EPA-600/R-96-142b
August 1996
Report to Congress under CAA Amendments of 1990, Section 901 (e)
Public Law 104-549
Assessment of
International Air Pollution Prevention
and Control Technology
Volume!. Technical Report
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
E-107
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completi \\ \ |||| || |||||| 1 1| 1 1| 1 1|| ||| |||
I. REPORT NO. 2 — ' ~~~
EPA-600/R-96-142b
4. TITLE 5«NosuBTiTLEAssesament of international Air Pollu-
Uon Prevention and Control Technology (Report to
Congress), Volume 2. Technical Report
/. AUTHORS Clint Burklin. Mahesh Gundappa, and
1 Donna Jones
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Radian Corporation
P. O. Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
. f in mi ii iiini in in mi in in
PB97-131379
. REPORT DATE
August 1996
. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-04-0022. W.A. 18
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final: 12/93-12/95
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
is. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES APPCD project officer is Michael A. Maxwell. Mail Drop 60,
919/541-3019. (Richard D. Stern, the initial project officer, is no longer with the
Agency.) Volume 1 is an executive summary; Volume 2 is the full report.
i«. ABSTRACT
report gives results of a study that identifies new and innovative air
pollution prevention and/or control technologies, of selected industrialized countries
that are not currently used extensively in the U. S. The technologies may be entirely
new to the U. S. , or they may be technologies currently in limited use in the TJ. S. thai
achieve either a higher level of control than existing technologies or the same level
of control more cost effectively. The study addressed technologies that prevent or
control the emissions of the following pollutants from each of four sources of air pol-
lution: (1) Urban emissions — ozone precursors to include nitrogen oxides (NOx), vola-1
tile organic compounds (VOCs). particulate matter (PM), and air toxics; (2) Motor
[vehicle emissions — NOx, carbon monoxide (CO), and PM; (3) Toxic air emissions —
jany one of the 189 compounds on the list of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) in the
1990 CAAA (Title HI); and (4) Acid deposition-- NOx, sulfur oxides (SOx), and. to a
lesser extent, VOCs. The report describes the -approach taken to identify potentially
useful technologies, gives results of the technology search and evaluation, and des-
cribes the selected technologies.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
|». DESCRIPTORS
Pollution Toxicity
DNitrogen Oxides Carbon Monoxide
jSulfur Oxides Motor Vehicles
[Organic Compounds Emission
[Volatility
IP articles
he. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Volatile Organic Com-
pounds (VOCs)
Particulate
Acid Rain
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
2O. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
c. COSATI Field/Group
3B 06T
07B
13F
07C
20 M
14G
21. NO. OF PAGES
142
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
NOTICE
This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse
raent or recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with pro-
tecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national
environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions lead-
ing to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural
systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research
program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental pro-
blems today and building a science knowledge base necessary to manage our eco-
logical resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and pre-
vent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for
investigation of technological and management approaches for reducing risks
from threats to human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's
research program is on methods for the prevention and control of pollution to air,
land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water
systems; remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and prevention and
control of indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze
development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective environmental
technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to
support regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and infor-
mation transfer to ensure effective implementation of environmental regulations
and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-
term research plan. It is published and made available by EPA's Office of Re-
search and Development to assist the user community and to link researchers
with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
Under Tide EX of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to assess international air pollution
prevention and control technologies that may have beneficial applications to the U.S. air
pollution control efforts. This report presents results of a study that identifies new and
innovative air pollution prevention and/or control technologies, of selected industrialized
countries, that are not currently extensively used hi the United States. The technologies may
be entirely new to the U.S., or they may be technologies currently in limited use in the U.S.
that either achieve a higher level of control than existing technologies or achieve the same
level of control more cost-effectively.
In accordance with the Title EX requirements, the study specifically addressed
technologies that prevent or control the emissions of the following pollutants from each of four
sources of air pollution:
• Urban emissions: Ozone precursors to include nitrogen oxides (NO^, volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), particulate matter (PM), and air toxics.
• Motor vehicle emissions: NOX, carbon monoxide (CO), and PM.
• Toxic air emissions: Any one of the 189 compounds on the list of hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) in the 1990 CAAA (Title III).
• Acid deposition: NOX, sulfur oxides (SOJ, and to a lesser extent, VOCs.
This report describes the approach taken to identify potentially useful technologies, the
results of the technology search and review, and a description of the selected technologies.
IV
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Richard D. Stern, the former Senior Technical Advisor for International Technology
Liaison at the Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division (APPCD), was instrumental in
collection and analysis of the candidate technologies, and for final selection of technologies
included in this report. Michael A. Maxwell coordinated the external peer reviews and
preparation of the final report. Support is also gratefully acknowledged from the staff of EPA's
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, and
Office of Mobile Sources from which valuable guidance and review of the technologies were
received during the course of the study. ERG, formerly Radian Corporation, is acknowledged for
their role in data gathering and compilation of candidate technologies.
-------
METRIC CONVERSION TABLE
EPA policy requires the use of metric units; however, at times, nomnetric units are
used for the reader's convenience. Readers more familiar with the metric system may use the
following factors to convert to that system.
Nonmetric
cfm
ft
fli
gal
in.
Ib
oz
ton
Times
0.000472
0.305
0.0929
0.00379
3.79
2.54
0.454
0.0283
907
0.907
Yields Metric
m3/s
m
m2
m3
L
cm
kg
kg
kg
tonne
Vi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
METRIC CONVERSION TABLE vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 SCOPE OF REPORT 2-1
3.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH 3-1
3.1 Identification of Key Emissions Sources 3-1
3.2 Development of Criteria for Technology Search 3-3
3.3 Countries Included in the Study 3-5
3.4 Technology Identification and Review Methods 3-5
3.5 Information Gathering 3-7
3.6 EPA Final Review of Potentially Promising Technologies 3-8
4.0 RESULTS '. 4-1
5.0 REFERENCES 5-1
EXHIBITS
1 Key U.S. Emission Sources 3-4
2 Potentially Beneficial Pollution Prevention and Control Technologies 4-2
3 Applicability of Identified Technologies 4-8
ATTACHMENTS
A. List of Embassies Contacted A-l
B. List of Organizations Contacted B-l
vii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
C. List of People Contacted During this Study C_l
D. List of Foreign Technology Vendors Contacted D-l
E. Details of the 21 Technologies Identified for Consideration by U.S. Industry ... E-l
viii
-------
1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under Title IX of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to assess international air pollution
prevention and control technologies that may have beneficial applications to the U.S. air
pollution control efforts. Specifically, EPA is required to:
...conduct a study that compares international air pollution
control technologies of selected industrialized countries to
determine if there exist air pollution control technologies
in countries outside the United States that may have
beneficial applications to this Nation's air pollution
control efforts. With respect to each country studied, the
study shall include the topics of urban air quality, motor
vehicle emissions, toxic air emissions, and acid
deposition.
This report presents the results of the study. An executive summary of this
report is contained in Volume 1.
-------
2-1
2.0 SCOPE OF REPORT
This report presents results of a study to identify new and innovative air
pollution prevention and/or control technologies of selected industrialized countries, that are
not currently extensively used in the United States. The technologies may be entirely new to
the U.S., or they may be technologies currently in limited use in the U.S. that achieve either a
higher level of control than existing technologies, or the same level of control more cost
effectively.
In accordance with the Title IX requirements, the study specifically addressed
technologies that prevent or control the emissions of the following pollutants from each of four
sources of air pollution:
• Urban emissions: Ozone precursors to include nitrogen oxides (NO,),
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), paniculate matter (PM), and air
toxics.
• Motor vehicle emissions: NOX, carbon monoxide (CO), and PM.
• Toxic air emissions: Any one of the 189 compounds on the list of
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) in the 1990 CAAA (Title III).
• Acid deposition: NOX, sulfur oxides (SOX), and, to a lesser extent,
VOCs.
This report describes the approach taken to identify potentially useful
technologies, gives results of the technology search and review, and describes the technologies
meeting the selection criteria. Within each of the categories described above, the technologies
meeting the selection criteria are described with the following information:
• Vendor,
• Country of origin,
• Applicable industries and developmental status of the technology,
• Pollutants controlled and secondary impacts (if any),
-------
2-2
• Detailed process description, limitations of the technology, and case
studies,
• Control costs, and
• Comparisons to existing U.S. technologies.
The information in the technology descriptions was provided by the vendors,
often after multiple discussions for clarification, during the course of the study. Despite these
iterations, some technologies have incomplete information in terms of the items listed above.
A serious attempt was also made to identify independent sources of information to corroborate
vendor claims, and what limited information identified has been presented in this report.
Based on the information available, potentially useful technologies were grouped into two
categories: 1) technologies currently available for consideration by U.S. industry and
2) technologies which warrant further attention (monitoring/tracking, research, etc.) by U.S.
industry in order to acquire additional data for future consideration.
-------
3-1
3.0 TECHNICAL APPROACH
The technical approach used in the study included:
1. A preliminary identification of key industrial emission sources in the
U.S. that are in need of air pollution control.
2. Development of criteria for a technology search strategy for these
sources.
3. Identification of key foreign countries to be addressed for potential
technologies.
4. Conduct of an international search to identify potentially promising
technologies.
5. Collection of detailed information for the technologies that appeared to
meet the goals of the study.
6. Final review of potential beneficial technologies.
This section describes hi more detail the technical approach used for these efforts.
3.1 Identification of Key Emissions Sources
To define the U.S. ah" pollution prevention and control needs hi each of the four
emission categories (urban air quality, motor vehicle emissions, toxics air emissions, and acid
deposition), a list of high polluting U.S. industries hi each category was developed. However,
since motor vehicles are major urban emission sources and acid deposition sources, the motor
vehicle source category was incorporated within the urban air quality and acid deposition
categories for this study, including development of the list. Various publications/studies were
reviewed to develop the list for each category, as follows:
-------
3-2
Urban Air Quality:
For the Urban Air Quality category, the list of pollution sources was developed
from an EPA study: Evaluation of Hazardous Air Pollutant Inventories from Three Major
Urban Areas (11. This study showed the expected dependence of urban air quality problems
on the kinds of industries that have developed in and around three major urban areas. Since
many of the pollution sources from the three study areas are common to most urban areas,
these sources formed the basis for the list of high polluting industries identified for the urban
air quality category. As stated earlier, motor vehicle emissions, a major source of urban
emissions, were also included under this category.
Toxic Air Emissions:
The key sources of toxics air emissions were determined from the results of an
EPA study that ranked sources of toxics air emissions based on environmental effects data (2).
The study was conducted in 1993 by EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS) in support of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. In this study, approximately
175 emission source categories were ranked according to their national emissions of HAPs and
the environmental effects of their emitted HAPs. The environmental effects included: human
toxicity, aquatic toxicity, bioconcentration potential, and environmental persistence.
Acid Deposition:
The key emission sources hi the acid deposition category were identified from a
U.S. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) study on acid deposition (3).
The NAPAP study included a national inventory of point and area emission sources for the
year 1985, conducted by the EPA. Major air pollutant emission sources were ranked by their
combined national emissions of three key pollutants contributing to acid deposition: SO2, NOX,
and VOCs. As stated earlier, motor vehicle emissions, a major source of acid deposition,
were also included under this category.
-------
3-3
Control Division (APPCD). The OAQPS reviewers included the Associate Director of
Science, Policy and New Programs and the staffs specializing in chemical and petroleum
emissions and industrial studies within the Emission Standards Division. The APPCD
reviewers included the staffs specializing hi organics control, combustion research, gas
cleaning technology, indoor air, and radon mitigation. Exhibit 1 presents the final list based
on the inputs from these review groups. Thirty specific source categories (most important for
each of the three major source category groups) are identified. However, since each of the
studies used to develop the key source lists shown hi Exhibit 1 stressed that there were many
uncertainties hi the source's relative emissions impact, the source categories identified as major
sources hi their respective categories are listed hi alphabetical order. They are not ranked hi
order of importance.
3.2 Development of Criteria for Technology Search
To ensure proper screening and prioritization of the foreign pollution prevention
and control technologies, specific technology selection criteria were developed as follows:
1. The technology must be applicable to an ah* pollution source listed in
Exhibit 1. This ensured that the search remained focused on those
foreign technologies potentially benefitting key emission sources hi the
United States. Applicability of technology to multiple sources/pollutants
was also considered.
2. The technology search would include both clean technologies (pollution
prevention) and "end-of-pipe" (pollution control) technologies. Clean
technologies include process modifications that result in the minimization
or elimination of certain pollutant emissions.
-------
3-4
EXHIBIT 1
Key U.S. Emission Sources
Urban Air Quality
Automobiles (including heavy-duty and off-road vehicles)
Boilers, Turbines, and Heaters
Chemical Manufacturing
Degreasing/Dry Cleaning
Gasoline Distribution (bulk stations and terminals)
Petroleum Marketing (vehicle refueling/spillage)
Plastics Manufacture
Solid Waste Disposal
Surface Coating
Woodstoves and Fireplaces
Toxic Air Emissions
Cyanide Production/Coke Ovens
Industrial Boilers
Lead Smelting
Petroleum Refineries
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing
Polycarbonates Production
Resins Production (amino and acetal)
Solid Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
Surface Coating
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industries (SOCMI)
Acid Deposition
Asphalt Paving
Automobiles (including heavy-duty and off-road vehicles)
Bakeries
Cement Manufacture
Chemicals Manufacturing
Fossil Fuel-Fired Boilers
Gasoline Station Evaporation Loss
Petroleum Refining
Primary Metals Manufacture
Solvent Evaooration fdrv cleanine decreasing, printing, etc.)
-------
3-5
3. The technology was to have attained at least a large pilot-scale
demonstration status to ensure that sufficient technical information would
be available to review the potential for the selected technologies to meet
the U.S. immediate air pollution control needs. This last criterion
ensured that the technology review would be based on realistic
performance and cost information rather than estimations of projected
performance and costs that are generally optimistic.
3.3 Countries Included in the Study
Initially, the information search was focused on environmental technologies
developed in Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom (UK), and Canada. However, the study
was expanded to include Scandinavian and other Western European countries hi recognition of
the strong environmental technology development programs initiated in these countries. Later,
Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Brazil, and Argentina were also added to the study hi
recognition of their specific areas of expertise.
3.4 Technology Identification and Review Methods
Several methods were used to solicit technical information on candidate foreign
technologies. Contacts were established with:
• Scientific counselors at 19 key foreign embassies hi the United States
(shown hi Attachment A);
• Representatives and/or publications from six international organizations:
the United Nations (UN), the Center for the Analysis and Dissemination
of Demonstrated Energy Technologies (CADDET)*, the World Bank,
the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the World Environment
Center (WEC) (listed hi Attachment B).
*CADDET functions as the International Energy Agency (IEA) center for dissemination of
information on end-use technology demonstration projects for all IEA-CADDET member
countries. The IEA implements the energy program within the framework of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
-------
3-6
Fifty-four consultants and/or indigenous (in-country)
contacts/researchers (listed in Attachment C) who were knowledgeable
about recent developments in foreign technologies;
Eight international technology vendors (listed in Attachment D) who
initiated discussions hi addition to sending literature; and
On-line searches of four key scientific databases [Energy Science and
Technology (ES&T), National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
Air and Waste Management Association (A&WMA), and Japanese
patent (JAPIO) databases] and several national and international
publications.
The results of this technology assessment produced over 100 leads for potential technologies
and over 200 abstracts and articles to review. From the literature and contacts made, over 300
initial candidate technologies were identified to be reviewed for applicability to the project
goals. This screening process, which involved evaluating each technology based on the
criteria presented in Section 3.2, produced an initial list of 30 potentially innovative candidate
technologies.
This initial slate of 30 candidate technologies that emerged from the first phase
of the information search were reviewed by the same staff groups at EPA that reviewed the
pollution source category lists (Section 3.1). These same groups were selected because of their
knowledge of air pollution problems and current emerging technologies. These briefings were
used to identify additional promising technologies, from the original list of 300, which should
be added to the candidate technologies slate and to remove technologies, as appropriate, based
on EPA knowledge regarding state-of-the-art technologies.
As additional information from various vendors was received and reviewed, 22
additional technologies were identified. By the end of this phase of the study, a total of 52
technologies were identified and their vendors contacted. These 52 technologies corresponded
to 10 foreign countries: Australia (1), Denmark (2), Finland (1), Germany (11), Japan (12),
the Netherlands (3), Norway (2), Poland (1), Sweden (4), and the UK (15).
-------
3-7
3.5 Information Gathering
In this next phase of the study, letters were sent to the vendors of the 52
technologies requesting more detailed information needed to further review the technologies.
Eleven specific information needs were requested from the vendors of the technologies as
follows:
1. A detailed description of the technology.
2. A statement of the current status of the technology: e.g., research stage,
later development, full-scale demonstration, commercially
available/existing full-scale applications.
3. Case study descriptions.
4. Identification of the applicable industries/sources and any limitations of
the technology within each industry.
5. A list of specific pollutants the technology controls or eliminates.
6. Test data that document the performance of the technology.
7. All requirements for operation of the technology (e.g., feedstock, fuel
consumption, energy, space).
8. Quantification of cost information, including capital cost, estimated
payback period, and operating and maintenance costs.
9. Secondary pollution impacts (e.g., wastewater discharges, solid waste
generation).
10. Any available comparisons of performance and cost reviews with
competing U.S. state-of-the-art technologies for similar applications.
11. How the technology performance and cost vary with changes in input
parameters.
Our information requests also stressed the value and need for independent data
corroborating the information developed by the vendor. In some cases, information obtained
-------
3-8
from vendors did not provide enough detail to adequately review the technology with respect
to the criteria developed for this study.
Follow up calls were made to the vendors to encourage their participation hi the
study. At the request of 10 of the vendors/foreign representatives, meetings were held in the
U.S. and England to present details of their technology. Twenty-eight technologies were
selected for potential inclusion in the filial list.
3.6 EPA Final Review of Potentially Promising Technologies
The 28 technologies were reviewed by EPA staff in OAQPS, APPCD, and the
Office of Mobile Sources, who were selected for their expertise hi the specific areas of
technology. The EPA staff reviewed the technologies based on the information provided for
the study and their knowledge of the technologies currently available to address the same
source pollutant problem. The 21 technologies that reviewers believe may be useful to U.S.
industry appear hi Exhibit 2.
Although EPA identified technologies which may be useful to U.S. industries in
general, it is important to note this report does not evaluate the applicability of these
technologies to any specific U.S. industrial facility. Rather, the report serves as a survey of
potentially applicable technologies, and does provide an independent evaluation of vendor
information by EPA. EPA review of information provided by vendor does not include an
evaluation of technologies relative to then- potential for application to segments of relevant
U.S. industries or to the individual U.S. industrial facilities, or the ability of the technology to
meet current or anticipated Federal requirements. In addition, these technologies were not
compared to current U.S. technologies or to U.S. technologies under development, to
determine where the U.S. has a clear competitive advantage, since this was beyond the scope
of the report.
-------
3-9
In light of the nature of the review performed, readers are encouraged to contact
individual vendors for more specific information related to the potential application of a
technology for any individual facility operator's or pollution control agency's needs.
-------
4-1
4.0 RESULTS
Exhibit 2 presents the 21 air pollution prevention and control technologies that
were identified in this study, as potentially beneficial technologies to bring to the attention of
U.S. industry. For each technology, the information in Exhibit 2 includes a short descriptive
title; a brief description; the vendor name; country of origin; the applicable industries and/or
emission sources; the pollutants controlled; the development status; and available information
on performance, cost, and secondary impacts. It is important to stress that information
presented hi Exhibit 2 was obtained from the vendor and may, hi some cases, lack detail or the
objectivity needed for an in-depth comparison of technologies. Readers are encouraged to
contact individual vendors for more specific information relating individual technologies to
their specific application.
This table is divided into two sections. The first section (Technologies A1-A14)
presents those technologies for which enough information was available to determine that the
technology is worthy of current consideration by U.S. industry. The second part of the table
(Technologies B1-B7) presents technologies that are believed to be feasible and innovative and
which may have potential benefits for U.S. industry but which lacked sufficient information
for current consideration. However, these technologies should be watched for future
consideration as more information becomes available. Details for each technology presented in
Exhibit 2 can be found in Attachment E.
The applicability of the technologies identified hi this study relative to the 3
major source categories is summarized in Exhibit 3, which shows the 30 specific source
categories under the three major source category groups, and the number of international
pollution control or pollution prevention technologies that were identified for each source
category.
-------
EXHIBIT 2
Technology
Number*
A-l
IA-2
A-3
Potentially Beneficial Pollution Prevention and Control Technologies
Technology Name and Brief Description
Zinc Oxide Process— Waste gas cleaning technology
that offers effective removal of SO, while producing
no wastewater effluent The Zinc Oxide absorbs the
tollutants from annealing and drying kilns in a two-
stage countercurrent flow absorber. In the absorber,
zinc oxide suspension is added to the top of the
column in a concentration above stoichiometric. The
waste gas, which is cleaned of most of its dust and
erosols in venturi scrubbers prior to column entry,
enters the column near the bottom. The hydrogen
sulfide and the sulfur dioxide react with the zinc
oxide absorber to form Zn(HSO^, ZnSO4, ZnSO,,
and ZnS.
