EPA-450/3-74-056-b
OCTOBER 1973
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
AIR POLLUTION STUDY -
EMISSION PROJECTION
METHODOLOGY
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
EPA-450/3-74-056-B
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
AIR POLLUTION STUDY -
EMISSION PROJECTION
METHODOLOGY
by
John C. Goodrich
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc.
429 Marrett Road
Lexington, Massachusetts 02173
Contract No. EHSD 71-39
EPA Project Officer: John Robson
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
October 1973
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report technical
data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are available free
of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and grantees, and nonprofit
organizations r as supplies permit-from the Air Pollution Technical Information
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by the
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. , in fulfillment of Contract
No. EHSD 71-39. The contents of this report are reproduced herein as received
from the Environmental Protection Agency. The opinions, findings, and
conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those
of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of company or product
names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection
Agency.
Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-056-b
11
-------
PREFACE
Increasing recognition is being placed on the importance of land use
planning as a means of improving future air quality. As a part of this
recognition the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency jointly sponsored a study to develop
methods to assess the air pollution impact of land use plans, and to apply
these methods to the evaluation of alternative land use plans for the New
Jersey Hackensack Meadowlands as a case study.
Environmental Research 5 Technology, Inc. (ERT) of Lexington, Mass.
was selected to undertake the study. In response to the study objectives,
ERT designed a computer-oriented tool, called the AQUIP (Air Quality for
Urban § Industrial Planning) System, which is intended for use by planners
to incorporate air pollution considerations more directly into the planning
process.
The specific study objectives included the development and application
of techniques for projecting to the year 1990 the total air pollutant
emissions from an urbanized area. This methodology for computing emissions
based on planning data inputs is one of the basic features of the AQUIP
System. Since AQUIP permits direct input of land use and transportation
planning data, it can be used by urban planners to compute ambient air
quality related to specific land use activities.
The Hackensack Meadowlands Air Pollution Study final report consists of
a summary report, 5 task reports, and 3 appendices, each bound separately.
This report is the first of the 5 task reports. It describes the emission
projection methodology that was developed and its application to the
ill
-------
Hackensack Meadowlands Development Plans. The report is divided into three
major parts:
PART I - Emission Projection Methodology
PART II - Discussion of the Emission Inventories
The Appendices - Data Sets and Emission Inventories
Part I covers the procedures developed, requirements of the methodology,
and the major clarifying assumptions and constraints. Figures are numbered
1-1, 1-2, etc. It is divided into sections as follows:
1. Background,including the form of planning activity data.
2. Those requirements of the AQUIP system and the dispersion model that
influence the structure of the emission inventories.
3. The role of regulations and control technology in ,the study.
4. The actual development of the methodology.
5. The assumptions and constraints, including a discussion of the
decisions concerning activity data, activity indices, fuel use,
and emission factors.
Part II describes the actual emission inventories as developed, partic-
ularly for the Meadowlands plans. Figures are numbered II-l, II-2, etc.
It is divided into sections covering:
1. The emissions catalog specifications.
2. The current emission inventory.
3. The background emission inventory.
4. The inventories for the 1990 land use plans.
The emissions inventory was prepared before Nation Emission
Data System (NEDS) forms were available from the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Readers are cautioned that emissions inventories
IV
-------
now prepared in conjunction with any EPA requirement must be in compliance
with NEDS forms and procedures. The Appendix material includes:
Appendix A - Plan Data Sets and Conversion Factors Catalog
Appendix B - Current and Background Emission Inventories
(Confidential Material)
It is intended as a supplement to the software descriptions of the Task 5
Report and as a user manual for those interested in using the data and
techniques for further study; several test cases are included.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work upon which this report is based was performed pursuant to
Contract No. EHSD-71-39 with the Environmental Protection Agency, and
Contract No. IP-290 with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
The comments and assistance of Mr. George D. Cascino, Engineer,
Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission and other members of the staff
are gratefully acknowledged as are the efforts of numerous individuals in
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). The significant contribution of our
subcontractor, Burns and Roe, Inc., of Oradell, N.J., particularly of
Mr. William Foy of their staff, is gratefully acknowledged. Mr. David
Berghcffer of the ERT staff was 'responsible for the majority of the software
development for Task 1.
VI1
-------
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Application of the emissions projection methodology to the Meadowlands
plans showed that we could achieve our basic objectives. In addition, the
five step procedure developed to transform activity levels into emission
strengths was workable and, in fact, quite adaptable to the land use consid-
erations which were encountered. In particular, the development of the con-
version factors catalog demonstrated that the planner need input only planning-
related data.
However, it was found that the planner must specify data he does not
normally deal with, including the size of a development as it relates to
heating demand and the types of manufacturing operations anticipated.
Furthermore, the level of detail obtainable from the data was unsatisfactory
for discerning between related activities, particularly for calculating
default parameters such as the propensity to use different fuels and the
amount of separate process emissions. Consequently, the greatest need for
further work involves the empirical derivation of activity indices and
default parameters. The availability of current region wide emissions data
for model validation and determination of protective indices was inadequate
as well.
The methodology as developed and applied allows for meaningful comparison
I etween the alternative land use plans and provides a useful tool for use by
others in determining the effect of incremental changes in a plan or in the
testing of additional plans. This methodology is combined with the other
aspects of the AQUIP system, namely:
1. A model for computing air quality based on emission and meteorolo-
gical data
IX
-------
2. Methods for evaluating the air pollution impact associated with a
given plan and ranking alternative land use plans based on air
quality criteria, this methodology for computing emissions
should permit planners to incorporate air pollution considera-
tions more directly into the planning process
-------
TERMINOLOGY
Because the terminologies of several different professions are used in
this report, often in unfamiliar ways, this brief discussion of terminology
is presented to show the context within which different terms were used in
our study. Specific definitions of these and other terms are listed in the
Glossary.
The basic land use and transportation planning units of intensity of
use - vehicles per day on a highway, acres of residential land use, square
feet of industrial plant space - are called the activities or the activity
level. The parameters which translate the activity levels into demand for
fuel for heating purposes are called activity indices; for instance, BTU's
(British thermal units of heat demand) per square foot for industrial plant
space.
We distinguish between fuel related and non-fuel related activities or
sources of emissions. The fuel related sources use fuel for:
1. heating area, such as heating a school in the winter; the amount of
heat required and the fuel consumed is a function of the temperature or
the number of degree-days (the sum of negative departures of average
daily temperature from 65°F). We have termed this fuel use as that
required for heating, or space heating.
2. raising a product to a certain temperature during an industrial
process, or for cooking (with gas) in the home; the amount of fuel con-
sumed is a function of the activity and is generally not related to
outside temperature. We have termed this fuel use as that required
for process heating, or non-space heating.
XI
-------
The area to be heated for space heating purposes and the amount of the
year it will be heated (a function of the schedule, such as 250 days per
year for an industrial plant) help determine the heating requirements for an
activity. If the activity requires process heat as well, the total heating
requirements will be the sum of the space heating requirements and the non-
space heating requirements. The percent of the total allocated to either
type is called the percent space heat, or, conversely, percent process heat.
The total heat requirement determines the demand for fuel; different
activities are more apt to use one fuel than another. The propensity to
use a particular fuel or fuels (the fuel use propensity) determines the
actual fuel used to satisfy the heat requirement.
Different types of activities may have varying activity indices or per-
cent space heat or fuel use propensities; for instance, each industrial
category in the U.S. census 4-digit SIC classification may have a unique
value. However, we may know information only by broad industrial groups
(1 or 2 digit SIC). The value applying to the larger or broader group being
used for the smaller or more detailed group when the unique value is not
known has been termed a default parameter in our study.
There are two types of non-fuel related activities or sources of emis-
sions. Transportation sources - motor vehicles, vessels, and airplanes -
that do not burn fuel primarily for heating purposes have been termed non-
fuel burning sources. The emissions are a function of:
1. activity level, times
2. emission factors, yields
3. emissions
whereas, for what we term fuel burning sources the emissions are a function of:
XI1
-------
1. activity levels, times
2. activity indices, yields
3. fuel demand; fuel use, times
4. emission factors, yields
5. emissions
The other type of non-fuel related activity is composed of emissions
from sources, often industrial, that do not come from the burning of fuel;
for example, evaporation from a refinery storage tank. Refuse burning and
incineration fall into this category. These are termed separate process
emissions or process emissions in our study. Note the distinction between
process heating related emissions and separate process emissions. Separate
process emissions are a function of:
1. activity level, times
2. emission factors, yields
3. emissions
There are several distinctions made geographically or spatially, or in
terms of different portions of the study area. Our main effort in determining
emissions is concentrated on the Meadowlands planning area and emissions re-
sulting from activities presented in the plans. All other sources of emissions
are considered to be background sources and are discussed as a part of the
background inventory for the year 1990. On the other hand all background
sources for 1969 and all sources presently within the Meadowlands are treated
equally and discussed as a part of the current inventory. In brief, there are
three emissions inventories and all sources are discussed relative to these:
1. current inventory - all sources for 1969
2. background inventory - all sources for 1990 not directly related
to the Meadowlands plans.
3. plans inventories - all sources for 1990 related to the Meadow-
lands plans.
Xlll
j
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vii
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ix
TERMINOLOGY xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS xv
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - Part I xx
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS - Part II
PART I EMISSION PROJECT METHODOLOGY
1. BACKGROUND 1
1.1 General Applicability 1
1.2 Pollutants Investigated 1
1.3 Confidentiality . 2
1.4 Planning Activitiy Data 2
1.5 Meadowlands Case Study 4
2. REQUIREMENTS OF THE AQUIP SYSTEM 7
2.1 Role of Emissions in the System 7
2.2 Requirements Due to Modeling 10
2.2.1 Scale of Analysis 10
2.2.2 Criteria for Grid Size Selection 11
3. REGULATIONS AND" CONTROL TECHNOLOGY 15
3.1 Role of Control Technology 15
3.2 Emission Control Regulations 17
3.2.1 Quantifying the Regulations 18
3.2.2 Applicable Regulations 20
3.2.3 Regulations Tested 22
3.2.4 Summary of Findings 22
3.3 Air Quality Standards 23
xv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS, contd.
Page
4. DEVELOPMENT OF THE METHODOLOGY 27
4.1 General Philosophy 27
4.1.1 Development of New Approaches 27
4.1.2 Constraints 29
4.2 Use of a Multi-Step Approach 30
4.2.1 Procedures for Determining Emissions 33
4.2.2 Examples of the Procedures 36
4.2.3 Problems in Obtaining Data 39
4.3 Current Inventory Data 42
4.3.1 Zones of Analysis 42
4.3.2 Initial Criteria 44
4.3.3 Final Criteria " 45
4.3.4 General Approach 47
4.4 Background Inventory Criteria 47
4.4.1 Zones of Analysis 50
4.4.2 Changes in Criteria 50
4.4.3 General Approach 53
5. ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS 55
5.1 Activity Data 55
5.1.1 The Four Land Use Plans 55
5.1.2 Sources of Data 61
5.1.3 Problems with Data Hierarchy 63
5.1.4 Summary of Planning Decisions 54
5.1.5 Determination of Development Characteristics 55
5.1.6 Determination of Heating Requirements 59
5.1.7 Determination of Non-Heating Emissions 70
xvi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS, contd
Page
5.1.8 Industrial Sources 71
5.1.9 Data Procedures 72
5.1.10 Existing Land Uses 73
5.1.11 Changes in the Plans 73
5.1.12 Background Activity Data 74
5.2 Activity Indices 75
5.2.1 Activity Indices for Meadowlands Plans 75
5.2.2 Activity Indices for Background Point Sources 82
5.2.3 Activity Indices for Background Area Sources 86
5.3 Fuel Supply and Demand 90
5.3.1 Current Fuel Consumption 91
5.3.2 Total Fuel Consumption - 1990 95
5.3.3 1990 Point Source Fuel Use 95
5.3.4 1990 Area Source Fuel Use 98
5.4 Emission Factors 98
5.4.1 Present Emission Factors 99
5.4.2 Projection Methodology 101
5.4.3 1990 Emission Factors 102
5.5 Emission Characteristics 107
xvi i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS, contd.
Page
PART II 111
PREFACE TO PART II 113
1. EMISSION CATALOG SPECIFICATIONS 115
1.1. AQUIP Emission Data Sets 115
1.2. Sources of Data 117
2. CURRENT EMISSION INVENTORY 121
2.1. Components of the Inventory 121
2.2. Current Point Source Emission Inventory 121
2.2.1. Approach to Data Acquisition 128
2.2.2. Development of the Data 128
2.2.3. Types of Information Sought 130
2.2.4. Supplemental Data 132
2.2.5. Data Completeness and Quality 138
2.2.6. General Comments on Future Information Gathering 144
•»'
2.2.7. Default Parameters 145
2.3. Current Line Source Emission Inventory 146
2.4. Current Area Source Emission Inventory 152
2.4.1. New Jersey Fuel Emissions 153
2.4.2. New Jersey Non-Fuel Emissions 154
2.4.3. New York City Emissions 155
2.4.4. New York State Emissions 158
2.4.5. Summary of Inventory
2.4.6. Accuracy of Analysis
xvm
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS, contd.
Page
BACKGROUND EMISSION INVENTORY 163
3.1. Components of the Inventory 163
3.2. Background Point Source Emission Inventory 163
3.2.1. Industrial Point Source Projections 164
3.2.2. Power Plant Projection 176
3.2.3. Refuse Incineration 189
3.3. Background Line Source Emission Inventory 195
3.4. Background Area Source Emission Inventory 196
3.4.1. Determination of Fuel Burning Emissions 197
3.4.2. Determination of Non-Fuel Emissions 202
3.4.3. Summary of Inventory 207
4. 1990 LAND USE PLANS 211
4.1. Introduction 211
: 4.1.1. Major Land Use Categories 211
4.1.2. Determining Heating Requirements 214
4.1.3. Calculating Emissions 215
4.2. Activities and Activity Indices 215
4.2.1. Description of the Activity Categories 216
4.2.2. Decisions Affecting Heating Demand 217
4.3. Fuel Decisions 226
4.4. Emission Factors 233
4.5. Criteria for Determining Point Sources 237
4.6. Highway Emissions 238
4.7. Meadowlands Incinerator Emissions 240
REFERENCES 245
GLOSSARY 249
xix
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
PART I
Figure Page
1-1 AQUIP System Information Flow 8
1-2 AQUIP System Information Flow: Background Emission
Inventories 9
1-3 Seventeen County Influence Region 13
1-4 Area Source Grid System 14
1-5 Emission Control Regulations 21
1-6 Derivation of Air Quality Standards 24
1-7 Five Steps to Determine Emissions from Activities 34
1-8 Two Phases to Projecting Emissions 35
1-9 Examples of Steps in Determining Emissions 37
I-10 Analysis Zones for Current Inventory 43
I-11 Current Inventory Point Source Criteria 48
1-12 Analysis Zone for 1990 Inventory 51
1-13 1990 Background Inventory Point Source Criteria 52
1-14 Plan 1 56
1-15 Plan 1A 57
1-16 Plan IB . 58
1-17 Plan 1C 59
1-18 Distribution of Land Uses for the Four Alternative
Plans 60
1-19 Schematic of Island Residential Land Use 66
1-20 Schematic of Commercial and Industrial Land Uses 68
1-21 Activity Indices for Meadowlands Plans 76
1-22 Activity Indices for Background Inventory Point Sources 77
1-23 Activity Indices for Background Inventory Area Sources -
Fuel Burning 78
xxi
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Contd.
Figure
1-24 Activity Indices for Background Inventory Area Sources -
Non Fuel Burning 79
1-25 Summary of Fuel Use - 1965 92
1-26 Summary of Fuel Use - 1969 93
1-27 Summary of Fuel Use - 1990 94
1-28 Comparison of Fuel Use Propensities 96
1-29 Comparison of Total Fuel Demand 97
1-30 Summary of Emission Factors 100
1-31 Pollutant Priority Rating 103
1-32 Seasonal and Stack Parameters 108
PART II
II-1 Flow of Information for 1990 Model Inputs 116
II-2 Relation of Sources of Information 118
II-3 Summary Information for All Point Sources - Current
Inventory 123
II-4 1969 Point Source Fuel Emissions 133
II-5 1969 Point Source Industrial Process Emissions 137
II-6 New Jersey Point Sources for Zones 1 through 3 139
II-7 Point Source Activity Data 141
II-8 Summary of Line Source Parameters 147
II-9 Summary of Line Source Emissions 150
11-10 Highway Link for 1969 and 1990 151
11-11 Area Source Fuel Emissions 156
11-12 Area Sources Non-Fuel Emissions 157
11-13 Current Area Source Emission Inventory 159
11-14 Area Source Grid System 160
xxi i
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Contd.
Figure Page
11-15 Tri-State Grid 166
11-16 Point Source Projecting Data 167
11-17 1990 Point Source Fuel Emissions - New Jersey 170
11-18 Point Source Fuel Use Changes - New York 173
11-19 1990 Point Source Industrial Process Emissions -
New Jersey 174
11-20 Summary Information for all New Point Sources 177
11-21 Installed Capacity for Region's Power Plants 180
11-22 Point Source Power and Incinerator Assumptions 183
11-23 Summary of Tests Against Emission Regulations 186
11-24 Determination of Incineration 191
11-25 _ Background Area Source Assumptions - Fuel Demand and Use 198
11-26 Area Source Fuel Emissions - 1990 for New Jersey 203
11-27 Area Source Power and Incineration Assumptions 204
11-28 Derivation of Area Source Transportation Emissions 206
11-29 Area Source Non-Fuel Emissions - 1990 for New Jersey 208
11-30 Background Area Source Emissions Inventory 209
11-31 Flow Information From Activities to Emissions . 212
II-32 Land Use Activities 213
11-33 Decisions Affecting Heating Demand 218
11-34 Plan Activities Indices 220
11-35 Plan Fuel Use Allocation 227
11-36 List of Plan Emission Factors as Presented by the
LANTRAN Program 234
11-37 Allocation of Emissions to Point and Area Sources 239
11-38 Plan Highway Allocation 241
XXlll
-------
PART I: EMISSION PROJECTION METHODOLOGY
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 General Applicability
One of the major purposes of the study was to develop a general tool
to aid planners in determining emissions directly from activity data, and
to apply this tool to a case study for the Hackensack Meadowlands. As the
study developed compromises had to be made when the requirements of the
Meadowlands analysis were in conflict with the general methodology. In all
cases the premise was made that the procedures should be transferable to
other regions and that no procedure should be used if it were specific to
the Meadowlands. Wherever possible particular approaches or applications
which reflect unique characteristics of the Meadowlands and their transla-
tion to a general case have been pointed out.
1.2 Pollutants Investigated
EPA and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection were /
originally interested in six pollutants: total suspended particulates
(herein referred to as particulates or TSP), sulfur dioxide (SOO, carbon
monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), oxides of nitrogen (NO,.), and oxidants.
It was recognized from the outset that oxidants could not be modeled directly
and would have to be examined by a secondary analysis. Furthermore, there
was no way to validate our estimates for oxidants. Therefore, it was agreed
upon early in the analysis that oxidants would not be considered in the study.
Although much of the existing emissions information is confined to
sulfur dioxides and particulates all of the analyses were carried out
for all five pollutants equally. In many cases this meant a great deal of
extra effort, as in the determination of separate process emissions for
-------
carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and oxides of nitrogen, but it was essential
for maintaining a consistent analysis of each pollutant so that the final
determination of impact for Meadowlands plans could involve comparison be-
tween pollutants as well as the combined effect of all pollutants.
As a result of these efforts the first comprehensive detailed inven-
tory for certain pollutants for this region has been developed. However,
the scope of the task did not include improvement, updating or verification
of current emission inventories for the New York region and therefore these
data should not be used for purposes beyond those intended.
1.3 Confidentiality
The development of emissions inventories depends to a very large extent
on the cooperation of individual emitters. Because of the nature of the data
and the competitiveness of many of the industries, it is extremely important
that the confidentiality of the information for individual sources be main-
tained. Accordingly, as a part of this study, all point sources are referred
to only by number and industrial category. No mention is made or is intended
for individual sources by name. In addition, only data from Federal and
state air pollution agencies provided specifically for this study was used.
In turn it is these same agencies who will be reviewing the results; there-
fore, there is no net transfer of confidential information on point sources
from one interested party to another.
1.4 Planning Activity Data
As a part of this study air pollution emissions have been characterized
as a function of land use and transportation planning data, referred to as
"activities". Such planning information may consist of specific data on the
-------
development of parcels of land, zoning regulations, tables of statistics
such as employment projections, vehicular travel assignments, capital im-
provement programs, and information specific to an activity such as the
extension of utility lines. In general this study was concerned only with
planning data for activities which would contribute to air pollutant emissions,
Furthermore, it was necessary that the planning data be spatially located
so that emissions could likewise be spatially assigned. This makes it
difficult to use a great deal of information, such as general tables of
statistics or capital improvement program material, that do not locate
specific projects and give their magnitude.
Air pollutant emission patterns are a function of the intensity of
land use as well as the type and location of the land use. In most cases
neither regional nor local plans give an adequate indication of the inten-
sity of development so that emissions can be accurately assessed. The infor-
mation provided by the Hackensack Meadowlands Commission was very detailed
due in part to the fact that it was designed for this study. Information
existed from zoning ordinances on the intensity of development by detailed
categories of activity.
However, investigation of the Tri-State Transportation data and the
New York City Planning Commission data as representative of what might be
available showed that estimates are forthcoming, in general, for only such,
pvrameters as population, total employment, square foot usage by various
categories, and vehicular travel. Therefore, the extension of the procedures
to other regions must take into account the less detailed information that
characterizes most planning data. The procedures that were formulated for
the background area, using Tri-State Transportation data, may be more
-------
representative of certain general situations. On the other hand the air
quality determined from such data can only be assessed on a regional basis.
Furthermore, the development of the procedures for the background area was
of secondary priority in this study and, therefore, the applicability was
not adequately tested.
1.5 Meadowlands Case Study
The proposed development of the Hackensack Meadowlands area is quite
unique in many aspects. It involves very intensive development in a highly
industrialized and densely populated area. It is, therefore, not character-
istic of many proposed new town projects. Secondly, because it does involve
new development in an area where little current development exists, it can-
not be characterized as representative of urban redevelopment programs.
These differences should be kept in mind when attempts are made to translate
the methodologies to other planning situations.
Furthermore the Meadowlands area represents the possibility of highly
controlled development with many single projects built at a much larger
scale than normally found. For this reason the concept of large scale
central heating systems is much more heavily emphasized for the Meadowlands
plans than would generally be true. In addition, because of the high den-
sity development anticipated, the concepts of low, medium, and high density
housing takes on a different meaning here. A density of ten housing units
*
or dwelling units per acre would generally be considered fairly high;
however, this is the low density category specified for the Meadowlands,
whereas high density is 50 to 80 dwelling units per acre.
The term "dwelling unit" is used in this report since it was contained
in the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commissions land use plans and
supporting data.
4
-------
The reliance on large-scale planned projects with integrated commercial
and institutional facilities greatly lessens the need for the automobile for
local travel. Therefore most vehicular travel is assigned to major highways.
This, too, would not be representative of many other planning situations.
These unique characteristics of the Meadowlands in no way invalidate
the procedures developed. However, their existence means that caution should
be exercised in translating the exact indices used for the Meadowlands to
other situations. For instance, the analysis of low density housing for
the Meadowlands should not be transferred intact to 2 and 3 acre zoning,
nor should the negligible amount of local motor vehicle emissions.
-------
2. REQUIREMENTS OF THE AQUIP SYSTEM
2.1 Role of Emissions in the System
The development and the use of the emissions inventories are only one
set of steps in the AQUIP system. Figure 1-1 shows the general flow of
information in the AQUIP system from the specification of land use plans
through to plan evaluation and ranking. Only the first three boxes relate
to emissions inventories. In a general sense the information on land use
plans is translated directly into emissions by the use of the conversion
factors catalog. This catalog contains all necessary information on heating
requirements, fuel use, process emissions and the manner in which specific
activities produce air pollutant emissions.
It is intended as the black box for the planner to use: he can input
his land use planning information and obtain a profile of the air pollution
emissions that would result. The content and form of the land use plan is
determined by the specific interests of the planner. On the other hand,
the content and form of the emissions inventories is mainly a function of
aodeling requirements. Finally, the conversion factors catalog is directly
a function of the information needed to translate the land use plans into
the required emissions inventories.
Figure 1-2 shows the relationship of the background emission inventories
^o this process and to the initial step of model validation using current air
quality data. As noted in the glossary of terms the background inventories
include all sources not directly related to the Meadowlands plans.
-------
5141
Land Use
Receptors
Emissions
Inventory
Projected
Air
Quality
Evaluation
Figure 1-1 AQUIP System Information Flow
-------
5142
Figure 1-2 AQUIP System Information Flow: Background Emission Inventories
-------
2.2 Requirements Due To Modeling
1 2
The diffusion model (MARTIK) ' used in this study accepts
data on emission rates for discrete point, line and area sources.
Point sources can be defined as major single emitters termed significant
by the particular criteria of the study. Line sources represent mobile
emissions characterized by highway or other transportation line segments
that are similarly of significance according to the criteria of the study.
All other individual sources of emission and mobile sources, together with
general area-wide sources (such as home heating) are aggregated into area
grid cells. The emission rate for any one grid cell is assumed to be uni-
form over its area and is the sum of all contributing sources contained
within that cell.
The criteria for deciding what sources should be point, line, or area
specific were determined in conjunction with the modeling requirements for
this study. This approach greatly determined the form and content of the
emissions inventories developed. Furthermore, the area-wide sources assigned
to grid cells are, by definition, the residual of total emissions minus the
specific point and line sources. It should be stressed that the emissions
inventories used were in response to the specific study objectives and con-
straints and were not designed to improve our knowledge of total emissions
in the New York area or for any other purposes outside the scope of the study.
2.2.1 Scale of Analysis
The scale of analysis to be undertaken is a function of both the model
requirements and the availability of information. Stated simply, if the
model could distinguish among all sources of emissions and if every source
10
-------
could be identified uniquely, both the data and the corresponding results
would be more accurate. However, a point of diminishing returns is rapidly
reached in terms of the amount of information that the model.can accurately
reflect on a small scale basis and the cost of obtaining and using that
information. It was hoped that at least two different scales of analysis
could be identified in the existing emissions inventories so as to test out
the question of accuracy in emissions estimation. One scale was to have
3 4
consisted of the EPA 1965-1966 Regional Abatement Inventory ' while the
other was to have been a more detailed assessment of current emissions
prepared as a part of the study. The availability of information was such
that no reasonable comparative analysis could be made relative to present
air quality; therefore, it was necessary to make the assessment based upon
an incomplete current inventory and its comparison to the current air
quality.
2.2.2 Criteria For Grid Size Selection
The selection of a grid size for area source modeling depends upon many
factors including accuracy of the diffusion model, emissions inventory data,
and the meteorological, topographical and climatological features of the
region under study. It was felt that a grid size much below 2,000 ft. on
•-\ side would tend to overpower the model while not yielding more accurate
results. Further, grid sizes much smaller than the zone sizes of the original
land use and planning data can lead to misleading conclusions in terms of
data accuracy.
The 1 km grid system established by the Meadowlands Commission served
as a base for all future grid cell decisions. Grid cells used for the area
source inventories were always multiples of this system. Improved data for
11
-------
the area sources for the region surrounding the Meadowlands would have
allowed investigation of a grid system for that area in more detail; however,
it is not possible to conclude how much this would have increased the accuracy
of the analysis.
One aspect of the validation analysis was to define the region of in-
fluence for the Meadowlands area. Based upon the availability of information,
the 17 county New York Abatement Region ' was defined as the initial area for
analysis with the assumption that some influence from the Philadelphia
area might be required. The data available from the 17 county region was not
accurate enough in practice to warrant selecting a subsection of the 17 county
area for use in 1990. Therefore, the entire 17 county region was used as the
influence region for both the current and 1990 analysis.
Sensitivity tests showed that the influence of the Philadelphia area
would not be significant. Furthermore, the degree to which this influence
could be specified would not have significantly increased the accuracy of
the analysis. Figure 1-3 shows the 17 county.influence region while Figure
1-4 shows the area source grid cell system to which the influence region data
were assigned.
12
-------
NEW Y/'O
X
NEW J E
Figure 1-3 Seventeen County Influence Region
13
-------
4589
4573
4551
4:41
4525
4509
4493
4477
4461
4445
490 506 522 538 554 570 586 602 618
634 650
4429
Figure 1-4 Area Source Grid System
14
-------
3. REGULATIONS AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
3.1 Role of Control Technology
One of the important peripheral aspects of this study was the examination
of control technology as it would influence emissions for 1990. Because of
the enormous scope of such a task it was necessary to make a number of
simplifying assumptions at the outset. First, changes in the actual level
of activity or production of emission sources were made only according to
available information from planning, commerce, and air pollution agencies.
Np_ attempt was made to analyze changes in manufacturing processes as they
would influence emissions (definitely outside the scope of this study).
Secondly, changes in habits or patterns such as the amount of heat that
would be required per square foot for a dwelling or an office building were
made only where it was strongly evident. Otherwise a conservative approach
was used and the heat requirement that was found for the current inventory
was carried forward to 1990.
Thirdly, changes in overall fuel use patterns were again made with
conservatism. Major shifts such as from coal to oil and gas were naturally
taken into account. However, unless there was strong evidence to the contrary
the fuel use propensity for individual sources was kept the same in 1990 as
found in 1969. For new sources and particularly for sources resulting from
•_he Meadowlands Plans, logical design fuels were assigned. The most important
assumption was that there would not be as drastic a switch to natural gas as has
been suggested by numerous sources. This switch was tempered in our analysis
due to more recent appraisals of the supply. Sulfur content of fuels burned
in the study area has major direct effect on the determination of sulfur dioxide
15
-------
emissions. The 1968 New Jersey sulfur regulations were used for all calcu-
lations of the current inventory. This consists of anthracite coal .7%
sulfur, bituminous coal 1% sulfur, residual oil 1% sulfur and distillate oil
.7% sulfur. For all sources in New York and Connecticut, EPA had used the
most applicable sulfur contents in calculating the emissions for their region-
al update inventory . These emissions were used directly in this study. In
calculating the 1990 emissions the appropriate sulfur regulations for the
State of New Jersey as promulgated were used in determining 1990 emission
factors.
Fourthly, in determining emission factors for 1990 published feasible
control technology for fuel burning was used wherever appropriate. However,
process control for that time period is unclear and more of a problem to
incorporate into the emission factors for several reasons. In many cases the
appropriate indices for determining process rate are not available. Further-
more, new emission regulations for processes were being promulgated while
the study was being conducted, but were not yet available at the time deci-
sions had to be made. Therefore, a proportional reduction emission factor
for sources that exist now was used in consultation with the appropriate
air pollution agencies and a proportion of the fuel emissions was applied
for industrial separate process sources occurring as a result of the Meadow-
lands Plans. As the requisite information becomes available it can be in-
corporated into the procedures and into the data sets of the AQUIP system.
Fifthly, it was necessary to derive default stack height and plume
rise values for numerous fuel and process stacks in the current inventory.
Furthermore, for 1990 with the exception of power plant design parameters,
it was necessary to rely on the existing stack height and plume rise values
adjusted for an increase in plume rise of approximately 20% where a default
values was necessary.
16
-------
In summary, it was possible to incorporate the latest control technology
only insofar as it could be determined for the fuel emission factors, as ex-
plained in the literature. There were insufficient data to adequately assess
process emissions control and we did not examine changes in manufacturing
processes themselves were not examined, this being beyond the scope of this study.
3.2 Emission Control Regulations
Various federal, state and local air pollution agencies have promulgated
or will be promulgating emission control regulations. These limit the amount
of effluent that may be released from a stack under various conditions. It
is possible for a future time period such as 1990 that with the most appro-
priate emission factors and control technology information a source may still
not meet the applicable emission control regulations. Therefore, it is impor-
tant to include as a final step in the emissions projection methodology a
check against applicable emission control regulations. If the emissions as
determined do not meet regulations then a feed back loop in the process becomes
necessary to re-determine activities or fuel.
As a part of the study, therefore, it was necessary to determine the
applicable emission control regulations affecting the Meadowlands and the
influence region. As a result of the available information the existing or
proposed regulations as of August 1971 were used as representative of 1990
control, thereby unavoidably introducing a weakness into the analysis. It
should be recognized that several of the involved federal, state and local
agencies are presently contemplating changing their emission regulations
and certainly new regulations will be promulgated in the future. However,
it was beyond the scope of this study to try to determine the nature of these
possible regulations. As a part of any future analysis the appropriate
17
-------
emission control regulations should be updated to reflect the most recent
information.
There are six major jurisdictions that formulate and enforce emission
control regulations in the study area. These are Federal, State of New
Jersey, State of New York, New York City, State of Connecticut, and the
Hackensack Meadowlands Commission. Because the Hackensack Meadowlands
Commission regulations had not been finalized at the time of analysis and
because they dealt with density controls}it was decided to use only the
applicable New Jersey regulations for that area. Unfortunately there is a
pyramiding effect in the areas controlled by the respective agencies. Local
agencies have jurisdiction over the immediate vicinity, state agencies over
the entire state, including the local areas, and the federal agency has
jurisdiction over the entire 17 county region. Accordingly, a particular
source such as a power plant in New York City may be subject to the emission
control regulations of at least three jurisdictions. It is likewise possible
for a single agency to have more than one regulation affecting the emission of
any particular pollutant from a specific source.
3.2.1 Quantifying the Regulations
An emission standard or control regulation is a limit on the amount
of a pollutant emitted from a source. The concentration in the effluent
may be stated subjectively in terms of its appearance to the observer
or objectively in terms of the stack height or rated heat input.
Subjective standards based on visual measurements could not be analyzed in
this study since the regulation could not be quantified for comparison pur-
poses. Since fuel regulations are incorporated into the emission factor
analysis those regulations which can be tested for 1990 are those which
18
-------
directly limit emissions based on weight or volumetric bases. Accordingly,
the respective emission control regulations of the Federal government, the
States of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut and the City of New York were
analyzed to determine the applicable regulations based on weight or volumetric
consideration.
It was found that the regulations promulgated by the various agencies fr
the same pollutant often consider a different parameter as the basis for con-
trol. For instance, particulate emissions may be regulated based on indices
of stack height, distance from property line, boiler capacity, percent of
exit gas volume or weight of the gas. Because of the great variation in the
regulations and in the manner in which they are stated a number of simplifi-
cations and definitions were made for the purpose of the analysis.
1. An emission control regulation or standard is a mechanism which
controls the emission of one of the five major air pollutants by restriction
based on some characteristic of the source. For the purpose of this study
the regulations quantify the restriction.
2. Restrictions on fuel composition (specifically on the content of
sulfur)are not considered to be emission regulations per se and are incor-
porated into the 1990 emission factors.
3. Regulations on the opacity of smoke which generally employ the
Ringelmann Charts are not considered emission regulations although they
may indirectly control particulates. Opacity cannot be quantified for use.
Furthermore, many factors besides particulate emissions can and do effect the
use of opacity charts.
19
-------
3.2.2 Applicable Regulations
When these various problems and assumptions were taken into account
twenty-seven regulations were found to be appropriate for consideration in
the study. These are summarized in Figure 1-5. The regulations were dis-
*
cussed at the Milestone 5 meeting and the following decisions made. All
federal regulations were eliminated from analysis under the assumption that
the appropriate state regulations were more stringent and therefore should
supersede the federal regulations. Secondly, a number of regulations were
eliminated from further consideration because no sources existed in the
inventory to which the regulations would apply. The remaining regulations
were analyzed in greater detail to determine the ability to quantify their
restrictions and to use them in the study.
Unfortunately, the remaining three regulations applying to the State
of New Jersey were found to be inappropriate for analysis because insuf-
ficient data were available through the emission inventory to assess whether
or not the particular sources could meet the emission control regulation.
These regulations require a great deal of detailed information about the
particular source and in most cases cannot be assessed adequately without
stack testing. In brief there was not sufficient information in the current
point source inventory to allow accurate analysis of the regulations. There-
fore, it would be impossible to try to project parameters forward to 1990
to test the regulations. Furthermore, the type of averaged parameters that
can be estimated for point sources occurring in the Meadowlands do not lend
themselves at all to this type of analysis.
* A series of Milestone meetings were held throughout the study between EPA,
NJDEP, and ERT to review progress and approve aspects of both the approach
and data used. Many decisions stated herein are a result of these meetings,
20
-------
FIGURE 1-5
Emission Control Regulations
Pollutant
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Particulates
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Jurisdiction
Federal
Federal
Federal
Federal
N.J.
N.J.
N.J.
N.Y.
N.Y.
.N.Y.
N.Y.
N.Y.C.
N.Y.C.
N.Y.C.
Conn.
Conn.
Conn .
Federal
Federal
Federal
Federal
Federal
N.J.
N.Y.C.
N.Y.C.
Oxides of Nitrogen Federal
Oxides of Nitrogen N.Y.C.
