EPA-450/3-73-010
December 1973
     AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
      TECHNOLOGY AND  COSTS
   IN SEVEN  SELECTED AREAS
       U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            Office of Air and Water Programs
        Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
       Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                               EPA-450/3-73-010
 AIR POLLUTION  CONTROL

 TECHNOLOGY AND COSTS

IN SEVEN  SELECTED AREAS
                  by

        Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute
              P.O. Box 1333
         Stamford, Connecticut  06904
           Contract No.  68-02-0289
       EPA Project Officer:  Paul A. Boys
               Prepared for

         ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        Office of Air and Water Programs
    Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
       Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711

               December 1973

-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to
report technical data of interest to a limited number of readers.
Copies are available free of charge to Federal employees, current
contractors and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies
permit - from the Air Pollution Technical Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, or from the National Technical Information Service, 5285
Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia  22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute, Stamford, Connecticut, in fulfillment
of Contract No. 68-02-0289.  The contents of this report are reproduced
herein as received from the contractor.  The opinions, findings, and
conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily
those of the Environmental Protection Agency.
                    Publication No.  EPA-450/3-73-010
                                   11

-------
      CONTRACT NUMBER 68-02-0289










        AIR  POLLUTION CONTROL




        TECHNOLOGY AND COSTS




        IN SEVEN SELECTED AREAS
              FINAL REPORT







        (Submitted December 15, 1973)







                   by




      L. C. Hardison, Coordinating Engineer




                   for




   INDUSTRIAL GAS CLEANING INSTITUTE




     Box 1333, Stamford, Connecticut 06904










               Prepared For




THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY




        Durham, North Carolina 27701

-------
                  INDUSTRIAL GAS CLEANING INSTITUTE,  INC.
     Box 1333
         Stamford, Connecticut 06904
                                       MEMBERS
AIR CORRECTION DIVISION
   UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS CO.
AMERICAN AIR FILTER COMPANY,  INC.
AMERICAN STANDARD, INC.
   INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS DIVISION
BELCO POLLUTION CONTROL CORP.
BUFFALO FORGE COMPANY
THE CARBORUNDUM COMPANY
   POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
CE AIR PREHEATER
THE CEILCOTE COMPANY, INC.
CHEMICAL CONSTRUCTION CORP.
   POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
THE DUCON COMPANY, INC.
   SUBS. OF U.S. FILTER CORP.
DUSTEX DIVISION
   AMERICAN PRECISION INDUSTRIES, INC.
ENVIRONEERING. INC.
   SUBS. OF THE RILEY COMPANY
ENVIROTECH-CORPORATION
   ARCO DIVISION
   BUELL DIVISION
   NORBLO DIVISION
FISHER-KLOSTERMAN, INC.
FULLER COMPANY, DRACCO PRODUCTS
   SUBS. OF GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP.
GALLAGHER-KAISER CORPORATION
INDUSTRIAL CLEAN AIR, INC.
JOHNS MANVILLE CORP.,
   ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS GROUP
THE KIRK & BLUM MANUFACTURING CO.
THE KOPPERS COMPANY, INC.
   ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS DIVISION
MATHEY-BISHOP, INC.
MIKROPUL, DIV. OF U.S. FILTER CORP.
PEABODY ENGINEERING CORPORATION
POLLUTION CONTROL-WALTHER, INC.
PRECIPITATION ASSOCIATES OF AMERICA, INC.
RESEARCH-COTTRELL, INC.
THE TORIT CORPORATION
WESTERN PRECIPITATION DIVISION
   JOY MANUFACTURING COMPANY
WHEELABRATOR-FRYE, INC.
   AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC.
   AIR SYSTEMS DIVISION
                             STATEMENT  OF PURPOSES

     The Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute, incorporated in 1960 in  the State of New York, was
     founded to further the interests of manufacturers of air pollution control equipment, by

     encouraging  the  general improvement  of  engineering  and  technical standards in  the
     manufacture, installation, operation, and performance of equipment

     disseminating information on air pollution;  the effect of industrial gas cleaning on public
     health; and  general economic, social,  scientific,  technical,  and governmental matters
     affecting the industry, together with the views of the members thereon; and

     promoting the industry through desirable advertising and publicity.
                                ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
     The efforts of the IGCI Engineering Standards Committee in the preparation, editing and
     reviewing of this Report are gratefully acknowledged:

                      Harry Krockta, Chairman, The Ducon Company, Inc.
                          G. L. Brewer, Air Correction Division, UOP
                        C. A. Gallaer, Buell Division of Envirotech Corp.
                          N. D. Phillips, Fuller Co., Dracco Products
             E. P. Stastny, Koppers Company, Inc., Environmental Systems Division

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                            Page No.

I.    INTRODUCTION                                             1

II.   TECHNICAL DATA                                           2
     A.     General Description
           1.    Format
           2.    Selection of Applicable Equipment Types
           3.    Basis for Preparing Specifications and Bid Prices
           4.    Presentation of Data

     B.     Process Description and Costs
           1.    Phosphate Industry                                11
                a.   Wet Phosphoric Acid (WPPA)
                b.   Super Phosphoric Acid (SPA)
                c.   Granular Triple Superphosphate (GTSP)
                d.   Diammonium Phosphate (DAP)
                e.   GTSP Storage
           2.    Feed and Grain Industry                          193
                a.   Feed Mills
                b.   Flour Mills
                c.   Feed Flash Dryers
           3.    Paint and Varnish Industry                       249
                a.   Open Kettles
                b.   Closed Reactors
           4.    Graphic Arts                                    331
                a.   Web Offset Printing
                b.   Metal Decorating
                c.   Gravure  Printing
           5.    Soap and Detergent                              429
                a.   Spray Dryers
                b.   Dry Product Handling
           6.    Lime Kilns                                     481
                a.   Vertical  Rock Kilns
                b.   Rotary Sludge Kilns
           7.    Gray Iron Foundaries                            561
                a.   Cupolas

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                             (continued)
                                                             Page No.
    C.     Additional Cost Data
           1.   Discussion of  Cost  Basis                         605
           2.   Operating Cost at Various Utility Cost Levels      607
           3.   Derived Cost  Indices                             610
           4.   Generalized Cost Data                           677

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Appencides

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                        Page No.
Figure 1    Outline Map of U.S. Indicating Phosphate Producing Areas  	     13
Figure 2    Block Diagram of Phosphate Fertilizer Manufacturing Processes ....     15
Figure 3    Simplified Flow Scheme for Strong Acid Process  	     21
Figure 4    Schematic Flow Diagram for Wet Phosphoric Acid Process	     23
Figure 5    Contribution of HF and SiF4 to Vapor Phase Fluorine
              Content at 50°C  	     44
Figure 6    Concentration  of Fluorine in Vapor Over h^SiFg Solutions 	     45
Figure 7    Concentration  of Fluorine in Vapor Over h^SiFg Solutions
              Vs. Temperature  	     46
Figure 8    Comparison  of Scrubber Types  	     49
Figure 9    Sketch of Cross-flow Packed Scrubber	     50
Figure 10   Combination Scrubber for WPPA Process  	     51
Figure 11   Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for WPPA Process Plants  	     61
Figure 12   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Scrubbers for WPPA
              Process Plants  	     63
Figure 13   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Scrubbers for WPPA
              Process Plants  	     65
Figure 14   Annual Cost for Wet Scrubbers for WPPA Process Plants   	     67
Figure 15   Schematic Flow Diagram for Vacuum Flash Superphosphoric Acid
              Process  	     69
Figure 16   Schematic Representation of Polyphosphoric Acid Forms  	     75
Figure 17   Plot of Barometric Condenser Temperature Vs. Cooling Water/
              Steam Ratio  	     78
Figure 18   Schematic Drawing of Water-Induced Venturi Scrubber  	     81
Figure 19   Schematic Drawing of Venturi Scrubber with Packed
              Entrainment Separater   	     83
Figure 20   Capital Cost for Water Induced Venturi Scrubbers for SPA
              Process Plants  			     89
Figure 21   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Water Induced Venturi
              Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants   	     91
Figure 22   Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Water Induced Venturi
              Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants   	     93
Figure 23   Annual Cost for Water Induced Venturi Scrubbers for SPA
              Process Plants  	     95
Figure 24   Capital Cost for Venturi Scrubbers with Packed Section for
              SPA Process Plants  	     97
Figure 25   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Venturi Scrubbers  with
              Packed Section for SPA Process Plants  	     99

-------
                                                                         Page No.

Figure 26   Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Venturi Scrubber with
              Packed Section for SPA Process Plants	   101
Figure 27   Annual Cost for Venturi Scrubbers with Packed Section for
              SPA Process Plants   	   103
Figure 28   Flow Diagram of Granular Triple.Superphosphate Plant  	   105
Figure 29   Flow Scheme of Phosphate Rock Milling Operation  	   109
Figure 30   Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for GTSP Process Plants	   121
Figure 31    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for
              GTSP  Process Plants  	   123
Figure 32   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Installed Wet Scrubbers
              for GTSP Process Plants  	   125
Figure 33   Annual Cost of Wet Scrubbers for GTSP Process Plants   	   127
Figure 34   Schematic Flow Drawing for Diammonium Phosphate Process  	   129
Figure 35   Schematic Drawing of Scrubbers Used in DAP Tail Gas Treating  ...   142
Figure 36   Acceptable Scrubber Combinations for  DAP Process Plants  	   144
Figure 37   Capital Cost of Two Stage Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP  Process
              Plants  	   151
Figure 38   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Two Stage Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	   153
Figure 39   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Installed Two Stage
              Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants	   155
Figure 40   Annual Cost of Two Stage Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP  Process
              Plants  	   157
Figure 41    Capital Cost of Venturi Cyclone Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants ..   159
Figure 42   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Venturi Cyclone Scrubbers
              for DAP Process Plants  	   161
Figure 43   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Installed Venturi  Cyclone
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	   163
Figure 44   Annual Cost of Venturi Cyclone Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  .   165
Figure 45   Capital Cost for Packed Cross-flow Scrubbers for DAP Process
              Plants  	   169
Figure 46   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Packed Cross-flow
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	   171
Figure 47    Confidence Limits for Installed  Cost of  Packed Cross-flow
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	   173
Figure 48    Annual Cost of Packed Cross-Flow Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants.   177
Figure 49    Sketch of GTSP Storage Building with 4,000,000 ft3 Interior   	   180
Figure 50   GTSP Storage Building with Cyclonic Scrubbers  	   183

-------
                                                               Page No.

Figure 51    Simplified Flow Diagram of a Feed Mill  	     199
Figure 52    Simplified Flow Diagram of a Modern Flour Mill  : . . .  .     202
Figure 53    Flash Drying Combined with Disintegration  	     207
Figure 54    Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Flour Milling	     219
Figure 55    Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Flour Milling  	     221
Figure 56    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Fabric Filters
              for Flour Milling  	     223
Figure 57    Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Feed Grinding	     227
Figure 58    Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Feed Grinding  ....     229
Figure 59    Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of
              Fabric Filters for Feed Grinding  	     231
Figure 60    Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Feed Flash
              Dryers (High Efficiency)  	     235
Figure 61    Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Feed Flash
              Dryers (High Efficiency)  	     237
Figure 62    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Feed Flash Dryers (High Efficiency)  	     239
Figure 63    Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Feed
              Flash Dryers  	     243
Figure 64    Annual Costs for Thermal  Incinerators for Feed
              Flash Dryers  	     245
Figure 65    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Thermal
              Incinerators for  Feed Flash Dryers  	     247
Figure 66    Paint Manufacturing Using Sand Mill for Grinding
              Operation   	     251
Figure 67    Materials Flow Sheet for Paint Manufacturing	'.     252
Figure 68    Typical Varnish Cooking Room  	     255
Figure 69    Modern Resin Production System  	     263
Figure 70    Hydrocarbon Emission for Dowtherm Kettle  	     270
Figure 71    Hydrocarbon Emission for Paint Kettle	     271
Figure 72    Kettle Hydrocarbon Emission — 2 Batches Monitored   .     272
Figure 73    Pigment Emission Control  System	     274
Figure 74    Thermal Combustion System for Resin Reactor  or
              Closed Kettle	    276
Figure 75    Schematic Diagram of a Catalytic Combustion System
              for Varnish Kettles  	     278
Figure 76    Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for the
              Paint and Varnish Industry (Without Heat Exchange)      306

-------
                                                                Page No.

Figure 77   Capital Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for the
              Paint and Varnish Industry (Without Heat Exchange)     307
Figure 78   Direct Annual Costs for Thermal and Catalytic
              Incinerators for the Paint and Varnish  Industry
              (Without Heat Exchange)   	    308
Figure 79   Total Annual Costs for Thermal and Catalytic
              Incinerators for the Paint and Varnish  Industry
              (Without Heat Exchange)   	    309
Figure 80   Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for the Paint
              and Varnish Industry (With Heat Exchange)  	    322
Figure 81   Capital Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for the
              Paint and Varnish Industry (With Heat Exchange)  .  .    323
Figure 82   Direct Annual Costs for Thermal and Catalytic
              Incinerators for the Paint and Varnish  Industry
              (With Heat  Exchange)  	    324
Figure 83   Total Annual Costs for Thermal and Catalytic
              Incinerators for the Paint and Varnish  Industry
              (With Heat  Exchange)  .	    325
Figure 84   Total Installed Costs for Thermal and Catalytic
              Incinerators for the Paint and Varnish  Industry  ....    327
Figure 85   Web Offset, Publication	    342
Figure 86   Emission Rates from Web Offset and Web Letterpress
              Employing  Heatset Inks  	    345
Figure 87   Web Letterpress, Publication  	    346
Figure 88   Web Letterpress, Newspaper   	    348
Figure 89   Rotogravure Printing Operation  	    349
Figure 90   Emission Rates from a Typical Rotogravure Printing
              Operation   	    351
Figure 91   Metal Decorating Coating Operation 	    352
Figure 92   Metal Decorating Printing and Varnish Overcoating  . ..    353
Figure 93   Products Produced at Various Oxidation Stages  During
              Combustion	    357
Figure 94   Flow Diagram for Thermal Combustion Including
              Possibilities for Heat Recovery  	    358
Figure 95   Flow Diagram for Catalytic Combustion Including
              Possibilities for Heat Recovery  	,	    359
Figure 96   Flow Diagram of Adsorption Process  	    360
Figure 97   Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal and Catalytic
              Combustion Without Heat Exchange for Web Offset
              and Metal Decorating  	    365
Figure 98   Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Web Offset
              Printing (Without Heat Exchange) 	    369

-------
                                                               Page No.

Figure 99  Annual Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Web Offset
              Printing (Without Heat Exchange)	    371
Figure 100  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  and  Catalytic
              Combustion Without Heat Exchange for Web Offset
              and Metal Decorating   	    373
Figure 101  Capital Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Web Offset
              Printing (Without Heat Exchange)  	    377
Figure 102  Annual Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Web Offset
              Printing (Without Heat Exchange)  	    379
Figure 103  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  and  Catalytic
              Combustion Without Heat Exchange for Web Offset
              and Metal Decorating   	    381
Figure 104  Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)   	    385
Figure 105  Annual Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)   	    387
Figure 106  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  and  Catalytic
              Combustion With Heat Exchange for Web Offset and
              Metal Decorating 	    389
Figure 107  Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  . .	    393
Figure 108  Annual Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    395
Figure 109  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  and  Catalytic
              Combustion Without Heat Exchange for Web Offset
              and Metal Decorating   	    397
Figure 110  Capital Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)   	    401
Figure 111   Annual Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)   	    403
Figure 112  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  and  Catalytic
              Combustion With Heat Exchange for Web Offset and
              Metal Decorating 	    405
Figure 113  Capital Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    409
Figure 114  Annual Costs for Catalytic Incinerators for Metal
              Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    411
Figure 115  Schematic Flow Diagram of Thermal  Combustion With
              Heat Exchange for Gravure Printing  	    413
Figure 116   Capital Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Gravure
              Printing (With Heat Exchange)   	    417
Figure 117   Annual Costs for Thermal Incinerators for Gravure
              Printing (With Heat Exchange)   	    419

-------
                                                                 Page No.

Figure 118    Capital Costs for Carbon Adsorption for Gravure
               Printing  	   423
Figure 119    Annual Costs for Carbon Adsorption for Gravure
               Printing  	   425
Figure 120    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Carbon Adsorption
               for Gravure Printing  	   427
Figure 121    Over-All  Routes to Linear Alkylate Sulfonates (LAS),
               Alpha-Olefin Sulfonates (AOS) and Alcohol Sulfates     432
Figure 122    Low- and High-Active Sulfonation Using Oleum  	   433
Figure 123    Alpha-Olefin Sulfonation Flowsheet 	   434
Figure 124    Typical Spray Drying Plant 	   437
Figure 125    Continuous Process for Soap Manufacture  	   440
Figure 126    Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Soap and  Detergent
               Spray  Drying (Medium Efficiency)  	   455
Figure 127    Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Soap and  Detergent
               Spray  Drying (Medium Efficiency)  	   457
Figure 128    Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Soap and  Detergent
               Spray  Drying (High Efficiency)  	   458
Figure 129    Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Soap and  Detergent
               Spray  Drying (High Efficiency)  	   459
Figure 130    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for
               Soap and Detergent Spray Drying (Medium Efficiency)  461
Figure 131    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for
               Soap and Detergent Spray Drying (High Efficiency)   .   463
Figure 132    Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Soap and Detergent
               Spray  Drying 	   467
Figure 133    Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Soap and Detergent
               Spray  Drying 	   469
Figure 134    Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of  Fabric
               Filters for Soap and Detergent Spray Drying	   471
Figure 135    Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Soap and Detergent
               Product Handling   	   475
Figure 136    Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Soap and Detergent
               Product Handling   	   477
Figure 137    Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of  Fabric
               Filters for Soap and Detergent Product Handling  ....  479
Figure 138    Simplified  Flow Sheet of a Typical Lime Manufacturing
               Operation  	   482
Figure 139    Vertical Lime Kiln	   484
Figure 140    Simplified  Kraft Mill  Flow  Diagram   	   491
Figure 141    Kraft Pulping Recausticizing Flow Sheet	   492
Figure 142    Cyclonic Gas Scrubber  	   508

-------
                                                                 Page No.

 Figure 143  Variable Orifice Scrubber  	   509
 Figure 144  Lime Kiln Venturi Scrubber System  	'. .. .  .   510
 Figure 145  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Vertical Lime
               Rock Kilns (Medium Efficiency) 	   515
 Figure 146  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Vertical Lime Rock
               Kilns (Medium Efficiency)   	   517
 Figure 147  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Vertical Lime
               Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   518
 Figure 148  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Vertical Lime
               Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   519
 Figure 149  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
               for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  ....   521
 Figure 150  Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Vertical Lime
               Rock Kilns 	   525
 Figure 151  Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Vertical Lime
               Rock Kilns 	   527
 Figure 152  Capital Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Vertical Lime  Rock Kilns (Medium Efficiency)	   532
 Figure 153  Annual Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Vertical Lime  Rock Kilns (Medium Efficiency)	   533
 Figure 154  Capital Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Vertical Lime  Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   534
 Figure 155  Annual Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Vertical Lime  Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   535
 Figure 156  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns
               (High Efficiency)	   537
 Figure 157  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Rotary Lime Sludge
               Kilns (Medium  Efficiency)   	   542
 Figure 158  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Rotary Lime Sludge
               Kilns (Medium  Efficiency)   	   543
 Figure 159  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Rotary Lime Sludge
               Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   544
 Figure 160  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Rotary Lime Sludge
               Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   545
 Figure 161  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   547
Figure 162  Capital Costs for Electrostatic Precipitatbrs for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (Medium Efficiency)  ....   552
Figure 163  Annual Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (Medium Efficiency)  ....   553
Figure 164  Capital Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   554

-------
                                                               Page No.

Figure 165  Annual Costs for Electrostatic Precipitators for
              Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   555
Figure 166  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Electrostatic
              Precipitators for Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns
              (High Efficiency) 	   557
Figure 167  Distribution of Iron Foundry Sizes (1969)  	   562
Figure 168  Schematic Flow Diagram of Cast Iron Production	   566
Figure 169  Flow Diagram of Major Iron Foundry Operations	   567
Figure 170  Trends in Types of Iron Foundry Furnaces  	   569
Figure 171  Typical Gray Iron Cupola  	   571
Figure 172  Capital Costs for Fabric Filters for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas	   587
Figure 173  Annual Costs for Fabric Filters for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas	   589
Figure 174  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Fabric Filters
              for Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas	   591
Figure 175  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas (Medium Efficiency)  	   593
Figure 176  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas (Medium Efficiency)  	   599
Figure 177  Capital Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas (High Efficiency) 	   600
Figure 178  Annual Costs for Wet Scrubbers for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupolas (High Efficiency) 	   601
Figure 179  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas (High Efficiency)  . . .   603

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES
                                                                          Page No.
 Table 1     Abatement Equipment Types Selected for the Seven Process Areas . .       5
 Table 2     Process Weight Table for Medium Efficiency for Particulate
              Collection Cases Only	       8
 Table 3     Performance Levels Selected for Phase 11 and ! 11 Areas  	       9
 Table 4     Typical Composition and Particle Size of Commercial Grades
              of Florida Phosphate Rock  	     28
 Table 5     Analyses of Pebble  Phosphate Rock  	     29
 Table 6     Feed to WPPA Process Before and After Calcination	     30
 Table 7     Wet Phosphoric Acid Product Breakdown 	     32
 TableS     Distribution of Fluorine in WPPA Plant Discharge Streams  	     33
 Table 9     Florida Fluoride Emission Law  	     36
 Table 10    Estimated Abatement Requirements Under Florida Law  	     39
 Table 11    Calculated Concentrations of SiF4 and HF at 50°C  	     41
 Table 12    Calculated Concentrations of Fluorine in Vapor Phase at 60°C
              and 70°C	     43
 Table 13    Concentration Limits at Scrubber Outlet  	     53
 Table 14    NTU Required to Reach 2.15 ppm  F  Discharge Concentration 	     55
 Table 15    Process Description for Wet Process Phosphoric Acid Plant
              Cross-flow Scrubber  	     57
 Table 16    Operating Conditions for Wet Process Phosphoric Acid Plant
              Cross-flow Scrubber  	     58
 Table 17    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars)  for Wet Scrubbers
              for WPPA Process Plants  	     60
 Table 18    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Scrubbers for WPPA
              Process Plants  	     62
 Table 19    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Installed Scrubbers for
              WPPA Process Plants 	     64
 Table 20    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Wet Scrubbers
              for WPPA Process Plants  	     66
Table 21     Forms of Phosphoric Acid	     74
Table 22    Process Description for Wet Scrubber for SPA Process
              Specification  	     84
Table 23    Operating Conditions for Wet Scrubber	     86
Table 24    Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Water Induced Venturi
              Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants  	     88
Table 25    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Water Induced Venturi
              Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants  	     90

-------
                                                                         Page No.
 Table 26    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Water Induced Venturi
              Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants   	
 Table 27    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Water Induced
              Venturi Scrubbers for SPA Process Plants 	
 Table 28    Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Venturi Scrubber with
              Packed Section for SPA Process Plants  	
 Table 29    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Venturi Scrubbers with
              Packed Section for SPA Process Plants  	
 Table 30    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Venturi Scrubbers with
              Packed Section for SPA Process Plants  	
 Table 31    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Venturi Scrubber
              with Packed Section for SPA Process Plants   	
 Table 32    Material Balance of GTSP Process for 250 Ton/Day  	
 Table 33    Materials Evolved as Gases from Triple Superphosphate Manufacture
              for 250 Ton/Day Process	
 Table 34    Process Description for Granular Triple Superphosphate
              Specification 	
 Table 35    Operating Conditions for Granular Triple Superphosphate Wet
              Scrubber Specification  	
 Table 36    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Wet
              Scrubbers for GTSP Process Plants   	
 Table 37    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers for GTSP
              Process Plants  	
 Table 38    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Wet Scrubbers for
              GTSP Process Plants  	
 Table 39    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Wet Scrubbers
              for GTSP Process Plants   	
Table 40    Approximate Material Balance of 1,000 Ton/Day DAP Process
Table 41    Combined Vents from Reactor and Granulator  	
Table 42    Rough Heat Balance for DAP Dryer for 1,000 Ton/Day Process
Table 43    Process Description  for Wet Scrubbers for DAP Process  	
Table 44    Operating Conditions for Primary Scrubbers for DAP Process
              Dryer Vents	
Table 45    Operating Conditions for Secondary Scrubbers for DAP Process
              Dryer Vents	
Table 46    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Two Stage
              Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants 	
Table 47    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Two Stage Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	
Table 48    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Two Stage Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	
 92

 94

 96

 98

100

102
111

113

117

119

120

122

124

126
134
136
138
145

147

148

150

152

154

-------
                                                                         Page No.

Table 49    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Two Stage
              Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	    156
Table 50    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Venturi
              Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants  	    158
Table 51    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Venturi Cyclonic Scrubbers
              for DAP Process Plants  	    160
Table 52    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Venturi Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants 	    162
Table 53    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Venturi
              Cyclonic Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants	    164
Table 54    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Packed
              Cross-flow Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants   	    167
Table 55    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Packed Cross-flow
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants 	    170
Table 56    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Packed Cross-flow
              Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants 	    172
Table 57    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Packed
              Cross-flow Scrubbers for DAP Process Plants   	    175
Table 58    Process Description for GTSP Storage Building Scrubber  	    185
Table 59    Operating Conditions for Scrubber Specification for GTSP
              Storage Building Vent	    186
Table 60    Estimated Capital Cost Data (Costs in Dollars) for Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for GTSP Storage Vents 	    187
Table 61    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Cyclonic Scrubbers
              for GTSP Storage  	    188
Table 62    Confidence Limits for Installed Cost of Cyclonic Scrubbers
              for GTSP Storage  	    189
Table 63    Annual Operating Cost Data (Costs in $/Year) for Cyclonic
              Scrubbers for GTSP Storage Vents 	    190
Table 64    Composition of Typical Feedstuffs Used in Manufacture of Feed  ...    194
Table 65    Rations and Supplements for Brood Sows  	    196
Table 66    Beef Cattle  Feed Supplements	    197
Table 67    Sources of Air Pollution in Feed and Grain Industry  	    209
Table 68    Particle Size Analysis of the Primary Cyclone Catch and the
              Secondary Fabric  Filter Catch of Dust from a Railroad  Receiving
              Hopper Hood Controlling the Unloading of a Boxcar of Feed-Type
              Barley	    210
Table 69    Dust Losses from Cyclones	    212
Table 70    Fabric Filter Process Description for Flour Milling Specification   ...    216
Table 71    Fabric Filter Operating Conditions for Flour Milling Specification ...    217
Table 72    Estimated Capital Cost  Data for Fabric Filters for Flour Milling	    218

-------
                                                                Page No.
 Table 73    Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
               Flour Milling  	    220
 Table 74    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Fabric Filters
               for Flour Milling  	    222
 Table 75    Fabric Filter Process Description for Feed Grinding
               Specification  	    224
 Table 76    Fabric Filter Operating Conditions for Feed Grinding
               Specification  	    225
 Table 77    Estimated Capital Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
               Feed Grinding  	    226
 Table 78    Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
               Feed Grinding  	    228
 Table 79    Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of Fabric
               Filters for Feed Grinding	    230
 Table 80    Wet Scrubber Process Description for Feed Flash
               Dryer Specification  	    232
 Table 81    Wet Scrubber Operating Conditions for Feed Flash Dryer
               Specification  	    233
 Table 82    Estimated Capital Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
               Feed Flash Dryers 	    234
 Table 83    Annual Operating Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
               Feed Flash Dryers 	    236
 Table 84    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
               for Feed Flash Dryers (High Efficiency)  	    238
 Table 85    Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Feed
               Flash Dryer Specification	    240
 Table 86    Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Feed
               Flash Dryer Specification  	    241
 Table 87    Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal  Incinerators
               for Feed Flash Dryers  	    242
 Table 88    Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal  Incinerators
               for Feed Flash Dryers  	    244
 Table 89    Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Thermal
               Incinerators for Feed Flash Dryers  	    246
 Table 90    Varnish Raw Material  	    254
 Table 91    Composition of Oil and Varnish Fumes	    267
 Table 92    Emission  Data Summary  	    269
Table 93    Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Resin
               Reactor Specification   	    282
Table 94    Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Resin
               Reactor Specification (Without Heat Exchange)  ....    285

-------
                                                                 Page No.

 Table 95    Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (Without Heat Exchange)  	    286
 Table 96    Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (Without Heat Exchange)  	    287
 Table 97    Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Open
               Kettle Specification	    288
 Table 98    Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Open
               Kettle Specification (Without Heat Exchange)   	    291
 Table 99    Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Open Kettles (Without Heat Exchange)  	    292
 Table 100   Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Open Kettles (Without Heat Exchange)  	    293
 Table 101    Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Resin
               Reactor Specification   	    294
 Table 102   Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Resin
               Reactor Specification  (Without Heat Exchange)  ....    297
 Table 103   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (Without Heat Exchange)  	    298
 Table 104   Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (Without Heat Exchange)  	    299
 Table 105    Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Open
               Kettle Specification	    300
 Table 106    Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Open
               Kettle Specification (Without Heat Exchange)   	    303
 Table 107    Estimated  Capital Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Open Kettles (Without  Heat Exchange)  	    304
 Table 108    Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Open Kettles (Without  Heat Exchange)  	    305
 Table 109    Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Resin
               Reactor Specification   	    310
 Table 110    Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Resin
               Reactor Specification (With Heat Exchange) 	    313
 Table 111    Estimated  Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (With Heat Exchange)  	    314
 Table 112    Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (With Heat Exchange)  	    315
Table 113    Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Resin
               Reactor Specification   	    316
Table 114    Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Resin
               Reactor Specif ication (With Heat Exchange)	    319
Table 115    Estimated  Capital Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (With Heat Exchange)  	    320

-------
                                                                Page No.
Table 116   Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Resin Reactors (With Heat Exchange)  	   321
Table 117   Commercial Printing Market  	   333
Table 118   Ink Consumption in 1968  	   334
Table 119   Physical Properties of Commonly Used Solvents  	   337
Table 120   Percentage Breakdown of Solvent Consumed for Ink
               Dilution by Printing Process and Solvent Type (1968)   333
Table 121   Volume Breakdown of Solvent Consumed for Ink Dilution
               by Printing Process and Solvent Type (1968)  	   339
Table 122   Volume Breakdown of Total Solvent Consumption by
               Use and Solvent Type (1968)  	   340
Table 123   Percentage Breakdown of Total Solvent Consumption by
               Use and Solvent Type (1968)  	   341
Table 124   Analysis of Dryer Exhaust Gas from Web Offset
               Publication   	   344
Table 125   Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Web Offset
               Printing Specification  	   364
Table 126   Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Web
               Offset Printing Specification (Without Heat Exchange)   367
Table 127   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Web Offset Printing (Without Heat Exchange) . . .   368
Table 128   Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Web Offset Printing (Without Heat Exchange) . . .   370
Table 129   Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Web
               Offset Printing Specification   	    372
Table 130   Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Web
               Offset Printing Specification (Without Heat Exchange)    375
Table 131   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Web Offset Printing (Without Heat Exchange) . . .    376
Table 132   Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
               for Web Offset Printing (Without Heat Exchange) . ..    378
Table 133   Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Metal
               Decorating Specification  	    380
Table 134   Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Metal
               Decorating Specification (Without Heat Exchange) .  .    383
Table 135   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Metal Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)	   384
Table 136   Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
               for Metal Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)	   ooo
Table 137   Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Metal
               Decorating Specification  	   _00
                                                                 ooo

-------
                                                                Page No.
Table 138   Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Metal
              Decorating Specification (With Heat Exchange)   ....    391
Table 139   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    392
Table 140   Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    394
Table 141   Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Metal
              Decorating Specification  	    396
Table 142   Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Metal
              Decorating Specification (Without Heat Exchange) . .    399
Table 143   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)	    400
Table 144   Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (Without Heat Exchange)	    402
Table 145   Catalytic Incinerator Process Description for Metal
              Decorating Specification  	    404
Table 146   Catalytic Incinerator Operating Conditions for Metal
              Decorating Specification (With Heat Exchange)   ....    407
Table 147   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Catayltic Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    408
Table 148   Annual Operating Cost Data for Catalytic Incinerators
              for Metal Decorating (With Heat Exchange)  	    410
Table 149   Thermal Incinerator Process Description for Gravure
              Printing Specification   	    412
Table 150   Thermal Incinerator Operating Conditions for Gravure
              Printing Specification (With Heat Exchange)	    415
Table 151   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
              for Gravure Printing (With Heat Exchange)  	    416
Table 152   Annual Operating Cost Data for Thermal Incinerators
              for Gravure Printing (With Heat Exchange)  	    418
Table 153   Carbon Adsorption  Process Description for Gravure
              Printing Specification   	    420
Table 154   Carbon Adsorption  Operating Conditions for Gravure
              Printing Specification   	    421
Table 155   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Carbon Adsorption
              for Gravure Printing  	    422
Table 156   Annual Operating Cost Data for Carbon Adsorption
              for Gravure Printing  	    424
Table 157   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Carbon Adsorption
              for Gravure Printing  	    426

-------
                                                                Page No.
Table 158   Typical Operating Conditions for Continuous Sulfonating
              of Linear Alkylate	    436
Table 159   Typical Synthetic Detergent Formulas  	    446
Table 160   Wet Scrubber Process Description for Soap and
              Detergent Spray Drying Specification  	    452
Table 161   Wet Scrubber Operating Conditions for Soap and
              Detergent Spray Drying Specification  	    453
Table 162   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
              Soap and Detergent Spray Drying  	    454
Table 163   Annual Operating Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for Soap
              and Detergent Spray Drying  	    455
Table 164   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Soap and  Detergent Spray Drying (Medium
              Efficiency)   	    460
Table 165   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Soap and  Detergent Spray Drying
              (High Efficiency)	    462
Table 166   Fabric Filter Process Description for Soap and
              Detergent Spray Drying Specification  	    464
Table 167   Fabric Filter Operating Conditions for Soap and
              Detergent Spray Drying Specification  	    465
Table 168   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Soap and Detergent Spray Drying  	    466
Table 169   Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Soap and Detergent Spray Drying  	    468
Table 170   Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of Fabric
              Filters for Soap and Detergent Spray Drying	    470
Table 171   Fabric Filter Process Description for Soap and
              Detergent Product Handling Specification	    472
Table 172   Fabric Filter Operating Conditions for Soap and
              Detergent Product Handling Specification	    473
Table 173   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Soap and Detergent Product Handling	    474
Table 174   Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for Soap
              and Detergent Product Handling  	    476
Table 175   Confidence Limits for Collector Only Cost of Fabric
              Filters for Soap and Detergent Product Handling  . ..    478
Table 176   Typical Analyses of High Calcium and Dolomitic
              Commercial Limestones  	    488
Table 177   Typical Composition of High Calcium and Dolomitic
              Quicklime  	    489

-------
                                                               Page No.
Table 178   Typical Composition of Reburned Quicklime ...:....   494
Table 179   Typical Compositions of Exhaust Gases from Lime Sludge
              Kilns  	   497
Table 180   Breakdown of Fuel Usage in Lime Rock Kilns During 196;  498
Table 181   Typical Gaseous Sulfur Concentration Ranges and Average
              for Lime Sludge Kiln Exhaust  	   499
Table 182   Typical Emissions of a Natural Gas-Fired Lime Rock Kiln  501
Table 183   Typical Emissions of a Pulverized Coal-Fired Lime
              Rock Kiln  	   502
Table 184   Various Compositions of Lime Sludge Kiln Dust	   503
Table 185   Typical Exhaust Gas Production for Several Lime Sludge
              Kiln Sizes   	   504
Table 186   Theoretical Lime Rock Kiln Exhaust Rates for
              Different Fuels  	   505
Table 187   Typical Particle Size  Distribution of Vertical Lime
              Rock Kiln Emissions  	   507
Table 188   Wet Scrubber Process Description for Vertical Lime Rock
              Kiln Specification  	   512
Table 189   Wet Scrubber Operating Conditions for Vertical Lime
              Rock Kiln Specification  	   513
Table 190   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kilns   	   514
Table 191   Annual Operating Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kilns   	   515
Table 192   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns (High Efficiency)  	   520
Table 193   Fabric Filter Process Description for Vertical Lime
              Rock Kiln Specification  	   522
Table 194   Fabric Filter Operating Conditions for Vertical Lime
              Rock Kiln Specification  	   523
Table 195   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kilns   	   524
Table 196   Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kilns   	   526
Table 197   Electrostatic Precipitator Process  Description for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kiln Specification  	   528
Table 198   Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Conditions for
              Vertical Lime Rock Kiln Specification  	   529
Table 199   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Electrostatic
              Precipitators for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns  	   530

-------
                                                                 Page No.
 Table 200  Annual Operating Cost Data for Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns  	    531
 Table 201  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Vertical Lime Rock Kilns
               (High Efficiency)	    536
 Table 202  Wet Scrubber Process Description for Rotary Lime
               Sludge Kiln Specification   	    538
 Table 203  Wet Scrubber Operating Conditions for Rotary Lime
               Sludge Kiln Specification   	    539
 Table 204  Estimated Capital Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns   	    540
 Table 205  Annual Operating Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns   	    541
 Table 206  Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
               for Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns (High Efficiency)  ....    546
 Table 207  Electrostatic Precipitator Process Description for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kiln Specification  	    548
 Table 208  Electrostatic Precipitator Operating Conditions for
               Rotary Lime Sludge Kiln Specification  	    549
 Table 209  Estimated Capital Cost Data for Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns 	    550
 Table 210  Annual Operating Cost Data for Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns	    551
 Table 211   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Electrostatic
               Precipitators for Rotary Lime Sludge Kilns
               (High Efficiency)	   556
 Table 212  Average Annual Foundry Production in the United States  553
 Table 213  Properties of Cast Irons 	   565
 Table 214  Exhaust Gases Compositions from Four Different Cupolas  574
 Table 215  Material Balance for Theoretical Cupola  	   576
 Table 216  Particle Size Distributions of Emissions from Three
               Different Cupolas  	   579
 Table 217   Abatement Equipment Types Used for Collecting
               Particulate Matter From Foundries 	   580
Table 218   Fabric  Filter Process Description for Gray Iron
               Foundry Cupola Specification	   582
Table 219   Fabric  Filter Operating Conditions for Gray Iron
               Foundry Cupola Specification	   583
Table 220   Fabric  Filter Operating Conditions for Gray Iron
               Foundry Cupolas	   585

-------
                                                              Page No.

Table 221   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Fabric Filters for
              Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas	  586
Table 222   Annual Operating Cost Data for Fabric Filters for Gray
              Iron Foundry Cupolas  	  588
Table 223   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Fabric Filters
              for Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas	  590
Table 224   Wet Scrubber Process Description for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupola Specification	  592
Table 225   Wet Scrubber Operating Conditions for Gray Iron
              Foundry Cupola Specification	  593
Table 226   Estimated Capital Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
              Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas  	  596
Table 227   Annual Operating Cost Data for Wet Scrubbers for
              Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas  	  597
Table 228   Confidence Limits for Capital Cost of Wet Scrubbers
              for Gray Iron Foundry Cupolas (High Efficiency)	  602

-------
                        LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix I         Complete Sample Specification



Appendix 11        Instructions for Submitting Cost Data



Appendix III       Labor Cost Indices



Appendix IV       Statistical Basis for Data Presentation



Appendix V        List of Standard Abbreviations

-------
 I.   INTRODUCTION

     The  Industrial Gas Cleaning  Institute (IGCI)  is the national association of
 manufacturers of gas cleaning equipment, used primarily for the abatement of
 industrial air pollution.  Under this twelve-month contract, the IGCI is collect-
 ing and  formalizing data on air pollution  control in seven industrial  areas
 selected by the EPA. These areas are:
     1.    Phosphate Industry

     2.    Feed and Grain Industry

     3.    Paint and Varnish Industry

     4.    Graphic Arts Industry

     5.    Soap and Detergent Industry

     6.    Lime Kilns

     7.    Gray Iron Foundries
Phase I
Phase 11
Phase III
     This report contains all of the technical information assembled for each of
the seven process areas. The technical material consists of a narrative description
of each of the process areas  tabulated above, specifications for air pollution
abatement  equipment for each, and a summary of capital and operating costs
for equipment, obtained from the IGCI member companies in response to the
specifications. The  following section summarizes all  of  the  technical  data
assembled  for this  study.
II.   TECHNICAL DATA

     This  section contains  all  of  the data collected as part  of this program.
This  includes information  on process  descriptions,  air pollution control
requirements,  specifications and  capital  and operating costs for  abatement
equipment used  in these industries. Narrative material was generated  by the
combined   efforts  of Air  Resources, Inc. personnel acting as  editors  and
coordinators for the  program,  and the most qualified personnel of the member
companies active in the field. The  cost data, however, is entirely the product of
companies judged most  qualified. In addition  to IGCI  member companies,
several  non-members  participated  by   supplying  cost  information.  These
companies prepared  cost   estimates independently  of  one  another.  Air
Resources, Inc. consolidated the data and edited it with regard to format only.

-------
                       GENERAL  DESCRIPTION

1.   FORMAT

     This study includes  seven  industrial areas that were divided into three
groups, each of which was covered by  a separate phase report. In this final
report, the three phases are summarized.

     There are seven  sections each covering one  of the  industrial areas. For
each area, the following format is used:

     1.   Description  of the Process

         a.   Manufacturing or Production Aspects

         b.   Air Pollution Control Equipment

     2.   Specifications and Costs

         a.   Electrostatic Precipitators

              (1)   Specifications

              (2)   Capital Costs

              (3)   Operating Costs

         b.   Wet Scrubbers

         c.   Fabric  Filters

         d.   Other

     3.   Summary Comments

     This material  will not be presented in  outline form, nor will each item
necessarily  be included  for each process area.

-------
2.   SELECTION  OF APPLICABLE EQUIPMENT  TYPES

     In previous studies conducted by the IGCI, particulate emissions were of
more concern than emissions of gaseous contaminants. In this study, there are
three process areas in which the gaseous emissions predominate, or are equally
important. These are:

         Phosphate Industry                  — HFandSiF^

         Paint and Varnish                   — hydrocarbons

         Printing                            — organic inks and solvents

Also included are four areas where particulate emissions predominate:

         Feed and Grain

         Gray  Iron Foundries

         Lime Kilns

         Soap and Detergent

Because of the wider range of  potential air  pollutants covered, abatement
devices of almost every conceivable type will be involved in the program. These
will include all of the gaseous control devices:

         Wet Scrubbers

         Gas Incinerators

         Adsorption Units

and the particulate control devices:

         Electrostatic Precipitators

         Wet Scrubbers

         Fabric Filters

     In general, a given process is amenable  to control by more than one type
of equipment.  The Engineering  Standards Committee of  the  IGCI  has been

-------
responsible for selecting the types which will be considered in this program. In
many areas, the EPA is  conducting simultaneous programs in which industry
surveys, source tests, and other programs may furnish additional insight into
the  equipment  types predominating in well-controlled  installations.  This
information was incorporated into the judgments reached by the Engineering
Standards Committee through a series of technical exchange meetings with the
EPA.


     For the seven process areas covered by this study, selections of equipment
types to be  studied were made during three Engineering Standards Committee
meetings  and  four  technical  exchange meetings.  Present at the technical
exchange  meetings were representatives of the following groups:

     EPA       Economic Analysis Branch
     EPA       Industrial Studies Branch
     EPA       Performance Standards Branch
     IGCI       Technical Director
     IGCI       Project Director
     IGCI       Engineering Standards Committee
     ARI        Project Coordinator
     ARI        Project Engineer

The end results of this selection process are presented on Table 1.
3.   BASIS FOR  PREPARING SPECIFICATIONS  AND BID PRICES

     The degree of reduction of emissions required in a given application will
influence the cost significantly for wet scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators.
Fabric filters,  mechanical collectors  and incinerators are, on the other hand,
relatively insensitive to the  efficiency  level specified. In all cases, the cost is
directly related to size or gas handling capacity required.

     In  order to make  a  meaningful comparison of capital and operating costs,
it is necessary to specify the  performance  level, or degree of reduction of
emissions required. In  previous projects, two arbitrary  levels of performance
were specified:

     1.   An  "intermediate level" which corresponded to  the Los  Angeles
process weight requirements, and

     2.   A "high  level" of performance which should show  little or no
subjective evidence of  emissions; that  is no visible particulate matter, and no
detectable odor level.

-------
                                       TABLE  1

                      ABATEMENT EQUIPMENT TYPES SELECTED
                          FOR THE SEVEN PROCESS AREAS
Process Area
Emission Source
Equipment Types
Phosphates
Feed and Grain
Paint and Varnish
Graphic Arts
Wet Phosphoric Acid Reactors
Superphosphoric Acid Process
                    Diammonium Phosphate Process
Granular Triplesuperphosphate Reactors
GTSP Storage

Feed Mills
Flour Mills
Feed Flash Dryers

Open Kettles
Closed Reactors

Web Offset
Metal Decorating
Gravure Printing
Soap and Detergent   Spray Dryers
                    Dry Product Handling
Lime Kilns
Vertical Rock Kilns
                    Rotary Sludge Kilns
Packed Cross Flow Scrubber
Water Induced Venturi Scrubber
Venturi Scrubber with Packed
  Mist Eliminator
Two Stage Cyclonic Scrubber
Venturi — Cyclone Scrubber
Packed Cross Flow Scrubber
Venturi — Cyclone Scrubber
Cyclonic Scrubber

Fabric Filter
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber, Thermal Incinerator

Thermal and Catalytic Incinerator
Thermal and Catalytic Incinerator

Thermal and Catalytic Incinerator
Thermal and Catalytic Incinerator
Thermal Incinerator, Adsorption

Fabric Filter, Wet Scrubber
Fabric Filter

Wet Scrubber, Fabric Filter,
  Precipitator
Wet Scrubber, Precipitator
Gray Iron Foundries  Cupola
                                      Fabric Filter, Wet Scrubber

-------
     These  arbitrary  levels  served   reasonably  well  with  regard  to  the
specification of performance of particulate collection  equipment. However,
they did not serve the intended purpose; i.e., the development of a relationship
between system cost and efficiency or performance level when:

     1.    gaseous pollutants were involved

     2.    when the pollutants were particulate but the plant was large or

     3.    the  pollutants were  particulate  but the  particles  were  large in
          diameter.

In the latter two cases, the "intermediate level" of performance was likely to
be equally or more restrictive than the  "high level".

     In  the case of gaseous emissions, the process weight basis for specifications
and the visible emission  basis are clearly inappropriate. In these circumstances,
an  alternative basis  for  setting performance  level may  be  drawn from
regulations in force or proposed by state or local agencies, but unanimity with
regard to appropriateness  is far less likely for gaseous contaminants than  was
the case for particulates.

     In  phosphate fertilizer plants, the emission of gaseous fluorides in the form
of hydrogen  fluoride and silicon tetrafluoride is the most critical problem.
These plants  are mostly located in  the State of  Florida, which  has adopted
stringent  limitations on total fluoride emissions to protect sensitive citrus crops
from damage by fluorides.
     It  was  agreed by  discussion  with  EPA personnel that  the regulations
adopted by the State of Florida and currently applicable to new plants (to be
enforced  on existing plants in 1975) would be used as the basis for the lower
efficiency level, and one-half of that absolute emission rate  would be used for
the higher efficiency case.

     For the six process areas covered in Phases II and III, performance levels
were chosen during the technical exchange meetings. For those areas where the
emissions are particulate matter, performance levels were generally chosen as
follows:
     Medium  Efficiency       —   The process weight table  published in the
                                 Federal Register April 7,  1971

     High Efficiency          —   A sufficiently low grain loading to achieve
                                 a clear stack.

The process weight table used is presented in Table 2.

      For  those areas where the emissions are gaseous, performance levels were

-------
 selected  to  correspond  to  the maximum  practical  abatement efficiencies
 currently available  to  the industry under study. Table  3 shows the list  of
 performance levels selected for all six industries.

     Several simplifications were made in the preparation  of the specifications
which have some bearing  on the results which are reported here. These should
be kept  in mind when using the prices, operating costs, etc. The form of the
specification  for equipment may  have an influence  over the price quoted.
Overly-restrictive specifications may add  5 to 10% to the equipment  price
without  a corresponding increase in value received by the purchaser. In each of
the cases presented  in  this report,  prices  are  based on a  specification which
covers most  of the conditions of  purchase  in an equitable way. Instead of
writing each  specification  independently, the participants agreed upon the
general terms and conditions to be  specified, and these conditions were made
identical for  each specification. The final  specification in  each case was made
by  inserting  one page of descriptive material and  one page of operating
conditions pertaining to the specific application into the standard format. To
avoid unnecessary repetition, a  sample of the complete specification for one of
the applications is  included  as Appendix I  to this  report. Only the pages
pertinent to specific  applications are contained in the body  of the report.

     Prices were requested in such a  way as to indicate three bases:

     1.   Air pollution control device. This includes only the flange-to-flange
          precipitator, fabric filter, scrubber, etc.

     2.   Air pollution control  auxiliary equipment. This includes major items
          such as fans, pumps, etc.

     3.   Complete  turnkey installation. This includes the  design, all labor and
          materials, equipment fabrication, erection and startup.

     In order to maintain a consistent approach to quoting in each area, the
specifications were written around the air pollution control device. The process
description was, however, made general enough to allow the members to quote
on the auxiliary equipment, such as fans,  pumps, solid handling devices, etc.,
and  to  quote  on  an  approximate  installation  cost. A  complete  set  of
instructions for quoting is given  in Appendix II.

     Labor costs are a  variable from  one  location to  another, and it was not
possible to establish  the complex pattern of variations  in turnkey prices which
occurs as a  function  of  local variations in  hourly  rate, productivity and
availability of construction tradesmen.  In order to provide a consistent basis for
the preparation of price quotations, the cost indices given in Appendix III  were
used.  This was taken from "Building Construction Cost Data, 1970". This gives
a construction cost  index for 90 cities, using  100 to represent the  national
average.  These figures are  for  the  building trades,  but they should  be
representative of field construction rates in  general.
                                                         (text continued on p. 10)

-------
                             TABLE  2

    PROCESS WEIGHT TABLE FOR MEDIUM  EFFICIENCY CASES*

 Process Weight                                             Rate of
  Rate (Ib/hr)                                          Emission (Ib/h.r)
    100	0.551
    200	0.877
   400	1.40
   600	1.85
   800	2.22
  1,000	2.58
  1,500	3.38
  2,000	4.10
  2,500	4.76
  3,000	5.38
  3,500	5.96
  4,000	6.52
  5,000	7.58
  6,000	8.56
  7,000	9.49
  8,000	10.44
  9,000	11.2
 12,000	13.6
 16,000	16.5
 18,000	17.9
 20,000	19.2
 30,000	25.2
 40,000	30.5
 50,000	35.4
 60,000 or more  	40.0
*Federal Register April 7, 1971

8

-------
                              TABLE 3

                 PERFORMANCE LEVELS SELECTED
               FOR PHASE  II AND III PROCESS AREAS
                                         Performance Level
Process Area

Feed and Grain
  Feed Mills
  Flour Mills
Paint and Varnish
  Open Kettles
  Closed Reactors

Graphic Arts
  Web Offset
  Metal Decorating
  Gravure Printing
Emission Type
Particulate
Particulate
  Feed Flash Dryers   Odor
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrocarbon Gas
Hydrocarbon Gas
Soap and Detergent
  Spray Dryers       Particulate
  Dry Prod. Handling Particulate
Lime Kilns
  Vertical Rock
  Rotary Sludge

Gray Iron Foundries
  Cupolas
Particulate
Particulate
Particulate
  Medium
     (1)
     (1)
67% Removal
    (1)
    (1)
     (1)
     (1)
     (1)
                 PWT (2)
                      (1)
PWT (2)
PWT (2)
PWT (2)
  High
0.01 gr/ACF
0.01 gr/ACF
93% Removal
1600° F Maximum Incinerator Temp.
1600° F Maximum Incinerator Temp.
1600°F Maximum Incinerator Temp.
1600° F Maximum Incinerator Temp.
1600°F Maximum Incinerator Temp.
               0.01 gr/ACF
               0.01 gr/ACF
0.01 gr/ACF
0.01 gr/ACF
0.02 gr/ACF
(1) Only one efficiency level specified.

(2) PWT = Process Weight Table, See Table 2.

-------
      These figures do not take productivity differences into account and may
 understate the variations in cost from one city to another.

      The  participating companies  were instructed to estimate the installation
 costs as though erection or installation of the system would be in Milwaukee,
 Wisconsin or another city relatively convenient to  the participants' point of
 shipment with a labor rate near 100. Readers are cautioned to take local labor
 rates and productivity into account when making first estimates of air pollution
 control  system installed costs based on the data in this report.  Appendix  III
 shows the tabulated hourly  rates for various  construction trades  (based  on
 national averages) which may be useful for this purpose.

      Considerable  emphasis  was  placed  on estimation of  operating costs.
 Manufacturers submitting costs for equipment were  asked  to  estimate  the
 operating costs in terms of utility requirements, maintenance and repair labor,
 and  operating labor. These were requested in terms of the quantity required,
 rather than the cost. This  is because the costs will be analyzed in  terms of low,
 average  and  high utility and  labor cost  areas  for  the final  report. For this
 report, only  the average utility costs were used  for preparing total annual cost
 figures.
 4.    PRESENTATION OF DATA

      In general, the capital cost data is presented as a series of three graphs
 showing capital costs as a  straight-line plot on log-log paper. One graph shows
 the capital cost for the air pollution abatement device, one shows the cost for
 the total  equipment and one shows the cost for the complete turnkey system.
 Where  it was  possible to  do so, an  analysis of the confidence limits of  the
 sample is presented — where three quotations were obtained as a "sample" of
 perhaps 20 possible suppliers who might have quoted. The confidence limits are
 shown as dotted lines. Appendix IV contains a description of the mathematical
 procedure involved.

      In all specifications of pollution control equipment standard temperature
 is70°F (530° R).
     Operating costs are presented  in graphic form in this report. Expanded
tables showing operating costs for various utility cost levels are also included in
some cases.

     A total annual cost has been calculated for each process by combining an
annual capital charge with a direct annual operating cost. The resulting figures
are presented as a graph of total  annual cost versus unit  size  where  such
information makes a meaningful pattern.
10

-------
PHOSPHATE

-------
       PROCESS  DESCRIPTIONS, SPECIFICATIONS  AND COSTS

1.   PHOSPHATE  ROCK PRODUCTS MANUFACTURE

     Phosphorus is one of the elements essential to plant  growth and animal
life. For this reason,  it is a major constituent of chemical fertilizers and animal
feed supplements.  The fertilizer-related uses of phosphorus have generated a
large segment of industry involved with the mining and  processing of natural
phosphate  rock deposits. This  discussion includes this  entire industry  in  a
general way, and several specific manufacturing processes within the industry in
detail.

     Those  sections  of the phosphate rock  processing  industry  chosen for
detailed study are as follows:

     a.   Wet Process Phosphoric Acid manufacture (WPPA)

     b.   Superphosphoric acid manufacture (SPA)

     c.   Diammonium Phosphate (DAP)

     d.   Granular Triplesuperphosphate manufacture (GTSP)

     e.   GTSP Storage

     Phosphate rock  deposits exist in high concentration in only a few small
geographic  areas within the United  States. Figure  1 is an outline map of the
United  States indicating those  locations where phosphate rock  deposits are
found.'1' It is typical of the industry that the chemical  processing plants which
use phosphate rock as raw material and generate finished fertilizer  products are
located  in  the immediate  vicinity of the  mines  and, therefore, within  the
geographic areas indicated in Figure 1.

     The initial paragraphs  in this  section will be devoted to a generalized
description of the over-all  processing  pattern within  the phosphate fertilizer
industry. Subsequent sections are related to the specifics of each process.


                       GENERAL DESCRIPTION

     Phosphate rock  is generally found in rich deposits  of fluorapatite, with
related minerals as  impurities. Fluorapatite Ca-n-^fPO^  is extremely stable
                                                                     11

-------
and  insoluble in  water. For this reason, the phosphate content is not readily
available for use by plants, nor is it leached from the deposits by percolation of
water. In order to convert the rock to useful fertilizers, it is necessary to alter
the  chemical structure in  such  a way that the  materials become at least
moderately water soluble, or,  more precisely, soluble in  plant juices. Several
chemical processes are used for converting the rock to soluble  forms, three of
which are among the specific subjects  of this discussion.  The processes in
current use are:

     (1)  Phosphoric  acid  manufacture        (wet  process  and  electric
                                               (furnace

     (2)  Normal Superphosphate

     (3)  Diammonium Phosphate

     (4)  Triplesuperphosphate

     (5)  Superphosphoric Acid

     This discussion  is concerned principally with those processes likely  to be
incorporated in a modern  fertilizer  production facility.  These are generally
arranged  as shown  in   the  block  diagram  in  Figure   2. Ordinarily, ore
benefication (upgrading) to produce a concentrate with 70 to 75% CagfPO^
content,'3'  or "70-75%  Bone Phosphate of Lime". The scheme  shown is
tailored to the processing of Florida pebble phosphate rock, which comprises
the world's largest source of phosphates.

     Each  of the  processing steps involves some potential for the release of
fluorine compounds into  the air,  and in some cases paniculate solids as well.
The  description  of the  process  sequence and  basic  chemistry  has  been
oversimplified for this general description and the  discussion of emission
sources and  control methods deferred to  the sub-sections dealing with each
specific process.
Phosphoric Acid Manufacture

The manufacture  of phosphoric acid is involved with decomposition of the
fluorapatite by sulfuric acid. This dissolution or digestion process results in the
release of much of the fluorine as hydrofluoric acid or fluosilicic acid. Some of
this is discharged  from  the  process  and  becomes  a  potential  for  air
12

-------
        i-Uirni^T^p: \4-rM -sXltzLcfl^

           FIGURE 1

OUTLINE MAP OF U.S. INDICATING
  PHOSPHATE PRODUCING AREAS

-------
pollution, some is retained in the acid product, and some is discarded  with
byproduct gypsum. The basic chemistry of the manufacture of phosphoric acid
is represented by the following equation:

     Ca3(P04)2 + 3H2S04  +  6H20 -> 3 [CaS04 • 2H20]  +  2H3P04   (1)
    Phosphate  Rock + Sulfuric Acid + Water ->Gypsum + Phosphoric Acid

     Although  some dust is generated  by processing of dry rock, release of
gaseous fluorine-containing compounds constitutes the  principal air pollution
sources which must be treated in a phosphoric acid plant.

     It is unusual to apply phosphoric acid directly as a fertilizer component,
but  it  is more generally  used in the manufacture  of other  phosphorus-
containing compounds for direct application as fertilizers.
TSP Manufacture

    Triplesuperphosphate is one of the common fertilizer forms marketed. It
has a  good balance of properties, including moderate water solubility, lack of
either strong alkalinity or basicity,  and ease of handling. Triplesuperphosphate
is  made  by reacting phosphate rock with phosphoric acid according  to  the
following chemical reaction:

           Ca3(P04)2 + 4 H3P04 +  3H20 -»- 3 [CaH4 (P04)2 •  H20]   (2)
      Phosphate  Rock + Phosphoric Acid + Water -^Triplesuperphosphate

    In the acidulation process, part of the elemental fluorine contained in the
phosphate rock  is released and again presents a potential for air pollution by
HF and by SiF4. In addition, both the rock charge material  and the finished
products are granular solids which have significant dusting problems associated
with the bulk handling steps in the process

    Earlier processes  for  the digestion  of  phosphate  rock involved  the
production of normal superphosphate by acidulation with sulfuric acid, and the
production of "run of pile" triplesuperphosphate. Both of these processes are
still widely used in existing  fertilizer plants, but do not represent the  best
current technology. The normal superphosphate process utilizes sulfuric acid to
produce the monocalcium phosphate rich material according to

    Ca3(P04)2  + 2H2S04 + 4H20  + CaH4(P04)2  + 2(CaS04-2H20)  (3)
 Phosphate Rock + Sulfuric Acid + Water -^Monocalcium Phosphate  + Gypsum
14

-------
OPERATIONS
  AT MINE
      X
                OPERATIONS IN
             FERTILIZER  PLANT
                           1
                                                                                         SULFURIC
                                                                                            AC. ID

              ORE
        BENEFACTION
                                       MIL-LI NG


                                     SCREENING
            TAIL-INGS
              TO
            WASTE
CALCINATION
                                                                                                    WATER
                                                          WATER
     WET
 PHOSPHORIC
    ACID
MA NU FACTU RE
         GYPSUM
             '-PRODUCT.
                                                                GRANULAR
                                                            MANUFACTURING
    SUPER
 PHOSPHORIC
    ACID
MANUFACTURE
                                                                                                       11
                                                                 TSP
                                                             t
                                                       GRANULAR
                                                          DAP.-if-

                                                     MANUFACTURIN <3
                                                               STORAOE
                                                        DAP
                                                     STORAGE
                                                                                                     USUALLY  GTSPANDGDAP  PRODUCTION
                                                                                                     ARE ALTERNATIVES WITHIN  A GIVEN PLANT
                                                                     FIGURE  2
                                                      BLOCK DIAGRAM OF PHOSPHATE FERTILIZER

                                                            MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
                                                                       15

-------
This process has been supplanted by TSP manufacture because the TSP is not
diluted by gypsum as is normal superphosphate.

     The initial processes for manufacture of TSP utilized the "den" method,
where  solidification and curing  of the product  took place on a slow-moving
belt. The chemistry of  this process  is substantially  the same as that for the
GTSP  process, but the emission sources are significantly different. The physical
properties of  the  product,  called "run  of  pile"  are less  desirable  than the
granular product, and the latter is expected to be predominant in the future.
DAP Manufacture

     Diammonium  phosphate is  a  desirable component  of  fertilizers which
require a  high  ratio of nitrogen to  phosphorus.  In this process, ammonia and
phosphoric acid are used as raw materials, and produce diammonium phosphate
as the  principal product, with HF and SiF4 as byproducts. The basic chemistry
of the process is described by the following equation:

                     H3PO4 + 2NH3 -» (NH4)2 HP04                  (4)

           Phosphoric Acid + Ammonia ^-Diammonium Phosphate


NPK Manufacture

     Fertilizers are  usually blends of compounds containing available nitrogen,
available  phosphorus  and  available  potassium. The  proper application of
fertilizers  requires that these nutrients be supplied to the soil in the proportions
required for balanced  plant  nutrition.  Soil  tests are run  to  establish the
deficiency of each component in  terms of tons/acre requirement for  each
element. Commercially available  fertilizers  are  then  applied on  the basis of
weight percent specifications for each nutrient in the particular fertilizer blend.
The composition of the fertilizer is represented  by the manufacturer in terms
of pounds of each nutrient available per 100 pounds of total material. In order
to make the proper application of elements  to the soil in a particular area, it is
usually  necessary to apply  several fertilizer blends.  For this reason,  it  is
necessary  that fertilizer manufacturers  make available  a wide variety of blends
of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash containing  materials  for the  agricultural
industry.  Several  of  the  products  described  in   this  study  are  high
phosphate-content materials which have little or no nitrogen or potash content.
Diammonium  phosphate  contains  both   nitrogen and  phosphate, but  most
                                                                       17

-------
compounded fertilizers are simply blends of phosphate materials with  other
chemicals which are rich in nitrogen or rich in potash. The plants in which this
blending operation  is carried out are  called NPK plants, and carry out the
chemical operations of mixing,  blending, granulating  and product  handling
associated with combining these elements into the commercial fertilizers in the
proper proportions.
Storage and Handling

Because both raw  materials and  products of phosphate fertilizer plants are
granular solids, there is a significant potential for air pollution emissions in the
form of dusts at points where handling, transferring, milling, drying, storing
and bagging of the solids are carried out.

     Although these potential sources are important ones, this study  has been
restricted principally to those from which potentially serious gaseous fluoride
emissions are likely. The only non-process source which falls into this category
is the storage and curing buildings in which the granular TSP or DAP products
are stored, cured and sometimes bagged. Within these buildings, the reactions
involved in the final manufacturing steps are completed, and some emission of
fluorine, moisture and  heat occur. High  ventilation rates through the storage
buildings are required to  maintain reasonable working conditions within  the
building. The ventilation air discharge from either DAP or TSP storage requires
treatment to prevent significant emissions of fluorine-containing gases.
Summary of Applications

     Prior to initiation of this program, representatives of the Industrial Studies
Branch, the Performance Standards Branch, and the Economic Analysis Branch
of the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  agreed upon the applications of
equipment in  the  foregoing areas for which additional information on which
technology and costs data should be assembled by the Industrial Gas Cleaning
Institute.

     Each of these applications is developed  in some detail in the following
sections.
18

-------
                  PHOSPHORIC ACID MANUFACTURE
     Phosphoric acid manufacture  is carried  out by  the direct digestion of
phosphate rock in su If uric acid, or by the furnace method in which the rock is
reduced  to elemental phosphorus. Digestion in concentrated acid is the most
widely used method for the production of phosphoric acid for use in fertilizers,
while the electric furnace method is used to prepare high purity acid.131 This
discussion  is  limited to the sulfuric acid or wet process, frequently designated
as the WPPA process.

     Most  of the wet process phosphoric plants  in  use are  located in central
Florida, where the product is used in the manufacture of phosphate-containing
fertilizers.  Several designs are in use, which differ in the detail but utilize nearly
the same basic process  flow  scheme.  This process  is often described as  the
dihydrate process, because the byproduct gypsum formed is substantially all in
the dihydrate form.

     The  chemical  operations  required for countercurrent  washing,  leaching
and filtering  of the  rock involve steps  which  are difficult to carry  out on a
continuous basis, particularly  because very  corrosive acid materials  are used.
These problems have been solved by several ingenious designs.
                        PROCESS  DESCRIPTION

     Because the process  flow scheme for a typical WPPA plant is relatively
complex, a simplified flow diagram omitting many of the process steps is given
in Figure  3. The discussion of basic process chemistry will refer to this flow
drawing. Figure 4 is a more detailed diagram of the same process, showing an
arrangement of process equipment which corresponds more closely  with the
operating plants.

     In Figure 3, calcined, ground rock is introduced into a digester where it is
slurried with a mixture of 24% phosphoric acid and 93% sulfuric acid. In the
case of phosphoric  acid,  the acid strength  refers to  wt.%  P2^5' while the
sulfuric acid strength is given as wt.% h^SO^ Digestion of the rock is strongly
exothermic, and requires heat removal to maintain a low and uniform digestion
temperature, to keep  the  CaSO^ byproduct  from dissolving. The cooling is
accomplished primarily  by recycling a high slurry rate through a cooler chilled
by  vaporization of  water  and in some  older plants by blowing cooling air
through the  digester.  The reaction  goes  nearly  to completion within  the
digestion chambers.

     The slurry is agitated and circulated from compartment to compartment
within the digester and a net stream of phosphoric acid-calcium sulfate slurry is
withdrawn for filtering.
                                                                      19

-------
     The filtering  and washing operations  are carried out on a series of filter
surfaces shown symbolically as drum filters in Figure 3. Here the phosphoric
acid-rich liquor entrapped  within  the solid  CaSO^h^O crystal matrix is
gradually replaced by washing with more and more dilute solutions, until, on
the final filter, fresh make-up water  is used for washing. The  gypsum and
entrained water are then sluiced to a gypsum settling pond.

     The wash-water produced at each filtering-washing stage is recycled back
into the process and contacted with solids  of  higher phosphoric acid content,
so these streams build up in concentration and finally leave the first filter stage
at about 30 wt.% phosphoric acid (throughout this discussion, "30 wt.% acid"
refers to the percentage by weight  of P2®5 rather than HgPO^. The "weight
fraction of phosphoric acid" is, in this case, 41.5% HgPC^, which  is equivalent
to30%P205).

     A more detailed description of the process flow  and equipment  can be
given  using Figure  4 as a basis. Here, calcined phosphate rock is shown entering
the process in three chambers of the digester along with 24 wt.% acid produced
within the process and 93% sulfuric acid used  as a raw material. These acids are
mixed in a cooler which removes the heat of dilution of the H2S04.

     The slurry of rock and acid  is pumped from chamber to chamber as the
digestion reaction  takes place with the  concurrent solution  of phosphate  as
^s'D^4' s'"ca as ^SiFg,  precipitation  of gypsum, release  of HF from the
fluorapatite,  and volatilization of HF and  SiF^.  The gaseous byproducts are
swept away from the digester by the ventilation air stream.

     The slurry of digested rock  and acid  progresses to a final digestion tank
(shown  as tank No. 9 in Figure 4)  from which it is pumped  to a circular flat
pan filter where the countercurrent washing steps are carried out. The digestion
tanks and filters are designed as complementary units in modern WPPA  plants.
Several versions of this design are  in use,  the most common of which is the
Prayon  design,  built  under license  of S. A.  Metalurgique de  Prayon  by
Wellman-Powergas.141  The filter is composed  of flat, pie-shaped segments with
slurry introduced above  each section, and  a vacuum drawn beneath the filter
bed. The entire bed, consisting of about 8 segments, rotates beneath stationary
feeding and washing connections,  and after the solids have made one complete
circuit, each  filter  segment  is reversed top-for-bottom  and the spent gypsum
washed off for  sluicing to the gypsum pond. This type of filter is known as a
Bird-Prayon tilting  pan filter.
20

-------
CALCINED
 GROUND
   ROCK
    A
2-4-
              S3 T^
               SULFUR 1C
                 ACID
                                  VACUUM
                                     FLASH
                                       COOLER
                                                                                                                                                          FROM POND
      PHOSPHORIC
ACID RECYCLE
                                                                                                                                     WATER WASH
                                                                                         SO ^ ACID
                                                                                           STORAGE
                                                                                                                                              C5YRSUM
                                                                                                                                               SLUHRY
                                                                          FIGURE 3

                                                                  SIMPLIFIED FLOW  SCHEME

                                                                  FOR STRONG 'ACID  PROCESS
                                                                                                                      21

-------
                                       10% ACID
   3O% ACID
CALCINED
PHOSPHATE
                                                                                                      POND WATER
                                         -4-% ACID
                    ROTATING     FIL.TER
                                                            GYPSUM
                                                            Sl-URRY
                                                               TO
                                                              POND
                                                                                                       SPENT  L.IQUOR
                                                                                                          TO POND
                                                                                                              FL-UOSII-ICIC
                                                                                                           ACID  SCRUBBERS
                                         3O°/o ACID
                                                                                      STEAM
                                      L-INED
                                   DIGESTION
                                      TANKS
       3O°/o ACID
       STORAGE
EVAPO RATO R
FEED   TANK
                                                                                         EVAPORATOR
                           EVAPORATOR
                                                                                                                                   fcd t±d td
                                                                                                                                  SETTLERS
~l

Y


r

v/





                            3O°/o ACID
                               TO
                         DAP OR  TSP
                       MANUFACTURE
                                                                                                          ACID
                                                                                                       TO
                                                                                                 DAP OR  TSP
                                                                                                MANUFACTURE
                          STEAM
   STEAM

FIGURE 4
STEAM
                                                                                                                                                                         «> 4.0/0 PHOSPHORIC
                                                                                                                                                                         ACID     PRODUCT
                                   SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM

                           FOR WET PHOSPHORIC ACID PROCESS PLANT
                                      (GULF DESIGN PLANT)
                                                                                                                        ACID
                                                                                                                     TO
                                                                                                           SUPERPHOSPHORIC
                                                                                                                    ACID
                                                                                                                                                                            23

-------
     Acid at 30% concentration from the rotating tilting-pan filter is discharged
to a 30% acid storage tank from which part is removed for use in DAP or TSP
manufacture and part is passed through a multiple effect evaporation system in
which the concentration is raised to about 54% P^Ofr ^ne evaP°rators use high
pressure steam to distill water overhead, and operate under vacuum to maintain
low  evaporation temperature. The vacuum is usually maintained by two-stage
steam-jet ejectors with barometric condensers. In the concentration process, a
substantial amount of fluorine is driven off as  SiF4. This is not ordinarily a
significant air pollution source, in that most of the gas leaving the evaporators
is  steam  rather  than  air and  when the  steam  condenses in  the barometric
condensers the SiF4 is combined  with HP to form H2SiFg and condenses along
with it. However, if this material is allowed to escape to the gypsum pond, the
potential for profitable recovery of  the fluosilicic acid is lost and it places an
additional chemical burden on the pond system.(5)

     In Figure 4, each of the evaporators is shown equipped with a packed
scrubber  for the collection  of H2SiFg, which  can be produced at 20 wt.%
concentration. One Florida processor reported the collection and sale of 5,000
T/year (on a 100 wt.% basis) of H2SiFg.(5)

     Acid leaving the  final evaporator is usually around 54 wt.% P2Og 'or ^4.5
wt.% H3PO4).

     The acid is passed  through a  series of clarifiers to remove as much as
possible of the last traces of fines, and then discharged to storage. Product acid
at  54% concentration  may be taken  for manufacture of DAP or TSP fertilizers
prior to the final  clarification stages.  Acid  for  sale as product or for further
concentration  to superphosphoric acid may be subjected to several additional
stages of clarification and may be centrifuged for final removal of fines.
                      CHEMISTRY OF PROCESS

     The basic chemical reaction for the production of phosphoric acid by the
dihydrate process as given in equation (1) is repeated here:

              }2 +  3H2S04 + 6H20 +3 [CaS04 • 2H20]  + 2H3P04 (1)
                                                                      25

-------
This equation oversimplifies the reactions taking place in several respects. Most
important from  an air pollution standpoint is the presence of fluorine in the
rock as fluorapatite. This may be considered to take part in a chain of reactions
represented as follows:

            3 [Ca3(P04)2]   CaF2   ->-  3Ca3(P04)2   +   CaF2
                                                                     (5)
          Fluorapatite ->• Tricalcium Phosphate + Calcium Fluoride
                                               or Fluorspar

            CaF2 + H2S04  +  2H2O + CaS04-2H20 +  2HF
                                                                     (6)
       Fluorspar + Sulfuric Acid + Water -^-Gypsum + Hydrofluoric Acid

     If pure fluorapatite were the raw material for the digestion process, the
principal gaseous byproduct would be HF, part of which would be retained in
the acid  and part  would be liberated as  gaseous HF. A major portion of the
fluorine  would  probably be retained in  the solid phase as CaF2, which is
extremely insoluble in water.

     There are, however, some significant side reactions which have a great deal
of influence on the disposition of the fluorine in the feed.

     Principal among these are the reactions involving the solution of silica to
form  H2SiFg. A substantial amount of silica is present in the feed, either as
free silica or as calcium, aluminum or iron  silicates. Acidification of the  rock
brings about a series of reactions which may  be represented as follows:

                CaF2   +  H2S04   +  CaS04  +   2HF
                                                                     (7)
   Calcium Fluoride + Sulfuric Acid -^-Calcium Sulfate + Hydrofluoric Acid

                   Si02   +   4HF  +2H20   +  SiF4
                                                                     (8)
          Silica + Hydrofluoric Acid -s-Water + Silicon Tetrafluoride

                       SiF4  +   2HF   •+  H2SiF6
                                                                     (9)
         Silicon Tetrafluoride + Hydrofluoric Acid  •+ Fluosilicic Acid

    These reactions work to form HF, SIF4 and H2SiFg. These three may be
assumed  to form an equilibrium system in the presence of water, from which
26

-------
the  principal  material  escaping  is Sip4  in the normal range of  digestion
temperatures 130-170° F.(7)
                          FEED  COMPOSITION

     Several analyses of the typical  Florida  pebble  phosphates are given in
Table4.(6)  The analyses given do not report actual  components, but rather
convenient equivalents; that is, the sulfate-containing materials are not reported
as such, but the total sulfur is reported as the equivalent SOg. Such an analysis
might be restated on the presumption that most of the phosphorus is present as
fluorapatite, the CO2 as carbonate, etc. Table 5 is a  restatement of a typical
analysis, first using the assumption that the principal  impurities are present as
common calcium compounds. A second restatement simply gives the analysis in
terms of weight percent of each element.

     The analyses  shown in Table  5 are used  subsequently as the raw material
for hypothetical process plants defined for purposes of obtaining abatement
equipment costs.

     The  reaction  process is  further  complicated  if  CaC03 and organic
materials present in most rock are allowed  to enter the digester. Both give rise
to serious  foaming problems and  require the addition of costly anti-foaming
agents. Current practice usually avoids these problems by calcination of the
rock  in  fluidized  beds.  Calcination  effectively  drives off C02  from  the
carbonates and oxidizes the organic material, without any  significant loss of
phosphorus or fluorine.  Table 6 illustrates the effect of calcination on the feed
composition.

     The digestion reactions are aimed at producing the highest acid strength
possible while  producing  crystals of  gypsum byproduct which  have good
filtering characteristics.  High temperature favors the  production of  high acid
strength, but causes several operating problems, such as high rates of CaSO^  •
Vih^O,  or calcium sulfate hemihydrate, which  is considerably  more soluble
than the  dihydrate  and  tends to cause serious scaling problems as the acid
cools.  Other problems  associated  with high temperature  operation  of the
digester are excessive corrosion and high solubility of impurities in the product
acid. In most cases, the  digester is control led to about 160- 185°F to produce
a digester-acid with about 30% P2®5 content.'61

     Digester temperature is controlled either by blowing air into the slurry or
by vacuum flash evaporation of a  part of  the slurry recycle. The use of air
cooling is being supplanted  by vacuum flash  evaporation in the new plants.
                                                                      27

-------
                            TABLE 4
         TYPICAL COMPOSITION  AND  PARTICLE SIZE OF
    COMMERCIAL GRADES OF FLORIDA PHOSPHATE  ROCK
                                                         (a)
                               Specified BPL^ Range
                     68/66
70/68
72/70
                         Screen Analysis
75/74
77/76
BPL (by analysis)
P20g equiv.
H20
Fe203
AI203
Organic
Si02
C02
F2
CaO
so3
68.15
31.18
1.3
1.33
1.76
2.18
9.48
3.48
3.60
45.05
1.05
70.16
32.10
1.0
1.25
0.96
1.74
8.68
3.05
3.67
46.12
1.02
72.14
33.00
1.0
1.07
0.83
1.76
6.46
2.87
3.62
48.10
1.11
75.17
34.39
1.0
1.03
0.82
1.73
4.59
2.65
3.78
50.14
0.74
77.12
35.28
1.0
0.84
0.56
1.70
2.02
2.98
3.89
51.53
0.66
                               % Larger or Smaller Than Indicated Mesh Size
Specified Size(c)       +50
+70
+100
+200
-200
85% through 100 mesh   1.5
90% through 100 mesh   1.0
5.5
4.0
14.0
10.0
25.0
24.1
75.0
75.9
(a) Dry basis
(b) Bone Phosphate of Lime
(c) All grades
28

-------
                            TABLE 5


            ANALYSES OF PEBBLE PHOSPHATE ROCK

       Analysis               Same Analysis             Same Analysis
        Given                   Restated                  Restated
        Wt. %                    Wt. %                    Wt. %

BPL

P2°5
H20
Fe2°3
AI2°3
Organic
Si02

C02
F2
CaO
S03
             99.82


*  ' Chemical combinations of these are uncertain.

(2) Assumed to be (CH)n
(72.14)

33.0
1.0
1.07
0.83
1.76
6.46

2.87
3.62
48.10
1.11
3Ca3(P04)2-CaF2
CaC03

CaF2
S03 -|
Si02
Fe203 L (1)
AI203 f
OxygenJ
Organic (2)
Water


79.0
6.5

1.3
1.1
6.5
1.1
0.8
0.9
1.8
1.0
110.0

P
Ca
Fe
Al
Si
Co
O
S
F
H



14.40
34.35
0.75
0.44
3.01
2.40
40.17
0.44
3.62
0.24
99.87


                                                              29

-------
                           TABLE 6







                    FEED TO WPPA PROCESS




               BEFORE AND AFTER CALCINATION










                           To Calciner            From Calciner
Charge                   T/D     Ib/hr         T/D     Ib/hr




(P205)                   (520)    (43,330)      (520)    (43,300)




3 [Ca(P04)2] • CaF2        1,245    104,000      1,245    104,000




CaC03                    103      8,600




CaF2                       20      1,710        20      1,710




CaO                       -         -          58      4,800




Organ ics                    28      2,340       -         -




Other                     179     14,650       179     14,650
Total                     1,575    131,300      1,502    125,160
30

-------
     Excessive  su If uric acid is  necessary  in  the digester to precipitate the
gypsum  and assure  near-complete solution  of  the phosphorus.  Common
practice with Florida rock is to maintain between 1.5 and 2.5% free H^SC^ by
weight in the digester. This limits the loss of ?2O^ to 0.2 - 0.7 wt.% of the total
in the feed unreacted and discharged with the gypsum.    In addition to this
loss, some additional  material is  lost by  substitution  of (HPO4=) ions for
(804=) ions in  the gypsum crystal lattice during washing,'2)  and a loss of acid
by  entrainment in  the filter  cake.  The overall  efficiency  of the process  in
converting ?2®5 'n tne roc^ to phosphoric acid is about 95 to 97%.'6) Table 7
gives a typical composition of product acid.'61

     The distribution of impurities in the rock, and in particular of fluorine, is
of concern  in  establishing  the levels  of pollutant  concentration in the gas
discharge.

     Several references indicate typical concentration levels of impurities in the
streams discharged from WPPA plants, or give percentage distributions of the
total  incoming fluorine. Table 8  summarizes  these  references.  It  is apparent
that the total quantity of Sip4 stripped out of the acid in the digester will vary
with the digester temperature, the amount of  cooling air used (which depends
on the balance  between cooling by air sparging or impingement and cooling by
flash vaporization of slurry). The more cooling air used, the higher the fraction
of fluorine stripped out and the lower the concentration.

     Current practice minimizes the use of air for cooling the reactor, and as a
consequence, the fluorine  emission rate  has  been reduced  below the values
indicated  in  Table 8  by several-fold. The  reactor cooling  load  is distributed
principally between the sulfuric acid dilution cooler and the flash vaporization
cooler:11 5)
                                                      MM BTU/ton
                                                          P2°5
     Sulfuric Acid Dilution                                   1.0
       Cooler

     Flash Vaporization                                      1.3
       Cooler

     Cooling Air                                             0.1

                                                            2.4
                                                                       31

-------
                         TABLE 7
              WET PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID
                   PRODUCT BREAKDOWN
                           Wt. %
            T/D
            Ib/hr
       P2°5



       F




       SO-,
       AI203
       Fe203




       Other




       Water




       Total
54
1.5
1.7
2.0
0.8
0.4
39.6
500
14.3
15.8
18.6
7.4
3.7
367.2
41,690
1,190
1,315
1,545
620
310
30,610
100.0
927.0
77,280
32

-------
                           TABLE  8
             DISTRIBUTION OF  FLUORINE IN WPPA
                  PLANT DISCHARGE STREAMS
Effluent



Rock Feed
Digester Vent
Gas

Filter Vents

Sump Vents

Discharge
With Gypsum
Collected by
Evaporator
Scrubber
Discharged
With 54%
Acid
Percent of Total F
By Weight
Given By
Source

100
5-10
5(e)

—

—

18-30(d)
30
35-50(d)
40

Used In
Hypothetical
Plant
100
1.5

—

—

30
40


28.5

Concentration



3.6 wt.%(a)
33-100(b)
200-500(c)
40-80(e)
mg/SCF
10-30(c)
mg/SCF
0.5
3-10(c)
mg/SCF
—
—


2-5
wt.%

*a'To match example in Table II
(b) Reference (4)
^Reference (8)
(d) Reference (9)
te) Reference (6)
(f)
  Chosen to match current practice.
                                                              33

-------
34

-------
     The quantity of air drawn  through the digester is established  by the
ventilation  requirements  rather  than  by  the heat load.'15'  The  fluorine
distribution in the second column of Table  8 was assumed  for use in the
remainder of this discussion.

     A  similar table could be  prepared  indicating  the  distribution  of  silica
among the  various discharges from the process; this distribution is considerably
less critical from a pollution control standpoint, and it may simply be  assumed
that the gaseous fluorine discharges are all  in  the  form of SiF^ from the
relatively low  temperature digester, and HSiF  from the vacuum evaporators.
               NATURE  OF  THE GASEOUS DISCHARGE

     The most significant emission source in the typical WPPA process is the
ventilating air from the digester. This is treated, in many cases, in combination
with ventilating air streams  from the filtration section of the plant and from
the  barometric  condenser pumps. However,  the digester  emissions will  be
considered as a completely separate source in this study.

     The digester vent  gas  consists of ambient air  to which water vapor,
particulate  dust, and SiF4  have been  added  as the  air passes through  the
digester. Some old designs use air sparging through the slurry to accomplish the
heat removal,  while others employed jets of air blown down on the surface of
the slurry.  Recent designs do  not rely upon the ventilating air to cool  the
reactor.
                    ABATEMENT  REQUIREMENTS

     The present Florida  law, excerpted in  Table 9, limits fluorine emissions
from new  WPPA plants  to  0.02 Ib/ton  P2C>5- ln addition,  old  plants are
required to conform to this restriction by July 1, 1975. In effect, this limits the
emissions from a 500 T/D plant to 10 Ib/day, or about 0.42 Ib/hr. In each case
the law uses the weight of P2®5 fgd to the process.

     By the most liberal interpretation, this would require the limitation of the
digester effluent gas fluorine content  to this value  and  require  a  removal
efficiency of  99.82%.  However,  the  overall  emission  specification  for the
process is 0.02 Ib/T, and it is necessary to take into account the small amounts
of fluorine in  the gas streams vented over the filters and from the barometric
condenser sumps in specifying the  efficiency requirement for the digester.
                                                                     35

-------
                               TABLE 9

                 FLORIDA FLUORIDE EMISSION  LAW
     (c)  Phosphate   Processing  —  the  emission   limiting  standards  for
phosphate processing are:
     1.   Fluorides (water soluble or gaseous-atomic weight 19)  the following
quantities expressed  as pounds  of  fluoride  per ton of phosphatic  materials
input to the system, expressed as tons of ?2^ for:
     a.   New plants or plant sections:
     a 1. Wet process phosphoric acid production, and  auxiliary equipment —
0.02 pounds of F per ton of P205-
     a 2. Run of pile triple super phosphate  mixing belt and den and auxiliary
equipment — 0.05 pounds of F  per ton of P205-
     a 3. Run  of  pile triple super  phosphate curing of storage process and
auxiliary equipment — 0.12 pounds of F per ton of ^2^5-
     a 4. Granular triple super phosphate production and auxiliary equipment.
     i.   Granular triple  super  phosphate  made by granulating run-of-pile
triple super phosphate 0.06 pounds of F per ton of P2C>5-
     ii.   Granular triple  super  phosphate made from phosphoric  acid and
phorphate rock slurry — 0.15 pounds of F per ton of P2O5-
     a 5. Granular triple super phosphate  storage and auxiliary  equipment —
0.05 pounds of F per ton of ?2®5-
     a 6. Di  ammonium phosphate production and auxiliary equipment —
0.06 pounds of F per ton of ?2®$-
     a 7. Calcining or  other thermal phosphate rock processing  and  auxiliary
equipment excepting phosphate rock drying and defluorinating — 0.05 pounds
of F per ton of P2O5-
     a 8. Defluorinating phosphate  rock by  thermal  processing  and  auxiliary
equipment — 0.37 pounds of F  per ton of P2C>5-
     a 9. All plants,  plant sections or unit  operations and auxiliary equipment
not listed in  a.1 to a.8 will comply  with best technology pursuant to Section
2.03(1) of this rule.
     b.   Existing  plants or plant sections.  Emissions shall comply with above
section,  17-2.04(6)(c) 1.a., for  existing plants as expeditiously as possible but
not later than July  1,  1975 or
     b 1. Where a plant  complex  exists with an  operating  wet  process
phosphoric  acid section (including any items 17-2.04(6)  1., a., a.1. through a.6.
above) and  other  plant sections processing  or  handling  phosphoric acid or
products or  phosphoric acid  processing,  the total  emission of the entire
36

-------
complex may not exceed 0.4 pounds of F per ton of ?2®5 'nPut to the wet
process phosphoric acid section.
     b 2.  For the individual plant sections included  in  17-2.04(6)(c), 1.,  a.,
1.1. through 6.6 above but not included as a part as defined in 17-2.04(6)(c)  1.,
b., b.1  above,  if it  can  be  shown by comprehensive engineering study and
report to  the Department that the existing plant sections are not suitable for
the application of existing technology, which may include major rebuilding or
repairs and scrubber installations, the emission  limiting standard to apply will
be the lowest obtained by any similar plant section existing and operating.
                                                                      37

-------
     Table 10contains estimated gas flows, concentrations and loadings for all
three gas streams, and illustrates  the relationship of the digester vents to the
other potential emission sources in the WPPA plant.

