United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-WFB-10
March 1981
Air
Bft
Nonfossil Fueled Boilers
Emission Test Report
Weyerhaeuser Company
Longview, Washington
-------
NONFOSSIL FUELED BOILERS
Emission Test Report
Weyerhaeuser Company
Longview, Washington
8-12 December 1980
by
James A. Peters and Windle H. McDonald
MONSANTO RESEARCH CORPORATION
Dayton Laboratory
Dayton, Ohio 45407
Contract No. 68-02-3547
Work Assignment No. 3 (78/31)
Project No. 80-WFB-10
March 1981
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS
EMISSION MEASUREMENT BRANCH
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711
ETR1:G
-------
CONTENTS
Figures iv
Tables v
1. Introduction 1
2. Summary of Results 2
3. Process Description 18
4. Location of Sampling Points 21
5. Sampling and Analytical Procedures 24
Appendices
A. Complete Emission Results A-l
B. Field Data Sheets B-l
C. Analytical Data Sheets C-l
D. BaP Sampling and Analysis Data Sheets D-l
E. Boiler Operating Data E-l
F. Equipment Calibration Sheets F-l
G. Project Participants G-l
111
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Boiler and emission flow schematic showing
sampling locations
2 Electroscrubber module schematic 15
3 Electroscrubber de-entrainment and level
control system 16
4 Longview electroscrubber module 17
5 Schematic diagram of three-module electroscrubber
system at Weyerhaeuser Longview mill 17
6 Location of electroscrubber inlet sampling ports,
Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington 18
7 Sampling port and point locations at inlet duct 3 . .
8 Electroscrubber triple stack outlet sampling
location, top view, Weyerhaeuser, Longview,
Washington 19
9 Electroscrubber triple stack outlet sampling location,
side view, Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington ... 20
10 BaP sample train 23
11 Schematic of sorbent trap 28
TABLES
Number Page
1 Weyerhaeuser-Longview Mill Boiler No. 11 Sampling
and Analysis Schedule 3
2 Particulate Emission Data and Stack Gas Parameters,
Boiler No. 11, Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 9-11, 1980 (English Units) 4
3 Particulate Emission Data and Stack Gas Parameters,
Boiler No. 11, Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 9-11, 1980 (Metric Units) 5
4 Summary of Integrated Gas Analyses, Weyerhaeuser,
Longview, Washington, December 9-11, 1980 6
5 Summary of Andersen Particle Sizing Results,
Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 9-11, 1980 8
6 Summary of BaP Emission Results, Electroscrubber
Inlet, Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 9-11, 1980 10
IV
-------
TABLES (cont'd)
Number Page
7 Summary of NO Emissions, Weyerhaeuser Electroscrubber
Outlet, Longview, Washington, December 9-11, 1980 . 11
8 Summary of Boiler Fuel Ultimate Analyses,
Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 9-11, 1980 13
9 Boiler and APCD Operating Conditions During
Testing, Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington,
December 8-11, 1980 15
v
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The nonfossil fueled boiler at the Longview Mill of Weyerhaeuser
Company in Longview, Washington was emission tested by Monsanto
Research Corporation (MRC) for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) under contract no. 68-02-3547, Work Assignment No.
3. The purpose of testing boiler #11 at Longview was to gather
data as background information for the development of possible
new source performance standards for nonfossil fueled boilers.
Particulate emissions were determined by simultaneous sampling of
four points: inlet and triple outlets of the air pollution
control device serving the boiler. The boiler sampled is a large
hog fuel fired boiler, producing 420,000 Ib steam/hr, controlled
by a two-stage multicyclone flyash collector and a three-module
Electroscrubber , an electrostatic granular filter designed to
remove particulate matter in a dry form.
The field test work was monitored by Dan Bivins, Field Testing
Section, Emission Measurement Branch, EPA. The sampling was di-
rected by Windle H. McDonald of MRC as team leader. The Longview
Mill was tested during the week of December 8-12, 1980. The
sample collection methods employed were EPA Methods 1 through 5,
7, particle sizing by Andersen cascade impactor, and benzo-
alpha-pyrene determination by an XAD-2 resin trap in a modified
Method 5 train.
Quality assurance/quality control in the sampling area covered
such activities as instrument calibration, using standard or
approved sampling methods, chain-of-custody procedures, and pro-
tocols for the recording and calculation of data. QA/QC in the
analysis area involved using only validated analysis methods,
periodic operator QC checking and training, sample QC by the use
of splits, reference standards, and spikes, and interlaboratory
audits.
-------
SECTION 2
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Pollutants which were measured for this emission test were par-
ticulate matter, particle size, C02, CO, NO , and BaP. Table 1
presents the sampling and analysis schedule in condensed form.
A total of three particulate emission runs were conducted simul-
taneously at one of the Electroscrubber inlet ducts and the three
outlet stacks. Concurrent opacity readings were to have been
taken on the outlet stacks, but were cancelled because of inter-
ference from other stacks at the mill. The inlet location sam-
pled during all three test runs was duct #3 (see Figure 6).
All EPA Method 5 runs were followed immediately with an Anderson
particle sizing and NO run.
X
Test equipment was set up and preliminary stack traverse data were
obtained on December 8. No tests were performed but readings were
taken of all monitored process parameters. It was learned that the
filter bypass valve on Electroscrubber module number 2 was leaking;
this could cause the emission test results for that module to be
slightly higher than normal.
The first test run began at 12:35 p.m. on December 9, after the
feed belt conveyor had been returned to service, and was ended at
the outlets after 108 minutes of sampling and 96 minutes at the
inlet. Due to equipment problems, the BaP test was not usuable.
Emission test run 2 began at 10:05 a.m. on December 10. During
the first few minutes on the test the soot blowers were operating.
When over half of the Method 5 was completed, it was noticed that
the line which removed the collected ash from the de-entrainment
vessel had plugged so the gravel was returned to the bed uncleaned.
