AP-42
                  SUPPLEMENT C
                 SEPTEMBER 1990
  SUPPLEMENT C
         TO
   COMPILATION
        OF
  AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION FACTORS
            i
     VOLUME I:
 STATIONARY POINT
 AND AREA SOURCES

-------
                               PUBLICATIONS IN SERIES
        Issue
 COMPILATION OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION FACTORS (Fourth Edition)
 SUPPLEMENT A
   Introduction
   Section 1.1
           1.2
           1.3
           1.4
           1.6
           1.7
           5.16
           7.1
           7.2
           7.3
           7.4
           7.5
           7.6
           7.7
           7.8
           7.-10
           7.11
           8.1
           8.3
           8.6
           8.10
           8.13
           8.15
           8.19.2
           8.22
           8.24
          10.1
          11.2.6
  Appendix C.1

  Appendix C.2
                                                                           Date
                                                       9/85

                                                      10/86
 Bituminous And Subbituminous Coal Combustion
 Anthracite Coal Combustion •
 Fuel Oil Combustion
 Natural Gas Combustion
 Wood Waste Combustion In Boilers
 Lignite Combustion
 Sodium Carbonate
 Primary Aluminum Production
 Coke Production
 Primary Copper Smelting
 Ferroalloy Production
 Iron And Steel Production
 Primary Lead Smelting
 Zinc Smelting              :
 Secondary Aluminum Operations
•G-ray fron—Foundrie's"	~ "	       	
 Secondary Lead Processing
Asphaltic Concrete Plants
Bricks  And Related Clay Products
Portland Cement Manufacturing
Concrete Batching
Glass Manufacturing
Lime  Manufacturing
Crushed Stone  Processing
Taconite Ore Processing
Western Surface  Coal Mining
Chemical  Wood  Pulping
Industrial  Paved Roads
Particle  Size  Distribution Data And Sized Emission Factors
  For Selected Sources
Generalized Particle Size Distributions
SUPPLEMENT B
  Section 1.1
          1.2
          1.10
          1.11
          2.1
          2.5
          4.2
          4.12
Bituminous And Subbituminous Coal Combustion
Anthracite Coal Combustion
Residential Wood Stoves
Waste Oil Combustion
Refuse Combustion
Sewage Sludge Incineration
Surface Coating
Polyester Resin Plastics Product Fabrication
                                                      9/88
                                     iii

-------
  Section 5.15
          6.4
          8.15
          8.19.2
          11.1
          11.2.1
          11.2.3
       •   11.2.6
          11.2.7
  Appendix C.3
 Soap And Detergents
 Grain Elevators And Processing Plants
 Lime Manufacturing
 Crushed Stone Processing
 Wildfires And Prescribed Burning
 Unpaved Roads
 Aggregate Handling And Storage Piles
 Industrial Paved Roads
 Industrial Wind Erosion
 Silt Analysis Procedures     [
SUPPLEMENT C
  Section 1.10
          2.1
          2.5
          4.2.2.13
          4.2.2.14
          5.19
          7.6
          7.10
          10.1
          11.1
          11.2.6
          11.2.7
          11.3
  Appendix C.2
  Appendix D
  Appendix E
Residential Wood  Stoves           '.•••••        .
Refuse Combustion     .       <         .
Sewage Sludge 'Incineration .•. ':
Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Industry
Surface Coating Of Plastic Parts  For  Business  Machines
Synthetic Fiber Manufacturing '•            '
Primary Lead Smelting            •   .
Gray Iron Foundries   v. .:.  . ..•  -.•    •••:•'      :  •
Chemical Wood Pulping  .                    ,      ,
Wildfires And Prescribed  Burning   •  '     :':
Industrial Paved Roads  •         .. '   . .   :   •; • .
Industrial Wind Erosion
Explosives.Detonation  '            .         '
Generalized Particle Size Distributions      '....•
Procedures For Sampling Surface/Bulk Dust  Loading
Procedures For Laboratory Analysis 'Of Surface/Bulk Dust
  Loading Slamples'
                                                       9/90
                                     IV

-------


CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION 	 	 . 	 	
1.











2.





3.









4.












EXTERNAL COMBUSTION SOURCES 	 	
1 . 1 Bituminous Coal Combustion 	 • 	 	 	
1 . 2 Anthracite Coal Combustion 	
1 . 3 Fuel Oil Combustion 	 	
1 . 4 Natural Gas Combustion 	 	 . . . f 	
1.5 Liquified Petroleum Gas Combustion 	 	 	
1 . 6 Wood Waste Combustion In Boilers . . . . 	 	
1 . 7 Lignite Combustion 	 	
1 . 8 Bagasse Combustion In Sugar Mills . . .' 	 	
1 . 9 Residential Fireplaces 	 	
1 . 10 Residential Wood Stoves 	 	 	 .....: 	
1 . 11 Waste Oil Combustion 	 	 	 	 	
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
2 . 1 Refuse Combustion 	 ...;... 	
2 . 2 Automobile Body Incineration 	 	 	
2 . 3 Conical Burners 	
2 . 4 Open Burning 	 	 	 	 	
2 . 5 Sewage Sludge Incineration 	 	
STATIONARY INTERNAL COMBUSTION SOURCES 	 	 ." 	 ;: 	
Glossary Of Terms 	 	 	 	 	 . . . 	 	
Highway Vehicles ...... 	 ....•„• 	 	
Off Highway Mobile Sources 	 	 	
3.1 Stationary Gas Turbines For Electric Utility
Power Plants 	 	 	 	
3.2 Heavy Duty Natural. Gas Fired Pipeline1
Compressor Engines 	
3.3 Gasoline And Diesel Industrial Engines 	 	 	
3.4 Stationary Large Bore And Dual Fuel Engines 	 	
EVAPORATION LOSS SOURCES 	
4.1 • Dry Cleaning 	
4 . 2 Surface Coating 	
4.3 Storage Of Organic Liquids 	
4.4 Transportation And Marketing Of Petroleum Liquids 	
4.5 Cutback Asphalt, Emulsified Asphalt And Asphalt Cement
4 . 6 Solvent Degreasing 	 	 	
4 . 7 Waste Solvent Reclamation 	 	
4 . 8 Tank And Drum Cleaning 	 	
4 . 9 Graphic Arts 	
4.10 Commercial/Consumer Solvent Use 	 	
4. 11 Textile Fabric Printing 	 	
4.12 Polyester Resin Plastics Product Fabrication 	

Page
1
.. 1.1-1
.. 1.1-1
.. 1.2-1
.. 1.3-1
.. 1.4-1
.. 1.5-1
.. 1.6-1
.. 1.7-1
.. 1.8-1
.. 1.9-1
. . 1.10-1
1.11-1
.. 2.0-1
.. 2.1-1
.. 2.2-1
.. • 2.3-1
. . 2.4-1
2.5-1
.. 3.0-1
. . Vol . II
. . Vol. II
. . Vol. II

.. 3.1-1

.. 3.2-1
.. 3.3-1
3.4-1
.. 4.1-1
.. 4.1-1
.. 4.2-1
.. 4.3-1
.. 4.4-1
.. 4.5-1
.. 4.6-1
. . 4.7-1
.. 4.8-1
. . 4.9-1
. . 4.10-1
. . 4.11-1
.. 4.12-1

-------
                                         ;                          Page

CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY	 .,	  5.1-1
5.1    Adipic Acid	  5.1-1
5.2    Synthetic Ammonia	  5.2-1
5 .3    Carbon Black	-	• • • •  5.3-1
5.4    Charcoal	  5.4-1
5.5    Chlor-Alkali . .'.	  5.5-1
5.6    Explosives	•  5.6-1
5.7    Hydrochloric Acid 	  5.7-1
5.8    'Hydrofluoric Acid	  5.8-1
5.9    Nitric Acid 	  5.9-1
5.10   Paint And Varnish 	. . . .	 5.10-1
5.11   Phosphoric Acid	<	• 5.11-1
5.12   Phthalic Anhydride 	 5.12-1
5.13   Plastics 	 5.13-1
5.14   Printing Ink	 5.14-1
5 .15   Soap And Detergents	 5,15-1
5.16   Sodium Carbonate  	. . .	 5.16-1
5.17   Sulfuric Acid 	:	 5.17-1
5 .18   Sulfur Recovery	 5.18-1
5.19   Synthetic Fibers  	'			 5.19-1
5.20   Synthetic Rubber  .	;	 5.20-1
5.21   Terephthalic Acid	 5.21-1
5.22   Lead Alkyl  ...„..,	,		 5 .22-1
5.23   Pharmaceuticals Production	 5.23-1
5 .24   Maleic Anhydride	•' -	 5 .24-1

FOOD  AND AGRICULTURAL  INDUSTRY 	   6.1-1
 6.1~"  Alfalfa  Dehydrating  . . : .	'.	   6.1-1
 6.2   Coffee Roasting			   6.2-1
 6.3   Cotton Ginning	   6 .3-1
 6.4   Grain Elevators And  Processing Plants 	   6.4-1
 6.5   Fermentation	   6.5-1
 6.6   Fish Processing 	•	   6.6-1
 6.7   Meat Smokehouses	   6.7-1
 6.8   Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizers  	   6.8-1
 6.9    Orchard Heaters 	   6.9-1
 6.10   Phosphate Fertilizers	  6 • 10-1
 6.11   Starch Manufacturing 	  6 • 11-1
 6.12   Sugar Cane Processing . .T . . . .  '.,".":'.'~.'. :	  6.12-1
 6.13   Bread Baking .	:.	  6.13-1
 6.14   Urea	  6.14-1
 6.15   Beef Cattle Feedlots 	:	  6.15-1
 6.16   Defoliation And Harvesting Of Cotton	  6.16-1
 6.17   Harvesting Of Grain	  6.17-1
 6 .18   Ammonium Sulf ate	  6.18-1

 METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY	.	;	  7'1"1
 7.1    Primary Aluminum Production	  7.1-1
 7.2    Coke Production  . . ...	  7 .2-1
 7.3    Primary Copper Smelting  	 	  7.3-1
 7.4    Ferroalloy Production  	  7.4-1

-------
                                                                        Page
8.
9.
10.
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.10
7.11
7.12
7.13
7.14
7.15
7.16
7.17
7.18
Iron And Steel Production '. 	 	 	
Primary Lead Smelting 	
Zinc Smelting 	 	 	
Secondary Aluminum Operations 	
Secondary Copper Smelting And Alloying 	 ;
Gray Iron Foundries 	 ; .
Secondary Lead. Processing 	
Secondary Magnesium Smelting 	
Steel Foundries 	
Secondary Zinc Processing . ; 	
Storage Battery Production 	 	
Lead Oxide And Pigment Production 	
Miscellaneous Lead Products 	 	
Leadbearing Ore Crushing And Grinding 	
MINERAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY 	 ..........
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
8.9
8.10
8.11
8.12
8.13
8.14
8.15
8.16
8.17
8.18
8.19
8.20
8.21
8.22
8.23
8.24
Asphaltic Concrete Plants 	 	
Asphalt Roofing 	
Bricks And Related Clay Products ............
Calcium Carbide .Manuf acturing 	 	 	 	 	
Castable Refractories 	
Portland Cement Manufacturing 	 	
Ceramic Clay Manufacturing 	 	 	 	
Clay And Fly Ash Sintering 	 	
Coal Cleaning 	 	 	 	
Concrete Batching 	 	 . . . . .: 	
Glass Fiber Manufacturing . . . .-.. 	 	
Frit Manufacturing 	 , . 	 	
Glass Manufacturing 	 J . . 	 	
Gypsum Manufacturing 	
Lime Manufacturing ... 	 	 	 .•
Mineral Wool Manufacturing 	
Perlite Manufacturing 	 , . . . 	 	
Phosphate Rock Processing 	 	 	
Construction Aggregate Processing- ..;.... 	
[Reserved] 	 	
Coal Conversion 	 	 	
Taconite Ore Processing 	 ; 	
Metallic Minerals Processing . ". . . . . i'.". 	 	
Western Surface Coal Mining 	 i 	
PETROLEUM INDUSTRY 	 	 	 	
9.1
9.2
WOOD
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
Petroleum Refining 	 	 	
Natural Gas Processing 	 , 	
PRODUCTS INDUSTRY 	 	 	
Chemical Wood Pulping 	
Pulpboard 	
Plywood Veneer "And Layout Operations 	
Woodworking Waste Collection Operations 	
	 	 7.5-1
	 7.6-1
	 7.7-1
	 7.8-1
	 7.9-1
	 7.10-1
	 7.11-1
	 7.12-1
	 7.13-1
	 7.14-1
. 	 	 7.15-1
	 7.16-1
	 7.17-1
	 7.18-1
	 	 8.1-1
	 8.1-1
	 8.2-1
	 	 	 8.3-1
. . 	 	 8.4-1
	 8.5-1
	 8.6-1
	 8.7-1
	 	 8.8-1
	 8.9-1
	 8.10-1
	 8.11-1
	 8.12-1
	 8.13-1
	 	 8.14-1
	 8.15-1
	 	 	 8.16-1
	 8.17-1
	 ;. 8.18-1
	 8.19-1
	 8.20-1
	 8.21-1
	 8.22-1
	 	 . .. 8.23-1
	 8.24-1
	 	 9.1-1
	 9.1-1
	 9.2-1
	 ;. 	 10.1-1
	 10.1-1
	 10.2-1
	 	 . . . ; . 10.3-1
	 10.4-1
                                      vii

-------
                                              :                          Page

11.  MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES 	 H. i_]_
     11.1   Wildfires And Prescribed Burning	 11.1-1
     11.2   Fugitive Dust Sources	 11.2-1
   •  11.3   Explosives Detonation	 11.3-1
APPENDIX A  Miscellaneous Data And Conversion Factors

APPENDIX B  (Reserved For Future Use)         ',
                                                          A-l
APPENDIX C.I   Particle Size Distribution Data And Sized Emission
                 Factors For Selected Sources	•  C.l-1

APPENDIX C.2   Generalized Particle Size Distributions 	  C.2-1
APPENDIX C.3

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E
Silt Analysis- Procedures	  c. 3-1

Procedures For Sampling Surface!/Bulk Dust Loading ....  D-l

Procedures For Laboratory Analysis Of Surface/Bulk
  Dust Loading Samples 	  E-l
                                     viii

-------
                             ,    KEY WORD INDEX


Acid
  Adipic	   : .     .                     g .,
  Hydrochloric	,_ _          ' ' '	   g ' 7
  Hydrofluoric	L . . .              	 5 ' 8
  .Phosphoric	          	s'n
  Sulf uric	   5*17
  Terephthalic	             	   5' 91
Adipic Acid	^           '  	   5 ',
Aggregate,  Construction	,.	.r	\\	   8*19
Aggregate Storage  Piles     ;
  Fugitive  Dust  Sources	:	    -j^ 2
Agricultural  Tilling        \
  Fugitive  Dust  Sources	i	            -Q 2
Alfalfa Dehydrating	\ _   	   g' ^
Alkali, Chlor-	   5*5
Alloys
  Ferroalloy  Production	         -74
  Secondary Copper Smelting  And Alloying	'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.   l'.9
Aluminum
  Primary Aluminum Production	     7 ]_
  Secondary Aluminum Operations	   7*8
Ammonia, Synthetic	;	  _ _ _'	   5*2
Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizers	 . . . J	       6*8
Anhydride,  Phthalic	„	   5 ' 12
Anthracite  Coal  Combustion.	        ' '   ' '   j_' 2
Ash
  Fly Ash Sintering	;	;	    g g
Asphalt
  Cutback Asphalt,  Emulsified Asphalt And Asphalt Cement	   4.5
  Roofing	                      g 2
Asphaltic Concrete Plants	          g ]_
Automobile  Body  Incineration	      2 2

Bagasse Combustion In Sugar Mills	   1, g
Baking,  Bread	       '   6*13
Bark
  Wood Waste Combustion In Boilers	   1 6
Batching, Concrete	           g ]_Q
Battery
  Storage Battery  Production	   1.15
Beer Production
  Fermentation	              g 5
Bituminous  Coal  Combustion	                  "LI
Bread Baking	„	,	    6.' 13
Bricks And Related Clay Prodxxcts	:	\\   3*3
Burners ,  Conical (Teepee)	    2 3
Burning,  Open	 . ,;	!...!!   2". 4

-------
Calcium Carbide Manufacturing	;	   8.4
Cane
  Sugar CAne Processing	. . . .	]	  6  12
Carbon Black	,	   5*3
Carbonate                                        :  '
  Sodium Carbonate Manufacturing	   5.16
Castable Refractories	 .	; . . . ;	    g  5
Cattle                                           '.    "'	
  Beef Cattle Feedlots	.....'	j	   g". 15
Cement                     .                      ,     '
  Asphalt	 ;	   4.5
   Portland Cement Manufacturing	,....'.	   8.6
Ceramic Clay Manufacturing	 . . . J	  .    8*7
Charcoal	    5  4
Chemical Wood Pulping	 10' 1
Chlor-Alkali	          '                          5*5
Clay                                	"" 1	•••••••	••    ••
  Bricks And Related Clay Products	 . . . .:.	   8.3
  Ceramic Clay Manufacturing	. ... .	   8.7
  Clay And Fly Ash Sintering	   8.' 8
Cleaning                                         }
  Coal	...'..'	  ...              8  9
  Dry	.....-..'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.I}'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.   4'.!
  Tank And Drum	;	        4  %
Coal                                          '    	
  Anthracite Coal Combustion	.".....:...	   1.2
  Bituminous Coal Combustion.	;	  \  i
  Cleaning		    8.9
  Conversion	.•	            8  21
Coating,  Surface	(	      42
Coffee Roasting	'....•	      6  2
Coke Manufacturing	•	     .     7  2
Combustion                                       ;
  Anthracite Coal	,	'	   ^ ' 2'
  Bagasse,  In Sugar Mills	   I'.g
  Bituminous Coal	'	;	                  11
  Fuel Oil		.	..............:.......................   1.3
  Internal	 Vol _ ' IT
  Lignite	, . . . ,	          17
  Liquified Petroleum Gas	:. .'	   X. 5
  Natural Gas	:	    14
  Orchard Heaters	   g  9
  Residential Fireplaces	;	......'	   1.9
  Waste Oil	    l'II
  Wood Stoves	      ^  j_0
Concrete                                         !
  Asphaltic Concrete Plants	   8.1
  Concrete Batching	   8 .10
Conical (Teepee) Burners	   2.3
Construction Aggregate	'.	   8.19
Construction Operations
  Fugitive Dust Sources	 . .'	'	 11.2
Conversion,  Coal	   8  21
  Wood Waste In Boilers	
                                       x

-------
Copper
  Primary  Copper  Smelting	            73
  Secondary copper  Smelting And Alloying	;	............    79
Cotton
  Defoliation And Harvesting	         6 16
  Ginning	           	  63

Dacron
  Synthetic Fibers	                   5 19
Defoliation, Cotton	         '  	  6 16
Degreasing,  Solvent	. . .	.'.'"'.""''  4*6
Dehydrating, Alfalfa	'.'...'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'."'  6' 1
Detergents
  Soap And Detergents. ;	             5 -^
Detonation,  Explosives	„....•	',[	 11' 3
Drum
  Tank And Drum Cleaning	; 4 _         4 g
Dry Cleaning	j       ','.'.'.'.	  41
Dual Fuel  Engines,  Stationary	'	  3*4
Dust                                            ",	
  Fugitive Dust Sources	'	       11 2
Dust Loading Sampling Procedures	 'App'  D
Dust Loading Analysis	',	  App"  E

Electric Utility  Power Plants,  Gas.	       3 -±
Elevators,  Feed And Grain Mills	  ' ' '	  g '4
Explosives	_	              ' '  c'g
Explosives Detonation.	 ,	      '     11*3

Feed
  Beef Cattle Feedlots. . . . .	  g ^5
  Feed And Grain  Mills And  Elevators	.".	  6'. 4
Fermentation	           	  g'c
Fertilizers
  Ammonium Nitrate.	              g g
  Phosphate	            6 10
Ferroalloy Production.,	                                   7 'A
Fiber	
  Glass Fiber Manufacturing. . :	  g il
Fiber, Synthetic	 ...... ................  519
Fires      ..    .....     .        ,                   ,
  Forest Wildfires And Prescribed Burning	 11.1
Fireplaces, Residential	  i' 9
Fish Processing	                 g g
Fly Ash      .	'	
  Clay And Fly Ash Sintering. „	   g _ g
Foundries                     '
  Gray Iron Foundries	,;	   7.10
  Steel Foundries	,	          7 ^3
Frit Manufacturing	       8 ' 12
Fuel Oil Combustion	._. .„.	            1*3
Fugitive Dust Sources	,;	          11' 2
                                      X3.

-------
Gas Combustion, Liquified Petroleum	  1.5
Gas, Natural
  Natural Gas  Combustion	: . .	  1.4
  Natural Gas  Processing..,'.'		  9.2
Gasoline/Diesel Engines.	,	  3.3
Ginning, Cotton	, . .•	  6.3
Glass Manufacturing	,	  8 .13
.Glass Fiber Manufacturing	  8.11
Grain                                           :
  Feed And Grain  Mills And Elevators	;	  6.4
  Harvesting Of Grain	;	  6 .17
Gravel
  Sand And Gravel Processing	:	*	  8.19
Gray Iron. Foundries	.		 .  7.10
Gypsum Manufacturing	.«	4	  8 .14

Harvesting
  Cotton	  6.16
  Grain	%. . . .	•.			  6.17
Heaters, Orchard	  6.9
Hydrochloric Acid	„	..........	  5.7
rHydrofluoric Acid	,	  5.8

Incineration
  Automobile Body	 1	  2.2
  Conical  (Teepee)	.'	,	:	,	  2.3
  Refuse	  2.1
  Sewage  Sludge	  2.5
Industrial Engines,  Gasoline And Diesel	'.	  3.3
1 Ink, Printing. . . . . . .	;	  5 .14
Internal  Combustion Engines
  Highway Vehicles	Vol. II
•  Off Highway  Mobile Sources	.......;	 Vol. II
  ' Off Highway  Stationary Sources	    3.0
Iron
  Ferroalloy Production	•	  7.4
  Gray  Iron Foundries	  7 .10
  Iron And Steel  Mills	  7.5
  Taconite Ore Processing	;	  8.22

Large Bore Engines	  3 ; 4
Lead
  Leadbearing  Ore Crushing And Grinding	;.......	  7.18
  Miscellaneous  Lead Products	.'	  7 .17
  Primary Lead Smelting	'.	  7.6
   Secondary Lead Smelting	'	  7 .11
Lead Alkyl		  5.22
Lead Oxide And Pigment Production	  7.16
Leadbearing Ore  Crushing And Grinding		  7.18
Lignite  Combustion	  1.7
Lime ManufacturihgTr. . . . . .~. . . . . . .T.~.".".".". . . ..... . . . . . . . .~".	  8.15
Liquified Petroleum Gas Combustion	  1.5
                                       xii

-------
 Magnesium   .         .  .    '.     .          ••'•'•.....    ••-..-    .-• .   ..
   Secondary Magnesium Smelting	   •.    7.12
 Magnetic Tape Manufacturing;	,	;.......;....... ; > 1 .  . 4^2
 Maleic Anhydride	'/.'..;	        . 5 24
 Marketing   .                          ,                 :    •
   Transportation And Marketing  Of Petroleum Liquids	   4.4
 Meat Smokehouses	          67
. Mineral Wool Manufacturing	..;....	..„.'.   s!l6
 Mobile Sources
  •.Highway	„	.....;...;......	,. . . Vol. II
  'Off Highway	...;.„	,.			.. Vol. II

 Natural Gas Combustion	;	........   1 4
 Natural Gas Fired Pipeline Compressors	   3.2
 Natural >Gas Processing	,.	..............:    92
 Nitric Acid Manufacturing	-;	   5 9

 Off Highway Mobile Sources	,	.. .. Vol. II
 Off Highway Stationary Sources	    ,                            30
 Oil                               .             :      	'	,.' '.      .   .'
  ". Fuel Oil. Combustion	\	.;....	  1 .,3
   Waste. Oil. Combustion	,	.:.;.. 1 11
 Open Burning	        2 4
 Orchard Heaters	  6 9
 Ore Processing                                 ,             ...
  .Leadbearing Ore Crushing And Grinding	•'...........  7.18
   Taconite	  .	      '8 22
 Organic Liquids,  Storage. . .	  4.3

 Paint And Varnish Manufacturing	;	  -5.10
 Paved Roads                                       . .     .      .  . ..
   Fugitive Dust Sources.  . .	; .  11.2
 Perlite Manufacturing	......;..;....  8 17
 Petroleum                                      :
   Liquified Petroleum Gas Combustion	  1.5
   Refining	;	•. . . .  9.1
   Storage Of Organic Liquids	; . .  4.3
   Transportation And Marketing Of. Petroleum  Liquids		  4.4
 Pharmaceuticals Production	,....: . . .-. . ..... .'....... ... .  5.23
 Phosphate Fertilizers	;	  6.10
 Phosphate Rock Processing	,	  8.18
 Phosphoric Acid	'	  5.11
 Phthalic Anhydride	....,...;...	..-...;.;	;. . .  5.12
 Pigment                                        :
   Lead Oxide And Pigment Production	•	  7.16
 Pipeline Compressors	  3.2
 Plastics	  5.13
 Plywood Veneer And Layout Operations	, . . . J	10. 3
 Polyester Resin Plastics Product Fabrication. . .'	  4.12
 Portland Cement Manufacturing	_._.	  8.6
 Prescribed Burning	 ~	  11.1
 Printing Ink	  5.14
 Pulpboard	  10.2
 Pulping,  Chemical Wood	  10.1
                                      xiii

-------
Reclamation, Waste Solvent.	'	  4.7
Recovery, Sulfur	,	  5 .18
Refractories, Castable	'	  8.5
Residential Fireplaces	  1.9  '
Roads, Paved                                     •
  Fugitive Dust Sources	.	 11.2
Roads, Unpaved
  Fugitive Dust Sources	'	 11.2
Roasting Coffee	  62
Rock               .               .               •
  Phosphate 'Rock Processing	  8 .18
Roofing, Asphalt	  g. 2
Rubber,  Synthetic	i	  5.20

Sand And Gravel Processing	  8 .19
Sewage Sludge Incineration	  2.5
Sintering, Clay And Fly Ash. .	;	  8.8
Sinelting                                         i
  Primary Copper Smelting	 -7.3
  Primary Lead Smelting	  7.6
  Secondary Copper Smelting Arid Alloying	,	 .  7.9
  Secondary Lead Smelting	:	  7 .11
  Secondary Magnesium Smelting	  7.12
  Zinc Smelting	;	  7.7
Smokehouses, Meat	  6.7
Soap And Detergent Manufacturing	'	  5 .15
Sodium Carbonate Manufacturing.	;;	  5 .16
Solvent
  Commercial/Consumer Use	  4.10
  Solvent Degreasing	•	  4.6
  Waste Solvent Reclamation	  4.7
Starch Manufacturing	  6.11
Stationary Gas Turbines	  3.1
Stationary Sources, Off Highway	  3.0
Steel                             ,
  Iron And Steel Mills	  7.5
  Steel Foundries	  7.13
Storage Battery Production. . . ,	'	  7.15
Storage Of Organic Liquids	  4.3
Sugar Cane Processing	  6 .12
Sugar Mills, Bagasse Combustion In	..1.8
Sulfur Recovery	  5.18
Sulfuric Acid	i	  5 .17
Surface Coating	  4.2
Synthetic Ammonia	;	  5.2
Synthetic Fiber	~,	:	  5.19
Synthetic Rubber	  5 . 20

Taconite Ore Processing	  8.22
Tank And Drum Cleaning	 . „ . t	:	  4.8
Tape, Magnetic			.....'	  4.2
Terephthalic Acid	„	  5 .21
                                      xiv

-------
Tilling, Agricultural                           ;
  Fugitive Dust Sources	  H 2
Transportation And Marketing Of Petroleum Liquids	   4! 4
Turbine Engines, Natural Gas	   3.' 1

Unpaved Roads
  Fugitive Dust Sources	    ,                          11 2
Urea	•	'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.]'.   6'! 14

Varnish                                         ;
  Paint And Varnish Manufacturing	   5 < IQ
Vehicles, Highway And Off Highway	 '.' Vol. ' II

Waste Solvent Reclamation	     4 7
Waste Oil Combustion	                1' 11
Whiskey Production
  Fermentation	          ,    /• 5
Wildfires, Forest	'.'.'."'"  11' 1
Wine Making
  Fermentation.	\	              .       c c
Wood Pulping, Chemical	,	    10' 1
Wood Stoves	;	           '   i' IQ
Wood Waste Combustion In Boilers	;	 ;  t .        16
Woodworking Waste Collection Operations	...'.'.'.'.'  10 .*4

Zinc                                            \
  Secbndary"'Zinc Processing. , . . .		   7 14
  Smelting	          77
                                      xv

-------

-------
1.10    RESIDENTIAL WOOD STOVES                :

1.10.1  General1"3                             ;

      Wood stoves are commonly used as space heaters in residences to
supplement conventional heating systems.  They are increasingly found as the
primary source of residential heat.            ;

     Because of differences in both the magnitude and the composition of
emissions from wood stoves, four different categories of stoves should be
considered when estimating emissions:           :
                                               i
             the conventional noncatalytic wood stove,

          -  the noncatalytic low emitting wood stove,

             the pellet fired noncatalytic wood'stove, and

             the catalytic wood stove.

     Among these categories,  there are many variations in wood stove design
and operation characteristics.                  ;

      The conventional stove category comprises all stoves without catalytic
combustors not included in the other noncatalytic categories.   Stoves of many
different airflow designs, such as updraft, downdraft, crossdraft, and S-flow,
may be in this category.

     "Noncatalytic low emitting" wood stoves are those units properly
installed, haying no catalyst and meeting EPA certification standards as of
July 1, 1990.•"-

     Pellet fired stoves are those fueled with pellets of sawdust, wood
products, and other biomass materials pressed into manageable shape and size.
These stoves have a specially designed or modified grate to accommodate this
type of fuel. '

     Catalytic stoves are equipped with a ceramic or metal honeycomb device,
called a combustor or converter, that is coated1with a noble metal such as
platinum or palladium.  The catalyst material reduces the ignition temperature
of the unburned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide in the exhaust gases, thus
augmenting their ignition and combustion at normal stove operating
temperatures.  As these components of the gases1burn, the temperature inside
the catalyst increases to a point where the ignition of the gases is
essentially selfsustaining.  The particulate emissions data in Table 1.10
represent the field operation emissions expected from properly installed
catalytic wood heaters meeting the EPA July 1, 1990 certification standards.
                        External Combustion Sources                     1.10-1

-------
 1.10.2  Emissions4"15

     The  combustion and pyrolysis  of wood in wood stoves  produce  atmospheric
 emissions of  particulate,  carbon monoxide,  nitrogen oxides,  organic compounds,
 mineral residues,  and  to a lesser  extent,  sulfur oxides.   The  quantities  and
 types of  emissions are highly variable and depend on a number  of  factors,
 including the stages of the combustion cycle.   During initial  stages of
 burning,  after a new wood  charge is  introduced,  emissions increase
 dramatically  and are primarily volatile organic compounds (VOC).  After the
 initial period of  high burn rate,  there is a charcoal stage  of the  burn cycle,
 characterized by a slower  burn rate  and decreased, emission rates.   Emission
 rates during  this  stage are cyclical,  characterized by relatively long periods
 of  low emissions with  shorter episodes of emission spikes.

     Particulate emissions ar€> defined in this document as the total catch
 measured  by the EPA Method 5H (Oregon Method 7) sampling  train.   A small
 portion of wood stove  particulate  emissions includes "solid" particles of
 elemental carbon and wood.  The vast majority of particulate emissions is
 condensed organic  products of incomplete combustion equal to or less than 10
 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter  (PM,Q>.  The particulate emission values
 shown in  Table 1.10-1  represent estimates of emissions produced by  wood
 heaters expected to be available over the next few years  as  cleaner, more
 reliable  wood stoves are manufactured to meet the. New Source Performance
 Standards.   These emission values are derived from limited  field test data
 from studies  of the best available wood stove control technology.   Still,
 there is  a .potential for higher emissions from some wood  stove models.

      In  addition, the values for  particulate and carbon  monoxide emissions on
 the table reflect  tests of new units.   Control devices on wood stoves may
.exhibit reduced control efficiency over a period of operation,  resulting  in
 increased emissions 3.to 5 years after installation.  For catalyst  equipped
 wood heaters, the  potential for control degradation is probably on  the order
 of  10 to  30 percent after  3 years  of operation.   Control  degradation for  any
 stoves, including  low  emitting noncatalyst wood stoves may also occur, as a
 result of deteriorated seals and gaskets,  misaligned baffles and  bypass
 mechanisms, broken refractory , or other damaged functional  components.  The
 increase  in emissions  resulting from such control; degradation  has not been
 quantified, but can be significant.

     Although^reported .particle size data are scarce, one reference states
 that 95 percent of the particles in  the emissions from a  wood  stove were  less
 than 0.4  micrometers in size. *"

     Sulfur oxides are formed by oxidation of sulfur in the  wood.   Nitrogen
 oxides are formed  by oxidation of  fuel and atmospheric nitrogen.  Mineral
 constituents, such-as  potassium and  sodium compounds, are also released from
 the wood  matrix during combustion."  The high levels of organic compound and
 carbon monoxide emissions  result from incomplete combustion  of the  wood.
 1.10-2                        EMISSION FACTORS                             9/90

-------
         I
         Q
IALW
         UJ
         g

         CO
         UJ
         cc.
o

I
CO

§
 s
 CO
 cc
 o


I

 o

'8
         in
 UJ

.rf
                   o

                   
                                                   CO
                                  {§.   co.  ea
                                               §   $2:
                                                 "
                                           c\
                                           ca
                                      CD  cb

                                      o»  T-:'
                                                o
al
No
fi

                                                     .*
                                                 S  w

                                                 'E  M

                                                . ~   5=

£  o

£•  *i
z  o
s  co
grada
.

late, CO a
                                                           I
                                                                s
                                                           O   Q.
                                                           2   Q)

                                                           ?,   «
                                                              o   ~
                                                                  Js'io
•u w

o 58
-c JS

^3 E



if
D5_C

>; '"8
O *"£   S'
JS'ouj B!S|

<0 O M  r^
*^ 	 CO Q3 LJ i
c ?CM
                                                                  *5*§
                                                                  H_ (0
                                                         w 0  i£
                                                         ra>53 mo

                                                         •

                                                                               C3)
                                                                    ed" •
                                                              ;Z:<5-"~'
               «
               c


              :|


              m
                                                                       '
                                                 „> X = o c c § c ra S

                                                 w J? £ CC £ £ -s £ «3 §
                                                   n*^-. flj ^« Q5 rtj f" flj ^ JTJ
                                                   ^3] s-» ^~ !*.!> »^_ g* *£« frt ^U
                                                 .E   m ""• m a*   n>   *t?
                                                              a>
                                                              CC
                                                                  CECE
                                                                  0-0
                                                               CE
                                                               
-------
      Organic constituents of wood smoke vary considerably in both .type and
volatility.  These constituents include simple hydrocarbons of carbon number 1
through 7 (Gl - C7), which exist as gases or which volatilize at ambient
conditions, and complex low volatility substances that condense at ambient
conditions.  These low volatility condensible materials generally are
considered to have boiling points below 300°C (572°F).

     Polycyclic organic matter (POM) is an important component of the
condensible fraction of wood smoke.  POM contains a wide range of compounds,
including organic compounds formed by the combination of free radical species
in the flame zone through incomplete combustion.. This group contains some
potentially carcinogenic compounds, such as benzp(a)pyrene.

      Emission factors and their ratings for wood combustion in residential
wood stoves are. presented in Table 1.10-1.

      As mentioned, particulate emissions are defined as the total emissions
equivalent to that collected by EPA Method 5H (Oregon Method 7).  This method
employs a heated filter followed by three impingers, an unheated filter, and a
final impinger.  Particulate emissions data used to develop the factors in
Table 1.10-1 are primarily from data collected during field testing programs,
and they are presented as values equivalent to. that collected with Method 5H.8
Conversions are employed, as appropriate, for data collected with other
methods.  See Reference 2 for detailed discussions of EPA Methods 5H and 28.
Other emission factors shown in Table 1.10-1 have been developed from data
collected during :laboratory testing programs.
                    •              "   .            J

References for Section 1.10                       •       -     "-~

 1-   Standards Of Performance For New Stationary Sources:  New Residential
     ' .Wood Heaters. 53 FR 5860, February 26, 1988.

 2.   G. E. Weant, Emission Factor Documentation!For AP-42 Section 1.10.
      Residential Wood Stoves. EPA-450/4-89-007, U. S. Environmental
     „ Protection Agency,.Research Triangle Park, NG, May 1989. .

 3.   R. Gay and J. Shah, Technical Support Document For Residential Wood
      Combustion. EPA-450/4-85-012, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
   _-;  -Research Triangle Park, NC, February 1986;  "  •         __   -••-•••

 4-.   Residential Wood Heater Test Report. Phase 1. Tennessee Valley
      Authority, Chattanooga, TN, November 1982.!

 5.   J. A. Rau and J. J. Huntzicker,- "Compositipn And Size Distribution Of
      •Residential Wood'Smoke Aerosols".  Presented at the"21st'Annual Meeting
      of the Air"And Waste Management Association, Pacific Northwest
      International Section, Portland, OR, November 1984.
1.10-4                        EMISSION FACTORS                              9/90

-------
  6.   R. C. McCrillis and R. G. Merrill, "Emission Control Effectiveness Of A
       Woodstove Catalyst And Emission Measurement Methods Comparison"
       Presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Air And Waste Management
       Association, Detroit, MI, 1985.

  7.   L. E. Cottone and E. Messer, Test Method Evaluations And Emissions
       Testing For Rating Wood Stoves, EPA-600/2-86-100, U. S. Environmental
       Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, October 1986.

  8'   In-situ Emission Factors For Residential Wood Combustion TTnit-g,
       EPA-450/3-88-013,  U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
       Triangle Park,  NC, December 1988.       ;
                                                                 •
  9.   K. E. Leese and S.'M. Harkins, Effects Of Burn Rate. Wood-Speeiea.
'   •    Moisture Content.  And Weight' Of Wood Loaded. On Woodstove EmlaaiAna, . EPA-
       Son2"89"025' U> S"  Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, May
       1989.                      .             !                 .'.•-.'.