     In addition to the gaseous fluorine in the digester vent, there is likely to
be a little (0.05  gr/scf) rock dust generated by the mechanical handling of the
calcined  rock. This dust  is quite  likely to be removed incidentally  to the
removal of fluorine,  however, a nominal specification for particulate removal
efficiency is reasonable  in that  the rock  contains some  fluorine and will
contribute to the  overall discharge  if allowed to  escape from the process. A
discharge of 0.005 gr/ACF of material with 3.5 wt.% F from  a 500 T/D process
would add
                      x 25,000  x 60 x  0.035 = 0.037 Ib/hr
              7000

or nearly 10% of the allowed fluorine emission.


                 POLLUTION  CONTROL EQUIPMENT

     Of the  types of  pollution  control  equipment  available, only  those
involving absorption, (wet scrubbers) or adsorption (solid reagent or adsorption
systems) are capable of removing gaseous fluorine compounds from ventilating
air. Wet scrubbers have been used almost exclusively for this service although
solid packed beds of limestone or alumina have been proposed for the removal
of fluorine by adsorption.111'

     In this discussion only scrubbers have been considered as a part of the
demonstrated technology.

     Wet scrubbing  combines the ability to remove matter from gas streams by
impaction of the particulates on  the surface of liquid droplets with the ability
to absorb gaseous constituents into the liquid phase. Both of these functions
are limited by the characteristics of the scrubbing liquor, the properties of the
materials  to  be removed and  sometimes by  characteristics of the two in
combination. In this case, the chemistry of the reactions between gypsum pond
water and the fluorine-containing  gases  discharged from  the WPPA plant
reactor produce a gelatinous precipitate which  tends to plug the packing in
scrubbers and limits the types of scrubbing equipment applicable.

     The basic chemistry of the compounds of fluorine, silicon and water must
38

-------
                           TABLE 10
            ESTIMATED ABATEMENT  REQUIREMENTS
                     UNDER  FLORIDA LAW
                   (for 500 T/D P205 WPPA plant)
Gas Flow, SCFM

Fluorine Content
  mg/SCF
  ppm
  Ib/hr

Required Discharge
  mg/SCF
  ppm
  Ib/hr

Efficiency Required, %
                             Digester    Filter
 99.80
                     Sumps     Total
99.1
85
25,000    15,000     25,000     65,000
25
1,050
80
0.05*
2.15
0.16
5.5
231
11
0.05*
2.15
0.10
0.3
13
1
0.05*
2.15
0.16
—

99
0.05*
2.15
0.42
99.58
* Assumed equilibrium limited in scrubbing system.
                                                              39

-------
 be  considered in order to characterize the application. In the reactor the
 fluorine contained in the fluorapatite or fluorspar goes into solution according
 to one or more of the following reactions:
CaF2(s) +  H2S04(1) + CaS04(s)  + 2HF(1)           (10)

     2HF(1)  + SiF4(1) «- + H2SiF6(1)                 (11)
or
A liquid vapor  equilibrium is set  up between  the reactants  in equation 11
above, which may be regarded  as the reverse of equation 12.

                      H2SiF6(1)  +2HF +  +  SiF4  +                 (12)

     High temperature tends  to drive the reaction to  the  right, increasing the
vapor  pressure of both  HF and SiF4, and  tending  to  increase the relative
significance of silicon tetrafluoride as the fluorine-containing species. These
vapor pressures set a lower limit of concentration in the gas phase leaving the
scrubber.  Although vapor pressure data for both HF and SiF4 is available for
the pure compounds, relatively little data is available in  the literature on the
vapor  pressures  of the two in water solutions. One  Russian  paper'1 2)  does
quote vapor pressures of both HF and SiF4 and these are used throughout the
remainder of this discussion.

    Table 11 gives a conversion of the vapor  pressure data to equilibrium ppm
of SiF4 and HF at various concentrations of H2SiFg in the liquid phase. The
last column in Table 9 gives  the concentration of total fluorine in ppm F at
50° C.

     Table 12 contains similar conversions for temperatures of 60 and 70°C.
Table 11 data are plotted  in Figure 5, which shows the distribution between
fluorine vapor in equilibrium with acidic water at various temperatures. Figure
6 plots the total fluorine in the vapor with temperature as a parameter. Figure
7 is a cross plot of the data in Figure 6.

     In addition  to the reactions given,  hydrolysis of SiF4 occurs when the
concentration of this  component  is higher  than the  equilibrium values,
according to

                   3SiF4 +  4H20 + Si(OH)4 +  2H2SiF6             (13)
40

-------
                             TABLE 11


          CALCULATED CONCENTRATIONS OF  SiF4 AND

                           HF AT  50°C
  wt%         mmHg	    ppm        ppm        SiF4      Total
H2SiF6      HF       SiF4       HF        SiF4       as ppm F    ppm F
 0.105     .0015      .0001      2.0         .1         0.4        2.4

 0.55      .0018      .0002      2.4         .26        1.44       3.8

 1.00      .0023      .0002      3.0         .26        1.44       4.4

 2.64      .0030      .0003      4.0         .4         1.58       5.6

 5.05*     .0050      .0004      6.6        0.5         2.10       8.7

 5.05*     .0045      .0003      5.9        0.4         1.58       7.6

 7.47*     .0045      .0011      5.9        1.4         5.80      11.7

 7.47*     .0047      .0013      6.2        1.7         6.85      13.1

 9.55      .0055      .0012      7.2        1.6         6.31      13.5

11.715     .0065      .0020      8.5        2.6        10.55      19.1



*Two experimental values were obtained at these concentrations.
                                                                41

-------
42

-------
                            TABLE  12


         CALCULATED  CONCENTRATIONS OF  FLUORINE

                        IN  VAPOR PHASE

                        AT60°C AND70°C
             60°C                              70°C
             ppm                               ppm
 Wt.%             4~x              Wt.%
H2SiFg    HF     SiF4     Total    H2SiFg    HF   as ppm F   Total F

  .105    2.24     1.58     3.82

  .55     3.30     1.05     4.35     0.55     6.58     2.64     7.22

  .55     2.77     1.58     4.35     1.09     9.50     4.21    13.71

 1.00     5.00     2.10     7.10     2.61     9.60     5.80    15.40

 2.61     7.65     1.58     9.23     5.05    14.60     6.31    20.91

 2.61     6.71     3.70    10.41     5.05    14.10     6.31    20.41

 5.05    10.9      3.16    14.06     7.47    15.80    17.90    33.70

 5.05     9.75     2.64    12.39     9.55    18.30    24.7     43.0

 5.05    11.45     4.75    16.20    11.715   31.5     54.2     85.7

 7.47     7.76     5.80    13.56    14.48    52.0    156.5    208.5

 7.47    11.45    13.70    25.15

 9.55    10.8     14.75    25.55

11.715   13.0     21.6     34.6

14.48    28.0     55.5     83.5
                                                               43

-------
                       FIGURE 5




             CONTRIBUTION OF HF AND SiF4 TO




         VAPOR PHASE FLUORINE CONTENT AT 50°C
                                                      IO
       CONCETMTRATION IN LIQUOR V/T.
44

-------
              FIGURE 6
CONCENTRATIONS OF FLUORINE IN VAPOR
        OVER H2SiF6 SOLUTIONS
                   4.          ©
CONCENTRATION IN LIQUOR WT;
                                              10
H»S-i.Ffi
                                                 45

-------
1-4-
 100
   46
                         FIGURE 7
          CONCENTRATION OF  FLUORINE IN VAPOR OVER
              H2SiF6 SOLUTIONS VS. TEMPERATURE
              WEIGHT %.  H2S-i-FG)  2«
110
\SO       130       \40



  TEMPERATURE   °F
                                                    rso
                                                   I <£>O

-------
     This reaction tends to occur as the temperature of a gas stream is reduced
in the presence of water, and leads to the formation of gelatinous deposits of
polymeric silica which tend to plug scrubber packings. This problem limits the
use of conventional packed countercurrent absorbers in this service, as well as
other contacting  devices which have small gas passages which might plug up.
The remaining types of scrubbers which  are  likely  to perform well in this
service are

          (1)  Spray towers

          (2)  Wet cyclonic scrubbers

          (3)  Venturi scrubbers

          (4)  Concurrent packed absorbers

          (5)  Cross-flow packed absorbers

     Spray  towers are not  capable  of  the  high  efficiencies  required  for
compliance  with  present  regulations.  They  may,  however,  be  useful  as
pre-contactors to cool the gas  stream  and remove  fluorine at relatively high
concentration levels. They have relatively little pressure drop and can be used
to  bring large volumes of pond water  into contact with the digester gas to
reduce the temperature and improve the absorption equilibrium.

     Wet cyclones are also limited  in efficiency, but may be used as precoolers.
They have a higher pressure drop requirement at high liquid flows than do the
spray chambers.

     Venturi scrubbers  can bring about effective contact and gas absorption
when sufficient energy  is imparted to the gas to atomize the scrubbing liquor
and create very small  droplets. The contact time in a Venturi is very short, and
it  has been  found that the power requirements at a given  level of  fluorine
absorption are high as compared with packed scrubbers.'1 2'

     Countercurrent scrubbers have an inherent advantage over concurrent or
cross-flow scrubbers for gas absorption applications where the concentration of
contaminant leaving the scrubber  approaches equilibrium with the scrubbing
liquor. This advantage is most clearly explained by reference to Figure 8.

     Here the concentration of contaminant in the gas phase is plotted as a
function of position in the scrubber. YI represents the inlet concentration and
                                                                      47

-------
Y2  the  outlet concentration.  In  a counter-current scrubber,  Figure  8a, the
liquor contains some of the contaminant and has a composition such that gas in
equilibrium with it would have a concentration \i^ at the gas outlet, and y^' at
the gas  inlet. The difference between y  and y' at any point  in  the scrubber is
the absorption driving force.

     The counter-current scrubber has the highest potential removal efficiency,
because it contacts the gas leaving the  scrubber with the cleanest scrubbing
liquor.

     The concurrent scrubber does just the opposite and tends to bring the
discharge gas into  equilibrium with the most contaminated liquor. However,
the co-current  scrubbers  are considerably  less prone to plugging with solids
than the counter-current, and also require less gas pressure drop to operate.

     Both  plugging  potential  and  bringing  about a  close  approach  to
equilibrium are important in the WPPA application, and a compromise between
the efficiency of the counter-current and  the  mechanical  advantages of the
co-current scrubber is reached  in the cross-flow packed scrubber illustrated by
Figure 8c.

     This  type  of  scrubber  has been  widely  used,  either  alone  or  in
combination with spray towers, Venturis, or wet cyclonics in phosphoric acid
plants. Figure  9 is a  sketch of a cross-flow  packed scrubber.'1 4) Combination
scrubbers, treating gases from all the sources in the WPPA plant have also been
used, as shown in Figure 10.(4)

     In  this  discussion,  the use  of  a  cross-flow  packed   scrubber will be
considered as the principal contacting device, either alone or  preceded by a
scrubber-cooler.
                      CHEMICAL REQUIREMENTS

     The efficiency which can be obtained by a cross-flow scrubber is limited
by the pond water composition if this is used alone as the scrubbing medium.
In addition, the "pick-up" of fluorine as the water passes through the scrubber
is of importance in setting the minimum concentration attainable.

     For the case  of a 500 T/D  plant as illustrated in Table 10,the required
outlet  concentration is about 2.15 ppm F  (this  is approximate because the
scrubber outlet gas flow will be slightly  different than the inlet flow on which
48

-------
                               FIGURE 8
                     COMPARISON OF SCRUBBER TYPES
  MOU

IN VAPOR
        0-.  COUNTER  CURRENT
                SCRUBBER
CON-CUR RE NT
   SCRUBBER
          C.  CROSS ri_OW
               SCRUBBER
                                                            49

-------
                                       CROSS-FLOW
                                    PACKED SCRUBBER

Capacity
ACFM
T = 70' F.
2.100
4,000
5,900
8,000
10,000
12,000
13.800
16,300
18,000
20,500
22,000
"24,300
26.000
28,500
30,000
32.000
"34.000 "
36,000
38.000
40.000
42,000
44,000
46.300
48.500
50,000


Liquid
Rale
CPM
8- 16
11-22
14-28
17-34
19-38
21 42
22-44
24 -48
25-50
26-5?
28 56
29-58
30-60
31-62
32-64
33-66
"36-72
36-72
38 - 76
38-76
40-80
40-80
42-84
42-84
43-86

Minimum
Overall
Length
0
6'
7
7'
7-
7-6"
7-6"
8'
8-
8 6"
9'
9'
9'
9' -6
10'
9' -6"
10'
9-6'
10'
9'-6-
10'
10'
10-6"
10'
10' -6"
10-6"


Overall
Width
W
2-
2' - 9"
3-6"
4-3
4 -9"
5' j
5 - 6"
6
6 -3
6 t,
7
7-3'
7- -6"
7 -9"
8'
8 - 3
9'
9
9 6"
9 6
10'
10'
10 6"
10' 6
10' 9'


Overall
Height
H
4'
5'
5-6
6
6'-6~
7
7 6"
8
8 -6'
9r
9'
9' -6'
9' - 9-
H 3
10 6
10 9"
1( 6'
1
1
116
116
12'
1?
\?' 6



Base To
C/L Inlet
E
1-9
T 3
2' -6
,' 9
3
3 3
< 6'
39-
4
4' - 3-
43'
4'-6-
4- 8"
4'- 10'
5
5'-2~
5
53-
•.' 3~
5 -6
6'
6 -3'
6-3-
6 6-
6' 6

Inlet
Outlet
Dimensions
A>B
? x 2 6
? 9'x3-6
3 6' x 4
4 3 x 4 ()"
4 9-<5'
53 x 5 6"
5-6x6
6 x6 6
6 3' x 7
6'-6' x 7'-6-
7'x 7'-6'
7-3" x 8'
7-6' x8'3"
79x8-9
8 x9'
8-3 x 9'-3"
9' x 9'
9' » 9' 6
9' 6x9-6"
9 6 x 10
10 » 10'
10' x 10'-6'
10' 6'x 10'6-
10 6' x 11-
10 9 x 1 1'


Duct
Dia.
C
1?
16'
20
24
?6'
30'
32
36'
36'
40'
40
42"
42"
44"
48"
48'
48"
48'
54"
54"
54"
54"
60
60"
60"


Shipping
Weight
(Lbs.)
525
800
1.050
1.275
1,550
1 ,800
2,050
2.350
2.600
2.900
3,100
3.300
3.600
3.900
4,000
4,280
4,400
4,700
4,850
5,100
5,300
5.650
5.800
6,100
6,200


Operating
Weight
(Us.)
1.100
1 600
2,100
2600
3.100
3,500
3,900
4,400
4,800
5.250
5.600
6.000
6.400
6,900
7,100
7,500
7,900
8,300
8,600
8,950
9.350
9.750
10100
10,500
10700

       NOTE: 1. Minimum base length (L) is 4 ft. tor all units.
            2. All dimensions are approximate.
            3. Pressure drop is approximately 0.4 in. W.C. per foot of packed depth.
            4. Final dimensions will vary to meet specific operating conditions.
                                     FIGURE  9

              SKETCH OF  A  CROSS-FLOW  PACKED SCRUBBER
50

-------
                                          POND
                                         WATER
                                                           POND
                                                           WATER
DISCHARGE
    TO
ATMOSPHERE
  GAS
  FROM
REACTOR
                                     FIGURE 10

                               COMBINATION SCRUBBER
                                 FOR WPPA PROCESS
                                                                  51

-------
this value was based).  In order to achieve low  level, it is necessary that the
water entering the scrubber have an equilibrium  vapor pressure (y') lower than
this value.

     Table 13  lists a number of calculated concentrations  in equilibrium with
water of various  fluosilicic acid contents and temperatures. A typical  pond
water is likely to contain between 0.2 and  1.5 wt.% h^SiFg and average around
80° F. This is  low enough to bring about acceptable scrubbing (provided the
scrubber is large enough) as long as the concentration is below about 1.0 wt.%
and the temperature in the scrubber is below 100°F. At 120°F, the pond water
would have to  be near 0.1 wt.% hSiF  for satisfactory performance.
     The  degree  to which  the  scrubber  approaches the limit  set  by the
composition and temperature of the pond water is often measured in terms of
the "Number of Transfer Units", or NTU. This is defined as
                NTU  =
                NTU  =
-Y2



 Y1

In
_dy
 v-v'
                                y-i  -
                                    - Y2'
(14)
                              (15)
where the scrubbing liquor is pure water, and the quantity of water flow is
large, Y1' = y2' = 0 and
                NTU =
In

                              (16)
A  scrubber  called upon  to  bring  about a  95%  reduction  in  fluorine
concentration at a gas temperature of 100°F, operating in a range where the
concentrations in equilibrium with the pond water would be negligible, and the
NTU value required would be
                                    Y1
                NTU =
 In
                           In
                           3.0
      0.05 y1
     20
     The operation  of the cross-flow scrubber must be such as to reduce the
concentration to the same range as that found in equilibrium with the pond
water. This requires a great deal of additional contact as illustrated in Table 14.
52

-------
                          TABLE 13
        CONCENTRATION  LIMITS AT SCRUBBER  OUTLET
(Using
                          — Containing Pond Water)
                            ppm F
Temperature
at Scrubber
Discharge, °F
80
100
120
140
0
0
0
0
0
Fluorine*
0.1
0.4
1.0
2.1
3.5
Content
0.5
0.7
1.45
2.7
4.8
of Pond
1.0
0.9
1.8
3.5
6.1
Water, Wt. «
1.5
1.1
2.3
4.3
7.6
%
2.0
1.3
2.6
5
9
                                  144
*NOTE:  h^SiFg content is approximately ~T7 =  1.26

times fluorine content.
                                                           53

-------
 Here the NTU values required for reaching 0.16 Ib/hr emission of F fora 500
 T/D plant are given  in terms of the pond water composition and temperature.

      In preparing specifications  for scrubbing systems, the  two scrubbing
 efficiencies  specified will,  in effect, be those for  0.5 wt.% fluorine with and
 without a prescrubber.
54

-------
                          TABLE 14
            NTU REQUIRED TO REACH 2.15 ppm F(1)
                 DISCHARGE CONCENTRATION




                        (NTU Units)(2)
Temperature
at Scrubber
Discharge, °F
80
100
120
Fluorine Content of Water from Scrubber, Wt.%
0 0.11 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.28
6.72
10
6.59
7.32
NA
6.72 6.91
8.00 NA
NA NA
7.22
NA
NA
  140              6.2      NA      NA      NA     NA     NA
'"'' Total fluorine as SiF^ and HF, reported as F°





'^'Based on an inlet concentration of 1050  ppm F°.
                                                           55

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

     The preparation of specifications for scrubbing equipment was based on
 the  definition of two hypothetical  WPPA  plants.  The smaller  of the two
 corresponds in size to the 500 T/day example used throughout  this section.
 The larger process was taken as 900 T/day.

     Ventilating air from the digester was presumed to be treated  separately
 from the other effluent gases. This air was taken at 25,000 and 36,000 SCFM
 at the digester, and it was assumed that the gas was 75% saturated  at 140° F.
 This would result in  an adiabatic saturation temperature of about  132°F if
 insufficient cooling water were provided,  and it  would  not be possible  to
 achieve the required  reduction in  fluorine. Therefore, it is  necessary for the
 scrubber  manufacturer to take into account the additional water  requirement
 to  cool  the  gases to approximately  100°F  in order to meet the  efficiency
 requirements.

     The ventilating air usage is not proportional to the plant throughput. For
 this reason, the larger process  may be assumed to require a lower ventilating
 rate per  ton of product than the smaller one. This is likely to pick up fluorine
 at about the same concentration level  as the  small unit and, therefore, have a
 potential for emission per ton of product which  is lower than for a similarly
 designed  small plant. However, for purposes of this specification, a scrubber
 with the same NTU, and presumably the same packing height, was specified so
 as to make scrubber gas flow the only variable between the two specifications.

     In  order to  ascertain the variation  in  cost  with scrubber  size, a low
 efficiency case was specified in which the gas flow through the  reactor was
 reduced  by one-third, and the residual fluorine content  held constant.  This
 results in increasing the allowable concentration of fluorine in the effluent by a
 factor of three and reduces the efficiency requirement for the scrubber. In this
 case, the cost of the abatement system will  be lower, even though the same
 emission level is expected.

     In order to make a reasonable presentation of the cost pattern,  it must be
 presumed that the cost is not  fixed relative  to plant size and total allowable
 emission, but rather varies with design gas flow rate and allowable emission.
 The freedom  to  reduce the ventilation rate through the digester allows the
 process designer to improve the emission potential of the system and at the
 same time to reduce the cost of pollution abatement equipment.
56

-------
                                   TABLE  15


                  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR WET PROCESS

              PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBER


     This  specification describes  a scrubbing system  to serve a Prayon-designed WPPA
facility of the specified size.  The scrubbing system  is  to comprise a cross-flow packed
scrubber of non-plugging design, a fan to overcome the pressure drop through the scrubber
and ductwork, a recirculating pump (if required), a  100 ft.  free-standing stack, and all
interconnecting ductwork.  The scrubber supplier is to furnish the ductwork connecting the
digester to the scrubber, which will be approximately 120 feet long.

     The scrubbing system is intended to serve only the reactor air vent. Other arrangements
will be provided for the filter ventilation and sump vents.

     Pond water is available at 80°F with the following properties:

                                        Design         Min.          Max.
             Pond Water pH              2.0           1.2           2.2
             Temp.,0 F                 80.0         55           88
             S04, wt. %                  0.15         -
                    wt.%                 0.1
                     wt. %               0.63         0.25          1.0
             Fluorine, wt.%              0.5          0.2           0.8

     The scrubber is required to produce the design performance when operating with the
"design" pond water conditions. The scrubber manufacturer shall specify the required water
circulation rate through the scrubber in order to accomplish both cooling of the reactor
effluent gases to 100°F or lower and absorption of fluorine containing gases at the specified
level.

    Materials of construction shall be limited to the following, which shall be selected for
hydrofluoric acid service:

                                        PVC

                                        Rubber (below 160° F)

                                        FRP (Dynel lined)

    No metal parts shall be used where exposure to process gas or pond water may be
significant.
                                                                                57

-------
                                TABLE 16


                OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR  WET PROCESS

         PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT CROSS-FLOW PACKED SCRUBBER
Plant Capacity, Ton/Day P^Og
Acid Strength, Wt. % P^05
     From Digesters
     From Evaporators
Fluorine Content, Wt.  % F
Gas to Scrubbers
     Flow, SCFM
     Flow, DSCFM
     Flow, ACFM
     Temp., °F
     Moisture, Vol. %
     Fluorine^, Ib/hr
     Fluorine^, ppm
     Paniculate, Ib/hr
     Paniculate, gr/SCF
Gas from Scrubbers
     Flow, SCFM
     Flow, DSCFM
     Flow, ACFM
     Temp. ° F
     Moisture, Vol. %
     Fluorine, Ib/hr
     Fluorine, ppm
     Fluorine Removal, Wt. %
Small

   500

    30
    54
    1.5

  B
Large

  900

   30
   54
   1.5

  D
8,333
7,040
9,433
140
15.7
60
2,400
3.6
0.05
7,540
2,040
7,960
100
6.7
0.16
7.1
99.73
25,000
21,050
28,300
140
15.7
80
1,050
10.8
0.05
22,600
21,050
23,700
100
6.7
0.16
2.35
99.80
12,000
10,100
13,533
140
15.7
86.6
2,400
5.2
0.05
10,800
10,100
11,000
100
6.7
0.29
8.9
99.66
36,000
30,300
40,600
140
15.7
115
1,050
15.5
0.05
32,500
30,300
34,400
100
6.7
0.29
2.95
99.75
(1' Total Fluorine reported as F ~.
58

-------
Paniculate, Ib/hr                  0.032        0.097          0.46           1.4
Paniculate, gr/SCF                 0.005        0.005         0.005        0.005
Paniculate Removal, Wt.  %(5)        91.1         91.1          91.1         91.1
Estimated y',ppm                   1.4           1.4           1.4           1.4
Estimated NTU required             5.92(3)       7.05(4>       5.75(3)       6.50(2-4)
 <1 '/f is not expected that this paniculate removal specification will influence the scrubber
 design.

 ^Please quote a scrubber with the same packing depth and NTU as for the "small" unit —
 i.e. 7.05 NTU.
 c\\
 1  These should be quoted on the basis of a rounded off NTU value of 6. Please see the
 supplementary scrubber price sheet attached.

 (4) These should be quoted on the basis of a rounded off NTU value of 7.5.
 (5)  Total fluorine reported as F °.
                                                                                  59

-------
                       TABLE 17

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
      FOR WET SCRUBBERS  FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr, Fluorine
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/tir, Fluorine
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(!) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
One-third Gas Flow
Small

9,433
140
8,333
15.7

2,400
60

7,960
100
7,540
6.7

7.1
0.16
99.73
8,370
4,357
2,240
2,037
— —


—

25,832
1,500
2,355


4,812
— —
3,300


_ _
710
1,475
6,900
38,559
Large

13,533
140
12,000
15.7

2,400
86.6

11,000
100
10,800
6.7

8.9
0.29
99.66
9,685
5,223
3,066
2,067
	


__

28,450
1,750
2,417


5,140

3,750


_ _
710
1,475
8,000
43,358
Normal Gas Flow
Small

28,300
140
25,000
15.7

1,050
80

23,700
100
22,600
6.7

2.35
0.16
99.66
17,703
8,533
4,886
3,495



—

36,270
2,000
3,000


7,285

4,575


__
710
1,475
9,150
62,506
Large

40,600
140
36,000
15.7

1,050
115

34,400
100
32,500
6.7

2.95
0.29
99.75
21,576
9,473
5,993
3,310



__

40,865
2,250
3,125


8,025

4,925


_ _
710
1,475
10,250
71,914
60

-------
                                    FIGURE  11
     500000
     100000
CO
cc.
o
Q


te
o
o
0.
<
o
      10000
       1000
                        CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                             FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS




















































TURNKEY




COLLECTOR
PLUS AUXILIARIES


COLL








ECTOR ONLY '
































ii

tf
f'li
if
















•Vv
f

$
$\
T
















;!i


'$
•f.

















a


t
4















ji
.vrt^7
p^"

J
o
P'






—







-j
^*


^
^
J






(N
-- iy
(L
ASS R
5.
~ I






#^'



8^
fHfr













































































































































ORMAL GAS FLOW RANGE
1EDIUM EMISSION LEVEL)
3 NORMAL GAS FLOW RANGE
.OW EMISSION)
ANGE OF PRICES FOR
5 TO 7 NTU
I I I l l 1
        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
                                                                 61

-------
                            TABLE 18

            CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
           OF SCRUBBERS FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS
    Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 2

                       Capital Cost = $17,702
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
          Capital Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
 $16,663
   15,401
   12,930
   10,262
 $18,741
   20,004
   22,474
   25,142
                       Capital Cost = $21,576
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
Lower Limit

 $20,559
   19,323
   16,905
   14,293
Upper Limit

 $22,593
  23,828
  26,246
  28,858
62

-------
                                      FIGURE 12
                        CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                       OF SCRUBBERS FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS
     500000
     100000
CO
DC
o
Q


te
o
o
_l
<
K
Q.

o
      10000
       1000
       95% -

       ,75%~

     MEAN

        75%


        95%
                   •;r

NORMAL GAS FLOW RANGE

   (medium emission level)
    10000


GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                            100000
                  300000
                                                                 63

-------
                           TABLE  19

            CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR  CAPITAL  COST
     OF INSTALLED SCRUBBERS FOR WPPA  PROCESS PLANTS
    Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 2

                      Installed Cost = $62,506
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
         Installed Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
 $59,227
  55,244
  47,449
  39,029
 $65,785
   69,767
   77,563
   85,982
                      Installed Cost = $71,914
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
Lower Limit

 $71,609
  71,238
  70,513
  69,730
Upper Limit

 $72,219
  75,589
  73,314
  74,097
64

-------
                               FIGURE 13
                  CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
           OF  INSTALLED SCRUBBERS FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS
500000.
100000
CO
DC
_i
_i
O
Q
te
O
0
51
0
10000
1000

















































































































































































<

M
















35%
^^ ^


T /
/
9
















K
!























































NORMAL GAS FLOW RANGE
(medium emission level)









































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                          65

-------
                                                TABLE 20


                              ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS
O)
O)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr


$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal
$.05/M gal

One-third Gas Flow
Small

$ 854
1,920
75
850
850
3,703
3,856
7,559
Large

$1.504
2,200
100
1,400
1,400
5,209
4,336
9,545
Normal Gas Flow
Small

$ 2,404
3,105
150
2,770
2,770
8,387
6,251
14,638
Large

$ 4,204
3,415
200
4,350
4,350
12,182
7,191
19,373

-------
                                     FIGURE 14
                         ANNUAL COST FOR WET SCRUBBERS

                             FOR WPPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)
cc
o
Q
8
100000
10000
1000








































































































4


4

















>


f
*

















f


s
p
















/



/
















u



L
r















X
r
j;
x^
x^
x^
















X
>
_x
r


















X
f
^

















































































TOTAL COST
(OPERATING COST PLUS
CAPITAL CHARGES)
(









DPE









.R









A-









n









N









G COST




















1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                             67

-------
SUPERPHOSPHORIC  ACID

     Superphosphoric acid (SPA) is a product of further dehydration of 54%
P20g phosphoric acid.  It is useful in the manufacture of high quality fertilizers,
and in particular liquid  fertilizers.

     Because the further dehydration of phosphoric acid drives off most of the
remaining fluorine, super phosphoric acid is also prepared as an intermediate in
the production of low-fluorine content phosphoric acid or fertilizers.

     Ordinarily,  superphosphoric acid is prepared  at concentrations  in the
range of  72% P2^5  which corresponds  to approximately  100%  HgPO^
However,  the product is not the  pure  orthophosphoric  acid but a  complex
mixture of ortho, pyro, tri and meta phosphoric acid forms.'21
                        PROCESS DESCRIPTION

     Phosphoric acid  of about 54 wt.% P2C>5  is charged to the process as
shown in  Figure 15. Depending on the pretreatment of the 54% acid prior to
storage, and on the intended use of the SPA, further centrifugation or settling
for the removal of solids may be employed. The presence of solids in the SPA is
considerably more objectionable than  in the ortho acid, especially if SPA is to
be used in the manufacture of liquid fertilizers.(6)

     The  54%  acid is pumped into the  vacuum flash evaporator circulating
stream before  the heat exchanger and admixed with hot circulating acid. The
mixture is circulated  by gravity, using the density  differential  of the boiling
acid  between  the  riser  and the relatively cool acid in the return leg as the
driving force. The partially vaporized mixture is discharged into the vacuum
flash vessel where steam,  Sip4 and HF are disengaged from the concentrated
acid. The  liquid phase collects  in the flash vessel and  flows by gravity down the
return  leg. Part of the liquid is drawn  off at this point to the  product cooling
tank and part is recycled to the heat exchanger.

     The  method  of heating  and  vaporizing varies  considerably from one
process design  to another. The vacuum flash evaporator may be replaced by a
falling-film evaporator,  in which  the  heat transfer  and phase separation are
accomplished  in  a single vessel,  or by  a  non-recirculated single-stage  flash
process. The  configuration of  the  vaporizer   is not as  important as the
down-stream equipment from an air pollution control standpoint.'6'
68

-------
                        VACUUM
                         FLASH.
                    EVAPORATOR
               DOWTMERM
                  HEAT
             EXCHANGER
 ^ PHOSPHORIC
  ACID
STORAGE
n
                     HEATED
                   DOW THERM
                           RETURN TO
                      DOWTHERM HEATER
                                                        -PRODUCT
                                                          COOLER
                                                                        JET  EJECTORS
                                                                         STEAM      STEAM
                                                                                                                                        POND  WATER
                                                         COVERED
                                                          HO T WELL
                                                                                                                    RETURN
                                                                                                                       TO
                                                                                                                      POND
                                                                                                                                           SUPER PHOSPHOR 1C
                                                                                                                                            ACID  PRODUCT
                                COOL I NO
                                WATER
                                                                           FIGURE  15
                                                                 SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM  FOR
                                                         VACUUM  FLASH SUPERPHOSPHORIC ACID PROCESS
                                                                                                                                                                    69

-------
     In  several existing plants,  the  vaporization  is accomplished  by direct
contact  of hot combustion gases with the phosphoric acid in an evaporation
chamber.  This process, described  as the "submerged combustion process"
differed widely from that described here. One of the principal draw-backs of
the process was the substantial  volume  of effluent  gases contaminated with
fluorine. This  problem has contributed to  the reduced  popularity of the
submerged combustion  process.

     The  steam, acid fumes and non-condensable gases discharged from the
vacuum flash evaporator are cooled in a barometric condenser by circulating
pond water,  and most of the steam and fluorine-containing compounds are
removed from  the  barometric with  the  water for return to the pond. It  is
probable that the principal form  of the fluorine compounds at the barometric
condenser  inlet is  HF, and  that  contact with  the pond  water causes an
equilibration between the HF and SiF4, which is the principal gaseous fluorine
compound leaving with  the barometric condenser gaseous effluent.181

     The barometric condenser is likely  to operate at a high temperature  —
130-160° F and the fluorine content  of the steam-acid vapors discharged into
the condenser will be on the order of:

              wt. F         Fluorine removed from acid
              wt.  H20      Water removed from acid

              wt.  F         1  •  (0.015-0.003)       0.012   . _,_ Ib
                                                           = 0.048
              wt.  H20      1  •  (0.25 - 0.00)*       0.25           Ib H20

or nearly 5% fluorine. Condensation of this material in a surface condenser
would  produce high concentrations of fluorine  in the  non-condensable gas
phase.  However, the use of a large volume of pond water to condense the steam
provides  for dilution of the  liquid-phase fluorine content to a level closer to
that  of the pond  water  than the calculated condensate concentration. The
concentration of fluorine discharged from the barometrics can be presumed to
be something in excess of the concentration in equilibrium with pond water at
the barometric condenser operating temperature.
'Water removed from acid in SPA process is based on:
              54%  P2O5  =  74.5% acid,  25.5% water
              72%  P2O5  =  100% acid,  0% water
                                                                     71

-------
     One or  two  stages of  steam-jet  ejectors  may  be  used  to pump
non-condensable gases and residual steam out of the barometric condenser and
up to  atmospheric  pressure.  Each  steam-jet  ejector is  equipped  with  a
barometric condenser to condense the steam  used  for motive power and the
residual steam present at the inlet.

     In  the  flow  scheme illustrated in  Figure 15,  it is  apparent that the
non-condensables entering the  system, steam  load from the final barometric,
and the fluorine compounds which contaminate the combination of these two
constitute  the only  process emission source  in the SPA  plant. Two  other
sources  are  usually  piped into the same emission  control  device as the
barometric condenser vent. These are:

     (1)  the  hotwells into which  the  discharge of  cooling water from the
         barometrics and  product coolers flows, and from which pumps for
         return of the cooling water to the gypsum pond take suction.

     (2)  the cooling  tank.

Neither of these can be considered a process source in the ordinary use of the
term, because there is no gas generation or air usage required by the process.  In
the case  of the hotwells, it is a  matter of convenience that these are allowed  to
"breathe" through  relatively loose-fitting covers which eliminate the need for
pressure  controls to prevent flashing of water at the return  pump suction, and
allow for easy access  for cleanout and maintenance of the hotwell. Air leakage
through  the covers  is  likely to provide  the main gas source to the pollution
abatement device.

     The hot liquid effluent from the flash evaporator is likely to be cooled  in
a tank with  cooling coils or surfaces in it. This is because the scaling properties
of the acid make it difficult to  use shell-and-tube coolers. A cooler-surge tank
of this type requires  a vent to  accommodate changes in the liquid level,  even
though the gas flow entering the tank on decreases in level ought to just equal
the gas flow leaving as the level  increases. A  vapor-tight surge system could
provide  for intermittant  breathing of  the tank without any  net gas  flow.
However, such a system would be costly to build  and maintain,  and would
offer  little  advantage over simply venting the tank into the inlet of the
condenser vent scrubber.

    The air pollution control device shown in Figure 15 as a Venturi scrubber
followed by a packed scrubbing section which serves as a gas absorber and mist
eliminator,  uses pond  water to provide  final  cleanup of the non-condensable
72

-------
gases and air leakage into the system before discharge to the atmosphere. This
gas stream is  likely to  be quite  small,  and can be treated  by any  of  the
scrubbing  devices which can handle small volumes of gas and do an effective
job of collecting aerosols and gaseous fluorides. A water-induced Venturi, or a
conventional Venturi-fan combination as  shown, are the most commonly used.
                   CHEMISTRY  OF  THE  PROCESS

     "Phosphoric acid" may be considered as a dilute form of orthophosphoric
acid:121

              392 Ib   =  284 Ib + 108 Ib

              4H3PO4 = P401Q • 6H20.                           (17)

     At 54% PoOc by weight, the concentration of orthophosphoric acid in
                     392
water solution is 54 X 234 = 74.5.  That is, a  100 pound sample of 54% ?2^^
acid may be assumed to contain 74.5 pounds of orthophosphoric acid plus 25.5
pounds of water.

     More concentrated  acids can be produced  either by contacting  the
ordinary phosphoric acid with anhydrous P2^5 or by evaporation of some of
the water. In either  case, removal of  the free water alone would limit  the
concentration to 72.5% P2C>5 which corresponds to 100% HgPO^.

     It is possible to further dehydrate the orthophosphoric acid by removal of
some  of the molecular water, which converts the acid to  forms other than
ortho. The forms known to exist'2' are listed in Table 21. The ions formed by
these acids are shown schematically in Figure 16.

     Actually  the  dehydrated  ortho  acid  species  are   mixed  at  most
concentrations  above  that for pure ortho,  and form increasingly  viscous
solutions  as water   is  removed.  Although  vaporization  of   water  from
concentrated acid can  produce semi-solid syrupy products, pure solid forms of
the acids cannot be obtained by this procedure. Pure  ortho and phosphoric
acids  have been prepared by chemical synthesis. Orthophosphoric acid  is a
white solid  with a  melting point of 42.3°C, and  orthophosphoric  acid
hemi-hydrate, 2H3P04 •  H^O, melts at 29.35°C. Crystalline pyrophosphoric
acid melts at about 61°C.(2)

     In order to obtain the concentrated polyacid forms, it is necessary to drive
                                                                    73

-------
                             TABLE 21
                    FORMS OF PHOSPHORIC ACID
            NAME
  FORMULA
  Orthophosphoric
        or
  Phosphoric Acid
                                             or
  H3P04
                                                         74.5
  Pyrophosphoric
P4H1fJ:4H20
                                             or
                                         H4P207
                  80
  Triphosphoric
        or
  Tripolysphosphoric Acid
P4H10:13° H20
                                             or
  H5P3°10
                  82.5
  Metaphosphoric Acid
        or
  Tetrapolyphosphoric Acid
P4H1rj:2H20
                                            or
    HPOi
                                                         88.7
74

-------
                         FIGURE 16
               SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION  OF
                POLYPHOSPHORIC ACID FORMS
        H
        0
H :  O :  P :  0 :  H
      :  0 :
                     Orthophosphoric acid
                         0
                     0 :  P   :  0
                         0
                         -3
               + 3hT
                                             (18)
        H
      :  0 :
H
H:  0:  P:  0: P: 0: H

  :  O :    :  0 :
        H
H
H
      :  O :    : O :    :  0 :
H:  0:  P:  0: P: 0: P:  O:  H
      :  0 :    : 0 :    :  0 :
             Pyrophosphoric acid

                 :  0 :    :  0 :

             : 0 :  P :  0 :  P   :  0 :

                 :  0 :    :  0 :
                                           -4
                                               4hT  (19)
Metaphosphoric acid
                         :  O :    :  O :    : O :
                       O:P:0:P:0:P:0
                         :  0 :    :  0 :    : O :
                                          -5
                                            (20)
                                            + 5HH
                                                            75

-------
off most  of  the  h^SiFg  present in the 54% acid. This gives rise to some
potential for  air pollution, although  most of the fluorine-containing species are
automatically condensed with the water driven from the acid and recondensed
in barometric condensers.  The fact that about 80% of the fluorine is distilled
out  of the  acid  during  the concentration  process  leads to  the  use  of
superphosphoric acid to make low-fluorine orthophosphoric. As the super acid
is diluted, it reverts to the ortho form spontaneously.

     In the  vaporization  process, temperatures  as high as 700-800°F  are
used.'6'  The basic  process is a  simple flash distillation from which a vapor
consisting of  water, SiF^ HF and traces of phosphoric acid is discharged, and a
liquid consisting of mixed phosphoric acids, including:

                       orthophosphoric
                       pyro
                       polyphosphoric
                       tripolyphosphoric
                       tetrapolyphosphoric
                       H2SiF6
                       Impurities

is produced.
              POLLUTION CONTROL  CONSIDERATIONS

     The gas stream leaving the barometric condensers should consist mainly of
the air  absorbed  into  the  phosphoric  acid charge plus air leakage into  the
vacuum section  of the process.  While the absorbed  air flow rate can be
calculated, the leakage  rate cannot, as it depends upon the physical state of the
equipment. For this reason it is customary to base the design of the steam jet
ejectors on an assumed maximum leakage rate, and then to maintain the system
so as to stay within the  design rate. Typical design rates for SPA plants are:

              Plant Capacity                Non-condensable
               T/D P2O5                     SCFM

                  100                           150
                 300                           200
                 500                           250

     The exit gas temperature from the final condenser stage is set by the ratio
76

-------
of cooling water to steam used. Figure 17 is a plot of a temperature vs. ratio for
a particular design. Thus for  a non-condensable gas rate of 200 SCFM and a
ratio of 15/1 cooling water/steam on the last condenser stage, the vent from
the final condenser will have a composition as follows:

                  SCFM      M.W.       Ib/hr            mo I %

non-condensables  200        28.8         942           75.8
water vapor          64        18           182           24.2
HF                 -         20              .00083      1  ppm
SiF4                -         104             .0085      2 ppm
Total fluorine        -          -              .008      ~ 10 ppm

                  264        24.5       1,024

     For other ratios of  pond water to steam and other non-condensable gas
rates, similar tables could be constructed for purposes of specifying the inlet to
a scrubber for removal of fluorine.

     The  hotwell and  tank  vents   are  also  combinations  of  air  and
steam-HF/SiF4 vapors, where the total volume of gas is set by the design of the
hotwell  covers  and   the composition and  quantity   of  contaminants  is
determined by the outlet temperature from  the barometrics. In  this case, it is
the average temperature of the water used in all of the barometric condensers
(if a combined hotwell is used) rather than the temperature from the last stage.

     The leakage rate may be set by designing the covers to limit the area of
cracks around access ways and  other  openings, and then  by  designing the
ventilating system to  maintain a slight negative pressure inside the enclosure to
induce an inward  leakage velocity on the order of 200  FPM. This requires a
negative pressure on the order of:
                               2

                  AP=   V
                               ;  Y f2P-2.r
                                                .0086 Ib/fe
                           0.05  Xl^l                  2        (2,1
                              2  X 32.2
                                     62 4
                       =   0.0017 X-q^-  =    0.0045 inches w.c.

A hotwell eight feet square with a 1/4 in. crack all around the edge would have
an area of:
                                     1/4         0
                     (8 + 8 + 8 + 8) X ~  = 2/3 ft2.
                                                                     77

-------
                            FIGURE 17
L
0


Id
y
DL
u
u
(A
5
£
z
y
o
o
o
E

y

0
cc
0
CO
    0
    0
    0
    t
    8
ID   ~
    0
    CO
    78
                    CONDENSER TEMPERATURE


                 VS. COOLING WATER/STEAM RATIO


                     (FOR 80°F POND WATER)
                 to
                       20
2>O
                RATIO, COOl-ING WATER TO STEAM, I_B/I_B

-------
     This leakage rate is likely to be overshadowed by the need for an open
access way for maintenance and inspection. This would require about 250 FPM
ventilation rate and  might be as  large as 2'  x 4', which would result in 2000
SCFM inward leakage. This gas flow is likely  to comprise the main gas emission
source  from the process.  It  is relatively arbitrary, in that the designer of the
process  can limit the flow rate to any degree he chooses by careful design of
the enclosure. It is common to install a scrubber of  nominal capacity, on the
order of 2500 SCFM  for this service, regardless of the  size of the plant.

     Paniculate contaminants are  limited  to the liquid aerosols produced by
condensation within  the process,  or by mists formed by mechanical action  in
the evaporator, condensers  or elsewhere. The  direct contact heat exchange
which brings about condensation of the water in the barometric condensers is
not  likely to produce fine particle-size aerosols. The mechanically produced
mists have a large particle size, and can be  removed from the gas stream at very
high efficiency by simple wet scrubbers. The principal problem  is that of
removal of gaseous fluorides and a satisfactory  scrubber for gaseous fluoride
removal will ordinarily be adequate for removal of the paniculate mists.

     In the case where falling film evaporators, spray towers, or other specially
designed evaporators are used  in place of the vacuum flash evaporator,  it may
be possible to generate sub-micron aerosols in the evaporator. For this reason,
it should not be assumed that paniculate emissions can be ignored if an unusual
evaporator is incorporated into the system.
                     GAS CLEANING  EQUIPMENT

     As in the wet process for phosphoric acid manufacture, the SPA process
emissions  are treated exclusively by wet scrubbers. This is due to the need for
gaseous fluorine removal from a wet gas stream, and the ready availability of
scrubbing  liquor from the gypsum pond.

     Three  significant  factors  contribute  to the  frequent selection  of
water-induced Venturi scrubbers for this service:

     1.    The gas flow is very low during normal operation.

     2.    There is likely to be a substantial variation in gas flow with time.

     3.    The water-induced scrubber does not require a fan.
                                                                      79

-------
     The water-induced Venturi scrubber, shown schematically in Figure 18, is
well  suited for small gas flows, but seldom used for gas volumes over 5,000
ACFM.  This  is because it uses large quantities of water — relative to the gas
flow —  to pump  the  gas through the scrubber,  the  inlet  ductwork and  the
discharge stack. Where  the flow is not large, the inefficiency involved in the use
of the water jet is of less importance  than  the mechanical simplicity and
reliability gained by elimination of a fan from the system.

     A second advantage of the water-induced Venturi for this service lies in its
relative  insensitivity to  reductions in gas flow rate.

     Packed  scrubbers  and conventional Venturi  scrubbers  rely upon  the
velocity of the gas passing through the scrubber for the energy required to give
good  contacting of gas  and  liquid. For this reason they are likely to  show
decreasing efficiency if the gas flow drops below 50 or 75 percent of the design
flow rate. The water-induced  Venturi does not rely on the gas flow for motive
power, and will maintain high efficiency  levels at extremely low gas flow rates,
provided the  water supply is not reduced. This is particularly important where
the scrubber is arranged to handle gas leakage into  a system with an  access door
which may be opened periodically.

     The water-induced  Venturi is concurrent and limited to one theoretical
stage and  therefore it  may  be  necessary  to add a packed section in  the
entrainment  separator  vessel which serves to remove  liquid  droplets which
become  entrained  in  the  throat as well as to  provide  for  additional  gas
absorption when the gas flow  rates are the highest.

     The scrubbing requirements  for SPA plants are rather nominal, and other
types of  scrubbers, such  as  cross-flow  packed  units, conventional  Venturi
scrubbers, mobile packed scrubbers and spray towers, each with an  appropriate
fan, are probably acceptable but mechanically more complicated alternatives to
the water-induced  Venturi  in this application. A conventional Venturi scrubber
with a packed gas  absorption section in the entrainment separator is shown in
Figure 19.
80

-------
            FIGURE 18
      SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF
 WATER-INDUCED VENTURI  SCRUBBER
 POND
WATER
                GAS
              OUT LET-
                                   OPTION AU
                                  WATER SUPPLY
                                    FROM POND
                                PACKING
           WATER OUTL-ET
                 TO
         HOTWEL.L. OR SUMP
                                          81

-------
                    SPECIFICATIONS  AND COSTS

     Specifications were  written for a scrubber for this application on the
assumption that the plant size does  not significantly  affect the  size of the
scrubber.  Rather, the requirement that the air leakage into the hot wells into
which the barometric condensers discharge is the main  source of gas, and the
leakage  into  the hot  wells is more  a function of  the  type of  access-way
ventilation required than the size of the plant.

     Similarly, it was assumed that the emissions from hot wells and vents were
nominal, and that a nominal scrubber efficiency would be satisfactory.
82

-------
                       FIGURE 19
                 SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF
                 VENTURI  SCRUBBER WITH
             PACKED ENTRAPMENT SEPARATOR
      POND
     WATER
WATER
  TO
 POND
                 WATER
                   TO
                  POND
                                  WATER
                                  SUPPL-Y
                                   FROM
                                   POND
                                PACKING
t
                                                          STACK
                                                         INDUCED
                                                          DRAFT
                                                           FAN
                                                    83

-------
                                  TABLE  22

                 PROCESS  DESCRIPTION FOR  WET SCRUBBER

                       FOR SPA PROCESS SPECIFICATION

     The scrubber is to serve a 300 T/day Vacuum Evaporation superphosphoric acid plant.
The scrubber is to treat all of the gases discharged from the process vents as follows:

     (1)  Barometric Condenser vents

     (2)  Hotwell vents

     (3)  Hot product cooling tank vent

     The scrubber is to use gypsum pond water with the following characteristics:

                                        Design       Min.          Max.
Pond Water pH
Temperature, °F
SO4,wt.%
P2°5, wt- %
HySiFg, wt. %
Fluorine, wt. %
2.0
80
0.15
0.7
0.63
0.5
1.2
55


0.25
0.2
2.2
88


1.0
0.8
     The scrubber is required to produce the specified performance when operating with
water at "design" conditions. The scrubber manufacturer shall specify the circulation rate
through the scrubber.

     Materials of construction shall be limited to the following, which shall be selected for
hydrofluoric acid service:

         PVC

         Rubber (below 160°F)

         FRP (Dynel lined)

     No metal parts shall be used where exposure to process gas or pond water may be
significant.
84

-------
     Two scrubbers are to be considered as alternatives for this service.
A.   Water-Induced Venturi

     The water-induced Venturi scrubber shall be furnished so as to provide for a negative
pressure of 1/4" w.c. at the inlet to the scrubber when processing gas at the design flow rate.
The scrubber shall be equipped with an entrainment separator and a stub  stack which
extends to approximately 25 feet above grade.

     The scrubber is to be located adjacent to the hotwells, to which it may be connected by
approximately 20 ft. of suitable ductwork, which is to be furnished as a part of the scrubber
installation. The o ther vents will be piped into the hotwell by the piping contractor.
B.   Venturi with Optional Packed Section

     The Venturi scrubber shall be furnished complete with fan, interconnecting ductwork
and 25 ft. discharge stack. The fan shall be sized so as to provide sufficient static head for
overcoming the pressure drop in the scrubber system and inlet ductwork.

     The scrubber is to be located adjacent to the hotwells, to which it may be connected
with 20 ft. of ductwork which is to be furnished as a part of this installation. In addition, an
inlet damper and barometric damper shall be installed in the  ductwork  adjacent to the
scrubber inlet for adjusting the gas flow through the scrubber.
                                                                                  85

-------
                               TABLE  23

               OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR WET SCRUBBER

            FOR SPA PROCESS COMBINED VENTS SPECIFICATION
Plant Capacity, ton/day
Acid Strength, Wt.%P2O5
to Evaporator
from Evaporator
Fluorine Content, Wt.% F
to Evaporator
from Evaporator
300
54
72
1.5
0.4

Scrubber inlet Streams
Source

Flow, ACFM
Temp., °F
Flow, SCFM
Moisture, Vol.%
Flow, DSCFM
Fluorine, ppm
Fluorine, Ib/hr
Barometric
Condenser
287
147.5
250
24
190
10
0.008
Hotwell

2,120
100
2,000
6.7
1,880
5
0.030
Cooling
Chamber
264
100
250
6.7
234
30
0.024
Total to
Scrubber
2,671
105
2,500
7.8
2,304
8.25
0.062
     Scrubber Outlet
       Flow, DSCFM
       Temp., °F
       Moisture, Vol. %
       Flow, SCFM
       Fluorine, ppm
       Fluorine, Ib/hr

       Scrubber Efficiency, %
       Estimated y', ppm
       Estimated NTU requirement
2,304
  100
  6.7
2,470
1.455
0.011

 82.5
  1.4
  5.0
86

-------
87

-------
                                TABLE 24
                 CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS  IN DOLLARS)
                 FOR WATER-INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS
                        FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr , Fluorine
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr, .Fluorine
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
Nominal Efficiency
Small

1,335
105
1,250
7.8

8.25
0.031

1,310
100
1,235
6.7

1.455
0.0055
82.5
6,383








2,467

700*

250*

250*
300*


300*

375*

9,183
Large

2,671
105
2,500
7.8

8.25
0.062

2,620
100
2,470
6.7

1.455
0.011
82.5
8,603








2,673

760*

325*

250*
475*


300*

375*

11,843

Small









































Large









































*Items of installed cost, average of two bidders.  Third bidder did not itemize.

      88

-------
                                FIGURE 20


                 CAPITAL COST FOR WATER INDUCED VENTURI  SCRUBBERS


                               FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)

DC
o
Q


te
o
o
o.

<
O
100000
10000
1000




























































































































































































0



















^^
a*^-^
^^

















*&*•
/>*••
£fa

c





































































































TURN KEY COST
i i i i i . i
COLLECTOR PLUS AUXII
1 i
OLLECTOR COST






























ONLY

















LIARIE








100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                                89

-------
                               TABLE  25

                CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
OF WATER INDUCED VENTURI  SCRUBBERS FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
        Population — 5
           Sample Size — 3

Capital Cost = $6,383
    Conf. Level, %

        50
        75
        90
        95
             Capital Cost; Dollars
    Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
     $5,162
      4,018
      2,258
       630
 $7,602
  8,747
 10,507
 12,135
                          Capital Cost = $8,603
    Conf. Level,

        50
        75
        90
        95
    Lower Limit

     $6,940
      5,381
      2,982
       764
Upper Limit

 $10,265
   11,824
   14,223
   16,442
   90

-------
                                   FIGURE 21

                         CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                        OF WATER INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS

                               FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
     100000
CO
cc
o
D


k
O
o
_l
<
t
a.

O
     10000
      1000
                    90%
                      i

                    75%
                      i  I

                    MEAN
                                                  75%
                                                  90%
    1000


GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                          10000
30000
                                                                  91

-------
                            TABLE 26

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST
            OF WATER  INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS
                    FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
      Population — 5
            Sample Size — 3
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
Installed Cost = $9,182

             Installed Cost, Dollars
    Lower Limit                Upper Limit
     $  7,999
        6,889
        5,181
        3,603
 $10,366
   11,475
   13,183
   14,762
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
                       Installed Cost = $11,843
    Lower Limit
     $10,416
        9,078
        7,019
        5,115
Upper Limit

 $13,270
   14,608
   16,667
   18,570
92

-------
                                 FIGURE 22

                       CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST

                       OF  WATER INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS

                              FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
GO
oc
o
Q


fe
O
O
100000
10000
1000




































































































































































•
1
m

1

















••
*•
*•

^

















3-^^-
y ^^
^-^*
J-*"
?r^
















^^
^r
j€^"

















90'
75^
ME
75^
90°
















y -
70
/o
EA^
/D

4,


















J













































































































































100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                               93

-------
                 TABLE 27
ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
    FOR WATER-INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS
           FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

.011/kw-hr
.25/M gal
.05/M gal

Nominal Efficiency
Small

$ 200
74
442
$ 877
877
1,593
918
$2,511
Large

$ 200
76
540
$1,425
" 1,425
2,241
1,184
$3,425

Small






Large







-------
                                FIGURE 23

                 ANNUAL COST FOR WATER  INDUCED VENTURI SCRUBBERS
                               FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
    100000
oo
DC
o
Q

fe
O
U
     10000
      1000
                                                       TOTAL COST
                                                    (OPERATING COST
                                                  PLUS CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                                 OPERATING COST
    1000

GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                         10000
30000
                                                                95

-------
                               TABLE 28

                 CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN  DOLLARS)
              FOR VENTURI SCRUBBER WITH PACKED SECTION
                        FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr, Fluorine
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr , Fluorine
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
Nominal Efficiency
Small

1,335
105
1,250
7.8

8.25
0.031

1,310
100
1,235
6.7

1.455
.0055
82.5
6,292
4,167
3,100*
800*
500*

	

13,597
2,600*
2,750*


1,500*
1,350*



2,150*

24,056
Large

2,671
105
2,500
7.8

8.25
0.062

2,620
100
2,470
6.7

1.455
.011
82.5
7,742
4,683
3,400*
800*
575*



16,155
2,650*
3,500*
^_

1,750*
1,550*



2,150*

28,580

Small












-

























Large






































*Items of installed cost, average of two bidders.   Third bidder did not  itemize.
     96

-------
                                FIGURE 24




                   CAPITAL COST FOR VENTURI SCRUBBERS

               WITH PACKED SECTION FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
CO

QC
O
Q


te
o
u
Q.
<
o
100000
10000
1000

































































































































































<
_•


_«















^
9&


^















9^^-
fr-^~


_r^*
&~~^
















-&~
-e-

^e-~
















Tl
p











JRIV
C
LUJ











JKE
OL
>AI











!Y
LE
J>













EC
(II













T(
LI













D
A

- COLLECTOR O






















































R
RIES

MLY





























100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                               97

-------
                             TABLE 29

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST OF
            VENTURI SCRUBBERS WITH  PACKED SECTION
                     FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
      Population Size —5               Sample Size — 3

                         Capital Cost = $6,292
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
          Capital Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                Upper Limit
 $5,515
  .4,786
  3,665
  2,629
  $7,069
   7,797
   8,918
   9,954
                         Capital Cost = $7,742
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
Lower Limit

 $6,713
  5,748
  4,264
  2,892
Upper Limit

 $8,770
  9,734
 11,218
 12,591
98

-------
                                FIGURE 25




         CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST OF VENTURI SCRUBBERS

               WITH PACKED SECTION FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)
tr
o
o
8
_i
<
H
E

o
100000
10000
1000






































































































































































•
-1

•
1
















^
^
^

«*
•^














^
Or'**^~ -^
*£7 ^
l^>"_jr- *—
«-^^
^.^
fef^
©•^















• JW
^—

,-w
-•e^















90l
75












/o
%
- MEAI

7!
5%














M



_ 90%













































































































































100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                                99

-------
                              TABLE 30

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST OF
            VENTURI SCRUBBERS  WITH PACKED SECTION
                      FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
      Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                        Installed Cost = $24,055
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
         Installed Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
 $22,423
   20,893
   18,538
   16,361
  $25,687
   27,217
   29,572
   31,749
                        Installed Cost = $28,580
  Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
Lower Limit

 $26,148
  23,868
  20,359
  17,114
Upper Limit

 $31,012
  33,292
  36,801
  40,046
100

-------
                                   FIGURE  26
              CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR  INSTALLED COST OF  VENTURI SCRUBBER



                    WITH PACKED SECTION FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)
cc
o
o

k
8
0.
<
o
100000
10000
1000





































































































































































tf
*
«




















*
*
V



















©, ^^
e- — -
9- —



















.e-*
-e^
^^ «••


















90

m
9C


















%
EAF
%



















M














































































































































100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                                101

-------
                                                TABLE 31

                               ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                FOR VENTURI SCRUBBER WITH PACKED SECTION
                                          FOR  SPA PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Recirculating Pond Water
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr


$.011/kw-hr
$.05/M gal




Nominal Efficiency
Small

$1.227
700

612
610
377

987
3,526
2,406
5,932
Large

$1.227
608

728
1,164
604

1,768
4,331
2,858
7,189
High Efficiency
Small










Large










o
NJ

-------
                                      FIGURE 27




                         ANNUAL COST FOR VENTURI SCRUBBERS


                     WITH PACKED SECTION FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
    100000
CO

oc
o
o


te
o
o
     10000
      1000
                         TOTAL COST


                      (OPERATING COST


                    PLUS CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                                OPERATING COST
    100C



GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                        10000
30000
                                                               103

-------
TRIPLESUPERPHOSPHATE GRANULATION PLANTS

     Triplesuperphosphate  is manufactured by acidulation of phosphate rock
with phosphoric acid. The two  processes in common use differ  in the method
of solidifying and drying the solid product. The older method  discharges the
precipitated  material  onto a slow-moving  belt or den and produces a solid
aggregate of varying particle size. This material is cured for thirty days or more
while the reactions go to completion, and is  sold as run-of-pile (abbreviated
ROP), triplesuperphosphate.

     The den  method of production is being replaced by direct granulation of
the  product  as  it is  formed.  This  discussion  deals exclusively with the
granulation process (GTSP) as it is applied to Florida phosphate operations.
                     .   PROCESS  DESCRIPTION

     Figure 28 is a schematic flow diagram for a typical triplesuperphosphate
granulation plant.11 6)

     Finely ground commercial  rock is charged to the process from a ball or
roller milling and screening operation. The rock is metered onto a belt conveyer
at a fixed weight rate of flow and discharged into a reactor vessel. Thirty-eight
percent ^2®$ phosphoric acid is  charged into the same reactor and formed into
a slurry with the phosphate rock. Ordinarily, this intermediate strength acid is
made by blending concentrated acid  from the vacuum evaporation section of a
phosphoric plant at 54 wt. % ?2^^ strength with 30 wt. % phosphoric acid
taken directly from the digester section of the phosphoric  acid plant. These
two streams are  premixed  in   a combination mixer and  hold  tank  which
provides some surge capacity.

     The slurry is  held and agitated until the reaction is near completion, and
the mixture  overflows into a second reaction chamber where the acidulation
reaction is completed. Both  reactor  vessels are vented through a scrubber or
combination  of  scrubbers to the atmosphere. The slurry  leaving the reactors
contains all of the product material plus additional  free water which will be
vaporized   in the drier. The liquid   reactor effluent  is fed  into a horizontal
mixing vessel called a blunger where it is admixed with a recycled solid material
of smaller size than the desired product granules.

     The blunger serves  to further pulverize  the undersized solids and  mix it
into a paste  with  the  liquid reactor product. This paste is  discharged  into a
104

-------
                                               BL.UIMGER
      BPL.
  GROUND
PHOSPHATE
   ROCK
                                                                                                                      SPRAY
                                                                                                                    CHAMBER
                                                                                                                    SCRUBBER
VENTURI
SCRUBBER
                  REACTORS
                                                                                                                                     WATER
                                                                                                                                      FROM
                                                                                                                                      POND
                                                            WATER
                                                              FROM
                                                              POND
                                                                       CYCLONE
                                                                                                 PRIMARY
                                                                                                      EN
                                                                                                          SECONDARY
                                                                                                           SCREENS
                                                  NATURAL.
                                                    GAS
                                                             DRIER -
                                                          <3RANUL_ATOR
                      SO 9«
                  PHOSPHORIC
                      ACID
 ACID
                                                                                                                          PRODUCT
                                                                                                                          STORAGE
                                                    SPHERICAL.
                                                    GRANULES)
                            PHOSPHORIC
                                ACID
                                                                         FIGURE 28
                                                                    FLOW DIAGRAM FOR
                                                                   TRIPLE SUPERPHOSPHATE
                                                                    GRANULATION PLANT
                                                                      105

-------
granulator-dryer from which water vapor, products of combustion and granular
solid  products  are  discharged. The blunger and  reaction tanks are usually
ventilated through  a common scrubber  and  the  gas  is discharged to the
atmosphere. The dryer is heated by a  direct-fired gas or oil burner. The solid
product leaving the dryer is discharged into a bucket elevator and lifted to a
primary screening device. The coarse material, larger than the desired product
granule size,  is discharged from the screen into a mill which pulverizes it and
drops  it onto a conveyer for  return  to the blunger.  An  intermediate screen
retains materials of  approximately the  desired product size range and drops the
fines  through onto the same  conveyer belt for return  to the  blunger. The
overflow from the product screen is discharged to a secondary screen where a
final separation is made between the  product  material  and  fines.  Again, the
fines are returned to the blunger by the common conveyer belt. The granular
product is transported to a storage building where it is retained for six to eight
days while the "curing" reactions are completed.

     The combustion gas from the granulator-dryer is discharged into a cyclone
where  the  fine  TSP  particles entrained  are separated  and returned to the
blunger by way of a common fines conveyer belt. The gas discharge from the
cyclone is vented to the atmosphere through a scrubbing system which serves
to remove particulate matter, chlorides, and in some cases sulfur dioxide.
                    CHEMISTRY OF THE PROCESS

     The basic chemistry is represented in a superficial way by equation (2) as
follows:

   Ca3 (PO4)2  + 4H3P04 + 3H20  -> 3 CaH4 (P04)2 •  H20           (2)

   Phosphate     Phosphoric Water    Monocalcium Phosphate
   Rock          Acid

This equation is oversimplified both by the omission of the fluorine component
of the f luorapitite rock, and also by the omission of the silica diluent. A better
representation is given in equation (22):
3 [Ca3(P04)2]  CaF2 + 14H3PO4 + HQH20 +IOCaH4 (P04)2 ' H20 + 2HF (22)

Fluorapatite + Phosphoric Acid + Water -^Monocalcium Phosphate -> Hydrofluor-
                                                              ic Acid
                                                                    107

-------
  where the fluorine evolution as HF is indicated.  However, as in the case of the
  wet phosphoric acid manufacture, the chemical equilibrium between HF and
  silicon tetrafluoride is represented by equations (23) and (24):
                    2HF    +     Si02   $    H20      +       SiF4    (23)

           Hydrofluoric Acid +    Silica    +   Water    +        Silicon
                                                            Tetrafluoride

  and

                    SiF4    +     2HF      t      H2SiF6            (24)

                  Silicon    + Hydrofluoric  +   Fluorosalicic
             Tetrafluoride         Acid              Acid

  favors the emission of SiF4 at low temperatures.

      A number of side-reactions take place and produce by-products such as
                                          + H2O
             Ca3 (PO4)2  +    H3P04        +      3Ca HP04  •   2H2O
             Tricalcium    +  Phosphoric     Water   ->-   Calcium       (25)
             Phosphate        Acid                  Metaphosphate

  None of these side reactions are of significance in the consideration of  air
  pollution emissions, however.

                            RAW MATERIALS

      The principal  raw  material  for the process is ground-to-size phosphate
  rock similar to that  used for wet process phosphoric acid manufacture. Figure 2
  indicates the ore benefaction and milling and sizing steps which precede the
  GTSP process.

      Figure 29 shows a flow scheme of  a  phosphate rock  milling operation.
  Granular rock  at about 1/4 inch size is delivered by  rail  or truck from a
  benefaction plant to a loading hopper and  loaded into a storage silo. Rock is
  charged from the silo to a ball mill in which it is ground to 80% through a 100
  mesh screen or finer.'1'

      The mill discharge is conveyed pneumatically  to a centrifugal classifier
  which separates the ground rock according to particle size. The largest fraction,
108

-------
                               STORAGE
                                 SIUO
 BALL. MILJL.
FEED HOPPER
                                                                                                                       CENTRIFUGAL.
                                                                                                                        CL-ASSIFIER
«RANUL_AR
PHOSPHATE
  ROCK—
             BA1_I_ MILL.
             .3OOOOO
             STEEL- PA1  I *»)
                                                                                     AIR
                                  TO
                                MANUFACTURE
      TO
 PHOSPHORIC
     ACID
MANUFACTURE
                                                                       FIGURE 29
                                                               FLOW SCHEME OF 6000 T/D
                                                          PHOSPHATE ROCK MILLING OPERATION
                                                                                                                                                       109

-------
                                 TABLE 32

                 MATERIAL  BALANCE  OF GTSP PROCESS
                            FOR 250 TON/DAY
            Acid Feed               Rock Feed            Product GTSP

P2°5
CaO
F
S03
AI203
Ton/day
175.0
—
4.3
5.6
6.5
Ib/hr
14,600
—
416
460
540
Ton/day
75.0
109.8
8.3
2.6
1.9
Ib/hr
6,250
9,150
685
212
163
Ton/day
250.0
109.8
9.1*
8.1
8.4
Ib/hr
20,850
9,150
800
672
703
Fe203     2.6         218         2.4         205         5.0         422

Other      1.3         108        25.2       2,100        13.7**      1,225**

Water    264.7      22,058         2.3         190       109.9***     9,115***
Total    460.0      38,400       227.5      18,955       515.0      42,937
  *Based on retention of 72.5 of F in solid product after storage.

 **Based on evolution of CO2 and water as from decomposition of carbonates and
   organic matter.

***Product moisture taken at 1 wt.% free hO.
                                                                   111

-------
 greater than 100 mesh, is returned to the mill.

      Each of the ground products is transferred to intermediate storage prior to
 charging to the next process in line.

      Phosphoric acid  makes  up the  only other raw  material used. This is
 obtained by blending 30%  acid and 54% acid, which produces a total acid with
 somewhat more fluorine in it than would be the case were all 54% acid used
 and  blended  with  water. However, no serious error will be introduced in this
 discussion if the composition of 54% acid given in Table 7 is used.

      Table 32  gives  a material balance  for  a hypothetical  process  with a
 production rate of 250 Ton/day P205-  For purposes of preparing this table, it
 was  assumed that  there was no  loss of phosphorus values (i.e.  that particulate
 losses were substantially all returned to the process).

      Several  notations in Table  32 are significant with regard  to air pollution
 emissions. The following approximate fluorine balances were reported values
 by Teller'6) for the POP process and by Chemico11 7> for the GTSP process.

                                                      POP       GTSP
                                                      % of        % of
                                                    Total F    Total F
      Fluorine retained in product                       65        72.5
      Fluorine discharged in reactor - dryer - cooler        33.5      27
      Fluorine discharged in storage                       1.5        0.5
                                                      100.0     100.0

      The "other" materials contained in the acid and rock feed consist of

                    Silicates
                    Carbonates
                    Organ ics

 as reported in the WPPA section of this report.

      As the acidulation process takes place in the  reactor, it is  likely that the
 carbonates and organics  decompose and are  discharged from the reactor and
 dryer vents as CC>2 and water vapor. In addition, some of the fluorine vaporizes
 as SiF  and carries some of the silica out of the system.
112

-------
                          TABLE 33

            MATERIALS EVOLVED AS GASES FROM
            TRIPLESUPERPHOSPHATE MANUFACTURE
                  FOR 250 TON/DAY  PROCESS
Water
    Total
                    Ton/day
159.9
                 Ib/hr
13,370
               SCFM
r
From Acid
From Organics
157.1
2.8
13,133
237
4,600
82
4,682
CO-
    From Carbonates     6.6
    From Organics      13.7

    Total             20.3
                  545
                1,143

                1,688
                  78
                 164

                 242
SiF,
    Fluorine
    Silicon
  3.4
  1.25
  283
  104
    Total
  4.65
  387
 23.5
                                                          113

-------
     Table 33 presents a calculated breakdown of the CC^, water and fluorine
 balances for the reactor and dryer.
                        GASEOUS DISCHARGES

      Four principal emission points are common in GTSP plants:

           1.    The reactor vents

          2.    Blunger vents

          3.    Dryer gas effluent.

          4.    Dust exhaust

      This  study is  concerned  with  assembly of cost information only for the
 dryer vents.  However, some discussion  of the other effluents is included for
 completeness.


                               REACTORS

      A principal source of emissions in the GTSP process is the reactor vessels.
 This is  ventilated  at  relatively high rates  because  of  the  large open  areas
 required for the continuous addition of ground rock. The rate of ventilation
 depends largely on the mechanical design of the reactor, in that there is little
 emission of gas from the reaction.

      For purposes of obtaining cost data, the following gas flows were taken as
 typical of current design practice for the reactor-granulator combination:

                   Ton/day              Gas Flow,
                     P205                SCFM

                     250                15,000
                     500                20,000

      Although the  reaction of the  rock  and acid is strongly exothermic, and
 temperatures as high as 180° F are experienced in the reactor, the temperature
 of the ventilating air leaving the reactor seldom exceeds 140°F. The fluorine
 emission from  the reactor is relatively high, and may reach 25 Ib/ton P0.<6)
114

-------
The gaseous contaminant is  reported to be SiF^  as the HF reacts with the
excess of phosphate rock and is reabsorbed.'61

     For a 250 Ton/day process as illustrated in Tables 32 and 33, the reactor
vent is assumed to contain about 100 mg/SCF fluorine as SiF^ and 15 gr/SCF
particulate rock dust.

     The dryer vent  is a second  significant source of emissions in the GTSP
process. The dryer receives granulated product from the granulator, along with
a large loading of recycled fine material. Recycled solids/net product ratios on
the order of 12/1 are common.  This  limits the  capacity of the dryer for
production of GTSP to a lower value than for  DAP, where recycle/net solids
ratios are on the order of 5/1.

     The dryer is usually operated with counter-current contact between the
flue gas and wet solids. The dryer may be gas or oil fired, and the products of
combustion  are  tempered  by  dilution  with   ambient air to  reduce  the
temperature below 1000° F before contact with  the product. The exhaust gases
from the dryer are again diluted somewhat with ambient air at the dryer outlet
in order to reduce the moisture content and temperature.

     Gas flows for GTSP dryers are likely to approximate those for DAP dryers
handling the same moisture  content. In fact, the  same process equipment is
often used interchangeably for DAP and GTSP  manufacture. In this study, the
gas flows were chosen so as to correspond exactly with the flowing volumes for
DAP processes in order to obtain directly comparable prices.
              POLLUTION CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

     Much of the discussion of pollution control devices for WPPA processes is
also appropriate to the GTSP  process. Gas absorption is of prime concern (the
limitations on fluorine emission under  present Florida law are 0.15 Ib F/ton
PoOc for all process vents, and 0.05 Ib F/ton for  auxiliary equipment and
storage, as given  in Table 9). This requires reduction of the fluorine content to
levels approaching those in equilibrium with gypsum pond water, and also
necessitates the use of scrubbing equipment which is tolerant to deposits of
gelatinous SiO2 formed by reaction of the SiF4 with pond water.

     The scrubber specifications have been  set on  the  basis that the dryer
emission can  produce one-half the  total fluorine  emission allowed under the
Florida  law, or 0.075 Ib/ton  P0. This amounts to  0.075 X 250 = 18.75
                                                                    115

-------
 Ib/day for the smaller of the two plants. The paniculate matter entering the
 scrubber is presumed to be  3.5 wt. % fluorine and  this has been taken into
 account  in allowing a total weight of  18 Ib/day  F. This case is described as a
 "low efficiency"  case  with respect to  fluorine removal.  A  second higher
 efficiency is defined by requiring the fluoride emission reduction to a level half
 as high.

      Particulate emissions from the dryer are high, and an efficient paniculate
 scrubber is required to reduce the particulates to a level comparable to  the
 process weight limitations for particulates in general, or, to a  level near  the
 visible  threshold.  A  concentration   of 0.01   gr/SCF  was  taken  as   an
 approximation to the visible threshold.

      Both  of  the paniculate specifications  require  the  device chosen to  be
 capable of collecting paniculate matter at high efficiency, and doing so without
 plugging with solids. These  circumstances suggest that a  Venturi-cyclonic of
 conventional  design should be chosen as the primary collecting device. The low
 allowable emission of fluorine suggests that the Venturi-cyclonic alone may  not
 be suitable for the complete absorption job.

      Cross-flow or counter  current-flow packed scrubbers, mobile packing
 scrubbers, or  other  gas absorption devices  might be  required as  "tail gas"
 scrubbers following  the Venturi to obtain the  higher  absorption efficiencies
 required.
116

-------
                                   TABLE 34

                    PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR GRANULAR
                    TRIPLESUPERPHOSPHA TE  SPECIF 1C A TION
     This specification describes a Venturi-packed scrubber for paniculate removal and
fluorine absorption service on a GTSP  dryer.  The paniculate removal function is to be
carried out in a Venturi section  of conventional design using gypsum pond water as the
scrubbing medium. Removal of entrained water and  absorption of fluorides  is to be
accomplished in a second scrubbing stage containing a  fixed plastic  packing material. In
addition  to these functions, the scrubber must circulate sufficient pond water to reduce the
temperature of the effluent gas to approximately 100° F in order to reduce the limiting
vapor pressure of fluoride-containing gases.

     Two efficiency levels are specified with respect to fluoride removal. These are to be met
with pond water at the "design" condition specified below:

                                          Design       Min.          Max.

           Pond water ph                    2.0          1.2           2.2
           Temperature, °F                80*         55           88
           S04,wt.%                       0.15
           P^D5,wt.%                      0.1          -            -
           H£iF&\Nt.%                    0.63        0.25          1.0
           Fluorine, wt.%                   0.5         0.2           0.8

     The water flow shall be calculated by the supplier to provide the proper heat balance.

     Materials of construction shall be limited to the following, which shall be specified for
hydrofluoric acid service:

                                       PVC

                                 Rubber-lined steel

                                 FRP (Dyne/ lined)

     No metal parts shall be used where exposure to process gas or pond water is likely to be
significant.
*NOTE:  Pond water average temperatures as high as 90°F are common and would require a
more effective scrubber than specified here.
                                                                               117

-------
Mechanical

     The  scrubber  shall be furnished complete  with  interconnecting ductwork (if any)
between the Venturi section and the packed section. The scrubber shall be equipped with a
pressure regulating device, such as a barometric damper or variable throat mechanism which
shall operate to minimize pressure fluctuations at the dryer.

     A  fan capable of overcoming the pressure  drop across the scrubber stages and all
ductwork  shall be supplied as an auxiliary, and shall be located adjacent to the scrubber. A
separate hotwell,  enclosed to minimize fluorine loss, a return pump, 50 foot high stack and
ductwork  comprise the system.

     The scrubber and all auxiliaries are to be located outside, adjacent to the dryer.
118

-------
                                 TABLE 35

                  OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR GRANULAR
           TRIPLESUPERPHOSPHATE WET SCRUBBER SPECIFICATION
          Plant Capacity, ton/day ^2^
          Plant Capacity, ton/day TSP
          Process Weight, ton/hr

          Gas to Scrubber
               Flow, DSCFM(1)
               Flow, SCFM<1)
               Flow, ACFM^1)
               Temp., °F
               Moisture, vol.%
               Paniculate, Ib/hr
               Paniculate, gr/SCF
               Fluorine F~, ppm
               Fluorine, Ib/hr

          Gas from Scrubber
               Flow, DSCFM
               Flow, SCFM
               Flow, ACFM
                   250
                   515
                    40
                 30,000
                 32,000
                 34,000
                   400
                   825
                    65
30,000
33,800
40,900
180
12.64
116
0.4
195
25
48,000
54,000
65,300
180
12.64
185
0.4
195
40
                 48,000
                 51,200
                 54,000
                                   Mod. Eff.     High Eff.     Mod. Eff.     High Eff.
Temp., °F
Moisture, vol.%
Paniculate, gr/SCF
Paniculate, Ib/hr
Fluorine F~,ppm
Fluorine, Ib/hr

Paniculate efficiency, %
Fluorine efficiency, %
Estimated y'
Estimated NTU (overall)
100
6.47
0.02
5.4
5.2
0.5<2>
100
6.47
0.02
5.4
2.6
0.25^
WO
6.47
0.02
8.8
5.2
0.8<2>
100
6.47
0.02
8.8
2.6

95
98
 1.95
 1.95
95
99
 1.95
 3.55
95
98
 1.95
 1.95
95
99
 1.95
 3.55
(1)   These flows have been modified slightly to correspond to flows for DAP process.

(2)  Based on 1/2 of 0.15 Ib/ton permissible for entire process.

(3)  Based on 1/4 of 0.15 Ib/ton permissible for entire process.
                                                                           119

-------
                               TABLE 36

            ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN  DOLLARS)
              FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Concentration Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr, Particulate
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
(ppm), Fluorine
Ib/hr, Particulate
Cleaning Efficiency, % Fluorine
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
MODERATE EFFICIENCY
Small

40,900
180
33,800
12.64

195
116

34,000
100
32,000
6.47

5.2
5.4
98
36,933
22,800
14,450*
5,050*
2,200*

—

86,197
6,200*
15,250*


16,650*
4,850*
6,250*

730*

4,250*
2,150*
13,750*
145,930
Large

65,300
180
54,000
12.64

195
185

54,000
100
51,200
6.47

5.2
8.8
98
52,827
33,733
25,300*
7,650*
2,750*

__

116,647
8,250*
22,100*


25,675*
8,100*
9,050*

1,185*

5,750*
2,150*
19,950*
203,207
High Efficiency
Small

Same







34,000
100
32,000
6.47

2.6
5.4
99
40,700
23,933
15,050*
6,150*
2,200*

__

90,457
6,200*
16,100*


16,650*
5,350*
7,250*

855*

4,250*
2,150*
14,800*
155,180
Large

Same







54,000
100
51,200
6.47

2.6
8.8
99
58,900
34,233
25,200*
8,150*
2,750*

_ _

122,657
8,250*
23,300*


25,675*
8,600*
10,550*

1,375*

5,750*
2,150*
21,325*
215,970
* Average of two bids.  Third bidder did not itemize.
   120

-------
                                     FIGURE 30
                           CAPITAL COST OF WET SCRUBBERS


                              FOR  GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
     500000
     100000
CO
oc
o
Q


te
o
o
h;


0.

<

O
      10000
      1000












































































CO

















f


LU




















ri





JF





tl\





KEY COS1


COLLECTOR PLUS
AUXILIARIES
EC










T(










31










3










COST ONL




•"• ~~









•*



A
'/
L
$
Y '





^ •"•









f


S*
^
7
ll
V





^H








A
rjp-
fa
W

f*
$
r


M(



fr
s>
s


s
A
Y



3D













. E













EF













F













C

HIGH EFFIC










































:IENCY


IENCY




























        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
                                                                  121

-------
                          TABLE 37

          CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST OF
          WET SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP  PROCESS PLANTS
                      (MOD.  EFF.  LEVEL)
    Population — 5
            Sample Size — 3
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
Capital Cost = $36,933

              Capital Cost, Dollars
    Lower Limit                Upper Limit
     $29,012
       21,585
       10,156
 $44,855
  52,282
  63,710
Conf. Level, %

    50
    75
    90
Capital Cost = $52,827

    Lower Limit

     $48,883
      35,497
      22,594
Upper Limit

 $61,770
  70,156
  83,059
122

-------
                                  FIGURE 31
                       CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST


                               OF WET SCRUBBERS


                            FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
CO

DC
O
o


fe
o
o
O.
<
o
100000
10000
1000



































































































































































































































jt
i
'
>
J
f.
/
t
'












^
)'
f
>
r
<'
4
/














r«J
ft
/*•
9
'
Q.
a














X
_^
^
.
s
,



9
7
l\
7!



0^
'5«
IE
5°X



{,
Yo
A

90%

IV










10










D


























N



El





















=F.































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW,  DSCFM
                                                                123

-------
                           TABLE 38

         CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR INSTALLED  COST OF
          WET  SCRUBBERS  FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
                      (MOD. EFF. LEVEL)
    Population — 5
             Sample Size — 3
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
Installed Cost = $145,930

              Installed Cost, Dollars
     Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
      $131,937
       118,818
        98,630
        79,962
$159,923
  173,042
  193,230
  211,898
Conf. Level,

    50
    75
    90
    95
Installed Cost = $203,207

     Lower Limit

     $191,793
       181,092
       164,626
       149,400
Upper Limit

$214,620
 225.321
 241,787
 257.013
124

-------
                                   FIGURE 32
                       CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                          OF INSTALLED WET SCRUBBERS


                            FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)

DC
O
o


te
o
o
Q.
<
o
100000
10000
1000











































































































































































































/
90% »*
75% .^
MEAN^
7fi% ^

90% /
































»<
.X
'/'
')



















>j2
^2




















^
r





















M





















O

































































EFF.









































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                                125

-------
                                                TABLE 39


                              ANNUAL OPERATING COST  DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)

                                FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Recirculated Pond Water
Water (Make-up)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

JO.Oll/kw-hi
$.05/M gal
$.25/M gal

MODERATE EFFICIENCY
Small

$ 1,950
3,667
4,017
22,053
14,776
3,600*
38,030
47,664
14,593
62,257
Large

$ 1,950
4,333
5,800
36,726
23,660
5,400*
62,197
74,280
20,321
94,601
High Efficiency
Small

$ 1,950
3,833
4,950
25,657
16,136
3,600*
42,994
53,727
15,518
69,245
Large

$ 1,950
4,667
7,433
40,572
25,420
5,400*
67,789
81,842
21,597
103,439
NJ
O)
     *From one bidder only.

-------
                                    FIGURE 33
                           ANNUAL COST OF WET SCRUBBERS

                               FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
V)
cc
o
Q


to*
O
O
100000
10000
1000






















































































































































































































_ ^ .












(.
/y
•I
f






_ __ .











^;


K
3






•i









9.
'#

>
f
>
/





M



X
^v
r






O[


(C

0




D.


)P
C

PE




El


El
A
EF




=F


1
3/
PI
?/




•|l
HIGH EFFICI





1000 10000



























'OTAL CO
^ING CO
TAL CHA

mNG CO!




CIENCY


FMPY
CIML> T







ST
STPLL
RGES)

•*^F-
5T















IS
100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                                 127

-------
                    DIAMMONIUM  PHOSPHATE (DAP)

       Diammonium phosphate (DAP) is produced in plants similar to those used
  for  the  manufacture of granular triplesuperphosphate, and in fact the same
  plant is often used to produce these products alternatively.

       DAP is made by first reacting anhydrous ammonia with phosphoric acid in
  a pre-reactor to  form hot  liquid  DAP.  This  liquid is then  pumped to an
  ammoniator-granulator drum, where  it is further mixed with NHg and recycled
  solid material, and solidified. It is then dried, screened to size,  cooled and sent
  to DAP product storage.

       Acid produced by wet process  phosphoric acid plants  is used  almost
  exclusively for the manufacture of diammonium phosphate fertilizers. Acid at
  54% strength from the vacuum evaporation section of the plant is used for the
  initial preneutralization reactions, and  acid  at 30%  strength  is ordinarily
  blended to maintain the proper  water level.'16)

       DAP plants involve many  of the same pollution considerations as WPP A,
  SPA, and GTSP  processes treated  previously  in this report.  However,  in
  addition  to  the  problems  associated  with  absorbing  gaseous  fluoride
  compounds, the DAP process  volatilizes a substantial amount of unreacted
  ammonia in the reactor and granulator-drier vessels. It is necessary to  absorb
  the  ammonia vapors in strongly  acidic solutions for return to the reactor in
  order to minimize the loss of raw material and to avoid substantial air pollution
  by the ammonia discharge.
                             Process Description

      Figure 34  is a process flow diagram1161  for a diammonium phosphate
  granulation plant.  The  following process description  will make  frequent
  reference to this diagram.

