EPA 600/5-74-020
February 1974
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
The Integrated Multi-Media
Pollution Model
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and appli-
cation of environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum inter-
face in related fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
series. This series includes research on environmental management, compre-
hensive planning and forecasting and analysis methodologies. Included are
tools for determining varying impacts of alternative policies, analyses of
environmental planning techniques at the regional, state and local levels,
and approaches to measuring environmental quality perceptions. Such topics
as urban form, industrial mix, growth policies, control and organizational
structure are discussed in terms of optimal environmental performance.
These interdisciplinary studies and systems analyses are presented in forms
varying from quantitative relational analyses to management and policy-
oriented reports.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
EPA-600/5-74-020
February 1974
THE INTEGRATED MULTI-MEDIA POLLUTION MODEL
by
Inja K. Paik
John Harrington, Jr,
F.W. McElroy
Grant No. 801411
Program Element 1HA096
Roap/Task 21 ALV-20
Project Officer
Dr. Philip D. Patterson
Washington Environmental Research Center
Washington, D.C.
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $3.30
-------
Abstract
The primary objective of the project was to develop a prototype
multi-pollution model for a typical metropolitan region. This
report includes the basic design and some of the results of initial
testing of the model. The Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model,
or IMMP, views environmental pollution as a set of interrelated
problems — the solution of which requires examination of all types
of pollution jointly and simultaneously — and attempts to seek
an overall solution to environmental resource management. Speci-
fically, the model embodies the trade-offs among different forms
of residuals disposed finally in the environment that are effected
by alternative land use policies, production processes, pollution
control strategies and methods. Thus, the Land Use submodel re-
lates various land use policies to the distribution of the sources
of environmental pollution; the Residuals Management submodel re-
lates alternative levels of pollution generating activities, input
mixes, production processes of various activities, and the alter-
native treatment processes associated therewith to the magnitude,
composition and distribution of pollutants; and Disposal-Disper-
sion submodel relates pollution emissions at source to (ambient)
environmental quality at destination. The model provides a
comprehensive framework in which to test and evaluate a wide
range of strategies for planning, managing and controlling our
environmental resources.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Grant Number R801411
by Georgetown University under the sponsorship of the Environmental
Protection Agency. Work was completed as of August 1973.
ii
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ±±
List of Figures iv
Acknowledgments v
Sections
I Overview 1
II Alternative Strategies for Environmental Resource 33
Management — Land Use Submodel
III Alternative Strategies for Environmental Resource 40
Management — Residual Management Submodel
IV Alternative Strategies for Environmental Resource 56
Management — Dispersion Submodel
V The Test of IMMP Model 77
VI Instructions for Operation of IMMP 110
VII The IMMP Program 140
VIII Appendix 172
IX Bibliography 256
iii
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
la Interdependent Relationships Among Residuals From Air 3
to Other Media
Ib Interdependent Relationships Among Residuals From Water 4
to Other Media
lc: Interdependent Relationships Among Residuals From Land 5
to Other Media
2 A Flow Diagram of IMMP Model 12
3 A Hypothetical Metropolitan Area 14
4 Alternative Controls of Land Use 39
5 A Flow Diagram of the Residuals Management Submodel 42
6 Residuals and Sources 45
7 Air Diffusion 60
8 Water Diffusion 70
9 Configuration of the Hypothetical Region 79
10 Gross remissions of Pollutants from Six Alternative 85
Specifications of the IMMP Model
11 Total Net Pollutant Levels (Water) 86
12 Anbient Pollution Levels (Water) 98
iv
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Dr. Peter House, Acting Assistant Director, Washington Environ-
mental Research Center, Office of Research and Development, EPA, and
Dr. Philip D. Patterson, EPA Project Officer for this grant, for recog-
nizing the need for and value of developing an integrated multi-pollution
model and for providing their guidance and support.
This research was performed 'within the Economics Department, Georgetown
University, Washington, D. C. Credit for the development of diffusion
models goes to Professor F. W. McElroy; Dr. John Harrington, Jr. is
responsible for programming the model. Inja Paik was director of the
project, collected data, designed the overall model, and provided inter-
face with EPA personnel.
-------
SECTION I
OVERVIEW
The Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model
The primary objective of the project has been to develop
a prototype multi-pollution model for a typical metropolitan re-
gion. The Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model or IMMP, embodies
the trade-offs among different forms of residuals disposed finally
in the environment that are effected by alternative production
processes -- including possibilities of input substitution --
and alternative control strategies and methods. These trade-offs
are ignored in most of the currently existing environmental pollu-
tion models but are clearly of critical importance for rational
environmental quality management.
It is a well-known fact that abatement of one type
of pollution results in another type of pollution. For example,
the use of a wet scrubber to trap particulates that would
otherwise be discharged into the air reduces the level of air
pollution but increases that of water pollution. The dredging
of a water body would make it cleaner, but would at the same time
mean an increase in solid waste, which if burnt, would add to air
pollution. Dumping solid wastes in a remote area would lessen
"landscape" defacement in one area but aggravate the same in an-
other area, and also, increase the level of air pollution and
-------
noise pollution in the process of their transportation. This
phenomenon of trade-offs among different forms of wastes is evi-
dently omnipresent and indeed no less than a logical consequence
of the "law of conservation of mass." Figures la» Ib, Ic list
possible trade-offs between air-, water-borne pollution and solid
wastes.
While it is clear that the kind and quantity of residual
wastes to be disposed eventually in the natural environment are
dependent on these trade-offs, and therefore, no rational abatement
program can be evaluated without including them in the analysis,
traditionally, environmental pollution has been classified in
terms of the "receiving medium," i.e., into air-, water-, solid
waste- (or land-) pollution, with noise and thermal pollution
treated as special cases, and accordingly, the formulation, plan-
ning and administration of policies and programs of environmental
quality management, at both the federal and state levels, adhere
closely to the same categorization.
The receiving-medium based organization of environmental
management (for example, into "air program office," "water program
office," etc.) may be necessary to take full advantage of the
"administrative" and "operational" efficiency derived from group-
ing together the activities which require similar technical exper-
tise, but cannot be considered a logical basis for determining
overall optimal strategies for pollution control. To illustrate,
-------
Figure la
Interdependent Relationships among Residuals
From Air to Other Jiedla
Primary Residuals
Treatment Processes
Particulate
Sulfur oxide
Nitrogen oxide
Hydrocarbon
Carbon monoxide
Settling chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
precipitator
Fabric filter
Wet scrubber
Afterburner
Secondary Residuals
Airborne[
|Waterborne
Landbornel
Dispersion or
Further
treatment
-------
Figure Ib
Interdependent Relationships among Residuals
From Water to Other Media
Primary _Residuals
Treatment Processes
Secondary Hesiduals
Biochemical oxygen
demand
Suspended solids
Dissolved solids
Total phosphate
Total nitrogen
Heat
Heavy metal
Screening
Sedimentation
Equalization
-------
Fijmre Ic
interdependent .ri..elatlons_hi£s
i: i.anu to other
ieslduals
Primary ties id uals
wastes:
Combustible
Lnreatnient processes
Incineration
j open auinping
•i Sanitary lanaf ill
Jecondary iiesidaals
[Airborne]
(TaterborneJ
[Land borne]
_v Jlspersion or
~ Further
treatment
-------
consider a case of a "water program office" contemplating whether
to permit the burning of the sludge that emerges from the water
treatment plant. In the cost-benefit analysis of the program,
the "direct" costs of incineration — the costs of the initial
investment and the operating costs — will be included routinely,
but the additional social costs entailing from the additional
air pollution will not. At least not in commensurate terms.
In short, there exists a divergence of social costs and parochial
*
costs which nullifies the justification for partial analysis; the
decision on one type of pollution cannot be made without recog-
nizing its effects on other types of pollution. ;
A metropolitan area is a system of economic, political,
social, demographic and environmental variables. Political-social
institutions and forces, and the size and characteristics of the
population in the area determine the kinds and levels of economic
activities, i.e., production and consumption, and vice versa.
Production and consumption inevitably generate residuals which,
when disposed in the environment, result in its degradation.
Given the quantities and locations of the residuals discharged,
the particular hydrological, geophysical and meteorological
characteristics of the area determine the type, location and
degree of the environmental degradation, and these in turn bring
aesthetic, health-, recreation-, and materials-related damages
to the specific segments of the population. Efforts to abate
-------
the pollution and its damages entail changes in the mix and level
of economic and noneconiomic activities.
More specifically, if the population continues to hold
to such traditional social and personal goals as economic growth
and "high standard of living" — especially through production
and consumption of high-polluting goods (e.g., paper, electricity,
automobiles) in contrast to low-polluting goods (e.g., services,
bicycles), further depletion and deterioration of environmental
resources are unavoidable. Alternatively, arrestment in popula-
tion growth, demographic redistribution, change in land-use
pattern and stabilization of the high standard of living may
alleviate the problems of environmental pollution, but would
have a profound effect on the pattern and level of economic
activities, and therefore, prerequire a drastic revision in the
social and personal values and way of thinking and living.
Obviously, the manager of environmental resources
cannot ignore the permeating impact of his pollution control
policies and programs on such economic and demographic-social
variables as the pattern of economic growth, income, employ-
ment, health, migration, leisure-time allocation, etc., and
in reverse, the effects on the environment of economic and
noneconomic debisions and activities of individual households,
businesses and governments that lie outside his control but
amplify or attenuate the effectiveness of his own abatement
-------
efforts. Indeed, in order to examine the trade-offs among various
types of pollution vis-a-vis the trade-offs among the competing
goals of the region, it may be necessary to construct what may
be called a total environmental resource management model that
include all the relevant economic, political, social, demographic
and environmental variables and their interactions. Building
such a comprehensive model is envisioned, but is beyond the
purview of present research effort.
A Brief Description of IMMP
The IMMP model is intended to be used either as a frame-
work for analyzing the interdependent nature of environmental
pollution, by focusing primarily on those variables that affect
pollution levels directly, or as a submodel to other metropolitan
system models thereby allowing the user of the model to observe
the interactions between the environmental sector and other sec-
tors within the metropolitan region.
The IMMP model differs from most of the currently
existing environmental pollution models in several important
respects. The distinguishing feature of the IMMP is its explicit
recognition and representation of all of the significant elements
of the metropolitan environmental pollution and their interrela-
tionships. In contrast to other models which focus their atten-
tion on only a part of the total environmental pollution system,
8
-------
the IMMP views the environmental pollution as an integral set
of interrelated problems — the solution of which requires
examination of all types of pollution jointly and simultaneously
— and attempts to seek an overall solution, while others offer
partial solutions based on partial analyses.
The analysts and policy makers often find the existing
models — even when they are designed to deal with multiple
pollutants and thus are quite comprehensive in scope — do not
render themselves readily as a practical tool for analyzing
and evaluating alternative programs and policies in the real
world. This is commonly due to the rigid structure the model
is "locked in" as in the input-output models and linear program-
ming models. Flexibility in addition to "comprehensiveness" and
"integrality" is another distinguishing feature of IMMP. Speci-
fically, the IMMP model is designed in modular form so that any
part of the model — e.g., an activity — can be added or deleted
freely with no structural change in the model.. With such built-
in flexibility, it can easily be adapted to different metropolitan
regions faced with their own sets of environmental problems.
Finally, another main feature of the IMMP is a data
bank developed and maintained to provide the user of the model
with up-do-date information on alternative production processes
of major industries, alternative abatement technologies, etc.
which is necessary for the practical use to which the model
t
is to be put.
-------
In short, the IMMP is a multi-media pollution model
which synthesizes the currently available information on all
important aspects of the environmental degradation problem in-
tended as a comprehensive, flexible and practical tool for (
analyzing and evaluating alternative strategies for managing
the environmental resources of metropolitan areas.
The IMMP is not an optimization model. The arguments
for choosing a descriptive rather than optimizing framework are
twofold: In general, the structure of an optimization model
is more restrictive compared with that of a simulation model
thus diminishing its adaptibility to various metropolitan areas
with a varying set of environmental pollution problems. More
importantly, because of the complex interrelationships that exist
among various sectors within a metropolitan region, it is often
difficult, if not impossible, to delineate a practical and meaning-
ful single objective function for the model.
The IMMP as it stands is a steady-state model. This limitation
is to be rectified in the next phase of the project.
The Structure of IMMP
Programs to protect environmental quality can be
classified into three broad categories: (1) programs to regulate
land-use pattern, (2) programs to regulate economic and non-
economic activities which create the residuals initially, and
programs to regulate on-site and central residuals treatment
activities which alter the forms of residuals, and (3) programs
10
-------
to alter the residual dispersion processes. The model is struc-
tured along these categories. Specifically, the actions that
affect the configuration of the metropolitan region and locations
of pollutant generating and altering activities determine the
distribution of pollutants within the region and belong to the
first category. The actions determining the levels of pollution
generating activities, production processes and pollution treatment
processes all of which in turn determine the magnitudes and types
of pollutants produced belong to the second categories. Finally,
the actions which alter the disposal-dispersion of pollutants
belong to the third category. These components of the model are
shown in a flow-chart form in Figure 2.
Each rectangled entry represents a controllable variable
or structural relation on which the user of the model is allowed
to exercise his option, while each circled entry denotes a non-
controllable variable or relation which is determined within the
model given the specifications of the controllable variables and
relations and the parameters.
With the aid of the data bank, the user of the model can
test and make a wide range of decisions from those involving land-
use to those concerning the choice of an appropriate set of activ-
ities (and locations thereof), through the knowledge of the quanti-
ties of pollutants generated therefrom and their ultimate impact
on the ambient pollution levels throughout the region. Conversely,
11
-------
Residuals management submodel
K)
l^oafijaration]
lofjresion |
„ v ,
[identification1
!.i location of
'.exogenous and
e.iaorenous
'activities
V
~evel of
er.zosenous
^activities.
(exogenous
^activities
V
/
a
r'roauction
process
notion!
^process
i,ar.d use submodel
Treatment
i
\
A Flow Diagram of IHi-lP nodel
Figure 2
lar.a- ,
ollutar.ts J
— i i, ,—r^**1^
Air-, water-
land-
dispersion
processes
Aa.iie.-nfc levels
of air-, water-,'
land- /
pollutants y
-------
the model provides a framework for evaluating the impact of alter-
native pollutant emission standards or ambient quality standards
on various activities within the region.
In anticipation of a more detailed discussion in the
subsequent chapters, a brief overview of the basic nature and
concepts of the model is given in the following with reference
to the flow chart of Figure 2.
Configuration of the Region: For the model, a metro-
politan region is considered a rectangular space with a number of
rows and columns that divide the space into a set of square grids
as illustrated in Figure 3. Political jurisdiction is not the
main basis for defining the size of the region; the principal
criterion is the degree or intensity of economic, social, political,
demographic and environmental interaction that exists between
activities carried out at different locations. The hypothetical
metropolitan region of Figure 3 includes industrial, residen-
tial, commercial, agricultural and recreational areas as well as
a landfill area, municipal incinerators, a municipal waste water
treatment plant, a power plant, an airport and a river. Definition
of the size of the region is accomplished by the user by specifying
the number of rows and columns and the distance between two ad-
jacent rows (or columns).
More important than defining the size of the region,
the user can exercise a considerable degree of discretion in
13
-------
Figure 3
A Hypothetical Metropolitan Area
(§) Airport
(D Municipal Incinerator
© Power Plant
{£) Water Treatment Plant
NEF Noise Contours
Truck Route
River
14
-------
specifying the land-use pattern. If a new city is being planned
and designed from scratch, the option over the land-use available
to the user of the model is rather complete, but even with an
existing metropolitan region with more or less fixed spatial
structure, the managers may be able to relocate activities, es-
pecially in the long run, through zoning classification, taxation
and other means. Also, the direction of the flow of a river may
be altered, or a new branch of a river may be opened for the ex-
clusive use as the receptor of residual discharges. The model
can evaluate the environmental impact of these alternative con-
figurations of the region.
Identification and Location of ...Activities; The activities
in the model as sources of pollution consist of a set 'of exogenous
activities and a set of endogenous activities. Exogenous activities
are those whose levels of operation are determined outside the
model, i.e., by the user of the model. For IMMP, the agricultural,
industrial, commercial, and residential activities are included
as exogenous variables. For endogenous activities, the levels
of operation are determined within the model as the results of
the exogenous activities. For the purpose of IMMP, the endogenous
activities are classified into two categories: those representing
residuals-treatment activities such as municipal incinerators and
v,
waste water treatment plants, and those other than treatment
activities such as transportation and power plants.
The model is however capable of treating any activity as endo-
genous .
15
-------
Whether for a new or existing metropolitan region, the
user of the model has the option of choosing which of these exo-
genous and endogenous activities are to be included in the model
and of deciding where to locate them. Through exercise of this
option, the managers can evaluate the environmental impact of
t -» [
alternative mixes of industries, etc. and of alternative land-
uses.
Levels of Exogenous Activities and Nontreatment Endo-
genous Activities: Upon stipulating a set of activities, the
I
user is required to specify for each exogenous activity its level
i
of operation, e.g., output per day in dollars or tons for a steel
\
mill. Once this is done, the levels of nontreatment endogenous
activities, i.e., of transportation and power plant activities
are determined automatically by applying transformation coeffi-
cients (or functions). Through varying the levels of various
activities and evaluating the resulting variation in the levels
of pollutant emissions and of ambient quality, the user enhances
his understanding of the effect of economic (and other) policies
on the environment and vice versa.
