&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EPA-450/3-89-15
May 1989
Air
Model Boiler Cost
Analysis for Controlling
Particulate Matter (PM)
Emissions from Small
Steam Generating Units
-------
EPA-450/3-89-15
MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS
FOR CONTROLLING PARTICULATE MATTER (PM)
EMISSIONS FROM SMALL STEAM GENERATING UNITS
Emission Standards Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
May 1989
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Emission Standards Division of the
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA, and approved for
publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products is not intended
to constitute endorsement or recommendation of use. Copies of the report
are available through the Library Service Office (MD-35), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, or from National
Technical Information Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY 2
3.0 MODEL BOILER COSTING METHODOLOGY 8
4.0 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS RESULTS 10
4.1 OIL . . . . 10
4.1.1 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVEL 1 10
4.1.2 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVEL 2 11
4.1.3 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVEL 3 . 12
4.2 COAL . 13
4.2.1 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVEL 1 13
4.2.2 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVEL 2 v ...... 16
.4.3 WOOD 17
5.0 REFERENCES 19
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVELS FOR SMALL BOILERS 21
2 PM ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVELS FOR SMALL OIL-,
COAL-, AND WOOD-FIRED BOILERS 22
3 PROJECTED FUEL PRICES FOR EPA REGION V 24
4 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES ON MEDIUM SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS IN
REGION V AT 0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 25
5 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER
CONTROL ALTERNATIVES ON MEDIUM SULFUR OIL:FIRED
BOILERS IN REGION V AT 0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR 27
6 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR ADDITIONAL PM CONTROL ON MEDIUM
SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS AT 0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 29
7 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR ADDITIONAL PM CONTROL ON MEDIUM
MEDIUM SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS AT 0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR. . 31
8 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES ON VERY LOW SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS
IN REGION V AT 0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 33
9 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES ON VERY LOW SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS IN
REGION V AT 0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR . 34
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
10 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR ADDITIONAL PM CONTROL ON VERY
LOW SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS AT 0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR , . . 35
11 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR ADDITIONAL PM CONTROL ON VERY
LOW SULFUR OIL-FIRED BOILERS AT 0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR ... 36
12 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER
CONTROL ALTERNATIVES FOR OIL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT
TO A PERCENT REDUCTION REQUIREMENT IN REGION V AT
0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 37
13 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR OIL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT TO A PERCENT
REDUCTION REQUIREMENT IN REGION V AT 0.55 CAPACITY
FACTOR 38
14 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR OIL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT TO A PERCENT
REDUCTION REQUIREMENT IN REGION V AT 0.26 CAPACITY
FACTOR 39
15 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR OIL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT TO A PERCENT
IN REGION V AT 0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR 40
16 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR S02 LOW SULFUR COAL-FIRED BOILERS IN
REGION V AT 0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 41
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
'able Page
17 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR S02 LOW SULFUR COAL-CONTROLLED-FIRED
BOILERS IN REGION V (0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR) 44
18 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR S02 LOW SULFUR COAL-CONTROLLED
COAL-FIRED MODEL BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR) 47
19 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR S02 LOW SULFUR COAL-CONTROLLED
COAL-FIRED MODEL BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR) . 50 .
20 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR COAL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT TO A PERCENT
REDUCTION REQUIREMENT IN REGION V AT
0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR 53
21 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR COAL-FIRED BOILERS SUBJECT TO A PERCENT
REDUCTION REQUIREMENT IN REGION V AT
0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR 54
22 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF SULFUR DIOXIDE CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR COAL-FIRED BOILERS IN REGION V AT
0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR SUBJECT TO A PERCENT REDUCTION
REQUIREMENT 55
v1
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
23 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF SULFUR DIOXIDE CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR COAL-FIRED BOILERS IN REGION V AT
0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR SUBJECT TO A PERCENT REDUCTION
REQUIREMENT 56
24 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR WOOD-FIRED BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR) 57
25 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR WOOD-FIRED BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR) 59
26 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR WOOD-FIRED MODEL BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.26 CAPACITY FACTOR) 61
27 COST EFFECTIVENESS RESULTS OF PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL
ALTERNATIVES FOR WOOD-FIRED MODEL BOILERS IN REGION V
(0.55 CAPACITY FACTOR) 63
vii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents estimates of the costs and cost effectiveness
associated with controlling particulate matter (PM) emissions from small
coal-, oil-, and wood-fired steam generating units (i.e., boilers). The
report was prepared as part of the project to develop new source performance
standards (NSPS) for small boilers under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.
Small boilers are defined as industrial-commercial-institutional boilers
having heat input capacities of 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) or less. The
regulatory baseline emission levels and alternative control levels used in
this cost analysis are discussed in the reports entitled, "Overview of the
Regulatory Baseline, Technical Basis, and Alternative Control Levels for
Sulfur Dioxide (S02) Emission Standards for Small Steam Generating Units"
and "Overview of the Regulatory Baseline, Technical Basis, and Alternative
Control Levels for Particulate Matter (PM) Emission Standards for Small
Steam Generating Units".1'2
-------
2.0 SUMMARY
Capital, operating and maintenance (O&M), and annualized costs were
estimated for model oil-, wood-, and coal-fired boilers and S02 and PM
emissions control systems in EPA Region V. The PM emissions control
techniques examined for oil-fired boilers were the use of medium sulfur oil,
very low sulfur oil, wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems or wet
scrubbers, and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs). For coal-fired boilers,
double mechanical collectors, sidestream separators, wet FGO systems or wet
scrubbers, ESPs and fabric filters were examined. For wood-fired boilers,
double mechanical collectors, wet scrubbers, and ESPs were examined.
Alternative control levels for standards limiting SO- emissions from
oil and coal combustion can result in reduced PM emissions. In focusing on
alternative control levels for standards limiting PM emissions from oil and
coal combustion, therefore, any reduction in PM emissions associated with
alternative control levels for standards limiting SO- emissions should be
taken into account. Thus, alternative control levels for standards limiting
PM emissions from oil and coal combustion were considered in relation to
alternative control levels for standards limiting SO- emissions. The
alternative control levels considered for standards limiting SO- and PM
emissions are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Because wood
contains little or no sulfur, alternative control levels for standards
limiting SO- emissions from wood combustion were not developed. Therefore,
alternative control levels for standards limiting PM emissions from wood
combustion are considered separately, with no relation to standards limiting
S02 emissions.
SO- Alternative Control Level 1 for Oil-Fired Boilers
Alternative Control Level 1 for S0« emissions from small oil-fired
boilers is 690 ng/J (1.60 Ib/million Btu). This S02 emissions level is
achieved by firing medium sulfur oil, which generates PM emissions of
73 ng/J (0.17 ID/million Btu) or less (PM Alternative Control Level A). The
-------
annualized cost of firing medium sulfur oil ranges from $336,000/year at the
2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to
$2,722,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. Firing very low sulfur oil under PM Alternative Control
Level B [43 ng/J (0.10 ID/million Btu)] increases the annualized costs by
about 7 percent over PM Alternative Control Level A for all boiler sizes.
Alternative Control Level C [22 ng/J (0.05 Ib/million Btu)], based on the
use of an ESP, increases annualized costs by 12 to 31 percent over
Alternative Control Level A.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level B over PM Alternative Control Level A ranges
from $14,000/Mg ($12,700/ton) at the 15 MW (50 million Btu/hour) boiler size
and 0.55 capacity factor to $34,100/Mg ($30,900/ton) at the 22 MW
(75 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control Level B ranges
from $13,500/Mg ($12,300/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler
size and 0.26 capacity factor to $l,930,000/Mg ($l,750,000/ton) at the 2.9
MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
SO^ Alternative Control Level 2 for Oil-Fired Boilers
Alternative Control Level 2 for SO^ emissions from small oil-fired
boilers is achieved by firing very low sulfur oil. The PM emission level
that is achieved by firing very low sulfur oil is 43 ng/J (0.10 1 fa/million
Btu) or less, which corresponds to PM Alternative Control Level B. The
annualized cost of firing very low sulfur oil (PM Alternative Control Level
B) ranges from $345,000/yr at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size
and 0.26 capacity factor to $2,916,000/yr at the 29 MW (100 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor. Applying an ESP under PM
Alternative Control Level C increases annualized costs by 12 to 30 percent.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with PM
Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control Level B ranges from
-------
$349,000/Mg ($317,000/ton) at the 29 MW (100 Million Btu/hour) boiler size
and 0.55 capacity factor to $2,530,000/Mg ($2,290,000/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10
million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
SO,. Alternative Control Level 3 for Oil-Fired Boilers
Alternative Control Level 3 for SO^ emissions from small oil-fired
boilers requires 90 percent SO- reduction. This alternative can be met by
using an FGO system. Use of an FGO system achieves a PM emission level of
43 ng/J (0.10 ID/million Btu) which corresponds to PM Alternative Control
Level B. The annualized costs for model oil-fired boilers and FGD systems
(PM Alternative Control Level B) range from $648,000/year at the 2.9 MW (10
million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to $3,375,000/year at
the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor.
Adding an ESP to achieve PM Alternative Control Level C increases the
annualized cost by 6 to 11 percent over PM Alternative Control Level B.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control Level B ranges
from $18,300/Mg ($16,600/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hr) boiler size
and 0.55 capacity factor to $93,900/Mg ($85,200/ton) at the 2.9 MW
(10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
SO- Alternative Control Level 1 for Coal-Fired Boilers
Alternative Control Level 1 for SOg emissions from small coal-fired
boilers is 520 ng/J (1.2 Ib/million Btu) based on the use of low sulfur
coal. The regulatory baseline for PM emissions is based on the use of
single mechanical collectors. The annualized costs for model low sulfur
coal-fired boilers at the PM regulatory baseline range from $638,000/year at
the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to
$2,955,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. Dual mechanical collectors are the lowest cost option
for meeting PM Alternative Control Level A for all model boilers examined.
-------
Under PM Alternative Control Level B, sidestream separators are the lowest
cost option for boiler sizes above 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) heat input,
while fabric filters are the lowest cost option for boiler sizes of 2.9 MW
(10 million Btu/hour) and below.
Fabric filters are the lowest cost option for achieving PM Alternative
Control Levels C and 0 for all model boilers examined. The alternative PM
control levels increase annualized costs over the regulatory baseline PM
emission level by the following amounts:
o Alternative Control Level A - 2 to 6 percent
o Alternative Control Level B - 3 to 9 percent
o Alternative Control Level C - 5 to 9 percent
o Alternative Control Level D - 5 to 9 percent
Fabric filters are generally designed and operated to achieve an
emission level of 22 ng/J (0.05 Ib/million Btu) or less (corresponding to PM
Alternative Control Level D). However, because of their relatively low
cost, fabric filters have been included for analysis at PM Alternative
Control Levels B and C as well. Although PM Alternative Control Levels B
and C limit PM emissions to 86 and 43 ng/J (0.20 and 0.10 Ib/million Btu),
respectively, the costs and incremental cost effectiveness for all fabric
filters were calculated based on achieving an emission rate of 22 ng/J
(0.05 ID/million Btu). Thus, there is no additional cost or cost
effectiveness impact associated with increasing the stringency of
alternative control levels when fabric filters are the lowest cost option
for the two levels being compared.
The incremental cost effectiveness of PM emission control associated
with PM Alternative Control Level A over the PM regulatory baseline ranges
from $890/Mg ($810/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and
-------
0.55 capacity factor to $22,600/Mg ($20,500/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost
effectiveness of emission control associated with PM Alternative Control
Level B over PM Alternative Control Level A ranges from $3,270/Mg
($2,970/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor to $16,330/Mg ($14,820/ton) at the 7.3 MW (25 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor. At the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size, the incremental cost effectiveness is $8,640/Mg
($7,850/ton).
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control Level B at the
2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size is $0/Mg ($0/ton) for both capacity
factors. At the 7.3 MW (25 million Btu/hour) boiler size, the incremental
cost effectiveness ranges from $610/Mg ($555/ton) to $l,550/Mg ($l,400/ton)
for the two capacity factors examined. For boilers 15 MW (50 million
Btu/hour) and larger, the incremental cost effectiveness remains nearly
constant at. approximately $5,130/Mg ($4,660/ton) and $2,450/Mg ($2,230/ton)
when boilers are operating at capacity factors of Q.26 and 0.55,
respectively.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level D over PM Alternative Control Level C is $0/Mg
($0/ton) for all boiler sizes and capacity factors.
SCL Alternative Control Level 2 for Coal-fired Boilers
Alternative Control Level 2 for SCL emissions from small coal-fired
boilers requires 90 percent S02 reduction. This control level can be
achieved by using either an FGD system or a fluidized bed combustion (FBC)
unit. This level of SO- control corresponds to a level of a 43 ng/J (0.10
ID/million Btu) or less (PM Alternative Control Level C) for coal-fired
boilers.
