United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA/600/S2-87/066 Nov. 1987
&EPA Project Summary
A Method for Estimating Fugitive
Paniculate Emissions from
Hazardous Waste Sites
James H. Turner, Marvin R. Branscome, and C. Clark Allen
A literature review on fugitive par-
ticulate emissions from agricultural,
industrial, and other activities was
performed to identify control techniques
which may be applicable to fugitive
emissions from hazardous waste sites.
Techniques judged applicable include
chemical stabilization (40 to 100 per-
cent efficiency, $520/acre-yr to
$2,720/acre-yr), wet suppression (25
to 90 percent efficiency, $365/acre-yr
to $1,270/acre-yr), physical covering
(30 to 100 percent efficiency, $0.01 /m2
to $65/m2), vegetative covering (50 to
80 percent efficiency, $0.11/m2 to
$3.96/m2), and windscreens (30 to 80
percent efficiency, $18.01/m2 to
$26.907m2 of screen). Reducing vehicle
speed on unpaved roads can reduce
emissions by 25 to 80 percent depend-
ing on initial conditions.
Supporting reviews are included for
soil characteristics, emission factors,
and dispersion processes that generate
and distribute fugitive particulate mat-
ter. A method is described to estimate
degree of contamination (DOC) of soil
particles based on the contamining
chemical's water solubility and the soil's
organic carbon content. A firt-order
decay process is included. Five example
sites are described and estimates made
of uncontrolled and controlled down-
wind concentrations of hazardous con-
stituents. Annual averages are in the
attogram to nanogram per cubic meter
range. Ranges for control and efficiency
costs for each site are included.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 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
Particulate emissions from hazardous
waste sites may be significant contri-
butors to offsite contamination. Liquid
hazardous materials are adsorbed by sur-
rounding soil particles that subsequently
are windborne and inhaled by exposed
populations or deposited on land or water
used for food production. Similarly, solid
materials may become eroded or wind-
borne and eventually inhaled or deposited.
Examples of sites that can contribute
to windborne contaminants include open
waste piles, unpaved haul roads, landfills
of various configurations, and dried
lagoons. For each, some combination of
mechanisms must allow a contaminating
material to be adsorbed by containing or
surrounding soil and dispersed in pre-
vailing winds.
Methods of controlling fugitive par-
ticulate emissions range from preventing
contaminants from reaching the soil or
from being eroded (if solid) to planting
vegetative covers that prevent soil move-
ment. A site can be covered with benign
material or crustal agents used to bond
soil particles together to prevent soil
movement. To determine the overall con-
trol effectiveness, one must be able to
measure or estimate emission factors
(controlled and uncontrolled) from sites
of interest, degree of contamination (DOC)
of emitted particles, and dispersion of
particles.
A major objective of this report is to
identify and evaluate individual control
-------
options for treatment, storage, and dis-
posal facilities (TSDFs). A supporting ob-
jective is to provide data and estimation
procedures to determine DOC of soils at
TSDFs.
Procedure
Control techniques are described first,
including their effectiveness and costs,
followed by a brief discussion of soil
characteristics important to estimating
fugitive emissions. A method is described
for predicting downwind concentrations
of hazardous constituents and is applied
to five example sites. Control efficiency
and cost are given for each site.
Information for this report was taken
primarily from the literature on agri-
cultural, mining, and industrial emissions
and from pesticides research. No field
work was performed.
Results and Discussion
Control Techniques and Cost
Several control techniques for fugitive
particulate emissions have been investi-
gated and applied in recent years for
sources such as storage and waste piles.
paved and unpaved roads, cropland, con-
struction areas, and in the handling and
transfer of bulk solids. Very few of these
techniques have been evaluated by field
sampling at TSDFs; however they have
been applied and evaluated at sources
similar to TSDFs such that technology
transfer should be straightforward.
Evaluating these control techniques in-
cluded investigating application methods
and rates, practicality, and control
efficiency.
Control efficiencies have been mea-
sured and reported in the literature in
different ways by different investigators.
The different methods of evaluating con-
trol efficiency include:
• Reduction in particulate matter in
the ambient air
• Reduction in percent silt on the
surface
• Reduction in soil movement
• Increase in wind threshold or en-
trainment velocity.
Control efficiencies are site-specific and
depend upon a myriad of variables that
change with the types of controls, emis-
sion sources, and climates. Even for a
specific site, the control efficiency may
vary day to day because of changes in the
many variables affecting emissions. For
these reasons, control efficiencies are
presented in the form of ranges that are
derived from the published results of
several different investigators. Control
methods reported in the literature include
chemical stabilization, wet suppression,
physical covering, vegetative covers,
windscreens, and traffic speed reduction.
