EPA-450/2-78-003a
January 1978
(OAQPS No. 1.2-091)
  DRAFT GUIDELINE DOCUMENT:
     CONTROL OF TRS EMISSIONS
                     FROM  EXISTING
                KRAFT PULP MILLS
                       GUIDELINE SERIES
  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-450/2-78-003a
                      Notice
This document has not been formally released by EPA and should not now be
construed to represent Agency policy. It is being circulated for comment on its
technical accuracy and policy implications.
                  DRAFT
      GUIDELINE DOCUMENT:
  CONTROL OF  TRS EMISSIONS
           FROM EXISTING
         KRAFT PULP MILLS
           Emission Standards and Engineering Division
          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             Office of Air and Waste Management
           Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
           Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

                    January 1978

-------
                  OAQPS GUIDELINE SERIES

The guideline series of reports is being issued by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to provide information to state and local
air pollution control agencies; for example, to provide guidance on the
acquisition and processing of air quality data and on the planning and
analysis requisite for the maintenance of air quality.  Reports published in
this series will be available - as supplies permit - from the Library Services
Office  (MD-35), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park,  North Carolina 27711;  or,  for a nominal fee, from the National
Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia
22161.
                   Publication No.  EPA-450/2-78-003a
                          (OAQPS No.  1.2-091)
                                  11

-------
                                     Draft

                          Guideline Document For The
                     Control Of TRS Emissions From Existing

                               Kraft Pulp Mills

                        Type of Action:  Administrative

                                  Prepared by
                                                                     71
-^ ^— —•      ^    I t  I  , ' ^ L- w I- V

                                                                 (Date)

Don R. Goodwin
Director, Emission Standards and Engineering Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle  Park, North Carolina  27711
                                                 «•>..

                                     Approved by
                                                                 (Date)
Assistant Administrator
Office of Air and Waste Management
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S. W.
Washington, D. C.  20460
Additional copies may be obtained at:

Environmental Protection Agency
Library (MD-35)
Research Triangle Park, N. C.  27711
                                  iii

-------
                            TABLE  OF  CONTENTS
                                                                       Page
 1.   Introduction
     1.1   Purpose of Document	1-1
     1.2   TRS Compounds  and  Their  Control	1-4
     1.3   Standards  of Performance for  New Stationary Sources  ....   1-5
     1.4   Emission Guidelines  	   1-5
 2.   Health  and  Welfare  Effects  of TRS  Compounds
     2.1   Introduction	2-1
     2.2   Effects on Human Health	2-3
          2.2.1   Odor Perception	2-6
     2.3   Effects on Animals	2-8
     2.4   Effects on Vegetation	2-9
     2.5   Welfare Effects of Atmospheric TRS   	   2-9
          2.5.1   Effect  on Property Values  	   2-9
          2.5.2   Effects on  Paint    	2-10
          2.5.3   Effects on  Metals	2-11
     2.6   Rationale  .  .	2-11
3.   Industry Characterization
     3.1   Georgraphic  Distribution  	   3-1
     3.2   Integration  and Concentration 	   3-1
     3.3   International  Influence  	   3-2
4.   Process Description
    4.1   Kraft Pulping Process  	  4-1
    4.2  Description of Individual Process Facilities  	  4.4
                                   IV

-------
5.  Emissions
    5.1  Nature of Emissions 	  5-1
    5.2  Uncontrolled TRS Emissions  	  5-3
    5.3  Typical TRS Emissions	5-8
6.  Control Techniques for TRS from Kraft Pulp Mills
    6.1  Alternative Control Techniques  	  6-1
         6.1.1  Recovery Furnace 	  6-1
         6.1.2  Digesters and Multiple Effect Evaporator Systems  .  .  6-9
         6.1.3  Lime Kiln	6-11
         6.1.4  Brown Stock Washer System   !	6-13
         6.1.5  Black Liquor Oxidation System  	  6-lS
         6.1.6  Smelt Dissolvinq Tank  	  6-1/
         6.1.7  Condensate Stripper System  	  6-lfr
    6.2  Summary of Retrofit Models  	  6-19
    6.3  Installation and Start-up Time	6-23
7.  Emission Monitoring and Compliance Testinq Techniques and Costs
                                                                  V.' "
    7.1  Emission Measurement Techniques 	  .  .  7-1
         7.1.1  Emission Monitorinq  	  7-1
         7.1.2  Compliance Testinq 	  7-2
8.  Cost Analysis Of Alternative Emission Control Systems
    8.1  Introduction	8-1
    8.2  Methodology   	8-3
    8.3  Costs of Affected Facilities  	  8-6
    8.4  Incremental Costs for Model Mills  	  8-21
    8.5  Aggregate Costs for Industry  	  8-32
    8.6  Cost Effectiveness	8-35

-------
                                                                          Page
  9.   Environmental  Impact of TRS Controls
      9.1   Air Pollution Impact	    9-1
           9.1.1   Annual Air Emission  Reductions   	    9-1
           9.1.2   Annual Air Emission  Increase  	    9-3
           9.1.3   Atmospheric Dispersion of TRS Emissions 	    9-5
           9.1.4   Changes in Solid and Liauid Wastes	    9-12
           9.1.5   Energy Consumption  	    9-12
 10.   Emission Guidelines for Existing Kraft Pulp Mills
      10.1   General  Rationale 	    10-1
      10.2   Evaluation of Individual Process Facilities 	    10-3
            10.2.1   Recovery Furnace System 	    10-3
            10.2.2  Digester System 	    10-7
            10.2.3  Multiple Effect Evaporator System 	    10-8
            10.2.4  Lime Kiln	    10-10
            10.2.5  Brown Stock Washer System 	  10-12
            10.2.6  Black Liquor Oxidation  System 	    10-13
            10.2.7  Condensate Stripper System  	    10-13
            10.2.8  Smelt Dissolving Tank 	    10-14
      10.3   Summary  of the Rationale for Selectina the  Best  Control        10-14
            System  	
      10.4   Selection  of the Format of the  Emission  Guidelines   ....    io-16
      10.5   Monitoring Requirements  	    10-18
Appendix A  -  Summary  of Kraft Mills in  the United States
Appendix B  -  Data Summary
Appendix C  -  Dispersion Studies Results
                                      VI

-------
                            1.  INTRODUCTION

1.1  PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT
     This document has been prepared in accordance with regulations established
under Section lll(d) of the Clean Air Act.  Under the regulations,
EPA has established procedures whereby states submit plans to control existing
sources of "designated pollutants".  Designated pollutants are pollutants
which are not included on a list published under Section 108(a) (National
Ambient Air Quality Standards) or 112(b)(l)(A) (Hazardous Air Pollutants).
but to which a standard of performance for new sources applies under Section 111.
Under Section lll(d), emission standards are to be adopted by the states and
Submitted to EPA for approval.  The standards will limit the emissions of
designated pollutants from existing facilities which, if new, would be
subject to the standards of performance for new stationary sources.  Such
facilities are called "designated facilities".
     In accordance with Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, standards of
performance (NSPS) for eight source categories in the kraft pulp industry
were proposed on September 24, 1976.  The standards include emission limits
for total reduced sulfur (TRS) and particulates.  TRS is a designated
pollutant.   This document is therefore being prepared to establish criteria
by which the states may develop emission standards for designated facilities.
                                   1-1

-------
     Subpart B of 40 CFR 60 contains the procedures under which states submit
these plans to control existing sources of designated pollutants.  Subpart B
requires the states to develop plans for the control of designated pollutants
within Federal guidelines.  As indicated in Subpart B, EPA will publish
guidelines documents for development of state emission standards simultaneous
with promulgation of any new source standard of performance for a designated
pollutant.  These guidelines will apply to designated facilities which emit
those designated pollutants and will include useful information for states,
such as discussion of the pollutant's effects, description of control
techniques and their effectiveness, costs, and potential impacts.  Finally,
as guidance for the states, recommended emission limits (emission guidelines)
and times for compliance are set forth and control equipment which will achieve
these emission limits is identified.
     After publication of the final guideline document for the pollutant in
question, the States will have nine months to develop and submit plans for
control of that pollutant from designated facilities.  Within four months
after the date for submission of plans, the Administrator will approve or
disapprove each plan (or portions thereof).  If a state plan  (or portion thereof)
is disapproved, the Administrator will promulgate a plan (or portion thereof)
within six months after the date for plan submission.  These and related
provisions of subpart B are basically patterned after Section 110 of the Act
and 40 CFR Part 51 (concerning adoption and submittal  of state implementation
plans under Section 110).
     As discussed in the preamble to Subpart B,  a distinction is  drawn
between designated pollutants which may cause or contribute  to endangerment
of public health (referred to as "health-related pollutants")  and  those for
                                    1-2

-------
which adverse effects on public health have not been demonstrated (referred
to as "we!fare-related pollutants").  For health-related pollutants, emission
standards and compliance times in state plans must ordinarily be at least
as stringent as the corresponding emission guidelines and compliance times
in EPA's guideline documents.  As provided in Subpart B, states may apply
less stringent requirements for particular facilities or classes of facilities
when economic factors or physical limitations make such application significantly
more reasonable.  Such justification may include unreasonable control  costs
resulting from plant age, location, process design, or the physical  impossibility
of installing the specified control system.  States may also relax compliance
time if sufficient justification is proven.  Such justification may include
unusual time delays caused by unavailability of labor, climatological  factors,
scarcity of strategic materials, and large work backlogs for equipment vendors
or construction contractors.
     For Welfare-related pollutants, states may balance the emission guide-
lines, times for compliance, and other information provided in a guideline
document against other factors of public concern in establishing emission
standards, compliance schedule's, and variances provided that appropriate
consideration is given to the information presented in the guideline document
and at public hearing(s) required by Subpart B and that all other requirements
of Subpart B are met.  Where sources of pollutants that cause only adverse
effects to crops are located in non-agricultural areas, for example, or
where residents of a community depend on an economically marginal plant
for their livelihood, such factors may be taken into account (in addition to
those that would justify variances if a health-related pollutant was involved).
Thus, states will have substantial flexibility to consider factors other than
technology and costs in establishing plans for the control of welfare-related
pollutants if they wish.
                                     1-3

-------
     For reasons discussed in Chapter 2 of this document,  the Administrator
has determined that TRS emissions from kraft pulp mills may cause or
contribute to endangerment of the public welfare but that adverse effects on
public health have not been demonstrated.  As discussed above, this means
that TRS emissions will be considered a welfare-related pollutant and the
states will have greater flexibility in establishing plans for the control
of TRS that would be the case if public health might be affected.
     This state guidelines document briefly  discusses  the  effects of reduced
sulfur compounds on health,  and on crops, materials, and animals.  Eight
process categories having reduced sulfur  emissions  are discussed.  The
greatest emphasis, however,  has been placed  on the  technical  and  economic
evaluation of control  techniques that are effective in reducing  total reduced
sulfur emissions, with particular emphasis on  retrofitting existing mills.
Section 6.2 proposes several control systems available to  the states.  The
costs of these control systems is analyzed in Chapter  8, while Chapter 9
assesses the environmental and energy impact of these  control systems.  Finally,
as guidance for the states, recommended emission limitations are set forth
and control equipment which will achieve these emission limitations is suggested.
1.2  TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR COMPOUNDS AND THEIR CONTROL
     For purposes of new source performance standards  (NSPS) and the attendant
requirements of Section lll(d), "total reduced sulfur" is the designated
pollutant to be controlled.
     The intent of the NSPS and lll(d) standards is to limit emissions of
hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide,  and dimethyl disulfide.
Control of TRS emissions at kraft pulp mills is well demonstrated by operation
of the combustion sources or incineration of the exhaust gases.
                                     1-4

-------
     The limited information currently available on the health and welfare
effects of TRS generally deals with hydrogen sulfide (H2S).  Adverse health
effects are noticeable down to 20 ppmv, but this concentration is much
higher than expected in the ambient air as a result of even uncontrolled
TRS emissions from kraft pulp mills.  H£S at concentration down to a few
parts per billion is recognized as an odor nuisance.  The OSHA occupational
exposure maximum is 10 ppmv, not to be exceeded at any time.
1.3  STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONS SOURCES
     In accordance with Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, standards of
performance for eight affected facilities or emission sources in the kraft
pulping industry have been promulgated (Subpart BB of 40 CFR Part 60).   These
sources are the recovery furnace (both straight kraft and cross-recovery
furnaces)*, digester system, multiple-effect evaporator system, lime kiln,
brown stock washer system, black liquor oxidation system, smelt dissolving
tank, and condensate stripper system.  Information and emission data collected
during development of the proposed new source performance standards indicate
that best demonstrated control technology can limit the TRS emissions to five
parts per million by volume dry gas basis for all new sources except lime
kilns and cross-recovery furnaces, which can be limited to 8 ppm and 25  ppm,
respectively.
     Water treatment ponds, however, are not covered by the proposed NSPS
because data on actual TRS emissions are not available and accurate sampling
methods for determining TRS and other odorous emissions from treatment ponds
are not sufficiently developed or demonstrated.  Therefore, water treatment
ponds will not be covered in this document.
*NOTh:  Throughout the document, the term "recovery furnaces" will  imply both
straight kraft recovery furnaces and cross-recovery furnaces, unless otherwise
specified.
                                    1-5

-------
1.4  EMISSION GUIDELINES
1.4.1  Recommended TRS Emission Limitations for the States
     Emission guidelines for control of TRS emissions that may be achieved
by application of best adequately demonstrated technology to existing facilities
are listed in Table 1-1.  These emission guidelines are less stringent in
some cases than the standards proposed for new sources since the application
of the best adequately demonstrated technology for new sources would result
in excessive control costs at existing sources.  However, emission guidelines
do require the same type of control as judged to be best adequately demonstrated
technology for new sources for the three major TRS sources (recovery furnace,
digester system, and multiple-effect evaporator system).  The justification
for these emission guidelines are discussed more completely in Chapters 8 and 9.
     Adoption of these guidelines would result in an overall nationwide TRS
emission reduction of about 82 percent.
                                    1-6

-------
       Table 1-1.  TRS EMISSION GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING
                            KRAFT PULP MILLS

                                           Emission Guidelines
  Affected Facility	ppm	
Recovery Furnace^
  Old Design Furnaces3                             20
  New Design Furnaces^                              5
  Cross Recovery Furnaces                          25
Digester System                                     5
Multiple-Effect Evaporator System                   5
Lime Kiln                                          205
Brown Stock Washer System                      No Control
Black Liquor Oxidation System                  No Control
Condensate Stripper System                          5
                                                g/kg BLS
Smelt Dissolving Tank                            0.0084
^Guidelines given are in terms of four-hour averages.
2Three percent of all four-hour TRS averages above the specified
 level are not considered .to be excess emissions.
^Furnaces without welded wall  construction or emission-control
 designed air systems.
^Furnaces with both welded wall construction and emission-control
 design air systems.
5Two percent of all four-hour TRS averages above 20 ppm are not
 considered to be excess emissions.

-------
                    2.  HEALTH AND WELFARE EFFECTS OF
                        TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR COMPOUNDS
2.1  INTRODUCTION
     In accordance with 40 CFR 60.22(b), promulgated on November 17,
1975 (40 FR 53340), this chapter presents a summary of the available
information on the potential health and welfare effects of total
reduced sulfur (TRS) compounds and the rationale for the Administrator's
determination that TRS is a welfare-related pollutant for purposes of
section lll(d) of the Clean Air Act.
     The Administrator first considers potential health and welfare effects
of a designated pollutant in connection with the establishment of
standards of performance for new sources of that pollutant under
section lll(b) of the Act.  Before such standards may be established, the
Administrator must find that the pollutant in question "may contribute
significantly to air pollution which causes or contributes to the
endangerment of public health or welfare" [see section 111(b)(l)(a)].
Because this finding is, in effect, a prerequisite to the same pollutant
being identified as a designated pollutant under section lll(d), all
designated pollutants will have been found to have potential adverse
effects on public health, public welfare, or both.
                                2-1

-------
     As discussed in section 1.1  of this document, Subpart B of Part 60
distinguishes between designated  pollutants that may cause or contribute
to endangerment of public health  (referred to as "health-related pollutants")
and those for which adverse effects on public health have not been
demonstrated ("welfare-related pollutants").  In general, the significance
of the distinction is that states have more flexibility in establishing
plans for the control of welfare-related pollutants than is provided for
plans involving health-related pollutants.
     In determining whether a designated pollutant is health-related or
welfare-related for purposes of section lll(d), the Administrator
considers such factors as:  (1) known and suspected effects of the
pollutant on public health and welfare; (2) potential ambient concentrations
of the pollutant; (3) generation  of any secondary pollutants for which
the designated pollutant may be a precursor; (4) any synergistic effect
with other pollutants; and (5) potential effects from accumulation in
the environment (e.g., soil, water, and food chains).
     It should be noted that the  Administrator's determination of whether
a designated pollutant is health-related or welfare-related for purposes
of section lll(d) does not affect the degree of control represented by
EPA's emission guidelines.  For reasons discussed in the preamble to
Subpart B, EPA's emission guidelines [like standards of performance for
new sources under section lll(b)] are based on the degree of control
achievable with the best adequately demonstrated control systems (considering
costs), rather than on direct protection of public health or welfare.  This
                                   2-2

-------
is true whether a particular designated pollutant has been found to be
health-related or welfare-related.  Thus, the only consequence of
that finding is the degree of flexibility that will be available to the
states in establishing plans for control of the pollutant, as indicated
above.
     Very little information is available on the effects of the total
reduced sulfur compounds discharged from kraft pulp mills on human health,
animals, vegetation, and materials.  Almost all the information that was
found during this investigation deals with only hydrogen sulfide (H^S).
Essentially no information on the health and welfare effects of the other
reduced sulfur compounds (methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and dimethyl
disulfide) emitted from kraft pulp mills was found.  Therefore, this
chapter discusses the effects of hydrogen sulfide only.   However, hydrogen
sulfide is the predominant TRS compound emitted by kraft pulp mills.
2.2  EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS ON HUMAN HEALTH1
     At sufficiently high concentrations, hydrogen sulfide is very toxic
to humans.  It generally enters the human body through the respiratory
tract, from which it is carried by the blood stream to various body organs.
Hydrogen sulfide that enters the blood can lead to blocking of oxygen
transfer, especially at high concentrations.  In general, the hydrogen
sulfide acts as a cell and enzyme poison and can cause irreversible changes
in nerve tissue.
     Some of the effects of hydrogen sulfide and the air concentrations at
which they occur are shown in Table 2-1.  At high concentrations
                               2-3

-------
                                Table 2-1

             EFFECTS OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE INHALATION ON HUMANS
Hydrogen Sulfide   3
Concentration, yg/m  (ppm)
               Effects
1-45 (7.2 x 10"4 - 3.2 x 10"2)
10 (7.2 x 10"3)


150  (0.10)

500  (0.40)

15,000  (11.0)


30,000  (22.0)




30,000-60,000  (22.0-43.0)




150,000 (110)





270,000-480,000 (200-350)



640,000-1,120,000  (460-810)


900,000 (650)

1,160,000-1,370,000  (840-990)



1,500,000+  (1100+)
Odor threshold.  No reported injury
  to health

Threshold of reflex effect on eye
  sensitivity to light

Smell slightly perceptible

Smell definitely perceptible

Minimum concentration causing eye
  irritation

Maximum allowable occupational
  exposure for 8 hours (ACGIH
  Tolerance Limit)

Strongly perceptible but not in-
  tolerable smell.  Minimum con-
  centration causing lung irritation

Olfactory fatigue in 2-15 minutes;
  irritation of eyes and respira-
  tory tract after 1 hour; death in
  8  to 48 hrs

No serious damage for 1 hour but
  intense local irritation; eye
  irritation in 6 to 8 minutes

Dangerous concentration after 30
  minutes or less

Fatal in 30 minutes

Rapid unconsciousness, respiration
  arrest, and death, possibly
  without odor sensation

Immediate unconsciousness and rapid
  death
                                  2-4

-------
                    •3
(over 1,000,000 yg/m ), hydrogen sulfide can cause death quickly by

paralysis of the respiratory center.  However, if the victim is moved

quickly to uncontaminated air and respiration is initiated before heart

action stops, rapid recovery can be expected.  At lower concentrations
                       o
(30,000 to 500,000 vg/m ), hydrogen sulfide causes conjunctivitis, lachrymal

secretion, respiratory tract irritation, pulmonary edema, damage to the

heart muscle, psychic changes, disturbed equilibrium, nerve paralysis,

spasms, unconsciousness, and circulatory collapse.  Some common symptoms

are metallic taste, fatigue, diarrhea, blurred vision, intense aching of

the eyes, insomnia, and vertigo.

     The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has established

a maximum allowable exposure concentration (not to be exceeded at any time)
                                   o
for hydrogen sulfide of 30,000 vg/m  (20 ppm).  In comparison, OSHA has

set a maximum allowable exposure concentration for methyl mercaptans of
                o
only 15,000 vg/m  (10 ppm).


                                                 o
     Concentrations of TRS as high as 30,000 vg/m  (20 ppm) are not likely

to be realized near existing kraft pulp mills.  For example, measurements

of ambient hydrogen sulfide concentration were made during a six-month

period in 1961  and 1962 in the Lewiston, Idaho, area where the major

contributor of gaseous  pollutants was a pulp mill  which had only the recovery

furnace controlled for TRS emissions.  The levels of hydrogen sulfide were

generally less  than 15  vg/m •  During an air pollution episode in November
                                           3
1961, peak 2-hour concentrations of 77 yg/m  were measured.  These levels

are well below the maximum allowable occupational exposure concentration

established by OSHA.
                                    2-5

-------
     For the purpose of evaluating the air pollution  impacts  associated

with alternative emission limits (see Chapter 9), dispersion  studies  were

performed by EPA on model kraft pulp mills.  These studies indicated

that the maximum ground-level ambient concentration of hydrogen sulfide

resulting from  an  uncontrolled  large  sized  (907 megagrams/day) kraft pulp
                                2
mill would  be  about 10,300  yg/m  (one-hour average).  This level, even

though  much higher than actually  measured at the existing mill mentioned

above,  is  still lower than  the minimum exposure concentration that causes

eye irritation.


2.2.1   Odor Perception


      The odor characteristic of kraft mills is principally due to the


presence of a mixture of hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl


sulfide, and dimethyl disulfide.   These sulfides are extremely odorous


and are detectable at concentrations as low as 1 part per billion (ppb).


However, the odor perception thresholds of these gases vary considerably


among  individuals and apparently depend on the age and sex of the


individuals, the size of the town where they live, and whether they

smoke.   The reported odor threshold of hydrogen sulfide varies between


1  and  45 yg/m  (see Table 2-2).  The odor becomes more intense as the

concentration increases. At very high concentrations (H2S above 320,000

yg/m  ), the smell  is not as pungent,  probably due to paralysis of the
                                                                          o
olfactory  nerves.   At hydrogen  sulfide concentrations over 1,120,000 yg/m ,

there  is little sensation of odor and death can occur rapidly.   Therefore,

this dulling  of the sense of smell  constitutes  a  major danger to  persons

potentially exposed to  high  concentrations  of hydrogen sulfide.   The

reported odor  thresholds  for methyl mercaptan,  dimethyl sulfide,  and

dimethyl disulfide  are  shown in Table 2-3.



                                   2-6

-------
                  Table 2-2
ODOR DETECTION THRESHOLD FOR HYDROGEN SULFIDE
 Odor Threshold
ug/m  (ppmv)
 9-45
 7.1a
  .71fc
15
 6.8C
12-30
 (.007-.032)
 (.005)
 (.0005)
 (.011)
 (.005)
 (.009-.022)
  Hydrogen sulfide from sodium sulfide.
  Hydrogen sulfide gas.
 GMean value ratio of highest to lowest odor
   threshold concentration detected by all
   observers in successive tests is 3.18.
Table 2-3.  ODOR THRESHOLDS OF REDUCED SULFUR
    COMPOUNDS OTHER THAN HYDROGEN SULFIDE 3' 4
Compound
Methyl Mercaptan-CH3SH
Dimethyl Sulfide-(CH3)2S
Dimethyl Disulfide-(CH3)2S2
Odor threshold
ppm
0.0021
0.0010
0.0056
yg/m3
4.5
2.9
23.7
                  2-7

-------
     At the ambient around-level concentrations likely to occur near an

uncontrolled kraft pulp mill, as determined by EPA dispersion estimates,

odors would definitely be perceptible.  A kraft pulp mill that operates

typical controls (see Chapter 5) would likely have an odor level that is

slightly perceptible.

     Most studies dealing with  health effects of kraft pulp mill odors are

inconclusive.  The studies show that populations in the  area of an  uncontrolled

kraft  pulp mill are annoyed by  the odor, and that short-term effects

(vomiting, headaches, shortness of breath, dizziness) occur in some

individuals  after prolonged exposure.  These effects have been reported to

be  of  a  psychosomatic nature;   however, the evidence in  this reaard  is not

conclusive.    Studies indicate  that the sense of smell becomes rapidly

fatigued in  the  presence  of h^S at levels above the odor threshold.   This

olfactory fatigue prevents the  odor from beina perceived over  the lona

term.  When  oerceotion  of the odor becomes weaker or disaooears, the effects
                        8
of the odor  also  cease.


 2.3  EFFECTS OF  ATMOSPHERIC TRS ON ANIMALS9

      Hydrogen sulfide produces  about the same health effects in domestic

 animals  as in man,  at approximately the same air concentrations.  The

Air Pollution Control Association Committee on Ambient Air Standards stated
                                                                     •3
 that spontaneous  injury to animals occurs at 150,000 to  450,000 yq/m  of

 hydrogen sulfide.   These  concentrations are, however, much hiaher than

expected to  result  from existina kraft pulp mill operation.
                                  2-8

-------
2.4  EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS ON VEGETATION10
     There is little evidence that hydroqen sulfide causes sianificant
injury to field crops at environmental  air conditions.
     Experiments have indicated that little or no injury occurred  to  29
                                                                     3
species of plants when they were fumigated with less than 60,000 yq/m  of
                                                                  3
hydrogen sulfide for five hours.  After five hours at 600,000 yq/m ,  some
species were injured, but not all.  Boston Fern, apple,  cherry,  peach
and coleus showed appreciable injury at concentrations of 600,000  yq/m .
At concentrations between 60,000 and 600,000 yq/m , qladiolus, rose,
castor bean, sunflower, and buckwheat showed moderate injury.  Tobacco,
cucumber, sal via, and tomato were sliqhtly more sensitive.
     In general, hydrogen sulfide injures the youngest plant  leaves rather
than the middle-aged or older ones.  Youna, rapidly elonaatina tissues are
the most severely injured.  Typical exterior symptoms are wilting, without
typical discoloration (which starts at the tip of the leaf).   The  scorching
of the youngest leaves of the plant occurs first.
2.5  WELFARE EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS
2.5.1  Effect on Property Values11'12
     Sociologically, such noxious odors can ruin personal and community pride,
interfere with human relations in various ways, discourage capital improvements,
lower socioeconomic status, and damage a community's reputation.   Economically,
they can strifle growth and development of a community.   Both industry and
Tabor prefer to locate in a desirable area in which to live,  work, and play;
and the natural tendency is to avoid communities with obvious odor problems.
Tourists also shun such areas.  The resultina decline in property  values, tax
revenues, payrolls, and sales can be disastrous to a community.
                                  2-9

-------
     In summary, the presence of odors may reduce the value  of property
within the affected area, depending upon the extent to which the odors are
considered objectionable to the buyer and seller of the property.
2.5.2  Effects  on Paint13
     Hydrogen sulfide  in the  atmosphere  reacts with  paint containing  heavy
metal  salts  in  the  pigment  and the drier to form a precipitate which  darkens
or  discolors the surface.   Lead,  mercury, cobalt, iron,  and tin salts cause
a gray or black discoloration; cadmium salts cause a yellowish-oranqe
discoloration.   Damage to  house paint caused by hydrogen sulfide emissions
from a kraft pulp mill has  been reported in the communities of Lewiston,
                                  14
Idaho, and Clarkston,  Washington.
      Lead is probably  the  most common metal to  exhibit discoloration
caused by the formation of black lead sulfides.   The most commonly used
white  pigment in the past  was basic lead carbonate.   Titanium dioxide
pigments  have now Generally replaced the use of lead carbonate in the paint
industry.  However, lead pigments continue to be used in the area of  road
coatings  because of the added durability they impart to paint films.
      Experiments have  shown that old lead-base  paints are more susceptible
to  hydrogen  sulfide damage  than are new ones.  These experiments have also
shown  that darkening is dependent on duration of exposure and concentration,
and can occur after exposure  to hydrogen sulfide concentrations as low as
       3
75  yg/m   for two hours. These experiments indicate  that paint darkening
by  hydroaen  sulfide depends on:   (1)  heavy metal  content of paint; (2) tem-
perature  and moisture; (3)  hydrogen  sulfide concentration;  (4)  acre and
condition of paint; and (5) presence  of  other contaminants  in  the air.
                                  2-10

-------
2.5.3  Effects on Metals15
     Copper and silver can tarnish rapidly in the presence of hydrogen
sulfide.  However, copper that has been exposed to unpolluted air for some
time resists attack by hydrogen sulfide.  Experiments have indicated that
hydrogen sulfide-sensitive metals, such as silver and copper, will  tarnish
                                                            o
when exposed to hydrogen sulfide concentrations above 4 yq/m  for 40 Pours
at room temperature.  Both moisture and oxygen must be present for tarnishing
to occur.  The sulfide coating formed on copper and silver electrical
contacts can increase resistance when the contacts are closed.  In some
cases, this can result in the contacts becomina welded shut.
     Some alloys of gold, even such a hiah-carat alloy as 69 percent aold,
25 percent silver and 6 percent platinum, will tarnish when exposed to
hydrogen sulfide.  However, gold (14-carat and above) and gold leaf
(95 percent gold and above) usually will not tarnish appreciably from
exposure to atmospheric hydrogen sulfide.
     Hydrogen sulfide will attack zinc at room temperature.  A zinc sulfide
film is formed which prevents further corrosion.  At high temperatures, the
attack is quite vigorous.  At concentrations normally found in the atmosphere
and at ambient temperatures, hydrogen sulfide is not corrosive to ferrous
metals.

2.6  RATIONALE
     Based upon the information provided in the preceding sections of Chapter 2,
is it clear that TRS emissions from kraft pulp mills have no significant
effect on human health.  TRS emissions, however, are highly odorous and
studies show that the population in the area of an existina kraft pulp mill
                                  2-11

-------
is annoyed by the odor.  Hydrogen sulfide also has  effects on paints and
metals at concentrations that can occur in the vicinity of existing  kraft
pulp mills.  The Administrator has concluded that TRS emissions from kraft
pulp mills do not contribute to  the endangerment of public health.  Thus,
TRS emissions will  be  considered a welfare-related pollutant for purposes
of Section lll(d) and  Subpart  B  of Part  60.
                                   2-12

-------
                            REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2

 1.   Preliminary Air Pollution, Survey of Hydrogen Sulfide,  A Literature
 Review.   U.  S.  Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare.   October 1969.
 pp  2-4;  29-32.
 2.   Op Cit,  Reference 1.   Table 1.
 3.   Adams, D.  F.,  and F.  A. Young.   Kraft Odor Detection and  Objectionability
 Thresholds.   Washington State University Progress Report on U.  S.  Public
 Health Service  Grant.  1965.
 4.   Leonardos,  G., et al.   Odor Threshold Determinations of 53  Odorant
 Chemicals.  Presented at 61st Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution  Control
 Association.  St.  Paul, Minnesota.   June 1968.
 5.   Pavanello,  R., and D.  Rondia.   "Odor Nuisance and Public  Health,  Part  2".
 Water Waste  Treatment.  June 1971.
 6.   Hydrogen Sulfide Health Effects and Recommended Air Quality Standard.
 Illinois  Institute for Environmental Quality.   PB-233-843.   March  1974.
 7.   Sullivan,  R. J.  Preliminary Air Pollution Survey of Odorous Compounds.
 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.   Raleigh, North Carolina.
 APTD 69-42.   October 1969.  pp 8-9.
 8.   Op Cit,  Reference 6.   pp 17-22.
 9.   Op Cit,  Reference 1.  pp 6-7.
10.   Op Cit,  Reference 1.  p 12.
11.   Op Cit,  Reference 7.   pp 1-2.
12.   A Study  of the Social  and Economic Impact of Odors.  Copley International
Corporation.   EPA Contract No. 68-02-0095.  February 1973.
                                   2-13

-------
13.   Op Cit,  Reference 1.   pp  16-19.
14.   "A Study of Air Pollution  in  the  Interstate Region of Lewiston, Idaho,
and Clarkston, Washington".   Public  Health  Service  Publication  999-AP-8.
1964.
15.   Op Cit,  Reference 1.   pp  19-20.
                                    2-14

-------
                3.   INDUSTRY  CHARACTERIZATION
3.1    Geogra ph i c D i s tr i b u t: on
     As of December 1975, there were 56 firms operating about 120
kraft pulping mills in 28 states.  Most U.S. kraft pulping mills
and mill capacity is found in the South. "Alabama, Georgia, and
Louisiana are the leaders.  Alabama has 13 mills and 10 percent
of U.S. mill capacity.  Georgia has 11 mills and 13 percent of U.S.
mill capacity.  And Louisiana has 11 mills and 11 percent of U.S.
capacity.  Over the past 20 years, growth in the kraft pulping
industry has occurred mainly in the South.    However, recent 1974,
current 1975, and planned(1976 and later) modifications to existing
mills as well as plans for new mills are found in all sections of
            •>
ene country.  -
3.2    Integration and Concentration
     Only about 1/3 of the 56 firms are producers of pulp, paper,
and/or paperboard exclusively.  The others  are engaged in a wide
variety of activities.  The activities include chemical  manufacture,
detergent production, magazine publishing,  land development, and can
production.  The degree of dependency on kraft pulping and related
activities varies among these horizontally integrated firms.  Whereas
International Paper Company derived 55.6 percent of their 1974
sales from pulp, paper, and paperboard production; Ethyl Corporation
derived 11 percent of 1974 sales from pulp and paper operations.
     Besides being horizontally integrated,  the U.S.  kraft pulping
industry is highly concentrated.  The 6 largest firms in terms of mill
capacity account for 40 percent of U.S. kraft pulp capacity.  The
10 largest account for 56 percent of U.S. kraft pulp capacity.
                                  3-1

-------
     Vertical integration is another characteristic of the U.S.  kraft
pulping industry.  Only 41 U.S. kraft pulping mills are listed in the
directory of world market pulp producers.  The most prevalent kraft
grade listed is bleached hardwood followed closely by bleached soft-
wood.  Moreover, appearance in the directory does not mean the mills'
pulp cannot be used captively.  When available, pulp for market is
produced at the designated mills, However, nearly all  kraft pulo
(about 90 percent) produced in the U.S. is not marketed; but is used
captively.   In fact, 109 kraft pulping mills also have facilities at
the same location for producing paper end paperboard.  However, these
mills cannot always satisfy the kraft pulping requirements of the
paper and paperboard facilities.  Often times, intracompany transfers
from other U.S. and Canadian mills are required to fill the kraft
pulping voids.
3.3    International Influence
     The U.S.  kraft pulping industry is not devoid of foreign influence.
Pulp, paper, and paperboard production in other countries, especially
Canada, has a  pronounced  influence en U.S. kraft pulping firms and
trade balances.  Although the U.S. is the world's largest producer of
kraft pulp and the fourth leading exporter (behind Canada, Sweden,
and Finland),  the U.S. has been a net importer of kraft pulp.  Over
90 percent of  the kraft pulp imported to the U.S. comes from Canada.
This is not surprising in view'of the earlier statement about intra-
company transfers and the fact that a third of the U.S. kraft pulp
producers have kraft pulping facilities in Canada.
     The aforementioned industry characterization statements were
derived primarily from Appendix A and Tables  3-1  and  3-2.   Appendix A  displays
                                 3-2