Annualized costs for systems achieving 90 percent SCL control
(equivalent to PM Alternative Control Level C) range from $2,935,000/year at
the 29 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to
-------
$4,465,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. The increase in annualized cost associated with applying a
fabric filter (PM Alternative Control Level D) over PM Alternative Control
Level C for these boilers ranges from 2 to 7 percent. The incremental cost
effectiveness of emission control associated With PM Alternative Control
Level D over PM Alternative Control Level C averages about $42,000/Mg
($38,000/ton) at a capacity factor of 0.26 and near $14,000/Mg ($13,000/ton)
at a capacity factor of 0.55.
Wood-Fired Boilers
4
The regulatory baseline for small wood-fired boilers is based on the
use of single mechanical collectors. The annualized costs for systems at
the regulatory baseline range from $511,000/yr at the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to $3,353,000/yr at the 29 MW
(100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor. Alternative
Control Level A increases the annualized costs by 2 to 7 percent over the
regulatory baseline. Alternative Control Levels B and C increase the
annualized costs over the regulatory baseline by 9 to 16 percent and 10 to
19 percent, respectively.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
Alternative Control Level A over the regulatory baseline ranges from $900/Mg
($820/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity
factor to $21,900/Mg ($19,900/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost effectiveness of
Alternative Control Level B over Alternative Control Level A ranges from
$9,580/Mg ($8,690/ton) at the 22 MW (75 million Btu/hour) boiler size and
0.55 capacity factor to $39,700/Mg ($36,000/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost
effectiveness of Alternative Control Level C over Alternative Control Level
B ranges from $l,330/Mg ($l,200/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to $15,500/Mg ($14,000/ton) at the 2.9
MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
-------
3.0 MODEL BOILER COSTING METHODOLOGY
This model boiler cost analysis estimates capital, O&M, and annualized
costs using methodologies discussed in References 3 through 7. The
selection of model boiler types and sizes used in the analysis is covered in
Reference 8. All costs are presented in June 1985 dollars. Capital and O&M
costs were updated from other time bases using the Chemical Engineering
plant cost and Bureau of Labor Statistics producer price indices,
respectively. The total cost for each model system includes the costs of
the boiler, fuel, and add-on PM and SO- control equipment, where applicable.
The PM and S0~ regulatory baseline emission levels and alternative control
levels used in this analysis are presented in Tables 1 and 2.
Particulate matter emissions from oil combustion can be correlated with
9
oil sulfur content. Such correlations indicate that reductions in PM
emissions are a secondary benefit associated with reducing S0« emissions
through the combustion of low sulfur oils. Particulate matter emissions are
also reduced if FGD systems are used to reduce SO, emissions from oil
10
combustion. As a result, standards limiting S02 emissions from oil
combustion, either through combustion of medium or very low sulfur oils or
the use of FGD systems, result in reductions in PM emissions.
In considering alternative control levels for standards to limit PM
emissions from oil combustion, the reductions in PM emissions associated
with alternative control levels for standards limiting SO- emissions from
oil combustion should be taken into account. In focusing on alternative
control levels for PM standards, therefore, this report considers these
alternatives in relation to alternative control levels selected for SO,
11
standards.
Since PM emissions from coal, unlike oil, cannot be correlated to fuel
sulfur content, limiting SO, emission from coal combustion through the use
12
of low sulfur coal has no effect on PM emissions. The use of FGD systems
to limit SO- emissions from coal combustion, however, does result in reduced
PM emissions.13
8
-------
Consequently, alternative control levels for standards limiting SO-
emissions from coal combustion can also result in reductions in PM
emissions. In focusing on alternative control levels for standards limiting
PM emissions from coal combustion, therefore, any reduction in PM emissions
associated with alternative control levels for standards limiting S02
emissions should be taken into account. Thus, as with oil, alternative
control levels for standards limiting PM emissions from coal combustion are
considered in relation to alternative control levels for standards limiting
SOp emissions.
Because wood contains little or no sulfur, alternative control levels
for standards limiting SOg emissions from wood combustion were not
developed. Therefore, alternative control levels for standards limiting PM
emissions from wood combustion are considered separately, with no relation
to standards limiting SO* emissions.
The fuel prices used in the analysis are presented in Table 3. These
are projected prices for fuel delivered in EPA Region V, levelized over the
14
period from 1992 to 2007. Although Region V prices were used for
illustrative purposes, fuel prices from other EPA Regions would be expected
to produce similar cost results.
Costs for SO2 compliance requirements are included for each model
c'oal- and oil-fired system. These costs are discussed in Reference 15.
It should be noted that the incremental cost effectiveness associated with
PM emission control is not affected by the SO^ compliance requirement
specified because S02 compliance costs are equal between the PM alternative
control levels compared. Cost differences among SO. compliance options are
accounted for in the incremental cost effectiveness associated with SO,
15
emission control.
Costs for opacity monitors are included for the alternative PM control
level cases to ensure PM emission compliance. Opacity monitors are not
included for the PM regulatory baseline cases. Although opacity monitors
would not actually be used when FGO systems are used for S0~ control,
opacity monitor costs are included as surrogate costs for other possible PM
compliance options, such as monitoring of venturi scrubber pressure drop or
liquid-to-gas ratio.
-------
4.0 MODEL BOILER COST ANALYSIS RESULTS
4.1 OIL
As discussed above, reductions in PM emissions associated with
alternative control levels for standards limiting SO- emissions from oil
combustion should be taken into account when considering alternative control
levels for standards limiting PN emissions. Thus, costs and cost
effectiveness are estimated for additional PM emission control on boilers
achieving specified S02 emission standards.
4.1.1 SO- Alternative Control Level 1
Alternative Control Level 1 for SO- emissions from oil-fired boilers is
690 ng/J (1.60 To/million Btu). This SOg emission level is achieved by
firing medium sulfur oil, which generates PM emissions of 73 ng/J (0.17
Ib/million Btu) or less. This PM emission rate is defined as PM Alternative
Control Level A. Alternative Control Level B for PM emissions is 43 ng/J
(0.10 Ib/million Btu) based on the use of either very low sulfur oil or a
wet scrubber. Alternative Control Level C for PM emissions is 22 ng/J
(0.05 Ib/million Btu) based on the use of an ESP. Tables 4 and 5 present
the costs of these alternative PM control levels under S02 Alternative
Control Level 1. The annualized cost of firing medium sulfur oil (PM
Alternative Control Level A) ranges from $336,000/year at the 2.9 MW
(10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to
$2,722,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. Alternative Control Level B for PM emissions increases the
annualized costs about 7 percent over PM Alternative Control Level A for all
boiler sizes. Alternative Control Level C for PM emissions increases
annualized costs by 12 to 31 percent over PM Alternative Control Level A.
Tables 6 and 7 present the results of the analysis for model boilers
under SOg Alternative Control Level 1 operating at capacity factors of 0.26
and 0.55, respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness of emission
control associated with PM Alternative Control Level B over PM Alternative
Control Level A ranges from $14,000/Mg ($12,700/ton) at the 15 MW
10
-------
(50 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to $34,100/Mg
($30,900/ton) at the 22 MM (75 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control
associated with PM Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control
Level B ranges from $13,500/Mg ($12,300/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to $l,930,000/Mg
($l,750,000/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26
capacity factor.
The firing of very low sulfur oil is the lowest cost option to meet PM
Alternative Control Level B for all boilers operating at a 0.26 capacity
factor and for boilers with 15 MW (50 million Btu/hour) heat input or less
operating at a 0.55 capacity factor. Application of a wet scrubber results
in the lowest costs for the 22 and 29 MW (75 and 100 million Btu/hour)
boilers operating at a 0.55 capacity factor.
When very low sulfur oil is fired to meet PM Alternative Control Level
B, the incremental cost effectiveness decreases with increasing boiler size
and capacity factor. This result is due to the addition of an opacity
monitor to ensure PM emission compliance under PM Alternative Control Level
B but not under PM Alternative Control Level A. Although the annualized
cost for an opacity monitor remains constant for all boiler sizes and
capacity factors, the annual PM emission reductions achieved increase with
increasing boiler size and capacity factor. Thus, incremental cost
effectiveness decreases. The incremental cost effectiveness increases at
the 22 MW (75 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor because
application of a wet scrubber becomes the lowest cost option. The
incremental cost effectiveness associated with PM Alternative Control
Level C decreases with increasing boiler size and capacity factor due to the
economies of scale associated with ESP applications.
4.1.2 SO- Alternative Control Level 2
Alternative Control Level 2 for SO* emissions is achieved by firing
very low sulfur oil. The PM emission level that is achieved by firing very
low sulfur oil is 43 ng/J (0.10 ID/million Btu) or less which corresponds to
11
-------
PM Alternative Control Level B. Alternative Control Level C for PM
emissions can be achieved by applying an ESP. Tables 8 and 9 present the
costs of these alternative PM control levels under SOg Alternative Control
Level 2. The annualized cost of firing very low sulfur oil (PM Alternative
Control Level B) ranges from $345,000/yr at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to $2,916,000/yr at the 29 MW
(100 million Btu/hour) and 0.55 capacity factor. Applying an ESP under PM
Alternative Control Level C increases annualized costs by 12 to 30 percent.
Tables 10 and 11 present the results of the analysis for model boilers
under S02 Alternative Control Level 2. The incremental cost effectiveness
of emission control associated with PM Alternative Control Level C over PM
Alternative Control Level B ranges from $349,000/Mg ($317,000/ton) at the
29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to
$2,530,000/Mg ($2,290,000/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler
size and 0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost effectiveness increases
with decreasing boiler size and capacity factor due to the economies of
scale associated with ESP applications.
4.1.3 SO^ Alternative Control Level 3
Alternative Control Level 3 for S02 emissions from oil-fired boilers
requires 90 percent SO- reduction. This level can be achieved by using an
FGD system. As discussed in Reference 2, an FGO system can reduce PM
emissions from oil-fired boilers to 43 ng/J (0.10 Ib/million Btu). This
reduction corresponds to PM Alternative Control Level B. Alternative
Control Level C for PM emissions can be achieved by applying an ESP upstream
of the FGD system.
Tables 12 and 13 present the costs associated with model oil-fired
boilers and FGD systems (PM Alternative Control Level B) operating at
capacity factors of 0.26 and 0.55, respectively. The annualized costs for
these systems range from $648,000/year at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to $3,375,000/year at the 29 MW
12
-------
(100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor. Adding an ESP
to achieve PM Alternative Control Level C increases the annualized cost by 6
to 11 percent over PM Alternative Control Level B.
Tables 14 and 15 present the results of the analysis for the model
oil-fired boilers under SOg Alternative Control Level 3. The incremental
cost effectiveness of emission control associated with PM Alternative
Control Level C over Alternative Control Level B ranges from $18,300/Mg
($16,600/ton) at the 29 MM (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor to $93,900/Mg ($85,200/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
The incremental cost effectiveness decreases with increasing boiler size
and capacity factor. This result is primarily due to the economies of scale
associated with ESP applications and the inclusion of an opacity monitor
under PM Alternative Control Level C but not under PM Alternative Control
Level B.
4.2 COAL -
As discussed above, reductions in PM emissions associated with
alternative control levels for standards limiting S02 emissions from coal
combustion should be taken into account when considering alternative control
levels for standards limiting PM emissions. Thus, costs and cost
effectiveness are estimated for additional PM emission control on boilers
achieving SO* emissions standards.
4.2.1 SO J\l tentative Control Level 1
Alternative Control Level 1 for SOg emissions from coal-fired boilers is
520 ng/J (1.2 ID/million Btu) based on the use of low sulfur coal. The
regulatory baseline for PM emissions is based on the use of single
mechanical collectors. As discussed in Reference 2, this level is 190 ng/J
(0.45 To/million Btu) for boilers smaller than 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour)
heat input and 260 ng/J (0.60 Ib/million Btu) for boilers of 8.7 MW
(30 million Btu/hour) and larger. Alternative Control Levels A, B, C, and D
13
-------
for PM emissions are 130, 86, 43, and 22 ng/J (0.30, 0.20, 0.10, and
0.05 Ib/million Btu), respectively. Tables 16 and 17 present the costs of
these PM control levels under SOg Alternative Control Level 1.
