OKLAHOMA CITY METROPOLITAN AREA
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION INVENTORY
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
-------
.-
The APTO (Air Pollution Technical Data) series of reports is issued by
the Office 01 Air Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, to report
Technical data of interest to a limited numb,erof readers. Copies of
APTD reports are available free of charge to Federal employees, current
contractQrs and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies
penlit - from the Office of Techniaal Information and Publications,
EnvironMental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27111 or from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151. .
Office of Air Programs Publication No. APTO-0825
-------
OKLAHOMA CITY METROPOLITAN AREA AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION INVENTORY
'Q
Prepared by
Michael J. McGraw
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Division of Air Quality and Emission Data
Durham, North Carolina
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
'Q
Sincere gratitude is extended by the National Air Pollution Control
Administration to the many individuals and companies who contributed
to this study.
r
Special thanks are due to Keith Stanley of the Oklahoma City County
Health Department and Robert Blanche and Doyle McWhirter of the Oklahoma
State Department of Health, who contributed invaluable assistance in the
gathering of data for this report.
-------
PREFACE
'
-------
CONTENTS
Introduction........
....""........"" ....." ........." ....".."" ..."".. ...
. ~
Summary of Results..
Description of Study Area.
Grid Coordinate System...
....".." ...""" ...."".."".."",,..,,".. ...
" " , " " , " " " , , " " , " " " """ " , " " " " " , " " " " " , , " ,
..........
..........
......""..""..""",,...... ....""
',..
Emissions by
Stationary
Category. . ..
Fuel Combustion...
...........
.................
" " , " , " , , ,
" " , " " , " "
" " " " " " " " "
Steam-Electric....
" " , " , , , , "
..... ...............
...........
Industrial...
" , , " " , " " "
, " , " " " " " ,
................
Residential. .
, , " " , , , , "
" , , , , " "
" " " " .. "
" , , , " " .. , " , " , " "
" " , " , " " , ,
Commercial and Institutional.
..............".
, , " " " , "
" , , , , " " , " ,
Transportation...
Motor Vehicles.
" " " , , , " " " , '" ,
" , , " " , , "
..........
" " , " , , " " , " , " " , , " "
, , , , " "
" , .. " , " , , , , "
, " " " " "
Aircraft. .
" " " " , ,
" " , " , ,
, " , " , " , , , "
" " , " " ,
Railroads.
, " , " " , " " ,
" , " .. " , ,
, " " " , .. " "
...............
Solid Waste Disposal.
Incineration.
..........
, " " , " , ,
" , , " " , , " , , " . . . . .
........
...............
.............
.............
Open Burning...................................
Industrial Process Losses.......................
...............
. . . . . . . .
Evaporative Losses.......
. . . . . . . . . .
.. .............. .........
Emissions
by Jurisdic tion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by Grid................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emissions
References..
.............
.......... .... ....... ...... ...
...........
Appendix. . .
...... ............ .... ....... .......... ....... .........
'-
Page
1
3
8
15
17
17
17
21
21
21
22
22
25
25
25
29
29
29
31
35
45
58
-------
c Table
1
r
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
G 24
25
TABLES
Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions in Oklahoma City
Study Area. . . . " " " . . . . . . . . . . " " " " . . . " . " " . " " . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage Contribution of Each Source Category to
To tal llini s s ion s. . . . . " " . . . . " . . . . " . . " " . . " . . . " " " . " . . . . . . . . " . . .
Area and Population Characteristics, 1968..................
Selected Manufacturing Establishments in Oklahoma City
Study Area.........."..""......"..".....""""............"".
Natural Gas Consumption by County..........................
Domestic Consumption of
LPG. . . . " . " " . . " . . " " " " . . . . . . " " " . . " " " "
Air Pollutant Emissions from Stationary Fuel Combustion....
Vehicle Miles of Travel for Road Vehicles..................
Air Pollutant Emissions from Transportation Sources........
Air Traffic Activity at the Largest Airports...............
Solid Waste Balance for Oklahoma City Study Area...........
Air Pollutant Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal..........
Air Pollutant Emissions from Industrial Processes..........
Hydrocarbon Emissions from Evaporative Losses..............
Summary of Emissions in Canadian County....................
Summary of Emissions in Cleveland County...................
Summary of Emissions in Grady County.......................
Summary of Emissions in Kingfisher County..................
Summary of Emissions in Linc10n County.....................
Summary of Emissions in Logan County.......................
Summary of Emissions in McClain County.....................
Summary of Emissions in Oklahoma County....................
Summary of Emissions in Pottawatomie County................
Summary of Point Source Emissions by Season................
Summary of Emissions fram all Sources by Season............
Page
6
7
11
14
18
19
20
23
24
26
27
28
30
32
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
48
-------
Figure
1
I"
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
FIGURES
Page
Map of the Oklahoma City Study Area and Surrounding
Ci ties. " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " , " " " " " " " " " " ,,' " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " 9
Detailed Map of Oklahoma City Study Area.................. 10
Population Density for Oklahoma City Study Area, 1968..... 12
Grid Coordinate System for Oklahoma City Study Area....... 16
Point Source Locations.................................... 46
Particulate Emission Density Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 54
Carbon Monoxide Emission Density Map...................... 55
Hydrocarbon Emission Density Map.......................... 56
-------
INTRODUCTION
This report is a summary of the Oklahoma City
air pollutant emission
"
inventory conducted in Sept~uber 1969. Since all inventories are based
upon a calendar year, the data and ~uission estimates presented are repres-
entative of 1968 and should be considered as indicating the conditions as
existed during that year.
The Study Area, which was chosen on the basis of the distribution
of population and air pollution sources, consists of nine counties surrounding
Oklahoma City.
This area covers approximately 7,200 square miles and had
a 1968 population of 736,000.
A grid coordinate system was used to show the geographical distribution
of emissions within counties. The Study Area was subdivided into 77 grid
zones ranging in size from 25 square kilometers in the heavily populated
and industrialized areas to 400 square kilometers in the rural areas.
All sources of emissions were classified into five categories--trans-
portation, stationary fuel combustion, solid-waste disposal, industrial
processes and evaporative losses. Each of these source categories was
divided into two subgroups--point sources and area sources. Facilities,
which emit large quantities of air pollutants, were considered individually
as point sources, while the many remaining contributors such as motor
vehicles, residential and commercial fuel users, small industries and
on-site refuse burning equipment, were considered collectively as area
sources. For this report, fourty-eight individual sources, which had
e~issions greater than 0.5 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
e~1SS1on rates. These factors represent average emission rates for a
particular source category. Since individual sources have inherent differences
that cannot always be taken into consideration, discrepancies between the actual
-------
and estimated emissions are more likely in individual sources than in tne
total emissions for a source category.
As in all emission surveys, the data presented are estimates ann snouln
not be interpreted as absolute values.
The estimates are, in some cases,
partial totals due to the lack of emission factors and production or consumn-
tion data. Despite these limitations, these estimates are of sufficient
accuracy and validity in defining the extent and distribution of ai.r nol1utant
emissions in the Study Area.
-------
SUMMARY
'v
The annual emissions as estimated by the Oklahoma City Metropolitan
Area Air Pollutant Emission Inventory are:
p
1. Sulfur Oxides 2,200 tons
2. Particulates 14,200 tons
3. Carbon Monoxide 429,700 tons
4. Hydrocarbons 150,700 tons
5. Nitrogen Oxides 43,600 tons
The following is a brief description of the air pollutant emissions
as presented in Table 1 and Table 2.
Sulfur Oxides:
In the Study Area natural gas~is essentially the only
fuel used.
Since sulfur oxide emissions are practically
non-existant from 'the burning of
this fuel, the
contribution to total sulfur oxide emissions from
stationary fuel combustion was negligible.
The only significant source of sulfur oxides was
transportation sources. Motor vehicles, by far the
largest source category, contributed approximately 84
percent of the total sulfur oxide emissions.
Aircraft
and railroads accounted for 8 percent of the total
emissions while the disposal of refuse by incineration
and open burning also accounted for 8 percent.
Particulates:
Individual sources of particulates from industrial
processes accounted for almost 50 percent of the total
L
particulate emissions in the Oklahoma City Study Area.
Even though this area was void of any heavy industry, it
did have a large number of plants in the food and
-------
Carbon Monoxide:
Hydrocarbons:
agricultural industry and the mineral products industry.
The largest sources in these industries were fertilizer
plants, grain elevators, and rock processing operations
accounting for 8 percent, 15 percent and 13 percent,
respectively, of the total particulate emissions.