-------
           Table 3-1.  SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS:  FIRMS-MILL NUMBER AND  CAPACITY
                                           DISTRIBUTION
                                                            Capacity
                                                           U.S. Mills
         Firm
Allied Paper, Inc.
 (sub. of SCM)
Alton Box Board Co.
American Can Co.
Appleton Papers, Inc.
  (Div. of NCR)
Boise Cascade Corp.
Bowater, Inc.
Brown Co.
Champion International
Chesapeake Corp. of Va.
Consolidated Papers, Inc.
Container Corp. of Amer.
  (sub. of Marcor)
Continental Can Co.
Crown Zellerbach
Diamond Int'l Corp.
Federal Paper Board
  Co., Inc.
Fibreboard Corp.
Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Gilman Paper Co.
P.H. Glatfelter Co.
Great Northern Nekoosa
  Corp.
Green Bay Packaging, Inc.
Gulf States Paper Corp.
Hamrnermill Paper Co.
Hoerner Waldorf Corp.
Hudson Paper Co.
ITT Rayonier, Inc.
Inland Container Corp.
* U.S. Mills
1
1
2
1
5
2
1
3
1
1
2
4
5.5
1
1
1
4
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
1
1
Ii5
% U.S. Total
1
1
2
1
4
2
1
3
1
1
2
3
5
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
Megagram
Per Day
445
590
1,125
163
3,438
1,360
635
2,430
1,043
358
2,040
3,355
3,824
385
1,088
408
5,007
998
454
2,276
590
794
777
1,950
861
1,133
1,100
Tons
Per Day
(490)
(650)
(1,240)
(180)
(3,790)
(1,500)
(700)
(2,680)
(1,150)
(395)
(2,250)
(3,700)
(4,216)
(425)
(1,200)
(450)
(5,520)
(1,100)
(500)
(2,510)
(650)
(875)
C856)
(2,150)
(950)
(1,250)
(1,213)
% of U.S.
Total
<1
<1
1
negligible
4
1
<1
3
1
negligible
2
4
4
negligible
1
negligible
5
1
negligible
2
<1
<1
<1
2
<1
1
1
                                               3-3

-------
          Table 3-1 (Continued).  SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS:   FIRMS-MILL NUMBER AND
                                              CAPACITY DISTRIBUTION
                Firm
     International Paper Co.
     Interstate Container Corp.
     Kemberly-Clark Corp.
     Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co.
       (Div. of Premoid)
     Longview Fibre Co.
     Louisiana Pacific Corp.
     MacMillan Bloedel Ltd.
     Mead Corp.
     Mosinee Paper Corp.
     01 in Kraft,  Inc.
     Owens-Illinois,  Inc.
     Oxford Paper
        (Div. Ethyl Corp.)
     Packaging Corp.  of
       Amer.  (A Tenneco  Co.)
     Permtech  Papers, Inc.
     Pineville  Kraft  Corp.
     Potlatch  Corp.
     Procter  &  Gamble Co.
     St.  Joe  Paper Co.
      St.  Regis  Paper  Co.
      Scott Paper  Co.
      Simpson  Lee  Paper Co.
      Southland Paper  Mills, Inc.
      Southwest Forest Industries
      South Carolina  Industries
        (79% owned by  Stone Con-
        tainer Corp.)
      Tempie-Eastex,  Inc.
        (sub.  of Time, Inc.)
      Union Camp Corp.
     Western  Kraft
     Westvaco  Corp.
     Weyerhauser  Co.
                                                                 Capacity
                                                                U.S. Mills
# U.S. Mills
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
2
1
% U.S. Total
12
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
Meg ag ram
Per Day
14,500
500
530
290
1,723
635
840
2,837
160
1,043
1,610
530
Tons °
Per Day
(15,985)
(550)
(585)
(320)
(1,900)
(700)
(925)
(3,128)
(175)
(1,150)
0,775)
(585)
I of U.S.
Total
14
<1
<1
<]
1
<1
<1
4
<1
1
2
<1
                                                     703    (775)
                                              <1
1
1
2
1
1
4
3.5
1.5
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
3
1
2
1
1
163
800
1,225
816
1,180
4,880
2,450
690
816
545
612
(180) n
(880)
(1,350)
(900)
(1,300)
(5,381)
(2,700)
(760)
(900)
(600)
(675)
egli(
<1
1
<1
1
5
3
<1
<1
<1
<1
                                                   1,180   (1,300)
3
3
4
7
3
3
3
6
4,517
1,243
3,858
5,620
(4,980)
(1,370)
(4,254)
(6,195J_
5
1
5
6
Totals
56
119
95,750   (105,567)
                                              3-4

-------
            Table 3-Z.   SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS:  STATES-MILL NUMBER AND CAPACITY
                                           DISTRIBUTION
                                                                    State Mill
                                                                     Capacity
       State
    A1abama
    Arizona
    Arkansas
    California
    Florida
    Georgia
    Idaho
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Maine
    Maryland
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    New York
    North Carolina
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    South Carolina
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Virginia
    Washington
    Wisconsin

Totals     28
Number of
Mills
13
1
6
4
8
11
1
2
11
6
1
2
2
4
1
1
1
5
1
1
7
3
4
2
6
4
7
4
% of U.S.
Total
11
1
5
3
7
9
1
2
9
5
1
2
2
3
1
1
1
4
1
1
6
3
3
2
5
3
6
3
Megagram
Per Day
9,325
545
4,925
1,732
8,400
12,250
860
835
10,570
3,583
603
750
785
4,270
1,090
635
535
5,125
490
1,450
5,357
780
4,983
1,156
4,145
4,127
5,310
1,140
Tons
Per Day
(10,280)
(600)
(5,430)
(1,910)
(9,260)
(13,505)
(950)
(920)
(11,655)
(3,950)
(665)
(825)
(865)
(4,707)
(1,200)
(700)
(590)
(5,650)
(540)
(1,600)
(5,906)
(860)
(5,494)
(1,275)
(4,570)
(4,550)
(5,854)
(1,256)
% of U.S.
Total
10
1
5
2
9
13
1
1
11
4
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
5
1
2
6
1
5
1
4
4
6
1
119
95,750   (105,567)
                                             3-5

-------
kraft in-ill characteristics.  Table 3-1 exhibits mill number and
capacity distribution by firm.  Table 3-2 exhibits mill number and
capacity distribution by state.
                           3-6

-------
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3
1.  Guthrie, John A.   An Economic Analysis of the Pulp and  Paper Industry.
    Pullman, Washington, Washington State University Press, 1972,  pp.  1-15.
2.  Van Derveer, Paul  D.  Profiles of the North American Pulp and  Paper
    Industry.  Pulp & Paper.   June 30, 1975.   pp. 32-33; 36-38;  43-44;
    48-49.
3.  Wood Pulp Statistics 36th Edition.  Pulp  & Raw Materials Group,  New  York,
    American Paper Institute, Inc., October 1972.  pp.  63-83.
                                3-7

-------
                         4.  PROCESS DESCRIPTION

     Manufacturing of paper and paper products is a complex process which is
carried out in two distinct phases:  the pulping of the wood and the manufacture
of the paper.  Pulping is the conversion of fibrous raw material, wood, into
a material suitable for use in paper, paperboard, and building materials.
The fibrous material ready to be made into paper is called pulp.  There are
four major chemical pulping techniques:  (1) kraft or sulfate, (2) sulfide,
(3) semichemical, and (4) soda.
     Of the two phases involved in paper-making, the pulping process is the
largest source of air pollution.  Of the four major pulping techniques, the
kraft or sulfate process produces over 80 percent of the chemical pulp produced
annually in the United States.

4.1  KRAFT PULPING PROCESS
     Pulp wood can be considered to have two basic components, cellulose and
lignin.  The fibers of cellulose, which comprise the pulp, are bound together
in the wood by the lignin.  To render cellulose usable for paper manufacture,
any chemical pulping process must first remove the lignin.
     The kraft process for producing pulp from wood is shown in Figure 4-1.
In the process, wood chips are cooked (digested), at an elevated temperature
and pressure in "white litruor", which ts a water solution of sodium sulfide (NagS) and

-------
CfL
Lul
>
o
                               T
                      Noncondensables
                                                      T
                                                    Vent Gases
          	Wood	>

         -White Liquors
          (NaOH + Na2S)
                             Condensate


                               	Pulp
                DIGESTER
                SYSTEM
                  Exhaust Gas
               ^/ater—>
        1s  White
         J— l.i
Liquor
          (recycle to
           digester)
                          RECOVERY
                          FURNACE
                          SYSTEM
                              PULP
                              WASHERS
                                                                                 Pulp
                                                                              «-Water
                                                      Weak Black Liquor>'
              Vent Gases
                                                             Cond
     None
ensate—
-------
sodium hydroxide (NaOH).  The white liquor chemically dissolves lignin from
the wood.  The remaining cellulose (pulp) is filtered from the spent cooking
liquor and washed with water.  Usually, the pulp then proceeds through
various intermittent stages of washing and possibly bleaching, after which
it is pressed and dried into the finished product (paper).
     The balance of the process is designed to recover the cooking chemicals
and heat.  Spent cooking liquor and the pulp wash water are combined to
form a weak black liquor whieli is concentrated in a multiple-effect evaporator
systems to about 55 percent solids.  The black liquor can then be further concentrated
to 65 percent solids in a direct-contact evaporator, which evaporates water  --—-•—--^------
by bringing the liquor in contact with the flue gases from a recovery furnace.
The strong black liquor is then fired in a recovery furnace.  Combustion of
the organics dissolved In the black liquor provides heat for generating
process steam and converting sodium sulfate (NagSO^) to Na^S.  To make up
for chemicals lost in the operating cycle, salt cake (sodium sulfate' ) is
usually added to the concentrated black liquor before it is sprayed into the
furnace.  Inorganic chemicals present in the black liquor collect as a molten
smelt at the bottom of the furnace.
     The smelt, consisting of sodium carbonate (Na2C03) and sodium sulfide,
is dissolved in water to form green liquor which is transferred to a
causticizing tank where quicklime (CaO) is added to convert the sodium
carbonate to sodium hydroxide.  Formation of the sodium hydroxide completes
the regeneration of white liquor, which is returned to the digester system.
A calcium carbonate mud precipitates from the causticizing tank and is
calcined in a lime kiln to regenerate quicklime.
                                  4-3

-------
4.2  DESCRIPTION OF INDIVIDUAL PROCESS FACILITIES
4.2.1  Digester System
     Wood chips are cooked with wMte liquor at aBout 170 to 175°C and at
pressures ranging from 6.9 to 9.3 x  10  pascals  (100 to 135 psig).  Gases
formed during  digestion  are  vented to  "relieve"  the digester and maintain
proper cooking pressure.  At some mills the gases are  first cooled to condense
and  recover turpentine  before venting.  The condenser  cooling  water recovers
the  heat and may be used in  some other process.   There are two types of digester
system:   batch and continuous.   At the end of the cooking cycle in a batch
digester system, the contents of the digester are transferred  to  an atmospheric
tank usually referred to as  a blow tank.   Here the major portion  of the spent
cooking  liquor containing the dissolved lignin is drained and  the pulp is
transferred to the initial  stage of washing.  Steam and other  gases that flash
from the blow tank are piped to a  heat recovery unit.   This  blow of the digester
is not applicable to continuous digester systems.  Most kraft  pulping  is presently
done in  batch digesters, although  increasing numbers of continuous digesters
are being employed in the industry.
4.2.2  Brown Stock Washer System
      Pulp from the digester  system normally passes through the knotter which
 removes  chunks of wood not digested  during cooking. The pulp  then is  washed
countercurrently with water  in  several  sequential stages.  On  leaving  each
 stage,  the pulp is dewatered on a  vacuum  filter, and the water drains  into
 filtrate tanks.  The washers are normally hooded to collect  the vapors that
 steam off the open washers.
4.2.3 Multiple-Effect Evaporator  System
      Spent cooking liquor from  the digester system is  comBined wtth the brown
stock washer discharge  to form  weak  (dilute)  black liquor.  Multiple-effect
                                  4-4

-------
evaporators are utilized to concentrate the weak, black liquor from an initial
12 to 18 percent sol Ids to a final level of 40 to 55 percent solids.  Usually,
five or six evaporation units (effects} make up t&e system.  Each effect
consists of a vapor head and a Beating element.  Hot vapors from the vapor
head of a previous effect pass to the heating element of the following effect.
The effects are operated at successively lower pressures, which causes a
decrease in the boiling point of the liquor.  Vapors after the final effect
are condensed rapidly enough to maintain a high vacuum.  Two types of barometric
condensers are used:  direct contact condensers and surface condensers.  Each
type of condenser is equipped with a steam ejector to remove noncondehsables.
4.2.4  Recovery Furnace System
     The purposes of burning concentrated black liquor in the kraft recovery
furnace are:   (a) to recover sodium and sulfur, (b) to produce steam, and
(c) to dispose of unwanted dissolved wood components in the liquor.  In most
instances, liquor of 60 to 65 percent solids content will burn in a self-
supporting combustion.
     The recovery furnace theoretically is divided into three sections:  the
drying zone, the reducing zone, and the oxidizing zone.  The black liquor is
introduced to the furnace through spray guns located in the drying zone.  The
heat in the furnace is sufficient to evaporate the remaining water from the
liquor.  The dried  solids fall to the hearth to form the char bed.
     Combustion of  the black liquor char begins on the hearth of  the furnace.
Air for combustion  is supplied by a forced-draft system to the reducing and
oxidizing zone of the furnace.  Since a reducing atmosphere is required to
convert sodium sulfate and other sodium-base sulfur compounds to  sodium
                                4-5

-------
sulfide, only a portion of the air required for complete combustion is supplied
to the char bed through the lower or primary air ports.   The heat released by
the combustion in the zone is sufficient to liquefy the chemicals in the char
and to sustain the endotheraic reduction.  The liquefied chemical, or molten
smelt, is continuously drained from the furnace hearth-
     Air is admitted through secondary- and terttary air ports- aBove the primary
zone to complete the combustion of the volatile gases from the char in the furnace.
     There are two main types of recovery furnace systems.  The first type
employs a direct-contact evaporator to provide the final stage of evaporation
for the black, liquor.  This ts accomplished by bringing the BlacR. liquor in
direct contact with, the furnace's exhaust gases.  This furnace type is called
a conventional or direct-contact system.  A conventional system is shown in
Figure 4-2.  The second type of recovery furnace system employs an indirect-
contact evaporator as the final evaporation stage; this type is called a
noncontact, direct-fired, or "low odor" system.  A noncontact system is shown
in Figure 4-3.  The majority of the furnace systems in operation are the conventional
type.
      In addition,  so-called  cross-recovery is  practiced at  several  mills. ;This
 practice is  where  the  waste  liquor  from neutral  sulfite semi-chemical  (NSSC)
 cooking is combined  with  the black  liquor  from the  kraft mill prior to  burning.
 The  inorganic content  of  the NSSC liquor will  join  the  bulk of  inorganics
 and  occur in the  smelt from  the  furnace, substituting for the sodium sulfate
 normally added in  the  kraft  recovery  cycle to  cover losses  of chemicals.
                                   4-6

-------
Air
Sme" t
                                 Coition
                                    9as
       I---*
65% Solids
                                        DIRECT CONTACT
                                          EVAPORATOR
.__,
                                                                       DEVICE
                        T
                      Vent    '
                      Gases   '
Snllrf
                                                                     BLACK LIQUOR
                                                                                                      Exhaust
                                                                                                      Gas
                                                                                          Black Liquor
          Figure 4-2.  Direct Contact (Conventional)  Recovery Furnace System With Black  Liquor Oxidation

-------
-p.
I
00
             Air
             Smel t
                   rf
                   4:
                                     \
                         RECOVERY  FURNACE
                                        65% Solids
_Combus_tipn_ gas_
INDIRECT
CONTACT
EVAPORATOR
<—i
                     	*
             PARTICULATE
               CONTROL
                DFVTr.F
                                                                                                                    E.
-------
4.2.5  Smelt Dissolvtng Tank
     The smelt dissolver is a large tank located below the recovery furnace
hearth.  Molten smelt (sodium carbonate and sodium sulfide) that accumulates
on the floor of the furnace is dissolved in water to form green liquor in the
tank.  The tank is equipped with an agitator to assist dissolution, and a steam
or liquid shatterjet system to break up the smelt stream before it enters the
solution.  Contact of the molten smelt with the water causes the evolution of
large volumes of steam, which must be vented.
4.2.6  Lime Kiln
     The lime kiln is an essential element of the closed-loop system that
converts green liquor (solution of sodium carbonate and sodium sulfide) to
white liquor.  The kiln calcines the lime mud (calcium carbonate which precipitates
from the causticizer) to produce calcium  oxide (quicklime, CaO).  The quicklime
ts vetted  (slaked! by the water tn the green liquor solution to form calcium
hydroxide, ;CaCOftI2» for the causticizihg reaction.
     The kraft pulp industry typically uses large rotary kilns that are capable
of producting 36 to 360 megagrams (40 to 400 tons) of quicklime per day.   Lime
mud is fed in at the elevated end as a 55 to 60 percent solid-water slurry.  The
mud is contacted by hot gases produced by the combustion of natural gas or fuel
oil and proceeding through the kiln in the opposite direction.  Large motors
turn  the entire  kiln at  low  speeds  (1-2 rpm), causing the  lime to  proceed
downward through the kiln  toward the high-terperature zone  (980 to 1090°C;
1800  to 2000°F)  to discharge at the lower end.  As  the mud  moves along,  it
dries  in the  upper section, which may  be equipped with chains or baffles to
give  the wet mud better  contact with the gases.  As  the lime  mud moves down
farther, it agglomerates into  small pellets  and finally is  calcined  to calcium
oxide in the  high-temperature  zone  near the  burner.
                                    4-9

-------
     Fluidized bed calciners are presently being used at four kraft pulp mills,
but the production rate of each kiln at this time is under  136  megagrams  (150 tons)
of  lime  per  day.
4.2.7  Black Liquor Oxidation Systejn
     Black, liquor oxidation is the. practice of oxidizing  the  sodium sulfide in
either weak, or strong black, liquor to sodium th.ios.ulfate  or possibly  higher
oxidation states.  Black, liquor oxidation is designed to  decrease  the emissions
from the direct contact evaporator by producing a negligible  sodium sulfide
 concentration in  the black, liquor.   In  those mills  which, oxidize black, liquor,
 air is most often used.   However,  molecular oxygen  has- been used instead of
 air at two mills.  Sparging reactors,  packed towers, and bubble tray columns
 have been used in single or multiple stages to provide intimate contact
 between the liquor and air.
 4.2.8  Condensate Stripping System
      When digester and multiple-effect evaporator off-gases are condensed,
 some TRS gases are partially dissolved  in the condensate.  To prevent the
 release of kraft odor from the water treatment ponds, the TRS compounds can
 be stripped from the digester and  multiple-effect evaporator condensates
 prior to being discharged to the ponds.   The two  principal  ways of stripping
 are air stripping and steam strippino.   Stripping can be performed in multistage
 (multiple tray) columns with a large countercurrent flow of air or steam.
                                    4-10

-------
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
1.   Atmospheric Emissions from the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Industry,
    EPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973, page 5.  (Also published by NCASI as
    Technical Bulletin No. 69, February 1974).
                                  4-11

-------
                               5.   EMISSIONS





5.1  NATURE OF EMISSIONS



     The characteristic kraft mill  odor is caused principally by a variable



mixture of hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl  sulfide, and dimethyl



disulfide.   All  of these qases contain sulfur, which is  a necessary component



of the kraft cooking liquor.



     Hydrogen sulfide emissions originate from breakdown of sodium sulfide,



which is a corr.^cnent of the kraft cooking liquor.  Methyl mercaptan and



dimethyl sulfide are formed in reactions with the wood component lignin.



Dimethyl disulfide is formed through the oxidation of mercaptan groups derived



from the thiolignins.



5.1.1  Hydrogen  Sulfide



     Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a weak acidic qas which partially ionizes  in



aqueous solution.  The ionization proceeds in two staqes with the formation



of hydrosulfide  and, with increasing pH, sulfide ions



                         H2S Z HS"  + H+ -t S= + 2H+    (5-1)



                              increasing pH ->



     Black liquor contains a hiah concentration of dissolved sodium sulfide



in strongly alkaline solution.  If  the pH were depressed, the sodium sulfide



would hydrolyze  to sodium hydrosulfide.  Below pH 8, appreciable unionized



hydrogen sulfide would form as the  reaction equilibria in equation 5-1  moves



from right to left.  It is reported that at a pH of about 8.0, most hydrogen
                                   5-1

-------
sulfide forms hydrosulfide ions.  Consequently, in normal black liquor conditions,
there is very little dissolved hydrogen sulfide in the liquor.
     Due to the equilibrium between the hydrosulfide  ion and water vapor,
hydrogen sulfide gas can be stripped from black liquor at  steam vents.  There
could be, therefore, a significant concentration of H2S  in  the evaporator
areas of the kraft mill.
     Hydrogen sulfide is formed  in the recovery furnace  and lime  kiln as the
sulfur-containing compounds from the black  liauor or  lime  mud are volatilized
and  reduced.  Hydrogen sulfide generally represents the  largest gaseous emission
from the  kraft  process.
5.1.2   Methyl Mercaptan
     Methyl  mercaptan  (MeSH)  is  a reduced sulfur compound  which ~;s  formed
during the  kraft  cook by the  reaction of hydrosuKide ion  and thf methoxy-lignin
                      2
 component of the  wood:
                Lignin  - OCH3  + HS" •*• MeSH + Lignin -  0~     (5-2)
 Methyl  mercaptan  will also dissociate in an aqueous solution  to methyl mercaptide
 ion.  It is reported  that  this dissociation is essentially completed  above  a
 pH of 12.0.  Methyl  mercaptan is, therefore, present in low  concentrations as
 a dissolved gas in  the  black  liquor.  As the pH decreases,  MeSH gas  is evolved.
      Methyl mercaptan  is primarily emitted  from the digester  relief  and blow
 where  it is formed,  and from  the brown stock washers  where the pH of the liquor
 drops  below the equilibrium point.  Emissions decrease as  the residual
 concentration  in  the  liquor diminishes.
 5.1.3   Dimethyl Sulfide
      Dircethyl  Sulfide  (MeSMe) is primarily  formed through  the reaction of methyl
mercaptide  ion  with  the methoxy-lignin component of the  wood.    It  does not,
 however,  dissociate  as  hydrogen  sulfide  and methyl mercaptan  do:
                                    5-2

-------
               Lignin - OCH3 + MeS~ + Lignin - 0~ + MeSMe   (5-3)
Dimethyl  sulfide may also be formed by the disproportionate of methyl
mercaptan.   At normal liquor temperature (150-200°F) it is highly volatile.
5.1.4  Dimethyl  Disulfide
     Dimethyl  disulfide (MeSSMe) is formed by the oxidation of methyl mercaptan
throughout the recovery system, especially in oxidation towers:
                      4 MeSH + 02 2 2 MeSSMe + 2 H20   (5-4)
Dimethyl  disulfide has a higher boiling point than any of tne other compounds
and its retention in the liquor is therefore greater.

5.2  UNCONTROLLED TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR EMISSIONS
     Uncontrolled total reduced sulfur (TRS) emissions are listed in table 5-1
for each of the TRS sources under consideration.  These emission rates are for
a 907 megagrams per day (1000 tons per day) kraft pulp mill.  Table 5-1
also lists typical gas volume rates for each source.
5.2.1  Recovery Furnace System
     TRS emissions are generated both in the furnace and in the direct-contact
evaporator.  The furnace generated TRS concentration is as high as several
hundred parts per million (ppm) and as low as 1 ppm depending on the furnace
design and operation.  Recovery furnace emissions are affected by the relative
quantity and distribution of combustion air, rate of solids (concentrated black
liquor) feed,  spray pattern and droplet size of the liquor fed, turbulence in
the oxidation zone, smelt bed disturbance, and the sulfidity and heat content
value of the liquor fed.  The impact of these variables on TRS emissions is
independent on tho. absence or presence of a direct-contact evaporator.
     TRS  emissions generated in the direct-contact evaporator depend largely
on the concentration of sodium sulfide in the black liquor.  Acidic gases such
                                  5-3

-------
as carbon dioxide in the flue gas react with sodium sulfide in the black  liquor
to form hydrogen sulfide.
     Uncontrolled TRS emissions  from  a conventional recovery  furnace  system
range from 0.75 to  31 grams  per  kilogram  (1.5  to 62 pounds per ton)  of air
dried pulp and average about 7.5 grams per  kilogram  (15 pounds per ton) of air
dried pulp (ADP).   This is  an averaae of about  550 ppm.
5.2.2  Digester System
     The noncondensable gases from  the relief  system  and  the  blow tank vent
contain TRS  concentrations as high  as 30,000 ppm.   Both  stream--  are  so.iietimes
referred to  as digester  "noncondensables".  TRS  compounds formed  in  the digester
are  mainly methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide  and  dimethyl disuKide.   Uncontrolled
TRS  emissions from  a digester system  *-ange  bet>'eep 0.24 and 5.25  g/k^ ADP
 (0.47 and  10.5 Ib/ton ADP) and average about 0.75  g/kg ADP (1.5 Ib/ton ADP)
 at a concentration  of  9,500 ppm.    Operating variables that affect diqester
 TRS emissions include the black liquor recycle rate,  cook duration, cooking
 liquor sulfidity (percentage of sodium sulfide to total alkali, Na2S and NaOH,
 in white liquor),  and residual  alkali  level.
 5.2.3  Multiple-Effect Evaporator  System
      The noricondensable gases from a multiple-effect  evaporator (MEE) system
 consist of air drawn in through system leaks  and reduced sulfur compounds that
 were either in the  dilute black liquor or formed during the evaporation process.
                                                             o
 TRS emissions from  the MEE system  are  as high as 44,000 ppm.   Uncontrolled
 TRS emissions from  a MEE system average about 0.5 g/ka ADP (1.0 Ib/T ADP) at
                             O
 a concentration of  670C ppm.
      The type of condenser used can influence the concentration of TRS emissions.
 Certain types of condensers (e.g.  direct-contact) allow the noncondensable qases
 and the condensate  to mix, which results in a limited quantity of hydrogen
                                  5-4

-------
Table 5-1. TRS EMISSIONS FROM AN UNCONTROLLED 907 ft
(1000 TONS PER DAY) KRAFT PULP MILL*1 -
Source
Recovery Furnace
Digester System
Multiple-Effect
Evaporator System
Lime Kiln
Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving Tank
Condensate Stripper
System
Typical
Exhaust Gas
Flow Rate
m3/s(acfm)
212(450,000)
3(6,200)
1(2,200)
37(79,200)
71(150,000)
14(30,000)
27(58,100)
2(4,000)
TRS Emission Range
ppm g/kq ADP (Ib/T ADP)
18-1303 0.75-31(1.5-62)
1525-30,000 0.24-5.3(0.47-10.5;
92-44,000 0.015-3.2(0.03-6.3)
3-613 0.01-2.1(0.02-4.2)
0.005-0.5(0.01-0.9)
3-335 0.005-0.37(0.01-0.73)
5-811 0.007-1.9(0.013-3.70)
-
[EGAGRAMS PER DAY
Average^ TRS
ppm g/s(lb/hr)
550 79(625)
9,500 8(63)
6,700 5(42)
170 4(33)
30 2(13)
35 0.5(4)
60 1(8)
5000 10(83)

Emission Rate
g/kg ADP(lb/T ADP)
7.5(15.0)
0.75(1.5)
0.5(1.0)
0.4(0.8)
0.15(0.3)
0.05(0.1)
0.1(0.2)
1.0(2.0)
^'Uncontrolled emission data for condensate strippers were obtained from Reference 13.   Data  for all  other sources
were obtained from Reference 5.

^'Average values listed are calculated from data listed in Reference 5.   Insufficient informt+ion was available in
Reference 5 to evaluate the operation of the units for which data were reported.

-------
sulfide and methyl mercaptan gases dissolved in the water.   This reduces  the
TRS concentration from the system, but increases the sulfide level  in the
condensate.  Sulfidity and pH of the weak black liquor also have an effect on
the TRS concentration from the multiple-effect evaporators.  Higher sulfidity
levels result in higher TRS emissions.  TRS levels increase with decreasing pH levels.
5.2.4  Lime Kiln
     TRS emissions can be generated in the lime kiln proper and in the downstream
scrubber which is normally installed to control particulate emissions.
     TRS emissions originating in the lime kiln are affected by the oxygen
content of the exhaust, the kiln length to diameter ratio, the  lime mud sulfide
content, cold-end exit gas temperature, and simultaneous burning of sulfur
bearing materials contained in the  lime mud (e.g.  green liquor dregs; the
                                                       Q
impurities resulting from clarifying the  green  liquor).
      If  digester and  evaporator  condensates are used as  lime kiln  scrubber
water, reduced  sulfur compounds  can be stripped into the  exit qas  stream.
If  the scrubbing liquor contains sodium sulfide,  as it does in  some
installations,  H2S  may be formed in the scrubber  from the reaction of ^S,
C02,  and water  in the same  manner as it is in the direct  contact evaporator.
     Uncontrolled TRS  emissions  from a  lime kiln  average about  0.4 g/kg ADP
(0.8 Ib/T ADP) at a concentration of 170  ppm.   TRS  emissions from  lime kilns
range between 3  and 600 ppm (0.02 to 4.2  Ib/T ADP) depending on combustion
characteristics  of the individual kilns.
5.2.5  Hrown Stock Masher System
     TRS emissions from the brown stock washers arise primarily from the
vaporization of the volatile reduced sulfur compounds. TRS compounds emitted
are principally dimethyl sulfide  and dimethyl  disulfide.
                                5-6

-------
     Uncontrolled TRS-emissions from the brown stock washer system average
about 0.14 g/kg ADP (0.27 Ib/T ADP) at a concentration of 30 ppm.  About
0.05 g/kg ADP (5-37 ppm) are emitted from the hood vent and about 0.08 g/kg ADP
(240-600 ppm) are emitted from the filtrate tank (under) vent.
     Brown stock washer TRS emissions are affected by the wash water source,
water temperature, degree of agitation and turbulence in filtrate tank, and
blow tank pulp consistency.    TRS emissions will increase significantly if
contaminanted condensate from the digester and evaporator systems are used for
washing.  Higher temperatures and agitation result in increased stripping of
the TRS during the washing.
5.2.6  Black Liquor Oxidation System
     TRS emissions from the oxidation system are created by the stripping of
the reduced sulfur compounds from the black liquor by air passing through the
liquor.  Uncontrolled TRS emissions (principally dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl
disulfide) are in the range of 0.005 to 0.37 g/kg ADP (about 3 to 335 ppm)
                                   •jo
and average 0.05 g/kg ADP (35 ppm).    Oxidation systems that use only molecular
oxygen have the advantage of emitting virtually no off-gases because the
total gas stream rexacts in the sparge system.
     Primary factors affecting TRS emissions from black liquor oxidation
systems are the inlet sulfide content, the temperature of the black liquor,
residence time, and the air flow rate per unit volume.  TRS emissions tend to
increase for higher liquor temperatures and greater air flow rates because of
greater volatility of the gases and stripping action of the air, respectively.
TRS emissions also tend to increase with increasing sulfide concentrations in
the incoming black liquor and with increasing residence time.
5.2.7  Smelt Dissolving Tank
     Because of the presence of a small percentage of reduced sulfur compounds
in the smelt, some of these odorous materials escape the tank with the flashed
                                  5-7

-------
steam.  Uncontrolled TRS emissions are as high as 2.0 g/kg ADP (811 ppm) and
                                                                      13
as low as non-detectable.  The average is about 0.1 g/kg ADP $60 ppm).
     Several factors affect the TRS emissions.  Among these are the water
used in the smelt tank, turbulence of the dissolving water, scrubbing liquor
used in the particulate control device, pH of scrubbing liquor, and sulfide
content of the particulate collected in the control device.    The use of
contaminated condensate in the smelt tank or the scrubber can result in the
stripping of TRS compounds into the gas stream.  Turbulence can increase the
stripping action.  Increased h^S formation can occur with a increase in sulfide
content of the scrubbing liquid and a decrease in pH of the scrubbing liquor.
5.2.8  Condensate Stripping System
     Presently there are onjy five condensate strippers in operation in the
U.S. kraft pulp industry.  Actual TRS emission data are unavailable, but TRS
emissions from condensate strippers are expected to be high because the condensate
contains high concentrations of dissolved TRS compounds.    The stripping
efficiency is greater than 95 percent.    Uncontrolled TRS emissions are
estimated to be about 1 g/kg ADP (5000 ppm) from a condensate stripping system.
5.3  TYPICAL'TRS EMISSIONS
     Typical controlled TRS emissions are listed in table 5.2 for each of the
sources under consideration.  These values represent average TRS emissions
from existing facilities, based on the information listed in Appendix A.
Appendix A lists emission rates for five sources (recovery furnaces, lime kilns,
digesters, aultipie-effect evaporators, and brown stock washers) at each kraft
pulp mill in the United States.  Information in Appendix A was obtained from
the literature, state pollution control agencies, and the kraft pulp mills.
Emission rates for uncontrolled sources are average uncontrolled values (See
section 5.2)  for the industry, except where actual levels are known.  Controlled
                                  5-8

-------
                             Table 5-2.  TRS EMISSIONS FROM THE EXISTING KRAFT PULP INDUSTRY
Average Uncontrolled Level
Source :
Recovery Furnace
Digester System
Multiple-Effect
Evaporator System
Lime Kiln
Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving Tank
Condensate Stripper
System
ppm
550
9500
6800
170
30
35
60
5000
g/kg ADP
(lb/T ADP)
7.5
(15.0)
0.75
(1.5)
0.5
(l.o)
0.4
(0.8)
0.15
(0.3)
0.05
(0.1)
0.1
(0.2)
1.0
(2.0)
Percent Capacity
Control ledU)^
88.7
58.4
58.6
28.2
2.8
2.1
-
100
Typical Controlled Level
ppm
5-70
5
5
5-40
5
0-10
-
5
g/kg ADP
(lb/T ADP)
0.075-1.05
(0.15-2.1)
0.01
(0.02)
0.01
(0.02)
0.0125-0.1
(0.025-0.2)
0.01
(0.02)
0.0-0.01
CQ.O-Q.Q2)
-
0.01
(0.02)
Average National
ppm
92
4050
2920
130
30
35
60
500
g/kg ADP
(lb/T ADP!
1225
(2.5)
0.32
(0.64)
0.22
(0.43)
0.31
(0.62)
0.15
(0.3)
0.05
(0.1)
0.1
(0.2)
0.11
(0.22)
Emissions
megagrams
39,000
10,000
6,700
9,700
4,420
1,470
2,940
0.4
( 'Percentage based on mills controlled by existing state regulations, plus information collected
during previous surveys.

-------
levels listed are the actual  levels where these were known;  otherwise the
applicable state standard is  listed.
     Table 5.2 also gives an  estimate of the percentage of facilities presently
controlled, and the TRS level to which they are most frequently controlled.
These estimates on the percent of facilities controlled are based on existing
or soon to be adopted state regulations.  The estimates also include information
obtained from various surveys of the industry on controlled facilities which
are not presently covered by state regulations.
      In most cases the typical emissions from existing facilities are equal
to or near the uncontrolled  levels.  A few mills presently control TRS
emissions from the brown stock washers,  smelt dissolving tanks,  lime kilns,
and black liquor oxidation system.   The  other TRS sources have been controlled
to some extent by a  large percentage of  the  industry.  The typical TRS
emissions from these sources are discussed  in  the following sections.

