18425.007
AIR QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
FOR THE
STATE OF ALASKA
VOLUME I: CONTROL STRATEGY APPENDICES
DECEMBER 1971
Prepared for the
STATE OF ALASKA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
TRW
SYSJfMS GROUP
/£ SPACE PARK • RCDONDO BEACH. CALIFORN/A £0278
-------
18425.007
AIR QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
FOR THE
STATE OF ALASKA
VOLUME I: CONTROL STRATEGY APPENDICES
DECEMBER 1971
Prepared for the
STATE OF ALASKA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
TRW
SYSTEMS GROUP
ONE SPACE PARK • REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA S0278
-------
The work upon which this publication is based
was performed by TRW Systems Group pursuant
to Contract #68-02-0048 with the Office of Air
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
PREFACE
This document presents appendices which contain supportive data
and calculations for the control measures. These appendices are named
for the section of the main report to which they apply. For example,
appendices 3A through 3G show calculations for control measures in the
Northern Alaska Intrastate AQCR, discussed in Section 3 of the main
report. Reference numbers quoted correspond to the reference list in
Section 6 of the main report. Variables used these appendices are
defined in the Nomenclature in the main report.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix Title Page
2A Estimation of Air Quality Caused by Particulate
Emission in Anchorage 2A-1
2B Variations in Particulate Concentrations with Wind,
Rain and Temperature 2B-1
2C Seasonal Variations in Particulate Concentrations
In Anchorage 2C-1
2D Description of Road Surface Conditions in Anchorage 2D-1
2E Cost of Paving and Maintaining 2E-1
3A Variations in Particulate Concentrations with Wind,
Rain, and Temperature 3A-1
3B Estimation of Air Quality Due to Particulates and
Carbon Monoxide in Fairbanks 3B-1
3C Motor Vehicle Emissions in Fairbanks 3C-1
3D Estimation of the Reduction in Carbon Monoxide
Automobile Emissions 3D-1
3E Emissions From Fuel Combustion 3E-1
3F Description of Rejected Control Measures 3F-1
3G Estimate of Carbon Monoxide Reduction Due to
Automatic Traffic Signal Control 3G-1
5A Estimates of Ground Level Concentration of SOX, CO,
and Particulates A-l
iii
-------
APPENDIX 2A
ESTIMATION OF AIR QUALITY CAUSED BY PARTICULATE
EMISSION IN ANCHORAGE
Calculations shown in this appendix were based on the procedures
given in Reference 7, Appendix A: "Air Quality Estimation". The
following values were used:
1) Average wind speed is 2.3 m/sec.
2) Particulate emissions from identifiable point and area
sources in the Cook Inlet Intrastate AQCR total 2626 tons/
year. (This value does not include emissions from
certain man-made sources, such as traffic-generated
dust and forest fires. )
1. URBAN SIZE C
Urban size C is defined in Reference 7 as
C = — Durban area, km
Three areas were chosen to be used for "urban area":
1) Within city limits: 129.5 km ; C = 5.68 km
2) Greater Anchorage: 184 km ; C = 6.80 km
3) "Air shed" area: 450 km2; C = 10.6 km
2. NORMALIZED CONCENTRATION -£•
Pollutant concentration, X, is calculated from the known emission
density (or emission rate per unit area), Q [g/sec-m ], and the average
wind speed, u (m/sec), by means of a curve developed by the EPA,
described by the curve-fit equation
Thus,
Iog10 T = 0.3981og1()C + 1.829
1) C = 5.68: T = 134
2) C = 6.8: = 142
3) C = 10.6: -T - 169
where
u = 2. 3 m/sec
Q = emission density
2A-1
-------
3. PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION
For a limiting value calculation we shall assume that all of the
particulate emissions included in the Emission Inventory influence the
particulate concentration in downtown Anchorage (location of maximum
increased concentrations).
Then, Q = (total emissions)/(urban area)
= 2626 (ton/year) x 28. 8 x 10'3 (^T^)/ (urban area)
= (75.7 -£—)/(urban area)
sec I
1) Urban Area = 129.5km2
Q = 0.575 jzg/m -sec
= 134 x 0.575/2.3 = H
2
2) Urban Area = 184 km
= 0.^
= 142 x 0.412/2.3 = 25
Q = 0.412 \ig/m -sec
3) Urban Area = 450 km2
2
Q = 0. 168 ng/m -sec
= 169 x 0. 168/2. 3 = 12
Measured particulate concentrations are generally far above these
values (see Figures 2B-1 through 2B-4 of Appendix 2B). Thus, it
is clear that particulate sources such as blown dust, road dust,
and /or forest fires must contribute substantially to the particulate
concentration in the Anchorage region.
Control strategies are based on measured particulate concentra-
tions. The above calculations only serve to compare emission rates
from identified sources to emission rates necessary to explain high
particulate concentrations.
2A-2
-------
APPENDIX 2B
VARIATIONS IN PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
WITH WIND, RAIN AND TEMPERATURE
Tables 2B-1 and 2B-2 summarize the effects of precipitation and wind
direction on mean participate concentrations at each of eight local stations.
Table 2B-1 consists of directional analysis of dry data C48 hours, no
precipitation). No particular correlation is evident in the directional data.
Table 2B-2 consists of a directional analysis of all wet days (measureable
precipitation or trace precipitation over more than 12 of 24 hours, or
trace precipitation on a day following 2 or more days of heavy precipita-
tion.). Again no correlation is evident in the directional data shown
here. However, the influence of a correlation between wind strength and
direction may be needed to complete the analysis.
A comparison of the sample means for wet days versus dry days
definitely indicates a higher particulate concentration on dry days.
Table 2B-3 summarizes the effects of precipitation and wind direction on
mean particulate concentrations at the NASN station. Although there are
far fewer total samples, a strong correlation is evident. The NASN site
and the City Fire Station site are both in downtown Anchorage, The wet/
dry geometric means are:
Mean, dry days Mean, wet days Dry/Wet
NASN, fig/m3 82 66 1.28
City Fire Station, fig/m 124 53 2.34
The mean suspended particulate concentration for wet days is similar for
the two sites, while the mean suspended particulate concentration for dry
days is markedly higher at the City Fire Station. This difference is
attributed to reentrained street dust, which will influence the City Fire
Station sampler (elevation: 5 feet) much more strongly than the NASN
sampler (elevation: 26 feet).
2B-1
-------
Table 2B-1. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
Anchorage
(March 1969
Dry
Local Data
- March 1971)
Days
Station and
Sampling Period
Muldoon Fire Station
3/19/69 to 3/19/70
3/21/70 to 3/5/71
Nikiski Station
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Matanuska Valley
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Palmer Agriculture
Building
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Kenai Borough Office
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Tudor Fire Station
3/21/70 to 3/15/71
Sand Lake Station
3/25-69 to 8/21/70
City Fire Station
3/25/69 to 3/19/70
3/21/70 to 3/15/71
Total 00 33-05
-g
(Tg
o
n
xg
Og
n
xg
-------
Table 2B-2. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
Wet Days
Anchorage Local Data
(March 1969 - March 1971)
Station and
Sampling Period
Muldoon Fire Station
3/19/69 to 3/19/70
3/21/70 to 3/5/71
Nikiski Station •
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Matanuska Valley
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Palmer Agriculture
Building
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Kenai Borough Office
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Tudor Fire Station
3/21/70 to 3/15/71
Sand Lake Station
3/25/69 to 8/21/70
City Fire Station
3/25/69 to 3/19/70
3/21/70 to 3/15/71
0 i J-S1 1C 1,1.1 UJ1 1 XXC&UlLCtllLI
sample
Total 00 33-05
xg
o
n
x
(Tg
n
Xg
O
n
xg
""g
n
Xg
O
n
xe
o
n
Xg
O
n
xg
O
n
30
2. 12
43
16
1.61
7
24
3. 19
10
42
4.74
11
20
2.24
6
37
1.70
26
46
2.21
34
53
1. 73
38
23
1.98
16
17
1. 64
2
11
4.06
2
14
2.58
2
26
3.00
2
28
1.51
9
33
1.73
9
53
1.75
14
06-14
73
2. 10
3
24
1
37
3.44
3
42
5.82
2
• — — ••
___ _
50
1.24
2
66
2.42
2
35
1.56
3
15-23
36
1.95
22
14
1.62
4
29
3.08
5
49
5.74
6
17
2.01
4
46
1.80
15
52
2.65
22
56
1.81
19
24-32
21
2.49
2
• M « •
— — _ _
162
1
. * _ _
_ __ _
w •• « «
_ — -
38
1
54
1.41
2
Xg = geometric mean
o"g = geometric standard deviation
n = number of samples *
2B-3
-------
Table 2B-3. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
As A Function Of Wind Direction
Anchorage NASN Data
(1969-1970)
Direction (Resultant)
33-05 06-14 15-23 24-32
Dry Days
Wet Days
All Dry Days
All Wet Days
X
g
n
X
°g
n
IT
g
'g
n
X
g
°g
n
64 48
2.49 1.86
12 3
60 48
2.38 1.95
7 2
82
2.26
31
66
1.91
19
118 72
1.82 2.93
13 3
77 70
1.28 3.68
8 2
x = geometric mean ( pg/m )
O
0- = geometric standard deviation
O
n = number of samples
The variation in particulate concentration with temperature distri-
bution is given in Table 2B-4 for the local data and Table 2B-5 for NASN
data. There is a significant correlation between particulate concentration
and increasing temperature. The NASN data also show a fairly significant
correlation although the data for this station are limited.
Table 2B-6 shows the variation in particulate concentration with
average daily wind speed at each of the eight local stations. A weak
correlation appears to exist between increasing wind speed and particulate
concentration although too few samples are available for the >12 mph
2B.-4
-------
Table 2B-4. Measurements of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
As a Function of Temperature
Anchorage Local Data
(March 1969 - March 1971)
Station
Muldoon xe
O
n
Sand Lake Xg
°g
n
City Fire Station Xg
°g
w
n
Palmer Agriculture Xg
40 F
81
2.05
133
135
2.58
127
120
1.58
132
116
5.00
24
59
2.38
16
20
1.70
17
66
2.71
21
77
1.97
77
x« = geometric mean (pig/m )
-------
X
g
°g
n
37
1.88
10
Table 2B-5. Measurement Of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
As A Function Of Temperature Distribution
Anchorage NASN Data
(1969-1970)
<25°F 25°-40°F >40°F
72 105
2.35 1.63
16 24
x = geometric mean (jig/m )
O *
a = geometric standard deviation
&
n = number of samples
grouping to be significant. The NASN data versus wind speed distribution,
as shown in Table 2B-7, is too limited to support any conclusion.
The variation in particulate concentration with wind speed distri-
bution and precipitation is shown in Table 2B-8 for City Fire Station. This
was the only station with sufficient,data for this analysis. The increase
in particulate concentration is apparent in this analysis; however, the
number of samples in the greater than 12 mph grouping is still insufficient
to conclude a continued increase in particulate concentration with wind
speed above 12 mph.
Figures 2B-1 and 2B-2 illustrate the seasonal variation in particulate
concentration at the Anchorage NASN station for 1969 and 1970. Figure
2B-3 is a composite of these 2 years using the Monthly Geometric Mean
concentrations. There are too few data available for this station to
support a definitive analysis; however, the major features of the seasonal
distribution are indicative of the effects of the climatological factors dis-
cussed above. For example, the late spring maximum suggests the
predominance of precipitation or dryness as a factor especially during
the warmer months when the soil is not frozen. Freezing temperatures
combined with light winds and frequent precipitation could account for the
2B-6
-------
Table 2B-6. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
As a Function of Wind Speed Distribution
(Average Daily)
Anchorage Local Data
(March 1969 - March 1971)
Station and
Sampling Period <5 5-12 >12 mph
Muldoon
3/19/69 to 3/19/70
Nikiski
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Matanuska Valley
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Palmer
1/20/70 to 1/8/71
Kenai
1/13/70 to 1/12/71
Tudor Fire Station
3/12/70 to 3/15/71
Sand Lake Fire Station
3/25/69 to 3/24/70
City Fire Station
3/25/69 to 3/19/70
3/21/70 to 3/15/71
xg
n
-
(Tg
n
xg
n
xg
O
°g
n
Xg
O
n
Xg
O
n
Xg
O
n
xg
n
64
2.97
45
8
2.02
10
20
1.88
9
25
2.98
9
25
2.73
10
57
2.39
18
85
2.91
37
82
1.96
58
66
2.37
147
21
1.66
23
40
4.04
26
45
4.82
27
61
3.27
26
63
1.82
90
95
2.96
126
100
2. 11
160
50
1.81
23
17
1.40
4
114
1.52
6
214
2.45
9
37
1.48
3
58
1.96
16
80
2.24
19
97
1.59
17
2
Xg = geometric mean ((Jig/m )
-------
280
260
240
220
<* 200
UJ
UJ
y 180
CO
:D
* 160
ffi
to
I 140
o
§ 120
i
100
80
60
40
20
0
M
M
J J
MONTH
N
Figure 2B-1. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulates 1969,
Anchorage NASN Data
2B-8
-------
M
M
J J
MONTH
N
Figure 2B-2. Seasonal Variation of Suspended 'Particulates 1970,
Anchorage NASN Data
2B-9
-------
to
w
I
140
«* 120
LU
LU
U
CO
Q_
CO
100
80
60
O
O 40
u
5 20
TWO-YEAR AVERAGE (1969-1970)
(GEOMETRIC MONTHLY MEANS)
M
M
J J
MONTH
N
D
Figure 2B-3. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulate Concentration,
Anchorage NASN Data
-------
Table 2B-7. Measurements Of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
ASA Function Of Wind Speed Distribution
Anchorage NASN Data
(1969-1970)
X
g
fT
°g
n
<5 mph
62
2.59
12
5-12 mph
81
2.06
30
>12 mph
79
1.73
8
x = geometric mean (|j.g/m )
O
cr = geometric standard deviation
O
n = number of samples
Table 2B-8. Measurement Of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP)
As A Function Of Wind Speed Distribution
(Average Daily)
Anchorage Local Data
(March 1969 - March 1971)
City Fire Station < 5 5-12 >12 mph
Wet Days x 43 54 62
O
^g 1.86 1.75 1.47
n 8 25 5
Dry Days
X
g
*S
n
115
• 1.74
32
134
1.73
78
96
1.79
8
x = geometric mean (ng/m )
O
ag = geometric standard deviation
n = number of samples
2B-11
-------
very low particulate concentrations experienced throughout the midwinter
months.
Data for the City Fire Station in downtown Anchorage are sufficient
to support the conclusions suggested by the NASN seasonal distribution
data. The overall shape of the curve given in Figure 2B-4 is very similar
to the curve given for the NASN data in Figure 2B-3. The spring maximum
is more pronounced and the fall dry period also is better defined. The
summer minimum is shifted to later in the season which would seem to
be a better indicator of the late summer rainy season. The overall
average concentration appears slightly higher than the NASN station.
This could reflect the proximity of the local station to the road or the
limited data available for the NASN station.