It was decided to continue the test since the opacity monitor
showed only a slight increase (to about 5%). This situation would
have gone uncorrected by plant personnel until the opacity reached
10% during normal operation. The BaP test was again not usuable
due to equipment problems.
-------
Emission test run 3 began at 9:30 a.m. on December 11, continued
with no problems, and ended at 11:23 a.m. One additional set of
NO samples at stack #3 was taken to redo the samples from run #2,
for which insufficient gas volumes were pulled. About halfway
through the Method 5 run it was discovered that power had been lost
to the number three module. The stack opacity remained low so
testing was continued. All three required BaP runs were completed
on this day.
Particulate emission calculations and stack gas parameters are
summarized in Tables 2 and 3. All outlet test runs were conducted
within isokinetic variation limits. The inlet run #3 was 150%
isokinetic; it is believed that the orifice manometer malfunctioned,
gave false readings, and the operator then changed the probe tip
diameter to compensate for the loss of pressure head observed.
Accordingly, inlet run #3 is not included in the averages for
Tables 2 and 3.
The effects of the soot blow during run #2 on particulate concen-
tration in the stack gas are evident, particularly at the inlet
duct sampling and at the outlet of Electroscrubber module #2. For
all three runs the stack outlet of module #2 had higher particulate
emissions.
Integrated gas analysis results are given in Table 4. Small
amounts of CO (less than 0.1%) were detected at the outlet loca-
tions. Completed integrated gas analysis results are included
with the field data sheets in Appendix B.
-------
TABLE 1. WEYERHAEUSER-LONGVIEW MILL BOILER NO. 11 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS SCHEDULE
Sampling site
Elect roscrubber
inlet
Electrosc rubber
inlet
E 1 ectr os c rubber
inlet
Electroscrubber
inlet
Electroscrubber
outlet
Electroscrubber
outlet
Electroscrubber
outlet
Electroscrubber
outlet
Electroscrubber
outlet
Boiler feed
conveyor
Total
number of
samples
3
3
3
3
3x3
3x3
3x3
3x3 runs,
4 samples
each
3
3 samples,
2 fuel
Sampling Initial analysis
Sample type method Minimum sampling time Type l-l-ttK,,)
Particulate EPA 5 60 minutes
matter
Particle size Andersen
distribution
Integrated gas EPA 3 C07 , 0-, , CO EPA 3
analysis
BaP Modified EPA 5 60 minutes Fluorescence spec-
trophotometry
Particulate EPA 5 60 minutes
matter
Particle size Andersen
distribution
Integrated gas EPA 3 CO2 , 02 , CO EFA 3
analysis
NO EPA 7 15 minute intervals
Opacity EPA 9 30 min before EPA 5 until
30 min after EPA S
ASTM Grab every 15 min during EPA 5 Ultimate analysis, ASTM, ASTM
then composite heating value
analyses
-------
TABLE 2. PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS, BOILER NO. 11,
WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9-11, 1980 (ENGLISH UNTS)
Emissions
Run No.
Electroscrubber
1
2
3 b
Average
Electroscrubber
Stack 1
1
2
3
Average
Stack 2
1
2
3
Average
Stack 3
1
2
3
Average
Date
Time,
min
Stack
temperature, Flow,
°F dscfm
H20,
%
Isokinetic
°/
/o
, Actual
gr/dscf
Ib/hr
Ib/mm Btu
Corrected to
12% C0^_
gi/dscf
Inlet (Duct #3)
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
Outlet
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
96
96
96
96
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
334
342
335
338
316
329
322
322
311
317
317
315
312
319
313
315
71,
69,
61,
70,
59,
66,
56,
61,
58,
60,
54,
57,
58,
63,
55,
59,
810
078
822
444
740
356
929
008
393
436
836
888
806
708
636
383
19.71
26.09
22.39
22.90
21.32
23.96
21.20
22.16
21.16
24.33
21.51
22.33
21.18
23.77
21.15
22.03
89
102
150
99
104
97
98
104
98
99
105
99
—
.7
.7
.0
.1
.8
.9
.0
.3
.7
.6
.8
.1
0
0.
0,
0.
0
0
0.
0
0,
0,
0
0.
0
0
0
0
•B75 a
.2644a
.1873
.2110
.0088
.0085
.0086
.0086
.0129
.0162a
.0138
.0143
.0082
.0113a
.0115
.0103
97
156.
99.
126.
4.
4,
4.
4 .
6.
8.
6.
7.
4
6
5
5,
9
,b
.2
.7
.b
.9
.2
.b
.5
.4
.5
•X
.1
.1
.5
,2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.4401
.6856
.4857
5629
.0220
.0213
.0223
.0219
0344
.0385
,0355
0361
.0211
.0276
.0315
0267
0,
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.2423
,3623a
.2204
3123
.0096
.0095a
.0100
.0097
,0166^
,0174a
,0162
.0167
.0093
.01243
.0142
.0120
aRun 2 included a soot blow.
Average of runs 1 and 2 only.
-------
TABLE 3. PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA AND STACK GAS PARAMETERS, BOILER NO. 11,
WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
(METRIC UNITS)
Run No.
Elect rose rubber
1
2
3 ,
Average
Electroscrubber
Stack 1
1
2
3
Average
Stack 2
1
2
3
Average
Stack 3
1
2
3
Average
Date
Time,
min
Inlet (Duct #3)
12/9/80 96
12/10/80 96
12/11/80 96
Outlet
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
12/9/80
12/10/80
12/11/80
96
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
108
Stack
temperature, Flow,
°C dncmpm
168
172
168
170
158
165
161
161
155
158
158
157
156
160
156
157
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
,034
,956
,751
,914
,692
,879
,612
,728
,654
,712
,553
,640
,665
,786
,576
,676
F.mi ssions
H20, Isokinetic
Actual
% % q/dncm
19.
26.
22,
22
21.
23
21
22
21.
24,
21.
22.
21.
