United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Research and Development
EPA/600/S7-86/011 May 1986
£EPA Project Summary
Environmental Assessment of a
Commercial Boiler Fired with a
Coal/Waste Plastic Mixture
R. DeRosier, H. I. Lips, and L. R. Waterland
This report describes emission results
obtained from field testing of a stoker-fired
commercial boiler firing a coal/waste
plastic mixture. Two tests were perform-
ed: in one (test 1), the unit fired its typical
coal fuel; and in the other (test 2),
granulated waste polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) beverage bottles were
added to the coal to about 16 percent by
weight in the mixed fuel. Emission
measurements performed included con-
tinuous monitoring of flue gas emissions;
source assessment sampling system
(SASS) sampling of the flue gas, with
subsequent laboratory analysis of samples
to obtain total flue gas organics in two
boiling point ranges, compound category
information within these ranges, specific
quantitation of the semivolatile organic
priority pollutants, and flue gas concenta-
tions of 73 trace elements; EPA Method
5 sampling for paniculate; EPA Method 8
sampling for SO2 and SO3 emissions;
volatile organic sampling train (VOST)
testing for volatile organic priority pollu-
tant emissions (test 2 only); HCI train
sampling (test 2 only); gas grab sampling
for N2O emissions measurements; and
grab sampling of fuel ash bottom and
cyclone collector hopper for inorganic
composition determination.
NOX, total unburned hydrocarbon
(TUHC), and solid participate emissions
were relatively unchanged for the two
tests, averaging 286 and 214 ppm, <2 and
3ppm, and 54 and 69 mg/dscm, respec-
tively, for tests 1 and 2. The emitted par-
ticle size distribution was apparently
unchanged as well. SOX emissions
decreased with the coal/PET fuel in keep-
ing with its lowered sulfur content. S02
and SO3 levels were 930 and 640 ppm.
and 4.4 and 2.5 ppm (all corrected to 3
percent O2), respectively, for tests 1 and
2. Average CO emissions at 81 ppm were
also decreased in test 2, from 184 ppm in
test 1, apparently due to higher excess air
levels in test 2. HCI emissions were mea-
sured at 336 ppm (at 3 percent 02) with
the coal/PET fuel; however, this level is
almost 3 times that which was accounted
for by the fuel chlorine level.
Flue gas emissions of most trace
elements were comparable for both tests,
as were the trace element compositions
of corresponding ash streams. However,
estimated lead emissions (1,100 ^g/dscm)
were significantly increased for test 2
when compared to levels for test 1 (30
^g/dscm). This increase apparently reflects
the increased lead content of the mixed
coal/PET fuel, the increased lead coming
inexplicably from the PET additive. The
cyclone hopper ash for the coal/PET test
had consistently lower leachable trace ele-
ment and anion content than that for the
coal fuel test.
Total flue gas organic emissions were
comparable for both tests, in the 1
mg/dscm range. Most (90 percent) of the
flue gas organic was nonvolatile (boiling
point greater than about 300 °C). Of the
semivolatile organic priority pollutants,
napthalene was detected in flue gas sam-
ples for both tests, emissions increased
from about 2 (test 1) to 16 ^g/dscm (test
2) with the coal/PET fuel. Phenanthrene,
f luoranthene, and phenol were present in
test 2 at levels ranging from 2 to 20
Mg/dscm; they were not detected in test
1. In addition, several phthalates were
measured in the test 2 flue gas at levels
of 0.4 to 6 /jg/dscm, while none were
found in test 1. Phthalates present at such
-------
levels are often ascribed to sample con-
tamination; however, the observed in-
creased emissions of these with the coal
/PET in these tests may be real.
Of the volatile organic priority
pollutants, several chlorinated C, and C2
hydrocarbons, chlorobenzene, toluene.
and ethylbenzene were measured in the
test 2 flue gas at levels of 1 to 25 pig/dscm.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory, Research Triangle
Park, NC, to announce key findings of the
research project that is fully documented
in two separate volumes of the same title
(see Project Report ordering information
at back).
