EPA-902/4-77-006
METHODS USED TO ESTIMATE
AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
1974, 1980, 1985 AND 2000
NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK - CONNECTICUT
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
JUNE 1977
FINAL REPORT
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION II
-------
EPA-902/4-77-006
METHODS USED TO ESTIMATE AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
1974, 1980, 1985. and 2000
NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK - CONNECTICUT
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
Tri-State Regional Planning Commission
One World Trade Center
New York, New York 10048
EPA Contract No.: 68-02-2096
EPA Project Officer: Dr. George Kerr
.Prepared for
.ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
-------
This air pollution report is issued by Region II, Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, to assist state and local air pollution control agencies
in carrying out their program activities. Copies of this report may be
obtained, for a nominal cost, from the National Technical Information Ser-
vice, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished by the Environmental Protection Agency by
Tri-State Regional Planning Commission (Conn/N.J./N.Y.) in partial fulfill-
ment of EPA-902/4-77-006. This report has been reviewed by Air Branch, Re-
gion II, EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Region II Publication No. EPA-902/4-77-006
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-902/4-77-006
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
METHODS USED TO ESTIMATE AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
1974, 1980, 1985 and 2000
NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK - CONNECTICUT
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REfilQN
5. REPORT DATE
May 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
R-572
7. AUTHOR(S)
Jocelyn M. Bishop, Paul M. Nutkowitz PhD, Hall Winslow
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
R-572 Method Report
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADORESS
Tri-State Regional Planning Commission
1 World Trade Center - 82d floor
New York City N.Y. 10048
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
EPA 68-02-2096
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10007
[13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
[Final Method Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Prepared in cooperation with the air resources planning staffs of the environmental
protection departments of.Connecticut, New Jersey and New York and of Region II,
16. ABSTRACT
An explanation of methods, procedures and data inputs used in calculating
air pollutant emissions for subsequent dispersion modelling. Arranged by
area sources and point sources, withinstate portions and New York City.
Shows data deficiencies and modifications of methods necessary in an 8500-
sq.mi. 3-state region. Demonstrates how the extensive land use and trans-
portation planning resources of an interstate metropolitan planning agency
can be used in estimating emissions.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
ii
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
AREA SOURCES
A 1 Residential Fuel Combustion
A 1-a Natural Gas
A 1-b Distillate Oil
A 1-c Residual Oil
A 2 Commercial and Institutional Fuel Combustion
A 2-a Natural Gas
A 2-b Distil late Oil
A 2-c Residual Oil
A 3 Industrial Fuel Combustion
A 3-a Natural Gas
A 3-b Distil late Oil
A 3-c Residual Oil
A 4 Onsite Incineration
A 6 Diesel Locomotives
A 7 Vessels
A 8 Aircraft
A 9-a " Gasoline and Diesel Fuel - Highway
A 9-b(1) Gasoline - Offhighway
A 9-b(ii) Diesel - Offhighway
iii
-------
CONTENTS - continued
A 10 Evaporation - Solvents
A 10-a Evaporation - Gasoline Marketing
A 11 Apartment Construction Dust
POINT SOURCES
P 1 Electric Power Plants
P 2 Industrial Process Fuel Combustion (incl. Area Sources)
P 3 Municipal Incinerators
P 4 Point Source Fuel Combustion
APPENDIX
I Metric Conversion of Land Use Files
II List of Supplementary Studies
III List of Tables Produced
IV Method of Estimating Housing Units
V Method of Estimating Employment
VI Statewide Fuel Balance Calculations for 1974, New York State
iv
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Tri-State Regional Planning Commission, as contractor to the Envir-
onmental Protection Agency, has prepared a comprehensive air pollutant emis-
sions inventory for the NJ-NY-Conn. AQCR for the baseline calibration year
of 1974 and the projection years of 1980, 1985, and 2000. This is the ini- .
tial step in estimating the air pollution concentrations in this AQCR, which
in turn will be used in the preparation of an Air Quality Maintenance Plan
by the three states and New York City.
This report contains an explanation of the methods used in preparing
the inventory. It is arranged by pollution source, and is divided into two
main parts - area sources and point sources. Methods were based mainly on
those set forth in
- Guide for Compiling a Comprehensive Emission Inventory - APTD-1135
- Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis
- Vol. 7 Projecting County Emissions
- Vol. 13 Allocating Projected Emissions to Subcounty Areas.
Whenever different approaches are used, reasons for the choices are set forth.
The work involved the use of Tri-State's land development data resources
and inventory methods, its travel demand models and computerized highway in-
ventories, economic growth projections, a citizens housing survey, and se-
lected other inventories. See Appendix II - List of Supplementary Studies
and Appendix IV - Method of Estimating Housing Units.
-------
Other products of this inventory activity consist of updated NEDS files,
report tables listed in Guidelines, Vols. 7 and 13 (some of which are presented
in computer printout format), and the various computer tapes showing allocation
of pollutant emissions by square kilometer.
As a major foundation for the area source pollution emissions,Tri-State
has provided a tape file and printout of the land use parameters for projection
years. The land use categories are:
Population Residential Land Area
Employment Non-Residential Floorspace
Total Housing Units Non-Residential Land Area-
Occupied Housing Units Other Land Area
Residential Floorspace
Owing to differences in data supplied by the three states and by New
York City and necessary variations in methods, several of the method re-
ports are divided into four sections. These are for areas as follows:
- the nine counties of Northeast New Jersey
_ the seven New York suburban counties
- New York City itself
- Fairfield County in Connecticut,
Explanations are hinged on the work diagrams for the respective sources.
To avoid duplication in and padding of the report, the work diagrams carry
notations on tables produced and on data sources. Where other detail or dis-
cussion of method choices are needed, they are provided in the narrative accom-
panying the diagrams.
Although emissions from Ulster County are included in the scope of this
contract, they are to be calculated by New York Department of Environmental
Conservation, as covered in a letter from the Project Officer dated May
1977.
vi
-------
A la / 1
A la NATURAL GAS - RESIDENTIAL
Update Level: 3 [pp 79-82, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 3 [pp 136-139, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 3 [pp 31-38, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
The state total of residential natural gas use, A, was estimated by the
formula
4
A =/ B x F. x H x C x FUF
ZB. x F.
i i
i
-------
Ala NATURAL GAS - RESIDENTIAL
(AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL:
ORDER:
3
3
STATE TOTAL OF RESIDENTIAL
USE IN 1974.
EMISSION FACTORS,
TABLE 3.1-8
7 PROJECT RESIDENTIAL GAS
USE FOR 1980. 1985, AND
2000.
COMPARE, AND ACCEPT
OR REJECT FUEL USE
FACTORS.
1974 MIS STATE TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL USE.
ENTER IN TABLE 2.5
COMPUTE RESIDENTIAL
GAS USE BY SO. KM.
AND SUM TO COUNTY
TOTALS. REPORT IN
TABLES 3.1-3. 3.1-4,
3.1-5. 3.1-6, 3.1-7, 2.1
& 2.6
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM.
AND BY COUNTY.
TABLES 3.1-9 & 7.1
8
COMPUTE RESIDENTIAL GAS
USE BY SQ. KM. AND BY
COUNTY AND REPORT IN
TABLES 3.1-3, 3.1-4, 3.1-5,
3.1-6, 3.1-7, 2.7, 2.8
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.1-8
10 EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM.
AND BY COUNTY. TABLES
3.1-9 & 7.2
-------
A la / 3
New Jersey cont.
where B^ = the state total of dwelling units in building size i (1=1,
1 d.u./bldg.; i = 2, 2 to 4 du's/bldg.; 1 = 3, 5 to 19 du's/
bldg., i = 4, 20+ du's/bldg.) Source: See Appendix IV
F.J = the fraction of dwelling units using natural gas for space
heating in building size i
H = state average, annual heating degree days (hdd)
C = correction factor; state average, rooms per dwelling unit/5.0
FUF.. = fuel use factor for dwelling units in building size i
(ft. 3/du-hdd)
The values used are listed in the matrix below:
i
1
2
3
4
Total
Bi
1,380,095
503,749
269,877
229,977
2,383,698
Fi
0.619
0.378
0.308
0.000
H
5000
5000
5000
5000
C
1.04
1.04
1.04
1.04
FUFi
26.6
23.9
18.4
12.4
A (cu. ft.)
118,163.xl06
23,665.xl06
7,953.xl06
0.
149.781.xl06
Step 2
MIS = 135,843.xl06cu. ft.
Step 3
Since the estimate in Step 1 is 10% higher than MIS, but is obtained
by estimating a crude value of H, it was decided to use the FUF^'s as
given in Step 1.
-------
A la / 4
New Jersey cont.
Step 4
The quantity of natural gas used for space heating in square kilometer
j, A.:, was estimated using the formula:
j
4
Aj = Bij x Fi x C x DJ x FUFi
1=1
where B^j = The number of dwelling units in building size i in square
kilometer j (i = 1, 1 du/bldg; i = 2, 2 to 4 du's/bldg,
i = 3, 5 to 19 du's/bldg; i = 4, 20+ du's/bldg)
F^ = The fraction of dwelling units using natural gas in building
size i (F. = 0.619, F. = 0.378, F. = 0.308, F. = 0.00)
C = correction factor; county average, rooms per du/5.0
DJ = heating degree days in square kilometer j
o
FUF. = fuel use factor (ft /du - hdd) for dwelling units in
building size i
The B.. were estimated by Tri-State (see Appendix IV), the FI were de-
' 0
rived from Tri -State's "Housing and Neighborhood Survey," and the FUFi from
Guidelines, Vol. 13. The sum of the products B... x FI- for each square kil-
ometer were scaled by using a pseudo control number derived from 1970 Cen-
sus data and Tri-State's 1974 land use files.
-------
A la / 5
New Jersey cont.
Step 5
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
POLLUTANT
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
lb/10 CU. FT.
10.0
0.6
80
8
20
Source: AP-42
Step 7
For projection years it is assumed that there will be little or no
additional natural gas supplied to this Region. This scenario is based
upon analyses performed by the Federal Energy Administration and reported
in "National Energy Outlook," February, 1976. While the above assumption
is probably reasonable over the period 1974 to 1985, the long term forecast
may be altered by the resolution of transportation of Alaska gas to the
lower-48, and/or East Coast DCS activity.
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1. 2 and 3
Omit
-------
A la / 6
New York City cont.
Step 4
County totals of natural gas used for residential space heating were
supplied by the New York City Department of Air Resources. These county
totals were allocated to square kilometers using the following 3-step
procedure:
A. County totals of the following four quantities were calculated:
y] (cu. ft.) = (no. of du's in 1 du/bldg using gas) (heating deg.-days)
(26.6 ft 3/du-hdd)
y^ (cu« ft-) = (no- °f du's in 2-4 du/bldg using gas) (heating deg.-days)x
(23.9 ft 3/du-hdd)
y^ (cu. ft.) = (no. of du's in 5-19 du/bldg using gas) (heating deg.-days) x
(18.4 ft 3/du-hdd)
y/l (cu.,ft.) = (no. of du's in 20+ du/bldg using gas) (heating deg.-days) x
(12.4 ft 3/du-hdd)
B' 1< IDl £§uPtta&&aL°£ 9as used by du's in buildings with 1 du/bldg was
WCt.) LQ I V»U I vl ICU TiOMl
yl
y-i = (County total of residential gas x _^ '
use [supplied by NYCDAR]) Y, + y« + y3 + y.
B. 11. The County total of gas used by du's in buildings with 2 to 4 du's/bldg
was calculated from
y = (County total of residental gas x
use [supplied by NYCDAR]) y^ + Y2 + Y3 + Y4
B.iii. The County total of gas used by du's in buildings with 5 to 19 du's/
bldg was calculated from
y3
y3 = (County total of residential gas x _
use [supplied by NYCDAR]) y^ + y2 + y3 + y%
B. 1v. The County total of gas used by du's in buildings with 20 + du's/
bldg was calculated from
y4
y, = (County total of residential gas x _
4 use [supplied by NYCDAR]) y + y + y + y
-------
A la / 7
New York City cont.
C. Allocate county total Y-| to square kilometers
Qas used in sq. km. = Y-j x no. of du's using gas in 1 du/bldg structures in sq.km-
j by du's in 1 no. of du's using gas in 1 du/bldg structures in county
du/bldg structures
Gas used in sq. km. = Y? x no. of du's using gas in 2-4 du/bldg structures in sq.km^
j by du's in 2-4 no. of du's using gas in 2-4 du/bldg structures in county
du/bldg structures
etc.
See Appendix IV for source of dwelling units by building size.
Step 5
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
POLLUTANT
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
lb/10u CU. FT.
6
0.6
100
4
20
Source: NYCDAR
Step 7
Same assumption as for New Jersey.
-------
A la / 8
NEW YORK STATE (EXCL. NEW YORK CITY)
Steps 1 through 4
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel
Balance Calculations for 1974, New York State. No points were denoted
Residential as such.
-------
A la / 9
New York State cont.
Step 5
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
POLLUTANT 1b/106 CU. FT.
Particulates 10
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 80
Hydrocarbons 8
Carbon Monoxide 20
Source: AP-42
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Steps 1, 2 and 3
Omit
Step 4
Residential natural gas use for 1974 by MCD was supplied by the
CONNDEP. These numbers were allocated to square kilometers by the same
methods used for New York City, with MCD data instead of county data.
-------
A la / 10
Connecticut cont.
Step 5
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
POLLUTANT 1b/106 CU. FT.
Particulates 10.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 80.0
Hydrocarbons 8.0
Carbon Monoxide 20.0
Source: AP-42
Step 7'
Same assumptions as for New Jersey.
-------
A 1-b / 1
A Ib DISTILLATE OIL - RESIDENTIAL
Update Level: 2[pp. 62-63, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 3 [pp. 136-137, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 3 [pp. 31-38, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
Distillate oil use by square kilometer, A., and by county (9 counties of
J
N.E.N.J.) was calculated using the equation
2
A. => B.. x F. x H. x C x FUF.
J f~* U i J 1
where B.. = the number of dwelling units in type i structures (i = 1, 1 du/
bldg.; i = 2, 2 to 4 du/bldg) in square kilometer j
Source: see Appendix IV
-------
A 1b DISTILLATE OIL-RESIDENTIAL
(AREA SOURCE)
DISTILLATE OIL USED IN 1974
BY SQ. KM. AND BY COUNTY.
TABLES 3.1-4, 3.1-5, 3.1-6
3.1-7, 2.1
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.1-8
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS
BY STRUCTURE TYPE(TSRPC
DENSITY/STRUCTURE TYPE
MODEL)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
TABLE 3.1-3
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY
FOR 1974
TABLE 3.1-9, 7.1
DISTILLATE OIL USED IN 1980 / 1985
AND 2000 BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY.
TABLES 3.1-4, 3.1-5 , 3.1-6, 3.1-7, 2.8
PROJECTIONS OF DISTILLATE - TYPE
HEATING OIL FOR 1980 / 1985 / 2000.
RELATIONSHIP TO NATURAL GAS AND
RESIDUAL OIL PROJECTIONS.
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY
IN 1980 / 1985 / 2000.
TABLE 3.1-9, 7.2
i
a4
to
-------
A 1-b / 3
New Jersey cont,
F. = The fraction of dwelling units using oil for space heating in type
i structures (obtained from TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood Sur-
vey) for New Jersey counties.
H. = The number of heating degree days in square kilometer j
J
C = A correction factor (the county average number of rooms per dwell-
ing unit, divided by 5)
FUF. = The fuel use factor for dwelling units in type i structures
(FUF^ = 0.157 gals/du-hdd; FUF2 = 0.142 gals/du-hdd)
The frequency distribution of distillate oil use as a function of building size
was approximated by assuming that buildings with 5 or more dwelling units use
only residual oil.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/103 gal
Particulates 2.5
Sulfur Oxides 142 Sa = 28.4
Nitrogen Oxides 20.
Hydrocarbons 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0
a. S = 0.2
Source: AP-42
-------
A 1-b / 4
New Jersey cont,
Step 5
It is assumed that all future demand in space heating will be served by
oil. This assumption can be derived from analysis performed by the FEA and
reported in "National Energy Outlook, February 1976." This scenario is prob-
ably valid through 1985, with decreasing reliability thereafter. (See Appendix
IV for assumptions regarding housing units by building size.)
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
County totals of distillate oil were provided by the New York City Depart-
ment of Air Resources. Methods used to develop these totals are described in
a series of technical reports issued by the Bureau of Technical Services, DAR.
Allocation of county totals to square kilometers was accomplished using the
following method. The number of dwelling units using oil in square kilometer j
in building size i, Nij, was estimated from the product
Nij = Nij * Fi
where N-- = the number of dwelling units in building size i (i = 1,
' J
1 du/bldg; i = 2, 2 to 4 du's/bldg) in square kilometer j.
(Source: see Appendix IV)
F.J = the fraction of dwelling units using oil in building size i,
(obtained from the TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood Survey").
The frequency distribution of distillate oil use as a function of building size
was approximated by assuming that distillate is used only in building sizes i'
-------
A 1-b / 5
New York City cont. - Step 1
equal 1 and 2. Then the distillate oil used in square kilometer j, A.-, is
J
estimated from
A, = C, x if] _
J T ^ 2
Z E N. .
J
where C = County total distillate oil (supplied by NYCDAR)
2 = Total number of square kilometers in the county
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMPUSTION
Pollutant _ lb/103 Gal.
Parti culates 2.5
Sulfur Oxides 142 Sa= 28.4
Nitrogen Oxides 20.
Hydrocarbons 1.5
Carbon Monoxide 10.
a. S = .2
Source: New York City Dept. of Air Resources
Step 5
The same assumption as for New Jersey. See Appendix IV for source of
housing units by building size.
-------
A 1-b / 6
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 through 4
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. Residential distillate oil
usage for each county was estimated by subtracting the point source usage
from the total for that county. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel Balance
Calculations for 1974, New York State.
-------
A 1-b / 7
New York State cont.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Rockland, West- (Western} Eastern Suffolkdand
Chester,Nassau Suffolk Orange, Putnam, Dutchess
Pollutant
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
lb/103 gal
2.5
142 Sa=52.5
18.0
1.0
5.0
lb/103 gal
2.5
142 Sc=142
18.0
1.0
5.0
lb/10Jgal
2.5
142 Se=284
18.0
1.0
5.0
a. S = 0.37
b. Towns of Babylon, Brookhaven, Huntington, Islip, and Smithtown
c. S = 1.00
d. Towns of Easthampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton,
Southold
e. S = 2.00
Step 5
The same assumptions as for the New Jersey sector,
-------
A 1-b / 8
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Step 1
Distillate oil data were supplied by the Connecticut Department of Envir-
onmental Protection by MCD. Methods used to develop these data are described
in Appendix A, Connecticut Air Inventory Reference (CONNAIR), Department of
Environmental Protection, Air Compliance Unit, Engineering Section. Alloca-
tion to square kilometers was accomplished by the same methods used for New
York City, but with MCD totals replacing county totals.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant lb/103 gal
Particulates 2.5
Sulfur Oxide 71.0
Nitrogen Oxide 18.0
Hydrocarbon 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0
a. Assumes S = 0.5%
Source: AP-42
Step 5
The same assumptions as the New Jersey sector.
-------
A Ic / 1
A Ic RESIDUAL OIL - RESIDENTIAL
Update Level: 2 [p. 61, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 3 [p. 31, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
Residual oil used in square kilometer j. A,- , and by county (9 counties
of northeastern New Jersey) was estimated using the formula
4
A, =Z_j B,,- x F, x H, x C x FUF,
j j _
-------
A Ic / 2
LEVEL: 2
ORDER:3
A 1c RESIDUAL OIL - RESIDENTIAL
(AREA SOURCE)
RESIDUAL OIL USED IN 1974 BY SO. KM.
AND COUNTY. TABLES 2.1, 3.1-4, 3.1-5, 3.1-6,
3.1-7
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS BY STRUCTURE
TYPE (TSRPC DENSITY/STRUCTURE TYPE MODEL)
1974/1980/1985/2000. TABLE 3.1-3
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.1-8
EMISSIONS BY SO. KM. AND COUNTY FOR 1974.
TABLES 3.1-9 AND 7.1
PROJECTIONS OF RESIDUAL-TYPE HEATING
OIL FOR 1980/1985/2000. RELATIONSHIP TO
NATURAL GAS AND DISTILLATE OIL
PROJECTIONS.
RESIDUAL OIL USED IN 1980/1985/2000
BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY. TABLES 2.8,
3.1-4,3.1-5,3.1-6,3.1-7
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.1-8
8
EMISSIONS IN 1980/1985/2000 BY SQ. KM.
AND COUNTY. TABLES 3.1-9 AND 7.2
-------
A Ic / 3
New Jersey Step 1 cont.
F. = the fraction of dwelling units using oil for heating in type i
structures (obtained from TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood
Survey")for the New Jersey sector.
H. = heating degree days (hdd) in square kilometer j.
J
C = the county average number of rooms per dwelling unit divided
by 5.
FUF.= the fuel use factor (gal/du-hdd) for du's in type i structures.
The frequency distribution of residual oil use as a function of building size
was approximated by assuming that structures with 4 or less dwelling units use
no residual oil. For northeastern New Jersey
F. FUF.
3 0.576 0.115
4 0.941 0.085
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Residential buildings of five or more units are the only ones assumed
to use residual oil and these are apartments. EPA tabular data formats provide
for reporting apartment use as if commercial. Thus, factors used are the same
as for commercial uses.
-------
A Ic / 4
New Jersey cont.
*
Pollutant 1b/103 gal
Particulates 10.
Sulfur Oxide 157 Sa = 47.1
Nitrogen Oxides 60.0
Hydrocarbon 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0
a. S = 0.3
Source: AP-42
Step 5
Methodology used in forecasting residential fuel usage permitted existing
gas usage to continue but allowed no increase in gas usage.
It is assumed that all future demand in space heating will be supplied by
oil. This assumption is based upon analyses performed by FEA and reported in
"National Energy Outlook, February 1976." This scenario has maximum validity
through 1985, with decreasing reliability thereafter.
Step 7
Same as Step 2.
-------
A Ic / 5
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
Data by county was supplied directly by New York City Department of Air Re-
sources. Methods used to develop these data are described in technical re-
ports prepared by the Bureau of Technical Services. Allocation to square kil-
ometers was performed using >a following method. The number of dwelling
units using oil in square kilometer j in building size i, N.., was estimi-
' j
mated from the product
N.. = n.. x F.
ij ij i
where n.. = the number of dwelling units in building size i (1=1,1 du/bldg;
' J
i = 2, 2 to 4 du's/bldg; i = 3, 5 to 19 du's/bldg; i = 4, 20 + du's/
bldg) in square kilometer j. (See Appendix IV)
F. = the fraction of dwelling units using oil in building size i, ob-
tained from the TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood Survey," for the
New York City sector.
The frequency distribution of residual oil use as a function of building size
was approximated by assuming that residual oil is used only in buildings with
5 or more dwelling units. Then residual oil used in square kilometer j, A. ,
J
is estimated from 2 ..
£ Nu
1*1
A. = C x
J T Z 2
E N
where C_ = county total of residual oil (supplied by NYCDAR)
Z = total number of square kilometers in the county
-------
A Ic / 6
New York City cont.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/103 gal
Particulates 8.7
Sulfur Oxides 150 Sa =45.0
Nitrogen Oxides 48.6
Hydrocarbons 0.22
Carbon Monoxide 0.8
a. S = 0.3
Source: NYC DAR
Step 5
Same as New Jersey, Step 5.
Step 7
Same as Step 2.
-------
A Ic / 7
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 through 4
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. Residential residual oil usage
for each county was estimated by subtracting the point source usage from the
total for that county. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel Balance Calculations
for 1974, New York State.
-------
A Ic /8
New York State cont.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Rock!and,West- (Western). Eastern Suffolk
Chester,Nassau Suffolk Orange.Putnam, Dutchess
ik/ifW -«l lk/ift«J _-l lu/ln;? ~.i
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
lb/10° gal
6.7
157 Sa = 58.1
60.0
1.0
5.0
lb/10° gal
13.0
157 Sc = 157.
60.0
1.0
5.0
lb/10j gal
23.0
157 Se = 314.
60.0
1.0
5.0
Source: AP-42, New York State Point Source Inventory
a. S = 0.37
b. Towns of Babylon, Brookhaven, Huntington, Islip, and Smithtown.
c. S = 1.00
d. Towns of Easthampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton, Southold.
e. S = 2.00
Step 5
The same as New Jersey, Step 5.
Step 7
Same as Step 2.
-------
A Ic
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Step 1
There was no residential residual oil use in Fairfield County in 1974,
according to data supplied by the CONNDEP. No emissions are assumed for
the future.
-------
A 2a / 1
A 2a NATURAL GAS - COMMERCIAL
Update Level: 2 [pp 61-64, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 2 [pp 80-81, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
MIS = 58,210.xl06 cu.ft.
Step 2
State total commercial point source use = 1,485. x 10 cu.ft.
-------
1 STATE TOTAL: ALL
COMMERCIAL USE IN
1974 (MIS).
2 SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL OF
NATURAL GAS USED BY POINT
SOURCES.
STATE TOTAL: AREA
SOURCES
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT BY
COUNTY (FRACTION OF STATE
TOTAL).
5 COUNTY TOTAL: AREA
SOURCES.
i
6 COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
GROWTH FACTORS, 1980 / 1985 /
2000.
A 2a NATURAL GAS-COMMERCIAL
(AREA SOURCE)
7 EMISSION FACTORS 1974 / 1980
1985 / 2000.
I
METHOD FOR ALLOCATION TO
SO. KM.
8
COUNTY TOTALS: AREA
SOURCE EMISSIONS 1980 /
1985 / 2000.
TABLES 7.1, 7.2
10A
FUEL USE BY SQ. KM.
TABLE 3.3-9
I
10B
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM.
TABLE 3.3-11
ro
03
NJ
-------
New Jersey cont.
Step 3
A,2a
State total: Area sources =
cu.ft.
Step 4
Comm/Inst.Employment
Ratio:
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
(in thousands )_
312.2;
349.2:
193.8:
198.3:
139.5
113.4
152.1
64.2
230.0
County Comm Employ. /State Comm. Employ
0.127
0.142
0.078
0.080
0.056
0.046
0.061
0.026
0.093
State total
Step 5
2,454.5
Source: TSRPC ITR 4545-1202 "Regional and County Employment
Monitoring, Year 1974." February 1976.
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Area source (10 cu.ft.)
7,204.
8,055.
4,425.
4,538.
3,177.
-------
A 2a / 4
New Jersey
Step 5 cont.
County
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Area source (10
2,609.
3,460.
1,475.
5,275.
cu.ft.)
Step 6
Commercial/Institutional Employment Growth Factors
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
1.038
1.002
0.993
1.096
1.088
1.057
0.996
1.020
0.997
1985
1.104
1.005
1.040
1.205
1.161
1.118
1.014
1.097
0.995
2000
1.301
1.095
1.247
1.505
1.403
1.324
1.143
1.327
1.024
See Appendix V for derivation.
-------
A 2a / 5
New Jersey cont,
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/106 ft3
Participates 10.
Sulfur oxides (SOj 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides (NOg) 120.
Hydrocarbons (CH^) 8.
Carbon monoxide 20.
