AIR  POLLUTANT EMISSION
                  FOR
    MEMPHIS  METROPOLITAN AREA
      U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
               Public Health Service
             Environmental Health Service

-------
, ,- '."ioJ!~'
I.
.
. .
. ,~
!"
, ,
01
c"
,
"
Office of Air Programs Publication No. APTD-0882
""
.

-------
  AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION INVENTORY
 FOR THE MEMPHIS  METROPOLITAN AREA
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE
               Public Health Service
 Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
      National Air Pollution Control Administration
                                                        r

-------
  MEMPHIS METROPOLITAN AREA. AIR POLLUTANT
            EMISSION INVENTORY
                Prepared by:
             Michael J. McGraw
  U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
            PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Services
   National Air Pollution Control Administration
    Division o£...Air Quality and Emission Data
           Durham, North Carolina
             September, 1969

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                           Page
PREFACE	   1
INTRODUCTION	   3
SUMMARY OF RESULTS	   4
STUDY AREA	   7
TOPOGRAPHY	  12
GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM	  13
EMISSIONS BY CATEGORY	  15
  Fuel Combustion in Stationary Sources	  17
    Emissions from Fuel Combustion	  17
    Data Sources	  17
  Transportation	  19
    Road Vehicles	  19
    Aircraft		  21
    Railroads	;...  21
  Solid Waste Disposal	  21
  Industrial Process Losses	  22
  Evaporative Losses.....	 ..  22
EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION. .			'.  32
EMISSIONS BY GRID			  36
EMISSIONS DENSITIES BY GRID	  43
REFERENCES	  49
APPENDIX	  50

-------
Table 1


Table 2

Table 3


Table 4

Table 5


Table 6

Table 7

Table 8


Table 9

Table 10

Table 11

Table 12


Table 13

Table 14

Table 15

Table 16

Table 17

Table 18

Table 19
           LIST OF TABLES

                                                    Page

Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions in Memphis
S tudy Area	  6
Area and Population Characteristics, 1967.
10
Annual Fuel Consumption in Political Subdivisions of
of the Memphis Study Area	16
Sulfur and Ash  Content of Fuels.
16
Air Pollutant Emissions From Combustion of Fuels in
Stationary Sources	18

Vehicle Miles of Travel for Road Vehicles	20

Air Pollutant Emissions from Transportation Sources.. 24

Air Traffic Activity at Memphis Metropolitan and
Millington Naval Airports	;	25

Air Traffic Activity by Engine Type	26

Solid Waste Balance for Memphis Study Area	27

Air Pollutant Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal.... 28

Selected Manufacturing Establishments in Memphis
Study Area	'.	29

Air Pollutant Emissions from Industrial Processes.... 30

Air Pollutant Emissions from Evaporative Losses	31

Summary of Emissions in Crittenden County.	33

Summary of Emissions in DeSoto County	 . .	34

Summary of Emissions in Shelby. County	35

Summary of Point Source Emissions by Season	38

Summary of Emissions from all Sources by Season	40

-------
                       LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                 Page
Figure 1    Map of the State of Tennessee Showing the Memphis
            Study Area	  8
Figure 2    Detailed Map of Memphis Study Area	  9
Figure 3    Population Density for Memphis Study Area, 1968	 11
Figure 4    Grid Coordinate System for Memphis Study Area	14
Figure 5    Point Source Locations	37
Figure 6    Sulfur Oxides Emission Density Map	 44
Figure 7    Particulate Emission Density Map	45
Figure 8    Carbon Monoxide Emission Density Map	46
                                                                  47
Figure 9    Hydrocarbon Emission Density Map	
Figure 10   Nitrogen Oxides Emission Density Map	48

-------
                       ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

     We acknowledge with appreciation the many contributions of
cooperating agencies in the gathering of the data for this report.
In particular, we are grateful for the use of data and personnel
assistance furnished by the following:

     1.  Memphis and Shelby County Health Department
     2.  Arkansas Pollution Control Commission
     3.  Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Commission.

-------
., '
PREFACE
This report which ~cesents the emissions inventory of the
Memphis Metropolitan area is another in a series of studies out-
lining the sources and emissions of air pollutants for major
metropolitan areas in the country. These reports provide esti-
mates of total emissions of oxides of sulfur, oxides of nitrogen,
hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and particulate ,matter.
The emissions
i
I '
of these pollutants are delineated with respect to source type, sea-
son of the year as well as their geographical distribution within
the area.
These surveys are also intended to determine the present
'"
level of emissions and status of their control.
The general procedure for these surveys is based on the rapid
survey technique. The Study Area is divided into grid zones that
serve as the basis for locating sources and reporting their emissions.
All sources of pollutants are divided into two subgroups - point and
area sources. Sources that emit large quant~ties of air pollutants
are considered indiv:l,dually and located' specifically within the area.
This latter group which generally contains about fifty to one hundred
sources typically includes large industries, power plants, arid central
refuse burning facilities.
The remaining multitude of sources are con-
sidered collectively as area sources and their emissions are reported
as totals for grid zones.
This category includes motor vehicles, home
heating, smaller industries, on-site refuse burning, etc.
The emissions
" ,
in both ca~es are expressed in terms of tons of'poll~tants ror an'
averaGe 'annual,su~~and~~nter~day~
Emissions for the most,part are estimated using,various indicators
of pollutant emissions and average emission factors that are related to
these. This means, that information and data are collected on fuel con-
i
......
sumption, refuse burning rates, vehicle miles and gasoline consumption,
as well as various production data. ' These are then translated into emis-
sion,estimates by use of average emission factors.
These factors, for
the most part, represent average emission rates for a particular industry
- 1 -
, ~'~. . . c-;. '-.-"~ -

-------
#,
or fuel type.
Because of the inherent difference in type of equip-
ment, operating rates, control equipment, and efficiency of operation
among the plants and fuel users within a given category, the applica-
tion of the emission factors to any individual plant or even a smaller
number of similar plants or processes may result in a'discrepancy'
between the actual and the estimated emissions.
However, the estimates
of total pollutants from all sources in the study area should be re~sonably
accurate since the emission factors are based on average conditions.
.~
. ;h.
-------
I ,
.,
INTRODUCTION
. .
The information and data presented in this report were gathered
in cooperation with the acknowledged state and local agencies during
a survey conducted in June 1969.
The data obtained in this study is,
for the most part, representative of 1967 and emission estimates pre-
sented herein should be considered as showing the conditions during
1967.
For purposes of this survey, a Study Area consisting of three
counties surrounding the city of Memphis was selected. 'This entire
area covers some 1,800 square miles and included a 1967 population
of about 835 thousand people.
The Study Area was subdivided into
I
I
I
f.,
63 grid zones ranging in size from 25 square kilometers in the heavily
populated and industrialzied areas to 100 square kilometers in the
outlying areas.
Any individual source which had emissions of anyone pollutant
greater than 0.5 ton per average annual day was classified as a
point source and located specifically in the aforementioned grid
zones. Thirty-five individual sources fall into this classification
and the remaining single sources were added to the area sources and
reported as grid totals.
""
- 3 -

-------
."
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
An estimated 641,000 tons of the' five major. pollutants are
emitted annually in the Study Area.
The breakdcwn of these emis-
sions by type of pollutant and source category are summarized in
Table 1. The. following is a brief summary of pollutant emissions.
as presented in Table 1.
1967 Total = 77,600 Tons
.Sulfur Oxides
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
Solid Waste Disposal
Industrial Processes
2.1%
0.4%
70.2%
4.5%
0.1%
22.7%
.....
Utility Power Plants
Industrial Fuel Consumption
Particulates
1967 Total = 34,000 Tons
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
7.9%
3.5%
Fuel Combustion
Industrial
Residential
Commercial
1.8%
0.6%
0.3%

44.1%
11. 8%
30.0%
Utility Power. Plants
Solid Waste Disposal
Industrial Process
,"'
Carbon Monoxide
1968 Total = 401,000 Tons
Indu~trial Processes
79.8%
3.5%
3.1%

13.6%
Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
Solid Waste Disposal
- 4 -

