RENO AREA
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION INVENTORY

-------
The APTD (Air Pollution Technical Data) series of reports is issued by
the Office of Air Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, to report
Technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies of
APTD reports are available free of charge to Federal employees, current
contractors and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies
permit - from the Office of Technical Information and Publications,
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711 or from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.

-------
,.
'"
,:
o
RENO METROPOLITAN AREA AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION INVENTORY
Prepared by
Michael J. McGraw
~
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
Environmental Health Service
c, .
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Division of Air Quality and Emission Data
Durham, North Carolina

-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I'
Sincere gratitude is extended by the National Air Pollution Control
Administration to the many individuals. and companies who contributed
to this study.
Special thanks are due to Burt Cole and James Williams of the
State of Nevada Department of Health and Howard Clodfelter of the
Washoe County Health Department, who contributed invaluable assistance
in the ga the ring of da ta for this report.

-------
PREFACE
"
This report, which presents the emission inventory for the Reno.
Metropolitan Area, is another i.n a series of surveys outlining the sources
and emissions of air pollutants for major metropolitan areas in the country.
, These surveys, conducted by the National Inventory of Air Pollutant
Emissions and Control Branch of the National Air Pollution Control
Administration, provide estimates of the present levels of air pollutant
emissions and status of their control. The pollutants which include
sulfur oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and 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 estimating air
1
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.

-------
:.J
TABLE OF CONTENTS
"
References.
Appendices.
. .
 Page
 1
 .3
 8
 11
 13
 13
. 13
 13
 16
 16
. 16
 22
. 22
 22
. 22
. 2&,
. 32.
. 37
. 38
Introduction.
Summary of Results.
Study Area.
Grid Coordinate System.
Emissions by Category.
Stationary Fuel Combustion.
Transportation.
Motor Vehicles.
Aircraft.
Railroads.
Solid Waste Disposal.
Industrial Process Losses
Evaporative Losses.
,'"
Automobiles.
. .
Gasoline Storage and Handling.
Emissions
Emissions
by Jurisdiction.
by Grid.
",'

-------
LIST OF TABLES
Taple                           Page
t, 1 Summa ry of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Study Area.        5
c                           
 1A Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Study Area. .  . .    6
 2 Area and Population Characteristics .     . . . .   . . . 7
 3 Fuel Consumption in Study Area. . . . . .  .    . . . . . 14
 4 Summary of Emission from Stationary Fuel Combustion       
  Sources     . . .  . . . .  .          15
 5 Vehicle Mil e s of Travel for Motor Vehicles  in Study Area.    17
 6 Air Pollutant Emissions from Transportation Sources .  . . . . 18
 7 Airport Activity at Major Airport in Study Area . .  .     19
 8 Solid Waste Balance for Reno Study  Area . .  . . . . .   . . 20
 9 Air Pollutant Emissions from Solid  Waste Disposal .  . .    21
10 Particulate Emissions from Industrial Processes .   . . .   23
11 Hydrocarbon Emissions from Evaporative Loss Sources  . .    24
.                            
12 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Carson  City . .   . . . 27
13 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Douglas County. . . . . . 28
14 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Lyon  County  . . . .  . 29
15 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  in Storey  County       30
16 Summary of Air Po 11 u tan t Emissions  in Washoe  County  . . . . . 31
17 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions  from Point Sources . .  . . 33
18 Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions. .     . . . . . .    34

-------
Figure
1

2
3
~
LIST OF FIGURES
Map of the Reno Study Area. .
Detailed Map of Study Area.
. . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . .
Grid Coordinate System for Study Area. .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
. . . . .
Page
.9

10

-------
INTRODUCTION
This report is a summary of the Reno air pollutant emission inventory
conducted in March 1970.
Since all inventories are based upon a calendar
year, the data and emission estimates presented are representative of
1969 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 five counties surround-
ing Reno and Carson City. This area covers approximately 9,400 square
miles and had a 1969 population of 161,500.
A grid coordinate system was used to show the geographical distri-
bution of emissions within counties.
The Study Area was subdivided into
60 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--
transportation, stationary fuel combustion, solid-waste disposal, indus-
trial processes and evaporative losses.
Each of these source categories
was divided into two subgroups--point 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, seventy-one individual sources, which had
emissions greater than 50 tons/year 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
i . 2
em ss~on rates. These factors represent average emission rates for a
particular source category. Since individual sources have inherent dif-
ferences that cannot always be taken into consideration, discrepancies