SOLINOX process for the reduction of SO2-This
process comprises a two-step scrubbing process with
ts primary objective the reduction of SO, emissions.
A proprietary organic adsorbent (polyethylene-
glycol-dimethylether) removes the SO, by selective
physical) absorption. The organic adsorbent can be
regenerated without any losses. The recovered
concentrated SO, (90 percent) is cooled and
compressed, and can be sold.
LINKman Expert-System-Used to optimize the
cement manufacturing process and thereby reduce
emissions. The process is optimized by continuous
monitoring of NO,, CO, and O, emission levels, key
temperatures, and the power required to turn the
kiln.
Vendor/Country of
Origin
Sachtleben Chemie
GmbH Dr. Hans-Dieter
Bauerman Duisburg
Germany
Sachtleben Chemie
GmbH
Dr. Hans-Dieter
Bauerman
Germany
Image Automation Ltd.
Mr. D.W. Haspel
UK
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
Two sites in
Germany.
4 facilities in 3
countries:
Austria,
Germany,
Poland.
Over 60 plants
worldwide in
16 countries (2
U.S.)
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
SO,
Sources:
Chemical Manufacturing (ADP)
Secondary Jinpacts:
None
Pollutants:
SO,, PM, HC's, HC1 and other
halogen compounds
Sources:
Primary metals (ADP)
Industrial Boilers (TAB, UAP,
ADP)
Chemical Manufacture (ADP)
Secondary Impacts:
Recovered SO, and wastewater
Pollutants:
NO,
Sources:
Cement Manufacture (ADP)
Chemical manufacture (ADP)
Secondary Impacts:
None
Performance
Levels
90% reduction in
SO,.
97% SO,
removal.
85% dust
removal.
NO, emissions
reduced from 500
ppm to 200 ppm.
Some SO,
reductions also
claimed.
9% capacity
increase, 3% fuel
savings, and 40%
reduction in
offspec. material
produced.
Costs
$l,080/tonofSO,
removed.
For 70,000 Nm'/hr plant:
Capital costs = $11. 8M
operating costs =
$1.4M/yr.
Capital investment
$350,000 for 1.1 M ton
clinker plant.
Payback period less than 3
months.
$1.50 savings/ton clinker.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number'
A-4
A-5
A-6
Technology Name and Brief Description
Ftuidized-Bed Sintering System for Pollution
Prevention through Energy Efficiency in Iron and
Steel Production (DIOS Project)-DIOS process uses
fine and granular non-coking coal and iron ore
directly for making molten iron without resorting to
the coking and sintering operations required in the
traditional blast furnace process. DIOS dispenses
with coking coal and can utilize non-coking coal
directly, thereby ensuring a wider selection of
resources to be used in ironmaking. The
agglomerating process (sintering and coking) is
eliminated, thereby reducing capital expenditures
and energy costs. Sulfur emissions are "scarcely
measurable" since the sulfur charged is either
dissolved into the melted slag and metal, or absorbed
onto dust and collected. DIOS uses less energy than
a conventional blast furnace and, as a result, less
emissions will be associated with the combustion of
fuels.
Cerafil Low Density Filter Elements-This
technology utilizes low-density ceramic filter
elements, called Cerafil elements, that are
comprised of man-made mineral fibers bonded with
organic and inorganic materials to form a porous
filtration medium. Particulate matter (PM) in the
flue gas forms a dust cake on the outside of the
elements. The dust cakes are removed via reverse
pulse-jet cleaning. The elements are temperature
resistant to 900 *C and resistant to acid and alkali
contaminants in the flue gas. For flue gases above
250*C, the Cerafil filter plant eliminates the
necessity of gas cooling equipment. Cerafil will
also control HC1 and SO2 with the use of a sorbent
material (e.g., calcium hydroxide).
Cool Sorption Vapor Recovery Units-Controls
evaporation losses. When a road tanker is filled,
gasoline displaces vapor in the tank. The vapor is
piped into the cool sorption unit, washed in a
counter-current of cooled kerosine. The mixture is
stabilized then fed into a splitter where the kerosine
and gasoline (liquid) are separated. Kerosine is
cooled and recycled; gasoline is returned to the
storage tank. Operation is fully automatic. Active
charcoal filter can be added as 2nd staee air ourifier.
Vendor/Country of
Origin
Center Clean Coal
Utilization
Mr. Elichi Yugeta
Japan
Cerel, Ltd.
Andy Startin
UK
Cool Sorption A/S Mr.
Morten Reimer
Hamrrem Glostrup
Denmart
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
500 tpd pilot
plant under
study
Several full-
scale units in
use throughout
Europe.
Commercial in
use in Europe
at more than 60
units
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
SO,, CO2, and other energy
related pollutants
Sources:
Primary Metals Manufacture
(ADP)
Secondary IlHPa$$:
None
Pollutants:
SOj, HC1, PM
Sources:
Cement Manufacure (ADP)
Industrial Boilers (UAP, TAB,
ADP)
Solid Waste Disposal (UAP,
TAB)
Chemical Manufacturing (UAP,
ADP)
Primary Metals Manufacture
(ADP)
Secondary ImP??t?:
None
Pollutants:
VOCs
Sources:
Petroleum Marketing (UAP)
Gasoline distribution (UAP)
Secondary Impact;:
Wastewater
Performance
Levels
"Scarcely
measurable"
sulfur emissions
and 5-10%
reduction in CO2.
99.7% PM
control.
No data on SO2.
Meets or exceeds
EPA
requirements.
Costs
Costs reduced due to
elimination of sintering
and coking.
$16.2 per ACFM of flue
gas treated.
Capital costs range from
$600Ktol2M. Savings
due to product recovery.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number'
A-7
IA-8
A-9
A-10
Technology Name and Brief Description
ligh Combustion Efficiency Woodstove with
)owndiaft Combustion-Downbuming combustion
woodstove used to bum smoke (paiticulate), carbon
monoxide, and hydrocarbons that would in a
conventional stove be emitted to the atmosphere.
This method of burning not only reduces pollution
by almost 90 percent as compared to a conventional
stove), but also increases net stove efficiency. The
CRE woodstove is designed to pall air from outside
the top of the stove down into the combustion zone
and then completes combustion in a secondary
chamber.
Burning Image analyZER (BIZER)-Combustion
control in kraft pulp mill recovery boilers by use of
nfrared fire-room cameras to view smelt pile and
digital image processing to provide presentation of
ranting information in a dear form. Can be used
for automatic burning control, and automatic
prevention of disturbances in the fuel bed.
ELSORB process-Wet scrubbing method which
utilizes a phosphate buffer for absorption of SO,
from flue gas. Buffer is stable, nonvolatile,
nontoxic, easily available and is continuously
recycled to the process after removal of SO, by
evaporation. Process produces concentrated SO, for
further processing either to HjSO4, or elemental S,
or liquid SO,.
Water-based Liquid Resins-Proprietary resin
dispersion technology used for applying water-based
resin adhesives. Resins are free from organic
solvents, proteins and starches. Adhesives are
nontoxic and can generate higher levels of adhesion
through penetration of absorbent substrates
Vendor/Country of
Origin
CRE Group, Ltd
UK
ABB Industry Oy
Mr. Raimo Sutinen
Finland
Elkem Technology, Inc.
Mr. Frank Fereday
Pittsburgh, PA Norway
Blueminster Ltd.
Mr. Trevor Jones
United Kingdom
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
Prototype
tested in
Russia.
Commercially
available in
Indonesia
Demonstration
at U.S. facility
in NM-1995.
Current Austria
and Norway
foil-scale
facilities
In use by major
European/Lit' 1
manufacturers
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
VOCs, PM, CO
Sources:
Woodstoves and Fireplaces
(UAP)
Secondary Impacts:
None
Pollutants:
VOC, CO, NO,, PM (through
energy efficiency)
Sources:
Industrial Boilers (UAP)
Solid Waste Disposal (UAP)
Secondary Jmpacts:
None
Pollutants:
SO,
Sources:
Industrial Boilers (ADP)
Petroleum Refineries (ADP)
Secondary Jmpacts.:
Minor amounts of water and
wastewater
Pollutants:
VOCs
Sources:
Resins Production (TAB)
Solvent Evaporation (ADP)
Surface Coating (UAP)
Secondary IlHP?ct?:
Wastewater and resin disposal
Performance
Levels
78% reduction of
ordinary stove
emissions.
65% reduction of
conventional
catalytic stove
emissions.
Maximizes
energy efficiency.
>95% control.
Eliminates VOC
emissions from
adhesives.
Saves drying
energy
requirements.
Costs
$1.50 per ton of smoke
reduced.
$185/yr savings over
typical catalytic stoves.
Paybacjk 1-2 years.
Capital costs 500,000 -
$2M.
$479/ton SO, removed.
Savings potential for
HjSO, recovered at
$30/ton recovered.
Cost savings due to
reduced solvent
requirements.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number*
A-ll
A-12
A-13
Technology Name and Brief Description
Airborne 10 Absorption/biodegeneration Agent— A
proprietary blend of surfactants that when atomized
with water, increases the effective surface area or
interface area of the water droplet by 500,000
percent. When introduced into an exhaust gas, the
Airborne 10 droplet collides with a pollutant aerosol
and absorbs the pollutant. The Airborne
10/pollution aerosol falls to the ground where it is
broken down by the natural bacteria present The
high droplet surface area and volume allows for
more effective gas contact, scrubbing, and,
consequently, more effective air pollution control.
Oilless, Dry Centrifugal "leak free" Compressors-
Dry gas seals offer the advantage of very little
leakage, which eliminates the need for a
sophisticated seal oil supply system. Enables
increased reliability, energy savings, and
maintainability, which is required in some fugitive
leaks standards. Energy savings by use of magnetic
bearings can offer a speed increase of the rotor and a
size reduction of the casing.
Degreasing with Alkaline Cleaning-Traditional
trichloroethylene degreasing process replaced by an
alkaline cleaning process. Totally reduces need for
solvent.
Vendor/Country of
Origin
Impex U.K. Ltd.
I.P. Edgar, Managing
Director
UK
Hitachi Ltd.
Mr. Yasyo Fukushima
Hitachi U.S.
Mr. Peter Bellavigna
Japan
Thorn Jamkonst AB Mr.
Egon Conrad Sweden
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
Available and
in use
throughout
Europe
One full scale
commercial
application at a
petroleum
refinery
One site
participated in
study.
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
VOCs, toxics
Sources:
Solid Waste TSDF (TAB)
Chemical Manufacturing (UAP,
ADP)
Synthetic Organic Chem. Mfr.
(TAB)
Plastics Manufacture (UAP)
Bakeries (ADP)
Secondary ftn.pa.cts:
Water quality
Pollutants:
VOC (process fugitives and
through energy efficiency), CO,
NO,, PM (through energy
efficiency)
Sources:
Petroleum Refineries (TAB)
Chemical Manufacturing (UAP)
Synthetic Organic Chem. Mfr.
(TAB)
Secondary Impacts:
None
Pollutants:
VOCs
Sources:
DegreasingADry Cleaning (UAP)
Solvent Evaporation (ADP)
Secondary frnpacfs:
Wastewater
Performance
Levels
99.8% removal
of emissions.
100% control of
fugitive
compressor
emissions.
100% reduction
in solvent
emissions.
Costs
$0.37 savings per ton
waste processed over
traditional scrubbing
mechanisms.
Relative to typical
reciprocal compressor:
capital costs 21% less,
operating costs 4% less.
20% less than using
solvents.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number'
A-14
B-l
B-2
Technology Name and Brief Description
QSL Process-Designed to treat all grades of lead
concentrates and secondary materials. Reactor
consists of a horizontal, slightly-sloped cylinder
which is divided into oxidation and reduction zones.
law material is introduced in the oxidation zone
where the lead sulfides are oxidized forming primary
ead bullion and a slag containing about
20-25 %PbO. The PbOi» reduced to metallic Pb in
the reduction zone by the use of pulverized coal or
coke. The off gas which contains • high
concentration of SO2 and dust is treated before it is
exhausted. The process is designed to include
recovery of Cd, Zn, and H£O,.
Envirotreat Modified Clays for the Control of VOC
in Waste Air Streams— This technology utilizes a
range of modified clays that readily react with
pollutants contained in waste gas streams. The clays
act as a filter to remove the VOCs in the air stream.
The Envirotreat clays (E-clays) were developed
initially for use in land remediation, but the high
reactivity of the clays made them well suited for air
pollution as well. The equipment required for
implementation is similar to that used with activated
carbon processes. Unlike activated carbon which,
once saturated with VOCs, must be treated to avoid
the reversal of the adsorption process, the E-clays do
not require treatment and will not desorb the
pollutants back into the environment.
Fluidized-bed Cement Kiln Technology-The
technology utilizes multiple fluid beds to improve the
combustion and heat transfer characteristics of the
cement production process, enabling better control
of the sintering temperature; reducing Nox and CO2
emissions. The fiuidized bed system also enables
lower grades of coal to be used (low carbon and high
hydrogen content).
Vendor/Country of
Origin
Lurgi Metallurgie
Dr. Andreas Siegmund
Germany
Rowe Technology, Ltd
R.M. Weir, Director
UK
Center Clean Coal
Utilization
Mr. Elichi Yugeta
Japan
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
Commercial
operation in
Germany,
Korea, Canada,
China
Prototype
under
development
Under study
since 1986.
Pilot plant
testing began
1995
(200 ton/day
plant)
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
Lead, Cd, SO2
Sources:
Lead Smelting (TAB)
Secondary Im.pa.cts:
Process waste and wastewater
Pollutants:
VOCs, toxics
Sources:
Solvent Evaporation (ADP)
Surface Coating (TAB)
Chemical Manufacturing (UAP,
ADP) Synthetic Organic Chem.
Mft. (TAB)
Secondary .Impacts :
Solid waste (spent clay)
Pollutants:
NOX and CO,
Sources:
Cement Manufacture (ADP)
Industrial boilers (ADP)
Secondary Impels:
None
Performance
Levels
>90% reduction
in Pb and Cd
emissions.
98% reduction in
SO2 emissions,
compared to
conventional
plants.
High efficiency
expected.
NO, levels
reduced one-half
to one-third
compared to
typical cement
kilns.
Reduces CO2 (by
10%), feel
consumption, and
pollution.
Costs
$70M capital costs for
75,000 T/yr lead
production plant.
$90/ton of pollutant
removed.
Reduces construction costs
by 30%, saves 70% of
usual space requirements,
reduces fuel consumption
10%.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number'
B-3
B-4
Technology Name and Brief Description
Oxidation Low Temperature Catalyst for Catalytic
Combustion Deodorization/odor Abatement Systems-
-Catalyst has unique high activity at low
temperatures, allowing for low temperature odor
treatment, which eliminates the possibility of NO,
formation. Catalyst can resist temperatures up to
800>C, allowing for greater catalyst life and lower
operating costs (fewer regenerations/replacements).
Ftuidized-bed Heat Treatment of metal components—
A gas phase heat treatment process using a fluidized
bed of alumina particles. A mixture of gases is used
to produce the fluidizing atmosphere for heat
treatment of the material immersed in the fluidized
bed. Hydrocarbon gases are used for carburizing,
ammonia for nitrating, and nitrogen for neutral
hardening. The bed is heated by electricity or gas,
and quenching is also carried out in a fluidized bed.
Because the process areas are enclosed, fugitive
emissions can be easily controlled when compared to
current molten salt bath heat treatment methods.
Vendor/Country of
Origin
Babcock Hitachi KK
Mr. Hiroshi Ichiryu
Japan
Quality Heat Treatment
Pty Ltd. Mr. Ray W.
Reynoldson Australia
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
Two full-scale
systems in
operation;
acrylic acid and
styrene
monomer plant
Four facilities
in 3 countries:
Australia,
Indonesia,
Malaysia (2)
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
NOj
Sources:
Chemical Manufacturing (ADP)
Secondary Impacts:
None.
Pollutants:
Metals, CN, VOC's, Halogens
Sources:
Primary Metals Manufacture
(ADP)
Secondary Impacts*
None
Performance
Levels
Produces less
thermal NO, with
90% reduction of
target pollutants
at 350*C with no
deterioration at
3,000+ hours of
catalyst service.
100% control of
chemicals
replaced.
Costs
Capital costs: $1.3Mfor
20,000 NmVhr acrylic
plant and $2.8M for
60,000 Nm'/hr styrene
monomer plant
For 100-275 kg/hr plant,
cost savings of
$87,000/yr, two-year
capital cost payback
period.
(continued)
-------
EXHIBIT 2 (Continued)
Technology
Number'
B-5
IB-6
B-7
Technology Name and Brief Description
"BIOTON" Biofilter-Biofiltcr works by providing an
environment in which the microorganisms can
thrive. The construction of this environment begins
with organic-bearing material, such as compost,
surrounded by a thin film of water. The compost
serves as the nutrient source for the microorganisms
until the polluted gas stream becomes the food
source. One cubic meter of filter material can
provide approximately 10 million particles, and each
particle can house up to 100,000 microorganisms.
Ecoclean Cleaning Machines— Batch solvent cleaning
machines. The cleaning chamber is hermetically
sealed during the cleaning cycle. After completion
of the cleaning cycle, the solvent vapor is a
evacuated from the chamber through a solvent
recovery system.
F-l Clean-Ultrasonic cleaning and drying batch
solvent cleaning machine. Cleaning chamber is
closed during cleaning and drying is performed
under vacuum with recovery of residual solvent
vapors.
Vendor/Country of
Origin
PPC Biofilter/Clair Tec
Mr. Scot Standefer
Longview, Texas
Netherlands
Durr Industries/
Automation, Lie.
Mr. David Townsend
and Mr. Joseph
Scapoelilti
Germany
Tiyoda Mfg.
Mr. Mickey Ohkubo
Japan
Developmental
Status/Sites in
Use
20+ facilities
in Europe
Commercially
available
throughout '
Europe
Commercial
use in Japan by
many large
companies.
Targeted Pollutants and Sources,
and Secondary Impacts
Pollutants:
VOCs, toxics
Sources:
Chemical Manufacturing (UAP,
ADP)
Petroleum Refineries (TAB,
ADP)
Synthetic Organic Chem. Mfr.
(TAB)
Surface coating (TAB)
Secondary Jn^oacts:
Disposal of aged filter material
Pollutants:
VOCs, toxics
Sources:
Degreasing/Dry cleaning (UAP)
Solvent evaporation (ADP)
Secondary Jmpacff:
None
Pollutants:
VOCs, Toxics
Sources:
Solvent Evaporation (ADP)
Degreasing/Dry Clean (UAP)
Secondary Impacts,:
Sludge from filters
Performance
Levels .
80-90% control.
99% reduction in
solvent use when
compared to the
conventional
open-top vapor
cleaners being
used in the U.S.
99.99% control.
Costs
$15-100 per cfm of air
cleaned.
$30/ton of load degreased.
Capital costs $200K -
250K.
OO
' A- = Technology is worthy of current consideration by U.S. industry; B- = Technology may have potential benefits for U.S. industry, but sufficient information is lacking.
(continued)
-------
4-9
EXHIBIT 3
Applicability of Identified Technologies
Emission Source
Urban Air Quality
Automobiles (also heavy-duty and off-road vehicles)
Boilers, Turbines, and Heaters
Chemical Manufacturing
Degreasing/Dry Cleaning
Gasoline Distribution (bulk stations and terminals)
Petroleum Marketing (vehicle refueling/spillage)
Plastics Manufacture
Solid Waste Disposal
Surface Coating
Woodstoves and Fireplaces
Toxic Air Emissions
Cyanide Production/Coke Ovens
Industrial Boilers
Lead Smelting
Petroleum Refineries
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing
Polycarbonates Production
Resins Production (amino and acetal)
Solid Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
Surface Coating
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industries
(SOCMQ
Add Deposition
Asphalt Paving
Automobiles (inclnding heavy-duty and off-road vehicles)
Bakeries
Cement Manufacture
Chemicals Manufacturing
Fossil Fuel-Fired Boilers
Gasoline Station Evaporation Loss
Petroleum Refining
Primary Metals Manufacture
Solvent Evaporation (dry cleaning/degreasing, printing)
Applicable Air Pollution Prevention and Control
Technologies
Pollution Control
0
A-2, A-5
A-5, A-ll, B-l, B-5
B-6, B-7
A-6
A-6
A-ll
A-5
0
0
0
A-2, A-5
0
0
0
0
0
A-5 A-ll
B-l, B-5
A-ll,B-l,B-5
0
A-ll
A-5
A-l, A-2, A-5, A-ll, B-l, B-5
A-9, A-5
0
A-9
A-2, A-5
B-6, B-7, B-l
0
Pollution
Prevention
0
A-8, A-12
A-12
A-13
0
0
0
A-8
A-10
A-7
0
A-12
A-14
A-12
0
0
A-10
0
0
A-12
0
0
A-3, B-2
A-3, B-3, B-4
A-12, B-2
0
0
A-4, B-4,
A-10, A-13, B-3
0
From the list of 21 technologies shown in Exhibit 2, listed here by technology number.