. .
Again, since natural gas was the only fuel used,
the contribution to total particulate emissions from
stationary fuel combustion was under 8 percent.
Transporta-
tion sources accounted for 29 percent of total partic-
ulate emissions and refuse disposal, 15 percent.
In most metropolitan areas the largest source of carbon
monoxide emissions is from automobiles attd other motor
vehicles.
This was also true in Oklahoma City as motor
vehicles contributed 93 percent of the carbon monoxide
emitted annually. Other transportation sources including
railroad and aircraft operations contributed another 4
percent.
The only other significant source of carbon monoxide
was from the inefficient combustion of refuse at open
burning dumps and backyard incinerators.
This category
accounted for about 2 percent of the total emissions.
The Oklahoma City Study Area is almost saturated with
small crude oil production wells. ;These wells, even
though essentially closed systems" do emit hydrocarbon
vapors from evaporation.
It was estimated that over one-
third of the total hydrocarbon emissions could be contri-
buted to this crude production.
The area also has numerous
LPG processing plants which emit hydrocarbons. These plants
accounted for over 17 percent of the total hydrocarbon
emissions.
J
Evaporative losses from automobiles which includes
-------
. ~
Nitrogen Oxides:
~
losses from the gas tank, carburetor and engine crank-
case accounted for 12 percent of total hydrocarbon
emissions.
Other smaller evaporative loss sources
gasoline storage and handling, industrial solvent usage,
dry cleaning plants, miscellaneous solvent usage, and the
storage of crude oil, collectively accounted for 10 percent
of the total hydrocarbon emissions.
Exhaust gases from motor
vehicles was a primary
source of hydrocarbon emissions, accounting for over 20
percent of the total.
Other sources included the open
burning of solid waste and railroad and aircraft operations
which accounted for 3 and 2 percent, respectively, of
total emissions.
The major source of nitrogen oxides was the exhaust
gas from motor vehicles, which contributed over 55 percent
of the total emissions.
Natural gas combustion, while not a significant
source of other pollutants is a large source of oxides of
nitrogen. In the Oklahoma City Study Area this source
accounted for 41 percent of the total nitrogen oxides
emissions. Of this 41 percent, 33 percent came from the
two steam-electric plants in the Study Area.
The remaining 4 percent of the total nitrogen oxides
came from the disposal of refuse by incineration and
open burning.
-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN THE OKLAHOMA
CITY STUDY AREA, 1968 (TONS/YEAR)
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen .
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 1,880 3,290 399,300 31,300 22,100
Other 180 770 19,400 4,500 2,040
Subtotal 2,060 4,060 418,700 35,800 24,140
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N 100 N N 1,150
Steam-Electric 10 560 N N 14,440
Residential N 290 N N 1,840
Commercial and
Institutional N 110 N N 690
Subtotal 10 1,060 N N 18,120
Refuse Disposal
Incineration 50 240 1,070 20 70
Open Burning 120 1,850 9,870 3,480 1,280
Subtotal 170 2,090 10,940 3,500 1,350
Process Losses N 7,000 90 N N
Evaporative Losses 111 ,400
GRAND TOTALa 2,200 14,200 429,700 150,700 43,600
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded to nearest 100 tons/year.
./
-------
TABLE 2 PERCENTAGE CONTRIBUTION OF EACH SOURCE CATEGORY
TO TOTAL EMISSIONS IN THE OKLAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA
o Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
'"
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 83.9 23.2 92.9 20.8 50.7
Other 8.0 5.4 4.5 3.0 4.7
Subtotal 91. 9 28.6 97.4 23.8 55.4
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N 0.7 N N 2.6
Steam-Electric 0.5 3.9 N N 33.1
Residential N 2.0 N N 4.2
Connnercial and
Insti tutiona1 N 0.8 N N 1.6
Subtotal 0.5 7.4 N N 41.5
Refuse Disposal
Incineration 2.2 1.7 0.3 N 0.2
Open Burning 5.4 13.0 2.3 2.3 2.9
Subtotal 7.6 14.7 2.5 2.3 3.1
Process Losses N 49.3 N N N
Evaporative Losses 0.0 0.0 0.0 73.9 0.0
TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100
N ::: Negligible ,.
\..
-------
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
The Study Area for the emission survey of the Oklahoma City Metropolitan
Area consists of nine counties--Canadian, Cleveland, Grady, Kingfisher,
Lincoln, Logan, McClain, Oklahoma and Pottawatomie. The nine-county area
is located in the central part of Oklahoma. Figure 1 shows the location of .
the Oklahoma City Study Area relative to other large cities in its vicinity.
Figure 2 represents a more detailed drawing of the Oklahoma City Study
Area showing the major urban areas. It should be pointed out that the
boundaries of these areas do not correspond to city limits, but rather give
. .
a general outline of the major clusters of population.
The Study Area
occupies 7,280 square miles and contained an estimated 1968 population of
735,800, which is approximately a 14 percent increase since 1960 (Table 2).3
The population density map (Figure 3) shows the heaviest concentrations
near Oklahoma City.
TOPOGRAPHY
The Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area is located along the North Canadian
River in a minor valley at the geographic center of the State. The surrounding
country is gently rolling with the nearest hills or low mountains, the
Arbuckles, 80 miles south. Although the Oklahoma City Area is fortunate in
not being enclosed by towering mountains on any side, the minor valley in
which it is located plays somewhat of a role in the entrapment of pollution
in the city.
CLIMATOLOGY
The climate of the Study Area falls mainly under continental control
characteristics of the Great Plains Region.
The continental effect produces
pronounced daily and seasonal temperature changes and considerable variation
in seasonal and annual rainfall.
are comparatively mild and short.
Summers are long and usually hot. Winters
The prevailing winds are southerly and
-------
COLORADO
/ KANSAS CITY
\»
I ST. LOUIS
3UIS»7
NEW MEXICO
~1
KANSAS " *
I MISSOURI N
• WITCHITA I >,
OKLAHOMA J—— "" £1
MOB • I I
OHraRB TULSA ' ARKANSAS I
•JTENNEI
^WEWPHIS
I
TEXAS
—OKLAHOMA CITY! LITTLE ROCK /
N*^|>>^ STUDY AREA I /
"**^ I
FT. WORTH *^ \
• *DALU" » H»«PPI
TENNESSEE
.^r*EMPHIS^_
ALABAMA
-------
..... -. -. -.-. -. -.-. - .-. -.-. -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -.-. -. -.-.-. 1"-'-' -. -. - .-. -.-.-. -.-. -. -. -. - i
! ! i
! ! i
i i!
i i!
! ! i
! ! i
I ,-
i \ [/-'\..._,-,-,-,---,-;-----_..._---------_...__..._---------------------- I
: KINGFISHER : LOGAN i :
i i i !
i i i !
i i i !
!------_t_----------------------------[--------------------------------1 L "COL' I
i i ! !
i CANADIAN i OKLAHOMA I I
! ! LAKE HEFNER : :
I I~ . i
i i .~. ! .
<"I V n .n. ""'''[ie'; ~.""" '"' l------------------------'
i i i ;
i i MIDWEST CITY i i ,_r;--,-,,_,-_..'
! i ! i
,----- - - - -- -1--- --- j --- /_---- - ------\::-------:- - -- --C~~-E='-O- --- -- - --1- ~..." I
! i ; ! i
: ! j NORMAN ! i
i \ \.' -. i. !
! i '-'-'< I POTTAWATOM1E:
! i., ! i
! i "" ! i
! i',! i
! i i ! i
! i \ ! i
! i ---.,! i
! i i! i
! i i! i
! i i! i
! GRADY i McCLAIN i I i
! i i! i
\ \ '-'----,-,_._,_..._._L-.-._,.,-,//,/\'\-,,/,-\.1
I - I
i! i
i! i
i \-- _.- .-. -.-.-.-. -.-.- .-.-.-. - .-. -. - .-.- .-.-.- .-.-. -. -. -. -.-.-. - ';0'-'-"
! i 115_-
\ !
! i
! i
! i
! i
L._._. -.-. -. -. -. -. -.-' - .-. - .-. -.-. -. _. -. j
zp
LJ- !