-------
::r
--- ..-- -
between the actual and estimated emissions are more likely -in individual
8ource8 than in the total emissions for 8 source category.
A8 in 811 emission surveys, the data presented are estimates and
.hould not be interpreted as absolute values. The estimates are, in some
cases, partial totals due to the lack of emission factors and production
or consumption data. Despite these limitations, these estimates are of
sufficient accuracy and validity in defining the extent and distribution
of air pollutant emissions in the Study Area.
. -

-------
RESULTS
The breakdown of air pollutant emissions by source type and pollutant
is summarized in Table 1 and Table 2. The following is a brief summary
of pollutant emissions as presented in these tables.
Sulfur Oxides:
1969 Total = 2,500 Tons

Road Vehicles 22.1%
Other Transportation 1.2%
Fuel Combustion
Industrial
Residentia 1
Commercial
Solid Waste Disposal
5.5%
22.1%
47.1%
2.0%
Particu 1a tes:
1969 Total = 35,500 Tons

Road Vehicles 2.9%
Other Transportation 0.5%
Fuel Combustion 1.0%
Solid Waste Disposal 0.8%
Industrial Process 94.8%
Carbon Monoxide:
1969 Total = 128,500 Tons
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
Solid Waste Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning
98.5%
0.5%
0.4%
0.6%
Hydrocarbons:
1969 Total = 17,700 Tons
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
Fuel Combustion
Solid Waste Disposal
Evaporative Losses
54.8%
1. 9%
0.2%
0.6%
42.5%
-

-------
Nitrogen Oxides:
1969 Total = 10,000 Tons
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
Fuel Combustion
Industrial
Steam-Electric
Residential
Commercial
Solid Waste Disposal
4
'.
63.1 %
2.6%
'.'
2.4%
21. 7%
2.4/0
6.A%
1. 0%
.'"
,,'
",
, -

-------
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN STUDY AREA, 1969
(Tons!Vear\
c
      Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- b Nitrogen
  Source Category   Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
  Transportation        
  Road Vehicles   560 1,040 126,500 9,730  6,350
  Other    30 170 650 330  260
  Subtotal    590 1,210 127,150 10,060  6,610
  Stationary Fuel        
  Combustion         
  Steam-Electric   N 80 N N  2,190
  Industry    140 30 N N  240
  Residential - 560 90 20 30  350
  Commercial and        
  lnsti tu dona1 1,190 160 10 10  680
  Subtotal  1,890 360 30 40  3,460
  Refuse Disposal        
  Incineration   20 120 520 10  40
  Open Burning   30 170 770 90  60
  Subtotal    50 290 1,290 100  100
  Industrial Process   33,610    
  Evaporative Losses     7,540  
   a 2,500 35,500 128,500 17,700  10,000
  GRAND TOTAL  
~ .          
  N = Negligible        
 ~ a = Totals have been rounded.     
 .     
  b = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included under evaporative losses only.

-------
.'
TABLE 1A
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN STUDY AREA, 1969
(1000 kg/year)
  Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation     
Motor Vehicles 510 940 114,700 8,830 5,760
Other  30 150 590 300 240
Subtotal  540 1,090 115,290 9,130 6,000
Stationary Fuel     
Combustion      
Industrial 130 30 N N 220
Steam-Electric N 70 N N 1,990
Residential 510 80 20 30 220
Connnercial and     
Institutional 1,080 150 10 10 620
Subtotal  1,720 330 30 40 3,050
Refuse Disposal     
Incineration 20 110 470 10 40
Open Burning 30 150 700 80 50
Subtotal  50 260 1,170 90 90
Industrial Processes  30,490   
Evaporative Losses    6,840 
GRAND TOTAL  2,310 32,170 116,490 16,100 9,140
, -

-------
TABLE 2
AREA AND POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE RENO STUDY AREA
o
  Land Area Popu 1a tion Population
Political Jurisdiction (Sq. Mi.) 1960 1969 Density (1969)
Carson City 141 8,100 15,400 109
Douglas 2,946 3,500 6,400 2
Lyon  2,010 6,100 8,100 4
Storey  262 570 600 2
Washoe a 4,000 84,700 131,000 20
TOTAL  9,359 102,970 161,500 17
a = Includes only a portion of the entire county.
v
,
Q
.

