SERA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Research and Development
EPA/600/S7-85/022 Aug. 1985
Project Summary
A Model for Evaluation of
Refinery and Synfuels VOC
Emission Data
R. G. Wetherold, G. E. Harris, F. D. Skinner, and L P. Provost
Estimates of the emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) from
petroleum refineries and synfuel plants
are of considerable interest to EPA, in-
dustry, and the public. Such estimates
are needed in the preparation and re-
view of Environmental Impact State-
ments (EIS) and permits required by the
Clean Air Act. In response to this need,
several studies have been made of VOC
emissions, particularly from refineries.
Methods for estimating VOC emissions
and the results of VOC emissions tests
have been published in various journals
and at numerous forums. A need has
developed to define a consistent and
comprehensive approach for estimat-
ing VOC emissions from refineries and
synfuel plants.
This study has resulted in the devel-
opment of a model for performing such
estimates. A modular technique was
developed in which the entire spectrum
of potential VOC emissions sources
was defined in a number of process and
utility modules. Each module repre-
sents a process or auxiliary unit. The
user of the model provides emission
source counts and other process infor-
mation, or uses default values pro-
vided. Emissions are calculated, using
emission factors for each source type.
Detailed examples of the application of
the model to both refineries and syn-
fuels plants are presented.
This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Air and Energy Engineer-
ing Research Laboratory, Research Tri-
angle Park, NC, to announce key
findings of the research project that is
fully documented in two separate
volumes (see Project Report ordering
information at back).
Introduction
Over the past several years, volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions
from petroleum refineries and synfuel
plants have been of considerable inter-
est to the EPA, industry, and the general
public. The preparation and review of
Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
and permitting requirements of the
Clean Air Act depend on emission esti-
mates. In response to this need, several
studies have been made of VOC emis-
sions, particularly from refineries.
Methods for estimating VOC emissions
and the results of VOC emissions tests
have been published in various journals
and at numerous forums. A need has
developed to define a consistent and
comprehensive approach for estimating
VOC emissions from refineries and syn-
fuel plants. This study was performed to
fulfill this objective.
A literature search was conducted to
obtain all available information on VOC
emissions from petroleum refineries
and synfuel plants. The types of synfuel
plants included in the search were coal
gasification (excluding in-situ gasifica-
tion), coal liquefaction (direct and indi-
rect), and oil shale processing.
Four major sources of emissions
were included in the search: process
emissions, product storage, baggable
fugitive emissions, and nonbaggable
fugitive emissions. Both controlled and
uncontrolled sources were considered;
if the source was controlled, any avail-
able information on the degree and type
of control and the rationale for control
application was included.
Process operating parameters and
physical data were included if they per-
-------
tained to a process stream for which
emission data were expected to be
available or if they pertained to any ex-
isting emission model. Emission data
could include measurements of emis-
sion rates, measurements of parame-
ters that could correlate with or predict
emission rates, or composition data.
Because of Radian's involvement
with EPA in VOC emissions activities
over the past 7 years, it was expected
that very little information of signifi-
cance would be found of which EPA and
Radian were not already aware. A
search of the DOE ENERGY data base
using the DIALOG Information Retrieval
Service bore this out. The search in-
cluded the last 5 years. Therefore, the
bulk of the information was gathered
through the Radian library. Particularly
in the refinery area, a great deal of the
available information on emissions is
the result of EPA/Radian testing efforts.
Refinery emission data were obtained
from a few major sources which had
been identified from past studies. These
sources are tabulated in the full report.
Some of these references also provided
additional data (e.g., emission source
distributions and process and operating
parameters) needed to develop a model
for estimating refinery VOC emissions.
Much less information on VOC emis-
sions from synfuels plants is available
than for refineries. The full report sum-
marizes the literature surveyed. Source
types and frequencies for a number of
synfuel processes, together with a lim-
ited amount of emission factor data (pri-
marily for Lurgi gasification plants),
were located.