-------
5-1
5.0 REFERENCES
Jones, J. W., D. Campbell, P. Murphy, and R. Smith. Preliminary Analysis of
Hazardous Air Pollutant Emission Inventories from Three Major Urban Areas.
(EPA-600/A-94-007). (NTIS PB94-139508). Presented at the Joint
A&WMA/CARB/SCAQMD Conference. Pasadena, California. October 18-
20, 1993.
French, C. Schedule for Standards: Methodology and Results for Ranking
Source Categories Based on Environmental Effects Data. (EPA-453/R-93-053).
(NTIS PB95-187993). Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. September
1993.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Acidic Deposition: State of Science
and Technology, Volume IV. Ed. P. M. Irving. U. S. National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). Washington, DC. 1990.
-------
A-l
Attachment A
List of Embassies Contacted
Mr. Juan Skaf
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Argentina
Mr. Norman Gomm
Industry, Science, and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Australia
Mr. Bemhard Zimburg
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Austria
Ms. Carmen Lidia Richter Ribeiro Moura
First Secretary
Embassy of Brazil
Mr. Michael Stephens
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Canada
Ms. Grith Becker
Commercial Counselor
Embassy of Denmark
Mr. Gilbert Fayl
Science and Technology Counselor
Delegation of the Commission of European
Communities
Dr. Markka Auer
Scientific Counselor
Embassy of Finland
Mrs. Michele Durand
Scientific Attache - Biotechnology and Environment
Embassy of France
Mr. Helmut Lueders
First Secretary - Environment
Embassy of Germany
Mr. Alastair Allcock
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Great Britain
Dr. Emanuele Mannarino
Scientific Attache
Embassy of Italy
Mr. Yukihide Hayashi
Scientific Counselor
Embassy of Japan
Mr. Hans van Zijst
Counselor - Environment
Embassy of the Netherlands
Mr. David Cunliffe
Secondary Secretary, Political and Economic
Embassy of New Zealand
Dr. Gunner Wilhelmsen
Scientific Counselor
Embassy of Norway
Mr. Niels C. Huaffe
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of South Africa
Mr. Svante Lundin
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Sweden
Dr. Christoph von Arb
Science and Technology Counselor
Embassy of Switzerland
-------
B-l
Attachment B
List of Organizations Contacted
Ms. Melissa K. Vass
Center for the Analysis and Dissemination of
Demonstrated Energy Technologies (CADDET)
Oak Ridge. TN. USA
Ms. Chizuru Aoki
United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP)
Paris, France
Mr. Dariusz Prasek
European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD)
London, UK
Ms. Janice Mazur
The World Bank Group
Washington, DC, USA
Mr. Dennis Nicolay
R&TD, Directorate General Xffl/D-2
Commission of the European Community
Luxembourg
Mr. Tom McGrath
World Environment Center
New York, NY, USA
-------
C-l
Attachment C
List of People Contacted During this Study
Dr. Wolfgang Lanz
EG - Forschungs-und
Technologic Programme, und EUREKA
Wien, Austria
Mr. Guillaume Dedeurwaerder
Programme de la Poltique
Scientifique
Brussels, Belgium
Mme A. Vankeerbergen
Ministere de la Region Wallonne
Jambes, Belgium
Ms. Angelica Arellano Escalera
Program De Control De Emisiones De Fuentes
Fijas
Santiago, Chile
Mr. David Saunders
UK EUREKA Office
London, England
Dr. Heikki Kotilainen
TEKES Technology Development Centre
Helsinki, Finland
Mr. R. Band
Obsevatoire des Sciences et des Techniques
Paris, France
Mr. Phillip Manguin
Ministrere de la Recherche et de la Technologic
Paris, France
Mr. Hans-Hermann Eggers
Federal Environmental Agency
Berlin, Germany
Dr. R. Faust
Info-Institut fur Wirtschaftsforschung
Munich, Germany
Prof. Giancarlo Schileo
Coordinatore Nazionale EUREKA
Pom** Ttalv
Mr. L. Patteet
Ministerie van Volksgezondheid
en Leeftnilieu
Brussels, Belgium
Mr. Ghilio C. Grata
C.C.E. DGXH
Brussels, Belgium
Dr. Luis Beilacqua
Ministry for Science and Technology
Brasilia, Brazil
Civ. Ing. Poul Knudsen
National Agency of Industry and Trade
Copenhagen, Denmark
Mr. Wally Ford
ETIS Office
London, England
Mr. Michel Aubert
Secretariat Francais d' EUREKA
Paris, France
Mr. B. Bobe
Strategic & Technology
Centrale Management
Ecole Centrale de Paris
Chatenay-Malabry Cedex, France
Dr. Olav Hohmeyer
ZEW
Mannheim, Germany
Bundesministerium fur Forschung und Technologie
Bonn, Germany
Dr. H. Grupp
Fraunhofer-Institut fur Systemchnik
und Innovationsforschun
Karlsruhe, Germany
Dr. Ushio
Air Quality Bureau
Tnlrvn Tapan
(continued)
-------
C-2
Attachment C
Continued
Prof. Hidetsuiu Matushita
Sbizuoka Prefectual University
Shizuoka-ski, Japan
Mr. Takao Hamada
Overseas Environmental Cooperation Center
Tokyo, Japan
Bernard Vandervan
Studiecentrum Voor Technologic
en Beleid TNO
Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
Dr. Endert
Ministry of Science
Zoetermeer, the Netherlands
MT Hcrnan Tpminink
TNO Environmental Research
the Netherlands
Dr. AFJ van Raan
Center for Science and Technology Studies
University of Leiden
Leiden, the Netherlands
Mr. Bjom Henriksen
Royal Norwegian Council for Scientific
& Industrial Research (NTNF)
Oslo, Norway
Mr. Andres Zabara
Coordinador Nacional EUREKA
Madrid, Spain
Mr. Anders Sodergem
Department of Environment
and Energy
Ecology House
Lund, Sweden
Mr. J. Annerstedt
Nordic Centre for Innovation
T unsl Q r\
Mr. Masaji Okuyama
Japan Society of Industrial Machinery
Manufacturers
Tokyo, Japan
Mr. F. Kodama
National Institute of Science, Technology and
Engineering Polic
Tokyo, Japan
Dr. Boyd
Novem
Utrecht, the Netherlands
Mr. R.A.J. van Loen
Technologic Management
Group - TNO
Delft, the Netherlands
Mr. L. J. A. M. van den Bergen
EUREKA Secretariaat
Den Haag, the Netherlands
Dr. H.P. Dits
Directie Organsatie en Informatieverzorging
Hoofddirectie Wetenschapsbeleid
Minister Van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen
Zoetermeer, the Netherlands
Mr. Tomas Andrezal
Sensor, Incorporated
Bratislava, Slovak Republic
Sven Erickson
Natlikan
Stockholm, Sweden
Mr. Jan Hjorth
Swedish Board for Technical Development
Stockholm, Sweden
P. Guller
Synergo
(continued)
-------
C-3
Attachment C
Continued
Mr. Jeff Taylor
Energy Efficiency Office
Department of the Environment
London, UK
Mr. David Pounder
Energy Efficiency Office
Department of the Environment
London, UK
Mr. Peter Jennings
Environmental Business
West Devon, UK
Ms. Christine Cinnali
EPA
Washington, DC, USA
Mr. William Ellison
Ellison Consultants
Monrovia, MD, USA
The McHvaine Company
2970 Maria Avenue
Northbrook, IL, USA
Mr. Francis Fox
Engitec Impianti S.p.A.
Milano, Italy
Mr. Thomas Czesky
Hahn and Kolb (USA), Inc.
Elk Grove Village, EL, USA
Mr. Alan Attyerg
Haldor-Topsoe
Houston, TX, USA
Dr. Hillary Newport
Environmental Technology
Best Practical Hotline
London, UK
Dr. Jimski
University of Sussex
Sussex, UK
Mr. Ohad Jehassi
EPA - Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Washington, DC, USA
Ms. Cybele Martin
Research Triangle Institute
RTP, NC, USA
Mr. JeffHoldridge
Japanese Technology Evaluation Center
Baltimore, MD, USA
Mr. Paul Spaite
Consultant
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Mr. Scot Standefer
PPC BIOFILTER
Longview, TX, USA
Mr. Joel Tapia
S&K Products International
Chestnut Ridge, NY, USA
Mr. Magnus Danielsson
Weatherly, Incorporated
Atlanta, GA, USA
-------
D-l
Attachment D
List of Foreign Technology Vendors Contacted
Mr. Dave Townsend
Durr Automation, Inc.
Davisburg, MI, USA
Mr. Francis Fox
Engitec Impianti S.p.A.
Milano, Italy
Mr. Thomas Czesky
Hahn and Koto (USA), Inc.
Elk Grove Village, IL, USA
Mr. Alan Albjerg
Haldor-Topsoe
Houston, TX, USA
Mr. Jack Riley
Lurgi Corporation
Baltimore, MD, USA
Mr. Scot Standefer
PPC BIOFILTER
Longview, TX, USA
Mr. Joel Tapia
S&K Products International
Chestnut Ridge, NY, USA
Mr. Magnus Danielsson
Weatherly, Incorporated
Atlanta, GA, USA
-------
E-l
Attachment £
Details of the 21 Technologies
Identified for Consideration by U. S. Industry
Technology No. Title Page
A-l Zinc Oxide Process for S02 Emission Control in Chemical
Manufacturing E-3
A-2 Solinox Process for Reduction of S02 E-9
A-3 Linkman Kiln Control System E-15
A-4 DIGS (Direct Iron Ore Smelting Reduction) Process E-21
A-5 CerafiT Low Density Filter Elements E-25
A-6 Cool Sorption Cold Liquid Absorption Vapor
Recovery Process E-30
A-7 Bioreactor for Remediation of Low-to-Medium Level VOC
Emissions E-37
A-8 BIZER Process for Combustion Control in Recovery Boilers by
Digital Image Processing E-41
A-9 Elsorb® Process for Reduction of S02 E-44
A-10 Blueminster Production Process of Water-based Liquid Resins and
Resin Dispersions E-51
A-ll Airborne 10 Absorption Agent Chemical Technology E-55
A-12 Oilless, Dry Centrifugal Leak-free Compressors for Fugitive
Emission Control and Energy Efficiency E-60
A-13 Degreasing with Alkaline-based Cleaners E-65
A-14 QSL Lead Smelter Reactor E-69
B-l Use of Envirotreat Modified Clays for the Control of VOC in Waste
Ah* Streams E-76
-------
E-2
Technology No. Title Page
B-2 Fluidized-bed Cement Kiln Technology E-80
B-3 Low-temperature Catalytic Incineration E-85
B-4 Fluidized-bed Heat Treatment of Metal Components E-90
B-5 Bioton Biofilter for Control of Air Pollutants E-97
B-6 Ecoclean Cleaning Machines SOS, 81S, and 83S for
Degreasing E-100
B-7 F-l Clean Ultrasonic Cleaning Machine for Degreasing E-104
-------
E-3
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-1
ZINC OXIDE PROCESS FOR SO. EMISSION CONTROL IN CHEMICAL MANUFACTURING
Vendor: Sachtleben Chemie GmbH
Duisburg, F.R.G.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
/
The Zinc Oxide process is a waste gas cleaning technology that offers effective removal of H2S
and S02 while producing no wastewater effluent. It was developed for compliance with
German air regulations at the vendor's lithopone (a zinc sulfide white pigment) plant. The
process uses the Zinc Oxide process to absorb the pollutants from annealing and drying kilns in
a two-stage countercurrent flow absorber. A predecessor technology was implemented at
Sachtleben's titanium dioxide pigment facility in 1991; this facility also uses a Zinc Oxide
absorption system in addition to a sulfuric acid and peroxide absorption system.
In the absorber, a zinc oxide suspension is added to the top of the column in a concentration
above stoichiometric. The waste gas, which is cleaned of most of its dust and aerosols in
venturi scrubbers prior to column entry, enters the column near the bottom. The hydrogen
sulfide and the sulfur dioxide react with the zinc oxide absorber to form Zn(HS03)2, ZnS04,
ZnS03, and ZnS.
The scrubbing liquor overflow from the top column section is sent to the bottom section where
the excess absorbent is used to complete the reactions. A demister is included at the column
top, which uses process water to remove suspension droplets carried in the gas stream. The
two sections of the column are packed with a conventional plastic packing material that has
high efficiency and low pressure loss. The material discharging from the bottom of the column
is a mixture of zinc sulfate, zinc sulfide, zinc sulfite, and excess zinc oxide. This mixture is
pumped to a zinc liquor treatment tank and reused in the production process.
At the titanium dioxide facility, following the removal of dust and sulfuric acid aerosols, the gas
stream passes through two absorption columns. In this system , the type and design of the
absorption agent is variable to market conditions (i.e., the availability of the various absorption
agents). The first column has the flexibility to utilize a sulfuric acid/hydrogen peroxide mixture,
-------
E-4
a zinc oxide slurry, or a caustic soda solution for the conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfuric
acid, which is recovered for use or for sale. The second column typically uses zinc oxide slurry
or caustic soda solution for the conversion of hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide into zinc
sulfate and zinc sulfide, which can be used in another facility, or marketed. If the zinc
products cannot be used or marketed, the zinc oxide can be recovered, generating a pure sulfur
dioxide stream which can then be used or marketed as a raw material.
The existence of process waste at zinc smelting facilities is a primary concern. Typical
components of the waste are: 7 percent zinc, 50 percent iron, and 10 percent sulfur. The use
of the Walz process to recover zinc from this residue is a possible use of this waste. In the
Walz process, zinc products react to form zinc oxide in the presence of coal in a rotary kiln.
The zinc oxide is removed from the exhaust gas of the kiln by filters. The exhaust gas contains
normal combustion products and 3-6 g/Nm3 sulfur dioxide. To remove the sulfur dioxide, the
Sachtleben Process is used. A one stage countercurrent absorption column running with a zinc
oxide slurry absorbs the sulfur dioxide to form zinc sulfite. The zinc sulfite bottoms is then
roasted to produce zinc oxide and almost pure sulfur dioxide, which can be then further reacted
to form sulfuric acid. This process can similarly be used to clean the tail gas from a sulfuric
acid plant.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The technology is currently utilized by its manufacturer, Sachtleben Chemie, at its Duisburg
location in two factories:
• Since 1991, for the exhaust gas from the titanium dioxide factory.
• Since 1994, at the lithopone plant for the exhaust gas from its
annealing and drying kilns.
3.0 CASE STUDY
The lithopone factory has been in full scale operation since the end of 1994, with
approximately 98 percent availability (operational capacity) during its initial seven months. The
titanium dioxide plant has been 92 percent available since 1991. The data for the lithopone
and'titanium dioxide facilities are listed in the table below.
-------
E-5
Table 1-1.
Parameter
Gas flow (Nm3/hr)
Inlet loading (mg/Nm3)
S02
S03
H2S
Dust
Outlet emissions (mg/Nm3)
SOx
H2S
Dust
Lithopone Plant
58
1700
92
300
105
<180
<3
<30
Value
Titanium Dioxide Plant
61,000
6.6-4.4
1.4-0.8
0.2-0.18
1.2-0.38
S02 <20
S03 <22
<2.5
<20
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Chemical Manufacture
Limitations:
High capital requirements (particularly in the case where the raw
absorption products cannot be reused and a zinc oxide recovery
process must be added.
• Maximum inlet pollutant concentrations
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
• SOX (S02 and S03)
H2S
-------
E-6
6.0 TEST DATA
The testing information was acquired from the performance of the technology at the two
Sachtleben facilities in 1991 and 1993-94. Cold tests of the operations were performed to
resolve control behavior difficulties and any other spurious engineering problems. The inlet and
outlet streams of the absorption columns were monitored continuously. According to
monitoring data, the target of reducing the waste gas pollutant load was achieved almost
immediately.
A June 6, 1995, report was done by the German testing firm RWTOV on the Sachtleben
Lithopone facility at Duisburg to the test emissions of the waste-gas cleaning system. The test
was performed by placing continuous emission monitors in six sites on and around the plant:
The gas stream was measured for velocity of flow, stack pressure, gas temperature, and
humidity. A gravimetric evaluation was also performed. The CEMs were initially tested for
sensitivity using N02, S02/ NO, CO, and C02. Samples were also taken from filters
strategically placed in the gas stream. Three examinations were run on the process. Test
results show that the waste gas cleaning process successfully lowered SOX concentrations
from 1665-2045 mg/m3to 13-19 mg/m3.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The lithopone and titanium dioxide plants have the process requirements shown in the table
below.
Table 1-2.
Parameter
Gas
Electrical power
Process water
Zinc oxide
Hydrogen peroxide
Lithopone Plant
(58 Nm3/hr)
1585kW
10m3/hr
1 30 kg/hr
_
Titanium Dioxide Plant
(61,OOONm3/hr)
750 kW
15m3/hr
540 kg/hr
1 60 kg/hr
-------
E-7
8.0 COSTS
The following data was provided for the Lithopone plant:
Table 1-3.
Parameter
Value
Capital cost
Operating costs
Cost basis
$15.82 million
$2.03 million/yr
DM
For a typical plant, the following cost data were provided by the vendor:
Table 1-4.
Parameter
Capital cost
Payback period
Interest rate
Maintenance (annual)
Operation (annual)
Electrical power
Compressed air
Water
Washing agent
Personnel
Miscellaneous
Cost per ton of pollutant
Currency Basis
Value
$4.0 million
1 0 years
8-10 percent
$200,000/yr
$425,200
$36,700
$106,000
$216,000
$800,000
$175,000
$1,080/ton
DM 1995
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No secondary impacts if the absorption by-products of zinc sulfate, zinc sulfide, zinc sulfite,
and excess zinc oxide are all reused.
-------
E-8
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
No comparisons available.
11.0 VARIATIONS
For a constant flowrate, a rise of pollutant concentration (H2S, S02) has the following effects:
• More of the ZnO slurry will be needed.
• The scrubbing sections will require more plastic packing material.
• The increased pressure drop from the increased packing corresponds to
a increased power for the exhaust fan.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Looks like a technology that would be potentially applicable to the metallurgy
industry
• Does seem to have a high potential for negative secondary environmental
impacts
-------
E-9
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-2
SOLINOX PROCESS FOR REDUCTION OF S02
Vendor: Sachtleben Chemie GmbH
Duisburg, F.R.G.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The SOLINOX process comprises a two-step scrubbing process with its primary objective the
reduction of S02 emissions.
In the first step of the Solinox process, the flue gas is cooled by a water spray which also
removes most of the dust, halogenated hydrocarbons (HF, HCI), and heavy hydrocarbons. The
cooled flue gas enters a second nonaqueous scrubbing column in which S02 is removed with a
proprietary organic adsorbent (polyethylene-glycol-dimethylether) by selective (physical)
absorption. The organic adsorbent can be regenerated without any losses. The regeneration of
the organics is achieved by heating the rich adsorbent to 100-1400°C and passing through a
packed separator. The recovered concentrated S02 (90 percent) is cooled and compressed,
and can be sold.
This process is capable of controlling S02 in flue gases meeting TA-Luft (FRG) standards. The
SOLINOX process is also a cost efficient alternative as S02 concentrations in flue gases
increase, maintaining performance as concentrations vary, even as operation exceeded design
capacity 25 percent.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The SOLINOX technology has been installed at a number of facilities as shown in the table
below.
-------
E-10
Table 2-1.
Status
Full scale
Country
Austria
Facility
Zinc and lead smelter
Flue Gas (Nm3/hr)
30,000, and
50,000
Year
1986/
1988
Full scale
Austria
Cellulose (pulp) factory
100,000
1987
Full scale
Germany
Spar roaster
25,000
1990
Full scale
Coal-fired boilers and sulfuric 225,000
acid plant
1993
Full scale Germany Rotary kilns Ba2S production 70,000 (design)
(Sachtleben)
1993
Full scale
Poland
Copper foundry (Legnica)
250,000
1993 (est)
The SOLINOX processes at the above facilities were first installed on a pilot scale basis and
then developed into full scale units. At two locations, the units are no longer in operation due
to process changes that do not require S02 control.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Sachtleben Chemie GmbH (Duisburg)
This facility produces titanium oxide and other white pigments on a zinc-barium base
(lithopones) for paints. Its operations include a reduction-oxidation reaction in which
concentrated barium sulfate (92-93 percent) is reacted with cokes in a natural gas-fired rotary
kiln, and S02 is formed as an undesired by-product (up to 0.5 percent of the flue gas). The
concentration of S02 was found to vary considerably as uncontrollable process conditions
change (in addition to operational load). Halogen and hydrocarbon levels also were to be
controlled to meet German standards.