 10'    Residential Wood -Heater Test Report.  Phase II.  Vol. 1.  Tennessee Valley
       Authority,  Chattanooga, TN,  August 1983.                 i  '   '•'

 11.    J. M. Allen,  et al., Study Of The Effectiveness Of A Catalytic
       Combustion Device  On A Wood Burning Appliance.  EPA-600/7-84-04, U. S.
       Environmental Protection Agency,  Cincinnati,  OH, March 1984.
 12.    J.  M.  Allen and W.  M.  Cooke,  Control Of Emissions From Residential Wood
       Burning By Combustion  Modification.  EPA-600/7-81-091, U. S.
       Environmental, Protection Agency,  Cincinnati,  OH,  May'1981.

 13.    R.  S.  Truesdale and J.  G.  Cleland,  "Residential Stove Emissions From
       Coal And Other Fuels Combustion".    Presented at the Specialty
       Conference on Residential  Wood and  Coal Combustion, • Louisville  KY
       March  1982.                        -                            '

 14.    R.  E.  Imhoff,  et al.,  "Final  Report  On A; Study Of The Ambient Impact Of
       Residential  Wood Combustion in Petersville, Alabama".  Presented at the
       Specialty Conference on Residential  Wood' and  Coal Combustion
       Louisville,  KY,  March  1982.              :

 15.  ..  D.  G.  Deangelis,  e't ajL., Preliminary Cha-i-acterization Of Emissions From
       Wood-fired Residential  Combustion Equipment.  EPA-600/7-80-040,  U.  S.
       Environmental  Protection Agency, Cincinnati,  OH,  March 1980.      :.
                         External Combustion Sources                     1.10-5

-------

-------
2.1  REFUSE COMBUSTION                           :

     Refuse combustion is generally the burning  of predominantly nonhazardous
garbage  or other  solid wastes.  Types of combustion devices used to  burn
refuse include single chamber units, multiple chamber units, trench
incinerators, controlled air incinerators, and p&thological incinerators.
These devices are used to burn municipal, commercial, industrial,
pathological, and domestic refuse.

2.1.1  Municipal Waste Combustion                ',

     There are currently over 150 municipal waste combustion (MWC) plants in
operation in the United States.1  Three main types of combustors are used:
mass burn, modular, and refuse derived fuel (RDFJ) fired.  In mass burn units,
the municipal solid waste (MSW) is combusted without any preprocessing other'
than removal of items too large to go through th<= feed system.  In a typical
mass burn combustor, refuse is placed on a grate;that moves through the
combustor.  Combustion air in excess of stoichiometric amounts is supplied
both, below (underfire air) and above (overfire air) the grate.  Mass burn
combustors are usually erected at the site (as opposed to being prefabricated
at .another location) and range in size from 46 to 900 megagrams (50 to 1000
tons), per day of refuse throughput per unit.  Many mass burn facilities have
two or more combustors arid have combined site capacities of greater than 900
megagrams (1000 tons) per day.  The mass burn category can be further divided
into waterwall and refractory wall designs.  Most refractory wall combustors
were built prior to the. early 1970s.  Newer units are mainly waterwall
designs, which have water-filled tubes in the walls of the combustor used,to
recover heat for production of steam and/or electricity.  Process diagrams for
one type of refractory wall combustor and a typical waterwall combustor are
presented in Figures 2.1.1-1 and 2.1.1-2, respectively.

     Modular combustors :also burn waste without preprocessing,  but they are
typically shop fabricated and generally range in size from 5 to 110 megagrams
(5 to 120 tons) per day of refuse throughput.   One of the most common types of
modular combustors is the starved air or controlled air type, incorporating
two combustion chambers.   A process diagram of a;typical modular starved-air
combustor is presented in Figure 2.1.1-3.  Air is supplied to the primary
chamber at substoichio-metric levels.   The incomplete combustion products
(carbon monoxide and organic compounds) pass into the secondary combustion
chamber where excessi air is add.ed and combustion is completed.   Another type
of modular combustor, functionally similar to mass burn units,  uses excess-air
in the primary chamber.       '                    :

     Refuse derived fuel  fired combustors burn processed waste which may vary
from shredded waste to finely divided fuel suitable for co-firing with
pulverized coal.   A process diagram for a typical RDF combustor is shown in
Figure 2.1.1-4.   Preprocessing usually consists of removing noncombustibles
and shredding the waste,  which raises  the heating value and provides a more
9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                        2.1-1

-------
uniform fuel.  Combustor sizes range from 290 to;l,300 megagrams (320 to 1400
tons) per day.  Most RDF facilities have two or more combustors, and site
capacities range up to 2700 megagrams  (3000 tons) per day.  RDF facilities  .
typically recover heat for production  of steam and/or electricity.

     There are also small, numbers of other types|of MWCs.  One type used less
extensively  is the rotary waterwall combustor.  As with mass burn units,
rotary waterwall combustors burn waste without preprocessing but differ in
design from  most mass burn units in the use of a:rotary combustion chamber
equipped with water-filled tubes for heat recovery.  Other types of MWCs
include batch incinerators and fluidized bed combustors.

     Over 30 percent of the units currently operating are mass burn units
(including refractory and waterwall). and another, 40  to  50 percent are modular
units.  Over 10 percent of the, units are RDF units and  the remainder of the
units are of other designs.   In terms  of waste combusted, mass burn units
account for  about 60 percent  of the MSW combusted, modular units account for  8
percent, and RDF units for 30 percent. ^-               .          ,

2.1.1.1  Process Description           .                                 . .

      Types  of combustors  described  in  this  section include:

                - Mass  burn refractory  wall
             — * .Mass  burn waterwall     '...'	    ;-.
                •r. Refuse, derived fuel fired 	        . ..     •
               --Modular starved air ..„_. ,,;,..  -.     '  ..   ,.;  -       ,  •        .   .
                -  Modular excess air
                - Rotary waterwall
                -  Fluidized bed  	      .    ;

      Mass Burn Refractory Wall - At least three distinct,combustor designs
 make up the existing population of refractory wall combustors.   The first
 design is a batch fed upright combustor,  where the combustor may be
 cylindrical or rectangular in shape.  This type of combustor was prevalent in
 the 1950s,  but no additional units of this design are expected to be built.

      A more common design consists of rectangular combustion chambers with
 traveling,  rocking, or reciprocating  grates,  This type of combustor is
 continuously fed and operates in an excess air mode with both underfire and
 overfire airprovided.  The primary distinction between plants,with this
 design is the manner .in which the waste is moved through the combustor.  The
 traveling grate moves on a set of sprockets and does not agitate the waste .bed
 as it advances through the combustor. . Rocking and reciprocating grate systems
 agitate and aerate the waste bed as it advances.through the combustion
 chamber.  The system generally discharges the ash at the end of the grates to
 a water quench pit for collection and disposal in a landfill.

      A third major design type in the mass burn refractory wall population is
 a system which combines  grate burning technology with  a rotary kiln.  Two
 grate sections (drying and ignition)  precede a refractory lined rotary kiln.
 Combustion  is completed  in the kiln,  and ash leaving the kiln falls into a
 water quench.  This system is depicted in Figure  2.1.1-1.
  2.1-4                          EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
      Most mass burn refractory wall combustors have electrostatic
 precipitators (ESPs) for particulate control.. Others have a wet particulate
 control device,  such as a wet scrubber.   '   •  '.

      Mass Burn Waterwall - With this type of system, unprocessed waste with
 large, bulky, noncombustibles removed is delivered by an overhead crane to a
 feed hopper from which it is fed into the combustion chamber.  Earlier mass
 burn designs utilized gravity feeders,  but it is more typical today to feed by
 means of single  or dual hydraulic rams that operate on a set frequency.

      Nearly all  modern conventional mass burn facilities utilize
 reciprocating grates to move the waste through the combustion chamber   The
 grates typically include two or three separate sections where designated
 stages in the combustion process occur.  The initial grate section is referred
 to as the drying grate, where heat reduces the moisture content of the waste
 prior to ignition.   The second grate section is the burning grate, where the
 majority of active  burning takes place.  The third grate section is referred
 to as the burnout or finishing grate,  where remaining combustibles are burned-
 Smaller units may have two rather than three individual grate sections
 Bottom ash is discharged from the finishing grate into a water filled ash    :
 quench pit.   Dry ash systems have been used in some designs,  but are not
 widespread.                  '        ...

      Combustion  air is added to the waste from beneath the grate by way of
 underfire air plenums.-,. The majority of mass burn waterwall systems supply
 underfire air to,the individual grate  sections  through multiple plenums.   As
 the waste bed burns.',, additional air is  required to; oxidize fuel rich gases and
 complete the combustion process.   Overfire air  is injected through rows of
 high pressure nozzles  (usually two to three inches in diameter)   Typically
 mass burn waterwall MWCs  are operated with 80 to'  100 percent  excess air.

      The majority of mass bum waterwall combustors have ESPs for particulate
 control.   Several plants  have acid gas  controls in combination with'a fabric
 filter or ESP.                      •            t   •

      Refuse  Derived Fuel  - As a means of raising:  the heating  value,  raw MSW
 can be processed to refuse  derived fuel (RDF) before combustion.   A set of
 standards  for classifying RDF types  has been established by the American
 Society For  Testing And Materials.2  The type of  RDF used is  dependent  on  the
 boiler design.   Boilers that are  designed to burn RDF  as a primary fuel
 usually ..utilize  spreader  stokers  and fire-RDF-3 (fluff,  or f-RDF)  in a  semi-
 suspension mode.  This  mode  of feeding  is accomplished by using an air  swept
 distributor,  which  allows a  portion  of  the feed to  burn in suspension and  the
 remainder  to  be  burned  out after'falling'on  a horizontal  traveling grate.

      Suspension  fired RDF boilers, such as pulverized  coal (PC)  fired'boilers
 can  co-fire RDF-3 or RDF-4 (powdered or  p-RDF). 'If RDF-3  is used,  the fuel
 processing must be  more extensive  so that a  very;  fine  fluff results.
 Currently, PC boilers co-fire  fluff  with pulverized coal.  Suspension firing
 is usually associated with larger boilers due to•the increased boiler height
and retention time  required for combustion to be ^completed in total
 suspension.   Smaller systems firing  RDF  in suspension require moving or dump
grates in the lower furnace to handle the falling material that is not
completely combusted in suspension.  Boilers co-firing RDF in suspension are
generally limited to 50 percent RDF, based on heating value.3
                                                I
9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                         2.1-5

-------
      o
      ffl
      12



      10



       8



       6



       4


       2
                             Contrail
                                                    Uncontrolled
                   0.1
                           J—LJLJJJJJ - 1 — I   I I I M.U. - 1 — I  i n I ill  o
                                    J,Q               10              lw
   0.12



   0.10



   0.08



   0.06


   0.04



   0.02
                                                                                i-i
                                                                                O
                                                                                 §
                                                                                •rl
                                                                                 (0
                                                        TJ
                                                        
          ca 60
          to S
         •rl ---.
          S 60
          
-------
1
g
                           §  M
                          •H  O
                          ti
                          3
o n  01
•HOC
M il  -H
M O  4J
•H rfl  ra
6 t.  «
                               §
                               jj
                         O  M  0>
                         •HOC
                         M  JJ  -H
                         «  O  4J
                         •H  «  ra
                         .B  &a  as
                         S § J
                         o  K

                         o  jj —.


                         till
                         tg -H
                                                                            Q   ! Q    O
                                               CO CO CM «r CO    0?    O    ^L.
                                               M in r^ r- r*    o      •    £H"

                                               o o o o o    o     2.     ?
                   .   .   .  ".  ". ".    °.    °     «
                  o  o  o  o  o o    o    o"     o
                                                                     CO    *-*
                                                                                       vo

                                                                                       P)
                                           t

                                           °.
                             ^t

                       S S  S  S
                                                 2.  £ S S    °    °      •
                                                                                      "^
                                           o  o  o  o o o
               _ o  ~	.  „    ^    JJ    „
                 co  o CM  m  •v  in    en    rt    r-     ^    ?


                 £  .d. i  d.  d.  d •   d.    S    ri     ^   - <*>


                 O  o o  in -o -in    if)    «    m     ' J    .1
                 »rifi«>vDr--t-    o,    5    SN    H


                 o  o o  o  o'  o    o'    o'    o'     CM    d











                 °                   «    U     O   .  O,   . Q








                 "1  ""!  '1  ""1 'I S    5    °     —    o    111

                 a  °  s  s a 2    2    s    2    ?    «'

                 inmmoo       '^    ,_i     *"*    22.    N
                 invo[^oo
-------
      The emission controls for RDF systems are typically ESPs alone,  although
 acid gas controls are used with particulate control devices in some systems.

      Modular Starved Air - The basic design of a' modular starved air combustor
 consists of two separate combustion chambers,  "primary" and "secondary".
 Waste is batch fed to the primary chamber by a hydraulically activated ram..
 The charging bin is filled by a front end loader;.  Waste is fed automatically
 on a set frequency, generally 6 to 10 minutes between charges.

      Waste is moved through the primary combustion chamber by either hydraulic
 transfer rams or reciprocating grates.   Combustors using transfer rams have
 individual hearths upon which combustion takes pjlace.  Grate systems generally
 include two separate grate sections.  In either case, waste retention times in
 the primary chamber are long, up to 12 hours.  Bottom ash is usually
 discharged to a wet quench pit.

      The quantity of air introduced in the primary chamber defines the rate at
 which waste burns.  The primary chamber essentially functions as a gasifier,
 producing a hot fuel gas which is burned out in jthe secondary chamber.  The
 combustion air flow rate to the primary chamber 'is controlled to maintain an
 exhaust gas temperature set point (generally 650 to 760°C  [1200 to 1400°F]),
 which normally corresponds to about 40 percent theoretical air.  Other system
 designs operate with-a primary chamber temperature between 870 to 980°C (1600
 and 1800°F), which requires 50 to 60 percent theoretical air.

     "As the hot, fuel rich flue "gases flow to the" secondary chamber, they are
 mixedLwith excess air to complete the burning process.  The temperature of the
 exhaust gases from the primary chamber is above"'the autoignition point.  Thus,
 completing combustion is simply a matter of introducing air to the fuel rich
 gases.  The amount of air added to the secondary chamber is controlled to
 maintain a" desired flue gas exit temperature, typically 980 to 1200°C (1800 to
 2200°F)/  Approximately 80 percent of the total'combustion air is introduced
 •as  secondary air,  so that excess air levels for'the  system are about 100
 percent.  Typical  operating ranges vary from  80 ,to 150 percent excess air.

       The walls of  both combustion chambers are refractory  lined.  Early
 starved air modular  combustors did not include heat  recovery, but a waste heat
 boiler  is  common in  newer installations, with two  or more  combustion modules
 manifolded to a  boiler.   Combustors with heat recovery capabilities also have
 dump stacks.  A  dump stack is an alternate emission  point, located upstream  of
 _the Jsqdler and/or  air pollution control equipment.   It is  for use  in an  -
• emergency,  or when the boiler and/or air pollution control equipment  are not
 in operation.

       Because emissions  are relatively low, many.modular  starved  air MWCs do
 not have  emissions control.   Those  that do usually have  ESPs  for particulate
 control,  although fabric  filters have been usedi   A  few  newer starved air MWCs
 have acid gas  controls.

       Modular Excess  Air  -  This design is  similar to  that of  modular  starved
 air units.   The  basic design includes two-separate combustion chambers  _
  (referred to as  the  "primary" and "secondary" chambers).   Waste  is batch fed
 to the primary chamber,  which is  refractory lined.   The  waste is moved through
  2.1-8                          EMISSION FACTORS;.                           9/90

-------
                CO
1
pa
53
ton
ca
ci
,.
'
^C
03
03
35
N bC
•H a


r^. f-* i — in co •— i *H
O O O O O CD -4
f> o co CM -H o in
o o o o ; o o o
^0 -JT CN O CTi 3" S*
Cs) CM CN CM -M ^H H oo
o, o o o lo o o
_. o o «n ;«n m
o o\ oo r>. \o in ON
—1 O O O 'O O rt
O O O O ;O O O
'. 00
00  <•> ^N CM O •* /-N
°O -Jf CM . ' . .OO
'T* "™* »™* c^ ^ in co
o o o MS in r^
v r*% \o *3*  r**« CM *^* co ** o

-------
    .8
    •a-
    §
    E-)
    I
    1
    CO
    co
 CN

 S
•0
m

tJ
0
*J
0)
W
tt
•rl
U
I-l



tn CM ^ -«^ ^ tn o
*"*



«n m
•4 «n
•H 1-1 CM 55 s •-< in









en m -4 «*! . B5 !K S3 !•» •-!




o o •<•«;-«! o o






in o  co in en






tt tt
C9 - tt J£

tt to IH tt
ft U 09 tt .0.
g tt w M a
« ,0 U c3
*O § 4J "3 O %
js — _...._. e,  an
« •
i*. en


^
VI 0
tt (!« (L
«Q |4 |4
§ js «
. r* B|
*J *s 3
w JQ
tt <8

c'TJ a)
"o ' ^
...-. W U
o :s o.
•H b
4J ^3 43
O •<•» 4J
ISS
5



cn




in

^_f


;






bo
19!
2:



to
SS
!


too

S




bO





60 .
O


'

«o
, o




1

ico







• *^

j




.1 '-i:. L



' O*
O
"&
0
rH
0
U
••&







)

) .



)




«
i

fi
1
1
1
1
|
)
a
i
!

.

i
•H
JJ
9
)
t

$
t
0
Vl
)

a
4 -k. ,
jj -y -
•H
J

5

3
^
to
tt
t-l
3
1
O
K
Q.

<
PU
_ " "

C
O
1
5

03 «
bO «8
0} • 43 •
Vl CM4J C-
tt O 0 O
s« a»
oo a o
tt a) A 
-------
the primary chamber by hydraulic transfer rams, 'oscillating grates or a
revolving hearth.  Bottom ash is discharged to a wet quench pit.

     The majority of combustion air is provided :in the primary chamber.  Up to
200 percent excess air can be supplied.  Flue gas burnout occurs in the
secondary chamber, which is also refractory lined.  Heat is recovered in waste
heat boilers.

     Particulate emissions are typically controlled by ESPs, although other
controls including a cyclone and an electrified gravel bed, are used.  A few
newer facilities have acid gas controls. Some modular excess air combustors
operate without emission controls.

     Rotary Waterwall - This type of system uses' a rotary combustion chamber
with pre-sorting of objects too large to fit in .the combustor.  The waste is
ram fed to the rotary combustion chamber, which jsits at an angle and rotates
slowly, causing the waste to advance and tumble ^as it burns.  Bottom ash is
discharged from the rotary combustor to a stationary after burning grate and
then into a wet quench pit.

     Underfire air is injected through the waste bed and overfire air is
provided directly above the waste bed.  Approximately 80 percent of the
combustion air is provided along the combustion chamber length with most of
this provided in the first half of the length.  'The rest of the combustion air
is supplied to, the afterburner grate and above the rotary combustor outlet in
the boiler chamber.  Water flowing through the tubes in the rotary chamber
recovers heat from combustion.  Additional heat recovery occurs in the boiler
waterwall, superheater and economizer.  Flue gas emissions are controlled by
ESPs or fabric filters.                         ;

     Fluidized Bed - This technology is an alternative method of combusting
RDF.  Fluffed or palletized RDF is combusted on ,a turbulent bed of heated
noncombustible material such as limestone, sand, silica, or alumina.  The bed
is suspended or "fluidized" through introduction of underfire air at a high
flow rate.  Overfire air is \ised to complete combustion.

     There are two basic types of fluidized bed 'combustion systems; bubbling
bed combustors and circulating fluidized bed combustors.  With bubbling bed
combustors, most of the fluidized solids are maintained near the bottom of the
combustor by using relatively low air fluidization velocities.  This helps
prevent the entrainment of solids from the bed into the flue gas, minimizing
recirculation or reinjection of bed particles.  Circulating fluidized bed
combustors operate at relatively high fluidization velocities to promote carry
over of solids into the upper section of the combustor.  Combustion occurs in
both the bed and upper section of the combustor.'  By design, a fraction of the
bed material is entrained in the combustion gas and enters a cyclone separator
which recycles unburned waste and inert particles to the lower bed.

2.1.1.2  Emissions And Controls

-	 Refuse combustors have the -potential to emit significant quantities of
pollutants to the atmosphere,, "the major pollutants emitted are: (1)
particulate matter, (2) metals (in solid form on particulate,  except for
mercury), (3) acid gases (primarily hydrogen chloride [HC1] and sulfur dioxide
[S02D, (4) carbon monoxide (CO),  (5) nitrogen oxides (NOX), and (6) toxic

9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                       2.1-11

-------
          2
          o
          u
          t>
          "3
          §
          a
          o.
         I
30


25


20


15


10

 5

 0
                  0.1
                            Uncontrolled
                                                V-Controlled
                                                i 'i 11
                                  1.0
                                    Fartlcld
                , 10
                (us)
                                                                    0.60
                                   0.50   M
                                   0.40


                                   0.30
                                   0.10
                                                 100
                                         H
                                         o
                                         4J
                                         u
                                         OJ
                                                                          e
                                                                          o
                                                                          •H
                                           bo
                                                                   0.20   3
                                                                          r-(
                                                                          O
                                         g
                                         O
          Figure 2.1-7. • Cumulative particle size distribution and size
                         specific emission factors for refuse-derived  fuel
                         combustors.


,organic compounds (most notably chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and chlorinated
.dibenzo furans: [CDD/CDF]).           . . .•.  ;     '  -   •           '        '

      Particulate matter is emitted because of the turbulent movement  of  the
 combustion gases with respect to the burning refuse and  resultant ash.
 Particulate matter is also produced when metals.that  are volatilized  in  the
 combustion zone condense in the exhaust gas stream.   The particle size
 distribution and concentration of the particulate emissions leaving the
 combustor vary widely, depending on the composition of the refuse being  burned
 and the type and operation of the combustor.

      Particulate matter from MWCs contributes to hazardous air  emissions in
 two ways.  First, trace metals are emitted because they  are typically
 concentrated in the smaller size fraction of the total particulate  emissions
 where capture is more, difficult.  Secondly,_ the; amount of^ particulate surface
 area^ may contribute to the availability of sites for  catalytic  reactions
 involving toxic organic compounds, thus playing a role in potential downstream
 formation mechanisms  (see below).

      Metals emissions are affected by two primary factors,  (1)  level  of
 particulate matter control, and  (2) flue gas" temperature,.  Most metals  (with
 the exception of mercury)'are associated with fine particulate, and would
 therefore be removed  as the fine particulate are removed.  Mercury  is
 generally not contained on particulate matter and removal  is  not a  function of
 particulate removal.                            |

      Concentrations of HCl and SC>2 in MWC flue  gases  are directly related to
 the quantities of chlorine and sulfur in the waste.   Refuse  components  that
 are major contributors of sulfur  include rubber, plastics,  foodwastes,• -••—-
 2.1-12
EMISSION FACTORS
                                                            9/90

-------
yard-wastes,  and paper.   Similarly,  plastics  and miscellaneous organic
compounds  are  the  major sources  of  chlorine  in refuse.  .Therefore,  chlorine
and  sulfur contents  can vary considerably based on seasonal  and local waste
•variations.                •                     i

      Carbon  monoxide can be  formed  when insufficient  oxygen  is available for
complete combustion,  or when excess air levels are too  high,  thus lowering
combustion temperature.                         •

      Nitrogen  oxides  are formed  during  combustion through (1) oxidation of
nitrogen in  the waste and (2)  fixation  of atmospheric nitrogen.  Conversion of
nitrogen in  the waste occurs  at  relatively low temperatures  (less than 1090°C
[2000°F]), while fixation of  atmospheric of  atmospheric nitrogen occurs at
higher temperatures.  75 to  80 percent  of NOX  formed  is associated  with
nitrogen in  the waste.

      CDD/CDF; may be  formed through  two  mechanisms.  In  the first, CDD/CDF are
formed as  products of reactions  in  the  furnace.when the combustion  process
fails to completely  convert hydrocarbons to  carbon dioxide and water.
Alternatively,  organic  compounds which  escape  the  high  temperature  regions of
the  furnace  may react at lower temperatures  downstream  to form CDD/CDF.
Formation  of CDD/GDF  across the  ESP is  a recently  identified  concern  with the
operation  of MWC ESPs'at temperatures above  roughly 230°C (450°F).  The
mechanism  and  extent  of  formation are poorly understood.^

      A wide  variety of control technologies  are used  to control  emissions from
MWGs-.--- For-particulate control,  electrostatic  precipitators are  most
frequently used, although other  particulate  control devices  (including
electrified  gravel beds,  fabric  filters,  cyclones  and venturi scrubbers)  are
used.  Processes used for  acid gas  control include wet  scrubbing, dry sorbent
injection, and spray  drying.  -            ;"  •-".-:.:	-"--  -		   -	   ,

      Electrostatic Precipitator  - Particulate  emissions from  MWCs are most
often controlled using ESPs.   In this process,  flue gas flows between a series
of high voltage  (20 to 100 kilovolts) discharge electrodes and grounded metal
plates.  Negatively charged ions formed by this^high  voltage  field  (known as  a
"corona") attach to PM in  the  flue  gas,   causing, the charged particles to
migrate toward the grounded plates.  Once  the  charged particles  are collected
on the grounded  plates,   the resulting dust layer is removed from the  plates by
rapping, washing, or  some  other method  and collected  in a hopper.  When the
dust  layer-is  removed,- some of the  collected PM.becomes reentrained in  the
flue  gas. , To  assure  good  PM'collection.efficiency during plate  cleaning  and
electrical upsets, ESPs have several fields located in  series  along the
direction of flue gas flow that  can be  energized and  cleaned  independently.
Particles reentrained when the dust layer is removed  from one  field can be
recollected  in a downstream field.              :   -  -

      Small particles generally have lower migration velocities than large
particles,  and are therefore more difficult to collect.  This  factor  is
especially important to MWCs because of  the large amount of total fly ash
smaller than_one micron... As	cojnpared_jto pulverized^coal fired combustors, in
which only 1 to 3 percent of the fly ash is generally smaller  than 1'micron,
20 to 70 percent of the fly ash at  the  ESP inlet for MWCs is  reported to  be
smaller than 1 micron.  As a result, effective collection of PM from MWCs


9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                       2.1-13

-------
-^requires greater collection areas and lower flue !gas velocities than many
 other combustion types.                                           .          .  . .

      The most common types of ESPs used by MWCs are (1) plate wire units in
 which the discharge electrode is a bottom weighted or rigid wire and (2) flat
 plate units which use flat plates rather than wires as the discharge
 electrode.  Plate wire ESPs generally are better suited for use with fly ashes
 with large amounts of small particulate and with large flue gas flow,rates
 (greater than 5700 actual cubic meters per minute [200,000 actual cubic feet
 per minute]).  Flat plate units are less sensitive to back corona problems and
 are thus well suited for use with high resistivity PM.  Both of these ESP
 types have been widely used on MWCs in the U.. S.,| Europe, and Japan.

      As an approximate indicator of collection efficiency, the specific
 collection area (SCA) of an EI3P is frequently used.  The SGA is calculated by
 dividing the collecting electrode plate area by the actual flue gas flow rate
 and is expressed as square feet of collecting area per 1000 actual cubic feet
 per minute of flue gas.   In general, the higher the SCA, the higher the
 collection efficiency.                           \

  _  ...Fabric: Filters. = Fabric .filters .(haghousas) iare_. frequently: uae.d. in.  .  ...
 combination with acid gas controls and are of two basic designs, reverse air
 and pulse cleaned.  Both methods provide additional potential for acid gas
 removal as the filter cake builds up on the bags;  In a reverse air fabric
 filter, flue gas flows through unsupported filter bags, leaving the
 particulate on the inside of the ...bags'.  The particulate builds up to form a
 particulate^ filter cake.  Once excessive pressure.drop across the filter cake
 is,reached,, _air is blown through the filter in the'opposite direction, the
 filter bag collapses,'and the filter cake falls off and is collected.  In a
 pulse cleaned fabric filter, flue gas flows through supported filter bags
 leaving particulate_ron tHe"outsideof"the bags.;  ;jb remove built up
 particulate filter cake, compressed air is introduced through the inside of
 the filter bag, the filter bag expands and the filter cake falls off and is
 collected.  Particulate removal by a fabric filter following acid gas controls
 is typically greater than 99 percent.

      Wet Scrubbers - Many types of wet scrubbers are used for controlling acid
 emissions from MWCs.  These include spray towers, centrifugal scrubbers, and
 venturi scrubbers.  In these devices, the flue gas enters the absorber where
 it is contacted with enough alkaline solution to isaturate the gas stream.  The
 alkaline solution, typically containing calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2] reacts
 with the .acid gas to form.salts, which are generally insoluble and may be
 removed by sequential clarifying,'thickening, and^vacuum .filtering.  The
 dewatered salts or sludges are then landfilled.  .

      Dry Sorbent Injection - This type of technology has been developed
 primarily to control acid gas emissions.  However^ when combined with flue gas
 cooling and either a fabric filter or ESP, sorbent injection processes may
 also control CDD/CDF and particulate emissions from MWCs.  Two primary subsets
 of dry sorbent injection technologies exist.  The more widely used of these
 approaches, referred to as duct sorbent injection (DSI), involves injecting
 dry alkali sbrbents" into flue gas downstream of-the combustor "outlet and
 upstream of the particulate control device.  The,second approach, referred to
 as furnace sorbent injection (FSI), injects sorbent directly into the
 combustor.	 ••                    ' 	     ...  .— ..    ......

 2.1-14                         EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
      In DSI,  powdered sorbent is pneumatically injected intt> either a separate
 reaction vessel or a section of flue gas duct located downstream of the
 combustor economizer or quench tower.  'Alkali in the sorbent (generally
 calcium or sodium) reacts with HCl,  hydrogen fluoride 3 ] ) .  By lowering the acid c1 ontent of the flue gas ,
 downstream equipment can be operated at reduced temperatures while minimizing
 the potential for acid corrosion of  equipment.  Reaction products, fly ash,
 and unreacted sorbent are collected  with either a fabric filter or ESP.

      Acid gas removal efficiency with DSI depends on flue gas temperature,
 sorbent type  and feed rate, and the  extent of sorbent mixing with the flue
 gas.  Flue gas temperature at the point of sorbent injection can range from1
 180 to 320°C  (350 to 600°F) depending on the sorbent being used and the design
 of the process.  Sorbents that have  been successfully tested include hydrated
 lime (Ca(OH)2), soda ash (Na2C03) , and sodium bicarbonate (NaHG03) .   Based on
 published data for hydrated lime, DSI can achieve relatively high removals of
 HCl (60 to 90 percent) and S02 (40 to 70 percent) under proper operating
 conditions.   Limestone (CaG03) has also been tested but is relatively
 unreactive at the above temperatures.

      By combining flue gas cooling with DSI, it may be possible to increase
 the potential for CDD/CDF removal which is believed to occur through a
 combination of vapor condensation and adsorption onto the sorbent surface .
 Cooling may also benefit PM control  by decreasing the effective flue gas flow
 rate- (i.  e. ,  actual cubic meters • per minute) and 'reducing the resistivity of
 individual.-. particles.  •• -                       -   .           _..,..

      Furnace  sorbent injection involves the injection of powdered alkali
 sorbent into  the furnace section of  a combustor..  This can be accomplished by
 addition, of sorbent -to the overf ire  air; injection -through separate ports, or
 mixing with the waste prior to feeding to the combustor.  As with DSI,
 reaction products, flyash, and unreacted sorbent are collected using a fabric
 filter or ESP.                                   !

      The basic chemistry of FSI is similar to DSI.  Both use a reaction of
 sorbent with  acid gases to form alkali salts.  However, several key
 differences exist in these two approaches.  First, by injecting sorbent
 directly into the furnace (at temperatures of 870 to 1200°C [1600 to 2200°F])
 limestone can be calcined in the combustor to more reactive lime, thereby
...allowing, use  of, less expensive limestone as a sorbent. :. Second, at these
 temperatures, S02 and -lime- react in  the combustor, thus providing a mechanism
 for effective removal of S02 at relatively low sorbent feed rates.  Third, by
 injecting sorbent into the furnace rather than irjto a downstream duct,
 additional time is available for mixing and reaction between the sorbent and
 acid" gases.   As a result, it may be  possible to remove HCl and S02 from the
 flue gas at 1-ower sorbent -to -acid gas stoichiometric ^ratios than with DSI.
 Fourth, if a  significant portion of  the HCl is removed before the flue gas
 exits the combustor,  it may be possible to reduce the formation of CDD/CDF in
 latter sections of the flue gas ducting.  However, HCl and lime do not react
 with each other at_temperatures above 760° C (1,400°F).
      Spray Drying - Spray drying is designed to Control S02 and HCl emissions,
 When used in combination with particulate control,  the system can control
'CDD/CDF,  PM,  S02, and HCl emissions from MWCs.   In" the spray "drying process,

 9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                       2.1-15

-------
 lime  slurry is injected into a spray dryer (SD):.   The water in the slurry
 evaporates to cool the flue gas and the lime reacts with acid gases to form
 salts that can be removed by a PM control device..  The simultaneous
 evaporation and reaction increases the moisture: and particulate content in the
 flue  gas.   The particulate leaving the SD contains fly ash plus calcium salts,
 water,  and unreacted lime.
                                                i
      The key design and operating parameters that significantly affect SD
 performance are SD outlet temperature and lime-to-acid gas stoichiometric
 ratio.   The SD outlet temperature is controlled by the amount of water in the
 slurry.  More effective acid gas removal occurs; at lower temperatures, but the
 temperature must be high enough to ensure the slurry and reaction products are
 adequately dried prior to collection in the PM control device.  For MWC flue
 gas. containing significant chlorine, a minimum SD outlet temperature of around
 120°C (240°F) is required to control agglomeration of PM and sorbent by
 calcium chloride.   The stoichiometric ratio is the molar ratio of. calcium fed
 to the theoretical amount of calcium required to react with the inlet HC1 and
 SC>2.   Lime is fed in .quantities sufficient to react with the peak acid gas
 concentrations expected without severely decreasing performance.   The lime
 content in the slurry must be maintained at or below approximately 30 percent
 by weight  to prevent clogging of the lime slurry feed system and spray
 nozzles.                                       ,

      Spray drying 'can be used in combination with either a fabric filter or an
 ESP for PM control.  Both combinations have been used for MWCs in the United
 States,- although SD/fabric filter systems are more common.  Typical" removal
 efficiencies range from 50 to 90 percent for S02 and for 70" to 95 percent for
 HC1.   -•  '    '--•-..--        ;       -          i . -      -••-.-.:-•.

•  •  ..  Emission factors for municipal waste cumbustors are shown in Table 2.1-1.
-Table 2". 1-2 shows the cumulative particle size'distribution and size specific
 emission factors for municipal waste combustors.   Figures 2.1-5,  2.1-6 and
 2.1-7 show the cumulative particle size distribution and size specific
 emission factors for mass biirn,  starved air and RDF combustors, respectively.

 2.1.2  Other Types Of Combustors8"11

      The most common types of combustors consist of a refractory-lined
 chamber with a grate upon which refuse is burned.  In some newer
 incinerators water-walled furnaces are used.  Combustion products are formed
 by heating and burning 'of refuse-on the grate.  In most -cases, since
 insufficient underfire - (undergrade) air'is provided to renabre complete " '
 combustion, additional over-fire air is admitted above the burning waste to
 promote complete gas-phase combustion. ' In multiple-chamber incinerators,
 gases from the primary chamber flow to a small secondary-mixing chamber
 where more air is admitted,  and more complete' oxidation occurs.  As much as
 300" percent excess" ai'r may be supplied in order to-promote oxidation of
 combustibles. ' Auxilliary burners are sometimes installed in th'e~mixing
 chamber to increase the combustion temperature.  Many small-size incin-
 erators are single-chamber units in which gases are vented from the primary
 combustion chamber directly into the exhaust stack..  Single-chamber
 incinerators of this type do not meet modern air pollution codes.
 2.1-16                         EMISSION FACTORS'                           9/90

-------
2.1.2.1  Process Description8"11

     Industrial/commercial Combustors - The capacities of these units cover a
wide range, generally between 22.7 and 1800 kilograms (50 and 4000 pounds)
per hour.  Of either single- or multiple-chamber design, these units are
often manually charged and intermittently operated.  Some industrial
combustors are similar to municipal combustors in size and design.  Better
designed emission control systems include gas-fired afterburners, scrubbers,
or both.                                        '

     Trench Combustors - A trench combustor is designed for the combustion of
wastes having relatively high heat content and low ash content.  The design
of the unit is simple.  A U-shaped combustion chamber is formed by the sides
and bottom of the pit, and air is supplied frominozzles (or fans) along the
top of the pit.  The nozzles are directed at an iangle below the horizontal
to provide a curtain of air across the top of the pit and to provide air for
combustion in the pit.  Low construction and operating costs have resulted
in the use of this combustor to dispose of materials other than those for
which it was originally designed.  Emission factors for trench combustors
used to burn three such materials are included in Table 2.1-4.^

     Domestic Combustors - This category includes combustors marketed for
residential use.  Fairly simple in design, they may have single or multiple
chambers and usually are equipped with an auxiliary burner to aid
combustion.                                     ;                    .......

    "• Flue'-fed Combustors - These units, commonly found in large" apartment
houses, are characterized by the charging method of dropping refuse down the
combustor flue and into the combustion chamber. : Modified flue-fed
incinerators utilize afterburners and draft- controls to improve combustion
efficiency and' reduce emissions .  	~  ' •••-;'-~-^~--^--••-••••-:  --	-

     Pathological Combustors - These are corabustors used to dispose of animal
remains and other organic material of high moisture content.  Generally,
these units are in a size range of 22.7 to 45.4'kilograms (50 to 100 pounds).
per hour.  Wastes are burned on a hearth in the combustion chamber.  The
units are equipped with combustion controls and afterburners to ensure good
combustion and minimal emissions.

2.1.2.2  Emissions And Controls**

	'.' Operating conditions, refuse composition, arid basic combustor design
have a pronounced effect on emissions.  The manner in which air is supplied
to the combustion chamber or chambers has a significant effect on the
quantity of particulate emissions.  Air may be introduced from beneath the
chamber, from the side, or from the top of the combustion chamber.  As
underfire air is increased, an increase in fly-ash? emissions occurs.'
Erratic refuse charging causes a disruption of the combustion bed and a
subsequent release of large quantities of particulates.  Large quantities  of
uncombusted particulate matter and carbon monoxide are also emitted for an
extended period after charging of batch-fed .units because of interruptions
in the combustion process.  In continuously fed.units, furnace particulate
emissions are strongly dependent upon grate type.  The use of a rotary kiln
and reciprocating grates results in higher particulate emissions than the
use of a rocking or traveling grate.  Emissions:of oxides of sulfur are

9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                       2.1-17

-------
si
p
 IS
 ;«:
             -s
              a

              3

              II
                                                 d    _•
                                                 SB
                                 » *«•>  O  U>
                                                       •
                                                      f
                                                      J1
                      sa    -
                      *-•  "%-
                  u
                  l-
5   15
    .u

    '^
    % '
    IB

    I
    '"
    m.
?   -g
C.