-------
I-
I
.,
,.
A
Hydrocarbons
1967 Total = 85,400 Tons
Road Vehicles 29.8%
Other Transportation 3.4%
Solid Waste Disposal 5.5%
Evaporative Losses 56.8%
Industrial Processes 4.5%
"
Nitrogen Oxides
1967 Total = 43,400 Tons
.. Road Vehicles
Other Transportation
42.5%
5.2%
Fuel Combustion
Industrial
Residential
10.7%
3.2%

2~2%
31.4%
4.7%
Commercial
~
Utility Power Plants
Solid Waste Disposal
Industrial Process
0.1%
.
.
~
.
- 5 -

-------
TABLE 1
S~ARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN ~~HIS STUDY AREA
1967 (TONS/YEAR)
4
,.
Source Category SuI fur Partie - Carbon  Hydro- Nitrogen 
Oxides u1ates .- Monoxide  carbons Oxides 
Transportation       
Road Vehicles 1,600 2,700 320,000  25,400 18,400 
Other 300 1,200 14,000  2,900 2,200 
Sub-TQtal 1~900 3,900 334,000  28,300 20,600 
Fuel Combustion in       
Stationary Sources*       
Industry 3,500 600 20  10 4,600 
Steam-Electric       
 Uti Ii ty 54,500 15,000 240  100 13,600 
Residential N 200 N  N 1,350 
r.cI.:mercial and       ,---
 Institutional N 100 N  N 900 
Sub-Total 58,000 15,900 260  110 20,400 ..
Solid-Haste Disposal       
Incineration N 1,900 4,900  2,200 1,100 
Open Burning 100 2,100 7,400  2,500 900 
Sub-Total 100 4,000 12,300  4,700 2,000 
Industrial Processes  17,600 10,000 54,300  3,800 430 
Evapora.tive Losses       
Dry Cleaning -- -- --  1,660 -- 
Automobile -- -- --  15,700 -- t!\ 
Gasoline Storage &    . ' .,  
 Handling -- -- -- .., 31,100 -- 
     . 
Sub-Total --.. -- --  ," 48 ,460 --
TOTAL ALL SOURCES* 77 ,600 34,000 401,000  85,400 43,400 
        -
~l
~~otals have been rounded
N::Negl igib1e
':1 '-'-'

-------
I .
STUDY: AREA
~
. '.
The Study Area for the emission survey of the Memphis Metro-
politan Area consists of three counties--Crittenden County, Arkansas; .
DeSoto County, ~lississippi; and Shelby County, Tennessee. The three-
county area is located in the south western tip of Tennessee and
extends into three states. Figure 1 shows the location of the Memphis
Study Area relative to other large cities in its vicinity.
Figure 2 represents a mpre detailed drawing of the Memphis Study
Area, showing the boundaries of the urban areas of Memphis and West
Memphis. The Study Area occupies 1,840 square miles and contains an
estimated 1967 population of 835,000 which is approximately a 16
percent increase since 1969 (Table 2). The population density map
(Figure 3) shows that the heaviest population is concentrated in and
near the city of Memphis.
~I
rl
~ t
. .
..,
.'
I
-'
- 7 -

-------
MISSOURI
little Rock
o

ARKANSAS
o 50' 100
FSJ~~ -
Scale
Atlanta
.'
Birmingham
.
GEORGIA
MISSISSIPPI
ALABAMA
.Jackson
Figure 1. Map of the state of Tennessee showing the Memphis study area and surrounding cities.
)
~
- 8 -
~~.
)
\
,
,.

-------
I
I
! .,
I 
~ r:
i'
.
J.
f
r
~ .
I
! I '
I ~ ,
. .
(--\
. ,
. , .
. _---:"_---------/"," \

I. .... . I,' --"\ ~'.
, ~t
I. \- . I"

I

I

.

I

,

I

.
I
,
I,
1.----1

.

I

I

I

I

I
I
~
.
I
.
I
,

!
I
~../..,_.
N
(
,
.......
o. .
.,~
Scali 1:250.000
w
- or-"\
---,--______I :'-_---,
:r,
I
I

,

I

I

I

.

I

I

I

,

I

,

I

,

~~ I
t- ~ ,

~~ ~~ . . !
~~ ~ I
ec: ~~,,\\~ ---1~-"NE~~~___--------r ------
.....J:-------- . MISSISSIPI .'
I

.

I

,
I

"

------ I
I .
, I
I .
'I ,.--------.1

,.,."'" . .
.' \ .J"
l/ . '- ~
. ...,... ......,
"-.r" .,.)

-------
TABLE 2.
AREA AND POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS FOR MEMPHI~
STUDY AREA
  Land Area population population
  . (sq. mi.) 1960 1967 Density ( 196 7)
Crittenden County 608 47,600 55,500 91 
DeSoto County 476 23,900 29,500 62 
Sr.e1by County 755 627,000 750,000 993 
Tc:al Study Area 1,839 698,500 835,000 454 
""
<"I
I .
- 10 -

-------
I I
i' 
, 
 t N
 ~
 r
, 0
~~
~
\ 'J
t ' JJ~: .
--- ---,' ( lifJ
- - - , ;......- ',/ . ,~C/ -
I '.. . - - -r "
. I (I \.. ,~~'l----__.__I ~.:





'" ,--.... .....t.... .." ,... . "..,.. < Ir...'.. .'. ,. r.'.. .









,S """"""""''''~''':':':':':':':'''''-'''''''''''';',%.~~«< ::::~':':':':""""""""""":"""':':':':':':) . ~

::t}~::;;:~.:;.iiiti~wi\.'1118:::;.:.i:~~.::.~:-- ~

.,... \i... fa...... .'.....u..... .., ,"...~.""w,wm....


::::;:i:i!f;f~;'~ili~:ii;I!I!!illll!llll!ilili'llilll1llliii!lli11li1j
,if!llj!!llt\II:1jl\II:II\i!\jli~~I~I~;I~
\ .
'"", f'
...r" ....."
',-./-~ .
r

I

I
I

I

I

I

I

I
I
I

I.
L
--"
I

I

I

I

I

I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.

l/
I

I

I
"

L/
Sc8I.I:2'!IO.OOO
POPULA TION DENSITY,
lon/mi2.day'
"
.'"
..,
-----::'""""3
,~........... ..
':J
'\
t
D 0- 30
[J 30 - 60
ill] 60 - 100
[ill 100 - 1,000
m 1,000 - 4,000
r] 4,000 - 7,000
I.
"""   
Figure 3.
Population density for Memphis study area, 1967.
11
...- ... .,-
'~':". '.',

-------
TOPOGRAPHY.
The topography of the Memphis .area varies from the level alluvial
area in east-central Arkansas to the slightly rolling area in north-
western }fiss~ssippi~ The terrain of Shelby ~ounty is relatively flat
with elevations ranging from 200 feet above mean sea level (MSL) along
the Mississippi River t~ 400 feet MSL in southeast Shelby County.
There are no natural obstructions in the Memphis area to hinder the.
movement of weather systems.
Memphis is bounded on the west by the Mississippi River and is
dissected by the Wolf River in the northern part of the city and by
Nonconnah Creek in the southern part. The low areas adjoining Wolf
River and Nonconnah Creek are important topographic features since
some major pollution sources are located in these areas.
-
- 12 -

-------
. -
GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM
Grid coordinates based on the Universal Transverse Mecator
System were used in this, study to show the geographical distribution

, '
of sources and emissions. As shown in Figure 4, the Study Area was
divided into 63 grids of two different sizes - 25 and 100 square
kilometers.
Different size grids are used to limit the number of grid zones
and yet allow a satisfactory definition of geographical gradation of
emissions in areas where the majority of pollution occurs.
For this
I
~
~

.
reason, the 25 square kilometer grids are used in the downtown areas
, and areas of high industrial concentration where the emission densities
would change abruptly within short distances. In areas primarlily rural
in nature, the use of small zones are not as important.
As illustrated in Figure 4 each grid line is identified by a co-
ordinate number. The north-south and the east-west coordinates are
expressed in meters.
'"
t
The point sources in the Study Area are identified by both hori-
zontal and vertical coordinates to the nearest 100 meters. The grids
are identified by the coordinates of their geographical center.
I
I
.,
- 13 -
.', H'~, ',. :'~.
~-"",-".,__",-'.,.r'-