Source: AP-42
Step 9
Allocation of commercial-institutional fuel use by total floor area (in-
cluding residential) is admittedly a generalized approach. A more sensitized
method was used to allocate to land use units described as "Economic Cluster"
(Type 1) and "Cluster Related Residential" (Type 2). The former are defined as
appearing on "cross-accepted" county plan maps as areas of predominately "eco-
nomic or institutional activity" and generally having, or will have, nonresiden-
tial floor space equal to or greater than 38% of total floor space, and nonresi-
dential floor space equal to or greater than 500,000 square feet. Exceptions to
these floor space rules would include predominantly "open" or low density uses
like airport runways and oil tank farms. "Cluster Related Residential" square
miles are defined as generally adjacent to "Economic Clusters" and are usually
defined on county plans as areas of extensive higher residential density or
-------
A 2a/ 6
New Jersey
Step 9 cont.
predominantly residential. Thus, it is likely that commercial/institutional
emissions would come mainly from these types of areas. A computer procedure
was evolved which made such special allocation possible.
See ITR 4351-5401: "The Land Development System..., an Overview" for the
context of this part of the land use modelling system.
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
MIS = 136,332.xl06. This datum was not used in subsequent calculations,
and is recorded for possible use in checking whether results are reasonable.
Steps 2 and 3
Omit
-------
A 2a / 7
New York Ctty cont.
Step 4
County Comm./Inst.Employment (000's)
Bronx 242.7
Kings 518.7
New York 2,014.8
Queens 438.3;
Richmond 55.4:
State total 6,575.1
These data were not used in subsequent calculations, and are recorded for
possible use in checking if results are unreasonable.
Step 5
Data supplied by New York City Department of Air Resources,
County Area Source Total (IQr cu.ft.)
Bronx 4,694,052
Kings 8,781,462
New York 7,708,224
Queens 8,187,217
Richmond 548,050
-------
A 2a / 8
New York City cont.
Step 6
Commercial Employment Growth Factors
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
0.982
0.984
1.046
0.998
1.213
1985
1.019
0.979
1.092
1.003
1.390
2000
1.166
1.036
1.109
1.056
1.836
See Appendix V for derivation.
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant Ib/lO^cu.ft.
Particulates 6.
Sulfur Oxides (SO ) 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides (NO ) 100.
Hydrocarbons (CH ) 4.
Carbon Monoxide 20.
Source: NYCDAR
Step 9
Same method as New Jersey
-------
A 2a / 9
NEW YORK STATE (excluding New York City)
Steps 1 through 5
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. Commercial/institutional natural
gas usage for each county was estimated by subtracting the point source usage
from the total for that county. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel Balance Calcu-
lations for 1974, New York State.
Step 6
Commercial/Institutional Employment Growth Factors
County
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suf f ol k
Westchester
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
1.068
0.989
1.148
1.007
1.057
1.079
0.999
1985
1.126
0.999
1.271
1.050
1.105
1.147
1.037
2000
1.33C
1.09Z
1.61J
1.30J
1.27;
1.28f
1.165
See Appendix V for derivation.
-------
A 2a / 10
New York State cont.
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/10 cu.ft.
Particulates 10.
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 120.
Hydrocarbons 8.
Carbon Monoxide 20.
Source: AP-42
Step 9
Same method as New Jersey
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Steps 1 through 9
Commercial/institutional natural gas data were supplied by the Connecticut
Department of Environmental Protection by MCD. Methods used to develop these
data are described in Appendix A, Connecticut Air Inventory Reference (CONNAIR),
Department of Environmental Protection, Air Compliance Unit, Engineering Section,
Allocation to square kilometers was accomplished by the same methods used for
New York City, but with MCD totals replacing county totals.
-------
A 2a / 11
Connecticut (Fairfield County) cont.
Step 4
County Commercial Employment (In thousands)
1974 1980 1985 2000
Fairfield 335.5 338.7 343.2 383.4
Step 5
Data supplied by CONNDEP by MCD
Step 6
Commercial Employment Growth Factors
County 1974 1980 1985 2000
Fairfield 1.000 1.010 1.023 1.143
See Appendix V for derivation.
-------
A 2a / 12
Connecticut (Falrfield County) cont.
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant lb/106 cu.ft.
Particulates 10.0
Sulfur Oxide 0.6
Nitrogen Oxide 120.0
Hydrocarbon 8.0
Carbon Monoxide 20.0
Source: AP-42
Step 9
Same method as New Jersey
-------
A 2b / 1
.A 2b DISTILLATE - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL AND INDUSTRIAL
Update Level: 2 [pp. 62-63, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 2 [pp. 80-81, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
"Distillate-type heating oil, "(MIS) = 1,894,578,000. gal
"Kerosine used for heating, "(MIS) = 44,562,000. gal
"Distillate used by the military," (MIS)
13.440.000. gal
Total 1,952,580,000. gal
This is the state total of residential, commercial, and industrial distillate
oil used for space heating, and conforms with the definitions on Bureau of
Mines form "FUEL OIL AND KEROSINE SALES AND INVENTORIES."
-------
A 2b/ A 3b DISTILLATE - COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
A 2b / 2
STATE TOTAL - RESIDENTIAL,
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL
DISTILLATE OIL USED FOR
HEATING IN 1974 (MIS)
TABLE 2.4
STATE TOTAL - ALL SOURCES
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DISTILLATE OIL USED FOR
HEATING.
STATE TOTALS - COMMERCIAL
AREA SOURCES AND INDUSTRIAL
SOURCES USING DISTILLATE OIL
FOR SPACE HEATING. SUBTRACT
STEP 8.
STATE TOTAL OF DISTILLATE
OIL USED BY COM/INST. AREA
SOURCES. TABLE 2.5
11
COUNTY TOTALS - AREA
SOURCES. TABLE 2.1
13
FUEL USE BY SO. KM TABLE 3.3-9
15
EMISSIONS BY SO. KM. AND
COUNTY TABLES 3.3-11, 7.1
17
FUEL USE BY COUNTY AND
SO. KM. 1980/1985/2000.
TABLES 3.3-9, 2.8
19
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY AND
SO. KM. 1980/1985/2000.
TABLES 3.3-11,7.2
SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL OF
RESIDENTIAL DIST. OIL USE
IN 1974. TABLE 2.4
SUBTRACT: COMMERCIAL
POINT SOURCE (NEDS)
TABLE 2.5
STATE TOTAL OF DISTILLATE
OIL USED BY INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCES (NEDS)
TABLE 2.5
8
STATE TOTAL OF DISTILLATE
OIL USED BY INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCES FOR HEATING.
I
SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL OF
DISTILLATE OIL USED BY
INDUSTRY FOR MANUFACTURING
(MIS) TABLE 2.4
10
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
BY COUNTY (FRACTION OF
STATE TOTAL)
12
ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS.
14
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.3-10
16
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
GROWTH FACTORS. 1980/
1985/2000 (TABLE 2.7)
18
EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.3-10
-------
A 2b / 3
New Jersey cont.
Step 2
The state total of residential distillate oil use in in 1974, A, was
estimated using the equation
2
L B1 x F.
x H x C x FUF.
where B.= the number of dwelling units in structure type i (i = 1 , 1 du/bldg;
i = 2, 2 to 4 du's/bldg) (Source: see Appendix IV)
F.= the fraction of dwelling units using oil in structure type i, ob-
tained from the TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood Survey," for the
New Jersey sector.
H = the number of heating degree days
C = the average number of rooms per dwelling unit/5.0
FUF.= the fuel use factor (gal/du-hdd) for structure type i
The frequency distribution of distillate oil use by building size was approxi-
mated by assuming that distillate oil is used only in building types with i
equal 1 and 2. Then, using the values below, the State total of residential
distillate oil use = 611,011,000. gal.
i
1
2
B.
1,380,095.
503,749.
F.
0.344
0.585
H
5000.
5000.
C
1.05
1.05
FUF.
0.157
0.142
-------
A 2b / 4
New Jersey cont.
Step 3
State total of distillate.oil used by commercial/institutional and indus-
trial sources for heating = 1,341,569,000. gal.
Step 4
State total of distillate used by commercial/institutional point sources
(from NEDS file) = 159,000. gal.
Step 5
State total of distillate oil used for heating by commercial/institutional
area sources and industrial sources = 1,341,410,000. gal.
Step 6
State total of distillate oil used by industrial point sources (NEDS)
= 114,312,000. gal.
Step 7
"Industrial Use," (MIS) = 101,472,000. gal
"Oil Companies," (MIS) = 10,500,000. gal
State total of distillate oil used by industry for manufacturing (MIS)
= 111,972,000. gal.
-------
A 2b / 5
New Jersey cont.
Step 8
State total of distillate oil used by industrial [point] sources for
heating = 2,340,000. gal.
Step 9
State total of distillate oil used by commercial/institutional area
sources = 1,339,070,030. gal.
Step 10
County Comm.Employ/
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morri s
Passaic
Somerset
Union
1974 Comm Employment J 000' sj
312.2
349.2
193.8
198.3
139.5
113.4
152.1
64.2
230.0
State Comm. Employ
0.127
0.142
0.079
0.081
0.057
0.046
0.062
0.026
0.094
State total 2,454,500
-------
A 2b / 6
New Jersey cont.
Step 11
County County totals-area sources (gal)
Bergen 170,062,000.
Essex 190,148,000.
Hudson 105,787,000.
Middlesex 108,465,000.
Monmouth 76,327,000.
Morris 61,597,000.
Passaic 83,022,000.
Somerset 34,816,000.
Union 125,873,000.
Step 12
See alternative to allocation by floor area in A 2a , Step 9, p .5.
-------
A 2b / 7
New. Jertsey cont.
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Step 16
Pollutant
1b/10J gal.
2.
142 sa = 28.4
22.
1.
5.
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
Source: AP-42
a. S = 0.2
Commercial/Institutional Employment (in thousands)
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex.
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
1974
312.2
349.2
193.8
198.3
139.5
113.4
152.1
64.2
230.0
1980
323.9
349.9
192.4
217.3
151.7
119.9
151.5
65.5
229.4
1985
344.5
351.0
201.6
238.9
161.9
126.8
154.2
70.4
228.8
2000
406.3
382.2
241.6
298.5
195.7
150.0
173.9
85.2
235.6
See Appendix V for derivation.
-------
A 2b / 8
New Jersey Step 16 cont,
Growth Factors
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morri s
Passaic
Somerset
Union
1974
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1980
1.038
1.002
0.993
1.096
1.088
1.057
0.996
1.020
0.997
1985
1.104
1.005
1.040
1.205
1.161
1.118
1.014
1.097
0.995
2000
1.301
1.095
1.247
1.505
1.403
1.324
1.143
1.327
1.024
Step 18
Same factors as Step 14.
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1 to 10
Omi tted
Step 11
Data supplied by New York City Department of Air Resources. Methods used
to develop these data are described in technical reports prepared by the Bureau
of Technical Services.
-------
A 2b / 9
New York City cont.
Step 12
The same procedure as used in the. New Jersey sector,
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
#2 Oil #4 Oil .
Pollutant lb/10 gal 1b/10 gal
Particulates 1.2 4.3
Sulfur Oxides 142 Sa = 28.4 148 Sb = 44.4
Nitrogen Oxides 24.9 45.9
Hydrocarbons 0.17 0.2
Carbon Monoxide 0.5 0.7
Source: NYCDAR
a. S = 0.2
b. S = 0.3
The emission factors used for distil late-type oil were weighted averages,
where the weights are the fractions of #2 and #4 oil used.
-------
A 2b / 10
New York City Step 14 cont.
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION -
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
Step 16
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
a. S = .226
lb/103 gal
2.148
3.3.294
31.324
0.179
0.561
average
Commercial Employment (ooo's)
County
Bronx
Ki ngs
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
242.7
518.7
2,014.8
438.3
55.4
1980 1985
238.4 247.4
510.3 508.0
2,107.0 2,199.6
437.3 439.8
67.2 77.0
2000
283.0
537.2
2,235.4
462.7
101.7
Commercial Employment Growth Factors
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1980 1985
0.982 1.019
0.984 0.979
1.046 1.092
0.998 1.003
1.213 1.390
2000
1.166
1.036
1.109
1.056
1.836
See Appendix V for derivation.
-------
A 2b / 11
New York City cont.
Step 18
Same emission factors as Step 14.
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 through 11
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. Commercial/institutional
distillate oil usage for each county was estimated by subtracting the point
source usage from the total for that county. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel
Balance Calculations for 1974, New York State.
Step 12
Same allocation method as used in the New Jersey sector.
-------
A 2b / 12
New York State cont.
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Rock! and, West- (Western)5, Eastern Suffolk0 and
Chester. Nassau Suffolk Orange. Putnam, Dutchess
Pollutant Tb/1Q3 gal Ib/lO^ gal 1b/10^"gaT"
Particulates 2.0 2.0 2.0
Sulfur Oxides 142 Sa = 52.5 142 Sc = 142.0 142 Se = 284.0
Nitrogen Oxides 22.0 22.0 22.0
Hydrocarbons 1.0 1.0 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0 5.0 5.0
a. S = 0.37
b. Towns of Babylon, Brookhaven, Huntington, Islip, and Smithtown.
c. S = 1.00
d. Towns of Easthampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton,
Southold.
e. S = 2.00
Source: AP-42
Step 16
Commercial Employment (in thousands)
County
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
1974
76.0
477.3
70.5
13.9
71.4
355.7
312.3
1980
81.2
472.1
80.9
14.0
75.5
384.1
312.2
1985
85.6
477.2
89.6
14.6
78.9
407.8
323.8
2000
101.0
521.0
114.1
18.1
90.8
457.5
362.8
-------
A 2b / 13
New York State Step 16 cont.
Growth Factors
County
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suf f ol k
Westchester
1974
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1980
1.068
0.989
1.148
1.007
1.057
1.079
0.999
1985
1.126
.0.999
1.271
1.050
1.105
1.147
1.037
2000
1.330
1 ;092
1.618
1.302
1.272
1.286
1.162
See Appendix V for derivation.
Step 18
Same emission factors as Step 14.
CONNECTICUT
.Steps 1 to 10
Omi tted
Step 11
Data supplied by Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection by
MCD. Methods used to develop these data are described in "Appendix A, Connect-
icut Air Inventory Reference (CONNAIR), Dept. of Environmental Protection, Air
Compliance Unit, Engineering Section.
-------
A 2b / 14
Connecticut cont.
Step 12
Fuel use was allocated to square kilometers by the same methods used for
New York City sector, but with MCD totals replacing county totals.
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTILLATE OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
lb/10J gal
2.0
71.0°
22.0
1.0
5.0
a. Assumes .5% sulfur content
Source: Conn DEP
Step 16
County
Falrfield
County
Fairfield
Comm./Inst. Employment (in thousands)
1974 1980 1985 2000
335.5
1974
1.00
338.7
343.2
Growth Factors
1980 1985
1.010
1.023
383.4
2000
1.143
-------
A 2b / 15
Connecticut cont.
Step 18
Same emission factors as Step 14,
-------
A 2c / 1
A 2c RESIDUAL OIL - COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL AND INDUSTRIAL
Update Level: 2 [p. 61, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 2 [p. 80, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
"Residual-type heating oil," (MIS) = 476,826,000. gal
"Residual oil used by the military," (MIS) = 90,342,000. gal
State total of residential, commercial, and
industrial residual oil used for heating = 567,168,000. gal
-------
A 2c/ 2
LEVEL:
ORDER:
2
2
A 2c RESIDUAL OIL - COMMERCIAL (+ INDUSTRIAL)
(AREA SOURCE)
1 STATE TOTAL-RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL,
INDUSTRIAL. RESIDUAL OIL USED FOR
HEATING IN 1974 (MIS). TABLE 2.4
i
STATE TOTAL-RESIDUAL OIL USED
BY ALL COMMERCIAL SOURCE AND
INDUSTRIAL (POINT) SOURCE FOR
HEATING.
i
STATE TOTAL-COMMERCIAL AREA
SOURCES AND INDUSTRIAL
SOURCES USING RESIDUAL OIL FOR
HEATING. SUBTRACT STEP 8.
I
STATE TOTAL OF RESIDUAL OIL USED
BY COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL AREA
SOURCES. TABLE 2.5
1 1 COUNTY TOTALS-AREA SOURCES.
TABLE 2.1
FUEL USE BY SQ. KM. TABLE 3.3-9
1 5 EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY.
TABLES 3.3-1 1,7.1
FUEL USE BY COUNTY AND SQ. KM.
1980/1985/2000. TABLES 2.8, 3.3-19
19 EMISSION BY SQ. KM. AND COUNTY
1980/1985/2000. TABLES 3.3-11, 7.2
SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
. RESIDUAL OIL USE IN 1974. TABLE 2.5
SUBTRACT: COMMERCIAL
POINT SOURCE RESIDUAL
OIL USE (NEDS) TABLE 2.5
STATE TOTAL OF RESIDUAL
OIL USED BY INDUSTRIAL
POINT SOURCES (NEDS)
TABLE 2.5
8
STATE TOTAL OF RESIDUAL OIL
USED BY INDUSTRIAL (POINT)
SOURCES FOR HEATING
i
SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL
OF RESIDUAL OIL USED BY
INDUSTRY FOR MANUFACTURING
(MIS) TABLE 2.4
10
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT BY
COUNTY (FRACTION OF STATE
TOTAL)
12,
ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS.
14
EMISSION FACTORS.
TABLE 3.3-10
16
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
GROWTH FACTORS, 1980/1985/
2000. TABLE 2.7
18
EMISSION FACTORS.
TABLE 3.3-10
-------
A 2c / 3
New Jersey cont.
Step 2
The state total of residual oil used for residential heating in 1974, A,
was estimated using the equation
A = £-J B. xF. xHxCx FUF.
i=3 n ! 1
where B. = the state total of dwelling units in structure type i (i =3,
5 to 19 du's/bldg; i = 4, 20 + du's/bldg). (Source: see Appendix IV)
F. = the fraction of dwelling units which use oil for heating in
structure type i, in the New Jersey sector of the Region ob-
tained from the TSRPC "Housing and Neighborhood Survey."
H = the state average number of heating degree days.
C = state average, number of rooms per dwelling unit/5.0
FUF = fuel use factor (gal/du-hdd) for dwelling units in structure
type i.
The distribution of residual oil use by building size was approximated by assum-
ing that buildings with 5 or more dwelling units which use oil use only resid-
ual oil. Using the values in the matrix below yields A = 190,423,000. gal.
1
3
4
Bi
269,877
229,977
F.
i
0.576
0.941
H
5000
5000
C
1.05
1.05
FUF.
0.115
0.085
Step 3
State total of residual oil used by all commercial sources and industrial
[point] sources for heating = 376,745,000. gal.
-------
A 2c / 4
New Jersey cont.
Step 4
State total of residual oil used by commercial point sources in 1974
from NEDS =4,505,000. gal.
Step 5
State total of residual oil used by commercial area sources and indus-
trial [point] sources for heating = 372,240,000. gal.
Step 6
State total of residual oil used by industrial point sources in NEDS
908,733,000. gal.
Step 7
"Industrial Use, Residual Oil," (MIS) = 367,332,000. gal
"Oil Companies, Residual Oil," (MIS) = 233,688,000. gal
State total of residual oil used by
industry for manufacturing, etc. = 601,020,000. gal
-------
A 2c / 5
New Jersey cont.
Step 8
State total of residual oil used by industrial [point] sources for heat-
ing = 307,713,000. gal. It was assumed that there was no residual oil used at
industrial facilities which did not have NJDEP permits.
Step 9
State total of residual oil used by commercial area sources = 64,527,000.
gal. This means that the state total of residual oil used by commercial area
sources was zero.
Step 10
County Commercial Employment County Comm. Employ.
(in thousands) State Comm. Employ.
Bergen 312.2 0.127
Essex 349.2 0.142
Hudson 193.8 0.079
Middlesex 198.3 0.081
Monmouth 139.5 0.057
Morris 113.4 0.046
Passaic 152.1 0.062
Somerset 64.2 0.026
Union 230.0 0.094
State total 2,454.5
Source: TSRPC ITR 4545-1202 "Regional and County Employment
Monitoring, Year 1974." February 1976.
-------
New Jersey cont.
A 2c/ 6
Step 11
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Commercial Residual Oil
Area Source Totals (gals)
8,195,000.
9,163,000.
5,098,000.
5,227,000.
3,678,000.
2,968,000.
4,001,000
1,678,000.
6,066,000
-------
A 2c / 7
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1 to 10
Omitted
Step 11
County totals were supplied by the New York City Department of Air Re-
sources. Methods used to estimate these totals are described in technical
reports prepared by the Bureau of Technical Services.
County
AREA SOURCE TOTALS
Commercial/Institutional Industrial
(IP7 gallons) (104 gallons)
Bronx 5169 675
Kings 9156 3045
New York 7819 6047
Queens 8895 2027
Richmond 1696 511
Step 12
The procedure was the same as that described in A-2b: Commercial
Distillate Oil Use.
-------
A 2c / 8
New York CHy cont.
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Step 16
Pollutant
1b/10J gal
Participate
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
a. S = 0.3
Source: NYCDAR
8.7
150 Sa = 45.
48.6
0.22
0.8
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
(in thousands)
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
242.7
518.7
2,014.8
438.3
55.4
1980
238.4
510.3
2,107.0
437.3
67.2
1985
247.4
508.0
2,199.6
439.8
77.0
2000
283.0
537.2
2,235.4
462.7
101.7
-------
A 2c / 9
New York City Step 16 cont,
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT GROWTH FACTORS
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1980
0.982
0.984
1.046
0.998
1.213
1985
1.019
0.979
1.092
1.003
1.390
2000
1.166
1.036
1.109
1.056
1.836
See Appendix V for derivation.
Step 18
The same emission factors as Step 14.
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 through 11
Total fuel use by fuel type by user class was calculated by New York
Department of Environmental Conservation. Commercial/institutional residual
oil usage for each county was estimated by subtracting the point source usage
from the total for that county. See Appendix VI, Statewide Fuel Balance Cal-
culations for 1974, New York State.
-------
A 2c / 10
New York State Step 11 cont.
Step 12
The procedure used to allocate residual oil to commercial sources is the
same as that followed in A-2b: Commercial Distillate Oil Use.
Step 14
EMISSION FACTORS FOR COMMERCIAL RESIDUAL OIL USE
Rockland,West- (Western) Eastern Suffolkd and
Chester,Nassau Suffolk3 Orange, Putnam. Dutchess
Pollutant lb/103 gal 1b/103 gal lb/103 gal
Particulates 6.7 13.0 23.0
Sulfur Oxide 157 S° = 58.1 157 Sc = 157.0 157 Se = 314.0
Nitrogen Oxides 60.1 60.0 60.0
Hydrocarbons 1.0 1.0 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0 5.0 5.0
Source: AP-42, New York State Point Source Inventory
a. S = 0.37
b. Towns of Babylon, Brookhaven, Huntington, Islip, and Smithtown
c. S = 1.00 .
d. Towns of Easthampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton, Southold.
S = 2.0
-------
A 2c / 11
New York State cont.
Step 16
COMMERCIAL EMPLOYMENT
(in thousands)
Countv
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
County
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
1974
76.0
477.3
70.5
13.9
71.4
355.7
312.3
COMMERCIAL
1974
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1980
81.2
472.1
80.9
14.0
75.5
384.1
312.2
EMPLOYMENT
1980
1.068
0.989
1.148
1.007
1.057
1.079
0.999
1985
85.6
477.2
89.6
14.6
78.9
407.8
323.8
GROWTH FACTORS
1985
1.126
0.999
1.271
1.050
1.105
1.147
1.037
2000
101.1
521.0
114.1
18.1
90.8
457.5
362.8
2000
1.330
1.092
1.618
1.302
1.272
1.286
1.162
Step 18
The same emission factors as Step 14.
-------
A 2 c / 12
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
Steps 1 to 10
Omi tted
Step 11
Data supplied by CONNDEP shows no residual oil used for commercial space
heating in 1974,
-------
A 3a / 1
A 3a NATURAL GAS - INDUSTRIAL
Update Level: 2 [pp. 61-64, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 1 [pp.109-111, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Steps 1 through 5 -- omitted
After manipulating state totals of natural gas by subtracting various
categories of use, there was no natural gas left for area', industrial sources.
However, in the NEDS file, various listed activities were classified as area
sources, and these were used to distribute "area" source natural gas usage.
Employment as a distribution factor for 1974 was not involved.
-------
STATE TOTAt:
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES.
(MIS)
SUBTRACT: STATE TOTAL OF
NATURAL GAS USED BY
INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCES
(NEDS.) TABLE 2.5
A 3a NATURAL GAS - INDUSTRIAL
STATE TOTAL: AREA
SOURCES. TABLE 2.5
MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
BY COUNTY (FRACTION OF STATE
TOTAL)
EMISSION FACTORS, 1974 / 1980 /
1985 / 2000. TABLE 3.3-10
(RELABELED)
COUNTY TOTAL: AREA
SOURCES. TABLE 2.1
i
I
MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT
GROWTH FACTORS, 1980 / 1985 /
2000. (TABLE 2.7)
ALLOCATION TO SO. KM. BY
NONRESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA
8
COUNTY TOTAL: AREA
SOURCE EMISSIONS, 1974 /
1980 / 1985 / 2000.
TABLE 7.1. 7.2
A10
i
FUEL USE BY SO. KM. IN
1980 / 1985 / 2000.
TABLE 3.3-9 (RELABELED)
B10
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM. IN
1980 / 1985 / 2000.
TABLE 3.3-11 (RELABELED)
>
CO
-------
A 3a / 3
New Jersey cont,
Step 6
See Table, P 2. /6 for manufacturing growth factors.
classes of
The methodology employed could not include the projection of/manufacturing
employment by county. Please refer to Appendix V for a description of the pro-
jection methods used to forecast manufacturing employment by category of manu-
facturing.
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant lb/106 cu.ft.
Particulates 10.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 175.0
Hydrocarbons 3.0
Carbon Monoxide 17.0
Source: AP-42
-------
A 3a / 4
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1 through 4
Omit.
Step 5
County Area source totals (10 cu.ft.)
Bronx 505
Kings 8,612
New York 2,954
Queens 2,809
Richmond 0
These data were supplied by the New York City Department of Air Resources.
Methods used to develop these data are described in a series of technical
reports Issued by the Bureau of Technical Services.
-------
A 3a / 5
New York City cont.
Step 6
See Table, P 2 /6, for manufacturing growth factors.
The methodology employed could not include the projection of manufacturing
employment by county. Please refer to Appendix V for a description of the pro-
jection methods used to forecast manufacturing employment by category of manu-
facturing.
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant lb/10 cu.ft.
Particulates 10.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 175.0
Hydrocarbons 3.0
Carbon Monoxide 17.0
Source: AP-42
Step 9
Same as method used in the New Jersey sector.
-------
A 3a / 6
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 through 5
There was no natural gas used by industrial point sources, according to
calculations of New York State Department of Environmental Protection. (See
Appendix VI). However, certain sources listed in the NEDS file, classified
as "area" sources through the arbitrary quantity cutoff, were used to distri-
bute to the specific km where the activities were located.
Step 6
See Table, P 2 /6, for manufacturing growth factors.
The methodology employed could not include the projection of manufacturing
employment by county. Please refer to Appendix V for a description of the pro-
jection methods used to forecast manufacturing employment by category of manu-
facturing.
