S.



585.
1 1 06.
2471 .
4127.
661 f<.
144,
T01 .
607.
1 O?/).
16i9.



170.
121.
717.
1 1 9 7 .
1919.
73.
113,
1598.
*948.
76
                                                                                                                                100.8t'
                                                                                                                                 95.37
                                                                                                                                332. r^
                                                                                                                                110.22
                                                                                                                                 7 A . 5 0
                                                                                                                                 '    <
                                                                                                                               3-10.02
                                                                                                                               1-1 1 .89
                                                                                                                               11 r>, 61
                                                                                                                               102.69
                                                                                                                                 97.M
                                                                                                                                333.07
                                                                                                                                112.2b
                                                                                                                                 79, 08
                                                                                                                                 A',.37
                                                                                                                                                         Ln

-------
                                           Z  O 33
                                           c,  .  rn

                                               XI J-J
                                           X  -T -
                                           rn   ri -r
                                           I.  m n
                                                                       7? rn  -n
                                                                       "i o  :£
O Cl !^
o o O en
O o o o  M
o o o o  o
o o o o  o
o  ci :,:
o  o o en
oooo  •-,
o  o o o  o
oooo  •:•
o en  t^
ooo a
o o  o c
o o  o c
o o  o o  c
                                         o
o en  --.
c o  o  en
C'  C  O  O Xi

o o  o  o -c
                                                               o  o
                                                               E:  r-
       rj  —
       o-  — en
                            to TJ  en
                            -^ f j  ar
                               tj  M
                               -o  —
                           M * j
                           en o ~
                           en en
 o -J  -^J -J
 CO CD  O-  jj
                                 - en t
                                   en t
                                                                                      O O —
                                                                                      O '.* X
                                                                                      o —' m
            CO ^
            03 en
            -& en
  ,-  ,-j "  o w
 t>-  o ^c  co xi
-O
cct
xi i
                           '^  O **•>  CO XI
                                                                                                                             i
                                                                                                                            —;

                                                                                                                            •n
  -O •  r
                                                                                                                      o z>
                                                                                                                      en 3.
  en x1  cj —
  K- n  -& o f o
  V-. -J  o — -O
  o o  -v o- xi
                e-j
              i  o
                             >  xi ui —
                             -o  xi w o
         i-  rj -
         fO  •< —
   k-^ -• fj   0 -~i
   CO -O O  W OJ
   co -j v  ;.•; ^

   e" '-j •>  -o o
   en rj co  ^  xi
 .v en  -j\ ro
 C?- XI  -> C'-
                                 co  ^ o  ct-
                                  -coo  ui
                                 3  -n ~  's>
                                     3; cp  -i
                                                                                 9-V

-------
OFFf>,
                  Hfnl  filPTFf!! 13.00   PTD/5CF
                      rFdPtRATUftE  1100  F
     fASF
0 . 5 0 S F C
NO HFf.T
          TlhF
        RECOYERV
           iinE
0.50SEC
HEAT RFCllVERY
           '(THE
0.7^r.EC
NO HFAT  RECOVERY
RESTfiFMCT  fthF
0.7PSEC
HE.1T  RhCOVERI
         OFFCAS
           FLOW

         SCFh
                      ;oc>.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                    50000.
                   100000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                    50000,
                   100000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    .70000.
                    50000.
                   I 00000.
                      700,
                     5000.
                    20000.
                    50000,
                   100000.
CAF'IThl
 COST
                                                         OPEPAI"!
                          567.
                         1 039.
                         2080.
                         "1705.
                         575T.,
                          585,
                         1 1 06,
                         2471 .
                         1127,
                         6618.
                          1 074.
                          2258.
                          4022.
                          6321 .
                           5BA,
                          t M 1 .
                          2649.
                          mi,
                          7184.
               MXED
               CCS I
                 164.
                 "'•01.
                 603.
                1 "74.
                 170,
                 321.
                 717.
                ) 1.97.
                1919.
                 165.
                 311.
                 655.
                1166.
                1833.
                 170.
                 331 .
                 769.
                1 T'89.
                2083,
    uii r -(IK
Oi'TRfUTNG
   COST
  (000)
   158 .
  1 020,
  4026.
 10037.
    17A.
  1.035.
  4033.
 10029.
 20o:.'t.
    ir.H.
  jo:;o.
  4026.
 10037.
 20056.
    176,
   1035.
   4033.
                                                                                 i v
 200?I ,
                                                                                  RFOOVFR f
                                                                                  CREUTi
                                                                                  (000)
  28.
 193.
 79?.
1 ?f)0.
3960.
 198.
 79? ,
1980,
^960,
               WET
                   TZED
           COLT  UK  f~RFri.l
                 323.
                1321.
                4629,
               11 I 12.
               217:>S.
  313.
 11*58.
 3958.
 9216.
] 79H.I .
                 323,
                1331.
                4680 ,
               1 1.204.
               218B9,
  318.
 11 68.
 4009.
 •7338,
               NET  COST
              n R  s n v 111 G s
               FFR  PTFM
                  461,00
                  ?6<),24
                  231.44
                  2?.'.2i
                  217.25
2 U .60
19/,HR
1.8 4 , 91
179.81
                  461,41
                  266.27
                  234.02
                  221.07
454.»6
235.6?
20O.47
186.7b
181.45

-------
                                 i
          OFFi'AS  HF.-'if  f.iHITEill  .-'U <
          COhBUSTION rFnF'FRATURF
.;  RTD/SCF
4 df' F
     CASE
OFFOfiB
 FLOU

SCFh
                CAPITAL
                  HOST

                (000)
                      OPFRAI fHl. COST-OR-nKHm f
               IMXED         OPERATING
               COf; I             COST
               (000)           (000)
                                                                                    CRFIHT
                                                                                    (000)
                                                               MET
                                                            nHHUAlIZED
                                                           COST  OR  CKFTi i I'
                                                               (000)
                                                              NET ( o;>r
                                                             OR SAVU.'Gb
                                                              HhF: s( hh
                                                               i/sOFh
RESiriFilCE  TIhE
0.50SEC
NO HFfU RECOyFRf
        ::.  i i HE
0.50SEC
HEAT  RECOVER*
 REsmFMr
 0 . 75SEC
           ITht
   700 .
  5000.
 .10000.
 50000.
I 00000.
   '00.
  5000.
 20000.
 50000.
L00000.
 567,
I o J9.
2080 ,
3"/05.
5755 .
 585.
1 106.
217t .

6618.
 603.
1 <-• 11 .
 170.

 717.
t 197.
19 ) V .
fUJ n 1. 1 . 1 r\ c. u u •/ i- 1 . '




RESmFMOr- ITMF
(I, 75'rFC
HEAT F.FCm.'FR'i




700.
5000.
,.'0000.
50000.
100000.


/ 0 ',; ,
5000.
20000.
50000.
i 00000.
56H.
1.074.
2258.
1022.
6321 .


5So .
Mil.
26'',1/.
/i f> \ A t
7184.
165,
Mil ,
&55
J.166
1£33


170
331
766
1 ?89
2083
                                                                     ."'OH.
                                                                    1 374.
                                                                    51'';.' <
                                                                   13577,
                                                                   27137,
                                                                    1389.
                                                                    54".V.
                                                                   I 3569.
                                                                     208.
                                                                    1 "574.
                                                                    5449.
                                                                   13569.
                                                   0.
                                                   0,
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                 1 98,
                                                 792.
                                                19RO.
                                                3960,
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                   0.
                                                  198.
                                                  792.
                                                 1980.
                                                 3960.
                                                 3/2.
                                                1 A75.
                                                 367,
                                                T.it2.
                                                5374 ,
                                               1?786.
                                               25061.
                                                 373.
                                                1685.
                                                6097,
                                               1 .1 7 11.
                                               ?89/"0.
                                                                                                     368.
                                               t?R78.
                                                                                                 531.HO
                                                                                                 33',. 0':,
                                                                                                 30?, ,'5
                                                                                                 T'VH.OA
                                                                                                 288. •'6
                                                                                                 521.85
                                                                                                 30?.41
                                                                                                 268. ^9
                                                                                                 532,22
                                                                                                 3.57.OB
                                                                                                 304.82
                                                                                                 ?91.88
                                                                                                 289.70
                                                                                                                     301.44
                                                                                                                     271,?7
                                                                                                                                            oo

-------
                   Hi-,iT rniiTFi-'f  =".0.0'"'
                   rncJ rFMPERATURE 140
                     OFF Gf.i
                      FLOW

                     SCFn
RESIIiEfH :  TlhF
0 , SOf-FC
MO HFAT  RECO'.'ER r
      Fili:!'  I FME
0.75SEC
NO  HFiM  RECOVERf
RE'-. Lr'Fi-l
0. 7?SE L
HECiT  RF
           I TrtF
                       / 0 0 .
                      3000,
                     JOOOO.
                     50000,
                    I 00000.
                       700.
                      5000.
                     20000.
                     50000.
                    100000,
Ci1!F II A
 r f i s T

(000)
OPFRATTNli COii f  OR





RESIHE.IDE 11 nE
0.50SEC
HE.'iT RECOVERY





700.
5000.
,100 i'C> .
50000.
tooooo.



7 0 ', ' ,
SO','0.
..'00 '.>('.
50000.
I 00000 .
567
1 039
2030
1705
5 7 5fi



585
1 1 06
2471
11 27
6618
1074,
2258.
1022,
6321 .
 584,
1111,
2649 ,
•M14,
7184,
IJXED
COST
(000)
                 •501.
                 c.03.
                1071.
                1669.
 165,
 111.
 655,
1 166.
1833.
 170.
 111.
                 POP)
                (000)
                                                                       420.
                                                                     11T.1 1 ,
                                                                     2ii7:iO.
1289.
2083.
           420,
          ?89i.
         11511.
         ^87:10.
         574B:.'.
                  43ft ,
                2907.
               lir,1H.
               2B7-12,
               57447,
                          RFCUVFRf
                          cRErm
                          (000)
                                    0.
                                    0.
                                    0.
                                    0.
                                    0.
                                                 NFT
                                                     TZED
                                             CO!1.1 OR  CREDIT
                             28.
                            198.
                            792,
                           19RO.
 NET f'OST
OR SfWIilG;"
 F'FP M.Fn
                                                   DUD .
                                                  A I 93.
                                                1211",,
                                                ?9flT5,
                                                591 T, i ,
170.
121.
717.
1197.
1919.
4 38,
2907.
115IH.
28712.
5744/,
;?H,
198.
792,
1 9BO.
3960.
580
3 0 2 9
1144,1
2 7959
55407
                                                  3203,
                                                 12166.
5931.1;,,


  580.

11495.
                                                                                                         71
                                                             S ^,, '^
                                                             63S.51
                                                             60S,70
                                                             "j 9 6.4 y
                                                             591.51
                                                                                                                         823.,-(0
                                                                                                                         40Sj.86
                                                                                                                         572,15
                                                                                                                         I^V . 17
                                                                                                                         554.07
   6 i 0 . 5 4
   608. ;<9
   "78.33
   593,15
   828.72
   407,8V
   ?74,73
   '/.'.1 . OJ
   555.71

-------
                                   i
     OFFhAs HFAl  rHNTFrlf   I
     COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE


CASE            OFFGAS
                 Fi OU

                SCFli
                                     .00   PTU/SCF
                                      1600 F
                                       CAPI I I'll
                                        TOST

                                       (000)
       OPERATI.NC. (,()!,T -Ok-I.REDIT
,-KEI,          OI'FRATING         RECOVERY
cosr              cor.T            CRFJHI
'
   NET
ANNUAL TZED
ObT  OF1  CREDIT
 i»!F-T  TOST
OR SiWIMGJ
 F-hR  S.CFrf
  •»/t;r,Fri
RESTDEJ!
     M-C
           TIME"
U . UV PI L.
HO HFAT RECOVERY


RESinEflCi flrtE
0 . 50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY

;oo,
5000.
500 0 0 .
1 00000.


"00.
5000.
2 0 0 'J 0 .
50000 .
100000.
587.
1 108.
2698.
1107.
6377.


592.
1 190.
2798.
4701.
755?.
170.
3° 1 .
782,
1191.
18-19.


172.
811 .
1363.
2190.
88.
20 <.>:•',
•1985.
V9V,1.


105.
2010.
4971.
9907.
0.
0.
0.
.
0,


,58.
272 .
1086.
271 6.
5131 .
258.
ft"7- 6.
278/,
61 76.
11801 .


239 .
603.
3619,
 RES ITiFMf'.1"
                                                                                                                              36B. :."'.
                                                                                                                              1 ,',7 . 20
                                                                                                                              139.3d
                                                                                                                              \?. 4.52
                                                                                                                              118,01
                                                                                                                               \ 10 . 6 ','
                                                                                                                                  i. 66
NO HEAT RECOVERY


RES) TiFLnr.:" f 1 HE
o .7T.REC
HEAT RF COVERS
/OO.
5000.
20000.
50000.
I 00000.


700.
5000.
20000.
50000.
100000.
594.
I 149.
2910.
1190.
7057,


599,
1211.
3010.
8232.
172,
333.
844.
1302.
2047 .


174.
357.
873.
J 174.
2387.
88.
*" 1 cr
, J 1 -J .
2005.
1985.
99,.,-.'.


l. 05.
-,30.
2010.
1971 .
V90/ .
0.
0 .
0.
0,
0 .



38.
272.
1086,
271 6.
f.431. .
2oO.
848.
2849.



615.
1797,
3730.
6863.
7~>\ ,
167.
14?.
119.


- , -
12?.
89.
v i ,
68.
5t)
'.,3
98


•vfl
99
84
60
63

-------
           C 0 fl fi U S T 1 0
                        r riT-I T F HI 10.00   B T l) / P T F
                                  F.  1600 F
      CASE
RESiriEMfT Tint
0 , 50SEC
NO HFAT  RECOVERY
         r ITME
0.50SEC
HEAT  RFCOVERY
0.75SEC
NO HEAT
                     OFFGr.S
                      F L 0 U
                     5CFh
         RECOMFRY
CAPITAI
 r.OST

(000)
700,
5000.
'JO 000.
50000.
lOOOt'O,
587.
I 103.
2698.
'1 107,
6377,
170,
3?1 .
78?.
1191.
1849.
i r/ 1
970
3825
'V337
19055
       OPFRATTMr-  rOST-dk  l RED i
FIXED         UPFROTING
COST              POTT           CREIUT
(000)            (000)           (000)
/ 0 0 .
5000.
20000.
50000.
100000,
RES i riFiii:;-" i THE:
0 ,7l~,SFC
HEAT f' F i ' 0 V E R 1
700.
5000,
20000,
5 0 0 0 0 .
J 00000.
594,
11-19.
2910,
1190,
7057.



599,
l ? 3 1 .
3010.
nof)4 ,
823?.
172
333
844
1.302
2047



174
357
873
1-174
2387
                                                                        1 f, A ,
                                                                        V70.
                                                                     19055.
                                                                       169,
                                                                       "-95.
                                                                      ;<87.t ,
                                                                      V'23.
                                                                     19010.
                                                   38.
                                                  ?72,
                                                 1086.
    MET
 AMflDAI TZED
COST OR  fKFru r
    (000)
 K'ET  [,|if. I
OR SAUTJIGt
 PFR  SCFrt
                                                                                                        460f<,
                                                                                                       107?3,
                                                                                                       209 Or,
'00,
5000.
>0000.
50000.
100000,
59?,
1 I 90,
2798,
•1701 .
7552.
172.
3-15.
81 1 ,
] 363.
2190,
16V,
985,
3831 ,
9523.
19010,
38.
T>72 .
1086.
,(716.
5431 .
30?
J 018
3556
in 7i
15769
                                                                   324,
                                                                  1303.
                                                                  466V,
                                                                 10839,
                                                                 21102.
     305,
    1070.
    36 I H.
    8?82.
   15967.
                                                                                    459. ''7
                                                                                    2:.8.24
                                                                                    2 ;0, '10
                                                                                    /1 -:.5f-j
                                                                                    209, (i?
                                                                                                                         •132. 12
                                                                                                                         "M 1. .6^1
                                                                                                                         177,80
                                                                                                                         16 ',. 4 2
                                                                                                                         157,69
                      •562. 17
                      ?-v>,t:'
                      233. ",7
   ? 1 1, 0 3
   180,88
   1 f>"-i, i4
   157,67

-------
OFHiA!>
LOnBUS
                   Hrfil flMlTFfil  13.00  BTU/SCF
                  TION TEfnr'EFi'iTURF  I ft(>C' F
     I.ASE
          OFF GAS
           FLOW

          SCFh
CfiF'TTAL
 COST

(000)
            i  u-ir,  (.of>r -OR- i,Ki-n rr
! i)&;-
COSII  fiR  CREDIT     HIR  i,(,Fh
     (000)           t/SCFM
RESinENf;- Mr-it-
0.5GSEC
NO HEAT  RECOVFRf





RES 1 IiF,li,f | IrtE
0.50SEC
HEAT RFCDVERC





/OO.
5000.
I'vOOO.
5 0 0 0 0 .
I 00000.



700,
5000.
JOOOO.
50000.
L 00000.
587.
1 JOS.
269B,
•'I 107,
6377.



592.
1190.
2798.
1/01.
7552.
170,
3 ? 1 .
732.
II"!.
1 8 4 9 .



I/:-,
345.
811 .
1363.
2190.
173
1 1 22
443;'
1 1 0 "i 4
220 VO



190
1 136
443H
11011
2. M> 4f>
                                                                                           0.
                                                                                           0.
                                                                                           0.
                                                                                           0.
                                                                                           0.
                                                                                          3B.
                                                                                         77 °.
                                                                                        J.OR6,

                                                                                        543 i. .
                                                                                               343.
                                                                                              I 143.
                                                                                              521',,,
                                                                                               324,

                                                                                              4163,

                                                                                             I 8BO4,
                                                                                                                260.74
                                                                                                                '"11. y o
                                                                                                                239. ,<9
                                                                                     462. if.
                                                                                     ?12,00
                                                                                     208. 15
                                                                                     193,76
                                                                                     18 B . <<",
           1 IMF
NO  HFAT RECOUEPY
RESJ TiFfli^  I 1 HF

HEAT  RFCOVER1
                        '00,
                       5000.
                     "..'OOuO.
                     50000.
                     L 0 0 0 0 0 .
                            594.
                           1 1 19.
                           2910.
                           1 -190,
                           7057.
                  172,
                  333.
                  841.
                 1 302,
                 2047.
                  173,
                 1 1 22,
                11OS4.
                22090,
"'00.
5000.
JOOOO.
50000.
i 00000.
599.
1 '31 .
3010.
5084.
8232 .
1.7/i.
357.
873.
1 474.
2387.
190
1 1 36
443?
1 1. 0 1 1
2 2 0 4 '. •
                                                                                          3P,
                                                                                         ?72.
                                                                                        10RA.
                                                                                        °71 6.
                                                                                        5431 .
     I 155.
     5276,

    21137.
                                                                                               326.
                                                                                              t ?22.
                                                                                              4224 ,
                                                                                              9799.
                                                                                             J9001,
49'-.:,;:
2V.,, 96
263.HI

241 ,37
                                                                                     211 . ''2
                                                                                     19 i.'1?
                                                                                     190,01

-------
                                                         A-13
                                                         o
                                                         cj
                                    rx bi

                                    111  X
                             n ,x.  c. fi
                             r. rx  -c c>-
               _  r>  tr.
                   »)  ..": IIT  r. co
                             — in  •*: \r>
                                                                                                                                            CO
                                                                                                                                            o
                  — cj o
                  (_' LJ O
                                                                                                  o  o o ^ o
                                                                                        -c -o  —
                                                                                        cc -r-  ^',
                                                                                        o iv  f
                                                                                        T-I ••-  in
                                                 <•  o> 'x
                                                 cc  u- i-
                                                                          o -r  >-i x;
                                                                          Cf- UT  o: r;
                                                     rj rx  <- o-  tx
                                                     r-j <^  co ir  -<
                                                               ii". cc r;
                                                               cc i^ ^-.
                  x cr. o
                  - o c
                  _ CJ —
r,  co o  •?•
c  r- *-  co
rj Hi — M  c-
rx <- »H o  CN
^ r"  co .T  -i
          —  a
                                                                                                  r.
                                                                                                  rx
if rj rx
-v o <•
CO ~? O
   ^-  Ci
x- rx ho  -o rx
rx u"j rx  rx cc
-H r- co  <~ fi
           i- CJ
    o
    o
                                          ix  oj  co
                                          CO o  o-
                          '  o a  *-< c;
                            O- CN  O uT
                                                                         i-  cj  —  rx
                            -.- i>  o o  rx
                            i> ^  T-* o-  ir>
                            llT T-  O- ^  O
                               T-  cj T"  rx
                     Cr- .H  o x-  CI
                     O-. <*~  —' CO  K)

                     llT r   O O  Ci

                        *-  M .-,  CO
C   LU
cj  a;
                                          ^ o  o o  o
                                          o o  o o  c
                                          r~'  o  o o  o
                                             u~  o o  o
                                                 r; in  o
                        o  o o  o -c-
                        o  o o  o o
                        •x  o o  o o
                            liT O  O O
                               rj  in o
                           o o  o o  o
                           o o  o o  o
                           rx o  o o  o
                               in  o o  o
                                   r; ir)  o
                     <-, o  o o  o
                     O O  O '3  O
                     r-. O  O O  O
                        lil  O O  O
                            C' til  O
                               L4J  UJ C
                               i  X UJ
                               i-i  O X
                               I/)  111
                               UJ   - O
                               or  o z
                                                                  UJ
                                                                  >
                 iji  c
                   •  ui
                 O  X
                                                 o

                                                 LJ
                                          1= CO  UJ
                                          •- L-.  x
                                          c.~ rx
                                                                                                                   x  o
                                                                                                                   U.'  UJ
                                             LT
                                             u,

-------
OFF ;;rr->
CQnPtiM
CASE


RESHtFiiri- TIhE
NO HEr.T RECOVER f





RFsIliniCi M flE
0 . 503FC
HEAT RFCOYERY





RES) PEr-IC:- IThF
0,7f,SKC
rIO HFftT RECOVER/





RES 1 1iFr\ir,l 1 TrfF
0 . 7 f, 5 E C
H E .1 T R F r 0 <,' E R Y





HI- nT i" i i i ' T F i-t 1 5 0 .
1 C N T E rl F E R T, T 1 1 F. F
0 F F G A *
FLOW
SCFh


•'00.
50') '"> .
.'0000.
SOOOO.
tOOOOo.



7 0 0 ,
5 0 0 0 .
20000,
5 0 0 0 0 .
1 00000.



700,
5000.
JOOOO.
5 0 0 0 0 .
100000.



7 '.i 0 .
5000.
20000,
5 u 0 0 0 .
1 00000.
. 0- Fill
I '....-. F
CI'.FT rr.
r.nsr
(000)


537 ,
i ! 08 .
2 6 9 ft ,
11 07.
6377,



592.
1 190.
279H ,
1701 .
7552.