23
21
22
.71 89.7
.09 102.7
.39 150.0
.90
.32 99.1
.96 104.8
.20
.16
.16 98.0
,33 104.3
.51 98.7
.33
.18 99.6
.77 105.6
.15 99.1
.03
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3604
6052
4287
,4648
,0201
,0195a
.0197
.0198
.0295
.0371a
.0316
.0327
.0188
,0259a
.0262
.0236
kg/hi
44.0
71.0
45.0
53.3
2 .04
2.20
1 .90
2.05
2.93
3.61
2.94
3.23
1 .88
2 .78
2 .48
2.38
kg/
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
Collected t
1 2%_ CC ,
'GJ
1893
2948
2089
2421
0095
0092
,0096
,0094
,0148
.0166
.0153
.0155
.0091
.0119
.0135
.0115
\:
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
l/dnciii
5545a
5044
6446
.0219
.0219°
.0230
.0223
.0381
.0398a
.0372
.0384
.0213
.0265d
.0324
.0274
Run 2 included a soot blow.
3Average of runs 1 and 2 only.
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF INTEGRATED GAS ANALYSES,
WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON,
DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
Run no.
Date
C02 ,
-------
Particle sizing by Andersen cascade impactor was sampled at the
inlet and three outlet locations. Each Andersen run immediately
followed the particulate emission test run. Results are presented
in Table 5; complete Andersen run results are furnished with field
data sheets in Appendix B. A larger fraction of particles in the
>12 pm size range was found in all three outlet stacks during run 2
Also, outlet of module 2 showed consistently larger particles,
probably related to the increased Method 5 test results at module
2 for all tests.
Emissions of benzo-alpha-pyrene (BaP), a polynuclear aromatic hydro'
carbon with carcinogenic potential, were measured at the Electro-
scrubber inlet. Table 6 summarizes the results. Complete results
are shown in Appendix A; and field data sheets and analytical re-
sults are given in Appendix D.
Emissions of NO were measured at the three Electroscrubber
outlet location!. Table 7 contains the summarized N0x emission
results; complete results are given in Appendix A and QA/QC
results of NO analysis are given in Appendix C.
A.
During each particulate emission test run a composited fuel
sample was taken. Table 8 presents the results of the fuel
ultimate analyses and Btu content. Boiler operating conditions
during testing are summarized in Table 9; complete boiler process
data are furnished in Appendix E.
The boiler and Electroscrubber were operated normally during all
of the tests. The results of the test on the outlet of module 2
may be slightly higher than normal for all three Method 5 test
runs. The results of Method 5 run three for module number 3 may
also be slightly higher than normal due to the power failure. The
opacities of these stacks were not significantly affected however.
Therefore, the results from these tests should be representative
of particulate emissions from this location.
8
-------
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF ANDERSEN PARTICLE SIZING RESULTS,
WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON,
DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
Electroscrubber
Run 1-1
Flow rate (ACFM) :
Percent ISO:
Percent
in size
range
7.5
1.2
3.0
18.1
34.3
12.5
12.5
10.9
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
92.5
91.3
88.3
70.2
35.9
23.4 0
10.9 0
0
Size
range ,
microns
>12.5
7.8-12.5
5.4-7.8
2.3-5.4
1.2-2.3
.72-1.2
.48-0.72
0-0.48
Run 2-1
inlet
Flow rate (ACFM):
Percent ISO:
Percent
in size
range
2.8
6.4
13.5
14.3
19.1
19.9
8.9
2.8
12.2
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
97.1
90.7
77.2
62.9
43.8
23.9
15.0
12.2
0
Electroscrubber
Flow
Run 1-Stack 1
rate (ACFM) :
Percent ISO: 104
Percent
in size
range
25.5
19.6
5.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.7
0.0
35.3
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
74.5
54.9 8
49.0
49.0
49.0
49.0 1
35.3 0
35.3 0
0
0.63
.1
Size
range ,
microns
>13.5
.4-13.5
5.8-8.4
3.9-5.8
2.5-3.9
.22-2.5
.77-1.22
.52-0.77
0-0.52
Flow
Run 2-Stack
rate (ACFM)
Size
range ,
microns
>18.0
12.0-18.0
7.8-12.0
5.4-7.8
3.4-5.4
1.7-3.4
1.1-1.7
0.74-1.1
0-0.74
outlet
1
: 0.75
Percent ISO: 104.2
Percent
in size
range
36.1
3.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.7
0.0
55.6
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
63.0
59.3
59.3
59.3
59.3
59.3
55.6
55.6
0
Size
range ,
microns
>12.4
7.7-12.4
5.7-7.7
3.6-5.2
2.3-3.6
1.1-2.3
0.70-1.1
0.48-0 7
0-0.70
Run 3-1
Flow rate (ACFM) :
Percent ISO:
Percent
in size
range
2.3
4.5
9.4
8.4
15.4
24.3
12.3
11.6
10.9
Flow
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
97.9
93.4 8
84.0 6
74.6 4
59.2 2
34.9 1
22.5 0
10.9 0
0
Run 3-Stack 1
rate (ACFM):
Percent ISO: 104
Percent
in size
range
5.9
0.0
7.6
0.5
0.2
3.2
4.4
8.3
70.0
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
94.2
94.2
86.6
86.1
85.9
82.7
78.3 0
70.0 0
0
Size
range ,
microns
>14.0
.9-14.0
.1-8.9
.2-6.1
.6-4.2
.3-2.6
.81-1.3
.56-0.81
0-0.56
0.54
.2
Size
range ,
microns
>13.3
9.1-13.3
6.2-9.1
4.2-6.2
2.7-4.2
1.3-2.7
.84-1.3
.57-0.84
0-0.67
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (continued)
Electroscrubber
Run 1-Stack
Flow
rate
Percent
(ACFM)
2
: 0.36
ISO: 109.7
Flow
Run 2-Stack
rate (ACFM)
outlet
2
: 0.72
Percent ISO: 106.4
Cumulative
Percent
in size
range
43.5
0.0
0.0
6.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.7
39.1
percent
less
size
than
range
56.6
56.5
56.5
47.8
47.8
47.8
47.8
39.1
0
Size
range ,
microns
>19.5
12.2-19.5
8.3-12.2
5.6-8.3
3.6-5.6
1.8-3.6
1.1-1.8
0.79-1.1
0-0.79
Percent
in size
range
46.3
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.3
0.0
0.0
45.1
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
53.6
52.4
52.4
52.4
52.4
45.1
45.1
45.1
0
Size
range ,
microns
>12.5
7.8-12.5
5.4-7.