Regulation
Sect. 3.4.1
Sect. 3.4.21
Sect. 3.5.1
Sect. 3.3.1
Sect. 5.2.1
Sect. 7.2.15 5 .16
Sect. 11.1
Sect. 202.2
Sect. 187. 3a
Sect. 194.4
Sect. 188.3
Sect. 1403.2-9.09 (a) (2)
Sect. 1403.2-9.23
Sect. 1403.2-9.09 (a) (1)
Sect. 19-13 G38
Sect. 19-13 B32
Sect. 19-13 G16a
Sect. 4.12
Sect. 4.1.3
Sect. 4.2.1
Sect. 4.4.1
Sect. 4.5.1
Sect. 8.22 (a) 6 (b)
Sect. 140.3. 2-9. 07b
Sect. 1403.2-9.07(a)
Sect. 7.1.1-7.12
Sect. 1403.2-9.13
Sources
Fuel Burning (Solid)
Fuel Burning (Oil)
Process
Incineration
Solid Fuel
Process
Incineration
Solid Fuel, power
Process
Incineration
Ferrous Jobbing Foundaries
Fuel Burning
Process
Incineration
Fuel Burning
Process
Incineration
Fuel Burning
Refineries
Sulfuric Acid Plants
Nonferrous Smelters
Sulphyte Pulp Mills
Sulfur Compounds
Fuel Burning
Processes
Fuel Burning
Fuel Burning
Analysis
No*
No*
No*
No*
None in 1990, assumed
Insufficient data: rate
Insufficient data: exhaust volume
None in 1990, assumed
None in inventory
Yes
None in inventory
Yes
None in inventory
Yes
Yes
None in inventory
None in inventory
No*
No*
No*
No*
No*
Insufficient data: stack
Yes
None in inventory
No*
Yes
*Agreed upon between ERT, EPA, and NJDEP not to consider any federal regulations.
-------
3.2.3 Regulations Tested
As a result of these decisions six regulations were chosen as appro-
priate for analysis. Four of these regulations concerned particulates and
one each for sulfur oxides and oxides of nitrogen. Three of the regulations
concerned fuel burning in New York City (for particulates, sulfur oxides and
nitrogen oxides). The remaining three regulations affecting particulates
were for New York City incineration, incineration for the remaining counties
of New York State within the study area, and fuel burning in Connecticut.
Since the greatest efforts of the study were concentrated on New Jersey
sources, particularly point sources, the information available to test the
regulations for New York and Connecticut was not as good as might be hoped
for. Furthermore, the projection methodology to determine 1990 point sources
was also concentrated on the New Jersey area and, therefore, 1990 point
source decisions for New York and Connecticut were based predominately on
exogenous factors and existing data extrapolated forward to 1990. In
particular, this includes the power plant and incinerator projections made
independently from the projection methodology due to the special expertise
of the study team in these areas.
3.2.4 Summary of Findings
The actual comparison of the six regulations to the appropriate point
sources is discussed under the area on background point sources. However,
the following points should be made in summary:
1. In no case could a satisfactory comparison be made resulting in
a yes or no decision as to whether a source would meet an emission control
regulation.
22
-------
2. In no case were the available data sufficient to characterize the
individual point source to the level of detail required by the regulations.
3. The relationship of annual fuel use to the number of hours of
operation as expressed in the regulations is inconsistent with the form of
the data in the inventory.
4. The use of average emission factors may not be representative of
a particular source.
5. The use of existing stack parameters for projected sources when no
other information is available skews the analysis further.
6. When all possible margin of error is taken into account it would
appear that several New York City power plants may not meet the NO emission
A.
control regulations. However, it is not possible to make a definitive state-
ment due to the inaccuracies of the data available relative to the analysis
requirements.
3.3 Air Quality Standards
One of the major tasks of the study was to examine the air quality
resulting from each of the four plans for the Hackensack Meadowlands relative
to the appropriate air quality standards. Both federal and state standards
have been established for each of the five pollutants. As a result of the
Milestone 4 meeting it was determined that the New Jersey State standards
would have precedent and that Federal standards would be used only if the
New Jersey standards were inappropriate to the time period modeled. Since
the modeled air quality represents an annual arithmetic mean (or a seasonal
arithmetic mean) it was determined that the only standard for which compar-
isons could be made would be the annual arithmetic mean. Unfortunately,
the standards that have been promulgated are for various time averaging
periods as shown in Figure 1-6.
23
-------
FIGURE 1-6
Derivation of Air Quality Standards
TSP
so2
CO
HC
N02
1-hr, max
P. S. N.J.
3-hr, max
P. S. N.J.
468.
40000.40000.15000.
160. 160. 160.
ug/m
8-hr, max
P. S. N.J.
3
24-hr, max
P. S. N.J.
260. 150. 150.
365. 260. 260.
10000.10000.10000.
250. 250.
Annual
Geom. Mean
P. S. N.J.
75. 60. 65.
Annual
Arith. Mean
P. S. N.J.
80. 60. 53.
100. 100. 100.
Baseline and
Jurisdiction
65. N.J.
53. N.J.
10000. N.J.
160. Fed.
100. N.J.
Annual
Arith Mean *
70.1
53.0 0.020
1425.0 1.250
160. 0.24
100.0 0.053
NOTES:
P = Federal primary standard
S = Federal secondary standard
Federal primary and secondary maxima may be exceeded once per year;
New Jersey maxima may be attained once.
Baseline values are in yg/m and are for
verifying averaging periods as follows:
TSP annual geometric mean
SO- annual arithmetic mean
CO 8-hr maximum
HC 3-hr maximum
N0? annual arithmetic mean
Annual arithmetic mean values for TSP and CO
derived from above using Larson's model.
* Extrapolation of 3-hour standard to an
annual average not considered valid.
-------
It was therefore necessary to determine the appropriate baseline standards
and then to translate these into the annual arithmetic mean standard.
As a result of the Milestone 4 meeting the following baseline standards
were adopted:
0 For particulates, the New Jersey annual geometric mean
0 For sulfur dioxide, the New Jersey annual arithmetic mean
0 For carbon monoxide, the New Jersey eight-hour maximum value
0 For hydrocarbon, the federal secondary three-hour maximum value
« For nitrogen dioxide, the New Jersey annual arithmetic mean.
In each of the three cases where the baseline standard was not the
annual arithmetic mean a standard procedure incorporating Larson's model was
to be used to calculate the annual arithmetic mean. Larson's model requires
information on the standard deviation of measurements. Accordingly, information
from recent New Jersey measurement programs was used to determine appropriate
standard deviations. The last two columns in Figure 1-6 show the annual
arithmetic means to be used in the analysis, in terms of micrograms per
cubic meter and parts per million.
•i~
The air quality standards did not enter into the emission inventory
procedure directly in any way. Rather they were determined at this stage
in the analysis for later use in assessing the impact of each^of the land
use plans on air quality.
25
-------
4. DEVELOPMENT. OF THE METHODOLOGY
4.1 General Philosophy
Air pollutant emissions are generally determined as multiple or area
sources because: 1) it is not possible to survey all single source emitters
individually; 2) for most modeling and control purposes many small sources
can be treated as one area-wide source; and 3) the data handling and modeling
procedures have practical limits on the total number of sources to be con-
sidered. Furthermore, when future sources of pollution are considered,
protective data does not usually exist to handle emissions on a single source
basis. In fact, land use planners rarely deal with information that would
indicate individual sources of pollution. Rather, they are concerned-with
general zones of land use which may or may not be sources of pollution.
Accordingly, there is no correct scale or scope of analysis for area
source data. Flexibility is needed for updating;for cell aggregation and
disaggregation, conversion to single source information}and computerized
interfacing for the uses desired, such as modeling. In traditional approaches
to emission inventories , area-wide sources have generally been based too
heavily on population variables with emissions allocated to grid cells on a
gross scale.
4.1.1 Development of New Approaches
More reliable and detailed area-wide emission inventories can be developed
utilizing available socio-economic and planning data, including the censuses
of population, housing, manufacturing and fuel use. Further, a computerized
system can be used to allocate the emissions to grid cells of varying size.
27
-------
Such techniques are aptly suited to continuous updating and projecting
analyses. Area source emissions can be categorized as to whether they are
population and housing or employment related. For instance, residential
space heating is housing related; commercial activities may fall into two
types: central area clustering related to employment and localized scattering
related to population. Industrial activities, exclusive of those emitters
considered to be point sources, are related to industrial employment.
Institutional emissions may be population related with the exception of major
institutional complexes which are handled in a manner similar to commercial
clustering. Finally, the information may be melded into a continuously
updated inventory on the most consistent data base possible, generally by
counties, cities and often by census tracts in the central part of the region.
By orienting our thinking to such procedures for current emission
inventories we are in a much better position to develop techniques for future
emission inventories. This is because future inventories must depend directly
upon planning related data.. Furthermore, it is only through an excellent
understanding of the relationship between planning and emissions for current
inventories that the necessary conversion factors can be developed to
project future emissions.
Too often emission inventories are tied heavily to the grid cell used for
modeling purposes. Much of the original information by land use zones or
political jurisdiction is lost in the process of transferring to the grid
system. The grid cell size cannot be changed at a later date for different
purposes and a great deal of manual input of data must be undertaken.
To avoid these problems, a powerful and innovative technique was developed
to make the processing of information independent of grid size. The key to
the technique is the initial listing of land use activities and characteristics
28
-------
in a computer data bank by geographical coordinates and land use zones.
Emissions data for each land use zone are computed by referencing the con-
version factors catalog. Finally, any specified grid size can be superimposed
and the emissions contained within each grid cell calculated.
If changes are desired in the initial land use data or if a different
grid cell system is desired incremental changes can be made without destroying
the entire data system. Such a system provides for the maximum in updating
and flexibility of use.
4.1.2 Constraints
To put such a philosophy into practice requires assumptions and com-
promises: the data may not be available according to the land use zones
and political jurisdictions desired; many of the parameters necessary for
the conversion factors catalog may be missing from the data base. The
flexibility of the system is essential in the first case. Since any size
land use zone and any grid cell size can be used, information can initially
be coded by large jurisdictions, such as counties in a regional analysis.
When more detailed information becomes available on a town or census tract
basis, this information can be incorporated and more detailed values
assigned to any arbitrary grid system.
For missing data the concept of "default parameters" was developed.
If information is desired according to an industrial classification (such
as the 4-digit SIC code) for the propensity to use different fuels and the
data are only available as a total for all industries in the region, a de-
fault parameter is used to assign the industry-wide factor to each individual
industry. If, at a later date, specific information for an industry is known,
it can be used in place of the default parameter.
29
-------
The development of the conversion factors catalog itself requires a
great deal of analysis since numerous steps are involved to translate acti-
vities into emissions. These steps vary according to the land use code.
Some activities produce fuel emissions whereas others produce only non-fuel
or process emissions.
Finally, the step by step procedures and checking methods required to
develop and verify the default parameters involve careful coordination between
existing data and future requirements.
4.2 Use of a Multi-Step Approach
The first step in developing an emission projection methodology useful
to planners involved identifying the major requirements or constraints of the
methodology. Four broad requirements were defined as follows:
1. All procedures should be compatible with both the planning-related
data (inputs) and the diffusion modeling formats (outputs).
2. All assumptions should be applicable to other situations and not
specific to the Meadowlands; likewise, the scale of analysis should be
sensitive to individual land use activities and not just to overall develop-
ment plans.
3. All data needed for future time periods should be derivable from
existing information, unless normally supplied by planners.
4. All assumptions and constraints should be updatable as new information
becomes available.
The first requirement was the most important. Land use and transportation
planning data are typically in the form of:
1. Parcels of land of arbitrary size and shape, with their associated
permitted uses and densities of development.
30
-------
2. Tables of statistics (such as employment projections by industrial
category), capital improvement plans and other non-spatial information.
3. Vehicular travel (assigned to network links or aggregated by zones).
In all cases a "level of activity" is specified or implied; however, this
may give little indication of the pollution-generating potential of the
activity.
1 2
On the other hand the modified Martin-Tikvart diffusion model ' used for
the study requires the specification of point, line and area source locations
together with their associated emission strengths and relevant stack dispersion
data. The procedures, therefore, must be capable of transforming the land use
and transportation planning data - representing levels of activities for oddly
shaped land use zones, specific point locations, and highway links - into
emission strengths for any configuration of area source grid cells required
by the diffusion model, and for those individual point and line sources not
aggregated into these area cells. Ideally, source emission "size criteria",
used to determine which points and lines are treated separately and which
are aggregated into area cells, should be completely responsive to the
modeling decisions which govern the detail of the pollutant isopleths and be
fixed during emission inventory development.
In many cases, emission inventories have been developed for a specific
use as a function of the limited data available. As a second requirement of
the study all decisions regarding procedures to be used were to preserve the
adaptability of the techniques to other regions, to other development plans
and time periods for the same region, and to the analysis of component
activities of a land use plan as well as to overall comparison between plans.
Because of the time and budget constraints of the study, this requirement
demanded compromise: the sensitivity to component activities could not be
31
-------
analyzed and it is not possible to assess how readily translatable are all
techniques.
The third requirement was the most complicated. In order to have a
system that would require only planning-related data as routine input,
all other data should take the form of "default parameters" which the planner
would override only when he has more appropriate information for his region
or time period. All of these parameters had to be estimated from available
national data (as in the case of fuel and process emission factor trends for
1990) or be derived empirically from the existing emission inventories for the
New York - New Jersey area (as in the case of the percent of fuel used for
heating for each activity category).
To satisfy the last requirement it was necessary to have all assumptions
and constraints fully disclosed and documented in this report and at the
Milestone meetings, and all default parameters capable of modification or
specification in greater detail by either activity category or geographical
area. Most emission inventories have suffered from their static nature
since 1) assumptions and procedures are not well explained; 2) new infor-
mation cannot be incorporated into the inventory because of the aggregation
procedures; and 3) accuracy tests can rarely be performed.
The nature of the procedures as defined and implemented tended to preserve
this requirement. However, the particular development characteristics of the
Meadowlands plans and the default parameters that had to be incorporated in
response to these characteristics limit the dynamic aspects of the techniques.
32
-------
4.2.1 Procedures for Determining Emissions
Research presently being conducted on procedures for estimating emissions
from land use and transportation planning data often emphasizes empirical
derivation of emission indices as a direct one-step function of activity
categories. For this study, however, a multi-step approach was necessary,
so that all assumptions and constraints involved in transforming the levels
of activities into emission strengths could be examined, and the procedures
for updating the default parameters specified.
In response to the four requirements identified above, a five-step
procedure was formulated as shown in Figure 1-7:
Step 1 - activities: For all land use and transportation planning data
the level of activity is specified.
Step 2 - activity indices: For each category of activity, default
parameters for determining fuel requirements are developed.
Step 3 - fuel use: For each category of activity (and geographical area)
default parameters for the propensity to use different fuels are applied to
the fuel requirements.
Step 4 - emission factors: For each category of activity, engineering
estimates of fuel and process source emission factors are developed and
applied to fuel use and process rates.
Step 5 - emissions: Emissions calculated from fuel and process sources
are adjusted for seasons, based on temperature variation (degree days) and
default parameters representing the percent of fuel used for heating purposes.
Furthermore, a two-phase procedure was employed as portrayed in Figure
1-8. In the first phase current planning data and current fuel use are
correlated to produce projecting indices. In the second phase these pro-
jecting indices are modified to reflect future time periods and are applied
33
-------
5143
Activities
Activity
Indices
i
Fuel 1 Fuel
Demand j Use
1
Emission
Factors
Emissions
FIGURE 1-7 FIVE STEPS TO Di-TTJ'INE EMISSIONS TROM ACTIVITIES
-------
5144
PHASE I
Current
Inventories
Activities
Activity
Indices
Fuel Balance
\
Emission
Factors
Emissions
Default
Parameters
PHASE g
Future
Inventories
Activities
Activity
Indices
\
Fuel | Fuel
Demand \ Use
\
Emission
Factors
Emissions
Planner
Inputs
Figure 1-8 Two Phases to Projecting Emissions
-------
to planning data so as to generate future fuel demand and emission levels.
Current data on fuel use and emission factors are likewise used to pre-
dict future information. The Phase I analysis provides the majority of the
default parameters to be used in Phase II in conjunction with the planner
inputs. Phase I and Phase II can actually represent the same time period
if an iterative process is used.
4.2.2 Examples of the Procedures
Examples of the information needed to proceed from activities to emissions
are illustrated in Figure 1-9. The three examples show, respectively, 1) a
residential land use zone represented as an area source; 2) an industrial
activity represented as a point source; and 3) a highway segment represented
as a line source. The upper row of boxes deals with the kind of information
that the planner must provide; the next row summarizes some of the necessary
default parameters; and the bottom rows show typical dimensional units for
each step. In practice a conversion must be made in the last step to the
dimensional units required by the diffusion model.
First, looking specifically at the residential land use category shown
in Figure 1-9 there are several planning inputs that are required:
Step 1^: The density and acreage can be used to determine the number of
dwelling units.
Step 2: The average number of rooms and type of dwelling unit can be
used to determine the heating requirement per dwelling unit.
Step 3: The mix of single family homes, town houses and apartments
can be used to determine what fuels will be burned and with what size
equipment.
36
-------
Figure T.-9
Examples of Steps in Determining Emissions
i) area
ii) point
iii) line
Default Parameters
i) area
ii) point
iii) line
Dimensional Units
used in the study
i) area
ii) point
iii) line
Corresponding metric
Dimensional units
i) area
j ii) point
iii) line
Step 1 Step 2
Activities Activity Indices
dwelling units per acre rooms per dwelling unit
sq.ft. of industrial floor space ' floors per building
number of vehicles n.a.
BTU per dwelling unit
BTU per sq.ft. ;% fuel
for space heat
n.a.
d.u./acre x BTU/d.u.
sq.ft. x BTU/sq.ft.
veh. n.a.
d.u./km2 x Cal./d,u.
m2 x Cal./nT
veh. x n.a.
Step 3 i Step 4
i
Fuel Demand: Fuel Use i Emission Factors
type of development '•
type of development
n.a.
type of fuel used factors by fuel type
type of fuel used factors by fuel and
process type
n.a. factors by vehicle type
BTU/ acre : gal. /acre x Ibs/gal
BTU : gal. x Ibs/gal
n.a. 'x Ibs/veh-mi.
1
= Cal./km : liter/km i x g/liter
= Cal. : liter ; x g/liter
n.a. x g/veh-km
Step 5
Emissions
= Ibs/acre
= Ibs
= Ibs/mi.
= g/km
= g
= g/km
The examples shown are for
i) area - a residential land use zone
ii) point - an industrial activity
iii) line - a highway segment
BTU is British Thermal Units, a measure of heating requirements.
The dimensional analysis assumes the use of fuel oil for heating.
Note: the terms 'dwelling unit' and 'housing unit' are used interchangeably in this study.
n.a. = not applicable.
Neither the planning nor emissions inventory data given to use for our .study were in metric units;
therefore, we have used the original units throughout this report since conversion of all data was
outside the scope of the study.
-------
Several default parameters may also be required, as shown in Step 2.
Current data on activity levels and fuel use can be used to calculate a
default parameter for heating demand - British thermal units (or Calories)
per dwelling unit (BTU/d.u.); this value can be adjusted for a future time
period and for differences between residential categories, particularly for
the number of rooms per dwelling unit. In practice, the results of the first
phase -- empirically deriving parameters from the existing data -- may not be
conclusive; engineering judgement may be very important in determining th
actual values to be used in the second phase which is concerned with the
future time period.
The level of activity shown in Step 1 (d.u./acre) is multiplied times
the activity index shown in Step 2 (BTU/d.u.) to produce the fuel demand
for the residential land use zone shown in Step 3 (BTU/acre). It is then
necessary to answer several important questions concerning how this fuel
demand will be satisfied:
1. What fuel will be used (oil, coal, gas, steam or electricity).
2. What other home activities in addition to heating will use the
fuel (cooking, hot water).
3. What type of fuel-burning apparatus will be used (individual home
heating, or a central heating system for several thousand dwelling units).
National or regional default parameters can usually be relied upon to
answer the first two questions, but the third question is basically a plan-
ning decision. There is a significant trend towards centralized heating and
cooling systems for reasons of economy in large-scale developments such as
the Meadowlands. The governing factor is the scale of the individual develop-
ment, particularly:
1. The density,which governs the number of units.
2. The clustering,which governs the heating distribution system
necessary with central heating facilities.
38
-------
3. The overall size,which governs whether a developer will put up
the capital for a central system.
Finally, for each fuel and type of fuel burning equipment (individual
house or central system), the appropriate EPA emission factors, as depicted
in Step 4, are used to translate the amount of fuel burned into the quantity
of emissions for various pollutants as represented by Step 5. The size of
the fuel-burning installation determines which factors should be used and
whether or not emission control devices are apt to be used.
4.2.3 Problems in Obtaining Data
For an industrial activity such as that shown as example 2 in Figure
1-9, the problem may be more complex. For an existing major emitter rep-
resented as a point source, there may be adequate emissions information
from a current inventory; however, neither the present level of activity
nor projected changes in that level may be known. Conversely, planning
information tends to deal with industries by broad categories and rarely
with a specific firm and its characteristics which will influence the
level of emissions at a particular location. The land use planner does work
with parameters such as acres and lot coverage which can yield an estimate of
the number of square feet of floor space for a new facility as shown in
Step 1 of Figure 1-9.
Empirically derived estimates of BTU's per square foot for heating
purposes (Step 2) show great variation. Even greater variation is exhibited
in the empirical data for the percent of fuel used by industries for heating;
it may be 100% for a warehouse and close to zero for a. foundry. Propensities
to use different fuels (Step 3) may be empirically derived by industrial
category, such as the 2-digit or 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) adopted by the U.S. Census.
39
-------
For example, in the first phase of the procedures existing fuel use data
from the current emission inventories can be examined and homogeneous categories
derived. These are then modified according to national, regional, and local
trends, by category, and employed in the second phase to produce fuel use
propensities for the appropriate future time period;
The least reliable information involves separate process emissions from
industrial sources, such as the evaporation from a tank farm or area-wide
solvent evaporation. Source emission inventories have generally been incom-
plete in this area; therefore, little empirical data are available from which
to derive default parameters. Furthermore, where emission factors have been
determined, they are related to process rate: the total quantity of material
processed per unit time for the operation producing the emissions. Process
rate has not as yet been correlated with parameters that are readily available
to the planner; virtually no planning effort would include projections of
process rate. Therefore, very crude default parameters have been developed
in this study to relate process emission by activity category directly to fuel
emissions or to activity level, such as employment. In general, if reasonable
engineering data are not available for process emissions for a particular
source, current land use planning based estimating procedures will not yield
satisfactory results; the estimation procedures described here have been in-
cluded in the analysis merely for completeness rather than for accuracy.
Complete data by even the most detailed classification schemes, such as the
4-digit SIC code, will not solve the problem: both nitric and sulfuric acid
plants can be found in the same 4-digit SIC category.
If an activity such as the industrial land use example shown in Figure 1-9
reaches a certain scale, by virtue of its emissions, it should be considered
a point source rather than an area source for modeling purposes. It is
40
-------
possible to determine default "size criteria" for each activity category
to allow the planner to decide, objectively, whether a development should be
considered a point source or not.
Example 3 in Figure 1-9 shows the procedure for determining line source
emissions from a highway network. Activities (Step 1) are multiplied directly
by emission factors (Step 4) to produce emissions (Step 5). The emission factors
vary by vehicle class: cars and light-duty trucks, heavy-duty gasoline trucks,
and diesel trucks and buses; in addition certain pollutants vary with speed.
Transportation planners routinely determine all of the activity data needed
although not necessarily on a detailed basis; default parameters for vehicle
class mix, model year mix and average speed can be used where local data are
not available. Whether or not a particular traffic segment should be a line
source or an area source can be determined by a "size criteria", based, on
vehicle miles per unit time.
The procedures to go from activity levels (Step 1) to emission strengths
(Step 5) for all other activities represent combinations of and modifications
to the three examples shown in Figure 1-9. In many cases commercial, institu-
tional or transportation activity emissions can be determined as a function
of the residential activities they serve. This is particularly relevant when a
planned development is involved, with apartments, offices, stores and parking
areas built as one unit.
41
-------
4.3 Current Inventory Data
The current emission inventory was developed for three very specific
purposes: 1) validation of the model for the Meadowlands area; 2) as a basis
for the background inventory to be used for 1990; and 3) as a basis for
developing activity and default parameters to be used with the Meadowlands
plans.
The first purpose required the most detailed spatial information, ;^ ice
the accuracy of the emissions inventory determines in large part the success
of the validation procedure. The first decision to be made involved the size
of the region to be inventoried. This was governed mainly by the availabilit/
3 4
of information for a 17 county area around New York City ' and formed the
boundary of the initial influence region.
The second decision involved the detail of data to be gathered within
this region. There were three criteria to consider: 1) the availability of
information; 2) the requirements of the model; and 3) the necessity of having
accuracy to validate the model and to characterize future emissions in and
around the Meadowlands.
4.3.1 Zones of Analysis
Accordingly the region was divided into several zones approximating
concentric circles around the Meadowlands. For each zone a differing level of
detail for data gathering was assigned. Figure 1-10 shows the analysis zones
derived for the current inventory. In brief, zone 1 is the Meadowlands district;
the zone 2 boundary is approximately 1 mile outside the Meadowlands - it is
defined by town boundaries everywhere except to the south in the cities of
Newark and Jersey City; the zone 3 boundary is a circle approximately 5 miles
42
-------
A, Validation Sites
Note: Actual boundaries between zones usually followed town boundaries;
they were developed only to define differing levels of detail and
have no physical or political significance.
Figure 1-10 Analysis Zones for Current Inventory
43
-------
outside the Meadowlands - it also is defined by town lines and includes only
Manhattan in the New York part of the region; finally, zone 4 includes all of
the remaining parts of New Jersey and New York contained within the 17 county
abatement region.
4.3.2 Initial Criteria
Separate rules were established for point, line and area sources fo, each
of these zones. The criteria proposed for point sources were reviewed at
the Milestone 4 meeting and agreed upon by EPA and NJDEP. They were based
t
upori several general rules for selection including: 1) that all significant
point sources within and immediately surrounding the Meadowlands would be
treated as point sources; 2) that a point of diminishing returns concerning
model accuracy is reached when approximately 100 separate point sources are
considered; and 3) beyond about 5 miles from the Meadowlands boundary the
specification of individual stack parameters is no longer important to model
accuracy within the Meadowlands. At that time the selection rules for point
sources were tentatively given as follows:
1. For zone 1 all sources with rates greater than 100 tons per year for
any one single pollutant would be considered. For sources with multiple
stacks having different stack parameters,separate point sources would be
specified.
2. For zone 2 the criteria would be the same as zone 1, except that all
stacks for a plant would be aggregated into one source using major stack
parameters.
3. For zone 3 the same criteria as zone 2,except that much of the data
would have to be estimated and the cutoff for the point sources might be
raised to 200 tons per year.
44
-------
4. Zone 3B, a separate part of zone 3, was defined for Manhattan; the
criteria were the same as for New Jersey zone 3, except that the cutoff would
be 500 tons per year. This was determined for two reasons:
a) The area sources for Manhattan have much greater emissions than
other areas of equal size; therefore, 100 tons per year is less significant
as a point source in relation to the area source density; and
b) There are a manageable number of point sources in Manhattan greater
than 500 tons per year but too many greater than 100 tons for the model to
handle reasonably.
5. For zone 4A, the remainder of Bergen, Passaic, Essex and Union
counties, a point source cutoff of 500 tons per year would be used.
6. For zone 4B, the remainder of the 17 county region plus the Connecticut
area of the Air Quality Control Region (as of 1969), a cutoff of 1,000 tons
per year would be used. Only point sources in Connecticut were considered in
the analysis.
The criteria established for line sources were as follows:
1. For zones 1 and 2 all major highway links as provided by the New
Jersey Department of Transportation would be considered as separate line
sources.
2. For zones 3 and 4 all transportation emissions would be treated
as a part of the area source data.
Finally, the tentative criteria for area sources were defined as follows:
1. For zone 1, within the Meadowlands, emissions would be handled on
a scale of approximately 1 km cells.
2. For zone 2 emissions would be projected from Tri-State Transportation
Commission data on a one square mile basis or from census tract information.
3. For zone 3 emissions would be developed from data by townships or
45
-------
the one square mile grid; special procedures would be developed for Manhattan
if necessary.
4. For zone 4 emissions would be grouped according to counties.
4.3.3 Final Criteria
As the development of t!ie current emission inventories and determinatior
of the validation procedures progressed,a number of modifications to th si,
tentative criteria had to be made. For point sources very few cases were
found in zones 2 and 3 where data existed for more than one stack group for
a single source; therefore, all information was used separately and no data
were aggregated to a single stack for a particular source. Furthermore, there
were so few sources in the 100 to 200 ton range that the 100 ton criterion
was kept for all of zones 1 through 3.
For area sources, based upon computer running times and efficiencies1
as well as availability of information on a sub-county level, it was deter-
mined that the following breakdown would be more useful:
1. For zones 1, 2, and part of 3, 2 km grid cells would be used, with
the option of using 1 km cells where emission density variation warranted
their use.
2. For the remainder of zone 3 and part of zone 4, 8 km cells would
be used.
3. For the outer parts of zone 4, 16 km cells.
When the final validation runs were made only the 8 and 16 km cells were
used for several reasons: 1) The initial runs had shown the area sources to
be a very small part of the total emissions. When this was later found to
be questionable, there was not sufficient time to assemble census and one
square mile data to develop accurate 2 km grid cell area sources. 2) Reason-
46
-------
able current data did not exist at the sub-county level; it was not meaning-
ful to allocate the county data below approximately an 8 km grid size.
3) Sensitivity tests with the model were inconclusive as to the effect the
smaller grid cells would have on the validation sites.
Figure 1-4 shows the actual area source grid used for the current inventory
runs. Figure 1-11 summarizes both the criteria used for point.source deter-
mination and the number of separate point sources found. For New Jersey the
separate stack groups are also noted. All but 34 of these point sources fall
within the 8 km area source region shown in Figure 1-4; 17 fall outside in
New Jersey and 17 in New York.
4.3.4 General Approach
The current inventory as developed for use with the Meadowlands study is
very much a function of the available information and the specific requirements
for validation. Further, it represents a point in time for a specific region
and, therefore, it is difficult to translate more than the general criteria
to other regions. However, the three main criteria used - the availability of
information, the requirements of the model used,and the development of sufficient
accuracy for both the validation sites and to characterize the areas in and
around the immediate study area - will hold for any region studied.
4.4 Background Inventory Criteria
The criteria used to develop the background emissions inventory were a
logical outgrowth of those used with the current inventory. In developing the
current inventory only emissions data already available from federal, state,
and local authorities were used. New sources for which data did not exist
were not inventoried, nor were fuel use or separate process emissions
47
-------
FIGURE 1-11
Current Inventory Point Source Criteria
Criteria
Zone 1 100 tons
Zone 2 100 tons
Zone 3a 100 tons
Zone 3b 500 tons
Zone 4a 500 tons
Zone 4b 1000 tons
TOTAL
Number of Sources
N.J.
8
16
28
--
13
18
83
(stack groups)
(13)
(23)
(30)
(14)
(19)
(99)
N.Y.City
--
--
—
12
—
14
26
New York State § Conn.
--
--
--
--
--
18
18
Total
8
16
28
12
13
50
127
00
-------
determined where they were not known. In many cases, however, where emis-
sions were not known for all five pollutants, the remaining pollutant emis-
sions were determined in the study, based upon the known fuel use and
current emission factors.
For the background inventory, however, it was necessary to start with basic
activity data, in most cases, and to develop fuel-use profiles directly. Because
of the magnitude of this task alone, and the necessity to keep it of secondary
importance to the analysis of the Meadowlands plans, strict criteria were set
up at the outset.
For point sources these included the following:
1. No new sources would be considered, other than power plants and
incinerators for which Burns § Roe could independently project the necessary
information from available sources; such new sources were automatically
scheduled as area sources but were not treated in detail.
2. For existing New Jersey industrial sources, changes in the level of
activity would be made only insofar as projective activity data could be made
available from government agencies and clarification made in consultation
with these agencies.
3. No changes in the level of activity for non-New Jersey sources would
be considered unless readily available information existed.
4. Changes in activity indices, fuel use propensity and related
factors, would be made only insofar as published trends were available and
clarification could be made in conjunction with appropriate agencies.
5. Projections for emission factors were confined to non-process sources.
Most of these decisions and the way in which they were implemented are
described in later sections of the report. For line sources all data were to
be derived from the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the Tri-State
Transportation Commission figures as available. Area source data were to be
49
-------
developed from Tri-State population, employment and square feet of floor space
projections to 1985, and from regional trends in fuel use.
4.4.1 Zones of Analysis
As a result of the validation procedures, it was decided that nearly
the same zones should be used for 1990 as were used for 1969. Figure 1-1
shows the analysis zones for the 1990 inventory. Point source projections
for zone 1 were made in consultation with the Hackensack Meadowlands Com-
mission. For zones 2 and 3 the Tri-State and New Jersey Bureau of Labor
and Industry data were used to project activity levels for existing point
sources. Existing sources for both New Jersey and New York were treated
identically for zones 3 and 4. Nearly all new point sources are in zone 4.
Line sources were treated for zones 1 and 2 in the same manner as with the
current inventory. Finally, area sources were determined on a county basis ts
in the current inventory and then allocated to the 16 and 8 km grid shown in
Figure 1-4.
4.4.2 Changes in Criteria
One of the major reasons for the similarity between the criteria used in
the background inventory and in the current inventory was so that consis-
tency could be maintained for modeling purposes. Figure 1-13 summarizes
the point source criteria used in the background inventory. An initial
decision had been made to use a criteria of 100 tons per year as used with
the current inventory. However, fuel burning emission factors - particu-
larly for particulates, sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen (the largest
point sources in 1969) - were reduced significantly from 1969 to 1990.
50
-------
New Jersey
(Zone 4)
• HACKS N SACK"
MEADOWLANOS
-< DISTRICT
Figure 1-12 Analysis Zone for 1990 Inventory
51
-------
FIGURE 1-13
1990 Background Inventory Point Source Criteria
Criteria
Zone 1 25 tons
Zone 2 25 tons*
Zone 3 25 tons
Zone 4 25 tons
TOTAL
h
N.J.
[1969 -New Removed]
8+1-1 = 8
16 + 1 - 0 = 17
28 + 0 - 4 = 24
31 + 9 - 0 = 40
83 +11 - 5 = 89
(umber of Source:
(stack groups)
(13)
(24)
(26)
(42)
(105)
> : Changes
N.Y.City
[1969 'New]
12 + 0 = 12
14 + 6 = 20
26 + 6 = 32
N.Y. State § Conn.
[1969 -New]
18 + 9 = 27
18 + 9 = 27
Total
[1969 'New- Removed]
8+1-1 = 8
16 + 1 - 0 = 17
40 + 0 - 4 = 36
63 +24 - 0 = 87
127 +26 - 5 =148
en
to
*0ne source at 24 tons was retained.
Zone 1 New Source is the Meadowlands Incinerator, assumed at only one location.
-------
A criteria of 25 tons per year for any one pollutant was ultimately
decided upon. One of the major deciding factors was the desire to keep as
many of the 1969 point sources in the inventory as possible for model consis-
tency purposes; no distinction was made by zone. Figure 1-13 shows the 1969
point sources, the new point sources and the 5 sources removed from the
inventory. One was removed because it was anticipated that it would shut down;
the other four were removed because emissions did not exceed 25 tons per
year for any of the pollutants. The new source shown in zone 1 is the
Meadowlands incinerator, while the source in zone 2 accounts for the pro-
vision of expanded power plant facilities at an existing site. All of the
new sources in zone 4 are power plants and incinerators.
4.4.3 General Approach
As with the current inventory, the criteria used to develop the background
inventory are highly related to the information available and the specific
requirements of the study. However, a general approach should not differ
greatly from what was attempted here. Current data should be used as much
as possible to develop the background inventory. For consistency purposes,
sources in the current inventory should be carried forward to the future time
period and only the most significant new sources added as point sources.
Regional and national projective data and "control totals" as to fuel use,
population and employment should be used in conjunction with the most rea-
sonable activity indices. Many of these indices, such as the heating demand
per square foot, need not vary greatly from region to region, except with
variation in temperature. Others, such as propensity to use different
fuels, are highly a function of current uses in the particular region.
53
-------
5. ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
5.1 Activity Data
The most important aspect of the data gathering involved the planning or
land use data - generally termed "activity data" in this study. It is impor-
tant to determine what data can and should be provided by the planner, as
opposed to the information that should be standard or default as a part of
the AQUIP system. It was necessary, therefore, to assess how detailed the
planning data was for the Meadowlands plans as well as how unique. In general
it can be said that the data provided for the Hackensack Meadowlands plans were
excellent in terms of the details required for the methodology; however, they
were often unique, both in terms of the degree of detail and the peculiar
types of development and heating requirements involved. On the other hand,
the type of data available for the background region (which is quite repre-
sentative of regional planning) lacks the detail necessary to create a reason-
ably accurate inventory; this is reflected in the analysis of the background.
5.1.1 The Four Land Use Plans
Figures 1-14 through 1-17 show each of the four land use plans analyzed in
the study. Plan 1 is the Master Plan developed by the Hackensack Meadowlands
Commission. Plans 1A and IB represent two alternative plans previously developed,
the first embodying a New Town concept and the second representing an expansion
of this portion of the existing New York metropolitan area. Finally, Plan 1C
represents no plan at all. It shows what would result if the normal development
pressures (taking into account zoning ordinances) were allowed to take their
course. Figure 1-18 summarizes the distribution of land use for the existing
development and the additional land uses for each of the four plans. Plan IB
55
-------
45"
45"
45*'
45 '•
45 '
45"
45 '»
45"
45"
45'
•H -t-
45 "
572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584
D- —-H Manufacturing
F'.*j.';;'y.| Conservation
]Mmtmlh La* Density Residential IK) Dul
I I Island Residential (SO Du)
Parks/do Residential ISODu)
k-;-;-;-I-J Specie/Uses
— Afoss Transit and Commuter Railroad
Turnpike and Limited Access
Cultural Center
Business District
Transportation .Center
Commercial Recreation
Hotel -Off ice -Highway Commercial
Distribution
Figure 1-14 Plan 1
56
-------
4 4- -I- 4- + +
45
572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584
h~ ==.-^3 Manufacturing
\'/l\fs,*A Low Density Residential !K> Du>
O Kro^j CWA'/a/ Cmfer
* IH Busimss
P" ' Water
[> ' ' \Hiyr) Density Residential (SO Oul 11111111 Holel~olfKe'H'9h'«Vc°mme":i<'l
KC-IHXH Special Uses Distritx.