594.
1119.
2910.
••I 10Q.
7057,



599.
1 ? 3 1 .
301 0,
r/0£H .
8232,
' s r F
                OPERA I i I-'I) riir.T-OR-CREOTT
         FIXED          ORFRATING          RFCOVFRf
         cos f              COST            CRFH r r
         (000)            (1)00)            (000)
 170.
 •}?!.
 782,
1191,
1849.
           17?.
           345.
           811 .
          I 163.
          2190,
           17?
           844.
          1102,
          20-17,
           17",.
           3C.7 ,
           873,
          1-174.
          2337.
                          ?993.
                         ItVli),
                         ? 7 7 6 7 ,
                         59516.
                  -i??,
                 3 0 0 8 .
                11 9 ? .<.
                29754.
                G 9 4 71. ,
                           434.
                           '993.
                         1 1 9 ( H ,
                595
                  452.
                 '', 008.
                U9?3,

                5947.,
                                                  ME I
                                               Cii-MlhM 1 ZED
                                              COST OR  CFFTi I F
                                                  d)00)
                                r!ET
                               OR  ?.'
 ?72 .
1086.
.'716.
5431,
  38.
 ?72,
1 OB6.
2716.
5431 .
                127()0,
  586.
 3081 .
1 16''. H ,

56230,
                                                   607 ,
                                                  3326.
                                                 1276?,
                                                 31069.
                                                 61563,
  588.
 1093.
11/10,
?;!:', 1 2.
56427.
                                   035.00
                                   619,16
                                   613, f^5
582. n
')6fi. 0~i
56?,30
                                   866, 7 H
                                   66',. 22
                                   638.08
                                   621.38
                                   615.63
83'»,63
6 1 ff. 61
5 b ci , ", 3
"7'>.2b
564 .27

-------
                    APPENDIX B



ANNUAL COST DATA FOR HALOGEN-CONTAINING VOC CONTROL

-------
                    6 I ' fc <'
                    :r '88
                                                                              '.'! I- t
                                                                      vyz t
                                                                      ' me
                                                                      •60V
                                                                      •sor
'OOOOS
•ij-tooi'
                                                                                                                                                            JV.1H
                    V'} 'iJt I
                    6 C ' UI t
                                                                              1 o ,•: £ i
                                                                              •50V
                                                                              >00l
                                                                                                '861
                                                                                        ' £ L L C
                                                                                        'i8. i
                                                                                                                                              A y 3 A 0 0 3 y  J. V J H  0 N
                                         ' 9 y 6 9
                                          'sty
                                                              ii.
                                                                              •ocv
                                                                              '811
                                                                      '  lt> I

                                                                      '  loi.
                                                                      vor
                                                                                                                  ' 6 1 > I
'00000'
' 0 0 0 0 5
' onooi;
• o o o s
' Ad/
                                                                                                                                                             1V3H
CO

PQ
                                                    Vi/TT
                                                                              'GOT
                                                                                                                                                         IV.iH
,.,'i             (Coo;
 y3J     na JH )  MI)  i ;:u:
"? di.i        Q3Z 1  IVilllK'M
 1 d.l              L3N
                                                                              (000)              (000
                                                                              I MU                isrij
                                                                            ONII'v'M 1.JM          i]3*' ! J
                                                                  I I l| IM I  MM- J SD 1  ')Nil'jy3dO
                                                                                                                  J  0 >'.' 8 I  3 d Cl i V y J d N d 1  N 0 ! 1 I- II a 4 0 )
                                                                                                            Jj'i-lllH   'J'J ' t   ii.'jii'ij I  I'.'dH  M-LJ:MO

-------
            QFFliA^ HM-il  nihfTFfll  1 •"'.'"">   FiT
                      ON IFhPFPf.r'lRF  UJC'O F
                       OFFf.nS
                        FLOW
CAPITA
 TOST
I  I ,,ED
l.Oi. I
...00)
i ML  I'Ui'l  O
 OF'TRATTNG
     LUST
    d'OO)
P F r, 11 y r R
fRFn i i
(000)
     t>i r
 fVIHUAI. 17 Eli
COST OR  fKF)
     (000)
                 i-!FT (  Uf I
                OR  SAVhJuE
                 Pl K t f Frt
PFSTIiFf.'Ht  TlhF
.i.SCSEC
i-JO  hLAT  PECOVFKY
RE c. i ii
       RF'-.M','ERi
 Rfs I ii>--;M,;  i T hF
 o.  ' r>! E r,
 NU  HthT  fECOVF F 1
 f-£•-. I IiFi'Tf   1 I nF-
 0 . 7 T-Q F_ C
 HE ill  RFrii'.'EP'r
                                          1 7.-, 3 ,
                                          7443.
                                            71 .5,
                                           I 3'! 9 ,
                                          23SA .
                                          ri .90.
                                          9293.
                                           I -'87.
                                           2773,
                                            7 1 7 .
                                           1110.
                                           3047,
                                                             1 « 7 .
                                                                1 .
                   2496,
                    r?n.
                    373.
                    801 .
                   I ri 1 7 .
                     109,
                     894 .
                                                                               ,',07 I ,
                                                                               7 6 ci 1 ,
                                      142,
                                      7?Lj.
                                     3073,
                                     76? 9,
                                    15222,
      125.
      7fJl.
    307 I  ,
    7 6 ci 1 .
                                       79
                         50000.
                        I 00000,
                        372.
                       1 489 ,
                       3723 .
                       / /; /; ^ ,
                        372.
                       1 1PV,
                       3 7 ? 3 .
                       7 4 '1 6 ,
                                                                           321,
                                                                          M 37,
                                                                          38'.\9 ,
                                                                          9012.
                                                                         1 7 4 *. 3 ,
                                          ? 9 / «
                                          R1 4 ,
  323,
 1 1 ""j 5 ,

 •>i AS.
1 77 I ,-.
                                                                            R32
                                                                            4? ''.,''

                                                                            121. C.
                                                                            1 1 •;.!;•
                                                                            105, /
                                                                               , , V "•
                                                                               > . 91
                                                                            I?,
                                                                            123. 3E>
                                                                            1 1 -' . 2 -
                                                                            107.  ii

-------
L I ' /> \ l * c I 6 1 I
•"-, o • i- .: i w o v
C 0 ' f_j 'i I ' V 0 i C
<:o •*<-!. '068
'S'itfr 'V0£


CK'Bol "C888T
'",0 "=;.'• t 'iTt^A
Vi- "-;OL '60 IV
o '•? • i, ;• •: ' £ c <: i
i >• * o i. i ' i - F


1 1 • v 1 1 • i i' y 1. 1
'•. C ' C 0 I 'CUV
v :' ' (.. '' 1 !a G 9 O
;: s H / 1 • £ i. e
<>/> ''-i£t< 'S0£


1
M 1 1 ' 9 8 1 ' f I y 8 I
t- £ ' L A i • i I y />
;.: i ' ' o c ' c 9 o t-
'-' 0 ' 6 L <: ' 5 6 I I
L, .'. ' ,' i. i- ' 0 £ i!



Wd'iH/ i (000 >
wdjs y 3d j i uda ) a o i soj
spc'ii'Wb yu aa/:i iviiHuy
1503 IB;) i3w

' V ',' V (. ' \ 6 £ 9 (
' Eo^i: ' t [08
• /, (.j «/ 1 • ^ o £ y.
'C^L 'i-'^a
'tTS 'O'JC


'0 '£'.A'9T
* 0 ' S £ L, 8
' 0 * Li 0 i. £
' 0 ' 0 ir 8
•0 '££1


' 9 V t ^ ' I ,', £ 9 1
'£l) '££[



(000) (000)
i j ijsyo isuj
AddAUUda OMliUH j.dO
j m:iM:)-M.i-jsn:) ONiiv:

W6?^ 'OECOl '000001
Vi<_l '8&OV 'OOOOS
' V 8 8 V ^ 0 £ * 0 0 0 0 (",
•601 '0 tl I 'OOOS
•80'? ' /: 1 1 • o o /


'^\,~C 'S££8 'O'iOO'ji
VT L 1 ' T i •- "i ' 0 0 0 0 S
•V08 '£i^e 'OOOC-r
•E^t 'ttJol 'OOOS
•861 -L;B'J *oo/
X

•96°'J *86i.'6 '000001
•lc.'-l '06','j 'OOOOS
' i'£tt ' °38o ' OOOOi'
* 1 6 i. ' i i. k. l '0 0 0 S
V.O; '£!/ '004



•8S1" '£!'',/ '000001
•lyti. 'E1-..; -oooo!;
VS;: TT9T 'OOOOi'
' 9 'J l. * " J o i • 0 0 0 5
V6I "S^V '00.'



(00^) (000; U|dJ9
iSOJ
a 3 v ( i i s o j 11 o "i d
J3dO I'MJdyO iVDddO
d COST 3?ni"d3dNjJ N'Ji t'r





i M 3 Al l 'J d a J V 3 H
dWl 1 i'Ji-HU l bdy





d3o033d iVdH ON
,, ^3S"'°
dwu ,,ih'jaib3.d




lyaAuody 1V3H
D3SOS'"
3WU H'Jt'JU Ib3y





/dBAOZlji-1 1VJH UN
OISO'J'O
JWU J )i'3iH^3vl



3Sy.
; u y M o "J
dJb/iiiH    00 'it   LiJJil-'Oj   IVJH  LV'JddO

-------
                                                    B-6
          >-  u-  u:
          UJ     '—
                                      rj  '1  O ^
                                      r  in  --T  O

                                      II. <  o »
                                      •>  <;  to -
                                      ^ c<  r~4 r.
                          t*i .1  o
                          -o c  -o
              ui  i:
              tv  <_ •—
              j-     O
          t-  _,  a: c-
          UJ  *-.
 l<- -O i-.
                                       o o  o o  o
                                                                                               c. o  o o  o
                                                                                          Cr- to  -C
                                                                                          CC Ci  T
                                                                                          T r-.  rr
           UL

           O
           tn  t—  i/) o
           c:  <;  o c
           t_  Lt  'J ^
             o
             co
c; o to  rx *>
v. o- u"  rx T-
T-- O- CC  L~ --
                           o o ro  r^
                           r^ »> IT,  i^-
                           ^< i> m  tr
                                  ri  cs

                                                                                                       -q- r~»  o-
                                                                                                       o T-  ci
                                                                                                       no .~  ^
                                        a: o  r. ^ t
                                        iv r..  ^  c
                                         O C   ^O "V
                                o- <.  o m
                              i  <- co  o~ o-
a  r~. f.  1-1
OD  or iv.  r- -
-o  r-  r^  c
                                                                                        <-  o c~  r,
                                                                                        —  to <•  o
Uj O
                                         c~5  O O  O O
                                         o  o o  o o
                                         f-.  O O  C C
                                             IP o  o O
                                                 ",  ti~ O
                                 O O  O O
                                 o o  o o
                                 O O  O O
                                 m o  o o
                                    TJ  UT O
 z^ o  o o  o
 O C  O O-  CJ
 ^  o  o o  o
                                                          : o  o o o
                                                          •-_ o  o o o
                                                          r> ooo o
                                                             in  o o o
                                                                 <-' in o
J-  -C
u_  ^

O  _!
                                M .;.  x
                                u'. u~
                                LU   -  a
                                                            z u  u.
                                                            u.1 ui  a:
                                                                            ^ O  u-

                                                                            U_ UlJ  LC.




                                                                            rj- tx  .,:

                                                                            U.   *  !JU

-------
           OF; r
           L D n'
                IP ] I OK'  FFhPFRATUPE
, 0 0  P T11 '
 1300 F
       H b E
C . 50?EC
NO H F i*: T
             Trtf"
         R E C 0V E R 'r
RES I linn'
0 . 5 0 S E C
MEAT K'Ff.
           1 1 (It
RE1; i TiFiii;:  Tint
0.75SEC
NO  HEAT  PECOVERT
                     OFFGAS
                       FL''iU)

                     SCFfl
                       5000,
                      ,200V''.
                      5 o 0 o 0 ,
                     LOOOOO.
  TAP i  (I,
   r n s T
   e-8.
  1 ??&,
  2612,
  17 6 2 ,
  7 -! 4 :•:.





RESUiFJin- Tlrif
0 . 7T.SE C
HEAT PFCnUER'r





70'j,
5 " 0 0 .
.'0000,
5 0 0 0 0 ,
iOOO',,0.



700.
5000.
20000,
50000.
i Od 000,
68,''
1237
2773
V3]
8375



/1 /
1-MO
3047
6 OS 3
10230
                  FIXED
                  C'OST
                  (000*
700,
5 0 0 0 .
>OOoO,
5" ','00,
1 00000 ,
713.
1 VI 9 .
2886,
T590.
929P.
207
391
S3 7
1 6 M
2696
                                                        198,
                                                        208.
                                                        109,
                                                        SR'i ,
                                                       1757.
IC i;u:, r-ok -( KI u r i
 OF'FRATTNG         Rl- Cn'/iFR
    COS.!"            CREUTT
   (000)            (000)
   6163,
  1."",.", 4 4 .
  308/O,
                                                                         251,
                                                                        1ri75,
                                                                        6190.
                                    1 5*1 .
                                    6188.

                                  30370.
                                   1 '75.
                                   61 90,

                                  30308,
                                                     37'',
                                                    14«V,
                                                    37">3.
                      D J .
                     372.
                    1 1 ft v ,
                    3 7 ? 3 .
                    7440,
     NFT
 AflHDiH T7.ED
ror. r  ni:  (
     (000)
                                     1916.
                                      4 0 A ,
                                     11)93.
                                     553S.
                                     6992,
                                    1A9A1 ,
                                    332VH.
      '4 (I 7 ,
     1611,
     5585,

   26328,
 CFT  msi
OP VillTiJG:-
 P£P  SfFrt
                        i'/,:/ v
                        <,.<•. .50
                       •30. ^S
                                                                                                                                                    w
                                                                                                                            3 '19 , 6 •
                                                                                                                            "^"^9, 21

-------
                                      B-8
                                                     o
                                                     X
                                                      r--  T- P^
                                                                 *-  If
  us  :=:
  r,  !_'  —
ij~i 'X"  X  ." u~i
    -,  o  < ci
                                                                                  OD co  v i-1   :•
                                                                                  •o o  x o   ::
                                                                                  L.-I t>-  cc r-  rv
                                                                                     ~-  c <•  r
                                                                                         ^-  -;  ui
                                                                                    •3- 0~  IX '>  -
                                                                                    in L~  ^' ^-  x
                                                                                       r.  t>-  -;  L"
                                                       r. cs  f>- <•)  -.5
                                                       L". r.  TO '* -  <"
                                                                                    r.  r.  -^ f-.  -c
                                                                                    L",  P-  i; C-  -v
-  <:  o c
_  ilC  U C
                                                       00 *T  "^   •£ 0?
                                                                  .-  o
                                                                  "«  t~
                                                         •~- tl~i b~ !i~>  -
                                                         r% ,"  -JL >r f.
                                                         t-T l~ O ^ K
                                                            r, O  .- O
                                                                —i r. L-.
                                                                                                               co  o- "^ f
                                                                                                               CO  T ~ -O
                                                                                                                   r.  O ." O
                                                        C,  '> r«  '~- O-
                                                                                                                           r-. o
                                                                                                                           ^ rj
                                                                                                                 rv  o  r-- ''o  c-

                                                                                                                 ^  -  o o  r,
                                                                                                                     —  ri -c  o

-------
• >•'. n -1/9',
.-. - ' £ £ T • i L 9 .;
•--•"'- i L ' 6 L b
i ' ' ''•; ;- ':;<.'£


'''a ' 1 -"L ' Oi. 0 I 1
> '- ' V £ J • t. i L t-
<:!"•••<:;: 'laii
re. '6 IS "^s>£


/i'^.''l 48yi.S
t 0 ' t. 'J I ' >lu 'j£
R £ ' 6 v i via
>' I ' £ >. '•,' * £ 0 £
0>
1
«
'" <- ' 6 'I 'J ' / fclAO I
8 L" £ £ r • v ^ '• t-
'• _ ' 6 v .. ' i v v. I
f L ' U I S ' A L; £


'•IJ'jb , i ( 000 i
I-H J? J id 1 i u J.I J a u is CO
"UJH iTi'v1 :• du ii jz i lUdi'SJ1;
1 'l1-1 iJ.J 13!J
' L £ I v » ,f. i o (0
' i £ i' C ' £ L) V £
' £ [ v ' ". i, 6
' V H '£91


' 0 4 0 L f ''>
* 0 ' £ 9 " £
1 0 ' A J A
4 0 ' V V 1


4 Ci. t V ' 6i'06
4£Sl'.J "Z'jVE
4 £ f V ' 0 t 6
> 9 8 > 1 9 1



* 0 40£l .3
• n ' y 9 9 £'
'0 '6J.S
'0 'VH


<.Oi.uo '000)
1 i UJdJ ISUJ
,' HJ^iJ'Jdd HiJIi'.'d j.Jn
j i a.iH i-yo- Ji.o.i 'IN i j '.' a 3
' t- L ': <: • l r i, t, • •) o o o 5
• Ti.t-1 ,_C"5 • '"'.O^.'
4'"L.L. 4£0.-|. 40'''05
4 l£o ' ^6,'_ ' 'J'.v
'j.-iS1:,,-: • o
'U1J 'Jl'3il [c3-.t
•060<: vo._v 4oooo'--,
•woi -TT^E ''---.oo..

'ST.: '£'J/ '00;
i. a 3 ("i 0 11 3 H i ' ' j H 0 N
"JWI 1 1 ii'3'liS3y
' T v U. ' 3 1 ; H '0 0 n 0 S
4 L. 6 £ 1 'HlSt' ' 0 0 0 0 r
4 o i. o • •: 6 ^ i • o M c s
'VoL '16^ '00-:
^ aSiMj :H ^ i>. in
T3 •; ' ' 'T 4 ' ;
JW [ L • i'( T] j -3d
' ^ j y i ' -• o ' y 4 o * i '.'• o ^
'£00 1 -«bi£ 'O'-JOJ
* .t. 1- '' 4 V t, 1, i 4 '; 0 0 i
'£TC  U .i 3 S
ISO')
'J3'' J .1 !.SL> _. f u"l d
dd T.'iTdHj bU'jJHO 3?A'J

-------
r.£' '.  I I
                                       '8l<:/
                                       '60££
                                       '8£0 l
                                       '0££
                                        i y
                                    ' V8
                 'l/S'-'O I

                 ' TO U
                                                                      'V9/ f
                                                                      'OSL,
                                                                      1 T£C
                                 '06 (A
                                 ' S S 0 S
                                 ' 8 o b I
                                                                                                                              J.V3H
O
r-i
 I
                   '(r IH<" I
                   ' "^t'j
                   1 6 S. L L
                   '98£
                    'S869
                    'l^Ji:
                    '900 [
                                       • T b' ['I
                                       •(joes
                                       VO'J I
                                       • T8£
'0
•0
•0
•0
                                     TTV
                                     •98
•SiYOT

•0*0 I
•89T
                                                                         • fr 8"01
                                                                         1 != 6 o t-
                                                                         1 TO I f
                                                     • y? t
                                                                      'Si '
                                                                                          'OS',
                                                                                          '8TC
                                                                                                           I Si
                                                   ' (08V
                                                   1 i_t><: t
                                                   ' t,LL
'00<'OS

'OOOS
" 0 0 (
                                                  •oooos
                                                  •oooo.:
                                                  ' 0 0 0 &
                                                  ' <'i 0.'.
                                                                                                       ' 0 0 0 0 5
                                                                                                       •oooo<:
                                                                                                       • o (• o s
                                                                                                                           iy3H ON
                                                                                                                           DBSUd'O
                                                                                                                         ;;u;3u isaa
                                                                                                                           33SOS ' 0
                                                                                                                           1V3H  ON
                                                                                                                           03i;oi'o
                                                                                                                          ji.i3ur;3d
 MJJU/t
L9UJ  Jj.'J
                    (000)
                      HO  i
                      13H
                                     (000)
                                               :i;i
                                                     (000)
                                                                                          (00")
                                                                                           1SOO
                                                   ( 0 0 0 )

                                                   15 UJ
                                                 VJ1 Ld'.'J
                                                    WJ3S

                                                   ncn j
                                                                                                      J.JM JJ I"H i
                                                                                                   NJIMO.I J'J3H

-------
                ^ HE AT Curl TENT 1,<,oO
                S' I0fl TrrlPF
                    OFFfir.s
                     FLOu

                    SCFh
T t. P I T A L
 COST

(000)
      OPFRA1 i hit)
I TXED         OPERATING
COST             COST
(000)           (000)
                                RFCOMFR f
                                CREDIT
                                (000)
                NET
             AHrlDAI TZED
            COST OR
                (000)
                                               KET  ! I)!.T
                                              OR  SAVTHGS
                                               H-R  ',( FK
                                                WJCFh
RESTDEMTF  TlhF
0 . f.O^EC
NO HEAT  RECOVERY
RESIDENCl  rihf
0.50SEC
HEAT RFCOVERY
RESUiEMCi,  UhL
0.75SEC
NO HEAT  RECOVERY
         H-  Tlht
0.7T.3EC
HEAT RFCOVERY
                      7 0 0 ,
                     5000,
                    JOOOO.
                    50000.
                       .'00,
                     5000,
                    150000,
                    50000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                    50000.
                       700.
                     5000.
                     _'0000.
                     50000.
 733.
1 137.
3-131 .
 779.
1785.
4795.
B377.
 750.
1^18,
3685,
7153.
 796.
J896.
50'',9.
9180.
 213,
 117.
 995.
1 ft 41.
 T1S.
1391.
 218.
 -119,
1069,
                 176,
                11-13.
                15 J V,
               11271.
                 193.
                1154.
                4r.('V,
                1?20,
 1 76.
1.1 -13.
4519.
 231.
 rlciO,
  193.
 1154.
 450V .
1 1 2"'0.
  86.
 61 3,
2153.
6132.
                                  P6,
                                 613,
                                2453,
                                6132,
                                                 388.
                                                                                                   13112.
                                                 332.
                                                 393.
                                                1H92.
                                                5588.
                 337.
                1091 .
                35?1 ,
                7750.
                                 31.3.03
                                 275,70
                                                 •'.75, 00
                                                 211 .78
                                                 172.37
                                                 150.34
                                 561.53
                                 31B,46
                                 279.38
                                 266.90
                                                 •»8? . 0-1
                                                 218.22
                                                 17,A, 05

-------
•Ji
                            HE
             f A b E





       RE'"] UFMiT TlhF

       NO  hFnl"  F'EC OVERT
                 ;   II hi
        0.5','SEC
        HEAT  R F C 0 yE R Y
        p. E c> T n E 111: i   11 h i
        0. 7T.PEC
        NO  HFAf RECOVERY
        REST riFrii,;  Tint
        0.75SEC
              RFCOVERY
,,[ fOHTFNT
PO.OO HTU/SCF





N TFrtf-'FRATlJRr 2~'Mi F
OFFCr.b
F L 0 U

SCi-'n
.' 0 0 .
5000.
,?000i,'.
50000.
'00 .
5C 00 .
20000.
50000.
.' 0 0 .
5 000.
.!0000,
5 0 0 0 0 .
'00.
5000.
'_' 0 0 0 0 ,
5 o • ) 0 0 .
CAP- [Tr'il
HOST

( 0 0 0 )
73P.
1 13 2.
3415.
,',618.
777.
1 "'fil .
478P.
S154.
749 .
1 ", 1 3 .
3669,
7121 .
794,
1 '(92 .
5036.
71 57,

! i X E D
COf,)
( uOO )
212,
11 5.
•' 9 0 ,
1332.
?25.
", 1 7 .
13B7,
:"! ? 3 .
"•17
118.
1064.
.'065 .
230.
^ 1 9 .
1461 .
P655.
OPERA T TNT, ruiJI -(IK -(
(IPFRATIHG
COST
(000)
1 93,
1 "' 6 8 ,
5018.
1 P -j 1 9 .
P1 0 ,
1 P 7 9 .
f.fM'V.
1P168.
193,
1 P 6 8 .
501 R,
1P519.
"MO,
1 P79,
5009.
1 -M68.
KFIi i f
RFCDUFR (
CREDIT
(000)
0.
0.
0.
0.
86.
613.
2153.
61 32.
0.
0,
0,
0,
86.
613.
P 4 ?, ?•
.1132.
MET
AMrlUrM TZEB
COT. 1 OR (.RFfMT
(000)
105,
1683,
6009.
1 
-------
              lifrl.A^  hfi'.T  C.UNTEMT  50 . u»   Ull
              I ri'-.;?','0  F
       CASF
REr.IIiE-.Hr!-  TIME
'.) . 50SE C
Mi  HE. AT  RECQ'.'FRi
REbHifili:!   flhF
0.506EC
Hf.T  RFCrtVERY
RES1 DEfli I   I I fit
o. 7fi3t L
Nu  HEAT  KECOVFRY
R t S T n F111,!   1 ] n I
\i. 7 <". S E C
IK AT  PFCHYERY
G 1- t- U A S
FLUU

E C F h
• 0 v .
5 0 0 0 ,
.'0000.
ft 0 0 ''' 0 .
/' 0 ' '
5000.
..'00','u ,
SOOoO.
.'00.
5000,
20COO,
5 0 0 0 0 .
.'O'i ,
500'1.
.'00 («<.
50000.
C A F1 1 T A L
CfKT

(000)
•7-MT
1 110.
33-18,
.1 J 8 3 ,
772 ,
1763.
472ft.
ft '52.
T /' --J
1 -j 2 1 .
3 A 0 ? ,
6 9 f : 6 .
739,
1 Fi 7 f, ,
'1980.
9055.