-------
, ~..\
,. .
).
STUDY AREA
The Study Area for the emission survey of the Reno Metropolitan Area
consists of five counties surrounding the cities of Reno and Carson City.
Since it was felt that the northern half of Washoe County was not tied closely
with the area it was not included in this preliminary area. Figure 1
shows the location of the Reno Study Area relative to other large cities
in its vicinity.
.. .
Figure 2 represents a more detailed drawing of the Reno Study Area
showing the major urban areas. It should be pointed out that the bound-
aries of these areas do not correspond to city limits, bu.t rather give a
general outline of the major clusters of population. This Study Area
occupies 9,400 square miles and contained an estimated 1969 population
of 161,500 (see Table 2).
.

-------
PACIFIC OCEAN

-------
                   WASHOE COUNTY
                  Reno
                                  STOREY COUNTY /
1  Carson City




 CARSON CITY
                    DOUGLAS COUNTY
                                                   LYON COUNTY
                      CALIFORNIA^   NEVADA
                  15    20
0    S   10   15   M  2,5   30
                  • ill!





                  hilcmetin
            Figure  2   Detailed  Map  of  the Reno  Study Area





-------
GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM
A grid coordinate system, based on the Universal Transverse Mercator
Projection (UTM) was used in the Charlotte Study Area to show the geo-
graphical distribution of emissions. A.map of this grid system is pre-
sented in Figure 3.
The UTM system was chosen due to its advantages over other standard
grid systems such as the Latitude-Longitude and State Plane Coordinate
Systems. The major advantages of this system are that (1) it is contin-
uous across the country and is not hindered by political subdivisions,
(2) the grids are of uniform size throughout the country, (3) it has
world-wide use, and (4) the grids are square in shape--a necessary
feature for use in meteorological dispersion models.
The Universal Transverse Mercator Projection is based upon the metric
system. Each north-south and east-west grid line, as illustrated in
Figure 3, is identified by a coordinate number expressed in meters. Each
point source and grid is identified by the horizontal and vertical coor-
dinates of their geographical center to the nearest 100 meters.
As shown in Figure 3, the Study Area was divided into 62 grids of
three different sizes--25, 100, and 400 square kilometers. Grid zones of
different sizes are used to limit the number of grid zones and yet allow
a satisfactory definition of the geographical gradation of emissions.
The majority of the emissions is usually concentrated in the populated
and industrialized 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 because of the inherent inaccuracies in the data.
Since
o .
only a small percentage of the total emissions occur in rural areas,
larger grid zones are normally used to show the distribution of emissions
in these lightly populated portions of a Study Area.

-------
                                                      4300W
5   f  ?  1,1  1.1  1»   i.i  »,»
                                                                  250QMO
                                       300"          32IX>™         340,00
       Figure 3   Grid Coordinate System for the  Reno  Study Area


-------
EMISSIONS BY CATEGORY
"
For the purposes of compiling the ba:sic. data and emission estimates,
the air pollutant sources were classified into the following five categories:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Stationary fuel combustion
Transportation
Solid waste disposal
Industrial processes
5.
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 institu-
tiona1 establishments.
In the Reno area, natural gas, 1iquified petro1-
eum gas, distillate oil, and residual oil were the major fuels used.
Table 3 presents a su~ry of the fuels consumed in the area and ~ab1e 4
the air pollutant emissions from the combustion of these fuels.
TRANSPORTATION
Three types of transportation sources of air pollution are considered
in this survey--motor.vehic1es, aircraft, and railroads.
Motor vehicles,
which are by far t~e most significant source in this category, are further
subdivided according to type of fue1--gaso1ine or diesel.
o .
Motor Vehicles
More than 3.5 million miles per day were traveled by motor vehicles
in 1969 in the Reno Study Area. In the process, 110 million gallons of