.iles
IUS
.il,..ters
zu.-",..!,o
Figure 2
Detailed Map of Oklahoma City Study Area
10
. -
--;
~
~
-------
TABLE 3
AREA AND POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE
OKLAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA
L
" Land Area Population Population
County sq. mi. 1960 1968 Density (1968)
Canadian 897 24 , 700 ,31,400 35
Cleveland 541 47,600 76,000 140
Grady 1,096 29,600 30,000 27
Kingfisher 904 10,600 12,600 14
Lincoln 973 18,800 19,500 20
Logan 751 18,700 18,100 24
McClain 573 12,700 13,400 23
Oklahoma 705 439,500 493,000 700
Pottawatomie 794 41,500 41,800 53
STUDY AREA 7 ,234 643,700 735,800 102
"
-------
r
POPULATION DENSITY,
people/mi^
D
0 - 20
20 - 50
50 - 100
100 - 1,000
1,000 - 2,000
2,000 - 7,000
Figure 3 . Population densities for the Oklahoma City study area, 1968.
-------
. ~
they are usually brisk, averaging 14 mph in the fall and winter, 16 mph in
the spring and 12 mph in the summer. In general, the climatological
conditions in the Oklahoma City Study Area are not conducive for the accumu-
lation of large concentrations of pollutants, but lend themselves more
towards dispersion of the emissions away from the area.
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL FACTORS
Table 4 shows selected manufacturing establishments in the Study Area
by county for 1963.4 The area is notably void of any heavy industry and is
characterized by the large number of food and agricultural plants. It may
be noted from the table that Oklahoma County accounts for the largest single
percentage of every type of manufacturing. At least 75 percent of the
establishments of any type are located in Oklahoma County.
-------
TABLE 4 SELECTED MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE OKLAHOMA
CITY STUDY AREA
Jurisdiction
Canadian
Cleveland
Grady
Kingfisher
Lincoln
Logan
McClain
Oklahoma
Pottawatomie
Study Area
Food and
Tobacco
2
3
3
—
—
—
—
46
2
56
Number
Paper and
Printing
_._
3
1
—
—
—
—
14
1
19
of Establishments with 20 or
Wood
Products
__
—
—
—
1
—
10
—
ill
Stone
Products
__
—
—
—
1
—
—
11
—
12
Metal
Products
__.
—
—
—
—
—
—
25
1
26
More Employees
.^Machinery Total
1
—
2
—
—
—
—
28
1
32
3
6
6
—
1
1
—
134
5
156
-------
GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM
. ~
A grid coordinate system, based on the Dniversal Transverse ~fercator
Projection (UTM) was used in the Oklahoma Citv Study Area to show the
geographical distribution of emissions. A map of this grid system is
presented in Figure 4.
The UTM system was chosen due to its advantages over other standard
grid systems such as the Latitude-Longitude and State ~lane Coordinate
systems. The major advantages of this system are that (1) it is continuous
across the country and is not hindered by political subdivisions, (?) the
grids are of uniform size throughout the country, (3) it has world-wide
use, and (4) the grids are square in shape--a necessarv feature for use in
meteorological dispersion models.
The Universal Transverse Mercator ~roiection is hased upon the metric
system. Each north-south and east-west grid line, as illustrated in
Figure 4, is identified by a coordinate number expressed in meters.
"Rach
point source and grid is
identified by the horizontal and vertical coordi-
of their geographical center to the nearest Ion meters.
As shown in Figure 4, the Study Area was divided into 77 "grids of three
different sizes--25,IOO, and 400 square kilometers. r,rid zones of different
sizes are used to limit the numher of grid zones and vet allow a satisfactory
definition of the geographical gradation of emissions.
The ma;oritv of the
emissions is usually concentrated in the populated and industrializen portions
of a Study Area.
Smaller grids are placed over these areas in order to
reflect abrupt changes in emissions within short distances.
The use of
grid zones smaller than 25 square kilometers is not warranted hecause of the
inherent inaccuracies in the data. Since only a small percentage of the
total emissions occur in rural areas, larger grid zones are normallv usen to show
-
the distribution of emissions in these lightlv populated portions of a ~tudv
Area.
-------
.
,..... ,'-'-'-'-'-' .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- ~
i i
i i
i i
i i
i i
i
j i -_J -
':_--~=--:-:i '---==-=:I~:~:--- "--1- . ~cm JJ ~-
4 j i i
i i
i i
i i
i i
r-'-'-'-'-' r-r'-'-'-'-'-'-'-~-' --~~'::~.'~'~'-'-]j IIZ'.
51 i I . "...'...
.-.-.-.-.j i
'1'-'---"."....-/\,. ...''''', i i
i ''''''-'-'-''''''''-''''' Iii
i ; CLEVELAND j II i
i \ i i
i : i i
i Iii
I " -r- 1"-
: : .,.,.,.,. : POTTAWATOMIE i
i i i i
i i "" i i
i i i i
i i 'I i !
i i' i I
i i '.-.-. i i
! !
1. -- ~--ll- i i. J+-
i I~ . I .
i GRADY j McCLAIN \ j i
i 1 t. i !
! ! "-'-'-', ,.-.,.-.-.l.-.-.,.,., , """"/1,\"-"''- \.)
i i I
i! !
1 i !-.-.-.-.-.- .-.- .-.-.-. -.-. - .-.-.-.- .-.- .-.- .-.-.-. -.-. -'-' -.- '-'- .-._'~
. ,
! i
! i
! i
! i
! i
! i
! i
! i
-r==::.==._._._._._._._._._._._.U~~
r '-'-';"'I"'---'==:~'~~~r--'~~'=---'-ir-'---'-'---'-'-'i4~-.-.-.-:
! ! i
! i
! i
i !
! l./'\_.,.
i r-- -- --- ---
i KINGFISHER
j
i
j
j
i
. I
I'F-__- \-~jf __--H ...
i j-.-.-.-.-:-.-.-.-l.-.-.-.-.-.---.-.-.
. j I
i : I
~j--- --112
I :
t."::; I
I i
I i ~j-
L -!~--
j
i.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
11-
11-
JI-
LOGAN
'--1---
11'-
L'
~ . ___"
.11"
I~ . '5 d- Z~.z~ - 3'
.u.....,.
~
~
Figure 4
Grid Coordinate System for Oklahoma City Study Area
16
721..1
311""
. .
-------
EMISSIONS BY CATEGORY
For the purposes of compiling the basic data and emission estimates,
the air pollutant sources were classified into the following five categories:
. ~
1.
2.
Stationary fuel combustion
Transportation
3.
4.
5.
Solid waste disposal
Industrial processes
Evaporative losses
Each of these categories is considered individually in this section where
data sources are given and methods of calculation discussed.
STATIONARY FUEL COMBUSTION
The stationary fuel combustion category is concerned with any fixed
source which burns fuels for either space heating or process heating.
The
four primary sources in this category are industrial facilities, steam-
electric plants, residential housing, and commercial and institutional
establishments.
In the O~lahoma City area, natural gas and liquified pet-
roleum gas were primarily the only fuels used.
Table 5 and Table 6 present
a summary of the fuels consumed in the Study Area.
Steam-Electric Utility
METHODOLOGY: Data on the two power plants in the area were acquired
from the Oklahoma State Health Department and compared to figures presented
by the National Coal Association.5 The data included the annual fuel
consumption for 1968 and the method of firing employed at each plant.
RESULTS: The two steam-electric generating plants in the Oklahoma City
area consumed over 60 percent of the total natural gas utilized by all sources.
Air pollutant emissions from fuel combustion at these plants as well as
from all other fuel combustion sources are summarized in Table 7.
The
steam-electric plants were significant sources of particulate and nitrogen
oxides.
Over 80 percent of the total nitrogen oxides from stationary fuel
combustion and 50 percent of the particulates were attributed to these two
plants.
-------
TABLE 5
NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION BY COUNTY, 1968 (MILLION CF/YEAR)
Political Jurisdiction
Residential
Industrial
Steam-Electric
Commercial & Institutional
Total
Canadian 770 140 410 1,320
Cleveland 2,020 1,320 1,200 4,540
Grady 900 120 310 1,330
Kingfisher 230 260 130 620
Lincoln 400 20 70 490
Logan 520 130 230 880
I-' McClain 230 30 70 330
00
Oklahoma 19,300 8,570 74, 100 9,090 111,060
Pottawatomie 1,230 190 430 1,850
-------
TABLE 6
DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION OF LPG BY COUNTY,
1968 (Gal/Year)
. ~
.,
Political Jurisdiction
Residential LPG Use
Canadian 1 ,910 ,000
Cleveland 1,420,000
Grady 2,550,000
Kingfisher 1,210,000
Lincoln 1,440,000
Logan 650,000
McClain 1,630,000
Oklahoma 4,300,000
Pottawatomie 1,810,000
TOTAL 16,920,000
-------
TABLE 7
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY FUEL
COMBUSTION IN STUDY AREA, 1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Su lfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Fuel User Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Natural Gas
Industrial N 100 N N 1,150
Steam-Electric 10 560 N N 14,440
Residential N 240 N N 1,490
Commercial and
Institutional N 110 N N 690
Subtotal 10 1 ,010 N N 17,770
LPG
Residential N 50 N N 350
GRAND TOTAL 10 1,060 N N 18,120
N = Negligible
-------
,1
I.,
!"
