United States
                     Environmental Protection
                     Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                     Research and Development
EPA/600/S7-88/012  Nov. 1988
c/EPA          Project  Summary
                     Cost  of  Controlling   Directly
                     Emitted   Acidic  Emissions  from
                     Major  Industrial   Sources
                     T.E. Emmel, J.T. Waddell, and R.C. Adams
                      Stationary U.S. sources, each of which
                     as a group emits over 4,500 Mg (5000
                     tons) or more of acidic material (e.g.,
                     acid sulfates, HCI, HF) per year, include:
                     utility and industrial boilers, Glaus sulfur
                     recovery plants, catalytic cracking units,
                     primary copper smelters, coke oven
                     plants, primary aluminum smelters, and
                     municipal solid waste incinerators. Utility
                     and industrial boilers are by far the
                     largest sources, emitting about 760,000
                     Mg (830,000 tons) and 180,000-250,000
                     Mg  (200,000-275,000 tons)  of  acidic
                     material per year, respectively. Using a
                     model plant approach, estimates were
                     made of costs for retrofitting selected
                     control  systems to these plants. Cost-
                     effectiveness (defined as the unit annual
                     cost for removal of the acidic materials)
                     of each control system was calculated
                     based on the anticipated performance of
                     the system. If SO2  is simultaneously
                     emitted with the acidic materials, con-
                     trols were selected which removed both
                     SO2 and the acidic materials.  Cost-
                     effectiveness was considerably better for
                     the combined (SO2  + acidic material)
                     removal systems.  For example,  a
                     limestone wet scrubber on a 600 MW,
                     high-sulfur-coal-fired utility boiler was
                     estimated to have a cost-effectiveness of
                     $65,000/Mg  ($59,000/ton)  for  acid
                     sulfates, HCI, and HF, but a combined
                     (SO2  +  acidic  material)  cost  effec-
                     tiveness of $1100/Mg ($1000/ton).  Be-
                     cause of a need for performance data on
                     acidic emissions control  systems,  it
                     would be desirable if research could be
                     conducted on removal of acid sulfates
                     and nitrates by existing gaseous and par-
                     ticulate control systems.
                      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 a separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering information  at
back).

Introduction
  The Acid Precipitation Act of 1980
established an Interagency Task Force to
develop a comprehensive research pro-
gram for investigation of acid precipitation
issues.  The National Acid  Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP) was subse-
quently  established to develop the
necessary data and provide  a framework
for policy  recommendations  in regard  to
acid precipitation. One aspect of the overall
acid deposition issue is to understand the
role and significance of direct emissions of
acidic materials. As such, it is necessary
to identify the major industrial sources of
direct emissions of acidic material (e.g.,
sulfates, chlorides) and to evaluate the con-
trol of these materials. In addition, it is im-
portant to  know if the most cost-effective
methods for reducing acidic emissions dif-
fer from those for controlling  acid deposi-
tion precursors (SO2> NOX, and VOC).
  Accordingly, the objectives of this study
were: 1) to identify and characterize sta-
tionary combustion and industrial sources
of directly emitted acidic materials in the
U.S.; 2) to evaluate the technical feasibility
of control techniques for these sources; and
3) to estimate the costs of applying these
control technologies. This assessment was
conducted by reviewing and analyzing ex-
isting data, including  the  preliminary
control strategies evaluated by the In-
teragency  Task Force. The potential for
emissions from transportation sources was
not examined in this study.

-------
  Results of the study can be  used to
evaluate the merits of controlling directly
emitted acidic materials as part of a policy
evaluation of overall acid deposition con-
trol strategies. For example, if it were deter-
mined that (for a region) local emissions of
directly emitted acid materials were more
significant than long range precursor emit-
ters, the information in this report could be
used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
controlling local sources of directly emitted
acidic materials versus sources of long
range precursor emissions.

Methodology
  To identify and characterize sources of
directly emitted acidic materials,  national
acidic materials emissions of all stationary
combustion and industrial  sources were
identiied by means of a literature search.
Model  units were then  developed  for
sources that emit 4,500 Mg (5,000 tons) or
more of acidic material per year. The model
units were used as bases for establishing
control techniques and for determining the
technical feasibility of candidate conven-
tional control techniques. The cost of retrofit
controls for the model units was estimated,
and cost-effectiveness values were deter-
mined.  The  cost-effectiveness of  acidic
materials control was compared  with the
cost-effectiveness where applicable of SO2
which is co-emitted with acidic materials.
Additionally, promising  research  and
development activities  relevant  to  acid
materials control were also examined.