-------
":-
r

I

I

,

I

I

I

I

I

.
I
.
I,
I.
N
~
~~~-
13
21
---1
I

,

I

I

I
.
~
.
I
.
I
,
I
.
I
---
6
14 IS 
 CRITTI9I1 '(0. 
22 2J 24
J6
48
S4
.
L,,1" ...00
I 760000
L/
Sut, I 2~:J.con
--'::r---:-.-=---=-=.-- ------:-....3
.: -T ._-~- ~ --~.2':..~'::".'"
.).- . --- :--'..J
~ ~--:
::-:-~~---
SO
--- --
S6
60
,.....
~
. .-r-,"\
-----~--_...r. ~-~
392°000
10
II
12
     3910000
17  18 19 20 
   SHILl' (0.  
     3900000
26 27 3Z JJ :J4 
30 31    
     3890000
J9 40  46 47 ,
~
u
44
SI
TENNESSEE
iifISSIS"SIPI
388°000
810000
S2
S3
__---e. -
-----
-----
S7
S8
S9
DISOTO (0.
61
u
62
.
I
,---_.i
.r"--
3850000
80C~OO
\ 770000 1a ao
.-"\ ~
""""',-../- ..,i--'
7900C.O
,-
Figure 4. Grid coordinate system for the Memphis study area.
- 14 -

-------
:!'
I
I
f
",
.
I'
L
! ,
f .
,
. ,
[
f
I .
I
I
',.'. ;
,
.
. ,
,.
f
. I

,.

r
!
,
I
'I
I
EMISSIONS BY CATEGORY
For the purposes ~~ compiling the basic data and emission estimates,
the air pollutant sources were classified' into the following five cate-
gories:
1.
2.
3.
4:
5.
Fuel combustion in stationary sources
Transportation
Solid Waste Disposal
Industrial Process Losses
Evaporative Losses
Each of these categories are considered individually in this section
where' data sources are given and methods of calculation are discussed; .
It is important to note that the estimates presented herein are,
in most cases, partial totals.
This stems from the inavailability of
emission factors as well as appropriate production data.
should be viewed with these limitations in mind.
The results
Fuel Combustion in Stationary Sources
Table 3 presents the fuel consumption withi. the Study Area. As
'sh~ in the 'table, natural gas is the primary fu~l used. .Approximately
960 thousand tons of coal, 14 million gallons of fuel oil and 37 billion
cubic feet of natural gas were consumed in the Study Area. The break-
down of fuel consumption by user category and by jurisdiction is also
shown in Table 3.
The steam-electric generating plant within the Study Area consumed
over 99 percent of the total coal utilized by all sources. Industry is
'the other user .of coal consuming less than 1 percent of the total.'
Distillate fuel oil is consumed entirely by the steam~electric
. plant in the ~tudy area while residual oil is used entirel~ in indus-
trial operations.,
Natural gas, for all practical purposes is the only fuel used for
. .

residential home heating. ,There are homes heated by other fuels but
they represent a very small percentage of the total.
Average values for the sulfur and ash contents of the fuels used
are summarized ,in Table 4.4,5
- 15 -

-------
.. -.. -~-----.----~-- ~ ~~-
TAm.E 'I.
MINnA!. FilET. r:ON~,IIr-IPTTON TN pm.TTTr:AT. snrHHVTSTONS
OF TIlE MEMPmS STUDY AREA,
1%7
   Steam-electric  Commercials & 
Fuel Jurisdiction Industry Utilities Residential Institutional Totals
Natural Gas      
Hi Uion Cubic      
Feet/Year Crittenden 680 -- 1,310 410 2,400
 DeSoto 160 -- 120 40 320
 Shelby 35 ,800 21,200 21,400 15,000 93,400
 Totals 36,640 21,200 22 ,830 15,450 %,120
Coal.      
Tons/Year Shelby 6,600 956,000 N N 962,600
 Total 6,(>00 956,000 N. N 962,600
Fuel Oi 1      
1000 gal./Year Shelby 13 ,600 20 N N 13,620
 Total 13 , 600 20 N N l3,620
N = negligible
TABLE 4
SULFUR AND ASH CONTENT OF FUELS, 1967.
Fuel
% Sulfur
% Ash
Distillate Oil
Natural Gas
3.0
3.0
0.2
0.0008
8.7
Coal
Residual Oil
-.
.

-------
1--- --j--_.._-
l
f.
... 
, 
 ..
 !
. I
 t
 t
 .
 ,
.'
I
I
. ,
. I
Emissions from Fuel Combustion
Air pollutant emissions resulting from fuel combustion in station-
ary sources are summarized in Table 5.
The emissions are presented for
industri41, steam-electric utility, residential and commercial--institu-
tional sources.
Emissions from natural gas consumption account for ap-
proximately 28 percent of the total nitrogen oxide emissions and less
than 1 percent of the total for any other pollutant.
Data Sources
Fuel consumption numbers were supplied by the local air pollution
agencies which had obtained these numbers by jurisdiction with a break-
down by industry, residential, commercial.and institutional source
categories. The largest industrial users in each county, as well as the
steam-electric plant were considered individually as single sources.
The balance of the fuel was distributed to the three area source cate-
gories of fuel consumption:
tional and (3) industrial.
(1) residential (2) commercial--institu-
The amount of fuel burned for home heating purposes was calculated
6
using the procedure described in the Rapid Survey Technique. This

method involves' the use of such variables, as total annual degree days,
average number of rooms per dwelling unit, and the number of units
using each type of fuel.
- 17 -

-------
TABLE 5
AIR POLLUTANT ErITSSIONS FROM CO}ffiUSTION OF FUELS IN
STATIONARY SOURCES IN MEMPHIS STUDY AREA
1967 (TONS/YEAR)
Fuel User Category Su lfu r Partie - Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen 
Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides 
Coal Industrial 240 120  10 N  70 
 Steam-Electric 54,500 14,800 240 100 9t500 
 Residential .N N N  N  N 
 Commercia 1 &        
 Institutional        
  'N N N  N  N 
 Tota1:f'r 54,740 14,920 250 100 ' 9 ~~OO 
Fuel Oil Industrial 3,240 130  10  10 560 
 Steam-Electric N N N  N  N 
 Residential N N N  N  N 
 Commercia 1 &        ...
 Institutional        
  N N N  N  N 
         .
 Totals 3,240 130  10  10 560 
Gas Industrial N 330 N  N  3,930 
 Steam-Electric N 160 N  N  4,130 
 Residential N 220 N  N  1,350 
 Commercial &        
 Institutional,        
  N 150 N  N  900 
 Totals N 860 N  N  10,300 
GRA.ND TOTALS * 58,000 15,900 260 110 20,400 
        ..
* Totals have been rounded
N=NegligibLe .
- 18 -

-------
I -
I
I~ . .
I""
[. .
I .
. ,
I
. f
, t
.
, .
Transportation
Four' types of transportation sources of air pollution are considered
in this ;survey--road vehicles, aircraft vessels and ra~lroads. Road
vehicles, which are by far the mOlt significant source of air pollution
in this category, are further subdivided according to type of fuel--
gasoline or diesel.
", Road Vehicles
The'~iles of travel by motor vehicles in the Study Area are sum-
'.
marized in Table 6.
Vehicle mile ,.data for essentially all of the roads in Shelby County
. ,

were supplied by Harland, Bartholemew and Associates for about 600 traf-

, .
fic zones. The vehicle miles were transferred from these traffic zones
onto the previously mentioned grid system.
Vehicle mile data for all major arterials and highways in Crittenden
County were obtained from traffic flow maps supplied b~, the local highway
department. In DeSoto County vehicle mile information was not available
, 7
and thus gasoline consumption was used. to find vehicular emsssions. The
gasoline consumed in DeSoto County was apportioned on a grid basis by
population.
The contribution to the total road vehicle pollution by diesel
powered vehicles was determined by assuming that approximately 3 percent
of the total vehicle miles traveled were by diesel vehicles. This was
. 8
checked by estimating diesel fuel consumption in each county. These
emissions were apportioned on a grid basis by assuming they were pro-
portional to ga8~line emissions.
- 19 -

-------
TABLE 6.
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL FOR ROAD VEHICLES IN MEMPHIS
STUDY AREA PER DAY FOR 1967
 (X 1000) Diesel (X 1000) 
Jurisdiction Gasoline Vehicle Miles Vehicle Mi 1es Total
Crittenden 780  20 800
DeSoto 520  20 540
Shelby 8,900 300 9,200
TOTALS 10,200 340 10,540
..
6
- 20 -

-------
  .~ 
  ,. 
  > 
  ~. 
 . f 
I.   
  f 
  .' 
  ~ 
  . ,
  I
   I.
   f
   t
   f:
   1
 "t  ,
I'   I