2B-12
-------
w
. I
200
180
160
140
120
U
Oi
£ 100
in
| 80
O
Of.
y 60
40
20
6
TWO-YEAR AVERAGE (1969-1970)
(GEOMETRIC MONTHLY MEANS)
M
M
N
_
MONTH
Figure 2B-4. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulate Concentration,
Anchorage Local Data City Fire Station
-------
APPENDIX 2C
SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
IN ANCHORAGE
A summary of the suspended particulate measurements in
Anchorage from 1963 to 1970 and the calculation of the estimated average
yearly variation in dustfall is presented in Table 2C-1. An average varia-
tion of 65% is indicated.
2C-1
-------
Table 2C-1. Summary of Suspended Particulate Measurements in Anchorage
Composite Quarterlies
Year
1963
Max
Min
1964
Max
Min
1966
Max
Min
1967
Max
Min
1968
Max
Min
1969
Max
Min
1970
Max
Min
No. of
Samples
27
24
23
24
28
26
24
Quarter No. 1
(Jan. -Mar . )
35
5 on 3/15
31
36
12 on 3/4
42
70
20 on 2/28
45
67
24 on 1/15
Quarter No. 2
(Apr. -June)
H-g/rn3
102
234 on 5/22
130
148
198
320 on 5/21
97
190 on 4/26
134
99
Quarter No. 3
(July-Sep. )
62
190
342 on 8/14
152
85
86
151
85
Quarter No. 4
(Oct. -Dec.)
fjig/m3
72
53
119
349 on 10/1
20 on 11/17
73
55
95
268 on 10/23
19 on 12/16
106
258 on 10/20
Yearly Variation:
max-min .
max
102-35 ,fnl
102 -6j/0
190-36 n4«,
190 - °4%
152-36 (M
152 - 70%
198-42 „
198 - '9/0
^p = 44%
151-45 , „,
i c i ~ Ooyo
106-67 „,
106 - 37%
O
i
A m ir • ^- 2 (% Yearly Variation) , _.,
Average % Variation = ^-^ =—l •• = 65%
& 7 years '
-------
APPENDIX 2D
DESCRIPTION OF ROAD SURFACE CONDITIONS IN ANCHORAGE
1. ESTIMATE OF NUMBER OF PAVED AND UNPAVED ROADS IN
1971 AND 1975
1. 1 1971
The numbers of miles of paved and unpaved roads in Anchorage
service areas and in the City of Anchorage were taken from Reference 29.
Service Areas; Spenard, Muldoon and Sandlake
Total miles of borough maintained roads in service areas =
126. 7 miles
Total miles of paved roads in service areas = 25.6 miles
% paved roads in service areas = ( ^'> _ )xlOO = 20%
X L* D * t
Total miles of unpaved roads in service areas = 101. 1 miles
% unpaved roads in service areas = ( ..' ) xlOO = 80fo
X d D • I
City of Anchorage
Assume the city of Anchorage is the central business district
(CBD)
Total miles of roads and alleys in CBD = 204. 1 miles
Total miles of paved roads and alleys = 95. 2 miles
95 2
. % paved roads and alleys in Anchorage = (7?j . )xlOO = 45%
Total miles of unpaved roads and alleys = 108. 9 miles
108 Q
% unpaved roads and alleys in CBD = (,)»?' \ )xlOO = 55%
£ U~t • J.
% breakdown of paved and unpaved roads and alleys in CBD:
Roads Alleys
Unpaved 73. 9 miles 35. 0 miles
Paved 91. 3 miles 3. 9 miles
Total 165.2 miles 38. 9 miles
(Above data from Reference 29)
2D-1
-------
% paved roads in CBD = ( \^2 ) xlOO = 55%
73 9
% unpaved roads in CBD = ( ^g 2 ) xlOO = 45%
% paved alleys in CBD = (j—^JxlOO = 10%
% unpaved alleys in CBD = (ff^) *100 = 90%
1.2 1975
The amount of road paving planned for existing roads for 1971 to
1975 was estimated by Mr. J. Emerson of Anchorage:
% increase in paved roads from 1971 to 1975 = 80%
Assume that all roads built between 1971 and 1975 will be paved,
and that the total miles of roads (paved plus unpaved) remain the same in
1975 as in 1971 for both the service areas and the Anchorage CBD.
Service Areas - Spenard, Muldoon and Sandlake
Total miles of Borough.maintained roads in service areas
in 1975 = 126.7 miles
Total miles of paved roads in service areas in 1971 =
25. 6 miles
Total miles of paved roads in service areas in 1975 =
25. 6 miles x (1. 8) = 46.1 miles
% paved roads in service areas in 1975 = ( , )xlOO = 36%
IbO. I ~~""""~""
Total miles of unpaved roads in service areas in 1975 =
101. 1 miles - 20. 5 miles = 80. 6 miles
fio A
% unpaved roads in service areas in 1975 = (.,/ -jxlOO = 64%
IZo. 7
City of Anchorage (CBD)
Total miles of roads and alleys in CBD in 1975 = 204.1 miles
Total miles of paved roads and alleys in CBD in 1975 -
95. 2 miles x (1. 8) = 171.4 miles
171 4
% paved roads and alleys in CBD in 1975 = ( ' ,)x!00 = 84%
Mvl4« 1* ^—^™«»
Total miles of unpaved roads and alleys in CBD in 1975 =
108. 9 miles - 76. 2 miles = 32. 7 miles
2D-2
-------
1^2 7
% unpaved roads and alleys in CBD in 1975 = {. * ;) xlOO
~~ - - """" 204. 1
= 16%
% breakdown of paved and unpaved roads and alleys in
CBD in 1975:
Roads Alleys
Unpaved 1.2 miles 31. 9 miles
Paved 164 miles 7 miles
Total 165. 2 miles 38. 9 miles
% paved roads in CBD in 1975 = (-f-?) xlOO = 99%
% unpaved roads in CBD in 1975 = (|^ -) xlOO =
% paved alleys in- CBD in 1975 = (T^-Q) xlOO = 18%
JM-'"--r-" " - - - - -JI--LLU JOm V
% unpaved alleys in CBD in 1975 = (^j) xlOO = 82%
2. ESTIMATE OF VEHICLE MILES AND DESTINATIONS
2. 1 1971
From Reference 26, Page 48: Average number of vehicle trips made
within the Anchorage metropolitan area (including the service areas) on
an average weekday.
= 230, 549 vehicle trips /day
From Reference 26, page 62: Average trip length
= 10. 6 minutes
Assume average trip speed of 20 miles per hour
Average trip length = 20mph ( ^miTutTs/hr) = 3. 5 miles /trip
Average number of vehicle miles driven within the Anchorage
metropolitan area on an average weekday
= 230,549
From Reference 26, page 48: Destinations of vehicles' trips
21.5% of all driven trips were made entirely within the
CBD (assume City of Anchorage only).
2D-3
-------
Number of miles per day driven entirely within the CBD
= 806,922 ™iles x 0.215 = 173,500 miles
day day
12. 8% of all driven trips were made to, from or within
Elmendorf Air Force Base and Fort Richardson (assume all
within service areas only).
Number of miles per day driven entirely within the service
areas = 806,922 mes x 0. 128 = 103, 300 miles/day
65. 7% of all driven trips were made to and from the city of
Anchorage (CBD) to and from the service areas.
Assume that 65. 7% of inter CBD/service area trips, 50% of
trips are driven in CBD and 50% of trips are driven in
service area.
Number of miles per day driven in the CBD
= 806,922 miles/day x 0.657 x 0. 5 = 265, 000 miles/day
Number of miles per day driven in the service areas
= 806,922 miles/day x 0.657 x 0. 5 = 265, 000 miles/day
Total number of miles driven in the CBD per average weekday
= 173,500 + 265,000 = 438, 500 miles/day
Total number of miles driven in the service area per average
weekday
= 103,300 -I- 265,000 = 368, 300 miles/day
2.2 1975
Assume 1971 to 1975 growth rate of 12%
Average number of vehicle trips on an average weekday in 1975
= 230,549 x 1.12 = 258,000 vehicle trips/day
Assume same average trip time and average vehicle speed in 1975
as in 1971 (i.e., 3.5 miles/trip)
2D-4
-------
Average number of vehicle miles driven within the Anchorage
Metropolitan area on an average weekday in 1975
= 258, 000 Chicle trips ^ 5 ^^ = 903f 000 HSleJL
day r ' day
Assume no change in destinations from 1971 breakdown
Total number of miles driven in the CBD per average weekday in 1975
= 438, 500 2Hl^ x 1. 12 = 491,000
day day
Total number of miles driven in the service area per average
weekday in 1975
= 368, 300 x 1.12 = 412, 500 2^££
day
3. ESTIMATE OF NUMBER OF VEHICLE MILES DRIVEN ON PAVED
AND UNPAVED ROADS
Assume City of Anchorage is the CBD.
3.1 1971
Assume 90% of miles driven in the CBD are driven on roads and
10% in alleys.
Assume 80% of miles driven in the CBD are driven on paved roads
and alleys and 20% on unpaved roads and alleys.
From Section 2. 1 of this appendix, the total number of miles driven
in the CBD per average weekday
= 438,500 miles/day
Number of miles driven on paved roads in CBD per average weekday
= 438, 500 miles/day x 0. 9 x 0. 8 = 316,000 miles/day
Number of miles driven on unpaved roads in CBD per average weekday
= 438, 500 miles/day x 0. 9 x 0. 2 = 79,000 miles day
Number of miles driven on paved alleys in CBD per average weekday
= 438, 500 miles/day x 0. 1 x 0. 8 = 35. OOP miles/day
Number of miles driven on unpaved alleys in CBD per average weekday
= 438, 500 miles/day x 0. 1 x 0. 2 = 9,000 miles/day
2D-5
-------
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
per average weekday
= 316,000+35,000 = 351,000 miles/day
Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
per average weekday
= 79,000 + 9,000 = 88,000 miles/day
Service Areas: Spenard, Muldoon and Sandlake
Assume 70% of miles driven in the service areas are driven on
paved roads and 30% on unpaved roads.
From Section 2. 1 of this appendix, the total number of miles driven
in the service areas per average weekday
= 368, 300 miles/day
Number of miles driven on paved roads in the service areas per
average weekday
= 368,300 miles/day x 0.7 = 258,000 miles/day
Number of miles driven on unpaved roads in the service areas
per average weekday
= 368, 300 miles/day x 0. 3 = 110.000 miles/day
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 351,000 + 258,000 = 609, OOOmiles/day
Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 88,000 + 110,000 = 198,000 miles/day
3.2 1975
Assume 90% of miles driven in the CBD are driven on roads and
10% on alleys.
Assume 90% of miles driven in the CBD are driven on paved roads
and alleys and 10% on unpaved roads and alleys-.
2D-6
-------
City of Anchorage (CBD) from Section 2. 2
Total number of miles driven in the CBD per average weekday in 1975
= 491, 000 miles/day
Number of miles driven on paved roads in CBD per average weekday
= 491, 000 miles/day x 0. 9 x 0. 9 = 398. OOP miles/day
Number of miles driven on unpaved roads in CBD per average weekday
= 491, 000 miles/day x 0. 9 x 0.1 = 44. OOP miles/day
Number of miles driven on paved alleys in CBD per average weekday
= 491, 000 miles/day x 0.1 x 0. 9 = 44, OOP miles /day
Number of miles driven on unpaved alleys in CBD per average weekday
= 491, 000 miles/day x 0.1 x 0.1 = 5, OOP miles/day
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
per average weekday in 1975
= 398, 000 + 44, 000 = 442. OOP miles/day
Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
per average weekday in 1975
= 44, 000 + 5, 000 = 49. OOP miles/day
Service Areas: Spenard, Muldoon and Sandlake
Assume that in 1975 80% of miles driven in the service areas are
driven on paved roads and 20% on unpaved roads.
From Section 2.2 of this appendix, the total number of miles driven in
service areas per average weekday in 1975
= 412, 500 miles/day
Number of miles driven on paved roads in the service areas per
average weekday in 1975
= 412, 500 miles/day x 0. 8 = 330, OOP miles/day
Number of miles driven on unpaved roads in the service areas
per average weekday in 1975
= 412, 500 miles/day x 0. 2 = 82, 500 miles/day
2D-7
-------
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday in 1975
= 442,000 + 330,000 = 772.000 miles/day
Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday in 1975
= 49, 000' + 82, 500 = 131, 500 miles/day
4. ESTIMATE OF VEHICULAR PRODUCED DUST (from Section 3).
4. 1 1971
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 609, 000 miles/day
Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 198, 000 miles/day
4.2 1975
Total number of miles driven on paved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 772, 000 miles/day
.Total number of miles driven on unpaved roads and alleys in CBD
and service areas per average weekday
= 131, 500 miles/day
At the present time, no correlation between traffic flow and road
conditions (i. e. , paved/unpaved) to dust production is available. An
estimate of vehicle-caused dust could be made if dust produced by
vehicular traffic on paved and unpaved roads at various speeds can
be determined. Converting the vehicle-caused dust production to some
applicable form, such as grams of dust per vehicular mile traveled,
and combining this with the number of miles driven in Anchorage on
paved and unpaved roads per average weekday would result in a
reasonable estimate of vehicle-caused dust in Anchorage.
2D-8
-------
APPENDIX 2E
COST OF PAVING AND MAINTAINING
1. ESTIMATING COSTS
Dust is generated by vehicular traffic on paved and unpaved roads
and streets. Wet-sweeping paved roads and streets, paving unpaved
roads and streets, and grading and oiling unpaved roads and shoulders
are the proposed control strategies.
Three sources of information were used in estimating the cost of
paving, wet-sweeping, grading, and oiling road surfaces.
1. 1 CALCULATION OF COSTS BASED ON INFORMATION FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, STATE OF ALASKA
The following information was obtained from M. R. Hamilton,
Department of Highways, State of Alaska, Juneau, Alaska.
$35, OOP to $40, OOP per mile
Paving;
Wet-sweeping;
Grading;
Oiling:
Sweeper operating cost; $17. /hr
Driver labor cost: $12. /hr
Operation speed: 2-4 miles/hr
Water and wetting agent cost; small
Average cost; (17 + 12)/3 = $10. /mile
Motor grader operating cost: $10. /hr
Driver labor cost: $12. /hr
Operation speed: 3-5 miles/hr -- 3 passes required
Average cost; (10 + 12)/(4/3) = 16. 50/mile
Asphalt distributor operating cost; $25. /hr
Driver labor cost: $12. /hr
Speed of operation; 3-5 miles/hr
Oil costs: $15./bbl = $0. 358/gallon
Oil expenditure: 1 /4 gal/square yard
Average road width: 24 ft =8 yd
Surface of 1 mile of road: 1760 x 8 = 14100 square yards
Oil expenditure: 14100 x 1/4 = 3520 gal/mile
3520x0.358= $1260/mile
Average cost of oiling; 1260 + (25 + 12)/4 = $1270/mile
2E-1
-------
Oiling Road Width: 1 yard on each side
Shoulders; or r 4 -i e JT.U
Surface of 1 mile of road shoulders:
1 760 x 1 x 2 = 3520 square yards
Oil expenditure: 3520x1/4x0.358 = $315/mile
Average cost of oiling road shoulders;
315 + (25 + 12)/4 = $324/mile
1.2 ESTIMATES BASED ON INFORMATION FROM ANCHORAGE
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT (FOR OILING COSTS ONLY)
Oiling costs were also obtained from the Anchorage Highway
Department through R. Mikkelson. There a mix of PS 300 residual
oil and of diesel oil is used. The average cost of oiling is $640/mile,
i. e. , about half of the cost calculated from information obtained from
the Alaska Department of Highways. Prorating the cost of oiling road
shoulders, which was about one-fourth of the cost of oiling roads, we
find an average cost of oiling road shoulders to be $l60/mile.