Production Processes: The magnitude and type of pol-
t
lutants arising from an activity — be it exogenous or endogenous
— are functions not only of the level of operation but also of
production processes and inputs used. Thus, each of the alterna-
tive production processes can be represented by a matrix with an
16
-------
appropriate set of residual coefficients which transforms a vector
;
of inputs into an output vector of pollutants.
The user of the model is allowed to evaluate the pollu-
tion effects of using alternative inputs, especially in reference
j
to high-sulfur vs. low-sulfur fuels, as well as the effects of
using alternative production process. The data bank contains
pollution transformation coefficients for various production pro-
cesses of each industry both in current use as well as in develop-
ment, and the possibilities of input substitution.
1 ..«<
Since different inputs and production processes involve
different costs of investment and maintenance, the data bank in-
I !
eludes data for these costs, enabling the user to compare the
differential pollution effects of alternatives with their differ-
ential cost effects.
Gross Emissions of Pollutants; As shown in the flow
/
chart, the result of the decisions made by the user of the model
up to this point is the gross emissions of all pollutants in the
various subareas of the region where the pollution-generating
activities are located. In bare skeleton, the structural rela-
tions involved are as follows. Let:
" - . t
X = a vector of exogenous activities, each element
of which represents an activity in a particular
subarea.
17
-------
Y = a vector of endogenous activities such as trans-
portation and power plants. Each element of Y
represents an endogenous activity in a particular
subarea. '
E = a vector of gross pollutants emitted prior to any
O
treatment, on-site or otherwise.
Then,
Y = F1(X)
Eg = F2(X) + F3(Y) = F2(X) +
The decision maker can specify alternative levels of
X as well as alternative residual transformations of X and Y
into E , i.e., alternative relations, F and F~ , in order
g z j
to observe their effects on E . In reverse, the decision
8
maker may stipulate alternative levels of E -- alternative
O
emission standards — and observe, through iteration, their
effects on X and Y , the activities.
On-site Treatment: Prior to being dispersed into
various environmental receptors, air, water and land, or being
transported to other facilities for further treatment, the pollu-
tants arising from the activities are often treated at the source,
18
-------
In the model, a treatment process is represented by an
array of coefficients whereby a given (untreated) residuals are
transformed into a set of treated residuals. Simple treatment
processes would be represented by such simple diagonal matrices
".5 0 0'
as 3^ =
010
001
. Assuming that there were only-three
E ,
pre-treatment pollutants E =
O
, the post-treatment
vector of net pollutants would be E = T-E
n l
g
•5E
gi
; that
is, the treatment removes 50% of the first pollutant but leaves
the other pollutants unchanged. A more complicated treatment may
1 0.3 0
take the form, T« =
000
0 1.5 1
which removes the second
pollutant entirely but, in the process, creates an additional
0.3 of the first pollutant and 1,5 of the third for every unit of
the second pollutant removed.
The data bank supplies the user of the model a list of
treatment technologies for each activity that correspond to known
alternatives. If the user does not specify what treatment tech-
nology is applied in a given activity at a given location, the
19
-------
model will assume that no treatment is applied in that instance.
In addition to the transformation matrix of coefficients, the data
bank contains the information on the costs of investment and main-
tenance for alternative on-site treatments.
The quantities of net emissions after on-site treatment
i
are the final emissions at the source and may serve as the basis
i
for pollution regulation by standards; the user therefore is sup-
, »
plied with the printout of these net emissions.
Disposal: The next decision to be made by the user is
what part of these initially treated pollutants is to be "shipped"
i
to the municipal sewage treatment plants and incinerators,E., and
to which environmental medium and at which location (subarea) the
remainder of pollutants are to be disposed of,E,. For each itera-
tion, the user has complete freedom in specifying these proportions
Again the data bank supplies cost information on alternative dis-
posal decisions.
Municipal Water Treatment and Incinerator Activities:
Municipal waste water treatment and incinerator activities are
endogenous in that the levels of these operations are determined
as the result of exogenous activities. Thus, given the disposal
decision and E^, the resulting quantities of pollutants designated
to be treated at the municipal facilities, the levels of these
• 7
treatment activities are determined within the model. This is
accomplished by solving a matrix equation reminiscent of the
i • •
solution to an input-output problem.
20
-------
The reason that E^ (the result of the disposal decision)
cannot be directly used as the levels of these "central" or "col-
lective" treatment operations is because of the interdependence
that exist between the treatment activities themselves. Sludge
and suspended solids produced by the water treatment plant may
be shipped to the incinerator, and the residues from the incinera-
i
tor may be discharged into the sewer or a river to end up as an
added load to the water treatment plant. Thus, ultimately the
levels of central treatment activities E are the sum of E_,
the pollutant loads from the disposal decision, and E , the in-
creases in the loads of the treatment activities necessitated
from the treatment activities themselves; that is, E = Ef + E .
Now, since E can be obtained as E = SE^ where S is
e e t
the matrix of coefficients each column of which represents the
changes in the levels of all the treatment activities induced by
a particular treatment activity, E = Ef + SE . Therefore,
Et - SEt = Ef
(I - S)Et = Ef
Efc = (I - S)'1Ef
i
In summary, the steps in determining the endogenous
treatment activities are: (1) The user specifies a particular
treatment technology for each and every treatment activity. This
21
-------
means in effect the specification of how much of what pollutant
is discharged into air, water and land, and of how much of what
pollutant is for further treatment at other treatment activities
per unit activity of the treatment plant in question. (2) The
computer forms a particular matrix based on the decision in the
first step. Each column of this matrix pertains to a particular
treatment activity. The (row) entries of a column are the changes
in the levels of all the treatment activities induced by an addi-
tional unit of a particular treatment activity that is represented
by the column. (3) The computer forms the matrix (I - S) and then
inverts it. (4) When E~, the pollutant loads resulting from the
disposal decision, are read in, the ultimate levels of treatment
-1
activities E are computed by the matrix multiplication (I - S)
Now that the levels of central treatment activities E
have been computed, the next step is to determine E , the quantities
of pollutants which are discharged from the treatment plants to
the environmental media. In order to obtain E , another matrix
m
multiplication, similar to the earlier transformation for produc-
tion processes and on-site treatments, is performed on E . That
is, E = RE , where the matrix R depends on the choice of treat-
ment technologies made by the user in connection with the deter-
mination of the levels of treatment activities.
Again, the data bank stores descriptions of alternative
treatment technologies together with the associated residual
22
-------
transformation matrices and costs so as to enable the user to
evaluate their impact.
The sum of the quantities of pollutants discharged by
the central treatment plants E and that part of pollutants emerging
from on-site treatments which is discharged directly to the environ-
mental media as the result of the disposal decision E., namely, E =
E + E^ , gives the final quantities of emissions the environment
receives initially at various subareas (i.e., grid squares). As
a practical matter, these quantities often serve as the basis for
pollution regulations, and accordingly, their printout is supplied
to the user of the model.
Air-, Water-, and Land-Dispersion Processes: The part
of IMMP described so far is sufficiently self-contained and^there-
fore, can be used by the environmental managers to test the impacts
of changes in the kinds, levels and processes of various pollution-
generating and pollution-abating or altering activities on the
pollutants dumped in the environment, and in reverse, the impacts
of alternative emission standards on various activities. But
pollutants deposited in a water body or in the atmosphere do not
remain there; they are diffused or dispersed to other parts of the
region.- The environmental managers cannot limit their attention
Solid wastes are assumed to remain where they are deposited
initially. The user of the model can, however, decide to trans-
port them to some other locations in the region, which could be
viewed as a dispersion process. "Leaching" through land is
totally ignored in the model.
23
-------
only to the original emissions but must be concerned also with
the ambient quality of the environment which results from such
dispersion. Thus, IMMP adds another module relating the emis-
sions E to the ambient pollution levels L.
Diffusion processes of pollutants whether via atmosphere
or via water are extremely complex, and are functions of a
larger number of variables and their interactions. The water
diffusion process depends on water temperature, flow, velocity
and other characteristics of the water body; the air diffusion
process depends on wind speed and direction, emission rate, stack
height and diameter, the stability of the atmosphere and other
characteristics.
The complex diffusion processes can be modelled in a
number of alternative forms: mathematical-analytical model, re-
duced-coefficient-matrix model, and simulation model. Although
rather simple mathematical models are adopted for both air and
water dispersion processes in the initial attempt, IMMP is flexi-
ble enough to permit later replacement by more refined mathematical
models or by other kinds of model should they prove more reliable.
In brief, the water diffusion process used is a modified Streeter-
•
Phelps model; the air diffusion process draws heavily on Turner's
All diffusion processes take place over time. Since our
model is a steady-state one, the temporal diffusion pattern is
ignored at this stage.
24
-------
model. An added feature to these basic diffusion models is a
provision for assigning different probabilities to the parameters.
This would allow for shifts from season to season, month to month,
or even day to day in the wind direction, air temperature, baro-
metric pressure, river flow, velocity, water temperature, etc.
In the flow chart, the diffusion processes are given in
a rectangle, denoting controllability by the user. Though certain
parameters of the processes are geophysically, hydrologically and
meteorologically fixed given a specific region, such other para-
meters as stack height and diameter in the case of air and water
temperature, direction of flow (new tributaries can be opened), etc,
are controllable by the user of the model. The model enables
evaluation of the effects of variation in these controllable
variables on the ambient quality level. Of course, even the geo-
physical and meteorological parameters can be considered controll-
able if the model is used for the purpose of planning a new metro-
politan region.
D. Bruce Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Esti-
mates. EPA, 1970.
25
-------
The Human Link; The machine-part of the flow chart ends
at the ambient quality of the environment. At that point, however,
the man-part of the system, the user, takes over, evaluates the
degree of desirability or undesirability of the system state, and
decides to take various actions available to him; in other words,
arrows could be drawn formally from the ambient quality to all the
action points of the model — all the rectangled entries including
productive and treatment activities — thus "forming loops" for
these variables. As a matter of fact, the human participant can
form direct or indirect loops between any two points in the model.
It is the versatility of the model that the user can intervene
almost at every stage of the flow chart and observe the system
reaction -- both forward and backward, and often returning to the
original point of intervention — to the alternative programs he
stipulates.
Rational Environmental Management
It has been seen in the above that the IMMP model pro-
vides its user with a tool to evaluate various mixes of all three
major classes of strategies for the management of environmental
*
resources, i.e., the land-use strategies, the residuals generating
and altering strategies, and the residuals dispersion strategies,
and that it recognizes and incorporates the interrelationships
among various pollution and other variables of the metropolitan
26
-------
area. Yet there is no guarantee that the use of the model will
yield more or less rational environmental management decisions.
For while rationality presumes some preestablished objective
function, the model does not offer one.
At the conceptual level, rationality requires comparison
of all costs and all benefits — economic or otherwise — of an
action. The costs and benefits of pollution abatement are many
and diverse and difficult to measure: Besides the direct costs
of investment and maintenance of abatement equipment and facilities,
the costs include the net adverse effects on production, consump-
tion, income and employment, and the effects on migration, welfare
distribution, etc. The benefits include the general, subjective
aesthetic benefits gained from the improved quality of the environ-
ment as well as the benefits in the form of reduced damages on
health, plants, animals and inanimate materials.
Of all these benefits and costs, currently the IMMP
model provides the user with only the direct costs of alternative
strategies. Although the model is flexible enough to add other
cost information and data on damages from pollution when and if
they become available, it is doubtful that the time will ever
come when the estimates of benefits and costs are inclusive and
accurate enough to warrant an effort to define a single objective
function for the purpose of environmental quality management in
any metropolitan area. Incorporation of a partial and inaccurate
27
-------
objective function to maximize would run the danger of prejudicing
the issues being analyzed. Furthermore, as stated earlier, optimi-
ation models inevitably increase the rigidity of the model. For
IMMP it has been decided that the human participant would make
the subjective trade-offs among the multiple goals (and amenities)
of the metropolitan area in order to arrive heuristically at a
satisfactory solution to the environmental management problem.
Other Models
An extensive search of literature — both published and
unpublished — has been made to determine what other researchers
have done in developing models and tools of analysis for managing
the environmental quality of metropolitan areas. Promising models
1 2
have been built by Dorfman and Jacoby, Isard et al, Russell
34 5
and Spofford, Forrester, and Ingram et al. Some use input-
Robert Dorfman and Henry D. Jacoby, "A Model of Public Decisions
Illustrated by a Water Pollution Problem," in U.S. Congress Joint
Economic Committee, The Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expendi-
tures: The PPB System, volume 1. GPO, Washington, D.C., 1969.
waiter Isard et al, "On the Linkage of Secio-Economic and
Ecological System," The Regional Science Association Papers, 21
(1968).
3
Clifford S. Russell and Walter 0. Spofford, Jr., "A Quantita-
tive Framework for Residuals-Management Decisions," in Environmental
Quality Analysis; Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, edited
by A.V. Kneese and B.T. Bower, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1972.
Jay W. Forrester, Urban Dynamics, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1970.
Gregory K. Ingram, John F. Kain, J. Royce Ginn, The Detroit
Prototype of the NBER Urban Simulation Model, National Bureau of
Economic Research, New York, 1972.
28
-------
output or linear programming models with a predominance of economic
variables; some attempt to devise an explicit utility function
for optimization -- mostly of economic efficiency; some include
both economic and noneconomic variables besides pollution variables
(but neglect to focus on the interrelationships among the latter);
some allow participation by human decision makers through role
playing.
When evaluated by the criteria we have imposed on our-
selves — comprehensiveness, integrality, flexibility, simplicity,
man-machine interaction, none of the already developed models is
directly suitable for our purpose. This does not mean, however,
that we have not gained from these models; indeed, our model IMMP
and TERM could be considered as the end product of improving, re-
fining, expanding, and synthesizing the existing models.
Limitations of the Current IMMP
Despite our efforts to make the model as comprehensive
and to obtain data as accurate as possible, due to the limitation
on time and because the main objective of the current phase of the
project is to determine the feasibility of such a model as described
above, currently the IMMP is encumbered with a number of limitations
that could be lifted in the coming phases of the research.
Data Bank. Transportation, Construction and Noise: The
flexibility of the model is such that any number of pollution
29
-------
producing activities and any number of pollutants can be handled.
The only limitation to the inclusion in the model of a particular
activity or a particular pollutant is from nonavailability of
relevant information. In general, a constant effort should be
made to improve the quality and amount of information stored in
the data bank; in particular, special attention shall be paid to
noise and transportation.
While noise is receiving an increasing attention from
the public and government agencies, no data on noise from trucks,
aircrafts and construction activities have been collected during
the current project period. Upon gathering of the information on
alternative modes and processes of these activities, alternative
noise abatement technologies, and their differential costs, the
activities and the related noise can be included in the model.
Transportation (and construction) can be considered
exogenous or endogenous as the case may be. Besides, transporta-
tion -- ground and air -- is a major source not only of noise but
also of air pollution; the trade-off between noise and air pollu-
tion (and cost, of course), will have to be represented in the
model.
Exogenous and Endogenous Variables: The levels of
industrial, agricultural, household and commercial activities
are treated in the current model as exogenous if the loops formed
by the human user are ignored. These activities, however, may be
30
-------
formally linked to pollution control strategies through such
intervening variables as income, employment, property values and
/
others. An effort will be made to convert as many exogenous
variables into endogenous variables as theoretically justifiable
by formally drawing more loops between variables.
Nonlinearity; All relations in the current model are
assumed linear. In some instances, however, the assumption may
be unrealistic. For example, the level of an activity and the
resulting levels of various pollutants discharged may not be in
fixed proportion in reality. The assumed fixed efficiency rate
of control technologies regardless of the quantity of the pollu-
tant treated may also be unrealistic. In the model, nonlinearity
need not necessarily be represented by formal mathematical func-
tions, but could be represented by a set or "table" of transfor-
mation coefficient matrices which vary according to the variation
in the level of activity.
Dynamic Model: The IMMP model as it stands is a time-
less, steady-state model and has no provision to allow for the
time lag in the system. This limitation can diminish the use-
fulness of the model materially, especially when the user of the
model is interested in the changing levels of pollutants over a
period of time. For example, both the carbonaceous and nitro-
genous BOD's contribute to DOD, but the latter with a consider-
able time lag in comparison to the former. Thus, with a steady-
31
-------
state model, it may not be possible to distinguish between the
behavior of the two pollutants within a specified time. In
general, a dynamic model is needed to evaluate the system reaction
pattern — dampening or amplification — over time. The necessity
and feasibility of conversion to a dynamic model must be inves-
tigated in the next phase of the project.
j
The Organization of the Report
The ensuing chapters discuss the IMMP model in more detail,
The discussion is organized in accordance with the flow chart, i.e.,
the classification of environmental management strategies into the
land-use control strategies, the strategies to regulate pollutant
generation and alteration, and the strategies affecting dispersion
processes. Then, the last chapter demonstrates the feasibility of
the model by actually exercising it for a hypothetical metropolitan
region.