Turnpike and Limited Access
tributiort
Figure 1-15 Plan 1A
57
-------
45"
45'
45Z
45!1
45 z
45"
45'
45"
45'
45"
45'°
+ +
572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584
[f~^j Manufacturing O y///fa Cultural Center
feS^'s'tSrl Par/!S * l^m Buslness afslr'cf
\ff////////]h Law Density Residential (lODul |f--!d§] W4''e''
I I Medium Density Residential tlODu) Yy/$'/ff/\ Commercial Recreation
^ '. j High Density Residential (SODu) HS||j| Hotel-Office-Highway Commercial
, I 1
[-^-'>X-:] Of/ler ^as Distribution
— - — Mass Transit
— — Turnpike and Limited Access
Figure 1-16 Plan IB
58
-------
45 *
45'
45Z
45'"
45'
45"
45"
45 "
45"
45"
45'°
572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584
Manufacturing
Paris
Low Density Residential
Transportation Center
Turnpike and Limited Access
.. . ,. Water
j|{|j|j||j Hotel-Office-Highway Commercial
Y//v. I-- '\ Commercial Recreation
Airport
Figure 1-17 Plan 1C
59
-------
Figure 1-18
Distribution of Land Uses for the Four Alternative Plans
Areas, in acres
Land Use Types
low density residential
medium density resid.
high density resid.
schools
special uses
commercial
manufacturing and
research
distribution
airport and transport.
center
parks and recreation
water
highways and railroads
Total
Population
Existing
Land Use
235
-
-
-
-
190
800
1800
670
105
1400
1995
7195
6000
Additional Land Use
Plan 1:
Master Plan
.
-
1400
250
750
575
2100
2200
230
2895
800
1205
12405
Plan 1-A:
New Town
235
1250
1250
400
500
800
2400
2500
100
1900
-
1070
12405
180,000 320,000
Plan 1-B:
Expansion
1000
2800
450
400
400
2200
2500
100
1480
-
1075
12405
445,000
Plan 1-C:
Zoning
.
-
-
-
-
-
hl675
100
200
-
430
12405
-
60
-------
projects the highest population whereas Plan 1C is almost totally devoted to
industrial development.
5.1.2 Sources of Data
One of the major premises established was the use of the planning data
provided by the Hackensack Meadowlands Commission in its original form as
much as possible and reliance upon default parameters wherever additional
information was necessary. Furthermore, since computerized procedures were
being developed to determine the emissions, it was necessary to set up
numerous rules to estimate missing information and resolve conflicting in-
formation as to how each of the four plans would be developed.-
Four different sources of information were provided by the Meadowlands
planners. These were:
1. The four land use maps shown in Figures 1-14 through 1-17.
8 9
2. An extensive zoning code. '
3. A set of summary statistics, including tables similar to that shown
in Figure 1-18.
4. Clarifying information solicited from the planners through numerous
working sessions.
Use of Land Use Maps
The maps were used to provide the basic information for all land uses
except manufacturing. For instance, the total number of acres of residential
land for low density in Plan 1 as analyzed in the study represents those areas
shown in Figure 1-14, rather than the total acreage shown in Figure 1-18
(which was derived from the summary statistics). In the case of manufacturing
land use, the Meadowlands planners had developed a list of 10 acre lots to
61
-------
be devoted to manufacturing for each plan. The list contained the location
of the centroid of each 10 acre lot, together with the 4-digit SIC code
most representative of the development that would take place there. This
10 acre lot served as the module for all industrial development. However,
in cases where adjoining lots were assigned the same 4-digit SIC code, this
was taken to represent a single larger industrial facility covering 20, 30,
40, or more acres.
Use of Zoning Codes
The zoning code was used to determine the intensity of most development.
For instance, for each residential category a permissible maximum density of
dwelling units per acre is given in the zoning code. This value was used as
the value assumed for development. When the total acreage from the land use
plan is multiplied by the dwelling units per acre for each land use and the
average population per dwelling unit given in the zoning regulations,it does
not produce the population figures shown in Figure 1-18. This is not surpris-
ing, due to the averaging procedures used to develop the summary statistics.
However, to be consistent our analyses used information from the plan together
with the zoning code, rather than the data shown in Figure 1-18.
Use of Summary Statistics and Clarifying Information.
The summary statistics were used only for the manufacturing category.
In general, the fourth type of information - the clarifying information obtained
through the working sessions - overrode any other source.
62
-------
5.1.3 Problems with Data Hierarchy
Although this hierarchy of decisions proved very workable during the study,
it did introduce one significant error into the final analysis. In the land use
summary shown in Figure 1-18 for Plan 1C, the acreage for distribution and
manufacturing were not separately stated. Likewise, for Plan 1C in Figure 1-17
the areas representing both these land uses were shaded with the same code.
Accordingly, when the land use zones were computerized according to the estab-
lished procedures,it was assumed that all of this land use was assigned to
manufacturing as in the other three plans. However, manufacturing 10 acre lots
taken from the summary statistics in actuality cover only a little over 3,000
of the more than 11,000 acres assigned to the joint category.
Since the distribution land use had not been separately shown on Plan 1C,
it was never identified as such nor transferred to a computer form and was,
therefore, not included in the analysis. Since all of the procedures set up
for checking information referred back to the original premises of using either
the plan maps or the industrial SIC list as a guide, this error was never dis-
covered until the final analyses were being made as a part of plan evaluation.
in Task 3.
Error Introduced
Although the acreage involved is large^the error introduced is not as
significant as might be expected because the land use category of distribution
is a low producer of fuel emissions per acre. A calculation was done after
the fact to determine the relative emission rate of the distribution area
compared with the manufacturing land uses for Plan 1C. This showed that
inclusion of the emissions from distribution would increase the total emission
rate by only about 10%.
63
-------
Effect On Evaluation
In the discussions of the air quality resulting from the plans, a new
code of Plan ID has been assigned to the Plan 1C land uses actually
examined. In other words, Plan ID consists of the original Plan 1C minus
the distribution land use. This is the same as assuming that more than
8,000 acres zoned for distribution were not developed in Plan ID. This
assumption may not be that much further from reality than what was proposed
in Plan 1C, since the Plan 1C distribution land use assumed extremely intensive
development of warehousing and distribution without any provision for the
necessary ancillary services, including transportation networks.
5.1.4 Summary of Planning Decisions
A great many planning decisions had to be developed out of the working
sessions with the Meadowlands planners. All of these decisions relate to tbe
basic premises of what land uses are to be heated under what conditions and
what other types of emission sources exist. Any land uses that were not
considered to be significant sources of fuel or process emissions were not
analyzed.
Since this study was confined to estimating emissions on an annual or
seasonal average basis, sources such as a sports complex (which is heated
only a few days a year) do not become significant sources on an annual basis;
likewise peak-hour traffic congestion and open-burning landfall fires are
averaged out to be negligible sources. Of the land uses shown in Figure
1-18, parks, recreation, water and railroads were all eliminated from con-
sideration on an annual and seasonal basis. Residential categories, commercial,
distribution, manufacturing and research, special uses, schools and the trans-
portation center were all considered to be significant sources of fuel and
64
-------
heating-related emissions. The airport, highway systems and parking lots in
the sports complex were considered to be sources of non-fuel emissions.
5.1.5 Determination of Development Characteristics
Having decided what categories of land use would have fuel or heating-
related emissions, the next question was how would each of these land u- e.c be
in fact heated. The Meadowlands area has a peculiarity which affects b "h i ,ie
manner in which it will be developed and the way in which the development will
be heated. This condition results from the large open tracts available for
development and the individual ownership of very large parcels. It is also
influenced by the great demand for development. All of these combine to in-
dicate that extremely large developments will be built at one time with cen-
tral heating and cooling systems.
In conjunction with the Meadowlands planners a series of large resident'.al
and commercial zones were identified which would be developed at a'single
time. The individual residential and commercial areas were then assigned to
•
these large zones and locations defined for the new central heating .systems.
Figure 1-19 shows a schematic of this type of development for an island
residential land use in the Master Plan. Three residential islands to be
comprised of high rise apartments with some lower developments are shown
numbered 1, 2. and 3. Each has a school associated with it: numbers 4, 5 and
6. The schools will be built individually by the appropriate government
agencies. Each of the residential islands has neighborhood commercial shop-
ping associated with it (numbers 8, 9 and 10). Since these will be built as
part of the residential complex their heating will also be served by the
central heating system. Land uses 7 and 11 show, respectively, a secondary
65
-------
5145
O\
ISLAND RESIDENTIAL
ISLAND RESIDENTIAL
ISLAND RESIDENTIAL
SCHOOL
SCHOOL
SCHOOL
SECONDARY SCHOOL
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL
COMMUNITY COMMERCIA
ISLAND RESIDENTIAL
FIGURE 1-19 SCHEMATIC OF IT LAND -}E3IDEKTIAL LAND USES
-------
school and community commercial facilities that would be built and heated
separately.
The central heating system has been located at number 12. Therefore, as
far as fuel emissions are concerned, the sources of pollution for -Figure 1-19
consist of the three schools (numbers 4, 5 and 6), the secondary school
(number 7), the commercial area (number 11) and the central heating system
(number 12). In reality the residential areas 1, 2 and 3 and the commercial
areas, 8, 9 and 10, do not enter into the final pattern of emissions - spatially.
This is a fundamental characteristic of the way in which the Meadowlands will
be developed and the complex procedures used to translate land use planning
data into fuel-related emissions. In one other type of case - the Berry's
Creek Shopping Center - several separate land use zones assigned to commercial
use would all be built at one time as part of a major shopping center with a
central heating system. Similar linking of land use zones for heating
purposes were therefore assigned to this area.
All other fuel-related land uses were treated individually as shown in
Figure 1-20. The intensity of development assigned to the commercial area,
number 14, and the distribution area, number 15, would determine the total
heating demand. This would be assigned uniformly to the whole area shown and
then reassigned by the LANTRAN program to the area source grid cells used for
modeling. Numbers 17 through 24 in Figure 1-20 represent 10 acre industrial
lots. In the case of numbers 23 and 24 the same 4-digit. SIC is involved;
therefore, these would be combined as one 20 acre lot and a single heating
system located at number 25.
67
-------
5146
AIRPORT
16
OO
RIVER
—i
//- PARK
14' COMMERCIAL
15- DISTRIBUTION
16' AIRPORT
//- INDUSTRIAL-2011
18' INDUSTRIAL-2012
19- INDUSTRIAL-3214
20- INDUSTRIAL-3310
//= INDUSTRIAL-3840
22- INDUSTRIAL-2390
23= INDUSTRIAL-3150
24' INDUSTRIAL-3150
25- INDUSTRIAL-3150
FIGURE 1-20 SCHEMATIC OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USES
-------
;>.1.6 Determination of Heating Requirements
The next step was to determine how much heat would be required for each
of the land use zones. All of the necessary planning information was avail-
able from the zoning codes or through discussion with the Meadowlands planners.
For residential land uses the heating demand is a function of the numarr
of dwelling units and the permissible dwelling units per acre, which is jvr-t
of the zoning code. For commercial land uses related to the residential area,
such as points 8, 9 and 10, in Figure 1-19, the heating demand is a function
of the number of square feet of commercial space. The zoning code describes
an allowable percentage of residential square footage to be put into commer-
cial development. By knowing the square feet per dwelling unit and this allow-
able percent, the total square footage of commercial development in the compl ^x
was determined.
For commercial development in hotel and highway commercial areas or in ;ae
Berry Creek Shopping Center lot coverage and floor area ratios from the zoning
code were used to develop the number of square feet of commercial space
for each land use area. Assumptions had to be made in conjunction with the
Meadowlands planners as to what the net lot coverage would be for various land
use categories.
Likewise for distribution, manufacturing and research areas, lot coverage
and floor area ratios were used to develop square foot figures. It was decided
in working sessions with the Meadowlands planners that such land use categories
as special use, transportation centers and cultural centers would be treated
in the same manner as the distribution category, since more specific informa-
tion was lacking.
The heating demand for schools was a function of the number of classrooms.
In all cases the size of a school was directly related to the residential area
69
-------
served; therefore, knowing the number of dwelling units and the average pupil
per dwelling unit ratio for the particular residential code, the total number
of pupils in a residential area could be derived. Using the estimated percentage
of pupils who would go to either the primary or secondary schools as contained
in the summary statistics, the number of pupils could be assigned to a school.
A representative figure of pupils per classroom by school type was developed
in conjunction with the Meadowlands planners yielding the assumed number ot*
classrooms for each school. If, as in certain residential areas, more than
one school would serve the students, it was assumed that each school would
take an equal number of students.
5.1.7 Determination of Non-Heating Emissions
Several planning decisions were necessary for the non-heating and fuel-
related sources. The Hackensack Meadowlands Commission estimated on a regional
basis the number of flights per year that could be expected from Teterboro
Airport. The final number used was 400,000. The emissions from these flights
were distributed uniformly over the area of the airport. If the study had
been examining sources of emissions on a more detailed basis than the annual
and seasonal averages used, other sources at the airport (such as motor vehicle
traffic, the heating plant and the actual location of runways) would have become
significant. Similarly, because of the averaging to annual and seasonal conditions,
the only significant source included in the new sports complex was a point source
representing the idling of vehicles in the parking lots during congestion periods.
An estimate was made in conjunction with the Meadowlands planners that
4,500,000 vehicles per year would idle for approximately one hour; however,
when this idling time is averaged over a year it is not as significant a
source as might be expected.
70
-------
Consideration was given to assigning transportation emissions to eac, land
use zone according to the intensity of development. In fact, the LANTRAK pro-
gram can accommodate this approach. However, the Hackensack Meadowlands planners
felt that assigning all motor vehicle emissions to the highway network would
adequately represent the situation, because, as a part of the land use plan,
far less local automobile traffic is expected than would normally be the ca^,
particularly for the Master Plan.
Other Planning Decisions
The remaining planning decisions were a function of the activity indices
rather than the activity data themselves. Planning-related inputs includ- 1
decisions as to the percent process heat and the number of hours of operation
for each of the types of land uses. These again were made in consultation with
the Meadowlands planners.
5.1.8 Industrial Sources
A great deal of time was spent discussing the possible industrial sources
within the Meadowlands boundary. Existing point sources were handled separate!;
since the Meadowlands planners had reasonable information as to the future
activities of these sources. In one case it was assumed that a facility
would shut down.
The industrial sources are of special significance because of the un-
certainty as to the amount of fuel required for process heating and the
incidence of separate process emissions. Efforts to develop a statistical
sample of the propensity to use fuel for process heating by industrial
category, based upon the current emission inventory, were not successful.
It was possible to divide the industrial SIC codes into only two major cate-
gories of "relatively clean" and "relatively unclean" industries. The clean
71
-------
industries were assumed to operate fewer hours per year and use a greater
percentage of their fuel for space heating.
Process Emissions
A separate study of process emissions corresponding to the 4-digit SIC
industries proposed for the Meadowlands was made. With the exception of
possible sources in the chemical and petrochemical and primary metals area,
the SICs proposed for the Meadowlands are not significant separate process
emitters. There are some potential emissions of particulates and hydrocarbons
from selected SICs. These were accounted for by adding a percentage of the
fuel burning emissions to determine the total emissions since no information
was available on process rate. The Meadowlands planners felt that there would
be no petrochemical or primary metals smelting operations in the Meadowlands.
5.1.9 Data Procedures
Once these decisions had been made, it was possible to set up the
computerized procedures for transferring the data from the land use maps,
zoning codes and statistical tables into the various data banks used. Each
plan is referenced to the Universal Transverse Mercator (U.T.M.) grid system.
This grid system was laid out on base maps of the Meadowlands district at
the same scale as the existing plans. The land use data for each plan were
then transferred to the new maps for those areas that had a significant
emission potential; parks, water areas and recreation were not transferred.
Areas for residential, commercial, distribution and related zones were coded
as enclosed polygons composed of the three or more line segments approximating
as close as possible the curvalinear shapes of the original zones.
72
-------
The X and Y location of each vertex in UTM coordinates and the land use
code were recorded. Sources such as local schools and community shopping
centers which were represented on the plan as a round dot were transferred
as discrete points. The roadways contained in the proposed plan were coded
separately as line sources composed of straight line segments approximating
as closely as possible the curvalinear roadways on the plans.
5.1.10 Existing Land Uses
In order to prevent duplication of sources from existing land uses
within the areas adjacent to the Meadowlands, a template was prepared showing
all major industrial land uses in the area. This template was then compared
to each plan to locate zones where the proposed land uses overlapped existing
ones. In most instances where there was an overlap the existing land us • wa'
retained and the proposed land use disregarded.
5.1.11 Changes in the Plans
A number of changes were made by the Meadowlands planners in the course
of the study. The only one of significance involved the development of the
sports complex which is to be located in the western part of the Meadowlands
just north of Route 3. It was assumed that this complex would be built in
all four plans. Land uses that existed in this area were eliminated, although
in a few cases residential zones and associated schools were moved to another
location, replacing industry or distribution zones. The land use type most
consistently eliminated was industrial, although some net loss in residential
and commercial land exists as well.
A cutoff was established in August 1971 for incorporating any new changes
into the land use plans as considered for this study. Figures 1-14 through
1-17 show those land uses that were actually considered with the exception of
73
-------
the modifications for the sports complex and the elimination of the distri-
bution land use from Plan 1C. It should be realized that the Meadowlands
plan as it currently exists does differ, in some cases significantly, from
Plan 1 as analyzed.
5.1.12 Background Activity Data
Because of the amount of time that had to be devoted to the Meadowian' s
activity data and the complexities involved, a rather strict approach was taken
to the amount of activity data to be obtained for the background area. For,
the current emissions inventory existing information and the activity data
associated with it formed the entire base, although a great deal of time had
to be spent to verify certain portions of the inventory. For the 1990 back-
ground inventory the following criteria were set up regarding the obtaining
of activity data:
1. All activity data would be estimated by Burns & Roe for power plants
and incinerators, due to their particular expertise in that area.
2. No other new point sources were to be considered outside the
Meadowlands.
3. For existing point sources regional and local projections of
employment changes from the New Jersey Bureau of Labor and Industry and the
Tri-State Transportation Commission were to be used to project forward employ-
ment for existing firms; this parameter would then be used to project forward
heating demand for 1990.
4. All available published information on process change would be
assembled; however, in the final analysis decisions as to changes in process
emissions had to be made in consultation with the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection on an industry by industry basis.
74
-------
5. For line sources all activity data would be supplied directly by
the New Jersey Department of Transportation and any missing information
would be determined in consultation with them and the Hackensack Meadowlands
planners.
6. For area sources, regional and national fuel use projections,
population, employment and square feet of floor space data from the Tri "t ite
Transportation Commission for 1985, together with parameters from the ^ ' re^t
inventory were to be used. New point sources not otherwise considered were
automatically included in this category.
5.2 Activity Indices
The most complicated part of the emission projection methodology and
the area of most usefulness and interest to the planner is the development
of the activity indices which relate land use and transportation planning
data to emission characteristics, such as fuel use and process emissions.
Figures 1-21, 1-22, 1-23 and 1-24 summarize all of the decisions that had to
be made in this study.
5.2.1 Activity Indices for Meadowlands Plans
Figure 1-21 summarizes the activity indices required for the Meadowlands
plans. It shows how the example indices of Figure 1-9 were actually applied.
All of the activity-related indices in columns 1, 2 and 3 were discusses in
the previous section and reference was made to the heat requirements, schedule
and percent process heat as planner inputs in columns 4, 5 and 6. The step
by step procedures for each land use category are discussed below briefly.
75
-------
FIGURE 1-21
Activity Indices for Meadowlands Plans
Residential
-neighborhood commercial
-neighborhood schools
Commercial
Distribution
-transportation center
-special uses
-cultural center
Research
Industrial
-4 digit SIC's
Airport
Parking Lot
Water
Parks
Conservation
Commercial Recreation
Activity
1
d.u./acre
% sq. ft.
% primary
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
% coverage
flights/yr.
veh./day
--
-_ .
--
--
Related
2
(pupils/d.u.)
pupils/class
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
F.A.R.
Indices
3
(sq.ft./d.u.)
acres/lot
acres /lot
Heat Requirement
4
BTU/d.u.
BTU/ft2
BTU/ class room
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
BTU/ft2
--
—
--
--
--
--
Schedule
5
}k,
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
hr.
--
Process Heat
6
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
% proc. ht.
--
hr. idling
--
--
--
--
--
--
'
--
Fuel Propensity
7
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
% ea. fuel
--
--
—
—
--
—
F.A.R. = floor area ratio; ratio of total square footage to ground floor square footage
B.T.U. = British Thermal Units; measure of heating requirements used in the study.
(metric units are Cal/d.u., Cal/m2, and Cal/classroom)
-------
FIGURE 1-22
Activity Indices for Background Inventory
Point Sources
Indices sought
Current Activity Data
(1969 inventory)
Derived Indices
By Individual Source
By SIC Category
Exogenous Data
1969
•All Sources
% process heat
% process heat by SIC
1990
•N.J. Industrial
% process heat
schedule
f ue 1 us e
process emission
•N.Y. Industrial
% process heat
schedule
fuel use
•All Power Plants
schedule
f ue 1 us e
'Existing Incinerators
emissions
'New Incinerators
emissions
•employees
enclosed space
gross area
% process heat
schedule
f ue 1 us e
process rate
% process heat
schedule
fuel use
emissions
emission factors
BTU/hr/employee
(space heating)
BTU/hr
proc. rate/employee
refuse per day
BTU/hr/employee by SIC
(space heating)
% process heat by SIC
Schedule by SIC
Fuel propensity by SIC
proc. rate/employee by SIC
ratio 1980 to 1969 employment
by county and SIC
ratio 1985 to 1963 employment
by Tri-State 1 sq. mi. grid
Fuel use trends by SIC and county
Process control by SIC
Fuel use trends by county
Schedule, duty, heat rating
System fuel propensity
Refuse per day
Notes: Current activity date and exogenous data were used to derive indices to be applied to the point io;;•>-.-
to produce the indices sought; the derived indices by SIC category imy be modific ' for future ti...
-------
FIGURE 1-23
Activity Indices for Background Inventory
Area Sources - Fuel Burning
Indices Sought
Existing Activity Data
1965 Inventory I 196961970 Inventory
Derived Indices
Exogenous Data
Tri-State Transportation I
Other
1969
'Fuel Burning
% process heat
fuel use
% process heat, by category
and county
1990
'Fuel Burning
heat demand
% process heat
fuel propensity
emission factors
fuel use
% process heat
fuel use
% process heat
N.Y. Fuel Tables
% residual oil
% Indust., Commerc.
use by fuel 5
state
1969 N.J. Fuel Tables
% residual oil trend
(1965 space heat BTU, by state)
BTU/sq. ft. by state
(1985 space heat BTU, by state)
% process heat by state
space heat multiplier by state
% oil, gas for resid,non-resid,
by state
% residual oil trend
weighted averages of fuel use
by state
1963 Resid § Non-Resid
sq.ft. by state
1985 Resid § Non-Resid
sq.ft., by county
% increase in non-resid.
sq.ft., 1963-1985
by state
Meadow lands
BTU/sq.ft.
trend in Resid.
Assume non-resid
interpolate betw.
% now § % if
fixed amount
trend in commerc.
NYC trend in gas
Resid.,Commerc.,
Indust. Emiss .
Factors for oil
and gas
[* in general," by state1'means: N.J., N.Y.C., N.Y. other]
Notes: Data from the 1965 inventory refer to the N.Y. Region Abatement Inventory; Data from the 1969 and 1970
inventory refer to the state inventory and the EPA regional update for the N.Y. area. Other exogenous
data are for 1990 unless otherwise stated.
-------
FIGURE 1-24
Activity Indices for Background Inventory-
Area Sources - Non-Fuel Burning
Indices Sought
Existing Activity Data
1965 Inventory I 196951970 Inventory
Derived Indices
Exogenous Data
Tri-State Transportation I Other
1990
'Non-Fuel Burning
'Incineration
process rate
'Power
heat input
'Evaporation
emissions
'Motor Vehicles
veh-mi
vehicle mix
'Aircraft
emissions
pop. by county
gas. consumpt. by
county
'Other
process emissions
other transp. emiss.
gas. marketing emiss,
1969 N.J. veh. mix
1969 N.J. emiss. by county
1970 N.Y. emiss. by county
1969 commercial aircraft
emission factors
1970 emissions by county
1970 emissions by county
1970 emissions by county
(1965 gals/capita by county)
N.J. veh-mi/capita oy county
.N'.J. mi/gal by county
N.Y. mi/gal by county
N.Y. veh-mi/capita by county
ratio 1990/1969 Emiss. Factors
1985 population by county
1985 N.J. pop. by county
1985 N.Y. pop. by county
refuse by county
heat input by
utility company;
assigned by
counties served.
tPA emiss/capita
N.J.DOT veh-mi
by county
(categorize
mi/gal)
N.J. veh. mix
commercial air-
craft emiss.
factors
trend in flights
for region
trend to 1975
trend to 1975
trend to 1975
Notes: Data from the 1965 inventory refer to the .N.Y. Region Abatement Inventor)-; Llata from the 1969 and 1970
inventory refer to the state inventory and the EPA regional update for tiie N.Y. area. Other exogenous
data are for 1990 unless otherwise specified.
-------
Residential
For all residential zones the dwelling units per acre are multiplied
times the number of acres for the land use zone to produce total dwelling
units. The space heating requirement is then derived by multiplying the
number of dwelling units by the BTUs per dwelling unit shown in column 4.
All of the numbers for the parameter shown in this column, "Heat Requirement",
were developed as design parameters by engineers at Burns § Roe, using
11 12
standard published engineering manuals. ' . This approach was thought to
be more accurate than developing default parameters from the incomplete data
of the current inventory. The information on schedule and process heat was
developed in conjunction with the Meadowlands planners for each category.
Fuel propensity for each land use was assigned by the study team in
consultation with the Meadowlands planners, taking into account: 1) regional
fuel use propensities by land use category; 2) expected fuels due to design
criteria; and 3) the type and scale of development anticipated. In most cases
it was assumed that distillate oil would be burned, although natural gas was
assigned to low density residential development.
Other Land Uses
The activity indices for the neighborhood commercial land use category
are a bit more complicated since the heating demand is a function of the
residential area served. The dwelling units per acre times the assumed
square feet per dwelling unit and the percentage of square feet in the complex
that will be devoted to commercial use yields the total number of square feet
for the commercial facility. For this and the remaining fuel-burning land
uses the procedures for columns 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the same as discussed under
Residential and the necessary information was obtained in the same way.
80
-------
Neighborhood schools are also a function of the residential area. Dwelling
units per acre, pupils per dwelling unit and percent pupils going to a
particular school yield the number of students at that school; dividing by
the pupils per classroom yields the number of classrooms for the school.
All of the remaining fuel-related land uses: commercial, distribution, trans-
portation centers,, special uses, cultural center, research and industrial, use
the same parameters: number of acres of land use, the percent lot coverage
allowed, and the floor area ratios. These yield the total square footage
to be heated. In all cases this information was determined in consultation
with the Meadowlands planners.
In theory the heating requirements, schedules, percent process heat and
fuel propensity would be determined individually for each 4-digit SIC code.
In practice this was not possible because of the available information. All
industries were divided into only two categories of activity indices: the
BTUs per square foot were the same for both categories but the schedule, process
heat and fuel propensity varied.
The information for the remaining land uses - the airport and the parking
lot - was all provided as planning input in conjunction with the Meadowlands
planners. No exogenous activity indices were required.
Quality of Data
In summary, although the procedures required to develop the activity
indices for the Meadowlands plans are in theory quite complex, the actual
numbers required fall into a few rather simple categories. These consist of
the BTUs per dwelling unit, square foot, or classroom that represent the
heat requirement, the schedule, the percentage of heat used for space heating
versus process heating and the relative propensity of fuel use for each of
the categories. The design information for the first category is as accurate
81
-------
as the distinctions that the planner can make in land use codes. Fairly
reasonable estimates can be made of the number of hours of operation for each
type of facility and for process heat for all categories except industrial.
Lack of information and tremendous variation in this variable as experienced
in the point source inventory affects the results of the Meadowlands analysis
as well. Finally, with the uncertainty in international fuel supplies even
one to two years in the future it is virtually impossible to make reasonable
estimates by land use category for 1990 as to fuel usage. In using the
activity indices the planner is constrained by the national and regional
availability of fuel-use related data.
The actual numbers used are discussed in Part II and their role in the
activities packages of LANTRAN is covered in the Appendix to Task 1.
the individual source and by SIC categories, as well as data on current employees,
5.2.2 Activity Indices for Background Point Sources
Figure 1-22 shows the activity indices developed for the background
inventory for point sources. As can be seen from the first entry a default
parameter was required in the current inventory for percent process heat for
many of the sources. The required values were developed from a statistical
sample of other current point sources. This of necessity affects the
accuracy involved in projecting this parameter forward to 1990, since the
accuracy of any activity index in the future time period is conditioned by
our present knowledge of its behavior.
New Jersey Industrial Sources
An elaborate system was set up to project percent process heating,
schedule, fuel use propensity and process emissions for existing New Jersey
82
-------
industrial sources to 1990. Indices derived from current activity data for
the individual source and by category as well as data on current employees,
enclosed space and gross plant area were requested for each industrial source
in our inventory. The data obtainable for a large number of sources were the
number of employees; therefore, this parameter was used as the major projective
variable.
For each point source the number of BTUs for space heating per hour
and per employee was derived. It was assumed that this parameter would
not vary significantly by industrial category; however, when summaries were
made by industrial category, wide variation was found and no statistical con-
clusions could be drawn. This is no doubt due in part to the inaccuracy in
the percent process heat variable from which the amount of space heating versus
process heating is derived.
Information was determined on the ratio of 1980 to 1969 employment by
county and SIC code from the New Jersey Bureau of Labor and Industry. Quite
a few assumptions had to be made because of the categories of SIC codes for
which that data are available and the labor market areas (cutting across
county boundaries) for which information is assembled.
A ratio of 1985 to 1963 total employment by Tri-State one square mile grid
areas was also developed for zones 1 through 3. It was intended to project 1990
space heating directly in BTUs per hour using the employment ratios and any
assumed change in the BTU per hour and employee index. This would then be com-
bined with a new projection of percent process heat to yield total BTU heat
demand for a source for 1990. Accordingly, information on current percent pro-
cess heat was used to develop an index of percent process heat by SIC. This
parameter yielded two broad categories of industrial use. It was therefore,
concluded that present information was not sufficient to carry through the
analysis as intended.
83
-------
The employment ratio was applied to the total BTUs per hour per employee
to generate a 1990 total BTUs per hour. No distinction could be made between
space heating and process heating. In this way the same implied percent pro-
cess heat figure was carried forward to 1990. When more accurate percent pro-
cess heating data can be determined, projections for these figures can be more
reliably made for future time periods.
Information on number of hours of operation for each source was aggre-
gated into industrial categories. Again no clear cut patterns could be found.
Accordingly, the current schedule for each firm was carried forward to 1990.
i
Unfortunately similar findings were made for fuel use. No significant fuel
propensity by SIC could be determined. Again, two broad categories of fuel
use were derived and these were applied to the Meadowlands industrial sources.
Furthermore, no exogenous information on fuel use trends by industry or
county could be determined. Accordingly, the fuel use for point sources was
assumed to maintain the current proportions for 1990, except for switches from
coal to oil or gas which were analyzed separately.
Attempts were made to adequately assess changes in process emissions for
each source for 1990. The necessary information includes the current process
rate and the number of employees. An index of process rate per employee
was to be developed by industrial category and then national and regional
information on process control by category applied to this index. Adequate
information on process rate does not exist for most of the current sources.
Furthermore, very little information exists on process control in a form that
could be used. Therefore, blanket percent reductions in emissions by indus-
trial category were applied to each source in consultation with the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection.
In summary, of all the elaborate procedures involving activity indices set
up for use with the background point source inventory, the only one that could
84
-------
be implemented was the ratioing of future to current employment by industrial
category and geographic area. In all other cases current information had to be
extrapolated forward or engineering judgement used.
New York Industrial Sources
Since the primary concern was for the New Jersey sources and the current
information for New York sources was so incomplete, no attempt was made to do
a detailed analysis .for them. Current percent process heat was carried forward
to 1990, as was schedule. For fuel use the current propensities were used,
except for general trends identified by counties. The only trends that
could be ascertained in practice were a few shifts from coal to oil and gas.
Power Plants
Information on schedule and fuel use for all power plants, both existing
14-17
and new, was determined separately,based upon the expertise of Burns & Roe.
Using the information on schedule, duty assignment, heat input rating and
system fuel use propensities the schedule and fuel use for each power plant
were determined. All other information was carried forward to 1990 for exist-
ing sources; data were developed from design parameters or on the basis of
current sources for new plants where needed.
Incinerators
Emissions for existing incinerators for 1990 were based upon current data.
The amount of refuse per day burned was assumed to remain constant and only the
emission factors were changed. For those sources where the current amount of
refuse burned per day was not known, current inventory data on emissions and
emissions factors were used to generate the necessary information. For new
incinerators emissions were developed from the separate estimates of Burns §
Roe on refuse per day.
85
-------
5.2.3 Activity Indices for Background Area Sources
The procedures established to determine the 1990 background area source
inventory involved a complex use of activity indices as shown in Figures
1-23 and 1-24. As with the point source inventory the data necessary to carry
forward these procedures were often lacking.
Fuel Burning Sources
Figure 1-23 shows all of the activity indices required for estimating
1990 fuel burning emissions. Four parameters were used; heat demand, percent
process heat, fuel use propensity and weighted emission factors. Again existing
activity data, derived indices and exogenous data were relied upon.
The first column indicates all existing data developed from the 1965-
1966 Abatement Region inventory, whereas, the second column shows data derived
22
from the 1969 New Jersey Fuel Tables or the 1970 Implementation Plan inventories,
except as noted. The derived indices are all for 1990, except where otherwise
shown. Finally, the exogenous data represents 1990 estimates either from the
23
Tri-State Transportation Commission or from other sources, except where other
dates are shown.
Heating demand estimates relied upon current fuel use and percent process
heat data from the Abatement Region inventory. 1969 data did not exist for the
New York portion of the region and were not in sufficient detail for the New
Jersey areas. From these data 1965 estimates of space heating BTUs by "state"
were developed. The state breakdown, as referred to here, means the three
jurisdictions of New York City, New Jersey, and the remaining counties in the
17 county region of New York outside of New York City. Using the space heating
BTUs and Tri-State information on 1963 residential and non-residential square
86
-------
feet of floor space by state, an index of the BTUs per square foot by state was
developed. Great variation was found in what was thought to be a relatively
simple index. The calculations were, therefore, tempered by the design factors
found for the Meadowlands and applied to the 1985 square feet of residential and
non-residential floor space from the Tri-State Transportation Commission. This
yielded a county by county heating demand value for residential and non-
residential use.
The percent process heat was likewise estimated using 1965 data on fuel
use and percent process heat. The 1965 space heating demand and the Tri-State
percent increase in non-residential square feet from 1963 - 1985 was used to
determine the 1985 space heating demand for non-residential use. Assuming that
the non-residential percent process heat could be approximated by a number in-
between the present percent and the percent that would be derived empirically
by projecting space heating while holding actual process heat constant, a new
percent process heat value for non-residential land use was derived. On the
other hand, local trends in residential process heat were used to develop the
residential index. From these, multipliers were derived for each state and
applied to the space heating demand to produce total BTUs for both space and
process heating.
Projection of fuel propensity for residential and non-residential use
relied upon the 1965 New York Fuel Tables. Estimates were made of the percent
of oil and gas used for residential and non-residential purposes taking into
account regional trends such as the increase in natural gas usage for New York
City. Lacking additional information, a conservative approach was taken and
the 1969 percent distribution was generally used for 1990.
87
-------
Fuel Emission Factors
Although the emission factors were generally developed independently
from the activity indices, a special circumstance existed for the 1990 area
source data. Because the projective planning data from the Tri-State
Transportation Commission were broken down into only two categories - residential
and non-residential - the 1990 emission factors for industrial and commercial
land uses had to be weighted to produce a single set of emission factors for
non-residential land use. As can be seen from Figure 1-23 this was done by
using current information on the percentage of residual versus distillate
oil, and the percentage use by fuel and state for industrial and commercial
purposes. From these a percentage residual oil trend was derived, as well as
the weighted averages of fuel use by state. Using the projected 1990 emission
factors for oil and gas, a new set of weighted emission factors were derived.
Non-Fuel Burning Sources
Less information was available for projecting 1990 non-fuel burning
emissions than for the fuel burning ones. As can be seen from Figure 1-24
the activity indices were highly tempered by the available data. In
the case of incineration and power the Burns § Roe data were used directly.
In the case of evaporative emissions the 1985 Tri-State population by county
and an estimate from EPA of emissions per capita were used.
When the evaporations category is considered relative to the entire
inventory it is found to be extremely important, accounting for nearly one-
half of the hydrocarbon emissions predicted for 1990. An estimate of 20 pounds
per capita rather than the 30 used would reduce the hydrocarbon emissions for
the region by nearly 100,000 tons. Furthermore, the use of some other index
88
-------
rather than population distribution would greatly change the spatial allocation
of hydrocarbon emissions for the region. However, it is unclear how the spatial
patterns might change in the Meadowlands area since local variations are probably
more the result of local transportation and process sources. The population
density surface does not exhibit significant local variations in our analysis.
The activity indices for motor vehicle estimation shown in Figure 1-24
are different from those originally intended. The simplest procedure would have
been to use the Tri-State 1985 vehicle mile data aggregated by county and to
apply the 1990 emission factors directly to them. However, since the aggre- ,
gated county data were not available at the time of the calculation, the New
Jersey Department of Transportation county estimates for the New Jersey portion
were relied upon, together with a series of assumptions as follows for deter-
mining the New York estimates:
1. 1965 population and gasoline consumption by county were used to
determine gallons per capita.