1~1
i'
.'1,
,J
Industrial
METHODOLOGY: Natural gas numbers were obtained from each of the local
o
suppliers who provided the breakdown by user category. Since natural gas,
for all practical purposes, was the only fuel used by industry, no other
contacts were necessary. No specific data on the natural gas consumption by
individual plants was obtained'. It was assumed that all industrial fuel
. ,)
. ~
consumption was an area source and was apportionned onto grids based on
industrial land use.
;';
It should be noted that fuel combustion by industries includes both
fuel used for space heating, and fuel used for process heating. A national
average was used to separate process heating from space heating.
RESULTS: The emissions from the combustion of natural gas were almost
~I ,
~
:1
I~~
~ :
i
insignificant contributing less than 10 percent of the stationary fuel
combustion emissions for any pollutant.
."
Residential
METHODOLOGY: Natural gas and LPG, for all practical purposes, were the
only fuels used for residential home heating. There were homes heated by
other fuels, but they represent a very small percentage of the total. Data
on the amount of natural gas used for domestic heating was supplied by the
J ~~
I,
~. .
local power companies and ,compared with the rapid survey technique of estimating
the fuel used for res'identia1 heating. 6 LPG consumption data was estimated
based on the rapid survey technique.
RESULTS: Residential sources accounted for 20 percent of the total
particulates from stationary fuel combustion, and 10 percent of the nitrogen
oxides. Sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons were negligible from
residential heating.
",
',.1,
{t
!:
~
~j c
~\
~ .'
r'
r~: .
Commercial and Institutional
METHODOLOGY: Commercial and institutional establishments use primarily
natural gas as' the only fuel.
Data on the amount of natural gas used by
these estab1ishment~ were provided by the local power company.
RESULTS: Since commercial and institutional sources use only natural
"
II
I...:
!.
'~
gas for their space heating, this was not a significant source of pollution.
1'1,0(
"
I
-------
TRANSPORTATION
Three types of transportation sources of air pollution are considered
in this survey-~otor vehicles, aircraft, and railroads.
Motor vehicles,
which are by far the most significant source in this category, are further
subdivided according to type of fuel--gasoline or diesel.
. .
Motor Vehicles
More than 12 million miles were traveled by motor vehicles in 1968
in the Oklahoma City Study Area. In the process, 322 million gallons of
~ ."
gasoline and 27 million gallons of diesel fuel were consmed for highway
purposes. Table 8 shows the miles of travel for gasoline and diesel
~
vehicles for each county in the Study Area.
Vehicle~ile data for essentially all of the roads in Oklahoma County
.,
were supplied by the State Highway Department.
For Oklahoma County, this
data was in the form of traffic flow maps which showed average daily traffic
.y
along the roads.
In the remaining counties, vehicle-mile information was
not available, and thus gasoline consumption was used to find vehicular
.. 7
em~ss~ons.
The contribution to the total motor vehicle pollution by diesel-powered
vehicles was determined by assuming that approximately three percent of the
total vehicle miles traveled were by diesel-powered vehicles. This was checked
by estimating diesel fuel consumption in each county. These emissions were
apportionned on a grid basis by assuming they were proportional to gasoline
emissions.
Emissions from motor vehicles are a function 'of the speed at which the
vehicle travels.
Average speeds of 10-20 mph were assumed for downtown areas,
20-30 mph for the residential areas, and 30-45 mph for the rural areas to
calculate vehicle emissions.
From all transportation sources, motor vehicles accounted for 65
percent of the sulfur oxides, 44 percent of the particulates, 95 percent
of the carbon monoxide, 82 percent of the hydrocarbons, and 79 percent of
the nitrogen oxides. Gasoline powered motor vehicles contributed a greater
percent of all pollutants than diesel powered motor vehicles. Emissions
from transportation sources are summarized in Table 9.
.~
"
-------
TABLE 8
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL FOR MOTOR VEHICLES IN THE
OKLAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA, 1968 (THOUSAND VEHICLE
MILES PER DAY)
c
,
Poli tical Jurisdiction Gasoline Vehicle Miles Diesel Vehicle Miles Total
Canadian 620 20 640
Cleveland 970 30 1,000
Grady 440 10 450
Kingfisher 240 10 250
Lincoln 340 10 350
Logan 290 10 300
McClain 220 10 230
Oklahoma 8,490 260 8,750
Pottawatomie 680 20 700
TOTAL 12,290 380 12,670
\..
-------
TABLE 9
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partie - Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Motor Vehicles
Gasoline 1,340 1,790 398,460 29,500 19,100
Diesel 540 1,500 820 1,840 3,020
Subtotal 1,880 3,290 399,280 31,340 22,120
Aircraft
Jet 180 280 310 160
Piston 90 18,900 3,600 880
Turboprop N N N N
Subtotal 270 19,180 3,910 1,040
Railroads 180 500 270 610 1,000
GRAND TOTAL 2,060 4,060 418,730 35,860 24,160
N = Negligible
-------
Aircraft
Table 10 shows the air traffic activity at the largest airports in the
Study Area.
An estimate of the number of flights by engine type was supplied
by the traffic controller at each airport and summarized in Table 10.
The air pollutant emissions from aircraft include all phases of operation
-
(taxi, take-off, climb out, approach and landing) that take place below
. .
the arbitrarily chosen altitude of 3,500 feet.
Emissions at cruise
altitude (above 3,500 feet) are not of concern in an emission inventory.
From all transportation sources, aircraft accounted for 6 percent of the
particulates, 4 percent of the carbon monoxide, 10 percent of the hydro-
carbons and 4 percent of the nitrogen oxides.
Railroads
Railraod operations (mainly locomotive) consume about 9 million gallons
of diesel fuel per year within the Study Area: This quantity is about 60
percent less than the amount of diesel fuel consumed by motor vehicles.
The majority of this fuel is consumed during switching operations.
Diesel
fuel consumption data were supplied by each of the major railraods in the
Oklahoma City area.
Railroad operations contribute about 12 percent of the particulates
from all transportation sources.
They account for less than 4 percent of the
emissions for any other pollutant.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Approximately 654,000 tons of refuse was generated during 1968 within
the Study Area. Table 11 presents a solid waste balance for the Oklahoma
City Study Area, showing the various methods of disposal and the quantities
disposed of by each method. The bulk of the refuse in Oklahoma, Canadian
and Cleveland Counties was disposed of by landfills, whereas in all other
counties it was burned in open burning dumps. Refuse data for all of the
counties except Oklahoma County were supplied by the State Department of
Solid Waste.
For Oklahoma County the Oklahoma City-County Health Department
supplied the numbers.
-------
TABLE 10
AIR TRAFFIC ACTIVITY AT THE LARGEST AIRPORTS IN THE
OKLAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA, 1968 (FLIGHTS/YEAR)
. .
Type Aircraft
Will Rogers
Wiley Post
Cimarron
MaJ1
Westheimer
Chickasha
Municipal
1. Engine Conventional .let 2,100
2 Engine Conventional .let 8,400 2,600
3 Engine Fan-Jet 11 ,500
4 Engine Fan-.Tet 11 , 500
2 Engine Turboprop 1,800
1. Engine Piston 29,600 67,200 54,700 55,000 12,700
2 Engine Piston 21,000 16,800 4,800
4 Engine Piston 14,900
TOTAL 99,000 98,400 54,700 59,800 12,700
a = Flight is defined as a combination of a landing and a take-off.
-------
TABLE 11
SOLID WASTE BALANCE FOR THE OKLAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA, 1968
N
-....J
Total Refuse Open Burning Non-Burning
Poli tical Jurisdiction Generated On-Site Incineration On-Site Dumps Landfills Dumps
Canadian 40,100 -- 3,700 9,800 26,600 --
Cleveland 99,700 -- -- 26,400 73,300 --
Grady 27,400 -- 5,500 21,900 -- --
Kinghsher 16,100 -- 2,000 12,000 -- 2,100
Lincoln 17,800 -- 3,600 10,500 -- 3,700
Logan 23,100 -- 1,700 9,800 -- 11,600
McClain 12,200 -- 4,100 4,000 -- 4,100
Oklahoma 364,600 48,700 12,200 61,000 242,700 --
Pottawatomie 53,400 -- 9,100 35,200 -- 9,100
-------
TABLE 12
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partie - Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Inci nera tion
Municipal
On-Site 50 240 1,070 20 70
Subtotal 50 240 1,070 20 70
Open Burning
On -Site 20 330 1,780 630 230
Dump 100 1,520 8,090 2,850 1,050
Subtotal 120 1,850 9,870 3,480 1,280
GRAND TOTAL 170 2,090 10,940 3,500 1,350
-------
Incineration
In the Oklahoma City Study Area there were no municipal incinerators
used to dispose of solid waste.