32
-------
SECTION II
ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: LAND USE SUBMODEL
Once an airport, a power plant or a high rise building
is sited and constructed at a given location, it stays there more
.*.
or less permanently and restricts the area's options for spatial
development for a long time. The spatial structure in combination
with the prevailing geophysical, hydrological and meteorological
conditions largely determines the levels of air, water, solid
*
waste, noise and other pollution at various subareas. Thus it
"S
is a truism to say that the air pollution in Los Angeles today
is a result of spatial decisions made many years ago. Land use
decisions are obviously one of the most important elements of
environmental resource management.
Traditionally the spatial structure of a metropolitan
region has to a large extent been governed by economic motives of
various decision making entities. Accessibility to the place of
employment, i.e., the distance and the travel cost, has been a
significant determinant of the household's decision on resi-
dential location. Once a cluster of homes form at a given loca-
tion, such amenities as shopping centers, schools, parks and
other municipal services follow in the vicinity, which in turn
attracts more households to move into the area. Similarly, firms
have also made their decision on the location of their plants
33
-------
primarily on the basis of accessibility to raw materials and
labor, i.e., the costs of these inputs, and accessibility to the
market for its output, i.e., the revenue. Then, the government
in its turn, concerned with the maintenance of its tax base and
i
to meet the needs of its constituents would build roads and
highways and provide other services. Behind the rapid growth
of the urban areas are these mutually amplifying interactions of
the economically motivated forces, and the result has been one
of the toughest problems of today — the general decay of the inner-
city, crimes, congestion and environmental degradation.
Though belatedly, in the last three or four years there
has been an increasing awareness on the part of the public and
the governments at different levels of the true nature of the
urban problem, namely, an awareness that the economic goal is
but one of many that a city strives to attain. The impacts of
land-use policies are likely to permeate to all the economic,
social, political, and environmental sectors within the metro-
politan area. The IMMP model includes only the impact on the
natural environment of land-use decisions.
The two rectangled entries right at the start of the
flow chart of Figure 2; i.e., the "configuration of the region"
and the "identification and location of exogenous and endogenous
activities," refer to the land-use decisions by the human partici-
pants. The following alternatives for changing the land-use
pattern have been identified as technically, economically,
34
-------
politically, and legally feasible. Basically, they are attempts
to redistribute the sources of environmental pollution among sub-
areas in such a way as to improve the overall environmental
quality of the metropolitan region.
Configuration of the Region
Diversion of Water Bodies: The model has the capability
of testing the effects on pollution of alternative directions of
the flow of rivers. This capability is useful not only in
planning a new city but also in evaluating the effect of "re-
channeling" an existing river of a given metropolitan area. Al-
ternatively, the existing water bodies may be restricted to speci-
fied uses so that, for example, only the recreational use is per-
mitted in one river while the other is used for the discharge of
industrial wastes as was done in Ruhr, Germany.
Location of Activities
Zoning; Although under the Constitution, States appar-
ently have the inherent power over land-use regulations, most
States have delegated the authority to local governments. Local
governments, with their narrower vision, have on many occasions
yielded to economic pressures for development at the expense of
environmental degradation. Recently, however, spurred by Federal
legislative efforts and on their own accord, States have begun
resuming control over local land use and have already enacted
Or one alternative would be to "export" the pollutants to
the outside of the region.
35
-------
a number of laws under which the environmental and other broader
interests can be protected. Thus, zoning is emerging as one of
the potentially powerful means for locating and relocating various
activity zones — agricultural, industrial, commercial and
residential areas — within a metropolitan region. . For the pur-
pose of designing a new metropolis or for the purpose of relocation
within an existing one, the IMMP model will enhance the planners'
awareness of the environmental effects of alternative zoning
classifications.
Power Plant Siting: A number of states have adopted
potent power plant siting laws. For example, Maryland requires
long-range planning by power companies and provides for early
approval of the planned plant sites and for advance purchase by
the State of plant sites for later sale to power companies. Inas-
much as power plants are one of the major sources of pollution,
their alternative siting is a significant consideration in the
oyerall management of the metropolitan environment.
Airport Siting; Aircrafts landing on arid taking off
from an airport are a major source of noise (and a source of
air pollution). In addition, airports bring ground traffic
congestion and unsightly sprouting of commercial activities --
motels, restaurants, etc. Thus, the possibility of alternative
siting of airports and of controlling development in the vicinity
of airports has been investigated in a-number'of metropolitan
36
-------
areas. For example, Minnesota has enacted an Airport Zoning Act
which controls development around airports. The IMMP model does
not allow evaluation of the desirability of alternative landscapes
of the airport area but allows evaluation of the noise and air
pollution effects of alternative siting of an airport.
Housing, Highway and Transit System Construction Program:
Where homes are built, where highways are opened, and where and
what kind of mass transit system is operated all affect at least
three pollution-related variables: the levels of initial emissions
at various subareas (because the industrial and residential loca-
tion decisions by firms and households are dependent on these
factors), the levels of ambient pollution at various subareas
(when the initial emissions interact with the geophysical and
meteorological conditions of the region), and the significance
of the pollution problem to people (i.e., damages from pollution).
What the last item means is .simply that if people can be made to
live and work away from the polluted area, a large part of the
"pollution problem" will disappear. With the use of the model,
the user can evaluate the effects on these variables of alterna-
tive housing, highway and transit system construction programs.
Municipal Services Programs: To the extent that avail-
ability at different locations of such amenities as parks, re-
creational areas, cultural centers, schools, sewage services,
etc. influences the residential location decision by households,
government agencies in charge of managing these municipal services
affect the land-use pattern within the metropolitan area.
37
-------
Tax Incentives: Differential tax treatments of dif-
ferent activities at different locations can be used to influence
the location decisions by firms and households thereby affecting
the land-use pattern. For example, the Federal Environmental
Protection Tax Act purports to influence land use through dif-
ferential taxes.
In summary, there are two classes of governmental actions
that could be taken to affect the land-use decisions in a metro-
politan area. Figure 4 summarizes them in tabular form.
Costs of Alternative Programs
One of the benefits of land-use alteration is the reduced
damages from reduced pollution. The model provides variations in
the level and pattern of pollution in response to alternative
land uses and activity sitings, though not the damages per se.
Costs — both direct and secondary — are the other side of the
information input necessary for rational land-use policy decisions.
Unlike the case with the alternative production processes and
treatment technologies, no cost data are currently available for
the case of land-use altering alternatives, and therefore, this
aspect cannot be included in the model.
The next chapter discusses alternative production pro-
cesses and alternative residuals treatment technologies as means
of managing the level, composition and distribution of pollutants
within the metropolitan region.
38
-------
Figure 4
Alternative Controls of Land Use
By Regulations and Edicts
Zoning regulation
Area-specific emission standards
Power plant siting
Airport siting
Area-specific prohibition of specific activities
By Economic Incentives
Housing programs
Highway programs
Mass transit programs
Municipal services programs
Parks, recreational areas, sewage, schools
hospitals, cultural centers
Area- and activity-specific taxes and subsidies
39
-------
SECTION III
ALTEENATIVE STRATEGIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT — RESIDUALS MANAGEMENT SUBMODEL
Section II discussed the land-use sub model which relates various
land-use policies, e.g., zoning laws, tax incentives to relocate pol-
luting activities, etc., to the distribution of the sources of environ-
mental pollution within the metropolitan region. The present chapter
discusses the residuals management submodel which relates alternative
levels, input mixes, and production processes of various activities and
the alternative treatment processes associated therewith to the magnitude,
composition and distribution of pollutants within the region.
As stated earlier, the main objective of our study has been to
develop a model that considers all forms of pollutants, i.e., air-
borne, water-borne, land-borne simultaneously, and represents their
interrelationships explicitly.
Of critical importance in planning, managing and controlling our
environmental resources is to be aware that reduction in one form of
residual does not eliminate it but merely changes its form. This inter-
dependent nature of environmental pollution is largely ignored in most
of the existing pollution abatement programs and models.
Figure 5 illustrates the structure of the residuals manage-
ment submodel. It is simply an expansion of the relevant
part of the overall IMMP flow chart given in Figure 2, and
40
-------
is presented in such a way as to highlight the interdependence
among various forms of pollution. Without being linked to the
diffusion processes, the residuals management submodel could
very well serve as an independent tool of the environmental
managers.
There are two alternative ways of regulating pollution
through standards: (1) through setting and enforcing emission
standards (at the sources), and (2) through setting and enforcing
ambient quality standards. Although ultimately the ambient
quality determines the level of pollution damages, and the
damages must be taken into account in one form or another in
making the environmental decisions, if the meteorology, geophysics
and hydrology of the region are considered noncontrollable, what
is controllable are the activities which emit pollutants. It is
not surprising, therefore, that the regulatory bodies often favor
the first approach, that is, the policies and programs regulating
directly the levels of residuals emissions by households, in-
dustries and other activities and by central residuals and water
treatment plants. Many believe that the control of residuals
at the sources is the most direct and unambiguous approach;
and the residuals management submodel standing alone is suffi-
cient to accommodate the need for an analytical tool of such an
approach.
41
-------
Figure 5
A Flaw Liiagram of the Hesiduals rianageiaeat Jubinodel
N)
Level of ;
agricultural! •
activities j
TLevel~"bf~
household
.activities
'I
vel o
r power p
\activities
(agricultural
(Production
^processes
It- reduction I
^processes J
(Froductio
tant — ^processes
Les ' — —
un-site
^^ l/X t?cl 1/lUtJll U
Disposal
\
} \
i - -
/.uevel of \
V 1
* airborne \
ph-site
-^1 treatment
tJjisposal
pollutants
^
~ " f '
•Ori-slte ~
-V treatment
.Jisposal J
:^.._
i^evel of x <( -
— =>s water borne j —
\pollutants ./
^ run-site Vt---.-... .
— } treatment, —
-J Jisposal j
I
- "-A
-x__
V
— —
-
*
j>/Level of
I land borne
>\pollutants
it:.
Level and
technologies
of uuniclpal
incinerators
Level and" " 1
technologies!
of municipali_
water treat-;
L I
Jiilternative
x^evei of v
transportaA _ i
tion '[systems
activities
of
A.noise
Jori-vehioTe| j
-Equipment j
t
7J
-------
According to the diagram of Figure 5, the levels of
various pollutants emitted or discharged into air, water and land
within a metropolitan area depend not only on the size and nature
of various activities -- agricultural, industrial, commercial,
power plant, transportation, household, municipal incinerator,
municipal water treatment, but also on the kinds of raw materials
used, production processes, control processes applied to wastes,
and the extent of recycling of the waste materials. Thus, these
alternatives, individually and jointly, represent potential means
for altering the forms and levels of pollutants ultimately dis-
charged into the environment.
The following is a systematic and detailed presentation
of the ways in which these alternatives can affect the forms and
levels of various pollutants deposited in the environment.
Residuals and Sources
As an initial task in managing environmental quality
one needs to identify both the pollutants that contribute to the
environmental degradation and the sources from which these pollu-
tants emanate. The forms in which this information might be
gathered would depend largely on the purpose for which it is
to be used and the availability of data.
As the potential sources of pollution in a metropolitan
area a set of activities listed in Figure 6 are considered in
43
-------
the IMMP model. They are 2-digit SIC industries. Our decision
to classify the sources into 2-digit SIC industries was based on
two considerations. First, the available data do not permit
the classification of sources on a more disaggregate level at
present; but further disaggregation into 3-digit or 4-digit level
can be achieved easily as such data become available in the future.
Second, while the classification on this level of aggregation may
not permit the user of the model to test the full range of alter-
native strategies, it would allow, as a minimum, the testing of
the basic workings of the model and demonstrate the usefulness
of the model.
Along with"these pollution generating activities Figure
6 gives the list of pollutants generally considered to contribute
significantly to the environmental pollution and the accompanying
damages to the inhabitants. The lists of residuals and their
sources are by no means exhaustive but would constitute the
majority. At any rate, other items can be added readily if
needed.
Exogenous and Endogenous Activities; All of the pri-
mary sources except the electrical power plant activity are
considered exogenous in the IMMP model; and this exception
and all of the secondary sources are considered endogenous.
Thus, the levels of industrial, household and agricultural
activities are determined outside the model, that
44
-------
Figure 6
Residuals and Sources
I Primary Sources of Residuals
Industrial Activities;
1. Food and Kindred
2. Tobacco
3. Textile Mill
4. Lumber and Wood
5. Apparel § Related Prod.
6. Furniture and Fixtures
7. Paper and Allied Prod.
8. Printing and Publishing
9. Chemical and Allied Prod.
10. Petroleum and Coal
11. Rubber and Plastic
12. Leather and Leather Prod.
13. Stone, Clay and Glass
14. Primary Metal
15. Fabricated Metal
16. Machinery, Except Electrical
17. Electrical Machinery
18. Transportation Equipment
19. Instrument and Related Prod.
20. Houshold Activity
21. Agricultural Activity
22. Transportation Activity
23. Electric Power Plant
Secondary Sources of Residuals
24. Municipal Incinerator
25. Waste Water Treat. Plant
i Primary Residuals
I Airborne:
Particulates (P)
Hydrocarbon (HC)
Sulfur Oxide (SCO
Carbon Monoxide {CO)
Nitrogen Oxide (NOX)
Waterborne;
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
Suspended Solids (SS)
Dissolved Solids (DS)
Total Phosphate (TP)
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Heat (H)
Heavy Metal (HM)
Landborne:
Solid Waste (3W)
Combustible
Noncombustible
Others:
Noise
Radioactivity
45
-------
is, are to be stipulated by the user of the model, while
the levels of power plants, municipal incinerators
and waste water treatment plants are determined within the
model.
The distinction between the exogenous and endogenous
activities is at best arbitrary. Strictly speaking, no economic
activity is purely exogenous as all activities are to a greater
or lesser extent interdependent. If a region under consideration
is indeed "closed" — in the sense that it is economically self-
contained — and a complete interdependency exists among the
activities, the only correct specification would be to desig-
nate all of them as endogenous, that is, take into account their
interrelationships. This is more or less the case with a national
or a regional economy, and the input-output model is an excellent
vehicle for illustrating the interdependent relationships within
a closed economy.
But it is seldom that a relatively small geographic
area such as a city or a metropolis can sustain economically on
its own without sizable "importation" from and "exportation"
to the outside of the area. In other words, a metropolitan
area can be best characterized as an "open economy." This is,
of course, not to imply that a strong interdependency cannot
exist among certain activities even in a basically open economy.
46
-------
A case in point is the dependency of the transportation
activity on the industrial and household activities. On the other
hand, the question of whether the level of the electric power
plant activity is wholely endogenous is not so clear-cut. The
ambiguity stems from the fact that at least in the short run,
the amount of electricity generated in a power plant depends
more on the capacity of the plant than on the area's demand for
electricity. The IMMP model can treat the power plant activity
as wholely or partially endogenous, or exogenous according to
the degree of endogeneity or exogeneity being specified by the
user. In general, the model possesses the capability to add any
number of new endogenous activities if the need arises.
Finally, it is to be emphasized that in principle nothing
prevents construction of a full-scale input-output table for a
metropolitan region if the case warrants it, but it can be done
only at the cost of considerably more work. The mix of activities
and the extent of interdependency vary a great deal from one
metropolitan region to another and to take this variation into
account means the need to construct an entirely new input-output
table for each different region. This vitiates the flexibility
of the model, one of the distinguishing features of the IMMP.
Residuals: The list of residuals of Figure 6 in-
cludes heavy metals (toxic substances), noise and radioactivity.
Data on these residuals are yet to be collected.
47
-------
If the trade-off between coal-fired, oil-fired and nuclear power
plants is adjudged real and significant within a relatively short
span of time, data on radioactivity will also be collected in
the next phase. At any rate, new data can be added, inadequate
data supplemented, and inaccurate data corrected at any time
better information becomes available.
One.of the most harmful results of certain industrial
activities and power plants is thermal pollution; heat, therefore,
is included in the list under the heading of water-borne residuals.
The effect of heat discharge into the atmosphere is not certain,
and accordingly, it is not given under the air-borne category.
Residual Generation Coefficients
All productive activities produce some waste materials
along with their intended output, i.e., useful products. The
magnitudes of waste materials generated per unit level of activity
are called residual generation coefficients or simply, residual
coefficients. These coefficients are the formal link between the
levels of activities and the initial emissions of pollutants at
•
the sources. The nature, the assumptions and the limitations
of the residual coefficients are discussed in the following.
A production process can be viewed under certain cir-
cumstances as a matrix of coefficients by which a set of raw
48
-------
materials (including fuels) is transformed into a set of (desired)
outputs and a set of (undesired) waste materials. In matrix
notation,
[•][•] •
where
vector;
is the input
is the vector of outputs and residuals. If
is the production coefficients;
"o"
• * i
E
P is partitioned into PQ and ?„ , the output production matrix
and the residual production matrix, respectively, that is,
'E
, then,
and
[•]-[•]
For a given activity, the selection of a productive
prdcess and the accompanying selection of a set.of raw materials
inputs would completely determine the levels of outputs and the
levels of residuals produced. In symbols, once
po.