There are thousands of potential VOC
emission sources in a refinery or syn-
fuel plant, but this variety of sources
falls into one of the following general
categories:
• Process fugitive emissions. These
are the result of leakage of VOC
from the piping and fittings with
which a process unit is constructed.
Sources of process fugitive emis-
sions and their uncontrolled emis-
sion factors are given in Tables 1
and 2. Note that the emission fac-
tors are presented by industry, and
that there are significant differences
between industries. The full report
describes how VOCs may be emit-
ted from each source type, how
such emissions may be controlled,
and the effectiveness of these con-
trol measures.
Table 1. Process Fugitive Emission Factors
Emission Factors,
Ib/day/source
Source
Type
Pump Seals
Pump Seals
Compressor Seals
Compressor Seals
Valves
Valves
Valves
Valves
Connections
Relief Valves
Relief Valves
Open End Lines
Process Drains
Service
Category
Light Liquidb
Heavy Liquid'
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrogend
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrogen
Light Liquid
Heavy Liquid
All
Gas
Liquid
All
All
Refineries
6.0
7.7
34.0
2.6
1.4
0.43
0.58
0.012
0.013
8.6
0.37
0.12
1.7
SOCMI'
2.6
1.1
12.0
-
0.30
-
0.38
0.01 2e
0.044
5.5
0.37e
0.09
-
'The Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. These emission factors may be more appropria
for petrochemical units associated with refineries or synfuel plants.
bAny organic material more volatile than kerosene.
cAny organic material with a volatility equal to or less than kerosene.
dA stream with greater than 50 percent (by volume) of hydrogen.
eFrom refinery data since there were not enough heavy liquid sources found in the SOCMI testing to warrai
the development of separate emission factors.
• Process combustion emissions.
Many refinery or synfuel processes
require a great deal of heat input,
which may be provided directly by a
fixed process heater, or indirectly
by steam, generated in a boiler. In-
complete fuel combustion and/or
reactions between the products of
combustion may result in VOC
emissions. Emission factors from
combustion sources are given in
Table 3.
• Process point source emissions.
Point sources of VOC emissions are
present in some process units, and
emissions must of necessity be esti-
mated for each individual process
unit. Data obtained in this study
were used to identify the point
sources occurring in various pro-
cess units and to develop emission
factors for each.
• Slowdown and flare system emis-
sions. Flares are used to handle
large emergency releases from re-
finery and synfuel plant process
units and for combusting continu-
ous, low flows of VOC that are trans
ported in closed vent systems. Flar
destruction efficiencies may rang
from 91 to 100 percent; a mean eff
ciency of 98 percent is normally as
sumed.
Wastewater treatment system emit
sions. Primary sources of VOi
emissions from wastewater treat
ment systems are evaporative emis
sions from oil/water separators am
dissolved air flotation units. Con
trolled and uncontrolled emissioi
factors are given in Table 4.
Sludge/solid waste treating emis
sions. Atmospheric VOC emission
can result from the land disposal o
refinery and synfuel plant oil'
wastes. No well-established emis
sion factors exist for any of the im
portant disposal methods (land
farming, landfilling, and surfaci
impoundment), but the full repor
presents several predictive emis
sion models which have been pro
posed in the literature.
-------
Table 2. Process Fugitive Emission Factors Used in the Gasification, Acid Gas Removal,
and Wastewater Extraction Modules
Source Type
Pump Seals - Aqueous
Pump Seals - Hydrocarbon Liquid
Compressor Seals - Hydrocarbon Gas
Compressor Seals - Hydrogen Gas
Valves - Hydrocarbon Gas
Valves - Hydrogen Gas
Valves - Hydrocarbon Liquids
Valves - Aqueous
Connections - Hydrocarbon Gas
Connections - Hydrocarbon Liquid
Connections - Aqueous
Relief Valves - Gas •
Relief Valves - Liquid
Open End Lines
Process Drains
Sample System Purging
VOC Emission Factor,
lb/day/sourcea
0.0026
0.011
34.0
2.6
0.0042
0.43
0.0057
0.0026
0.0005
0.0011
< 0.00007
0.34
0.0037
0.12
1.7
0.79
"There is some concern over the accuracy of these numbers, since they represent only the
gaseous portion of the leak (i. e., they do not include the potential contribution of liquid leaks).