The amount of refuse disposed of by on-
. .
site incineration was assumed to be negligible except in Oklahoma County.
In Oklahoma County the 48,000 tons of refuse burned by on-site incinerators
. 0
was treated as an area source and apportionned onto grids by population.
No incinerators were classified as point sources.
The incineration of refuse contributed 30 percent of the tot~l sulfur
oxide emissions from solid waste disposal, 11 percent of the particulates,
10 percent of the carbon monoxide,S percent of the nitrogen oxides and less
than 1 percent of the hydrocarbons.
Open Burning
The two major categories of open burning are open burning dumps and
on-site open burning.
Open burning dumps are the largest contributors to
the air pollution from solid waste disposal.
There were 11 open burning
dumps in the Study Area that were classified as point sources. Th~account
for 60 percent of the sulfur oxides, 73 percent of the particulates, 74
percent of the carbon monoxide, 81 percent of the hydrocarbons, and 78
percent of the nitrogen oxides.
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
The Study Area is notably void of any heavy industrial complexes. From
an air pollution standpoint the food and agricultural industry and mineral
products industry were by far the most significant industrial process sources.
In the food and agriculatural industry the largest sources were 10 grain
elevators, 7 feed and grain mills, 1 alfalfa dehydrating plant, 1 coffee
roasting plant, 3 fertilizer plants, and 1 cotton seed oil plant.
In the
~
mineral products industry the largest sources were 7 asphalt batching plants,
1 asphalt roofing manufacturer, 4 brick manufacture~s,4 concrete batching
plants, and 1 glass manufacturer.
Other industries that generate air pollutant
emissions from their processes include 1 oil reclaiming plant and 1 grey
iron foundry.
Table 13 presents a summary of the emissions from the various
industrial processes.
-------
TABLE 13
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
Source Category
Particulates
Carbon Monoxide
.
Chemical Process Industry
Oil Reclaiming
20
Food and Agricultural
Alfalfa Dehydrating
Coffee Roasting
Cotton Seed Oil
Industry
Fertilizer
Grain Elevators
260
40
630
1,150
2,130
'"
Grain Mills
Subtotal
930
5,140
Metallurgical Industry
Grey Iron Foundry
10
90
Mineral Products Industry
Asphalt Batching
Asphal t Roofing
Subtotal
570
200
680
30
180
170
1,830
Brick Manufacturing
Concrete Batching
Glass Manufacturing
Rock Processing
GRAND TOTAL
7,000
90
-------
. .
The area included in the Oklahoma City Study Area has a large number of
in the feed and grain industry. The 10 grain elevators processed more than
7 million bushels of grain in 1968, and the 7 feed and grain mills processed
approximately 300,000 tons. Most of these plants are equipped with cyclones
plants
to control dust emissions.
The primary source of dust emissions from the
. u
mills was the cleaning operation, which removes the chaff and dirt before
the grain is processed.
Receiving, handling and storage operations also
contribute to the dust emissions.
Approximately 44 percent of the
particulates from all industrial processes are emitted from the feed and
grain industry.
Approximately 35 thousand tons of fertilizer were processed by the three
fertilizer plants in the area. It was assumed that 4 percent of the amount
processed was lost as particulate emissions.
These three fertilizer plants
accounted for 16 percent of the total particulates from industrial processes.
The seven asphalt batching plants in the Study Area produced 600,000
tons of hot mix asphalt in 1968.
imately 100,000 tons of asphalt.
The asphalt, roofing plant processed approx-
These 8 plants accounted for 11 percent of
the particulates from industrial processes.
Over 75 million bricks were manufactured by the four plants in the
Study Area. It was assumed that all of these plants employed some type of
control for dust emissions. These plants accounted for 10 percent of the
particulates.
The remaining 20 percent of the particulate emissions from industrial
processes was distributed among other minor operations as shown in Table 13.
EVAPORATIVE LOSSES
Four source categories were considered for evaporative losses--automobiles,
gasoline storage and handling, the consumption of solvents and petroleum
operations.
The hydrocarbon emissions from all sources by evaporative losses
are shown in Table 14.
-------
TABLE 14
HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM EVAPORATIVE LOSSES
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
. .
Source Category
HC Emissions - Tons/Year
Au tomobile s
Gasoline Storage and Handling
Industrial Solvent Evaporation
18,840
3,950
3,680
1,470
1,100
26,670
50,850
Dry Cleaning
Miscellaneous Solvent Usage
LPG Processing Plants
Crude Production
Crude Storage
4,830
TOTAL
111,390
-------
Automobiles
Automobile evaporation losses include gas tank and carburetor evapor-
ation and engine crankcase blowby.
Since 1963, most new automobiles were
. .
equipped with positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) valves that reduce
hydrocarbon emissions from the crankcase by about 90 percent. Due to a
lag time in the automobile replacement rate, it was assumed that 20 percent
. Q
of the automobiles were not equipped with PCV valves.
The hydrocarbon emissions from automobiles were calculated from vehicle-
mile data and were apportionned onto grids using the same methods as for
motor vehicles discussed earlier.
Evaporative losses from automobiles
accounted for 17 percent of the total hydrocarbon emissions from evapor-
ative losses in the Study Area.
Gasoline Storage and Handling
There are four major points (excluding evaporation from the motor
vehicle) of hydrocarbon emissions in the storage and handling of gasoline.
They are:
1.
2.
Breathing and filling losses from storage tanks
Filling losses from loading tank conveyances
Filling losses from loading underground storage tanks at service
3.
stations
4.
Spillage and filling losses in filling automobile gas tanks at
service stations.
Approximately 320 million gallons of gasoline were stored in the Study
Area in 1968.
The evaporative losses from this storage and the subsequent
handling of the gasoline accounted for 4 percent of the total evaporative
losses.
Consumption of Solvents
This category included the consumption of solvents at dry cleaning
plants, industrial solvent usage and the miscellaneous use of solvents by small
commercial establishments and 'domestic units.
Organic solvents emitted from
-------
these operations were determined by assuming an emission rate of 4 lb/
capita/year for any cleaning plants, 13 lb/capita/year for industries and
3 lb/capita/year for miscellaneous consumption.9,10 The consumption of
solvents by these three categories accounted for 5 percent of the hydro-
carbon emissions from evaporative losses.
- .
Petroleum Operations
The Oklahoma City Study Area is saturated with sources of evaporative
losses from petroleum operations.
These operations include the production
of crude oil, crude storage and LPG processing plants.
The largest source of hydrocarbons from these three operations was the
production of crude. Over 40 million barrels of crude were produced in the
Study Area in 1968. This was approximately 18 percent of the state total.
The evaporative losses from the production of crude were estimated at
50,800 tons of hydrocarbons, approximately 45 percent of the total.
From the Oklahoma State Tax Commission, Gross Production Division,
it was found that the storage capacity of crude in the Study Area was
890,000 barrels. The crude throughput for the year was 370 million
gallons. The evaporative losses from the storage of this crude oil
accounted for 4 percent of the total.
There were 16 LPG processing plants in the Study Area which produced
over 345 million gallons of LPG. Evaporative losses from these plants
are held to a minimum. However, they still contributed approximately
23percent of the total hydrocarbon emission from evaporative loss
sources.
-------
EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION
The previous section presented the air pollutant emissions by source
. .
category.
In order to show the contribution of each county to the pollution
in the entire Study Area, their emissions are summarized in Tables 15 through
. <
23.
As is expected due to a higher degree of urbanization than the other
counties, Oklahoma County contributes the majority of air pollutants.
Oklahoma County accounts for 70 percent of the total sulfur oxides in the
Study Area, 46 percent of the particulates, 75 percent of the carbon monoxide,
34 percent of the hydrocarbons, and 79 percent of the nitrogen oxides.