F f X E D
c o;.T
(000)
2 1 0 .
109,
971 .
1 793.
221.
ill.
1370.
''393.
?JT-.
1-1] .
101?.
-'026.
229,
c. 1 -1 .
144-1.
7' A 2 6 ,
OF'FRA 1 i Md ( (i!) f
OPFRATIi'
COST
'000)
26R,
1 803.
71 :",•• ,
1 7fj70.
235.
1814.
7119.
1 7R19.
">68.
1 F)03.
7ir,v,
17870.
265.
1 81 <\ .
?-\ A(/ ,
1 7R19.
dR-( RhDTT
< G F' F C i ) V F R i
T F' F f M r
(000)
0 ,
0 .
0.
0.
R6.
413,
? ') ft 3 ,
 1 4 .
8 2 ('3 .
1"R96.
428.
1715.
41 ",<>,
M S1 3.
rlET i ii!, I
0 F1 T A y 1 i , G F.
HI R ;.( K.i
t.".;CFM

-112,44
-1 0 0.49
393. 2i
6 0 'i , 0 v
3-1"'. 5'.'
,-. 0 ^ . ,'• 4
231 . 60
r,90. I 1
-1 1 Ft , £ f|
410. 17
397 .92
(* 1 1 , i ,-'
3 i S . 9 J
307.01
,"> R A . 2 1

-------
             UFFCAS  HE''iT I  OHTFf-n U'O. uv   HTll/SCF
             CCir^UM Iii.l  iriiPEKATHRF  .'"'<><> f
      CASE
KFSTDEclCl  TIME
0 . 5 f> SEC
(HJ  HEf.T  FECO'-'ERi
REi-.Tl~iE.IU  I mi-
ll . 5'">SEC
HEAT  R F CI) \i E P- i
       £f!H!   flME
0.75SEC
NO Hfr.T  RECOVER I
      •lENC:' TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT  RFCiiyERY
OFFOA3
FLUU

S C F .1
;00.
5000.
JO 000.
5 0 0 0 0 ,
' O'l> V
5 0 0 0 .
joooo.
5 0 0 0 0 ,
700.
5000.
.'0000.
50000.
700.
5 0 0 0 .
.JOOC.O.
5 0 0 0 0 ,
Ci'.PT I t.\
HOST

(000)
71-;,
1 "I 7 .') ,
3236.
•=-<-"=; 9.
762
1 734 .
'1631 ,
R 0 ft 4 .
731 .
1 435.
3490,
6762.
''79,
1 f) 1 5 .
',885.
3 rt f i ""• .

n XED
COST
d)00)
207.
198.
=•39.
1 7 •> S ,
221 .
103.
1 ? 4 3 .
? •". 1 -1 .
21?,
-131.
101?,
I9M.
126.
135.
1 '1 1 / ,
"•> r *7 "7
OPERATING TOP f -UK-
OPERATING
I Of" 1
( MOO)

? 6 9 5 .
10726.
r'.^Sw,
4 .1 (i ,
''706.
10716,
?6737.
393.
->695.
10726.
?6788.
410,
?706,
10716.
?.'.737.
ChlDu 1 NET
RFCOMFR f AHrlDAI TIED
CREHTT COM OR rp.FTUT
(000) (000)
0 . 60 0 ,
0. ,4093.
(i, 11665.
|fi2.
HFT (,HM
OP -1.v,ir1'6<
PER SCF'l

85.-, i-i 7.
ii 8 , t v
58T. , ''/.
', 70,3 ^
7 -; 3 . 5 4
•5 t 9 . 1 L,
460.31
VlB.95
8 d 3 . H fl
ft , ' '-j . 1 '.
C 3 6 , '- 1
1 7 'i * V TJ
''SS.St
5/1 .er
•', "i : ;• ">
j» ^ / 1 ^ ^
 I
(-1
*-

-------
          OFFGAS HFAT CONTENT   1.00   BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE  2600  F
     CASE
RESIDENCE TIMF
0.50SEC
NO HFAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                   OFFGAS
                    FLOU

                   SCFH
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000,
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
1190.
2649,
5807.
1208.
2903.
7238.
1240.
2879.
6467.
1258.
3133.
7898.
      OPERATING COST-OR-CREIHT                NET           NET COST
FIXED        OPERATING         RECOVERY     ANNUAI.IZFD      OR SAVINGS
COST            COST           CREDIT      COST OR CREDIT    PER SCFM
(000)           (000)           (000)           (000)           $/SCFM
 345.
 768.
1684.
 350.
 842.
2099.
 360.
 835.
1875.
 365.
 909.
2290.
 270.
1821.
7230.
 286.
1822.
7181 .
 270,
1821,
7230,
 286,
1822,
7181 ,
 170.
1218,
4871 .
 170.
1218.
4871 .
                615.
               2589.
               8914,
 466,
1447,
4409,
                630,
               2656,
               9106,
 480.
1513,
4601 ,
                879.?0
                517.85
                445.71
665.51
289.31
220.47
                899.92
                531 . 19
                455.28
686.23
302.65
230.04

-------
          OFFGAS  HEAT  CONTENT 10.00  BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 2600 F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOW

SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-QR-CREDIT
FIXFP        OPFRATING        RECOVERY
COST'           COST          CREDIT
(000)          <°00>          <000)
              NET
           ANNUALIZED
          COST OR CREDIT
              (000)
              NET  COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PER  SCFM
               $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HLAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
 RESIDENCE  TIME
 0.75SEC
 NO HEAT  RECOVERY
 RESIDENCE TIME
 0.75SEC
 HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                1187.
                2638.
                5777,
                1206.
                2896,
                7216,
                1237.
                2868,
                6437,
                 1256.
                 3126.
                 7876.
                344.
                765.
                1675.
                 350.
                 840.
                2093.
                 359.
                 832.
                1867.
                 364.
                 907.
                2284.
                292.
                1973.
                7836.
                 307.
                1974.
                7787.
                1973.
                7836.
                 307.
                1974.
                7787,
   0.
   0.
   0.
 170.
1218,
4871.
 170.
1218.
4871 ,
 636.
2738.
9512.
 486.
1596.
5009,
                650.
               2804.
               9703,
  501 .
 1663,
 5201 .
908.39
547.55
475.60
694.97
319.22
250.47
                 929. 11
                 560.89
                 435.12
 715.69
 332.56
 260.04

-------
          OFFGAS HEAT CONTENT 13.00  BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 2600 F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOW

SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CRFDIT
FIXED        OPERATING        RECOVERY
COST            COST          CREDIT
(000)          (000)          (000)
               NET
            ANNUALIZED
           COST  OR  CREDIT
               (000)
              NET  COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PER  SCFM
               */SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO  HEAT  RECOVERY
 RESIDENCE  TIME
 0.75SEC
 HEAT  RECOVERY
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                    20000.
               1186.
               2635.
               5768,
                1205.
                2894.
                7209,
                1236.
                2865.
                6428.
                1255.
                3124,
                7869,
                344.
                764.
               1673.
                349.
                839.
               2091 .
                358.
                831.
                1864.
                 364.
                 906.
                2282.
                299.
               2023.
               8038.
                 314.
                2024.
                7989.
                 299.
                2023.
                8038.
                 314.
                2024.
                7989,
   0.
   0.
   0.
 170.
1 218.
4871.
 170.
1218.
4871 ,
 643.
2787.
9711 .
 493.
1646,
5209,
                657.
               7854.
               9903.
  508.
 1713.
 5401 ,
918. 12
557.46
485.56
704.79
329.20
260.47
                 938.84
                 570.80
                 495.13
 725.51
 342.54
 270.04
                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                 h-1
                                                                                                                 ^-J

-------
          QFFGAS HEAT  CONTENT  20.00   BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE  2600 F
     CASE
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NT) HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SFC
HEAT RECOVERY
                   OFFOAS
                    FLOU

                   SCFM
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000,
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
1184.
2627.
5745.
1203.
2889.
7193.
1234.
2857.
6405.
1253.
3119.
7853.
      OPERATING  COST-OR-CREDIT
COST
(000)
 343.
 762.
1666.
 349.
 838.
2086.
 358.
 829.
1857.
 363.
 904.
2277.
OPERATING
   COST
  (000)
   315.
  2141.
  8510.
   331.
  2142.
  8461.
   315.
  2141.
  8510.
  331.
 2142.
 8461 .
                               RECOVERY
                               CREDIT
                               (000)
                                 0.
                                 0.
                                 0.
                               170.
                              1218.
                              4871.
                               170.
                              12J8.
                              4871 .
    NET
 ANNUALIZED
COST OR CREDIT
    (000)
     659.
    2903.
   10176.
     509.
    1762.
    5676.
                                              673.
                                             2970.
                                            10367.
     524.
    1829.
    5867.
 NET COST
Oft SAVINGS
 PFR SCFM
  t/SCFM
   940.83
   580.56
   508.80
   727.70
   352.46
   283.80
                    961,54
                    593.90
                    518.37
  748.42
  365.80
  293.37
                                                                                                 ta
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                                                    co

-------
          OFFGAS HEAT CONTENT 50.00  BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 2600 F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOU

SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CRFPIT
FIXED        OPERATING        RECOVERY
COST            COST          CREDIT
(000)          (000)          (000)
               NET
            ANNUALIZED
           COST OR CREniT
               (000)
               NET COST
              OR SAVINGS
               PER SCFM
                $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                   20000.
                      700.
                    5000.
                    20000,
               1175.
               2592.
               5647.
               1197,
               2866.
               7122.
               1225.
               2822.
               6307.
                1247.
                3096,
                7782,
                341 .
                752.
               1638.
                347.
                831 .
               2065.
                355.
                819.
               1829.
                362,
                898.
               2257.
                386.
               2646.
              10530.
                402.
               2647.
              10481.
                386.
               2646.
               10530.
                 402.
               2647.
               10481 .
   0.
   0.
   0.
 170.
1218.
4871.
   0.
   0.
   0.
 170.
1218.
4871 .
  727 .
 3398 .
12168.
  578.
 2261 .
 7676,
  741 .
 3465.
12360.
  593.
 2328.
 7867.
1038.12
 679.59
 608.41
 825.89
 452.17
 383.80
1058.84
 692.93
 617.98
 846.61
 465.51
 393.37
                                                                                                                                    W

-------
1
ir'Ala
                 OFFGAS  HFAT CONTENT 100 . 00  BTII/SCF
                 COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 2600 F
            CASE
                         OFFGAS
                          FLOW

                         SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
                                                        FIXED
                                                        COST
                                                        (000)
OPERATING CflST-OR-CRFPIT
       OPERATING        RECOVERY
          COST          CRF.niT
          (000)          (000)
               NET
            ANNIJALIZED
           COST OR CREDIT
               (000)
               NET  COST
              OR  SAVINGS
               PER  SCFM
                t/SCFM
       RESIDENCE TIME
       0.50SEC
       NO HEAT RECOVERY
       RESIDENCF TIME
       0.50SEC
       HEAT RECOVERY
       RESIDENCE  TIME
       0.75SEC
       NO HEAT RECOVERY
        RESIDENCE  TIME
        0.75SEC
        HEAT  RECOVERY
                            700.
                           5000.
                           30000.
                            700.
                            5000.
                           20000.
                             700.
                            5000.
                           20000.
                             700.
                            5000.
                           20000.
                                        1160,
                                        2535.
                                        5485,
                                         1185.
                                         2828.
                                         7004.
                                         1210.
                                         2765,
                                         6145,
                                         1235.
                                         3058.
                                         7664.
                336.
                735.
               1591 .
                 344.
                 820.
                2031,
                 351 .
                 802.
                1782.
                 358.
                 887.
                2223.
          504.
          3488.
         1389R.
           519.
          3489.
         13849.
           504.
          3488.
         13898.
           519.
          3489.
         13849.
   0.
   0.
   0.
 170.
1218.
4871.
 170.
1218.
4871 .
  840.
 4223.
15489.
  693.
 3092.
11009.
                855.
               4290.
               15680,
  707.
 3158.
11201 .
                1200.29
                 844.63
                 774.43
                 989.55
                 618.36
                 550.47
                1221.00
                 857.97
                 784.00
                 1010.26
                  631 .70
                  560.04
                                                                                                  f

-------
          OFFGAS HEAT CONTENT  1,00  BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 3000 F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOU

SCFrt
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CREDIT
FIXED        OPERATING        RECOVERY
COST            COST          CREDIT
(000)          (000)          (000)
               NET
            ANMUALI7.ED
           COST OR CREPT!
               (000)
              NET COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PFR SCFM
               t/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                     5000.
               1870.
               4878.
               2090.
               5548.
               1970.
               5638.
               2190.
               6308,
                542.
               1A 1.5 .
                606.
               1609.
                571,
               1635.
                635.
               1829.
                782.
               5472.
                798.
               5480.
                782.
               5472.
                798.
               5480.
   0.
   0.
 530.
3784.
 530.
3784,
1324.
AR87.
 874.
3304.
               1353.
               7107.
 903.
3525.
1891.13
1377.41
1249.04
 660.87
               1932.55
               1421.49
1290.47
 704.95
                                                                                                                W

-------
          OFFfiAS HEAT CONTENT  10.00   PTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE  3000  F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOU

SCFH
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CRFDIT
FIXED        OPERATING        RECOVERY
COST            COST          CREDIT
(000)          (000)          (000)
               NFT
            ANNUITIZED
           COST OR CREDIT
               (000)
              NET COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PER SCFH
               $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0 .50SEC
NO HFAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESHiFNCF  TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                    5000.
                     700.
                     5000.
                1865.
                4859.
               2086.
               5537.
                1965.
                5619.
                2186.
                6297,
                541.
               1409.
                605.
               1606.
                570.
               1629.
                634.
               J826.
                801 .
               5610.
                817.
               5617.
                801.
               5610.
                817.
               5617.
 530.
3784,
 530.
37R4,
               1342.
               7019.
 893.
3438,
               1371 .
               7239.
 922.
3659.
               1916.83
               1403.78
1275.19
 687.69
               1958.26
               1447.86
1316.62
 731.77
                                                                                                                  Cd

-------
          OFFfiAS HEAT  CONTENT  13.00  BTII/STF
          COMBUSTION TFhPFRATURF. 3000 F
     CASE
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
MO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.75SEC
HFAT RECOVERY
                    OFFGAS
                     FLOU

                    SCFM
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700,
                     5000,
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
1864.
4853.
2085.
5533.
1964.
5613.
2185.
6?93.
      OF'FRATINn CflST-OR-CRFDIT                NET
FIXED        OPERATING         RECOVERY    ANNUALI7ED
COST            COST           CREDIT      COST OR CREDIT
(000)           (000)           (000)           (000)
 541,
1407,
 605.
1605.
 570.
1628,
 634,
1825.
 807.
5656.
 824.
5663.
 807.
5656.
 824.
5663.
 530.
3784,
 530.
3784.
               1348.
               7063.
 899.
3483.
               1377.
               7283.
 928.
3704.
                                             NET COST
                                            OR SAVINGS
                                             PER SCTh
                                              t/SCFM
               1925,40
               1412,57
1283.91
 696.63
               1966.8?
               1456.65
1325.33
 740.71
                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                   ho
                                                                                                   u>

-------
          OFFOAS HEAT  CONTENT  20.00  BTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TFMPERATURE 3000 F
     CASE
OFFGAS
 FLOU

SCFh
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CREniT
FIXED        OPERATING        RECOVERY
COST            COST          CREDIT
(000)          (000)          (000)
               NET
            ANNUALIZED
           COST OR CREDIT
               (000)
              NET COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PFR SCFM
               $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE  TIME
0.75SFC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE  TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                1861 .
                4838.
                2083.
                5524.
                1961 .
                5598.
                2183.
                62K4.
                540.
               1403.
                604.
               1602.
                569.
               1623.
                633.
               1822.
                82?.
               5762.
                839.
                3770.
                822,
               5762.
                839.
               5770.
 530.
3784.
 530,
3784.
               13A2
               7165
 913.
3587.
               1391 .
               7386,
 942 .
3808.
               1945.39
               1433.08
1304,24
 717.49
               1986.81
               1477. 16
1345.67
 761.57
                                                                                                                   I
                                                                                                                   ho

-------
          OFFGAS HEAT  CONTENT  50.00  BTIJ/SCF
          COhHJSTION TEMPERATURE  3000 f
     CASE
OFFGAS
 Fl 010

SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
      OPERATING COST-OR-CRFDTT
FIXED        OPERATING         RECOVERY
COST            COST           CREDIT
(000)           (000)           (000)
               NET
            ANNUAL I ZED
           COST OR CREDIT
               (000)
              NET COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PER SCFM
               $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE TJhF
0.75SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE  TIME
0.75SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                1846.
                4775.
                207?.
                5487.
                1946.
                5535.
                217?.
                6247.
                535.
                1 385.
                 601.
                1591..
                 564.
                1605.
                 630.
                1811.
                 886.
                6220.
                 903.
                6228.
                 886.
                6220.
                 903.
                6228.
 530.
3794.
 530.
3784.
               1422.
               7605,
 974.
4034.
                1451 .
                7825,
1003.
4255.
               2031.06
               1520.99
139] .41
 806.88
                2072.49
                1565.07
1432.P4
 850.96
                                                                                                                   ho

-------
                 HEAT CONTENTIOO . 00  PTU/SCF
          COMBUSTION TEMPERATURE 3000 F
     CASE
OFF'GAS
 FLOW

SCFM
CAPITAL
 COST

(000)
                                                  FIXED
                                                  COST
                                                  (000)
OPERATING nOST-OR-CRErUT
       OPERATING         RECOVERY
          COST           CREDIT
          (000)           (000)
               NET
            ANNUALIZED
           COST OR CREDIT
               (000)
              NET COST
             OR SAVINGS
              PER SCFM
               $/SCFM
RESIDENCE TIME
0.50SEC
NO HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCF  TIME
0.50SEC
HEAT RECOVERY
RESIDENCE  TIME
0.75SEC
NO HEAT  RECOVERY
RESIDENCE  TIME
0.75SE.C
HEAT  KECOVFK'Y
                      700.
                     5000,
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                      700.
                     5000.
                1823.
                4670,
                205?.
                5-124.
                1923.
                5430.
                2155.
                A184.
                529.
               1354.
                596.
                1573.
                558.
                1575,
                 625.
                1793.
          993.
          6983.
          1010.
          6991 ,
           993.
          6983.
          1010.
          6991,
 530.
3784.
 530.
3784,
               1522.
               8337,
1076.
4779.
                1551.
                8558.
1105.
5000.
               1667.50
1536.69
 955.8A
               2215.28
               1711.58
1578.11
 999 .94

-------
                                           3-i
                                      REPORT 3
                              CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION
                                 CATALYTIC OXIDATION

                                      J. A. Key

                                  IT Enviroscience
                              9041 Executive Park Drive
                             Knoxville, Tennessee  37923
                                    Prepared for
                     Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                    Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                           ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                       Research Triangle Park,  North Carolina
                                    October 1980
D94I

-------
                                CONTENTS OF REPORT 3
  I.  INTRODUCTION                                                           1.1
 II.  CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS AND FACTORS INFLUENCING PERFORMANCE       II-l
      AND DESIGN
      A.   System Description                                               II-l
      B.   Catalytic Oxidation Efficiencies                                 H-g
III.  CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF CATALYTIC OXIDIZERS               III-l
      A.   New Plants                                                      III-l
      B.   Existing Plants                                                 III-l
 IV.  COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION                        IV-1
      A.   Base-Case Catalytic Oxidizer Design Summary                      IV-1
      B.   Cost Basis                                                       IV-1
      C.   Annual Costs                                                      IV-7
      D.   Cost and Energy Effectiveness                                    IV-15
  V.  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS                                                V-l
 VI.  REFERENCES                                                            VI_1
                               APPENDICES OF REPORT 3

     A.   PURCHASE COSTS                                                    A_!
     B.   ANNUAL COST DATA                                                  B_!

-------
                                          3-v


                                  TABLES OF REPORT 3

Number
 H-1   Parameters for Catalytic Oxidation Calculations
 IV-1   Factors Used for Estim
 IV-2   Annual Cost Parameters
IV-1   Factors Used for Estimating Total Installed Costs
                                                                            Page
  1-1   Catalytic Ignition Temperature for 90% Conversion                    j_2
                                                                           II-5
                                                                           IV-2
                                                                           IV-8
IV-3   Cost Effectiveness of Catalytic Oxidation                          Iv_16
IV-4   Fuel Energy Effectiveness of Catalytic Oxidation                   Iv_17

-------
                                         3-vii



                                 FIGURES OF REPORT  3


Number
 II-l   Basic Catalytic Oxidizer                                            II-2

 II-2   Flue-Gas Heat Content                                               H-7

 II-3   Recuperative Heat Exchanger Design at 900 to 1200°F                 II-8
        Flue-Gas Temperature (100°F Waste Gas and Air,  Constant
        Specific Heat)

 IV-1   Installed Capital Costs of Catalytic Oxidizer Systems  for           IV-4
        Waste Gas with a Heat Content of 0 to 10 Btu/scf

 IV-2   Installed Capital Costs of Catalytic Oxidizer Systems  for           IV-5
        Waste Gas with a Heat Content of 20 Btu/scf

 IV-3   Installed Capital Costs of Catalytic Oxidizer Systems  for           IV-6
        Waste Gas with a Heat Content of 10 Btu/scf in Air

 IV-4   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for Catalytic                IV-9
        Oxidizers Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with
        No Heat Recovery

 IV-5   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for Catalytic               IV-10
        Oxidizers Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with
        Recuperative Heat Exchangers

 IV-6   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for Catalytic  Oxidizers     IV-11
        Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with Waste-Heat
        Boilers

 IV-7   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for Catalytic  Oxidizers     IV-12
        Having a Destruction Efficiency of 99% and with No Heat Recovery

 IV-8   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for Catalytic  Oxidizers     IV-13
        Having a Destruction Efficiency of 99% and with Recuperative
        Heat Exchangers

 IV-9   Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas  Flow Rate  for Catalytic  Oxidizers     IV-14
        Having a Destruction Efficiency of 99% and with Waste-Heat
        Boilers

 A-l   Purchase Costs for Catalytic  Oxidizers                               A-3
 A-2   Purchase Costs for Catalysts                                         A-4

 A-3   Purchase Costs for Waste-Heat  Boilers  Producing 100-psig  Steam       A-5

-------
                                     1-1
                             I.   INTRODUCTION

Catalytic oxidation is a control technology, currently used by many industries,
that involves the oxidation of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence
of a catalyst.  The principles and the equipment, except for the catalyst, are
similar to those used for thermal oxidation, the subject of a previous control-
device evaluation report.1*  A waste-gas stream and oxygen, usually from air,
are contacted with the catalyst at a temperature that allows the oxidation
reactions to proceed rapidly.  The primary difference between the equipment
used for catalytic oxidation and that used for thermal oxidation is the added
provision for the catalyst, which is usually composed of a noble-metal coating
on activated alumina.  Nonprecious-metal catalysts may be used when selectivity
is not critical.  Because of the catalyst the oxidation reaction takes place at
a lower  temperature, and therefore less fuel is  required to heat the waste gas
than for thermal oxidation  (see Table 1-1 for catalytic ignition temperatures
of some  common VOC as given by Oxy-Catalyst, Inc., in their brochure2).  The
actual temperatures  required will vary with different catalysts and different
supports.3

The  energy  in the  hot flue  gas  leaving  the  catalyst may be  recovered by use  of
a  recuperative heat  exchanger to preheat the waste gas and  combustion  air  or by
use  of a waste-heat  boiler  to produce  steam, in  the same that  way  energy  is
recovered  from the hot  flue gases of a  thermal oxidizer.  When the concen-
tration  of  VOC is  high  enough,  a catalytic  oxidizer with a  recuperative heat
exchanger  can be designed  that  requires no  additional  fuel  after  operating
 temperatures are reached.2—5

 Catalytic  oxidation  accomplishes  the same  results as  thermal oxidation,  i.e.,
 the oxidation of the VOC in the waste gas  to water and carbon dioxide.  The
 catalyst increases the  rate of oxidation,  and  thus the reaction proceeds  to
 equilibrium at a lower  temperature  (energy level).  The reactions of the  indi-
 vidual molecules take place at active sites on the surface of the catalyst.
 The VOC and oxygen are  first transferred to the surface of the catalyst by
 diffusion in the waste  gas and are then chemisorbed in the pores of the catalyst
 to the active sites, where the reaction (oxidation) takes place.  The reaction

*See Sect. VI for  the references cited in this report.

-------
                               1-2
   Table i-l.   Catalytic  ignition Temperature  for  90%  Conversion^


       Component
Hydrogen
Acetylene
Carbon monoxide
Propyne
Propadiene
Propylene
Ethylene
rv-Neptane
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene
Ethanol
Methyl ethyl  ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
 Propane
 Ethyl acetate
 Dimethyl formamide
 Ethane
 Cyclopropane
 Methane
  it
  See  ret  2.

-------
                                     1-3
products are then desorbed from the catalyst sites and transferred by diffusion
into the waste-gas stream leaving the catalyst.  The heat of combustion released
by the catalytic oxidation reaction is the same as that released by thermal
oxidation.2—4

An advantage of catalytic oxidation over thermal oxidation is that less NO^ is
formed as the results of the lower temperature used and of operating close to
the required stoichiometric amount of oxygen.  Because of the theoretical
relationships between VOC and NO , attaining the ozone standard may be served
better by a lower destruction of VOC with less NO^ formation.6

Catalytic oxidation has some limitations that do not apply to thermal oxidation.
Normally  the waste gas should not contain materials that poison the catalyst,
such as phosphorus, bismuth, lead, arsenic, antimony, mercury, iron oxide, tin,
silicon,  zinc,  sulfur, or halogens. Care must be taken that liquid or solid
particles do not  deposit on the catalyst and form a coating. In some applica-
tions it  may be possible to adequately remove  the poison or particulate materials,
or  catalytic oxidation systems may be available that will effectively handle
some of the poisons,  such as sulfur compounds, or some halogenated compounds.
The VOC content of the waste gas should be  relatively constant and low enough
 (or the waste gas diluted with air) so that the catalyst is not overheated and
its activity destroyed.  Because of safety  considerations it is general practice
to  keep the concentration of VOC at less  than  25 to 30% of the lower explosive
limit.  This concentration  is  in the  range  of  12 to 14 Btu/scf in air or  20  to
22  Btu/scf  in nitrogen.  Design for a specific application requires good  basic
data  and  experience;  a pilot study is often necessary.  This report is intended
 for use in  preliminary screening  studies  to indicate whether additional investi-
 gation  of catalytic  oxidation  is  advisable.2—7

 Catalytic oxidizers  are  being  used successfully  as  emission  control devices  on
 the off-gases  (waste gases)  from  the  production  of  ethylene  oxide,  cumene,
 caprolactam,  phthalic anhydride,  bisphenol A,  formaldehyde,  acrylonitrile,  and
 ethylene  dichloride, and have  been considered for use  on maleic  anhydride waste gas,
 all in the synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI).24'7

-------
                                          II-l
              II.   CATALYTIC  OXIDATION SYSTEMS  AND  FACTORS  INCLUENCING
                               PERFORMANCE  AND  DESIGN

     In this section the  main elements of a catalytic oxidizer system are discussed
     (or reference is made  to the thermal oxidizer  report,1 in which the elements
     discussed are the same).  The factors  influencing catalytic oxidizer design and
     performance are analyzed, with the analysis directed toward development of a
     design for a typical or  base-case system.   This base-case catalytic oxidizer
     and variations of it form the basis for the cost estimation given in Sect. IV.