3.6-5.
2.3-3.
1.13-2.
0.72-1.
0.48-0.
0-0.
8
4
6
3
13
72
48
Flow
Run 3-Stack 2
rate (ACFM):
0.65
Percent ISO: 102.2
Percent
in size
range
23.2
3.6
8.9
0.0
9.8
8.0
6.3
2.7
37.5
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
76.8
73.2
64.3
64.3
54.5
46.5
40.2 0
37.5 0
0
Size
range ,
microns
>13.2
8.4-13
5.7-8.
3.7-5.
2.4-3.
1.2-2.
.75-1 .
.52-0.
0-0.
.2
4
7
7
4
2
75
52
Electroscrubber
Run 1-Stack
Flow
rate
Percent
(ACFM)
3
: 0.30
ISO: 109.6
Flow
Run 2-Stack
rate (ACFM)
outlet
3
: 0.63
Percent ISO: 106.6
Cumulative
Percent
in size
range
4.6
2.6
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
0.0
89.6
percent
less
size
than
range
95.3
92.7
91.5
91.5
91.5
91.5
89.6
89.6
0
Size
range ,
microns
>19.5
12.2-19.5
8.3-12.2
5.6-8.3
3.6-5.6
1.8-3.6
1.1-1.8
0.29-1.1
0-0.79
Percent
in size
range
28.0
0.0
10.7
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.0
8.0
49.3
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
72.0
72.0
61.3
61.3
61.3
57.3
57.3
49.3
0
Size
range ,
microns
>13.5
8.4-13
5.8-8.
3.9-5.
2.3-3.
1.22-2.
0.77-1.
0.52-0.
0-0.
.5
4
8
9
5
22
77
52
Flow
Run 3-Stack 3
rate (ACFM):
Percent ISO: 102
Percent
in size
range
1.9
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
21.7
21.7
17.0
34.9
Cumulative
percent
less than
size range
98.1
98.1
95.3
95.3
95.3
73.6
51.9 0
34.9 0
0
0.60
.2
Size
range ,
microns
>13.7
8.6-13
5.8-8.
4.0-5.
2.5-4.
1.3-2.
.79-1.
.54-0.
0-0.
.7
6
8
0
5
3
79
54
10
-------
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF BaP EMISSION RESULTS, ELECTROSCRUBBER INLET,
WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
Parameter
Date
Test run time, min
Stack temperature,
oF
°C
Stack flow,
dscfm
dncmpm
Moisture,- %
Isokinetic, %
Emission loading,
Ib/dscf
mb/dncm
Emission rate,
Ib/hr
bg/hr
Run 1
12/11/80
96
334
168
64,480
1,827
20.6
95.0
1.60 x 10"11
2.58 x 10"4
6.19 x 10"5
2.83 x 10"5
Run 2
12/11/80
96
337
170
65,506
1,856
25.4
99.9
3.26 x 10"10
5.25 x 10~3
1.28 x 10"3
5.80 x 10"4
Run 3
12/11/80
96
336
169
70,453
1,996
21.0
96.7
1.75 X 10"11
2.82 X 10"4
7.40 x 10"5
3.38 X 10"5
Average
96
336
169
66,813
1,893
22.3
-
1.20 x 10"10
1.93 x 10"3
4.72 x 10"4
2.14 x 10"4
11
-------
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF NO EMISSIONS, WEYERHAEUSER ELECTROSCRUBBER
OUTLET, LONGV?EW, WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
Run No.
Stack 1:
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
Average
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
Average
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
Average
Stack 2:
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
Average
Stack 2
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
Average
Date ppm
12/9/80 93
268
201
205
192
12/10/80 241
224
255
292
253,
12/11/80 230,
262.
259.
248.
250.
12/9/80 65.
253.
66.
188.
143.
12/10/80 249.
251.
250.
238.
247.
.9
.4
.8
.1
.1
.1
.6
.3
.3
.3
.8
,5
,7
5
4
0
7
7
1
4
8
9
1
2
5
Ib/dscf
x 10"6
11
31
23
24
22
28
26
30
34
29
27.
31.
30.
29.
29.
7.
30.
7.
22.
16.
29.
29.
29.
28.
29.
.04
.75
.88
.26
.73
.53
.57
.21
.59
.97
.31
.06
.73
.40
,62
69
02
89
26
97
56
8
60
18
29
lb/hra
39
113
85
87
81
113
105
120
137
119
93
106
105
100
101
26
105
27
.6
.8
.6
.0
.5
.6
.8
.3
.7
.3
.3
.1
.0
.4
.2
.9
.2
.6
80.0
59
107
108
107
102
106
.4
.2
.1
.3
.2
.2
Ib/mm Btu
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.1934
.5562
.4184
.4250
.3982
.4785
.4655
.6060
.6060
.5251
.4957
.5638
.5578
.5336
.5376
.1435
.5600
.1472
.4153
.3166
.4922
.4962
.4929
.4692
.4877
g/ncm
0.
0.