2. From the New Jersey vehicle miles per capita based on projected
population and vehicle miles, the implied miles per gallon for New Jersey
could be derived. These were categorized and similar assignments made to
the New York counties for miles per gallon.
3. When the gallons per capita were applied to the 1985 estimates of
population, vehicle miles for each county were derived.
Although this approach is not as accurate as could be achieved and is
not recommended, it is presented here for documentation because it was the one
actually followed in practice. Current New Jersey vehicle mix data and pro-
jective data from the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the Hackensack
Meadowlands Commission were used to derive a vehicle mix estimate to be applied
to the entire region.
Aircraft emissions were extrapolated forward from current emissions by
county, using a general regional trend in the number of flights, 1990 estimates
89
-------
of emission factors and the current emission factors. Knowledge of regional
trends in aircraft flights is in the same state of chaos as fuel use propen-
sities; however, a general doubling in the number of flights uniformly for
all counties was assumed.
For all other sources of non-fuel emissions (including area-wide process
emission, other transportation sources and gasoline marketing) the 1970
22 24
emissions from the Implementation Plan inventories, ' taking into account
1975 trends, were extrapolated forward to 1990.
5.3 Fuel Supply and Demand
The projection of fuel consumption for 1990 made in this study was based
largely on national trends. Little information is available on the different
regional areas such as the New York metropolitan area. Furthermore, it was
beyond the scope of the study to undertake a detailed regional fuel projection
analysis. Several nationwide projections are available, the results of which
are inconsistent with each other. The majority of these projections were made
before 1965 and all projections make assumptions that are suspect. These
assumptions are:
1. That the reserves of all types of fuel are sufficiently abundant
to meet the anticipated demands. Frankly, with the current rationing practices
in the natural gas supply, this is difficult to agree with.
2. That the recent environmental concern will not affect traditional
growth trends in fuel consumption. With the kind of fuel switching currently
being carried out, for environmental control purposes, this assumption has
been violated already.
In addition, all projections of 1990 fuel demand include fuel consumption
by mobile sources. Since 1990 emissions from mobile sources were projected
90
-------
separately on a vehicle mile basis and the fuel projection to be used was
based on stationary sources only, it was therefore, necessary to modify the
1990 baseline fuel projections made by others to remove fuel consumed by
mobile sources.
5.3.1 Current Fuel Consumption
Figures 1-25 and 1-26, following, are the 1965 and current fuel consumption
totals in the 17 county region by fuel and source type. The totals have been.
converted to a BTU basis because in the energy form the proportional use of
each of the fuels can be compared and changes for 1990 can be mitigated by
known differences between the New York region and the national totals.
Throughout this study the following conversion factors were used for
heating demand, taken from the 1965 New York Abatement Region Report.
Anthracite Coal 26,000,000 BTU per ton
Bituminous Coal 26,000,000 BTU per ton
Residual Oil 152,000 BTU per gallon
Distillate Oil 142,000 BTU per gallon
Natural Gas 1,100 BTU per cubic foot
In addition, coal gas was assumed to yield 1,100 BTU per cubic foot
for use with the 1990 inventory.
As can be seen from the figures, coal is used predominately by a few.
power plants and some of the larger industries. Its use has declined sig-
nificantly in the region in the last 10 years, as evidenced by the decrease
for New Jersey from 1965 to 1969. Residual oil has become the mainstay for
energy production in the industrial sector and the use of distillate oil and
natural gas is significant in the area source category (residential and
commercial space heating). Figure 1-27 shows the summary of fuel use developed
for 1990. The following sections explain how it was determined.
91
-------
FIGURE 1-25
Summary of Fuel Use
1965
New Jersey
Coal
Resid. Oil
Distil. Oil
Gas
New York City
Coal
Resid. Oil
Disti. Oil
Gas
New York State
Coal
Resid. Oil
Distil. Oil
Gas
Residential
959.
21.
1289.
97.
509.
982.
1074.
68.
89.
28.
440.
21.
Commercial
316.
637.
138.
24.
265.
454.
365.
23.
34.
38.
107.
17.
Industrial
1110.
886.
183.
44.
77.
264.
61.
11.
188.
49.
26.
2.
Power
3429.
476.
--
21.
5251.
886.
--
65.
474.
139.
--
17.
Total
5805.
2019.
1610.
185.
6104.
2586.
1500.
167.
786.
254.
573.
56.
BTU
151.
303.
242.
20A-
900.
159.
388.
225.
1 JW •_
956.
21.
38.
86.
62 .
207.
Units :
coal 10 tons
oil 106 gallons
gas 109 eu. ft.
BTU 10 12 BTU
Source :
1965 N.Y. Region
Abatement Report
92
-------
FIGURE 1-26
Summary of Fuel Use
1969
New Jersey
Coal
Resid. Oil
Distil. Oil
Gas
Residential
379
21
1347
92
Commercial
130
791
129
31
Industrial
793
1134
194
59
Power
2086
859
--
31
Total
3388
2805
1670
213
BTU
88
420
250
234
992
Units :
coal
oil
gas
BTU
10 3 tons
106 gallons
109 cu. ft.
10 12 BTU
Source: 1969 NJDEP county
fuel use tables
93
-------
FIGURE 1-27
SUMMARY OF FUEL USE
1990
New Jersey
Oil
Gas
New York City
Oil
Gas
New York State
Oil
Gas
Residential
1487
110
2079
100
673
31
Non-
Residential
1889
95
1216
56
395
36
Industrial
Point
629
15
Power*
1278
3167
934
Total
5283
220
6462
156
2002
67
1
BTU
792
242
1034
970
172
1142
300
74
"377
Units: Oil -- 10 gallons
Gas -- 10 cubic feet
BTU -- 1012 BTU
Source: Derived from 1990 background inventory
*In addition, power plants will consume 228 x 10 cubic feet coal
gas, representing 251 x 10
natural gas in gas turbines.
12 12
gas, representing 251 x 10 BTU and use 11 x 10 BTU input of
94
-------
5.3.2 Total Fuel Consumption - 1990
The baseline used for 1990 fuel consumption was the "Energy Model for the
25
United States" prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior, July 1968.
This estimate was used for convenience since it separates out transportation
sources and provides a breakdown by the same consumption sectors used in this
study. The bottom half of Figure 1-28, following, presents that projection;
it was used to check the 1990 fuel use totals (shown in Figure 1-27 and the
top of Figure 1-28) that resulted from the fuel allocation process. As can
be seen from the table, total energy consumption is expected to increase 50%
between 1970 and 1990. The use of the fluid fuels will increase 50% and the
use of coal will decline in all sectors except in power production where it
will nearly double.
Fuel Assignment
Area sources in the background inventory for the Tri-State region were
assigned fuels based on existing fuel use for the same source category,
weighted by regional trends.
Figure 1-29 summarizes the resulting fuel demand per square foot of
residential and non-residential space. Decreases in demand reflect design
efficiencies postulated in heating as well as differing assumptions made in
determining total BTU demand.
5.3.3 1990 Point Source Fuel Use
The 1990 fuel use by existing (1969) sources was projected to be the
same as at present with the following exceptions. The use of coal by
industrial point sources will decrease and be replaced by residual oil. The
other known cases of fuel switching presently being made were incorporated
95
-------
NEW YORK REGION
Resident.§ Commercial
Industrial**
Power
/
TOTAL
FIGURE 1-28
Comparison of Fuel Use Propensities
[1965]
Coal
56
36
258
330
Oil
835
220
225
1280
Gas
275
62
112
449
[1990]
Total 1 Coal
1166
318
575
2059
0
0
0
0
Oil
1160
94
J506
2060
Gas
573
17
262*
752
Tota1
If "3
i.i '
1
1066 ,
2812 )
NATION
Resident. § Commercial
Industrial
Power
TOTAL
[1970]
508
5901
8035
14444
5979
5481
856
13316
7350
8988
2589
18927
13837
20370
11480.
45687
[1990]
160
3875
15618
19653
4470
10097
861
15428
14600
14640
3552
32792
192PO
286' '
200^1
670. J
.12
Units are 10 BTU
* Includes coal gas and gas turbines
**For 1965, all industrial sources; however, for 1990 only point sources - area
sources are included with the residential and commercial.
96
-------
Figure 1-29
Comparison of Total Fuel Demand
Year
Residential
Non- Residential*
Power**
BTU
xlO L£
(1965)
820.
664.
575.
Sq.Ft.
xlO9
(1963)
5.3
2.8
8.1
BTU/sq.ft.
xlO
-
155.
237.
71.
Year
Residential
Non- Residential*
Power**
(1990)
902.
842.
1068.
(1985)
8.0
4.3
12.3
-
113.
196.
87.
*.For 1965, combination of commercial and industrial fuel use from
Figure 1-25; for 1990 combination of non-residential and industrial
point source fuel use from Figure 1-27.
** Sq.ft. used to compare power BTU is sum of residential and non-
residential.
Source: BTU from Figures 1-25 through 1-27; sq. ft. from Tri-State Trans-
portation Commission; 1985 values are for 'Plan C1.
97
-------
into the projection. The use of coal by power plants in the region was re-
placed by increases in gas consumption using coal gas supplemented by natural
gas. New sources from any of the Meadowlands plans were assigned a fuel de-
mand based on the existing industrial mix or a fuel propensity based on SIC
classification. New power plants were assigned fuel based on individual
utility fuel consumption patterns.
5.3.4 1990 Area Source Fuel Use
The various area sources in the Meadowlands district were assigned
fuels individually according to the type and scale of development of each
source.
5.4 Emission Factors
Emission factors are usually given as pounds of pollutant emitted per
unit quantity of fuel burned; or for process emissions, pounds of pollutant
per ton of finished product. It was one of the tasks of the study to develop
a list of emission factors to be used to validate the 1969 inventory, to dis-
cuss the various ways that emission factors may change in the future and,
finally, to estimate what the emission factors will be in 1990.
Scope
The emission factor analysis did not attempt to cover all changes that
may effect emissions. For instance, a cessation of a particular activity at
a source or sources was not covered by the emission factor analysis. A change
in fuel type such as a switch from oil to gas, or a change in raw material for
an industrial process were likewise not covered. These types of emission
changes, while they may result from the application of a total air pollution
98
-------
control strategy, are not changes in emission factors, as defined, and their
effects were covered elsewhere in the study.
Given an activity that presently exists and will also exist in 1990 the
emission factor analysis covered how each activity emits the five subject
pollutants both now and in 1990.
5.4.1 Present Emission Factors
Figure 1-30, following, is a listing of all the major emission factors
used for this study. The classification of emission activities are by fuel
burning and non-fuel burning source categories. Each classification is sub-
divided into small subclasses of emissions. For instance, within non-fuel
burning, refuse incineration includes open burning, domestic incineration,
apartment house incineration, commercial incineration and central station
municipal incineration. For each identifiable activity to be found in the
study an emission factor was recorded if data were available. While the
dimensional units may not be the ones used in the modeling, they are the ones
for which emission data were published at the time of the analysis and carried
through the emission factor modification process. The table includes those
categories which account for approximately 95% of the emissions of the five
basic pollutants. Emissions from industrial processes .were deleted from the
list. These emissions are discussed at the end of this section.
Following the listing of the activities and the emission factor dimen-
sional unit are the current emission factors for the five subject pollutants.
These are taken from the document Compilation of Emission Factors published
jt o o
by the Public Health Service. The current emission factors were used
for the 1969 inventory and they incorporate the New Jersey sulfur standards
existing at that time. The emission factors for automobile travel were ob-
tained by private communication from EPA since the most up-to-date informa-
tion had not been published at the time of the analysis.
99
-------
Figure 1-30
Summary of Emission Factors
A. FUEL BURNING
A-l Power Anthracite Coal
Plants Bituminous Coal
Residual Oil
Natural Gas
Coal Gas
Turbine-D-Oil
(base)
Turbine-D-Oil
(peak)
Turbine-N-Gas
(base)
Turbine-N-Gas
(peak)
A-2 Industrial Anthracite Coal
Bituminous Coal
Residual Oil
Distillate Oil
Natural Gas
A- 3 Commer- Anthracite Coal
cial Bituminous Coal
Residual Oil
Distillate Oil
Natural Gas
A-4 Residen- Coal
tial Distillate Oil
Natural Gas
English
'/ton
'/ton
»/1000 gal
*/106 ft3
'/106 ft3
*/106 BTU
input
'/106 BTU
input
' '/106 BTU
input
»/10s BTU
input
'/ton
'/ton
»/1000 gal
»/1000 gal
«/106 ft3
#/ton
'/ton
*/1000 gal
«/1000 gal
»/106 ft3
'/ton
*/1000 gal
*/106 ft3
Metric
g/kg
g/kg
g/liter
g/m3
g/m3
g/cal.
g/cal.
g/cal.
g/cal.
g/kg
g/kg
g/liter
g/liter.
g/m3
g/kg
g/kg
g/liter
g/liter
g/m3
g/fcg
g/liter
g/m3
Conversion-
Factors ll>
0.5
0.5
1.2 x 10s
1.6 x 1010
1.6 x 1010
1.8 x 10s
1.8 x 106
1.8 x 106
1.8 x 10s
0.5
0.5
1.2 x 105
1.2 x 105
1.6 x 1010
0.5
0.5
1.2 x 10s
1.2 x 10s
1.6 x 1010
0.5
1.2 x 10s
1.6 x 1010
Current Emission Factors
PART
3
4
6
15
_
_
_
_
15
12
23
15
18
10
18
23
15
19
20
10
19
so2
27
38
159
0.6
_
_
_
_
27
38
159
43
0.6
36
38
159
43
0.6
38
43
0.6
CO
S
1
0.04
0.4
_
_
_
_
5
2
0.2
0.2
0.4
90
10
0.2
0.2
20
90
0.2
20
HC
0.1
0.3
5
40
_
_
_
_
0.1
1
3
3
40
2.5
3
3
3
8
20
3
8
NO,
12
36
105
390
_
_
_
_
12
15
60
60
175
3
6
60
60
100
3
12
50
Total Modification*-2-*
PART
75
75
90
NEF.
_
_
_
_
75
75
_
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
so2
90
90
85
NEC.
_
_
_
_
90
90
85
85
80
80
75
75
80
85
CO
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
HC
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
:
NOX
60
60
70
70
.-
_
_
_
60
60
70
70
20
-
-
60
60
20
-
60
1990 Emission Factors^2'
PART
0.75
1.0
0.6
15
30
0.12
0.11
_
_
3.75
3.0
23-
15
18
• 10
. 18
23
15
19
20
10
19
so2
3
3.8
24
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
_
_
3
3.8
24
6
0.6
7
7.6
40
11
0.6
7.6
6.5
0.6
CO
5
1
0.04
0.4
0.3
-
_
_
_
s.o
2.0
0.2
0.2
0.4
90
10
0.2
0.2
20
90
0.2
20
HC
0.1
0.3
S
40
80
_
_
_
_
0.1
1.0
3.0
3.0
40
2.5
3
3
3
8
20
3
8
NO,
4.8
14.4
31
117
400
0.845
0.895
0.57
0.64
4.8
6
18
18
140
3
6
24
24
8
3
4.8
50
B. NON-FUEL
BURNING
B-l Inciner-
ation Open Burning
Incineration
(Domestic)
Incineration
(Apartment)
Commercial
(1 Chamber)
Commercial
(2 Chamber)
Municipal
B-2 Motor Cars
Vehicle Trucks - Gas
Trucks - Diesel
B-3 Aircraft Commercial
General Aviation
B-4 Evapo- Solvents
ration
'/ton refuse
'/ton refuse
'/ton refuse
'/ton refuse
'/ton refuse
'/ton refuse
»/1000 veh.rai
»/1000 veh.mi
»/1000 veh.mi
'/flight
'/flight
'/capita
g/kg refuse
g/kg refuse
g/kg refuse
g/kg refuse
g/kg refuse
g/kg refuse
g/veh.kro
g/veh.km
g/veh.km
g/flight
g/flight
g/capita
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
O.S
2.82 x 105
2.82 x 105
2.82 x 105
454
454
454
16
35
30
15
7
14
1.3
1.3
S
8
0.2
_
1
0.5
O.S
1.5
1.5
1.5
0.4
0.4
9
2
2
_
85
300
20
20
10
1
139
500
65
28
12
_
30
100
15
15
3
1.5
12.9
66
13
17
0.4
_
6
2
3
2 .
3
2
14.9
24
68
5
0.2
_
_
_
90
_
_
90
50
50
SO
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
_
„
_
_
_
_
-
92
97
87
80
SO
_
_
_
_
_
.
-
92
97
66
80
50
_
_
^
_
_
.
50
90
91
72
30
16
35
3
15
7
1.5
0.7
0.7
2.5
8
0.2
_
1
0.5
0.5
1.5
l.S
l.S
0.4
0.4
9
2
2
_
85
300
20
20
10
1
11
15
8
6
6
_
30
100
15
15
3
l.S
1.0
2.0
0.8
4
0.2
30
6
2
3
2
3
1
1.5
2.2
1.7
3.S
0.2
_
(1) Multiply English units by indicated conversion factor to obtain metric units.
(2) English units.
-------
5.4.2 Projection Methodology
It is anticipated that these current emission factors will change sub-
stantially by 1990. Changes will occur from the application of more restric-
tive emission controls recently promulgated and also because of improved
methods of testing. Changes of the latter type are largely speculative at
this time. Changes in emission factors due to the proposed emission con-
trols will cause significant reduction in future emission levels. There are
three types of changes that would affect current emission factors. The first
type of change is called a process change. This type of change includes
such things as the development of a more efficient internal combustion engine
and modification in operating procedures for fuel burning equipment. The
second type of change is fuel modification which includes such things as the
removal of ash from coal or sulfur from oil. It would also include a change
in raw material for an industrial process. The third type of change will
result in improvements in flue gas cleaning technology.
A literature search was made for information concerning the application
of each type of change to the control of the five subject pollutants.
Generally, each possible change is directed toward one specific pollutant.
For instance, a more efficient electrostatic precipitator is developed to
control particulates; therefore, the literature will have information con-
cerning the removal of particulates. However, no information will be avail-
able concerning the effect of this device on the remaining four pollutants.
In cases like these the other pollutants have been assumed to pass through
unchanged.
The columns labeled TOTAL MODIFICATION represent a subjective estimate
of the total reduction in 1990 emission factors based on the components of
change discussed above. These factors were reviewed and approved by EPA
101
-------
and NJDEP at the Milestone 5 meeting. These percentages were applied to
the current (1969) factors to produce the 1990 emission factors projections.
Recent reductions in particulate emissions have been brought about in part by
process change, fuel modification and the installation of flue gas cleaning
equipment. It is believed that this will be the case for future emission?
factor changes as well. Rather than 100% reduction by gas cleaning, a
partial reduction will be made by process change, by fuel modification and
by the installation of devices.
Not all five pollutants from each source category are considered to be
critical from an air pollution point of view. It would be expected that re-
sources would be concentrated on the control of emissions for a pollutant
placed high on the list. Since relatively little effort is being expended
toward the control of emissions of those pollutants at the bottom of the
list, little future reduction would be expected in these emission factors.
Priority ratings can be set up for the major categories of emission as shown
in Figure 1-31.
5.4.3 1990 Emission Factors
Power Plants
A great deal of research is being conducted on air pollution emissions
from power plants. Particulates can be controlled under current technology
to 98% efficiency. New electrostatic precipitator/scrubber combinations
are expected to have a capacity of 99.5% (a reduction of 75% over current)
when applied to coal burners. The installation of precipitators to oil
burning plants is anticipated, with an overall reduction in emission factors
of 90%. A reduction in particulates from gas burning power plants is not
anticipated.
102
-------
Figure 1-31
Pollutant Priority Rating
Fuel Burning
Power Plants
Industrial
Commercial
Residential
Non-Fuel Burning
Incineration
Motor Vehicle
Parti culates
1
1
1
1
1
4
Sulfur Dioxide
2
2
2
2
5
5
Carbon Monoxide
4
4
4
3
2
1
Hydrocarbon
5
5
5
5
4
2
Nitrogen Dioxide
3
3
3
4
3
3
o
C/4
-------
Significant reductions in SO emissions from power plants are antici-
pated. This will be accomplished in part by the reduction of sulfur con-
centrations in coal and fuel oil and in part by advances in the gas cleaning
technology. There are presently available several processes for the reduc-
tion of 90% of SCL from power plants. This level is considered to be a re-
alistic overall goal that is attainable.
NO control from power plants will be accomplished largely by modifica-
tions to fuel burning equipment and changes in operating procedures. The
limestone injection system is a flue gas cleaning system that is directed
toward S0_ control but also reduces NO emissions significantly. Significant
reductions in CO and HC emissions from power plants are not anticipated.
Industrial Fuel Burning
The same 75% reduction in particulates is predicted from industrial
coal burners as for power plants. However, since these emission factors
are currently higher, the 1990 emission factors will also be higher. SO
control will be provided by sulfur reduction in the fuel. NO emission
A.
factors will be reduced by process change and no substantial changes in
emission factors from CO and HC are anticipated.
Refuse Incineration
The use of open burning and domestic incineration have largely been
banned in the New York - New Jersey areas. There is no feasible method of
emissions control for this activity to the levels required by current regu-
lations. For these reasons, it is expected that these methods will largely
disappear and therefore, no effort is anticipated in emission factor reduction.
The upgrading of apartment house incinerators has been ordered in
New York City. The order is being met, in some cases, by the installation
104
-------
of auxiliary burning equipment and scrubbing devices; in other cases the
incinerators are being shut down in favor of compactor units. It is antici-
pated that there will be a reduction of about 90% in particulate emission
factors. While reductions in CO and NO emissions factors are anticipated,
no data are available on the extent of the reductions in these areas. For
municipal incinerators, the installation of electrostatic precipitators and
scrubber/precipitator combinations will reduce particulate emission factors
by 95% over the time period considered. CO emissions from new installations
are already sufficiently low, with good operating practice. The installation
of water walls for the purpose of steam generation will reduce the NO emis-
sion factor by providing a mechanism for the control of furnace temperatures;
this waste heat recovery will probably be standard in the area by 1990.
Transportation
The reduced emission factors for gasoline burning vehicles were extracted
directly from the information supplied by EPA, urban traffic data were used
(with an average speed of 25 mph) for this analysis. Significant reductions
in particulate and sulfur oxide emissions are not expected, since these are
not presently considered troublesome with respect to gasoline burning vehicles.
Little information was available as to possible reductions in the emission
factors for aircraft although emission standards were soon to be promulgated
at the time of the analysis. The greater emissions from the new larger air-
craft will probably be offset to a great extent by more efficient controls,
and thus result in a relatively small change in emissions per flight.
Commercial and Residential Fuel Burning
Emissions from these sources will be largely affected by changes in
fuels and fuel substitution. The installation of complex fuel gas cleaning
105
-------
devices is not economical in these small sizes. Some operational changes
can be made to effect a reduction in NO emissions. These, however, would
A
tend to increase CO and HC emissions.
Several emission factors were ascertained for 1990 that were not neces-
sary for the current emission inventory. These included the coal gas and
gas turbine data for power plants and emission from solvent evaporation.
All of the information was obtained directly from EPA after the Milestone 5
meeting with the exception of coal gas estimates which were determined by
Burns & Roe.
Industrial Separate Process Emissions
Industrial separate process emissions need to be handled on an indivi-
dual source by source basis because emission factors are greatly affected
bv detailed information on product type, production rates, equipment types
and age. Using a standard factor for all refinery operations as an example
would be greatly misleading. Even 4-digit SIC categories do not give suf-
ficient delineation - sulfuric acid and nitric plants are in the same cate-
gory.
106
-------
5.5 Emission Characteristics
The emission inventories prepared as a part of this study represent
only the average annual day, the average summer day and the average winter
day. The average annual day, for example, assumes that all total fuel and
non-fuel emissions for the year are divided equally by 365 days. Any vari-
ations that occur between weekday and weekend, month of the year, hour of the
day, in the level of activity or in the type of fuel used are completely
averaged out. This means that sources which occur intermittently are generally
obscured and considered negligible. This includes such things as heating of
i
a stadium or a sports complex a few weekends a year, open burning from land
fires and rush hour traffic jams. Therefore, the inventory that has been
prepared is a statistical one. It does not truly exist at any one time.
The annual activity level for a particular source is multiplied by the
activity index to produce the annual fuel use. The fuel or fuels assigned
are multiplied times the average emission factor to yield a fuel emission for
the year. For non-fuel emissions, the annual activity level is multiplied
times the average emission factor.
The summer and winter seasonal inventories were developed simply by
ratioing the space heating portion of fuel use according to the number of
degree days (as shown in Figure 1-32)and the percentage of fuel used for
space heating for each source or source category. In many cases, the per-
centage of fuel used for space heating was not known. For point sources,
default parameters were developed directly from the known current point
sources. These are shown in Figure 1-32. The same default parameters were
used for 1969 and 1990 sources. The only new sources were power plants and
incinerators, all of which have 0% space heating factor. 1969 assumptions
for percent space heating for area sources are shown in Figure 1-32. These were
107
-------
Figure 1-32
Seasonal and Stack Parameters
Annual
Winter
Summer
no. of days
365.
91.
91.
degree days
4859.
2780.
0.
avg. daily degree days
13.3
30.5
0.
ratio to annual
1.0
2.3
0.
ambient temp.
285.60°K
276.00°K
295.00°K
Percent of Fuel Used for Space Heating
Point Sources :
Industrial (SIC 20-29)
Industrial (SIC 30-39)
Power Plants
Institutional
Area Sources (New Jersey)
Industrial
Commercial
Residential
Area Sources (New York)
Industrial
Commercial
Residential
10%
25%
0%
90%
25%
100%
90%
25-50%
100%
70-85%
Default Stack
Height *
Point Sources :
Fuel Burning
100 feet
Separate Process 50 feet
Line Sources :
Area Sources :
(as a function
> 50, 000 pop/mi
10,000-50,000
1,000-10,000
< 1,000 pop/mi
0
of population density)
100 feet
50 feet
30 feet
20 feet
o
00
*in each case the average effective stack height
is 1.5 times the height shown; this is for a
4 m/sec wind speed and changes with wind speed
as a function of the stability class.
-------
developed from the 1965 - 1966 New York Abatement Region inventory. The
1990 percent space-.heating figures were developed separately and are discussed
in the section on the background area source inventory.
In addition to information on location of each source and emission rate
for each of the five pollutants, the model requires information on stack
height and plume rise factor. These are used to calculate the effective
stack height in MARTIK for each source. The equation for determining plume
rise is as follows:
plume rise (m /sec) = 0.0929 x velocity (ft/sec) x Diameter (ft) x
1.5 +{ 8.17 x 10 x 1000 x Temp (°K) - Temp.ambient x Diameter(ft)}
Temp
As a part of the data gathering for the current point source inventory infor-
mation on stack height, diameter, exit velocity and exit temperature were
obtained. In many cases, the information was not available and default
parameters had to be used. These default parameters were developed in con-
junction with the modeling decisions of Task 2: if any of the three parameters
needed to develop plume rise were missing, the plume rise factor was auto-
matically set at 1/2 times the height, multiplied by a wind speed of 4 meters
per second. Within MARTIK, the plume rise is divided by wind speed (a func-
tion of stability class)to derive the effective stack height. Accordingly,
the effective stack height used for modeling is variable with stability
class but averages one and one-half the times the actual stack height in the
default case.
Where stack height itself was not known, a default value of 100 ft.
was used for fuel burning stacks, 50 ft. for separate process stacks and 100
ft. for combined stacks or cases where the stack type was not known.
109
-------
Actual and effective stack height of 0 was used for all line sources. Very
little information exists on what are the appropriate stack heights and
effective stack heights to use for area sources, because of the multiplicity
of sources contributing to an area-wide grid cell. A procedure was developed
to relate the stack height to the population density of the cell under consid-
eration. It was felt that population density was one of the most readily
available parameters that could be used to indicate the general height of
buildings for an area-wide source. Figure 1-32 shows the assumed stack
heights (also taken to be the effective stack heights) for various population
densities representative of the study region.
One important but controversial feature of a land use planning methodology
is the use of dimensional units which can be understood by the planner.
Recent emission inventories have been assembled in both metric and English
units. The units associated with the Meadowlands plans and the current
state and federal inventories were mainly English units, and were used in
this study unaltered. Although EPA is stressing the use of the metric system
for all air pollution work, it is still necessary as part of a land use plan-
ning approach to use units that the planner currently works with. Accordingly,
all calculations were performed in the units most commonly found in planning
and related literature and then transformed as a final step to the metric units
used by MARTIK. These consist of the following: For point source grams per
second, for line sources grams per meter-second, and for area sources grams
2
per meter second. The figures in Part II of this report generally present
point sources in units of tons, pounds or tons per year. Line sources are
generally discussed in the transportation units of vehicle miles per day or
vehicle miles per year, while area sources are usually presented as tons or
pounds per square mile per year. In the discussion of the land use plans the
areal unit, acres, is generally used.
110
-------
PART II:
DISCUSSION OF THE EMISSION INVENTORIES
111
-------
PREFACE TO PART II
Part II presents the discussion of each of the emission inventories,
including the way in which they were developed, the problems encountered,
areas for improvement, and a summary of the component data sets themselves.
The actual data sets and their description are found in Appendix A and
Appendix B; the reasons for developing the inventories in the manner chosen
have been discussed in Part I.
The first section of Part II describes the overall emission catalog
specifications and the interrelationships of the components of the inventories,
The following two sections present the data associated with the current and
background inventories. The final section of Part II covers the major efforts
of the study: the actual application of the techniques to the Meadowlands
plans and the translating of the activity data into emissions using the con-
version factors catalog.
113
-------
1. EMISSION CATALOG SPECIFICATIONS
1.1 AQUIP Emission Data Sets
Figure II-l shows each of the emission data sets used in the study,
together with the flow of information from these data sets to the inventories
used as inputs to MARTIK. The creation of each labeled box for each of the
emission inventories is discussed in the following sections. Furthermore,
this figure illustrates the actual data sets which are discussed in the
Appendix.
As can be seen from Figure II-l, the current emission inventory
has three components: point, line, and area sources. The current inven-
tory was used for three purposes. First of all, and most importantly, it
was used for the validation runs from which the calibration constants were
developed. Secondly, it provided some of the projective data used for the
background emission inventory. Finally it provided projective data used
in the actual conversion factors catalog for the Meadowlands plans.
Similarly, the background emission inventory has three major components:
point, line, and area, as well as a special separate component included for
the Meadowlands Incinerator. Finally, the 1990 Hackensack Meadowlands plans
each have three components: Point, line and area. The point and area
inventories are created with the conversion factors catalog and the LANTRAN
Program. Each plan's line sources are handled in a similar manner as the
current and background line sources.
The right hand side of Figure II-l shows three of the four components
required to run MARTIK for 1990 air quality. The fourth component is the
meteorological data.
115
-------
5153
O\
Current
Point
Current
Line
Current
Area
Land Use
Plans
».
Current
Emission
Inventory
{ Proje
\ Do
\
Active \
^~
fa j
/\
,
Conversion Factors
Catalog
"^
Model
Validation
Runs
Background
Area
Background
Point
Background
Line
Incinerator
Plan
Area
Plan
Point
Plan
Line
Calibration
Constants
Background
Emission
Inventory
Plan
Emission
Inventory
—
Figure II-l Flow of Information for 1990 Model Inputs
-------
1.2 Sources of Data
The most time-consuming part of the study was locating, obtaining,
and verifying the information necessary to create the emission inventories.
In Figure II-2, along the left side are listed the major agencies and
other sources of information used. Along the top of the figure are listed
categories of data which were obtained. In terms of a land use planning
methodology this table is quite revealing, since information on only three
categories of data were obtained from the planning agency, the Hackensack ;
Meadowlands Commission. This included the majority of the data on the
land use plans and some of the information on activity indices and the
background point inventory.
The regional planning agency, the Tri-State Transportation Commission,
was able to provide data on activity indices, fuel use, background point
sources, and background area sources. The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) provided information of a more national nature in the form of emission
factors and standards, and of a regional nature for fuel use and current
point sources. However, it was necessary to resort to local and state air
pollution and other government agencies for a large portion of the data.
The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the New Jersey
Department of Transportation we have heavily relied upon, as Figure II-2
shows. These data were supplemented with information from the New Jersey
Bureau of Labor and Industry and the New York State Division of Air Resources,
as well as the New York City Division of Air Resources.
The initial literature search was of great use in the areas of
activity indices, fuel use, emission factors, background point sources,
117
-------
Hackensack Meadowlands
Commission
USE PA
N . J . Dept . Envir . Protection
N.J.Dept.of Transportation
N.J. Bureau Labor 5 Industry
I/)
%
.-i
Cu
X
• H
c
^j
3
u
rt
(U
•^
•P
c
d>
3
U
•P
C
•l-l
O
a,
•d
§
s
00
•a
a)
CQ
X
0)
c
•H
, 1
•d
§
2
00
•8
rt
00
Oj
d>
M
«jj
•d
§
2
00
•8
rt
CQ
V)
c
0
•H
rt
^H
a
(U
•3
M
rt
•d
s
P
W3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N.Y. State Div.Air Resources
N.Y.City Div. Air Resources
X
X
X
X
X
X
Tri-State Transportation
X
X
X
X
literature search
professional judgment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Figure 11-2
Relation of Sources of Information
118
-------
regulations and standards. The last line indicates that professional
judgment was a significant input in the interpretation of the plans,
the development of activity indices, the interpretation of the current
point and area source inventories, as well as the development of the
background point and area source inventories. This indicates some of
the areas where problems will be encountered in translating the results
to other regions, because of the necessity of using state and local
air pollution data, as well as the need for professional judgment.
In reviewing the following sections the assumptions and constraints
discussed in Part I, Emission Projection Methodology, should be kept in
mind. In particular, it should be stressed that the projecting indices
had to be developed as well as applied as a part of this study; this affects
the accuracy obtainable. Likewise, it should be stressed that the first
priority was in preparing emissions inventories for the Meadowlands plans;
all other emission inventories were subserviant to this task since they do
not directly affect either the modeling or the performance of the AQUIP
system.
119
-------
2. CURRENT EMISSION INVENTORY
2.1 Components of the Inventory
The current emission inventory was divided into three components -
point, line, and area sources - because of the separate model require-
ments and the availability of information. Point source information
was constructed from existing federal and state inventories with indivi-
dual source verification. Line source information was developed entirely
from data supplied by a separate transportation agency. Finally, area
source information was assembled from many sources to form a residual
inventory when the most reasonable level of detail had been reached in
characterizing the point and line sources.
The discussion of the point source inventory covers: (1) the
sources of data; (2) approach to data acquisition; (3) development of
the data; (4) types of information sought; (5.) supplemental data required;
(6) data completeness and quality; and (7) the use of default parameters.
The discussion of the line source inventory covers the simple steps
required to assemble and use the traffic data.
The section on the current area source inventory discusses: (1) data
sources; (2) New Jersey fuel emissions; (3) New Jersey non-fuel emissions;
(4) New York City emissions; (5) New York State emissions; (6) an inven-
tory summary; and (7) accuracy of analysis.
2.2 Current Point Source Inventory
The major source of data for the point source inventory was the files
of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. From the Trenton
office the following sources were utilized:
121
-------
1. Initial screening of all large sources which included plant
name, county location, UTM coordinate, average daily emission in tons/
day for particulates and SO .
2. Fuel consumption for all major point sources, annual quantities
by fuel type as well as recent and projected changes.
3. The 1965-1966 and 1969 N.Y. Region EPA inventories. These
questionnaires provided some information on operating schedules, fuel
distribution and air pollution control data.
The second largest source of information was the enforcement files
located in the department's field office. These files provided the most
extensive information on stack parameters and separate process emissions.
However, because of voluminous amounts of material contained in these files
they were only examined for those sources nearest the Meadowlands (first
60 sources in Figure II-3).
The New Jersey Department of Commerce provided some projective
information on plant employment, enclosed space and plant area. Additional
employment data were provided by the New Jersey Department of Labor and
Industry.
Another significant source of information was the 1969 regional
update printout provided by EPA. This source provided the bulk of the
point source inventory data for the New York-Connecticut region as well
as many of the stack parameters for the zone 3 and zone 4 sources in New
Jersey.
122
-------
Figure H-3
Summary Information for all Point Sources
Current Inventory
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
41
42
County
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Zone
3
3
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
3
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Disposition
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
Comments
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
insuffici-
ent data
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
<100 tons
Process
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
insuffici-
ent data
Code
39
26
38
36
26
28
49
28
28
28
32
80
35
27
44
20
34
28
49
49
49
34
40
36
29
28
32
40
39
1 2 3 t
Default Parameters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
.".
X
X
X
X
X
X
*1 = height, 2 = plume rise, 3 = % process heat.
123
-------
Figure II-3 Cont'd
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
County
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Essex
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Essex
Essex
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Passaic
Passaic
Passaic
Passaic
Passaic
Passaic
Passaie
Passaic
Passaic
Passaic
Bergen
Passaic
Bergen
Union
Union
Union
Union
Zone
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
Disposition
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
Comments
<100 tons
1970 data
1970 data
<500 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
insuffici-
ent data
< 100 tons
insuffici-
ent data
insuffici-
ent data
<100 tons
insuffici-
ent data
1970 data
Process
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Code
49-1
29
20
29
28
20
20
33
30
28
28
28
28
20
26
30
30
34
34
28
28
30
26
28
28
28
29
1
Defai
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
lit Para
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3 *
meters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*1 = height, 2 = plume rise, 3 = % process heat,
124
-------
Figure II-3 Cont'd
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
County
Union
Union
Union
Union
Union
Unio
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Bergen
Essex
Union
Passaic
Morris
Essex
Morris
Morris
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Somerset
Somerset
Somerset
Somerset
Somerset
Bronx
Queens
Queens
Richmond
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Brooklyn
Zone
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
Disposition
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
Comments
<500 tons
< 500 tons
<500 tons
<500 tons
< 500 tons
< 500 tons
<500 tons
< 1000 tons
1970 data
1970 data
unresolved
emissions
1970 data
1970 data
< 1000 tons
< 1000 tons
< 500 tons
Process
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Code
28
49
26
28
35
26
26
39
28
90
28
29
33
49
49
33
49
33
28
29
39
39
28
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
1
Defa
X
X
2 ' 3
ult Parameters *
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
.