A summary of the techniques, efficiencies,
and costs is given in Table 1.
The practicality of these control options
for specific sites depends upon active or
inactive use, climate, and properties of
specific products or controls. For example,
vegetative covers are obviously impractical
for the active portions of a site. Water-
soluble chemical stabilizers may be im-
practical in areas with a high incidence
of rainfall, and wet suppression tech-
niques may be impractical in arid areas
that have a limited water supply. The
practicality of a given product or control
technique for a specific site must be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis and
one should consider factors such as cost,
desired control efficiency, expected life-
time of the control, climatic effects, and
Table 1. Summary of Control Costs and Efficiencies
Site and control technique
Total suspended Inhalable
Cost estimate particle (TSP) particle (IP)
($/yr) efficiency 1%}° efficiency*
40-acre landfill
1. Chemical stabilization
a. Partially active, frequent application
b. Inactive, infrequent application
2.
3.
4.
Cover - inactive site
a. Synthetic film, 5-yr life
b. Hardened foam, 2 in., 5-yr life
c. 6-in. soil cover, 5-yr life
Vegetative stabilization, inactive site
a. Hydraulic seeding, 10-yrlife
b. Above plu topsoil
c. Hydraulic seeding plus chemical stabilization
Wet suppression
a. For 1 -acre active site
b. For entire 40 acres
Dried lagoon (1 acre!
1. Chemical stabilization
2. Cover
a. Synthetic film, 5-yr life
b. Hardened foam. 2 in., 5-yr life
c. 6-in. soil cover. 5-yr life
3. Vegetative stabilization
a. Grade, seed, fertilize, 10-yr life
b. Hydraulic seed, fertilize, mulch, 10-yr life
c. Above plus local topsoil
35,500-109.000
3.700-9.200
43.000-256.000
93,000
16,000
12.000
26.000
15,700-21,200
365-1,270
15,000-51,000
744
1,000-6,300
3,400
400
1.100
290
650
75-100
75-100
85-100
85-100
85-100
50-80
50-80
85-100
25-90
25-90
75-100
85-100
85-100
85-100
50-80
50-80
50-80
Same
Same
Same
Same
Same
Lower
Same
Same
Higher
Higher
Same
Same
Same
Same
Lower
Lower
Same
-------
TaWe 1. (Continued)
Site and control technique
Cost estimate
($/yr)
Total suspended
particle (TSP)
efficiency (%f
Inhalable
particle (IP)
efficiency^
4. Wet suppression
a. Water spraying
b. With sprinkler system, 10-yr life
Drum storage area
1. Chemical stabilization
a. Yearly application
b. Monthly application
2. Cover
a. Synthetic film, 5-yr life
b. Dome cover, 10- to 20-yr life
3. Vegetative stabilization
a. Grade, seed, fertilize, 10-yr life
b. Above plus topsoil
Unpaved road (0.5 mi)
1. Chemical stabilization
2. Cover
a. 3 to 6 in. of gravel, 5-yr life
b. Pave, 3 in., 10- to 20-yr life
c. Road carpet
3. Wet suppression
Waste pile (1.8 acres)
1. Chemical stabilization - active site
2. Cover
a. Synthetic film, inactive site, 5-yr life
b. Above plus tension cables, auger feed, active
c. Hardened foam cover, inactive site, 5-yr life
3. Vegetative stabilization
a. Grade, seed, fertilize. 10-yr life
b. Hydraulic seeding, mulch, 10-yr life
c. Above plus topsoil
4. Windscreen, 10-yr life
5. Wet suppression
365-1,270
7,500
151
1.8OO
50-290
11.0OO-16,OOO
52
68
22,000-33.000
5,000-9,200
6.500-8.500
4.900
20.500-31,500
1.6OO-4.9OO
2,000-12,000
52.000-79.0OO
5,300
2,OOO
54O
1.200
3.200-12.400
66O-2.600
25-90
25-90
75-1OO
75-100
85-1OO
Up to 100
50-80
50-8O
40-96
30
85
45
50
75-90
85-100
85-1 OO
85-1 OO
50-80
50-80
50-80
30-8O
25-90
Higher
Higher
Same
Same
Same
Same
Lower
Same
Same
Lower
Same
Same
Higher
Same
Same
Same
Same
Lower
Lower
Same
Lower
Higher
* Percent reduction in TSPs (total suspended paniculate).
b Expected control of inhalable particles (IP) relative to TSP (higher, lower, or the same).
potential for creating other adverse en-
vironmental impacts (e.g., increased
leachate generation or spread of con-
tamination).