Results and Recommendations
  The major combustion and industrial
sources of directly emitted acidic materials
that were identified during this study are
presented  in Table 1. For most source
categories,  emissions  were  estimated
using emissions factors and combustion
and process capacities found in the litera-
ture.  Utility and industrial boilers are by
far the  largest  acidic emissions  sources
in the U.S., producing  about 760,000 Mg
(830,000 tons)  and 180,000-250,000 Mg
(200,000-275,000  tons) of acidic  material
emissions per year, respectively. It  was also
estimated that emissions of directly emit-
ted acidic materials represent only 2% of
the annual emissions  of SO2, NOX,  and
VOC (which are acid precipitation precur-
sors)  from stationary sources.
  Based on  information obtained  in the
literature, model plants, including the most
applicable  acidic material controls, were
developed for sources that emit over 4,500
Mg (5,000 tons) of acidic material per year.
This cutoff point allowed the project to focus
on source  categories  with the  greatest
emissions. The major sources considered
include utility and industrial boilers, Claus
sulfur recovery plants, catalytic cracking
units, primary copper smelters, coke oven
plants,  primary aluminum smelters,  and
municipal  solid  waste  incinerators.
Although Kraft pulp mills, gypsum plants,
and cement plants are large sulfate emis-
sions sources, they were not analyzed fur-
ther because the compounds emitted are
alkaline or pH neutral. In addition, gypsum
ponds were identified as a source category
emitting large amounts of HF. However, HF
emissions from gypsum ponds are reduced
by water treatment methods, whereas this
study focused primarily on controls which
treat acidic gases. Thus, no further analysis
was attempted.
  Little performance data is available con-
cerning the control of acidic emissions by
currently   operating control  systems.
Therefore, the systems chosen for model
unit development are generally those which
are demonstrated for control of SO2  and
NOX and provide the  greatest potential for
control of acidic material emissions.
  Cost  analyses  were  performed to
estimate the costs  required for retrofitting
the selected control systems to model
plants. Table 2  summarizes the  control
systems analyzed for  each  significant
source category and their respective cost-
effectiveness. Cost-effectivenes is defined
as the unit annual cost for removing the
acidic materials. If SO2 is present in the
emission stream, controls were selected for
concurrent removal of SO2 and the acidic
materials.  Typically, the volume of SO2 is
quite  large compared to  that of  acidic
materials. Therefore,  cost-effectiveness is
considerably improved if calculated for the
combined removal  of acidic materials and
SO2.  The  combined cost-effectiveness
values are  included in Table. 2.
  The greatest obstacle in this study  was
the lack of available performance data for
acidic emissions control systems. No infor-
mation was available concerning the con-
trol of acid nitrates. All test data for remov-
ing acid sulfates were presented in terms
of H2SO4  mist control and show a wide
range of removal efficiencies. Therefore, it
would be desirable if research could be
directed toward quantitating the acid sulfate
and acid nitrate control performances of ex-
isting applicable gaseous and paniculate
controls. While  data for  HCI and  HF
removal are  also  lacking,  the need for
research in this area is not urgent, because
HCI and HF have high affinities to the
alkaline solutions commonly used by FGD
systems and, as indicated by the limited
test data, removal is expected to be high.
  The technologies identified  as being
most applicable to reducing directly emit-
ted acidic materials are wet/dry scrubbing
techniques.  Conventional  electrostatic
precipitators and fabric filters are not as ef-
fective because acidic material frequently
forms downstream of where these devices
are typically located. For this reason, the
most cost-effective  control devices  for
sulfates,  fluorides,  and  chloride are the
same as would be employed for SO2. Con-
ventional combustion modification techni-
ques, used to control NOX emissions from
boilers, were identified as the best commer-
cially available methods for reducing nitrate
emissions.