-------
A 3a / 7
New York State cont,
Step 7
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION
Pollutant lb/106 cu.ft.
Particulates 10.0
Sulfur Oxides 0.6
Nitrogen Oxides 175.0
Hydrocarbons 3.0
Carbon Monoxide 17.0
Source: AP-42
Step 9
Same as method used in the New Jersey sector.
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Step 1
MIS = 16,100.xl06 cu.ft. This datum was not used in subsequent calcula-
tions, but is recorded for possible use in checking the reasonableness of re-
sults.
-------
A 3a / 8
Connecticut (Fairfield County) cont,
Step 5
Fuel use datawere supplied by the CONNDEP at the MCD level. Methods used
to develop this information are reported in "Appendix A, Connecticut Air Inven-
tory Reference (CONNAIR), Department of Environmental Protection, Air Compli-
ance Unit, Engineering Section."
Step 9
Same as method described in Step 9, New Jersey, A 2a /5.
-------
A 3b / 1
A 3b DISTILLATE OIL - INDUSTRIAL
Update Level: 2 [pp. 62-63, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 1 [pp. 109-11, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
Points using distillate oil within facilities emitting 100 T/Y or more
of particulates or sulfur oxides are defined as point sources. Those with
less than 100 T/Y of these pollutants are defined as area sources.
-------
A 3b DISTILLATE OIL - INDUSTRIAL
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL
SOURCES USING DISTILLATE OIL
(NEDS). SORT INTO POINT AND
AREA SOURCES.
TABLE 3.4-5. 2.1
POINT SOURCES. FUEL USE AND
EMISSIONS. SEE P4
INDUSTRIAL GROWTH FACTORS (TSRPC/OBERS)
TABLE 2.7
ALLOCATE AREA SOURCES DIRECTLY
TO SQ. KM. BY USE OF UTM COORDS.
REPORT FUEL USE AND EMISSIONS BY
SQ. KM. AND COUNTY.
TABLE 7.1
FUEL USE AND EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM. AND
COUNTY FOR 1980 / 1985 / AND 2000.
TABLE 7.2
-------
A 3b / 3
New Jersey cont,
Step 4
The growth factor for fuel used in manufacturing is the Regional growth
factor for manufacturing developed under P2Industrial Processes Fuel Combus-
tion, Steps 5 and 6.
GROWTH FACTOR
1974 1980 1985 2000
Manufacturing 1.00 1J13 1>224 1>704
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1 to 5
Same as New Jersey.
NEW YORK STATE
Step 1
Points using distillate oil within facilities emitting 25 T/Y or more of
any one of particulate matter, S02 and HC are defined as point sources. Points
emitting less than 25 T/Y of these pollutants are defined as area sources.
-------
A 3b / 4
New York State cont.
Steps 2 to 5
Same as New Jersey.
CONNECTICUT (Fairfield County)
Steps 1 to 5
Quantities supplied by Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
and increased for target years were distributed by floor area. See New Jersey,
A 2a / 5, for an explanation of the floor area distribution technique.
-------
A 3c / 1
A 3c RESIDUAL OIL - INDUSTRIAL
Update Level: 2 [p. 61, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 1 [p. 109, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
Points using distillate oil within facilities emitting 100 T/Y or more of
particulates or sulfur oxides are defined as point sources. Those with less
than 100 T/Y of these pollutants are defined as area sources.
-------
A 3c / 2
A 3c RESIDUAL OIL - INDUSTRIAL
(AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL : 2
ORDER : 1
SORT FACILITIES IN NEDS
INVENTORY INTO POINT
AND AREA SOURCE.
TABLES 3.4-5, 3.4-5a (MODIFIED)
ASSIGN AREA SOURCES TO SO. KM.
AND COUNTY BY UTM COORDINATES.
1974 FUEL USE
TABLES 2.1, 3.4-5
I
EMISSION FACTORS, 1974
I
1974 EMISSIONS
TABLES 7.1, 3.4-5a (MODIFIED)
I
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
TABLE 2.7
I
FUEL USE 1980 / 1985 / 2000
TABLES 2.8, 3.4-5
EMISSION FACTORS 1980 / 1985 / 2000
I
8
EMISSIONS IN 1980 / 1985 / 2000
TABLES 7.2, 3.4-5a (MODIFIED)
-------
A 3c / 3
New Jersey cont.
Step 3
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/103 gal
Particulates 6.0
Sulfur Oxides 157 Sa = 47.1
Nitrogen Oxides 60.0
Hydrocarbons i.o
Carbon Monoxide 5.0
Source: AP-42
a. S = 0.3
Step 5
The growth factors for the manufacturing sector computed from OBERS, as
modified by the TSRPC, are listed below.
Growth Factors
1974
1.00
1980 1985
1.113 1.224
2000
1.704
See P 2/6 for details.
Step 7
Same emission factors as Step 3.
-------
A 3c / 4
NEW YORK CITY
Step 2
Area source totals by county were supplied by the New York City Depart-
ment of Air Resources. Methods used to develop these data are described in
reports prepared by the Bureau of Technical Sources.
Step 3
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
Area Source Totals (10°
6,700
33,500
60,000
20,200
13,167
gal)
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Pollutant 1b/1pa 9a1
Particulates 8.7
Sulfur Oxides 157 Sa =45.0
Nitrogen Oxides 48.6
Hydrocarbons .22
Carbon Monoxide .8
Source: NYCDAR
a. S = 0.3
-------
A 3c / 5
New York City cont.
Step 5
The same growth factors as New Jersey, Step 5.
Step 7
The same emission factors as Step 3.
NEW YORK STATE
There was no residual oil left for area industrial sources. However, the
NEDS entries classed as "area" sources were used to allocate the amounts esti-
mated for these for the target years.
-------
A 3c / 6
New York State cont.
/
Step 3
EMISSION FACTORS FOR INDUSTRIAL RESIDUAL OIL COMBUSTION
Rockland,West-(Western)bEastern Suffolkd and
Chester.Nassau Suffolk Orange, Putnam, Dutchess
Pollutant lb/103 gal lb/103 gal lb.103 gal
Particulates 6.7 13.0 23«
Sulfur Oxides 157 Sa = 58.1 157 Sc = 157.0 157 Se = 314.
Nitrogen Oxides 60.0 60.0 60.0
Hydrocarbons 1.0 1.0 1.0
Carbon Monoxide 5.0 5.0 5*0
Source: AP-42
a. S = 037
b. Towns of Babylon, Brookhaven, Huntington, Islip, and Smithtown.
c. S = 1.00
d. Towns of Easthampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton, Southold,
e. S = 2.00
Step 5
The same growth factors as in New Jersey, Step 5.
Step 7
The same emission factors as Step 3,
-------
A 3c / 7
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
Step 1
The same definitions of point and area sources as New York State.
Step 2
There was no residual oil used by industrial sources in 1974, according
to the CONNDEP. It is assumed that the same will hold true for all future
years.
-------
A 4/1
A 4 ONSITE INCINERATION
Update Level: 3 [p. 75, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 1 or 2 [p. 118 or p. 133, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 2 or 3 [p. 125 or p. 127, Guidelines, Vol. 13]-
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
A 4a RESIDENTIAL
NEW JERSEY
Steps 1 and 2
Residential on-site incineration is permitted by the New Jersey Adminis-
trative Code, Title 7, Chapter 27, Subchapter 11, Incinerators, which requires
that incinerators be multiple chamber. The provisions of this Subchapter do
not apply to incinerators installed or used in one or two-family dwellings or
multi-occupied dwellings containing six or less family units and having one
owner occupied.
-------
LEVEL: 1/2/3
ORDER: 2/3
A 4. ONSITE INCINERATION (RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL)
(AREA SOURCES)
1974 PROCESS RATES,
COUNTY TOTALS. TABLE 5.1
I
ALLOCATION TO SO. KM.
TABLE 3.5-2
I
1974 EMISSION FACTORS
TABLE 3.5-3
I
EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM.
TABLE 3.5-4, AND BY
COUNTY, TABLE 7.1
I
GROWTH PROJECTIONS,
GENERATION AND RECOVERY.
1
" 1980/1985/2000 PROCESS
RATES, COUNTY TOTALS
TABLE 5.2
7
ALLOCATION TO SQ. KM.
TABLE 3.5-2
8 1980/1985/2000
EMISSION FACTORS,
TABLE 3.5-3
9
COMPLIANCE
ASSUMPTIONS.
10 EMISSIONS BY SQ. KM.
TABLE 3.5-4, AND BY
COUNTY, TABLE 7.2,
1980/1985/2000
no
-------
A 4/3
A 4a Residential cont. (N.J.)
It is virtually impossible to estimate process rates for the exceptions
described above. Therefore, the only incineration sources which can be esti
mated are those with permits listed in N.J. NEDS file. Process rates were
allocated directly to their respective square kilometers using the source's
U.T.M. coordinates.
NEW YORK CITY
Steps 1 and 2
Regulations concerning refuse burning equipment and refuse compacting
systems are contained in the Administrative Code of the City of New York,
Chapter 57, Part II, Article 4, and in Article 9, dealing with emission
standards. Chapter 57 became effective August 25, 1971. The relevant sec-
tions of Article 4 are listed below:
Exiting Re^oae. Running Equu.pme.nt
buAning e.quipme.nt Jin operation attest January 7, 7965, could n.emain
in operation on, i£ dit>continue.d, be. n.e.place.d by a compactor. Und&n. ceAtain
conditions, dit>cut>Ae.d beZow, an opeJtaton. o& an incineAatoi could shot the. in-
cineAatoi down and not x.e.place. Jut with a. compacton.. The^e.
OC.CUM.ILd'
7. Upon the. application o£ any owneA ofi JicfiuAe. banning zqiLiprnznt Jun. a.
multiple, dwelling uJi&t containing 42 dweJtJU,ng unit& on. leAA peA unit o
banning equipment, piovide.d that tkn applicant &kowe.d to the. &atit>£action o£
the. admini&tsiato*. that it would, not be. tLea&onably practicable, ion. the. applicant
to cauAe. the. e.quipmewt in Auch multiple, dwelling to fiully me.e£ the. (emi&&ion)
&tandcjidi> o£ thi& code., on. to install, a n.eaAonably e.^icie.nt ne.faja>t compacting
, by n.ea&on o£ the. physical chaMicteAi&tic& o& the. multiple, dwelling.
-------
A 4/4
A 4a Residential cont, (N,Y,C. Steps 1 and 2)
2. Upon the. application 0$ any owner o{ n.e,£ui>e, banning zquu.pme.nt in a
public, building, in a public. hou&ing p/to/ec/t operated by the. New Yolk city
hou&ing authority containing 42 on £e&4 dwelling unite, in a building oper-
ate.d by a charitable, on. non-profit in&titution, on. in a building utitize.d
&oleJty for tna.de., but>ineA& on. pnafieA&ional occupancy.
Installation oj re.^u&e. bunning equipment, other than municipal, pnanibite.d;
new
a. No peA&on &haJUL pesanit the. in&tallation o£ n.e.^u&e. burning e.quipme.nt,
e.x.ce.pt in
(1) kobpitatt,
(2) pubtic sewage, tn.eatme.nt plants and Aolid wa&te. d
TheAe.6on.e., at &itzA wheAe. on-&ite. incineration oc.ojtvm.ejd. in 1977 opeAotou
could ckoo&e. among the. following alternatives
1. Continue, incineration and upgnade.
2. Continue, incineration and not upgna.de. (not in compliance,}
3. Convert to compacton*
4. Vi&continue. incineration (and not in&tall compacton*)
The New York City Department of Air Resources, as of December 31, 1975,
estimated the following breakout for 17,000 on-site incinerators:
1. Continue incineration and upgrade = 3,705
2. Continue incineration and not upgrade = 2,119
3. Convert to compactors = 8,075
4. Discontinue incineration = 2,791
Therefore, both the upgraded and nonupgraded incinerators had to be allocated
to square kilometers, consistent with the regulations related to structure
sizes described above.
-------
A 4/5
A 4a Residential cont. (N.Y.C.)
Step 3
EMISSION FACTORS FOR FLUE FED APARTMENT HOUSE INCINERATORS
Status of Incinerator
Pollutant
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
Unupgraded
lb/ ton refuse
30.
0.5
20.0
15.
3.0
Upgraded
Ib/ton refuse
6.0
0.5
10.0
3.
10.
Source: New York City Department of Air Resources
Although these are actually residential , emissions from apart-
ments have been reported under Commercial/Institutional (Tables 5.1 and 5.2)
Step 5
Increases in residential solid waste were based on growth in population
estimated to dwell in incinerator-served buildings for the target years. Such
increases evolved from estimations regarding:
a. What proportion of relevant NYC Department of Real Estate building
categories would have incinerators.
-------
A 4a Residential cont. (N.Y.C. Step 5)
A 4/6
b. The square footage of each category obtained by Tri-State calculations
of data in ORE files for its 1963 Land Use Inventory.
c. The square foot-per-person factors derived from Tri-State empirical
floor area studies.
d. The estimated population residing in these buildings by borough and the
proportion to the total population by borough.
e. The application of these proportions to projected borough populations.
f. Derivation of growth factors by borough.
Following are the assumptions regarding building categories and sq.ft. factors:
sq.ft. per pers.
411
641
758
641
411
341
372
372
100% Calculated
50% Calculated
ORE
Category
Dl
D3
D4
D6
D8
DO
Cl
C8
# of buildings, 1963
5,142
1,807
676
362
539
1,346
4,448
1,841
(net)
(net)
16,161
Step 9
It was assumed that sources not in compliance in 1974 would achieve com-
pliance in 1980.
-------
A 4/7
A 4a Residential cont.
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 and 2
Incineration in New York State is regulated under Part 219, Incinerators,
and Part 222, Incinerators - New York City, Nassau, and Westchester counties,
of Title 6, Chapter III, of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regu-
lations of the State of New York.
All on-site incineration was calculated from data on smaller sources in
the New York State [Point Source] Inventory. Process rate and emission data
were assigned to square kilometers using the U.T.M. coordinates of the source.
Step 3
Emission factors in the New York State [Point Source] Inventory were ob-
tained from either AP-42 or stack test data.
Step 5
Growth factors were calculated from population growth at the county level
See Appendix IV
Step 9
It was assumed that sources not in compliance in 1974 would achieve com-
pliance before 1980.
-------
A 4/8
A 4b ON-SITE INCINERATION-COMMERCIAL
NEW JERSEY
Steps 1 and 2
Codes dealing with the regulation of incineration are listed in the Resi-
dential section (A 4a). Process rates were obtained from the NEDS point source
inventory. Process rates for "listed" area sources were allocated to square ki-
lometers by using the U.T.M. coordinates of the sources.
No further calculations were carried out because of lack of input data such
as process rates.
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
The 1974 county total process rate was approximately zero, according to
information from the New York City Department of Air Resources. No change was
foreseen. However, emissions from apartments have been reported under Commer-
cial/Institutional (Tables 5.1 and 5.2). See A 4/6.
-------
A 4/9
A 4b On-Site IncinerationCommercial cont.
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 and 2
Codes dealing with the regulation of incineration are listed in the Resi'
dential section of A 4. Process rates were obtained from the New York State
[Point Source] Inventory.
Step 5
Growth factors were estimated from the commercial/institutional sector
growth factor of the OBERS projections, as modified by the TSRPC. See A 2 b/17
for quantities.
Step 9
It was assumed that sources not in compliance in 1974 would achieve com-
pliance before 1980.
-------
A 4/10
A 4c ON-SITE INCINERATION-INDUSTRIAL
NEW JERSEY
Steps 1 and 2
Codes dealing with the regulation of incineration are listed in the Resi-
dential section (A 4a). Process rates were obtained from the NEDS point source
inventory. Process rates for listed "area" sources were allocated to square
kilometers by using the U.T.M. coordinates of the sources. For non-listed
area sources, no calculations were made because of lack of input data.
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
The 1974 county total process rate was approximately zero, according to
information from the New York City Department of Air Resources.
NEW YORK STATE
Steps 1 and 2
Codes dealing with the regulation of incineration are listed in the Resi'
dential section (A 4a). Process rates were obtained from the New York State
-------
A 4/11
A 4c On-Site IncinerationIndustrial cont. N.Y.S.
[Point Source] Inventory. Process rates and emissions of listed "area" sources
were allocated to square kilometers by using the U.T.M. coordinates of the sources,
Step 5
Growth factors were estimated from the manufacturing sector growth factors
in the OBERS projections, as modified by the TSRPC (See P 2/3 Industrial Pro-
cesses).
1974 1980 1985 2000
1.00 1.113 1.224 1.704
Step 9
It was assumed that sources not in compliance in 1974 would achieve com-
pliance before 1980.
-------
A 6 / 1
A 6 DIESEL LOCOMOTIVES
Level: 1, 2, 3 identical (pp.115 Guidelines. Vol.7)
Order: 1, 2, 3 identical (pp.60-61, Guidelines. Vol.13)
METHOD
Refer to chart for sequence of steps. The following will give details
for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 2 Track and Yard Measurement
Statewide 1974 diesel locomotive fuel consumption totals from the Mineral
Industries Survey were allocated to the Tri-State Region portion of the States
and to the counties by using measured track and route miles. The Region's
railroad track mileage was estimated using a combination of railroad operations
and Tri-State documents and map or valuation sheet reconnaissance. Multiple
track lines were identified, then the lines or branches were researched to
obtain mileage distances. Maps were measured to provide accuracy checks.
Electrically operated rail lines with no diesel locomotive traffic were
-------
A6 - DIESEL LOCOMOTIVES
(AREA SOURCE)
MINERAL INDUSTRIES SURVEY
(MIS)
1974 DIESEL FUEL USED BY
PASSENGER / FREIGHT LOCOMOTIVES
BY STATE
I
LEVEL: 1,2,3, (IDENTICAL)
ORDER: 1,2,3, (IDENTICAL)
TRACK AND YARD MEASUREMENT
- ROUTE MILES PER REGION
AND STATE.
- TRACK MILES PER COUNTY
I
8 STATUS OF PLANNING FOR THE
FUTURE RAIL SYSTEM.
- N. E. CORRIDOR PLANS
- CONRAIL & USRA PLANS
- TRI-STATE & STATE PLANS
ALLOCATE FUEL
- TO REGION BY ROUTE MILES
- TO COUNTIES BY TRACK MILES
I
NEDS FORM: FUEL USE
EPA EMISSION FACTORS
AP-42
I
ESTIMATE FUTURE SYSTEM TRAFFIC
AND FUEL USE BY COUNTY
1980 / 1985 / 2000
10 GROWTH FACTORS ( NO CONTROLS)
TABLE 3.1, LINE 6
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY 1974
TABLE 7.1
SQUARE KILOMETER IDENTIFICATION
-KEYPUNCH
-PLOT
1 3 ALLOCATION BY Km2, 1974
TABLE 3.2-7 TRACKS
TABLE 3.2-8 YARDS
I
11 EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
TABLE 7.2
1980 / 1985 / 2000
12
DISTRIBUTE EMISSIONS BETWEEN
RUNNING TRACK AND YARDS
14 ALLOCATION BY Kin
TABLE 3.2-7 TRACKS
TABLE 3.2-6 YARDS
1980 / 1985 / 2000
o\
to
-------
A 6 / 3
eliminated from consideration. Major rail yards and engine terminals were
identified and their size estimated by measuring USGS maps, and Tri-State
aerial photographs.
Step 3 Allocate 1974 Fuel to Region and Counties
Mineral Industry Survey fuel sales (consumption) by states were distri-
buted to the Tri-State Region by allocating fuel in the same proportion as
railroad route mileage. For more critical fuel allocation down to county
level, the track mile proportion between region and county by state is used.
Tables I and II (in Tri-State files) outline these procedures. These methods
assume that there is a positive relationship between route miles on a state
basis or track miles on a regional basis and railroad locomotive activity or
fuel consumption. This is a reasonable assumption as long as it applied on
a state/regional scale.
Steps 5 and 6 EPA Emission Factors Applied to County Fuel Data
Emission factors found in AP-42 were applied to the diesel locomotive fuel
consumption by county. This procedure furnished the 5 major emission types
(Particulates, SOV, NOV, HC, and CO) in tons per year by county. Later steps
A A
use this same procedure to estimate future year emissions by type and county.
These data were entered on EPA Table 7.1 (future year 7.2) and are summarized
on Table IIIA (in Tri-State files).
-------
A 6 / 4
Step 7 Identify Square Kilometers
A square kilometer grid was superimposed on the regional rail system map.
Diesel-operated rail lines and yards previously identified 1n Step 2 were lo-
o
cated on the latter. Square kilometers (Km ) which these rail facilities pass
through or abut directly were then identified on the map and their coordinates
recorded for keypunching. Square kilometer coordinates impacted by the base
year (1974) rail system were punched arid then plotted to enable not only accur-
acy checks, but also adaptation of future year changes to the rail system.
Figure VIII (attached) shows a portion of this plot.
Step 8 Status of Planning for Future Rail Systems
Under federal mandate, the three states of the region have prepared their
own statewide rail plans. These state plans, the Final System Plan (FSP) and
the Tri-State Rail Freight Plan constitute major sources for determining the
county shares of the region's rail system for future years.
Connecticut State Rail Plan - Phase II (Draft). Connecticut Department
of Transportation, October 1975.
Final System Plan (FSP) Volume 1. United States Railway Association
(USRA), February 26, 1975.
New Jersey State Rail Plan - Phase II, New Jersey Department of
Transportation, December 9, 1975.
New York State Rail Plan, New York State Department of Transportation,
November 1975.
Regional Rail Freight. 1974 and the Future. Tri-State Regional Planning
Commission, March 1974.
-------
A 6 / 5
Step 9 Estimate Future Rail System Traffic and Fuel Use
The United States Railway Association (USRA) estimated growth in rail
traffic as part of their development of their Final System Plan (FSP). This
source was used to estimate the growth in rail activity as a measure of change
in locomotive fuel consumption for EPA target years 1980, 1985, and year 2000.
Volume I of the FSP states "Freight tonnage is expected to increase from
352.2 million tons in 1973 to 416.8 in 1985 (340.29 in 1974). This growth
was forecast using data on thirteen major commodity groups. The Association
(USRA) sees a compound growth rate 1.41 between 1973 and 1985." This growth
rate was extended from 1985 to year 2000 for this study.
Steps 10 and 11 Growth Factors Applied to Estimate Emissions By County
Traffic (locomotive activity) growth factors were applied to estimate loco-
motive fuel consumption in 1980, 1985, and year 2000. The base year 1974 loco-
motive fuel use had been estimated earlier in steps 3 and 4. The EPA Emission
factors (AP-42) were applied to future county fuel use to derive the five
emission types by county in the same manner as for the base year in step 6.
The five emission types were entered on EPA table 7.2 for future years..
Step 12 Distribute Emissions to Track and Yards
Prior to accomplishing this step, the changes in the rail system for 1980,
1985, and year 2000 identified in step 8 were transferred to the square kilometer
grid. Square kilometers of branch lines added or deleted in future years were
recorded by their square kilometer grid coordinates and punched and plotted
-------
A 6 / 6
to ease identification of errors and implementation of corrections.
Electronic data processing procedures were used to distribute emissions
between running track Km2 and yard Km2 by county. In the manual, EPA suggested
doubling the weight of yards vs. running tracks and this modification was used.
The valid assumption is that yards are more intensively used than running track.
Steps 13 and 14 Allocate to Square Kilometers Base and Future Years
This process was accomplished by the computer. The allocation was uni-
form within each county, using the county wide emission totals as control.
2
The yard Km were accorded double the weight of running tracks as mentioned
in Step 12. Some consideration was given to weighting multiple track lines with
a heavier allocation of emissions than single track lines. But the allocation
was by route miles rather than track miles. In other words, allocation was by
Km2 rather than by tracks. There are two reasons for this decision: First,
the number of tracks is not necessarily related to the capacity or amount of
traffic. Advanced technology has provided signalling and centralized traffic
control which reduces the need for multiple trackage. In addition, the heavi-
est multiple track lines in this Region have substantial electrically propelled
train movements.
-------
A 6 / 7
536
535
534
532
511
530
52555'5r'^53555r'555555'i5555555555l>55Ii555555S555555555555555li55666S^f.£
Oil llll I I H2^?'?2?.2223333133333^'f444A444'!.'i55r. r>5'iIiei5f>6SSAri666r; 7 777 7777 77 0l23456789il234567390l23't'367890l2
-------
A 7 / 1
A 7 SEA VESSELS
Level: 3 [pp. 93-94, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Order: Channel/Terminal Location
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The following
details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 2
Commercial Movements -
1. Obtain the number of vessels using Tri-State channels.
Section 2 of Part 1 of Waterborne Commerce of the United States - 1974
by the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers was used to obtain the number
of vessels entering [not also departing] the channels of the New York and
New Jersey counties of the Tri-State Region. Judgement was used to split
channels bordering more than one county.
For each channel vessel movements for self-propelled categories were
broken out to show drafts of up to 18 feet, and drafts of over 18 feet.
Vessel movements for two installations in Suffolk County, at Northport and
Northville, which are not covered by Corps of Engineers data, were included.
2. Calculate "In Port" Consumption of Fuel
A weighted average of 2 days at dock was worked out from information
supplied by the Port Authority.
-------
A7 SEA VESSELS
(MISC. AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL: 3
ORDER: CHANNEL/TERMINAL LOCATION
1974 STATE TOTALS OF FUELS
USED BY VESSELS - - GASOLINE,
DIESEL, RESIDUAL
(MINERAL INDUSTRIES SURVEY)
1
2 COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OF FUELS USED
(TABLE 3.1)
- COMMERCIAL, BASED ON VESSEL MOVEMENTS,
UNDERWAY AND DOCKSIDE. FROM WATERBORNE
COMMERCE,
RECREATION, BASED ON REGISTRATION
8
DETERMINE GROWTH FACTORS:
- COMMERCIAL: TONNAGE AND VESSEL
MOVEMENTS(T.RI-STATE PROJECTIONS
AND EXTRAPOLATIONS)
- RECREATION: BASED ON POPULATION
EMISSION FACTORS
(EPA - AP42)
1974 EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
(TABLE 7.1)
KM* ID, CHANNELS
& LAKES; OMIT
COASTWISE
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
EMISSIONS
(FROM STATE OF CONN.)
FUEL USE, 1980, 1985, 2000
(TABLE 3.1 LINE 10)
10
MODIFY KM
ON PLANS
IF NECESSARY
BASED
11
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
(TABLE 7.2)
I
KM2 ALLOCATION OF EMISSIONS
TABLE 3.2-9)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
N)
-------
A 7 / 3
Using the suggested formula, vessel days in port were distributed
to residual and diesel users, and this was then multiplied by the use
factor suggested for each type of fuel, yielding "In Port" consumption,
by county:
New York State:
Sales of Residual Oil for vessels [Mineral Industries Surveys]
1974 - 10,676,000 barrels X 42 = 448,392,000 gal.
448.392.000 = 235 gg5 , d
1,900 gal./day "*»»* vessel days
Sales of Distillate [Diesel] oil for vessels [MIS]
1974 - 1,005,000 barrels X 42 = 42,210,000 gal.
- ",955 vessel days
Residual 235,995 79%
Diesel 63.955 21%
Total Vessel Days 299,950 100%
New Jersey State:
Sales of Residual Oil for vessels [MIS]
1974 - 4,044,000 barrels X 42 = 169,848,000 gal.