-------
TABLE 3
FUEL CONSUMPTION IN THE RENO STUDY AREA, 1969
       "
       . '
   Steam-   Connnercial- '~
     .
Fuel Jurisdiction Electric Industrial Residential Ins ti tu tional Total
Natural Gas (Mill. CF)    
Carson City   200 650 
Douglas    170 1,400 
Lyon  6,600 870 30 130 
Storey  4,600  10  
Washoe   1,000 2,000 700 
Subtotal  11,200 1,870 2,410 2,730 
Distillate Fuel Oil     
(1000 Gal.)      
Carson City   2,500 100 
      ,
Douglas    no 100 
     -'.,
Lyon    1,100 50 
Storey    40 10 
Washoe    13 ,000 7 ~ r:;e 
Subtotal    16,750 " 
Residual Fuel Oil     
(1000 Gal.)      
Carson City    200 
Douglas     100 
Lyon  10   50 
Storey  20    
Washoe   1,000  6,500 
Subtotal  30 1,000  6,850 
     .
LPG (1000 Gal.)     
Carson City  NA 1,000 NA .
Douglas   NA 1,100 30 
Lyon   NA 1,300 NA 
Storey   NA 50 NA 
Washoe   NA 2,400 NA 
Subtotal   NA 5,850 30 

-------
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY FUEL COMBUSTION SOURCES
1969 (Tons/Year\
v
  SuI fur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Fuel User Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Natural       
Industrial N 20 N N 200 
Steam-Electric N 80 N N 2,180 
Residential N 20 N N 140 
Commercial-      
Institutional N 30 N N 170 
LPG       
Residential N N N N 120 
Commerci~l-      
Institutional N N N N N 
Fuel Oil       
Industrial 140 10   40 
Steam-Electric N N N N N 
Residential 560 70 20 30 100 -
Commercial-      
Insti tutiona 1 1,190 130 ]0 10 .510 
TOTAL  1,890 360 30 40 3,460 
N = Negligible
c'

-------
~:~;

~:
~
gasoline and 10 million gallons of diesel fuel were consumed for highway
purposes for the year 1969. Table 5 shows the miles of travel for gas-
oline and diesel vehicles for each county in the Study Area. Emissions
from motor vehicles and all other transportation sources are summarized
in Table 6.
Aircraft
Table 7 shows the air traffic activity at the main airport 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 7. 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. Emis-
sions at cruise altitude (above 3,500 feet) are not of concern in an
emission inventory.
Railroads
Railroad operations (mainly locomotive) consume about 1.5 million
gallons of diesel fuel per year within the Study Area. This quantity
is about 85 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 railroads in the Reno area.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Approximately 235,000 tons of refuse was generated during 1969
within the Study Area. Table 8 presents a solid waste balance for the
Reno Study Area, showing the various methods of disposal and the quantities
disposed of by each method. Table 9 summarizes the air pollutant emissions
from this disposal of refuse.
. .

-------
TABLE 5
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL FOR MOTOR VEHICLES IN THE RENO STUDY
AREA, 1969 (Vehicle Miles/Day'
v
u
Jurisdiction
Gasoline Vehicle Miles Diesel Vehicle Mil e s Total
230,000 32,000  262,000
180,000 20,000  200,000
185,000 30,000  215,000
170,000 2,000  172 ,000
2,630,000 50,000  2,680,000
3,395,000 134 ,000  3,529,000
Douglas
Carson City
Lyon
Storey
Washoe
TOTAL
C .

-------
TABLE 6
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES, 1969
(Tons/Year'
..,
 Su 1 fur Partic- Carbon Hydro - Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbonfJ Oxides
Road Vehicles     
Gasoline 370 500 126,200 9,070 5,260
Diesel 190 540 290 660 1,090
Evaporative    5,200 
Subtotal 560 1,040 126,490 14,930 6,350
Aircraft     
.Tet N 80 120 140 70
Piston N N 480 90 20
Subtotal N 80 600 230 90
Railroads 30 90 50 100 170
GRAND TOTALa 590 1,210 127,100 15,300 6,600
N = Negligible
a = Totals have been rounded.
- ..