-------
Table 1. National Emissions
Source Category
Utility Boilers
Coal
Residual Oil
Distillate Oil
Industrial Boilers
Coal
Residual Oil
Distillate Oil
Municipal Solid Waste
Catalytic Cracking
Primary Copper
Primary Aluminum
Gypsum Ponds
Claus Plants
Coke Ovens
Proplyene Oxide
Manufacturing
Residential Boilers
Sulfuric Acid Plants
Phosphoric Acid Plants
Triple Superphosphate
Manufacturing
Primary Zinc
Diammonium Phosphate
Manufacturing
HF Manufacturing
Estimates for Identified Source Categories
Acid Sulfate Emissions Nitrate Emissions
(703 Mg/yr) (103 Mg/yr
103 tons/yr) 103 tons/yr)
107(117) 64(70)
25 (28)
3.6 (4)
20-81 (25-89) 32 (35)
5-10.4 (5.5-11.5)
27 (30)

11.3(12.5)
8.6-10.4 (9.5-11.5)
0.18-0.41 (0.2-0.45)

5.4 (6)
5 (5.5)


1.8 (2)


0.2 (0.25)


Tattle 2. Summary of Controls Analyzed and Cost-Effectiveness
Source Category/ Fuel
Process Capacity Type" Control
Industrial Boilers''
30 5 GJ/hr (3O MMBtu/hr)




HCI Emissions HF Emissions Total Emissions Year
(103 Mg/yr) (10* Mg/yr) (103 Mg/yr) Data
103 tons/yr) 103 tons/yr) 103 tons/yr) Reported
496(546) 60(66) 756(831) 1980/1982
88 (96) 10.6(11.5) 182-248(203-273) 1980/1982
20 (22) 20 (22) —
11.3(12.5) 1983
8.6-10.4 (9.5-11.5) 1984
5.9(6.5) 6.1-6.3(6.7-7) 1983
5.9 (6.5) 5.9 (6.5) 1980
5.4 (6) 1980
5 (5.5) 1983
2.7-4.1(3-4.5) 2.7-4.1(3-4.5) 1980
2.7(3) 0.2(0.25) 2.9(3.25) 1974
1.8 (2) 1982
0.14(0.15) 0.14(0.15) 1980
0.18(0.2) 0.18(0.2) 1980
0.2 (0.25) 1983
0.2 (0.25) 0.2 (0.25) 1980
0.01-1.2 (0.01-1.35) 0.01-1.2 (0.01-1.35) 1980
Cost-Effectiveness of Removal
Acidic Species Acidic Material Acidic Material + SO2
Controlled $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)

HSC Sodium-Based Scrubber SuHates, HCI, HF 39,300 (35,700) 810 (740)
LSC 24,400 (22,200) 2,640 (2,400)
DO Sulfates 359,000 (327,000) 4,890 (4,440)
RO 492,800 (448,000) 1,110 (1,010)
HSC Dual Alkali Scrubber
LSC
DO
RO
HSC Lime Spray Dryer
LSC
DO
RO
Sulfates, HCI, HF 86,100 (78,300) 1,770 (1.610)
66,000 (60,000) 7,130 (6,480)
Sulfates 999,000 (908,000) 13,600 (12,360)
1,200,000 (1,090,000) 2,720 (2,470)
SuHates, HCI, HF 72,600 (66,000) 1,910 (1,730)
59,900 (54,400) 7,930 (7,210)
Sulfates 626,000 (569,000) 15,400 (14,000)
704,000 (640,000) 2,920 (2,660)

-------
Table 2. (Continued)
Source Category/
Process Capacity
406 GJ/hr (400 MMBtu/hr)



Utility Boiler"
2,0311 GJ/hr (2,000 MMBtu/hr)





5,078 GJ/hr (5,000 MMBtu/hr)





Cost-Effectiveness of Removal
Fuel
Typ^
HSC
LSC
DO
RO
HSC
LSC
DO
RO
HSC
LSC
DO
RO
HSC
LSC
Coal
HSC
LSC
RO
HSC
LSC
HSC
LSC
Coal
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
HSC
LSC
RO
HSC
LSC
HSC
LSC
Coal
Coal
Oil
Coal
Oil
Control
Sodium-Based Scrubber
Dual Alkali Scrubber
Lime Spray Dryer
Low Excess Air
Overfire Air
Limestone Wet Scrubber
Wellman-Lord System
Lime Spray Dryer
Low A/0* Burners
Low Excess Air
Overfire Air
Limestone Wet Scrubber
Wellman-Lord System
Lime Spray Dryer
Low A/Ox Burners
Low Excess Air
Overfire Air
Acidic Species
Controlled
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates
A/O/
A/0/
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates, HCI, HF
A/0/
A/0/
A/O/
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates
Sulfates, HCI, HF
Sulfates, HCI, HF
WO/
A/0/
A/O/
Acidic Material Acidic Material + SO2
$/Mg ($fton) $/Mg (Won)
18,900
7,000
89,000
200,000
20,600
11,400
156,000
249,000
21,700
14,300
119,000
172,000
132
9
112
64,700
52,600
291,000
94,600
62,800
62,100
47,300
123
7
2
96
131
45,700
37,600
229,000
74,300
49,400
48,000
35,300
71
3
1
56
83
(17,200)
(6,300)
(81,000)
(182,000)
(18,700)
(10,300)
(142,000)
(226,000)
(19,800)
(13,000)
(108,000)
(156,000)
(120)
(8)
(102)
(58,800)
(47,800)
(264,600)
(86,000)
(57, 100)
(56,500)
(43,000)
(112)
(6)
(2)
(87)
(119)
(41,600)
(34,200)
(208,000)
(67,600)
(44,900)
(43,600)
(32,000)
(64)
(3)
(1)
(51)
(75)
390
750
1,180
450
420
1,220
2,060
560
560
1,810
2,870
710


