United States
[Environmental Protection
Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Research and Development
EPA/600/SR-93/080 June 1993
EPA Project Summary
Kress Indirect Dry Cooling
System: Bethlehem Steel's Coke
Plant Demonstration at Sparrows
Point, Maryland
A. George Ossman
This report evaluates the Kress Indi-
rect Dry Cooling (KIDC) process, an
innovative system for handling and
cooling coke produced from a slot-type
by-product coke oven battery. The re-
port is based on the test work and
demonstration of the system at
Bethlehem Steel Corporation's Spar-
rows Point facility in 1991, covering
both environmental and operational im-
pacts of the KIDC process. Areas cov-
ered in the report include opacity lev-
els, quenching emissions, and the im-
pact of the KIDC coke on blast furnace
operations. Also evaluated were vari-
ous performance characteristics of the
KIDC system, including reliability, cycle
time, coke cooling requirements, and
costs. Unfortunately, the abbreviated
test program, caused by the idling of
coke production at Sparrows Point, lim-
ited the experience and data collected
during the demonstration.
The data presented in this report have
not been thoroughly audited, and the
conclusions are not approved or en-
dorsed by the Agency. Because of the
sudden termination of the project and
the associated quality assurance effort,
it was not possible to perform the de-
tailed laboratory and data audits that
had been planned.
This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory, Research Tri-
angle Park, NC, to announce key find-
ings 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 Kress Indirect Dry Cooling (KIDC)
process is an innovative method of cap-
turing and cooling coke produced from a
by-product coke battery. It offers the po-
tential to reduce significantly the emis-
sions from coke pushing and quenching
operations. The KIDC demonstration was
conducted at Bethlehem Steel Corporation's
Sparrows Point, MD, facility using an existing
4-m by-product coke battery. During the dem-
onstration, 321 KIDC pushes were performed.
This report describes the KIDC process and
provides an evaluation based on preliminary
baseline and demonstration emission testing
data.
The KIDC concept has been under de-
velopment by the Kress Corporation since
the early 1980s. On June 6, 1987, the first
prototype testing started at National Steel
Corporation's Granite City Division in Gran-
ite City, IL. During this testing, 27 pushes
were successfully performed by the KIDC
system. In December 1988, the first dem-
onstration of the KIDC prototype occurred
at Bethlehem's Sparrows Point plant with
the successful demonstration of 12 pushes.
Following this testing, Bethlehem signed
a contract with the Kress Corporation to
install a full scale demonstration system.
The installation was to occur in two phases:
Phase I was the installation and demon-
stration of the new technology on coke
oven battery No. 11, and Phase II was to
be an extension of the system to include
controls on battery No. 12 if the demon-
stration on battery No. 11 was successful.
Start-up of the KIDC system began on
June 7, 1991, on battery No. 11. This
start-up testing of the system continued
-------
for about 3-1/2 months until the com-
mencement of the performance demon-
stration early in October. This demonstra-
tion ended prematurely, however, with the
idling of all coke production at Bethlehem's
Sparrows Point facility in December. The
results of the demonstration are reported
based on KIDC pushes made during the
limited 2-month demonstration. The re-
sults indicate that the technology has po-
tential to reduce pushing and quenching
emissions over many existing control tech-
nologies. A longer demonstration, how-
ever, would provide a better assessment
of long-term operability of the KIDC sys-
tem in the rigors of a coke oven environ-
ment.
Process Description
The KIDC System
The KIDC system is a patented process
of the Kress Corporation for cooling coke
after removal from a coke oven. It was
designed to control emissions during both
the pushing and quenching operations.
The KIDC process confines the emissions
completely during the push, unlike previ-
ous emission control technologies that typi-
cally rely on filtering or scrubbing the emis-
sions after they have escaped. The con-
ventional pushing technologies used for
the baseline testing reported here utilized
a water spay during the push (to reduce
particulate emissions) or a Chemico con-
trol car.
The KIDC system completely eliminates
the wet quenching process and relies in-
stead on an indirect dry cooling process.
The hot coke never comes into direct con-
tact with the cooling water, thus eliminat-
ing the vigorous evolution of steam and
consequent entrainment of particulate mat-
ter.
The KIDC carrier is impressively large,
weighing about 400,000 Ib (180,000 kg),
with 8 ft (2.4 m) rubber tires. It carries and
manipulates a 50 ft (15.2 m) long, 13 ft (4
m) high, and 3 ft (0.9 m) wide KIDC con-
tainer (box). Its 24 or more hydraulic cylin-
ders handle the intricate operations de-
scribed below. These hydraulic cylinders
have computer/electronic sensors for ex-
act positioning and control. Auxiliary equip-
ment includes 10 or more KIDC boxes, a
support rail, a maintenance building, a
quench station, and a fueling station. The
support rail is used to balance the carrier's
weight, counteract pushing forces, and
maintain the carrier at a precise distance
from the oven. Other functions of the KIDC
carrier include door removal/replacement,
door and jamb cleaning, and catching coke
debris when the door is operated.