PE
and
I are specified, 0 and. E ,
49
-------
the levels of outputs and the levels of residuals, respectively,
are determined. If the vector [E], i.e., the levels of resi-
duals, is divided by o. , an element of the vector [0] or the
level of one of the products produced, the result
E
o
is the
residual coefficients of that particular product. If it is assumed
that a single output is produced from the production process, the
output vector [0] is reduced to a scalar, [0] , and there is
only one set of residual coefficients, i.e.,
The fixed relationship between activity and residuals
holds only to the extent that the inputs of production
and production process are fixed. In general,
as these factors vary, the residual coefficients vary. For
example, use of oil instead of coal as fuel would change the
levels of various air pollutants while replacing the sulfate
i
method by the sulfite method in wood pulping would affect the
levels of water pollutants. For each industry, therefore, it
would be possible to develop a set of residual coefficients, each
pertaining to a particular production process and a particular
mix of raw materials.
In the present study, three alternative production pro-
cesses (excluding fuels) and three alternative fuels are considered
*
feasible for each of the industrial activities given in Figure 6
50
-------
Thus, under the assumption that each industry produces only one
product, nine (3 times 3) alternative residual production matrices
are available to the user of the model for each industry. In
evaluating the pollution effect of a particular industry, the
user would invoke one of these. This, however, is not without
a conceptual as well as practical difficulty when more than one
' ». /
heterogeneous product or subindustry are included in an industry.
To understand the nature of the difficulty, suppose that the Food
!
and Kindred Products industry consisted of meat packing and fruit
canning. Insofar as an industry-wide residual production matrix
is obtained on the basis of a particular meat packing process
*• *
(including fuels) and a particular fruit canning process (including
fuels) and the relative volumes of operations of the two sub-
industries at a given point of time, it could yield distorted
results when used in analyzing the residuals produced from either
a fruit canning plant or a meat packing plant individually, or
at a different point of time. The industry-wide matrix presumes
the existence of the industry-wide production process or tech-
nology, arid the validity of the concept itself. is suspect.
Ideally," therefore, given an activity, all its major
heterogeneous products are identified first, and then a particular
The use of the industry average residual matrix is justi-
fiable if the fruit canning and the meat packing are the joint
products, that is, two^operations coexist in approximately the
same proportion as that of .the industry.
51
-------
residual matrix are defined for each of the alternative produc-
tion processes available for each of these products. The task
would obviously entail a great deal of time and effort. An
effort will be made along this line in the second phase of the
project, perhaps by way of disaggregating the activity classifi-
cation. But in the meantime, it must be noted that the problem
is not as serious as it may appear: For managing a particular
metropolitan area, the user of the model may obtain the partic-
ular residual coefficients applicable to the particular activities
in the area and substitute them in lieu of what is in the data
bank.
Another potential source of distortion that might
arise from using the residual coefficients as described above
: I
is the underlying assumption of linearity, i.e., the assumption
of a fixed relationship between the level of activity and the
level of residuals generated. The fixed proportionality which
may hold within a certain finite range of levels of a given
activity, however, may not be valid beyond that range.
i ...<• i
One way of handling the problem of nonlinearity would
; ' f
be to assume "piecewise" linearity, i.e., the varying linearity
for different ranges of output, so that instead of one residual
, • i
coefficient matrix, there would be a set of matrices for each
production process alternative. This aspect will be pursued
further in the next phase of the study.
52
-------
The residual generation coefficients for the activities
listed in Figure 6 are given in Tables PI ~ P25, Appendix:
Data Bank.
Observe that for each of the industrial activities,
different residual coefficients are given for three alternative
production processes (other than fuel inputs) and for three
alternative fuel inputs, i.e., coal, oil and gas. The unit of
activity measure for industries is in millions of dollars.
Dollars serve as the common denominator for the heterogeneous
unit designations of heterogeneous products subsumed under an
industry heading. For a more or less homogeneous industry such
as paper products, the use of a physical measure (i.e., tons)
may be more direct. Appropriate physical units of activity are
employed for household, power plant and transportation activities.
i
Residual Transformation Coefficients
As in the above, a given level of a given activity can
i
be translated into a set of pollutants. Prior to the discharge
into the environment, these initially produced residuals or
gross emissions may be treated by a control process to yield
i
The residual coefficients included in the Data Bank are
developed from Environmental Implications of Technological and ,
Economic Change for the United States, 1967-2000; An Input-Output
Analysis, International Research and Technology, Washington, D.C.,
1971. The mix of production processes and raw materials for 1967-
1979 is used in our study as the production process 1, the mix
for 1980-89 as the production process 2, and the mix for 1990-2000
as the production process 3.
53
-------
a net set of pollutants. Analogous to the production process,
the emission control process may be viewed as a matrix whereby
a set of gross emissions are transformed into a set of treated
residuals. The coefficients representing the transformation
process are called the residual transformation coefficients
or matrix. There are as many alternative matrices as there are
alternative control technologies. Some of the more common con-
trol processes are given in Tables Tla, b,c ^ T25a, b, c, Appen-
dix: Data Bank. The coefficients reflecting the initial
treatment of pollutants are referred to as primary residual
->.
transformation coefficients while the subsequent treatment co-
efficients are referred to as secondary and tertiary residual
transformation coefficients.
Strictly speaking, the residual transformation co-
efficients are of two types: coefficients representing the
magnitudes of pollutants removed — or what is remaining of
the pollutants — by a treatment process, and coefficients re-
presenting the rates at which given pollutants are transformed
!
into other types of pollutants. The distinction between the
two can be seen in Table Tla, Appendix. When the high effi-
ciency wet scrubber is installed, it reduces particulates by
1 ""*
Data on air and solid waste treatment processes was ob-
tained from Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1972; data on water pollutant
treatment processes came from The Economics of Clean Water, U.S,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.
54
-------
90%, SO by 90% and NO by 60%, or 10% of participates, 10% of
X X
SO and 40% of NO would remain. At the same time, 90% of the
x x
particulates removed is "transformed" into bottom ash. Since
it involves transformation of a pollutant from one medium (air)
to another (solid waste), sometimes it is referred to as the
intermedia residual transformation coefficient.
In compiling the above coefficients some simplifying
assumptions were made: Regardless of the type of activity the
efficiency of the treatment processes remains constant. Secondly,
in the case of air, the total weight of particulates removed
creates bottom ash in equal weight. Likewise, the total weights
of BOD, SS, DS removed create dry sludge in equal weight. The
magnitude of these coefficients is likely to vary from industry
to industry. Further, the amount of sludge produced from various
water treatment processes would vary considerably depending upon
the concentration of waste materials and the amount of waste
water treated. This variation is ignored here by relating the
water pollutants removed directly to dry sludge. -
55
-------
SECTION IV
ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT: DISPERSION SUBMODEL
Through the land-use submodel and the residuals manage-
ment submodel as discussed in Sections II and III, the user of the
IMMP model can, for given levels and locations of the exogenous
and endogenous activities, determine the kinds, quantities and
locations of pollutants discharged (initially) into the environ-
ment. Viewed in reverse, these two submodels are sufficient to
test, through iteration, the compatibility of given sets of emission
standards (at the sources) or given reductions in emission levels
with the alternative mixes and locations of the residual-generating
and residual-treating activities. Thus, by themselves, the land-use
and residuals management submodels would be a practical tool of the
metropolitan environmental management.
While the regulation of emission standards certainly is
a direct and viable approach to the environmental resource manage-
ment, it must be remembered that the approach runs the risk of
neglecting one of the most important ingredients of rational environ-
mental management, i.e., damages from pollution. For the pollution
damages depend mostly on the ambient pollution, not on the emissions
at the source. (If no one lives near the source of emission, there
56
-------
is no damage, no need for pollution abatement.) Thus, even if the
emissions standard approach is chosen to take advantage of its
direction and unambiguity, the ambient pollution and the accom-
panying damages cannot be totally ignored.
As stated earlier, no damage data are included in the
current IMMP model, but it incorporates the dispersion process sub-
models which enable translation of the emissions at the sources into
the ambient levels of pollution at the various subareas of the
metropolitan area. With the dispersion submodels, the user of the
model can evaluate the effects of alternative sets of emissions
standards on the ambient quality at various subareas.
The model considers only the diffusion of pollutants through
the atmosphere and water bodies. Once the transportation of solid
wastes is regarded as part of disposal decisions within the resi-
duals management submodel, the diffusion of pollutants through land
such as leaching can probably be ignored as insignificant, or at
least the process is too little known to be modeled at this time.
The mathematical form of the diffusion models has been
adopted for both air and water in the IMMP. This does not imply,
however, that the mathematical models are superior to other forms
such as simulation models. Should the models of other forms prove
more reliable, they can be easily substituted for the current
models. Inasmuch the general applicability and the reliability
of all existing models are suspect, there is room for constant
testing and improvement no matter which models are in use.
57
-------
As will be seen, some of the variables of the diffusion
processes are controllable and others are not. Indeed, it may be
said that the factors which are determined completely by the hydro-
logy* geophysics and meteorology of the area are more predominant
than the humanly controllable factors. But it is also true that
with advance in weather-change technology, etc., more variables
will become controllable — at least partially — in the future.
In the case of the air diffusion process, the currently adjustable
variables include stack height, stack diameter, emission rate; in
the case of water, they include water temperature, reoxygenation
rate. A detailed discussion of the diffusion model follows.
58
-------
Air Diffusion Model
I Point Sources: The metropolitan area is covered with a grid
as in Figure 7. Each square is referred to by the subscripts
attached to its center; e.g., A is at the center of square 1,3.
Given the assumed meteorological conditions discussed in
Sec. V, the user will specify a stability class (S = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
or 6). When this is known, the effective height of release, h ,
of a point emission source is calculated as in Sec. VI and the
depth of the mixing layer, L , is calculated as in Sec. VII.
_3
With this information, X(in gm ) , the pollutant con-
centration at (x, y) at ground level is given by
(1) X(x,y,0;h) =
Q
y
- 1/2 (
exp
.693(x/u)
3600T
where Q is the source strength (gsec ) , u is the mean wind
speed (msec" ) , T is the half-life of the pollutant in hours,
and CT , cr are the horizontal and vertical standard deviations
y z
which like x , y and z are in meters.* The x-axis is in the
direction of the mean wind; the y-axis, crosswind; the z-axis,
*
For a discussion of the derivation of this formula see
D. Bruce Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1970, and TRW Air Quality Im-
plementation Planning Program, Vol. 1, 1970.
59
-------
N
B12 B13
Figure 7
Air Diffusion
B15 B16 B17 B18 B19 B1.10
fll
A21
\31
A41
A51
A61
A71
>
t91
A10,l
*
A12
\
A13
\
i
i
1
t
i
i
1
I
t
t
1
1
1
1
X
64
A15
A25
^\
r
1
t
t
1
t
/
\
\
\
\
i
l
i
t
i
i
i
J. V
S
\
.'r
f
A17
/
N
\
\
N
>
/
/
s
S
N
j6
\
\
\
Al,10
s
\
B
21
B
31
B
41
B
51
B
61
B
71
B
81
B
91
B
10,1
For the square with center A. . , NW corner is B. . , NE
Corner is B. .,- , SE-corner is B
60
-------
vertical; and the origin, at the base of the actual emission
source. The formulas for calculating the standard deviations are
(2)
3 b ,
= ax ; a = ax + c
where ct , P , a , b , c are constants which vary with the stability
*
class.
Eq. (1) holds only for x ^ x. where x- is such that
cr = 0.47 L , i.e.,
Z
is the solution of 0.47 L = ax,. + c for
~ L
x ^ 2x. , the formula used is
(3) X(x,y,0;h)
Q
, — exp
V2rr
-------
The application of these formulas depends on which of
8 basic wind directions is involved, and is discussed below.
62
-------
II Area Sources*: Area sources arise through such things as
space heating in a residential area. To account for them, an
average effective stack height (height of release), h , must
be given. Given h , an area source is treated as though it were
a point source with an initial standard deviation in the crosswind
direction cr = s/4.3 , where s is the length of the side of
the area (assumed square). This gives a virtual upwind distance
Q
x 0 as the solution of cr = s/4.3 = a(x Q) .
In applying the formulas (1) and (3), the distances x
and y are measured from the square's center, but in calculating
the appropriate cr , the distance x + x 0 is used. (Note that
in calculating a , x itself is still used.)
z
Similarly, if a Q , the standard deviation of the initial
vertical distribution of sources is known, a virtual distance
x n given by solving cr n = a(x rt) + c could be used to cal-
zu zu zu
culate cr at x + x ~ .
z" zO
Calculation of the effects of area sources is then accom-
plished by the same procedure as for point sources, except that
in (1) and (3), x and y are actual distances from the square's
center point but
-------
When Mean Wind Is ft am the South; The squares affected by
a point source at A in Exhibit 4-1 are assumed to be those
within a 90 sector*with vertex at A,, , the boundaries of which
64 .
pass through A _ , A , A _ on the one hand and A , A,- ,
^"37 ' ^"28 ' A19 on t*ie ot^er- In general, a point source at A .
in a south wind will be assumed to affect squares within a 90
sector bounded on one side by A -_, A ._,... successively
1-1,J-l i-£,J-Z
lowering each index by unity until one of them reaches unity and on
the other, by A. - .,- , A. ,_ , ... successively augmenting
1-1, j~i l-Z,j"rZ
the column index by unity and reducing the row index by unity until
the row index hits unity or the column index hits its maximum.
For these squares, the concentration is calculated at
the center point of each and also at the four corners, and these
5 numbers are averaged to obtain a single number for the square.
The computation for a south wind for a source at Ag,
thus involves 33 squares including Ag, itself. The x-axis is
taken along A , , A , , A , . The cases of N, E and W winds
are also treated analogously.
Similarly, when wind is from NW, Figure 7 shows the
squares within a 90 sector that would be affected by a source at
A25 '
t f\
The 90 sector was chosen since calculations showed that•
for each stability class the concentrations outside this sector
would be very small proportions of the total, even if the grid
step size were as small as 100 meters.
64
-------
V Stability Classes: The classification of stability is based
on the scheme in D. Bruce Turner, op. cit. The user will specify
which of the six stability classes S = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 is
to be used in the calculations.* Class 1 refers to the most un-
stable and class 6 to the most stable condition.
However, for the purpose of calculating pollutants over
longer-period averages, provision can be made to store all the
items of information on which the stability classification is
based, namely: day or night, wind speed in 5 classes, strength
of incoming solar radiation in 4 classes for daytime, and degree
of cloud cover in 3 classes.
•g
Stability classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 correspond to Turner's
A, B, C, D, E, F, respectively.
See TRW op. cit. for a justification for using the same s
values of o?,P,a,b,c (discussed above) for classes 4,
5, and 6.
65
-------
VI Effective Height*: To calculate the effective height of
release h , use the formula
h = h* + Ah(1.4 - 0.1S)
V T -3 ^Ts ' Ta\ 1
where Ah =» -S- 1.5 + 2.68 X 10 p ( s T a) d .
u L ^ Tg x j
h* = actual height of release, m
Ah = rise of plume above the stack, m
V = stack gas exit velocity, m sec
u = wind speed, m sec
p = atmospheric pressure, mb
T - stack gas temperature, c
S
T = air temperature, c
S = the index of the stability class and varies from 1 to 6
d = inside stack diameter, m .
*
cf. Turner op. cit., Ch; 4 and TRW op. cit.
66
-------
VII Depth of Mixing Layer*; The depth of the monthly mean after-
noon mixing layer L is taken as input.
The mixing layer depth L is taken to be
(1.5) L- for stability class s = 1
(1.0) LQ for " s = 2,3,4
100 m for " s = 5,6
VIII Average Concentration Levels: The user may specify the
proportion of the time each configuration of parameters (e.g.,
the wind direction, wind speed in several classes) occurs and the
program will then calculate the average concentrations over the
sets of different conditions corresponding to these different
parameter configurations.
*
Based on TRW, op. cit.
+
If the proportions specified do not add up to one, they are
scaled up or down until they do, a message is printed, and the
program continues.
67
-------
X Limitations: The many assumptions on which this model is based
are spelled out in the works by Turner and TRW cited above, and
these should be consulted before the model is used for an actual
problem.
As Turner points out (op. cit., pp. 37-38), the above
formulas correspond to concentrations over short averaging times,
and he includes an adjustment for longer periods which allows for'
the increased 6 due to meander of wind direction. This adjust-
7
ment was deliberately not applied since it reduces the concentra-
tions from a given source everywhere and the concern here is to
allow for the total effect of a given source. The use of a 90
sector, as discussed above, is felt to go a long way towards
allowing for a meandering wind direction.
68
-------
Water Pollution Diffusion Model*
The model user must give a name to each river and
specify the points through which it flows in their natural
sequence as shown in Exhibit 4-2. The program then establishes
a correspondence Pj^ = An , ?2 = A^ , ?3 - A32 , . . . to
obtain a sequential ordering of the points through which the river
flows. (Note that A . could be P« , but the user is encouraged
to take PO = A- in order that actual stream miles be better
approximated . )
It is also necessary to keep track of the distance in
stream kilometers between successive points, P_, P , P_ , ...,
from which a matrix (d .) of distances between any points P.
and P. can be obtained.
The basic equation to describe the effects of a BOD
load L discharged at P. on stream conditions at a downstream
point P. , j > i , is*
J
i |-kt. . -rt.ri
Le J - e 1JJ •
In the present model version lakes and estuaries are not
treated separately. Also, only (carbonaceous) BOD is considered.
Similar remarks apply to the stretch from A_ to A0£ .
JL IJ OD
For a derivation of this formula, see Fair, G.M. Geyer, J.C.,
and Okun, D.A., Water and Wastewater Engineering, (New York: Wiley,
1968), Vol. 2, Ch. 33.