      Anhydrous ammonia is obtained in bulk as a liquid under pressure. Liquid
  ammonia is ordinarily pumped from the storage vessel through a steam-jacketed
  coil in which the ammonia is vaporized. The ammonia vapor is bubbled through
  the liquid in a preneutralization reactor. Phosphoric acid at 54 wt.% is pumped
  through  the reactor from the WPPA process. In addition, phosphoric acid at 26
  to  30 wt.% which has been  circulated through the reactor vent scrubber is also
  added to the preneutralization reactor.'7)

      Substantial heat of reaction is evolved in  the reactor,  and some of the
128

-------
                                                                                                                           TO  AATMOS.
                     PRENEUTRAL-IZATION
                          REACTOR
TEAM
                                                                                                                                                                    TO
                                                                                                                                                                  ATMOS.
                                                                                REACTOR
                                                                                  VENT
                                                                               SCRUBBER
                                                                                                                    POND
                                                                                                                   WETTER
                                                                                              DRIER VENT
                                                                                               SCRUBBER
                                                                                                                        POND
                                                                                                                         KTER
                                                                                                                CYCLjONE
                                                                                                               SEPARATOR
CONDENSATE
    AMMONIA
    STORAGE
                                                                                                                                                         POND
                                                                                                                                                        WATER
                                                                                    <3RANUL_ATOR
                                                                                       DRUM
                                                                                                                                  PRIMARY
                                                                                                                                  SCREEN
                                                                                                                                            SECONDARY
                                                                                                                                             SCREENS
                                                PHOSPHORIC
                                                    ACID
                                                 STORAGE
             PHOSPHORIC ACID
                    FROM
            ACID MANUFACTURING
                                      PHOSPHORIC ACID
                                            FROM
                                     ACID MANUFACTURING
                                                                                                                                                      PRODUCT
                                                                                                                                                      STORAGE
                                                                                                                                                         M SPHERICAL.
                                                                                                                                                        GRANUUES)
                                                                               FIGURE 34
                                                                          FLOW DIAGRAM FOR
                                                                     DIAMMONIUM PHOSPHATE  (DAP)

                                                                          GRANULATION PLANT
                                                                                                                                                       129

-------
ammonia is discharged from the reactor as a vapor. Because there are no solid
feed materials added to the  reactor, it is possible to operate a nearly closed
system from which  only ammonia and steam, and  little non-condensable gas
such as air, must be discharged.11 5)

     The preneutralization reactor is operated with a somewhat lower mol ratio
of ammonia to P2C>5 than is required for the production of  DAP, in order to
prevent  solidification  of the  entire mixture  in this  reactor. The  resulting
product  is a slurry which can  be pumped from the  preneutralization reactor
into the ammoniator-granulator. In the  granulator,  the slurry is exposed to
additional  ammonia vapor and solidification of the diammonium phosphate
solid takes place.161 In addition to the slurry which is fed to the granulator
from the preneutralization reactor,  a recycle of finely divided solid particles is
added to the granulator from  a  recycle elevator as shown in Figure 25. The
diammonium phosphate formed in the granulator and solidified from the slurry
increases  the particle  size  of  the  solids  being  recirculated through   the
granulator. The  solid effluent  from the granulator drum is dropped to a gas
fired (or oil fired)  rotary drier where excess moisture is driven off by direct
contact with the flue  gases.  Flue gas from the drier is vented through a  dry
cyclone collector which collects the dust  generated in the granulator-drier and
returns  it to a recycle  belt. The granular solids discharged from the drier are
elevated  to a screening arrangement shown in the right hand side of Figure 25.

     A primary screen removes undersized material from the flow stream and
drops it  onto the fines return conveyor. Oversized material is passed to a ball
mill where it is ground  to relatively small size and returned  to the belt. The
material  passing the  primary screen falls onto a secondary screen which rejects
any fines which  may have been carried  over  and  passes the material of proper
particle size through a rotary cooler  into a product storage drum.'1 6>

     All  of the other solids, both  oversized and undersized,  are recycled by
means of a single conveyor belt and  elevator back to the granulator drum where
they are trapped until  the particle size has grown sufficiently large for them to
be classified with finished product.

     Particular attention must  be given  to the gas scrubber systems in the DAP
process   because they  form  an  integral  and necessary part  of the process.
Ordinarily, the vents from the preneutralization reactor and the granulator have
a high ammonia content. In order to recover  the  ammonia contained in these
gases, it  is customary  to circulate  20 to  30% acid (expressed as wt.% P2^)
through the scrubbers instead of pond water. The acid is circulated from a 30%
acid storage tank as  shown in  Figure 34 through the primary scurbbing devices
and the acid returned to the storage tank. Makeup acid from the reactor section of
                                                                       131

-------
 the WPPA plant is added to the acid storage tank and 30% acid for addition to
 the preneutralization reactor is withdrawn from the tank.
                    CHEMISTRY OF THE PROCESS

     In  each  of the  processes described  previously,  it  was necessary  to
 oversimplify the reactions involving fluorapatite rock in order to illustrate the
 basic chemistry. In the case of the DAP process, the reactions are represented
 with good accuracy by the simple equation shown as follows:

            H3PO4  +  2NH3  + (NH)2HP04  -  81,500BTU        (26)

            (Liquid)    (Gas)       (Liquid)       AHRat60°F)

 For purposes  of this discussion, it  may be assumed that the ammonia feed
 stock  is substantially free of impurities.  The phosphoric acid, on the other
 hand, contains some impurities which participate in side reactions.

     The acid composition given in Table  7 may be used  for the development
 of hypothetical process emissions, although it should be borne in mind that the
 use of 30% acid or feed grade WPPA acid in addition to the 54% acid results in
 bringing more  fluorine into  the reaction  than  indicated  by the  Table 7
 composition.

     The side   reactions  involve   the  formation  of   ammonium  sulfate,
 ammonium fluoride, and ammonium  fluorosilicate. Also, some of the fluorine
 is liberated as silicon tetrafluoride and discharged from the reactor with the
 ammonia gas. It should be  noted that the product weight, rather than the P2^^
 content  of the  product,  is the  usual basis for rating the  DAP  plant. It is
 apparent from Table 40 that a substantial  amount of the  water  present in the
 phosphoric acid is removed in the drying process.
               NATURE OF THE  GASEOUS DISCHARGE

     The DAP process has two major sources of gaseous discharge and two dust
sources which may be significant from a pollution standpoint:

     Gaseous

     1.    Reactor and granulator ventilating gas

     2.    Drier flue gas
132

-------
     Dust

     1.    Cooler air discharge*

     2.    Transfer points and screen ventilation

In this  section, all three of these sources will  be considered, and pollution
control  equipment  applicable to each source  will be specified, and cost data
will be obtained for each.


                                 Reactor

     The  reactor or preneutralizer is a vessel into which  about 70% of the
ammonia  and all of the phosphoric acid  are  introduced.  In  some plants, 93
wt.% H2S04 is introduced to control final  analysis of the product.

     The  reaction generates a substantial amount of heat which  raises the
temperature of the  reactants and results in the discharge of large quantities of
water vapor, unreacted ammonia and SiF^ In order to assure that there will be
no leakage of ammonia  and phosphoric acid from the mixing vessel, the vessel
is well  ventilated with  outside  air. The ventilating air flow  rate is a  critical
factor in the design of subsequent gas treating equipment, and this is set on the
basis  of  mechanical  factors in  the reactor design, rather  than by any
fundamental requirement of  the process.  In theory, the reactor could  be
designed to avoid any ventilating air flow and the system run without discharge
to the atmosphere.

     In  practice, ventilating  air flow  rates  of around 2,500  SCFM through the
reactor  are common.'1 5> The  ventilating air serves to remove  some of the heat
of reaction, and also increases the flow of ammonia out of the reactor vessel.
The  ammonia  "lost" from  the  reactor at  this point is captured  in  the
preneutralizer  scrubber  through  which   20  to  30% concentration  acid is
circulated. Concentrations around 26% are preferred to keep the product in the
MAP range.

     The  rate of gas flow  through  the  preneutralizer is established  by the
inward air leakage required to prevent loss of ammonia and fluorine-containing
gases from the preneutralizer. Inward air  leakage rates on the order of 2,000
SCFM are reasonable for reactors of commercial design.  To this air stream is
added ammonia, water  vapor, and minor components of  the DAP slurry in
*ln some cases NHg losses have been observed where inadequate operation of
the dryer shifts losses to the cooler.
                                                                     133

-------
 NH-
                           TABLE 40

             APPROXIMATE MATERIAL BALANCE OF
                  1,000 TON/DAY DAP PROCESS
Acid Feed
(@ 40% P205)
Ton/Day Lb/hr
Ammonia Feed
Ton/Day Lb/Hr
DAP Product
@ 1 wt.%
Moisture
Ton/Day Lb/Hr
240   20,000
                500     41,690
F
S03
AI203
Fe203
Other
Water
Total
14.3
15.8
18.6
7.4
3.7
690.2
1,250.0
1,190
1,315
1,545
620
310
57,500
104,170
12.2
15.8
18.6
7.4
3.7
9.8<1
240 20,000 997.5
1,015
1,315
1,545
620
310
1 810
84.115
 (1)  Water removed is (690.2 Ton/Day total water — 190 Ton/Day combined
     water in phosphoric acid — 9.8 Ton/Day in product = 490.2 Ton/Day).
134

-------
portion to the vapor pressure at the reaction temperature. Water vapor will
move toward equilibrium between  the gas stream and a liquid phase which is
less than  60% water. The gas stream will  never contain more than about 60%
saturated  with respect  to liquid water  in  the  reactor, but will  be close to
saturation at the exhaust temperature of 170 to 180° F.

     At a discharge temperature of 180° F, the estimated composition of the
effluent gases for a reactor with 2,000 SCFM in-leakage of air is given in Table
41. The  fluorine content of  this gas stream, either as particulate or vaporized
components has in the past been of little  concern as it  leaves the reactor. The
ammonia  content is too  high for discharge into the atmosphere for reasons of
economy  and  pollution  control,  and   it  is   necessary  to  contact  the
ammonia-bearing gas stream  with relatively concentrated phosphoric acid in
order to minimize ammonia loss. The contracting process serves to recover the
ammonia  effectively, but in doing so  results in volatilization  of fluorine
compounds from the absorbing liquor.'6) Today, the fluorine stripping effect is
sufficient  to warrant the addition of a  tail  gas  scrubber after the primary
absorber.  In the hypothetical  process selected for study here, it will be assumed
that  30% acid is used for  the  scrubbing liquid  and that  the  fluorine
concentration in the tail gas is significant.
                             GRANULATOR

     A  second  significant  source of  emissions  from  the  process  is  the
granulator.(8)  Here, a solids  recycle material consisting of under-sized solid
product is fed to the granulator from a bucket elevator or other loading device.
In addition, the slurry from the preneutralizer and the remaining ammonia are
added and  final solidification of the  DAP takes place.  As in the case of the
preneutralization reactor, the granulator might  be operated without any net
flow of gas, except that it is mechanically very difficult to maintain a sealed
rotary unit into which solids are fed.  For this reason, granulators are designed
with a substantial in-leakage of air around the inlet and outlet connections.  The
ventilating  air  flow  purges   a  substantial  amount  of  ammonia from  the
granulator along with some water vapor and DAP dust.

     There  is  very little  evolution  of  fluorine-containing  gases from  the
granulator because  of the high concentration of ammonia in the vapor phase.
Again, the recovery of ammonia from the ventilating gas is the primary concern
in  the   treatment  of  the   off  gases  from  the  granulator.  Substantial
concentrations  of particulate matter in the DAP  pose  a potential fluoride
emission  problem  and   particulate  collection  with return  of  the DAP
                                                                     135

-------
                            TABLE  41

                COMBINED VENTS  FROM REACTOR
                        AND GRANULATOR
 Temp, ° F
 Moisture, vol %
                    Reactor
  190
   50
 Moisture, Ib/lbs Gas       0.625

 Gas Composition, SCFM

    Water            2,000
    Air
    Ammonia
2,000
   20
                     4,020
           Granulator
   150
    39
                0.39
11,250

18,000

   200

29,450
 Total
  to
Scrubber

   170

    40
                 0.415
 Total
 from
Scrubber

   135

    40.8
                 0.430
13,250       13,750

20,000       20,000

   220(2>        12°
                        33,470
            33,762
 (1)  Basedon 3 Ib/ton NH3feed.
 (2)  Based on 11.2 ton/hr in.
136

-------
particulates to the preneutralization reactor along with the phosphoric acid
scrubbing liquid is essential to the process. An estimate of the composition of
gas from the granulator is given  in Table 41.  The rotary drier removes the free
water from the DAP by direct contact with flue gases. The flue gas generation
rate may be calculated approximately by heat balance of the drier. The heat
input must be sufficient to vaporize the difference between the water content
of the dry product and the  water  input with both  phosphoric acid streams.
Little  heat  is added  to  the  solid product  because  it  enters the  dryer
combination at nearly the exit temperature.

     A rough heat balance of the dryer for a 500 Ton/day plant  is  shown in
Table 42, and the calculated  gas flow on the heat balance is used in specifying
the abatement equipment at the end of this section.

     At  the  dryer  outlet, there must be some provision for  in-leakage  of
ventilating air to  prevent loss of flue gas and product dust. The flue  gas-steam
combination  produced in  the dryer  is ordinarily vented through a mechanical
collector and serves to collect particulate solids for return to the process. The
exhaust gas from the cyclone is scrubbed  either in combination with the gas
ventilated through the preneutralization reactor, or in a separate scrubber. The
two services may be combined if a common phosphoric acid circulating stream
is used for both of them.  In  the flow scheme shown in Figure 34, the streams
are treated separately, and in the hypothetical plant for which  specifications
and prices are given, this is the case.
                                COOLER

     The final emission sources which must be treated in a DAP plant are the
air used for cooling the solid product and ventilating the solids transfer points.
The  product cooler reduces the  temperature from 190° F or thereabouts to
about 110°F by direct contact of cooling air with the solids in a rotary drum.
The air flow requirement can again be calculated on an approximate basis by a
heat balance of the process. There is little in the way of volatile material given
off  in the cooler as the temperature is reduced and the vapor pressure of each
of the species decreases. However, there is a substantial dusting problem due to
the  mechanical  handling of the granular solids. The principal pollution control
problem  associated with the cooler is the  recovery of this particulate matter.
Because the ammonia has been stripped out of the solid at this point, it is not
necessary to use acidic water for scrubbing, and pond water may be used in this
scrubber  for convenience.
                                                                      137

-------
                             TABLE  42

             ROUGH HEAT  BALANCE FOR  DAP  DRYER
                   FOR 1,000 TON/DAY PROCESS
  Into Dryer

  Wet DAP
     DAP
     Water
  Recycle Solids
  Air to Burner*1)
  Fuel to Burner'21
  Tempering Air(3)
  Dilution Air(4)

  Total Gases

Flow
SCFM

—
—
—
9,000
900
21,900
—

Flow
Ib/hr
124,905
(83,305)
(41,600)
420,725
41,000
2,280
100,000
37,000

Temp.,
°F
200
200
200
200
70
70
70
—
Heat
Content
BTU/lb

( 32.5)
(130 )
33.5
0
0
0
0
Heat
Content
BTU/hr
8.12
( 2.71)
( 5.41)
14.10
0
0
0
0
30,900    143,280
22.22
 Out of Dryer
DAP Product
DAP
Water
Recycle Solids
Flue Gas
N2
02
C02
H20
_
—
—
—
46,000
(24,480)
( 4,620)
( 900)
(16,100)
84,145
(83,305)
( 840)
420,725
184,040
008,500)
(23,400)
( 6,240)
(45,900)
200
200
200
200
180
180
180
180
180
33.5
( 32.5)
(130)
—
293

27.5

(1,090)
2.82
( 2.71)
( 0.11)
14.10
53.80

( 3.80)

( 50.0)
 Burner Duty = 70.72 - 22.22 = 48.50 X 106 BTU/hr.

 (1)  Based on 10/1 air to fuel ratio for gas firing
 (2)  Based on 900 BTU/SCF lower heating value
 (3)  Tempering air to produce 1,500° F temperature to dryer
 (4)  Dilution air to reduce outlet temperature to 180° F
                                                             70.70
138

-------
          TRANSFER  POINTS AND SCREEN  VENTILATION

     The  DAP granulation  process,  as illustrated in Figure 34 involves the
handling and screening of a great deal of granular solid product and recycle
solids. At each  transfer  point  (i.e.,  elevator,  belt conveyor, screen or mill
discharge) there is some generation and dispersion of  product dust. This must
be retained  within the process  by  exhausting air from exclosures around the
transfer points. This dust contains a small amount of fluorine as an impurity,
but consists  mainly of DAP product.

     Recovery of the dust and return to the process offers some potential for
improved product yield,  and phosphoric acid  may be used as the  scrubbing
medium. The  dust may,  however,  be  collected in scrubbers circulating pond
water, which discharges into the gypsum pond.
               APPLICABLE ABATEMENT  EQUIPMENT

     This  discussion deals with the wet scrubbing equipment conventionally
applied for removal of ammonia, fluorides and  particulate dusts from effluent
gas streams generated in DAP plants. These scrubbers are designed for a variety
of functions which include:

         Ammonia Recovery
         Particulate Collection (and sometimes recovery)
         Fluorine Removal

These functions require a complex arrangement of the scrubbing equipment.

     The three major process sources in DAP plants are treated exclusively by
wet  scrubbers.  Several  circumstances contribute to the  selection  of wet
scrubbers over other types of pollution control devices for these services. The
necessity for removal of gaseous  ammonia and fluoride compounds from the
gas stream is a significant factor in DAP process plants, although the emphasis
here is more on control  of particulate emissions than is the case for any of the
phosphate processes described in  earlier sections.  A second contributing factor
is the relatively high humidity of the gas streams, all of which originate in wet
reactors, driers, or other pieces of process equipment from which water vapor
emission is significant. The high concentration of water in the gas streams poses
problems in the use of fabric collectors, and, to  a lesser extent,  in the use of
mechanical or electrostatic  collectors.

     Finally, the ready availability of pond water as a scrubbing  medium, and
                                                                    139

-------
 the  gypsum pond as a  settling  basin  for  collected solids is  a significant
 advantage for wet scrubbers.

      The combination of  requirements for particulate collection  and  gas
 absorption  for  NHg  recovery and  fluorine  emission  control  permits  the
 application  of a  wide variety of scrubber types for DAP service. The devices
 most used are:

      1.   Two-stage wet cyclonic

      2.   Venturi-cyclone* scrubbers

      3.   Cross-flow packed scrubbers

 Figure  35 shows a schematic drawing  of each of these three  types. These
 scrubbers are ordinarily used as follows:

                                     Primary            Secondary
                                     Scrubber           Scrubber

      Reactor granulator         '     Venturi-
                                     Cyclone            Cyclonic
                                        or                 or
      Dryer                          Two-Stage          Packed Cross-
                                     Cyclonic           flow

      Cooler +                       Venturi
      Transfer points                 Cyclone
                                        or
                                     Two-Stage
                                     Cyclonic

      The two-stage wet cyclonic scrubbers are relatively simple in design and
 construction, and have relatively low pressure drop characteristics.  They  are
 well suited for the  collection of particulate greater than about  3y in size, and
 for gas absorption. They  are  less efficient as absorption  devices than are  the
 scrubbers utilizing wetted  packings.
      *"Venturi-cyclone", rather than the more common "Venturi-cyclonic" is
 used  here to distinguish  a  scrubber in which the  "cyclone" is used for
 entrainment  separation only. "Cyclonic" is reserved  for scrubbers using the
 cyclonic scrubbing principal.
140

-------
     The  Venturi  cyclone, operating in  the  range of 15  to 30 inches water
column pressure drop, is perhaps the best particulate collection scrubber of the
three and also  serves adequately  for ammonia  absorption, especially when a
packed section  is installed after the primary Venturi cyclone collector, or when
water  sprays  are  used  in  the entrainment separator to  enhance  the gas
absorption characteristics of the unit.

     Typically,  a 30 in. w.c. pressure drop Venturi can be used to collect not
only the dusts,  but also the condensation products such as  ammonium fluoride
in the sub-micron size range, formed by gas phase reactors.

     The cross-flow packed scrubber is the  best of the three devices from a gas
absorption standpoint,  but  is less  effective for the collection of particulate
matter, and  for this reason is used as a "tail gas" scrubber following a Venturi
or two-stage cyclonic.  The  packed scrubbers  are  seldom used as primary
scrubbers because  of the tendency to plug  with gelatinous  silicon or DAP
deposits.

     In order to generate a reasonably complete picture of the costs of these
scrubbers in the various services, a generalized pattern has been followed  in
writing specifications. The equipment  is presumed to be installed on a 1,000
T/D  DAP process (500 T/D P2^ content) and individual scrubbers specified  as
follows:

          Reactor-Granulator               - 20,000 DSCFM
                Venturi-Cyclone
                Two-Stage Cyclonic
          Dryer                           - 30,000 DSCFM
                Venturi-Cyclone
                Two-Stage Cyclonic
          Tail Gas  Service

     The  particulate  collection  scrubber should always  be the "upstream"
member  of a two  scrubber combination. That is, a  two-stage wet cyclonic or
Venturi-cyclone would always precede  a  cross-flow packed  scrubber. It  is
difficult  to  envision circumstances that would  lead  to the installation of a
cross-flow packed  scrubber ahead  of a two-stage  wet  cyclone. Figure 36
illustrates those combinations which are reasonable from the standpoint of
performing the  solid collection in the scrubber most suited for handling solids
and the gas absorption in subsequent scrubbing steps.

     As  in  each   of  the  previous cases,  the equilibrium  between  the
fluorine-containing gas, SiF4 and HF, and h^SiFg in the pond water is of
                                                                     141

-------
                          GAS
                         OUTLET
                                   GAS
                                  OUTLET
WATER

INLET
  GAS
 INLET
                                                GAS
                                               INLET
                                        WATER

                                        INLET
                WATER
               OUTLET

           TWO-STAGE
            CYCLONIC
            SCRUBBER
                                 WATER
                                 OUTLET
                                VENTURl
                               CYCLONIC.
                               SCRUBBER
     WATER
      INLET
                                   WATER
                                   OUTLET

                          CROSS-FLOW RACKED
                                 SCRUBBER
                                 FIGURE 35
         142
SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF SCRUBBERS

 USED IN DAP TAIL GAS TREATING

-------
considerable importance. The equilibrium vapor pressures of these gases given
in the discussion of the WPPA process indicate that  the gas stream must be
relatively cool in order for low enough values of fluorine in the ventilating gas
to meet the  present Florida law to be realized.  Ordinarily,  gases entering a
scrubber are at a higher temperature and lower moisture content than those
exiting, due to the saturation and cooling of the gas which takes place in the
scrubber. In the DAP plant, the moisture content of gases vented to the tail gas
scrubber is too high  for evaporative  cooling  to  take  place,  and  some
condensation of moisture from the gas must take place in the  scrubber. This
requires that a substantially higher flow rate of scrubber liquor  per unit of gas
must  be passed through the scrubber than would be the case for cooling of the
gas by evaporation of moisture from the scrubbing liquor.

     One  other problem  is peculiar  to DAP  scrubbing among the  other
phosphate rock processing  pollution abatement processes. Because recovery of
ammonia is of critical importance in the process economics, the  scrubbers may
be  operated  at   temperatures  as  high   as  185°F  for  contacting the
ammonia-containing vent  gases  with  30% phosphoric  acid.  Many of the
materials of construction most desirable from a  corrosion standpoint (PVC,
FRP  and rubber)  have substantially  decreased  physical properties in this
temperature range, and  pose  some specific problems in fabrication of large
scrubbers of these materials. In particular, PVC is unlikely to be acceptable in
this service because of the high temperatures.
                                                                     143

-------
                     ACID
  GAS
  FROM
REACTOR
                   1
   REACTOR

  SCRUBBER
                    t
              RECYCLE TO
                REACTOR

                  POND
                 WATER
 FROM
GRANULATOR

  SCRUBBER
                    t
                            TAIL GAS
                            SCRUBBER
   GAS TO
"ATMOSPHERE
                 RETURN
                TO POND
      CROSS-FLOW

      VENTURI 	
             TWO-STAGE CYCLONIC
                      OR
                   VENTURI
                      OR
             CROSS-FLOW PACKED
   t
      C ROSS - FLOW

      C ROSS- FL.OW
             CROSS-FLOW PACKED
      CROSS-FLOW
      TWO-STAGE CYCLONIC
                     TWO-STAGE CYCLONIC /
                              OR           >
                     CROSS-FLOW PACKED  \
_t
      VENTURI

      VENTURI
             TWO- STAGE CYCLON 1C
                       OR
                    VENTURI
                       OR
             CROSS-FLOW PACKED
                             FIGURE 36


       ACCEPTABLE SCRUBBER COMBINATIONS FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
  144

-------
                                   TABLE  43
                 PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR  WET SCRUBBERS
                               FOR  DAP PROCESS
     This  specification describes three  types of scrubbers and three process gas streams.
There is some degree of interchangeability of the scrubbers specified.

The  DRYER is to  be  treated  for  paniculate  and  ammonia removal  by  either a
Venturi-cyclone or a two-stage wet cyclonic scrubber.  Thirty percent phosphoric acid is used
as the scrubbing medium in these scrubbers.  Either is  followed by a crossflow packed
scrubber using water as the scrubbing medium for fluorine removal. These scrubbers should
be identical to those specified for the Reactor-Granulator vent, except for size.  The cooler
and dryer are to be considered interchangeable applications.

   .  Two  efficiency  levels are specified for each  scrubber.  A  separate set  of process
conditions is specified for each size.

     The pond water to be used for scrubbing has characteristics as follows:

                                     Design           Min.            Max.

     Pond Water, pH                   2.0             1.2             2.2
      Temperature,°F                 80*            55              88
     S04,Wt.%                       0.15
     P£)5,Wt.%                      0.7
     H£iF6,Wt.%                    0.63            0.25             1.0
     Fluorine, Wt.%                    0.5             0.2             0.8

*NOTE: Pond water temperature may  be considerably higher than the values given here.
Design temperatures of 90°F+  may be specified, and correspondingly high gaseous fluorine
limits may be expected.
     The scrubber is required to produce the specified performance when operating with
water at the "design" conditions.  The vendor shall specify the water flow rate to be used,
and that this flow rate is adequate for his scrubber design.

     Materials of construction shall be limited to the following, which shall be selected for
hydrofluoric acid service:

                  Rubber-Lined Steel

                  FRP (Dynel Lined)

No metal parts shall be used where exposure to process gas or pond water may be significant.
                                                                              145

-------
                                     MECHANICAL

   A.   Two-Stage Wet Cyclonic

       The scrubber shall be equipped with a cone bottom, bottom tangential gas inlet, two
   stages of sprays which can  be removed for cleaning of spray nozzles while the unit is
   operating, and a top gas outlet.

       A fan capable of overcoming the pressure drop across the scrubber stages and ductwork
   shall be supplied as an auxiliary and shall be located adjacent to the scrubbers. The fan shall
   operate on the discharge side of the cyclone.

       A separate hotwell with a barometric leg seal must be supplied, and should be enclosed
   to minimize fluorine losses.

       The scrubber system shall be furnished complete with all interconnecting ductwork
   from the scrubber to  the  fan and from the fan to the stack. A return pump, 50 ft. stack and
   barometric damper to minimize pressure fluctuations at the dryer shall be provided.

       The scrubber and auxiliaries are to be located outside, adjacent to the dryer.


   B.   Venturi-Cyclone

       The Venturi cyclone scrubber shall have a pressure drop of 15-30 inch water column
   and shall be designed to  have no spray nozzles in the Venturi section. All interconnecting
   ductwork, fan, return pump, etc. similar to that outlined under the Two-Stage Wet Cyclone
   shall be provided. A variable  throat may be substituted for  the barometric damper to
   maintain the dryer peressure constant.


   C.   Cross-Flow Packed

       The cross-flow tail gas scrubber, if required, should be placed in series after either the
   two stage cyclone or the Venturi cyclone. The fan shall be placed between the primary
   scrubbers and the cross-flow tail gas scrubber.

       The  cross-flow scrubber should be designed to treat the gas stream in a single packed
   bed of sufficient depth to obtain the required removal efficiency.  Top irrigation as well as a
   front face spray of the wetted bed should be used. High top liquid irrigation rates should be
   used in the front packed section to prevent solids deposition.

       A dry packed bed shall serve as an entrainment separator. Top water sprays shall be
   furnished in the entrainment separation section for intermittent wash-down of the packing.
   The scrubber sump bottom should be sloped to prevent solids build-up and should contain
   baffles to prevent gas by-pass of the packed bed.

       When  the  cross-flow packed  scrubber is  required  all  additional interconnecting
   ductwork, return pump, etc., shall be provided in addition to that outlined in the Two-Stage
   Wet Cyclone and Venturi Cyclone sections to comprise a complete system.
146

-------
                                 TABLE 44
            OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR PRIMARY SCRUBBERS
                     FOR  DAP PROCESS DRYER  VENTS*
Plant Capacity, Ton/Day DAP
Plant Capacity, Ton/Day P2O5
Process Weight, Ton/Hr

Gas to Scrubber
     Flow, DSCFM
     Flow, SCFM
     Flow, ACFM
     Temp., °F
     Moisture, vol.%
     Paniculate, gr/SCF
     Particulate, Lb/Hr
     Ammonia, Lb/Ton P^0§
     Ammonia, Lb/Hr
     Ammonia, ppm

Gas from Scrubber
     Flow, DSCFM
     Flow, SCFM
     Flow, ACFM
     Temp., °F
     Moisture, vol.%
     Particulate, gr/SCF
     Particulate, Lb/Hr
     Ammonia, Lb/Ton Pfl$
     Ammonia, Lb/Hr
     Ammonia, ppm
     Particulate Efficiency, wt. 5
     Ammonia Efficiency, %
1,000
500
42
30,000
46,100
55,700
180
35
0.5
200
8.0
167
1,350
30,000
46,800
53,500
164
36
0.01
4.0
0.08
1.67
13.4
98
99
1,600
800
66.7
48,000
74,000
89,000
180
35
0.5
320
8.0
267
1,350
48,000
75,000
85,500
164
36
0.01
6.4
0.08
2.67
13.4
98
99
*These are considered interchangeable with cooler vent scrubbers.
                                                                       147

-------
                                    TABLE 45
             OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR SECONDARY SCRUBBERS
                       FOR DAP PROCESS DRYER  VENTS*
  Plant Capacity, Ton/Day DAP
  Plant Capacity, Ton/Day ^05
  Process Weight, Ton/Hr

  Gas to Scrubber
       Flow, DSCFM
       Flow, SCFM
       Flow, ACFM
       Temp., °F
       Moisture, vol.%
       Fluorine, ppm as F-
       Fluorine, Lb/Hr

  Gas from Scrubber
       Flow, DSCFM
       Flow, SCFM
       Flow, ACFM
       Temp., °F
       Moisture, vol.%
             1,000
              500
               42
           30,000
           46,800
           53,500
              164
               36
               15
                2.1
           30,000
           31,900
           33,700
              100
                7
  1,600
   800
    66.7
48,000
75,000
85,500
   164
    36.
    15
     3.35
48,000
51,000
54,000
   100
     7
       Fluorine, ppm as F-
       Fluorine, Lb/Hr(1)
       Fluorine removal, %
       Estimated y', ppm
       Estimated NTU
Medium Efficiency Case

                4.1
                0.415
               80
                1.95
                1.80
     4.1
     0.67
    80
     1.95
     1.80
       Fluoride, ppm as F-
       Fluoride, Lb/Hr(2i
       Fluorine removal, %
       Estimated y'
       Estimated NTU
 High Efficiency Case

                3.25
                0.31
               85
                1.95
                2.8
     3.25
     0
    85
     1.95
     2.8
  *These are considered interchangeable with cooler vent scrubbers.

  (1)  Based on 1/3 of 0.06 Lb F/Ton ^2^5 allowable under present Florida law.

  (2)  Based on 1/4 of 0.06 Lb F/Ton.
148

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

     Tables 41 - 43 contain specifications for scrubbers representative of those
used  in  controlling  DAP process emissions. Table 41 is a general  process
description for the dryer, and covers both primary and secondary scrubbers.
The  primary scrubber  may  be either  a two-stage cyclonic scrubber or a
Venturi-cyclone, and the secondary scrubber  is limited to a corss-flow packed
scrubber.  A single efficiency level is requested for each  of the  two primary
scrubbers, while two levels of efficiency are requested for the secondary or tail
gas scrubber.

     In  order to cover the size range encountered for scrubbers  used to treat
reactor and cooler gas streams as well as those of the dryer, the manufacturers
of the scrubbing equipment  were asked to  provide cost  information for a
20,000  DSCFM  scrubber (which represents  the  reactor-drier gas flow on a
1,000 ton/day DAP  process),  but which is identical in  all respects except gas
flow  capacity to  the  dryer  effluent scrubbers.  This should  provide costs
described  for a range of scrubber  sizes  from which estimates of the  cost of
treating the reactor-granulator, the dryer, or the cooler vents can be made for
most plant sizes.
                                                                     149

-------
                                 TABLE 46

               ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
                    FOR TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
                          FOR DAP  PROCESS PLANTS
FLOW. DSCFM
Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Dust Loading
gr/SCF
Ib/hr, Particulate
Ib/Tir, Ammonia
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
gr/SCF
Ib/hr, Particulate
Cleaning Efficiency, % part .
Ammonia
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost

?n nnn

37,000
180
30,800
35

0.5
133
111

35,600
164
31,200
36

0.01
2.7
98
99
48,900*
14,050*





91,700*













154,650*
30.000

55,700
180
46,100
35

0.5
200
167

53,500
164
46,800
36

0.01
4
98
99
66,400
21,767
17,350**
3,850**
1,450**

—

102,417
6,750**
19,300**


23,500**
4,400**
9,250**



5,750**
2,150**
11,500**
190,584

48 r 000

89,000
180
73,800
35

0.5
320
267

85,500
164
74,800
36

0.01
6.4
98
QQ
92,867
33,900
30,400**
5,800**
2,150**

—

145,733
10,500**
25,000**


33,750**
8,000**
15,350**



9,250**
2,150**
17,000**
272,500










































* Only two bids obtained for this size.

**Auxiliaries and items of installed cost averaged from two bids.
  bidder did not itemize.
  150 '
Third

-------
                                    FIGURES?
                   CAPITAL COST OF TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS


                              FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
CO
DC
O
Q


te
o
o
a.

<
O
100000
10000
1000
10(









































































































































































































;



£
r
/















/
f
J
^X"
r J
/
r
















X^
r
X
r
















^
X*
>
x



















^
^























TURNKEY COST _
COLLECTOR PLUS -
AUXILIARIES
COLLECTOR COST
ONLY


































































































)0 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                              151

-------
                             TABLE 47

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS  FOR CAPITAL  COST  OF
   TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR  DAP PROCESS PLANTS
      Population Size — 5
            Sample Size — 2
 Conf. Level. %

      50
      75
Capital Cost = $48,900

              Capital Cost, Dollars
    Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
      $33,341
       14,444
  $64,459
   83,356
     Population Size - 5               Sample Size - 3

                        Capital Cost = $66,400
 Conf. Level,

     50
     75
     90
    Lower Limit

     $59,121
       52,295
       41,793
Upper Limit

  $73,679
   80,504
   91,006
     Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                        Capital Cost = $92,867
 Conf. Level, %

     50
     75
     90
    Lower Limit

     $86,054
      79,667
      69,838
Upper Limit

 $99,679
 106,067
 115,895
152

-------
     500000
                                        FIGURE 38
                          CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                           OF TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
                                FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
     100000
CO
oc
o
Q
to*
8
0.
<
U
      10000
       1000
                                              T
                   75%
                   MEAN
75%
         1000
    10000

GAS  FLOW, DSCFM
                     100000
300000
            ^Confidence limit determined from a sample of two bidders. Third bidder
            did not bid for this size.
                                                                    153

-------
                             TABLE 48

           CONFIDENCE LIMITS  FOR INSTALLED COST OF
   TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
      Population Size — 5
             Sample Size - 2
 Conf. Level, %

      50
      75
      90
Installed Cost = $154,650

               Installed Cost, Dollars
     Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
      $128,061
        95,766
        32,553
$181,239
  213,534
  276,747
      Population Size — 5                Sample Size — 3
                       Installed Cost = $190,583
 Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
     Lower Limit

     $176,575
       163,441
       143,231
       124,542
Upper Limit

$204,592
 217,726
 237,936
 256,624
     Population Size — 5                Sample Size — 3

                       Installed Cost = $272,500
 Conf. Level,

      50
      75
      90
      95
     Lower Limit

     $257,346
       243,137
       221,274
       201,057
Upper Limit

$287,654
 301,863
 323,726
 343,943
154

-------
     500000
                                      FIGURE 39
                           CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                      OF INSTALLED TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS

                                 FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
CO
cc
O
O


fe
O
O
Q.

<

O
100000
10000
1000








































































































































































































75%* (
. t. "ICO/ ff . j
/O70 ^



















> A
y%
j



















4
w
r



















a
"?
P




















£
!••

75
M
%
E/

^
75%













































































































































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                               GAS FLOW, DSCFM
           'Confidence limit determined from a sample of two bidders. Third bidder

           did not bid for this size.
                                                                    155

-------
                                                      TABLE 49
en
at
                                    ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                         FOR TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
                                               FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Pond Water (Make-up)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal
$.05/M gal

MODERATE EFFICIENCY
20,000 SCFM DG

$ 3,670*
6,825*
4,229*
12,030*
2,235*
14,265
28,989
15,465
44,454
30,000 SCFM DG

$ 2,447
6,033
3,801
15,814
5,259
21,073
33,354
19,058
52,412

48,000 SCFM DG

$ 2,447
7,450
5,355
24,920
8,433
33,353
48,605
27,205
75,810
Large






     * Only two bids obtained for this size.

-------
                                   FIGURE 40
                   ANNUAL COST OF TWO STAGE CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS

                              FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
    100000
CO
cc
o
Q


te
o
u
     10000
      1000
     TOTAL COST


   (OPERATING COST

PLUS CAPITAL
                             OPERATING


                                COST
                         ^
            10000



         GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                         100000
300000
                                                              157

-------
                                  TABLE 50

                ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
                       FOR VENTURI  CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
                           FOR  DAP PROCESS PLANTS
FLOW, DSCFM
Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Dust Loading
gr/SCF
Jb/hr, Particulate
rb/'hr. Ammonia
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
gr/SCF
Ib/hr , Particulate
Cleaning Efficiency, % Part .
Ammonia
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(1) Other
(4) Total Cost

20,000

37,000
180
30,800
35

0.5
Wi

35,600
164
31,200
36

0.01
2.7
98
09
33,250*
18,025*







76,680*













127,955*
30.000

55,700
180
46,100
35

0.5
200
167

53,500
164
46,800
36

0.01
4
98
99
44,433
28,500
24,000**
3,800**
2,450**
_ _

__

88,833
6,600**
15,000**

__
13,300**
5,300**
5,800**

2,100**

4,500**
2,150**.
14,750**
161,766

48rono

89,000
180
73,800
35

0.5
320
267

85,500
164
74,800
36

0.01
6.4
98
9^9
61,467
45,300
43,100**
6,700**
3,150**
• 0>

_~

128,577
8,500**
21,700**

—
29,750**
8,750**
8,600**

2,815**

6,250**
2,150**
21,600**
235,344











































* Only two bids obtained for this size.

**Auxiliaries and items of installed cost averaged from two bidders,
  bidder did not itemize.
  158
Third

-------
500000
                              FIGURE 41
                CAPITAL COST OF VENTURI-CYCLONE SCRUBBERS
                          FOR  DAP PROCESS PLANTS
100000
C/5
cc
_i
_i
O
0
te
0
U
_J
<
1-
0.
U
10000
1000









































































































































































































>
r



L
/
I

















fi
s
s
A
/














/
)

s
/
y
/
f














&
Q
/*


fi
X















x
^


rf
r


























TURNKEY COST
COLLECTOR PLUS
AUXILIARIES



















C(













31













.L
















.ECTOR COST -
ONLY


























1000 10000 100000 3000C
                        GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                         159

-------
                            TABLE  51

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST OF
    VENTURI-CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
     Population Size-5               Sample Size — 2

                        Capital Cost = $33,250
 Conf. Level, %

      50
      75
          Capital Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
 $20,284
   4,536
  $46,215
   61,963
     Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                        Capital Cost = $44,433

 Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit
     50
     75
     90
     95
 $38,349
  32,644
  23,865
  15,748
Upper Limit

 $50,518
   56,223
   65,001
   73,118
     Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                        Capital Cost = $61,467
 Conf. Level,

     50
     75
     90
     95
Lower Limit

 $54,802
  48,553
  38,938
  30,047
Upper Limit

 $68,131
   74,380
   83,995
   92,886
160

-------
                                       FIGURE 42
     500000
                           CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                              OF VENTURI-CYCLONE SCRUBBERS
                                 FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
     100000
CO
DC
O
Q

65
o
o
_i
<
CL
O
      10000
       1000
                                         75%*
                                               t
         1000
    10000

GAS  FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
             "Confidence limit determined from a  sample of two bidders. Third bidder
             did not bid for this size.
                                                                     161

-------
                              TABLE  52

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST OF
      VENTURI-CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
       Population Size — 5                Sample Size — 2

                         Installed Cost = $127,955
   Conf. Level,

       50
       75
       90
         Installed Cost, Dollars
Lower Limit                 Upper Limit
$105,472
   78,165
   24,715
 $150,438
  177,745
  231,195
       Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                         Installed Cost = $161,767
   Conf. Level, %

       50
       75
       90
       95
Lower Limit

$151,791
  142,438
  128,046
  114,738
Upper Limit

$171,742
  181,095
  195,487
  208,795
       Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3

                         Installed Cost = $235,343
   Conf. Level,

       50
       75
       90
       95
Lower Limit

$229,416
 223,859
 215,307
 207,400
Upper Limit

$241,271
 246,828
 255,379
 263,287
162

-------
                                       FIGURE 43
                          CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                       OF INSTALLED VENTURI-CYCLONE SCRUBBERS
                                FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
     500000
CO
DC
O
Q

te
O
O
CL
<
O
100000
10000
1000









































































































































































































75%* (


75%* ~5


















? .i
\#
;•
<
)

















4
f




















Sol
f




















'•I




















^5'
VIE
5°/



















y0
LA
'o




















N





















































































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                                GAS FLOW, DSCFM


           *Confidence limit determined from a sample of two bidders. Third bidder
           did not bid for this size.
                                                                    163

-------
                                                      TABLE 53

                                    ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                          FOR VENTURI CYCLONIC  SCRUBBERS
                                              FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
a
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Pond Water CMake-up)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

$0.011/kw-to
$.25/M gal
$.05/M gal

MODERATE EFFICIENCY
20.000 SCFM DG

$ 2,925*
4,650*
3,932*
17,850*
1,425***
18,808*
30,315*
12,795*
43,110*
30.000 SCFM DG

$ 1,950
4,100
3,511
27,645
5,562**
31,354
40,915
16,177
57,092

48,000 SCFM DG

$ 1,950
5,166
4,828
43,901
8,950**
49,868
61,812
23,534
85,346
Large






     * Only two bids obtained for this size.

     **Average of two bidders.  Third bidder did not itemize.

    '**From one bidder only.

-------
                                   FIGURE 44
                   ANNUAL COST OF VENTURI-CYCLONE SCRUBBERS

                             FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
CO
oc
O
Q
O
O
100000
10000
1000





























(C

















































TOTAL COST
IPERATING COST
CAPITAL CHARC














>PI 1 IQ
rl_Uo
3ES)
JJ
r
t
OPERATING COST '























































































f.
s
' 6
/
7
















_s
/
7
s
r

















j>
fr
at
/*

















/

>
s



















































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                            GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                              165

-------
166

-------
                               TABLE 54

             ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST  DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
                   FOR  PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS
                        FOR  DAP PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
. Contaminant Effluent Loading
(ppm) Fluorine
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
MEDIUM EFFICIENCY
Small

53,500
164
46,800
36

15
2.1

33,700
100
31,900
7
Contaminant Cleaned Gas Loading
(ppm) Fluorine
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
4.1
0.415
80
27,425
13,684
6,425
7,089
170

. .

38,462
2,000
3,500*

5,000*
5,500*
5,430*
10,550*
375
375
450
710
1,475
1,500
79,471
Large

85,500
164
75,000
36

15
3.35

54,000
100
51,000
7

4.1
0.67
80
43,200
17,470
9,400
7,755
315

_ _

50,358
2,000
5,000*

6,200*
6,000*
7,970*
15,200*
500
450
450
710
1,475
2,000
111,028
High Efficiency
Small

53,500
164
46,800
36

15
2.1

33,700
100
31,900
7

3.25
0.31
85
32,375
13,684
6,425
7,089
170

_ _

38,962
2,000
3,500*

5,000*
5,500*
5,430*
10,550*
375
375
450
710
1,475
1,500
85,021
Large

85,500
164
75,000
36

15
3.35

54,000
100
51,000
7

3.25
0.50
85
47,050
17,470
9,400
7,755
J
315

— •»

50,857
2,000
5,000*

6,200*
6,000*
7,970*
15,200*
500
450
450
710
1,475
2,000
115,377
*Items of installed cost.  Itemized  for materials and labor by one bidder only.
                                                             167

-------
                          TABLE 54 continued

             ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
                   FOR  PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS
                        FOR  DAP PROCESS PLANTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Contaminant . Effluent Loading
(ppm) Fluorine
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
MEDIUM EFFICIENCY | High Efficiency
Small 20,000 DSCFM Small













Contaminant Cleaned Gas Loading
(ppm) Fluorine
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost























36,500
164
30,000
36

15
1.4

22,600
100
21,400
7

4.1
0.27
80
21,025
9,502
4,350
5,000
152


- _

32,540
2,000
3,000*
4,600*
3,000*
4,040*
6,200*
325
325
450
710
1,475
1,250
63,067




































20,000 DSCFM

36,500
164
30,000
36

15
1.4

22,600
100
21,400
7

3.25
0.216
85
23,525
9,502
4,350
5,000
1 ^2
J. J £<

__

33,042
2,000
3,000*
4,600*
3,000*
4,040*
6,250*
325
325
•J 4* *J
450
710
1,475
1,250
66,069
*Items of installed cost.  Itemized for materials and labor by one bidder only.

   168

-------
                                      FIGURE 45



                    CAPITAL COST  FOR PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS

                               FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
     100000
V)
cc.
o
Q


te
o
o
_l
<
t
Q.

u
     10000
      1000
                 ^r
                                                         MOD. EFF.



                                                         HIGH EFF.
        1000
    10000


GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
                                                                 169

-------
                             TABLE 55

              CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR  CAPITAL COST
                OF PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS
                     FOR  DAP PROCESS  PLANTS
        Population Size — 5           Sample Size — 2

                        Capital Cost = $21,025

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

 Conf. Level %          Lower Limit                      Upper Limit

        50             20,001                           22,049
        75             18,757                           23,293
        90             16,322                           25,729
        95             13,691                           28,359


        Population Size — 5           Sample Size — 2

                        Capital Cost = $27,425

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

 Conf. Level %          Lower Limit                      Upper Limit

        50             22,603                           32,247
        75             16,747                           38,103
        90              5,283                           49,566


        Population Size —5           Sample Size — 2

                        Capital Cost = $43,200

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

 Conf. Level %          Lower Limit                      Upper Limit

        50             38,004                           48,396
        75             31,692                           54,708
        90             19,338                           67,062
        95              5,995                           80,405
170

-------
                                    FIGURE 46




                      CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                        OF PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS

                             FOR DAP  PROCESS PLANTS
     500000
o
o


te
o
o
o
100000
10000
1000

















































































































































































































,',
X



























*
, >
c
J*
&
*' (









)'
>
fx"
*

















i
'\
I
s

















J
^
^
^


















1














75%








IE AN
75%

























































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                                GAS FLOW, DSCFM



          *The disparity between bids for this size scrubber is greater than the disparity


          for the other two sizes.
                                                                     171

-------
                            TABLE 56

           CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST
               OF PACKED  CROSS-FLOW  SCRUBBERS
                   FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
       Population Size — 5           Sample Size — 2

                       Installed Cost = $63,070
 Conf. Level

       50
       75
       90
       95
Lower Limit

61,596
59,806
56,302
52,517
 Upper Limit

 64,544
 66,334
 69,839
 73,623
       Population Size — 5           Sample Size — 2

                      Installed Cost = $79,572
Conf. Level %

       50
       75
       90
       95
Lower Limit

71,151
60,923
40,904
19,281
 Upper Limit

 87,992
 98,220
118,239
139,861
       Population Size — 5           Sample Size — 2

                      Installed Cost = $111,028
Conf. Level

       50
       75
       90
       95
Lower Limit

100,552
 87,829
 62,925
 36,027
 Upper Limit

 121,503
 134,226
 159,130
 186,028
172

-------
                                     FIGURE 47




                      CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR  INSTALLED COST


                         OF PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS

                             FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
     500000
     100000
CO
cc
o
o


k

8
_l
<
H
O.

o
      10000
       1000
                                                        ^7
75%

 i i

MEAN

 I I  I"
                                                              75%
                                    10000                      100000



                                GAS FLOW, DSCFM



          *The disparity between bids for this size scrubber is greater than the disparity

          for the other two sizes.
               300000
                                                                      173

-------
174

-------
                                               TABLE 57

                              ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                   FOR PACKED  CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS
                                        FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Pond Water (Make-up)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr

$6/hr




$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal
$.05/M gal




MEDIUM EFFICIENCY
30,OOODSCFM
8rOOO
1,738


1,875

200

4,787
34
4,821
8,624
7,957
16,581
48,OOODSCFM
8.000
3,613


2,888

250

7,150
55
7,205
13,955
11,103
25,058
High Efficiency
30,OOODSCFM
8.000
1,738


1,875

200

4,990
35
5,025
8,828
8,502
17,330
48.000DSCFM
8.000
3,613


2,888

250

7,287
57
7,344
14,095
11,538
25,633
CJI

-------
                                             TABLE 57 continued


                                ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
                                     FOR  PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS
                                          FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Pond Water (Make-up)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hr
$.025/M gal
$.05/M gal

MEDIUM EFFICIENCY







,20,OOODSCFM
8.000
1,738
1,838
150
3,051
23
3,074
6,800
6,307
13,107
High Efficiency



• -



20,OOODSCFM
8rOOO
1.738
1.838
150
3,183
24
3,207
6,933
6,609
13,540
•sj
O)

-------
                                   FIGURE 48



                  ANNUAL COST OF PACKED CROSS-FLOW SCRUBBERS

                             FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
    500000
     100000
CO
cc.
o
Q
O
u
     10000
      1000
                                                          MOD. EFF.
                                                       .   HIGH  EFF.
                                  10000



                              GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
                                                                   177

-------
                              GTSP STORAGE

      The reactions initiated in the GTSP reactor are completed over a period of
  several weeks after acidulation.16' During this time the granular product must
  be stored under roof to protect it from the weather. The storage building must
  be well ventilated to provide a safe  environment for employees  engaged in
  loading, unloading and moving the bulk material, and the ventilating air stream
  must be treated to remove dust and fluorine (or  SiF^)  before discharge to the
  atmosphere.

      Typically the storage is in gable-roofed shed buildings which are ventilated
  by natural  draft if no air pollution control equipment  is used. Such buildings
  are designed for high ventilation  rates,  typically from 100,000 to 1,000,000
  SCFM, with thermal density  differences as the driving force. The addition of
  scrubbing equipment for air pollution control provides a strong incentive for
  the  reduction  of the ventilation  rate to the minimum consistent with  good
  working conditions. This section  discusses the problem in terms of treating a
  reduced flow of about 200,000 ACFM.
                             Process  Description

      The screened granular triplesuperphosphate is ordinarily discharged from
  the  last screening operation onto a rubber conveyor belt which carries it into
  the  storage building.  Here it is discharged into bins or piles.  The product may
  be moved into position in a larger bulk storage pile by use of portable elevators,
  overhead cross transfer belts, front-end loaders, or by other  relocatable solids
  handling equipment.

      Any scheme for moving the solids inside the storage building must take
  into account  that all  the  GTSP  should be  held long enough to stabilize the
  composition  so  no  fluorine  evolution will take place after  the  product is
  shipped. Any additional  storage time is wasteful of space. The logistics of
  moving  500 or  1,000 ton/day solid  material through a 30-day retention pile
  requires a well planned solids handling program.

      Usually the buildings are designed for holding a pyramid-shaped  pile of
  GTSP considerably larger than that required for a 30-day retention. This allows
  for some inefficiency in use of the space to minimize handling.
      The evolution  of fluorine as SiF4  occurs  slowly, and  at a rate which
  decreases with storage time. If the entire storage building is treated as a unit,
  the evolution rate has been quoted as approximately 0.2 to 0.6 Ib F day/ton of
178

-------
GTSP.(6)  Thus,  a  storage building designed for a throughput of 500 ton/day
(P205 content) might be expected to evolve 100 to 300 Ib/day of SiF4.

     The  size of  the  building determines the  ventilation  rate required  to
produce good working conditions inside. For a 500 ton/day plant, the average
storage level  should be around 15,000 ton, and the building should have an
                                                                  o
interior volume  of perhaps three times the average value. At 30 Ib/ft , the
volume should be on the order of

                          15,000  X 3 X 2000   =           ^
                                                    '    '
                              0.564 X  40
A building of the dimensions shown in Figure 28 would contain approximately
this volume.
                        Ventilation Requirements

     Ventilation for  worker safety in storage buildings is ordinarily expressed
in terms of the number of "air changes per hour", based on total building
volume. Typical values for warehouses range  from  1 to  15 air changes per
hour,11 7) or one complete turnover of the air inside the building in 60 minutes
for the lower rate and  4 minutes for the higher one.  For the 4,000,000 cubic
foot storage building this amounts  to a minimum rate of 67,000 ACFM and a
maximu m of 1,000,000 ACFM.

     The  emissions  of  SiF4  require a  higher  than minimum rate  of
ventilation,(6)  and  three  air changes  per  hour is a reasonable  value.  This
corresponds to  200,000 ACFM for a  hypothetical  500  ton/day GTSP plant.
Careful selection of  the ventilation rate is  important because the cost of gas
cleaning equipment varies in direct relation  to the gas flow, and oversizing the
ventilation  system will increase the cost  of purchasing and operating  the gas
cleaning equipment.

     Design of the ventilation system in such a way as to produce acceptable
air quality in all  parts of the storage building is complicated by several factors:

     (1)  The dust release is primarily local and associated with handling of the
         stored product.

     (2)  The fluorine release is slow and decreases with time.
                                                                 179

-------
                               FIGURE 49

                   SKETCH OF GTSP STORAGE BUILDING
                      WITH 4,000,000 FT3 INTERIOR
180

-------
The building ventilation system  should  be designed to provide for clean  air
induction in a controlled pattern  as well  as adequate exhaust of contaminated
air.
                     Pollution Control  Considerations

     The dust generated  by solids handling and the fluorine evolved by curing
of the TSP product pose potential pollution problems.' 8) These can be treated
separately by use of  a fabric collector for  particulate removal followed by a
cyclonic scrubber or packed scrubber for  gas absorption, or by a scrubber
which serves both functions. The latter case is the only one considered  here,
but combination systems are practical and have been used.

     The particulate matter generated  by mechanical handling of the  granular
TSP is relatively fine with the coarser particles separated out of the ventilating
air  stream  by  gravity.  Particle  size  is predominantly above one  micron,
however, any moderate scrubber pressure drop levels (less than 10" w.c.) are
adequate for collection. Typical dust loadings on the order of 0.1 gr/ACF or

                          0.1 X 200,000  X 60  , 1?0|b/hr
                                  7,000

are encountered,  but the rate of dust evolution is likely to be very variable and
very  low levels  of  dust generation are likely  when no  materials handling
operations are being carried out.  Peak emission rates, on the other hand, may
reach levels  of 1 gr/ACF for short periods, and require efficiencies on the order
of 99% to avoid visible discharge and violation of particulate emission limits.

     The gas absorption  requirements  are relatively straightforward, and may
be met by use of a variety of absorption devices. The emission from a  GTSP
storage building for a 500 ton/day  plant will be in the range of 0.5 Ib/ton of
P20g,(6) which is approximately 250  Ib/day of fluorine. The present Florida
law limits the total emission  to 0.05 Ib/ton P205- or approximately 25 Ib/day.
This requires 90% scrubbing efficiency and an outlet concentration of about

          25  x 379 x   1

          19     6°     ^  *  1.000.000- 1.73 ppm.
              2OQ000

equivalent to 0.04 mg/SCF as F. This efficiency level demands low temperature
pond water in large quantity for scrubbing. Reference to Figure 8 and Table 13
indicates  that   equilibrium   levels  of  fluorine   are  low   enough   to
                                                                     181

-------
    meet the required outlet concentration at temperatures on the order of 80° F at
    almost any pond water fluorine  content. At 100° F, a low concentration  of
    h^SiFg (below 1.0 wt.%)  would be required, and at 120°F the specification
    could not be met.

        Field  experience has shown that the header ducts from storage building
    should be sprayed to minimize solids build-up.  Further, the  spraying converts
    the SiF4 to h^SiFg and SiC^ which then becomes conditioned for scrubbing,
    minimizing space otherwise lost in the scrubber shell.

        With  80° F pond  water  of normal  fluorine  content, the absorption
    requirement  is not severe. For this reason, a variety of scrubbers can perform
    satisfactorily  in  this service,  and  minimization  of energy  input  is  more
    important  than maximization of gas-liquid contact. The following  scrubber
    types are acceptable on this basis:

             (1)   Cyclonic

             (2)   Spray towers

             (3)   Cross flow packed

        The use of a conventional cyclonic scrubbing stage is relatively common,
    and the single specification for this service  is based  on this combination.
    Figure   is a photograph of a GTSP storage  building, showing two cyclonic
    scrubbers.
182

-------
CO

CO
         X W

         3-

         P3
         O F
         JJ :=

         DO D
         DO =
         m g
                    m

                    en
                    o

-------
184

-------
                                   TABLE 58
                       PROCESS DESCRIPTION  FOR GTSP
                         STORAGE BUILDING SCRUBBER
     This specification  describes  a scrubber to remove paniculate matter and gaseous
fluorides from the ventilating air discharged from a granular triplesuperphosphate fertilizer
storage building. The scrubber shall consist of a cyclonic scrubber for absorption of gaseous
            , particulate collection and de-entrainment of scrubbing liquor.
     The scrubbing system is to include a fan to overcome the pressure drop across the
scrubber and associated ductwork, a collection plenum system equipped with internal water
sprays,  which is to connect roof  ventilators along the  length of the storage  building,
balancing dampers,  scrubber inlet ductwork, a 180 ft. discharge stack, and a liquor return
sump. The building dimensions are approximately 180 ft. wide x 380 ft. long x 105 ft. at the
ridge line.

     Pond water is to be used as the scrubbing medium in both stages. The scrubbing system
will discharge into a sump to be provided as a part of the scrubbing system. Pumps for
supplying  the pond water will be by others, but the scrubber contractor is to supply the
pond water return pumps as a pan of his system.

     Pond water characteristics are as follows:

                                           Design           Min.       Max.
           Pond Water, PH                   2.0             1.2       2.2
           Temp.,°F                       80              55        88
           S04,wt.%                        0.15
           P205,wt.%                       0.1
           H^iFg, wt.%                     0.63            0.25       1.0
           Fluorine, wt.%                    0.5             0.2       0.8

     The scrubber is required to produce the specified performance when operating with the
"design" pond water conditions. The scrubber manufacturer shall specify the required water
circulation rate through both the duct section and the Cyclonic scrubber.

     Materials of construction shall be limited to the following:

                                     PVC
                                     Rubber
                                     FRP (Dynel lined)

     Minimal metal parts shall be exposed to process gas or pond water.
                                                                               185

-------
                                   TABLE  59
           OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR SCRUBBER SPECIFICATION
                     FOR GTSP STORAGE  BUILDING  VENT
      Plant Capacity, ton/day P^K                               500
      Building Dimensions, ft.
           Width                                              180
           Length                                             380
           Height at Ridge                                      105
      Building Volume, ft3                                 4,000,000
      Ventilation Rate, ACFM                                200,000

      Gas to Scrubber
           Flow, ACFM                                    200,000
           Temperature, °F                                      80
           Moisture Content, Vol.%                                1.6
           Flow, DSCFM                                   196,800
           Gaseous Fluoride (SiFj) Loading, ppm                   17.3
           Gaseous Fluoride (SiF^) Loading, Ib/hr                  10.4

           Paniculate Solid, gr/A CF                             0.10
           Paniculate Solids, Ib/hr                               170
      Gas from Scrubber
           Flow, ACFM                                    202,000
           Flow, DSCFM                                   196,800
           Temp., °F                                            68
           Moisture Content, Vol.%                               2.4
           Gaseous Fluoride Loading, ppm                         1.70
           Gaseous Fluoride Loading, Ib/hr                         1.0
           Fluoride Efficiency, Wt.%                             90.4

      Paniculate Solids L oading, gr/A CF                          0.01
      Paniculate Solids Loading, Ib/hr                              1.7
      Paniculate Efficiency, Wt.%                                  90

      Estimated Fluorine in Equilibrium with
       Pond Water, ppm                                        0.7
      Estimated NTU required                                     1.8
186

-------
                                TABLE 60

             ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
            FOR  CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP  STORAGE  VENTS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Concentration Loading
Cppm), Fluoride
Ib/hr, Particulate
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
(ppm), Fluoride
Ib/hr, Particulate
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
(c) Ductwork
(d) Stack
(e) Electrical
(f) Piping
(g) Insulation
(h) Painting
(i) Supervision
(j) Startup
(k) Performance Test
(I) Other
(4) Total Cost
LA Process Wt.
Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small































(48,000)'









Large

200,000
80
196,000
1.6

17.3
170

202,000
68
196,800
2.4

1.70
17
90
101,000
109,250
57,700*
9,975*





333,480
13,900*
21,150*


*(312,000)**
20,100*
22,000*

3,570*
10,500*
5,250*
28,750*

543,730
* Average of two bidders.  Third bidder did not itemize.

**Lower price from one bidder for one stack to handle 200,000 SCFM.  Higher
  price from another bidder for four stacks each handling 50,000 SCFM.
                                                                  187

-------
                              TABLE 61

              CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST OF
              CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP STORAGE
        Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3


                         Capital Cost = $101,000
                                       Capital Cost, Dollars
    Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit                Upper Limit
        50                     $93,149                   $108,851
        75                      85,788                    116,212
        90                      74,462                    127,538
        95                      63,988                    138,012
188

-------
                          TABLE 62

         CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR INSTALLED COST OF
          CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP  STORAGE
    Population Size — 5               Sample Size — 3


                     Installed Cost = $543,730
                                   Installed Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit                 Upper Limit

    50                    $491,266                  $596,194
    75                     442,076                   645,384
    90                     366,385                   721,075
    95                     296,394                   791,066
                                                              189

-------
                                                  TABLE 63



                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA  (COSTS IN $/YEAR)

                                 FOR CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS FOR GTSP STORAGE VENTS
CO
o
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Pond Water (Make-up)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annual ized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal

LA Process Wt.
Small






Large






High Efficiency
Small






Large

$ 1,950
7,933
10,513
60,975
15,000
75,975
96,371
54,373
150,744

-------
                             REFERENCES
(1)   Stern, Arthur C., Air Pollution, Volume III, Academic Press, New York &
     London, 1968, p. 221.

(2)   Waggman, W. H., Phosphoric Acid, Phosphates and Phosphatic Fertilizers,
     2nd ed., Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, 1952.

(3)   Shreve, Norris, The Chemical Process Industries, p. 340.

(4)   Grant, H. 0., "Pollution Control  in a Phosphoric Acid Plant", Chemical
     Engineering Progress, (Vol. 60, No. 1), January,  1964, p. 53-55.

(5)   Annon., "Cleanup Pays Off for Fertilizer Plant", Environmental Science
     and Technology, (Vol. 6, No. 5), May, 1972, p. 401-402.

(6)   Slack, A. V., Phosphoric Acid, Vol.  1, Fertilizer Science and Technology
     Selves, Marcel Dekker, Inc., N.Y. 1968.

(7)   Specht,  R.  C.,  and R.  R.  Calaceto, "Gaseous  Fluoride Emissions from
     Stationary  Sources", Chemical  Engineering Progress, (Vol.  63,  No.  5),
     May 1967, p. 78-84.

(8)   Teller,  A.   J.,   "Control  of Gaseous Fluoride Emissions",  Chemical
     Engineering Progress, (Vol. 63, No. 3), March 1967, p. 75-79.

(9)   English,  M., "Fluorine  Recovery from Phosphate Fertilizer Manufacture",
     Chemical and Process Engineering, December,  1967, p. 43-47.

(10) State of  Florida Air Pollution Regulations 17-204(6)-1.

(11) Gilbert,  Nathan, L.  A. Hobbs and W.  D.  Sandberg,  "Adsorption of
     Hydrogen Fluoride in a Limestone Packed Tower", Chemical Engineering
     Progress, (Vol. 49, No. 3), March, 1953, p. 120-128.

(12) Yatlov, V. S. and E. N.  Pineskaya, Zhur. Priklao Khim., 14, No. 1, 11-13,
     1941.
(13) Lunde,  K.  E.,  "Performance  of Equipment  for Control of  Fluoride
     Emission," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, (Vol. 50, No. 3), March,
     1958, p. 293-298.
                                                                191

-------
  (14) Ceilcote Corporation, private communication.

  (15) Wellman-Powergas Co., private communication.

  (16) Farmland Corporation, Lakeland, Florida, private communication.

  (17) Patty,  Frank  A.,  Industrial   Hygiene  and  Toxicology,  Volume  I,
       Interscience Publishers,  Inc., New York, N.Y., 2nd Ed., 1958, p. 289-293.
192

-------
FEED and GRAIN

-------
2.   FEED AND  GRAIN INDUSTRY

     Slightly more than 86% of  the cereal grains raised in the United States
today  and  consumed  domestically goes  for  the  feeding of  livestock  and
poultry.11' The feed industry combines cereal grains and mixtures of grain with
other natural products and synthetics to produce what are called "formula" or
"mixed"  feeds.  Millions of farmers still feed some  straight grain, sometimes
fortified with an  oil meal, to their livestock. However, the trend is toward
wider use of commercially formulated manufactured rations.

     Corn gluten* meal is recognized as the first dry protein cereal by-product
to have been fed widely to livestock. Corn gluten meal is a by-product of the
wet  milling of corn.  In  this  process, whole grain corn is steeped in  a dilute
sulfurous acid solution  and subsequently separated  into starch, fiber, gluten,
and corn germ**.

     Some of the gluten meal is mixed with coarse and fine fiber (hulls and
bran***) and other low-protein by-products to make a lower-grade feed than
the meal itself. Drying and handling of this final  feed are frequently done in a
flash drying system.

     Other by-product feedstuffs are frequently recovered in the manufacture
of the main food product. Whenever the by-product is high in protein value, it
is dried, ground, and sold as a high-protein feed, or mixed with low protein
by-products  (chaff,  hulls, bran,  etc.)  to  increase  their  feed value.  Other
important high-protein feeds  are oil-seed meals (soybean, cottonseed,  flaxseed
and safflower seed), dried distillers' solubles****, fish meal, and various animal
residues  (blood, tankage*****, etc.).Table 64.'1'presents the composition of
several feedstuffs used in the manufacture of feed.

     Feed manufacturing is a comparatively simple operation. Cereal grains, oil
seed meals, packinghouse by-products,  and occasionally minute quantities of
vitamins, molasses, and  other ingredients, are combined to  produce rations.  If
every trace element and vitamin additive were individually  counted and added
to the total number  of basic ingredients such as the  grains, a formula could
easily contain 50 or more components.
*Gluten is a term which describes the protein derived from grains, principally
corn or wheat.
**Germ is the seed part of the grain.
***Bran is the skin or husk of the grain.
****Dry  distillers' solubles are by-products of  the  brewing  and distilling
industry.
*****Tankage  refers to the  residual solids created in the wet  rendering of
animal carcasses.

                                                                      193

-------
                       TABLE 64

          COMPOSITION OF TYPICAL  FEEDSTUFFS11'
             USED  IN MANUFACTURE OF FEED


Description



Corn (dent) grain
Wheat grain
Barley grain
Oats grain
Soybean meal
Sesame meal
Linseed meal
Cottonseed meal
Safflower meal
Cooked feathers
Raw feathers
Tankage
Rice bran
Malt sprouts
Wheat bran
Dried beet pulp
Alfalfa hay (early)
Alfalfa hay (late)
Orchardgrass (early)
Orchardgrass (late)
Timothy
Coastal Bermudagrass
Soybean hulls
Soybean straw
Barley straw
Wheat straw
Corn cobs & husk
Rice hulls

Crude
Fiber



2.2
2.3
7.0
12
6.4
6.9
9.0
12.4
35
1.5
1.3
3.7
13
12.5
11
21
23.5
39
24
35
32
32
28
43
38
42
32
43

Cell
Walls



10.1
12.4
20
31
12.0
16.8
25
27
58
19.5
9.0
25
24.1
45
47
54
40
55
52
70
65
76
63
67
72
82
83
81
Acid
Deterg.
Fiber
Dry
Matter
Basis
2.7
3.1
6.3
16.4
9.0
9.8
16.4
18.0
41
12.2
65.0
3.6
15.9
16
12.1
33
25
40
27
40
43
38
45
53
45
53
45
66


Lignin



0.6
0.7
1.0
2.8
0.3
2.0
6.7
6.6
13.7
	
—
—
4.3
1.1
4.0
2.5
5.3
9.0
2.7
4.7
7.0
5.6
2.0
12.0
5.2
7.6
5.0
14

Crude
Protein



9.8
11.6
12.7
13.6
44
52
38
44
24
96
96
67
15
26
17.4
10.0
20
14
24
11
10
6.4
15
11
2.6
3.2
2.3
3.0
Dry Digestibility
Matter Non-
Ruminant ruminant



86
85
80
75
84
77
81
19
50
70
<10
68
61
77
73
76
62 50
53
72 38
57 20
50
46
68
44
54
36
50
< 10
194

-------
Table 65(1) provides illustrations  of  rations and supplements for one class of
swine, the brood sow. The formula under "ration" is for a complete diet, ready
for the sow. If the "supplement" formula is used, a ton of complete feed would
be  prepared by adding 1,100 Ib of ground corn and 400 Ib of ground oats to
500 Ib of the supplement. The supplement type of  feed is usually used  in the
feeding of beef cattle.  It provides sufficient protein to balance that which is in
the grain and roughage which the cattle eat. Table 66(1)gives four formulas for
beef  cattle  supplements, three  providing 32%  protein  and  one  with 65%
protein. The major difference between these supplements is that one is based
on  all natural protein, while the other three include a non-protein source in the
form of urea.

     The feed formulas presented inTables65and66are  representative of those
being manufactured in the  United States today. The composition of feed for
other animals and poultry vary from these only in relation to the differences in
their requirements for various nutrients.11'

      In both the manufacture of feed and the manufacture of flour, a process
called milling is employed. However, feed  milling  and flour  milling are two
entirely distinct processes. The function of feed milling is to reduce the cereal
grains and oilseed meals  to the desired size and consistency  of particle, and
then  to  mix  this ground material with  other  ingredients  to produce
scientifically formulated  rations.  The reduction in size of  the cereal grains and
other constituents is usually performed in a grinding device, such as a hammer
mill.

     Flour and products made from flour have been  used by man for centuries.
The bland taste  of food made from cereal grains has much to do with this fact.
The first articles made from  flour were unleavened breads.  Later,  the Egyptians
introduced yeast leavened bread.

     The primary reason for the continued use of cereal grains as a food is not
taste, but the ease of growing cereals and  their stability in storage. The power
of drying as a means of  preserving cereal grains was discovered by early man.
He  used sun drying techniques to avoid spoilage and antique milling techniques
to improve the taste of the food products.

     The original millstones, which have been found in ruins that date back to
4000 B.C., were essentially a crude mortar and pestle arrangement designed to
crush wheat into  smaller particles. Then it  was discovered that moving one
millstone  on another in  a semicircular fashion was  a more efficient  means of
reducing grain to flour. Power to run such  mills often came from animals. The
water wheel was invented around 100 B.C., and wind and water then became
                                                                      195

-------
                             TABLE 65

         RATIONS AND  SUPPLEMENTS FOR BROOD SOWS11'


                                   Ration              Supplement

 Ground corn                        1,110 Ib             —
 Ground oats                         400                —
 Middlings                            50                200
 17% dehy. alfalfa meal                  50                200
 50% meat & bone meal                 75                300
 60% fish meal                         25                100
 44% soybean meal                    250              1,030
 Dicalcium phosphate (18%)             10                 40
 Calcium carbonate                     20                 80
 Salt                                  8                 30
 Trace mineral mix                      1                   4
 Hog vitamin premix                     5                 20

 Total batch                         2,004 Ib           2,004 Ib


                CALCULATED NUTRIENT CONTENT

 Protein, %                            16.2                36.2
 Fat, %                                3.6                 2.6
 Fiber, %                               5.6                 7.3
 Calcium, %                             1.02                4.0
 Vitamin A,  lU/lb                    2,750             10,000
 Phosphorus, %                         0.62                1.65
 Vitamin D  , USPU/lb                 375              1,500
 Riboflavin,  Mg/lb                       2.4                 7.7
 Niacin, Mg/lb                          23.3                66.5
 Pantothenic acid, Mg/lb                  8.9                26.0
 Choline, Mg/lb                       530              1,145
 Vitamin B12,Mcg/lb                   12.5                51.0


                     GUARANTEED ANALYSIS

 Crude protein, min %                   16.0                36.0
 Crude fat, min %                       3.5                 2.5
 Crude fiber, max %                      6.0                 8.0
 Calcium (Ca),  max%                  Not Needed              4.5
 Calcium (Ca),  min %                  Not Needed              3.5
 Phosphorus (P), min %                Not Needed              1.6
 Iodine (I), min %                    Not Needed              0.0006
 Salt (NaCI), max %                   Not Needed              2.0
 Salt (NaCI), min  %                   Not Needed              1.0
196

-------
                                  TABLE  66

                    BEEF  CATTLE  FEED SUPPLEMENTS11:
    Ingredients

44% Soybean meal
Wheat middlings
Corn gluten feed
17% deny, alfalfa
Urea (45%)
Dicalcium phosphate
Calcium carbonate
Salt
Trace mineral mix
"Dry" molasses product
Vitamin A
Vitamin D2
Molasses (wet)

Total batch, Ib
Protein, %
Equivalent protein, %
Fat, %
Fiber, %
Calcium, %
Phosphorus, %
Vitamin A, lU/lb
Vitamin D0, lU/lb
Crude protein, min %
This includes no more than -°A
  equivalent crude protein
  from non-protein nitrogen
Crude fat, min %
Crude fiber, max %
Calcium (Ca), max %
Calcium (Ca), min %
Phosphorus (P),  min %
Iodine (I), min %
Salt (NaCI), max %
Salt (NaCI), min %
32% Cattle
Supplement
All Natural
Protein
1,320
100
100
150
—
30
100
50
5
—
2
1
150
2,008
32% Cattle
Supplement
with
4% Urea
600
750
—
200
80
30
110
50
5
—
2
1
180
2,008
32% Cattle
Supplement
with
6% Urea
60
450
800
200
120
40
100
50
5
—
2
1
180
2,008
65% Cattle
Supplement
with
20% Urea
50
150
—
600
400
150
60
80
10
400
4
2
100
2,006
CALCULATED NUTRIENT CONTENT
32.2
—
1.05
7.0
2.58
0.80
13,600
2,000
32.2
11.24
2.1
7.5
2.72
0.81
13,600
2,000
32.4
16.86
2.0
8.2
2.73
0.85
13,600
2,000
64.4
56.20
1.04
11.3
3.36
1.51
27,200
4,000
                          GUARANTEED ANALYSIS
32.0
32.0
32.0
64.0

1.0
8.0
3.0
2.5
0.8
0.0006
3.0
2.5
11.5
2.0
8.5
3.0
2.5
0.8
0.0006
3.0
2.5
17.0
2.0
9.0
3.0
2.5
0.8
0.0006
3.0
2.5
56.5
1.0
12.5
4.0
3.0
1.5
0.001
5.0
4.0
                                                                      197

-------
the prime sources of energy for milling until comparatively recent times.

     The function of flour milling is to separate the starchy endosperm, which
is the  part that is ultimately made into flour, from the bran and germ  of the
grain. The  bran  is composed of several outer coverings of the grain. The germ is
the embryo of the new plant.

     There are many manufacturing processes used within the Feed and Grain
Industry.  The  scope of  this  contract limits  detailed consideration to the
following processes:

     1.   Feed Milling

     2.   Flour Milling

     3.   Feed Flash Drying
                        FEED MANUFACTURING

     Feed manufacturing involves the combining of cereal grains, oilseed meals,
and packinghouse and other by-products to produce rations most beneficial to
the production of meat, milk, eggs or fur. Molasses, vitamins, drugs and other
ingredients are occasionally used in minute quantities to further improve upon
the formulation.  A flow diagram  of a simplified feed manufacturing facility,
commonly referred to as a feed mill, is shown in Figure 51.(2)

     Feed materials are usually shipped to the feed mill  by truck or rail. The
medium-size  and large-size  mills  sometimes receive  their required  grain  by
barge.  Grain  is unloaded by  gravity, by air or by hand.  Frequently, railroad
boxcars are unloaded with power  shovels and hand labor. Positive or negative
pressure air systems are generally used for unloading barges.

     The movement of grain within the mill is usually by bucket elevator and
gravity.

     Grain is usually stored in concrete bins. Its moisture content usually does
not exceed 15%, and  12% moisture content is preferred. If necessary, the grain
can be dried in a separate structure adjacent to the mill.

     From the storage  bins, whole  grains are conveyed  to  cleaning,  rolling,
grinding, and  other plant processes.  The processed grains may  be shipped to
consumers or  held  for feed formulation.  Finished feed  formulas can  be
198

-------
                                    FIGURE 51


                          SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM OF A
                                    FEED MILL
r	
i
i
i	
  V
BOX  CAR
RECEIVING
HOPPER
           •FABRIC FILTERS-
              CYCLONES
                                                     1
                           	1
         O


         u

         id
1
rv













1 1



VENT
FILTERS

if 1
BIN














v'





BIN














1





B






t

1
i i



1
1









N

















oe
|
kl
kl
            HOPPER  CAR
            RECEIVING
            HOPPER
      31
                                            "|CLEANER|^|ROU-E:R
  I
                                                         SHIPPING

                      BASIC EQUIPMENT SHOWN  IN SOLID LINES,
                       CONTROL EQUIPMENT IS DOTTED LINES.
                                                                  199

-------
prepared  in  the  form  of  finely ground mash*,  pellets,.or  mixed mash and
pellets.
Grinding

     The basic grinding device is the hammer mill. The mill's grinding chamber
houses  rows of loosely mounted  swinging  hammers and plates of hardened
steel. These hammers pulverize the grain by  striking it sharply. The pulverized
grain is ejected from the mill when it is ground finely enough to pass through a
screen which is part of the mill. The screens have openings ranging from 1/8 in.
upwards to 1/2 in. The fineness of grind is determined by the type of feed in
which the ground material is to be used.

     Other types of mills used in feed production include the attrition mill and
roller mills. In the attrition mill, revolving grinding plates pulverize the grain to
produce a finely textured soft product. Roller mills include pairs of corrugated
metal rolls, one of which revolves at a speed 2 to 4 times that of the  other. The
grain is forced between the rolls and sheared by the corrugation.

     A  fan  is required to convey the ground material away from the grinding
unit, whether it be a hammer mill, attrition mill or roller mill.
Cleaning

     Scalpers**are  one of several  devices used to remove coarse, non-edible
material from the product flow before it reaches the mixer. Separators, which
consist  of reciprocating  sieves which classify grains  of different sizes  and
textures, perform a  similar function.

     Permanent or  electric magnets are usually installed ahead of the grinder
for the removal of stray pieces of wire or metal.
Mixing

     There are three basic types of feed mixers:
'Mixture of ground grain and water.
**Revolving wire cage containing curved, internal baffles.
 200

-------
     1.   Vertical

     2.   Horizontal

     3.   Drum

     The  vertical mixer  is the most widely  used  in the smaller plants. It can
range in capacity from 500 Ib to 7 tons and is usually a batch operation.

     The  ground grain and  other  ingredients,  which may include a protein
source, vitamins, minerals, and drugs, are measured into the  mixing cylinder.
The screws or paddles inside the cylinder are then operated for the necessary
time to establish the proper blending of the mixture.

     A dry mash feed is ready for packaging, bulk delivery, or storage after it
has been mixed.
Pelleting

     A  major  advantage of pellets is that  all the components are  bonded
together so that  the bird or animal consumes the proper balance of nutrients
intended for it.

     The  manufacture of pellets begins with the blending  of molasses or fat
with the dry mash. A binding agent is also incorporated into the mixture. Live
steam is added to the dry  mixed feed as it enters the pellet mill. After the
pellets are formed and  compressed, they are  released into a cooling system
which hardens the pellets. Broken pellets and milling fines are returned to the
pellet mill for reprocessing.
                            FLOUR  MILLING

     Not all cereal grains are pulverized to a flour. Rice and barley are milled in
such a way that only the husk is removed. Oats are rolled into a flattened form.
The following is a description of the milling process used for the conversion of
wheat into flour.

     A simplified flow diagram of a modern flour mill is shown in Figure 52.(3)
Wheat is stored at the  mill in large bins. Most mills store at least 6 weeks
supply, with some  having over  42 weeks storage capacity. On arrival, wheat
contains foreign impurities such as sticks, stones, string, rodent contamination,
                                                                      201

-------
                                                                             FIGURE 5Z
                                                                    SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM OF A

                                                                        MODERN FLOUR MILL
  4 RAW WHEAT
     B,NS
4 UERCHEN _,  ,f
  FEEDERS ^i-^^
        c.
                 DOTTED  EXHAUST  LINES  CONNECT  ALL   ITEMS  OF   EQUIPMENT   TO  FABRIC  FILTERS

-------
etc. which are removed before wheat goes into storage. Dust and smaller pieces
of foreign matter are removed in the cleaning done just prior to milling.

     If  the wheat is too wet, it  is dried before going into storage. If the
moisture of the  grain is above 14.5%, heat production results from the growth
of microorganisms in the grain.  Hot air is used for the drying of wheat.
Evaporated moisture is carried away by air currents.
Cleaning Prior to Milling

     As  grain is  needed for milling, it is withdrawn  from storage and  sent
through a cleaning operation.

     Prior to entering  the cleaning house  from storage, the wheat is weighed.
Then it  goes through  the same  type of  separator used in  cleaning prior to
storage, except the separator is set to remove fine impurities and dust. Light
impurities such as wheat chaff are  removed by air currents. Next, the wheat
passes through  magnetic  separators  which  remove  bits  of  metal  which
inadvertently found their way into the wheat mix.

     Then  additional aspiration is provided, from which  the wheat enters a
machine designed  to remove cereal grains other than wheat and  to  remove
foreign  seeds, particularly weed seeds.  The  unwanted seeds are caught in
specially designed pockets in  a revolving metal plate, and are  lifted  up and
carried away, while the wheat passes through the machine.

     Another cleaning operation  is  performed in  a  scourer. Scouring, a dry
operation, involves the removal of dirt on the surface of the wheat by friction.
Sometimes a light  washing is performed prior to scouring in  order to toughen
the bran coat.

     The  final cleaning step is a water wash, which  dissolves the dirt and
permits stones and bits of metal  to sink. The washer adds about 1% to the
moisture content of  the wheat. In a typical washer, wheat is conveyed through
a trough of water where dirt is floated away  and stones sink. After washing,
excess surface moisture is removed from the wheat by centrifugal forces.
Tempering and Conditioning

     Tempering refers to the addition of water to the bran and endosperm. The
bran becomes tough and rubbery while the endosperm becomes softer, which
                                                                     203

-------
improves  the  milling efficiency.  Conditioning employs  a  controlled heating
process in addition to the moistening procedure.

     Wheats can be  broadly  classified  into the classes of hard wheat and soft
wheat according to their milling characteristics. Hard wheats require about 20%
more horsepower to grind to a given size. When hard and soft wheats are found
in the same wheat mix, the problem evolves into one of  overgrinding the soft
wheat or  undergrinding the hard wheat. If hard wheats are maintained in the
presence of moisture under the proper conditions and for appropriate periods
of time, they grind more like soft wheats.

     Tempering, as  it is still practiced in the United States, involves adding
water to grain to raise the  moisture to 15 to 19% for hard wheats and 14.5 to
17% for soft wheats. An excessive amount of water is added to the grain, which
lies in tempering bins. The unabsorbed surface  moisture is drained from the
tempering bins, and  the wheat is allowed to lie in the bins for periods of 18 to
72 hours. Usually, tempering is done in  successive steps since it is impractical to
add more than a few percent of water to wheat at one time.

     Conditioning, in contrast to tempering, always involves the use of heat.
Quick diffusion of water into the endosperm as well as the bran is the purpose.
Normally,  a temperature  of 115°F  cannot be exceeded without  causing
detectable changes in the baking quality of the flour.

     Wheat conditioners consist of four sections. The  first section heats the
wheat to the  proper temperature. The second  adds moisture and holds the
wheat for the proper  time.  The  third section cools  the wheat to  room
temperature. The final  section allows  time for the moisture in  the wheat to
equilibrate prior to milling.

     The wheat goes through the first  three sections in 1.5 hours or less. The
wheat is held  in the fourth section  for 8 to 18 hours, with the longer  times
being used for the harder wheats.
Grinding

     The purpose of flour milling is first to separate the endosperm from bran
and  germ in chunks as large as possible and then  to reduce the  size  of the
endosperm chunks to flour-sized particles through a series of grinding steps.

     The grinding of wheat is done between pairs of rolls. These rolls move in
opposite directions and at different rates  of  speed. They are set with an
204

-------
appreciable gap between them, such that they do not grind the wheat primarily
by crushing, but  rather  by shearing forces  which are relatively  gentle.  The
rapidly moving roll runs about  2.5  times faster  than the  slower  one and at
speeds from 250 to 450 rpm.

     The roller  milling area is divided into the break section and the reduction
section. The bran  is broken open and the endosperm  is milled away  in the
break  section.  This section usually involves four or  more sets  of rolls, each
taking stock from  the preceding one. After each break, the mixture of  free
bran, free  endosperm, free germ, and bran containing adhering endosperm is
sifted. The bran having  endosperm still attached goes to the next break  roll,
and the process is repeated until as much endosperm  has been separated from
the bran as is possible.

     The surface of break rolls is always fluted to obtain the necessary grinding
effect. The number of saw-tooth flutes increase from  10 to 12 flutes per inch
on the first break, to about 28 flutes per inch on the  fourth break.

     A sifting  system (called  scalping)  follows each set of break rolls.  The
scalping system is  a combination of a sieving operation (plansifters) and air
aspiration (purifiers).

     A plansifter consists of flat sieves piled in tiers, one above the other.  The
action of  the sifter is rotary  in  a plane parallel with the  floor. As the sifter
moves in a 3.5  in. circle,  the  small-sized particles travel across  the sieve to a
collecting trough and are removed. Large pieces of bran are first removed and
are sent to the next break roll. Bran  and germ are scalped off the  finer sieves.
Below these are the flour sieves. The resulting flour and  endosperm chunks
(middlings) still contain  minute  size bran particles. These are removed  by
sending the product through a purifier where air currents carry the bran away.

     A purifier is a long oscillating sieve, inclined downwards, with  air currents
passing through  the sieve in the direction from floor to ceiling. The buoyancy
effect  of the air causes the flour to stratify into endosperm chunks  of different
sizes. Thus, a purifier is used to make a coarse separation of middlings as well as
for the removal  of  bran. The endosperm chunks fall  through the sieve openings
and are sent to the appropriate  reduction rolls. The overs  are a  composite of
bran and bran plus endosperm. These go back to the break rolls or to millfeed
stock. Aspirated materials go to millfeed.

     For a flour roll break section, a scalping system containing  12 purifiers is
normal. The fine  middlings from the first, second, third  and fourth breaks
normally go through a double purification  step  while  only one purification
                                                                      205

-------
 treatment is needed for the coarser middlings.

     The reduction system consists of two parts, roll mills and sifting machines.
 The major difference from the break system is that the surface of the reduction
 mills is smooth rather  than grooved.  The reduction rolls reduce  endosperm
 middlings to flour size and facilitate the removal of the last remaining particles
 of bran and germ.

     In a reduction system the roll stands are divided into coarse rolls and fine
 rolls. Coarse and fine is in reference to the setting of the rolls, whether they are
 set wide to produce  coarse grinding or close to  produce fine grinding. The
 middlings produced from the coarse rolls are sent to the fine rolls to be ground
 to flour.

     After each reduction, the resulting product is classified by particle size in
 a  sifter.  Oversized  material is sent back to the  reduction  rolls  for  further
 processing. Normally there is at least one sifting device for every reduction roll
 stand.
 Conveying System

     Older  mills depend upon  gravity for the  transport of flour  stock  from
 machine to machine. The wheat and flour is moved to the top of  the mill by
 bucket elevators, and then the material flows by spouts to the rolls and to the
 sifters.

     Bucket elevators are dusty and they provide a place for insects to grow.
 Consequently, flour mills are abandoning  bucket elevators  and gravity spouts,
 and are converting to air conveying. Powerful suction fans provide the negative
 pressure. The air intake  is through the roller mills. This air movement has the
 desirable effect of keeping the rolls and  the flour  cool during  grinding. The
 simplified flow diagram  of a modern flour mill  shown in Figure  2  includes an
 air conveying system.
                          FEED FLASH  DRYING

      Flash drying systems, as applied to the feed industry, are usually designed
 to accomplish drying with disintegration.  Such a system is shown  in  Figure
 53.(2) This is in contrast to simultaneous drying and grinding operations. Since
 the desired particle size has been established  in the original wet feed, the dried
 material is simply disintegrated, i.e., separation of loosely packed materials.
206

-------
                                        FIGURE 53
                       FLASH DRYING COMBINED WITH DISINTEGRATION
          AIR
         INLET
  OIL
OR GAS
BURNER
                                   DRY
                                 DIVIDER
                                                                    EXPANSION
                                                                      JOINT
•

1 1

AIR
HEATER
1 1


1 1



TO DRYING
SYSTEM
                                 MIXER
                                              CAGE
                                              MILL
                                                                        207

-------
 Disintegration is usually accomplished with a cage mill.