A.   SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
     The catalyst bed in a catalytic oxidizer usually follows a burner and mixing
     chamber (see Fig. II-l).  The waste gas enters the mixing chamber and is heated
     by mixing with the combustion products from the burner.  The mixing chamber and
     burner should be carefully designed so the mixed gas is uniformly heated and
     distributed before it enters the catalyst bed.  The catalyst bed is usually a
     deposit of platinum or another noble metal on the surface of a ceramic base
     that is shaped so that contact with the mixed gas is enhanced.  Alternatively,
     the deposit may be on a metal mesh-pad structure. The catalyst bed depth is
     normally  12  in. but may be 8 to  24  in., and the volume may vary from 0.5 to 2
     ft3 per 1000  scfm of flow through the bed.2—5

     When heat recovery is practiced,  the  recuperative heat exchanger or waste-heat
     boiler is connected to  the catalyst chamber.  The hot flue gases leaving  the
     catalyst  are  cooled by  (1)  the entering waste gas and/or  combustion air being
     heated in the recuperative heat  exchanger  or  (2) by the  steam  being produced  in
     the waste-heat  boiler.

     If the waste gas  is not under  pressure  in  the process,  a fan  is  usually required.
     If the waste gas  does not contain at  least 16 mole %  oxygen,  combustion air is
     required for the  burner and another fan is required.  When the  VOC  is mixed with
     air,  the  combustion air fan is not required.

     The complete catalytic  oxidizer  system also has contol instruments for tempera-
      ture,  flow, and fuel and for combustion safety.  A stack is needed to  exhaust
      the flue gases at sufficient height to be safely dispersed.
4

-------
                                                                  FLUE GAS
                                                                     A
                      BURNER-
                                              CATALYST
                                              BED
WASTE GAS
FROM
PROCESS
             WASTE
            GAS  FAN
 NAT. GAS
 FUEL
         AIR
MIXING
CHAMBER
                                                                   STACK
HEAT       I
RECOVERY   I
[optional 1    {
H
H
                   COMBUSTION
                   AIR FAN
                      Fig.  II-l.   Basic Catalytic Oxidizer

-------
                                      II-3
 The important variables in sizing a catalytic oxidizer system are the following:

 1.   the waste-gas flow rate
 2.   the waste-gas oxygen content
 3.   the VOC destruction efficiency
 4.   the waste-gas heat content,  which is a function of the VOC concentration
      and composition
 5.   the operating temperatures
                                                                           1
 Except for item 5 the values for  the parameters  are the same as those used in
 the thermal oxidation report.1  In addition to the case for which the waste-gas
 oxygen content is assumed to be zero,  a  study was  made  of the case in which the
 waste-gas  oxygen content is  the same as  that for air.

 The operating temperature  conditions are  more complex,  with the  following
 values  assumed for this  study:

 1.   the temperature  of  the waste  gas  from  the process  is  100°F,
 2.   the minimum temperature  of the  mixed gases  entering  the  catalyst bed is
     600°F  to  ensure  an  adequate initial  reaction  rate,
 3.   the minimum temperature  of the  flue  gas  leaving the catalyst bed is  900°F
     to ensure  an  adequate overall reaction  rate to give the  desired VOC  destruc-
     tion efficiency,
 4.   the maximum temperature  of the  flue  gas  leaving the catalyst bed is  1200°F
     (ref 5) to prevent catalyst deactivation by overheating,
 5.   the minimum temperature  of the  flue  gases leaving the heat recovery  sec-
     tion is 500°F to prevent condensation and corrosion of the heat-transfer
     surfaces.

For specific applications other temperatures may be appropriate.  For example,
temperatures of 400 to 450°F are reported at one installation and 500 to  550°F
at another.  The temperature of the flue gas leaving the catalyst bed is a
function of VOC concentration and  specific heat and may be less than 900°F for
some waste gases that are more easily oxidized and still give the desired VOC
destruction.6

-------
                                           II-4
      Only 1 or 2% excess of oxygen may be required with an effective catalyst,
      although a minimum of 3 mole % oxygen in the flue gas is assumed for this
      study,  as was used for the thermal oxidation study.   By keeping air addition to
      the minimum required,  supplemental fuel usage is  minimized.6

      Two levels of VOC destruction efficiency are assumed,  90% and 99%.   See  Table  II-l
      for the specific  parameters  used for the five waste-gas composition cases
      studied for this  report.

 1.    Catalyst  Bed Size
      The amount of catalyst  and the depth and cross-sectional  area  of the catalyst
      bed depend to a certain extent on  the vendor's experience with waste gases
      having  similar compositions  to the one under  consideration.  When such ex-
      perience  is  lacking, a  pilot unit  should be  run on the  actual stream for  a
      period  of  time.   For the base case of 90% destruction efficiency a catalyst
      volume  of  1  ft* per 1000 scfm of flue-gas flow is used; 1.5 ft* of catalyst per
      1000 scfm  of  flue-gas flow is assumed to give 99% destruction of VOC as indi-
      cated by Du Pont.5  They also indicate that the bed depth is normally 12 in.
     but can vary  from 8 to 24 in.5  The degree of removal of combustible gaseous
     compounds depends on the mass-transfer limitations.  A unit can be designed for
     a high degree of VOC removal by making it long enough (more catalyst),  but this
     introduces a higher pressure drop through the device.  In some cases therefore
     this increased pressure drop can be a limiting factor that dictates  the degree
     of destruction.6

2.    Mixing Chamber Design
     The mixing chamber must be  of sufficient length and design so  that the  flame
     from the preheat burner will  not  impinge on  the catalyst bed and so  that  the
     waste gas will be  well  mixed  and evenly  heated before it enters the  catalyst
     bed.  The mixing chamber designs  on which this study  is based  are  those used by
     catalytic oxidizer vendors.5' 13—"  Details  of the designs  were not furnished.
     A typical design velocity of  25—35 fps  for  the heated mixed gases is usually
     adequate for mixing and is  used for at least  one type of catalyst bed.3

-------
Table II-l.  Parameters for Catalytic Oxidation Calculations
t-io Ht-at Recovery
T-'i. "erature ( °F)
W-.stc-Gas 	 	 	
Heat Content To From
(Bta/sci) Cat.al>-",t Cataiyr.t
0 900 900
2 855 900
10 600 900
?0 600 1150
10 (in air) 600 1019
Catalytic oxidizer conditions:
VOC molar heat o£ combustion = 730,
VOC molecular weight = 50.
VOC C, H, 0 fraction = 68.3 wt % C ,
or with Waste-Heat Be
Ratio
/ Flue -Gas Flow \
\ V,'r. -ite-Ga , F low /
1.'15
1.48
1.45
1.58
1.0
250 Btu/Jb-rrole.
1 1 , 4 wt % H , 20 . 3 wt
>iler
Fuel
Required
(Utu/scf )
23.9
24.2
14.6
15.9
10.1
% O.
With
Temperature (°
From Heat To
Exchanger Catalyst
400 900
400 850
400 600
600 600
600 600

Recuperative Heat Exchanqer
F) Ratio j
r - ( Flue-Gas F]ow -\ p,"iuir-J
Cataly-st \ Waste-Gas Flo • / (Btu/scf )
900 1.34 14.1
900 1.36 14.2
930 1.35 5.6
1200 1.39 0
1032 1.0 0

Jiverage waste-gas molecular weight - /I9.
No oxygen in waste gas except where indicated "in air."
Water content of combustion air =1.0 wt %.
3 nole % oxygen or greater in flue gas after oxidation.
bTemperature of flue gas leaving waste-heat boiler = 500°F.
                                                                                           H
                                                                                           un

-------
                                         II-6
3 .    Fans
     Fans for both the waste gas and the combustion air are required unless the
     waste gas contains sufficient oxygen (16 mole %)  to be used in burning the
     auxiliary fuel.  The pressure drops used in this  report for catalytic oxidizer
     systems with conversions of 90% are 5 in. H20 with no heat recovery and 14 in.
     H20 with heat recovery, for either a recuperative heat exchanger or for a
     waste-heat boiler.  For a system with 99% conversion, pressure drops of 7 in.
     H20 with no heat recovery and 16 in. H20 with heat recovery are used.  The cost
     of  the  fans is included in the catalytic oxidizer costs given in Appendix A.

 4.   Recuperative Heat Exchangers
     A recuperative heat exchanger transfers  heat  from  the  flue gas  to  the waste  gas
     and combustion air,  lowering the amount  of  fuel  and  combustion  air required.
     See Sect.  III-A-2 of the  thermal oxidizer  report1  for  a discussion of heat
     recovery by recuperative  heat exchange.  The  heat  content of  the  flue gas*  from
      the catalytic  oxidizers studied for this report  is shown  in Fig.  II-2.   The
      actual heat content of a  flue  gas  depends  on the relative quantities of fuel,
      air, VOC, and waste gas going to the catalytic oxidizer.   The straight  line of
      Fig. II-2 represents a best fit to several data  points and is adequate  for
      estimating the heat recovery and the surface area required.   Figure II-3 shows
      the ratio of the heat exchanger surface to the flue-gas flow rate as a function
      of the percent of heat recovery and the overall heat-transfer coefficient (U)
      for recuperative heat exchangers for flue gases having temperatures of 900 to
      1200°F.  An overall heat-transfer coefficient of 4 Btu/(hr) (ft2) (°F) is used in
      this  study.

  5    Waste-Heat Boiler
      For this study  a waste-heat boiler producing 100-psig steam  was  chosen because
       the temperature of the flue  gas  from a catalytic  oxidizer is 1200°F or less.
       temperature of  500°F for the  flue gas exhausted from the waste-heat boiler is
       used for this study.  See Sect.  III-A-4 in the  thermal oxidizer report* for a
       discussion of heat recovery by use of a waste-heat boiler.
A
        the VOC contained in the waste gas.

-------
0
 500
                                                                                     H
                                                                                     I
600      700     800      900     1000     1100     1200


            Flue-Gas Temperature (°F)
            Fig. 11-2.  Flue-Gas  Heat Content

-------
                            II-8
                1.OO
                           U = Overall  Heat
                          Transfer  Coefficient
                            20       30       4O

                           Heat Recovery   (%)
Fig. II-3.  Recuperative Heat Exchanger Design at 900 to 1200°F
    Flue-Gas Temperature  (100°F Waste-Gas  and Air, Constant
                        Specific Heat)

-------
                                          II-9
6.   Stack and Other Equipment
     The stack and ducting for this report are based on the same parameters used for
     the thermal oxidizer (see Sects.  III-A-5 and 6 in the thermal oxidizer report1).

B.   CATALYTIC OXIDATION EFFICIENCIES
     The destruction efficiency (conversion of VOC to carbon dioxide and water) for
     catalytic oxidizers depends on the catalyst type and volume, the operating
     temperature,  and the composition  and concentration of VOC in the waste gas.
     The chemical  structure of a compound affects the destruction efficiency of a
     catalytic oxidizer more than it does a thermal oxidizer.   A portion of the
     waste gas can by-pass the catalyst at times in most bed designs, and this
     limits the destruction efficiency that can be achieved.6   The catalyst may lose
     activity with time for such reasons as sintering,  accumulations of poisons, or
     an accumulation of products.   Although a higher operating temperature may
     compensate to some extent for this loss in activity.,  there is a limit dictated
     by the maximum operating temperature of the catalyst.   In some cases the catalyst
     may have to be cleaned periodically for activity and destruction efficiency to
     be maintained.  The actual life of the catalyst will vary with application and
     is uncertain  for a new use.   Some catalysts are reported  to have been in use
     for over 8 years,  but in some applications the catalyst must be replaced every
     year; the average  life appears to be in the range  of 3 to 5 years.   For this
     study replacement  of the catalyst every three years is assumed.2—5

-------
                                           III-l
            III.  CONSIDERATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF CATALYTIC OXIDIZERS

A.   NEW PLANTS
     All requirements that are considered when thermal oxidizers are installed also
     apply to the installation of catalytic oxidizers (see Sect. IV of the thermal
     oxidizer report1).

B.   EXISTING PLANTS
     All considerations  for installation of a catalytic oxidizer in a new plant also
     apply to retrofitting one in an existing plant.   However,  if the steam generation
     boiler in an existing plant is adequate,  a  waste-heat boiler may not be economi-
     cally feasible.  The  costs and cost-effectiveness data presented in this report
     are not intended to apply to retrofitted catalytic oxidizer systems.   In
     retrofitted systems additional costs may be  encountered because  of  such items  as
     demolition requirements,  crowded construction working conditions, scheduling
     construction activities with production  activities, and longer interconnecting
     ducts.   These factors  are  site-specific,  and no  attempt has  been made  to provide
     costs.   For specific  retrofit  cases,  rough costs may  be obtained by using the
     new-site  data and adding as  required for  a specific retrofit  situation.

-------
                                           IV-1
                             J ENERGY IMPACTS  OF  CATALYTIC  OXIDATION

                     ^U OXIDIZER DESIGN SUMMARY
                    jost- and energy-effectiveness  calculations  for the  typical  or
                 ealytic oxidation system are  presented here.  The catalytic  oxidizer
             T«J,  the waste-gas heat contents,  and the  resulting  temperatures  given in
       V  il-l for the base-case design establish  the fuel requirement,  the  ratio of
       .e-gas flow to waste-gas flow, and the  percent  of heat  recovered.   Costs  are
     .stimated for seven waste-gas flows.-  700,  2,000, 5,000,  10,000,  20,000, 50,000,
     and 100,000  scfm,-  for destruction efficiencies of 90 and  99%; and for no heat
     recovery, heat recovery with a recuperative  heat  exchanger  used  to  heat  the
     waste gas and combustion air, and heat recovery with a waste-heat boiler used to
     produce steam.

B.   COST BASIS
     The estimated capital costs for the catalytic oxidation systems  described repre-
     sent the total investment required for purchase and installation of all  equipment
     and material to provide a facility like that described in Sect.  II.  This includes
     all indirect costs, such as engineering and contractors'  fees and overheads.
     The estimated capital costs are battery-limits costs and do not  include  provi-
     sion for bringing utilities, services, or roads to the site, backup facilities,
     land, research and development, or process piping and instrumentation intercon-
     nections that may be required within the process generating the  waste-gas feed
     to the catalytic oxidation system.

     The method used to develop the estimated capital costs was based on applying
     certain  factors to the purchase prices of equipment to arrive at an installed
     capital  cost.  Purchase costs were  obtained from vendors and previous EPA reports
     as described below.  Table IV-1 gives the ranges used for factoring up  the
     purchased price of equipment to the installed cost and is based on historical
     data of  IT Enviroscience  Process Engineering.  The expected accuracy of the  total
     installed cost  thus  obtained is in  the range of  ±30%.  This method of obtaining
     total  installed capital  costs  is suitable for study or screening estimates.

     For  catalytic  oxidation  systems a  30% allowance  was added  to the estimated  major
     equipment purchase  cost  to compensate for unspecified items, resulting  in  the

-------
                                           IV-2
              Table IV-1.   Factors Used for Estimating Tota
A = Major Equipment Purchase
    Installation costs
      Foundations
      Structures
      Equipment Erection
      Piping
      Insulation

      Paint
      Fire Protection
      Instruments

      Electrical
 B  = Base  Cost
     Sales Tax
     Freight
     Contractor's Fees
 C  = Total Contract
                a
     Engineering
               .  b
     Contingencies
 D  = Unit Installed Cost
 E  = Total Subestimates
 F = Total Project Cost
Cost Plus 0.1 to 0.35 Allowance

       0.06A + $100 X number of pumps
       0.15A (no structures) to 0.30A (mu
       0.15A to 0.30A  (depending on complex.
       0.40A (package units) to 1.10A (rat's .
       0.06A or 0.15 X piping  (normal) to 0.30 ^      t
          (bulk hot or cold)
       0.05A
       0.01A to 0.06A  (depending on requirements)
       0.10A to 0.30A or 0.01A to 0.25A + $50,000 to
          $300,000  for process control computer
       0.15A or 0.05A  + $500 per motor
       A +  Sum of  Installation Costs
       0.025A + 0.025B
       0.16A
       0. 30 (B-A)
       B +  Taxes,  Freight, and Fees
       0.01C to  0.20C
       0.15C
       C +  Engineering + Contingencies
       Sum  of  semidetailed subestiraates (buildings, site
          development,  cooling towers, etc.).  Each subesti-
          mate  should include taxes,  freight, fees, engi-
          neering and contingency, and should be escalated
          to date of expenditure for that cost component.
          Engineering costs, contingencies, and escalation
          factors for these subestimates will vary according
          to the type of job.
         D + E
  Includes cost  from capital project teams, process engineering, engineering,
    purchasing, and other support groups.
  "contingency should not be applied to any cost component that  has been committed by
    either purchase order or contract.

-------
                                           IV-1
                 IV.  COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION

A.   BASE-CASE CATALYTIC OXIDIZER DESIGN SUMMARY
     The results of cost- and energy-effectiveness calculations for the typical or
     base-case catalytic oxidation system are presented here.   The catalytic oxidizer
     conditions, the waste-gas heat contents, and the resulting temperatures given in
     Table II-l for the base-case design establish the fuel requirement,  the ratio of
     flue-gas flow to waste-gas flow,  and the percent of heat  recovered.   Costs are
     estimated for seven waste-gas flows:  700,  2,000, 5,000,  10,000,  20,000, 50,000,
     and 100,000 scfm; for destruction efficiencies of 90 and  99%; and for no heat
     recovery, heat recovery with a recuperative heat exchanger used to heat the
     waste gas and combustion air, and heat recovery with a waste-heat boiler used to
     produce steam.

B.   COST BASIS
     The estimated capital costs for the catalytic oxidation systems described repre-
     sent the total investment required for purchase and installation of  all equipment
     and material to provide a facility like that described in Sect. II.   This includes
     all indirect costs,  such as engineering and contractors'  fees and overheads.
     The estimated capital costs are battery-limits costs and  do not include provi-
     sion for bringing utilities,  services,  or roads to the site,  backup  facilities,
     land,  research and development, or process  piping and instrumentation intercon-
     nections that may be required within the process generating the waste-gas feed
     to the catalytic oxidation system.

     The method used to develop the estimated capital costs was based  on  applying
     certain factors to the purchase prices  of equipment to arrive at  an  installed
     capital cost.   Purchase costs were obtained from vendors  and previous EPA reports
     as described below.   Table IV-1 gives  the ranges used for factoring  up the
     purchased price of equipment  to the installed cost and is based on historical
     data of IT Enviroscience Process  Engineering.   The expected accuracy of the total
     installed cost thus  obtained  is in the  range of ±30%.   This method of obtaining
     total  installed capital costs is  suitable for study or screening  estimates.

     For catalytic oxidation systems a 30%  allowance was added to the  estimated major
     equipment purchase cost to compensate  for unspecified items,  resulting in the

-------
                                           IV-2
              Table IV-1.   Factors  Used for Estimating Total  Installed  Costs
A = Major Equipment Purchase
    Installation costs
      Foundations
      Structures
      Equipment Erection
      Piping
      Insulation

      Paint
      Fire Protection
      Instruments

      Electrical
 B  = Base Cost
    Sales Tax
    Freight
    Contractor's Fees
 C  = Total Contract
                a
    Engineering
               .  b
    Contingencies
 D  =  Unit Installed Cost
 E  = Total Subestimates
 F = Total Project Cost
Cost Plus 0.1 to 0.35 Allowance

       0.06A + $100 X number of pumps
       0.15A (no structures) to 0.30A (multideck structures)
       0.15A to 0.30A  (depending on complexity)
       0.40A (package units) to 1.10A (rat's nest)
       0.06A or 0.15 X piping  (normal) to 0.30 X piping
          (bulk hot or cold)
       0.05A
       0.01A to 0.06A  (depending on requirements)
       0.10A to 0.30A or 0.01A to 0.25A + $50,000 to
          $300,000  for process control computer
       0.15A or 0.05A  + $500 per motor
       A +  Sum of  Installation Costs
       0.025A + 0.025B
       0.16A
       0.30 (B-A)
       B +  Taxes,  Freight, and Fees
       0.01C to  0.20C
       0.15C
       C +  Engineering +  Contingencies
        Sum  of  semidetailed subestimates (buildings, site
          development,  cooling towers, etc.).  Each subesti-
          mate  should include taxes,  freight, fees, engi-
          neering and contingency,  and should be escalated
          to date of expenditure for that cost component.
          Engineering costs, contingencies, and escalation
          factors for these subestimates will vary according
          to the type of job.
         D + E
  "includes cost from capital project teams, process engineering, engineering,
   purchasing, and other support groups.
  Contingency should not be applied to any cost component that has been committed by
   either purchase order or contract.

-------
                                      IV-3
total estimated equipment purchase cost designated A in Table IV-1.   This estab-
lished the basis for the application of all the installed capital cost factors
shown.

The sum of the installation costs for a catalytic oxidizer without a catalyst
bed or a connecting duct and with a minimum stack was estimated to be about 1.1
times A.  The base cost (B) is therefore approximately 2.1 times the total
estimated equipment purchase cost (A).  Additional percentages were applied to
the base cost (B) as shown in Table IV-1 to arrive at a unit installed cost (D)
for a catalytic oxidizer with a minimum stack but without a catalyst bed and
without a connecting duct to the process.  The initial catalyst installed cost
(D) was estimated by multiplying the catalyst purchase cost obtained from
Fig. A-2 by 1.2 to account for the costs of freight, taxes, and labor and fees
for installing the catalyst bed in the oxidizer.

The sum of the installation costs for a waste heat boiler was also estimated to
be about 1.1 times A.  For a recuperative heat exchanger, for the connecting
duct from the process to the catalytic oxidizer, and for the 80-ft stack the sum
of the installation costs was estimated to be about 0.5 times A (B is therefore
approximately 1.5 times A) because the foundations, structures, erection, and
piping will be incremental and relatively small when compared to those required
for the catalytic oxidizer.  The same additional percentages for sales tax, freight,
contractor's fees, engineering, and contingencies were applied to the base cost (B)
to arrive at the unit installed costs (D) (see Table IV-1).  Allowances for the
cost of site development and for the cost of vendor assistance during startup were
added to the total of all the unit installed costs  (D) for each case to give the
total installed capital costs shown in Figs. IV-1 through IV-3.

The basic pieces of equipment are catalytic oxidizers, recuperative heat ex-
changers, and waste-heat boilers, plus the catalyst, ducts, and stacks.  The
sources of purchase cost data for these  items follow, and curves showing pur-
chase costs of  the catalytic oxidizers,  the catalyst, and the waste-heat boilers
are given in Appendix A.  A curve showing the purchase costs of recuperative
heat exchangers  is shown in Appendix A of the thermal oxidizer  report.1

-------
 10,000
o
o
o
 in
 O
O


73
*-•

'a
 0 1000-
 •o
 
-------
                    December 1979  Total  Installed  Capital  Cost  ($1000)
w  •
rt
fO  H
3  <
w  i
   to
HI  •
o
If
   H
s;  3
P)  Ul
w  rt
rt  pj
fD  H
   h-'
0)

*  g?
H- *O
ft H-
ff rt
   cu
ffi O
fD 0
p) W
rt rr
   cn
O
0 O
3 Hi
rt
fl> O
a pj
rt rt-
   Cu
O M
Hi ••<
   rt
K) H-
o o

W O
rt x
C H-
\ Oa
cn H-
O N
Hi fD
         D)
         (0
O
u
to


T1

O
cn
o
                                            S-AI

-------
10,000
                       -— 99% Destruction
                           90% Destruction
                        No heat recovery
                        Waste-heat boiler,  56% recovery
                        Recuperative heat exchanger, 53% recovery
                                                                                                            H
                                                                                                            <
                                                                                                            cn
    100
       100
                                    1000
10,000
                                                                                            100,000
                                         Waste-Gas Flow  (scfm)
             Fig.  IV-3.   Installed Capital Costs of  Catalytic Oxidizer Systems
                   for Waste Gas with a Heat Content of  10 Btu/scf in Air

-------
                                           IV-7
1.    Purchase Costs of Catalytic Oxidizers
     Preliminary purchase costs for catalytic oxidizers were obtained from vendors.
     Several vendors were contacted by telephone and letter and three supplied cost
     data and other information:  Du Pont,5 Englehard,13 and Oxy-Catalyst.14  The
     costs were for prepiped and prewired units complete with the burner,  blower, re-
     fractory, controls,  etc.,  required for handling various waste-gas flows [in
     standard cubic feet  per minute (scfm)].  Purchase  cost data were also extracted
     from previous EPA reports  and escalated to December 1979.   The curves shown in
     Appendix A for the purchase costs of the catalytic oxidizers and of the catalyst
     were derived from the combined data.

2.    Purchase Costs of Recuperative Heat Exchangers
     The purchase costs of recuperative heat exchangers were obtained from Appendix  A
     of the thermal oxidizer report.1

3.    Purchase Costs of Waste-Heat Boilers
     The purchase costs of waste-heat boilers for 100-psig steam were estimated by
     adjusting the purchase costs from the thermal oxidizer report1 to compensate for
     the differences in flue-gas temperatures and steam pressures.

4.    Purchase Costs of Ducts
     Each system is assumed to require 150 ft of round-steel inlet ductwork with the
     same fittings shown for the thermal oxidizer.1  The costs used are also the
     same.