-------
TABLE 15
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN CANADIAN COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 100 170 15,180 1,290 1,120
Other 10 30 2,090 440 140
Subtotal 110 200 17,270 1,730 1,260
Stationary Fuel Combustion
Industry N N N N 10
Steam-Electric
Residential N 20 N N 80
Commercial and
Institutional N N N N 20
Subtotal N 20 N N 110
Refuse Disposal
Inc ineration
Open Burning 10 110 580 200 70
Subtotal 10 110 580 200 70
Process Losses N 1,620 N N N
Evaporative Losses 1,630
GRAND TOTALa 120 1,950 17,900 3,560 1,440
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 16
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN CLEVELAND COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
c Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxi de carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 150 260 25,580 2,130 1,740
Other 20 60 2,760 600 230
Subtotal 170 320 28,340 2,730 1,970
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N 10 N N 140
Steam-Electric
Residential N 20 N N 120
Corm:nercial and
Institutional N 10 N N 70
Subtotal N 40 N N 330
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning 10 210 1 , 120 400 150
Subtotal 10 210 1,120 400 150
Process Losses N 80 N N N
Evaporative Losses 9,920
GRAND TOTALSa 180 650 29,500 13,100 2,450
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 17
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN GRADY COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partie - Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 70 120 11 ,190 940 780
Other 10 20 490 120 60
Subtotal 80 140 11 ,680 1,060 840
Statiom ry Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N 10
Steam-Electric
Residential N 20 N N 100
Cormnercial and
Institutional N N N N 20
Subtotal N 20 N N 130
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning 10 220 1,160 410 150
Subtota 1 10 220 1,160 410 150
Process Losses N 1,100 N N N
Evaporative Losses 15,140
GRAND TOTALSa 90 1,480 12,800 16,600 J,120
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN KINGFISHER
COu~TY, 1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Su lfu r Par tic- Carbon Hydro - Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 40 60 6,710 550 430
Other N 10 N 10 20
Subtotal 40 70 6,710 560 450
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N N
Steam-Electric
Residential N N N N 10
Conunercia1 and
Institutional N N N N 10
Subtotal N N N N 50
Refuse Disposal
Incineration .--
Open Burning 10 -110 600 210 80
Subtotal 10 110 600 210 80
Process Losses N 780 N N N
Evaporative Losses -- 20,300
GRAND TOTALSa 50 960 7,310 21,100 580
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 19
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN LINCOLN COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Su lfu r Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 50 90 8,160 700 610
Other N 10 10 20 30
Subtotal 50 100 8,170 720 640
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N N
Steam -E1ec tri(:
Residential N N N N 60
Commercial and
Institutional N N N N N
Subtotal N N N N 60
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning 10 no 600 210 80
Subtotal 10 no 600 210 80
Process Losses N 300 N N N
Evaporative Losses J 0,190
GRAND TOTALSa 60 510 8,770 n ,100 780
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 20
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN LOGAN COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
Sulfur Partie - Carbon Hydro - Nitrogen
'Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 40 80 7 , 58 0 630 520
Other N 10 10 10 20
Subtotal 40 90 7,590 640 540
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N 10
Steam-Electric
Residential N N N N 50
COI.T.III1ercial and
Institutional N N N N 10
Subtotal N N N N 70
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning N 80 450 160 60
Subtotal N 80 450 160 60
Process Losses N 30 N N N
Evaporative Losses 4,090
GRAND TOTALS 40 200 8,040 4,890 670
N = Negligible
-------
TABLE 21
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN Mc~LAIN COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 30 60 5,790 480 400
Other N 10 N 10 20
Subtotal 30 70 5,790 490 420
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N N
Steam-Electric
Residential 10 N N N 40
Cormnercial and
Institutional N N N N N
Subtotal 10 N N N 40
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning N 60 350 120 40
Subtotal N 60 350 120 40
Process Losses N 220 N N N
Evaporative Losses 10,380
GRAND TOTAL a 40 250 6,140 11 ,000 500
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded
-------
TABLE 22
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN OKLAHOMA COUNTY
1968 (TONS/YEAR)
,
Su lfu r Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 1,300 2,270 301,560 23,170 15,250
Other 120 570 14,060 3,290 1,460
Subtotal 1,420 2,840 315,620 26,460 16,710
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N 80 N N 920
Steam-Electric 10 560 N N 14,440
Residential 10 180 N N 1,200
Commercial and
Institutional N 90 N N 530
Subtotal 20 910 N N 17,090
Refuse Disposal
Incineration 50 . 240 1,070 20 70
Open Burning 40 590 3,130 J.,100 400
Subtotal 90 830 4,400 1,120 470
Process Losses N 2,000 90 N N
Evaporative Losses 33,650
GRAND TOTALa 1,530 6,580 320,100 51,200 34,300
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
TABLE 23
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN POTTAWATOMIE
COUNTY, 1968 (TONS/YEAR)
.
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 100 180 17,520 1,470 1,220
Other 10 30 10 30'- 60
Subtotal llO 210 17 ,530 1,500 J , 280
Stationary Fuel
Combustion
Industry N N N N 20
Steam-Electric
Residential 10 10 N N 100
Corrnnercial and
Institutional N N N N 20
Subtotal 10 10 N N 140
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning 20 350 1',880 660 240
Subtotal 20 350 1,880 660 240
Process Losses N 910 N N N
Evaporative Losses 6 , 080
GRAND TOTALa 40 1,490 19,400 8,240 1,660
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
-------
EMISSIONS BY GRID
. .
For the purpose of defining the geographical variation of air pollutant
emissions in the Study Area, the resulting emissions were apportionned on
the grid coordinate system.
The emissions were divided into two source
groups--point and area sources.
Fourty-eight point sources are identified
individually with respect to location and emissions.
Each of these point
sources emitted more than 0.5 tons per average annual day of any pollutant.
CONTRIBUTIONS OF POINT AND AREA SOURCES
Figure 5 shows the location of all point sources in the area.
Collectively
the fourty-eight point
37 percent of nitrogen
6 percent of the carbon
sources account for 55 percent of particulate matter,
oxides, 21 percent of the hydrocarbons, and only
monoxide and 0 percent of the sulfur oxides.
The
percentage contribution to carbon monoxide and sulfur oxides emissions is
low because motor vehicles, which are area sources, contribute 84 percent
of the total sulfur oxide emissions and 93 percent of the total carbon
monoxide emissions.
Similarly, the contribution to total hydrocarbon emissions
is low since two groups of area sources, motor vehicles and evaporative losses
are the major sources.
Table 24 presents the emissions of point sources.
Each source is identified by source category, grid number and horizontal
and vertical coordinates.
The emissions of sulfur oxides, particualtes,
I
carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides are shown for an average
annual day, average winter day (December, January,' February), and average
summer day (June, July, August).
culating these three averages.
The appendix presents the method of cal-
Area sources are sources of emissions that are insignificant by them-
selves, but as a group may emit a large portion of the areas total pollution.
Examples of area sources are motor vehicles, residences, light commercial
and industrial establishments and backyard burning.
The emissions from area
-------
i'- '-'-'j..,"._._._._._._._._.tOn'r'-'-'-'-'-'~~~-i~:'''-'- '-'-'-'-'-'-'14;;"-'-~~-! - -- , ~~"
, I'r---~- -'~.' .\C- ! ---- '-- f - i '
! ! i
! I I i
l 81 I !/"
i ";INGI1;;E; . --I' - i~GAN . ~ ' -;--I;'->rC~';18:=o--"=-"==-'-'~r':'----i4.';'1""
i 8 I !! i I
! L:. I i I I: '[ \ II
. I ! I I I .
56"" . l -1 I L OJ! ----- __,L_-.L-,~L -'------1~'. L J m-
i2 -- --,' - 13-- 14' .5' 16 '11. 118 " "
.; I. , ' . O.
',' I I ~, It: I,' ,
. I I r.- .-.-.-.-.-. .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.; I
I !--.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. '-'-'--'-'-'-'--T'-'-'-'--'-'-'--':-'-'-'- ;1 !! i LlNCO~ : ~
I i '! i j II ! 1
i I ,j. L:. i . i '! 'I
: 0 DIAN . 'i. 0 ~ OKLAHOMA: . : . i ,
"< I 8 I I; ~ . n - - 33~ ::' I :
l \ ~- 4 ---J L:.0 ~ _-f~L~~L:.~~ - J 'II---.-J. i i
i I I ~ III 0: I ~_._._._._.~.__._._._._._._._. .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-i
L I -, J - . r ,~~ ,'0, -;I:--,-----1-----L,- -J51, -1\I'-- -<-".,":A~L 3!2''''
i L2 0 (3 "~ _._!._._,~_._._._._._._._._.i~._._.-': f ~-- ; .'-
L'_'-'-'-'-'-'-'-q'-'-'-"".,.J',..,.....,. . r-'-'-'-' I j ! ~O ;
! ! l'.4 : !