      In  a  flash dryer, or pneumatic conveyer dryer,  moisture  is removed by
 dispersing the material to be dried in a hot gas zone followed by conveying at
 high velocities. The dispersion is usually accomplished with a cage mill, a device
 designed to break up  loosely packed materials, or an imp mill for more tightly
 compacted materials. The imp mill is a high-speed impact pulverizer.

      The dryer system consists of a furnace or other source of hot  gases, a
 dispersion device, a duct through which the gases convey the material, and a
 collection  system for removing the dry product from the gas stream.

      Frequently, the wet feed must be conditioned by mixing with recycled
 dry product in a mixer. This is required in  order to achieve good dispersion in
 the cage  mill. Filter  cakes, the form of  many  by-products of wet milling
 processes, have  very  unfavorable  drying  characteristics. They are usually
 conditioned by mixing with previously dried material.
                NATURE  OF THE GASEOUS  DISCHARGE

     There are  many sources of air pollution  in the feed and grain industry.
Table 67(4) presents the more common sources.

     The air pollution problems with regard to receiving, handling, and storing
 operations are generally due to the fine dusts found in field run grains.  Fine
 particles are produced from the grain itself, by abrasion in handling and storing.
 The fine  dust  may include the soil  in  which the grain was grown, or fine
 particles originating from weeds or insects. Therefore, because of these possible
 sources of fine  dust, no reliable prediction of the kind  and amount of dust in
 any specific shipment of field run grain can be made.

     Table 68<2) presents the particle size distribution of dusts generated during
 the unloading of barley from  a  boxcar. The barley was received in a deep
 hopper equipped with a control hood. A blower carried the dust picked up by
 the control hood to a cyclone where the larger particles dropped out and were
 collected in a sack  (sample no. 1). The cyclone was vented to a fabric filter,
 which collected the finer material in a hopper (sample no. 2).

     Grain grinding, which is commonly done in feed mills with a hammer  mill,
 generates a large amount of fine dust. A fan conveys away the ground materials
 from the hammer mill and discharges it into a cyclone. Typical dust losses from
 a hammer mill cyclone, along  with the  dust  losses from some  grain cleaner
 208

-------
                              TABLE 67
SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION  IN FEED AND GRAIN  INDUSTRY141
   Source
Grain Unloading

Grain Handling & Transport

Grain Cleaning

Grain Storage

Grain Grinding

Pelletizing of Feed Mixtures


Feed Loading into Trucks & Rail Cars

Flour Milling

Loading of Middlings & Chaff from
Flour Milling into Rail Cars

Loading Grain Dust Cars

Oil-Seed Expelling

Flash Drying

Barley Malt Toasting
Emission Type

Fine Dust

Fine Dust

Fine Dust

Fine Dust

Fine Dust

Fine Dust
(sometimes Odor)

Fine Dust

Very Fine Dust

Fine Dust


Fine Dust

Odor

Dust, Vapors & Odor

Odor
                                                                 209

-------
                        TABLE 68(2)

              PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF THE
       PRIMARY  CYCLONE CATCH AND  THE SECONDARY
      FABRIC FILTER CATCH OF  DUST FROM A RAILROAD
         RECEIVING HOPPER HOOD CONTROLLING THE
       UNLOADING OF A BOXCAR OF FEED-TYPE BARLEY(al
                Particle Size Distribution by Weight

                    Sample No. 1            Sample No. 2
Particle Size, y
Oto5
5 to 10
10 to 20
20 to 44
44 to 74
74 to 149
149 to 250
Over 250 (60 mesh)
Cyclone Bottoms, % F
0.9
0.9
3.9
9.3
12.9
16.2
5.4
50.5
abric Filter Hopper, %
4
25
66
5
0
0
0
0
(a)Specific gravity of both samples was 1.8.
210

-------
cyclones, are presented in Table 69.(2)

     During the drying of a high-protein feed, the air contaminants that may be
emitted are dusts, vapors, and odors. If the material is agitated or stirred during
the drying process,  such as in a flash drying system, dust emissions are likely to
be a problem. The nature  of the emissions  is determined by the material being
dried and the operating conditions of the drying system.

     A typical flash drying system will reduce the moisture content of wet feed
from 60%  down  to 30%.  For a 20,000  Ib/hr feed  rate,  this is equivalent to
removing 8,570 Ib/hr of moisture as a vapor. The gas flow associated with this
rate of water removal is 20,000 ACFM at 220° F.

     In the modern flour mill the product flows by gravity from the top of the
building, through the various machines, to the ground floor. At the completion
of  each  phase of  processing,  the material  is relifted to the top floor by
pneumatic conveyors for  further  processing.  Many passes up and down the
building are required to produce the finished product. A considerable amount
of  piping  and  auxiliary  equipment is  required in  connection  with  these
pneumatic conveying systems. The conveying systems  are typically divided up
according to their function as follows:

     1.   System for delivery of raw wheat from a nearby grain elevator

     2.   Pneumatic relift  conveyors for the  wheat  cleaning and tempering
         processes

     3.   Pneumatic conveyor for collecting the screenings from the cleaning
         process

     4.   Pneumatic relifts for the wheat milling process

     5.   Pneumatic conveyors for the storage of finished flour and feed

     All of the above pneumatic conveying  systems are shown in Figure 52. The
design of each of these systems is a function of the nature of the material being
moved as well as the distance and rate of flow.

     At the end  of each pneumatic conveying line, the  material is fed  to a
receiver or cyclone.  From  the receiver or cyclone, the  material falls by gravity
through rotary air-locks directly into processing machinery.

     Each one  of the pneumatic  conveying systems is equipped  with a  dust
                                                                     211

-------
                           TABLE  69




                DUST LOSSES  FROM CYCLONES'21
Grain
Basic Equipment
Process wt, Ib/hr
Exhaust Air Volum
SCFM
Dust Concentration
gr/SCF
Dust Loss, Ib/hr
Malted Barley
Grain Cleaner
Test No. 1
53,000
'/
2,970
0.194
4.95
Test No. 2
50,000
2,970
0.160
4.07
Feed Barley
Hammer Mill
10,350
3,790
0.488
15.8
Milo*
Grain Cleaner
11,250
First Cyclone
3,680
0.058
1.83
Second Cyclone
2,610
0.006
0.13
 *A sorghum similar to millet and grown for forage
212

-------
collection system. Each of the five dust collection systems uses fabric filters. In
the cleaning  section,  for  example, the dust collector aspirates all receivers on
the intermediate relift conveyors. In addition it aspirates the screenings suction
conveyor, all cleaning machinery, all feeders and all  of the screw conveyors in
the cleaning  section.  The other four filters serve other areas of the plant in a
similar manner.

     Therefore, the gaseous discharges from a modern flour mill should be,
except during periods of  upset operation, extremely clean.  In fact, since the
design of most pneumatic conveying systems allows  for recycle of the air used
in them, there should be no gaseous discharges, except during periods of upset
operation.
               POLLUTION CONTROL  CONSIDERATIONS

     Gases discharged from  the following  pieces of equipment and/or systems
will be considered:

     1.    Feed Grinder

     2.    Pneumatic Relift System for the flour milling process

     3.    Flash Drying System

     In  the cases of feed grinders and pneumatic relift systems, the emission
problem is limited to fine dusts. These fine dusts are the result of losses from
product  recovery cyclones.  Since it  is  desirable to recover the material lost
from  these cyclones in a dry state the  only practical means of control is the
fabric filter.

     Since the exhaust fan  in a flash drying system is usually  placed at the
product  discharge  end of  the system, the entire system  is under  negative
pressure. This precludes any emissions, except from the final collector where
the product is separated from the air stream.

     Since the emissions from  a flash drying system include odors as well as
fine  dusts,  the pollution control  systems of  interest  are  combustion and
absorption. The odor levels in  the flash dryer specifications are expressed in
"odor units". One odor unit per cubic foot is that concentration of odor which
is numerically equivalent to  its odor threshold. A level of 1500 odor units per
cubic foot would require 1500 dilutions with clear, odor-free air to make it just
detectable.
                                                                     213

-------
214

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

     Specifications  for  air pollution  control systems were written for  three
sources in the feed and grain industry:

          Flour mill pneumatic conveying systems
          Feed mill grinders
          Feed flash dryers

     A  fabric  filter  system  was  specified  for the flour  mill  pneumatic
conveyors. The specifications are shown in Tables 70 and 71. The system was
not specified for total  control of the mill. It was only designed to handle the air
from  the  cyclonic dust  collectors  on the  pneumatic conveying system which
lifts milled  grain from the rolls up to the classifying equipment.  Other mill
emission sources, such as grain cleaning, are controlled by separate fabric filter
systems. Cost data are  presented on Tables 72 and 73 and on Figures 54 and 55.
Confidence  limits  for the  capital  cost  data  are presented on Table  74 and
Figure 56.

     A  fabric filter system was also specified for the  feed mill  grinder. In
keeping with conventional industry practice, the system was designed to handle
only the grinder exhaust rather than the total mill  exhaust. Specifications are
presented  on Tables 75  and 76. Cost data are presented  on Tables 77  and 78
and on Figures 57 and 58. Confidence limits for the  capital cost data are shown
on Table 79 and Figure 59.

     The emissions  from the feed flash dryer consist of both particulate matter
and odor. Specifications were written to deal primarily with the odor problem
but included a request that suppliers quote the particulate removal efficiency
which  would be  achieved  in  their  system.  Both scrubber systems,  using
buffered  potassium permanganate,  and thermal  combustion systems  were
quoted.

     Specifications  for wet scrubber systems  are shown on  Tables 80 and 81.
Cost data are presented on  Tables 82 and  83 and on  Figures  60 and 61.
Estimated removal  efficiencies for  particulate matter are also shown on Table
82. The primary  component of  the  operating costs for  the  wet scrubber
systems is the consumption of potassium permanganate and borax. The cost of
these chemicals represents  about 99% of the direct operating cost. These
chemical  consumption  numbers  are  based  upon  theoretical reaction calcu-
lations rather than upon  actual operating data.

     Specifications  for thermal combustion systems are shown  on Tables 85
and 86. Cost data are  presented on  Tables 87 and 88 and on Figures 63  and 64.
                                                                    215

-------
                                    TABLE  70

                     FABRIC FILTER PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR  FLOUR MILLING SPECIFICATION
     A fabric filter is to treat the effluent from the product recovery cyclones in a flour mill.
 These cyclones are an integral part of the pneumatic conveying systems which move the
product from the mills to the associated plansifters at higher elevation for classification.
Conveying air and solid are separated by cyclone. The air from the top of the cyclones will
be routed to  the subject fabric filter.  The filtered air is recycled  back  to  the pneumatic
conveying systems.

     The required ductwork from the cyclone  collector outlets to the fabric filter will be
provided by others. The vendor is  to furnish  the fabric filter proper,  including  hoppers
equipped with rotary air locks, the required booster fan, ductwork between the fabric filter
and fan, and controls.

     The entire collection system will be located inside a building, which  will be adjacent to
a public highway. There is little likelihood of interference caused by other equipment with
the location of pollution control equipment.

     The fan shall be capable of overcoming the system pressure drop at the design flow rate
while operating at no  more than 90% of the maximum recommended speed. The system
pressure drop  should include enough suction for the interconnecting ductwork between the
cyclone collector outlets and the control system inlet. Motors shall be capable of driving fans
at maximum recommended speed and the corresponding pressure differential at 20% over
design flow rate.
216

-------
                                  TABLE  71

                   FABRIC  FILTER OPERATING CONDITIONS
                     FOR FLOUR MILLING SPECIFICATION
     Two  sizes of fabric filters are specified at one efficiency level.  Vendors' quotations
should consist of one quotation  for each of the two sizes, with a representation of the
efficiency  expected  for the unit  quoted.  The efficiency quoted may be better than the
efficiency called for in this specification.
Plant Capacity, cwt./day
Process Weight, Ib/hr
Inlet to Fabric Filter
     Flow.ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     % Saturation
     Dew Point, °F
     Loading, Ib/hr
     Loading, gr/ACF
     Loading, gr/DSCF
                     Small           Large

                     3,000          10,000
                     12,500          41,700

                     6,000          20,000
                        70              70
                        30              30
                        38              38
                        40             134
                         0.778           0.778
                         0.779           0.779

CASE 1 - HIGH EFFICIENCY
   Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
   Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
   Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
   Collection Efficiency, wt. %
   Air-To-Cloth Ratio
                   0.515
                    0.01
                     .01
                    98.7
                    6/1
1.72
0.01
 .01
98.7
6/1
                                                                            217

-------
                            TABLE 72

          ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
               FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR FLOUR MILLING

Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM




Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. °/






t
D
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %



( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other ->
(4) Total Cost














>





'


Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

6,000
70
6,000
.75

0.778
40

6,000
70
6,000
.75

0.01
0.515
98.7
5,537

1,409
-
233


654

509





2,197






10,539
Large

20,000
70
20,000
.75

0.778
134

20,000
70
20,000
.75

0.01
1.72
98.7
11,764

3,197
-
317


1,421

1,018





4,583






22,300
218

-------
                                FIGURE 54




                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                            FOR FLOUR MILLING
    500000
CO

DC
O
o
O
o

100000
10000
1000















































































t


*

4















L
s^
f
>
^
>
















<




^
















X
y


x

















/
/


X

















/
,/


,x

















A
^
^
J^
r

















/,
s
/

































































































TURNKEY SYSTEM
COLLECTOR PLUS
Al
CC









iX\
)LL









LI/
EC









kR
TC









IE
)R









S
(









31









SILY































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                             219

-------
K)
NJ
O
                                                   TABLE 73


                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)

                                     FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR FLOUR MILLING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,000
$6/hr
$8/hr







f.Oll/kw-hr






Small















Large















High Efficiency
Small

165



236
-
350

1,246

1,246
1,997
1,054
3,051
Large

165



554
-
974

3,576

3,576
5,269
2,230
7,499

-------
                                FIGURE 55
                     ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                             FOR FLOUR MILLING
    500000.
     100000
O
Q


te
O
O
a.
<
O
     10000
      1000
               TOTAL COST

               (OPERATING COST PLUS

               CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                           J*±
                                               OPERATING COST
   10000



GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                             221

-------
                            TABLE 74

             CONFIDENCE LIMITS  FOR CAPITAL  COST
            OF FABRIC  FILTERS FOR FLOUR MILLING
    Population Size  - 20            Sample Size  - 3

                      Capital  Cost = $10,540

                                   Capital Cost,  Dollars
Conf.  Level,  %              Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                      $9,921                   $11,158
    75                       9,341                    11,738
    90                       8,449                    12,630
    95                       7,624                    13,455


                      Capital  Cost =$22,300

                                   Capital Cost,  Dollars
Conf.  Level,  %              Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $21,809                   $22,790
    75                      21,349                    23,250
    90                      20,641                    23,958
    95                      19,987                    24,612
222

-------
                                FIGURE 56



                   CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                  OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR FLOUR MILLING
    500000
CO

DC
O
Q


te
O
U
Q.

<

U
100000
10000
1000














































































90°x
75°/
EA
75°/
90°/

















'4
it
° *
r


















4
\*
J 4
/^
)



















s
s
/
s
^"




















>
s
s
s





















f1
s
s,
'/




















^
-------
                                    TABLE 75

                     FABRIC FILTER PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR FEED GRINDING  SPECIFICATION
     A fabric filter is to treat the effluent from the product recovery cyclone collectors in a
feed mill. These cyclone collectors are an integral part of the feed grinders.

     The required ductwork from  the cyclone collector outlets to  the fabric filter will be
provided by others.  The  vendor is to furnish the fabric filter proper, including hoppers
equipped with rotary air locks, the required booster fan, ductwork between the fabric filter
and fan, and controls.

     The entire collector system will be located inside a building, which will be adjacent to a
public highway. There is little likelihood of interference caused by other equipment with the
location of pollution  control equipment.

     The fan shall be capable of overcoming the system pressure drop at the design flow rate
while operating at no more than 90% of  the maximum recommended speed. The system
pressure  drop shall be defined to include enough suction  for the interconnecting ductwork
between  the cyclone  collector outlets and the control system inlet,  i.e., ductwork provided
by  others  than  the vendor.  Motors shall  be  capable of driving  fans  at  maximum
recommended speed  and the corresponding pressure differential at 20% over design flow
rate.
224

-------
                                   TABLE  76

                   FABRIC FILTER OPERATING CONDITIONS
                     FOR  FEED GRINDING SPECIFICATION
     Two  sizes of fabric filters are specified at one efficiency level. Vendors' quotations
should consist of one quotation for each of the  two sizes, with a representation of the
efficiency  expected for the unit quoted.  The efficiency quoted may be better than the
efficiency called for in this specification.
Plant Capacity, ton/hr
Process Weight, Ib/hr
Inlet to Fabric Filter
     Flow,ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     % Saturation
     Dew Point, °F
     Loading, Ib/hr
     Loading, gr/ACF
     Loading, gr/DSCF
Small

     6
13,200
 Large

    24
52,800
4,700
100
30
64
18.3
0.454
0.490
19,000
100
30
64
73.2
0.454
0.490
                           CASE 1 - HIGH EFFICIENCY
Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Collection Efficiency, wt. %
Air-to-cloth ratio
  0.40
  0.01
  0.011
  97.8
  6/1
  1.63
  0.01
  0.011
  97.8
  6/1
                                                                           225

-------
                     TABLE 77

   ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
        FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR FEED GRINDING


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
. Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %



•
Small

















(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(incl.Dust Disposal Equip)
(2) Auxiliaries Cost ]
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other -^
(4) Total Cost











I




























Large






































High Efficiency
Small

4,700
100
4,420
.75

.454
18.3

4,700
100
4,420
.75

.01
.40
97.8
5,201
1,048
-
71









5,961






12,281
Large

19,000
100
17,800
.75

.454
73.2

19,000
100
17,800
.75

.01
1.63
97.8
14,395
2,476
-
117









15,074






32,062
226

-------
                                FIGURE 57



                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                           FOR FEED GRINDING
    500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
Q
O
O
     10000
      1000
                                                TURNKEY SYSTEM
                  COLLECTOR!

               XPLUS AUXILIARI
                                                              ES-
                                                COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
   10000


GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
                                                             227

-------
ro
N3
CO
                                                    TABLE 78


                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)

                                      FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR FEED GRINDING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities;
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8.000
$8/hr






$.011/kw-h]






Small














Large














High Efficiency
Small

845



134

120
680
-
680
1,779
1,228
3,007
Large

845



327

481
2,960
.
2,960
4,613
3,206
7,819

-------
                               FIGURE 58



                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                           FOR FEED GRINDING
    500000
O
Q
O
O
100000
10000
1000
































































X
X



















/3
^
f



















\/
^
^



















/
/



















/

/•



















^

/



















^

/
















J*
_s
/
y81
X














7
{
>/;
x^ c


/c
















OT/
OPE
API
)PEF
















\L
RA
TA
?A1
















CO
TIIS
L C
'IN
















51
IG
H
G
















C
Al
C
















:c
=K
OJ
















s
3E
>'
















T PLUS

:S)





























1000 10000 100000 3000G
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                            229

-------
                            TABLE  79

        CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST
            OF  FABRIC  FILTERS  FOR  FEED  GRINDING
     Population Size - 20             Sample Size - 3

                     Collector  Cost = $5,201

                                    Collector Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %              Lower  Limit              Upper Limit

     50                     $4,670                   $5,733
     75                       4,171                    6,232
     90                       3,404                    6,999
     95                       2,695                    7,708
                     Collector Cost = $14,395

                                    Collector Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %              Lower  Limit              Upper Limit

     50                     $12,129                  $16,660
     75                      10,005                   18,784
     90                       6,737                   22,053
     95                       3,715                   25,075
230

-------
                                FIGURE 59



               CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST

                   OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR FEED GRINDING
    500000
c/j
cc
O
Q


te
O
O
_l
<

CL

O
100000
10000
1000







































































































r
q
(J
£
^

















jS
Y
<
f
jr
















y
f
/


/















s
/

'
/

















s

s


X














^
'//
s ^
/ >/
/
/ ^Q
^
x

























/ 90%
5/ 75%
/ME
f
P

IAN
%


kv' 900/-





























































































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                             231

-------
                                     TABLE 80

                      WET SCRUBBER PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                     FOR  FEED FLASH DRYER SPECIFICATION
       The scrubber is to deodorize the total gases emitted from the product recovery cyclone
  of a feed flash drying system.  The scrubber will be located outside and will be in use on a
  continuous basis. Sufficient electric power and fresh water are available at the site. A sewer
  is available and will accept water in the 4 to 10 pH range, if it contains less than 1 wt.%
  solids content.

       The scrubbing liquor is to consist of a  3 wt.% solution of potassium  permanganate
  buffered to 9.0pH with borax. Bids should include the following:

       1.   Low energy wet scrubber and mist eliminator.

      2.   Necessary fans and motors.  Fans should operate at less than 2,000 rpm.

      3.   30 ft stack.

      4.   Recirculation tank.

      5.   Permanganate makeup facilities and storage tank.

      6.   Interconnecting ductwork for all equipment furnished.

      7.   Appropriate control system.

      8.   Necessary provisions for periodic cleaning of manganese dioxide residue.

      9.   Winterizing protection down to -20°F.

      All of the above, except the scrubber proper, should be treated as auxiliaries.

      The scrubber must be designed to abate the odor from the effluent stream. However, an
  estimate of paniculate removal efficiency is required.

      Each bidder will submit four separate and independent quotations; one for each of two
  efficiency levels at each of two plant sizes.
232

-------
                                 TABLE 81

                  WET SCRUBBER  OPERATING CONDITIONS
                  FOR FEED FLASH DRYER SPECIFICATION
                                             Small          Large

Product Rate, Ib/hr                              7,360         51,300
Dryer Capacity, Ib/hr                           10,500         73,300
Dryer System Discharge Conditions
     Gas Flow, ACFM                          10,000         70,000
     Volume % Air                               75             75
     Water Content, Vol.%                         10             10
     Temperature, °F                            170*           170*
     Gas Flow, SCFM                           8,250         57,800
     Organic Content, gr/SCF                        0.2            0.2
     Organic Content, Ib/hr                        14.2           99
     Paniculate Loading, gr/DSCF                    0.2            0.2
     Odor Concentration, O.U./SCF               1,500           1,500
     Odor Emission Rate, O.U./min.              12.4 x 10s      86.7 x 106

Medium Efficiency Case
     Concentration @ Scrubber
       Outlet O.U./SCF                          500            500
     % Odor Removal                             67             67

High Efficiency Case
     Concentration @ Scrubber
       Outlet O.U./SCF                          100            100
     % Odor Removal                             93.2           93.2
*Possibly as high as 250°F
                                                                        233

-------
                              TABLE 82

            ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
              FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
Odor Cone., o.u./SCF
Odor Rate, o.u./min.
Cleaning Efficiency, % *
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(Incl. Fan $ Motor)
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Pump(s)
(b) Damper(s)
(c) Conditioning,
Equipment
(d) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering ^
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping ?•
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
_,/
(4) Total Cost
Medium Efficiency
Small

10,000
170
8,250
10

0.2
14.2

9,230
120
8,435
12.5

500
4.22 x 106
67
10,098


717
70


2,167








16,383






29,435
Large

70,000
170
57,800
10

0.2
99.0

64,570
120
59,000
12.5

500
29.5 x 106
67
33,050


1,295
141


5,500








29,577






69,563
High Efficiency
Small

10,000
170
8,250
10

0.2
14.2

9,230
120
8,435
12.5

100
0.84 x 106
93.2
10,478


717
70


2,167








16,383






29,815
Large

70,000
170
57,800
10

0.2
99.0

64,570
120
59,000
12.5

100
5.9 x 106
93.2
35,043


1,295
141


5,500








29,577






71,556
*Estimated particulate removal
     234
for both cases is 99.

-------
                                   FIGURE 60

                        CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                             FOR FEED  FLASH DRYERS
                                (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
cc
§
te
8
u
100000
10000
1000





































































































































































«•
••
y


















X
*
£
£


















J
^
7
,/
H


















^

X
x

















x^


2

















—
X

^
x

















X


X
'
















Jj
I*

I
^
^

















r1


fl
<




























TURNKEY SYSTEM
""


•»
'















COLLECTO
PLUS AUX
COLLECTO












'-











R

ILIARIES
R ONLY












1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFIVI
                                                             235,

-------
                 TABLE 83

ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN S/YEAR)
 FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify , KMnO^.
Borax
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,000



$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal
$0.39/lb
$0.0625/lb

Medium Efficiency
Small

170
1,207
300
2,126
1,800
203,830
175,090
382,846
384,523
2,944
387,467
Large

170
1,207
550
14,784
15,600
1,421,753
1,221,286
2,673,423
2,675,350
6,956
2,682,306
High Efficiency
Small

170
1,207
300
2,196
1,800
283,577
243,593
531,166
532,843
2,982
535,825
Large

170
1,207
550
15,616
15,600
1,977,737
1,698,876
3,707,829
3,709,756
7,156
3,716,912

-------
                                     FIGURE 61
   5,000,000
                         ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                              FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
                                 (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
   1,000,000
e/J
oc
O
Q
te
O
O
    100,000
     10,000
                                                         TOTAL COST
                                                         (OPERATING COST
                                                         PLUS CAPITAL CHARGES)
   10000

GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                            100000
300000
                                                                  237

-------
                            TABLE 84

            CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
         OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
                       (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size —  20            Sample  Size — 3

                     Capital Cost = $29,815

                                   Capital  Cost,  Dollars
Conf.  Level, %              Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $23,569                  $36,061
    75                      17,713                   41,917
    90                       8,702                   50,928
    95                        370                   59,260
                    Capital Cost =  $71,556

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf.  Level, %               Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $60,701                  $82,412
    75                     50,523                   92,590
    90                     34,862                  108,251
    95                     20,380                  122,733
238

-------
                                  FIGURE 62

                      CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                    OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
                               (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
V)
cc
o
o
te
o
o
Q.
<
o
100000
10000
1000






































































































































































•

















^
6
(•
>
&

>














-X-
^*"^^-
<^
^
T
^
^
r
*
/
sX
7













^ •
'" ^~
.x»"
^
^
/
X














_^ •
^
•^
^

/
X














^,
r
***

*s
f^

/'














— '




X
jf
/













£
(.

(
^
f,

J*














Y
tf

!f

JT

f














g
7



3'
5'
VIE



'o
y0

AN

75%

£












0












%


































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              239

-------
                                    TABLE 85

                  THERMAL INCINERATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR FEED FLASH DRYER  SPECIFICATION
     The incinerator is to deodorize the total gases emitted from the product recovery
 cyclone of a feed flash drying system. The incinerator will be in use on a continuous basis.

     The incinerator is to be natural gas fired.  The burner shall be of the 100% secondary air
 type, utilizing oxygen in the flash drying system  effluent for combustion. The burner shall
 be equipped  with  a continuous pilot, and  shall be controlled  to  maintain  an outlet
 temperature  no higher than  1,500°F.  Gas piping, flame  failure controls, etc., shall be
 designed to meet F.I.A. * safety standards.

     The incinerator must be designed  to  abate  the odor  from the effluent stream.
 Also, reuse of heat is a prime concern and  is to be accomplished by a self-recuperative
 heat exchanger. Dirty gas will be on the tube side of the heat exchanger.


     The incinerator  will be located outdoors near the flash dryer outlet.  The incinerator
 shall be  maintained under a slightly positive pressure by virtue of a fan at  the inlet of the
 heat exchanger on the odorous gas side.  This fan is to be selected to overcome the pressure
 drop of the incinerator, both sides of the heat exchanger, and the 30 feet of interconnecting
 ductwork between  the product recovery cyclone outlet and the heat exchanger  inlet. The
 fan will  be provided  with a draft breaker to prevent upsetting the  pressure balance at the
product recovery cyclone.
 *Factory Insurance Association
240

-------
                                TABLE 86

               THERMAL INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                  FOR FEED  FLASH DRYER SPECIFICATION
     One incinerator should be quoted for each size dryer listed below.
Product Rate, Ib/hr
Dryer Capacity, Ib/hr
Dryer System Discharge Conditions
     Gas Flow, ACFM
      Volume % Air
     Water Content, vol.%
     Temperature, °F
     Gas Flow, SCFM
     Organic Content, Btu/SCF
     Organic Content, gr/SCF
     Organic Content, Ib/hr
     Particulate Loading, gr/SCF
     Odor Concentration, O.U./SCF
     Odor Emission Rate, O.U./min

Incinerator Discharge Conditions
     Gas Flow, SCFM
     Temperature, °F
     Odor Concentration, O.U./SCF
     Odor Emission Rate, O.U./min

Combustion efficiency, %
Hot gas discharge from heat exchange, °F
Cold gas flow, SCFM
Cold gas temperature, °F
Cold gas discharge temperature, °F
Heat exchanger duty, MM Btu/hr
 Small

 7,360
 10,500

 10,000
    75
    10
   170
 8250
     0.5
     0.2
    14.2
     0.2
 1,500
 12.4 x 106
 ^€,400
 1,500
   100
.84 x 106

    93.2
   622
 8250
   170
 1,058
 -8.2
 Large

51,300
73,300

70,000
    75
    10
   170
57,800
     0.5
     0.2
    99
     0.2
  1,500
86.7 x 106
^68,700
  1,500
   100
5.87 x 106

    93.2
   622
57,800
   170
  1,058
 -8.2
                                                                          241

-------
                      TABLE 87

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
   FOR THERMAL  INCINERATORS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Dust Loading
Odor Cone. ,o.u./SCF
Odor Rate, o.u./min.
ftrprmiir Printout , RTII/SPF
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Dust Loading
Odor Cone. ,o.u./SCF
Odor Rate, o.u./min.
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other (Unit Erection)
(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

10,000
170
8,250
10
1,500
12.4 x 106
0.5

31,352
1,500
8,315
11

100
0.83 x 106
93.2
59,875

3,583
-
308





2,050

2,400
3,100
875
875
250
750
50
700
450
1,750
3,000
80,016
Large

70,000
170
57,800
10
1,500 ,
86.7 x 106
0.5

219,240
1,500
58,195
11

100
5.82 x 106
93.2
210,700

19,205
-
605





4,500

8,750
10,000
3,200
3,415
750
2,000
100
2,000
1,100
1,750
6,700
274,775
242

-------
                                   FIGURE 63
                    CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS

                            FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
    500000
     100000
oo
cc
fc
8
Q.

<
U
     10000
      1000
                                                         ^COLLECTOR	

                                                           PLUS AUXILIARIES

                                                         COLLECTOR ONLY
                                                           URNKEY SYSTEM
   10000


GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                         100000
300000
                                                             243

-------
                  TABLE 88

 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,000
$6/hr.

$6/hr.



$.011/kw-h:
$.80/MMBtu




LA Process Wt.
Small












Large












High Efficiency
Small

1,575
1,575

360
65
425

125
2,845
44,890
47,735
49,860
8,002
57,862
Large

2,325
2,325

720
300
1,020

275
19,750
212,512
232,262
235,882
27,478
263,360

-------
                                FIGURE 64




                   ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS

                           FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
o
Q
O
O
100000
10000
1000

































































































1





















/




























#
s












V



















/
/














(OPEF
r>i 1 1
-------
                            TABLE 89

            CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
     OF THERMAL  INCINERATORS FOR  FEED  FLASH DRYERS
    Population Size —  5              Sample  Size — 2

                     Capital Cost = $80,015

                                   Capital  Cost,  Dollars
Conf.  Level, %              Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $79,891                  $80,139
    75                      79,740                   80,289
    90                      79,446                   80,584
    95                      79,128                   80,902
                    Capital Cost = $274,775

                                   Capital Cost,  Dollars
Conf.  Level, %              Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $259,065                 $290,485
    75                      239,985                  309,565
    90                      202,637                  346,913
    95                      162,298                  387,252
246

-------
                                   FIGURE 65
                       CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

                 OF THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
    500000
     100000
oo
DC
O
Q

te
O
O
a.
<
O
     10000
      1000
                                                          90%

                                                          75%
                                                      JgfMEAN
                                                          75%

                                                          90%
   10000


GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                              247

-------
                             REFERENCES
 1.   Matz,  Samuel  A.,  Ph.D.,  Cereal  Technology,  The  AVI   Publishing
     Company, Inc., Westport, Conn., 1970.

 2.   Air Pollution Engineering Manual, U.S.  Dept. of Health, Education, and
     Welfare, Public  Health  Services Publication No. 999-AP-40, Cincinnati,
     Ohio, 1967.

 3.   "Plant Services Beat Explosion Hazards," Modern Power and Engineering,
     pp. 40-4, November, 1970.

 4.   McLouth,  Malcolm  E.  and  Paulus, Harold J.,  "Air Pollution from the
     Grain Industry," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, Vol.
     11:7, p. 313-17, July, 1961.
248

-------
PAINT and VARNISH

-------
3.   PAINT AND VARNISH

     The Paint and  Varnish industry is one  of the oldest manufacturing
 industries  in  the United  States.  The  industry  is made up  of  about  1,600
 companies operating  1,875 plants.11' It is well distributed geographically
 throughout the country  and the number of plants or production volume is
 definitely related  to  density of population. Even though about 27 companies
 account for  about 57%  of  the total sales,  the  industry is  one of the few
 remaining which contains numerous small  companies that specialize in a limited
 product line  to be marketed within a geographical region. There are fewer than
 20 companies that sell paint nationwide.

     The industry is now emerging as a scientific business from its beginning as
 an art 50 years  ago.  Even with rapid growth in technology,  the  industry
 processing  techniques still are not well defined and vary from one producer to
 another. To  add further  complication, the industry is technically one of the
 most complex of the chemical industry. A plant that produces a broad line of
 products might  utilize  over  600  different  raw materials and  purchased
 intermediates. These  materials can  be generally classified  in  the following
 categories: oils, metallic dryers, resins, pigment extenders, plasticizers, solvents,
 dyes,  bleaching agents, organic monomers for resins and additives of  many
 kinds.

     The industry produces an equally large number of finished products which
 are  generally  classified  as  trade  sale  finishes,  maintenance  finishes, and
 industrial finishes.

     Trade sale products  are stock-type  paints generally distributed through
 wholesale-retail channels and packaged in sizes ranging from  1/2 pint to 1
 gallon. A subdivision of trade sale products are maintenance finishes which are
 used for the  protection and upkeep  of factories, buildings, and structures such
 as bridges and storage tanks.  Since they are usually  stock  type,  they  come
 under the Department of Commerce  definition of trade sales.

     The other major type of paint products is industrial finishes which are
 generally defined as  those applied to manufactured products. These finishes
 such as automotive,  aircraft, furniture and  electrical  are usually specifically
 formulated for the using industry. Within these major product lines there are
 literally thousands of different  products  for many different  applications and
 types of customers. Trade sales  finishes and industrial finishes are produced in
 almost equal volume with the production  for this year estimated at 475 million
 gallons for each type. Trade sales, however, are expected to account for 55% of
 the dollar sales or about $1,685 million dollars.
                                                                      249

-------
                        PROCESS DESCRIPTION

     Starting with all  purchased raw material, the manufacturing process for
pigmented products is deceptively simple from a process viewpoint. Basically, it
consists of mixing or dispersing pigment and vehicle to give the final product.
This is schematically illustrated in Figure 66.

     The  paint vehicle is defined as the liquid portion of  the paint and consists
of  volatile solvent  and  non-volatile  binder  such as  oils  and  resins.  The
non-volatile portion  is  also called the vehicle solid or film former. The pigment
portion of the  paint  consists of  hiding pigments such as titanium dioxide
(Ti02), extenders or  fillers such as  talc or barium sulfate,  and any mineral
matter used for flatting or other purposes.

     The  incorporation of the pigment in the paint vehicle is accomplished by a
combination of  grinding  and  dispersion  or dispersion  alone.  When  it is
necessary to further grind the raw pigment, the pebble  or steel ball mills are
normally   used.  With  the  advent  of  fine  particle  grades  of pigment and
extenders, as well  as the wide spread  use of wetting agents, the trend is toward
milling methods that are based on dispersion without grinding. This dispersion
consists of breakup of the pigment clusters and  agglomerates, followed by
wetting of the individual particles with the binder or vehicle. Some of the more
popular methods currently being used are high speed disc impellers, high speed
impingement mills and sand mills.

     Aside from this  dispersion step,  pigment paint manufacturing involves
handling of raw material as well as handling and packaging of finished product.
Operations of a typical plant may be summarized as a raw material and finished
product handling problem with a variety of interdispersed batch operations.
The interrelationship  of  all  these operations is schematically illustrated  in
Figure 67.The operations depicted are  those of a plant that makes its own resins
and produces both trade sale and industrial finishes.

     Many of the  larger and some of the medium size manufacturers produce a
significant amount of their formulation ingredients, primarily resins.  A few
large manufacturers also produce pigments,  modified  oils, and basic chemicals.
Certain manufacturers  produce these  ingredients in  an amount exceeding their
requirements and sell the  excess to other manufacturers. A significant number
also produce only a portion of their resins and purchase the remainder from
their competitors or suppliers who  specialize in resin  manufacturing.

     The  manufacturing of resins and  varnishes is by far  the most complex
 250

-------
                                              FIGURE 66

                             RAINIT   MANUFACTURING   USING
                      SAND  MILL.   FOR   GRINDING   OPERATION
                 MIXER
                          n
PRE-MIX
TANK

PRE-M1X
TANK
/ LOADING HATCH
                            PRE-MIX
                         RECIRCULAT1NG'
                             LINE
                                                              SAND
                                                              GRINDING
                                                              VESSEL
                                                                                STORAGE
                                                                                 "TANK
                                                                TO
                                                               CAN
                                                              FILLING
                                                               LINE
                                        FEED
                                        PUMP
                                TAKE
                                AWAY
                                PUMP
ro
Ui

-------
                                                       FIGURES?

                                        MATERIALS FLOW SHEET FOR PAINT MANUFACTURING
                       RAW  MATERIALS   HANDLING
FORMULATION
PACKAGING
TRADE  SALES
           CATALYST,
         1 ADDITIVES
                                                                 ADDITIVES    i
  INDUSTRIAL  SALES
LACQUER
TYPE
£
CELLULOSE
HFDl VATIVP^


























i

PREMIX


MIXI NG
                                                                  TO
PAINT
STORAGE

i
                                                                                                                               CONTAINER
                                                                                                                               HANDLING
                                                                                                                 TO SHIPMENT

-------
process in a paint plant, primarily as the result of the large variety of different
raw materials, products and cooking formulas utilized. The complexity begins
with the  nomenclature used  in classification of the final product. Originally,
varnishes  were all made from naturally occurring material and they were easily
defined as a homogeneous solution of drying oils and resins in organic solvents.
As new synthetic resins were developed, the resulting varnishes were classified
as  resins   rather  than varnishes. Examples  of this  are alkyd,  epoxy,  and
polyurethane resin varnishes.

     There are two basic types of varnishes, spirit varnishes and oleoresinous
varnishes. Spirit varnishes are formed by dissolving a resin in a solvent and they
dry by solvent evaporation.  Shellac  is a good example of a  spirit varnish.
Another  material that  might fall  in this  category  is  lacquer. Technically,
lacquers are defined as a colloidal  dispersion or solution of nitro-cellulose, or of
similar film-forming  compounds, with resins and plasticizers,  in  solvent and
diluents which dry primarily by solvent evaporation.

     Oleoresinous varnishes,  as the name implies, are solutions of both oils and
resins. These  varnishes dry  by solvent evaporation and by  reaction  of the
non-volatile liquid portion with oxygen in the air to form a solid film. They are
classified  as  oxygen  convertible  varnishes and the film formed on drying is
insoluble  in the  original solvent.  A summary of the various types of material
used in the production of classical varnishes is given  in  Table 90.(2)

     Varnish is cooked in both portable kettles and large reactors.  Kettles are
still  being  used, to a  limited  extent,  by the smaller manufacturers, but some
continue  to be phased out  each year. The  very old,  coke fired, 30  gallon
capacity copper kettles are no longer used. The varnish kettles which are used,
have capacities of 150 to  375 gallons. These are fabricated on stainless steel,
have straight sides and are equipped with three or four-wheel trucks. Heating is
done with  natural gas or fuel oil for better temperature control. The kettles are
fitted  with retractable hoods and exhaust pipes, some  of which  may  incor-
porate solvent condensers. Cooling and thinning are normally done in special
rooms. A  typical  varnish production operation is illustrated in Figure 68.

     The  manufacturing of oleoresinous varnishes is somewhat more complex
than for spirit varnishes. This  manufacture consists of the heating or cooking of
oil and resins  together for the purpose of obtaining compatability of resin and
oil and solubility of the mixture in solvent, as well as for development of higher
molecular weight molecules or polymers.

     The  time and temperature of the cook are the operating variables used to
                                                                       253

-------
NJ
CJ1
*••
                        OILS
                   1. Hard
                     a. Tung
                     b. Oiticica
                     c. Dehydrated castor oil

                   2. Soft
                     a. Linseed
                     b. Safflower
                     c. Soya
                     d. Fish
                     e. Tall oil fatty acids

                   3. Chemically Modified
                     a. Maleic-treatment
                                                                   TABLE  90

                                                        VARNISH  RAW MATERIAL*2'
      RESINS
1. Natural
   a.  Fossil resin, congo
      kauri, pontianak
   b.  Semi-fossil resin
      manila, boea, batu,
      eastindia
   c.  Recent and crop resin
      dammar, accroides
      sandaral mastic, elemi,
      shellac
   d.  Rosin
      Gum rosin
      Wood rosin
      Tall oil rosin
      Rosin esters

2. Synthetic Resin
   a.  Maleic resin
      phenolic resin

3. Metallic Soaps
   a.  Limed rosin
   b.  Zinc resinate
   SOLVENTS

1.  Mineral Spirits
2.  VM&P Naphtha
3.  Toluol
4.  Xylol
5.  Terpene Solvents
DRYERS

 Lead
 Manganese
 Cobalt
 Calcium
 Zirconium
ADDITIVES

Anti-skinning
Agents

Ultra-violet
absorber

Flattening
Agents

-------
                                                 FIGURE 68
                            YPICAL_  VARNISH  OOOKINC3  ROOM
NJ    THINNING
S       ROOM
                            RECYCLE
                              RUMR
                                              OILS AND
                                               VARNISH
                                              TO SEWER
   WET
SCRUBBER
COOLING
STATION
COOKING
STATION

-------
develop the desired end  product polymerization  or "body". The chemical
reactions which occur are not well defined.  The resin  is a polymer before
cooking and may or may not increase in molecular size during the cook. This
resin may react with the oil to produce copolymers of oil and resin  or it may
exist as a homogeneous mixture  or solution of oil homopolymers  and  resin
homopolymers.

     It is possible  to blend  resins and  heat-bodied  oil  and obtain  the same
varnish that can be produced by cooking the resin  and the unbodied oils. This
indicates that copolymerization is not  the fundamental  reaction  in varnish
cooking.

     Heat bodying or polymerization of an oil is done to increase its viscosity
and  is carried  out in a  kettle in a fashion similar  to varnish cooking. The
fundamental  reaction that occurs is polymerization  of the  oil monomers to
form dimers with a small portion of trimers.

     There is  a large variety of  synthetic resins produced  for use in  the
manufacture of surface coatings.  A listing of the more popular resins is given
below. They are listed by order of consumption by the coatings industry:'6'

              Alkyd                 Styrene Butadiene
              Vinyl                  Phenolic
              Amino                 Polyester
              Epoxy                 Urethane
              Acrylic                Silicone

By far the most widely used of these resins are the alkyds and the vinyls. Alkyd
consumption  is  approximately  five times that  of the  vinyl,   which  is
approximately  twice that  of the amino resins.  Further discussion  will
concentrate on alkyd resins.

     Alkyd resins comprise a group of synthetic resins which can be described
as oil-modified  polyester  resins.  They  are produced from  the reaction of
polyols or polyhydric alcohol, polybasic acid and oil  or fatty monobasic acid.
A listing and discussion of commonly used raw materials will follow.
 256

-------
    1.   Oils or Fatty Acid'2'

              Linseed
              Soybean
              Safflower
              Tall Oil Fatty
              Tall Oil
              Fish
              Tung (minor)
              Oiticica (minor)
       Castor
       Coconut
       Cottonseed
       Laurie Acid
       Pelargonic Acid
       Isodecanoic Acid
              Dehydrated Castor (minor)

    The materials in the first column are oxidizing  or  drying  types. The
materials in the second  column are non-oxidizing and yield soft non-drying
alkyds which are used primarily as plasticizers for hard film resins. The acids
shown in this column are the only materials that are strictly synthetic in origin.

    2.   Polyols
         Name
         Ethylene glycol
Formula

 HC - OH

 HC - OH
  H
                              Form
                              Liquid
                              H   H      H   H
         Diethylene      HO-C - C - 0-C— C-OH
           glycol              H   H      H   H
                              Liquid
         Propylene glycol
     H   H    H
   HC- C-  OH
     H    |    H
        OH
                           Liquid
         Glycerine
           CP-95% glycerine
           Super-98%
     H
   HC   -
     I
   HC   -
     I
   HC   -
     H
           OH

           OH

           OH
Liquid
         Pentaerythritol
HOCH-
              COH
White Solid
                              HOCH2'
              H2COH
                                                                      257

-------
     Glycerol  or glycerine was the first  polyol  used for alkyds. It is also the
most widely used polyol for alkyds.

     The second polyol, based on usage, is pentaerythritol  (PE), which came
into common  use  in the  1940' s. PE is supplied as "technical grade" material
and  contains  mono,  di,  tri, and  polypentaerythritol. The material consists
primarily  of the  mono form which was illustrated previously in the list of
polyols.

     The important distinguishing  feature of the various polyols is the number
of   potentially  reactive  hydroxyl  groups  in  the  molecule,   known  as
functionality.  The glycols with  a  functionality of two produce only straight
chain polymers and their resins are soft and flexible. The resultant products are
used primarily as plasticizers for hard  resins. Glycerine has a functionality of
three and is used primarily in short and medium oil alkyds.  Pentaerythritol,
with a functionality of four, cross links to a greater extent, forming harder
polymers. It is ideal for use in long oil alkyds.
     3.   Acids and Anhydrides
          Name
       Formula
              Form
         Phthalic
           anhydride
           (ortho)
HC
  i
HC
              White solid
0
                                H
         Isophthalic
            acid (meta)

    HC
      1
    HC

                                    H
                                         OH
                                   White needles
                                                    0

                                                    OH
         Terephthalic
           acid (para)
                              HC
                               II
                              HC
                                  White crystals
               CH

               CH
258

-------
         Maleic                                 #         White solid
           anhydride               HC	  C

                                                   O

                                   HC	 C

                                                   0

     The acidic material can be used  as an acid or anhydride. The anhydride is
formed  from two molecules of acid minus a molecule of water or removal of
one molecule of water from a di-acid. It is preferred, since it reacts faster and
yields less water for removal from the  cook.

     For many years, ortho phthalic anhydride (PA)  was  the only polybasic
acid  used in substantial proportions in alkyds. It still remains the predominant
dibasic acid. PA is produced from the catalytic  oxidation of naphthalene or
ortho-xylene.

     The chemistry of alkyd resin systems is very complex.  So much so that
theoretical  considerations offer  only a good starting  point.  Final formulae and
variations are  developed  by trial and  error changes,  based  on performance
requirements and shortcomings of previous batches.

     Condensation is the reaction basic to all polyester  resins,  including alkyds.
This reaction  follows the elementary equation for esterification as  shown
below:
                                                   +   H20
     Acid       +        Alcohol          Ester     +   Water


                            For Alkyd Resins

                   PA  +  Glycerine $=i Ester  +  H20

     The ester monomer formed  is very  complex and further reacts to form
large polymers called resins. The polymers formed are low in molecular weight
                                                                    259

-------
by  comparison  to other resins.  For example  alkyd resins have molecular
weights  ranging from 1,000 to 7,000 while some vinyl and acrylic resins have
average  molecular weights in excess of 100,000 and in some cases as high as
500,000.

     The alkyd polymers also react  with oil  or fatty acid and are generally
classified by the amount of oil or PA used  in the formulation, as described
below:

                                     % Oil             % PA
Short Oil
Medium Oil
Long Oil
Very Long Oil
33 to 45
46 to 55
56 to 70
71 up
35
30 to 35
20 to 30
20
     The resulting reactants of the PA, polyol and oil may be represented in
part as shown below.

               Phthalic Anhydride (PA)  +  Glycerine (G)  •*
                                                  I
                                                  OH

               -G-PA-G-PA-G-PA-G-PA-

                 OH        O        0        OH

                 HOOC - PA        PA - COOH


     This will then react with the long chain oil monoglyceride or fatty acid
(FA) to yield:

 HOOC -PA-G-PA-G-PA-G-PA-G-PA-G-PA-G-OH

              OH       >       OH       OH       >        OH
                            Short oil alkyd

     Alkyds  can be manufactured directly from a fatty acid, polyol and acid
or from the  fatty  acid oil, polyol and acid.  The second combination (oil.
 260

-------
glycerine and PA) produces glyceryl phthalate which is insoluble in the oil and
precipitates. This problem can be overcome by first converting the oil to a
monoglyceride  by heating with a polyol  in the presence of a catalyst. This
process is called alcoholysis of the oil. The basic reaction is shown below:

         CH2OOCR             CH2OH                 CH2OH
          I                       I                       I
         C-HOOCR      +       2CHOH           ->    3CHOH

         C-H2OOCR             C-H2OH               CH2OOCR

         Triglyceride             Glycerine               Monoglyceride

     This is an ester interchange reaction with no loss of water.

     When  fatty acid rather than oil is used as the starting  material, this is
called the "one-stage" process. In this process, the fatty acid and glycerine are
added  to the kettle, the agitator is started and heat is introduced. When the
batch  reaches 440° F, the PA is slowly  added and cooking continued for
another 3 to 4 hours until the desired body and acid number are reached.

     If the fusion process is  being used, a continuous purge of  inert gas is
maintained to remove the water formed in the reaction. This water  may also be
removed  by what is known as the solvent process. It is similar to the fusion
process except that about 10% aromatic solvent (usually xylene) is added at the
start. The vaporized solvent is passed into a condenser. The condensate then
flows to a decant receiver for separation of reaction water. Recovered solvent is
returned to the reactor.

     As discussed earlier, when oil is used rather than fatty acid, the alkyds are
produced in a two  stage process.  In the first stage  the monoglyceride is first
produced from the linseed oil and glycerol. Catalyst and oil are added and the
alcoholysis of the polyol and oil  is carried out between 450 and 500° F until
the  desired  end point  is reached. When  the alcoholysis is  completed,  any
additional polyol needed is added.

     Following this, the required amount of PA and esterification  catalyst are
slowly  added. If solvent cooking is to be used, the solvent is also added at this
time. Cooking then proceeds as before.

     A  typical  manufacturing  formula  for  a  50% oil-modified  glyceryl
phthalate alkyd using the two stage process is given below.'4'
                                                                    261

-------
                                                 Ib

          First stage

            Linseed oil                           51.3
            Glycerol (95%)                       12.8
            Catalyst, Ca(OH)2                      0.026

          Second stage

            Glycerol (95%)                        6.2
            Phthalic Anhydride                   39.7
            Catalyst
            Methyl p-Toluene Sulfonate            0.2
                                                110.2

             Approx. Loss                        10.2
             Solids Yield                        100.0

     Alkyd  and other resins are cooked  in closed set kettles more properly
called reactors. They vary in size in commercial production from 500 to 10,000
gallons. A typical reactor  system is shown in  Figure 69. They are generally
fabricated of Type 304  or 316 stainless  steel with  well polished surfaces to
assure easy cleaning. Design pressure is usually 50 psig. These reactors may be
heated electrically, direct fired  with gas or oil, or indirectly heated using a heat
transfer  medium  such  as  Dowtherm(R>.  They  are also  equipped  with  a
manway, sight-glass, charging and sampling line, condenser system, weigh tanks,
temperature measuring devices and agitator.  The manway  is used both for
charging solid material and for access to the kettle for cleaning and repair.

     The  reactor  may  be  equipped with  a  variety of different  condenser
systems. The  system  shown  in Figure  69  includes a  packed fractionating
column, a reflux condenser and a  main condenser. The  condensers are water
cooled shell and tube type and may  be either horizontally  or vertically inclined.
Vapors  are processed and condensed on  the tube side and drain to a decant
receiver for  separation and  possible return  as solvent to the reactor.  A dual
function aspirator Venturi scrubber is often added to the system. It is  used to
ventilate the kettle  during  addition of solid materials and may also  remove
entrained unreacted or vaporized solids and liquids from the venting gases.
262

-------
                                              FIGURE 69
          MODERN   RESIN    PRODUCTION    SYSTEM
                          • SPRAY  TOWER
                                                                  REIFL-UX
                                                                 COMDEMSER
                                                                                CONDEFNISER
                                          FRAC T IONIAT IMG
                                           DISTILLATION!
                                            COLUMN
                                                                               DECANTER
                                                                               REICEIIVEIR
                 FUN/IE
             SCRUBBER
                                                   REACTOR
                                                                       PORTHOLE
                                                                       FOR  SOLIDS
 OVERFLOW
TO  SEWER
         COMDEMSET.R
                              THINIISI IMG
                                        DIRECT  FIRED  OR
                                        JACKETED  FOR  HIGH
                                        TEMPERATURE  VAPOR
                                          R   LIQUID
pro  REIS>IN)
STORAGE
                                                                                    263

-------
     Thinning tanks are always included as part of the reactor system. They are
normally  water cooled  and equipped  with  a  condenser and agitator. The
partially cooled finished alkyd is transferred from the reactor to the partially
filled thinning tank. Since most alkyd  resins  are thinned to 50% solids, the
capacities of these tanks are normally twice the capacity of the reactors. These
tanks are also frequently mounted on scales so that thinning solvents may be
accurately added.

     The  final step in a reactor system is filtering of the thinned resin prior to
final storage. This is normally done while  it is still hot. Filter presses are the
most commonly used filtering device.

     The  manufacturing procedures and equipment used for the production of
other resins  listed  at the beginning of  this discussion are quite similar. The
major  differences are  the raw materials  and the process  steps utilized. A
detailed discussion of these other resins is beyond the scope of this narrative.
                  NATURE  OF  GASEOUS DISCHARGE

     There are two major types of emissions from a paint plant.  These are
non-fugitive and fugitive. Non-fugitive emissions are those that are collected by
and  confined within an exhaust system.  Fugitive emissions  are those  that
escape into the  plant atmosphere from various operations and exit the plant
building through the doors and windows in an unregulated fashion.

     In today's  typical  paint plant there  are two types of fugitive  emissions.
These are pigment paniculate and paint solvents.  In a small percentage of the
plants an attempt  is made to collect these emissions. The incentive for doing so
is  based on insurance requirements as well  as occupational health and safety
rather than air pollution considerations or regulations. The newly passed OSHA
regulations will  have a dramatic effect on the paint industry practice and
necessitate the regulation of fugitive emissions.
                    PARTICULATE  CONTAMINANTS

     Fugitive particulate emissions consist primarily of the various pigments
used. As a general rule, the pigments are received and stored in 25 to 50 pound
paper sacks or fiber drums. Modern pigment manufacturing has developed fine
sized  pigment,  0.05 to 0.25 microns, for ease of dispersion into the paint
vehicle. Loading  of  these  fine pigments  into grinding equipment results in
264

-------
fugitive particulate dust emissions into the surrounding plant areas. This dust is
either collected  by a ventilation and exhaust system or allowed to settle and
later collected as part of the general housekeeping requirements.

     A variety of resins are received as granular or flaked solids which are of
large size and do not result in a fugitive dust emission. The manufacturer of
these solid resins,  however,  does encounter fugitive emission problems in his
flaking or grinding operations.
                      GASEOUS CONTAMINANTS

     Solvent  emissions  occur in almost  every  phase of  paint and  varnish
manufacturing  and in  numerous  locations throughout  individual  plants.  A
listing of emission points is given  below.

   Location        Operation         Temp., °F         Pressure

1. Resin Plant      Thinning          200 to 300° F      Atmospheric
2. Resin Plant      Filtering          200 to 300° F      Atmospheric
3. Resin Plant      Storage Tanks          100°F         Atmospheric
4. Paint Plant      Blending Tanks       Ambient         Atmospheric
5. Paint Plant      Milling               Ambient         Atmospheric
6. Paint Plant      Dispersion            Ambient         Atmospheric
7. Paint Plant      Holding Tank         Ambient         Atmospheric
8. Paint Plant      Filtering             Ambient         Atmospheric
9. Paint Plant      Packaging            Ambient         Atmospheric

     The extent of these  emissions varies with the type of operation and the
effort extended to control atmospheric losses. The high temperature thinning
and filtering result in  the largest emissions while  packaging  in drums and cans
contributes the smallest emission.  Other operations contribute intermediate
emissions which vary depending on the  degree of control  exercised and the
vapor pressure of the solvent used.

     In  some cases, efforts  are made to  collect  fugitive  emissions by use of
ventilation hoods and a  closed exhaust system. More frequently, however, they
are exhausted  from  the  building  by  general building  exhaust  fans  which
ventilate areas having the highest contaminant concentration.

     Resin plants or paint plants producing resins and varnishes are likely to
have a  number of  regulated emissions. These emissions consist primarily of
                                                                    265

-------
gaseous hydrocarbons in air or inert gas streams. The three major sources of
these non-fugitive emissions are:

          1.   Varnish cooking
          2.   Resin cooking
          3.   Thinning

     Other less concentrated streams that may or may not be regulated are:

          1.   Storage and rundown tank vent systems
          2.   Filter press vent systems
          3.   Sandmi 11  vent systems

     Considerable effort has been expended to identify the various types of
chemical compounds emitted during a varnish cook. The majority of this work
was  done in  the 1950's and is well summarized by R. L. Stenburg'31 in the
H.E.W.  Technical Report A58-4. A copy of his summary is included here as
Table 91.(3)  In general, one or  more of the following compounds are emitted,
depending upon the  ingredients in the cook  and the cooking temperature:
water vapor,  fatty acids,  glycerine,  acrolein,  phenols,  aldehydes,  ketones,
terpene oils and terpene. These materials are mainly decomposition products of
the varnish ingredients.

     Varnishes and oils are cooked  or boiled  at temperatures from 200 to
650° F.  At about 350° F decomposition begins and continues throughout the
cooking  cycle which  normally  runs between 8  and  12 hours. The  quantity,
composition and rate of emissions depend upon the ingredients in the cook as
well  as  the maximum temperature,  the  length, the method of  introducing
additive, the degree of stirring and the  use of inert gas blowing. In  general, the
emissions will average  between one  to  three  percent of  the charge in oil
bodying  and  three  to six percent in varnish cooking. Aside from academic
interest, the exact chemical structure of these emissions is not too important.
Of more importance are the characteristics of the emissions related to ease of
removal by the applicable pollution control devices.

     Modern  resin reactors and varnish cookers  account  for the majority of
clear  coatings production  in the  paint and varnish industry. As described
earlier, these  products are cooked in larger more carefully controlled reactors
equipped  with product  recovery devices which  also help  reduce  atmospheric
emission.

     As with  the old varnish kettles, the amount of emissions varies with the
type  of  cook,  the cooking time,  the  maximum temperature, the initial
 266

-------
                  TABLE 91




COMPOSITION  OF OIL AND  VARNISH FUMES'31
Bodying Oils
Water vapor
Fatty acids
Glycerine
Acrolein
Aldehydes
Ketones
Carbon dioxide
Running Natural
Gums
Water vapor
Fatty acids
Terpenes
Terpene Oils
Tar


Manufacturing
Oleo resinous
Varnish
Water vapor
Fatty acids
Glycerine
Acrolein
Phenols
Aldehydes
Ketones
Manufacturing
Alkyd Varnish
Water vapor
Fatty acids
Glycerine
Phthalic anhydride
Carbon dioxide


                       Terpene Oils




                       Terpenes




                       Carbon dioxide
                                                   267

-------
 ingredients as well as the type and method of introducing ingredients.

     For solvent cooking the quantity of emission does not vary significantly
 with the size of the reactor but is rather more a function of the volatility of the
 solvent being used and the size and/or efficiency of the condenser. Since there
 is no sparge gas used  in solvent cooking, exhaust volumes are small and consist
 primarily of  non-condensed solvent fumes. Emissions will  run from 0.1 to 0.5
 pounds per hour and will be less cyclic in nature than for fusion cooks.

     Emissions during fusion cooking run much higher and vary with the size
 of the reactor. The total exhaust volume is dependent primarily on the sparge
 rate of inert gas. Dean H. Parker'4'  indicated typical  sparge rates of  0.04
 ft3/min/gal  of charge during the first hour, 0.02  ft3  during  the second, and
 0.01 ft3 during the remainder of the cook. The exhaust rate will average from 2
 ft3/min/100 gallons of capacity on small reactors to 1  ft3/min/100 gallons of
 capacity on large reactors.  A summary of source test results from a variety of
resin reactors is presented in Table 92.<11'

     Since  fusion cooking  is  a cyclic  batch process, the  concentration  of
 emission will  vary  from  the  start to  finish  of  the  cook.  Hydrocarbon
 concentration will vary from  15,000 to 80,000 ppm  as methane equivalent,
 depending on the time of the cycle and the type of cook. There are at least 100
 different emission curves that could  be encountered  if  one tried to cover all of
 the different  cooking formulas. Particulate phthalic anhydride (PA)  is also
 emitted from the kettle and concentration levels vary depending on cycle time,
 types of cook, method of charging and type of PA used. Charging of liquid PA
 rather than dry solid PA significantly reduces the emission rate. However, if the
 linear velocity of the  sparge gas is maintained below 150 ft/min, the carry-over
 of  PA  is also significantly  reduced.  Entrained and  sublimed PA will run
 between 1 to 3 pounds per hour over a period of 50 to 70 minutes during and
 following the charging period. Plots of hydrocarbon  emission level vs. time for
 three of many possible cooks are  given as  Figures 70, 71 and 72.(10) These
 emission concentrations  are those  measured directly out of a  closed kettle or
 reactor.

     Figure 72 shows typical variations in emissions from one batch to another
 when cooking the same product in the same kettle. Variations twice as great as
 this are not uncommon.  Emissions  increase  dramatically  and  rapidly  as
 indicated on  Figures 70 and 71  whenever the loading hatches are opened. This
 is a result of forced exhaust of the kettle to prevent spillage of fumes into the
 room from the open hatch.
 268

-------
                                                                 TABLE 92
                                                         EMISSION  DATA  SUMMARY
Resin
Type
Alkyds
Polyester
Reactor
Size
(gal)
4,000
1,000
1,000
4,000
1,000
EMISSION:
RANGE
(Ib/hr)
0.07-1.45
0.17-0.75
0.44-1.74
1.32-27.3
0.35-2.23
EMISSION:
AVERAGE
(ib'/hr)
0.7
0.3
1.0
12.9
1.18
Average
Major Reaction
Component Temp. (°F.
Xylene 410-460
Xylene
Xylene
Propylene 400-410
Glycol
Propylene
Glycol
O)
CD
Acrylics,
Melamines  4,000

           1,000
0.06-0.21      0.10        Butanol

0.15-0.16      0.15        Butanol
                                                                                410-460    Solvent Cook, based upon 4 resins.

                                                                                           Solvent/fusion cook, based upon
                                                                                           7 resins.

                                                                                           Solvent cook, based upon 4 resins.

                                                                                           Emissions exceeded 8 pounds/hour
                                                                                           during second stage changing.

                                                                                           Fusion cook, based upon 4 resins.

                                                                                           Emissions exceeded 8 pounds/hour
                                                                                           during changing exotherm,  and
                                                                                           sparging.

                                                                                           Fusion cook, based upon 8 resins.
220-250    Solvent cook, based upon 11 resins.

           Solvent cook, based upon 2 resins.

-------
NJ
-J

O
        z
        UJ


        I

        0
        u
        a.
        a.
        0
        Q.
        Z
        0
        0
        o:
        <
        0
        0
        o:
        o
                                                       FIGURE 70


                      HYDROCARBON   EMISSIOM  FOR  DOWTHE1RM KETTL-E  Oo>
        VAPOR  TEMPERATURE  RANGED   FROM  IOO*F *TO

              KETTLE   TEMPERATURE   FROM   SO~F  TO ^OO* F

                               C.OOK  RAN  20 HOURS
             so coo
                         OREIMED  MAISIHOL-EI

                         TO CHARGE  PA
-4OOOO
3OOOO
^0000
 IOOOO
                        OPEIMED
                        MANHOL.E:

                           TO

                        CHARGE
                           PE
                                                       TIME-HOURS

-------
I-

u

Q.

0
I
Q-
Q-
l

£
0
Q.
z
0
ID
o:
<
0
0
IT
Q
                                     FIGURE 71


             HYDROC.ARBOM  EMISSION FOR PAINT KEITTLE  Clo)



        VAPOR  TEMPERATURE:  RANGED FROM  ioo*» F  TO 310° F

              KETTLE  TEMPERATURE  FROM  »O*F TO
     so,ooo
-40,000
    300OO
20,000
IOOOO
                                                  DROPPEZD BATCH
                                            STARTED TO THIN IN
          O
                                   TIN/IE , HOURS

-------
NJ
-»J
ro
          £_    SOOOO
h
z
LJ


i
D
0
y
  1
I
0
*^_—

I
Q.
Q.
 I

£
0
(L
          z
          0
          ID
          It
          <
          U
          0
          It
          Q
                                    FIGURE 72


KETTL-E  HYDROC.ARBON EMISSON - 2 BATC.HES MONITORED  ClO)



VAPOR   TEMPERATURE  RANGED   FROM   IOO*F   TO 3IO"F

    KETTLE   TEMPERATURE  RANGED UP  TO  -49O°F
                -40000
                SOOOO
                2OOOO
      IOOOO
                                            (—OPEN M/A.NIHOL.E:
                         BATCH
                                        BATCH  2. —^.-—
                                                                                PUN/IP OUT
                                                          TIME - HOURS

-------
     The storage of liquid PA will result in significant vaporization losses from
the storage tank and an effort must be made to control these losses. The most
widely used method consists of an inert gas blanketing in conjunction with a
pressure  controlled  unit. The  tank  is also equipped with a water  cooled
condenser used to vent the tank during filling. After  filling the condenser is
then heated with steam to remove collected PA by melting.
              POLLUTION  CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

     Collection  of  particulate   pigment  or  resin  emission   is  a  simple
straightforward job. The only practical control device is a fabric filter, and it is
ideally suited for this application. Collection  efficiency for the  submicron
pigment dust (0.05 to 0.25 microns) is in the range  of 99.9%. There are no
temperature problems since the exhaust system runs at ambient temperatures.
The grain  loading is very low and baglife is extensive. Approximately 0.01% of
the loaded pigments are  lost and collected. Grain loadings to the fabric filter
run around 0.19 grain/SCF. A typical collection system  is shown in Figure 73.
The collection system  can  be a  fixed hood which  can  handle both dust and
pigment bags or a flexible hose positioned above the loading hatch or attached
to the top of the tank. The tank attachment provides the most positive control
of fugitive dust emission but also increases pigment  and  solvent losses slightly.

     The application of control equipment to this problem is quite simple and
can be solved with standard off-the-shelf equipment from a host of suppliers.
For  this reason, detailed equipment cost and installation bids will  not be
required.

     The control of hydrocarbon and odors from  the various emission sources
listed earlier is  not quite as straightforward  as the dust emission. There are
three types of control equipment that have been applied to this problem. They
are catalytic and thermal combustion devices, and wet scrubbers.

     As a general rule, wet scrubbing does not provide a satisfactory solution
for the following reasons:

     1.    Removal  efficiency of  fine  hydrocarbon aerosol  is  not good at
          economically practical pressure drops.

     2.    Non-condensible hydrocarbon solvent vapors will not be removed.

     3.    Odor  removal  without the addition  of an oxidizing  agent such as
                                                                     273

-------
                                                                  FIGURE 73
NJ
                                        PIGMENT  EMISSION  CONTROL.   SYSTEM
ALTERNATE
METHOD USING
"LEXIBLE HOSE

JP

/

/— FIXED 	 v
X STATIONS N^
X /

\
1

1

C
YCLONE
1
L FABRIC
FILTER

«

1
^
1
]
•
MEZZANINE
FLOOR

ft •
PE
K.
BE
1IL
/- LOADING 	 v
/f H ATC H X
^— M-*
5LE
.L

«.NW>
» •
^Y — ^
ROLLER
MILL
m 4
     HIGH  SREED
    MIXING TANK
RECOVERED RIGMENT
RECYCLE  FOR  DARK
   PRIMER  PAINTS
                                                                                   TO
                                                                             SOLID WASTE
                                                                                DISPOSAL

-------
          potassium permanganate or sodium hypochorite is unsatisfactory. If
          an  oxidizing agent is used, operating cost will be quite high due to
          the high concentration of other oxidizable material such as phthalic
          anydride, resins and oil.

     4.    Mobile packing and high make-up water rates are required to prevent
          plugging of the scrubber beds and spray nozzles.

     5.    Correction of the air pollution problem with wet scrubbing causes an
          equivalent water pollution problem which in  many areas is  more
          costly to correct than the original air pollution problem.

     The only control technique currently being used that has proven effective
for all cases  is  combustion.  Three general methods are employed to combust
waste gases:

          1.    Flame Combustion
          2.   Thermal Combustion
          3.   Catalytic Combustion

     All  of  the  above  methods  are oxidation  processes.  Ordinarily,  each
requires that the gaseous effluents be heated to the point where oxidation of
the combustible  will  take  place.  The three methods differ basically in the
temperature to  which the gas stream must be  heated.

     Flame combustion is the easiest of the three to understand, as it comes
the closest to everyday experience. When a gas stream  is contaminated with
combustibles at a concentration approaching the lower flammable limit, it is
frequently practical to add a small amount of natural gas as an auxiliary fuel
and sufficient air for combustion when  necessary, and then pass the resulting
mixture through a burner. The contaminants in the mixture  serve as a part of
the fuel.  Flame  incinerators  of this type  are  most often  used for closed
chemical reactors. They are not used on resin reactors at present. They may be
an  ideal  solution some day, however, when methods of operating a  closed,
pressurized resin reactor are developed.

     It is far more likely that the  concentration of combustible contaminants
in an air stream will be well below the lower  limit of flammability. When this is
the case,  direct thermal combustion is  considerably more  economical than
flame combustion. Direct thermal combustion is carried out by equipment such
as that illustrated in Figure 74.  In  this equipment, a gas burner is used to raise
the temperature  of the  flowing stream  sufficiently  to cause a slow thermal
reaction to occur in a residence chamber.
                                                                    275

-------
                                                 FIGURE 74

                                  THERMAL  COMBUSTION   SYSTEM
                                                  FOR
                                 RESIN REACTOR  OR CLOSED KETTLE
   HIGH-VELOCITY
      VENTURI
      SECTION
              HEAT EXCHANGER
                (OPTIONAL)
     FUEL
     GAS
NJ
                          COMBUSTION
                            DEVICE-^
                                                    (hd
MINIMUM FLOW DAMPER
  MANUAL CONTROL
                                         PRESS HOOD
       TEMPERATURE INDICATOR  ALARM  HIGH
       TEMPERATURE INDICATOR CONTROLLER
                                                          -DIVERSION
                                                            STACK
                                                                    FROM
                                                                   REACTOR
                                               FROM
                                          THINNING TANK

-------
     Whereas flame  temperatures  bring  about  oxidation  by  free  radical
 mechanisms at  temperatures  of  2500° F and higher, thermal combustion of
.ordinary hydrocarbon compounds begins to take place at temperatures as low
 as 900 to 1000° F. Good conversion efficiencies are produced at temperatures
 in the order of 1400° F with a  residence time of 0.3 to 0.6 seconds.

     Catalytic combustion  is carried  out by bringing  the gas  stream into
 intimate contact with a bed of catalyst.  In this sytem, the reaction takes place
 directly upon the surface of the catalyst, which is usually composed of precious
 metals, such as platinum and palladium.  While thermal  combustion equipment
 brings about oxidation at concentrations  below the limits of flame combustion,
 catalytic combustion takes place below  the limits of flammability and below
 the  normal oxidation  temperatures of the  contaminants.  The  reaction is
 instantaneous by comparison to thermal combustion and no residence chamber
 is required.  Catalytic combustion  is carried out by equipment such as that
 illustrated in Figure 75.

     In general, catalytic afterburners  are less expensive to operate. However,
 they depend directly  on the performance of the catalyst for their effectiveness.
 They will not function properly if the catalyst becomes deactivated. Because of
 this, catalytic units are not  inherently  functional when operated at design
 conditions.  In many  areas, means for  ensuring adequate performance of the
 catalyst on  a long term basis will  be required by environmental control offices.

     The basis  for design of either catalytic or thermal  combustion  is the
 hydrocarbon concentration of the exhaust gases handled by the  incinerator.
 The  maximum  hydrocarbon  level  is  set by  most insurance companies at
 one-quarter of  the lower explosive limit (LED which is equivalent to  13
 Btu/SCF of exhaust gas. As outlined earlier, the quantity of emission may vary
 significantly with  cooking  time and the type of cook. There is also likely to be
 a very  large variety of different  hydrocarbons emitted.  For  this  reason,
 theoretical  calculations of emission for design purposes are not satisfactory. On
 site emission measurements,  as  shown earlier  on  Figures 70 and 71,  are
 required. Once  the rate of  emission  is determined,  it  is then necessary to
 calculate the dilution air required to meet 1/4 LEL and set up the duct work
 system to  provide for this  dilution.  When  possible,  dilution air should  be
 utilized to  help capture as many  fugitive fume emissions as possible.  For
 example this can be accomplished by  taking the dilution  air from a hood
 positioned over the resin filter press and venting the thinning tanks and product
 run down tanks  into the same  system.

     A concentration of 1/4 LEL or 13 Btu/SCF will give a  temperature rise of
                                                                     277

-------
                                               FIGURE 75
NJ
^1
00
         SCHEMATIC   DIAGRAM  OF  A  CATALYTIC
COMBUSTION  SYSTEM    FOR  VARNISH  KETTLES
                                                                                STACK
                                                                              DISCHARGE
          HIGH-LOW
           LIK/1IT
        CONTROLLER
         SENSING
           T/C'S
     BURNER
   CONTROLLER
  CONTROL
  CABINET
                                              INSULATED —I
                                               DOUBLE   /
                                              MANIFOLD 1
                                                                  RECYCLING
                                                                   DAMPER
           ALARM
                         CATALYST
                                    PREHEAT
                                     BURNER
                                                                       COOKI NG
                                                                       STATIONS

-------
 about 600° F in  the  afterburner. This is too high if a heat exchanger is to be
 used, and in these cases, dilution will be required to a maximum concentration
 of 12 Btu/SCF. In all cases, the heat exchangers will  be the parallel flow type
 having  a  thermal efficiency of 42%. This is required to assure temperature
 balance and control, due to the high emission concentration.

     The  major problem with  catalytic or thermal afterburners as applied to
open  or closed resin and varnish kettles is the danger of fires and/or explosions.
This has happened in  numerous occasions in the past due primarily to excessive
hydrocarbon  emission  from   kettles.  These  problems  have been all  but
eliminated on  newer  units  by assuring that the design was based on  actual
emission measurements  of the highest emitting cook and the addition of some
of the following system  safety features:

     1.    High limit  temperature alarm  to shut off burner and  activate a
          diversion system.

     2.    High velocity duct  section to  assure  gas  flow  to afterburner
          substantially  exceeds flame propogation velocity of hydrocarbons
          being burned.

     3.    Double manifolding  or hot gas recycle to prevent condensation of
          heavy hydrocarbons or phthalic anhydride.

     4.    Diversion system to block  off  hydrocarbon  emissions  to  unit,
          by-passing them directly out of separate exhaust, and introduce fresh
          air to purge the unit.

     5.    Pneumatic operation  of the diversion system to assure fast positive
          action and  provide a fail safe system in  the event  of either air or
          electrical failure.

     6.    Purging with inert gas in the event of power failure.

     The above general  requirements are applicable to  all types of afterburner
control. Specific details for each type of system will be given in the equipment
specifications.
                                                                      279

-------
280

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND  COSTS

     Specifications  were  written  for  combustion  systems applied to  two
sources typical  of those in the paint and varnish industry: closed resin reactors
and open cooking kettles. Each of these sources emits primarily hydrocarbons.
Both thermal and catalytic combustion systems were specified for abatement in
each application. For  those  applications where the gas flow was sufficient,
separate, but parallel, specifications were written for combustion systems with
and  without heat  exchange. Separate specifications  and  cost  tables  are
presented for each application.

     For the graphical  presentation of cost data, however, sets of similar data
were grouped together rather than showing one set of cost graphs for each
application. This grouping permits the presentation of cost graphs covering a
wider  range  of combustion  system  sizes. Operating cost curves for similar
thermal and catalytic systems are presented on the same figure for comparison
purposes. The data were grouped  and presented as follows:

       System                      Capital Cost     Operating Cost
        Type                        Figure            Figure	

Thermal, without heat exchange         26             28,29
Catalytic, without heat exchange         27             28,29
Thermal, with heat exchange            30             32, 33
Catalytic, with heat exchange            31             32,33

In addition to  the  cost data gathered under this contract, similar cost data
gathered at the same  time  under contract No. 68-02-0259, Air Pollution
Control Engineering and Cost Study of the Paint and Varnish Industry, are  also
presented  on these  figures.  These additional data  are not included in  the
average cost tables.
                                                                    281

-------
                                    TABLE 93

                THERMAL  INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR  RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes  the  requirements for a thermal combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown  tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution air will
be supplied through a hood  over the resin filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this part of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow for a maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL in the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet to assure gas flow is in  excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to be natural gas fired.  Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of 1.0 psig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than  16% 0£/ to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas or process air burner. A combustion air system is not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator is composed of 75% kettle emission and 25% from other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak.  The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to be based on average  emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction in burner is to be calculated as follows:

     10% for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency of afterburner and burner duty.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be designed  for outdoor operation. Incinerator operating  and safety controls are to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association)  requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and contain an integral fail-safe air reservoir.  The system is to
automatically divert in the event of low flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure.  The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure  or loss  of flow.  Damper operating is to be sequential with the
position  switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after the preheat burner or  the incinerator outlet and shall be constructed to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature. The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the  capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and  any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2 in.  w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
hot gas recycle or a combination of both.
  282

-------
                                   INSTALLATION

     A complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is requested.  For the purpose of this proposal  fan  and damper including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary. The controls and control cabinet are to  be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner will be assumed to  be located on a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required. A tie through the roof from the base  to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at 100 psig and located within 30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A 10  ft exhaust stack will be  mounted on the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan.  A total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                  283

-------
284

-------
                                TABLE 94

             THERMAL  INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                    FOR  RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Process Conditions
                                        Small
                     Large
     Reactors, Number
       Size each, gal
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr
     Hcbn Emission Ave, Ib/hr
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM
     Exhaust Temperature, °F
     Heat of Combustion of
       Reactor Fume, Btu/lb
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum, Btu/SCF
       Average, Btu/SCF
     1
 4,000
   95
   57
 3,000
   110

17,000

   12
    7
    3
 5,000
  317
  190
10,000
  110

17,000

    12
    7
Incinerator Without Heat Exchange

     Unit Inlet                            325
     Burner AT" from Fuel Gas, °F            550
     *Burner A T from Flame Combustion, °F   125
     Burner Outlet Temperature, °F          1,000
     * *Unit A T from Thermal Combustion, °F  435
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F            1,435
     * * * Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr            3.36
                     325
                     550
                      125
                    1,000
                     435
                    1,435
                    11.19
    * Assumes 20% fume combustion in burner flame
   ** Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
 *** ,
     Supplied by bidders
                                                                        285

-------
                      TABLE 95

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR RESIN REACTORS
              (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s) .
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small







































Large







































High Efficiency
Small

3,225
110
3,000
4.3

95
57

10,840
1,435
3,036
9.2

4.8
95
14,806

1,636

1,085





1,800
1,913
2,600
850
600
510


900
400
1,500

28,600
Large

10,750
110
10,000
4.3

317
190

36,130
1,435
10,120
9.2

16
95
27,071

4,655

1,405





2,650
2,725
4,150
1,750
1,100
720


900
400
1,500

49,026
286

-------
                                                   TABLE 96

                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                                 FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR RESIN REACTORS
                                           (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760

$6/hr



$6/hr





;.011/kw-hr
1.80/MM Btu








Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small


375
_
375

390
160
550

375

2,024
20,784



22,808
24,108
2,860
26,968
Large


375
_
375

390
210
600

475

5,059
69,026



74,085
75,535
4,903
80,438
N)
00

-------
                                    TABLE 97

                THERMAL  INCINERATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                       FOR OPEN  KETTLE SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes  the  requirements for a thermal combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution air will
be supplied through a hood over the resin filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this part of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow for a maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL  in the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet to assure  gas flow is in excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to  be natural gas fired. Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of 1.0 psig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than 16% 0^ to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas  or process  air burner. A combustion air system is  not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator is composed of 75% kettle emission and  25% from other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak.  The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to  be based on average emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction in burner is to be calculated as follows:

     10% for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency of afterburner and burner duty.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be designed  for outdoor operation.  Incinerator operating and safety controls are to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association) requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and contain  an integral fail-safe air reservoir. The  system is to
automatically divert in the event of low  flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure. The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure or loss of flow.  Damper operating is  to be sequential with the
position switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after the preheat burner or  the incinerator outlet and shall be constructed to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature. The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the  capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2 in. w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
hot gas recycle or a combination of both.
 288

-------
                                   INSTALLATION

     A complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is requested.  For the purpose of this proposal  fan  and damper including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary. The controls and control cabinet are to  be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner will be assumed to be located on a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required. A tie through the roof from the base  to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at lOOpsig and located within 30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A 10  ft exhaust stack will be mounted on the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan. A total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                 289

-------
290

-------
                                TABLE  98

             THERMAL  INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                     FOR OPEN KETTLE SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
                                                  Small           Large

Process Conditions

     Kettles, Number                                   1             3
        Size each, gal                                200           375
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr                          16.8          101.1
     Hcbn Emission A ve, Ib/hr                          10.1          60.6
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM                        500          3,000
     Exhaust Temperature, °F                          80            80
     Heat of Combustion of
       Kettle Fume, Btu/lb                          16,000         16,000
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum, Btu/SCF                             12            12
     Average, Btu/SCF                                  7             7


Incinerator Without Heat Exchange

     Unit Inlet                                       300           300
     Burner A 7from Fuel Gas, °F                      575           575
     *Burner A T from Flame Combustion, °F             125           125
     Burner Outlet Temperature, °F                    1,000          1,000
     **Unit AT" from Thermal Combustion, °F            435           435
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F                      1,435          1,435
     * * * Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr                      0.58           3.43
    Assumes 20% fume combustion in burner flame
  ** Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
 ***,
   f Supplied by bidders
                                                                         291

-------
                    TABLE 99

  ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA {COSTS IN DOLLARS)
   FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR OPEN KETTLES
            (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small







































Large







































High Efficiency
Small

509
80
500
1.7

16.8
10.1

1,810
1,435
506
6.7

8.4
95
12,081

720

923





1,650
1,650
2,360
750
550
470


800
350
1,150

23,454
Large

3,056
80
3,000
1.7

101.1
60.6

10,860
1,435
3,036
6.7

50.5
95
14,806

1,636

1,085





1,913
1,913
3,025
850
600
510


900
350
1,250

28,838
292

-------
                                                 TABLE 100

                                 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN  $/YR)
                                 FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR OPEN KETTLES
                                          (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760
$6/hr

$6/hr


;.011/kw-hr
1.80/MMBtu





Small











Large











High Efficiency
Small

.375
375

390
110
500

325
482
3,554
4,036
5,236
2,345
7,581
Large

375
375

390
160
550

375
2,024
21,003
23,027
24,327
2,884
27,211
CO
CO

-------
                                    TABLE 101

                CATALYTIC INCINERATOR PROCESS DSCRIPTION
                      FOR RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes  the requirements for a catalytic combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution air will
be supplied through a hood over the resin filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this pan of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow for a maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL  in the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet to assure  gas flow is in excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to  be natural gas fired. Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of I.Opsig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than 16% 02, to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas or process air burner. A combustion air system is  not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator is composed of 75% kettle  emission and 25% from  other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak.  The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to  be based on average emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction in burner is to be calculated as follows:

     10% for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency of afterburner, burner duty, catalyst  face velocity,
and catalyst volume.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be designed  for outdoor operation.  Incinerator operating  and safety controls are  to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association) requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and contain an integral fail-safe air reservoir. The  system is to
automatically divert in the event of low flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure. The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure or loss of flow. Damper operating is to be sequential with the
position switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after the preheat burner or the incinerator outlet and shall be constructed to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature. The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the  capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2 in.  w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
a combination of both.
 294

-------
                                   INSTALLATION

     A complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is requested.  For the purpose of this proposal fan and damper Including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary. The controls and control cabinet are  to be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner will be assumed to  be located on  a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required. A tie through the roof from the base to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at WOpsig and located within  30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A 10 ft exhaust stack will be mounted on  the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan. A total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                 295

-------
296

-------
                               TABLE  102

            CATALYTIC INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                   FOR RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
                       (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
                                                  Small
                Large
Process Conditions
     Reactors, Number
       Size each, gal
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr
     Hcbn Emission Ave, Ib/hr
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM
     Exhaust Temperature, °F
     Heat of Combustion of
       Reactor Fume, Btu/lb
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum, Btu/SCF
     Average, Btu/SCF
     1
 4,000
   95
   57
 3,000
   110

17,000

   12
     7
    3
 5,000
  317
   190
10,000
   110

17,000

    12
    7
Incinerator Without Heat Exchange

     Unit Inlet
     Burner hTfrom Fuel Gas, °F
     * Burner AT from Flame Combustion, °F
     Burner Outlet Temperature, °F
     **Unit AT" from Thermal Combustion, °F
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F
     Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr
  300
  240
   60
  600
  500
 1,100
  300
  240
   60
  600
  500
 1,100
  * Assumes 10% fume combustion in burner flame
 ** Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
                                                                       297

-------
                     TABLE 103

   ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN  DOLLARS)
   FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR RESIN  REACTORS
             (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost ->.
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,/
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering "*"
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other ^






>






(4) Total Cost

Small







































Large







































High Efficiency
Small

3,225
110
3,000
4.3

95
57

8,880
1,100
3,015

4.8
95
22,988




3,990










11,386






38,364
Large

10,750
110
10,000
4.3

317
190

29,600
1,100
1,000

15.9
95
43,260




8,515










18,123






69,898
298

-------
                                                 TABLE 104


                                ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                              FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR RESIN  REACTORS

                                          (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760
$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

I.Oll/kw-hr
1.80/MMBtu


Small






Large






High Efficiency
Small

675
200
875
510
115
625
1,265
1,118
9,251
10,369
13,134
3,836
16,970
Large

675
200
875
510
145
655
4,045
3,239
30,835
34,074
39,649
6,990
46,639
NJ
CO
CO

-------
                                    TABLE  105

               CATALYTIC  INCINERATOR PROCESS  DESCRIPTION
                       FOR  OPEN  KETTLE SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements for a catalytic combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution air will
be supplied through a hood over the resin  filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this part of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow for a maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL  in the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet to assure  gas  flow is in excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to  be natural gas  fired. Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of 1.0psig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than 16% Oy, to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas  or process air burner. A combustion air system is not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator  is composed of 75% kettle emission and 25% from other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak.  The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to  be based on average emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction  in burner is to be calculated as follows:
         for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency of afterburner, burner duty, catalyst face velocity,
and catalyst volume.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be  designed  for outdoor operation.  Incinerator operating and safety controls are to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association) requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and  contain an  integral fail-safe air  reservoir. The system is to
automatically divert in the event of low flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure. The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure or loss of flow. Damper operating is to be sequential with the
position switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after the preheat burner or  the incinerator outlet and shall be constructed  to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature.  The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2  in. w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized  for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
hot gas recycle or a combination of both.
 300

-------
                                   INSTALLATION

     A complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is requested.  For the purpose of this proposal  fan  and  damper including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary. The controls and control  cabinet are to  be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner will be assumed to be located on a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required. A tie through the roof from the base to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at 100 psig and located within 30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A 10 ft exhaust stack will be mounted on the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan.  A total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                 301

-------
302

-------
                                TABLE  106

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR OPERATING  CONDITIONS
                     FOR  OPEN  KETTLE  SPECIFICATION
                       (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
                                                  Small          Large

Process Conditions

     Kettles Number                                   1             3
        Size each, gal                                200           375
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr                          16.8          101.1
     Hcbn Emission Ave, Ib/hr                          10.1           60.6
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM                        500          3,000
     Exhaust Temperature, °F                          80            80
     Heat of Combustion of
       Kettle Fume, Btu/lb                         16,000         16,000
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum, Btu/SCF                             12            12
       Average, Btu/SCF                                7             7

Incinerator Without Heat Exchange

     Unit Inlet                                      280           280
     Burner kTfrom Fuel Gas, °F                      260           260
     *Burner AT" from Flame Combustion, °F              60            60
     Burner Outlet Temperature,0 F                     600           600
     **Unit [\T from Thermal Combustion, °F            500           500
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F                      1,100          1,100
     Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr                        	          	
   * Assumes 10% fume combustion in burner flame
   * Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
                                                                      303

-------
                      TABLE 107

   ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR OPEN KETTLES
              (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s) 1
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning, >
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other






>






(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

509
80
500
1.7

16.8
10.1

1,480
1,100
503
5.4

0.8
95
11,974




2,218










9,003






23,195
Large

3,056
80
3,000
1.7

101.1
60.6

8,880
1,100
3,018
5.4

5.0
95
22,988




3,990










11,773






38,751
304

-------
                                                    TABLE 108

                                   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                                  FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR OPEN KETTLES
                                            (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760

$6/hr
$8/hr


$6/hr





:.011/kw-hr
;.80/MM Btu








Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small


675
200
875

510
85
595

300

253
1,752



2,005
3,775
2,320
6,095
Large


675
200
875

510
110
620

1,265

1,118
10,232



11,350
14,110
3,875
17,985
CO
o
Ol

-------
                                  FIGURE 76
                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR  THERMAL INCINERATORS
                    FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH  INDUSTRY
                          (WITHOUT HEAT  EXCHANGE)
     500000
     100000
CO
cc
3
o
Q
te
o
o
Q.
<
o
      10000
TURNKEY SYSTEM
 COLLECTOR PLUS
 AUXILIARIES
       1000
        100
                   COLLECTOR ONLY
                                     UBASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0289
                                     ABASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0259
                   1000

                GAS FLOW, SCFM
10000
30000
       306

-------
                                 FIGURE 77



                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                    FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH  INDUSTRY

                          (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
     500000
     100QOO
c/j
QC
o
Q

te

8
t
Q.
<
u
      10000
       1000
             COLLECTOR PLUS

             AUXILIARIES

                   r    i
             COLLECTOR ONLY
             TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                      BASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0289



                                       BASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0259
        100
                                  1000


                               GAS FLOW, SCFM
10000
30000
                                                                       307

-------
                               FIGURE 78



      DIRECT ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL AND CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                  FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY

                       (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)



    500000
C/3

DC
o
Q
o
O
Z
100000
10000
1000


















TLJ cf
~~ CATAL



















3MAL
YTIC



















^
,



















>
X
s



















/
j*
f


















/

f


















4
r

X

















.
r

s

















i
/


4
















*
r >
S'
.S

/











0. 68-02-0289
O. 68-02-0259






















100 1000 10000 3000G
                            GAS FLOW, SCFM
     308

-------
                                 FIGURE 79
      TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS FOR  THERMAL AND CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                   FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY

                         (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
    100000
V)
DC
o
o
00
O
U
D
Z
     10000
      1000
                  THERMAL
                  I     I   I
                CATALYTIC
                                                               jl
                                     A,
       BASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0289


       'BASED ON DATA FROM EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-02-0259
   1000


GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                            10000
30000
                                                                309

-------
                                    TABLE 109

                THERMAL  INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR  RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes  the  requirements for a thermal combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution air will
be supplied through a hood over the resin filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this part of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow for a maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL  in the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet to assure  gas flow is in excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to  be natural gas fired. Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of 1.0 psig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than 16% 0^ to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas  or process  air burner. A combustion air system is  not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator  is composed of 75% kettle emission and 25% from other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak.  The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to  be based on average emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction in burner is to be calculated as follows:

     10% for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency, of afterburner, burner duty, heat exchanger duty,
thermal efficiency, overall heat transfer coefficient (U), and tube surface area.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be designed  for outdoor operation. Incinerator operating and safety controls are to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association) requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and contain an integral fail-safe air reservoir. The  system is to
automatically divert in the event of low flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure. The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure or loss  of flow.  Damper operating is to be sequential with the
position switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after the preheat burner or  the incinerator outlet and shall be  constructed to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature. The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2 in.  w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
hot gas recycle or a combination of both.
310

-------
     The  heat exchanger is to be the parallel flow shell and tube type and designed  to
operate at an afterburner outlet temperature of 1500°F. Maximum exchanger pressure drop,
both sides, should not exceed a total of 6 in. w.c. hot. Dirty gas is to flow through the tube
side.
                                   INSTALLATION

     A complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is  requested. For the purpose of this proposal fan and damper including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary.  The controls and control cabinet are to be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner will be assumed  to be located on a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required. A tie through the roof from the base to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at WOpsig and located within 30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A  10 ft exhaust stack will be mounted on the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan. A  total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                 311

-------
312

-------
                                 TABLE 110

              THERMAL INCINERATOR  OPERATING CONDITIONS
                    FOR RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
Process Conditions
                                                  Small
     Reactors, Number
       Size each, gal
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr
     Hcbn Emission Ave, Ib/hr
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM
     Exhaust Temperature, °F
     Heat of Combustion of
       Reactor Fume, Btu/lb
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum Btu/SCF
       Average Btu/SCF
     Residence Time, sec  1500°F

Incinerator with Heat Exchange

     Inlet Tube Side, °F
     Unit Inlet, °F
     Burner AT" from Fuel Gas, °F
     * Burner AT"'from Flame Combustion, °F
     Burner Outlet Temperature, °F
     **Unit A T from Thermal Combustion, °F
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F
     Outlet Shell Side, °F
     ***Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr
     ***H.E. Duty, MM Btu/hr
     Thermal Efficiency, %
     ***Overall Heat Trans Coef, U
     * * *Tube Surface Area, fl2
1
4,000
95
57
3,000
110
3
5,000
317
190
10,000
110
17,000

    12
    7
    0.6
17,000

    12
    7
    0.6
325
825
115
60
1.000
500
1,500
1,030
1.66
1.77
42
4.9
628
325
825
115
60
1,000
500
1,500
1,030
5.4
5.9
42
4.9
2.095
   * Assumes 10% fume combustion in burner flame
  * * Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
 ***,
    * Supplied by bidders
                                                                        313

-------
                     TABLE 111

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
     FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR RESIN REACTORS
                (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small







































Large







































High Efficiency
Small

3,225
110
3,000
4.3

95
57

8,510
1,030
3,015
7.2

4.8
95
29,674

1,863

1,100





2,050
2,688
2,600
850
600
525


900
400
1,500

44,750
Large

10,750
110
10,000
4.3

317
190

28,400
1,030
10,050
7.2

16
95
46,840

4,740

1,405





3,000
4,375
4,150
1,750
1,400
720


900
400
1,500

71,180
314

-------
                                                  TABLE 112

                                 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                                FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS  FOR  RESIN  REACTORS
                                            (WITH HEAT  EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760
$6/hr
$6/hr

Mll/kw-hr
MO/MM Btu


Small






Large






High Efficiency
Small

375
375
390
160
550
375
2,746
6,590
9,336
10,636
4,475
15,111
Large

375
375
390
210
600
475
8,528
21,800
30,328
31,778
7,118
38,896
00
Ul

-------
                                    TABLE 113

               CATALYTIC  INCINERATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                      FOR RESIN REACTOR SPECIFICATION
     This specification  describes the requirements for a catalytic combustion system for
abatement of the hydrocarbon emissions from the resin production  facility of a paint and
varnish plant. The system  will be similar to that shown in Figure 24. All reactor thinning
tanks and product rundown tanks will be vented to the collection system. Dilution  air will
be supplied through a hood over the resin filter press(es). A minimum flow damper is to be
supplied in this part of the ventilation system. It is to be sized to allow fora maximum fume
concentration of 40% LEL  in  the fully closed position. A high velocity Venturi section is to
be located at the incinerator inlet  to assure gas  flow is in  excess of flame propagation
velocity at 1/2 design flow rate.