1.3 INFORMATION FROM THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
OF FAIRBANKS (FOR OILING COSTS ONLY)
According to information obtained in the Highways Department of
Fairbanks, the oil used in Fairbanks is the same as used in Anchorage
so that there is no difference in oiling costs in the two areas.
2. COMPARISON OF COSTS
Comparison can now be made of the costs of the following two
alternatives:
1) Paving one mile every five years, resurfacing it once
a year, and wet-sweeping it 100 times a year.
2) Grading a mile of unpaved road twice a year and oiling
it four to six times a year.
In this comparison the cost of resurfacing, which involves all
road-surface maintenance short of complete paving, has been assumed
to be $1000/mile.
The Anchorage (and Fairbanks) information on oiling roads and
road shoulders is considered more reliable, since it does not involve
intermediate calculations, and it therefore appears in Table 2E-1.
2E-2
-------
The cost estimates calculated from the State Department of Highways
information (Section 1.1 of this appendix) are used for paving, wet-
sweeping, and grading in the table.
Oiling road shoulders is listed as a separate cost item, since it
is conceivable that it could be included in both of the alternatives,
depending on the type of road.
Table 2E-1. Road and Street Maintenance Costs
r f/\/ri Frequency Cost Total Costs
^ost/Miie Times/year g/mile-year g/mile-year
Paving
Resurfacing
Wet- sweeping
Grading
Oiling
Oiling- road
shoulder
$ 40, 000
1,000
10
16
640
215
1/5
1
100
2
4-6
4-6
$ 8,000
1,000
1,000
32
2560-3840
860-1290
$10,000
2590-3870
860-1290
3. CONCLUSIONS
The more cost-effective approach may well be the paving and wet-
sweeping program (as compared to the grading/oiling approach) since it
is probable that frequently cleaned paved roads produce less dust than
graded and oiled unpaved roads. However, paving requires a capital
investment. Therefore, acceleration of the paving program for
Anchorage and creation of an extensive paving program for Fairbanks
are not recommended in the first year of the implementation plan.
Studies of dust fall and air quality in the vicinity of paved and unpaved
roads will permit an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the two
approaches. Decisions on extension of paving programs can then be
made.
2E-3
-------
APPENDIX 3A
VARIATIONS IN PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
WITH WIND, RAIN AND TEMPERATURE
Four years of suspended particulate data are available from the
NASN station in Fairbanks. The sampling station intake elevation is
3 feet. Samples are obtained on a random basis throughout the year. It
is notable that few midwinter samples were collected. Table 3-A-l is a
summary of the effects of precipitation and wind direction on mean
particulate concentration for this station. Data are insufficient in any
of the quadrants with the exception of the northerly quadrant to conclude
any directional effect. There are sufficient data among all the dry day
samples (48 hours without precipitation) and all the wet day samples
(any measureable amount of precipitation within 24 hours or trace quan-
tities over a period greater than 12 of 24 hours or a trace amount of
precipitation on a day following 2 or more days of heavy precipitation) to
suggest that dry days yield a significantly higher concentration of sus-
pended particulates than wet days.
Table 3A-2 shows the variation in particulate concentration with
temperature distribution. It is significant that for days with average
temperature well below freezing the particulate concentrations are fairly
low. It should be remembered that there is a persistent snow cover
throughout the winter months. There are too few samples for the 25° to
40° F range to draw any conclusions; however, the overall increase in
particulate concentration with temperature is significant.
Wind speed distribution versus particulate concentration is given
in Table 3A-3 . Although a weak correlation could be suspected from these
data, there are too few cases for the greater than 12 mph grouping to
substantively support this conclusion.
Figures 3A-1 through 3A-4 illustrate the seasonal variation in
particulate concentration at Fairbanks for each of the 4 years of NASN data.
Figure 3A-5 is a composite of these 4 years showing the monthly geometric :
mean concentrations. Although there are limited data available for each
month, the composite does illustrate the combined effects of freezing
3A-1
-------
Table 3-A-l. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates
(TSP) as a Function of Wind Direction
Fairbanks NASN Data
(1967-1970)
Dry Days
Wet Days
All Dry Days
All Wet Days
X
g
n
X
g
n
X
g
(T
g
n
Xg
n
Calm
00
59
1
220
1.91
56
89
2. 07
25
Wind Direction Quadrant (degrees)
33-05
259
1. 90
36
78
1.72
8
06-14
213
1.87
7
317
1
15-23
177
1. 39
7
82
2.21
10
24-32
152
1. 86
6
99
2. 19
6
x = geometric mean (^g/m )
O
(r = geometric standard deviation
O
n = number of samples
3A-2
-------
M
M J J
MONTHS
•s
'N
Figure 3A-1. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Participates 1967
Fairbanks NASN Data
3A-3
-------
720
680
640
600
560
520
480
440
G 400
360
OS
UJ
o
320
280
O
Of.
y 240
200
160
120
80
40
J FMAMJJASOND
MONTHS
Figure 3A-2. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulates 1968
Fairbanks NASN Data
3A-4
-------
u
680
640
600
560
520
480
440
400
360
320
5= 280
240
200
160
120
80
40
M
N
A M J J A S O
MONTHS
Figure 3A-3. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulates 1969
Fairbanks NASN Data
3A-5
-------
560
520
480
440
400
360
5 320
D
U
O-
to
280
2240
2
y 200
160
120
80
40
J FMAMJ JASOND
MONTHS
Figure 3A-4. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulates 1970
Fairbanks NASN Data
3A-6
-------
480
440
400
360
2 320
LLJ
5
g 280|
3
U
Q_
CO
240|
200
o
U 1601
1201
801
40|
FOUR-YEAR AVERAGE 1967-1970
(GEOMETRIC MONTHLY MEANS)
M
M J J A S O N
MONTHS
Figure 3A-5. Seasonal Variation of Suspended Particulates
Fairbanks NASN Data
3A-7
-------
Table 3-A-2. Measurement of Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) as a'
Function of Temperature Distribution (Average Daily)
Fairbanks NASN Data (1967-1970)
<25°F 25-40° F >40°F
x 89 168 259
g
o- 1.82 2.85 1.51
O
n 43 19 44
x = geometric mean
O
12 mph
x 101 194 178
g
a- 2. 30 2. 03 1.
g
n 35 67 4
x = geometric mean (|ig/m )
O
a = geometric standard deviation
n = number of samples
3A-8
-------
Temperatures, low wind speeds and snow cover during the winter months
as suggested in the foregoing analyses. The September maximum appears
to be a result of the very dry period during September just before the
return of freezing temperatures. The cool nights and warm dry days
experienced during this month would tend to cause expansion and con-
traction in the soil, loosening the surface and allowing even fairly light
winds to entrain this thin crusty alluvium.
3A-9
-------
APPENDIX 3B
ESTIMATION OF AIR QUALITY DUE TO PARTICULATES
AND CARBON MONOXIDE IN FAIRBANKS
These calculations are based on the procedures in Reference 6,
Appendix A: "Air Quality Estimation". The average wind speed is
2. 3 m/sec.
1. URBAN SIZE C
Urban size is defined in Reference 6 as C = 1 /2 »/urban area, km
Two areas were chosen to be used for "urban area" (see Figure 3-6):
1) City area: 42 km ; C = 3. 23 km
2) "Air shed" area: 227 km2; C = 7. 55 km
2. NORMALIZED CONCENTRATION ~
Pollutant concentration, X, is calculated from the known emission
density, Q, and the average wind speed, u, by means of a curve developed
by the EPA and described by the curve-fit equation
Iog10 ^-= 0.398 l9g1Q C + 1
1) for C = 3.23; •—= 107.4; X= 47 Q
2) for C = 7.55;^-= 151; X= 65.6 Q
for u = 2. 3 m/ sec
3. PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
The total particulate emission excluding forest fires, traffic-
generated dust and blown-in dust is 2555 tons/year from area sources
(Reference 20, page 21). Particulate emissions from the major point
sources amount to about 6000 tons/year if the cyclone efficiencies are
assumed to be 84% or less. However, some of the particulate emissions
cannot affect air quality in the central city. Eielson AFB is too far
removed (22 miles from Fairbanks) to affect either the larger "air shed"
area or the city-sized area. A total of 7000 tons/year is a reasonable
3B-1
-------
total emission rate for the larger area. The smaller area includes the
Fairbanks Municipal and the University of Alaska power plants and an
estimated 75% of the area sources, for a total of 3600 tons/year.
1) City area; Q = 3600 x 28.8 x 103/(42 x 106) = 2.46 /xg/sec-m2
2) "Air shed" area; Q = 7000 x 28. 8 x 103/(227 x 106)
2
= 0. 9 /ug/sec-m
Thus,
3
1) X = 116 //g/m based on the city area
2) X = 59 /xg/m based on an "air shed" area.
The air quality calculated with the smaller area is larger than
the measured monthly geometric mean averages in winter (see
Figure 3A-5 in Appendix 3A).
The air quality calculated with the larger "air shed" type area is
close to the particulate concentrations measured during the winter
months, when blown-in and traffic-generated dust is practically nil and
forest fires are unlikely to occur.
Further control of power plant emissions will reduce point-source
emissions to about 2000 tons/year. The air quality in 1975, based on a
2
227 km area and including a 16% population growth between 1970-and
1975, would be close to 41 /ug/m3 in winter (1. 16 x 2555 + 2000 = 4900
tons/year).
4. CARBON MONOXIDE
The yearly carbon monoxide emissions in Fairbanks total
35, 182 tons/year (Reference 20, page 10). This number includes
3248 tons/year from open burning and forest fires (Reference 20,
page 21). Since carbon monoxide concentrations are highest in winter,
forest fires and open burning will not be included in the air quality
estimation. For the "air shed" area, all but the Eilson AFB
(1002 tons/year) and NASA Stad Station (106 tons/year) contributions
are included. Thus, the applicable emission rate is:
35, 182 - 3248 - 1108 = 30, 800 tons/year
Q = 30, 800 x 28.8/(227 x 10 ) = 3. 88 x 10"3 mg/m2 - sec
3B-2
-------
The smaller "city" area receives carbon monoxide from the
Fairbanks Municipal and the Univeristy of Alaska power plants and
about 75% of the area source contributions.
Q = 22,300x28.8/(42 x 106) = 1 5. 2 x 10"3 mg/m2 - sec
Thus,
and
3
1) X = 0. 71 mg/m based on the city area
3
2) X = 0.26 mg/m based on the "air shed" area
The recommended procedure for obtaining 8-hour concentrations
from the annual estimates given above is the use of a factor of 6. Thus,
3
X = 4. 2 mg/m
and
3
X = 1. 6 mg/m
are the annual average carbon monoxide 8-hour concentrations. How-
ever, conditions under which the much higher measured concentrations
occur are not average, either in terms of air velocity or of automotive
admission. A more detailed treatment of carbon monoxide concentra-
tions is given in Appendix 3C.
3B-3
-------
APPENDIX 3C
MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS IN FAIRBANKS
1. BASIC INFORMATION
1.1 ASSUMPTIONS
• 12% increase in car population between 1971 and 1975.
• Vehicle distribution by year model (i. e. , car age) unchanged
The distribution of 1970 applies to 1971, 1975, and 1977.
• 907c of the gasoline burned in Division 4 is consumed in the
Fairbanks region.
1.2 CAR POPULATION
1970 - 21,237 motor vehicles licensed in Fairbanks office. Thus,
there are about:
• 22,000 vehicles in 1971
• 25, 000 vehicles in 1975
• 26,000 vehicles in 1977.
Vehicle distribution by year model for July 1970 from Reference 18
is shown in Table 3C-1.
2. CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
2. 1 IDLE EMISSION RATE
Car models 1967 and older are not exhaust emission controlled and
have substantially higher rates than 1968-1970 vehicles; the controls will
be more effective on the post 1971 cars. Carbon monoxide mass emissions
for the three vehicle age groups, as measured by 1972 Federal test pro-
cedures, are shown in Table 3C-2. The 1972 Federal test cycle is a com-
posite drive cycle with average speed of 22 mph which is initiated with the
powertrain conditioned to 70 F.
The emission factors corresponding to 1972 Federal test cycle have
been developed by TRW from numerous tests on a large number of motor
vehicles. The radically reduced carbon monoxide emission factor to be
required on 1975 model cars (4. gm/mile) has not been taken into account
in the 1975 calculation. To be conservative, the level of emission was
assumed to be the same on all post-1970 models. The impact of more
stringent regulations on the post-1974 vehicles would be small in 1975;
however, it is accounted for in the 1977 projections.
3C-1
-------
Table 3C-1. Vehicle Population Distribution
1970
Distribution
Year Model Percent
1971
Distribution
Year Model
1975
Distribution
Year Model
1977
Distribution
Year Model
Percent
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
and older
Total
8.52
12.82
14.82
10.70
10.25
9.84
7.58
6. 34
19. 13
100%
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
and older
22, 000
vehicles
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
and older
25,000
vehicles
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
and older
26, 000
vehicles
8. 52
12. 82
14.82
10. 70
10. 25
9.84
7.58
6. 34
4.00
3.00
12. 13
100%
Table 3C-2. Carbon Monoxide Emission Rates for Motor Vehicles
Precontrolled
Controlled -
Controlled -
Controlled -
<: 1967
1968-70
1971-74
1975-77
1972 Test
22 MPH
gm/mile
122
88
51
4
Cold Weather
Idle gm/hour
2700
2700
2700
2700
10 MPH
400
400
400
400
5 MPH
600
600
600
600
3C-2
-------
The cold weather, low speed emission factors are extrapolations of
tests reported in Reference 17. Cold weather idle emission factor is cal-
culated as follows:
The estimate of cold weather idle CO exhaust emissions is made
using the following assumptions:
1) Manual choke override in cold weather results in fuel-to-air
ratio mixtures near the black smoking condition, regardless
of manufacturer or model year.
2) The powertrain population is essentially made up of
middle-sized V-8 engines.
3) The total carburetor air mass flow rate is insensitive to the
choke blade setting (i.e., reduced volumetric flow rate is
directly offset by increased air density resulting from sub-
zero temperatures).
Applying the above assumptions and the following equation, CO emis-
sions of 2700 gm/hr are calculated:
co.p
= 2700 gm/hr
where:
V = volumetric flow rate at idle, 10 cfm (Reference 11, assump-
tions 2 and 3)
CO = CO concentration at incipient black smoke, 13.5% (Reference 11)
p = conversion constant, 33 gm/ft (Reference 8 ).