89-400 vessel da*s
Sales of Distillate [Diesel] oil for vessels [MIS]
1974 - 1,754,000 barrels X 42 = 73,668,000 gal.
63606ga8l?°/Say = ^,618 vessel days
Residual 89,400 44%
Diesel 111.618 56%
Total Vessel Days 201,018 100%
-------
A 7 / 4
Number of vessels with draft over 18 feet entering channel, X two
days in port; distribution of vessel days to residual and diesel as shown
above; X use factor of 1,900 gal. for residual and 660 gal. for diesel
yields number of gallons consumed in port, by type of fuel, by county.
3. Calculate "Underway" Consumption - Diesel Fuel Only
Tonnages handled were listed for 1974 from Waterborne Commerce of
the U.S. Sec. 1 of Part 1 for all channels in the States of N.Y. and N.J.
Distribution by county was made for the TSR portion. The percent that each
county's tonnage bears to its State total was calculated. After subtracting
the sum of the "in port" diesel fuel consumption previously calculated from
the State total, the balance was distributed to the Tri-State counties
according to share of tonnage handled.
New York
Sales of Distillate for
Vessels - 1974 [MIS]
X 42 gal./barrel =
Less "In Port" consumption
New Jersey
1,005,000 barrels 1,754,000 barrels
42,210,000 gals. 73,668,000 gals.
5,151,000 gals.
4,112,000 gals.
Balance to be distributed
to TSR counties according
to share of tonnage handled
RECREATION USE
37,059,000 gals. 69,556,000 gals.
For New York State, motorboat registrations by county of predominant
use were obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the counties of
our interest. Data is collected for New York City as a whole, and this we
apportioned among the five New York City counties according to share of the
City's population.
-------
A 7 / 5
New Jersey data are collected by Division of Motor Vehicles for
the Trenton Main Office and four other district offices in the State.
Registrations were apportioned to the counties of our interest on the
basis of inland water surface area, as determined from the Bureau of the
Census Area Measurement Reports.
The number of motorboat registarations thus determined was multiplied
by the use factor of 160 gallons to arrive at gasoline consumption for the
counties of our interest for 1974.
Step 3
County fuel use by type of fuel was multiplied by the following factors
from AP 42:
Commercial Vessels
Pleasure Craft
Diesel
In Port &
Underway
Table 3.2.3-1
27
no
50
270
_
Residual
In Port
"Hotel ing"
Table 3.2.3-2
47. 7b
Neg.
3.2
36.4
10.0
Gasoline3
In-
board
3.2.3-5
6.4
1240
86
131
_
Out-
board
3.2.4-1
6.4
3300
1100
6.6
«
Emmissions
lb/103 gal.
Sulfur oxides [SOX]
Carbon monoxide [CO]
Hydrocarbons [HC]
Nitrogen oxides [NOX]
Particulates
[a] More detailed data on motorboat registrations from the State
Motor Vehicle Agencies indicate that New York State 14% were
inboard and 86% were outboard motors, while for New Jersey
20% were inboard and 80% were outboard.
[b] In 1974 residual fuel used in this area was .3% Sulphur.
Step 4
The above calculations yield emissions in pounds. This was converted to
tons [2000 Ibs.]
-------
A 7 / 6
Step 5
Connecticut
A packet of information received from Conn. Dept. of E.P. contained
printouts for each town in Fairfield County showing quantity of fuel used
for vessels for 1973. Conversation with Mr. Freeto indicated the following
usage:
Tugs & Ferries - distillate [diesel]
Ships in berth - residual
Ships underway - distillate [diesel]
Gasoline powered - gasoline
Fuel used was aggregated by type of fuel, and the same emission factors
we used for New York and New Jersey were applied. This yielded emissions, in
tons, by type of fuel for particulates, SOX, CO, HC, and NOX. In a table in-
cluded in the Fairfield County packet, emissions for the county, not broken
out by type of fuel, shows CO about 10% higher than the figure we arrived at,
and HC 4% higher than our figure. [No emissions were shown for the other three
elements.] A decision was made to use the higher Connecticut figures for CO
and HC. We apportioned the Connecticut CO and HC figures to types of fuel
according to the ratio from our calculations in order to meet the requirements
of Form 7.1.
The emissions for CO and HC supplied by Conn. Dept. of E.P. were for
1973, 1975, 1978 and 1985. We interpolated to arrive at the figures for 1974,
the base year. The growth rates arrived at for the two elements were used to
project from 1973 to 1974 for the remaining three elements.
-------
A 7 / 7
There are several methodologies available for preparing a vessel
emission inventory. TSRPC chose a level that was consistent with AP 42
documentation, had prior approval by EPA, and was applicable for use over
the entire region. The CONNAIR inventory chose a slightly different
methodology to compute emissions from vessels. [Documented in Appendix A
Connecticut Air Inventory Reference [CONNAIR] DEP Air Compliance Unit,
Engineering Section.] Thus, since fuel use computations are similar, the
difference between the CONNAIR and TSRPC values for TSP and NOX appear to
be a result of differing emission computation methods. Differences between
values for the other pollutants are negligible.
Step 6
Using the Port Authority's Port District Map and a TSRPC 10-mile grid
map with the XY coordinate system, every fourth grid in the Region's channels
was listed. Then greater weight was given by adding km2's to channel en-
trances and areas where heavy activity is known to exist, such as at the
Port Newark-Elizabeth Channels. The percent each channel's vessel acti-
vity bears to the county total vessel activity was calculated. [Chan/Cty %]
This figure was then divided by the number of km^'s listed for the channel to
the third decimal [activity proportion]. The activity proportion was then applied
to the county's total vessel emissions by type and kind of fuel. [Table 3.2-9]
Emissions distribution in the Ocean and Long Island Sound was omitted
as there is no high-sea movement data for calculating fuel use.
-------
A 7 / 8
Step 8
Information received from MARAD in Washington indicated waterborne
commerce would increase nationwide by 278% from 1974 to year 2000. For
this Region, such growth appeared to be invalid.
An unpublished forecast from the Port Authority indicates national
waterborne and airborne foreign commerce is expected to increase by 66%
during the period 1970 to 1990. The P.A.'s forecast for the Port's ocean
and air foregn trade indicates an increase of about 71%, 1990 over 1970.
A Tri-State forecast made in 1973 indicated TSR domestic oceanborne
and foreign waterborne commerce is expected to increase by only about 80%
for the period 1975 to the year 2000. Furthermore, Tri-State found an
overall increase of only 56% in domestic and foreign commerce at the PONY
0
over the past 25 years [1950-1975]. The Tri-State forecast is in general
agreement with the Port Authority's. The Project Officer agreed that
Tri-State's projections should be used.
Growth rates obtained from these projections were applied uniformly
to the counties affected.
Recreational Vessels
Growth rates for gasoline consumption for recreational vessels follow
the rates established by Tri-State planning for most likely population
targets for planned growth to the year 2000. These growth rates were applied
to 1974 baseline emissions to produce estimates for target years.
-------
A 8 / 1
A 8 AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS
Level: Predominantly 3 (p.144, Guidelines. Vol.7)
Order: not numbered (pp.59-60, Guidelines, Vol.13)
METHOD
Refer to chart for brief description and sequence of steps. The follow-
ing notes will supply details for steps where procedures are not obvious. In
addition, detailed notes for individual airports were prepared, since inputs
and assumptions differ among them.
Emissions from ground operation vehicles (at the airports) are calculated
in the category of off-highway vehicles (See Task A9b).
Highway vehicle emissions on roads within the larger airports will be
calculated within the category of highway vehicle emissions (See Task A9a).
Step 1: Operations and Aircraft Types at Airports
Area. The airports selected in this work are those located in the Tri-
State Region, except for Connecticut portion where only Fairfield County is
included.
-------
A8 AIRCRAFT
(AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL:3
ORDER: PER MANUAL
OPERATIONS, AIRCRAFT TYPES.
(from FAA/DOT/PANYNJ)
X AIRPORT
LTO's
EPA
EMISSION
FACTORS
1974 EMISSIONS BY AIRPORT BY A/C TYPE
(ITR V-230)
MAKE AIRCRAFT TYPE
ASSUMPTIONS
BY EXTENDING 1974
PROPORTIONS
i
REVISE FOR SMALLER AIRPORTS, BASED ON
INTERVIEWS AND ADDITIONAL REPORTS
10
FAA ACTIVITY
FORECASTS (1974
VERSION) FOR 1980 /
1985
I
11
AMPLIFY FOR ADDIT-
IONAL AIRPORTS AND
EXTEND TO 2000
1
6
TABLE 3.5
LTO BY AIRPORT
BY TYPE
I
TABLE 7.1
TOTAL EMISSIONS
BY TYPE BY COUNTY
12
TABLE 3.5
PROJECTIONS OF LTO BY
AIRPORT BY A/C TYPE
13
TABLE 7.2
PROJECTED EMISSIONS
BY COUNTY
1980 / 1985 / 2000
8
TABLE 3.2-6 Km2 ALLOCATION BY AIRPORT
AND COUNTY
oo
-------
A 8 / 3
Airport Classification. The baseline (1974) information is available
for 61 airports, one-third of which is named in the Tri-State Plan. The
majority of the remaining 40 airports could be classified as non-tower Gen-
eral Aviation airports. Some of the private airports, heliports and sea-
plane bases are also included.
Aircraft Type. Since emission factors are given in pounds per engine per
LTO cycle for each aircraft type, it was necessary to determine, for every air-
port, the percent distribution by type of aircraft and the number of engines.
Aircrafts are categorized by type and number of engines in Appendix VI of
TSRPC, Analysis Report V-230. Air Pollution Emissions from Aircraft. 1974.
October 1975. .
Traffic Activity. Information for major airports was extracted from DQT-
FAA publication, FAA Air Traffic Activity, Calendar Year 1974, March 1975, and
supplemented by a draft copy of a table prepared by NJ-DOT, 1974 Characteristics
of New Jersey Airports.
Additional information for lesser airports was obtained from NYS-DOT sheets,
Estimated Number of Aircraft Operations per Week: (1974).
Consultation of the airport management regarding volume and trends was used
wherever available, especially at smaller non-plan airports.
Step 2
The methods used for establishing number of Landing and Take-off Cycles
(LTO) for the base year are outlined in TSRPC Analysis Report V-230.
-------
A 8 / 4
Step 3
Emission Factors. Emission factors for five pollutants are specified
in "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors," Second Edition, issued
by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, April, 1973 (AP-42).
Steps 4-5
The methods used in calculating total yearly emissions are described in
TSRPC Analysis Report V-230, previously mentioned.
While these emission factors remain constant, fluctuations of other com-
ponents are so wide that a uniform methodology for the entire Region could not
be developed.
Instead, every airport was analyzed separately and its emissions recorded
in the appropriate forms. Details by individual airport are available in Tri-
State's files.
Steps 8 and 14
Geographical Identification. A square-kilometer grid applied to "U.S.G.S.
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP," 1951, photorevised 1972 , and then updated through FAA Form
5010, was used for recording XY coordinates of the airports in question. These
data were punched and the emissions from each airport distributed electronically.
Step 9
The distribution by type of aircraft fleet was developed in accordance with
the following assumptions:
-------
A 8 / 5
A rapid decline in Long Range Jet operations because of discontinued
production (DC-8) and gradual replacement by the new wide-body type.
Gradual elimination of Air Carrier Turboprop types.
Progressive increase of General Aviation Turboprop operations,replac-
ing a proportional number of comparable Piston Aircrafts.
Detailed assumptions for each airport are available in Tri-State's files,
Steps 10-11
All forecasts of key aviation activity at major Tri-State Plan airports
for calendar years 1980, 1985 and 2000 were based on printouts made availa-
ble for this project by the Aviation Forecast Branch of FAA. These sheets
contain substantial revisions of statistics published by DOT.-FAA in their
preceding document, Terminal Area Forecast, 1976-1986, September 1974. One
percent growth annually is anticipated between 1987 and 2000.
In some cases, particularly in New Jersey portion, the number of flights
were projected in accordance with a table, Forecast of Annual Operations, de-
veloped by NJ-DOT.
General Aviation Forecasts
The only available publication on the subject, General Aviation Fore-
casts. 1975-1987 (Systems Consultants, Inc., April 1976) although sponsored
by the DOT-FAA, does "not necessarily reflect the official views or policy
of the Department of Transportation," as noted in the introduction.
-------
A 8 / 6
This report, known also as FAA-AVP-76-7, provides annual forecasts and
identifies the forecasting models and the rationale used in their develop-
ment. These models, based on a state's wealth, population and aeronautical
characteristics, were found acceptable. The statement on page 3 that "by
1987, the Northeast Region is expected to be the least active in terms of
operations" is in agreement with the Tri-State assumptions.
According to Table 2.4-3.2 on page 27, the total number of G.A. operations
in New York State in 1875 was 4,879,000 ops. In 1987, they will be 8,705,000
and the percentage of growth 1974-87 is shown on Figure 2.4-3 to be 84 per-
cent; thus the estimated number of operations for 1974 is calculated as
8,705,000 * 1.84 = 4,731,000 ops., and the growth factors from this baseline
are:
1980 5,998,000*4,731,000=1.2678
1985 7,792,000*4,731,000=1.6470
2000 8,705,000 x 1.13 (one percent annual growth) =
9,836,700 * 4,731,000 = 2.0792
The above forecasts are confirmed by several of the Region's airports,
notably Zahn's, whose management anticipates the yearly rate of growth to be
around 5 percent (26.78% * 6 years = 4.96%).
The growth factor for 1985 may be slightly overestimated (64.7% * 11
years = 5.9%) but the trend to the year 2000 appears more realistic (107.92% *
26 years = 4.15%). These factors were considered valid for both New York and
New Jersey.
Unless specifically rejected by a given airport staff, these factors were
used throughout all counties of New York and New Jersey. Where FAA has made
forecasts for specific airports, they were used (i.e., Teterboro, Newark).
-------
A 8 / 7
(Step 11, continued)
Unimportant changes in the physical character of several airports during
the period immediately following the base year were reflected in the 1980 fore-
casts. The nature of changes between the years 1980 and 2000 was found to be
impossible of projection and therefore 1980 status was used in distributing
emissions for 1985 and 2000.
Step 12
The calculations of LTO's for Table 3.5 reflect computations from basic
work sheets, with one exception: For civil aviation types, projections were
made separately for each subtype (number of engines), and then grouped into
the categories required for Table 3.5.
-------
A 9a / 1
A 9a MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS - HIGHWAY GASOLINE AND DIESEL
Level: Synthesized
Order: Expressway Mileage/Floor Area
METHOD
Refer to work chart for substance and sequence of steps. For those steps
where procedures are not obvious, the following descriptions are provided. 'A
chart from "Air Quality Plan/Transportation Plan Consistency Assessment
TSRPC, July 1976" is included for additional detail.
Step 1 Miles of Expressways and Arterials
The freeway and arterial supply, current and future, reflects the route
miles and lane miles of expressways and principal arterials existing and pro-
grammed in the Tri-State transportation plan. Details are found in ITR 4572-
1205, "Limited Access Highway Status Report: 1975," April 1976; and in Main-
taining Mobility: The Plan and Program for Regional Transportation through
2000, 2d Edition, November 1976.
-------
LEVEL: SYNTHESIZED
ORDER: EXPRESSWAY MILEAGE/FLOOR AREA
A9a MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS - GASOLINE AND DIESEL - HIGHWAY
(AREA SOURCE)
MILES OF EXPRESSWAY
AND PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS
(TSRPC TRANSP. PLAN)
1974/1980/1985/2000
TRIP FORECAST (VEHICLE TRIP
ENDS) (TSRPC TRANSP. PLAN/RDG)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
VEHICLE TYPE AND AGE MIX
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
VMT BY VEHICLE TYPE AND
AVERAGE SPEEDS
EMISSION FACTORS
(AP42.SUPPL. 5)
HC/CO/NO EMISSIONS ON
EXPRESSWAYS. BY COUNTY
MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
SO2 PART. EMISSIONS ON
EXPRESSWAYS, ALL EMISSIONS
ON ARTERIALS AND LOCAL
BY COUNTY
8
EXPRESSWAYS BY SO. Ml.
<% OF COUNTY IN EACH SO. Ml.)
10
TOTAL FLOOR AREA BY SO. Ml.
(TRI-STATE TIME SERIES FILES)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
11
TOTAL MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS BY SO. Ml.
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
>
0)
-------
A 9a / 3
Step 2 Trip Forecast
Estimating travel demand, in terms of vehicle trip ends (VTE), involves
forecasting county vehicle registrations based on estimates of income, density,
and household characteristics. Trip rates per registered vehicle are then
applied to produce vehicle trips, which are allocated to square miles based
on estimates of households and nonresidential activity. (ITR 1507 and 1508:
"Highway Travel Forecasts 1980 Through 2000." March 1977).
Step 3 Vehicle Type and Age
Vehicle age distribution by type is taken from Supplement No.6, USEPA,
December 1975.
Step 4 VMT By Vehicle Type and Average Speeds
The vehicle miles of travel and speeds are projected for each of the
Analysis Areas (see Map 9a/4) using the Highway Evaluation Model (HEM). This
model is described in detail in ITR 4432-2101, "Cost and Performance Evaluation
of Alternate Highway Strategies" and ITR 4212-2461, "Evaluating the Interim
Plan II."
The Highway Evaluation Model is not a network model. VMT and speeds are
estimated independently for each Analysis Area based upon input vehicle trip
ends (VTE) and roadway supply. The model was calibrated based on observed
1963 travel patterns and reflects shorter average trip lengths (VMT/VTE) at
higher densities and increased travel as a result of added freeway supply.
-------
MAP A 9a / 4
TRI-ST»TE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
ANALYSIS AREAS
-------
A 9a / 5
Step 5 Emission Factors
The emissions are estimated using a computer program supplied by the New
York City Department of Air Resources based on the method described in Supple-
ment No.5.
SOX and Particulates: The emission rates (gms/veh.mi.) for each vehicle
type were extracted from the following tables in Supplement 5.
Light-duty vehicles Table 3.1.2-13
Light-duty gas trucks Table 3.1.4-7
Heavy-duty gas trucks Table 3.1.4-13
Heavy-duty diesel vehicles Table 3.1.5-1
HC, CO, and N0v: The emission rates were obtained by use of Supplement 5
methodology, with inputs as follows:
Vehicle speeds (from HEM)
Percent Hot Plus Cold Operation
Calendar Year
Temperature: annual average
Proportion of Vehicle Miles by Type
Age mix of vehicles from Supplement 5
Proportion of Starts which are Cold
Step 6 Expressway/Arterial-Local Split
The Highway Evaluation Model with the emissions subroutine provides the HC,
CO, and NO pollutants emitted by motor vehicles on expressways, arterial streets,
and local streets. Pollutants emitted on expressways are allocated to km^ based
on the proportion of miles of expressway in each knr. All pollutants emitted on
arterials and local roads are distributed to km^ based on the proportion of
total floor area in each km^.
-------
(From: "Air Quality Plan/Transportation Plan Consistency Assessment" TSRPC, July 1976.)
MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS PROJECTION OUTLINE
CO
a,
01
4-1
C/i
CO
(X
-------
A 9b(i) / 1
A 9b (i) OFF-HIGHWAY FUEL USE - GASOLINE
Level: generally 3 (p.91 of Guidelines. Vol.7)
Order: population base (no number given)
The work chart gives substance and sequence of steps. The following ex-
planations give details for those steps where method is not obvious.
Off-highway gasoline use is divided into two categories: tractors and
all other agricultural and small utility equipment.
Step 1
County tractor data was obtained from the 1950, 1960, and 1970 Census
of Agriculture. These data and corresponding U.S. Census population density
data by counties were used to develop an historical relationship of tractor
per capita to population density. As county population density increases,
tractors per capita decrease sharply. Variables are related in a logarithmic
scale such that as population density increases and tractors per capita de-
crease, tractors per square mile also decrease. This relationship and Tri-State
-------
A9b (i) OFF HIGHWAY FUEL USE-GASOLINE
(MISC. AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL: 3
ORDER: POPULATION
FARM TRACTORS
ALL OTHER AGRICULTURAL AND
SMALL UTILITY EQUIPMENT
FARM TRACTORS BY COUNTY X 0.6
(CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE, EPA 450)
I
PROJECTIONS OF TRACTORS
1980 / 1985 / 2000
BASED ON DENSITY /TRACTOR RATIO
FUEL CONSUMPTION FACTOR:
1000 GAL/TRACTOR/YR (EPA 450)
I
1974 TRACTOR GASOLINE USE BY COUNTY
(TABLE 3.1 LINE I)
TRACTOR GASOLINE USE BY COUNTY
(TABLE 3.1)
1980 / 1985 / 2000
EMISSION FACTOR
(AP 42)
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
(TABLE 6.1)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
I
° POPULATION BY KM2
(TSRPC TIME SERIES FILES)
EPA FACTORS APPEAR INVALID FOR
THISAOCR.
EMISSIONS ADJUDGED INSIGNIFICANT.
THIS CATEGORY OMITTED.
cr
/N
H-
ALLOCATION TO KM*
TABLE 7.1 TABLE 7.2
1974
1980 / 1985 / 2000
-------
A 9b(i) / 3
Regional Planning Commission (TSRPC) population density data were then used to
calculate 1974 tractors by county. Gasoline tractors were assumed to consti-
tute 60% of all tractors (from EPA-450).
Step 2
Each gasoline tractor was estimated to consume an average of 1000 gallons/
year. (This figure is given in EPA-450 and is presumably a national average.)
Step 4
Emission factors given in AP-42 were then applied to fuel used to calculate
emissions.
Steps 5-6
The method for projecting future year emissions was analogous to the base
year approach with the following addition: Future county tractor populations
were projected using TSRPC population density forecasts and the same histori-
cal tractor per capita/population density relationship used for base-year cal-
culations.
Other off-highway gasoline uses such as lawn mowers, chain saws, snowmobiles,
and agricultural equipment other than tractors.
The EPA-450 manual provides a national average use factor of 13 gallons/
-------
A 9b(i) / 4
person for these types of off-highway gasoline uses, However, most of this
was assumed to relate to agricultural equipment other than tractors. For
this Region it is reasonable to assume that these types of gasoline use are
negligible, since nearly all agricultural equipment is tractor driven. Gas-
oline powered chain saws, snowmobiles, and gasoline powered lawn mowers are not
assumed to yield emissions for base and future years. The Emission Factors
Section (MD-14), National Air Data Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, was consulted on this
subject and generally concurs with the Tri-State approach.
-------
A 9b(ii) / 1
A 9b (ii) OFF-HIGHWAY FUEL USE-DIESEL
Level: 3 (p.92, Guidelines. Vol.7),
Order: by population (number not given)
Off-highway diesel fuel use is divided for estimation purposes into
farm tractors, other farm equipment, and construction equipment. The flow
chart gives the substance and sequence of steps. The following explanations
are provided for those steps where detailed information is necessary.
Step 1
The procedure for estimating overall 1974 tractors by county is described
under A 9b(i), step 1,Off-Highway Gasoline. Diesel tractors are assumed to
constitute 35% of all tractors.
Step 2
The procedure for projecting future emissions is similar except with regard
to estimation of tractor populations (described under A 9b(i), step 6.)
-------
A9b (ii) OFF HIGHWAY FUEL USE-DIESEL
(MISC. AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL:2
ORDER: POPULATION
FARM TRACTORS
DIESEL CONST. Co.
OTHER FARM EQUIPMENT
FARM TRACTORS BY COUNTY
X 0.35 (US CENSUS OF
AGRIC.) 1974
I
FARM TRACTORS - PROJECTION
BASED ON DENSITY/TRACTOR
RATIOS (TSRPC) 1980/1985/2000
I
NONBUILDING CONSTRUCTION
EMPLOYEES, BASED ON OBERS
MODIFIED BY TSRPC
1974/1980/1985/2000
FUEL CONSUMPTION FACTOR
GAL/TRACTOR/YR.
(EPA)
I
I
CONSUPTION FACTOR
5000 GAL/EMPL./YEAR
(EPA)
TRACTOR DIESEL USE BY COUNTY
(TABLE 3.1, LINE 3 ) 1974/1985/2000
T
I
8
FUEL USED (TABLE 3.1 LINE 4)
1974/1980/1985/2000
EMISSION FACTORS
(AP 450)
I
EMISSIONS ADJUDGED
INSIGNIFICANT
ESTIMATIONS OMITTED
EMISSION FACTOR
(EPA FACTORS MODIFIED
BY TSRPC)
10
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
TABLE 6.1
1974/1980/1985/2000
I
11
POPULATION BY Km2
(TSRPC TIME SERIES)
v£>
O"
12
EMISSIONS BY KM
TABLE 7.1 TABLE 7.2
1974
1980/ 1985/2000
-------
A 9b(ii) / 3
Step 3
Each tractor is estimated to consume an average of 1000 gallons/year.
(These figures are given in EPA-450 and are presumably national averages.)
Step 6
County non-building construction employee data for 1973 was obtained
from "County Business Patterns." The term "non-building construction" is
assumed to include the following construction categories: heavy construction,
concrete, structural steel, excavating and foundation, and wrecking and demoli-
tion. A survey of employment in the Tri-State Region between 1958 and 1970
(TSRPC Interim Technical Report 4287-2501) shows that the percentage share
attributable to the construction industry has remained stable (3-4%) over this
period; construction employment has grown over the years in approximately the
same proportion as total employment. If one assumes this to continue to hold
for future years, 1974 non-building construction employees is then computed
from the product of the 1973 numbers and the 1973-4 growth factor derived from
total employment.
Non-building construction employees are forecasted by applying growth
factors. These were obtained by dividing TSRPC forecasts of employment for
future years by the 1973 levels.
Step 7
Construction equipment is estimated to consume 5000 gallons/year/non-building
construction employee. (This figure is provided in EPA-450 and is presumably
-------
A 9b(ii) / 4
a national average.)
Step 9
Factors listed under the miscellaneous construction equipment category
are used to approximate average values for all types of equipment.
Other Diesel Equipment
The EPA-450 book provides a national average use factor of 7.5 gallons/per-
son for these types of off-highway diesel uses. However, for this Region it is
reasonable to assume that these types of diesel uses are negligible; nearly all
agricultural equipment in the Region is tractor driven and other possible uses
are insignificant for base and target years.
The Emission Factors Section (MD-14), National Air Data Branch, U.S. Envir-
onmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, was consulted on this sub-
ject and generally concurs with the Tri-State approach.
-------
A 10 / 1
A 10 SOLVENTS
Level: generally 2 (p.76 of Guidelines, vol.7)
Order: by population, number not given
The work chart gives substance and sequence of steps. The following
will supply details for steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 1
Solvents used in each county are estimated from county populations and
the following national average use factors provided in EPA-450:
a) County population less than 100,0003 Ibs/capita/yr
b) County population 100,000 to 500,0008 Ibs/capita/yr
c) County population 500,000 to 1,000,00018 Ibs/capita/yr
d) County population greater than 1,000,00028 Ibs/capita/yr
The above factors include solvents used for dry cleaning and in surface coat-
ings.