-------
E-ll
In order to control the volume of flue gas and hence reduce the capital costs of the Solinox
control technology, natural gas was combusted with pure oxygen. This reduced the volumetric
flue gas flow rate to 2,000 m3/hr and improved operation of the kiln.
Prior to S02 removal, dust was removed by an electrostatic precipitator from flue gas that had
been cooled from 600°C to 350°C.
The emission reductions achieved by the Solinox process at Sachtleben were:
S02 - 97 percent (0.12 g/m3 exhaust)
dust - 85 percent
Regeneration of the rich organic adsorbent was achieved by heat exchange of waste heat
(steam) available from other processes in this facility. The recovered S02-rich gas product,
which also contains co-absorbed hydrocarbons, was converted to H2S04 in an existing plant.
Other case study information was available for lead and zinc mills in Austria. The Solinox
process was used to achieve 97.7 percent S02 control at the lead facility at 96.1 percent S02
control at the zinc facility.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Primary Metals industry
Chemical Manufacture (pulp, pigment)
• Industrial Boilers (coal-fired)
Limitations:
• Best suited for gas with a high concentration of pollutants
• Minimum level of S02 in flue gas is 0.3 volume percent (technical) or
2000 ppmv (economic)
• Cost effectiveness will improve as sulfur dioxide fraction increases
• Degree of control depends on design
• Deposition of sulfur in heat exchangers and columns (pebble filter) might be a
concern, and is dependent on fraction of H2S in adsorbent
-------
E-12
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
SOX (S02 and S03)
• Hydrocarbons (such as benzene and naphthalene)
• Halogen compounds, such as HCI
• Paniculate matter
6.0 TEST DATA
Tests performed at the Sachtleben facility on November 11, 1991, and December 13, 1993,
show the following control efficiencies for gas flows of 25.8 and 20.1 Nm3/hr respectively.
Table 2-2.
Pollutant
S02
HCI
HF
Benzene
PM
Control Efficiency
Gas Flow:
25.8 Nma/hr
99.8
97.7
92.5
89.9
48
(percent)
Gas Flow:
20.1 Nm3/hr
98.5
99.2
78.6
57.7
18.4
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following table shows the operating parameters from the Sachtleben facility.
-------
E-13
Table 2-3.
Parameter Value
Design capacity 70,000 Nm3/hr
Temperature (inlet) 300°C
Pressure absorbent regeneration 0.5 bar
S02 mass flow 250 kg/hr
S02 mass flow variation (inlet) 100-400 kg/hr
Dust mass flow (inlet) 5 kg/hr
8.0 COSTS
The costs presented below are from the Sachtleben facility (design capacity 70,000 Nm3/hr).
Table 2-4.
Parameter Value
Capital costs (investment) $11.8 million
Operating costs $1.4 million/yr
Cost year/basis 1990 (DM, at 1.40 DM/$)
Interest (inflation) rate 2 percent (assumed)
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Recovered concentrated S02, (80-90 volume percent), that also contains some VOCs,
must be refined for reuse or disposed.
• Wastewater from bottom of aqueous scrubber will require further treatment.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
None available.
-------
E-14
11.0 VARIATIONS
Solinox process maintains stable performance as S02 levels in flue gas vary.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Potentially feasible for high sulfur coal application
-------
E-15
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-3
LINKMAN KILN CONTROL SYSTEM
Vendor: Image Automation Ltd.
London, U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Linkman system is an automated expert kiln control system designed to mimic best
operating practices and maintain optimum process conditions in the production of cement.
Typical emission reductions of NOX are 25 percent; up to 50 percent has been demonstrated.
Cement is made by burning fuel together with limestone and clay, shale or slate, yielding a
clinker which is then ground with gypsum to produce cement. The process is carried out in
large rotating kilns and as it is complex, it is easy to lose control and make sub-standard
product. To obtain a good quality product the temperature of the kiln must be regulated. A
stable kiln process is reached between the temperatures of 1,400 and 1,600°C; at higher
temperatures, energy consumption is high due to both the increased level of heat and the
energy required to grind the hard clinker produced. To achieve a softer high quality clinker, the
process must be operated at the lower end of the temperature range, thereby reducing both
NOX and SOX levels which increase with higher temperatures. Therefore, in a more controlled
system the temperature is kept lower, hence lower emissions and savings in energy use.
In the Linkman system, data from the plant relayed to the control center includes:
• Percent 02, CO, and NO at kiln inlet and /or preheater exit
• Percent 02 and CO at precalciner outlet
• Raw material feed rate
• Coal feed rate kiln burner
• Coal feed rate precalciner burner
• Air flow rates cooler fans
• Kiln amps
• Kiln hood pressure
-------
E-16
• Pressure under the first grate cooler chamber
• First grate cooler speed
• Kiln speed
• Tertiary air temperature
• Gas temperature outlet at the different cyclones
• Preheater waste gas temperature
• Gas temperature at kiln inlet
• Burning zone pyrometer
• Position of tertiary air damper
• Stack emissions
• Position of IDF damper
Laboratory data that is relayed to the control center includes:
• Lime feed, silica ratio, and alumina ratio
• Kiln feed percent calculation
• Clinker free lime per unit weight
• Clinker volatiles (S03, K20, etc.)
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The Linkman technology has been introduced in over 60 cement plants world-wide and is
diversifying into other processes where this type of control is needed, including a lubrication oil
plant run by BP and float glass lines run by Pilkington Glass. Table 3-1 lists a few of these
facilities.
In addition to the facilities mentioned above, there are also facilities in the following countries:
Australia (1), Brazil (7), Chile (1), Costa Rica (1), Ecuador (2), France (1), Germany (2), India (2),
Indonesia (1), Italy (2), Mexico (6), South Africa (3), South Korea (2), Switzerland (2), U.K. (9),
and U.S. (2).
-------
E-17
Table 3-1
Site/Company
Controlled Process
Blue Circle Cement
Aberthaw, U.K.
National Cement Co.
Lebec, U.S.A.
Ciments d' Obourg SA
Obourg, Belgium
Ciments Lafarge
Havre-Saint Vigor, France
Canakkale Cimento Sanayi AS
Mahutbay, Turkey
Orissa Cement Ltd
Sundagarh, India
Cementeria di Merone SPA
Merone 1, Italy
Bunder Cementwerke AG
Untervaz, Switzerland
Ssang Yong Industrial
Dong Hae, South Korea
Blue Circle Cement
Lichtenburg, South Africa
PT Semen Cibinong
Narogong, Indonesia
St. Lawrence Cement
Mississauga, Canada
1 preheater kiln
1 long dry kiln, cooler
2 wet process kilns
1 preheater kiln
1 precalciner kiln, cooler
1 precalciner kiln, cooler, raw mill
1 Lepol kiln, cooler
1 preheater kiln, mill
1 precalciner kiln
1 preheater kiln
1 precalciner kiln, 2 preheater kilns, coolers
1 twin-tower precalciner kiln, cooler, mill
These Linkman operations total over 1.3 million hours of on-line closed loop control in the
cement industry from fully commercially operating systems.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Blue Circle Cement, Hope Works, Kent, U.K.
In the early eighties, the Energy Efficiency Office set up a project to demonstrate how, by the
use of high level computer control, a consistent maximum output of high quality could be
produced from a kiln at minimum operating costs. The project involved several companies, the
-------
E-18
host company, Blue Circle Industries Pic; the monitoring contractor, WS Atkins Management
Consultants; and the equipment manufacturer, SIRA Ltd.
In March 1985, high level control was applied as an experiment to one of the two kilns at Hope
Works, which produce 1.1 million tons of concrete clinker per year. Using the existing
proprietary process control system, a maximum of 60 percent availability of time on high level
control was reached.
In the summer of 1986, in conjunction with SIRA, a new system was developed and named
Linkman. It provided much greater availability and reliability, and by February 1987, high level
control was operational for 70-90 percent of the time. Using NOX as an indicator of kiln
temperature, the process reduced specific energy consumption and increased clinker
production. The life span of the kiln refractory lining was also increased. By reducing the
operating temperature, NOX emissions were reduced by 25 to 50 percent.
In addition to increased output and improved clinker quality, a reduction of 7.7 percent in kiln
fuel consumption was achieved. A U.K. government energy audit identified a cost saving of
$1.5/ton of clinker, giving an annual saving of approximately $1,500,000 and a payback period
of less than three months, for 1.1 million tons of cement clinker produced per year.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Cement Manufacture
• Chemical Manufacture (titanium dioxide)
• Other industries:
De-asphalting plant
Catalytic cracker
Lime-recovery plant
Lubricating oil production
Float-glass production
Any industry where process performance is dependent on that of the
operator
-------
E-19
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
• NOX (reduced by 25 and 50 percent)
• Paniculate matter emissions minimized (not quantified by vendor)
6.0 TEST DATA
None available.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
Process requirements include adequate quality of existing instrumentation for implementation
of the system and the requirement that all key supervisory control parameters are available
through an appropriate sensor.
8.0 COSTS
Financial details are based on the case study (see Section 3) at the Blue Circle Cement plant in
Kent, U.K., that produces 1.1 million tons of concrete clinker a year:
Table 3-2
Parameter
Value
Capital costs (investment)
Estimated payback period
Operating costs and maintenance costs
Annual savings
Savings per ton of clinker
Cost year basis
$324,800
Less than three months
Not available
$1,488,000
$1.50
1987 U.K. pound
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No data available.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
None available.
-------
E-20
11.0 VARIATIONS
NOX emissions may vary with different flame shape, burning zone material temperature, and
other process dynamics. However, if the combustion system, NOX monitor, and kiln gas
sampling mechanism are all in good operating condition, and the oxygen target is high enough,
then the Linkman system should be able to maintain a stable operation in the kiln.
12.0 COMMENTS
Process controls described improve energy efficiency; however, there is not
enough information to determine what makes this process control different
from others.
-------
E-21
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-*
DIOS (DIRECT IRON ORE SMELTING REDUCTION) PROCESS
Vendor: Clean Coal Utilization
Tokyo, Japan
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
DIOS process uses fine and granular non-coking coal and iron ore directly for making molten
iron without resorting to the coking and sintering operations required in the traditional blast
furnace process. In DIOS, non-coking coal is charged into a smelting reduction furnace either
directly or after cooling, while iron ore is charged into the furnace after prereduction in a
fluidized bed to produce molten iron.
The following advantages are expected:
• While coking coal is a prerequisite to the blast furnace process, DIOS dispenses
with coking coal and can utilize non-coking coal directly, thereby ensuring a
wider selection of resources to be used in ironmaking.
• Start-ups and shut-downs of operations are easier with DIOS than the blast
furnace process, thereby enhancing flexibility in production.
• The agglomerating process (sintering and coking) is eliminated, thereby
reducing capital expenditures and energy costs.
• The export gas can be easily controlled, thereby optimizing operational
efficiency.
• An approximately 10 percent reduction in production cost of molten iron is
expected as compared with the blast furnace process.
• C02 emissions will be reduced by 5-10 percent in the heat-efficient DIOS
process, as compared with the blast furnace process.
• Sulfur emissions are scarcely measurable since the sulfur charged is either
dissolved into the melted slag and metal, or absorbed onto dust and collected.
DIOS uses less energy than a conventional blast furnace and, as a result, less emissions will be
associated with the combustion of fuels.
-------
E-22
In addition, DIOS does not require the horizontal coke ovens, sintering plant or pelletising plant
normally required by a blast furnace. As a result, energy costs will be less and no pollutants
associated with these operations will be produced.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
DIOS is currently at the late development stage. The DIOS project is an 8 year program started
in April 1988. The first three years of the project were conducted at five leading Japanese
steel plants. Following these studies, a 500 t/d pilot plant was constructed at NKK's Keihin
Steel Plant and completed in 1993. Operational tests are being conducted at this plant and are
expected to be completed by March 1996.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Table 4-1
Facility
Keihin Steel Plant
Capacity
500 t/day
1 80,000 t/yr
Country
Japan
Year
1993-1996
Status
Pilot
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Primary Metals manufacture (iron)
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
S02
C02
The sulfur is almost entirely absorbed in fine dust or iron ore in the preheating
and pre-reduction furnaces. More than half of this is recycled to the smelting
reduction furnace, with the remainder being passed through the cyclone prior
to being collected by the scrubber. This is removed for commercial recycling.
Emissions will be (5-10 percent) less than those produced by a conventional
blast furnace.
-------
E-23
6.0 TEST DATA
Although it is claimed that gaseous sulfide was scarcely measurable in the exhaust, no details
are provided.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following table provides operational information for the DIGS and pilot plant in Japan.
8.0 COSTS
No financial details were provided, although the vendors believe that DIOS could operate at
around 10 percent less than a conventional blast furnace due to the elimination of
agglomerating process (sintering, and coking).
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No additional secondary impacts reported for the DIOS process as compared to conventional
iron production.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
No comparison was presented, is available although it was noted that similar processes are
under research by AISI in the U.S. and Hismelt in Australia.
11.0 VARIATIONS
No data provided.
12.0 COMMENTS
• The most significant advantage is the elimination of the traditional coke making
process, which results in very hazardous emissions with an associated high
risk.
Table 4-2
-------
E-24
Equipment
Specifications
Production rate
Coal consumption
Raw material feeding
Iron ore
Coal
Flux
Preheating furnace
Type
Temperature
Residence time
Pre-reduction furnace
Type
Inner diameter
Height
Capacity
Temperature
Residence time
Smelting reduction furnace
Type
Inner diameter
Height
In furnace pressure
Oxygen rate
Nitrogen rate
Gas reforming
Fine coal addition
Tapping device
Type
Diameter
500t/d(21t/h)
780-950 kg/t
max 45 t/h
25t/h
4.6 t/h
Fluidized bed
500'C
20 minutes
Fluidized bed
2,700 mm
8,000 mm
max 39 t/h
700° C
60 minutes
Iron bath furnace
3,700 mm
9,30Q,mm
<2.0kgfcnY2G(bar)
10,000 - 13,000 Nm3/hr, max. 20,000 Nm3/hr
500 - 6,000 nm3/hr
max 4 t/h
Opener-mudgun
70mm
Steady state
1-2 hours after start-up
-------
E-25
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-5
CERAFIL" LOW DENSITY FILTER ELEMENTS
Vendor: Cerel Ltd.
U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology utilizes low-density ceramic filter elements, called Cerafil® elements, for the
removal of smoke, dust, and fume particles from the flue gases generated by many industrial
processes. Cerafil* elements are comprised of man-made mineral fibers bonded with organic
and inorganic materials to form a porous filtration medium. These individual elements are
loaded into cells that comprise the filtration plant.
The flue gases are drawn through the elements, such that the paniculate matter (PM) collected
forms a dust cake on the outside of the elements. The dust cakes are removed via reverse
pulse-jet cleaning. The advantages of the Cerafil* filter elements over traditional fabric media
are:
• Temperature resistant to 900°C.
• Thermal shock resistant.
• Resistant to acid and alkali contaminants in the flue gas.
• Can operate under variations in gas velocity and temperature.
For flue gases above 250°C, the Cerafil® filter plant eliminates the necessity of gas cooling
equipment that would typically be required for operation of fabric filters. Also, the Cerafil®
filter produces a dry waste in comparison to the sludges generated by liquid scrubbers.
Cerafil® will also control HCI and S02 with the use of a sorbent material (e.g., calcium
hydroxide).
-------
E-26
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
This technology is commercially available and in several full-scale industrial applications
throughout Europe. Five are listed in the table below.
Table 5-1
Application
Location
Soil remediation
Clinical waste incineration
Waste tire incineration
Coal processing
Secondary aluminum processing
NBM Bodemsanering B.V., the Netherlands
Alexandra Hospital, U.K.
Avon Tires Ltd., U.K.
Coal Products, Ltd., U.K.
Brent Smelting Works, U.K.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Coal Products, Ltd., Coventry, U.K.
Coal Products, Ltd. decided to use a Cerafil® filter bed plant to control their paniculate
emissions. The facility manufactures a smokeless fuel derived from coal. The fuel, called
Homefire, is produced by eliminating the low-temperature tars which make coal smoke when
burning. Particulate emissions emanate from the Coal Products, Ltd. process waste gas that is
incinerated in two boilers at the facility. The gas contains tars, volatiles, coal fines, methane,
hydrogen, and carbon monoxide.
A Cerafil* filter plant was fitted to the exhaust stream of one of the boilers in October 1991,
after an extensive pilot plant trial period. The filter contained 2400 Cerafil® S-1000 elements,
and had a design capacity of 25,000 Nm3/hr and a temperature range of 250-300°C. Inlet dust
loading on the filter varied from 3.0-30.0 g/m3, with particle sizes ranging from 1.9 to 54 /jm,
and 50 percent less than 7.2 //m. The outlet dust loading was typically in the 2.0-4.0 mg/m3
range.
-------
E-27
Difficulties occurred when incomplete combustion of the waste gas produced fires in the
Cerafil filter plant. The Cerafil filter plant was refitted in January 1993, with modifications to
ensure fire suppression and filter bypass. The Cerafil filter plant has operated trouble free
since, with an outlet dust concentration of less than 4 mg/m3.
A second filter plant was installed on the second boiler in August 1992, incorporating the
changes to the unit on the first boiler. This second boiler has operated with the Cerafil filter
control system with only minor difficulties since installation.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Cement Manufacture
• Industrial Boilers
• Solid Waste Disposal
• Primary Metals Manufacture
Limitations:
• Gas must be dry, since liquid will damage the filter
» Temperature must be less than or equal to 900°C
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
This technology is designed to control:
• Paniculate
• HCI and S02 (with the use of a sorbent material)
6.0 TEST DATA
The vendor provided information for a smokeless fuel manufacturing facility, where the inlet
dust concentration was 500 mg/m3 and mean particle size was 4.8 //m. At this facility, the
outlet dust concentration was found to be 1.5 mg/m3, for a control efficiency of 99.7 percent.
-------
E-28
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
For a 24,000 ACFM filter plant the following are required:
Electric power for draft fan and reverse jet pulse cleaning, at 50 kW/yr
Compressed air for pulse cleaning, at 2 liters of air per cleaning
8.0 COSTS
For a filter plant that treats 24,000 ACFM, contains 1,512 filter elements, and operates
8 hr/day, 5 days/week:
Table 5-2
Parameter
Value
Capital cost of filter plant
Cost per element
Percent of capital cost for elements
Cost per ACFM of flue gas treated
Electricity
Daily inspection
Maintenance
Replacement elements
Currency basis
$400,000
$38 per element
14.5 percent
$16.15
$10,810
$370
$820
$24,000 (1 set every 4 years)
British pound, 1995 ($1.6/pound)
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No secondary impacts are found in excess of the usual dust disposal common to other
particulate control devices, such as fabric filters and ESPs.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
For a control device serving a 200 ton/day glass furnace and treating 21,700 ACFM of flue gas
at 200°C, comparisons of Cerafil® to traditional dust cleaning are shown in the table below.
-------
E-29
Table 5-3
Control Device
Electrostatic precipitator
Electrified granulate bed filter
Bag filter
Cerafil® filter
Capital Cost
1.89
1.68
0.95
1
Relative Cost
Operating Cost
0.71
0.91
1
1
The data above was based on a survey by the Energy Efficiency Office in the U.K. Although
the flue gas temperature was only 200°C, the ceramic filters compared favorably to the
existing technologies.
As compared to electrostatic precipitators, the ceramic filter is smaller, less expensive, and
more adept to handling surges in particle loading. When compared to fabric filters, ceramic
filters can operate at higher flue gas velocities and temperatures (up to 900°C), with only a
slight increase in capital cost.
11.0 VARIATIONS
No significant variations in filtration efficiency with changes in flue gas paniculate loading.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Feasible for high temperature applications
• Long term stability may be a question
• Need more information to determine applicability for gas treatment of acid
deposition emission sources
-------
E-30
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-6
COOL SORPTION COLD LIQUID ABSORPTION VAPOR RECOVERY PROCESS
Vendor: Cool Sorption A/S
Glostrup, Denmark
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Cool Sorption's Cold Liquid Absorption (CLA) vapor recovery process provides a cost effective
alternative to reduce VOC emissions from gasoline and crude oil handling operations. This
process is well-suited for processes such as fuel terminals, with large vapor flows. The system
is very efficient, particularly for larger (heavier) hydrocarbon molecules.
In the CLA process, incoming vapors, that consist of a mixture of hydrocarbons and air, pass
through an absorber column packed with rings. In the column, the mixture is scrubbed by the
counter-current flow of a cold absorbent (often kerosene) which removes up to 98 percent of
the hydrocarbon content. The absorption of the hydrocarbons is dependent on both the vapor
pressure and the temperature of the absorbent. The temperature of the absorbent is
maintained at -25"C, which facilitates the condensation of higher hydrocarbons. Other factors
affecting the efficiency are the ratio of absorbent to vapor flow, the height of the column, and
type of packing material. In addition, a feed-forward control can achieve a quick response if
the volume of vapor entering the unit varies significantly. This occurs most often during road
tanker loading operations, and is less necessary during ship loading.