5.    Purchase Costs of Stacks
     The costs of the stacks are the same as those used for thermal oxidizers.1

C.    ANNUAL COSTS
     Annual costs for various operating conditions are given in Appendix B.  These
     costs are the basis for all the net annual cost graphs included in the report.
     The basis used in calculating these annual costs is defined  in Table IV-2.

     Figures  IV-4 through IV-9 present the  net annual costs of catalytic  oxidation
     for various cases.

-------
                                    IV-8
                      Table  IV-2.  Annual Cost Parameters
Operating  factor
Operating  labor
Fixed Costs
  Maintenance labor plus
    materials, 6%
  Capital recovery, 18%
  Taxes, insurances,
    administration charges, 5
Utilities
  Electric power
  Natural gas
Heat recovery credits
  (equivalent to natural gas)
 8760  hr/yrc
 $15/man-hr
29% of installed
  capital
$0.03/kWh
$2.00/million Btu
$2.00/million Btu
 Control devices will usually operate on the  same  cycle  as  the  process.
 Process downtime is normally expected to range  from 5 to 15%.   If  the hourly
 rate remains constant,  the annual production and  annual VOC  emissions will  be
 correspondingly reduced.   From the standpoint of  cost-effectiveness  calcula-
 tions,  the error introduced by assuming continuous  operation is negligible.
 Based on 10-year life and 12% interest.

-------
 E
•*-
 o
   200,
   1501
in
O
U

-  100
05
3
c
c
U
z
50

  r
                                                        Conditions


                                             90% Conversion of VOC

                                             No Heat  Recovery

                                             Waste-Gas Heat Content



                                               	— 10



                                               	10 (in air)
                                                                          (Btu/scf
                                                                                                         H
                                                                                                         <
      100                         1000                         10iooo


                                      Waste-Gas Flow Rate  (scfm)



             Fig. IV-4.  Net Annual Costs vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate  for  Catalytic
        Oxidizers Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with No  Heat  Recovery
                                                                                       100,000

-------
  200
  150
w
o

<-> 100

"ra
a
c
c
 0)
 z
    50
      100
                                   Conditions


                        90% Conversion  of  VOC

                        Recuperative Heat  Exchanger



                        Waste-Gas  Heat  Content  IBtu/scf):

                                         2
                                                                          H

                                                                          <
                                                                                                             O
                                                                                      _L_J	I	L_L
1000                          10'000


     Waste-Gas Flow Rate  (scfm)
                                                                                            100,000
          Fig. IV-5.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow Rate for Catalytic Oxiclizers

         Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with Recuperative Heat Exchangers

-------
  200
 E
 o
  150
in
O

" 100

15
3
C
C
*  50
         Conditions

90%  Conversion of VOC

Waste-Heat  Boiler, 100-psig  Steam


Waste-Gas  Heat  Content (etu/scf


   	 10

   	20;  10 (in air)
                                                                                  J	L
     100                         1000                        10,000


                                     Waste-Gas Flow  Rate  (scfm)



           Fig. IV-6.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow Rate for Catalytic Oxidizers

               Having a Destruction Efficiency of 90% and with Waste-Heat Boilers
                                   100,000

-------
200
150
                                                            Conditions
                                                   99% Conversion  of  VOC
                                                   No Heat  Recovery
                                                   Waste-Gas Heat Content  (Btu/scf):
                                                                 2
                                                                20
                                                                10
                                                     	10 (in  air)
                                                                                                   M
                                                                                                   to
100
                                1000                          10,000

                                    Waste-Gas  Flow  Rate  (scfm)
                                                                                      100,000
   Fig  IV-7   Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow Rate for Catalytic Oxidizers
        Having a Destruction Efficiency of 99% and with No Heat Recovery

-------
  200
   150
«  100
o
O
ra
c
<

o
z
   50
      100
                    _l	
                                                                     Conditions

                                                          99% Conversion of VOC

                                                          Recuperative  Heat Exchanger



                                                          Waste-Gas  Heat Content  (etu/scf)
I
M
U>
                                            _L
                                                  J_
                                   1000                         10,000


                                      Waste-Gas Flow Rate  (scfm)
                                                                                            100,000
      Fig,  IV-8.   Net Annual  Costs  vs  Waste-Gas Flow Rate for Catalytic Oxidizers

     Having a Destruction  Efficiency of 99% and with Recuperative Heat Exchangers

-------
200
    100
           Conditions
99%  Conversion of VOC
Waste-Heat  Boiler, 100-psig  Steam
                                                      Waste-Gas Heat Content  (Btu/scf
                                                                    2
                                                                    10
                                                                    20 ; 10 (in air)
                                                                                                        H

                                                                                                        f
                                1000
                                                              10,000
                                   100,000
                                     Waste-Gas  Flow  Rate
        Fig  IV-9.  Net Annual Costs vs Waste-Gas Flow Rate for Catalytic Oxidizers
            Having  a Destruction Efficiency of 99% and with Waste-Heat Boilers

-------
                                      IV-15
COST AND ENERGY EFFECTIVENESS
The cost effectiveness and energy effectiveness were calculated by dividing the
annual cost for a particular option (Appendix B) or the fuel usage in Btu/yr by
the total annual amount of VOC destroyed with the conversion efficiencies assumed
in Sect. II.   The cost effectiveness is given in Table IV-3 and the energy
effectiveness is given in Table IV-4.   Data on cases not shown in the cited
tables can be easily developed by use  of Appendix B.

-------
Table IV-3.   Cost  Effectiveness of Catalytic Oxidation



w t • t v Waste-Gas VOC
' . " J rlow Destroyed
Cogent Hate (lb/hr)
(BLUA-.CO 	 (^ISL^ 	 £t^0^_
"2 700 5.18
5,000 37.0
50,000 370
100,000 739
700 25.9
30
5,000 185
50,000 1,850
100,000 3,700
700 51.8
5,000 370
50,000 3,700
100,000 7,390
700 25.9
10 (in air)
5,000 185
50,000 1,850
100,000 3,700
	 	 	 	 — 	 	 	 	 	
aVOC molecular weight = 50; molar heat of
bl ft3 of catalyst per 1000 scfm.
C1.5 ft3 of catalyst per 1000 scfm.

voc
Dostroyci
(lb/hr)
at 99ta
5.69
40.7
407
813
28.5
203
2,030
4,070
56.9
407
4,070
8,130
26.5
203
2,030
4,070
_. ._.. , 	 	 • 	 	
combustion =
	
— 	

	 — 	 	 	 	
Co'-t Effectiveness (per Ib ot vu^J ueatiuyeu, . . 	
	 b 99» VOC Destruction
901 VGC Destruction __ 	 	 	
d
Ho Heat Recuperative
$2.00 $2.37
0.758 0.733
0.517 0.410
0.503 0.390
0.367 °-445
0.120 0.118
0.0719 0.0538
0.0692 0.0497
0.188 0.219
0.0632 0.0529
0.0388 0.0200
0.0375 0.0180
0.336 0-423
0.0977 0.0985
0.0518 0.0348
0.0488 0.0305
730,250 Btu/lb-mole.

Waste-Heat
Boiler
$2.63
0.735
0.389
0.362
0.495
0.116
0.0472
0.0417
0.239
0.0481
0.0127
0.00925
0.466
0.0961
0.0297
0.0242

No Heat
Recovery
$1.84
0.710
0.489
0.476
0.338
0.113
0.0691
0.0665
0.173
0.0596
0.0373
0.0361
0.309
0.0916
0.0497
0.0469

Recuperative
Heat Exchanger
$2.18
0.685
0.391
0.372
0.409
0.111
0.0524
0.0486
0.201
0.0500
0.0200
0.0181
0.387
0.0924
0.0342
0.0302

Waste-Heat
Bo 1 ] e r
$2.41
0.688
0.373
0.348
0.454
0.110
0.04G7
0.0416
0.219
0.0459
0.0135
0.0104
0.427
0.0901
0.0296
0.0246

                                                                                      H

-------
                                  Table  iv-4.   Fuel  Energy Effectiveness of Catalytic  Oxidation
Hc,-,t ConLCi.t
	(Btu/sct I	or WastL-llo^t  Boiler  Heat Lxcr .-:ic;L'r
  2                  24.2               i-;.2
 10                  14.G
 20                  15.9
 10(in air)           10.1
                                                        i: .8
                                                         2.2
                                                        (6.1)
                                                        (1.0)
                                                                                       J:l1^/jy_J^fpctivenj2SS__(liLu/lb of VOC Destro'.-J)'
'0 .. VCXJ Destruc
n ui t
He it exchanger
115,000
9,090
0
0
tion
W
Boiler
96,000
3,570
(4,900)
(1 ,620)


Po co very
179,000
21,500
11,700
14,900
99 i VOC ^-t>-,--t i - -

Rocu; . r.itive ,s
Hc.it E.-c!u---.aji-
Iu5,000
8,2oO
J
0
1.5 ft  of catalyst  per lOOu scftn.

-------
                                      v-i
                         V.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

 Catalytic oxidation is used in several industries as a control technique for
 VOC emissions.   The VOC in  the off-gases from several processes in the synthetic
 organic chemical manufacturing industry are  controlled by use of catalytic
 oxidation.   A design criterion and design procedures are  presented that allow
 for a preliminary catalytic oxidation design.   A catalytic oxidation system
 with two destruction efficiencies  and three  heat recovery options,  i.e.,  no
 heat recovery, heat recovery with  a recuperative heat exchanger,  or heat
 recovery with a  waste-heat  boiler,  is considered.   Capital and operating costs
 are developed, and the  annual  cost  of catalytic oxidation is  calculated as a
 function of  the  characteristics of  the  waste  gas.   The  cost effectiveness  and
 energy effectiveness  of the  two VOC destruction efficiencies  and  of three  heat
 recovery cases are  developed.

 The  conclusions  of  the  cost  evaluation  are as follows:

 1.    The  waste-gas  flow  rate is a highly sensitive variable in  the  determina-
      tion of  the  annual  cost and cost effectiveness  (see Table  IV-3).  Energy
      effectiveness  is independent of  flow rate.  As the feed flow rate increases,
      the  annual costs increase but  the annual cost per scfm decreases.  The
      annual cost per scfm decreases quickly between 700 and 4000 scfm.  The
      ratio decreases moderately between 4,000 and 40,000 scfm and is almost
      constant above 40,000 scfm.

2.   The cost effectiveness  and the energy effectiveness are strongly dependent
     on the waste-gas heat content, i.e., the VOC concentration (see Table IV-3,
     Table IV-4,  and Appendix B).   At 20 Btu/scf or 10 Btu/scf in air no fuel
     is required when recuperative  heat recovery is used and the system is at
     operating temperature so that  the energy effectiveness is almost zero.  At
     the same VOC concentrations the recovery credit is greater than the fuel
     energy required if a waste-heat boiler is employed.

3.   The annual cost, cost effectiveness, and energy effectiveness are slightly
     sensitive to the destruction efficiency  or amount of  catalyst (see
     Tables IV-3  and IV-4 and Figs.  IV-4 through IV-9).  This  sensitivity is
     greater  at low waste-gas flow  rates than at high flow rates.

-------
                                        VI-1
                                   VI .  REFERENCES*

  1.  J. W. Blackburn, IT Enviroscience, Inc., Control Device Evaluation.  Thermal
      Oxidation (July 1980) (EPA/ESED report, Research Triangle Park, NC) . -

  2.  R. W. Kent,  A Guide to Catalytic Oxidation. Oxy-Catalyst, Inc., Research-
      Cottrell, Inc., West Chester, PA (in-house brochure).

  3.  R. W. Rolke  et al. ,  shell Development Company,  Afterburner Systems Study
      EPA-R2-062,  Research Triangle Park,  NC (August 1972).        -
                 Emission Control Systems .  Oxy-Catlyst,  Inc.,  West Chester  PA
      (in-house brochure).

  5.  G.  I.  Madden,  E.  I.  du Pont de Nemours & Company,  letter dated Oct  4  1979  to
      J.  A.  Key, IT  Enviroscience,  Inc.,  with data on catalytic oxidation.

  6.  J.  Beale,  Chemical Manufacturers  Association,  letter  dated July 14  1980
      with attached  comments on draft Catalytic Oxidation Report.

  7.  J.  A  Key, IT  Enviroscience,  Inc.,  notes  on  EPA meeting  on RShne-Poulenc S  A
      catalytic  oxidation  technology, at  Durham, NC,  on Aug. 23,  1979.

  8.  J.  C.  Zimmer   Rhone-Poulenc S.A., letter  dated  May 29, 1979,  to  R. Walsh, EPA
      regarding  phthalic anhydride,  maleic  anhydride,  and bisphenol A.

  9.  B.  Tichenor, EPA, memorandum  dated  Feb. 25,  1980, to L.  B. Evans,  EPA  with
      data on formaldehyde from work on EPA  Contract  No. 68-02-3133.

 10.   J   A.  Key,  IT  Enviroscience,  Inc.,  Trip Report  for Visit  to E. I.  du Pont de
      Nemours &  Company, Beaumont,  TX. Sept. 7, 1977  (Acrvlonitrile) (data on  file at
      fcPA, ESED,  Research Triangle  Park, NC) .

 11-   W.  R.  Taylor, Diamond Shamrock Corporation, letter dated Oct  3  1977  to D  R
      Goodwin, EPA,  regarding ethylene dichloride oxychlorination vent.

 12.   J.  F.  Lawson, IT Enviroscience, Inc.,  Trip Report for Visit to Union Carbide
      Corporation, South Charleston, WV. Dec. 1, 1977 (Ethvlene oxid»l (*»*»£%,.
      at EPA, ESED, Research Triangle Park,  NC) .

 13.  R. D. Uhlman, Engelhard Minerals & Chemicals  Corporation, letter dated
     Oct^ 24,  1979,  to J.  A. Key,  IT Enviroscience,  Inc.,  with data on catalytic
     oxidation.                                                              J

14.  T. T. Fung, Oxy-Catalyst,  Inc., letter dated  Nov. 9,  1979  to J  A  Key
     IT Enviroscience,  Inc., with data  on catalytic  oxidation.

15.  CE Air  Preheater,  Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute, Report of Fuel Requirements
     Capital Cost and Operating Expense for Catalytic and Thermal Afterburners, - '
     EPA-450/3-76-031,  Research Triangle  Park,  NC  (September 1976).

-------
                                      VI-2
16.   M.  L.  Kinkley and R.  B.  Neveril,  Card,  Inc.,  Capital  and Operating Costs
     of  Selected Air Pollution Control Systems,  EPA-450/3-76-014,  Research Triangle
     Park,  NC (May 1976).

17.   Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute,  Air  Pollution  Control Technology and Costs
     in  Seven Selected Areas,  EPA 450/3-73-010,  Research Triangle  Park,  NC (December
     1973).
    ^Usually,  when a reference is located at the  end of a  paragraph,  it  refers  to
     the entire paragraph.   If another reference  relates to  certain portions  of
     that paragraph, that reference number is indicated on the  material  involved.
     When the  reference appears on a heading, it  refers to all  the  text  covered by
     that heading.

-------
              APPENDIX A
PURCHASE COSTS FOR CATALYTIC OXIDIZERS,
   CATALYST, AND WASTE-HEAT BOILERS

-------
1000
                        99% Destruction
                        90% Destruction
                        Without  Catalyst
     100
1000                          10,000
      Flue Gas  Flow   (scfm)
                                                                                          100,000
                      A-l.  Purchase Costs  for  Catalytic Oxidizers

-------
     500
                          • 99%  Destruction

                           90%  Destruction
o
o
o
 o
O
 a

 u
 9
 O)
 TJ
 3
 m

 O)
 r-
 o>
 
-------
  500
o
o
o

O
O

a>
in
re
3
Q.
m

O)
 u.
 0)

 I
 0)
 o
 0)
 Q
                                                      /

   100

xX
                                /
                                  X
   50
          —  900° F  Flue  Gas

          — 1200°F  Flue  Gas
                                                i
                                                m
                        5      10                 50      100

                        Waste-Heat-Boiler Steam  Capacity  (lOOOIb/hr)
                                   500
       Fig.  A-3.  Purchase Cost for Waste-Heat Boilers Producing 100-psig Steam

-------
   APPENDIX B
ANNUAL COST DATA

-------
                                        B-3
                       SAMPLE CALCULATIONS- — ANNUAL COST DATA


 The following sample calculations are based on an off-gas stream having a
 heat content of 10 Btu/scf and consisting primarily of nitrogen  (combustion
 air must be supplied to the preheat burner and air must also be mixed with
 the off-gas so that after combustion of the fuel to the burner and oxidation
 of the VOC in the off-gas the flue gas contains 3 mole % oxygen) .

 Basis  of calculations:

     Off-gas flow rate                         8,000 scfm
     Off-gas temperature                      100 °F
     Destruction of VOC                       99%
     Flue gas to off-gas ratio                 1.45 scf/scf (Table II-l)
     Heat recovery                            Waste-heat boiler generating
                                               100-psig steam with 50% heat
                                               recovery and flue gas in at
                                               900 °F and out at 500 °F

 Capital  cost = $563,000;  from Fig.  IV- 1.


 Fixed  cost  = ($563,000  X 0.29*) +  catalyst  replacement cost ($16,000)  = $179,000/yr.


     Catalyst  replacement cost =

          catalyst purchase cost  ($40,000)  X installation  factor  (1.2)
                                3-yr replacement

     Catalyst purchase  cost = $40,000; from Fig. A- 2
           (1.45 X 8000 scfm = 11,600 scfm of flue gas).


Operating cost = fuel ($122,780)  + electricity  ($9,551) +  labor  ($36,000)
     = $168,331/hr.

     Fuel =  [14.6 Btu/scf (Table II-l] X (8,000 scfm) X  ($2.00/million Btu*) X
          (60 min/hr) X  (8760 hr/yr) = $122,780/yr.

     Electricj-ty =

     (16  in.  HO  X  (o. 0001575  T-^_\   X (8,000 scfm)  X fl.45 S°f °f air
              z     V           ln-  H°/                    \
                                                           .
                                   2°/                     \        scf of off-gas    /
                           • - — - — - — — . — - - — - . - . - , - _ X
                                   0.60 efficiency

        X (0.746 kWh)  X ($0.03/kWh*) X  (8760 hr/yr) = $9,551/yr.


     Labor = $36,000/yr (from ref 1) ;  the labor cost for a system without
          heat recovery is $18,000/yr.
*
 See Table IV-2.

-------
                                       B-4
Credit =  (8.56 Etu/scf) X  (8,000 scfm) X  (l.45  ^f of waste^as)  X (6° min/hr) x


    X  ($2.00/million Btu) X  (8760 hr/yr) =  $104,000/yr.






Annual cost = fixed cost  ($179,000/yr) -f- operating cost ($168,000/yr)  -

          credit  ($104,000/yr ) =  $243,000/yr.
Net cost = -              nn           -  $30.4/scfm.
            flow rate  (8,000 scfm)

-------
                                     ANNUAL COSTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                90% CONVERSION OF VOC
                                          OFF-GAS HEAT CONTENT!  0.0 PTU/SCF
      CASE        OFF-GAS        CAPITAL
                   FLOW           COST

                  (SCFM)        ($1000)

NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700,          184.
                    2000.          236.
                    5000.          314.
                   10000.          411.
                   20000.          574.
                   50000.         1022.
                  100000.         1812.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER
     37% HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          236.
                    2000.          311.
                    LiOOO.          429.
                   10000.          582.
                   20000.          841.
                   50000.         1347.
                  100000.         2740,
WASTE HEAT BOILER,100 PSIG STEAM
     SOX HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          251.
                    2000.          322.
                    5000.          444.
                   10000.          612.
                   20000.          909.
                   50000.         1716.
                  100000.         2950.
  OPCRrM TNG
FIXEIi
 COST
   54.
   71 .
   98.
  132.
  192.
  359.
  649.
   69.
   93.
  131.
  181.
  268.
  507,
  910.
   74.
   96.
  135.
  191 .
  290.
  561.
  979.
COST OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      36.
      69,
     MS ,
     273.
     528,
    1293,
    2568,
      38.
      59.
     106.
     185.
     342.
     815.
    1602.
      54.
      38.
     167.
     298.
     559.
    1315.
    2653.
< $1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       9.
      26.
      65 .
     130.
     261 .
     652.
    130T..
      NET
  ANNUAL!ZED
COST OR CKEDIT
    ($1000)
       90.
      140.
      213.
      405.
      720.
     1652.
     3216.
      107.
      151.
      237.
      366.
      610.
     13?2.
     2512.
      119.
      158.
      237.
      358.
      588.
     1253.
     2327.
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 <«/SCFM>
     129.
      70.
      49.
      41 .
      36.
      33.
      32,
     154,
      76,
      47.
      37,
      31.
      26 .
      25.
     170,
      79.
      47,
      36.
      29.
      25.
      23.
                                                                                ft)
                                                                                Ul

-------
                                     ANNUAL  COSTS OF CATAIYTFC  OXIDATION  SYSTEMS

                                                90X  rOK'VFRBION  OF  VOC
                                          QFF-fiAS HEAT  CONTENT!   2.0  BTU/SCF
      T.ASE
OFF-GAS
 FLOU

(SCFM)
 CAPITAL
  COST

(tlOOO)
NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700 .
                    2000 .
                    5000.
                   10000.
                   20000.
                   50000.
                   100000.
RECUPERATIVE  HEAT  EXCHANGER
      -177.  HEAT  RECOVERY
                      700.
                     2000.
                     5000.
                    10000.
                    20000.
                    50000.
                   100000.
 UASTE HEAT BOILER,100 PSIG STEAh
      505! HEAT RECOVERY^

                     2000.
                     5000.
                     10000.
                     20000.
                     50000.
                    100000.
                  184.
                  237.
                  316.
                  -115.
                  580.
                 1037.
                  236.
                  311.
                  429.
                  D82.
                  841 .
                 1547.
                 2740.
                   252.
                   323.
                   446.
                   615.
                   915.
                  1731.
                  2983,
  OPERATING COST OF; CRtlU f
PTXED        OPERATING
 COST           COST
                   54.
                   72.
                   98.
                  134.
                  195.
                  365.
                  661.
                   69.
                   93.
                  131 .
                  181 .
                  268.
                  507,
                  910.
                    74.
                    97.
                   136.
                   192.
                   n92 »
                   566.
                   991 i
                  36.
                  70.
                  147.
                  ?76.
                  534.
                 1308.
                 2598.
                   38.
                   59.
                  107.
                  186.
                  345.
                  822.
                 1617.
                   55.
                   89.
                   168.
                   301 .
                   566.
                  1360.
                  2685.
(41000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
        0.
        0.
        0.
        0.
        0.
        0.
        0.
        9.
       27.
       67.
      133.
      266.
      666.
      1332,
      NET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OR CREDIT
    ($1000)
       91 .
      141 .
      246.
      110.
      729.
      1673.
      3259.
       108.
       152.
       237.
       367.
       613.
      1329.
      2527 ,
       119.
       159.
       238.
       339.
       591,
       1241,
       2344 ,
  MET COST
OR SAVINGS

 (t/SCFH)
     129 .
      71 .
      49 .
      41 .
      36.
      33.
      33.
      154.
       76.
       f.7 .
       37.
       31 .
       27.
       25.
      170.
       79.
       48.
       36.
       30.
       25.
       23.
W
I

-------
                                     ANNUAL COSTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                907. CONVERSION OF VOC
                                          OFF-GAS HF.AT CONTENT!  10.0 BTU/SCF"
      CASE        OFF-GAS        CAPITAL
                   FLOW           COST

                  (SCFM)        ($1000)

NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          184,
                    2000.          236.
                    5000.          314.
                   10000.          411.
                   20000.          574,
                   50000.         1022.
                  100000.         1812,
RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER
     36X HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          235.
                    2000.          309.
                    5000.          426,
                   10000.          576.
                   20000.          830,
                   50000.         1520.
                  100000.         2684.
UASTE HEAT BOILER»100 PSIG STEAM
     SOX HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          251.
                    2000.          322.
                    5000.          444.
                   10000.          612.
                   20000.          709.
                   50000.         1716,
                  100000.         2950.
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COST
   54.
   71 .
   98.
  132.
  192.
  359.
  649.
   69.
   92.
  130.
  179.
  265.
  500.
  894,
   74,
   96,
  135,
  191 ,
  290 ,
  561 ,
  979,
COPT OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      29.
      49.
      97.
     175.
     333.
     305,
    1592.
      32,
      41.
      41.
      96.
     165.
     371.
     715.
      47.
      69.
     118,
     200.
     364 ,
     837.
    1678.
t 000)
RECOVERY
 CREDIT
     0,
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0,
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     0.
     9.
    26.
    65.
   ] 30.
   261 .
   652.
  1305,
      MET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OR CREDIT
    (tlOOO)
       83.
      121 .
      194 .
      308.
      525.
     1164.
     2241 .
      101 .
      133.
      191 .
      T75.
      429.
      871 .
     1609.
      112.
      139.
      188.
      260.
      393.
      765.
     1351 .
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 ($/SCFM)
     119.
      60,
      39.
      31,
      26.
      23.
     144,
      66,
      38,
      28,
      21 ,
      17,
      16,
     160,
      69.
      38,
      26.
      20,
      15.
      14,
                                                                                W