Introduction
Some states, Vermont included, are now
requiring deposits on beverage containers
as a means of controlling litter and en-
couraging recycling and reuse. Plastic
beverage containers cannot be reused as
containers; however, one way to reclaim
these is to use them as a fuel supplement
in an energy recovery operation. In one
Table 1, Summary of Boiler Operation and Fuel Analyses
Test 1
(coat fuel)
Boiler operation (over the SASS
sampling period)
Steam load, kg/s (1O3 Ib/hrl
Steam pressure, kPa (psig)
Feedwater inlet temperature, °C (°F)
Stack temperature, °C (°F)
Firebox temperature, °C (°F)
Fuel feedrate, kg/hr (Ib/hr)
Excess air, percent
Boiler efficiency, percent
Fuel ultimate analysis (percent
by weight as fired)
Carbon
Hydrogen
Sulfur
Nitrogen
Oxygen3
Ash
Moisture
Chloride
Higher heating value, kJ/kg (Btu/lb)
PET, weight percent
aBy difference.
0.38 (3.0)
17 (2.5)
12 (54)
146 (295)
768 (1,415)
110 (240)
47
79.3
69.5
5.2
1.0
1.5
11.4
8.5
2.7
0.2
31,212 (13,450)
0
Test 2
(coal/PET fuel)
0.42 (3.3)
21 (3.0)
13 (55)
165 (329)
882 (1,620)
130 (285)
77
79.1
71.4
5.5
0.6
1.4
11.7
6.8
2.4
0.2
31,270 (13,479)
16.4
such project, the use of waste PET bot-
tles is being evaluated as a fuel supple-
ment in a commercial boiler at a quarry
and stonecutting plant in Barre, Vermont.
Past efforts have indicated that PET is a
clean-burning, high-heating-value fuel with
no apparent environmental problems as-
sociated with its use as a solid fuel sup-
plement. The tests described in this report
were performed to confirm that this is the
case by performing a comprehensive eval-
uation of the emissions and ash discharge
compositions from a boiler burning its
typical coal fuel and a coal/PET mixture.
The boiler tested is a coal-fired firetube
unit with an underfeed stoker. The unit is
rated at 0.6 kg/s steam at 100 kPa (4,640
Ib/hr at 15 psig). Nominal full load coal
feed rate is 180 kg/hr (400 Ib/hr). The
boiler was equipped with a cyclone collec-
tor for particulate emissions control.
Summary and Conclusions
Boiler Operation
The test program called for flue gas
emission measurements and ash dis-
charge stream sampling with the boiler
operating at constant, near-rated capacity
with both fuels. Two tests were perform-
ed: test 1 with the unit firing its typical
coal fuel, and test 2 with a coal/PET mix-
ture containing about 16 percent by
weight granulated PET beverage bottles.
Table 1 summarizes the boiler operating
conditions and the fuel ultimate analysis
for both tests. As indicated, test 2 was run
at about the same coal feedrate as test 1
(110 kg/hr); however, the test 2 fuel mix-
ture contained about 20 kg/hr of added
waste PET. Consequently heat input and
boiler load were slightly higher for test 2.
Boiler efficiency, calculated by the ASME
heat loss method, was unchanged at
about 79 percent. The boiler underwent
some load excursions during test 2. These
excursions could have some effect on
emissions over and above the change in
fuel composition.
Emission Measurements and Results
The sampling and analysis procedures
used in this test program conformed to an
extended EPA Level 1 protocol. All flue gas
was sampled in the unit's stack, down-
stream of the cyclone collector, except for
the continuous flue gas analyzers which
were operated both at the stack and at the
boiler exit. Emission measurements
included:
• Continuous monitoring for 02, C02,
NOX, CO, and TUHC.
• Source assessment sampling system
(SASS) for trace elements and semi-
volatile and non-volatile organic
emissions.
• Volatile organic sampling train
(VOST) for volatile organic emissions
(test 2 only).
• Combined EPA Method 5/8 for par-
ticulate and SOX.
• HCI train sampling.
• Grab samples for N2O analysis.
In addition, samples of the fuel, bottom
ash, and a cyclone hopper ash were col-
lected for analysis. The analysis protocol
included:
• Performing proximate, ultimate, and
heating value analyses of fuel sam-
ples, and ultimate analyses of bottom
and cyclone hopper ash samples.
• Analyzing the fuel, ash,ash aqueous
leachates, and SASS train samples
for 73 trace elements using spark
source mass spectrometry (SSMS),
supplemented by atomic absorption
spectrometry (AAS).
• Analyzing ash aqueous leachates for
selected anions using ion
chromatography.
• Analyzing VOST traps for the volatile
organic priority pollutants.
• Analyzing ash sample organic ex-
tracts for total nonvolatile organic
content by gravimetry (GRAV).
• Analyzing the SASS train organic ex-
tract samples for total organic con-
tent in two boiling point ranges: 10C
to 300 °C by total chromatographic
organics (TCO) analysis, and >300°C
by GRAV.