 .  
,.
f
I .. .
. ..
I
.. .
\..
.\
I
.
~
i
'Emissiotis from road vehicles are a function of the speed at
which the vehicle travels.
Average speeds ~f 10-20 mph were
assumed for downtown areas; 20-30 mph for the residential areas;
and 30-45 mph for the rural areas.
From all transportation sources, road vehicles accounted for
84 percent of the sulfur oxides. 69. percent of the particulates, 96
percent of the carbon monoxide, 93 percent of the hydrocarbons and
89 percent of the nitrogen oxides. Gasoline powered road vehicles
contributed a greater percent of all pollutants than diesel powered
road vehicles. Emissions from tran~portation sources are summarized
in Table 7.
Aircraft
Table 8 shows the air traffic activity at the two largest air-
ports in the Study Area.
The local air pollution agency contacted
. .
the two. major airports in the Area in order to obtain their flight
data for 1967. The breakdown of all flights at each airport by
engine type is, shown in Table 9.
aircraft accounted for 10 percent
the carbon monoxide. 5 percent of
the nitrogen oxides.
From all transportation sources
of the particulates 4 percent of
the hydrocarbons and 4 percent of
Railroads and Vessels
Railroads consume about 11 million gallons of diesel fuel per
. year in the Study Area. Th~se figures were obtained from the various
railroads in the Study Area. River vessels consume about 3 million
gallons of diesel fuel per year. The air pollutant emissions arising
from railroads and vessel sources are insignificant when .compared to
other transportation sour~es.
Solid Waste Disposal
Approximately 1.-1 million tons of refuse were generated during
1967 in the Study Area. Table 10 presents a solid waste balance for
the Memphis Study Area, showing the various methods' of disposal and
the quantities disposed of by each method. Refuse data for each of
the counties were supplied by each local air pollution agency.
- 21 -
'c"- - '." - --
. ''''''-r-''.' .

-------
Dumps accounted for 61 percent of the total refuse disposed,
open burning dumps 12 percent, wood waste burning 20 percent and
other disposal methods 7 percent.
Table 11 show the air pollutant emissions from solid waste
disposal in the. Memphis
- Study Area.
A total of l2.30~ tons of
carbon monoxide. 4.000 tons of particulates 4.700 tons of hydro-
carbons.and 2,000 tons nitrogen oxides were emitted from solid waste
disposal practices.
The largest sources were five open burning dumps
. .
one auto body incinerator, one commercial incinerator. and one wood
waste incinerator in Shelby County and one open burning dump in
DeSoto County
Industrial Process Losses
Table 12 shows selected manufacturing establishments in the
. 9
area by county for 1963. It may be noted from the table that
Shelby County accounts for the largest s~ngle percentage of every
..
type of manufacturing.
At least eighty-five percent of the estab-
lishments of any type are located in Shelby County.
industrial process losses are shown in Table 13.
Emissions from
Evaporative Losses
Three source categories are considered for evaporative losses--
solvent evaporation from dry cleaning plants, gasoline storage and
handling losses. and evaporative losses from automobiles.
Organic solvents emitted from dry cleaning plants were deter-
mined by assuming an emission rate of approximately 4 Ib/yr./capita.10
The resulting emissions were apportioned onto grids by population.
Automobile evaporative losses were calculated from vehicle
mile data and the emissions apportioned onto grids using the same
methods as for road vehicles.
Approximately 400 million gallons of gasoline were stored in
.Shelby County in 1967. The evaporative losses from this storage and
- 22 -

-------
1---
I
~

!
. .
the subse~uent handling of the gasoline were apportioned onto
grids based on the location of the largest bulk terminals.
i
. 1
Evaporative losses from automobiles accounted for approxi-
mately 32 percent of the total hydrocarbon emission~dry cleaning
plants 4 percent and gasoline storage and handling 64 percent
(See Table 14),
f.
I


i
\
t

. I

~
, i
i
. .
1
- 23 -
.. ".", ,...".,_',-,~,.._-,...~." -"'; ~'".

-------
TABLE 7.
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES
IN MEMPHIS STUDY AREA, 1967 (TONS/YEAR)
I

/.
I
  Sulfur Par tic-  Carbon Hydro - Nitrogen
Sources  Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Road. Vehicles     
.Gasoiine  . 1, 100 1,500 319,400 23,900 15,900
Evaporation, -- -- -- 15,700 --
Diesel  500 1,200 700 1,500 2,500
Sub-Total  1,600 2,700 320,100 41,100 18,400
Aircraft      
Jet  N 350 400 100 240
Piston  N 50 13,100 1,900 . 480
Turboprop  N 'N N N N
Sub-Total  N 400 13,500 2,000 720
Railroad  210 600 320 740 1,200
Vessels  50 150 80 190 310
Total All Sources* 1,900 3,900 334,000 44,000 20,600
.
N = Negligible
*Tota1s have been rounded
.".. "--'. .
- 24 -

-------
.
~a ---
TABLE 8.
AIR TRAFFIC ACTIVITY AT MEMPHIS METROPOLITAN AND MILLINGTON

NAVAL AIRPORT FOR 1967
\
J
. ,
 Memphis Metropolitan   Millington Naval 
 "~ t      
 0iItinerant! Operations** Local Opera tions ItlineranN Operations Local Operations
Air Carrier 78,.900  --  --  --
General Aviation 122,200 72,800  --  --
Military 4,500  3,100 60,000  *
TOTALS 205,600 75,900 60,000  *
.j
r r
* Included under ltineranf operations
** Operation-take off or landing
- 2S -

-------
TABLE 9.
AIR TRAFFIC ACTIVITY BY ENGINE TYPE FOR
MEHPHIS STUDY AREA 1967
 Engine Type Number of Fligh ts-Jc 
1 Engine Jet 10,500 
2 Engine Jet 20,700 
3 Engine Jet 5,700 
4 Engine Jet 4,000 
2 Engine TurboRrop 1,600 
4 Engine Turboprop 1,200 
1 Engine Piston 76,700 ~
2 Engine Piston 47,200 
4 Engine Piston. 3,100 
TOTALS
170,700
* Flight combination take off and landing
- 26 -

-------
. .-
.
.... .
~------~
.--------
--;"-.''-'"
~ ~--,..."'-
- .~...._-,.
------. -
- i
TABL~ 10. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL IN MEMPHIS,
STUDY AREA 1967 (TONS/YEAR)
, !
: t
i .-.!
;
j-
  Total Refuse Incineration  .Open Burning Auto Body Wood Waste
  Generated On-Site Municipal Dumps On-Site Dumps Burning Burning
Crittenden County 55,000 -- 15',000 -- 8,000 32,000 -- --
DeSoto Coun~y 37,000 -- -- -- 6,800 27,200 3,000 --
Shelby .County : ~ ,000',000 19,000 -- 667,000 -- 74,000 17,000 223,000
TOTALS  1,092,000 19,000 15,000 667,000 14,800 133,200 20,000 223,000
    .     
i -.
I' .
, -
-',
- 27 -

-------
TABLE 11.
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM SOLID-WASTE DISPOSAL IN
MEMPHIS STUDY AREA, 1967 (TONS/YEAR)
 Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro - Nitrogen
Ca tegory Oxides ulates Monoxide carbons Oxides
Incineration     
Hunicipal N 130 80 N 10
On-Site N 170 420 10 50
Wood Waste N 1,680 4,400 2,230 1,080
Sub-Total N 1,980 4,900' 2,240 1,140
Open Burning     
Dumps 90 1,060 5,660 2,000 730
On -Site ,N 120 630 220 90
Auto Body 10 920 1,150 270 70
Sub-Total 100 2,100 7,440 2,490 890
GRAND TOTAL* 100 4,100 12,300 4,700 2,000
'.
- 28 -

-------
~
.
. I

I
.' I
f
I
. I
i'
. i
.,

J
I
1
,
TABLE 12.
SELECTED MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE
MEHPHIS STUDY AREA
I
I.
f
 Type of  Number of Estl blishments b, County 
Establishments Crittenden DeSoto Shelby Study Area
Food' & Tobacco 1 1 76 78 
Paper & Printing 2 -- 38 40 
Chemicals, Petroleum     
Products  -- -- 39 39 
Metal Production 5 -- 40 45 
Lumber Production 2 2 SS 59 
Stone, Clay & Glass 1 -- 15 16 
TOTALS   11 3 263 277 
- 29 -
..,. '._._~~.~-~.",~- ~
. "
Po' -. -;\-:~-'-'.;"'~--";~'~---" ;--;-... .. '-:.' ,

-------
TABLE 13.
PROCESS LOSS
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM
SOURCES IN THE MEMPHIS STUDY AREA
1967
(TONS/YEAR)
Type of Industry  SOx PART. CO HC NOx 