5.3.1  Recovery  Furnace  System
      TRS emissions from  direct  contact  systems  depend  on the design and operation
of the recovery  furnace  and,iff utilized,  an oxidation system.   A survey of
32 recovery furnace  systems  where  black  liquor oxidation is not  used shows TRS
emissions ranging from 35 to 1300  ppm,  representing  0.75 to 31 g/kg ADP  (1.5 to
62 Ib/T ADP).  The average is 7.7  g/kg  ADP  (15.4 Ib/T  ADP).  A survey of 17
units that utilize black liquor oxidation  indicates  a  broad TRS  emission ragge
of 0.1 to 13.0 g/kg ADP  (0.2 to 25.9 Ib/T ADP), with an average  value of 3.7
g/kg  ADP (170 ppm).    TRS emissions  from noo-contact  systems are usually
confined to a narrow range of about  0.015 to 0.15 g/kg ADP (1 to 11 ppm).
      Based on Appendix A, it is estimated that TRS emissions from about 89
percent of the existing furnaces are either controlled by black  liquor oxidation
                                   5-10

-------
or have been replaced with or converted to a non-contact system.
It is also estimated that the average national emission level is 1.25 g/kg ADP
(92 ppmv).
5.3.2  Digester and Multiple-Effect Evaporator Systems
     The digester and multiple-effect evaporators will be considered together
because their emissions are normally combined for treatment.  Until recently,
the noncondensable gases were in most cases vented to the atmosphere uncontrolled.
However, several mills now incinerate the gases to control odors.  Most comonly,
the gases are burned in the lime kiln.  Based on EPA tests,   incineration can
reduce TRS emissions to less than 5 ppm (Q.0075 g/kg ADP).  It is estimated
that approximately 58 percent of the mills are incinerating these gases or are
installing systems to incinerate these noncondensables.  White liquor (caustic)
scrubbers are used at a few mills.  These scrubbers are only effective in
removing hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan.  TRS emissions from these
scrubbers are estimated to be aboit 0.5 g/kg ADP (1 Ib/T ADP).
     Based on Appendix A, the average national emission rate from digester
systems is calculated to be 0.32 g/kg ADP (0.64 Ib/T ADP).  The average
national emission rate from multiple-effect evaporators is calculated to be
0.22 g/kg ADP (0.43 Ib/T ADP).  These values are based upon 58 percent being
controlled to 5 ppm and 42 percent being uncontrolled.
5.3.3  Lime Kiln
     TRS emissions from a lime kiln installation are dependent on the operation
of the kiln, the mud washing efficiency, and the type of water used in the
scrubber.  Only about 28 percent (See Appendix A) of the kilns are actually
operated to control TRS emissions.  This percentage is mostly based on kilns
affected by existing state or local regulations.  Based on this percentage of
                                 5-11

-------
controlled kilns, the calculated average national emission rate for lime kilns
is 0.31 g/kg ADP (130 ppm).
5.3.4  Condensate Stripping System
     All the condensate strippers in operation are controlled for TRS emissions.
Incineration is the control technique used at four mills.  The TRS emissions
from these sources are estimated to be 5 ppm as mentioned in section 5.3.2.
A caustic scrubber is utilized at the remaining one mill, but no data is
available on the TRS emissions.
     The average national emission rate is estimated to be 0.11 g/kg ADP
(0.22 Ib/T ADP).  This is based on 5 ppm TRS being achieved  at 4 mills and
50 percent control at the mill that uses a caustic scrubber.
5.3.5  Brown Stock Masher Systems, Black Liquor  Oxidation Systems.aand
       Smelt Dissolving Tanks
     These three sources are generally  not controlled  for TRS emissions.
However, two U.S. mills incinerate the  vent  gases from the brown stock washer
systems.  Two other U.S.mills  use molecular  oxygen in  their  black liquor
oxidation system, which results  in no vent gases and no TRS  emissions.  One
mill is controlling TRS emissions from  the brown stock washers by a chlorine
scrubber.  One other mill  is controlling TRS emissions from  their brown stock
washers and black liquor oxidation system by a chlorine gas  injection system.
                                  5-12

-------
 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5
 1.  Shih, T. T., Hrutfiord, B. F., Sarkanen,  K.  V.,  and  Johanson,  L.  N.,
     Hydrogen Sulflde Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium In Aqueous Systems As a
     Function of Temperature and pH. TAPPI,  50(12), 630-4,  1967.
 2.  McKean, W. R., Hrutfiord, B. F., Sarkanen,  K. V.,  Kinetic  Analysis  of
     Odor Formation 1n the Kraft Pulping Process, TAPPI,  48(12), 699-7UJ, 1965.
 3.  Shih, T.,T., Hrutfiord, B. F., Sarkanen,  K.  V.,  Johonson,  L. N.,
     Methyl Mercaptan Vapor-Liquid Equilibrium 4n Aqueous Systems As a
     Function of Temperature and pH. TAPPI,  50(12), 634-8,  1967.
 4.  Control of Atmospheric Emissions in the Mood Pulping industry, Environ-
     mental Engineering Inc., and J. E.  Sirrine Company,  Final  Report, EPA
     Contract No. CPA-22-69-18, March 15, 1970.
 5.  Atmospheric Emissions from the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Industry,
     EPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973.  (Also  published by NCASI as Technical
     Bulletin No. 69, February 1974).
 6.  Reference 5, Table 14.
 7.  Reference 5, Table 3.
 8.  Reference 5, Table 7.
 9.  Suggested Procedures for the Conduct of Lime Kiln  Studies  to Define
     Emissions of Reduced Sulfur Through Control  of Kiln  and  Scrubber  Operating
     Variables. NCASI Special Report No. 70-71,  January 1971.
10.  Reference 5. Table A-5.
11.  Factors Affecting Emission of Odorous Reduced Sulfur Compounds from
     Miscellaneous Kraft Process Sources, NCASI  Technical Bulletin  No. 60,
     March 1972.
12.  Reference 5, Table 21.
13.  Reference 5.
                                  5-13

-------
14.  Butryn, 6.  L.  and Ayers,  K.  C.,  Mead  Experience  in  Steam  Stripping
     Kraft Mill  Condensate, presented at TAPPI  Environmental Conference,
     May 14-16,  1975.
15.  Air Emisslon Control Program For Hoerner Waldorf Corporation  Mill
     Expansion Missoula, Montana, submitted by Hoerner Waldorf Corporation
     to Montana State, March 12, 1974.
16.  Reference 5 , Table 15.
17.  Malodorous Reduced Sulfur Emissions From Incineration of Non-condensable
     Off-gases.  EPA  Test Report  73-KPM-1A.
                                    5-14

-------
          6.  CONTROL TECHNIQUES  FOR TRS  FROM  KRAFT  PULP  MLLLS

6.1  ALTERNATIVE CONTROL TECHNIQUES
     The various control techniques that  have  been or  can be  applied
to the emission sources affected  by NSPS  is  discussed  in  this section.
The affected sources: are the  recovery  furnace,  digester system,
multiple-effect evaporator system, lime kiln,  brown  stock washer
system, black liquor oxidation system, smelt dissolving tank, and
condensate stripper system.   The  applicability and effectiveness of the
control techniques when retrofitted on existing facilities is also
discussed.  Table 6-1 summarizes  the control techniques and corresponding
TRS levels achievable for each source  of  TRS.   Section 6.2 discusses
alternative control systems for entire kraft pulp mills.   Retrofit
models are presented which permit estimates  to  be made of required
costs for retrofitting existing facilities with, the  alternative
control systems.
6.1..1  Recovery Furnace System
     TRS emissions from a recovery furnace system can originate in the
recovery furnace its,elf, or in the direct contact evaporator  if this
type of evaporator is. us.ed.  Most existing recovery  furnace systems
have direct contact evaporators.  About 75 percent of the new recovery
furnaces that have been installed in the  last 5 years are, however, of
the non-contact desfgn.  In these furnaces,  the furnace flue  gases
never directly contact the black  liquor and TRS cannot be formed in the
                              6-1

-------
             Table 6-1.  TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROLLING TRS EMISSIONS
                            FROM SOURCES IN A KRAFT PULP MILL
     Source
           Control
          Technique
   Achievable TRS
       Level
Recovery furnace
Digester system
Multiple-effect
  evaporator  system
Lime kiln
Brown stock
  washer system  '

Black liquor
  oxidation system
Smelt dissolving
  tank

Condensate stripping
  system
1)  Process controls +
    black liquor oxidation
                        2)  Process controls +
                            conversion to non-contact
                            evaporator
1)  Caustic scrubbing

2)  Incineration

1)  Caustic scrubbing

2)  Incineration

1)  Process controls

2)  Process controls +  good
    mud washing

3)  Process controls, good mud
    washing + caustic scrubbing

1)  Incineration


1)  Molecular oxygen

2)  Incineration

1)  Fresh water usage


1)  Caustic scrubbing

2)  Incineration
20 ppm (Old design
        furnaces)
 5 ppm (New design2
        furnaces)
25 ppm (Cross recovery
        furnaces)

20 ppm (Old design
        furnaces)
 5 ppm (New design
        furnaces)
25 ppm (Cross recovery
        furnaces)

     7,000 ppm3

        5 ppm

      350 ppm3

        5 ppm

       40 ppm

       20 ppm


        8 ppm


        5 ppm


        0 ppm

        5 ppm

   0.0084 g/kg BLS
                                                                   5 ppm
'Old design furnaces are defined as furnaces without welded wall or membrane wall
 construction or emission-control designed air systems.
2New design furnaces are defined as furnaces with both welded wall  or membrane wall
 construction and emission-control  designed air systems.
3Calculated based upon scrubber removing only hydrogen sulfide and  methyl  mercaptan
 and using reference 5 to determine percent of hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan
 present in vent stream.

-------
evaporator.  The non-contact furnace was first introduced in
1967.
     Several operating and design variables that have some effect on,
or relationship to, the generation of TRS emissiona in a recovery
furnace have been identified.  These include the quantity and manner
of introduction of combustion air, the rate of solids (concentrated
black liquor) feed, the degree of turbulence in the oxidation zone,
the oxygen content of the flue gas, the spray pattern and droplet
size of the liquor fed the furnace, and the degree of disturbance of
              1 2
the smelt bed. '   The effect of these variables is independent of the
absence or presence of a direct contact evaporator.  There is no
evidence that sulfide content of the liquor combusted in the furnace
                                                                      o
bears any relationship to the TRS emissions from the recovery furnace.
This is not to be confused, however, with sulfur compounds generated
or stripped in a direct contact evaporator.
     The age of existing furnaces has been reported to be a significant
indicator of the furnace's ability to control TRS emissions.    (The
typical life of a recovery furnace is considered to be 25 years.  )
Generally,the  age reflects an absence or lack of refinement in
controls and instrumentation that assist the operator in maintaining
close control of the process.  Also, older furnaces may not incorporate
recent manufacturers' improvements, such as new;means of introducing
air, flexibility in distributing air in the furnace and means to change
ai.r velocity at injection ports.   Furthermore, a major design change
was made to recovery furnaces in late 1964.  This change consisted of
                                 6-3

-------
installing a jnembrane between the wall tubes, located in front of the
furnace's wall insulation.  Thi.s design change made the furnace air-
tight.  The wall insulation on furnaces, without this membrane wall
concept tends to deteriorate.  This allows air to leak into the furnace.
Thi.s in turn affects; the combustion in the furnace and reduces
significantly the capability of the operator to control TRS emissions.
These older recovery furnaces could be modified to incorporate
these new design features, but the modifications would be extremely
          Q
expensive.   However, changes in operating procedures can more easily be
made.
     There are  two  control  techniques  to  reduce TRS  emissions from the
direct contact  evaporator:   black  liquor  oxidation and  conversion to
a non-contact evaporator.   Black  liquor oxidation  inhibits  the reactions
between the  combustion  gases and  black liquor  that normally generate
hydrogen sulfide.   This  is  accomplished by oxidizing the Na2S to
Na^SpO- in the  black liquor before  it  enters the direct contact
evaporator.  In  converting  to a non-contact evaporator, the direct
contact between  furnace  gases, and  black liquor is eliminated, and
hydrogen sulfide formation  is prevented.
     There are  several modes, of operation of black liquor oxidation
systems..  The black liquor  is sometimes oxidized before being
concentrated in the multiple-effect evaporators (weak black liquor
oxiddtion), sometimes following evaporation (strong black liquor
oxidation]  and sometimes, both, before and after.   Air is the normal
oxidizing agent, but molecular oxygen is  also used when available on
site.  Air sparging reactors are the most  common  units,  but
                                6-4

-------
packed towers and bubble tray towers are also used.
     In modifying an existing recovery furnace with, a direct contact
evaporator to a non-contact design, a black liquor evaporator
(concentrator) and a second feed water economizer is necessary.  In
addition, elimination of the. existing direct contact evaporator will
result in an increased parti.culate concentration discharge from the
furnace system into the. particulate control device.  To maintain
particulate emissions at the original level, it will be necessary
to replace the existing collector with a new higher efficiency
precipitator or install an additional secondary collector.  This
conversion to a non-contact design has. been accomplished by at least
two pulp mills.
     At one recovery furnace system, erected in 1966, where the
conversion was made, TRS emissions decreased from approximately 400
                    q
ppm to about 10 ppm.   Modifications also included changes to the
operation of the furnace, such as, oxygen content and air distribution.
Therefore, a portion of the TRS reduction is attributable to decreased
emissions of TRS from the furnace system.
     TRS emissions from direct contact systems depend on the design
and operation of the recovery furnace and the black, liquor oxidation
system.  An analysis, of 2QQ stack gas samples showed the relation
between oxidation efficiency and TRS emissions, presented in Table 6-2.
Since these samples were taken at stacks on new recovery furnaces, the
furnace TRS contribution is assumed to be negligible.    The data
show: a clear relationship between oxidation efficiency and TRS
                              6-5

-------
                       Table. 6-2
Relationship of Oxidation Efficiency and
                                                  Emissions
                                                            11
Oxidation
Efficiency
Percent
80-85
85-90
90-94
94-96
96-98
98-99
99-100
               Number
                of
               Samples
                8
                15
               29
               18
               15
               19
               96
            H0S. Emissions
 gO/Kg
Max  Win  Wean
4.1  0.75  2.3    8.1
3.0  0.05  1.6    6.0
3.3  0.25  1.2    6.6
2.2  0.05  0.9    4.3
1.4  0.05  0.65   2.8
1.1  0.0   0.35   2.1
1.6  0.0   0.2    3.2
Lb bLS/Ton Pulp
    Win   Mean
   1.5
   0.1
   0.5
   0.1
   0.1
   0.0
   0.0
                                4.6
                                3.2
                                2.4
                                1.8
                                1.3
                                0.7
                                0.4
                                6-6

-------
emissions.  Emissions from the direct contact evaporator will'.'be
eliminated by conversion to a non-contact type system.  As. mentioned
previously, neither black liquor oxidation nor conversion to a non-
contact system are effective in reducing TRS emissions from the
furnace proper.
     TRS emission tests conducted during the NSRS development program
indicate that TRS emissions from new recovery furnaces can be controlled
                  12
to at least 5 ppra.    During the NSPS program, three recovery furnaces
Ctw.o direct contact systems and one non-contact system) were tested
by EPA.  TRS emissions averaged from the individual furnaces are 1.4
ppm (_6 tests, each 4-hours) Q.6 ppm (6 tests, each 4-hours), and
3.9 ppm (_S tests, each 4-hours).  Only one 4-hour test showed emissions
greater Cabout 7 ppra) than 5 ppm.
     One furnace manufacturer indicates that many recovery furnaces built
since 1965 are basically the same design as new furnaces built today, and
that these should also be capable of achieving 5 ppm TRS with good process
control and either black liquor oxidation or conversion to a non-contact
           13
evaporator.    These existing recovery furnaces, defined as "new design"
furnaces, were designed for low TRS emissions (i.e., incorporates manufacturer's
improvements) and will have stated in their contracts that these furnaces
                                                            14
were constructed with air pollution control as an objective.     Recovery
furnaces, mainly those built before 1965, that were not constructed with
air pollution control as an objective, have a somewhat different desiqn,
as mentioned previously, and are not capable of achieving 5 ppm TRS
(4-hour average basis).   These furnaces, defined as "old design" furnaces,
                                6-7

-------
can generally achieve about 15 to 20 ppm TRS with good process control
                                                                     15
and black liquor oxidation or conversion to a non-contact evaporator.
This TRS level (15 to 20 ppm) is presently being achieved by existing
recovery furnaces (see AppendixB), many built before 1965, in those
                                                             16
states which have TRS regulations of 17.5 ppm (daily average).  Some
existing furnaces may have difficulty achieving even this level (20 ppm)
if they are operating at a much hiqher Airing rate than originally
designed or do not have the sufficient combustion control capability.
     Cross recovery liguors are somewhat different than straight kraft
liquor, and, therefore, it is possible that the TRS emissions from a cross
recovery furnace are not controllable to the same degree  as are those from
the straight kraft furnace.  There are three reasons why  TRS emissions
may be higher from cross recovery furnaces.    The first  relates to the
sulfur content of the liquor which is higher with this process than in
straight kraft processes.  In cross recovery operations,  the heat content
of the black liquor is lower than found in straight kraft mills.  This is
because the NSSC process gives higher pulp yields than the kraft process
and, as a consequence, the spent liquor associated with the NSSC process
contains less organic content.  Therefore, its Btu value  is lower as compared
with kraft black liquor.  The third reason pertains to the restriction on
excess oxygen available in cross recovery furnaces to oxidize the relatively
large quantities of volatile sulfur compounds given off as a consequence
of the heavy sulfur loading and lower furnace operating temperatures.  If
enough excess oxygen is supplied to completely oxidize all volatile sulfur
compounds, a sticky dust problem will  develop which can plug up the
precipitator and render furnace operation  impossible.
                              6-8

-------
                      18
      Based on a study   conducted on one cross-recovery furnace, cross-
recovery furnaces which experience areen liquor sulfidities in excess of
28 percent and liquor mixtures of more than 7 percent NSSC on an air dry
ton basis can not achieve the same TRS levels as straight kraft recovery
furnaces.  Emission data reported in the study indicate that TRS emission
levels of 25 ppm, corrected to 8 percent oxygen, can be achieved from
well-controlled cross-recovery furnaces.
     A recently developed control technique for recovery furnaces is alkaline
adsorption with carbon activated oxidation of the scrubbing solution.
Pilot'plant studies indicate that this technique can reduce TRS emissions
                                            19
from 20 to 2500 ppm to between 1 and 10 ppm.    Reduction in particulate and
S0_ emissions are also reportedly achieved.  This technique could be used
to control TRS emissions on those older existing furnaces or cross  recovery
furnaces which do not have the combustion control capability for low TRS
emissions.  This technique could prevent the need to replace or reduce the
load on older existing furnaces that are not capable of achieving the
necessary TRS regulations.
 6.1.2  Digester and Multiple-Effect Evaporator Systems
      The digesters and multiple-effect evaporators will be considered
 together because non-condensable gases discharged from these two
 sources are nerraally combined for treatment.   At least half the mills are
 incinerating the gases, to destory odors.   Most commonly, the gases  are
 burned  in the lime kiln.   However, a few special  gas-fired incinerators
 are also used,  either as  backup for the kiln  when it is shutdown,  or
 as the  full  time control  deyi.ce.
      Retrofitting an  existing mill to handle  and incinerate these
 non-condensable  gases  is  apparently no significant problem.   Generally,
 it is simply a matter of  ducting the gases to the kiln or incinerator
 and  installing  necessary  condensers and gas holding equipment.   The
                               6-9

-------
non-condensable gaaes. are added to the primary air to the  kiln.
This retrofit situation has now been performed at over sixty mills.
     The blow gases from batch digesters are generated in  strong
bursts,  that normally exceed the capacity of the  lime kiln.   For this
reason, special gas handling equipment has been  developed  to make
                           ?n
the gas. flows more uniform.  Adjustable volume gasholders, with
movable diaphragms or floating tops, receive the gas surges, and a
small steady stream is bled to the kiln.  Although the non-condensable
gases form explosive mixtures in air, possible explosion hazards
have been minimized by- the development of appropriate  gasholding
systems, flame  arresters  and  rupture  disks  in  the  gasholding ducts,
and flame-out controls, at the lime kiln.  Incineration of  these
gases in existing process equipment such as the  lime kiln  is particularly
attractive since no additional fuel is required  to achieve effective
emission control.
     Scrubbers are used at a few existing mills.  White liquor, the
usual scrubbing medium, is effective for removing hydrogen sulffrde and
                                                                 21
methyl mercaptan, but not dimethyl sulfide or dimethyl disulfide.
At least 3 mills  scrub the noncondensable gases before incineration to:
0] recover sulfur, (2) condense steam, and (3) remove turpentine
vapors and mist, thereby reducing the explosion hazards.
     Combustion of noncondensable gases in a lime ki.ln or gas-fired
incinerator provides nearly complete destruction of TRS compounds.
During an  EPA test (conducted for NSPS)  on a separate incinerator
burning  noncondensables from a digester system and a multiple effect
                               6-10

-------
evaporator system, the  residual  unburned TRS was  less  than  5  ppm
                22
CQ.OI g/kg ADP)   .  The TRS test results (4-hour  averages)  of the
four tests conducted ranged between 0.5 and 3.Q ppm, and averaged
1.5 ppm Cdry gas  basis}.  During the tests, the Incinerator was
operating at 1000°F (measured! with, a calculated  retention  time for
the gases of at least Q.5 seconds.
     Scrubber efficiencies are much lower than properly operated
Incinerators because only hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan
react with the alkaline medium.  The composition  of noncondensible
gases is highly variable, but on the average hydrogen sulfide and
                                                       23
methyl mercaptan  comprise about half the TRS compounds.     Uncontrolled
emissions are ( 9,500 ppm] from the digester system and ( 6700 ppm)
                                           24
from the multiple-effect evaporator system.    Since caustic scrubbing
is only effective in controlling hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan,
alkaline scrubber efficiencies are, therefore, roughly 50 percent.
TRS emissions from a scrubber are calculated to be about 0.63 g/kg ADP
(0.59 g/kg  ADP from digester system and 0.04 g/kg ADP from multiple-
effect evaporator system! or abouf'7500 ppm.
6.1.3  Lime ICi.ln
     TRS emissions, principally hydrogen sulfide, can originate from
two areas in the  lime kiln installation, the lime kiln proper and a
scrubber that serves, as the particulate control device.  TRS emissions
from the lime kiln installation are controlled by maintaining proper
process conditions.   The most important parameters that were identified
in an industry (National Council of the Pulp and  Paper Industry for
                                  or
Air and Stream Improvement) study   include the temperature at the
                                 6-11

-------
cold end (.point of exhuast discharge) of the kiln, the oxygen
content of the gases leaving the kiln, the sulfide content of the
lime mud fed to the kiln, and the pH and sulfide content of the
water used in a parti.culate scrubber.  If contaminated condensate is
used as the scrubbing medium, the exhaust gases could strip out the
dissolved TRS and increase the TRS emissions from the lime kiln
installation.  Scrubbing the exhaust gases with a caustic solution
                                               26
can reduce the TRS emissions from a lime kiln.
     The amount of retrofitting necessary to achieve proper process
conditions depends on the design of the existing kiln installation.
If the existing kiln does, not achieve sufficient oxygen levels,
increased fan capacity or changes, to the scrubber system may be
necessary to increase the air flow through  the  kiln.  Molecular
oxygen can also be used  to replace a portion of the combustion air
to increase oxygen levels.  Additional  lime mud washing capacity may
also be necessary to reduce the sulfide content of the mud and
thereby reduce TRS emissions.  This may require replacement of
existing centrifuges, with, more efficient vacuum drum filters, and
the addition of another mud washing stage.  Furthermore, a mill
presently using condensate that contains dissolved reduced  sulfur
compounds for a scrubbing medium would have to either install a
condensate stripper to remove the dissolved TRS prior to the scrubber
or replace the condensate with fresh water.
     TRS emissions from existing lime kilns range from about 0.01 to
2.0 g/kg ADR (4 to 840 ppm), depending on the degree of control,  with
                               6-12

-------
                                           27
an average of about 0.4 g/kg ADP (168 ppm).    EPA tests (.conducted
for NSPS development} on two lime kilns indicate that lime kiln TRS
emissions can be reduced to below 20 ppm  (4-hour average) using process  controls.
Another lime kiln using caustic scrubbing in addition to process
control is eapable, based on EPA results, of TRS emissions below 8
ppm.(4-hour average).  When tested by EPA, all three lime kilns were burning
non-condensable gases from the digester system and multiple-effect
evaporator system.
     It appears that existing lime kilns can be retrofitted to also
achieve low TRS emissions.  TRS emissions from two existing 'lime kiln
installations have reportedly been reduced from over 100 ppm to less
than 20 ppm by modifying the lime mud washing systems and making
                                     28
adjustments in the process operation,       However, the TRS levels
to which existing kilns can he retrofitted depends on the load at
which the kiln is normally operated.  If the kiln is operated
sufficiently over design capacity, it may be very difficult to obtain
the oxygen levels necessary for low TRS emissions (a&out 20 ppm).
Discussions mth the kraft industry indicate that TRS emissions from
these lime kilns can be reduced, however, to about 40 ppm.
6.1.4  Brown Stock Washer System
     Nearly all existing kraft mills vent the brown stock washing
system gases directly to the atmosphere without control.  However, at
least three mills in the. United States and Canelda, and several
in Sweden, utilize the gases as combustion air in a recovery furnace.
The furnace systems handling these gases are newer furnace systems which
                                6-13

-------
which were designed to burn the washer gases.   No existing recovery furnace
(not designed for burning these gases) has yet been used to incinerate the
washer gases.
     As discussed in section 6.1.2 the residual TRS after incineration is
very low, less than 5 ppm (0.01 g/kg ADP).  Since the qas volume from the
                                  ?                 29
washer drums is large, about 112 nr/Mq (150 CFM/TPD;   the most likely
equipment for combustion is a recovery furnace or power boiler.  The gases,
due to their large volume, would have to supplement the recovery furnace's
combustion air requirements.  Even if the washers were enclosed with tiaht
hoods, the gas volume would be too large to burn in a lime kiln.  The
actual gas volume handle at one mill is 75 m3/Mg (100 CFM/TPD).  The gas
volume that would need to be handled at other  existing mills can be hiqher
or lower depending upon tightness of hooding and degree of condensing.
     The vent gases from the filtrate tank are considerably smaller in
                   o                o/-\
volume, about 4.5 m /Mg  (6 CFM/TPD).    This stream is sufficiently small
for combustion in a lime kiln, or blended with the hood vent gas and
burned in a recovery  furnace.
     Incineration of  the washer gases is a recovery furnace will not
affect furnace operation provided the moisture content of the qases
                 31
is not too qreat.     High moisture content can increase aaseous
sulfur emissions and  produce unsafe operating  conditions.  Red
(furnace) temperature decreases almost linearly with increased content
of vaporized water in the combustion air because of sensible heat
losses.  With decreased bed temperatures, S02 emissions increase at a
rapid rate and reduced sulfur compounds become increasinqly difficult
                                    6-14

-------
           32
to control.    Water entrained in the combustion qases can create
extremely dangerous conditions such as smelt-water explosions.
     One furnace manufacturer recommends that the washer gases be
incinerated only in the secondary or tertiary air zones of the furnace.
This would keep the moist washer gases away from the smelt bed.  Burninq
the gases only in the secondary or tertiary zones may affect the flexibility
of the recovery furnace,  however, since the operator would not have the
                                               33
ability to vary the air flow rate to each zone.
     High moisture content would result in an increase in gas flow and
reduce the capacity of the recovery furnace.
     An alternative to incineration of brown stock washer gases is
chemical scrubbing.  White liquor (caustic) scrubbing, as previously
mentioned, is only effective in controlling hydrogen sulfide and methyl
mercaptan.  However, the TRS emissions from a brown stock washer
                                                               34
system are principally dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide.    A
more effective system is reportedly a chlorination-caustic scrubbing
system.  In this system, the chlorine absorbs and oxidizes the dimethyl
sulfide and dimethyl disulfide.    This technique was installed at one
mill in February 1976 and tests conducted at that time demonstrated TRS
emissions of less than 5 ppm.    Another technique is chlorine gas injection.
This technique is used at one mill and tests conducted demonstrated TRS
emissions of less than 5 ppm and a control efficiency of 80 percent.37
6.1.5  Black Liquor Oxidation System,
      The vent gases from nearly all existing black liquor oxidation (BLO)
systems are emitted directly to the atmosphere without control.
                              6-15

-------
     One control technique is incineration.  Incineration has proved
highly effective in controlling similar streams in some mills, for
example, the vent gases from pulp washing systems, the noncondensable
gases from digesters and multiple-effect evaporators, and vent gases from
condensate strippers.  Similar to the pulp washing system, incineration in
the recovery furnace or power boiler is most likely, since the BLO gas
volume is usually too large to be handled by an existing kiln.  This
would result in no significant fuel penalty.
     Because of the high moisture content of the BLO gases, it would be
necessary to use  condensers to reduce the moisture content before
burning, especially if the moist washer gases are burned in the same
furnace.  Incineration of these moist qases in the furnace would probably
cause increased corrosion problems in the forced-draft fan ductwork and
the forced-draft fan itself.  This would probably necessitate the replace-
ment of this equipment with corrosion-resistant equipment.  A larger
forced-draft fan may be necessary to handle the increased mass flow due
                                                                       38
to the high moisture content of the gases, even after using condensers.
     The recovery furnace operation should not be adversely affected by
burning the BLO gases, even in combination with the washer gases,
provided the moisture content is sufficiently reduced and the gases are
                           39
burned high in the furnace.    Since the BLO qases are deficient in oxygen,
one furnace manufacturer suggests burning them in the secondary or
tertiary air zone but states that the gases should still contain
sufficient oxygen to preclude adversely affecting the furnace operation.
                                 6-16

-------
As mentioned in Section 6.1.4, the operational flexibility of the furnace is
reduced because a portion (BLO gases and washer gases) of the total combustion
air must always be introduced into the secondary and tertiary air zones and
cannot be used in the primary air zone when air in this zone is needed to
adjust furnace operation.
     Emissions will be reduced to low levels if oxidation vent gases are
burned.  Since these gases contain the same TRS compounds present in the
digester and multiple-effect evaporator off-qases which EPA tested after
incineration, TRS combustion residuals of the BLO vent gas will be less than
5 ppm.
     A second control technique is the use of molecular oxygen in oxidation
systems instead of air.  At least two mills in the United States now oxidize
black liquor by pumping oxygen directly into the black liquor lines.  There
are no vent gases from this closed system.  The economic feasibility of such
a system depends largely on the price and availability of oxygen.
     Another technique is chlorine gas injection.  This technique is used at
one mill on the vent gases from primary oxidation system.  Tests conducted
demonstrated TRS emissions of less than 5 ppm and a control efficiency of
95 percent.
6.1.6  Smelt Dissolving Tank
     Smelt dissolving tank TRS emissions are governed by process condi-
tions; that is; the presence of reduced sulfur compounds either in the
smelt or the water.  The principal control option available is the
choice of water in the smelt dissolving tank or the particulate control
device.  Clean water, low in dissolved sulfides, is preferable, although
                               6-17

-------
low emissions have been reported with  nearly all  process streams.•*
If TRS emissions are high  and  no particulate control  device (scrubber)
is used, a wet scrubber (e.g.,  packed  tower) can  be used to control  the
TRS emissions.  This scrubber would  also  result in controlling particulate
emissions.  One mill reportedly reduced TRS  emissions over 95 percent
from a level of about 0.19 g/kg of black  liquor solids (BLS)  (0.56 Ib/T ADP)
                                           42
when a packed scrubber tower was installed.
     TRS emissions from smelt dissolving  tanks  are normally low and  average
about 0.007 g/kg BLS (0.02 Ib/T ADP).43   EPA tests on two smelt dissolving
tanks indicate TRS emissions below 0.0084 g/kg  BLS (8 ppm).
These levels can be achieved on both new  and existing smelt tanks.
Both these smelt tanks have wet scrubbers for controlling particulates.
Weak wash liquor was used  as the scrubbing medium in  both scrubbers.
6.1.7  Condensate Stripping System
     In at least four United States  mills, dissolved  sulftdes and other
volatile compounds are stripped from the  digester and evaporator conden-
sates prior to discharge to treatment  ponds. One mill,  which uses steam
as the stripping medium, discharges  the gases from the stripper column
to a lime kiln.  Two mills use  air as  the stripping medium.   One of  these
incinerate the stripper gases  in a separate  incinerator, while the other
incinerates the gases in the recovery  furnace.  One mill, which uses steam,
is presently scrubbing the stripper  gases with  white  liquor,  but this
                                              44
technique is not as effective as incineration.
     As mentioned in Section 6.1.2,  incineration  has  proven to reduce
TRS levels from digester and multiple-effect evaporator  systems to less
than 5 ppm.   Since the vent gas from condensate strippers contains the

-------
same TRS compounds present tn the digester and multiple-effect
evaporator gases, TRS emissions in the condensate stripper gases after
incineration can be reduced to 5 ppm (0.01 g/kg ADP).
6.2  SUMMARY OF RETROFIT MODELS
     Section 6.1.1 through Section 6.1.7 have examined the various
control techniques that can be applied to each source of TRS emissions and
have quantified the emission levels that can be achieved by applying
these controls.  The economic and environmental impact of applying these
alternative control techniques will be discussed in Chapters 8 and 9,
respectively.  In order to assess the impacts of applying controls
simultaneously to the various TRS sources in the entire mill, various
alternative control systems (retrofit models) were developed.  The
alternative systems chosen range from controlling each TRS source to the
best achievable level, to controlling only the major TRS sources with
techniques less effective than best available technology.  The six
retrofit models that use alternative control systems are listed in
Table 6-2.  These six control systems were selected because the
differences between systems reflect major differences in the types
and costs of retrofits that would be carried out at an existing kraft
mill.  The economic and environmental impacts of these retrofit models
will be analyzed in conjunction with the present controls already
installed at each existing kraft pulp mill.  The six control  systems
are discussed below.
     Retrofit Model No. 1:  All eight TRS sources are controlled to
the level of best available control technology.  This system will
                                  6-19

-------
                                                    Table 6-2.   POSSIBLE CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR
                                                                 EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
Source
Recovery furnace

Digester system
Multiple-effect
evaporator system
Lime kiln


Brown stock
washer system
Black liquor
oxidation system
Smelt dissolving
tank
Condensate
stripper system
No. 1
Process control +
BLO/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls
+ caustic scrub-
bing/8 ppm
Incineration/5ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

Fresh water/8 ppm
(.0084 g/kg BLS)
Incineration/5 ppm

No. 2
Process control +
BLO/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls
+ caustic scrub-
bing/8 ppm
No control

No control

Fresh water/8 ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

Control Systems/emission level (ppm)
No. 3 No. 4
Process control +
BLO/20 ppm*
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls
+ caustic scruh-
bing/8 pom
No control

No control

Fresh water/8 ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

Process control +
BLO/20 ppm*
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls/
20 ppm

No control

No control

Fresh wat^r/S ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

No. 5
Process control +
BLO/20 ppm*
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls/
40 ppm

No control

No control

Fresh water/8 ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

No. 6
Process control +
BLO/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm

Process controls/
40 ppm

No control

No control

Fresh water/8 ppm

Incineration/5 ppm

*The 20 ppm levels applies to old design furnaces; new design furnaces can achieve 5 ppm with application of the same control technology
   (two-stage BLO).