• Analyzing the SASS train extrad
samples for the 58 semivolatile or
ganic species, including many of the
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbor
(PAH) compounds.
-------
• Performing infrared (IR) spectrometry
analysis of organic sample extracts.
• Performing liquid chromatography
(LC) separation of selected sample
extracts with subsequent TCO, GRAV,
and IR analyses of eluted LC
fractions.
Bioassay tests were also performed on
SASS train and ash samples to estimate
their potential toxicity and mutagenicity.
Table 2 summarizes flue gas emissions
measured in the test program. Emissions
are presented as nanograms per Joule
heat input and as milligrams per dry stan-
dard cubic meter of flue gas. As a measure
of the potential significance of the emis-
sions levels for further monitoring or
evaluation, an occupational exposure
guideline for most pollutants is also noted
in the table. The occupational exposure
guideline noted is either the time-
weighted-average Threshold Limit Value
(TLV) established by the American Con-
ference of Governmental Industrial Hy-
gienists, or the 8-hr time-weighted-aver-
aged exposure limit established by the
Occupational Safety and Health Admin-
istration (OSHA). These are noted only to
aid in ranking the potential significance of
the emission levels. In this respect, pol-
lutants emitted at levels several orders of
magnitude higher than their occupational
exposure guidelines might warrant further
evaluation, while species emitted at levels
significantly lower than their occupational
exposure guidelines might be considered
of lower priority. Only elements emitted at
levels exceeding 10 percent of their occu-
pational exposure guidelines in these tests
are noted in Table 2.
Table 2 shows that flue gas concentra-
tions of chromium, sodium, nickel, iron,
lead, and cobalt were significantly higher
for test 2 than for test 1. The test 2 flue
gas levels for all these (except cobalt) were
also greater than their respective occupa-
tional exposure guidelines. The higher lead
emissions for test 2, are thought to be ac-
tual increases. The coal/PET fuel had
significantly higher lead content (28 ppm)
than did the coal itself (3 ppm). The source
of the added lead is apparently the waste
PET, although no lead source within the
PET is known. Unfortunately, the trace ele-
ment emission levels noted in Table 2 for
test 2 are based on an estimated 1 to 3
/urn SASS train paniculate emission rate
and the assumption that the Mo 3 urn par-
ticulate had the same composition as the
less-than-1-/dn paniculate (the 1 to 3 urn
SASS particulate sample for test 2 was
destroyed in transit from the field to the
laboratory). Consequently, the significance
Table 2. Summary of Flue Gas Emissions8
Concentration
Test 1 (coal fuel) Test 2 Icoal/Pet fuel)
Component
(ng/J
heat input)
(mg/dscm)
(ng/J
heat input)
(mg/dscm)
Occupational
exposure
guideline
(mg/m3)b
Major constituents
NOX (as NO2)
SO2
S03
CO
HCI
Solid particulate
Total semivolatile
organics (TCO)
Total nonvolatile
organics (GRAV)
Trace elements
176
800
4.6
69
_c
35
0.049
0.575
270
1,210
7.0
105
_c
54
O.075
0.875
165
690
3.4
38
206
41
0.071
0.641
280
1,160
5.7
64
347
69
0.12
1.08
6.0
5.0
1.0
55
7.0*
10*
Chromium, Cr
Sodium, Na
Nickel, Ni
Iron, Fe
Lead, Pb
Phosphorous, P
Arsenic, As
Aluminum, Al
Lithium, Li
Calcium, Ca
Beryllium, Be
Silicon, Si
Potassium, K
Cobalt, Co
Cadmium, Cd
Vanadium, V
Copper, Cu
Platinum, Pt
Silver, Ag
Selenium, Se
Barium, Ba
0.0065
0.42
0.017
2.05
0.020
1.39
0.011
1.38
>0.017
1.24
0.00063
>1.52
0.59
0.0019
0.0016
0.011
0.020
_h
0.0017
0.0068
0.036
0.010
0.65
0.027
3.18
0.030
2.15
O.017
2.15
>O.026
1.93
0.00097
>2.36
O.91
0.003
0.0025
0.018
0.032
_h
0.0026
0.010
0.056
3.03
63
2.23
16.2
0.65
0.79
0.029
1.43
>0.081
0.28
0.00093
3.00
0.57
0.024
0.010
0.0073
0.021
0.00031
0.0010
0.024
0.012
5.17
107
3.81
27.6
1.10
1.35
0.049
2.45
>0.014
0.49
0.0016
5.12
0.97
0.041
0.018
0.012
0.035
0.00052
0.0018
0.041
0.021
0.05
2.0?