Cold weather prolongs engine warm-up and results in extended idling
time to maintain favorable underhood temperatures. In order to estimate
vehicle CO exhaust emission rates, a composite estimate of combined
nominal and cold weather driving is required. Cold weather idle emissions
and low speeds driving during warm-up are assumed equivalent across all
model years (i.e. , engine warm-up requires the same amount of choke
action and idle warm-up).
2.2 EMISSIONS ATTRIBUTED TO WINTER IDLING
The following is a calculation of the percent of automobile CO emissions
due to winter idling. This calculation is based on data derived previously
in this report and on statistics acquired independently.
3C-3
-------
1) 908 million miles were traveled in Alaska during 1968,
according to 1968 statistics from the U.S. Department
of Transportation. Three percent increase per year
results in 955 million miles being traveled in 1970.
2) Fairbanks has 15% of the total State-wide vehicle regis-
trations. If vehicle miles are apportioned according to
vehicle registration, therefore, of the 955 million miles,
143 million were driven in Fairbanks in 1970.
3) Fairbanks gasoline consumption for 1970 was 17,460,000
gallons, according to the Fuel Facts Division of the
Department of Revenue.
4) A national average of 12. 5 miles per gallon applies to
average U.S. driving conditions. Assume 10 miles per
gallon for severe winter driving conditions. 14. 3 million
gallons of gasoline would be required to drive 143 million
miles. Therefore, 3. 2 million gallons of gasoline are
attributed to consumption during extended idling periods.
5) Assume that two gallons per hour are consumed during idle.
From previous calculations, 2700 grams per hour of CO
are emitted at idle. Therefore^ 1350 grams per gallon
are emitted at idle, or 4. 32 x 10 grams are emitted per
3.2 x 10 gallons of gasoline are consumed.
6) Average urban CO emission factor is 95 grams per mile
(Reference 16). At 10 miles per gallon, this equals 950
grains per gallon. 14. 3 x 10" gallons x 950 grams per
gallon = 13. 58 x 10^ grams.
Q
7) Combining 5 and 6: 4. 32 x 10 grams CO from idling
13. 58 x 109 grams CO from driving
24% CO emissions are due to idling
76% CO emissions are due to driving.
2.3 MILEAGE DISTRIBUTION
Previous studies of driving habits indicate that older cars are driven
less than newer ones. A linear decrease from 13,500 miles per year for
the newest model to 4000 miles/year for 12-year-old vehicles is assumed,
as shown in Figures 3C-l-and 3C-2. Since there are fewer roads in
Fairbanks than the United States average, a factor of 0. 7 will be applied
to estimate yearly mileage. This estimate was based on information
obtained from local car owners.
3C-4
-------
3. CARBON MONOXIDE ANNUAL EMISSIONS
Table 3C-3 presents the calculation for carbon monoxide emission
rates as they would be obtained if all driving were done in warm weather
at normal average speeds in Fairbanks.
3C-5
-------
Table 3C-3. Carbon Monoxide Emission Rates
(Cold Weather Increment Excluded)
Fairbanks
1971
% cars
No. of cars
Miles /year -car
Miles /year
, Emission rate, gm/mile
Emission rate, gm/yr
Emission rate, tons/yr
1975
% cars
No. of cars
Miles /year -car
Miles /year
Emission rate, gm/mile
Emission rate, gm/yr
Emission rate, tons/yr
1977
% cars
No. of cars
Miles /year -car
Miles /year
Emission rate, gm/mile
Emission rate, gm/yr
Emission rate, tons/yr
Pre-Control
53.2
11,700
6, 550
76. 5x1 O6
122
9. 45x1 09
19
4, 750
3, 500
16. 6x1 O6
122
2. Oxl O9
Pre-Control
12.1
3, 100
2, 100
6. 5x1 O6
122
. 79x1 O9
Controlled
68-70
38.3
8,430
8,400
71xl06
88
6. 2 5x1 O9
23.8
5,950
5, 600
33. 3x1 O6
88
2. 93x1 O9
Controlled
68-70
13.3
3, 500
4, 800
I6.8xl06
88
1.48xl09
Controlled
Post-71
8. 5
1, 870
9,400
17. 5x1 O6
51
0. 9x1 O9
57.2
14,300
8,400
120. Oxl O6
51
6. Oxl O9
71-74 75-77
38.4 36.2
10,000 9,400
6, 800 8, 800
68. Oxl O6 83. Oxl O6
51 4
3. 46x1 O9 ,33xl09
Total
100
22, 000
I65xl06
I6.6xl09
18, 300
100
25, 000
170xl06
ll.OxlO9
12, 100
Total
100
26, 000
1 74x1 O6
6. 05x1 O9
6, 700
-------
CO
n
14
12
> 10
"J ~
< 8
6
to
UJ
1975 CAR MODEL DISTRIBUTION
1975 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64
8.5%
I I I I I
PERCENTAGE BY CONTROL TYPE
PERCENTAGE BY CONTROL TYPE
38.3%
•53.2%
1971 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60
1971 CAR MODELDISTRIBUTION
Figure 3C-1. Car Population Distribution and Mileage Travelled in 1971 and 1975
-------
O
i
00
1977 76
75
1975 CAR MODEL DISTRIBUTION
74 73 72 71 70 69
0£
5
oo
PERCENTAGE BY CONTROL TYPE
PERCENTAGE BY CONTROL TYPE
1971
61
60
1971 CAR MODEL DISTRIBUTION
Figure 3C-2. Car Population Distribution and Mileage Travelled in 1971 and 1977
-------
4. COLD WEATHER EMISSIONS
The above emission estimates are based on a normal (22 mph- moderate
weather) driving cycle. Additional gasoline is consumed in idling and cold
weather driving. An estimate of additional emissions due to these factors
can be made on the basis of the annual gasoline consumption (i. e. , 20 mil-
lion gallons of gasoline sold in Division 4). Since most vehicles in that
region are located in Fairbanks, we will assume that 90% or 18 million
gallons were used there. The mileage travelled in 1971 was 165 million
miles (see Table 3C-3).
Under normal conditions, with an average fuel consumption of
11 miles/gallon, 15 million gallons would have been needed. Thus, 3 mil-
lion gallons can be attributed to the cold weather increment. If all of it is
attributed to idling, the resulting CO emissions would be (assuming
2 gallons/hour of idling and 2700 gms/hour CO emission).
Idle CO = -|-106 x 2700 = 4. 05 x 1 O9 gm/yr
or
4500 tons/year in 1971.
The 1971 total CO emissions from motor vehicles are 22, 800 tons/year
(see Table 3C-4). The cold weather emissions increment thus represents
20% of the motor vehicle emissions. That percentage will be higher in
1975: the normal driving emission will drop to 12, 100 tons/year despite
a car population increase. However, the controls required by the Federal
regulations may have little effect on idling and fuel-rich cold weather
driving. Thus, the cold weather emission increment will grow by 12% to
5000 tons/year or 29% of the motor vehicle emissions in 1975
Similarly, the cold weather emissions increment in 1977 will be
18% greater than in 1971, i. e., 5300 tons/year or 44% of the motor vehicle
emission in 1977. This calculation assumes that the means used to reduce
car emissions as measured on a Federal driving cycle do not affect cold
weather driving. This pessimistic approach is taken in order to insure
a conservative projection. Table 3C-4 summarizes the results.
3C-9
-------
Table 3C-4. Carbon Monoxide Emissions in Fairbanks
Automobiles
Normal Driving, tons/yr
Cold Weather, tons/yr
Automobile total, tons /yr
^f
Other sources, tons/yr
TOTAL, year
1971
18, 300
4. 500
22, 800
12,400
35, 200
1975
12, 100
5,000
17, 100
13,900
31,000
1977
6,700
5,300
12,000
14, 600
26, 600
5.
Includes stationary sources and transportation other than
automobiles and light trucks.
PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
IN AIR SHED AREA
In the "air shed" area, all stationary sources except Eilson AFB
(1002 tons/yr) and NASA Stad Station (106 tons/yr) are included. Thus,
emissions from other sources in this area are:
12400 - 1100 = 11300 tons/yr
The highest carbon monoxide concentration in Fairbanks is found on
cold winter days. Seasonal adjustments of emission rates are necessary
in order to estimate air concentration in winter.
The seasonal adjustment on fuel burning sources can be based on
seasonal variations in power loads in the Fairbanks Municipal Utility Power
Plant.
January 1971 average peak load is 13.4 Mw
July 1971 average peak load is 8. 2 Mw
Therefore, the winter load is approximately 22% higher than average while
the summer load is 22% lower than average. However, forest fires and
open fires, normally not winter sources, contribute 3, 200 t/yr (Reference 20,
page 12) ; diesel and air craft contributions should also be adjusted downward.
Seasonal adjustments on sources other than automobiles will therefore be
3C-10
-------
limited to removing forest fires and open burning from the "other sources"
of Table 3C-4. On a winter day "other sources" contribute
(11,300 - 3,200)/365 = 22 tons/day in 1971
and
25 x 1.12 = 25 tons/day in 1975
Motor Vehicles CO emission also vary with the weather. Idle mode
and fuel-rich driving will increase the emission during the 150 days of
winter while normal driving is distributed over 365 days. The daily
emissions from stationary sources, normal driving and cold weather con-
tributions, are shown in Table 3C-5.
Table 3C-5. Carbon Monoxide Emissions (Air Shed Area)
Winter
1971
Other sources
Automobiles
Driving (365 days)
Cold Weather (150 days)
TOTAL
1975
Other sources
Automobiles
Driving (365 days)
Cold Weather (150 days)
TOTAL,
Average
tons/yr
11,300
18,300
4,500
Average
tons/day
31
50
13,900
12,100
5,000
35
33
Winter
tons/day
22
50
30
I^PWV
102
25
33
33
9i
Twenty-four hour average concentration for winter days can now be
calculated for 1975.
The previously calculated concentration equation (Appendix 3B) is
X = 65.6 Q
'3C-11
-------
where the emission rate, Q, should be calculated in mg/m - sec in order
3
to obtain concentration, X, in mg/m .
Q = 91 x 365 x 28. 8 mg/sec (227 x 1 06 m2)"1
-32
= 4. 2 x 10 mg/m - sec
*
X = 0. 28 mg/m3
The recommended procedure to obtain 8-hour concentrations from
24-hour concentrations is the use of a factor of 6. Thus, the calculated
8-hour concentration is:
X = 1. 7 in winter.
m
o
These calculated values a-re below the air quality standard of 10 mg/m
and well below the measured CO concentrations in downtown Fairbanks,
3
which reached 19 mg/m in December - January '69-'70; one-hour con-
centrations of 81 mg/m have also been recorded.
However, the calculated CO concentrations are based on a wind
velocity of 2. 3 m/s - average for the Fairbanks region. In winter, when
temperature inversions are frequent, the air is very still. Benson and
Weller state that the wind speed near the ground during ice fog is about
0. 5 m/ sec (Reference 3, page 18). For u = 0. 5 m/s
2
X = 9 mg/m
a value more in keeping with measured concentrations.
Thus, no CO sources other than those accounted for in the inventory
are needed to explain. the high carbon monoxide concentrations in Fairbanks.
Projected values of CO emissions for 1975 show that carbon monoxide
concentration will not decrease significantly for their present values,
unless corrective measures are taken.
3C-12
-------
APPENDIX 3D
ESTIMATION OF THE REDUCTION IN CARBON
MONOXIDE AUTOMOBILE EMISSIONS
1. EMISSION RATES IN 1971 AND 1975
Definitions
An "employee" is defined here as a person who travels from home
to a single destination and back — 8 to 10 hours later. A "shopper" is
a person who parks in the CBD for shorter periods of time and may
change parking spaces several times.
1. 1 Estimate of Vehicle and Traveler Destination
Reference 28 (Page 11): Average summer weekday traffic volume
on main arteries servicing the downtown Fairbanks area
= 70,000 vehicles trips/day
Assume 20% of the traffic on the main arteries is done by
"employees" who make a two-way trip (to and from work)
every weekday*
= 14,000 vehicle trips/day by "employees" (2 trips/day)
= 7000 vehicles being driven on the main arteries by
"employees"
Assume 1. 5 passengers per car for an average summer
weekday (reference 27)
= 7000 vehicles x 1. 5 people = 10, 500 "employed"
vehicle
employed year around - assumed a constant number
From map of Fairbanks: Fort Wainwright is serviced primarily by
Gaffney Road and Eielson Air Force Base is serviced primarily by
Richardson Highway.
5k
This percentage was obtained through examination of the traffic volume
change during a day as given in Reference 28.
3D-1
-------
From Reference 28 (Page 11): Gaffney Road handles 11, 900.
vehicles/day; Richardson Highway handles 8500 vehicles/day. Number
of "employees" at Fort Wainwright
-11^x10,500 = 2000
Number of "employees" at Eielson Air Force Base
• Assumed daily commuters to the University and airports
= 1200
• "Employees" in the CBD = 10, 500 - (2000 + 1300 +
1200) = 6000 employees
Summary of employed commuter destination:
Area of Employment Number of Employed
Fort Wainwright 2000
Eielson Air Force Base 1300
University and Airport 1200
Downtown CBD 6000*
from Reference 20: Number of automobiles and trucks = 18,000.
• 25% of these vehicles do not come into CBD: 13, 500
vehicles drive inside the CBD. Number of vehicles
driven by "shoppers" (i. e. , commuters who do not
arrive at one location and remain there, such as
shoppers, truck drivers, etc. ):
= 13, 500 - number of vehicles driven by employees
= 13,500 -7. OOP = 6, 500 vehicles
1. 2 Estimate of Vehicle Miles Driven per Day
• Assume number of miles driven by employed
= 2. 5 miles one way (5 miles round trip)
The number of people employed in Fairbanks is larger, but not all
employees use the main access roads to enter the CBD.
3D-2
-------
• Number of miles driven per day by employees
= 14,000 vehicle trips x 2. 5 miles = 35,000 miles/day
trip
• Assume "shoppers" drive
= 1.0 mile/trip inside the CBD
The total number of internal trips is 90,000 (Reference 27)
and 75% of these trips are taken in the CBD.
The average number of trips by "shoppers"
0.75 (90,000 - 14,000)
= 57, 000 vehicle trips/day
• Number of miles driven by shoppers
= 57,000 vehicle trips x 1.0 mile = 57, 000 miles /day
day trip
1. 3 Summer to Winter Adjustment in Travel Conditions
• Assume 2. 5 employees for an average winter weekday
and 5 miles round trip
• Assume same number of employees in winter as in
summer.
• Total number of employee vehicles in winter
= 10, 500 people/2. 5 people/vehicle = 4200 vehicles/day
• Number of miles driven by employees in winter
= 4200 vehicles x 5 miles = 21, OOP miles
day vehicle day
• Assume "shoppers" winter vehicular travel is 60 percent
of summer vehicular travel, (Reference28 shows that
travel in January is 57% of average travel in June, July,
and August". On the coldest days the traffic is even lower).
• Number of miles driven by shoppers
= 0. 6 x 57, OOP miles = 34, OOP miles
day day
3D-3
-------
• Assume the number of shoppers' vehicles driven in the
winter is 70 percent of the shoppers' vehicles driven in
the summer.