1,130
4,960
2,350
1,660
5,930
1,140
4,650



800
3,550
1,850
1,300
4,670
880
3,460



(350)
(680)
(1,070)
(410)
(380)
(1,110)
(1,870)
(510)
(510)
(1,650)
(2,610)
(640)
	
	
(1,030)
(4,510)
(2,140)
(1,510)
(5,390)
(1,040)
(4,230)
	
	
	
(730)
(3,230)
(1,680)
(1, 190)
(4,240)
(800)
(3,150)
	
	
	
C/aus Plants
 10 Mg/day (11 tons/day)
100 Mg/day (110 tons/day)
250 Mg/day (275 tons/day)
Amine Tail Gas Treatment
Sulfates        242,800   (220,300)    2,420   (2,200)
                77,200    (70,000)      770     (700)
                54,900    (49,800)      550     (500)

-------
Table 2.   (Continued)
                                                                                                  Cost-Effectiveness of Removal
Source Category/
Process Capacity
Fluid Catalytic
Cracking Units
2,500 mVsd (15,725 bbl/sdf
8,000 m3/sd (50,320 bbl/sdjf
Primary Copper Smelters
115,000 Mg/yr (127,000 tons/yr)
Coke Oven Plants
2000 Mg/day (220 tons/day)
6000 Mg/day (6600 tons/day)
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
380 Mg/day (420 tons/day)
730 Mg/day (800 tons/day)
Fuel Acidic Species Acidic Material Acidic Material + SOj
Type3 Control Controlled $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)

ISF" Sodium-Based Scrubber9 Sutfates 93,640
HSP* 63,450
ISFd 62,580
HSP* 47,830

Sulfuric Acid Plant Sulfates 9,800

Vacuum Carbonate System Sulfates 11,700
6,900

MSW Sodium-Based Scrubbed HCL 1,900
MSW 1,480

(84,950)
(57,560)
(56,770)
(43,390)

(8,900)

(10,600)
(6,300)

(1,730)
(1,340)

1,090
740
730
560

130

950
570

1,020
970

(990)
(670)
(660)
(510)

(120)

(870)
(520)

(1,120)
(880)
 *HSC = high-sulfur coal; LSC = low-sulfur coal; DO = distillate oil; RO = residual oil.

 "Boiler capacities presented in terms of heat input.

 °No emissions data, specifically in terms of acid nitrate emissions, were available. Thus, all cost-effectiveness results are given in terms of controlling NOX emissions.

 "Catalytic cracking unit feed rather than fuel. ISF = intermediate-sulfur feed (1.5 wt. % S); HSF = high-sulfur feed (3.5 wt. % S).

 "High energy venturi scrubber using soda-ash-based scrubbing liquor.

 'Single stage acid plant.

 ^Employs caustic-soda-based scrubbing liquor.

 hExcludes benefits of concurrent SO2 reductions.

 'm3/sd: cubic meter per stream day
 bbl/sd: barrel per stream day.
    T. £. Emmel, J. T. Waddell, and R. C. Adams are  with Radian Corporation,
      Research Triangle Park. NC 27709.
   Julian W. Jones is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
    The complete report, entitled "Cost of  Controllling Directly Emitted Acidic
      Emissions from  Major  Industrial Sources," (Order No. PB 88-234 190/AS;
      Cost: $19.95, subject to change) will be available only from:
            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

-------