-------
result in the lowest TRS emissions from a kraft pulp mill and will
require installation of a new furnace if the existing furnace is
relatively old and cannot achieve 5 ppm TRS.   In most cases, this
system will also require caustic addition to the existing scrubber
and the improvement or replacement of the lime mud washing facility in
order to achieve a TRS level of 8 ppm from the lime kiln.  TRS emissions
from the smelt dissolving tank will be controlled by using fresh water
in the tank and the particulate control device.  Incineration will be
used to control TRS emissions from the digester system, multiple-effect
evaporator system, brown stock washer system, black liquor oxidation
system and condensate stripping system.  The gases from the digesters,
multiple-effect evaporators and condensate strippers will be incinerated
in the lime kilns.  The gases from the washers and oxidation system
for purposes of impact analysis are assumed to be burned in a separate
incinerator since no existing recovery furnace has been modified to
handle these gases.
     Retrofit Model No. 2:  This control system is similar to
Retrofit Model No. 1 except that the vent gases from the washer system
and the BLO system are not incinerated.  This system was chosen as
a model because, based on the economic analysis performed for NSPS
development, these two smaller TRS emission sources are less cost effective
to control than the other sources.  It is assumed that these two sources
would be combined for treatment.  The cost of controlling one source is
related to the cost of controlling the other source because one
incinerator would be installed to handle both gas streams.  Therefore,
modifications made to an existing mill would generally be the same
whether both or only one of these sources is controlled.
                                6-21

-------
     Retrofit Model No. 3:  This control system is similar to
Retrofit Model No. 2 except that less effective control of a higher
TRS level from the recovery furnace is allowed.  This system was
chosen because the higher TRS level (20 ppm) will allow mainly older
recovery furnaces (mostly those built before 1965) to remain in operation.  The 5
ppm level as required in Retrofit Models No. 1 and No. 2 would probably
require these older furnaces to be replaced.  The cost impact of
Models No. 1 and 2 will be substantially greater than that of Model
No. 3 if furnace replacement is necessary.
     Retrofit Model No. 4:  This control system is similar to retrofit
Model No. 3 except that the lime kiln TRS level has been relaxed from
«  to 20 ppm.  This system would permit many kilns to achieve this
level without using caustic scrubbing.  The TRS emissions from the lime
kiln would be controlled by process controls and require the lime mud
washing facility to be improved or replaced.  Caustic scrubbing would
be a major expense if the caustic cannot be used in the pulping process
or a wet scrubber is not already used for particulate control.
     Retrofit Model No. 5:  This control system is similar to
Retrofit Model No. 4 except that the lime kiln TRS level has been
relaxed from 20 to 40 ppm.  This system would permit many kilns to
achieve the level without modifying the lime mud washing installation.
TRS emissions from the lime kilns would be controlled by using process
controls on the kiln itself.  Modifications to the mud washing system
are a major expense (see Chapter 8) in controlling TRS emissions from an
existing kraft pulp mill.
                                 6-22

-------
     Retrofit Model No. 6:  This system is similar to Retrofit Model
No. 5 except that all recovery furnaces are controlled to 5 ppm TRS
rather than 20 ppm.  This system was chosen to determine the differences
on the impacts in relaxing controls on the lime kiln (Model No. 5) in
comparison to relaxing controls on the recovery furnace (Model No. 3).
6.3  INSTALLATION AND START-UP TIME
     The amount of time necessary to retrofit an existing kraft mill
depends on what TRS sources are to be controlled and what technologies
are to be used.  It should also be pointed out that actual time require-
ments to implement a given control technology can vary widely depending
upon such factors as space limitations, weather conditions, lack of
                         j
available utilities, delays in equipment delivery, and time required to
develop engineering data.
     Table 6-3 presents estimates of the normal length of time required
to retrofit the various sources in order to bring them into compliance.
Table 6-3 shows that the time necessary for initial design and approval
can vary from 6 months to 3 years, depending on the source and the
complexity of retrofitting that source.  This time period includes:
     a.  Engineering design of the overall project;
     b.  Project fund approval;
     c.  Control  agency approval;
     d.  Order placement.
     Table 6-3 also presents estimates of the amount of time required
for installation  of the necessary equipment.  This time is for the
                               6-23

-------
                  Table 6-3.   DESIGN AND INSTALLATION TIMES*
. ... . - ^_- - - -

TRS source
Recovery furnace
Digester system
Multiple-effect
evaporator system
Lime kiln
Brown stock


Design and
approval
(months)
18-36
6
6
6-24
6-24
-- • . -

Installation
(months)
12-36
18
18
24
12-15
  washer system

Black liquor                                 6                         12
  oxidation system

Smelt dissolving                             6                         18
  tank

Condensate stripping                         6                         18
  system
*Based on discussions with various  companies  and manufacturers.  The actual  times

 of aooroval  and installation may over-lao to some extent.
                                    6-24

-------
period from the order date to start-up.  This installation time varies
from about one year for installing black liquor oxidation system to
three years for installing a new recovery furnace.
                             6-25

-------
  REFERENCES  FOR  CHAPTER  6

  1.   Factors Affecting Reduced  Sulfur  Emissions from the Kraft Recovery
  Furnace and Direct  Contact  Evaporator, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 44,
  December 1969.
  2.   JheEffect  of Combustion Variables on  the Release of Odorous Sulfur
  Compounds from  a  Kraft  Recovery  Furnace. Thoen,  G. N., De Haas, G. G.,
  Tallent, R. G., and Davis,  A.  S., TAPPI, 51(8):329-333, August 1968.
  3.   Op.  cit., Reference 1,  page  28.
  4.   Op.  cit., Reference 1,  page  31.
  5.   Meeting Report  - Babcock & Wilcox Company and  EPA, Durham, NC,
  May  1,  1975.
  6.   Op.  cit., Reference 4.
  7.   Op.  cit., Reference 5.
  8.   Op.  cit., Reference 5.
  9.   Improved Air  Pollution  Control  for a Kraft Recovery Boiler:  Modified
  Recovery Boiler No.  3.  Henning,  K., Anderson, W.,  and Ryan, J., EPA
  Report  No.  650/2-74-071-a,  August 1974.
 10.   Survey  of Current Black Liquor  Oxidation Practices in the Kraft
 Industry, NCASI  Technical  Bulletin No.  39,  December 1968.
 11.   Op.  cit., Reference 10, Table 6.
 12.   Standards Fupport and Environmental Impact Document, Volume 1:
 Proposedjjandjrds_pf_Performance for  Kraft Pulp  Mills, Environmental
 Protection Agency, September 1976.
 13.   Letter  from J. W. Kisner of Babcock & Wilcox Company to James
 Eddinger  of  EPA, dated May 27,  1975.
14.   Presentation given  by  Julius  Gommi of Combustion Engineering at the
NAPCTAC meeting  in  Raleigh, North  Carolina,  on March 3, 1'977.
                              6-26

-------
 15.  Op.  cit.,  Reference  13.
 16.  Monthly  Reports  obtained  from  the Washington  Department of
 Ecology  and the Oregon  Department of  Environmental Quality.
 17-  A Report on the  Study  of  TRS Emissions  from a NSSC-Kraft  Recovery Boiler,
 Container Corporation of  America, March  9, 1977.
 18.  Op.  cit.,  Reference  17, page 2.
 Ecology  and the Oregon  Department of  Environmental Quality.
 19.  Considerations in  the  Design for TRS and  Parti oil ate  Recovery from
 Effluents of  Kraft Recovery Furnaces, Teller,  A. J., and Amberg, H. R.,
 Preprint, TAPPI Environmental  Conference, May  1975.
 20.  Current  Practices  in Thermal Oxidation  of Noncpndensable  Gases jn the
 Kraft  Industry. NCASI Technical  Bulletin No. 34, November  1967.
 21.  Atmospheric Emissions  from  the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Industry,
 EPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973.   (Also published by NCASI as Technical
 Bulleton  No.  69, February 1974.)
 22.  Malodorous Reduced Sulfur Emissions from  Incineration of  Noncondensable
 Off-Gases. EPA  Test Report  No. 73-KPM-1A, 1973.
 23.  Op.  cit.,  Reference  21, Tables 3, 5, and  7.
 24.  Op.  cit.,  Reference  21, Tables 3, 5, and  7.
 25.  Suggested  Procedures for  the Conduct of Lime  Kiln Studies to Define
 Emissions of  Reduced  Sulfur Through Control  of Kiln and Scrubber Operating
 Variables, NCASI Special  Report  No. 70-71, January 1971.
 26.  Kraft Odor Control at  Mead  Papers,  Ayers, K.  C., Clutter, L. W.,  and
 Adams, A.  B., TAPPI,  September 1974.
 27.  Op.  cit.,  Reference  21, Table  A-5.
28.   Trip Report on Visit to the Champion International Mill in Pasadena,
 Texas, on April  4, 1975.
                            6-27

-------
29.   Factors  Affecting Emission of Odorous  Reduced  Sulfur Compounds
from  Mi'scellanepus  Kraft Process Sources,  NCASI  Technical Bulletin
No. 60,  March 1972.
30.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 29.
31.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 13.
.32.   Letter from S.  T.  Potterton of Babcock & Mil cox Company to James
 Eddinger of EPA, dated July 23, 1974.
33.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 5.
34.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 29,  page 6.
35.   Letter from H.  M. Patterson of Oregon  Department of Environmental
 Quality to James Eddinger of EPA, dated April 4, 1975; and letter from
 L. A. Broeren of Crown Zellerbach Corporation to Doug Ober of Oregon
 Department of Environmental Quality,  dated  January  10. 1975.
 36.   Telephone conversation between Chuck  Clinton  of Oregon Department
 of Environmental Quality and  James Eddinger of EPA  on December 6, 1976.
 37.   Monthly Reports obtained from the Humboldt  County Air Pollution
 Control  District.
 38.   Letter from Russell Blosser of NCASI  to FT*;! Boys of EPA dated
 November 17,  1972.
 39.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 19.
 40.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 37.
41.   Op.  cit.,  Reference 3, Table 25.
42.   Telephone  conversation between Richard Labrecque of S. D. Warren
 Company  and James Eddinger of EPA on  July  19, 1973.
43.   Op.  cit.,  Reference  41.
44.   Private  communication between Arthur  Plummer of Chesapeake Corpor-
ation and James Eddinger of EPA on February 13,  1975.
                               6-28

-------
             CHAPTER 7.   EMISSION MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE
                            TESTING TECHNIQUES AND COSTS

     This chapter discusses the various monitoring and compliance testing
methods that have or could be used in the kraft pulp industry, and also
discusses the rationale  leading to the selection of the reference test
method used for the TRS  source tests conducted during the SPNSS development
program.
7.1  EMISSION MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
7.1.1  Emission Monitoring
     Performance specifications for oxygen continuous monitors have already
been published in 40 CFR, Part 60, Appendix B, Performance Specification Three,
but it has not been demonstrated that these monitors will perform in the same
manner when used at a kraft pulp mill.  There is, however, no technical reason
to believe that they will not be able to meet these requirements.  A number of
commercially available instruments are capable of meeting the performance
specifications.  The cost of one of these instruments, installed, is in the
range of $9,000 to $11,000.
     Equipment is also commercially available for temperature monitoring.  This
can be accomplished using a thermocouple, electronic cold junction, and a
millivolt strip-chart recorder.  A system such as this could be purchased for
less than $2,000.  Instrumentation is also available for continuously monitoring
the pressure loss of the gas stream through the scrubber and for monitoring the
scrubbing liquid supply  pressure to the scrubber.
                                    7-1

-------
     At present, there are several types of instruments that have been used
to successfully measure TRS on a short-term basis.  However, some questions
remain about their reliability for data gathering on a continuous basis.  The
GC technique described in Method 16 was not designed to be used as a continuous
monitor and its suitability for this purpose has not yet been evaluated.
There are other systems which have been used on a long-term basis but necessary
maintenance and quality control procedures to insure that these monitors are
operating properly are still being developed.  Work is presently underway in
cooperation with the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement to evaluate
a number of different types of systems for their suitability as continuous
monitors.  Ultimately, this should result in published performance specifications
for  TRS monitors.
7.1.2  Compliance Testing
7.1.2.1  TRS Compounds  -  The need for an effective test method for measurement
of reduced sulfur emissions from stationary sources resulted from a new source
performance standard NSPS program to establish performance standards for a
variety of kraft mill unit processes with respect to malodorous emissions.  As
with previous NSPS programs, test methodology was needed to gather:  (a) accurate
data which would demonstrate emission limitations attainable through the use
of best available emission control systems; and (b) enough sampling and analytical
data such that a reference method for performance testing could be prescribed.
     At the inception of the NSPS kraft mill program in January 1972, a survey
was  made to evaluate existing test methods for potential use.  This survey
included a review of the literature, contact with mill personnel, and review of
previous research and evaluation of analytical techniques by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).  Since the degree to which methods are available for
field use in odor measurements is directly related to the complexity of the
odorant mixture to be measured, it was fortunate that the nature of emissions
                                    7-2

-------
from kraft pulping operations had been well-defined.  Emissions consist
primarily of sulfur dioxide (S02) and four reduced sulfur compounds  -
hydrogen sulfide (H2S), methyl mercaptan (CH-SH), dimethyl sulfide (DMS),
and dimethyl disulfide (DMDS).  These compounds are highly reactive,
particularly the H2S-S02 mixture which may form elemental sulfur, and are
present in low concentrations in well-controlled sources.  In addition, the
sources of these emissions (recovery furnaces, lime kilns, smelt dissolving
tanks, digesters, multiple-effect evaporators, washer systems, oxidation
systems, and condensate strippers) are characterized by high temperatures and
moist, parti oilate-laden effluent streams.
     After careful consideration, it was determined that an additive total
reduced sulfur (TRS) standard, reflecting all sulfur compounds present minus
SO-j was desired.  Considering this and the previously mentioned source condi-
tions, a field method which could measure reduced sulfur compounds, either indi-
vidually or collectively, was sought.
     7.1.2.1.1  Methods surveyed  -  A review of the literature revealed that
analytical methods fell into four main categories:  colorimetry, direct
spectrophotometry, coulometry, and gas chromatography.  Although most of the
methods surveyed were developed for measurement of ambient concentrations, this
did not preclude their possible application to the measurement of stack emissions.
                Colorimetry  -  A sample is bubbled through a solution which
selectively absorbs the component or components desired.  The absorbed compound
is then reacted with specific reagent to form a characteristic color which is
measured spectrophotometrically.
                An example of a colorimetric method is the methylene blue
method which involves the absorption of TRS compounds in an alkaline suspension
                                     7-3

-------
of cadmium hydroxide to form a cadmium sulfide precipitate.  The precipitate
is then reacted with a strongly acidic solution of N, N, dimethyl-P-phenylene-
diamine and ferric chloride to give methylene blue, which  is measured spectro-
photometrically.  Automated sampling and analytical trains using sequential
techniques are available for this procedure.  Inherent deficiencies for stack
sampling applications include variable collection efficiency, range limitations,
and interferences from oxidants.
                Another colorimetric method is the use of  paper tape samplers
impregnated with either lead acetate or cadmium hydroxide.  These compounds
react  specifically with H?S and the resultant colored compound can be measured
directly with a densitometer.  Tape samplers would not be  appropriate for all
TRS compounds unless they were all reduced quantitatively  to H^S.  In addition,
the range  is limited and the method suffers from light sensitivity, fading, the
necessity  for precise humidity control, and variability in tape response.
                Spectrophotometry  -  The use of infrared  and mass spectro-
photometry and other sophisticated spectroscopic methods for analysis of
individual odorants is well established.  However, these methods were considered
expensive, time consuming, and not suitable for routine field applications.
                One promising method in this area was split-beam ultraviolet
spectrophotometry, which utilizes the strong absorption of ultraviolet radiation
at 282 nm  by S02.  In this method, the gas sample is mixed with air, filtered,
and split  into two streams.  One stream passes through a catalytic oxidation
furnace where sulfur constituents are oxidized to SO,, and  then through an
optical cell where its absorbance is measured.  The second stream passes through
a dummy furnace and then into a reference optical cell.  The difference in
abosrbance values between the two cells is a measure of the non-SOp sulfur
                                    7-4

-------
constituents in the sample stream.  The system is capable of S02/TRS concentrations
in the range of 10 to 2500 ppm.  Since well-controlled kraft mill sources fall
below the minimum range of 10 ppm, this method was considered not applicable.
                Co ul pine try  -  Coulometric titration is based on the principle
of electrolytically generating a selected titrant in a titration cell.   The
titrant may be a free halogen (bromine or iodine) in aqueous solution as an
oxidizing agent, or a metal ion (silver), as a reducing agent.  The electrolytic
current required to generate the titrant, as it is consumed, is a linear
measure of the concentration of reactive compounds in the gas sample.
                 Gas Chromatography  -  This system is based on the ability of
 the gas chromatographic columns to separate individual sulfur compounds, which
 are then determined individually by various analytical techniques.  The most
 sensitive determination is the flame photometric detector (FPD).   This technique
 involves measurement of light emitted from the excited S02 species formed when
 a sulfur compound is burned in a hydrogen-rich flame.
      7.1.2.1.2  Methods used for data gathering  -
                 Analytical Techni ques  -  Based on the survey, the 6C/FPD
 technique was considered to be the most promising and was selected for field
 evaluation.   At several of the plants, the coulometric titrator was also tried
 since this instrument was widely used by the industry at the time.
                 Sample Collection  -  Considering the sulfur compound reactivity,
 high moisture, and presence of particulate matter, EPA developed a special
 sample handling system.  It utilizes a sampling probe enclosed in a stainless
 steel  sheath with inlet ports perpendicular to the stack wall.  A deflector
                                      7-5

-------
shield is fixed on the underside to deflect the heavier particles while the
proble is packed with glass wool to trap finer particles.  Teflon tubing
heated to 250°F is used to carry the sample from the probe to a dilution
system where the sample is routinely diluted 1:9 with clean dry air.  The
heated sample line prevents condensation and teflon does not react with sulfur
compounds.  After the sample is diluted in a heated dilution box, its moisture
content is reduced so that the dew point is below ambient temperature, preventing
condensation and sample loss during analysis.
                Calibration of Instruments  -  For delivery to and calibration
of analytical instruments, a special system containing premeation tubes with
appropriate concentrations of S02, H2$, DMS, DMDS, and CHgSH were installed
into  the  sampling and analytical system.  These gas permeation tube standards
were  developed by EPA personnel specifically for use with GC systems.
                Field Evaluation  -  Since 1972, EPA has used the sample
delivery  system, dilution system, calibration system, and the GC/FPD methods
at a  number of kraft mills.  Two separate GC/FPD systems were employed to
facilitate the rapid analysis of both high and low molecular weight sulfur
compounds.  One system resolved HLS, S0_, CFLSH, and DMS, while the other
simultaneously resolved DMDS and other high molecular weight homologs.  To
ensure reliability of the data, the GC/FPD systems were frequently calibrated
with  standards of each of the sulfur compounds.
                Field experience has shown that the GC/FPD method is the
most  reliable, sensitive, and precise for determination of TRS.  This has
also  been substantiated via verbal  communications with industry experts.
There, may, however, be some loss of precision in asing this method on
sources having high levels of S0? in comparison to the level of TRS.
Further developmental work is underway to eliminate this problem and the
necessary changes will  be made in Method 16 as soon as the work is completed.
                                    7-6

-------
                 Conversely, at six of these kraft mills,' two different
coulometric instruments have yielded poor results, possibly due to the low
concentrations encountered, and the operational  problems mentioned earlier.
This instrument is unacceptable for compliance testing.
      7.1.2.1.1  Compliance method - As the result of field experience of
testing TRS compounds at kraft mills, Method 16 was prepared for determining
compliance with new source performance standards.  This  method requires
use of a GC/FPD system using the same measuring principle as used for
the data gathering process.   Design specifications for  the
required dilution system, calibration techniques, and instrumentation that
was considered necessary to insure accuracy, precision,  and reliability
are specified.
                                     7-7

-------
8.  COST ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS
8.1  Introduction
     The purpose of this chapter is to develop estimates of retrofit costs
for alternative emission control systems for reduction of total reduced
sulfur (TRS) emissions at existing kraft pulp mills.  Capital and annualized
costs will be developed for alternative controls on each affected facility
on three sizes of kraft pulp mills:  500, 1000, and 1500 ton per day mills.
Following this aggregate costs will be presented for six alternative emission
control systems on a 1000 TPD kraft pulp mill.  Finally, a summary of an
analysis for estimating industry-wide costs will be presented.
     The determination of incremental costs for the various control  al-
ternatives over state regulations for kraft mill sources is a critical
element in this analysis.  Some 28 states with kraft mills have regulations
which vary widely in their effectiveness of reducing TRS emissions.   The
variability in regulations from state to state has been taken into account
in the determination of total industry costs.
     Throughout this chapter the terms capital cost and annualized cost
are used; therefore, a brief definition is in order.  The capital cost
includes all the items necessary to design, purchase, and retrofit either
a control device or process equipment necessary to achieve the emission
reduction.  The capital  cost includes the purchase of all factory assembled
equipment, such as a recovery furnace boiler, black liquor oxidation system
components, incinerator, and so forth; ancillary items, such as fans, instru-
mentation, pumps; equipment installation cost including demolition,  site
clearance, piping, wiring, and the cost of engineering, construction
overhead, and contingencies.   Capital costs are reported in third quarter
                                8-1

-------
1976 dollars.  The annualized cost of a retrofit project, whether it be a
control device or replacement of process equipment, is a measure of what
it costs the company to own and operate that system.  The annualized cost
includes direct operating costs such as labor, utilities and maintenance;
and capital related charges such as depreciation, interest, administrative
overhead, property taxes, and insurance.  The actual costs experienced by
individual mills may vary considerably and often are difficult to collect.
Nevertheless, attempts must be made to determine reasonable estimates of
these costs.  The following values were chosen as typical and should pro-
vide a reasonable estimate of the annualized costs of the retrofit control
requirements.  Operating labor is charged at a rate of $6 per hour with
supervision at $8 per hour.  Electricity is assumed to cost 2,5 cents per
kilowatt-hour.  Fuel costs are assessed at $2.00 per million BTU.,  For
purposes of estimating annualized costs, 328.5 operating days per year
were assumed.
     Recovery famaces and lime kilns that would constitute as replacements
necessary to achieve TRS reduction are not allocated any charges for main-
tenance and repair.   The reason for this is that such maintenance costs
incurred for replacement would be offset by maintenance charges foregone
in scrapping the old equipment.
     For gas collection and piping systems, including incinerators,  main-
tenance costs are assessed at a 2 percent of capital  investment.  For
black liquor oxidation systems and oxygen plants, a charge of 4 percent of
capital  investment is expensed.
                                8-2

-------
     Capital charges have been calculated on the basis of 100 percent
debt financing and recovery of capital by uniform periodic payments
(capital recovery factor).  Rate of interest for institutional lending
is assumed to be 10 percent.  The economic life assumed for all equipment
is 15 years.  Property taxes and insurance are assessed at a rate of 2
percent.  Administrative overhead costs involving records keeping,
monitoring, etc. are also assessed at a rate of 2 percent.
8.2  Methodology
     The affected facilities and control systems were previously discussed
in Chapter 6.  The retrofit control techniques that can achieve the necessary
emission reductions, as outlined in Table 6-2, are summarized in Table 8-1
for each affected facility and control system.  These control  techniques
were based on certain assumptions, which reflect the content of information
available for estimating retrofit costs.  These assumptions  will  be dis-
cussed in detail in the following subsections for each affected facility.
     The cost information on retrofit controls for recovery  furnaces  presented
in this chapter applies to cross-recovery furnaces as well as  straight kraft
recovery systems.  However, there is one precaution that should be noted.
The application of the control  techniques for straight kraft recovery furnaces
as discussed here and in Chapter 6 will not necessarily result in the same
achievable emission levels for cross-recovery furnaces as reported in this
chapter.
     For cost estimating purposes, a list of mill characteristics was
compiled for each kraft pulp mill in the United States.  The information
compiled includes Kraft production capacity; number, capacity, manufacturer,
basis design (direct or indirect contact) and year of manufacture of the
recovery furnace; the number and production rate for lime kilns;  the number,
                                   8-3

-------
                       Table 8-1.  SUMMARY OF RETROFIT CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR ALTERNATIVE  CONTROL  SYSTEMS  ON  EXISTING KRAFT  MILLS
      SOURCE

Recovery Furnace
Digester System

Multiple Effect Evaporators

Lime Kiln
Brown Stock Washer System

Black Liquor Oxidation
 System Vents

Smelt Dissolving Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
                                          1
a) Replace Furnaces
   >10 yrs. of age
b) Add 2nd Stage Black
   Liquor Oxidation
   (Including furnaces
   <10 yrs. of age). Also
   improve  furnace air
   distribution
Incineration

Incineration
                                b)
   Increase Lime Mud
   Washing Capacity
   Increase fan cap.
   & Monitor Oxygen
   and temp, (kiln)
c) Ada caustic to
   kiln scrubber

Incineration

Molecular Oxygen
Substitute fresh
water for condensate

Incineration
                                                                                    CONTROL  SYSTEMS
  Same as       a)  Replace Furnaces
     1            >20 yrs.  of  age
                b)  Add 2nd Stage Black
                   liquor oxidation  for
                   all other furnaces.
                   Also improve furnace
                   air distribution.
Incineration    Incineration

Incineration    Incineration

  Same as         Same as
     1                1
  Same as
     3
  Same as
     3
Incineration    Incineration
Incineration

Incineration
Incineration

Incineration
a) Increase Lime
   Mud Washing
   Capacity
b) Increase Fan
   Cap. & Monitor
   oxygen & temp(kiln)
a) Increase Fan
   Cap. & Monitor
   Oxygen and
   temp. (Kiln)
   Same as
      1
Incineration

Incineration

  Same as
     5
No Control
No Control
Same as
1
No Control
No Control
Same as
1
No Control
No Control
Same as
1
No Control
No Control
Same as
1
"No Control
No Control
Same as
1
Incineration
Incineration
Incineration

-------
 type,  and TRS controls for multiple effect evaporators and digesters;
 and  the number of brown stock washing systems and number of washing stages
 per  system.   Mill  capacity and other data were compiled from Posts'    and
 Lockwoods' 2  directories and updated wherever possible from contacts  with
 pulp and paper companies.
     The  approach used to estimate  retrofit control costs  is as follows.
 The  National  Council for  Air  and Stream Improvement (NCASI) was called
 upon to provide EPA both  the  contacts within  individual  paper companies
 for  sources  of cost data  and  the technical parameters, or  guidelines/3'
 for  estimating costs.  These  guidelines were  also, made available to Industry
 personnel  for estimating  costs.  The following 8  companies were selected
                                                                •
 and  contacted to provide  maximum coverage  in  terms of mills and capacity:
     (a)   International Paper
     (b)  Weyerhaeuser
     (c)  Georgia Pacific
     (d)  Westvaco
     (e)  Boise Cascade
     (f)  St. Regis
     (g)  Western Kraft (Willamette Industries)
     (h)  Mead Corporation
 Actual corporate data covering both costs and mill characteristics were
 provided for 42 mills by  these companies.   This coverage constitutes 35
 percent of the number of  total mills and about 41 percent of total U.S.
 capacity.  Two boiler manufacturers, who have built all the kraft recovery
 furnaces in the U.S.,were contacted to provide information on ages of
 existing furnaces, as well as the cost of new furnaces.  In-house informa-
 tion was used to generate cost estimates,  which were then used as a forum
 for discussion during visits with the corporate staff of the eight paper
 companies.  The time for the data gathering phase was the second quarter
of 1975.
                                  8-5

-------
     The data received from the paper companies were analyzed for regression
possibilities with mill characteristics.  The next step was to develop model
plant costs for the following model mills:  500 tons per day, 1000 tons per
day, and 1500 tons per day production capacity.  These model plant costs in
combination with the information on mill characteristics and furnace age
were used to estimate costs for the remaining 65 percent of the mills in
the U.S.
8.3  Costs for Affected Facilities
8,3.1  Recovery Furnaces
     The major problem from the standpoint of TRS emission in existing
kraft mills is associated with the burning of black liquor in direct
contact recovery furnaces.  The methods used to reduce these emissions are:
(1) close monitoring and control of the process variables in the recovery
furnace and, (2) oxidizing the black liquor to reduce the sulfides content
before evaporation of the black liquor in the direct contact evaporator.
Control of the process variables depends significantly upon the original
design and configuration of the recovery furnace.   Hence, furnace age is a
critical factor in determining the extent of retrofit costs.
     Recovery furnaces, including both direct contact and indirect contact,
of recent vintage—those built since 1965--are capable of achieving a 5 ppm
level  of TRS without any additional costs for process controls, as indicated
in Chapter 6.   Many of those process controls discussed in Chapter 6, such
as flexibility in air distribution and the membrane insulation between wall
tubes, are inherently designed in furnaces constructed since 1965.  Mills
with a direct  contact furnace of the design just mentioned are assumed to
incur costs only for a second stage of black liquor oxidation as the
                                8-6

-------
requirement for achieving a 5 ppm level of TRS from the total recovery
furnace affected facility.  Mills with indirect contact furnaces are
assumed to achieve the 5 ppm without any additional costs.  Note that the
indirect contact furnace design concept has been commercially available
only since 1967.
     Recovery furnaces built prior to 1965 are assumed to be incapable of
achieving a 5 ppm level of TRS despite any attempts to achieve the most
efficient black liquor oxidation system.  The key element in the assumption
is related to the earlier design of the furnace itself, which was not con-
ducive toward reduction of TRS to low levels.  Therefore, the control
strategy for a 5 ppm level would require the replacement of the recovery
furnace, which constitutes as the retrofit cost.   For furnaces built
between 1955 and 1965, the 20 ppm level is assumed to be achievable, according
to NCASI guidelines and discussion in Chapter 6.  The only costs incurred
are those associated with adding a second stage of black liquor oxidation.
For furnaces built prior to 1955, the retrofit costs assumed include re-
placement of the furnace plus a complete 2-stage black liquor oxidation for
both the 5 ppm and the 20 ppm control levels.  This assumption is in accord
with NCASI guidelines.
     Another important factor besides age that would affect costs is the
need for additional  black liquor burning capacity.  In particular, mills
that have not added a recovery furnace since 1965 may be overloading fur-
naces with black liquor from a design standpoint.  Such a practice leads
to high TRS emissions.  Mills that have furnaces  built between 1955 and
1965 and appear to have underrated furnace capability, according to
available data on mill characteristics, are assumed to add additional
                                 8-7

-------
black liquor burning capacity in order to achieve the 20 ppm strategy.
Therefore, such mills would have to purchase a new furnace in order to
achieve the 20 ppm level.
     Additional guidelines were developed by NCASI to provide these com-
panies technical parameters for black liquor oxidation as a complement to
process controls in the recovery furnace toward achieving the 5 ppm and
the 20 ppm levels.
     The guidelines used for estimating costs of black liquor oxidation
requirements are stated as follows.  The oxidation system representative
of best technology consists of:  (a) two-stage oxidation with at least one
stage of oxidation, (b) retention time of five hours for both stages com-
bined, (c) stand-by blower capacity, and (d) monitoring of both oxidizing
air and liquor flow rates.  The NCASI provided these guidelines to each
company, which in turn was to assess its requirements relative to their
existing oxidation system capabilities.
     The costs presented in Table 8-2 for model  plants were analytically
derived from the results received for some 42 mills.   Cost data for recovery
furnaces in 17 mills, which management felt may be required,  correlated
reasonably well with mill size as a parameter.   Conversely, data received
from various companies for oxidation requirements as  to the condition of
existing oxidation systems, sulfidity of black liquor, and level of ex-
perience acquired with development of highly efficient oxidation systems
did not correlate well  with mill size.  This result occurred  despite the
specific guidelines set forth by NCASI to the managerial  staff of the 8
companies.  A probable explanation is that the nature of mill  operations
and mill  lay-out vary widely, which affect costs significantly.

-------
                                                                       \
                                                                       \
                         Table 8-2.   RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR RECOVERY  FURNACES
                                              A.   Furnace Replacement
                                                                     CD
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
13,400,000
2,270,000
13.82
1000
23,300,000
4,000,000
12,18
1500
32,200,000
5,470,000
11.09
00

VO
                                              B.   Second Stage Black Liquor Oxidation
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
600,000
153,000
0.93
1000
1,000,000
242,000
0.74
1500
1 ,500,000
360,000
0.73
       (1) Control  strategy required to achieve 5 ppm for mills whose  furnaces were  built  prior to  1965.  Costs
           include secondary black liquor oxidation.

       (2) Control  strategy required to achieve 20 ppm for furnaces  built  since  1955.   Pre-1955 furnaces  are
           assumed unable to achieve 20 ppm; require  replacement.

-------
8.3.2  Digesters and Multiple Effect  Evaporators
     The control technique for achieving a 5 ppm level  is  incineration of
the noncondensible TRS compounds emitted from various vents.  The  nature
of the retrofit project involves the  collection of the  noncondensibles and
piping them to the incineration point, as well as necessary upgrading of
the blow heat recovery system associated with the digesters.  Normally, the
incineration point is the lime kiln;  however, in some situations,  a separate
incinerator may be used as the back-up for the lime kiln or as the regular
control device.
     Data gathered from the selected  paper companies did not reveal any
significant correlation of cost with mill size.  The probable explanation
of this are the number of digesters,  their spatial arrangement, condition
?f blow heat recovery system, and type of gas holding system.  Despite the
weak correlation of costs with capacity estimates were made for model plants
to represent three conditions:  (1) batch digesters with extensive piping
requirements only (low retrofit penalty); C2) batch digesters with extensive
piping, refurbished blow heat recovery, and separate incineration; Chigh
retrofit penalty) and (3) continuous digesters.  Multiple effect evaporator
vents are assumed to be combined with the digester vents for all three cases.
The costs for incineration are presented in Table 8-3.  Utility requirements
for electricity and fuel were developed from data by an engineering con-
                  (c\
struction company.  '  Fuel consumption assumed in Table 8-3 for destruction  of
noncondensible TRS emissions are based on use of a separate incinerator as
a stand-by control device for 33 days, or ten percent of the time.  This
represents an assumed duration of downtime for the lime kiln for maintenance
when the kiln becomes unavailable as a control  device for incinerating TRS
emissions.
                                 8-10

-------
                       Table 8-3.  RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR DIGESTERS AND MULTIPLE EFFECT  EVAPORATORS

                                               A.   Batch Digesters - Low Retrofit Penalty'1'
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annuali zed Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
400,000
96,000
0.58
1000
900,000
210,000
0.64
1500
1,600,000
360,000
0.73
                                               B.   Batch Digesters - High Retrofit Penalty
                                                                                          (2)
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr. )
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
900,000
207,000
1.26
1000
2,000,000
452,000
1.38
1500
3,500,000
773,000
1.57
CO
                                               C.  Continuous Digesters
Mill Size
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
300,000
67,000
0.41
1000
400,000
96,000
0.29
1500
500,000
125,000
0.25
        (1)  Includes provision for extensive piping only.
        (2)  Includes blow heat recovery system, extensive  piping, separate incinerator.

-------
8.3.3  Brown Stock Washers
     The control technique for achieving the 5 ppm level of TRS emissions
from washer vents is incineration.  The incineration may be carried out
either in the recovery furnace or a separate incinerator.  As pointed out
in Chapter 6, incineration in an existing recovery furnace may restrict
the operation of the recovery furnace.  The gas flows from the washer
system are too great for the lime kiln to incinerate.  For some mills, a
separate incinerator may be the only available control device to treat the
washer vent gases.
     Preliminary EPA costs were developed in-house on the basis of ventila-
tion requirements of 100 scfm/TPD, a parameter which is documented in
Chapter 6.  The basis for estimating hooding and ducting requirements
was information provided from NCASI for actual  retrofit situations.  '
The capital costs for a separate incinerator were developed from data by
the Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute^ ' for an incinerator Cwith heat
recovery) application on an asphalt saturator plant.  The preliminary EPA
costs were dissiminated to the selected group of paper companies for comment.
The responses from these companies was assimilated into revision of the
estimates, whieh are presented in Table 8-4.
     It must be pointed out that some unusual retrofit problems can occur
at specific mills, where hooding brown stock washers may be constrained
severely by space limitations.  In such mills,  demolition of portions of
the washing building and reconstruction may be  required.  In other mills,
the washers may have to be replaced with semi-closed drum washers.  For
these  situations,  retrofit costs may be much higher than those estimates
presented in Table 8-4.
                                 8-12

-------
                       Table 8-4.  RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR BROWN STOCK WASHERS
                                              A.  Destruction 1n Separate Incinerator
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual i zed Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual i zed Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
1 ,600,000
900,000
5.48
1000
2,500,000
1,670,000
5.08
1500
3,200,000
2,400,000
4.87
00
I
                                              B.  Destruction in Recovery Furnace
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs Per Ton ($/T)
500
900,000
192,000
1.17
1000
1 ,500,000
326,000
0.99
1500
1,900,000
423,000
0.86

-------
       For separate incineration, a fuel  penalty of 1.76 million BTU per
ton pulp was used.  The basis for this is 22 million BTU per hour for a
                                                                      (0)
30,000 scfm incinerator utilizing primary and secondary heat recovery.   '
Responses from the industry indicated that this fuel penalty is just
slightly above the industry average.  It should be pointed out that fuel
requirements would be sensitive to ventilation rates of the washers, the
degree of heat recovery, and use of catalyst to reduce ignition temperature.
The use of catalyst was not assumed In the above estimate.
8~.3_.4  Lime Kilns
       Three levels of control are being considered for this affected
facility.  The level of 40 ppm represents process controls of adding
more air and raising the cold-end temperature of the kiln by 100° F.
Adding a fan and  instrumentation are assumed to be the required cost
items.  In-house  EPA estimates of costs were generated on the basis of
available costs for fans and instrumentation.  These costs were then
reviewed with industry personnel for comparison with actual modification
co*ts for lime kilns.
       The level   of 20 ppm represents the combination of good lime mud
washing and control of the kiln process variables.  Costs were provided
by companies on the basis of replacing centrifuges with vacuum drum
                                                               (9}
filters and adding another mud washing stage.  NCASI guidelines  ' for
                                                  2
cost estimating purposes were approximately 0.5 ft /ton pulp for filtra-
tion and 12 to 21 hours of retention in the clarifier stage.
       The level  of 8 ppm represents the addition of caustic to the lime
kiln scrubber as  a complement to the aforementioned requirements for
achieving  8  ppm.  The costs for caustic addition are assumed to be the
same as those reported in the Standards Support and Environmental Impact
Statement/10^
                                  8-14

-------
       The capital  and annualized costs for the three control  levels are
presented in Table 8-5.  There are three points concerning Table 8-5 that
should be discussed.  First, the fuel penalty assumed in the annualized
costs for process controls was based on use of 135 million BTU fuel  for a
1000 ton per day mill.  This is the enthalpy requirement to raise the
cold-end temperature of the kiln 100° F.  Second, either process controls
or combined process controls with mud washing may not achieve the 40 ppm
level.  In this circumstance, the mill may be short on lime burning capacity
and would have to add another lime kiln unit.  Results from surveying the
industry indicate that a kiln addition in the range of 160-200 TPD (CaO
basis) seemed typical, regardless of mill size.  Capital costs for the kiln
are $3 million; and annualized costs, $510,000.  For this mill, the kiln
addition plus process controls on the existing kiln would be the requirement
to achieve 40 ppm.
     Lastly, the costs in Table 8-5 are presented to demonstrate retrofit
problems with mud washing.  Results from  the industry survey varied widely.
To take account of this, costs were estimated for a low retrofit and a high
retrofit case.  Some of the problems associated with high retrofit costs may
be related to space limitation, replacement of the entire washing system,
or changing condensate wash water to fresh water by addition of a condensate
stripper.
8.3.5  Black Liquor Oxidation Vents
     The control techniques for achieving the 5 ppm level of TRS emissions
from black liquor oxidat.ion system vents are incineration and the use of
molecular oxygen for oxidation.  The vent gases may be combined with the
brown stock washer vents and destroyed in the recovery furnace or separate
                                 8-15

-------
                              Table 8-5.  RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR LIME KILNS
                                                A.  Process Controls^ '
CO
I
01
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr. }
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)

Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)

Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
75,000
54,000
0.33
B. Mud Washing Capacity
500
480,000
91,200
0.56
C. Mud Washing Capacity
500
960,000 1
182,000
1.11
1000
100,000
107,000
0.33
- Low Retrofit
1000
730,000
139,000
0.42
- High Retrofit
1000
,460,000
278,000
0.85
1500
200,000
175,000
0.36
Penalty^
1500
950,000
181,000
0.37
Penalty^ 3^
1500
1,900,000
362,000
0.73
D. Caustic Addition
Hill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
-0-
3000
0.02
1000
-0-
6000
0.02
1500
-0-
9000
0.02
         (1) In some situations, mills may be short on lime burning capacity.   Typical  capacity requirements
             might be on the order of 160 to 200 TPD CaO, which was fouiind to  be independent of mill  size,
             Capital costs would be $3 million; annualized costs of $510,000 per year.
         (2) Includes only additional filtration and clarifier capacity.
         (3) Includes condensate stripper for removal of TRS from water used for mud washing and/or charges
             for space limitation.