X
*1 = height, 2 = plume rise, 3 = % process heat
125
-------
Figure II-3 Cont'd
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
County
Nassau
Queens
Nassau
Rock land
Connecti-
cut
Connecti-
cut
West-
chester
Connecti-
cut
Connecti-
cut
Connecti-
cut
West-
chester
Connecti-
cut
West-
chester
Rockland
Richmond
Bronx
Queens
Bronx
Brooklyn
Brooklyn
Nassau
Nassau
Nassau
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
West
Chester
Brooklyn
Rockland
Brooklyn
Zone
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
Disposition
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
removed
Comments
insuffici-
ent data
shutdown
insuffici-
ent data
< 1000 tons
<1000 tons
< 1000 tons
Process
Code
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
34
35
28
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
80
1
Defa
2
ult Para
3
.meters
X ,
X
X
X
X
•
cl = height, 2 = plume rise, 3 = % process heat.
126
-------
Figure II-3 Cont'd
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
County
Richmond
Manhattan
Manhattan
Brooklyn
Middlesex
Middlesex
Union
Zone
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
Disposition
removed
removed
Comments
< 1000 tons
1970 data.
< 1000 tons
1970 data
Process
X
X
Code
80
80
80
35
34
1
Defa
2
alt Par
3 *
ameters
X
X
X
X
Notes:
Zones defined in Part I, Figure 1-10; criterion for removing sources from
point source inventory related to the zone.
1969 data used except where noted that 1970 data were used.
An "X" under process means that the source has separate process emissions
(excludes incinerators).
An "X" under default parameters means that the data were missing and a
default parameter for the value had to be used.
Code is the activity code assigned to each source as follows:
20-39 Manufacturing sources - corresponds to the 2-digit SIC
(Standard Industrial Classification) Codes used by the
U.S. Census.
40 Warehouse, distribution, etc.
44 Railroad
49 Power plants
49-1 Incinerators
80 Hospitals, other institutions
90 U.S. Government facilities
127
-------
The New York City Environmental Protection Administration and the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation were also contacted.
The latter provided clarification of the New York data contained in the
1969 EPA regional update.
2.2.1 Approach to Data Acquisition
Figure II-3 shows the summary information for all point sources in the
current inventory. The county name, AQUIP zone number, and two-digit SIC
code are included. The approach to data acquisition for the point sources
as well as the sources of information (as shown in Figure II-2) for point
sources depended upon the location of the various points with respect to
the four AQUIP zones. In general, effort was concentrated on those sources
which are closest to the Meadowlands region. For these points it is felt
that all possible data sources have been exhausted and that the most complete
set of consistent data available has been compiled. For those sources in the
outer reaches of Zone 3 and for all sources in New York and Connecticut infor-
mation from the appropriate state and federal agencies was relied upon, and
only a minimum of original work was performed as a part of the study to
supply missing information.
2.2.2 Development of the Data
The completion of the point source inventory included assembly of the
useful information from the above-mentioned sources as well as initial gen-
erating of some of the input. Input from the study was concentrated on those
sources in zones 1 and 2 and the inner region of zone 3. The inventory was
developed roughly as follows:
128
-------
Sources 1-60
The largest amount of time was spent on these sources since
they are located within and immediately surrounding the Meadowlands. An
onsite inspection was made of each of these sources to determine their
exact location. These locations were plotted, in the field, on USGS •
series 1:20,000 topographic maps which contain the UTM coordinate system.
In this manner the exact location of each source was determined. The fuel
data were provided by the New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection
with some small supplement for fuel consumption by power plants. The
Trenton files of the NJDEP as well as the enforcement files in Springfield,
N.J. , were examined in detail for each of these sources. The Trenton
files produced the information on operating schedules and fuel distribution.
The enforcement files produced most of the stack parameters and .separate
process emission data. Some stack parameters were obtained from the 1969
regional update printout. The Commerce Data Guide gave the only infor-
mation on enclosed space and gross plant area that could be obtained;
it also contained much of the information on plant employment. The remain-
ing employment data were obtained from the Bureau of Labor and Industry.
Emissions of the five pollutants were generated in the study directly from
the fuel data using standard emission factors and employing the current
1969 N.J. fuel regulations.
Sources 61-119 and 171-173
These sources are located in the outer regions of zones 3 and 4.
This information was largely accepted without modification from the central
office files of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
129
-------
Tliis information included all aspects of plant location, the emissions for
particulates and S02, the fuel data and separate process emission. Some
stack parameters for the largest sources were obtained from the EPA 1969
update. The study team prepared the emissions inventory for CO, HC and
NO. from fuel burning based on the current emission factors.
A.
Sources 120-170
These sources are located in New York and Connecticut. The
entire inventory was taken from the 1969 fcPA regional update printout.
The study team again generated the emissions for CO, HC and NO from fuel
burning using standard emission factors.
2.2.3 Types of Information Sought
The data search for point sources, particularly in the New Jersey
portion of the study area, was very comprehensive in view of the importance
which this part of the inventory has to the total program. The following
types of information were sought, particularly for New Jersey sources
examined in detail:
Plant Name and Location
The current name of each plant is very important since many
of the country's largest corporations are included in our inventory and
these companies have plants at several locations in the region; only some
of which are major emitters. The correct municipality and county location
for each plant is necessary because incorrect location of a major source
can cause discrepancies in county totals, producing large errors in the
area source inventory derived therefrom. The UTM coordinate location is
used to reference each source for modeling purposes.
130
-------
Stack Parameters
Standard stack parameters sought for each of the sources
included the total number of stacks at each location and the designation
of each as a process stack or a fuel-burning stack; the maximum spread
between individual stacks; and the plume rise parameters of stack height,
stack diameter, exit gas temperature, exit gas velocity and mass flow rate.
Fuel Data
The total 1969 consumption by each plant of the four major
fuels, coal (anthracite and bituminous), residual oil, distillate oil and
natural gas was sought. In addition, any information on seasonal usages
of individual fuels was sought.
Plant Operation Schedule
The plant operating schedule was sought. This included the
number of eight hour shifts per day; the number of days operated in the
week and the number of weeks operated annually. The percentage of fuel
burned for space heating and for process operation was also sought. This
factor provides an estimate of that part of the fuel burning emission that
is constant and the part which varies with ambient temperature.
Boiler Data and Air Pollution Control Equipment
This information was concerned with coal burning boilers only.
For these boilers the burner configuration was determined, as was the rated
capacity in millions of BTUs per hour which affects emission potential, and
the type and efficiency of particulate collection equipment which affects
the controlled emissions.
131
-------
Separate Process Data
For those sources that have separate process emissions the average
process rate was sought; this usually is stated in terms of tons of product
produced by each process on an hourly time basis. In addition, the average
emission of the five pollutants from each process source was sought.
Projecting Data
In addition to the process rate, other information was sought rela-
tive to the point sources which would be useful for projection of both exist-
ing point sources and any new ones that might emerge in the Meadowlands.
These parameters include the identification of the various products produced
at each plant, the number of employees at each plant, the gross plant area,
and the total enclosed space.
2.2.4 Supplemental Data
At the Milestone 4 meeting a list of the 60-odd New Jersey point sources
in zones 3 and 4 was submitted to the NJDEP and assistance requested in filling
in missing data. The additional information received was incorporated into the
inventory. A final check with the department (over some of the larger sources)
was required prior to finalizing the inventory. This resulted from some dis-
crepancies in county total emissions. The result of this check were changes
in some of the separate process emissions. Figures II-4 and II-5 show the fuel
emissions and process emissions for each source. Figure II-4 also shows fuel
emissions from New York and Connecticut sources; no point source process emis-
sions outside New Jersey met criteria for inclusion.
132
-------
Figure 11-4
1969 Point Source Fuel Emissions
Source ID
New Jersey
-Zone 1
4
7
9
13
14
16
28
34
P articulates
63
64
2600
61
20
32
1400
175
-Zones 2 § 3
1
2
5
6
10
12
18
19
20
21
24
25
27
29
30
32
33
36
37
40
42
43*
44
45
46
47
52
54
56
57
58
59
103
35
582
230
41
96
142
12
40
105
35
39
1620
375
1020
1450
75
20
102
2640
46
1038
1590
76
44
212
67
1030
138
53
95
51
A°2
432
445
74800
419
-
218
61200
120
714
238
1590
938
282
664
355
85
278
857
246
240
27600
6420
162
921
517
-
687
418
319
501
5490
527
160
1470
460
17400
954
564
655
349
CO
_
-
988
_
4
-
516
10
_
-
80
38
_
-
10
-
-
51
-
-
8
2
60
34
-
-
-
31
-
157
14
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
-
-
HC
9
8
322
10
44
4
990
5
14
5
1
4
5
13
2
2
5
67
5
14
1010
218
9
7
10
46
20
16
6
241
208
10
6
29
9
680
18
7
12
7
NOX
204
202
32700
204
253
99
28700
80
324
108
632
383
128
303
219
39
126
652
113
164
21400
4920
152
614
234
200
350
232
144
435
4140
243
137
630
208
13800
432
168
297
162
units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year; * means incinerators
133
-------
Figure II-4 Cont'd
Source ID
60
62
65
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
77
-Zone 4
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
91
97
98
99
100
101
103
104
105
106
107
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
P articulates
168
58
24
174
207
51
1510
32
27
41
46
4760
161
11
115
400
1230
345
143
386
6
161
771
770
2
221
2430
5340
401
282
1380
594
236
1770
529
2420
1590
169
545
3620
81
22
SO
1160
434
165
1210
1430
356
240
219
187
286
318
756
1110
87
795
2770
8520
2380
22000
1740
44
1110
5330
5340
13
1530
1770
4950
1170
1440
26700
13700
2800
45600
3660
2240
5490
280
3600
22100
560
151
CO
_
-
2
-
-
-
9
-
-
-
-
28
1
-
1
3
11
3
21
-
-
1
_
7
-
2
93
240
4
2
595
141
-
26
5
118
1
1
5
1
-
-
HC
22
8
3
23
27
7
27
4
4
5
6
56
21
2
15
52
161
45
314
7
-
21
7
101
_
29
47
152
184
42
423
306
12
158
69
59
216
22
68
_
11
3
NO
A
525
183
75
546
648
161
303
99
85
130
144
504
504
39
360
1250
3860
1080
7530
176
20
504
178
2410
10
691
701
2570
1490
752
21500
9720
229
30800
1660
885
4190
528
1630
9
254
68
units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year; * means incinerators,
. 134
-------
Figure II-4 Cont'd
Source ID
New York
-Zone 3
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
160*
161*
162*
168
169
-Zone 4
120
121
122
123
1.31
135
.136
137
138
141
146
148'
150
151*
152*
153*
154*
155* .
156*
157*
158*
159*
163*
165
167
P articulates
686
1320
577
431
1010
4640
458
1340
2530
3430
132
1510
1380
4350
6240
2830
2970
905
445
17
5980
.379
11200
934
174
1090
2750
8080
8770
5350
8510
5410
2630
4100
1200
2460
3460
SO
L
8120
18600
7380
4910
11500
19300
3800
298
702
503
1560
117
18400
68600
66100
41300
396.00
25600
5940
27200
42200
5470
4800
2190
2000
109
402
950
1030
667
1000
720
438
548
160
1500
1730
CO
14
26
2
9
20
54
6
198
467
335
1
1
_
1040
1760
1010
60
112
9
3
543
8
54
-
_
73
268
633
687
445
667
480
292
365
107
219
292
HC
2070
393
288
129
301
428
92
298
702
503
20
17
690
1230
613
386
894
728
134
430
257
114
17
46
73
109
402
950
1030
667
1000
720
438
548
160
66
88
NOV
4960
9430
6040
3100
7230
11500
2230
397
936
670
476
418
14500
78500
101000
57200
21400
20500
3220
9040
33000
3030
3000
982
1050
145
535
1270
1370
890
1330
960
585
730
213
131
175
units are 103 pounds of pollutant per year; * means incinerators,
135
-------
Figure II-4 Cont'd
Source ID
Connecticut
-Zone 4
139
140
142
143
144
145
147
Particulates
646
5840
795
1200
2360
1700
212
so2
87000
84800
6340
3280
77800
22600
3240
CO
850
730
60
48
1
3
-
H£
256
538
305
15
174
342
45
NO
46800
46800
9180
2660
3700
7200
944
units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year
136
-------
Figure II-5
1969 Point Source Industrial Process Emissions
Source ID
New Jersey
-Zone 1
14
34
P articulates
432
840
-Zones 2$3
5
10
18
19
24
25
30
36
44
46
65
72
-Zone 4
81
82
83
84
85
88
91
99
103
104
105
109
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
21
536 .
860
172
332
100
189
39
1230
2800
3370
900
142
1180
9990
29000
472
.
so2
28
3090
8480
850
1140
13300
228
6800
3030
112
10000
CO
4760
155000
2080
4400
HC
20
7300
2600
400000
4350
3300
3200
5760
84
18700
2500
1800
3880
NO
4140
2300
44
units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year
137
-------
2.2.5 Data Completeness and Quality
Some general comments on the completeness and quality are necessary
at this point. The information used in the inventory is complete in some
aspects and very spotty in others. In terms of the general information
categories sought the data used have the following quality.
Locations
Field inspection of the Meadowlands and surrounding areas provided a
check on the completeness and locations of the initial point source list
provided. With a few exceptions — for some plants which appeared to be
significant emitters and for a few minor changes in UTM locations -- the
inspection confirmed these data. The point source locations for zones 1
through 3 are shown in Figure II-6. It is assumed that the information
for the balance of the N.J. region is at least as good. The location of
some of the New York City power plants was checked against base maps, and
again reasonable agreement was found. The data on point source screening
and location is considered to be good.
Stack Parameters
About 75 percent of the stack heights for the point source list could
be obtained. For the balance of the required stack parameters fewer than
50% were available. (These are shown as parameters 1 and 2 in Figure II-3.)
There was no way to check the accuracy of any of these other than visual
observation. The New York stack parameters had fewer missing values, but
there was no way of checking the accuracy or completeness of that inventory.
The stack data are considered to be poor.
138
-------
A Validation Sites
Note: Locations are only schematic,
Power Plants and Process sources are circled; numbers refer
to the source ID used in the study.
Figure II-6 New Jersey Point Sources for Zones 1 through 3
139
-------
Fuel Data
The fuel data for all point sources in New Jersey and New York
was quite complete. The New Jersey information compared well with the
county-wide totals after adjustments were made through consultation with
the NJDEP. The New York data could not be checked as completely. The
information is considered to be excellent.
Plant Operation and Seasonality
Fuel distribution data (space heating versus process heating) were
available for about 50% of the New Jersey firms and for none of those in
New York and Connecticut. (This is shown as parameter 3 in Figure II-3,
for industrial sources.) However, since fuel distribution information
is obtained from subjective estimates of the various plant managers, and
there is no consistency in this information it is considered to be question-
able. The operating schedule information is good and quite complete as
shown by parameter 2 in Figure II-7.
Separate Process Data
Since separate process information does not lend itself to emis-
sion factor analysis as well as do fuel burning emissions, it was not possible
to check the accuracy of these emissions. Several estimates were obtained
from different sources and for different time periods for many of the
industrial process emitters in the inventory; some of the data, particu-
larly for refineries were for 1970, rather than 1969. The discrepancies
in these separate findings are very large. There are other industrial
sources, whose operations indicated significant process emission, for
which no record of process emission was available from any source.
140
-------
Figure II-7
Point Source Activity Data
Source ID
Zone 1
4
7
13
14
16
34
Zone 2 § 3
1
2
5
6
10
12
18
19
20
21
24
25
30
32
33
36
37
40
42
44
45
46
47
52
56
57
58
59
60
62
65
67
68
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
345
Parameters
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a
X
X
X
a
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
XXX
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
XXX
X X
X
X
XXX
X
X X
X
10 BTU/employee/hour
Heat Demand .
24
36
16
27
370
10
25
80
130
16
5
72
16
310
460
140
0
24
56
26
28
6
20
12
141
-------
Figure II-7 Cont'd
Source ID
69
70
71
72
73
74
77
Zone 4
80
81
82
83
84
85
87
88
91
97
98
99
100
101
103
104
105
108
109
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
345
Parameters
X
X
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a
X
X
a
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
10 BTU/employee/hour
Heat Demand
230
23
3
0
50
0
67
78
53
11
0
180
42
710
62
240
3100
12
Notes to Figure II-7
parameters: l - percent fuel for space heating
2 - hours of operation per yeat
3 - number of employees
4 - gross area
5 - enclosed plant area
An 'x' means that the information was available.
142
-------
Figure II-7 Cont'd
Estimates were made as follows:
for percent heating, SIC 20-29, 10%
SIC 30-39, 25%
Institutional , 90%
for hours of operation, if marked with an "a", 4800 hrs.
all others, 8736 hrs.
Heat Demand is 10 BTU/employee/hour for space heating only and is
derived from fuel use and the first three parameters.
143
-------
The separate emission data are considered to be poor. The information is
presented in Figures II-3 and II-5.
Projective Data
Of the four protective factors sought (in addition to stack and fuel
distribution information) -- production rates, employment,, enclosed space,
and gross plant area -- only the data received on employment were sufficient
to be of any use. We believe this category to be poor in general, as shown
under parameters 3 through 5 in Figure II-7. No consistency in heat demand
per employee per square foot could be found (Figure II-7), making it impossible
to develop projective parameters by industrial category.
2.2.6 General Comments on Future Information Gathering
In view of the apparent weakness of the inventory as regards separate
process data and projective information, it is necessary to comment on the
reasons for this and how subsequent studies of this type might improve the
quality of the information.
The New Jersey Air Pollution Control Program, as well as those from
most states, is based on compliance with specific emission control regu-
lations. In connection with each regulation, there are specific forms
and procedures to determine compliance. However, unless a complaint
against a particular source is filed, the department is not authorized to
enter private property to gather information. Complaints may originate
from private citizens or may be initiated by the Department in the course
of their areawide surveillance activities. In the process of checking a
complaint, it is not standard practice to check for all violations of the
code but rather to concentrate on the specific complaint.
144
-------
In the course of making their inspection the inspectors take compre-
hensive information including, in some cases, source testing. From these
forms and appendixed material comes the most detailed information on
specific sources. However, since not all large sources have been flagged
for violations, many sources do not have these detailed forms.
In addition, the department periodically makes statewide surveys
of major sources using questionnaire and follow-up procedures. While
the information requested in these forms is often valuable, the procedure
places heavy emphasis on the cooperation and judgment of individual plant
managers. These people have no direct positive incentive for compliance
or completeness of their information, often cannot spend the time to
gather the required information, and often are not technically competent
to provide the required information. Therefore much of the information
requested often is not provided. An alternate approach that was brought
to light too late in the study to be adopted was the use of a limited
telephone canvas of the major firms requesting the required information
on production rates, employment, plant area and enclosed space. Since
this information does not directly affect emissions, there would be no
reason for the appropriate company official to refuse. However, since
the study team was requested not to contact industrial firms directly, this
procedure was not used in the study.
2.2.7 Default Parameters
In place of missing data, default parameters were substituted to
expedite subsequent work (as specified in the methodology). These para-
meters were developed from the balance of the inventory and the experience
of the project members. Figure II-3 shows which sources required default
145
-------
parameters for stack height, plume rise, and percent fuel used for process
heat. The default parameters themselves are shown in Figure 1-32.
Size criteria were established for each state and zone as shown in
Figure 1-11. When these criteria were applied to the current point source
inventory several sources were removed as shown in Figure II-3. In a few
cases sources were removed due to insufficient data for determining reasonable
emission levels.
Emission rates for each source for the summer and winter seasons were
developed from the numbers in Figure I1-4 according to the percent of fuel
used for space heating and the number of degree days per season shown in
Figure 1-32.
2.3 Current Line Source Emission Inventory
Motor vehicle emissions were represented as line sources in this
study only for zones 1 and 2. For other portions of the region motor
vehicle emissions were characterized as area sources. The 1969 emissions
were determined almost entirely from data supplied by the New Jersey Department
of Transportation. This consisted of vehicle counts per day by highway
links for 1969. These links are shown in Figure 11-10. Figure II-8 shows
a summary of the line source parameters for both 1969 and 1990.
Since the published emission factors vary by speed and
vehicle type, it is usually necessary to determine vehicle counts for each
link according to speed and vehicle type. The first assumption made was
that for the entire study region an average urban speed of 25 mph would
not introduce significant error. Therefore, the EPA Urban Emission Factors
could be used directly and it was not necessary to vary emissions with speed.
Secondly, vehicle type was derived empirically from vehicle counts taken
146
-------
Figure II-8
Summary of Line Source Parameters
Source ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ii
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Road Type
A
A
A
B
B
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
A
C
B
B
C
C
C
B
C
A
A
C
B
B
B
B
A
B
B
B
B
B
A
B
B
B
C
B
C
B
B
C
B
A
1969 Veh.
85
49
83
-
-
-
37
40
45
33
45
65
39
28
-
-
36
-
17
44
25
39
-
32
-
8
36
33
39
86
13
68
89
8
-
93
85
93
30
85
-
85
170
18
36
75
Estimate Code
2
2
1
8
4,7
2
2,7
7
2
7
7
7
8
1
2,7
4,7
7
7
8
7
7
7
1
3
3
4
4
4
2
3
5
1990 Veh.
122
86
137
28
23
106
34
71
63
73
54
64
120
40
20
20
50
11
15
60
25
40
80
45 .
25
35
50
60
40
100
18
120
110
22 ,
43
131
115
131
42
115
19
106
213
27
57
79
Est.Yr.SVeh.
i'
(87) 39
(87) 18
(87) 46
(80) 14
(80) 49
(85) 26
(85) 16
(85) 27
(80) 40
(85) 52
(80) 86
(80) 15
(85) 109
Veh. units are 10 vehicle counts/day (both directions)
147
-------
Figure II-8 Cont'd
Source It
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
72
74
75
Road Type
B
B
C
B
B
B
C
A
B
A
A
A
B
B
B
C
A
B
A
A
A
B
B
C
C
B
A
C
C
1969 Veh.
33
-
48
15
18
18
18
75
-
-
•• -
-
30
12
30
64
20
12
-
_
75
50
-
_
_
_
_
-
-
Estimate Code
4
2
6
6
5
2
1
1
1
4,6
1
1
3
5
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1990 Veh.
51
26
62
34
40
40
27
79
26
47
47.
93
50
82
50
82
73
14
67
67
174
76
52
52
26
128
67
60
50
Est.Yr.^Veh.
Notes
Estimate Codes:
1 = future construction - used for 1990 only
2 = insufficient data for 1969 - used for 1990 only
3 = incomplete data for 1969 - estimated as equalling adjacent link
4 - incomplete data for 1969 - estimated from ratio of adjacent
link for 1969 § 1990 values
5 = incomplete data for 1969 - no sound basis for estimate
6 = incomplete data for 1990 - estimated from adjacent links
7 = incomplete data for 1990 - estimate from 1980, 1985 and 1987
vehicle data according to balanced network.
8 = incomplete data for 1969 - estimated from N.J. Turnpike data.
Determination of vehicle mix:
Road type % auto and light truck .% heavy duty truck % diesel
A
B
C
84
81
65
12
14
20
4
5
15
148
-------
by the New Jersey Department of Transportation at about 10 sites in and
around our region of interest. From this information three categories of
road use were developed, termed A, B, and C as shown in Figure II-8. Type
A represents the highest percentage of automobile and light truck such as
would be found on an interstate highway. Type B represents an intermediate
percentage of automobile usage such as would be found on major roads like
Route 3. Finally, type C represents high truck usage such as would be found
in an industrial area containing local service roads. The actual percent-
age breakdowns for auto and light truck, heavy duty truck and diesel usage
as found empirically are shown in the notes to Figure II-8.
Although estimates have been made by the New Jersey Department of
Transportation (NJDEP) of vehicle counts for almost all the links shown
in Figure 11-10 for 1990, no information was available for many of the
links for 1969. Accordingly, estimates were made for all links within
zone 1. Where information was not available for links in zone 2, these
were left out of the 1969 inventory. Figure II-8 shows the codes for
the different forms of estimation procedure used. For some cases, as
shown by code 1, future construction was involved and therefore there were
no emissions for 1969. In other cases however, as shown by codes 3, 4,
and 8, estimates were made from New Jersey Turnpike data or adjacent links
for which information was known. In a number of cases, as shown by code 5,
no sound basis for an estimate existed; therefore, an estimate was made in
conjunction with the New Jersey Department of Transportation. Using the
vehicle counts shown in Figure II-8 the emission factors in Figure 1-30,
and the vehicle mix by road type shown in Figure II-8, the emissions were
calculated for each link. These are summarized in Figure II-9.
149
-------
FIGURE II-9
Summary of Line Source Emissions
1969
-Zone 1
-Zone 2
1990
-Zone 1 •
-Zone 2
106
Veh-Mi/Yr
505
453
•
930
931
106 pound/year
Particulates
0.7
0.6
0.7
0 .7
so2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
CO
69.5
63.0
10.3
10.3
HC ,
6.5
5.9
0.9
0.9
N0y
7.5
6.8
1.4
1.4
150
-------
4 4 4- 4- 4
4 3 !•'!
572
561 532 58J 5S1
•« 1969 HIGHWAY LINKS MODELED
-. ADDITIONAL LINKS FOR 1990
Figure 11-10 Planned Highway Links for 1969 and 1990
Note: Numbers refer to source ID for each link.
151
-------
Information on monthly variation in vehicle flow for this area was
obtained from the New Jersey Department of Transportation. It showed that
for road types A, B, and C in the study area, no more than 2% variation
could be found between the summer, winter and annual average vehicle flow.
Therefore, the same emissions were used for the summer and winter seasons.
As shown in Figure 1-32 a stack height arid plume rise of zero were assumed
for motor vehicle emissions modeled as line sources.
2.4 Current Area Source Emission Inventory
Although the current point source inventory required the greatest
effort because of the amount of information involved, the current area
source inventory involved more subjective input. It had been the
original intention to develop a reasonable area source inventory from ,
existing information particularly the 1965, 1966 and 1969 federal inven-
tories for the New York Abatement Region. However, it became evident near
the beginning of the study that this would not be possible for several
reasons:
1. There were considerable changes in fuel use patterns from 1965
to 1969. This precluded the use of most of the 1965 and 1966 detailed
fuel use information for the current inventory.
2. The procedures used to derive intermediate fuel and emission
totals in the federal inventories were not always available nor readily
usable.
3. The 1969 federal regional update was of little use insofar as
the area sources were concerned because it consisted of a grid cell by grid
cell proportional update of the 1965/1966 data.
152
-------
4. Since, by definition, the area source inventory was the residual
of total emissions minus those specified as point and line sources, and,
since new point and line source inventories had been developed in the study,
it was necessary to derive a new residual set of sources.
Therefore, it was decided to use the best available current state
information to develop the area source inventory. This consisted of
the following:
1. For New Jersey, 1969 fuel use information by counties and
source categories, and a mix of 1969 and 1970 non-fuel emissions by
counties.
2. For New York City, total emissions by four categories for the
five boroughs combined.
3. For the remainder of New York State, a breakdown by source
category of emissions for each county; some of this information was for
1970 rather than for 1969.
It is, therefore, evident that we have neither a consistent set
of information for each county nor consistency within the nominal year for
the inventory. In general, we have reasonable estimates of fuel emissions
for all counties for 1969 but varying degrees of accuracy for the non-fuel
emissions. It was not possible to obtain a more recent data base than the
1965/1966 one or greater detail than the county breakdown used.
2.4.1 New Jersey Fuel Emissions
The New Jersey fuel-related emissions were developed from county
fuel use totals supplied by the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection. These totals included fuel use for both point and
153
-------
area sources; therefore, it was necessary to subtract out point source
fuel use by county from the total. When this was done it was discovered
that for a number of counties there was more coal used by point sources
than the total supposedly consumed in the county. This necessitated
checking back through all of the fuel use data with the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection. The discrepancies had arisen
because of differing assumptions in the shift in coal use from 1965-1969
and was resolved, but not without a great deal of extra time and expended
t
effort.
Percentages for fuel used for space heating and non-space heating
by county and source category (the source categories being residential,
industrial, and commercial, including institutional and government) were
developed from the 1965 Abatement Region Report information. These
were the only default parameters needed for the 1969 area inventory. From
this information emissions by season (summer, winter, and annual average)
were developed from the fuel use data, using the appropriate emission
factors in Figure 1-30.
2.4.2 New Jersey Non-Fuel Emissions
All of the information for New Jersey non-fuel emissions (with
the exception of motor vehicle emissions) was obtained directly from
the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. In all cases the
data were for 1970 rather than 1969. Information was provided on solvent
and gasoline marketing evaporative emissions, area wide incineration, and
aircraft emissions by county. Area wide process emissions were considered
to be negligible.
154
-------
In the case of motor vehicle emissions 1969 vehicle-mile data by
«
county were obtained from the New Jersey Department of Transportation.
An average urban speed of 25 mph was assumed to hold for the entire region
and the vehicle mix was assumed to average 80% automobile and light truck,
15% heavy duty truck, and 5% diesel, comparable to road type B in our line
source inventory. The 1969 motor vehicle emission factors in Figure 1-30
i
were used to calculate the emissions for each county.
Figure 11-11 shows the annual area source fuel emissions by county
for New Jersey, rounded to the nearest million pounds per year. Similarly,
Figure 11-12 shows the annual area source non-fuel emissions. Fuel emis-
sions predominate only for sulfur dioxide, are nearly equal for particu-
lates, and represent about 1% of the total for carbon monoxide. The
largest single source in several categories is motor vehicle emissions
-- particularly for carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons.
2.4.3 New York City Emissions
Total emissions in tons per year for each of the pollutants were
obtained for 1969 for the five boroughs of New York City by five source
categories: space heating, motor vehicle transportation, industrial
process, incineration, and evaporation. Point sources for space heating
and incineration were subtracted from these totals. Allocations were then
made to the five boroughs based upon the distribution of emissions in the
1965 inventory. More up-to-date information has become available since the
time this analysis was undertaken, in particular the 1970 borough by borough
source inventory developed as a part of the State Implementation Plan. How-
ever, it was not available at the time the current area source allocation had
to be made and it might not increase significantly the accuracy of the analysis,
155
-------
FIGURE 11-11
Area Source Fuel Emissions
1969 New Jersey
10 pounds/year
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morri s
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Particulates
10
12
9
10
3
4
5
4
9
so2
50
56
46
50
12
19
26
15
44
CO
5
8
5
4
3
3
4
3
4
HC
3
4
3
3
1
3
2
9
3
NO,
20
24
20
22
5
8
11
7
20
Note: Due to aggregation and rounding procedures, this table is presented
only for report summary purposes.
156
-------
FIGURE 11-12
Area Source Non-Fuel Emissions
1969 New Jersey
10 pounds/year
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Particulates
16
; 11
6
11
9
'6
!
5
4
8
so2
5
4
2
3
4
2
2
2
4
CO
900
652
278
788
602
438
400
252
576
HC
112
82
36
90
86
56
54
30
70
NO,
90
66
28
80
60
50
40
26
58
Note: Due to aggregation and rounding procedures, this table is presented
only for report summary purposes.
157
-------
2.4.4 New York State Emissions
The 1969 emissions were obtained from the New York State Division
of Air Resources for those counties in New York State outside of New York
City. This included total emissions for transportation, process, power
generation, space heating, refuse, and evaporation. As with the other
jurisdictions, point sources in the inventory were subtracted from the
area totals for a particular category. Difficulties were resolved in
consultation with the New York State Division of Air Resources. However,
the accuracy of both the point and area source results for these counties
is more questionable than for New Jersey and New York City.
2.4.5 Summary of Inventory
Figure 11-13 shows the complete current area source emission inven-
tory in the units used for input to the dispersion model, MARTIK. The emis-
sion densities show variations of 1 to 2 orders of magnitude, indicating that
the area source background cannot be considered uniform for modeling. Similar
emissions were generated for the summer and winter seasons, based upon
variations in the percent space heating for each of the applicable source
categories.
The average county emission densities were located at the popula-
tion centroid of each county and the SYMAP computer mapping program
was used to interpolate continuous emission density surfaces between the
county centroids; then, values were read from each emission density surface
at the centroids of the area source grid cells shown in Figure 11-14. These
were the values used for modeling with MARTIK. Although this may sound
complicated, it is merely an objective interpolation procedure used to
158
-------
FIGURE 11-13
Current Area Source Emission Inventory
106 g/ro2 - sec
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bronx
Brooklyn
Richmond
Manhattan
Queens
Nassau
Rock land
Westchester
Particulates
0.63
0.98
1.93
0.38
0.15
0.12
0.29
0.15
0.89
1.86
1.74
0.28
5.01
1.27
0.44
0.12
0.16
so2
1.30
2.60
5.88
0.98
0.18
0.26
0.79
0.30
2.59
12.50
12.50
1.97
32.10
5.66
1.05
0.13
0.44
CO
21.6
28.6
34.9
14.1
7.1
5.2
11.6
4.6
31.2
83.5
72.6
14.3
273.0
108.0
38.4
7.9
13.7
HC
2.8
3.7
4.9
1.7
1.0
0.7
1.6
0.7
3.9
14.7
13.5
2.3
41.3
14.1
6.6
1.3
2.3
NOX
2.7
3.9
6.0
1.8
0.8
0,7
1.5
0.6
4.2
12.7
11.9
2.1
37.0
11.0
4.3
0.9
1.7
Note: due to rounding, this
purposes.
table is presented only for report summary
159
-------
554 562 570 578
594 602
-i 4589
4573
4551
4541
4525
= 4509
4493
4477
4461
- 4445
490 506 522 538 554
570
586 602 618 634 650
4429
Figure 11-14 Area Source Grid System
Notes: Outer 16 km grid has 36 cells; blank cells are water or outside study area.
Inner 8 km grid (1-1, etc.) has 35 cells. Area source inventory combined
as inner 8 km cells with 24 outer 16 km ones (the 36, minus cell numbers
10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 23, and 24) for a total of 59 cells.
In the 16 km grid, no number is assigned to the cell between numbers 23 and
24 because this area is largely water and assumed to have no emissions; for
the same reason no number is assigned to the cell to the right of 1-35 in
the inner grid.
160
-------
transform the area source data from irregularly shaped political jurisdic-
tions to a grid system which is required for modeling. The LANTRAN
program is designed to do this type of surface interpolation; however, at
the time the particular analysis was done, SYMAP was used because LANTRAN was
still undergoing testing.
2.4.6 Accuracy of Analysis
As a part of the validation procedures of Task 2,emission densities
were determined from the county emission inventory for an 8 kilometer
grid in addition to the original 16 km grid. This generated a total of 59
area source cells for the combined 8 and 16 km grid shown in Figure 11-14.
To examine the sensitivity of the model to different source categories as
a part of validation, one square mile area source cells were calculated
in the vicinity of the monitoring stations using the 1965 Abatement Region
Report inventory as the base for small scale variation in emission densi-
ties. No definitive conclusions could be reached as to how much the
accuracy of the calculations were increased; however, it is evident from
the 1965 data used as a base that significant local variation does occur ,
in area source emissions.
The original intention had been to use county data for the outlying
regions and town and census tract data for the inner portions of the
study area as the basis for varying area source emissions. However,
since the monitoring stations used for validation as shown in Figure I-10
were scattered over the central portion of the region, there was no clear
cut distinction between inner areas which would require detail and outlying
areas warranting less detail.
161
-------
Without the sufficient air quality and emissions data to conduct
an extremely detailed validation procedure, it is not possible to deter-
mine what level of accuracy is necessary — either in the original data
for political jurisdictions or in emissions data for the grid cells used
for modeling. It is, therefore, not possible to affirm or deny the
choice of grid cell size. As the analysis progressed it became more and
more evident that the area source contribution to total emissions is large;
therefore, greater detail in this portion of the inventory should increase
accuracy. The use of 2 or 4 km cells in the region of greatest interest
warrants consideration; the original data by land use zones and political
jurisdictions should, therefore, be of a similar scale.
162
-------
3. BACKGROUND EMISSION INVENTORY
3.1 Components of the Inventory
The background emission inventory was divided into three components
parallel to the current emission inventory -- point, line, and area --
again, because of the separate modeling requirements and the availability
of information. Point source information was constructed from the cur-
rent point source inventory, projective data gathered specifically for
the task, and from separate data on power plant and incineration require-
ments. Line source information was again developed from data supplied
by a separate transportation agency. The area source information was not
assembled to form a residual inventory for 1990; instead, the current
area source inventory and separate regional planning data were used to
construct the background area source inventory.
The discussion of the point source inventory is divided into
three broad areas: (a) industrial point source projecting for both fuel
and process sources; (b) power plant projections; and (c) refuse incinera-
tion estimates. The discussion of the line source inventory briefly
explains the steps required to assemble and use the traffic data.
The section on the background area source inventory discusses:
(a) data sources, (b) fuel burning emissions, and (c) non-fuel femissions.
It is divided by source type rather than jurisidiction, as in the current
area source inventory.
3.2 Background Point Source Emission Inventory
This portion of the analysis was concerned with some of the changes
and additions to the point source inventory that are likely to occur
163
-------
by 1990. Some of the changes will result from the evolution of the
existing point sources and others will be contingent upon realization
of the alternate Meadowlands plans themselves. The types of changes to be
covered in this section include cessation of operations, additions of new
sources, increases and declines in point source activities, and changes in
the methods used to carry out certain activities. Changes in the manner
in which the various specific activities emit the five pollutants were
incorporated in the emission factor analysis along with the regulations
concerning fuel constituents shown in Figure 1-30.