-------
TABLE 7
AIRPORT ACTIVITY AT THE MAJOR AIRPORT IN THE STUDY AREA
(Number of Flights for 1969'
v
Type Engine
Number of Flights
Conventional .Tet
7,800
11 , 000
5,900
Fan Jet
Piston
TOTAL
24,700

-------
"'''''''..;.~
TABLE 8
SOLID WASTE BALANCE FOR THE RENO STUDY AREA, 1969 (Tons/Year'
  Total Refuse On-Site Landfill or   Open Burning 
 Jurisdiction Generated Incineration Non-Burning Dump Dump On-Site Auto Body Agricultural
 Carson City 22,500 2,200 18,300 N 2,000 NA NA
 Douglas 9,500 1,000 7,500 N 1,000 NA NA
 Lyon 12,000 1,200 9,000 N 1,800 NA NA
 Storey 1,000 100 700 N 200 NA NA
 Washoe 190,000 19,000 145,700 N 25,000 50 250
N        
0 TOTAL 235,000 23,500 181,200 N 30,000 50 250
N. = There are no dumps that burn as standard practice. Some of the non-burning dumps catch fire occassionally
but the quantity of refuse disposed of by this burning is negligible.

NA = Information not available or not. reported.
, .
"

-------
TABlE 9
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL, 1969
(Tons/Year\
<::>
 Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Incineration     
Municipal     
On-Site 20 120 520 10 40
Subtotal 20 120 520 )0 40
Open Burning     
On-Site 30 160 760 80 60
Dump N N 10 N N
Suhtota 1 30 160 770 80 60
GRAND TOTAL 50 280 1,290 90 100
N = Negligible
u -

-------
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS LOSSES
}'
.
Emissions from industrial process losses are shown in Table 10.
Parti-
culate emissions from the mineral products industry are the only significant
source of air pollution from this category.
.,{/
EVAPORATIVE LOSSES
Three source categories were considered for evaporative losses--
automobiles, gasoline storage and handling, and the consumption of solvents.
The hydrocarbon emissions from all sources by evaporative losses are shown
in Table 11.
Automobiles
Automobile evaporation losses include gas tank and carburetor evap-
oration 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 per-
cent of the automobiles were not equipped with PCV valves.
Gasoline Storage and Handl~~
There are four major points (excluding evaporation from the motor
vehicle\ of hydrocarbon emissions in the storage and handling of gasoline.
There are:
1.
2.
Breathing and filling losses from storage tanks
3.
Filling losses

Filling losses
stations.
from loading tank conveyances
from loading underground storage tanks at service
4.
Spillage and filling losses in filling automobile gas tanks at
service stations.
Approximately 110 million gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel were
stored in the Study Area in 1969. The evaporative losses from this

-------
TABLE 10
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
\.
'-
o
Type Industry
Emissions
Mineral Products
Asphalt Batching
Cement
Diatamaceous Earth
170

14,600

3,740
. ; 730
Mining Operations
Rock Crushing
Sand and Gravel
9,530'
4,840
TOTAL
33 ,61 ()
oJ "

-------
'?
\.
,..I-.o;'O\.a.""'""
TABLE 11
HYDROCARBON EM1:SSIONS FROM EVAPORATIVE LOSS SOURCES, 1969
(Tons/Year'
,
.
"'
"
Source Category
Emissions
Gasoline Storage
Dry Cleaning
Automobile
Miscellaneous Solvent Consumption
and Handling
1,610

320

5,200
410
TOTAL
7,540

-------
storage and the subsequent handling accounted for 21 percent of the total
evaporative losses.
'.
\.,
()
Consumption of Solvents
This category included the consumption of solvents at dry cleaning
plants, and the miscellaneous use of solvents by industries, small cornmer-
cial establishments and domestic units.
The consumption of solvents by
these categories accounted for 5 percent of the hydrocarbon emissions from
evaporative losses.
",
~ .
-

-------
EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION
TIe 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 12
through 16.
26
~
~
'-'
..
, ::
, , . ,~~. .