Refineries  600 -- 19,000 3,800 430 
Gray Iron Foundries  650 9,600   
Lead Smelting  950 210    
Rock Wool Production  100    
Chromium Alloys Production  4,630    
Chemical Plants  16,000 380    
Armnonia Plants   40 25,700   .
Asphaltic Concrete  370    .
Feed & Grain Mills  3,230    
Cotton Ginning   360    
Alfalfa Mills   270    
TOTALS*   17,600 10,200 54,300 3,800 430 
*Tota1s have been rounded.
- 30 -

-------
r--------- -

j
I
...
J
I
. '
. I
I
TABLE 14. HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM
EVAPORATIVE LOSSES SOURCES IN MEMPHIS STUDY AREA
1967 (TONS/YEAR)
Source Category
Hydrocarbons
!

I
i
J
Dry Cleaning Plants

Automobile

Gasoline Storage
& Handling
1,660
15,700
31,100
TOTAL
48,460
I-
'1
f
t
I
I
r
..
. I
- 31 -

-------
I
I
"
.....,
EMISSIONS BY JURISDICTION
" I
" J

,I
In order to detennine which counties are significant'
from an air pollution standpoint, emissions have been sum-
!
marized for each of the three counties.
Table 15, through 17
" ,
present the summary ,of emissions for each county.
The air pollutant emissions are far greater in Shelby
County than in any of the other two counties. Since Shelby
all industry in the Area, this seems reasonable.
Shelby County
II
"~
County is more heavily populated and contains the majority of
accounts for 99 percent of the total sulfur oxides in the Study
Area, 94 percent of the particulates, 88 percent of the carbon
monoxide, 89 percent of the "hydrocarbons, and 93 percent of the
nitrogen oxides.
.t.
- 32 -

-------
TABLE
15
S~}i~RY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN CRITTENDE~ COUNTY
1967 (TONS/YFAR)
l
.. f
,.
,
rurce C~tegory


:ra.TIsporta.tion

Road Vehicles

I Other

Sub-Totals

!
,./
Partic-
ulates
Sulfur
Oxides
120
N
200
N
.120
200
~el Combustion in
~ationary Sources*

Industry

Steam-Electric'
Utility
N
N
--
--
Residential
I .
; Commerc~al and
. Ins ti tu tiona 1

. Sub-Total
N
10
N
N
N
10
~
~olid-Was te Oi sposa 1
~
, Incfneration
, Open Burning'
N
20
130
300

430
Sub-Total
20
ndustria1 Processes
400
700
.
~aporative Losses
t Dry Cleaning
I . .'
i. Au tomobHe
i
--
--
--
-...
i Gasoline Storage &
i Handling.
,

i Sub-Total
--
-..
--
--
I
I
rOTAL ALL SOURCES*
. ,
500
.1,300
-
Carbon
Monoxide
Hydro-
carbons,
Nitrogen
Oxides
21,800
N
21,800
1,800
N
1,400
N

ir,400
1,800
N
N
80
--
--
--
N
N
80
N
N
N
.N
20

180
80
1,700
N
600
10
220

230
1,700
600
700
--
230
--
100
1,200
--
--
--
--
NA
1,300
--
--
--
2l~, 200
3,700
1,800
N=Ne~1igible

NA=Information not available or not reported
* Totals have been rounded
,- --;-~'-"'-'-_. _. ~.<.,
- 33 -

-------
TABLE 16
SU}~RY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN DESOTO COUNTY
1967 (TONS/YEAR)
'"
-'
Source Category   Sulfur partic- Carbon Hydro-  . Ni trogen    
  Oxides u1ates Monoxide carbons Oxides    
:ransportation            
Road Vehicles   ~O 100 16,000 1,300 900    
        -       
O~her    N N N  N N    
Sub -Total    80. 100 16,000 1,300 '900    I
:::e 1 Combustion in           
5tat:ionary Sources           
Inc"..lstry    N N N  N 20    
S:eam-E1ectric Utility -- -- -- -- --    
:\esidentia1   N N N  N 20    
Co::1!l1ercia1 and           . 
Institutional   N N N  N N    
             . 
Sub-Total    N N N  N 40    
Solid-Has te Disposal         ' 
Incineration   N N .N N  N   J 
O';'en Burning   20 400 1,630 550  200  .1 
Sub-Total    20 400 1,630 550  200    
            ,-...   
Industrial Processes -- 20 300 --  --    
   -            
Evaporative Losses           
   ...          I  
Dry Cleaning   -- -- -- 60  --    
Automob:i_l~    -- -- -- 800  --    
            .   
Gasoline S.tonge &          
Handling    -- -- -- NA  --    
Sub -Total       860   .   
   -- -- --  --    
            -'"
TOTAL ALL SOURCES*  100 500 17,900 2,700  1,100    
            -   
N=Negligible
NA=Information not available or not reported
* Totals have been rounded

-------
~ ;
TA'3LE 17
SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN SHELBY COUNTY
1967 (TONS/YEAR)
f

.. I
~
.
turce Ca tegory

J'
rllnspor ta tion

~ Road Vehicles

rOther

\ Sub-Total
!
~el Combustion in
~ationary Sources
. .
Industry

'Steam-Electric Utility
Residential

Commercial and
J Institutional
~ Sub-Total
~lid-Waste Disposal
6.
Incineration
Open Burning
Sub-Total
~dustria1 Processes
I~aporat~ve Losses
Dry Cleaning
Automobile
Gasoline Storage &
Handling

Sub-Total
I
.

fTAL ALL SOURCES*

.
~
Sulfur
Oxides
1,400
300

1,700
3,500'

54,500
N
N
58,000
N
60
60
17,200
--
--
--
--
77,000
N=Negligib1e
* Totals have been rounded
, .
Partie -
ulates
2,400
1,200
3,600
..
...
'0
..
600

15,000
200
100
15,900
1,850
1,400
3,250
9,200
--
--
--
--
32,000
- 35 - .
"-'.. ~.~ '.- -..
. - <. 0 '. "~-' - - .
Carbon
Monoxide
282,200
14,000
296,200
20

240
N
N

260
4,820

4,110
8,930
53,300
--
--
.'
--
--
359,000
Hydro-
carbons
22,300
2,900
25,200
10
100
N
N
110
2,240
1,340
3,580
3,800
1,~OQ.
13 , 700
31,100 .
46,300
79,000
.'
Nitrogen
Oxides
16,100
2,200
18,300
4,500
13,600
1,250
880
20,200
1,130
470
1,600
200
--
--
--
--
40',300

-------
,
EMISSIONS BY GRID
.l-
i
,
For the purpose of modeling the air pollutant emissions
in the Study Area, the resulting emissions were apportioned
on the grid reference system shown in Figure 4.
The emissions of each pollutant were divided into two
source subgroups--point and area sources.
The 3S point sources
were identified. by source category, grid number and horizontal
and vertical coordinates. Figure S shows the location of all'
major point sources in the Study Area. The point sources are.
presented in Tab~e 18, along with emissions of sulfur oxides,
particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and nitrogen .oxides
for an average annual, winter and summer day.
The appendix
presents the method of calculating these three averages.
The emissions from all sources on the annual, winter and
summer basis are shown in Table 19.
The calculation of these
~
t
averages is similar to that. presented in the appendix for point
sources.
,1
.j
!
.
"- 36 -

-------
 i 
 ~ 
 , 
~. 
, " 
i 
r r
I
I  I
 I
 I
I  I
 t
I  .
 I
 I
 I
  .
  \,
  I.
!'

I.

j'
, .
t ;
".
.
c=a....--
. .
- --- ~.
~
FIGURE 5
POINT SOURCE LOCATIONS FOR MEMPHIS
          - -r -~   
      ---______I !...--: 3920000
       10  II  12 I 
        A    I 
           I 
            I 
             3910000
  14 15  17  II  19  20 01 
      .      
  ClITTlllla (0.   .. .  SNElIY CO.   I 
          0  I 
             3900000
  22 23 24  27 32  33  34  
      .       
      .       
      31       
      .    0   
---1           
           3890DO~
I  36      46  47 I 
  -...       I 
I         I 
I    43 44      o! 
    A      
I   0       
I          3980000
41  50 51  S2  53    810000
 .    T~-"NE~~EE ----- ----'- ----....-
~   -----0 tAlSSISSIPI       
.            
\             
.             
I 54  S6 57  sa  S9    
,            
I     DESOTO (0.       
.           
\            
 . .'          
 l.J14 00. 60 61  62      
STUDY ARFA
13
21
63
.r'--
i
____.i
Selt, 1:2SO.000
"
. '80000 \ 770000 1. 0
l/...... f'
. .""" .-",
. ',-./- ~
Xl5,....."""
790000
: .
, c.
. Industry
o Th.1mp
A Incinera tor
A Ai rporl-
5 Steam-Eletric Utili ty
xRefinery
IAuto Body Burning
-. 37 -.:.
3850000
. 800000

-------
TABLE 18
SUNNARY OF POINT SOURCE ENISSIONS BY SEASON FOR THE
MEMPHIS STUDY AREA. 1967 (TONS/ DAY) .
     SO   PART.   CO   HC    NO 
     X             X 
Source Category Grid HC VC S W A S W A S W A S W .A  S \-1 A
Airport 10 . 7860 39160    0.2 0.2 0.2 5.7 5.7 5.7 1.1 1.1 1.1  0.4 0.4 0.4
Industrial 17 7767 39066    12.5 12.5 12.5      -- . --  
Industrial 17 7748 39060 43.5 44.1 43.7 0.8 0.9 0.8        1.2 2~5 1.7