-------
incinerator.  However, incineration costs for the BLO vents will be con-
sidered separately from the brown stock washers.
     Costs for incineration in recovery furnaces were taken from the costs
developed for new sources/11^  Very few responses were received from indus-
try, but one company did report similar costs,"z* which were found to be
comparable with EPA estimates.  Costs for separate incinerators were
developed on the basis of a 26,000 scfm incinerator required for a 1000
ton per day mill.  The source of the basic cost information was information
provided by the Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute.^^'  Costs for a 500 ton
per day and 1500 ton per day were developed by using a scale factor of 0.3,
Fuel requirements were calculated to be 19 million BTU per hour for the
26,000 scfin incinerator on the basis of using primary and secondary heat
recovery.  No costs for separate incineration were reported from industry.
     Costs for molecular oxygen were developed on the basis of 45 tons
                                 [•\A\
oxygen per 800 ton pulp produced.vy  Capital costs for skid-mounted  low-
pressure oxygen plants were obtained from Airco, Inc. ^  '  The energy con-
sumption for use of molecular oxygen is assumed to be 20 kilowatt-hours per
ton of pulp, or 380 kilowatt-hours per ton of oxygen produced.^  *
     A summary of capital  and annualized costs for control of black liquor
oxidation vents is presented in Table 8-6.   The costs for incineration in a
recovery furnace should reflect minimal retrofit problems.  On the other'
hand, separate incineration and molecular oxygen should represent high
retrofit costs.
8.3.6  Smelt Dissolving Tank
     The control  strategy  for achieving 8 ppm is the use of fresh water in
a scrubber.   This scrubber should  already be installed in most mills because
of state regulations for controlling particulates.  The use of fresh water
                                  8-17

-------
                      Table 8-6.  RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR BLACK LIQUOR OXIDATION VENTS


                                                A.  Destruction in Recovery Furnace
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr. )
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
220,000
60,000
0.37
1000
330,000
96,000
0.29
1500
432,000
133,000
0.27
                                                B.  Destruction in Separate Incinerator
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
400,000
233,000
1.42
1000
560,000
420,000
1.28
1500
700,000
605,000
1.23
00
I
CO
                                                C.  Molecular Oxygen
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500
1,080,000
309,000
1.88
1000
1,640,000
509 ,000
1.55
1500
2,100,000
645,000
1.31

-------
is the only additional requirement which may be needed to reduce the TRS
effectively.
     It is expected that costs associated with use of fresh water will be
small,  During the survey, one company provided cost data for installing
particulate scrubbers on this affected facility on one mill.  Other than
this example, no other company reported any cost for substituting fresh
water for process water with high sulfides content.
8.3.7  Condensate Strippers
     The control technique for achieving the 5 ppm level is incineration
in the lime kiln for steam stripping and incineration in the recovery
furnace for air stripping.  Only five mills in the U.S. presently employ
condensate strippers.  Four of these mills are presently incinerating con-
densate stripper vents.
     Those mills that may decide to install condensate strippers in the
future are assumed to incur costs similar to reported costs for new sources,   '
Those costs which are in 1976 dollars are summarized in Table 8-7.  These
costs include a fan, duct, seal pot, and flame arrester with the incinera-
tion point being the lime kiln.  No retrofit penalty has been assigned
because there are very few condensate strippers in existing mills.  Future
controls for new strippers should incur minimal retrofit costs.   However,
it still is possible that some retrofit penalty could be incurred if prior
provisions have not been made to tap into the mill's piping system for
venting other noncondensibles to an incineration point within the mill.
                                 8-19

-------
                             Table 8-7.  CONTROL COSTS FOR CONDENSATE STRIPPER
CO
       Mill Size, TPD
  500
 1000
 1500
       Capital Cost ($)
       Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
       Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
16,200
 6',300
   0.04
22,700
 7,800
  0.02
28,100
 8,900
  0.02

-------
8.4  Incremental Costs For Model Mills
     The purpose of this section is to present incremental control costs
over requirements for state regulations, on a total  mill basis.  To take
into account the interrelationships involved with the many significant
factors in estimation of retrofit costs, three model mill situations will
be utilized to depict costs.  These model situations are described as
follows:
     (1)  a post-1965 modern mill
     (2)  an old (pre-1965) mill with low retrofit penalty
     (3)  an old (pre-1965) mill with high retrofit penalty
     The modern mill has a recovery furnace of modern design that can
achieve the 5 ppm level under good operating conditions.  The black liquor
burning unit may be either a direct contact furnace or an indirect contact
furnace.  The latter type of furnace has been installed in mills only since
1967.  Only the direct contact furnace will incur any control costs, which
will be for secondary black liquor oxidation to assure achievement of the
5 ppm level.  As for as the remaining affected facilities, only low retro-
fit costs are assumed to be incurred.
     The old mill built before 1965, with low retrofit penalty, is assumed
to have a recovery furnace(s) capable of achieving the 20 ppm level.
Furnace replacement costs would be incurred only for a 5 ppm system.  On
the remaining affected facilities, low retrofit costs would be associated
with addition of controls.
     The old mill built before 1965, with a high retrofit penalty, is
assumed to have a recovery furnace(s) that cannot achieve the 20 ppm
level.   This may be due to a very old furnace, greater than 20 years of age,
                                 3-21

-------
or insufficient black liquor burning capacity.  The result of this
condition is that a new furnace will be required for all control systems.
The remaining affected facilities will incur high retrofit costs with the
addition of control.
     The next important factor influencing incremental costs is the
variability in state regulations.  Some states with pulp mills have no
emission control regulations for existing sources.   One set of costs will
be presented for such states.  Many states with pulp mills have regulations
which call for controls on existing recovery furnaces and incineration of
noncondensible gases from miscellaneous sources such as digesters, multiple
effect evaporators, and condensate strippers.  Another set of incremental
costs will be presented for such states.   Very few states, perhaps one or
two, require controls on existing lime kilns, and no states require controls
on existing brown stock washers and black liquor oxidation system vents.
     Tables 8-8 and 8-9 present incremental costs for a modern mill under
the two regulatory situations as described earlier.  Capital and annua-
lized costs are presented for the six alternative control systems detailed
in Table 8-1.  Costs are presented for the direct contact and indirect
contact recovery furnace designs.  For brown stock washers and black
liquor oxidation system vents, costs are presented only for destruction in
a separate incineration.  Destruction of TRS in the recovery furnace may
not be widely applicable due to attendant problems of inflexibility and
possible explosions, as pointed out in Chapter 6.
     Where no regulations exist (Table 8-8), incremental annualized control
costs for the  model mill with the direct contact recovery furnace range
from $1.73 per ton for control system 6 to $8.53 per ton for system 1.  For
                                 8-22

-------
                                       Table 8-8.   INCREMENTAL  RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPD MODERN MILL (BUILT AFTER 1965)
                                                                 Location:  Statt with No Regulations
                                                    No.  1
No. 2
No. 3
00
ro
CO




A.


B.




Recovery Furnace
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact
Batch Digester and^'

Capital.
Costs
($1000)

1,000
0

Multiple Effect Evaporator goo
C.
D.


E.
F.



Brown Stock Washers*2'
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Ventsl2)
(Direct Contact Only)
Lime Kiln*3)
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact
2,500
560


830
23

5,813
4,253

Annual 1 zed
Costs
($1000/yr)

242
0

210
1,670
420


252
8

2,802
2,140
Unit
Annual 1zed
Costs
($/T)

0.74
0

0.64
5.08
1.28


0.77
0.02

8.53
6.51

Capital
Costs
($1000)

1,000
0

goo
0
0


830
23

2,753
1,753

Annual 1 zed
Costs
(SlOOO/yr)

242
0

210
0
0
•

252
8

712
470
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
(JAM

0.74
0

0.64
0
0


0.77
0.02

2.17
1.43

Capital
Costs
($1000)

1,000
0

900
0
0


830
23

2,753
1,753

Annual 1 zed
Costs
($1000/yr)

242
0

210
0
0


252
8

712
470
Unit
Annualized
Costs
($/T)

0.74
0

0.64
0
0


0.77
0.02

2.17
1.43
                                                   No. 4
No. 5
No. 6
A.


B.

C.
D.

E.
F.



Recovery Furnace
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact
Batch Digester and*1)
Multiple Effect Evaporator
Brown Stock Washers* '
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents*2'
(Direct Contact Only)
Lime Kiln' '
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact

1,000
0

900
0
. 0

830
23

2,753
1,753

242
0

210
0
0

246
8

706
464

0.74
0

0.64
0
0

0.75
0.02

2.15
1.41

1,000
0

900
0
' 0

100
23

2,023
1,023

242
0

210
0
0

107
8

567
325

0


0

'''

0
0

1
0

.74
0

.64
0
0

.33
.02

.73
.99

1,000
0

900
0
0

100
23

\0'3
1 ,023

242
0

210
0
0

107
8

567
325

0.74
0

0.64
0
0

0.33
0.02

1.73
0.99
        (1)  Low retrofit penalty
        (2) Destruction in separate incinerator
        (3) Low retrofit penalty

-------
Table 8-9.  INCREMENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A
                          Location:

             No. 1
                                                                                          1000 TPD  MODERN MILL  (BUILT AFTER  1965)
                                                                          State with Typical  Regulations^1)
                                                                                           No.  2
                                                                                                                                  No.  3




A.


B.

C.
D.


E.
F.







Recovery Furnace
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact
Batch Digesters and
Multiple Effect Evaporator
Brown Stock Washers'2'
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents (2)
(Direct Contact Only)
Lime Kiln(3)
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact

Capital
Costs
($1000)

1,000
0

0
2,500
560


830
0

4,890
3,330

Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)

242
0

0
1,670
420


252
0

2,584
1,922
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)

0.74
0

0
5.08
1.28


0.77
0

7.87
5.85

Capital
Costs
($1000)

1,000
0

0
0
0


830
0

1,830
830

Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)

242
0

0
0
0


252
0

494
252
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)

0.74
0

0
0
0


0.77
0

1.50
0.77

Capital
Costs
($1000)

0
0

0
0
0


830
0

830
830

Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)

0
0

0
0
0


252
0

252
252
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
(J/T)

0
0

0
0
0


0.77
0

~Q~.77
0.77
co
r\>

A.


B.

C.
D.

E.
F.




Recovery Furnace
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact
Batch Digester and
Multiple Effect Evaporator
Brown Stock Mashers'2'
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents!2'
(Direct Contact Only)
Lime Kiln'3'
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
a) Direct Contact
b) Indirect Contact


0
0

0
0
'o

830
0

830
830
No. 4

0
0

0
0
0

246
0

246
246


0
0

0
0
0

0.75
0

0.75
0.75
lio. 5

0
0

0
.0
0

100
0

100
100

C
0

0
0
0

107
0

107
107

0
0

0
0
0

0.33
0

0.33
0.33
No. 6

1,000
0

0
0
0

100
0

1,100
100

242
0

0
0
0

107
0

349
107

0.74 •
0

0
0
0

0.33
0

1.07
0.33
     (1) A  typical  state  is assumed  to require 20 ppm for the recovery furnace and Incineration (5 ppm) of TRS emissions from digesters, multiple
         effect evaporators,  and condensate  strippers.
     (2) Destruction In  separate Incinerator.
     (3) Low retrofit penalty

-------
the indirect contact furnace, the model mill incurs incremental annualized
control costs ranging from $0.99 per ton for system 6 to $6.51 per ton
for system 1.  In states with the typical composite of regulations (Table
8-9), incremental annualized control costs range from $1.07 per ton for
system 6 to $7.87 per ton for system 1 in a mill with a direct contact
furnace.  For the mill with the indirect contact furnace, incremental
annualized costs for these respective systems range from $0.33 per ton to
$5.85 per ton.
     For modern mills, the most significant cost is that associated with
incineration of brown stock washer gases.  The control of this affected
facility alone is $5.08 per ton for system 1 (Table 8-8 and 8-9) of which
$3.50 per ton is a fuel penalty.  The fuel penalty would not be incurred
in some mills where the washer gases can be Incinerated in a recovery furnace.
It should be noted that the rather significant $1.28 per ton cost for
controlling black, liquor oxidation system vents only occurs for the mill
with a direct contact furnace.
     Tables 8-10 and 8-11 present control costs for an old mill with a low
retrofit penalty.  Capital and annualized costs are presented for the
six alternative control systems detailed in Table 8-1.  The costs for
control of brown stock washers and black liquor oxidation system vents is
based on separate incineration.  The replacement of the recovery furnace is
assumed to be required for systems 1,2, and 6.  Furthermore, the furnace
is assumed to have ample capacity to support the mill's normal production
needs.  This assumption eliminates any consideration of additional furnace
investment for systems 3, 4, and 5.
     Where no state regulations exist (Table 8-10), incremental annualized
                                  8-25

-------
                                  Table 8-10.  INCREMENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPD OLD MILL (BUILT BEFORE 1955)  - LOW RETROFIT PENALTY

                                                                     '  Location:  State with No Regulations
                                                 No. 1
No. 2
                                    No.  3
A.
B.
C.
0.
E.
F.

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.

Recovery Furnace'^'
Batch Digester and
Multiple Effect Evaporators
Brown Stock Washers ^'
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents (2>
Lime Kiln
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
Recovery Furnace^ '
Batch Digester and
Multiple Effect Evaporators
Brown Stock Washers (2)
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents (2)
Lime Kiln
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
Capital
Costs
23,300
900-
2,500
560
830
23
28,113

1,000
900
0
0
830
23
2,753
Annual Ized
Costs
(tlOoW)
4,000
210
1,670
420
252
8
6,560
No. 4
242
210
0
0
246
8
706
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($/T)
12.18
0.64
5.08
1.28
0.77
0.02
19.97

0.74
0.64
0
0
0.75
0.02
Capital
Costs
C$1000)
23,300
900
0
0
830
23
25,053
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
210
0
0
252
8
4,470
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
(VT)
12.18
0.64
0
0
0.77
0.02
13.61
No. 5
1,000
900
0
0
100
23
2.15 2,023
242
210
0
0
107
8
567
0.74
0.64
0
0
0.33
0.02
Caoital
Costs
($1000)
1,000
900
0
0
830
23
2,7.53
Annual i zed
Costs
($1000/yr)
242
210
0
0
252
8
712
Unit
Annual i zed
Costs
($/T)
0.74
0.64
0
0
0.77
0.02
2.17
No. 6 !
23,300
900
0
0
100
23
1.73 24,323
4,000
210
0
0
107
8
4,325
12.18
i
0.64
0
0
0.33
0.02
13.17
co
i
ro
CTl
       0)
           Recovery furnace would be a direct contact furnace only
       (2)  Destruction in separate Incinerator

-------
Table 8-11.  INCREMENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL  COSTS'FOR A 1000 TPD OLD MILL
                                   Location:  State with Typical Regulations
                                                                                                      BEFORE 1965) - LOW RETROFIT PENALTY
                                                 No. 1
                                                                 No. 2
No. 3




A. Recovery Furnace
B. Batch Digesters and
Multiple Effect Evaporators
C. Brown Stock Washers'2'
0. Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents(2)
E. Lime Kiln
F. Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS

Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300

0
2,500
560
830
0
27,190

Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000

0
1,670
420
252
0
6,342
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($/T)
12.18

0
5.08
1.28
0.77
0
19.31

Capital
Costs
(tiooo)
23.300

0
0
0
830.
0
24,130

Annual 1 zed
Costs
(SlOOO/yr)
4,000

0
0
0
252
0
4,252
Unit
Annual Ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18

0
0
0
0.77
0
12.95

Capital
Costs
($1000)
0

0
0
0
830
0
830

Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
0

0
0
0
252
0
252
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($/T)
0

0
0
0
0.77
0
0.77 •
CO

ro
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.

Recovery Furnace
Batch Digesters and
Multiple Effect Evaporators
Brown Stock Washers^
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents (2)
Lime Kiln
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS

Capital
Costs
($1000)
0
0
0
0
830
0
830
No. 4
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)-
0
0
0
0
246
0
246

Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
0
0
0
0
0.75
0
0.75
No. 5
Capital
Costs
($1000)
0
0
0
0
100
0
100
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
0
0
0
0
107
0
107
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
0
0
0
0
0.33
0
0.33
No. 6
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
0
0
0
100
0
23,400
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
0
0
0
107
0
4,107
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18
0
0
0
0.33
0
12.51
   (1) A  typical  state  is  assumed  to  require  20 ppni for the recovery furnace and Incineration (5  ppm) of TRS emissions turn digesters, multiple effect
      evaporators,  and  condensate strippers
   (2) Destruction  In  separate Incinerator.

-------
costs range from $1.73 per ton to $2.17 per ton'for systems 3, 4, and 5.
The incremental annualized costs for systems 1, 2, and 6 range from $13.17
to $19.97 per ton.  The replacement of the recovery furnace is responsible
for $12.18 per ton of these costs.
     In a state with typical regulations, incremental annualized costs
range from $0.33 to $0.77 per ton for systems 3, 4, and 5.  For systems
1, 2, and 6, incremental annualized costs range from $12.51 per ton to
$19.31 per ton, the most expensive being system 1.  Again, recovery furnace
replacement is responsible for $12.18 per ton.
     Tables 8-12 and.8-13 present control costs for the old model mill with
the incidental high retrofit penalty.  Capital  and annualized costs are
presented for the six alternative control systems similar to the previous
models.  Costs of control for the washer gases  and the oxidation vents is
based on separate incineration.  The construction of new furnace sized to
support the entire 1000 ton per day mill is assumed in the cost estimates
for:  (1) all control systems in states with no regulations, and (2)
control systems 1, 2, and 6 in states with typical regulations.  The aspects
of the high retrofit costs for this model mill  involve the controlling of
the digestors/evaporators and the lime kiln.  The two factors associated
with the lime kiln, namely additional requirements for lime mud washing
and additional lime burning capacity, have been taken into account for this
model mill.  In summary, Table 8-12 would represent the worst situation - -
an old rr..il with incidental high retrofit penalties in a state with no
regulations.
     Where no regulations exist (Table 8-12), incremental annualized costs
range from $15.46 per ton for system 6 to $22.68 per ton for system 1.  New
furnace costs are responsible for $12.18 per ton of these costs.  In
                                 8-28

-------
                         Table 8-12.   INCREMENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPD OLD HILL (BUILT BEFORE 1965) - HIGH RETROFIT PEliALTY
                                                                          Location:  State With No Regulations
                                                  No. 1
No. 2
No. 3


A.
B.

C.
D.

E.
F.


10 A.
B.

C.
D.

E.
F.



Recovery Furnace
"ate1" "iGester and
Multiple Effect Evaporator
Brown Stock Washers' '
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents(2)
Lime K1ln(3)
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS

Recovery Furnace
Batch Digester and
Multiple Effect Evaporator
Brown Stock Washers^
Black Liquor Oxidation
System Vents (2)
Lime Kiln*3*
Condensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
2,000

2,500
560

4,560
23
32,943

23 ,30U
2,000

0
0

4,560
23
29.U83
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
452

1,670
420

901
8
7,451
No. 4
4,OOU
452

0
0

896
8
b,3b5
Unit
Annual Ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18
1.38

5.08
1.28

2.74
0.02
22.68

12. 18
1.38

0
0

2.73
0.02
16.30
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
2,000

0
0

4,560
23
29,883

23,300
2,000

0
0

3,100
23
28.4U/
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
452

0
0

' 901
8
5,361
No. 5
4,000
452

0
0

617
8
b.O//
Unit
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($/T)
12
1




2
0
16

12
1




1
0
15
.18
.38

0
0

.74
.02
.32

. IB
.38

0
0

.88
.02
.46
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23.300
2,000

0
0

4,560
23
29,883

23.3UO
2.000

0
0

3,100
23
2B.407
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
452

0
0

901
8
5,361
No. 6
4,000
452

0
0

617
8
5,077
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18
1.38

0
0

2.74
0.02
16.32

12.18
1.38

0
0

1.88
0.02
15.46
(1) Recovery furnace - direct contact only.  Furnace with an assumed age exceeding twenty years would have to be replaced for each control strategy.

(2) Destruction in separate Incinerator.

(3) High retrofit expenditures for the following:   addition of a  new lime  kiln for each control strategy and addition of Condensate stripper for
    strategy numbers 1 through 4.

-------
                         Table  3-13.   INCREMENTAL  RETROFIT  CONTROL  COSTS  FOR A  10UU  TPL) OLD MILL  (13U1LJ>UEFORE  1965) - HIGH RETROFIT PENALTY
                                                            Location:   State with Typical Regulations1  '
                                                     No.  1.
                                                                                               No. 2
                                                                                                                                         No.  3
A
B
C.
D
L.
r
Re-overy Furnace
Ba ;ch Digester and
'lultiole Effect Evaporators
Brr.-;n Stock Washers'2'
Bl ck Liquor Oxidation
S.-stem VentsU)
Li e Kiln'3'
Co'idensate Stripper
TOTAL COSTS
A
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
TO
Recovery Furnace
Batch Digester and Multiple
Lffect Evaporators
Brv.vn Stock Washers'2'
Bla;k Liquor Oxidation
System Vents' '
Lir'e Kiln'3'
Cotidensate Stripper
TAL COSTS
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
0
2,500
560
4,560
0
30,920

Capital
Costs
($1000)
0
0
0
0
4,560
0
4,560
Annual i zed
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
0
1,670
420
901
0
6,991
No. 4
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
0
0
0
0
896
0
896
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
(S/T)
12.18
0
5.08
1.28
2.74
0
21.28

Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
0
0
0
0
2.73
0
2.73
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
0
0
0
4,560
0
27,860
Annual 1 zed
Costs
($1000/yr)
4,000
0
0
0
901
0
4,901
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18
0
0
0
2.74
0
14.92
No. 5
Capital
Costs
($1000)
0
0
0
0
3,100
0
3,100
Annual ized
Costs
($1000/yr)
0
0
0
0
617
0
617
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
0
0
0
0
1.88
0
1.88
Capital
Costs
($1000)
0
0
0
0
4,560
0
4,560
Annual ized
Costs
($10QO/yr)
0
0
0
0
901
0
901
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
0
0
0
0
2.74
0
2.74
No. 6
Capital
Costs
($1000)
23,300
0
0
0
3,100
0
26 ,400
Annual ized
Costs
($lCOO/yr)
4,000
0
0
0
617
0
4,617
Unit
Annual ized
Costs
($/T)
12.18
0
0
0
1.88
0
14.05
CO
 I
OJ
o
    (1) A typical state is assumed to require 20 ppm for the recovery furnace and incineration (5 ppm) of TRS emissions from digesters, multiple effect
        e'. iporators, and condensate strippers.
     (2)D.-,truction  in  separate  incinerator
     (3)  ' igh  retrofit  expenditures for  the  following:  addition of a new lime kiln for each control   system and addition of
          • :>ndensate  stripper for  system  numbers  1  through 4.

-------
states with typical regulations, the incremental annualized costs range
from $14.06 per ton to $21.28 per ton for control systems 1, 2, and 6,
with system 1 being most expensive.  For control systems 3, 4, and 5, the
incremental annualized costs range from $1.88 per ton to $2.74 per ton.
     From the previous discussion on old mills, the most significant
factor that frequently re-appears in the total mill costs has been require-
ments for new recovery furnace investment.  Up to this point all  capital
related charges associated with purchasing, installing, and ownership of
the recovery furnace have been presented as control costs.   However, the
recovery furnace is a productive capital asset in the sense that  it
contributes to the economics of pulp production with recovery of  energy
and chemicals.  Consequently, some credit for a productive asset  should be
deducted from the control costs.  However, it is very difficult to estimate
this credit on a source by source basis in terms of dollars per ton.
Therefore, no credit was deducted.
     The extent of credit to be deductible is very source specific.  The
amount of credit would depend on the remaining economic life of existing
furnace equipment.  In a specific mill the recovery furnace could be very
old, like thirty years of age, and very inefficient.  Such a mill would
probably be scheduling for the replacement of the old furnace in  the near
future.  Here, the replacement cost should be treated as a normal produc-
tive asset with no credit given for control costs.  In another mill, a
recovery furnace may have a significant amount of residual  economic life,
say 15 years.  Suppose a state should require a 5 ppm level which would
force the scrapping and replacement of this recovery furnace.  In this
situation, the capital value foregone in scrapping the furnace should be
                                 8-31

-------
the approximate control cost.
     In a similar vein, mills that tend to overload recovery  furnaces may
be required to provide additional black liquor burning capacity to  reduce
TRS emissions.  The incremental capacity sufficient to reduce the emissions
to a satisfactory level should be the approximate control cost although a
mill would install a complete new recovery unit which would exceed  the
necessary incremental capacity.
8.5  Aggregate Costs For Industry
     In this section the estimated incremental control costs  are reported
for the existing kraft pulp industry for the six alternative  emission
control systems outlined in Table 8-1.  The approach used was to estimate
these costs for each individual mill on the basis of the best technical
information available for each mill regarding production rates, furnace
capacity and age, type of controls used, status of state regulations, and
other technical parameters.  Section 8.3, Costs For Affected  Facilities,
which relates control costs as a function of mill size was used to  make
the estimates.  The model mill approach as outlined in Section 8.4 was not
considered suitable to estimate total industry costs because  of the wide
variability in mill characteristics and state regulatory requirements.  How-
ever, the two approaches should give consistent results.   Verification of
the model mill approach with the results obtained by the individual mill
approach does support this claim.
     Actual cost information received from 42 mills during the EPA  industry
survey was used to derive the Section 8.3 costs.  From these  costs, estimates
of capital and annualized were made individually for 77 mills which were not
contacted in the industry survey.  The costs for these mills  were then
                                 8-32

-------
combined with the actual costs received for the 42 surveyed mills to
derive industry totals.
     The summary of industry incremental  costs are reported in Table 8-14
for each system.   Capital  and annualized costs are presented for industry
totals and on a unit basis.   In addition, incremental  capital  costs are
related to mill investment as a measured percentage.   The investment for a
battery limits mill  is $150 million is 1976 dollars, which was derived
from a study for EPA's Office of Solid Waste ManagementJ18^  Similarly,
incremental annualized costs are related to the market pulp price as a
measured percentage.   The price used was $330, which  is the currently
quoted contract price for domestic bleached kraft pulp/  '  This price
represents the average of pulps derived from hard and  softwoods.
     The industry-wide incremental annualized control  costs range from
$1.99 per ton for system 5 to $12.72 per ton for system 1.  The $1.99 per
ton figure is predicated on the basis of replacement of 18 recovery
furnaces and 3 lime kilns.  The $12.72 per ton figure  is predicated on the
basis of replacement of 63 recovery furnaces and 33 lime kilns.  It should
be noted that systems 3 and 4 would require replacement of 18 recovery
furnaces and 33 lime kilns.   The corresponding percentages in relation to
market pulp price are 0.6 percent for system 5 ($1.99  per ton) and 3.9 per
ton for system 1  ($12.72 per ton).
     Capital, requirements  for incremental controls range from $10.32 per
ton capacity for system 5 to $46.20 per ton for system 1.  In relation to
requirements for new mill  investment, these estimates  amount to 1.8 percent
for system 5 and 8.1  per cent for system 1.
     The approach used to develop industry-wide costs  represents a composite
                                 8-33

-------
             Table 8-14.  Sumary of Industry  IncrwtwUl Control Costs for Stx Alternatives Control Strategies

Total Capital ($1000)
Capital , per ton
capacity ($/T)
Capital , as a percent
of new mill(l)
Total Annual i zed Costs
($1000/yr)
Unit Annual i zed Costs ($/T)
Annuali zed costs, as a
percent of market pulp
price (2)
No. 1
1,602,000
46.20
8.1
441 ,000
12.72
3.9
No. 2
1,275,000
36.78
6.5
237,000
6.84
2.1
No. 3
495,000
14.27
2.5
94,300
2.72
0.8
No. 4
495,000
14.27
2.5
93,600
2.70
0.8
No. 5
358,000
10.32
1.8
69 ,000
1.99
0.6
No. 6
1,148,000
33.11
5.8
200,000
5.76
1.7
00
I
CO
     (^Capital  Costs  for  New Battery Limits 800 TPD Mill is $150 million,  or  $570 per ton (1976 dollars)    Source:
        Arthur D.  Little,  Reference 18.
     (2)Market pulp  price  is  $330 per ton, based on fourth quarter 1976  prices  for domestic kraft bleached pulp.
        Source:   Paper Trade  Journal.

-------
of many different types of state regulations and the individual character
of 119 mills.  Although the model mill approach in Section 8.4 was
considered inappropriate to estimate industry costs, there should be some
linkage between the industry-wide costs and the model mill costs on a unit
basis.   A comparison of the two approaches revealed that the industry-wide
costs in Table 8-14 fall about midway between cost requirements for a
modern mill in a state with typical regulations (Table 8-9) and for an old
mill with low retrofit penalty in a state with no regulations (Table 8-10)
for systems 1, 2, and 6.  Industry-wide costs in Table 8-14 are somewhat
higher than the costs reported for an old mill (Table 8-10) for systems
3, 4, and 5.  A conclusion would be that there is some reasonable agreement
in the magnitude of the costs developed from the two separate approaches.
8.6  Cost-Effectiveness
     An analysis was made to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the six
alternative emission control systems in terms of their contribution to
reducing national  TRS emissions.  The cost-effectiveness technique is a
useful tool in selecting an appropriate control system as a recommended
guideline.  In this  selection, those control systems that have significantly
high control costs in terms of their pollutant removal  are rejected as
viable control recommendations.  It should be strongly emphasized that the
cost-effectiveness approach for recommending controls is only applicable
for welfare-related  111-d pollutants, such as TRS.   For health-related 111-d
pollutants, an economic impact analysis is a requirement for determining
affordability of best controls.
     The industry aggregate annualized control  costs presented in Table
8-14 and the national  emission reduction data reported in Table 9-2 were
                                 8-35

-------
used to make the cost-effectiveness calculations.  The results are
presented in Table 8-15.  The control systems are ranked in ascending
order in terms of emission reduction and costs, starting with system 5 as
the least expensive.  Two calculations of cost-effectiveness are presented
for each control system in columns (E) and (F).  The calculation in
column (E) simply represents the costs per ton removed by a particular
control system.  The calculation in column (F) represents the marginal costs
per ton removed by a particular control system relative to a system of
lower ranking.  The marginal cost calculation is a more sensitive indicator
in revealing the more expensive control system.  For example, in Table
8-15, system 6 costs $75,500 per ton marginally.  This is much more
significant than the $1750 for system 3 or $11,180 for system 4.  With
respect to actual cost per ton, system 6 costs $3000 per ton, which is
significantly higher, to a lesser degree, than the approximate $1400 per
ton for systems 4 and 3.
     Based on the data in Table 8-15, it would seem reasonable to reject
control systems 6, 2, and 1  as being cost-effective.  System 5 might be
considered a minimal strategy, costing $1060 per ton.   Control systems 4
and 3 cost somewhat more, about $1400 per ton, which would not seem to be  of such
a magnitude to preclude consideration of these control  systems as a viable
control technology.
                                8-36

-------
                          Table 8-15.  COST EFFECTIVENESS DATA FOR ALTERNATIVE CONTROL SYSTEMS

Control System
5
4
3
6
2
1
A
National
Emission
Reduction
tons/yr.
65,000
67,200
67,600
69,000
71 ,500
77,700
B
Marginal
Emission
Reduction
tons/yr.
65,000
2,200
400
1,400
2,500
6,200
C
Industry
Annual ized
Control
Costs
$1000/yr
69,000
93,600
94,300
200,000
237,000
441 ,000
' D
Marginal
Annual ized
Control
Costs
$1000/yr.
69,000
24,600
700
105,700
37,000
204,000
E
Annual 1 zed
Costs per
ton Removed
(C)r(A).
($/ton)
1,060
1,390
1,395
3,000
3,315
5,675
F
Marginal
Annual ized
Cost per ton
Removed
(D)-(B),$/ton
1,060
11,180
1,750
75,500
14,800
32,900
00
I
oo

-------
                       References for Chapter 8


 1.  Post's 1973 Pulp and Paper Directory,Miller Freeman Publications,
     Inc., San Francisco.

 2.  Lockwood's Directory of the Paper and Allied Trades, Lockwood Publishing
     Co., New York, 1974.

 3.  Correspondence from Mr. Russell  Blosser, National  Council  for Air and
     Stream Improvement, Inc., to Mr.  Frank L.  Bunyard, EPA, OAQPS,
     April 22, 1975.

 4.  See Reference 3.

 5.  Correspondence from Mr. C. T. Tolar,  Rust Engineering Co., Birmingham,
     Ala., to Mr. Paul A. Boys, October 20, 1972.

 6.  Correspondence from Mr. Russell  Blosser, National  Council  for Air and
     Stream Improvement, Inc., to Mr.  Paul A.  Boys, November 17, 1972.

 7.  Air Pollution Control  Technology and  Costs:   Seven Selected Emission
     Sources. Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute,  EPA-450/3-74-060,
     National Technical Information Service,  Springfield, Va.,  December, 1974.

 8.  Report of Fuel Requirements, Capital  Cost and Operating Expense for
     Catalytic and Thermal  Afterburners, CE Air Preheater for Industrial
     Gas Cleaning Institute, EPA-450/3-76-031,  National  Technical  Informa-
     tion Service, Springfield, Va.,  September 1976.

 9.  See Reference 3.

10.  Standards Support and  Environmental  Impact Statement - Volume I:
     Proposed Standards of  Performance for Kraft  Pulp Mills, EPA-450/2-76-014a
     National Technical Information Service,  Springfield, Va.,  September 1976.

11.  See reference 10.

12.  Correspondence from Mr. Joe Kolberg,  Boise Cascade, to Mr.  Frank  L.
     Bunyard, OAQPS,  EPA, May 1975.

13.  See reference 8.

14.  See reference 5.

15.  Telephone conversation from F.  L.  Bunyard, OAQPS,  EPA, to  George
     Horvat,  Airco, Inc., December 30,  1974.
                                   8-38

-------
16.   Investment and Operating Cost Data  for Low Pressure Oxygen  Plant
     Applicability to Non-Ferrous Metallurgy,  Volcan  -  Cincinnati,  EPA
     Contract No.  68-02-2099, Task No.  2,  September 29, 1972.

17.   See reference 10.

18.   Analysis of Demand and Supply for Secondary Fiber  in  the U.S.  Paper
     and Paperboard Industry. Volume 2:  Section IX  -  Process Economics.
     Arthur D. Little Report for Contract  #68-01-02220, Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office of Solid  Waste  Management Programs,  March, 1975.