9.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
177
509
382
389
364
457
426
484
554
480
437
437
492
471
474
123
481
126
357
272
473
477
474
451
469
kg/hra
17.95
51.63
38.82
39.45
36.96
51.52
47 98
54.55
62.46
54.13
42.31
42.31
47.61
45.55
45.90
12.21
47.72
12.53
35.38
26.96
48.62
49.02
48.68
46.35
48.17
(continued)
12
-------
TABLE 7. (continued)
Run No. Date
3-1 12/11/80
3-2
3-3
3-4
Average
Stack 3:
1-1 12/9/80
1-2
1-3
1-4
Average
2-1 12/11/80
2-2
2-3
2-4
Average
3-1 12/11/80
3-2
3-3
3-4
Average
ppm
238
230
313
225
252
216
261
121
162
190
210
193
182
100
171
173
171
210
204
189
.8
.3
.3
.5
.0
.4
.0
.9
.7
.5
.8
.2
.2
.0
.6
.4
.2
.0
.1
.7
Ib/dscf
x 10~6
28
27
37
26
29
25
30
14
19
22
24
22
21
11
20
20
20
24
24
22
.25
.25
.07
.68
.81
.61
.88
.42
.25
.54
.94
.86
.56
.84
.30
.52
.26
.85
.15
.44
lb/hra
93
89
122
87
98
90
109
50
67
79
83
76
72
39
67
68
67
82
80
74
.0
.6
.0
.8
.1
.4
.0
.9
.9
.5
.3
.3
.0
.5
.8
.5
.6
.9
.6
.9
Ib/mm Btu
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.5082
.4902
.6668
.4799
.5362
.4607
.5555
.2594
.3463
.4055
.4258
.3903
.3681
.2022
.3466
.3937
.3888
.4768
.4634
.4306
g/ncm
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.453
.436
.594
.427
.477
.410
.495
.231
.308
.361
.399
.366
.345
.190
.325
.329
.324
.398
.387
.359
kg/hra
42.16
40.66
55.32
39.82
44.49
40.99
49.43
23.07
30.80
36.07
37.76
34.61
32.65
17.92
30.74
31.06
30.67
37.62
36.56
33.98
aBased on stack flow rate from corresponding Method 5 run.
bBased on F-factor of 9,640 dscf/mm Btu for wood bark.
13
-------
TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF BOILER FUEL ULTIMATE ANALYSES, WEYERHAEUSER,
LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON, DECEMBER 9-11, 1980
Sample
number Date
Run 1 12/9/80
as received
dry basis
Run 2 12/10/80
as received
dry basis
Run 3 12/11/80
as received
dry basis
Average, all guns
as received
dry basis
Carbon,
percent
22.
49
19,
46.
18.
42,
20,
40.
.39
.61
.89
.35
.63
.27
.30
.08
Hydrogen,
percent
8
5
7
3
7
1
7
3
.42
.04
.82
.33
.10
.91
.78
.43
Nitrogen,
percent
0.
0.
0,
0,
0.
0
0
0
.06
.14
.07
. 16
.05
.12
.06
.14
Sulfur,
percent
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.02
.04
.03
.06
.04
.08
.03
.06
Oxygen,
percent
66.94
40. 36
68.56
41.64
68.57
42 .87
68.02
41.62
Ash, Moisture,
percent percent
2.
4 .
3
8.
5
12
3
8
17 54.87
.82
.63 57.08
.45
.62 55.94
.76
.81 55.96
.68
Fuel
Btu
3,
8,
3,
8,
3,
8,
3,
8,
value,
/lb
711
224
665
541
542
039
639
268
Includes moisture.
-------
TABLE 9. BOILER AND APCD OPERATING CONDITIONS DURING
TESTING, WEYERHAEUSER, LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON
DECEMBER 8-11, 1980
Date
Parameter 8 Dec 9 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec
Steam Flow, Ib/hr 400,000 401,000 400,000 347,000
Steam Pressure @ superheater, psig 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,170
Total wood air flow, 62 66.5 75.3 65.4
% recorder scale
Hog fuel rate to boiler, tons - 80.0 85.2 67.9
Flue gas 02 @ boiler outlet, % 3.5 5.5 5.5 6.4
Electroscrubber AP, inches of
water gage
Module 1 5.3 5.3 6.4 5.1
Module 2 5.4 5.5 6.7 5.9
Module 3 5.7 5.6 6.8 6.5
15
-------
SECTION 3
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Weyerhaeuser Company operates a major pulp, paper, and chemical
complex at Longview. There are ten boilers in all operating at
the mill for process steam and electrical power.
Power boiler #11 at Longview, purchased from Foster-Wheeler,
is one of the largest operating hog fuel power boilers in the
United States. At full capacity, it is rated at producing 30 MW
of power, and drives a General Electric turbine as well as
producing process steam. Steam production (1250 psig) is rated
at 420,000 Ib/hr when using 55% moisture hog fuel and 575,000
Ib/hr on dry hog fuel, oil or gas. Boiler #11 is a traveling
grate type and accepts a hog fuel specie mix of cedar, hemlock,
and fir.
Emission control for boiler #11 consists of a two-stage UOP
multiclone flyash collector (6 inch diameter, multiple-tube)
which lowers the grain loading to about 0.4 gr/dscf (corrected
to 12% C02)- The multiclone catch from the first stage is
slurried, wet sieved, then dropped in a wet state onto the
hog fuel feed belt. The partially cleaned gases then travel to
the old boiler exhaust stack where an ID fan pushes the exhaust
gas to a three-module Electroscrubber®, a dry electrostatic gran-
ular filter device installed in 1979 and manufactured by Combustion
Power Company, Inc., a Weyerhaeuser subsidiary. Figure 1 illus-
trates the boiler and emission control system.
