..••.ntF1^'1
RF* ^ I 3 BI"c^f\^9*PB P"Pni
-------
,- ~~'~""....: p ...~.~ ,...' '-
____--1---:
, .
t.
\ !
.
,-
r
,
- ..
"
...-..
-,-
.. ...-.p'" ., . ."":ia~''''~''
, ",;......'..:.
.; ::".). .,'...'.,' .
----.-
MERRIMACK VALLEY
AIR POLLUTANT EHISSION ,INVENTORY
..
. i
\
Prepared by
Alan J. Hoffman
Division of Air Quality and Emission Data'
P B - ZOS '2-,/ s-
. . -
U ~ S. DEPARTME~ OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Durham, North Carolina .
. April 19/0
- '~"--''''' .-6 ....-..4-... ,
I '
---
.
-------
- -...,~. . ,- --. , -
" .
...,
\
\
.,01""'~': .. - .----' ...._...-----.~...-.
-,
---- r -~.' -
"
Ii .
I .
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
~ .
~. .
Sincere gratitude is extended by the National Air Pollution Control
I
, Administration to the many individuals and companies wh9 contributed
- i
to this air pollution emission inventory. I
I
Special thanks are extended to Forrest Bumford of the New Hampshire
- -
Air Pollution Control Agency, James Dallas, Neil O'leary and Ken Haag
of the Massachusetts Department of Health and Erik Hall of the Tewksbury
Regional Health Office, who contributed invaluable assistance in the
gathering of data for this report.
\
.~.
. .
- ---- ---
.-- _0 ----.-------.---.-
.
.- \.
\,' '"' b
-------
""
_"'4 -"""-~"
~ .
\ .
.
,"
"
...'
'/---,"
, i
Figure
l'
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
,'.'t.:
, ,.
... ..'...
-.',
!'
LIST OF FIGURES
Map of the Northeastern United States Showing the
Merrimack Valley Area................~...........
...........
Detailed Map of the Merrimack Valley Study Area..~...........
Population Density of Merrimack Valley Study Area............ 11
Grid Coordinate System for Merrimack Valley Study Area....... 15
Point Source Locations....................................... 44
Sulfur Oxides Emission Density Map........~.................. 51
Particulate Emission Density Map............~................ 52
Carbon Monoxide Emission Density Map......................... 53
Hy~rocarbon Emission Density Map............................. 54
Nitrogen Oxides fuission Dens~ty Map... .. ..'.................. 55
-....
. "-'--""""'.'-' -. .
Page
7
8
- -- .--- -------------------
-------
,,-
",'
4..~. .~....._._.'
. .. , . ,.,'. . - .~.... .
.. '
'. .
.. .\.'.:.:.:' ~\ 0" "
.' ,.,. -.,.. ~-
, . ~ .
...-' ..,,;\,,: .' '," .. ..
0'
, t',
-,
. '
'--j~
I'
i!
I
PREFACE
( .
I'
I
'-
i
emission inventory ~or the Merrimack
in a series of sUrV;eys outlining
I
the sources and emissions of air pollutants for major metropolitan areas
in the country. These sUr\7eys, conducted by the National Inventory of
Air Pollutant Emissions and Control Branch of the National Air Pollution
Control Administration, p~ovide estin~tes of the present levels of air
pollutant emissions and status of their control. The pollut~nts, which
include sulfur oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and
. This report, which presents the
Valley Metropolitan Area, is another
( . ,
nitrogen oxides, are delineated with respect to source type, season of
the year and geographical distribution within the area. The general
procedure for the surveys is based upon the rapid survey technique for
1
estimating air pollutant emissions., These reports are intended to
serve as aids in the proposing of boundaries of Air Quality Control
-....
Regions, as directed by the Air Quality Act of 1967.
.
_..--- --.- -.-- ..-.
- -- - ----.-.-------------
, ..
,
.
-------
,,' .' '1\' .. .. .. .. ..:" ~ " '. .
).
"
.&:".....
.~-' ~ ".. ---..... -~. _.~,-...;..,:~
. --- ---
. ".
/
INTRODUCTION
;,,-.~,'4..""
.. --........
'-.
~
This report is a summary of the Merrimack Valley air pollutant
emission inventory conducted in December 1969.
Since all inventories
. are based upon a calendar ye3r, the data and emission estimates presented
are representative of 1968 and should be considered as indicating the
conditions as existed during that. year.
The Study Area, which was chosen on
of population and air pollation sources,
Southern New Hampshire and 28 cities and
the basis of the distribution
consists of six counties in
towns in northeast Massachusetts.
This area covers approximately 4,690 square miles and had a 1968 popula-
tion of 1,045,000.
A grid coordinate system was used to show the geographical distri-
bution of emissions within counties. The Study Area was subdivided
into 68 grid zones ranging in size trom 25 square kilometers in the
heav~.ly populated and industrialized areas to 400 square kilometers in
the"rural areas.
All sources of emissions were c1assifieJ into five categories--
transportation, stationary fuel combustion, solid~waste disposal,
industrial processes and evapor~tive losses. ,Each of these source
categories was divided into t~o subgroups--point sources and area
sources.
Facilities, wnich emit large quantities of air pollutants,
were considered individually as point sources, while the many remaining
contributors such as motor vehicles, residential fuel users, small
commercial and industrial facilities and on-site refuse burning equipment,
were considered collectively as area sources.
For this report,
individual sources, which had emissions greater than 0.50
tons per
--... -.- ------ . -
,,~. ... .
average annual day for any pollutant,- were classified as point' sources.
-------
--- .--
Emissions were estimated by using various indicators such as fuel
consumption, refuse burning rates, vehicle-miles, production data, and
control efficiencies and emission factors relating these indicators to
. 2
emission rates.
.
These factors represent average emission rates for a
. '-
~ .... .~ +-.... -'.
particular sour~e catego.ry. Since individual sources have inherent
d~fferenc~s that cannot always be taken into consideration, discrep-
ancies betw~en the actual and estimated emissions are more likely in
individual sources than in the total emissions for a source category.
As in all emission surveys, the data presented are estimates and
should not be interpreted as absolute values.
The estimates are, in
some cases, partial totals due to the lack 0= emission factors and
production or consumption data.
Despite the:,e limitations, the
estimates are of sufficient acc~racy and validity in defining the
extent and distribution of air pollutant emissions within the Study
Area.
...~.
.
4 ---.- ---
-_..- - ---
-------
)
.~
-.-.-!
'-,
"'1--.-
. .1:'
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
j "
- .
The estimated annual emi~sions of ~~; five sUr\~eyed polluta~ts
in the Merrimack ~a11ey Metropolitan Area are presented in Table 1.
- The fo1l~wing is a brief summary of poll~tant emissions and sources.
I
I
I
~e predominant sour=es of the 100~700 tons of sulfur
oxides emitted annua:ly are the combustion of fuels.
Sulfur Oxides
The largest collecti7e source is steam-electric pOwer
plants, which emit C7er 65 percent.
Par~icu1ate Matter. The annual emissions of 29,090 tons are distributed
between the various source types.
The largest source
is stationary +uel c~bustion with solid waste disposal
the second largest.
.....
Carbon Monoxide
Motor vehicles contri.bute 89 percent of the 452,200 tons
of carbon monoxide e:::itted within the Study Area in 1.968.
Other important sources include solid waste disposal and
aircraft.
Hydrocarbons
The two largest sour=es of the yearly 71,900 tons of
hydrocarbons are moter vehicles and evaporative losses.
They contribute 44 a~d 31 percent respectively.
Oxides of Nitrogen
Moto~ vehicles and s=ationary fuel combustion are the
important sources of ::he 52,900 tonS of oxicfes of
.'
n:£.trogen.
The five ~:eam-elect-;::; utilities .alone-
account for 29 perce~t of the tc~l emitted.
-.
.'
. -.' -.-."
-------
~.
- ''--.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIOXS FOR THE MERR~'~!..CK
VALLEY STu~Y ARE~, 1968 (:ons/Year)
=
SuI fur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide 'carbons Oxides
Transportation 1,840 2,930 411,800 33,240 22,770
Motor Vehicles 1,730 2,730 402.,060 . 31,260 2~,060
I
Other 110 200 9,740 1,980 710
Stationary Fuel
Combustion 100,720 11 ,590 950 930 25,380
Industrial 11,590 2,470 100 80 2,990
Steam-Electric 67,380 6,250 280 230 14,880
Residential 4,930 1,350 310 460 2,550
Commercial-
Institutional 16,820 1,520 260 160 4,960
Solid Waste Disposal 920 9,440 38,780 11,210 4,780
'..,...
Incineration 550 3,540 .7,460 160 720
Open Burning 370 5,900 31,320 11,050 4,060
Industrial Processes 80 5,130 700 4,220 0
Evaporative Losses 22,300
TOTAL 103,560 29,090 452,230 71,900 5:,930
.
-------
. "
, ,~.i~'::',.
",:
...._~_._..._._....._.. .,
~ '''-''
/,:~\
/' I~ '~:-'--- .,:
---- .-
SUMMARY O~ AIR POLLUTANT EMISS::'~,S FOR THE ME?2.!:'_-\CK
~
VALLEY STUDY AREA, 1968 (lO-~g/Year)
.
..
~ . - --------.
.. --
Sulfur Partic - Carcon Hydro- Nit:rogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation 1,670 2,660 373,580 30,160 20,560
Motor Vehicles 1,570 . 2,480 367,750 I 28,360 20,010
, Other 100 180 8,830 1,80:> 650
Stationary Fuel
Combustion 91,370 10,510 860 840 23,020
Industrial 10,510 2,240 90 70 27710
Steam-Electric 61,130 5,670 250 210 13~500
Residential 4,470 1,220 280 420 2,310
Commercia1-
. Institutional . 15,260 1',380 ~40 1LO 4,500
Solid Wa~te Disposal 830 8,560 35,180 10,170 4,340
In~ineration 500 3,210 6,770 150 650
Open Burning 330 5,350 27,510 10,020 3,690
Industrial Processes 70 4,650 640 3,830 0
Evaporative Losses 20~:!30
TOTAL 93,940 26,380 410,260 65,230 48,020
TABLE 1A
.