The annualized costs for model boilers at the PM regulatory baseline
range from $638,000/year at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and
0.26 capacity factor to $2,955,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor. Dual mechanical collectors are the
lowest cost option for meeting PM Alternative Control Level A for all model
boilers examined. Under PM Alternative Control Level B, sidestream
separators are the lowest cost option for boilers above 2.9 MW
(10 million Btu/hour) heat input, while fabric filters are the lowest cost
option for boilers 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) and below. Fabric filters
are the lowest cost option for achieving both PM Alternative Control Levels
C and D for all model boilers examined. The alternative PM control levels
increase annualized costs over the PM regulatory baseline by the following
amounts:
o Alternative Control Level A - 2 to 6 percent
o Alternative Control Level B - 3 to 9 percent
o Alternative Control Level C - 5 to 9 percent
o Alternative Control Level D - 5 to 9 percent
Tables 18 and 19 present the results of the analysis for model boilers
under SO- Alternative Control Level 1 operating at capacity factors of 0.26
and 0.55, respectively. The incremental cost effectiveness of emission
control associated with PM Alternative Control Level A over the PM
regulatory baseline ranges from $890/Mg ($810/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to $22,600/Mg ($22,500/ton)
at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with PM
Alternative Control Level B over PM Alternative Control Level A ranges from
$3,270/Mg ($2,970/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and
0.55 capacity factor to $16,330/Mg ($14,820/ton) at the 7.3 MW (25 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
14
-------
The incremental cost effectiveness of PM Alternative Control Level B
over PM Alternative Control Level A and PM Alternative Control Level A over
the PM regulatory baseline generally increases with decreasing boiler size
and capacity factor. This result is due to the economies of scale
associated with the PM control technologies applied. The only case which
deviates from this trend is at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size
and 0.26 capacity factor, where fabric filters are the lowest cost option to
meet PM Alternative Control Level B. For all other cases, sidestream
separators are the lowest cost option to meet this regulatory alternative.
Thus, two different technologies and actual emission rates are being
compared.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level C over PM Alternative Control Level B at the
2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size is $0/Mg ($0/ton) for both capacity
factors. At the 7.3 MW (25 million Btu/hour) boiler size, the incremental
cost effectiveness ranges from $610/Mg ($550/ton) to $l,550/Mg ($l,400/ton)
for the two capacity factors examined. For boilers 15 MW (50 million
Btu/hour) and larger, the incremental cost effectiveness remains nearly
constant at approximately $5,130/Mg ($4,660/ton) and $.2,450/Mg ($2,230/ton)
when operating at capacity factors of 0.26 and 0.55, respectively.
At the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size, fabric filters are the
lowest cost option to meet PM Alternative Control Levels B and C. Fabric
filters are generally designed and operated to achieve an emission level of
22 ng/J (0.05 Ib/million Btu) or less (PM Alternative Control Level D).
However, because of their relatively low cost, fabric filters have been
included for analysis at PM Alternative Control Levels B and C as well.
Although Alternative Control Levels B and C limit PM emissions to 86 and
43 ng/J (0.20 and 0.10 Ib/million Btu), respectively, the costs and
incremental cost effectiveness for all fabric filters were calculated based
on achieving an emission rate of 22 ng/J (0.05 Ib/million Btu). Thus, there
is no additional cost or cost effectiveness impact associated with
increasing the stringency of alternative control levels when fabric filters
are the lowest cost option for the two levels being compared. As a result,
the incremental cost effectiveness is $0/Mg ($0/ton).
15
-------
At the other boiler sizes, sidestream separators and fabric filters are
the lowest cost options to meet PM Alternative Control Levels B and C,
respectively. Fabric filter costs increase more rapidly with size than
sidestream separator costs for boilers up to 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour)
heat input. However, for boiler sizes above 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour),
costs for fabric filters and sidestream separators increase with boiler size
at nearly equal rates. Thus, the incremental cost effectiveness increases
with boiler size up to 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) and then becomes nearly
constant as size increases.
The incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level D over PM Alternative Control Level C is $0/Mg
($0/ton) for all boiler sizes and capacity factors. This result is due to
fabric filters being the lowest cost option at both alternative control
levels. That is, as discussed above, fabric filter control performance and
costs do not change between alternative control levels.
4.2.2 SO- Alternative Control Level 2
Alternative Control Level 2 for SO- emissions from coal-fired boilers
requires 90 percent SO- reduction. This control level can be achieved by
using either an FGO system or an FBC unit. As discussed in Reference 17,
the costs for achieving 90 percent SO- reduction under SO- Alternative
Control Level 2 are based on costs for FGD. When an FGO system is used to
meet SOg Alternative Control Level 2, PM emissions will be reduced to
43 ng/J (0.10 ID/million Btu) or less. This PM emission level corresponds
to PM Alternative Control Level C for coal-fired boilers. Alternative
Control Level D for PM emissions is 22 ng/J (0.05 ID/million Btu) based on
the use of a fabric filter.
Tables 20 and 21 present the costs of the alternative PM control levels
for coal-fired boilers under S02 Alternative Control Level 2. Annualized
costs for the boilers with FGD systems (PM Alternative Control Level C)
range from $2,935,000/year at the 29 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size
and 0.26 capacity factor to $4,465,000/year at the 29 MW (100 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor. The increase in annualized
cost associated with PM Alternative Control Level D over PM Alternative
Control Level C ranges from 2 to 7 percent.
16
-------
Tables 22 and 23 present the results of the analysis for coal-fired
boilers operating at capacity factors of 0.26 and 0.55, respectively. The
incremental cost effectiveness of emission control associated with
PM Alternative Control Level D over PM Alternative Control Level C averages
approximately $42,000/Mg ($38,000/ton) at a capacity factor of 0.26 and near
$14,000/Mg ($13,000/ton) at a capacity factor of 0.55.
Fabric filter costs increase more rapidly with size for boilers smaller
than 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) than for those above this size.
Therefore, the incremental cost effectiveness increases as boiler sizes
approach the 8.7 to 15 MW (30 to 50 million Btu/hour) size range, but then
begins to decrease for the larger systems. However, as the capacity factor
increases, the emissions reductions associated with these costs also
increase. Thus, the incremental cost effectiveness decreases with
increasing capacity factors.
4.3 WOOD
As discussed above, since wood contains little or no sulfur,
alternative control levels for standards limiting SOp emissions from wood
combustion were not developed. Therefore, alternative control levels for
standards limiting PM emissions from wood combustion are considered
separately, with no relation to standards limiting SCL emissions.
The regulatory baseline for PM emissions is 190 ng/J (0.45 To/million
Btu) for boilers smaller than 8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) heat input and
260 ng/J (0.60 Ib/million Btu) for boilers larger than or equal to this
size; these levels are based on the use of a single mechanical collector.
Alternative Control Level A is 130 ng/J (0.30 Ib/million Btu) based on the
use of a double mechanical collector. Alternative Control Level B is 86
hg/J (0.20 Ib/million Btu) based on the use of either an ESP or a wet
scrubber operated at a low pressure drop. The lowest cost option to meet
Alternative Control Level B for all boilers except the largest [29 MW (100
million Btu/hour)] boilers at both capacity factors is the use of an ESP.
Alternative Control Level C is 43 ng/J (0.10 Ib/million Btu) based on the
use of either an ESP or a wet scrubber operating at a medium pressure drop.
Use of an ESP is again the lowest cost option to meet Alternative Control
17
-------
Level C for all boilers except the largest [29 MW (100 million Btu/hour)]
boilers at both capacity factors.
Tables 24 and 25 present the costs of the Alternative Control Levels
for wood-fired boilers. The annualized costs for a wood-fired boilers with
a single mechanical collectors (regulatory baseline) range from $511,000/yr
at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor to
$3,353,000/yr at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor. Alternative Control Level A increases the annualized costs
by 2 to 7 percent over the regulatory baseline. Alternative Control Levels
B and C increase the annualized costs over the regulatory baseline by 9 to
16 percent and 10 to 19 percent, respectively.
Tables 26 and 27 present the results of the analysis for wood-fired
boilers at capacity factors of 0.26 and 0.55, respectively. The incremental
cost effectiveness of emission control associated with Alternative Control
Level A over the regulatory baseline ranges from $900/Mg ($820/ton) at the
29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to
$21,900/Mg ($19,900/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and
0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost effectiveness of Alternative
Control Level B over Alternative Control Level A ranges from $9,580/Mg
($8,690/ton) at the 22 MW (75 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.55
capacity factor to $39,700/Mg ($36,100/ton) at the 2.9 MW (10 million
Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor. The incremental cost
effectiveness of Alternative Control Level C over Alternative Control Level
B ranges from $l,330/Mg ($l,200/ton) at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour)
boiler size and 0.55 capacity factor to $15,500/Mg ($14,000/ton) at the 2.9
MW (10 million Btu/hour) boiler size and 0.26 capacity factor.
The incremental cost effectiveness associated with each alternative
control level generally decreases with increasing boiler sizes and capacity
factors. This result is due to the economies of scale associated with the
PM control devices applied. The only cases that deviate from this trend are
under Alternative Control Level B at the 29 MW (100 million Btu/hour) boiler
size for both capacity factors. For these systems, the incremental cost
effectiveness increases because a different PM control device is chosen to
meet the Alternative Control Level.
18
-------
5.0 REFERENCES
1. Overview of the Regulatory Baseline, Technical Basis, and Alternative
Control Level for Sulfur Dioxide (SO-) Emission Standards for Small
Steam Generating Units. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-89-12. May 1989.
2. Overview of the Regulatory Baseline, Technical Basis, and Alternative
Control Levels for Particulate Matter (PM) Emission Standards for Small
Steam Generating Units. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-89-11. May 1989.
3. Industrial Boiler S02 Cost Report. Prepared by Radian Corporation.
Prepared for the U.ST Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. Publication No. EPA-450/3-85-011. July 1984. 78p.
4. Development of an Algorithm for Estimating the Costs of Sodium Flue Gas
Desulfurization Systems Designed to Control Emissions of Particulate
Matter and Sulfur Dioxide. Prepared by Radian Corporation. Prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC. August 1986. 93p.
5. Capital and Operating Costs of Particulate Controls on Coal- and
Oil-fired Industrial Boilers. Prepared by PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. Publication No. EPA-450/5-80-009. August 1980.
6. Memorandum from Stackhouse, C.W., J.T. Waddell, and E.F. Aul, Radian
Corporation, to Maxwell, W.H., EPA/ISB. March 10, 1988. Cost Estimate
Adjustments for Fabric Filter Costs for Small Boiler Applications. 5p.
7. Memorandum from Stackhouse, C. and E. Aul, Radian Corporation, to
Maxwell, W.H., EPA/ISB. March 9, 1988. Cost Estimates for Annual
Inspection and Maintenance Programs for Mechanical Collectors and
Sidestream Separators. 7p.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Small Steam Generating Unit
Characteristics and Emission Control Techniques. Research Triangle
Park, NC, under Contract No. 68-02-4378. March 31, 1989.
9. Reference 2. p. 5.
10. Reference 2. p. 9.
11. Reference 1. pp. 2, 3.
12. Reference 2. p. 13.
19
-------
13. Reference 2. p. 18.
14. Letter from Hogan, T., Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., to
Link, I.E., EPA/EAB. June 5, 1987. Annualized Industrial Fuel Prices,
15. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Controlling Sulfur Dioxide (SCO
Emissions from Small Steam Generating Units. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No.
EPA-450/3-89-14. May 1989.
16. Memorandun from Copland, R., EPArSDB, to Link, I., EPArEAB. July
2, 1987. Revised Regulatory Alternatives for Small Boiler Impacts
Analysis.
17. Reference 1. p. 5.
20
-------
TABLE 1. S02 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVELS FOR SMALL BOILERS
SO, Emission Standard
Basis
Coal-Fired Boilers
Regulatory baseline
Alternative Control Level 1
Alternative Control Level 2
Oil-Fired Boilers
Regulatory baseline
Alternative Control Level 1
Alternative Control Level 2
Alternative Control Level 3
1,550 ng/J
(3.6 Ib/million Btu)
520 ng/J
(1.2 ID/million Btu)
90% S02 reduction
1,290 ng/J
(3.0 Ib/million Btu)
670 ng/J
(1.6 Ib/million Btu)
210 ng/J
(0.50 Ib/million Btu)
90% S02 reduction
Medium sulfur coal3
Low sulfur coal
FGD or FBCC
High sulfur oil
Low sulfur oil
Very low sulfur oil
FGD
Type F - bituminous
Type B - bituminous
CFGD - Flue Gas Desulfurization
FBC » Fluidized Bed Combustion
SOURCE: Reference 1.