1   *
i   "5
"g   «

I   1
*~   O
u.   a
                                                3
                                                »
g^   g-

II   1
                                                          -O

                                                          'En
                                                           G

                                                           II

                                                           8
                                                          <2
                                                          ,1
                                                           cS    g
                                                           o      — i
                                                                 S
                                                                 ••H

                                                                 I
                                                        ••S

                                                        'J
                                                             .s
                                                             •K3
                                             =

                                             •i  5§
                                                    13


                                                  CD §
                                                                                      I
                                                    ^



                                                   .1


                                                  V2
                                                  C!O d>
                                                                              -i 1
                                                                     OJ (C
                                                                   'ipapQ
                                                                    <£>
-------
 dependent on the sulfur content of the refuse.   Carbon monoxide and unburned
 hydrocarbon emissions may be significant and are caused by poor combustion
 resulting from improper combustor design or operating conditions.   Nitrogen
 oxide emissions increase with an increase- in the temperature of the
 combustion zone, an increase in the residence time in the combustion zone
 before quenching, and an increase in the excess air rates to the point where
 dilution cooling overcomes the effect of increased oxygen concentration. ^


 References for Section 2.1                      :

  1.    Municipal Waste Combustion Industry Profile - Facilities Subject To
       Section lllfd") Guidelines. Radian Corporation, Research Triangle Park,
       NC, prepared for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 16,
       1988.

  2.    Municipal Waste Combustion Study - Combustion Control Of Organic
       Emissions. EPA/530-SW-87-021-C, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
       Research Triangle Park, NC, June 1987, p. 6-2.

  3.    Municipal Waste Combustion Retrofit Study '(Draft), Radian Corporation,
       Research Triangle Park, NG, prepared for U;. S. Environmental Protection
       Agency, August 5, 1988, p. 6-4.

  4.    Air Pollution Control At Resource Recovery Facilities. California Air
•-	Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, May 24, 1984.      	

  5;    Control Of NO^. Emissions from Municipal Waste Gombustors. Radian
       Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC, prepared for TL S.
       Environmental Protection Agency, February,3, 19.8.9.,  .. . .        .,

  6.    H. Vogg and L. Stieglitz, Chemosphere. Volume 15, 1986.

  7.    Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Section 2.1.1:  Municipal Waste
       Combustion. EPA-450/4-90-016, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
       Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1990.

  8.    Air Pollutant Emission Factors. APTD-0923, U. S. Environmental
       Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1970.

  9..	 Control Techniques For Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Stationary
       Sources. AP-65, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
       Park, NG, March 1970.

 10.    Air Pollution Engineering Manual. AP-40, U. S. Environmental  Protection
       Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1967.'

 11.    J. DeMarco. et al. . Incinerator Guidelines 1969. SW. 13TS, U. S.
       Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle  Park, NC,  1969.

 12.  _ J._0. Brukle^ J. A^ Dprsey,  an4 B- T- Riley,  "The Effects Of  Operating
       Variables And Refuse  Types On  Emissions From A Pilot-scale Trench
       Incinerator", Proceedings Of The 1968 Incinerator Conference. American
       Society Of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, May  1968.


 9/90                          Solid Waste Disposal                        2.1-19

-------
13.   Walter R. Nessen, Systems Study Of Air Pollution From Municipal
      Incineration, Contract Number CPA-22-69-23, Arthur D. Little, Inc
      Cambridge, MA, March 1970..

14.   C. V. Kanter, R. G. Lunche, and A. P. Fururich, "Techniques For Testing
      Air Contaminants From Combustion Sources", Journal Of The Air Pollution
      Control Association, 6(4): 191-199, February 1957.

15.   J. L. Stear, Municipal incineration:  A Review Of Literature. AP-79, U.
      S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June


16.   E. R. Kaiser, Refuse Reduction Processes In Proceedings Of Surgeon
      General's Conference On Solid Waste Management. PHS 1729, Public Health
      Service, Washington, DC, 1967.

17.   Unpublished source test data on incinerators, Resources Research,
      Incorporated, Reston, VA, 1966-1969.

18.   E. R. Kaiser, e-t al. . Modifications To Reduce Emissions From A Flue-fed
      Incinerator,, Report Number 552.2, College 'Of Engineering, New York
      University, June 1959, pp. 40 and 49.

19.   Communication between Resources Research, Incorporated, Reston, VA, and
   	.Division Of Air Quality Control, Maryland State Department Of Health,
      Baltimore, MD, 1969.

20.   Unpublished data on incinerator testing, U. S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1970.
2.1-20        '                 EMISSION FACTORS ;                          9/90

-------
2.5    SEWAGE SLUDGE  INCINERATION      .

       There are currently  almost 200 sewage sludge incineration (SSI) plants
in operation, in the United  States.  Three main types of incinerators are used:
multiple hearth, fluidized  bed, and electric infrared.   Some  sludge  is co-
fired with municipal  solid  waste  in combustors based on refuse  combustion
technology.  Refuse co-fired with sludge in  combustors  based  on sludge
incinerating technology is  limited to multiple hearth incinerators only.

      • Over 80 percent of the  identified operating sludge incinerators are of
the multiple hearth design.  About 15 percent are  fluidized bed combustors  and
3 percent are electric.  The remaining combustors  co-fire refuse with sludge.
Most sludge incinerators are located  in the  Eastern United States, though
there are a significant number on the West Coast.   New  York .has the  largest
number of facilities  with 28.  Pennsylvania  and Michigan have the next-largest
numbers of facilities with  20 and 19  sites,  respectively.

2.5.1  Process Description^'^                     ;

       Types of incineration described in this section  include:

            Multiple  hearth
            Fluidized bed
            Electric                              i
       „-.., .  Single .hearth cyclone . ..    .                          ,
•••••• '••	 Rotary kiln  •   • -                  ......   	  -..;	.-_  .-,,   	
  •'-•  .•-".-.   High pressure,  wet air oxidation     '
      -.---;'   v Co -incineration with  refuse       .           :   ,•

2.5.1.1  Multiple Hearth Furnaces  •-'•	 _....v..,.,..-,	...---

       The multiple hearth  furnace was originally; developed for mineral ore
roasting nearly a century ago.  The air-cooled variation has  been used to
incinerate sewage sludge since the 1930s.  A cross section diagram of a
typical multiple hearth furnace is shown in  Figure 2.5-1.   The  basic multiple
hearth furnace (MHF)  is cylinder  shaped and  oriented vertically.  The outer
shell is constructed  of steel, lined  with refractory, and surrounds  a series
of horizontal refractory hearths.  A  hollow  cast iron rotating  shaft runs
through the center of the hearths.  Cooling  air is introduced into the shaft
by a fan located at its base.  Attached to the central  shaft  are rabble arms,
which.extend above,-the hearths.   Each rabble arm is equipped  with a  number  of
teeth, approximately  6 inches in  length, and spaced about-10  inches  apart.
The teeth are shaped'to rake the  sludge in a spiral motion, alternating in
direction from the outside  in, to the inside out,'between hearths.   Typically,
the upper and lower hearths are fitted with  4 rabble arms,  and  the middle
hearths are fitted with two.  Burners, providing auxiliary heat, are located
in the sidewalls'of the hearths.          _~ . ;r  -.:-_.,,
9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal '•   '                     2.5-1

-------
                       SCUM
                       AUXILIARY
                       AIR PORTS
                                                       BURNERS
                                                       SUPPLEMENTAL
                                                       FUEL
                                                      -COMBUSTION AIR


                                                       SHAFT COOLING
                                                       AIR RETURN


                                                       SOLIDS FLOW
                                                                   DROP HOLES
          Figure  2.5-1. '  Cross  section  of a  multiple  hearth furnace.
                                                       ** EXHAUST AND ASH
                                                         ==S PRESSURE TAP
                               SAND/M.
                               FEED'S
                         THERMOCOUPLE
                          SLUDGE-
                          INLET
                        FLUIDIZING •
                        AIR INLET
                                                               BURNER
                                                 STARTUP
                                                 PREHEAT
                                                 BURNER
                                                 FOR HOT
                                                 WINDBOX
2.5-2
Figure  2.5-2.   Cross  section of a. fluidized  bed furnace.


                          EMISSION  FACTORS
9/90

-------
        Partially dewatered Kludge is fed onto the perimeter of 'the top.
 hearth.   The motion of the rabble arms rakes the sludge toward the center
 shaft where it drops through holes located at the center of the hearth.  In
 the next hearth the sludge is raked in the opposite direction.  This process
 is repeated in all of the subsequent hearths.  The effect of the ra"bble motion
 is to break up solid material to allow better surface contact with heat and
 oxygen,  and is arranged so that sludge .depth of about one inch is maintained
 in each hearth at the design sludge flow rate, .

        Scum may also be fed to one or more hearths of the incinerator.  Scum
 is the material that floats on wastewater. -It is generally composed of
 vegetable and mineral oils, grease.,, hair, waxes', fats, and other materials
 that will float.  Scum may be removed from many treatment units including
 preaeration tanks, skimming tanks, and sedimentation tanks.  Quantities of
 scum are generally small compared to those of other wastewater solids.

        Ambient air is first ducted through the .central shaft and its
 associated rabble arms.  A portion, or all, of this air is then taken from the
 top of the shaft and recirculated into the lowermost hearth as preheated
 combustion air.  Shaft cooling air which is not circulated back into the
 furnace is ducted into the iitack downstream of the air pollution control
 devices.  The combustion air flows upward through the drop holes in the
 hearths, countercurrent to the flow of the sludge, before being exhausted from
 the top hearth.  Provisions are usually made to. inject ambient air directly
 into, on the middle hearths, as well.       .._     		. _._,_.	

        From the standpoint of the overall incineration process, multiple
'hearth furnaces can be divided into three zones,.  The upper hearths comprise
 the drying zone where most of the moisture in the. sludge is evaporated.  The
 temperature in the drying zone is typically between 425 and 760°C (800 and
 1400°F).  Sludge combustion occurs in the middle hearths (second zone) as the
 temperature is increased to about 925°C (1700°F).  The combustion zone can be
 further subdivided into the upper middle hearths where the volatile gases and
 solids are burned, and the lower middle hearths where most of the fixed carbon
 is combusted.  The third zone, made up of the lowermost hearth(s), is the
 cooling zone.  In this zone .the ash is cooled as its heat is transferred to
 the incoming combustion air.

        Multiple hearth furnaces are sometimes operated with afterburners to
 further reduce odors and concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons.  In
"afterburning,.furnace exhaust .gases^are..ducted:'to'.a chamber where they are
 mixed with supplemental fuel and air and completely combusted.  Some
 incinerators have the flexibility to allow sludge to be fed to a lower hearth,
 thus allowing the upper hearth(s) to function essentially as an afterburner.

        Under normal  operating conditions,  50 to  100 percent excess air must
 be added to a MHF in order to ensure complete combustion of the sludge.
 Besides enhancing contact between fuel and oxygen in the furnace, these
 relatively high rates of excess air are necessary to compensate for normal
 variations in both the organic characteristics of the sludge feed and the rate
 at which it enters the incinerator.  When an-inadequate amount of excess air
 is available, only partial oxidation of the carbon will occur with a resultant
 increase in emissions of carbon monoxide, soot, and hydrocarbons.  Too much
 excess air, on the other hand, can cause increased entrainment of particulate
 and unnecessarily high auxiliary fuel consumption.

 9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                        2.5-3

-------
        Some MHFs have  been designed to  operate  in;a starved air  mode.
Starved air combustion (SAG) is, in effect,  incomplete combustion.  The key to.
SAC is the use of less  than theoretical quantities  of air in the furnace,
30 to 90 percent of stoichiometric  quantities.  . This makes  SAC more fuel
efficient than an excess air mode MHF. . The  SAC reaction products are
combustible gases, tars and oils, and a solid char  that can have appreciable
heating value.  The most effective  utilization  of ;these products is by burning
of the total gas stream with subsequent heat recovery.  When an  SAC MHF is
combined with an afterburner, an overall excess air rate of 25 to 50 percent
can be maintained (as  compared to 75 to 200  percent overall for  an excess air
MHF with an afterburner).

       Multiple hearth furnace emissions are usually controlled  by a. venturi
scrubber, an impingement tray scrubber, or a combination of both.  Wet
cyclones are also used.                           :

2.5.1.2  Fluidized Bed  Incinerators

       Fluidized bed technology was first developed by the  petroleum industry
to be used for catalyst regeneration.  Figure 2.5-2 shows the cross section
diagram of a fluidized  bed  furnace.  Fluidized'bed furnaces (FBF) are
cylindrically shaped and oriented vertically.   The outer shell is constructed
of steel, and is lined.with refractory.  Tuyeres (nozzles, designed to deliver
blasts of air) are located  at the base of the furnace within a refractory-
lined^grid.  A bed of  sand,, approximately 0.75  meters (2.5  feet) thick, rests
upon the grid.  Two general configurations can  be distinguished""bn the basis
of how the fluidizing air is injected into the  furnace,.  In the  "hot windbox"
design the combustion air is first  preheated by passing through a heat
exchanger where heat is recovered from the hot  flue gases.  Alternatively,
ambient air can be injected directly into the furnace from  aJcold windbox.

       Partially dewatered  sludge is fed .into the lower portion  of the
furnace.  Air injected  through the  tuyeres,  at  pressure of  from 20 to
35 kilopascals (3 to 5  pounds per square inch grade), simultaneously fluidizes
the bed of hot sand and the incoming sludge.  Temperatures  of 750 to 925°C
(1400 to 1700°F) are maintained in  the bed.  Residence times are on the order
of 2 to 5 seconds.   As  the  sludge burns, fine ash particles  are carried out
the top of the furnace.  Some sand  is also removed in the air stream;  sand
make-up requirements are on the order of 5 percent for every 300 hours of
operation.

       The overall process  of combustion of  the sludge occurs in two zones.
Within the bed itself  (zone 1) evaporation of the water and pyrolysis of the
organic materials occur nearly simultaneously as the .temperature of the sludge
is rapidly raised."  In  the  second zone, (freeboard area)  the remaining free
carbon and combustible  gases are burned.  The second zone functions
essentially as an after burner.   _.       :,.  . •-  ' ' ••

       Fluidization achieves nearly ideal mixing between the sludge and the
combustion air and the  turbulence facilitates the transfer  of heat from the
hot sand to the sludge.  The most noticeable impact of the better burning
atmosphere provided by  a fluidized  bed Incinerator!"is~seen  in~the limited""
amount of excess air required for complete combustion of the sludge.   These
incinerators can achieve complete combustion with 20 to 50  percent excess air,
about half the amount of excess air typically required for  incinerating sewage

2.5-4                          EMISSION FACTORS •  ;                        9/90

-------
 sludge in multiple hearth furnaces.  As a consequence, FBF incinerators have
 generally lower fuel requirements compared to MHF  incinerators.

        Fluidized bed incinerators most often have  venturi scrubbers  or
 venturi/impingement tray scrubber combinations for emissions control.

 2.5.1.3  Electric Incinerators                  :

        Electric furnace technology  is new compared to  other sludge combustor
 designs; the first electric furnace was installed  in 1975.  Electric
 incinerators consist of a horizontally oriented,: insulated furnace.  A woven
 wire belt conveyor extends the length of the furnace and infrared heating
 elements are located in the roof above the conveyor belt.  Combustion  air is
 preheated by the flue gases and is injected into the discharge end of  the
 furnace.  Electric incinerators consist of a number of prefabricated modules,
 which can be linked together to provide the necessary furnace length.  A cross
 section of an electric furnace is shown in Figure  2.5-3.

        The dewatered sludge cake is conveyed into  one  end of the incinerator.
 An internal roller mechanism levels the sludge into a continuous layer
 approximately one inch thick across the width of the belt.  The sludge is
 sequentially dried and then burned as it moves beneath the infrared heating
 elements.  Ash is discharged into a hopper at the  opposite end of the furnace.
 The preheated combustion air enters the furnace above the ash hopper and is
 further heated by the outgoing ash.  The direction of air flow is
 countercurrent to the 'movement of the sludge along the conveyor!  Exhaust
 gases leave the furnace at the feed end.   Excess, air rates vary from 20 to
 70 percent.                •  '	        ••               -"

'-  "'-	When compared to MHF and FBF technologies, 'the electric furnace offers
 the advantage of lower capital cost, especially for smaller systems.   However,
 electricity costs in some areas may make an electric furnace infeasible.   One
 other concern is replacement of various components such as the woven wire belt
 and infrared heaters,  which have 3 to 5 year lifetimes.

        Electric incinerators are usually controlled with a venturi scrubber
 or some  other wet scrubber.

 2.5.1.4   Other Technologies

	A number of other technologies have been used for incineration of
 sewage sludge including cyclonic reactors,  rotary;kilns :and wet oxidation
 reactors.   These processes  are not in widespread.use in the  United States and
 will be  discussed only briefly.                 .      •-••..-

        The cyclonic-reactor is designed for small  capacity applications.   It
 is constructed of a vertical cylindrical  chamber.that is lined with
 refractory.   Preheated  combustion air is  introduced into the chamber
 tangentially at high velocities.   The sludge is sprayed radially toward the
 hot refractory walls.   Combustion is rapid:   the residence time of the sludge
 in the chamber is  on the order of 10 seconds.,  The_ash_is  removed with the
 flue gases.

 ,.   ^ Rotary kilns are also generally used for. small capacity applications.
 The kiln is  inclined slightly from the horizontal  plane, with the upper end

 9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                         2.5-5

-------
 receiving  both the  sludge  feed and the  combustiop air.   A burner is  located at
 the  lower  end of the  kiln.   The circumference of the kiln rotates at a speed
 of about 6 inches per second.   Ash is deposited into a  hopper located below
 the  burner.

        The wet oxidation process is not strictly one of incineration; it
 instead utilizes oxidation at  elevated  temperature and  pressure  in the
 presence of water (flameless combustion).   Thickened sludge,  at  about six
 percent solids,  .is  first ground and mixed with a stoichiometric  amount of
 compressed air.   The  slurry is then pressurized.   The mixture is then
 circulated through  a  series of heat exchangers before entering a pressurized,
 reactor.   The temperature  of the reactor is held between 175  and 315°C
 (350 and 600°F).  The pressure is normally  7000 to 12,500 kilopascals (1000 to
 1800 pounds per  square grade).    Steam  is usually used  for auxiliary.heat.
 The  water  and remaining ash are circulated  out the reactor and-.are finally
 separated  in  a tank or lagoon.   The liquid  phase; is recycled  to  the  treatment
 plant.  Off-gases must be  treated to eliminate odors:   wet scrubbing,
 afterburning  or  carbon absorption may be used.

 2.5.1.5  Co-incineration With  Refuse

        Wastewater treatment plant sludge generally has  a high water  content
 and  in  some cases,  fairly hig;h levels of inert.materials.  As a  result,  its
 net  fuel value is often low.   If sludge is  combined with  other combustible
 materials  in  a co-combustion scheme, a furnace feed can be created that  has
 both a low water concentration and"a heat value high, enough to sustain
 combustion with  little or no supplemental fuel.  ,

        Virtually any  material  that can be burned can be combined with sludge
 in a co-combustion  process.  Common materials  for .co-combustion  are  coal,
 municipal  solid  waste  (MSW), wood waste :and agricultural waste.   Thus; a'
 municipal  or  industrial waste  can be disposed  of while  providing an  autogenous
 (self-sustaining) sludge feed,  thereby solving two  disposal problems.

        There  are two  basic  approaches to combusting sludge with  municipal
 solid waste,  1)  use of MSW  combustion technology by adding dewatered  or dried
 sludge to  the MSW combustion unit,  and 2) use  of\sludge combustion technology
 by adding processed MSW as  a supplemental fuel to the sludge  furnace.  With
 the  latter, MSW  is processed by removing noncombustibles,  shredding,   air
 classifying, and  screening.  Waste  that is more finely processed  is less
 likely to  cause jproblems such as  severe erosion.of  the hearths,  poor
 temperature control, and refractory failures.   ___- ___-  - -  -

 2.5.2  Emissions And Controls1"3

        Sewage  sludge  incinerators potentially  emit  significant quantities of
pollutants.  The major pollutants  emitted are:  1)  particulate .matter,
2) metals,  3)~carbon monoxide  (CO), 4) nitrogen oxides  (NOX),  5) sulfur
dioxide^(S02) and 6) unburned hydrocarbons.   Partial combustion of sludge can
result in emissions of intermediate products of incomplete combustion  (PIC)
including toxic organic compotinds.

       Uncontrolled particulate' emission rates vary widely depending  on  the
type of incinerator, the volatiles and moisture content of the sludge, _and  the
operating practices employed.  Generally,  uncontrolled pafticuiate" emissions

2-5-6                          EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
                                          RADIANT

                                          INFRARED
                                          HEATING

                                          ELEMENTS (TYP)
                          WOVEN WIRE

                          CONTINUOUS BELT
         Figure 2.5-3.  Cross  section of  an electric  infrared furnace,



        ••--•-;  	;   .......         GaExSlehduotdijie*   •   ' "     '  •-  - •
                 tt-
                         to       o
                      Vjnfcrt——^^
                      Tfnct
                                                               TnenMntOwcfcw
                                                                IfnpJflQnwrtTr&y
                                                                  ScnJbbw
                Figure 2.5-4.   Venturi/impingement tray scrubber.
9/90
Solid Waste Disposal
2.5-7

-------
 are highest from fluidized bed incinerators because suspension burning results
'in much of the ash being carried out of the incinerator with the flue gas.
 Uncontrolled emissions from multiple hearth and fluidized bed incinerators  are
 extremely variable, however.  Electric incinerators appear to have the lowest
 rates of uncontrolled particulate release of the three major furnace types,
 possibly because the sludge is not disturbed during firing.   In general,
 higher airflow rates increase the opportunity for particulate matter to be
 entrained in the exhaust gases.  Sludge with low volatile content or high
 moisture content may compound this situation by requiring more supplemental
 fuel to burn.  As more fuel is consumed, the amount of air flowing through  the
 incinerator is also increased.   However, no direct correlation has been
 established between air flow and particulate emissions.

        Metals emissions are affected by flue gas temperature and the level  of
 particulate matter control, since metals which are volatilized in the
 combustion zone condense in the exhaust gas stream.   Most metals (except
 mercury) are associated with fine particulate and are removed as the fine
 particulates are removed.

        Carbon monoxide is formed when available oxygen is insufficient for
 complete combustion or when excess air levels are too high,  resulting in lower
 combustion temperatures.

        Nitrogen and sulfur oxide emissions are primarily the result of
.oxidation of nitrogen and sulfur in the sludge.   Therefore,  these emissions
 can vary greatly based on local and seasonal sewage characteristics.

        Emissions of volatile organic compounds also vary greatly with
 incinerator type and operation.  Incinerators with countercurrent air flow
 such as multiple hearth designs provide the greatest 'opportunity for unburned
 hydrocarbons to be emitted.  In the MHF, hot air 'and wet sludge feed are
 contacted at the top of the furnace.  Any compounds distilled from the solids
'are immediately vented from the furnace" at temperatures too  low to completely'
 destruct them.

        Particulate emissions from sewage sludge incinerators have
 historically been controlled by wet scrubbers, since the associated sewage
 treatment plant provides both a convenient source and a good disposal option
 for the scrubber water.  The types of existing sewage sludge incinerator
 controls range from low pressure drop spray towers and wet cyclones to higher
 pressure drop venturi scrubbers and venturi/impingement tray scrubber
 combinations.  A few electrostatic precipitators-are employed, primarily where
 sludge is co-fired with municipal solid waste.   The most widely used control
 device applied to a multiple hearth incinerator is the impingement tray
 scrubber.  Older units use the tray scrubber alone while combination
 venturi/impingement tray scrubbers are widely applied to newer multiple hearth
 incinerators and to fluidized bed incinerators.   Most electric incinerators
 and many fluidized bed incinerators use venturi scrubbers only.

        In a typical combination venturi/impingement tray scrubber (shown in
 Figure 2.5-4), hot gas exits the incinerator and enters the  precooling or
 quench section of the scrubber.  Spray nozzles in the quench section cool the
 incoming gas and the quenched gas then enters the venturi section of the
 control device.              .'....
 2.5-8                          EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
       Venturi water is usually pumped into an inlet weir above the quencher.
The venturi water1 enters the scrubber above the throat and floods the throat
completely.   This eliminates build-up of solids and reduces abrasion.
Turbulence created by high gas velocity in the converging throat section
deflects some of the water traveling down the throat into the gas stream,
Particulate matter carried along with the gas stream impacts on'these water
particles and on the water wall.   As the scrubber water and flue gas leave the
venturi section, they pass into a flooded elbow where the stream velocity
decreases, allowing the water and gas to separate.  Most venturi sections come
equipped with variable throats.  By restricting the throat area within the
venturi, the linear gas velocity is increased, and the pressure drop is
subsequently increased.  Up to a certain point, increasing the venturi
pressure drop increases the removal efficiency.  Venturi scrubbers typically
maintain 60 to 99 percent removal efficiency for particulate matter, depending
on pressure drop and particle size distribution.

       At the base of the flooded elbow, the gas stream passes through a
connecting duct to the base of the impingement tr'ay tower.  Gas velocity is
further reduced upon entry to the tower as the gas stream passes upward
through the perforated impingement trays.   Water usually enters the trays from
inlet ports on opposite sides and flows across the tray.  As gas passes
through each perforation in the tray, it creates :a jet which bubbles.up the
water and further entrains solid particles.  At the top of the tower is a mist
eliminator to reduce the carryover of water droplets in the stack effluent
gas.-The impingement section can contain from one to four trays, but most
systems for which data are available have two or three trays.

       Emission factors and emission factor ratings for sludge incinerators
are shown in Table 2.5-1.   Table 2.5-2 shows the cumulative particle size
distribution and size specific" emission factors for sewage sludge  -  -    "
incinerators.  Figures 2.5-5, 2.5-6, and 2.5-7'show cumulative particle size
distribution and size-specific emission factors for multiple-hearth,
fluidized-bed,- and electric infrared incinerators, respectively.
9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                        2.5-9

-------














o

t—i
y
w
g
co
Cd
g
55-
CO
1
I

&4
^
I— 1
CO
S
0

*— 1
IT)
eg
S
1













•g
§
c=
•rH
_.
1
»








^U
^)
1
• 1— 1
1

S











,gj

S
•**
is
1










•1-1
.1


*.
S-l
. ^
o *§
pjj O
.
^H
"2
•i

§
0
?

M if
-S s
CO



'S'
^
1



—+
0
•1-1
•*— 1
M


>-> &
-S s
al
.
Q?-
i — 1
Uncontro


1=5




J-i tr»
"o £>
*O (O
fV( pi^

*O
x— ->
^5" *••«
^i, -P
•^a

^a
.S' §
• — .+•>


>-l Cn
11

S1'?
l;iL
S-g




g^"
%




S-4 en
.8.S
 C
"o> S
•rp


Pollutant.

fa

05
S

CD
CD
CD
CD
rH
in

CD

H
•0
<— 1
CD
CO
CD
CD




ti





W



o
t-H
CD
CD
CD

CD
V£>
CD
CO
^
in
wo
CD


Particulate




CD
•
|CDj
m
CD
CM
rH
CD
UD

CD



CD
CO
CD
S
CD















VO
rH
CD
CO
CD
CD

^j<
5-
CD

CD
rH







CD *3* CD ^J*
rH rH CNa CM
>— ^ •*— ^ ^— -* -*~- s
CD CD CD CM
in t— •

CD «* CD \O
CM CO UD CO
CD C** CD CO
rH rH CO nl*




\& CD ^J* .1^
CD CD CD CD
CO CD CM CO
rH CM CM CM
CD CD CD CD















CO CD CM •*
rH CM CM CM
CD CD CD C3
CT1 CD rH CM
CD rH rH rH
CD CD CD CD

CM CM CM CM
rH CM «*


in CD CD CD
CM in CD in


X
•—
0

fa ca . ta

CU CU (I>
CM S CD VD S S S
^4*
rH •*_' CO
CD
CM

CO @ CD GO" € ^ ^
' ' £i ' '
"* CD * ,
rH



o O ca ca tq w ,
O CD CU <13  CD
CD



<=>
< — 1
• . • ".:•- ••" " - - . -- • ....-_--__ ,; ~ -'; _-.. -
- - ..-.—:- ... "- '""" " ""


C_> CJ C^t CJ C_J f~} (T~\



C3 Q5 O <1) CD CP 
O3 O3 _, pj
fO •«—! >r— | X {£
2"§ ^ cf g 3 US &
id, -a 5-1 Ct vQ roG1^
H • TO I 	 1 HJ I_) r-H O
CU £3 *fH ro O
i-a co a c_> t=. . - ,




















g
•^H





















"S
•^
CU
s
CO
• tH
1
SO
i
G
'o
S3
•«H
O
CO
gu
^_J
s
>d
CO rH
cu to
ja
C_3
CO CU
cu S1
O CU
•— 1 E>
O n3
J§

*^3J CU
03 *e
i'-1
•B S
OJ Qi
- 
-------
    TABLE 2.5-2.   CUMULATIVE PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION AND SIZE SPECIFIC
              EMISSION FACTORS FOR  SEWAGE  SLUDGE  INCINERATORS3-
Particle Cumulative mass % < stated size
size.
microns
15

10

5.0

2.5

1.0

0.625

TOTAL

Uncontrol led Control led
MH° [PS0 Ela MHD FBC Ela
15 NA 43 30 7.7 60

10 NA 30 27 7.3 50

5.3 NA 17 25 6.7 35

2.8 NA 10 22 6.0 25

1.2 NA 6.0 20 5.0 18

0.75 NA 5.0 17 2.7 15

100 100 100 100 100 100

Cumulative
Uncontrol
MHD FBC
6.0 NA
(12)
4.1 NA
(8.2)
2.1 NA
(4.2)
1.1 NA
(2.2)
0.47 NA
(0.94)
0.30 NA
(0.60)
40 NA
(80)
emission
led
Eld
4.3
(8.6)
3.0
(6.0)
1.7
(3.4)
1.0
(2.0)
0.60
(1.2)
0.50
(1.0)
10
(20)
factor.

MHD
0.12
(0.24)
0.11
(0.22)
0.10
(0.20)
0.09
(0.18)
0.08
(0.16)
0.07
(0.14)
0.40
(0.80)
kg/Mg (Ib/ton)
Controlled
FBC
0.23
(0.46)
0.22
(0.44)
0.20
(0.40)
0.18
(0.36)
0.15
(0.30)
0.08
(0.16)
3.0
(6.0)

Eld
1.2
(2.4)
1.0
(2.0)
0.70
(1.4)
0.50
(1.0)
0.35
(0.70)
0.30
(0.60)
2.0
(4.0)
^Reference 5. NA == riot available. ' " •
bMH =
'CFB r
dEI -

























multiple hearth.
fluidized bed.
electric infrared.
hn o n
•*-4 X * W
60
A!
M 7.5
o
•u
o
n)
•w 6.0
c
o
•H
" CO , c
w 4.5
•H
6

-------
                                                     0.24




                                                     0.20




                                                     Q..16
                                                                   60
                                                                   S
                                                              0.12 |
                                                                    en
                                                                    CO
                                                                   •H


                                                              0.08  "

                                                                    cu
           O.I
                   1.0               10
                      Piirtlclt d1«Mttr (ui»)
                                                    i  i  i i i 11
                                                           100
                                                    -  0.04  g

                                                            a
                                                            o

                                                      0     "
          Figure 2.5-6.   Cumulative particle size distribution and

                      size-specific emission factors for

                          fluidized-bed incinerators.
        60 6
        35

        "eo
        j<
         . 5
        n
        O
        *>
        u

        ."*
        «•
        O
        T< .
        10 -i
        « 3
•5

I1
i.
            0.1
                     Controlled
                                              Uncontrolled
                     i  i iiiiii
                    l.o               10
                       PartlcU di**ct
-------
 References for Section 2.5

1.   Second Review Of Standards Of Performance For Sewage Sludge Incinerators.
    EPA-450/3-84-010, U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Research Triangle
    Park,  NC,  March 1984.                         :

2.   Process Design Manual  For Sludge Treatment And Disposal.   EPA-625/1-79-011,
    U. S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH,  September 1979.

3.   Control Techniques For Particulate Emissions :From Stationary Sources -  Volume 1.
    EPA-450/3-81-005a, U.  S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
    NC, September 1982.

4.   Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Section 2.5: Sewage Sludge Incineration.
    EPA-450/4-90-017, U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Research Triangle Park,
    NC, August 1990.
  9/90                         Solid Waste Disposal                       2.5-13

-------

-------
 4.2.2.13  Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Industry1"9

      Magnetic tape manufacturing is a subcategory of industrial paper
 coating, which includes coating of foil and plastic film.  In the
 manufacturing process, a mixture of magnetic particles,  resins and solvents is
 coated on a thin plastic film or "web".  Magnetic tape is used largely for
 audio and video recording and computer information storage.  Other uses
 include magnetic cards, credit cards, bank transfer ribbons,  instrumentation
 tape, and dictation tape.  The magnetic tape coating industry is included in
 two Standard Industrial Classification codes, 3573 (Electronic Computing
 Equipment) and 3679 (Electronic Components Wot Elsewhere Classified).

      Process Description1'2 - The process of manufacturing magnetic tape
 consists of:

           1) mixing the coating ingredients (including solvents)
           2) conditioning the web
           3) applying the coating to the web
           4) orienting the magnetic particles  :
           5) drying the coating in a drying oven,
           6) finishing the tape by calendering,.rewinding, slitting,  testing,
           and packaging.                        :

      Figure 4.2.2.13-1 shows a typical magnetic:tape coating  operation,
 indicating volatile organic compound (VOC) emission points.  Typical  plants
 have.from 5 to 12 horizontal or vertical solvent  storage tanks,  ranging in
 capacity from 3,800 to 75,700 liters (1,000 to 20,000 gallons),  that  are
 operated at or slightly above atmospheric pressure.   Coating  preparation
 equipment includes the mills, mixers,  polishing  tanks, and holding tanks used
 to prepare the magnetic coatings before application.   Four types of coaters
 are used in producing magnetic tapes:   extrusion  (slot die),  gravure,  knife,
 and reverse roll  (3-  and 4-roll).   The web may carry coating  on  one or both
 sides.   Some products receive a nonmagnetic coating on the back.   After
 coating,  the web  is guided through an orientation  field,  in which an
 electromagnet or  permanent magnet aligns the individual  magnetic particles in
 the intended direction.   Webs from which flexible  disks  are to be produced do
 not^go  through the orientation process.   The coated web  then  passes through a
 drying  oven,  where the solvents in the coating evaporate.   Typically,  air
 flotation ovens are used,  in which the web is supported  by jets  of drying air.
 For safe operation,  the concentration of solvent vapors  is held  between 10 and
 40 percent of the lower explosive limit.   The dry  coated web  may be passed
 through several calendering tolls to compact the coating and  to  smooth the
 surface finish.   Nondestructive testing is performed on  up to 100 percent of
 the final  product,  depending on the level of precision required  of the final
 product.   The web may then be slit  into the desired  tape widths.   Flexible
 disks are  punched from the finished web with a die.   The final product is then
 packaged.   Some plants ship the coated webs in bulk  to other  facilities  for
 slitting and packaging.

      High performance tapes require very clean production conditions,
•especially in the coating  application and drying oven areas.   Air supplied to

 9/90                       Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.13-1

-------
             s
             O
             §
                                                                            2L

                                                                            O
                                                                            "8
                                                                            O
4.2.2.13-2
EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
 these areas is conditioned to remove dust particles and to adjust the
 temperature and humidity.  In some cases, "clean room" conditions are
 rigorously maintained.                         :

      Emissions And Controls1'8 - The significant VOC emission sources in a
 magnetic_tape manufacturing plant include the coating preparation equipment
 the coating application and flashoff area, and the drying ovens.  Emissions'
 from the solvent storage tanks and the cleanup area are generally only a
 negligible percentage of total emissions.      ;

      In the mixing or coating preparation area, VOGs are emitted from the
 individual pieces of equipment during the following operations-   filling of
 mixers and tanks; transfer of the coating; intermittent activities,  such as
 changing the filters in the holding tanks; and mixing (if equipment  is not
 equipped with tightly fitting covers).   Factors: affecting emissions  in the
 mixing areas include the capacity of the equipment,  the number of pieces of
 equipment,  solvent vapor pressure,  throughput,  and the design and performance
 of equipment covers.   Emissions will be intermittent or continuous,  depending
 on whether the preparation method is batch or continuous.

      Emissions from the coating application area result from the evaporation
 of solvent during use of the  coating application equipment and from  the
 exposed web as it travels from the  coater to the drying oven (flashoff)
 Factors affecting emissions are the solvent  content  of the coating,  line width
 and speed,  coating thickness,  volatility of  the.solvent(s),  temperature
 distance between  coater and oven, and air turbulence in the coating  area.

      Emissions from the drying oven are of the  remaining  solvent that  is
 driven off  in the oven.   Uncontrolled emissions at this point are determined
 by the solvent content of the. coating when it reaches  the  oven.   Because the
 oven evaporates all  the remaining solvent from  the coating,  there are  no
 process  VOG emissions  after oven drying.

      Solvent type and quantity are  the  common factors  affecting  emissions
 from all operations  in a magnetic tape  coating  facility.   The  rate of
 evaporation or drying  depends  on solvent  vapor  pressure at a  given temperature
 and  concentration.  The  most commonly used organic solvents are  toluene
 methyl  ethyl ketone,  cyclohexanone, tetrahydrofuran, and methyl  isobutyl
 ketone.  Solvents  are  selected for their  cost,  solvency, availability, desired
 evaporation rate,  ease  of use after recovery, compatibility with solvent
 recovery equipment, and  toxicity.'

      Of the  total uncontrolled VOC emissions  from the mixing area and  coating
 operation (application/flashoff area  and  drying oven), approximately 10
 percent is  emitted from  the mixing area,  and  90 percent from the coating
 operation.  Within the coating operation, approximately 10 percent occurs in
 the application/flashoff area, and 90 percent in the drying oven.
                                                                            a
     A control system for evaporative emissions consists of two components  a
capture device and a control device.  The efficiency of the control system is
determined by the efficiencies of the two components.
9/90                       Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.13-3

-------
     A capture device is used to contain emissions from a process operation
and direct them to a stack or to a control device.  Room ventilation systems,
covers, and hoods are possible capture devices from coating preparation
equipment.  Room ventilation systems, hoods, and partial and total enclosures
are typical capture devices used in the coating application area.  A drying
oven can be considered a capture device, because it both contains and directs
VOG process emissions.  The efficiency of a capture device or a combination of
capture devices is variable and depends on the quality of design and the
levels of operation and maintenance.