The KIDC box, slightly wider and deeper
than the coke charge, is positioned flush
against the coke oven and receives the
push. The KIDC process utilizes the con-
ventional push-side apparatus. After the
push is completed and the pusher ram is
withdrawn, the KIDC box's guillotine door
closes. The volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) are controlled by a flare at the
rear of the box, which is ignited during the
push or start of travel. During the push,
the KIDC carrier also cleans the cokeside
door and door jamb, which should facili-
tate meeting the proposed National Emis-
sions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollut-
ants (NESHAP) regulations on door leaks.
The jamb cleaner was, however, not oper-
able during the demonstration. After the
push, the box is transferred to the quench-
ing station. During travel, VOCs also evolve
and burn through small leaks at the guillo-
tine door. The carrier runs cooling water
on the outside of the box during the push
and travel primarily to protect the box from
overheating.
At the quench station, the carrier moves
the box from the carrier into one of the
nine cooling racks. Cooling water runs
over the box to cool the coke. A
recirculation fan, which derives power from
a drive wheel in the quench rack, aids this
cooling. During the first part of the quench-
ing process, VOCs still evolve and burn at
the guillotine door. After cooling, the car-
rier removes the box from the rack, car-
ries it to the receiving station where the
guillotine door is opened and the box is
emptied by tilting.
Coke Oven Batteries
A typical by-product coke oven battery
consists of 50 to 80 slot ovens. Each
oven is charged from the top with coal
specially blended for metallurgical coke
production. This coal is pyrolyzed by heat-
ing the sidewalls of these narrow ovens to
about 1150°C for 16 to 48 hours. The
resulting product consists of elemental car-
bon and other non-volatile materials that
were present in the initial coal blend. This
product is essential to blast furnace op-
eration where molten iron is produced.
The facilities on which the demonstra-
tion was carried out were Sparrows Point
batteries No. 11 and 12: each is an
underjet 4-m battery with 65 ovens. These
batteries were constructed by Koppers and
commissioned in 1955 and 1957, respec-
tively. The condition of the batteries had,
however, deteriorated significantly with
age. At the time that testing began in
1991, 22 ovens were in service on battery
No. 11 with coking times that ranged from
23 to 48 hours. In general, production on
battery No. 11 was 18 ovens pushed per
day. This production was scheduled dur-
ing two shifts, 11 pm - 7 am and 11 am -
7 pm, because of the small number of
ovens available and to balance gas flows
in order to obtain a consistent coke oven
operation.
Two conventional pushing emission con-
trols were utilized on batteries No. 11 and
12: one was a Chemico scrubber car, and
the other was a water spray car. These
conventional controls established a
baseline against which the KIDC perfor-
mance was evaluated.
The Test Program
The test plan for the KIDC program
consisted of (1) evaluating the operational
impact of the KIDC system on the coke
oven facilities and operations, and (2)
evaluating the impact of the KIDC system
on pushing emissions; quenching emis-
sions; top, side, and door emissions; coke
quality; blast furnace operations; and gen-
eral area air quality.
The demonstration test program was
scheduled for a 30-week period, which
included a Performance Test lasting 4
weeks and an Operational Test lasting an
additional 26 weeks. The test program
was cut short, however, as a result of
Bethlehem's decision to cease all coke
oven production at Sparrows Point at the
beginning of December 1991.
The baseline program was designed to
provide an understanding of where the
existing operation was with respect to a
number of parameters that might change
from the implementation of the KIDC sys-
tem. Some of the baseline parameters
measured and reported on included coal
and coke quality; coke pushing, travel,
and handling emissions; door emissions;
quench and makeup water analysis; area
monitoring of cokeside machinery; and
evaluating the impact of coke quality
changes on blast furnace performance.
Environmental Observations
EPA Method 9 was utilized to deter-
mine the maximum opacity during the
push, and EPA Method 22 was utilized to
determine the total duration of visible emis-
sions. These methods were utilized for
observation from the cokeside, the topside,
and the pusherside of the battery during
the pushing operation. In addition, the coke
discharge and handling emissions were
observed from both the conventional and
KIDC systems. Readings were performed
similarly for both the conventional pushing
operation and the KIDC system. Cokeside
observations for the KIDC system were,
however, more specific so that emissions
-------
could be evaluated based on the different
operations and areas from which emis-
sions occur in the system.
Results indicated that cokeside visible
emissions were reduced significantly with
the KIDC system (see Table 1). These
reductions were partially offset, however,
by increases in emissions from the topside,
pushside, and discharge (see Tables 2-
4). These increases were minimal, how-
ever, when compared with the large re-
duction in cokeside emissions attained.