21
-------
TABLE 2. PM ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVELS FOR SMALL OIL-, COAL-, AND
WOOD-FIRED BOILERS
PM Emission Standard
Basis'
95 ng/J (0.22 Ib/million Btu)
73 ng/J (0.17 Ib/million Btu)
43 ng/J (0.10 Ib/million Btu)
22 ng/J (0.05 Ib/million Btu)
Oil-Fired Boilers
Regulatory Baseline
Alternative Control Level A
Alternative Control Level B
Alternative Control Level C
Coal-Fired Boilers
Regulatory Baseline
<8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) 190 ng/J (0.45
>8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) 260 ng/J (0.60
Alternative Control Level A 130 ng/J (0.30
Alternative Control Level B 86 ng/J (0.20
Alternative Control Level C 43 ng/J (0.10
Alternative Control Level D 22 ng/J (0.05
1fa/million Btu)
Ib/million Btu)
1 fa/million Btu)
Ib/million Btu)
Ib/million Btu)
Ib/million Btu)
HSO
MSO
WS or VLSO
ESP
SMC
SMC
DMC
SSS
SMC+WS
FF or SMC+
ESP
22
-------
TABLE 2. PM ALTERNATIVE CONTROL LEVELS FOR SMALL OIL-, COAL-,
AND WOOD FIRED BOILERS (continued)
PM Emission Standard
Basis'
Wood-Fired Boilers
Regulatory Baseline
<8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) 190 ng/J (0.45 Ib/million Btu) SMC
>8.7 MW (30 million Btu/hour) 260 ng/J (0.60 ID/million Btu) SMC
Alternative Control Level A 130 ng/J (0.30 To/million Btu) DMC
Alternative Control Level B 86 ng/J (0.20 Ib/million Btu) SMC+ESP or
SMC+WS
(low
pressure
drop)
SMC+ESP or
SMC+WS
(medium
pressure
drop)
Alternative Control Level C 43 ng/J (0.10 1 fa/million: Btu)
*SMC - Single Mechanical Collector
DMC * Double Mechanical Collector
SSS - Sidestream Separator
FF - Fabric Filter
ESP - Electrostatic Precipitator
WS = Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization System (or Wet Scrubber)
HSO - High Sulfur Oil
MSO - Medium Sulfur Oil
VLSO - Very Low Sulfur Oil
23
-------
TABLE 3. PROJECTED FUEL PRICES FOR EPA REGION V
Coal: S/GJ fS/million Btu)a
Low sulfur bituminous 2.73 (2.88)
Medium sulfur bituminous 2.38 (2.51)
Oil:
Medium sulfur 5.18 (5.46)
Very low sulfur 4.07 (4.30)
Natural Gas:
b 4.49 (4.73)
aLevelized prices in June 1985 dollars.
Industrial noncarriage market price. Used during FGD malfunction,
SOURCE: Reference 14.
24
-------
Table 4. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Hatter Control Alternatives on Median Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers in Region V
at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b)
r\>
01
Boiler Size
mrVintml ^o^hn^ma _
UjnilUl IcQVtllfJc
Alternative Control Level (c,d)
2.9 MW ( lOltBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FtyMetu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB Pty/Mtitu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FtyWBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu
7.3 m ( 25 MCtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FM/M«tu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB PtyMCtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FM/MBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/M*tu
15 W ( 50 Mtitu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB PM/Wfitu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB PM/MBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/M*tu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu
m
ulllddlUil ndlc
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual PM
CllllbbllJIld
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
1.32 (1.45)
1.03 (1.13)
0.55 (0.61)
0.51 (0.57)
3.29 (3.63)
2.57 (2.83)
1.39 (1.53)
1.28 (1.41)
6.58 (7.25)
5.13 (5.65)
2.77 (3.05)
2.57 (2.83)
Capital
fY»«t«
Unla
($1,000)
445
648
505
849
734
991
794
1,410
1,483
1,830
1,546
2,550
OU
Fuel
89
89
98
89
222
222
245
222
444
444
490
444
1 Costs ($1,
Nonfuel
175
209
183.
213
232
274
239
275
275
329
282
325
,000/yr)
Total
264
298
281
302
454
496
484
497
719
773
772
769
Annual ized
(net
UJ>I>
($l,000/yr)
336
403
361
441
573
656
612
729
963
1,074
1,025
1,192
/fYinHniiorl\
-------
Table 4. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Part icul ate Natter Control Alternatives on Mad inn Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers In Region V
at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b) (Continued)
Boiler Size
m/Vi»vf wil Tor-tin 4 r* ta
Lonunoi lecmiCfJc *
Alternative Control Level (c,d)
22 m( 75WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB PM/WBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB FM/MMBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/WCtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/HBtu
29 MW ( 100 WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB PM/Mfitu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB FM/MMBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/MBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/Mtitu
PN
emission Kale
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual PM Ca
Pnvlcc'i/uic r
UlllobHJfld L
Mj/yr (tons/yr) ($1
9.87 (10.83)
7.70 (8.48)
4.16 (4.58)
3.85 (4.24)
13.16 (14.51)
10.26 (11.31)
5.55 (6.11)
5.13 (5.65)
pital
'ncf-c
UblS
,000)
1,903
2,341
1,968
3,279
2,281
2,810
2,348
3,823
O&l
Fuel
666
666
735
666
888
888
979
888
1 Costs ($1,
Nonfuel
319
385
326
375
362
441
370
424
,000/yr)
Total
985
1,051
1,061
1,041
1,250
1,329
1,349
1,312
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
1,299
1,437
1,384
1,587
1,626
1,792
1,734
1,948
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b Coipllance option costs at the PM baseline (I.e., MSO) Include shipment fuel samplIng/analysis. The PM control alternatives
Level B and C (I.e., VS or VLSO and ESP, respectively) costs Include shipment fuel sampl 1ng/anslys1s and opacity monitors.
c MSO - Medlun sulfur oil
VS = Venturi scrubber
VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
d The VLSO option Is based on very low sulfur residual oil rather than distillate oil which would have higher model costs.
-------
Table 5. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter Control Alternatives on Median Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers
in Region V at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
ro
Boiler Size
FM Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d)
2.9 W( 10 WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/WBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu
7.3 W ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/WBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB PH/WBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu
15 m ( 50 WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/WBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PH/WBtu
FH
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual FM Capital
Emissions Costs
Mg/yr (tons/yr) ($1,000)
2.78 (3.07)
2.17 (2.39)
1.17 (1.29)
1.09 (1.20)
6.96 (7.67)
5.43 (5.98)
2.93 (3.23)
2.71 (2.99)
13.92 (15.34)
10.85 (11.96)
5.87 (6.46)
5.43 (5.98)
462
666
523
867
766
1,025
829
1,445
1,539
1,889
1,606
2,608
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr) i
Fuel Nonfuel
188
183
207
188
470
470
518
470
940
940
1,036
940
220
260
228
266
292
343
301
344
346
414
355
407
Total
408
448
435
454
762
813
819
814
1,286
1,354
1,391
1,347
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
482
554
518
595
885
977
950
1,050
1,537
1,661
1,650
1,776
/rnnHmioH
-------
Table 5. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Partlculate Matter Control Alternatives on Mediun Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers in Region V
at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b) (Continued)
ro
00
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d)
22 W( 75MMBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO- 0.17 LB FM/MBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB PM/ftBtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/MCtu
29 W ( 100 Wetu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FM/MMBtu
Level B/VS - 0.10 LB FM/MCtu
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/Mfitu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/HBtu
PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual PM Capital
Emissions Costs
Mg/yr (tons/yr) ($1,000)
20.89 (23.02)
16.28 (17.94)
8.80 (9.70)
8.14 (8.97)
27.85 (30.69)
21.71 (23.92)
11.73 (12.93)
10.85 (11.96)
1,982
2,424
2,053
3,361
2,382
2,916
2,458
3,927
0 & H Costs ($l,000/yr) ,
Fuel Nonfuel
1,409
1,409
1,554
1,409
1,879
1,879
2,072
1,879
402
487
410
471
456
559
464
533
Total
1,811
1,896
1,964
1,880
2,335
2,438
2,536
2,412
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
2,133
2,290
2,295
2,434
2,722
2,911
2,932
3,058
a All costs In June 1985 dollars.
b Ccnpllance option costs at the PM baseline (I.e., MSO) Include shipment fuel sampling/analysis. The PM control alternatives
Level B and C (i.e., VS or VLSO and ESP, respectively) costs include shipment fuel sanpling/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c MSO = Medium sulfur oil
VS = Venturi scrubber
VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic preclpitator
d The VLSO option is based on very low sulfur residual oil rather than distillate oil which would have higher model costs.
-------
Table 6. Cost Effectiveness for Additional PM Control on Medlun Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b)
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d,e)
PM Annual Annual i zed Average Incremental
Emission Rate Emissions, Cost, Cost Effectiveness, Cost Eeffectlveness,
ng/(lb/M«tu) Hg/yr (ton/yr) ($1000/yr) $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)
ro
2.9 W( lOMCtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FM/MMBtu 55 (0.128) 1.32 (1.45)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu 23 (0.054) 0.55 (0.61)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/WBtu 21 (0.050) 0.51 (0.57)
7.3 MW( 25NBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FM/WBtu 55 (0.128) 3.29 (3.63)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FM/Hfitu 23 (0.054) 1.39 (1.53)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/Hfltu 21 (0.050) 1.28 .(1-41)
15 Ml ( 50 MMBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FM/WBtu 55 (0.128) 6.58 (7.25)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/MCtu 23(0.054) 2.77 (3.06)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PH/Mfitu 21 (0.050) 2.57 (2.83)
336 -
361 32,800 (29,800)
441 131,000 (119,000)
573
612 20,500 (18,600)
729 77,700 (70,500)
963
1,025 16,300 (14,800)
1,192 57,000 (51,700)
33,000 (30,000)
1,930,000 (1,750,000)
20,500 (18,600)
1,130,000 (1,020,000)
16,300 (14,800)
804,000 (729,000)
(Continued)
-------
Table 6. Cost Effectiveness for Additional PM Control on Median Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b)
(Continued)
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d,e)
PM Annual Annual ized Average Incremental
Emission Rate Emissions, Cost, Cost Effectiveness, Cost Effectiveness,
ng/(lb/MBtu) Hg/yr (ton/yr) ($1000/yr) $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
22 W( 75
A/M90-
B/VLSO -
C/ESP -
29 W( 100
A/MSO-
B/VLSO -
C/ESP -
MCtu/hr)
0.17 LB
0.10 LB
0.05 LB
PM/HBtu
FM/wetu
FM/MCtu
55
23
21
(0.128)
(0.054)
(0.050)
9.87
4.16
3.85
(10.88)
(4.58)
(4.24)
1,299
1,384
1,587
-
14,900
47,800
-
(13,500)
(43,400)
-
14,900 (13,500)
651,000 (591,000)
WBtu/hr)
0.17 LB
0.10 LB
0.05 LB
PM/WBtu
FM/toBtu
pM/wetu
55
23
21
(0.128)
(0.054)
(0.050)
13.16
5.55
5.13
(14.51)
(6.11)
(5.65)
1,626
1,734
1,948
-
14,200
40,100
-
(12,900)
(36,400)
-
14,200 (12,900)
515,000 (467,000)
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the PM baseline (I.e., MSO) Include shipment fuel sanplIng/analysis. The PM control alternatives
Level B and C (I.e., VS or VLSO and ESP, respectively) costs include shipment fuel sanpling/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c MSO - Median sulfur oil
VS - Venturl scrubber
VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
d The VLSO option is based on very low sulfur residual oil rather than distillate oil which would have
higher cost effectiveness values.
e The least cost option for Level B from the VS and VLSO control options.
-------
Table 7. Cost Effectiveness for Additional FM Control on Medlun Sulfur 011-fired Boilers at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
Boiler Size
FN Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d,e)
PM
Emission Rate
Annual Annual Ized Average Incremental
Emissions, Cost, Cost Effectiveness, Cost Effectiveness,
($1000/yr) $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)
u>
2.9 hW ( 10 WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/WBtu 55 (0.128) 2.78 (3.07)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PH/WBtu 23 (0.054) 1.17 (1.29)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PH/WBtu 21 (0.050) 1.09 (1.20)
7.3 Mrf( 25WBtu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/MBtu 55 (0.128) 6.96 (7.67)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu 23 (0.054) 2.93 (3.23)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu 21 (0.050) 2.71 (2.99)
15 VU( SOMfitu/hr)
Level A/MSO - 0.17 LB FH/WBtu 55 (0.128) 13.92 (15.34)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FH/WBtu 23 (0.054) 5.87 (6.46)
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/WBtu 21 (0.050) 5.43 (5.93)
482
518 22,300 (20,300)
595 66,500 (60,300)
885
950 16,100 (14,600)
1,050 38,800 (35,200)
1,537
1,650 14,000 (12,700)
1,776 28,100 (25,500)
22,300 (20,300)
876,000 (795,000)
16,100 (14,600)
455,000 (413,000)
14,000 (12,700)
287,000 (260,000)
-------
Table 7. Cost Effectiveness for Additional PM Control on Median Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
(Continued)
CJ
ro
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Alternative Control Level (c,d,e)
PM Annual Annual Ized Average Incremental
Emission Rate Emissions, Cost, Cost effectiveness, Cost Effectiveness,
na/(lb/MWu) Ma/yr(ton/yr) ($1000/yr) $/Mg ($/ton) $/Mg ($/ton)
22 W( 75
Level A/MSO-
Level B/VS -
Level C/ESP -
29 MM ( 100
Level A/MSO-
Level B/VS -
Level C/ESP -
MMBtu/hr)
0.17 LB PM/WBtu
0.10 LB PM/WBtu
0.05 LB FM/MBtu
MMBtu/hr)
0.17 LB PM/Mfitu
0.10 LB PM/WBtu
0.05 LB FM/MMBtu
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
21 (0.050)
55 (0.128)
43 (0.100)
21 (0.050)
20.89 (23.02)
16.28 (17.94)
8.14 (8.97)
27.85 (30.69)
21.71 (23.92)
10.85(11.96)
2,133
2,290
2,434
2,722
2,911
3,058
-
34,100 (30,900)
23,600 (21,400)
-
30,800 (27,900)
19,800 (17,900)
-
34,100 (30,900)
17,700 (16,100)
.