"
,.
c
-------
. ..
--- -..--
.
S111DY AREA
The Study Area for the Merrimack Valley ~'~etropolitan Area Air
Pollutant Emiss~o~ Inventory ~onsists of six ~~~nties in souther~ Xew
. .
.
Hampshire ~nd ~enty-eight cities and towns i~ Massachusetts.
The
. .
New Hampshire portion of the Study Area contai~s 80 percent of the
State's population. Figure 1 presents the Study Area in relation to
other large metropolitan areas.
The six counties in New Hampshire consis~ of Cheshire, Hillsborough,
Merri~ck, Rockingham, Strafford and Sulliva1, (Figure 2). The }mssachus~~ts
portion contains 28 cities and towns in portiQjs of Essex and }liddlesex
counties. Table 3 is a listing ~f the Massac~~setts portion of the Stud7
Area. Part of the Study Area is in two Standard Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (SMSA) as defined by the Bureau of the 3~dget. These SMSA's con-
tain cities and towns in New Hampshire and }~ssachusetts.
The other
counties and t~~s were added in the study tc insure that all areas
which may have a high rate of growth in futur; years were included.
The approximate 1968 population for the Study Area was 1,045,000
..._.
Which covers an area of 4,693 square miles. ~able 2, which gives pop-
ulation by county and Fi&ure 3, Which shows t~e population densi~',
indicate that most of the population is in the urbanized portions of
.
southern New Hampshire and reost of M8ssachuse~~s. The population in
this area has increased at a quicker pace tha~ the nation as a whole.
Betwe~n 1960 and 1968, the na~ion's populatio~ increased over 11 percent
while the Merri~ck Valley Study Area increased 17 percent.
The Study Area lies in the prevailing wes~erlies 50 that major
systems affecting the area are cold, dry air =rom the North and warm,
moist air traveling overland from the Gulf 0: ;':exico. Since the :10"..7
of air is generally offshore, the adjacent ocean ~onsitutes a mOdifying
. . -. .----
factor on the immediate coast, but its effect is felt less and-less
farther inland.
The temperatures are generally cooler in summer a~d
6
-------
* •»
.Hditfouli
I
CONNECTICUT '
ISLAND
-------
^
-------
~:. . I
" "
-,"
t'"
~
' "
,>' '\
~'" .:-
---- --.' . . -~-:::-- .
I,
TABLE 2
POPULATION AND AREA CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE HERRJ:'~!... ~
VALIEl STUDY AREA, ,1968
,. '-
r:
"
. .
population I I
2 popu1a::ion ,
Jurisdiction 1960 1968 Area M~ . Densi t:y : 968 "
, * I
Massachusetts Portion
TOTAL 415,680 458,340 549 835.0
.
New Hampshire
Cheshire 43,340 " 49,640 715 69.~
Hi11sborough 178,160 219,700 893 246.0
Merrimack 67,790 75,520 930 81.2
Rockingham 99,030 140',610 691 203.5
Strafford 59,800 69,050 376 . 183.6
-".-,.
Sullivan 28',070 32,500 539 60.3
"
TOTAL 478,660 587,020 4,144 141. 7
GRAND TOTAL 894,340 1,045,360 4,693 223.0
* See Table 3
for defi~ition of Massachusetts
Portion
.
)
9
'. - - ,..~
.. .. ',.~ -.... -"~' ..', ......,-<
1.< '
-------
~..
.
TABLE 3
JURISDICTIm;s IN MASSACHC'SETTS P'J?TION OF THE
STUT:!! AREA
Ci ties Tcr.."I1 s h i p s
1. Haverbi11 1. Amesbury
2. Lawrence 2. AIldover
3. Lowell 3. Aya=: . I
4. Newbu-::-yport 4. Billerica
5. Boxford
6. Carlisle
7. Chelmsford
8. Dr a. cut
9. l)l-.:1stable
10. Georgetown
11. Groton
...-. 12. Gro~J'e land
13: Li ~t1eton
14. Methuen
15. Me=::;:-imac
16. Ne-...:,ury
17. North Andover
18. Pe?pere1l
19. RO""...1 ey
20. Salisbury
21. Te-~-ksbury
.
22. T:.-:-.gsDorough .
23. \';2£ ::£ord
24. '~est Newbury
-------
r ~ f
\ i
1 (
1 \
i
; ;
j r
/ """
V
1 '>
'11 '
/
i
\
t
';
V-.-.J
/
f
f
ff
^ i
t
\
«**
! J
•> . • ..*•
•* • • -> i '
• \
:
\
V
•V
, >
i
POPULA1 DENSITY, I
^'x->.
i.- ....
IIUIHI CMfTV
7
/l.-._
t
*"-tJ * e j>m
r-~^_ —
1
11"" • M""
peri . ni^
i
u • »•
n •' M u
J '?] ?':' ',000
V-*I
vj '.'•')•• .'.(mo
,,r,1: .1,000
4n
.... H-
• - -/"
^,
<*
j
1
/*
r
/
r-y <
i
/
/
/
V
«
\
»%
i \.*»'^*~**" •
1 ^* \
-i-/ X
• **"
/
i
, y
'i
— i
-_
i
i
i
\
\
s
\
25""
t
ti
II III If
\-
\
r'\ .
^
x-
|M»^. ,M » 1W(111V)1T , ,„,
K3 "* ' '" % ^d "MVw
.* , .,.4 w.*tt
„
.«**n
a — ,^.^ | *-
^
k
1
1 1
•'"''•x
x's
X.
vv
**
W «,' >
;V.V.WVA\V,V.V.«?.'.V.
x*i*x*x*x*X'
:X;If;*;*v';X;'
"**»*»***>****''"*»*«"i
*»*******•*•*** •*•"•*!
I'X'X'X'X'I-J
>
\
Xy,
/\
/
/
/*
.
vX-!vX':';y
""X""**'X'' '?*'•'
,•.•.••"•• • »'l
^:::::;:::::;:;g:;:^::^
&fc«V- "'" ' V.'
-^ Bx-'-''' " .<'^
S;yX;C^:;
*. «.iu, f.. .Ai. '''K'!'''X'l
Xvl-ijX'X'X1 ****""*"'
:x:::::5::::x':^
f'«'»'«'''4>'-'-'.'H ~*Tr^, ^
._.—'«
t
\
V
'"•"•v
|iii|j:^i|^§i^
:||j;|||ji|||ii;|
j^M^£:fi;:;:::;:iy':x:;-;:L^::xj;y::
tJSI «F,lt
;$:W:&:'::::
""V_i/ »
.
iv.:.:v......v:
^\^y
->>X4:j;-.X:
• • •
/ »
\ ^
i
i
i
i
\
)
_./
/
/
i
W 1 ^/
s
t
\
4 •••••§
'*
'
\
k
§*•*«' l' «"•*»*•*•*•
:$:Xx$:$:
*V X*!v ''*X*X*
•Mil
— — • — —
::v:;X::::::x:
:j<;- :::::;:::;i
f
t
j
I ,
** " " *"~ *"***"
:•:•! ' '-:-/:•:
:;||p;|i||||
::p;:p;^:i:;:i'S;:;:;:|
*'f'*'t*Il" 'I* *»•%*•"•"•*« *•*•***«*«*!
, T, . < *. i "*'••, 'X-X'X'X'"*
^ - ** '• -*i ' '' ' '^''ktN
^•;:;fe:%3
KS. •»x-:<-:
"a>'':^ •>$?•*
. .-. *
• • v^ i Jt i * » »
•••••••^SK
'_•»".* .-.-.•".*. V-"-
-vsll— -
'/
•/ w
•M*
_A «K ^ ^
•,
• ***»^J»
l$x%
>/X'X'X
,4" :;:.::-::::
::::•:•:•:::•:::•::::
;•;•:•;•;•;•;•;::•:•:
..
• *
i
'
«•(
411""
'\
>'
/
.'
t
\
*•>
'%
mm%-
Xv'vX'X^Tf
x'x'x-xi/j
•x::;:::::"j i
**•**• •"-••'•' '///* v/' *
m^
:$:•:*•$:§:$:
:S
': J
l r*
.'
i\Y>.
i._^. j^iinS^t y
^*r !$•••• ^-V^
•M
-------
. ...
~.
warmer in winter near the coas~.
PrecipitatlOn is fairly co~stant throughout the year. Prevailing
winds are westerly. During the summer, winds norcally come frO'::] the
scut~'t~.est, ",~ile during the ~;::'::-.~er the northwest di::-ection precO':linates.
~
...,.,.
.
-------
. ~ & , ...
\
\ .
.~ . & --.......
,
'.--." ,
~'
I "-
. .., \
--/ ,.// --
',,':::-.., -,
, ".
~~
G?.ID COORDINATE SYSTEH .
. '
..
. .
A grid coordin~te s:,"stem, based on the :o:-,:.':ersal Trans..,..~~se Nercator
Projection (UTM), was used in the Merrimack ~:al1ey Study Are-a to indicate
tbe geographical distri~ution of emissions; A map showing the grid
coordinate system is presented in Figure 4.
An evaluation of all tbe available coorcinate
~
systems ~~s completed
I
before the UTM system ~~s chosen to present e=issions. The =ost convenien~
systems evaluated were ~he State PlaIie, Lon3:L~ude-Latitude, 8"Zld U'r.-!.
Alt30ugh each of the systems had valuable qualities, the use of the
,U~ coordinate system ~~as~elt' to be necessary to meet the requireEents
of these emission inven-=ories.
The two primary requisites of the grid coordinate syst~s were used
to evafuate each systeQ. The firstrequire=e!lt was that tte grid
coordinate system had ~o have square grid zo~es, since the cata were
to be used in meteorological dispersion modeis.