A number of liquid leaks were noted, although most were in aqueous stream service. These
factors were included because they are the only source of gasification specific data, but the use
of refinery factors may be more accurate if liquid leaks are suspected to be significant.
• Emissions from storage tanks.
Emission models have been devel-
oped for the most commonly used
types of tanks used to store crude
oil and liquid products or byprod-
ucts. These models are quite com-
plex; details are given in the full re-
port.
• Emissions for cooling towers. VOC
emissions from cooling towers typi-
cally occur as a result of leaks in
shell-and-tube heat exchangers
through which cooling water circu-
lates. An emission factor of 6 Ib
VOC/106 gal. of cooling water circu-
lated is used.
Emissions from product loading op-
erations. VOC emissions result
from evaporation of products dur-
ing loading operations. Emission
factors for several different stocks,
means of transport, and style of
loading are given in Table 5. For
other products, emissions may be
Table 3. Emission Factors
Fuel Type
Natural Gas
Fuel Oil
Coal (Bituminous or Lignite)
Coal (Anthracite)
for Heaters and Boilers
Emission Factors,
Industrial Heaters and Boilers
(< 100 x 106 Btu/hr) '
0.0029
0.0667
1.0 Ib/ton
negligible
lb/106 Btu
Utility Boilers
(> 100 x 10s Btu/hr)
0.001
0.0667
0.3 Ib/ton
negligible
estimated by using the factors for
the product listed whose volatility is
closest to the product of interest.
Refineries and synfuel plants may be
thought of as consisting of a number of
process units and auxiliary operations.
To provide a VOC emission model, a
number of such process and auxiliary
units were selected. Process and auxil-
iary modules were developed to repre-
sent the process units and auxiliary op-
erations in their generic form. Modules
were assigned to those processes
which may potentially make a signifi-
cant contribution to VOC emissions.
The refinery and synfuel modules con-
sidered in the VOC emission model de-
veloped as a result of this study are
listed in Tables 6 and 7. Note that there
is some overlap; a number of the refin-
ery modules will be found in most syn-
fuel plants. The full report describes
each module so that the user may select
those which are applicable to his refin-
ery or synfuel plant.
Information on the numbers and
types of VOC emission sources occur-
ring in each module was used to de-
velop various levels of default values.
These defaults provide useful informa-
tion to users of the model who may
have different amounts of detailed data
regarding a specific refinery or synfuels
plant for which an estimate of VOC
emissions is desired.
Results
The VOC emission model is pre-
sented in a workbook format in appen-
dices to the full report. The model con-
sists of calculation sheets and module
default sheets. The basic emission cal-
culations for all emission sources are
done on the calculation sheets. If the
person using the model has complete
descriptive information about the plant
in question, then the calculation sheets
will provide everything else necessary
to estimate the VOC emissions. In most
cases, however, the calculation sheets
will require some input data that the
user does not have, and the default
sheets were designed to provide rea-
sonable estimates for .such missing
data.
The logic flow of the emission model
is illustrated in Figure 1. The user first
characterizes the plant to be modeled
by selecting .appropriate process and
auxiliary modules. Process modules are
the model's representation of process
units (such as a Fluid Catalytic Cracker,
a Naphtha Hydrotreater, or a Lurgi Gasi-
fier). Auxiliary modules are the repre-
-------
sentation of non-process operations
(such as wastewater treating, cooling
towers, and product storage). If the user
does not know which modules should
be included, several typical refineries
and synfuel plants are fully defined.