-------
A10 EVAPORATION-SOLVENTS
(MISC. AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL: 2
ORDER: POPULATION
SOLVENT USE FACTORS
BY COUNTY (P. 76 - EPA 450)
COUNTY POPULATIONS
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
(CENSUS. OFFICIAL COMMISSION TARGETS,
AND TSRPC TIME SERIES FILES)
ESTIMATION OF
SOLVENTS USED
IN DRY CLEANING
SOLVENTS USED BY COUNTY (TABLE 3.1)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
4a
ESTIMATION OF
SOLVENTS USED
IN SURFACE COATINGS
ASSUMED EMISSION FACTORS
(BASED ON AP-450)
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY (TABLE 6.1)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
5a
ASSUMED EMISSION FACTORS
(BASED ON AP - 450)
POPULATION BY KM2
(TSRPC TIME SERIES FILES)
I
8
ALLOCATION TO KM
TABLE 7.1
1974
TABLE 7.2
1980 / 1985 / 2000
f-o
-------
A 10 /3
Steps 4 and 5
Emission factors are provided in AP-42 only for specific dry cleaning
and surface coating applications. It is therefore necessary to estimate the
proportion of solvent associated with each type of application.
Approximately 2.35 Ibs of solvent per person are used on the average for
dry cleaning in the United States (given in AP-42). The 1975 population of
the United States according to "Statistical Abstracts" is 213,000,000. This
translates into 500,550,000 Ibs of solvent used in dry cleaning for the coun-
try in 1975. According to the National Paint and Surface Coating Manufactur-
ers Association, 889,567,000 gallons of surface coating were sold in. the
country in 1975. If we assume an average that one gallon of surface coat-
ing weighs approximately 12.5 Ibs (given in AP-42), the amount of surface
coating sold then translates into 1,111,958,000 Tbs. However, only approx-
imately 60% of surface coating by weight is solvent. Therefore, the amount
of solvent used in surface coatings in the nation in 1975 was approximately
only 667,175,000 Ibs. Total solvent use in the nation for 1975 is the amount
used in dry cleaning, 500,550,000 Ibs, plus the amount used in surface coat-
ings, 667,175,000 Ibs, equals 1,167,725,000 Ibs: approximately 43% used in
dry cleaning, 57% in surface coatings.
If one assumes average conditions for the dry cleaning industry as stated
in AP-42, (50% of all dry cleaning solvents are petroleum based, the other
50% synthetically based; no petroleum solvent plants are controlled and only
25% of all synthetic solvent plants are controlled) county dry cleaning sol-
vents are then easily applied to emission factors given in AP-42.
In order to apply surface coating emission factors, county surface coat-
-------
A 10 / 4
ing solvents must be first translated back into total surface coating weight
and then must be broken down into the various types of surface coating.
According to the Sherwin Williams Co., one of the nation's leading surface
coating manufacturers, the following is the approximate breakdown of their
sales by weight of various surface coatings:
50% paint
10% lacquers
5% varnish
20% enamels
15% primers
Emission factors provided in AP-42 could then be applied.
FUTURE YEAR APPROACHES
Step 6
Future county solvent use quantities are obtained by applying the same
county solvent use factors to the TSRPC population forecasts.
-------
A lOa / 1
A 10 a EVAPORATION - GASOLINE MARKETING
Level: generally 2 (p.76, Guidelines, Vol.7)
Order: Population base (no number given)
The work chart gives substance and sequence of steps. The following will
supply details for steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 1
The methods used to estimate these quantities are an element in Tri-State's
transportation planning process. Details are given in TSRPC Interim Technical
Report 4506-1205: Gasoline Consumption: 1967 and 1972, April 1975.
Steps 2 and 3
Totals from Step 1 plus off-highway gasoline use calculated in A9b(ii)
equals total 1974 gasoline sales.
-------
A10a EVAPORATION - GASOLINE MARKETING
(MISC. AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL 1/2/3
1
1974 HIGHWAY
GASOLINE
SALES BY
COUNTY
(TSRPC
ITR 4506)
OFF-
HIGHWAY
GASOLINE
USE 1974
(FROM
A9b(ii))
ASSUMPTIONS ON CONTROLS
(FROM STATES)
- UNDERGROUND TANK LOADING
- VAPOR DISPLACEMENT LOSS
- LIQUID SPILLAGE LOSS
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
VMT BY COUNTY
(TSRPC HIGHWAY EVALUATION MODEL)
1980 / 1985 / 2000
8
VEHICLE EFFICIENCY FACTORS (EPA)
AND VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION
(TSRPC)
I
MOBILE SOURCE FUEL USE
(DERIVED BY TSRPC)
1974 GASOLINE SALES BY COUNTY
(TABLE 3.1)
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
1974
(TABLE 6.1)
10
OFF-HIGHWAY
GASOLINE USE
1980 / 1985 / 2000
EMISSION FACTORS
(AP-42)
11
GASOLINE SALES BY COUNTY
1980 / 1985 / 2000
(TABLE 6.1)
13
POPULATION BY Km2
(TSRPC TIME SERIES FILES)
1974/1980/1985/2000
i
12
EMISSIONS BY COUNTY
1980 / 1985 / 2000
TABLE 7.2)
14
ALLOCATION BY Km2 (TABLE 3.6-1)
1974 / 1980 / 1985 / 2000
O
CU
ro
-------
A lOa / 3
Step 4
The following assumptions were obtained from the respective states re-
lating to the marketing of gasoline.
a) loading of underground gasoline storage tanks--
N.Y. - all splash fill, 1974, 1980, 1985, 2000.
N.J. - all splash fill, 1974; submerged fill with open vapor, 1980,
1985, 2000.
Conn - 50% splash fill, 50% submerged uncontrolled fill, 1974; re-
duction of 80% of emissions over what would occur, from sub-
merged uncontrolled fill, 1980, 1985, 2000. (Stage 1 regu-
lation stated for May 31, 1977.)
b) filling of motor vehicles: 1) vapor displacement loss and 2) liquid
spillage loss--
N.Y. - no controls, 1974, 1980, 1985, 2000.
N.J. - no controls, 1974, 1980, 1985, 2000.
Conn - no controls, 1974, 1980; 80% reduction of both vapor displace-
ment and liquid spillage loss, 1985, 2000. (Stage II. regula-
tion tentatively slated for May 31, 1980. Additional public
hearings may be required before that time for final approval.)
Assumptions used by states were obtained from the following sources:
N.Y. Department of Environmental Conservation - Jack Lauber,
Bureau of Source Control, Process Section, 518-457-5309
N.J. Department of Environmental Protection - Larry Gorry
609-292-5450
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection - Jim Vicary,
Enforcement Section, 203-566-3160
-------
A lOa / 4
Step 7
From Tri-State's Highway Evaluation model. This is an element in Tri-
State's transportation planning process. See A9a - Highway Gasoline/Diesel
for explanation.
Step 8
Efficiency factors from EPA regulations for automotive manufacture,
P.L. 94-163, TITLE V., Vehicle age distribution from Highway Evaluation model
(Step 7).
Step 10
Calculated in A9b(ii).
-------
A 11 / 1
A 11 FUGITIVE DUST - APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION
Level: Not in Guidelines
Order: Housing-based Distribution
EPA studies provide emission rates for only two kinds of construction -
apartment houses and shopping centers. In response, a valid method for esti-
mating apartment house construction and land involved was developed. In addi-
tion, considerable research was done to project the proportion of commercial
activity in shopping centers so that this aspect could also be estimated.
However, the lack of any reliable method for locating future shopping center
construction aborted this effort. Commercial zoning is not usually done for
shopping centers; rather, zoning for such large development would be a response
to developer's specific requests. Thus, zoning could not be justified as a lo-
cator.
The following gives details for those steps that are not obvious on the
work chart.
Step 1 1974 Housing Units
Tri-State routinely monitors housing authorizations by community, using
the structure-size breaks provided in reports.
-------
A11 FUGITIVE DUST - APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION
(AREA SOURCE)
LEVEL: NOT GIVEN
ORDER: BASED ON HOUSING/TYPE
DISTRIBUTION
1974 HOUSING UNITS IN BUILDINGS
WITH 5+ UNITS, BY COMMUNITY.
(TSRPC HOUSING AUTHORIZATIONS
FILE).
ANNUAL INCREMENTAL H.U. BY
SQ. Ml. (TSRPC TIME SERIES
MANIPULATION)
1980 / 1985 / 2000.
CONVERT TO SQ. Ml., USING PROPORTIONS
(SQ. Ml. TO COMMUNITY) IN TSRPC 1970
FILE.
1
8
ESTIMATE OF H.U. IN 5+ BUILDINGS
BY SQ. Ml.
(FROM TSRPC STRUCTURE TYPE/
'DENSITY MODEL)
LAND FACTOR (20 H.U./A)
AP-42
4 CONSTRUCTION DURATION
FACTOR (.25 OF YEAR)
AP-42
EMISSION FACTOR
(3.6 T/A)
AP-42
1974 ANNUAL FUGITIVE DUST
EMISSIONS (TONS PER SQ. Ml.)
I
ANNUAL FUGITIVE DUST EMISSIONS
(TON PER SQ. Ml.)
1980 / 1985 / 2000.
10
CONVERSION TO KM"
-------
A 11 / 3
Steps 3, 4. and 5
The land where apartment construction occurs in the base year and each of
the target years was calculated at the rate of 20 d.u. per acre. The duration
of dust-emitting construction was calculated at 0.25 of the year, thus giving
a base for the application of the emission factor 3.6 tons per acre.
Step 7
The annual incremental growth in apartments was calculated from the TSRPC
Time Series files, where housing unit totals and increments for five-year inter-
vals to 2000 were available. This model is explained in ITR 4509: "Most
Likely Targets for Planned Growth." January 1976. See also Appendix IV for a
comprehensive treatment of housing inputs.
Step 8 Estimate of Apartment Units
The annual housing unit increments for the target years were distributed
by structure type by using the Tri-State Structure Type/Density Model. Initial
runs of the model were calibrated to documented changes between 1970 and 1975.
A draft report explaining the workings of this model is available (Analysis
Notes 3402).
Step 10
Emissions were initially allocated to square mile rather than km since
2
this was the more efficient method. The emissions were translated to the km
format at the same time as the land use parameters of the planning file, along
with another typevehicle emissions.
-------
p 1/1
P 1 ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANTS
Update Level: 2/3 [pp. 75, 94, Guidelines, Vol. 8]
Projection Level: 2 [p. 131, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those where procedures are not obvious.
NEW JERSEY
Step 1
Fuel use data for facilities, and points within facilities, were derived
from the following sources: The 1970 NEDS inventory, FPC Form 67, electric
utility company 149-B reports, Steam-Electric Power Plant Factors, the 1975
NEDS inventory, and personal communications.
-------
P 1/2
P1 ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANTS
LEVEL: 2/3
1974 FUEL USE. TABLE 4.1
(MODIFIED)
I
1974 EMISSION FACTORS
I
1974 EMISSIONS. TABLE 7.1
I
CALCULATION OF ALLOWABLE
EMISSIONS. COMPLIANCE ASSUMPTIONS
I
5 GROWTH PROJECTIONS 1980/1985/2000
TABLE 4.2 (MODIFIED)
I
1980/1985/2000 FUEL USE.
TABLE 4.1 (MODIFIED)
i
EMISSION FACTORS 1980/1985/2000
1
EMISSIONS, 1980/1985/2000.
TABLE 7.2
-------
P 1/3
New Jersey cont.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, EXTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrobarbons
Carbon Monoxide
FUEL
RESIDUAL OIL
lb/103 gal
1974
8.
157. (s)
105.
2.
5.
Forecast
6.
157. (s)
105,50*
1.
17.
1
1974
10.
0.6
600.
1.
17.
NATURAL GAS
b/106 cu.ft.
Forecast
10.
0.6
300,700*
1.
17.
* From AP-42 (Table 1.4-1, 5/74-gas; Table 1.3-1, 4/76-oil: emissions from
units installed after 1974, presumed to be tangentially fired, are calcu-
lated using the lower emission factors; emissions from older units are
calculated using the higher factors.
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, INTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
FUEL
DISTILLATE OIL
lb/103 gal
1974
. 5.
144. (s)
67.8
5.57
15.0
Forecast
5.
3.5
67.8
5.57
15.4
NATURAL GAS
lb/105 cu.ft.
1974
14.
0.6
413.
42.
115.
Forecast
14.
0.6
413.
42.
115.
Source: AP-42
-------
P 1/4
New Jersey cont.
Step 4
Allowable emissions were calculated from the New Jersey Administrative
Code Title 7, Chapter 27: Subchapter 4, Control and Prohibition of Solid
Particles from Combustion of Fuel; and Subchapter 9, Sulfur in Fuels, Control
Prohibition of Air Pollution from Sulfur Dioxide Caused by the Combustion of
Fuel.
It was assumed that all sources which were not in compliance in 1974
would achieve compliance before 1980.
Step 5
Projections to Target Years 1980, 1985, and 2000
A. Facilities existing in 1974 were assumed to continue at the same rate of
fuel consumption as in 1974 unless they were scheduled for retirement,
in which case they were removed from the appropriate file or files.
B. In the case of steam boiler facilities whose fuel in 1974 was all or
partially natural gas, the same proportional use of gas was assumed for
1980. For subsequent years, however, this was changed to all residual oil.
C. New generating facilities planned by the utilities were incorporated into
the appropriate year file (and subsequently) according to estimated in-
service dates.
D. Projected peak demand for each utility company in 1980, 1985, and 2000
was compared with projected capability to each time period. Estimates were
made of required new facilities over and above announced plans of the
-------
P 1/5
New Jersey Step 5 cont.
utilities, allowing for an 18 percent reserve over and above peak demand.
It was assumed that these unscheduled but needed units would be divided
into fossil vs nuclear facilities in the same ratio as units for which the
utilities had already announced plans.
In cases where the franchise area of a utility company extends beyond this
AQCR, planned units without a specified location, and unscheduled units esti-
mated to be required in the future, would be divided between in-Region and
extra-Region location in the proportion that company's load in the Region bears
to total load, as estimated by the utility companies.
Megawatt capacity of new fossil-fuel plants estimated to be built within
the Region were allocated as equally as practicable among the company's exist-
ing fossil-fuel locations within the Region.
Unscheduled units inserted in the record are identified in the "Comments"
section of the NEDS coding form as "hypothetical units."
A summary of reasoning by which fuel type and location allocations were
made appears below for each electric utility serving the New Jersey sector of
the AQCR.
-------
P 1/6
New Jersey Step 5 cont.
Public Service Electric and Gas
1974 Capability - 8,541 Megawatts
Year
1980
1985
2000
Peak Demand
8,050
. 9,850
17,600
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
9,500
16,620
20,765
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity
9,543
12,680
18,140
Gap
-
3,940
2,625
Of plans announced by the company, 4,750 MW or 84 percent are nuclear;
301 MW or 5 percent are fossil fueled, and 600 MW are unassigned. The last is
assumed to be fossil fueled, under a conservative approach.
PSEG will have to add by 1985 3,940 MW of capacity over and above announced
plans. Of this, it is assumed 16 percent will be fossil fueled630 MW. The
company estimates that 77 percent of its load is in the Region, so 77 percent
of 630 MW (or 485 MW) of fossil capacity was assigned to the Region. This was
split among the eight locations in the Region where company has fossil fuel
facilities--60 MW of combustion turbines at each.
After 1985 another 2,625 MW of new capacity will be needed--!6 percent
(or 420 MW) of the fossil-fueled capacity, of which 77 percent (or 325 MW)
will be within the Region. Additionally, the 600 MW of "unassigned" capacity
planned by the company for 1987 and which is assumed will be fossil-fueled,
will have to be assigned a location. The concern is with the 77 percent or
460 MW which will be located in the Region, making a total of 460 and 325 or
785 MW to locate. The solution was to locate 200 MW of conventional steam
oil-fired capacity at each of four present locations randomly selected from
the eight existing locations.
-------
P 1/7
New Jersey Step 5 cont.
Jersey Central Power and Light
1974 Capability - 2,722 Megawatts
Year
1980
1985
2000
Peak Demand
3,116
3,976
8,226
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
3,675
4,690
9,705
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity..
3,065
5,155
5,155
Gap
609
-
4,553
Existing plans for additional capacity are 29 percent fossil, 71 percent
nuclear. Additions are assumed to be in the same ratio.
JCPL will have to add 600 MW capacity by 1980, of which 180 MW will be
fossil fueled. This was divided into four 45 MW turbines one assumed to be
located at each of the company's four fossil-fuel locations. Of these, two
are in the AQCR--at Sayreville and Werner.
Added between 1985 and 2000 will be 4,550 MW. It is assumed 30 percent
or 1,360 MW will be oil-fueled conventional steam; one-half (680 MW) will be
located at the Sayreville and Werner stations.
Step 7
The same emission factors as Step 2.
-------
P 1/8
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
Fuel use data for facilities, and points within facilities, were derived
from the following sources: the 1970 NEDS inventory, FPC Form 67, electric
utility company 149-B reports and personal communications, Steam-Electric Power
Plant Factors, and the 1972 IPP inventory (obtained from the New York City
Department of Air Resources).
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, EXTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
RESIDUAL OIL
Ib/ltf gal
10(s) + 3
157(s)
105,50*
1
5
FUEL
BITUMINOUS COAL
Ib/ton
17.
38. (s)
18.
0.3
1
NATURAL GAS
lb/106 cu.ft.
10.
0.6
300,700*
1.
17.
Source: AP-42
* From AP-42 (Table 1.4-1, 5/74-gas; Table 1.3-1, 4/76-oil): emissions
from units installed after 1974, presumed to be tangentially fired, are
calculated using the lower emission factors; emissions from older units
are calculated using the higher factors.
-------
P 1/9
New York City Step 2 cont.
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, INTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Participates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
FUEL
DISTILLATE OIL
lb/103 gal
5.0
3.5
67.8
5.57
15.4
NATURAL GAS
lb/103 cu.ft.
14.0
5.2
413.0
42.0
115.0
Source: AP-42
Step 4
Allowable emissions were calculated from the Administrative Code of the
City of New York, Chapter 57, Emission Standards.
It was assumed that all sources which were not in compliance in 1974
would achieve compliance before 1980.
Step 5
Assumptions applicable to all sectors of the Region are reported on P 1/4
Jersey, Step 5. A summary of reasoning by which fuel type and location alloca-
tions were made appears below each electric utility serving the New York City
and New York State sectors of the Region.
-------
P 1/10
New York City Step 5 cont.
Consolidated Edison
1974 Capability - 10,359 Megawatts
Year
1980
1985
2000
Peak Demand
9,625
10,890
16,810
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
11,355
12,850
19,835
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity
10,519
11,519
12,519
Gap
838
1,341
7,316
By 1985, the Power Authority of State of New York (PASNY) is scheduled to
take over Con Ed's MTA load, with estimated peaks of 1,036 MW in 1985 and 2,291
MW in 2000. Failing this take-over, Con Ed's peaks would be higher by these
amounts. Indian Point #3 (nuclear) and Astoria #6 (oil fueled),scheduled for
completion in 1976, are to be taken over by PASNY.
The only planned additions to Con Ed's capacity are an uprating of Indian
Point #2 of 160 MW in 1980; and for the Cornwall pumped storage facility, 1000
MW in 1985 and 1,000 MW in 1986.
However, nuclear units planned by the New York Power Pool for the late
1980's and 1990, totalling 9,100 MW, and a coal plant @ 850 MW have not been
identified as to specific ownership; and except for 2,600 MW at Shoreham, loca-
tions have not been announced.
The projected coal-burning plant is to be called Lake Erie #2. Lake Erie
#1 is planned by Niagara Mohawk, so #2 is unlikely to be in this AQCR.
It is assumed that Con Ed requirements will be met by fossil plants out-
side the Region and by nuclear plants.
-------
p 1/11
New York City Step 5 cont.
Central Hudson Gas and Electric
Year
1980
1985
2000
1974
Peak Demand
985
1,435
2,680
Capability - '
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
1,160
1,690
3,160
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity Gap
787 375
1,456 235
1,690 1,470
Existing plans 9% of Nine Mile Pt #2 (N) 99 MW 1981
17% of Sterling (N) 195 1982
Of the 375 MW to be added by 1980, we have assumed 60% (225 MW) will be in the
AQCR, since 60% of Central Hudson's present load is in the region. Thus, 225
MW will be assumed to be located at the Danskammer plant in Roseton.
Of the 235 MW required by 1985, it is assumed that 60% or 140 MW will also
be located at Danskammer.
For the increment required by the year 2000, it is assumed to be in nuclear
additions.
Orange and Rock!and
1974 Capability - 1,037 Megawatts
Year
1980
1985
2000
Peak Demand
966
1,347
2,740
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
1,140
1,590
3,235
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity
1,191
1,571
1,571
Gap
-
18
1,662
Existing plans include uprating of Lovett #4 8 MW 1975
Gas Turbines 146 1980
1/3 of Sterling Nuclear 380 1982
It is assumed the capacity needed in 2000 will be nuclear.
-------
P 1/12
New York City Step 5 cont.
Long Island Lighting Company
1974 Capability - 3,457 Megawatts
Year
1980
1985
2000
Peak Demand
4,170
5,250
8,540
Peak Plus
18% Reserve
4,920
6,185
10,075
Existing Plus
Planned Capacity
5,027
7,327
7,327
Gap
-
-
2,750
Company plans for expansion up to 1984 split as follows:
Nuclear 81%
Conventional steam 11
Turbine 8
It is assumed the 2,750 MW required will be allocated in roughly the
same proportion:
Nuclear 2,225 MW
Conventional steam 386 "
Turbine 140 "
The capacity of the conventional steam unit was varied slightly to
conform to the existing three units at Northport, where this one
will be located.
Turbines are assumed to be located at Hoi brook, site of existing
turbines.
Step 7
The same emission factors as Step 2,
-------
P 1/13
NEW YORK STATE
Step 1
Fuel use data for facilities and points within facilities were derived
from the following sources: the 1970 NEDS inventory, FPC Form 67, electric
utility company 149-B reports and personal communications. Steam-Electric
Power Plant Factors, and the 1974 NEDS inventory.
Step 2
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, EXTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
FUEL FUEL
RESIDUAL OIL
lb/103 gal
10(s) + 3
157(s)
50,105*
1
5
NATURAL GAS
lb/106 cu.ft.
10.
0.6
300,700**
1
17
Source: AP-42
EMISSION FACTORS FOR POWER PLANTS, INTERNAL COMBUSTION
Pollutant
Parti culates
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Hydrocarbons
Carbon Monoxide
FUEL
DISTILLATE OIL
lb/103 gal
5.0
3.5
67.8
5.57
15.4
NATURAL GAS
lb/106 cu.ft.
14.0
5.2
413.0
42.0
115.0
Source: AP-42
-------
P 1/14
New York State cont.
Step 4
Allowable emissions were calculated from the Official Compilation of
Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, Title 6, Chapter III,
Part 225, Fuel Composition and Use, and Part 227, Stationary Combustion Instal
lations.
It was assumed that all sources which were not in compliance in 1974
would achieve compliance before 1980.
Step 5
Assumptions applicable to all sectors of the Region are reported in New
Jersey, Step 5. A summary of reasoning by which fuel type and location alloca-
tions were made is reported in New York City, Step 5.
Step 7
The same emission factors as Step 2.
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
All Steps
Since Connecticut data were contained in the AQDM file, electric gener-
ating emissions were extrapolated for 1974 and 1980 from the AQDM 1972, 1975,
and 1978 data and carried over for 1985.
-------
P 2 / 1
P.2 INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
Update Level: 3 [pp. 78-79, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level:! [pp. 105-108, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Allocation Order: 1 [pp. 96-97, Guidelines, Vol. 13]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 3
For New Jersey and New York City, process emissions which are part of fa-
cilities which emit 100 T/Y or more of particulates or sulfur oxides were con-
sidered point sources. But for New York State (excluding New York City) pro-
cess emissions which are part of facilities which emit 25 T/Y or more of
particulates, sulfur oxides, or hydrocarbons were considered point sources.
Regarding industrial process emissions from establishments not listed in
the state NEDS files, there is some evidence that these would be insignificant
residues and thus Tri-State did not take the considerable extra time required
to carry out subcounty allocations. If time and employment data were avail-
able the weight of this residue could be more precisely estimated. Employment
-------
P2 INDUSTRIAL PROCESS
(POINT AND AREA SOURCES)
UPDATE LEVEL: 3
PROJECTION LEVEL: 1
ALLOCATION ORDER: 1
1974 NEDS
ANALYZE FOR COMPLETENESS, LOCATION, CLASSIFICATION, ETC.
AND LIST IN TABLE 3.4 - 1 (MODIFIED)
SELECT POINT SOURCE EMITTERS
TABLE 3.4 - 1A
I
4
ASSIGN TO NEDS PROCESS
CATEGORY (NER, SCO
4A
SUMMARIZE 1974 EMISSIONS
IN TABLE 7.1 BY COUNTY
BY NEDS PROCESS CATEGORY
SOURCE COMPLIANCE ASSUMPTIONS
i
MULTIPLY SOURCES BY INDUSTRIAL OUTPUT
GROWTH FACTORS (TSRPC MODIFICATIONS OF
OBERS PROJECTIONS 1980/1985/2000)
COMPLETE TABLE 3.4-1
6A
SUMMARIZE 1980, 1985 AND
YEAR 2000 EMISSIONS IN
TABLE 7.2
SELECT AREA SOURCE EMITTERS
TABLE 3.4 - 1B
1
8
ASSIGN TO NEDS PROCESS CATEGORY
(NER, SCO
I
SOURCE COMPLIANCE ASSUMPTIONS
i
8A
SUMMARIZE 1974 EMISSIONS IN
TABLE 7.1A BY COUNTY BY NEDS
PROCESS CATEGORY, AND BY SO. KM.
IN MODIFIED TABLE 3.4 - 3
10
MULTIPLY SOURCES BY INDUSTRIAL
OUTPUT GROWTH FACTORS
(TSRPC MODIFICATIONS OF OBERS
PROJECTIONS 1980/1985/2000)
COMPLETE TABLE 3.4 - 1
10A
SUMMARIZE 1980,1985.2000 EMISSIONS
IN TABLE 7.2A BY COUNTY BY NEDS
PROCESS CATEGORY, AND BY SO. KM.
IN MODIFIED TABLE 3.4 - 3
ro
rvj
-------
P 2 / 3
of listed sources could be compared with the residue of employment at non-
listed sources to test the validity, of the assumption above.
Steps 5 and 6
Assume that sometime between January 1, 1975 and December 31, 1979,
sources come into compliance. Therefore, if estimated emissions are greater
than allowable emissions,estimated emissions are set equal to allowable
emissions. If estimated emissions are equal to or less than allowable emis-
sions, then these sources are already in compliance. Projection year emis-
sions are calculated for each source by
Eij= Eikx Gkj
where E.. = emissions for source i in year j (j = 1980, 1985, 2000)
' J
E.. = emissions for source i in year k (k = 1974)
I K
G. . = growth factor from year k to j (k-»j = 1974 to 1980, 1974 to 1985,
kj 1974 to 2000)
PROJECTIONS OF INDUSTRIAL OUTPUT
The projection procedure recommended by EPA involves determining growth
factors for each of 13 NER process categories. These generally coincide with
the two-digit SIC's (Standard Industrial Classification Codes) manufacturing
industries and in some cases with the combined industries. In projecting manu-
facturing activities by two-digit level, EPA also suggested that OBERS projec-
tions be used if no better local data were available.