The grid zones, which
..,,,;..
the'UTM system and most of the State Plane systems project, are al~~ys
square, but the longitude-latitude system projects grid zones that
b~come skewed as the ZO:les be,come further fr~ the equator. The other
quality the grid coordinate system had to'possess was consistency.
Each e~ssion invento~" should be conducted C~ a grid coorc:.~ate system '
which used the same reference point througho:::: the Study Area. Since
some air pollutant inventories would include areas in two or more states,
the State Plane systems could not be used. ~owever, since ~he ~!
system, as well as the longitude-latitude system, is not re=erenced
to points in individual states, it is not in=luen~ed by j~risdiction
boundaries. '
The UTI! s:."stem Y,1as chosen since it was the or.::." pr~valent
coordinate system whic:-. can project square £rid zones over 8:1Y Study
Area using a common re=erence point.
" .
The Universe Trar.s';erse Nercator Projection is based ::?on the
metric system.
Each r:='~th-south and east-~"es:: grid line,
as illustrated
-------
. r.
in Figure 4, ~s identified by a coordinate'n~ber expressed i~ meters.
Eacb point so~=ce and grid, using its geogra?hical center, is identified
by a borizon:~l and vertical coordinate to the nearest 100 ~e:ers.
Grid Z07.es of different sizes are used in the grid coor=!~ate
system to al:~w a satisfactory definition of tbe geographica: graoation
of emissions E.:id to limit the number of ,grid zones. The majo=i.ty of
, th~ emissions is usually concentrated in the populated and i::custrlalized
portions of 8 Study Area. Smaller grids are placed over these areas
I
,
to allow tbe 5rid coordinate system to reflect tbe cbanges of emissions
; i
over sbort distances. Grid zones smaller than the 25 kilometer grid
zones used i:: ~his report are not usually w~rranted because c= the
inberent inaccuracies in tbe data.
Larg~r grid zones are used in the
rural portio::s, bec'ause a smaller percentage of the total emissions
usu~lly occurs in ligbtly populated areas.
.. ~. . -.. .
.., -' .-- - ".
...-.
'," <... ,) I,
.
.. '.".. ,-'" ..., ....-. .'-' ...:.. ....:.. . ,..,.' '4.
"~" """ '{.
-'~ . ~1>- . .-'-.. ,..-.- -.." - . .
-------
-------
---- -.
. ..
EMISSIONS BY CATEGORY
. "''''~-...~
TRANSPORTATION
. -
~
Transport&tion is the source ca~egory concerned with =~bile sources
of air pollutants. The sources in t~is category include: ~oad vehicles
(both gasoline and diesel powered), aircraft, vessels, and railroads.
With the exceptio~ of aircraft, all ~~e sources are prese~~ed as area
sources. Since most of the aircraft emissions are attribc~~b1e to the
. immediate vicinity of the airports, aircraft are presented as point
sources.
Road Vehicles
METHODOLOGY: Vehicle miles of t=ave1 were obtained frc=:J. gasoline
consumption. Total vehicle miles of travel for 1968 were o~tained
fr~ Highway Statistics using an average factor of fuel co~sumed per
vehicle m11e.3
"_.
The vehicle miles of travel Which included both gaso1~~e and
diesel vehicles ~ apportionned onto the grid system by ~~tor v~~icle
registration in Hassachusetts and po?ulation in New Hampsh-:.re.
ApproxL~ately 1.5 to 2.0 perce~~ of gasoline is lost =~rough
evaporation from the gasoline tanks ~nd carburetor losses. (This is
exclusive of hydrocarbon losses fro= exhaust.) It was ass~ed that
no diesel fuel was lost byevaporati~n. Since 1963 most ~e~ auto=obiles
were equipped with positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) va~7es that
reduce hydrocarbon emissions from tr:e crankcase by about 9J percent.
Due to a lag time in the autOI':1obile :-eplacement rate, it ~.~:.~ ass:..:~ed
.
that only 20 percent of the automobi!.es were not equipped ~..-:.::h =0;
-- ._-~-_.
. valves.
RESULTS: Hore than 4.88 billio:1 miles were traveled =-:;- moto:-
. vehicles in 1968.
In the process, 3~3 million ga1103s of ~~soli~~ ~,d
-------
, .
',','
.
,~ ., '"., . . ".
....- '- H''''''''>':' "
'-,';.., ,
" ~."." '.
. ... ~ .," . .
. " >t- ~~.~'j:":..: - ...
~
-
"r"
, :
i! .
......
Table 4 indicates that about 61 percent of ~ll motor vehicle travel
occurs in the Massachusetts portion and Hillsborough County in !;ew
Hampshire.
The resulting emissions from motor vehicles are shown in Table S.
. .
c
Motor vehicles are by far the most significant transportation source,
'accounting for89 percent of the carbon monoxide a~d 68 percent of the
hydrocarbons. I
Aircraft
.
. .
METHODOLOGY: The total number of flights by type was obtained
from the Federal Aviation administration and the 1968/1969 Transportation
45' .
Facts.' A flight is defined as the combination of a take-off and
l~nding. Estimates were made as to the kind and number of engines in
, each type category. Table 6 presents the results of these estimates at
the 'six" airports in the Study Area.
Emissions were obtained by applying the appropriate emission factors
to the total number of:£1i.ghts 'tn.:es:ch.-:engiare.'arid'!=ype . category .
~~,RESULTS: Table 7 presents the resulting air pollutant emissions
. .
from the six airports in the Study Area.
As can be seen, the piston
engines are the largest source of emissions among aircraft, accounting
for 99 percent of the carbon monoxide and 99 percent of the hydrocarbons.
.' .
Trains
METHODOLOGY: The total fuel consumed by railroads in any State is
6
given by the Bureau of Mines' Hinera1 Industry Surveys. The proportion
consumed in the Study Area was found by taking the ratio of population
of the Study Area to that of the State (in both Hassachusetts ar.d ~ew
Harepshire) times the total state fuel consumption. This fuel usage was
.
, apporti~nned to the i~dividual grids by locating t~~in routes ~~ci ~ail-
.-----~--- ---- _.- ---.- ------ +-------~
road yards.
RESULTS: The summary of Air pollutant Emissions from Transportation
'Sources (Table 4) shows that trains are not a significant sour~e of any
of .0
17
-------
. ...
~.
:'"
'.. .
',' .
~. ,
-,
TABLE 4
VEHICLE HILES OF TRAVEL A.\1) mEt CONSt:~TION IN
THE STUDY ARFA, 1968
. .
Total Gasoline Diesel
Vehicle-Miles
Jurisdiction 103/Day 103 Gal. /Year 103 Gal. /'Jay
Massachusetts Portion 5,410 160,000 8,300
I .
Cheshire 730 21,800 590
Hi11sborough 2,810 83,900 2,260
Merrimack 1,193 35,600 960
Rockingham 1,780 53,300 1,440
Strafford 1,052 31,400 850
Sullivan 395 11,700 320
TOTAL 13,3iO 397,700 "14,700
'L_.
.
. .-
-------
~./.."
" '...
'\
'" '/ \
... , .
_/' - .'
. '"
.----.. .
~::~:-
TABLE 5
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES
FOR THE MERRIMACK VALLEY STUDY AREA, 1968 (Tons/:'ear)
.
,
. .
."
Sulfur partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source <::ategory Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Motor Vehicles 1,730 2,730 402,040 31,260 22,060
Gasoline !
Exhaust 1,440 1,930 . 401,600 30,270 20,440
Evepora tion-!: 20,200
Diesel 290 . 800 440 990 1,620
Aircraft N 90 9,680 1,840 480
Jet N 40 30 20 30
Turbopr.op N N .N N ,.
.'
Piston N 50 9,650 1,820 450
Rai1roacrs. . 40 110 60, 140 220
Vessels 70 N N N N
TOTAL 1,840 2,930 . 411,780 33,240 22,776
N = Negligible
* = Included under evaporative losses
.
;.
.
;
. ~.~- ~~.'
-------
~<
- -- .~::-.
TABLE 6
AIRCRAFT FLIGHTS FOR THE STUDY AREA, 1968
Airport'and Engine Type
1 Engine
Number of Flights
2 Engines
3 Engi~es
Haverhi11
Pi.ston 3,500 3,500
Lawrence
Pis ton 24,000 24,100
Plum Island
. Piston 600 600
Tew-~.c
Piston ,3,000 3,000
Methuen
...~. 200
Piston 200
Manchester
Conventional Jet 1,500 2 , 0'0 a
Fan Jet 1,000
Piston 27,000 24,000
TOTAL 58,300 57,900 2,00:>
.
'- ... ~ -. .-': ...
. ~. ~.....'. "" '. . -"-.. .
. ". .~ _. j. .-- -'...
-------
,.:.- ",. ,..,.
.' ~.
.. ';.;....' '.
I.
'"
...&1.'1.:
~... --_...
---- -.
/'
TABLE 7 AIR POLLUTANT ~ITSSIONS FROM AIRCRAFT, 1968 (Tons/Year)
.
. . ---..
'-
~
.
. .
Sulfur Partie - Carbon Hydro- Nitr~Een
Airport Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxi::es
Haverhi 11 N N 600 110 30
Lawrence N ' 30 4,140 780 .,....,...
.!.._,~
Plum Island N N 110 20 ,.
. .~
Tew-Mac N N 520 100 20
Methuen N N 40 10 N
Manchester N 60 4,270 820 230
TOTAL N 90 9,680 1,840 4-80
...~,
N I: Negligible
.
- -- - -' ..- ---- - ---,-
-'-------~+ -+ - - .
---.' '--'-'------ -...-..--
,'.
o
-,. ," ,.~.' ,.,. ~',
-... ~ .~_.- ...' ,,",_. - ..... -.-..
-------
~
'~
-,-
of the five pol~utants.