     A control device is any equipment that has as its primary function the
reduction of emissions to the atmosphere.  Control devices typically used in
this industry are carbon adsorbers, condensers and incinerators.  Tightly
fitting covers on coating preparation equipment may be considered both capture
and control devices, because they can be used either to direct emissions to a
desired point outside the equipment or to prevent potential emissions from
escaping.

     Carbon adsorption units use activated carbon to adsorb VOCs from a gas
stream, after which the VOCs are desorbed and recovered from the carbon.  Two
types of carbon adsorbers are available, fixed bed and fluidized bed.  Fixed
bed carbon adsorbers are designed with a steam-stripping technique to' recover
the VOCs and to regenerate the activated carbon. ' The fluidized bed units used
in this industry are designed to use nitrogen for VOC vapor recovery and
carbon regeneration.  Both types achieve typical iVOC control efficiencies of
95 percent when properly designed, operated arid maintained,      ~

     Condensers control VOC emissions by cooling the solvent-laden gas to the
dew point of the solvent(s) and then collecting the droplets.  There are two
condenser designs commercially available, nitrogen_(inert gas) atmosphere and
air atmosphere.  These systems differ in the design and operation of the
drying oven (i. e., use of nitrogen or air in the oven) and in the method of
cooling the. solvent-laden air (i. e., liquified nitrogen or refrigeration).
Both design types can achieve VOC control efficiencies of 95 percent.

     Incinerators control VOC emissions by oxidation of the organic compounds
into carbon dioxide and water.  Incinerators used to control VOC emissions may
be of thermal or catalytic design and may use primary or secondary heat
recovery to reduce fuel costs.  Thermal incinerators operate at approximately
890°C (1600°F) to assure oxidation of the organic compounds.  Catalytic
incinerators operate in the range of 400° to 540 °:C (750° to 1000°F) while
using a catalyst to achieve comparable oxidation 'of VOCs.   Both design types
achieve a typical VOC control efficiency of 98 percent.

     Tightly fitting covers control VOC emissions from coating preparation
equipment by reducing evaporative losses.  The parameters affecting the
efficiency .of. these controls are solvent vapor pressure, cyclic temperature
change, tank size, and product throughput.  A good system of tightly fitting
covers on coating preparation equipment reduces emissions by as much as 40
percent.  Control efficiencies of 95 or 98 percent can be obtained by venting
the covered equipment to an adsorber, condenser .or incinerator.
4.2.2.13-4                     EMISSION FACTORS  ;                         9/90

-------
 _   J5?n'.the efficiencies of a Capture device and control device are known
 the, efficiency of the control system can be computed by the following
 equation:                                       ;                    °
                    capture    control device    '. control system
                  efficiency x   efficiency    "    efficiency

 The terms of this equation are fractional efficiencies rather than
 percentages.  For instance, a system of hoods delivering 60 percent of VOC
 emissions to a 90 percent efficient carbon adsorber would have control system
 efficiency of 54 percent (0.60 X 0.90 - 0.54).  Table 4.2.2.13-1 summarizes
 control system efficiencies,  which may be used to estimate emissions in the
 absence of measured data on equipment and coating operations.


              TABLE 4.2.2.13-1.  TYPICAL OF CONTROL EFFICIENCIES3
   Control technology                            :         Control Efficiencyb
 Coating Preparation Equipment

   Uncontrolled                                  ]                 n

   Tightly fitting covers                  -  - -                    ^

   Sealed covers with                            :    .          .
     carbon adsorber/condenser                                   95

 Coating Operation01     - - •-   • •         -     -- '..'-"."-  - :,—,  .  -,

   Local ventilation with
     carbon adsorber/condenser                                   83

   Partial  enclosure with
     carbon adsorber/condenser                   •                oy

   Total  enclosure  with
      carbon adsorber/condenser                                  93

   Total  enclosure  with incinerator                               95
aReference
b
 'To be applied to uncontrolled emissions from indicated process area, not from
 entire plant.                                    ;
Includes coating application/flashoff area and drying oven.


  _   Emission Estimation Techniques1'3"9 - In this industry, realistic
emission estimates require solvent consumption data.  The variations found in
coating formulations, line speeds* and products mean that no reliable
inferences can be made otherwise.


                           Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.13-5

-------
     In uncontrolled plants and in those where VOGs are recovered for reuse
or sale, plantwide emissions can be estimated by performing a liquid material
balance based on the assumption that all solvent purchased replaces that which
has been emitted.  Any identifiable and quantifiable side streams should be
subtracted from this total.  The liquid material balance may be performed
Using the following general formula:

                      solvent     quantifiable        VOG
                     purchased " solvent output  =  emitted

The first term encompasses all solvent purchased, including thinners, cleaning
agents, and any solvent directly used in coating formulation.  From this .
total, any quantifiable solvent outputs are subtracted.  Outputs may include
reclaimed solvent sold for use outside the planp or solvent contained in waste
streams.  Reclaimed solvent that is reused at the plant is not subtracted.

     The advantages, of this method are that it is based on data that are
usually readily available, it reflects actual operations rather than
theoretical steady state production and control conditions, and it includes
emissions from all sources at the plant.  Care should be taken not to apply
this method over too short a time span.  Solvent purchase, production and
waste removal occur in cycles which may not coincide exactly.

     Occasionally, a liquid material balance may be possible on a scale
smaller than the entire plant.  Such an approach may be feasible for a single
coating line or group of lines, if served by a dedicated mixing area and a
dedicated control and recovery system.  In this case, the computation begins
with total solvent metered to the mixing area, instead of with solvent
purchased.  Reclaimed solvent is subtracted from this volume, whether or not
it is reused on the site.  Of course, other solvent input and output streams
must be accounted, as previously indicated.  The difference between total
solvent input and total solvent output is then taken to be the quantity of
VOCs emitted from the equipment in question.   ;

     Frequently, the configuration of meters, mixing areas, production
equipment, and controls will make"the liquid material balance approach
impossible.  In cases where control devices des.troy potential emissions, or
where a liquid material balance is inappropriate for other reasons, plantwide
emissions can be estimated by summing the emissions calculated for specific
areas of the plant.  Techniques for these calculations are presented below.

     Estimating VOC emissions from a coating operation  (application/flashoff
area and drying  oven) starts with the assumption that the uncontrolled
emission level is equal to the quantity of solvent contained in the coating
applied.  In other words,  all the VOC in the coating evaporates by the end of
the drying process.

     Two factors are necessary to calculate the quantity of  solvent applied,
solvent content  of the coating and the quantity of coating applied.  Coating
solvent content  can be either directly measured using EPA Reference Method 24
or  estimated using coating formulation data usually available from the plant
owner/operator.  The amount of coating applied may be directly metered.  If it
is. not, it must  be determined from production data.  These data should be
 4.2.2.13-6                     EMISSION FACTORS                            9/90

-------
 available from the plant owner/operator.   Care should be taken in developing
 these two factors to assure that they are in compatible units.  In cases where
 plant-specific data cannot be obtained,  the information in Table 4 2.2 13-2
 may be useful in approximating the quantity of solvent applied.

      When an estimate of uncontrolled emissions is obtained,  the controlled
 emissions level is computed by applying  a control system efficiency factor:

      (uncontrolled VOC)  x (1-control  system efficiency) = (VOC emitted).


              TABLE 4.2.2.13-2.  SELECTED COATING MIX PROPERTIES*1
 Parameter
                                    Unit
                                                                      Range
 Solids


 VOC


 Density  of coating


 Density  of coating solids


 Resins/binder

 Magnetic particles
       weight  %
       volume  %

       weight  %
       volume  %

         kg/1
        lb/gal 	

         kg/1
     . .  lb/gal

  weight % of'  s olids

  weight % of  solids
 15-50
 10-26

 50-85
 74-90

1.0-1.2
  8-10
Density of magnetic material


Viscosity
Coating thickness
  Wet
  Dry
         kg/1
        lb/gal

         Pa-s
                                 lb
                                     /urn
                                     mil
                                     mil
 2.8-4.0
  23-33

 15-21

 66-78

1.2-4.8
 10-40

 2.7-5.0
0.06-0.10
                                          3.8-54
                                         0,15-2.1

                                          1.0-11
                                         0.04-0.4
Reference 9.  To be used when plant-specific data are unavailable.
As previously explained, the control system efficiency is the product of the
efficiencies of the capture device and.of the control device.  If these values
are not known, typical efficiencies for some combinations of capture and
9/90
Evaporation Loss Sources
                                                                    4.2.2.13-7

-------
control devices are presented in Table 4.2.2.13:-!.  It is important to note
that these control system efficiencies apply only to emissions that occur
within the areas serviced by the systems.  Emissions from sources such as
process wastewater or discarded waste coatings may not be controlled at all.

     In cases where emission estimates from the mixing area alone are
desired, a slightly different approach is necessary.  Here, uncontrolled
emissions will consist of only that portion of total solvent that evaporates
during the mixing process.  A liquid material balance across the mixing area
(i.e., solvent entering minxis solvent content of coating applied) would
provide a good estimate.  In the absence of any measured value, it may be
assumed, very approximately, that 10 percent of the total solvent entering the
mixing area is emitted during the mixing process.  When an estimate of
uncontrolled mixing area emissions has been made, the controlled emission rate
can be calculated as discussed previously.  Table 4.2.2.13-1 lists typical
overall control efficiencies for coating mix preparation equipment.

     Solvent storage tanks  of the size typically found in this industry are
regulated by only a few states and localities.  Tank emissions are generally
small  (130 kilograms per year or less).  If an emissions estimate is desired,
it can be computed using the equations, tables and figures provided in Section
4.3.2.
References For  Section 4.2.2.13     .  .-

1.   Magnetic Tape  Manufacturing  Industry  -  Background  Information For
     Proposed Standards.  EPA-450/3-85-029a.,  U. • S.  Environmental  Protection
     Agency, Research Triangle Park,  NC, December  1985.

2.   Control of Volatile  Organic  Emissions From Existing Stationary Sources  -
     Volume II:   Surface  Coating  Of Cans.  Coils. Paper.  Fabrics.  Automobiles.
     And Light  Duty Trucks.  EPA 450/2-77-008,  tl. S.  Environmental Protection
     Agency, Research Triangle Park,  NG, May 1977.

3.   C.  Beall,  "Distribution Of Emissions  Between  Coating Mix Preparation
     Area And The Coating Line",  Memorandum  file,  Midwest Research Institute,
     Raleigh, NC, June  22,  1984.              . '

4.   C.  Beall,  "Distribution Of Emissions  Between  Coating Application/
     Flashoff Area And  Drying Oven",  Memorandum to file, Midwest-Research
     Institute,  Raleigh,  NC,  June 22, 1984	!

 5.   Control Of Volatile  Organic  Emission From;Existing Stationary Sources -
     Volume  I:   Control Methods For Surface-coating Operations.  EPA-450/2-76-
     028, U.  S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,  NC,
     November  1976".            "              ,_-,_-

 6.   G.  Crane,  Carbon Adsorption  For  VOG Control.  U. S.  Environmental
     Protection Agency, Research  Triangle Park, NC, January 1982.
 4.2.2.13-8                     EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
      D  Mascone, "Thermal Incinerator Performance For NSPS", Memorandum,
      Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards, U. S. Environmental
      Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NG, June 11, 1980.

 8.   D. Mascone, "Thermal Incinerator Performance For NSPS, Addendum"
      Memorandum, Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards  U  S  '
      Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 22,


 9.   C. Beall,  "Summary Of Wonconfidential Information On U. S  Magnetic Tape
      Coating Facilities", Memorandum, with attachment, to file, Midwest
      Research Institute, Raleigh,  NC, June 22,  1984.
9/90                       Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.13-9

-------

-------
4.2.2.14  Surface Coating Of Plastic Par1;s For Business Machines

4.2.2.14.1  General1-2

     Surface coating of plastic parts for business machines is defined as the
process of applying coatings to plastic business machines parts to improve the
appearance of the parts, to protect the parts from physical or chemical
stress, and/or to attenuate electromagnetic interference/radio frequency
interference (EMI/RFI) that would otherwise pass through plastic housings.
Plastic parts for business machines are synthetic polymers formed into panels,
housings, bases, covers, or other business machine components.  The business
machines category includes items such as typewriters, electronic computing
devices, calculating and accounting machines, telephone and telegraph
equipment, photocopiers and miscellaneous office machines.

     The process of applying an exterior coating to a plastic part can include
surface preparation, spray coating, and curing, with each step possibly being
repeated several times.   Surface preparation may involve merely wiping off the
surface, or it could involve sanding and puttying to smooth the surface.  The
plastic parts are placed on racks or trays, or are hung on racks or hooks from
an overhead conveyor track for transport among spray booths, flashoff areas
and ovens.  Coatings are sprayed onto parts in partially enclosed booths.  An
induced air flow is maintained through the booths to remove overspray and to
keep solvent concentrations in the room air at safe levels.  Although low
temperature bake ovens (140° F or less) are often used to speed up the curing
process, coatings also may be partially or completely cured at room
temperature.

     Dry filters or water curtains (in water wash spray booths) are used to
remove overspray particles from the booth exhaust.  In waterwash spray booths,
most of the insoluble material, is collected as sludge, but some of this
material is dispersed in the water along with the soluble overspray
components.  Figure 4.2.2.14-1 depicts a typical dry filter spray booth, and
Figure 4.2.2,14-2 depicts a typical water wash spray booth.

     Many surface coating plants have only one manually operated spray gun per
spray booth, and they interchange spray guns according to  what type of
coating is to be applied to the plastic parts.  However, some larger surface
coating plants operate several spray guns (manual or robotic) per spray booth,
because coating a large volume of similar parts on conveyor coating lines
makes production more efficient.

     Spray coating systems commonly used in this industry fall into three
categories, three coat,  two coat, and single coat.  The three coat system is
the most common, applying a prime coat, a color or base coat, and a texture
coat.  Typical dry film thickness for the three coat system ranges from 1 to
3 mils for the prime coat, 1 to 2 mils for the color coat, and 1 to 5 mils for
the texture coat.  Figure 4.2.2.14-3 depicts a typical conveyorized coating
line using the three-coat system.  The conveyor line consists of three
separate spray booths, each followed by a flashoff (or drying) area, all of
9/90                       Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.14-1

-------
                                                                        §•
                                                                        S
                                                           !§
4.2.2.14-2
EMISSION FACTORS'
9/90

-------
9/90
Evaporation Loss Sources
4.2.2.14-3

-------
which is followed by a curing oven.  A two coat system applies a color or base
coat, then a texture coat.  Typical dry film thickness for the two coat system
is 2 mils for the color (or base) coat and 2 to 5 mils for the texture coat.
The rarely used single coat system applies only a thin color coat, either to
protect the plastic substrate or to improve color matching between parts whose
color and texture are molded in.  Less coating solids are applied with the
single coat system than with the other systems.  The dry film thickness
applied for the single coat system depends on the function of the coating.  If
protective properties are desired, the dry film thickness must be at least 1
mil (.001 inches).  For purposes of color matching among parts having
molded-in color and texture, a dry film thickness of 0.5 mils or less is
needed to avoid masking the molded-in texture.  The process of applying 0.5
mils of coating or less for color matching is commonly known as "fog coating",
"mist coating", or "uniforming".

     The three basic spray methods used in this industry to apply
decorative/exterior coatings are air atomized spray, air-assisted airless
spray, and electrostatic air spray.  Air atomized spray is the most widely
used coating technique for plastic business machine parts.  Air-assisted
airless spray is growing in popularity but is still not frequently found.
Electrostatic air spray is rarely used, because plastic parts are not
conductive.  It has been used to coat parts that have been either treated with
a conductive sensitizer or plated with a thin film of metal.

     Air atomized spray coating uses compressed air, which may be heated and
filtered, to atomize the coating and to direct the spray.  Air atomized spray
equipment is compatible with all coatings commonly found on plastic parts for ,
business machines.

     Air-assisted airless spray is a variation o.f'airless spray, a spray
technique used in other industries.  In airless spray coating, the coating is
atomized without air by forcing the liquid coating through specially designed
nozzles, usually at pressures of 7 to 21 megapascals (MPa) (1,000 to 3,000
pounds per square inch).  Air-assisted airless spray atomizes the coating by
the same mechanism as airless spray, but at lower fluid pressures (under 7
MPa).  After atomizing, air is then used to atomize the coating further and to
help shape the spray pattern, reducing overspray to levels lower than those
achieved with airless atomization alone.  Figure 4.2.2.14-4 depicts a typical
air-assisted airless spray gun.  Air-assisted airless spray has been used to
apply prime and color coats but not texture coats, because the larger size of
the sprayed coating droplet (relative to that achieved by conventional, air
atomized spray)  makes it difficult to achieve the desired surface finish
quality for a texture coat.  A, touch-up coating step with air atomized
equipment is sometimes necessary to apply color to recessed and louvered areas
missed by air-assisted airless spray.

     In electrostatic air spray, the coating is, usually charged electrically,
and the parts being coated are grounded to create an electric, potential
between the coating and the parts.  The atomized coating is attracted to the
part by electrostatic force.  Because plastic is an insulator, it is necessary
to provide a conductive surface that can bleed off the electrical charge to
maintain the ground potential of the part as the charged coating particles
accumulate on the surfaces.  Electrostatic air spray, has been demonstrated for
application of prime and color coats and has been1used to apply texture coats,


4.2.2.14-4                     EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
                                      fa
                                                          OS S3
                                                          I
                  a
                  SI
            CO
            CO
            l-l

            s

            o
                                                         S
       s
       8
                                    o
                                   z a
                                   M «5

                                   iSiS

                                  -39-Si
                                                                            ft
                                                                            en
                                                3
                                                .1


                                                i
                                                3
                                                *
                                                                            2
                                                                            «-4
                                                                            CNJ

                                                                            H
                                                                            «*
9/90
Evaporation Loss Sources
                                                                     4.2.2.14-5

-------
          Figure 4.2.2.14-4.   Typical air assisted airless spray gun.5


but this  technique does not  function well with the large  size particles
generated for the texture  coat, and  it  offers no.substantial improvement  over
air atomized spray for texture coating.  A touch-up coating step with  air
atomized  spray  is sometimes  necessary to apply color and  texture to  recessed
and louvered areas missed  by electrostatic spray.

     The  coatings used for decorative/exterior coats are  generally solvent-
based and waterborne coatings.  Solvents-used include toluene, methyl  ethyl
ketone, methylene chloride,  xylene,  acetone and isopropanol.  Typically,
organic solvent-based coatings used  for decorative/exterior coats are  two
types of  two-component catalyzed urethanes.  The isolids contents of  these
coatings  are from 30 to 35 volume percent (low solids) and 40 to 54  volume
percent (medium.solids).-at.the spray gun (i.e., at the,_point of application,
or as applied).  Waterborne  decorative/exterior coatings  typically contain no
more than 37 volume percent  solids at the gun.  Other decorative/exterior
coatings  being used by the industry  include solvent-based high solids  coatings
(i.e., equal to  or greater than 60 volume percent solids) and one-component
low solids and medium solids  coatings.

     The  application of an EMI/RFI shielding coat is done in a variety of
ways.  About 45 percent of EMI/RFI shielding applied to plastic parts  is  done
by zinc-arc spraying, a process that does not emit volatile organic  compounds
(VOG).  About 45 percent is done using organic solvent-based and waterborne
metal-filled coatings,, and the remaining EMI/RFI shielding is achieved by a
variety of techniques involving electroless plating,  and vacuum metallizing or
sputtering (defined, below), and'use of conductive plastics, and metal  inserts.

     Zinc-arc spraying is a two-step process in which the plastic surface
(usually  the interior.of a housing) is first roughened by sanding or grit
blasting and then sprayed with molten zinc.   Grit, blasting and zinc-arc
spraying are performed in separate booths specifically equipped for those
activities.   Both the surface preparation and the zinc-arc spraying steps
currently are performed manually,  but robot systems have recently become
available.  Zinc-arc spraying requires a spray booth,  a special spray gun,
pressurized air and zinc wire.  The zinc-arc spray gun mechanically feeds two
zinc wires into the tip of the spray gun, where they are melted by an electric
4.2.2.14-6                     EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
arc.  A high pressure air nozzle blows the molten zinc particles onto the
surface of the plastic part.  The coating thickness usually ranges from 1 to 4
mils, depending on product requirements.

     Conductive coatings can be applied with most conventional spray equipment
used to apply exterior coatings.  Conductive coatings are usually applied
manually with air spray guns, although air-assisted airless spray guns are
sometimes used.  Electrostatic spray methods can not be used because of the
high conductivity of EMI/RFI shielding coatings.

     Organic solvent-based conductive coatings contain particles of nickel,
silver, copper or graphite, in either an acrylic or an urethane resin.
Nickel-filled acrylic coatings are the most frequently used, because of their
shielding ability and their lower cost.  Nickel-filled acrylics and urethanes
contain from 15 to 25 volume percent solids at the gun.  Waterborne nickel-
filled acrylics with between 25 and 34 volume percent solids at the gun
(approximately 50 to 60 volume percent solids, minus water) are less
frequently used than,ares organic-solvent-based conductive coatings.

     The application of a conductive coating usually involves three steps:
surface preparation, coating application, and curing.  Although the first step
can be eliminated if parts are kept free of mold-release agents and dirt, part
surfaces are usually cleaned by wiping with organic solvents or detergent
solutions and then roughened by light sanding.  Coatings are usually applied
to the interior surface of plastic housings, at a dry film thickness of 1 to
3 mils.  Most conductive! coatirigs can be cured at room temperature, but some
must be baked in an oven.       .   .    .        — • „..,

     Electroless plating is a dip process iti which a film of metal is
deposited in aqueous solution onto all exposed surfaces of the part.  In the
case of plastic business! machine housings, both sides of a housing are
coated.  No VOC emissions are associated with the plating process itself.
However, coatings applied before the plating step, so that only selected areas
of the parts are plated, may emit VOCs.  Wastewater treatment may be necessary
to treat the spent plating chemicals.

     Vacuum metallizing and sputtering are iSimilar techniques in which a thin
film of metal  (usually aluminum) is deposited from the vapor phase onto the
plastic part.  Although no VOC emissions occur during the actual metallizing
process, prime coats often applied to ensure good adhesion and top coats to
protect the metal film may both emit VOCs

     Conductive plastics are thermoplastic resins that contain conductive
flakes or fibers of materials such as aluminum, steel, metallized glass or
carbon.  Resin types currently available with conductive fillers include
acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene/polycarbonate
blends, polyphenylene oxide, nylon 6/6, polyvinyl chloride, and polybutyl
terephthalate.  The conductivity, and therefore the EMI/RFI shielding
effectiveness, of these materials relies on contact or near contact between
the conductive particles within the resin matrix.  Conductive plastic parts
usually are formed by straight injection molding.  Structural foam injection
molding can Iceduce the EMI/RFI "shie'ld effectiveness' of these materials because
air pockets in the foam separate the conductive particles.
 9/90                       Evaporation Loss Sources                 4.2.2.14-7

-------
4.2.2.14.2  Emissions And Controls

     The major pollutants from surface coating of plastic parts for business
machines are VOC emissions from evaporation of organic solvents in the
coatings used, and from reaction byproducts when the coatings cure.  VOG
sources include spray booth(s), flashoff area(s),:and oven(s) or drying
areas(s).  The relative contribution of each to total VOC emissions from a
from plant to plant, but for an average coating operation, about 80 percent is
emitted from the spray booth(s), 10 percent from the flashoff area(s), and 10
percent from the oven(s) or drying area(s).       ;

     Factors,affecting the quantity of VOC emitted are the VOC content of the
coatings applied, the solids content of coatings as applied, film build
(thickness of the applied coating), and the transfer efficiency (TE) of the
application equipment. To determine of VOC emissions when waterborne coatings
are used, it is necessary to know the amounts of VOC, water and solids in the
coatings.
              «

     The TE is the fraction of the solids sprayed;that remains on a part.  TE
varies with application technique and with type of coating applied.
Table 4.2.2.14-1 presents typical TE values for various application methods.
                   TABLE 4.2.2.14-1. TRANSFER EFFICIENCIES1
     Application methods
      Transfer
    efficiency
Type of coating
     Air atomized spray

     Air-assisted airless spray
     Electrostatic air spray
        25

        40
        40
Prime, color, texture,
touchup and fog coats
Prime, color coats
Prime, color coats
     "As noted in the promulgated standards,  values  are presented solely to
     aid in determining compliance with the standards and may not reflect
     actual TE at a given plant.  For this reason, table should be used with
     caution for estimating VOC emissions from any hew facility.  For a more
     exact estimate of emissions, the actual TE from specific coating
     operations at a given plant should be used.1


     Volatile organic compound emissions can be reduced by using low
VOC-content coatings (i.e., high solids or waterborne coatings), using- surface
finishing techniques that do not emit VOC, improved TE, and/or added controls.
Lower VOC content decorative/exterior coatings include high solids-content
(i.e., at least 60 volume percent solids at the spray gun) two-component
catalyzed urethahe coatings arid,waterborne "coatings (iVe.", "37 volume percent
solids and 12.6 volume percent VOC at the spray gun).  Both of these types of
exterior/decorative coatings contain less VOC than conventional urethane
4.2.2.14-8
EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
            "5
&•-
g,5
•S
             §
             •s

           to ~-r

              w
                     o  o o o
                        o o t— <— i es
                        CD ^** VQ  ^ C3
                        tr> oo oo vo <=>
	    o o o c

   Sf- CO UD    <=> ID ^D
   CO   «. oo    vii P~ «-~
   — — —    Ir*- O3 CP>
            ^
           CO

           O^
                     vo co i— i cr>
                                             CO
                                             *&
                                                   en
                 CO    r-l O l£> £-.

                 CM    CM t^» CO CTt

                 t-l    CO CO CM i—)
                             C4-I
                             •-; en
                      '•£  ca  w co
                      «  co  -o
                      O     "-I  K>   JS
                      o  to  •— i 13     e
                         •3  O «-!     C
                      O3  .-1  CO .— 1
                      e  •— t     o
                      •^  o

                      •   OT
                                          en o CQ

                                             8 w
                                                               x  fi s -^-i
                                                              ••i .1-1 c3 •*->
                                                               S   -   -   -
                          CO W

                             '
      •S-'SS
      "1 W --I
                 -

                 "
                                                .*3
                                                13 ty>
                     ^-
                  T3  O

                SSI  W
               —- 1  O

                a3  w
                w  g
                                co


                                en
                                                                ^
                                                               CO


                                                               s
                                                                                               en en
                                                                                              -t-» -t->
                                                                                               <5 <3
                                                  •=-  — .3 .E5 -a
                                                     co    e co co E=


                                                                                          S S II  II  H
9/90
Evaporation Loss  Sources
                                                                                                   4.2.2.14-9

-------
                8 .8
                     5 S
                    • —I .-H
  a
         
         'S'S
                     8
4.2.2.14-10
                  EMISSION  FACTORS
9/90

-------

X
g<
8
IS
g
EH
£
o
I-H
EH
L
l|
Is
w 25.
S» h- 1
iH §
i
CO
r-l
C>3

CS1
1







•d
CD
s
co2a
3 S
g »— >
C_J




if
g-s
•Is
§ "«
C-J O
"cT
M >1 CO

ft) CO  CD
C N
3 ^}*
VD OO C^-
"S1 CO r"~i



io
^" CT»
O .t-i >s
^ 8-&=) S
•»-J QTl N. CX4
•3 -S g^en w
co -a s c p
<-; t-i ^^ o O
•gn -fe •" S c
a g sr









i




„ :„







o ^j* *a* c=>
^« C"^ tO ^^3
CD C^ ^^ *!J*
C^] t^- CO *3*
t— 1


I— 1
So" ITH"®* o1*
p3 CTI 5S cn pi
CQ O W 8 IcS (O
•fH >t3 S *n3 S C3 O
^— I •— i ^-* ---^..^-t S-i •-- -' —
O O W Q> HH '•(-> -=l
9/90
Evaporation Loss Sources
                                                                   4.2.2.14-11

-------
 CM


 CM
        §
              •s-
        33
        •8
                     -g
               W
        !
•g
               —• ^ «f—i *a
 S ^-t 9 B 5 -H  OB

 g.&.a s S3 a^

ff*fftf>&J?-Sfi
4.2.2.14-12
                        EMISSION FACTORS
                                                          9/90

-------
                          i

                        I
                        1
and
CM CM "-H t-. C3
        oo
CM ^ T-i t—1 OO
CM CTl CM  •• t—
i—i as CM_ CM t—

oo «—i m «-i •-<
         S.  oo
        C=>  r-<


      CD \^  CD



        CD
                                          -S
                                     «
                                     Vt
                                     •O
      r-* 13 en
      Q "-t C
 11 ^ SI «

 llill
                                                   \o
                                                   OO
                                                      SCO

                                                      00
                                                    <*•*«=!•  • OO
                                                    oo <™i tn cs t-<
                                                           U3
                                                           CO
                                                         ••-! C
                                                    •a 33
                                                            PQ
                                                            co
                                                     E  »—
                                                    .H o  e K   «-H


C3 «-J C3 >S CS
        CO
                                      *a  ••"* o^
                                    o  en-t-1 t3
                                     x S  «S •-<
 O) .H

 •S "o

 0?  ®
 w  31

 s a
                                                                             "H ^
                                                                             — 1 "-
to
9/90
Evaporation  Loss  Sources
                                                                                     4.2.2.14-13

-------
     CM

     CM
                                        I
                                        CO
                                        S3'



                                        g1
     <=•      a
                                                      S  O
                                                      en :>
     i
 §
.8*


I
<*H
S
 s
             3
             CM

             CM
S
             •§,
             1
                        I
                        •
                        s
                        .1

3
•a
                                en U
                           s
           as
           <«-<

           g
           O
                        II  II

                        Ed-i-3
                             R3 Q
                             O •£>
                             o g
                 to ig
                 CM •"^



                 II II
                                        1
                •J-j "-J "j  W

                'S'g -35
                 co w E5 ^^

                c^ <^ <^>  W
                 S  o *J   42 C
                 S. O J=3   43 O
                 co .  en   ••-! ja
fS   • CM         O
   JO>  • CM O CD >
   e «a* co in to
   C            f—

fg .8 —i c  S1 c

i  3 «•§ -a -3
         5 II     S O O -
         H    X  O O U


              en 5 sf ^


                 u £3 o  '
                                                        OJ
                                                        p
                                                        5-5
                                                        O
                                                   8  8 S
                                                   o  o o
                              s g  g
4.2.2.14-14
                             EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                    9/90

-------









&£!**• '
QJ rt3
g s|
5 i— i
CO £-<

JV t ^»j
O *—)
§3
S CO
ss
O P5
S §
§§
CO g
co S
5= 0
E3 EH
• CO
in ss

•sf 1— 1
«-H E-<
CM 3
H§
cb
C*3 53
pQ E*<
S 55
E-i O
«-?
















£
"tr>
W
O
'e
1
o
3
t«->
^5
o
>• $-1
S-i
Cr>
M





•s
V
*&















" *• ' "•" ••





s
• ^H
•H
2
^71 O
"H H
8 8
-+j *o
§ §
CLi
CO
Scoca*3 cn'«4<«!j'cD
CD CD CD CO P^ t-H








CD CO r-t t*~ in CTl CD
<=> CM in CD CO CO CD
in co CM r— in VD

CM i— 1 IT! CT» IT)
un CM




i— ic— in CD «~ir-incD
in CM CD in CM CD
CD CD CD « CD CD













•O 1=>

o .S ' "^ • 5 ' •
11 ' 1 i,
O £3 • • OB
O"i *O '. cn *o
B «— 1 C3 •— (
*O *S ^Oi ''O "S ^O^
*3 "w «5 o w .S
'^ g g '4 g g
g g- g. g j5f g!
S- ® '^ £r ^ '-3
1 2 i~2 11 'ffe
*T"1 Q r—t «*r"t O CttJ
•^i w 3 o .I-H to S tj 	
O M t— t co OS-^H- IfO
t— i !S CD C3 S SI C7> £~
& CD
CO ?£«

^1" <— 1 <-H CD
CD VJD CO
CO r=!







CO i-H »-l
^a1 co CM

«H «* CM
CM ID t-l
t— 1




i— l r— in CD
in CM o
CD CD CD













t^
o>
o .S
%-> c>
O cri
O p*
0*3
*o .S^o^
QJ to "H
!c >— i 
hH* -3
CO -J3 OT S-i
	 ilg?
O S-i t-* S

-------
                                              03



                                              1

                                              •§
                                              O
     i
    OJ

    01

    •*,

    a
            II

            w
i
            g
          fc
          I5
          I
                     3
                     B
                             ^3
              $£

              ^
                 T3 .	H

                 ^ -M



                 ^•g.
                                            §r=> O
                                         Cn&&

                                         0)3 "J
                                         5.^=0


                                            
          CO
     Cn CT»CO


     II-
1=1 -

11 e  e

^ -S c" H1 °
(3 <8 *^H *^H tm

                                  .S

                             s s 43
                                             <-; rrt
       H-l M ^
           CM



           **
           I
            W
            s-
4.2.2.14-16
                          EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                                          9/90

-------
coatings, which are typically 32 volume percent solids at the gun.  Lower VOG
content EMI/RFI shielding coatings include organic solvent-based acrylic or
urethane conductive coatings containing at least 25 volume percent solids at
the spray gun and waterborne conductive coatings containing 30 to 34 volume
percent solids at the gun.  Use of lower VOG content coatings reduces
emissions of VOCs both by reducing the volume of coating needed to cover the
part(s) and by reducing the amount of VOC in the coatings that are sprayed.

     The major technique which provides an attractive exterior/decorative
finish on plastic parts for business machines yithout emitting VOCs is the use
of molded-in color and texture.  VOG-free techniques for EMI/RFI shielding
include zinc-arc spraying, electroless plating, the use of conductive plastics
or metal inserts, and in some cases, vacuum metallizing and sputtering.

     Transfer efficiency can be improved by using air-assisted airless or
electrostatic spray equipment, which are more efficient than the common
application technique (air atomized).   More efficient equipment can reduce VOC
emissions by as much as 37 percent over conventional air atomized spray
equipment, through reducing the amount of coating that must be sprayed to
achieve a given film thickness.

     Addon controls applied to VOC emissions in other surface coating
industries include thermal and catalytic incinerators, carbon adsorbers and
condensers.  However, these control technologies have not been used in the
surface coating of plastic parts because the large volume of exhaust air and
the low concentrations of VOC in the exhaust reduce their efficiency.

     The operating parameters in Tables 4.2.2.14-2 and 4.2.2.14-3 and the
emissions factors in Tables 4.2.2.14-4 and 4.2.2.14-5 are representative of
conditions at-existing plants with similar operating characteristics.  The
three general sizes of surface coating plants presented in these tables
(small, medium and large) are given to assist in making a general estimate of
VOC emissions.  However, each plant has its own combination of coating
formulations, application equipment and operating parameters.  Thus, it is
recommended that, whenever possible, plant-specific values be obtained for all
variables when calculating emission estimates.

     A material balance may be used to provide a more accurate estimate of
VOC emissions from the surface coating of plastic parts for business machines.
An emissions estimate can be calculated using coating composition data (as
determined by EPA Reference Method 24) and data on coating and solvent
quantities used in a given time period by a surface coating operation.  Using
this approach, emissions are calculated as follows:
                                     n

                                     X    L=i D<4 W°i
                                     -  1 -     :
where:
     MT = total mass of VOC emitted (kg)
     Lc = volume of each coating consumed,  as sprayed (£)
     De = density of each coating as sprayed (k/£)


9/90                       Evaporation  Loss  Sources                4.2.2.14-17

-------
     W0 = the proportion of VOC in each coating, as sprayed (including
          dilution solvent  added  at  plant)  (weight  fraction)
     n  = number  of coatings  applied ,


References for  Section 4.2.2.14

!•   Surface  Coating Of Plastic Parts For Business  Machines - Background
     Information  for Proposed Standards. EPA-450/3-85-019a, U.  S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research  Triangle Park, NC, December
     1985.

2.   Written  communication  from Midwest Research Institute, Raleigh, NC, to
     David Salman,  U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
     Park, NC,  June 19, 1985.        '           '

3.   ProtectaireR Spray Booths, Protectaire Systems  Company,  Elgin,  IL,  1982,

4.   Sinks* Spray Booths and Related Equipment,  Catalog SB-7,  Binks
     Manufacturing Company, Franklin Park,  IL,  1982.

5.   Product  Literature on  Wagner* Air Coat* Spray Gun, Wagner Spray
    .Technology, Minneapolis,  MN, 1982.
4.2.2.14-18                    EMISSION FACTORS  .                         9/90

-------
5.19  SYNTHETIC FIBER MANUFACTURING

5.19.1  General1"3

     There are two types of synthetic fiber products, the  semisynthetics,  or
cellulosics, (viscose rayon and cellulose acetate) and the true synthetics, or
noncellulosics, (polyester, nylon, acrylic and modacrylic, and polyolefin).
These six fiber types compose over 99 percent of the total production  of
manmade fibers in the U. S.

5.19.2  Process Description'-"6

     Semisynthetics are formed from natural polymeric materials such as
cellulose.  True synthetics are products of the polymerization of  smaller
chemical units into long chain molecular polymers.  Fibers are formed  by
forcing a viscous fluid or solution of the polymer through the small orifices
of a spinneret (see Figure 5.19-1.) and immediately solidifying or
precipitating the resulting filaments.  This prepared polymer may  also be  used
in the manufacture of other than fiber products, such as the enormous  number
of extruded plastic and synthetic rubber products..
                               SPINNING SOLUTION
                               OR DOPE
                                 FIBERS
                          Figure 5.19-1. Spinneret.

     Synthetic fibers  (both  semisynthetic  and  true  synthetic)  are  produced
typically by two easily distinguishable methods, melt  spinning and solvent
spinning.  Melt spinning processes use heat to melt the  fiber  polymer  to  a
viscosity suitable for extrusion through the spinneret.   Solvent spinning
processes use large amounts  of  organic solvents, which usually are recovered
for economic reasons, to dissolve the fiber polymer into a  fluid polymer
solution suitable for extrusion through a  spinneret. The major solvent
spinning operations are dry  spinning and wet spinning.   A third method,
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-1

-------
-reaction  spinning,  is  also used, but  to  a much lesser  extent.  Reaction
 spinning  processes  involve the  formation of  filaments  from prepolymers and
 monomers  that are further polymerized and cross linked after the  filament is
 formed.