Conceptually, as shown in Figure 2, each module of the Electro-
scrubber system consists of a cylindrical vessel containing two
concentric louvered cylindrical tubes. The annular space between
the tubes is filled with pea-sized gravel media. The particulate
laden exhaust gas enters the filter through the tops of the
elements and discharges out the sides. Dirty gas is distributed
by louvers and passed through the filter media at velocities
ranging from 100-150 ft/min. Particulate is removed from the
gas stream by impaction with the media, enhanced by electrostatic
forces and diffusion. Since the gas flows from a smaller diameter
(the inside of the elements) to a larger diameter (the outside
shell of the elements) the gas velocity is decreasing as it
exits. This helps reduce re-entrainment of the collected particu-
late into the cleaned gas. Cleaned gases exit directly through
16
-------
INFILTRATION
AIR
CHAR
WOOD I FUEL
LOW OVER
FIRE AIR
BOILER
SAMPLING/MEASURING
LOCATIONS
HIGH OVER
FIRE AIR
OIL BURNER
AIR
UNDERGRATE
AIR
INFILTRATION
AIR
CHAR
1 - FUEL SAMPLES FOR ANALYSIS
2- INLET TO MODULE 3
- METHOD 5
-PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
- B(a)P
3 - OUTLETS OF MODULES
- METHOD 5
- PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
- NO..
BAGHOUSE
ASH ASH & CHAR
ASH
Figure 1. Boiler and emissions control system flow
schematic showing sampling locations.
-------
TO LIFT AIR -
PARTICULATE SEPARATION
AND STORAGE SYSTEM
,1^ ,-DE-iNTRAINMENT
t MEDIA LEVEL
CONTROL SECTION
ELECTROSTATIC
CRID
ELECTROSCRUBBER
MODULE
PNEUMATIC MEDIA
RECIRCULATION
^ & PARTICULATE
/ REMOVAL SYSTEM
MEDIA RESERVOIR
t FILL HOPPER
Figure 2. Electroscrubber module schematic.
a free standing exhaust stack at the side of each electroscrubber
module.
An electrical conductor (electrostatic grid) is positioned within
the media bed and produces an electrical field between the conductor
and the inlet and outlet louvers by the high voltage (^20,000
volts) applied to the conductor. As the particles migrate through
the rock filter, the electrical field either attracts or repels
the particle, depending upon its charge, towards one of the rocks
where it is captured by impaction and retained.
To prevent a filter cake from forming on the face of the filter,
and the resulting potential plugging problems and high pressure
drop, the filtering media is continuously, but slowly (6-10 ft/hr),
moved downward in a plug or mass flow. The resulting churning
action across each louver opening prevents a filter cake from
forming. To provide cleaning of the louver face, the louvers are
designed so that some of the media is pushed through each louver
opening thus preventing any bridging or buildup of particulate
material.
The particulate laden media is continuously removed at the bottom
of the Electroscrubber where it is transported by a pneumatic
conveying system to the air/particulate de-entrainment section
of the system. The action of the gravel media being transported
vertically in the pneumatic lift pipe separates the particulate
from the media so that the particulate can be pneumatically removed
18
-------
from the de-entrainment section for pneumatic transport to a
participate separation (fabric filter baghouse) and storage silo.
The clean gravel media then drains by gravity from the de-entrain-
ment section and is returned to the top of the Electroscrubber
unit for recycling.
As shown in detail in Figure 3, the pneumatic media recirculation
and particulate removal system is comprised of: a seal leg,
an "L" valve, a media lift pipe, and a de-entrainment section,
a media reservoir, and fill hopper. The air transporting the
media is supplied by a standard air fan furnished with the
equipment.
DC-ENTRAPMENT
CHAMBER
REMOTE DUST
REMOVAL I
STORAGE SILO
^ MEDIA LfVEL
CONTROL SECTION
MEDIA RETURN PIPE
V CLEANED MEDIA RETURNED
TO ELECTROSCRUBBER
DUST LADEN MEDIA FROM
ELECTROSCRUBBER
Figure 3. Electroscrubber de-entrainment and
level control system.
The media from the Electroscrubber is pneumatically conveyed to
the de-entrainment vessel through the vertical lift pipe. The
air velocity is approximately 80 ft/sec, where the slip velocity
of the media in relation to the wall of the lift pipe does not
exceed 15 ft/sec. The air flow and pressure required to lift
the media is comparatively-low and at a maximum requires about one
pound of air per 20 pounds of media. The maximum air pressure
required is approximately 7 psig. To prevent the lift air from
flowing into the media outlet section of the Electroscrubber, a
seal leg of sufficient length is used to function as a media/air
valve.
Figure 4 illustrates a whole Electroscrubber module, as installed
at Longview. The entire three-module installation is depicted
19
-------
Figure 4. Longview electroscrubber module.
in Figure 5, which also illustrates the placement of the pulsed-
jet baghouse used to clean the ash line. The Electroscrubber
system is designed to accept 420,000 acfm of flue gas at a temper-
ature of 345°F with a moisture content of 20%. Pressure drop
through the Electroscrubber ranges from 2.8 to 5.2 inches H20.
EXHAUST ITACK
•AOHOUSE
BAGMOUSE
fD FAN
LlfT
PILL HOTTER
- LIFT BLOWER
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of three-module electro-
scrubber system at Weyerhaeuser Longview mill
20
-------
SECTION 4
LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
As a result of the pretest survey, the sampling program included
one inlet duct to the Electroscrubber system and the three outlet
stacks, each stack serving one Electroscrubber module. Simultaneous
sampling for particulate emissions using EPA Method 5 was performed
at the four locations.
Electroscrubber Inlet
A schematic drawing of the Electroscrubber inlet ductwork is
provided in Figure 5. No sampling ports exist while the inlet
duct is a single exhaust duct. The horizontal circular portion
of the duct from the old boiler stack is over 60 ft above ground
level with no access for a sampling crew and equipment. As the
duct approaches the Electroscrubber modules, it is joined to a
rectangular duct (13.83 ft x 9.83 ft). This rectangular duct
then splits into three rectangular ducts, each of which feeds
an Electroscrubber module, as depicted in Figure 6. Baffles are
built into the rectangular feeder duct to channel the exhaust
gas into three streams. Each duct portion has four 7-inch
flanged ports aligned vertically in the 9.83 ft duct face with
individual gate valves installed.