19.   Paper Trade Journal.  January 1, 1977.
                                   8-39

-------
                       9.  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF TRS CONTROLS

     The environmental impacts discussed are for each of the control tech-
niques and control systems mentioned in Chapter 6.  This includes discussions
on the impacts on air, water, and solid waste pollution and energy consumption
for a relatively large kraft pulp mill (907 megagrams   of pulp per day) and on
a national basis.
9.1  AIR POLLUTION IMPACT
9.1.1  Annual Air Emission Reductions
     Installation of the various control techniques described in Section 6.1
are estimated to reduce TRS emissions from the existing kraft industry by
the amounts indicated in Table 9-1.  Emission reductions range from 20.6
percent for digester systems to 96 to 97 percent for digester systems and lime
kiln systems.  All values presented in Table 9-1 are based on information
presented in Chapters 5 and 6 and Appendix A of this study.
     The following procedure was used to arrive at the numbers listed in
Table 9-1.  The values listed in Column 2 (Current National Average Emission
Rate) were previously mentioned in Chapter 5 and are based on the information
listed in Appendix A.  Information in Appendix A is based upon discussions with
various kraft pulp mills and state control agencies.  Column 5 presents the
percentage of existing facilities presently using the control techniques
described in Column 2 as based on the information listed in Appendix A.  The
values in Column 6 were developed by applying the emission level achievable by
                                        9-1

-------
              TABLE 9-1
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE
  VARIOUS TRS SOURCES IN A KRAFT MILL
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock Washer
System
Black Liquor Oxidation
System
Smelt Dissolving Tank
Condensate Strippers

Current Average
National Emission
g/Kg ADP (IT ADP)
1 .25
1.25
0.32
0.32
0.22
0.22
0.31
0.31

0.31


0.15

0.05
0.05
0.10
0.11
0.11
(2.5)
(2.5)
(0.64)
(0.64)
(0.43)
(0.43)
(0.62)
(0-62)

(0.62)


(0.3)

(0.1)
(0.1)
(0.2)
(0.22)
(0.22)
Control
Technique
BLO ( 20 ppm)
BLO ( 5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
2) Process Control & High
Eff . Mud Washing
3) Process Controls, High
Eff. Mud Mashing &
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water
Incineration
Scrubber
Emission Level
Achievable With
Control Technique
g/Kg ADP (# T/ADP)
0.31
0.08
0.59
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.10
0.05

0.021


0.01

0.01
0
0.013
0.01
0.5
(0.6)
(0.15)
(1.17)
(0.02)
(0.08)
(0.02)
(0.2)
(0.1)

(0.04)


(0.02)

(0.02)
(0)
(0.025)
(0.02)
(1.0)
% of Capacity
Not Presently
Achieving This
Level
35.7
86.9
41.8
42.4
41.4
45.9
71.8
90.5

99.4


99.1

98.0
98.0
—
20
0
Estimated Average National
Emission If Control
Technique Is Required
g/Ks ADP (# T/ADP)
0.25
0.08
0.26
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.09
0.05

0.021


0.01

0.01
0
0.01
0.01
0.11
(0.5)
(0.15)
(0.51)
(0.02)
(0.05)
(0.02)
(0.18)
(0.1)

(0.04)


(0.02)

(0.02)
(0)
(0.02)
(0.02)
(0.22
% Emission
Reduction
Achieved
Nationally
80.0
94.0
20.6
96.9
89.1
95.3
71.0
84.0

92.0


93.3

80.0
100.0
87.5
90.9
0
National
Emission Reduction
Mq/year (tons/year)
31 ,200
36,690
2,040
9,300
5,940
6,400
6,900
8,900

9,300


4,350

1,270
1,540
2,800
3,130
0
(34,400)
(40,450)
( 2,250)
(10,700)
( 6,550)
( 7.050)
( 7.600)
( 9,800)

(10.250)


( 4,800)

( 1.400)
( 1.700)
( 3,100)
( 3.450)
(0)

-------
a particulate control device (Column 4) to those existing mills which are not
presently achieving that level, as listed in Appendix A, and calculating the
national average emission level that would result.  Column 7 (Percent Emission
Reduction Achieved Nationally) is the percent difference between Columns 2 and 6.
The national emission reduction achieved by a specific control  device (Column 8)
was calculated by multiplying the difference between Columns 2 and 6 by the annual
kraft pulp production rate (31,196,000 megagrams/year).
     Table 9-1 shows that the greatest reduction of TRS emissions is achieved
by controlling the recovery furnace system with the digester system, lime kiln,
multiple-effect evaporator system, brown stock washer system, smelt dissolving
tank, black liquor oxidation system and condensate stripping system following
in decreasing impact.
     Table 9-2 shows the impact of the various control systems mentioned in
Section 6.2.  For example, if System No. 1 (best available technology as
defined for NSPS) was applied to each source, the TRS emissions from the kraft
industry would be reduced by about 70,500  megagrams  per year (77,700 tons
per year) or 94.2 percent.  System No. 5, if applied, would result in the least
impact but would still reduce TRS emissions by about 59,000 megagrams per
year (65,000 tons per year) or 78.8 percent.  Control of four sources in a
kraft mill account for a major portion of the impact achieved by each of the
control systems.  These four sources are the recovery furnace, digester system,
multiple-effect evaporator system, and the lime kiln.
9.1.2  Annual  Air Emission Increase
     The only control  techniques mentioned in Chapter 6 that would apparently
result in increasing the emission rates of other pollutants is the incineration
of the vent gases from the brown stock washer systems and the black liquor
                                      9-3

-------
                                         TABLE 9-2

                      ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT OF VARIOUS  CONTROL  SYSTEMS
                               FOR EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
                 Estimate Average
                 TRS Emission With
National
Emission
Control
System
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Control System
g/Kq ADP (#T ADP)
0
0
0
0
0
0
.14
.32
.44
.45
.51
.40
(0.
(o.
(o.
(o.
(1.
(0.
28)
64)
87)
89)
02)
79)
Emission
Reduction*
94.
86.
81.
81.
78.
83.
2
7
9
5
8
5
Reduction
megagrams/year (tons/year)
70,
64,
61,
61,
59,
62,
500
900
300
000
000
600
(77
(71
(67
(67
,700)
,500)
,600)
,200)
(65,000)
(69
,000)
*  Based on a current control  level  of 2.4 g/Kg  ADP  (4.8 Ib/T  ADP).
                                            9-4

-------
oxidation systems if these gases are burned in a separate incinerator.  The
emission rates of nitrogen oxides (NO ) and sulfur dioxide (S0?) from a mill
                                     /V                        ™
would increase by the amounts emitted from this separate incinerator.  If
natural gas was fired in the incinerator at a 907 metric tons per day (1000
tons per day) mill, the NO  and S09 emissions resulting are estimated to be
                          X       £
160 and 220 kilograms.per day (350 and 480 pounds per day), respectively.
These are in comparison with a TRS reduction of 180 kilograms per day (400
pounds per day).  Furthermore, if fuel oil C\% sulfur content) was used instead
of natural gas, the NO  and S09 emissions resulting are estimated to be about
                      /\       £
380 and 1040 kilograms per day (840 and 2280 pounds per day), respectively.
Using a gas-fired or oil-fired incinerator to burn these gases is a realistic
alternative since the industry feels that burning these gases safely in a
recovery furnace has not yet been demonstrated.  However, if these gases were
burned in a recovery furnace or power boiler, no increase in the S0? or NO
                                                                   ^      A
emissions from these sources are expected.
     No increase in other pollutants is expected from burning the noncondensable
gases from the digester systems, multiple-effect evaporator system or condensate
stripper system since these gases will normally be burned in a lime kiln as
part of the normal  combustion air.  S02 generated should be absorbed by the
lime dust (calcium oxide) present in the kiln.   The scrubbers used on most
lime kiln systems also are effective gas removal system.  Very little S02 is
emitted from the kiln system for this reason.
9.1.3  Atmospheric Dispersion of TRS Emissions
     A dispersion analysis was made on model  kraft pulp mills to evaluate the
impact of the various control techniques and retrofit systems on ground-level
TRS concentration downwind of a kraft pulp mill.  The models chosen were of
average design and layout as shown i-n Figure 9-1, and included the eight

                                       9-5

-------
                     FIGURE 9-1.  Typical Plant Layout  (lOOD ton per day kraft pulp mill)
I
CM












H-50

4 	 H
t
o
Cl
U1
T
TREATMENT
POND
60 ACRES






« 180

H-50





)00 	








— =1

in
U

« —









T 1
'
•—100 	 *


e
r
	 176 	 1
H-50 r




( C J
© "
n-n /T\ x-x
ni © ©._,„„._„
A' f C M flfl M n i
^^(TVas-HV-EO-^-*^^'0 s.
70 | "^^ (?) (°) i 'f
k< • "• j»0fl - • •• — '-> f— »Q" /"?\ ^ ^ — ^"^ •"
L I § T o J[ C^)* — 12° — O '^
jii i3a°>o75p^2o>^"35"x^
t 175 / T Y12/ E ^1
S H-60 \ J \ J
T V_y ^-^ Stacks:
3 i* - 25 — >
t ^
g 1 . Recovery Furnnce
01 A 2. Smelt Oissolvinq
I Tank
_ . .. j T 3. Lime Ki ; i
Ja -^ i /• ^ • i
1^- X — N 5" * ... • _=f", •"•• '!-, r,-'«-|pv-c-,
\_^y \ y H-50 ^ • '.".Vupora tor.';
Q)*30*CD^- 4 © t 6. Brown Stock Hashers
= _ s~^ 30r7 J, ,,, S l*-2S-Ol6,v j, 7. DxirlaHnn Svcitnin
CD 1AJ "V" ^ To WT 8- Conclensate Strionsr
00 § T ' " V ^)i
1 °" — • — • u
' X~X <-± 	 . -211 	 *i
W © JL
TANK0-> A - 40' F 50*
B • 35' G 15'
C • CO1 H 10'
0-35' J 12'
E • 60' K 20'

-------
 affected  facilities  being  considered.  Modeling was  performed  for mills of
 500,  1000,  and  1500  tons per day of  air-dried  pulp  (ADP)  produced,  a  range
 within which  the majority  of kraft pulp mill capacities fall.
      Maximum  ground-level  concentrations of TRS were determined for the emission
 rates corresponding  to each control  technique  and system.  The concentrations
 decreased predictably with decreases in the emission rates.  It was possible
 to  adjust the meteorological conditions of the study to achieve the worst cases
 that  would  be expected to  occur at and near a  kraft  pulp  mill.
      Ambient  concentrations of TRS due to the  alternative control techniques
 and systems were calculated using state-of-the-art modeling  techniques.  These
 calculations  are assumed to be reliable within about a factor of two.   The
 following assumptions were applied for the analytical approach:
      1.  There are no significant seasonal or  hourly variations in emission
 rates for these mills.
      2.  The mills are located in flat or gently rolling  terrain.
      3.  The meteorological regime is unfavorable to the  dispersion of effluents.
 This  assumption introduces an element of conservatism into the analysis.
 Calculations were performed assuming the presence of aerodynamic downwash
 effects on the emissions.  Unfavorable design characteristics of the model
 mill  such as:   (1)  a 220-foot structure adjacent to  a 250-foot recovery furnace
 stack;  (2)  a  175-foot smelt dissolving tank stack next to a 175-foot building;
 and (3) a two-foot stack for the black liquor oxidation tank atop a 50-foot
 building will  result in downwash in most situations.  Maximum ground-level
 concentrations were estimated by assuming worst meteorological  conditions.
The correlation of  those estimates with observed concentrations at any particular
 kraft pulp mill  would depend upon many factors, including  the accuracy of the
emission data, the  mill configuration, the distance  from  the mill at which
                                       9-7

-------
samples are obtained, the sampling period and the climatology of the mill
location.
     The estimated maximum ambient TRS concentration (10 second average)
in a vicinity of a 907 megagrams (1000 tons) per day pulp mill resulting from
the individual affected facilities v»ith and without controls are listed in
Table 9-3.  The maximum concentrations occur at 300 meters from the source.
Table 9-3 shows that the sources (excluding the condensate strippers) resulting
in the greatest impact on ambient concentrations of TRS are, in decreasing
order, the digester systems, multiple-effect evaporator systems, recovery
furnace, and the lime kiln.  An uncontrolled digester system can result in a
maximum ambient TRS concentration of 20,000 yg/m  whereas an uncontrolled
brown stock washer system results in a maximum ambient concentration of 370
    3
yg/m .  Table 9-3 also shows the percent reductions of applying each control
technique on uncontrolled levels and the ambient levels at various distances
under the controlled case.
     Tables similar to Table 9-3 showing the impact of applying controls to
the various TRS sources on  ambient TRS concentrations in terms of one-hour and
24-hour averages and for 454 and 1350 megagrams (500 and 1500 tons) per day
kraft pulp mills are included in Appendix C.  For the stacks of each mill,
all averaging period maximum concentrations are noted at extremely close-in
distances (300 meters).  This is due to considerable aerodynamic effect
influencing the plume rise  in each case.   The distances given in the tables are
distances from the stack in question.  Concentrations closer to the stack than
the 300 meters given may be even higher.   These tables also give an estimate of
the frequency of occurrence for the maximum ambient concentration due to each
source.   The TRS concentrations with low frequencies of occurrence are the
                                           9-8

-------
                                                    TABLE 9-3
                               IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON
                              AMBIENT TRS  CONCENTRATION  FROM A  907 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                                KRAFT PULP MILL
                                                          Maximum Ambient Concentration:
Frequency -
.% of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
High Eff. Mud Washing
3) Process Controls * High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration
Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
Incineration
Uncontrolled Distance
Leyel ? 0.3 km 0.3 0.6
8.030
8,030
20,000
20,000
3,750
3,750
800
800

800


370
310
310
560
14,000
14,000
320 210
80 50
15,290 5580
Ob
310 200
Ob
200 70
50 20

25 10


25
60 20
DC
70
7,000
Ob
from Source (km) IGreater than 1/2
1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
120 50
30 13
3550

120
55 45 40
15 11 10

76 5


9 6
95 3
26 16
975 525
28
28
3
.
4
1
1

1


34
25
3
25
Percent
Reduction
96.0
99.0
23.5
100.0
91.7
100.0
75.0
93.8

96.9


93.2
80.6
100.0
87.5
50.0
100.0
a Reduction from uncontrolled average level

b Gases are assumed burned in the lime kiln.  The levels from the lime kiln
  include unburned TRS portion of these oases.
          oases.

-------
10-second and 1-hour concentrations from the smelt dissolving tank, the
digesters, and the multiple-effect evaporators, along with all three averaging
period concentrations from the lime kiln.  In each case, less than 5 percent
of the averages during the year were above half the maximum value for the
respective averaging periods.  These maxima, then, appear to be caused by
conditions of usually high wind speed which bring about aerodynamic downwash.
     Table 9-4 shows the estimated maximum ambient TRS concentrations resulting
from the various control systems.  If System No. 1 (best available control
technology) was applied to each source, the estimated maximum ambient TRS
concentration would be 97 micrograms per cubic meter (10-second average).
Control Systems No. 2 and No. 6 would reduce the average ambient TRS concentration
around a kraft mill to about 308 yg/m  (10-second average).  Application of
Control Systems No. 3 and No. 5 would result in a TRS ambient concentration of
              o
about 487 ug/m  (10-second average).  These concentrations are mainly caused
by emissions from three facilities:  the recovery furnace, the smelt dissolving
tank, and the brown stock washer system.  Contribution due to emissions from the
lime kiln and black liquor oxidation system are negligible in all cases.  No
values are reported for the digesters, multiple-effect evaporators  and
condensate strippers since it is assumed that the gases from these systems
would be burned in the lime kiln.
     Averaging times of 10 seconds, one hour, and twenty-four hours were
selected for the TRS calculations, representing short and long-term exposures.
The 10-second average would be considered a "whiff", and applicable to the
study of odorous emissions.  The one-hour average gives an indication of the
level of exposure experienced through casual contact, while the 24-hour average
shows the level of exposure of a person living near the mill.
                                        9-10

-------
TABLE 9-4.  ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE CONTROL SYSTEMS ON MAXIMUM AMBIENT TRS LEVELS
                 AROUND AN EXISTING (907 MEGAGRAMS PER DAY)  KRAFT PULP MILL
Control
System
1


2


3


4


5


6


Averaging
Time
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
10 sec
1 hr
24 hr
Maximum
Combined
Concentration
uq/m3
97
30
7
308
95
24
487
150
38
487
150
38
487
150
38
308
95
24

RF
81
25
6
260
25
6
260
80
20
260
80
20
260
80
20
81
25
6
CONTRIBUTION
SDT
16
5
1
16
5
1
16
5
1
16
5
1
16
5
1
16
5
1
OF EACH SOURCE
LK
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
(yg/m3)
BLO
._
—
—
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.

m:

~-
—
211
65
17
211
65
17
211
65
17
211
65
17
211
65
17

-------
9.1.4  Changes  in Solid and  Liquid Wastes



     Increased  control of gaseous TRS compounds will not  change  the  amount  of



solid waste generated by the  kraft pulp  industry  since none  of the control



techniques result in collecting solids that can not be recycled  to the  process.



Water effluent  from a mill may increase, however, due to  the various  TRS



controls.  Controls requiring use of fresh water  instead  of  contaminated



condensate will result in an  increase in the mill effluent of the amount of



the condensate.  This increase could be eliminated by using  a condensate



stripper and reusing the stripped water.  A condensate stripper would also



prevent the TRS dissolved in  the condensate from  being emitted from  the treat-



ment pond during aeration.   Increasing the mud washing efficiency to  control



TRS emissions from the lime  kiln can also increase the mill's water effluent.



However, this additional effluent from the mud washer can probably be recycled


back to the process.



9.1.5  Energy Consumption



     The energy (fuel or electricity) required for each of the control techniques



mentioned in Chapter 6 are listed in Table 9-5.  The additional  emissions



resulting from a coal-fired power plant supplying the necessary power (electricity)



for these control  techniques are also listed in Table 9-5.



     As indicated in Table 9-5, the additional particulate,  SCL and NO  emissions
                                                              £.       A


that will  occur at a coal-fired power plant due to producing  the electricity



that will  be required to control  emissions is small  compared  to the TRS



redu .ion  that will  be achieved at the kraft mill.



     As indicated by Table 9-5, the only control techniques  requiring additional



fuel consumption at a kraft mill  are incineration (in a separate incinerator) of



the vent gases from the brown stock washer system and the black liquor oxidation



system,  and process  controls used on the lime kiln.   Incineration of  the
                                         9-12

-------
VO
I
to
TABLE 9-5
COMPARISON OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES ON ENERGY IMPACT
FOR A 907 MEGA6RAMS PER DAY KRAFT PULP MILL
Fuel
Source
Recovery Furnace


Digester System
.
Multiple-effect
Evaporator System
Lime Kiln







Brown Stock Washer
System
Slack Liquor Oxi-
dation System
Smelt Dissolving*1
Tank
Condensate Stripper
System
Control
Technique
BLOb
Non -con tact
evaporator
Scrubbing
Incineration
Scrubbing
Incineration
Process Controls
Process Controls &
High Eff. Mud
Washing
Process Controls,
High Eff. Mud
Washing & Caustic
Scrubbing
Incineration
Incineration
Oxygen
Fresh Water

Incineration

o Requirement
10* J/day (10° Btu/day)
0

1150
0
0

142
142


142



2340

0
0

0

(0)

(1090)
(0)
(0)

(135)
(135)


(135)



(2220)

(0)
(0)

(0)

Electrical
Total Energy
Requirement Q Requirement
Kwh/day 10 J/day (10° Btu/day)
14,400

0
2,880
2,880
INCLUDED
1 ,075*
1,075C


1 ,075C



5.376
INCLUDED
20,000
2,400

840

52

1150
11
11
IN DIGESTER
147
147


147



2360
IN WASHER
80
8

3

(49)

(1090)
(10)
(10)
SECTION
(139)
(139)


(139)



(2240)
SECTION
(68)
(8)

(3)


Emissions Ib/day


Additional Emissions from Coal
-Fired Power Plant Supolyina
The Electrical Energy
Part. NO.,
5.7 (12.6)

0 (0)
1.1 (2.5)
1.1 (2.5)

0.5 (1.0)
0.5 (1.0)


0.5 (1.0)



2.1 (4.7)

8.0 (17.5)
1.0 (2.1)

0.3 (0.7)

40 (88)

0 (0)
8 (18)
8 (18)

3 (7)
3 (7)


3 (7)



15 (33)

55 (122)
7 (15)

2 (5)




TRS
a Reduction from
SO, Control Technique
68 (150)

0 (0)
14 (30)
14 (30)

5 (12)
5 (12)


5 (12)



25 (56)

95 (210)
11 (25)

4 (8)

650

650
180
680
420
450
270
340


350



140
45
45
80

910

(1440)

(1440)
(400)
(1500)
(920)
(1000)
(600)
(750)


(775)



(300)
(100)
(100)
(175)

(2000)

   a Data  are  based on the new source performance standards for coal-fired power plants  (Part. - 0.1 lb/10  Btu; NO. - 0.7 lb/10  Btu;
     S02 - 1.2 lb/106 Btu).                                                                                      *
     Requirements are for two-stage oxidation.
   c Electrical  requirement is for operating a condensate stripper to TRS from scrubbing water, if contaminated condensate Is used.
   d Requirements are for a scrubbing system, 1f a scrubber is not already used to control partlcuUte'emissions.

-------
noncondensable gases (digester, multiple-effect evaporator, and condensate
stripper) would not require additional fuel if they are burned in the lime kiln
as part of the primary air feed.
     Incineration of the vent gases from the brown stock washers and black
liquor oxidation system would require an additional fuel consumption of 2340
X 109 joules/day (1,750 million Btu/day).
     It is estimated that an additional 142 X 10  joules/day (100 million Btu/day)
of fuel will be required when process controls (higher cold end temperatures
and higher oxygen levels) are used to control TRS compounds from a lime kiln.
This is approximately five percent of the normal  fuel consumption of lime kiln.
     The additional electrical energy needed for each of these control tech-
niques is estimated to be between zero and 15,000 kilowatt-hours per day.
Control System 1 would reauire about 23,500 kilowatt-hours per day of additional
electrical energy.  Control Systems 2 through 6 would require about 18,125
kilowatt-hours per day of additional electrical energy.  An additional 350
kilowatt-hour per day would be required for each system if a condensate stripper
and a scrubber for the smelt dissolving tank are needed.
     Each control system would result in an additional fuel requirement of 142
    g
X 10  joules/day (for lime kiln controls) except for Control System No. 1,
                                                                 q
which would result in an additional fuel requirement of 2482 X 10  joules/day
(incineration of BLO and washer gases).  A pulp and paper mill requires an
electrical requirement in the order of 700 to 1400 kilowatt-hours per ton of
        2
product.   Therefore, these control systems will result in an increase of
between one to three percent of the total  mill electrical usage.
                                        9-14

-------
                              REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9

1.  Incineration of Malodorous, Gases in Kraft Pulp Mills. Burgess, T. L.,
Cater, D.  N., and Mcl^chern, D.  E.  Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada.
Volume 75, Number 5.  May 1974.
2.  Energy and Air Emissions in the Pulp and Paper Industry.  James E.
J. E.  Sirrine Company.  Greenville, South Carolina.
                                        9-15

-------
                      10.  EMISSION GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING
                                 KRAFT PULP MILLS
     Various alternative control systems can be applied to exir^'ng ' , ?ft pulp
mills as described in Chapter 6.  This chapter will select a system which is
judged to be the best for existing plants when costs are taken into account,
and will specify emission limitations that reflect the application of such a
system.   Time requirements to incorporate control techniques for each affected
facility are discussed in Section 6.3.  Section 10.3 will briefly discuss why
the other control systems were not selected as best retrofit technology.
10.1  GENERAL RATIONALE
     The best retrofit control technologies for the reduction of TRS emissions,
taking into account the cost of this control, correspond to alternative control
system No. 4, as indicated in Table 6-2.  The recommended control technologies
for brown stock washers, lime kilns, and black liquor oxidation systems are
less restrictive than those that have been proposed by EPA for new kraft pulp
mills.  The recommended control technologies for the recovery furnace, digesters,
multiple effect evaporators, smelt dissolving tank, and condensate stripper
are the same for both new and existing sources.  The following factors were
considered in determining best retrofit control technology:
     1.   The degree of emission reduction achievable through the application
of various demonstrated control technologies.
     2.   The technical feasibility of applying the various demonstrated tech-
nologies to existing sources.  In particular, more than one basic design of
existing recovery furnacs was evaluated.
                                     10-1

-------
     3.  The impact of the various control technologies on national energy
consumption, water pollution, solid waste disposal, and ambient air concentrations
of TRS.
     4.  The cost of adopting the emission guidelines.  Control costs were
estimated for each alternative control system for each retrofit model, taking
into account the level of existing controls.
     Identification of the best demonstrated control technology for new mills
was accomplished during the development of NSPS for the kraft pulp industry.
A question that must be answered by this study is whether or not it is technically
and economically feasible to apply this technology to existing sources.  Where
this is not feasible, best retrofit technology considering cost is identified.
     Evaluation of the technical problems and costs associated with a retrofit
project is complicated by the lack of actual data for some sources.  For example,
only recently has an existing brown stock washer system and black oxidation system
been retrofitted for control of TRS.   Also, no new black liquor oxidation
units have been installed with control systems.  Retrofit information on
control systems was available for the other process facilities in existing mills.
Retrofit models were developed (see Section 6.2) to evaluate the environmental and
cost impacts of installing TRS controls on existing recovery furnaces, digesters,
multiple-effect evaporators, lime kilns, brown stock washers, black liquor
oxidation systems, smelt dissolving tanks, and condensate strippers.  The
retrofit model approach presents the impacts on an entire kraft pulp mill of
applying control technologies to individual sources of TRS.  The major tech-
nical problem, aside from space limitations, foreseen for the average mill is
the ability of existing furnaces to maintain good combustion for TRS control
                                        10-2

-------
while burning  the  vent gases from the pulp washer and the black liquor oxi-
dation system.
     Table 10-1  indicates  the impact on annual  TRS emissions from the kraft
industry if best retrofit  control  technology, (i.e.  alternative control system
No. 4) was used.  Adoption of best retrofit control  technology would result in
emission reductions ranging  from  40 percent at  typically controlled mills
to 95 percent at uncontrolled mills.   Total  emissions from the industry would
be reduced by about 81  percent, resulting  in a  national  TRS reduction of about
60,900 megagrams per year  (67,150 tons per year).
     Adoption of best  retrofit control  technology will  result in a maximum
reduction of 95 percent in ambient air concentrations at uncontrolled mills.
Emission reductions, and likewise control  costs,  will be less for mills  which
have already installed some  control  systems.
10.2  SELECTION OF BEST RETROFIT  TECHNOLOGY  AND EMISSION GUIDELINE
10.2.1  Recovery Furnace System
     Emission Guideline -  "Old Design" furnaces  (i.e., furnaces without membrane
wall or welded wall  construction,  or emission-control  designed air  systems):
20 ppm of TRS as hLS (0.3  g/Kg ADP) on a dry gas basis and  as  a 4-hour average,
corrected to  8 volume  percent oxygen.
     -  "New  Design" furnaces (i.e., furnaces with  both membrane wall or welded
wall construction and  emission-control designed  air systems):  5 ppm of TRS as
H~S (0.075 g/Kg ADP) on a  dry gas  basis and as a 4-hour average, corrected to 8
volume percent oxygen.   (A "New Design" furnace will  have stated in its contract a
TRS performance guarantee  or  that  it was designed with air  pollution control as an
objective.)
     -  Cross  recovery furnaces (i.e., furnaces with  green  liquor sulfiditi.es in
excess of 28  percent and liquor mixtures of more than  7 percent NSSC on an air dry
ton basis):   25 ppm of TRS  as H2S  (0.6 q/Kg ADP) on a  dry gas  basis and as a 4-hour
average,  corrected to  8 volume percent oxygen.
                                      10-3

-------
                          Table 10-1.  BEST RETROFIT"CONTROL TECHNOLOGY AND IMPACT FOR INDIVIDUAL
                                            SOURCES IN THE EXISTING KRAFT PULP INDUSTRY
o
i
                                                                             Resultant TRS reduction
                                                                               at an average kraft
                                                                                           Resultant  national
Source
Recovery furnace
Digester system
Multiple-effect
Bes.t-.Dernonstrated
control technique
Process controls +
BLO
Incineration
Incineration
TRS level mill
achievable mill
20 ppm*(01d Design)
5 ppm*(New Design)
25 ppm* (Cross Recovery)
5 ppm
5 ppm
(% of total
emissions)
44.2
13,0
8.6
TRS reduction
(tons/year)
36,500
10,700
7,050
  evaporator system
Lime kiln
           Brown  stock washer
             system
           Black  liquor
             oxidation system
           Smelt  dissolving tank
           Condensate  stripping
             system
Process controls
(inc. high eff. mud
washing)
No control
                                                          20 ppm
                                                                **
                        No control
                        Fresh water
                        Incineration
                   0.0084 q/kg BLS
                        5 ppm
                        Total % reduction
11.9
 0

 3.7
 neg.
81.4
 9,800
 3,100
  n'eg.
67,150
         *Three percent of all four-hour TRS averages  above the specified level are not considered to be excess  emissions.
        **Two percent of all  four-hour TRS averages  above 20 ppm are not considered to be excess emissions.

-------
     Discussion  - The emission guidelines represent the levels that can be
achieved by using a two-stage black liquor oxidation system together with
good furnace operation.   The two specified levels of TRS emissions for straight
kraft recovery furnaces  reflect the dependence of TRS emissions on the design
of the furnace, which in turn depends on the age of the recovery furnace.  While
the design of the furnace affects the TRS level that can be achieved, the
reduction of TRS emissions from the direct contact evaporator necessary to
reduce emissions to the  level of the guidelines requires the use of high efficiency
black liquor oxidation systems regardless of the design of the furnace.  Most
recovery furnaces constructed since 1965 are generally considered capable of
achieving 5 ppm TRS because the furnace design is basically similar to furnaces
presently being installed which can achieve 5 ppm TRS.   Approximately 40 percent
of the existing recovery furnaces were constructed after 1965.  Recovery furnaces
which were constructed before 1965 generally do not have the appropriate design (i.e.,
membrane or welded wall  construction and flexibility of air distribution) or
instrumentation necessary for achieving 5 ppm.   As confirmed by the two furnace
              2 3
manufacturers, '  however, these older furnaces are generally capable of limiting
TRS emissions to 20 ppm  if the furnace is properly operated, uses high efficiency
black liquor oxidation,  and is not operated at an excessive production rate.
     As mentioned in Chapter 6, cross recovery liquors are somewhat different
than straight kraft liquors.  Consequently, TRS emissions from a cross recovery
furnace are not controllable to the same degree as are those from straight
kraft recovery furnaces.  The reasons for this include higher sulfur-to-
soda ratios and lower BTU value of the liquor fired.  Furthermore, the tech-
nique of using excess combustion air (high oxygen levels) to reduce TRS
emissions is of limited  utility because it reportedly results in a sticky
                                      10-5

-------
dust which will foul the precipitator and render furnace operation difficult
or impossible.  Tests performed on a non-contact type cross-recovery furnace
indicate that TRS emission levels of 25 ppm (4-hour average) can be achieved
from well controlled cross recovery furnaces.4
     Appendix B presents TRS emission data for straight kraft recovery furnaces
and a cross recovery furnace.
     Retrofit annualized costs for installing a second stage of black liquor
oxidation are about $240,000 for a 907 megagrams/day (1,000 tons ADP/day) mill.
Retrofit costs would be double if a mill does not presently have a single
stage of oxidation.  Annualized costs, including capital charges, are estimated
to be about $0.75 per ton ADP, or about 0.25 percent of the pulp price to install
a second stage of black liquor oxidation.  These costs are not considered
excessive.
     It appears that approximately 18 recovery furnaces may not be able to
achieve 20 ppm TRS because the furnace either does not have sufficient control
for proper combustion or is operated at an excessive production rate and cannot
supply sufficient oxygen to achieve good combustion.  Studies have demonstrated
that minimum TRS emissions are not achieved unless residual oxygen content of
the flue gas is in the range of 2.5 to 4.5 percent.  (Low oxygen levels due to
overloading of the furnace can exist regardless of the age of the furnace.)  If
these furnaces are required to achieve the emission guideline, a new furnace
would have to be installed (at an annualized cost of about $2.3 million for a
500 tons per day furnace) to compensate for the cutback on production of an
existing furnace.   Many of the recovery furnaces that would have to be replaced
are at least 20 years old.   This age is near the normal life (25 years) of a
furnace, considering the compliance schedule under Section lll(d), and are
near replacement.

                                      10-6

-------
     An alternative  to  replacing  an  old  furnace  would  be  to install  a scrubber
 system, as mentioned in Section 6.11, which  is capable of achieving  less  than
 20 ppm TRS.  A scrubber system has been  installed  at one  mill.5   Installation
 and operation of such a system is expected to be a much less  expensive alternative
 than replacement of  the furnace.
     The emission guidelines for  recovery furnaces are comparable to the  emission
 levels which existing furnaces in Oregon and Washington are required to meet
 as of July, 1975 (17.5 ppm).*5  The 17.5 ppm  level  represents  the'level that can
 be achieved by most  existing recovery furnaces,  and the 1983  Oregon  and Washington
 level of 5 ppm represents the level  achievable with the newer design furnaces
 and allows time for  the replacement  of older furnaces  (non-membrane  wall  construction)
     The estimated impact of adoption of the emission  guideline  on annual  TRS
 emissions from recovery furnaces  is  33,470 megagrams per  year, an 85 percent
 reduction.  The predicted maximum ambient air TRS  concentration  due  to emissions
 from an uncontrolled recovery furnace would decrease by 96  to 99 percent  with
 the recommended control technology.
 10.2.2  Digester System
     Emission Guideline - 5 parts per million of TRS as H2S on a dry gas  basis
jindtrs^ar 4-hour average.
     Discussion - This TRS level  is  the  same as  that included in the new  source
 performance standards for new digester systems.  The 5 ppm level is  achievable
 by incineration of the  noncondensable gases.  Existing mills  in  Oregon, Washington,
 and several other states are required to incinerate  the noncondensable gases
 from digester systems as of July, 1975.'   It is  estimated that adoption of this
 control technology will result  in a  reduction of 99  percent in the uncontrolled
 TRS emitted from a digester system.
                                         10-7

-------
     The TRS level achievable by incineration of noncondensable gases from
digester systems has been well-demonstrated as reported in Section 6.1.2.  The
gases from the digester system can be handled in the lime kiln as part of the
combustion air without requiring extensive modification to the digester system
or lime kiln.  Incineration of the gases in lime kilns or in power boilers
is presently being accomplished by at least 60 mills.  Nearly all of these
incineration systems were retrofitted to the existing mills.
     Incineration is the only control option capable of providing high efficiency
TRS reduction.  A thousand-fold increase in emissions to approximately 7000 pom
would result from control by white liquor scrubbers  (see Chapter 6).  These
scrubbers are effective in controlling H?S and methyl mercaptan which comnrise
only approximately 20 percent of the TRS emissions from digester systems.
     If the emission guidelines were increased moderately, incineration costs
would not vary greatly.  The cost of collecting and burning the gases in the
lime kiln is essentially fixed regardless of the selected emission level.  Most
existing kraft pulp mills incinerate these gases in the lime kiln and normal
kiln operation will oxidize the TRS compounds to less than 5 opm.
     Retrofit annualized costs are estimated to range from about $65,000 to
about $210,000 for a 454 megagram mill, or about $0.40 to $1.25/T ADP.  The
low value represents costs for piping only, while the high value represents
costs for piping, blow heat recovery system, and a separate incinerator.  These
costs are not considered excessive.
     The estimated impact of adoption of best retrofit control technology on
annual  TRS emissions from digester systems is significant, 11,800 meaaarams per
year or a 97 percent reduction from uncontrolled levels.
                                       10-8

-------
10.2.3  Multiple-Effect  Evaporator System
    Emission Guideline  -  5  parts  per  million of TRS as HgS on a dry gas basis
and as a 4-hour average.
    Discussion - This TRS level is  also  the  same as that in the new source
performance standards for  new multiple-effect evaporator systems.   It is estimated
that achievement of this level will  require a reduction of 98 percent of the TRS
emitted  from an uncontrolled multiple-effect evaporator system.   Incineration
is capable of achieving  this level.  Existing mills   in Oregon, Washington,
and several other States are required  to  incinerate  these gases as of July, 1975.8
    The TRS level achievable by incineration has been  well-demonstrated as reported
in the Standards Support and Environmental  Impact Statement document for new
kraft pulp mills.  The non-condensable gases  from the multiple-effect evaporators
can easily be handled in the lime  kiln as part of the combustion  air without
requiring extensive modifications  to be made  to the  multiple-effect evaporator
system or the lime kiln.   Incineration of these gases in lime kilns or in power
boilers is presently being accomplished by  at least  59  mills.   The majority of
these incineration systems were retrofitted to existing multiple-effect evaporator systems,
    Incineration is the only control  option  capable of providing high efficiency
TRS reduction.  A sixty-fold increase  in  TRS  emissions  to approximately 300 ppm
(see Section 6.1.3) would  be required  to  allow the use  of white liquor scrubbers.   These
scrubbers have only about  a 90 percent TRS  collection efficiency  when used on the
noncondensable gases from  a multiple-effect evaporator  system.
    If the emission guidelines were increased moderately, incineration costs
would not vary greatly.  The control costs  are mainly for collecting and transferring
the gases to the control device whether incineration or scrubbing is practiced.
                                      10-9