69
-------
Figure 8
Water Diffusion
8
3
4
^54
8
A
85
A
86
87
9
10
\108
Direction of flow
Actual river path
Simulated path
70
-------
Here t. . is the average (stream) travel time (in days) between
P. and P. , that is, t.. = - L where v is the average speed
of the stream (in kilometers per day). D. . is the contribution
of the load at i to the dissolved oxygen deficit at j .* L.
is measured in mg/1 (milligrams per liter) , and might be calculated
as X-j/1^ > where X. is the discharge at P. of BOD (in mg per
day) and F. is the river flow at P. (in liters per day).
k and r are de- and re-oxygenation coefficients the
calculation of which is described later- For simplicity of exposi-
tion v , r , k are here assumed constant for the whole river in
question. The more general case is discussed below.
The total dissolved oxygen deficit at P. is
J
(2) D. = £ D.. +D.e~rtli
J
where D- is the (exogenously) given deficit at point P, . The
actual concentration of dissolved oxygen at P. is given by
(3) C. = CS - D.
where CS is the saturation value calculated as
"if
It is realized that there may be more than one source of BOD
at P£ and a double subscript notation D^. might refer to the
effect at P. of the k-th source at P. . J
+ J x
cf. Fair et al., op_. cit., Ch. 23, Sec. 6.
71
-------
CS = 760 [14'652 - (4-1022 x 10"1)! + (7.9910 x 10"3)T2
- (7.774 x 10"5)T3]
where T = temperature of the water in degrees centigrade
P = pressure (barometric) in mm of mercury.
Calculation of k*
where, if k_ and TQ are not specified by the user, kQ = 0.39
and TQ = 20°C.
If 0°C < T < 7.5°C 9fc = 1.15
if 7.5°C £ T < 15°C 9k = 1.11
if 15°C £ T £ 30C 0. = 1.05
k
if 30°C < T 6fc = 0.97
k is in units of days
T is the water temperature in degrees of centigrade.
Calculation of r
0.024(T-Tn)
r = rQe 0
If rn and T are not specified by the user, T. = 20°C , and
calculations of r_ is as follows:
•
The user will be asked to designate the class of the
receiving water as one of the following:
*cf. ibid., Ch. 33, Sec. 7.
"^Based on Fair etal., op_. cit., Ch. 33, Sec. 13.
72
-------
Class Description
1 Sluggish streams and large lakes or
imp oundmen t s
2 Large streams of low velocity
3 Large streams of moderate velocity
4 Swift streams
The value of rn is then taken from the following table:*
Class
rQ 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.6
r is also in units of days
General Case
Because of many factors, the basic user-supplier para-
meters such as water temperature, flow, etc., may well change
from stretch to stretch of the river. The user must specify these
new values at any change points.
The way the program actually operates is to take a given
initial load from a particular source and compute its contribution
\
to the dissolved oxygen deficit at each successive point downstream
in an iterative fashion allowing for the changes in conditions from
"ft
This table is based on Table 33-4 of Fair et al., og. cit.,
and the rQ values are obtained by multiplying by the default
value of kn (.39) the mid-points of the ranges of values given
for the r/R ratio of the corresponding classes in that table.
73
-------
stretch to stretch. The BOD load (from this particular source)
remaining at the beginning of each stretch is taken as the load
remaining at the beginning of the previous stretch multiplied by
-kt ,
e , where t is the time required to traverse the previous
stretch and k has the value appropriate for the previous stretch.*
Then Eq. (1) above is applied with this value of L. and the cur-
rent-stretch values for r and k .
The program goes through this computation for each load
source and then cumulates the contributions to obtain a total dis-
solved oxygen deficit at each point (including the effects of any
initial deficits in the system). Subtraction of the total deficit
from the DO saturation value at each point then yields the DO
concentration at each point.
Treatment of Tributaries
Since the model user gives each river a name, specifies
the sequence of points through which it flows, and can terminate
it by indicating that it flows into another river, the junction
of two rivers can be handled by making either river a tributary
of the other, or else forming a new river where they meet. In
*
For a justification of this procedure, see Fair et al.,
op. cit., Ch. 33, Sec. 7. When the flow changes between Succes-
sive stretches, the load is also adjusted by multiplication by
F /F where F and F are the flows in the previous and
current stretchis, respectively, and F < F . If F > F
the load is not adjusted. P -c PC
74
-------
According to the diagram of Figure 5, the levels of
various pollutants emitted or discharged into air, water and land
within a metropolitan area depend not only on the size and nature
of various activities -- agricultural, industrial, commercial,
power plant, transportation, household, municipal incinerator,
municipal water treatment, but also on the kinds of raw materials
used, production processes, control processes applied to wastes,
and the extent of recycling of the waste materials. Thus, these
alternatives, individually and jointly, represent potential means
for altering the forms and levels of pollutants ultimately dis-
charged into the environment.
The following is a systematic and detailed presentation
of the ways in which these alternatives can affect the forms and
levels of various pollutants deposited in the environment.
Residuals and Sources
As an initial task in managing environmental quality
one needs to identify both the pollutants that contribute to the
environmental degradation and the sources from which these pollu-
tants emanate. The forms in which this information might be
gathered would depend largely on the purpose for which it is
to be used and the availability of data.
As the potential sources of pollution in a metropolitan
area a set of activities listed in Figure 6 are considered in
43
-------
the IMMP model. They are 2-digit SIC industries. Our decision
to classify the sources into 2-digit SIC industries was based on
two considerations. First, the available data do not permit
the classification of sources on a more disaggregate level at
present; but further disaggregation into 3-digit or 4-digit level
can be achieved easily as such data become available in the future.
Second, while the classification on this level of aggregation may
not permit the user of the model to test the full range of alter-
native strategies, it would allow, as a minimum, the testing of
the basic workings of the model and demonstrate the usefulness
of the model.
Along with these pollution generating activities Figure
6 gives the list of pollutants generally considered to contribute
significantly to the environmental pollution and the accompanying
damages to the inhabitants. The lists of residuals and their
sources are by no means exhaustive but would constitute the
majority. At any rate, other items can be added readily if
needed.
Exogenous and Endogenous Activities: All of the pri-
mary sources except the electrical power plant activity are
considered exogenous in the IMMP model; and this exception
and all of the secondary sources are considered endogenous.
Thus, the levels of industrial, household and agricultural
activities are determined outside the model, that
44
-------
Figure 6
Residuals and Sources
Primary Sources of Residuals
Industrial Activities:
1. Food and Kindred
2. Tobacco
3. Textile Mill
4. Lumber and Wood
5. Apparel § Related Prod.
6. Furniture and Fixtures
7. Paper and Allied Prod.
8. Printing and Publishing
9. Chemical and Allied Prod.
10. Petroleum and Coal
11. Rubber and Plastic
12. Leather and Leather Prod.
13. Stone, Clay and Glass
14. Primary Metal
15. Fabricated Metal
16. Machinery, Except Electrical
17. Electrical Machinery
18. Transportation Equipment
19. Instrument and Related Prod.
20. Houshold Activity
21. Agricultural Activity
22. Transportation Activity
23. Electric Power Plant
Secondary Sources of Residuals
24. Municipal Incinerator
25. Waste Water Treat. Plant
i Primary Residuals
I Airborne:
Particulates (P)
Hydrocarbon (HC)
Sulfur Oxide (SO^)
Carbon Monoxide (.CO')
Nitrogen Oxide (NOX)
Waterborne:
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
Suspended Solids (SS)
Dissolved Solids (DS)
Total Phosphate (TP)
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Heat (H)
Heavy Metal (HM)
Landborne;
Solid Waste (3\vr)
Combustible
Noncombustible
Others:
Noise
Radioactivity
45
-------
is, are to be stipulated by the user of the model, while
the levels of power plants, municipal incinerators
and waste water treatment plants are determined within the
model.
The distinction between the exogenous and endogenous
activities is at best arbitrary. Strictly speaking, no economic
activity is purely exogenous as all activities are to a greater
or lesser extent interdependent. If a region under consideration
is indeed "closed" — in the sense that it is economically self-
contained — and a complete interdependency exists among the
activities, the only correct specification would be to desig-
nate all of them as endogenous, that is, take into account their
interrelationships. This is more or less the case with a national
or a regional economy, and the input-output model is an excellent
vehicle for illustrating the interdependent relationships within
a closed economy.
But it is seldom that a relatively small geographic
area such as a city or a metropolis can sustain economically on
its own without sizable "importation" from and "exportation"
to the outside of the area. In other words, a metropolitan
area can be best characterized as an "open economy." This is,
of course, not to imply that a strong interdependency cannot
exist among certain activities even in a basically open economy.
46
-------
A case in point is the dependency of the transportation
activity on the industrial and household activities. On the other
hand, the question of whether the level of the electric power
plant activity is wholely endogenous is not so clear-cut. The
ambiguity stems from the fact that at least in the short run,
the amount of electricity generated in a power plant depends
more on the capacity of the plant than on the area's demand for
electricity. The IMMP model can treat the power plant activity
as wholely or partially endogenous, or exogenous according to
the degree of endogeneity or exogeneity being specified by the
user. In general, the model possesses the capability to add any
number of new endogenous activities if the need arises.
Finally, it is to be emphasized that in principle nothing
prevents construction of a full-scale input-output table for a
metropolitan region if the case warrants it, but it can be done
only at the cost of considerably more work. The mix of activities
and the extent of interdependency vary a great deal from one
metropolitan region to another and to take this variation into
account means the need to construct an entirely new input-output
table for each different region. This vitiates the flexibility
of the model, one of the distinguishing features of the IMMP.
Residuals: The list of residuals of Figure 6 in-
cludes heavy metals (toxic substances), noise and radioactivity.
Data on these residuals are yet to be collected.
47
-------
If the trade-off between coal-fired, oil-fired and nuclear power
plants is adjudged real and significant within a relatively short
span of time, data on radioactivity will also be collected in
the next phase. At any rate, new data can be added, inadequate
data supplemented, and inaccurate data corrected at any time
better information becomes available. i
One iof the most harmful results of certain industrial
activities and power plants is thermal pollution; heat, therefore,
is included in the list under the heading of water-borne residuals.
The effect of heat discharge into the atmosphere is not certain,
and accordingly, it is not given under the air-borne category-
Residual Generation Coefficients
All productive activities produce some waste materials
along with their intended output, i.e., useful products. The
magnitudes of waste materials generated per unit level of activity
are called residual generation coefficients or simply, residual
coefficients. These coefficients are the formal link between the
levels of activities and the initial emissions of pollutants at
the sources. The nature, the assumptions a*nd the limitations
of the residual coefficients are discussed in the following.
A production process can be viewed under certain cir-
cumstances as a matrix of coefficients by which a set of raw
48
-------
materials (including fuels) is transformed into a set of (desired)
outputs and a set of (undesired) waste materials. In matrix
notation,
HH - ffl
where
vector;
PJ is t
the production 'coefficients;
is the input
is the vector of outputs and residuals. If
P is partitioned into PQ and PE , the output production matrix
and the residual production matrix, respectively, that is,
, then,
L. _l
and
•"•'•" For a given activity, the selection of a productive
process and the accompanying selection of a set of raw materials
inputs would completely determine the levels of outputs and the
levels of residuals produced. In symbols, once
and
are .specified, 0 and. E ,
49
-------
the levels of outputs and the levels of residuals, respectively,
are determined. If the vector [E], i.e., the levels of resi-
duals, is divided by o. , an element of the vector [0] or the
level of one of the products produced, the result
°i
is the
residual coefficients of that particular product. If it is assumed
that a single output is produced ffom the production process, the
output vector [0] is reduced to a scalar, [0] , and there is
rEn
only one set of residual coefficients, i.e., — .
the fixed relationship between activity and residuals
holds only to the extent that the inputs of production
and production process are fixed. In general,
as these factors vary, the residual coefficients vary. For
example, use of oil instead of coal aS fuel would change the
levels of various air pollutants while replacing the sulfate
method by the sulfite method in wood pulping would affect the
levels of water pollutants. For each industry, therefore, it
would be possible to develop a set of Residual coefficients, each
pertaining to a particular production process and a particular
mix of raw materials.
In the present study, three alternative production pro-
cesses (excluding fuels) and three alternative fuels are considered
feasible for each of the industrial activities given in Figure 6
50
-------
Thus, under the assumption that each industry produces only one
product, nine (3 times 3) alternative residual production matrices
are available to the user of the model for each industry. In
evaluating the pollution effect of a particular industry, the
user would invoke one of these. This, however, is not without
a conceptual as well as practical difficulty when more than one
* .
heterogeneous product or subindustry are included in an industry.
To understand the nature of the difficulty, suppose that the Food
i
and Kindred Products industry consisted of meat packing and fruit
canning. Insofar as an industry-wide residual production matrix
is obtained on the basis of a particular meat packing process
(including fuels) and a particular fruit canning process (including
fuels) and the relative volumes of operations of the two sub-
industries at a given point of time, it could yield distorted
results when used in analyzing the residuals produced from either
a fruit canning plant or a meat packing plant individually, or
at a different point of time. The industry-wide matrix presumes
the existence of the industry-wide production process or tech-
i
nology, arid the validity of the concept itself is suspect.
v
Ideally, therefore, given an activity, all its major
heterogeneous products are identified first, and then a particular
The use of the industry average residual matrix is justi-
fiable if the fruit canning and the meat packing are the joint
products, that is, two operations coexist in approximately the
same proportion as that of the industry.
51
-------
residual matrix are defined for each of the alternative produc-
tion processes available for each of these products. The task
would obviously entail a great deal of time and effort. An
effort will be made along this line in the second phase of the
project, perhaps by way of disaggregating the activity classifi-
cation. But in the meantime, it must be noted that the problem
is not as serious as it may appear: For managing a particular
metropolitan area, the user of the model may obtain the partic-
ular residual coefficients applicable to the particular activities
in the area and substitute them in lieu of what is in the data
bank.
Another potential source of distortion that might
arise from using the residual coefficients as described above
i
is the underlying assumption of linearity, i.e., the assumption
of a fixed relationship between the level of activity and the
level of residuals generated. The fixed proportionality which
may hold within a certain finite range of levels of a given
activity, however, may not be valid beyond that range.
> i i
One way of handling the problem of nonlinearity would
be to assume "piecewise" linearity, i.e., the varying linearity
for different ranges of output, so that instead of one residual
coefficient matrix, there would be a set of matrices for each
production process alternative. This aspect will be pursued
further in the next phase of the study.
52
-------
The residual generation coefficients for the activities
listed in Figure 6 are given in Tables PI ~ P25, Appendix;
T, i 1
Data Bank.
Observe that for each of the industrial activities,
different residual coefficients are given for three alternative
production processes (other than fuel inputs) and for three
alternative fuel inputs, i.e., coal, oil and gas. The unit of
activity measure for industries is in millions of dollars.
Dollars serve as the common denominator for the heterogeneous
unit designations of heterogeneous products subsumed under an
industry heading. For a more or less homogeneous industry such
as paper products, the use of a physical measure (i.e., tons)
may be more direct. Appropriate physical units of activity are
employed for household, power plant and transportation activities.
Residual Transformation Coefficients
t
As in the above, a given level of a given activity can
i
be translated into a set of pollutants. Prior to the discharge
into the environment, these initially produced residuals or
gross emissions may be treated by a control process to yield
The residual coefficients included in the Data Bank are
developed from Environmental Implications of Technological and
Economic Change' for the United States. 1967-2000: An Input-Output
Analysis, International Research and Technology, Washington, B.C.,
1971. The mix of production processes and raw materials for 1967-
1979 is used in our study as the production process 1, the mix
for 1980-89 as the production process 2, and the mix for 1990-2000
as the production process 3.
53
-------
a net set of pollutants. Analogous to the production process,
the emission control process may be viewed as a matrix whereby
a set of gross emissions are transformed into a set of treated
residuals. The coefficients representing the transformation
process are called the residual transformation coefficients
or matrix. There are as many alternative matrices as there are
alternative control technologies. Some of the more common con-
trol processes are given in Tables Tla, b,c ~ T25a, b, c, Appen-
dix: Data Bank. The coefficients reflecting the initial
treatment of pollutants are referred to as primary residual
transformation coefficients while the subsequent treatment co-
efficients are referred to as secondary and tertiary residual
transformation coefficients.
Strictly speaking, the residual transformation co-
efficients are of two types: coefficients representing the
magnitudes of pollutants removed — or what is remaining of
the pollutants — by a treatment process, and coefficients re-
presenting the rates at which given pollutants are transformed
into other types of pollutants. The distinction between the
two can be seen in Table Tla, Appendix. When the high effi-
ciency wet scrubber is installed, it reduces particulates by
Data on air and solid waste treatment processes was ob-
tained from Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1972; data on water pollutant
treatment processes came from The Economics of Clean Water. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.
54
-------
90%, SO by 90% and NO by 60%, or 10% of particulates, 10% of
2C X
SO and 40% of NO would remain. At the same time, 90% of the
x x '
particulates removed is "transformed" into bottom ash. Since
it involves transformation of a pollutant from one medium (air)
to another (solid waste), sometimes it is referred to as the
intermedia residual transformation coefficient.