PORTS-INLET NO. 3
PORTS-INLET NO. 2
NO. 1
PORTS-INLET NO. 1
Figure 6. Location of Electroscrubber inlet sampling ports,
Weyerhaeuser, Longview, Washington.
21
-------
TRAVERSE POINTS
108"
12 11 10
4- -t. 4-
9
4-
76
4- +
5
4
4
4
3 2 1
4 +
+ +
4- +
44+4 +
-(- -t
44
•f +•
SAMPLE PORTS
48'
Cross Section of Inlet Duct 3.
Traverse Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Distance From Duct
Wall (Inches)
2.0
6.0
10
14
18
22
26
30
34
38
42
46
Figure 7. Sampling port and point locations at inlet duct 3
22
-------
The sampling location of duct #3 is less than 1/2 duct diameter
from the nearest upstream disturbance (split), and over four
equivalent duct diameters from the nearest downstream disturbance
(bend). Forty-eight sampling points were selected with twelve
points in each of the four ports, as shown in Figure 7.
Electroscrubber Outlet
Each of the Electroscrubber modules has a separate outlet stack;
hence, there were three outlet sampling locations. Fortunately,
a common platform serves the three stacks with ample room and
electrical power. Figure 8 is a top view of the sampling platform
area, with dimensions noted. Outlet ports on each stack, 7-inch
diameter with flange caps and 90° apart, are located 3 ft above
the platform floor for each of the end stacks and 5 ft above the
floor for the center stack. Lear Siegler in-stack opacity meters
are installed below the ports on each stack.
Figure 8. Electroscrubber triple stack outlet sampling
location, top view, Weyerhaeuser, Longview,
Washington.
The circular stacks are each 6 ft in diameter. The nearest up-
stream disturbance was an expansion about 28 ft (>4 diameters) away,
and the nearest downstream disturbance was the stack outlet about
40 ft (>6 diameters) away. Figure 9 provides a side view of the
outlet sampling location. Thirty-six sampling points were selected
with eighteen points in each port.
23
-------
45'
#1
PORT
PORT
PORT
#3
OPACITY
METER
28'
PLATFORM
Figure 9. Electroscrubber triple stack outlet sampling
location, side view, Weyerhaeuser, Longview
Washington.
24
-------
SECTION 5
SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The Weyerhaeuser-Longview Mill was sampled for particulate
matter, particle size, opacity, integrated gas analysis, BaP, NO ,
and fuel analysis. x
The following describes the methods used.
Sampling Procedures
Particulate Matter--
Sampling for particulates was performed using the method outlined
in the Federal Register (40 CFR 60, Subpart A), Method 5, "Deter-
mination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources,"
modified so that the sample box temperature was 325°F instead of
250°F. A 5-ft glass-lined probe with pre-filter cyclone was
used at the inlet sampling location, and an 8-ft stainless steel
probe without cyclone was used at the outlet. A six-step cleanup
was used on the stainless steel probes.
Particle Size—
Sampling for particle size was performed using an Andersen cascade
impactor with seven stages and a back-up filter.
The sampling train used consisted of the following equipment
listed in order of the flow: a 10-mm diameter probe tip; a
curved (90°) probe tip to Andersen head connector; standard
Andersen heads; a probe; a Smith-Greenburg impinger with water,
then one charged with color indicating silica gel; and an EPA-5
console equipped with a dry gas meter, digital electronic thermom-
eter and an inclined manometer. Also, an S-type pitot tube was
connected to the probe so the stack pressure could be continually
monitored. A 5-ft glass-lined probe with pre-separator was used
at the inlet sampling location, and an 8 ft stainless steel probe
without preseparator was used at the outlet location.
A total of three particle sizing runs were made simultaneously at
the inlet and outlet locations. Each run was conducted for about
5-10 minutes under isokinetic conditions at the inlet location and
for 15-25 minutes at the stack outlet. At the completion of each
run, the moisture collected was measured and the Andersen heads
were opened, filters removed.
25
-------
All weight measurements were made with a Mettler analytical
balance. The balance was calibrated daily and rezeroed before
each weight determination. Calculations were performed using
the methods and tables provided in the Andersen manual.
Opacity--
Visible emissions of the outlet stacks were to be read during
particulate sampling by a certified smoke reader; however,
readings were cancelled due to interferences in the background
from steam plume sources.
Integrated Gas Composition--
Exhaust gas sampling was performed using the method outlined in
the Federal Register, Method 3, "Gas Analysis for Carbon Dioxide
Oxygen, Excess Air, and Dry Molecular Weight."
Nitrogen Oxides--
Sampling for NO was performed using the method outlined in the
Federal Register, Method 7, "Determination of Nitrogen Oxide
Emissions from Stationary Sources."
Benzo-alpha-pyrene--
A Battelle trap, preloaded with XAD-2 resin to adsorb BaP and
wrapped in aluminum foil to prevent visible and ultraviolet light
from reaching the resin, was incorporated in a Method 5 sampling
train. The Battelle trap was heated and maintained at a tempera-
ture of 127°F by a thermostatically controlled recirculating
water bath. Figure 10 is a schematic of a typical BaP modified
Method 5 train. Figure 11 illustrates the XAD-2 sorbent resin
trap.
The front half of the sampling train consisted of a stainless
steel nozzle, a heated three foot glass sample probe, a heated
flex line, a heated glass fiber filter, and a cooling coil used
as a spacer to help accomodate the XAD-2 resin trap. The Battelle
trap that contained the XAD-2 resin was held in an upright condi-
tion with the gas flow passing through from the top towards
the frit. The back half of the train consisted of four impingers
that held: 100 grams water, 100 grams water, blank and 200 grams
silica gel as a dessicant. An internal thermocouple at the
exit of the fourth impinger was used to read the internal gas
temperature. The four impingers were kept in an ice water bath
to help cool the gas stream.