These "generic plants" may be used as
is or simply as a guide in selecting the
modules for a particular plant.
The emissions are calculated on a
module-by-module basis, using emis-
sion calculation sheets and default
sheets (as necessary). When all the pro-
cess modules have been calculated, a
similar procedure is followed for the
auxiliary modules. The results may be
displayed in at least two useful ways.
First, the emission estimates on a
module-by-module basis will show
which modules are producing the most
emissions; control efforts can be con-
centrated where they will accomplish
the greatest emissions reductions. Sec-
ond, adding together the emissions
from like sources (e.g., light liquid pump
seals) can facilitate comparisons of po-
tential reductions which may be
achieved by control programs aimed at
all sources of a given type, such as leak
detection and repair programs or im-
proved equipment specifications.
Several examples of the use of the
VOC emission model are detailed in the
full report. One of the example plants
was a small refinery. Table 8 lists the
modules used to represent the small re-
finery, and Figure 2 is a block diagram.
The results of the model VOC estimate
are summarized in Table 9. As de-
scribed previously, the VOC model has
multiple levels of defaults to allow the
user to take advantage of whatever data
is available. Table 10 compares the
model results, using three levels of de-
faults.
Conclusions and
Recommendations
This report presents a mathematical
model for estimating VOC emissions
from refineries and several types of syn-
fuel plants. All significant VOC emission
sources have been included in the emis-.
sions model. A modular technique was
developed in which the entire spectrum
of potential VOC emissions sources was
defined in a distinct number of process
and utility modules. This model is con-
venient, flexible, and functional for de-
veloping VOC emissions estimates for
very diverse petroleum refineries and
synfuel plants.
The model developed in this study
Table 4. Emission Factors for Wastewater Treating Slowdown Systems, Flares, and
Cooling Towers
Source Type
Emission Control
Emission Factor
Wastewater Treating
Oil/Water Separator
Oil/Water Separator
Oil/Water Separator
Dissolved Air Flotation
Slowdown and Flares
Cooling Towers
Uncovered
Covered
Covered and vented to flare
NA
NA
NA
1.88 lb/103 gal. WV\
0.38 Ib/W3 gal. WV\
0.06 lb/103 gal. WU
0.09 lb/103 gal. WV\
0.8 lb/103 bbl crudt
6 lb/106 gal. CW
Table 5. Emission Factors for Product Loading
Emission Factor, lb/103 gal.
Vehicle
Tank Trucks/
Tank Cars
Barges
Ocean Barges
Marine Tankers
Loading
Style
Submerged-
normal
Splash-
normal
Submerged-
balanced
Splash-
balanced
Clean-vapor
free
Uncleaned-
dedicated
Average
condition
Clean-vapor
free
Uncleaned-
dedicated
Ballasted
Clean-Vapor
free
Ballasted
Uncleaned-
dedicated
Average
condition
Gasoline
5.0
12.0
8.0
8.0
1.2
4.0
4.0
1.3
3.3
2.1
1.0
1.6
2.4
1.4
Jet No. 2 No. 6
Naphtha Kerosene Fuel Oil Fuel Oi
1.5 0.02 0.01 0.0001
4.0 0.04 0.03 0.0003
2.5 NA NA NA
2.5 NA NA NA
1.2 0.13 0.012 0.0000&
0.5 0.005 0.005 0.00004
-------
has several unique and valuable fea-
tures. The modules lend themselves
readily to individual updating, improve-
ment, and expansion, without disturb-
ing the integrity of the remaining mod-
ules. The model is capable of
developing emissions estimates from
various levels of information. In the ex-
treme, VOC emission estimates for re-
fineries and synfuel plants can be devel-
oped when only the plant type and
capacity are known. The results of these
"maximum default" cases are pre-
sented as Table 10.