30,800 (27,900)
13,500 (12,300)
a All costs In June 1935 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the PH baseline (I.e., MSO) include shipment fuel sampling/analysis. The FM control alternatives
Level B and C (I.e., VS or VLSO and ESP, respectively) costs include shipment fuel sanpllng/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c MSO - Hedlun sulfur oil
VS - Venturi scrubber
VLSO - Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
d The VLSO option is based on very low sulfur residual oil rather than distillate oil which would have
higher cost effectiveness values.
e The least cost option for Level B from the VS and VLSO control options.
-------
Table 8. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives on Very Low Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers
in Region V at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b)
tu
CO
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Nominal Emission Rate (c)
2.9 VU ( 10 MGtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/MCtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/MCtu
7.3W( 25Mtttu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FM/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/MTOu
15 m ( 50 WBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/HBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/Mfitu
22 W( 75WBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/Mfitu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/ftfitu
29 VU ( 100 NBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FM/ttBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/MBtu
Actual PM
Emission Rate
no/J (Ib/WBtu)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual PM Capital
Emissions Costs
Mg/yr (tons/yr) ($1,000)
0.55 (0.61)
0.51 (0.57)
1.39 (1.53)
1.28 (1.41)
2.77 (3.06)
2.57 (2.83)
4.16 (4.58)
3.85 (4.24)
5.55 (6.11)
5.13 (5.65)
446
850
735
1,412
1,487
2,553
1,909
3,285
2,289
3,830
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr) ,
Fuel Nonfuel
98
98
245
245
490
490
735
735
979
979
175
214
231
274
274
324
318
374
362
424
Total
273
312
476
519
764
814
1,053
1,109
1,341
1,403
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
345
450
596
752
1,009
1,238
1,368
1,655
1,718
2,039
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the FM baseline (i.e., VLSO) include shipment fuel sampling/analysis. The PM control alternative
Level C (i.e., ESP) costs include shipment fuel sanpling/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
-------
Table 9. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives on Very Low Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers In Region V
at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
Boiler Size/Control - Nominal
Emission Rate
2.9 VU( lOWBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/MWu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/MMBtu
7.3 W( 25ttBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB FM/WBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB PM/WBtu
15 VU( 50MCtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/Mfitu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/Wetu
22 VU( 75MBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/fflBtu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FM/MCtu
29 W ( 100 WBtu/hr)
Level B/VLSO - 0.10 LB PM/Mtitu
Level C/ESP - 0.05 LB FH/Wetu'
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/Hfitu)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
23 (0.054)
21 (0.050)
Annual PM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
1.17 (1.29)
1.09 (1.20)
2.93 (3.23)
2.71 (2.99)
5.87 (6.46)
5.43 (5.98)
8.80 (9.70)
8.14 (8.97)
11.73 (12.93)
10.85 (11.96)
Capital
Costs
($1,000)
464
869
770
1,449
1,547
2,616
1,994
3,372
2,399
3,943
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
207
207
518
518
1,036
1,036
1,554
1,554
2,072
2,072
220
267
293
344
347
407
402
471
456
533
Total
427
474
811
862
1,383
1,443
1,956
2,025
2,528
2,605
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
502
614
934
1,098
1,634
1,873
2,279
2,579
2,916
3,252
a All costs In June 1985 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the PM baseline (i.e., VLSO) Include shipment fuel sampling/analysis. The FM control alternative
Level C (i.e., ESP) costs Include shipment fuel sanpling/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
-------
Table 10. Cost Effectiveness for Additional PN Control on Very Low Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b)
Boiler Size
FM Control Technique -
Nominal Emission Rate (c,d)
2.9 Mtf (
Level B/VLSO
Level
C/ESP
7.3 Mrf(
Level B/VLSO
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
C/ESP
15 W(
B/VLSO
C/ESP
22MW(
B/VLSO
C/ESP
29W(
B/VLSO
C/ESP
lONGtu/hr)
- 0.10 LB FM/WBtu
- 0.05 LB
PtyMfitu
25WBtu/hr)
- 0.10 LB PM/WBtu
- 0.05 LB
pM/wetu
50M«tu/hr)
- 0.10 LB PfyMfitu
- 0.05 LB
FM/WBtu
75WBtu/hr)
- 0.10 LB PM/Mfltu
- 0.05 LB
FM/wetu
lOOWBtu/hr)
• 0.10 LB FM/MWu
- 0.05 LB
FM/wetu
Actual PM
Emission Rate,
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
23
21
23
21
23
21
23
21
23
21
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Ma/yr (ton/yr) ($1000/yr)
0
0
1
1
2
2
4
3
.55
.51
.39
.28
.77
.57
.16
.85
5.55
5.13
(0.61)
(0
(1
(1
(3
(2
(4
(4
(6
(5
.57)
.53)
.41)
.06)
.83)
.58)
.24)
•H)
.65)
345
450
596
752
1,009
1,238
1,368
1,655
1,718
2,039
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
-
2,530,000 (2,290,000)
-
1,500,000 (1,360,000)
-
1,100,000 (1,000,000)
-
921,000 (836,000)
-
772,000 (701,000)
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the PM baseline (i.e., VLSO) include shipment fuel sanpling/analysis. The FM control alternative
Level C (i.e., ESP) costs Include shipment fuel sanpling/anslysis and opacity monitors.
c VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
-------
Table 11. Cost Effectiveness for Additional PM Control on Very Low Sulfur Oil-fired Boilers at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
to
0\
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique -
Nominal Emission Rate (c,d)
2.9 W(
Level B/VLSO
Level C/ESP
7.3 Ml (
Level B/VLSO
Level C/ESP
15 VU(
Level B/VLSO
Level C/ESP
22 VU (
Level B/VLSO
Level C/ESP
29Mrf(
Level B/VLSO
Level C/ESP
lOWBtu/hr)
- 0.10 Lfi FM/MCtu
- 0.05 LB PM/H6tu
25WBtu/hr)
- 0.10 Lfi FM/Metu
- o.o5 Lfi FM/wetu
50WBtu/hr)
- 0.10 Lfi FM/MBtu
- 0.05 Lfi PM/MBtu
75WBtu/hr)
- 0.10 Lfi PM/ttfitu
- 0.05 LB PM/MGtu
lOOMMBtu/hr)
- 0.10 LB FM/HBtu
- 0.05 LB PM/MCtu
Actual PM
Emission Rate,
ng/J (Ib/MBtu)
23
21
23
21
23
21
23
21
23
21
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
(0.054)
(0.050)
Annual formalized
Emissions, Cost,
Ms/yr (ton/yr) ($1000/yr)
1.17
1.09
2.93
2.71
5.87
5.43
8.80
8.14
11.73
10.85
(1.29)
(1.20)
(3.23)
(2.99)
(6.46)
(5.98)
(9.70)
(8.97)
(12.93)
(11.96)
502
614
934
1,098
1,634
1,873
2,279
2,579
2,916
3,252
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
-
1,270,000 (1,160,000)
-
750,000 (680,000)
_
540,000 (490,000)
-
455,000 (413,000)
-
382,000 (347,000)
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b Compliance option costs at the PM baseline (i.e., VLSO) Include shipment fuel sampling/analysis. The PM control alternative
Level C (i.e., ESP) costs include shipment fuel sampling/anslysis and opacity monitors.*
c VLSO = Very low sulfur oil
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
-------
Table 12. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for Oil-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement in Region V at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a)
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique (b,c,d)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
a
b
c
d
VU ( 10 MWu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
VU ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
MM ( 50 Mfitu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
VU ( 75 Mtttu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
VU (100 WBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
Actual PM Annual FM Capital
Emission Rate Emissions Costs
no/J (Ib/fflBtu) Mg/yr (tons/yr) ($1,000)
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
1.0
0.5
2.6
1.3
5.2
2.6
7.7
3.9
10
5.2
(1.1)
(0.6)
(2.8)
(1.4)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(8.5)
(4.3)
(ID
(5.7)
1,172
1,373
1,682
2,130
2,699
3,489
3,341
4,387
3,921
5,074
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr) Ar
Fuel
84
84
211
211
421
421
632
632
843
843
Nonfuel
374
389
455
470
536
549
615
627
691
700
Total (1
458
473
666
681
957
970
1,247
1,259
1,534
1,543
Dualized
Cost
»,000/yr)
648
696
942
1,032
1,406
1,553
1,805
1,994
2,186
2,395
All costs are in June 1985 dollars.
PR = 90% S02 removal (based on flue
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
gas desulfurization)
The corpliance option costs at the Baseline
at the FGD inlet and continuous S02 emission
The PM control alternative I
(PR-ESP)
include
(PR) are the costs
monitoring at the
inlet fuel s
amplinc
associated with daily
FGD outlet.
i/analysis, an
fuel sampling/analysis
outlet S02 CEM, and
surrogate costs for control device performance monitoring (instead of opacity CEM).
-------
Table 13. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter Control Alternatives for Oil-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement In Region V at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
00
Actual FM Annual PM Capital
Boiler Size Emission Rate Emissions Costs
FM Control Technique (b,c,d) ng/J (Ib/Ttfitu) Ma/yr (tons/yr) ($1,000)
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr) At
Fuel
Nonfuel
Total 0
muallzed
Cost
H,000/yr)
2.9 VU ( 10 MBtu/hr)
7
14
22
29
a
b
c
d
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
.3 f-W ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
.6 VU ( 50 MCtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
.0 W( 75 MCtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
.3 VU (100 netu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
2.2
1.1
5.5
2.7
11
5.5
16
8.2
22
11
(2.4)
(1.2)
(6.0)
(3.0)
(12)
(6.0)
(18)
(9.0)
(24)
(12)
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
,194
,396
,723
,172
,769
,559
,440
,485
,046
,198
178
178
446
446
891
891
1,337
1,337
1,783
1,783
452
470
565
581
682
696
797
806
910
915
630
648
1,011
1,027
1,573
1,587
2,134
2,143
2,693
2,698
824
876
1,295
1,386
2,036
2,182
2,712
2,898
3,375
3,575
All costs are In June 1985 dollars.
PR = 90% S02 removal (based on flue
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
The compliance option costs at
at the FGD inlet and continuous
The PM control alternative (PR-
gas desulfurizatlon)
the Baseline
S02 emission
ESP)
include
(PR) are the costs
monitoring at the
inlet fuel s
amplinc
associated with daily
FGD outlet.
i/analysi
s, an
fuel sampling/analysis
outlet S02 CEM, and
surrogate costs for control device performance monitoring (instead of opacity CEM).
-------
Table 14. Cost Effectiveness Results for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for Oil-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement in Region V at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a)
U)
vo
Actual FM
Boiler Size Emission Rate,
PM Control Technique (b,c,d) ng/J(lb/WBtu)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
a
b
c
d
MJ( lOMCtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
m( 25MMBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
MM ( 50 MGtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
M ( 75 fflBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
VU ( 100 MBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
All costs are in June
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
1985 dollars.
Annual
Emissions,
KMton/yr)
1.0
0.5
2.6
1.3
5.2
2.6
7.7
3.9
10
5.2
(1.1)
(0.6)
(2.8)
(1.4)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(8.5)
(4.3)
(11)
(5.7)
Annual ized Incremental
Cost, Cost Effectiveness,
($1000/yr) $/Mg ($/ton)
648
696
'
942
1,032
1,406
1,553
1,805
1,994
2,186
2,395
\
93,900 (85,200)
69,700 (63,200)
56,900 (51,600)
48,800 (44,300)
40,500 (36,700)
PR - 90% S02 removal (based on flue gas desulfurization)
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
The coipliance option costs at the Baseline (PR) are the costs
at the FGD inlet and continuous S02 emission monitoring at the
The PM control alternative (PR-ESP) include
inlet fuel Si
associated with daily
FGD outlet.
fuel sampling/analy
ampl ing/analysis, an outlet S02 CEM, and
surrogate costs for control device performance monitoring (instead of opacity CEM).