      Figure  5.19-2  is  a general process  diagram for synthetic  fiber
 production using the major types of fiber spinning procedures.  The spinning
 process used for a  particular polymer is determined by the polymer's melting
 point, melt  stability  and solubility  in  organic and/or inorganic  (salt)
 solvents.  (The  polymerization  of  the fiber  polymer is typically  carried out
 at  the same  facility that produces the fiber.)  Table  5.19-1 lists the
 different types  of  spinning  methods with the fiber types  produced by each
 method.   After the  fiber is  spun,  it  may undergo one or more different
 processing treatments  to meet the  required physical, or handling properties.
 Such processing  treatments include drawing,  lubrication',  crimping, heat  '
 setting,  cutting, and  twisting. The finished fiber product may be classified
 as  tow,  staple,  or  continuous filament yarn.

                 TABLE 5.19-1.  TYPES  OF  SPINNING, METHODS  AND
                             FIBER TYPES PRODUCED
     Spinning method                     Fiber type

     Melt spinning                       Polyester
                                         Nylon 6
                                         Nylon 66'
                                         Polyolefin

     Solvent spinning_  ......                ....'....

       Dry solvent - spinning              Cellulose acetate
                                         Cellulose triacetate
                                         Acrylic '.
                                         Modacrylic
                                         Vinyon
                                         Spandex

       Wet solvent spinning              Acrylic
                                         Modacrylic

     Reaction spinning                   Sparidex '
                                         Rayon  (viscose process)


      Melt Spinning - Melt spinning uses heat to melt the polymer to a
 viscosity suitable for extrusion.  This type of spinning is used for polymers
 that are not decomposed or degraded by the temperatures necessary for
 extrusion.  Polymer chips may be melted by a number of methods.  The trend is
 toward melting and immediate extrusion of the polymer chips in an electrically
 heated screw extruder. Alternatively, the molten polymer is processed in an
 inert gas atmosphere, usually nitrogen, and is metered through a precisely
 machined gear pump to a filter assembly consisting of a series of metal gauges
 interspersed in layers of graded sand.  The molten polymer is extruded at high


 5.19-2                         EMISSION FACTORS        .                   9/90

-------
                  Figure  5.19-2.   General  process  diagram for,
                   melt,  wet and dry spun systhetic fibers.
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-3

-------
pressure and constant rate through a spinneret into a relatively  cooler  air
stream which solidifies the filaments.  Lubricants and finishing  oils  are
applied to the fibers in the spin cell.  At the base of the spin  cell, a
thread guide converges the individual filaments to produce a  continuous
filament yarn, or a spun yarn, that typically is'composed of  between 15  and
100 filaments.  Once formed, the filament yarn either is immediately wound
onto bobbins or is further treated for certain desired characteristics or  end
use^  Treatments include drawing, lubrication, crimping, heat setting,
cutting, and twisting.

     Since melt spinning does not require the use of solvents,  VOG emissions
are significantly lower than those from dry and wet solvent spinning
processes.  Lubricants and oils are sometimes added during the spinning  of the
fibers to provide certain properties necessary for subsequent operations,  such
as lubrication and static suppression.  These lubricants and  oils vaporize,
condense, and then coalesce as aerosols primarily from the spinning operation,
although certain post-spinning operations may aljso give rise  to these  aerosol
emissions.

     Dry Solvent Spinning  - The dry spinning process begins by dissolving  the
polymer in an organic solvent. This solution is blended with  additives and
is filtered to produce a viscous polymer  solution, referred to as "dope",  for
spinning.  The polymer solution is then extruded through a spinneret as
filaments into a zone of heated gas or vapor.  The solvent evaporates  into
the gas stream and leaves  solidified  filaments, which are further treated
using one or more of the processes described in the general process
description section.   (See Figure  5.19-3.)  This; type of spinning is used  for
easily dissolved polymers  such as  cellulose acetate, acrylics and modacrylics.
         POLYMER
                                          SPTOCSLL
              VOC     A
              EMISSIONS I
                                              SOLVENT-LADEN
                                              STREAM TO
                                              RECOVERY
                                                                •PRODUCT
                          Figure 5.19-3.  Dry spinning.
 5'.19-4
EMISSION FACTORS.
9/90

-------
      Dry spinning is the fiber formation process potentially emitting the'"
 largest amounts of VOC per pound of fiber produced.  Air pollutant emissions
 include volatilized residual monomer,  organic solvents, additives, and other
 organic compounds used in fiber processing.   Unrecovered solvent constitutes
 the  major substance.   The largest amounts of unrecovered solvent are emitted
 from the fiber spinning step and drying the  fiber.  Other emission sources
 include dope  preparation (dissolving the polymer,  blending the spinning
 solution,  and filtering the dope),  fiber processing (drawing, washing,
 crimping)  and solvent recovery.

      Wet Solvent Spinning - Wet spinning also uses solvent to dissolve the
 polymer to prepare the spinning dope.  The process  begins by dissolving polymer
 chips in a suitable organic solvent,  such as dimethylformamide (DMF),
 dimethylacetamide (DMAc),  or acetone,  as in  dry spinning; or in a weak
 inorganic  acid,  such as zinc chloride  or aqueous sodium thiocyanate.  In wet
 spinning,  the spinning solution is  extruded  through spinnerets into a
 precipitation bath that contains a  coagulant (or precipant) such as aqueous
 DMAc or water.   Precipitation or coagulation occurs by diffusion of the
 solvent out of the thread and by diffusion of the  coagulant into the thread.
 Wet  spun filaments also undergo  one or more  of the additional treatment
 processes  described earlier,  as  depicted in  Figure 5.19-4.
         POLYMER
     PRECffrTATION
     BATH SOLUTION

     SOLVENT/WATER
     MIXTURE)
                                                                    •PRODUCT
                            SPINNERET
                         Figure 5,19-4.  Wet spinning.

     Air pollution emission points in 'the wet spinning "organic  solvent
process are similar to those of dry spinning.  Wet  spinning processes that  use
solutions of acids or salts to dissolve the polymer chips emit  no  solvent VOC,
only unreacted monomer, and are, therefore, relatively clean,from  an air
pollution standpoint. For those that require solvent, emissions occur as
solvent evaporates from the spinning bath and from  the fiber in post-spinning
operations.
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-5

-------
     Reaction Spinning - As in the wet and dry spinning processes,  the.
reaction spinning process begins with the preparation of a viscous spinning
solution,which is prepared by dissolving a low molecular weight polymer, such
as polyester for the production of spandex fibers, in a suitable solvent and a
reactant, such as di-isocyanate.  The spinning solution is then forced through
spinnerets into a solution..containing a diamine, similarly to wet spinning, or
is combined with the third reactant and then dry:spun.  The primary
distinguishable characteristic of reaction spinning processes is that the
final cross-linking between the polymer molecule!chains in the filament occurs
after the fibers have been spun.  Post-spinning steps typically include drying
and lubrication.  Emissions from the wet and dry reaction spinning processes
are similar to those of solvemt wet and dry spinning, respectively.

5.19.3 Emissions And Controls'.

     For each pound of fiber produced with the organic solvent spinning
processes, a pound of polymer is dissolved in about 3 pounds of solvent.
Because of the economic value of the large amounts of solvent used, capture,
and recovery of these solvents are an integral portion of the solvent spinning
processes.  At present, 94 to 98 percent of the solvents used in these fiber
formation processes is recovered.  In both dry and wet spinning processes,
capture systems with subsequent solvent recovery are applied most frequently
to the fiber spinning operation alone, because the emission stream from the
spinning operation contains the highest concentration of solvent and, there-
fore, possesses the greatest potential for efficient and economic solvent
recovery.  Recovery systems used include gas ads.orption, gas absorption,
condensation, and distillation and are specific, ,to a  particular fiber type or
spinning method.  For example, distillation is typical in wet spinning
processes to recover solvent from the  spinning  bath,  drawing, and washing  (see
Figure 5.19-8),_while condensers or  scrubbers are typical in dry spinning
processes for recovering  solvent-from  the spin  cell  (see Figures 5.19-6 and
5.19-9).  The recovery  systems  themselves are also a  source of  emissions from
the  spinning processes.                         •

      The majority of VOC  emissions  from pre-spinning  (dope preparation, for
example) and post-spinning (washing, drawing,  crimping,  etc.)  operations
typically are not recovered for reuse.   In many instances, emissions  from
these operations  are  captured by hoods or complete  enclosures  to prevent
worker exposure to solvent vapors  and  unreacted monomer.  Although already
 captured,  the  quantities  of solvent released from these operations are
 typically much smaller ...than...those  released  during the spinning operation.   The
relatively  high air flow rates  required in  order to  reduce  solvent and  monomer
 concentrations  around the process  line to  acceptable health and safety  limits
make recovery economically unattractive.   Solvent recovery,  therefore,  is
 usually not attempted.

      Table 5.19-2 presents emission factors from production of the most
 widely known semisynthetic and true synthetic fibers.  These emission factors
 address emissions only from the spinning and post-spinning operations and.the
 associated recovery or control systems.   Emissions from the polymerization of
 the fiber polymer and from the preparation of the fiber^ polymer; f orspinning
 are not included in these emission factors.   While significant emissions occur
 in the polymerization and related processes, these emissions are discussed in
 Sections 5.13,  "Plastics", and 5.20., "Synthetic Rubber".


 5.19-6                         EMISSION FACTORS                            9/90

-------
       TABLE 5.19-2.   EMISSION FACTORS FOR SYNTHETIC FIBER MANUFACTURING
                          EMISSION FACTOR RATING:  C
Type of Fiber
Rayon, viscose process
Cellulose acetate, filter tow
Cellulose acetate and
triacetate, filament yarn
Polyester, melt spun
Staple
Yarnk
Acrylic, dry spun
Uncontrolled
Controlled
Modacrylic, dry spun
Acrylic and modacrylic, wet spun
Acrylic, inorganic wet spun
Homopolymer
Copolymer
Nylon 6 , melt spun
Staple
Yarn
Nylon 66 , melt spun
Uncontrolled
Controlled
Polyolefin, melt spun
Spandex, dry spun
Spandex, reaction spun
Vinyon, dry spun
Nonme thane
Volatile
Organic s
0
112d
199d,e
0.6f'S
0.05f'§
40
32m
I25g,h
/• 6.75?
2.75§'r
3.93§
0.45s
2.13f>t
0.31f'v
..5g..:.— .,
4.23m
138X
150m
Particulate
c
c
: c
25 . 2h> J
! O.OSS'J
c
: .,..«?... ....
• - c
c
c
: 0.018
c
0.5U
O.lu
o.pis
c
c
i c
References
7-8,10,35-36
11,37
11,38
41-42
21,43-44
45
19,46
47-48
25,49
26
5,25,28,49
32.
50-51
52
aFactors are pounds of emissions per 1000 pounds of fiber spun,  including
 waste fiber.                                    :                   —   -.»..
Uncontrolled carbon disculfide (CS2) emissions are 251 Ib CS2/1000 Ib fiber
 spun; uncontrolled hydrogen sulfide emissions are 50.4 Ib H2S/1000 Ib fiber
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-7

-------
                             TABLE 5.19-2 (CONT.).

 spun.  If recovery of CS2 from the "hot dip" stage takes place, CS2 emissions
 are reduced by about 16%.
°Particulate emissions from the spinning solution preparation area and later
 stages through the finished product are essentially nil.
dAfter recovery from the spin cells and dryers.  'Use of more extensive
 recovery systems can reduce emissions by 40% or more.
eUse of methyl chloride and methanol as the solvent, rather than acetone, in
 production of triacetate can double emissions.  -
fEmitted in aerosol form.
^Uncontrolled.
 .After control on extrusion parts cleaning operations.
^Mostly particulate,, with some aerosols.
^Factors for high intrinsic viscosity industrial and tire yarn production are
 0.18 Ib VOC and 3.85 Ib particulate.            !
mAfter recovery from spin cells.
nAbout 18 Ib is from dope preparation, and about 107 Ib'is from spinning/post-
 spinning operations.                            :
PAfter solvent recovery from the spinning, washing, and drawing stages.  This
 factor includes acrylonitrile emissions.  An emission factor of 87 lb/1000 Ib
 fiber has been reported.
^Average emission factor; range is from 13.9 to 27.7 Ib.
rAverage emision factor; range is from 2.04 to 16.4 Ib.
sAfter recovery of emissions from the spin cells.  Without recovery, emission
 factor would be 1.39 Ib.
Average of plants producing yarn from batch and•continuous polymerization
 processes.  Range is from abut 0.5 to 4.9 Ib.  Add 0.1 Ib to the average
 factor for plants producing tow or staple.  Continous polymerization
 processes average emission rates.approximately 170%.  Batch polymerization
 processes average emission rates approximately 80%.
uFor plants with spinning equipment cleaning operations.
vAfter control of spin cells in plants with batch and continuous
 polymerization processes producing yarn.  Range:is from 0.1 to 0.6 Ib.  Add
 0.02 Ib to the average controlled factor for producing tow or staple.  Double
 the average controlled .emission factor for plants using continuous
 polymerization only; subract 0.01 Ib for plants using batch plymerization
 only.
wAfter control of spinning equipment cleaning operation.
xAfter recovery by carbon adsorption from spin cells and post-spinning
 operations.  Average collection efficiency 83%.  Collection efficiency of
 carbon adsorber decreases over 18 month's^"from'95% to 63%. _
5.19-8                         EMISSION FACTORS      •"    "                9/90

-------
      Examination of VOC pollutant emissions from the synthetic fibers
 industry has recently concentrated on those fiber production processes that
 use an organic solvent to dissolve the polymer for extrusion or that use an
 organic solvent in some other way during the filament forming step.  Such
 processes,  while representing only about 20 percent of total industry
 production, do generate about. 94 percent of totkl industry VOC emissions
 Participate 'emissions from fiber plants are relatively low, at least an order
 of magnitude lower than the solvent VOG emissions.

 5.19.4 Semisynthetics

      Rayon Fiber Process Description5-7-10 - In: the United States,  most rayon
 is made by the viscose process.   Rayon fibers are made using cellulose
 (dissolved wood pulp), sodium hydroxide,  carbon'disulfide,  and sulfuric acid
 As shown in Figure 5.19-5,  the series of chemical reactions in the  viscose
 process used to make rayon consists of the following stages:

      1.    Wood cellulose and a concentrated solution of sodium hydroxide
           react to form soda cellulose.

      2.    The soda cellulose reacts with carbon:disulfide to form sodium
           cellulose xanthate.                   :

      3.    The sodium cellulose xanthate  is dissolved in a dilute  solution of
           sodium hydroxide  to give a viscose solution.

      4.   The solution is ripened or aged to complete the reaction.

      5.   The viscose solution is extruded through spinnerets  into  dilute
          sulfuric  acid, which regenerates the  cellulose in the form of
          continuous  filaments.

      Emissions And  Controls  -  Air pollutant  emissions from  viscose  rayon
 fiber production  are  mainly  carbon disulfide  (CS2), hydrogen sulfide  (H9S)
 and small amounts of  particulate  matter.   Most  CS2 and  HoS  emissions  occur
 during the  spinning and post-spinning processing  operations.  Emission
 controls are not used extensively in the rayon  fiber  industry.  A counter-
 current scrubber  (condenser) is used in at least:  one  instance to recover  CS9
 vapors from the sulfuric acid  bath alone.  The  emissions  from this  operation
 are high enough in concentration  and low enough In volume to make such
 recovery both technically and  economically feasible.  The scrubber recovers
nearly all  of the CS2 and H2S  that enters  it, reducing overall CS7 and HoS
emissions from the process line by about 14 percent.  While carbon adsorption
 systems are capable of CS2 emission reductions  of up  to 95 percent,  attempts
to use carbon adsorbers have had  serious problem's.

      Cellulose Acetate And Triacetate Fiber Process Description5'11'14 - All
cellulose acetate and triacetate fibers are produced by dry spinning.  These
fibers are used for either cigarette filter tow or filament yarn.   Figure
5.19-6 shows the typical process for the production of cigarette filter tow
Dried cellulose acetate polymer flakes are dissolved in a solvent, acetone
and/or a chlorinated hydrocarbon in a closed mixer.  The spinning solution
(dope) is filtered, as it is with other fibers.  The dope is forced through
spinnerets to form cellulose acetate filaments, from which the solvent rapidly


9/90                      Chemical Process Industry                     5.19-9

-------






	  _	-.Figure-. 5... 1.9.=.5.. ,Rayo.n.-.v.is.c.o.s.e.J.prb,c.ess,,.	

evaporates as the  filaments pass  down a spin cell or column.   After the
filaments emerge from  the  spin cell,  there is a residual solvent content which
continues to evaporate more slowly until equilibrium is attained.  The
filaments then undergo several post-spinning operations before they are cut
and baled.

      In the production of  filament yarn, the same basic process steps are
carried out as for filter  tow, up through and including the actual spinning of
the fiber.  Unlike filter  tow  filaments, however, filaments used for filament
yarn  do not undergo the series of post-spinning operations shown in Figure
5.19-6, but rather are wound immediately onto bobbins as they emerge from the
spin  cells.  In  some instances, a slight twist is given to the filaments to
meet  product specifications. In another area, the wound filament yarn is
subsequently removed from the  bobbins and wrapped on beams or cones (referred
to as "beaming") for shipment.      ....         ,            ...	
         f                           ..,,,...,,....,..
      Emissions And Controls -  Air pollutant emissions from cellulose acetate
fiber production include solvents, additives andBother organic compounds used
in fiber processing.  Acetone, methyl ethyl ketone and methanol are the only
solvents currently used in commercial production,of cellulose acetate and
triacetate fibers.                                                    -

      In the  production of all  cellulose acetate fibers, i.e., tow, staple, or
filament yarn,  solvent emissions occur during dissolving of the acetate
.flakes,. .blending and filtering of the dope, spinning of the fiber, processing
of the fiber after spinning, and the solvent recovery process.  The largest
emissions  of solvent occur during spinning and processing of the fiber.
Filament  yarns  are typically not dried  as thoroughly in the spinning cell as
are  tow or staple  yarns. Consequently,  they contain larger amounts of residual
solvent,  which evaporates into the spinning room: air where the filaments are
 5.19-10
EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
                FILTRATION
                                                            t
                                                            {  VOC EMISSIONS
                               	7	7	y

nuuTMe
	 »



















                                                   DRYING
                                                          CUTTING
                                                                 BALING
          Figure 5.19-6.  Cellulose acetate and triacetate filter tow.

wound and into the room air where the wound yarn is subsequently transferred
to  beams.   This residual solvent continues to eyaporate for several days
until an equilibrium is  attained.  The largest emissions occur during the
,.spLnning_.pf. the, fiber and the._.empora.tio.n..o.f...the..res.idual .solvent...from ..the-	
wound and beamed filaments.  Both processes also emit lubricants (various
vegetable and mineral oils) applied to .the fiber after spinning and before    •
winding,  particularly from the dryers in the cigarette filter tow process.

      VOC control techniques,are primarily...carbon adsorbers and scrubbers.  '"
They  are used to control and recover solvent emissions from process gas
streams  from the spin cells in both the  production of cigarette filter tow and
filament yarn.   Carbon adsorbers also are used to control and recover solvent
emissions  from the dryers used in the production of cigarette filter tow.  The
solvent  recovery efficiencies of these recovery;systems range-from 92 to 95
percent.   Fugitive emissions from other  post-spinning operations,  even though
they  are a major source,  are generally not controlled.  In at least one
instance  however,  an air management system is being used in which the air from
the dope  preparation and beaming areas is combined at carefully controlled
rates with the  spinning  room air which is used to provide the quench air for
the spin cell.  A fixed amount of spinning room air is then combined with the'
process  gas  stream from  the spin cell and this mix is vented to the recovery
system.                                          ,

5.19.5 True  Synthetic Fibers                    :

     Polyester  Fiber Process Description5,11,15-17 . Polyethylene
terepthalate  (PET)  polymer is produced from ethylene glycol and either
dimethyl terepthalate (DMT)  or terepthalic acid i(TPA).  Polyester filament
yarn and staple are manufactured either  by direct melt spinning of molten PET
from the polymerization  equipment or by  spinning reheated polymer chips.
Polyester  fiber spinning  is  done almost  exclusively with extruders.which feed
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
                                                                        5.19-11

-------
the molten polymer under pressure through  the  spinnerets.  Filament
solidification is  induced by blowing the filaments with cold air at the top  of
the spin cell.   The filaments are then led down the spin cell through a fiber
finishing application,  from which they are gathered into tow, hauled off and
coiled into  spinning cans.  The post-spinning  processes, steps 14 through  24
in Figure 5.19-7,  usually take up more time and space and may be located far
from the spinning  machines.  Depending on  the  desired product, post-spinning •
operations vary but may include lubrication, drawing, crimping, heat setting,
and stapling.
     1 Chips
     2 Dryer
     3 Extruder       *
     4 Or direct spinning, spinning manlloM
     5 Filtration
6 Spinneret
7 Conventional haul-off
8 Blowing air
9 Spinning shall, solidification
10 Finish application
11 Tow
12 Haul-off unit
13 Fibre can
14 Can creel
15 Finish
IB Drawing
17 Heating zone
18 (setting)
19 Crimping
20 Tow
21 Stapling (letting)
                                                                       24
22 Flocks
23 Bale press
24 Carton lining
                      Figure 5.19-7. Polyester production.     ";/"'      "

      Emissions And Controls - Air  pollutant emissions from polyester  fiber
production include polymer dust from drying" operations, "volatilized'residual
monomer,  fiber lubricants  (in the  form of fume or oil smoke), and the burned
polymer and combustion products from cleaning the spinning equipment.
Relative  to the solvent spinning processes, the melt spinning of polyester
fibers does not generate significant amounts of volatilized monomer or
polymer,  so emission control measures typically are not used in the spinning
area.  Finish oils that are applied  in polyester! fiber spinning operations are
usually recovered and recirculated.   When applied, finish oils are vaporized
in  the spin cell to some.extent and,  in some instances, are vented to either
demisters, which remove some of the  oils, or catalytic incinerators,  which
oxidize significant quantities of  volatile hydrocarbons.  Small amounts  of
finish oils are vaporized  in the post-spinning process.' Vapors from  hot draw
operations are typically controlled  by such devices as electrostatic
precipitators.  Emissions  from most  other steps are not controlled.

      Acrylic And Modacrylic Fiber  Process Description5.18-24,53 _ Acrylic and
modacrylic fibers are based on acrylonitrile monbmer, which is derived from
propylene and ammonia.  Acrylics are defined as those fibers that are composed
of  at least 85 percent acrylonitrile.  Modacrylics are defined as those  fibers
that are  composed of between 35 and  85 percent acrylonitrile.  The remaining
composition of the fiber typically includes at least one of the following -
methyl methacrylate, .methyl acrylate, vinyl acetate, vinyl chloride,  or
vinylidene chloride.  Polyacrylonitrile fiber polymers are produced by the
 5.19-12
    EMISSION FACTORS
                              9/90

-------
 industry using two methods, suspension polymerization and solution
 polymerization.  Either batch or continuous reaction modes may be employed.

      As shown in Figures 5.19-8 and 5.19-9, the polymer is dissolved  in a
 suitable solvent., such as diimethylformamide or dimethylacetamide.  Additives
 and delusterants are added, and the solution is ; usually filtered in plate and
 frame presses.  The solution is then pumped through a manifold to the
 spinnerets (usually a. bank of 30 to 50 per machine).  At this point in the
 process, either wet or dry spinning may be used\to form the acrylic fibers.
 The spinnerets are in a spinning bath for wet spun fiber, or at the top of an
 enclosed column for dry spinning.  The wet spun ifilaments are pulled from the
 bath on takeup wheels, then washed to remove more solvent.  After washing, the
 filaments are gathered into a tow band, stretched to improve strength, dried,
 crimped, heat set, and then cut into staple. The dry spun filaments are
 gathered into a tow band, stretched, dried, crimped, and cut into staple.

      Emissions And Controls - Air pollutant emissions from the production of
 acrylic and modacrylic fibers include emissions :or acrylonitrile (volatilized
 residual monomer), solvents,  additives, and other organics used in fiber
 processing.  As shown in Figures 5.19-8 and 5.19-9, both the wet and the dry
 spinning processes have many emission points.   The major emission areas for
 the wet spin fiber process are the spinning and 'washing steps.   The major
 emission areas from dry spinning of acrylic and modacrylic fibers are the
 spinning and post-spinning areas, up through and including drying.  Solvent
 recovery in dry-spinning of modacrylic fibers is also a major emission point.

      The most cost-effective method for reducing solvent VOC emissions from
 both wet and dry spinning processes is a solvent recovery system.  In wet •
 spinning processes,  distillation is used to recover and recycle solvent from
 the solvent/water stream that circulates through the spinning,  washing,  and
 drawing operations.~ In dry spinning processes,  control"techniques include
 scrubbers,  condensers, and carbon adsorption.  Scrubbers and condensers are
 used to recover solvent emisssions from the spinning cells and the dryers.
 Carbon adsorption is used to  recover solvent emissions from storage tank vents
 and from mixing and filtering operations.   Distillation columns are also used
 in dry spinning processes to  recover solvent from the condenser,  scrubber,  and
 wash water (from the washing  operation).

      Nylon Fiber 6 and 66 Process Description5,17,24-27 _ jjyion 6 polymer is
 produced from caprolactam.   Gaprolactam is derived most commonly from
 cyclohexanone,  which in turn  comes from either phenol or cyclohexane.   About
.70. percent of all nylon 6 polymer is produced by! continuous  polymerization."
 Nylon 66 polymer is  made from adipic acid and hexamethylene  diamine,  which
 react to form hexamethylene diamonium adipate  (AH salt).   The salt is  then -
 washed in a methyl alcohol  bath.   Polymerization then takes  place under heat
 and pressure in a batch process.   The fiber spinning and processing procedures
 are the same as described earlier in the  description of melt spinning.

      Emissions  And Controls -  The major air pollutant emissions from
 production of nylon  6  fibers  are  volatilized monomer (caprolactam)  and oil
 vapors or  mists.   Caprolactam emissions may occur at the spinning step,
 because the polymerization  reaction is  reversible and exothermic,  and the heat
 of extrusion causes  the polymer to  revert  partially to  the monomer form.  A
 monomer recovery system is  used on caprolactam volatilized at the spinneret


 9/9°                       Chemical Process Industry                    5.19-13

-------
                                                                         VOC EMISSIOHS
                     Figure 5.19-8.   Acrylic  fiber wet  spinning,
                                   — HAKE UP
                                      SOLVENT
                                                      RECOVERED SOLVENT
          VOC EMISSIOHS
TJO
                             PIDDLING
                               BOX
                                       DRAWING     HASHING    FINISH     CRIMPING     STEADING     DRYING
                                                        APPLICATION
                                                                          FIBER OUT
                                                                          (RESIDUAL
                                                                           SOLVENT)
                      Figure 5.19-9.   Acrylic fiber  dry spinning.
5.19-14
         EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
                                  KTOIIS
                                         FILTMTICN
                                                     SPIBBKT
                      Figure 5.19-10. Nylon production.

during nylon 6 fiber formation. Monomer recovery, systems are not used  in nylon
66 (polyhexamethylene adipamide) spinning operations,  since nylon  66 does not
contain a significant amount of residual monomer.  Emissions, though small,
are in some instances controlled by catalytic incinerators.  The finish  oils,
plasticizers and lubricants a.pplied to both nylon 6 and 66 fibers  during the
spinning process are vaporised during post-spinning processes and, in  some
instances, such as the hot drawing of nylon 6, are vented to fabric filters,
scrubbers and/or electrostatic precipitators.

     Polyolefin Fiber Process Description2'5'28"30 - Polyolefin fibers are
molecularly oriented extrusions of highly crystalline  olefinic polymers,
predominantly polypropylene.  Melt spinning of polypropylene is the method of
choice because the high degree of polymerization, makes wet spinning or
dissolving of the polymer difficult.  The fiber  spinning and processing
procedures are generally the same as described earlier for melt spinning.
Polypropylene is also manufactured by the split  film process, in which it is
extruded as a film and then stretched and split  into flat filaments, or  narrow
tapes, that are twisted or wound into a fiber. Some fibers are manufactured as
a combination of nylon and polyolefin polymers,  being melted together in a
ratio of about 20 percent nylon 6 and 80 percent' polyolefin such as
polypropylene, and being spun from this melt. Polypropylene is processed more
like nylon 6 than nylon 66, because of the lower,melting point 203°C (397°F)
for nylon 6 versus 263°C (505°F) for nylon 66.   '

     Emissions And Controls - Limited information is available on  emissions
from the actual spinning or processing of polyolefin fibers.  The  available
data quantify and describe the emissions from the ejxtruder/pelletizer stage,
the last stage of polymer manufacture, and from  jjust before the "melting  of the
polymer for spinning.  VOC content of the dried  polymer after extruding  and
9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-15

-------
pelletizing was found to be as much as 0.5 weight percent.  Assuming the
content is  as high as 0.5 percent and that all this VOG is lost in the
extrusion and processing of the fiber (melting, spinning, drawing, winding-,
etc.),  there would be 5 pounds of VOC emissions per 1,000 pounds of polyolefin
fiber-.   The VOCs in the dried polymer are hexane,, propane and methanol, and
the  approximate proportions are 1.6 pounds of hexane, 1.6 pounds of propane
and  1.8 pounds of methanol.
                                                             Q
                      QUENCH TANK
                                PULL
                                .ROLLS
                                           AMREU.IIIG OVEN
                                                                     VOC EMISSIONS
                                                         OR**
                                                         BOLLS
                  Figure 5.19-11. Polyolefin fiber production

      During processing, lubricant and finish oils are added to the fiber, and
 some, of these additives are driven off in the form of aerosols during
 processing.  No specific information has been obtained to describe the oil
 aerosol emissions for polyolefin processing, but 'certain^assumptions may be
.made to provide reasonably accurate values.  Because polyolefins-are melt spun
 similarly to other melt spun fibers (nylon 6, nylon 66, polyester, etc.), a
 fiber similar to the polyolefins would exhibit similar emissions.  Processing
 temperatures are similar for polyolefins and nylon 6.   Thus, aerosol emission
 values for nylon 6 can be assumed valid for. polyolefins.

      Spandex Fiber Manufacturing Process Description^>31-33 - Spandex is a
 generic name for a polyurethane fiber in which the fiber-forming substance is
 a long chain of synthetic polymer comprising of at least 85 percent of a
 segmented polyurethane,.  In between the urethane 'groups, there are long chains
 which may be polyglycols, polyesters or, polyamides. ... Being spun from a
-polyurethane (a rubber-like material), spandex fibers are elastomeric, that
 is,  they stretch.  Spandex fibers are used in such stretch fabrics as belts,
 foundation garments, surgical stockings, and stocking tops.

      Spandex is produced by two different processes in the United States.
 One  process is similar in some respects to that used for acetate textile yarn,
 in that the fiber is dry spun, immediately wound \onto takeup bobbins, and then
 twisted or processed in other ways.  This process is referred to as dry
 spinning.  The other process, which uses reaction spinning, is substantially
 different from any other fiber forming process used by domestic synthetic
 fiber producers.::	:	                        ;        .     _  .     ..
 5.19-16
EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
     Spandex Dry Spun Process Description -  This:manufacturing process, which
is illustrated in Figure 5.19-12, is characterized by use of solution
polymerization and dry spinning with an organic solvent.   Tetrahydrofuran is
the principal raw material.  The compound's  molecular ring structure is
opened, and' the resulting straight chain  compound is  polymerized to give a low
molecular weight polymer. This polymer is then treated with an excess of a
di-isocyanate. The reactant, with any unreacted di-isocyanate,  is next reacted
with some diamine, with monoamine added as a stabilizer.   This final
polymerization stage is carried out in dimethylformamide  solution, and then
the spandex is dry spun from this solution.   Immediately  after spinning,
spandex yarn is wound onto a bobbin as continuous filament yarn.   This yarn is
later transferred to large spools for shipment or for further processing in
another part of the plant.
                                                 DISTILLATION
                                                          I TOG EMISSIONS
                                                              POLYMER FIBER
                                                                OUT
                                             PROCESSING  SEAMING I
                                                    PACKAGING
                     Figure  5.19-12.  Spandex dry spinning.

     Emissions  And Controls -  The-major emissions from the spandex dry
spinning, process  are volatilized solvent losses,. which occur at a number of
points  of production.   Solvent emissions occur during filtering of the spin
dope, spinning  of the fiber, treatment of the fiber after spinning,  and .the
solvent recovery  process.   The emission points from this process are also
shown in Figure 5,19-12.                     -

     Total  emissions from spandex fiber dry spinning are considerably lower
than from other dry spinning processes.  It appears that the single most
influencing factor that accounts for the lower emissions is that, because of
nature  of the polymeric material and/or spinning conditions, the amount of
residual solvent"in the fiber  as it leaves the spin cell is considerably lower
than other  dry  spun fibers. This situation may be because of the lower
 9/90
Chemical Process Industry
5.19-17

-------
 solvent/polymer ratio that is-used in spandex dry spinning.   Less solvent is
•used for each unit of fiber produced, relative to other fibers.   A
 condensation system is used to recover solvent emissions from the .spin cell
 exhaust gas.  Recovery of solvent emissions from this process is  as high as 99
 percent.  Since the residual solvent in the fiber leaving the spin cell is. much
 lower than for other fiber types, the potential for economic capture and
 recovery is also much lower.   Therefore,  these post-spinning emissions,  which
 are small,  are nqt controlled.

      Spandex Reaction Spun Process Description -:In the reaction spun
 process,  a polyol (typically,  polyester)  is reacted with an excess of
 di-isocynate to form the urethane prepolymer, which is pumped through
 spinnerets at a constant rate  into a bath of dilute solution of
 ethylenediamine in toluene. The ethylenediamine Ireacts with isocyanate  end
 groups on the resin to form long chain cross-linked polyurethane elastomeric
 fiber.  The final cross linking reaction takes place after the fiber has been
 spun. .The fiber is transported from the bath to x^ *
i * i of Conveyor Drying .i
FUtraffan )^^^~j
	 ,. • t












                  Figure- 5 '. 19-13. -Spandex reaction -spinning.   ---

      Emissions And Controls -  Essentially all air that enters the spinning
 room is drawn into the hooding that surrounds the process equipment and then
 leads to a carbon adsorption system.  The oven is also vented to the carbon
 adsorber.  The gas streams from the spinning room and oven are combined and
 cooled in a heat exchanger before they enter the activated carbon bed.

      Vinyon Fiber Process Description5'34 - Vinypn is a copolymer of vinyl
 chloride (88 percent) and vinyl acetate (12 percent).  The polymer is
 dissolved in a ketone (acetone' or methyl ethyl ketone) to make a 23 weight
 percent spinning solution.   After filtering, the:solution is extruded as
 filaments into warm air to evaporate the solvent and to allow its recovery and
 reuse. The spinning process is similar to that of cellulose acetate.  After
 5.19-18
EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                           9/90

-------
spinning, the filaments are stretched to achieve molecular orientation to
impart strength.

     Emissions And Controls - Emissions'occur at steps similar to those of
cellulose acetate, at dope preparation  and spinning, and as fugitive
emissions, from the spun fiber during processes such as winding and
stretching.  The major source of VOC is the spinning step, where the warm air
stream evaporates the solvent.  This air/solvent stream is sent to either a
scrubber or carbon adsorber for solvent recovery.  Emissions may also occur at
the exhausts from these control device.

     Other Fibers - There are synthetic fibers manufactured on a small volume
scale relative to the commodity fibers, Because of the wide variety of these
fiber manufacturing processes, specific products and processes are not
discussed. Table 5.19-3 lists some of these fibers and the respective
producers.
            TABLE  5.19-3. OTHER  SYNTHETIC FIBERS AND THEIR MAKERS
                 Nomex  (aramid)
                                   DuPont

                                   DuPont
                  FBI  (polybenzimidazole)

                  Kynol  (novoloid)

                 ^Teflon
                                   Gelanese

                                   Carborundum

                                   DuPont--- -—-
 Crimping:



 Coagulant:


 Continuous
   filament
.   yarn:


 Cutting:

 Delusterant:— •
                   GLOSSARY

A process in which waves and angles are set into fibers,
such as acrylic fiber filaments,  to help simulate properties
of natural fibers..
A substance, either a salt or an acid,"used to precipitate
polymer solids out of emulsions or latexes.
Very long fibers that have been 'converged to form a
multifiber yarn, typically consisting of 15 to 100 filaments.

Refers to the conversion of tow .to staple fiber.

Tiber finishing additives (typically clays or barium sulfate)
used to dull the surfaces of the fibers.
 9/90
            Chemical Process Industry
5.19-19

-------
Dope:
Drawing:
Filament:
The polymer, either in molten form  or  dissolved, in solvent,
that is  spun into fiber.

The stretching of the filaments  in  order  to  increase  the
fiber's  strength; also makes the fiber more  supple and
unshrinkable (that is, the stretch  is  irreversible).  The
degree of stretching varies with the yarn being spun.

The solidified polymer that has  emerged from a  single hole or
orifice  in a spinneret.
Filament yarn: (See continuous filament yarn)
Heat setting:
Lubrication:
Spinneret:
Spun yarn:
Staple:
Tow:
Twisting:
The dimensional stabilization of;the fibers with heat  so
that the fibers are completely undisturbed by subsequent
treatments such as washing or dry cleaning at a lower
temperature.  .To illustrate, heat setting allows a pleat to be
retained in the fabric, while helping prevent undesirable
creases later in the life of the fabric.

The application of oils or similar substances to the
fibers in order, for example, to ifacilitate subsequent
handling of the fibers and to provide static suppression.

A spinneret is used, in the production of.all man-made fiber
whereby liquid is forced through holes.  Filaments emerging
from .the.,holes are,.hardened and,,solidified.  The process of,
extrusion and hardening is.called spinning.

Yarn made from staple fibers that have been twisted or spun
together into a^continuous strand.                     		

Lengths of fiber made by cutting man-made fiber tow into
short (1- to 6-inch) and usually^uniform lengths, which
are subsequently twisted into spun yarn.

A collection of many (often thousands) parallel, continuous
filaments, without twist,  which are grouped together in
a rope-like form having a diameter of about one-quarter
inch.                .

Giving the filaments in a yarn a-'very slight twist that-
prevents the fibers from sliding over each other when pulled,
thus increasing the strength of the yarn. . •
References for Section 5.19                               .   -

1-   Man-made Fiber Producer's Base Book. Textile Economics Bureau
     Incorporated, New York, NY, 1977.

2.   "Fibers - 540.000", Chemical-Economics Handbook.  Menlo Park, CA, March'
     1978.
5.19-20
                EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
3.    Industrial Process Profiles For Environmental Use - Chapter 11 - The
     Synthetic Fiber Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-02-1310, Aeronautical
     Research Associates of Princeton, Princeton; NJ, November 1976.