     The afterburner is to  be natural gas fired. Sufficient gas, having a specific gravity of
0.60 and an upper heating value of 1040 Btu/SCF, is available at pressure of 1.0 psig.

     The exhaust gas contains sufficient oxygen, greater than  16% 0^ to allow firing of the
afterburner with a raw gas or process air burner. A combustion air system is not required.
Fume  load to the incinerator is composed of 75% kettle emission and 25% from other
sources. Average emissions are 60% of peak. The system is to be designed on peak emission
but operating costs are to  be based on  average emissions. Operating conditions listed are
based on peak emissions. Fume destruction in burner is to be calculated as follows:

     10% for catalytic units with or without heat exchange

     10% for thermal units with heat exchange

     20% for thermal units without heat exchange.

     Please fill in estimated efficiency of afterburner, burner duty,  heat exchanger duty,
overall heat transfer coefficient (U), tube surface area, catalyst face velocity, and catalyst
volume.

     The afterburner is to be supplied with a suitable control panel and all equipment is to
be designed  for outdoor operation.  Incinerator operating and safety controls are to be
designed to meet F.I.A. (Factory Insurance Association) requirements. All dampers are to be
pneumatically operated and contain an  integral fail-safe  air reservoir. The system is  to
automatically divert in  the event of low flow, high afterburner temperature, high reactor
pressure, and afterburner preheat burner failure. The exhaust system should also be purged
with inert gas on fan failure or loss of flow. Damper operating is to be sequential with the
position switches mounted on the damper arm and not the operator. The system fan shall be
located after  the preheat burner  or the incinerator outlet  and shall be  constructed  to
withstand 200°F higher than design operating temperature. The fan shall have a V-belt drive
and fan and motor shall have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,
afterburner and any heat exchanger that may be used. System ductwork should be sized for
a maximum A P of 2 in. w.c. hot. The fan motor may be sized for restricted flow cold start.
The ductwork to the incinerator should be heated either by the use of a double manifold or
hot gas recycle or a combination of both.
 316

-------
     The heat exchanger is to be the parallel flow shell and tube type and designed to
operate at an afterburner outlet temperature of 1500°F. Maximum exchanger pressure drop,
both sides, should not exceed a total of 6 in. w.c. hot. Dirty gas is to flow through the tube
side.
                                   INSTALLATION

     A  complete turnkey proposal including ductwork, structural steel, fuel and inert gas
piping,  etc., is requested.  For the purpose of this proposal fan and damper including
operators are to be considered as auxiliary. The  controls and control cabinet are  to be
included with the afterburner price.  The afterburner  will be assumed to  be located on a
structural steel base on the resin plant roof. No modification to the building structural steel
is required.  A tie through the roof from the  base to the building steel is required. The base
and tie-in are part of the installed structural cost. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the
control cabinet, motor, and burner. Plant air is available at 100 psig and located within  30 ft.
Inert gas is available and will require 30 ft of piping from supply to ductwork. The existing
stack can be used for the diversion stack. A 10 ft exhaust stack will be  mounted on  the
incinerator,  double manifold or exhaust fan.  A total of thirty-five (35) feet of new exhaust
ductwork and twenty-five (25) feet of double manifold will be required.
                                                                                 317

-------
318

-------
                                TABLE 114

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                    FOR RESIN  REACTOR  SPECIFICATION
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
Process Conditions
                                                  Small
                Large
     Reactor Number
        Size each, gal
     Hcbn Emission Max, Ib/hr
     Hcbn Emission A ve, Ib/hr
     Total Exhaust Rate, SCFM
     Exhaust Temperature, °F
     Heat of Combustion of
       Resin Fume, Btu/lb
     Hydrocarbon Concentration
       Maximum Btu/SCF
       Average Btu/SCF

 Incinerator with Heat Exchange

     Inlet Tube Side, °F
     Unit Inlet, °F
     Burner AT" from Fuel Gas, °F
     * Burner AT" from Flame Combustion, °F
     Burner Outlet Temperature, °F
     **Unit t^T from Thermal Combustion, °F
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F
     Outlet Shell Side, °F
     Burner Duty, MM Btu/hr
     HE Duty, MM Btu/hr
     Thermal Efficiency
     ***Overall Heat Trans Coef, U
     * * *Tube Surface Area, ft2
     1
 4,000
   95
   57
 3,000
   110

17,000

    12
     7
  300
  500
   40
   60
  600
  500
 1,100
  915
  23%
   4.2
  405
    3
 5,000
  317
  190
10,000
  110

17,000

    12
    7
  300
  500
   40
   60
  600
  500
 1,100
  915
"23%
   4.2
 1,350
   * Assumes 10% fume combustion in burner flame
  * * Assumes 95% overall fume combustion
 * * *
    Supplied by bidders
                                                                          319

-------
                      TABLE 115

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR RESIN REACTORS
                (WITH HEAT  EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr, Max
Ib/hr, Avg
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost _
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning, >
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost ^
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other _,






>






(4) Total Cost

Small







































Large







































High Efficiency
Small

3,225
110
3,000
4.3

95
57

7,775
915
3,002
7.0

4.8
95
31 , 698




4,608










11,561






47,867
Large

10,750
110
10,000
4.3

317
190

25,900
915
10,007
7.0

15.9
95
53,890




10,230










17,173






81,293
320

-------
                                                  TABLE 116

                                 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                               FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR RESIN  REACTORS
                                            (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost
8,760

$6/hr
$8/hr


$6/hr





f.Oll/kw-hr
;.80/MM Btu








Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small


675
200
875

510
115
625

1,265

2,004
841



2,845
5,610
4,787
10,397
Large


675
200
875

510
145
655

4,045

5,436
3,083



8,519
14,094
8,129
22,223
CO

-------
                                FIGURE 80
                CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                  FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY
                    (WITH 42% EFFICIENT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
    100000
eo
oc
o
Q
fc
o
o
o.
<
O
     10000
      1000


















































































































TURNKEY SYSTEM ^
COLLECTOR WITH
PLL










ISA










UX










ILI










AF










\\










ES










E
i










XCHANGE
CO
EX








°BASEDON t
ABASED ON c
R -H
--<
LLEC'
CHAN








5ATA FF
)ATA FF








^
r^
r*~
•OR
GEF








*OM I
IOM E








**•
**
*»
Wl
Ol








EPA
EPA








^
J
^
TH
SIL>








CON
CON








^
f
^
r








TP
TR







4
'
^










A(
AC







*
^
^











;T
:T






^
'
^
>











N
N





^
^
jl
6
r











O. 68-02-0289
O. 68-02-0259






















        100
   1000

GAS FLOW, SCFM
10000
30000
          322

-------
                                 FIGURE 81
                 CAPITAL  COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS
                   FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH  INDUSTRY
                    (WITH 23% EFFICIENT HEAT EXCHANGE)
     500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
Q
te
O
U
Q.
<
U
      10000
      1QDO






































































































T


















URN KEY SYSTEM
I 1^
COLLECTOR WITH EXCH£
PLUS AUXILIARIES













































































•T
JXIGEP
—^
— <
COLLECTOR
EXCHANGER









°BASEDON C
ABASED ON









)ATA FF
DATA F
V
WIT
ON








OM E
ROM








**>
^
**
H
LY








PA
EPA








i***
>
,4
y^l










:ON
co^







f-
**
^
J










TR
ITF







^
?











AC
1A






«J
,
^
"
















f
4
^
^












:TN
CT^




*
^
s
TS
r












0. 68-02-0289
0. 68-02-025E






















        100
   1000

GAS FLOW, SCFM
10000
30000
                                                                323

-------
                               FIGURE 82


         DIRECT ANNUAL COSTS  FOR THERMAL AND CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                  FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY

                         (WITH  HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
DC
O
Q
CO
O
u
z
<
100000
10000



1000











































































































































































































THERMAL














A
^~



CATALYTIC ^






DBASEDON C
A BASE DON [



ATA FR
3ATA FF












^



S
r



OM E
HOM I















S
]r




PA(
EPA












/*
*
A
s






:ON
CON












>
>
1
w







TR
TF











.









AC
1A(











/
/








T
:T










j
/
>








N(
N









/
/

/








3. 68-02-0289
O. 68-02-0259






















100 1000 10000 3000G
                            GAS FLOW, SCFM
          324

-------
                               FIGURE 83


         TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL AND CATALYTIC INCINERATORS
                  FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY

                         (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
DC
o
Q
CO
O
U
D
Z
100000
10000
1000

























































































































































































c


















THERMAL
ATALYTIC





°BASED ON
A BASE DON












J(
t
k ^^^*







DATA Fl
DATA F












<
fS








^OM
ROM












S
s








EPA
EPA











A
/
>








COI\
cor











<
t








TF
VIT











/
'








1A
RA










.

*








:T
C1










/\
>









N
r r








/
/
'
S









0. 68-02-0289
*IO. 68-02-025





















3
100 1000 10000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                             325

-------
326

-------
                                FIGURE 84




         TOTAL INSTALLED COSTS FOR THERMAL AND CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                   FOR THE PAINT AND VARNISH INDUSTRY
    500000
     100000
CO
tc
o
Q


te
o
o
Q.

<

O
     10000
      1000









THE
CATALY














































































CAT/




:RMAL WITH 42% HEAT EXCHANC
• i i i i i i i •- -1
TIC WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE






















d










M










B










£










*
m










*
m










=^
THERr












^LYTI




JE ^j
^
^*
l/IALW












CW



4^
\>
-**
<^
r
fITH












TH



<$
S
^
OU












23


^
^
S
*>
Th












%


X
x
^


IE












H


^
^
xi
X

A'












E/

^
X
j

**

r












\-

i
$

<*

E;












' EXCHAIS
^^^f
£s
}r
s


KCHANGE












IGE


















        100
    1000



GAS FLOW, SCFM
10000
30000
                                                             327

-------
                              REFERENCES

 1.    Marketing  Guide to the Paint Industry, Patricia Noble, Ed., Charles H.
      Kline & Co., Inc., Fairfield, New Jersey, 1969.

 2.    Federation Series on Coating Technology, Units
      1.   Introduction to Coating Technology, Oct., 1964
      3.   Oils for Organic Coatings, Sept., 1965
      4.   Modern Varnish Technology, May, 1966
      5.   Alkyd Resins, March, 1967
      12.  Principles of Formulation and Paint Calculation, June, 1969
      17.  Acrylic Resins, March, 1971
      19.  Vinyl Resins,  April,  1972, Federation  of  Societies  for Paint
          Technology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

 3.    Stenburg, R.  L,  Control  of Atmospheric  Emissions  from Paint  and
      Varnish Manufacturing Operations, U.S. Department of Health, Education
      and  Welfare,  Robert A.  Taft  Sanitary Engineering Center, Technical
      Report A58-4, Cincinnati, Ohio (June,  1958).

 4.    Parker, Dean  H., Principles of Surface  Coating Technology, John Wiley &
      Sons, Interscience Publishers Division, New York, N.Y., 1965.

 5.    The  Technology of Paints, Varnishes  and  Lacquers, Charles R. Martens,
      Ed.,  Reinhold Book Corp., New York, N.Y., 1968.

 6.    Spence, J. W. and  Haynie, F. H., Paint Technology and  Air Pollution: A
      Survey and Economic  Assessment, Environmental  Protection Agency,
      National   Environmental  Research  Center,  Office of  Air Programs
      Publication  No.  AP-103,  Research   Triangle  Park,  North Carolina,
      February, 1972.

 7.    Hardison, L.  C., "A Summary  of the Use of Catalyst for Stationary
      Emission Source Control", presented  at Franklin Institute, Philadelphia,
      Pennsylvania (Nov., 1968).

 8.    Hardison, L. C., "Disposal of Gaseous Wastes", presented  at East Ohio  Gas
      Company Seminar on Waste Disposal, Cleveland, Ohio (May, 1967).

 9.    Hardison, L. C., "Controlling Combustible Emissions", Paint and Varnish
      Production, July, 1967.
328

-------
10.  Unpublished  source tests  of  11  different  kettles,  Hirt Combustion
     Engineers, Montebello, California, August, 1971.

11.  Unpublished source tests of 10 different kettles, PPG Industries.

12.  Rolke,  R.  W., et al. Afterburner Systems Study, Shell  Development Co.,
     Emeryville, California.
                                                                    329

-------
330

-------
GRAPHIC ARTS

-------
4.   THE GRAPHIC ARTS INDUSTRY

     The graphic arts  industry  encompasses  all operations  involved  in the
 printing of an image onto a surface. The images may consist of alphabetical and
 numerical figures, illustrations, and photographs, while the surfaces may consist
 of  various grades of paper, metal,  plastic, fabric, and glass. The industry is
 composed  of over 40,000 commercial establishments'1' scattered throughout
 the country  and ranks seventh  in value-added to the Gross National Product
 and eighth  in employment.121  Although the  industry is large on a national
 scale,  it is one of the few remaining industries composed  mainly of small
 businesses. Approximately 80%'3) of the commercial printing establishments
 employ less than twenty people.

     The industry can be classified into three general categories:

     1.   Publishing — newspapers, books, magazines, etc.

     2.   Package Printing — paper containers, labels, etc.

     3.   Metal Decorating — metal containers, bottle caps, metal signs, etc.

 Generally, these categories differ in the type of surfaces (substrates) to which
 the printing images are  applied. The publishing and package printing  industries
 generally employ various  grades of paper as  substrates,  while the metal
 decorating industry employs various types of sheet metal.

     The majority of  commercial  printing operations employ one of the
 following printing processes:

          Letterpress
          Lithography
          Gravure
          Flexography
         Screen Printing

 Each process has  a  unique method  of applying the  printing image  onto the
 substrate and a unique ink composition.

     In letterpress printing,  the  printing image* is  relief outward  from the
 non-image area. Originally, the printing surface was  a  flat  plate; however,  in
 modern letterpress printing, the printing image is transferred to a flexible mat
 from which a cylindrical plate is  made. The curved plates are then attached to
*That  portion of the printing plate or cylinder which transfers the ink to the
substrate.

                                                                      331

-------
rollers in the press. The process is capable of both sheet-fed and web-fed (roll)
printing with press speeds up to 1500 feet per minute (web).

     Letterpress  is  the  oldest  and  most  basic form of  printing and still
predominates in  periodical  and  newspaper publishing. Approximately 93% of
the nation's newspapers are printed by this process.'41 Letterpress accounts for
35.6% of the eight billion dollar commercial printing market (Table 117)'5> and
57.3?/o of the industry's ink consumption (Table 118).(6)

     Lithography printing is  characterized by having the image area on the
same plane as the non-image area. The image area chemically attracts ink (ink
receptive area) while the non-image area chemically repels ink (water receptive
area). The printing  image is applied to  a cylinder which transfers the inked
image  directly to the substrate  (direct lithography) or to a rubber  blanket
cylinder which in the same revolution prints the wet inked  image onto the
substrate  (offset lithography). When  a  web or  continuous roll of  paper  is
employed with the offset process, it is called web-offset printing.

     Lithography currently accounts for 50.9% of the commercial printing
market  and  10.9%  of the  industry's ink consumption.  It is considered the
fastest growing printing process and finds its greatest  use in books, pamphlets,
metal decorating, and newspapers of over 100,000 circulation.

     In  gravure or intaglio  printing, the image area is relief inward from the
non-image  area.  During  the inking  process, both the image and  non-image
surfaces are submerged in an ink  bath, and the excess ink is scraped from the
non-image area with a blade (Doctor's blade). After removal of the excess ink,
the  inked  image area is transferred directly to the substrate.  In sheet-fed
gravure, the image carrier may be either a flat plate or a curved plate attached
to a cylinder. In roll-fed  gravure or rotogravure, the  image is engraved into a
metal cylinder. Rotogravure presses are  capable of press speeds up to 2,000
feet per minute.'2'

     Gravure printing accounts for 6.6% of the commercial printing market and
19.1% of the industry's ink consumption. The process is widely used in package
printing (cellophane, metallic foil, gift wrap, and labels), magazines, catalogues,
and Sunday newspaper supplements.

     Flexography is very similar to  letterpress in that the printing  image  is
relief outward  from the non-image area; however, in flexography the printing
plate is  made of rubber. The process is always web-fed and is used primarily in
package printing (milk cartons).
332

-------
                       TABLE 117




            COMMERCIAL  PRINTING MARKET'5'
Printing
Process
Letterpress
Lithography
Gravure
Flexography
Screen Printing
Value of Receipts
1963 1967
2,074
1,896
287
263
69
2,236
2,787
207
304
130
($ Million)
1970
2,814
4,032
525
337
210
Percentage of Market
1963 1967 1970
45.3
41.3
6.2
5.7
1.5
38.2
47.5
6.9
5.2
2.2
35.6
50.9
6.6
4.3
2.6
Total
4,589    5,664    7,918
100.0    100.0    100.0
                                                       333

-------
                              TABLE  118

                   INK* CONSUMPTION IN 1968(6)
         Printing
          Process
Ink* Consumed
 Pounds x 10'6
Ink* Consumed
 % of Total
         Lithography

         Letterpress
            (Publication)
            (Newspaper)

         Gravure

         Flexography

         Screen Printing
   81.5

  459.0
  (143.0)
  (316.0)

  153.0

   66.5

   41.0
   11.0

   57.0
   (18.0)
   (39.0)

   18.0

    9.0

    5.0
            Total
  801.0
  100.0
 *Undiluted Ink
334

-------
     In screen printing, the printing image is a fine screen through which the
ink or paint  flows. Non-image areas are produced by  impregnating the screen
with  a  waxy material which  prevents flow  of the ink through the screen.
This process  is entirely sheet-fed and is  employed  mainly  in the printing of
greeting cards, signs, and wallpaper.
                         INKS  AND  SOLVENTS

     In the printing processes, the main sources of air pollution result from the
printing inks which usually consist of three components.

     1.   Pigments, which produce the desired colors, are composed of finely
         divided organic and inorganic materials.

     2.   Resins, which bind the pigments to the  substrate, are composed of
         organic resins and polymers.

     3.   Solvents,  which dissolve or  disperse the resins and pigments, are
         usually composed of organic compounds. The  solvent is removed
         from the ink  and  emitted  to  the  atmosphere during the drying
         process.

     Solvents can be classified into five general categories according to their
chemical  composition.

     1.   Aromatics: benzene, toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene, unsaturates, and
         mixtures with aromatic contents greater than 25%.

     2.   Aliphatics  and  Intermediates:   normal  and  isoparaffins,  cyclo-
         paraffins, and mineral spirits containing less than 15% aromatics.

     3.   Oxygen-containing  Compounds:  methanol, propanol,  isopropanol,
         butanol, isobutanol, glycols, esters, and ketones.

     4.   Chlorinated  Compounds: trichloroethylene, trichloroethane, methy-
         lene chloride.

     5.   Nitrogen-containing Compounds: nitroparaffins and dimethyl forma-
         mide.

     The distribution of solvent usage among the various printing processes is
                                                                     335

-------
tabulated in Tables 120<2) and 121(2) and chemical properties of representative
solvents for each group are contained in Table 119.(1'

     The viscosity of printing inks is controlled by the solvent content and may
vary from a paste-like substance in letterpress and lithography to a very fluid
substance in gravure. Gravure inks must be fluid enough to flow into and out of
the engraved cells of the printing cylinder, while letterpress  and lithography
inks must be viscous enough to adhere to the image areas during the printing
process.

     Gravure inks usually have a solvent concentration of approximately 65%
and  are  composed of highly volatile aromatics  (toluene  and xylene)  which
evaporate very rapidly at room temperature. Letterpress and lithography inks
can be divided  into two categories: oxidative drying inks and heat set inks. The
oxidative drying  inks (newspaper printing)  contain very  little solvent and dry
by oxidative polymerization without the addition of heat. Heatset inks contain
approximately  40%  aliphatic solvent, and during the  high  temperature (=;
400° F) drying operation, approximately 50% of the original solvent is removed
and emitted to the atmosphere.

     Small quantities of solvents are also  consumed in the printing industry as
washing  solutions and varnish thinners. The  relative  quantities consumed for
these purposes are tabulated in Tables 122(2) and 123.(2)
         SOLVENT  FLOW DIAGRAMS AND EMISSION RATES

Web-offset - Heatset Ink

     A solvent flow diagram of a web-offset operation employing a heatset ink
is illustrated  in Figure 85.  The web travels through the presses  (one for each
color), where it is printed on both sides simultaneously. The wet web is then
passed through a  dryer  (=: 400°F) where approximately 60%  of the initial
solvent  is removed, and then through chill  rolls where it is cooled  prior to
folding and cutting.

     The dryer may be either a hot air  dryer (as shown  in the illustration)
where a  minimum of flame impingement occurs or an all flame dryer where
direct impingement of the  flame on  the web occurs. The composition of the
dryer effluent gas depends on the type of dryer being employed.

     In the hot air dryer, very little if any solvent decomposition occurs. As the
336

-------
                           TABLE  119

    PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COMMONLY USED SOLVENTS*1'
      SOLVENT
ESTERS:
    Methyl Acetate
    Ethyl Acetate
    Isopropyl Acetate
    Secondary Butyl Acetate
    Normal Butyl Acetate
    Amyl Acetate

ALCOHOLS:
    Methyl Alcohol
    Isopropyl Alcohol
    Normal Butyl Alcohol

GLYCOL-ETHER:
    Methyl "Cellosolve"
    "Cellosolve"

KETONES:
    Acetone
    Methyl Ethyl Ketone
    Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
    Cyclohexanone

AROMATICS:
    Toluene
    Xylene

ALIPHATIC NAPHTHAS:
    Hexane
    Fast Diluent Naphtha
    Heptane
    Lacquer Diluent Naphtha
    Octane
    Mineral Spirits
BOILING
RANGE, °F
125 to 136
161 to 176
183 to 194
219 to 242
239 to 266
248 to 302
147 to 149
177 to 181
240 to 246
253 to 258
269 to 278
132 to 134
172 to 177
237 to 242
266 to 343
229 to 233
275 to 290
150 to 158
140 to 180
200 to 210
200 to 240
21 5 to 230
310 to 400
FLASH
POINT, °F
less than 30
42
60
90
102
116
61
70
115
115
130
less than 15
less than 30
80
130
45
82
less than 0
less than 0
less than 0
less than 30
30
100
Ib/gal
@ 68° F
7.55
7.40
7.25
7.18
7.30
7.20
6.60
6.55
6.75
8.03
7.74
6.60
6.71
6.68
7.88
7.24
7.26
5.70
5.75
6.05
6.20
6.20
6.50
                                                             337

-------
                                            TABLE 120

            PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN  OF  SOLVENT CONSUMED FOR INK DILUTION
                        BY  PRINTING PROCESS AND SOLVENT TYPE (1968)(2)
PRINTING                                  SOLVENT TYPE (VOLUME %)
 PROCESS               A          B         C         D          E          F        TOTAL
Lithography            12.8        20.4       14.4       0.04       0.58       0.30        48.52%

Letterpress              0.1         0.4        0.3        0.06       -         -           0.86%

Flexography             0.05        0.5        8.7        -         -        0.15         9.40%

Gravure                8.6        21.1       11.1        -        0.02        -          40.82%

Screen Printing          0.05        0.2         -        -         -        0.15         0.40%
   Total               21.60%     42.60%    34.50%    0.10%      0.60%      0.60%      100.0%*
*Total solvent consumed as ink diluent was 1 1,682,500 gal in 1968.

Solvent Types:
A — Benzene, toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene, unsaturates and mixtures with aromatic content greater than
    25% by volume
B — Normal and isoparaffins, cycloparaffins, mineral spirits containing less than 15% aromatics,
    heavy naphthas with aromatic contents greater than 25%, turpentine
C — Methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, butanol, isobutanol, glycols, esters, ketones
D — Trichloroethylene, trichloroethane, methylene chloride
E — Nitroparaffins and dimethyl formamide
F — Miscellaneous

-------
                                                       TABLE  121
GO
00
CO
                            VOLUME BREAKDOWN OF SOLVENT CONSUMED FOR INK DILUTION
                                    BY PRINTING PROCESS AND SOLVENT TYPE (1968)
                                                                                  (2)
PRINTING
PROCESS
Lithography
Letterpress
Flexography
Gravure
Screen Printing
A
14,972
98
58
10,089
34
SOLVENT TYPE (HUNDRED GALLONS)
B CD E F TOTAL
23,941
444
606
24,637
173
16,691 38
399 52
10,180
12,868
85
723 408 56,773
1 994
1 170 11,015
12 - 47,606
145 437
                  Total
25,251    49,801     40,223    90
736
724
116.825
               Solvent Type - See Table 60

-------
CO
4*
O
                                                       TABLE 122

                                VOLUME BREAKDOWN OF TOTAL SOLVENT CONSUMPTION
                                          BY USE AND SOLVENT TYPE  (1968)'2'
                                                      SOLVENT TYPE (THOUSAND GALLONS)
                   USE                        A        B         C       D, E, & F             TOTAL
Ink Dilution
Washes*
Coating & Varnish Thinner
2,525
579
614
4,980
1,774
1,156
4,022
519
984
155
—
—
                                                                                            11,682

                                                                                             2,872

                                                                                             2,754


                  Total                      3,718     7,910      5,525        155              17,308



                *Washing presses, rollers, blankets, etc.



                Solvent Type — See Table 60

-------
                                                           TABLE 123

                                PERCENTAGE  BREAKDOWN OF TOTAL  SOLVENT CONSUMPTION
                                               BY USE AND SOLVENT  TYPE (1968)(2)
                    USE                          A         B         C        D. E, & F             TOTAL
                 Ink Dilution                      14.5       28.8       23.2          1.0                 67.5

                 Washes*                         3.4       10.2        3.0           -                 16.6

                 Coating & Varnish Thinner          3.5        6.7        5.7           -                 15.9
                   Total                        21.4       45.7       31.9          1.0                100.0%
                 "Washing presses, rollers, blankets, etc.
                 Solvent Type - See Table 60
GO

-------
                                   FIGURE 85


                             WEB OFFSET, PUBLICATION
 £
     x. I.2LB./HR.
   OF  SOLVENT
                                           XHAUST
                1500 "TO aooof-V
                         SCFM   ^-S
             , ALIPHAl
              SOLVENT
 WASH-UP
  SOLVENT -- -
        INK
--FOUNTAINS
30 IN. WEB, IOOO FPM
  2 SIDES ,
  COVERAGE  COATED
  PAPER
    WATER
                     DAMPENING
     ISOPROPANOL
     O.3LB./LB. OF  INK
        I  A
        I  I
       ?
                                            PRESS
                                                                 FILTER
                                     6
                                                                             -AIR  AT  TS°F
                                                                  FILTER
                                          300 SCFM
                                         TO  BURNER
                                            GAS
                                                                                      I2OO SCFM
                                                                                  r
                                                                         AIR HEATER
                                                                           (SSO°F)
                                                                                                6OOO  TO  IOOOO
                                                                                                   SCFM
     WATER S.
-^ ISOPROPANOL
      VAPOR
                                                    DRYER
                                                  s-4OO°F
                                                                                                  AIR & SMOKE
                                                            PRODUCT

                                                            PLUS   <4-O°/o
                                                            OF  INITIAL
                                                            SOLVENT
                                                                   AIR AT TS°F
                                                                     AIR AT  7S°F
                         "Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs and

                          operating conditions, large variations will exist.

-------
amount of flame impingement increases, the quantity of solvent decomposition
also increases.

     Exhaust gas analyses  from a web-offset publication operation* with and
without ink and for coated and non-coated paper are included in Table 124.(2)
These  analyses indicate that the ink is not the only source of emissions  from
the printing operation. The paper coating also emits substantial quantities of
hydrocarbons.

     The operation illustrated  in Figure 85 represents a "typical" web-offset,
heatset ink, printing process operating at the following conditions:

       Web Width                            38 in.
       Press Speed                            1,000 ft/min
       Number of Sides Printed               2
       Ink Coverage                          150%
       Ink Mileage                            0.41  Ib ink/106 in.2
       Solvent Content of Ink                 35% (Aliphatic)
       % of Initial Solvent  Removed  in Dryer   60%

The emission rate of solvent from the operation as a function of press speed is
shown in Figure  86.
Letterpress — Publication

     Letterpress differs from lithography (web-offset)  in  that  the web is
printed on one side at a time, and the web is dried after each color is printed.
When  four  colors  are  printed, a  procedure  calied  double ending may be
employed: the web passes through one press and one dryer, is then  turned over,
and returned to the same press where it runs adjacent to the first pass on the
same  cylinder.  In this manner, only four presses and four dryers  are required
for four-color, two-sided printing.  The exhaust and  solvent emission rates
shown in  the solvent flow diagram  (Figure 87) represent one color, two-sided
printing.  In  an  actual  four-color operation,  the four  dryers would be
manifolded together to a common exhaust stack and the emission rates would
be four times as great as those shown in the illustration.

     Letterpress publication  ink   is  very  similar  in composition  to  the
web-offset ink  (heatset' - 35%  aliphatic  solvent),  and consequently,  the

* Dryer type not included.
                                                                     343

-------
                           TABLE  124

             ANALYSIS OF DRYER EXHAUST GAS
              FROM  WEB-OFFSET PUBLICATION121
                                        Web-Offset - Publication
  Component                    A         B          C         D
CO, ppm                         55        36.5        7.3       55

CH4/ppm                        18         9          9.1       18

C02, ppm                     3,010      2,970      3,180      2,850

HCBN*                           1.03       0.703      0.297      0.985

Carbon, Ib/hr                      0.279      0.190      0.077      0.266



*CH4 free hydrocarbons, (IbC/ft3) x 105



A — Coated paper, 30 in. web, 60% coverage, 4 color, one side 1,500
    impressions/min, 300° F oven temperature, exhaust = 4,500 SCFM

B — Same as A except no ink was used.

C — News stock (uncoated) paper, same conditions as B. No ink.

D — News stock, same conditions as A.
344

-------
                                      FIGURE 86
UJ
I-
z
o
5
UJ
      o.4 r
I    °-3
\
H
z
UJ
_l
o

m
      0.2
      O.I
                     EMISSION  RATES* FROM  WEB OFFSET  AND
                   WEB  LETTERPRESS EMPLOYING HEATSET INKS
                                               WE
                                               WE
          B OFFSE
          B LET
TE
RPRESS
                         500            1000           1500

                           PRESS SPEED, FEET/MIN.
                                 2000
          *Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variations of printing
           jobs and operating conditions, large variations will exist. The basis used for calculat-
           ing emission rates is the following:
               Web width
               Number of sides printed
               Ink coverage
               Ink mileage
38 in.
2
150%
0.41  Ib ink coated,
106 in.2
Offset
0.58 Ib ink coated,
106 in.2
     0.62 Ib ink non-coated
     106 in.2

     0.79 Ib ink non-coated
     106 in.2
               Solvent content of ink
35% - 60% removed during drying.
                                                                          345

-------
                     FIGURES?
         WEB LETTERPRESS, PUBLICATION
EXHAUST JS.I2 L.B.,
w 7000 SCFM SOLVE N-i
en


IP-ILJ. "T'Z? 1 R /HR, te. .
ll>jrs-x3SP/o AL.IPHATIC
SOLVENT
i

38 1 N . WEB , ISOO FPM
2 SIDES., 1 COLOR
l£>O*Vo COVERAGE
4
i
i
D
I
I
(0
/HR.*



.
'

i



1
1
1
h
z
y
>,
F LTERJ j [ FILTER
S*
	 	 J£M
1 Is
AIR
(SOO-F)
1
s^ ,^ AIR A. SMOKE
' " t

^ DRVER ^ CHIL.L. PRODUCT _
OF INITIAL."
SOLVENT
1 I 11
AIR AT TS°F AIR H2O
Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs
and operating conditions, large variations will exist.

-------
 composition of the effluent gas also depends on the type of dryer employed.
 Emission  rates  as  a  function of  press speed  for a letterpress,  heatset ink
 operation are shown in Figure 86 for the following operating conditions.

       Web Width                            38 in.
       Number of Sides Printed               2
       Ink Coverage                          150%
       Ink Mileage                           0.58 Ib ink/106 in.2
       % of  Initial Solvent Removed in Dryer   60%
Web-Offset and Letterpress Newspaper Publication

     Web-offset  and   letterpress  newspaper  printing  operations  employ
oxidative drying  inks  which contain  little,  if any,  solvent; therefore, the
exhaust gases from these operations are  not a source of hydrocarbon emissions.
Usually the  only  materials emitted from these operations are ink mist and
paper dust, which may be removed with  filters as shown  in Figure 88.
Rotogravure

     Rotogravure  printing is similar to  web-letterpress  in  that  the  web  is
printed on one side at a time and must be dried after each color is printed. In
publication  printing, the web is usually passed through four presses where four
colors are applied to one side  of the  web. The web is then turned over and
passed  through  four  additional  presses for  the  reverse  side  printing.
Consequently, for four-color, two-sided printing, a total of eight presses must
be employed, and each press will include a steam drum or hot air dryer where
nearly all of the initial solvent is removed.

     A solvent flow diagram  for a single press operation is contained in Figure
89.  For an  integrated  eight press operation, all  of the  dryers would be
manifolded  to one or two exhaust stacks; therefore, the exhaust rate shown in
Figure 89 should be multiplied by four or eight for an actual operation.

     As previously described, rotogravure  inks are composed ot approximately
65% highly volatile, aromatic solvent which is not subject to decomposition in
the drying process. For most commercial operations, the solvent concentrations
in the exhaust  gases range between 25 and 40% of the  lower  explosive  limit
(LED.  Solvent emission  rates  as a function of press speed for a "typical"
rotogravure  printing   operation  running  at  the  following conditions  are
contained in Figure 90.
                                                                      347

-------
                                                                FIGURE 88
                                                    WEB LETTERPRESS, NEWSPAPER

                                                                         AIR     ^
CO
                                                                                     ICFM/6FT.3 OF  PRESSROOM
                                                         FI LITER
                                                                INK   MIST,
                                                                PAPER  DUST
                                                       HOOD  &
                                                       EXHAUST
                                                           FAN
           30 IN. WEB
            IOOO FPM
                                                         PRESS
                       )NK= -4-.SL.B. /HR
            PRODUCT
                                    CARBON
                              NO  SOLVENT
VENTIL.ATING
AIR   TO  PRESSROOM
                      * Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs and operating conditions,
                      large variations will exist.

-------
                                                                       FIGURE 89
                                                        ROTOGRAVURE PRINTING OPERATION
  GRX*/URE  INK
«65°/£,  SOLVENT
 ( AROMATIC «
6OL.B/MIN. YELLOW
           t
                      INK
                  FOUNTAIN!
                                                                                               SOLVENT  L.ADEN  AIR
                                                                                                           I. OF  SOLVENT*
                                                     *
 63 IN. WEB ,ISOOFPM
ONE
           SIDE  PRINTING
           COVERAGE
   PRESS
(ONE  UNIT)
    STEAM
    DRUM
  OR  HOT
       DRYER
9O TO ISO°F
                                                                       AIR
                                                                3OOO  SCFM
                                                                                                           CHIL.L.

                                                                                                          ROL.L.S
                                                                                                                           PRODUCT
                                                   AIR
                                                                 PER  COL.OR
 CO
 4^
 CO
                                                                                    HEAT
                                                                                    FROM
                                                                                    STEAM,
                                                                                HOT  W^TER
                                                                                      OR
                                                                                  HOT AIR
                                                              MT
                                                            AIR   COOL.
                                                                  WATER
                                     ^Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs
                                      and operating conditions, large variations will exist.

-------
        Web Width                           63 in.
        Number of Sides Printed               2
        Number of Colors                     4
        Ink Coverage                         125%
        Ink Mileage                           10.67 Ib ink/T06in.2
        Solvent Content of Ink                65%

Metal Decorating

     The  metal decorating  industry includes all  operations involved  in  the
printing of  an image onto  a sheet  of metal.  The printing image is usually
applied to  a  coated sheet  of metal  with a  lithographic  press, sometimes
followed by a final coating applied over the wet ink. The entire process involves
three operations:  application of the undercoating to the bare metal, application
of the  printing  image  to the dried  coating,  and  application of the final
overcoating  to the wet  image. The steps  involved in a common three-stage
metal decorating operation are illustrated in  Figures 91 and 92.

     The  coating  is  usually  a lacquer  containing  approximately 70% solvent
which is  applied  with a roller type device (Figure 91). The sheets are then
passed through a wicket oven where they are contacted  with hot air at
approximately  375° F.  The  quantity  of  solvent emitted  from  the  oven is
dependent  on  the thickness and solvent content  of  the  lacquer coating;
however, the ovens are usually operated from 10 to 25% of the lower explosive
limit. If the  metal must be coated on both sides, the sheets are coated and dried
on one side, turned over, and the procedure  is repeated.

     The second and third steps (Figure 92) include the printing of the image
onto the dry coated  sheet of metal and the application of the overcoating. The
coated sheets  are  printed with lithographic inks containing very  little if any
solvent. The wet inked sheets are then  coated  with  a  varnish containing
approximately 50% solvent and dried in wicket ovens (=320°F) which again are
operated at  10 to  25% of the lower explosive limit.

     Since many  metal  decorating operations are for containers, three piece
being older  and more common than two piece, it should be mentioned that
within some plants there  are  inside  container spraying  and baking emissions
following  seaming of the container body after the undercoating and printing.
Frequently  this operation is  carried  out  by the packager  at his location and
since  it is  not  directly involved in the printing operation, it is not considered in
this study.

     The  newer two piece containers are not handled in sheet form nor does
the body  require  seaming and the  handling is much different although  the
emissions  are similar.

     The  solvents employed  in the  varnish and lacquer coatings are usually
composed of methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK), xylol, and aliphatic solvent, all
of which  are removed  in  the  wicket  ovens.'8'  The  extent   of  solvent
decomposition  is  a function  of the variation of temperature  due to a variation
of the mixing efficiencies of the hot and cold gases in the  oven.
350

-------
                               FIGURE 90



                 EMISSION  RATES* FROM  A TYPICAL

                 ROTOGRAVURE  PRINTING OPERATION
20
UJ
I-

D

Z
CO
_l
—
O
<
cc

z
o


g    5
s
UJ
^
                                           <>£*
                                                             x'
                                           	  Emission Rate

                                            	Concentration
                                                                       9000





                                                                       8000





                                                                       7000





                                                                       6000






                                                                       5000





                                                                       4000





                                                                       3000
                                                                                  Q.

                                                                                  QL
                                                                                  O
                                                                                  2
                                                                                  u

                                                                                  Z
                                                                                     
-------
                                                         FIGURE 91



                                                    METAL DECORATING

                                                   COATING OPERATION
CO
ui
HOOD
TOO
CFM i
AIR & SOLVENT*
2.29 LB. /MIN.
7D°F -
ROOM
AIR
IO,OOO
i
1
SCFM
^ A ^»
_ AIR
    so SHEETS /MIN.
28 IN. X 35 IN.
               EXTRA
             SOLVENT
       LACQUER, INSIDE

       OR  REVERSE   	'
       SIDE, T0°/0 SOLVENT
                                                                          ROOM  OR
                                                                         OUTSIDE  AIR
                                                                                INVERT

                                                                                 STACK
                                                                            20 MILLIGRAMS   <4 IN.
                                                                            ESSENTIALLY   DRY
                                             AIR
                                                            TO  OUTSIDE
                                                              (HOT AIR)
                                                GAS
          WEIGHT

           RATIOS
                 28 MIBK
                 36 XYLOL

                 36 ALIPHATIC
           'Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs and operating conditions,

            large variations will exist.

-------
                                                                 FIGURE 92


                                                           METAL DECORATING

                                                  PRINTING AND VARNISH OVERCOATING
                                WATER
                                VAPOR
                                               HOOD
30  SHEETS/s/IIN.
Z.&  IN. X
               IN.
CO
Ul
CO
                     PRESS

                      UNIT
                         I
PRESS

 UNIT
               WATER  FOR
                FOUNTAIN
                SOLUTION
                                                       7O°F   O.3O LB
                                                    TOO SCFM  4-4-OOOSCFM
                                                    k      ROOM
                                                            AIR
VARNISH
  OVER-
COATER
       EXTRAI
       SOLVENT,
                                                                              -f
                                                                              IN.|
                                                                                                         WAX;
                                                                                                   NO  SOLVENT
                                                                                           ROOM OR
                                                                                         OUTSIDE   AIR
                                                                   OVEN
                                                      AIR  |	L.
                                                                             AIR
                                                                         L—OAS
                                                             WICKET
                                                                PRE-
                                                               HEAT
                                               VARNISH.
                                              '• SOLVENT,
                                          SAME   RATIO  4  '
                                          AS  FIG.  -4-1


                                                            AJR

                                                               GAS
                                       INK ,
                        5°/o  ALIPHATIC  SOLVENT
                         MAY  BE   ADDED  ON  PRESS
                                                                        1
                                                                                                             WAXER

                                                                                                            NOT FOR
                                                                                                             CANS)
                                                                                                                           •STACK
STACK
                                                                                           ONLY.
                                                                        12 MILLK3RAMS/-4-IN£
                                                                        ESSENTIALLY  DRY
                                                                                HOT  AIR
                                                                             TO OUTSIDE
                 * Emission rates shown are "typical", however, because of wide variation of printing jobs and operating conditions,

                  large variations will exist.

-------
                        ABATEMENT  SYSTEMS


     In the  printing and  metal  decorating industries,  gaseous  emissions of
hydrocarbons are potential  sources of photochemical smog and control of these
emissions can be accomplished.  Possible  control techniques applicable to the
graphic arts industry may be classified into the following categories:

     1.   Process modification

     2.   Ink modification

     3.   Conventional air pollution control equipment


Process Modification

     Since the  major portion  of  hydrocarbon  emissions from  a printing
operation is  produced during the drying process,  the  most logical area for
modification  is the dryer. The type of dryer employed in a particular operation
depends on the substrate,  ink composition, press speed, and type of printing
process and may consist of flame and high velocity air, heated air, or steam.
Several novel  methods of  drying are  currently being developed which  may
reduce or completely eliminate  hydrocarbon  emissions:  microwave  drying,
ultraviolet drying, electron beam drying, and infrared drying.

     In microwave  drying, the temperature of the ink is  increased  by the
application of electromagnetic energy  (alternating electric field). Since fuel is
not directly  consumed in  this type of operation,  the oven exhaust will not
contain combustion  products; however, solvent vapors will still be emitted if
conventional  inks are used.(9)

     In infrared  drying,  the ink is dried  by  a free radical polymerization
mechanism which requires  a non-volatile, monomer-based ink. Since the ink
will not contain a volatile  solvent, hydrocarbon emissions will be eliminated.
This type of drying is still in the early experimental stages.

     Electron beam drying  requires  inks  composed of  monomers  or  pre-
polymers  which solidify by electron-induced polymerization. This procedure
is  currently  being employed in  a small number of  commercial operations;
however,  equipment costs  are high  and since  X-rays  are produced  when the
electrons strike the target, shielding of the entire unit is required.
354

-------
      In ultraviolet drying,  lamps operating at 2400 to 3600 angstroms activate
 monomer-based inks resulting in rapid polymerization.  It is anticipated that
 ultraviolet drying will be employed in 80% of the offset printing operations and
 70%  of  the  letterpress  printing  operations within  five  years. Although
 hydrocarbon emissions are eliminated in this type of drying, the system does
 have  some inherent disadvantages: the monomer-based  inks are more expensive
 than  conventional inks, ozone is produced in the process and must be vented,
 and the inks are not easily removed during paper reclamation.
Ink Modification

     A great deal of research is currently underway to develop non-pollutant
inks. The majority of the research is aimed at the development of aqueous and
solventless inks.

     Aqueous inks are already being used in some flexographic operations. One
major  disadvantage of the aqueous system is that the relatively high latent heat
of  water limits  the press  speeds  when  conventional  dryers are employed;
however, the application of microwave drying to aqueous systems has actually
enabled press speeds to increase.'1 0)

     Solventless  inks  are  currently  being  marketed  for  web-offset and
web-letterpress operations. In contrast to solvent base inks which are dried by
evaporation, solventless inks are dried by a thermally-induced polymerization
reaction which appreciably  reduces  or completely  eliminates hydrocarbon
emissions.  The ink  manufacturers  claim  that these inks can be adapted  to
present equipment without modification  and, since lower oven temperatures
are required, press speeds  may be  increased. Some problems have apparently
been encountered in areas of gloss, sharpness of printing, and quality, and the
ink manufacturers are actively pursuing solutions to these problems.
Conventional Air Pollution Control Equipment

     Exhaust gases from printing and metal decorating plants may be treated
with  conventional pollution  control  equipment  to  eliminate  the organic
emissions. Three conventional abatement systems are applicable to the graphic
arts industry, and the advantages and disadvantages of each will  be discussed:
thermal and catalytic combustion and solvent recovery (adsorption).

     Thermal combustion involves burning the effluent gas directly in a gas or
                                                                     355

-------
oil fired flame. The combustible components of the exhaust stream are heated
to their auto-ignition  temperature in  the presence of  sufficient oxygen to
complete the following reaction:
         CNHM +  
-------
                                        FIGURE 93

                        PRODUCTS  PRODUCED   AT  SERIOUS
                              OXIDATION   STAGES   DURING
                                      COMBUSTION
               INPUT
        RH
 SATURATED
  HYDROCARBONS
(ALMOST ODORLESS^
          ROM
       Al_COHOL_S
      (LOW  ODORS)
                              PARTIAL
                             oxiDATioTsi
                             (STAGE  I)
                                   CHUO
                              FOR M ALDEHYDE
                            (TYPICAL ALIPHATIC
                            END-GROUP PRODUCT)
                               RCOOH
                           ORGANIC ACIDS
                           (SOUR ODORS)
     ADDITIONAL
      OXIDATION
                                                         (STAGE 2)
COMPLETE
 )XIDATION
 STAGE 3)
                     PARTIAL
                    OXIDATION
GENERALIZED BURNED
 ODORS v SUBOXIDES
  SUCH AS CO ETC
CO
01
           ArH
       AROMATICS
   (MODERATE  ODORS)
   ,     RCOOR'
   TESTERS, MODERATE
         ODORS)
         RCOCR1
   'KETONES, MODERATE
         ODORS)
                                           PARTIAL
                                          OXIDATION
                               ArCHO
                             AROMATIC
                            ALDEHYDES
                           (FRUITY  ODORS)
                             -c=c-c
    002
     &
                                                                                ODOR
                  COMPLETE
                  OXIDATION
                                                           MOST
                                                       COMPONENTS
                                                         UNKNOWN
                          L
                         J[,$ - UNSATUR ATED
                        ALDEHYDES & ACIDS
                        (IRRITATING PUNGENCY-
                       EXAMPLE , ACROLEIN) i

-------
                                                         FIGURE 94
 CO
 01
 00
               FLOW   DIAGRAM   FOR    THERMAL.    COMBUSTION
                INCLUDING  POSSIBILITIES  FOR  HEAT  RECOVERY
                   CONTAMINATED
                       AIR OUT
                   3OO  TO  -4-OO °F
         FAN
 AIR IN
TO TO 90
   °F
   PRESS
   DRYER

     OR
   METAL
DECORATING
    OVEN
                 I
                 I
                         TOO TO
                                              HEAT
                                          EXCHANGER
                                                             IOOO TO  ISOO °F
                                                 AUXILIARY
                                                    FUEL-
                                                  6OO  TO IOOO°F
IOOO°F
                                                                     1
                                                                  IOOO TO I5OO°F
RESIDENCE
CHAMBER
                                                                                             I
                                                                                   IOOO
                                                                                   ISOO
                                                       TO
                                                       °F
TO  STACK
^    OR
   PLAMT
  HEATIMC3
  SYSTEM
                               J
                                                  TO STACK
                                                       OR
                                               PLANT   HEATING
                                                    SYSTEM

-------
                                                    FIGURE 95

                         FLOW   DIAGRAM   FOR   CATALYTIC   COMBUSTION
                          INCLUDING   POSSIBILITIES   FOR  HELAT   RECOVERY
                  CONTAMINATED
                      AIR  OUT
                   300 TO  4-OO -F
         FAN
    ffl
  AIR IN
/O TO OO
   •F
 CO
 en
 CO

   PRESS
   DRYER
     OR
   METAL
DECORATING
    OVEN
               T
                                            HEAT
                                        EXCHANGER
                                                          TOO  TO  9OO °F
                                               AUXILIARY
                                                  FUEL
                                               600 TO SOO «F
                                                                  1
                                                                  CATAL-YST
                                                                     BED
                                                                     9OO°F
                                                                  RESIDENCE
                                                                   CHAMBER
         I
TOO  TO I
9OO
 TO  STACK
^    OR
   PLANT
  HEATING
  SYSTEM
                               I	
                I	I
                                      TO STACK
                                           OR
                                   PLANT HEATING
                                         SYSTEM

-------
                                        FIGUKE96

            FLOW   DIAGRAM   OF   ADSORPTION  PROCESS
ADSORPTION (SOLVENT-RECOVERY  SYSTEM)

                                         EXHAUST AIR
                                              TO
                                         ATMOSPHERE
                                       (SOLVENT  FREE)













DRV
0
OVI




















'ER
R
EN









VAPOR
-^ LADEN, 	
AIR


I
1 ,
T J

1
1













— »i


-

,
i



^^
•
*







r •»
1

— — ^_ — •— ^^_ ^^_ ^^ ^^_ .^_ ^^ ^_
ACTIVATED CARBON
	 	



ADSORBER

,
1

ACTIVATED CARBON

ADSORBER



^—
^ LC-VV PKh.Sl=>
FOR REGENI
AND RECOVE









te


1

__^_l





URE
ERAT
E:RY
i
4
1
| STEAM PLUS
1 SOLVENT VAPORS

i

A
T "

;
f
CONDENSER
^ RECOVERED
SOLVENT


///

STEAM /// DECANTER
•ION '///
i
                                                                            •WATER
         SWITCHING OR AIR  FLOWS  WOULD  BE  NECESSARY  TO

                       ADSORPTION — REGENERATION  CYCLE
ACHIEVE:

-------
adsorption capacity  of  the bed  has  been reached. The gas stream is then
diverted to an alternate bed while the  original bed is regenerated with steam or
hot  air.  If  the hydrocarbon solvent  is  not  miscible  with water, it can  be
recovered by simple decantation; otherwise, recovery of the hydrocarbon will
require distillation.

     Adsorption is governed by the laws of chemical equilibrium and diffusion
and, therefore, the following operation variables will influence the capacity of a
carbon bed for an organic solvent:

     Partial Pressure —              the  adsorption capacity of a bed
                                    increases as the partial pressure of
                                   the  vapor in the gas stream increases.

     Temperature —                the  capacity of the bed increases
                                   as the temperature decreases.

     Molecular Size —              the  bed capacity decreases as the
                                   molecular size increases.

     Water Vapor —                 water vapor decreases the capacity
                                   of a bed.

     Performance will also be influenced  by the presence of and the nature of
solid  and liquid paniculate  matter in  the  gas stream being treated. In  most
designs,  filters  precede  the  carbon  beds in order  to remove  suspended
paniculate matter.

     Generally,  in a  well-designed  adsorption  unit,  the activated carbon will
adsorb approximately 15% of its own  weight of solvent before  regeneration is
required.
                                                                      361

-------
362

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

     Abatement specifications for three sets of graphic arts applications were
written: web offset printing, metal decorating, and gravure printing. In the case
of web offset printing, both thermal and catalytic combustion systems without
heat  exchange  were  specified.  Heat exchange was  not included  in  the
specifications because the ventilation  rates  from the model printing presses
studied were  too  low. Cost data and equipment specifications for the web
offset applications are presented in Tables 125 to 132 and in Figures 97 to 103.

     Thermal  and catalytic combustion  systems were  also specified for the
metal  decorating application. Since the gas  flows were higher for the metal
decorating cases, however, systems both with and without heat exchange were
specified.  Cost data and equipment specifications are presented in Tables 133 to
148 and in Figures 103 to 114.

     Gravure printing applications require that large volumes of ventilation air
be  treated relative to metal decorating  or web offset printing applications.
Specifications were  written  for  two  types of abatement systems:  thermal
combustion  systems and  activated carbon  adsorption  systems. The thermal
combustion  system specifications were written to apply to one or two presses
in the  printing plant. This is in keeping with the industry practice of using one
incinerator for every one or two press vents. The flow from each gravure press
vent is large enough to clearly justify heat exchange in the combustion system
and the specifications have been written accordingly. Cost data and equipment
specifications are presented in Tables 149 to 152 and in Figures 115 to 117.

     The carbon adsorption system  specifications were written to apply to all
of the presses in a printing plant. The model plants studied in this contract
contained four and twelve roughly equivalent presses. Cost data and equipment
specifications  are presented in Tables 153 to 157 and  in Figures 118 to 120. The
carbon adsorption  system differs from  the other abatement systems studied in
that it recovers the hydrocarbon emissions in a form reusable as solvent in the
gravure printing process. The  value of  the recovered solvent  is significant
relative to the total operating costs  of the adsorption system and, in the cases
studied here, offers  an  attractive  payout  on the  capital investment. The
recovered  solvent credit, valued at  $0.04/lb is shown with the operating cost
data in Table 156 and Figure 119.
                                                                      363

-------
                                    TABLE  125

              THERMAL INCINERATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                      WEB-OFFSET PRINTING SPECIFICA TION
     This specification describes the requirements of a thermal combustion system for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions from a web-offset printing facility. A schematic flow
diagram  of the desired combustion system is included in Figure 97  while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in Table 126.

     The incinerator will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of 1.0psig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF. The exhaust
gas from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen (greather than 16%) to allow firing
of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have  the capacity to overcome the pressure drop  of the ductwork and the system. The
system's ductwork will be sized for a maximum A P  of 2 in.  w.c. (hot).

     The incinerator will be supplied with suitable  control panels and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimate shall include the following items:

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                    10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service
    All items with exception of the incinerator and burner shall be considered auxiliaries.

    The unit  will be  designed for the  maximum hydrocarbon  concentration, while
operating costs shall be estimated at the average hydrocarbon concentration.

     The incinerator will be located on the roof of  the printing facility and no modification
of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the control
cabinet, motor, and burner.
364

-------
                                           FIGURE 97
                          SCHEMATIC   FLOW   DIAGRAM  OF
                            THERMAL  AND   CATALYTIC
                              COMBUSTION  WITHOUT
                                HEIAT  EXCHANGER FOR
                     WEB-OFF SET  AND  METAL  DECORATING
       BURNER
        FUEL.
                                                                                    STACK
         FAN
CO
05
O1
                                          RESIDENCE CHAMBER
                                                   OR
                                             CATALYST BED
       CON TA MINI ATE D GASES
       FROM PRINTING PRESS
                                        rrn TEMPERATURE  INDICATOR

                                        VTC\ TEMPERATURE  CONTROL.

-------
366

-------
                                TABLE  126

              THERMAL INCINERATOR  OPERATING CONDITIONS
                 FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size
Process Conditions
   Small
   Large
     Effluent Gas Temperature,  F
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM
     Hcbn Concentration, ppm' '
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ib/hr
       Maximum
       Average
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn,
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF
       Maximum
       Average

Incinerator Specifications
     Inlet Temperature, °F
     Outlet Temperature, °F
     Residence Time @ Temperature, sec
     Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr*
     350
    2,000
    3,060
500-2.000

     10.0
      6.3
   19,500

      1.5
      0.9
     350
    1,500
      0.6
     3.35
     350
    7,000
   10,700
500-2,000

     35.4
     22.1
   19,500

      1.5
      0.9
     350
    1,500
      0.6
    10.52
(1) Measured as methane equivalents
(2) Assumed as n-hexane
*To be filled in by supplier
                                                                         367

-------
                      TABLE 127

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
  FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
               (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
ppm
ID Rt.ii/scf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
ppm
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small

3,060
350
2,000
-

500-2,000
6.3
0.9

7,550
1,500
2,039
5.35

5-20
<0.3
>95
16,075

1,870







1,950

1,200
2,150
650
625
300


600
450
1,750
2,450
30,070
Large

10,700
350
7,000
-

500-2.000
22.1
0.9

26,480
1,500
7,136
5.35

5-20
<1. 1
>95
21,025

3,420







2,450

1,625
2,850
850
800
350


600
450
1,750
2,688
38,858
368

-------
                                FIGURE 98
                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                         FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
                         (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
     100000
O
O
k
8
Q.
<
O
     10000
      10.00
                                      TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                      COLLECTOR PLUS AUXILIARIES
                                       COLLECTOR
                                          ONLY
        1000
                                 10000

                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
100000
300000
                                                              369

-------
                                                   TABLE 128
GO
•vj
o
                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                               FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
                                            (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$6/hr


$.011/kw-hr
$.80/MMBtu





Small










Large










High Efficiency
Small
4,000
1,500
1,500
336
135
471
125
125
222
10,026
10,248
12,344
3,007
15,351
Large
4,000
1,500
1,500
336
160
496
125
125
813
33,196
34,009
36,130
3,886
40,016

-------
                                FIGURE 99

                 ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                         FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
cc
O
Q
te
o
O
100000
10000
1000












4
•^




















t




















//





















^




















^




















f
£




















<
r




















>




















>
^
















1C
(OPE
PLUS C/i
^




DTAL
RAT^
iPITAl





COS
JG C
. Cl-





;T
:os
IAF


OPERATING COST
















































T






IGES]











































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                              371

-------
                                    TABLE 129

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                     WEB-OFFSET PRINTING  SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of a thermal combustion system for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions from a web-offset printing facility. A schematic flow
diagram  of the desired combustion system is included in Figure 100 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in Table 130.

     The incinerator will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of I.Opsig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF. The exhaust
gas from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen (greather than 16%) to allow firing
of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have  the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork and the system. The
system's ductwork will be sized for a maximum A P of 2 in.  w.c. (hot).

     The incinerator will be supplied with suitable control panels, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimate shall include the following items:

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                   10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service

    All items with exception of the incinerator and burner shall be considered auxiliaries.

     The  unit  will  be designed  for  the  maximum  hydrocarbon concentration,  while
operating costs shall be estimated at the average hydrocarbon concentration.

     The incinerator will be located on the roof of the printing facility and no modification
of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the control
cabinet, motor, and burner.
 372

-------
                                               FIGURE 100


                              SCHEMATIC  FLOW  DIAGRAM  OF

                                  THERMAL-  AND CATALYTIC

                                   COMBUSTION  •   WITHOUT

                                   HEAT    EXCHANGE   FOR

                           WEB-OFFSET AND METAL DECORATING
       BURNER
        FUEL
         FAN
CO
^j
CO
                                            STACK
                                               RESIDENCE CHAMBER
                                                         OR

                                                  CATALYST BED
       CONTAMINATED GASES
       FROM PRINTINGS PRESS
TEMPERATURE


TEMPERATURE
INDICATOR


CONTROL

-------
374

-------
                                 TABLE 130

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR  OPERATING CONDITIONS
                 FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size                                   Small          Large
Process Conditions

     Effluent Gas Temperature, °F                      350           350
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM                        2,000          7,000
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM                        3,060         10,700
     Hcbn Concentration, ppm^V                 500-2,000      500-2,000
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ib/hr
       Maximum                                    10.1           35.4
       Average                                      6.3           22.1
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn, Btu/lb(2)            19,500         19,500
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF
       Maximum                                    1.5            1.5
       Average                                      0.9            0.9

Incinerator Specifications

    Inlet Temperature, °F                            350           350
    Outlet Temperature, °F                          /, WO          1,100
    Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr*                          1.89           6.60
(1) Measured as methane equivalents
(2) Assumed as n-hexane
*To be filled in by supplier
                                                                         375

-------
                      TABLE 131

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
  FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
               (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
ppm

D/nr 8Rt,,/<;rf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

3,060
350
2,000
-
500-2,000
6.3
0.9

5,970
1,100
2,031
-

0.3
95
17,960

1,790









9,485










29,235
Large

10,700
350
7,000
-
500-2,000
22.1
0.9

20,900
1,100
7,105
-

1.1
95
34,300

3,690









11,938










49,928
376

-------
                                FIGURE 101
                CAPITAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                         FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING

                         (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000.
     100000
CO

DC
fc
o
u
_l
<
t
0.

u
     10000
      1000
                                    TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                        COLLECTOR
                                      PLUS AUXILIARIES
                                      COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, SCFM
100000
300000
                                                                     377

-------
                                                    TABLE 132
CO
•>j
00
    ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)

FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR  WEB-OFFSET PRINTING

             (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hi
$ . 80/MMBtu

LA Process Wt.
Small






Large






High Efficiency
Small
4,000
875
510
110
620
943
943
423
5,842
6,265
8,703
2,924
11,627
Large
4,000
875
510
135
645
2,950
2,950
1,369
20,466
21,835
26,305
4,993
31,298

-------
                                FIGURE 102
                 ANNUAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                         FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING

                         (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000.
     100000
CO
DC
O
O


te
O
O
     10000
      1000












/
s
>
s


















k
*f
5









































/









































,
>




















<
<




















/
^




















^
/



















(OPERA'
CAPI1
>
^
OPERA'




























)TAL COST
FING COST P
•AL CHARGE

FING











:os











T
























LUS
S)






































































































































        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, SCFM
100000
300000
                                                                   379

-------
                                    TABLE  133

             THERMAL  INCINERATOR PROCESS  DESCRIPTION  FOR
                      METAL DECORATING SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of a thermal combustion system for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions  from metal  decorating facilities.  Schematic flow
diagrams of the desired combustion systems are included in Figure 103 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in  Table 134.

     The incinerators will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of 1.0 psig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF.

     The exhaust gas  from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen (greater than
16%) to allow firing of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork, burner,  and heat exchange
that may be incorporated in the system. The system's ductwork will be sized for a maximum
A/*of2in. w.c. (hot).

     The incinerators will be supplied with suitable control panels, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimates for each combustion system will include the following items;

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                   10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service
                                   Dampers (when included)

    All items with exception of the incinerator and burner will be considered auxiliaries.

     The  incinerators  shall be  located  on the roof of  the printing facility,  and  no
modification of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of
the control cabinet, motor, and burner.
380

-------
                                              FIGURE 103

                              SCHEMATIC  FLOW  DIAGRAM  OF
                                  THERMAL.  AND CATALYTIC
                                   COMBUSTION     WITHOUT
                                   HEAT   EXCHANGE   FOR
                           WEB~OFFSET  AND METAL DECORATING
       BURNER
         FUEU
                                                                                              STACK
         FAN
CO
00
                                            |<  RESIDENCE CHAMBER
                                            '           OR
                                                  CATAUYST BED
       CONTAMINATED GASES
       FROM  PRINTING PRESS
                                              TM TEMPERATURE   INDICATOR
                                                  TEMPERATURE  CONTROL

-------
382

-------
                                 TABLE 134

              THERMAL  INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                 FOR METAL DECORATING SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size                                  Small          Large
Process Conditions

     Effluent Gas Temperature, °F                      350           350
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM                        4,000         10,000
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM                        6,100         15250
     Hcbn Concentration, % LEL                         15            15
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ib/hr                          97           242
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF                        7.4            7.4
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn, Btu/lb              18,400         18,400

Incinerator Specifications
     Inlet Gas Temperature, °F                         350            350
     Outlet Gas Temperature, °F                      1,500           1,500
     Residence Time  Temperature, sec                  0.6             0.6
     Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr*                          4.21           11.07
*To be filled in by supplier
                                                                         383

-------
                      TABLE 135

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
               (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Hydrocarbon
%LEL
lb/hr Btu/scf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
lb/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost
-
Small






































Large






































High Efficiency
Small

6,100
350
4,000
*•
-I •-
15
97
7.4

15,070
1,500
4,075
-

<4.9
>95
16,775


2,338






2,850

2,450
2,750
825
750
250

950
450
1,750
4,525
36,663
Large

15,250
350
10,000
-
"1 r"
15
242
7.4

37,684
1,500
10,190
-

<12.1
>95
27,800


3,995






3,500

2,800
4,000
1,325
1,250
425

950
450
1,750
5,925
54,170
384

-------
                                FIGURE 104




                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS


                         FOR METAL DECORATING

                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
cc
o
a
o
o
Z
<
o
100000
10000
1000
































^





















>
f
4


















—
y*
s
r


















1*

',
*


















*

'
'



















0

s
+


















if


*
«•


















it.

k
k
•














TIJ

_^
^r
_^
tf?
r COLLE






























RNKEY SYSTEM

CC
PLUS
ECTOF











)LLE
AU)
i or











EC7

-------
                                               TABLE 136
oo
00
05
  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
           (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost


$6/hr



$6/hr





$.011/kw-hi
$.80/MMBtu








Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small
4,000

1,500

1,500

336
135
471
125
125

510
14,488



14,998
17,094
3,666
20,760
Large
4,000

1,500

1,500

336
160
496
125
125

1,097
37,044



38,141
40,262
5,417
45,679

-------
                               FIGURE 105
                ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                         FOR METAL DECORATING
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
    100000
CO
cc
o
G
te
o
o
     10000
      1000
//
r /
      &
             TOTAL COST
         (OPERATING COST PLUS
        I_ CAPITAL CHARGES)  .
            OPERATING COST
     10000

 GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                        100000
                                     300000
                                                            387

-------
                                    TABLE  137

             THERMAL  INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                      METAL  DECORATING SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of a thermal combustion system for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions from  metal decorating  facilities.  Schematic flow
diagrams  of  the desired combustion  systems are included in Figure 106 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in Table 138.


     The incinerators will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of 1.0 psig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF.

     The exhaust gas from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen (greater than
16%) to allow firing of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork, burner, and heat exchange
that may be incorporated in the system. The system's ductwork will be sized for a maximum
AP of 2 in. w.c.  (hot).

     The heat exchanger shall be a parallel flow shell and tube exchanger and designed to
operate at an  incinerator outlet temperature of 1,500°F. Maximum exchanger pressure drop,
both sides, shall not exceed 6.0 in.  w.c. (hot),  and dirty gas shall flow through the tube side.
Approximate thermal efficiencies of the exchangers are tabulated in the specification sheets.
     The incinerators will be supplied with suitable control panels, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimates for each combustion system will include the following items:

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                   10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service
                                   Heat exchanger
                                   Dampers (when included)

     All  items with exception  of the incinerator,  burner,  and heat exchanger will be
considered auxiliaries.

     The  incinerators  shall be located  on  the roof  of  the  printing  facility,  and  no
modification of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of
the control cabinet, motor, and burner.

388

-------
                                               FIGURE 106


                               SCHEMATIC  FLOW  DIAGRAM  OF
                                   THERMAL  AND  CATALYTIC
                                    COMBUSTION           WITH
                                    HEAT   EXCHANGE   FOR

                            WEB-OFF SET  AND METAL  DECORATING
                                                                                                         1
                    BURNER
                     FUEL
FAN
GO
00
CO
                                               RESIDENCE CHAMBER
                                                         OR
                                                 CATALYST  BED
                                                                                             HEAT
                                                                                           EXCHANGE
STACK
CONTAMINATED GASES
FROM  PRINTING PRESS
                                               n~C\ TEMPERATURE  CONTROL

-------
390

-------
                                TABLE  138

              THERMAL INCINERATOR OPERATING  CONDITIONS
                  FOR  METAL DECORATING SPECIFICATION
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size                                   Small          Large
Process Conditions

     Effluent Gas Temperature, °F                      350           350
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM                        4,000         10,000
     Effluent Gas Rate, A CFM                        6,100         15,250
     Hcbn Concentration, % LEL                         15             15
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ib/hr                          97           242
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF                        7.4            7.4
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn, Btu/lb              18,400         18,400

Incinerator Specifications
     Residence Time, sec  Temperature                   0.6            0.6
     Inlet Tubeside Temperature, °F                     350           350
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F                     1,500          1,500
     Thermal Efficiency                              ^42           ^42
     Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr*                         1.83           3.49
*To be filled in by supplier
                                                                         391

-------
                      TABLE 139

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST  DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
                 (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Hydrocarbon
%LEL
lb/hr Btu/scf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
ppm
lb/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small

6,100
350
4,000
-

15
97
7.4

15,070
1,500
4,075
-


<4.9
>95
32,500



2,788





3,100

2,750
2,750
800
875
250


1,050
450
1,750
5,860
54,923
Large

15,250
350
10,000
-

15
242
7.4

37,684
1,500
10,190
-


<12.1
>95
39,575



5,680





3,750

4,000
4,000
1,300
1,625
400


1,050
450
1,750
5,960
69,540
392

-------
                                FIGURE 107
                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS

                          FOR METAL DECORATING

                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000.
    100000
oo
DC
o
Q


te
o
o
_l
<
t
Q.

o
     10000
      1000
                                         TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                            COLLECTOR

                                         PLUS AUXILIARIES
                                      COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
                                 10000


                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
100000
300000
                                                              393

-------
                                                  TABLE 140
CO
CO
   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
             (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost


$6/hr



$6/hr





$.011/kw-hr
$.80/MMBtu








Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small
4,000

1,575

1,575

360
135
495
125
125

1,043
5,479



6,522
8,717
5,492
14,209
Large
4,000

1,575

1,575

360
160
520
125
125

2,149
12,036



14,185
16,405
6,954
23,359

-------
                                FIGURE 108
                 ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                          FOR METAL DECORATING
                          {WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
O
O
O
     10000
      1000
                        3E
               TOTAL COST
          (OPERATING COST PLUS
            CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                       OPERATING COST
    10000

GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                         100000
300000
                                                              395

-------
                                  TABLE 141

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION  FOR
                      METAL  DECORATING SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of catalytic combustion systems for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions  from metal  decorating facilities.  Schematic flow
diagrams  of  the desired combustion systems are included in Figure 109 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in  Table 142.
     The incinerators will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of 1.0 psig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF.

     The exhaust gas from the printing press will contain  sufficient oxygen (greater than
16%) to allow firing of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have the capacity to overcome  the pressure  drop  of the ductwork, burner, and any heat
exchange that may be incorporated in the system. The system's ductwork will be sized for a
maximum &Pof2in. w.c. (hot).

     The incinerators will be supplied with suitable control panels, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimates for each combustion system shall include the following items:

                                    Incinerator
                                    Burner
                                    10 ft stack
                                    Controls
                                    Control panel
                                    Structural steel
                                    Fuel gas piping
                                    Electrical
                                    Ductwork
                                    Insulation
                                    Fan
                                    Fan motor
                                    Two day start-up  service
                                    Dampers (when included)
     All items with exception  of the incinerator and burner will be considered auxiliaries.

     The  incinerators will be  located on  the  roof of the printing  facility,  and no
modification of the building  structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of
the control cabinet, motor, and burner.
396

-------
                                   FIGURE 109

                     SCHEMATIC  FLOW  DIAGRAM OF
                        "THEIRMAL AND  CATALYTIC
                         COMBUSTION!   WITHOUT
                         HE: AT   EXCHANGE:  FOR
                    WEB OFFSET AND METAL DECORATING
     BURNER
      FUEL.
      FAN
CO
CD
                           I    V

                                                                    STACK
                               \
RESIDENCE CHAMBER
       OR
  CATAL.YST BED
     CONTAMINATED GASES
     FROM PRINTING PRESS
                                  ~ I  TEMPERATURE  INDICATOR
                                    TEMPERATURE  CONTROL

-------
398

-------
                                TABLE 142

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                 FOR METAL DECORATING  SPECIFICATION
                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size                                  Small           Large
Process Conditions

     Effluent Gas Temperature, °F                      350           350
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM                        4,000         10,000
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM                       6,100         15,250
     Hcbn Concentration, % LEL                        15             15
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ibs/hr                         97           242
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF                       7.4            7.4
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn, Btu/lb               18,400         18,400

Incinerator Specifications

     Inlet Gas Temperature, °F                         350           350
     Outlet Gas Temperature, °F                      1,100          1,100
     *Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr                          1.97           4.92
*To be filled in by supplier
                                                                       399

-------
                       TABLE 143

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
   FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
                (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Hydrocarbon
% LEL
lb/hr Btu/scf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
lb/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

6,100
350

4,000

15
97
7.4

11,860
1,100
4,033


4.9
95
26,010

2,270







10,565












38,845
Large

15,250
350

10,000

15
242
7.4

29,650
1,100
10,083


12.1
95
42,560

4,940







14,775












62,275
400

-------
                               FIGURE 110



                CAPITAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                          FOR METAL DECORATING

                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
cc
o
Q

te
o
o
5Z
<
o
100000
10000
1000
































+
+
>



















f
^
4



















vS
J
f



















^
4
+


















x>

^



















'
4
''



















s
'
s


















L
*"^
A















TURNK


xX
iT



CEY S





VST





EM




















COLLECTOR








' ^<. PLUS AUXILIARIES
^
COLLI












ECTOF












I Of












slL\












i





















































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                              401

-------
                                                TABLE 144
£
to
                                ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                             FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
                                         (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr

$6/hr



$.011/kw-hi
$.80/MMBtu





Small












Large












High Efficiency
Small
4,000
875

510
110
620

1,708
824
6,490
7,314
10,517
3,885
14,402
Large
4,000
875

510
135
645

4,175
2,058
16,225
18,283
23,978
6,228
30,206

-------
                               FIGURE 111



                ANNUAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS

                          FOR METAL DECORATING

                        (WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
V)
cc
o
Q
O
O
100000
10000
1000


































,





















',
/




















f
j'





















/
/




















/
/




















/
/




















/
/




















(
>
^
























TOTAL












COST
















(OPERATING COST
PLUS C^
Sr *
Y
1 OPEF










^PITAL CHARGES

*ATIN











G C











OS











T





































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                             403

-------
                                   TABLE  145

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                      METAL  DECORATING  SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of catalytic combustion systems for the
abatement of hydrocarbon emissions from  metal decorating  facilities.  Schematic  flow
diagrams  of  the  desired combustion systems ary included in Figure 112 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in Table 146.

     The  incinerators will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of 1.0 psig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of 1,040 Btu/SCF.

     The exhaust gas from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen  (greater than
16%) to allow firing of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerator inlet. The fan will
have the capacity to overcome the pressure drop of the ductwork,  burner, and any heat
exchange that may be incorporated in the system. The system's ductwork will be sized for a
maximum NPof2in. w.c. (hot).

     The heat exchanger will be a parallel flow shell and tube exchanger and designed to
operate at an  outlet temperature of 1,100°F. Maximum exchanger pressure drop, both sides,
will not exceed 6.0 in. w.c. (hot), and dirty gas will flow through the tube side. Approximate
thermal efficiencies of the exchangers are tabulated in the specification sheets.
     The incinerators will be supplied with suitable control panels, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimates for each combustion system shall include the following items:

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                   10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service
                                   Heat exchanger
                                   Dampers (when included)

     All  items with exception of the incinerator,  burner, and heat  exchanger will be
considered auxiliaries.

     The  incinerators  will be located on  the roof  of the printing facility, and no
modification  of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of
the control cabinet, motor, and burner.

 404

-------
                                                FIGURE 112

                              SCHEMATIC  FLOW  DIAGRAM  OF
                                  "THERMAL  AND CATALYTIC
                                    COMBUSTION        WITH
                                    HEAT   EXCHANGE   FOR
                           WEB-OFFSET  AND METAL DECORATING
                    BURNER
                     FUEL. """
FAN
                                                                                                      I

                                         k
                                         K   RESIDENCE  CHAMBER
                                         k             OR
                                         l<£      CATALYST BED
                                         K%
                                                                                          HEAT
                                                                                        EXCHANGE
STACH
CONTAMINATED GASES
FROM PRINTING PRESS
                                              fTC) TEMPERATURE   CONTROL-

-------
406

-------
                                TABLE  146

             CATALYTIC INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                  FOR METAL  DECORATING SPECIFICATION
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size
 Small
Process Conditions
     Effluent Gas Temperature,  F
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM
     Hcbn Concentration, % LEL
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ib/hr
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn, Btu/lb
   350
 4,000
 6,100
    15
    97
     7.4
18,400
  350
10,000
15250
    15
  242
     7.4
18,400
Incinerator Specifications
     Inlet Tubeside Temperature, °F
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F
     Burner A T from Fuel Gas, °F
     Thermal Efficiency

      *Duty, MMBtu/hr
      *Burner Duty, MMBtu/hr
      *0verall Heat Transfer Coef., U
      *Tube Surface Area, fir
   350            350
 1,100          1,100
25°F (min)      25°F (min)
To obtain min burner A T
  1.71
  1.97
   4.5
 1,100
  4.28
  4.92
   4.5
 2,740
 *To be filled in by supplier
                                                                          407

-------
                       TABLE 147

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
                  (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Hydrocarbon
%LEL
lb/hr Btu/scf
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
lb/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

6,100
350
4,000
-

15
97
7.4

11,800
1,100
4,000
-

4.85
95
36,160



3,053







11,915










51,128
Large

15,250
350
10,000
-

15
242
7.4

29,400
1,100
10,000
•

12.1
95
55,950



6,635







16,275










78,860
408

-------
                                FIGURE  113





                CAPITAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS


                          FOR METAL DECORATING


                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
V)

DC
o
Q


te
o
O
51
<
o
100000
10000
1000































*
«
«l



















c

-------
                   TABLE 148

   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS FOR METAL DECORATING
              (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr






$.011/kw-hi
$.80/MMBtu






Small














Large







.






High Efficiency
Small
4,000
875

510
110
620

1,708
1,314
266

1,580
4,783
5,113
9,896
Large
4,000
875

510
135
645

4,175
2,891
657

3,548
9,243
7,886
17,129

-------
                               FIGURE 114

                ANNUAL COSTS FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATORS
                         FOR METAL DECORATING
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
o
o
te
o
U
100000
10000
1000




































^>




/














r
s*




s















s
J



/
J















s



Jt
^/
















s



/

















s


/


















'

f



















I
6

























































































TOTAL COST











(OPERATING COST PLUS
^ CAPITAL CHARGES)
r
. OPE
>T








ERATI









MG









CO









5T






























































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                            GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                            411

-------
                                   TABLE  149

              THERMAL  INCINERATOR  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                       GRAVURE PRINTING SPECIFICATION
     This specification describes the requirements of a thermal combustion system for the
abatement of hydrocarbon  emissions from  gravure printing  facilities.  A schematic  flow
diagram  of the desired combustion  system is included in  Figure 115 while processing
conditions and specifications for small and large facilities are tabulated in  Table 150.

     The incinerator will be gas fired using natural gas available at a pressure of I.Opsig and
having a specific gravity of 0.6 and an upper heating value of  1,040 Btu/SCF.  The exhaust
gas from the printing press will contain sufficient oxygen  (greather than 16%) to allow firing
of the burner without the addition of a combustion air system.

     A fan equipped with a V-belt drive will be required at the incinerstor inlet. The fan will
have  the  capacity  to overcome  the  pressure  drop of the ductwork, burner, and  heat
exchanger. The system's ductwork will be sized for a maximum  A P of 2 in. w.c. (hot).

     The heat exchanger will be a parallel  flow shell and tube exchanger and be designed to
operate at an outlet incinerator temperature of 1,500°F. Maximum exchanger pressure drop,
both sides, will not exceed 6.0 in.  w.c. (hot) and dirty gas will flow through the tube side.
The approximate thermal efficiency of the exchanger is tabulated in the specification sheet.

     The incinerator will be supplied with a suitable control panel, and all equipment will be
designed for outdoor operation and to meet Factory Insurance Association's standards.

     The cost estimate for the combustion system will include the following items:

                                   Incinerator
                                   Burner
                                   10 ft stack
                                   Controls
                                   Control panel
                                   Structural steel
                                   Fuel gas piping
                                   Electrical
                                   Ductwork
                                   Insulation
                                   Fan
                                   Fan motor
                                   Two day start-up service
                                   Heat exchanger
                                   Dampers

    All items with exception of the  incinerator, burner, and  heat  exchanger will be
considered auxiliaries.