The rich absorbent from the column is then directed to a splitter, where the hydrocarbons are
stripped. The two-stage splitter column is packed with rings and operates on the reflux
principle. The reflux condensator at the top of the column prevents the absorbent from being
carried over.
The top product of the splitter column is condensed and absorbed in a re-absorber column. In
this column, the vapors are washed in a counter-current flow of liquid gasoline or crude oil at
ambient temperature. The lean absorbent from the splitter vessel is cooled by a heat
exchanger and a chiller in connection with a standard industrial refrigeration unit. (Ammonia is
used as the refrigerant.) The process unit is intrinsically safe, although a flame arrester may be
installed on the outlet of the absorption column.
-------
E-31
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The CLA process was developed and patented in 1982. Currently, the process is applied by
most European oil companies. The vendor claims that in 1991 more than 60 units were in
operation. Some example installations are shown in the table below.
Table 6-1
Status
Pilot plant
Facility/Application
Shell/refinery
Capacity
500 m3/hr
Vapor Recovery
0.8 liters/m3
Country
Denmark
Full-scale
DSM/chemical plant
> 99 percent the Netherlands
Full-scale
Exxon U.K./road tanker
terminals
> 90 percent
United Kingdom
Construction of
world's largest
vapor recovery unit
OTS* Sture Terminal/
ship tanker loading
operations
1 7,000 m3/hr
400 tankers/yr
50,000 m3 liquid
hydrocarbons/yr
Norway
OTS = Oseberg Transport system which is owned by Statoil (majority share), Norsk Hydro
(operator). Saga, Elf, and Mobil
3.0 CASE STUDY
Exxon Research Center in the U.K. tested two CLA units at road tanker loading terminals in
1988. These units were operating directly on vapor displaced from bottom loading of road
tankers. There were no vapor returns from top loading bays or storage tanks. Three out of
four tests showed average control efficiencies > 95 percent, which met the US EPA emission
limit of 35 mg hydrocarbon/I of product loaded. Kerosene was used as the absorbent and
cooled to -20*C. Test data are presented in section 6.0.
Tests of a prototype CLA unit for North Sea crude oil showed that methane was the most
significant remaining pollutant in the resulting emissions.
-------
E-32
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Limitations:
Petroleum Marketing
Gasoline Distribution (road tankers and ships).
The process does not achieve optimum control for diluted vapors, such as
those from industrial painting operations (e.g., car painting).
The efficiency of the unit decreases with falling molecular weight and inlet
concentration.
The CLA technology requires road tankers and ships to be fitted with the
appropriate equipment.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
Gasoline vapors
Crude oil vapors
Control efficiency of 96-99 percent
Exhaust emissions of 25-30 g hydrocarbons/m3
VOC emissions primarily generated during ship loading
operations can be controlled with an efficiency of
85-90 percent. Tests indicate that most of the
remaining hydrocarbon emissions consist of methane.
6.0 TEST DATA
Test data for two Exxon (UK) road tankers loading terminals with Cool Sorption CLA units are
shown below.
-------
Table 6-2
Exxon Test Data
Birmingham
Parameter
CONDITIONS
Test date
Test period
Duration o'f test period with loading
Number of trucks loaded
Mogas temperature (mean)
Air temperature
Total loaded m3 (to CLA)
Total 4* loaded m3 (to CLA)
Total 2 'loaded m3 (to CLA)
Total ULP loaded m3 (to CLA)
Total diesel loaded m3 (to CLA)
Total loaded m3 (not to unit)
Total 4* loaded m3 (not to unit)
Total 2* loaded m3 (not to unit)
Total ULP loaded m3 (not to unit)
Total diesel loaded m3 (not to unit)
RESULTS
Mean vapor flowrate to CLA m3/min
Total vapor volume to CLA m3
Mean HC. concentration to VRU volume percent
Mean HC vapor flowrate to VRU m3/min
Total HC vapor volume to VRU m3
Mean HC concentration from VRU volume percent
Mean HC vapor flowrate from VRU m3/min
Total HC vapor volume from VRU m3
Mean recovery efficiency (Percent)
Product recovered over test period (m3 liquid)
Product recovered over test period (kg liquid)
Product recovered as percent of product loaded
EMISSION RATES (EPA limit: 35 mg/l)
mg emitted/liter product loaded
Test 1
3/10/88
53 mins
44 mins
6
12.5*C
9*C
188.9
150.9(79.9%)
13.0(6.9%)
5.0 (2.6%)
20.0(10.6%)
4.3
188.8
17.4
0.75
32.9
1.6
0.056
2.5
91.7
0.137
82.9
0.0725
36
Test 2
4/10/88
775 mins
297 mins
35
13*C
7-1 4'C
1044.8
830.8 (79.5%)
71.4(6.8%)
14.0(1.3%)
128.6(12.3%)
256.3
222.7
19.6
0.0
14.0
3.5
1045.2
17.2
0.605
179.8
0.84
0.024
7.3
96.2
0.778
470
0.0745
19
Manchester
Test 1
5/10/88
317 mins
168 mins
21
14.3°C
7-C
675.1
523.5 (77.5%)
33.0 (4.9%)
10.0(1.5%)
108.6(16.1%)
4.0
675.8
9.5
0.38
64.2
0.27
0.010
1.65
97.4
0.28
169
0.0415
7
Test 2
6/10/88
313 mins
1 58 mins
22
14.3'C
6-9'C
671.1
542.0 (80.8%)
50.4 (7.5%)
14.0(2.1%)
64.6 (9.6%)
m
co
co
4.3
671.6
9.6
0.41
64.5
0.14
0.0053
0.85
98.8
0.29
172
0.0432
4
Note: 2* and 4* are two gasoline grades.
-------
E-34
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following table shows the process parameters for a CLA unit.
Table 6-3
Parameter
Value
Energy demand
Absorbent
Recommended temperature absorbent
Absorbent to vapor flow ratio dependent on:
Pressure loss
<0.5 kWh/l recovered product
±10 percent of recovered product needed as
fuel (steam and electricity) for cooler
kerosene
-25'C
• vapor composition and concentration;
lighter hydrocarbons require more
absorbent.
• temperature of the absorbent; lower
temperatures will require less absorbent.
• type of absorbent.
There is almost no pressure drop in the CLA
system if no flame arresters are applied, and the
connecting piping is reduced to a minimum by
placing the absorber column next to the ship. In
this case, there is no need for compressors or
blowers to transport the vapor.
8.0 COSTS
Capital costs are dependent on the unit design and therefore may vary considerably. The
control efficiency and, hence, costs are a function of:
Vapor composition and concentration
Type of absorbent
Absorbent temperature
Absorbent to vapor flow ratio (l/g ratio)
-------
E-35
• Dimensions of absorber column (height and packing)
• Remaining small hydrocarbons in absorbent
Three cost examples provided by the vendor are shown below.
Table 6-4
Parameter
Type of facility
Size
Capacity
m3/yr
m3/day
m3/hr
Product RVP
Efficiency
Liters removed
Product per m3 vapor
Total annual recovery (m3)
CLA plant cost
Example 1
Crude oil shiploading
Large
42,000,000
400,000
17,000
1.1
1.1
45,000
$12 million
Values
Example 2
Crude oil and
gasoline shiploading
Small
8,000,000
1 20,000
5,000
0.8
0.8
6,400
$4 million
Example 3
Gasoline loading
truck terminal
Medium
1,400,000
7,000
900
Not specified
1.8
2,520
$600,000
Typical annual operating costs are estimated as follows:
• Maintenance: 2 percent of capital costs, per year
• Energy: 0.5 kWh/l recovered product
In general, large CLA units are more cost effective than smaller units. Since the costs of the
unit are dependent on size and design, the payback period may vary from several months to
years. Vendor notes that Exxon U.K. purchased their cool sorption equipment to be able to
earn money on their U.K. sites.
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
Wastewater «0.1 m3/day), as condensate water, that is contaminated with additives
and hydrocarbons
-------
E-36
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U,S. TECHNOLOGIES
• Flaring - no product recovery; and therefore, not a cost effective option.
• Carbon adsorption achieves a better control efficiency than the CLA process.
However, large scale carbon adsorption applications are not as cost effective as the
CLA because of the (high) price of activated carbon. In addition, activated carbon used
to collect ketones can lead to spontaneous ignition.
11.0 VARIATIONS
Originally, the CLA technology was developed for gasoline applications, but currently it is also
used to recover vapors from chemical and crude oil handling operations. The control efficiency
of the CLA vapor recovery process is dependent on:
• Vapor components and concentration,
• Absorbent temperature,
• Absorbent to vapor flow ratio (l/g ratio),
• Dimensions of absorber column (height and packing), and
• Residual small hydrocarbons in absorbent (i.e., temp, of de-absorber column).
Dependent on vapor components and concentration, the other four parameters may be varied in
order to obtain optimum cost/control efficiency performance.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Provides better performance over flaring since no recovery occurs with flaring
• More details on construction/installation and operational costs are needed to
accurately quantify cost-effectiveness
-------
E-37
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-7
BIOREACTOR FOR REMEDIATION OF LOW-TO-MEDIUM LEVEL VOC EMISSIONS
Vendor: Sutcliffe Crenshaw, Ltd.
Lancashire, U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology utilizes monocultures of a specially selected and developed strain of naturally
occurring microorganism supported in a reactor (Bioreactor SC) to degrade a wide range of
chemicals commonly present in industrial effluent air streams. The bacterial strains can handle
relatively high concentrations (up to 1000 mg/m3) of individual VOCs or VOC mixtures.
The bacteria, or biocatalysts , are held in a specially designed and prepared support in a
chamber into which the waste gas stream is passed. This gas stream is preconditioned such
that its humidity and temperature are within a suitable range for interaction with the bacteria.
Residence time in the bioreactor is comparatively low (only a few seconds). The bioreactor
includes a panel-type smoothing filter that serves to moderate temporary solvent peaks.
The waste gas stream enters the reactor, flowing over the microorganisms that are located on
the support. The microorganisms use the waste air stream as a food source, biodegrading the
contaminants and converting them to less harmful products plus C02 and water.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
This technology is commercially available throughout the U.K. and Europe.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Commercial case study data was too sensitive at this time to be made available by the vendor.
-------
E-38
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Solvent Evaporation
• Surface Coating
Limitations:
• Not effective on air streams with extremely high concentrations of
pollutants (> 1000 mg/m3).
• Certain pollutants (toxics) can adversely affect bacteria.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
• VOCs, including chlorinated hydrocarbons
6.0 TEST DATA
No test data were available at this time, although data may be accessible by early 1996.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
Based on an example installation with an airflow of 10,000 Nm3/hr, an influent VOC
concentration of 300 mg/m3, and 1,920 operating hours per year, the process requirements
are:
Table 7-1.
Parameter Value
Space 9 m2
Electrical power 20,000 kWh (nominal)
Water 42 m3/yr
Steam 266,800 kg/yr
Nutrients 565 kg/yr
-------
E-39
8.0 COSTS
Based on the above example installation (airflow 10,000 Nm3/hr, VOC concentration
300 mg/m3, operating 1,920 hours per year) the costs of the bioreactor are:
Table 7-2
Parameter
Value
Capital costs
Payback period
Electrical power
Water
Steam
Nutrients
Total utility
Cost per ton of pollutant controlled
Currency basis
$144,000-$168,000
3.8 years
$1,200
$18
$6,450
$181
$7,890
$1.39/ton
British pound (1995)
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
The annual cleaning of the biocatalyst bed uses wash water that requires wastewater
treatment.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
According to a September 1993 Environmental Business report, running costs are shown to be
85 percent less than activated carbon, 93 percent less than incineration, and 67 percent less
than scrubbing.
11.0 VARIATIONS
The bioreactor efficiency may vary with pollutant type and concentration.
-------
E-40
12.0 COMMENTS
Technology appears feasible but more test data would be useful to more
accurately determine performance
-------
E-41
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-8
BIZER PROCESS FOR COMBUSTION CONTROL IN RECOVERY BOILERS BY
DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING
Vendor: ABB Industries Oy
Helsinki, Finland
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Burning Image Analyzer (BIZER) is a system that utilizes digital image processing to
calculate and supervise smelt bed conditions in recovery boilers. BIZER monitors the interior of
the recovery boiler by fire-room cameras. The recorded video information is then converted to
digital form by digital image processing techniques. The analyzing system has been designed
to identify and quantify important features of the camera picture and present the obtained
information to the boiler operator.
The first step in this process transfers a standard video signal from the fire-room cameras to
the analyzer's grabbing module and digitizes it. The second consists of reducing the image
information and filtering out noise and momentary disturbances. The next step is a contrast
reduction of the image signal that emphasizes the desired image features by digital
enhancement. Lastly, this information is used to search a histogram of desired elements
characteristic of combustion and recommend changes to optimize the combustion.
BIZER can be an independent monitoring system or work as an integrated part of a recovery
boiler control system. The system supervises and calculates smelt bed conditions such as bed
height, form, area, symmetry, and temperature gradients. It includes functions for the
calculation of burning parameters such as droplet size index, viscosity index, symmetry index,
and heat input parameter, and also includes functions for the calculation of heat flow entered
in the furnace, burning performance analysis, and knowledge-based Burning Expert modules.
BIZER presents the variables describing the performance of burning on a scale ranging from
poor to excellent. It can display the variables describing smelt bed burning and behavior in
trend form to calculate bed trends. The actual shape of char bed is compared with target
images stored in the system's memory. The system generates a synthetic, colored image of
the smelt bed for display and gives visual alarms to indicate different degrees of plugging of the
camera openings.
-------
E-42
BIZER has the flexibility to include other parameters, variables, etc. for calculation and analysis
and can be integrated with a recovery boiler control system to optimize smelt bed conditions
and combustion.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
Stand alone versions of BIZER are commercially available and are being used in Indonesia.
Integration of BIZER and AutoRecovery, another ABB system which is used to optimize
recovery boiler operation, has been done only in laboratory studies, but more development is
planned.
3.0 CASE STUDY
No specific case study information was presented.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Industrial boilers
Recovery boilers in the pulp and paper industry.
Solid fuel fired grate boilers (more development is needed for this
application).
Limitations:
• None listed.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
The BIZER system is not designed to control any pollutants, per se. However, since the system
optimizes smelt bed conditions, it reduces the products of incomplete combustion that are
characteristic of inefficient systems. These pollutants are CO, VOC, NOX, and PM.
6.0 TEST DATA
Although test information was collected during mill trials and installations, ABB does not have
any publicly available test results.
-------
E-43
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The BIZER system includes a PC (IBM/PC/AT compatible), some dedicated image processing
boards, and necessary software modules. Optional equipment includes a black and white
monitor, a RGB color monitor, and additional process measurement instruments. The fire-room
cameras can be included or purchased separately.
8.0 COSTS
The capital costs given by the manufacturer are for a completely integrated system of BIZER
technology and their AutoRecovery control system. This cost depends on the scope of the
processes installed; it can range between $500,000 and $2,000,000. The payback period is
one or two years depending on instrumentation investment, energy prices, etc.
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
There are no secondary impacts.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
ABB does not know of any competing U.S. firms with a comparable technology.
11.0 VARIATIONS
This system does not seem to be affected by variations in pollutant concentration or fuel type.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Initial expense is high but payback period is relatively short
• Technology is innovative because it combines photo digitizing/analysis and
process optimization. It will also likely have wider applications.
-------
E-44
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-9
ELSORB® PROCESS FOR REDUCTION OF S02
Vendor: Elkem Technology, Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
Elkem Technology AS
Kristiansand, Norway
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Elsorb process is a regenerate process for S02 recovery that utilizes chemical absorption
followed by regeneration. Designed for treating flue gases at utility and industrial sites, the
Elsorb process produces S02 which can be converted into liquid S02, sulfuric acid, or elemental
sulfur. Over 95 percent control of S02 has been achieved with the process, although the
efficiency can vary with S02 inlet gas concentration.
In the process, flue gas is first cooled to its adiabatic saturation temperature. The gas then
passes through a pre-scrubber to remove HF, HCI, and dust. Contact then occurs between the
flue gas and an aqueous sodium phosphate buffer, which flows counter-current in a packed
absorption tower (pH of 5-6.5). The S02 is absorbed by the buffer and is recovered by
evaporation at 115-120°C followed by condensation. The more tightly packed the absorber,
the more S02 can be absorbed.
The phosphate buffer is regenerated back to its original, chemically stable form by heating with
an external heat exchanger that uses steam as the heating medium. The buffer then passes
through a vapor/liquid separator, where S02 is abstracted as a product. To remove S03,
appropriate equipment must be included to reduce the amount of buffer being consumed in this
stage. The buffer concentrate is then drawn off and sent back to the buffer tank.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The Elsorb process was tested in laboratory and bench scale models. Two pilot plants were
also tested leading to two full-scale installations. These operations are listed in the table
below.
-------
E-45
Table 9-1
Facility
Norwegian Institute of Technology
Norwegian Institute of Technology
Norwegian Institute of Technology
Coal-fired boiler
Wellman-Lord 0MV refinery
Esso Slagentangen refinery
Public Service Co. of New Mexico
San Juan Generating Station
Status
Laboratory
Bench scale
Pilot plant
Pilot plant (1 09 NnrvVhr)
Full scale
Full scale
(Proposed) full scale
Year
1985
1988
1990
1991
1993
1993
1995
Country
Norway
Norway
Norway
Czech
Republic
Austria
Norway
U.S.
3.0 CASE STUDY
: was
Vitkovice Steel (Ostrava, Czech Republic) Pilot Plant
A pilot plant was connected to a boiler at the Vitkovice Steel plant. The boiler burned black
coal with a sulfur content of 0.8-1.1 percent. Because of the low concentration of S02, it w
decided that the test program should be carried out with an additional amount of S02 spiked
from an S02 cylinder in order to obtain a concentration in the influent gas of about
3,000 ppmv. The test program at Vitkovice was completed with a long-term (100 hour) test of
the process in the conditions listed in the table below.
Table 9-2
Parameter
Value
Flue gas volume
Concentration of S02 in gas
Concentration of 02 in gas
Absorption temperature
Buffer volume to absorber
109Nm3/h
3,000 ppmv
7.7 percent
55°C
151/h
-------
E-46
The testing assessed not only the efficiency of the absorption and regeneration units, but also
the general operation of the equipment. During the 100 hours of continuous operation, the
density of the buffer was also altered to observe the change in S02 absorption. The results
obtained are shown in the table below.
Table 9-3
Test #1
Test #2
Specific steam consumption
Mean concentration of S02 in clean gas
Control efficiency
10.2kgH20/kgS02
98 ppmv
96.7 percent
11.2 kg H2O/kg S02
115 ppmv
96.2 percent
4.0
APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Limitations:
Fossil-fuel Fired Boilers.
Petroleum Refining.
Claus plant tail gas.
Sulfuric acid plants tail gas.
Rehabilitation of Wellman-Lord plants.
• More suited to operations with high concentrations of S02.
• Control efficiency dependent upon the inlet gas S02 concentration.
• Extra equipment required for the removal of S03.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
SO,
• Particulate matter
• HF and HCI (with a prescrubber)
-------
E47
6.0 TEST DATA
Bench-scale
A bench scale test program was carried out with 3,000 ppmv S02 in the entering gas and 50"C
absorption temperature. An absorption efficiency well above 95 percent, together with an S02
uptake of more than 1.0 mol/l, was generally observed when the liquid circulation rate was
properly adjusted to the amount of S02 in the entering gas. The specific energy requirement(s)
for regeneration of the buffer, expressed as kilograms of steam required per kilogram of S02
recovered, varied between 9 and 11. This refers to single-effect evaporation. If double-effect
evaporation had been used instead, the S-value would be nearly halved. Also a higher S02
concentration in the feed gas, and a lower absorption temperature would reduce S.
A buffer oxidation experiment was carried out at a temperature of 55" C, by recirculating the
gas and a given volume of S02 loaded buffer over the absorber for an extended time period.
The concentrations of S02, NO, and 02 in the gas phase were held at 3,000 ppmv, 1,000 ppmv
and 5 volume percent, respectively. The corresponding concentration of S02 in the buffer was
1.5 mol/l. The test was run continuously for 24 hours. The results indicate a buffer oxidation
loss of S02 at about 0.5 percent. With this low oxidation rate, it was concluded that full
advantage could be taken of the high cyclic capacity of the buffer solution.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS REQUIREMENTS
The operational requirements for a typical Elsorb process are shown in the table below.
Table 9-4
Parameter Value
Chemicals Sodium base and phosphoric acid
Steam @ 2.7 bar (130°C) 10.1 ton/hr
Electric power 9900 kWh/hr
Raw water 60 m3/hr
Cooling water 196 m3/hr
Paniculate load 20-50 mg/Nm3
-------
8.0 COSTS
Elkem have modelled costs on the EPRI model plant. The plant parameters and corresponding
costs for application of the Elsorb process are shown in the tables below.