0.10
1.0
0.0503
0.10
0.010
2.0
0.025
2.0
0.002
10°
2.0*
0.10
0.0 5d
0.050
0.109
0.002
0.010
0.20
0.50
aFlue gas O2 and CO2 averaged 7.0 and 12.0 percent (dry) for test 1 and 5.2 and
12.9 percent for test 2.
b Time-weighted average TLV unless noted.
CHCI sampled for test 2 only.
dCeiling limit.
eFor nuisance particulate.
fNo occupational exposure guideline applicable.
g8-hour time-weighted-average OSHA exposure limit.
hLess than the method detection limit.
of the increased lead emission levels cited
deserves further study.
Several possibilities exist to explain the
higher concentration of chromium,
sodium, nickel, iron, lead, and cobalt.
These are conjectures, however, so addi-
tional sampling and analysis may be
merited.
Emission levels of the other elements
noted in Table 2 were quite comparable
between the two tests. In fact, the trace
element content of all SASS train samples
(except the impinger solution and lead in
the fine particulate noted above), the bot-
tom ash, and the cyclone hopper ash were
quite comparable for both tests.
The data in Table 2 show that boiler
emissions of NOX, solid particulate, and
total semi- and non-volatile organics were
relatively unchanged with the addition of
the PET to the boiler fuel. Emissions of
S02, and S03 were decreased, in keeping
with the lower sulfur content of the
coal/PET fuel (the apparently small dif-
ference noted in Table 2 is amplified con-
siderably when corrected in each instance
-------
to a common flue gas 02 level; e.g., 3 per-
cent). On a mass loading basis, total sulfur
emissions were relatively unchanged due
to the constant coal firing rate. CO emis-
sions were decreased with the coal/PET
fuel as well due probably to the higher level
of excess air used with the mixed fuel.
The HCI emission level noted in Table 2
for test 2 corresponds to almost 3 times
the amount which would be expected
from the chlorine content of the fuel. The
above discussion regarding the possible in-
troduction of inorganic chloride into the
SASS train suggests that perhaps ex-
traneous chloride was introduced into the
HCI train as well. This train measures total
vapor phase (at stack temperature) in-
organic chloride, not strictly HCI.
Further analysis of the SASS train
organic sorbent module extract via LC
fractionation and IR spectroscopy of both
the total extract and the eluted LC frac-
tions suggests that the organic emissions
for both tests were roughly 25 to 35 per-
cent aliphatic hydrocarbons, 40 percent
less polar oxygenated hydrocarbons, and
25 to 35 percent more polar oxygenates.
Table 3 summarizes the organic priority
pollutant emission results. Emission levels
of the semivolatile compounds detected
were significantly increased with the
coal/PET fuel, despite the fact that total
semivolatile organic emissions were
relatively unchanged. The phthalates
noted in the table could be sample con-
taminants. Phthalates are common con-
taminants in SASS train samples at levels
comparable to those noted in Table 3.
However, that levels detected in the test
2 samples were generally significantly
higher than those in the test 1 samples,
and that phthalates are expected to be
found in PET, suggest that these com-
pounds may actually have been present in
the test 2 flue gas.
Table 3 also notes that several chlor-
inated C1 and C2 aliphatic hydrocarbons,
chlorobenzene, toluene, and ethylbenzene
were emitted during test 2 at levels of
from <1 to about 24 ^g/dscm. The levels
of the aromatic hydrocarbons noted
(toluene and ethylbenzene) are in the
range typically encountered in VOST tests
of combustion sources. The source of the
chlorinated compounds is not clear, al-
though these compounds do arise when-
ever chlorine, even inorganic chloride, is
introduced into a combustion process. It
is interesting that these compounds were
detected in the test 2 flue gas, the same
test with apparent chloride introduction
into the SASS train, and unaccountably
high (perhaps again due to extraneous flue
Table 3. Summary of Organic Priority Pollutant Emissions
Emission concentration fog/dscm)
Compound
Test 1
(coal fuel)
Test 2
tcoal/PET fuell
Volatile organic priority
pollutants:
Chloromethane
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Semivolatile organic priority
pollutants:
1.0
4.5
2.0
24
2.5
14
7.5
0.7
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
2.2
>0.4
>0.4
>0.4
4.4
>0.4
>0.4
16
3.0
2.2
20
4.2
6.0
O.4
aVolatiles sampled for test 2 only.
gas chloride) chloride emissions measured
with the HCI train.