However, a careful review of OBERS projections of the manufacturing sec-
tor for the Tri-State Region indicated that even their slowest growth projec-
tion (Series E) appears to be unrealistically high. Actually, the Region's
-------
P 2 / 4
Steps 5 and 6 - cont.
post-1970 manufacturing employment performance has been one of continual de-
cline in both absolute and relative terms. Moreover, in manufacturing act-
ivities the Region has been severely lagging behind the nation for quite some
time. These phenomena have led Tri-State to a downward adjustment of long-term
regional growth factors of manufacturing sectors.
The projection method used in estimating the regional manufacturing out-
put, from which the industrial growth factors were developed, involved the fol-
lowing processes: 1) The control total for the Region's manufacturing sector
as a whole (see Appendix IV); 2) the disaggregation of the control total to more
detailed industries (the two-digit SIC level) via analysis of the regional loca-
tion quotient (LQ); 3) the derivation of the Region's productivity level by two-
digit industry; and 4) the computation of industrial output.
The basic input data used in disaggregating the regional control total
and in obtaining productivity relatives were those of the Census of Manufactur-
ING (1958, 1963, 1967, and 1972). From these sources, employment and value-added
figures for each of two-digit SIC levels were first assembled for both the U.S.
and the Region. Work tables showing the various stages of analyses are availa-
ble in the Socio-Economic Development Section at Tri-State.
The next step was to establish the historical relationships between the
U.S. and the Region in terms of industrial-mix and productivity relatives. The
industrial-mix relationships were obtained by computing the ratio: each two-
digit industry's percent share of total regional manufacturing sector to that
share of the total U.S. manufacturing sector. This provided numerical values
of the regional location quotient by each industry with the national value of
each industry being unity. These historical LQ ratios by industry were further
extrapolated independently, on the basis of trend, to each of the target years.
-------
P 2 / 5
Graphs showing extrapolated LQ ratios are available in work files in the Socio-
Economic Development Section at Tri-State. The projected regional LQ ratios
obtained in this way were then applied to the projected national two-digit
manufacturing distribution as derived from OBERS (Series E).
Through this process, including a forcing to 100 percent to meet the
control total, the projected regional industrial mix for each of target years
was obtained, on which base the projected regional manufacturing employment
total was disaggregated. A similar procedure was employed to project the
productivity relatives by relating the Region's value added per employee to
that of the U.S., and by extending them to future years. The projected pro-
ductivity relatives were applied to OBERS projections of national output per
worker to make adjustment for the regional productivity.
Finally, by multiplying each of the projected regional two-digit level
productivity relatives by the corresponding industry's employment, the indus-
trial output figures for the Region were calculated. Graphs showing extrapo-
lations of these productivity relatives ere available in work files in the
Socio-Economic Development Section at Tri-State.
The two-digit SIC figures were then converted to 13 NER process categor-
ies, based on the identification guide lines provided by EPA. The results of
these compulations are shown in the accompanying table (P 2/6).
Step 8A
Allocate source industrial process emissions directly to their respective
square kilometers through U.T.M. coordinates.
-------
P 2 / 6
Industrial Output Growth Factors
for Tri-State Region
(Growth index: 1974 = 1.000)
Industrial Sectors
1974
1980
1985
2000
Chemical Mfg
Food/Agriculture
Primary Metals
Secondary Metals
Mineral Products
Petroleum
Wood Products
Evaporation (Total Mfg)a
Metal Fabrication
Leather
Textile
Inprocess Fuel
Other
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.297
1.002
0.840
0.840
1.151
1.107
1.003
1.113
1.100
1.151
1.020
1.113
1.151
1.519
1.004
0.840
0.840
1.288
1.188
1.094
1.224
1.205
1.288
1.180
1.224
1.288
2.513
1.165
0.862
0.862
1.868
1.531
1.493
1.704
1.663
1.868
1.550
1.704
1.868
a. Also used to project fuel use for Total Manufacturing
Source: OBERS projections, modified by TSRPC
>
For purposes of allocation, "significant growth" was adjudged to be over an
average of 1.0% a year. Lower growth was assumed to be assimilated by on-site
expansion or technological improvements resulting in productivity raises.
Thus, only Chemical Mfg was determined to exhibit significant new growth.
-------
P 3/1
P 3 INCINERATORS (MUNICIPAL)
Update Level: 3 [p. 95, Guidelines, Vol. 7)
Projection Level: 3 [p. 146, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
The municipal incinerator point source inventories for base year 1974 and
projection years were compiled according to the steps illustrated in the work
chart. Additional details, where needed, are supplied below. These include
several exceptions arising because solid waste management varies considerably
among states, counties, and localities. No private incinerators emit more than
100 t/yr and therefore all are distributed as area sources.
NEW JERSEY
No input data was provided in the New Jersey NEDS file and no calculations
were made.
-------
P 3/2
LEVEL: 3
P 3 INCINERATORS - (MUNICIPAL)
(POINT SOURCE)
1974 PROCESS RATES
TABLE 5.1 (MODIFIED)
EMISSION FACTORS. 1974
1974 EMISSION ESTIMATES
TABLE 7.1
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS.
COMPLIANCE ASSUMPTIONS.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS,
GENERATION AND RECOVERY
6
1980/1985/2000 PROCESS
RATES. TABLE 5.2 (MODIFIED)
EMISSION FACTORS, 1980/1985/2000
8
1980/1985/2000 EMISSION
ESTIMATES. TABLE 7.2
-------
P 3/3
NEW YORK CITY
Step 1
Process rate data were derived from the 1972 IPP inventory supplied by
the New York City Department of Air Resources, and from data from the New
York City Department of Sanitation.
Step 2
Emission factors for refuse incinerators were obtained from AP-42, with
the following exception for particulate emissions from incinerators with set-
tling chambers and water spray systems. For New York City, the particulate
-------
P 3/4
New York City Step 2 cont.
emission factor specified by the EPA in AP-42 was shown by a series of stack
tests on city incinerators to overestimate the emissions. As a result, a new
value was calculated for use in predicting emissions from New York City incin-
erators. The new value13.7 lb/ton--is slightly below the 14.0 Ib/ton sug-
gested by EPA.
Steps 4 and 5
New York City - Data on the annual tonnage of refuse collected in New York
City over the past 15 years were analyzed by the Solid Waste Task Force and
projections of future generation rates were made for various annual per cap-
ita increase in population in New York City through 1985 and a less than 1%
increase in the generation of refuse as the most probable scenario. These
factors, when combined with 1974 process rates, indicate no preceptible change
in incineration process rates for the 1974-1985 period.
It was assumed that sources not in compliance in 1974 would achieve com-
pliance before 1984. Allowable emissions were calculated using emission stand-
ards contained in the Administrative Code of the City of New York, Chapter 57,
Article 9, Section 1403.2-9.09. The emission estimates for the remaining pollu-
tants are not expected to change from 1974 levels as control devices are not
planned and the composition of the refuse is not expected to change substantially.
Incinerator emissions for the year 2000 are assumed to equal zero because
-------
P 3/5
New York City Steps 4 and 5 cont.
currently operating incinerators will be obsolete and alternative waste recov-
ery systems will be processing most of the refuse generated.
Step 7
Emission factors are from AP-42, except for particulates, which were
supplied by NYC DAR.
NEW YORK STATE
Step 1
These data were obtained from a variety of sources including records kept
by individual townships on incineration volumes during the base year. Where
township records were not available, data from the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Regional Offices were substituted. When
data concerning the operation characteristics of each source were not tabulated
on the NEDS form, data from operating permit files in DEC offices were obtained.
In some cases, where source data were not available directly, stack test data
were used to complete the file.
Step 2
Emission factors were obtained from AP-42.
-------
P 3/6
New York State cont.
Steps 4 to 8
Nassau-County - The projection of future incineration rates was developed
from available studies on solid waste and information from discussions with
solid waste engineers for Nassau County. Many of the incinerators operating
in 1974 were not in compliance with EPA regulations. Only a few have been up-
graded to meet regulations and those that are not upgraded by 1977, will be
closed. Sources that will continue to operate will meet EPA regulations by
1980 and the emission rates for these sources have been computed on the basis
of allowable emission and process rates. Process rates have been projected
for 1980 on the basis of population increases in the areas served by the in-
?
cinerators in operation. Actual particulate emission rates are those meas-
ured outputs reported by NYS DEC from controlled equipment, or, if these are
lacking, calculated from AP-42.
Solid waste recovery systems will play an important role in the process-
ing of future solid waste generated in Nassau after 1980. Incinerator process
rates for 1985 are, therefore, held at 1980 levels. This anticipates reduc-
tions in refuse incinerators because alternative waste recovery systems will
absorb the increased generation caused by increases in population. By the
year 2000, solid waste recovery systems are projected to process all refuse
in the area and all incineration will cease.
Suffolk, Westchester, Dutchess, Orange, and Rockland counties - Most
municipal incinerators should be phased out of oparation by 1980. Those that
remain will probably operate near 1974 levels and must comply with particulate
emission regulations. Again, by the year 2000, all incinerators are assumed
-------
P 3/7
New'York State Steps 4 to 8 cont.
to be obsolete and solid waste recovery systems would have become operational
Some of the government incinerators in these counties were removed from the
NYS NEDS file because the emissions from these sources were negligible.
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
All Steps
The AQDM data on incinerators were extrapolated for 1974 and 1980 from
the AQDM dates (1972, 1975, and 1978), and carried over for 1985.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The contract for the compilation of this inventory did not specifically
intend Tri-State to exhaustively examine the source data tabulated on the NEDS
coding forms. However, Tri-State did perform considerable checking as des-
cribed in the steps above. This showed that existing files were seriously
inadequate. Although Tri-State improved the existing files, corrections to
some records are still necessary before modelling efforts can begin. It would
be desirable to apply a preliminary test to calculate the impact of errors in
the incinerator files on the total error involved in the concentration pre-
dictions. Once this comparison is complete, decisions can be made about addi-
tional efforts in updating and correcting the current incinerator file.
-------
Fairfield County cont. P 3/8
Solid waste recovery systems have been cited throughout this presentation
to absorb the responsibility for solid waste disposal. These systems also have
associated pollutant emissions that have not been accounted for in the current
inventory. In addition to refuse, alternative sewage sludge methods are also
being contemplated for the Tri-State region (Sewage Sludge Disposal Management
Program, June 1976, Interstate Sanitation Commission). These also have associ-
ated emissions that have not been recognized in this inventory. Therefore, be-
fore computer modelling of the inventory is initiated, it would be appropriate
to include the additional sources of pollutants from solid waste recovery sys-
tems and sewage sludge disposal systems.
-------
P 4 / 1
P4 POINT SOURCE FUEL COMBUSTION
Update Level: 3 [p. 79, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Projection Level: 2 [p/123, Guidelines, Vol. 7]
Substance and sequence of steps are given in the work chart. The follow-
ing details are provided for those steps where procedures are not obvious.
Step 1
Definitions of point and area source facilities for New Jersey,
and New York State are listed below:
New JerseyNew York State
"' Facility emits 100 Facility emits 25 tons/
Point tons/year of more of year or more of particulates,
particulates, or sulfur sulfur oxides, or HC.
oxides.
Facility emits less than Facility emits less than 25
Area 100 tons/year of any one tons/year or any one of
of these pollutants. these pollutants.
-------
P4 POINT SOURCE FUEL COMBUSTION (COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL & INDUSTRIAL)
P 4 / 2
1
SORT FACILITIES INTO POINT AND AREA SOURCES.
LEVEL: 3
ORDER : :2
9
INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCE FUEL USE, 1974.
TABLES 3.4-5, 2.1,2.5
* t
2
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL POINT SOURCE
FUEL USE, 1974. TABLES 3.3-1, 2.5, 2.1
10
EMISSION FACTORS. 1974.
* I
3
EMISSION FACTORS, 1974. TABLE 3.3-10
INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS, 1974.
TABLES 3.4-5a, 7.1
* *
4
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL POINT SOURCE
EMISSIONS, 1974. TABLES 3.3-2. 7.1
12
GROWTH FACTORS. TABLE 2.7
1 1
5
GROWTH FACTORS. TABLE 2.7
10
INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCE FUEL USE, 1980/
1985/2000. TABLES 3.4-5, 2.8
1 i
6
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL POINT SOURCE
FUEL USE, 1980/1 985/2000. TABLES 3.3-1, 2.8
14
EMISSION FACTORS, 1980/1985/2000
* i
7
EMISSION FACTORS, 1980/1985/2000. TABLE 3.3-10
*
Q
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL POINT SOURCE
EMISSIONS, 1980/1985/2000. TABLES 3.3-2, 7.2
15
INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS.
1980/1985/2000. TABLES 3.4-5a, 7.2
-------
P 4 / 3
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
New Jersey
Step 3
Emission factors for commercial/institutional natural gas, distillate
oil, and residual oil combustion are the same as those in the respective
area source sections.
Step 5
Growth Factors
County
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1 .000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
1.038
1.002
0.993
1.096
1.088
1.057
0.996
1.020
0.997
1985
1.104
1.005
1.040
1.205
1.161
1.118
1.014
1.097
0.995
2000
1.301
1.095
1.247
1.505
1.403
1.324
1.143
1.327
1.024
Step 7
The same emission factors as in Step 3.
-------
P 4 / 4
Commercial/Institutional cont.
New York City
Step 3
Emission factors for commercial/institutional natural gas, distillate
oil, and residual oil combustion are the same as those in the respective
.area source sections (Al, 2, 3).
Step 5
Growth Factors
County
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
0.982
0.984
1.046
0.998
1.213
1985
1.019
0.979
1.092
1.003
1.390
2000
1.166
1.C36
1.109
1.056
1 .836
Step 7
The same emission factors as in Step 3.
-------
P 4 / 5
Commercial/Institutional cont.
NEW YORK STATE
Step 3
Emission factors for commercial/institutional natural gas, distillate
oil, and residual oil combustion are the same as those in the respective
area source sections (Al, 2, 3).
Step 5
Growth Factors
County
Dutchess
Nassau
Orange
Putnam
Rockland
Suffolk
Westchester
1974
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1980
1.068
0.989
1.148
1.007
1.057
1.079
0.999
1985
1.126
0.999
1.271
1.050
1.105
1.147
1.037
2000
1.330
1.092
1.618
1.302
1.272
1.286
1.162
Step 7
The same emission factors as in Step 3.
-------
P 4 / 6
Commercial/Institutional cont.
Fairfield County
All Steps
Commercial/industrial points emissions listed in the AQDM file were extrap-
olated for the desired target years and carried over for 1985.
-------
P 4 / 7
INDUSTRIAL
New Jersey, New York City. New York State
Step 10
Emission factors for industrial natural gas, distillate oil, and residual
oil combustion are the same as those in the respective area source sections
(Al, 2, 3).
Step 12
Growth Factors
County 1974 1980 1985 2000
All counties 1.00 1.11 1.22 1.70
See P 2/3 for method
Step 14
The same emission factors as Step 10.
FAIRFIELD COUNTY
All Steps
Emissions were extrapolated for desired target years and for 1985 were
carried over.
-------
APPENDICES
I METRIC CONVERSION OF LAND USE FILES
II LIST OF SUPPLEMENTARY STUDIES
III LIST OF TABLES PRODUCED
IV METHODS OF ESTIMATING POPULATION, HOUSING UNITS, AND FLOOR SPACE
V METHODS OF ESTIMATING EMPLOYMENT
-------
Appendix I /I
APPENDIX I
METRIC CONVERSION OF LAND USE FILES
Tri-State's land use data for current and forecasj years are reported
by square miles. The E.P.A. Air Quality Inventory required these data to
be reported by square kilometers.
1. Grid Systems
a. Square Mile Grid
The square mile grid cell is a unit of the Tri-State X-Y grid
system which is oriented to the street pattern of Manhattan. The X
coordinates are approximately 30° east of north with the X500
coordinate aligned with 8th Avenue. The Y500 coordinate intersects
the X500 coordinate at 61st Street. The coordinate units are in
terms of miles and fractions of miles. (Figure 1.)
b. Universal Transverse Mercator Grid (square kilometer)
The Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) system divides the world
into sixty zones, each covering 6° longitude. Zones are numbered
from west to1 east beginning at 180° longitude. The Tri-State Region
lies in Zone 18. The UTM grid is established by designating the
middle longitude of the zone as the central meridian or X coordinate
-------
Appendix 1/2
and the equator as the starting Y coordinate. Coordinate values
are given in terms of meters and increase to the north and east.
The central meridian is called the E (easting) 500,000 meter line
and the equator the N(northing) 0 meter line. This designation
permits computation of distance without generating negative numbers.
The grid as it applies to the Tri-State Region is shown in Figure 2.
2. Conversion Methodology
Initially, the 1963 land use inventory acquired a large variety
of land uses. For planning purposes, these had to be condensed
later into eight categories and aggregated to a modified square
mile grid cell. These data were updated to 1970 and were the basis
for forecasting future land usage.
The distribution and location of the various land uses within
the square mile is not carried in the computer file. For purposes
of conversion, it was necessary to assume that all land uses were
equally distributed over the grid cell. The cell was subdivided
into 16 equal parts, each assigned 1/16 of the grid's land uses.
Geographic ID ;.. . 5
Each grid cell had previously been assigned to a specific commu-
nity (usually MCD) within a specific county and given an appropriate
identifying code. This code was attached to each of the 16 sub-
divided parts of every cell.
The square mile grid cell is identified by the X-Y coordinates
of the lower left (southwest) corner. Each sixteenth unit was also
identified by its southwest corner coordinates.
-------
Appendix I / 3
Rotation
Then the Tri-State X-Y coordinates of the "sixteenths" were
translated by computer formula ("rotated") to the UTM Easting and
Northing coordinates. The data in the rotated units were then
aggregated to (1) one square kilometer (1 km^) grid cells where
all rotated segments carried the same county and community codes
and (2) to partial km^ grid cells for each unique county and
community portion received from the sixteenth square mile cell.
The partial km^ grid cells were re-summed to 1-km^ grids and
assigned the county and community codes from the partial grid
containing the larger area.
3. Evaluation
The effect of this conversion method on the reliability of 1970
land quantities and land use categories was evaluated in two ways:
- by comparing the square mile data to the square kilometer data at
state and sub-region (county and planning region) levels;
- by comparing square kilometer data values to ground truth: aerial
photographs.
(Since the conversion merely changed the land use values from one
orientation to another, regional totals are not affected.)
a. State and Sub-Region Comparison of Land Area
- There was a negligible effect, just over 0.10%, at State level,
as shown in Table 1.
-------
Appendix I /4
- At subregion level, there was greater variance thari at-state
level. Fifteen subregions had less land,area,as a result of
conversion; twelve had more. The percent difference on. the
minus side ranged 0.10% (Union County) to 4.21% (Valley Plan-
ning Region), the average being 0.98%. The percent difference
on the plus side varied from 0.09% (Suffolk County) to 2.72%
(Putnam County) with an average of 1.04%. Table 2 ranks the
)
subregions by percent difference.
b. Examination of Selected KM2 Grids
r\
Two hundred forty four KNr grids were randomly selected from the
converted file. These were located and outlined on aerial photo-
graphs. A visual photo interpretation was made of the following land
uses: Residential; Non-Residential; Vacant (including Recreation and
special uses); Water (including Swamp). Percent of area found in
each group was estimated and recorded. Street area was estimated to
be 20% of the total of observed Residential and Non-Residential
areas. Three technicians independently recorded their observations
of all selected grid cells, and these readings were then averaged.
The percent of land in each land use category observed in the aerial
photo was compared to the parallel value in the converted KM2 cell. The
average variance for all land use categories within sample cells was
then derived. For example:
-------
Appendix 1/5
Variance in : Non-Residential Use 1.0%
Residential Use 6.0%
Street Use 2.0%
Vacant-type Use 7.0%
Water and Swamp 0.0%
Average Variance in all categories 3.2%
The average of these variances for all sample KM2 cells was 5.8%,
ranging from 0% to 40.0%. Table 3 shows the distribution of the sample
by percent variance.
The results of the comparison by each land use category are shown
in Table 4.
In the course of the comparison, some of the converted file values were
found to be less than the aerial photo observations and some above. Table 5
displays the distribution of the cells between plus and minus.
TABLE 1 : COMPARISON OF TOTAL LAND BY STATE
1970 Trl-State Square Mile vs UTM Kilometer
( Values in Square Miles )
Connecticut
New Jersey
New York
Tri-State
Sq. Mi.
1,411.4
2,256.7
3,965.5
UTM
Sq. KM
1,409.2
2,254.1
3,970.3
Difference
(2.2)
(2.6)
4.8
Per Cent
Difference
(.16)
(.12)
.12
Region
7,633.6
7,633.6
-------
Appendix 1/6
TABLE 2: COMPARISON OF TOTAL LAND AREA BY SUBREGION --
1970 Tri-State Square Mile vs .UTM Kilometer
(Values in Square Miles)
Decrease in Total Land
Union
Rockland
Bergen
Essex
Nassau
Somerset
Dutchess
Housatonic Valley
Richmond
Queens
Central Naugatuck
Southwestern
Kings
Passaic
Valley
Tri-State
Sq. Mi.
103.31
179.39
234.91
125.98
284.38
303.71
793.59
323.76
57.14
108.72
Valley 309.77
213.64
72.35
187.10
56.17
UTM
Sq KM
103,20
179.10
234.20
125.55
283.41
302.31
789.46
322.00
56.67
107.79
306.76
210.74
71.17
183.30
53.81
Difference
(0.11)
(0.29)
(0.71)
(0.43)
(0.97)
(1.40)
(4.13)
(1.76)
(0.47)
(0.93)
(3.01)
(2.90)
(1.18)
(3.80)
(2.36)
Per Cent
Difference
(0.10)
(0.16)
(0.31)
(0.33)
(0.34)
(0.46)
(0.52)
(0.54)
(0.82)
(0.86)
(0.97)
(1.36)
(1.64)
(2.03)
(4.21)
Increase in Total Land
Suffolk
Monmouth
Orange
Middlesex
Morris
Westchester
Hudson
South Central
Bronx
Manhattan
Greater Bridgeport
Putnam
Tri-State
Sq. Mi.
917.05
475.03
809.16
311.67
466.96
446.04
47.99
370.11
43.19
22.24
137.74
234.77
UTM
Sq. KM
917.88
475.89
811.16
312.54
468.79
443.46
48.32
374.52
43.87
22.67'
141.29
241.15
Difference
. 0.83
0.86
2.00
0.87
1.83
2.58
0.33
4.41
0.68
0.43
3.55
6.38
Per Cent
Difference
0.09
0.18
0.25
0.28
0.39
0.58
0.67
1,
1,
1,
2.
19
58
94
58
2.72
-------
Appendix I /7
TABLE 3: COMPARISON OF SQUARE KILOMETER CELLS WITH AERIAL PHOTOS
(Number of Cells by Per Cent Variance)
0-5% 6-10% 11-15% 16-20% 21-25% 26%+
Average Variance of
All Land Uses in
Square Kilometer
154
47
27
TABLE 4: COMPARISON BY LAND USE
(Number
Land Use Category
Non- Residential
Residential
Streets
Vacant, Recreation
and Special
Water & Swamp
TABLE 5: PLUS
(Number
Land Use Category
Non-Residential +
-
Residential +
-
Streets +
-
Vacant, Recreation +
and Special
Water & Swamp +
-
of Cells
0-5%
196
146
213
111
188
& MINUS
of cells
0-5%
143
53
110
36
156
57
64
47
135
53
by Per
6-10%
22
45
17
53
23
Cent
11
CATEGORY
Variance)
11-15% 16-20%
6
17
5
24
7
DISTRIBUTION
by per
6-10%
9
13
28
17
7
10
25
28
8
15
cent
8
15
3
18
7
OF LAND USE
variance)
11-15% 16-20%
3
3
12
5
2
3
10
14
4
3
4
4
9
6
3
0
7
11
5
2
2
21-25%
4
7
1
9
3
VARIANCES
21-25%
1
3
6
11
1
0
5
4
2
1
3
26%+
8
14
5
29
16
26%+
6
2
9
5
5
0
18
11
6
10
+ = converter grid values greater than value observed in aerial photo.
- = converted grid values less than value observed in aerial photo.
-------
Appendix I /8
TRI-STATE GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM
(1 SQUARE MILE)
Appendix I - Fig. 1
-------
UTM GRID COORDINATE SYSTEM
IN THE TRI-STATE REGION
(2 Kilometer Grid Square)
Appendix I - Fig. 2
UTM is the abbreviation for "Universal Transverse Mercator"
projection grid. The UTM grid is comprised of 60 zones
in each hemisphere, encompassing the world. Each zone
is 6° longitude in width and in the northern hemisphere
extends from the Equator to 84° north latitude. One
meridian, known as the central meridian, passes through
the center of the grid zone. The Tri-State Region is within
zone 18 with the central meridian being at 75° longitude.
All measurements are expressed in meters.
(2 kilometers = 1.24274 miles)
FEB. 1976
-------
Appendix II/ 1
APPENDIX II
LIST OF SUPPLEMENTARY STUDIES
Tnzt>£. Atudiu CJKL available, upon izqueAt to ?u.bticjation& Sectcon, Ttii-
State. Rtglonat Planning CommcA4-con, 1 Wo
-------
Appendix II / 2
ITR 4509-1506: "Most Likely Targets for Planned Growth. I - The Region
II - The Counties and Planning Regions." January 1976.
ITR 4533-1210: "1974-1975 Housing Changes in the Tri-State Region."
September 1975.
ITR 4545-1202: "Regional and County Employment Monitoring: Year 1974."
February 1976.
ITR 4572-1205: "Limited Access Highway Status Report: 1975." April 1976.
ITR 4587-1215: "Historical Trends in Electric Energy and Fossil Fuels."
January 1977.
ITR 4593-1207: "1975 Highlights of Prime Activities at Major Regional
Airports." October 1976.
ANALYSIS NOTES
Analysis Notes 1504: "Projected Demand for Electric Energy and for the
Fossil Fuels Required for Generation." May 1976.
Analysis Notes 3402: "Methodology and Analysis of the Tri-State Housing
Structure Type Model." January 1975.
Analysis Notes L-009: "Population, Employment and Land Use Forecast Data
File Description." June 1976.
Analysis Notes V-230: "Air Pollution Emissions from Aircraft." October 1975.
-------
Appendix II / 3
MISCELLANEOUS
Housing and Neighborhood Quality, Citizen Survey Series 1. Tri-State
Regional Planning Commission, October 1975.
Maintaining Mobility; The Plan and Program for Regional Transportation
through 2000. Second Edition, November 1976. Tri-State Regional Plan-
ning Commission.
Regional Rail Freight, 1974 and the Future. Tri-State Regional Planning
Commission, March 1974.
Regional Profile: "Residential Building Trends." October 1975.
Technical Manual 1018-1310: "Basic Land Use Information System."
May 1975.
-------
APPENDIX III - LIST OF TABLES PRODUCED
App.III/1
1. Tape and printed listing of land use parameters by square kilometer in counties
in the Tri-State region, for the years desired by EPA. The land use parameters
are:
Population Residential land area
Employment Non^residential floor space
Total housing units Non-residential land area
Occupied housing units 'Other' land area
Residential floor space
2. Computer maps of population, employment, and housing units by square mile for
the years 1980, 1985, 2000.