Table 9-5
Parameter
Value
Plant size/type
Flue gas volume
Fuel
Sulfur content
Flue gas S02 concentration
Flue gas 02 concentration
Flue gas temperature
Flue gas pressure
S02 cleaning efficiency
Oxidation of absorbed S02 to sulfate
Annual operating hours
Absorption temperature
Recovered SOz
Oxidation product formed (dry)
300 MWE power plant (EPRI model plant)
1,450,000 Nm3/h
Pulverized coal
2.6 percent
1,700 ppmv
5 (volume) percent
139°C
99kPa
95 percent
1 percent
6,000 hrs/yr
51CC
6,592 kg/hr
417kg/hr
-------
E-49
Table 9-6
Parameter
Value-
Capital costs
Estimated payback period
Annual operating costs
Control cost
Annual operating income
Savings potential
Cost year basis
Interest rate
approximately $300/kWe
($90,000,000 for example)
No data available
$3,800,000
$479 per ton S02 removed
$1,800,000
$30 per ton of sulfuric acid produced
1994
9.6 percent
Cost estimates were taken from costs for a Wellman-Lord process, due to Elsorb's similarity to
this process.
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Fly ash disposal:
• Wastewater:
» Solid waste:
The collected particulates must be disposed.
Small amounts of acidic effluent, with halides and solids from
the prescrubber, need treatment before being discharged.
Minor amounts of Na2S04 are formed in the oxidation process
but can be used in the fertilizer industry.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
A study (by Elkem) comparing the Elsorb process with the Wellman-Lord process claims that
the Elsorb process offers:
• Less chemical consumption
• Less waste disposal
• More S02 produced
• Less problems dealing with the buffer
• Less scaling in the evaporator system
-------
E-50
11.0 VARIATIONS
Control efficiency (90-98 percent) variable with S02 inlet gas concentration.
12.0 COMMENTS
• Capital costs may be considered too high for the utility market, therefore,
cost-effectiveness may be an issue.
-------
E-51
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-10
BLUEMINSTER PRODUCTION PROCESS OF
WATER-BASED LIQUID RESINS AND RESIN DISPERSIONS
Vendor: Blueminster Ltd.
Kent, U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Blueminster has developed a low-energy technology for the production of water-based, high
solids adhesives and resin dispersions. This technology will eliminate the use of solvents,
including both toxic and non-toxic (chlorinated) hydrocarbons, during the resin and polymer
blending phase. The technology developed by Blueminster is based on two key processes
discussed below.
Production of Liquid Resin X and Resin XE in a resin kettle
Resin X is manufactured in a stainless steel resin kettle in which rosin reacts with a blend of
glycols. The reaction takes place at a maximum temperature of 240°C and takes ±24 hrs.
The kettle is heated by electricity or super-heated steam. Liquid Resin X tackifier/plasticizer
contributes to the low temperature performance of adhesives. The liquid resin (Resin X) is
modified by the addition of surfactants to form Resin XE. Resin XE is a self-emulsifying
tackifier that can be added directly without solvent and with simple stirring to a variety of
latexes (polymers) to produce water-based adhesives (see below).
Production of Water-based Resin Dispersions in a Dispersion Kettle
Water-based resin dispersions with high solids content (58-62 percent) are produced from
Resin XE. Rapid inversion takes place in a heated stainless steel kettle fitted with a sweep
stirrer and a special stirrer. The dispersions are blended (without solvent) with a variety of
latexes including styrene butadiene rubber, acrylic, modified acrylic, E.V.A., polychloroprene,
P.V.A., and natural rubber, to produce water-based adhesives. Resin XE dissolves higher
melting resins to produce dispersions with an improved higher temperature performance. The
softening point is increased to 115"C. This technology may also be applied to resin
derivatives, hydrocarbon resins, terpene and terpene phenolic resins, coumarone and
coumarone indene resins, styrenated resins. The resin to polymer ratios are:
-------
E-52
Liquid resin: 20 parts of resin to 80 parts of polymer. A
higher ratio of liquid resin gives a softer
adhesive.
Resin dispersions: One part of resin to one part of polymer
Wastewater treatment will be required for the wash water. The treatment consists of
neutralizing and filtering out precipitated resinous material. Waste generated during this
process is non-toxic resinous material and can be incinerated.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
Major European/international adhesive manufacturers are utilizing the technology on a
commercial scale. Several U.S. manufacturers are currently evaluating the technology. No
details were provided on the scale of this trend.
3.0 CASE STUDY
No information available.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Solvent evaporation: production of pressure sensitive and contact adhesives to
be used in the following manufacturing industries:
tapes and labels
coatings
flooring
leather
wood (including furniture)
foam
vinyl
closures, paper, fabrics
food packaging (since water-based adhesives are non-toxic, these
adhesives are particularly suitable for this source category).
-------
E-53
Limitations:
The technology does not produce adhesives that can be exposed to total
immersion in water for prolonged periods.
The drying process of water-based adhesives is slow compared with solvent
based adhesives.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
voc
Energy-related emissions (CO, SOX, NOX/ PM)
Vendor claims that the water-based adhesives require three to five times less
drying energy for application than solvent-based adhesives.
6.0 TEST DATA
None available.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
Table 10-1
Parameter
Value
Maximum temperature
Reaction time
Equipment
Energy
Space
(10 T resin and 5 T dispersion kettles)
240°C
±24hrs
Stainless steel kettle needed with appropriate flow and
head space
Electricity or super heated steam
1000 ft2 floor
20 ft head
8.0 COSTS
Costs are defined below for a production unit with a 10 T resin kettle and 5 T dispersion kettle.
-------
E-54
Table 10-2
Parameter
Value
Capital costs
Estimated payback period
Operating and maintenance costs
Cost <$)/T pollutant removed
Cost basis
$560,000
1-1.5 years
$80,000/yr
Given the current market price of solvents and the
relatively low operational costs of this new
technology, it is likely that the water-based resin
may be produced at lower cost compared with
current solvent-based adhesives, resulting in a cost
savings (with less pollution).
U.K. pound, 1995 (exchange rate of $1.60/£)
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Wastewater from wash water.
• Non-toxic resinous waste from wastewater treatment.
* Combustion products from the incineration of resinous waste.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
Blueminster claims that there are no directly comparable state of the art technologies available
in the U.S.
11.0 VARIATIONS
Energy, fuel consumption, and space are dependent on batch size, that ranges from
0.5 to 20 tons.
12.0 COMMENTS
Limitations regarding exposure to water and longer drying times may limit the
applicability, but otherwise it appears promising.
-------
E-55
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-11
AIRBORNE 10 ABSORPTION AGENT CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY
Vendor: Impex Ltd.
Herts, U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology was developed as a method of controlling odor-causing pollutants (VOCs) from
industrial and agricultural facilities. Airborne 10 is a proprietary blend of surfactants that when
atomized with water, increases the effective surface area or interface area of the water droplet
by 500,000 percent. When introduced into an exhaust gas, the Airborne 10 droplet collides
with a pollutant aerosol and absorbs the pollutant. The Airborne 10/pollution aerosol falls to
the ground where it is broken down by the natural bacteria present. The high droplet surface
area and volume allows for more effective gas contact, scrubbing, and, consequently, more
effective air pollution control.
The Airborne 10 is fed from a tank through a Dosatron proportional injector to the sprayhead.
The sprayhead, a REDCO 200/400/500 Series Atomizer Head, consists of an electrically driven
rotary machine that produces 80 percent of the sprayed volume in the desired droplet size.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
Airborne 10 is commercially available and in use in Europe.
3.0 CASE STUDY
At North West Water's Wastewater Treatment Plant in the U.K., the Sludge Storage and
Transfer facility successfully used Airborne 10 in lieu of a biofilter system to eliminate odors.
For biofilter system installation, the price tag has been estimated at $800,000'. For the
Airborne 10 system, consisting of two atomizers, installation costs were $6,4001 and annual
costs were $ 1,600.*
2Based on an estimated s! -fi/British pound conversion rate.
-------
E-56
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal
• Chemical Manufacturing
• Plastics Manufacture
• Bakeries (food industry)
Limitations:
• Only applicable where Airborne 10 outfall can be safely degraded by
natural bacteria on the ground, unless mist eliminators are fitted. The
collected solute would then have to be treated as a secondary pollutant
(by bioremediation/biodegradation or disposal of in accordance with
local regulations).
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
• Toxics
6.0 TEST DATA
The vendor cited toxicological test data from a 1993 U.S. testing company report that showed
Airborne 10 to be nontoxic and innocuous. The vendor also supplied test data that compared
Airborne 10 to a U.S. product for hydrogen sulfide removal from air, as shown in the table
below.
-------
E-57
Table 11-1
Dilution
Product Rate
U.S. 375:1
Airborne 10 400:1
Final Concentration (ppm)
(ppm) On Contact 5 min 1 5 min
48 40 7 <2
500+ <1
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
A clean water supply of < 200 ppm total dissolved solids, with a minimum
water pressure of 0.5 bar (7.5 psi.)
A power supply of 70 watts per spray head.
A sufficient number of heads to obtain dispersal and coverage.
A Dosatron, or other automatic proportional dosing equipment.
8.0 COSTS
For a 1,500 ton/day waste reclamation plant:
Table 11-2
Parameter
Value
Capital cost
Payback period
Operating and maintenance costs:
Chemical
Electricity
Water
Miscellaneous
Annual refurbishing
Total
Cost saving per ton processed
Currency basis
$5,768
1 month
$9,000 per year
$50 per year
$75 per year
$175 per year
$2,700 per year
$12,000
$0.37 per ton
U.S. Dollar (1995)
See also Section 3 (case study) for wastewater treatment plant costs.
-------
E-58
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Wastewater: Because Airborne 10 relies on natural bacteria to degrade
byproducts, it is possible that ground contamination could result from toxic or
otherwise undesirable byproducts that are either toxic to the naturally occurring
bacteria or are not degraded. In this case, mist eliminators could be fitted on
the unit. Collected solute would be treated as secondary pollutant using
bioremediation, biodegradation, or as specified by local regulations.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
The Airborne 10 control technology is far less expensive (up to 90 percent less) than scrubbing
towers, packed column scrubbers, and cyclonic scrubbers; Airborne 10 is much less expensive
than biofiltration.
For the reclamation plant discussed in Section 8 (costs) above, a comparison to a typical
biofiltration system is as follows:
Table 11-3
Parameter
Capital cost
Financing cost
Operating and maintenance costs
Value
Biofilter
$375,000
$250/yr @ 1 5 percent
$60,900 per year
Airborne 10
$5,767
Not necessary
$11,990
See also Section 3 (case study) for a cost comparison at a wastewater treatment plant.
11.0 VARIATIONS
For wastewater treatment plants:
-------
12.0 COMMENTS
E-59
Table 11-4
Plant Size Amount of Airborne 10 Needed
2.5 MM Gal/day 2 fl. oz. per hour
36 MMGal/day 5.4 gal per month
50 MMGal/day 25 gal per month
• Major concerns are pollutant media transfer from one media to another
• Fallout control at small sites or on windy days may be problematic
-------
E-60
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-12
OILLESS, DRY CENTRIFUGAL LEAK-FREE COMPRESSORS FOR FUGITIVE EMISSION CONTROL AND
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Vendor: Hitachi Ltd.
Tokyo, Japan
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology utilizes magnetic bearings and nitrogen gas seals in an oilless, dry, centrifugal,
leak-free (ODCC) compressor that controls fugitive emissions normally associated with
compressors in petroleum refining.
The magnetic bearings in the compressor allow the compressor to be smaller in size and less
expensive to operate. The conventional oil-fed bearings require a constant source of oil to
maintain lubrication. In addition, the magnetic bearing allows the compressor to take full
advantage of a high-speed supercritical rotor, that allows for smaller compressor design with
decreased cost and power usage. A dry-gas seal used in the compressor's interstage labyrinths
prevents complications that accompany lubricated or water-cooled seals. The gas medium
(nitrogen) also is used to cool the seals. The amount of nitrogen is controlled via proportional
and integral derivative (PID) process controls that are protected by a secondary nitrogen seal.
An automatic balancing system (ABS) is also used in the ODCC. The ABS system employs a
tracking filter which synchronizes with the rotating speed and can change or reduce the gain
(stiffness) at the rotating speed. In effect, this can reduce vibration due to imbalance by
allowing the shaft to rotate about its axis of inertia.
The Hitachi centrifugal compressor has the following advantages:
• Minimizes space requirements for the compressor
• Can utilize a steam turbine driver to optimize the plant's utility balance
and reduce energy usage
• Reduces plant construction cost as well as running expenses
-------
E-61
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
A Hitachi compressor was put into commercial operation in December 1992 at an Okinawa
Sekiwu Seisei Co. (Japan) petroleum refinery. The compressor has run trouble free
(8,000 hours) since installation. There have been many other commercial applications since.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Okinawa Oil Refinery.
At this petroleum refinery, a net gas booster compressor was required for the Continuous
Catalytic Regeneration-Platforming Process in the production of high quality gasoline to
pressurize the hydrogen-rich gas to the plant header in the refinery.
Normally, a reciprocating compressor is used due to the low molecular weight of the gas and
the required high-pressure ratio. However, in order to lower the inlet pressure of the process
and to increase the inlet volume of the compressor, three (4-cylinder type) reciprocating
compressors (2 operating and 1 spare) would be required, each handling 50 percent of the gas
flow and operating in parallel. This type of arrangement usually takes up a large amount of
space, which was a major concern during the planning stages since space was at a premium.
On the other hand, a conventional centrifugal compressor would take up far less room, solving
the spacing problem. However, conventional oil-type centrifugal compressors for this
application would have required at least three casings, which would have been a disadvantage
in terms of both initial cost and operating expenses.
At this stage, a magnetic bearing type compressor was proposed, which would only require a
two-casing construction. In order to reduce the number of compressor casings to two, a higher
rotational speed was required above the capability of standard impeller materials. Table 12-1
below shows the design of the compressors. Tests performed on the compressors
demonstrated the suitability of the ODCC for the intended purpose (see also Section 6, Test
Data).
The machine was put into commercial operation in December 1992, and has been running
without any major trouble for over 8,000 hours. The client's operator and maintenance staff
are fully satisfied with this machine because there is no need to change any oil filters; no need
for cleaning around the machine area; and because of easy machine monitoring in the control
room console, especially for bearing temperature, vibration, and current in the bearing. Also,
-------
E-62
capital costs, operating costs, and space requirements were all lower with the ODCC as
compared to a reciprocating and conventional centrifugal compressor (see also Section 10
costs).
Table 12-1
Parameter
Low Pressure Casing High Pressure Casing
Hydrogen flow (Nm3/hr)
Suction volume (m3/hr)
Suction pressure (kg/cm2)
Discharge pressure (kg/cm2)
Speed (1/min)
Shaft power (kW)
Speed range (1/min)
Driver rating
43,691
15,369
3.4
9.3
43,486
6,311
8.1
20.3
10,600
4,120
9,265 - 11,445 (85 percent - 105 percent)
5,300 kW condensing turbine
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Limitations:
Petroleum Refineries
Chemical Manufacture
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Due to inexperience with magnetic bearings, problems with heat
accumulation occur.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs (process fugitives)
NOX, PM, C02, CO (through increased energy efficiency)
6.0 TEST DATA
-------
E-63
The compressor at the Okinawa refinery was shop performance tested in accordance with
ASME PTC-10 and was subject to a mechanical running test in accordance with API 617.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
For the two-stage 44,000 Nm3/hr hydrogen compressor at the Okinawa Refinery:
• A 5,300 kW condensing turbine for power
• Nitrogen for the gas seals
• A PID (proportional-integral-derivative) controller for the seals and
magnetic bearings
8.0 COSTS
See relative cost data below (Section 10).
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No secondary pollution impacts.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
According to Hitachi's economic evaluation, the ODCC compares well in terms of cost and
space requirements to other compressor types. Table 12-2 shows the comparisons developed
by the vendor.
-------
E-64
Table 12-2
Relative Costs
Parameter
Capital (equipment) cost
Operating cost
Space requirement
Reciprocal
1
1
1
Centrifugal
0.9
1.15
0.43
Dry Centrifugal
0.79
0.96
0.39
In addition, the oilless compressor accomplishes equal performance to the reciprocal and
centrifugal compressors without the cleaning required for the lubricated-type compressors.
11.0 VARIATIONS
None given.
12.0 COMMENTS
Cost analysis is limited to capital costs; information provided doesn't address
operating cost differences
Heat accumulation may be a problem
-------
E-65
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-13
DECREASING WITH ALKALINE-BASED CLEANERS
Vendor: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
TEM Foundation
Lund, Sweden
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Alkaline degreasing was proposed as a pollution prevention alternative to conventional
degreasing with trichloroethylene during a Swedish study conducted from 1987-1991 at a
number of small to medium Swedish industrial facilities. A firm that produces lighting fittings
and fixtures, Thorn Jarnkonst AB, successfully switched from trichloroethylene to alkaline
degreasers for the study. Alkaline degreasers were found to have the following advantages:
• No discharge of solvents to the atmosphere
• Major reduction in the amount of hazardous waste
• Improved working environment with less solvent vapors
See details of the process in the case study below.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
Commercially available.
3.0 CASE STUDY
Thorn Jarnkonst, Sweden.
Thorn Jarnkonst produces 600,000 units of lighting fixtures for indoor use and 150,000 units
for outdoor use. The total number of employees was 400 and their revenues in 1993 were
$38.4 million.
-------
E-66
The main pollution source at Thorn was air emissions from an organic solvent,
trichloroethylene, used during parts cleaning. Previous to the study, 16 tons of
trichloroethylene were used, with air emissions of 11 tons and 5 tons of hazardous waste.
A changeover to vegetable oils was first performed to make degreasing easier. Substitution of
alkaline degreasers for trichloroethylene reduced air emissions of trichloroethylene to zero with
no corresponding increase in other air pollutants. Wastewater was generated, however, that
required neutralization and sludge separation. This wastewater treatment was performed at
the on-site wastewater treatment facility. Hazardous waste decreased from 5 tons of
trichloroethylene sludge to 1-2 tons of oil bearing sludge that was below the permitted
maximum load.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Degreasing
• Solvent evaporation
Limitations:
• None provided
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
• Trichloroethylene
• VOCs (chlorinated)
6.0 TEST DATA
No test data were provided.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
• Alkaline reagent
• Water
• Energy
-------
E-67
8.0 COSTS
The following table shows the costs of using alkaline degreasers versus trichloroethylene at the
Thorn Jarnkonst site.
Table 13-1
Cost Item
Chemicals
Water
Energy
Labor
Cleaning Equipment
Total Annual Costs
Cost Basis
Value
$3,400
$13,500
$18,600
$75,900
$2,500
$113,900
$ 1990
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Wastewater (neutralization and sludge separation).
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
The following table compares the cost of using alkaline degreasers at the Thorn Jarnkonst
facility to the prior use of trichloroethylene at the same site.
-------
E-68
Table 13-2
Cost Item
Chemicals
Water
Energy
Labor
Cleaning Equipment
Capital Costs
Total Annual Costs
Cost Basis
Trichloroethylene
$3,400'
•o
$6,700
$75,900
$33,700'
$16,900'
$136,600
Value
Alkaline Degreasers
$3,400
$13,500
$18,600
$75,900
$2,500
None
$113,900
$ 1990
* For recycling of trichloroethylene
11.0 VARIATIONS
No data provided.
12.0 COMMENTS
Technology is cost-effective where water and treatment are available.
-------
E-69
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: A-14
QSL LEAD SMELTER REACTOR
Vendor: Lurgi Metallurgie
Frankfurt am Main, F.R.G.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The QSL process is a continuous treatment of metal sulfide concentrates with oxygen. The
process is designed to treat all grades of lead concentrates as well as secondary materials.
This technology is applicable to the lead smelting industry. The QSL reactor replaces
conventional smelting units (sinter plant and blast/shaft furnaces). The lead recovery rate is
estimated to be ±98 percent.
The QSL process utilizes a bath smelting process that includes submerged high-pressure
injection of oxygen and fossil fuels. Two types of redox reactions take place in the process, as
shown below.
• Autogenous (exothermic) roast-reaction smelting of raw materials containing
sulphur and lead:
PbS + 1 '/2 02 = PbO + S02
PbS + 2 02 = PbS04
PbS + 02 = Pb + S02
PbS + 2 PbO = 3 Pb + S02
PbS + PbS04 = 2 Pb + 2 S02
• Carbothermic (endothermic) reduction of metal from the slag:
PbO + CO = Pb + C02
C + C02 = 2 CO
The reduction zone is separated from the oxidation zone by a partition wall which has an
underflow for the exchange of slag and metallic lead and an opening for the process gas.
-------
E-70
Post combustion of the oxidation and reduction gases is achieved by injection of oxygen-
enriched air or oxygen into the reactor via lances. These lances are located in the roof of the
reactor. The exhaust with a high concentration of S02 and some dust leaves the reactor at a
temperature of 1150-1200°C. Dust can then be largely removed by an electrostatic
precipitator. Precipitated flue dust can be recycled to the process or partially withdrawn to
recover cadmium contained in the dust. Heat may be recovered by waste heat boilers.