-------
Table 15. Cost Effectiveness Results for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for Oil-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement in Region V at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b)
Boiler Size
PM Control Technique (b,c,d)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
a
b
c
d
W ( 10 FMBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
W ( 25 Mtttu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
Mrf( 50H*tu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
m ( 75 MBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
VU ( 100 MBtu/hr)
Level B/PR
Level C/PR-ESP
Actual PM
Emission Rate,
ng/J(lb/WBtu)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
Annual
Emissions,
M3/y(ton/yr)
2.2
1.1
5.5
2.7
11
5.5
16
8.2
22
11
(2.4)
(1.2)
(6.0)
(3.0)
(12)
(6.0)
(18)
(9.0)
(24)
(12)
Annual ized
Cost,
($iooo/yr)
824
876
1,295
1,386
2,036
2,182
2,712
2,898
3,375
3,575
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
47,600 (43,200)
33,500 (30,400)
26,800 (24,300)
22,700 (20,600)
18,300 (16,600)
All costs are in June 1985 dollars.
PR « 90% S02 removal (based on flue gas desulfurization)
ESP = Electrostatic precipitator
The compliance option costs at the Baseline
at the FGD inlet and continuous S02 emission
The PM control alternative I
[PR-ESP) include
(PR) are the costs
monitoring at the
inlet fuel s
amplinc
associated with
FGD outlet.
daily fuel sampling/analy
I/analysis, an outlet S02 CEM, and
surrogate costs for control device performance monitoring (instead of opacity CEM).
-------
Table 16. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter.Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur
Coal-Fired Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a)
Boiler Size,
FM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate
2.9 W(
(b,c)
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/Mtitu)
Annual PM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
Capital
Costs
($1,000)
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
Total
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
lOMMBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
7.3 Md(
A/DMC -
B/FF
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
D/MC-ESP-
25WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC -
B/FF
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP -
D/FF
D/MC-ESP-
0.45
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.45
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
194
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
194
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
4.7
3.1
0.5
2.1
2.1
0.5
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
11.6
7.8
1.3
5.2
5.2
1.3
2.6
2.6
1.3
1.3
(5.1)
(3.4)
(0.6)
(2.3)
(2.3)
(0.6)
(1.1)
(1.1)
(0.6)
(0.6)
(12.8)
(8.5)
(1.4)
(5.7)
(5.7)
(1.4)
(2.8)
(2.8)
(1.4)
(1.4)
1,580
1,650
1,784
1,675
1,752
. 1,784
2,146
1,789
1,784
1,821
2,823.
2,911
3,169
2,953
3,115
3,169
3,489
3,174
3,169
3,226
66
66
66
66
66
66
57
66
66
66
164
164
164
164
164
164
143
164
164
164
311
336
335
369
348
335
382
348
335
349
418
443
448
478
458
448
506
458
448
- 459
377
402
401
435
414
401
439
414
401
415
582
607
612
642
622
612
649
622
612
623
638
673
695
710
702
695
798
708
695
714
1,050
1,068
1,136
1,130
1,137
,136
,236
,148
,136
,157
-------
Table 16. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-Fired Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate
(b,c)
14.6 Mtf ( 50 Mfitu/hr)
Baseline/SMC - 0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC -
B/FF
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
D/MC-ESP-
22.0 Mrf ( 75 Mfitu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC -
B/FF -
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
CVFF
D/MC-ESP-
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.60
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/MBtu)
258
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
258
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual FM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
31.0
15.5
2.6
10.3
10.3
2.6
5.2
5.2
2.6
2.6
46.5
23.3
3.9
15.5
15.5
3.9
7.8
7.8
3.9
3.9
(34.2)
(17.1)
(2.8)
(11.4)
(11-4)
(2.8)
(5.7)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(2.8)
(51.2)
(25.6)
(4.3)
(17.1)
(17.1)
(4.3)
(8.5)
(8.5)
(4.3)
(4.3)
Capital
Costs -
($1,000)
4,994
5,111
5,562
5,177
5,472
5,562
6,052
5,549
5,562
5,625
7,165
7,309
7,885
7,396
7,774
7,885
8,436
7,869
7,885
7,963
0 & M Costs
($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
328
328
328
328
328
328
286
328
328
328
492
492
492
492
492
492 *
429
492
492
492
619
645
657
683
664
657
740
665
657
666
689
717
737
757
739
737
839
740
737
741
Total
947
973
985
1,011
992
985
1,026
993
985
994
1,181
1,209
1,229
1,249
1,231
1,229
1,268
1,232
1,229
1,233
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
1,776
1,820
1,908
1,869
1,900
1,908
2,054
1,914
1,908
1,927
2,374
2,424
2,541
2,478
2,525
2,541
2,704
2,542
2,541
2,576
frnntiniuvM
-------
co
Table 16. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-Fired Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Boiler Size,
FM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate (b,c)
29.3 VU (100 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC - 0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC
B/FF
B/SSS
B/MC-ESP
C/FF
C/MC-VS
C/MC-ESP
D/FF
D/tC-ESP
-0.30
-0.20
-0.20
-0.20
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.05
-0.05
Actual FM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/HBtu)
258
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual FM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
62.0
31.0
5.2
20.7
20.7
5.2
10.3
10.3.
5.2
5.2
(68.3)
(34.2)
(5.7)
(22.8)
(22.8)
(5.7)
(11-4)
(11.4)
(5.7)
(5.7)
Capital
Costs
($1,000)
9,189
9,360
10,025
9,465
10,422
10,025
10,655
10,530
10,025
10,635
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel
656
656
656
656
656
656
572
656
656
656
Nonfuel
768
796
826
841
826
826
946
827
826
828
Total
1,424
1,452
,482
,497
,482
,482
,518
,483
1,482
1,484
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
2,955
3,010
3,150
3,072
3,220
3,150
3,334
3,239
3,150
3,258
a All costs In June 1985
b UC - Uncontrolled
dollars and include
daily fuel sampling/analysis
compliance
costs.
SMC - Single mechanical collector
CMC « Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP - Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-VS - Single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
FF - Fabric filter
The FM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, Level C, and Level D) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
-------
Table 17. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled -
Fired Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate
(b,c)
2.9 VU ( 10 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC - 0.45
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/EMC -
B/FF -
B/SSS -
B/tC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
D/MC-ESP-
7.3 m ( 25 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC -
B/FF -
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
D/MC-ESP-
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.45
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (lb/ttetu)
194
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
194
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual FM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr) i
9.8
6.6
1.1
4.4
4.4
1.1
2.2
2.2
1.1
1.1
24.6
16.4
2.7
10.9
10.9
2.7
5.5
5.5
2.7
2.7
(10.8)
(7.2)
(1.2)
(4.8)
(4.8)
(1.2)
(2.4)
(2.4)
(1.2)
(1.2)
(27.1)
(18.1)
(3.0)
(12.0)
(12.0)
(3.0)
(6.0)
(6.0)
(3.0)
(3.0)
Capital
Costs -
($1,000)
1,599
1,670
1,805
1,696
1,773
1,805
2,168
1,809
1,805
1,842
2,858
2,946
3,206
2,991
3,152
3,206
3,526
3,211
3,206
3,263
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
139
139
139
139
139
139
121
139
139
139
347
347
347
347
347
347
302
347
347
347
382
406
410
447
426
410
466
427
410
427
518
544
554
586
566
554
638
567
554
567
Total
521
545
549
586
565
549
587
566
549
566
865
891
901
933
913
901
940
914
901
914
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
784
818
844
863
855
844
952
862
844
868
1,337
1,375
1,429
1,425
1,432
1,430
1,541
1,443
1,430
1,452
/rnnHmioH\
-------
Table 17. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-Fired Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (Continued)
in
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate
(b,c)
14.6 Ml ( 50 MBtu/hr)
Basel ine/SHC - 0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC -
B/FF
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
IVMC-ESP-
22.0 VU ( 75 Mtitu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CKC -
B/FF
B/SSS -
B/MC-ESP-
C/FF
C/MC-VS -
C/MC-ESP-
D/FF
D/MC-ESP -
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.60
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (ItyttEtu)
258
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
258
129
22
86
86
22
43
43
22
22
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual PM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
65.6
32.8
5.5
21.9
21.9
5.5
10.9
10.9
5.5
5.5
98.4
49.2
8.2
32.8
32.8
8.2
16.4
16.4
8.2
8.2
(72.3)
(36.1)
(6.0)
(24.1)
(24.1)
(6.0)
(12.0)
(12.0)
(6.0)
(6.0)
(108.4)
(54.2)
(9.0)
(36.1)
(36.1)
(9.0)
(18.1)
(18.1)
(9.0)
(9.0)
Capital
Costs
($1,000)
5,4)51
5,168
5,622
5,236
5,531
5,622
6,129
5,608
5,622
5,684
7,241
7,386
7,964
7,474
7,852
7,964
8,527
7,948
7,964
8,041
O&M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
694
694
694
694
694
694
605
694
694
694
1,041
1,041
\
1,041
1,041
1,041
1,041
907
1,041
1,041
1,041
755
783
803
830
810
803
934
811
804
812
843
873
904
923
904
904
1,078
905
904
907
Total
1,449
1,477
1,497
1,524
1,504
1,497
1,539
1,505
1,498
1,506
1,884
1,914
,945
,964
,945
,945
,985
1,946
1,945
1,948
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
2,285
2,330
2,427
2,389
2,419
2,427
2,595
2,433
2,427
2,447
3,085
3,136
3,264
3,200
3,247
3,264
3,461
3,265
3,264
3,282
-------
Table 17. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Partkulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled-
Fired Boilers In Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (Continued)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate (b,c)
29.3 W (100 Wetu/hr)
Baseline/SMC - 0.60
Level A/CMC - 0.30
Level B/FF - 0.20
Level B/SSS - 0.20
Level B/MC-ESP - 0.20
Level C/FF - 0.10
Level C/MC-VS - 0.10
Level C/MC-ESP - 0.10
Level D/FF - 0.05
Level D/MC-ESP - 0.05
Actual PM
Emission Rate
ng/J (Ib/MMBtu)
258 (0.60)
129 (0.30)
22 (0.05)
86 (0.20)
86 (0.20)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
22 (0.05)
Annual FM
Emissions
Ma/yr (tons/yr)
131.2 (144.5)
65.6 (72.3)
10.9 (12.0)
43.7 (48.2)
43.7 (48.2)
10.9 (12.0)
21.9 (24.1)
21.9 (24.1)
10.9 (12.0)
10.9 (12.0)
Capital
.Costs
($1,000)
9,285
9,456
10,124
9,563
10,521
10,124
10,770
10,628
10,124
10,733
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel
1,388
1,388
1,383
1,383
1,388
,388
,209
,388
,388
,388
Nonfuel
941
972
1,014
1,027
1,011
1,014
1,230
1,013
1,015
1,015
Total
2,329
2,360
2,402
2,415
2,399
2,402
2,439
2,401
2,403
2,403
Annual Ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
3,870
3,928
4,080
4,000
4,147
4,080
4,310
4,168
4,080
4,187
^
a All costs In June 1985
b UC - uncontrolled
dollars and Include
dally fuel sanpl Ing/analysis coipl lance
costs.
SMC = Single mechanical collector
CMC - Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP - Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-VS » Single mechanical collector followed by venturl scrubber
FF - Fabric filter
The FM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, Level C, and Level D) include the carpiiance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
-------
18. Cost Effectiveness Results of Part icul ate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a)
Boiler Size, Actual PM
PM Control Device - Emission Rate
Nominal Emission Rate (b,c,d,e,f) ng/J (Ib/HBtu)
2.9 VU ( 10 Mtitu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.45
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/EKC
B/FF
C/FF
IVFF
- 0.30
-0.20
- 0.10
-0.05
7.3 W ( 25 MBtu/hr)
Basel ine/SMC - 0.45
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
14.6 VU ( 50 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
194
129
22
22
22
194
129
86
22
22
258
129
86
22
22
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Ma/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
4.7
3
.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
11
7
5
1
1
31
15
10
2
2
.6
.8
.2
.3
.3
.0
.5
.3
.6
.6
(5.1)
(3.4)
(0.6)
(0.6)
(0.6)
(12.8)
(8.5)
(5.7)
(1.4)
(1.4)
(34.2)
(17.1)
(11.4)
(2.8)
(2.8)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
638
673
695
695
695
,050
,088
,130
,136
,136
,776
,820
1,869
1
1
,908
,908
N Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
—
22,600
8,630
0
0
-
9,830
16,300
1,550
0
-
2,820
9,480
5,070
0
.