County totals of land use parameters for base and future years in the following documents:
3. ITR 4569-1202, 'Population and Vital Statistics: 1974'
4. ITR 4545-1202, 'Regional and County Employment Monitoring: Year 1974'
5. ITR 4533-1210, '1974-1975 Housing Changes in the Tri-State Region'
6. ITR 4509-1506, 'Revised Estimates of Jobs and Population,
I - The Region: Forecasts,
II - The Counties and Planning Regions: Projections Based
on Plans'
7. Packet of Population, Employment, and Housing for 1970, 1980, 1985, 1990, and
2000, Regional Development Division, January 1976.
8. Table 1.1
9. Table 2.1
10. Table 2.6
11. Table 2.8
12. Table 3.1
13. Table 3.5
14. Table 5.1
15. Table 5.2
16. Table 7.1
17. Table 7.2
Baseline Industrial Process Emissions
- by county
Baseline County Fuel Use
Baseline County Fuel Use,
BTU Equivalents
-I/
- clerical form
Projected County Fuel Use
Transportation Activity
Aircraft Activity
Baseline Solid Waste Disposal
Projections for Solid Waste Disposal - clerical form
County Base Year Emissions Report - clerical form
Projected County Emissions Report
- clerical form
- clerical form
- clerical form
- clerical form
- clerical form
- clerical form
18. Table 3.1-1 Population-Based Allocation Proportions
for subcounty areas (kma) - included in Table 3.2-10,
printed and on tape
-------
App.III/2
19. Table 3.1-3 Residential Building Size Distribution - printed and on tape
20. Table 3.1-4 Residential Fuel Use Distribution
21. Table 3.1-5
22. Table 3.1-6
23. Table 3.1-7
Residential Fuel Use Factors by
Building Size
Annual Residential Fuel Use by
Building Size
Residential Fuel Use Allocated to
subcounty areas (km2)
24. Table 3.1-8 Residential Fuel Combustion
Emissions Factors
25. Table 3.1-9 Residential Fuel Combustion Emissions
Allocated to subcounty areas (km2)
26. Table 3.2-
26a Table 3.2'
27. Table 3.2-
3 Limited Access Highway Emissions 2.'
5 Motor Vehicle Emissions
-6 Airport Emissions
Railroad Emissions-Track
Railroad Emissions-Yards
Sea Vessel Emissions
28. Table 3.2-7
29. Table 3.2-8
30. Table 3.2-9
31. Table 3.2-10 Off Highway Vehicle Emissions
32. Table 3.2-11 Transportation Emissions Allocated
to subcounty areas (km2)
33. Table 3.3-1 Commercial/Institutional Point
Source Fuel Use 3/
34. Table 3.3-2 Commercial/Institutional Point
Source Emissions .?_/
35. Table 3.3-9 Commercial/Institutional Fuel Use
Allocated to subcounty areas (km2)
36. Table 3.3-10 Commercial/Institutional Fuel
Combustion Emission Factors
37. Table 3.3-11 Commercial/Institutional Fuel
Combustion Emissions Allocated
to subcounty areas (km2)
combined with Table 3.1-7,
printed and on tape
-.clerical form and in
Methodology Report
- clerical form
combined with Table 3.1-4,
printed and on tape
clerical form and in
Methodology Report
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
_ II I! II II
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
- printed and on tape
- printed or clerical form
and on tape
- printed or clerical form
and on tape
- printed and on tape
clerical form and in
. Methodology Report
- printed and on tape
-------
App.III/3
38. Table 3.4-1
40.
41.
42,
Point Source Industrial Process
Emissions A/
39. Table 3.4-5 Industrial Point Source Fuel Use A/
Table 3.4-5a Industrial Point Source Fuel
Combustion Emissions A/
- printed or clerical form
and on tape
- printed or clerical form
and on tape
- printed or clerical form
and on tape
Table 3.4-5,
modified
Table 3.4-8,
modified
Industrial Area Source Fuel Use !/ - printed and on tape !/
43. Table 3.5-2
44. Table 3.5-3
Industrial Point and Area Source
Fuel Combustion Emissions -
subarea summary (km2) 5/
Annual Solid Waste Incineration
Allocated to subcounty areas (km^)
Solid Waste Incineration
Emission Factors
45. Table 3.5-6 Solid Waste Incineration Emissions,
46. Table 3.6-1
47. Table 3.6-2
Allocated to subcounty areas (km )
Distributed Miscellaneous Source
Emissions
Isolated Miscellaneous Source
Emissions
- printed and on tape I/
- combined with Table 3.5-6,
printed and on tape 2.'
- clerical form and in
Methodology Report
- combined with Table 3.5-2,
printed and on tape
- combined with Tables 3.6-2
and 3.1-1, printed and
on tape
- combined with Tables 3.6-1
and 3.1-1, printed and
on tape
48. Point source files, base year and forecast, in NEDS format - on tape and printed.
49. Area source data by county, base year and forecast, in NEDS format - in clerical
form.
50. Point source parameters in AQDM format:
- printed in emission inventory format as specified in figure 3-B, page 3-13,
'Air Quality Display Model',PB 189 194, November 1969, distributed by NTIS;
- on tape, separately and combined with area source parameters, in required
model input format.
51. Area source parameters in AQDM format:
- printed in emission inventory format as specified in figure 3-B, page 3-13,
'Air Quality Display Model", P'B 189 194, November 1969, distributed by NTIS;
- on tape, combined with point source parameters, in required model input format.
-------
App.III/4
Notes:
_!/ Table 1.1 baseyear data are printed by computer; forecast year data are
available from summary on printed forms of Table 3.4-1.
2J Table 3.2-3 reports only three pollutants from Limited Access Highways
for reasons fully explained in the Methodology Report.
_3/ Tables 3.3-1 and 3.3-2 were not produced for Hew Jersey because the data
provided to Tri-State contain no Commercial/Institutional point sources.
Where these data do exist, they will be included in the NEDS files and
AQDM files, on tape.
4/ The data for Tables 3.4-1, 3.4-5, 3.4-5a are included in the NEDS files
and AQDM files, on tape.
5J The area source data reported in Tables 3.4-5, modified, and 3.4-8, modified,
are included in the 'Tabulated Area Source Data' file on tape, as are area
source process emissions, not printed in any table.
6_/ Tables 5.1, 5.2, 3.5-2, and 3.5-6 were not produced for New Jersey because
data were unavailable. For the same reason, the 'Tabulated Area Source
Data' file as formatted and constructed for New Jersey does not contain
these data.
All references to tape in items listed below refer to the 'Tabulated
Area Source Data' file, the format of which is available:
items 18-20 item 37
item 23 items 41-43
items 25-32 items 45-47
item 35
Tables 2.4 and 2.5 have been excluded; Tri-State's fuel apportionment
procedures are available in the Methodology Report.
Table 2.7 has been excluded because growth factors for fuel combustion were
calculated uniquely for each sector of fuel demand:
1. residential growth, as explained in the Methodology Report, is
based upon growth in dwelling units in specific building sizes
as forecast by Tri-State's modelling techniques;
2. commercial/institutional growth factors, based on county
employment change in this secto^ are in the Methodology Report;
3. industrial growth factors, from OBERS as modified by Tri-State,
are in the Methodology Report.
Table 3.1-2 has been excluded as irrelevant to the Tri-State methodology.
-------
Appendix IV /I
APPENDIX IV
METHOD OF ESTIMATING POPULATION, HOUSING UNITS, AND FLOOR SPACE
The purpose of this appendix is to indicate the sources of the esti-
mated population, housing units, and non-residential floor space quantities
that are involved so frequently in the methods for calculating pollutant
emissions for this Inventory. Also to be indicated is how estimates for
the various target years were derived from the main target date ("capacity")
used in Tri-State land use planning.
Three Tri-State Interim Technical Reports, all Included among the backup
documentation, are necessary to explain the complicated planning operations
involved in estimates. The basic one is ITR 4531-5401: The Land Develop-
ment System for the Tri-State Region, an Overview. January 1976. This docu-
ment explains the methods used in obtaining estimates employed in the Inven-
tory. The Commission is currently revising the goals* objectives, criteria,
and allocations of its plan (the Regional Development Guide, briefly
described on page 17). But the inputs in this Inventory were those derived
from the so-called 1972 plan; thus the processes described in the ITR above
provide the pertinent explanations.
-------
Appendix IV /2
Housing
In this Inventory, 1974 baseline housing units were estimated by mon-
itoring housing authorizations and adding them to the 1970 Census quantities.
(See another backup report which illustrates this activity: ITR 4533-1210:
1974-1975 Housing Changes in the Tri-State Region, particularly Table 12,
p. 24.) Yearly increments, originally collected by municipalities, are
distributed to square miles (to be later "rotated" to mercator-oriented square
kilometers, see Appendix I) by a computerized distributor.
Residential buildings by number of units (called "building size" for
short) are also available from the yearly increments (see Table 4, p. 9).
This parameter is important in another step in estimating housing, to be ex-
plained below.
Housing unit estimates for future years are functions of the land devel-
opment model series. While a complete reading of ITR 4531 is desirable, the
researcher may begin on page 24, where the "capacity" system is described.
Especially important is the "density norm" for future residential development,
explained on page 16 and mentioned as a model input on page 26. The residen-
tial routine (p. 27) yields the capacity measures of total housing units as
well as the measure of the density (per square mile) for the data cell.
Population
Population estimates per square mile are basically a simple derivation
from housing units obtained by applying a persons/household factor (page 24,
V-l-a). But these in turn are modified by the officially determined "targets"
-------
Appendix IV /3
set by the Commission in the Regional Development Guide after concurrence by
subregions (see ITR 4509-1506), as well as the ratio of employment to popu-
lation assigned to the relevant subregion (pp. 28-29, item 7).
Building Size. Conversion of total housing units to number of housing units
in buildings of various sizes was accomplished through a semi-independent
model, described in "Methodology and Analysis of the Tr1-State Housing struc-
ture Type Model," Analysis Notes 3402, January 1975 (Included among the back-
up reports). Although the model is not regarded as a final answer, it is the
best available system anywhere that is operable in such a large region.
The method used changes in building size distribution between 1960-1970
as a principal determinant in the calculation. Another principal determinant
is the density of housing per square mile at capacity. This latter parameter
is converted to the likeliest housing type by reference to a distribution
matrix (p. 3).
The quantities contained in the reference were later changed, based on
recalibration to the 1975 housing unit breakdowns obtained from the yearly
monitoring activities referenced above. In other words, the model was ad-
justed to replicate the changes that had occurred between 1970 and 1975.
-------
Appendix V/l
APPENDIX V
METHODS OF ESTIMATING EMPLOYMENT
A. Total Employment
As described in ITR 4531: The Land Development System (pp. 24 ff.),
a nonresidential routine calculates nonresidential land at capacity,
translates this to nonresidential floor area by the use of a density norm,
and estimates jobs based on a floor area/worker ratio. These parameters
are then adjusted by comparison to the employment/population ratios used
for the respective subregions, which in turn are keyed to a regional em-
ployment control.
Quantities for intervening years were products of the Time Series oper-
ation (pp. 36 ff.). For this, employment totals were determined for the year
1974 and forecasted for the year 1985 and 2000. (See ITR 4509-1506, "Most
Likely Targets for Planned Growth," January 1976, pp. 6-9). These forecasts
were checked for reasonableness by reflecting them against an output pro-
ductivity approach.
B. Industry Breakdowns of Employment
Certain calculations such as the numerous ones for fuel use required
that breakdowns of employment related to categories of pollutant sources be
-------
Appendix V/2
available. These were: "Commercial/institutional" and "Industrial."
Since these are not standard employment breakdowns, they had to be
reached through a series of accepted assumptions for re-grouping conven-
tional breakdowns into the required categories.
Conventional Categories. One-digit establishment breakdowns of 1974 employ-
ment for each county formed the basis for distributing the 1985 and 2000
totals obtained previously. These were obtained routinely by Tri-State as
part of its annual monitoring series. (See ITR 4545-1202: Regional and
County Employment Monitoring: Year 1974, February 1976.)
These distribution factors were then applied to the county totals for
1980, 1985, and 2000 yielded by the Time Series operation. Distributed
quantities were then balanced to conform with the distributed regional total
for 1985 and 2000, obtained from a 1970 analysis of trends in one-digit SIC
sectors from 1958 to 1968. In this analysis, proportions were extrapolated
on the basis of shift-share analysis. Factors obtained were later applied
to employment totals adopted by the Commission in 1976. (See ITR 4287-2501:
"Regional Employment Projections by Major Industry.")
Pollution Source Categories. The remaining step was to re-group conventional
categories into "commercial/institutional" and "industrial." This was accom-
plished through the use of a procedure as follows:
Industrial: Take 65% of manufacturing employment. This is the
proportion of production workers in this sector.
Commercial/Insitutional: The following shares of relevant sectors
were assembled:
- 100% of Agriculture and Mining (since most employment in these
categories is at headquarters and office-type installations).
-------
Appendix V/3
- 100% of Construction, since such jobs are not engaged in the
production of goods.
- 35% of Manufacturing, the nonproduction residual.
- 100% of Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate.
- 85% of Services, since 15% are in the nonprofit categories.
- 97% of Wholesale and Retail Trade, thus allowing a small
portion for production jobs.
Two special operations were also conducted. One was a distribution of
industrial employment into two-digit categories related to emissions from
processing operations. These were explained in the chapter on Industrial
Processes, P 2/pp. 3-5. Another involved the geographical distribution of
area source pollutants in the "commercial/institutional" and "industrial"
categories by the use of nonresidential floor area files. This process is
explained on page A 2a/5-6.
Work sheets showing intermediate data produced in these processes are
available for inspection in the files of the Socio-Economic Development Sec-
tion at Tri-State.
-------
Appendix VI / 1
STATEWIDE FUEL BALANCE CALCULATIONS FOR 1974
NEW YORK STATE
(Obtaining County Totals From MIS State Totals)
The purpose of the following methodology is to provide county level heating
fuel use estimates by user class for use in air quality maintenance planning.
This work is a necessary part of developing the comprehensive emission in-
ventory needed for air quality modeling. It should be noted that the numbers
generated for * county are the total fuel use for that class for that county
and thus include both point and area sources. To find the area source fuel
use for a county, the point source fuel use (determined from the NYS DEC AIR-
100 files) should be subtracted from the total fuel use.
The numbers generated by this methodology are consistent with the mineral
industries survey of the Bureau of Mines, and with the fuels and electric
energy consumed publication from the annual Survey of Manufacturers. However,
with the exception of the natural gas use, they are mathematical derivations
based upon the best available information. If the oil and coal fuel surveys
presently underway by DEC receive sufficient response, they should be used
for county totals, as they represent direct measurements rather than mathe-
' matical estimates.
(A) Start with mineral industry surveys 1974 fuel use in New York State
(Use figures from the 1975 publications as they contain adjusted
1974 data).
OIL OIL ,
x 1000 BBL x 1000 BBL 10 CF COALS
FUEL TYPE (#1. 2, 4) (#5-6) NATURAL GAS x 1000 TONS
HEATING OILS 86,406 51,880
INDUSTRIAL USE OILS 2,462 8,551
Residential Gas 341,032
Commercial Gas 118,693
Industrial Gas 108,542'
BITUMINOUS COAL & LIGNITE
Retail Dealers 72
All Others 2,058
*>-}.
ANTHRICITE COAL 632
TOTALS 88,868 60,431 568,267 2,762
'k
Includes refinery fuel use and carbon black production.
**From New York State Public Service Commission.
-------
-2-
Appendix VI / 2
(B) Get New York State industrial fuel use from the U.S. Department of
Commerce 1974 Annual Survey of Manufacturers (ASM) Fuels and Electric
Energy Consumed:
RAW NUMBERS: 8,129.0 x 1000 BBL Distillate Oil (#1, 2, 4)
14,810.8 x 1000 BBL ResidualOil (#5, 6)
2,243.1 x 1000 tons coal
(Disclosure)"" x 1000 tons coke-use 1971 ASM # * 544.0 x 1000 tons
93.3 BCF.gas
35.4 million dollars other :
it
(Disclosure) million, dollars of "fuels not specified.by kind"
* ' .'
Disclosure means data withheld to avoid disclosing individual company
data.
On page A-2 is the statement: "Some small establishments reported total
cost of fuels but failed to report the cost and quantity of their specific
fuels used. Estimates of their total cost of fuels are included in the
tables, under the heading "Fuels, Not Specified By Kind." To the extent
that the information on detailed fuels consumed was not obtained, the data
shown for individual fuels in this report tend to be understated."
Also on Page XIV it states that natural gas used to produce carbon black
is excluded.
In view of the above conditions on the reported data, two correction steps
are necessary:
(1) The total industrial natural gas use should equal that determined by
the NYS DEC fuel survey = 100,848 x 106 ft3.
(2) The "Fuel Not Specified By Kind" (FNSK) must be apportioned among
the other fuels. This can be done via Kilowatt hour equivalents.
Certain assumptions are necessary.
(a) FNSK does not include any coal or coke -- this makes sense
as the ASM accounts for over 80% of the MIS coal used by all
classes of users, and coke use is specialized.
(b) FNSK contains all of the natural gas needed to make the ASH
equal the NYS DEC fuel survey.
-------
-3-
Appendix VI / 3
(c) The balance of FNSK is 50% distillate and 50% residual'
this reflects the fact that the smaller companies included .
in FNSK use less residual than the 65% residual used by
companies included in the reported numbers.
Table 2.4 on Page XV gives the KWH equivalents for each fuel type. And,
Table 3 gives the State total at 117.7 x 109 KWH.
Using the Table 2.4 values, the reported KWH equivalents are:
Distillate ((8,129.7 x 1000 BBL )(1,707 KWH/BBL) - 13.88 x 109 KWH
Residual (14,810.8 x 1000 BBL )(1,842 KWH/BBL) - 27.28
Coal ( 2,243.1 x 1000 Tons )(7,677 KWH/Ton) « 17.09
Coke ( 544 x 1000 tons ) (7,618 KWH/Ton) « 4.14
Gas ( 93.3 x 109 Ft3)(303.3 KWH/103Ft3) = 28.30
Other ( 35.4 x 10611)(168.6 KWH/11) - 5.97
96.66
State total KWH = 117.7 96.66 = 21.04 for FNSK.
GAS: ASM = 93.3, Need 100,848 so must have 7.548 BCF
this is 2.29 KWH
This leaves 21.04 -2.29 = 18.75 x 109 KWH for oil when this
is split in half, need 9.375 x 109 KWH each of distillate and residual.
This yeilds: 9.375 x 109/1,707 = 5,492.1.x 1000 BBL distillate.
9.375 x 109/1,842 = 5,089.6 x 1000 BBL residual.
So use ASM AS: 5,492.1 + 8,129.0 = 13,621.8 x 1000 BBL distillate
5,089.6 + 14,810.8 = 19,900.4 x 1000 BBL residual
(C) Subtract New York State ASM adjusted fuel use from MIS
MIS
ASM
x 1000 BBL
DISTILLATE
88,868
13,622
x 1000 BBL
RESIDUAL
60,431
19,900
x 1000 TONS x 1000 TONS
COAL COKE
2,762
2,243 454
BCF
GAS (INDUSTRIAL)
108.5
100.5
BALANCE 75,246 40,531 519 0 8.0 Ind -
Carbon Blac.
This balance plus the MIS residential and commercial gas use is all of the fuel left
for other uses.
-------
-4-
Appendlx VI / 4
(D) Calculate Statewide residential fuel use by county.
(1) This is done by EPA's Volume 13 Order 3 method.
(2) Data is from New York State Detailed Housing Characteristics
from the 1970 Census Publication HC(1)-B34..
(3) New households since 1970 are estimated from NYS Economic
Development Board projections.
(4) Fuel use split in new households is the same as 1970 fuel use
for 1971, 1972 and 1973. For 1974 on, 707. of new households
are oil heated, 30% electric.
(5) The degree days for all counties in an SMSA are the samei
All degree day data is from New York State Business Fact Books
which get their data from weather bureau. A table of the de-
gree days used for each county is in the Appendix.
(6) Detailed county level calculations are available in the
Appendix.
(7) There is no attempt to split distillate oil from residual
oil at this time.
(8) As.agreed with George Kerr of USEPA on February 17, 1977,
residential oil use for water heating by oil fired water
heaters (reported in the Census of Housing) is estimated at
250 gal. per oil fired water heater per year. This water
heating oil use is added to the space heating oil use calcu-
lated by the Volume 13 Order 3 method to get total residential
oil use.
RESIDENTIAL FUEL USE
AREA
OILS (x 1000 BBLS)
SPACE HEATING
Binghamton SMSA
(New York Part)
Buffalo SMSA
Rochester SMSA
Ontario County
WATER HEATING GAS (BGF) COAL (1000 TONS)
Albany SMSA
Montgomery County
3,240
226.7
273.7
12.9
20.6
1.7
11.9
3.6
789
1,833
2,492
256.1
37.6
110.2
75.8
3.1
9.9
63.0
30.3
2.6
19.8
20.3
28.7
3.5
Syracuse SMSA
1,130
34.4
25.2
17.4
-------
-5-
Appendix VI / 5
AREA
Utica-Rome SMSA
Chautauqua County
Chemung County
Steuben County
J New York City
^ Nassau County
, Suffolk County
4 Rockland County
J Westchester County
Orange County
Putnam! County
Ulster County
Dutchess County
Balance of State
TOTALS
OILS (x 1000 BBLS)
SPACE HEATING
1,240
162.5
124.3
245.6
28,582.3
7,075.3
5,515.1
183.4
3,739.1
1,084.9
479.6
1,036.8
1,488.8
7,133.9
68,058
WATER HEATING
41.5
3.1
3.5
8.9
10,184.5
1,752.2
1,092.4
14.9
954
114.3
65 . 7
120.9
194.9
385.6
GAS ' (BCF)
9.6
7.7
4.9
3.7
89.0
9.7
10.7
8.5 .
10.7
4.8
0
0.9
1.9
28.4
COAL (1000 TONS)
16.3
3.1
1.9
7.2
264.2
5.1
2.5
0.4
7.3
7.0
0.2
2.7
2.8
71.8
15,484.1
343.8
497.7
(E) Subtract these numbers from residential-commercial MIS balance,
x 1000 BBL MMCF x 1000 TONS
OILS GAS (RESIDENTIAL) COAL
MIS BALANCE
RESIDENTIAL
CALCULATIONS
OIL WATER
HEATING
115,777
68,058
47,719
-15,484
341,032 519
343,800 498
- 2,770 =0 21
32,235
-------
-6-
Appendix VI / 6
New York State Fuel Survey gas is 330,482 or 96.9% of MIS, so use
New York State Fuel Survey for residential gas distribution.
(F) This balance is: Statewide commercial-governmental-institutional
fuel use.
(1) MIS says commercial gas is 118.7 BCF; New York State Fuel Survey
gives 113.3 BCF or 95.45% of MIS. Use New York State Fuel
Survey numbers'for commercial gas distribution.
(2) The 21,000 tons of coal is a negligible contributor to the total
BTU's in this balance. No attempt will be made to allocate it.
Rather, coal will be placed from the NYS DEC AIR-100 file.
(3) New York City Department of Air Resources data gives New York
City steam generation fuel use as:
409,921,000 gallons #6 oil
77,000 gallons #2 oil
4,972,000 MCF gas
The output BTU equivalents are:
#6 oil 409,921 x 103 gal. x 147 x 103 BTU/gal x .75 HPE = 45,193.8 x 109 Bit"
#2 oil 77 x 103 gal. x 144 x 103 BTU/gal x .75HPE = 8.3 x 109 Bltt
gas 4.972 x 109 Ft3 x 800 BTU/Ft3 x .80 HPE = 3,182.1 x 109 BTU
TOTAL STEAM HEAT
These numbers would not be in MtS heating fuel numbers: 48,384.2
x 109 BTU's
(4) The MIS balance contains the following output BTU's:
32,235 x 103 BBL oil x 42 gal/BBL x 145 x 103 BTU/BBL x .75 HPE = 147,233 q
x 10
113.3 x 109Ft3 gas x 800 BTU/Ft3 x .8 HPE = = 72,512
x 10y
219,745
x 109
(5) Adding New York City steam 48,384 x 109 BTU's gives total
commercial-institutional-government heat use of 268,129
' ' X 109 BTl
-------
-7-
Appendix VI / 7
(6) Assume:
(a) Fuel use is related to employment.
(b) Fuel use per employee is related to degree days.
(c) Fuel use per employee is inversely related to density
'of development (as is true for residential).
(7) To obtain the heating requirement per employee:
(a) Find total commercial-government-institutional employment
for each area. This is from the 1974 data in the New
York State Business Fact Book, 1976 supplement. The
categories of employment included are: Transportation,
public utilities; wholesale, retail trade; finance, in-
surance, real estate; services and miscellaneous;
government. .
(b) Generate a degree day and density factor for each area.
For this analysis, the relative fuel requirement (RFR)
factors generated for residential use were used for den-
sity, as the resources to estimate relative commercial
densities did not exist. The RFR's were then multiplied
by the degree days for an area. In order to simplify
future calculations, this RFR times degree days number
was divided by the New York City RFR times degree day
number to get factors ranging from 1.0 to .1.675. These
factors indicate the relative heating fuel requirements
per employee for the different areas of the State.
(c) Multiply the commercial employment for an area found in
(a) by its relative heating fuel requirement per employ-
ment found in (b) to get an area's heating fuel equivalent
employment. "
(d) Sum the heating fuel equivalent employments found in (c)
to obtain a statewide heating fuel equivalent employment.
(e) Divide the total commercial heat (from Step F-5) by the
heating fuel equivalent employment found in (d) to get
total heat per equivalent employee (the number obtained.
is 43.59 x 106 BTU's/employee).
(8) Multiply the heating requirements per employee (from F-7(e))
by each area's equivalent employment (from F-7(c)) to get the
heating requirement for a county or SMSA.
(9) To find the fuel mix for an area:
(a) Subtract New York City steam BTU1s from the New York City
total BTU's. .
-------
-8-
Appendix VI / 8
(b) Subtract the gas BTU1s from the NYS DEC fuel survey from
the appropriate county heating .requirements..
(c) The remaining BTU's in an area are oil convert to
gallons and 1000 BBLS.
(10) The calculations are on the next two tables:
AREA
New York State Tot.
New York City
Nassau- Suffolk
Westchester
Rockland
Dutchess
Rochester (5 Co.)
Syracuse SMSA
Elmira SMSA
Utica-Rome
Buffalo SMSA
A-S-T (5 County)
Steuben
Chautauqua
Putnam
Orange
Ulster
Binghamton
Balance
EMPLOYEES
(x 1000)
1974
5,238.7
2,742.6
610.3
228.4
54.9
54.1
226.1
170.1
23.2
74.6
327.6
232.5
18.2
31.2
8.8
52.0
32.9
52.8
298.4
RFR * DD
FACTOR
1.174
1.00
1.05 '
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.578
1.565
1.670
1.578
1.563
1.616
1.67
1.60
1.05
1.05
1.05
1.675
1.607
EQUIVALENT
EMPLOYMENT
6,151.2
2,742.6
640.8 .