• Total number of shoppers' vehicles in winter
= 0. 7 x 6, 500 vehicles = 4, 500 vehicles/day
1. 4 Vehicle CO Emissions in Wintertime
• Assume 400 g/mile CO emission while driven (some choke
and some idle)
• Assume 2,700 g/hour CO emissions while idling (see
Appendix 3C section 2.2)
• Assume idling time of 1 hour/day for each vehicle that
does not have a plug-in available to use and zero idling
time for vehicles with plug-in at the parking place.
*
"Shoppers"
• CO emissions while driving
= 34, OOP miles x 400 grams x 1 ton , =
day mile 0.908x10 grams
15 tons/day
• Assume "shoppers" use no plug-ins
• Idle CO emissions
= 4, 500 vehicles x 1 hour idle x 2700 grams x
day vehicle hour idle
1 ton , = 14 tons
0.908 x 10b day
grams
Total CO emissions from "shopper" vehicles = 29 tons/day
• "Employees"
CO emissions while driving
= 21,000 miles x 400 grams x 1 ton , = 9 tons
day mile 0. 908 x 10 day
grams
Assume heavy idling is produced by only the "employees"
working in the downtown CBT (i. e. , workers
at Fort Eielson, at Fort Wainwright, at the University,
and airport contribute only CO idling emissions in a
driving mode).
3D-4
-------
• Number of vehicles in downtown CBS and Fort Wainwright -
number of plug-ins presently available
= 6000 - 500 vehicle plug-ins =
2. 5 people/vehicle
1900 vehicles without plug-ins
• Idle CO emissions
= 1900 vehicles x 1 hour idle x 2, 700 grams x 1 ton ,
vehicle hour 0. 908 x 10
grams
= 5. 6 tons
day
Total CO emissions from "employee" vehicles1 15 tons/day
Total Winter CO emissions in 1971 from mobile sources =
29 + 15 = 44 tons/day
1. 5 Stationary CO Emissions in Wintertime
From Reference20: Residential CO emissions = 752 tons/year
Commercial CO emissions = 833 tons/year
Diesel emissions = 2250 tons/year
Small aircraft CO emissions = 2233 tons/year
6068 tons/year
In winter, small aircraft do not fly very much and diesel operation
is greatly reduced (no construction for instance). Residential and
commercial emissions include installations far removed from the CBD
(Eielson AFB, North Pole, etc. ), so that only about 3000 tons/year can
be assigned to sources other than automobiles.
• Total winter stationary CO emissions in 1971
(3000 tons/year) x LWy • ') = 8 tons/day
i-jo^ days
\
1. 6 Total Uncontrolled CO Emissions in 1975
• Assume 1971 to 1975 growth rate of 12%.
3D-5
-------
Total uncontrolled winter CO emissions in 1971
= (1971 mobile CO emissions + 1971 stationary
CO emissions)
= 44 + 8 = 52 tons/day
Total uncontrolled CO emissions in 1975
52 ^ x 1. 12 = 58 tons /day
day
(No influence of from the implementation of Federal Motor
Vehicle Standards on cold day emissions. )
1. 7 Percent CO Reduction Required to Meet 1975 Federal Standards
NAAQS Primary Standard
= 10mg/m3
3
Assume worst case CO 8 hour episode level = 19 mg/m
(Assumption based on 1970 NASN Data Measured at Fairbanks
Post Office.)
% CO Reduction Required = 19'1", 10 x 100 = 47%
An acceptable emission level is
\
0. 53 x 52 = 28 ton/day
Required Reduction 58-28 = 30 tons/day in 1975
3D-6
-------
2. REDUCTION TO BE EXPECTED FROM PLUG-IN FACILITY
500 plug-ins presently exist
2000 parking spaces exist
Assuming 3% per year increase, there will be 2250 parking spaces
in 1975. The additional 250 spaces installed between now and 1975 will
be equipped with plug-ins according to proposed regulations. The number
of conversions of the existing 1500 spaces without plug-ins will be:
1700 required - 250 installed (1971-75) - 500 existing =
950 to be converted
Therefore, expected emission reduction is 900 £ 1500 = 63%.
3D-7
-------
APPENDIX 3E
EMISSIONS FROM FUEL COMBUSTION
Ice fog, caused by water vapor emissions in extremely cold
(-35 C) weather, makes the use of fuels which produce much water
vapor undesirable. The water vapor emissions per million Btu
generated are given below and summarized in Table 3E-1.
1) Gasoline: Heat content is 20,500 Btu/lb (Reference 14).
Molecular weight of CgH18 = • Therefore,
114 Ib 20,500 Btu _ , -,7 . -6 Btu generated
• X i •• — £* % 3 j I X X \) m i7 j •
mole Ib moles burned
Weight of water (9 H2O) generated is 9 x 18 = mofe8 Burned'
The water generated in pounds per million Btu is
162 -- /Q >>7
2. 337 " 69' 3Z'
2) Methane: Heat content is 23,900 Btu/lb (Reference 14).
Molecular weight of CH4 = •~^|~ • Therefore,
16 Ib 23.900 Btu _fl_ .-6 Btu generated
mole X Ib " * *** X 1U moles burned*
Weight of water (2 H2O) generated is 2 x 18 =
The water generated in pounds per million Btu is
— "— - QA 24.
. 382 ~ V4< ^*-
3) Propane: Heat content is 21,700 Btu/lb (Reference 14).
Molecular weight of C,HQ = 44 |b. Therefore,
5 o mole
44 Ib x 21.700 Btu _ 055 x ip6 Btu generated
mole Ib ~ * moles burned
7? 1 Vk
Weight of water (4 H-O) generated is 4 x 18 = - . ° - %.
The water generated in pounds per million Btu is
?2 = 75 30
.955 '*'^'
3E-1
-------
Table 3E-1. Water Vapor Emissions
Fuel
Reaction
Water Emissions
Generated lb/l()6 Btu
% Increase of
(Compared to GAS)
W
i
N»
Gasoline
Methane
Propane
Coal
Fuel Oil
12.50
C_H0 + 5 O_ = 3 CO- + 4 H_O
3 O L. & L,
69.32
94.24
75.393
68
70
36
-------
4) Coal: Heat content is 20 x 10 Btu/ton. Water generated
in pounds per million Btu is 68. (Reference 24.)
5) Fuel Oil: Heat content 0. 14 x 106 Btu/gal. Water
generated in pounds per million Btu is 70. (Reference 24. )
To use Table 3E-1 for comparing water vapor emissions from com-
bustion with burning the indicated fuels, it must be assumed that the
respective combustion units, if used for the same application (for
example, automobile power), have identical thermal efficiencies. In
other words, thermal efficiencies must be the same to produce the same
correlation between the water vapor emissions rate in pounds of water
vapor produced per output unit (such as brake horsepower) and the
pounds of water vapor per million BTU input, as indicated in the table.
To obtain values for thermal efficiency requires identification of
the combustion units and their specifications.
3E-3
-------
APPENDIX 3F
DESCRIPTION OF REJECTED CONTROL MEASURES
1. ENFORCED VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
It is well documented (Reference 21) that vehicles in general use
deteriorate with regard to their exhaust emissions. These changes are
related to electrical and mechanical component deterioration as well as
to deposit buildup in combustion cylinders and in critical metering sec-
tions of the carburetor. Substantial deterioration results in hydrocarbon
and carbon monoxide emission which is 30 to 40% higher than emissions
from new, low mileage vehicles. Theoreticallyi with a program of
enforced inspection and maintenance, this deterioration could be minimized.
1.1 INSPECTION PROCEDURES
Significant engineering factors to be determined when selecting
inspection procedures are (1) the extent and complexity of inspection
and maintenance procedures,(2) the-rejection criteria, and (3) the
frequency of inspection.
Two basic inspection approaches have been considered, a franchised
garage and a state lane. A franchised garage approach is probably most
suitable for a small city such as Fairbanks. In the franchised garage
system, systematic specific inspection procedures are applied previous
to maintenance. Those vehicles shown not to comply to quantitative
specifications (i. e. , fail a specified performance level) are then main-
tained, usually directly following the inspection process by the same
service organization. The advantages of this approach are:
• No large, new capital expenditures are required to
initiate the system
• The vehicle owner is only inconvenienced once.
1.2 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE AS A CONTROL MEASURE
CO emission reductions at several levels can be effected depending
upon the required air quality and the degree to which inspection and
maintenance repair is imposed. Approaches range from inspection
and diagnosis of idle setting maladjustments (fuel-to-air ratio, basic
3F-1
-------
timing and idle speed) and their subsequent repair, to more exhaustive
inspections where major components in the induction system such as
air cleaners, positive crankcase ventilation systems and carburetors may
be repaired. The cost-effectiveness of these procedures vary considerably.
Winter emission reductions and yearly costs for the two programs men-
tioned are summarized in Table 3F-1. Generally, the adjustments of the
idle parameters is less costly because no parts and little labor are involved.
However, only 50% of the emissions reductions which could be effected are
obtained with these adjustments. Efforts must be made to find malfunctions
in the induction system to effect more substantial reductions. Carbon
monoxide 4-year average reductions of approximately 10% are obtainable
with the idle adjustment program, whereas the more substantial program
can reduce emissions by another 8 to 10%, relative to emission levels
measured at 70°F ambient conditions. Since cold weather average CO
emissions with choked carburetion can result in average CO mass emission
levels which are nearly twice as high, the average relative 4-year average
reduction would be approximately 5 and 9% for the idle adjustment and
extensive maintenance procedures, respectively. These values appear
in Table 3F-1.
Emission reductions continue to improve up to 4 years after inspec-
tion program implementation; therefore, emission reductions at 4 years
are also presented in the table. Corrections were made to the referenced
percent emissions reductions to adjust from the 7-mode composite emis-
sion test procedure to the constant volume sampling mass basis using the
1972 Federal procedure.
Table 3F-1. Winter CO Emission Reductions for Two
Mandatory Inspection Programs
(Reference 21)
Procedure
Idle adjustment
Idle plus induction
4 yr avg
CO, %*
5
9
4th yr
CO, %
10
18
Average cost/yeart
$2. 50
6.00
* Reduction relative to constant volume sampling mass emissions —
winter environment
tLabor, parts, inspection, and enforcement prorated over inspected
population
3F-2
-------
Unfortunately, the predominant source of CO emissions is pro-
longed idle, usually with a choked carburetor. This condition substan-
tially dominates the winter CO emissions, thus resulting in low relative
performance of a mandatory vehicle inspection/maintenance program.
This is because the benefits of maintaining those adjustments and
components which affect fuel to air ratio and, therefore, CO emissions
are lost in a choke-dominated operating mode. Because of the relatively
low emissions reductions effected in winter months and the requirement
to initiate the program 4 years previous to the time of achieving maximum
reductions, this strategy was not selected for implementation.
2. EXTENSIVE, PERMANENT BUS SYSTEM FOR FAIRBANKS
An extensive, permanent bus system can potentially remove a sub-
stantial fraction of traffic from Fairbanks' arterial streets for the entire
10-hour commercial period of the day. The system would have to perform
with no degradation during the coldest weather months to be effective in
controlling CO emissions.
2.1 SYSTEM DESIGN
A system having the following characteristics is required:
• Substantial removal of CBD vehicular traffic
• Direct service to major areas of economic activity
(University of Alaska, Airport, Fort Wainwright, CBD)
• Protected CBD passenger dispersal
• Adequate winter protection to waiting passengers
• Service equivalent to passenger vehicle in winter
environment (cost and trip time)
Based on the above criteria, the following baseline system was selected
in order to perform a rough order of magnitude cost-strategy effectiveness
estimate:
• Two main city loops (three stops)
Airport, CBD, University — outside loop
Second Ave. , Peger Road, College Road, East Side —
inside loop x
3F-3
-------
• One shuttle from the CBD to Fort Wainwright
• Secondary southside loop (three stops).
These express loops all serve the main downtown terminal and an average
of two suburban terminals. Five suburban collector terminals are placed
on main arteries or in immediate proximity to high density residential
areas. In addition, terminals are located at the University, Fort
Wainwright, and the Airport. All terminals are heated and have motor
vehicle parking capacity for approximately one third of the transit system
users.
The following route distances and speeds were assumed in estimating
system capacity and equipment requirements.
Table 3F-2. Transit System Characteristics
Route
Shuttle
South Side Loop
Inside Loop
Outside Loop
Round Trip Miles
2
5
8
10
Route Speed
MPH
20
20
25
25
Trip Time*
minutes
11
20
25
30
Includes wait time at terminals.
Assuming that (1) the system is sized to carry approximately 50% downtown
commuters (3000 people/hr), (2) the average in-bound load factor is 100%,
(3) 50-passenger buses are used, and (4) three bus trips per hour, average.
The number of required buses is:
(3000 pass/hr)/(150 pass/hr-bus) a 20
Assuming a 10% float for repair, 22 vehicles are required. The number
of trips per hour may be calculated from the trip times in Table 3F-2
for each route. If 5 buses are used for each route, then:
3F-4
-------
— y • 'r — - = £ (number of trips per hr x O-D trip length x number of buses)
= (5x2x5)+ (3 x 5 x 5) + (2 x 8 x 5) + (2 x 1 0 x 5) = 305
Assuming an average of 1. 5 passengers per vehicle, the reduction in car
miles per hour resulting from such a bus system is:
1500 pass miles/hr = t 000 car miles/hr
f . 5 pass/car
2.2 YEARLY CO REDUCTION: LIQUID PROPANE-FUELED BUSES
The peak-hour tons of CO reduced are
ile)l
I V
— *
(1000 miles/hr)(100 gm/mile) - (305 miles/hr)(74 gm/mile)
AGO = _
vehicle emissions reduced bus emissions added J
(1.1 x 10 tons/mg) = 0. 085 tons/hr
The peak-hour tons of CO in the absence of a rapid transit system are
based upon 7000 cars/hr entering the CBD (Reference 28).
car miles per hour at peak = (7000 cars/hr)(4 miles/trip)
. 28.000^^20".
and the yearly reduction is:
.00% x ,> - .00% , ("•'"' - »•»*
2. 3 CO REDUCTION IN WINTER MONTHS: GASOLINE- FUELED BUSES
The carbon monoxide emissions from a gasoline -powered bus is
about 400 gm/mile under normal ambient conditions. In winter,
800 gm/mile is a reasonable estimate. Thus, bus carbon monoxide
emissions are approximately:
305 miles/hr x 800 gm/mile s 240, 000 gm/hr
The twenty buses will replace 20 (50/2. 5) = 400 passenger cars in
winter (assuming 50 passengers/bus and 2. 5 passengers/car). The car
mileage replacement is:
3F-5
-------
305 (50/2. 5) = 6000 car miles/hr
In winter, that means:
6000 x 400 = 2, 400, 000 gm/hr
The reduction is:
A CO = 2, 400, 000 - 240, 000 = 2, 160, 000 gm/hr
For this rush hours/day:
AGO = 4. 32 x 106 gm/day = 4. 75 tons/day
(i. e. , 16% of the required 30 ton/day reduction)
Actual reductions will be considerably higher since the buses will
also be replacing cars used by ".shoppers. " Moreover, reduced traffic
density will produce a faster traffic flow and thus another incremental
reduction. To this, about one hour of idling for each car not having a
plug-in must be added. If the 400 cars do not have a plug-in, the
increment in CO emission reduction is another 1. 2 ton/day.