Vessels
}mTHODOLOGY: The emount of fuel consumed ~y vessels was es:i~ated
.' .6
by the Bureau of }anes. It was assumed the quantity of fuel burned in
Massachusetts was negligible.
RESULTS: Air pollutant emissions are sh~m in Table 5. E::::.issions
from this category are small when compared ~o the total from t~e other
transportation sources.
. I
FUEL COMBUSTION IN STATIONARY SOURCES
All three of the major
. ~'i. thin the Study Area, wi th
1968 fuel oil accounted for
fuels (Coal, oil, natural gas) are consumed
fuel oil being the ~ost i~portant. In
92 x 1012 BTU's of energy or about 68
percent of the total.
As shown in Tables 8 and 9, 15.5 billic~ cubic
~,-,""f. ~ ".{:
-iIIioo'_,- .....,-
~~t~=~l g~~, 146.2 willion'gQllons of distillate fuel oil,
'414.5 million gallons of residual fuel oi1 were consumed in the Study
L_.
Area. In addition, 1.1 million tons of coal ~ere burned in p~wer plants
and 30,000 tons in commercial and industrial sources. Commercial and
instftutional buildings consume the largest amount of residual fuel with
steam-electric utilities consuming al~ost as much. Distillate ~e1 oil
is consumed pred~nantly for residential home heating and co. , ercial-
institutional buildings. Natural gas is burned primarily for residential
heating and by some industrial cons~ers. Coal only finds usage in one
power plant and a few other sources.
There are five steam-electric p~~er plants in the Study A=ea.
Table 10 presents t~e fuels consu~ed, and Table 11 presents t~2~r sulfur
and ash contents.
~,e coal fired plant is equipped ~~th cycl~~es and
electrostatic precipitators.
They use pulverized coal boilers.
METHODOLOGY:
:;" tural gas consu:::1ption and fuels consumed": :;- power
plants were obtained fr~ the utility companies and are consic2~ed
accurate.
Ho;.yever, t~e fuel oil figures were based 0':1 state t:-:als
1"'\1""0, 1 ~~ 7''", ~ 1
r .., - ........ ~~. .
~.=:. ~>:
. . ......... ~ .. "",,,'
-------
. - .
. ~,
. ~,.""'".' ,'.:1.- ,',. w'
J ,. ,. J.~
".-.
. ..............;..
.',.' '. .
,~, ""\
///~.
. ~------
. -... ----.
- .~.
. TABLE 8
NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION BY CONS~.n CATEGORY, 1968
( 106 Feet3)
.;
r
..
-
Commercia1-
Jurisdiction Residential Institutional Industr-:..a.1
Massachusetts Portion 6,630 .1,290 I. 1,410
'
Cheshire 510 N N
Hil1sborough 2,350 50 .200
Merrimack 580 N N
Rockingham 1,150 100 1,600
.Strafford 270 N N
Sullivan 290 N N
TOTAL 11,780 1,440 3,21C
"_.
.
-------
~,
, t.,
'-. ~--~
.
TABLE 9
FUEL OIL CONSUHPTION BY CONSt~.~ CATEGORY, 1~S8
3 .
(10 Gallons)
Residual Oil Dist~!.late Oil
Jurisdiction Commercial Industrial Residential C~ercia1 Industrial
Massachusetts Portion 70,000 36,100 121,800 25,000 3,200
~ Cheshire 1,200 2,000 15,500 2,000 530
Hi11sborough 5,600 13,000 71 ,300 6,000 1,500
Merrimack 4,000 3,100 23,900 2,000 570
Rockingham ' 2,000 2,000 43,600 4,000 540
Strafford 3,000 1,200 ~3,500 2,000 420
Sullivan 860 2,200 '9,900 1,000 40
TOTAL 86,600 \ 59,600 309,500 .'='2 ,000 6,800
...-.
.
-------
\
,\ .
. . ,-,,'"
,- .
- -- '''------.'-
, ",
"--- --
,/
- .
.
I
I
I
'I
TABLE 10
FUEL CONSUMPTION IN STEA}!-ELECTRIC POh~R PIJu~TS, 1968
'--
"""....
'-
.
. .
.
, ; Res~dual on Coal
Plant County (10 Gallons) (103 Tons)
Schiller Rockingh3.Itl 58.8
Daniel Street Rockingham 6.3
Manchester Hillsborough 5.3
Kelleys Hillsborough 4.2
Merrimack Hillsborough 1,100
TOTAL Hillsborough 74.6 1,100
. ''''.'
TABLE 11
SULFUR AND ASH CONTENTS OF, FUELS IN ALL STATIONARY
SOL~CES (By Wp.ight)
Fuel
Ash
Sulfur
.
Coal
--..- ----,----- a
Residual Oil
Distillate Oil b
7.1 - 10.0
2.6.
. - .- -. -- .--.------.-- - --
1.6 - 2.3
0.2 - 1.5
.
.
. Q
a = Grac~s ~~5,6
b ::: Gr'-idcs 1,:2,3
-------
--- -----~
The emissions from fuel combustion in area sources were apportionned
to the individual grids by population.
RESULTS: The resulting emissions are presented in Table 12.
The
combustion o~ coal, although providing 21 percent of the energy input,
. --
produces the uajority of emissions from combustion of statiCJ.lary fuels.
SOLID WASTE
METHODOLOGY: The total solid waste generated within the Study Area
was found by applying the national average per capita genera~ion rate or
10 pounds of refuse per day to the total Study Area resident population.~
This generation rate includes both collected and uncollected waste. On
the-average 5.5 lb/day of waste is collected by municipalities for
disposal. This figure includes household, commercial and industrial
refuse. . The remaining 4.5 lb/day includes industrial (3.0 lb/day),
'", ., "
and commercial and other household (1.5 lb/day).
The di9?o~al methods ,.,~re dete.rmined from the State Air Pollution
- .
Agencies. Then, the national averages of disposal method quantities
werEt-applied ~o the known disposal methods of the jurisdiction involved.
The emissions from large municipal and private disposal facilities
-were calculated individually and located within the Study Area. The
remaining waste (on-site incineration, on-site open burn~g, and small
open burning dumps) were treated as area sources and were ap?ortionned
onto the grid system by population.
RESULTS: Table 13 which is a solid waste balance for the Study
Area shows the results of the above methodology. . The predo~nant
disposal p~actices within the Study Area are sanitary landfills (26%)
- ,- - -- -
and open bur~.~g dumps (22%). There are three municipal ~nci~erators.
The majority of emissions in this category (Table 14) comes from'open
burning. - - - - - --
26
-------
I.. ~,
\
. ,.&.,,,',..,. ...'::-' - ._,'
~\
,;,-/ -'~ .~
.,,' --:...-:;...-:.
.. -
,. '
.--'
TABLE 12
AIR POLLUTA~TI' EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY FUEL C~~USTIO~
1968 (Tons/Year)
.
.
. .
.
.
~
. . Su 1 fur Par tic- Carbon Hydro-
Nitro~e~
Fuel User Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Coal 5 team -'E1ectri c 54,340 5,880 280 110 11,000
Industrial 1,000 1,700 40 10 250
Commercial 190 120 120 20 20
Total 55,530 7,700 440 140 .11,270
Distillate
Fuel Oi1 Residential 4,930 1,240 310 460 1,860
Commercial-
Institutional 1,480 390 40 40 1,580
Industrial 110 40 10 10 250
Total 6,5~0 ,1,670 360 510 3,690
Residuii1
Fue 1 Oil Steam-Electric 13,040 , 370 N 120 3,880
Industrial ,10,420 700 60 60 2,150
Commercial 15,150 1,000 90 100 3,280
Total 38,610 ., 2,070 150 280 '9 ,310
Natural Gas Residential N 110 N ~ 690
Commercial N 10 N ~ 80
Industrial N 30 N ,. 3!P0
."
Total N 150 N N 1,110
TOTAL All Users 100,720 11,590 950 930 25,330
.
,'.
.
. .
''Y. '. ,'-' .. .
. -- "." H- ...." ':'..;.-
''''.''''' .."--~ J"--,,:~" "', -¥ . ."\..,. ,"
-------
-.--
Ju .
E'
. r:.
'V
Cr)
'i.l, '. t.
TABLE 13
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL PRACTICES FOR THE MERRIHACK STUDY
AREA, 19.68. (TONS/YEAR)
~.
I
1
. .'
Open BumiT',g Incineration '
Waste Sanitary Hauled
He tion Generated . Dumps On -SHe Municipal On-Site Landfills Out
:husetts Portion
\L 830,000 218,000 142,000 150,000 160,000 i160,000 °
lIilp8h lre
;hire 63,000 9,000 15,000 ° 13,000 26,000 °
lsborough 400,000 40,000 65,000 70,000 80,000 145,000 °
'iuack 96,000 15,000 31,000 ° 15,000 35,000 0
:ingham 260,000 90,000 70,000 0, 44,000 56,000 °
fford 88,000 15,000 17,000 ° 17,000 39,000 °
I i van 42,000 5,000 5,000 ° 5,000 ° 27,000
\1. 91. ') , ()()O I iI, ,000 203, C/O() 70,000 17/, ,000 101 ,000 'J7 ,000
,
,
S'I11m AlmA . 1,779,000 3n,000 345,000 220,000 334,000 461,000 ,27,000
,'I
.:1
.
-------
_.-
/
/
. ,.
TABLE 14
AIR POLLUTANT EHISSIONS FROM SOLID WASTE DISPO~:U.
PRACTICES IN THE MERRIMACK VALLh"'Y S11.1DY AREA
1968, (Tons/Year)
~
"'.
.
." ""'....... -.-,
'-.
Sulfur partic- Carbon Hydro- Ni=:-ogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide . carbons C:t::.des
Incineration.