In compiling the above coefficients some simplifying
assumptions were made: Regardless of the type of activity the
efficiency of the treatment processes remains constant. Secondly,
in the case of air, the total weight of particulates removed
creates bottom ash in equal weight. Likewise, the total weights
of BOD, SS, DS removed create dry sludge in equal weight. The
magnitude of these coefficients is likely to vary from industry
to industry. Further, the amount of sludge produced from various
r
water treatment processes would vary considerably depending upon
the concentration of waste materials and the amount of waste
water treated. This variation is ignored here by relating the
water pollutants removed directly to dry sludge.
55
-------
SECTION IV
ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT: DISPERSION SUBMODEL
Through the land-use submodel and the residuals manage-
ment submodel as discussed in Sections II and III, the user of the
IMMP model can, for given levels and locations of the exogenous
and endogenous activities, determine the kinds, quantities and
locations of pollutants discharged (initially) into the environ-
ment. Viewed in reverse, these two submodels are sufficient to
test, through iteration, the compatibility of given sets of emission
standards (at the sources) or given reductions in emission levels
with the alternative mixes and locations of the residual-generating
and residual-treating activities. Thus, by themselves, the land-use
and residuals management submodels would be a practical tool of the
metropolitan environmental management.
While the regulation of emission standards certainly is
a direct and viable approach to the environmental resource manage-
ment, it must be remembered that the approach runs the risk of
neglecting one of the most important ingredients of rational environ-
mental management, i.e., damages from pollution. For the pollution
damages depend mostly on the ambient pollution, not on the emissions
at the source. (If no one lives near the source of emission, there
56
-------
is no damage, no need for pollution abatement.) Thus, even if the
emissions standard approach is chosen to take advantage of its
direction and unambiguity, the ambient pollution and the accom-
panying damages cannot be totally ignored.
As stated earlier, no damage data are included in the
current IMMP model, but it incorporates the dispersion process sub-
models which enable translation of the emissions at the sources into
the ambient levels of pollution at the various subareas of the
metropolitan area. With the dispersion submodels, the user of the
model can evaluate the effects of alternative sets of emissions
standards on the ambient quality at various subareas.
The model considers only the diffusion of pollutants through
the atmosphere and water bodies. Once the transportation of solid
wastes is regarded as part of disposal decisions within the resi-
duals management submodel, the diffusion of pollutants through land
such as leaching can probably be ignored as insignificant, or at
least the process is too little known to be modeled at this time.
The mathematical form of the diffusion models has been
adopted for both air and water in the IMMP. This does not imply,
however, that the mathematical models are superior to other forms
such as simulation models. Should the models of other forms prove
more reliable, they can be easily substituted for the current
models. Inasmuch the general applicability and the reliability
of all existing models are suspect, there is room for constant
testing and improvement no matter which models are in use.
57
-------
As will be seen, some of the variables of the diffusion
processes are controllable and others are not. Indeed, it may be
said that the factors which are determined completely by the hydro-
logy* geophysics and meteorology of the area are more predominant
than the humanly controllable factors. But it is also true that
with advance in weather-change technology, etc., more variables
will become controllable — at least partially — in the future.
In the case of the air diffusion process, the currently adjustable
variables include stack height, stack diameter, emission rate; in
the case of water, they include water temperature, reoxygenation
rate. A detailed discussion of the diffusion model follows.
58
-------
Air Diffusion Model
I Point Sources: The metropolitan area is covered with a grid
as in Figure 7. Each square is referred to by the subscripts
attached to its center; e.g., A is at the center of square 1,3.
Given the assumed meteorological conditions discussed in
Sec. V, the user will specify a stability class (S = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
or 6). When this is known, the effective height of release, h ,
of a point emission source is calculated as in Sec. VI and the
depth of the mixing layer, L , is calculated as in Sec. VII.
_3
..With this information, x(in gm ) , the pollutant con-
centration at (x, y) at ground level is given by
(1) X(x,y,0;h) =
u
exp
y z
- 1/2 (-)
-i.
exp
.693(x/u)
3600T
where Q is the source strength (gsec ) , u is the mean wind
speed (msec" ) , T is the half- life of the pollutant in hours,
and
are the horizontal and vertical standard deviations
,
y z
which like x , y and z are in meters.* The x-axis is in the
direction of the mean wind; the y-axis, crosswind; the z-axis,
For a discussion of the derivation of this formula see
D. Bruce Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1970, and TRW Air Quality Im-
plementation Planning Program, Vol. 1, 1970.
59
-------
N
B12 B13
Figure 7
Air Diffusion
B15 B16 B17 B18 B19 B1.10
fll
A21
\31
A41
A51
t61
A71
A81
A91
A10,l
A12
\
A!3
\
1
1
1
1
V
64
tl5
A25
%
t V
c
|T
i
fl6
S
s
/
A17
/
V
X
V
N
V
>
X
/
\
\
\
N
j6
\
V
S
\
\
Al,10
s
\
B
21
B
31
B
41
B
51
B
61
B
71
B
81
B
91
B
10,1
For the square with center. A , NW corner is B. . , NE
Corner is B +1 , SE corner is Bi+1 .
60
-------
vertical; and the origin, at the base of the actual emission
source. The formulas for calculating the standard deviations are
(2)
.
CT = ax ; a = ax + c
where ot , P , a , b , c are constants which vary with the stability
*
class.
Eq. (1) holds only for x ^ x_ where x, is such that
cr = 0.47 L , i.e., x. is the solution of 0.47 L = ax. + c for
Z Li Ti
x ^ 2x, , the formula used is
(3) X(x,y,0;h) =
Q
1 — exp
V2rr o- LU
-l/2<^)2
y _
exp
0.693(x/u)
3600T
For x = 6^ + (1 - 6)2^ , 0
6
(4) X(x,y,0;h) =
- e)[x(x2L,y,0;h)]
where
is calculated from Eq. (1) and x(x2T >
is calculated from Eq . (3) .
The actual values for these constants based on Figures 3-2
and 3-3 in Turner, op. cit. and on TRW, op. cit. are:
Constants for Stability Classes
Class 1 .450 .889 .001 1.890 9.6
2 .285 .912 .048 1.110 2.0
3 .177 .924 .119 .915 0
4,5,6 .111 .928 2.610 .450 -25.5
The rationale for using the different formulas is given
in Turner, op. cit., p. 7.
61
-------
The application of these formulas depends on which of
8 basic wind directions is involved, and is discussed below.
62
-------
II Area Sources*; Area sources arise through such things as
space heating in a residential area. To account for them, an
average effective stack height (height of release) , h , must
be given. Given h , an area source is treated as though it were
a point source with an initial standard deviation in the crosswind
direction cr _ = s/4.3 , where s is the length of the side of
the area (assumed square) . This gives a virtual upwind distance
g
x 0 as the solution of cr Q = s/4.3 = or(x Q) .
In applying the formulas (1) and (3) , the distances x
and y are measured from the square's center, but in calculating
the appropriate a , the distance x + x - is used. (Note that
in calculating a , x itself is still used.)
z
Similarly, if a Q , the standard deviation of the initial
vertical distribution of sources is known, a virtual distance
x n given by solving cr A = a(x n) + c could be used to cal-
zu zu zu
culate
-------
When Mean Wind Is from the South; The squares affected by
a point source at A in Exhibit 4-1 are assumed to be those
within a 90 sector*with vertex at A... , the boundaries of which
OH
pass through A53 , A^2 , A31 on the one hand and A , A ,
^"37 * ^28 ' ^19 on fc^e ot^er> *n general, a point source at A .
in a south wind will be assumed to affect squares within a 90
sector bounded on one side by A. - - , A 0 . , . . . successively
i-i, j-i i-/,j-/
lowering each index by unity until one of them reaches unity and on
the other, by A. _ .. , A _ , ... successively augmenting
X-i,jTi 1-^,JTZ
the column index by unity and reducing the row index by unity until
the row index hits unity or the column index hits its maximum.
For these squares, the concentration is calculated at
the center point of each and also at the four corners, and these
5 numbers are averaged to obtain a single number for the square.
The computation for a south wind for a source at Afi,
thus involves 33 squares including A-, itself. The x-axis is
taken along A , , A , , A , . The cases of N, E and W winds
are also treated analogously.
Similarly, when wind is from NW, Figure 7 shows the
squares within a 90 sector that would be affected by a source at
A25 '
The 90° sector was chosen since calculations showed that
for each stability class the concentrations outside this sector
would be very small proportions of the total, even if the grid
step size were as small as 100 meters.
64
-------
V Stability Classes: The classification of stability is based
on the scheme in D. Bruce Turner, op. cit. The user will specify
which of the six stability classes S = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 is
to be used in the calculations.* Class 1 refers to the most un-
stable and class 6 to the most stable condition.
However, for the purpose of calculating pollutants over
longer-period averages, provision can be made to store all the
items of information on which the stability classification is
' »
based, namely: day or night, wind speed in 5 classes, strength
of incoming solar radiation in 4 classes for daytime, and degree
of cloud cover in 3 classes.
"ft
Stability classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 correspond to Turner's
A, B, C, D, E, F, respectively. ,
See TRW op. cit. for a justification for using the same v
values of a , P , a , b , c (discussed above) for classes 4,
5, and 6.
65
-------
VI Effective Height*: To calculate the effective height of
release h , use the formula
h = h* + Ah(1.4 - 0.1S)
V d p yl - *$. -^ -\
where Ah = -4- 1.5 + 2.68 X l(f p Q s T *) d .
*- s -"
h* = actual height of release, m
Ah = rise of plume above the stack, m
V_ = stack gas exit velocity, m gee"
u - wind speed, m sec
p = atmospheric pressure, mb
T = stack gas temperature, c
S
T = air temperature, c
a
S - the index of the stability class and varies from 1 to 6
d = inside stack diameter, m .
cf. Turner op. cit., Oh. 4 and TBW op. cit.
66
-------
VII Depth of Mixing Layer*; The depth of the monthly mean after-
noon mixing layer L is taken as input.
The mixing layer depth L is taken to be
(1.5) LQ for stability class s = 1
(1.0) LQ for " s = 2,3,4
100 m for " s = 5,6
VIII Average Concentration Levels: The user may specify the
proportion of the time each configuration of parameters (e.g.,
the wind direction, wind speed in several classes) occurs and the
program will then calculate the average concentrations over the
sets of different conditions corresponding to these different
parameter configurations.
*
Based on TRW, op. cit.
If the proportions specified do not add up to one, they are
scaled up or down until they do, a message is printed, and the
program continues.
67
-------
X Limitations: The many assumptions on which this model is based
are spelled out in the works by Turner and TRW cited above, and
these should be consulted before the model is used for an actual
problem.
As Turner points out (op. cit., pp. 37-38), the above
formulas correspond to concentrations over short averaging times,
and he includes an adjustment for longer periods which allows for
the increased 8 due to meander of wind direction. This adjust-
ment was deliberately not applied since it reduces the concentra-
tions from a given source everywhere and the concern here is to
allow for the total effect of a given source. The use of a 90
sector, as discussed above, is felt to go a long way towards
allowing for a meandering wind direction.
68
-------
Water Pollution Diffusion Model*
The model user must give a name to each river and
specify the points through which it flows in their natural
sequence as shown in Exhibit 4-2. The program then establishes
a correspondence ^l = AU , P2 = A21 » P3 = A32 ' '' * t0
obtain a sequential ordering of the points through which the river
flows. (Note that A could be P^ , but the user is encouraged
to take PO = A^ in order that actual stream miles be better
approximated. )
It is also necessary to keep track of the distance in
stream kilometers between successive points, P.. , P_ , P~ , ....,
from which a matrix (d .) of distances between any points P.
and P. can be obtained.
The basic equation to describe the effects of a BOD
load L. discharged at P. on stream conditions at a downstream
point P. , j > i , is*
(1)
'ij r - k
"ft
In the present model version lakes and estuaries are not
treated separately. Also, only (carbonaceous) BOD is considered.
Similar remarks apply to the stretch from A to A . .
ii /o oo
For a derivation of this formula, see Fair, G.M. Geyer, J.C.,
and Okun, D.A., Water and Wastewater Engineering, (New York: Wiley,
1968), Vol. 2, Ch. 33.
69
-------
Figure 8
Water Diffusion
8
2
3
43
-
64"-\
8
85
0.
86
87
9
\A98
10
08
Direction of flow
•
Actual river path
Simulated path
70
-------
Here t . . is the average (stream) travel time (in days) between
P. and P. , that is, t.. = - L where v is the average speed
of the stream (in kilometers per day). D. . is the contribution
of the load at i to the dissolved oxygen deficit at j .* L
is measured in mg/1 (milligrams per liter), and might be calculated
as X./F. , where X. is the discharge at P. of BOD (in mg per
day) and F. is the river flow at P. (in liters per day).
k and r are de- and re-oxygenation coefficients the
calculation of which is described later. For simplicity of exposi-
tion v , r , k are here assumed constant for the whole river in
question. The more general case is discussed below.
The total dissolved oxygen deficit at P. is
(2) D = S D +D ,e~rtli
J ±
-------
CS = ~ [14.652 - (4.1022 x 10~V + (7.9910 x 10"3)T2
- (7.774 x 10"5)T3]
where T = temperature of the water in degrees centigrade
P = pressure (barometric) in mm of mercury.
Calculation of k*
where, if kQ and T are not specified by the user, kQ = 0.39
and TQ = 20°C.
If 0°C < T < 7.5°C 9k = 1.15
if 7.5°C £ T < 15°C 6k = 1.11
if 15°C £ T £ 30C 6. = 1.05
k
if 30°C < T efc = 0.97
k is in units of days
T is the water temperature in degrees of centigrade.
Calculation of r
r = re°
If rQ and T are not specified by the user, TQ = 20°C , and
calculations of r_ is as follows:
The user will be asked to designate the class of the
receiving water as one of the following:
*c£. ibid., Ch. 33, Sec. 7.
+Based on Fair et al., op_. cit., Ch. 33, Sec. 13.
72
-------
Class Description
1 Sluggish streams and large lakes or
imp oundmen t s
2 Large streams of low velocity
3 Large streams of moderate velocity
4 Swift streams
The value of r_ is then taken from the following table:*
Class
rQ 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.6
r is also in units of days
General Case
Because of many factors, the basic user-supplier para-
meters such as water temperature, flow, etc., may well change
from stretch to stretch of the river. The user must specify these
new values at any change points.
/
The way the program actually operates is to take a given
initial load from a particular source and compute its contribution
to the dissolved oxygen deficit at each successive point downstream
in an iterative fashion allowing for the changes in conditions from
This table is based on Table 33-4 of Fair et al., op_. cit'.,
and the rQ values are obtained by multiplying by the default
value of kn (.39) the mid-points of the ranges of values given
for the r/R ratio of the corresponding classes in that table.
73
-------
stretch to stretch. The BOD load (from this particular source)
remaining at the beginning of each stretch is taken as the load
remaining at the beginning of the previous stretch multiplied by
-kt ,
e , where t is the time required to traverse the previous
stretch and k has the value appropriate for the previous stretch.*
Then Eq. (1) above is applied with this value of L. and the cur-
rent-stretch values for r and k .
The program goes through this computation for each load
source and then cumulates the contributions to obtain a total dis-
solved oxygen deficit at each point (including the effects of any
initial deficits in the system). Subtraction of the total deficit
from the DO saturation value at each point then yields the DO
concentration at each point.
Treatment of Tributaries
Since the model user gives each river a name, specifies
the sequence of points through which it flows, and can terminate
it by indicating that it flows into another river, the junction
of two rivers can be handled by making either river a tributary
of the other, or else forming a new river where they meet. In
For a justification of this procedure, see Fair et al.
op. cit., Ch. 33, Sec. 7. When the flow changes between Succes-
sive stretches, the load is also adjusted by multiplication by
F /F where F and FC are the flows in the previous and
cfirrent stretchis, respectively, and F < F . If F > F
the load is not adjusted. PC p c '
74
-------
AMI POLLUTANTS (G PER CUBIC Kb TEH) fiUd
PCLLUTANT J PARTICUL
RCK
rtUrt
R0i>
RCM
PCK
ROM
HOV4
CCLtJKN
1
2
3
5
6
7
T
10
1
7. 149/.MC-04
7IOUC77I-05 *
3.274A23H-OA
B.n77fcB8F-05
2.167S83E-03
1.266489E-04
S.9262A3E-05
9.5?C04«-03
2.743166E-02
4.9222451-03
2.753604F-04
7.593043E-04
1.4279B5E-04
5.S43887E-04
4.284980E-04
1.784514E-02
4.336C81F-02
1.51C472E-02
2.529638E-02
l.tC618BE-02
2.518520E-03
3.417C23F-01
1.5C5245F-C?
4.533S29H-07
1.78509flr-02
7.55CC01E-01
3.l9a787E-02
2.0C37B7E-02
1.79C713E-03
9.2B5223F-04
2.415232F-03
3.63C134E-C2
1.498276F-02
8.694477E-03
3.2S7J92E-02
2.716660F-02
1.571959F-C2
3.111662C-C2
1.3SC6C6E-02
7.423B24E-03
9.133972E-04
CCLUVN
O
vj
RCk
«(:v,
^Or.
ncx
HCA
ROW
7
o
9
1C
1.3IUC97F-02
1. 7H«S')I:-P2
3.6
(,. 0
PCLLUTANT : SCX
KHV.
ROk
110k
KCo
KCt.