Estimation of Emissions
Estimating fugitive paniculate emis-
sions and resulting downwind ground-
level contaminant concentration is a
two-step process. The first step is to
determine the emission or entrainment
rate of participates into ambient air, and
the second step is to determine the
atmospheric dispersion of the emitted
material and resulting downwind con-
centrations. The theory of atmospheric
dispersion and Gaussian diffusion models
has been relatively well developed, and a
number of computer models have.been
developed to predict downwind air and
surface concentrations using point, line,
or area sources of emissions. Estimating
fugitive emissions from TSDFs, however,
must be based on available data from
other similar fugitive paniculate emission
sources such as unpaved roads, storage
piles, and open-area sources.
Fugitive emissions from a hazardous
waste facility or an open dust source may
be expected to depend upon several
factors:
• Soil characteristics such as particle
size, organic content, moisture, soil
type and texture, and erodibility. Soil
properties determine the ease or
propensity of particle entrainment.
• Climatic conditions such as mean
wind velocity, humidity, and extent
of precipitation and solar influx.
These parameters affect the long-
term average soil moisture content.
• Destabilizing factors such as me-
chanical activity and vehicle traffic
on the site. Such factors may change
-------
the soil surface characteristics
and/or contribute mechanical energy
for particle entrainment. Mechanical
activity tends to restore a site's
"erosion potential."
• Extent of nonerodible elements at a
site determine its erosion potential.
Elements such as clumps of grass or
stones on the surface consume part
of the shear stress of the wind that
otherwise would be transferred to
erodible soil.
Conclusions
Many fugitive particulate controls have
been found that prevent or reduce contact
between wind and soil particles. The most
common type is some form of liquid, such
as asphaltic compounds, that can be
sprayed over soil surfaces to form crusts
or to bond particles together. Other types
include vegetative covers, wind breaks,
and physical covers of soil, clay, or
artificial materials. Control effectiveness
depends on efficiency, longevity of actions,
and resistance to wind and other erosive
forces. A summary of control costs and
efficiencies is given in Table 1. Calcula-
tions have been made for five emission
sources to determine DOC, uncontrolled
and controlled emissions, downwind
concentration of hazardous materials, and
control costs. Results from these calcula-
tions are presented in Tables 2 and 3. No
data are available to check the validity of
these projections. This information was
developed from a broad review of control
techniques discussed in hazardous
waste, solid waste, mining, civil engineer-
ing, construction industry, and EPA
documents.
Controls may be needed to prevent
dispersion of hazardous waste emissions
from areas of contamination. These emis-
sions may be hazardous wastes in particle
form but are more apt to be soil particles
contaminated with the wastes. Few data
have been found regarding degree of soil
contamination at TSDFs; however, soil
contamination by pesticides has been
investigated extensively. Using the gen-
eralized results of these investigations, a
method was developed for estimating DOC
of soils from sparingly soluble hazardous
waste. The method assumes that all con-
taminant retention on soil occurs by
adsorption from a saturated solution and
that all contaminant degradation (prior to
particle emission) occurs from a first-
order decay process. The only information
required to use the method is water
solubility for the compound of interest
and organic carbon content of the ad-
sorbing soil. If significant degradation of
the contaminant is assumed, a value for
the first-order rate constant is required,
since results for two example TSDFs that
could be checked are accurate to about
10 and 35 percent. Further work will be
needed to establish the usefulness of
this method.
Relatively little information has been
found regarding site characteristics im-
portant for assessing downwind deposi-
tion from contaminated fugitive particulate
matter. However, for prediction purposes,
the several types of sites considered can
be generalized to three models: line
sources for contaminated roads; flat area
sources for typical waste sites, landfills,
and dried lagoons; and storage pile
sources for waste piles.
This report was submitted in fulfillment
of Contract Number 68-03-3149, Work
Assignment Number 7-1, by Research
Triangle Institute under the sponsorship
of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. This report covers a period from
April to September 1984.