     The incinerator will be located on the roof of the printing facility, and no modification
of the building structure is required. All utilities are available within 30 ft of the control
cabinet, motor, and burner.

    Since  the hydrocarbon concentration of the exhaust gas from this gravure printing
operation is greater than 25% of the LEL, the exhaust gas will be diluted with sufficient hot
recycle gas to lower the hydrocarbon concentration to 25% LEL.

 412

-------
                                                 FIGURE 115

                               SCHEMATIC   FLOW  DIAGRAM  OF
                               THERMAL  COMBUSTION   WITH
                                   HEAT   EXCHANGE    FOR
                                    GRAVURE      PRINTING
                                                                                                       1
                     BURNER_
                      FUEL-
 FAN
CO
                                          k
                                          I
RESIDENCE CHAMBER
          OR
   CATALYST  BED
                                                                                           HEAT
                                                                                         EXCHANGE
                                                                                   DAMPER
                                                            STACK
 CONTAMINATED  GASES
 FROM PRINTING PRESS
                                               (TO TEMPERATURE   CONTROL-

-------
414

-------
                                TABLE  150

              THERMAL INCINERATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS
                  FOR GRAVURE PRINTING SPECIFICATION
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
       Plant Size
  Small
  Large
Process Conditions
     Effluent Gas Temperature
     Effluent Gas Rate, SCFM
     Effluent Gas Rate, ACFM
     Hcbn Concentration, % LEL
     Hcbn Emission Rate, Ibs/hr
     Heating Value of Gas, Btu/SCF
     Heat of Combustion of Hcbn,
     90
 12,000
 12,500
     35
    621
     15.2
 17,600
     90
 24,000
 25,000
     35
   1,242
     15.2
 17,600
Incinerator Specifications

     Inlet Hcbn Concentration, %
     Residence Time @ Temperature, sec
     Inlet Tubeside Temp., °F
     Unit Outlet Temperature, °F
     Burner A T from Fuel Gas, °F
     Thermal Efficiency
25% (max)
     0.6
     90
   1,500
 25°F (min)
25% (max)
     0.6
     90
   1,500
 25°F (min)
 To obtain min burner A T ^
(1)Assumed as toluene
(2) To be obtained with hot recycle gas dilution
                                                                          415

-------
                      TABLE 151

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
    FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS FOR GRAVURE  PRINTING
                 (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol %
Effluent Hydrocarbon
%LEL
lb/hr Btu/SCF
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
lb/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost

Small








































Large








































High Efficiency
Small

12,500
90
12,000


35
621
15.2

44,750
1,500
12,100
-

<31
>95
47,600


5,125






3,100

3,750
3,245
950
1,000
275


1,050
450
1,750
5,960
74,255
Large

25,000
90
24,000


35
1,242
15.2

89,500
1,500
24,200
-

<62
>95
72,350


10,578






3,750

5,850
4,870
1,600
1,654
488


1,200
550
1,750
6,260
110,900
416

-------
                                FIGURE  116


                 CAPITAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                          FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000
CO
oc
O
O

te
8
_i
<
z
o
100000
10000
1000










































































































































































































.s
s^
(Si i
s J^>
J3r
SJ0















^
_/
a

rS
r
r














1000 10000



1
r 1
f

CCJ




































•URNKEY) SYSTEM
COLLECTOR
'LUS AUXILIARIES
1 1 l
LLECTOR Of



























































































ill \f
MLY






































100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                              417

-------
                                                 TABLE  152

                                 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                              FOR THERMAL INCINCERATORS FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
                                           (WITH  HEAT EXCHANGE)
oo
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr

$6/hr









Small












Large












High Efficiency
Small
4,000
1,575
1,575

360
135
495
125
125

1,796
6,520
8,316
10,511
7,426
17,937
Large
4,000
1,575
1,575

360
260
620
125
125

4,334
13,020
17,354
19,674
11,090
30,764

-------
                                FIGURE 117
                 ANNUAL COSTS FOR THERMAL INCINERATORS
                          FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
                          (WITH HEAT EXCHANGE)
    500000.
    100000
CO
cc
§
te
8
     10000
      1000
              X
     TOTAL COST
(OPERATING COST PLUS
  CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                                  OPERATING COST
    10000

GAS FLOW, SCFM
                                                         100000
                  300000
                                                             419

-------
                                   TABLE  153

               CARBON ADSORPTION  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
                       GRAVURE  PRINTING  SPECIFICATION
     A  carbon adsorption system  is  to  remove hydrocarbon emissions from a gravure
printing facility and to provide for their recovery for reuse at the facility. Effluent gas from
each of the presses  will be combined and treated in the single adsorption system. Process
conditions and specifications for a small and large facility are tabulated in Table 154.

     The  system  will  be of  the  continuous,  regenerative type.  Regeneration will be
accomplished with low pressure steam and air.  The hydrocarbon to be recovered will be
toluene. Suitable carbon will be selected  for this sytem. The system will be designed for
automatic operation but will have manual overrides. In order to insure adequate ventilation,
the ducts leading from each of the presses will be designed for equal pressure losses. Bids will
include the following:

     1.   Carbon adsorption devices.

     2.   A booster fan sufficient to handle the total gas effluent from the vent fans over
         each press and to overcome the pressure drop across the system's ductwork and
         across the carbon adsorption beds.

     3.   A continuous type filter located before the carbon beds. The filter will remove ink
         and dust particles, in  order to prevent clogging and/or fouling of the carbon beds.

     4.   Two hundred fifty  feet  of rectangular ductwork  which  will provide for the
         collection  of  the effluent gas  from the different presses and provide for their
         transport after their exit from the adsorption system. The manifold duct will be
         left open at one end in order to provide for capacity differences due to changes in
         press operation.

     5.   An automatic control system which continually measures and records the toluene
         level at the outlet of the adsorption system.

     6.   Appropriate recovery and storage facilities for the hydrocarbon solvent.

     7.   Dampers.

     All items other than the first will be considered auxiliaries.

     The adsorption  system will be located on the roof and no modifications of the existing
structure will be necessary. Low pressure steam,  city water at 90°F, and electric power at
440 v, 220 v, and 110 v are all available within 30  ft of the site.
 420

-------
                               TABLE  154

              CARBON ADSORPTION OPERATING CONDITIONS
                 FOR GRAVURE PRINTING  SPECIFICATION
                                                 Small          Large
Number of Presses                                     4             12
ACFM/Press                                      12,450         12,450

Adsorption Equipment Inlet

     Gas Rate, ACFM                              49,800        149,400
     Temperature, °F                                 90             90
     Gas Rate, SCFM                              48,000        144,000
     Hydrocarbon Solvent
       %LEL                                       35             35
       ppm by vol                                 3,560          3,560
     Ib/hr                                        2,484          7,452
     Relative Humidity, %                           < 50          <.  50
     Heating Value, Btu/SCF                           15.2           15.2

Performance Requirement

     Hydrocarbon Recovery, %                       >95            >95
                                                                       421

-------
                              TABLE 155

            ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
             FOR CARBON ADSORPTION FOR GRAVURE PRINTING


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, R.H.%
Effluent Contaminant Loading

Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
ppm
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
*(a) Fan(s) ^
*(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment j



>



(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering ">
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test J












Other - Carbon
(4) Total Cost

Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small

49,800
90
48,000
50

3,560
2,484

50,990
105
47,836


178
124
95
215,150




9,850









172,567






25,029
422,596
Large

149,400
90
144,000
50

3,560
7,452

152,970
105
143,508


178
372
95
504,516




20,950









325,867






61,901
913,234
*Included in item (1)
       422

-------
                                FIGURE 118




                   CAPITAL COSTS FOR CARBON ADSORPTION


                           FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
GO

DC
O
O


te
O
o
O.

<
O
,000,000
lOOjOOO
lf\ /%/N/N








































































































































































TURNKEY SYSTEM >























































COLLECTOR PL
I- AUXILIARIES
I
COLLECTOF


















US
ois


















>
s
4
"
ILY


















s

f





















t


















/

/.
/

















^


^


















/


/
/














>
Sf
^^
S^
>
J&'
S^'
r














'


s
'/














1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              423

-------
                 TABLE 156

 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
FOR CARBON ADSORPTION FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Steam (low pressure)
Carbon make-up 4%/yr
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr







$.011/kw-hr
$.05/M Gal
$1.00/Mlb




Small














Large














High Efficiency
Small
8,000
2,844
2,844



4,973

3,346

12,833
14,975
74,667
1,001
103,476
114,639
42,260
156,899
Large
8,000
2,844
2,844



10,967

7,427

38,148
44,925
210,667
2,476
296,216
317,454
91,324
408,778

-------
                                FIGURE 119
   5000000
   1000000
CO
cc
o
Q
O
U
     100000
     100CO
                   ANNUAL COSTS FOR CARBON ADSORPTION

                           FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
        1000


























































































































































r~ CREDIT FOR








SOLVENT RECOVERY '



























P











.1










XOT A 1
r 1 U 1 AL
(OPERATI
JS CAPITA










. COS'
NG Ci
iL CH,










r
OST
<\RG
*
4







4
/



ES
/
>
w






/
)




1
/






F






/
/





/







/
/





/







/
/


OPERATING







































/







/
/


(







?
V
+
J
/





j/
/y
/



:OST














^













    10000


GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
                                                               425

-------
                           TABLE 157

             CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
       OF  CARBON ADSORPTION  FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
    Population Size — 20                Sample Size — 3

                      Capital Cost = $422,629

                                     Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                 Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                       $382,846                 $462,412
    75                        345,547                   499,711
    90                        288,152                   557,106
    95                        235,079                   610,179
                      Capital Cost = $913,235

                                     Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                 Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                       $753,573                $1,072,900
    75                        603,877                  1,222,590
    90                        373,531                   1,452,940
    95                        160,533                  1,665,940
426

-------
                                 FIGURE 120


                    CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
                OF CARBON ADSORPTION FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
GO
cc
O
Q


to'
O
O
_J
<
t
Q.

O
1000000
100000
10000
10(



























































































































































































































































4
X
-


















A

^
*A

















f
fs
k
f

















.
s
s


















.
/

X
X
«*
















r
, *
^
r
«l
•















'
/

/

/
^














X
x^^
* X >
X J2^
_x*^
^x^
^ x*
^

^^-VJ













90%
xx 75°X
^ MEX^


A 75%


•-90%-












)0 10000 100000 3000C
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                               427

-------
                             REFERENCES
 1.  U.S.   Department  of  Commerce,  U.S.  Industrial   Outlook  1970,
     Washington, Government Printing Office, 1969, Chapter 5.

 2.  Gadomski, R. R., David, M. P., Blahut, J. A., Evaluation of Emissions and
     Control Technologies  in  the  Graphic  Arts  Industries,  Graphic Arts
     Technical Foundation, 1970.

 3.  U.S.   Department  of  Commerce,  1967  Census  of   Manufacturers
     Preliminary Reports,  Industry Series, Washington, U.S.  Department of
     Commerce, 1969.

 4.  Anon., Printing Plates Magazine, Vol. 56, No. 4, April, 1970, p. 28.

 5.  Drury, H. F., Total Products Shipments— 1970, Inland Printer/American
     Lithographer, Vol. 164, No. 4, Jan., 1970, p. 46-48.

 6.  Anon., Survey  of  Gravure  Printing,  Gravure  Technical  Association
     Bulletin, Vol. 20, No. 2 Summer, 1969, p. 10-24.

 7.  Cartright, H. M., Jackay,  R.,  Rotogravure — A Survey of European and
     American Methods, Mackay Publishing Co., 196, p. 240.

 8.  Hays, D. R., Official Digest, Vol. 36, No. 473, 1963, pp. 605-624.

 9.  Bock,  R.  F.,  Ink  Drying — GATF Research  Department  Report of
     Progress  1969, Pittsburgh,  Pa., Graphic Arts Technical Foundation, 1970.

10. 'Heuser, A. R., Friends in Air Conservation in the Graphic Arts Industry,
     Gravure, Vol. 15, No. 2,  Feb., 1969, pp.  22-25, 45-48.
 428

-------
SOAP and DETERGENT

-------
5.   SOAP AND  DETERGENTS

     Soaps and synthetic detergents are two of the most common products in
the Western World. With approximately 14.5 million tons of soap and detergent
produced  in  1969,'1) they may be called the  most widely  used  chemical
compounds in  the  modern  world.  U. S. production of synthetic detergents
(syndets) in 1968 was reported to be 2.75 million tons; this was 83% of total
soap and detergent consumption  which was approximately 3.3 million tons.'1'

     Water, which wets unevenly, is not  a  very efficient cleaning compound.
The major  function of all soaps and detergents is to reduce the surface tension
and  improve the wetting efficiency of the water.  The surface tension prevents
the water from fully  contacting  the material to be cleaned and removing  the
dirt. Soaps and detergents have both hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups. The
hydrophilic group enables the detergent to dissolve in water and  reduce surface
tension, while the hydrophobic part contacts the dirt. The dirt  is removed by
agitation and prevented from resettling by electrical charges produced by  the
detergent.'2'

     Soap  making is an ancient  practice, dating  back to  Roman civilization.
However, the first synthetic detergent was not made until World  War I. Around
1930, long chain alkyl-aryl sulfonates were introduced in the U. S. and began
to compete with  soap. In the early  1950's,  tetra-propylene benzene sulfonate
(TPBS)  dominated  the synthetic detergent market.  This detergent caused
extensive foam formation in inland waterways.  TPBS has a branched alkyl
chain and, consequently, resists biological degradation. In 1965, U. S. detergent
manufacturers switched to  linear  alkyl  sulfonates (LAS),  a  biodegradable
product with detergency values comparable with TPBS. Recently, the use of
sodium tripolyphosphate as a builder in most detergent formulations has been
suspected  of  encouraging  algae  growth  in  natural waterways, so additional
formulation changes may be expected in the  near future.
                       PROCESS DESCRIPTION

     This section will deal mainly with synthetic detergent manufacture. The
major source of air pollution in detergent production is spray drying. The air
pollution problems found  in soap making are generally not as severe as those
in detergent making because soap flakes are primarily produced in a drum dryer.
Only one-third of the soap produced is spray dried to flake or  powder form.'1'

     Modern  detergent  formulations  are  extremely  varied.   The  active
                                                                   429

-------
 ingredient, usually linear alkyl benzene sulfonate, alcohol sulfate, alcohol ether
 sulfonate, alcohol ethoxylate, or sodium alkenyl sulfonate, comprises a third or
 less of the detergent weight. The  remainder of the detergent consists of a
 sequestering  agent, an anti-corrosion agent, an anti-soil redeposition  agent, a
 foam booster, bleach, a brightener, filler, and in some cases, enzymes.'31

     Basically,  the manufacture of  powdered detergents  consists of  the
 following steps:

     1.   Sulfation or sulfonation of the raw material (fatty alcohol or linear
          alkylate).

     2.   Neutralization of the acid to produce the sulfate or sulfonate.

     3.   Blending the sulfonate paste with other ingredients.

     4.   Spray drying of this mixture.

     5.   Packaging and  storing of the detergent.

     In the manufacture of liquid detergents, a foam stabilizer and solubilizer is
 blended in before the detergent is bottled. Liquid detergents accounted for 20
 to 25% of total syndet production in 1968.

     Detergents and soaps may be  broken down into three main classes:

     1.   Anionic detergents — ionize in water to produce a negatively charged
          organic  ion; used mainly in soaps and powdered synthetic detergents.

     2.   Nonionic detergents — do not ionize in water; used mainly in  liquid
          synthetic detergents.

     3.  Cationic detergents  — ionize in water to produce a positively charged
         organic ion; not  normally classified as detergents, but as germicides.

     In 1966, anionic detergents  (including soap)  represented 74.3% of total
detergent production, nonionic, 20.6%, and cationic, less than 5%.<4)

     The most frequently used active ingredient in anionic synthetic detergents
today  is linear alkylbenzene sulfonate (LAS). Alcohol sulfatesand alpha-olefin
sulfonates (AOS) are also used. Although AOS consumption in 1968 was  about
 19% of total sulfonate consumption, it has been discussed as the most serious
430

-------
 competition to LAS.*^' Overall routes to these three ingredients are shown in
 Figure 121.(2>5) The major feed materials to the detergent manufacturing plant
 for these three processes would be  linear alkylbenzene, primary alcohol, and
 linear paraffin wax (or ethylene), respectively.

      Of the nonionic active ingredients in  synthetic detergents, ethoxylated
 long chain  alcohols and to  a  lesser  extent, ethoxylated alkyl-phenols are the
 most common. These materials are produced by reacting the linear alcohol  or
 alkyl-phenol with ethylene oxide in a mole ratio of 1 :(2 to 10).(6)

      The sulfonation  (or sulfation) of the raw materials in anionic synthetic
 detergent production  is very similar for the three main processes. Flow sheets
are shown in Figures 122 and 123 for the sulfonationof linear alkyl benzene and
 linear alpha-olefins.<2) In the actual sulfonation reaction, a mixture of 4% SOo
 (vol/vol air) is generally used. For optimum reaction conditions, this mixture
 should be at a pressure of  1.0 to 1.3 atmospheres, a temperature of 100 to
 140° F, a dew point of — 58° F, and free of acid mists.121 This S03/air mixture
 is usually prepared from one of three reagents. Stabilized liquid sulfur trioxide
 is probably the most versatile. It is exclusively used in alpha-olefin sulfonation.
 Sulfuric acid, usually  in the  form of  oleum (H2 804 • SOg), and occasionally
 sulfur are also used to produce the S03/air mixture.

      In  some  plants oleum  or less frequently sulfuric acid is directly mixed
 with alkyl benzene to produce the sulfonate. However, large excesses of oleum
 and  larger  excesses  of sulfuric acid  are required  to  drive the reaction to
 completion, causing these processes to be relatively expensive.'7)

      Sulfonation  processes are typically composed of a  raw material metering
 system, a  sulfonation reactor, a  cooling circuit,  a  separating  circuit, and a
 hydrolyzer.

      In  the manufacture of linear alkyl  benzene sulfonate, the linear alkyl
 benzene and  SOg/air mixture are  metered into the reactor  at a SOg/raw
 material mole ratio of 1.0 to 1.1.(2) The reaction is very quick and exothermic,
 and  heat  must  be rapidly  removed to  prevent  discoloration. The heat of
 reaction  is  removed  by  recycling  the reactants through  a  temperature
 controlled heat exchanger. The reaction is completed as the overflow from the
 reactor flows through a reaction coil. Although feed materials other than linear
 alkyl benzene  (alpha-olefins, fatty alcohols) may  require different  post-treat-
 ment, the sulfonation  step is  much  the same.

      Typical  operating conditions  for  the sulfonation  of  linear  benzene
                                                                       431

-------
   N)
                                                                    FIGURE 121
             OVER-ALL.   ROUTES    TO  LINEAR   ALKYLATE    SULFONATES   (LAS),
                   ALPHA-OLEFIN    SULFONATES    (AOS)   AND    ALCOHOL    SULFATES
             LAS
KEROSENE RANGE HYDROCARBONS
                                  MOLECULAR
                                Y SIEVES
                    STRAIGHT CHAIN HYDROCARBON
            AOS
WAX RANGE CRUDE DISTILLATE
                                                                                                         ALCOHOL SULFATES
(
                                                          SOLVENT
                                                          DEOILING
                                                                          COCONUT  OIL
                                                                                                   1. N»OH
                                                                                                             OLEFINS
                                                                                                                         ETHYLENE
                                            STRAIGHT CHAIN PARAFFIN WAX

Cl
UI2
(
1 A D A ETPIfc.1
#
CATALYTIC
DEHYDROGENATION
DEHYDRO f
1
                                                                            THERMAL
                                                                            CRACKING
                                                              STRAIGHT CHAIN ALPHA OLEFINS
                                                                          1
                                                                         1
                                                          DISTILLATION
                                                                C|5-C|8 ALPHA OLEFINS
        I. BENZENE, AICI3

         Z. DISTILLATION
I. BENZENE ,HF
2. DISTILLATION


                                                 SULFONIC ACID
                                                 AND SULTONES
                 STRAIGHT CHAIN  ALKYLBENZENE
                     (LINEAR  ALKYLATE)
                                I
                                nc
                                I
                                                        1
               I. N«OH,HEAT

               2. BLEACHING
                 SO^OR OLEUM
                                               SODIUM SULFONATE
       SULFONIC ACID

                 NaOH

       SODIUM  SULFONATE
                                                                                  2.NaREDUCTION
                                                                 ETHYLENE GROWTH
                                                                 BY ZIEGLER
                                                                 CATALYSTS
                                                   LAURYL
                                                  ALCOHOL
                                                      SYNTHETIC
                                                      ALCOHOLS
                                                                                                             *
                                             PRIMARY
                                              LINEAR
                                            ALCOHOLS
                                                                    SO3 OR
                                                                    CHLOROSULFONIC ACID


                                                         ALCOHOL SULFATE
                                    SODIUM ALCOHOL  SULFATE

-------
                                                        FIGURE 122

                   LOW- AND   HIGH-ACTIVE:    SULFONATION    USING   OLEUM
                                                                  BYPASS FOR LOW ACTIVE
                                                                 SULFONATION   OPERATION
     ALKYL
    BENZENE
                                          REACTOR
     OLEUM
CO
CO
                                         SULFONATION
                                         COOLER
             PROPORTIONING
                PUMP
MIXING
 PUMP
                                                                                                               ALKYL
                                                                                                               BENZENE
                                                                                                               SULFONATION
                                                                             NEUTRALIZATION
                                                                             COOLER
MIXING
 PUMP
                                                         WATER
                                                                                               ALKALI
                              SULFONATION
                                                                DILUTION
                                             SULFONIC ACID
                                             CONCENTRATION
 NEUTRALIZATION

-------
                                                                     FIGURE 123

                                 ALPHA - OL-EFIN   SULFONATION  FLOWSHEET
ALPHA-
OLEFIN
PROPORTIONING
    PUMP
                                 LIQUID
                                 FILM
                                 REACTOR
                                                                                           BLEACH
                                                                                           AND pH
                                                                                          MIX TANK



i r
1 1
l-J
                                                                       SULFURIC
                                                                       ACID
                                                                                                             BLEACH
                                                                                                             DIGESTER
                                                          CYCLONE
                                            COOLER
                                            PUMP
                  DEMISTER
                                                          ALKALI
      PROPORTIONING
         PUMPS
SODIUM
HYPOCHLORITE
                                                     SODIUM
                                                     ALKENE
                                                     SULFONATE
                                                                                                                         HYDROLYZER
                                                                                              PUMP  COOLER

-------
alkylates  are given in Table 158.(7)  Reactor capacities range from less than 1
million Ib/yr to more than  20 million Ib/yr of sulfonic acid, based on 6000
hr/yr of operation.17)

     The  reactor effluent  consists mainly of sulfonic and  sulfuric  acids. The
excess  sulfuric acid  is usually removed by  first diluting it with water; after
dilution, the difference in  densities is large enough to permit phase separation
and the spent acid is removed after a residence time of about 15 minutes.

     The  sulfonic acid is next neutralized to form the sulfonate. Caustic soda is
generally  used. The  neutralization  reaction   is  also rapid and  extremely
exothermic and the  reactants are recirculated through  a  cooler. The solids
content of this slurry will normally be about 46%.(2)

     In the  sulfation  of  primary  alcohols,  chlorosulfonic acid  is  usually
employed as the sulfating agent.'81  Gaseous HCI is  liberated during sulfation
and this necessitates  absorption and disposal of the acid, which  is extremely
corrosive.  For this  reason the reaction  is usually carried out  batchwise  in
glass-lined kettles at  about 86°F.(9>  Sulfuric acid can be  used in alcohol
sulfation but because of the reverse hydrolysis reaction, equilibrium conversion
to the sulfonic acid is only  65%, and a large excess of acid  must be used.  It
appears that SO^ gas  may  be the  best method for sulfation, as well as for
sulfonation. An excess of 3.5% SOg  (converter gas) provides good sulfation of
linear alcohols (lauryl or synthetic), with a  sulfation time  of 40  minutes and
mean temperature of 95°F.(8)

     After sulfonation  (or sulfation), the  sulfonate  paste is blended with the
numerous detergent additives. The dry ingredients are weighed  and fed to a
screw conveyor which acts also as a mixer. The conveyor  transports the dry
ingredients  to the  main  mixer,  where they  are blended  with the liquid
ingredients (including the  sulfonate paste). The  blended  materials are then
conveyed  to an aging crutcher, where the slurry is aged and further  mixed.
Final drying is done in a spray dryer.

     Synthetic detergent and soap powders are formed by spray  drying. Since
World  War II, vacuum spray dryers  have  also  been  used  to  perform the
functions  of  hot-air dryers in soap drying.'12)  A flowsheet for a  typical
detergent  spray drying plant is shown in Figure 124.'21

     Neat  soap is  generally  about  60 to  70%  solids,  while the  detergent
sulfonate  paste is usually 55  to 60% solids. The paste comes from the blending
unit at a temperature of 120 to 175°F, is filtered, and pumped at pressures up
                                                                      435

-------
                            TABLE 158
              TYPICAL  OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR
      CONTINUOUS  SULFONATING OF  LINEAR ALKYLATE(7)
 Temperature, °F
     Linear alkylate feed                                   65-85
     Vaporized S03 - dry air mixture                       100-110
     Product sulfonic acid                                120-140

 Flow rates, Ib/hr
     Linear alkylate feed                                   1240
     Vaporized S03                                       433
     Dry air feed (SCFM)                                   800
     Product sulfonic acid                                 1670

 Molar ratio, S03:alkylate                                 1.03:1.0

 SO3 carried by air, vol %                                      4

 Aging time, minutes                                        15
436

-------
                                               FIGURE 124

                            TYPICAL SPRAY DRYING   PLANT
                                                                                          TO
                                                                                    ATMOSPHERE
SUURRY
      TO
ATMOSPHERE
               CO-CURRENT
                    AIR
                 STREAM
                                                                       CYC l_ ONES
                                        SPRAY
                                        DRYER
                                 COUNTERCURRENT
                                  AIR  STREAM
                                                                                               CYCL-ONE
                                                                                     ORANUI-ATOR
                                                                                   DETERGENT
                                                                                    PRODUCT

-------
to 70 atmg through feed nozzles at the top of the spray tower.121 The towers
are usually larger than 14 ft in diameter and about 60 to 100 ft high, with a
60°  bottom  cone. The nozzles spray the paste  into a hot drying air stream.
When the paste reaches the right density, it settles to the bottom of the dryer
and  is removed by a belt conveyor to packaging. Moisture contents of the dry
powder bead are in the 3  to 18 wt.%  range.'2'  The bead is rather coarse,
spherical, stable, and has a large surface area.

     The air for drying is taken from the atmosphere and heated in an oil or gas
fired furnace to 645  to 710° F. Three different air systems are  generally
employed in spray dryers:

     1.  Parallel or co-current

     2.  Countercurrent

     3.  Mixed air flow

     In the co-current system, hot air is introduced at the top of the tower and
flows down the tower with the sprayed  detergent particles. In the discharge
cone, the drying air is separated from the beads and drawn through a cyclone.
Cool- air, drawn in at the  bottom of the  tower, cools the beads and separates
the  hollow beads from the  fines, which are collected in the cyclone. The
product produced in this system will have density of 0.08 to 0.15 g/cc and a
moisture content of 3 to 8%.(2) The countercurrent system is most often used
in spray drying. Hot air enters at the bottom of  the tower and contacts the
downward  flowing detergent beads. An average tower will dry 10,000 ton/yr
with larger towers handling up to 100,000  ton/yr.'3'  The product bead will
have a 0.18  to 0.4 g/cc density and a 6 to  15% moisture content.'2' In the
mixed air  flow system a reduced amount of hot  air enters through the top,
while a large  quantity of cold air  enters at the bottom. The upper part of the
tower consequently operates  as a co-current unit, while the lower part acts as a
countercurrent unit. The powder produced  is in the form of  a hollow  bead
containing  a very high percentage  of water of crystallization; the water content
is usually 20 to 25%.

     The detergent beads are conveyed from the bottom of the drying tower to
a pneumatic air lift. The beads are cooled as they travel up the air lift. At the
top of the lift they are separated  from the air stream by  a cyclone or gravity
separator and fall to a  vibrating screen which removes the oversized particles.
The detergent is then sprayed  with perfume and packaged.
438

-------
     The manufacture of soap is a bit simpler. Soap consists of the sodium or
potassium salts of various fatty acids, usually in the C-|2 to C-|g range. Soap is
usually manufactured either by saponification of fats or the hydrolysis of fats
followed  by neutralization of  the  resultant fatty acids.  The trend today  is
toward the  latter process, although direct saponification is much older and still
widely used.

     The main raw materials used in soap manufacture are tallow, greases, and
coconut oil. These are the fatty materials which are hydrolyzed, or split, into
fatty acids  and glycerine. In some cases, however, free fatty acids are used as
raw  material and are  neutralized  directly.  Fatty acids are usually produced
from fats in one  of three processes: Twitchell, batch autoclave, or continuous
high-pressure process. The Twitchell process is the oldest. The fats are boiled
for 12  to 48 hours at 212 to 220° F in an open tank with  0.75 to 1.25%
Twitchell's  reagent   (alkyl-aryl  sulfonic   acids)  and  0.5%  sulfonic  acid.
Hydrolysis  is  85 to 98% complete.11 °- 11' A 5 to  15% aqueous glycerine
solution is drawn off,  neutralized and concentrated by evaporation.11 0) The
batch autoclave process is a faster process (5 to 10 hr) and operates at pressures
from  75 to  150 psig and  temperatures of 300 to 350° F in the presence of 1 to
2% zinc, calcium, or magnesium catalyst.'11' In the continuous countercurrent
process, the fats  (or fatty oil)  are first deaerated  under a vacuum.  Deaerated
fatty  oil is  charged to the bottom of the hydrolyzing tower. Deaerated water
enters at the top of the tower. The oil at the bottom extracts the fatty material
dissolved in  the glycerine phase,  while the water extracts the glycerine dissolved
in the fatty  phase. Final splitting occurs at about 485° F and 600 to 700 psig;
direct high pressure steam is used  for heating. The fatty acids exit through the
top and the  glycerine at the bottom.

     The  fatty acids produced in one of these processes (mainly the continuous
countercurrent process) are now neutralized, usually with sodium hydroxide.
This  process  is  shown  in  Figure 125.<10)  The crude  fatty acids from the
hydrolyzing tower first have the water flushed off, and then are purified by dry
vacuum distillation. The distillate is then condensed and neutralized in a high
speed mixer with a NaOH solution.  The neat soap, or soap of the higher fatty
acids, is discharged at temperature greater than 200° F to a blending tank. This
soap  contains 0.02 to 0.10 wt.% free caustic as Na20, 0.3 to 0.6% salt, and
about 30%  moisture. The soap is now dried  in hot-air dryers, spray dryers, or
steam heated tubes. Most soap is dried in  hot-air dryers. Soap used in chips,
bars and  flakes is dried this way and then  milled and broken into chips. The
chips can be charged to  mixers where other ingredients (perfume) are added.
The  chips are  now  finally  rolled, and finished as  bars or flakes.111)  Soap
powders are produced by spray drying, which has been previously discussed.
                                                                     439

-------
                                                    FIGURE 12i>

           CONTINUOUS   PROCESS  FOR    SOAP   MANUFACTURE

                                 STEAMS	
                         STEAM
                 FLASH
                  TANK
                              STEAM
                                                     1
         1
                                                      >N DENSER

                      EXCHANGER


           HYDROLYZER
FATS AND
CATALYST
                                   HIGH  VACUUM
                                         STILL
    CAUSTIC
      SODA
                              MIXER-
                          NEUTRALIZER
                                                                COO LINO
                                                                 WATER
DISTILLATE
 RECEIVER
                                                                                »
  SOAP
STORAGE
                                        BOTTOMS ,TO
                                         STORAGE  S.
                                         RECOVERY
       I                 U
      CONVENTIONAL
      SOAP FfMISHING I
      BAR,FLAKE  OR
            POWDER   | CUTTER
     STEAM
                                          CRUDE
                                         3LYCERINE
                    EVAPORATORS
                          £
                                                  HIGH
                                                PRESSURE
                                                  PUMP
                                               STEAM
                                                                                                 FREEZER
                                                                                   PACK OFF

-------
This entire process takes about 24 hours.

     In contrast, the kettle or batch processes take several days to produce an
equivalent amount of  soap.  The  major batch process is the  "full  boiled
process".  This  process employs  direct saponification of fats, and consists of
several steps, or "changes." The fats are first melted and  mixed with 12.6%
NaOH in the soap kettle, which  is  heated with open steam. After 3 to 4 hours,
a sodium chloride  solution is added until  a  concentration of 10 to 12% is
achieved and the soap mixture separates distinctly into soap and spent lye. The
steam  is removed and  the  lye, containing 1 to 8% glycerine, is settled and is
drawn off. The soap is again  boiled and water is added until the mixture is
again  creamy;  more caustic  may  be added and the process repeated. These
series of processes are called the "brine  changes." On the third day, the last of
the oil and  fats are saponified with 18.6% NaOH; the mixture  is heated with
closed steam until separation and then allowed to cool for 3 to 4 hours. The lye
is run off and used in saponification of  a new batch of fats; this step is called
the "strengthening change." In the "finishing change," the soap is again heated
and water is added, and the mixture is boiled. Upon cooling, the soap separates
into 3 layers. The top  layer is neat soap, the middle layer consists of nigre (a
dark,  alkaline soap), and the bottom layer  is  a mixture of soap and  lye. The
neat soap is finished as described  above. The nigre is used either in the next
batch or degraded and  used  in darker,  cheaper grades of soap, and the  lye is
neutralized  and recycled after the glycerine has been removed. The  Sharpies
process is a  continuous full-boiled process which takes 2 hours to produce neat
soap.  This process contains the same stages as  the batch process, but  the flow
of lye is countercurrent to  the flow of fat and oil. The soap, lye, and nigre are
separated  in 15,000 rpm centrifuges which develop a centrifugal force 13,200
times that of gravity.'10>
                         PROCESS CHEMISTRY

     Many chemical reactions are involved in soap and detergent manufacture.
The reactions involved in soap manufacture can be summarized as follows:'1 ol

     1.   Saponification of fats

         3 NaOH   +   (C17H35COO)3C3H5  +

         Caustic Soda  Glyceryl Stearate

         3C17H35COONa  +   C3H5(OH)3

         Sodium Stearate     Glycerine
                                                                     441

-------
     2a.  Hydrolysis of fats

         (C17H35COO)3C3H5  +  3H20  -»•  3C17H35COOH  +   C3H5(OH)3

         Glyceryl Stearate                  Stearic Acid         Glycerine

      b.  Neutralization of fatty acids

         C17H35COOH  +   NaOH   -»•  C17H35COONa   +  H20

         Stearic Acid     Caustic    Sodium Stearate

     Although  Stearate has been shown  in these reactions, other  fats with
carbon chains of 12 to 18 atoms, such as oleate, laurate, or palmitate are also
present.

     The formation  of  sulfonated  detergents  takes  place mainly by the
reactions summarized below.

1.   Alkyl-benzene sulfonation:(2>

     a.   Sulfonation stage, 98+% conversion
                                                            +  H9S04
                                                     S03H       Z   *
         Alkyl Benzene,      Oleum        Sulfonic Acid      96%Sulfuric
           C^QtoC-|4                                         acid

* An S03-air mixture is often used instead of oleum.

    b.   Neutralization
                                +  NaOH ->   I      1+  Na9SOd + 3H9O
                    \                        x/\
                     S03H                           S03Na

                                           "Sodium alkyl benzene sulfonate
442

-------
2.   Alpha-olefin sulfonation:'2'
     a.   Sulfonation, 96 to 98+% conversion
         R-CH =
         linear alpha-olefin,
         C14toC18
         R-CH = CH2  + S03   •*  R'-
         linear alpha-olefin
      H = CH-(CH2)n-S03H

       alkene sulfonic acid
                                                            H;C
                           + R-CH
                                \
                                                 so-
                                                    Sultones
    b.   Neutralization
   7
R-CH
                    \
+   NaOH
       \
                      CH
           Sultone
                    SO
R' - CH2 - CH(OH) - CH2 - CH2 - S03 Na
   Sodium hydroxy sulfonate

R - CH2 - CH = CH - CH2 - S03 Na
  Sodium alkene sulfonate
R'-CH = CH-(CH2)n-SO3H + NaOH ^ R'- CH = CH - (CH2)n - SO3Na + H2O
    Alkene sulfonic acid                    Sodium alkene sulfonate

         Composition of final product:'5'

         50 to 60% alkene sulfonate
         40 to 50% hydroxy sulfonate

3.   Alcohol sulfation:

    a.   Sulfation'81

         I.   With chlorosulfonic acid; 95 to 98% conversion'31
         R-OH

    Primary linear
    alcohol, Cj2 to
  CIS03H

Chlorosulfonic
    acid
            R-0-S03H  +  . HCI t

            Alkyl sulfuric acid
                                                                443

-------
         II.     With sulfur trioxide, 95 to 98% conversion

               R - OH  +  S03  -»-  R - 0 - S03H
                         3.5%
                         excess

         III.    With sulfuric acid (oleum or monohyd rated), 65% conversion

               R - OH  +  H2S04  £  R - 0 - S03H  +  H20
                           70%
                           excess

    b.   Neutralization

         I.    R-0-S03H  +  NaOH  ->  R - 0 - SO3Na  +  H20
                                     Sodium alcohol sulfate
II.  R-0-S03H  +   H2S04  +  SNaOH
4.   Alcohol ethoxylation and sulfation:'6- 10)
    a.   Ethoxylation
                                                R-0-S03Na
                                                  55%
                                                             Na2S04 + 3H20
                                                              45%
R-CHoOH
Linear alcohol,
                                             R -CH20(CH2CH2O)nH
                                             Alcohol ethoxylate
C12toC
       18
                Ethylene oxide
                n = 2 to 10 moles
or alkyl
(=Cg) phenol
    b.   Sulfation and Neutralization

R-CH2O(CH2CH20)nH       +
Alcohol ethoxylate
    R = CiitoC-|7
    n = 2 to 4

R-CH2O(CH2CH2O)nS03H    +
                                    S03  ->  R-CH2O(CH2CH2O)nSO3H
                           NaOH  -*  R-CH20(CH2CH20)nS03Na
                                       Alcohol ethoxy sulfate
                                                                        H0
444

-------
                  RAW MATERIALS  AND  PRODUCTS

     The  raw materials for soap  manufacturing consist  mainly  of  tallow,
greases, coconut  oil, and free fatty acids. Tallow is obtained  mainly  by the
steam rendering of cattle fat; greases are obtained from the steam rendering of
the fats of hogs, smaller domestic animals, and from garbage.

     An extremely wide range of compounds, both natural and synthetic may
be classified as raw materials for the manufacture of synthetic detergents. The
active ingredient in detergents comprises about 14 to 37% of the total product;
the remainder is composed of builders, fillers, etc., which  are not generally
produced  by the detergent manufacturers. Table 159 shows typical formulations
of modern detergent products.'31

     The  basic raw material  used in the manufacture of LAS is a linear alkyl
benzene, mainly dodecyl alkyl benzene. This alkylated  benzene is produced by
either  dehydrogenation or chlorination of a n-paraffin, followed by Friedel-
Craft alkylation.

     Alpha-olefin sulfonate is made by employing  a  linear paraffin wax or
ethylene to produce a C-jg to C-jg alpha-olefin, which is then sulfonated. In the
production  of alcohol  sulfates or ethoxylated sulfates, straight chain primary
alcohols (C-|2 to C-jg)  are usually  the  feed material.  Lauryl alcohol, derived
from coconut oil, is often used, but it is being replaced by synthetic alcohols
made by either ethylene growth  over Ziegler catalysts or the reaction of olefins
with carbon monoxide and then hydrogen.(6)

     The  major materials  used  in  sulfonation or sulfation  are, as previously
mentioned, stabilized  liquid  sulfur trioxide,  oleum,  chlorosulfonic acid, or
sulfur.  Alcohol ethoxylates are prepared by reacting ethylene oxide or propy-
lene oxide with linear alcohols. Neutralization of the sulfonic acid is carried out
by an agent which does not produce gaseous side products. Sodium hydroxide
is generally used,  but potassium, lithium, magnesium, and ammonium hydrox-
ides, as well as trietanolamine are also employed.

     Soaps and synthetic detergents are available in powder, liquid, bar, flake
and chip  form. They are used primarily as cleaning compounds, and  have  a
large range of home and industrial applications. Major products include laundry
detergents,  toilet  soap, and dish  washing detergents used  in the  home.
Detergents are also  used in  textile finishing, dyeing, laundries, dairies, and
metal cleaning. They are used as  a frothing agent in wallboard manufacture and
as an entraining agent in portland cement. Soap is used in the manufacture of
                                                                     445

-------
&
                    TABLE 159

 TYPICAL SYNTHETIC DETERGENT FORMULAS'31
                                           Heavy-duty
                                             product
                                           U.S., Canada
                 Active ingredient
                 (e.g., alkylbenzene
                 sulfonate, fatty alcohol
                 sulfate)

                 Foam booster
                 (e.g., lauryl alcohol,
                 cocomonoethanolamide)

                 Sodium tripolyphosphate
 14 to 20%
 1.5 to 2%
 40 to 60%
                 Anti-soil redeposition agent
                 (e.g., sodium carboxy
                 methyl cellulose)             0.5 to 0.9%

                 Anti-corrosion agent
(e.g., sodium silicate)
Optical brightener
Enzymes
Moisture
5 to 7%
0.30 to 0.75%
0.20 to 0.75%
6 to 12%
                 Filler (e.g., sodium
                 sulfate)

                 Other ingredients
remainder
                       Light-duty
                        powders
                      all countries
25 to 32%
 2 to 15%
                                                                 0.02 to 0.08%
                                                                   1 to 4%
60 to 68%
                      Light-duty
                        liquids
                      all countries
30 to 37%
                        5 to 12%
                       Detergent
                      laundry bars
20 to 25%
                                               6 to 9%
                      15 to 25%



                      0.3 to 0.5%


                       3 to 8%

                     0.05 to 0.25%



                       3 to 8%


                      15 to 30%

                       15 to 20%

-------
synthetic rubber,  textile  processing and as an emulsifier in cold cream and
cosmetic  preparations.  Glycerine,  which  is  a major  by-product  of soap
manufacture, is used  in the manufacture of alkyd  resins and explosives, as a
humectant in tobacco, as a plasticizer in cellophane, and in products such as
cosmetics, dentrifices, corks, gaskets, and Pharmaceuticals.'10)
               NATURE  OF THE GASEOUS DISCHARGE

     In soap  manufacturing plants,  paniculate and/or  odors are  the main
atmospheric  contaminant. The odors are  mostly due  to  the storage and
unloading of the fat charge stock particularly rendered fats and greases, and the
vacuum distillation of higher molecular weight fatty acids.  Excepting spray
dryers,  dust emissions in  soap making cause little more than dust problems
within the plant.

     The main source  of  air pollution in a detergent plant is the exhaust air
from the spray dryer. Dust from dry product handling and acid fumes from the
sulfonation process can also be problems.

     The  exhaust  air  from  a  countercurrent spray  dryer will  be at  a
temperature of 150 to  250° F,  typically about  210  to 220° F.  The  air  is
exhausted to a collector, either a  cyclone or a wet scrubber, and the collected
particles (in the form of fines or  in a slurry) are recycled to the process. The
spray dryer is essentially  an  evaporator,  reducing  the moisture content from
about 40% to between 6 and 15%. The wet bulb temperature of the exhaust gas
before entering the collector will be  120 to 150°F and the  paniculate dust
loading will  be in the 3 to 7 gr/SCF range. This paniculate content will depend
on the tower rates, the fineness of the sprays, the characteristics of the specific
product being  dried and  other variables.  The particles  will  be rather large,
approximately 50% being  greater than 40 microns.113) The composition of the
particles will be very close to that of the finished product, with the  exception
that sodium perborate, enzymes, and organic foam boosters are not present. A
problem is  caused by the  great amount  of  moisture evaporated, which  is
discharged in the exhaust gas and condenses in the atmosphere, forming a dense
white plume.

     Detergent formulations have recently been undergoing changes in response
to public concern over the possible connection of phosphates to  algae growth
in inland waterways.  As a  result,  the  industry  trend  has been  toward
non-phosphate  formulations. It is speculation as to the make-up of the new
detergents, but the emphasis appears to  be on non-ionic surfactants such  as
                                                                     447

-------
alcohol ethoxylates.'14' At any rate, these new formulations produce problems
in spray  dryer emission control. The spray dryer emits a blue haze which has
not been controlled by conventional technology. This haze is believed to be a
sub-micron organic aerosol mist. As the scope of this contract  is limited  to
conventional  emission  control  technology,  only  the  phosphate  detergent
pollution problem will be dealt with in detail.

     The pneumatic air lift used to cool and convey the dried product contains
the  potential  for  sizable paniculate  emissions.  Paniculate  rates  from the
separating device at the top of the lift average about 3 to 4% of the amount  of
beads conveyed. The air used in the pneumatic lift will be approximately 1
cfm/lb/hr of product and will  have a temperature of near  100°F.(13)

     There are various gaseous contaminants released during the sulfonation
processes. In the burning of sulfur to produce the SC^-air sulfonating mixture,
some of the SC>2 is not converted to SOg. This will result in a small amount  of
sulfur  dioxide emission. If oleum  is used as the sulfonating agent, a  small
amount of acid vapor will escape  from the unloading, storage,  sulfonating,
aging,  and  neutralization equipment. When chlorosulfonic acid is used in the
sulfation process, large quantities of gaseous hydrogen chloride are  produced
and must be disposed of.
              POLLUTION  CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

     The  control  of  odors  in a  soap and  detergent  manufacturing plant,
compared to the control of product paniculate, is a rather simple problem. The
majority of odor emissions in soap making plants will come from the vacuum
type  steam stills  in  the  neutralization process,  or the soap kettles in the
full-boiled  process. These  odors may  be  controlled by spray condensers or.
surface  condensers and  the  noncondensibles  vented  to the  firebox  of a
continuous boiler.'1 3) The odor level from detergent spray dryers will be about
four  or  five odor units/SCF.  Although  usually  this will  not constitute a
problem, discharging the exhaust gas at a high velocity from a tall stack will
greatly  lessen  the  chance  of the  plume reaching ground in any  noticeable
concentration.'13)

     In  the control of paniculate  emissions from spray dryers,  cyclones are
frequently  employed,  as the fines from the dryer amount to an economically
recoverable portion. The cyclones used are high efficiency (90% or better) and
relatively high pressure drop (4 to 5 in. w.c.), and are used alone or with one or
more additional units  in series. Two-stage cyclone collectors operating at 12 in.
448

-------
w.c. are reported to obtain collection efficiencies of 99%. The small tube type
of cyclone is not usually employed. The cyclones are usually carefully insulated
to prevent solids build-up.

     The gases discharged from a single cyclone will generally have a particulate
loading of 0.3 to 0.6  gr/SCF. Much of this weight will be accounted for by a
few large particles which  escape the cyclone.(13) This level  of  particulate
loading is not  economically recoverable, but may be  in  violation of  many
emission standards. Therefore, some form of subsequent control  equipment
will be required. A two-stage cyclone will have emission loadings in the order of
0.1 gr/SCF.

     Problems may be  encountered  when fabric  filters are used  as  control
devices for detergent  drying towers, as the exhaust gas is very humid and  the
product particles are  sticky at high temperatures.  These conditions can  cause
caking and build-up problems in the filter.

     Wet scrubbing seems to offer the best means of reducing the  particulate
loading of the cyclone exhaust gas. Spray chambers, centrifugal impingement
scrubbers, and  Venturi  scrubbers have  all  been used. Velocities in  spray
chambers  should be a maximum of 250 ft/min to prevent water entrainment;
scrubbing liquid rates as low as 1 to 2 gpm for every 1000 cfm of exhaust are
satisfactory. Emission  concentrations of about  0.15  gr/SCF  are normal  for
spray chambers. Venturi scrubbers would use a scrubbing liquid rate of about 8
to  10  gpm/1000 acfm. A  medium  pressure drop  (8 to 10 in. w.c.) Venturi
scrubber would  discharge air with particulate loadings as low as 0.02  to 0.03
gr/SCF. If a low gas pressure drop (3 to 5  in. w.c.) were used, the  particulate
loading would be about 0.1  gr/SCF.(1 3> To prevent foaming in the scrubber, a
high detergent concentration should be maintained in the recirculated liquid;
40 to 45 wt.% solids is a typical range.
     The  emissions from the  pneumatic air  lift  represent an economically
important fraction of the product. This 3 to 4% fraction is equivalent to a grain
loading  of 3.5 to 4.7 gr/ACF in the separator exhaust. The usual method of
recovering these fines is the use of a fabric filter. Filter caking is not as much of
a problem here as the detergent beads are less sticky at lower temperatures.
                                                                    449

-------
450

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

     Abatement  system  specifications have  been  written  to control  the
emissions from two sources in a detergent manufacturing plant. The first of
these sources is the  spray dryer vent. Both  wet scrubber  and fabric  filter
systems have been specified. Each system is based upon  the presumption  that
the detergent being made is of  the conventional high phosphate variety  and,
therefore,  no hydrocarbon  mist problem  exists.  Cost  data and equipment
specifications for these two systems are presented in Tables 160 to 170 and
Figures 126 to 134.

     The second source for which specifications have been written is the dry
product handling operation which transfers  spray dried product from the spray
dryer to the storage facility. Transfer is done by pneumatic conveying in which
the air both transports and cools the detergent product.  The single abatement
device specified  for this  application  is  the fabric filter.  Cost  data  and
specifications are presented  in Tables 171  to  175 and  Figures 135 to  137.
                                                                    451

-------
                                   TABLE  160

                  WET SCRUBBER PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
            SOAP AND  DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING SPECIFICATION
     The wet scrubber is to remove entrained detergent particles from the exhaust gas of a
gas-fired spray dryer producing conventional phosphate  detergents. The flow of air and
detergent in the spray dryer is countercurrent. Detergent product is collected at the bottom
of the spray drying tower and sent to storage by a conveyor system. The exhaust gases leave
the tower at the top.

     The exhaust gas from the spray dryer will be brought to a fan located outside of the
building. The fan outlet is to be five feet above grade. The wet scrubber will be located
beyond the  fan in an  area free of space limitations.  The scrubber is to be designed to
withstand the discharge pressure developed by the fan.  The ducting to the scrubber should
be insulated to alleviate build-up.

     The scrubber  will recirculate a slurry of 40 to 45 wt.% solids content in order to
minimize foaming problems in the unit.  Fresh  water is available at the site  for make-up.
Slurry  withdrawn from the unit will be  returned to the detergent manufacturing process.
The temperature of  the  slurry in the  recycle tank should be kept in the range of
approximately 13GPF.
     The scrubbing system will include:

     1.   A wet scrubber equipped with suitable connections for periodic cleaning of solids
          build-up.

     2.   Carbon steel construction with manufacturer's standard prime paint applied.

     3.   A fan capable of overcoming the system pressure drop at the design  flow rate
          while operating at no more than 90%  of the maximum recommended speed. The
          fan motor shall be capable of driving the fan at the maximum recommended speed
          and the corresponding pressure differential at 20% over the design flow rate.

     4.   Pumps capable of handling slurrys at the design solids content.

     5.   A fifty foot stack following the scrubber.

     All equipment other than  the scrubber should be considered auxiliary equipment.
 452

-------
                                 TABLE 161

                WET SCRUBBER OPERATING CONDITIONS  FOR
           SOAP AND  DETERGENT SPRAY  DRYING  SPECIFICATIONS
     Two sizes of wet scrubbers are to be quoted for each of two efficiency levels. Vendors'
quotations should consist of four separate and independent quotations.
Dryer Capacity, Ib/hr
Process Wt., Ib/hr
Inlet Gas to Scrubber
     Flow.ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     Flow, SCFM
     % Moisture (vol)
     Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Scrubber Outlet Gas
     Volume, ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     % Moisture (vol)
               Small

               20,000
               30,000

               30,290
                  210
               23,960
                   15
                1,298
                7.44

               27,450
                  134
                   17
   Large

   80,000
  120,000

  121,150
      210
   95,840
       15
    5,192
    7.44

  109,800
      134
       17
Outlet Solids Rate. Ib/hr
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Efficiency, wt.%
Scrubber, &P
Case 1 - Medium Efficiency *

                 25.2
                 0.14
                98.04
               10 in. w.c.

 Case 2 — High Efficiency *
Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Collection Efficiency, wt. %
Scrubber, A P
                2.35
                0.01
              0.0135
               99.82
            40 in. w.c.
     40.0
     0.06
    99.23
   10 in. w.c.
    9.41
    0.01
  0.0135
   99.82
40 in. w.c.
*See page 6 for definition of efficiency levels.
                                                                           453

-------
                      TABLE  162

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s) -|
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment _,







(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other





•







(4) Total Cost
Medium Efficiency
Small

30,290
210
23,960
15

5.00
1,298

27,450
134
24,492
17

0.11
25.2
98.0
28,500


13,750












52,300






94,550
Large

121,150
210
95,840
15

5.00
5,192

109,800
134
97,970
17

0.04
40.0
99.3
69,300


34,100












94,400






197,800
High Efficiency
Small

30,290
210
23,960
15

5.00
1,298

27,450
134
24,492
17

0.01
2.35
99.8
28,000


22,275












67,050






117,325
Large

121,150
210
95,840
15

5.00
5,192

109,800
134
97,970
17

0.01
9.41
99.8
62,650


53,650












124,450






240,750
 454

-------
                                                 TABLE 163


                                 ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                           FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost




$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal

Medium Efficiency
Small
8,000
1,800
3,975
1,825
5,199
1,140
6,339
13,939
9,455
23,394
Large
8,000
1,800
5,660
2,925
38,500
4,560
43,060
53,445
19,780
73,225
High Efficiency
Small
8,000
1,800
5,100
2,485
22,880
2,578
25,458
34,843
11,733
46,576
Large
8,000
1,800
7,500
4,005
86,790
9,660
96,450
109,755
24,075
133,830
CJI
Ol

-------
                                FIGURE  126




                     CAPITAL  COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS

                  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING


                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
    100000
CO
cc
o
o


te

8
_i
<
t
0.

o
     10000
      1000,
                              TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                COLLECTOR PLUS

                                AUXILIARIES
                                     COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
                                 10000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
         456

-------
                                FIGURE 127

                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
oc
O
O
O
O
100000
10000
1000













































































(OF
(




















»EF
:AF




















T(
!A
Jll




















31
Tl
'A




















•fi
N
L




















^L
G
(




















COST
COST PL
:HARGES)











us>^
/
/
OPERATING CO5

























/

?T



















/




















'
/



















/
A
f


















A





















/

/




















/
















s^
s^
yf _/
' /
of
'



































1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              457

-------
    500000.
                                FIGURE 128

                    CAPITAL COSTS  FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
                            (HIGH  EFFICIENCY)
     100000
CO
DC
fc
o
o
a.
<
o
     10000
      1000
                                TURNKEY SYSTEM
                               COLLECTOR  PLUS
                                 AUXILIARIES
                              COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
                                 10000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
          458

-------
                               FIGURE 129
                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000.
     100000
CO
cc
o
Q
te
o
o
     10000
      1000
     TOTAL COST-
OPERATING COST PLUS^
"""CAPITAL CHARGESnfer"
                                     OPERATING COST
    10000

 GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                              459

-------
                          TABLE  164

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
OF WET SCRUBBERS  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY  DRYING
                     (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size - 20              Sample Size - 2

                      Capital Cost = $94,550

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                     $  90,142                 $ 98,958
    75                       84,787                  104,313
    90                       74,307                  114,793
    95                       62,987                  126,113
                      Capital Cost = $197,800

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                     $168,127                 $227,473
    75                      132,086                  263,514
    90                      61,540                  334,060
460

-------
                                FIGURE 130


                   CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
         OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
DC
O
Q

te
8
Q.
<
O
100000
10000
1000































































































































































































































SJ
&
~^k
~€


















£
' ^
r
»•-.

















X
^
^

_—•

















X
/
^
**


-mm.
















/
4
*
'
^


•mm
















/
f
'
«•


r;
















X
•»»
X
• '


«
















^
y
^
^


•














X
^ x'
x,
<#^
^'



"•e- — -














90%
75%
VIE AN
75%



90%-













1000 10000 100000 3000G
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                 461

-------
                          TABLE 165

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
OF  WET SCRUBBERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
                      (HIGH  EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size - 20             Sample Size - 2

                      Capital Cost = $117,325

                                  Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit              Upper Limit
    50                    $92,036                 $142,614
    75                     61,321   -                173,329
    90                      1,200                  233,450
                      Capital Cost = $240,600

                                  Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                    $239,083                 $242,117
    75                     237,241                 243,959
    90                     233,635                  247,565
    95                     229,740                  251,460
462

-------
                                FIGURE 131


                   CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

         OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING

                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)

    500QQO.
cc
<
ws
O
O
_i
<

CL
<
O
100000
10000
1000








































































































































































































90% 1
75% .
MEAN •







^




/
75% '











91











)% (


>— '
J-—
^


/
f












J
/
1
1
1
p


•• •
X
y
/










I
1
1
1

r


m -
X
/








/
/
*
f








•
^
^
/







;
i
1











^M
•*
^«
/






/
1
/












*
•
**
y




/















m
&
04


I
/

















^
^ /
/
/
/








































1000 10000 100000 30000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              463

-------
                                   TABLE  166

                  FABRIC FILTER PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
            SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING SPECIFICATION
     The fabric filter is to remove entrained detergent particles from the exhaust gas of a
spray dryer processing conventional phosphate detergents. The flow of air and detergent in
the dryer is countercurrent.  The dryer is fired by natural gas. Before entering the filter, the
dryer exhaust gas passes through one or more high efficiency cyclones with a combined
efficiency of 90%. The recovered fines are returned to the process.

     The exhaust gas  from the cyclones will be brought to the filter by means of a fan. The
fabric filter is to be located outside of the building in an area free of space limitations. The
fan is to follow the filter and discharge into the base of a thirty foot stack.  The ducting to
the filter should be insulated to alleviate build-up.

     The fabric filter is to consist of a minimum of five compartments and will allow for
isolation of an individual compartment for cleaning during operation. Any  four of these
compartments should be capable of handling the full flow at designed differential pressure.
Each section  should also be capable of isolation  for maintenance and have provisions for
personal safety during filter operation. The collecting process is to be continuous and should
include the following:

     1.   Pulse jet  fabric filter or equal,  fully insulated, top removal design, compart-
         merited as  described above,  with a maximum air-to-cloth ratio  of 6/1 and  a
         design  differential pressure of 6 in.  w.c.

     2.   Insulated hoppers with a minimum side angle of 60° and a manual slide gate at the
         screw conveyor for isolation. The hopper should be strong enough to support a
         full load although in routine operation the hopper will not be full.

     3.   Insulate and heat trace entire system ductwork.

     4.   Carbon steel construction with manufacturer's standard prime paint applied.

     5.   An insulated screw conveyor equipped with a single rotary air lock.

     6.   A fan, located downstream of the filter sized with 20%  excess capacity when
         operating at the design pressure and 90% of the maximum recommended speed.
464

-------
                                  TABLE  167

                FABRIC FILTER OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR
           SOAP  AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING  SPECIFICATION
     Two  sizes of fabric filters are specified for the "high efficiency" level.  Vendors'
quotations should consist of one quotation for each of the two sizes, with a representation
of the efficiency expected for the unit quoted. The efficiency quoted may be better than the
"high efficiency" case.
Dryer Capacity, Ib/hr
Process wt, Ib/hr
Inlet Gas to Primary Collector
      Flow, ACFM
      Temperature, °F
      Flow, SCFM
      % Moisture (vol)
Inlet Sol ids Rate, Ib/hr
Inlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Inlet Gas to Fabric Filter
      Flow, ACFM
      Temperature, °F
      Flow, SCFM
      % Moisture (vol)
      Dew Point, °F
Inlet So/ids Rate, Ib/hr
Inlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Inlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
          Small

         20,000
         30,000

        30,290
           210
         23,960
            15
           616
          2.37

         29,840
           200
         23,960
            15
           132
          61.6
         0.24
         0.35
 Large

 80,000
120,000

121,150
  210
 95,840
    15
 2,464
  2.37

119,350
  200
 95,840
    15
   132
 246.4
 0.24
 0.35
Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Co/lection Efficiency, wt. %
Air-To-Cloth Ratio
High Efficiency

          2.56
          0.01
         0.015
         95.94
          6/1
 10.23
  0.01
  0.15
 95.85
  6/1
                                                                           465

-------
                        TABLE 168

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
FOR  FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %















Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost



















•








Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small

30,290
210
23,960
15

2.37
616

30,290
210
23,960
15

0.01
2.56
95.94*
35,278



11,558





4,905




35,375







87,116
Large

121,150
210
95,840
15

2.37
2,464

121,150
210
95,840
15

0.01
10.23
95.85*
138,250



31,293





13,993




126,393







309,929
466
             *Cleaning efficiency for
             efficient cyclone.
baghouse only; proceeded by 90%

-------
                                FIGURE 132



                    CAPITAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                  FOR SOAP AND  DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
    500000
V)
QC
O
Q


to'
O
u
Q.

<

O
100000
10000
1000













































































1




"U

















RNKEYSYSTEI\








/I >


COLLECTOR PLUS
AUXILIARIES










CO









LI









LE









C









T









OR ONLY










J\
'J
/














y
5


/
^ /
1














/



f

















/

>
/

f
















/
y

y

















/
/

/


















/
/
/



















/
/



















/
f
$
r









































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                   467

-------
00
                                                  TABLE 169

                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                            FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$8/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hr


Small






Large






High Efficiency
Small
8,000
290
290
1,300
719
2,019
1,075
1,075
3,932
3,932
7,316
8,712
16,028
Large
8,000
290
290
4,298
2,597
6,895
3,600
3,600
17,508
17,508
28,293
30,993
59,286

-------
                                FIGURE  133


                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS
                  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
    500000.
CO
DC
O
Q
8
100000
10000
1000
























































1
(




















•QT
OPE
AP


















AL
ER/
IT/

0















C
\T
^L

PE















:o
IIS
C

ER















S
1C
:h

A















T
i
\A

T















COST PLL
Df* CO\ 	 1
n(jtb)

ING COST















y
s

t
s
s
















/
>
s
<



















T



















/




















/

/



















/

/


















/

>



















/


















x
r/
*



/

































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                  469

-------
                           TABLE 170

        CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR  ONLY COST
OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT SPRAY  DRYING
    Population Size — 20              Sample Size — 2

                      Capital Cost = $35,277.5

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                     $ 24,022.1                $ 46,532.9
    75                       10,351.3                  60,203.7
                      Capital Cost = $138,250

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

     50                     $ 97,911.5                $178,589
     75                       48,916.7                 227,583
470

-------
                                FIGURE 134
               CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST

         OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP  AND DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
    500000
     100000
CO
tr
O
Q



fc
O
O
a.
<
O
     10000
      1000
         75%_

         50%-
         MEAN-
                                           75%J
        1000
10000
100000
300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              471

-------
                                   TABLE  171

                  FABRIC FILTER  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR
         SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING  SPECIFICATION
     The fabric filter is to remove entrained detergent from the exhaust gas of the cyclone
separator in the dry product pneumatic air conveying system. This device separates the air
from the  dried detergent beads being transferred from  the spray  dryer  to dry product
storage. Air used in the conveying system  is atmospheric air.  The  fines recovered by the
fabric  filter represent an economically significant amount and are to be returned to the
process.

     The exhaust gas from the separating device will be brought to the filter by means of a
fan.  The fabric filter is  to  be located outside of the building in  an area free of space
limitations. The fan is to follow the filter.

     The fabric filter is to consist of a minimum of five  compartments and will allow for
isolation of an individual compartment for cleaning during operation. Any four of  these
compartments should be capable of handling the full flow at designed differential pressure.
Each section should also be capable of isolation for maintenance and have provisions for
personal safety during filter operation. The collecting process is to be continuous and should
include the following:

     1.   Pulse jet  fabric filter or equal, top removal design, compartmented as described
         above, with a maximum air-to-cloth ratio of 6/1 and a design differential pressure
         of 6 in. w.c.

     2.   Insulated hoppers with a minimum side angle of 60P and a manual slide gate at the
         screw conveyor for isolation.  The hopper should be strong enough to support a
         full load, although in routine operation the hopper will not be full.

     3.   Insulate and heat trace entire system ductwork.

     4.   Carbon steel construction with manufacturer's standard prime paint applied.

     5.   An insulated screw conveyor equipped with a single rotary air lock.

     6.   A fan,  located downstream of the filter sized with 20%  excess capacity when
         operating at the design pressure and 90% of the maximum recommended speed.
472

-------
                                  TABLE  172

                FABRIC FILTER  OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR
         SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT  HANDLING SPECIFICATION
     Two  sizes of fabric  filters are specified for  the  "high efficiency" level.  Vendors'
quotations should consist of one quotation for each of the two sizes, with a representation
of the efficiency expected for the unit quoted. The efficiency quoted may be better than the
"high efficiency" case.
Pneumatic Air Conveying System
     Product Rate, Ib/hr
Inlet Gas to Fabric Filter
     Flow, ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     Flow, SCFM
     % Moisture (vol)
     Dew Point, °F
Inlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
Inlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Inlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
                                           Small
         20,000

         20,000
           WO
         18,900
           0.3
            15
           600
           3.5
           3.7
                              Large
80,000

80,000
  WO
75,700
  0.3
   15
2,400
  3.5
  3.7
Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
Collection Efficiency, wt. %
Air-To-Cloth Ratio
High Efficiency

           1.71
          0.01
          0.01
         99.80
          6/1
 6.86
 0.01
 0.01
99.80
 6/1
                                                                          473

-------
                       TABLE 173

     ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA  (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
FOR  FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %















Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other J
(4) Total Cost




























Small









































Large









































High Efficiency
Small

20,000
100
18,900
0.3

3.5
600

20,000
100
18,900
0.3

0.01
1.71
99.80
24,768


8,665






4,850




24,025







62,308
Large

80,000
100
75,700
0.3

3.5
2,400

80,000
100
75,700
0.3

0.01
6.86
99.80
98,993


24,338






10,200




91,400







224,931
474

-------
                                FIGURE  135



                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR  FABRIC FILTERS

                FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING
    500000
CO
DC
O
O


te
O
O
O
100000
10000
1000

































































TURNKE










Y

COLLECTO
AUXILIAR
CO









LLE









ECT









O























SY

R
E
R










F
5
C
















S-

>L
>l\
















C
FEM y/

us ^

LY














S^
/
f

/^
*/
<














r


A
/
/















/


>
'
/
















/
V
f

/

















/
^
/
r

















^
>
/i
/



















^
7
»T
)




















s
/




















/
',








































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                  475

-------
Ol
                                                  TABLE 174

                                  ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                            FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$8/hr
$6/hr




$.011/kw-hr






Small













Large













High Efficiency
Small
8,000
290
290
975
493
1,468
775
775

2,841

2,841
5,374
6,231
11,605
Large

290
290
3,250
1,740
4,990
2,700
2,700

11,704

11,704
19,684
22,493
42,177

-------
                                FIGURE 136




                     ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS


                FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING
    500000
CO

cc
O
Q



te
o
U
100000
10000
1000





































(Ol
CA

























































TAL COST
'ERATING (
PITAL CHA
Of
















:c
RC
>ERATING






















S
31














T
ES
C(
















>
s
r
PLUS
)
L
/
JSI














/


:/
s
r















/
X
s
s



















/



















/
/




















/

/


















f\

f
/•


















1

/
y

















A


,


















/


/

































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                     477

-------
                           TABLE 175

        CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST
OF FABRIC FILTERS  FOR  SOAP  AND  DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING
    Population Size - 20                Sample Size - 2

                      Capital Cost = $24,768.5

                                     Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower  Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $ 18,007.6               $ 31,529.4
    75                        9,795.99                39,741.0
                      Capital Cost = $98,993.5

                                     Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $ 63,815.5               $134,171
    75                       21,088.8                176,898
478

-------
                                FIGURE  137


               CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST

         OF FABRIC FILTERS  FOR SOAP AND DETERGENT PRODUCT HANDLING
    500000
CO
DC
O
Q


k
O
O
o.
<
o
100000
10000
1000































































































































































































7E














f
A
* V*i
50% y^
MEAN' fr
50% ^
t


/
/
y
^
»













f
t
>
f A
/



S'












>
/
y*
y
r

/


^**












/

V


/



^<












>
'
I
»
/


C
^


f













^
^
<
3






?f













^
/


.




<












,
>

^
'




«•
































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                             479

-------
                             REFERENCES
 1.  "World Soap, Detergent Production," Soap &  Chem. Specialties, 46:  p.
     40-4+; (Sept. 1970)

 2.  Duckworth,  R.  A.,  "Synthetic  Detergent Powders," Chem. and  Proc.
     Engineering, 51:4, p. 63-65+ (1970)

 3.  Silvis, S. T.; "Detergents," Chemical Week, 105:12; p. 72-4+, (1969)

 4.  Hatch,  L.  F., "What's Ahead for Synthetic Detergents,"  Hydrocarbon
     Processing. 47, 3, p. 93 (1968)

 5.  Marquis,  D.  M.,  "Make AOS  from  Olefins and  803,"  Hydrocarbon
     Processing, 47, 3, p. 109-114 (1968)

 6.  Hollis,  G.  L., "Domestic  Detergents: today-tomorrow," Chemistry and
     Industry; p. 1309-15; October 10, 1970

 7.  Kremers,  F.  J., and  Shultz, A.,  "Continuous Sulfonation with  Sulfur
     Trioxide," Soap and Chem. Specialties, 46: p. 44-6+ (1970)

 8.  Holzman, S. and Zoller, U., "Long Chain Alcohol Sulfates from Converter
     Gas," Soap and Chem. Specialties, 45, 9, p. 43-46+ (1969)

 9.  Gilbert, E. E., Sulfonation and Related Reactions, Interscience Publishers,
     N.Y., 1965

10.  Shreve, R.  N.,  The  Chemical  Process Industries, McGraw-Hill  Book
     Company, Inc. N.Y., 1956

11.  Danielson, John  A.,  Air  Pollution Engineering  Manual, Public Health
     Service, Cincinnati, 1967, p. 716-20.

12.  Spitz,  L.,  "Advances in  Saponification,  Drying  and   Soap Finishing
     Technology," Soap and Chem. Specialties 44: p. 60+ (October, 1968)

13.  Phelps, A.  H.,   "Air Pollution  Aspects  of  Soap   and  Detergent
     Manufacture," Journal of Air Pollution Control Association, 17, 8,  p.
     505-7 (1967)

14.  "Market Newsletter," Chemical Week, p. 33, October 18,  1972
480

-------
LIME KILNS

-------
6.   LIME KILNS

     The manufacture of lime is an ancient practice, dating back to the Roman,
Greek, and Egyptian civilizations. In the colonial period of America, lime was
manufactured  by burning  limestone in brick or masonry kilns dug out of the
side of a hill. The kilns used either a coal or wood fire at the bottom, and were
open  at  the top. Lime manufacture  did  not change substantially  until the
twentieth century, and most of the progress has been made since 1935.

     Today, the manufacture of lime is a  large industry using sophisticated
technical  control and making a  product of high quality and uniformity. The
manufacture   of lime  involves the burning  of  limestone (CaCC^   or
CaCOg-MgCC^)  to   release carbon dioxide  and  form quicklime  (CaO  or
CaO'MgO). There  are two types  of  limestone used to  produce lime.  The
limestone is  classified  as  "high calcium" or "calcite"  if the magnesium
carbonate content is less than 5%, and "dolomitic limestone" or "dolomite" if
the magnesium carbonate  content is 30 to 40%.(1) Figure 88 is a flowsheet
showing the manufacture of lime in its  entirety.(2)

     In the United States, limestone is calcined in either vertical or rotary kilns.
In 1964,  about  15% of the  open-market lime and over  50%  of the captive
market lime was produced in vertical  kilns.'31 In that year about 30% of the
11.4 million tons of lime produced was captive market lime.<2) This "captive
market" lime consists mainly of the lime produced and used in the alkali, sugar,
and pulp and paper industries.

     This section will discuss vertical limestone calcining kilns and those rotary
lime kilns used in the pulp  and paper industry. Other rotary kilns were studied
under NAPCA  Contract CPA70-150.
                           VERTICAL  KILNS

Process Description

     Vertical, or shaft, kilns are the oldest and most widely used type of lime
calcining kilns.  Consequently, the particulars of kiln design vary greatly. All
vertical kilns do operate similarly, however, and have four distinct zones from
top to bottom:

         1.   Stone storage zone
         2.   Preheating zone
         3.   Calcining zone
         4.   Cooling and discharge zone
                                                                    481

-------
                                                              FIGURE 138

SIMPLIFIED   FLOW  SHEET   OF  A   TYPICAL  LIME   MANUFACTURING   OPERATION
 ro
                    LIME MANUFACTURING
                          KILN
                       i
                              PULVERIZING
                                                                                               COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS
LIMESTONE MINE
OR QUARRY


CRUSHING
AND
SCREENING
<
I
	 *•
....I
             STOCKPILES
                                                                               COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS
                                                          LIME KILN FEED
                                                      COMMERCIAL
                                                       PRODUCTS
LIME CRUSHING
AND SCREENING
                                                                                GRINDING AND
                                                                                PULVERIZING
LIME STORAGE
   BINS
COMMERCIAL
 PRODUCTS
                                                                     LIME HYDRATOR
                                                                        FEED
                                                                          i



GRINDING AND/ OR
AIR CLASSIFICATION



HYDRATE
STORAGE
BINS


COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS
BULK LOADING AND /OR
BAG LOADING

-------
These zones are  shown  in a schematic diagram  of a vertical  kiln contained in
Figure 139.(2-3)

     The flow of stone in the kiln is countercurrent to the flow of cooling air
and combustion gases. The stone is charged at the top and preheated by the  hot
exhaust gases from the calcining zone. The stone is burned in the calcining zone
in various ways which will be described below. Air blown  into the bottom of
the kiln  cools the lime before it is discharged. This air is heated sufficiently by
the time it reaches the calcining zone to be used as secondary combustion  air.
The lime is discharged to cars on tracks or to conveyor belts, and either shipped
or further processed by hydrating.

     The limestone  is usually  charged to the kiln  continuously  by inclined
conveyor belt,  although some  older kilns  still are charged in batches by skip
hoist. Modern vertical kilns are enclosed and vent exhaust  gases through flues
or dampers.  In these kilns either a  forced or induced draft moves the gases
through  the  kiln. There are  some old kilns left that are open at the top, but
they  have  serious disadvantages. Winds interfere with the  draft, sometimes
causing downdrafts, or rains wet the stone charge.

     The hot exhaust gases rising from the calcining zone contain more than
enough  heat for preheating, and  the excess is frequently recycled to the
calcining zone and mixed with  cooling air  to be used as secondary  combustion
gas.  This exhaust gas recirculation is one reason  that emission rates from
enclosed vertical kilns are generally lower than those of rotary kilns.

     In most modern lime kilns, gaseous rather than solid fuels are employed.
This  prevents a  reduction  in  quality due  to  fuel  ash.  The  gaseous fuels
employed are natural gas, fuel oil, or producer gas.  Natural gas is  preferred in
the United States. Most modern natural gas and oil  fired kilns are equipped
with center burners on two or  four sides of the kiln in the calcining zone. Side
burners are usually used also.  This arrangement provides good uniformity in
temperature throughout the  calcining zone, improving kiln performance, fuel
efficiency,  lime quality, and kiln capacity.  Producer gas kilns  burn  solid  fuel in
separate  furnaces. The fuel  is burned with a  deficient air supply, or with an
air-steam  mixture,  producing  carbon  monoxide and  hydrogen.  This  hot
combustible  gas is burned in the calcining zone, either undiluted or diluted
with primary air.

     There are two types of kilns where solid fuel is in direct contact with the
limestone. The standard vertical kiln, which was common in  the United States
up to  1940, is largely of the direct hand fired type. These kilns are manually
                                                                     483

-------
                                  FIGURE 139

                         VERTICAL LIME  KILN
                   STONE
                 CHARGING
                    DOOR
                                                                 ZONES
         EXHAUST
KILN  HOUSING
                       LIME
                    DISCHARGE
                                  KILN
                                 SHAFT
                                  FIRE BOX
                                     OR
                                  FUEL PORTS
                                                                STORAGE
                                                               PREHEATING
                                                        FINISHING
                                                               CALCINING
                                                                COOLING
                                                                  j
        484

-------
fueled by  periodic  coal  shoveling.  Usage of kilns of this  type is  declining
because  of  considerable  manual  labor,  low  kiln  capacity,  poor  thermal
efficiency, and inadequate quality and uniformity of lime.(3> The second type
of solid  fuel kiln  is the mixed feed kiln. This  kiln is widely used in Europe
although it produces a generally poorer grade of lime. The fuel used  in mixed
feed kilns  is usually anthracite coal or a metallurgical grade of low reactivity
coke. The fuel is comparable in size with the limestone  and the two are
intimately  mixed  in  fixed  proportions  before  charging. The overriding
advantage  of a mixed  feed  kiln  is its fuel  economy. It has the lowest fuel
consumption of any type of  lime  kiln, and is a  great improvement over earlier
solid fuel kilns. In these older  solid  fuel kilns, substantial heat losses occur as
the result of carbon  monoxide formation. Carbon dioxide reacts with hot fuel
to   form    carbon    monoxide   with   a   subsequent    loss  of   heat
(C02 +  C + heat -> 2CO). For 1% CO in the exhaust gas, the heat loss will be
about  240,000 Btu/ton  of  lime.<3) The intimate fuel-limestone mixing in
mixed feed kilns greatly reduces the possibility  of fuel-carbon dioxide contact
and the occurrence of the resultant heat loss.

     Vertical kilns range from 6.5 to 25 ft in outside diameter and 16 to 100 ft
in height; an average size is 12 ft in  diameter by 50 ft in height. Lime kilns are
generally constructed  of insulated refractory brick, and a  heavy steel boiler
plate  casing.  Kiln  capacities  vary  greatly;  the older standard kilns  have
capacities from 1/4  to  1/2 ton/day/ft2 cross-sectional area, while large direct
gas fired kilns  have  1  to 2 ton/day/ft2 capacities. The majority of kilns  have
capacities ranging from 50 to 250 plus tons of lime/day.(3) Some kilns recently
built have  capacities up  to 680 ton/day.(4)  Fuel consumption for direct and
indirect gas fired kilns  range from 4 to 6 million  Btu/ton of lime produced. For
large mixed feed kilns, consumption  of 3 million Btu/ton has been reported.(3)

     The vertical kiln has several advantages over a rotary kiln:

     1.    Lower fuel consumption.

     2.   Greater flexibility due to smaller producing units.

     3.   Lower first cost.

The major disadvantages are:

     1.   Cannot effectively handle small  feed sizes.

     2.   Chemical reactivity is less, producing less product uniformity.

     3.    Longer calcining time required.

     4.    Lesser degree of quality control  possible.
                                                                      485

-------
Process Chemistry

     The calcination of limestone involves thermal decomposition and can be
represented by the following reactions:

     1.   CaC03(c) +  Heat           J  CaO(c) + C02(g)
         (high calcium limestone)          (high calcium quicklime)

     2.   CaC03 • MgC03(c) +  Heat   J  CaO • MgO(c) +  2C02(g)
         (dolomitic limestone)             (dolomitic quicklime)

There are three essential factors in limestone decomposition kinetics:(3>

     1.   The limestone must  be heated to the dissociation temperature of
         carbonates. This  temperature is  1648° F for  calcite and from 930 to
         1480° F for dolomite. The dissociation temperature of dolomite is
         dependent on the amount of magnesium carbonate (MgCC^) present,
         as it dissociates  at  lower temperatures  (756 to 896° F).  The heat
         required to reach the theoretical minimum dissociation temperature
         is approximately 1.5 million Btu/ton of high calcium quicklime and
         1.25 million Btu/ton of dolomitic quicklime produced.

     2.   The minimum dissociation temperature must be maintained through-
         out the reaction. The  heat consumed here is about  2.77 million
         Btu/ton of  high  calcium  quicklime  and 2.6  million Btu/ton  of
         dolomitic   quicklime  produced.  In  practice,  however,  higher
         temperatures are maintained and more heat is consumed. Inadequate
         control of the temperature will lead to fuel  losses and poor product
         quality. The  correct  temperature depends  on  the limestone being
         calcined,  but generally ranges from  1900 to 2450°F for calcium
         carbonate  and 1750 to 2300° F for dolomitic limestone.

     3.   The CC>2  gas that  is produced must  be removed to  minimize
         carbonate reformation, as the reaction is reversible.
Raw Materials and Products

     The feed to lime kilns consists of the carbonates of calcium or magnesium,
which  are obtained  from  natural deposits of  limestone, marble, chalk,
dolomite, or oyster and clam shells. Limestone is generally used as the  raw
material for lime manufacture. Some plants, particularly along the Gulf Coast,
486

-------
use oyster shells. Limestone deposits exist throughout the country, but only a
small  portion  are of  sufficient  purity to  be used  in  lime manufacture.
Table 176'21 presents some typical lime kiln feed compositions.

     Greater than 90% of the limestone  quarried is from open  pit operations.
The remainder is extracted  from underground mines.'21  The stone  that  is
quarried contains as few impurities as possible. These impurities include silica,
alumina, iron and clay.

     The size distribution used in vertical lime  kilns is critical. Ample voids
must be present in the bulk limestone to insure unrestricted circulation of flue
gases and air around and through the stone  and lime. This is necessary for
uniform heat transfer  and expulsion of the CC^. The  ideal  external void
fraction is 45%.<3) A range of particle sizes  may have  lower void fraction (i.e.
the  small particles fill  in between the large ones) than either  uniform large
particles or  uniform small particles. Stones less than 2 inches in diameter can-
not  be  successfully calcined in a vertical  kiln.  Stone sizes range from 8 by  12
in. to a  minimum of 2 by 4 in., with an average size being 4 by 8 in.'3*

     Limestone and lime have as many different uses in industry as any  natural
substance. Lime is a close second to sulfuric acid  in total production among the
basic chemicals.  Lime is used in building construction, agriculture, and highway
construction. Lime is used in the pulp and paper industry to  causticize the
waste sodium carbonate solution in the sulfate process. This particular process
will be discussed in detail in the second half of this section. Lime is also  used in
the manufacture of pig iron, steel,  magnesia or magnesium metal, alkalis, sugar,
calcium carbide, insecticides,  bleaches, and other chemicals. Lime, in terms of
tonnage, is  the main water treatment  chemical. It  is employed in water
softening, purification,  coagulation,  neutralization of acid  wastes,  sewage
treatment, and treatment of industrial waste water. Lime has also been  used in
the form of a slurry for the scrubbing of stack gases to remove SC>2, HCI, HF,
and other acidic gases.

     Most lime produced is high calcium quicklime of at  least 90% calcium
oxide content.  Table 177 shows a typical composition of high calcium and
dolomitic quicklime.'31 The  composition of the lime  varies depending on  its
intended usage. This composition is controlled by proper selection of the stone
and specific  conditions of the  manufacturing process used.
                     ROTARY KILNS (PULP MILL)

     Rotary lime sludge kilns are widely used in alkali pulping processes in the
                                                                      487

-------
                            TABLE 176

              TYPICAL ANALYSES OF  HIGH CALCIUM
           AND DOLOMITIC  COMMERCIAL LIMESTONES*21
                                  High
                                 Calcium          Dolomitic
Component                         Wt.%             Wt.%

Calcium carbonate
  (CaC03)                        97.40            52.34

Magnesium carbonate
  (MgCO3)                         1.25            47.04

Iron oxide
  (Fe203)                         0.11             0.04

Aluminum oxide
  (AI203)                          0.35             0.20

Silica (Si02) plus
  acid insolubles                     0.95             0.26

Loss on ignition (C02)               43.40            47.67
488

-------
                            TABLE 177

            TYPICAL COMPOSITION OF HIGH CALCIUM
                  AND DOLOMITIC QUICKLIME131
Component

CaO

MgO

Si02
Fe203
AI203

C02

S03

p
 High Calcium,
 Range, wt.%

93.00 to 98.00

 0.30 to 2.50

 0.20 to 2.00

 0.10 to 0.40

 0.10 to 0.60

 0.40 to 2.00

 0.01 to 0.10

 trace to 0.05
  Dolomitic,
 Range, wt.%

55.00 to 57.50

37.00 to 41.00

 0.10 to 1.75

 0.05 to 0.40

 0.05 to 0.50

 0.40 to 2.00

 0.01 to 0.10

 trace to 0.05
                                                              489

-------
pulp and paper industry. These processes basically convert wood to wood pulp
by "cooking" the wood in an alkaline solution known as the cooking liquor.
The function  of the kiln is to reburn lime for use in the regeneration of this
wood cooking liquor.

     Alkali pulping is a  term  applicable to  two similar processes used in the
preparation of cellulose wood pulp. These are the sulfate pulping (Kraft) and
the soda pulping processes. In both processes, sodium hydroxide is the major
ingredient in the cooking liquor. The main difference between the processes is
that sodium  sulfate is used in the former instead of sodium carbonate as a
make-up chemical  for the cooking liquor.  The sulfate is reduced to sulfide, so
in the sulfate process,  not only  caustic  soda but also sodium sulfide is a
component of the cooking  liquor.  A simplified sulfate pulping flow diagram is
shown in Figure 140.(5i6)
Process Description

     In sulfate  pulping, wood  chips  are  cooked  in  a digester at elevated
temperature and pressure. The "fresh" cooking liquor  is a solution  of NaOH,
Na2S,  and IV^COg,  called the "white  liquor."  The  spent  liquor from the
digester is separated  from the pulp. This liquor, known as "black liquor,"
contains  95 to 99% of the alkali, mostly  in the form of sodium carbonate.
Various organic  sulfur compounds in combination with sodium sulfide are also
present, along with other numerous impurities. A portion of this "black liquor"
is recycled back to the digester. The actual cooking liquor will contain from 20
to 50% of this recycled liquor. The remainder of the black liquor is recovered
and regenerated.

     The  recovery of  the cooking chemicals involves the concentration  of the
black liquor by evaporation, burning of the concentrated liquor in a furnace to
convert the sodium  compounds to IS^CC^ and Na2S, and causticizing the
carbonate "smelt" with lime  to reform the white liquor. The  lime used in
causticizing is regenerated by  burning the CaCOg mud, which is generated in
causticizing, in  a rotary lime  kiln. In this way, about 90 to 95% of the total
sodium and 50% of the total sulfur are recovered.(7) Since the function of the
lime kiln  is an  integral part  of the black liquor recovery  process, the total
process will be described briefly. A flow chart of the process is shown in  Figure
141.