Therefore, the total winter emissions reduced in the CBD is at
least 20%. Obviously greater reductions could be effected with a larger
capacity system. However, excess capacity would result at off peak
hours; hence, capital costs relative to 8 hour reductions could rapidly
become excessive.
3. IDLE CONTROL
A substantial source of winter CO emissions is idle engine exhaust.
Over half the total motor vehicle CO emissions are attributable to pro-
longed idle with a highly choked carburetor. Two approaches to reducing
this source were considered:
• Retrofit all motor vehicles with an air reactor system.
• Reduce downtown traffic idling by automatic signal control.
3.1 AIR REACTOR RETROFIT
Exhaust manifold air reactors are devices for incinerating combustible
pollutants remaining in the post-combustion exhaust products. Secondary
air is injected into an insulated exhaust manifold using an auxiliary
3F-6
-------
crankshaft-driven air pump. The primary advantage of this approach is
that within reasonable limits, performance (i. e. , percent of incoming CO
combusted) is insensitive to vehicle operation (choke or nominal carburetion).
These devices are particularly effective at idle where high CO con-
centrations (5 to 13%) exist since reaction rate chemistry (concentration
and residence time) favor a high conversion efficiency. Data at nominal
carburetor fuel metering (Reference 4 ) and rich fuel metering more
typical of cold idle choking (Reference 21) show that conversion efficiencies
of between 60 and 80% are achievable at idle. A number of 1966-67 vehicles
sold in California, for example, were equipped with air reactors which
performed satisfactorily. Application of this approach at extremely low
(-60 F) ambient temperatures could conceivably result in less efficient
operation if cold ambient air is injected, since colder average initial
temperatures will occur in the reaction zone. Also, prolonged cold
weather warm-up will minimize the effectiveness of air reactors. Trips
lasting under six (6) minutes will result in smaller reductions, although
an estimate of cold weather performance indicates that higher initial
reactant concentrations and final reactor temperatures generally com-
pensate for lower cold-weather initial temperatures (see Figure 3F-1).
Most vehicles can probably be retrofitted with an air reactor system (air
pump, belt, hoses, and modified exhaust manifolds). Relatively little
impact on vehicle operation and performance will occur since the exhaust
products are treated in a post-combustion process. Estimated cost, of
labor and materials for the retrofit (assuming spare parts availability)
is $122 per vehicle, according to Reference 5 .
It should be noted that at least one automobile manufacturer
(Chrysler) will use an improved air reactor design on their 1972 models.
This will provide an opportunity to evaluate cold-weather performance.
An evaluation should be conducted on a fleet of 1 0 vehicles. Idle CO and
CO? emissions, fuel consumption and reactor temperatures should be
monitored with and without the air pump connected for the following
range of variables:
• Ambient temperatures from 0 to -60 F.
• Full choked cold start to part choked, warmed.-up engines.
3F-7
-------
00
SECONDARY
AIR INJECTION
IDLE MODE CONVERSION OF CO WITH AIR REACTOR
MAX. REACTOR
TEMP.
10%
CO
or
T
INITlAbsRATE/C'_,n=> C'
TMAX. ' 192°
TMAX. = 133°
FINAL RATE, C_60»C+6C)
C0_60, 60% CONVERSION
<3 CO
+60'
TIME
I
•8
Figure 3F-1. Idle Mode Conversion of CO with Air Reactor
(References 4 and 21)
-------
These data will be used to verify the estimated effectiveness of air
reactors and to develop accurate emission factors for estimating the
impact of more sophisticated vehicle control systems on cold-weather
CO emissions in the 1975 time period. It is possible that the effect of
new control technology will reduce the requirement for alternative
abatement strategies.
Because of the high cost of air reactor retrofit conversion and the
uncertainties in cold-weather CO emission reductions, this procedure
was not selected for implementation. Emission reductions have been
conservatively based upon a 50% efficiency and 100% retrofit on all
vehicles:
AGO = (20 tons/day)(0. 5) = 10 tons/day
3.2 AUTOMATIC SIGNAL CONTROL
The second alternative to reducing idle CO emissions is to increase
the CBD traffic flow through automatic signal control. This approach is
only effective on that fraction of idle time associated with stopping at
intersections, whereas the air reactor is effective 100% of the time
(exclusive of warm-up effects). As a representative approach, applica-
tion of the TRW SAFER traffic control system was evaluated to assess
its impact in reducing idle traffic time. Calculations of delay time, CO
reduction and cost are shown in Appendix 3G.
4. FLEET NATURAL GAS
This strategy was rejected because the increase in water vapor
production would aggravate the ice fog connected problems of low visibility,
though an 80% reduction in CO is effected. There is a 36% increase in
water vapor emissions when gasoline is replaced by natural gas (methane);
the increase is 9% when liquid propane is used. Natural gas is not avail-
able in Fairbanks; liquid propane is.
The normal boiling point of propane is -44°F. At moderate ambient
temperatures liquid propane tanks self-p'ressurize to about 100 psi, thus
providing overpressure for the fuel vaporization and fuel system. In
colder climates ethane is added to propane in order to conserve the tank
self-pressurization capability at lower ambient temperatures (ethane's
normal boiling point is -127 F). Since ethane is heavier than propane,
3F-9
-------
the amount of water vapor (which increases with the hydrogen/carbon
ratio) would be still closer to the water vapor emissions of gasoline.
Liquid propane fuel has several advantages besides a clean exhaust.
Cold weather starting is less of a problem since the fuel is evaporated
before being introduced into the engine. The cost of fuel is lower and
maintenance costs are considerably reduced too. A gasoline-powered
car requires monthly oil changes in winter in Fairbanks. Propane-
powered engines do not form carbons and require fewer oil changes.
Propane is presently used by one taxi cab fleet in Fairbanks.
Trucks, which constitute 30% of the Fairbanks car population according
to the car registration records are particularly well adopted to conversion
to propane because fuel tank installation is easy.
5. CAR POOLING
Car pooling can be an effective means of reducing motor vehicle
emissions, particularly when the average number of passengers per
vehicle is low, say of order 1. 2. Capital costs associated with imple-
menting this strategy can vary considerably. At one limit a low key,
public relations approach can be implemented, and at another limited
parking spaces may be provided, or prohibition of the use of arterial
streets may be effected for vehicles containing a specified number of
passengers. The effectiveness of car pooling is a strong function of
the degree to which it is now practiced and to the non-environmental
benefits received by the participants. For example, a recent attempt
through news media to promote car pooling on a trial basis for a specific
day in Los Angeles was not effective when the stated incentive was only
to improve the environment (i.e. , reduce vehicle exhaust emissions).
It appears that other incentives (positive and negative) will be required
if car pooling is to be an effective control strategy.
Because of the many variables affecting the ability of car pooling
to reduce emissions, an estimation was made for two levels of incentive
and, hence, levels of increased vehicle load factor.
Plan Load Factor Increase Incentive
A 30% Public Relations
B 80% Tangible Benefits
3F-10
-------
The following origin-destination (O-D) trip frequencies and distances
were assumed:
Table 3F-3. CBD Trip Characteristics
O-D Trip
Load Factor _.. A _ '•
Distance Frequency
A B miles trips /day
Basis
CBD-CBD 0 30
Suburb-CBD 30 80
Interurb-CBD 30 80
Interurb-Suburb 0 30
2 32, 000 Twice CBD length
4 18, 500 Avg. trip length
7 14, 000 Max. city limit
6 14, 000 Max. city limit
#The frequency factors are rough estimates based upon population density,
the current 70, 000 trips/day, and a 1975 growth factor of 12%.
1) Estimated Mileage Per Day in City
The estimated total mileage driven in Fairbanks in 1975 is:
4
2J (O-D trip miles) x (trip frequency);
i = l
2(32, 000) + 4(18, 500) + 7(14, 000) + 6(14, 000) =. 320, 000
2) Estimated Mileage Reduction with Car Pooling - Plan A
The estimated mileage reduction with car pooling for
Plan A is:
4
5^ (O-D trip miles) (trip frequency) (load factor increase)
-^
= 2(32, 000)(0) + 4(18, 500)- + 7(14,
J. • J
- 40, 000 miles/day
% reduction - 100 ( 40> 00° \ = 12%
\320,000/
+ 6(14, 000)(0)
3F-H
-------
3) Estimated Mileage Reduction with Car Pooling - Plan B
The estimated mileage reduction with car pooling for
Plan B is:
= 2(32, 000)%-^ + 4<18' 500)^-^ + 7(14, 000) + 6(14, 000)
1 . J J..O 1 . O i .
= 110, 000 miles/day
% reduction = lOof "!('™n I = 34%
(110.000\
320,000 /
It is assumed that the automobile emissions are reduced in direct
proportion to the number of vehicle miles reduced, 12% and 34% reductions
in CO for plans A and B, respectively.
6. SUMMARY
The rejected control measures discussed in this Appendix are
summarized in Table 3F-4.
3F-12
-------
Table 3F-4. Rejected Control Measures
Measure
Advantages
Disadvantage*
1. Vehicle Inspection I. Can be effective in simultaneously reducing HC. CO.
Maintenance and NO exhaust emissions
(Idle and Extensive)
I. Small capital investment in teat equipment
i. Idle Control
(a) Air Reactor
(b) Traffic
3. Fleet Natural Gas
(Natural gas and
liquid propane)
4. Bus System*
S. Car Pooling
I. High CO emission reduction
2. Ktnission reduction produced for total year.
3. Relatively inexpensive compared to other strategies
4. Most vehicles could be retrofitted.
3. Factory installation on new vehicles
I. Improve travel time through congested downtown area
2. Decrease idle time during driving cycle
3. {Omission reductions produced for total year
4. Some reduction in vehicle operating costs.
1. High omission reduction in HC, CO. and NO emissions
i. Lower maintenance and operating cost than gasoline
1. Emission reductions produced for total year
1. High emission reduction
<£. Emission reduction produced for total year
3, Reduces traffic volume &i idling time
4. Can be implemented specifically during episodes
5. Potentially could pay for itself
1. High emission reduction possible
i. (Omission reduction produced for total year
3. Reduces traffic volume and idling time
4, Can be implemented specifically during episodes
f>. Substantial reduction in vehicle owner operating
costs with no capital costs
1. Procedures not oriented toward cold winter weather
excessive choke and idling that exists In Fairbanks
2. Difficult to administer maintenance program in cold
weather climate due to excessive cost* in test housing
facilities.
3. Relatively small emission reduction compared to other
strategies.
1. Long warm-up time in extreme cold
2. Untried in cold weather
.3. Moderately high capitalisation (conversion coat)
directly to public
1. Relatively small emission reduction comparedto other
strategies
2. Relatively high capitalization costs.
3. Inoperative in ice fog conditions
4. Effectiveness relatively small since low traffic density
in Fairbanks
1. Limited availability and supply
Z. Relatively expensive capitalization (conversion cost)
to public
3. Lack of distribution system
4. Adds to ice fog. Natural gas especially has a higher
water vapor content than gasoline.
1. Relatively high capitalization
2. Complicated system configuration
3. Uncertainty in participation
1. Uncertainty in participation
2. Emission reductions uncertain
3. Significant increase in car pooling may not be feasible
(i. e. . baseline of present car pooling unknown).
The bus system has been rejected only as sn immediate solution; this rejection is not absolute
3F-13
-------
APPENDIX 3G
ESTIMATE OF CARBON MONOXIDE REDUCTION DUE
TO AUTOMATIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL
1. CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL REDUCTION IN DELAY PER
VEHICLE DURING PEAK PERIOD
Assuming a desired free flow speed of 20 mph, trip time for the
1 mile main street = 1 mi/20 mph, or 1/20 hr, or 3 min.
T, =3 min/vehicle
free
Given that average speed during peak period is actually 3 mph, then
average actual trip time for the 1 mile main street = 1 mi/ 3 mph, or
1/3 hour or 20 min
T = 20 min/vehicle
Total Delay then = D
and
D = T . - T.
act free
= 20-3
= 17 min/vehicle
Assuming that more efficient control (SAFER)* would yield a 25%
reduction in delay, then delay reduction per vehicle (D_) is (0.25) (17
K.
min/vehicle).
Dp = 4. 25 min/vehicle, during peak period.
^SAFER is a unique, computerized system that improves the movement
of vehicles by controlling and coordinating a network of traffic signals
in immediate response to changing traffic conditions.
3G-1
-------
2. ESTIMATE OF PEAK PERIOD VOLUME
Given: 1 lane each direction,
Average headway = 2 sec,
Peak period duration = 45 min or 3/4 hr
Average car length = 20 ft = d
3 mph = 4.4 fps
for speed of 4.4 fps, a 2-sec headway corresponds to a distance, d, ,
of 4.4 fps x 2 sec.
dh
= 8.8 ft
Distance, d, attributed to each vehicle traveling at 4.4 fps then
dh + dc
or,
d = dh
d
= 8.8+20
= 29 ft.
Volume, V., in 1 mile (5280 ft) length of main street (one lane) then is
,, 5280 ft/mi
vi a—
5280
~29 '
= 182 vehicles/mi/lane
3G-2
-------
Volume, V0, of veh/sec = , P
c. a
*
.
2 ~ 29 ft/veh
= 0. 152 veh/sec/lane
Converting above to veh/hr/lane (V,),
V3 = V2 x 3600 sec/hr
= 0. 152 (3600)
= 550 veh/hr/lane
s
Then for 2 directions on main street, peak period volume (V.) = 550 x 2
V4 = HOOveh/hr
Since peak period lasts 3/4 hr, peak volume (V,.) is 3/4 of V>, or
V5 = 3/4 (V4) = 3/4(1100) = 825 vehicles
3. CALCULATION OF DELAY REDUCTION PER PEAK PERIOD (D )
D = D,, x V,
p R 5
= (4.25 min/veh)(825 veh)
= 3600 min or 60 hours/peak period for
1 mile of main street.
3G-3
-------
Assume side street delay/peak period is equal to main street delay, then
total delay reduction (D™) per peak period is:
DT ' 2 Dp
= 120 hr
4. CALCULATION OF SAVINGS TO DRIVER PER PEAK PERIOD
Assume cost of delay (idle) is equal to cost of driving at 8 mph, then
"equivalent" miles saved (M ) is D^ x 8 mph,
s j.
M = DT x 8 mph
S i.
= 120 hr x 8 mph
= 960 miles/peak period.