! ! ~~-':.....--- i !
,: ~ Ii ~16\ I I : I :
~-""+ GRA;-1t8~Cl;;N .~.._c ll--t-l~ --H-
! I !. i t. j ,--". \
1 ! : I "-'--'."-" j.-.-.- ,/ : \._.._i' \ :
i ' j L -'-. ".,.... ,./~. i t,..!
! i i
j . ---- -- . 31'"''
16 1-- - ~ -- t i_._._.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-..
i i
i i
i i
i i
i i
i . i
i i
i i
! i
'-.-.-. - .-. -. -. -.-:-. -. -.-. -. -.-.-. _.u.~;.
,.
(
,
~
L9
10
15
-- .1-
2JD
t..-J ,I,
.Un
1,0 15
kil,.,iln
21, 2~., ~O
LEGEND
. LPG PLANT
L:. DUMP
o INDUSTRIAL
A AI RPORT
. STEAM.ELECTRIC
Figure .s.Point source locations for the Oklahoma City study area.
-------
sources have been added to that for point sources to obtain total emissions
from all sources by grid, as shown in Table 25. The emissions from all
sources are also shown for an annual average, winter and summer day.
EMISSION DENSITIES
. .
In order to provide a visual representation of the emissions of pollutants
by grids, emission density maps have been prepared. Emission densities were
obtained by summing the annual area and point source emissions for each
grid and dividing this total by the land area of the grid.
Figures 6 through
10 show the variation in emission densities for the respective grids through-
out the Study Area.
As expected the emissions generally follow the pattern
and degree of urbanization.
Emission densities for carbon monoxide and
nitrogen oxides are higher in the grids with the higher populations and
corresponding higher vehicular activity. Particulate emissions are high
only in areas where industries are located.
Hydrocarbon emission densities
are highest in grids where gas processing plants are located and in grids
which contain a large number of crude oil wells. Sulfur oxide emission
densities are not shown because of the extremely low values.
~
-------
TABLE 24
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM POINT SOURCES IN THE OKLAHOMA
CITY STUDY AREA, 1968 (TONS/nAY)
SOx PART. CO HC NOx
Source Category Grid HC VC S W A S W A S W A S W A S W A
LPG Plant 1 5990 39950 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.04 3.04 3.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 1 5990 39960 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.90 13.90 13.90 0.00 0.00 0.00
))Imp 1 5980 39980 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.09 0.09
Industrial 5 5950 39724 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 5 5950 39726 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 5 5970 39720 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.07 0.07 0.07
))Imp 8 6401 39750 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.11 0.11
LPG Plant 9 6780 39630 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 12 5797 39405 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 15 6370 39430 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 15 6350 ~948.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.30 0.30 0.30 1.59 1.59 1.59 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.20 0.20
L?(;- pi.~'t- ,.::. '. -- 15._. ,~~~ - 39.~9_. . -Q.. Q... ".g " 9 .~ , ~ :..9.,Q 0.09 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.60 15.60 15.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 18 6920 39500 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.10 0.10 0.10
LPG Plant 19 7030 39590 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.72 0:00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 19 7020 39570 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,67 2.67 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 19 7120 39580 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 22 5930 39340 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 22 5920 39330 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 25 6120 39320 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 25 6100 39320 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.19 0.19 0.19 1.05 1.05 1.05 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.13 0.13 0.13
Airport 25 6070 39290 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.02 0.02 '5.69 5.69 5.69 1.12 1.12 1.12 0.26 0.26 0.26
-------
TABLE 24 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM POINT SOURCES (cant.)
SOX PART. CO HC NOx
Source Category Grid HC VC S W A S W A S W A S W A S W A
LPG Plant 29 6380 39355 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.58 1.58 1.58 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 29 6370 39360 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.37 0.37 0.37 1.97 1.97 1.97 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.25 0.25 0.25
Airport 30 6230 39340 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12 0.12 0.12 13.21 13.21 13.21 2.54 2.54 2.54 0.65 0.65 0.65
Steam-Electric 32 6327 39324 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.07 0.60 0.50
Dumps 33 6380 39330 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.51 0.51 0.51 2.75 2.75 2.75 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.35 0.35 0.35
Steam-Electric 36 6203 39258 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.71 0.65 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.48 17.05 17.52
Industrial 38 6329 39258 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 39 6352 39251 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.71 1.71 1.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00. 0.00
Dump 43 6283 3923$ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.08 0.08 0.g8
tndustria1 44 6348 39223 0.0 0.0 0..0 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 46 6440 39205 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.59 3.59 3.59 0.00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 49 6640 39310 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.17 0.70 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.57 18.34 21. 54
Industrial 52 5951 39180 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 54 6360 39190 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.46 2.46 2.46 0.00 0.00 0.00
Airport. 54 6370 39020 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.03 0.03 7.48 7.48 7.48 1.45 1.45 1.45 0.34 0.34 0.34
Airport 54 6275 39177 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.53 0.53 0.53 24:81 24.81 24.81 5.33 5.33 5.33 1.52 1.52 1. 52
Industrial 57 6880 39120 '0.0 0.0 0..0 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 57 6860 39130 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dump 57 6870 39103 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.71 0.71 0.71 3.80 3.80 3.80 1.34 1.34 1.34 0.49 0.49 0.49
. 5950 38820 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.73 2.73 2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industrial 61
Dump 61 5950 38820 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.32 0.32 0.32 1.74 1.74 1.74 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.22 0.22 0.22
.
Airport 61 5910 38850 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.32 1.32 1.32 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.06 0.06
Dumps 64 6440 389~0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.54 0..54 0.54 .2.87 2.87 2.87 1.01 1.01 1.01 0.37 0.37 0.37
LPG Plant 72 6270 38740 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.77 4.77 4.77 0.00 0.00 0.00
-,
LPG Plant 72 6230 38780 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.07 1.07 1.07 0.00 0.00 0.00
LPG Plant 77 6170 38430 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 '0.00 0.00 0.00 21.40 21.40 21.40 0.00 0.00 0.00
-------
TABLE 25 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCES IN THE OKIAHOMA CITY STUDY AREA
1968. (TONS/DAY)
Land Area SOX PART. CO HC NOx
Grid (Sq. Mi.) S 101 A S 101 A S 101 A S 101 A S 101 A
1 154.4- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 4.9 4.2 4.~ 26.9 26.7 26.8 0.5 0.5 0.5
2 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.7 1.8 4.7 4.6 4.6 0.2 0.2 0.2
3 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.8. 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1
4 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1
5 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.1 . 2.1 2.1 10.8 9.0 9.9 18.4 18.2 18.3 0.8 0.7 0.7
6 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.2 2.4 4.8 4.7 4.8 0.2 0.2 0.2
7 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 2.8 3.1. 2.0 1.9 1.9 0.3 0.3 0.2
8 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 16.7 13.9 15.3 9.4 9.0 9.2 1.3 1.3 1.3
9 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.2 1.3 2.4 2.3 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
10 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.5 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.1 0.2 0.2 0.2
11 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.1
12 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
13 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.7 3.0 3.4 2.9 2.8 2.8 0.3 0.3 0.3
14 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.7 1.9 1.3 1.2 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
15 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 19.0 15.9 17.4 19.5 19.1 19.3 1.3 1.4 1.3
16 154.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 30.3 24.8 27.5 4.3 3.6 4.0 1.8 1.6 1.7
17 154.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 8.9 7.3 8.1 3.0 2.8 2.9 0.6 0.5 0.6
18 154.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 6.4 5.4 5.9 6.2 6.1 6.1 0.6 0.5 0.5
19 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.3 4.4 4.9 9.5 9.3 9;4 0.5 0.5 0.5
20 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
21 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
22 38.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.8 1.8 1.8 23.6 19.4 21.5 4.3 3.7 4.0 1.7 1.6 1.7
-------
('
t'
TABLE 25
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCES (cant.)