The types of sources for which specific projections were made are
industrial plants, power plants and refuse incinerators. Together, these
three categories account for over 95% of the point sources in the 1969
inventory and over 991 of the emissions from point sources. While there
are a few additional point sources, namely institutional and governmental
facilities, they were too few in number and too small in size to warrant
special projective considerations.
3.2.1 Industrial Point Source Projections
The projections of changes in the industrial point sources proved
to be the most difficult to make since the range of activities is very
broad and the data available to make projections are scarce and diffused
among widely scattered sources. The industrial point source projection
covers two components: fuel use and process sources.
Industrial Fuel Emission Projections
Several basic information sources were used to project fuel
emissions from industrial point sources for New Jersey. The Meadowlands
Development Commission is thoroughly familiar with the sources and
164
-------
industries within its jurisdiction and was able to predict both cessation
of operations as well as new industrial background sources in its area. The
New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry provided a listing of possible
new sources to be constructed between 1969 and 1975 based on enclosed space
for all counties in the study. There was not sufficient information, how-
ever, to incorporate these into the inventory.
Changes in level of activity for industrial background sources
were based on changes in employment. This expediency was used since the
initial data search for production rates and changes, enclosed space and
gross plant area produced only limited information as shown in Figure II-7.
The only consistent set of protective data are changes in employment.
Estimates of total employment without regard to industrial classification
were available on a one square mile grid from the Tri-State Transportation
Commission for 1985 as shown in Figure 11-15. Estimates of employment
changes by two, three, and in some cases four digit SIC for the various
labor market regions in the study area were also available. This infor-
mation was provided by the N.J. Department of Labor and Industry.
Figure 11-16 shows the appropriate ratio of 1980 to 1969 employ-
ment for each New Jersey industrial source for the Bureau of Labor and
Industry, Tri-State, and Hackensack Meadowlands Commission assumptions.
It also shows the actual ratio decided upon by subjectively weighting these
three sources of information. For non-industrial sources (hospitals, etc.)
or sources where employment was not known, an implied ratio of 1.0 was used.
The ratio was applied directly to 1969 heating demand to
determine 1990 heating demand; the same fuels were used as in 1969 except
for fuel switching from coal to gas or oil as determined in consultation
165
-------
Zone 4
(New Jersey)
HacKnsack
/ Passaic
HAC KEN SAC
MEADOWLA
DISTRICT
'yOueens
°0
Richmond
Zones
(New York)
Figure 11-15 Tri-State Grid
166
01
to
-------
Figure 11-16
Point Source Projecting Data
Source ID
Zone 1
4
"7
13
14
In
34
Zones 2i',3
I
1
5
(>
10
i:
is
10
20
:i
24
25
30
32
53
56
57
40
42
44
45
46
47
52
56
57
58
59
60
62
65
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Bi.t; r
1.10
I . h()
1.60
1.55
1.20
1.05
1.20
1.60
1.60
0.70
O.S5
0.90
0.70
0.95
0.70
0.95
0.95
1.00
1.55
1.00
0.90
1.00
1.25
0.80
1.80
0.55
1.70
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
0.80
1.20
1.70
1.70
1.40
1.40
1.60
1.60
Tri .
0.95
1.15
0.90
1 . 29
0.95
0.95
1.14
1.20
2.87
0.95
1.21
0.85
0.90
1.21
1.73
0.95
1.23
0.90
1.10
1.00
1.25
0.95
1.12
0.92
1.35
2.00
0.93
1.10
1.13
1.00
0.95
1.00
0.95
0.95
1.20
0.95
IIMC
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0
Actual
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0
1.00
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.60
1.25
1.00
0.85
1.00
0.90
1.00
1.00
0.75
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
1.25
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.25
0.95
0.90
0.90
1.00
1.25
1.00
1.15
1.15
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.40
1.00
Fuel Change
Coal to gas
Coal to oi 1
Coal to oil
Coal to gas
Coal to oil
Coal to oil
Coal to gas
167
-------
Figure 11-16 Cont'd
Source ID
Zones 253
77
Zone 4
80
81
82
83
84
85
87
88
91
97
98
99
100
101
103
104
105
108
109
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
BL$I
1.75
1.20
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.25
1.00
1.25
1.45
1.20
1.00
1.25
1.30
1.00
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
1.30
1.00
1.30
1.55
1.30
1.10
Tri,
1.25
HMC
Actual
1.00
1.20
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.25
1.00
1.25
1.45
1.20
1.00
1.00
1.25
1.00
1.30
1.00
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
1.30
1.00
1.30
1.55
1.30
1.10
1.00
Fuel Change
Coal to oil
Coal to oil
Coal to oil
Coal to oil
Coal to oil
NOTES to Figure 41
Employment changes - ratio of years in parentheses.
BUI -
Tri
HMC
Actual -
Fuel Changes -
N.J. Bureau of Labor and Industry, according to industrial
category and labor market area (1980-1969)
Tri-State Transportation Commission total (1985-1963)
employment data per square mile grid.
Hackensack Meadowlands Commission, subjective estimates
(1972-1990)
Decision reached as to fuel use index to be used (1990-
1969).
No changes were made in the propensity to use different fuels except
for the shifts from coal to oil and gas as shown.
168
-------
with the NJDEP. The 1990 emission factors from Figure 1-30 were then
applied to calculate the fuel emissions shown in Figure 11-17. The point
source cut-off criteria of 25 tons for any one pollutant as shown in Figure
1-13 was derived empirically from Figure 11-17 by considering:
1. The general level of point source emissions as reflected
in the 1990 emission factors.
2. Consistency in the number and location of point sources
for the 1969 and 1990 model runs.
Only five sources were removed from the inventory.
All existing New York industrial and institutional sources
were assumed to remain the same for 1990, except for the fuel switching
shown in Figure 11-18 and the use of the 1990 emission factors. It was
beyond the scope of this analysis to either determine changes in the level
of activity for these sources or ascertain new sources. In general, they
are not significant compared to the New Jersey industrial sources or the
New York and Connecticut power plants and incinerators. Because of the
shift away from coal and the 1990 emission factors their 1990 emissions
are greatly reduced; they are shown to be negligible, by comparison, in
the summary of 1990 fuel use shown in Figure 1-27.
Industrial Process Emission Projections
Very little information with which to project changes in 1990
industrial process emissions was available; it was not possible to adequately
characterize current activities to produce a base for projecting either 1990
activities or 1990 emission factors. Accordingly, the default procedure
shown in Figure 11-19 was used. Where estimates could be made by the
169
-------
Figure 11-17
1990 Point Source Fuel Emissions - New Jersey
Source ID
Zone 1
4
7
9
13
14
16
28
34
Zones 2S3
1
2
5
6
10
12
18
19
20
21
24
25
27
29
30
32
33
36
37
40
42
43*
44
45
46
47
52
54
56
57
58
Particulates
58
64
981
61
20
32
1635
104
20
127
65
120
141
10
106
36
39
53
13
4
135
75
20
102
61
58
25
783
76
44
266
63
32
124
47
95
SO 2
50
67
6
61
-
55
11
108
-
133
68
124
147
11
98
37
36
2112
504
-
140
78
-
104
64
60
961
816
78
46
276
66
1272
130
48
98
CO
„
-
10
-
-
_
16
_
-
1
-
1
1
_
1
-
-
3
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
2
7
-
-
2
-
2
1
-
-
HC
8
8
2616
10
44
4
4360
14
44
17
8
16
18
1
15
5
14
440
105
10
18
10
44
. 20
8
8
201
102
10
6
36
8
265
16
6
12
N0y
45
50
13080
54
154
33
21800
81
155
100
51
95
110
8
91
28
60
2728
651
35
105
59
153
101
48
45
1240
613
61
34
212
50
1643
97
38
74
Comments
<50 tons
<50 tons
<50 tons
<50 tons
removed: shut down
<100 tons
removed: <25 tons
<100 tons
< 100 tons
<100 tons
removed: < 25 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
<100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
< 100 tons
Units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year;
*Means incineration.
170
-------
Figure 1 1
Cont'd
Source ID
Zones 2§3
59
60
62
65
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
77
Zone 4
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
91
97
98
99
100
101
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
Particulates
63
168
67
28
175 '
207
52
15
27
58
110
193
16
144
499
1233
430
113
150
8
232
69
771
2
276
184
909
401
213
440
99
2484
30
199
290
301
1238
219
805
3
89
22
so2
64
175
70
29
182
216
54
-
,'
28
61
115
202
16
150
521
1286
449 .
4512
156
8
242
72
804
-
288
320
806
355
215
3
-
2592
23
7944
302
314
1179
229 %
840
3
93
23
CO
v
i
9
m
2
I
i»
«
«
V
- •
2
fl»
1
4
11
4
8
•I
2
f*
7
- •
2
2
778
4
2
4
-
22
T
13
3
3
12
2
7
-"
_
\
' ;
HC
y«i 'i
8
22
9
4
23
P
7
13
4
' a
14
25
2,
19
65
161
56
940
2Q
1
3Q
9
m
••
36
24
58
184
32
1184
'264
324
7
1655
38
39
388
29
105
a
12
3
NO^
51
131
53
22
137
162
40
117
21
45
86
151
12
113
391
965
337
5828
117
7
182
54
603
2
216
192
1000
755
184
5920
1320
^944
35
10250
227
236
1727
172
630
2
70
17
Comments
<100 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
removed :< 25 tons
1
<100 tons
removed: <25 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
<100 tons
Not in 1969 inventory.
\
Units are 10 pounds of pollutant pe? year} *me^n? incineration.
* Means incineration.
-------
Figure 11-17 Cont'd
Source ID
Zone 4
206*
207*
208*
209*
210*
217
218
219
220
221
Particulates
360
225
225
270.
270
170
188
-
-
-
S°2
360
225
225
270
270
6816
7512
-
_
-
££
240
156
150
180
180
11
13
-
-
-
HC
360
225
225
270
270
1420
1565
-
-
-
NOY
A
240
150
150
180
180
8804
9703
1843
922
979
Comments
Units are 10° pounds of pollutant per year; *means incineration.
* Means incineration.
172
-------
Source ID
Figure 11-18
Point Source Fuel Use Changes
New York
146
147
148
150
165
167
168
169
shift from coal § distillate to residual
no change
no change
no change
shift from coal to residual
shift from coal to residual
no change
no change
Notes: In all cases the 1969 BTU heat demand, percent fuel for
space heating, and hours of operation were used for 1990;
only shifts in fuel use as noted were made.
173
-------
Figure 11-19
1990 Point Source Industrial Process Emissions - New Jersey
Source ID
Zone 1
14
Decision
HMC
Zones 2§3
5
10
18
19
24
25
30
36
44
46
65
72
Zone 4
81
82
83
84
85
88
91
99
103
104
105
108*
109
111
112
113
114
115
119
171
173
Override
NJDEP
NJDEP
BL§I
NJDEP
NJDEP
BLSI/Tri.
BUI
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
Override
NJDEP
NJDEP
BLSI
BL&I
BLSI
BLU
NJDEP
NJDEP
Override
Override
NJDEP
NJDEP
NJDEP
Change
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.90
0.85
0.90
1.00
0.79
0.95
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.90
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.50
1.00
1.00
0.90
1.00
1.00
0.50
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
1.00
0.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.90
0.90
Particulates
432
21
482
774
172
315
50
189
39
1230
1400
3370
450
78
225
649
5490
29000
472
SO,
28
3090
8480
850
1140
6650
228
6800
1510
62
9790
1000
CO
2380
77500
'
2000
2960
HC
20
6200
1950
200000
2180
2970
2880
2880
24
84
9350
2500
1620
3490
NO,
2070
2300
*Not in 1969 inventory.
Units are 10 pounds of pollutant per year
174
-------
Notes to Figure 11-19:
EXPLANATION OF DECISIONS
HMC
NJDEP
BL$I/Tri.-
Override -
Estimate made by Hackensack Meadowlands Commission;
all point sources in Meadowlands stay the same, except
34, which would shut down.
Estimate made in conjunction with New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection; all refinery process emis-
sions would be 0.50 times present, all machinery and
fabricated metals process emissions would be 0.90 times
present, all chemicals would be equal to present.
Based on ratio of 1980 to 1969 employment.
Estimates of the New Jersey Bureau of Labor and Industry,
by labor market area and industrial category; where
Tri. State Transportation Commission data also known
(change in number of employees total per square mile)
from 1963 to 1985, the two indices were subjectively
weighted.
If the estimate in any case were greater than 1.0, this
value was used as an override; e.g., in no case were
process emissions increased.
175
-------
Hackensack Meadowlands Commission, these took precedent. For four
industrial categories - chemicals, refineries, fabricated metals,
and machinery (SIC's 28, 29, 34, and 35) - across-the-board percentage
reductions in process emissions were made subjectively in conjunction
with the NJDEP. For other categories the Bureau of Labor and Industry and
Tri-State 1980 to 1969 employment ratios were used, as with the fuel
emissions.
Finally, to reflect the strict and necessary attitude for pro-
cess control in New Jersey, where the employment ratios showed an increase
in emissions, a value of 1.0 was used as an override so that in no case
would process emissions for a source increase from 1969 to 1990.
This portion of the background point source inventory, as with
the 1990 emission factors, requires the greatest amount of continued
analysis.
3.2.2 Power Plant Projection
Projections of all power plants and incinerators in the study area --
both existing and new -- were made independently of the general projec-
tion methodology because of the special expertise of Burns and Roe in
this area. Summary information for all new point sources (power plants
and incinerators) is shown in Figure 11-20.
The basic approach to power plant projections was presented at
the Milestone 5 meeting in Trenton and it was suggested at that time that the
concerned utilities be contacted to solicit (i) their comments on the approach,
and (ii) their assistance in providing detailed information concerning
total energy consumption, additional new installations and plans for
176
-------
Figure 11-20
Summary Information for all New Point Sources
Source ID
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
County
Richmond
Bronx
Queens
Brooklyn
Connecticut
Passaic
Monmouth
Morris
Middlesex
Union
Nassau
Westchester
Westchester
Rockland
Queens
Brooklyn
Union
Middlesex
Essex
Middlesex
Nassau
Nassau
Rockland
Connecticut
Zone
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Code
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-rl
49-1
49-1
49-1
49-1
49
49
49 -GT
49
49
49-GT
49-GT
49-GT
49-GT
49-GT
49-GT
49
1
Defa
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2
nit Param
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3
eters*
* 1 = Height, 2 = plume rise, 3 = % process.
Code is that used in Figure II-3:
49 Power plant
49-GT Power plant, Gas Turbine
49-1 Incinerator
177
-------
retiring old equipment. Since this information could not be made available
in time for the study, it was necessary to base the projections on the latest
information currently available.
Projection was based on matching total installed generat-
ing capacity (both existing and proposed) against total energy demand in
1990. Using appropriate assumptions based on plant age and type, each
plant was assigned to a specific duty cycle in each utility system and
the annual hours of operation from which emissions can be computed were
thereby determined. The basic assumption was that essentially all energy
required in the region will be generated within the region; individual utilities
within the region may export and import from a neighbor utility to take
advantage of the best economic usage of total installed equipment.
Utilities in the 17-County Region
There are eight major utilities in the 17-county region. They
are as follows:
Consolidated Edison
Public Service Electric § Gas
Long Island Lighting
New Jersey Power § Light
Orange £ Rockland Utilities
Connecticut Power & Light
Hartford Electric
United Illuminating
The study was expanded, at the start, to include all installed capacity,
existing and proposed, in the area served as well as the entire energy demand
in the region.
178
-------
Installed Capacity
Figure 11-21 is a summation of the total presently installed
capacity for all utilities in the region broken down by category of unit
(fossil fuel, nuclear, hydro-electric and peaking) and by location inside
or outside the 17 county region. The total presently installed capacity
as shown in the Table is 21,367 MW.
In addition, all information on proposed new capacity for the
eight utilities in the region who assembled. This additional capacity
amounts to some 26,962 MW which, when added to the existing capacity, makes
a total generating capacity in 1990 of some 48,329 MW.
System Load Factor
A utility system load factor represents the percentage of
time the equipment of a utility is operated at capacity. For the eight
utilities in the 17 county region, the system load factor averaged 0.55
for the years 1969 and 1970. The average load factor for the fifty largest
electric utilities in the nation for the same period was 0.60. There are
two reasons for the poor performance of the region utilities. The main
reason is the age of the equipment, primarily in the Con Edison and Public
Service inventories. The other reason is the extreme peaks experienced
in regional demand, particularly in the summer periods,, which require
additional standby equipment. A gradual improvement in the load factor for
the regional utilities is expected as the peaking factors are moderated and
new equipment is built. Therefore, a 1990 system load factor of 0.60 for
the region's utilities was used.
179
-------
Figure 11-21
INSTALLED CAPACITY FOR REGION'S POWER PLANTS
Inside 17 County Area
Outside 17 County Area
1969 Existing Capacity
Con Ed.
PSE5G
Lilco
Conn. L§P
UN. Ilium.
JCPSL
Hart Elec.
Orange 5 Rock
1980 Proposed Additions
Con. Ed
PSESG
Lilco
Conn L$P
Un. Ilium.
JCP&L
Hart Elec.
Orange § Rock
Fossil Nuclear
7,565 275
3, 806
800
334
746
468
54
518 •
14,291 275
1 Capacity
2,578 7,068
880
-
-
-
-
-
-
3,458 7,068
Hydro Peak
199
507
50*
100
39
-
-
-
895
636
1,035
313
-
-
129 366
-
129 2,404
Fossil
-
1,493
1,188
657
135
276
632
-
4,381 •
480
-
-
400
400
-
1,200
-
2,480
Nuclear
-
-
-
-
-
530
-
-
530
210
3,888
800
130
-
2,000
130
-
7,158
Hydro
-
165
-
122
-
165
10
44
506
4,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4,000
Peak
-
180
120*
115
-
-
74
-
489
-
-
56
-
-
155
-
54
265
Summary
Inside 17 County Area
Outside 17 County Area Total
1969
Proposed
1980 Total
15,461
13,059
28,520
5,906
13,903
19,809
21,367
26,962
48,329
*Estimated
Units are megawatts.
180
-------
Projection of Regional Energy Demand
The energy consumption in 1969 for the area was used to provide
a baseline estimate of energy demand for the region. The sales
to customers in the region amounted to some 85,691 x 10 Kwh. Adding 5%
for transmission losses,these utilities generated some 89,975 x 10 Kwh in
1969. Using an annual compounded growth in energy demand of 5% the 1990
energy demand becomes 238,000 x 10 Kwh. This compares with the Tri-State
Transportation Commission estimate of 200,000 x 10 Kwh in 1985. A compar-
ative figure may be calculated from the total installed capacity and system
load factor as follows:
net generation = installed capacity x load factor x annual
hours
NG = 48,329 x 103 x (0.60) x 8760
= 254,000 x 106 Kwh
There is a reasonable agreement among these three estimates; therefore
the 1990 baseline energy demand for the eight utilities in the region was
set as follows:
Consolidated Edison - 31,810 x 10 Kwh
Public Service - 24,800 x 10 Kwh
Long Is. Lighting - 9,450 x 106 Kwh
Conn. Power § Light - 7,550 x 1.0 Kwh
United Illuminating - 3,950 x 10 Kwh
N. J. Power § Light - 5,650 x 106 Kwh
Hartford Electric - 4,280 x 106 Kwh
Orange g Rockland _ ^^ x 1Q6
Utility
181
-------
Determination of Total Energy Generated
Using the plant capacities, the annual hours of operation
and the system load factor, determination of the total energy produced by
each utility was obtained for the particular duties assigned to each of
its units. This number was then compared to the projected energy demand
calculated above. Any differences between the two numbers were rectified
by successive iterations using revised duty assignments and hours allowing
for exports or imports of power and removal of aging equipment from
service. Basically, the projection method worked well. There seemed to
be adequate capacity in the major utilities nearest to the Meadowlands.
Some of Con Edison's oldest equipment was assumed to shift from high service
power generation to low pressure steam generation following a pattern pre-
sently used by the system. A major export of power from New Jersey Power and
Light to Public Service provided a much needed balance of capacity for
these two systems which already are highly integrated. There was a
significant under capacity in some of the smaller utilities in the outer
regions. No attempt was made to cover these shortages since these utilities
are entirely in Zone 4 and additional capacity is unlikely to constitute
significant emission sources.
Determining Total BTU Expended
Having allocated the total energy demand to the individual
plants in 1990, the scope was narrowed from the total utility system to
fuel. These are the only power plants that are air pollution sources in the
study area. To determine the total heat consumed by each power plant as shown
in Figure 11-22 the plant heat rates were used; these, within fairly close
182
-------
Figure 11-22
Point Source Power and Incineration Assumptions
Source ID
Incinerators
201
202
203
204
205*
206*
207*
208*
209*
, 210*
211*
212*
213*
County
Richmond
Bronx
Queens
Brooklyn
Fairfield, Conn.
Passaic
Monmouth
Morris
Middlesex
Union
Nassau
Incineration (tons/ day)
5000
3200
5000
6000
985
800
500.
500
600
600
810
Westchester (north) 430
Westchester (south) 1000
Power Plants
Source ID
: 9
27
28
29
54
86
106
107
110
120
121
122
123
County
Bergen
Hudson
Hudson
Hudson
Essex
Union
Middlesex
Middlesex
Middlesex
Bronx
Queens
Queens
Richmond
Load (1012 BTU)
heat input/year
36
13
60
31
8
29
16
4
50
6
86
56
30
Fuel Assigned
Coal Gas
R-oil
Coal Gas
R-oil
R-oil
R-oil
Coal Gas
Coal Gas
R-oil
R-oil
R-oil
** D-oil
** D-oil
Note: All power plant load estimates have been rounded; only fossil fuel
estimates are included.
* These are hypothetical locations at county population centers; all other
sites are proposed or under construction.
Fuel Abbreviations: R-oil: Residual oil
D-oil: Distillate oil
N-gas: Natural gas
** Denotes major fuel shift, generally from coal to coal gas, or to a second
fuel currently being used.
183
-------
Figure 11-22 Cont'd
Power Plants
Source ID
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
County
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Manhattan
Brooklyn
Nassau
Queens
Nassau
Rock land
Load (1012 BTU)
heat input/year
88
62
2
8
14
8
4
8
15
5
15
31
Fairfield, Conn. 20
Fairfield, Conn. 31
Westchester 6
Fairfield, Conn. 24
Fairfield, Conn. 7
Fairfield, Conn. 40
Fairfield, Conn. 6
Rock land
Queens
Brooklyn
Union
Middlesex
Essex
Burlington
Middlesex
Nassau
Nassau
Rock land
49
79
Fuel Assigned
D-oil
U-oil
R-oil
U-oil
U-oil
** U-oil ;
U-oil
U-oil
** R-oil
U-oil
R-oil
** Coal Gas
** Coal Gas
** Coal Gas
U-oil
** Coal Gas
** Coal Gas
R-oil
R-oil
U-oil
U-oil
3 (Turbine) N-Gas
43
48
R-oil
R-oil
3 (Turbine) N-Gas
1 (Turbine) N-Gas
2 (Turbine) N-Gas
2 (Turbine) N-Gas
1 (Turbine) N-Gas
1 (Turbine) N-Gas
Fairfield, Conn. 22
** Coal Gas
Fuel Abbreviations:
R-oil : Residual oil
U-oil : Uistillate oil
N-gas : Natural gas
** denotes major fuel shift, generally from coal to coal gas, or to a
second fuel currently being used.
184
-------
limits, are a function of plant age (actually a function of the year con-
structed). Some of Con Edison's oldest equipment may have heat rates as
high as 14,000 BTU per kilowatt hour. The newest plants may have heat
rates as low as 9000 BTU per Kwh.
Determination of Power Plant Emission
With the total heat requirement for each plant known,assign-
ment was made of the particular fuel to be used. Knowing the average heat
content of each fuel, the quantities of fuel consumed at each plant could
be determined. It was assumed that the fuels currently burned would con-
tinue to be burned in 1990, except for complete switching from coal to coal
gas, or to oil if both coal and oil were currently used. The 1990 emission
factors in Figure 1-30 were then used to calculate emissions.
For existing power plants the 1969 stack parameters were
used unchanged for 1990; for new plants default parameters (as shown in
Figure 11-20) were used based upon a plant currently under construction.
Since it was not possible to contact the utilities directly for design infor-
mation, no better estimates of stack data could be made.
Comparison of Emissions with Emission Control Regulations
Each of the power plants was tested against the applicable
N.Y.C. and Connecticut regulations as shown in Figure 11-23. Twelve of
the power plants failed at least one regulation and five failed to meet the
regulations for both SO- and NO ^.
As discussed in an earlier section no definitive conclusions
could be made about the validity of these findings because of the inade-
quacy of the information used. Capacity, fuel use, emission factors,
schedule of operations, and stack parameters all enter into the calculation
185
-------
Figure 11-23
Summary of Tests against Emission Regulations
Source
120
121
122
123
124
125
127
128
131
142
215
216
Following Pollutant(s)
Failed Test
S00, NO
7 v
SO^, NOA
so:: NojJ
NO '
SO^ NO v
/ v
S07 NOA
2 Y
NO 7 A
NOA
x
NOA
x
Particulates
NO
NO
X
Significant *
SO NO
NOV' X
X
NOV
x
NOA
x
Notes: all but no. 142 are N.Y.C. power plants subject to fuel burning
regulations; no. 142 is a Connecticut power plant subject to a
fuel burning regulation.
* For these sources and pollutants, the wide margin of error
possible in determining allowable emissions is probably not
sufficient to explain the actual pollutant levels calculated.
Test for N.Y.C. NOy and S0~ is summarized as follows:
actual emissions <(constant) x (diameter) x (exit velocity)
x (hours of operation)
with a different constant for each pollutant.
Test for Conn, particulates is summarized as follows:
actual emissions< (hours of operation) x (allowable
emissions per hour) where allowable read from table
as a function of the BTU rating of the boiler.
186
-------
of emissions and allowable emissions; all of these parameters were determ-
ined by different means with different assumptions, based upon the available
information. The equations for allowable emissions in N.Y.C. for SO- and
NO^ are a function of stack diameter, exit gas velocity, and hours of
operation. When the same amount of fuel was assumed to be burned over a
full year of operation (base load) rather than some shorter period, and
with design rather than current exit gas velocities, the allowable emission
rates increased an average of 400%. However, even under these assumptions,
four N.Y.C. power plants as shown in Figure 11-23 still failed to meet one
or more regulations. Although the violations cannot be quantified it can
be determined from the analysis that these four cases are significant emitters
with respect to emission limitations and therefore need further study.
Discussion of Detailed Projection Approach
The approach used in this study relied heavily on extracting
relationships from the operation of existing plants in the area and using
these relationships with only minor modification to estimate 1990 emissions.
Since the present energy crisis is apt to introduce a great deal of change
in the manner that electric power is generated and consumed in 1990, this
type of projection has obvious weaknesses. It was not the study team's first
choice for an approach to determining 1990 power plant 'emissions.
The preferred approach would have been to obtain certain
protective data directly from the seven major utilities serving the area.
(The 17 County - Tri-State area). Much of the data needed is prepared
by these utilities on a regular basis. This information is used to explain
the companies' operation to their stockholders,to support bonding requests
187
-------
and to support applications for licensing before the Federal Power
Commission, the AEC and others.
The work to be done would have included the following:
Step 1 - Establish existing power plant inventory - This was
done under the current point source summary (Figure II-3). Some additional
statistics such as total energy produced per year per KW of installed
capacity, (use factor), plant age, etc. are available from other sources.
Step 2 - Determine location, size and fueling characteristics
for new and planned plants. - Much of this is available and has already
been extrapolated to 1980. The estimates of the separate utilities for
new plant construction between 1980 and 1990 would be a useful addition,
Step 5 - Projection of peak demand (KW) load factor, and
total energy demand for 1990 - This is where the official projection of peak
demand would permit the specification of the gap in .capacity above that of the
existing plus proposed future plants. This gap will have to be filled with
hypothetical installations. The total annual energy demand would permit the
determination (albeit with several limiting assumptions) of the total energy
produced by each plant. This is a better index of emissions than installed
capacity. The curves for an average, peak and minimum day would allow
differentiation between the three cases normally specified.. Projections
should cover the entire area serviced by each utility and not just those parts
that are in the study area. All seven utilities should be canvassed. The
contributions of Con Edison and N.J. Public Service alone are not enough
because their share of the region's energy supply will diminish while those
of the other utilities will increase between now and 1990.
Step 4 - The disposition of existing old plants must be
determined - The assumption that plants older than 25 years will be
188
-------
dismantled is not consistent with current status. Both Con Edison and
Public Service have several plants over fifty years old that are still
heavily used. The utilities themselves would be better able to estimate
the 1990 disposition of the older plants still in service.
Step 5 - Rules for System Operation - The projected 1990
capacity must be matched against anticipated demands to determine the
usage of each plant in the system as in the approach followed. New nuclear
capacity will generally be assigned to base load duty (more than 4000 hours
per year of operation). Gas turbines and pumped storage plants will
usually be assigned to intermediate and/or intermittent duty (2000-4000
hours per year operation).
Step 6 - Determine 1990 Emissions - Having assigned the total
demand to the individual generating units, it would then be possible to narrow
the scope to only those fossil fuel plants located in the study area, as in
the approach followed. Knowing the hours of operation at rated capacity and
the amount and types of fuels being used as contemplated for use, the 1990
emissions can be determined by employing the emission factors determined
previously.
3.2.3 Refuse Incineration
A number of factors combine to make central station refuse incinera-
tion a larger factor in future solid waste management in the region.
Among these are increased populations and a decrease in open space
suitable for landfilling operation; the closing down of smaller resi-
dential and commercial incinerators for air pollution control reasons
and the resultant increase in solid waste quantities; and the rapidly
emerging technologies in waste heat utilization and air pollution control
189
-------
relative to these facilities. Competing with refuse incineration will be
new concepts of materials utilization and recycling which are currently
receiving a large share of the Federal solid waste research and development
funds. Implicit in the approach used in this study is the hypothesis that
all wastes produced in the region will be disposed of in the region. The
current interest in exporting solid waste materials from the densely popu-
lated suburban and exurban rings is a temporary expediency and will most likely
not stand the reaction which can be expected from these outlying communities.
Study Basis
The basic political unit for handling the solid waste manage-
ment problem will be the county. The states of New York and New Jersey
have taken official positions supporting the county-wide approach, and
both have programs of financial support for studies of county-wide solid
waste management systems. An exception to this is New York City where
refuse quantities may be moved interborough for disposal purposes.
Another exception is. likely to be the Meadowlands district where the
Development Commission seeks to find an alternate solution for disposal of
wastes from large parts of Bergen, Hudson and Essex Counties.
Population Projections
Population estimates were used as a base in the projection as
shown in Figure 11-24. For the New York State and Connecticut counties,
population estimates of the Tri-State Transportation Commission were used. These
were prepared for 1985. For the New Jersey counties, population estimates
were taken from the State-Wide Solid Waste Management Plans and are pro-
jections for 1987.
190
-------
Figure 11-24
DETERMINATION OF INCINERATION
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bronx
Brooklyn
Richmond
Manhattan
Queens
Nassau
Rockland
Westchester
Fairfield, Conn.
Bridgeport, Conn.
10 People
Population
1114
1021
613
884
758
657
604
462
682
1531
2600
340
1632
1872
1368
. 2814
1211
435
350
Incineration
50
75
75
50
25
25
25
25
50
75
75
50
75
75
50
25
50
25
75
Tons/day Incineration amounts
Demand
2890
2690
1750
970
700
590
930
495
1055
4310
7400
635
4760
5260
2560
214
2275
407
985
Existing
-
-
324
-
-
-
-
-
-
300
1355
-
1650
590
1750
-
845
-
-
Proposed
"j
y 6000
J
-
-
-
-
-
-
3200
6000
5000
-
5000
-
-
-
-
-
Additional
250
300
180
970
700
590
930
495
1055
\ o
J
810
214
1930
407
985
Notes: Population estimates for New Jersey are 1987 State-wide Solid Waste Disposal.Plan; for New York
and Connecticut, 1985 Tri-State.
Solid waste estimate used to determine incineration amount based on State-wide plan for New Jersey
and 7.5 ff/capita/day for New York and Connecticut.
Proposed include Meadowlands and N.Y.C. proposed capacity.
-------
Refuse Quantities
Refuse quantities for the New Jersey counties were also taken
from the State-Wide Plan and include domestic, commercial and industrial
wastes but exclude agricultural wastes. For the New York and Connecticut
areas an average present per capita waste generation rate of 5#/day was used;
a compounded growth rate of 2% per year for twenty years was also used to
obtain 1990 refuse generation rates.
Waste Recycling
A significant increase in material recycling activities is
anticipated by 1990. Materials that can conceivably be recycled include
glass, various ferrous and non-ferrous metals and paper. Together these
components account for approximately half of the total weight of whole
mixed refuse. It is not logical to assume that markets for all of this
potentially recyclable materials can be created, nor even that all these
components can be economically separated in an uncontaminated condition.
Therefore a recycle factor of 25% of the total refuse generated has been
used and applied to all counties.
Currently, less than 10% of the region's refuse is inciner-
ated. This is due to several factors.
1. Up to now, there has been sufficient landfill area for
disposal of refuse at a cost significantly less than incineration in most
parts of the region.
2. Current incinerators are large emitters of particulates
and are found objectionable by the surrounding population.
The situation for 1990 is estimated to be such that the
above two factors will not be applicable. First, little area will remain
192
-------
available for landfill in most counties. The Meadowlands itself, the last
large area available for landfilling, is seeking to halt the present
dumping operations in favor of large incinerators. Second, advances have
been made in electrostatic precipitator, high energy scrubber and other
air pollution control device technology that will enable achievement of
significantly reduced emissions from municipal incinerators. Offsetting
those factors that tend to increase the volume of refuse incinerated will
be the increase in material recycling.
Refuse Quantities Incinerated
The basis for determining the split between sanitary landfill
and incineration in central stations was population density in the various
counties in 1990. The higher the population density, the less land avail-
able for landfilling and the higher the percentage of refuse incinerated.
For population densities greater than 5000 persons per square mile it was
assumed that virtually all materials not recycled are incinerated. This
means that, with recycled materials removed, 75% of the refuse generated
in these counties will be incinerated. For those counties with 1990 popu-
lation densities between 2500-5000 persons per square mile, an estimated 50%
of the refuse generated will be incinerated; for densities less than 2500
only 25% will be incinerated. These quantities incinerated in each county
are recorded in Figure 11-24.
Existing and Proposed Incinerators
All existing incinerators are included in the 1990 projection.
This assumes that old incinerators are abandoned and replaced at the same
location by new units of the same capacity and same operating parameters.
New proposed incinerators for the region have also been included at the
193
-------
locations and capacities proposed by their sponsors. The proposed Meadowlands
incinerator was figured at 6000 tons/day and will service areas in Bergen,
Hudson and Essex County as proposed byrthe Meadowlands Commission.
Additional Incineration Capacity
The existing and proposed capacity was subtracted from the total refuse
incinerated and the balance recorded in Figure 11-24. This additional amount
of refuse to be incinerated was allocated as follows: Central county in-
cinerators of at least 500 tons per day were located at the county center
of population. These will service an area of about 200 square miles (the
area of a circle with a radius of about 15 miles centered on the centroid
of the county). This will insure a round trip haul from the furthest
collection route to the site of the incinerator of about one hour. Addition-
al central incinerators were located in counties where one unit cannot
serve widely spaced population centers. The refuse per day for these new
incinerators is shown in Figure 11-22.
194
-------
3.3 Background Line Source Emission Inventory
Unlike the background point source emission inventory no elaborate
projection methodology was needed for the line sources. Information was
obtained from the New Jersey Department of Transportation for 1990 vehicle
counts by links in exactly the same form as the 1969 vehicle counts. Further-
more, the inventory was more extensive and fewer estimates were necessary.
Figure 11-10 shows all of the links for which vehicle counts were determined.
Figure II-8 shows the actual vehicle counts used for 1-90. In a number of
cases the New Jersey Department of Transportation estimates were for earlier
years -- 1980, 1985 and 1987. These counts were extrapolated to 1990 accord-
ing to rules set up in accordance with a balanced network for adjacent links.
accordance with a balanced network for adjacent links.
In consultation with the Hackensack Meadowlands Commission road
types A, B, and C were assigned to the new links. There was no evidence
that the road types developed for the 1969 links warranted changes for
1990. The same percentages for vehicle mix were carried forward to 1990
as well, as the result of consultation with the Hackensack Meadowlands
Commission. Using the 1990 vehicle counts shown in Figure II-8, the
1990 emission factors in Figure 1-30, and the percentage distribution by
road type shown in Figure I1-8, emissions were determined for each link.
These are summarized in Figure I1-9. No significant variation was assumed
by season as in 1969 and, therefore, the same emissions were used for the
summer and winter seasons. Stack height and plume rise of zero were assumed
as with the current inventory.
195
-------
3.4 Background Area Source Emission Inventory
The requirements for the background area source emission inventory
were slightly different from the current area source inventory. First
of all, a general but representative background inventory for all sources
outsi.de the Meadowlands excluding point and line sources was desired. As
with the current inventory the most consistent data base for analysis was
the county, .
Unlike the current inventory the area source calculations do not
represent the residual of total fuel use and emissions less point sources.
In the case of the current inventory the base parameter for fuel burning
was,generally,actual fuel use by county; the known point source fuel use was
subtracted from the known total fuel use to generate a residual area source
fuel use. For 1990, however, the base parameter is generally square feet
of residential and non-residential land use. The amount of square footage
associated with the point sources is relatively small compared to the
county totals of square footage. This is not surprising since, in general,
the major point sources are intensive users of land in terms of their fuel
use and emissions. They are most often power plants, incinerators, large
process sources or large users of fuel for process heat. Accordingly,
it was assumed that the error introduced by not subtracting the point source
square footage from total square footage would be negligible.