KIDC Box Gas Sampling
During the demonstration test program,
sampling and analysis of the gases con-
tained within a KIDC box was performed
by Keystone Environmental Resources,
Inc., to provide both qualitative and quan-
titative analyses of the gases that are
held in the KIDC box at the start and the
end of the cooling cycle. A number of
volatile and semi-volatile compounds were
analyzed, including a library scan to iden-
tify the most prominent components. Three
tests were performed during two cooling
cycles. The samplings took place at 5
minutes and at 2 hours into the cooling
cycle.
The results of these analyses show that
VOC concentrations are extremely low for
the gases held in the box. The semi-vola-
tile compounds (SVOCs) investigated were
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs); phenols and cresols; and phtha-
lates. Many of the targeted PAHs were
found above the detection level but at
very low levels. The analysis for phenols
and cresols indicated the presence of two
of the six targeted compounds. None of
the targeted phthalate compounds were
found above detection levels.
Area Monitoring
Area monitoring of the ambient air qual-
ity in the area of the coke oven bench of
batteries No. 11 and 12 was performed.
Samples were obtained in accordance with
industrial hygiene methods. The constitu-
ents sampled for were total nuisance par-
ticulate and the benezene soluble fraction
of total particulate matter (BSFTPM). This
constituent is also sometimes referred to
as benzene soluble organics (BSO). These
samples were obtained over an 8-hour
period in the area of the conventional coke
oven door machine. This area was cho-
sen because of its close proximity to the
pushing operation. Each sample was con-
verted to a time weighted average con-
centration (TWA). As a result of the lim-
ited operation of the KIDC system, no
reliable comparison of ambient air quality
Table 1. Comparison of Visible Emission Observations for Pushing Emission Control Systems
(Average Readings)
Operation
Shenango Car Chemico Car KIDC
Pushing - Ave. Max. % Opacity
Jamb Interface
Flare Stack
Before Ignition
After Ignition and Travel
Travel - Ave. Max. % Opacity
Cumulative Time of Emissions - sec.
Pushing
Travel
Relative Quantity of Emissions
(Engineering Judgement)"
69.5
NA
NA
NA
33.1
74.7
46.7
Large
67.6
NA
NA
NA
29.0
61.9
47.5
Large
NA
9.1
20.4
12.2
NA
72.1
120.6
Small
could be made between the baseline and
demonstration test periods.
Quenching Emissions
One of the environmental benefits of
the KIDC system is the elimination of
quench tower emissions. This testing pro-
gram attempted to estimate the magni-
tude of the current quenching emissions
from the operation of batteries No. 11 and
12 at Sparrows Point. A sampling pro-
gram was undertaken to determine a num-
ber of the constituents in the quench wa-
ter that might be evolved in the quenching
process.
In general, it has been shown that one
of the most reliable indicators of total par-
ticulate emissions is the amount of total
dissolved solids (TDS) in the quench wa-
ter. With the assistance of EPA, the spe-
cific design of the quench tower utilized
for the battery 11 and 12 quenching op-
eration was evaluated and their potential
emissions were assessed.
Based on previous testing at other steel
mills that appear to have similar physical
design characteristics as Sparrows Point's
battery 11 and 12 quenching operation,
an equation was developed to provide a
correlation between TDS and pounds of
particulate emissions per ton of coal
charged:
E= 1. 31 + 0.000144Y
where
NA - Not Applicable. ' "
'Observation of videotapes will provide the reader with a better comparison of the relative magnitude of
the quality of emissions released by the respective pushing emission control systems.
E = Particulate emissions (pounds
per ton of coal charged)
Y =TDS (mg/L).
Coke Quality
A major objective of the KIDC test pro-
gram was to determine the quality and
yield of the coke produced by the KIDC
system and to compare these results to
the coke produced by the conventional
wet quenched process during the same
time period. Improvements were seen in
reduced moisture levels and an increase
in stability. Although data indicated a re-
duction in size, this is believed to have
occurred from the specific coke handling
characteristics of the system and not from
the KIDC process itself. The effect of these
changes on blast furnace performance was
evaluated based on Bethlehem's Primary
Facilities (BALWAX) model.
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1993 - 750-071/80008
-------
A. George Ossman is with Bethlehem Steel Corp., Bethlehem, PA 18016-7699.
Chester A. Vogel is the EPA Project Officer (see below)
The complete report consists of two volumes entitled "Kress Indirect Dry Cooling
System: Bethlehem Steel's Coke Plant Demonstration at Sparrows Point, Mary-
land:"
"Volume 1. Technical Report and Appendices A-F," (Order No. PB93-191 302;
Cost: $36.50, subject to change).
"Volume 2. Appendices G-N," (Order No. PB93-191 310; Cost: $44.50, subject
to change).
The above reports 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
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/600/SR-93/080
------- |