Several areas for further work could
enhance the model developed in this
study. The most obvious is computeri-
zation of the model. The modular form
of this model is ideal for computeriza-
tion. A computerized version of the
model would allow rapid estimation of
VOC emissions and optimization of pro-
cessing and control techniques for min-
imizing VOC emissions. Different levels
of control could be quickly evaluated
under different scenarios. Summaries
of emissions from particular sources
across modules could be prepared with
minimal effort.
VOC emissions from fugitive process
sources (valves, pumps, flanges, etc.)
represent a significant percentage of
total VOC emissions. Emissions from
these sources are best controlled by a
leak detection and repair program. This
VOC emissions model could ultimately
incorporate EPA's leak detection (LDAR)
model to allow additional evaluation
and emission minimization studies to
be performed rapidly. The LDAR model
is currently in computer form.
The accuracy of the VOC emission es-
timate is not evaluated by the current
model. An assessment of accuracy
would require information on the accu-
racy of the emission source data as well
as the equipment counts and loading
levels. This information is available (in
the form of confidence intervals, stand-
ard errors, and other types of error
bounds) for some of the data used in
developing the model. For other
sources, new data are currently being
developed which should include an ac-
curacy assessment. The level of accu-
racy in using the model will also depend
on the level of information that the user
has available (e.g., equipment counts
versus unit capacity levels). The current
model could be updated to include lev-
els of accuracy for all default values.
These values could then be summarized
by appropriate error propagation meth-
Table 6. Refinery Modules
Module Name
Comments
1. Atmospheric Crude Distillation
2, Vacuum Crude Distillation
3. Naphtha Hydrotreating
4. Middle Distillate Hydrotreating
5. Gas Oil Hydrotreating
6. Vacuum Resid Hydrodesulfurization
7. Catalytic Reforming
8. Aromatics Extraction
9. Catalytic Cracking
10, Hydrocracking
7 1. Thermal Cracking & Visbreaking
12. Delayed Coking
13. Fluid Coking
14. Light Ends Recovery and Fractiona-
tion
15. Other Miscellaneous Fractionation
Units
16. Alkylation
17. Polymerization
18. Isomerization
19. Lubes Processing - Volatile Organic
Solvents
20. Other Lube Oil Processing
Includes desalting, heat exchange network, at-
mospheric column, and side stream strippers.
Does not include facilities for processing LPG
in non-condensible OH gases (see # 14).
For sulfur reduction in straight-run or cracked
naphthas.
For sulfur reduction in jet fuels and kerosene.
For low sulfur fuel oils, cracking feed pretreat-
ment, and lube oil hydroprocessing.
Includes Platforming, Rheniforming, and
Powerforming. Does not include naphtha hy-
drotreating (see #3).
Includes Udex, Sulfolane, and Tetra.
Includes fluid and moving bed crackers such
as the FCC, HCC, and TCC. Includes reactor,
regenerator, main fractionater, and heat ex-
change. Light ends recovery and fractionation
are not included (see # 14).
27. Asphalt Production
22. Hydrogen Production
Includes fluid coking and flexicoking.
Includes circulating oil absorption/stripping
and fractionation of recovered light ends.
Independent naphtha splitters, rerun stills,
stabilizers, etc.
Includes both HF and H^SO4 alkylation.
Production of polymer gasoline from propy-
lene and LPG mixtures.
Includes both C4 and Cs/C6 isomerization.
Includes propane deasphalting, propane de-
resining, propane dewaxing, solvent dewax-
ing, Duo Sol, solvent deasphalting, MEK de-
waxing, and MEK-toluene dewaxing.
Includes phenol extraction, furfural extraction,
acid treating, SO2 extraction, white oil manu-
facture, centrifuge and chilling, naphthenic
lube oils, clay contacting, wax deoiling, wax
sweating, wax neutral separation, and com-
pounding.
Includes asphalt oxidizing, asphalt emulsify-
ing, Dubbs pitch, and 200°F softening point
unfluxed asphalt.
Includes steam reforming and partial oxida-
tion.