-------
TABLE 12
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN CARSON CITY, 1969
(Tons/Year)
,
<.
t
   Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category  Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
--,--~---    
Transportation      
Road Vehicles  50 100 6,000 540 440
Other  N N N N 
Subtotal  50 100 6,000 540 440
Stationary Fuel      
Combustion      
Industry  N N N N N
Steam-Electric  N N N N N
Residential  80 10 N N 30
Connnercial and      
Institutional  30 JO N N 50
Subtotal  110 20 N N 80
Refuse Disposal      
Incineration  N 10 50 N N
Open Burning  N 20 80 30 10
Subtotal  N 30 130 30 10
Process   910 N N 
Evaporative Losses    430 
GRAND TOTAL  160 1,060 6,130 1,000 530
a = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included only under evaporative losses.
<

-------
~.'
II,
:".;
"
I
TABLE 13
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN DOUGLAS COUNTY, 1969
(Tons/Year'
.'
  Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Transportation     
Road Vehicles 70 160 6,130 620 610
Other  N N N N N
Subtotal  70 160 6,130 620 610
Stationary Fuel     
Combustion      
Industry  N N N N N
Steam-Electric     
Residential N N N N 10
Commercial and     
Institutional 20 20 N N 90
Subtotal  20 20 N N 100
Refuse Disposal     
Incineration N N 20 N N
Open Burning N ]O 40 10 N
Subtotal  N 10 60 10 N
Industrial Process : 730   
Evaporative Losses a   500 
GRAND TOTAL  90 920 6,190 1,130 710
a = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included only under evaporative losses.

-------
  TABLE 14 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN LYON COUNTY, 1969
 -     (Tons/Year'   
"         
oc:.         
     Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- a Nitrogen
  Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
  Transportation      
  Road Vehicles 60 150 4,930 520 520
  Other   N N N N N
  Subtota 1   60 150 4,930 52.0 520
  Stationary Fuel      
  Combustion        
  Industry   N 10 N N 90
  Steam-Electric N 50 N N 1,290
  Residential  40 N N N 10
  Commercial and      
  Institutional 10 N N N 10
  Subtotal   50 60 N N 1,400
  Refuse Disposal      
  Incineration N 10 30  N
  Open Burning N 10 80 30 10
  Subtotal   N 20 110 30 10
  Industrial Process  23,670   
  Evaporative Losses     410 
  GRAND TOTAL   no 23,900 5,120 960 1,930
~          
  a = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included only under evapordtive losses.
~ .         
 ~         

-------
TABLE 15
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN STOREY COUNTY, 1969
(Tons/Year\
  SuI fur Partic- Carbon Hydro - a Nitrogen
Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons  Oxides
Transportation         
Road Vehicles 20 30   5,130 400  280 
Other  N N   N N  N 
Subtotal  20 30   5,130 400  280 
Stationary Fuel         
Combustion          
Industry  N N   N N   N
Steam-Electric N 30   N N  900
Residential N N   N N   N
Commercial and         
Institutional N N   N N   N
Subtotal  N 30   N N  900
Refuse Disposal         
Incineration N N   N r   N
Open Burning N N   10 u   N
Subtotal  N N   10 N   N
Industrial Pro cess         
Evaporative Losses      320   
GRAND TOTAL  20 60   5,140 720  1,180
a = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included only under evapoIQlive losses.
30
,

-------
 TABLE 16 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN WASHOE COUNTY, 1969
~    (Tons/Year~    
(;        
~        
:.>        
   Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- a Nitrogen
 Source Category Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons  Oxides
 Transportation      
 Road Vehicles 360 590 104,330 7,650  4,500
 Other  30 160 650 330  260
 Subtotal  390 750 104,980 7,980  4,760
 Stationary Fuel      
 Combustion       
 Industry  140 20 N N  140
 Steam-Electric      
 Residential 440 70 10 20  200
 Commercial-      
 Institutional 1,130 130 10 10  530
 Subtotal  1,710 220 20 30  870
 Refuse Disposal      
 Incineration 20 100 420 10  30
 Open Burning 30 130 560 10  40
 Subtotal  50 230 980 20  70
 Industrial Process  8,3.00    
 Evaporative Losses    5,880  
 GRAND TOTAL 2,150 9,500 105,980 13,910  5,700
a = Evaporative losses from motor vehicles included only under evaporative losses.
..