Municipal 220 1 ,~70 110 30 :20
On-site 330 1,670 . 7,350 130 500
Total 550 3,540 7,460 160 720
Open Burning
Dr,-site 170 2,760 14,660 5,170 1,900
Dumps. 200 . 3\, 140 16,660 5,880 2.,160
Total" 370 5,900 31,320 11,050 4,060
...-.
GRAND TOTAL 920 9,440 38,780 11,210 4,780
.(
.
-_..- - - -------- . ._~-- - - -----
._- - ---------
"----.------
.
.
. -".' ." ."
-------
, '"
--- r -
.
I
i:
INDUS~IAL PROCESSES
~,e area is notably void of the h~avy industrial areas or the ch~ical
:... . . ,,-~'.. .: f .
,<'"::':,':::\...': 'process industries. Table 15 shows t::at a majority of industrial estab-
. ". <"l'~".J.':. ::'.:. ,"" ,.I, ".'
, ~shme~ts are in food, textiles, clothing,. leather and machinery. There
are, however, several foundries, asphalt and concrete batching plants
I
. I
I
and o~e paper ui11.
Table 1 presents emissions from industrial processes.
As can be
seen, this cat~gory represents a small percentage of the Area's emissions.
.....
.
- -"---- --
- - - - - -. ~
-------
'I
,
a I
/ '
\
'"
I
TABLE 1$
SELECTED MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS FOR THE MERRIMACK
VALIEi STUDY AREA, 1963
(
)
:.
(.
-~~-
Jurisdiction
Food
Textiles 6&
Apparel
Lumber
6& Wood
Leather
Machinery
Total All
Establishments
.' ':. s. Portion 98 68 28 125 180 900
, ,,':cshire 6 14 44 5 23 r 157
i.I j lsborough 55 54 58 39 67 449
;'c ~. rimack 10 19 43 7 22 169
I.;, " :. kingham 23 11 28 31 16 161
I' "
t~ i :af ford 15 7 18 22 15 126
~',) 11 i van 11 8 21 1 .9 70
Ie: t'al Hass. 98' 68 28 125 180 900'
I /.,
!'lIl a1 N.II. 120 113 212 105 152 1.,132
TOTAL 218 181 240 230 332 2,032
.
.
.." ...
.-- '___T
'"
. \1""
- . . ._- - .--~
- ... -.. .. "-. "
1~-- ..'¥..- ';' "'.
-------
--- ---
"
. EVAPORATIVE LOSSES
"-
The sources of solvent evaporation considered in this survey were
. ' .
industry, dry cleaning and motor vehicles.
'METHODOLOGY: Industrial solvent evapor~tion was found fra~ individual
source information. Dry cleaning emissions were calculated using a per
8 '
capita ra~e of 4.0 lb/year. This was apportionned to the grid system
by population. Motor vehicle emissions were determined from the
vehicle miles, age of vehicle and extent of control equi~ent (see
transportation - motor vehicles).
This was broken down on a grid basis
in a manner similar to that used for exhaust emissions from motor
vehicles.
RESULTS: There was over 22,300 tons. of hydrocarbons emitted, of
which none was industrial, 2',100 was from dry cleaning operations,
and 21,200 were from automobiles.
....,.
.
.. .. .~ - .'.-
-------
. .
.... . ,"'" '
'... - .~~ . ..:':. ~'..",.. .. ~";"".; .
, "'- ~ .
. _.~.\ :
(
-~
-'l'~
!.
, I:
,
,
I
... '.
EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION
.
. .
The previous section of this report pre~ents emissions primarily
,
I
by source category. The emissions by county and sourceiare summarized
I
I
here in Tables 16 through 23.
As is expected due to a higher degree of urbanization than the
other counties. . The Massachusetts portion a~= parts of Rillsboroug~
and Merrimack contribute to the majority of air pollutants.
/'
...-.
.
..- --,-.- .---
-- ---- - .-.---
. :. 0
.. 0
33
.. ... '." .'~' '" ...
. '..- ""-'--''''' ._--' '-
. .
. -. .-.""" - .
. . '. ',' -. ~
-------
TABLE 16 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS' --
IN MASS PORTION COUNTY. \
- -" -
TON3/YEAR
SOURCE CATEGORY sox i. PART CO HC NOX
TrU\~~SPORTATION'
ROAD VEHICLES 735. 1 ? 0 2., 162131. 12127. 9099,
OTHt:~ 37. 1 ?o? 5466. 11'1. 464,
SUB-TOTAL 773. 1332. . 161603. 13818.. 9563.
c.',~P.USTION OF FUELS
HID!) $ TI~ Y 7615. 2 154. 11. 51. 1817.
S TE t,I,1..ELEC O. O. o. O. o.
nESIDENTIAL 1939. 550. 123. 182, 1116.
Cor.~1.1 AND INST. 13189. 1004. 95. 94. 3494.
SUA-TOTAL 22745. 3709. 295. 329. 6428.
l-' ' . USE DISPOSAL
i> "
INCH~ERATION 309. 2075. :3 594. 86. 389.
oPEN BUUNIfjG 179, 2 B 79. 15299. '399. 1979,
:jUf\-"rOT AL 489. 4 I} 54, 18894. . 5486. 236CJ.
r -.E55 80. 2 a 32. 700. U. O. '
. ) LOSSES 9062.
'
--------
--'---- - --- -
.
-------
... '\.I " .
0 r " <'.- :
TABLE 17 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
IN CHESHIRE COUNTY \
TONS/YEAR. '\
SOURCE CATEGORY SOX '{ PART CO \
HC ~OX :
'I: / \
:.
Tq f\i,ISPORT AT ION
ROAD VEHICLES 91. 1~9. 22004. 1699, 1180, '0
OTHER O. O. O. O. O. f
,1;,,-
SUB-TOTAL 91. 139. 22004. 1699. 1188, '0
co; '[~lJ S T ION OF FUELS J
" .,
IfWU 5 or R Y '278. 26, 2. ,. 2. 91. L.
S T L A..1...ELEC O. O. o. o. o.
::ES I DErH IAL 246. 66. 15. 23, 122,
(Oi;lt-'i AND ItJST. 251, 28. 3. 3. 115.
~,un..'TOT f\L 776, 122. 21. '28. 328.
w 1i~!uSE DISPOSAL
VI INCINERf,TI0N 13. 65. 285. 5. 19.
OPEN AUHNING 12. 192, 1019. 359, 132i ~{-" :
;.
SUB-TOTAL 25. 257. 1305. 365. 151.
~ '
hW CE S S 0'0 o. o. o. O.
L ''; }\ P LOSSES 1205.
! J,'
-------
,.
-,
TABLE 18 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
IN HI L LS BOROl) GH COUNTY ---
TONS/YEAR
SOURCE CATF.GORY SOX i, ' PART CO HC NOX
TRANSPORTATION
ROAD VEHICLES 352. 538. 84700. 6541. 4574.
OTHER O. 60. 4274. 818. 226.
SUR-TOTAL 352. 599. , 88975. 7360. 4800.
C0MRI.ISTION OF FUELS
INDUSTRv 2'231. 162. 14. 14. 543.
STEAI.1-ELEC 1652. 47. O. 15. 491.
RESIDENTIAL 1134.' 307. 71. 101. 564.
em.1M AND INST. 1076. 109. ' 11. 11. 420.
SUA-TOTAL 6096. 621. 98. , 148. 2020.
I
w ~fFUSE DISPOSAL
C1'< HIC I NERA T ION 150. 994. ' 1794. 42. 190.
OPEN BUrUJ I NG 52. 839. 4462. 1574. 511.
SUA-TO T 1\ L 202. 1834. 6257. 1611. 167.
!J ROCE SS O. 2291. O. 4215. O.
:V/dJ LOSSES 4691.
. - - . -
-------- --.- ------...- ...--
.
.
. (
-------
,. ~-
o ~
TABLE 19
SOURCE CATEGORY
TR/NSPORTATION
ROAD VEHICLES
OTHER
SUA-TOTAL
cn~AUSTION OF FuELS
INDUSTRY
S TE A/-1-ELEC
RESIDENTIAL
(OMM AND INST.
SUA-TOTAL
\".) .
'J
r: F FUSE DISPOSAL
INCINERATION
OPEN Bur~NIt!G
.5UH-TOTAL
! I : ',I C f. 5 S
( ',' ",r LOSSES
. I
I
I
.
~ .
. \.&
. l.
,
, .
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIO~S
. IN MERRIMAtK COUNTY
TONS/YEAR
.-.
,
i.
- _. - .---
;'.', I
. ,
SOX . ... PART CO
149. 228. 35960.
o. 2. 1.
150. 231. 35961.
HC
NOX
2777.
3.
2780.
1942.
5.
1947.
471. 39. 3. 3. 132. . /
I
54340. 5813. 275. 110. 11000.
319. ' 100. 23. 35. 176.
1122. . 256. 137. 37. ~~7.
56314. 6270. 439. 186. 11766.
" f
:
15. 75. 330. 6. 22.
22. 367. 1954. 689. 252.
37. 442. 22A4. 695. 215.
.-
o. O. . O. o. o.
1951.
'J
'-, -_._~_..__._--._--
- ---,. .
. .
t/
.,
,
',. ,
, I,..,~'
-------
....
TABLE 20 SUMMARY OF AIR POLl.UTANT EMISSIONS
IN ROCKINGHAM COUNTY
.) TONS/YEAR
SOURCE CATEGORY SOX ,. PART CO HC NOX
T~ANSPORTATION
ROAD VEHICLES 222. 340. 53653. 4143. 2897.
OTHER 66. 5. 1. 2. 16.
SUR-TOTAL 289. 346. 5365~. 4146. 2913.
{':)W~lJSTION OF FUEl.S
r W")U 5 TRY . '374. 41. 2. 2. 262.
S'j F J~ \1- E LEe 11385. 325. 1. 104. 3385.
f~ESIDENT IAL 693. 18S. 43. 65. 328.
CO,",} AND INST. 427. 53.. 6. 5. 221.