Table 4 summarizes the results of the
nonvolatile (GRAV) organic analyses of the
bottom ash and cyclone hopper ash ex-
tracts. For test 1, only the cyclone hopper
ash contained measurable levels of non-
volatile organics. For test 2, the organic
content of the bottom ash increased,
although that of the cyclone hopper ash
was about half that for test 1. The total
ash loading was less in test 2 than test 1.
In test 1, total ash was 13.5 percent of fuel
fed, whereas ash was only 8.2 percent in
test 2. For both tests, cyclone ash was
about 3 percent of total ash.
Infrared spectra of bottom ash extracts
suggest that only aliphatic hydrocarbons
were present. Analyses of cyclone ash ex-
tracts via LC fractionation and IR spec-
troscopy suggest that these contain: 30
to 40 percent aliphatic hydrocarbons, 15
to 20 percent less polar oxygenated hydro-
Table 4. Ash Stream Total Organic Content
carbons (e.g., aldehydes and ethers), and
40 to 55 percent more polar oxygenates
(e.g., carboxylic acids, alcohols, and
ketones).
Table 5 summarizes the concentrations
of the priority pollutant trace metals in
aqueous leachates of the ash stream sam-
ples prepared according to Level 1 guide-
lines. As a measure of the potential signif-
icance of these concentrations for further
analyses, the water quality criterion for
each element is noted in the table. Again,
these are noted only to aid in ranking the
potential significance of the teachable ele-
ment levels noted. Only elements having
at least one leachate concentration greater
than its water quality criterion are noted.
On a mass flow basis, it is noteworthy that
the ash mass flow was 40 percent lower
for test 2.
The data in Table 5 show that the cy-
clone ash leachates for both tests con-
tained considerably higher levels of the
Total nonvolatile organics by gravimetry
(mg/kg ash)
Sample
Test 1 (coal fuel)
Test 2 (coal/PET fuelt
Bottom ash
Cyclone hopper ash
>80
1,100
220
5OO
-------
Table 5. Inorganic Priority Pollutants in Ash Leachates at Concentrations Exceeding
Their Water Quality Criteria
Bottom ash leachate
concentration (\ng/l)
Cyclone hopper
ash leachate
concentration lug/1)
Element
Test 1
(coal)
Test 2
(coal/PET)
Test 1
(coal)
Test 2
(coal/PET)
Water
quality
criterion
(mg/l)
Arsenic
0.030
0.0 JO
4.1
0.20
2.2 x 10
-5a
Beryllium
Nickel
Selenium
Chromium
Cadmium
Thallium
Mercury
Lead
Barium
Antimony
>O.OOJ
0.01
0.10
0.02
>0.001
>0.001
0.002
>0.004
0.06
>0.004
>0.002
0.02
0.10
0.06
0.004
>0.002
>0.001
0.009
0.30
0.20
0.32
4.0
0.80
3.7
0.17
0.21
>0.001
0.27
2.1
0.15
0.070
0.80
0.2O
1.0
0.10
0.09
>0.001
0.10
0.05
0.05
3.7 x 10'
0.0134
0.010
0.050
0.010
0.013
1.44 x 10
0.050
1.0
0.146
5*
-4
a Water quality criterion based on cancer risk; level noted
corresponds to increased lifetime risk of 10~5.
inorganic priority pollutants than did the
bottom ash leachates. The test 2 bottom
ash leachate contained slightly higher
levels of most of the elements noted.
However, the cyclone ash leachate for test
2 contained significantly lower levels of all
the elements noted (with the possible
exception of mercury). This suggests that
the addition of waste PET to the boiler's
fuel may have had the beneficial effect of
decreasing leachable toxic trace element
discharges in the cyclone hopper ash
stream. This effect is augmented by the
observed 40 percent reduction in ash out-
put in test 2 relative to fuel flow.
Table 6 summarizes the leachable anion
content of the ash stream aqueous leach-
ates. As for the inorganic priority pol-
lutants, the anion levels in cyclone ash
leachates are significantly higher than
those of bottom ash leachates. However,
no consistent trend in composition be-
tween corresponding ash leachates for the
two tests is apparent. Interestingly, the
chloride and sulfate concentrations in the
test 2 ash stream leachates are slightly
lower than those from test 1. One might
expect that, if a corrosive component were
present in the test 2 combustion gas, as
implied by the results of the SASS, HCI,
and VOST analyses discussed above, evi-
dence of this component would appear in
the ash leachates, especially the cyclone
ash leachate. An alternative explanation
would be that the component was present
in the vapor phase at the cyclone temper-
ature, although this seems unlikely.