At the conclusion of each test, the sampling train was disassem-
bled, sealed and moved to the clean area for recovery. The dry
particulate in the cyclone is removed and placed in an amber 250
mL bottle. The nozzle, glass probe liner, cyclone, heated flex
line, filter housing, and the spacer - condenser were rinsed with
Burdick and Jackson Distilled-In-Glass methylene chloride. Any
adhering particulate was loosened with a nylon brush and the train
was rinsed again with methylene chloride. The rinses were placed
in a 950 mL amber glass bottle and labeled.
26
-------
*- PHOT TUBE
BATTELLE TRAP TEMP.
h-FILTER TEMP.
STACK TEMP.
' 1 — 1 1 <
I CYCLONE 1
r '"
1 |
' 1
L u
THf
^•>
I
RN
' 1
SILICA
GEL
inMnH
-
t
1
EMPTY
••••
•^
^
---
-H20-
*a^m
^"
~T ICE
I/BATH
1
1
J
^
VACUUM
GAUGE
THERMOCOUPLE MINIMITE
JUNCTION BOX
UMBILICAL CORD
Figure 10. BaP sample train.
-------
Flow
Glass Water
Jacket
28/12 Socket
Thermocouple
Glass Fritted
Disc
Glass Wool
Plug
Flow
28/12 Socket
Figure 11. Schematic of sorbent trap.
was rinsed again with methylene chloride. The rinses were placed
in a 950 mL amber glass bottle and labeled.
The filters were removed, folded, and placed in a 250 mL amber
glass bottle.
The impingers were each weighed and the combined weight gain was
the amount of water codensate collected. The contents of the
first impinger were saved in a 950 mL amber glass bottle as a
check on resin break through.
Fuel —
Fuel samples were grabbed in polyethylene bags from the bark con-
veyer to the boilers every 15 min during each test run, then com-
posited afterwards for one fuel sample per run.
Analytical Procedures
Particulate Matter—
Analytical procedures were performed using the methods described
in EPA Method 5, previously mentioned in the sampling procedures
section.
28
-------
Nitrogen Oxides—
Analytical procedures were performed using the methods described
in EPA Method 7, previously mentioned in the sampling procedures
section.
Benzo-alpha-pyrene—
Each test run resulted in five fractions. These are: an impinger
wash, which consists of the water and rinse from the impinger
train; a probe rinse, which consists of the methylene chloride
rinse of the probe and lines; the particulate filter; the cyclone
catch; and the XAD-2 resin.
Some sample preparation was required prior to analysis. For the
impinger samples, the preparation consisted of five 10 mL extrac-
tions of the water with cyclohexane. The extractions were per-
formed in separatory funnels.
The probe rinse samples were filtered and placed in Kuderna-Danish
concentrators (KD). Seven mL of cyclohexane was added to each
sample prior to being concentrated. When the methylene chloride
had evaporated, the remaining sample was rinsed with cyclohexane
and brought to 25 mL cyclohexane.
The particulate filters along with the cyclone catch samples
were placed in cellulose extraction thimbles in soxhlet extrac-
tion apparatus and extracted for eight hours with 150 mL cyclo-
hexane. The cyclone catch was filtered and the water was extracted
with five 30 mL portions of cyclohexane. The cyclohexane extract
and the filtered cyclone catch were placed in a soxhlet extraction
apparatus and extracted for eight hours separately from the filter.
The XAD-2 resin from each test run was removed from the Battelle
trap, placed in cellulose thimbles, and extracted with 250 mL
cyclohexane in soxhlet extraction apparatus for eight hours.
The cellulose thimbles used for the extractions were extracted with
pure cyclohexane and the extract was analyzed for BaP prior to
their use to check for contamination. The thimble was checked
with a black light to conform complete extraction. Since BaP
will photodegrade under exposure to light, all extractions and KD
procedures were conducted under a yellow safe-light screen. The
extract was stored in an amber bottle at 4°C until the analysis
was performed.
The samples were analyzed for BaP using the fluorescence spectro-
photometric procedure. This method is preferred over the thin
layer chromatographic (TLC) method for low level BaP analysis,
as the TLC method has only 0.01 the sensitivity of direct liquid
measurement. The thin layer chromatography separation method with
measurement by scanning in-situ with a scanning attachment for
the spectrofluorometer was originally chosen, but lacked the
sensitivity required for the analysis.
29
-------
All the samples were analyzed on an Aminco SPF-125S spectro-
fluorometer. The excitation monochromater wavelength was set at
388 run with a slit width of 1 mm (11 nm bandpass). The emission
monochromater wavelength was set at 430 nm with a 0.5 mm slit
width (0.5 nm bandpass). This produced the maximum peak height
for BaP. The instrument becomes extremely substance specific
at these very narrow slit widths and can measure BaP concentrations
as low as 0.001 ppm. The fluorescence is expressed as a relative
intensity value which is converted to BaP concentrations by
analysis of a set of known standards. A standard curve is then
plotted, and the pg/mL in the sample is then determined by the
sample's relative intensity compared to the graph of the standards.
A standard was analyzed after every four samples to be certain
that there was no loss of sensitivity. Blanks were run before
every sample to be certain that there was no contamination present
in the cuvette.
For analytical purposes, the samples were divided into sections.
The analysis of the filter consisted of the filter and cyclone
catch combined. The XAD-2 resin was analyzed independently. The
probe rinse was filtered and the filtrate (rinse) was analyzed
separately from the particulate accumulated on the filter. These
results can be seen in Appendix A. The impinger wash which was
recovered as a check on the resin breakthrough was analyzed inde-
pendently. The results showed 0 ug of BaP, indicating no break-
through of resin, and so was not included in the sample total.
Fuel —
Analysis of the bark feed was performed using ASTM D 3178 for
carbon and hydrogen, ASTM D 3176 for oxygen, ASTM D 3179 for
nitrogen, ASTM D 3177 for sulfur, and ASTM D 3174 for ash. Fuel
value was determined using ASTM D 2015.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control—
Results of quality control tests are furnished with the analytical
data sheets provided in Appendix C.
30
------- |