4.    R. N. Shreve, Chemical Process Industries. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New
     York, NY, 1967.

5.    R. W. Moncrief, Man-made Fibers, Newes-Butterworth, London, 1975.

6.    Guide To Man-made Fibers. Man-made Fiber Producers Association, Inc.
     Washington, DC, 1977.

7.    "Trip Report/Plant Visit To American Enlca Company, Lowland, Tennessee",
     Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC,, January 22, 1980.

8.    "Report Of The Initial Plant Visit To Avtex'• Fibers, Inc., Rayon Fiber
     Division, Front Royal, VA", Pacific Environmental Services, Inc.,
     Durham, NC, January 15, 1980.   '

9.    "Fluidized Recovery System Nabs Carbon Disulfide", Chemical Engineering,
     70181:92-94, April 15, 1963.

10.  Standards Of Performance For Synthetic Fibers NSPS, Docket No. A-80-7,
     II-B-3, "Viscose Rayon Fiber Production - Phase I Investigation", U. S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, February 25, 1980.

11.  "Report Of The Initial-Plant Visit To Tennessee'Eastman Company     	
     Synthetic Fibers Manufacturing", Kingsport,\TN, Pacific Environmental
     Services, Inc., Durham, NC, December 13, 1979.

12.  "Report Of The Phase if'P~lant Visit To Celanese's Celriver Acetate Plant
     In Rock Hill, SC", Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC, May
     28, 1980.                                   I

13.  "Report Of The Phase II Plant Visit To Celanese's Celco Acetate Fiber
     Plant In Narrows, VA", Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC,
     August 11, 1980.                            ;

14.  Standards Of Performance For Synthetic Fibers NSPS, Docket No. A-80-7,
     II-I-43, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, December
     1979.                                       \  .-        	

15.  E. Welfers, "Process And Machine Technology;Of Man-made Fibre
     Production", International Textile Bulletin. World Spinning Edition,
     Schlieren/Zurich, Switzerland, February 1978.

16.  Written communication from R. B. Hayden, E. I. duPont de Nemours-and
     Co., Wilmington, DE, to E. L. Bechstein, Pullman, Inc., Houston, TX,
     November 8, 1978.

17.  Written communication from E. L. Bechstein,; Pullman, Inc., Houston, TX,
     to R. M. Glowers, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, NC, November 17, 1978  .
9/90                       Chemical Process Industry                   5.19-21

-------
18.V"Report Of The Plant Visit To Badische Corporation's Synthetic Fibers
     Plant In Williamsburg, VA", Pacific Environmental  Services, Inc.,
     Durham, NC, November 28, 1979.

1.9.  "Report Of The Initial Plant Visit To Monsanto Company's Plant In    .
     Decatur, AL", Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham  NC
     April 1, 1980.

20.  "Report Of The Initial Plant Visit To American Cyanamid Company",
     Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham\ NC,  April 11, 1980.

21.  Written communication from G. T. Esry, E, I.:duPont de Nemours and Co.,
     Wilmington, DE, to D. R. Goodwin, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Research Triangle Park, NC, July 7, 1978.    "•

22.  "Report Of The Initial Visit To duPont's Acrylic Fiber Plant In
     Waynesboro, VA", Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC
     May 1, 1980.

23.  "Report Of The Phase II Plant Visit To duPont's Acrylic Fiber May Plant
     In Gamden, SC% Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham. NC
     August 8, 1980.

24.  C. N. Click and D. K. Webber, Polymer Industry Ranking By VOG Emission
     Reduction That Would Occur From New Source PerformanceStandards. EPA
     Contract No. 68-02-2619, Pullman, Inc., Houston, TX, August 30, 1979.

25.  Written communication from E. L". Bechsteinj Pullman, Inc7, Houston, TX,
     to R. M.  Glowers, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, NC,^November 28, 1978.        '•.         -

26.  Written communication from R. B. Hayden,  E. I. duPont de Nemours and
     Co., Wilmington, DE, to W. Talbert, Pullman, ;Inc., Houston, TX, October
     17, 1978.

27.  "Report Of The Initial Plant Visit To Allied Chemical's Synthetic Fibers
     Division, Chesterfield, VA, Pacific Environmental  Services, Inc.,
     Durham, NC, November 27, 1979.

28.  Background Information Document -- Polymers And Resins Industry.
     EPA-450/3-83-019a, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Research
     Triangle Park, NC, January 1984.

29.  H. P. Frank, Polypropylene. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New
     York, NY, 1968.                              \

30.  A.'VT Galanti and C~ 'L.' Mantell, Polypropylene"- Fibers and Films,
     Plenum Press,  New York, NY," 1965.

31.  D. W. Grumpier, "Trip Report,- Plant Visit To Globe Manufacturing
     Company", D. Grumpier, U. S.  Environmental Protection Agency,  Research
     Triangle Park, NC, September 16 and 17, 1981.;
5-19-22                        EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
32.  "Standards Of Performance For Synthetic Fibers NSPS, Docket No. A-80-7,
     I1-I-115, Lycra Reamout Plan," U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Washington, DC, May 10, 1979.              :

33.  "Standards Of Performance For Synthetic Fibers NSPS, Docket No. A-80-7,
     II-I-95," U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, March
     2, 1982.                                   :

34.  Written communication from W. K. Mohney, Avtex Fibers, Inc., Meadville,
     PA, to R. Manley, Pacific Environmental Services, Durham, NC,
     April 14, 1981.                            !

35.  Personal communication from J. H. Cbsgrove, Avtex Fibers, Inc., Front
     Royal, VA, to R. Manley, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham,
     NC, November 29, 1982.                     \

36.  Written communication from T. C. Benning,  Jr., American Enka Co.,
     Lowland, TN, -to R. A. Zerbonia, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc.,
     Durham, NC, February 12, 1980.             '.

37.  Written communication from R. 0. Goetz, Virginia State Air Pollution
     Control Board, Richmond, VA, to Director,  Region II, Virginia State Air
     Pollution Control Board, Richmond, VA, November 22, 1974.

38.  Written communication from H. S. Hall, Avtex Fibers, Inc., Valley Forge,
     PA, to J. R. Farmer, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, NC-,' December 12, 1980.—    -  	.-

39.  Written communication from J. C. Pullen, Celahese Fibers Co., Charlotte,
     NC, to R. A. Zerbonia, Pacific Environmental Services, Inc., Durham, NC,  '
     July  3, 1980.   -,-•- ••-.-•--                    :

40.  Written communication from J. C. Pullen, Celanese Fibers Co., Charlotte,
     NC, to National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee,
     U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Resfearch Triangle Park, NC,
     September  8, 1981.

41.  "Report Of  The  Initial Plant Visit To Tennbssee Eastman Company
     Synthetic  Fibers Manufacturing, Kingsport,; TN", Pacific Environmental
     Services,  Inc., Durham, NC, December 13, 1979.

42.  Written  communication from J. C. Edwards,  JTehnessee Eastman Co.,
     Kingsport,  TN,  to R. Zerbonia, Pacific Environmental  Services, Inc.,
     Durham, NC, April  28, 1980.

43.  Written  communication from C. R. Earnhart, E.I. duPont de Nemours and
    . Co.,  Camden, SC, to D. W. Grumpier,  II. S.  Environmental Protection
     . Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,  November  5, 1981.

44.  C. N.  Click and D. K. Weber,  Emission Process  And  Control  Technology
     Study Of The ABS/SAN. Acrylic Fiber. And NBR  Industries. EPA Contract
   " No.  68-02-2619, Pullman,  Inc., Houston,  TX, April  20, 1979. --
 9/90                       Chemical Process Industry                    5.19-23

-------
 45.  Written communication from D. 0. Moore, Jr., Pullman,  Inc., Houston  TX
      to D. C. -Mascone, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
      Triangle Park, NC, April 18, 1979.        ;

 46.  Written communication from W. M. Talbert, Pullman, Inc., Houston, TX, to
      R. J. Kucera, Monsanto Textiles Co., Decatur, AL, July 17, 1978.

 47 '  S^?611 Communication from M. 0. Johnson, Badische Corporation
      Williamsburg, VA, to D. R. Patrick, U. S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 1, 1979.

 48.   Written communication from J. S. Lick, Badische Corporation
      Williamsburg, VA, to D. R. Goodwin, U. S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, .Research Triangle Park,  NC, May 14, 1980.
 49.   P.  T. Wallace, "Nylon Fibers" ,  Chemical Economies Harvlhn^ Stanford
      Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA, December 1977.

 50.   Written communication from R. Legendre, Globe Manufacturing Co   Fall
      River,  MA,  to Central Docket Section,  U.  S.  Environmental Protection
- Ageaey-r-Washtngton, Dg-" -- [ — " — — — -
 51.   Written communication from R.  Legendre,  Globe Manufacturing Co   Fall
      S^'^P fc° J;TrFarmer'  U" S" Environmental Protection Agency,  Research
      Triangle Park,  NC,  June 26, 1980.

 52,   Written communication from R.  H:  Hughes,  Aytex Fibers Co.,  Valley Forge
      PA  to  R.  Manley, Pacific Environmental  Services,  Inc.,  Durham  NC     '
      February 28,  1983.                         ;                        '

 535   ."Report Of The  Phase  II Plant  Visit,  duPont's Acrylic Fiber May  Plant In
   -   Camden,  SC",  Pacific  Environmental  Services,  Inc.,  Durham  NC
      April 29,  1980.                      .                     '    '
5-19-24                        EMISSION FACTORS  .                         9/90

-------
      Particulate emissions from sinter machines•range from 5 to 20 percent of
 the concentrated ore feed.  In product weight, typical emissions, are estimated
 at 106.5 kilograms per megagram (213 pounds per ton) of lead produced.  This
 value and other particulate and S02 factors appear in Table 7.6-1.

      Typical material balances from domestic lead smelters indicate that about
 15 percent of the sulfur in ore concentrate fed to the sinter machine is
 eliminated in the blast furnace.  . However,  only;half of this amount, about 7
 percent of the total sulfur in the ore is emitted as S02.

      The remainder is captured by the slag.  The concentration of this S02
 stream can vary from 1.4 to. 7.2 grams per cubic' meter (500 to 2500 parts per
 million) by volume, depending on the amount of dilution air injected-to
 oxidize the carbon monoxide and to cool the stream before baghouse particulate
 removal.                                                •

      Particulate emissions from blast furnaces contain many kinds of material,
 including a range of lead oxides, quartz, limestone, iron pyrites, iron-lime-
 silicate slag, arsenic and other metallic compounds associated with lead ores.
 These particles readily agglomerate and are primarily submicron in size,
"Slrfflreuil: Lo weL, and cahe~sive.  They wiHr~bridge and arch in hoppers-;—6n	
 average, this dust loading is quite substantial:, as is shown in Table 7.6-1.

      Minor quantities of particulate are .generated by ore crushing and
 materials handling operations, and these emission factors are. also presented
 in Table-7.6-1.                 "              /

     TABLE 7.6-1.  UNCONTROLLED EMISSION FACTORS'FOR PRIMARY LEAD SMELTING*

                   -'-- .     EMISSION FACTOR RATINQ:  B
Process
Total
Particulate
kg/Mg Ib/ton
Sulfur dioxide
kg/Mg Ib/ton
Lead
kg/Mg Ib/ton
 Ore crushing13            1.0     2.0       -       -     .0.15       0.3

 Sintering (updraft)0   106.5   213.0     275.0   550.0     87        174
                                                           (4.2-170) (8.4-340)
 Blast furnaced         180.5   361.0      22.5    45.0     29         59
      .                                          :          (8.7-50)  (17.5-100)

 Dross reverberatory
furnace
Materials
handl ing
10
2
.0
.5
20
5
.0
.0
Neg ;
Neg
2
(1.
.4
3-3.5)
4
(2.
.8
6-7.0
,aOre crushing factors expressed as kg/Mg (Ib/ton) of crushed ore.  All other
  factors are kg/Mg (Ib/ton) of lead product.  Dash = no data.  Neg =
  negligible.
.References 2,13...
 References 1, 4-6, 11, 14-17, 21-22.
 References 1-2, 7, 12, 14, 16-17, 19.
 References 2, 11-12, 14, 18, 20.              •
 ^Reference 2.

 9/90                        Metallurgical Industry                       7.6-5

-------
     -.Table 7.6-2 and Figure 7.6-2 present size specific emission factors  for
the controlled emissions from a primary lead blast, furnace.   No other size
distribution data can be located for point sources;within a  primary lead pro-
cessing plant.  Lacking definitive data, size distributions  for uncontrolled
assuming that the uncontrolled size distributions for the sinter machine and
blast furnace are the same as for fugitive emissions from these sources.

      Tables 7.6-3 through 7.6-7 and Figures 7,6-3^through 7.6-7 present size
specific emission factors for the fugitive emissions generated at a primary  lead
processing plant.  The.size distribution of fugitive emissions at a primary  lead
processing plan£ is fairly uniform, with approximately 79 percent of these
emissions at less than 2.5 micrometers.  Fugitive emissions  less than 0.625
micrometers in size make up approximately half of all fugitive emissions,  except
from the sinter machine, where they constitute about 73 percent.
                                                  i
      Emission factors for total fugitive particulate from primary lead smelting
processes are presented in Table 7.6-8.  The factors are based on a combination
of engineering estimates, test data from plants currently operating, and test
data from plants no longer operating.  The values should be  used with caution,
because of the reported difficulty in accurately measuring the source emission
rates.                                            I

      Emission controls on lead smelter operations,are for particulate and
sulfur dioxide.  The most commonly employed high efficiency  particulate control
devices are fabric filters and electrostatic precipitators (ESP), which often
follow centrifugal collectors and tubular coolers (pseudogravity collectors).

     Three of the six lead smelters presently operating in the United States use
single absorption sulfuric acid plants to control S02 emissions from sinter
machines and, occasionally, from blast furnaces.  Single stage plants can
attain sulfur oxide levels of 5.7 grams per cubic meter (2000 parts per mill-
ion) , and dual stage plants can attain levels of 1.6 grams per cubic meter (550
parts per million).  Typical efficiencies of dual stage sulfuric acid plants in
removing sulfur oxides can exceed 99 percent.  Other technically feasible  S02
control methods are elemental sulfur recovery plants and dimethylaniline (DMA.)
and ammonia absorption processes.  These methods and their representative
control efficiencies are given in Table 7.6-9.
7.6-6                           EMISSION FACTORS                          10/86

-------
References For Section 7.10

 !•  Summary Of Factors Affecting Compliance By Ferrous Foundries. Volume I:
    .Text, EPA-340/1-80-020, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Washington, DC, January 1981.

 2.  Air Pollution Aspects Of The Iron Foundry Industry. APTD-0806, U. S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park. NG, February
     1971.

 3-  Systems Analysis Of Emissions And Emission Control In The Iron Foundry
     Industry. Volume II; ' RvhiTrif.s, APTD-0645, .U. S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 1971.

 4.  J. A. Davis, et al. . Screening Study On Cupolas And Electric Furnaces In
     Gray Iron Foundries. EPA Contract No. 68-01-0611, Battelle Laboratories,
     Columbus, OH, August 1975.

 5.  R. W. Hein, et al.. Principles Of Metal Casting. McGraw-Hill, New York
     1967.

 6.  P. Fennelly and P. Spawn, Air Pollution Control Techniques For Electric
     Arc Furnaces In.The Iron And Steel Foundry Industry. EPA-450/2-78-024,
     U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June
     1978.                                      ;

 7.  R. D. Chmielewski and S,, Calvert, Flux Force/Condensation Scrubbing For
     Collecting Fine Particulate From Iron Melting Cupola. .EPA-600/7-81-148,
     U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
     September 1981.             	         •    - •         -

 8.  W. F. Hammond and S. M. Weiss, "Air Contaminant Emissions From
     Metallurgical Operations; In Los Angeles County", Presented at the Air
     Pollution Control Institute, Los Angeles, CA, July 1964.

 9.  Particulate Emission Test Report On A Gray Iron Cupola At Gherryville
     Foundry Works. Cherryville. NGT State Department Of Environmental Health
     And Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC, December 18, 1975.

10.  J. W. Davis and A. B. Draper, Statistical Analysis Of The Operating
     Parameters Which Affect Cupola Emissions. DOE Contract No. EY-76-5-02-
     2840.*000, Center For Air Environment Studies, Pennsylvania State
     University, University Park, PA, December 1977.

11-  Air Pollution Engineering Manual, Second Edition, AP-40, U. S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1973.
     Out of Print.

12.  Written communication from Dean Packard, Department Of Natural
     Resources, Madison, WI, to Douglas Seeley, Alliance Technology, Bedford,
     MA, April 15, 1982.
9/90                        Metallurgical Industry                     7.10-19

-------
13.  Particulate  Emissions  Testing At  Opellka Foundry.  Birmingham.  AL. Air
     Pollution. Control  Commission,  Montgomery,  AL>  November 1977 -  January
     1978.                                                                J

14.  Written  communication  from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,  St.. Paul,
     MN, to Mike  Jasinski,  Alliance Technology,  Bedford,  MA,  July 12,  1982.

15 •  Stack Test Report.  Dunkirk Radiator  Corporation Cupola Scrubber.  State
     Department Of  Environmental  Conservation,  Region IX,  Albany,  NY
     November 1975.                               ;           .          '    .

16 •  Particulate  Emission Test  Report  For A Scrubber Stack For A Gray  Iron
     Cupola At Dewey Brothers.  Goldsboro.  NC.  State Department Of
     Environmental  Health And Natural  Resources,  Raleigh,  NC,  April  7, 1978.
17-  Stack Test Report. Wm-Hrrngf.on  Corp.  Cupol a. ! s-hai-a n^t-t-n.^-h n-F
     Environmental Conservation, Region  IX, Albany,  NY,  November .4-5,  1976.
18 •  Stack Test Report. Dregsp.r Clark Cupola Wet  Scrubber.  Qrlean.  NY.  State
     Department Of -Environmental Conservation, Altany,  NY,  July 14  & 18,


19 •  Stack Test Report. Chevrolet Tonawanda Metal 'Casting.  Plant Cupola #3
     And Cupola #4. Tonawanda. NY. State Department  Of  Environmental
     Conservation., Albany, NY, August 1977.

20 •  Stack Analysis For Particulate Emission. Atlantic -States  Cast  Iron
     Foundry/Scrubber , State Department Of Environmental  Protection,  Trenton,
     NJ, September 1980.                          '

21.  S. Calvert, et al_._. Fine Particle Scrubber Performance; 'EPA'-TfiSQ/? -76.-
     093, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Cincinnati, OH,  October
     1974.                                        '   '
22.  S. Calvert, et ai^, National Dust Collector rtndel  850 Variable Rod
     Module Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/2-76-282, U.  S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, ;OH, December 1976..

23 •  Source Test. Electric Arc Furnace At Paxton-Mitchell Foundry. Omaha.  NBT
     Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, 'October 1974.

24 •  Source Test. John -Deere Tractor Works. East Moline.- IL. Gray  Iron
     Electric Arc Furnace. Walden Research, Wilmington, MA, July 1974.

25.  S. Gronberg, Characterization Of Inhalable Particulate Matter Emissions
     From An Iron Foundry. Lynchburg Foundry. Archer Creek Plant, EPA-600/X-
     85-328, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, August
     1984.  .         .                             ;

26 .  Particulate Emissions Measurements From The Ro'toclone And General
     Casting Shakeout Operations Of United States Pipe  & Foundry.  Inc.
     Anniston, AL, Black, Crow and Eidsness, Montgomery, AL, November  1973,
7.10-20       ••                EMISSION FACTORS                      .     9/90

-------
27.   Report Of Source Emissions Testing At Newbury Manufacturing. Talladega1
     AL. State Air Pollution Control Commission,:Montgomery, AL, May 15-16,
     1979.

28.   Particulate Emission Test Report For A Gray Iron Cupola At Hardy And
     Newson. La Grange. NC. State Department Of Environmental Health And
     Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC, August 2-3,'1977.
                                                 i             .    •
29.   H. R. Crabaugh, et al.. "Dust And Fumes From Gray Iron Cupolas:  How Are
     They Controlled In Los Angeles County?", Air Repair. 4_(3):125-130,
     November 1954.

30.   J. M. Kane, "Equipment For Cupola Control".; American,Foundryman's
     Society Transactions.  64:525-531, 1956.

31.   Control Techniques For Lead Air Emissions.  2 Volumes, EPA-450/2-77-012,
     U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
     .December 1977.                              |

32.   W. E. Davis, Emissions Study Of Industrial  Sources Of Lead Air
     Pollutants. 1970. APTD-1543, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Research Triangle Park, NG, April 1973.

33.  Emission Test No. EMB-71-CI-27,'Office Of Air Quality Planning And
     Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
     Park, NC, February 1972.

34.  Emission Test No. EMB-71-CI-30, Office Of Air'Quality Planning And
     Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
  '-  Park, NC, March 1972.       ..  .  ..'... ... 	:..._  "....'..	..._,_,.._:,,,..

35.  John Zoller, et al..  Assessment Of Fugitive Particulate  Emission Factors
     For  Industrial Processes.  EPA-450/3-78-107, U.  S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Research Triangle  Park,  NC,  September 1978.

36.  John Jeffery, et al..  Gray Iron Foundry  Industry Particulate Emissions:
     Source Category Report. EPA-600/7-86-054, U.  S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, Cincinnati, OH, December  1986.
 9/90                        Metallurgical Industry                     7.10-21

-------

-------
i
B
O
4J
w to i-i
31 ro co
o *n ft) o 'U o
O O O *H •* -» -•<
^ S
ft) &> a a> ,0 P .a
*J AJ *J W -H ^5 qJ,Q
0) ft) ftl ft) 3 K S M
4J4J4J 4J C W 0- X «
c c c c ft) w 3
Cj t> CD o > w •<
n
a
4J U 4J
o u
O B fci
i-4 M «rt
JO O •«
Q<
•o « -a
C M > C
a u , (4
a) m *-( w o
•u o. «> o.
_ oa B «H > a
SI * 4J O >
bO O i-4 O 0>
•H K 3 OJ
Q 05 I 03


t |

J= JS
•H -*4
O O
in m
o o
0 0
as
m in
m m
I i

1 i
>
in —4
4J
V
B 03
U
01
-H U
o a
u
Honcontact recov
without direct
evaporator
Pn ro fn
O O O
in in in
o o o
T-l 1-J T-l
O O O
^^•a
0 O 0
1 1 1
1 1 1
esi  ji
4J « W
B 01 o

«
Snelt dissolving
'&!•
1 o c5
e s
• 0 0
s.s>
, 0 0
CM CM
O O
1-4 —4
i • •
0 O
1 o o
O 0
i <"> i
o
in
-H
in
in
in
; CO O
Cu
CO
p
O
"S M
U ft)

. S 2
1 B 0
C3 CO


B
•H
: «i
> 3
m tn
o o
tn m
o
Sr-i n V) JT •
9 iH >, 4J ~^ o
m K 9> 9
§ g -S || ?SS"2
°'o.l 82 * -8° «
oj ft> tc ji «e o iJ
fcj « JS B B S
B JS ^-4 " 13 U 1
II 4J*3U bpBUO
"5, « •** 0) -rt 13 "3
.Cu 0 -( • > C S S
4-1 . C inCO. tOiH .O U -rt
xu^i ° si o . "c s n o) s
aa out) a, 3 o a -o
« -a > -H *cno-H kiB -
1 i 1-1 u S o) a u a, -a 03 -a
KO9 M-rHi-t e CUO V
S2cr «4> o o o 4J o a, -o
W BB U^UiH S 3
y-s m -H « to y o ai j»i w «H
t | &i w M *o iw H C cd
^ . E 1>^ s^S's 1 -" e
tO in - ftl 3 01 rt 3 O. W «4
U »44Jj:l4-IJS3 O4J 4J
a>« ojcvtK ^coco c a
i t 4-iuua o  »Ccn  • t-* M o -n y so •< m
•H-HQ9 ^ > O *HO d.'-s. C B 0)
ct4-(ft) tnft). *d*-HOC o u
^ ^ 3rHy «0 t-i vH O 4J 4J
ft) a) 3 U S QJ O I-i O -J) 4J '*^. C i— (
S S -O ff) 03 U -H MtOrH O CO
* ^ S.r*S «0>u §"§0*^ ci'S o
ft) *j xJ to ti rd w o '»-•' *J
Cb S ft* .Q >"i *H W •)•{ tjQ ^ C
ojKBjtJto m cos o«o c
a n TH >, o *H t-t o 4> o P « >
f- •a)«H"dftlo ni s cj > .0 4-1 o u
c c 1 "-M to > t^' y cu ft} ft) y y O' ^N 4J
§ 5 *3a)« -a tn-fl^-acoc
IJ 5 OljSffS iHO "2 .-c-HrHH^-O
C rH M 4J O O >> ^» T-1 03 &\ r^ ^t r^ y t— ! y 00 S
O) fll ftl Q) C Oi i~( t— ( Q) C i-H i—4 fl) O QJ tO O *H
a, y **-< B 6G-&,3,ua,a)&sa53 » u
5 S * -0 y-o
-------
      TABLE 10.1-2.  CUMULATIVE PARTICLE  SIZE DISTRIBUTION AND  SIZE SPECIFIC
               EMISSION FACTORS FOR A RECOVERY BOILER WITH A DIRECT

                           CONTACT EVAPORATOR AND AN ESPa


                             EMISSION FACTOR RATING:   C
\

Particle size
(urn)
15
10
6
2.5
1.25
1.00
0.625
Total
Cumulative mass % <
stated size
Uncontrolled
95.0
93.5
92.2
83.5
' 56.5
45.3
26.5
100
Controlled
f*m
—
68.2
53.8
40.5
34.2
22.2
100
Cumulative emission factor
(kg/Mg of air dried pulp)
Uncontrolled
86
84
83
75
51
41
24
90
Reference 7. Dash = no data.
Controlled

'
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.0

   100

    90


    80


S- 70

•sf
i-o 60
wi *£
f: so


^° 40
                30
            3


                20



                10
                 0.1
                         Uncontrolled
                                              Controlled
                                  1.0              10
                                  Particle diameter (ym)
1.0


6.9


0.8


0.7


0.6


0.5


0.4



0.3


0.2


0.1

                                                                      §!
                                                                      !€
                                                     100
         Figure 10.1-2.  Cumulative  particle size distribution and
          	-  specific emission factors for recovery boiler
                     with direct contact evaporator and ESP.
                                                          size
10.1-6
                                 EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                 10/86

-------
     In discussing prescribed burning, the combustion process is divided into
preheating, flaming, glowing and smoldering phases.  The different phases of
combustion greatly affect the amount of emissions produced.5~7  The preheating
phase seldom releases significant quantities of material to .the atmosphere.
Glowing combustion is usually associated with burning of large concentrations
of woody fuels such as logging residue piles.  The smoldering combustion phase
is a very inefficient and incomplete combustion process that emits pollutants
at a much higher ratio to the quantity of fuel consumed than does the flaming
combustion of similar materials.

     The amount of fuel consumed depends on the moisture content of the fuel.^"^
For most fuel types, consumption during the smoldering phase is much greatest
when the fuel is driest.  When,lower layers of the fuel are moist, the fire
usually is extinguished rapidly.^             :

    • The major pollutants from wildland burning are particulate, carbon monoxide
and volatile organics.  Nitrogen oxides are emitted at rates of from 1 to 4
grams per kilogram burned, depending on combustion temperatures.  Emissions of
sulfur oxides are negligible. H~12

     Particulate emissions depend on the mix of combustion phase, the rate of
energy release, and the type of fuel consumed.  All of these elements must be
considered in selecting the appropriate emission factor for a given fire and
fuel situation.  In some cases, models developed by the U. S. Forest Service
have been used to predict particulate emission factors and sp_u.rce strength. ^
these models address fire behavior, fuel chemistry, and ignition technique, and
they predict the mix of combustion products.  There is insufficient knowledge
at this time to describe the effect of fuel chemistry on emissions.

     Table 11.1-3 presents emission factors from various pollutants, by fire
.and fuel configuration.  Table 11.1-4. gives emission factors for prescribed
burning, by geographical area within the United States.  Estimates of the
percent of total fuel consumed by region were compiled by polling experts
from the Forest Service.  The emission factors jare averages and can vary by
as much as 50 percent with fuel and fire conditions.  To use these factors,
multiply the mass of fuel consumed per hectare by the emission factor for the
appropriate fuel type.  The mass of fuel consumed by a fire is defined as the
available fuel.  Local forestry officials often compile information on fuel
consumption for prescribed fires and have techniques for estimating fuel
consumption under local conditions. ' The Southern Forestry Smoke Management
Guidebook5 and the Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide*5 should be consulted
when using these emission factor's.

     The regional emission factors in Table ll.:l-4 should be used only for
general planning purposes.  Regional averages are based on estimates of the
acreage and vegetation type burned and may not reflect prescribed burning
activities in a given state,,  Also"," the regions identified are broadly defined,
and the mix of vegetation and acres burned witnin a given state may vary
considerably from the regional averages provided.  Table 11.1-4 should not be
used to develop emission inventories and control strategies.

     To develop state emission inventories, the user is strongly urged to con-
tact that state's federal land management agencies and state  forestry agencies
that conduct prescribed burning to obtain, the b'est information on such activities.
9/88
                             Miscellaneous Sources                       11.1-7

-------
           .3 S S*
                                                                              oca
                                                                                           m m ca CQ M
 CD -~H
 P  e
 fcj
                                              COvdco

CRIBED BURNING3
11.1-3. . EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRES
Pollutant fa/kal
a

n— 1
c=
i
O)
• i-H
4-1
CJ
"ro
£
s
js °°e-:'=l: '-1^inr-:'*^ , ^cocM^cocn
g ^ c*j c-^ in co c*^ \iD
& ' .
J0 ^^^1 ". C^V°l°. ^^ i <= C-, CO |( C=COC=t-~CMCM
CM t^* in *— 1 r , in t— 1 CO r- 1 CMC3VCCOIO\O
« . . ;
O " "" " . . - - ^. - - . -;.... ...
s •"•-as. ^ s s "*• s s ^ s " i cl .-T.a,3 " s §
1 ass •assess "'"•"'' •n's*"^s""" ass'aa'jg
.^y-t t^.^^ c°IfHay:>f-Ha i •=t*t^-*^' 11 cococDvoinin
in
^ ^°aS ^SS^Sa "*«>"* i. r-CMcr,incoco
p_( -. ^~" *T* *~^ *~~i
          JS
                                CuCOEu
                                                                                          2
                                                                             CO c/3      Cm co ft, fc, co
   to

1.1
«)-I 
-------
g
1
s
a
          5 s-t  &»
         •3 €3
         •*-< CCS  fO
          S &..PS

               « g
                                ea ea « ea      o o
                                 iiii
                               i  i   i  i
o in CD co
CD CO in CD  I
                                                  Sin
                                                  c-»
                                      in  i       in
                                 CD in in    -*-s CM
                                 CM "—I <—I CO
                                  IIII       CO  I
                              ^oftn ^
                              i i i * .§
                               CD   GT»
                              t  I
                                   ^

                                                1
             -<
                             H-> CD    S-)
                              43 43 .3  J3 •»-> P3 03 ^_    -H
                              izf cr> (o   .  f^*   sO






                              'I^ISI.!1   S
                              CD C7> D3 *S *S W    CJJ
                              .d j=: *-H i£3 G3 £3    (CM

                                 CD     •   • CD    5
                                                               W  CD O
                                                                  O 0 O 4->
                                                               11  g S S S
                                 .^3   K.  s.  *. CD CD O)  O) CD
                                 g   CD CD C3O CJ O  O O




                                          3 CD CD CD  CD CD
                                                               q-
 9/90
                                     Miscellaneous Sources
                                                             11.1-9

-------
            TABLE  11.1-4.
EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRESCRIBED BURNING
     BY U. S.  REGION     '.
Regional
configuration and
fuel type8
Pacific Northwest
Logging slash
Filed slash
Douglas fir/
Western hemlock
Mixed conifer
Ponderosa pine
Hardwood
Underburning pine
Average for region
Pacific Southwest
Sagebrush
Chaparral
Pinyon/ Juniper
Underburing pine
Grassland
Average for region
Southeast
Palmetto/ gallberry
Underburning pine
Logging slash
Grassland
Other
Average for region
Rocky Mountain
Logging slash
Underburning pine
Grassland
Other
Average for region
North Central and Eastern
Logging slash
Grassland
Underburning pine
Other
Average for region
Percent
of fuelb


42

24
19
6
4
5
100

35
20
20
15
10
100

35
30
20
10
5
100

50
20
20
10
100

50
30 •
10
10
100
Pollutant0
Particulate

PM2.5


4

12
12
13
11
.30
9.4


8























PM10


5

13
13
13
12
30
10.3

9
9
13
30
10
13.0

15
30
13
10
17
18.8

4
30
10
17
11.9

13
10
30
17
14
PM .


6

17
17
20
18
35
13.3

15
15
17
35
10
17.8

16
35
20
10
17
21.9

6
35
10
17
13.7

17 .
10
35
17
16.5
CO


37
""
175
175
126
112
163
111.1

62
62
175
163
75
101.0

125
163
126
75
175
134

37
163
75
175
83.4

175
75
163
175
143.8
        aRegional areas are generalized, e. g., the Pacific Northwest  includes
         Oregon, Washington and parts  of Idaho and California.  Fuel  types
         generally reflect the ecosystems of a region, but users  should seek
         advice on fuel type mix for a given season of.the year.   An average
         factor for Northern California could be more accurately  described as
         chaparral, 25%; underburning  pine, 15%; sagebrush, 15%;  grassland,
         5%;  mixed conifer, 25%; and Douglas fir/Western hemlock, 15%.~ -
         Dash * no data.
        bBased on the judgment of forestry experts.
        cAdapted from Table 11.1-3 for the dominant fuel types burned.
11.1-10
      EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
References for Section 11.1 .

 !•  Development Of Emission. Factors For Estimating Atmospheric Emissions From
     Forest Fires. EPA-450/3-73-009, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency	
     Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1973.

 2.  D. E. Ward and C. C. Hardy, Advances In The Characterization And Control
     Of Emissions From Prescribed Broadcast Fires Of Coniferous Species Logging
     Slash On Clearcut Units. EPA DW12930110-01-3/DOE DE-A179-83BP12869, U. S.
     Forest Service, Seattle'9 WA, January 1986.

 3.  L. F..Radke, e't al.t Airborne Monitoring And Smoke Characterization Of
     Prescribed Fires On Forest Lands In Western Washington and Oregon,
     EPA-600/X-83-047, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
     July 1983.

 4.  H. E. Mobley, et alo. A Guide For Prescribed Fire In Southern Forests.
     U. S. Forest Service, Atlanta, GA, 1973^~

 5*  Southern Forestry Smoke Management Guidebook. SE-10, U. S. Forest Service
     Asheville, NC, 1976.                                                     '

 6.  D. E. Ward and C. C. Hardy, "Advances In The Characterization And Control
     Of Emissions From Prescribed Fires", Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting
     of the Air Pollution Control Association, San Francisco, CA, June 1984.

 7.  C. C. Hardy and D.  E. Ward, "Emission Factors For Particulate Matter By
     Phase Of Combustion From Prescribed Burning", Presented at the Annual
     Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association Pacific Northwest
     International Section,  Eugene,  OR,  November 19-21,  1986.

 8.  D. V, Sandberg and R. D.  Ottmar,  "Slash Burning And Fuel Consumption In
     The Douglas Fir Subregion", Presented at the 7th Conference On Fire And
     Forest Meteorology,  Fort Collins,'CO,  April 1983.

 9.  D. V. Sandberg, "Progress In Reducing Emissions From Prescribed Forest
     Burning In Western Washington And Western Oregon",  Presented at the Annual
     Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association Pacific Northwest
     International Section,  Eugene,  OR,  November 19-21,  1986.

10.  R. D. Ottmar and D.  V.  Sandberg,  "Estimating 1000-hour Fuel Moistures In
     The Douglas Fir Subregion", Presented at the 7th  Conference On Fire And
     Forest Meteorology, Fort Collins,  CO,  April 25-28,  1983.

11.  D. V. Sandberg, et  al..  Effects Of  Fire On Air -  A  State Of Knowledge
     Review.  WO-9, U.  S.  Forest Service, Washington, DC, 1978.

12.  C. K. McMahon,  "Characteristics Of  Forest Fuels,  Fires,  And Emissions",
     Presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control
     Association,  Atlanta, GA,  June  1983,

13.  D. E. Ward,  "Source Strength Modeling Of Particulate Matter Emissions From
     Forest Fires",  Presented  at the 76th Annual Meeting of the Mr Pollution
     Control  Association,  Atlanta, GA, June 1983.
 9/90                        Miscellaneous Sources                      11.1-11

-------
14.  D. E. Ward, et al. ,  "Particulate Source Strength Determination For Low-
     intensity Prescribed Fires", Presented at the Agricultural Air
     Pollutants Specialty Conference, Air Pollution Control Association,
     Memphis, TN, March 18-19, 1974.

15.  Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide. 420-1, BIFC-BLM Warehouse,
     Boise, ID, February 1983.

16.  Colin C. Hardy, Emission Factors For Air Pollutants From Range
     Improvement Prescribed Burning Of Western Juniper And Basin Big
     Sagebrush. PNW 88-575, Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards,
     TJ. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,
     March 1990.                                :
 11.1-12                        EMISSION FACTORS1                           9/90

-------
 11.2.6   INDUSTRIAL PAVED ROADS

 11.2.6.1  General

     Various field studies have indicated that dust emissions from industrial
 paved roads are a major component of atmospheric participate matter in the
 vicinity of industrial operations.  Industrial traffic dust has been found to
 consist  primarily of mineral matter, mostly tracked or deposited onto the road-
 way by vehicle traffic itself, when vehicles enter from an unpaved area or
 travel on the shoulder of the road, or when material is spilled onto the paved
 surface  from open truck bodies.

 11.2.6.2  Emissions And Correction Parameters'"^
                                                i
     The quantity of dust emissions from a given segment of paved road varies
 linearly with the volume of traffic.  In addition, field investigations have
 shown that emissions depend on correction parameters (road surface silt content,
 surface  dust loading and average vehicle weight) of a particular road and asso-
 ciated vehicle traffic.

     Dust emissions from industrial paved roads have been found to vary in
 direct proportion to the fraction of silt (particles equal to or less than 75
 microns  in diameter) in the road surface material.  The silt fraction is deter-
 mined by measuring the proportion of loose dry surface dust that passes a 200
 mesh screen, using the ASTM-C-136 method.  In addition, it has also been found
 that emissions vary in direct proportion to the surface dust loading.  The road
 surface dust loading is that loose material which can be collected by broom
 sweeping and vacuuming of the traveled portion of the paved road.   Table 11.2.6-1
 summarizes measured silt and loading values for industrial paved roads.