BOW
1C
' IC-Ti
,'il -01
3.5* C"i77E-OS
6.621' I JK-04
2.C?947fr- 03
2.fc7f 7A1F-C3
1.377fj?E-0?
7.107<»19F-03
1.I14166KH-0!
S.r>?',02At--0't
2.AKI'1'3St— 03
l.S';<>7B3t-02
9.0273171-04
I.S445APF-04
1.231071F-04
1.3CIC61F-03
2.<<49633t-02
2.334177F-03
2.CB9231F-03
3.27477')F-04
1.C6979SE-03
2.3734C5E-OJ
2.266416F-03
1..352691E.-03
8.815563E-02
2.11938SE-02
?.6C723ftE-C3
7. 133740F-04
4.27942SF-04
1.030577F.-C3
2.430S51F-03
9.158'!64E-02
1.057606E-01
1.464972E-02
7.1003'.7F-04
l.?S76<>lF-C3
2.C51C42F-C3
7.979i<)9E-04
3.2H1S73P-C5
l.£07220F-C2
1.44BS56E-CI
1.3n2C79f-01
S.CCZ4C5E-03
2.3<.04C8f-C3
1.7H2130E-03
7.6S536St-C't
3.73S410E-02
2.U2C29E-02
1.6371C8E-02
3.574130E-C3
CCLUCN
1
2
3
ROW
5
RCIi 7
KHk S
ROW 0
RCK 10
3.H27C4E-03
S.A.Ti79')E-03
2.499C19F-02
1.-.4C496E-0?
4.771A9£F.-03
l.lS2b96E-02
4.139C62E-03
-------
Figure 12 (Cont)
Ambient Pollution Levels (Water)
Ron F
RIVER
ROW COLUMN
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
(MG/L)
SATURATION
(MG/L)
DEFICIT
(MG/L)
POTOMAC
PCTOMAC
POTOMAC
PCTOMAC
PCTOMAC
POTOMAC
POTOMAC
POTOMAC
PCTCMAC
POTOMAC
POTOMAC
PCTOMAC
PCTCMAC
ROCK CRK
ROCK CRK
ROCK CRK
ROCK CRK
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
7
8
9
9
10
3
3
4
A
6
6
6
6
5
4
5
6
7
7
7
6
6
1
2
3
4
6.94728E 00
6.90363E 00
6.86157E 00
6.46544E CC
6.25308E CO
5.77641E 00
5.31741E CC
4.87560E 00
4.45051E CO
A.15980E CO
3.87705E 00
3.60213E 00
3.33A87E CO
9.32192E 00
9.31149E CC
9.29727E CO
9.28758E 00
1.06A73E 01
1.06473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.C6473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.C6473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.C6473E 01
1.06A73E 01
1.06473E 01
1.06473E 01
1.03219E 01
1.03219E 01
1.03219E 01
1.03219E 01
3.70000E 00
3.74364E 00
3.78571E 00
A.18183E 00
4.39419E 00
A.87087E 00
5.32987E 00
5.77167E 00
6.19675E 00
6.48747E 00
6.77022E 00
7.04515E 00
7.31240E 00
l.CCCOOE 00
1.01043E 00
1.02465E 00
1.0343AE 00
108
-------
AM
cc ffn CUBIC
POLLUTANT s
RCW
HOW
KG*
ROVi
KCVi
KfiH
COLI>N
1
7
3
i
i
7
H
9
10
5.ft.l071Se-OS
3.927/SSC-05
2.0?l9h5C-03
1.707767^-0'.
3.567571F-05
5.22M62F-OS
1.051S02C-04
7.0S79fl979'>OF-02
1.4H9CC1E-02
5.330238E-0«
7.659990F-03
3.C20H67F-C2
2.U6C47»--C2
3.S56C60E-04
1.55178AE-03
1.5AC752t-02
3.0S8767F-C2
1.2578S8E-C3
1.5C7517fc-03
9.-VC2941E-03
8.718122F-04
COLUMN
o
VO
ROW
ROV,
PCM
Hll,.
kt.'i!
KPX
RCW 10
POLLUTANT : SOX
S.4U423F-03
l.ir,M86E-03
KCW
Ki.-W
«r,w
•
«cv.
RCr,
RCX
COLUMN
1
2
3
S
6
7
9
1C
1.1172'ilF
3.77(i'.21E
CT
0'.
5.«?HH2CF-0«
7.97060'«SE-0'>
l.H9'Vt".7c-Q'.
-;.67S63CC-0'i
I.063A19F-C3
1.59«672H-02
9.020190F-01
[ -OS
l.HGliah-04
6.nar.2BOH-0'i
2.9772SOH-01
2.6^27216-02
2.306415E-03
7.35377CE-0*
1.7357UE-0*
1.543374E-0'.
l.C5C39'5F-03
2.21*.216E-03
6.S96153E-0'i
8.796215E-02
2.1C8674E-02
2.2D7l91E-0-«
9.77U7AF-04
7.365036E-03
9.1A7297F-OA
2.779769E-CA
9.1C7763E-02
1.052H14E-01
H5834SE-02
1.091076F.-03
1.K9251AI--03
3.CHHB2«F-05
l.736S8'iE-02
1.299JAOF-01
U379716E-03
1.2637C3J-03
2.2SC612E-OA
8.8l9912t-03
3.668925E-02
2.1127S2E-C2
1.63A6751-C2
3.572138E-03
RCW
ROi.
ROW
ROM
COLUMN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
1.5U335C-03
1.7-J5367E-03
9. 3i,3H06r-0'.
7.
2.3S7737F-02
l.O'IO'jlfic-02
A.67621SK-03
1.1R12S5E-02
A. 136998E-03
-------
SECTION VI
INSTRUCTIONS FOR OPERATION OF IMMP
I Introduction
This program has been designed to make it as easy as
possible for the user to specify the required information.
In all cases items such as activities, rivers, pollutants,
etc. , are given names of up to 8 characters for ease in
identifying them elsewhere. The program recognizes the
end of groups of cards by the use of an END card. This
relieves the user from the task of identifying how many of
each type of card will be specified. Every card supplied
to the program by the user will be printed exactly as it
is read. This print will be proceeded and followed by
five asterisks (*****).
This manual will follow with an outline of the input
cards. This will be followed by a discussion of each type
of group of data required for a run of the program. Detailed
format of the 14 different types of cards will be found in
the format section of this manual. The last section will
contain some technical notes on,the computer program.
110
-------
II Outline
A. Header Card
B. Economic Input and Pollutant Names Card
C. Activity Technology Cards
End Card
D. On-Site Pollution Treatment Activity Technology Cards
End Card
E. General Parameter List Card
F. Background Air Pollutant Levels Card
G. Air Pollutant Half Life Card
H. Air Diffusion Characteristics with Probabilities Card
End Card
I. River Characteristic Probability Card
J. Ror Each River Position
a. River Position Identification Card
b. River .Point Characteristic Cards (optional except for
first river point in each river)
End Card
K. Endogenous Activity Descriptions
a. Endogenous Activity Specification Card
b. Stack Parameter Card
c. Move Pollutants to Endogenous Activities Card (optional)
End Card
111
-------
L. Exogenous Activity Descriptions
a. Exogenous Activity Specification Card
b. Stack Parameter Card (optional)
c. Move Pollutants to Endogenous Activity Card (optional)
End Card
112
-------
III. Detailed Description of Each Card or C.ard Group
A. Header Card
Format of Header Card will.be found in IV A. This card
requires the user to specify the number of various categories
which will be used subsequently in the program. On this
card is specified the number of each different type of
pollutant and the number of rows and columns on the grid
which will comprise the region under consideration. One
option which the user must specify on this card is the
number of hours in the analysis. This refers to the
number of hours per day that the activities are presumed to
run. This is important as the meteorological data is
presumed to be valid over the period of time that the
pollutants are being generated. This number affects the
air pollution diffusion model as the pollutants are presumed
to be emitted in the units of mg/sec. Thus the total
number of KG of pollutants generated per period must be
/
converted to mg/sec. In the case of water pollutants this
number adjusts the river flow (given in millions of gallons
per day) to the number of millions of gallons per period.
The print option refers to the print of the final
emitted and ambient levels of air and solid pollutants.
Option 1 gives for each air and solid pollutant a matrix
113
-------
location. The emitted levels on the grid are for each air
pollutant a matrix of the ambient levels at each point on
the grid. Option 2 gives these values by row/column
point on the grid.
By specifying a logical unit (other than 5) for reading
the Activity Descriptions, the program could read the
Activity Technology Cards and (if separated by an END card)
the On-Site Pollution Treatment Activity Technology Cards
from a tape or disk (any sequential file).
B. Economic Input and Pollutant Name Cards
Format of Economic Input and Pollutant Name Card will
be found in IV B. On this card the user will give names
of up to eight (8) characters to the economic inputs, the
actual pollutants, and to any dummy pollutants. If the
names are less than eight (8) characters they should be
punched left adjusted in the irield. These names will be
used in the print out to refer to the pollutants and will
be used in the card "Move Pollutants to Endogenous Variables"
to refer to the pollutants to be sent to the appropriate
Endogenous activity.
C. Activity Technology Cards
Format of Activity Technology Cards will be found in
IV C. These cards give the Economic input data values and
114
-------
the residual pollutants per unit of output for an activity.
All pollutants will be measured in kilograms (KG). What
is considered unit output for an activity is optional. It
is probably a good idea to keep the levels of the residual
pollutants in the same order of magnitude among the various
activities. The unit output levels can be adjusted to
achieve this, goal.
D. On-Site Pollution Treatment Activity Technology Cards
Format of Oh-Site Pollution Treatment Activity Cards will
be found in IV D. An on-site pollution treatment activity
is represented by a square matrix of order equal to the number of
actual pollutants in the model. The jth column represents
the per unit effect of reducing the jth pollutant (the
value of the jth row will be less than or equal to one).
The other rows will contain the resultant increases (if any)
in the other pollutants. As indicated in IV D the economic input
values are guhctyed first and then the matrix. The'matrix
is punched by column, i.e., all the elements of the first
column are punched before any elements of the second column
are punched and so on.
As a matrix does not have a unit level of operation,
the economic input variable values should reflect the fact
115
-------
that they will be multiplied by the level of operation
of the associated activity to reflect the total impact of
this on-site treatment activity.
•
E. General Parameter. List
Format of General Parameter List Card will be found in
IV E, This card is designed to supply those values which
will( be used in various subroutines, particularly those
involved with diffusion processes. Currently two 'numbers
must be supplied in this card: the length of the side of
a grid square and the mean afternoon mixing layer depth.
F. Background Air Pollution Levels Card
Format of Background Air Pollution Levels Card will be
found in IV F. This card provides the assumed ambient levels
of air pollutants coming from outside of the region measured
in grams per cubic meter. The level punched on this card
for each air pollutant is added to the final ambient levels
determined from the activities in the region (hence the final
print of ambient levels includes these values}.
G. Air Pollutant Half Life Card
Format of Air Pollutant Half Life Card will be found in
IV G. This card contains the half life of each air pollutant
116
-------
which is used in the air diffusion model. These half lives
are measured in hours.
t
H. Air Diffusion Characteristics with Probabilities Card
Format of an Air Diffusion Characteristic with
Probabilities Card will be found in IV H. These cards
describe the atmospheric conditions which will be used in
the air diffusion model. On each card with the atmospheric
conditions is a probability. This number is used to weight
the ambient levels generated by the corresponding atmospheric
conditions. The probabilities on these cards must sum up to
one. One or more of these cards may be submitted. There
is no limit to the number of cards of this type which may be
used. If only one card is submitted, then the analysis
would study a region under a single atmospheric situation.
The set of these.cards must be followed by an END card, i.e.,
a card with END punched in Columns 1-3 and the rest of the
card blank.
I. River Characteristic Probability Card
Format of a River Characteristic Probability Card will
i
be found in IV I. This card describes the number of River
Point Characteristic Cards which may follow each River
Position Identification Card. Each River Point Characteristic
117
-------
Card will describe a set of river characteristics which
will determine the diffusion of the water pollutants. The
probabilities specified on this card are used to weight the
resultant ambient levels of the water pollutants generated
by the corresponding River Point Characteristic Card. The
number of probabilities on this card must be the number
as specified in Columns 8-10.
J. For Each River Position
Each river position is specified by a River Position
Identification Card. The format of a River Position
Identification Card will be found in IV J. This card gives
a name to the river, the sequence this river point appears
in the river, and the row, column position on the grid
which the river is passing through.
The first position of each river must have a set of
River Point Characteristic Cards, i.e., a set of cards must
immediately follow the first River Position Identification
Card for each river. The format of a River Point Characteristic
Card will be found in IV K. The river characteristics (such
:> ; i
as flow, temperature, etc.) defined for a river point are
assumed to continue to subsequent river points on the same
river unless a new set of River Point Characteristic Cards
follow a River Position Identification Card for a down river
point. This subsequent specification will assume to hold
118
-------
for further down river points until superseded by another
set of River Point Characteristic Cards for some subsequent
river point. It should be noted that the order of the River
Point Characteristic Cards is very important as they must
be associated with the probabilities specified on the
River Characteristic Probability Card.
The exogenous load and exogenous deficit will be
diffused through the remaining points in the river system.
They need not only be specified for the first river point
(i.e., coming from outside the region). If a small stream
or sewer outlet appear at some point on the river and an
activity does not seem appropriate (because say, the water
already has an oxygen deficit) then an exogenous load and/or
an exogenous deficit can be specified.
If more than one river flows through the region, the
program can have one river flow into another. This is
accomplished by following the last River Position Identification
\
Card (or the associated set of River Point Characteristic
Cards if it has one) with a card with a -1 (minus one) in
the field called "Position Sequence for this Point". The
name of the river into which the river is to flow should be
punched in the "River Name" field of this card. The row/column
-- i
of this river into which it will flow should be punched
appropriately in the fields marked "River Point Location".
In this way pollutants flowing down one river may flow into
119
-------
another river. One should note that the order that the
rivers are specified does not make any difference to the
program. However the print out of the pollutants at the
river points will be in the order that the rivers are
specified and consequently it is a good idea to put the
rivers in a logical flow sequence when arranging the deck.
After the last river point has been described, the
next card should be an END card (i.e., END punched in
Columns 1-3 and blank for the rest of the card).
K. Endogenous Activity Descriptions
Endogenous Activities are those whose levels of
operation are determined by the level of the pollutants
"sent to" them. Each Endogenous activity is assigned a
name on the Activity Specification Card. The format of
this card will be found in IV L. This name will be used
on the Move Pollutants to Endogenous Activities Card
(the format of this card will be found in IV N) .
When the Endogenous Activity Cards are read, the level
of operation has not yet been determined. The level of
operation is not determined until all the exogenous
activities have been processed. What is generated is a
"per unit" output ,of pollutants and this information is
stored. The actual processing of Endogenous Activities follows
120
-------
the processing of the exogenous activities. Except that
their level of operation is not specified, all the other
information that must be supplied about exogenous activities
must be specified also for endogenous activities. KR this
is so, the detailed description of this information will
be provided in the next subsection on Exogenous Activities.
After the last Endogenous activity has been specified,
the next card must be an END card (END in Columns 1-3,
blank elsewhere). This END card indicates the division
between the Endogenous and Exogenous activities.
L. Exogenous Activity Description
Exogenous Activities are those whose levels of operation
are specified by the user. The format of the Activity
Specification Card will be found in IV L. The activity
called will be referred to by the name given it in Activity
Technology Cards. The actual pre on-site treatment pollution
residuals are determined by multiplying the vector of
pre-unit residuals given in the Activity Technology Card by
the specified level of operation. This vector is then
multiplied by the on-site treatment technology matrix (if any)
to obtain the effective residual pollutants which is printed
out. Some or all of these pollutants may be "moved" to an
Endogenous activity by the use of the no've Pollutants to
Endogenous Activities Card. This card associates the name of
121
-------
a pollutant with the name of the Endogenous activity. If
any water pollutants remain they will be dumped into the
river specified at the location specified. The diffusion
process is seen immediately and if a P is punched in
column 69 of the Activity Specification Card, the user will
see a print out of the diffused water pollutants. If any
air pollutants remain, these will be diffused. The Activity
Specification Card contains a field to specify the stack
height for the air diffusion model. The user has the option
of specifying the effective stack height or by punching an *
in column 56, the actual stack height. If an * is punched
in column 56 then the Stack Parameters Card (format will be
found in IV M) must immediately follow the Activity
Specification Card. The parameters specified here are used
to calculate the effective stack height for the diffusion
model. Again, if a P is punched in column 69 of the Activity
Specification Card, the user will see a print out of the
ambient levels of the pollutants determined by this activity
alone.
122
-------
HEADER CARD
Note: No decimal points should be punched in this card.
Each number should be right adjusted in its field
H
1. | [ Number of Economic Input Variables (>0)
O
2. I I Number of Water Pollutants
10
3. | [ Number of Air Pollutants
15
4. | | Number of Solid Pollutants
20
i
5. | I Number of Dummy Pollutants
25
6. I I Number of Rows in Grid
30
7. | | Number of Columns in Grid
35
8. | | Number of Hours in the Analysis C24 assumed
3T) if left blank)
9. | | Number of General Parameters
, 45
10. | I Logical Unit Containing Activity Descriptions
50 (card reader assumed if this is left blank)
11. | | Print Option - Leave blank for both types of
55 final print. Punch 1 for matrix print.