Stp.\-TOTAL 12881. 606. 54. 178. 4198.
:,)
f....)
. F FUS [ DISPOSAL
I!!CINERAT ION 44. 219. 961. 17. 66.
.; OPEN nURtlING 80. . 1280. 6799. 2400. 819.
SlJl'-TOTAL 123. 1499. . 1767. 241'7. 945.
, "; 0 C F S S o. o. o. o. o.
., '/ I\P LOSSES 2975.
.
. ,
<,
-------
SOURCE CATfC,ORY
, .. '
.,
. b. ( . .,
? ~
TABLE 21 SUM~.IARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
IN STRAFFORD COUNTY 'f. '. \
TONS/YEAR \
\
I. \ I.
SOX PART CO HC NUX '. \
{
,
131. 201. 31710. ' 2448. 1712.
o. o. o. o. o.
131. 201. 31710. 2440. 111.2. ,./
TRM!5r>O~T AT ION
rmAD VEH ICLfS
OTHER
StiR-TOTAL
(O'\'\tJ5 T ION OF FUELS
}.'jf)U S TRY
S T F Ai-1- E L E C
'f~SIDENTIAL
(:)~,'M Af'JD INS T.
::,I.JR-TOTAL
'223. 16. 1. 1.. '~8.
o. o. o. o. o.
374. 96. 23. 3~. 156. /-
580. 49. 4. 4. 179.
1178. 163. 30. 41. 395.
w .
'D
r-{: iIJSF. DISPOSAL
[;!CINERATION
U~)EN BURN I NG
SUA-TOTAL
P ~~C)Cf. 5S
F'/MJ LOSSES
17. . 95. 313. 6. 25. i
!.
15. 255. 1359. 479. 17~. '
33. 340. 1733. 486. 201.
o. o. o. o. o.
1733.
i.
i
i
,
.
"
,..-'
- ...-- . - ,...
. " ......--: ..._..-....~. _-"'4-'
-------
TABLE 22 SUMMARY OF A JR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS -
IN SULLIVAN COUi>4lY
TONS/YEAR
SOURCE CATEGORY SOX i. PART CO HC NOX
r'.~I\NSPORTAT ION
ROAD VEHICLES 49. 75. 11906. 919. 643.
OTHEI~ O. O. O. O. o.
sun-TOTAL 49. 75. 1190;>8 919. 643.
::~;,"'1AUST ION OF FLJELS
INDUSTRY 396. 25. ' 2. ~ 80.
. '
ST[A~-ELEC O. O. o. o. O.
RESIDENTIAL 157. 43. 9. 14. 82.
CO'~i'~ AND tNST. 173. 17. 1. 1. 6 (.. '
~11I\-TOT"l 727. 06. 14. 18. 22Y.
f'
<;:,
. ',FUSE DISPOSAL
HiC INfRA T ION 5. 25. 110. 1. 7.
OPEN BURNING 5. 80. 425. 150. 55.
SUR-TOTAL 10. 104. 535. 151. 62.
)crss o. o. o. o. o.
'\P LOSSES 668.
----..- --~_. - -
-------
. "
. ...'~'.,i. " . " .
'".. ..........
,.
_t':'-:'.~ ,- '-
,.' ......~..'
.'
---- ----
TABLE 23
RELATIVE CQ}3IBUTION OF "EACH cotml'Y TO TOTAL
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
I
I
. ''''-..
.. . -"""---"~'-
'-.
.
. .
.
.-
SuI fer ?artic- Carbon . Hydor-. Nitr=-~en
Jurisdiction Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxi~e
Massachusetts Portion 23.2 44.2 41.5 40.0 34.7
Chesire 0.9 1.8 5.2 4.6 3.~
Hillsborough 6.4 18.4 21.0 25.1 14.:;,
Merrimack 54.5 23.9 8.6 7.8 26.~
Rockingham 12.8 8.4 13.6 13.5 15.:
Strafford 1.3 2.4 7.4 6.5 4.L
Sullivan 0.8 {).9 2.7 2.5 1.&
< \
TOTAL 100 100 . 100 100 100
...;;. .
.
. -. .-. ~.-- -..- - ---- _._._,---
. -.- - - -
--.---.- -.- ,,- ---_._--
-- - ~ -
""
;.
-------
~..
, t',
. -----
.'~
EMISSIONS BY GRID
For the p~rpose of defining the geographical variation of air
pollutant emissions in the Study Area, the resulting emissions were
apportionned on the grid coordinate syste~. The emissions were
divided into two source groups--point and area sources. Thirty-eight
point sources are identified individually with respect to location
and emissions. Each of these point sources ewi~ more than 0.5 ton
per day of any pollutant.
Figure 5 3hows the location of most of the point sources in the
axea. Collectively the 38 point sources account for 75 percent of
the sulfur oxides, 58 percent of particulates, 4 percent of carbon
monoxide, 13 percent of hydrocarbons and 34 percent of nitrogen oxides.
The percent contribution to carbon monoxide emissions is low because
motor vehicles, which are area sources account :~r most of the total
carbon monoxide emissions. Similarly, the contribution to total
. .
hyq~ocarbon emissions is low since two groups of area sources, motor
vehicles and evaporative 'losses are major contributors. Table 24
presents the emissions of point sources.
It has.been assumed that
seasonal variations in point sources are negligible.
Area sources are source~ of emissions tha~ are insignificant by
themselves, but as a group emit a significant a=ount.
Examples are
motor vehicles, residential houses, light com=e==ial and industrial
establishments and backyard burning. 7he emissions froc area sources
have been added to that for point sources to o~:ain total emissions by
grid as given in Table 25.
The emissions are pres ented for an annUl: 1 :.','_erage day, and avere.::e
. -
winter day (December, January, February), and ~~ average su~er day
(June, July, August). Tha annual average daily ~~ssion rates were
obtained by dividing yearly totals by 365. Seasonal averag~s were
-------
...-...
.
. .
.
. .
'-
~
I;. .
~."
. "'"
.6
-:::!...~d'
--1--:
\
\
'.'
,.!.IIt"...~""-..~._. a
';':"'."
. " .
. .t..
. .......
I,.
i
calculated by the use of space heating variations in fuel consumption a~d
variations in motor vehicle traffic activity. This method is described
Other sources were assumed to be constant
f
I
I
I
/
.r
lin detail in the appendix.
!throughout the year.
I
-....
,
J .
.
- __h_-- -- - ---
--------
. "
-------
- - ------:--
... --.---
--
...-,.
'.
~
~
iu . ~- ---. ---('jl~'':'_:':::~'~'-''<:~:~'>f''--:';l'\=/.\i .'. ,./\
' .' 1'-.-._,- ,- " . . I' A-
i "'-i' ".'., --r---.., ,.-,-
\. ,. -'-'{-~; -'--.-'~----.'lll \' ,.., ! / ;
" I ',. In '..... ,,, i
l I' : i i i i
' ! l " \ .,.., i i
' I '. I ' \ .' "'. ',.
.. i, ,.'.' . ", .. I
I II l.i ---.--- " !,
l___----I.--"'-""---'---"-~r,---,,-.. ... '. "'\
" i.... I I' .' '. ... . \
i . ') i 1,,/ .'. . : ;' . . .. . . . "'. . . . /) \ '..
I . , 0 o. ...----- $\'..., ~
I ',! ",,,....nm ". '. .. - . .' -', ( . \
' . i . '. '..,.' '. ~
:. !/ : :. .' f\~ .~.. . 11~lo.C8IITJ ..':' . 0 . /f......... ': '. TUF"'CIIIm ""'''''
t I , . I ',.
o i ----1 . -.-. --- --\-- . "! ". .
,. ~--- .- Sf \. . I ".
.)1 . .. i . ........, . . . ;!"'.
. { . I ~..., "I .' 0 '. '.
. l . ........-......,. ,\" . ,.' "...----
. ,., ....,,--- I "', '" . I -- . " , .
i '.1. i I ,. +,. "r::::;;--=\~ . .: ;
.. . \ --.-. I .-.-.-.-. .-' " ........ . "". ""
' .' , ", 1. ..' \. .. . . I l i
(! . i. / '. .. \ r .' ; t.,.,-,-,""""-'.._l
'."'" i _i';' L-.:;'-~~t- "
; --- ~---- ~~ ~ --_. ---. f---~~ -,' "''''0' (
0" \ I ., . '. "'''' . I8CI:IIIII ceart I
! ~, . I . . i. . []. "'. .
' r . . . ,
t j I . II. . " ,,-
: ...... '. .-. . D ,
! I "......,'. g . i
Y . . 1"""':.-_1 ,j '.' I ...-na.n .-a'- ,
"':1___----','23'-- \~
" . , "",'''.
!\", I. L\ .. .[~-;: t..-4~.
I '-. I ...~ 1.- . i ---- -----
' _.._----~----~------- ------l
: -asu(&: 11''1. ------
: - -- _Ir-'-
:":":~~':SH ---- -,,- . .. --T~-- ~L-- ... .... :'~r"~ !-~ ~ :.
c: .' [f~IA!- \
' I'! I. 'JT
41...
48f-
us-
"
.
:.
F
.,
f
'"
.'
~
;1'.
.,
,
,
,.J
,
"
G
41:-
- --It-
1\
"
I
"
-- '-1. --...
to
...
.
\-
\
\
-------
""- . .. .'
,
, POLLUTANT EMlSSl{)~S FROM POINT SOUIKt::$
) TABLE 2/, SUMMARY OF AIR
., TONS /1)\ Y
~O. II AI!! CO H(. Nt/)(
ID 'R He ve s w A S W A 5 W A '5 w A S W I~
~ 3 3190 47110 0.0 0.0 0.0 o. "'. 0.54 0.~4 2. '11 2.91 2.91 1.02 1.02 1.01 Od1 0.31 O. .\ i
7 331H It 71 75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.41 1.41 1.41 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.06 0 . L,{,
.