-------
                                     ANNUAL  COSTS  OF  CATALfTtC  OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                902  CONVERSION  OF  VUC
                                          OFF-GAS  HEAT  CONTENT!  20.0 BTII/SCF
      CASE
OFF-GAS
 FLOU

(SCFM)
 CAPITAL
  COST

($1000)
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COST
COPT OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
($1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
      NET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OF: CREDIT
    (*1000>
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 (*/SCFH>
NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          187.
                    2000.          241.
                    5000.          323.
                   10000.          126.
                   20000.          600.
                   50000.         1037.
                  100000.         1958.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER
     452 HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          244.
                    2000.          326.
                    5000.          459.
                   10000.          633.
                   20000.          933.
                   50000.         1763.
                  100000.         3182.
UASTE  HEAT  &OILER.100 PSIG STEAM
     62'X HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          258.
                    2000.          338.
                    5000.          476.
                   10000.          676.
                   20000.         1027.
                   50000.         1962.
                  100000.         3295.
                                 73.
                                101.
                                138.
                                202.
                                383.
                                702.
                                 72.
                                 97.
                                139.
                                196.
                                295.
                                572.
                               1041 .
                                 76.
                                101.
                                146.
                                210.
                                326.
                                637.
                                1090.
                                  30.
                                  52.
                                 104.
                                 189.
                                 360.
                                 873.
                                1729.
                                  28.
                                  29.
                                  32.
                                  37.
                                  47.
                                  77.
                                 127.
                                  48.
                                  72.
                                 125.
                                 214.
                                 393.
                                 928.
                                1820.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  0.
                                  16.
                                  46.
                                 116.
                                 231 .
                                 462.
                                1155.
                                2310.
                                    85.
                                   125.
                                   205.
                                   327.
                                   562.
                                  1207.
                                  2430.
                                     99.
                                    126.
                                    171 .
                                    233.
                                    342.
                                    649.
                                   1168 .
                                    108.
                                    126.
                                    156.
                                    194.
                                    257.
                                    •110.
                                    599.
                                      122.
                                       63.
                                       41 .
                                       33.
                                       28.
                                       25.
                                       24.
                                       142,
                                       63.
                                       34.
                                       23.
                                       17,
                                       13,
                                       12,
                                       155.
                                       63.
                                       31 .
                                       19 .
                                       13,
                                         8.
                                         6,
                                        CO
                                        I
                                        00

-------
                                     ANNUAL  COSTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                90% CnK'UFRSrdN OF VDC
                                      OFF-GAS HEAT CONTENT.1 10.0 BTU/SCFdN AIR)
      CASE        OFF-GAS        CAPITAL
                   FLOW           COST

                  (SCFM)        ($1000)

NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          172.
                    2000.          215,
                    5000.          279.
                   10000.          357.
                   20000.          482.
                   50000.          802.
                  100000.         1330.
RECUPERATIUE HEAT EXCHANGER
     53X HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          233.
                    2000.          308.
                    5000,          428.
                   10000.          335.
                   20000.          852.
                   50000.         1373.
                  100000.         2766.
UASTE HEAT HOILER.100 PSIG STEAM
     56X HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          238.
                    2000.          299.
                    5000.          401.
                   10000.          542.
                   20000.          789.
                   50000.         1138.
                  tOOOOO.         2390.
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COST
   51 .
   64.
   86.
  1 13.
  158.
  276.
  472.
   68.
   91 .
  129.
  179.
  265.
  500.
  888.
   70.
   88.
  121 .
  166.
  247.
  461 .
  779.
COST OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      40.
      72.
     127.
     236.
     563.
    110P.
      28.
      28.
      31 .
      34.
      41 .
      63.
      99.
      44.
      39,
      93.
     130,
     263,
     604.
    1172.
<*1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
       0,
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0 ,
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       8.
      23.
      58.
     117.
     233.
     OS3.
    1167.
      MET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OR CREDIT
    ($1000)
       76.
      104 .
      158.
      240.
      394.
      839.
     1579.
       96.
      120.
      160,
      213.
      307,
      563.
      987,
      106.
      124.
      156.
      199.
      277.
      481 ,
      784.
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 (*/SCFM>
     109,
      52,
      32.
      24,
      20,
      17,
      16,
     137,
      60.
      32,
      21 .
      15.
      1 1 .
      10,
     151,
      62.
      31 ,
      20.
      14 ,
      10 ,
                                                                                M

-------
                                     ANNUAL COSTS OF CATALYTIC  OXIDATION  SYSTEMS

                                                992 CONVERSION  OF  VOC
                                          OFF-GAS HEAT CONTENT!   0.0  &TU/SCF
      CASE
OFF-CAS
 FLOU

(SCFM)
 CAPITAL
  COST

($1000)
NO HFAT RECOVERY
                     700.           18?.
                    2000.           240.
                    5000.           324.
                    10000.           431.
                    ?0000.           613.
                    50000.          1117.
                   100000.          1996.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT  EXCHANGER
     377. HEAT  RECOVERY
                      700.           238,
                     2000.           315.
                     5000.           439.
                    10000.           601.
                    20000.           878.
                    50000.          1635.
                   100000.          2912.
UASTE  HEAT  BOILERflOO PSI6 STEAM
      •-,07.  HEAT  RECOVERY
                      700.           253.
                     2000.           326.
                     5000.           454.
                    10000.           632.
                    20000.           948.
                    50000.           1811,
                    100000,           3134,
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COPT
                                  74 .
                                 104 .
                                 145.
                                 217.
                                 418.
                                 763.
                                  70.
                                  95.
                                 137.
                                 193.
                                 291 .
                                 562,
                                1017,
                                  75.
                                  99.
                                 142.
                                 203.
                                 314.
                                 619.
                                1093,
cam OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
                                  36.
                                  69.
                                 146.
                                 274,
                                 531 .
                                1300.
                                2583.
                                   38.
                                   09.
                                  106.
                                  186.
                                  345.
                                  822.
                                 1616.
                                   54.
                                   39.
                                  168.
                                  299,
                                  562.
                                 1352.
                                 2668.
($1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
                                   0 .
                                   0,
                                   0.
                                   0.
                                   0.
                                   0,
                                   0 .
                                   9 ,
                                  26.
                                  65 .
                                 130.
                                 261 ,
                                 652,
                                1305,
      NET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OF: CREDIT
    ($1000)
                                     91 .
                                    143.
                                    250 .
                                    119.
                                    748.
                                   1719.
                                   3346 .
                                                108.
                                                154.
                                                243.
                                                379.
                                                636.
                                               1334,
                                               2633,
                                    120.
                                    161 .
                                    244 .
                                    372.
                                    615,
                                    1319,
                                    2457 ,
  MET COST
OR SAVINGS

 ($/<3CFM>
                                       130.
                                        72.
                                        50.
                                        42 .
                                        37.
                                        34.
                                        33.
                                                       155.
                                                       77 .
                                                       49.
                                                       38.
                                                       32.
                                                       28.
                                                       26 ,
                                       172,
                                        81 .
                                        49,
                                        37,
                                        31 ,
                                        26,
                                                                     td
                                                                     M
                                                                     O

-------
                                     ANNUAL COSTS OF CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                99% r.OHVFRSION OF MOC
                                          OFF-GAS HEAT CONTENT:  2.0 BTU/SCF
      CASE        OFF-GAS        CAPITAL
                   FLOU           COST

                  (SCFh)
NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          184.
                    2000,          241,
                    5000.          327.
                   10000.          435.
                   20000.          620.
                   50000.         1133.
                  JOOOOO.         2033.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER
     .37% HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          238.
                    2000.          315.
                    5000.          439.
                   10000.          601,
                   20000.          878.
                   50000.         1635,
                  100000.         2912.
UASTE HEAT BOILERflOO PSIG SIEAM
     50% HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.          253.
                    2000.          3^3,
                    5000.          456,
                   10000,          635.
                   20000.          955.
                   50000.         1828.
                  100000.         3171 .
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COCT
   74.
  105.
  146.
  219.
  425.
  778.
   70.
   95.
  137.
  193.
  291 .
  562.
 1017.
   75.
   99.
  143.
  205.
  317.
  626.
 1108.
COST OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      36.
      70.
     MS.
     278.
     537,
    1316.
    2613.
      38.
      59,
     107,
     187.
     348 ,
     829,
    1631 ,
      55,
      89,
     169 ,
     302.
     569,
    1368.
    2700,
($1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       9.
      27.
      67.
     133.
     266,
     666.
    1332.
      NET
  ANNUALIZEO
COST OR CREDIT
    ($1000)
       92.
      144 .
      253.
      424.
      756.
     1741 .
     339t .
      109 .
      154.
      244 .
      380,
      639,
     1391.
     2648 .
      120.
      162.
      245.
      374.
      619.
     1328.
     2476 .
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 (*/SCFM)
     131 ,
      72 .
      51 ,
      42.
      38,
      35.
      34.
      77.
      49,
      38.
      32,
      28,
      26.
     172,
      81 .
      49 ,
      37 .
      31 ,
      27.
      25,
                                                                                 ft)

-------
ANNUA1  COSTS OF CATALfTJC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

           99% (-(INVERSION OF VOC
     OFF-GAS HEAT CONTENT! 10.0 BTII/SCF
      CASE        OFF-GAS        CAPITAL
                   FLOU           COST

                  (SCFM)         ($1000)

NO HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.           185,
                    2000.           240,
                    5000.           324.
                   10000.           131.
                   20000.           613.
                   50000.          1117.
                  100000.          1996.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER
     36X  HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.           237.
                    2000.           313.
                    5000.           435.
                   10000.           594.
                   20000.           866.
                   50000.          1608.
                  100000.          2858.
WASTE  HEAT  HOILERtlOO  PSIG STEAH
     f.0%  HEAT RECOVERY
                     700.           253.
                    2000.           326.
                    5000.           454.
                    10000.           632.
                    20000.           948.
                    50000.          1811.
                   100000.          3134.
             OPERATING COST OR CRtDIT  (*1000)
           FIXED        OPERATING       RECOVERY
            COST           COST          CREDIT
              74.
             104 .
             145.
             217.
             
                   120.
                    62 .
                    40.
                    32 .
                    28.
                    25.
                    24 .
                   146 .
                    68.
                    40.
                    29.
                    23 ,
                    19 .
                    17,
162.
 71 .
 39 .
 27 ,
 21 ,
 17.
 15.
                                                                                            td

                                                                                            H»
                                                                                            N:

-------
                                      ANNIIAI  COSTS  OF  CATALYTTC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                 992  CONVERSION DF VOC
                                           OFF-GAS  HEAT  CONTENT!  20.0 BTU/3CF
      CASE         OFF-GAS         CAPITAL
                    FLOU            COST

                   (SCFM)         ($1000)

NO HEAT RECOVERY
                      700,           188.
                     2000.           246,
                     5000.           334.
                    10000.           448,
                    .70000.           643.
                    50000.          118?,
                   100000.          2158.
RECUPERATIVE HEAT  EXCHANGER
     45% HEAT RECOVERY
                      700.           245.
                     2000.           330.
                     5000.           468.
                    10000.           652.
                    20000.           970.
                    50000.          1354,
                   100000,          3358,
WASTE HEAT BOILER*100 PSIG STEAM
     62% HEAT RECOVERY
                      700.           260.
                     2000,           343.
                     5000.           489,
                    10000.           697.
                    20000.          1070.
                    50000.          2064,
                   100000.          3495,
  OPERATING
FIXED
 COST
   56.
   76,
  108.
  151.
  2°9.
  447.
  826.
   73.
  100,
  146,
  208.
  319.
  628.
 1151 ,
   77,
  104,
  153.
  ** ^4
  352.
  701,
 1214.
COPT OR CREDIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      30.
      53 .
     104.
     191.
     363.
     882.
    1745.
      28.
      29.
      33.
      38.
      50,
      84.
     141 .
      49.
      72,
     126.
     216.
     396.
     936.
    1836.
($1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDI r
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0,
       0.
      1 6,
      46,
     116.
     231 .
     462 .
   1155,
   2310.
      MET
  ANNUAL I ZED
COST OR CREDIT
    ($1000)
                     86.
                    128.
                    212.
                    342,
                    592.
                   1329.
                   2571.
      100.
      129.
      178.
      247.
      369.
      712.
     1293.
      109.
      130,
      163.
      209,
      286.
      432.
      740.
  NET COST
OR SAVINGS

 (*/SCFM>
                        123.
                         64 .
                         42 .
                         34.
                         30.
                         27.
                         26.
     143,
      65.
      36.
      25.
      18.
      14 .
      13.
     156,
      65.
      33.
      21.
      14 ,
      10 .
       7.
                                                                                tn

-------
                                     ANNUAL  COSTS  OF  CATALYTIC OXIDATION SYSTEMS

                                                 99X  CONVERSION OF VOC
                                       OFF-GAS  HEAT CONTENT:  10.0 BTU/SCF(IN AIR)
      CASE        OFF-GAS
                   FLOU

                  (SCFM)
HO HEAT RECOVER'
                      ;oo.
                     2000.
                     5000.
                    10000.
                    :;oooo.
                    50000.
                   tooooo .
RECUPERATIVE  HEAT  EXCHANGER
      53*  HEAT RECOVERY
                      700.
                     2000.
                     5 0 0 0 .
                    10 ""'" •
             100030.
 H-A1  f. OILEHitOO PSTG 31 i
-,6X. H^AT RECOVERY
                700.
               2000 .
               5000.
               10000.
               :: o o o o.
               50000.
              100000.
 CAPITAL
  COST

($1000)
   173 .
   218.
   237 .
   3M .
   509.
   863.
  1458.
   234.
   311.
   436 .
   -, 79 ,
                                AM
                                     240.
                                     302.
                                     409.
                                     556.
                                     816.
                                    1504.
                                    2517.
  OPERATING
r i x E D
 COST
   51 .
   66.
   90.
  121 .
  175.
  318.
    69.
    93.
   13,1.
   138.
   292.
   511 .
   968.
                    71 .
                    90.
                   126.
                   175.
                   264.
                   502.
                   859.
COST OR CREIiIT
 OPERATING
    COST
      26.
      40.
      73.
      128.
      238.
      568.
     1118.
       28.
       29.
       31 .
       35.
       43 .
       68.
      109,
                   44 ,
                   59.
                   93.
                  151 .
                  265.
                  609 .
                  1182,
(t1000)
  RECOVERY
   CREDIT
       0.
       0,
       0 .
       0.
       0.
       0.
       0.
        0.
        0.
        0 .
        0 .
        o.
        0,
        0.
                      23.
                      OP.
                      117.
                      233.
                      583.
                     1167,
      NET
  ANNUALIZED
COST OR CREDIT
    ($1000)
       77.
      1 06.
      163.
      249.
      413.
      836.
      1670.
        97.
       122.
       165.
       223.
       326.
       609 .
      107B.
                      106.
                      126.
                      161 .
                      20? .
                      296 .
                      528.
                      875.
                                                                                                          MET COST
                                                                                                        OR SAVINGS

                                                                                                          (*/SCFM)
                                                                                                              110.
                                                                                                               53.
                                                                                                               33.
                                                                                                               25.
                                                                                                               21 .
                                                                                                               18.
                                                                                                               17,
                                                                                                              138.
                                                                                                               61 .
                                                                                                               33.
                                                                                                               1 -)
                                                                                                               16 .
                                                                                                               12.
                                                                                                               1 1 .
                                                                                                                     1!
                           63.
                           32 .
                           21 .
                           15.
                           11 .
                            9 .

-------
                   4-i
                REPORT 4
       CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION

FLARES AND THE USE OF EMISSIONS AS FUELS
               V. Kalcevic
            IT Enviroscience
        9041 Executive Park Drive
       Knoxville, Tennessee  37923
              Prepared for

   Emission Standards and Engineering Division

  Office of Air Quality Planning  and Standards

         ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

      Research Triangle Park,  North  Carolina
               February 1981

-------
                                       4-iii
                               CONTENTS  OF REPORT  4
                                                                           Page
  I.   INTRODUCTION
 II.   SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONS
      A.    Elevated Flares
      B.    Enclosed Ground Flares
      C.    Fuel-Gas Source
III.   SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES
      A.    Steam-Assisted Elevated  Flares
      B.    Enclosed Ground Flares
      C.    Fuel-Gas Source
 IV.   DESIGN BASIS
      A.    Steam-Assisted Elevated  Flares
      B.    Enclosed Ground Flares
      C.    Fuel-Gas Source
  V.   COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS
      A.    Steam-Assisted Elevated  Flares
      B.    Enclosed Gound Flares
      C.    Fuel-Gas Source
VI.   SUMMARY AND CONSLUSIONS
      A.    Steam-Assisted Elevated  Flares
      B.    Enclosed Ground Flares
      C.    Fuel-Gas Source
VII.   REFERENCES
  1-1
 II-l
 II-l
 II-4
 II-6
III-l
III-l
III-2
III-3
 IV-1
 IV-1
 IV-9
 IV-9
  V-l
  V-4
  V-9
  V-9
 VI-1
 VI-1
 VI-1
 VI-2
VII-1
                             APPENDICES OF  REPORT 4
A.    ELEVATED-FLARE DESIGN EQUATIONS
B.    INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
C.    SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
  A-l
  B-l
  C-l

-------
                                         4-v
                              TABLES  OF REPORT  4

Number
  V-l    Factors  Used  for Estimating Total Installed Costs                  V-2
  V-2    Annual Cost Parameters
                                                                           V-3

-------
                                         4-vii


                                FIGURES  OF REPORT  4

Number
                                                                          Page
 II-l    Diagram of Steam-Assisted Smokeless  Elevated-Flare System        H-2
 II-2    Diagram of Enclosed Ground-Flare  System                          H_5
 II-3    Diagram of Emission-Fuel-Gas  System                               jj_7
 IV-1    Elevated-Flare  Capacity                                           IV_2
 IV-2    Maximum Steam Availability at Elevated-Flare  Tip                  IV-3
 IV-3    Elevated-Flare  Height                                             IV_5
 IV-4    Natural Gas Required for  Elevated Flare                           Iv_7
 IV-5    Gas Transfer-Line and Flame Lengths  for Elevated Flare            IV-8
 IV-6    Pressure Drop of Elevated-Flare System                            IV-io
 IV-7    Ground-Flare Capacity                                             TV-11
 IV-8    Ground-Flare Height                                               IV-12
 IV-9     Natural Gas Required for  Ground Flare                             IV-13
 IV-10    Fuel-Gas Source Transfer-Line Capacity                            IV-14
 V-l     Elevated-Flare-System Installed Capital Cost                      V-5
 V-2     Elevated-Flare-System Gross Annual Operating Cost                 V-6
 V-3     Cost Effectiveness of VOC Destroyed by an Elevated-Flare          V-7
         System
 V-4    Energy Effectiveness for  VOC Destroyed by an Elevated-Flare       V-8
        System
 V-5    Ground-Flare-System  Installed  Capital Cost                        V-10
 V-6    Ground-Flare-System  Gross  Annual Operating Cost                    V-ll
 V-7     Cost Effectiveness of VOC  Destroyed by a  Ground-Flare  System      V-12
 V-8     Energy Effectiveness for VOC Destroyed by  a  Ground-Flare          V-n
        System
 V-9     Fuel-Gas-System  Installed  Capital  Cost                            y-14
 V-10   Fuel-Gas-System  Gross Annual Operating Cost                        y-15
 V-ll   Cost Effectiveness for VOC Destroyed  by  a  Fuel-Gas  System          V-16
 B-l     Elevated-Flare-System Installed Capital  Cost                       B-3
 B-2     Ground-Flare-System  Installed  Capital  Cost                         B-4
 B-3     Fuel-Gas-System  Installed  Capital Cost                             B-5

-------
                                      1-1
                               I.  INTRODUCTION

 This  control  device  evaluation deals  with volatile  organic  compound  emissions
 (VOC) being destroyed by  a high-temperature  oxidation  flame  to  the normal
 combustion products  carbon dioxide and water.  Three types  of systems  are
 evaluated:  an elevated flare,  an enclosed ground flare, and using the emissions
 as a  fuel. To be controlled by these  systems  the emission must  have  sufficient
 fuel  value, or be enriched with auxiliary  fuel, for a stable flame  to be
 maintained.  Normal  safety precautions for handling combustible gases  must be
 exercised.  If the emission contains  constituents such as sulfur and halogen
 compounds, they will be oxidized to noxious gases that will  be  discharged to
 the atmosphere.

 The elevated flare, which is a  single burner  tip elevated above ground level
 for safety reasons, burns the vented gases in essentially a  diffusion  flame.
 This  type of system, especially in the large  sizes, can create problems with
 luminosity, combustion noise, and heat radiation.

 The ground flare is composed of multiple gas burner heads that are grouped in
 an enclosure and are staged to operate based on the flow of  the vented gas.  The
 enclosures reduce the luminosity,  noise,  and radiation problems and allows the
 flare to be located at ground elevation.

For the emissions to be used as a  fuel the need for it must be established and
transportation from the point of generation to the  point of use must be possible.
These restrictions  usually limit this control method to emissions  that have  a
fairly steady generation characteristic.

The three control systems  can be used in combinations  for improved handling  of
emissions, for instance,  for a facility that has  some  steady emissions, has
potential for some  fairly  frequent intermediate-size emissions,  and requires infre-
quent emergency venting. The fuel-gas system could  be  designed to  handle the steady
emissions;  emissions in excess of the fuel  needed  would go to an  enclosed
ground flare sized  to handle the intermediate-size  emissions; then further
excess emissions would go  to an elevated  flare sized to handle the emergency

-------
                                      1-2
venting.  This combined system would maximize energy conservation, burn most of
the emissions in a potentially more efficient and acceptable manner, and yet be
capable of safely handling emergency conditions.  Because a combined system is
very site-specific this report treats each control method independently.

-------
                                           II-l
                              II.  SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONS

A.   ELEVATED FLARES
     There are three general types of elevated flares:  those that are nonsmokeless,
     those that are smokeless,  and those that are fired or endothermic.  The first
     type, which is the most simple one, is just a flare tip without any special
     provision for enhancing the mixing of air into its flame.  Its use is limited
     essentially to gas streams that burn readily without producing smoke, for
     example,  streams that contain predominately methane, hydrogen, or carbon mon-
     oxide.  In the second type,  which is the one most widely used and is the most
     versatile,  an exterior momentum source is used to improve the flame-air mixing
     and turbulence.   The momentum sources that have been used are steam,  water
     sprays, high-pressure gas,  air blowers,  and compressed air.   The third type
     uses a  high-energy-content  fuel gas to provide heating value to a lean flare
     gas that  will not support  a stable  flame by itself,  usually  a gas with less
     than 115  Btu/ft3 heating value.1    This  type of flare  has very limited use.  It
     has been  used for disposal  of such  streams as sulfur tail gases and ammonia
     waste gases.  Although each  flare  type may have potential  application  to a
     specific  situation in the synthetic organic  chemicals  manufacturing industry,
     this study deals  only with  the  steam-assisted smokeless flare,  which  has been
     reported  to account  for  qreater than  95% of  the  flares  installed.2

     Figure II-l is a  diagram of a steam-assisted elevated  smokeless  flare  system
     showing the usual  components  that are used.   The emission source  gas  is con-
     veyed by  a transfer  line from the facility release point  to  the  flare  location.
     The  line  is equipped  for purging so that explosive mixtures  do not occur in the
     flare system either on startup or during operation.  The usual purge gas is
     natural gas, although other fuel gases and inert gases such  as nitrogen can be
     used.

     Liquids that may be in the emission source gas or that may condense out in  the
     collection headers and transfer line are removed by a disentrainment drum
     located close to the flare.  Liquids in a flare gas can cause smoke to form
     because of incomplete burning and if the size of the droplets3 is greater than
    *See Sect. VII for the references cited in this report.

-------
                                    P\L.OT
                           7—Ch
                                               TUBE
                                                                   IG|U\T\OVJ
Fig.  II-l.  Diagram of Steam-Assisted Smokeless Elevated-Flare System

-------
                                      II-3
 150 pm may generate a spray of burning chemicals that could reach ground level
 and present a safety hazard.  A water seal is usually located between the dis-
 entrainment drum and the flare stack to prevent flashbacks into the system.
 Other devices, such as flame arresters and actuated check valves, may sometimes
 replace a water seal or be used in conjunction with it.

 For safety reasons a stack is  used to elevate the flare.  The flare must be
 located so that it does not present a hazard to surrounding personnel and
 facilities;  therefore  the usual choice is to elevate it.   The  height is deter-
 mined by designing for a maximum ground-level heat  radiation and possibly also
 for plume dispersion in case of emission  ignition failure.   A  stack seal is
 normally used just below the flare tip to impede  the incursion of air back  into
 the flare system,  which could  create  an explosion potential.   The use of a  seal
 reduces  the  operating  purge-gas  requirements.

 The burner tip is  designed  to  give an environmentally acceptable  combustion of
 the flare gas  over  the  flare system's  capacity  range.  Consideration  is  given
 to  flame  stability,  ignition reliability, effective  assist-steam  injection,
 and, possibly, noise suppression.   The burner tips are normally proprietary in
 design.   Flame stability can be enhanced by flame holder retention devices
 incorporated in the  flare tip  inner circumference.  With burner tips with
 modern flame holder  designs the flame can be stable over a flare-gas exit
 discharge velocity range of 1  to 600 fps.*  Reliable ignition is obtained by
 continuous pilot burners designed  for stablility and positioned around the
 outer perimeter of the flare tip. The number of pilot burners required depends
 on  flare  size and,  possibly, on flare gas composition and wind conditions.  The
pilot burners are ignited by an ignition source system,  which can be designed
 for either manual or automatic  actuation.   Effective assist-steam injection to
promote turbulence  and mixing of air into the flare  gas  flame for more effi-
cient combustion and smoke suppressions is generally accomplished by using
high-velocity steam jets positioned around the outer perimeter  of the flare
tip.  For the larger flares steam can also be injected concentrically into the
flare tip.  For some proprietary designs  steam injection  includes the aspira-
tion of air along with  the steam.