239.8
57.6
56.8
356.8
266.2
38.7
117.7
512.0
375.7
. 30.4
49.9
9.2
54.6
34.5
88.4
479.5
NECESSARY
BTU'S
x 109
268,129
119,549
27,932
10,453
2,511
2,476
15,553
11,604
1,687
5,131
22,318
16,377
1,325
2,175
401
2,380
1,504
3,853
20,901
FUEL SURVEY
- NYC STEAM -GAS BTU1 S
BTU'S x 109 x 109
,
48,384 19,136
6,010
3,200
2,399
744
7,395
6,456
1,544
2,045
5,734
4,386
962
864
0
1,298
229
2,138
7,974
-------
Appendix VI / 9
New York State equivalent employment is 6,151,200
New York State commercial-institutional-government BTU's are
268,129 x 109.
Thus, BTU1s/Employee = 268,129 x 109 = 43.59 x 106 BTU's/
6,151.2 x 10J equivalent.employee
NOTE: Gas BTU's = Ft3 gas * 800 BTU's/Ft3 x .8 HPE = 640 BTU/Ft3
AREA ' x 109 OIL BTU'S OIL MGAL OIL x 1000 BBL
New York State Total
New York City
Nassau-Suffolk
Westchester
Rockland
Dutchess
Rochester (5 County)
Syracuse (SMSA)
Elmira (SMSA)
Utica-Rome (SMSA)
Buffalo (SMSA)
A-S-T (5 County)
Steuben
Chautauqua
Putnam
Orange
Ulster
Binghamton
Balance
52,029
21,922
7,253
112
1,732
8,158
5,148
143
3,086
16,584
11,991
363
1,311
401
1,082
1,275
1,715
12,927
478,428
201,582
66,694
1,030
15,926
75,016
47,338
1,315
28,377
152,497
110,262
3,338
12,055
3,687
9,949
11,724
15,770
118,869
32,235
11,391
4,800
1,588
25
379
1,786
1,127
31
676
3,631
2,625
79
287
88
237
279
375
2,830
-------
~10~ Appendix VI / 10
NOTE: 109 BTU's = 9,195 gallons oil @ HPE .75 and 145,000 BTU/gal.
1 BBL = 42 gal. and 1000 BBL = 42 MGAL oil
(G) Split of distillate vs residual for residential and commercial.
(1) For New York City commercial, NYC-DAR estimates give 67,340 MGAL
#2 + 24,337 MGAL #4 + 292,754 MGAL #6. = 384,431 MGAL.
DEC calculations give New York City 478,428 MGAL of oil or
124.5% of NYC-DAR.
Therefore, assume NYC-DAR split is correct and multiply each
entry by 1.2445.
This gives New York City commercial
2,717 x 1000 BBL distillate
#2 83,805 MGAL\. -
#4 30,288
#6 364,332 MGAL = 8,675 x 1000 BBL residual
(2) Similarly for residential in New York City
(a) New York City Division of Air Resources gives:
755,959 MGAL in + 299,813 MGAL #4 + 1,516,615 MGAL #6 «= 2,572,387 MGAL
(b) New York State Department of Environmental Conservation gives:
1,628,206 MGAL = .63222 of DAR.
(c) Use NYC-DAR split on NYS-DSC number to get the following
estimates:
100°
958,831 MGAL #6 = 22,829 x 1000 BBL residual
(d) Thus, New York City residential-commercial accounts for
the following amounts of residual oil.
22,879 residential
8,675 commercial
31,504 x 1000 BBL
-------
-11-
Appendix VI / 11
(3) From Step C we know that there are 40,531 x 1000 BBL of resi-
dential-commercial residual oil.
Taking out New York City numbers we get for balance of state:
DISTILLATE RESIDUAL
From Step C 75,246 40,531
New York City Above 18,609 31,504
BALANCES 56,637 9,027
(4) The New York State AIR-100 inventory contains:
t
5,137.4 x-1000 BBL commercial residual
904.4 x 1000 BBL residential residual
6,041.8 x 1000 BBL residual
(5) (a) This leaves 9,027 6,042 =2,985 x 1000 BBLS residual
oil unaccounted for.
This.is 5.0% of the available non-specified oils.
(b) So far commercial is 5,137 -f 8,675 = 13,812 residual
32,235
=42.85 residual.
and residential is 904 + 22,829 = 23,733
83,542
= 28.40% residual.
(c) The unaccounted-for residual is 8% of the known residential
and commercial residual. There are a number of equally
indefensible ways to distribute this oil, including:
(1) Give it all to New York City as DEC has only 31,504
out of NYC-DAR's estimated 43,080 x 1000 BBLS of
redisual oil.
(2) Distribute it around the State in proportion to
"known" residual oils.
(3) Give half to commercial, half to residential -- let
residential follow buildings of 20 units/structure,
let commercial follow areas with commercial residual
use, where less than 50% of commercial oil is residual.
(4) Many others.
-------
-12- A
Appendix VI / 12
(d) It is important to remember that we are talking of
only 2.0%.of the State's heating oil use and.2.6%
of the State's commercial residential heating oil
use.
(e) Methods 1 and 2 in Step G-5c will give additional
residual oil to New York City while Method 3 will
not.
Method 1 will give no new residual oil to places
outside of New York City, yet we know DEC"s inven-
tory is not perfect.
Therefore, Method 2 was choseel. The residual oil
in each county from the AIR-100 file and New York
City DAR estimates as modified was increased by 8%
(actually 7.9%).
(f) The results' of all of these manipulations on the
missing 2.6% of commercial/residential fuel are pre-
sented on the following tables. This gives New York
City 2,516/2,997 =83.95% of the unallocated residual
oil.
ESTIMATED RESIDENTIAL FUEL USE IN NEW YORK STATE
X 1000 B'BL
DISTILLATE X 1000 BBL CALCULATED FUEL SURVEY X 1000 TONS
AREA . OIL RESIDUAL OIL GAS (BCF) . (BCF) GAS COAL
New York City 14,123 24,644 89.0 93.3 264.2
Nassau 8,303 524 9.7 14.2 5.1
Suffolk 6,607 0 10.7 12.6 2.5
Rockland 197 1 8.5 10.0 0.4
Westchester 4,375 318 10.7 14.6 7.3
Orange 1,199 0 4.8 4.2 7.0
Putnam 540 5 0 0 0.2
Ulster 1,158 0 0.9 0.7 2.7
Dutchess 1,684 0 1.9 1.3 2.8
Albany (SMSA) 3,478 36 20.6 16.8 11.9
Montgomery County 240 0 1.7 1.1 3.6
Binghamton (SMSA) 827 . 0 9..9 7.6 19.8
New York Part .
Buffalo SMSA 1,868 75 63.0 60.9 20.3
-------
-13-
Appendix VI / 13
AREA
X 1000 BBL
DISTILLATE
on,
X 1000 BBL
RESIDUAL OIL
CALCULATED
GAS (BCF)
FUEL SURVEY .
(BCF) GAS
X 1000 TONS
COAL
Rochester SMSA 2,568
Ontario County 259
Syracuse SMSA 1,147
Utica-Rome SMSA 1,281
Jamestown-Chautauqua 166
Elmira-Chemung Steuben 382
Balance of State 7,520
State Totals 57,922
0
0
17
0
0
0
25,620
30.3
2.6
25.2
9.6.
7.7
8.6
28.4
343.8
27.2
2.3
2Q.9
9.1
3.2
7.6
22.8
337.4.
28.7
3.5
17.4
16.3
3.1
9.1
71.8
497.7
Inventory residual-x 1.1008 is entered on the chart below
and the distillate (= total residual) is calculated.
The results are total commercial-institutional fuel/county
presented below:
COMMERCIAL-INSTITUTIONAL-GOVERNMENT FUEL USE BY AREA
AREA
New York City
Nassau-Suffolk
Westchester
Rockland
But chess
Rochester (5 County)
Syracuse (SMSA)
Elmira (SMSA)
Utica-Rome (SMSA)
Buffalo (SMSA)
A-S-T .(5 County)
Steuben
Chautauqua
Putnam
Orange
Ulster
Binghamton
Balance
DISTILLATE OIL
1,979
4,068
1,178
0
174
1,394
849
0
544
2,798
1,822
74
287
80
185
210
318
1,388
17,348
RESIDUAL OIL
9,412,
732
41°*
34 (or 25)
205
392
278
46* (or 31)
132
833
803
5
0
8
52
69
57
1,442
14,910
BCF GAS
29.9.
9.4
5.0
3.7
1.2
11.6
10.1
2.4
3.2
9.0
6.9
1.5
1.4
0
2.0
0.4
3.3
12.5
113.5
;
'For Rockland and Chemung Counties, the calculated commercial oil use
is less than the AIR-100 file residual oil use. The higher number is
the AIR-100 number, while the lower number is the calculated oil use.
When these areas are analyzed, some decision will have to be made oh
how to handle this difference.
-------
-14-
Appendix VI / 14
(H) (1) We have now allocated:
Distillate oil
Residual oil
Natural gas
To county for residential, and cbmmercial-institutional-government
(2) Using the AIR-100 file for residual oil, we can physically locate
over 90% of the residual oil within each county except New York
City. The remaining residual oil in a county will have to be
considered an uncontrolled area source lumped in with the dis-
tillate oil users.
(I) For industrial fuel use:
(1) We can obtain SMSA level data for 1974 from the fuels and electric
energy consumed publication. This SMSA level data will have to
be adjusted for the fuels not specified by kind (FNSK). Then,
this data will have to be used with DEC's AIR-100 data NYC-DAR
industrial fuel use estimates to adjust certain AIR-100 entries
so that the inventory contains no more fuel in an.SMSA than is
actually available.
-------
Appendix VI / 15
APPENDIX
DEGREE DAYS USED IN FUEL BALANCE CALCULATIONS
AND
MORE DETAILED NEW YORK SMSA DATA SECURED SINCE CALCULATIONS
AREA
ALBANY SMSA
Albany
Rensselaer
Montgomery
Saratoga
Schenectady
DEGREE DAYS.USED
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
MORE DETAILED INFORMATION
BINGHAMXON SMSA
Broome
Tioga
7,654
7,654
BUFFALO SMSA
Erie
Niagara
7,364
7,364
NEW YORK SMSA
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Richmond
Nassau
Suffolk
Putnam
Rockland
Westchester
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
Central Park 5,916
JFK Airport .6,045
La-Guardia 5,957
Mineola 6,010
Bridgehampton 6,106
Patchogue 6,309
Riverhead 6,047
Setauket 5,908
Carmel 6,909
Scarsdale 6,192
Bedford Hills 6,496
-------
-16-
Appendlx VI / 16
AREA DEGREE DAYS USED MORE DETAILED INFORMATION
ROCHESTER SMSA
Livingston 7,250
Monroe 7,250
Ontario 7,250
Orleans 7,250
Wayne 7,250
SYRACUSE SMSA
Madison 7,229
Onondaga 7,229
Oswego . 7,229
UTICA-ROME
Herkimer 7,220
Oneida 7,220
ALL OTHERS (Guess) 7,200
-------
-17-
Appendix VI / 17
APPENDIX
Detailed county level residential fuel use estimates for fuel balance
calculations. These calculations follow the Volume 13 Order 3 residential
method of the EPA guidelines for air quality maintenance planning and
analysis.
'The Volume 13 Order 3 Method, (Called the Method in the rest of this
Appendix) is based upon:
(1) That the average heating requirement for a single family de-
tached dwelling unit is 17,000 BTU/degree day.
! ' .
(2) That more densely developed dwellings (i.e., duplexes, apart-
ments) require less heat per unit due to the lower number of
i outside walls per unit, and smaller average size.
i (3) An average heating plant efficiency and fuel heat content for
! each type of fuel.
I ' .
It is obvious that this method will do a poor job of predicting fuel use
for a single randomly selected dwelling unit, as it does not take into
account important variables such as: insulation, storm windows, heating
plant maintenance, size of dwelling, number of windows, temperature pre-
ferences, etc. However, for a city or county, the Method will give
reasonable results.
The specific steps involved in using this Method are:
(A) Find the number of equivalent single family units for the area in
question. This number is simply the sum of number of units of a
given type times the relative fuel requirement for that type of unit.
Due to lack of data, some assumptions were necessary.
(1) Assume that the number of units in buildings over four stories
with elevators represents the number of units in buildings of
over fifty (50) dwelling units.
(2) Assume that the relative fuel requirements for buildings of 5
to 19 units is the average of the relative fuel requirements
for buildings of 5 to 9 units and 10 to 19 units.
With these assumptions the following formula for determining equiv-
alent single family dwellings for coal and oil heated units emerges.
Equivalent S.F. Units = 1.0 x No. single family units.
+ 0.9 x #2-4 family units
+ 0.73 x #5-19 family units
+ 0.57 x (#20+ family units -# in 4+
story buildings with elevators)
+ 0.51 x # units in 4+ story buildings
with elevators
-------
-18-
Appendix VI / ]Q
The equation for gas heated uitits is similar, except
The 0.73 is changed to. 0.69
The 0.57 is changed to 0.49
The 0.51 is changed to 0.44
(B) Once the number of equivalent "single family units for an area is de-
termined, it is divided by the total number of units in the area to
get a composite area-wide relative fuel requirement. This is done for
both gas, and coal-oil.
(C) From the 1970 Census, determine the number of housing units in an
area heated with: oil, gas, coal and electricity. Also, determine
the fraction of the total gas, oil and electric housing units heated
with each type of fuel in 1970.
(D) From the New York State Economic Development Board projections, find
the number of new households created between 1970 and. 1975 for each
area.
(E) In order to make the fuel split assumed for this growth in the body
of this document (i.e., 71, 72, 73 at 1970 fuel split, 74, 75 at
70% oil, 30% electric), the 1970 fuel split percentages for only
gas, oil and electric obtained in (C) should be multiplied by 0.6
(for 3 out of 5 years), 28% added to the oil number and 12% added
to the electric number.
For Example: 70 to 75 oil % = (1970 oil %) x (0.6) + 28%
70 to 75 electric % = (1970 electric %) x (0.6) + 12%
70 to 75 gas % = (1970 gas %). x (0.6)
The resulting percentages can be applied to the growth found in (D)
to obtain new housing units by fuel type by area for 1970 to 1975.
(F) The new housing units by fuel type from (E) are added to the 1970
housing units by fuel type found in (C) to obtain 1975 housing units
by fuel type.
(G) Assume that the RFR for this growth is the same as the RFR for the
1970 housing units calculated in (B).
(H) 3?he space heating fuel use for the area is calculated from the
following formula:
-------
-19-
Appendix VI / 19
Area fuel use
(# units with heating fuel type) x (RFR for' fuel type)
x (Degree days for area) x (Fuel use factor)
The fuel use factors are simply the amount of fuel at the assumed
heating plant efficiency required to produce 17,000 BTU's of heat
output. They are:
Coal 2.38 Ibs.
Oil 0.157 gal.
Gas 26.6 cubic feat
(I) Significant results for selected areas are presented in the following
tables.
AREA
1970
TOTAL UNITS
OIL-COAL
EQUIVALENT
S.F. UNITS
GAS
EQUIVALENT
S.F. UNITS
COAL-OIL
KFR
GAS RFR
Bronx
Kings
New York
Queens
Aichmond
New York City
508,649
902,236
714,371
703,154
89,289
2,917,699
324,900
675,226
416,723
551,671
80,375
2,048,895
297,014
646,297
372,541
532,585
79,517
1,927,954
.63875
.74839
.58334
.78457
.90017
.70223
.58393
.71633
.52150
.75742
.89056
.66078
Nassau
Suffolk
Rockland
Westchester
Orange
Putnam
Ulster
Dutchess
407,416
313,489
62,167
290,377
71,665
19,017
50,286
67,962
388,027
306,946
58,224
245,143
68,066
18,601
48,446
65,972
385,576
306,172
57,715
239,265
67,756
18,563
48,290
65,547
.9524
.9791
.9366
.8442
.9498
.9781
.9634
.9707
.9463
.9766
.9284
.8240
.9455
.9761
.9603
.9645
Albany
Montgomery
Rensselaer
Saratoga
Schenectady
98,073
20,006
49,568
38,268
55,387
91,297
18,803
46,241
36,934
52,120
90,747
18,746
45,999
36,841
51,881
. 9309
.9399
.9329
.9651
.9410
.9253
.9370
.9280
.9627
.9367
Broome
Tioga
72,825
14,058
68,216
13,745
67,802
13,730
.9367
.9777
.9310
.9767
Erie
Niagara
359,384
74,085
335,069
70,932
333,492
70,584
.9323
.9574
.9280
.9527
-------
-20-
Appendix VI / 20
AREA
Livingston
Monroe
Ontario
Orleans
Wayne
Madison
Onondaga
Os we go
Herkimer
Oneida
. . :.-.*- '
Chemung
Steuben
1970
TOTAL UNITS
16,119
227,900
24,803
12,204
24,475
18,873
152,017
30,926
23,173
86,311
32,964
33,065
OIL- COAL
EQUIVALENT
S.F, UNITS
15,692
212,140
23,899
11,905
23,886
18,301
140,095
30,021
22,249
80,938
31,619
32,126
GAS
EQUIVALENT
S.F. UNITS
15,657
210,444
23,820
11,884
23,852
18,261
138,787
29,949
22,189
80,516
.31,524
32,076
COAL-OIL
RFR
.9735
.9308
.9636
.9755
.9759
.9697
.9216
.9707
.9601
.9377
.9592
.9716
GAS RFR
.9713
.9234
.9604
.9738
.9745
.9676
. .9130
.9684
.9575
.9329
.9563
.9701
Chautauqua
51,374
49,433
49,321
.9622
.9600
GROWTH FROM 1970 TO 1975
(HOUSEHOLDS)
AREA
TOTAL GROWTH
NEW OIL
NEW GAS
NEW ELECTRIC
New York City
26,000
17,700
4,870
3,430
Nassau
Suffolk
Rock land
Westchester
Orange
Putnam
Ulster
Dutches s
Albany
Montgomery
Rensselaer
Saratoga
Schenectady
9,000
46,000
10,000
12,000
9,000
4,000
7,000
7,000
6,000
1,000
4,000
8,000
2,000
7,030
34,280
3,360
8,420
5,730
3,520
5,660
5,480
3,330
560
2,526
5,029
1,105
880
6,170
5,430
2,110
2,110
0
460
660
1,870
300
937
1,829
631
1,090
5,550
1,210
1,470
1,160
480
880
860
800
140
537
1,142
264
-------
-21-
Appendix VI / 21
AREA
.'.TOTAL" GROWTH
NEW Oil
NEW GAS
NEW ELECTRIC
Broome
Tioga
Erie
Niagara
Livingston
Monroe
Ontario
Orleans
Wayne
Madison
Onondaga
Oswego
1
Herkimer
Oneida
Chemung
Steuben
3,000
1,000
17,000
6,000
: 1,000
12,000
3,000
1,000
. 1,000
1,000
11,000
4,000
2,000
4,000
2,000
2,000
1,335
721
5,688
3,430
559
5,564
1,520
659
594
625
4,156
2,200
1,211
2,080
723
922
1,274
140
9,170
1,884
290
4,775
1,080
201
272
243
5,287
1,250
522
1,198
1,020
824
391
139
2,142
686
151
1,661
400
140
134
132
1,557
550
267
722
257
254
Chautauqua
3,000
1,045
1,573
382
CALCULATED 1975 RESIDENTIAL SPACE HEATING FUEL USE
AREA
New York City
Nassau
Suffolk
FUEL
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
UNITS USING
FUEL IN 1975
1,840,510
855,477
53,448
335,925
65,222
764
254,713
69,670
363
RELATIVE FUEL
' REQUIREMENTS.
.70223
.66078
.70223
.9524
.9463
.9524
.9791
.9766
.9791
DEGREE
DAYS
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
FUEL USE*
28,582.2
88,956
264.2
7,075.2
9,712
5.1
5,515.1
10,707
2.5
-------
-22-
Appendix VI / 22
AREA
Rockland
Westchester
Orange
Putnam
. s -.*--
Ulster
Dutchess
Albany
Montgomery
Rensselaer
Saratoga
Schenectady
Broome
FUEL
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
UNITS USING.
FUEL IN 1975
3,853
58,429
67
200,283
82,188
1,231
42,439
26,241
861
18,057
0
. ... 22 --
39,983
4,752
329
55,454
10,073
341
45,533
49,714
352
8,961
9,403
451
29,319
18,791
492
24,846
14,824
224
24,878
28,139
377
19,758
48,728
1,486
RELATIVE FUEL
REQUIREMENTS
.9366
.9284
.9366
.8442
.8240
.8442
.9498
.9455
.9498
.9781
.9761
.9781
.9634
.9603
.9634
.9707
.9645
.9707
.9309
.9253
.9309
. .9399
.9370
.9399
.9329
.9280
.9329
.9651
.9627
.9651
.9410
.9367
.9410
.9367
.9310
.9367
DEGREE '
DAYS
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
5,916
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,462
7,654
7,654
7,654
FUEL USE*
183.4
8,536
0.4
3,739.1
10,657
7.3
1,084.9
. 4,752
7.0
475.3
0
0.2
1,036.7
874
2.7
1,448.8
1,861
2.8
1,182.3
9,131.
2.9
234.9
1,749
3.8
762.9
3,461.
4.1
668.9
2,833
1.9
653
5,232
3.2
529.5
9,236
12.7
-------
-23-
Appendix VI / 23
AREA
Tioga
Erie
Niagara
Livingston
.»-.-
Monroe
Ontario
Orleans
Wayne
.Madison
Onondaga
Oswego
Herkimer
FUEL
.Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
UNITS USING
FUEL IN 1975
9,615
2,961
821
36,685
315,482
1,180 ;
36,639
37,635
727
7,201
7,209
248
71,429
147,449
2,240
9,891
14,328
428
7,318
3,729
470
12,079
10,223
584
10,261
: 7,028
524
7,763
118,687
1,145
14,587
15,588
504
12,239
9,376
492
RELATIVE FUEL
REQUIREMENTS
.9777
.9767
.9777
.9323
.9280
.9323
.9574
.9527
.9574
.9735
.9713
..9735
.9308
.9234
.9308
.9636
.9604
.9636
.9755
.9738
.9755
.9759
.9745
.9759
.9697
.9676
.9697
.9216
.9130
.9216
.9707
.9684
.9707
.9601
.9575
.9601
DEGREE '
DAYS
7,564
7,654
7,654
7,364
7,364
7,364
7,364
7,364
7,364
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,250
7,229
7,229
. 7,229
7,229
7,229
7,229
7,229
7,229
7,229
7,220
7,220
7,220
FUEL USE*
270.0
589
7.3
941.5
57,348
14.8
965.6
7,023
6.1
190.0
1,350
2.1
1,801.9
26,257
18.0
258.3
2,654
3.6
193.5
700
4.0
319.5
1,921
4.9
268.9
1,308
4.4
. 193.3
20,837
9.1
382.6
2,903
4.2
317.1
1,724
4.1
-------
-24-
Appendix VI / 24
AREA
FUEL
UNITS USING
FUEL IN 1975
RELATIVE FUEL
REQUIREMENTS
DEGREE
DAYS
FUEL USE
Oneida
Chemung
Steuben
Chautauqua
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil
Gas
Coal
36,483
44,119
1,518
4,823
26,722
234
9,423
20,189
867
6,282
41,846
. 591 -..
.9377
.9329
.9377
.9592
.9563
.9592
.9716
.9701
.9716
.9622
.9600
.9622
7,220
7,220
7,220
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
7,200
923.3.
7,905
12.2
124.5
4,965
1.9
246.4
3,751
7.2
162.7
7,694
4.9
Oil in 1000 BBL, gas in million cubic feet, coal in 1000 tons
'(J) For oil, the amount of fuel used in water heating was calculated as
250 gallons/year per oil water heater. The 250 gallons/year is from
Volume 7 of the guidelines. This adjustment is necessary because
the Volume 13 Level 3 method for calculating oil space heating fuel
use appears to exclude the fuel used for water heating.
TOTAL OIL REQUIREMENTS FOR SELECTED AREAS
AREA
New York City
Nassau
Suffolk
Rockland
Westchester
Orange
Putnam
Ulster
Dutchess
Albany
Montgomery
Rensselaer
Saratoga
Schenectady
SPACE HEATING
x 1000 BBL
28,582.2
7,075.2
5,515.1
183.4
3,739.1
1,084.9
475.3
1,036.7
1,448.8
1,182.3
-234.9
762.9
668.9
653.0
WATER HEATING
x 1000 BBL
10,184.5
1
1
,752
,092
14
954
114
65
120
194
113
12
70
32
57
.2
.4
.9.
.0
.3
.7
.9
.9
.5
.9
.2
.8
.2
TOTAL
x 1000 BBL
37,985.1
8,827.4
6,607.5
198.3
4,693.1
1,199.2
541.0
1,157.6
1,643.7
1,295.8
247.8
833.1
701.7
710.2
-------
-25-
Appendix VI / 25
AREA
Brborae
Tioga
Erie
Niagara
Livingston
Monroe
Ontario
Orleans
Wayne
Madison
Onbndaga
Oswego
I
Herkimer
Oneida
Chemung
Steuben
SPACE HEATING
x 1000 BBL
529.5
270.0
941.5
965.6
190.0
1,801.9
258.3
193.5
319.5
268.9
193.3
382.6
317.1
923.3
124.5
246.4
WATER HEATING
x 1000 BBL
25.9 .
11.7
34.8
75.4
3.6
63.7
3.1
2.4
6.1
5.0
21.5
7.9
9.6
31.9
3.5
8.9
TOTAL
x 1000 BBL
555.4
231.7
976.3
1,041.0
193.6 .
1,865.6
261.4
195.9
325.6
273.9
214.8
390.5
326.7
955.2
128.0
255.3
Chautauqua
162.7
3.1
165.8
-------
CREDITS
Co-Managers of the project for Tri-State Regional Planning Commission were
Hall Winslow, AIP, Coordinator, Environment Studies and Paul M. Nutkowitz, Ph.D.,
Senior Environmental Planner. Kenneth A. Skipka, Meteorologist, provided ana-
lytical and other contributions.
Data Processing Coordinator was Jocelyn M. Bishop. Assisting with process-
ing were Roger Ann Connolly, Jerome Davis, Dennis Price, and Thomas Quinn. Con-
version of square mile data to square kilometer format was designed by William
Harting and Jocelyn M. Bishop.
Population and employment projections for target years were provided by the
Regional Development Division based on most likely targets for the year 2000
approved by the Commission, January 1976.
Cooperation and data inputs are acknowledged from the air resources staffs
of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and New York City.
Tri-State staff credits for specific elements are as follows:
Element
A 1-4 Fuel Combustion ) Dr> Paul M. Nutkow1tz
P 2 Industrial Processing )
A 6 Diesel Locomotives S. David Phraner
Joseph Kanell, John Scott, Technicians
A 7 Aircraft Valentin Mantulin
Patricia Miller, Technician
A 8 Vessels Olga B. Kean
John Scott, Technician
A 9 Gasoline and Diesel - Highway J. David Jordan
Michael Cohen, John Berdan
A 9 b Gasoline and Diesel - Offhighway) Larry S Reep
A 10 Evaporation ) E11zabeth Phiferj Technician
A 11 Apartment Construction Richard A. Hansen
P 1 Electric Power Plants Robert A. Leighton
P 2 Industrial Output Projections Ik Sun Kim
P 3 Municipal Incinerators Kenneth J. Skipka
Dr. Paul M. Nutkowitz
Report Preparation: Hannah Meyer
-in. pan£ia£ 6uf.6-UZme.nt o£ the.
EPA CovtMLct No. : 6S-02-2096 ; EPA-902/4-77-006.
------- |