     The molten smelt from the recovery furnace is removed and dissolved in
water and weak liquor from the causticizer, forming "green liquor." This liquor
490

-------
                                                          FIGURE 140

                               SIMPLIFIED   KRAFT  MILL   FLOW   DIAGRAM
                               CHIPS
CO
                                                           BLOW  HEAT
                                                           RECOVERY
                               BLACK  LIQUOR  RECYCLE
                                                                                                                TO PULP
                                                                                                              BLEACHING
                                                                                                               PROCESSING
                      ELECTROSTATIC
                       PRECIPITATOR
                           DIRECT
                           EVAPORATOR
                    I
"
COMBUSTION
  GASES

>
GREEN 3 EW
LIQUOR

Y
ER
SLAK
                                                                                                  OXIDATION
                                                                                                   TOWER
                                                  MULTIPLE
                                                   EFFECT
                                                  EVAPORATOR
                                                           I
                                                                                         KILN
                                                                                        EXHAUST
                                                                                EMISSION
                                                                                CONTROL
                                                                                DEVICE
                                                                                                   QUICKLIME

K.
N
WHITE
LIQUOR
STORAGE
(AKE-UP



TDI<
A, SO 4. ' ' '
* RECOVERY
FURNACE




.SOLVER
WHITE LIQUOR

CAL
                                                    MUD     MAKE-UP
                                                   FILTER    LIMESTONE

                                                       	I
                                                                                           LIME KILN

-------
                                                       FIGURE 141

                             KRAFT   PULPING  RECAUSTICIZING
                                               FLOWSHEET
£
NJ
              __ GREEN LIQUOR
                                  GREEN LIQUOR

                                    CLARIFIER
                                                             1

                                                              FROM
                                                             RECOVERY
                                                              FURNACE
                                                               i

	 	
DREGS
WASHER





-]






_ GREEN
~~ LIQUOR

SMELT
DIS SOLVER



           LIME
          SLAKER
                CLASSIFIE
                                                         TO WASTE
                                                           WHITE
                                                          LIQUOR
 GRIT
 TO
WASTE
                                    CAUSTICIZERS
r
                                                       WHITE
                                                       LIQUOR
                                                    ATMOSPHERE
                                     WHITE LIQUOR
                                      — —   — —'
                                      CLARIFIER
           QUICKLIME
                                                                                                            WASH
                                                                                                            WATER
                                                                                         1
TWO STAGE
  —.  ^-	—

LIME MUD

 WASHER
                                             EMISSION
                                             CONTROL
                                             DEVICE

-------
will contain 20% Na2C03 and 5% Na2S by weight, expressed as I\la20.(8> The
green liquor is clarified to remove such impurities as Fe203, silica, alumina,
unburned carbon, and furnace brick. Quicklime from the lime kiln is converted
to slaked lime by mixing it with clarified green liquor. This mixture is sent to a
series  of agitated tanks known  as causticizers.  In  these  vessels,  calcium
hydroxide reacts with sodium  carbonate to  form  sodium  hydroxide and
calcium carbonate. The sodium sulfide does not react in this mixture. The lime
sludge is separated from the clean white liquor by a clarifier. The lime sludge
mainly consists of calcium carbonate and sodium hydroxide. This lime mud  is
washed countercurrently, finally with fresh water on  a rotary vacuum filter.
The sodium  content  should be  reduced by washing from about 22 wt.% to
about 0.5 wt.% dry basis, but the lime  mud  may have about 1.5 to 3.0 wt.%
sodium (in the form of Na20) due to inadequate washing.(8)

     The soda pulping process operates in a similar way with the exception that
sodium carbonate is used in place of sodium sulfate and, therefore, no sulfides
or sulfates are present at any stage of the operation.

     The lime sludge  from the vacuum filter, which contains 55 to 60% solids,
is  the feed material for the rotary lime kiln. Some fresh  limestone is usually
also burned  to replenish lost lime.  The kiln, which is supported by rollers, is a
long inclined horizontal cylinder made  from refractory brick and lined with
steel plates.  Most kilns rotate at a  speed of about 1 rpm. These kilns range in
size from 6 to 11  ft in diameter and 100 to 325 ft in length.(9) Kilns in these
ranges produce from 30 to 175 tons of lime per day. Kilns  built today are a bit
larger. The lime flows countercurrent to the heat, the lime  mud entering at one
end  and the hot air entering at the other. Most kilns are fired  by either oil or
natural gas. The kiln is composed of three fairly distinct zones:'7'

          1.   The feed and drying zone.
          2.   The central or preheating zone.
          3.   The calcining zone.

     In  the  drying zone, steel chains are  commonly  used to facilitate  heat
transfer from the hot gases to the  lime mud. As the  kiln rotates, these chains
will  alternatively contact the hot gases and the mud. The  temperature in this
end  of the kiln  is kept below 1,000°F. In the preheating zone, the  lime will
pass through a  plastic  or  semi-liquid state,  forming pellets up to  1 in. in
diameter  under  normal conditions.181  The  operating temperature  in the
preheating and calcining zones is generally in the 2,000 to 2,400° F range, with
higher  temperatures being found in shorter kilns. The quicklime is discharged
directly to the  slaker or to a surge bin  and then  to the slaker. A typical
composition of this reburned quicklime is shown in Table 178.(1 °'
                                                                     493

-------
                         TABLE 178




      TYPICAL COMPOSITION OF  REBURNED QUICKLIME1101
Component
CaO
Na20
MgO
AI203
Wt.%
93
2
1
1
        Fe203
        Si02
        C0
           2
494
          Total oxides            100

-------
Process Chemistry

     The process chemistry of rotary lime sludge kilns is generally the same as
vertical kilns. The heat requirement is greater because the lime mud contains 40
to 45% water. The  heat  requirement for lime with 40%  water is around
6,740,000 Btu/ton of lime.171

     Several reactions take  place in the different  stages of  the black  liquor
recovery process.

     1.   Recovery furnace

         a.   Various organic combustion reactions.

         b.   Na20  +  C02 -> Na2C03

         c.   Na2S04  + 2C  -> Na2S + 2C02

     2.   Slaker

         a.   CaO + H20  + Ca(OH)2

         b.   Ca(OH)2 +  Na2C03 + 2NaOH  + CaC03 4-
                      (small extent)

     3.   Causticizer

         a.   Ca(OH)2 +  Na2C03 1 2NaOH  + CaC03 4-

     4.   Lime Kiln
a.   CaC0
                             C0
              NATURE OF THE  GASEOUS DISCHARGE

    The air pollutants emitted from both types of lime kilns consist mainly of
lime dust and the products of combustion. Emissions from a lime sludge kiln
will also include a small percentage of sodium and sulfur compounds. As a
result of this, odor can be a problem of lime sludge kiln exhausts.

    The contaminants in vertical lime kiln gases will be similar to those found
                                                                 495

-------
 in rotary lime kiln exhaust gases. The emissions from a vertical kiln will present
 less of a problem for the following reasons:

     1.   A portion of the exhaust gas from a vertical kiln is usually recycled
          to salvage its heat content.

     2.   The particulate emissions  from a vertical kiln are not as small as in
          the  rotary  kiln  case  because  there is  much  less attrition in the
          former than  in the latter.


     3.   The temperature of the exhaust gas from a vertical  kiln is in the 225
          to 310° F range, as opposed  to a rotary  kiln exhaust temperature of
          300 to 1,200°F.

     The exhaust  gases principally consist  of carbon  dioxide,  water, and
 nitrogen. Depending  on  the type  of  fuel used, various  other  gaseous
 contaminants will  be present. Typical  exhaust compositions from a gas fired
 lime sludge  kiln are presented in Table 179.<12) The relative usage of fuels for
 limestone  calcining  is  given  in   Table 180.(3)   Oil  and  natural  gas are
 predominantly used in lime sludge kilns.

     If sulfur-containing coal, coke, or oil is burned, a small amount of sulfur
 dioxide and sulfur  trioxide will be present. For coal containing 1 to 6 wt.%
 sulfur, sulfur dioxide will  be present  in the exhaust gases in concentrations
 ranging from 0.05  to 0.30 vol.%.'1)  When coke and coal are used, carbon
 monoxide (in the 1% range) and other  combustible gases may be present in the
 exhaust gases. These emissions result mainly from uneven  fuel  distribution, and
 have been largely eliminated in the  mixed feed vertical kiln. In modern oil and
 gas fired shaft kilns, virtually no unburnt fuel is present  in the exhaust gas.<4)
 Nitrogen oxides will be present, regardless of the fuel burned, in concentrations
 ranging from 100 to 1,400 ppm.(1'  The NOX concentration will increase as the
 amount of excess air used in combustion increases.

     Various sulfur compounds are  also found  in the exhaust gases from lime
 sludge kilns. Typical  concentration  ranges and averages for these compounds,
which  are responsible for kiln odors, are  given in Table  181.(17) However, in
 comparison  with other  odor sources in the  pulp mill, lime kiln odors are not
 significant. Hydrogen sulfide is the major odorous gas emitted from the kiln. It
 is caused by the presence of sodium  sulfide in the lime mud and is produced by
the following reaction:

                Na2S + C02 +  H20   +   Na2C03 +  H2S
 496

-------
                          TABLE 179

          TYPICAL COMPOSITIONS OF EXHAUST GASES
                 FROM LIME SLUDGE KILNS112'
Component                                Vol.%
H20
CO2

CO

02
200 TPD*
37.1
10.4
0.0
3.2
49.3
100.0
292 TPD**
30.0
15.3
0.5
0.2
54.0
100.0
   Excess air very high, kiln exhaust temp, high (415° F).

   Excess air less than 5%, exhaust temp. 350° F.
                                                           497

-------
                           TABLE 180

                  BREAKDOWN OF FUEL USAGE
              IN LIME  ROCK KILNS  DURING 1962(3)
         Fuel                         Percent*

         Natural gas                      36

         Coke                           30

         Bituminous coal                  22

         Oil                             6

         Unspecified and miscellaneous       6
                                      100
 *0f total 1962 fuel usage (weight) by lime rock kilns.
498

-------
                        TABLE 181

     TYPICAL GASEOUS SULFUR CONCENTRATION  RANGES
     AND AVERAGES  FOR LIME SLUDGE KILN EXHAUST117)
Pollutant                   Average (ppm)        Cone. Range (ppm)

H2S                          48                 0 to 100

CH3SH                         2                 0 to 3

CH3SCH3                       1                 0 to 1


-------
 If the temperature  is high enough, some of the hydrogen  sulfide will be
 oxidized to sulfur dioxide, much of which is absorbed in the  lime mud. This
 oxidation can be presented as follows:(13'

                    2H2S +  302   +  3S02 + 2H20

 Exit gas temperatures for  chain  equipped lime  sludge kilns  will be 300 to
 400° F for long kilns and 400 to 500° F for short kilns. For short kilns without
 a chain system, exhaust temperatures will be as high as 1,200°F.(9)

    The gas leaving lime kilns carries variable amounts of dust. The rotary lime
 sludge  kiln exhaust will carry a greater amount of dust than the vertical  lime
 kiln exhaust for the reasons discussed previously.

    A vertical lime  kiln will  generally emit particles  in the amount of 1% of
 the weight of the lime produced.'11' Actual particulate loadings have been
 reported  to range from 0.3 to 1.0 gr/SCF(2) and, for very large kilns, from 2.5
 to4.4gr/SCF.(4)

    Particulate  loadings in lime sludge kilns range from about  3  to 20
 gr/SCF.<13> 14)  Several compositions of the particulate matter emitted from
 high calcium  limestone calcining kilns are shown in Tables 182 and 183,(1>3)
and from  lime  sludge  kilns in  Table 184. (12>14)  It  is evident  that the
 composition of the particulate matter can vary greatly.  This is especially true of
 lime sludge kiln emissions, and is due in these cases to the variation  in the
composition of the lime  mud feed.  The  most important variation in  the  lime
 mud composition is in  the  amount  of  sodium sulfide present,  which is
controlled by the degree of washing which the lime mud receives.

    An approximate relationship  between process weight and gas flow in a gas
 fired lime  sludge kiln  is given  in Table 185.  Table 186 shows a theoretical
 relationship between  exhaust  flow rates  and  vertical lime  calcining  kiln
capacities. These rates were calculated from  an actual operating example'2) and
the heating content of  various  fuels.  Excess primary combustion air was
assumed  to be 10%, with 30% more air required for cooling  and even  heat
distribution. The lime produced  was assumed to be 95 wt.% CaO, and the
exhaust gas to contain 30.1 vol.%  C02, 2.5 vol.% O2  and 0 vol.% CO on a dry
basis, with the remainder being nitrogen and water vapor.
           AIR POLLUTION  CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

     The major contaminant in vertical  lime kiln exhaust gas is lime dust. This
500

-------
                        TABLE  182

             TYPICAL EMISSIONS OF A NATURAL
              GAS-FIRED LIME ROCK KILN*1-31
Component

CaO

CaC03

Ca(OH)2

MgO

CaS04

Other

                           100.0              100.0
High Calcium
Wt%
66.3
23.1
6.4
1.4
1.2
1.6
Dolomitic
Wt%
7.2
64.3
—
28.2
0.3
—
                                                      501

-------
                          TABLE  183

            TYPICAL EMISSIONS OF A PULVERIZED
              COAL-FIRED LIME  ROCK KlLN(1-3)
Component
Total oxides (CaO and MgO)

Total carbonates (CaCOg and MgCOg)

CaO chemically combined in compounds,
   including some
Si02

R2°3

Carbon
SO-
   Total
Wt.%

 37

 25


 10

 10

  5

 12

  1

100
502

-------
                          TABLE 184


     VARIOUS COMPOSITIONS OF LIME SLUDGE KILN DUST



                             Dolomitic1121         High Calcium1141
Component                      Wt.%                Wt.%


Available CaO                     6.4

CaC03                          60.8               60.3 to 91.7

Na2C03                         1.4                7.7 to 34.1


MgC03                         18.7

Na2S04                         -                 0.2 to 4.4


Fe203  +  AI203                  2.9            \
                                              S   0.3 to 1.2
Silica and other impurities           9.8            -^

                             100.0                 100.0
                                                            503

-------
                         TABLE 185

             TYPICAL EXHAUST GAS PRODUCTION
           FOR SEVERAL LIME SLUDGE KILN SIZES
       Lime Produced, Ton/Day        Exhaust Gas, DSCFM

              60                     7,150

             120                     14,500

             200                     25,000

             290                     31,000

             400                     50,000
504

-------
                          TABLE 186

        THEORETICAL LIME ROCK KILN EXHAUST RATES
                    FOR DIFFERENT  FUELS
                                  Exhaust Flow, SCFM (60° F)

 Kiln                    Natural      Fuel     Bituminous
Capacity                   Gas        Oil         Coal     Coke
 25                      1,100     1,280     1,400     1,500

100                      4,400     5,125     5,600     6,000

250                     11,000    12,800    14,000    15,000

350                     15,400    17,940    19,600    21,000

700                     30,800    35,875    39,200    42,000
                                                           505

-------
dust is relatively large, and in many cases, the bulk of paniculate matter can be
removed by a multiple dry cyclone unit. Collection efficiencies range from 75
to  85%.'3)  Table  .187  contains a typical  size distribution  of particulate
emissions from lime rock kilns.'11) The relatively large particle size is mainly
due to  the fact that  there is  much less attrition in a vertical  kiln than  in a
rotary kiln.

     Collection  efficiencies will  be higher if wet scrubbers, fabric filters, or
electrostatic  precipitators are used. All three types of equipment have been
used successfully but precipitators have not been applied commercially in great
numbers. Where  high sulfur containing coal or oil is burned, wet scrubbers
using an alkaline scrubbing solution have the advantage of controlling sulfur
dioxide emissions as well  as the particulate emissions.

     The two main types of emissions from lime sludge kilns which  must be
controlled  are the "soda fume" and the lime dust.  The soda fume consists of
fine particles of sodium compounds which are volatilized at the hot end of the
kiln. The lime particles are larger and are entrained in the exhaust gas.

     Wet scrubbing is the most widely  used method for controlling these
emissions. The cyclonic, variable orifice, and Venturi types of  scrubbers have
all  been successfully employed. Diagrams of these scrubbers are shown in
Figures 142, 143, and 144.(15)

     Pressure drops of 15  to  17 in. w.c. across the scrubber are sufficient to
remove about 99% of the lime dust but only 70 to 80% of the soda fume.'1 3)
This small  amount  of soda fume emission can cause opacity problems due to
the small size of the particles.  The problem of sodium loss can be  handled
several ways. The easiest method is to  properly wash the lime mud before it is
burned,  greatly reducing the amount of sodium  sulfide  put  into the kiln.
Electrostatic  precipitators can show better soda fume collection efficiency,  but,
so far, they have not been widely used.
506

-------
                   TABLE 187

    TYPICAL PARTICLE  SIZE  DISTRIBUTION  OF
    VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILN EMISSIONS1111
  Size Range,              Wt.% of Particles
   microns                  in Range

greater than 44               28

  20 to 44                  38

  20 to 20                  24

   5 to 10                   8

less than 5                    2

                          100
                                                     507

-------
                          FIGURE 142




          OYOLONIC.  GAS  SORUBBEIR
                    GAS OUTLET
            OUTLET
INLET
                     LIQUID
                                               OAS  INLET
508

-------
                  FIGURE 143

     VARIABLE ORIFICE  SCRUBBER
           INLET CAS
ADJUSTABLE
 ORIFICE
                               OFF GAS
                               LIQUOR
                               OUTLET
                                         509

-------
                                                          FIGURE 144
                                              LIME KILN VENTURI SCRUBBER SYSTEM
en
o
                                                                                 CYCLONIC
                                                                                 SEPARATOR
FRESH WATER OR
KILN  COOLING
WATER
                                                                                                           RECYCLE TO
                                                                                                        SMELT DISSOLVING
                                                                                                            TANK

-------
                     SPECIFICATIONS  AND COSTS

     Specifications  have been written for three abatement systems applied to
vertical  lime  rock  kilns:  wet  scrubbers,  fabric  filters,  and  electrostatic
precipitators. The model  plant sizes chosen for the precipitator specifications
were  larger than those chosen  for  both the fabric  filter and wet scrubber
systems.  This was done because  precipitators are economically attractive for
only the largest  sized vertical kilns. Cost data and equipment specifications for
vertical kilns are presented in Tables  188 to 201 and Figures 145 to 156.

     Two systems were specified for rotary sludge kilns in paper plants: wet
scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators. Since gas flows for rotary sludge kilns
are higher than  those for  vertical kilns,  the  model plant sizes chosen for both
abatement systems  were  the same. A  fabric filter system  was not  applied
because the high humidity of the exhaust  gas from  the  kiln causes blinding
problems.  Cost  data and equipment specifications are presented in Tables
202  to 211 and Figures 157  to 166.
                                                                      511

-------
                                   TABLE  188

                  WET SCRUBBER  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR

                  VERTICAL LIME  ROCK KILN SPECIFICATION


     The scrubber is to remove entrained limestone and lime dust from the exhaust gas of a
vertical lime rock kiln. The kiln is fired with natural gas. A portion of the hot exhaust gas
from  the calcining zone is recirculated for heat recovery. The kiln is fed with 6 to 8 in. sized
pieces of high calcium limestone.

     The exhaust gas is to be brought from the kiln exhaust ports to a fan located 20 feet
outside of the kiln enclosure. The fan outlet is to be five feet above grade. The scrubber will
be located beyond the fan in an area free of space limitations. The scrubber should be
designed to  withstand the discharge pressure developed by the fan.  Fresh makeup water is
available and is to be added to the recirculation tank. The scrubber is to operate so as to
reduce continuously the kiln outlet loading to the levels specified.

     The scrubbing system should include the following:

     1.   Venturi scrubber with a cyclonic entrainment separator.

    2.   Recirculation tank and pumps.

    3.   Slurry settler, which will handle a portion of the recirculation pump discharge,
         capable of producing a  reasonably thickened underflow product while returning
         water fully treated to minimize solids content. Slurry withdrawal should be set to
         maintain 10% (by weight) solids when the kiln is operating at design capacity.

    4.   Minimum of two filters to dewater the slurry product, capable of producing a cake
         with a minimum of 65%  (by weight) solids.

    5.   Necessary fans, dampers and motors.

    6.   Necessary controls.

    7.   Carbon steel construction.

    8.   Packing glands flushed with fresh water to prevent binding of the seals.
512

-------
                                  TABLE  189

                WET SCRUBBER  OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR

                  VERTICAL  LIME ROCK  KILN  SPECIFICATION
     Two sizes of wet scrubbers are to be quoted for each of two efficiency levels. Vendors'
quotations should consist of four separate and independent quotations.
     Kiln Capacity, ton/day
     Process wt., Ib/hr
     Inlet Gas
          Flow,ACFM
          Temp., °F
          Flow, SCFM
          % Moisture (vol)
     Inlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Inlet Solids Loading
          gr/ACF
          gr/DSCF
     Outlet Gas
          Flow,ACFM
          Temp., °F
          % Moisture (vol)
  Small

  100
 15,000

  7,300
   275
  5,300
     12
  80.7

   1.29
  2.03

  6,500
   130
     15
                           Case 1 —  Medium Efficiency*
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Loading
          gr/ACF
          gr/DSCF
     Collection Efficiency, wt. %
     Scrubber A P
   15.8

  0.28
  0.37
  80.4
  12 in.  w.c.
                             Case 2 - High Efficiency *
     Outlet So/ids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Collection Efficiency, wt. %
     Scrubber A P
  0.56
  0.01
 <0.015
 99.31
30 in. w.c.
  350
51,000

25,500
   275
18,400
     12
 288.5

   1.32
  2.08

22,700
   130
     15
  35.9

  0.18
  0.24
  87.6
  12 in.  w.c.
   1.94
   0.01
 <0.015
 99.33
30 in. w.c.
* See page 6 for definition of collection efficiency levels.
                                                                            513

-------
                     TABLE 190

   ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
  FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR VERTICAL LIME  ROCK KILNS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %















Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
* (d) Conditioning,
Equipment
* (e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering -\
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other J
(4) Total Cost



























LA Process Wt.
Small

7,300
275
5,300
12

1.29
80.7

6,500
130
5,850
15

0.28
15.8
80.4
6,699
4,407














22,767






33,873
Large

25,500
275
18,400
12

1.32
288.5

22,700
130
20,400
15

0.18
35.9
87.6
13,141
9,426














35,717






58,284
High Efficiency
Small

7,300
275
5,300
12

1.29
80.7

6,500
130
5,850
15

0.01
0.56
99.31
6,813
6,559














25,100






38,472
Large

25,500
275
18,400
12

1.32
288.5

22,700
130
20,400
15

0.01
1.94
99.33
13,357
11,546


'











38,083






62,986
514

-------
                                                   TABLE 191

                                   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)
                                FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost






$6/hr





$.011/kw-hr

$.25/M gal






LA Process Wt.
Small
8,000







1,123
619
619

3,448

191


3,639
5,381
3,387
8,768
Large
8,000







1,840
1,179
1,179

10,912

647


11,559
14,578
5,828
20,406
High Efficiency
Small
8,000







1,290
727
727

4,841

191


5,032
7,049
3,847
10,896
Large
8,000







2,007
1,283
1,283

15,726

647


16,373
19,663
6,299
25,962
Ul
CJ1

-------
                                 FIGURE 145
                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS

                       FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS

                            (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
e/j
cc
o
o


te

8
_l
<
t
o.

o
     10000
      1000
                                                    TURNKEY SYSTEM-
                                                    COLLECTOR PLUS

                                                      AUXILIARIES
                                                    COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                           100000
300000
          516

-------
                                FIGURE 146.
                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
C/J
oc
fc
8
     10000
      1000
                         TOTAL COST
                    (OPERATING COST PLUS
                      CAPITAL CHARGES)
        1000
   10000

GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
                                                              517

-------
                                FIGURE 147
                    CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK KILNS
                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000.
     100000
CO
cc
to-
O
U
o.
<
u
     10000
      1000
                                                 TURNKEY SYSTEM:
                                                  COLLECTOR PLUS
                                                    AUXILIARIES"
                                                 COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
                                 10000

                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
          518

-------
                                FIGURE 148
                     ANNUAL COSTS  FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
                             (HIGH  EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
O
Q
te
o
O
     10000
      1000
                                                      TOTAL
                    .(OPERATING COST PLUS
                      CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                                  OPERATING COST
   10000

GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                               519

-------
                           TABLE 192

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS  FOR  CAPITAL  COST
     OF  WET  SCRUBBERS FOR VERTICAL LIME  ROCK KILNS
                       (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size - 20              Sample Size - 3

                       Capital Cost = $38,471

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit              Upper Limit

    50                     $ 31,783                 $ 45,160
    75                       25,512                   51,431
    90                       15,862                   61,080
    95                        6,940                   70,003
                      Capital Cost = $62,986

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                Lower Limit              Upper Limit
    50                     $  50,488                 $ 75,485
    75                       38,770                   87,203
    90                       20,739                  105,234
    95                        4,065                  121,908
520

-------
                                FIGURE 149


                    CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

             OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS

                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
cc
o
a

te
o
o
a.
<
O
100000
10000
1000










































































1
^
4
«
•

















x'
,*•
X*
••-
-

















^
, ^
^
» '
<«
















ir
^'
-M
IT
9
•>'
















*
X
>

^
^
















F
^
«•

• '
«













**
^ ^
*^ ^*
^
• ^*
^
^^"














+*>'
rV*
f*#J

.*&*
^

*^€r
^•ft''













*'
i


^
~

^^<

-•*













. !
*


* l\





30°X
75°X






/IE AN




' 75%

- !











50°/





































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                               521

-------
                                    TABLE  193

                   FABRIC FILTER PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR

                   VERTICAL  LIME ROCK KILN  SPECIFICATION


      The fabric filter is to remove entrained limestone and lime dust from the exhaust gas of
 a vertical lime rock kiln.  The kiln is fired with natural gas. A portion of the hot exhaust gas
 from the calcining zone is recirculated for heat recovery. The kiln is fed with 6 to 8 in. sized
 pieces of high calcium limestone.

      The exhaust gas is to  be brought from the kiln exhaust ports to a  location 20 feet
 outside of the kiln enclosure by means of a fan. The  fabric filter will be located in an area
 free of space limitations.  The fan is to follow the filter and the fan outlet is to be five feet
 above grade.

      The fabric  filter  is to be compartmented to  allow for isolation  of an  individual
 compartment for cleaning during operation. A single compartment should have a maximum
 of 25% of the total collecting surface area. Each section should also be capable of isolation
 for maintenance and have provisions for personal safety during filter operation. No more
 than  two bags must be removed to permit access to all of the bags. The dust  collecting
 process should be continuous and should include the following:

      1.   Compartmented fabric filter operating with negative pressure.

     2.   Maximum air to cloth  ratio, when one compartment is down for cleaning, of 1.80.

     3.   Fiberglass bags.

     4.   Reverse air type cleaning system. This air is to be recirculated.

     5.   Insulation of entire filter system.

     6.   Trough  hoppers with  a minimum side and valley angle of 67.5°.  The hoppers
          should be capable of retaining the dust  collected over 24 hours of normal
          operation.

     7.   Oversized screw conveyor system which includes a 9 in. diameter (min) conveyor
          with a rotary air lock at its end.

     8.   Dust bin sized for seven days storage capacity which is to be adjacent to the filter
          and have a 15 foot clearance from grade.

     9.   Necessary fans and motors.
522

-------
                                  TABLE  194

                FABRIC FILTER  OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR

                  VERTICAL  LIME ROCK KILN  SPECIFICATION
     Two  sizes of fabric  filters are specified for the  "high efficiency" level.  Vendors'
quotations should consist of one quotation for each of the two sizes, with a representation
of the efficiency expected for the unit quoted. The efficiency quoted may be better than the
"high efficiency" case.
                                                Small
                      Large
     Kiln Capacity, ton/day
     Process wt., Ib/hr
     Inlet Gas
          Flow, ACFM
          Temp., °F
          Flow, SCFM
          % Moisture (vol)
          Dew Point, °F
     Inlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Inlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Inlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
   100
15,000

 7,300
   275
 5,300
    12
   122
  80.7
   1.29
  2.02
   350
51,000

25,500
   275
18,400
    12
   122
 288.5
   1.32
  2.02
                                  High Efficiency
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Collector Efficiency, wt. %
     Air-To-Cloth Ratio
  0.63
  0.01
 0.015
 99.22
 1.5/1
  2.19
  0.01
 0.015
 99.24
 1.5/1
                                                                             523

-------
                              TABLE 195

           ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
          FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK KILNS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s) Emer . Temp . a
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
* Electrical
Piping
* Insulation
Painting
Supervision
* Startup
Performance Test
Other












(4) Total Cost
LA Process Wt.
Small





















.r


















Large








































High Efficiency
Small

7,300
275
5,300
12

1.29
80.7

7,300
275
5,300
12

0.01
0.63
99.22
30,573

2,556

2,000


5,850








29,234





70,213
Large

25,500
275
18,400
12

1.32
288.5

25,500
275
18,400
12

0.01
2.19
99.24
78,427

6,213

2,000


5,850








52,318





144,808
*Not included.
       524

-------
                                FIGURE 150



                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                       FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
    500000
CO
cc
O
o

te

8
0.
<
o
100000
10000
1000






























— TURNKEY SYSTEM

COLI
AL
(













-ECTOR PLUi
JXILIARIES
:OLLE










CTC










)R











•»

ON

















s


/
/
L>



















I?
131
f
















S


/
/
















^



'
/














/*
_^s~
r
.S
^r*
SjS
S
*














^
gf
Se--S
JO
'




















































































































































































































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              525

-------
                                                     TABLE 196
                                    ANNUAL OPERATING COST  DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)

                                 FOR FABRIC FILTERS  FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
CJl
NJ
O)
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost






$6/hr





$.011/kw-hr








LA Process Wt.
Small





















Large





















High Efficiency
Small
8,000





9,000
200
9,200
400
400

1,980




1,980
11,580
6,821
18,401
Large
8,000





12,000
600
12,600
1,400
1,400

6,600




6,600
2-0,600
14,481
35,081

-------
                                FIGURE 151





                     ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS


                       FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
    500000
     100000
CO

cc
o
0


fe
o
u
     10000
      1000
                                                        TOTAL COST
                     (OPERATING COST PLUS


                       CAPITAL CHARGES)
   10000




GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                              527

-------
                                   TABLE  197

         ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR

                  VERTICAL  LIME ROCK KILN SPECIFICATION
     A single electrostatic precipitator is to remove entrained limestone and lime dust from
the exhaust gas of a vertical lime rock kiln. The kiln is fired with natural gas. A portion of
the hot exhaust gas from the calcining zone is recirculated for heat recovery. The kiln is fed
with 6 to 8 in. sized pieces of high calcium limestone.

     The exhaust gas  is to  be brought from the kiln  exhaust ports to a location 20 feet
outside of the kiln enclosure and 20 feet above grade  by means of a fan. The precipitator
will be at ground level in an area beyond the ductwork  which is free of space limitations.
The  fan will follow the precipitator. The precipitator is to reduce continuously the kiln
outlet loading to the levels specified.

     The precipitator system should include the following:

     1.   Precipitator provided with a minimum of two independent electrical fields in the
         direction of gas flow.

     2.   Trough type hoppers equipped with continuous dust removal by screw conveyor
         to a dust tank. The conveying system must be provided with suitable sealing for
         negative pressure operation.

     3.   Automatic voltage control.

     4.   Safety interlocked system which prevents access to the interior of the precipitator
         unless the electrical circuitry is disconnected and grounded.

     5.   Rapping system which is  adjustable in terms of both intensity and rapping period.

     6.   Necessary fans and motors.

     7.   Model study for precipitator gas distribution.
 528

-------
                                  TABLE  198

        ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR

                 VERTICAL  LIME ROCK KILN SPECIFICATION
     Two sizes of precipitators are to be quoted for each of two efficiency levels.  Vendors'
quotations should consist of four separate and independent quotations.
     Kiln Capacity, ton/day
     Process wt., Ib/hr
     Inlet Gas
       Flow, ACFM
       Temp., °F
       Flow, SCFM
       % Moisture (vol)
       Dew Point, °F
     Inlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Inlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Inlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
  Small

   350
51,000

25,500
   275
18,400
    12
   122
 288.5
   1.32
  2.08
                          Case 1 - Medium Efficiency'
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Collection Efficiency, wt. %
     Drift Velocity, fps
  35.9
  0.16
  0.25
  87.6
  0.25
                            Case 2 — High Efficiency *
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Collection Efficiency, wt. %
     Drift Velocity, fps
  2.19
  0.01
 0.015
 99.24
  0.25
   Large

    700
102,000

 50,900
    275
 36,700
     12
    122
  615.2
    1.41
   2.08
   40.0
   0.09
   0.14
   93.5
   0.25
   4.36
   0.01
  0.015
  99.29
   0.25
*Seepage 6 for definition of collection efficiency levels.
                                                                            529

-------
                       TABLE 199

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA  (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %



( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering "*
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
(4) Total Cost















»







LA Process Wt.
Small

25,500
275
18,400
12

1.32
288.5

25,500
275
18,400
12

0.16
35.9
87.6
52,705
23,713






-







45,140

•




121,558
Large

50,900
275
36,700
12

1.41
615

50,900
275
36,700
12

0.09
40
93.5
71,995
36,665














68,400






177,060
High Efficiency
Small

25,500
275
18,400
12

1.32
288.5

25,500
275
18,400
12

0.01
2.19
99.24
67,745
25,838














60,060






153,643
Large

50,900
275
36,700
12

1.41
615

50,900
275
36,700
12

0.01
4.36
99.29
95,515
38,225














82,350






216,090
 530

-------
                                                     TABLE 200


                                    ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)

                              FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr

$6/hr




$.011/kw-hi








LA Process Wt.
Small

2,000
2,000
1,072

1,072
600
600

1,320




1,320
4,992
12,156
17,148
Large

2,000
2,000
2,139

2,139
1,200
1,200

3,080




3,080
8,419
17,706
26,125
High Efficiency
Small

2,000
2,000
1,072

1,072
600
600

3,036




3,036
6,708
15,364.
22,072
Large

2,000
2,000
2,139

2,139
1,200
1,200

5,984




5,984
11,323
21,609
32,932
Ul
00

-------
                                FIGURE 152

              CAPITAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC  PRECIPITATORS
                      FOR  VERTICAL LIME ROCK  KILNS
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
oc
§
te
8
100000
10000
1000









































































































































































































_x
^


X

X















^


^G
^^
&"
















X
x
^

x
^
















>
^

J
X1
















T
*
*


-**
'
















UF
^
X

^1
^

















^
\
\
C(
*•

^


IK
1
1
DL
A




E
.L
U


COL















































Y SYSTEI\
ECTOR PI
XILIARIE

LECTOR (
















1
LUS
S

DNLYl














1000 10000 100000 3000G
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
          532

-------
                                FIGURE 153
              ANNUAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
                      FOR VERTICAL LIME  ROCK KILNS
                           (MEDIUM  EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
CO
cc
§
te
8
     10000
      1000
                                          ^
     TOTAL COST
(OPERATING COST PLUS
— CAPITAL CHARGES) —
                                OPERATING COST
       10000

   GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                          100000
300000
                                                               533

-------
                                FIGURE 154
              CAPITAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS

                      FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS

                             (HIGH  EFFICIENCY)
     500000
     100QOO
V)
cc
o
Q
O
O
O
     10000
      1000
                                                         -TURNKEY SYSTEM —
                                                          COLLECTOR PLUS —

                                                            AUXILIARIES
                                                           COLLECTOR ONLY-
        1000
    10000


GASFLOW,ACFM
100000
300000
          534

-------
                               FIGURE 155



              ANNUAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS

                      FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS

                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500QOO
C/3
CC
O
Q


te
O
U
100000
10000
1000























































































































































































































X















X



*s
/*


















>
x^

















>
(C
x



















^
)PE
Cfl
if



















s
1
R>
kp
/




















•o
M
T
^


O
















T
•|
A


*E
















A
SI
.


;F
















LCOST
G COST PI
CHARGES













.US
M


; ATI NG COST"











1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              535

-------
                           TABLE  201

            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
 OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
                      (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size - 20             Sample Size - 2

                      Capital Cost = $153,643

                                  Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                     $143,515                 $163,770
    75                      131,215                  176,070
    90                      107,138                  200,147
    95                      81,134                  226,151
                      Capital Cost-$216,090

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                     $185,127                 $247,053
    75                     147,521                  284,659
    90                      73,910                  358,270
    95                       5,594                  437,774
536

-------
                               FIGURE 156



                   CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST

         OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS  FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS

                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
cc
o
Q


te
o
O
u
100000
10000
1000






























































































































































































































*x
J**^
£
>V
~



















//
^
.— *
X
^1

















/
'/
4*
*~

«
*TJ
















*.
f
V
*r


')*,















i
f
*
'
^



>














^
f
'
*



•














90%
'
I
'



)(













rs
A
'5



I0/













%
BAN
%








































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                             537

-------
                                    TABLE  202

                  WET SCRUBBER  PROCESS DESCRIPTION FOR

                  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE  KILN SPECIFICATION


     The scrubber is to remove entrained lime dust and soda fume from the exhaust gas of a
rotary kiln used to produce reburned lime for the sulfate pulping process. The kiln is fired
with natural gas. The kiln is fed with lime sludge containing 55 wt.% solids. If the sludge has
been washed properly, it will contain about 0.5 wt.% sodium, expressed as Na^O on a dry
lime mud basis. However, this is not always the case and the sludge to this kiln has a sodium
content, expressed as Na2O, of about  2.0 wt. %. The feed end of the kiln is equipped with a
dust fallout chamber and a heat recuperating chain system.

     The exhaust gas will be brought from the  feed end housing to  a fan located 20 feet to
one side of the kiln enclosure. The fan outlet is to be five feet above grade. The scrubber will
be located beyond the fan in an area free  of space limitations. The scrubber should be
designed to withstand the discharge pressure developed by the fan. Clean makeup water is to
be added to the recirculation tank. The scrubber is to operate so as to reduce continuously
the kiln outlet loading to the levels specified.

     The scrubbing system should include the following:

     1.  Scrubber  with a  variable  throat  Venturi,   flooded elbow,  and a cyclonic
         entrainment separator.

     2.   Fifty foot stack following the scrubber.

     3.   Recirculation tank and pumps.

     4.   Slurry settler, which will  handle a portion of the recirculation  pump discharge,
         capable of producing a reasonably thickened underflow product while returning
         water fully treated to minimize solids content. Slurry withdrawal should be set to
         maintain 10% (by weight) solids when the kiln is operating  at design capacity.

     5.   Minimum of two filters to dewater the slurry product, capable of producing a cake
         with a minimum of 65% (by weight) solids.

     6.   Necessary fans, dampers, and motors.

     7.   Necessary controls.

     8.   Carbon steel construction.

     9.   Packing glands flushed with fresh water to prevent binding of the seals.
538

-------
                                 TABLE 203

                WET SCRUBBER OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR

                 ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILN SPECIFICATION
     Two sizes of wet scrubbers are to be quoted for each of two efficiency levels. Vendors'
quotations should consist of four separate and independent quotations.
     Kiln Capacity, ton/day
     Process wt, Ib/hr
     Inlet Gas
          Flow, ACFM
          Temp., °F
          Flow, SCFM
          % Moisture (vol)
     Inlet Loading
          Solids Rate, Ib/hr
          Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
               Rate, Ib/hr
               Loading, ppm
          Wt. % Soda Fume, as Na20
     Outlet Gas
          Flow, ACFM
         . Temp.,°F
          % Moisture (vol)
 Small

   120
31,000

34,000
   350
22,000
    35

 947.4
   7.62
   9.9
    85
    1.8

28,200
   168
    39
 Large

   400
103,400

120,000
   350
 77,000
    35

3,702.6
   8.64
   34.5
    85
    1.8

 99.600
    168
    39
                           Case 1 - Medium Efficiency
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Efficiency, wt.%
     Scrubber, A P
  25.7
  0.21
  97.3
 16 in. w.c.
                             Case 2 — High Efficiency
     Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
     Efficiency, wt.%
     Wt.% Soda Fume Removal Efficiency
     Scrubber, A P
  2.42
  0.01
<0.015
 99.74
    95
40  in.  w.c.
   40.0
   0.09
   98.9
  16 in.  w.c.
   8.54
   0.01
<0.016
  99.77
     95
 40 in. w.c.
                                                                            539

-------
                           TABLE 204

         ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
        FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR ROTARY  LIME SLUDGE KILNS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. c






-0
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. c






/o
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %



( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
* (d) Conditioning,
Equipment
* (e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering ""
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other J
(4) Total Cost
















>






LA Process Wt.
Small

34,000
350
22,000
35

3.25
947.4

28,200
168
22,000
39

0.11
25.7
97.3
15,627


12,196












45,542






73,365
Large

120,000
350
77,000
35

3.60
3,702.6

99,600
168
77,000
39

0.05
40.0
98.9
32,214


33,623












72,037






137,874
High Efficiency
Small

34,000
350
22,000
35

3.25
947.4

28,200
168
22,000
39

0.01
2.42
99.74
18,610


17,027












53,042






88,679
Large

120,000
350
77,000
35

3.6C
3,702.6

99,600
168
77,000
39

O.ffl
8.2
99.7/
36,997


45,557












83,703






166,257
*Not included.
       540

-------
                                                    TABLE 205



                                   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)

                                FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost


$6/hr

$.011/kw-hi
$.25/M gal

LA Process Wt.
Small
8,000

2,223
1,389
1,389
13,386
2,477
15,863
19,475
7,337
26,812
Large
8,000

3,312
2,404
2,404
45,293
9,011
54,304
60,020
13,787
73,807
High Efficiency
Small
8,000

2,889
1,833
1,833
22,117
3,435
25,552
30,274
8,868
39,142
Large
8,000

4,345
9,351
9,351
73,705
12,261
85,966
99,662
16,626
116,288
Ul
-t.

-------
                                FIGURE 157

                     CAPITAL COSTS  FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE  KILNS
                           (MEDIUM  EFFICIENCY)
     500000
V)
DC
fc
o
o
t
a.
O
100000
10000
1000
































































'














































































c






























•URNKEY SYSTEM i












^



OLLECTOR PLUS .
AUXILIARIES'^




















COLLE










-------
                               FIGURE 158

                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
c/j
tc
o
a
te
8
100000
10000
1000
























































































































(0




















PI
C)




















EF
M



















T
\t
>l



















OTAL COS
kTING COS
TAL CHAF
OPERA



















T
TPLU
GES)
TING



















S ^
tf
^oo
*J\J&



















/

T



















r
X



















/
/




















A
f



















/
/



















/


















jf
^T S^
jrf f
of
P




































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                               543

-------
                                FIGURE 159

                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                      FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE  KILNS
                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
     500QOO
V)
cc
o
Q

I
O
Q.
<
O
100000
10000
1000
























































































































I





















:c





















IL
A




















L
LJ













TURNKE'






ECTOR PL
XILIARIES
COLLECT












/SYS

^
_^r



vss

/
OR or












FEM
rV
jgr




^
^
&
JLY













F^






s













'







s













'




/


'













'



s



^

















/


s














+


/



^














*s
s^
J?5
r


^*
^


































1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GASFLOW.ACFM
          544

-------
                               FIGURE 160

                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS
                     FOR  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO
cc
o
o
I
100000
10000
1000











































>







































































































TOTAL COST
(OPERA












(











JX\











iP











II
D









TING COS1
•AL CHAR(
'ERATING


















FPLUS *
SEsr;
COST









w
0f
<£J


















/
f
r


















y
v
r


















4
f
/



















r
/



















f
/



















/
A



















^
Jf)
*







































1000 10000 100000 300000
                             GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                              545

-------
                           TABLE 206

             CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
     OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR  ROTARY  LIME SLUDGE KILNS
                       (HIGH  EFFICIENCY)
     Population Size — 20              Sample Size — 3

                       Capital Cost = $88,679

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
 Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

     50                    $ 70,015                 $107,342
     75                      52,516                  124,841
     90                      25,590                  151,767
     95                        691                    176,666
                       Capital Cost-$166,257

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
 Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

     50                    $143,333                 $189,181
     75                     121,840                  210,674
     90                      88,768                  243,746
     95                      58,187                  274,327
546

-------
                                FIGURE 161
                    CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
             OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR  ROTARY  LIME SLUDGE KILNS
                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
Q
te
8
a.
<
O
      10000
       1000
                                         90%
• MEAN
                                          90% X
        1000
   10000

GAS FLOW, ACFM
                    100000
300000
                                                               547

-------
                                   TABLE 207

         ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PROCESS  DESCRIPTION  FOR

                  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILN SPECIFICATION
     A single precipitator is to remove entrained lime dust or soda fume from the exhaust
gas of a rotary kiln used to produce reburned lime for the sulfate pulping process. The kiln is
fired with natural gas. The kiln  is fed with lime sludge containing 55 wt. % solids. If the
sludge has been washed properly, it will contain about 0.5 wt.% sodium, expressed as Na^O
on  a dry mud basis. However, this is not always the case, and the sludge to  this kiln has a
sodium content, expressed as Na^), of about 2.0 wt.%. The feed end of the kiln is equipped
with a dust fallout chamber and heat recuperating chain system.

     The exhaust gas is to be brought from the feed end housing to a location 20 feet to one
side of the kiln enclosure and 20 feet above grade. The precipitator will be at ground level in
an  area beyond the ductwork which is free of space limitations. A fan will exhaust the
precipitator outlet gas to a 50 foot high stack. The precipitator is to reduce continuously the
kiln outlet loading to the levels specified.

     The precipitator system should include the following:

     1.   Precipitator provided with a minimum of two independent electrical fields in the
         direction of gas flow.

     2.   Trough type hoppers equipped with continuous dust removal by screw conveyor
         to a dust tank. The conveying system must be provided with suitable sealing for
         negative pressure operation.

     3.   Automatic voltage control.

     4.   Safety interlocked system which prevents access to the interior of the precipitator
         unless the electrical circuitry is disconnected and grounded.

     5.   Flapping system which  is adjustable in terms of both intensity and rapping period.

     6.   Necessary fans and motors.

     7.   Model study for precipitator gas distribution
 548

-------
                                  TABLE 208

        ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR  OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR

                 ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILN SPECIFICATION
     Two sizes of precipitators are to be quoted for each of two efficiency levels. Vendors'
quotations should consist of four separate and independent quotations.
     Kiln Capacity, ton/day
     Process wt., Ib/hr
     Inlet Gas
          Flow,ACFM
          Temp., °F
          Flow, SCFM
          % Moisture (vol >
          Dew Point, °F
     Inlet Loading
          Total Solids Rate, Ib/hr
     Total Solids Loading, gr/ACF
     Total Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
              , Ib/hr
              , ppm (vol)
                  , Ib/hr
            afO3, gr/ACF
          Na£O4, Ib/hr
          Na ^S04, gr/ACF
Small

   120
31,000

34,000
   350
22,000
    35
   163

 947.4
  3.25
  7.70
   10.0
    85
   14.0
   0.96
    0.8
  0.006
 Large

    400
103,400

120,000
    350
 77,000
     35
    163

3,702.6
   3.60
   8.55
    35.1
     85
    49.5
    0.96
     2.9
  0.006
                            Case 1 - Medium Efficiency'
      Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr
      Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF
      Outlet Solids Loading, gr/DSCF
      Collection Efficiency, wt. %
      Drift  Velocity, fps
   25.7
   0.09
   0.21
   97.3
   0.25
                              Case 2 - High Efficiency *

      Outlet Solids Rate, Ib/hr                       2.92
      Outlet Solids Loading, gr/ACF                  0.01
      Ou tlet So/ids L oading, gr/DSCF                 0.02
      Collection Efficiency, wt.%                    99.69
      Wt. % Soda Fume Removal Efficiency              95
     Drift Velocity, fps                            0.25
 *See page 6 for definition of collection efficiency levels.
   40.0
   0.04
  0.095
   98.9
   0.25
                       10.28
                       0.01
                       0.02
                      99.72
                         95
                       0.25
                                                                            549

-------
                       TABLE 209

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering "]
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other _,






^





(4) Total Cost
LA Process Wt.
Small

34,000
350
22,000
35

3.25
947.4

34,000
350
22,000
35

0.09
25.7
97.3
67,260
25,963














60,310





153,533
Large

120,000
350
77,000
35

3.60
3,702.6

120,000
350
77,000
35

0.04
40
98.9
137,405
46,153














130,228





313,786
High Efficiency
Small

34,000
350
22,000
35

3.25
947.4

34,000
350
22,000
35

0.01
2.9
99.69
80,190
29,848














74,770





184,808
Large

120,000
350
77,000
35

3.60
3,702.6

120,000
350
77,000
35

0.01
10.2
99.72
158,970
48,090














142,300





349,360
 550

-------
                                                    TABLE 210



                                   ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YR)

                             FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$6/hr

$.011/kw-hr

LA Process Wt.
Small

2,000
2,000
1,429
1,429
1,000
1,000
2,178
2,178
6,607
15,353
21,960
Large

2,000
2,000
5,044
5,044
2,000
2,000
8,888
8,888
17,932
31,379
49,311
High Efficiency
Small

2,000
2,000
1,429
1,429
1,000
1,000
4,796
4,796
9,225
18,481
27,706
Large

2,000
2,000
5,044
5,044
2,000
2,000
12,628
12,628
21,672
34,936
56,608
en
01

-------
                                FIGURE 162


              CAPITAL COSTS  FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS

                      FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS

                            (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
O


te
O
O
_l
<
t
0.

O
      10000
      1000
                                 TURNKEY SYSTEM
                                  COLLECTOR PLUS

                                   AUXILIARIES^
                                    COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
10000
                              GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
          552

-------
                                FIGURE 163




              ANNUAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC  PRECIPITATORS

                      FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE  KILNS

                           (MEDIUM  EFFICIENCY)
    500000
CO

DC
o
Q


65
o
u
100000
10000
1000


























































































































PL





















(
u





















o
s












































.>
TOTAL COST
PERATING COST
CAPITAL CHARGE





















>
S















f*
ES)


G/
¥0
















/

j
x
'











x
'
>
/













X

/*














X

X













rf
'

/













/


/












^
x^

x
X




OPERATING COST



















































1000 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW. ACFM
                                                               553

-------
                                FIGURE  164

              CAPITAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
                      FOR  ROTARY LIME  SLUDGE KILNS
                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
     500000
     100000
CO
DC
O
G

te
O
O
_J
<
H
Q.
O
      10000
      1000
                               TUF
   KEY SYSTEM
COLLECTOR PLUS
 AUXILIARIES"
                                  -COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
 10000
                              GASFLOW.ACFM
100000
300000
          554

-------
                                FIGURE 165


              ANNUAL COSTS FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS

                      FOR  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS

                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
O
O


to*
O
O
Q.
<
O
100000
10000
1000
10(




































































































p





















LI

















K
j;

















)F
C

















T
E
:fi

















3TAL COS
RATING C
iPITAL'CH

















T
OST |
ARGE

>
s~



OPERATING COST






















^4
&
S)
aS
\o







































X*

X


















x


'


















x


/


















*




















+



s
















^.x



x
*
































JO 10000 100000 300000
                              GAS FLOW,ACFM
                                                                 555

-------
                           TABLE  211

         CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR  COLLECTOR ONLY COST
 OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS FOR  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
                        (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    Population Size — 20              Sample Size — 2

                    Collector Only Cost = $80,190

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars
Conf. Level, %                Lower Limit         •      Upper Limit

    50                     $ 74,417                 $ 85,964
    75                       67,404                   92,976
    90                       53,678                  106,702
    95                       38,853                  121,527
                   Collector Only Cost = $158,970

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

Conf. Level, %               Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    50                    $148,039                 $169,901
    75                      134,763                  183,177
    90                      108,776                  209,164
    95                      80,709                  237,231
556

-------
                                FIGURE 166


              CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR COLLECTOR ONLY COST

         OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS  FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS

                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)


    500000.
o
Q


te

8
_j
<
t
Q.

O
100000
10000
1000









































































































































































































onn/



^
yu% ^ *•
* ^
7b% X*x
IMFAfViX*,
7R%XX
o' *

^


















*
X
x
,

X



















»
«
"
^
^




















«^
*
'
X
1



















^
p-








































1000 10000 100000 3000C
                             GAS FLOW,ACFM
                                                              557

-------
                             REFERENCES
  1.  Study of Technical & Cost Information for Gas Cleaning Equipment in
     the Lime & Secondary Non-ferrous Metallurgical Industries, Industrial Gas
     Cleaning Institute, 1970, pp. 24-61.

 2.  Lewis, C. J. & Crocker, B.  B., "The Lime Industry's Problem of Airborne
     Dust," J.A.P.C.A., 19(1): 31-39 (Jan. 1969).

 3.  Boynton, R. S.,  The Chemistry & Technology  of  Lime &  Limestone,
     Interscience Publishers, N.Y., 1966.

 4.  Schwarzkopf, F., "Comparison of Modern Lime Calcining Systems," Rock
     Products, 73:68-71+ (July, 1971).

 5.  Stern, A. C.,  Air Pollution, Vol.  Ill, Academic  Press,  N.Y.,  1968, pp.
     243-267.

 6.  Shreve,  R.  N.,  The  Chemical Process  Industries,  McGraw-Hill  Book
     Company, Inc., N.Y., 1956.

 7.  Casey, J. P., Pulp & Paper, Vol.  1 —  Pulp  &  Bleaching,  Interscience
     Publishers, N.Y., 1960.

 8.  Britt, K.  W., Handbook  of Pulp  & Paper Technology,  Van  Nostrand,
     ReinholdCo., N.Y., 1970.

 9.  Stephenson, J.  N., Pulp & Paper Manufacture, Vol.  1 — Preparation  &
     Treatment of Wood Pulp, McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y., 1950.

10.  Rydholm, S. A., Pulping Processes, Interscience Publishers, N.Y., 1965.

11.  Duprey,  R.  L.,  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission  Factors,  U.  S.
     DHEW, Public Health Service, Publication No. 999-HP-42, Durham, North
     Carolina, 1968.

12.  Stuart,  H. H., &  Bailey,  R. E., "Performance Study of a Lime Kiln  &
     Scrubber Installation," TAPPI, 48(5):104A-108A (May, 1965).

13.  Shah, I.  S., "Pulp Plant Pollution Control," Chem. Eng. Progress, 64(9):
     66-77 (Sept., 1968).
558

-------
14.  Collins, T. T., Jr.,  "The Venturi Scrubber on Lime  Kiln Stack Gases":
     TAPPI, 42(1): 9-13 (Jan., 1959).

15.  Landry, J. E., and Longwell, D. H., "Advances in Air Pollution Control in
     the Pulp & Paper Industry," TAPPI, 48(6): 66A-70A (June, 1965).

16.  Walker, A. B., & Hall, R. M., "Operating Experience with a Fjooded Disc
     Scrubber. . .," J.A.P.C.A., 18(5): 319-23 (May, 1968).

17.  Walther, J. E.,  and Amberg, H. R., "A  Positive Air Quality Control
     Program at a New Kraft Mill," J.A.P.C.A.; 20(1): 9-18 (Jan., 1970).
                                                                   559

-------
560

-------
GRAY IRON FOUNDARIES

-------
 7.   GRAY  IRON FOUNDRIES

     Iron foundries are shops where iron and steel are melted and cast. These
shops exist over a wide  range of sizes from small family businesses to large
shops owned by giant  corporations. The total foundry population has shown a
steady decline since the end of World War II from 3,200 in  1947 to 1,600 in
 1971  mostly due to closing small shops.  The size of the average foundry has
risen from an annual production of 3,800 to 8,700 tons'1' during the same
period.  These figures show that while small foundries are closing down, their
production is being more than offset by new large foundries, resulting in a slow
but positive growth in total foundry capacity. The distribution of foundry sizes
in 1969 is shown in Figure 167.(2)

     Small foundries are  generally defined as those which employ less than 50
people.  They are most often "jobbing" foundries which make small  quantities
or job  lots of a  variety of cast products for independent  customers.  Large
foundries are often described  as captive in  that they are owned by their
principal customer. They tend to produce large quantities of a few specialized
castings. Examples of industries  which  rely mainly on  captive foundries are
automobile manufacturers and cast iron pipe producers.

     Iron foundries produce three forms of cast iron: gray iron, ductile iron,
and malleable iron. Gray iron is produced in the greatest amount as indicated
on Table 212.(1) All three forms of cast iron are alloys composed principally of
iron and carbon.

     All three contain carbon  in the graphitic  form. They differ  from one
another by the size and shape of the graphite particles dispersed throughout the
alloy. The graphite in gray iron appears in  large crinkled flakes. The flakes have
no strength and cause the  casting to be brittle. When gray iron castings  are
broken, the fracture goes through the graphite flakes, producing a gray color in
the fracture.  It is from  this property that gray iron gets its name. Gray iron cast
in such  a way that all of the carbon  occurs as the iron-carbon compound
cementite (Fe3C)  is called white  iron. Fractures in white iron also occur along
the carbon containing phase. Cementite, however, is steely white in appearance
and the fractures, therefore, are light colored.  Iron cast with high carbon and
silicon  contents will  form gray iron.  Lower carbon and silicon  contents will
form white iron.'4'

     The cementite phase  of white iron  can be converted  into graphite by
heating  in the presence of sufficient silicon after the casting has solidified. The
graphite formed by this process is  different from the flakes which are  present in
                                                                    561

-------
Ol
o>
to
    100
                                                     FIGURE 167



                                    DISTRIBUTION OF  IRON FOUNDRY SIZES (1969)
 y

 •   .^/~»
 j
 D


 D
 0
                             IO
IS
2S>
-40
                                        MELT CAPACITY , TPH

-------
                            TABLE 212
           AVERAGE  ANNUAL FOUNDRY  PRODUCTION
                    IN  THE  UNITED STATES*11
                                  Average Production   Percent of Total
Type of Iron                            ton/yr*           Production

Gray Iron                            11,650,000           84.3

Malleable Iron                         1,075,000            7.8

Ductile Iron                           1,092,000            7.9
  Total                              13,817,000          100.0
'For the five year period 1965 through 1969.
                                                               563

-------
 gray iron. The graphite is formed in spheroids which do not embrittle the cast
 metal as much as the graphite  flakes. As a  result  some deformation of the
 casting  is possible  without fracture. Metal  produced in this  way  is called
 malleable  iron. A comparison  of the physical  properties of gray iron and
 malleable iron is presented in Table 213.

      Further  alteration in  the  form  of the  graphite  can  be made  by
 innoculating the melt with a small amount of magnesium just before casting.
 The result is a cast iron containing very small spherical nodules of graphite. It is
 called ductile or nodular iron. It has ductility equivalent to malleable iron and
 has greater tensile strength. Its properties are also shown in Table 213.

      Differences in  the production  of these three forms of cast  iron are
 illustrated in Figure 168.(1)AII of  the operations shown apply to all three kinds
 of cast iron unless noted otherwise on the drawing.
                        FOUNDRY OPERATIONS

      Foundries engage in a great many separate operations in order to produce
 iron castings. The major operations include:

      1.   Raw material storage

      2.   Iron melting

      3.   Pouring

      4.   Mold making

      5.   Core making

      6.   Shakeout

      7.   Finished product handling

      8.   Sand reclamation

    Figure 169 shows a diagram of the flow through a foundry and relationships
 among these eight operations. Most foundries carry out  all  eight operations,
 and all have at  least the first three in  the  list.  Most of the eight operations
 involve emission sources and these, too, are indicated on the flow diagram.
564

-------
                                TABLE 213
                      PROPERTIES OF CAST IRONS
                             Gray Iron         Malleable Iron      Ductile Iron

Chemical Composition*"
  Carbon, wt.%               3.00 to 3.75       2.00 to 2.65       3.00 to 3.55
  Silicon, wt.%                1.10 to 2.80       0.90 to 1.65       2.25 to 2.55
  Manganese, wt.%              0.5            0.25 to 1.25          0.50
  Magnesium, wt.%               -                 -             0.04 to 0.1

Physical Properties'1)>(4)
  Tensile Strength, psi       20,000 to 51,000   50,000 to 77,000   75,000 to 120,000
  Yield Strength, psi             NA          32,000 to 70,000   28,000 to 45,000
  Brinell Hardness             160 to 270        110 to 245        120 to 270
  Elongation, %                 NA             3.5 to 22          1 to  15
  Impact Strength, ft-lb         1 to 3            4 to 16              NA
                                                                    565

-------
                                   FIGURE 168
                            SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
                            OF CAST IRON PRODUCTION
                                 RAW
                              MATERIAL
                               STORAGE
       MOUD MAKING
           AND
       COREMAKING
                                  I
                              MELTING
                                AND
                              HOLDING
                LADLE
               ADDITIONS
                               LADLE
                               POURING
            I
                                  I
                                                     1
                                                MAGNESIUM

                                                TREATMENT
                                                     J (DUCTILE IRON ONLY)
                              SHAKEOUT
        ANNEALING
i
                             CLEANING
(MALLEABLE IRON ONLY)
I
                              FINISHING
            PRESS
         STRAIGHTENING
(DUCTILE AND
 MALLEABLE
 IRON  ONLY)
             566

-------
                                                         FIGURE 169

                                  FLOW DIAGRAM OF MAJOR IRON  FOUNDRY  OPERATIONS
            METALLICS
      FLUXES
     SAND
                                                                                                              FINISHING

                                                                                                                r*

                                                                                                                >DUST
CJl
en
-vj
                                                                'GAS AND
                                                                PARTICULATE
                                                                EMISSIONS
                                               GAS AND
                                              PARTICULATE
                                               EMISSIONS
                     METAL
                   MELTING
                                                                               DUCTILE IRON
                                                                               INNOCULATION
                                                                                  CASTING
                                                                                  SHAKEOUT
                                                                                                  COOLING
                                                                                                   AND
                                                                                                 CLEANING
                                                                                         CORE SAND
                                                                                        AND BINDER
  SAND
PREPARATION

-------
     Raw  materials used in the production of iron castings are iron from
various sources, alloying agents, fluxes, sand, and fuel. The iron  is melted in a
furnace  and brought  to the proper composition with  appropriate alloying
agents. The molten  metal is then tapped into a ladle and poured into a sand
mold.  The mold is cooled, solidifying the metal. The mold is removed from the
casting in the shakeout area and the casting is sent to cleaning and finishing.

     Molds and cores are prepared in  many ways, depending upon the nature of
the product. Each mold making and core making process has its own recipe and
formulation. In general, sand is mixed with water and a binding agent, and then
formed with a pattern into the desired shape. The mold is dried or heated to fix
the shape prior to pouring. After pouring and cooling, the mold  is broken and
the casting removed. This may  be done manually or mechanically on  a large
vibrating  screen. Where  possible,  the sand  from shakeout  is recovered and
reclaimed by crushing followed by abrasive or thermal removal of spent binding
agent.  The reclaimed sand is sent back to mold making for use in new molds.

     Four  types of  furnaces are used for iron melting in foundries: the cupola,
electric arc, induction,  and  reverberatory  furnaces. Cupolas  are the most
numerous  but their  position is declining relative to electric arc and induction
furnaces. This decline is occurring because cupolas have much higher emission
rates than do the other types. Figure 170 shows the change  in the numerical
distribution of furnace types since 1959.(1'

     Cupolas are vertical cylindrical furnaces which are charged with alternate
layers  of  iron,  fuel (usually coke), and flux. The energy for  melting the iron
comes  from the combustion of the coke. Combustion air  is forced through the
bed from the bottom with a  blower. In some cupolas natural gas  is added with
the combustion air  as a supplementary fuel, and  it  is  also  fairly common
practice to enrich the  gas stream with oxygen. Preheating of the combustion
air by  direct-fired gas burners  may also be used. Slag and  molten  iron are
withdrawn through separate  tapholes at the bottom  or  in  many cases the
cupola  has  only  one taphole for withdrawal of, first the iron and then the
slag.

     Electric arc furnaces are cup-shaped vessels with roofs. Three carbpn
electrodes protrude through  the roof and extend into the  metal charge held by
the furnace. The energy required for melting is obtained from the arc.

     Induction  furnaces are also cup- or drum-shaped vessels that use electrical
568

-------
                                         FIGURE 170
                     TRENDS   IN   TYPES   OF    IRON
                             FOUNDRY   FURNACES
                                                            (1)
0)
Id
{£
D
L
L
0
DC
LJ
ID
I
D
Z
sooo
4SOO
4600
4-4OO
4200
4000
3SOO
3eoo
3400
3200
3OOO
2SOO
26OO
24OO
22OO
2000
 i©oo
 I6OO
 I4OO
 I2OO
 IOOO
  8OO
  6OO
 4OO
  200
TOTAL  FURNACES
                 INDUCTION
                                            ELECTRIC  ARC
           I959      I96I        I963      IQ6S      I967       I969      I9TI
                 I960       I962      I964      IO66      I96S      I97O       I9T72

                                           YEAR
                                                                      569

-------
energy to  melt  metal.  Induction  furnaces operate on the same principle as
transformers. A  primary coil is energized with alternating current, which sets
up a magnetic field around it. The magnetic field induces eddy currents in the
charge which are converted into heat by the electrical resistance of the charge.

      The  use of  reverberatory air furnaces  is expected to  decline  as they
 are  replaced by electric furnaces.

     The  melting  operation  causes the majority of the  emissions  from  a
foundry. Although all types of melting furnaces have significant emissions, the
cupola is  by far the most difficult to properly control. The remainder  of this
section will be limited to a discussion of control of emissions from cupolas.


                       THE  GRAY IRON  CUPOLA

     Although its use is steadily declining, the cupola is the work-horse of the
foundry industry. Figure 5 shows a diagram of a typical cupola. The furnace is
a vertical cylinder charged with alternate layers of iron, coke, and flux.

     A layer of sand is generally packed into the bottom of the cupola prior to
start  up  and stays  under the iron, coke and flux bed during operation.  Air
ports, or tuyeres, are located at the bottom. Blast air is forced into the furnace
through these tuyeres using a forced draft blower.

     Air   is  required for  two purposes.  The  greater  portion  is used  as
combustion air for the coke.  This combustion generates the energy for melting
the iron.  Additional air  is  required to  combust  the  carbon,  silicon,  and
manganese which may be present  in the metal to be melted.'3) The amount of
these materials  left unoxidized in the  molten  iron plays  a large  role  in
determining the properties of the cast iron.

     The air blown into a cupola  may  be preheated to  increase  the thermal
efficiency of the system. Two methods of preheating are available:

     1.    A separate external  preheater for the combustion air.

     2.    Combustion of the CO in the exhaust gases to C02 followed by heat
          exchange with the combustion air.

     There  is a current  EPA demonstration project on  recuperative  heat
exchange  for an iron foundry cupola,(5) however, the method is not used
conventionally.
570

-------
                               FIGURE  171

                    TYPICAL GRAY  IRON CUPOLA
                                             Cupola cap
Charging skip
                                                        Off- take (refractory lined)
                                                                Top of charging f bor
Windbox

Blastpipe connection




Tuyere box

Tap hole
 and spout




Bottom plate


Bottom doors
Slag spout
Floor level


Concrete foundation
                                                                               571

-------
The methods involving heat recovery  are not in common  use  at the present
time due to high capital cost, high maintenance cost, and  low operating rate
of many foundries.

     Raw  materials  are charged to the furnace through a door located in the
side of  the cupola above the charge bed. Small  cupolas are charged by hand.
Larger units use mechanical charging equipment such as skip  hoists.

     Exhaust gases  are  removed  from  the  cupola  either  from  the  top, as
indicated on Figure 171, or through an opening in the side, immediately below
the charging door.

     Operation  of the cupola is begun by putting coke into the  bottom and
igniting  it.  Additional charge materials are mixed into  a charge bin and con-
veyed into the cupola. As the metal melts and the coke is consumed, the entire
contents of the furnace shift downward and are replaced by new charge material.
The melting is generally  considered to occur  in three zones. As the new charge
moves downward in the cupola, it is preheated  by the rising hot  combustion
gases. These  gases  include  carbon  dioxide,  carbon  monoxide,  nitrogen,
hydrogen, and sulfur dioxide. There is no free oxygen. As the hot metal enters
the second zone, called the melting zone, the atmosphere is highly reducing. As
the molten metal continues downward, it enters the third or combustion zone
where it is superheated to the desired tapping temperature.  The atmosphere in
the combustion  zone is highly oxidizing.

     The gas flow through the cupola is countercurrent to the metal flow. Blast
air  enters through  the  tuyeres into the combustion zone.  In this  zone  it
combines with the coke as follows:

                         0  +  C  + C0  + heat
The oxidation of impurities in the metal charge also occurs in this zone. For
example:

                            Si  + 02 +Si02

Some oxidation of iron also occurs.

    As the  gas  moves upward, the oxygen  content is  depleted  and the
following reaction begins to occur to a greater extent:

                         C02 + C  $. 2CO 1 heat
572

-------
Water  vapor is also reduced in this zone  producing carbon monoxide and
hydrogen as follows:

                      C +  H20  -»-  CO  + H2 -  heat

     The  maximum  concentration  of  CC>2  (14  to  18%)  and maximum
temperature (2,800 to 3,400° F) occur at the boundary of the combustion and
melting zones.11'  As the gases enter the preheating zone, they give up heat to
the new charge and their temperature is lowered sufficiently to prevent further
reactions from occuring between carbon, oxygen, and oxides of carbon.
Nature of the Gaseous Discharge

     The gases which leave a cupola consist of the combustion products from
the cupola  reactions. The principal components are:  nitrogen, carbon dioxide,
oxygen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and sulfur dioxide.

     The oxides of carbon result from the coke as  described in the previous
section. Sulfur dioxide results from  the combustion of the sulfur contained in
the coke. The nitrogen is brought in with the combustion air. Oxygen appears
primarily as a result of air coming in through the charging door. The relative
proportion  of these components is highly variable. It depends primarily upon
the rate of flow and temperature of blast air, the amount of air coming through
the charge door, the cupola operating temperature, the ratio of coke to iron in
the cupola, and the composition  of the coke. Table 214 lists some examples
which demonstrate the variability.11'

     The rate of flow of exhaust gas is also variable  and depends on many of
the same variables which affect the composition of the gas. It is most strongly
influenced  by the quantity of blast air and  the quantity of air which enters
through the charge  door.  A good average value is 1,000 SCFM per ton/hr of
melt  capacity.  The off-gas  temperature  can vary  from  500 to 2,200° F
depending  upon:  whether a CO  afterburner is used, blast air rate,  preheat
temperature, and the rate of air entering through the charge door.

     The gas discharge  temperature  is cyclic, and decreases as cold material is
charged into the cupola. The temperature  rises gradually as the cold material
warms up. This short cycle, measured in minutes, is superimposed on a longer
cycle of light-off,  melting-pouring, and burndown.  After a period of a few
hours to a  few days of melting, it  is  necessary to shut the cupola down for
                                                                    573

-------
  H2
                         TABLE 214
               EXHAUST  GASES COMPOSITIONS
             FROM FOUR DIFFERENT CUPOLAS11'
                                 Mole Percent in Sample
Component                       A     B       C       D

  CO                           1320

  C02                          3      16       4      13

  02                          17       1       7      7

  N2                          75      80      86      80
                              99     100     99     100
574

-------
relining. The resulting "burndown" produces the highest emission temperatures
during the  operating cycle,  because  no cold charge is  being added during
burndown. Frequently,  two cupolas are operated in tandem, so that one can
melt while another is relined. A single gas cleaning system is used for the pair.

     Table 215 shows a weight balance for  a  theoretical  cupola  melting  one
ton/hr of iron. The theoretical cupola has the following characteristics:

     1.    Lined construction

     2.    Gas takeoff above the charge door

     3.    Charge door open during operation

     4.    Preheated blast air, unenriched
Pollution Control Considerations

     The control system which serves a cupola must deal  with at  least two
distinct types of emissions: carbon monoxide and paniculate matter. Emission
control systems which deal with these two problems consist of three parts:

     1.   An afterburner (combustion  chamber or upper cupola  stack)  to
         convert CO to COo and to burn organic matter

     2.   A cooling device to lower the afterburner exit temperature to a level
         suitable for conventional abatement equipment

     3.   A collector to remove particulate matter

     The afterburner may consist of a stack  above  the charge door containing
gas burners or torches.  These should be  designed  to raise the exit gas
temperature to at least 1,200°F.(3)  The geometry of  the installation should
provide a minimum of 1/4 sec. of residence time. In  large cupolas it is necessary
to create sufficient turbulence to insure that the combustibles and air become
properly mixed. This  may alter the  residence time required. Stratification of
the gas stream in large diameter cupolas can make mixing a problem.
                                                                    575

-------
                            TABLE 215

          MATERIAL BALANCE FOR THEORETICAL CUPOLA(7)

Input Material                       Ib/hr                    wt.%

Pig Iron                              97                     2.17
Silvery Piglets                         66                     1.48
Purchased Scrap                      873                    19.51
Steel Scrap                          388                     8.67
Returns                             582                    13.01

    Total Metal Charge              2006                    44.84

Coke                                268                     5.99
Natural Gas                            0                      -
Fuel Oil                               0

Flux and Additives                     40                     0.89

Air                                2139                    47.81
Oxygen                                0                      —

Cupola Lining                         21                     0.47

    Total                          4474                    100

Output Material

Molten Iron                         2000                    44.95
Slag                                 53                     1.19
Emission Dust                         20                      .45

Nitrogen                           1636                    36.77
Carbon Dioxide                      489                    10.99
Carbon Monoxide                     248                     5.57
Hydrogen                             2                      .04
Sulfur Dioxide                       	1_                      .02

    Total Off Gases                  2376
         Total                      4449                    100

Top Gas Molecular Weight -31.24
Top Gas Rate, SCFM - 461
Dust Concentration, gr/SCF - 5.07
Air in  Charge Door, Ib/hr/ton - 1693
CH4 into Afterburner, Ib/hr/ton — 25
Total Gas to Gas Cleaning System, Ib/hr/ton - 6167
576

-------
     While the major function of the afterburner  is the oxidation of carbon
monoxide for safety and environmental control, two other processes may also
occur. If oily scrap is charged to the cupola, the cupola exit gases will contain
oil  aerosol.  This oil will be oxidized in the afterburner, to the benefit of the
particulate collection devices  which follow. There  is also combustible dust in
the exhaust gases, consisting mostly of coke fines (carbon). This, too, is burned
to some extent in the afterburner.

     The  gases leaving the  afterburner  are  too  hot  to go  directly  into  a
particulate collector without cooling. Three types of coolers are conventionally
used:  quenchers, evaporative coolers,  and  radiant coolers.  Quenchers  are
distinguished  from  evaporative coolers  in that quenchers are devices that
adiabatically saturate using an excess amount of water, whereas evaporative
coolers control the amount  of cooling by controlling the  amount of  water
available for  evaporation. Cooling  by  air dilution is not  widely practiced
because of  the relatively large volumes required and the attendant increase in
the size  of  the  collection device.  There  is a current  EPA  demonstration
project on recuperative  heat exchange  for an iron foundry cupola,151 however,
the method  is not used conventionally.

     The choice  between  radiant and direct contact water cooling depends
upon  several variables:
     1.  The nature of the  abatement  equipment downstream. If a fabric
         collector is used, cooling  in a quencher  could lead  to wetting and
         blinding the bags.

     2.  The  temperature of the exhaust gas leaving the cupola.  Radiant
         coolers  are   efficient   only at  high  temperature levels.   Inlet
         temperatures  which  are  too  high, however, can lead to metallurgy
         problems.

     3.  Costs  of  utilities  and of maintenance labor.  Quenchers  and
         evaporative coolers  consume water, may need more maintenance
         than radiant coolers, and add to the total  gas volume to be handled.

     4.  Capital  cost.  Radiant  coolers  may cost many  times  more  than
         quenchers or evaporative coolers.

    5.   Space.   Radiant  coolers  require more  space  than   quenchers  or
         evaporative coolers.

For  most applications, quenchers or evaporative  coolers will be the  more
attractive choice because of the lower capital cost.

    Collection of particulate  matter emitted by cupolas can be accomplished
efficiently  by  fabric filters,  wet scrubbers,  and  electrostatic precipitators.
Precipitators are usually uneconomical, however, because  the exhaust gas rates
are too low.
                                                                     577

-------
     The design of the collector will be influenced by the size distribution of
 the particles which are emitted. The distribution varies greatly from cupola to
 cupola. Data which demonstrate the extent of this variation are shown in Table
 216.

     Fabric filters are effective devices in this application and have been used in
 many  commercial installations.  The inlet gas temperature to the fabric filter
 must be closely controlled, however, to prevent damage to the bags from high
 temperature upsets.  Fabric filter systems  should  have a  bypass which is
 activated by a  high temperature alarm in the inlet gas stream. This bypass may
 be the cupola closure cap. Carry-over of incandescent particles or sparks must
 also be guarded against in the design of the fabric filter system.

     Wet scrubber systems  have also been  successfully  applied  as control
 devices on cupolas. In most cases, they require a high energy input due to the
 small size of the particulate matter emitted  from the cupola. In addition, they
 are subject to acid corrosion resulting from the dissolving of sulfur oxides from
 the cupola top gases in the scrubber  recycle liquor. Where sulfur oxides exist in
 significant quantity, stainless steels such as 316L must be used in the scrubber
 to resist attack.


     Table 217 presents a summary of abatement equipment type, and number
 of  units of that particular type, that have been used for collecting particulate
 matter from foundries.
                      SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS

      Equipment specifications have been written for both fabric filters and wet
 scrubbers. In each  case, the specification  is based upon cupola exhaust gas
 leaving the afterburner. The system for both types of equipment  includes a gas
 cooler followed by the collector and  auxiliary equipment. Two different types
 of gas coolers were  specified, one for each  type of collection equipment. The
 gas cooling equipment appropriate to each collection device is a legitimate part
 of the cost of the abatement system, because no cooling of the gases is required
 where collection of particulate matter is not required.

     Specifications for the fabric filter system are listed in Tables  218, 219 and
 220. Vendors' quotations were not obtained for the two sizes specified in Table
 220.  The cost data  for these two sizes were determined  by interpolation and
 extrapolation of the cost data obtained for the two sizes specified  in Table 219.
578

-------
                         TABLE 216
                PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
       OF  EMISSIONS FROM THREE DIFFERENT CUPOLAS
Wt.% Less Than                    A         B
   200 microns                             99

   100 microns                             99

    50 microns                             92        60

    20 microns                   99        34        55

    10 microns                   93        12        45

     5 microns                   g2         2        28

     2 microns                   64                  13
                                                          579

-------
                        TABLE 217






           ABATEMENT EQUIPMENT TYPES USED FOR




     COLLECTING PARTICULATE MATTER FROM  FOUNDRIES(6)
Abatement
Equipment
Type
Fabric Filter
Cyclones
Wet Scrubber
Electrostatic Precipitator
In Plant Dust Collection
Number of
Units Installed
5,216
1,216
2,170
50
2,629
Number of
Foundries
2,198
514
778
32
1,122
  ^Data represents all foundries.
580

-------
Both sets of specifications include an evaporative cooler operating at a maxi-
mum outlet temperature of 400° F. Cost data for the system are presented on
Tables 221 and 222 and on Figures 172 and 173. Also presented on these tables
and figures are the interpolated and extrapolated costs determined for the two
fabric filter sizes specified in Table 220. Confidence limits for the capital cost
data obtained for the two fabric filter sizes specified in Table 219 are presented
on Table 223 and Figure 174.
     Specifications for the wet scrubber system are shown on Tables 223 and
224. The specifications include a quencher type gas cooler followed by a venturi
scrubber.  For  the  high efficiency cases,  the scrubber  is  followed  by  an
aftercooler which reduces the horsepower requirement on the system fan by
condensation. Cost  data for the system are presented on  Tables 225 and  226
and on Figures  175, 176, 177 and  178. Confidence limits for the capital costs
of the high collection efficiency cases are presented on Table 228 and Figure
179.

      Bids were not obtained for afterburners; however, generalized costs were
 obtained through private communications.18' The burners range in price from
 $5,000 to $10,000/cupola.

      The installation cost was estimated to be $2,100. The burner duty ranges
 from 5,200,000 Btu/hr/cupola to  16,000,000 Btu/hr/cupola. This corresponds
 to an annual fuel cost range of $21,900/yr/cupola to $67,000/yr/cupola. The
 fuel requirement is quite varied for cupola afterburners and in many cases the
 combustion of carbon monoxide could sustain itself.

      Generalized cost breakdown for afterburners is as follows:

          Device Cost Range           $ 5,000 to $10,000/cupola
          Installation Cost             $ 2,100 to $2,100/cupola
          Total Cost Range            $ 7,000 to $12,000/cupola
          Fuel Cost Range             $21,900 to $67,500/yr/cupola
                                                                    581

-------
                                     TABLE 218

                        FABRIC FILTER  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY  CUPOLA SPECIFICATION
      Emissions from a pair of new gray iron cupolas are to be controlled with a fabric filter.
  The cupolas are  to operate alternately, so the emissions from only one need be treated.  The
  cupolas  are conventional refractory lined units. Gas  takeoffs are above the charge doors.
  Products of combustion and charge door indraft are preheated to a degree sufficient to insure
  that the gases leaving  the cupola and  entering the pollution control system will be 1,20CPF.
  Each cupola is operated for 24 hours, then shut down for maintenance while the other cupola is
  operating. The operating factor for the abatement system serving the cupolas is 5,280 hr/yr.

      The abatement system will consist of:

      1.   An evaporative cooler

      2.   A fabric filter

      An afterburner will be supplied by others. It will be located in the stack above the charge
  door.  The geometry of  the installation will be arranged to  insure sufficient turbulence for
  complete combustion. Stack inserts to achieve turbulence may be used if necessary.

      The evaporative cooler will be used to lower the temperature of the afterburner exhaust
  gas to the required inlet temperature of the fabric collector. The cooler will be designed for a
  maximum inlet temperature of 2,20CPF. Sufficient space is available for the installation of the
  evaporative cooler at a distance of 15 feet  from  the cupola. The fabric filter will be located 40
  feet from the evaporative cooler. The afterburner exhaust gases  leave the  top of the cupola
  stack at a height of 50 feet above grade.

      The fabric  filter will be located immediately downstream of the evaporative cooler.  The
i  inlet gas stream  will be monitored with a high temperature alarm  and will be diverted out the
\  cupola stack in  the event of an alarm condition. The  filter will be either a shaker or reverse *\
'  collapse  type unit designed with a  minimum  of four isolatable compartments.  The unit  will
  operate under either positive or negative pressure and will be equipped with screw conveyors
  and air locks for solids removal.  A dust storage bin  with a capacity of two days operation  will
  be provided at the discharge of the  screw conveyors. The system fan will be sized with at least
  20% excess capacity when operating at the design pressure drop of the entire abatement system
  and 90% of the maximum recommended speed.
 582

-------
                                  TABLE  219

                FABRIC FILTER OPERATING  CONDITIONS FOR

                GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLA  SPECIFICATION
     Two sizes of fabric  filters are specified at one efficiency level. Vendors' quotations
should consist of one quotation for each of the two sizes, with a representation of the
efficiency  expected for the unit quoted. The efficiency quoted may be better than the
efficiency called for in this specification.
Cupola Inside Diameter, in.
Cupola Melt Rate, ton/hr
Cupola Iron/Coke Ratio
Cupola Process Weight, Ib/hr

A fterburner Exhaust Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
     Solids Loading
       Ib/hr
       gr/ACF
       gr/DSCF

Cooler Outlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
  Small

    36
   6.6
    10
14,730
27,500
 2,000
 5,920

   108
 0.459
  2.42
14,600
   400
 9,000
   Large

     90
   39.5
     10
 88,560
145,000
  2,000
 31,300

    540
  0.434
   2.29
 77,100
   400
 47,500
     Solids Size Distribution
        % >  10 microns
        % <  10 microns
        % < 5 microns
        % <  1 micron
        % < 0.7micron
        % < 0.3 micron
    68
    32
    24
    11
     8
     1
     68
     32
     24
     11
      8
      1
Fabric Filter Inlet Gas
     ACFM
      Temperature, °F
     SCFM
14,600
   400
 9,000
 77,100
   400
 47,500
Solids Loading
   Ib/hr
   gr/ACF
   gr/DSCF
Collector Efficiency, wt.l,
Air-to-cloth ratio
                              Case 1 — High Efficiency
   1.25
   0.01
 0.018
   98.8
 2.0/1
   6.61
   0.01
  0.018
   99.2
   2.0/1
                                                                             583

-------
584

-------
                                  TABLE  220

                 FABRIC FILTER  OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR

                        GRAY IRON FOUNDRY  CUPOLAS
      Two sizes of fabric filters are specified. Vendors' quotations were not obtained for
either of these sizes.  Cost data for these two sizes were determined by extrapolating the
cost data obtained for the two fabric filter sizes specified in Table 11.
                                                 Small
Cupola Inside Diameter, in.
Cupola Melt Rate, ton/hr
Cupola Iron/Coke Ratio
Cupola Process Weight, Ib/hr

Afterburner Exhaust Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
     Solids L oading
        Ib/hr
        gr/ACF
        gr/DSCF

Cooler Outlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM

Fabric Filter Inlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
Solids Loading
     Ib/hr
     gr/ACF
     gr/DSCF
Collector Efficiency, wt.l,
Air-to-cloth ratio
                     48
                     10
                     10
                 22,400
                 41,800
                  2,000
                  9,000

                    108
                  0.302
                    1.60
                 22,150
                    400
                  13,650
                 22,150
                    400
                 13,650

Case 1 — High Efficiency
                     1.9
                   0.01
                  0.018
                   98.0
                   2/1
                                                      v/
   Large

    114
     60
     10
134,400
220,000
  2,000
 47,500

    540
  0.286
    1.50
116,930
    400
 72,060
116,930
    400
 72,060
                                                                            585

-------
                       TABLE 221

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
                 FOR FABRIC FILTERS FOR
              GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF (ppm)
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol.






%
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF (ppm)
. Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %



(1) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations "^
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other
J
(4) Total Cost
















/







Extrapolated
Small

41,800
2,000
9,000
2

0.302
108

22,150
400
13,650
35.4

0.01
1.9
98.0
37,000*





45,000*









L03,000*







185,000*
Large

220,000
2,000
47,500
2

0.286
540

116,930
400
72,060
35.4

0.01
10.05
98.3
140,000*





170,000*









390,000*







700,000*
Specified
Small

27,500
2,000
5,920
2

0.459
108

14,600
400
'9"~"6obv
3-5V4— '

0.01
1.25
98.8
26,600

4,500
375
1,550

21,000

2,950

3,700





67,230







127,905
Large

145,000
2,000
31,300
2

0.434
540

77,100
400
47,500
35.4

0.01
6.61
99.2
99,850

21,600
2,375
11,925
,
65,500

21,750

11,700





218,125





s.

452,825
                           'Extrapolated from Cost Data presented in Figure 6
586

-------
                                 FIGURE  172



                     CAPITAL  COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS

                      FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
   5000000
    1000000
oo
cc
o
Q

te
o
U
a.
<
O
     100000
      10000










































Os COST DATA OBTAINED FROM VENDORS' QUOTATIONS
X's INTERPOLATED AND EXTRAPOLATED DATA













































Tl 1
1 U




CO











RN



LL
AU










KE



EC'
XII
CC









Y



rc
J>
LI









S



>R
\F
TE









Y



11
C









SI



3L
EJ
T<








/S

blvl
y
S^
S
S
.us
^ ^
/f
DR ONLY







/

S^
\r
*


S
X









/
/




/
















f











/




f















/



t
f
















VD



0
















/





















/



j















S
S


JS

S































        1000
10000
100000
300000
                            CLEAN  GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                                  587

-------
                                                        TABLE 222
S
00
ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS IN $/YEAR)
            FOR FABRIC  FILTERS  FOR
         GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost

$6/hr
$8/hr







$.011/kw-hr
$.25/M gal




Extrapolated
22,150 ACFM
5 .28(1











26,000*
18,500
44,500
116,930 ACFM
^ ?8f)











60,000*
70,000
130,000
Specified

5,280
3,950
1,050
5,000



4,980

6,000

2,850
2,400
5,250
21,230
12,790
34,020 '

5,280
3,950
1,050
5,000



4,980

16,500

16,900
6,750
23,650
50,130
45,282
95,412
                 'Extrapolated from Operating Cost Data presented in Figure 7

-------
                                 FIGURE  173
                      ANNUAL COSTS FOR FABRIC FILTERS
                      FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
     500000
     100000
C/J
DC
O
O
O
O
     10000
      1000

































(OPER
LCAF




















TOT
ATI
MTA






0










•AL
NG
L (
C
















C
C(
:H>
IPE
















3J
DS
^
yr
4\










rioNs
X= INTERPOLATED AND EXTRAPOLATED DATA







































        1000
      10000

CLEAN GAS FLOW, ACFM
100000
300000
                                                                589

-------
                          TABLE 223
            CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
   OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR  GRAY IRON  FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
    Population Size - 20             Sample Size - 2

                      Capital Cost = $127,905

                                  Capital Cost, Dollars

Conf. Level, %             Lower Limit               Upper Limit

    90                  $124,829                 $130,981
    75                   121,092                  134,718
                      Capital Cost = $452,825

                                  Capital Cost, Dollars

Conf. Level, %             Lower Limit               Upper Limit

  /?90\                $350,177                 $555,473
  C 75 J                 225,503                  680,147
590

-------
                                  FIGURE 174
                     CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST


             OF FABRIC FILTERS FOR GRAY IRON  FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
   5,000,000
   1,000,000
CO

DC
o
Q


fe
o
U
Q.