-------
                                        II-4
    Steam flow can be controlled manually but automatic control, based on flare gas
    flow and flame radiation, gives a faster response to the need for steam and a
    better adjustment of the quantity required.  The physical limitation on the
    quantity of steam that can be delivered and injected into the flare flame
    determines the smokeless capacity of the flare, which is usually less than its
    stable flame capacity. The use of steam injection into a flare flame can
    produce other results in addition to air entrainment and turbulence.  For
    example, the water  in the steam can enter into a water/gas  reaction with carbon
    or  into a  steam—re-forming reaction with hydrocarbons; either reaction can
    reduce smoke formation.  Steam can moderate the  flame temperature, which could
    inhibit flare-gas consituents from participating in cracking reactions that
    form  carbon and  smoke.  A detrimental  effect  of  steam usage is that  it can
    aggravate  the  flare noise problem by producing high-frequency jet noise and by
     increasing the combustion rate.  The jet noise can be reduced by the  use of
     small multiple steam jets and,  if necessary,  by  accoustical shrouding.

B.   ENCLOSED  GROUND  FLARES
     An enclosed ground flare has  multiple  burner  heads  that are staged to operate
     based on the  quantity of gas  being released to the  flare.   The size,  design,
     number,  and arrangement of  the  burner  heads depend on the  flare-gas characteri-
     stics.  An exterior motivation source, such as steam or air, to enhance com-
     bustion and prevent smoke formation is not required except in rare applica-
     tions.  Stable combustion can be obtained with some gases that have heat con-
     tents as low as 50 to 60 Btu/ft3 (ref 4).   Reliable and efficient operation can
     be attained from 0 to 100% of capacity.4

     Figure 11-2 is a diagram of an enclosed ground  flare system with the components
     that are normally  used.  The emission source gas is conveyed from its facility
     release point to the flare location by a transfer line.  Purge  gas probably  is
     needed only for initial purging of the system on startup.  Liquids  that may be
      in the emission source  gas or  that may condense out  in  the collection headers
      and transfer  line  are  removed  by a disentrainment drum  located  close  to the
      flare.   If a  potential for overloading  the ground-flare  system  exists,  the
      excess  gas may  need to be  diverted to an  elevated flare or other safety precau-
      tions taken.   A water seal can be  located between the  disentrainment drum and
      the ground flare if the potential exists  for flashbacks into the system.

-------
TO  ELEVAvTED-
PUR^E
 I
 I
J.	
       COUJeCT\OM HEADER
  AMD  TRANSFER LIME
     Y
                           DRUM
              f
                                     WATER

                                                HEAD'S
                                                               3ROUUD-
\
                                                            PILOT
                                                            BuRMeR
                                                                                 ^PIUTT
                   Fig. II-2.  Diagram of Enclosed Ground-Flare System

-------
                                          II-6
     The  number  of burner heads  and  their  arrangement  into groups  for  staged  opera-
     tion depend on  the  discharge characteristics  of the emission  source  gas.   To
     ensure  reliable  ignition, pilot burners with  igniters are provided.   The burner
     heads are enclosed  in  a  shell that  is internally  insulated  and that  can  be of
     several shapes,  such as  cylindical, hexagonal, or rectangular.    The height
     must be adequate for creating enough  draft  to supply sufficient air  for  smoke-
     less combustion of  the waste gas  and  for  dispersion of  the  thermal plume.
     Also, dispersion of toxic  substances  or VOC on flameout can be a  problem.   The
     base of the enclosure  is surrounded by an accoustical  fence.

C.   FUEL-GAS SOURCE
     To use  an emission as  a  fuel gas  requires that the emission be of fuel quality
     and that it be collected from  its source  and transported to the point of use.
     A typical system is shown in Fig. II-3;  an actual system may  differ signifi-
     cantly, depending on site-specific factors.  The decision to  use an emission as
     a fuel gas is normally based on economics.  For  a system to be economically
     viable usually requires that the emission be fairly consistent in flow and
     quality and that there be a use for  it in a transportable distance. If there is
     a potential for overloading the system or if there may not be a use for the
     fuel in the quantity generated or when generated, the excess may be diverted to
     a ground or elevated  flare.

-------
TO EUCLO<5EO
 OR  EUEVATeD-
                                                  <=J>C6>TEM
/
           COLUECTIOM
    HEADER  AMO
                    DRUM
                                                    OR
                                          COMPRESSOR
                                       UKIE TO
                                            'HEADED
                                                                  H
                                                                  M
                                                                  I
           Fig. II-3.   Diagram of Emission-Fuel-Gas System

-------
                                          III-l
                              III.  SYSTEM EFFICIENCIES

     Little information is presently available on the combustion efficiency of
     flares.  Although some test data are available (and discussed below), the
     results are not applicable to the combustion of typical SOCMI off-gas streams
     in typical SOCMI flares.

     Flare efficiencies of 98% and 99% are used for the purpose of cost-effective-
     ness calculations in this report.  It should not be assumed that typical SOCMI
     flares will obtain efficiencies in this range.   Well-designed and well-operated
     small flares burning easily combusted gases do obtain high efficiencies but
     further work is necessary to determine efficiencies of typical flares in this
     industry.  The EPA is presently (1981) conducting studies on the efficiencies
     obtained by a variety of flares at typical operating conditions.5

A.   STEAM-ASSISTED ELEVATED FLARES
     An elevated flare without steam assistance would burn as one large diffusion
     flame.  A diffusion flame is one in which air diffuses across the boundary of
     the fuel/combustion product stream toward the center of the fuel flow,  forming
     an envelope of a combustible gas mixture around a core of fuel gas.   This
     stream, on ignition,  establishes a stable flame zone around a gas core  above
     the burner tip.  This inner gas core is heated by diffusion of hot combustion
     products from the flame zone.  Cracking can occur with the formation of small
     hot particles of carbon that give the flame its characteristic luminosity.   If
     there is an oxygen deficiency and if the carbon particles are cooled to below
     their ignition temperature,  they can escape the flame zone as smoke. Also,  in
     large diffusion flames, combustion product vortices can form around burning
     portions of the gas and shut off the supply of oxygen.  This localized  insta-
     bility causes elongations and contractions (flame flickering), which can be
     accompanied by soot formation.  Steam jets directed into the flame or used to
     aspirate air into the flowing gas improve the mixing of air with the fuel and
     give the flame some premixed flame character, thereby reducing or eliminating
     soot formation.

     Sampling a commercial-size flare is very difficult with the methods now avail-
     able and results obtained from testing small flares cannot at the present time

-------
                                      III-2
   be  scaled up  for  commercial-size flares.  Three programs  are  reported  for
   testing smaller sized  commercial flares.1/6/?  In  one program flares with
   2-in.,  3-in.,  and 6-in.  tip  sizes were  tested;1  results  are  given  for selected
   tests with  natural gas as  the  fuel  and  without the use  of assist  steam.  From
   those results the methane  hydrocarbon feed  destruction  efficiency was  calcu-
   lated to be >90%  in only two tests  and  <70% in four tests.   In another program6
   the flare  tip size was 16  in.;  the  flare gas was a mercaptan in nitrogen and
   assist  steam was  not used.  The efficiencies reported ranged from 92  to >99%.

   An extensive flare test program has been conducted in Germany.7  The  flare tip
   was a truncated cone 20 cm (7.9 in.) at the flare-gas entrance, 50 cm
    (19.7 in.)  long,  and 70 cm (27.6 in.)  at the exit.  The cone was  fitted with
    six steam nozzles that aspirated air into the flaming gas before  it exited the
    cone.  The operating parameters used were the following:  flare gas flow,  0.13
    to 2.9 mt/hr; gas composition density,  0.54 to 1.86 kg/m3,- steam-to-gas weight
    ratio, 0 to  1.73; and cross wind,  0 to 6 m/s.  The gases combusted had a high
    proportion of hydrogen  and a low proportion of unsaturated hydrocarbons.
    Typically  the hydrogen  concentration was greater  than  50%.   Of 1298 measure-
    ments  at the  flame  end  and  downstream  from  the flame end for the complete range
    of test conditions, in  only 4  measurements  were the local burnouts to carbon
    dioxide less than 99%.

    The efficiencies used for cost-effectiveness calculations in this  report  are
    99% for flares to 12  in.  in diameter and 98% for  flares  over 12  in.  in diam-
     eter .
B.   ENCLOSED GROUND FLARES
     An enclosed ground flare burns with multiple small diffusion flames from burner
     heads that can be stage-operated based on flare gas flow and that are enclosed
     on the sides.  An enclosed ground flare has the control capabilities to maxi-
     mize combustion efficiency for most operating conditions.  The burner heads can
     be sized and designed for the materials in  the flare gas; they can be stage-
     operated to give a  turndown  from 100 to 0%« of design; and the enclosure  design
     allows  for a degree of  combustion air  and temperature control.

-------
                                           III-3
     Although the design of an enclosed ground flare would allow the combustion
     gases to be monitored to determine combustion efficiency, there are no reported
     test programs on commercial-sized units.  One reference1 cites that a perfor-
     mance estimate was made for an open-flare flame.

     The efficiency used in this report for cost-effectiveness calculations is 99%.

C.   FUEL-GAS SOURCE
     When an emission is used as a fuel gas,  the VOC destruction efficiency depends
     on the waste gas composition and on the  combustion conditions.  The efficiency
     used in this report for cost-effectiveness calculations is >99.9%.  According
     to the emission factors given in AP-428  for natural gas and LPG when burned
     under proper operating conditions, this  efficiency is attained.  This combus-
     tion efficiency does not apply to dilute VOC streams introduced into a combus-
     tion device in any way other than as a fuel gas.

-------
                                       IV-1
                                  IV. DESIGN BASIS

     The capital and operating costs developed for this study are based on model
     designs discussed in this section.  The three control systems, steam-assisted
     elevated flares, enclosed ground flares, and emissions used as a fuel source,
     are evaluated independently.  For all systems a model-waste-gas emission was
     used that had properties equivalent to those of propylene.  The standard con-
     struction material is carbon steel except where it is standard practice to use
     other materials, such as burner tips.

A.   STEAM-ASSISTED ELEVATED FLARES

1.   Flare-Tip Capacity
     The maximum and minimum capacity of a flare tip to burn a flared gas with a
     stable flame (not necessarily smokeless) is a function of tip design.  At too
     high an exit velocity the flame can lift off the tip and flame out,  while at
     too low a velocity it can burn back into the tip or lick down the sides of the
     stack.  Modern commercial flares with flame retention rings are reported to
     have stable flame capabilities over flare-gas discharge velocities of 1 to 600
     fps.1  The actual maximum capacity of a flare tip is usually limited by the
     flare-gas pressure available to overcome the system pressure drop.   For the
     purpose of determining flare heights the practical capacity in this  study was
     assumed to be the model-waste-gas flow at ambient conditions,  which  results in
     a flare-tip pressure drop of 18 in.  H20.   For the larger flare-tip sizes these
     conditions would result in a discharge velocity of about 200 fps.   Flare capa-
     city based on the correlations in ref 9 (see Appendix A) is plotted  in
     Fig.  IV-1.

     The capacity of a steam-assisted flare to burn smokelessly is  limited by the
     quantity of steam that is available.  There is a physical limit to the quantity
     of steam that can be effectively delivered to a flare tip.   Figure IV-2 is a
     smoothed curve of the quantity that can be delivered based on  a practical
     design of steam piping on the flare and on 150-lb steam pressure being avail-
     able to the flare site.10  Another steam limit could be the availability of
     steam-generation capacity.   In this study it was assumed that  steam  would be
     available to the flare site,  on demand when needed.

-------
                                  IV-2
  1,000,000rr
to   100,000
(0
o
V)
(0
T3
O
5
 (0
~   10,000 —
 o
 CO
 a
 (0
O
 to
u.
        1000
      Based on correla-
      tions in ref 9;
      see Appendix A.
Based on the steam
availability of
Fig. IV-2  and on 0.3 Ib
of steam per Ib of flare
gas for flare tips 24-in.
and smaller and 0.45 Ib
of steam per Ib of flare
gas for larger flare tip
sizes.
              1
 10
                                                                60
                             Flare-Tip Diameter  (in.)

                       Fig.  IV-1.  Elevated-Flare Capacity

-------
                       IV-3
200,000
100,000 —
    1000
                         Flare-Tip Diameter (in
      Fig. IV-2.  Maximum Steam Availability at
                Elevated-Flare Tip

-------
                                          IV-4
    The  steam  requirement per quantity of flare gas depends on  the  composition  of
    the  gas  flared and  on the flare-tip design.  Typical values  range  from  0.15 to
    0.50 Ib  of steam per pound of flare gas.11   Olefins, such  as propylene,  re-
    quire higher  steam  ratios than would a paraffin hydrocarbon to  burn  smokeless-
    ly.   A flare  with a small-diameter tip can use steam more efficiently than  a
    large-diameter tip  to mix air into the flame and promote turbulence.  The
    ratios of  steam to  model waste gas used  in this study, which are based  on
    experience,10 are 0.3 Ib per pound of flare gas for  flare tips  to  24 in.  in
    diameter and  0.45 Ib/lb for larger flares.  The design also assumes  instrument
    control  of steam  flow for optimum usage.  Smokeless  flare capacity based on
    those ratios  and  on the steam availability shown  in  Fig. IV-2  is plotted in
    Fig. IV-1.

2.  Flare Height
     The flare-height  design is  usually  a function of  maximum ground-level heat-
     radiation intensity.   This  study is  based on the  assumptions of a  ground-level
     radiation of 1500 Btu/(hr)(ft2), which is the maximum allowed for  short-term
     personnel exposure, and of a  sunny-condition solar radiation of 300 Btu/(hr)
     (ft2).3 The difference, 1200  Btu/(hr)(ft2),  is the maximum design radiation
     from  the  flare flame.   Figure IV-3 is a plot of the total flare heights  used
     and  is based on the equations given in ref 12 (see Appendix A). It is  further
     assumed for cost estimating purposes that as a minimum a 40-ft flare height is
     required.  (The minimum height requirement can be very site specific,-  one
     company reports that they use 150 ft as a minimum standard.)13

     Flare height may sometimes be determined by the need to safely disperse  the
     flared  gas in case of  flame out.  The height in these cases would be based on
     dispersion modeling for the particular  installation conditions.

 3.   Purge-Gas Requirements
     The minimum  continuous purge gas required is  determined by the design  of the
      stack seals, which are usually  proprietary  devices.  An older reference14
      reports that the gas velocity  required is  0.10  to 0.15  fps; modern seals are
      stated to require  less.  This  study is based on a flow of 0.03 fps,10  which is
      stated to be adequate for normal applications without any type of conservation
      Use  of various purge-gas conservation systems can reduce this consumption.
15

-------
                            Flare Height (ft)
                                        o
                                        o
                                                               o
                                                               o
                                                               o
                        1—TTT
W
M
to
(0
o.
R
ff
H-

t
o

i
•5

o

OJ'

3
(D
F*
O
                                                                                           H




                                                                                           Ul
         0>
         o

-------
                                           IV-6
     The purge gas is assumed to be a constant flow of natural gas at 60°F and
     1 atm.   Figure IV-4 shows a plot of these requirements.   Purge gas also may be
     needed to purge the system before startup and to prevent a vacuum from sucking
     air back into the system after a hot gas discharge is flared.  These uses are
     assumed to be minor.

4.   Pilot-Gas Requirements
     Pilot-gas usage is a function of the number of pilot units required to ensure
     positive ignition of the flared gas, of the design of the pilots, and of the
     mode of operation.  This study is based on the practice of one vendor for a
     certain number of pilots versus the flare size, the pilot size, and the use of
     a wind speed and direction controller to operate the pilots for gas conserva-
     tion.16  The average pilot-gas consumption under these conditions for all flare
     sizes is 60 scfh.  Figure IV-4 is a plot of these requirements, as well as of
     the gas requirement without gas conservation control.

5.   Gas Transfer Lines
     The gas collection header and transfer-line requirements are very site specific
     and depend on  the process facility where the emission is generated and on where
     the flare is located.  For the purposes of estimating capital cost and system
     pressure drop  it was assumed that the gas transfer line would be the  same size
     as the flare tip and that the total length would be 3 times  the  calculated
     flame length at  18 in. H20 flare-tip pressure-drop capacity, but with a  100-ft
     minimum.  Figure  IV-5 is  a plot  of  the  gas transfer-line length  used  and the
     calculated flame  length  (see Appendix A for flame-length calculation  equation).

6.   System Pressure  Drop
     The total  system pressure drop  is  a function  of the  design of  the various
      system components  and the flare-gas flow.  The following pressure-drop  relation-
      ships  are  assumed-.10'16

           Flare tip,  calculated (see Appendix A)
           Stack seal, 1.5  times flare-tip AP
           Stack
           Water seal
0.5 times flare-tip
           Disentrainment drum
           Transfer line, calculated based on diameter, length, and gas flow

-------
                          IV-7
   2000
   1000 —
 o
 (0


•o
 0)
 v_
'5
 cr
(0
O
I

15
*.
3
    100
    10
          Pilot  Gas
          Conservation  Control
Pilot  Gas  with

Conservation

Control
                               10
                                        6O
                     Flare-Tip Diameter (in.)
         Fig. IV-4.  Natural Gas Required for Elevated Flare

-------
                    Transfer-Line and Flame Lengths (ft)
H-
H
un
o
&
in
H  3
^  &>


i'  ?


I  i1

2  2
§  0)
»  3
H  O
Q  ^**
3  <0
 (fl   —

    3
 M
 M
 (D
 (D

 O-
                                     o
                                     o
        o>
                                                                o
                                                                o
                                                                o
                                                                                               H




                                                                                               03

-------
                                           IV-9
     Figure IV-6 is a plot of system pressure drops for operation at smokeless
     capacity and at 18 in. H20 flare-tip pressure-drop capacity.  For this study it
     was assumed that the process emissions would have sufficient pressure to over-
     come the system pressure drop.

B.   ENCLOSED GROUND FLARES
     An enclosed ground flare consists of burner heads designed for the flare-gas
     properties in sufficient number to handle the maximum design flow and staged to
     operate based on the flare-gas flow rate.  The enclosure is of sufficient cross
     section for the maximum heat release and is high enough to shield the illumina-
     tion and radiation from the flame and to adequately disperse the heat plume.
     Figures IV-7, 8 and 9, based on information from a vendor for an enclosed
     circular type of ground flare,16 give the capacity, height, and pilot-gas
     requirements used in this study.  It was assumed for estimating costs that the
     flare would be located in the area where the emission is generated and that the
     waste gas emission transfer-line requirement would be minimal.  The location of
     the flare can be very site specific and the cost in some cases can be signifi-
     cant, especially in retrofit situations.  It is estimated that 1-psig maximum
     gas pressure will be adequate to activate the burner head staging controls and
     to assure proper burner operation.  It was also assumed that the process emis-
     sion would have sufficient pressure to overcome the system pressure drop.

     If the potential emission rate to the enclosed ground flare can overload the
     flare, it should have overfire protection and probably should be associated
     with an elevated flare or some other safety precaution to take care of the
     overload.

C.   FUEL-GAS SOURCE
     The design of a system to use an emission as a fuel-gas source is site specif-
     ic.  For the purposes of estimating capital and operating costs the following
     assumptions were made for this study:  The compressor is located in the area
     where the emission is generated and the gas collection line required is mini-
     mal, the compression  ratio  is from 0 to 30 psig, the high-pressure transfer
     line is  500  ft, and the system capacity is the model-waste-gas flow that gives
     0.5-psi  pressure drop per 100 ft of the high-pressure line.   Figure IV-10  is  a
     plot of  the  transfer-line fuel-gas capacity.

-------
                              IV-10
   300
   100
O
 CM

X
a
o
&_
a
 V)
 V)

 o
 E
 
-------
                          IV-11
100,000
    400
                                   10              40




                 Flare Enclosure Diameter  (ft J




                 Fig. IV-7.  Ground-Flare Capacity

-------
                         IV-12
-^100
 .E
 CD

 'o
 I

 C)

 =5
 0)
 ^

 u
 C
 ui

 0)
 k.

 12
 u.
10
                                   10


                 Flare  Enclosure  Diameter  (ft)


             Fig. IV-8.   Ground-Flare Height
                                                 50

-------
                            IV-13
   300
x:
•*-
o
O

3  100
en
OJ
O

i_
o
c


CO


jD

a
    10
 1                           10


           Flare Enclosure Diameter (ft)


Fig.  IV- 9.  Natural Gas Required for Ground Flare
                                                       50

-------
                    IV-14
  20,000
   10,000 —
OT

O


*<•

re
£
_   1000 -
 Q>
•o
 O
 (0
 re
 o
 
-------
                                      IV-15
If the potential emission rate to the fuel-gas source can overload the compres-
sor or if there is not a reliable use for the emission,  then an associated
flare system or some other method probably should be provided to handle the
emission during these periods.

-------
                                    V-l
                        V.  COST AND ENERGY IMPACTS

The capital and operating costs and the energy impacts in this section are
based on the model designs discussed in Sect.  IV and on a model waste gas with
properties similar to those of propylene as the emission.  Each control sys-
tem—steam-assisted elevated flares, enclosed ground flares, and use of the
emission as a fuel source—is evaluated independently.  To aid in adjusting the
costs presented in this section to other situations that may vary considerably
from the model conditions assumed, the installed capital costs of each system
are presented based on the physical sizes shown in Appendix B.

The estimated capital costs represent the total investment, including all
indirect costs such as engineering and contractors' fees and overheads that
will be required for purchase and installation of all equipment and material to
provide a facility as described.  These are battery-limit costs and do not
inlcude the provisions for bringing utilities, services, or roads to the site,
the backup facilities, the land, the research and development required, or the
process piping and instrumentation interconnections that may be required within
the process generating the waste gas.  These costs are based on a new-plant
installation; no retrofit cost considerations are included.  Those costs are
usually higher than the cost for a new-site installation for the same system
and include, for example, demolition, crowded construction working conditions,
scheduling construction activities with production activities, and longer
interconnecting piping.  These factors are so site specific that no attempt has
been made to provide costs.  For specific retrofit cases, rough costs can be
obtained by using the new-site data and adding as required for a defined speci-
fic retrofit situation.

The method used to develop these estimated capital costs was based on prelim-
inary vendor quotes for the purchase and installation of major equipment items
or from such sources as Richardson Engineering Co. data and factoring up to
total installed costs based on the factors in Table V-l.  The expected accuracy
of the total installed cost with this degree of engineering detail using these
methods is ±30%.  These methods of obtaining estimated total installed capital
costs are suitable for a cost study or for screening estimates. The bases used
in calculating annual operating costs are given in Table V-2.

-------
                                          V-2
               Table V-l.   Factors  Used  for Estimating Total  Installed Costs
A = Major equipment purchase cost plus  0

    Installation costs
      Foundations

      Structures

      Equipment erection

      Piping


      Insulation


      Paint
      Fire protection

      Instruments



      Electrical
                                      .1 to 0.35 allowance
                                               0.06A + $100 X number of pumps
                                               0.15A  (no structures) to 0.30A  (multideck
                                                 structures)
                                               0.15A to 0.30A  (depending on complexity)

                                               0.40A  (package units) to 1.10A  (rat's
                                                 nest)
                                               0.06A or 0.15 X piping  (normal) to 0.30 X
                                                 piping  (bulk hot or cold)

                                               0.05A
                                               0.01A to 0.06A  (depending on requirements

                                               0.10A to 0.30A or 0.01A to 0.25A +
                                                 $50,000 to  $300,000 for process control
                                                 computer
                                               0.15A or 0.05A  + $500 per motor
B  =  Base cost

     Sales tax
     Freight
     Contractor's  fees
                                               A  +  sum of installation  costs

                                               0.25A + 0.025B

                                               0.16A

                                               0.30 (B-A)
 C = Total contract
                a
     Engineering
               .   b
     Contingencies
                                                B + taxes,  freight,  and fees

                                                0.01C to 0.20C

                                                0.15C
 D = Process unit installed  cost
                                                C + engineering + contingencies
 E = Total subestimates
 F  = Total project cost

 a
                                                Sum of semidetailed subestimates (build-
                                                 ings, site development, cooling towers,
                                                 etc.); each subestimate should include
                                                 taxes, freight, fees, engineering, and
                                                 contingency, and should be escalated
                                                 to date of expenditure for that cost
                                                 component; engineering costs, conting-
                                                 encies, and escalation factors for thes
                                                 subestimates will vary according to the
                                                 type of job involved
                                                  D + E
 includes cost from capital project  teams, process  engineering,  engineering, purchasing,
 and other support groups.
"contingency should not be  applied to any cost component  that  has  been committed by eith,
 purchase order or contract.