(20,500)
(7,830)
0
0
- .
(8,920)
(14,800)
(1,400)
0
-
(2,560)
(8,610)
(4,600)
0
/rnntiniioH\
-------
co
Table 18. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device -
Nominal Emission Rate
22.0 VU ( 75 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/EMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
Actual PM
Emission Rate
(b,c,d,e,f) ng/J (Ib/MBtu)
.60
- 0.30
-0.20
-0
.10
-0.05
29.3 Mtf (100 Mfitu/hr)
Basel Ine/SMC - 0
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0
-0
-0
-0
.60
.30
.20
.10
.05
258
129
86
22
22
258
129
86
22
22
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
46.5
23.3
15.5
3.9
3.9
62.0
31.0
20.7
5.2
5.2
(51
•2)
(25.6)
(17
(4
(4
(68
(34
(22
(5
(5
.1)
.3)
.3)
.3)
•2)
•8)
•7)
•7)
2,374
2,424
2,478
2,541
2,541
2,955
3,010
3,072
3,150
3,150
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
_
2,150
6,950
5,380
0
-
1,790
5,950
5,040
0
_
(1,960)
(6,310)
(4,890)
0
-
(1,620)
(5,400)
(4,580)
0
-------
Table 18. Cost Effectiveness Results of Participate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
a All costs in June 1965 dollars and Include dally fuel sanplIng/analysis conpliance costs.
b UNO Uncontrolled
SMC = Single mechanical collector
CMC - Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP = Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-VS = Single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
FF - Fabric filter
c .The FM control alternatives (I.e., Level A, Level B, Level C, and Level 0) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
d The least cost compliance option for the 0.20 Ib PM/W Btu control alternative was chosen from
the SSS, FF, or MC-ESP control options.
e The least cost conpliance option for the 0.10 Ib FM/tol Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-VS, FF, or MC-ESP control options.
f The least cost conpliance option for the 0.05 Ib PM/W Btu control alternative was chosen from
the FF or MC-ESP control options.
-------
Table 19. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a)
Boiler Size, Actual PM
PM Control Device - Emission Rate
Nominal Emission Rate (b,c,d,e,f) no/J (Ib/HBtu)
2.9 W ( 10 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.45
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DC
B/FF
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
- 0.10
-0.05
7.3 W ( 25 WCtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.45
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
14.6 W ( 50 NBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
194
129
22
22
22
194
129
22
22
22
258
129
86
22
22
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual Annual Ized
Emissions, Cost,
Ma/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
9.8
6.6
1
1
1
.1
.1
.1
24.6
16.4
10.9
2
2
65
.7
.7
.6
32.8
21
5
5
.9
.5
.5
(10.8)
(7.2)
(1.2)
(1.2)
(1.2)
(27.1)
(18.1)
(12.0)
(3.0)
(3.0)
(72.3)
(36.1)
(24.1)
(6.0)
(6.0)
1
1
784
818
844
844
844
,337
,375
1,425
1
1
2
2
2
2
,430
,430
,285
,330
,389
,427
2,427
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
-
10,400
4,810
0
0
-
4,680
9,130
610
0
-
1,360
5,400
2,340
0
-
(9,440)
(4,370)
0
0
-
(4,250)
(8,290)
(553)
0
-
(1,240)
(4,900)
(2,120)
0
-/fYmtiniioHt
-------
Table 19. Cost Effectiveness Results of Participate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-control led
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Boiler Size, Actual PM
PM Control Device - Emission Rate
Nominal Emission Rate (b,c,d,e,f) ng/J (Ib/MBtu)
22.0 m ( 75 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC -0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC
B/SSS
C/FF
IVFF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
29.3 Ml (100 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC - 0.60
Level
Level
Level
Level
A/DMC
B/SSS
C/FF
D/FF
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
-0.05
258
129
86
22
22
258
129
86
22
22
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.05)
(0.05)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
98.4
49.2
32.8
8.2
8.2
131.2
65.6
43.7
10.9
10.9
(108.4)
(54
.(36
(9
(9
(144
(72
(48
(12
(12
•2)
.1)
.0)
•0)
.5)
.3)
•2)
.0)
.0)
3,
3,
3,
3»
3,
3,
3,
4,
085
136
200
264
264
870
928
000
4,080
4,080
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness, .
$/Mg ($/ton)
-
1,040
3,900
2,590
0
-
890
3,270
2,450
0
-
(943)
(3,540)
(2,350)
0
-
(810)
(2,970)
(2,220)
0
a All costs in June 1985 dollars and include dally fuel sampling/analysis compliance costs.
b INC - Uncontrolled
SMC = Single mechanical collector
CMC = Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP = Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-VS = Single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
FF - Fabric filter
c The PM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, Level C, and Level D) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
-------
Table 19. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for S02 Low Sulfur Coal-controlled
Coal-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
d The least cost compliance option for the 0.20 Ib PM/MM Btu control alternative was chosen fron
the SSS, FF, or MC-ESP control options.
e The least cost compliance option for the 0.10 Ib PM/tM Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-VS, FF, or MC-ESP control options.
f The least cost compliance option for the 0.05 Ib FM/ttl Btu control alternative was chosen from
the FF or MC-ESP control options.
en
ro
-------
Table 20. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for Coal-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement in Region V at 0.26 Capacity Factor (a,b,c)
01
CJ
Boiler size,
PM Control Device (d)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
VU ( 10 Mtitu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
W ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
m ( 50 Mtitu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
m ( 75 NBtu/hr) '
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
Ml (100 MMBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
PM Annual PM
Emission Rate, Emissions,
ng/J (lb/»Btu) Mg/yr (tons/yr)
•
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
1.0
0.5
2.6
1.3
S.2
2.6
7.7
3.9
10.3
5.2
(1.1)
(0.6)
(2.8)
(1.4)
(5.7) .
(2.8)
(8.5)
(4.3)
(11.4)
(5.7)
Capital
Costs,
$1,000
2,399
2,375
3,833
3,998
6,366
6,738
8,761
9,363
10,991
11,774
0 & M Costs, $l,000/yr
Fuel
57
57
143
143
286
286
429
429
572
572
Nonfuel
479
503
605
636
837
876
936
982
1,042
1,096
Total
536
560
748
779
1,123
1,162
1,365
1,411
1,614
1,668
Annual ized
Cost,
$i,ooo/yr
1
1
2
2
935
952
,391
,446
,159
,291
2,793
2,987
3
3
,482
,653
a
b
c
All costs are in June 1985
dollars.
Percent reduction control of S02 emissions
Carpi iance option costs at
the PM baseline
achieved with flue gas
(PR) include inlet dai
desulfurization.
ly fuel san
pi ing/an
alysis and
an outlet
S02 emission monitor.
The PM control alternative include inlet daily fuel sampling, an outlet S02 emission monitor, and surrogate costs for control
device performance monitoring (instead of opacity monitoring).
PR = Percent reduction with a single mechanical collector followed by venturi -scrubber
FF = Fabric filter
-------
Table 21. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter Control Alternatives for Coal-fired Boilers
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement in Region V at 0.55 Capacity Factor (a,b,c)
.
[:.iler Size,
PM Control Device (d)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
VU ( 10 M«tu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
Ml ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
vu ( so r«Bti0ir)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
W ( 75 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
VU (100 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
PM Annual PM
Emission Rate, Emissions,
ng/J (Ib/WBtu) Mg/yr (tons/yr)
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
43
22
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
(0.10)
(0.05)
2.2
1.1
. 5.5
2.7
10.9
5.5
16.4
8.2
21.9
10.9
(2.4)
(1.2)
(6.0)
(3.0)
(12.0)
(6.0)
(18.1)
(9.0)
(24.1)
(12.0)
Capital
Costs,
$1,000
2,424
2,400
3,877
4,041
6,435
6,807
8,853
9,455
11,106
11,889
O&M
Fuel
121
121
302
302
605
605
907
907
1,209
1,209
Costs, $l,000/yr
Nonfuel
581
605
751
784
1,045
1,083
1,185
1,230
1,333
1,386
Total
702
726
1,053
1,086
1,650
1,688
2,092
2,137
2,542
2,595
Annual ized
cost,
$l,000/yr
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
,107
,124
,712
,763
,753
,838
,618
,742
4,465
4,619
a
b
c
All costs are In June 1985
dollars.
Percent reduction control of S02 emissions
Compliance option costs at
thePM
baseline
achieved with flue gas
(PR) include inlet dail
desulfurization.
ly fuel sa
npl ing/an
alysis and
an outlet
S02 emission monitor.
The PM control alternative include inlet daily fuel sampling, an outlet S02 emission monitor, and surrogate costs for control
device performance monitoring (instead of opacity monitoring).
PR = Percent reduction with a single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
FF = Fabric filter
-------
Table 22. Cost Effectiveness Results of Sulfur Dioxide Control Alternatives for Coal-fired Boilers in Region V at 0.26 Capacity Factor
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement (a,b,c)
en
en
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device (d,e)
PM Annual PM Annual ized Incremental
Emission Rate, Emissions, Cost, Cost Effectiveness,
ng/J (Ib/MBtu) Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr $/Mg ($/ton)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
W( lOFWBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
W ( 25 NBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
m ( so ttetu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
m ( 75 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
IN ( 100 Mtitu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
1.0
0.5
2.6
1.3
5.2
2.6
7.7
3.9
10.3
5.2
(1.1)
(0.6)
(2.8)
(1.4)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(8.5)
(4.3)
(11.4)
(5.7)
935
952 31,942 (28,978)
1,391
1,446 42,590 (38,640)
2,159
2,291 51,300 (46,500)
2,793
2,987 50,100 (45,400)
3,482
3,653 33,000 (30,000)
a
b
c
All costs are in June 1985
dollars.
Percent reduction control of S02 emissions
Compliance option costs at
the PM baseline
achieved
with flue
(PR) include inlet
gas desulfurization.
daily fuel sailing/analysis and an outlet S02 emission monitor.
"fhe FM control alternative include inlet daily fuel sampling, an outlet S02 emission monitor, and surrogate costs for control
device performance monitoring (instead of opacity monitoring).
PR = Percent reduction with a single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
IT = Fabric filter
-------
Table 23. Cost Effectiveness Results of Sulfur Dioxide Control Alternatives for Coal-fired Boilers in Region V at 0.55 Capacity Factor
Subject to a Percent Reduction Requirement (a,b,c)
in
01
Boiler Size,
PH Control Device (d,e)
PM Annual FN Annual ized Incremental
Emission Rate, Emissions, Cost, Cost Effectiveness,
ng/J (Ib/WBtu) Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr $/Mg ($/ton)
2.9
7.3
14.6
22.0
29.3
VU ( 10 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
MW( 25MBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
VU ( SOWBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
VU ( 75 WBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
VU ( 100 MBtu/hr)
Level C/PR
Level D/PR-FF
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
43 (0.10)
22 (0.05)
2.2
1.1
5.5
2.7
10.9
5.5
16.4
8.2
21.9
10.9
(2.4)
(1.2)
(6.0)
(3.0)
(12.0)
(6.0)
(18.1)
(9.0)
(24.1)
(12.0)
1,107
1,124 15,558 (14,114)
1,712
1,763 18,700 (16,900)
2,753
2,838 15,600 (14,200)
3,618
3,742 15,100 (13,700)
4,465
4,619 14,000 (12,700)
a
b
c
All costs are in June 1985
dollars.
Percent reduction control of S02 emissions
Compliance option costs at
the PM baseline
achieved
with flue
(PR) include inlet
gas desulfurization.
daily fuel sampling/analysis and an outlet S02 emission monitor.
The PM control alternative include inlet daily fuel sampling, an outlet S02 emission monitor, and surrogate costs for control
device performance monitoring (Instead of opacity monitoring).
PR = Percent reduction with a single mechanical collector followed by venturi scrubber
FF = Fabric filter
-------
Table 24. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter Control Alternatives for
Wood-fired Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a)
FM
2.
7.
14.