<

U
    100,000
     10,000

                                                     >.x
                                                                90%.
                                                                75%	


                                                                MEAN
                                                                75%
                                                                90%
                                  10000



                             CLEAN GAS FLOW, ACFM
                                                           100000
300000
                                                                591

-------
                                    TABLE 224

                      WET SCRUBBER  PROCESS DESCRIPTION
                     FOR GRAY IRON  CUPOLA SPECIFICATION
     Emissions from a pair of new gray iron cupolas are to be controlled with a wet scrubber.
The cupolas are to operate alternately, so the emissions from only one need be treated. The
cupolas are conventional  refractory lined units. Gas takeoffs are above the charge doors.
Products of combustion and charge door indraft are preheated to a temperature sufficient that
the gases leaving the cupola and entering the pollution control system will be 1,20CPF. Each
cupola is  operated for  24 hours then shutdown for maintenance while the other cupola is
operating. The yearly operating factor for the pollution control system is 5,280 hr/yr.

     The abatement system will consist of:

     1.   A quencher

     2.   A wet scrubber

     An afterburner will be supplied by others. It will be located in the stack above the charge
door. The  geometry of the installation will be arranged to insure sufficient turbulence for
complete combustion. Stack inserts to achieve turbulence may be used if necessary.

     The quencher will be used to lower the temperature of the afterburner exhaust gas to the
inlet temperature of the wet scrubber. The quencher should be located immediately after the
gases leave the  top of the cupola. The quencher  should be designed to lower  the gas
temperature from a maximum of 2,200°F to less than 200°F scrubber inlet temperature. The
cupola gas leaves the unit at a height of 50 feet above grade. The duct after the quencher must
transport the cooled gas to  the scrubber inlet located 40 feet away from the quencher. The
quencher is 15 feet away from the cupola.

     The wet scrubber will be a venturi-type with a liquid-to-gas ratio in excess of 5 gpm/1,000
ACFM (saturated).  Materials of construction  will be 316L stainless steel or equivalent. The
system will include the following:

     1.   A fan, located downstream of  the scrubber sized with 20% excess capacity when
         operating at the design pressure and 90% of the maximum recommended speed.

     2.   A slurry settling assembly capable of producing a thickened underflow (30% solids)
         while returning water with minimum solids content.

     3.   A minimum of at least two filters to dewater the slurry product which are capable of
         producing  a  filter cake  with  >  65%  solids content suitable  for  open  truck
         transportation.

     4.   An  aftercooler capable of lowering the scrubber effluent gas temperature to 105°F
         by countercurrent contact with 90°F cooling water (Case II - High  Efficiency only).
 592

-------
                                TABLE  225

                   WET SCRUBBER OPERATING  CONDITIONS
                   FOR GRAY  IRON  CUPOLA SPECIFICATION
                                        Small
                   Large
Cupola Inside Diameter, in.
Cupola Melt Rate, ton/hr
Cupola Iron/Coke Ratio
Cupola Process Weight, Ib/hr

Afterburner Exhaust Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
     DSCFM
     Water Content, vol%
     Solids Loading
       Ib/hr
       gr/ACF
       gr/DSCF
Quencher Outlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     Water Content, vol%
     SCFM
     DSCFM
     Solids Loading
       Ib/hr
       gr/ACF
       gr/DSCF

     Solids Size Distribution
       % > 10 microns
       % < 10 microns
       % < 5 microns
       % <  1 micron
       % < 0.7 micron
       % < 0.3 micron
48
10
10
22,400
41,800
2,000
9,000
8,820
2
108
0.301
1.429
18,700
200
41
15,000
8,820
108
0.21
1.429
114
60
10
134,400
220,000
2,000
47,500
46,550
2
540
0.286
1.353
98,300
200
41
73,900
46,550
540
0.20
1.353
   68
   32
   24
   11
    8
    1
    68
    32
    24
    11
     8
     1
Scrubber Outlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     Water Content, vol
     SCFM
     DSCFM
Aftercooler Outlet Gas
     ACFM
     Temperature, °F
     SCFM
     Water Content, vol
     DSCFM
18,100
   171
   42
15,200
8,820
     J
10,300
   105
 9,660
   8.7
 8,820
95,500
   171
    42
80,200
46,550

54,400
   105
51,000
   8.7
46,550
                                                                        593

-------
594

-------
                                             Small                . Large

                               Case I — Medium Efficiency

Solids Loading
     Ib/hr                                     20.4                   40
     gr/ACF                                   0.16                 0.06
     gr/DSCF                                  0.27                 0.10
Collection Efficiency, wt.%                      81.1                 92.6
Scrubber, A P                                25 in. w.c.            25 in.  w.c.

                                Case II — High Efficiency

Solids Loading
     Ib/hr                                      0.9                   4.7
     gr/ACF                                 0.010                0.010
     gr/DSCF                                0.011                 0.011
Collection Efficiency, wt.%                      99.1                 99.1
Scrubber, A P                                60 in. w.c.            60 in. w.c.
                                                                               595

-------
                      TABLE 226

    ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST DATA (COSTS IN DOLLARS)
               FOR WET SCRUBBERS FOR
              GRAY IRON  FOUNDRY CUPOLAS


Effluent Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
SCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Effluent Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaned Gas Flow
ACFM
°F
DSCFM
Moisture Content, Vol. %
Cleaned Gas Contaminant Loading
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Cleaning Efficiency, %
( 1 ) Gas Cleaning Device Cost
(2) Auxiliaries Cost
(a) Fan(s)
(b) Pump(s)
(c) Damper(s)
(d) Conditioning,
Equipment
(e) Dust Disposal
Equipment
(3) Installation Cost
(a) Engineering
(b) Foundations
& Support
Ductwork
Stack
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Supervision
Startup
Performance Test
Other





\
/






(4) Total Cost
LA Process Wt.
Small

41,800
2,000
9,000
2

0.301


18,100 *
171
8,820
42-"
*
0.16
20.4
81.1
19,067



56,700










117,166







192,933
Large

220,000
2,000
47,500
2

0.286


95,500
17;
46,550
42

0.06
40.0
92.6
55,833



110,120










203,467







369,420
High Efficiency
Small

41,800
2,000
9,000
2

0.301


10,300-
105"
8,820'
'.
99. 1
22,567



71,833










131,333







225,733
Large

220,000
2,000
47,500
2

0.286


54,400
105
46,550
8.7

0.01
4.7
99.1
69,000



149,567










239,800







458,367
596

-------
                                                     TABLE 227
                                    ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA (COSTS  IN $/YEAR)
                                              FOR WET SCRUBBERS  FOR
                                            GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
Operating Cost Item
Operating Factor, Hr/Year
Operating Labor (if any)
Operator
Supervisor
Total Operating Labor
Maintenance
Labor
Materials
Total Maintenance
Replacement Parts
Total Replacement Parts
Utilities
Electric Power
Fuel
Water (Process)
Water (Cooling)
Chemicals, Specify
Total Utilities
Total Direct Cost
Annualized Capital Charges
Total Annual Cost
Unit
Cost


$6/hr









$.011/kw-hr

$.25/M gal
$.05/M gal





LA Process Wt.
Small
5,280

4,560

4,560



5,923

4,290

7,969

1,520


9,489
24,262
19,293
43,555
Large
5,280

4,560

4,560



10,248

9,300

63,629

9,738


73,367
97,475
36,942
134,417
High Efficiency
Small
5,280

4,560

4,560



6,898

5,415

17,389

2,080
6,490

25,959
42,832
22,573
65,405
Large
5,280

4,560

4,560



12,398

11,770

121,055

9,738
37,734

168,527
197,255
45,837
243,092
01
CO

-------
                                FIGURE  175



                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS

                     FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS

                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
o
Q


b
O
O
a.
<
o
100000
10000
1000



1





















URNF



;EY



S\



ST
COLLECTOR PI
AUXILIARIE




C













DLL













EC













TO












Er



r
.us
SI -J





={














/
o












•e


4





M












f


1




/
f
L'











^
_^
^^^
^r^




s
/
Y










.^
s*
^





>
/












^

^




^t
/













&

&




J?
W *f













**


^



/



















































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                            GAS FLOW, DSCFM
          598

-------
                               FIGURE 176

                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR WET  SCRUBBERS
                    FOR GRAY IRON  FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
                           (MEDIUM EFFICIENCY)
    500000
V)
tr
O
a
CO
O
u
100000
10000
1000









(
PLUS



















TOT
OPER;
> CAP

c

















AL
vnr
TAI

)PEF

























COST
JG CQ
. CHA

*A-










•IN


















S'
R
A
f
G


















\,









f









/
GES)
/
C









^
O









y
S'















.s
s^
s
s
/
r
r













^x*^
^

/
s
















/

s
f


















ti
jo




















/
/























































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                            GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                             599

-------
                                FIGURE 177
                     CAPITAL COSTS FOR WET SCRUBBERS

                     FOR  GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS

                             (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
    100000
CO
DC
O
Q
8
_j
<
H
t£

O
     10000
      1000
                  TURN
                       KEY SYSTEM
                     COLLECTOR
                  PLUS AUXILIARIES
                 COLLECTOR ONLY
        1000
                                 10000


                             GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
         600

-------
                               FIGURE  178

                    ANNUAL COSTS FOR  WET SCRUBBERS
                     FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
                            (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
    500000
co
DC
o
Q
o
100000
10000
1000








(OP
PLUS C






























FOTAL COST
ERATING CC
IAPITAL CHX

























Ol

















)S7
\R(








BE







^
S)







<**

0
JV
JEF










IA










T










l\
















/


/

G














J* A
S /
s
S
/


COST













^
f



















J
/




















Hi




















,>
/
























































































































































1000 10000 100000 300000
                            GAS FLOW, DSCFM
                                                            601

-------
                           TABLE  228
             CONFIDENCE LIMITS FOR CAPITAL COST
    OF WET SCRUBBERS  FOR GRAY IRON  FOUNDRY CUPOLAS
                       (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
     Population Size — 20             Sample Size — 3

                       Capital Cost = $225,733

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

 Conf. Level, %             Lower Limit              Upper Limit

     50                  $187,854                $263,613
     75                   152,339                 299,128
     90                    97,689                 353,777
                       Capital Cost = $458,367 '

                                   Capital Cost, Dollars

 Conf. Level, %             Lower Limit              Upper Limit

     50                  $348,419                $568,315
     75                   245,333                 671,401
     90                    86,709                 830,024
602

-------
                                  FIGURE 179
                     CONFIDENCE  LIMITS FOR  CAPITAL COST

             OF WET SCRUBBERS FOR GRAY IRON FOUNDRY CUPOLAS

                              (HIGH EFFICIENCY)
   5,000,000
   1,000,000
V)
tc
o
Q


te
o
o
Q.

<

O
    100,000
     10,000
        1000
    10000



GAS FLOW, DSCFM
100000
300000
                                                                 603

-------
                             REFERENCES
 1.   Systems Analysis of Emissions and Emissions Control in the Iron Foundry
     Industry, Vols.  I, II,  and III, A. T. Kearny and Co., Chicago, III., 1971.
     EPA Contract No. CPA 22-69-106

 2.   A  Localized Study of Gray  Iron Foundries to Determine Business and
     Technical Commonalities Conducive to Reducing Abatement Costs, J. A.
     Commins & Associates, Inc., Fort Washington, Pa., 1972. EPA Contract
     No. 68-04-0043

 3.   Air Pollution  Engineering Manual, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and
     Welfare, Public  Health  Services Publication No. 999-AP-40,  Cincinnati,
     Ohio, 1967.

 4.   Hultgren, Ralph, Fundamentals of Physical Metallurgy, Prentice Hall, Inc.,
     New York, N.Y., 1952.

 5.   Iron  Foundry  Cupola-Recuperator  Demonstration,  Conceptual Test
     Program Definition, Catalytic, Inc., Charlotte, N.C., 1972. EPA Contract
     No. 68-02-0241.

6.   Industry Census  Guide, Metal Casting Journal, 1972 edition.
7.   The Cupola  and  Its Operation, American Foundrymen's Society, 3rd
     edition,  1965.

8.   Whiting  Corporation, Harvey, Illinois 60426.
 604

-------
COST CORRELATIONS

-------
C.   ADDITIONAL COST DATA

     The previous section of this report dealt with the cost of air pollution
control systems for eight specific  processing applications.  This section deals
with the generalized correlation of costs for each type of control system for all
eight of the process applications discussed. The discussion is divided into four
parts:

     1.  A discussion of the  annual  operating cost basis,  including both the
         direct and capital charge  portions of this cost.

     2.  A discussion  of the effects of utility price levels on overall  costs.

     3.  Derivation of capital cost indices for each specific process application.

     4.  Generalized graphical correlations of capital and operating costs for
         each type of control system.


1.   Discussion of Cost Basis

     As noted in the introduction  to this report, the total annual cost for a
particular control system  is the sum of the direct annual operating cost and an
annualized  capital charge.

     In the previous section of this report the annual direct operating costs for
air pollution control systems in specific processing applications were calculated
using estimates supplied by the equipment manufacturers. These  estimates were
prepared in terms of the quantity of each operating cost  item required, rather
than the cost.  A standard  price was applied to these estimates by the coordinat-
ing engineer in order to determine the equivalent cost. The standard prices used
are listed below:

     Cost Item                          Units          Price,  $/Unit

Operating Labor
     Operator                         man hrs              6
     Supervisor                       man hrs              8
Maintenance
     Materials                           *                  *
     Labor                            man hrs              6
Replacement Parts
Utilities
     Electric Power                    kwh               0.011
     Fuel                             mm Btu            0.80
     Process Water                     M Gal              0.25
     Cooling Water                     M Gal              0.05
     Chemicals                          *
                                                                         605

-------
     The sum of all the above items applied over a year's operation is the direct
annual operating cost of the system.

     The total annual cost of each system is calculated by adding the annual-
ized capital charges to the direct annual  operating cost.  In calculating  the
annualized capital charges, the  investment cost of the system, including taxes
and  interest, must be spread out over the useful  life of the equipment. Many
methods for annualizing  investment cost are used. These methods fall  into
three major categories:

     1.   Straight line  method which applies the capital charges at a fixed rate
         over the useful life of  the control system.

     2.   Accelerated methods  which apply the  capital charges at a declining
         rate over the useful life, on the theory that aging or loss in value of
         equipment occurs to a greater degree on new equipment than on old
         equipment.

     3.   Methods which relate capital  charges to some measure of equipment
         usage.  These methods are seldom applied to processing equipment.
         The most  common example  is mileage-based depreciation of  auto-
         mobiles.

     Of the two methods applicable  to processing  equipment,  the  most
commonly  used  is the straight  line method. This is the method used for the
data presented in this report. Reasons for  its common use are:

     1.   It is easy to understand and calculate.

     2.   It is thought by many to be the best approximation of the rate of
         obsolescence of process equipment.

     3.   It makes alternate control  systems comparable  on an annualized
         cost basis  since  the  capital  charges based upon  this method  are
         constant from  year to year.

     Once the decision has been made to use this  method, the only critical
issue is what value to use for the useful life of the control system. The useful
life of any control system is, in reality, a composite of the useful  lives of its
component  parts. Some  of those parts have  relatively long  lives, others
relatively short lives.  The value chosen for the economic evaluation of a control
system depends upon: the nature of the primary control device, the differences
606

-------
in expected useful life of similar equipment from different manufacturers, the
maintenance practices of the owning firm, the battery limits defined for the
system, the number and kind of structures built, and the accounting practices
of the owning firm, among others. For these reasons, the value chosen will vary
from firm to firm even for similar systems.

     Taxes  may  also play a  part in the determination  of useful life.  Under
normal circumstances, control systems are depreciated over their normal useful
lives.  They  may, however, be depreciated for  tax  purposes  at an accelerated
rate. Under certain circumstances, defined  by the Internal Revenue Service, all
or part of the air pollution control equipment  may be amortized over a sixty
month period. In most cases, this period  is much shorter than the normal useful
life.  Accelerated depreciation for tax  purposes, especially the sixty month
amortization, has the effect of decreasing effective  operating cost by deferring
tax payments into the future. The discounted value of the cash outflow caused
by the operation of the pollution control system is thereby reduced.

     The  money market at the time of  equipment  purchase is another impor-
tant variable in the determination  of capital'charges. The rate at which money
is available  varies widely  from firm to  firm, as well as with  overall economic
considerations. The cost of capital for financing  by means other than borrowing
also  varies  over a wide range from firm  to firm. Variations  in  the cost of
financing  can be  large enough to affect  the choice between alternative control
systems.

     For  the purpose of presenting the annual  operating  cost data  in this
report,  it  was decided to use the same fixed percentage of total installed cost as
the capital charge for all of the applications studied. The rate chosen was 10%.
It was based upon an estimated  useful equipment life of 15 to  20 years, debt
capital availability at  6 to 8%, and a correction for the tax incentives available
to installers of pollution control hardware of 2 to 4%. Although the rate chosen
is a good  general estimate, it does not  purport to be the correct rate for any
specific situation. It  is used  only as a good estimate to assist the cost pre-
sentations in this report.
2.   Discussion of Utility Price Levels

     Evaluation of, and selection among, equivalent control systems should be
based upon both the capital cost and the operating cost. Part 1 of this section
discussed the capital portion of the total annual  operating cost and showed
that the direct operating cost is composed of the following items:
                                                                      607

-------
          Operating (operator and supervisor) Labor

          Maintenance Labor and Materials

          Replacement Parts

          Utilities and Supplies

     The  utilities  portion of the operating cost is a function of utility price
levels. Price levels vary due  to:

     1.   Geography — The price of natural gas, for example, is much higher
          in the New England states than in the Gulf Coast states.

     2.   Demand  — The demand for low sulfur black fuel oil keeps its price
          as  much as 50 cents per barrel  higher  than the equivalent higher
          sulfur fuel.

     3.   Nature of Use — The rates for interruptible gas service are lower than
          those for continuous  service,  and  rates  for  peak period  use of
          electrical service are as  much as twice the rates for off-hour power
          consumption.

     The  total operating cost is the sum of the direct operating cost and the
capital charges and is, therefore, a function of utility costs in varying degrees.
The price level effect on the operating cost is proportional to the portion of the
total cost which is due to utilities. These portions have been calculated for each
type  of control equipment considered  in  this  report, and  the results are
presented in Table 229.

     Table 229 shows that,  on the average, utilities account for 44 to 73% of
the total annual cost of wet scrubbers, while they account for only 13 to 18%
of the total annual cost of electrostatic precipitators. Therefore, the price level
of electrical power would effect the total annual operating cost of a wet scrub-
ber more than a precipitator.

     The effect of utility cost levels also varies within a given type of system.
Capital cost is a larger part  of the total cost of a small unit than it is of a large
unit of the same type. Therefore, the utility costs are smaller relative to the
total  annual  operating cost, and  have less  effect on  it.  Also, the  operating
parameters of a system affect the relative size of  the utility costs. Scrubbers
using a high  pressure drop, for example, require more power to push the gas
 608

-------
                           TABLE 229
                          UTILITY COSTS
    System
   As Percent Of
Direct Operating Cost
  As Percent Of
Total Annual Cost

Fabric Filters
Small
Large
Incinerators w/o H. E.
Small
Large
Incinerators with H. E.
Small
Large
Wet Scrubbers
Small
Large
Elec. Precipitators
Small
Large
Carbon Adsorption
Small
Large
Min.

18
34

53
76

33
39

24
28

26
36

—
—
Ave.

42
56

79
89

65
74

61
73

38
49

90
93
Max.

64
68

95
98

96
98

99.7
99.9

48
58

—
—
Min.

11
20

33
61

16
21

12
28

10
12

—
—
Ave.

23
32

59
77

47
57

44
73

13
18

66
72
Max.

41
48

84
92

83
88

99.1
99.9

17
22

—
—
Overall Average
         66
        48
                                                                609

-------
through, than do scrubbers having a low pressure drop. Therefore, utilities will
be  a  larger portion of the total  cost of high energy scrubbers than of low
energy scrubbers.

    Table 229 shows that for all the systems considered  in this report the cost
of utilities accounts, on the average, for  about two thirds of the direct cost of
operating a system, and for about one half of the total annual operating cost of
a system. The general  level of operating  costs is substantial,  and  requires that
price  levels be considered when alternatives are being compared.
3.   Derived Capital Cost Indices

     For each of the process applications discussed in the previous sections of
this  report, capital costs of pollution control equipment have been presented
for two or three different process sizes. This permits development of a mathe-
matical expression for the capital cost of air pollution control systems  as a
function of process size in each application. The mathematical model chosen
was  the exponential  form often  used for relating cost  and size of capital
equipment.

          Capital Cost   =   K (Size)x

Where

          K and  x are constants, and

          Size is the  capacity of the plant to which  the abatement
          equipment is being applied.

This relationship assumes that a log-log plot of cost and size is a straight line for
each application. For most types of equipment, this is a good assumption.

     The  constants K and  x  were evaluated  by computer for each abatement
application studied. Calculations were made for each of the three  capital  cost
categories presented in each application:

     1.    Collector only

     2.    Collector plus auxiliaries

     3.    Turnkey system
610

-------
Calculations were made using the computer program listed in Dartmouth Basic
Language in Table 230.

     The units of the "Size" term in the equation for each application are the
same as  those  used in the prior discussion  of that  application. They are
summarized in  Table 231 .

     The results of these calculations for generating capital costs in dollars, are
presented in the following tables:
     Process Area                                   Table Numbers
     Phosphates
         - WPPA                                    232
         - SPA                                      233
         - GTSP                                     234
         - DAP                                      235, 236, 237, 238
     Feed and Grain                                   239,240,241,242
     Paint and Varnish                                 243, 244, 245, 246
     Graphic Arts                                     247, 248, 249, 250, 251
     Gray Iron Foundries                              252, 253
     Lime Kilns                                       254, 255, 256, 257, 258
     Soap and Detergent                               259, 260, 261
Also shown  in these tables are the ratios of turnkey system cost to collector
cost, total equipment cost to collector cost, and turnkey system cost to total
equipment cost.

     Calculated values  of  the  exponents  for the power function can be
summarized by equipment type as follows:
                                                  (Text continued on page 644)
                                                                    611

-------
                                TABLE 230
120 FILES «
122 PRINT "FORM CONTROL"
124 INPUT Z
130 READ #1,N$
140 READ #1,E$,C$
145 IF END ttl THEN 650
150 IF J=l GO TO 230
160 PRINT
170 PRINT
180 PRINT "                     DERIVED COST INDICES FOR ";N$
185 PRINT
187 PRINT
188 PRINT
190 PRINT
200 PRINT "          COLLECTOR  TYPE";"            K"";"         X"";
201 PRINT "      B/A";"       C/A";"       C/B"
230 PRINT
240 FOR M = 1 TO 4
250 FOR N = I TO 2
260 READ #1, ACM,N)
270 NEXT N
280 NEXT M
290 FOR N = 1 TO 2
310 NEXT N
320 FOR M = 1 TO 3
330 XCM) = CLOGCACM,1))-LOGCACM,2)))/CLOGCAC4,1))-LOGCAC4,2)))
340 PCM) = CLOGCACM,1))+LOGCACM,2)))-XCM)"CLOGCAC4,1))+LOGCAC4,2)))
350 PCM) = EXPCPCM)/2)
360 NEXT M
370 FOR N = 1 TO 2
375 RC1,N)=AC2,N)/AC1,N)
380 RC2,N) = AC3/N)/AC1,N)
390 RC3,N)= AC3,N)/AC2,N)
400 NEXT N
410 PRINT "        ";E$
415 PRINT "        ";C$
420 PRINT, 530, PCD, XC1)
430 PRINT,540,PC2),XC2)
440 PRINT,550,PCS),XC3)
450 PRINT
460 PRINT,560,RC1,1),RC2,1),RC3,D
470 PRINT,570,RC1,2),RC2,2),RC3,2)
480 PRINT
500 J = 1
510 GOTO 140
530 FMT X10,"COLLECTOR ONLYCA)",X6,I 7,X4,F6.3,X6,"-",X8,"-",X8,"-"
540 FMT X10,"TOTAL EQUIPMENTCB)",X5,I 7,X4,F6.3,X6,"-",X8,"-",X8,"-"
550 FMT X10,"TURNKEYCC)",X13,I7,X4,F6.3,X6,"-",X8,"-",X8,"-"
560 FMT X12,"SMALL",X20,"-",X9,"-",X6,F6.3,X2,F7.3,X2,F6.3
570 FMT X12,"LARGE",X20,"-",X9,"-",X6,F6.3,X2,F7.3,X2,F6.3
580 PRINT
590 PRINT
600 PRINT "        "FOR USE  IN  EQUATION   COST = K::CS IZE )"EXPCX)"
610 FOR N = 1 TO 30
620 PRINT
630 NEXT N
640 GO TO 700
650 FOR Y=l TO 12
660 PRINT
670 NEXT Y
680 GOTO 600
700 END
           612

-------
                           TABLE 231

        UNITS OF PLANT  SIZE FOR EACH PROCESS AREA



Process Area                            Plant Size Units
Phosphates
    - WPPA                          Ton/day   P205
    - SPA                            Ton/day  Product
    - GTSP                          Ton/day   TSP
    - DAP                           Ton/day   DAP
Feed and Grain                         Lb/hr     Product
Paint and Varnish                       Gals      Total Reactor Capacity
Graphic Arts                          SCFM     Exhaust Rate
Gray Iron Foundries                    Ton/hr    Cupola Melt Rate
Lime Kilns                            Ton/day   Kiln Capacity
Soap and Detergent                     Lb/hr     Product Rate
                                                             613

-------
                              TABLE 232
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR WPPA  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
ONE-THIRD GAS FLOW
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
NORMAL GAS FLOW
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


1789
2390
11156
»
"

2186
4421
14195
_

x::


.248
.269
.200
_


.337
.287
.239
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.521
1.539

-
-
—
1.482
1.439
C/A


-
-
—
4.607
4.477

-
-
—
3.531
3.333
C/B


-
-
—
3.030
2.908

-
-
—
2.382
2.316
:FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K::( SI ZE)-EXP(X)
         614

-------
                             TABLE  233
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR SPA PROCESS PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
W-I VENTURI SCRUBBERS
NOMINAL EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT OB)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
VENTURI-PACKED SCRUBBE
NOMINAL EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


738
738
1460
_

*

1405
3011
6922
-
X"


.431
.431
.367
_



.299
.249
.249
-
B/A


_
1.000
1.000


_
1.662
1.605
C/A


_
1.439
1.377


_
3.823
3.692
C/B


_
1.439
1.377


_
2.300
2.300
:FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)-EXP(X)
                                                          615

-------
                              TABLE 234
            DERIVED COST INDICES  FOR  GTSP  PROCESS PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
VENTURI-PACKED SCRUBBEF
MOD. EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
VENTURI-PACKED SCRUBBEI
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"

322
438
1814
—
"

304
511
1943
—

X"

.760
.787
.703
»


.784
.775
.701
__

B/A

-
-
—
1.617
1.639

-
-
—
1.588
1.581
" C/A

-
-
—
3.951
3.847

-
-
—
3.813
3.667
C/B

-
-
—
2.443
2.348

-
-
—
2.401
2.319
:FOR  USE IN EQUATION  COST  =  K::CS I ZE)"EXP(X)
         616

-------
                              TABLE 235
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR DAP  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
VENTURI SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT^)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
MEDIUM
VENTURI SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
MEDIUM
LARGE
K"


316
179
2964
-


377
269
655
-
X"


.716
.870
.579
^


.690
.811
.798
-
B/A


-
1.542
1.641


_
1.641
1.737
C/A


_
3.848
3.641


_
3.641
3.829
C/B


-
2.495
2.218


_
2.218
2.204
:FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST - K"(S I ZE)-EXP(X)
                                                           617

-------
                              TABLE 236
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR DAP  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
2-STAGE CYC. SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTCB)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
MEDIUM
2-STAGE CYC. SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
MEDIUM
LARGE
K"


360
282
5399
—
—


480
424
995
«•

X"


.755
.832
.516
_
~


.714
.773
.761
_

B/A


-
-
-
1.287
1.328


-
-
-
1.328
1.365
C/A


-
-
-
3.163
2.870


-
-
—
2.870
2.934
C/B


-
-
—
2.457
2.162


-
-
—
2.162
2.150
:FOR .USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXPCX)
         618

-------
                              TABLE 237
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR DAP  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
MED. EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
MEDIUM
PACKED C-F SCRUBBER
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEYCO
SMALL
MEDIUM
K"


295
256
1509
_
"


140
158
1151
_•

X"


.656
.735
.574
_
"


.789
.821
.623
_

B/A


-
-
-
1.452
1.499


_
_
-
1.404
1.423
C/A


-
_
-
3.000
. 2.901


—
—
• -
2.808
2.626
C/B


-
—
-
2.066
1.936


_
_
-
2.000
1.846
-FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
                                                           619

-------
                              TABLE 238
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR  DAP  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
PACKED C-F SCRUBBER
MED. EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
MEDIUM
LARGE
PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLYCA)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
MEDIUM
LARGE
K"


35
135
595
*~


133
325
957
-
X5:


.96?
.828
.709
-


.795
.717
.650
-
B/A


-
1.499
1.404


-
:
1.423
1.371
C/A


_
2.901
2.570


-
:
2.626
2.452
C/B


_
1.936
1.830


-
-
1.846
1.788
:FOR  USE IN EQUATION  COST = K::( SI ZE)"EXP(X)
         620

-------
                              TABLE 239
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR FLOUR MILLING
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTCB)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K»


15
21
30
_
"

X"


.626
.628
.622
—
"

B/A


-
-
—
1.415
1.420

C/A


-
-
—
1.903
1.896

C/B


-
-
—
1.345
1.335

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST -  K"(SIZE)»EXP(X)
                                                            621

-------
                              TABLE 240
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR  FEED  GRINDING
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K«


1395
1761
3553
_
^

X"


.734
.713
.692
_
"

B/A


-
-
—
1.215
1.180

C/A
(

-
-
—
2.361
2.227

C/B


-
-
—
1.9^3
1.887

-FOR USE IN EQUATION   COST  =  K"(SIZE)-EXP(X)
         622

-------
                              TABLE 241
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR FEED  FLASH  DRYERS
COLLECTOR TYPE
THERMAL INCINERATOR
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTCB)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


18?
176
279
_
"

x»


.648
.662
.635
«-
"

B/A


-
-
-
1.065
1.09^

C/A


-
-
—
1.336
1.304

C/B


-
-
—
1.255
1.192

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
                                                           623

-------
                              TABLE 242
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR  FEED FLASH DRYERS
COLLECTOR TYPE
WET SCRUBBER
MED. EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLYCA)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
WET SCRUBBER
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K::


44
77
570
._
MB


41
72 .
538
—

xj:


.611
.577
.443
_
™


.622
.587
.451
_

B/A


-
-
-
1.293
1.210


-
-
-
1.282
1.198
C/A


-
-
—
2.915
2.105


-
-
-
2.845
2.042
C/B


-
-
—
2.255
1.740


-
-
—
2.220
1.705
-FOR .USE IN EQUATION   COST  = K:c(SI ZE)"EXP(X)
          624

-------
                              TABLE 243
           DERIVED  COST INDICES FOR OPEN KETTLES
COLLECTOR TYPE
INCINERATORS W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


6473
6481
12443
*
*•

x::


.118
.142
.120
_
^

B/A


-
-
—
• 1.136
1.184

C/A


-
-
—
1.941
1.948

C/B


-
-
—
1.709
1.645

:FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
                                                            625

-------
                              TABLE 244
            DERIVED COST  INDICES FOR OPEN  KETTLES
COLLECTOR TYPE
CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLYCA)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


1619
1978
4805
_
—

X"


.378
.372
.297
_
—

B/A


-
-
—
1.185
1.174

C/A


-
-
—
1.937
1.686

C/B


-
-
—
1.634
1.436

-FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST =  K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
         626

-------
                              TABLE 245
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR RESIN  REACTOR
COLLECTOR TYPE
INCINERATORS W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
INCRS. WITH H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K::


336
322
972
..
~


1692
1552
2432
_

X:c


.457
.482
.408
_
~*


' .345
.367
.351
_

B/A


-
-
-
1.184
1.224


-
-
—
1.100
1.132
C/A


-
-
-
1.932
1.811


-
-
—
1.508
1.520
C/B


-
-
—
1.632
1.480


-
-
—
1.371
1.342
:FOR -USE IN EQUATION  COST = K::( SI ZE)"EXP(X)
                                                            627

-------
                              TABLE 246
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR RESIN  REACTORS
COLLECTOR TYPE
CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
CAT. INCRS. WITH H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


435
451
889
_
—


1134
1023
1725
—

X"


.478
.493
.454
_
••


.402
.430
.401
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.174
1.197


-
-
—
1.145
1.190
C/A


-
-
—
1.669
1.616


-
-
—
1.510
1.508
C/B


-
-
—
1.422
1.350


-
-
—
1.318
1.268
= FOR -USE  IN EQUATION  COST =  K::(S I ZE)"EXP(X)
         628

-------
                             TABLE  247
            DERIVED  COST INDICES FOR WEB-OFFSET PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
INCINERATORS W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT^!)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


3153
2751
6347
_
—


354
373
1137
_

X"


.214
.247
.205
_
—


' .516
.522
.427
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.116
1.163


-
-
—
1.100
1.108
C/A


-
-
—
1.871
1.848


-
-
—
1.628
1.456
C/B


-
-
—
1.676
1.590


-
-
—
1.480
1.314
{FOR "USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(S IZE )"EXP(X)
                                                            629

-------
                             TABLE  248
           DERIVED  COST  INDICES FOR METAL DECORATING
COLLECTOR TYPE
INCINERATOR W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEYCC)
SMALL
LARGE
INCRS. WITH H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


173
191
1071
_
~


5465
3713
6488
_

X"


.551
.555'
.426
_
•••


.215
.271
.258
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.139
1.144


-
-
-
1.086
1.144
C/A


-
-
—
2.186
1.949


-
-
-
1.690
1.757
C/B


-
-
—
1.918
1.704


-
-
—
1.556
1.537
:FOR .USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
         630

-------
                              TABLE 249
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR  METAL DECORATING
COLLECTOR TYPE
CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
CAT. INCRS. WITH H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEYCC)
SMALL
LARGE
K»


302
259
542
_
~


695
570
1012
_

X"


.537
.566
.515 ,
«
"


.476
.510
.473
_

B/A


-
-
' -
1.087
1.116


-
-
-
1.084
1.119
C/A


-
-
-
1.493
1.463


• -
-
-
1.414
1.409
C/B


-
-
-
1.374
1.3H


-
-
-
1.304
1.260
-FOR -USE IN EQUATION  COST  =  K"(S I ZE)-EXP(X)
                                                            631

-------
                             TABLE  250
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
INCRS. WITH H.E.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


164
114
324
_
—

X"


.604
.653
.579
_
"
'
B/A
,

-
-
-
1.108
• 1.146

C/A


-
• - •
-
1.560 '
1.533

C/B


-
-
—
1.408
1.337

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXPCX)
         632

-------
                              TABLE 251
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR GRAVURE  PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
CARBON ADSORPTION
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLYCA)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


73398
77154
159821
_
—

x::


.776
.772
.701
	
—
•
B/A


-
-
—
1.046
1.042

C/A


-
-
—
1.964
1.810

C/B



-
—
1.878
1.738

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
                                                            633

-------
                              TABLE 252
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR GRAY  IRON  CUPOLAS
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


4860
"9865
25195
_
—

X"


.738
.762
.706
—
™

B/A


-
-
—
2.142
2.233

C/A


-
-
—
4.808
4.535

C/B


-
-
—
2.245
2.031

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST = K"CSIZE)-EXP(X)
         634

-------
                             TABLE  253
            DERIVED  COST INDICES FOR GRAY IRON CUPOLAS
COLLECTOR TYPE
WET SCRUBBERS
LA PROCESS WT.
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
WET SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


4793
27663
83726
_
~


5367
32093
90839
_

X"


.600
.438
.363
_
—


.624
.469
.395
_

B/A


-
-
-
3.974
2.972


-
-
-
4.183
3.168
C/A


—
-
-
10.119
6.617


-
-
-
10.003
6.643
C/B


_
-
- .
2.546
2.226


—
—
—
2.391
2.097
:FOR USE  IN  EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)-EXP(X)
                                                           635

-------
                              TABLE  254
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR ROTARY LIME  SLUDGE  KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
LA PROCESS WT.
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTCEO
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEYCO
SMALL
LARGE
K::


146
278
332
_
—


225
484
781
_

X"


.593
.562
.593
—
—


.568
.525
.529
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.386
1.336


-
-
—
1.372
1.303
C/A


-

—
2.283
2.284


-
-
—
2.305
2.198
C/B


-
-
—
1.647
1.709


-
-
—
1.679
1.687
:FOR XISE IN EQUATION  COST  =  K::(S I ZE)-EXP(X)
         636

-------
                             TABLE  255
           DERIVED  COST  INDICES  FOR ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
WET SCRUBBERS
LA PROCESS WT.
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
WET SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K::

31
17
326
-


51
26
402
-
X"

.601
.715
.524
-


' .570
.697
.522
-
B/A

_
-
1.780
2.044


-
1.915
2.231
C/A

_
-
4.695
4.280


-
4.765
4.494
C/B

	
-
2.637
2.094


_
2.488
2.014
"FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXP(X)
                                                           637

-------
                              TABLE 256
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR  VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
LA PROCESS WT.
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT^)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K»


401
311
339
_
—


315
352
742
_

X"


.-450
.508
.5^3
_
—


.496
.515
.492
—

B/A


-
-
-
1.450
1.509


-
-
-
1.381
1.400
C/A


-
-
—
2.306
2.459


-
-
-
2.268
2.262
C/B


_—
-
-
1.591
1.629


-
-
-
1.642
1.616
:FOR  USE  IN EQUATION  COST =  K"(S I ZE )::EXP(X)
         638

-------
                              TABLE  257
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR VERTICAL LIME ROCK KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTCB;
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


19
68
238
_
—

x:c


.770
.665
.592
_
—

B/A


-
-
-
1.340
1.179

C/A


-
-
—
2.297
1.846

C/B


-
-
—
1.713
1.566

"FOR USE IN EQUATION   COST  = K"( S I ZE)::EXP(X)
                                                            639

-------
                              TABLE 258
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK  KILN
COLLECTOR TYPE
WET SCRUBBERS
LA PROCESS WT.
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENTS)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
WET SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


34
42
476
_
—


34
101
800
—

x»


.551
.579
.443
—
—


.550
.508
.403
_

B/A


-
-
-
1.658
1.717


-
-
—
1.963
1.864
C/A


' -
-
-
5.056
4.435


-
-
—
5.647
4.716
C/B


-
-
—
3.050
2.583


-
-
—
2.877
2.529
:FOR USE  IN  EQUATION  COST = K"(SIZE)"EXPCX)
         640

-------
                              TABLE 259
            DERIVED COST INDICES FOR DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
COLLECTOR TYPE
WET SCRUBBERS
MED. EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE
WET SCRUBBERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEYCC)
SMALL
LARGE
K"


50
71
485
_
—


89
126
691
.

X"


.641
.646
.532 ,
_
—


.581
.605
.519
_

B/A


-
-
—
1.482
1.492


-
-
—
1.796
1.856
C/A


-
-
—
3.318
2.854


-
-
—
4.190
3.843
C/B


-
-
—
2.238
1.913


-
-
—
2.334
2.070
:FOR  USE IN EQUATION  COST =  K::(S I ZE)::EXP(X)
                                                            641

-------
                              TABLE 260
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR  DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K::


2
5
10
__
—

X-


.985
.928
.915
__
~

B/A


-
-
—
1.328
1.226

C/A


—
-
—
2.469
2.242

C/B


-
-
—
1.860
1.828

"FOR USE IN EQUATION  COST  =  K"CSIZE)"EXPCX)
         642

-------
                              TABLE  261
            DERIVED COST  INDICES  FOR SOAP & DET. PROD.  HANDLING
COLLECTOR TYPE
FABRIC FILTERS
HIGH EFFICIENCY
COLLECTOR ONLY(A)
TOTAL EQUIPMENT(B)
TURNKEY(C)
SMALL
LARGE

K"


1
3
6
—
—

x::


.999
.942
.926
_
—

B/A


-
-
—
1.350
1.246

C/A


-
-
—
2.516
2.272

C/B


-
-
—
1.864
1.824

::FOR USE  IN EQUATION   COST = K::(S I ZE)"EXP(X)
                                                            643

-------
                                Maximum     Minimum   Arithmetic
Equipment Type                    Value        Value      Average

Fabric Filters
     Collector Only                 .999          .626        .816
     Turnkey System                .915          .622        .772

Carbon Adsorption
     Collector Only                  -            -         .776
     Turnkey System                 —            —         .701

Wet Scrubbers
     Collector Only                 .795          .248        .626
     Turnkey System                .798          .200        .514

Electrostatic Precipitators
     Collector Only                 .593      ,    .450        .527
     Turnkey System                .598          .492        .539

Incinerators
     Collector Only                 .648          .118        .402
     Turnkey System                .635          .120        .396

     Of the five  types of equipment involved, fabric filters had the highest
exponent. This was to be expected since fabric filtering equipment tends to be
additive. That is, to increase the capacity  of a fabric filter system one can many
times add another unit. This becomes more practicable with larger air flows.
Many of the fabric filter systems were under 25,000 ACFM. Had more been in
the 50,000-and-up range, the cost-to-size relationship would have been even
closer to linear.

     The exponent for incinerators  had  values from  .120 in the 500 ACFM
range to .635  in the 100,000 ACFM  range. The average was 0.4 — the lowest
for all the types of control systems considered in this report. This was below
the 0.6 exponent usually assumed, because a number  of the incinerators were
of  relatively  small  size.  Every  incinerator, regardless of size,  requires an
extensive system of safety control devices to prevent explosions. This system is
a significant part of the cost of incinerators. So in the small size range the cost
of increasing size is relatively small.

     The average exponent derived for carbon adsorption collectors was .776.
The limited  amount  of data  on  these  systems  precludes  drawing many
644

-------
conclusions,  but  the  cost data  presented  in  this report could  be safely
extrapolatable down to one gravure press, or 12,450 ACFM.

     Wet scrubbers had  an average exponent of .626 — somewhat higher  than
the 0.6 usually assumed for equipment. A number of the scrubbers had an  inlet
gas flow rate above 100,000 ACFM. In this range the basic design of scrubbers
must be changed to handle  the high volumes of  gas, and  the  cost starts
increasing more rapidly with  size.

     Exponents for electrostatic  precipitators varied from .450 to .593,  with
an  average value of .527. In  only  one  application was  the  gas flow above
100,000 ACFM. Precipitator flow rates from 300,000 to 600,000 ACFM are
not unusual. A major capital expense of precipitators is the power supply that
is required. This costs nearly as much for small precipitators as for large ones.
Therefore, the cost of small precipitators does not increase as rapidly with size
as would be expected in  larger designs.

     The use of the derived capital cost equations outside the range of the  data
from which  they were calculated  is valid  within certain limitations. Very small
equipment installations  tend to have relatively high capital costs which do not
correlate well with size. Small  systems cost roughly the  same regardless of the
treated  gas throughput. Very  large systems are frequently based on  different
designs than their smaller counterparts, or are composed of several smaller units.
Consequently, the derived cost indices will  be inaccurate for these larger sizes.
Numerical values for these large  and small limitations depend upon  both the
nature of the abatement equipment and the nature of the process to which it is
applied. Generalizations of these numerical values can be made, however, and
they are presented below as guidelines.

                                 Small  Limit, ACFM    Large Limit, ACFM

     Scrubbers                       2,000                  100,000
     Fabric Filters                    2,000                 very large
     Precipitators                    50,000                 very large
     Incinerators                     2,000                   50,000

     The basic capital cost data collected were also used to calculate the  cost
per SCFM of inlet gas  for each application.  Results of these  calculations are
presented  in the following tables:
                                                                     645

-------
    Process Area                   Table Numbers

    Phosphates
        - WPPA                     262
        - SPA                       263
        - GTSP                      264
        - DAP                       265, 266, 267, 268
    Feed and Grain                    269,270,271,272
    Paint and Varnish                  273, 274, 275, 276
    Graphic Arts                      277, 278, 279, 280, 281
    Gray Iron Foundries                282, 283
    Lime Kilns                        284, 285, 286, 287, 288
    Soap and Detergent                289, 290, 291
646

-------
                     TABLE 262
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM" FOR WPPA  PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
  ONE-THIRD GAS FLOW
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
     .  TURNKEY SYSTEM
8332
1.00
1.53
4.63
  .81
 1.25
 3.63
  WET SCRUBBERS
  NORMAL GAS FLOW
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
8332
2.12
3.15
7.50
11954
 1.80
 2.60
 6.02
    :BASED ON SCFM AT 70- DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                   647

-------
                     TABLE 263
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM" FOR SPA PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
VENTURI SCRUBBERS
NOMINAL EFFICIENCY
GAS FLOW, SCFM
COLLECTOR ONLY
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
TURNKEY SYSTEM
VENTURI-PACKED SCRUBBER '
NOMINAL EFFICIENCY
GAS FLOW, SCFM
COLLECTOR ONLY
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
TURNKEY SYSTEM
SMALL


1252
5.10
5.10
7.33


1252
5.02
8.35
19.21 '
LARGE


2506
3.43
•• 3.43
4.73


2506
3.09
4.96
11.41
   -BASED  ON  SCFM AT 70.DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET  INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
648

-------
                  TABLE 264
     DERIVED COST PER SCFM" FOR GTSP PROCESS PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
VENTUR I -PACKED SCRUBBER
MOD. EFFICIENCY
GAS FLOW, SCFM .
COLLECTOR ONLY
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
. TURNKEY SYSTEM
VENTURI-PAC.KED SCRUBBER '
HIGH EFFICIENCY
GAS FLOW, SCFM
COLLECTOR ONLY
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
TURNKEY SYSTEM
SMALL


33870
1.09
1.76
4.31


33870
1.20
1.91
4.58
LARGE


54077
.90
1.60
3.76


54077
1.09
1.72
3.99
'BASED  ON  SCFM AT 70-DEG.  F AT COLLECTOR
    INLET  INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                               649

-------
                     TABLE 265
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
  VENTURI SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 (SMALL)

 30641
  1.09
  1.67
  4.18
(MEDIUM)

46127
  .96
 1.58
 3.51
  VENTURI SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
(MEDIUM)

 46127
 .  .96
  1.58
  3.51
(LARGE)

73703
  .83
 1.45
 3.19
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC.  F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
 650

-------
                     TABLE 266
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DAP PROCESS PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
  CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
(SMALL)

 30641
  1.60
  2.05
  5.05
(MEDIUM)

46127
 1.44
 1.91
 4.13
  CYCLONIC SCRUBBERS
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
(MEDIUM)

 46127
  1.44
  1,91
  4.13
(LARGE)

73703
 1.26
 1.72
 3.70
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                  651

-------
                     TABLE 267
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DAP PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 MEDIUM
  PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
  MED. EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
3022?
  .70
 1.01
 2.09
44305
  .62
  .93
 1.80
  PACKED C-F SCRUBBER
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
30227
.  .78
 1.09
 2.19
44305
  .73
 1.04
 1.92
   ::BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG..  F  AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
 652

-------
                     TABLE 268
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DAP PROCESS  PLANTS
COLLECTOR TYPE
                                  MEDIUM
              LARGE
  PACKED C-F SCRUBBER
  MED. EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
44305
  .62
  .93
 1.80
70805
  .61
  .86
 1.57
  PACKED C-F SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
44305
  .73
 1.04
 1.92
70805
  .66
  .91
 1.63
   -BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                  653

-------
                     TABLE 269
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR FLOUR MILLING
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
6000
 .92
1.31
1.76
20000
  .59
  .83
 1.12
   "BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEC.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
 654

-------
                     TABLE 270
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR FEED GRINDING
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
1.17
1.H2
2.76
17982
  .80
  • 9V
 1.78
   -BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG.  F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  655

-------
                     TABLE  271
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  THERMAL INCINERATOR
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY 'SYSTEM
8*113
7.12
7.58
9.51
58889
 3.58
 3.91
 4.67
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
656

-------
                     TABLE 272
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR FEED FLASH DRYERS
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  WET SCRUBBER
  MED. EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
8413
1.20
1.55
3.50
58889
  .56
  .68
 1.18
  WET SCRUBBER
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY 'SYSTEM
8413
1.25
1.60
3.54
58889
  .60
  .71
 1.22
    :BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                  657

-------
                     TABLE 273
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR OPEN  KETTLES
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  INCINERATORS W/0 H.E,
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
  500
24.18
27.47
46.95
2999
4.94
5.84
9.61
   -BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
658

-------
                     TABLE 274
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR OPEN KETTLES
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
  500
23.97
28.41
 2999
 7.66
 8.99
12.92
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG.  F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  659

-------
                     TABLE 275
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR RESIN REACTORS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  INCINERATORS W/0 H.E,
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2999
 4.94
 5.84
 9.54
9996
2.71
3.31
4.90
  INCRS. WITH H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2999
 9.90
10.88
14.92
9996
4.69
5.31
7.12
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG.  F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
660

-------
                     TABLE 276
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR RESIN REACTORS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2999
 •7.67
 9.00
12.79
9996
4.33
5.18
6.99
  CAT. INCRS. WITH H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2999
10.57
12.11
15.96
9996
5.39
6.41
8.13
    :BASED ON  SCFM  AT  70  DEC,  F AT COLLECTOR
        INLET  INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  661

-------
                     TABLE 277
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR WEB-OFFSET  PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  INCINERATORS W/0 H.E,
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2002
 8.03
 8.96
15.02
7001
3.00
3.^9
5-55
  CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 2002
 8.97
 9.86
14.60
7001
4.90
5.43
7.13
   "BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEC.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
662

-------
                     TABLE 278
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR METAL DECORATING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  INCINERATOR W/0 H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 3991
 4.20
 4.79
 9.19
9978
2.79
3.19
5.43
  INCRS. WITH H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW, SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 3991
 8.14
 8.84
13.76
9978
3-97
4.54
6.97
    :BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEG.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
        INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  663

-------
                     TABLE 279
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR METAL DECORATING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
LARGE
  CAT. INCRS. W/0 H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 3991
 6.52
 7.09
 9.73
9978
4.27
4.76
6.24
  CAT. INCRS. WITH H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 3991
 9.06
 9.82
12.81
9978
5.61
6.27
7.90
   •"BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEC.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
        INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
664

-------
                     TABLE  280
        DERIVED COST PER. SCFM FOR GRAVURE  PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  INCRS. WITH H.E.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
12045
 3.95
 4.38
 6.16
24091
 3.00
 3.44
 4.60
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                  665

-------
                     TABLE 281
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR GRAVURE PRINTING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
  LARGE
  CARBON ADSORPTION
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
47989
 4.48
 4.69
 8.81
143967
  3.50
  3.65
  6.34
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC.  F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
 666

-------
                     TABLE 282
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR GRAY  IRON CUPOLAS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 8998
 2.96
 6.33
14.22
^7515
 2.10
 4.69
 9.53
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC. F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
                                                  667

-------
                     TABLE 283
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR GRAY  IRON CUPOLAS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  WET SCRUBBERS
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 9006
 2.12
 8.41
21.42
47398
 1.18
 3.50
 7.79
  WET SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
 9006
 2.51
10.48
25.07
47398
 1.46
 4.61
 9.67
   -BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
668

-------
                     TABLE 284
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK  KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
SMALL
 LARGE
  WET SCRUBBERS
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
5264
1.27
2.11
6.43
18388
  .71
 1.23
 3-17
  WET SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
5264
1.29
2.54
7.31
18388
  .73
 1.35
 3.^3
    :BASED ON SCFM AT  70 DEG.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
        INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  669

-------
                     TABLE 285
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK  KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
                      SMALL
                   LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
                      5264
                      5.81
                      7.78
                     13.3^
                  18388
                   4.27
                   5.03
                   7.88
   "BASED ON
       INLET
SCFM AT 70 DEG.
INCLUDING WATER
F AT COLLECTOR
VAPOR
670

-------
                     TABLE 286
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR VERTICAL  LIME  ROCK  KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
18388
 2.87
 4.16
 6.61
36703
 1.96
 2.96
 4.82
  ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
18388
 3.68
 5.09
 8.36
36703
 2.60
 3.64
 5.89
    :BASED ON SCFM AT  70 DEG.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                 671

-------
                     TABLE 287
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR ROTARY  LIME  SLUDGE  KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  WET SCRUBBERS
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY 'SYSTEM
22247
  .70

 1.25
 3.30
78518
  .41
  .84
 1.76
  WET SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT

       TURNKEY SYSTEM
22247
  .84
 1.60
 3.99
78518
  .47
 1.05
 2.12
   "BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEG. F AT COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
672

-------
                     TABLE 288
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR ROTARY  LIME  SLUDGE KILNS
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
  LA PROCESS WT.
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
22247
 3.02
 4.19
 6.90
78518
 1.75
 2.34
 4.00
  ELCSTC. PRCPTRS.
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
22247
 3.60
 4.95
 8.31
785lb
 2.02
 2.64
 4.45
    'BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEC.  F  AT  COLLECTOR
        INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR
                                                  673

-------
                     TABLE 289
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DETERGENT SPRAY DRYING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  WET SCRUBBERS
  MED. EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
23961
 1.19
 1.76
 3.95
95835
  .72
 1.08
 2.06
  WET SCRUBBERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
23961
 1.17
 2.10
 4.90
95835
  .65
 1.21
 2.51
   "BASED ON SCFM AT  70  DEG.  F AT  COLLECTOR
        INLET INCLUDING WATER  VAPOR  ,
 674

-------
                     TABLE 290
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR DETERGENT  SPRAY  DRYING
COLLECTOR TYPE
                      SMALL
                   LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
                     23961
                      1.47
                      1.95
                      3.64
                  95835
                   1.44
                   1.77
                   3.23
   "BASED ON
        INLET
SCFM AT 70 DEC.
INCLUDING WATER
F AT COLLECTOR
VAPOR
                                                  675

-------
                     TABLE 291
        DERIVED COST PER SCFM FOR SOAP g DET.  PROD.  HANDLING
COLLECTOR TYPE
 SMALL
 LARGE
  FABRIC FILTERS
  HIGH EFFICIENCY
     GAS FLOW,SCFM
       COLLECTOR ONLY
       TOTAL EQUIPMENT
       TURNKEY SYSTEM
18929
 1.31
 1.77
 3.29
75714
 1.31
 1.63
 2.97
   -BASED ON SCFM AT 70 DEC. F AT  COLLECTOR
       INLET INCLUDING WATER VAPOR
 676

-------
4.   GENERALIZED COST DATA

     A series of correlations were made to  investigate the general  relationship
of the cost of equipment to the gas flow rate for the types of control systems
discussed in this report. These correlations were made using the data presented
in the previous section of this report. The points plotted on each graphical
correlation are coded so that the process application  which they represent can
be identified. The same point symbol code  was used  in all of the graphs and it
is fully explained in Table 292.
Scrubbers

     Correlations were made for both  the  scrubber  cost and  for  the  total
installed cost of the  scrubber  system.  Figure 180  shows the cost of the
scrubber alone.  Although  there  is  a  wide scatter  in the  data, the results
correlate fairly well when the complexity of the scrubber is considered. Those
scrubbers that fall  along the "High  Complexity" line are units employing a
combination  of scrubbing methods,  such as venturi scrubbers with  a packed
section, to remove gaseous contaminants in a highly corrosive environment.
Those  falling along the "Low  Complexity"  line  are mostly  for  removing
particulates in a relatively  non-corrosive environment. Many of the  scrubbers
in the "Medium" area were of the packed cross-flow type.

     Figure 181   shows the cost for installed scrubbing systems. The  wide
variability in  the applications of the scrubbing systems has caused a very wide
scatter in the data. The  only generalizations that can be  made are that those
scrubbers having a high complexity and  using high energy would fall  along the
top edge of the plot area. Those of low complexity and using low energy would
fall along the bottom. Scrubbers having a pressure drop of 30 or more inches of
water have been defined  here as  being of high energy. Scrubbers defined here
as being of low energy have a pressure drop of 8 inches of water or less. The
intermediate  area contains systems of high energy and low complexity, or high
complexity but low energy.

     In both Figure 180 and Figure 181 the  bottom part of the curves are
fairly  straight, because  the  basis of the scrubber and  the system  remains
essentially the same from  very small scrubbers to moderately large  ones; and
therefore, a  good cost-to-size  relationship exists.  But over 50,000 ACFM the
basic design  must be changed to handle the  increasing gas flows; and the cost
starts increasing  more rapidly with  size, causing the lines to curve upward.
                                                                     677

-------
                           TABLE 292

                     PLOTTING SYMBOL KEY


    Process Area                       Symbol

    Phosphates
        - WPPA                        n
        -SPA                          O
        - GTSP                        X
        -DAP                          O

    Feed and Grain                       A

    Paint and Varnish                     Q

    Graphic Arts                         Q

    Soap and Detergent                   t^

    Lime Kilns                          0

    Gray Iron  Foundries                   Q
678

-------
APPENDIX

-------
                                                                                               5  67891
                  4   567891
                                                                                  (PARAMETERS REPRESENT
                                                                                   DEGREE OF COMPLEXITY)
                                                      hTTfrd ±rr±
                                              FIGURE 180  '
                                            CAPITAL COST OF
                                          WET SCRUBBERS ONLY
   :j±r
INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
 i ! i i • ; i i i i 11 i I: i i' r i" I;
10

-------
                                                                                              5  67891
                             67891
                                                            5  67891

                                                            HIGH ENERGY
                                                               AND
                                                            HIGH COMPLEXITY
                                                                                    LOW ENERGY
                                                                                        AND
                                                                                    LOW COMPLEXITY
                                                                              FIGURE 181
                                                                         TOTAL INSTALLED COST
                                                                         OF SCRUBBING SYSTEMS
                                           INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                                          i i i i 111111111 n
                          5  6789
10'
103

-------
     The  operating  cost  of scrubbers are shown in  Figure 182. The  results
correlate  well with  the pressure drop across the system. The top line is for
scrubbers with a pressure drop of 30 inches of water or greater, the middle for
10  to  16  inches, and the  bottom for eight inches of water or less. At the top
end of the top curve nearly all the operating costs  are from the power for
pushing the  large volumes of gas through  the scrubber, and the increase in
operating cost is nearly linear with increasing gas flow  rate. Each line starts
curving up  near its bottom  end  as the more fixed  operating costs, such as
operating and maintenance labor, become a more significant part of the total
which, therefore, increases less rapidly with size.
Fabric Filters

     Similar  correlations were made for fabric filters. However, as Figure 183
illustrates, due to  the wide  variability in  the  applications involved, no true
correlation exists between the different  application on a gas flow rate basis.
This is caused by the fact that the characteristics of the different particulates
being collected require a different air-to-cloth ratio for each application. When
the actual flow rate is divided by the air-to-cloth ratio, the result is the area, in
square feet,  of the fabric  used.  This area determines the physical size of the
unit. As  Figure 184 shows, when plotted against the fabric area, both the cost
of the filter only  and the installed  system cost can be well  represented by
straight lines.

     Figure 185 shows that when operating costs are plotted against the fabric
area the  results can be  well represented by  one line. As the size increases, the
relationship between size and cost becomes  nearly linear. This can be expected;
for as the size increases, the  cost of  labor and  material for replacing the bags
become  the  major part of  the  operating  cost. And  these bag replacement
costs are directly proportional  to the size of the unit.
Incinerators

     Basically, four types of incinerators were discussed in the previous section
of this report. They are thermal incinerators with and without heat exchangers,
and catalytic incinerators with and without heat exchangers.

     Figure 186 shows the capital cost of incinerators without heat exchangers.
In this, as well as in  subsequent plots of capital costs, the curves are concave
upward.  Near the lower end of the curve, the cost does not increase with size

                                                     (Text continued on page 686)


                                                                      681

-------
 10
  9
  8

  7

  6

  5
 10
  9
  8
1.0
0.1
       FIGURE  182        -f-
DlRECT OPERATING COST OF
     WET SCRUBBERS      =g
                                                                              6 7 8 9 10
             682

-------
                                                                             891.
                                       GRAY IRON
                                       CUPOLAS
                                              SOAP & DETERGENT
                                                          FIGURE 183
                                                      INSTALLED COST OF
                                                   Et=FABRIC FILTER SYSTEMS

LIME KILNS
         FEED &
         GRAIN
                                 RATE, ACFM
                                 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1111 11 III
INLET GAS FLOW
                                    56789

-------
                             j.M.I ' „! i_i. 1 _t J,'
                        FIGURE 184
                     CAPITAL COST OF
                      FABRIC FILTERS
                                  ri±L INSTALLED
                                                  FILTER
                                                  ONLY
                                                  FILTER ONLY
                                                  INSTALLED SYSTEM
               FABRIC AREA, Ft2 (ACFM + A/C RATIO)
                                           10*
2     3   4  66789 10
684

-------
                                                           5  67891.
         FIGURE 185
  DIRECT OPERATING COST OF
    FABRIC FILTER SYSTEMS
FABRIC AREA, Ft* (ACFM -^ A/C RATIO)
                       5678 9in4
5   6789

-------
nearly as rapidly as it does toward the curve's upper end. This is due mainly to
the  extensive  system of  safety  and control devices that every incinerator
requires,  regardless of size. This system  is a significant part  of the  cost of
incinerators and  keeps the cost of increasing size relatively small in the small
size  range.

     Figures 186 and  187  show that, as expected, the installed system cost as
well as the incinerator cost for catalytic units are greater than for the same size
thermal units.

     However, when  heat exchangers  are  added,  this relationship  is not
apparent. Figures 188 and 189 show that catalytic units with heat exchange
may tend to be slightly more expensive  than a similar thermal unit; but there
is not  enough data to show a definite separation, and one curve can represent
both types of units.

     The savings in operating cost realized by heat recovery are illustrated in
Figures 190 and  191.  In each case, the cost of operating without heat recovery
is two to three times that of operating  with heat recovery. But it is apparent
that the lines converge as the flow rate decreases, and that at some point heat
recovery will not be advantageous.

     Figures 192 and  193 show this same basic relationship when the annual
capital charges are  considered along with the direct operating costs. Due to the
higher capital charges of units with heat  exchange, the  curves are  closer and
will  converge at  a  higher flow rate than in Figures 190 and 191. Where  these
curves converge,  heat recovery loses its economic advantage.

     The economic relationship of catalytic incinerators and thermal  units is
illustrated by Figure 194. Even when the catalytic units' higher capital  charges
are  considered, the savings in fuel keep  the  total cost of catalytic units lower
than that of similar thermal units.

Electrostatic Precipitators

     Electrostatic precipitators  were  used  in only two applications  in this
report: vertical lime rock kilns and rotary  lime sludge kilns. Figure  195 shows
that the precipitator and installed  system  costs correlate well for  both
applications. The high efficiency unit costs 20 to 30% more than the medium
efficiency unit, for the precipitator alone as well as for the installed system.
The  cost of the  installed system was from  about  2 to 2.5 times that of the
precipitator alone.

                                                    (Text continued on page 696)


686

-------
                                                                           7891.
                    FIGURE 186
        CAPITAL COST OF INCINERATORS ONLY,
                  WITHOUT H. E.
THERMAL
CATALYTIC
                                            F CATALYTIC
                      AS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                                                                         6  7  8 .9 I

-------
                                                                          6  7891
                        FIG_UREJ87_
                TOTAL INSTALLED COST OF
                INCINERATORS WITHOUT H. E.
THERMAL
CATALYTIC
                                              CATALYTIC
                                                           HERMALj,
               INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I III I I I I I I M
                                        6  7  8  9 1Q4
67891

-------
789
                             5  67891
6 7891.
                    FIGURE 188
       CAPITAL COST OF INCINERATORS ONLY,
                   WITH H. E.
         INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM

-------
                                 THERMAL
                                 CATALYTIC
                      FIGURE 189
              INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                                                               I I 10
690

-------
it 1 ±: ± ± ±h±±±± ±H
                            i-H- -M--r -Hi- -H-H- l-Hi iirt H
              FIGURE 190
      1DIRECT OPERATING COSTS OF
        THERMAL INCINERATORS
                                    E3i WITHOUT H.E.
                                     WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE
                                     WITH HEAT EXCHANGE
       JNLET
GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM Cl
! : ! i i I * ; ! ! I ' • , il ! i I I 1 I M 11 I I' 11 1 lit
                                                     B  6  7 8 9 10
                                           691

-------
                         FIGURE 191
                  rDIRECT OPERATING COST OF
                   CATALYTIC INCINERATORS
      T HEAT EXCHANGE
WITH HEAT EXCHANGE
                LET GAS FLO
                                                               7 8 9 10
 692

-------
             FIGURE 192
       TOTAL OPERATING COST OF
        THERMAL INCINERATORS
INCLUDING ANNUALIZED CAPITAL CHARGES)
                               WITHOUT HEAT EXCHANGE
                               WITH HEAT EXCHANGE
                                                 6  6 7 8 9 10
                                        693

-------
10
 o
 8

 7

 6

 5


 4
                                                   -mt
±±
±h
   .inj_
        iiii
       -H-H-H-H

        m
-HI4
                  ifci
                  FIGURE 193              .ILL
           TOTAL OPERATING COST         _
         OF CATALYTIC INCINERATORS       _L|
  (INCLUDING ANNUALIZED CAPITAL CHARGES)^ i
  _ i.» ..I -_;_ . L 	!	:_ L ..:li • . . I ' I : : ! ... L. - - .1 • . : • i : : i_ :. _i. . . .	*, ... .~j
                                                                      r-TT
                                                                  -ItH
                                                              Hit
                                                                  ii
10
                                                                 WITHOUT H.E.
                                                                 WITH H.E.
                             INLET GAS FLOW RATE,
1.0
  10
                                                                          5  6 7 8 9 10
             694

-------
10
 9
 8

 7

 6

 5
                 iimi 1

-H-
              FIGURE 194
       TOTAL OPERATING COST OF
      INCINERATORS WITHOUT H. E.
(INCLUDING ANNUALIZED CAPITAL CHARGES)
                                                                THERMAL
                                                                CATALYTIC
                         INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                                                7 8 9104
                                             3   4  6  6789 10
                                                              695

-------
     Figure 196 shows the direct operating costs of precipitators. These, too,
correlated well. The data shows that the cost of operating a high efficiency unit
is  about 25 to 35% more than that of operating  a  medium efficiency unit.
Nearly all  of  the increase is due to  the increased  use  of  electrical power.
Carbon Adsorption

     Carbon adsorption was  used in only  one application in  this report. The
only correlations necessary were made when the costs were presented in the
previous section of this report.
 696

-------
JO~_.
                                                               INSTALLED
                                       HIGH EFFICIENCY
                                                 MEDIUM EFFICIENCY
                                                  i COST OF PRECIPITATOR ONLY
                                            EFFICIENCY
                                              MEDIUM EFFICIENCY
                                                        VERTICAL LIME ROCK K LIV
                                                        ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KILN

                                    FIGURE 195
                                CAPITAL COST OF
                           ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
                           INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM
                                                                       - . . 4  . . - -1	. - - -UI- . .f- -

                                                                       "TIT F TT " T!l" " t
^ilHHIitHIH-iH^hii'jHt^1 '
                                                          2.5
                                                                                  9 10
                                                                  697

-------
                                EFFICIENCY
                                      MEDIUM
                          EFFICIENCY

                                                  VERTICAL ROCK LIME KILN
                                                  ROTARY LIME SLUDGE KIL
                            FIGURE 196
                   DIRECT OPERATING COST OF
                  ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
                              •jlT! I
                                      :B:d::±ffrffl;riii
                                      -H rt-H-l Wffitl- i-
1.5
         2.5
INLET GAS FLOW RATE, ACFM Ij]
            •I'r'l-'.'' ' • ' ' i • i • i i i rrn ---

            8  9 1Q5
                                          1.5
                                                    2.5
                                                                    6  7  I  9 10
    698

-------
                                 APPENDIX  I
            SPECIFICATIONS FOR  ABATEMENT EQUIPMENT
/.    SCOPE

     A.   This specification covers vendor requirements for air pollution control equipment
for the subject  process.  The  intent of  the  specification is  to describe  the service  as
thoroughly as possible so as to secure vendor's proposal for equipment which is suitable in
every respect for the service intended. Basic information is tabulated in sections 2 and 3. The
vendor should specify any of the performance characteristics which cannot be guaranteed
without samples of process effluent.

     B.   The vendor shall submit a bid showing three separate prices as described below.

         1.   All  labor,  materials, equipment,  and services  to furnish  one pollution
              abatement device together with the following:

              a.   All ladders, platforms and other accessways to provide convenient
                  access to all points requiring observation or maintenance.

              b.   Foundation bolts as required.

              c.   Six (6) sets of drawings, instructions, spare parts list, etc., pertinent to
                  the above.

         2.   Auxiliaries including

              (a)  Fan(s)

              (b)  Pump(s)

              (c)  Damper(s)

              (d)  Conditioning Equipment

              (e)  Dust Disposal Equipment

         3.   A  turnkey  installation  of  the entire  system  including  the  following
              installation costs:

              (a)  Engineering

              (b)  Foundations & Support

              (c)  Ductwork

              (d)  Stack

              (e)  Electrical

-------
               (ft  Piping

               (g)  Insulation

               (h)  Painting

               (i)  Startup

               (k)  Performance Test

               (I)  Other (including general tradework such as erection, rigging, etc.)

     C.   For the "pollution abatement device only" quotation, the vendor shall furnish the
equipment FOB point of manufacture, and shall furnish as a part of this project competent
supervision of the erection, which shall be by others.

     D.   Vendor shall furnish * the following drawings, etc., as a minimum:

          1.    With his proposal:

               a.   Plan and elevation sho wing general arrangemen t.

               b.   Typical details of collector internals proposed.

               c.   Data relating projected performance with respect to pressure drop, gas
                   absorption efficiency and paniculate removal efficiency to operating
                   parameters such as gas flow.

          2.    Upon receipt of order:

               a.   Proposed schedule of design and delivery.

          3.    Within 60 days of order:

               a.   Complete drawings of equipment for approval by customer.

          4.    30 days prior to shipmen t:

               a.   Certified drawings of equipment, six sets

               b.   Installation instructions, six sets

               c.   Starting and operating instructions, six sets

               d.   Maintenance instructions and recommended spare parts lists, six sets

     E.   The design and construction of the  collector and auxiliaries shall conform to the
general conditions given in Section 5, and to good engineering practice.


*This is a typical request. The member companies are NOT to furnish this material under the
present project.

-------
4.   PROCESS PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE

     A.   The equipment  will  be guaranteed  to  reduce  the paniculate and/or  gas
contaminant loadings as indicated in the service description.

     B.   Performance test will be conducted in accordance with IGCI test methods where
applicable.

     C.   Testing shall be conducted at a time mutually agreeable to the customer and the
vendor.

     D.   The cost of the performance test is to be included in vendor's turnkey proposal.

     E.   In the event the equipment fails to comply with the guarantee at the specified
design conditions, the vendor shall  make every effort to correct any defect expeditiously at
his own expense. Subsequent retesting to obtain a satisfactory result shall be at the vendor's
expense.
5.   GENERAL CONDITIONS

     A.  Materials and Workmanship

     Only new materials of the best quality shall be used in the manufacture of items
covered by  this specification.  Workmanship shall be of high quality and performed by
competent workmen.

     B.  Equipment

     Equipment not of vendor's manufacture furnished as a part of this collector shall be
regarded in every respect as though it were of vendor's original manufacture.

     C.  Compliance with Applicable Work Standards and Codes

     It shall be  the responsibility of the vendor to design and manufacture the equipment
specified in compliance with the practice specified by applicable codes.

     D.  Delivery Schedules

     The vendor shall arrange delivery of equipment under this contract so as to provide for
unloading at the job  site within a time period specified by the customer.  Vendor shall
provide for expediting and following shipment of materials to the extent required to comply
with delivery specified.

-------
                             APPENDIX II


                  INSTRUCTIONS FOR  SUBMITTING

                             COST DATA
Two forms (two  copies each) are enclosed with each specification. These are
for submitting:

     (A)  Estimated Capital Cost Data

     (b)   Annual Operating Cost Data

These forms will also be used to exhibit averages of the three cost estimates for
each process  and equipment type. Because your costs  will be averaged  with
those of other  IGCI  members, it is necessary to prepare them in accordance
with instructions given in the following paragraphs.


     (A)  Estimated Capital Cost Data

The upper part of this form should already be filled  out for the particular
application when you  receive it. This information on  operating conditions
should be identical to that in the specification and is repeated here only for the
convenience of those reading the form.

You should fill in the  dollar amounts estimated in the  appropriate spaces on
the bottom half of the form. It should not be necessary to add any information
other than the dollar amounts.  If you wish to provide a description of the
equipment proposed, please do so on one or more separate sheets of paper, and
attach  it to the form.  If any item is not involved in the equipment you are
proposing, please indicate this by writing "none"  in  the space rather  than
leaving it blank or using a zero.

     (1)   The "gas cleaning device" cost should be reported just as you would
report a flange-to-flange equipment sale to the IGCI. That is, a complete device
including necessary auxiliaries such as power supplies, mist eliminators, etc. Do
NOT include  such items as fans, solids handling equipment, etc.,  unless these
are an integral part of your gas cleaning device.

-------
     (2)   "Auxiliaries" are those items of equipment which  are frequently
supplied  with the gas cleaning device. There is a purely arbitrary definition of
those items included  here  and those included in the "Installation" Costs. Do
NOT include any of the cost of erecting or installing auxiliaries in this category.
     (3)   "Installation Cost" should include all of the material not in (1) or (2)
and the field labor required to complete a turnkey installation. In cases where
the equipment supplier ordinarily erects  the equipment but does not supply
labor for foundations, etc., it is necessary to include an estimated cost for these
items. General tradework, including rigging, erection, etc. should be included in
the "Other" category.
The installation should be estimated for a new plant, or one in which there are
no  limitations imposed by the arrangement of existing equipment. Installation
labor should be estimated on the basis that the erection will take place in an
area where  labor rates are near the U.S. average, and the distance from your
plant is no more than 500 miles. Milwaukee, Wisconsin is an example of a city
with near-average labor rates.
     (B)  Annual Operating Cost Data

Some of the information will be supplied by Air Resources, such as unit costs
for labor and utilities, and annualized capital charges.  You should fill in the
usage figures for the complete abatement system in the units indicated below.
Please include the unit price.

          Labor                         hrs/year
          Maintenance Materials          Dollars/year
          Replacement Parts              Dollars/year
          Electric Power                 kw-hr/year
          Fuel                           MMBTU/year
          Water (Process)                 MM gal/year
          Water (Cooling)                MM gal/year
          Chemicals                     Dollars/year

Air Resources will average the consumption figures reported, and convert them
to dollar values for inclusion in the final report.

Be sure that the operating  factor,  in hours per year, supplied by ARI, is used
for estimating the utility and labor requirements.

-------
   APPENDIX  III
CITY COST  INDICES
Average 1969 Construction Cost & Labor Indices
City
Albany, N.Y.
Albuquerque, N.M.
Amarillo, Tx.
Anchorage, Ak.
Atlanta, Ga.
Baltimore, Md.
Baton Rouge, La.
Birmingham, Al.
Boston, Ma.
Bridgeport, Ct.
Buffalo, N.Y.
Burlington, Vt.
Charlotte, N.C.
Chattanooga, Tn.
Chicago, III.
Cincinnati, Oh.
Cleveland, Oh.
Columbus, Oh.
Dallas, Tx.
Dayton, Oh.
Denver, Co.
Des Moines, la.
Detroit, Mi.
Edmonton, Cn.
El Paso, Tx.
Erie, Pa.
Evansville, In.
Grand Rapids, Mi.
Harrisburg, Pa.
Hartford, Ct.
Honolulu, Hi.
Houston, Tx.
Indianapolis, In.
Jackson, Ms.
Jacksonville, Fl.
Kansas City, Mo.
Knoxville, Tn.
Las Vegas, Nv.
Little Rock, Ar.
Los Angeles, Ca.
Louisville, Ky.
Madison, Wi.
Manchester.N.H.
Memphis, Tn.
Miami, Fl.
Index
Labor
98
86
87
131
88
90
83
79
106
104
104
86
70
81
107
108
121
106
86
100
94
93
117
80
77
98
93
103
90
104
99
92
97
73
78
94
82
115
78
113
92
95
89
83
98
Total
100
95
84
148
94
93
88
86
103
102
107
90
75
84
103
104
112
99
89
103
91
96
111
83
83
99
97
99
92
100
109
89
98
75
79
93
82
107
81
102
93
98
92
82
94
City
Milwaukee, Wi.
Minneapolis, Mn.
Mobile, Al.
Montreal, Cn.
Nashville, Tn.
Newark, N.J.
New Haven, Ct.
New Orleans, La.
New York, N.Y.
Norfolk, Va.
OklahomaCity.Ok.
Omaha, Nb.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Phoenix, Az.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Portland, Me.
Portland, Or.
Providence, R.I.
Richmond, Va.
Rochester, N.Y.
Rockford, III.
Sacramento, Ca.
St. Louis, Mo.
Salt Lake City, Ut.
San Antonio, Tx.
San Diego, Ca.
San Francisco, Ca.
Savannah, Ga.
Scranton, Pa.
Seattle, Wa.
Shreveport, La.
South Bend, In.
Spokane, Wa.
Springfield, Ma.
Syracuse, N.Y.
Tampa, Fl.
Toledo, Oh.
Toronto, Cn.
Trenton, N.J.
Tulsa, Ok.
Vancouver, Cn.
Washington, D.C.
Wichita, Ks.
Winnipeg, Cn.
Youngstown, Oh.
Index
Labor
103
99
94
77
79
122
102
89
132
73
82
90
106
101
110
82
102
98
76
110
109
117
110
93
82
111
124
72
94
104
82
99
101
99
105
81
105
84
114
85
81
98
85
62
107
Total
108
98
90
89
82
109
100
95
118
77
88
93
101
97
106
87
103
97
79
107
109
110
103
95
82
107
109
77
96
99
89
97
100
97
103
84
105
93
103
89
91
94
90
82
106
Historical Average
Year
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959
1958
1957
1956
1955
1954
1953
1952
1951
1950
1949
1948
1947
1946
1945
1944
1943
1942
1941
1940
1939
1938
1937
1936
1935
1934
1933
1932
1931
1930
1929
1928
1927
1926
1925
1924
Index
100
91
86
83
79
78
76
74
72
71
69
67
65
63
59
58
57
55
53
49
48
48
43
35
30
29
29
28
25
24
23
23
23
20
20
20
18
17
20
22
23
23
23
23
23
23

-------
              APPENDIX Ill-a
AVERAGE HOURLY LABOR RATES BY TRADE
Trade
Common Building Labor
Skilled Average
Helpers Average
Foremen (usually 35^ over trade)
Bricklayers
Bricklayers Helpers
Carpenters
Cement Finishers
Electricians
Glaziers
Hoist Engineers
Lathers
Marble & Terrazzo Workers
Painters, Ordinary
Painters, Structural Steel
Paperhangers
Plasterers
Plasterers Helpers
Plumbers
Power Shovel or Crane Operator
Rodmen (Reinforcing)
Roofers, Composition
Roofers, Tile & Slate
Roofers Helpers (Composition)
Steamfitters
Sprinkler Installers
Structural Steel Workers
Tile Layers (Floor)
Tile Layers Helpers
Truck Drivers
Welders, Structural Steel
1970
$5.00
6.85
5.15
7.20
7.15
5.20
6.95
6.75
7.50
6.25
7.05
6.60
6.45
6.20
6.50
6.30
6.60
5.30
7.75
7.20
7.30
6.30
6.35
4.75
7.70
7.70
7.45
6.50
5.25
5.15
7.15
1969
$4.55
6.05
4.65
6.40
6.40
4.70
6.15
5.90
6.45
5.50
5.90
5.95
5.60
5.45
5.80
5.60
5.95
4.85
6.90
6.20
6.35
5.55
5.60
4.45
6.90
6.90
6.45
5.60
4.80
4.60
6.35
1968
$4.10
5.50
4.20
5.85
5.85
4.30
5.40
5.30
5.95
5.10
5.40
5.45
5.25
5.05
5.30
5.15
5.50
4.45
6.15
5.65
5.80
5.05
5.10
4.00
6.10
6.10
5.90
5.20
4.35
4.30
5.80
1967
$3.85
5.15
4.00
5.50
5.55
4.05
5.10
5.05
5.60
4.75
5.10
5.20
5.05
4.75
4.95
4.75
5.15
4.15
5.75
5.35
5.45
4.75
4.85
3.75
5.70
5.70
5.55
4.90
4.15
3.95
5.45
1966
$3.65
4.90
3.85
5.25
5.35
3.95
4.90
4.85
5.45
4.60
4.85
5.05
4.90
4.50
4.80
4.55
5.00
4.00
5.55
5.05
5.15
4.65
4.80
3.55
5.50
5.50
5.25
4.80
4.05
3.65
5.10

-------
                            APPENDIX  IV
          STATISTICAL  BASIS  FOR DATA PRESENTATION
The cost quotations received from member companies have in every case been
averaged and the resulting  values presented  graphically in the body of the
report.  Provided there is  no  more than  a  reasonable spread  between the
quotations, it is helpful to treat the data received as a random selection from
among a "population" of twenty or so potential  bidders. Statistical values for
the confidence limits of the mean cost have been calculated.

Calculation Method — The  calculations performed by ***COIMLIM are based
on the following formulas:

                     Confidence limits = X ± stn i . .,
                                             ii- 1 , ~f

                                where

           X = the sample mean, based on three bids in most cases

                    s = the sample standard  deviation

            " tlie ^Y* ^^  percentage  point of the student-t distribution
      n-1 • v
                        with n-1 degrees of freedom
                     Size of sample - n, usually three
                     Sample mean value =-
                   Variance of sample = ~ 5"?  (X-, -
                                         i= 1
                                             /£(XrX)2
               Standard deviation of sample =
          Estimated population standard deviation =""
                                                      n-1

-------
                                               s
                        Standard error of mean =
                                 where

                       S - sample standard deviation

When the population is finite, a correction factor of  ( — ^2 — ) is  included in  both
the variance and the standard deviation computations, as follows:

                             vs2
-------
                    APPENDIX V

       LIST OF STANDARD  ABBREVIATIONS
feet or foot                              ft
inch or inches                            in.
ton or tons                              ton
pound or pounds                         Ib
hours or hours                           hr
minute or minutes                        min
parts per million                          ppm
grain or grains                            gr
weight percent                           wt.%
actual cubic feet per minute                ACFM
standard cubic feet per minute             SCFM
dry standard cubic feet per minute          DSCFM
standard cubic feet                       SCF
actual cubic feet                          ACF
British thermal units                      Btu
odor units                               o.u.
volume                                  vol
mole                                    mol
gallon                                   gal
per cent                                 %
dollars                                  $
degrees Fahrenheit                        °F
pounds per square inch gauge               psig
change of pressure (delta pressure)          A P
water column (pressure)                   w.c.
change of temperature (delta temperature)   A T
temperature                              Temp
feet per minute                           FPM
dry standard cubic feet                    DSCF
cubic feet                               ft3
revolutions per minute                     rpm
gallons per minute                        gpm
millions (106)                            MM
atmospheres gage (pressure)                atmg
milligrams                               m9
micrograms                              yg
international unit                         ID
hundred weight (100 pounds)               cwt
hydrocarbon                             Hcbn
United States pharmacopoeia               ygp

-------
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
 SHEET
                     1. Report No.
                                                     2.
                          3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle

   Air  Pollution Control Technology and Costs  in Eight
   Selected Industries
                          5. Report Date
                           (Date  of issire)
                                        ^  igj ^
                          6.
7. Author(s)
                          8. Performing Organization Kept.
                            No'47.173
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
  Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute
  P.O.  Box  1333
  Stamford,  Connecticut  06904
                          10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
                          11. Contract/Grant No.

                             68-02-0289
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
  Environmental Protection Agency
  Durham Contract Operations
  Research Triangle  Park
  North  Carolina, 27711
                          13. Type of Report & Period
                             Covered
                            Final
                          14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
  Under  this contract,  the Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute collected  and formalized
  date on air pollution abatement  in eight selected industrial areas.   Those eight
  areas  were:  Phosphate Fertilizer Manufacture,  Feed and  Grain Milling,  Soap and
  Detergent Manufacture, Paint and Varnish Production, The Graphic Arts Industry, Lime
  Kiln Operation, and  Gray Iron  Foundry Cupola  Operation.   For each area studied, costs
  of conventionally  applied pollution control systems are  presented for a range of
  plant  sizes and control efficiencies.
 17. Key Words and Document Analysis.  17a. Descriptors
   Air Pollution
   Performance
   Air Pollution Control  Equipment
   Cost Estimates
   Cost Engineering
   Expenses
   Electrostatic Precipitators
   Scrubbers
   Incinerators
   Fabric Filters
 17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
   Air Pollution Control
   Graphic Arts
   Phosphate  Fertilizer
   Paint and  Varnish
   Lime Kilns

 17c. COSATI Field/Group    13.b
Feed and  Grain
Soap and  Detergent
Gray Iron Foundries
18. Availability Statement

   Release  Unlimited
              19. Security Class (This
                 Report)
                   UNCLASSIFIED
                                                          20. Security Class (This
                                                             Page
                                                               UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
   724
                                    22. Price
FORM NTIS-35 (REV. 3-72)
                                                                                USCOMM-DC I4852-P72

-------
    INSTRUCTIONS  FOR  COMPLETING  FORM  NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
   Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical  Reports Prepared by or for' the Federal Government,
   PB-180 600).

    1.  Report Number.  Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation selected by the performing
       organization or provided by the sponsoring organization. Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only.  Examples
       FASEB-NS-87 and FAA-RD-68-09.

    2.  Leave blank.

   3.  Recipient's Accession Number. . Reserved for use by each report recipient.

   4-  Title and Subtitle.  Title  should indicate clearly  and briefly the  subject coverage of the  report, and be displayed promi-
       nently.  Set subtitle,  if  used, in smaller type or otherwise subordinate it to main title.  When a report is prepared in more
       than one volume, repeat  the primary title, add volume  number and  include subtitle for the specific volume.

   5.  Report Date. Kach report shall carry a  date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected
       (e.g., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation.


   6.  Performing Organization Code.  Leave  blank.

   7.  Authors).  Give name(s) in conventional order (e.g.,  John K. Doe, or  J.Robert Doe).  List author's affiliation  if it differs
       from the performing organization.

   8.  Performing Organization Report Number.  Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

   9.  Performing Organization Name and  Address, (live name, street, ciiy, state, and zip code.  List no more than two levels of
       an organizational hierarchy.   Display the name of the organization exactly  as  it should appear in Government indexes such
       as  USGROR-I.

  10.  Project/Task/Work Unit Number.  list' ihe project, task  and  work  unit numbers under which the report was prepared.

  11.  Controct/Gront Number.  Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.

  12*  Sponsoring Agency Name and  Address.   Include zip code.

  13.  Type of Report and Period Covered.  Indicate interim, final, etc., and,  if applicable, dates covered.

  14-  Sponsoring Agency Code.  Leave blank.

  15.  Supplementary Notes.  Enter  information not  included elsewhere  but  useful,  such a:- : Prepared in cooperation  with .  . .
       Translation of ...  Presented at conference of ...   To lie published in ...   Supersedes  . . .       Supplements . . .

  16.  Abstract.   Include a brief  (200 words or less)  factual summary  of the  most significant information  contained in the report.
       If the report contains a significant  bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.

  17.  Key Words and  Document Analysis,  (a).  Descriptors.  Select from the  Thesaurus of  Knginecring and Scientific Term* the
       proper authorized terms that identify  the major concept of the research and  are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
       as index entries for cataloging.
       (b).  Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms.  Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc.  Use
       open-ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
       (c).  COSATI Field/Group.   Field  and  Group assignments  are to be taken  from the  1965  COSATI Subject Category  List.
       Since the majority of documents are multidisc iplinary  in nature, the primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be the specific
       discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object.  The application(s) will be cross-referenced with  secondary
       Field/Group assignments that will  follow the primary  posting(s).

  18.  Distribution Statement.  Denote releasability to the  public  or limitation for reasons  other than  security for  example  "Re-
       lease unlimited".  Cite any availability to the public, with address and price.

  19 & 20. Security Classification.  Do not submit classified reports to  the National Technical

  21.  Number of  Pages.   Insert the  total  number of pages,  including this  one and unnumbered pages,  but excluding distribution
       list, if any.                                                                    /
                                                                                   /  /
  22.  Price. Insert the price set by the  National Technical Information Service  or the Government Printing Office, if known.
FORM NTIS-35 (REV. 3-72)                                                                                   USCOMM-DC 14M2-P72

-------