-------
EMISSIONS BY GRID
For the purpose of defining the geographical variation of air pollutant
emissions in the Study Area, the resulting emissions were apportioned on
.
..
the grid coordinate system.
The emissions were divided into two source
groups--point and area sources.
Fifteen point sources are identified
individually with respect to location and emissions.
Each of these
point sources emitted more than 50 tons per year of any pollutant.
Table 17 presents the emissions of the fifteen point sources in the
. t'
area.
Each source is identified by source category, grid number and
"0'
horizontal and vertical coordinates.
The emissions of sulfur oxides,
particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides are
shown for an average summer day (Tune, July, August), an average winter
day (December, January February' and an average annual day.
presents the method of calculating these three averages.
Area sources are sources of emissions that are significant by them-
The appendix
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 sources have been added to that for point sources to obtain total
emissions from all sources by grid, as shown in Table 18.
The
lissions
from all sources are also shown for an annual average, winter aid summer
day.

-------
"
(,
,~
Co
t;
    TABLE 17   SUMMARY OF AIR PO~~UTANT EMISSIONS FROM POINT SOURCES     
           TONS/DAY        
      SOX   PART   CO  HC   HOX 
 ID GR He ve S w A S W A S W A S W A S w A
 2 20 2666 43814 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.39 7.39 7.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 4 22 2980 43830 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 0.07 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.9:i 1.90 2.3:i
 4 22 2990 43840 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.11 0.10
 2 23 3045 43890 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.01 40.02 40.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.25 0.22
 2 23 3070 43870 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 2 24 2450 43790 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 2 24 2450 43780 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.00 10.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 2 27 2614 43782 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.92 4.93 4.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01
-'                   
 2 27 2649 43793 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.55 1.55 1.55 0.00 0.00 0.00
 7 27 2619 43752 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.21 0.21 0.21 1.65 1.65 1.65 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.24 0.24 0.24
 2 45 2672 43374 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.50 1. SO 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
'"                   
'" ,~ 45 2665 43379 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00.,0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 2 51 2970 43270 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.00 ?pO 2000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
 2 52 3090 43120 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.60 24.60 24.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.02

-------
   TABLE 18  SUMMARY OF AIR POL.L.UTANT EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCES      
       TONS/DAY         
    SOX   PART   CO   He   NOX 
 GRID AREA S W A S W A S \II A S \II A S \II II
 1 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
 2 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 3 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 4 154.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.1 3.1 3.4 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2
 5 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
 6 154.4 0.0 0.0 0_.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
 1 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 8 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 2.3 2.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2
 9 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.6 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
 10 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 11 154.4 0.0 o.e o.e 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.4 1.9 2.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
U> 12 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
.po
 13 9.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 701 5.8 6., 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4
 14 9.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 5.0 4.1 4.6 0.1 0.6 ,0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3
 15 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0., 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 16 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 11 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 18 9.6 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 14.9 12.2 13.6 2.0 1.1 1.8 0.8 0.9. 0.9
 19 9.6 0.1 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.3 30.4 24.9 21.1 3., 3.0 3.2 1.2 104 1.3
 20 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 21 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 22 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.8 1., 1.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 3.2 2.1 2.6
 23 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 40.4 40.4 40.4 7.8 6.4 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.9
 24 38.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 10.5 10.4 10.4 3.9 3.2 3.5 0.6 0.' 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3
--

-------
  (C              " 
               ;; 
               ....  
. .       TABLE 18 (Cont.)         
 25 9.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 6.6 5.6 6.2 1.0 o.e 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4
 26 9.6 . 0.7 5.4 3.2 1.1 1.6 1.4 130.7 107.2 119.0 15.5 13.1 14.3 5.4 6.e 6.2
 27 9.6 0.3 1.6 1.1 5.6 5.7 5.7 62.8 51.7 57.2 9.0 7.9 8.5 2.7 3.0 2.9
 28 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 2.7 3.0 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1
 29 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
 30 9.6 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 6.4 5.2 5.6 0.8 0.7 0.7. 0.3 0.3 0.3
 31 9.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 6.7 5.5 6.1 0.8 0.7 o.e 0.3 0.3 0.3
 32 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 e.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 33 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 3.6 4.0 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2
 34 154.4 001 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 10.5 6.6 9.6 1.5 1.2 1.3 0.7 0.6 0.6
 35 36.6 b.o 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 6.7 5.5 6.1 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.4
 36 36.6 O.C 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 37 313.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 38 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 12.1 9.9 11.0 1.7 1.4 1.5 0.7 0.5 0.6
 .39 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
.... 40 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
VI                 
 41 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 5.7 4.6 5.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.5
 42 36.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 e.l 0.1 3.7 3.1 3.4 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3
 43 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0..0 0.0 1.0 0.6 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
 44 38.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 12.0 9.9 10.9 109 1.6 1.7 0.9 1.3 1.1
 45 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 .5 2.5 2.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 46 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 47 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
 48 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.e 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
 49 154.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 9.3 7.6 8.5 1.6 1.3 1.5 0.9 .1.6 1.3
 50 154.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 2.7 2.3 2.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3
 51 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2. ° 2.0 2. ° 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
 52 154.4 0.0 0.2 0.1 24.9 24.8 24.9 2.9 2.4 2.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 4.5 3.0 3.9