Boiler Size,
Control Device (b,c)
S> W ( 10 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
3 W ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
6 f-W ( 50 Mtttu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
FM Emission
Level/Rate
ng/J (Ib/MMBtu)
194
129
86
86
43
43
194
129
86
86
43
43
258
129
86
86
43
43
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
Annual FM
Emissions
Ma/yr (tons/yr)
4.7
3.1
2.1
2.1
1.0
1.0
11.6
7.8
5.2
5.2
2.6
2.6
31.0
15.5
10.3
10.3
5.2
5.2
(5.1)
(3.4)
(2.3)
(2.3)
(1.1)
(1.1)
(12.8)
(8.5)
(5.7)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(2.8)
(34.2)
(17.1)
(11.4)
(11.4)
(5.7)
(5.7)
Capital
Costs -
($1,000)
1,320
1,475
1,806
1,556
1,812
1,643
2,643
2,735
3,264
3,040
3,271
3,179
4,486
4,609
5,289
5,168
5,299
5,346
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel
56
56
56
56
56
56
139
139
139
139
139
139
278
278
278
278
278
278
Nonfuel
237
262
272
275
273
276
357
382
399
398
402
399
502
527
556
549
562
551
Total
293
318
328
331
329
332
496
521
538
537
541
538
780
805
834
827
840
829
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
511
545
625
586
627
602
935
973
1,079
1,041
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
/i
,084
,066
,524
,569
,712
,685
,720
,718
-------
Table 24. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Participate Matter Control Alternatives for
Mood-fired Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
tr.
00
U Her Size,
FM Control Device (b,c)
22.0
29.3
VU ( 75 NBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/tC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
VU (100 WBtu/hr)
Basel 1ne/SMC
Level A/DC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
FM Emission
Level/Rate
ng/J (Ib/WBtu)
258
129
86
86
43
43
258
129
86
86
43
43
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
Annual PM
Emissions
Ma/yr (tons/yr)
46.5
23.3
15.5
15.5
7.8
7.8
62.0
31.0
20.7
20.7
10.3
10.3
(51.2)
(25.6)
(17.1)
(17.1)
(8.5)
(8.5)
(68.3)
(34.2)
(22.8)
(22.8)
(11.4)
(11.4)
Capital
Costs -
($1,000)
6,119
6,273
7,086
6,982
7,098
7,203
7,625
7,809
8,748
9,132
8,761
9,379
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel Nonfuel
417
417
417
417
417
417
556
556
556
556
556
556
632
659
699
685
708
688
723
750
802
785
814
788
Total
1,049
1,076
1,116
1,102
1,125
1,105
1,279
1,306
1,358
1,341
1,370
1,344
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
2,067
2,117
2,295
2,264
2,306
2,304
2,548
2,604
2,815
2,863
2,829
2,908
a
b
All costs In June 1985
SMC = Single mechanical
dollars.
collector
CMC - Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP « Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-LVS » Single mechanical collector followed by low pressure drop venturi scrubber
MC-MVS « Single mechanical collector followed by median pressure drop venturi scrubber
The FM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, and Level C) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
-------
Table 25. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Particulate Natter Control Alternatives for
Wood-fired Boilers in Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a)
en
to
PM
2.
7.
14.
Boiler Size,
Control Device (b,c)
9 W ( 10 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/EMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-WS
Level C/MC-ESP
3 VU ( 25 NBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MYS
Level C/MC-ESP
6 Mrf ( 50 fflBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
PM Emission
Level/Rate
ng/J (Ib/Mfitu)
194
129
86
86
43
43
194
129
86
86
43
43
258
129
86
86
43
43
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.45)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
Annual FM
Emissions
Mg/yr (tons/yr)
9.8
6.6
4.4
4.4
2.2
2.2
24.6
16.4
10.9
10.9
5.5
5.5
65.6
32.8
21.9
21.9
10.9
10.9
(10.8)
(7.2)
(4.8)
(4.8)
(2.4)
(2.4)
(27.1)
(18.1)
(12.0)
(12.0)
(6.0)
(6.0)
(72.3)
(36.1)
(24.1)
(24.1)
(12.0)
(12.0)
Capital
Costs •
($1,000)
1,335
1,407
1,823
1,573
1,828
1,659
2,672
2,764
3,295
3,071
3,303
3,210
4,535
4,659
5,342
5,220
5,353
5,398
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel
118
118
118
118
118
118
294
294
294
294
294
294
588
588
588
588
588
588
Nonfuel
288
312
327
332
330
333
437
463
487
486
494
488
619
646
687
677
700
679
Total
406
430
445
450
448
451
731
757
781
780
788
782
1,207
1,234
1,275
1,265
1,288
1,267
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
/i
624
659
744
707
747
722
,173
,212
,326
,287
,334
,313
,957
,003
,160
,129
,174
,161
fnnt-iniioHV
-------
Table 25. Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Paniculate Matter Control Alternatives for
Wood-fired Boilers In Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device (b,c)
22.0
29.3
VU ( 75 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
VU (100 Mtttu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DMC
Level B/tC-LVS
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-MVS
Level C/MC-ESP
PM Emission
Level/Rate
ng/J (lb/MWu)
258
129
86
86
43
43
258
129
86
86
43
43
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
(0.60)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.10)
(0.10)
Annual PM
Emissions
Wyr (tons/yr)
98.4
49.2
32.8
32.8
16.4
16.4
131.2
65.6
43.7
43.7
21.9
21.9
(108.4)
(54.2)
(36.1)
(36.1)
(18.1)
(18.1)
(144.5)
(72.3)
(48.2)
(48.2)
(24.1)
(24.1)
Capital
Costs
($1,000)
6,188
6,343
7,160
7,054
7,174
7,275
7,712
7,896
8,840
9,221
8,857
9,469
0 & M Costs ($l,000/yr)
Fuel
882
882
882
882
882
882
1,176
1,176
1,176
1,176
1,176
1,176
Nonfuel
784
813
870
849
890
853
899
930
1,003
975
1,029
979
Total
1,666
1,695
1,752
1,731
1,772
1,735
2,075
2,106
2,179
2,151
2,205
2,155
Annual ized
Cost
($l,000/yr)
2,690
2,743
2,938
2,900
2,960
2,941
3,353
3,412
3,645
3,682
3,674
3,728
a
b
All costs in June 1985
SMC = Single mechanical
dollars.
collector
•
CMC = Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP •» Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-LVS = Single mechanical collector followed by low pressure drop venturi scrubber
MC-MVS = Single mechanical collector followed by median pressure drop venturi scrubber
The PM control alternatives (I.e., Level A, Level B, and Level C) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
-------
Table 26. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for
Mood-fired Model Boilers In Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device (b,e,d,e)
2.9
7.3
14.6
fW ( 10 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
MM ( 25 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
VU ( 50 MGtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
PM Emission
Level
ngt/J(1b/MBtu)
194 (0.45)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
194 (0.45)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
258 (0.60)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
Annual Annual Ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
4.7
3.1
2.1
1.0
11.6
7.8
5.2
2.6
31.0
15.5
10.3
5.2
(5.1)
(3.4)
(2.3)
(1.1)
(12.8)
(8.5)
(5.7)
(2.8)
(34.2)
(17.1)
(11.4)
(5.7)
511
545
586
602
935
973
1,041
1,066
1,524
1,569
1,685
1,718
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mgi ($/ton)
— —
21,900 (19,900)
39,700 (36,000)
15,500 (14,000)
-
9,810 (8,900)
26,300 (23,900)
9,680 (8,780)
-
2,900 (2,630)
22,500 (20,400)
6,390 (5,800)
/rnnt-iniioH\
-------
Table 26. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Natter Control Alternatives for
Mood-fired Model Boilers in Region V (0.26 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
Oi
ro
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device (b,c,d,e)
22.0 m ( 75 WBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
29.3 W (100 M«tu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/CMC
Level B/MC-LVS
Level C/MC-MVS
PM Emission
Level
ng/J(lb/toBtu)
258 (0.60)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
258 (0.60)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
' 46.5
23.3
15.5
7.8
62.0
31.0
20.7
10.3
(51.2)
(25.6)
(17.1)
(8.5)
(68.3)
(34.2)
(22.8)
(11-4)
2,067
2,117
2,264
2,304
2,548
2,604
2,815
2,829
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
— —
2,150 (1,950)
19,000 (17,200)
5,160 (4,680)
-
1,810 (1,640)
20,400 (18,500)
1,350 (1,230)
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b SMC - Single mechanical collector
CMC • Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP - Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-LVS - Single mechanical collector followed by low pressure drop venturi scrubber
MC-MVS « Single mechanical collector followed by medlun pressure drop venturi scrubber
c The PM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, and Level C) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
d The least cost compliance option for the 0.20 Ib FM/W Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-LVS or MC-ESP control options.
e The least cost carpi lance option for the 0.10 Ib PM/MM Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-MVS or MC-ESP control options.
-------
Table 27. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for
Uood-fired Model Boilers In Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a)
Boiler Size,
PM Control Device (b,c,d,e)
2.9 VU ( 10 MBtu/hr)
Basel Ine/SHC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
7.3 W ( 25 WBtu/hr) '
Basel Ine/SHC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
14.6 MW ( 50 MBtu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level A/DMC
Level B/MC-ESP
Level C/MC-ESP
PM Emission
Level
ng/J(lb/WBtu)
194 (0.45)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
194 (0.45)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
258 (0.60)
129 (0.30)
86 (0.20)
43 (0.10)
Annual Annual Ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mg/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
9.8
6.6
4.4
2.2
24.6
16.4
10.9
5.5
65.6
32.8
21.9
10.9
(10.8)
(7.2)
(4.8)
(2.4)
(27.1)
(18.1)
(12.0)
(6.0)
(72.3)
(36.1)
(24.1)
(12.0)
624
659
707
722
1,173
1,212
1,287
1,313
1,957
2,003
2,129
2,161
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
10,670 (9,690)
22,000 (19,900)
6,860 (6,230)
-
4,760 (4,320)
13,700 (12,500)
4,760 (4,320)
-
1,400 (1,270)
11,500 (10,500)
2,930 (2,660)
/rnnHniioH\
-------
Table 27. Cost Effectiveness Results of Particulate Matter Control Alternatives for
Wood-fired Model Boilers In Region V (0.55 Capacity Factor) (a) (Continued)
o>
-£»
Boiler
PM Control
Size,
Device (b,c,d,e)
22.0 Ml ( 75 M6tu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level
Level
Level
A/DC
B/MC-ESP
C/MC-ESP
29.3 W (100 Wetu/hr)
Baseline/SMC
Level
Level
Level
A/CMC
B/HC-LVS
C/MC-MVS
PM Emission
Level
ng/J(lb/WBtu)
258
129
86
43
258
129
86
43
(0
(0
(0
.60)
.30)
.20)
(0.10)
(0
.60)
(0.30)
(0
(0
.20)
.10)
Annual Annual ized
Emissions, Cost,
Mj/yr (ton/yr) $1000/yr
93.4
49
32
16
131
65
43
21
.2
.8
.4
.2
.6
.7
.9
(108.4)
(54.2)
(36.1)
(18.1)
(144.5)
(72.3)
(48.2)
(24.1)
Incremental
Cost Effectiveness,
$/Mg ($/ton)
2,690
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
,743
,900
,941
,353
,412
,645
,674
1,080
9,580
2,500
-
900
10,700
1,330
(978)
(8,690)
(2,270)
-
(816)
(9,670)
(1,200)
a All costs in June 1985 dollars.
b SMC - Single mechanical collector
CMC - Dual mechanical collector
MC-ESP • Single mechanical collector followed by electrostatic precipitator
MC-LVS - Single mechanical collector followed by low pressure drop venturi scrubber
MC-MVS - Single mechanical collector followed by medium pressure drop venturi scrubber
c The FM control alternatives (i.e., Level A, Level B, and Level C) include the compliance
costs for an opacity continuous emission monitor.
d The least cost ccmpl lance option for the 0.20 Ib PM/TW Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-LVS or MC-ESP control options.
e The least cost compliance option for the 0.10 Ib PM/W Btu control alternative was chosen from
the MC-MVS or MC-ESP control options.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/3-89-15
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Model Boiler Cost Analysis for Controlling
Participate Matter (PM) Emissions from Small
Steam Generating Units
5. REPORT DATE
May 1989
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Emission Standards Division
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-4378
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Air and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report presents estimates of the cost and cost effectiveness associated
with controlling particulate matter emissions from small coal-, oil-, and wood-
fired industrial-commercial-institutional steam generating units (small boilers).
The report was prepared during development of proposed new source performance
standards (NSPS) for small boilers (boilers with heat input capacities of 100
million Btu/hour or less)l
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Pollution Control
Standards of Performance
Steam Generating Units
Industrial Boilers
Small Boilers
Air Pollution Control
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (Tilts Report I
Unclassified
21. NO. Or PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R*v. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
I REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS 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 prominently. Set suhtillc. 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 title.
S. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the lusis on which it wax selected (e.g.. Jatc of mm: date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe. etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organixalional hircarchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parent heses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT 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 AGtNCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with. Translation of. 1'resciiicd at conference <>!'.
To be published in. Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in tlie report. It the report <.-imiams a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms 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 MELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are muitidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignments) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary licld/(irou|> assignments that will I'olln*
the primary postings).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." file any availability in
the public, with address and price.
19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, it any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) (R.v.rs.)
------- |