Industrial 17 7756 39075 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 70.4 70.4 70.4     0.8 1.6 1.1
!)Jmp 19 7940 39048    0.3 0.3 0.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.5 0.5 0.5  0.2 0.2 0.2
!)Jmp 20 8046 39074    0.3 0.3 0.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.5 0.5 0.5  0.2 0.2 0.2
Refinery 23 7575 38914 1.0 1.0 1.0           0.6 0.6 0.6
Industrial 23 7573 38941    0,1 0.1 0.1 2.1 2.1 2.1       
Industrial 25 7689 38997    1.3 1.3 1.3 18.7 18.7 18.7       
Auto Body Burning 25 7695 38965    1.4 1.4 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.8 0.4 0.4 0.4  0.1 0.1 0.1
Industrial 25 7691 38962    3.2 3.2 3.2          
Industrial 26 7741 38962       0.9 0.9 0.9       
Industrial 26 7778 38966 0.4 0.8 0.6           0.5 0.9 0.6
Indus trial 29 7683 38919       0.9 0.9 0.9       
Incineration 30 7703 38925    0.2 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.8       
Industrial 30 7702 38906    0.8 0.8 0.8          
Industrial 31 7767 38947 0.5 1.0 0.7           0.4 0.8 0.5
Industrial 31 7758 38923 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4          
LAHUl' 33 7930 38930    0.3 0.3 0.3 1.8 1.8 1.8 0.6 0.6 0.5  0.2 0.2 0.2
Indus'trial 37 7635 38875    1.0 1.0 1.0          
Industrial 38 7664 38865    0.2 0.2 0.2 2.5 2.5 2.5     --  
Refinery 38 7657 38862 1.3 1.7 ,1.4    52.2 52.2 52.2 10.4 10.4 10.4  0.9 1.3 1.1
Incineration 38 7673 38898    0.5 0.5 0.5 2.9 2.9 2.9 0.9 0.9 0.9  0.1 0.1 0.1
        - 38 -           
~                   
.,~-~......
~ ~-~.~'::.' .
'.
.....~ -~ ~..:'".::~~..~--~:-~
-:.;.~
~-~-""~''''':'::::'''"~.:::.;~;-:,,-~~-='O
.-<,---=:_~- .
$
...

-------
 -\                        
  ..... ~---_.-c_..... _.....~        . . "         .., . , 
            ~..~..-.:   ~- --. . ~ -    '_."'--"'-'~.--,  
 ,                        
 ,                        
 l                        
           TABLE 13 (cont.)           
       SUMMARY OF POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS BY SEASON FOR THE        
        MEMPHIS STUVY AREA. 1967 (TONS/My).         
        SO     PART.   CO   He   NO  
        x                x 
  Source Category- r.rid HC VC S W A  'S W A S W A S W A S W  -A
 -I rr,dostrial- 38 - 7699 38862          0.5 0.5 0.5       
 't              -- --
I i - Industrial 38 7684 38863 2.6 2.6 2.6  0.6 0.6 0.6          
I           
 .I Industrial 38 7686 38862      1.1 1.1 1.1          
 , Industrial 39 7703 38859      0.3 0.3 0.3          
  Industrial 39 7745 38878      1.2 1.2 1.2          
  Industrial 39 7744 38888      0.9 0.9 0.9          
  S.E. Ut~ lity 41 7601 38847 30.8 266.6 149.3  8.3 72.5 40.5 0.1 1.2 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.3 6.2 70.5 37:3
  fump  41 7620 38808      0.3 0.3 0.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2
  - Airport 44; 7756 38830      0.9 0.9 0.9 31.3 31.3 31.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.6 1.6 l.6
  fump  47 8040 38817      0.5 0.5 0.5 2.7 2.7 2.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4
  fump  50 7693 38760      0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 "0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 --   
  Industrial 53 7950 38708      0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.9       
- 39 -
'"

-------
  TABU: 19  SlIN!'L\RY OF AIR P01.LUTANT E!'IISSIONS FROM AI.L SOURCES BY SEASON FOn HEMI'IJIS STUDY AREA. 1%7 !TONS/ DA Y) 
 Land Area  SO   PART.   CO   HC   NO 
   x            x 
Grid (sq. miles) S W A 5 W A 5 W A '5 W A S W A
 38.6       0.2 0.2 0.2      
2 38.6       1.7 1.4 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
3 38.6       1.7 1.4 1.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
4 38.6               
5 38.6       1.2 1.0 1.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 -- 0.7 
6 38.6       4.0 3.2 3.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3
7 38.6    0.:' 0.:' 0.:' 2.3 2.0 2.2 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2
8 38.6          0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
9 38.6       5.8 4.8 5.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.4
10 38.6    0.3 0.4 0.3 15.1 13.3 14.2 6.6 6.3 6.5 1.2 1.3 1.2
II 38.6    0.2   2.0 1.6 1.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.2
12 38.6       0.8 . 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4   
13 38.6    0.4 0.4 0.4 3.7 3.2 3.5 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3
14 38.6    0.5 0.5 0.5 3.1 2.8 3.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3
15 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 5.9 4.9 5.3 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.4
16 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.9 9.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
17 38.6 43.9 44.7 44.2 13.8 13.9 13.8 95.7 91.1 93.4 8.4 " 7.7 8.0 4.0 6.1 4.7
18 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 7,8 6.4 7.1 2.9 2.7 2.8 0.6 0.6 0.6
19 38.6    0.3 0.3 0.3 5.7 5.0 5.3 1'.9 1".7 1.8 0.5 0.5 0.5
20 38.6    0.3 0.3 0.3 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.1 
21. 38.6       1.3 1.1 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
22 38.6    0.2 0.2 0.2 9.0 7.4 8.1 1.3 1.1 1.2 0.6 . 0.5 0.6
23 38.6 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 20.6 17.2 18.9 2.4 2.0 2.2 1.8 1.8 (.8
        - 40 -        
~
..>
. ....... ',-)<.;,.::.a';;..a;.o,
-.,--~-
~---':'::::'--,-.-
. .
~.,~_.,~.
..
!:>
.

-------
._._-._--..-~,-'"!- ...-...
--.. ~ .
..... - ....;;.--....-- ~.~ .
.. -~~
..
-
p
..~,-
..
--... &;~~~~
i       TABLE 19 TOTAL ALL SOURCES (cant.)      
  Land Area  SO   PART.   CO   HC   NO 
    'x             x 
J, Grid (sq. miles), S W A S W A S 'W A S W A S W A
 24 9.65       0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3   
 '25 9.65 0.6 0.6 0.6 7.0 7.0 7.0 31.8 30.0 30.9 3.7 3.4 3.5 2.3 2.2 2.2
'I 26 9.65 1.0' 1.4 1,.1 1.1 1.1 33.3 27.6 30.5 10.0 9.1 9.6 9.6 3.7 4.1 . 3.8
t
1 27 9.65 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 35.4 29.0 32.2 8.9 8.0 8.3 3.6 3.4 3.5
j
1 28 9.65 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 13.4 11.0 12. ~ 2.0 1.7 1.8 1.1 1.0 1.0
! 29 9.65 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 78.5 64.4 71.4 11.8 10.3 11. 1 4.2 3.8 4.0
l' 30 9.65 0.8 0.8 0.8 2.2 2.1 2.1 t11.3 91.3 101. 3 21.2 \8.8 20.0 6.6 6.1 6.3
I                  
 31 9.65 2.7 3.1 2.8, 2.3 2.2 2.3. 125.1 102.5 113.8 22.0 19.0 20.1 9.2 8.6 8.8
 32 38.6 1.0 1.C 1.C 1.1 1.1 1.1 82.2 67.3 74.8 ']9.9 17.8 18.9 6.7 6.2 6.4
 33 38.6    0.4 0.4. 0.4 3.0 2.8 2.9 1.6 1.6 1.5 0.3 0.4 0.3
 34 38.6       0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3   
. i .35 38.6    0.2 0.2 0.2 2.6 2.3 2.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3
 36 38.6    0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
 37 9.65 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.\ 0.1 0.1 0.\ 0.8 0.8 0.8
 38 9.65 5.3 5.7 5;4 6.3 6.3 6.3 144.2 129.7 137.0 29.8 28.3 29.0 8.1 8.0 8.0
 . 39 9.65 0.7 0.6' 0.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 57.9 47.4 52.6 12.6 11.4 12.0 3.8 3.6 3.6
 40 9.65 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 47.0 38.5 42.8 11. 2 10.1 10.7 3.5 3.4 3.4
 41 9.65 30.8 266.6 149.3 8.6 72.8 40.8 1.8 2.8 2.3 10.0 10.5 10.3 6.4 70.8 37.6
 42 9.65 0.6 0.5 .0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 65.3 53.5 59.4 11.6 10.1 10.9 4.5 ' 4.0 4.2
 43 9.65 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 14.3 11.7 13.0 3.7 3.4 3.5 1.2 1.2 1.2
 44 . 9.65 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 34.4 33.8 34.1' 7.2 7.2 7.3 2.3 2.5 2.4