.~ 2 5 3096 47133 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.0'3 0.06 0.04 o.no 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0010 o.IU o. t '.
.,
~ 5 3070 47225 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.65 0.65 0.65 3.49 3.49 3.49 1.23 1.23 1.23 0.45 0.45 0.', ~
,
5 5 304S 472'5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.87 0.87 0.87 4.6~ 4.65 4.65 1.64 1.64 1~()4 0.60 O.tlO O. (,0
,6 ~ 3070 4722S 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.63 1.63 1.63 0.09 0~09 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 O.l') 0.19 C;.lJ
'.
5 A 311~ 47170 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.39 0.39 0.39 2.o~ '2.09 2.09 0.13 0.73 0.13 0.21 0.21 () . ;: 7
2 10 ]234 1t7285 1.1 1.9 1.5 0.U7 0.12. 0.09 0.00 ,0.01 0.00 0.00 u.u1 0.00 0.22 0.36 0 0 ~~}
2 10.3237 47294 2.3 3.8 2.9 8.07 8.29 8.17 1.94 1.95 1.94 0.01 0.02, O. \)1 0.41 0.71 o. ~ ')
5 10 3220 ,.7290. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.43 0.43 0.43 2.32 2.3Z l.32 0.82 0.82 0.1:2 0.30 0.30 o. i 'J
.i-t' 6 10 3220 47290 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.86 1.86 1086 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.U3 0.21 O.?l
0.21
2 12 2890 4 7 2 60 1.5 2.6 2.0 3.20 5.52 4.27 0.06 0.10 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.40 0.69 (j , ';, 3
II)
. t
2 13 2995 47375 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.10 U.71 0.11 o.ou .o.ou u.oo 0.00 o.uo u . 00 u.u2 U.U4 "...3
2 13 2992 4H62 0.9 1.6 1.2 0.06 O.lu O.OR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 '0.00 <;.19 ' 0.33 \.I,': 5
2 13 2980 41316 ,0.1 0.2 0.2 0.01 0.01 0.U1 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 0.03 O.O~ ~,.\ ,. L I.t
i
'..~
; ""~ 2 13 2989 47366 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.17 0.78 0.71. 0.00 0.00 0.00, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 !) 0 ','1
) 2 13 2970 4H70 0.0 0.0 '0.0 4.0Q .. .U9 4.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.55 0.~5 0.00 0.00 n - I, l)
~1
7 15 3160 47330 . 0.0 0.0 ,0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 u.tO
2 16 3235 473 2 1.3 2.3 1.8 0.08 O.lS 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.47 o...J &
16 3215 U312 2.0 3.5 , 2.7 0.22 0.17 i 6.70
2 0.12 0.01 0.01 U.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.40 1/.:;4
2 16 3234 413 ,0' 2.1 3.1 2.8 0.13 0.23 0.18 0.01 0.04: 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.u1 0.42 0.13 c' ~~, u .
I" n \ 5 16 3240 4730\0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.98 0.98 a.9ft 5.Z3 h.n 5.23 1.84 1.84 1.84 0.61 0.67 O.L7
) 7 17_3260 41315 0.0 0.0, 0.0 0.05 0.U5 0.05 11.34 11.34 11.34 2.14 2.14 2.14 0.53 0.53 0.::'3
I". ,
" 7 20 HZ' 413'0 , 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1064 1.64 1.64 0.31 0.31 0.31 ,0.01 0.01 G~ 1,1
, . I
I
2 76 2981 474 5 f 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.03 0.06 0.U4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 :0.11 0.19 0.i.4
. 7 31 34U 474 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 o.vo 0.29 0.29 0.29. 0.05 0.05 0.05 :0.01 0.01 o~v1
, I J .fJ
-I i ,.
.. .. .n,1I. 1a7r.!.0'" 0.0". 0.0 0.16 0.16 0.16 11.70 . ..
-------
U -t,;, ,,~'r) I., f01U U.l 0.1 0.1' 1,.63 1.6' 1.6; 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.19
I
2 45 2'8' 476:3 0.1 1.0 0., 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.00' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.21 0.10
4 45 2965 ,47624 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.05 0.05 o.o~ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 ,0.01 0.60 0.60 0.59
4 45 2987 147640 2.5 2.5 2.5 0.07 0.0) 0.07 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.75 0.75 0.74
4 50'3546 47730 28.5 28.5 28.1 0.81 0.81 o.eo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.25 8.49 8.49 &.37
4 50 3570 477 7 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.08 0 .08i, 0408 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.90 0.90 0.89
,
2 54 2790 47850 0.6 1.1 O.es 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.23 0.18
? 55 2950 4786C 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.03 0.06 0.04 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.19 0.14
1 !>~ 2930 .47861 1.0 1.7 1.3 0.06 0.11 0.09 O.OtJ 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.21 0.36 0.28
IJ 55 2964 47840 150.9 150.9 148.8 16.31 16.31 16.09 0.76 0.76 0.75 0.30 0.30 0.30 30.55 30.55 30.U
? 59 2260 48020 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.03 ,0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.16 0.12
~
0\
.-
, .
.
-------
. ,&
GRID
1
,;4
r,
. ro.
AREA
38.6
2
36.6
3
38.6
,
4
38.6-
5
16.(,
6
9.6
7
9.6
8
9.6
9
.9.6
10
38.6
11
38.6
12
154.4
13
14
38.6
38.6
1~
30.6.
16
9.6
17
9.6
1P
9.6
19
9.6
20
38.6
21
22
38.6
154.4
23
24
154.4
1$4.4
25
15 4 .4
"AIIT.F. ?5
S
0.4
0.2
0.3
SUMMARY OF Aln POLLuTANT EMISSIONS
TlINS/hW
sox
W
3.0
I, .0
(..2
A.
1.6
1.9
3.0
7.2 . 10.n
0.1 - - 1.6.._.0_"-8
--
10.11
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
6.7
0.1
2.0
2.9
0.7 .
0.)
6.6
0.4'
0.1
0.1
5.8
2.2
2.7
1.7
21.2
2.0
5.6
'7.2
1.1
I, . 1
18.8
0.2
0.1
0.8-- 1-07-
0.0
0.1
9.1
. c
2.8
1.0
1.3
0.8
13.4
0.9
3.7
4.9
1.8
2.1
12.2
3.2
1.7
1.5
0.7
3.0
1.5
5.6
2.7
1.9
0.9
1.2
0.2
0.1
0.7
0.4
1.0
0.5
, . .
S
0.3
0.4
1.7.
0.2
~.1
.-- ---
0.6
0.3
0.7
0.2
11.7
. 0.2
,3.6
6.6
0.7
.0.2
.0.3
PAIH
~
0.6
0.8
l.d
0.3
().9
1.2
0.5
U.9
0.3
13.2
U.4
6.1
7.1
1.1
1.1
1.6
2.2
3.2
0'.4
0.6
0.3
0.'3
0.6
0.2
0.1.
0.2
0.3
A
0.4
0.6
1.4
0.2
5.9
0.9
0.3
0.8
0.3
12-4
0.3
4.8
6.8
0.9
1.3
2.6
0.5
0.2
0.6
0.5
1.1
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
;
'0.1
0..1
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.4
S
17.7
23.0
36.11
10.2
I}I, . ~
27.2
11. .,
15.n
9.4
56.3
'11.'7
CO
w
16.1
21.0
j309
: 9.3
131.1
24.9
10.7
13.9
8.5
51.9
10.7
41.2
19.7 18.0
37.6
36.1
1,1. 'J
40.4
24.6
15.6
31.4
12.3
11.7
32.9
38.9
37.4
23.5
7.6
14.2
28.8
"
11'.2
7.A
4.1
1.0.7
16.7
)
U.3
:::J. ~
A
16.9
22.0
3~.~
9.8
90.6
26.0 .
11.2
14.4
8.9
54.1
11.2
18.8
39.4
34.5
40.1
38.9
24.1
7.0 '
7.3
14.9
30.1
11.8
7.1
'7.5
3.8
4.0
11.2
16.0
S
2.4
3.7
~..,
1.4
lie
w
2.3
3.0
~.c..
1.3
A
2.4
3.1
~.I
1.4
1 5 . 7. 1". (, 14 . <]
3.9
1.7
2.(,
3.7
1.6
2.5
1.3
1.2
3.6
1.6
2.5
1.3
7.9
8.1
8.3
1.6
2.7
1.5
1.6
2.6
2.7
17.4 17.0 17.2
5.1
(,.1,
6.9
4.0
1.1
2.2
4.5
1.3
1.1
0.6
1.6
2.4
4."
4.9
b.t)
(, .1
6.7
6.1$
3.9
4.0
1.0
1.0
2.1
2.1
4.2
4.4
1.7
1.7
1.0
1.1
.005
0.6
1.5
1.6
2.2
2.3
S
1.1
.
1..'.
l..'.
'U.6
c:..u 11..0
I.B
0.8
1.1
0.6
i.OX
'ill
1;.8
7.~
~.o
1.0
3.3
1.3
~.o
6.8
0.7
1.6
3.0
2.2
le. ,
4.1
1.4
0.5
100
1.9
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.7
1.0
A
1.4
1.9
).2
G.e
9.2
z.~
1.0
1.8
1."
1.0
U.8
6.1
.102
0.9
2.6
2.1
4.2
3.6
3.0
2.6
... 'I
1.1
7.2
!I.5
z.z
1.8
U.9
0.6
1.8
1.3
3.4
2.6
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.3
0.3
0.9
0.8
1:3 .,1.,,1
-------
26 3 ~ e!) 0.8 :1.9 1.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 10.1 9.2 9.7 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.7 1.0 0.9
27 3S.~ 0.1' ! 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 13.1 12.1 12.6 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.8 lei 1.0
.
.'
2f 3" ,,{J 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 6.9 6.4 . 6.6 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.5
29 3~"" 0.2 3.2 1.6 0.6 0.9 0.8 2'+.4 22.3 23.3 ~.6 3.4 3.5 1.5 2.4 1.9
(.