For validation with the current area source inventory, the concern was
with air quality at a number of locations throughout the 17-county region;
however, for 1990, the concern was with air quality only in a very small
portion of the region: the Meadowlands. Because variations in the area
source inventory are not as significant in this case, the background inven-
196
-------
tory (1990) did not have to be as detailed as the current one (1969). The
available information for 1990 influenced the procedures for determining
the 1990 inventory. This information consisted of the current emission
inventories, Tri-State Transportation planning data, New Jersey Department
of Transportation highway data, the 1975 Implementation Plans for New
Jersey and New York, certain regional fuel projections, and engineering
judgment for the remainder of the information required.
In summary, the purpose of the inventory and the availability of the
information to determine the inventory governed the manner in which the
approach embodied in the activity indices shown in Figures 1-23 and 1-24
could be put into .effect.
3.4.1 Determination of Fuel Burning Emissions
Figure 11-25 shows the steps by which the procedures in Figure 1-23
were carried out for the background area source inventory. The first
step was to determine the actual space heating demand by county for the
portion of the Tri-State planning region coterminous with the 17-county
area. Since fuel information was available for only New Jersey for 1969,
the "consistent data base" was the 1965 N.Y. Abatement Region inventory.
From the fuel data in this inventory, total BTUs were determined separa-
tely for (i) New Jersey, (ii) New York City, and (iii) the remainder of New
York State. Then, the percent space heating from the 1965 and 1969 inventories,
as shown in Figure 11-25, was applied to calculate the BTUs used for space heat-
ing alone. Tri-State Transportation Commission 1963 floor space data on
residential and non-residential land uses was then used to determine
indices of BTUs per square foot. It was assumed that residential fuel
use was comparable to the Tri-State residential square foot figures and
197
-------
Figure H-25
Background Area Source Assumptions
Fuel Demand and Use
A. Space Heating Demand
1. Determine total BTU from 1965 data
2. Apply percent space heating
(1965 § 1969)
Resid. Indust. Commerc.
NT 90 2^ 100
N.Y.C. 85 50 100
N.Y. State 85 25 100
3. Calculate BTU for space heating
4. Determine BTU/sq.ft. using Tri-Stat
1963 floor space data.
io3
BTU/sq.ft.
Resid. Non-Resid.
N.J. 214 203
N.Y.C. 125 150
N.Y. State 123 134
N.J. (1969) 188
Meadowlands 90 120
Actual used 125 150
B. Percent Fuel for Space Heating
1. Determine existing weighted average
Resid. Non-Resid.
N.J. 90 54
N.Y.C. 85 86
N.Y. State 85 78
2. Assume Resid. = 90%
3. For non-resid. assume interpolate
between present percent and implied
percent if actual non-space heating
fuel amount held constant.
N I NYC NY State
Tri-State
increase in
floor space
('63- '85) 160% 125% 160%
present 54 86 78
implied 65 91 85
interpolated 59 91 83
5 adjusted.
C. Propensity to Use Fuels
1. Determine percent oil § gas
from 1969 data for N.J. and
1965 data for N.Y.
2. Adjust gas up 5% for N.Y.C.
Residential
oil gas
N.J. 65 35
N.Y.C. 75 25
N.Y. State 75 25
Non-Residential
oil gas
N.J. 75 25
NYC 7^ ?£,
N.Y. State 60 40
-------
Figure 11-25 contd.
Background Area Source Assumptions
Emission Factors
Non-Residential
Fuel Burning
Oil - New Jersey
New York
Gas - New Jersey
New York
Particulates
22.0
22.0
18.0
18.0
80,
20*
25*
0.6
0.6
CO
0.2
0.2
8.0*
20.0*
HC
3.0
3.0
30.0*
15.0*
NOX
20.0*
22.0*'
100.0*
35.0*
Units
lb/1000 gal
lb/1000 gal
lb/106cu.ft.
*These weighted average emission fact'ors were derived as follows:
For oil, averaging of the use of residual and distillate oil by industrial
and commercial users. From 1965 Abatement Report it was determined that
for New Jersey 60% of the use is industrial; for New York 20%; there is a
shift towards residual - 80% of the industrial oil was residual, 60% of the
commercial, except for New York City.
For gas, averaging of industrial and commercial users. New Jersey has 70%
of use industrial, while New York has only 30%.
Those factors not marked '*' and all residential factors are unchanged
from those in Figure 1-30.
All non-fuel burning factors are unchanged from those in Figure 25 except
for aircraft emissions; a weighted average was made which resulted in ratios
of 1990 to 1969 factors of 1.0 for particulates and S0_, 0.25 for CO and HC,
and 0.7 for N0-
199
-------
that the combination of commercial and industrial fuel use was comparable
to the Tri-State non-residential square foot figures.
As can be seen in Figure 11-25, significant variation was found in
the BTU per square foot indices. Variation in the non-residential category
can be explained by differences in the percent of commercial vs. industrial
square foot land use and the intensity of use. However, there appears no
clear explanation for the differences in the residential category. The
actual values decided upon, taking into account the Meadowlands design
figures, were much closer to the New York figures than the New Jersey ones.
It is felt that efficiencies in heating and the tendency towards multiple
family units will make this assumption bear out. However, this is a
parameter that one may wish to vary in the future to better reflect the
historical New Jersey information. The variation found in this index
also explains the different numbers for BTUs per square foot shown in
Figure 1-29 for the inventory as a whole.
The second step in calculating fuel burning emissions was to estimate
the percentage of fuel that would be used for space heating in 1990. Because
all of the fuel projections were based upon square foot heating intensity,
the factor that divides space heating from process heat demand becomes an
extremely important multiplier. Unfortunately, as pointed out previously,
this is an area where there is not sufficient information to make accurate
judgments. First, a weighted average was determined for the existing percent
space heating for non-residential land uses. This involved combining the
commercial and industrial figures from the 1965 inventory as shown in
Figure 11-25.
The current New Jersey average residential figures was carried forward
to 1990 for all portions of the region. This assumes that in the New York
200
-------
portion of the region more cooking and heating will be done by electricity
in the future than at present. However, it should be pointed out that there
are no clear trends one way or the other and that the figure of 90% is, at
best, a guess based on current information.
Assumptions also had to be made for the non-residential percent space
heating. At the two ends of the spectrum are (i) the use of the present percent
space heating carried forward to 1990, and (ii) the estimate that total process
heat would remain constant, thereby generating a new implied percentage.
Lacking any further information, it was decided to interpolate a value
midway between the values that would be derived from these two assumptions.
The Tri-State data on the increase in floor space from 1963 to 1985 gave
an index of the increase in space heating demand, assuming the same demand
per square foot. From this an implied space heating percent was derived
which assumed the constant value for process heat; finally, as shown in
Figure 11-25, the adjusted percent space heating values were determined.
The third step was to estimate 1990 propensity to use different fuels.
Because of the uncertain nature of fuel shifts in this region from year
to year and with no clear trends, a conservative approach was taken: most
source categories were assumed to use the same percentages of fuels in 1990
as at the present time. The only exception to this was an adjustment upward
in the percent using gas for New York City because of a concerted effort
to bring natural gas into this area. Similar suggestions have been put
forth as to trends for eastern portions of northern New Jersey but discussions
with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection indicated that
this may not be realistic.
The 1969 fuel data for New Jersey and 1965 data for New York were used
to determine the current percentage use of oil and gas for residential and
201
-------
non-residential heating. The percentages as adjusted for use with the 1990
data are shown in Figure 11-25. Because the different fuels vary widely in
their emission factors, this is another portion of the inventory that may
require significant change in the future as more information becomes avail-
able.
Using the 1985 Tri-State square foot data for residential and non-
residential land use by county, the BTU per square foot values, the percent
fuel for space heating, and the propensities to use various fuels, the amount
of fuel for each county was calculated. The emission factors for 1990 fuel
burning as presented in Figure 1-30 are broken down into the categories of
residential, commercial and industrial. It was necessary to perform a
weighted average of the commercial and industrial factors, to produce a
non-residential fuel burning factor for 1990. The procedures and calcula-
tions are shown in Figure 11-25. Emission factors were applied to the fuel
data to produce the area source fuel emissions as shown in Figure 11-26.
3.4.2 Determination of Non-Fuel Emissions
Less information was available to determine non-fuel emissions than
fuel emissions. In general, the same categories were used for 1990 as
had been used in 1969. These are summarized in Figure 1-24 together with
the activity indices necessary for determining the emissions. Independent
projections were made of area source incineration and power as described
in the section on the background point source inventory. Figure 11-27
shows for each county the number of tons per day of refuse incineration
and the number of BTUs heat input from gas turbines.
Hydrocarbon emissions from evaporative losses are an extremely
important part of the 1990 inventory. Little information is known on how
202
-------
Figure 11-26
Area Source Fuel Emissions
1990 for New Jersey
10 pounds/year
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Union
Particulates
10
10
7
7
6
5
5
6
S09
8
8
6
5
5
4
4
5
CO
1
1
-
1
1
-
-
-
HC
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
NOY
9
9
7
6
5
5
5
7
NOTE: Due to aggregation and rounding procedures, this table is presented
only for report summary purposes.
203
-------
Figure 11-27
Area Source Power and Incineration Assumptions
Counties/ Bo roughs
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bronx
Brooklyn
Richmond
Manhattan
Queens
Nassau
Rock land
Westchester
Incinerations [tons/day of refuse)
250
300
180
370
200
90
130
495
455
500
1000
100
600
700
.
215
-
12
Gas Turbines (10 BTU heat input/year)
) 12.7 *
)
)
1.8
-
-
-
-
*
) 1.8
)
)
)
)
1.5
-
-
Note: * Gas turbine heat input were divided up equally for those counties served by a single utility;
12
1.8 x 10 BTU were divided up equally for the fiv
BTU for Bergen, Essex, Hudson, and Union counties.
1.8 x 10 BTU were divided up equally for the five boroughs of New York City, and 12.7 x 1012
-------
best to characterize this source since it had not been heavily emphasized
in any of the current emission inventories. Evaporation emissions were
included, however, in the 1969 data. For 1990 Tri-State population esti-
mates by county for 1985 and an emission factor per capita as supplied by
EPA were used to calculate the hydrocarbon emissions. Very high numbers
were generated by this process, aggregating some 250,000 tons per year for
the study area and comprising nearly 50% of all hydrocarbon emissions.
Whenever more specific information becomes available on evaporation emis-
sions it should be incorporated into the inventory; any analysis of hydro-
carbon air quality should recognize the importance of this source and the
lack of definitive information on emission levels.
Motor vehicle emissions were estimated in two ways, as shown in Figure H-28
New Jersey Dept. of Transportation vehicle-mile data by county were used directly
in conjunction with estimates of vehicle mix and the 1990 emission factors.
A more involved process was used for the counties in New York State. First
of all information on population by county and gasoline consumption by
county from the 1965 inventory were used to determine the gallons per capita
on a county basis. This was combined with the New Jersey vehicle-mile per
capita data for 1990, derived from the 1985 population estimates, to produce
the number of miles per gallon assumed for each county in New Jersey.
These were categorized and assumptions made as to the similarity of
this parameter for various counties in New York. These assumed miles per
gallon for the New York counties were multiplied times the gallons per
capita to yield vehicle miles per capita. Finally, using the 1985 population
estimates vehicle miles per county were derived. A more straightforward
procedure would have involved the use of the Tri-State Transportation Com-
mission estimates on vehicle mile use per square mile. However, this
205
-------
Figure 11-28
Derivation of Area Source Transportation Emissions
10
New Jersey counties 1965 Population
10
1965 fuel
consumption 1965 galIons/capita
column § procedure:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
?.
8.
9.
New
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
York counties
column 5 procedure
Bronx
Brooklyn
Richmond
Manhattan
Queens
Nassau
R"ckland
Westch ester
1
0.85
0.95
0.60
0.55
0.44
0.30
0.45
0.15
0.55
45
65
0.25
1.70
2.00
1.40
0.20
0.85
360
340
165
170
140
120
140
50
215
195
300
45
340
570
545
75
340
3 = 2/1
425
360
275
310
320
390
310
330
390
3 = 2/1
135
115
180
200
285
390
375
400
106
1985 Population
4
1.223
0.958
0.622
0.994
0.749
0.631
0.519
0.528
0.562
io9
1990 veh-mi/yr
5
7.02
4.27
1.87
6.18
5.82
5.38
3.35
3.42
3.49
85' -90' veh
6 = 5 /
5750
4460
3000
6230
7770
8520
6470
6300
6200
mi/capita
4
1.531
2.600
0.340
1.632
1.872
1.368
0.281
1.211
6X4
2.07
2.99
0.61
3.26
5.34
8.00
2.39
9.69
6 = 3X7
1350
1150
1800
2000
2850
5850
8500
8000
7 = 6/3
15 (15)
12 (10)
11 (10)
20 (20)
24 (25)
22 (20)
21 (20)
19 (20)
16 (IS)
7 = Estimate
(10)
(10)
(10)
(10)
(10)
(15)
(22.5)
(20)
Sources: 1965 NY Abatement Region report
1985 Tri-State population estimates
1990 NJDOT veh-mi estimate
-------
information was not available to the study at the time the specific analysis
was undertaken.
Estimates of 1990 aircraft emissions were made based upon current
emission levels and regionwide projections in aircraft use. Unfortunately,
aircraft use projections have varied widely in the last few years and there
are no consistent trends. An average doubling of aircraft use per county for
the entire region was assumed as a reasonable estimate. Using current emis-
sion levels and emission factors, and the ratio of 1990 to 1969 emission
factors derived from Figure 1-30, 1990 emissions were calculated.
The remaining nom-fuel burning emissions consist of area process
sources, other transportation sources, and gasoline marketing. In each
case the 1970 Implementation Plan inventories and the 1975 inventory trends
were used to calculate emissions for 1990. No additional information was
available to adjust the current emission levels to some better estimate of
the 1990 levels.
3.4.3 Summary of Inventory
Figure 11-29 shows the total area source non-fuel emissions for the
New Jersey counties for 1990 and Figure 11-30 shows the combined fuel
burning and non-fuel burning emissions for the entire study area in the
units for input to the model. The same assumptions as to degree days and
percent space heating as used in the 1969 inventory were used for the back-
ground inventory. The only exception involved the use of weighted average
percent space heating for the non-residential category. The county emis-
sion densities were allocated to the 16 and 8 km grid cells shown in Figure
11-14 according to the same procedures used with the current inventory.
207
-------
Figure 11-29
Area Source Non-Fuel Emissions
1990 for New Jersey
10 pounds/ year
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Particulates
13
8
2
6
6
7
3
4
3
SO,,
z
8
3
3
11
8
4
1
2
3
CO
97
59
23
74
70
68
38
44
42
HC
58
46
25
40
36
31
22
25
28
NO
18
10
7
13
13
11
6
7
9
NOTE: Due to aggregation and rounding procedures, this table is presented
only for report summary purposes.
208
-------
FIGURE 11-30
Background Area Source Emission Inventory
10 g /m -sec
Bergen
Essex
Hudson
Middlesex
Monmouth
Morris
Passaic
Somerset
Union
Bronx
Brooklyn
Richmond
Manhattan
Queens
Nassau
Rock land
Westchester
Particulates
0.55
0.75
1.33
0.23
0.14
0.15
0.22
0.15
0.50
1.26
1.21
0.24
5.70
1.45
0.25
0.13
0.18
so2
0.37
0.48
1.16
0.27
0.14
0.09
0.17
0.10
0.42
0.89
0.85
0.20
5.07
0.49
0.18
0.08
0.13
CO
2.3
2.6
2.9
1.3
0.8
0.8
1.1
0.8
2.3
3.5
3.0
0.7
11.0
3.7
1.6
0.9
1.4
HC
1.4
2.1
3.3
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.5
1.6
7.2
11.7
3.0
15.9
5.0
1.4
0.4
0.7
NOX
0.6
0.8
1.7
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.8
1.2
1.4
0.5
6.5
1.5
0.4
0.2
0.3
Note: due to rounding, this table is presented only for report summary
purposes.
209
-------
4. 1990 LAND USE PLANS
4.1 Introduction
The major part of the study involved the application of the emission
projection methodologies to the Hackensack Meadowlands alternative land use
plans. Because one aspect of this methodology was the development and imple-
mentation of the software to transform land use activities directly into
emissions, all of the procedures described in this section parallel the
software steps involved. These software steps are accomplished for the most
part by the compute routines of the LANTRAN program described in the Appen-
dix.
Figure 11-31 shows the flow of information from activities to emissions.
The first step involves the land use figures (the zone areas and separate
points, as shown in Figures 1-19 and 1-20) with their associated activity
codes. The specific activity or land use codes used are presented in Figure
11-32.
4.1.1 Major Land Use Categories
The numerous land use categories as shown in Figures 1-18 and 1-21 were
aggregated into six major categories for purposes of analysis. These are
open space, institutional, residential, commercial, industrial and transpor-
tation as shown in Figure 11-31. Emissions from open space were considered
negligible on an annual average basis and not treated in the analysis.. Emis-
sions from institutional, residential and commercial were considered to be
only fuel use related, whereas emissions from industrial sources included
both fuel and process emissions.
211
-------
Negligible
r
Activity lndices:
i
| Density .
I Lot Coverage p
. Pupils/Classroom '
' Heat Demand
| per Unit
I % Space Heating
| Hrs. of Operation
Fuel Use
| "
• Emission Factors I
I I
I Fuel Emissions
I Process Emissions
Determine
No. of Classrooms
Land-Use Figures with Activity
Codes
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
Heating
Heating
Heating £< Process
I
Total Emissions
Non-Heating
\ \
Determine Determine
No. of D.U. No. of Sq. Ft.
\ /
Determine Heat Demand per hour
for Each Land-Use Figure to be Heated
\
Determine Fuel Use for Each Land
Use Figure
\
Determine Fuel Emissions for Each
Land- Use Figure
i
Determine Process Emissions
Each Land-Use Figure
1
Determine
No. of Sq. Ft.
.^
\
Figure 11-31 Flow of Information from Activities to Emissions
-------
Figure 11-32
Land Use Plan Activities
Category
Residential
low density (10 du/acre)
medium density (20 du/acre)
medium density (30 du/acre)
high density (50 du/acre)
high density (80 du/acre)
island resid. (50 du/acre)
parkside resid. (50 du/acre)
Commercial
business -neighborhood
business -community
business-Berry's Creek Center
hotel § highway
Institutional
primary schools
secondary schools
cultural center
special uses
Industrial
manufacturing
distribution
research
Transportation
transportation center
airport
stadium parking lot
Open Space
conservation
parks
water
commercial recreation
Code
R01
R21
R31
R32
R22
Rll
R12
Cll
C12
C31
C21
111
112
171
190
S20xx-S39xx
S42
S89
T10
T20
T30
Zll
Z12
Z20
Z31
Plan 1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
- 1A -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
IB -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Notes:
Code pertains to the land use activity codes as used with the LANTRAN
program; the above is the complete list used in the study. Four-digit
SIC codes (2000-3999) were used for manufacturing activities. Other
codes were developed for this study and do not correspond to any
published classification system. The activity indices and emission factors
used with the Meadowlands Plans are referenced to this activity code list.
213
-------
Transportation emissions were divided into several categories.
Discussions with the Meadowlands planners indicated that all highway
emissions should be treated as line sources separately from the plans.
Railroad emissions were considered negligible since most propulsion involves
electric engines. Emissions from water transportation vehicles were considered
negligible as well. The airport was handled as a non-fuel burning source
with emissions related directly to the number of flights. A further refine-
ment could have involved the specification of terminal areas as separate
fuel-burning sources, but these were considered to be negligible in the
regional scale annual average case. The parking lots for the sports stadium
were also treated as separate non-fuel burning sources of emissions related
to the number of vehicles idling at any one time.. Actual transportation cen-
ters (similar to a bus terminal) were treated like any other commercial fuel-
burning land use.
4.1.2 Determining Heating Refinements
Figure 1-21 shows that for each land use a heating requirement had to
be determined in terms of BTUs per dwelling unit, classroom or square foot.
Accordingly, as shown in Figure 11-31, it was necessary to determine the
number of classrooms, dwelling units, or square feet for the respective
categories of land use. The activity indices such as density, lot coverage,
and pupils per classroom that are a part of the conversion factors catalog
were used to convert the land use data into the number of classrooms,
dwelling units, and square feet. Once this information is known activity
indices for heat demand per unit of activity can be used to determine the heat
demand per hour for each land use figure that is to be heated.
214
-------
4.1.3 Calculating Emissions
The next step was to incorporate the fuel use information,including
the schedule, percent process heat, and fuel use propensity as shown in
Figure 1-21, into the analysis to determine the fuel used for each land use
figure, as shown on the fifth line of Figure 11-31. The final step in
determining the fuel emissions involved the incorporation of the appropri-
ate fuel emission factors.
Process emissions for each land use figure that involved industrial
sources were calculated by use of the process emission factors. Similarly,
process type emission factors for transportation, the airport, and parking
lot were used to determine the transportation related emissions. The sum-
mation of fuel and process emissions yielded the last line in Figure 11-31,
representing the total emissions for each land use figure.
The following sections describe in more detail each of the steps
required in this process.
4.2 Activities and Activity Indices
Each of the land use activities shown in the plans in Figures 1-14
through 1-17 was assigned an activity code. These are listed in Figure 11-32,
grouped according to the six land use categories shown in Figure 11-31.
There are seven possible categories of residential land use although no
more than three occur in any one plan. These are generally low, medium and
high density residual use with densities defined by the Meadowlands planners.
However, in Plan 1, the Master Plan, no distinction is made between medium
and high density; rather, the distinction is between island and riverside dev-
elopment called "island residential" and "parkside-residential", respectively.
215
-------
4.2.1 Description of the Activity Categories
The four commercial categories are distinguished by their relationship
to residential land use. Neighborhood and community business are generally
directly related to residential use whereas the Berry's Creek center is a single
large shopping complex. The fourth category (hotel and highway commercial)
contains all the separate commercial development to be found in all plans.
Institutional land use is generally reserved for primary and secondary
schools. In all cases these are directly related to the residential areas
they serve. Provision is made in the Master Plan for a Cultural Center.
Although it is coded as an institutional land use, it is generally treated
in the same manner as a distribution land use for heating purposes.
The industrial category is by far the largest in terms of percent land
area as well as emissions. It is subdivided into manufacturing, distribution,
and (in the case of the Master Plan) research parks. The manufacturing land
use category is further subdivided into four-digit SIC categories.
The transportation category is subdivided into the transportation
center (treated similarly to a distribution activity), the airport, and the
stadium parking lot; roadways were handled as separate line sources and,
therefore, not coded for use with the LANTRAN program.
Four categories of open space were identified: conservation, parks, water
and commercial recreation. None of these were thought to have significant
emission levels. However, they are important "receptors" of the air quality
calculated.
Figures 1-19 and 1-20 depict the spatial arrangements characteristic
of these various land uses for the Master Plan. Residential sources may
be large areas of single family homes with individual heating or they may
be clusters of island residential apartment towers all heated from a central
facility. Similarly, commercial establishments may be separate stores or
216
-------
hotels with individual heating systems, the large Berry's Creek shopping
center with a central system, or neighborhood stores heated by the central
residential heating system. Schools were all assumed to be built as indi-
vidual buildings; however, the amount of space involved is a function of the
residential area served.
Distribution is generally considered to be a land use zone with homo-
geneous heating requirements served by individual systems. It is, thei '-
fore, characteristic of an area-wide source. For simplicity, the cultural
center, most special uses, the transportation centers, and research activities
were assumed to behave in a similar manner as distribution. All manufacturing
activity was specified as a function of individual 10-acre lots. However,
where adjacent lots are of the same four-digit SIC this implies a large
facility of 20, 30, 40 or more .acres with a single heating system. The
airport was assumed to be an area-wide source; emissions were not allocated
to individual runways. Because of the uncertainty as to where parking lots
will be in the stadium complex, a single point source was used to represent
the idling emissions from automobiles in the parking lots.
4.2.2 Decisions Affecting Heating Demand
It became apparent that the particular ways in which each of the four
plans would be built and have their heating requirements satisfied required
a complex procedure for determining heating demand. The steps in the pro-
cedure developed are shown in Figure 11-33 for each of the four major cate-
gories of fuel-related emissions: institutional, residential, commercial
and industrial. Each of these will be discussed in detail.
217
-------
5165
N)
t—•
oo
INSTITUTIONAL
/. Indk
\
fidual
i
Determine
Sq. Ft.
\
(
2. Func
Reside
^
~tion
•>ntial
\
Determine
No. Classr'ms
1
i
««-
RESIDENTIAL
/. Indi
\
wduol
i
Determine
D.U.
i
i
Determine Heat Demand
COMMERCIAL
2. Grouped with 1. Combine with
Central Heat Resiential
\
Combine
Resid. Areas
i
Determine
D.U.
i
1
\
*~ Determine
_». Sq.Ft.
\
Determine
Heat Demand
\
i
Determine
Heat Demand
\
i
Combine Commercial
Heat Demand with
Residential
2. Indh
\
'idual
Determine
Sq.Ft.
\
i
INDUSTRIAL
/. Indiv
Non-1
\
'dual 6* 2. Multiple Loi
/lanuf. 1
Combine
Indust. Lots
1 i
i
Determine Determine
Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft.
\
i
i
Determine Heat Demand
Figure 11-33 Decisions Affecting Heating Demand
-------
Institutional
The few cases of institutional land use that were to be treated on an
individual basis (the cultural center and special uses) involve only one
step to determine the number of square feet heated as a function of the area
of the land use zone. The information required is shown in Figure 1-21.
Since the cultural center was to be treated similarly to a distribution
source, it is listed in that table under "distribution". Columns 1 and 2
in Figure 1-21 show that the percent lot coverage and the floor area ratio
are necessary to perform the calculation. The number of acres of land use,
and the percent lot coverage tell us how many square feet of the lot will
be built upon; the floor area ratio (as used here) shows how many floors will
exist in the building. Figure 11-34 shows the actual numbers assigned to the
parameters in Figure 1-21. If we read down the left-hand column until we en-
counter Example no. 1, activity code 1-71 (the code for cultural center) and
we read across to the columns labeled A-l and A-2 we see the number 40 (the
percent: lot coverage) and the number 1 (the floor area ratio).
Having determined the number of square feet assigned to the cultural
center we can multiply by the BTU per square foot to calculate the heat
demand. The appropriate number for BTUs per square foot is found in the
first column of Figure 11-34, labeled ACTV; the value is 12.5.
The majority of institutional land uses are the schools; their heat
demand is a function of the number of classrooms. The number of classrooms
is related to the number of pupils per classroom, the number of pupils per
dwelling unit, and the number of dwelling units in the residential area
which the school serves. Figure 1-21 shows that two of these parameters
(the number of dwelling units and the pupils per dwelling unit) are activity
219
-------
EXAMPLE NO. .' ' KEY-ACTIVITY
2,3 Low Density (^ ROJ,
4,5 Mid Density f~ Rll
R12
R21
R22
H31
R32
Neighborhood ( Cll
C12
C21
6 Berry's Creek C2l
2 Primary School ( 111
)
;
)
)
112
1 Cultural Center^ 1 71
T10
T20
T30
)
7 Distribution ^ S42 J
S42
9 Manufacturing ( S^5'
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S3*
S39
S39
S39
S39
SJ9
S39
S39
S39
S39
)
Figure 11-34 Plan Activity Indices
ACTIVfTY ACTIVITY NAMES
C
C31
I9U
S20J2
S2U3-5
S2U34
S2304
S2041
S2043
S*05l
S2052
S2U86
ACTV
(l8750.t/00 )
C 7500,000^
750U.OOO
1375U.OOO
4000.000
8750.000
7500.000
(^ 16.250 J
16.250
16.250'
V 16.2*0 )
C 15000,000 J
15000,000
( i2.5UOj
12,500
a.o
0.0
(^ 12.5(10 J
1?,500
( 27.500 J
27.500
27.500
27,500
27,500
27,500
27,500
27.500
27, ,500
27.500
27.500 •
27. SCO
27,500
27.500
27.500
Al
(
\^ 10.000 j
C 50.000
50,000
20,000
80.000
30,000
50.000
V^ 0.500
1.500
35.0011
(^ 35.000 J
(25.000
J
30.000
(^ 40.000 ^
4 0 . 'J 0 0
0.0
0.0
(3d .000
30.000
( 40.000
40. OOC
40.000
40.000
4 o , o o n
40.000
40.000
40,000
40.000
40.000
40.0CO
40.000
40,000
40,000
40.000
A2
1,500
0,500
1,000
. 1.000
0,500
1,000
1,000
1.000
1,000
0.750
0,450
0,200
1,000
1.C30
0.0
I), J
1.U30
1.000
1.000
l.OCO
1,000
1.000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1.000
1.000
1,000
1,000
A4
0,0
1500,000
2000.000
0.0
0,0
o.u
0, J
u,(;
O.C
0,0
O.li
0,0
0,0
0,1)
O.i)
O.o
0.0
O.u
0,0
0.0
0.0
0,1
O.C
o.o
G ,<•
-------
Figure 11-34 Cont'd I I
— .. :
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
539
S39
S39
S3-9
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
539
S39
S39
S39
S39
$39
S39
S39
539
S39
S39
S39
539
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S209B
S2295
S26A1
S2721
52015
S2S1C>
S2B18
S2H19
S2S31
S2d33
52634
S2U42
S2843
S2B44
S3'»33
S3S51
536b2
SSbb'l
S355b
53561
SS562
S 3 b 6 6
S3567
S3b73
535B1
S35Hi!
S3585
S3bb9
S3013
53635
53636
27.500
27,500
27,500
27,500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27,bOO
27,500
27,500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.50U
27, SOU
27,500
27.500
?7.5')0
27.SUO
27.500
27,500
27.5UO
27.500
27.500
27.500
27.500
27,500
27; 500
27,500
27,500
27,500
40,000
40.000
40.000
40,000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40, QUO
40.000
40 . OOU
40.000
4 0 . 0 U 11
40. OOU
40,000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40.000
40". 000
40.000
40.000
40.000
1,000 "
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,300
1,000
1,000
1,090
. . 1,000
1,000
1.000
1,000
1,000
i.aoo
1.000
1,0(10
i.ouo
1.000
i.noo
1.000
l.OOC
1. 000
1,000
l.uOO
1,000
1,000
l.OOP
1.000
1,000
l.OCO
• I..OOQ
1,000
1,000
" 0,0"
0,0
0,0
O.n
0,0
o,u
' a,1'
' '-0,n
• 0,0
0.0
0. ,
O.U
U, j
0,0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.n
n.o
0.0
o.o
O.U
0.0
O.n
U . U
0 .11
t' . 0
0.0
o.n
O.U
ii , M
t'.O
O.U
0,0
0 ,0
O.U
221
-------
Figure 11-34 Cont'd
8 Research
S39
S39
S39
S39
539
S39
539
S39
S39
539
539
539
539
S39
339
S39
S39
S39
S«9 J
539
b39
S3V
339
S39
S39
b.i9
b39
27,500
S363V
27.500
S3641
27,500
S3642
27.500
S3643
27.500
53644
27,500
S3651
27.500
53652
27.500
S3661
27,500
S3fr62
27,500
S3691
27,500
b J69i;
27,500
S36V3
27,500
Si/15
'(.1 ,500
S ^ / 1 4
i^ / & o u
S 2 H 4 \
27.500
S3' * ?
27.5UO
S 5 '-4 '.
27.5UU
s A i< (> :
i!V.50il
( ? C . I' 0 11 }
bit 41
27.5UO
S 3 6 .5 4
P 7 . 5u ij
5
-------
indices related directly to the residential area. If the school serves a
single family, low density area we would look in Figure 11-34 under the
activity code R-01 (Example No. 2). The value (10.) in the column labeled A-l
is the number of pupils per dwelling unit. Therefore, each acre of low
density land has 15 pupils assigned to the school serving that area. Since
both primary and secondary schools exist it is important to know what per-
centage of the eligible pupils go to each of the different types of schools.
If we are interested in the heat demand for a primary school, we would look
in Figure 11-34 under activity code 1-11. The column labeled A-2 contains
the number .45 which means that 45% of the school children would be going
to the primary school.
Finally, using the value in column A-l of 25 pupils per classroom we
can determine the total number of classrooms necessary in primary schools
to serve the particular residential area. If we have 100 acres of low den-
sity residential land, this would yield 1500 pupils, 45% of which is 675
primary school pupils; at 25 pupils per classroom this yields 27 classrooms.
Multiplying by the BTUs per classroom found in the first column, 15,000,
would yield the heat demand for that school.
Residential
Residential land uses have two sub-categories similar to institutional:
individual heating and heating provided by central facilities. In the case
of the individual heating (found in low-density housing) the heat demand is
a direct function of the number of dwelling units . In Figure 11-34 for Example
no. 3, under activity R-01 (low density residual), the column labeled A-l shows
10 dwelling units per acre. Multiplying this times the BTU per dwelling unit
223
-------
value of 18,750 would yield the heat demand for an acre of low-density
residential land use.
Most of the medium and high density development in the Meadowlands
Master Plan and alternative Plans 1-A and 1-B would be satisfied by central
facilities. A more complicated process is therefore required. First of all,
it is necessary to determine which residential land use zones should be
grouped together to be heated by a particular central system. The grouping
results in a total number of dwelling units to be heated, assigned to a
particular heating facility. This is accomplished by summing the acreage
of all the affected land use zones and multiplying times the dwelling units
per acre.
For instance, for island residential with a code of R-ll, Figure 11-34
Example no. 4, shows a value of 50 dwelling units per acre in column A-l.
Because the average dwelling unit size in high density development is smaller
and the efficiency of a central heating system is greater the BID per dwelling
unit value is only 7500 for this land use category. When the total heat demand
is determined it is assigned to the location of the central facility.
Commercial
Community and neighborhood shopping facilities are entirely a function
of the residential land uses they serve. In the Master Plan these are the
island and parkside residential areas. First of all, the actual square
footage of commercial development must be determined as a direct function
of the number and size of the dwelling units in the residential area; this
procedure is depicted in Figure 11-33. Neighborhood shopping with a code
of C-ll (Example no's) has a BTU per square foot demand of 16.25 as shown in
Figure 11-34. The number in the column labeled A-l tells us that 0.5% of the
224
-------
square footage of the residential development will be assigned to commercial
use; this is the number specified in the Hackensack Meadowlands zoning regulations,
But, for an island residential area with a code of R-ll, how do we deter-
mine what the total square feet of residential area is? Figure 11-34,
column A-4, gives us a value of 1500 square feet per dwelling unit. When
this is multiplied by the number of dwelling units, we obtain the'total
residential square feet. Once the heating demand in BTUs per hour is deter-
mined for this commercial use it must be added to the heat demand for the
residential area since all heating will be taken care of by the central
facility.
Separate commercial facilities such as the Berry's Creek shopping
center will be heated individually. The number of square feet is a function
of the lot coverage and the flopr area ratio. The code for Berry's Creek
(C-31) does not appear in the left column of Figure 11-34 (Example no. 6);
it is indented and the code C-21 for hotel and highway appears.in the left
column. This indicates an assumption that Berry's'Creek will be heated accord-
ing to the same parameters as hotel and highway (C-21). Column A-l gives us
the lot average, and Column A-2 the floor area ratio. Multiply the number of
square feet times the value of 16.25 BTUs per square foot yields the total
heat demand per hour. Some of the special facilities such as Berry's Creek
may consist of more than one land use zone with a central heating facility.
In this case, the procedure is similar to the island residential. The
commercial areas are combined before the activity indices are applied to the
total acreage.
.225
-------
Industrial
Most industrial land uses are handled in a similar manner to the sep-
arate commercial facility. All distribution, research, and individual
10-acre lots are heated separately. In the case of a large distribution
area this would take the form of homogeneous area-wide emissions from
numerous distribution facilities. In the case of a 10-acre manufacturing
lot this would probably mean emissions from a single facility. In Figure
11-34, columns A-l and A-2, respectively, give the percent lot coverage and floor
area ratio for Example no. 7, distribution (S-42), Example no. 8, research (S-89),
and Example no. 9, manufacturing (S-39). All four-digit SIC code manufacturing
activities are assumed to behave in a similar manner as S-39 for the purposes of
heating. This assumption was made simply because of the available information.
Where adjacent 10-acre industrial losts have the same SIC code and
are, therefore, to be combined as a single facility, the total acreage is
added together and assigned to a single central heating system, at a point.
Then the same procedures are used to calculate BTUs per hour.
Other Categories
Since no heat demand is assumed to occur for the transportation sources,
they are not involved in this part of the analysis.
4.3 Fuel Decisions
parameters are necessary to translate heat demand in BTUs per
hour into quantities of fuel used for both space heating and process heating
purposes. These are: the schedule (number of hours of operation per year),
the percent fuel used for process heat, and the percent of fuel demand satis-
fied by each of the fuels. Figure 1-21 showed that these parameters are the
same for all land uses. The actual values used are shown in Figure 11-35.
226
-------
Figure 11-35 Plan Fuel Use Allocation
KEY-ACTIVITY
ACTIVITY ACTIVITY
Residential
Commercial
•
Institutional
Transportation
Miscellaneous
Distribution
Rll
Hll
Rll
Rll
Rll
Rll
Cll
Cll
Cll
Cll
111
111
T20
T30
S42
iiC:(cU
1U O.J.
a toe , uoo
ALL --U1.TI-SE5.
S V 6 u , U d U
nl'£
9760 . UOJ
•J 7 1 0 . 0 U 0
a 7 6 u . o
-------
Figure 11-35 Cont'd
Research
Transportation
Center
Cultural
Center
Special Uses
Manufacturing
sa9
TIG
171
190
339
320
339
339
339
339
S39
339
339
339
339
339
S39
339
339
S3551
33552
SJ554
33555
33*61
S3I>62
S^t>66
S3S67
Si3^3
S35bl
33562
S35*5'J
535C9
KESbAnO"
2 c o •;, , o o o
TRA,\S'J, CTn
3 7 6 u , I" 0 0
O'JLHMAL CT'i.