Land Area SOx PART. CO HC NOx
Grid (Sq. Mi.) S W A S W A S W A S W A S -w A
23 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
24 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
25 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 1.4 1.4 16.2 14.5 15.3 3.4 3.1 3.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
26 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 1.9 2.1 0.4 0.3". 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2
27 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.3 4.4 4.8 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4
28 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.2 14.1 11. 5 12.8 3.4 3.1 3.2 1.0 1.3 1.1
29 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 5.5 4.9 5.2 2.8 2.7 2.7 0.5 0.4 0.5
30 9.6 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 22.6 20.9 21.8 4.6 4.4 4.5 1.3 1.4 1.4
31 9.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9. 0.9 0.9 77.5 63.4 70.4 10.6 8.9 9.7 4.0 3.7 3.8
32 9.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 63.8 52.3 58.0 9.9 8.6 9.3 4.5 4.2 3.9
33 9.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.9 0.9 50.5 41.9 46.2 7.4 6.4 6.9 2.8 2.6 2.7
34 38.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 15.8 13.0 14.4 2.9 2.5 2.7 1.0 1.1 1.1
35 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.3 3.5 3.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3
36 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 12.4 10.2 11.3 2.1 1.8 2.0 19.2 17.8 18.2
37 9.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.6 54.3 44.5 49.4 8.8 7.6 8.2 3.0 3.2 3.1
38 9.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 2.3 2.4 2.3 124.8 102.2 113.5 17.8 15.4 16.6 5.6 5.9 5.6
39 9.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 71.8 58.8 65.3 12.3 10.8 11. 5 4.1 4.4 4.1
40 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 27.2 22.3 24.8 4.6 4.0 4.3 1.5 1.7 1.6
41 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 11. 7 9.6 10.6 2.0 1.7 1.8 0.7 0.7 0.7
42 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.4 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
43 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 22.6 18.7 20.6 3.8 3.4 3.6 1.4 1.4 1.4
44 9.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 96.2 78.8 87.5 13.8 11.9 12.9 4.3 4.6 4.4
-------
TABLE 25
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCES (cont.)
Land Area SOx PART. CO HC NOx
Grid (Sq. Mi.) S W A S W A S W A S W A S W A
45 9.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 41.4 33.9 37.7 7.0 6.2 6.6 2.3 2.4 2.3
46 9.6 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.5 52.7 43.2 47.9 12.0 10.8 11.4 3.3 3.2 3.2
47 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 11.3 9.3 10.3 3.0 2.8 2.9 0.9 1.2 1.0
48 38.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 11.8 9.6 10.7 1.9 1.6 1.8 0.7 0.7 0.7
49 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.8 0.9 7.2 5.9 6.5 2.5 2.3 2.4 31.1 18.8 22.0
50 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.4 4.4 4.9 3.8 3.6 3.7 0.4 0.3 0.3
51 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.6 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.5 3.5 0.3 0.3 0.3
52 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 3.7 3.0 3.4 1.8 1.7 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.3
53 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.4 3.7 4.0 2.1 2.0 2.0 0.4 0.4 0.4
54 154.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 104.7 91.6 98.1 27.9 26.1 27.0 7.4 7.5 7.3
55 154.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.9 66.0 54.0 60.0 24.0 22.3 23.1 5.1 5.2 5.0
56 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 6.7 5.5 6.1 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.5
57 38.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 3.7 3.7 2.7 34.1 28.7 31.4 13.4 12.6 13.0 2.8 2.7 2.7
58 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.7 1.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.1
59 38.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 7.9 6.5 7.2 3.1 2.9 3.0 0.6 0.6 0.6
60 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.3 1.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1
61 154.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 3.6 3.6 3.6 23.5 19.9 21.7 14.3 13.8 14.0 1.9 1.9 1.9
62 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
63 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 6.6 5.4 6.0 7.0 6.9 6.9 0.5 0.4 0.4
64 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 5.7 5.2 5.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.6 0.6 0.6
65 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1
66 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1
-------
r
,
c
~
TABLE 25
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCES (cant.)
Land Area SOX PART. CO HC NOx
Grid (Sq. Mi.) S W A S W A S W A S W A S W ".! A
67 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
68 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.7 1.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2
69 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.6 3.0 3.3 1.6 1.5 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.3
70 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.8 1.5 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
71 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 1.9 2.2 1.7 1.7 1.7 0.2 0.2 0.2
72 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.0 2.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
73 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 10.1 8.4 9.2 11.9 11.7 11.8 0.9 0.9 0.9
74 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
75 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 1.3 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1
76 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.4 2.0 2.2 1.7 1.7 l",7 0.2 0.2 0.2
77 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 22.1 22.1 22.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
-------
KINGFISHER
Ts
V-''V*'.'.'.'i
a
LOGAN
1"
;
! MH^
;i ; :
!
MAN ' OKLAHOMA
SSggSg:;: f ii &;Vfe:'v j
*r
GRADY
CLEVELAND
- ...... I ...... -
McCLAIN
LINCOLN
i%; % -]
;, ,5 i
JS™* '""W " ~' 1
.
POHAWATOMIE
i in""
" "1
» 1
•ilH
II U H ZS Jl
-U4W
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS,
tons/mi 2-day
Q o o.oi
^] 0.01 - 0.05
f| 0.05 - 0.10
H 0.10 - 0.30
^ 0.30 - 0.40
Figure 6. Paniculate emissions densities for the Oklahoma City study area, 1968.
-------
H""
li:
CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS,
tons/mi 2-day
Q 0 - 0.01
[^ 0.01 - 0.05
0.05 - 0.10
1.0 - 5.0
5.0 - 12.0
Figure 7. Carbon monoxide emission densities for the Oklahoma City study area, 1968.
-------
.-'.•'••
sis
GRADY
xJSGtMl
i*::£:tfW*::i:-l
li^iplSxWft^SJs;^"
"TT"
..new
HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS,
tons/mi 2-day
Q 0 - 0.01
{^ 0.01 - 0.05
H 0.05 - 0.10
g| 0.10 - 1.0
m 1.0 -4.0
Figure 8. Hydrocarbon emission densities for the Oklahoma City study area, 1968.
-------
lllHNltft
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS,
o o.oi
0.01 -0.05
0.05-0.10
0.10-0.50
0.50 - 2.0
Figure 9. Nitrogen oxides emission densities for the Oklahoma City study area, 1968.
-------
REFERENCES
1.
Ozolins, Guntis and Smith, Raymond, Rapid Survey Technique for Estimating
Community Air Pollution Emissions. DHEW, PHS, October 1966.
~.
2.
Duprey, R. L., Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, United
States, DHEW, PHS, 1968.
.. .
3.
Population Estimates, State Department of Health, Public Health Statistics,
1968.
4.
County and City Data Book 1967, United States Department of Commerce,
April, 1967.
5.
Steam-Electric Plant Factors, National Coal Association, 1969.
6.
Ozolins, op. cit., pp. 43-45.
7.
Retail Trade Special Report, Census of Business, United States Department
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1963.
8.
Highway Statistics/1967, United States Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Public Roads.
9.
Duprey, op. cit., p. 46.
10.
St. Louis Interstate Air Pollution Study, Phase II, Air Pollutant
Emission Inventory, 1966, p. 38.
-------
APPENDIX
ME1HOD FOR CAJ.ClILA'fmC Sm1f.IER, WINTER AND ANNUAL
AVERAGE EMISSIONS FOR FUEL CONSm1PTION IN STATIONARY SOURCES
,-
c-
YEARLY AVERAGE (A)
-
A = Fuel Consumed x Emission Factor (E.P.)
Days of Operation
e.g.
A plant consumed 100,000 tons of coal in 1967 while operating
365 days. The total degree days for the area was 4,800 and
2,800 for the three winter months. The plant was estimated
to use 15 percent of the fuel for space heating and 85 percent
for process heating. From this information, the annual
average emission for carbon monoxide would be the following:
A = 100,000 Tonslyear x 3 lbs. COlTon co~l
365 Days/year x 2,000 lb./Ton
A = 0.41 Ton/Day
WINTER AVERAGE (W)
w = Fuel Consumed x E.F.
Days of Winter Operation
x Winter Depree Days
Total Degree Days
x
!lei Fuel Used
for space heatin~
Fuel Consumed x E.F.
365
W . [100,000 x 2,800
90 x 4,800
+
x
\ Fuel used for nrocess heating
x 0.15
+
100,000
365
x
0.8~ 2,0~0
w ..
0.49 Ton/Day
SmlMER AVERAGE (5)
S = Fuel Consumed x E.F.
Days of Summer Operation
Summer Degree Days
x Total De~ree Days
% Fuel Use':
x for space h~atin~
c
Fuel Consumed
365
S = [100,000
90
x E.F.
x
% Fuel used for- process heating
+
°
x 4,800
x 0.15
+
1006°00
3 5
x 0.85J 2,O~0
S =
0.35 Ton/Day
------- |