30 3.: 0.2 3.3 1.6 0.4 0.7 0.6 19.9 18.2 19.0 2.8 2.7 2.8 1.2 2.1 1.6
31 3" I . 0.1 6.6 3.4 0.1 1.3 .1.0 31.4 28.1 30.0 4.5 4.2 4.4 2.1' 3.8 2.9
32 3 ~. ,. ~) 0.1 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.4 18.3 16.7 17.5 2.6 2.4 2.5 1.1 ' 1.4 1.2
33 -: r; ;J t.. 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 15.0 14.7 14.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 0.9 1.0 0.9
31, :,..',.""\: 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 5.2 4.7 4.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.4
35 J . u', 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.9 1.8 1.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1
3~ -' 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 4.6 4.3 4.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.'4 0.3
37 J ' V 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 6.3 5.8 6.0 1.0. 0.9 0.9 U.4 0.5 0.5
:n ;:, .0 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.5 14.9 13.6 14.3 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.0 1.3 1.1
31 1: { ,.'. 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.3 3.9 4.1 0.6 0.6' 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.3
It c., 1 :. H {1 t. 1.2 2.0 1.1 0.6 0.9 0.7 36.0 32.6 34.4 5.0 4.1 4.9 l.l 2.1 2.4
'I. J 1 " 'I (. ..' ~ 0.1 0.1, ().~ 0.7 0.3 0.7 9. (. 1\.8 9.2 1.4 1.3 I.) U .l. I).' 0.6
42 1 ~ " . /1 0.1 100 0.5 0.3 ()a 5 0.4 16.9 15.5 16.2 2.4 2.2 2.3 1.0 1.3 1.1
43 : .~ ~ 6 0.1 4.1 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.3 72.6 66.3 69.4 10.2 9.6 9.9 4.5 5.8 5.1
"-
4... :3::.6 0.6 . 2.5 1.4 0.6 0.9 .0.8 30.3 27.1 29.0 4.3 4.0 4.2 1.9 2.5 2.2
"
4~ 3i!.6 5.0 7.6 6.1 O.ll 0.7 0.5 13.0 11.9 12.5 1.9 1.8 1.8 2.2 2.tI 2.4
46 ;-J.6 0.1 ! 0.5 0.3 0.2' 0.4 0.3 12.8 11.8 12.3 1.8 ,1.1 1.8 0.6 0.9 0.8
,
47 1 ~ I, . II 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.3 U.4 0.3 9.R 9.0 9.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 U.6 0.8 0.7
I.', 1 .' < II 0.2 1.9 1.0 0.11 1.1 0.9 32.6 29.9 31.2 4.') 4.6 4.1 2.0 2.6 2.3
l. 9 0.3 i 1."7 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.1 32.6 29.9 31.3 5.0 4.8 4.9 2.1 2.7 2.4
~A ~) ~ b ~
II!! . :' . f. °n./I '\ '} . ".j '31.h 1.1 1.2 1.1 tllB 6.l 6.5 1.3 1.3 103
-------
.--.. 0 ----
"
"5 1!14.4 1 ~3 el 15 (, . l 1 ~2 . ~ 17.4 18.3 17.6 43.2 39.11 41.5 6.3 b.\) 6.2 3'.. 2 :J '.J. 1 34.4
56 15/,.4 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 H.4 7.7 8.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 o.~ fJ.1 0.6
57 154.4 0.7 5.7 3.0 1.2 1.9 1.5 74.0 67.~ 7u.1 10.3
-------
,/
~",
'- r'
EMISS::~~ DENSITIES
, .'
In order to provide a vis~al representation of the e=:ssions of
pollutants by grid, emission de::sity maps have been provice:!.
Figures 6
through 10 show variation in e~ssion densities for the ~es?ective
. i
grids throughout the Study Area. As expected the emissiQ~s generally
follow the pattern and degree 0= urbanization. Emission de:lsities
are higher in grids with high populations and correspondin~ly high
vehicular and industrial activi~.
'..,.
.
+ - - ---- -- ---. .- -.---
. ." .
-------
.» f
SUI
CIIMIKCOHTT
,
.'? OXIDES, L^
* ------- i.2Ltt2L \
mi't»>uiTr"*~""~<'"»«-.«— i
! -J
] 0 _ 0.01
I - 0.10
:• 0.40
.L
—r»—--ffilPl. ^ / V L P
i ^»^*'^t;.-i»iyff.>>?iWW-"V-^^?::::
•Sj/J
- 0.80
J -
-------
PAP ; ULATES.
fo;
1
U
- 0.05
- 0.10
- O.VO
- 0.40
-------
CARP* .•< MONOXIDE, ,,L, - — ,,'«.
D
1 !
m
i i
, ,j
-.
0 -0.10
.10 - O.M)
( . 1 - 1.00
!..••) - 2-00
) - 4.00
. .
;^4 / \
:*•••: / \
;;.;1 / \
-
r \ ;
Cv.v*''." '>4''.v.'"*''-- •**
^-^^^S^x'-S^MeuKiM emn
.•--v: v •.S'-'.:-ro:''-:-:-M
•«.-i_i ,... _._._..
\ • t"
\ ' ! \
•—- ———__' "•"•••I" \ \
, wtiKwJmT~"~"~-~l--——A—_
-------
r
7
uuim cnin
1
i
i
(!.-. \""'
\ *
»
<
\
*
/'
i
y
*"'
i-\
HY 3CARBONS, '^..
) - 0.01
i - 0.10
J - 0.20
I - 0.40
•-. M: •!S:CU.7
, i ,
' . |.^'_TWI ; i
i •»iu~nm7T~~—-—<-.«.—-J.._
.1 - O.BO
-------
Li
D
>r,FN OXIDES. ^
/...a.A..a
0 - 0.01
.01 - 0.10
,10 O.yO
.20 - 0.40
.10 - 0.60
r *-s 11 &'•''••'•••'
X"* ' fe^
\ f \ . J'wS :ixctjn
, ^y1 -i«-V ';:*^-.r«.-'.'/-'i
-------
....-- .- .---
, -,
"--.. - -.- - ~ .--
I
.~ .
.-.-.- i,., "',-li>.
REFERENCES
.~--.
1.
Ozolins, G. and Smith, R., Rapid Survey Technique for Esti=ating
Community Air Pollu~ion, USDHEW, PHS, October, 1966.
.. :
. . .. ~
2.' .Duprey, R. L., Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,
USDHEW, PHS, 1968.
3.
Highway Statistics/1965, United States Department of Trans?ortati~,
Bureau of Public Roads, 1966.
4.
FAA Air Traffic Activity, Calendar Year 1968~ USDOT, 1969.
5.
1968/1969 Transportation Fact~, Eastern Massachusetts Transportation
Plan.
6.
Mlnera1 Industry Surveys, Fuel Oil Shipments, United States
Department of Interior, Bureau of Mines, 1969.
7.
1.968 National Survey of Community Solid Waste Practices, 0:1-
Interim Report, United States Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Public Heal~h Service. '
8.
...;.. .
Duprey, ££.. ci t.
.
- -.-" ._-
-------
.
..~
.
v
~'.
(
o
. \.
4
~.' - . .; JJ.r:'.~': .
~"
I~,... ..
. . .,."",'...
A:7ENDIX
----.
-
.-
METHOD FOR CALCULATI~7:; SUMr1ER, "''''Th7ER AND Ar-.1;UAL
AVERAGE nrrSSIONS FOP. FUEL C:~;SlTMPTION IN STATIONARY SOt;RCES
YEARLY AVERAGE (A)
.
A = Fuel Consu~ed x Emissi~ ?actor (E. F. )
. Days of Operatic~
..
e~g. A plant consumed 100,000 to~s of coal in 1967 while operating
365 days. The total degree:::ays for the area was 4,800 and
2,800 for the three winter ~~~ths. The plant was estimated
to use 15 percent of the fu~: for space heating and 85 percent
for process heating. From t~is information, the annual
average emission for carbo~ ~~noxide would be the following:
,I
A = 100,000 Tons/year x 3 1:5. COlTon coal
365 Days/year x 2,000 lb./Ton
A = 0.41 Ton/Day
. "
.
WINTER AVERAGE (W)
.
.
. W =' Fuel Consumed x E. F.
Days of WinterOperatio~
% "f'uel Used
for space heati~~
Winter De~ree Days
Total Degree Days
x
x
..+ Fuel Consumed x E.F. % Fuel used for proc.ess heating
365 x
1/ = 0°.000 x 2,800 0.15 100,000 0.8J 3
90 x 4.,800 x ..,.. 365 x 2,000
W = 0.49 Ton/Day
SL1-n-IER AVERAGE (S)
s = Fuel Consumed x E.F.
. Days of SU:-=ller Operatio~
Summer Degree Davs
Total Degree Days
% Fue: USe'::
for space ne~:~~g
x
x
Fuel Consumed x E.F.
365
S = rioo,ooo
l 90
+
:t
% Fuel used for process heating
x.o.s;l
.J
3
IOO.COO
1~-
_b.J
x
o
4,800
0.15
+
~
? - - -
_,L--
s = 0.35 Ton/Day
~ ~ -."~ . - .
-------
.,
, '. .' ~. .~.
,
I
. ........... ...-
r ~
"
I: .
APPENDIX B
METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS
-:
,
.' Multiply To Obtain
to !I,.
I
I
Feet 0.3048 Meters
I
Miles 1609 Meters
Square Feet 0.0929 Square m2ters
Square Miles 2.59 Square kilometers
Pounds 453.6 Grams
Pounds . 453.6/104 Tons (metric)
, Tons (metric) 1.103 Tons (short)
.
'. Tons (sbort) 907.2 Kilograms
Tons (short) .9072 Tons (t!letric)
...-.
To Obtain !z Divide
--
.
0-- --- -- .. --- .~.
------- |