Emissions are further controlled by directing the exhaust through a scrubber and sulfuric acid
plant. The process is capable of smelting both concentrates and secondary lead-bearing
materials like Pb/Ag-residues, Zn-residues, glasses, slags, and battery paste together.
If raw materials contain a high amount of zinc, a separate uptake in the reduction zone may be
installed for the recovery of zinc as zinc oxide fume. Under stronger reduction conditions, zinc
is partially fumed off. After cooling the exhaust, the oxide dust containing a mixture of zinc
and lead oxide is collected in a bag filter. Cadmium, found mainly in the flue dust from the
oxidation zone, can be recovered as cadmium-carbonate by bleeding the flue dust to treatment
in a separate leaching step.
If flue gas heat will be recovered in a convective boiler, the temperature is reduced from
1000 to 650°C. This may be achieved by heat exchange in a radiant heat boiler followed by
quenching of the gases. At temperatures in excess of this level in the convective section, flue
dust becomes sticky and causes clogging.
The advantages of the QSL process are:
• Direct recovery of lead during the oxidation of the sulfide
• Lower amount of slag due to the direct recovery of lead
• Lower gas exhaust volume
• Less generation of materials to be recycled
• High process flexibility
• Possibility of zinc, cadmium, and S02 recovery
• Lower capital cost than conventional smelting
• Lower operating cost than conventional smelting
-------
E-71
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The QSL process is based on patents obtained in 1973 for direct smelting of metals from metal
sulfide with oxygen in one smelting unit. German regulations adopted in the mid-1980s made
it cost-effective to replace conventional lead smelters with QSL technology. The first full-scale
commercial lead smelters came into operation in the early 1990s.
Table 14-1
Status
Pilot
Demonstration
Full scale*
Full scale/
commercial
Full scale*
Full scale/
commercial
Type of Facility
Batch process
Continuous smelting
Lead smelter
Lead smelter
Lead smelter
Lead smelter
Lead
Production
(T/yr)
5,000
30,000
120,000
75,000
52,000
60,000
Country
Germany
Germany
Canada
Germany
China
South Korea
Year
1976- 1979
1981 - 1986
Nov. 1989 -Mar.
1990
Dec. 1990 -Mar.
1992
1990
1991
* Natural gas was used instead of the prescribed coal; this caused a sufficient amount of problems to
require shutdown.
3.0 CASE STUDY
The case studies include the following processes:
• Full-scale lead smelter in commercial operation in Germany (75,000 T/yr)
• Full-scale lead smelter in commercial operation in South Korea (60,000 T/yr)
The early tests and pilot plants primarily focused on the problems associated with the flow
behavior of the slag, chemical and physical processes in the area of the reducing nozzles, and
service life of various parts of the reactor (injectors, refractory lining). The following is a
description of these two facilities.
-------
E-72
Table 14-2
Parameters
German Facility
Korean Facility
Production Capacity (T/yr) (lead output)
Reactor Dimensions (meters)
Total Length/diameter
Oxidation Zone
Reduction Zone
Feed (dry) (tons per year)
Raw material
Silica
Limestone
Recirculating oxygen fumes
Recirculating leach residue
Coal fines
Raw Material Feed Mixture (percent)
Concentrates
Residues
Composition Raw Material (percent)
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Arsenic
Antimony
Cadmium
Gases to reactor
Oxidation (oxygen) (Nm3/hr)
Reduction (coal dust) (T/hr)
Slag
Production (T/hr)
Pb content (percent)
Lead bullion (T/hr)
Exhaust Gas Stream
Volume (Nm3/hr)
Temperature (°C)
Dust (T/hr)
S02 (percent)
Cadmium
Mercury
S02
Lead
Copper
Arsenic
60,000
41
13x4.5
28 x 4.0
22.7
2.7
5.0
1.3
2.8
53
47
35.0
10.0
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.3
7300
1.4
8.8
2.0
7.9
22,000 - 24,000
±1,200
±6
8-10
0.001 mg/Nm3
< 0.0005 mg/Nm3
0.01 mg/Nm3
0.1
0.01
< 0.0005
75,000
33
11 x 3.5
22 x 3.0
20.8
0.004
0.3
4.3
1.9
63
37
45.0
5.0
0.7
0.3
0.4
0.05
4700
0.9
7.1
2.5
9.6
30,000 - 32,000
NA
7-8
9- 10
-------
E-73
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Limitations:
Primary Lead industry
Although originally a lead content in primary slag of 40-50 percent was
required, experience has shown that a level of 25-35 percent is possible
without substantial increase in flue dust.
High levels of PbO in the primary slag reduce the generation of lead fume.
The PbO content in the primary slag governs the slag fall (addition of fluxes)
and the amount of reductant required.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
Lead
Arsenic, cadmium, and S02 (due to reduced mass flow of recycled material)
Energy-related pollutants (NOX, PM, CO, and possibly SOX)
6.0 TEST DATA
Emissions tests were performed at a German lead smelting plant. Significant emission
reductions of lead, cadmium and S02 were found. The QSL technology was shown to meet
German air quality standards. The table below presents data for the QSL process and
compares the data to a conventional plant.
-------
Parameter
Lead
Arsenic
Cadmium
S02
Energy per ton of lead
produced
E-74
Table 14-3
Reduction
> 50 percent
± 70 percent
± 70 percent
± 90 percent
± 50 percent
1 00,000 TPY Lead Production
QSL Conventional
87 g 400 g
- -
_ _
2.6 kg 40 kg
1 .028 1 03 kcal 2.055 1 03 kcal
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The only additional parameter needed for the QSL process is a source of oxygen-enriched air.
See Table 14-2 above for the process parameters used in the case studies (Section 3.0).
8.0 COSTS
Both the German and Korean operations described in Table 14-2 above have reported that the
capital and operating costs of the QSL process are lower than with the conventional primary
lead smelting process (sinter/furnace process) built new. However, no details were provided.
It should be noted that retrofit of existing conventional furnaces is not possible with the QSL
process.
The capital costs for the QSL facility in Germany were estimated by the vendor at $70 million
(100 million DM). No details are included on what these costs include (e.g., smelter, sulfuric
acid facility, power generating plant, control equipment).
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
Process waste contains cadmium, arsenic trioxide, and H2S04 (that can be recycled
into sellable products).
Process wastewater contains sulfuric acid (that may be recovered and used in other
on-site processes.)
Slag that must be disposed of.
-------
E-75
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
A comparison to the standard lead production process (used in the U.S.), that uses sinter
machines and blast furnace, was performed by German authorities. It was found that
emissions with the QSL process were 92.6, 93.3, and 98.3 percent, respectively, of the
emissions of lead, cadmium, and S02 at conventional lead production facilities.
11.0 VARIATIONS
Primary/secondary lead ratio may be varied dependent on the plant design.
12.0 COMMENTS
• High initial capital investment may make this technology more feasible for new
construction rather than retrofits.
-------
E-76
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-1
USE OF ENVIROTREAT MODIFIED CLAYS FOR THE CONTROL OF VOC IN WASTE AIR STREAMS
Vendor: Rowe Technology, Ltd.
N. Yorks, U.K.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology utilizes a range of modified clays that readily react with pollutants contained in
waste air streams. The clays act as a filter to remove the VOCs in the air stream. The
Envirotreat clays (E-clays) were developed initially for use in land remediation, but the high
reactivity of the clays made them well suited for air pollution as well. The equipment required
for implementation is similar to that used with activated carbon processes. Unlike activated
carbon which, once saturated with VOCs, must be treated to avoid the reversal of the
adsorption process, the E-clays do not require treatment and will not desorb the pollutants back
into the environment.
The E-clays work by forming a series of complex chemical bonds with the organic materials in a
process that is irreversible. The end material formed by the reaction between the clays and the
organic compounds is safe and stable. The E-clays will absorb twenty to thirty times their own
weight of organic contamination.
This technology is best applied in cases where there are a number of contaminants in the
exhaust stream and it is not economical to recover and separate them. It is also effective in
the case of a high volume air stream with a low concentration of pollutants. E-clays can also
be used in conjunction with activated carbon systems, because long chain organics that
typically reduce carbon bed lifespan and reduce efficiency are controlled by the E-clays.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The E-clays are fully developed and in use as a remediation technology for contaminated land.
A prototype design for air pollution has been completed and will be constructed in the near
future, at which point full testing on polluted air streams will commence.
-------
E-77
3.0 CASE STUDY
No case study information available.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Surface Coating
Solvent Evaporation
• Chemical Manufacture
Limitations:
• As E-clay bonding process is irreversible, industries that rely on solvent
recovery would not be suitable.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
• Dioxins
6.0 TEST DATA
The filter media (E-clays) have been tested using the U.S. TCLP (Toxic Characteristic Leaching
Procedure) to prove that the clays can be safely deposited in standard landfill sites. However,
no tests have been performed at full-scale sites with loaded clays, since a prototype has not
been constructed.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following are the operational/process requirements for an E-clay system:
• Electric power for the air extraction fan
• E-clay replacement, that varies according to use, i.e., concentration of
pollutants in air stream
• Clay filter vessels that range in size from 33' x 25' (airflow of 235 cfm)
to 100' x 100' (airflow of 15,000 cfm)
8.0 COSTS
-------
E-78
The following are costs for typical E-clay units:
Table 1-1
Unit Size
Parameter Large Small
Capital cost $25,000 $5,000
Clay replacement (annual) $3,000 $100
Cost basis U.S. dollar, 1995
Cost per ton of pollutant removed $90
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Solid waste: Spent clay must be disposed of at standard landfill sites. The material
formed in clay-organic bonding process is stable and safe, and the clays are permeable.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
The organo-clays that have been developed in the U.S. were not developed for pollution
control, but for other industries. The average cost of these products is $3,000 per ton versus
$1,800 per ton for the E-clays. Also, the E-clays are more reactive than U.S. organo-clays and
will handle a wider range of contaminants.
11.0 VARIATIONS
The capital cost of an E-clay filter is governed by two factors-air flow and the concentration of
pollutants. The greater the air flow and/or concentration of the pollutants, the greater the
volume of clay required.
12.0 COMMENTS
The high volume, low concentration application provided by this technology is
extremely important and is presently without effective and economic control
technologies.
-------
E-79
• Other potential applications could include air streams from groundwater
stripping, odor control for rendering plants, fabricated rubber products.
• The bed thickness of 0.1 inches that is required for this technology could be
extremely difficult to manufacture. Breakthrough due to non-uniformity could
be a problem.
• Other potential limitations could include hazardous waste disposal costs, solid
waste disposal costs.
» Many costs were not considered in the analysis including power for the blower,
operation and maintenance costs, and waste disposal costs.
-------
E-80
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-2
FLUIDIZED-BED CEMENT KILN TECHNOLOGY
Vendor: Center for Clean Coal Utilization
Tokyo, Japan
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology sinters cement clinker in a fluidized-bed kiln system, comprised of a
spouted-bed kiln (granulation), a fluidized-bed kiln (sintering), and a fluidized-bed quencher
cooler. This system was developed to improve cement production that is traditionally
performed in rotary kilns. The Japanese technology improves the combustion and heat transfer
characteristics of the cement production process, enabling better control of the sintering
temperature. Unlike rotary kilns, the fluidized-bed kiln has no fire flames and the levels of NOX
are therefore very low. When compared with a rotary kiln, the fluidized bed system produces
only a third of the NOX, when heavy oil is used as a fuel, and one half when coal is used.
Compared with the traditional rotary cement kilns, this technology also cuts energy
consumption, thereby reducing C02 emissions.
The fluidized bed system also enables lower grades of coal to be used (low carbon and high
hydrogen content). This, combined with reduced fuel consumption, results in a 1-12 percent
reduction in C02 emissions.
The key features of this new technology are:
• Improves combustion (sintering) efficiency by 5 percent or more (from
55 percent to 60 percent).
• Reduces fuel consumption by 10-12 percent.
• Reduces C02 emissions by 10-12 percent.
• Saves natural resources by expanding the grades of coal which can be used.
• Reduces construction costs by 30 percent.
• Saves installation space by 70 percent.
-------
E-81
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The program to develop the fluidized-bed kiln was started in 1986 by the Japanese Ministry of
International Trade and Industry. A large scale production plant (200 t/day) is under
construction and a test operation was to have been started in January 1996. The development
schedule is shown below:
Table 2-1
Stage
Capacity Country
Year
Comments
Feasibility study
Pilot Plant Design and
Construction
Pilot Plant testing
Production Plant Design
and Construction
Production Plant testing
Japan 1986
20 t/day Japan 1987-1988 1 /100 scale of actual plant
Japan 1989-1992
200 t/day Japan 1993-1995 1 /10 scale of actual plant
1995-1997
3.0 CASE STUDY
As this technology is in the development stage, case studies of a commercial system are not
available. The details given below are based on a 20 t/day pilot plant operation.
In the pilot study, it was found that clinkers can be continuously granulated in the spouting bed
kiln (SBK) with no need for seed clinkers. The process was found to be unaffected by the type
of fuel used (heavy oil or coal). The diameter of the granules was found to be dependent on
the temperature of the SBK and was therefore easily controlled. The size of the granules
obtained was found to be very uniform and, consequently, their fluidity in the fluidized-bed kiln
(FBK) was easily maintained. In the FBK, the quality of the clinkers was found to be equal in
quality to those produced in a rotary kiln. Once again clinker quality was found to be
unaffected by the type of fuel used.
The system uses a fluidized-bed quenching cooler for maintaining clinker quality and a
packed-bed cooler for recovering waste heat. In the pilot plant, the efficiency of waste heat
recovery exceeded 80 percent, more than 20 percent higher than in conventional systems.
Heat recovery was affected by flow rate in the cooler, clinker size, and cool air intake.
-------
E-82
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Cement Manufacture
Limitations:
• None cited.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
C02
NOX
6.0 TEST DATA
Performance testing on the pilot plant (20 t/day) was carried out from June 1989 to
March 1993. NOX emissions test results are shown below. The NOX tests were performed
during granulation and sintering of clinkers for normal Portland cement.
Table 2-2
NO, Emissions*
System Heavy oil fuel Pulverized coal
Fluidized-bed cement kiln 60 - 100 ppm 230 - 270 ppm
Rotary kiln (traditional) 180 - 220 ppm 350 - 450 ppm
' At conditions with 10 percent 02
-------
E-83
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The specifications of the 20 t/day pilot plant are shown in the table below.
Table 2-3
Parameter Value
Granulating unit: spouted-bed kiln (SBK)
Operating temperature 1,300 to 1,350°C
Sintering unit: fluidized-bed kiln (FBK)
Operating temperature 1,400 to 1,450°C
Cooling unit: fluidized-bed quenching cooler (FBQ)
Cooling range 1,400°C to 1,450°C
Packed-bed cooler (PBC)
Cooling range 1,000 down to 100°C
Heat input 670 kcal/kg clinker
8.0 COSTS
Although no cost data was supplied, the developers claim that this technology is cost
competitive with traditional rotary cement kilns. A feasibility study will be carried out after the
test run of the 200 t/day production plant.
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No additional secondary impacts reported as compared to the traditional process.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
As far as the developers are aware, there are no similar technologies elsewhere in the world.
11.0 VARIATIONS
The clinker quality is expected to be unaffected by the type of fuel used.
-------
E-84
12.0 COMMENTS
• While technology looks promising, it should be run at production plant level for
a period of time to ensure feasibility and cost-effectiveness.
• Energy savings are the driver for this technology.
-------
E-85
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-3
LOW-TEMPERATURE CATALYTIC INCINERATION
Vendor: Babcock Hitachi KK
Tokyo, Japan
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Various catalysts have been developed to facilitate the incineration of pollutants in exhaust
streams with low calorific values at low combustion temperature (room temperature to 800"C).
This catalytic incineration process provides a means of oxidizing low concentrations of
(organic) pollutants by an improved combustion process utilizing noble metals, base metal
oxides, and transition metals as catalysts. In the catalytic incineration process, thermal NOX
production is also suppressed, as opposed to normal incineration.
The catalytic combustion system is composed of a catalytic combustor, heat exchanger, waste
energy recovery unit, starting preheater, fan and stack. The catalyst used in the process is in a
honeycomb form, thus allowing the gases to flow in a laminar state with a low pressure drop
through the catalyst. The catalytic combustor is lined with refractory material and has a
framework for dispersing the gases uniformly.
In the process, the emission gas is boosted to the required pressure by a blower. In order to
achieve complete combustion, the exhaust gas is passed through a heat exchanger to the
catalytic combustor. For inlet gases with very low calorific values, the inlet temperature to
the combustion chamber must be raised to ensure that the material reaches the complete
combustion temperature. A plate type heat exchanger is used for temperatures below 800° C,
while shell and tube type heat exchangers may be used for higher temperatures. An auxiliary
burner, installed between the heat exchanger and combustion chamber, can be used for this
purpose. The combustion heat is further recovered in a waste heat boiler prior to the release of
combustion products to the atmosphere.
-------
E-86
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
Development of the system began in 1982 and it is now available commercially. Two full-scale
systems for the treatment of emission exhaust gases have been installed:
• At an acrylic acid plant; estimated gas flow is 20,000 Nm3/hr.
• At a styrene monomer plant; estimated gas flow is 60,000 Nm3/hr.
3.0 CASE STUDY
No data provided.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Chemical Manufacturing
Plastics Manufacture
Bakeries (food industry)
Any industry with low hydrocarbon emissions.
Table 3-1
Industry
Types of Emissions
Target Chemicals
Chemical
Plastics
Food
Paint
Adhesive
Vent and purge gas
Byproduct gas
Solvents
Kitchen emissions
Solvents
Solvents
Hydrogen, CO, propane, methanol,
organic acids
Styrene, butadiene
Trimethylamine, formalin
Acetone, toluene, methanol,
formaldehyde
Toluene, benzene, acetone, methanol
Limitations:
Process limited to exhaust gases with low concentrations of pollutants.
-------
E-87
To prevent poisoning of the catalyst, potential poisons must be removed prior
to combustion. (See Table 3-2 below.) New catalysts are being developed to
deal with poisonous chemicals.
Table 3-2
Potential Catalyst Poisons
Poison Mechanism
Effects
Metals - Hg, Pb, Sn, Zn
Non metals - P, Sb, Bi, As, Si
Halogens - Cl, F, Br
Sulphur compounds -
S02, S03, H2S, thiols
Tar materials
Chemical combination with active
sites
Chemical combination with active
sites
Adsorption on active sites
Adsorption on active sites and
chemical combination with carrier
Permanent poisoning
Permanent poisoning
Regeneration of catalyst by
high temperatures
Regeneration of catalyst by
high temperatures
Deposit on catalyst surface blocking Regeneration by
pores incineration removal
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
The vendor states that the catalytic combustion process is applicable to the following gases:
Inorganic gases:
Organic gases:
Alkenes:
Aromatics:
Alcohols:
Ethers:
Aldehydes:
Ketones:
Acids/esters:
hydrogen, carbon monoxide
methane, ethane, propane, butane
ethene (ethylene), propene (propylene), butene
cyclopentane, cyclohexane, benzene, toluene, xylene,
ethylbenzene
ethanol, methanol, propanol
dimethyl ether, diethyl ether
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde
acetone, methyl ethyl ketone
ethanoic acid, acrylic acid, ethyl acetate
6.0 TEST DATA
No full-scale test data were provided. Laboratory endurance test results showed that the
catalyst can achieve 90 percent conversion of all targeted chemicals at approximately 350"C
-------
E-88
and does not deteriorate beyond this level after 3000 hours of service. The conventional
catalysts tested in conjunction with the Hitachi catalysts quickly deteriorated after initial
exposure so that after 400 hours of exposure an inlet temperature of at least 500° C was
required, with an inlet temperature of 800"C required after about 1000 hours of exposure.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following are process parameters for the Hitachi catalysts.
Table 3-3
Parameter
Requirement
Energy potential of gas to be heated
Fuel and power
Combustion temperature
Space
20,000 Nm3/hr system
60,000 Nm3/hr system
40-400 kcal/Nm3 (167.4-1673.6 kJ/Nm3}
Electricity and small amounts of LPG or kerosene
for the auxiliary burner
400-800"C (depends on catalyst)
12 x 15m (180m2)
19 x 15m (285m2)
8.0 COSTS
The following are the costs of the Hitachi catalysts.
Table 3-4
Parameter
Plant Size (Nm3/hr)
20,000
60,000
Capital costs
Operating costs
Catalyst exchanging costs
Payback period
' Assumed.
$1,300,000(1990)
Small amount of electricity
$360,000 every 3 years'
$2,800,000(1993)
Small amount of electricity
$1,080,000 every 3 years'
Vendor claims that the systems have not been
running long enough to determine this
-------
E-89
9-0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
Since the process requires electricity for the blower, and fossil fuels may be used in the
auxiliary burner, energy-related air pollution can occur.