IOC J.GU3
SPECIAL USES
36Uu . UllO
KAMJF - GLii,
361/0. OtO
B760.COO
36UU, 000
3600.000
3600. OUR
360u.UOO
360 u. OOP
36UJ.OOO
360J. 000
3600.000
360 U. 00 3
3oOu .000
360 U. 000
3600. OdO
U.u
U.O
0.0
O.t
75.UOC
90.000
75.0UO
75.000
75.000
75.000
75.000
75.000
75.000
75.00(1
75. JOO
75.00U
75.000
75.300
o.n
0 , 0
0, .)
o.n
0,950
U.750
0.950
0,950
J.950
0.950
0,950
1.950
11.950
0.950
0, 950
J.9?0
0,950
0.95J
1 . t' >.'• "
1 . U 0 j
1 . n i o
1 . 0 d 0
o.n
o.o
o.o
o.o
0,1)
0 ,0
o.o
o.o
o.n
o.o
0.3
0,0
o . n
0,0
o.o
U. 0
0.0
0.0
0. 050
0.250
0. 050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0,050
0,050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
U.050
o.o
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o .
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0 .0
0.0
0.0
0 .0
0.3
0 .0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0,0.
-------
Figure 11-35 Cont'd
S39
S39
539
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S3«
S39
S39
S39
339
S3 6 1.1
SJ6J5
S3636
S3639
33641
SJ642
S3M3
SJ644
S3651
S3652
S3661
S3662
S3691
S3692
33093
S3715
33/14
S.J.J41
Jtioo. aou
3600.303
3600.000
3609,000
3600, COO
3600,000
3600,000
3600,000
3600.000
3600,000
3600.000
3600, '000
3600.000
360J.OOO
36UO.OOO-
36ua,ouo
360U.UUO
360U, 000
3tOu,UOO
75 .00(1
75.0uO
75.000
75. QUO
75.000
75.000
75,000
75.000
75.000
75.300
75.000
75.000
75.000
75.000
75,000
75.000
75.100
75.000 '
75.000
U.^PO
0,950
0,950
0.950
0,950
0,950
0,950
0,950
0.950
0,950
0,950
3,950
0,953
3,953
0,950
0,950
0,950
0,950
J.95U
0,1)
0, J
O.lt
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0,0
0,3
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0,3
0.050
0.050
0.050
0,050
0.050
U.050
0.050
0,050
0,050
0,050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0,050
0,050
0.050
0.053
• o . o
0.0
0 .()
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
0 , 0
0,0
0, 0
0 .0
0.0
0 . 0
w , V
0 , 0
0,0
0,0
0.0
W f V
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,0
0.0
0,0'
w ^ w
0,0
-------
S39
S.59
S39
S20
S20
S20
S20
S20
S20
320
S20
320
S20
S20
320
S20
S20
S20
S20
SSSoX
SWSl
S2US2
S.J0.5}
S2U34
S2.JU4
5203^
Figure 11-35 Cont1
36u;<
JftOj
J6Li u
B76J
t*76j
6760
37hO
376J
3760
!»76li
0760
8760
876U
«76U
6760
6760
9760
876 J
. u u n
. 0 'J .1
.uiiu
.000
,0,)0
,000
.UOO
.000
.000
.000
,000
.UOO
,uuu
.000
.UOO
.ouo'
.000
.000
7r>
75
7y
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
.000
. 9 in)
. J'jj
. OLD
. 0 ') U
.ooc
. 0 0 !i
.uoo
.000
.OiiJ
.OOJ
.0(10
.coo
.000
.1)00
.000
.00(1
.000
•1
I)
u
J
0
0
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 9rjJ
, 950
,?iO
,730
.7Ji)
,75J
.750
, 7^0
,750
,75U
.750
, 750
,750
,750
, 750
.750
.750
.750
d
0
0
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. ;l
, l!
. •-'
. J
, 0
.0
.0
.0
t IJ
.0
.0
.0
,•)
.0
.0
,'J
.1)
.0
0.05U
0. 050
0.05'J
i).?50
0.2-i'J
0.253
U. 250
0.250
U.250
0.250
0.250
0. 250
0.250
0.250
U.250
0 . 2 5 U
0.250
0.250
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
O.J
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
Figure 11-35 Cont'd
S20
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
520
S20 •
S20
520
S20
520
520
520
520
520
s 2 2 '-i 5
S2^>61
52721
S2/J1
52815
S2B16
52818
S2819
S2U31
52833
S2834
52042
S2d43
52844
. 52851*
52992
33275
S.J2V1
li/hO
'J/6 J
S76U
8760
37&U
8760
8760
8760
8760
876J
8760
876J
8760
8760
8760
H76U
8760
-------
Figure 11-35 Cont'd
S2J
520
320
339
339
320
320
S2C
SJ9
320
SJi!92
'-.71.U
33"il
8761
SJ4J3
t»'6ii
S3*34
3 'J 0 j
S-S&21
36Uu
32d«l
S7GU
32035
1760
S2UJ7
8760
S«69
3oOO
S272C
8760
. lid'J
.DOC
.01)0
, u o u
,000
, 0 L 0
.uon
, o e o
. i; f' o
.OUC
•;n
9.)
90
7b
75
90
91)
90
75
90
.Ui'u
.OCO
. u i1 1:
.00:)
. 0 J >i
. U J •-'
.Ore
. 1, il 0
.000
.000
0
'j
;j
a
0
0
0
it
0
0
. 7'iO
,7^0
.760
, 940
,950
.7*50
. 75(1
.750
,95C
.75U
0 , 0
n . i.
'i , u
O.i;
0 . ;
f: ,0
O.i/
O.o
0.0
O.'J
J
0
;j
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
.250
.233 '
.250
.050
.050
.250
.250
.250
.050
.250
il. J
U.O
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0,0
0.0
0,0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
-------
The column labeled SCHED gives the number of hours per year of operation
assumed for each land use code. The column labeled PROC gives the percent
of fuel used for process heat. The next three columns show the portion of
total fuel demand assigned to residual oil, distillate oil, and natural gas.
Sufficient information existed to divide four-digit manufacturing SICs
into two categories for these parameters. One is ooded S-20 and the other
S-39; all industrial lots are assigned to one of these two categories.
S-20 represents heavier industry, operating almost continuously throughout
the year and using 90% of the fuel for process heat. S-39 represents 12-hour
per day operation, 6 days a week with only 75% of the fuel used for procrs-
heat. S-39 type industries are much more apt to use oil, as evidenced by
existing point sources in the current inventory.
4i4 Emission Factors
The emission factors used in conjunction with the Meadow lands plans .IT-..
shown in Figure II~36 for each activity code and fuel used by that activity.
Emission factors for each of the five pollutants are shown in the same uni's
used in Figure 1-30. Fuel burning was aggregated into residential, commer-
cial and industrial.
For the airport the names PROC 1 and PROC 2 were used, respectively,
for commercial and general aviation emissions. In Figure 11-35 for activity
T-20 the last two columns show values of 0. for PROC 1 and 1.0 for PROC.2.
This means that all aircraft assigned to the airport are of the general
aviation (PROC 2) category. For T-30 in Figure 11-36 the emission factors
assigned to PROC 1 represent automobile idling. These factors were developed
independently of the emission factor analysis and solely for the purposes of
the parking lot emissions. This was done because of the emission factor analysis
233
-------
List of Plan Enission Factors as Printed by the LANTRAN program.
Residential
Commercial f,
Institutional
Manufacturing
Parking Lot
4-Digit SIC .
Manufacturing
Rll
**••****•
P-UIL
N-GAS
Cll
••»*•*•«*
R-OIL*
D-OIL
N-GAS
S39
R-OlL
D-OIL
N-GAS
T20
PROC1
PROC2
T30
PROC1
S2031
H-QlL
D-OIL
N-GAS
PROP
S2041
R-OIL
D-OIL
N-GAS
PROP
S2051
R-OIL
D-OlL
N-GAS
PROP
S2082
R-OIL
PROP
S2095
R-OlL
D-O!L
N-GAS
PROP
R-0 IL
P*Q' I.
PROP
S2661
R-OIL
D-OIL
N-GAS
PROP
S2843
R-QIL
D-OIL
N-GAS
PROP
S2851
R-OIL
n-oiL
N-GAS
PROP
S3275
R-OIL
D-Olt
N-GAS
PROP
S3292
R-OIL
PROP
S3691
R-OIL
D-OIL
N-GAS
PROP
TSP S02 CO HC NQX
. WES, FUEL BURNING
FUELNAMfc NOT FOUND IN AVNAMUOCAT10NS 3 TO 7).
10,0000 6,5000 0,2000 3,0000 4.6066
iSIODOO 0,6000 2(S!0000 B.OOOO 5.UQOO
CUMMEHC, FUEL aUHNING
FUELNAMb NO* FOUND IN AVNAMILOCAT IONS 3 TO 7.1.
f'UtLNAMb NOT FOUND IN AVN*M(LOCAT IONS 3 TO 7 ,
23,0000 40,0000 0,2000 3,0000 24,0000
IS.OOOO 11,0000 0,2000 3,0000 24.QOOO
19,0000 0,6000 20,0000 8,0000 8,0000
lUDUST, FUEL BURNING
FUbLNAMfc NOT FOUND IN AVNiM < LOCAT IONS 3 TO 7),
FUtLNAMb NOT FOUND IN AVNAMtLOCAT lo^S 3 TO 7).
23,0000 24,0000 0,2000 3.0000 18.0000
IS.bOOu 6,0000 0,2000 3.00QO 18,0000
18,0000 0,6000 0,4000 40,0000 140,0000
AIRHOKTS- IBCCMMEKC. 2sGtN. AVIATION
8,0000 2,0000 6,0000 4,0000 3.5000
C.200C 2,0000 6.0000 0.7001 0,2000
4,3000 4,4000 . 1?.20UP 2,7000 O.SCOO
23,0000 24,0000 0.200(1 3,1)000 Ifa.UOGO
llJ.OObl1 6,0000 C'.kOOO .5,1)000 '5»j.OfiOO
1 r , u 0 b b 0.6000 0.4COC 40.')000 140.0000
Ic.JiUOb n.n o.u 2i:o,ubcii o.n
?3.0boO Z4,'lOOb O.«no') 3.0000 IP.unijU
IS, 3000 6.00HO n , 000 24,0000 0,2000 3,'JJOO 1H.UOIIO
15,0000 6.000J 0. dud a J, it 000 lti.li 000
iH.oOou n,60 no 0,4000 4n,oonO 1 4 n , o o n u
10.0000 C,:) 0.0 0.-) 0.0
23,(lOOO 24,oOO>) 0.2'JOO S.OUnO IH.nOOO
is.oooo 6,ngJO 0.2000 3,0000 tfa.riooo
iS.OOOU 0.6000 0.4000 40,0000 140,0000
ic.oooa o.o o.c 100.0000 o.o
is'.oooo j'.jooo o.^ooo '3!uooo- is!oooo
18.0000 0.6000 0.4000 40,'jOnO 140.0000
2S.uooo !>.o u|o as.'JQiin (i.o
2.5,ijOOO 24,0000 0,2000 3,0000 11.0000
13,0000 6,0000 0.2000 3,0000 18,0000
IH.QUOU o.60ao a. 4000 4g,ooo6 i4n.oooo
in, oooo u,o u.o 200,0000 o.o
23,0000 24,11000 0.2JOO 3,3000 10.0000
li.OOOO 6,0000 0.2000 .5,0000 lfl.0000
IC.pOQO 0.6000 0,4000 4(1,0000 140,0000
Pi., OOOO 0,11 C.U 0.0 0.0
>3.0000 24.JOOO 0.20UO 3.UOUO 13.0000
is.oooo 6, anon 0,2000 3,0000 is. oooo
Id.OOOO 0,6000 0.4000 40,0000 140.0000
25,0000 C,0 Q,D 0,0 0,0
23.0000 24,1)000 0.2000 3.0000 18.0000
Ib OOOO 6,0000 0.2000 3,'.)0on lo. 000-0
18,0000 0,6000 0,-*000 40,0000 140.0000
10,0000 C.O 0.0 0.1 0.0
23.0000 24, ,1000 0.2000 3,0000 19.0COO
15,0000 f.OOOO 0.2000 . 3.000J IS.OOOO
iH.oooo 0,6000 a.-iooj 40.onon i4;i,jooo
i c . o b o o o.o o.o n . d r, . >.)
?3,ooou ?4,oono 0.2000 3,0'jon IB.OOHO
15,0001) 6,0000 0.2li(IU 3.0000 IP.OOiiC
38.000L 0,60(10 O.-IOOo '40,0000 140.0000'
In. oooo o.n o.n o.o c.p
23,0000 24,0000 0.20(10 3,0000 l>..noOQ
15 OOOO 6.0000 b.20tO 3.0000 ib.OOOO
18.0000 0.6000 0,4000 40,0000 140,0000
0,0 25,0000 0,0 0,0 0.0
FUEL IS B-COA
FUEL is A-CUA
FUEL IS. B-COA
FUEL IS A-CUA
FUEL IS B-COA
234
-------
Figure 11-36 Cont'd
Cll
Cll
Cll
Cll
Cll
Cll
112
171
190
TlO
542
SB9
(Other Codus
Linked to
above Factors)
Rll
Rll
Mil
Rll
Rll
Rll
Cll
Cll
Cll
Cll
R01
(U2
R21
R22
R31
K32
Cl?
C21
C31
111
539
539
539
539
539
S31)
539
539
539
539
539
539
539
539
539
S39
539
539
539
539
539
539
S39
539
52(1.53
b;>l«34
b2.('"l
S2-J,|7
52'M3
52(115
SZu1^
S2uh6
S2LM7
S2T98
S27;?l
52731
S2bl5
S2W16
S2B1S
S2(:19
S2931
S2S33
52^34
S2?12
S2fc14
52992
S3m
S3431
235
-------
Figure 11-36 Cont'd
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
S39
$39
S39 S3irt'y
S39 S3M3
S39 bjb^b
S39 S3f>36
S39
S39
S39 S3A43
S39
S39 S3ftli;>
S39 53f>61
S39 S3692
S39
S39 Si'li.
b39 S3B41
S39 53*542
S39 S3b43
S39 S38fil
S39 S^^4l
S39 S3634
S39 S2U35
S39 S2U37
S39
S39
S39 S272Q
Notes: Units vary according to fuel. See Figure 1-30 for explanation of units.
The use of this data set is covered in the Appendix to Task 1, under the
discussion of the case study. It is shown here merely to present the
complete list of data used in the study.
236
-------
had been concluded prior to the identification of the stadium and its
parking lots as a land use. The most current information on idling emis-
sion rates was obtained from EPA as a part of another study. Lacking
further information, it was assumed that the same percent reduction in urban
I
vehicle speed emission factors from 1969 to 1990 would apply to the idling
emission factors. This produced the numbers shown in Figure 11-36 in pounds
per thousand hours of vehicle idling time.
Each of the four-digit industrial codes for the Meadowlands Plans
analyzed as to its propensity to produce process emissions, twelve 4-digit
SIC categories were identified as significant process sources; these are
shown in Figure 11-36. Because no specific information was available a? . re-
sult of the emission factor analysis, and because no activity data had been
developed as a part of the plans which would indicate process rates or
even process type, the emission factors were determined as proportionate to
fuel emissions. They are labeled PROP in Figure 11-36. The fuel emission
factors for these SICs are the same as those given for industrial fuel
burning. As mentioned under the discussion of current background emissio •>
the subject area of process emission sources requires the most additional wori,
The fuel emission factors were applied to the fuel uses as calculated
according to the procedures discussed. Industrial process emissions were
then proportioned to these. Emissions from the airport and the parking
lot were calculated as a direct function of the activity (number of air-
craft flights per year, and thousand hours of automobile idling per year).
4.5 Criteria for Determining Point Sources
The procedures discussed produced total emissions by season for each
of the land use figures. The figures consisted of both land use zones,
237
-------
such as distribution areas or low density residential areas, and individual
point locations, including manufacturing sources, schools, and central
heating systems for large residential areas. For these point sources it
remained to be determined which ones should be treated as separate point
sources for modeling and which should be aggregated into the area source
grid cells.
The size criterion established for point source status was 25 tons per
year of any one pollutant, the same as that used for the background point
source inventory. For each plan most of the industrial sources resulting
from zones greater than 10 acre lots became point sources, as did several
of the large residential areas.
Figure 11-37 shows the information flow for allocating the emissions
to point and area sources, based upon the size criteria. In the case of
the point sources stack parameters had to be assigned. The default numbers
in Figure 1-32 were used and the information formatted for input to the
model. No emission control regulations for New Jersey sources could be
quantified for testing. In the case of the area sources, the land use
figures were assigned to the grid cells in terms of emission densities, using
the LANTRAN allocation procedures, and the data formatted for direct input to
the model.
4.6 Highway Emissions
In addition to the background line sources resulting from the regional
highway network in and around the Meadowlands, each of the four land use
plans contained additional through and local streets. Because no network
assignments were made in conjunction with vehicle trip mile demand, it was
necessary to develop a highway allocation procedure. Initially, two types
238
-------
Total
Emissions by
Season
r~
Activity Indices
Size Criteria
Point Source
Emissions by Season
Ni
Stack
Parameter
• Conversion Units i
Land-Use Figure
Emissions by Season
Emissions Allocated
to Grid
Point Sources
in
Model Format
Area Sources
in
Model Format
Figure 11-37 Allocation of Emissions to "oint and Area Sources
-------
of roads were postulated. One with a 50,000 vehicle per day design volume
and the other with 25,000. Using the initial network from each of the
plans, the total number of vehicle miles per day as satisfied by the plan
highway network, was calculated. This is shown in Figure 11-38 at the
bottom, under the heading First Round Calculation.
At the same time the estimated number of vehicle miles per day, as a
demand from each of the four plans, was determined, based upon the popula-
tion and employment associated with each plan. This procedure is shown
in Figure 11-38. The number of vehicle miles per day was determined as a
function of the total work trips; the work trips were assumed to be a
function of the people who (1) live in the Meadowlands and work both inside
and outside the Meadowlands, and (2) those who live outside the Meadowlands
but work inside. Since very little development of a non-regional nature
was anticipated in Plan 1-C, it was assumed that the regional and plan net-
work should directly satisfy the demand of Plan 1-C. Using this assumption
a net demand not satisfied by the regional network was determined as shown
in Figure 11-38 and compared to the first round calculation from the highway
network. The ratio of these two showed that the Plan 1 network was over-built,
whereas the Plan 1-A and Plan 1-B networks would be overloaded as the assumed
vehicle mile design figures. For consistency the net demand figures were
assigned to the network, yielding figures for total vehicle miles per year
for each plan used in the analysis.
4.7 Meadowlands Incinerator Emissions
At the request of the Hackensack Meadowlands Commission, emissions
from the two proposed sites for the Hackensack Meadowlands incinerator were
240
-------
Figure 11-38
Plan Highway Allocation
Plan 1
1A
IB
1C
3
10 people
Population
185
325
450
6
(1)
Work
(50%) 92
(50%) 162
(60%) 270
(2)
Live in,
Work in
(50%) 46
(60%) 96
(20%) 54
(3)
Total
Work in
186
326
234
200
(4)=(3)-(2)
Live out,
Work in
140
230
. 180
200
CD + C4)
Total
rfork Trips
232
392
450
200
10 veh-mi/day
Estimated t1i1t
Total Demand
1392
2352
2700
1200
NJ
Plan 1
1A
IB
1C
10 veh-mi/day
Estimated
Total Demand-
Rounded
1400
2400
2700
1200
1
Net
Demand
300
1300
1600
100
1st Round
Calculation
1500
1000
1200*
100
Adjustment
Factor
0.2
1.3
1.3
1.0
AADT
Assignments
Uld
bOUOO
New
— 10000
66000
66000**
—
25000
5000
33000
-
25000
Comment
overbuilt
overloaded
overloaded
Comments: Employment assumptions from Hackensack Meadowlands Commission.
* By definition factor =1.0 for Plan 1C, thereby determining that 1100
veh-mi/day will be satisfied for aU_ plans by the regional highway network.
** For Plan IB all 25000 veh-mi/day capacity roads w^re 'upgr<,dr ! to 50000
veh-mi/day at the start of round one; otherwise the factor would have been 2.6.
*** Assume total travel -+- rate of 6 mile/—/, per work trip.
-------
calculated separately from the background emissions inventory. The
proposed southern location of the incinerator is in the vicinity of Source
#28 in Figure II-6; the proposed northern site is in the vicinity of Source
#9 in Figure I1-6. Only the emissions from the southern incinerator were
included in the actual background inventory used for modeling purposes.
As a part of the study of regional incineration, an incinerator of
6,000 tons per day capacity was assigned to the Meadowlands region, as
proposed by the Meadowlands Commission. However, since only five of the
six units would be used at any one time, the actual emission rate is based
on 5,000 tons of refuse per day. The incinerator would operate 24 hours a
day, six days a week and 52 weeks a year. This would yield approximately
1.5 million tons of refuse burned per year.
Using the 1990 incinerator emission factor in Figure 1-30, this yields
1,125 tons per year each of particulates, sulfur dioxide, and hydrocarbons
and 750 tons per year of carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides. For modeling
purposes, the height was estimated to be 300 feet and the effective stack
height, 345 feet, as estimated by the Meadowlands Commission.
Any source emitting over a thousand tons per year of any pollutant, parti-
cularly in 1990, must be considered a major point source. To ascertain the
relative importance of this facility, it was compared to the other major point
sources in the area. Examining Figure II-6, it is seen that there are 14 point
sources clustered neat the southern edge of the Meadowlands, in the vicinity
of the southern incinerator. Using the 1990 fuel and process emissions from
Figures 11-17 and 11-23, the following totals are found: For particulates,
2000 tons per year; sulfur dioxide, 2400 tons; and nitrogen oxides, 14,000 tons.
The emissions for the four power plants and three process sources alone are:
1,600, 2,000 and 13,500 tons per year, respectively.
242
-------
If the projected emissions from the incinerator are added to these, the
contribution of the incinerator, out of the new total of 15 point sources
in the area, would be 35% for particulates, 30% for sulfur dioxide, and 5%
for nitrogen oxides. This may serve as a useful measure of the relative
importance of the incinerator's emissions.
The northern incinerator has the same emission levels; however, due
to the predominant winds in the region, more of the emissions from the north-
ern incinerator would fall outside the Meadowlands boundary. There are five
point sources shown in Figure II-6 in the general vicinity of the northern
incinerator location. For 1990 they would contribute 625 tons of particu-
lates, 125 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 6,750 tons of nitrogen dioxide. The
one power plant and single-process source would contribute 500, zero, and
6,600 tons, respectively. If the emissions for the northern incinerator
are added to these totals, this incinerator would contribute the following
percentages of the total emission from the six sources in the area: 65%
for particulates, 90% for sulfur dioxide, and 19% for nitrogen oxides.
Because very little of the fuel use for these point sources is for
space heating, we would not expect the emission levels to vary signifi-
cantly for the summer and winter seasons.
243
-------
REFERENCES
1. Martin, D.O., and Tikvart, J., "A General Atmospheric Diffusion Model
for Estimating the Effects of One or More Sources on Air Quality,"
APCA paper No. 68-148, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Air
Pollution Control Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, June, 1968.
2. Egan, B.A., "Development and Validation of a Modeling Technique for
Predicting Air Quality Levels for the Meadowlands Planning Region
Environmental Research § Technology, Inc., Lexington, Mass., Projer
P-244, Task 2 Report, May 1972.
3. New York - New Jersey Air Pollution Abatement Activity (17 county
study) Volume 1, SOX & CO. U.S. Department of Health, Education $
Welfare, Public Health Service 1967.
4. New York - New Jersey Air Pollution Abatement Activity (17 county
study) Volume 2, Particulate Matter, U.S. Dept. of Health Education
§ Welfare, Public Health Service, 1967.
5. Environmental Protection Agency, 1969 computer printout: "Regional
Update of New York Region Inventory" (unpublished).
6. Larsen, R.I., "A Mathematical Model for Relating Air Quality Measure-
ments to Air Quality Standards", U.S•. Environmental Protection Agency,
November, 1971.
7. Ozolins, G., and Smith, R., "A Rapid Survey Technique for Estimating
Community Air Pollution Emissions," U.S. Public Health Service Publi-
cation No. 999-AP-29, October, 1966.
8. Goldman, C., and Mattson, C., "Hackensack Meadowlands Comprehensive
Land Use Plan", Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission, State
of New Jersey, October, 1970.
9. State of New Jersey, "Master Plan - Hackensack Meadowlands District
Zoning Regulations", Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission,
State of New Jersey, December 28, 1971."
10. State of New Jersey, "Summary of Statistical Data Provided by
Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission for Air Pollution Study"
(Not for Publication), Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission,
State of New Jersey, January, 1971.
11. ASHRAE Guide and Data Book, "Fundamentals and Equipment", American
Society of Heating,Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, 1965.
12. ASHRAE Guide and Data Book, "Applications", American Society of Heating,
Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, 1966.
245
-------
13. Industrial Data Guide - New Jersey Department of Commerce - 1969.
14. Steam Electric Plant Factors - 1970 Edition, National Coal Assoc.
15. Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources
Electric Power Production
(a Bibliography with Abstracts)
U.S.E.P.A. - Publication No. AP-96
16. Recommended Guide for the Prediction of the Dispersion of Airborne
Effluents,A.S.M.E. Publication
17. The Next Twenty Years - a forecast of population and jobs in New York,
New Jersey - Connecticut Metropolitan Region 1965-1985,Port of New York
Authority.
18. Tri-State Transportation Commission, "Air Pollution and Solid Waste
Generation in the Tri-State region," June, 1968.
19. Tri-State Transportation Commission, "Managing the Natural Environment -
A Plan for Water, Sewage, Air and Refuse".
20. Planners Associates Inc., "New Jersey State Solid Waste Management Plan",
July, 1970.
21. Zurn Environmental Engineers, "Analysis of Alternate Solid Wastes
Management Systems for the Hackensack Meadowlands District", May, 1970.
22. IBM Corporation, Emission Inventory for the State of New Jersey, Final
Report under Contract No. BOA 68-02-0043 for EPA, Air Pollution Control
Office, IBM Corporation, Federal Systems Division, Gaithersburg,
Maryland, August 27, 1971.
23. Pawling, D.F., et al, Plan Evaluation Series: No. 5, Land Area, Floor
Space, Population, Employment; Tri-State Counties and Planning Regions,
1963 and 1985, Interim Technical Report (Not for Public Release).Land
Development Division, Tri-State Transportation Commission, New York,
N.Y., January, 1970.
24. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York City
Metropolitan Area Air Quality Implementation Plan - January 1972, New
York State of Environmental Conservation.
25. Energy Model for the United States, U.S. Department of the Interior,
July, 1968.
246
-------
26. "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors", U.S. Dept. of Health
Education § Welfare, Public Health Service, 1968.
27. McGraw, M.J., and Duprey, R.L., "Compilation of Air Pollution Emission
Factors: Preliminary Document", Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
search Triangle Park, North Carolina, April, 1971.
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, February, 1972.
29. Control Techniques for Particulate Air Pollutants, U.S. Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service - 1969.
30. Control Techniques for Sulfur Oxide Air Pollutants (as above) 1969.
31. Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide Emission from Stationary Sources
(as above) - 1970.
32. Control Techniques for Hydrocarbon $ Organic Solvent from Stationary
Sources (as above) - 1970.
33. Control Techniques for Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources
(as above) 1970.
34. Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxide, and Hydrocarbon
Emissions from Mobile Sources.
35. Air Pollution § the Regulated Electric Power and Natural Gas Industries,
staff report - Federal Power Commission 1968.
36. Pinhuro, G.,"Precipitators for Oil Fired Boilers", Power Engineering,
April 1971.
247
-------
GLOSSARY
Activity, Activity Level - basic land use and transportation planning
units of intensity of use - vehicles per day on a highway, acres
of residential land use, square feet of industrial plant space.
Activity Index - a numerical conversion factor to transform the level of
activity specified for a land use category into demand for fuel for
heating purposes.
Air Quality Contour - a contour line in a plane (usually the horizontal
or vertical) representing points of equal concentrations for a specified
air pollutant.
Air Quality Criteria - factors used in this study that represent a basis
for decision-making, for example ambient air quality standards.
Air Quality Prediction - the calculation of current or future air pollutant
concentrations at specified receptor points resulting from the action
of meteorological conditions on source emissions.
Albedo - the fraction of solar radiation reflected from the ground surface.
Ambient Air - that portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to
which the general public has access.
Ambient Air Quality - concentration levels in ambient air for a specified
pollutant and a specified averaging time period within a given geographic
region.
Ambient Air Quality Standard - a level of air quality established by federal
or state agencies which is to be achieved and maintained; primary
standards are those judged necessary, with an adequate margin of
safety, to protect the public health; secondary standards are those
judged necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or
anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.
249
-------
AQUIP - an acronym for Air Duality for Urban and Industrial Planning,
a computer-based tool for incorporating air pollution considerations
into the land use and transportation planning process.
Atmospheric Boundary Layer - the lower region of the atmosphere (to
altitudes of 1 to 2 km) where meteorological conditions are strongly
influenced by the ground surface features.
Atmospheric Dispersion Model - a mathematical procedure for calculating
air pollution concentrations that result from a specified array of
emission sources and a specified set of meteorological conditions.
Average Receptor Exposure - a measure of the average impact of air quality
levels on specific receptors; the measure is based on the integrated
receptor exposure divided by the total number of receptors in the
study region.
Background Air Quality - levels of pollutant concentrations within a study
region which are the result of emissions from all other sources not
incorporated in the model for the study region.
Background Emissions - the emissions inventory applicable to the background
region; that is, all emission sources not explicitly included in the
inventory for the study region.
Climatology - the study of long term weather as represented by statistical
records of parameters such as winds, temperature, cloud cover, rainfall,
and humidity which determine the characteristic climate of a region;
climatology is distinguished from meteorology in that it is primarily
concerned with average, not actual, weather conditions.
Concentrations - a measure of the average density of pollutants usually
specified in terms of pollutant weight per unit (typically in units
of micrograms per cubic meter), or in terms of relative volume of pollutant
per unit volume of air (typically in units of parts per million).
250
-------
Default Parameters - values associated with a parameter for a category of
activities (such as heavy manufacturing) assigned to the activity para-
meter for a subcategory of activities (such as electrical machinery
production) when the actual value for the subcategory is not known.
Degree Days (Heating Degree Days) - the sum of negative departures of a1 rrage
temperature from 65°F; used to determine demand for fuel for heating purposes,
Effective Stack Height - the height of the plume center-line when it be-
comes horizontal.
Emission Factor - a numerical conversion factor applied to fuel use and
process rates to determine emissions and emission rates.
Emissions - effluents into the atmosphere, usually specified in terms of
weight per unit time for a given pollutant from a given source.
Emissions Inventory - a data set describing the location and source strength
of air pollution emissions within a geographical region.
Emissions Projection - the quantitative estimate of emissions for a speci^i^c!
source and a specified future time.
Equivalent Ambient Air Quality Standards - air quality levels adopted in
this study to permit analysis of all air pollutants in terms of annual
averages; in cases where state and federal annual standards do not exist,
the adopted levels are based on the extrapolation of short period stan-
dards .
Fuel Related Sources, Fuel Emissions - fuel related sources use fuel to heat
area, or to raise a product to a certain temperature during an industrial
process, or for cooking in the house; they produce fuel emissions.
(See also Non-Fuel Related Sources.)
251
-------
Fuel Use Propensity, Fuel Demand - the total heat requirement (space
heating plus process heating) determines the fuel demand; the propensity
to use a particular fuel or fuels determines the actual amounts of various
fuels used to satisfy the heat requirement.
Heating Requirements - the demand for fuel is specified in terms of the
heating requirements:
space heating - the fuel used to heat area, such as the floor space
of a school in the winter, is that required for space heating; the
heat content or value of that fuel defines the space heating re-
quirement (BTUs, British Thermal Units of heating content).
non-space heating, process heating - the fuel used to raise a pro-
duct to a certain temperature during an industrial process or for
cooking (with gas) in the home is that required for process heating
or non-space heating. It is generally not related to outside tempera-
ture whereas space heating requirements are.
percent space heating, percent process heating - the relative pro-
portion of a fuel or its heat content that is used for space heating
or process heating defines,respectively, the percent space heating
or percent process heating.
Impact Measure (or Parameter) - a quantitative representation of the degree
of impact on air quality or specific receptors resulting from concentrations
of specified pollutants.
Influence Region - the influence region for a study area is the geographical
region containing the emission sources responsible for at least 90% of
the ground level concentrations (averaged throughout the study area) of
all pollutants considered.
252
-------
Integrated Receptor Exposure - a measure of the total impact of air quality
levels on specific receptors; the measure is based on the summation
within the study region of the number of receptors times the concentration
levels to which they are exposed.
Inventories - the aggregation of all fuel and process emissions source is
called the emissions inventory; the components for use with the model:
current inventory - all sources for 1969
background inventory - all sources for 1990 not directly relatei
to the meadowlands plans.
plan inventories - all sources for 1990 related to the Meadowlands
plans; this excludes any source outside the Meadowlands boundai/
and also excludes existing major single sources and the highway
network.
Isppleth - the locus of points of equal value in a multidimensional space.
Land Use Intensity - the level of activity associated with a given land use
category, for example the population density of residential areas.
Land Use Mix - the percent of total study region area allocated to specific
land use categories.
Meteorology - the study of atmospheric motions and phenomena.
Microscale Air Quality - the representation of air quality in a geographical
scale characterized by distances between source and receptor ranging
from a few meters to a few tens of meters.
Mixing Depth - the vertical distance from the ground to the base of a stable
atmospheric layer (also called inversion height).
Model Calibration - the process of correlating model predictions with observed
(measurements) data, usually to determine calibration factors relating
predicted to observed values for each pollutant.
253
-------
Model Validation - the detailed investigation of model results by comparison
with measured values to identify systematic discrepencies that may be
corrected by alterations of model parameters or model mechanics.
Non-Fuel Related Sources, Process Emissions, Separate Process Emissions -
non-fuel related sources do not burn fuel primarily for heating purposes
or do not burn fuel at all; these include transportation sources, in-
cineration, and certain industrial processes; they produce process or
separate process emissions. (See also Fuel Related Sources.)
Ranking Index - a quantitative representation of the net impact on air
quality or specific receptors resulting from all pollutants being con-
sidered.
Receptor - a physical object which is exposed to air pollution concentrations;
objects may be animate or inanimate, and may be arbitrarily defined in
terms of size, numbers, and degree of specificity of the object.
Receptor Point - a geographical point at which air pollution concentrations
are measured or predicted.
Regional Air Quality - the representation of air quality in a geographical
scale characterized by large areas, for example, on the order of 50
square kilometers or greater.
Schedule - number of hours per year a fuel burning activity will consume fuel;
used to determine heating requirements.
Source - any stationary or mobile activity which produces air pollutant
emissions.
Source Geometry - all sources for modeling purposes are considered to exist
as a point, line, or area, defined as follows:
point source - a single major emitter located at a point.
line source - a major highway link, denoted by its end points.
254
-------
area source - a rectangular area referenced to a grid system; in-
cludes not only area-wide sources, such as residential emitters,
but single emitters and highway links deemed too small to be con-
sidered individual point or line sources by the model.
Stability Category - a classification of atmospheric stability conditions
based on surface wind speed, cloud cover and ceiling, supplemented by
solar elevation data (latitude, time of day, and time of year).
Stability Wind Rose - a tabulation of the joint frequency of occurrences of
wind speed and wind direction by atmospheric stability class at a
specific location.
Total Air Quality - the air quality at a receptor point resulting from back-
ground emission sources and from emission sources specifically within
the study region.
Trapping Distance - the distance downwind of a source at which vertical
mixing of a plume begins to be significantly inhibited by the base
of the stability layer, and gaussian vertical distribution can no
longer be assumed.
Wind Sector - a 22-1/2 degree wind direction range whose center-line is one
of the sixteen points of the compass.
255
-------
PRINCIPAL STUDY PARTICIPANTS
Environmental Research § Technology, Inc.
Dr. Byron H. Willis, Study Director - Plan Evaluation
John C. Goodrich - Emissions Projection
Dr. James R. Mahoney - Air Pollution Meteorology
Dr. Bruce A. Egan - Air Pollution Modeling
Dr. Edward C. Reifenstein, III - System Software Design and Development
Michael J. Keefe - Software Design and Programming
David A. Berghofer - Computer Programming
Burns § Roe, Inc. (subcontractor to ERT)
William A. Foy - Combustion and Process Emission Technology
William E. Wechter - Combustion and Process Emission Technology
257
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/3-74-056-b
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
4. TITLE ANDSUBTITLE
Hackensack Meadowlands Air Pollution Study - Emission
Projection Methodology
5. REPORT DATE
October 1973
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
John C. Goodrich
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Research and Technology, Inc.
429 Marrett Road
Lexington, Massachusetts 02173
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
EHSD 71-39
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Prepared in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,
Office of the Commissioner, Labor and Industry Building, Trenton, N.J. 08625
16. ABSTRACT
The Hackensack Meadowlands Air Pollution Study consists of a summary report and
five task reports. The summary report discusses the procedures developed for
considering air pollution in the planning process and the use of these procedures
to evaluate four alternative land use plans for the New Jersey Hackensack Meadowlands
for 1990. The task reports describe (1) the emission projection methodology and its
application to the Hackensack Meadowlands; (2) the model for predicting air quality
levels and its validation and calibration; (3) the evaluation and ranking of the
land use plans; (4) the planning guidelines derived from the analysis of the plans;
and, (5) the software system.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Land Use
Planning and Zoning
Local Governments
'County Governments
State Governments
Regional Governments
'Air
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
276
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
258
------- |