 11.2.6.3  Predictive Emission Factor Equations  ;

     The quantity of total suspended particulate emissions generated by vehicle
 traffic on dry industrial paved roads, per vehicle kilometer traveled (VKT) or
 vehicle mile traveled (VMT), may be estimated with a rating of B or D (see
 below), using the following empirical expression^:
     E = 0.022 I  [— J \~~l\- II ---        (kg/VKT)                  (1)


                                 L  \/W\0-7
     E- 0.077 I   —   	    —    —     :  (ib/VMT)
                    n  / \ 10 / \1000 H  3

where:  E = emission factor
        I = industrial augmentation factor (dimensionless) (see below)
        n = number of traffic lanes             '
        s = surface material silt content (%)
        L = surface dust loading, kg/km (Ib/mile)  (see below)
        W = average vehicle weight, Mg (ton)
11/88                        Miscellaneous Sources     .                11.2.6-1

-------
I 1











prf
o
co
Si
> ;
O cd
M W
9 tl
O M
*""* j-j
Q O
S5 <1
W I-l
•53 ft
O CO
O 9
•H'§
»J M
.M
CO E-<

^ CO
M  ^-' bO .
T— i d
•r4 Cd
CO M

/a
CO
4-1
CO -H
I d
O P
•-4
*
ftC d
C «)
*rl CU

O
«-!
1
(0 CD
SI?
w



O  0)
• cd d

S3 4J 43


y-N «
g^n (11
Jg
^J

£
«^^

*J  •— 1 CM
CM — <


O CO
O CT\ CT>
«^* r^^ •— *
1 1 1
00 CTi vO .
' CO O I--
*™H •
o
a -H a -d s -d
bo .^ bO »^ bo *Q
in
o> *a* H bO
d 4-1 d

4J d t-i r) 4J j;

a) 
!« O Cd > O
(t-i 4-1 rt o
cj co T3 H t-i
d ,a d bo o.
o cd
p co



























09 •
4J
•H
d

•d


CO CU
cu
o >->
d rH
CU d.
i4 •»-!
CU 4->
m i-i

-------
 11.2.7   INDUSTRIAL WIND EROSION                 |  '

 11.2.7.1 General1"3                           ,               .

.      Dust emissions may be generated by wind, erosion of open aggregate storaee
 piles and exposed areas within an industrial facility.  These sources
 typically are characterized by nonhomogeneous  surfaces impregnated with
 nonerodible elements  (particles larger than approximately 1 centimeter (cm) in
 diameter).  Field testing of coal piles and other exposed materials using a
 portable wind tunnel has shown that (a) threshold wind speeds exceed 5 meters
 per second (11 miles per hour) at 15 centimeters above the surface or 10
 meters per second (22 miles per hour) at 7 meters above the surface  and (b)
 particulate emission rates tend to decay rapidly (half life of a few minutes)
.during an erosion event.  In other words, these aggregate material surfaces
 are characterized by finite availability of erodible material (mass/area)
 referred to as the erosion potential.  Any natural crusting of the surface
 binds the erodible material, thereby reducing the erosion potential.

 11.2.7.2  Emissions And Correction Parameters

      If typical '.values for threshold wind speed at 15 centimeters are
 corrected to typical wind sensor height (7-10 meters),  the resulting values
 exceed the upper extremes of hourly mean wind speeds observed in most areas of
 the country.   In other words, mean atmospheric wind speeds are not sufficient
 to sustain wind erosion from flat surfaces of the type  tested.   However  wind
 gusts may quickly deplete a substantial portion"of "the "eroiion'potentiai
 Because erosion potential has been found to increase rapidly with increasing
 wind speed,  estimated emissions should be related to the gusts of hiehest
 magnitude.

      The routinely measured meteorological variable which best reflects the
 magnitude of  wind gusts is the fastest mile.   This quantity represents  the
 wind speed corresponding to the whole mile of wind movement which has passed
 by the 1 mile contact anemometer in the least amount of  time.   Daily
 measurements  of the fastest mile are presented in the monthly Local
 Glimatological Data (LCD)  summaries.   The duration of the fastest mile
 typically about 2 minutes  (for a fastest  mile of 30 miles per hour),  matches
 well with the half life of the erosion process, which ranges 'between 1  and  4
 minutes.   It  should'be noted,  however,  that peak winds can significantly
 exceed the  daily fastest mile.

       The wind speed  profile  in the  surface boundary layer is  found  to  follow
 a  logarithmic distribution:

                      u(z)  -=  u*_ In z_     (z > z0)                         (1)
                              0,4    z0

where u    =   wind  speed,  centimeters  per  second
      u*   =   friction velocity,  centimeters  per second
      z    =   height above  test  surface,  cm     :
      z0   =   roughness height,  cm                          -
      0.4 =   von Karman's  constant, dimensionless

9/90                         Miscellaneous Sources                    11.2.7-1

-------
 The friction velocity (u*) is a measure of wind shear stress on the erodible
 surface,  as determined from the slope of the logarithmic velocity profile.
 The roughness height (ZQ) is a. measure of the roughness of the exposed surface
 as determined from the y intercept of the velocity profile, i. e., the height
 at which the wind speed is zero .   These parameters are illustrated in Figure
 11.2.7-1 for a roughness height of 0.1 centimeters.

      Emissions generated by wind erosion are also dependent on the frequency
 of disturbance of the erodible surface because each time that a surface is
 disturbed, its erosion potential is restored.  A disturbance is defined as an
 action which results in the exposure of fresh surface material .  On a storage
 pile, this would occur whenever aggregate material is either added to or
 removed from the old surface.  A disturbance of an exposed area may also
 result from the turning of surface material to a depth exceeding the size of
 the largest pieces of material present.

 11.2.7.3  Predictive Emission Factor Equation

      The emission factor for wind generated particulate . emissions from
 mixtures of erodible and nonerodible surface material subject to disturbance
~ may "be expressed Ttf units" of" grams per " square "nreteT ~per year "as -^nll-ows-;

                                                N
                          Emission factor = k   S   P                       (2)
 where k    =   particle size multiplier        ,-,-...-''.
       N    =   number of disturbances per year   ;
       PJ   =   erosion potential corresponding to the  observed  (or
                probable) fastest mile of wind for the  ith period
                between disturbances , g/m^

 The particle size multiplier (k) for Equation 2 varies with aerodynamic
 particle size, as follows:

              AERODYNAMIC PARTICLE SIZE MULTIPLIERS FOR EQUATION 2

                 30 /zm    <15 urn.    <10 pm    <2.5 jam
                 1.0       0.6       0.5       0.2

      This distribution of particle  size within the under 30 micron  fraction
 is comparable to the distributions reported  for other  fugitive  dust sources
 where wind speed is a factor.  This is illustrated, for  example,  in the
 distributions for batch and continuous drop  operations encompassing a number
 of test aggregate materials (see Section 11.2.3).

      In calculating emission factors, each area of an  erodible  surface that
 is subject to a different frequency of disturbance should be  treated
 separately.  For a surface disturbed daily,  N - 365 per  year, and for a
 surface disturbance once every 6 months, N = 2 per year.
  11.2.7-2                        EMISSION FACTORS                            9/90

-------
       Figure 11.2.7-1.   Illustration of logarithmic velocity profile.




"/90                        Miscellaneous Sources                     11.2.7-3

-------
The erosion potential function for a dry, exposed surface is:

                                               -*\
P  =  58
                                     25
                                            - u
                                                       (3)
        where..u*
               *
              u
                  -  0 for u* < u*
friction velocity (m/s)

threshold friction velocity (m/s)
     Because of the nonlinear form of the erosion potential function, each
erosion event must be treated separately.                          '

     Equations 2 and 3 apply only to dry, exposed materials with limited
erosion potential.  The resulting calculation  is valid only for a time period
as long or longer than the period between disturbances.  Calculated emissions
represent intermittent events', and should not be input directly into dispersion
models that assume steady sta.te  emission rates.

     For uncrusted surfaces, the threshold  friction velocity  is best
estimated from the dry aggregate structure  of  the soil.  A simple hand sieving
test of surface soil can be used to determine  the mode of  the surface
aggregate size distribution by inspection of relative sieve catch amounts,
following the procedure described below in  Table 11.2.7.-1.   Alternatively,
the  threshold friction velocity  for erosion can be  determined from the mode  of
the  aggregate size distribution, as described  by Gillette.5"6

     Threshold friction velocities for  several surface types  have been
determined by field measurements with a portable wind-tunnel. These values
are  presented in Table 11.2.7-2.
             TABLE 11.2.7-1.   FIELD PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF
                        THRESHOLD FRICTION VELOCITY
Tyler
sieve no.
5
9
16
32
60
Opening
(mm)
4
2
1
0.5
0.25
Midpoint
(mm)
3
'•-1-5- :
0.75
0.375

u^ (cm/sec)
100
72
58
43

 11.2.7-4
            EMISSION FACTORS
                                                            9/90

-------
       FIELD PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF THRESHOLD FRICTION VELOCITY
         (from a 1952 laboratory procedure  published by W.  S.  Chepil):

 1.  Prepare a nest of sieves with the following openings:  4 mm, 2 mm, 1 mm,
     0.5 mm, 0.25 mm.  Place a collector pan below the bottom (0.25 mm)
     sieve.                                    :

2.   Collect a sample representing the surface layer of loose particles
     (approximately 1 cm in depth, for an encrusted surface), removing any
     rocks larger than about. 1 cm in average physical diameter.   The area to
     be sampled should be not less than 30 cm.

3.   Pour the sample into the top sieve (4 mm opening), and place a lid on
     the top.

4.   Move the covered sieve/pan unit by hand, using a broad circular arm
     motion in the horizontal plane.  .Complete 20 circular movements at a
     speed just necessary to achieve some relative horizontal motion between
     the sieve and the particles.

5.   Inspect the relative quantities of catch within each sieve, and
     determine where the mode in the aggregate size distribution lies, i. e.,
     between the opening size of the sieve with the largest catch and the
     opening size of the next largest sieve.

6.   Determine the threshold friction velocity from Figure 1.

The fastest mile of wind for the periods between disturbances may be obtained
from the monthly LCD summaries for the nearest reporting weather station that
is representative of the site in question.'  These summaries report actual
fastest mile values for each day of a given month.  Because the erosion
potential is a highly nonlinear function of the fastest mile, mean values of
the fastest mile are inappropriate.  The'anemometer heights of reporting
weather stations are found in Reference 8,  and should be corrected to a
10 meter reference height using Equation 1.

     To convert the fastest mile of wind (u+) from a reference anemometer
height of 10 meters to the equivalent friction velocity (u*), the logarithmic
wind speed profile may be used to yield the following equation:

                           '      u* =  0.053  u+                             (4)
                                            10                             V '
                  where u* =° friction velocity ((meters per second)

                        U* =' fastest mile of reference anemometer for period
                              between disturbances  (meters per second)

     This assumes a typical roughness height of 0.5 cm for open terrain.
Equation 4 is restricted to large relatively flat piles or exposed areas with
little penetration into the surface wind layer.
9/90                         Miscellaneous  Sources                     11.2.7-5

-------
                TABLE  11.2.7-2.   THRESHOLD FRICTION VELOCITIES
Threshold
friction
velocity
Material
Overburden3-
Scoria (roadbed
material )a
Ground coala
( surrounding
coal pile)
Uncrusted coal
pilea
Scraper tracks on
coal pile3-'*5
Fine coal dust
on concrete padc
(m/s)
1.02

1.33


0.55

1.12

0.62

0.54
Roughness
height
(cm)
0.3

0.3


0.01

0.3

0.06

0.2
Threshold wind
velocity at 10 m (m/s)

z0 = Act
; 21

27


16

23

15

11

z0 = 0.5 cm
19

25


10

21

12

10
        •f^fcs t-v-o.i.ji OVAJ-JUd^c l»UdJ. iUJ.J.113 .  JXCI.eL CilUc  £.
       "Lightly crusted.
       cEastern power plant.  Reference 3.

     If the pile significantly penetrates .the  surface  wind layer (i.  e.,  with
a height-to-base ratio exceeding 0.2), it is necessary to  divide the  pile area
into subareas representing different degrees of exposure to wind.   The  results
of physical modeling show that the frontal face of an  elevated pile is  exposed
to wind speeds of the same order as the approach wind  speed at the  top  of the
pile.              ,        ,                     ,              .

     For two representative pile shapes (conical and oval  with flattop,
37 degree side slope), the ratios of surface wind speed ,(ug) to approach  wind
speed (Uj.) have been derived from wind tunnel  studies.9 The results  are  shown
in Figure 11.2.7-2 corresponding to an actual  pile height  of 11 meters, a
reference (upwind) anemetersometer height of 10 meters, and a pile  surface
roughness height (ZQ) of 0.5 centimeters.  The measured surface winds
correspond to a height of 25 centimeters above the surface.   The area fraction
within each contour pair is specified in Table Hi. 2.7-3.

     The profiles of us/ur in Figure 11.2.7-2  .can be used  to estimate the
surface friction velocity distribution around  similarly shaped piles, using
the following procedure:
     1.   Correct the fastest mile value  (u+) for  the  period of  interest  from
          the anemometer height  (z)  to a  reference height  of 10  m (uj"rt) using
          a variation of Equation 1:
                                     10
                        u
                         10
                                u1
     In (10/0.005)

     In  (z/0.005)
 (5)
          where a typical roughness height of 0.5 cm  (0.005  meters)  has  been
          assumed.  If a site specific roughness height is   available,  it
          should be used.
11.2.7-6
EMISSION FACTORS
9/90

-------
     2.   Use the appropriate part of Figure 11.2.7-2 based on the pile shape
          and orientation to the fastest mile of wind, to obtain the
          corresponding surface wind speed distribution (u+):

     3.   For any subarea of the pile surface having a narrow range of
          surface wind speed, use a variation of Equation 1 to calculate the
          equivalent friction velocity (u*):

                                      0.4 u+
                                          s
                            u*  =	= 0-10 u+
                                       25              s
                                      lnO.5

     From this point on, the procedure is identical to that used for a flat
pile, as described above.

     Implementation of the above procedure is carried out in the following
steps:

     1.   Determine threshold friction velocity for erodible material of
          interest (see Table 11.2.7-2 or determine from mode of aggregate
          size distribution),

     2.   Divide the exposed surface area into subareas of constant frequency
          of disturbance (N).               ...  .       -

     3.   Tabulate fastest mile values (u+) for each frequency of disturbance
          and correct them to 10 m (u+ ) using Equation 5.

     4.   Convert fastest mile values (u10) to equivalent friction velocities
          (u*),  taking into account (a) the uniform wind exposure of
          nonelevated surfaces, using Equation 4, or (b) the nonuniform wind
          exposure of elevated surfaces (piles),, using Equations 6 and 7.

     5.   For elevated surfaces (piles),  subdivide areas of constant N into
          subareas of constant u* (i. e., within the isople'th values of u
          in Figure 11.2.7-2 and Table 11.2.7-3) and determine the size of
          each subarea.

     6.   Treating each.subarea (of constant N and u*) as a separate source,
          calculate the erosion potential (P^ for each period between
          disturbances using Equation 3 and the emission factor using
          Equation 2.

     7.   Multiply the resulting emission factor for each subarea by the size
          of the-subarea, and add the emission contributions of all subareas.
          Note that the highest' 24-hr emissions would be expected to occur on
          the windiest day of the year.  Maximum emissions are calculated
          assuming a single event with the highest fastest mile value for the
          annual period.

                            Miscellaneous Sources                     11.2.7-7

-------
  Flow
Direction
                    Pile A
Pile B1
                     Pile B2
                                                              Pile B3
      Figure 11.2.7-2.  Contours: of normalized surface wind speeds, ug/ur.

 11.2.7-8                       EMISSION FACTORS                            9/90

-------
            TABLE 11.2.7-3.  SUBAREA DISTRIBUTION FOR REGIMES OF ug/ur
Pile
Subarea
0.2a
0.2b
0.2c
0.6a
0.6b
0.9
1.1
Percent of pile surface area
Pile A
5
35
-
48
-
12
—
Pile Bl
5
2
29
26
24
14
-
Pile B2
3
28
•
29
22
15
3
Pile B3
3
25
_
28
26
14
4
     The recommended emission .factor equation presented above assumes that all
of the erosion potential corresponding to the fastest mile of wind is lost
during the period between disturbances.  Because the fastest mile event
typically lasts only about 2 minutes, which corresponds roughly to the
halflife for the decay of actual erosion potential, it could be argued that
the emission factor overestimates particulate emissions.  However, there are
other aspects of the wind erosion process which offset this apparent
conservatism:

     1.      The fastest mile event contains peak winds which substantially
            exceed the mean value for the event.

     2.      Whenever the fastest mile event occurs, there are usually, a number
            of periods of slightly lower mean wind speed which contain peak
            gusts of the same order as the fastest mile wind speed.


     Of greater concern is the likelihood of overprediction of wind erosion
emissions in the case of surfaces disturbed infrequently in comparison to the
rate of crust formation.

11.2.7.4    Example 1: Calculation for wind erosion emissions from conically
            shaped coal pile

     A coal burning facility maintains a conically shaped surge pile 11 meters
in height and 29.2 meters in base diameter, containing about 2000 megagrams of
coal, with a bulk density of 800 kg/m3 (50 Ib/ft3)"."  "The total exposed surface
area of the pile is calculated as follows:

                    S = £ r (r2 + h2)                           .

                      = 3.14(14.6)  (14.6)2 +(11.O)2

                      = 838 m2

     Goal is added to the pile by means of a fixed stacker and reclaimed by
front-end loaders operating at the base "of the pile on"the downwind side.  In
addition, every 3 days 250 megagrams (12.5 percent of the stored capacity of
coal) is added back to the pile by a topping off operation, thereby restoring
                                      '  *
9/90                        Miscellaneous Sources                     11.2.7-9

-------
 the full capacity of the pile.   It is assumed that (a) the reclaiming
 operation disturbs only a limited portion of the surface area where the daily
 activity is occurring,  such that the remainder of the pile surface remains
 intact,  and (b)  the topping off operation creates a fresh surface on the
 entire pile while restoring Its original shape in the area depleted by daily
 reclaiming activity.                            ;

     Because of  the high frequency of disturbance of  the pile,  a  large number
 of calculations  must be made to determine each contribution to the total
 annual wind erosion emissions;.   This illustration will use a single month as
 an example.

     SteP  1:  In the absence  of field data for  estimating the  threshold
 friction velocity,  a value of 1.12 meters per second  is obtained  from Table
 11.2.7-2.

     steP  2:  Except for a small area near the  base of the pile (see  Figure
 11.2.7-3),  the entire pile surface is disturbed every 3 days,  corresponding to
 a  value  of N - 120  per  year.  It will be shown  that the contribution of the
 area where daily activity occurs is negligible  so that it does not need to be
 treated  separately  in the calculations.          :

     SteP  3:  The calculation procedure  involves  determination of  the  fastest
 mile for each period of disturbance.   Figure  11.2.7-4 shows  a  representative
 set  of values (for  a 1-month  period)  that are assumed to be  applicable to  the
 geographic area  of  the  pile location.  The values have been  separated into 3-
 day  periods, and the highest  value in each period is  indicated.   In this
 example,  the anemometer height  is  7 meters, so  that a height correction to
 10 meters  is needed for the fastest mile  values.   From Equation 5,
                             u+
                                    In  (10/0.005)
                      10      7   1 In (7/0.005)

                     u+   =  1.05 u+
                      10           7

         _4j  The next step is to convert the fastest mile value for each 3
day period into the equivalent friction velocities for each surface wind
regime (i. e., ug/ur ratio) of the pile, using Equations 6 and. 7.  Figure
11.2.7-3 shows the surface wind speed pattern (expressed as a fraction of the
approach wind speed at a height of 10 meters).  The surface areas lying within
each wind speed regime are tabulated below the figure.

     The calculated friction velocities are presented in Table 11.2.7-4.   As
indicated, only three of the periods contain a friction velocity which exceeds
the threshold value of 1.12 meters per second for an uncrusted coal pile.
These three values all occur within the Ug/Uj. =0.9 regime of the pile
surface.

     SteP 5.:  "This step is not necessary because there" is only one frequency
of disturbance used in the calculations.  It is clear that the small area of
daily disturbance (which lies entirely within the us/ur =0.2 regime) is never
subject to wind speeds exceeding the threshold value.

11.2.7-10                      EMISSION FACTORS  :                         9/90

-------
 Prevailing
 Wind
 Direction

	*&»-
                                   Circled values
                                   refer to
 * A portion of G£ is disturbed daily by reclaiming activities,
                                                     Pile Surface
Area
ID
A
.B
C-i + Co
us
0.9
0.6
0,2
%
12
48
	 40
AT*O53 ( TTJ 1
.tt..LtJa. ^lu j
101
402
335
                                                          Total  838
         Figure 11.2.7-3.   Example 1:  Pile surface areas within each wind
                                       speed regime.
 9/90
Miscellaneous Sources
11.2.7-11

-------
        TABLE 11.2.7-4.  EXAMPLE 1:  CALCULATION OF FRICTION VELOCITIES
3 -day
period
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
U7 Ho
(mph)
14
29
30
31
22
21
16
25
17
13
(m/s)
6.3
13.0
13.4
13.9
9.8
9.4
7.2
11.2
7.6
5.8
(mph)
'15
31
32
33
23
22
17
26
18
14
(m/s)
6.6
13.7
14.1
14.6
10.3
9.9
7.6
11.8
8.0
6.1
u* =
us/ur: 0.2
0.13
0.27
0.28
0.29
. 0 . 21
0.20
0.15
0.24
0.16
0.12
0.1 us
0.6
0.40
0.82
0.84
0.88
0.62
0.59
0.46
0.71
0.48
0.37
(m/s)
0.9
0.59
1.23
1.27
1.31
0.93
0.89
0.68
1.06
0.72
0.55
     gteps 6 and 7:  The final set of calculations  (shown in Table 11 2 7-5)
 involves  the tabulation and  summation of  emissions  for  each disturbance period
 and for the affected subarea.  The erosion potential  (P) is calculated from
 Equation  3.


          TABLE 11.2.7-5.   EXAMPLE 1:  CALCULATION OF PM1Q EMISSIONS61
3 -day
period
2
3
4
u* (m/s)
1.23
1.27
1.31
u* ;-.u* (m/s)
0.11
0.15
0.19
P (g/m2)
3.45
5.06
6.84
Pile
Surface Area
ID (m2) •-
A
A
A
101
101
101
kPA
(s)
170
260
350
                                                              Total:    780

awhere u^ = 1.12 meters per second for uncrusted coal and k = 0.5 for PM10.

For example, the calculation for the second 3 day period is:

                   P  = 58(u* - u*)2 + 25(u* - u*)  .

                   P2 = 58(1.23 - 1.12)2 + 25(1.23 - 1.12)

                      - 0.70 + 2.75 = 3.45 g/m2   '


     The PM1Q emissions generated by each event are found as the product of
the PM1Q multiplier (k - 0.5),  the erosion potential (P), and the affected
area of the pile (A).
11.2.7-12                      EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
               Local  Climatological Data
                        MONTHLY SUMMARY
WIND
ce
0
•—
se
•«
_J
I/I
LJ
QC
13
30
01
10
13
12
20
29
29
22
14
29
17
21
10
10
01
33
27
32
24
22
32
29
07
34
31
30
30
33
34
29
•H'd'H Q33dS ^
tuviinciu """
	 	 "
5.3
10.5
2.4
1 1 .0
11 .3
11.1
19. &
10.9
3.0
1.4.6
22.3
7.9
7.7
<».s
& .7
13.7
11.2
4 . 3
9.3
7.5
10.3
17.1
2.4
«.9
1 It . 3
12.1
«.3
El. 2
!i.O
3. 1
-<*.9
o
UJ
UJ
CL
(A
Ul
0 SC
a c.
5 *
15
6.9
10.6
6.0
11.4
1 1 .9
'19.0
1.9.8
1 1 .2
B. 1
15.1
23.3
13.5
15.5
9.6
e.e
13.8
1 1 .5
5.8
10.2
7.8
10.6
17.3
e.s
8.8
11.7
12.2
8.5
8.3
6.6
5.2
5.5
FASTEST
MILE
o ~
ujo.
i»j
0. C
bn
16
10
16
1 7
15
2?
18
12
©
15
16
16
w
9
8
a:
o
*»•
o
UJ
o:
o
17
3&
01
02
13
1 1
30
30
30
13
12
29
17
16
13
1 I
36
34
31
35
24
20
32
13
02
32
32
26
32
32
31
25
FOB THE MONTH:
30
—
3.3
	
li.l
	
31 29
DATE: H




-
UJ
h—
•<
O
22
i
2
3
4
5
: 6
, 7
e
9
0
t
2
3
4
5
&
7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30
31

Figure 11.2.7-4.  Example daily fastest miles of wind for periods of interest.
9/90
Miscellaneous Sources
                                                           11.2.7-13

-------
      As shown in Table 11.2.7-5,  the results of these calculations indicate a
 monthly PM10 emission total of 780 grams.

 11.2.7.5    Example 2: Calculation for wind erosion from flat area covered
             with coal dust

      A flat circular area of 29.2 meters in'diameter is covered with coal dust
 left over from the total reclaiming of a conical coal pile described in the
 example above.   The total exposed surface area is calculated as follows:

                              7T
                      S  =   	  d2 = 0.785 (29.2)2  -  670m2
      This  area will  remain exposed for a period of 1 month when a new pile
 will be formed.                                                       ^

      SteP  L:   In tlie absence  of  field data for estimating the threshold
 friction velocity,  a value of 0.54 m/s is obtained from Table 11.2.7-2.

      SteP  2:   The entire  surface area is exposed for a period of 1 month after
 removal of a pile and N = 1/yr.

      S_tejD_3:   From Figure  11.2.7-4, the  highest value of fastest mile for the
 30-day period (31 mph) occurs on the  llth day of the period.   In this example
 the  reference anemometer  height  is 7  mv  so that a height correction is needed
 for  the fastest mile value.   From Step 3 of the previous example
  10  " 1<05  7 "'  S°  that      =33 mph.

      steP  4:   Equation 4 is tised to convert  the  fastest mile  value of 33  mph
 (14.6 mps) to an equivalent friction  velocity of 0.77 fflps.  This value exceeds
 the  threshold friction velocity  from  Step 1  so that erosion does occur.

      •steP  5-   This step is not necessary,  because  there is  only  one frequency
 of disturbance for the entire source  area.

      Steps  6  and  7:   The PM1() emissions  generated  by the erosion event are
 calculated as the product  of  the PM10 multiplier (k = 0.5), the  erosion
 potential  (P)  and the  source  area (A).   The  erosion potential is calculated
 from Equation 3 as follows:

                  P  =  58(u* -.u*)2 +  25(u* - u*)
                               t              t
                  P  =  58(0.77 -  0.54)2 + 25(0.77  -  0.54)
                     =3.07+5.75
                     =8.82 g/m2

Thus  the PM1Q  emissions for the  1 month  period are  found to be:

                  E  =  (0.5)(8.82  g/m2)(670 m2)
                     =  3.0 kg
11.2.7-14                      EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
References for Section 11.2.7

1.   C. Cowherd Jr., "A New Approach To Estimating Wind Generated Emissions
     From Coal Storage Piles",  Presented at the APCA Specialty Conference on
     Fugitive Dust Issues in the Coal Use Cycle, Pittsburgh, PA, April 1983.

2.   K. Axtell and C,  Cowherd,  Jr.,  Improved Emission Factors For Fugitive
     Dust From Surface Coal Mining Sources. EPA-600/7-84-048, U. S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, March 1984.

3.   G. E, Muleski, "Coal Yard Wind Erosion Measurement",  Midwest Research
     Institute, Kansas City, MO, March 1985.     \

4.   Update Of Fugitive Dust Emissions Factors In AP-42 Section 11.2 - Wind
     Erosion. MRI No.  8985-K, Midwest Research Institute,  Kansas City, MO,
     1988.                                       I

5.   W. S. Chepil, "Improved Rotary Sieve For Measuring State And Stability Of
     Dry Soil Structure", Soil Science Society Of America Proceedings.
     16:113-117, 1952.                           :

6.   D. A. Gillette, et al.. "Threshold Velocities For Input Of Soil Particles
     Into The Air By'Desert Soils",  Journal Of Geophysical Research.
     85(£10):5621-5630.
7.   Local Climatological Data, National Climatic Center, Asheville, NC.

8.   M. J. Changery, National Wind Data Index Final Report. HCO/T1041-01
     UC-60, National Climatic Center, Asheville, ;NC, December 1978.

9.   B. J, B, Stunder and S. P. S."Arya," "WiridbreaTc'Effectiveness'For Storage
     Pile Fugitive Dust Control:  A Wind Tunnel Study", Journal Of The Air
     Pollution Control Association. 38:135-143, 1988.
 9/90                         Miscellaneous Sources                    11.2.7-15

-------

-------
11.3  EXPLOSIVES DETONATION

11.3.1  General 1~5

     This section deals mainl]r with pollutants resulting from the
detonation of industrial explosives and firing of small arms.  Military
applications are excluded from this discussion.  Emissions associated
with the manufacture of explosives are treated in Section 5.6,
Explosives.

     An explosive is a chemical material that is capable of extremely
rapid combustion resulting in an explosion or detonation.  Since an
adequate supply of oxygen cannot be drawn from the air, a source of
oxygen must be. incorporated into the explosive mixture.  Some explo-
sives, such as trinitrotoluene (TNT), are single chemical species, but
most explosives are mixtures of several ingredients.  "Low explosive"
and "high explosive" classifications are based on the velocity of
explosion, which is directly related to the type of work the explosive
can perform.  There appears to be no direct relationship between the
velocity of explosions and the end products of explosive reactions.
These 'end products are determined primarily by the oxygen balance of the
explosive.  As in other combustion reactions, a deficiency of oxygen
favors the formation of carbon monoxide and unburned organic compounds
and produces little, if any, nitrogen oxides.  An excess of oxygen
causes more nitrogen oxides and less carbon monoxide and other unburned
organics.  For ammonium nitrate and fuel oil mixtures (ANFO), a fuel oil
content of more than 5.5 percent creates a deficiency of oxygen.

     There are hundreds of different explosives, with no universally
accepted system for classifying them.  The classification used in Table
11.3-1 is based on the chemical composition of the explosives, without
regard to other to other properties, such as rate of detonation, which
relate to the applications of explosives but not to their specific end
products.  Most explosives are used in two-, three-, or four-step trains
that are shown schematically in Figure 11.3-1.  The simple removal of a
tree stump might be done with a two-step train made up of an electric
blasting cap and a stick of dynamite.  The detonation wave from the
blasting cap would cause detonation of the dynamite.  To make a large
hole in the earth, an inexpensive explosive such as ammonium nitrate and
fuel oil (ANFO) might be used.  In this case} the detonation wave from
the blasting cap is not powerful enough to cause detonation, so a
booster must be used in a three- or four-step train.  Emissions from the
blasting caps and safety fuses used in these trains are usually small
compared to those from the main charge, because the emissions are
roughly proportional to the weight of explosive used, and the main
charge makes up most of the total weight.  No factors are given for
computing emissions from blasting caps or fuses, because these have not
been measured, and because the uncertainties are so great.in estimating
emissions  from the main and booster charges that a precise estimate of
all emissions is not practical.
 2/80                         Miscellaneous Sources                      11.3-1

-------
                                                     2. DYNAMITE
                                    1. ELECTRIC
                                      BLASTING CAP
                                   PRIMARY
                                   HIGH EXPLOSIVE
                                                    SECONDARY HIGH EXPLOSIVE
                                 a.  Two-step explosive  train
                                                          3. DYNAMITE
                         1. SAFETY FUSE

                            LOW EXPLOSIVE    PRIMARY
                            (BLACK POWDER)   HIGH
                                      •  -"EXPLOSIVE
                                                    SECONDARY HIGH EXPLOSIVE
                                 b.  Three-step explosive train
                                                               4. ANFO


1 KAFCTV *• NONELECTRIC
FUSE BLASTING CAP
^MEBMnn


— — 1
1
~l


3. DYNAMITE
BOOSTER
1



                           LOW       PRIMARY
                         ^ EXPLOSIVE  • HIGH EXPLOSIVE  SSCONDAHY HIGH EXPLOSIVE
                                  c.   Four-step explosive train
                     Figure 11.3-1. Two-, three-, and four-step explosive trains.
11.3-2
EMISSION  FACTORS
2/80

-------
 s



k.
M








•s
i
I
Z
I
•o
u












s
**<.
f-
£
j?
1
=1
s



be


1
i
o
1

S
£


|
+J
i/l
O



7n

0.

m

lfc-'
r-.
*~ O
*
CM en
«r to
o
sr
p- *T
CM 
o
~
f*» r—
0^
O
Z
Z
eo"
S T
to
m
CM

li


20-60X nitroglycerine/
ammonium nitrate/sodium
nitrate/wood pulp


«C\I


II
0
^- "£


tn co
o o
to CM
CM O
a: tn
i-T
d*n
C
CO
eno

s.
*f> I
CO
en
to tn
CM 1
"o
CM
V CM
cv,?
tn •—
CO
at
.85
SSJS
*j aS S
£ *J ••£
•5gts
•issf


20-1001 nitroglycerine





e «
o"


*~
CM
O
° ;

z


£*
Z

- :
CO
5
-'-S
en
Is i
*J tn
S-28
£-°.s
s*6
O J- C
US~


anonlum nitrate with
5.8-8T fuel oil





O
«c
C3 CM

CM CM
» S"
*f i CO < r~ ID *
i1 5 SS
S
*a- CM
en
fs.
 ^ §
•S 4J tJ t^ U
« t. 01 O 4J
E «-^» E 0<


trinitrotoluene





CM
h-
CM

"S
~
CM t
CM CM
f

Z


^
z

z
z
en to
^
CM

booster
c
I
{CH2}3H3(N02)3
yclotrimethylenetrlnitr





X
oc


(MO

r— O
m

Z


^
z

z
z
n
f*. i
CM
-1

booster
a*
£
4->
"c
41
H
§1
(-> Of





°k
a.


«i
H

S
ra

c
II
Z
t
^
a
•D
e
1-
Z
o"
U.
z

o
n
(l
S
*•
^
&
1
o
*
o

o
a
s carried out
S
on experlme
1
S
re
re carried out more than 40
«
VI
1
in


c
|
E
V*
«
•o
S
-1
X
u
O
^
1
S
£
a
£
•4-f
e
o
^
o
H
c
re

i
^
41
"5
1
the chemica
available.
0 0
ictors apply 1
ago. NA = i
5«
H >
19



















^
I
£
N
^i
,_•
I
(O
S
jj

u
a
n.
r 1SS grain |
u
a
:r than 6 mg
1
O
u














re
re
•o
re
u
1
S
|

o
c
w
JO
1
s
—

£
8
ved from th
«
factors are d
|
h
•o
2/80
Miscellaneous Sources
11.3-3

-------
    11.3.2  Emissions And Controls 2'4 6         ;

         Carbon monoxide is the pollutant produced in greatest quantity from
    explosives detonation.  TNT, an oxygen deficient explosive, produces
    more CO than most dynamites, which are oxygen balanced.  But all explo-
    sives produce measurable amounts of CO.  Particulates are produced as
    well, but such large quantities of particulate are generated in the
    shattering of the rock and earth by the explosive that the quantity of
    particulates from the explosive charge cannot' be distinguished.  Nitrogen
    oxides (both NO and N02) are formed, but only limited data are available
    on these emissions.  Oxygen deficient explosives are said to produce
    little or no nitrogen oxides, but there is only a small body of data to
    confirm this.  Unburned hydrocarbons also result from explosions, but in
    most instances, methane is the only species that has been reported.

         Hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen cyanide and ammonia all have been
    reported as products of explosives use.  Lead is emitted from the firing
    of small arms ammunition with lead projectiles and/or lead primers, but
    the explosive charge does not contribute to the lead emissions.

         The emissions from ejiplosives detonation are influenced by many
    factors such as explosive composition, product expansion, method of
    priming, length of charge, and confinement.  These factors are difficult
    to measure and .control in the field and are almost impossible to duplicate
    in a laboratory test facility.  With the exception of a few studies in
    underground mines, most studies have been performed in laboratory test
    chambers that differ substantially from the actual environment.  Any
    estimates of emissions from explosives use must be regarded as approxi-
    mations that cannot be made more precise, because explosives are not
    used in a precise, reproducible manner.

         To a certain extent, emissions can be altered by changing the
    composition of the explosive mixture.  This has been practiced for many
    years to safeguard miners who must use explosives.  The U. S. Bureau of
    Mines has a continuing program to study the products from explosives and
    to identify explosives that can be used safely underground.   Lead
    emissions from small arms use can be controlled by using jacketed soft
    point projectiles and special leadfree primers.

         Emission factors are given in Table 11.3-1.

    References for Section 11.3

    1.   C. R. Newhouser, Introduction to Explosives. National Bomb Data
         Center, International Association of Chiefs of Police,  Gaithersburg,
         MD (undated).

    2,   Roy V.  Carter,  "Emissions from the Open Burning or Detonation of
         Explosives", Presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Air
         Pollution Control Association, Houston, TX,  June 1978.
11-3-4                         EMISSION FACTORS                         '  2/80

-------
   3.   Melvin A. Cook, The Science of High Explosives, Reinhold Publishing
        Corporation, New York, 1958.

   4.   R. F. Chaiken, et al., Toxic Fumes from Explosives;  Ammonium
        Nitrate Fuel Oil Mixtures, Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations
        7867, U. S. Department of Interior, Washington, DC, 1974.

   5.   Sheridan J. Rogers, Analysis of Noncoal Mine Atmospheres;  Toxic
        Fumes from Explosives, Bureau of Mines, U. S. Department of Interior,
        Washington, DC, May 1976.