-------
Most existing kraft pulp mills incinerate the gases in the lime kiln along with
the digester gases, and normal lime kiln operations oxidize the gases to less
than 5 ppm TRS.
     Retrofit costs for incineration of the noncondensable gases from the
multiple-effect evaporators are included in the retrofit costs reported for
the digester system (Section 10.2.2).
     Estimated impact of adoption of best retrofit technology on annual TRS
emissions from multiple-effect evaporator systems is significant, 6,120
megagrams (6,750 tons) per year or a 96 percent reduction.
10.2.4  Lime Kiln
     Emission Guideline - 20 ppm of TRS as ^S on a dry gas basis and as a
4-hour average, corrected to 10 volume  percent oxygen.
     Discussion - The specified level reflects the dependence of TRS emissions
on the operation of the kiln.  This requires maintaining the proper oxygen
level and cold-end temperature, and using water that does not contain dissolved
sulfides in the particulate control scrubber.  Existing mills will probably
need to improve their lime mud washing efficiency (additional filtration and
clarifier capacity) to reduce the sulfide level  of mud fed to the kiln.  Additional
fan capacity may be necessary to obtain the required oxygen levels in existing
kilns and thereby provide appropriate control over the combustion.  There are
no apparent reasons why these changes cannot be made to existing kilns.  Furthermore,
installation of a condensate stripper may be required to remove sulfides from
the condensate if it is used in the particulate control scrubber.  Appendix B
presents TRS emission data, which were obtained during the NSPS program, for
several lime kilns that achieve this level.
                                       10-10

-------
     Retrofit annualized costs for additional  fan capacity (to achieve higher
oxygen levels) and instrumentation are about $55,000 for a 458 megagrams/day
(500 ton ADP/day) mill.   Retrofit annualized costs for additional mud washing
capacity are about $90,000.   An additional  $90,000 in retrofit annualized costs would be
incurred if a condensate stripper is needed to remove the sulfides from the
scrubbing water.   These  annualized costs, including capital charges, are estimated
to be about $0.90 per ton ADP if a condensate stripper is not needed and about
$1.50 per ton ADP if one is  needed.   These  costs are not considered excessive.
     The impact of adoption  of best demonstrated retrofit control technology
on TRS emissions  from kraft  lime kilns is significant, an 84 percent reduction
(9,800 tons/year) from existing levels.   Maximum ambient TRS concentration due
to an uncontrolled lime  kiln would be reduced by 83 percent.
     Lower TRS levels than the emission  guideline are achievable as stated
in Section 6.1.4 and as  reflected in the proposed standard for new lime kilns
(8 ppm TRS).  The lower  TRS  level is achievable with the addition of caustic
scrubbing.
     Many existing lime  kilns are operating in excess of design capacity,
 and some of these kilns, even with improved.mud washing efficiency, may not
be able to achieve TRS levels significantly lower than 40 ppm because of the
inability to supply sufficient oxygen for good combustion.  It appears that
between 20 and 33 lime kilns (corresponding to about 20 percent of the existing
kilns) would have to be  replaced or added in order to achieve 20 ppm TRS by applying
the best retrofit control technology discussed above (see_Chapter 8).  Capital
costs for a new lime kiln are $3 million, and annualized costs are $510,000.
     The lower TRS emission  level of 8 ppm is not recommended as an emission guideline
so that the number of kiln replacements  is  minimized.  The higher level also allows some
of those mills which cannot  achieve 20 ppm from the lime kiln by applying process

                                       10-11

-------
controls and improved mud washing to apply caustic scrubbing to achieve the guideline
rather than replacing or adding a new lime kiln.  The results of trials conducted at one
pulp mill showed that levels of 40 to 50 ppm TRS could be reduced to a  level
 less  than 20 ppm by  using  caustic addition.9   Nevertheless,  the  lower  TRS level
is technically achievable at existing mills and can be imposed if the location of
the mill or lime kiln warrants additional controls.
10.2.5  Brown Stock Washer System
     Emission Guideline - No emission guideline is recommended for existing
brown stock washer systems.
     Discussion - No TRS control is recommended due to the high costs associated
with hooding and collecting the gases and the possible effect the gases may have
on existing recovery furnace operation.
     Incineration of the vent gases is the emission control  technique that could
be used to reduce TRS emissions from brown stock washer systems.  Burning
these gases in an existing recovery furnace is considered by furnace manufacturers
to be technologically feasible.    This control technique, however, has not yet
been demonstrated on an existing furnace, and the TRS level  that can be achieved
from an existing furnace under these conditions has not been demonstrated.  The
control costs for incineration, therefore, have been based on the use of  a separate
incinerator.  Incineration of the gases would require that the washer be  hooded,
possibly with enclosed hoods, and ductwork would be necessary to transfer the
gases to the incinerator.  (These gases would have to be ducted over 1500 feet
at some mills if the recovery furnace was used.)  Incineration of gases in a
separate incinerator would require retrofit annualized costs of about $900,000
for a 454 meqaqram mill or about $5.50/T ADP.   These costs  are much more
                                         10-12

-------
severe than retrofit costs for the other TRS sources and are considered to be
excessive in comparison with control of the other sources of TRS and with the
amount of TRS reduction achieved (about 1 percent of total mill TRS emissions).
10.2.6  Black Liquor Oxidation System
     Emission Guideline - No emission guideline is recommended for existing
black liquor oxidation systems.
     Discussion - No TRS control  is recommended due to the expected cost impact
on the industry if existing sources were required to meet TRS levels achievable
for new systems.   There is no less  stringent control method possible (except for the
uncontrolled level) than that considered demonstrated for new sources.
     Achievable control technology  involves incineration of the vent gases or
the use of molecular oxygen instead of air to eliminate the vent gases.  The cost
of controlling the low concentration/high volume gases from black liquor oxidation
systems is considered more severe and excessive in comparison with controlling
the largest sources of TRS at kraft mills (see Section 10.3).  The control costs
for incineration have been based  on the use of a separate incinerator, since the
effect of these oxygen-deficient  gases on furnace combustion and thus TRS
emissions from existing furnaces  has not been determined.  Retrofit annualized
costs are estimated to be $230,000  for a 500 TPD kraft mill, or $1.50/T ADP.
These costs are considered excessive in view of the amount of TRS reduction that
would be achieved by incineration (about 0.4 percent of total mill TRS emissions).
10.2.7  Condensate Stripping System
     Emission Guideline - 5 parts per million of TRS as I^S on a dry gas basis
and as a 4-hour average.
                                    10-13

-------
     Discussion - This emission guideline is the same as that included in the
new source performance standards for new condensate stripping systems.  Only
five existing mills have condensate strippers, and only one is not presently
incinerating the off-gases.  Incineration of the off-gases is necessary to
achieve this TRS level.
     Retrofit annualized costs based on combining the stripper off-gases with
the noncondensable gas from the digesters and evaporators are estimated to be
about $6,500 for a 500-ton-per-day mill or about $0.05/T ADP.  The cost impact
on the industry due to control of this facility is expected to be negligible.
     Use of a white liquor scrubber, the only other control technique used,
would permit TRS emissions which are 100-fold higher than with incineration.
These TRS levels from scrubbers could be highly odorous.
10.2.8  Smelt Dissolving Tank
     Emission Guideline - 0.0084 g/kg BLS of TRS as H^S (approximately 8 ppm),
on a 4-hour average.
     Discussion - This emission guideline is also the same as that included in
the new source performance standards for new smelt dissolving tanks.  Achievement
of this level would require the use of fresh water, or possibly weak wash liquor,
in the particulate control device (scrubber) to ensure compliance.
     The control costs for achieving this level are not considered excessive.
Adoption of this level is expected to result in an emission reduction of about
2720 megagrams (3000 tons) per year of TRS.
10.2.9  Excess Emissions
     Excess emissions are defined in terms of the applicable guidelines.  For
example, if the emission guideline for a particular facility is 5 ppm of TRS,
4-hour average, then excess emissions would usually be defined as all occurrences
                                  10-14

-------
during the reporting period for which 5 ppm TRS, 4-hour average, was exceeded.
In some special cases where emissions in excess of the nominal guideline can
be predicted to normally occur at a well operated facility for a small percentage
of the time, this is reflected in the definition of excess emissions.  The
definitions of excess emissions for recovery furnaces and lime kilns are
discussed below.
     Recovery Furnace Systems - A pulp manufacturer submitted six months of
TRS emission data from one of their recovery furnaces and requested that EPA
consider the data in defining excess TRS emissions fro recovery furnace facilities.
The furnace was tested by EPA in developing the data upon which the new source
performance standard is based.   The submitted data, recorded by a continuous
monitor, show that over the 6-month period, the percent of time that the TRS
concentration exceeded 5 ppm during each month ranged from 0.7 to 7.7 percent
and averaged about 3 percent.
     EPA has investigated the furnace operation and the monitoring system at
this mill and believes that the data are a true indication of normal, well
controlled operation for this furnace.  Therefore, based on the information,
an allowance of 3 percent of the 4-hour averages has been given for excess
TRS emissions above the guideline.
     Lime Kiln - Test data (see Appendix B) were supplied by a mill (Lime Kiln P)
that had retrofitted the lime kiln system with additional fan capacity and mud
washing capacity.  These data give an indication of the variations in the emission
concentrations over a large number of four-hour periods.  The data show that
for the period when the mill was maintaining good process controls (high cold
end temperatures, high oxygen levels, and high mud solids contents) on the kiln,
the four-hour average TRS concentrations exceeded 20 ppm for approximately
11 percent of the time.11  However, during this same period the mud filter
                                 10-15

-------
(belt filter) was inoperative for 10 percent of the time.  Process and
emission monitoring data obtained on Lime Kiln E (see Appendix B) show
excess TRS emissions of 2 percent with down time on the mud filter (vacuum
drum) of only 1  percent.  Therefore, it is felt that with a reliable mud
filtering system and maintaining good process controls on the kiln, the
4-hour average TRS concentrations will exceed 20 ppm for approximately
2 percent of the time.  Hence, an allowance of a maximum 2 percent of the
4-hour averages has been provided for excess TRS emissions above the guideline.
10.3  SUMMARY OF THE RATIONALE FOR SELECTING THE BEST RETROFIT CONTROL SYSTEM
     The proposed TRS emission limits for new kraft pulp mills are technologically
achievable at existing kraft pulp mills when the best control techniques discussed
above are applied to each of the eight component process operations.  However,
the costs of applying the best control techniques are considered excessive for
some existing mills, in part because some techniques involve replacement of
recovery furnaces or lime kilns.  Further, alternative control techniques
which are effective but less costly are available for some process operations.
Therefore, the costs of applying the various control techniques had a considerable
influence on the selection of the recommended best retrofit control technology
(alternative control system No. 4 for an entire kraft mill).
     Control of the brown stock washer system and black liquor oxidation system
(alternative control system No. 1) are not recommended because incineration of
these vent gases in a separate incinerator would result in excessive operating
costs and fuel requirements in comparison to the TRS reduction achieved by the
control  technique.  Incineration of these gases in an existing recovery furnace
is not presently considered to be demonstrated retrofit technology.  No existing
recovery furnace not designed to handle these gases has demonstrated the ability
to burn  these gases and still maintain proper combustion for controlling TRS
emissions from the furnace itself.
                               10-16

-------
     The emission  guideline recommended for existing recovery  furnaces  is
20 ppm for  "old design" furnaces, 5 ppm for "new design" furnaces,  and  25  ppm
for cross recovery furnaces.  The older furnaces are not capable of achieving
5 ppm and a large number of existing furnaces would most likely have to be
replaced if such a level was required.  The control technique  required  for each
type of furnace to meet the recommended levels is two-stage black liquor oxidation
and process controls.
     Incineration of the noncondensable gases from the digesters, multiple-
effect evaporators, or condensate strippers in the lime kiln has been demonstrated
at many existing mills.  Therefore, since the control costs are not excessive,
the emission guideline recommended is the same as the new source performance
standard (5 ppm TRS) for new kraft pulp mills.
     An emission guideline of 20 ppm TRS is recommended for existing lime kilns.
Emission data obtained during the NSPS program show that 2Q ppm can be Achieved
with proper kiln operation and sufficient mud washing efficiency.   Larger fans
and additional mud washing capacity will be necessary for most existing kilns.
Lower TRS levels are achievable, but several additional lime kilns would have
to be replaced or added in order to achieve a level of 8 ppm TRS.
     The emission guideline recommended for smelt dissolving tanks will  probably
prevent the use of contaminated condensate in the tank and the particulate
control device, if one is used.  If a scrubber is not used already for controlling
particulates, one may have to be installed to reduce TRS emissions from an
existing smelt dissolving tank to the recommended guideline.
     The best retrofit technologies (alternative control  system No.  4)  will
produce a large reduction in national TRS emissions (67,150 tons/year)  and
in ambient TRS concentrations around existing mills.
                                10-17

-------
10.4  SELECTION OF THE FORMAT OF THE EMISSION GUIDELINES
     Standards for kraft pulp mills could be expressed in terms of either mass
emissions per unit of production or a concentration of pollutant in the effluent
gases.  The most common format now used by the industry and state control
agencies is pounds of pollutant per ton of air-dried unbleached pulp produced
(Ib/T ADP).  This format offers the advantage of preventing circumvention
of the standards by the addition of dilution air or the use of excessive
quantities of air in process operations.  The principal disadvantage is that
a control agency cannot readily or accurately measure the pulp production
over the short term.  Due to storage capacity of the mill, the recovery
furnace, smelt dissolving tank, lime kiln, condensate strippers, black liquor
oxidation tanks, and multiple-effect evaporators can be operating on
accumulated inventories when the digesters are off-stream (no pulp production).
Similarly, the above facilities can be operating below capacity even though
the pulp production may be at design rates.
     Concentration units are used as the format for the emission guidelines
for the digesters, the multiple-effect evaporators, the recovery furnace, the
lime kiln, and the condensate stripping system.  The reasons for the selection
of this format are outlined below:
     a.  Concentration units can be corrected for excess oxygen in the lime
kiln and recovery furnace exhaust streams, precluding circumvention of the
standards by dilution.
     b.  The reference test method for TRS produces data in concentration units.
No conversion factors are therefore required in determining compliance for the
affected facilities.
     c.  Average concentrations rather than instantaneous concentrations are
proposed to allow for fluctuations in emissions which occur even during periods
of normal operation.
                                   10-18

-------
     d.  Commercially available continuous monitors that may be used to measure
emissions from these facilities indicate concentration directly.  A direct
indication of performance of the control systems would be available, and therefore
the operator would be aware of excess emissions that require corrective action.
     The emission guideline for smelt dissolving tanks is expressed in grams
per kilogram BLS (g/kg BLS) to prevent circumvention by dilution.  EPA tests
show that gas volumes from existing smelt tanks vary in exhaust concentrations
by a factor of as much as 2.5, even when the smelt dissolving tanks have the
same mass emission rate (g/kg BLS).  Dilution cannot be prevented by correcting
for excess oxygen because the exhaust stream discharged from the smelt
dissolving tank is mostly ambient air.
10.5  RECOMMENDED MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
     Monitoring requirements are necessary to ensure proper operation and
maintenance of the affected facility and its associated control system.  The
volume concentration of TRS emissions can be monitored by use of measurement
systems (see Chapter 7).  Since there are no process or control device
parameters that are appropriate indicators of concentration of TRS emissions
from recovery furnace systems and lime kilns, it is recommended that TRS
continuous monitors be required for recovery furnaces and lime kilns.
     TRS concentrations in the effluent gases from an incinerator that controls
TRS emissions (from the digesters, multiple-effect evaporators, and/or condensate
strippers) can be measured by a continuous monitoring system.  An effective
alternative method of monitoring TRS emissions from an incinerator is continuous
measuring and recording of the fire box temperature of 540°C (1000°F) and operation
at a residence time of at least one-half second in the fire box.  Incinerators
are designed for a particular residence time that will not be reduced if the
incinerator is not operated above its design capacity.  The fire box temperature
                                   10-19

-------
can ba readily measured and recorded.   IT non con Jensub] 2  yascis  r,"om facilities
that JT2 covered by the guidelines are  incinerated  in  the recovery furnace
or the lime kiln, the TRS monitoring system on  the  fnrntics or the lime
kiln v/ill serve to monitor the sources  that are  being  inr.iccrate'.l.
     Since the yuideline for smalt JJssol vimj  I'-vnk-s  is  axprrj;;-^!  in a format
of pollutant mass per unit of  feed to  the furnjce,  the  rjas flow rate and the
feed rate to the furnace would have to  be measured simultaneously to reduce
the TRS concentrations measured by the  monitor to units of the  recommended
guideline.  The inaccuracies involved in continuously measuring emissions from
the smelt dissolving tank are felt to be sufficiently large that  no direct
monitoring of TRS emissions from the smelt dissolving tank is recommended.
                                 10-20

-------
                    APPENDIX  A.  SUMMARY  OF KRAFT MILLS

                             IN THE UNITED  STATES
                                    M111
                                    Size
                                 Ave. Kraft
                                 •Production
i.
Alabama




*


:>















Ari zona


Arkansas












i Corppanv

Allied Paper
American Can

.Champion

Container Corp.

.Gerogia Kraft

Gulf States

Gulf States
Hammer-mi 1 1

I-P-
'Kimberly-Clark
I
"MacMillan
Sloedel
: Scott

Union Camp


Southwest Forest


^Georgia-Pacific

Great Northern

. Green Bay

' I. P.

I. P.

Weyerhaeuser

I ,..-.-_
j i
_, Location

Jackson
Bulter

Courtland

Brewton

Mahrt .

Demo polis

Tuscaloosa
. Selma

, Mobile
Coosa Pines
j
Pine Hi|l
i
Mobile [

Montgomery


Snowflake

i -
Crossett
(
Ashdov;n
1
Morrilton

Camden

Pine Bluff

Pine Bluff

(Capacity
-.: ..tpd.. ".

500
930
(900)
500
(500)
900
(850)
1000
(975)
360
(400)
500
(475)
500
(500)
1300
(1200)
585
(600)
1000
(975)
1400
(1400)
870
(930)

600
(600)

1250

400
(400)
360
1
750
(750)
1220
(1300)
200
' (200)
No. of f
1
2
3

1

2

1

1

2
1

2
2

1

4

1


2


3

1

2

3

2.

1 .

Manuf

CE
B&W

B&W

B&W

B&U

B&W

B&W
B&W

B&W
CE

CE

B&W

CE


B&W


CE

CE

CE
B&W
B&W

B&W

CE

i Rating
; tpd

566
• Year
Jn'.t/Olc-:

post-1965
350 post-1%5
390 (each) 1965

600

390
600
900

330

175
250
450

700
900

932

450;300
300
700


250
500

^00&500
850
540

665
250
500
2-275
1100
390
165

1959,1956
1968

1962
1969
1965

1955

1947
1941

1970
post-1965

post-1965

pre 1965

pre 1965


1960
1969

pre 1965
pre 1965
post-1965

post-1965
1965
1966
1946
1966
1959
pre 1965

Control

BLO
BLO

BLO

BLO
Low Odor


BLO

BLO
(oxyoen)
BLO

BLO
BLO

BLO

BLO'

BLO





BLO











TKS Leve
VT yn?

0.5
0.5

0.15

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5
0.5

0.5
0.5

0_c

0.5

0.5


15.0


0.6

15.0

15.0

15.0

15.0

15.0

L'nc   incineration

i,C   Continuous
 BLO   Black Liquor Oxidation
                                       A-l

-------
Li.::;% Kiln
Size TR
No. of Tons ;CaO) Lev
L'n";s Per.L'ay ,v/T_
1 121 0.
t. 1 51 0.
each
i 181 0

2 120 0
t
1 • 0
. 1 120 o

2 130 0
75
1 125 o

0
2

1 225

4 1400
(total)
1 1 74

2
•
2 400

1 117

1


1 150
ADP „
8
8

05

8

8
8

8

2

8


















TDC ^~
Disaster „ 14'
I Type1" Control \ Level
.No.- -_L(.Size_L JechniqueJ/T. ADP
4 Batch Inc. Q.02
6 B Inc. o.02

1 C Inc. o.02
(500 tpd)
8 B Inc. 0.02

1 C Inc. 0.02
1 C Inc. 0-02
(400 tpd)
8 B Inc. 0.02
(495)
4 B Inc. o 02
(600)
Inc. o.02
6 B Inc. o.02
1 _ C
1 C Inc. 0.02
(925)
13 B (910) Inc. 0.02
C (500)
1 C Inc. Q.02
(870)
68 1.5

11 B Inc. 0.02
(1276)
4 B 1.5
(400)
2 • B 1-5
2 C Inc. \02
1.5
3 B '1.5
Itiple-efr'.'ct ,„,.
•/apordlor ' ° «
Control Level
"P.- .Technique ?/T AD:1
1 Inc. 0.02
2 inc. 0.02

1 inc. 0.02
(
2 inc. 0.02 '.

1 inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02

2 scrub. 0.08

1 inc. o . 02

Inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02

1 inc. 0,02

4 inc. 0.02

1 inc. , 0.02

2 ' 1.0
1
4 Inc. 0.02

1 1.0

1 1.0
1.0
KO
' 1.0
urovii Slock V/as!i£r 	 T
Capacity l-'asher Ic
Mo. ADTPD Jtagss ,v/r
1 3 0




2 3
4
1 2
1 3

2 300 3
475 4
1 600 3




2
,
5 i ;
|
2 |
1


2

1 3

1


1 ! 3
RS
/'.:!'
A OP
.3
































                                                                                                                           J


   I'l'Lonti oiled  fiauros yivjn are avoraije  uncontrolled  figures  fur the industry unli'ss  actual  level known,  cont'.rcllad levels

o:':-'n art.1 actual  ti.j'.ircs when known  ,.•!;,.er.rise state standard  is  given,  furnaces  controlled vJitli BLO but  for which no
;'.. it« st.indard r.'.iply or actual level  known,  ,1 level of  ?..'{  ;'/T  (70 DPII') is assumed.   A  conversion  table  showing the
; j•vesi.'ond.inf] eiiiiiSioii rate in tsrms  of  p^i,!  and g/Kg ADP  is  presented at  the end  of  the appendix.
                                                               A-2

-------




..--.._-.. -..._ 7--.-,~-r- . ... ..-..--^-T--
\t
1 ...... 	 Co.i:pcny ...
Cali- Crown Siripson
fornia
Fibreboercl
Louisiana-Psc.

Simpson Lee

Florida Alton Box

Container Corp.

Hudson P & P

I. P.

Proctor & Gamble

St. Joe

St. Regis

St. Regis

Sebroia Continental Can

Continental Can

Brunswick

Georgia Kraft

Georgia Krcft

Gilman

Great northern

Interstate
Itt Rayon i or

'


- - • . _ .
\ i
Lccetion
Fairhcvpn

Anlie •> ii
Samoa

Anderson

Jacksonville

rornandine Beach

Palatda

Panana City

Foley

Part St. Joe

Jacksonville

Pensacola

Augusta

Port Hentworth

Brunswick

Krannert

Hacon

St. Itery

Cedar Springs

Picek.r'i
Jesup
Mill
Sire
Avo. Kraft
Production
( Kt.ft )
(Capacity) :ju. of
.... tPd Units ,
550
(GW)

600
(7( j)
150
(160)
f,75
(C50)
1

2
2

2

1

1500 2
(1700) (
950' ! 3
(950) !•
1400 2
(1400)
900 [ 3
(900)
1300
(1300)
1350
(1400)

(920)
800
(800)
625
(600)
1550
(1550)
1550
(1550)
900
(900)
1100
(1000)
1 7P.r/
(170ri)
525
1200
(1250)
3

3

2

2

2

2

3

2

3

2

1
3












Recovery Furnace ,,
i Ralimj Year CnntrolJTRS Leve
l-bnuf.
P&W

CM'.'
cr

BM

CF

Bf,u

B)M'r
CF
CE

B&H
CF
CE

CF

PS.V

B&W

CE

B&W
CF
CF.

CE

BM'1
CF
PF
f.M-i

Ct
i-P.'3 . ./nstnl.le;' -.:•:!, ni'i'jc-.
800 1964 BLO

400 1959 BLO
350{eoc!-i)prc- 1965 BLO

150 1962 BLO
300 1973 Low Odor
750 post-1965 BLO

1000 1967 Low Odor
300 1955 BL(l(Oxyae
250(each)1950ri954
1200 post-1965
900(each)post-1965 RLO

413R550 1952&1956
500 ore 1965
233*300 ore 1965
1060 post-1965
300&383 pre -1965

SOO(each) 1973 Low Orior

400(each)1959?,1964 BLO

350(each)

1100 1970 Low Odor
450 ere 1965 BLO
300R550 pre 1965
500 oost-1965
300 pre 1965

500 1968 BLO
2-275 ore 1%5
66B ere 1965 Low Odor
1000 1972 Low Odor
4bO 1965
1100 1S70 Low Odor
465&350 pre 1965 RLO
,7/T ADP
0.5

0.6
0.5

6.5

0.5

0.15
n)
0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.15

0.6

15.0

0.5

15.0

15.0

15.0

0.5

15.0
0.6
A-3

-------
Li mo Kiln ' ,pc !'.;ilti;>lc- -c ffoct ., „.
-. . .. Sizn TRS ^ Digester , 14 ^'-poiMlor '"*f rt-rc.M .SU>cl: ',V-:.hcr TRS
;;o. of Tons (CaO) Level < Type" Control , Level' r:onu\,l Lcvc'l ' Cfp-"-i(-v IV-ci or i ,M,nv/l
.JJni.ts |. Per .Day..! »/T AD?.
1 0.15

2 0.05

1 700 0.12

1 50 0.05
(Fluo- i
solid) i
2 80 0.8
(each)
2 . 0.8
1
3 !

3
3 240

3 280 \
3 0.





f
2
1 110 tlpd 0.8
1 70 tlpd
(Fluo-
solid)
1 100
3 440
3 113
113
113
2 80
80
1 275
2 210
210
1 111

3 144













114
212
..No. . ^ISize). Tcchnique^/T ADP !!•-'. .Toc!::iic]uc ,;/] /,P!> (;0. ADTiV; SLayos :'/T A;;f
2 C inc. 0.02 \ i illc. 0.02 _>, 0.27
L.K. .! I..).. I '
4 B inc. 0-02
L.K.
1 C inc. 0.02
(700)
1 C scruj 0.6
(170)

6 B 1.5
(700)
7 B 1.5
1 C
13 B
(1000)
19 B
10 B (1300)
1 .C (5CO)
12 B





/
18 B inc. 0.02
2 C 1.5



9 B
17 B
(1550)
14 B

8 B
13 B
10 8 (1900)
1 C (340)
4 B
6 B
26 B















iii;;. 0.02 ! 2 4 0.11
L.I;. c
inc. 0.02 l 1 2 0.19
P
I L.K. jj
1 scruN 0.08

2 1.0

4 1.0

3

3
3

3 , v





/
4 inc. 0.02
2 1.0



2 :
4
4

2
\








/
2 0.08
1 . 1.0

1 0


0.12

1 3 0.3

3 0.2

4





















I
4 (
4 4

2 4





f
I




A-4

-------
 Georgia
 Idaho
 Kentucky
Louisiana
 Maine


*'' 1
	 Company
Owens-Illinois
Union Camp

Potlatch


Western Kraft

Westvaco

Boise Cascade

Boise Cascade

Continental Can

Crown Zellerbach

Crown Zellerbach

Georgia-Pacific
I. P.
I
I. P.

,01in

Pineville

Western Kraft
. Diamond Int.

Georgia-Pacific

I. P. •;-;--

Lincoln

•

1 !
_'! _... Location ._
Valdosta
Savannah

Lewis ton


Hawesville

Wickliffe

DeRidder

Elizabeth

Hodge

Bogalvsa

St. Francisville

Port Hudson
Bustrop

.Springhill

West. Monroe

Pineville

Campti
Old Town

Woodland

Jay

Lincoln

Mill
Si 2'.-
Ave. Kt\ift
Production
( Kruft )
(Capacity) No. of i
. tpd 	 Units ;
9*0
2600
(ziibo;
850
(900)

300
(320)
600
(600)
1030
(1050)
300
(325)
1400
(1400)
1340
(1350)
500
(500)
530
(640)
1100

1000
1650
1125
(1150)
3
6

4


2

1

1

1

2

2

1

2
2

4

2

800 1
(750)
450
350
(550)
800 '
(800)
600
(600)
340
(400)

1
1

2

2

1




Recovery Furnace

Mdnuf
CE
IE

CL
B&K

B&W

CE

B&W

B&W

B&W
CE
B&W
CE
B&W

B&W
CE
CE
B&H
B&W
CE
B&W
B&W
CE

B&W
B&W

B&W

C&W
CE
B&W

i Rating
•: tpd
350&250
1350

150S300
300
400
225
300
833

1000



300
1233
800
350
600

690
1000
300
1100
Year
Installed
pre-1965
post-1965
pre-1965
pre-1965
1954




;:ciii,-ci3TPs


Leva
•vi:niq.u i/T ADr>
BLO
BLO

BLO
BLO
2.
2.

0.

1
1

5

1970 Low Odor
1968
1974
post-1965

1968



1955
post-1965
1963
pre-1965
1963

1965
post-1965
pre-1965
1966
BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO
BLO

2-700;500 1973;66;62 BLO
350
450
800
833

420
590

pre-1965
1963

BLO
0.

0.

0.

2.

2.

2.

2.

0.
2.

0.

2.
15

5

6

1

1

1

1

6
1

6

1
1974 Low Odor
pre-1965

1972
1969

350(each) 1963

800
600
386


1974
pre-1965
1970

BLO

Low Odor
Low Odor

BLO

Low Odor
BLO
Low Odor

2.

1

0.1E








0.1E

0.5

c.r

0.1:

                                             A-5

-------
-ims Kiln
Size TRS „ n
Ho. of Tons (CaO) Level'' j
Units ; Per Day.: f/j ADP ! No.
'.
3 ' |. .0.8
I
3 525 | 0.8
j
3 400 i 0.2

0.2
1 80
0
1 60 0.05
i
1 i 0.8
1 75
2 471 !

• i


1 150


1 300
1 200

n.?
9
34
1
11
1

3
1

7
6
3

34
2
1
1
2

4
2


r

u 1
1 150 o |i
0.05
1 100 0.1

1
1
1
1

igsster ?
Type'
...LtS1/.e).
ti
(950)
B (1775)
C (600)
B (720)
C

B
(320)
C
(600)
B
B
(300)
C
(1650)
B (1250)
C (250)
'C
C
(660)
C

C
. 0290)
C
(840)




C
C
(600)
C
(600)
C
(400)

1 Control1
Technique:.



inc.


i nc .
inc.



inc.



inc.
inc.
inc.

inc,
inc.




•Inc.
inc.
inc.
inc.
K.'l ti,i'! •:-<_ i i'..c t . n,~
TRS , ! v..j <>. ;.'.•!!• ''J f r>ol;r Sto:.[; Washer TRS
Lcvs:4 Co-.itroi \..!-.'-\: Capacity l-'asnc,- i,w01
VT ADP.. ""• Ti>ci,ii-.;i.o •'./. ' '•}? no..... ADFP;' . StcJtjjs ;//r/l
1.5
1.5

0.02


0.02
0.02

1.5 ;
1.5 ':
0.02 '

1.5

0.02
0.02 ;
0.02
1.5
0.02 i
0.02 i
i
i




0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
3 1.0
c i.o

4 inc. 0.02


1 inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02

1 1-0
T 1.0
2 inc. 0.02

4 1.0

inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02
i.o ;
1.0
2 inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02 ;
i
3 4 0.3
0.3

0.3


1 3 0.3
1 2 0.3


1
4 '




1 2


4
2 2
i,




II
0.02
1 inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02


n.nz
1 4 T.3
A-6

-------



Mai ne




Maryland .


Michigan



*
Minnesota
\-



Mississippi








Montana


New
Hampshire


N. York :


N.Carolina








V-,
	
..
Company
- | * .. ..
Oxford

S. D. Warren


Westvaco


Mead

Scott


Boise Cascade

Potlatch


I. P.

I. P. ;

I. P. ;

St. Regis


Hoerner-Waldorf

'

Brown


I. P.


Champion

Federal

Hoerner-V/alacrf

Weyerhaeuser
Weyerhaeuser
•
. '. 	 ... - . ™ _ „.
'j locii.tion

Rumford

Westbrook


Luke


Escanaba

.Muskegon
i

Int'l Falls

Cloquet

1
Moss Point
,
Hatchez :
, i
Vicksburg
f
Monti cello


Missoula
i


Berlin-Gorham


Ticonderoga


Canton

Riegelwood

Roanoke Rapids

New Bern
Plymouth
Mill
Size
Ave. Kraft
Production
,-( Kraft )
(Capacity) No. of I
! tP
-------
Line Kiln
        Size    ..... TRS  . --,  ..Digester. ?  .-.-,.-,   ,
      To.is  (CEO)  Level   !           Type   i  Control

a. ot io.Ts (UJ) Level
Units L Per. Day J */"LADP_
•
1 120 0.8

1 90 0-8

0.8
1 220 0.05

1 70(Fluo- 0.05
i solids)
0.05
1 100 0.8

0.05
0.05
0.05
1 410 0.2
3 300 0.8
0.8


/ 0.05
2 300 0.8

2 280

1 200

1 225 j<

3 315 O.t

. NQ,._._

6

7

10
6

1
5
8



ft
2
3
8
8


1
18

11

11

7

231

lypc ! Lontroi : Level
_[Size) iTechniqueJ/T ADP
i
B inc. ! 0.02
(365)
B inc. O.Oi.'
(315)
B inc. i 0.02
B inc. 0.02
(700)
C inc. 0.02
(240)
B 1.5
B 1.5
(400)
inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02
C inc. 0.02
C inc. 0.02
(1650)
C (900) inc. 0.02
B (700)
1
- B inc. 0.02
L.K
i
C , inc. ' 0.02
B 1.5
(1250)
B 1.5
00 each)
B 1.5
(1000)
B inc. 0.02
(800)
B inc. 1 02
(1500)
(,!•:! cm 1 LO'.-'I
!)0. K--:!iq-.IC_;'/T /!?)•'

1 inc. 0.02

1 ii>~. 0.02 j
i i
inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02

1 inc. 0.02
1 1.0
1 1.0

inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02
2 inc. 0.02
4 inc. 0.02
1.0


inc. 0.02
3 scrub. 0.08

3 1.0

2 1.0

1 inc. 0.02

5 inc. LJ

Capacity washer Love:
Co. AD':rO Sxavs .r'/i A.V

2 4 0.3

1 . 3


1 3

1 3

2 3




2

2 3


! 2 0.02
3 3 0.3



3 3

1 3 •



                                                            A-8

-------
Ohio
                                                   Mill                                      !
                                                   Size
                                                Ave.  Kraft
                                                Production                                   !
                                                (  Kraft- )         .Recovery Furnace^	
                                                (Capacity) No. of'         Rating [  Yea>  , Control JTRS Level".
              -.-.Company.	'_•	_Loca,tjon.	[.__tp.d_.L_l)niis_  Manuf.J_tp_d	J.nstaJlec':'ec;'.rn>.;,; #/T ADP  ;

                                                                                   :      '                   ,   I!
,3TBC-
Grief

Mead ;
-

Oklahoma
Heyerhaeuser
t !

Iregon
'American Can
'!
Boise Cascade

'Crown Z

Georgie-Pacific
,I.P. !

Western Kraft

-- Weyerhaeuser
-_ •
Penna. !
Appleton

P.H. Glatfelter
1
1; ,
'I
: Penntech
'•'
S. Caro-
lina
Bowater

'I. P.