 45 38.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 36.4 29.8 33.1 6.2 5.3 5.7 3.2 3.4 3.2
 46 38.6       2.9 2.4 2.6 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.2
        - 41 -         

-------
      TABLE 19  TOTAL ALL SOURCES (cant.)      
 Land Area  SO   PART.   CO   HC   NO 
   x             x 
Grid (sq. miles) S W A S W A S W -A S W A S W:: A
47 38.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 5.7 5.2 5.5 "2.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 0.6 0.6 0.6
48 38:6    0.2 0.2 0.2 1.8 1.5 1.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
49 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 2.3 1.9 2.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.1
50 38.6    0.5 0.5 0.5 6.9 5.7 6.3 4.2 4.1 4.1 0.5 0.6 0.5
51 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 8.~ 6.7 7.4 - 3.4 3.2 ~.3 0.6 0.6 0.6
52 38.6    0.2 0.2 0.2 6.3 5.3 5.8 1.6 1.4 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.4
53 38.6 -    0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.2 0.2   
54 38.6    0.4 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1   
55 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 3.1 2.6 2.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2
56 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 4.1 3.4 3.8 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2
57 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 4.4 3.6 4.0 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.3
58 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 5.9 5.0 5.4 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.4
59 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 3.0 2.5 2.8 0.4 0.4 0.4' ; 0.2 0.2 0.2
60 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 4.5 3.8 .4.1 0.7 - 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3
61 38.f    0.2 0.2 0.2 8.1 6.7 7.4 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.5
62 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 3.6 3.0 3.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2
63 38.6    0.1 0.1 0.1 3.0 2.5 2.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2
-.
- 42 -
'-
". ~
,,"'.-.~....- .~:_,.
-.- -"--
- .... --- ,,-
,-

-------
J
i
J
i'
\
t
''''
i
~
;
f
EMISSION DENSITIES BY GRID
Emission densitiea un a grid basis were obtained by summing
the annual area and point source emissions for each grid. This
.tota1, divided by the grid area, gives an emission density in tons
per square mile per average day. Figures 6 through 10 present the
emission density maps for the five surveyed pollutants. It is
difficult to arrive at any valid conclusions from the emission
density maps alone. For this reason, when they are analyzed, the
detailed map of the Study Area and the population density maps
should also be considered.
The emission density maps for carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
show that the greatest emissions occur within the urbanized area
of Shelby County. Since transportation sources ,are the largest
I
i
1
I
I
t
single sources of carbon monoxide, it would seem logical that in
and near the city of Memphis carbon monoxide emissions should be
the highest. Hydrocarbon emissions are highest in and around the
. city not .only because of transportation sources but also because
of the heavy concentration of dry cleaning establishments near
the center ci ty.
Sulfur oxides, particulates and nitrogen oxides emission
densitie~ were highest in grid 41 because of the large power
plant located in this grid.
i-
f
I
I
~ 43 -
~.~ . -,---:.,"'_.-, ,~ , - :. -

-------
[ ,
I 
r 
 j
 ,
 1
 -
 I
PI

~
I

I

I

I

I
~

.
I
.

\
.
I
.
I
.

l/
. --r-'\"
---______r !...--:
r

I

I

I

I

.

I

.

I

.
I
.
I,
L
........".,.
.......,."..
,............
.0""""".
.............
.............
"...,.......
...........,.
,.......,....
.............
.,...........
.............
.............
..........,..
..,........,.
.......,.....
,.....,......
.........""
.............
...,.........
..,..........
.............
.............
..........".
.........,...
.............
ClITU18tt18 co.
\.
I
!
~
1
I
---
iil!!::!I!I:I~
"
--¥EHHESSEE
--- -- I MISSISSIPI
-- ---
--~-- -
. I

-I
I
-----
DESOTO CO.
I

.

I
L!
.r---
i
----.i
Se... 1.2'!1O.OOO
\ .
'oJ\ r
..""" ---'
',-./- ~
SULFUR OXIDE EMISSION, 
 ton/mi 2-day 
D 0  0.001 
0    '
0.001 - 0.01 
m 0,01  0.05 J
~   
[] 0.05  0,10 
m 0,10  1.0 
[J    
.. 1.0  15.0 
I - 
f
J
,
. ,
~
. . ,
~
~-~----:......-
"
~
,.(-
-- --.~
.'
'U""'--'"
--_:4
-..v
'~"..''''''''-
---- I
Figure 6.
Sulfur oxide emission density from all sources for Memphis study area.
/:/.2:'

-------
!  
I  
I  
,  
t.  
.  
 r
 I 
 I 
 I 
 I 
 I 
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
  I
  I,
  I.
..
.
.
N

~
.
~
.
~
O"'.'u"--
;:-.'~I
,...
!~.....,..._-
.
~
r
"
~
""----"
:'::~::::::»::~:'r": - -, - l.
)jf\fff ) - "\. }~
~~;,;;;:;;i"l.;; vl !!}:!!!!!:r::::::j::jj::::::
rmtF~}<:~'');~- . ] ~( li!i)!!!)!!i)i!!! i! i! i! i ~! i! r~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\1


\ I,iI1~'JII11:lillilillll:illlilllilliilllllilil :1~~~II~~illliil!lil!il!ilill!lilillill:lilllilj
V" \ lilliiilli:i:lillililllill[\\\I\\\\\\i\I\I\\\j!::~~liji:::j:I;:I~

ILl \- r,i

."""',,-,,,,,.,,,,,"..,.i-'
- ..r -'1
--------_..J ~-:
'"'" l::no.ooo
PARTICULATE EMISSION,
ton/ m i 2-doy
o 0 - 0.001
D 0.001  0.002
ill] 0.002 - 0.01
fill 0.01  0.10
::::::: 
m 0.10 - 1.0
D 1.0 - 5.0
Figure 7. 'Particulate emission density from all sources for Memphis study area.
- 45
'1';.4 '"
'..' ;~
.:'7'~
.",

-------
. 0
~ --:
~ ~
~
~")
j
l P:,
.)If ---____~_r--r-'L_:
~ \) ~ \ \ \) ~ \))) ~ ~ ~ \ \ ~ \)) \ ~~ ~ I) \ ~ \ \ ~ \ \ ~) \ \ \ ~ ~ ~ \ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ \ \ ~ \ \ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ \ \ ~ \ \ ~ ~ ~tt \ J;I /. !!!!i!iiiii!i!i!i!!i!!i!i!!i!i!i~jl!!!1I111i1~1i111!i!Ji!1: i!!!!!!! j! i j i i j! i! j! i! i! i! i: i! i! i!!!!!!! i: i

, , , , , , , , , , , , , r ' , , , ',',',',','" "",."..", \Wf ',',"""""'''" ,', .'.','.',',',',',',',",'", , , ,',',',' , , , , , , , , , , , , ,




















iijiijiiiii:::'~~I~"illl.111Ifll~~I~il; n_U-






\,~ ~'

""""'0,-",.".,- ~~
\-

I

I

I

I

.

I

.,

I

.
I
.
I,
p,--
",.0.......
'.'0"""'"
,...........
.............
.0.""','"
.,.......,...
.......,....
",,'0""'"
.......,....
..,..........
"0"""'"
,..........,.
............
N

~
I

,

I
L/
s.e...ll!tOOOO
"
-:.~
",\....~...-
. -t., .. .', I~ ..;:.......
-+L':'~-:'---I-' --r=_r:-:-~\ -=~.. "'-
CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSION,
ton/mi 2-day
D 0  0.01
[] 0.01 - 0.10
EJ 0,10 - 0.20
ill] 0.20 - 2.0
[ill 2.0 - 10.0
D 10.0 - 14.0
Figure 8.
Carbon monoxide emission density from all sources for Memphis study area.
,~
I
,,1
.I,
I

-I

I
~
.
J
t
J
!
J

-------
, 
Co 
f r
 I
 I
 I
 ,
 I
 \
 ,
 I
 ,
 I
 ,
 I,
 L
..
I
,
.
""",
,:
j'
i
.- I>
~
. .
==--
'):1.)
\'
l 4~

. ."
I' -"\ ..pt' - -______r"'....r-L_-,
'../~ ,

',- , ' ::: ::: ::::: ;:;::::;:::::::: ~::~:~;~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~: :=::::::::::::::::; =::;=::" ::;: ::;: ::;:::-
V :,:';':'.';':.:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.,.:.,.,.,.".".,.".: .:.:.:.;.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ':':':"':':'j
~:~::::::::~~~~:~:~::::::: :~';~;II....:::::..::.:...~:. ~{, iil!lliliiili;llil;lli!li!!!iiiI1il!iil\:lil!iil:lii:



"""""""""""" ... """" ""'. ~\~ """"""""""""""""l"""""" "" ...1



















. ii i~ ~ 2 i~ j~ ~ ~ j ~ ~~ j ~ ~~ ~ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \

..:Q~J~.{
-------
,
~
8-:1:"1"-'::;;"
,
.
~
~~~~,'
'.;.~ -t';, .J>~.i:.:H"~ "",">,It;'J'
';' ',.;.' I