   6.   A. A. Juhasz, "A Reduction of Airborne Lead in Indoor Firing
        Ranges by Using Modified Ammunition", Special Publication 480-26,
        Bureau of Standards, U. S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC,
        November 1977.
2/80                        Miscellaneous Sources                      11.3-5

-------

-------
                TABLE  C.2-1.   PARTICLE SIZE CATEGORY BY AP-42  SECTION
AP-42
Section
,

1.1
1.2
1.3



1.4
1.5
1.6

1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11

2.1
23 	
2.5

3.2


5.4
5.8



5.10
5.11
5.12
5.15
5.16
5.17

6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4

6.5
6.7
Source
Category
External combustion

Bituminous and subbituminous,
coal combustion
Anthracite coal combustion
Fuel oil combustion
Residual oil
TTtilitu
uuuiy
industrial
Commercial
Distillate oil
TTtllltar
Utility
Commercial
Residential
Natural gas combustion
Liquefied petroleum gas
Wood waste combustion
in boilers ,
Lignite combustion
Bagasse combustion
Residential fireplaces
Residential wood stoves
Waste oil combustion
Solid waste disposal
Refuse combustion
" " Conical burners (wood waste)
Sewage sludge incineration
Internal combustion engines
Highway vehicles
Off highway vehicles
Chemical processes

Charcoal
Hydrofluoric acid
Spar drying
Spar handling
Transfer
Faint and varnish
Phosphoric acid (thermal process)
Pthalic anhydride
Soap and detergents
Sodium carbonate
Sulfuric acid
Food and agricultural
Alfalfa dehydrating
Primary cyclone
Meal collector cyclone
Pellet cooler cyclone
Pellet regrind cyclone
Coffee roasting
Cotton ginning
Grain elevators and
processing plants
Fermentatipn
Meat smokehouses
Category
Number*


a
a

&
a
a
4 a
a
a
a
a
a
a
b
a
a
a

a
2
a '
c
1


9

3
3
3
4
a
9
a
a
b

b
7
7
7
6
b
a
6,7
9
AP-42
Section
6.8
6.10
6.10.3
6.11
£ \A
O*i*r
6.16

6.17
6.18

7.1





7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5








7.6
7.7
7.8




7.9
7.10
7.11
7.12
7.13
7.14
7.15
7.18



Source Category
Category Number*
Ammonium nitrate fertilizers
Phosphate fertilizers
Ammonium phosphates
Reactor/ammoniator-granulator
Dryer/cooler
Starch manufacturing
TTr*Mi
Ulva
Defoliation and harvesting of cotton
Trailer loading
Transport
Harvesting of grain
Harvesting machine
Truck loading
Field transport
Ammonium sulfate
Rotary dryer
Fluidized bed dryer
Metallurgical
Primary aluminum production
Bauxite grinding
Aluminum hydroxide calcining
Anode baking furnace
Prebakecell
Vertical Soderberg
Horizontal Soderberg
Coke manufacturing
Primary copper smelting
Ferroalloy production
Iron and steel production
Blastfurnace
Slips
Cast house
Sintering
Windbox
Sinter discharge
Basic oxygen furnace
Electric arc furnace
Primary lead smelting
Zinc smelting
Secondary aluminum operations
Sweating furnace
Smelting
Crucible furnace
Reverbcratory furnace
Secondary copper smelting
and alloying
Gray iron foundries
Secondary lead Processing
Secondary magnesium smelting
Steel foundries - melting
Secondary zinc processing
Storage battery production
Leadbearing ore crushing and grinding



a
3
4
4
7
&
6
6
6
6
6
b
b


'4
5
9
a
8
a
a
a
a

a
a

a
a
a
a
a
8

8

8
a

8
a
a
8
b
8
b
4



 Data for numbered categories are given in Table C.2-2. Particle size data on "a" categories are found in the AP-42
text; for "b" categories, in Appendix C.1; and for "c" categories, in AP-42 Volume II: Mobile Sources.
9/90
Appendix C.2
C.2-5

-------
                      TABLE  G.2-1.    PARTICLE  SIZE CATEGORY BY AP-42  SECTION  (cont.)
  AP-42
    Section
        Source
         Category
Category
 Number*
AP-42
 Section
 8.1
 8.3
 8.5
 8.6
 8.7
 8.8
8.9
8.10
8.11
8.13
8.14
8.15
8.16
8.18
      Mineral products
  Asphaltic concrete plants
  Bricks and related clay products
   Raw materials handling
     Dryers, grinders, etc.
     Tunnel/periodic kilns
      Gas fired
      Oil fired
      Coal fired
  Castable refractories
   Raw material dryer
   Raw material crushing and screening
   Electric arc melting
   Curing oven
  Portland cement manufacturing
   Dry process
     Kilns
    Dryers, grinders, etc.
   Wet process
     Kilns
    Dryers, grinders, etc.
  Ceramic clay manufacturing
  Drying
  Grinding
  Storage
  Clay and fly ash sintering
   Fly ash sintering, crushing, screening,
    yard storage
.   Clay mixed with coke
  Crushing, screening, yard storage
  Coal cleaning
  Concrete batching
  Glass fiber manufacturing
   Unloading and conveying
   Storage bins
   Mixing and weighing
   Glass furnace - wool
   Glass furnace - textile
  Glass manufacturing
  Gypsum manufacturing
  Rotary ore dryer
   Roller mill
  Impact mill
  Flash calciner
  Continuous kettle calciner
 Lime manufacturing
 Mineral wool manufacturing
  Cupola
  Reverberatory furnace
  Blow chamber
  Curing oven
  Cooler
 Phosphate rock processing
  Drying
  Calcining
  Grinding
  Transfer and storage
                                                                        8.19.1
                                                                        8.19.2
                                                                        8.22
                                                                       8.23
                                                                       8.24
                                                                       10.1
                                                                       11.1
                                                                       11.2
Source
 Category
Category
 Number*
                                        Sand and gravel processing
                                         Continuous drop
                                          Transfer station
                                          Pile formation - stacker
                                          Batch drop
                                         Active storage piles
                                         Vehicle traffic on unpaved road
                                        Crushed stone processing
                                         Dry crushing
                                          Primary crushing
                                          Secondary crushing and screening
                                          Tertiary crushing and screening
                                          Recrushing and screening
                                          Fines mill
                                         Screening, conveying, handling
                                        Taconite ore processing
                                         Fine crushing
                                         Waste gas
                                         Pellet handling
                                         Grate discharge
                                         Grate feed
                                         Bentonite blending
                                         Coarse crushing
                                         Ore transfer.
                                         Bentonite transfer
                                         Unpaved roads
                                       Metallic minerals processing
                                       Western surface coal mining
                                           Wood pmdiicftj
                                       Chemical wood pulping

                                           Miscellaneniig .-jourm
                                       Wildfires and prescribed burning
                                       Fugitive dust
                                                     a
                                                     a
                                                     3
                                                     4
                                                     4
                                                     a

                                                     4
                                                     a
                                                     4
                                                     S
                                                     4
                                                     4
                                                     3
                                                     3
                                                     4
                                                     a
                                                     a
                                                     a
 Data for numbered categories are given in Table C.2-2. Particle size data on "a" categories are found in the AP-42
text; for "b" categories, in Appendix Cl; and for "c" categories, in AP-42 Volume IT; Mobile Sources.
C.2-6
                                                   EMISSION  FACTORS
                                                                                                        9/90

-------
CL2.3  How To Use The Generalized Particle Size Distributions For Controlled
       Processes

     To calculate the size distribution and. the size specific emissions for a
source with a particulate control device, the user first calculates the
uncontrolled size specific emissions.  Next, the fractional control efficiency
for the control device is estimated, using Table G.2-3.  The Calculation Sheet
provided (Figure C.2-2) allows the user to record the type of control device
and the collection efficiencies from Table C.2-3, the mass in the size range
before and after control, and the cumulative mass.  the user will note that
the uncontrolled size data are expressed in cumulative fraction less than the
stated size.  The control efficiency data apply only to the size range
indicated and are not cumulative.  These data do not include results for the
greater than 10 ^m particle size range.  In order to account for the total
controlled emissions, particles greater than 10 /jm in size must be included.

C.2.4  Example Calculation

     An example calculation of uncontrolled total particulate emissions,
uncontrolled size specific emissions,  and controlled size specific .emission is
shown on Figure C.2-1.  A blank Calculation Sheet is provided in Figure C.2-2.
            TABLE C.2-3
TYPICAL COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES OF VARIOUS
PARTICULATE  CONTROL DEVICES3-
                                                        Particle size .
AIRS     Type  of  collector
Codeb
                       0 - 2.5   2.5 - 6
6 - 10
 001     Wet scrubber -  hi-efficiency              90         95
 002     Wet scrubber -  med-efficiency             25         85
 003     Wet scrubber -  low-efficiency             20         80
 004     Gravity collector -  hi-efficiency        .3.6        5
 005     Gravity collector -  med-efficiency         2.9        4
 006     Gravity collector -  low-efficiency         1.5        3.
 007     Centrifugal collector - hi-efficiency     80         95
 008     Centrifugal collector - med-efficiency   ,50         75
 009     Centrifugal collector - low-efficiency    10         35
 010     Electrostatic precipitator -
          hi-efficiency                           95         99
 Oil     Electrostatic precipitator -
          med-efficiency       boilers            50         80
                               other              80         90
 012     Electrostatic precipitator -
          low-efficiency       boilers            40         70
                               other              70         80
 014     Mist eliminator - high velocity >250 FPM  10         75
 015     Mist eliminator - low velocity <250 FPM    5         40
 016     Fabric filter - high temperature          99         99,
 017     Fabric filter - med temperature           99         99.
 018     Fabric filter - low temperature           99         99
                                               99
                                               95
                                               90
                                                6
                                                4.
                                                3.
                                               95
                                               85
                                               50
                                               99.5

                                               94
                                               97

                                               90
                                               90
                                               90
                                               75
                                               99.5
                                               99.5
                                               99.5
 9/90
         Appendix C.2
                                                                         C.2-17

-------
046
049
050
051
052
053
054
055
056
057
058
059
061
062

063
064
071
075
076
077
085
086
Process change
Liquid filtration system
Packed-gas absorption column
Tray- type gas absorption column
Spray tower
Venturi scrubber
Process enclosed
Impingement plate scrubber
Dynamic separator (dry)
Dynamic separator (wet)
Mat or panel filter - mist collector
Metal fabric filter screen
Dust suppression by water sprays
Dust suppression by chemical stabilizer
or wetting agents
Gravel bed filter
Annular ring filter
Fluid bed dry scrubber
Single cyclone
Multiple cyclone w/o fly ash reinjection
Multiple cyclone w/fly ash reinjection
Wet cyclonic separator
Water curtain

50
90
25
on
/u
1C
. D
25
£f^
90
50
92
10
-L. \J
40
40

.
80
W
10
JL W
10
JLVJ
80
50
50
10

75
RS
o j
O f\
80
f\ r;
95
3.2
Q^
7S
/ -J
94
1 Q
J.J
65 . .
fis
O J
on
yu
on
zu
95
75
7S
/ tj
45

85
f\f\
99
95
90
99
3.7
99
f\ f\
99
o c:
OD
97
A f.
20
90
QA
yo
80
r»-7
97
f\ f\
90
50
95
85
0 C
OD
90
       represent an average of actual efficiencies.
                                                                  are
      lencx.a.      c.nol.3 shorn are intended to provide guidance fo
            -                      —            -

G<2"18                         EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
References for Appendix C. 2

 1.  Fine Particle Emission Inventory System, Office Of Research And
     Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
     Park, NC, 1985.

 2.  Confidential test data from various sources, PEI Associates, Inc.,
     •Cincinnati, OH, 1985. ,

 3.  Final Guideline Document:  Control Of Sulfuric Acid Production Units.
     EPA-450/2-77-019, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
     Triangle Park, NC, 1977.
                                 *
 4.  Air Pollution Emission Test. Bunge Corp.. Destrehan. LA. EMB-74-GRN-7,
     U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC,  1974.

 5.  I. W. Kirk, "Air Quality  In Saw And Roller Gin Plants", Transactions Of
     The ASAE. £0:5, 1977.

 6.  Emission Test Report. Lightweight Aggregate Industry. Galite Corp.. EMB-
     80-LWA-6, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle  Park,
     NC, 1982.

 7.  • Air Pollution Emission _Test. Lightweight Aggregate  Industry. Texas
     Industries. Inc.. EMB-80-LWA-3, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Research Triangle Park, NC, 1975.  -    •

 8.  Air Pollution Emission Test. Empire Mining  Company. Palmer. Michigan.
     EMB-76-IOB-2, U.  S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
     Park, NG,  1975.

 9.  H. Taback,  et al..  Fine Particulat'e Emissions From  Stationary Sources  In
     The  South  Coast Air Basin.  KVB,  Inc., Tustin, CA,  1979.

 10.  K. Rosbury, Generalized__Particle  Size Distributions For Use In  Preparing
     Particle  Size  Specific Emission Inventories.  EPA Contract No.  68-02-
     3890, PEI  Associates,  Inc., Golden,  CO,  1985.
 9/90                             Appendix C.2                           C.2-19

-------

-------
                                  APPENDIX D

                PROCEDURES  FOR SAMPLING  SURFACE/BULK DUST LOADING


     Procedures are herein recommended for collection of road dust and
aggregate material samples from unpaved and paved industrial roads, and from
storage piles.   These recommended procedures are based on a review of American
Society Of Testing And Materials (ASTM)  standards.   The recommended procedures
follow ASTM standards where practical, and where not, an effort has been made
to develop procedures consistent with the intent of the majority of pertinent
ASTM Standards.

                         1.  Unpaved Industrial Roads

     The main objective in sampling the surface material from unpaved roads is
to collect composite samples from major road segments within an industrial
facility.  A composite, or gross, sample comprises of several incremental
samples collected from representative subareas of the source.  A road segment
can be defined as the distance between major intersections.   Major road
segments can be identifed by an analysis of plant delivery, shipment and
employee travel routes and should be mapped before sampling begins.

     The goal of this sampling procedure is to develop data on the mean silt
and moisture contents of surface material from a given road segment.
"Representative" samples will be collected and analyzed through the use of
compositing and splitting techniques.  A composite sample is formed by the
collection and subsequent mixing of the combined mass obtained from multiple
increments or grabs of the material in question.  The analyzed, or test,
sample refers to the reduced quantity of material extracted, or split, from
the larger field sample.  A minimum of 0.4 kg (~1 Ib) of sample is required
for analysis of the silt fraction and moisture content.

     A gross sample of 5 kg (10 Ib) to 23 kg (50 Ib) from every unpaved road
segment should be collected in a clean,  labeled, 19 liter (5 gal) plastic pail
with a sealable poly liner.  This sample should be composited from a minimum
of three incremental samples, but it may consist of only one, depending on the
length of the road segment and hazards to the sampling team.  The first sample
increment is collected at a random location within the first 0.8 km (0.5 mi)
of the road segment, with additional samples collected from each remaining 0.8
km (0.5 mi) of the road segment up to a maximum road segment length of 4.8 km
(3 mi).

     An acceptable method of selecting three sample locations on road segments
of less than 1.5 mi length is to sample at locations represented by three
random numbers  (x^, X£, xg), between 0.0 mi and y mi, the road segment length.
A scientific handheld calculator can produce pseudorandom numbers, or they may
be obtained from statistical tables.
9/90                              Appendix D                               D-l

-------
     LO
      CO
                             if
                             cc is
                                         4^
                                         o
>*
                                                  f
                                                   O
                                                               t
                                                               X
                                                                   CM
                                                                   X
                                                                       CO
                                                                       X
                                                                                 o
                                                                                 a:
                                                                                 
-------
Date Sample Collected.
                                Sampling Data for
                                 Unpaved Roads
               , Recorded by.
Type of Material Sampled:
Site of Sampling*:	
SAMPLING METHOD
  1.  Sampling device: whisk broom and dust pan
  2.  Sampling depth: loose surface material (do not abrade road base)
  3.  Sample container: metal or plastic bucket with sealed poly liner
  4.  Gross sample specifications:
     (a) 1 sample of 23kg (50 ib) minimum for every 4.8 km (3 mi) sampled
     (b) composite of at least 3 increments: lateral strips of 30 cm (1 ft) width extending over
        traveled portion of roadway

Indicate deviations from above methods and general meteorology:



SAMPLING DATA
Sample
No.










Time










Location*
•









Surface
Area










Depth










Quantity
of Sample










  Use code given on plant or road map for segment identification and indicate sample
  on map.

                  Figure 2.   Data Form For Unpaved Road  Sampling.
  9/90
Appendix D
D-3

-------
     Figure  1  illustrates  sampling locations along  industrial unpaved roads.
The width of each sampled  area  across  the  road  should be 0.3 m  (1 ft).   Only
the travelled  section  of the roadway should be  sampled.

     The  loose surface material  is removed from the hard road base with  a
whisk broom  and dustpan.   The material should be swept carefully to prevent
injection of fine dust into the  atmosphere.  The hard road base below the
loose surface  material should not be abraded so as  to generate more fine mate-
rial than exists  on  the road in  its natural state.  Figure 2 is a data form to
be used for  the sampling of unpaved roads.


                           2.  Payed Industrial  Roads

    ^For  paved roads,  it is necessary to obtain a representative sample of
loading (mass/area)  from the travelled surface  to characterize particulate
emissions  caused  by  vehicle traffic.  A composite sample should be collected
from each major road 'segment in  the plant.  A minimum sample mass of 0.4 kg
(~1 Ib) should be  composited from a minimum of  three separate increments.

     Figure  3  is  a diagram showing the locations of incremental samples for a
two-lane  paved industrial  road.  The first sample increment should be
collected at a random  location between 0.0 and  0.8  km (0.5 mi).  Additional
samples should be  collected from each remaining 0.8 km (0.5 mi).of the road
segment, up  to a maximum road segment length of 8 km (5 mi).  For road
segments  of less  than  2.4  km (1.5 mi) in length, an acceptable method would be
to collect sample  increments at  three randomly  chosen locations (x-,, x?, Xo),
between 0.0 km and y km, the road length.

     Care must be  taken that isampled dust loadings  are typical of only the
travelled  portion  of the road segment of interest.  On paved roads painted
with standard  markings, the area from '"solid white  line to solid white line"
should be  sampled.   Curbs  should not be sampled, since vehicles are not likely
to disturb dust from this  area.

     Each incremental  sample location consists of a lateral strip from 0.3 to
3 m (1 to  10 ft) wide  across the travelled portion  of the roadway.   The exact
area to be sampled depends on the amount of loose surface material on the
paved roadway.   For  a visibly dirty road, a width of 0.3 m (1 ft) is
sufficient, but for  a visibly clean road, a width of 3 m (10 ft) could be
required to obtain an adequate sample.

     This sampling procedure is  the preferred method of collecting surface
dust from a paved  industrial road segment.  However, if for lack of resources
or traffic hazards collection of a minimum of three sample increments across
all travel lanes is not feasible on a short road segment (<2.4 km or 1.5 mi),
sampling from a single representative paved'strip 3 to'9'm (10 to 30 ft) wide
across each lane will likely produce sufficient sample for analysis.

     Samples are removed from the road surface by vacuuming,  preceded by broom
sweeping if large aggregate is present.  The sample number is identified and
the sampled area measured and is recorded on the appropriate data form.    With
a whisk broom and a dust pan,' the larger particles are collected from the
sampling area and placed in a clean,  labeled plastic jar.   The remaining
                                         t

D-4                            EMISSION FACTORS                           9/90

-------
           }?
in

T—
Al
  S
               I

               '£
               iq
               o
           ,  \
                  o
                  n

                  i
                           Co m

                           £g
               E
               in
           }?
             V^


           ,1

              o















              x
                        in
                        I
£

                             c
                             ,g


                           CO en
                           O «
                           ^^* %••

                             S
                             C
                                              •a
                                               •a
                                               0)
                                               «3
                                               «^-

                                               +•>
                                               VI
                                               
-------
                                Paved Road Loading
 Date Sample Collected
           Recorded by.
 Type of Material Sampled:
 Sampling Location*:	'
. No. of Traffic Lanes:
. Surface Condition:
 *Use code given on plant or road map for segment identification and indicate sample on map.


  1. Sampling device: portable vacuum cleaner (broom sweep first if loading is heavy)
  2. Sampling depth: loose surface material
  3. Sample container: tared and numbered vacuum cleaner bags
  4. Gross sample specifications:
     (a)  Cample weiy 8 km (5 mi) of road length
                             " ~  > cm (1 ft) minimum width extending from curb to curb
	M do _not.sa.rnple curb.areas

Indicate deviations from above method:


SAMPLING DATA
Sample
No.




	 • - -

Vac
Bag






Time






Surface
Area






Broom
Swept?






Sample
No.






Vac
Bag






Time






Surface
Area






Broom
Swept?






DIAGRAM (mark each segment with vacuum bag number)

     -»...-.   .-..      -            .   t    ,,..._.,,...,,       . ,


                   Figure 4.   Data  Form  For  Paved Road Sampling.
   D-6
                                  EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                            9/90

-------
Date Sample Collected.
                                Sampling Data for
                                  Storage Piles
               . Recorded by.
Type of Material Sampled:
Site of Sampling :	
SAMPLING METHOD
  1.  Sampling device: pointed shovel
  2.  Sampling depth: 10-15 cm (4-6 in)
  3.  Sample container: metal or plastic bucket with sealed poly liner
  4.  Gross sample specifications:
     (a) 1 sample of 23kg (50 lib) minimum for every pile sampled
     (b) composite of 10 increments
  5.  Minimum portion of stored material (at one site) to be sampled: 25%

Indicate deviations from above method (e.g., use of sampling tube for inactive piles):
SAMPLING DATA
Sample
No.















Time















Location (Refer to map)















Surface
Area















Depth















Quantity
of Sample















                Figure 5.  Data Form For Storage Pile  Sampling.
9/90
Appendix D
D-7

-------
 smaller particles are then swept from the road with an electric broom-type
 vacuum sweeper.  The sweeper must be equipped with an empty weighed, labeled
 disposable vacuum bag.  Care must be taken to avoid tearing the bag and losing
 the sample.  After the sample has been collected, the bag should be removed
 from the sweeper, checked for leaks and stored in a previously labeled sealed
 plastic bag or paper envelope for transport.  Figure 4 presents a data form to
 be used for the sampling of paved roads.


                                3.   Storage Piles

      Ideally,  a gross sample made up of top, middle,  and bottom incremental
 samples from a pile should be obtained to determine representative silt and
 moisture content for use in predicting participate emissions from wind erosion
 and materials  handling operations.    However,  it is impractical to climb to
 the top_or even the middle of most industrial  storage piles,  because of their
 large size.

      The most  practical approach to minimize sampling location bias for laree
 piles is to sample as near to the middle  of  the pile  as  practical and to
 select sampling locations  in a random fashion.   A minimum of ten incremental
 samples should be obtained at locations along  the entire perimeter of a large
 pile   If a small pile is  sampled,  two sets  of three  incremental samples
 should be collected from the pile top-  middle,  and bottom.   A gross sample of

 1  KS/i  1?,*° 23,kS (5°  lb)  fr°m  a St°raSe Pile should be  Placed in a clean,
 labeled,  19  liter (5 gal)  plastic pail with  a  sealable-poly  liner.  ' .'   ""

      For  determination of  wind erosion estimation parameters,  incremental
 samples are  collected by skimming the surface  of  the  pile in an upwards
 direction, using a straight-point shovel  or  small garden spade.   Every effort
 must.be made n^t to  avoid  sampling  larger pieces  of aggregate'materiair ~	:

      To characterize  a  pile  for  particulate  emissions from materials handling
 processes,  incremental  samples  should be  taken  from the  portion of  the  storage
 pile surface (1)  which  has been  been recently formed by  the addition of aggre-
 gate material ,  or (2) from which aggregate material is being  reclaimed
 Samples should  be  collected with a  shovel to a  depth of  10 to  15  cm (4  to  6
 in),  taking  care  not  to avoid  sampling larger pieces of material.

      If an inactive pile is to be sampled before  loadout  operations, sample
 increments should be  obtained using  a  sampling  tube approximately 2 m  (6 ft)
 long pushed  to  a depth  of 1 m  (3 -ft).  The diameter of the sampling tube
 should be a  minimum of  10 times  the  diameter of the largest particle sampled
 Samples should be representative of the interior portions of the pile  that
 constitute the bulk of the material  to be transferred.  Figure  5 presents a
 data form to be used fo'r the sampling of storage piles.
D'8                            EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
                                  APPENDIX E

   PROCEDURES FOR LABORATORY ANALYSIS  OF SURFACE/BULK DUST  LOADING SAMPLES


               1.0  Samples From Sources Other Than Paved Roads

1.1  Sample Preparation

     Once the gross sample is brought to the laboratory, it must be prepared
for analyses of moisture and silt, the two physical parameters of principal
interest.  The latter is defined as the percent of test sample mass passing a
200 mesh screen (<75 micrometers physical diameter) based on mechanical
sieving of oven-dried material.   These analyses entail dividing the sample to
a workable size.

     The gross sample can bo divided by using  (1) mechanical devices,
(2) alternative shovel method, (3) riffle, or  (4) coning and quartering
method.  Mechanical division devices are not discussed in this section since
they are not found in many laboratories.  The  alternative shovel method is
actually only necessary for samples weighing hundreds of pounds.  Therefore,
only the use of the riffle and the coning and  quartering method are discussed.

     American Society For Testing And Materials (ASTM) standards describe the
selection of the  correct riffle size and the correct use of the riffle.
Riffle slot widths should be at least  three times T:he size"of the largest
aggregate in the  material being divided.  Figure 1 shows two riffles for
sample division.  The following describes the  use of the riffle.

          Divide  the gross sample by using a riffle;   Riffles properly used
     will reduce  sample variability but  cannot eliminate it.  Riffles are
     shown  in Figure 1,  (a)  and (b).   Pass the material through the riffle
     from a feed  scoop, feed bucket, or  riffle pan having a lip or  opening
     the full length of the  riffle.  When using any of the  above containers
     to feed the  riffle, spread the material evenly in the  container, raise
     the container, and hold it with its front edge resting on top of the
     feed chute,  then slowly tilt it so  that the material flows in a uniform
     stream through the hopper straight  down over the center of the riffle
     into all the slots, thence into the riffle pans,  one-half of  the sample
     being  collected in  a  pan.. Under  no circumstances shovel the  sample  into
     the riffle,  or dribble  into  the riffle from a small-mouthed container.
     Do not allow the material to build  up  in  or above the  riffle  slots.   If
     it does not  flow freely through the slots, shake or vibrate the riffle
     to  facilitate even  flow.

     The procedure for coning and quartering is best  illustrated in Figure  2.
 Coning and  quartering is a simple procedure which  is  applicable to all
 powdered materials and to  sample  sizes ranging from a few  grams to several
 hundred  pounds.2   Oversized,  material,  defined  as >0.6 mm (3/8  in)  in diameter,
 should be  removed prior  to quartering  and weighed  in  a tared  container.   The
 following  steps describe the procedure.


 9/90                             Appendix E                                E-l

-------
      1.    Mix the material and shovel it into a neat cone;

      2.    Flatten the cone by pressing the top without further mixing;

      3.    Divide the flat circular pile into equal quarters by cutting or
           scraping out two diameters at right angles;

      4.    Discard two opposite quarters;

      5.    Thoroughly mix the two remaining quarters,  shovel them into a cone,
           and repeat.the quartering and discarding procedures until the
           sample has been reduced to 0.4 to 1.8 kg (1  to 4 Ib).

 Preferably,  the  coning and quartering operation should.be conducted on a floor
 covered with clean 10 mil plastic.   Samples likely to  be affected by moisture
 or  drying  must be handled rapidly,  preferably in an area with a  controlled
 atmosphere,  and  sealed in a container to  prevent further changes during
 transportation and storage.   Care must be taken that the material is not
 contaminated by  anything on the  floor or  that a portion is not lost through
 cracks or  holes.

      The size of the laboratory  sample is important.   Too little sample will
 not be representative and too much  sample will  be unwieldly.   Ideally,  one
 would like to analyze the entire gross sample in batches,  but this  is not
 practical.   While all ASTM standards  acknowledge,this  impracticality,  they
 disagree on  the  exact size,  as indicated  by the  range  of recommended'samples,
 extending  from 0.05  to 27 kg (0.1 to  60 Ib).

      The main principle  in sizing the  laboratory sample  is to have  sufficient
 coarse and fine  portions to  be representative of the material and to allow
 sufficient mass  on each  sieve  so that .the weighing  is  accurate...  A  laboratory
 sample of  400 to  1600 g  is recommended since  these  masses  can be handled by
 the scales normally  available  (1.6.to  2.6 kg  capacities).   Also,  more sample
 than  this  can produce screen blinding  for the 20 cm (8  in)  diameter screens
 normally available.    In addition,  the  sample mass  should  be  such that  it can
 be  spread  out in  a reasonably sized drying pan to  a depth of  < 2.5  cm (1 in).

 1.2   Laboratory Analysis  Of  Samples For Moisture And Silt  Contents

      The basic recommended procedure for  silt analysis  is  mechanical, dry
 sieving after moisture_analysis.  Step-by-step procedures-are  given in
 Tables 1 and  2.   The  moisture  content  is  obtained from a differential weight
 analysis of the bulk  material  before and  after drying.                     &

     Non-organic  samples  should  be  oven dried overnight  at  110°  C (230°F)
 before sieving.   The  sieving timers variable; sieving should be  conducted for
 several periods of equal  interval (e., g,,  10 min), and continued until  the net
 sample weight collected  in the pan  increases by less than  3.0 percent of  the
previous silt weight.  A  small variation of 3.0 percent  is allowed  since  some
 sample grinding due to interparticle abrasion will, occur, and consequently
the weight will continue  to increase..

     When the silt mass change reduces to not more than 3.0 percent, it is
thought that the natural  silt has been passed through the No. 200 sieve screen
and that any additional increase is due to grinding.  The sample preparation
E-2            ,                EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                          9/90

-------
                    Feed Chute
                                 SAMPLE DIVIDERS (RIFFLES)
                             Rolled
                             Edges
                        Riffle Sampier

                            (b)
                               Riffle Bucket and
                            Separate Feed Chute Stand
                                    (b)
                        Figure  1.  Sample Dividers  (Riffles)
9/90
                                 CONING AND QUARTERING
Figure 2 .   Procedure For Coning And Quartering.


                     Appendix E
E-3

-------
Date:
                             MOISTURE ANALYSIS
By:
Sample No: 	_	Oven Temperature:  	
Material:	    Date In	Date Out
.. ... _    ,  _.  ,                       Time In	 Time Out
Split Sample Balance:                  Drying Time
   Make
   Capacity - , _ __    Material Weight (after drying)
   Smallest Division . _   •     Pan + Material: _ _
                                      Pan: __ •
Total Sample Weight: __ _    Dry Sample:
(Excl. Container)                                   ~~~
Number of Splits:       ' _ _ _     MOISTURE CONTENT:
                                        (A) Wet Sample Wt.
Split Sample Weight (before drying)         (B) Dry Sample Wt HZZ
Pan + Sample: _ _ _ _       (Q) Difference Wt.  ~~~
Pan:
                     .         _           1n
Wet Sample:          - _ _ _    ,   itJUfla = _ % Moisture
                  Figure 3. 'Example Moisture .Analysis Form._


operations and the moisture and sieving "results can be recorded on the data
forms shown in Figures 3 and 4,


                        2.0  Samples From Paved Roads

2.1  Sample Preparation And Analysis For Total Loading

     The gross sample" of _ paved  road dust' carTarrive" at the laboratory in two
types of containers,  (a) for heavily loaded roads, the broom swept particles
will be in plastic jars; and (b)  the vacuum swept dust will be in vacuum bags
sealed inside plastic bags  or paper envelopes.  The broom swept particles and
the'vacuum swept dust are individually weighed on a beam balance.   The broom
swept particles are weighed in  a  tared container.   The vacuum swept dust is
weighed in the vacuum bag which was tared in the laboratory before going to
the field.

     The total surface dust loading on the traveled lanes of the paved road is
then calculated in units of kilograms of dust on the traveled lanes per
kilometer of road.  The total dust loading on the  traveled lanes is calculated
as follows:
E-4           '                EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                         9/90

-------
                                   L =	


                                                                     (1)
 where:    m^ = mass of the broom swept dust (kg)
          niy. = mass of the vacuum swept dust (kg)1
          P  = width of the sampling strip as measured along the
               centerline of the road segment (km)


                    TABLE E-l.  MOISTURE ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
.  1.    Preheat the oven to approximately 110°C (230°F).   Record oven
       temperature.

  2.    Tare the laboratory sample containers which will  be placed in the oven.
       Tare the containers with,the lids on if they have lids.   Record the tare
       weight(s).   Check zero before each weighing.

  3.    Record the  make,  capacity, and smallest division  of the  scale.

  4.    Weigh the laboratory sample(s) in the container(s).a  Record the
       combined weight(s).  Check zero before each weighing.

  5.    Place sample  in oven and dry overnight.^

  6.    Remove sample container from oven and (a)  weigh immediately if
       uncovered,  being careful' of the hot container;  or (b)  place-tight-
       fitting lid on the container and let cool  before  weighing.   Record the
       combined sample and container weight(s).  Check zero reading on the
       balance before weighing.

  7.    Calculate the moisture as  the initial weight of the sample and container
       minus the oven-dried weight of the sample  and container  divided by the
       initial weight of the sample alone.  Record the value.

  8.    Calculate the sample weight to be used in  the silt analysis as the oven-
       dried weight  of the sample and.container minus  the weight of the
       container.  Record the value.    --  •-

 aFor materials with high moisture content,  agitate the  sample  container to
 ensure that any standing moisture is included in the  laboratory sample
 container.
 "Materials composed of hydrated minerals or organic material like coal and
 certain soils should be dried for only 1.5 h.
 9/90                              Appendix E                               E-5

-------
  Date	
  Sample No:
  Material:
         SILT ANALYSIS

           By
  Split Sample Balance:
  Make
  Capacity     .
  Smallest Division
           Material Weight (after drying)
           Pan + Material:	,
           Pan:
           Dry Sample:.

           Final Weight:
                                   / qji* _ Net Weight <200 Mesh  . nrt
                                            Total Net Weight    x100
                 SIEVING
   Time: Start:
   Initial (Tare!
   20 min:
   30 min:
   40 min:
Weight (Pan Only)
Screen
3/8 in.
4 mesh
10 mesh
20 mesh
40 mesh
100 mesh
140 mesh
200 mesh
Pan
Tare Weight
(Screen)









Final Weig
(Screen +









inal Weight
Screen + Sample)









Net Weight (Sample)









%









                    Figure 4.  Example Silt Analysis Form,
E-6
                               EMISSION FACTORS
                                                                         9/90

-------
                     TABLE E-2.   SILT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
  1. Select the appropriate 8-in diameter, 2-in deep sieve sizes.  Recommended
     U.S. Standard Series sizes are:  3/8 in, No. 4, No. 20, No, 40, No. 100,
     No. 140, No. 200, and a pan.  Comparable Tyler Series sizes can also .be
     utilized.  The No. 20 and the No. 200 are mandatory. The others can be
     varied if the recommended sieves are not available or if buildup on one
     participate sieve during sieving indicates that an intermediate sieve
     should be inserted.

 2.  Obtain a mechanical sieving device such as vibratory shaker or a Roto-Tap
     (without the tapping function).

 3.  Clean the sieves with compressed air and/or a soft brush.  Material
     lodged in the sieve openings or adhering to the sides of the sieve should
     be removed (if possible) without handling the screen roughly.

 4.  Obtain a scale (capacity of at least 1600 g) and record make, capacity,
     smallest division, date of last calibration, and accuracy.

 5.  Tare sieves and pan.  Check the zero before every weighing.  Record
     weights.                                               ,                 '

 6.  After nesting the sieves in decreasing order with pan at the bottom, dump
     dried laboratory sample (probably immediately after moisture analysis)
     into the top sieve.  The sample should weigh between 400 and 1600 g (-
     0.9 to 3.5 lb)a.   Brush fine material adhering toj the sides of the.con-
 -	tainer into the top sieve and cover the top sieve with,a special lid
     normally purchased with the pan.

 7.  Place nested sieves into the mechanical device and sieve for 10 min.
     Remove pan containing minus No., 200 and weigh.  Repeat the sieving in 10-
     min intervals until the difference between two successive pan sample
     weighings (where the tare of the pan has been subtracted) is less than
     3.0. percent.  Do not sieve longer than 40 min.

 8.  Weigh each sieve and its contents and record the weight.   Check the zero
     reading on the balance before every_weighing.

 9.  Collect the laboratory sample and place the sample In a separate
     container if further analysis is expected.

10.  Calculate the percent of mass less than the 200 mesh screen (75 urn).
     This is the silt content.

aThis amount will vary for finely textured materials;  100 to 300 g may be
sufficient when 90% of the sample passes a No. 8 (2.36 mm) sieve.


2.2  Sample Preparation And Analysis For Road Dust Silt Content

     After weighing the sample to calculate total surface dust loading on the
traveled lanes,  the broom swept, particles and vacuum swept dust are

9/90                              Appendix E                               E-7

-------
composited.  The  composited sample is usually small and may require  no sample
splitting in preparation for sieving.  If splitting is necessary to  prepare a
laboratory sample of  400 to 1600 g,  the techniques discussed  in  Section 1.1
can be used.  The laboratory sample is then sieved using the  techniques
described in part 1.2 above.


References For Appendix E

1.   "Standard Method Of Preparing Coal Samples For Analysis", D2013-72,
     Annual Book  Of ASTM Standards.  1977.

2.   L. Silverman, et alv  Particle Size Analysis In Industrial  Hygiene,
     Academic Press,  New York,  1971.
      u.s. GOVEreffliEHT ERINTIHG OFFICE 1990/727-090/27002
E-8                             EMISSION FACTORS                            9/90

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing}
. REPORT NO.
    AP-42 Supplement C
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Supplement C to  Compilation Of Air  Pollutant Emission
   Factors. AP-42,  Fourth Edition
5. REPORT DATE
  September 1990,
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 AUTHOR(S)
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 U.-'S. Environmental  Protection Agency
 Office Of Air And  Radiation
 Office Of Air Quality Planning And Standards
 Research Triangle  Park, NC  27711
                                                            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                            14..SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
 5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 EPA Editor:  Whitmel  M. Joyner
 6. ABSTRACT
      In'this Supplement to the Fourth Edition of AP-42,  new or revised emissions data  i
 are presented  for Residential Wood  Stoves; Refuse1Combustion; Sewage Sludge
 Incineration;  Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Industry; Surface Coating Of Plastic Parts
 For Business Machines; Synthetic  Fiber Manufacturing;  Primary Lead Smelting;  Gray
 Iron Foundries;  Chemical Wood Pulping; Willdfires And  Prescribed Burning;  Industrial
 Paved Roads; Industrial Wind Erosion; Explosives Detonation; Appendix C.2,
 "Generalized Particle'Size Distributions"; Appendix D,  "Procedures For Sampling
 Surface/Bulk Dust Loading",; and Appendix E, "Procedures  For Laboratory Analysis Of
 Surface/Bulk Dust Loading Samples".
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a.
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                               b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
              c.  cos AT I Field/Group
 Stationary  Sources
 Point Sources
 Area Sources
 Emission Factors
 Emissions
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
                                               19. SECURITY CLASS .(ThisReport)
                                                                           !1. NO. OF PAGES
                                                                               170
                                               20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                                          22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)   PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE

-------