S. Carolina

Westvaco

; '
'•• ''
l'.
Mass i Ion


(200)
Chillicothe COO



Valliant

•

Halsey

(540)


1300
(1300)


300
(300}
St. Helens '856'

(850)
Clatskmie '690'

Toledo
Gardiner

Al bany

(916)
\ •* • w /
1075
(1075)
600
(545)
. \+r tt* f
500
(550)
Springfield 1150"


; (1050)
|
Roaring Springs 180

180
. Spring Grove . 500
t


i (500)
i
!
Johnsonburg , 190



Catawba

; (iso)
!
\
940
(040}
Georgetown 1830 •

Florence

(1750)
6CO
(G75V
Charleston 2000 '
|



(1989)





"2



1



1

2

1

3
2

2

2


2

2

1

1



2

2

2

4






CE



CE



B&W

B&W
CE
B&W

CE
B&W
CE
B&W

CE


B&W

CE

B&W

CE



B&W

B&W

B&W

CE
B&W





366 pre-1965 BLO
175 .pre-1965


1500 post-1965 Low Odor

j
'
400 1967 Low Odor

450 1966 BLO
465 post-1965
800 1964 BLO

350(each)1-postl965 BLO
2-prel965
420 1972 Low Odor
420 pre-1965 BLO
600 1969 Low Odor
165 1965
800 (each) pre-1 965 ' BLO
.post-1965

122 1960
83 1950
.400&150 pre-1965 BLO

748 1969 Low Odor

160 pre-1965 BLO



600 1964 BLO
450 1957
900(each) 1966 BLO
1963
1000 1972 Low Odor
410 1962
1000 pre-1965 BlO
360 1955
250 1948
250 1945

15.0 |
fc
2.1 1
i
1
1
0.1E ', '
i


0.1E

0.5

0.5

0.1E
n.5

0.1E

0.15


15.0

2.1



2.1



2.1

0.5
!
0.15

2.1 ;
1
f

'<
\
                                               A-9

-------
Lime Kiln
... . Size .-TRS,, .-., Dige,ster 2-- - i
No! cf Tons (CaO) Leva; < \ Type ! Control ;
Uni ts iPer .Day..; W. AD?_ L . > •- --i-U-izs) - Technique
0.8
1 250 0.8


1 0.8



1 0.2
3 0.2
1 250 . 0.2
3 260 ! 0.2
1
! .0.05
1 0.2
'/.
0.2

1 . 0.8
I
1 0.05
Hue-
solid)
2 50 0.8

' 1 0.8

0.8
1 150 0.8
4 CC5 0.8



8 B inc.
(6CO)

3 C inc.
(1000)
, (500)
(100)
2 C inc.
: (300)
3 ' B inc.
2 i C
2 i C inc.
(916)
11 B (650) inc.
1 C (115)
inc.
6 B inc.
7 B (380) inc.
1 C (770)
5 B
8 B (285)
,C (250)

16 B
(170)
6 B
(940)

5 B
(625)
15 B (1COO) inc.
1 C (700)

TRS "j.
Level4
?/T..ADP_. .
1.5
0.02


0.02



0.02
•0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1
| 1.5
1.5


1.5

', 1-5
i
1 1.5
1.5
0.02


i unin-ei TOL i -,.„..
vaporalor ll0 , 3rowr
• Conlrol Lewi
No. ...Technique ?/T ;".!.'? Mo.
1.0 |
2 scrub 0.08 f
I
I
1 inc. 0.02 1



1 inc. 0.02 I 1
L.K.
2 inc. 0.02
1 inc. 0.02 I
3 inc. 0.02 I 3
! inc. 0.02 I
1 inc. 0.02 J 2
inc. 0.02 1

1.0 1
2 1.0 2


1 1.0 J 1
:
2 1.0 1

1 .0
1 1.0 2
4 inc. 0.02


                               Brown  Stock Masher          TRS
                                        Capacity  Kasher   Level'1
                                 i!o. . .. ADFPn  ...Stages  #/7 AD!'


                                                             0.3

                                                             0.3
                                                             C.3
                                          inc.
                                           Px.F.
                                                   (2-3)
                                                   (1-4)
                                                    (3,4)
0.02

0.3
A-10

-------
Tennessee
  Texas
  Virginia
Washington
                                                   Mill
                                                   Size
                                                Ave. Kraft
                                               •Production
                                                ( Kraft   )  ..      ...Recovery Furnace
                                                (Capacity) No. cf         i  Rating '' " Year
ControrTRS Level
            	Company . ._.; ......Location... _.._J..Jpd	L-Units  _.]laLul-'  _t.Pd_...).nsta.llerl.schnique. -?/T AC?
Bowater
Packaging

Champion

I. P.
Owens-Illinois

Southland

Southland

Temple-Fostex

Chesapeake
Continental

Union Camp

Westvaco

Boise Cascade

Crown Zellerbach

Crown Zellerbach

Longview
St. Regis

Weyerhaeuser

Calhoun
Counce

Pasadena

Texarkana
Orange

Houston

Lufkin

Evadale

West Point
Hopewel 1

Franklin

Covington

Wall ola

Caraas

Port Townsend

Longview
Tacoma

Everett

bOO
(BOO)

(775)
850
(820)
610
1000
(900)
650
(500)
, 400
(400)
1250
(1200)

1150
(1150)
896
(900)
1430
(1500)
1048
(1000)
460
(460)
780
(760)
420
(420)
1600
(]928}
1090
(1040)
360
(375)
2
1

2

1
2

1

2

3

3
2

3

1

2

2

1

3
2

1

CE
CE

B&W

B&W
B&W

CF

CE

R&l>'
CE

CE
CE

CE

CE

B&W

B&W
CE
CE

CE
CE

CE

600&320
420

550
. 550
750
550(each)

500

pre-1965
post-1965

1971
1955
1969
1965

post-1965

BLO


BLO


BLO
(oxyqen)
BLO

175(each)pre-1965

534
1100
530
900
400&200

1966
post-1965
pre-1965
oost-1965
ore-1965
375(each)pre-1965

580
580&350
1320

250
165
350
660
725

1100
2-700
863
467
365


post-1965
pre-1965
post-1965

1960
1957
1955
post-1965
post-1965

post-1965
pre-1965
oost-1965
pre-1965

BLO

BLO
BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

BLO

Low Odor

BLO
Low Odor
BLO
oost-1965 BLO


2.
2.

0.

0.
2.

2.

15.

2.

0.
0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.
1
1

5

5
1

1

0

1

5
5

5

5

5

5

5

5
0.5


0.5


                                                     A-11

-------
I.ini3
;o . of
Uni.t.s
1






3


1

1

1

3

2

3

3


2

3



4

2

1

Kiln

Size TRS .
Tons (CaO) Level
! P_er_.i)ay







35D


260

13)

85

36)

300

44 ">
(total)
40)
(total)



200



500

196 & 80

140


Digester 9
i Type11
#/J AD?.;_..No_. 	 j. .(Size)
0.8




0.8

0.05

-0.2
0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8
0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

6




5

9

5
2

1

6

9
1
8
1
13
2
12
2
10
5
1
9
1
9
1
18
4
4
2
6

B
(500)



B

B
100 each
B
C
(1000)
C
(500)
B
(400)
BO 200)
C (200)
B (600)
C (600)
B 900)
C (.230)
B (950)
C [800 )
B
B
C (150)
B
C
B
C
B (1600)
C (600
B (240)
C (690)
B (550)


Control
•rnr i i i L t 1 r 1 '.- t. i ' L •- I- i f»^ p -, IIP' TIlr
TRS rv,..' .-., -, in,- ' /. "''<-'••'• >^oci, !,i'S;,^'r Tljj
Level ^ ' Co'itir.l Level' rapacity (''asher Level''
Technique,?/! ADP :!°- - T'jch:,ic:i:- ,'.'/ 1" Air ;i0. AOT!'D Slopes .;//T A[)P
inc.






inc.

inc.















inc.

inc.

Power
inc.
inc.

inc. .

inc.

O.C2 \ 1 inc. 0.02 j 1 4 0.3
9 •




1.5

0.02

-0.02.
1.5

1.5'

1.5

1.5

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02
0.02

0.02

0.02
i
: 0.02

0.02

0.02

1 ,
\ 1


1.0

2 inc. 0.02 j
1




jj
inc. 0.02
1 1.0

1 1.0

2 1.0

3 1.0

3 0.02



1







2 0.02

4 0.02

0.02
2 inc. 0.02

3 inc. 0.02

inc; 0.02

6 inc. 0.02

2 inc. 0.02

1 inc. 0.02

4

3










3 3




































A-12

-------
Mill
Size
Ave. Kraft
Production
	 	 - 	 .....: 	 	 	 ( Kraft
• | ! (Capacity
Company 	 'i _. Loca.tio.n 	 '.__ tpd._ .
Uashim - Ueyerhaeuser Longvicw 650
ton ' (30f>)
nssc
ch. rcc.
plant
••Wisconsin Consolidated Wise. Rapids 400
(400)
ch. rec.
plant
Great Northern Nekoosa 310
(330)
ch. roc.
plant
Hammeriirill Kaukauna 400
(400)
Mosinee I1osir.ee 174
(175)
) . . Recovery
) No ."of [
! ..Units.... Manuf-L
i B&W
CE



i



Pinnace
Hating j " Year
tpd installed
1200 1972
350 pre-1965



2 CE 400(each)post-1965



2 CE



1 B&W

1 B&W




350 pre-1965
165 pre-1965


390 1960

250 1973





Control TRS Level
:;chnique. .-//T AtiP
Low Odor 0,5
BLO



BLO 0.5



0.5



BLO 0.5

Low Odor 0.5

New Mills (Planned  or  under construction)

 Scott Paper - Skowhegan, Maine - 750 TPD
 Potlatch Corp.  - McGehee, Arkansas - 500 TPD
                                          A-13

-------
      Kiln
        Size   -    TRS  ,
... of Tons  (CaO)  Level
•Jn.its Per  Day   #/T  AD?
                   0.2
0.8



0.8



0.8

0.8
Digester  ?.         -\
      Type   i Control   Level
                                                                                                    Ti!3
         No.    .:_(Size)  TechniqupiVT  ADP   !
                                    /•. .'•> o  P
      !  '1 tip 11.'- effect       T,.c
TRS    rvopnrcio-           Tlte 4  Bruv.v. Stock  Hasher
    4             Control   LOVIM            Capacity  Kashor   Level
                Jrc'iniquc f/T AD?  _  No.  .. ADTPD " .-Stages .$/j /,;;
                                                                                                        .
                                                                                                        "
          12
           1
                                     B
                                     C
                                  scrubber
                                             inc.
                   B
                 (17S)
                         0.02




                         1.1



                         1.5



                         1.5

                         1.5
                                                      inc.
                             0.02




                             1.0



                             1.0



                             1.0

                             1.0
                                                                                                     0.3


Source
Recovery Furnacs

[


Lime Kiln



Digester


Multiple-effect
Evaporator

Brown Stock Washer

CONVERSION1 ';

Ib/T flDP
0.15
0.5
0.6
2.1
15.0
0.05
0.1
0.?
0.8
0.02
1.1
1.5
0.02
0.08
1.0
0.02
0.3
P ^ ; r:
Eriisioii Rate
g/Ko APP
0.075
0.25
0.3
1.05
7.5
0.025
0.05
0.1
0.4
0.01
0.55
0.75
0.01
0.04
0.5
0.01
0.15


ppm
5
17.5
20
70
550
10
20
40
170
<5
7000
9500
<5
350
6700
<5
30
                                              A-14

-------
                                  APPENDIX B
                                 DATA SUMMARY
                               KRAFT PULP MILLS
     Recovery  Furnaces, Smelt Dissolving Tanks, Lime Kilns, and Incinerators

       Results are summarized for tests conducted by EPA at 6 kraft pulp mills.
   At these mills a total of 9 TRS tests; 3 recovery furnaces, 2 smelt dissolving
   tanks, 3 lime kilns, and one incinerator,were conducted by EPA.   Emission
   data obtained from operators or state agencies are also reported for some
   of the facilities.

TRS EMISSION DATA
    Incinerator:
        The incinerator handles the noncondensable gases from a continuous
        digester system and a multiple-effect evaporator system.  The
        continuous digester was producing 670 tons of pulp per day.
        The Incinerator was operating at 1000°F with a retention time
        for the gases of at least 0.5 seconds.  Natural gas is fired in
        the incinerator.

     Recovery  Furnaces:
     A.   Conventional  type recovery furnace  designed for an equivalent
         pulp  production rate of  657 tons  per day.   TRS emissions  are
         controlled by using  black  liquor  oxidation and maintaining proper
                                    *
         furnace  operation.   The  furnace was  operating near its design
         capacity during the  EPA  test period.  Continuous monitoring data
         were  also obtained from  the operator.
                                   B-l

-------
B.  Low-odor type recovery furnace designed for an equivalent pulp
    production of 300 tons per day.  During the EPA testing, the
    furnace was operating at a rate of about 345 tons of pulp per
    day.  TRS emissions are controlled by eliminating the direct contact
    evaporator and maintaining proper furnace operation.  Noncondensable
    gases from the brown stock washer system are burned in this furnace.
    Continuous monitoring data were also obtained from the state agency.
D.  Conventional type recovery furnace designed for an equivalent pulp
    production rate of 602 tons per day.  TRS emissions are controlled
    by black liquor oxidation and maintaining proper furnace operation.
H.  Low-odor type recovery furnace operating at an equivalent pulp
    production rate of about 200 tons per day.  TRS emissions are
    controlled by maintaining proper furnace operation.  Data were
    obtained from the state agency.
K.  Low-odor type recovery furnace designed for an equivalent pulp
    production rate of about 863 tons per day.  TRS emissions are
    controlled by maintaining proper furnace operation.  Data were
    obtained from state agency.

  Smelt Dissolving Tanks
  D.  A wet fan type scrubber is employed to control the particulate
      emissions.  Weak wash liquor is used as the scrubbing medium.
      The associated recovery furnace operates at an equivalent pulp
      production rate of 570 tons per day.
  E.  A wet fan type scrubber is employed to control the particulate
      emissions.  Fresh water is used as the scrubbing medium.  The
      associated recovery furnace operates at an equivalent pulp production
      rate of 770 tons per day.
                               P-2

-------
 Lime Kilns
 D.  Rotary lime kiln operating at an equivalent pulp production rate
     of 570 tons per day.  TRS emissions are controlled by maintaining
     proper kiln combustion and proper lime mud washing.  Noncondensable
     gases from the multiple-effect evaporators are burned in the kiln.
 E.  Rotary lime kiln operating at an equivalent pulp production rate
     of about 770 tons per day.  TRS emissions are controlled by
     maintaining proper combustion in the kiln, maintaining proper
     lime mud washing, and using a caustic solution in the particulate
     scrubber.  Noncondensable gases from the digesters, multiple-effect
     evaporators, condensate stripper, and miscellaneous storage tanks
     are burned in the kiln.  Continuous monitoring data were  also obtained
     from the operator.
 K.  Rotary lime kiln operating at an equivalent pulp production rate
     of about 320 tons per day.  TRS emissions are controlled by main-
     taining proper combustion in the kiln and proper lime mud washing.
     Noncondensable gases from the digesters, multiple-effect evaporators,'
     and turpentine system are burned in the kiln.

0.  Rotary lime kiln not tested by EPA.   Continuous monitoring data
    was obtained from the local agency.   TRS emissions  are controlled
    by maintaining process combustion in the kiln.
                                B-3

-------
                Table 19 - TRS and SOg Emissions from Incineration
                                FACILITY - Incinerator
                             Summary of Results
Run Number
Date - 1972
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (XI000) 2610
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temoerature - °F
     Water vanor - Vol.  %
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     62 - Vol. % dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     pom
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulp
S_0g Emissions
     nnm
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulo
1
10/5
240
2610
805
6.3
2.6
11.8
0
2.8
1.5
0.06
25
9.4
0.4
2
10/6
240
2223
805
4.3
2.4
12.0
0
0.4
0.2
0.007
306
96.9
3.8
3
10/7
240
2302
805
5.4
2.1
12.7
0
1.6
0.6
0.02
1050
358
13.9
4
12/13
240
-
-
-
9.0
15.7
0
0.9
0.4
0.02
«"
-
_
                                     B-4

-------
               Table  20 - TRS and S02 Emissions from Recovery Furnace A
                                FACILITY ~ Recovery Furnace A
                             Summary of Results
Run Number
Date - 1972
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (XI000)  142
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temperature - °F
     Water vanor - Vol. %
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     02 - Vol. % dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     DDm
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulo
SO? Emissions
     DDm
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulo
1
6/3
240
142
314
25.5
10.4
10.7
153
2.0
1.5
45
85.0
2 3
6/4 6/5
240 240
145
304
25.3
8.2 10.7
11.4 11.4
93 84
1.4 1.4
1.1 1.1
116 79
- -
4
6/6
240
148
303
21.9
11.8
10.1
95
1.5
1.2
118
mf
5
6/7
240
-
.
-
12.9
10.1
102
0.7
0.6
50
*•
                                     B-5

-------
            Table 21 - TRS and S02 Emissions from Recovery Furnace B
                             FACILITY - Recovery Furnace B
                          Summary of Results
Run Number
Date -  1972
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (XI 000)  85
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temnerature - °F
     Water vanor - Vol . %
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     Og - Vol. % dry
     CO - opm
TRS Emissions
     pom
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of oulo*
S02 Emissions
     pom
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulo
1
7/13
240
85
395
0
.05
2
7/14
240
84
400
12.3
8.T
0
0.2
0.7
.01
3
7/15
240
86
415
12.4
7,. 6
0
0.5
o:i
.02
4 5
7/18 7/19
240 240
12.7 12.0
7.7 8.0
0 0
0.3 0.4
0.2 0.2
.01 .01
6
7/20
240
12.4
8.0
0
0.3
0.2
.01
                             0.9
*  Based on 334.5 ATDP/day
                                    B-6

-------
               Table 22 - TRS and S02 Emissions from Recovery Furnace D
                                FACILITY - Recovery Furnace  D
                             Summary of Results
Run Number                      1           2345
Date - 1972                     11/11      IT/12     11/13     11/14    11/15
Test Time - minutes             240        240       240       240      240
Production Rate - TPH            -          -                   -       -
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (X1000)  73.2       73.2      73.2      73.2    73.2
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temoerature - °F
     Water vaoor - Vol. %       35         35        35        35       35
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     02 - Vol. % dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     DDm                        3.1        2.8       3.9       7.0      2.8
     Ib/hr                      55.1       48.9      53.7      12.5    46.0
     Ib/ton of nulo             -          -         -          -
SO? Emissions
     pom                        15.5    '   1.0       22.9      5.0      14.2
     Ib/hr                      162        10        239       52       149
     Ib/ton of nulo              -                    -
                                     B-7

-------
           Table 23

ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA
   FOR RECOVERY FURNACES*
Month
July 1971
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 1972
Feb.
March
April
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.




*Tested by
Recovery
Furnace A
TRS Concentration 1
(ppm, daily average
basis)
Maximum Average f
6.0
20.0
5.0
10.9
. 4.4
9.8
5.5
3.3
2.5
5.3
5.5
8.2
9.8
9.0
4.9
6.1




3.1
2.4
1.5
2.8
1.3
1.8
1.6
1.3
1.0
2.0
2.1
3.8
3.7
3.3
2.9
2.2




Recovery Furnace B
Month
April 1972
May
June
July
Aug.-
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 1973
Feb.
March
Apri 1
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average
basis)
Maximum Average
1.4
2.3
2.8
4.6
5.0
1.9
0.7
1.0
1.5
2.6
2.4
1.5
1.6
1.9
1.6
. 3.1
1.8
2.0
1.6
3.4
0.7
1.2
1.5
1.1
1.5
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.8
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.2
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.6
operators using barton titrators.
              B-8

-------
       Table 23 (cont.)

ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA
   FOR RECOVERY FURNACES
Recovery Furnace A
TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average
basis)
• Month Maximum Average



-
•
!
Recovery Furnace H
TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average
basis)
Month Maximum Average
April 1972 3 2.1
Hay 4 2.1
June 7 3.5
June 1972 8 3.1
July 4 2.4
Aug. 4 1.9
Sept. 2 1.3
Oct. 6 1.8



Month
Jan. 1974
Feb.
March
April
May.
June

Month
Aug. 1973
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 1974
Feb.
March
April
May
Recovery Furnace B
TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average . . .
basis)
Maximum Average
1.4 0.8
1.9 1.3
5.0 1.6
2.4 1.2
1.8 1.0
1.5 1.0
Recovery Furnace K
TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average
basis)
Maximum Average
6.2 1.0
32.0 5.2
7.3 2.4
17.0 4.1
1.2 0.7
1.8 0.6
2.4 1.0
9.7 2.3
3.0 1.4
3.4 1.4
            B-9

-------
                                        Table 23-A

                    TRS EMISSION DATA FOR A CROSS RECOVERY FURNACE*
                                                                           Days TRS (4-hour)
                Sulfldit.y       Average TRS         Maximum 4-Hour         Emissions Greater
    Month	Range (%)     Em'ssions (ppm)     TRS Emissions (ppm)	than 25 ppm
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
76
76
76
77
77
22
28
28
27
27
- 36
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 35
12.
24.
9.
7.
8.
5
3
5
7
0
54
51
43
36
48
.5
.2
.2
.5
.0
2
4
1
0
1
* Tested by operator using barton tatrator.

-------
               Table  24  - TRS  Emissions  frorr  Smelt  Dissolving  Tank  D
                                FACILITY - Smelt Dissolving Tank D
                             Summary of Results
Run Number                      1           2         3
Date -  1973                    10/31      11/1      11/2
Test Time - minutes             240        240       240
Production Rate - TPH           25.1       25.9      25.6
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM          9000       8880      9400
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton       21514      20571     22031
     Temperature - °F
     Water vaoor - Vol. %       37         41         40
     C02 - Vol. * dry
     02 - Vol. % dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     pom                        8.1        8.8       6.9
     Ib/hr                      0.43       0.44      0.38
     Ib/ton of oulD             0.017      0.017     .015
                                    B-10

-------
               Table 25 - TRS Emissions from Smelt Dissolving Tank E
Run Number
Date -  1973
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temoerature - °F
     Water vaoor - Vol. %
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     02 - Vol. X dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     pom
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of DU!D
   FACILITY-  Smelt  Dissolving  Tank E
Summary of Results
   1           2         3
   9/18       9/19      9/20
   240.        240       240
   30.1        34,1      31.3
   19542
   38954

   26
   2.4
   0.27
   0.009
18740
32974

26
1.9
0.20
.006
19100
36613

23.3
2.7
0.28
.009
                                     B-n

-------
1
11/5
240
2
11/7
240
3
11/7
240
4
11/7
240
5
11/8
240
6
11/8
240
                     Ti&le 26  - T3S  Emissions  from Lime Kiln D
                                FACILITY - Lime Kiln D
                             Summarv of Results
Run Number
Date -  1973
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (Xinno)
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temperature - °F
     Water vaoor - Vol. %       43         35        40        38      41      31
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     02 - Vol. % dry
     CO - Dpm
TRS Emissions
     pom                        3.5        24.1      2.8       5.7     4.6     17.8
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of DU!D
                                     B-12

-------
1
9/24
240
2
9/25
240
3
9/26
240
4
9/26
240
5
9/27
240
6
9/27
240
                       Table 27 - TRS Emissions from Lime Kiln E
                                FACILITY- Lime Kiln E
                             Summary of Results
Run Number
Date -  1973
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - OSCFM (XI000)
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temperature - °F
     Mater vaoor - Vol. %
     0)3 - Vol. % dry             9.4      10.2       10.0       9.8     8.2     9.8
     Og - Vol. % dry             13.2      11.0       12.2      12.0    13.1     11.8
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     pDm                          1.7       0.8        0.5       0.4     0.3     0.5
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of DU!D
                                     B-13

-------
                Table  28 -  TRS  arH S02 Emissions  from Lime Kiln K
                                FACILITY - Lime Kiln K
                             Summarv of Results
Run Number
Date -  1974
Test Time - minutes
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
     Flow rate - DSCFM (XI000)   13.8
     Flow rate - DSCF/ton
     Temperature - °F
     Mater vaoor - Vol. %
     C02 - Vol. % dry
     02 - Vol. % dry
     CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
     com
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of DU!D
SO? Emissions
     pom
     Ib/hr
     Ib/ton of nulo
1
4/5
240
13.8
142
21.8
13.0
7.6
0
4.6
0.34
52
7.2
2
4/5
240
13.8
142
21.8
13.0
7.6
0
12.0
0.88
42
5.8
3
4/9
• 240
14.0
146
22.9
14.2
7.1
0
4.5
0.33
25
3.5
4
4/9
240
13.4
152
26.0
14.2
7.1
0
4.8
0.34
18
2.4
5
4/10
240
13.6
155
25.8
14.6
6.4
0
4.0
0.29
16
2.2
6
4/10
240
14.2
154
26.8
14.2
7.2
0
5.2
0.39
37 I
5.2
                                       B-14

-------
                                  Table 29

                       ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA
                              FOR LIME KILNS*
Month
May 1973
June
.July
.Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 1974
Feb.
March
April
May




L1me Kiln E

TRS Concentration
(ppm, daily average)
Maximum Average
1.4
3.4
2.1
1.4
10.1
7.1
5.9
8.9
3.4
2.6
0.7
3.1
2.9




0.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
1.5
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.7




Month
Jan. 1973
Feb.
March
April
May.
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 1974
Feb.
March
April
May
Lime Kiln 0
TRS Concentr
(ppm, daily
Maximum
14
20
14
32
16
10
99
12
17
34
12
22
30
33
30
40
25
Average
•tion
average)
Average
6.8
9.3
7.6
9.6
4.7
3.4
4.5
3.8
5.0
8.2
5.7
9.8
17.9
21.1
19.3
16.2
12.3
= 9.7
*Tested by operators using barton titrators.
                                    B-15

-------
     TABLE 29 (CONTINUED)



         Lime Kiln P



TRS Summary:  4-Hour Averages





            4-Hour Averages Monitored
Month
February '75
March '75
April '75
May '75
<5 ppm
45
65
63
53
>5/ <10 ppm >10/ <20 ppm
26 9
25 7
16 12
25 13
01 01
fa fa
>20 ppm >40 ppm
20 12
7 2
9 5
8 2
             B-16

-------
                                                 "i •'.LI:   i
                             IMPAC" OF CONTROLLING TH:'. VARIOUS TRS SOURCES CM
                            AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 907 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                              KRAFT PULP MILL
                                                        Maximum Ambient  Concentration:
                                                                 (One-hour average)
ug/m3
Frequency -
% of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln







Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolvino
lank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
Hiah Eff. Mud Washing

3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbina

Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water

Scrubber
Incineration
"Uncontroi led Distance
Level (9 0.3 km 0.3 0.6
2465
2465
6000
6000
1175
1175
256
256


256



113

96
96
172

4400
aann
100 64
25 16
4680 1716
o*
96 60
0*

64 23
16 6


8 3



8

19 6
nc
\j\.
22

2200
nb.- .
from Source (km) Greater than 1/2
1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
38 16
10 4
1090

36

*
18 15 12
443


222



3 2

3 1 1


8 6

306 165
	 w
28
28
3

4
-
1
1


1



34

25

3

25

Percent
Reduction
95.9
99.0
22.0
inn n
IUU. U
91.8
100.0
75.0
93.8


96.9



92.9

80.2
100.0
87.2

50.0
inn n

a
i— i
CO
-o
m
8
f-H
O
^Z
CO
-H
O
1— 1
i '1
GO

ya
m
CO
c
i —
—I
GO













^
\j
-o
m
z
o
1— 1
X

o












Reduction from uncontrolled average level

Gases are assumed burned in th» lime kiln.   The levels from the lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these oases.

-------
                                                  TABLh
                              IMPACT  OF  CONTROLLING, THF  VARIOUS TRS  SOURCES  ON
                             AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 907 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                               KRAFT  PULP MILL
                                                        Maximum Ambient  Concentration:
                                                                    (24-hour average)
ug/m3
Frequency -
% of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester
Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolvino
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
Hiqh Eff. Mud Washing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washina +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration
Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
Tnri npratinn
Uncontrol led
Level @ 0.3 km
643
643
580
580
115
115
56
56

56


30
25
25
16
840
Rdn
Distance
0.3 0.6
26
6
450
Ob'
10
Ob-
14
4

2


2
5
OC-
2
420
nb-
16
4
150
6
7
2

1



2


from Source (km)
1.0 1.5 2.0
9 4
2 1
68
*k
3
432
1 1 1

1 1 1


1 1
1 1 1
1 1
66 34
	 	 ^
Greater than 1/2
the Maximum
29
29
48
55
1
1

1


26
20
46
30
Percent
Reduction
96.0
99.0
22.4
100.0
91.3
100.0
75.0
92.9

96.4


93.3
80.0
100.0
87.5
50.0
inn n
Reduction from uncontrolled averaae level.

Gases are assumed burned in the lime kiln.  The levels from the lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these oases.

NO vpnt nases

-------
TABL C-3
IMPACT or CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON
AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 4S4 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
t
Maximum Ambient Concentration: pg/m3 Frequency - 2
(10 second average) * of Concentrations *

Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System

Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
High Eff. Mud Mashing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water

Scrubber
Incineration
uncontro: led
Level 0 0.3 km
5250
5250
9800
QOnn
7OUU
1950
i o*\n
1 7*f U
440
440

440


370

210
7in
C. IU
270

9100
9100
Distance
0.3
210
53
7645
Ob
U
156
nb
U***
110
28

14


25

42
nC
u
34

4550
Ob.
0.6
135
35
2790

98

40
10

5




14





from so
1.0
80
20
1775

58

30
8

4


9

7

13

635

urce (Km) 'Greater than 1/Z
1.5 2.0 the Maximum
34 33
8 33
3

4

25 21 1
6 5 1

3 3 1


6 19

33 30

8 3

340 16

Percent
Reduction3
96.0
99.0
22.0
inn n
1 UU> U
92.0
inn n
IUU. \t
75.0
93.6

96.8


93.2

80.0
inn n
IUU. U
87.4

50.0
100.0
' Reduction from uncontrolled average level

1 Gases are assumed burned in the lime kiln.  The levels from the lime kiln
 include unburned TRS portion of these oases.

 No ven* oases.

-------
                                                  TABL_  L-4
                              IMPACT  OF CONTROLLING  THE  VARIOUS  TRS  SOURCtS ON
                             AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 454 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                               KRAFT PULP MILL
                                                         Maximum  Ambient  Concentration:
                                                                   (One-hour  average)
ug/m3
Frequency -
% of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
Tank
Condensate Stripning
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
High iff. Mud Washing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water

Scrubber
.
Uncontrolled Distance
Level 
18

987
322

1 1 1


3 2

2 1 1

^
4 3

195 105

33
33
3

4

1
1

1


19

30
-
3

16

Percent
Reduction
96.0
99.0
22.0
inn n
1 UU. U
92.0
i nn n
1 UU. U
75.0
93.4

96.3


92.9

80.3
100.0
86.9

50.0
l nn n
Reduction from uncontrolled averace level

Gases are assumed burned in tne lime kiln.  The levels fron the lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these oases.

No vent oases

-------
                     fABLi  C-5
 IMPACT Oh CONTROLLING hir  VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON
AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 454 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                  KRAFT PULP MILL
                            Maximum Ambient Concentration:
                                       (24-hour average)
                                                                                                   Frequency -
                                                                                                   % of Concentrations
                                                                                                  '
iource
t'eove1". Furna..'-

Multiple-Ffter*
Evaporator
Limp Kiln


(. on11""! IP'" Unique'
i>L'.' (ii1 nnin)
*L<- ' L pom)
Scrut-'.inv
Incineration
-^rubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
P) Process Controls -t
Hiah Eff. Mud Washina
TJncnntrol led Distance from Sourco (km] breater than 1/Z
Level » 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
430
430
290
290
60
60
32
32

17
4
226
ot>-
5
00-
8
2

11
3
76
3
4
1

6
1
34
2
2 2
1 1

2
1

	 >
1
1

27
27
48
55
4
4

Percent .
Reduction
96.0
99.1
22.1
100.0
91.7
100.0
75.0
93.8

                     3)  Process  Controls  + High
                        Eff.  Mud Washinn  +
                        Caustic  Scrubbina
                       32
Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
Incineration
Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
17
17
17
8
420
A9n
1
3 1
nr
i
210
nb
1
1
28
1
1
17

-^_
                                                                                52
                                                                                19
                                                                                46
                                                                                37
                                                                                               96.9
                                                                                                                            94.1

                                                                                                                            82.4
                                                                                                                           100.0
                                                                                                                            56.0
                                                                                                                           100.0
Reduction from uncontrol led average  level
Gases are assumed burned in trv lime kiln.
includp unburned TRS portion nf these
               The level1., from the lime kiln

-------
                                                  TABLE  I  6
                              IMPACT  OF  CONTROLLING  THE  VARIOUS  TRS  SOURCES  Ofi
                            AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 1350 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                               KRAFT PULP  MILL
                                                         Maximum  Ambient  Concentration:
                                                                   (10 second average)
ug/m3
          Frequency -
          % of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
?) Process Controls +
Hi ah Cff. Hud Washing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scruobing
Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxvqen
Fresh Waier

Scrubber
Incineration
Uncontrolled Distance
Level P 0.3 km 0.3 0.6
11 ,785
11,785
29,000
29,000
5,750
R 7"5n
J , / JU
1 ,280
1,280

1,280


555

490
4pn
HJU
840

21 ,000
?i .nnn
470 305
120 75
22,930 8370
Oh
470 295
Oh
U
320 115
80 29

40 14


37

98 33
rtr
u\* — —
105

10,500
nb
from Source (km) Greater than 1/2
1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
180 75
45 20
5325

175

88 73 62
22 18 16

11 9 8


14 9

14 7 5

	 	 	 ^.
39 24

1460 780
	 i.i • •-. .1 *>
28
28
3

4

1
1

1


34

25

3

25

Percent
Reduction
96.0
99.0
20.9
100. 0
91.8
i nn n
1 UU . U
75.0
93.8

96.9


93.3

80.0
i nn n
I UU. U
87.5

50.0
inn n
Reduction from uncontrolled averaoe  level

Gases are assumed burned in tne lime kiln.  The levels fron tne lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these cases.

No vent case-

-------
                                                  I ABU C-7
                              IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON
                            AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION  FROM A  1350 MEGAGRAMS/OAY
                                              KRAFT PULP HILL
                                                        Maximum Ambient Concentration:
                                                                   (One-hour average)
Frequency -
% of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester

Multiple-Effect
Evaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Black Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolvinn
Tank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
Hiqh Eff. Mud Washing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration

Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water

Scrubber
Tnri noraflnn
uncontrolled Distance
Level 1? 0.3 km 0.3 0.6
3,750
3,750
9,000
Q nnn
y , uuu
1,775
1 ,775
385
385

385


175

150
150
255

6,600
fi.finn
150 97
37 24
7,020 2,575
Ob
154 90
Oh
96 34
24 9

12 4


12

30 10
(1C

32

3,300 ••
nb
from Source (km) 'Greater than 1/2
1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
57 24
14 6
1,640

53

27 22 19
665

332


4 3 ._.

5 2 2


12 9

460 250
v
28
28
3

4

1
1

1


34

25
-
3

25

Percent
Reduction
96.0
99.0
22.0
100.0
91.3
100.0
75.0
93.8

96.9


94.8

80.0
100.0
87.5

50.0
inn n
Reduction from uncontrolled average level

Gases are assumed burned in the lime kiln.  The levels from thp lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these pases.

N-- vent aises.

-------
                                                  TABU  i.  8
                              IMPACT  OF  CONTROLLING  THE  VARIOUS  TRS  SOURCES  ON
                            AMBIENT TRS  CONCENTRATION FROM A 1350 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
                                               KRAFT PULP  MILL
                                                         Maximum  Ambient  Concentration:
                                                                    (24-hour  average)
yg/m3
Frequency -
  of Concentrations
Source
Recovery Furnace

Digester
Multiple-Effect
tvaporator
Lime Kiln





Brown Stock
Washer System
Blacl- Liquor
Oxidation System
Smelt Dissolving
lank
Condensate Stripping
System
Control Techniques
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO (5 ppm)
Scrubber
Incineration
Scrubber
Incineration
1 ) Process Controls
2) Process Controls +
Hiqh Eff. Mud Washing
3) Process Controls + High
Eff. Mud Washing +
Caustic Scrubbing
Incineration
Incineration
Molecular Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
Tnrinprflti nn
lincontrol led Distance
Level (? 0.3 km 0.3 0.6
965
965
870
870
175
175
80
80

80


45
40
40
25
1,300
i ..inn -
40 25
10 6
680 230
nb
15 9
Oh
20 10
5 3

3 2


3
8 3
Or
3
650
nb
from Source (km) .Greater than 1/2
1.0 1.5 2.0 the Maximum
15 5
4 1
100
5
643
2 1 1

1 1 1


1 1
1 1 1
1 1
87 53
29
29
48
55
1
1

1


26
20
46
30
Percent
Reduction
95.9
99.0
21.8
100.0
91.4
100.0
75.0
93.8

96.3


93.3
80.0
100.0
88 .'0
50.0
inn n
Reduction from uncontrolled averacie  level

Gases are assumed burned in the lime kiln.  The levels from the lime kiln
include unburned TRS portion of these cases.

No vent aasp .

-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. 2.
EPA-^0/9-7R-nm»
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Draft Guideline Document: Control of TRS
from Existing Kraft Pulp Mills
7. AUTHOR(S)
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standa
Environmental Protection Agency .
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
DAA for Air Quality Planning and Standard
Office of i^ir and .Waste Management
U. S» Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI*NO.
5. REPOFW DATE
-. _. January 1978
EllLU,wJ.UU~ 6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
rds
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
S
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
?11 EPA/200/04
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES -
This document discusses the proposed guidelines for existing mills and the
resulting environmental and economic effects.
16. ABSTRACT - • - -
Guidelines to aid the states .in. their preparation of plans for the control of
emissions of total reduced, sulfur (TRS) from existing kraf t pulp mills are
being proposed under the authority of section lll(d) of . the .Clean Air Act.
TRS emissions from kraf t pulp mills are extremely .odorous., and there are
numerous instances of poorly controlled mills, creating .public. odor problems.
Adoption of the proposed emission guidelines by the states would result in
an .overall reduction of about 80 percent in nationwide TRS emissions from
kraft pulp mills.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
Air pollution
Pollution control
Kraft pulp mills .
Total reduced sulfur
Particulate matter
Emission Guidelines
Unlimited
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Air pollution control
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
Unclassified 210
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE 	
Unclassified
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                         C-9

-------

-------