-------
       TABLE 18 (Cant.)        
54 154.4 0.0 0.0 O.C 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.4 2.8 301 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3
55 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
56 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1
57 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
58 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
59 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
60 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 001 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
61 a4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
62 154.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.C 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL  5.3 14.5 10.2 96.7 97.3 97.3 389.6 320.5 355.1 55.6 47.7 51.7 31.3 30.9 31'4
1.01

-------
}
(, .
\
."
"
L
~ .
REFERENCES
1.
Ozolins, Guntis and Raymond Smith, Rapid Survey Techniques for
Estimating Community Air Pollution Emissions. DREW, PRS, October 1966.
2.
Duprey, R.L., Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, United
States, DREW, PRS, 1968.

-------
-j .
..:1
..~~~~
: -'1
, ,
,', J
, :' ,~
",:,' ~
,- I
" \
'1
, '
.,1
,j
.1
. ",\
'...

<:,,'>'M
. .,
. ~"'.'..:.' .:.::'.j." .
. ,':
, "J
.:. '!
.: .,. -'''.J
"',
.',"
....',

:~'.j
..-
. . . I
.,
. '. ~I
. . ",.'
. . .'. ,,:: ~::';~:'.:{,~
/ ;
. '';'''.:
,,' .,'
- '..
. . ::-.~ ~
. ,- .
"

",' .::1
, ,
. ':':i
, ,
, ,
,
APPENDIx A
METHOD FOR CALCULATING SUMMER, WINTER AND ANNUAL
AVERAGE EMISSIONS FOR FUEL CONSUMPTION IN STATIONARY SOURCES
'YEARLY AVERAGE (A)
A a Fuel Consumed x Emission Factor (E. F. )
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 a:\d 85 percent
for process heating. From this information, the annual
,average emission for carbon monoxide would be the following:
.,
A = 100,000 Tons/year x 3 lbs. CO/Ton coal
365 Days/year x 2,000 lb~/Ton
A = 0.41 Ton/Day
.,
WINTER AVERAGE (W)
.
..
Winter DeRree Days
Total Degree Days
% fuel Used
for space heating
W = Fuel Consumed x E.F.
Days of Winter Operation
x
x
+ Fuel Consumed x E.F.  % Fuel used for process heating
365  x
II = 0°.000 x 2,800  0.15  100,000  0.8~ 3
 90 x 4,800 x + 365 x 2,000
W = 0.49 Ton/Day
SUMMER AVERAGE (S)
s = Fuel Consumed x E.F.
Days of Summer Operation
Summer Degree Days
Total Degree Days
% Fue: Used
for space heating
x
x
..
Fu e 1 Con surned x E.F.  ..     
+ 365  x % Fuel used for process heating  
S = ~OO,OOO  0    100,000 x 0.8j 3 
x  x 0.15 +  "
90  4,800 365 2,000 
S = 0.3J Ton/ Day    . tift.   .

-------
APPENDIX B
METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS
\
\


,
I
1
~,
, !~      
'.      
t Hu1 tip1y ~. To Obtain
 Feet   0.3048 Meters
 Hiles   1609 Heters
 Square Feet 0.0929 ~quare meters
 Square Hiles 2.59 Square kilometers
 Pounds  453.6 Grams 
 Pounds  453.6/104 Tons (metric)
 Tons (metric) 1. 103 Tons (short)
 Tons (short) 907.2 Ki 10grams
 Tons (short) .9072 Tons (metric)
 To Obtain ~ Divide
.
u
~'
I'

-------