-------
Table 6. Refinery Modules (Cont)
Module Name
Comments
23. Gasoline Treating
24. Other Product Treating
25. Olefins Production
26. Other Volatile Petrochemicals
27. Other Low Volatility Petrochemicals
28. Boilers
29. Slowdown System and Flares
30. Wastewater Treating
31. Sludge/Solids Handling
32. Crude and Product Storage
33. Cooling Towers
34. Product Loading Operations
Includes Merox, inhibitor sweetening, mercap-
fining, Petreco Locap, Linde, caustic treating,
and Doctor treating.
Includes clay treating, Linde, salt treating, and
blending for middle distillates and fuel oils.
Production of mixed olefins from gas, naph-
tha, and/or oil feedstocks.
Includes butadiene, alpha olefins, aromatics,
cumene, cyclohexane, aliphatics, linear paraf-
fins, heptene, MEK, MIBK, ethyl amyl ketone,
tertiary amylenes, acetone, isobutylene,
hydrodealkylation of aromatics.
Includes naphthalene, xylenes, mineral spirits,
octyl formal alkylate, styrene, phthalic anhy-
dride, nonene, diallylamine, poly isobutylene
chloride, oxalcohol, phenol, cresylic acid,
naphthenic acid, butyl alcohols, pentoxone,
sodium sulfonates, tertiary butyl toluene,
polymers, carbon black, furfural, catalysts,
mesityl oxide, isophorone, gasoline additives,
lubricant additives, and oxidates.
Independent combustion units for production
of steam and/or electricity.
Includes oil/water separators (OWS) and dis-
solved air flotation (DAF) units.
Includes any on-site treatment such as land-
farming, landfilling, and ponding.
Includes fixed roof and floating roof tanks.
Includes loading facilities for tank trucks, tank
cars, barges, ocean barges, and marine
tankers.
ods to estimate the accuracy of emis-
sion estimates generated by the model.
Obviously, it would be desirable to
update the modules periodically as ad-
ditional emission data become avail-
able. Additional emission data from
synfuel facilities should be available
during the next 5 years. As the model is
employed, users will undoubtedly find
additional needs which have not been
addressed by or included in the current
model. These needs should be cata-
logued for future model improvement
efforts.
This VOC emissions model has been
evaluated in a preliminary fashion by
applying the model to some specific fa-
cilities and comparing the emissions es-
timates to results obtained indepen-
dently (e.g., through permit proce-
dures). Field tests would be more thor-
ough and objective. Emissions could be
estimated using the model and then
measured using transect techniques.
The results from this effort could be
used to refine, calibrate, and validate
the model.
-------
Table 7. Synfuel Modules
Module Name
Comments
Coal Preparation (Thermal Drying)
Slurry Drying
Coal Gasification
Methanol Synthesis
Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis
Mobil M-Gasoline Synthesis
Direct Liquefaction
Above-Ground Oil-Shale Retorting
Acid Gas Removal
Oil-Soluble Arsenic Removal
Wastewater Solvent Extraction
Used in EDS process.
Includes gas cooling. Fugitive emissions from
some gasifiers negligible because they do not
provide significant hydrocarbons.
Includes product separation.
No default values developed due to lack of pro-
cess information.
Example: Phenosolvan process
Menu of
Process
and
Auxiliary
Modules
Repeat for Next Module
Repeat for Next Module
User
Input
Process
Module
Defaults
Process
Module
Emission
Calculations
Facility
Definition
By Module
Selection
No
— te,
u
Ini
i
ser
->ut
"i
Auxiliary
Module
Defaults
T '
Auxiliary
Module
Yes
Emission
Calculations
Store
Results
No
Complete
? /Yes
Store
Results
Baseline Emmisions Summary
Control Efficiency
Defaults
User
Input
Controlled Emissions Summary
Fjpurt 1. Logic flow diagram.