Assume an average cost of 10^/mile to the motorist, then dollars
saved (m.) is M ($. 10/mile):
1. S
m. = M x 0. 10
1 s
= 960 x 0. 10
= $96/peak period
5. CALCULATION OF SAVINGS TO DRIVERS PER YEAR
Savings for 2 peaks per day (m_) is 2 (m.), or $l90/day
3G-4
-------
Assume that at least an equal reduction in delay (savings to driver)
can be accrued by operating the system 24 hrs/day. (Actual additional
reduction probably 2X to 4X the peak)
Then total savings per day (m,) is 2(m?)
or
m3 = 2 (m2)
= 2($190/day)
= $380/day
Assuming 300 operating days per year, the total savings per year
(m.) is 300 (m,), or
m. = 300 m,
= 300 ($380/day)
= $114. OOP/year
The above calculation estimates a decrease in CBD idle time of
4 minutes per vehicle out of 60 total minutes per vehicle or approx-
imately a 7% reduction in CO emissions. Relative to the capital
cost of implementation, $200, 000 per 20 intersections plus subsystem
installation, this reduction is deemed not to be cost effective. It
should be noted, however, that user benefits of $130, 000 Per year
in terms of reduced fuel expenditures would result, which would
completely offset the annularized capital costs. The estimated
winter emission reductions in the CBD are:
AGO = (winter idle emissions)(idle reduction)
= 31 tons/day(. 07) = 2.2 tons/day
3G-5
-------
APPENDIX 5A
ESTIMATES OF GROUND LEVEL CONCENTRATION OF SOX, CO,
AND PARTICULATES
1. GENERAL
The ground level concentration of stack emissions was estimated
using an atmospheric dispersion equation. Estimates of the ground level
concentration of SOX, CO and participates at various Alaskan sites are
presented.
Equation 1 (from Reference 22) describes the atmospheric disper-
sion of gas or aerosols emitted by a continuous source with a given
effective emission height, H:
x
-------
Assuming no diffusion in the wind direction, the maximum ground
level concentration (z = 0), which occurs directly downwind of the source
(y = 0), is described by
X(x,0,0) = —^— exp
(2)
The effective emission height, H, is equal to the actual stack height
plus the plume rise due to its exit velocity and bouyancy. The plume rise
is given by the equation (Reference 22 ):
(3)
where
V = stack effluent exit velocity, m/sec
d = stack inside diameter, m
p = barometric pressure, mb
Ts = absolute temperature of stack effluents, K
Ta = absolute ambient temperature, K
u = wind speed, m/sec
H is then given by:
H = h + Ah (4)
where
h '= stack height, m
Equations (2), (3) and (4) were used to determine the ten minute
maximum ground level concentrations. Tabulations of
-------
To assess the one hour and 24 hour maximum ground level concentration,
the following transforms, presented in Reference 13, were used.
X(10 Minutes) _ , 1K
X(l Hour) ~ *'ib
(5)
X(l Hour) _ __
X(24 Hour) ~ *-16
2. SO2 GROUND LEVEL CONCENTRATION ESTIMATE AT PULP
MILLS DUE TO PROCESS EMISSIONS
2. 1 BASIC INFORMATION
Two pulp mills in southeastern Alaska discharge SO_ into the
atmosphere at the following rates:
Plant 1 (Alaska Pulp and Lumber Company in Sitka) 1600 tons/year
Plant 2 (Ketchikan Pulp Company near Ketchikan) 3400 tons/year
Concentrations were calculated for four atmospheric conditions as
follows:
a) Class D stability, 3 m/sec wind speed
b) Class D stability, 1 m/sec wind speed
c) Class F stability, 1 m/sec wind speed
d) Class A stability, Im/sec wind speed
The following stack conditions were provided for these plants:
stack diameter, 6 feet
stack effluent temperature, 120 F
stack effluent exit velocity, 27 feet/second
An ambient temperature of 60 F, representing the typical mean average
annual temperature of the area, was used to determine the effective
source height; equations (2) and (5) were then used to determine the
10 minute, 1 hour and 24 hour maximum ground level SO- concentrations,
The results are presented graphically on Figure 5A-1 through 5A-8.
5A-3
-------
1000
CO
O
Z
O
I
z
O
Q
Z
I
O
es
O
to
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
D CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2
DOWNWIND FROM PLANT No. 1 (SITKA)
Q = 46 GM/SEC
n=40M
WIND SPEED = 3 M/SEC
H =49.4 M
V = 27 FT/SEC
T= 120°F
d =6FT
p = 1000 MB
100
10
1 HRMAX
CONDITION
24 HRMAX CONDITION
3 4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-1.
-------
1000
CO
\
o
3.
z
Q
UJ
o
u
o
Z
8
O£
O
S
10
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
1 HOUR MAX CONDITION
24 HOUR MAX CONDITION
D CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2
DOWNWIND FROM PLANT No. 1 (SITKA)
Q = 46 GM/SEC
h = 40 M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
V • 27 FT/SEC
Ts = 120°F
60°F
d = 6 FT
p= 1000MB
I
3 4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-2.
-------
1000
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
F CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2
DOWNWIND FROM PLANT No. 1 (SITKA)
Q = 46GM/SEC
h = 40 M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
V = 27 FT/SEC
H =68.2 M
O
z
O
i
I—
UJ
u
O
u
0
Z
ID
O
Of
O
-------
1000
A CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2
DOWNWIND FROM PLANT No. 1 (SITKA)
Q = 46 GM/SEC
h=40M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
CO
O
Z
g
1
H =49.4M
1 HOUR MAX CONDITION
V = 27 FT/SEC
TS= 120°F
TA = 60° F
d = 6 FT
p = 1000MB
U
8
Q
Z
i
O
cT
100
10
24 HOUR MAX CONDITION
.4
.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-4
1.6
1.8
2.0
5A-7
-------
10 MINUTE MAX
CONDITION
1000
D CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS
OF SO2 DOWNWIND FROM PLANT NO. 2 (KETCHIKAN)
Q = 97.8GM/SEC
h MOM
WIND SPEED = 3 M/SEC
CO
5
o
a.
Z
O
1
o
u
o
z
I
o
= 27 FT/SEC
= 120°F
= 60°F
= 6FT
= 1000MB
100
10
1 HR MAX CONDITION
24 HR MAX CONDITION
3 4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-5
5A-8
-------
D CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2
DOWNWIND OF PLANT NO. 2 ( KETCHIKAN)
Q = 97.8GM/SEC
h = 40M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
27 FT/SEC
120°F
6 FT
1000MB
1000
CO
O
Z
O
1
u
O
u
O
Of.
O
100
10
1 HOUR MAX CONDITION
24 HR MAX CONDITION
3 4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-6
5A-9
-------
F CLASS STABILITY - GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF
SO2 DOWNWIND OF PLANT NO. 2 (KETCHIKAN)
Q = 97.8 GM/SEC
h = 40 M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
1000
O
a.
z
g
1
IU
U
z
O
o
o
Z
o
Of
o
CM
O
to
10 MINUTE MAX
CONDITION
100
10
] HR MAX CONDITION
24 HR MAX CONDITION
III!
10
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-7
100
5A-10
-------
14000
A CLASS STABILITY
GROUND CONCENTRATIONS OF SO2 DOWNWIND FROM
PLANT NO. 2 (KETCHIKAN)
H = 68.2 M
1000
= 27.2 FT/SEC
= 120°F
TA = 60° F
d = 6FT
P= 1000MB
V
5
O
a.
Z
O
1
LU
u
O
U
O
Z
=)
O
Of.
O
0>4
O
1/1
Q = 97.8 GM/SEC
h=40M
WIND SPEED = 1 M/SEC
10 MINUTE MAX CONDITION
100
10
1 HRMAX
CONDITION
24 HOUR MAX CONDITION
.2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4
DOWNWIND DISTANCE, KM
Figure 5A-8
1.6
1.8
2.0
5A-11
-------
The stability Class D with 1 m/sec wind velocity is believed to be
a conservative condition for these emissions for atmospheric conditions
prevailing in this part of Alaska. On that basis, the secondary standard
is uncomfortably approached by Plant #2 to the point that, within the
limits of calculational accuracy, the secondary standard can be said to be
exceeded.
2.2 EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS
The figures just presented are arranged so that the first four,
Figures 5A-1 through 5A-4, are concentrations near the Sitka plant and
the last four, Figures 5A-5 through 5A-8, near the Ketchikan plant.
The four figures for each plant correspond to meteorological conditions
specified above. The three curves on each figures correspond to aver-
aging times of ten minutes, one hour and 24 hours, respectively. Note
that approximately 2000 calculations were required to obtain enough data
to draw .all these curves. Example calculations to determine the location
of three points on Figures 5A-1 are as follows.
The conditions to be considered at the Sitka plant are:
Wind Speed, u = 3 m/sec
Source Strength, Q = 46 x 10 /ngm/sec
Stack Height, h = 40 m
Effluent Speed, V = (27 x 0. 305 = 8. 24) m/sec
Effluent Temperature, T = (120 - 32)/1.8 + 273 = 322°K
s
Ambient Temperature, T = (60 - 32)/l. 8 + 273 = 288°K
Stack Diameter, d = 6 x 0. 305 = 1. 83 m
Barometric Pressure, p = 1000 mb.
The horizontal, a • and vertical, cr , dispersion coefficients are taken
directly from Figures 3.2 and 3.3, respectively, of Reference 15.
The dispersion coefficients are a function of downwind distance as
well as atmospheric stability. Therefore, we chose arbitrarily to calcu-
late the concentration at 1.5 kilometers distance downwind of the plant
for this example. The corresponding dispersion coefficients are:
a = 100 and a =42.
Y z
5A-12
-------
Effective Stack Height, H
Equation (3)
A i. / 8.24x 1.83\ I" , -3 in3/322-288\ . 0,T
Ah = I T ^ [1.5+2.69x10 xlO ^ j?? / 1«83J
Ah = JO.2 m
Equation (4)
H = 40 + 10. 2
H = 50. 2 m
Equation (2)
X =569 tfgm/m3
This value is a ten minute average value
Equation (5)
X(lhr) =
X(l hr) = 265
X(24 hr) = j^
X(24hr) =71.2
Note these data points are marked as circles on the three curves of
Figure 5A- 1.
5A-13
-------
3. SOX GROUND-LEVEL CONCENTRATION DUE TO FUEL OIL
BURNING AT KETCHIKAN PULP MILL
3. 1 SUMMARY
The Ketchikan Pulp Mill burns an estimated 6. 8 million gallons of
Bunker C oil with 1.1 to 1. 5% sulfur in each of its two boilers. For an
average 1. 3% sulfur content, an SO? emission factor of 204 Ib per
1000 gallons, and an SO, emission factor of 2. 6 Ib per 1000 gallons, this
firing rate corresponds to a total SOX emission rate of 1410 tons/year.
The SOX is emitted by twin stacks, 140 feet high x 6 feet inside diameter,
which are in close proximity of each other. Because of the proximity
of the stacks, it was assumed that these stacks can be represented by
a single stack with an emission rate twice the individual stack rate, or
2820 tons/year.
A 400°F effluent temperature (typical of these stacks) and a 60°F
ambient temperature were assumed. The stack effluent exit velocity was
estimated assuming 60% excess air (typical of industrial/commercial
plants) and the effluent is essentially air.
As in prior cases, Equations (2), (3), (4), and (5) were then used
to determine the maximum ground-level SOX concentration. The results
are tabulated in Table 5A-1.
3.2 SUPPORTING CALCULATIONS
Calculations generated in the estimation of the ground-level con-
centrations are attached for the four stability classes.
SO2 Emission Factor = (157)(1.3) = 204 lb/1000 gal
(see Reference 16)
For two stacks, the fuel used is
(2)(6.8x 106) = 13. 6 x 106 gal/yr
S0? Emission Rate = (204M13- 6 x * ° ) = 1390 tons/year
2000 x 10
5 A-14
-------
Table 5A-1. SOX Ground Level Concentration at Ketchikan
Pulp Mill Due to Bunker C Oil Burning
Atmospheric
Stability
Class
A
F
D
D
Wind
Speed
m/sec
1
1
1
3
Ground Level Concentration, (Jigm/m
10 Min.
Maximum
874
139
381
406
1-Hour
Maximum
407
65
177
189
24- Hour
Maximum
109
17
48
51
Emission Rate = 43. 2 gmSOX/sec (total for two stacks)
Stack Height - 140 feet
Stack Diameter - 6 feet
Stack Effluent Temperature - 400°F
Stack Effluent Exit Velocity - 30 ft/sec
5A-15
-------
SO3 Emission Factor = (2)(1. 3) = 2. 6 lb/1000 gal
(see Reference 16)
SO Emission Rate = (2-6?(13-6x 10 ? = 17. 7 tons/year
2000x10
TOTAL SOX EMISSION RATE = 141 0 tons/year
Calculation of Exit Velocity
Assume 400 F effluent temperature of effluent
essentially air.
PL=
From Reference 1, Figure 7:
1.25 Ib of gases are produced by Bunker C
with 60% excess air (typical of industrial/
commercial plants) for each 100 Btu released.
Assuming a Bunker C sp. gr. = 0. 9,
1 gal= 8.33(0.9) = 7. 5 Ib
T, * 6.8 x 106
Burning Rate = 49(7)(24)
= 8. 26 x 10 gal/hr (49 wk/yr operation)
Weight of effluents generated (17, 965 Btu/lb Bunker C)
^ _ 1.25(17965)(7. 5)(826)
1000
= 139117 Ib/hr
•
Volume of effluents = 77- = !;3^1Z = 3. 0 x 1 O6 ft3/hr
PT 0.
5A-16
-------
V = 3.0 xlO6 = 1
-------
F class stability, u = 1 m/sec
H = 95. 6 m
« . TT » £•
X
10 km
13 km
15 km
D
H
2 km
2.5 km
3 km
D
H
1.0 km
1.2 km
1.5 km
-------
Source strength in metric units
SOX Emission Rate =1410 tons/year
Assuming 21 hour/day operation, 7 day a week, 49 wk/year
_ 1410(2000)(453.6)
49(7)(24)(3600)
Q = 43. 163 gm/sec total for both stacks
Max Ground Level Concentration (10 minutes)
A stability, u = 1 m/sec
X . 2.026 x IP"5 (43. 16 x 106) . R 7A x i p2
max ,
3
= 874 Mgm/m at 0.4 km
F stability, u = 1 m/sec
x = 3.22xlO-6(43.l6xl06) = /
max 1
D stability, u = 1 m/sec
= 8.82xlO-6(43.l6xl06) = 3gl /
max 1
D stability, u = 3 m/sec
x = 2.82xlQ-5(43.l6xl06)= ^ ,^ at j . 5 km
max 3
5A-19
-------
4. PARTICULATE GROUND-LEVEL CONCENTRATION ESTIMATES
AT THE PULP MILLS
The ground level concentrations for particulates were calculated
by the atmospheric dispersion equation presented on an earlier page. The
calculations are based on 0.3 grains per scf emissions obtained from the
questionnaire returned by Alaska Lumber at Sitka. These emission rate of
45, 000 cfm from each of the two stacks corresponds to about 1, 000 tons of
particulates per year. The Sitka mill incinerates only half of its liquor
and disposes of the other half in the liquid form. Since the production rate
at Ketchikan Pulp is about the same as that at Sitka, but all liquor is being
incinerated, the particulate emissions are exhausted at twice the rate of
the former, or 2,000 tons per year.