-------
Table 2. Emissions from Example Sites
Source Contaminant
1. Landfill
2. Dried lagoon
3. Drum storage
4. Haul road
5. Waste pile
Table 2. (continued)
Toluene
Dieldrin
Dioxin
(TCOD)
PCB
(Aroclor
1260)
Pb and In
Uncontrolled emission rate
DOCfag/g)
3,640 (estimated)
55. 7 (estimated)
0. 120 (measured)
0.078 (estimated
with decay)
1 25 (measured)
141 (estimated)
Pb 14.000
(measured)
Zn 34.000
(measured
combined)
Dust
1.07g/s
0.036 g/s
0. 1 12 mg/s
1,790mg/s
1.1 6 g/s
TSP
Contaminant
3.9 mg/s
2.0 ng/s
13.4 pg/s
224 ng/s
16.2 mg/s
39.4 mg/s
Dust
0.8 g/s
0.022 g/s
0.067 mg/s
897 mg/s
0.87 g/s
IP
Contaminant
2.9 mg/s
1.23 ng/s
8.06 pg/s
1 19 ng/s
12.2 mg/s
29.6 mg/s
Controlled emission rate
Source
1. Landfill
2. Dried lagoon
3. Drum storage
4. Haul road
5. Waste pile
Contaminant
Toluene
Dieldrin
Dioxin
(TCOD)
PCB
(Aroclor
1260)
Pb andZn
DOCfag/g)
3,640 (estimated)
55.7 (estimated)
0.1 20 (measured)
0.078 (estimated
with decay)
125 (measured)
141 (estimated)
Pb 14,000
(measured)
Zn 34,000
(measured
combined)
Dust
0.1 6 g/s
5.4 mg/s
16.8 pg/s
269 g/s
0.1 74 g/s
TSP
Contaminant
0.59 mg/s
0.30 ng/s
2.01 pg/s
33.6 v.g/s
2.43 mg/s
5.91 mg/s
Dust
0.1 2 g/s
3.3 mg/s
10.1 pg/s
135 mg/s
0.131 g/s
IP
Contaminant
0.44 mg/s
0.185 ng/s
1.21 pg/s
17.9ng/s
1.83 mg/s
4.44 mg/s
Definitions: DOC - Degree Of Contamination
TSP - Total Suspended Paniculate
IP - Inhalable Paniculate
-------
Table 3. Controls for Example Sites
Efficiency
Site
1. Landfill
Control method
Chemical stabilization
Vegetative plus chemical
stabilization
Total
75-700
85-1 OO
Inhalable
75-100
85- tOO
Capital
72,000
Control cost
Annualized ($/yr)
$ 3.7OO- 5,200
$15 7OO-21 2OO
Method
Chosen"
X
2. Dried lagoon
Chemical stabilization
Synthetic film cover
Vegetative plus chemical
stabilization
75-100
85-100
85-100
75-100
85-100
85-100
4,000-24,000
1,800-4,000
$ 744
$ 1.0OO-6.300.
$ 1.030-1,400
3. Drum storage
4. Haul road
5. Waste pile
Chemical stabilization
Synthetic film cover
Chemical stabilization
Wet suppression
Paving
Chemical stabilization
75-100
85-1 OO
40-96
50
85
75-10O
85-1OO
50-80
30-80
75-100
85-100
40-96
50
85
75-1OO
85-100
50-80
30-80
190-1 100
54,OOO
7,400-45,000
3.300-7,400
3,200-12,400
$ 151-1,800
$ 50-290 . . .
$22,000-33,000
$20,500-31,500
$ 6,5OO-8,5OO
$ 1.6OO-4.9OO
$ 2,000-12,000
$ 540-2,000
$ 3,2OO-12,4OO
X
X
X
' The lowest efficiency for each chosen method was used to calculate controlled emission rates shown in Table 2.
James H. Turner, Marvin R. Branscome, Robert L. Chessin, Ashok S. Damie,
Rajeev V. Kamath, Colleen M. Northeim, andC. Clark Allen are with Research
Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
Paul R. dePercin is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "A Method for Estimating Fugitive Paniculate
Emissions from Hazardous Waste Sites," (Order No. PB 87-232 203/AS;
Cost: $18.95, 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:
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
United States Center for Environmental Research M^
Environmental Protection Information
Agency Cincinnati OH 45268
0000329 PS
U S EHVIR PROTECTION AGENCY
RESIGN 5 LIBRARY
230 S Of ARBORS STREET
CHICAGO It. 60604
irk?;o
f - . - J-JOD
Official Business \. - ,r. ,-•', .1 v. TR
Penalty for Private Use $300 *"-—'
EPA/600/S2-87/066
------- |