-------
Table 8. Modules of Example Small
Existing Refinery3
Process Modules:
Atmospheric Crude Distillation
Vacuum Crude Distillation
Naphtha Hydrotreating
Catalytic Reforming
Aromatics Extraction
Fluid Catalytic Cracking
Light Ends Recovery and Fractionation
Other Miscellaneous Fractionation
Alkylation
Auxiliary Modules:
Boiler
Slowdown System and Flares
Wastewater Collection and Treating
Storage—Fixed Roof Tanks
Storage-Floating Roof Tanks
Cooling Towers
Loading Racks-Trucks or Rail Cars
"Crude capacity = 50,000 bbl/day.
I Slowdown I
J System and .
I Flares \
Figun 2. Block flow diagram for the example small refinery.
8
-------
Table 9. Summary of Baseline Emissions
Source Type/Service
Pumps/Light Liquid
Pumps/Heavy Liquid
Compressors/Hydrocarbon Gas
Compressors/Hydrogen Gas
Valves/Hydrocarbon Gas
Valves/Hydrogen Gas
Valves/Light Liquids
Valves/Heavy Liquids
Connections/All
Relief Valves/Gas
Relief Valves/Liquid
Open-End Lines/All
Process Drains/All
Combustion Sources
Other Point Sources
Wastewater Collection and Treating
Cooling Towers
Slowdown System and Flares
Loading Racks
Fixed Roof Storage
Floating Roof Storage
Totals
Emissions,
Ib/day
522
53
238
6
4938
142
4950
60
748
1446
33
42
539
91
450
1056
1314
110
308
1485
2306
20,837
Percent
of Total
2.5
0.3
1.1
neg.
23.7
0.7
23.8
0.3
3.6
6.9
0.1
0.2
2.6
0.4
2.2
5.1
6.3
0.5
1.5
7.1
11.1
100.0
Table 10. Summary of "Maximum
Default" Emission Estimates
The Type A (or topping) refinery can be es-
timated by:
Emissions (Ib/day) = 4,024 + (82.3)
(Crude Rate in TO3 BPDa)
The average Type A refinery has a crude
capacity of 14,000 BPSDb.
The Type B (or cracking) refinery can be es-
timated by:
Emissions (Ib/day) = 13,649 + (82.4)
(Crude Rate in W3 BPD)
The average Type B refinery has a crude
capacity of 66,000 BPSD.
The Type C (or petrochemicals) refinery can
be estimated by:
Emissions (Ib/day) = 25,339 + (83.1)
(Crude Rate in W3 BPD)
The average Type C refinery has a crude
capacity of 150,000 BPSD.
The Type D (or lubes) refinery can be esti-
mated by:
Emissions (Ib/day) = 24,455 + (86.0)
(Crude Rate in W3 BPD)
The average Type D refinery has a crude
capacity of 187,000 BPSD.
The Type E (or integrated) refinery emis-
sions can be estimated by:
Emissions (Ib/day) = 30,774 + #6.5;
(Crude Rate in 103 BPD)
The average Type E refinery has a crude
capacity of 312,000 BPSD.
aBarrels per day.
bBarrels per stream day..
R. G. Wetherold. G. E. Harris. F. D. Skinner, and L. P. Provost are with Radian
Corporation. Austin, TX 78766.
Robert C. Lagemann is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
. The complete report consists of two volumes, entitled "A Model for Evaluation of
Refinery and Synfuels VOC Emissions Data:"
"Volume!. Technical Report and Appendix A," (Order No. PB85-215 713/AS;
Cost: $23.50)
"Volume II. Appendices B and C," (Order No. PB 85-215 721/AS; Cost:
$16.00)
The above reports 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, NC27711
, U.S. aCVERNUENT PRINTING OFFICE I«S 559-111/20640
-------
(A
xj
00
01
s
o
5'
0)
O
I
tn
K>
o>
oo
TJ
m
30
2
nm
Z2
o >
u
01
------- |