The catalyst needs to be replaced periodically and the spent catalyst disposed of.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
No data available.
11.0 VARIATIONS
Various catalysts have been developed for different applications (see table below). However, it
should be noted that reductions in temperature and pressure below the optimum range of the
catalyst can lead to incomplete combustion.
Table 3-5
Catalyst Type*
Application
Controlled Pollutants (exampte)
LT1
LT2
HT2
HT2
HT3
SX1
SX2
Active at low temperatures
(100-500DC)
Active at room temperature
(adsorption and dissociation)
Heat resistant up to 1,000°C
Heat resistant up to 800°C
Heat resistant up to 800DC in very
steamy conditions
Resistant to S02 poisoning
Resistant to halogen poisoning
Aldehydes, alcohols, ammonia, amines,
CO, etc.
Methyl mercaptan, trimethyl amine,
methyl sulfide, H2S
Alkanes, aromatics, various solvents,
organic acids, etc
VOC streams
VOC streams (containing steam)
VOC (containing S02)
VOC (containing halogens)
•LT
HT
SX
= Low Temperature
= High Temperature
= Non-metal Poisoning Resistant
12.0 COMMENTS
High catalyst cost and catalyst poisoning are both of concern.
-------
E-90
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-4
FLUIDIZED-BED HEAT TREATMENT OF METAL COMPONENTS
Vendor: Quality Heat Treatment Pty Ltd.
Victoria, Australia
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology utilizes fluidized beds for the heat treatment of tool metal. Tool metal is
typically heat treated in salt baths or vacuum furnaces for the purpose of obtaining proper
metal hardness and microstructure. A new technology developed by Quality Heat Treatment
reduces the environmental impact of heat treatment of steel and other tool metals.
Steel is hardened by heat treating to improve its properties. Hardening, carburising and
nitrocarburising are all steel heat treatment processes that use baths of molten salts, such as
nitrites, nitrates, carbonates, cyanides, chlorides, or caustics. The combination of these
chemicals and heat not only causes air pollution related health problems, but also creates
environmental problems when disposing of the waste. Waste products all require treatment
before release to the environment, with the disposal of cyanide salts at $3,300 per ton.
A mixture of air, ammonia, nitrogen, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and other
gases is used as the fluidizing gas to carry out a heat treatment in Quality Heat's Fluidized-Bed
Heat Treatment technology. This technology:
• Reduces amounts of effluent
• Improves safety and working atmosphere
• Reduces the amount of energy used
• Improves quality and uniformity of the final product
• The use of 120 mesh or {105 fjm) white aluminum oxide significantly
reduces the usage of nitrogen.
• The computer controlled fluidization optimizes gas usage and heat
transfer, reducing the amount of gases used.
• Can be run in a fast track line allowing all processes to be performed in
line and quickly changed. Speed of heating and cooling is similar to
salt baths and can be individually reduced to optimize the heat
treatment of each part. Process times also can be reduced.
-------
E-91
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The technology is commercially available and is used throughout the world in countries such as
Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Germany, Columbia, Egypt, Jordan, China, Malaysia, Indonesia,
Taiwan, and Korea. Some locations are shown in the table below.
Table 4-1
Status
Full scale
Full scale
Full scale
Full scale
Country
Australia
Indonesia
Malaysia
Malaysia
Company
Comalco
PT Indal
Fujisash
Aluform
3.0 CASE STUDY
Chartered Metal Industries (CMI), Singapore.
For the toolroom at the Chartered Metal Industries (CMI) in Singapore, the standard heat
treatment process was a cyanide salt bath. Disposal of cyanide salt typically cost $3,300 per
ton. In addition, there are the environmental hazards that result from the use of toxic salts,
including the neutralization of quench water, oil, cleaning water and washing water, as well as
the off-gases that must be chemically scrubbed.
CMI replaced their existing salt bath line with Quality Heat fluidized beds. The advantages of
the fluidized-bed furnaces included temperature uniformity, atmosphere control, and the
environmental benefits of no longer using the cyanide salt. The fluidized beds showed
significant cost savings versus the salt baths at approximately $87,000 per year.
The loading and handling capacities of CMI's Quality Heat fluidized bed are shown in Table 4-2
below.
-------
E-92
Table 4-2
Temperature (°C)
Parameter
Throughput (kg/hr)
Maximum load (kg)
Nitrogen (ms/hr)
250
275
300
35
700
180
220
10
1100
100
150
7
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Primary Metals manufacturing
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
• Halogenated compounds
• Metals
• Eliminates the use of cyanide (and barium) used in salt baths; therefore eliminates
these potential emissions.
6.0 TEST DATA
None available.
-------
E-93
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The table below shows the operational parameters for the Quality Heat Treatment technology.
Table 4-3
Parameter
Value
Temperature
Furnace size
Furnace volume (bed)
Production loading capacity (per bed)
Furnace heat up time (approx. from cold)
Safety controls
Low gas flow alarm
Power failure
Over temperature
Heating Electricity
Fluidizing atmosphere (per bed)
Ambient to 1100°C
Bed 700 mm diameter by 900 mm deep
Load weight of aluminum oxide 615 kg
See Table 4-4 below
0.5 hours ambient to 200 °C
1.0 hours ambient to 360 °C
1.5 hours ambient to 500 °C
2.0 hours ambient to 720 "C
2.5 hours ambient to 900 °C
3.0 hours ambient to 1100 °C
Shuts off heating if fluidizing gas supply fails
An automatic nitrogen by-pass system is
provided to protect work
Shuts down elements if set temperature is
exceeded
125kW
See Table 4-5 below
-------
E-94
Table 4-4
Throughput (Approximate)
225 kg/hrat 1100°C
300kg/hrat 1000°C
350 kg/hrat 900 °C
400 kg/hrat 700 °C
500 kg/hrat 500 °C
600 kg/hrat 250 °C
Maximum Load*
300kg
400kg
400kg
560kg
600kg
600kg
Recommended loading capacity based on load weight in steel, including baskets and fixtures, and
sized so that no more than 50 percent of open area is occupied by the work load.
Table 4-5
Temperature
<°C)
Room
Temperature
250
500
Fluidizing Air
(m3/hr)
124at40kPa
70-80
36-38
Inert gas
< 1 0ppm 02
(m3/hr)
124at40kPa
70-80
36-38
Carburising gas,
Natural, Propane, or
LPG (m3/hr)
-
-
4 at 1 0 percent
Ammonia/
Dry ammonia
(m3/hr)
-
-
20 at 50 percent
750
1000
22-24
15-17
22-24
15-17
air flow
12 at 50 percent
air flow
2 at 10 percent
air flow
air flow
12 at 50 percent
air flow
2 at 10 percent
air flow
1100
13-15
13-15
-------
E-95
8.0 COSTS
Costs below are based on the system described in the CMI, Singapore, case study
(Section 3.0):
Table 4-6
Item
Value
Capital costs (investment)
Estimated payback period
Operating and maintenance costs (per year)
Energy and salt
Total cost savings
Cost year basis
$180,000
2 years (approximately)
$36,000
$51,000
$87,000
U.S.$, 1994
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
No data available.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
Quality Heat compared their fluidized bed process with similar processes from U.S.
manufacturers, and claims that the Quality Heat process offers:
• Lower capital costs.
• More sophisticated systems.
• 20 percent less in hourly running costs.
For the cost example above ($180,000 in capital costs for the CMI System), the vendors
estimated that the capital costs for atmospheric and vacuum furnaces performing the same
processes would be $350,000 and $500,000, respectively. In general, when compared to
vacuum furnaces, the Quality Heat System is estimated to have lower operating costs, at
$0.33/kg (estimated) as compared to $0.85/kg for vacuum furnaces; 2.5 times lower capital
costs; and 1.5 times more capacity.
-------
E-96
11.0 VARIATIONS
The total mass of metal that can be treated varies with temperature.
12.0 COMMENTS
• None provided.
-------
E-97
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-5
BIOTON B10FILTER FOR CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTANTS
Vendor: ClairTech
Utrech, the Netherlands
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology employs biofiltration to treat VOC (odor)-containing industrial exhaust. In
Europe, it is a proven technology that is economical for high volume of gasses which have a
low concentration of pollutants. The BIOTON system utilizes the natural process of VOC
degradation by microorganisms, on compost.
The BIOTON biofilter works by providing an environment in which the microorganisms can
thrive. The construction of this environment begins with organic-bearing material, such as
compost, surrounded by a thin film of water. The compost serves as the nutrient source for
the microorganisms until the polluted gas stream becomes the food source. One cubic meter
of filter material can provide approximately 10 million particles, and each particle can house up
to 100,000 microorganisms.
The industrial exhaust first passes over the filter, where the pollutants diffuse into the water
phase that contains the microorganisms. The microorganisms subsequently biodegrade the
pollutants by oxidation, producing by-products of water and carbon dioxide, the latter of which
is emitted to the atmosphere. An alkane, for example, is oxidized to a primary alcohol, then to
an aldehyde, and later to an organic acid. Once the hydrocarbon has been converted to an
acid, it can be metabolized further to carbon dioxide. Control efficiency is estimated to be as
high as 90 percent. During short periods, the concentrations of pollutants in the biofilter can
be very high. In these cases, the biofilter will have a control efficiency of 80 percent. This
control is achieved by mixing activated carbon through the filter material.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The BIOTON biofilter is widely used in more than 20 industrial facilities throughout Europe.
Industrial facilities using the BIOTON system include Cyanamid, Coca-Cola, Ciba Geigy, Fuji
Photo, AKZO Chemical, Cargill, and Novo Nordisk.
-------
E-98
3.0 CASE STUDY
A large BIOTON filter (approximately 120 m3) was purchased by AKZO Chemical's Sikkens
facility in 1988 for control of their paint production process. The exhaust gas volume was
typically 5,500 m3/hr, but reached up to 12,000 m3/hr. The gas stream components included
xylene, toluene, methyl ethyl ketone, and many other solvents. The main source of these
pollutants was cleaning solvents. The biofilter removed approximately 90 percent of the
solvents.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
Limitations:
• Surface Coating
• Chemical Manufacture
• Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
• Low to medium inlet concentrations of air contaminants
• Temperature range of 18-4VC
• High concentrations of acid-forming pollutants limit filter material
lifespan
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
• Toxics
6.0 TEST DATA
A series of tests were conducted at a Styrene-Butadiene-Rubber plant in Austria in 1989 by
ClairTech. The biofilter was tested with an exhaust gas that had styrene concentrations
ranging from 10 to 100 ppmv. Although the gas stream contained primarily styrene, smaller
quantities of other solvents were also present. The pilot plant treated 128 m3/hr of exhaust
gas with a filter volume of 1.6 m3. The residence time of the gas in the filter was
approximately 45 seconds; the gas stream temperature was approximately 25°C. The average
inlet pollutant concentration was 35 ppmv, with inlet concentrations ranging from 19 ppmv to
-------
E-99
74 ppmv. Control efficiencies ranged from 91 percent (at 52 ppmv) to 100 percent. The
average control efficiency was 98 percent.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
This technology requires the following for operation:
• A fan to move the gas stream over the filter
• A recirculating pump in the humidifying column
• Water to bring the gas stream to 98 percent humidity.
• A temperature range of 18-41°C
• Filter water-phase pH of 7.
8.0 COSTS
• Capital cost: $15-100 per cfm of treated air
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• The aged filter material must be disposed of in a municipal dump or used in
agricultural operations.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
No comparisons provided.
11.0 VARIATIONS
The biofilter is very sensitive to the concentration and nature of the pollutants. For example,
benzene can be successfully biodegraded in a mixed gas stream, while pure benzene is
poisonous to the microorganisms in concentrations above 10 ppmv.
-------
E-100
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-6
ECOCLEAN CLEANING MACHINES SOS, 81S, AND 83S FOR DECREASING
Vendor: Durr Industries (Automation, Inc.)
F.R.G.
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The Ecoclean cleaning machines are self-contained low-emission vapor degreasers (LEVD) that
are an alternative to conventional vapor degreasers used throughout industry. The LEVDs are
completely enclosed and airtight machines that significantly reduce air emissions and solvent
loss. The Ecoclean LEVDs can reduce air emissions by over 99 percent. The machines are
designed to use chlorinated solvents such as perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, and methylene chloride. Wastewater discharges are small, and waste
solids are equivalent to those currently generated by current vapor degreasing technology.
In conventional vapor degreasing, solvent vapors condense on parts, and this condensate drains
off the part, carrying the contaminants to a sump. The solvent is re-used until the
contaminants accumulate to the point where the solvent is no longer usable and must be
discarded. It is estimated that up to 90 percent of the solvent is lost through air emissions.
The parts are placed in a basket that is lowered into the machine chamber that is then
hermetically sealed shut. The machine proceeds through timed cleaning cycles that can be
adjusted by the operator. In the first cycle, the degreasing cycle, solvent vapors are
generated in a jacket that surrounds the working chamber. The solvent vapors then pass up
through the working chamber, condensing and removing soils and other contaminants from the
parts. The condensate passes to a water separator and on to the sump.
The next cycle is the condensation cycle, where the remaining solvent vapors are condensed
by a refrigerated cooling coil at the bottom of the working chamber. The machine then enters
an air recirculation stage, where the air-solvent mixture in the chamber is recirculated through a
chiller to further condense out more solvent. The next stage is a carbon heat-up cycle, where
the chamber air is heated by a fan and passed through a series of activated carbon filter mats.
This cycle allows for solvent captured by the carbon mats in the last cleaning cycle to desorb
and be collected in the sump.
-------
E-101
To collect the solvent from each cleaning cycle, the chamber air is recirculated in the reverse
direction, passing first through the chiller and then through the carbon mats in the adsorption
stage. The cool solvent vapor is adsorbed by the carbon mats, allowing for almost no solvent
vapor to exhaust out of the chamber when the workload of parts is removed.
2. 0 CURRENT STATUS
These machines have been commercially available in Europe, and now are commercially
available in the United States through a U.S. affiliate.
3.0 CASE STUDY
The Ecoclean 83-S was tested in a case study performed by Battelle Institute, commissioned
by the U.S. EPA under the Waste Reduction and Innovative Technology Evaluation (WRITE)
Program. The LEVD was shown to reduce air emissions by over 99 percent. It was concluded
that the LEVD was a cost-effective air pollution solution with pollution prevention capabilities.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Solvent Evaporation (degreasing and dry cleaning)
Limitations:
• Depending on the model, the weight of parts that can be cleaned is
limited.
• Depending on the metal being cleaned, the weight of parts and the
time required to clean them will vary. Aluminum, for instance, will
reach the vapor temperature much more quickly than steel. This
difference means that fewer aluminum parts can be cleaned per unit
time than steel parts.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
VOCs
• Toxics
-------
E-102
6.0 TEST DATA
Under the Battelle Laboratory program, product quality tests were run on the Ecoclean 83-S
using perchloroethylene (PCE) solvent. The test was conducted on machined steel parts
contaminated with various amounts of cutting oil. The machine was run through complete
cycles nine times. Total cycle time varied considerably with workload mass, while degree of
contamination appeared to have little effect. The parts were examined after each run to
determine the level of cleaning. No contamination was found on the parts from any of these
runs. Furthermore, there was less water combination of solvent that might lead to solvent
depletion and acid formation by hydrolysis.
To measure emissions from the LEVD, a flame ionization detector (FID) was used. The first FID
was inserted into the working chamber of the LEVD to measure the concentration of any
residual perchloroethylene following a cycle run. The second FID was used to continuously
monitor the emissions around the LEVD, to ensure leak-proof operation. The FID's were
calibrated with PCE standards and monitored through a single data capture system.
Throughout the test, the exterior FID read at ambient conditions. The interior FID read well
below the target concentration of 150 ppm, within a range of 40-50 ppm. When the lid was
opened, the exterior FID leaped to 6 ppm, but both FIDs leveled out at 3-4 ppm in a short
period of time. In fact, elevated exterior levels did not occur often, and were often remedied
with a simple adjustment of the LEVD seal pressure. The typical discharge of solvent, which
occurred at the opening of the LEVD lid, was 0.00132 Ib/cycle.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
The following specifications are required for the Ecoclean 83-S:
• 93,725 kW-hrs per year electrical power.
• Operator time of 5 min/cycle.
8.0 COSTS
The Battelle economic evaluation lists the following costs for the Ecoclean 83-S:
-------
E-103
Table 6-1
Parameter Value
Capital cost $210,000
Payback period 1 o years
Operation and maintenance costs $12,673 per year
Electricity $0.04/kW-hr
Operator and maintenance labor $8/hr
Currency basis U.S. Dollar ($) -1993
Cost of workload degreased $30/ton
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Sludge (landfill disposal) equivalent to conventional degreasers.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
According to the Battelle study, the LEVD reduced air emissions by over 99 percent compared
with the estimated air emissions from a conventional open-top vapor degreaser of similar size.
Furthermore, the Battelle economic evaluation showed that operating cost for the LEVD was
$12,673 per year, versus $35,640 per year for the conventional degreaser. According to the
evaluation, with a purchase price of $210,000 and payback period of 10 years, a composite
savings of $22,967 results.
11.0 VARIATIONS
The type of part material dictates how much the LEVD can clean in a set period of time. Also,
the amount of cleaning that can be accomplished per unit time is dependent upon how quickly
the parts reach the solvent vapor temperature. According to the Battelle study, fewer
aluminum parts can be cleaned per unit time, because of aluminum's lower thermal diffusivity
than steel.
-------
E-104
TECHNOLOGY NUMBER: B-7
F-1 CLEAN ULTRASONIC CLEANING MACHINE FOR DECREASING
Vendor: Tiyuda Manufacturing
Aichi, Japan
1.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This technology employs ultrasonic cleaning in conjunction with a vacuum-sealed hot and cold
solvent wash for precision cleaning of parts such a printed circuit boards. The F-1 Clean is
designed to use chlorinated solvents such as methylene chloride and trichloroethylene. Over
90 percent of the solvent is recovered through filtration, vapor condensation, and distillation.
With the use of a regenerating carbon adsorber system, an overall solvent recovery of
99.99 percent is achieved.
The F-1 Clean process begins when the parts are placed into a cleaning chamber equipped with
a lid. A vacuum seals the chamber automatically. In the first cleaning stage, warm solvent is
introduced into the cleaning chamber. The parts then become completely submerged in the
warm solvent. An ultrasonic vibration is then passed through the chamber to aid cleaning. The
warm solvent is drained through a warm solvent filter and returned to a warm solvent tank.
The next stage employs cold solvent in the same manner, also with ultrasonic vibration to aid
cleaning. The cold solvent is drained and returned to a cold solvent tank through a cold solvent
filter. The parts are rinsed in pure solvent vapor (generated from the warm solvent tank) and
vacuum dried at 680 mmHg. The solvent vapors recovered in the initial venting of the cleaning
chamber are recycled through a refrigerated condenser. The three subsequent ventings of the
cleaning chamber are passed through a dual-bed, self-regenerating, activated carbon adsorber.
Regeneration of the activated carbon occurs under vacuum, by indirect steam heating; the
desorbed solvent is routed to a still. The desorbed solvent is distilled continuously from the still
through two water separators and then is returned to either the cold or warm solvent tank.
The warm solvent tank overflow is also directed to the still.
2.0 CURRENT STATUS
The F-1 Clean is in widespread commercial use in Japan by companies such as Hitachi, Hewlett
Packard, and Fuji Electric.
-------
E-105
3.0 CASE STUDY
No case study data supplied.
4.0 APPLICATIONS/LIMITATIONS
Industries:
• Degreasing and Dry Cleaning Operations
• Solvent Evaporation
Limitations:
• Compatible only with solvents whose boiling points at atmospheric
pressure are under 88°C.
• Workload limited by size of working chamber.
5.0 CONTROLLED POLLUTANTS
This technology controls emissions of:
• VOCs (chlorinated)
• Toxics
6.0 TEST DATA
California's South Coast Air Quality Management District tested the F-1 Clean, Model
No. YEV-452-71 using trichloroethylene degreasing solvent. The source test showed the
efficiency of the F-1 Clean's system with a carbon adsorber was 99.99 percent.
7.0 OPERATIONAL/PROCESS PARAMETERS
Electricity and solvents are needed, based on the size of the unit.
8.0 COSTS
Capital costs were estimated at $200,000-250,000, depending on the size of the equipment.
-------
E-106
9.0 SECONDARY IMPACTS
• Sludge from the solvent filters and tanks must be disposed of in a controlled landfill.
10.0 COMPARISON WITH U.S. TECHNOLOGIES
None provided.
11.0 VARIATIONS
None provided.
-------
Reproduced by NTIS
u •
51 s >
0 fl).£ *•»
»-:! 0 o
o E o 0
^^ ^•M *r
w 0 §.!2
§'5EE
£000
M- a1 ~
± o c
.
0 o 05
ajS>c
4-1 Q.0)n
0£.Eo
'i-S
(/)*£
------- |