!
!
I
,
i
~
I.
\
I
r

I

I

I

I

,

I

1

I

.
I
.
I,
L
/
.-1"-"
--------_..J ~~;
'\ Iii \\: \\1 i\ \\::\11\ Ii \:
N

~
I ;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.; : 11~ : """';'f::':::::;::;':f';:':':':':;'f";;:;""';'""""";':j r""""""\ I

i ::??:.':~; ,,: ~' ~ ::::::::::::/!;~;\~~;~~~~ !!~}r\!?~~j!!I~~!~~\ ~!;~;\~Jrr~~;j~!~~~~~!~r- tfttj,

, -.:1(. \~!, t:.:':.:-:.:.:':':':.:.:': r-£{f...!lS~~ ' ':':':':':':':':"'~
~ ,-- ----- \ittt\: :~w~~rmttrr?-----.

I ~. ,',',',',',',','.',',',',','.',',',',',',',',',',',',.""""""""""""'j I













l/
I
~
----..--
s.c."" 1'2~0Q0
\ .
'"'" !"
...."... "......
',-./- ~
NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSION,
ton/mi2-dcy
"
.. ~I.'''' .......
'. .,..".~.....
L-"==--=~
'~"hl'Ur"""
. ,
- - 'i
.
'"
o 0 - 0.005
R 0.005 - 0.01
is
[ill 0.01 - 0.10
IT] 0.10 - 0.40
w.:.:.:..
D   
V~ 0,40 -. 1.0
o 1.0 - 4.0
~
Figure 10,
Nitrogen oxides 8mission density from all sources for f~emphls study are",.
I
\, .

-------
I
-,
"
It.
't
.
j
1- ,
.',
,



1


"
I' . .
f.
"
\)
.\
10.
REFERENCES
1.
Ozolins. Guntis and Raymond Smith, Rapid Survey Technique
for Estim4ting 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, Memphis Chamber of Commerce~ 1967
4.
Smith, W. S. and C. W. Gruber, Atmospheric Emissions from Coal
. Combustion, United States Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, PHS, April, 1966. . .
5.
Smith, W. S., Atmospheric Emissions' from Fuel Oil Combustion,
United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. PHS.
November, 1967.
6.
Ozolins, op. cit., pp 43-45
7.
Retail Tr8~e Special Report, Census of Business. United States
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the C~nsus. 1963.
8.
Highway Statisties/1967, United States Department of Transpor-
tation. Federal Highway Administration. Bureau of Public Roads.
9.
County and City Data Book 1967, United States Department of Commerce.
April, 1967
Duprey, op. eit., p. 46
- 49 -

-------
,
"
METHOD FOR CAJ,CUL,\T!1;G Sm~fER, WINTER AND ANNUAL
t
AVERAGE EmSS 10:\5 FOR FUEL CONSmlPTION IN' STATIO:-IARY SOURCES
YEARLY AVERAGE (A)
e.g.
A = Fuel Consumed x Emission Factor (E.F.)
Days of Operation

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 pcr~ent
for process heating. . From this information, the annual
average emission for carbon monoxide would be the following:
. I
I
I
A = 100,000 Tons/year x 3 1bs. COlTon coal
365 Days/year x 2,000 lb./Ton
w = Fuel Consumed x f.F.
Days of l'linter Operation
x Wi~ter De~ree Days
Total Degree Days
!
,
q
'j
~
f
" j
I
~ j
!'" Fuel Used '\
for space heatin:.
A = 0.41 Ton/Day
WINTER AVERAGE' (N)
x
+ Fuel Consumed x E.F.
365

W I: [100,000 x 2,800 x 0.15
90 x 4,800
x
% Fuel used for "rocess heating
+
100,000
365~
x
. J 3
0.8.:12,000
W I:
0.49 Ton/Day
SUHMER AVERAGE (5)
5 = Fuel Consumed x f.F.
Days of Summer Operation
Summer Degree Days
x '
Total Degree Days
% Fuel Used
x
for space h~atin:,
Fuel Consumed
365

S = [100 ,000
90
+
x E.F.
x
% Fuel used for. process heating
....
o
x 4,800
x 0.15
+
100.000
365
x 0.85J 2,O~O
;)
.;;
S = 0.35 Ton/Day
:.
50

-------