The results of the diffusion calculations are presented in Figure
5A-9. The 24 hour maximum ground level concentration for the Sitka
plant using Class D stability at a wind velocity of 1 m/sec is 18 Mgm/m ,
and it occurs about 2.2 km downstream from the two stacks.
The corresponding 24 hour concentration for the Ketchikan Mill are
about 34 Mgm/m . Both of these concentrations are well below the secondary
National Air Quality Standard for particulates.
Equations (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Section 1 of this appendix were
solved as demonstrated in previous sections to obtain data for the curves
of Figure 5A-9. A calculation summary is given in Table 5A-2.
5. CONICAL BURNERS: CO AND PARTICULATE GROUND-
LEVEL CONCENTRATIONS
5. 1 SUMMARY
Conical burners at the Alaska Wood Products Company and the
Wrangell Lumber Company consume 30, 580 and 72, 207 tons of wood
products per year. (These sources are listed in the emission inventory
printout as Numbers 8 and 22, respectively. ) At these burning rates,
pollutants at the following rates are discharged into the atmosphere:
Source 8, Alaska Wood Products: 1988 tons CO/yr,
107 tons' particulates/yr
Source 22, Wrangell Lumber Co.: 4693 tons CO/yr
253 tons particulates/yr
5A-20
-------
14
CO
O
Z
O
I
u
Z
O
u
24 HOUR MAXIMUM DOWNSTREAM GROUND LEVEL
CONCENTRATION
OF PARTICULATES PER STACK (2 STACKS)
PLANT 2 (KETCHIKAN)
10
Q
Z
z>
O
e£
O
CLASS D STABILITY
Q (PLANT 1) = 15.306 GM/SEC
Q (PLANT 2) = 30.612 GM/SEC
h = 42.67 M
WIND VELOCITY = 1 M/SEC
PARTICULATES - MAGNESIUM OXIDE
H =95.6M
= 27 FT/SEC
= 120°F
V
T,
TA = 60°F
d = 6FT
I
I
6 8
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (KM)
Figure 5A-9
10
12
14
5A-21
-------
Table 5A-2. Calculation Summary
X
'y
-------
The burner at Alaska Wood Products is 60 feet high and 20 feet in
diameter at the top. The dimensions of the unit at the Wrangell Lumber
Company were not firmly established at the time of the analysis; therefore
its characteristics (primarily effluent exit velocity) were assumed similar
to that of the Alaska Wood Products burner. A 60°F ambient air
temperature was assumed.
Two operational effluent temperatures were considered; 700°F
corresponding to operation with 500% excess air and 400°F corresponding
to 1200% excess air. To estimate the effluent exit velocity, the wood
products being burned were assumed (see Reference 14) essentially
C/H. -O_ with a heating value of ~7300 Btu/lb, such that 915 Ib of air
are required to burn 162 Ib of wood products. The effluents were taken
as essentially air at one atmosphere. This yielded exit velocities of
11.3 ft/sec at 500% excess iar (700°F) and 20 ft/sec at 1200% excess air
(400°F).
Based on these estimates of effluent exit velocity, Equations (2),
(4) and (5) were used to determine the maximum 10 minute, 1 hour and
24 hour averaged ground level concentration of CO and particulates. The
results are tabulated in Tables 5A-3 and 5A-4.
For all conditions of atmospheric stability considered, the maximum
concentrations calculated were several orders of magnitude below the
primary and secondary national standards for air quality. This provides
sufficient margin for possible errors in estimating the exit velocity.
Calculation sheets follow which gives details of the computation
performed in obtaining data for Tables 5A-3 and 5A-4.
5.2 DETAILED CALCULATIONS
• Effluent initial velocity estimates
Case 1. T = 700°F 500% excess air
s
Case 2. T = 400°F 1200% excess air
s
Assume wood essentially C6H1QO5 (Reference 14)
and Heating Value = 7300 Btu/lb
C6H10°5+ 602-6C02 + 5H20
For each "mole" C^in^c' ^ moles O? require^
5A-23
-------
Table 5A-3. CO and Particulate Ground Level Concentration Alaska Wood Products (Source 8)
Effect
Source
Height
240. 3 .m
315.5 m
240. 3 m
315.5 m
92.3 m
117. 3 m
240. 3 m
315.5 m
Stability Class
and
Wind Velocity
A, u = 1 m/sec
A, u = 1 m/sec
F, u = 1 m/sec
F, u= 1 m/sec
D, u= 3 m/sec
D, u = 3 m/sec
D, u = 1 m/sec
D, u = 1 m/sec
Distance Downwind
to Maximum
Concentration
0.4 km
0. 8 km
100 km
100 km
25 km
3.5 km
12 km
20 km
Max. Ground Level CO_
Concentration, ngm/m
10 Min.
652
440
7.7
0.7
410
221
115
58.2
1-Hr.
304
205
3.6
0. 325
190
103
53.5
27
24-Hr.
81.5
55
0.96
0.087
51. 3
27.6
14.4
7.3
Max. Ground Level -
Particulate Cone. , |j.gm/m
10 Min.
35
23.7
0.415
0. 038
22
11.8
6.2
3.2
1-Hr.
16. 3
11
0. 193
0. 0177
10.2
5.5
2.88
1.45
24-Hr.
4.4
2.96
0.052
0. 0047
2.75
1.47
0.78
0.392
I
ro
Assumptions and Bases:
• Ta = 60°F
H = 92. 3 m @ 500% excess air (Ts = 700°F), u = 3 m/sec
H = 117. 3 m @ 1200% excess air (Ts = 1200°F), u = 3 m/sec
H = 240. 3 m @ 500% excess air (Ts = 700°F), u = -1 m/sec
H = 315.5 m@ 1200% excess air (Ts = 1200°F), u = 1 m/sec
Particulate Emission Rate - 6. 83 gm/sec
CO Emission Rate - 127 gm/sec
-------
Table 5A-4. CO and Particulate Ground Level Concentration Wrangell Lumber (Source 22)
Effect.
Source
Height
240. 3 m
315.5 m
240.3 m
315.5 m
92. 3 m
117.3 m
240. 3 m
315.5 m
Stability Class
and
Wind Velocity ^
A, u = 1 m/sec
A, u = 1 m/sec
F, u = 1 m/sec
F, u = 1 m/sec
D, u = 3 m/sec
D, u = 3 m/sec
D, u = 1 m/sec
D, u = 1 m/sec
Distance Downwind
to Maximum
- Concentration
0.4 km
0. 8 km
1 00 km
100 km
2.5 km
3.5 km
12 km
20 km
Max. Ground Level CQ
Concentration, |j.gm/m
10 Min.
1530
1035
18.2
1.64
965
520
271
137
1-Hr.
712
482
8.45
0.76
449
242
126
63.7
24-Hr.
192
129
2.28
0.205
120.5
65
33.8
17. 1
Max. Ground Level ,
Particulate Cone. , ngm/m
10 Min.
83
56.2
0.985
0.089
52.2
28.2
14.7
7.42
1-Hr.
38.6
26. 1
0.458
0.0415
24.3
13.2
6.85
3.55
24-Hr.
10.4
7.03
0.123
0.0111
6.52
3.52
1.83
0.925
I
to
Assumptions and Bases:
Ta = 60°F
H = 92. 3 m @ 500% excess air (Ts = 700°F), u = 3 m/sec
H = 117. 3 m @ 1200% excess air (Ts = 1200°F), u = 3 m/sec
. H = 240. 3 m @ 500% excess air (Ts = 700°F), u = 1 m/sec
H = 315.5 m@ 1200% excess air (Ts = 1200°F), u = 1 m/sec
Particulate Emission Rate - 16.2 gm/sec
CO Emission Rate - 299 gm/sec
-------
For 162 Ib wood, 192 Ibs O- are required, or 915 Ib air.
For 500% excess air,
Ib wood _ 162 _ -2
Ibair ~ 915(5) ~ >b x 10 ~ °
For 1200% excess air
Using Source 8 conditions:
Burning rate = 3°- SOMOO) . 15480
.
Air rate at 500% excess air = 0*0*54 = 4.373 x
Air rate at 1200% excess air ] 5*8P0 - 10. 459 x 105
0. 0 14o
Air density at 700°F = 0.075 = 0.0342
at 400°F = 0.075 - = 0.0462
5 3
Air rate at 500% excess air = i-I = 12.79 x 106 ^-
5 3
Air rate at 1200% excess air - 10 = 22. 64 x 1 O6
For a diameter of 20 ft, the cross sectional area at taper
burner top
= J (20)2 = | (400) = lOOir = 314.2 ft2
* 10
V at 500% excess air = > = 40,706
314.2 J
.
nr. sec
V at 1200% excess air = ^'-f^,*,10 = 72,056-^ = 20.02^—
^ 14 « ^ hi*- sec
5A-26
-------
• Energy Balance Check:
o
Heat generation rate = 15480 (7300) = 1. 13 x 10 Btu/hr
At 500% excess air, assuming no heat losses,
A T . = 1.13xl08 = 1077°F
air 0.24(4.37 x 105)
"Actual" AT . required = 700 - 60 = 640°F
air n
This indicates roughly (1 - 640/1077) 100% or 41 % of the
heat generated by burning wood products is lost (via radiation,
convection and conduction) and does not contribute to raising
the temperature of the effluents. This is quite reasonable.
At 1200% excess air
g
AT . = ltl3 X 10 g- = 450°F versus (400 - 60)°F
air 0.24(10.459 x 10 ) or 340°F required
This indicates roughly (1 - 340/450) 100% or 25% of the heat
produced is lost. This is lower than the losses of 500% air
as it should be because of the lower temperature.
• Effective Stack Height Calculation
Plume rise:
'T - T \
Ah =
Vd
u
1.5 + 2.69 x 10"3p
(T -
s
-
The following are assumed to the same for both sources:
V= 11.3 ft/sec at T = 700°F (500% excess air)
S
V = 20 ft/sec at T = 400°F (1200% excess air)
S
d = 20 ft = 6. 1 meters
T = 60°F •= 520°R
a
p = 1000 mb
5A-27
-------
Then, for T = 700°F (500% excess air)
s
Ah =
Ah =
Vd
u
Vd
u
1.5 + 2
, /116
•69l — F
160 - 520
TSo
.. 1
1.5 + 9.06 x 10
= 10.56
Vd
u
For T = 400 F (1200% excess air)
S
Ah =
Vd
u
1.5+2.69 86° I 52° 6.1
860
= 7.99
Vd
u
3.28(3)
Ah = 11.3(6.^(10.56) =
m
m
500% excess air,
u = 3 m/sec
500% excess air,
u = 1 m/sec
Ah =
20(6.1)(7.99)
3.28(3)
= 99 m
1200% excess.air,
u = 3 m/sec
Ah =
20(6.1)(7.99)
3.78
= 297.2 m
1200% excess air,
u = 1 m/sec
h = 60 ft = 18.3 m
H = h + Ah = 18. 3 + 74 = 92. 3 m
= 18.3 + 222 = 240.3 m
= 18.3 + 99 = 117.3 m
= 18.3 + 297.2 = 315.5 m
500% excess air,
u = 3 m/sec
500% excess air,
u = 1 m/sec
1200% excess air,
u = 3 m/sec
1200% excess air,
u = 1 m/sec
5A-28
-------
ForH = 315. 5m; u = 1 m/sec:
• / T T V *•*
X
0.
0.
0.
7
8
9
ay
155
175
200
°Z
220
290
360
l!
1.
0.
0.
I
^V
028
592
384
expri\F7 ) Xu/Q
0.
0.
0.
358
554
681
3.
3.
3.
34x
47 x
0 x
10
10
10
-6
W
-6
V
-6
~ O
For Source 22:
Q = source strength = 4693tons CO/year
= 253 tons particulate/year
1 year's operation = 3950 hours
_ 4693 (2000)(453. 6)
UCO 3950 (3600)
_ 253 (2000)(453. 6) _ 1 ^
part 3950 (3600) ~ L'b*xL( sec
For Source 8:
Q = source strength = 1988 tons CO/year
= 107 tons particulate/year
1 year's operation = 3950 hours
_ 1988 (2000)(453. 6)
UCO ~ 3950 (3600)
= 127 gm/sec = 127 x 10 (igm/sec
107(2000)(453.6) ,
= 3950^00) = 6'
part 3950(3600)
5A-29
-------
The downwind concentrations are calculated from the following equation:
exp
Xu
Q
itability class
H= 92. 3 m; u
x a
y
2.0 km 130
2.5 km 160
3.0 km 190
H= 240. 3 m;
9.0km 540
10.0km 555
12.0km 650
H = 117. 3 m;
2.5km 160
3.0km 190
3. 5 km 220
\ \ zl I
ira ff
Y *•
= 3 m/sec:
'• * (£)
50 1.704
58 1.266
65 1.008
u = 1 m/sec :
125 1.848
135 1.584
150 1.283
u = 3 m/sec;
58 2.045
65 1.628
71 1.365
general e
2 ,
exp^
0. 182
0.282
0.365
0.158
0.205
0.278
0. 129
0. 196
0.256
Xu/Q
8.912x10
9. 672x10
9.408x10
-6
-6
-6
7.451x10
8.709x10
9.076x10
-7
-7
-7
4.425x10
5.052x10
5.217x10
-6
-6
-6
5A-30
-------
H = 315. 5 m; u =1 m/sec:
X
15
20
25
:ab
H
y
km 800
km 1000
km 1200
ility class
= 240.3 m;
az 2\aJ
175 1.625
200 1.244
230 0. 941
u = 1 m/sec:
exp j- -
0.197
0.288
0.39
XU/Q
4.479x10
4. 584x10
4.680x10
-7
-7
-7
100 km 2000 93 3. 34 0. 0355
125km 3000 100 2.89 0.056
150km 4000 105 2.62 0.073
H = 315. 5 m; u = 1 m/sec:
6. 08x10
5.94x10
5.53x10
-8
-8
-8
100km 2000 93 5.75
• A stability class
H = 240. 3 m; u = 1 m/sec :
0.0032
0. 35
0.4
0.5
135
155
180
155
220
290
1.202
0.597
0.34
0.302
0.55
0.712
5. 5x10
-9
4. 59x10
5. 13x10
4. 34x10
-6
-6
-6
5A-31
-------
6. CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SULFUR
CONTENT IN FUEL OIL
The proposed Rules and Regulations for Air Quality Control for the
State of Alaska limits the SOX emissions from a source to 500 ppm (see
ISAAC 50. 060). The calculations for establishing the maximum allowable
sulfur content of fuel oil used in industrial boilers is presented below.
For Bunker C oil, at 35% excess air, 13, 500 scf of flue gas are
generated per million Btu of heat (Figure 7-2 of Reference 19). Addi-
tionally at 500 ppm, the quantity of SOX (calculated as SO-) emitted per
standard cubic foot is
0. 075 Ib of air 500 parts SOX ^ 64_ _ g2 5xlo-6 lb
standard cubic foot . n6 . 29 * scf
10 parts air
therefore;
M* o-> c Bha " ~77~^u
The permissible sulfur content from equation (1) is, therefore, 1% at
550 ppm.
5A-32
------- |