-------
                                      V-3
                       Table V-2.  Annual Cost  Parameters
Operating  factor                                          8760  hr/yr3

Operating  labor                                           Negligible
Fixed costs

  Maintenance labor plus
    materials, 6%
  Capital recovery, 18%
  Taxes, insurances,
                       b
29% of installed
  capital cost
    administration charges, 5%
Utilities

  Electric power                                         $0.03/kWh

  steam                                                  $2.50/thousand Ib
  Natural gas                                            $2.00/thousand ft3
Heat recovery credits                                    $2.00/million Btu
  (equivalent to natural gas)

 Control devices will usually be available for operation on the same cycle as
 the process.  Process downtime is normally expected to range from 5 to 15%.
 From the standpoint of cost-effectiveness calculations the error introduced
 by assuming continuous availability is minor.  The percent of capacity opera-
 tion that the control device is utilized will be discussed as a variable in
 this section.
b
 Based on 10-year life and 12% interest.

-------
                                          V-4
A.   STEAM-ASSISTED ELEVATED FLARES
     The installed capital costs,  annual operating costs,  cost-effectiveness,  and
     energy-effectiveness curves for the model systems based on the model waste gas
     as the VOC emissions are shown in Figs. V-l to V-4 respectively.  For installed
     capital costs based on flare size see Appendix B.

     The annual operating cost will vary with the capacity of operation because
     steam assistance is used only during the time that flaring takes place.  Nor-
     mally an elevated flare will operate for only a very small percentage of the
     time; even so, steam costs can be an important factor.  In this study it was
     assumed that  150-psig  steam is available to  the  flare on demand at a nominal
     cost of $2.50 per thousand pounds.

     The cost  effectiveness and energy  effectiveness  of elevated  flares  are sensi-
     tive  to  the  capacity of operation  in the low ranges  of  operation  that  are
     normal.   One-tenth  percent of annual capacity operation is equal  to about  9 hr
     per year  of  flaring at smokeless capacity,  or 18 hr  at  half  capacity.  Natural
      gas used for purge  gas and for the pilots  and steam  used for injection at  the
      flare tip are the sources  of energy consumption.  It was assumed  that  modern
      flare-tip seal designs would be used to minimize the need for purge gas  and
      that  instrumentation would be used to reduce pilot-gas consumption.  The devia-
      tion in cost and energy effectiveness shown on Fig.  V-3 and V-4 at the larger
      capacities results from a higher ratio of steam to model waste gas being used
      for flares larger than 24-inch tip diameter and from the fact that purge gas
      consumption  increases as the cross section of the flare while the smokeless
      capacity proportionately decreases because of steam availability.  This effect
      is more pronounced  for  the lower percent of  annual capacity operation and  for
      the energy  effectiveness ratio.

      The  cost and energy effectiveness  presented here  is based on  the  flare  being
       used for pollution control.   This must be  evaluated with caution in many  actual
       situations  since elevated flares  are frequently designed and installed  as
       safety devices.

-------
 1000
O)

O)
r*

b»
O

e
4)
O
u
o
O
 
-------
  700i
                                Percent of Annual Capacity
o
o
o
 in
 O
O

 O)
 c
 '•M
 (0
 h.
 «
 a
 O
 c
 
-------
   .24
   .22 -
.20



.18



.16







.12



.10
o

£  -08

UJ

w  .06
o
O

   .04
_ .02
0)
o
 

 I  -O:
 ra
 (0
      -   0.5
          Percentage of Annual Capacity
                                                                                                        f
                                 10                            100               400


        Elevated-Flare  Smokeless Capacity as Model  Waste Gas  (1000 Ib/hr)
        Fig.  V-3.  Cost Effectiveness of VOC Destroyed by  an Elevated-Flare System

-------
                Energy  Effectiveness  (lOOO  Btu  consumed/lb of  VOC)
                                                               _k    _i    ->•
(D
Mi
(D
o
ft
(D
cn
O

O
(D
W
rt

g
 M
 M
 (D
 <

 £
 (D
 &

 TJ
 M
 P
 n
 (D

 cn
 ^<
 w
 H-
 CD
                                       8-A

-------
                                           V-9
B.   ENCLOSED GROUND FLARES
     The installed capital costs, annual operating costs, cost-effectiveness, and
     energy-effectiveness curves for the model systems based on the model waste gas
     as the VOC emission are plotted in Figs. V-5 to V-8 respectively.  For
     installed capital costs based on flare size see Appendix B.

     The cost effectiveness and energy effectiveness of ground flares are sensitive
     to the capacity of operation in the low ranges of operation that are probable.
     A 0.25% of annual capacity operation is equal to about 22 hr per year of
     flaring at capacity, or 44 hr at half capacity.  The discontinuities in the
     energy-effectiveness curves reflect the need for additional pilot burners as
     the flare increases in size.

C.   FUEL-GAS SOURCE
     The installed capital cost, annual operating costs,  and cost-effectiveness
     curves for the model systems based on the model waste gas are shown in
     Figs.  V-9 to V-ll  respectively.   For installed capital costs based on the
     fuel-gas-line size see Appendix B.

     The costs associated with the use  of VOC emission as a fuel gas  are very site
     specific.  The costs presented here are valid only for the models described but
     are descriptions  of what  may be  expected.   There is  a cost-effectiveness sav-
     ings,  except for  low-capacity operation,  when the VOC emission is credited at  a
     fuel-gas value equivalent to $0.0392 per pound of model waste gas ($2.00/mil-
     lion Btu).   Use of VOC as a fuel may be an attractive disposal method but only
     if the emission meets the requirements  of being satisfactory for  use  as  a fuel,
     is reasonably consistent  in generation,  and there is an adequate  use  for it  at
     a  reasonable distance.

     Using  a VOC emission as a fuel can  be very energy effective.   For the model
     system about 40 Btu of electrical  energy is  consumed per pound of model  waste
     gas compressed, whereas the net heat of combustion for  the model  waste gas  is
     19,600 Btu/lb.

-------
1000
                                     I   I   II 111
                                                                                       I
                                                                                       I—'
                                                                                       o
                                                                               100
         Ground-Flare  Capacity as  Model  Waste  Gas   (1000  Ib/hr)
                       Fig. V-5. Ground-Flare-System Installed Capital Cost

-------
    300
§ 10°
V)
o
O

o>
c
y
(0
w
o>
a
O

75
3
C
C
 (0
 O
O
     10
                              1
                                                              J	I	L
0.4           1                                10


     Ground-Flare Capacity  as Model Waste  Gas   (1000 Ib/hr)
                                                                                    100
                     Fig. V-6.  Ground-Flare-System Gross Annual Operating Cost

-------
         Percent of Annual Capacity
                                                                                          to
                                                                      100
       Ground-Flare Capacity  as Model  Waste Gas   (lOOOIb/hr)
Fig. V-7.  Cost Effectiveness of VOC Destroyed by a Ground-Flare System

-------
        Percent of Annual Capacity
             1                             10
        Ground-Flare Capacity as Model Waste Gas   (1000 Ib/hr)
100
Fig. V-8.  Energy Effectiveness for VOC Destroyed by a Ground-Flare  System

-------
    400
o
0)
.0
e
o
u
0)
O
o
O
 V)
 o
 o

 15
 *^

 '5.
 03
 O
 4->
 V)

 c
    100
        100
                        1000                            10,000   20,000



Fuel-Gas-System  Capacity  as Model  Waste Gas   (ib/hr)
                         Fig. V-9.  Fuel-Gas-System Installed Capital Cost

-------
   200
o
o
o
V)
o
O

Cf)
c
'•4-1
a
w
o
a
O

15
3
C
C
 V)
 v>
 o
 w
 O
                                                          Percent of Annual Capacity
    100
    10
       100
                     1000                           10,000


Fuel-Gas-System  Capacity as Model  Waste Gas   (ib/hr)
                                                                        U1
30,000
                         Fig. V-10.  Fuel-Gas-System Gross Annual Operating Cost

-------
V)
(0
d)
c
0)
O
0)


| .02
09


  .04
       .06L_

         100
                       Percent of Annual Capacity
                                                1
                                    1,000                            10,000


            Fuel-Gas-System Capacity  as Model Waste  Gas  (lb/hr)
                                                                                      f
                                                                                      M
                                                                                      CJ1
                                                                                  20,000
                     Fig. V-ll.  Cost Effectiveness for VOC Destroyed by a Fuel-Gas System

-------
                                           VI-1
                            VI.   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

     The emission control methods of burning VOC emissions in an elevated flare,  in
     a ground flare,  or using it as a fuel have been evaluated in this study.
     Flares frequently are installed primarily for the purpose of safety.   Each
     control method has its advantages and its limitations and could,  for appro-
     priate emission sources, be installed in an integrated system.   Such integrated
     systems would be very site  specific and are beyond the scope of this study.

A.   STEAM-ASSISTED ELEVATED FLARES
     1.   Steam-assisted elevated flares can be designed for large capacities  and
          can take overloads, but the smokeless capacity is usually limited to the
          amount of steam available.
     2.   Operation can be highly transitory.
     3.   The data on VOC destruction efficiency are limited.  This study for  cost-
          effectiveness presentation purposes only is based on an efficiency of 99%
          for flare tips under 12-in. diameter and 98% for those over 12-in. diameter.
          The EPA is conducting further testing.
     4.   An elevated flare must be ready for use at any time that there is poten-
          tial for emissions, but it may be actually flaring for a very small  per-
          cent of the time.  Under these circumstances the energy consumption  per
          quantity of VOC destroyed could be high.

B.   ENCLOSED GROUND FLARES
     1.   Enclosed ground flares can be designed for a wide capacity range but may
          need overload protection if potential for overloading exists.
     2.   Operation can be highly transitory, but 100 to 0% of capacity turndown
          exists.
     3.   VOC destruction efficiency data are not available; a 99% destruction was
          used to calculate cost effectiveness.
     4.   When a ground flare is used to burn emissions for only a small percent of
          its available time, the energy consumption per quantity of VOC destroyed
          can be high.  The energy use can be comparable to that of an elevated
          flare that is designed and operated to minimize natural-gas consumption.

-------
                                         VI-2
C    FUEL-GAS SOURCE
     1    Using VOC emission as a fuel can give a cost-effectiveness savings pro-
          vided that the emission is of fuel quality,  is produced in a reasonably
          consistent volume, and there is an adequate use for it.
     2    The VOC destruction efficiency used for cost-effectiveness calculations
          was >99 9%   According to emission factors given in AP-42 for natural gas
          and LPG when burned under proper operating conditions, this efficiency xs
          attained.

-------
                                         VI I-1
                                 VII.  REFERENCES*

 1.   John F. Straitz, III, National Air Oil Burner Company, Inc., Flaring for
     Gaseous Control in The Petroleum Industry, reprint of paper presented at the
     Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, June 20, 1978, Austin,
     Texas.
 2.   M. G. Klett, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, Report on a Trip to the John
     Zink Company to Discuss EPA Tank 3, Flare Systems Study, Feb. 19, 1974.
 3.   John F. Straitz, III, National Air Oil Burner Company, Inc., and Ricardo J.
     Altube, Tecna Estudios Y Proyectos, Flares; Design and Operation (in-house
     brochure).
 4.   NAO Ground  Flares, Bulletin 36 (in-house brochure). National Air Oil Burner
     Company,  Inc. Philadelphia, PA.
 5.   EPA Contract No. 68-02-3661 with Energy and Environmental Research Corpora-
     tion, Santa Ana, CA.
 6.   William R.  Chalker,  E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, letter dated May 16,
     1979, to  Donald R. Goodwin, Emission Standards and Engineering Division, EPA.
 7.   K. D. Siegel, Degree of Conversion of Flare Gas in Refinery High Flares.
     Pollutant Emission from Refinery High Flares as a Function of Their Operating
     Conditions, dissertation for the degree of Ph.D in Engineering Science at the
     Chemical  Engineering Department of the University in Karlsruhe, West Germany,
     February  1980.
 8.   T. Lahre,  "Natural Gas Combustion," p 1.4-2, and "Liquified Petroleum Gas
     Combustion," p  1.5-2 in Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42,
     Part A, 3d  ed.  (August 1977).
 9.   John F- Straitz, III,  "Nomogram Determines Proper Flare-Tip Diameter," Oil, Gas
     and Petroleum Equipment  (July  1979).
10.   Personal  communication Feb. 25, 1980, between John F. Straitz, III, National
     Air Oil Burner  Company,  Inc.,  and V. Kalcevic, IT Enviroscience.
11.   John F. Straitz, III,  "Flaring for Safety and Environmental Protection,"
     Drilling-DCW  (November 1977).
12.   John  F. Straitz, III,  "Nomogram Determines Proper Flare-Stack Height," Oil,
     Gas  and Petrochem  Equipment  (August  1977).
13.   R.  L.  Foster,  Union  Carbide  Corporation,  letter  dated Dec.  19,  1980,  to  EPA
     transmitting CMA comments  on  draft  report.

-------
                                             VII-2
14.   Robert D.  Reed,  "Design and Operation  of  Flare  Systems,"  Chemical Engineering

     Progress (June 1968).
15.   John F. Straitz,  III,  National Air Oil Burner Company,  Inc.,  letter  dated

     Oct  21  1980  to EPA with comments on draft report.

16.   John F.'straiiz,  III,  Combustion Unlimited,  Inc.,  letter  dated June  5,  1980,  to

     V. Kalcevic, IT Enviroscience, Inc.
       When,  however, an additional reference *' ™^;£*/££°«nCe number
       of  the paragraph or  captioned material, tne
       apply to that  particular portion.

-------
          APPENDIX A
ELEVATED-FLARE DESIGN EQUATIONS

-------
                                          A-3
 A.    FLARE  CAPACITIES  AND  PRESSURE DROPS
      Flare  capacities  and  pressure drops used in this report are based on the
      following  relationship.-9
                               2.72 X  10"3  (F)
                                           v  '
                                                     46°
                                                  MW
                         D =
     where
          D = flare-tip diameter, in.,
          F = flare gas flow rate, Ib/hr,
          T = temperature, °F (assumed to be 60°F),
         MW = molecular weight (propylene, 42),
         Ap = flare-tip pressure drop, in. H20.

B.   FLARE HEIGHTS
     The flare heights used in this report are based on the following relationship:12
                               F X LHV X £           l/Ap
                                 12.56 I    " 3'33 D } 55  cos 0
     where
                        1.47 V
            0 = tan"1    	    w
                        550
           in  which Vw  =  wind velocity,  mph (assumed to be 60),

         H =  flare height,  ft,
         F =  flare gas flow rate,  Ib/hr,
       LHV =  flare gas lower heating value, Btu/lb  (propylene,  19,600).
         £ =  flame emissivity (propylene,  0.13),
         I =  flame radiation intensity, Btu/(hr)(ft2)  (assumed  to  be  1200),
         D =  flare-tip diameter, in.,
        Ap =  flare-tip pressure drop, in.  H20.
   *See Sect. VII for references.

-------
                                         A-4
C.   FLAME LENGTHS
     The flame lengths used in this report to determine the gas transfer-line
     lengths are based on the following relationship:3
                    Lf = 10 X D X
     where
          Lf = flame length, ft,
           D = flare-tip diameter, in.,
          Ap = flare-tip pressure drop, in. H20  (assumed  to be  18).

-------
      APPENDIX B







INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS

-------
                              B-3
  1000
0)

O)
T—
l_
fl>

E
Q)

o 100
O
o
O
O
a
CO
O
ra
CO
c
    10
                                   10
60
                     Flare-Tip Diameter (in.)


     Fig. B-l.  Elevated-Flare-System Installed Capital Cost

-------
                          B-4
tf>
o
o

"co

'5.
(0
o

•o

—

"a
*->
v>
c
      1000
in
a>
£   S
•O   O
c   •*"
3

2   5
o   .Q
H-   E
O   0)
^   o
    Q>
    o
        100
    o
    o
    o
         10
                                                  1
                                         10
                                                             50
                       Flare Enclosure Diameter (ft)



    Fig.  B-2.  Ground-Flare-System Installed Capital  Cost

-------
                    B-5
    o
       1000
     £
     o
     o
     o
    O
    O
    ^ 100

    •4->
    w
    o
    O
     a
     a
    O
     ca
    *-
     
-------
                                     APPENDIX C
                                 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
D108E

-------
                                          C-3
                         COST AND ENERGY SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

     This report is based on using a model waste gas with properties similar to
     those of propylene as the VOC emissions.  The curves presented can be used in
     most cases for other VOC emissions with results probably within the accuracy of
     the curves developed.  For emissions that have a character significantly
     different from the model ones it may be advisable to review the design bases
     discussed in Sect. IV and then use the installed capital costs given in
     Appendix B.

A.   STEAM-ASSISTED ELEVATED FLARES
     This example is based on a 23,000-lb/hr maximum model-waste-gas VOC emission
     rate.

1.   Installed Capital Cost Versus Flare Capacity (Fig. V-l)

     a.   From Fig. IV-1, a 10-in. tip diameter flare is required.

     b.   From Fig. B-l, the installed capital cost for a 10-in. flare is $105,000.

2.   Gross Annual Operating Cost (Fig. V-2)

     a.   From Table V-2 the fixed cost, including capital recovery, is 29% of the
          installed capital cost:

               105,000 X 0.29 = $30,450/yr.

     b.   From Fig. IV-4 the natural gas used for the pilots is 60  scfh and for
          purging it is 60 scfh.  From Table V-2 the cost for gas is $2.00 per
          thousand ft3:

               (60 + 60) X 8760 X ~  = $2100/yr.
     c.   From Sect.  IV-A-1 of the report 0.3 Ib of steam is required per pound of
          VOC; from Table V-2 the cost for steam is $2 . 50/thousand Ib:

-------
                                         C-4
                                     2  50
               0.3  X  23,000 X  8760 X   '   X  fraction of  annual  capacity  operation

               =  151,000  X fraction of  annual capacity operation.
     d.    Annual  cost  summary
                       Fixed
                       Gas
                       Steam
                            Total
Cost per Capacity Operation of
  100%	1%	0%
$ 30,450    $30,450    $30,450
   2,100      2,100      2,100
 151,100      1,510     	
$183,650    $34,060    $32,550
3.   Cost Effectiveness (Fig.  V-3)
     Cost effectiveness is the gross annual operating cost (A-2-d above)  divided by
     the annual waste-gas VOC destroyed at 99% efficiency.

     a.   Annual VOC destroyed = 23,000 X 8760 X 0.99 X annual fraction of
          capacity operation.
     b.   Example at 1% of annual capacity operation is
                          34,060
               23,000 X 8760 X 0.99 X 0.01
                                           = $0.017/lb of VOC destroyed.
4.   Energy Effectiveness (Fig. V-4)
     Energy effectiveness is the energy consumed in the gas pilots, the purging gas,
     and the steam-assist gas divided by the annual waste-gas VOC destroyed at 99%,
     or 98% efficiency.

     a.   From A-2-b, natural gas consumed is 120 scfh, at 1000 Btu/ft3 =
          120,000 Btu/hr.

     b.   From A-3-c,  steam consumed is 0.3 Ib/lb of waste-gas VOC, at 1000 Btu/lb
          of steam;  this  results in 300 Btu/lb of waste-gas VOC.

-------
                                          C-5
      c.   Example at 1% of annual capacity operation:

               /   120,000 X 8760          \     l
               ^23,000 X 8760 X 0.01  +    )  X o799 ~ 83° Btu/lb of Voc destroyed.

 B.    ENCLOSED GROUND FLARES
      This example is based on 20,000-lb/hr maximum waste-gas VOC emission rate.

 1.    Installed Capital Cost Versus  Flare  Capacity (Fig.  V-5)

      a.    From Fig.  IV-7  a 15-ft-diam enclosure  flare is required.

      b.    From Fig.  B-2 a 15-ft  enclosed  ground  flare installed  capital cost  is
           $248,000.

 2.    Gross Annual  Operating Cost  (Fig. V-6)

      a.    From Table V-2  the  fixed  cost is 29% of  the  installed  cost:

                248,000 X  0.29 = $71,900/yr.

     b.   From Fig. IV-9  the natural gas used for  the pilots is  100 scfh.  From
          Table V-2 the cost for gas is $2.00/thousand ft3:

                100 X 8760 X —— = $1750/yr.

     c.   Total Cost

               Fixed          $71,900
               Gas              1,750
                              $73,650

3.    Cost Effectiveness (Fig. V-7)
     Cost effectiveness is the gross annual operating cost (B-2-c)  divided by  the
     annual waste-gas VOC  destroyed  at 99% efficiency.

-------
                                         06
     a.    Annual VOC  destroyed = 20,000 X 8760 X  0.99 X annual  fraction of
            capacity  operation.

     b.    Example  at  1% of  annual  capacity  operation:

               	73'650	  =  $0.042/lb of VOC destroyed.
               20,000 X 8760  X 0.99  X 0.01    9      '

4.   Energy Effectiveness (Fig.  V-8)
     Energy effectiveness is  the energy consumed for the  pilots divided by the
     annual waste-gas VOC destroyed at 99%  efficiency.

     a.    From B-2-b, natural gas consumed  is 100 scfh;  at 1000 Btu/ft3 amounts to
          100,000 Btu/hr.

     b.    Example at 1% of annual capacity  operation:

               	100>000 X 8760	 = 5Q5 Btu/lb of voc destroyed'
               20,000 X 8760 X 0.99 X 0.01

 C.   FUEL-GAS  SOURCE
     This example is based on 850-lb/hr maximum waste-gas VOC  emission rate.

 1.   Installed Capital  Cost Versus  Flare Capacity  (Fig. V-9)

     a.    Figure  IV-10  shows that a 2-in.  fuel-gas  transfer  line  is  required.

     b.    Figure  B-3 indicates  that a 2-in.  line installed capital cost  is  $65,000.

 2.   Annual Operating Costs

      a.    From Table V-2 the fixed cost  is 29%  of  the  installed cost:

                65,000 X 0.29 =  $18,850/yr.

      b.   The electrical power consumption for compressing the gas must be calcu-
           lated.  For  the model system of compressing from atmospheric pressure to
           30  psig the  adiabatic horsepower required was calculated to be 9.65

-------
                                           C-7
           (Eq.  6-23 on page 6-16 of Perry's  Chemical Engineers Handbook,  5th ed. ,
           McGraw-Hill,  was  used).   Assuming  an 85% electric  motor  efficiency and  an
           85% compressor  efficiency and  converting horsepower  to kilowatts  (1 hp  =
           0.746 kW),  the  electric  power  consumption rate  is
                                  X  °-746 =  9'96
                 '         5       5

           From  Table V-2  the electrical cost is $0.03/kWh.  For a 60% of annual
           capacity operation example the cost is

                9.96 X 8760 X 0.03 X 0.60 = $1570/yr.

     c.    From  Table V-2  the fuel credit is $2.00/million Btu.  For waste gas with a
           net heating value of 19,600 Btu/lb this is equal to a credit of $0.0392/lb
           of waste gas.   For the example of 60% of annual capacity operation the
           credit is

                850 X 8760 X 0.6 X 0.0392 = $175,130/yr.

     d.   Annual cost summary

               Fixed               $18,850
               Electrical            1,570
               Gross  (Fig. V-10)     20,420
               Credit             (175,130)
               Met                 (154,710)     Savings

3.    Cost Effectiveness  (Fig. V-ll)
     Cost effectiveness  is the  net  annual  operating  cost (C-2-d) divided by  the
     annual waste-gas VOC destroyed at  99.9%  efficiency.

     a.   Annual VOC  destroyed  =  850 X  8760 X 0.999  X annual fraction of capacity
          operation.

-------
                                       C-8
b.   Example at 60% of annual capacity operation:







          850 X 87io5x'o!999 X 0.60 = <*>-°346)/lb of VOC destroyed savings

-------
    £-ORT N'O
    EPA-450/3-80-026
                           IP} n,    ,TECHNICAI- REPORT DAT A
                           (Pkasc read Inaction: on rhf reverse before complcnn^	

                                                            [3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO?
    i ~E AMD SUBTITLE
    Organic Chemical Manufacturing
    Volume 4:  Combustion  Control Devices
                                                                    ORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
                                                              8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
AUTHOR(S)
          J.  W.  Blackburn
          H.  S.  Basdekis
                   -.j NAME AND ADDRESS
              —->, Inc.
 9041  Executive  Park  Drive
 Suite 226
 Knoxville,  Tennessee  37923
                                   J. A. Key
                                   v. Kalcevic
                                 and Standards
      •     ,-  „ .      -./  • •—	13 uiiu o L
      Tce of Air, Noise,  and Radiation
                                                               4. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                           --.
            Triangle  Park,  North Carolina   27711
                                                                 EPA/200/04
 : SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
                                                            5  REPORT DATE
                                                             December 1980
                                                               o. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.~
             Xffi^
  under Section 112 for volatile  oraan r rnmnn  H    fo>". hazardous air  pollutants
  chemical manufacturing ?ac   ties'    n sSK^'70"^^ fr°m Or9anfc
  on chemical  processing routes   VOC  emission,  ™ * th  V^ort> d^a  were  gathered
  and environmental  impacts r ^ ulting Torn cSntro?   ?   tec,hn^^s' Control  costs,
  and assimilated  into the ten volumls                             ^ *"*

                               _KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                                              I   >..i—   .... .

                                              b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Unlimited Distribution
                                           19 SECURITY CLAiiS (Tins
                                             Unclassified
                                                                          c.  COSATl Reid/Group
                                                                             13B
21. NO. OF PAGES

     354

-------