Bioassay tests were performed on the
SASS train organic sorbent module extract
and the ash stream samples. The health
effects bioassays included the Ames
mutagenicity assay and the CHO cytotox-
icity assay. The results of these assays are
summarized in Table 7. The results sug-
Table 6.
Ash Stream Leachable Anion Analysis Results
Concentration (mg/l)
Test 1 (coal fuel)
Test 2 (coal/PET fuel)
An ions
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate
Nitrite
Phosphate
Sulfate
Sulfite
Bottom
ash
leachate
2.6
0.25
>1.0
>1.0
>1.0
300
20
Cyclone
hopper ash
leachate
300
0.46
>10
>10
>10
19,000
5,000
Bottom
ash
leachate
1.3
0.10
>1.0
>1.0
>1.0
220
20
Cyclone
hopper ash
leachate
180
1.8
>10
>10
>10
12,000
5,000
gest that the flue gas was of moderate to
high toxicity and mutagenicity for both
tests. The cyclone hopper ash had nonde-
tectable toxicity for both tests. However,
this sample's mutagenicity apparently
decreased from borderline moderate/high
in test 1 to borderline low/moderate for
test 2. This observation is consistent with
the decreased leachable arsenic and beryl-
lium contents noted in Table 5, and con-
firm that the addition of waste PET to the
unit's fuel may have and the beneficial
effect of decreasing the potential environ-
mental hazard posed by this discharge.
The positive Ames responses for the
sorbent module extracts noted above are
typical for such extracts from SASS tests
of combustion sources. Current studies
are investigating if such bioassay re-
sponses are due to artifact compounds
formed when combustion product gas
containing NOX is passed over XAD-2
resin.
Quality assurance (QA) performed for
these tests to establish the percision and
accuracy of the laboratory analyses gen-
erally gave results within the project QA
objectives for these measures. However,
the precision of the SSMS analyses, as
determined by analysis of blind duplicate
samples, was of only borderline accepta-
bility and the accuracy of this analysis, as
determined by analyzing a blind audit sam-
ple, was not generally within a factor of
3 as specified by Level 1 protocol. How-
ever, this failure to achieve reasonably
good precision and accuracy has little
effect on test conclusions. The conclusion
that corresponding samples from both
tests had comparable trace element com-
positions (except for lead) should be unaf-
fected. The high lead levels in test 2
samples were quantified using AAS ana-
lyses, which met appropriate QA objec-
tives for precision and accuracy. The con-
clusions that cyclone ash leachates had
significantly higher trace element concen-
trations than bottom ash leachates, and
that the test 1 cyclone ash leachate had
higher trace element concentrations than
that from test 2, were based on observed
order of magnitude differences. Further-
more, these differences were often sub-
stantiated by AAS analyses which, again,
met appropriate QA objectives.
-------
Table 7. Bioassay Results
Bioassay response3
Test Sample
1 (coal) XAD-2 extract
Bottom ash
Cyclone hopper ash
2 fcoal/PET) XAD-2 extract
Bottom ash
Cyclone hopper ash
Ames
mutagenicity
H
ND
M/H
M
ND
L/M
CHO
clonal
toxicity
M
ND
ND
H/M
ND
ND
aND — Nondetectable mutagenicity/toxicity.
L — Low mutagenicity/toxicity.
M — Moderate mutagenicity/toxicity.
H — High mutagenicity/toxicity.
R. DeRosier, H. Lips, andL. Water/and are withAcurex Corp., Mountain View, CA
94039.
Joseph A. McSorley is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report consists of two volumes, entitled "Environmental Assess-
ment of a Commercial Boiler Fired with a Coal/Waste Plastic Mixture:"
"Volume I. Technical Results," (Order No. PB 86-183 811/AS; Cost: $16.95)
"Volume II. Data Supplement," (Order No. PB 86-183 829/AS; Cost: $22.95)
The above documents will be available only from: (cost subject to change)
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
' -&U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1986/646-116/20847
-------
United States Center for Environmental Research
Environmental Protection Information
Agency Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S7-86/011
0000329 PS
U S ENVIR PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 5 LIBRARY
230 S DEARBORN STREET
CHICAGO IL 60604
------- |