Punch 2 for print by position.
Maximums built into program (can be easily changed)
1. Maximum number of activities 100
2. Maximum number of On-site
transformation activities 50
3. Maximum number of rivers
parameters -' 20
4. Maximum number of river points 200
5. Maximum number of endogenous
activities 20
123
-------
B
ECONOMIC INPUT AND POLLUTANT NAMES
List Economic Input and Pollutant Names in the same order
as data appears on Activity Technology cards. All names
should begin at left most position of field.
8
18
28
38
48
58
68
7T~ 78
Use subsequent cards in the same format as required,
124
-------
c
ACTIVITY TECHNOLOGY
A
1
Activity Technology Name
List for unit output Economic Inputs and Pollutant Residuals
in the following order
1. Economic Inputs
2. Water Pollutants
3. Air Pollutants
4. Solid Pollutants
Each number should be punched either
a. with a decimal point
b. right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
ii
k
AT
lr
4r
Continue with Column 11 for subsequent cards as needed,
125
-------
D
ON-SITE POLLUTION TREATMENT ACTIVITY TECHNOLOGY
T
I || II II On-site Pollution Treatment
29 Technology Name
List 1)Economic Input Variables
2)Pollution Treatment Matrix by Column
Each number should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
II
L
21
25
31
Jr
36
L 1
41
L I
45
L I
51
I I
55
66
I I
71
J. '
126
-------
GENERAL PARAMETER LIST
Note: Each number should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
j
Grid Size'- Distance between rows and columns, in meters
Depth of the monthly mean afternoon mixing layer
I Parameter 1
II
I I Parameter 2
21
| Parameter 3
Parameter 4
71
41
Parameter 5
51
I Parameter 6
61
I Parameter 7
127
-------
F
BACKGROUND AIR POLLUTANT LEVELS
List background air pollution levels in G per cubic meter
in the order that the air pollutants, appear in the Activity
Description Cards. , ,
Each number should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
TO
11 20
21 30
31
41 50
si—: BO
61 TO
Use subsequent cards in the same format as required,
128
-------
G
AIR POLLUTANT HALF LIFE
I HALF LIFE
1
Each number should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
Half life "of* 1st air pollutant
31
II 20
2nd
21 30
3rd
71 80
4th
41 50
5th
51 60
6th
61 70
7th
129
-------
H
AIR DIFFUSION CHARACTERISTICS WITH PROBABILITIES
1-L.I
1
Each number in a field of length ten shoyld bs punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field qnly if it is a whole number
I | Probability
11 20
| I Stability Class - 1 to 6
2~5 (l=unstable, |3=verystable)
(N,S,E,W in column 30 or NE,NW,SE,SW in
31 40
TO column 29-30)
| Mean Wind Speed (meters per second)
| Atmospheric Pressure (mm of mercury)
41 50
| | Air Temperature (C° or K0: consistent
51 60 withidegree usfed with Stark Parameter Card)
*Usfed to calculate effective stack height. If effective
stadjjk heights are given in all activity specifications, then
this parameter may be left blank. >
130
-------
I
RIVER CHARACTERISTIC PROBABILITY CARD
Each number in a field of length ten should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
I PROB |
I Number of River Point Characteristic Cards which
10
1
11
21
1
31
41
51
1
61
1
71
may
This
will
in f
,J
20
30
40
50
60
70
80.
follow a River Point Identification Card.
will be the number of probabilities which
follow. Punch this number right adjusted
ield.
Probability associated with 1st River Point
Characteristic Card
. . . 2nd
. . .3rd
. . . 4th
. ..5th
. . . 6th
. . . 7th
If needed probabilities may be continued starting in column 11
of subsequent cards.
131
-------
J
1
RIVER POSITION IDENTIFICATION CARD
:!_RJ
Punch fields in length three right adjusted with no decimal.
I | II I II 'Rivet Name '(punch left adjusted)
Position Sequence for tliis point
H
| | | | | III River Point Location
H)
Row Column
132
-------
K
RIVER POINT CHARACTERISTIC CARD
Punch all fields (except River Class) either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
71
# I Identifies card as River Characteristic Card
Any information, such as season
10
I Flow (millions of liters per day)
IT
| | Average speed (kilometers per day)
2T 377 (1 m/sec=86.4 km per day=2.24 miles/hr)
| I Water temperature (C°)
31 3TF
| | Barometric Pressure (jaaa. of mercury)
41 577
Kn (calculated if blank)
55
| T0 (calculated if blank)
| | River class (1 to 4)- l=sluggish stream
61 4=swift stream
Exogenous Load (mg/1)
62 70
-*-
I Exogenous Deficit (mg/1)
133
-------
ACTIVITY SPECIFICATION
Punch all names left adjusted.
Punch all three position fields with a number right adjusted
without a decimal point.
On other fields follow specific instructions.
ENDOGENOUS | EXOGENOUS
IJLl | I X I
I
.1
2 9
Specify the name which will
be used to refer to this
endogenous activity.
I.
.1
11 T8
Activity Technology Name
I
2 9
Activity Technology Name
II T8
Level of operation of this
activity Cpunch with a decimal).
I I I
Row
L I L
Row
I I || Activity Location
24
5TJ
J
"63
Column
I On-site Pollution Treatment Technology Name
55
I If the water pollutants are to be moved
"T4 directly into a river, specify to the left
the river name and the location to which
the pollutants will be moved.
U-l—I—I
Column
For dispersion of air pollutants is this to
be considered a point or area source. Leave
blank or punch zero for point source. Punch
a one for area source.
1
Specify to the left the effective stack height
for the dispersion of air pollutants (punch
with a decimal point). If the effective stark
height is to be calculated, punch an asterisk
in column 56 and follow with the actual stack
height. The card following this must contain
the relevant parameter values.
[continued]
134
-------
ACTIVITY SPECIFICATION [continued]
[ | Specify the number of endogenous
6T"activities which will be specified on
subsequent cards.
I | Punch a P to print the effects of this
69 activity in all points.
135
-------
M
STACK PARAMETERS
| STACK FARM
TO
This card will immediately follow an Activity Specification
Card if an X is punched in column 56 of the Activity
Specification Card.
Each number should be punched either
a)with a decimal point
b)right adjusted in field only if it is a whole number
1. | I Escape velocity of the gas (m/sec)
TT 2~0
| Diameter of Stack (meters)
30
3. | | Temperature of particles emmitted from
31 40 stack (degree used must be consistent
with temperature specified on Air
Diffusion Characteristics Card)
136
-------
N
MOVE POLLUTANTS TO ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES
Name of Pollutant to be Moved
Name of Endogenous Activity
to which it will be moved
"8
T8
21
T8
3- I.
41
51
58
4- I.
61
68
71
78
Note: If an asterisk is placed in the first column of the
Name of the Pollutant to be moved, then the associated
Endogenous Activity will be run based on the level
of operation of the activity itself (rather than on
the basis of the level of some pollutant output).
137
-------
Technical Notes on the Computer Program IMMP
1. Maximums built into the program
All maximums built into the program can be easily changed.
Their specifications will all be found in the main routine.
a. Maximum number of Activity Technology
Descriptives 100
b. Maximum number of On-Site Pollution
Treatment Activity Matrices 50
c. Maximum number of River Point
Characteristic Cards in a set 20
d. Maximum number of river points 200
e. Maximum number of endogenous activities 20
2. Matrix Storage
All matrices are stored as required for the IBM Scientific
Subroutine Package for use as general matrices. This program
utilizes many o£ the matrix subroutines of the IBM Scientific
Subroutine Package. Space for these matrices is dynamically
allocated using the technique of defining a single large
vector. This vector is then partitioned into the required
matrices based on the length of card one. In this way only
one number on a dimension card need be changed to increase
the size of the problem that this program can handle (also
change the specification on NMAX in the main routine).
The program prints out how much of this large vector is'
being used up in any run of this program.
•: —i
3. Overlay Structure
As the program is large, an overlay structure is used to cut
down the memory requirements for the program. This is clearly
optional if the computer being used has a memory large
enough to handle the program. Listed below are all the
routines used in the program IMtfP with the overlay structure
specified:
MAIN
I TEST
ZERORY
SMPY
LOG
FREAD
FNUMBR
ERROR
ADD
138
-------
SEQ
ZEROI2
MADD
MXOUT
GMPRD
MOVE
KOMP
NUMBER
OVERLAY ALPHA
SIMPOL
OVERLAY BETA
NAMEP
OVERLAY BETA
AIRCHR
OVERLAY BETA
WRCH
OVERLAY BETA
EFAC
OVERLAY BETA
MINV
OVERLAY BETA
ASREAD
OVERLAY BETA
PMOVE
OVERLAY GAMMA
WATER1
LOADP
FLOW
DEOXK
REOXR
STPH
WPADD
OVERLAY GAMMA
ESH
AIRPRB
AIRDIF
SIG
Cflll
CHI 2
DML
CALT
AVG
OVERLAY BETA
DGMPRD
OVERLAY ALPHA
PRINTP
CS
139
-------
SECTION VII
IVMP MODEL PROGRAM
C
c
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
ARRAYS
P STORES -FDR EACH PO[NT THE LEVEL OF AIR AND SOLID POLLUTANTS
CCL I - INITIAL LEVEL OUTPUTTEC BY ACTIVITIES
COL 2 - MODIFIED AND SUMMED KY DISPERSION PROCESS
W STORES FOR EACH WATER POINT THE LEVEL CF WATER POLLUTION
COL 1 - INITIAL LEVEL Ot'TPUTTED BY ACTIVITEES
CCL 2 - MODIFIED AND SUMMED EY CISPERSICN PROCESS
RP C-ACH CCL REPRESENTS A RIVER POINT AND THE COL
BE THE RANDOM ACCESS SEQUENCE NUMBER
ROW 1 - RIVER I.C. NUMBER
ROW 2 - ROW
ROW 3 - COLUMN
ROW 4 - SEQUENCE NUMBER INDICATING RIVER PARAMETER GROUP
E EACH COLUMN REPRESENTS
DIRECT EFFECT OF THAT
AN ENDCGINCLS ACTIVITY. EACH ROW
SIMPCC05
SIMPCC06
SIMPCCC7
SIMP0008
SIMPCC09
SIMP0010
SIHPCC11
SIMP0012
SEQUENCE NUMBER WSIMPCC13
SIMPOCH
SIMPOC15
SIMPCC16
SIMPOC17
SIKPOC18
SIMPCC19
REPRESTSIM.P0020
EL ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES LEVEL DUE TC EXOGINOUTS ACTIVITESS
A STORES THE POLLUTANT LEVELS FOR UNIT OUTPUT FOR ANY ACTIVITY
T STORES POLLUTION TRANSFORMATION MATRICEES BY COLUMN
MTOT - STORES ECONOMIC INPUT VARIABLE LEVELS
COL 1 - DUE TO ACTIVITY TECHNOLOGY
COL 2 - OLE TO CN SITE TREATMENT
COL 3 - TOTAL
ACTIVITY CN THE ASSOCIATED ENDOGINOUS ACTSIKPOC21
SIMP0022
SIMPOC23
SIMPOC24
FL ENDOGINCUS ACTIVITEES LEVEL DUE TC EXOGINOUS AND ENDOGINOUS ACTSIMPCC25
SIMP0026
SIMPCC27
SIMP0028
SIMPOC29
SIMP0030
SIMPOC31
SIMP0032
SIMPCC33
SIHPOC34
SIMP0035
IF.ND STORES THE ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES AND THE ASSOCIATED POLLUTANTSIM.P0036
NUKBER GENERATED BY EACH ACTIVITY. EACH CO.LUMN IS EACH ENDOGENCUSSIMPOC37
ROW I - ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER SIMPOC38
ROW 2 - POLLUTANT SEQUENCE NIMBER DETERMENING LEVEL OF ACTSIMPOC39
SIMPCC40
kPRB - ONE ENTRY, A PROBABILITY, FOR EACH RIVEER CONDITION ENCOUNTS IM.POC41
SIMPGC42
STORES THSIMPCC43
SIMPCC44
SIKP0045
SIMPCC46
SIM.P0047
SIMPCC48
SIMP0049
SIMPCC50
SIMPOC51
SIMPOC52
SIMPOC53
SIMPCC54
SIMP0055
SIMPOC56
SIMPOC57
LCG1CAL UMI1S USr-S IN THIS PROGRAM
K5 - CARD MLAUEH
DAV - MAXI^U* LENGTH IS MAXIMUM NUMBER CF
AVERAGE DEFICIT FOR EACH LOAD L
RIVER POINTS.
DPP _ SAME AS DAV EXCEPT FOR A PARTICULAR PROBABILITY
TBLl STORES ACTIVITY NAMES
TBL2 STORES TRANSFORMATION ACTIVITY NAMES
TP.L3 STCRtS RIVtR NAMES
— Tf*L/f STC;RES ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITY NAMES
TRL«i STORES tCONfJVIC INPUT NAMES FOLLOWED BY POLLUTANT NAMES
Y 10
?0
21
?2
23
PRINTS
SfCtfilTIAL FILE WHICH
RANDOM ACCESS TILE TO
sANnrv ACT>SS
ACCt'SS
HLf
» ILE
fltt
- KA'.fH.r
flN ^Hl '
X{
ACCFSS
TC
TO
1C
TO
CONTAINS ACTIVITEES
STCREE ACTIVITIES
STCRE TRANSFORMATION MATRICIES
STORE ENCCGINOUS ACTIVITIES
STC«E WATER POLLUTANTS AT EACH
AIR AM) SLLID FOLLUIANTS
SIMPC058
SIMPOC59
SIMPCC60
SIMPCC61
SIMPOC62
SIMPOC63
SIMPOC6<«
RIVERSIMPOC65
AT EASIMPOC66
SIMP0067
Cl
i /.i *A xt »crr)
I MM:\ «;;:,'JA,'.'. f-.(>,NT,NlA,'JIAl,NTRf
140
SIMPOC6')
:,NPR,NG,NWl,N'W?,NAS2, SIMPCC70
-------
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
* NM,NTMfNIRM,NMl,N»A,NCA,NARP,NH,NOP SIPPOC71
COMMON /MAX/ MAXA, M/\XT , NR IV ,NRP TS , NNV ,MXA ,MXT ,MXR. MX£ ,MXN SIMPOO/2
CCMPON /UNIT/ K5,K6,KIC,K10 ' SIMPCfM
COMMON /SPACF/ X SIMPOC74
- THIS KAND(iM ACCESS FILt DEFINES A MAXIMUM OF 100 POSSIBLE ACT IVI T S I fPOC. 75
A MAXIMUM (JF 10 ACTUAL PCLLUTANT CUTPUTS, 2 DUMMY PCLLUTANT CSI^PCC/6
- AND 4 MACRO VARIABLES 1 OR A TOTAL NCT TO EXCEED 16) SIMPOC77
C
11
12
C
c
A MAXIMUM OF
10 PCLLUTANT
MAXIMUM
2 CUMMY
OF
50 PCSSIHLE
OUTPUTS ANC
?0
110)14)+! 2)(4)+( 4)14)=64
DEFINE FILt 201 100,64,L,10)
THIS RANOCM ACCESS flit- DEFINES
MATKICIES hITH A MAXIMUM CF
1 10)1 10)14)+! 4H4)=416
DEFINE ULE 211 50,416,L,IIJ
THIS RANDOM ACCESS FILF DEFINES
AND 10 ACTUAL POLLUTANT OUTPUTS
VARIABLES (12)(4 1 + 1 1CM4I + ( 2)(4)+< 4)(4)+( 4)(4)=128
DEFINE FILE 221 20,128,L,12)
THIS RANDOM ACCESS FILF DEFINES A MAXIMUM OF 200 RIVER
POLLUTANTS 1 5)(2M4) = 40
231 2CO, < 800,36,L,15)
INITIALIZE LOGICAL UNIT FOR CARD REACER AND PRINTER
K5=5
K30=30
MAXA - MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ACTIVITEES. SEE R.A. FILE #20
MAXA=100
HAXT - MAXIMUM NUMBER CF TRANSFORMATION ACTIVITIES. SEE R.A.
MAXT=SO
NRIV - MAXIMIM NUMBER CF RIVERS
NRIV=10
NRPTS - MAXIMUM NUMBER CF RIVER POINTS. SEE R.A. FILE #23
NRPfS=2CO
NNV - MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES. SEE R.A. FILE #22
NNV=20
HXPR - MAXIMUM NUMBER
M,XPR=20
INITIALIZE COUNTERS FOR TABLE NAMES TO ZERO.
MXA=0
HXT=0
MXR=0
KX€=0
MXN=0
READ ACTIVITY HEADER
RfcAC(K5,ll) HU,NM,NW,NA,NS,ND,NR,NC,
FORMAT(Al,I4,12I5)
WRITECK6,12) HD,NM,NW,NA,NS,NO,NR,NC,NH,NG,K10,NCP
FOfKATl•I*****',A 1,14,1215,'*****')
IF1KH. F.0.0) Nh=24
IF(KlO.tC.O) K10=K5
CF RIVER PARAMETER SETS AT EACH RIVER POINT
NH,NGfK10.NOP
NTA-=NT-ND
NTAl=NTA+l
NTM=N1 +NM
NMI=NM+1
NTR=NTA*NTA
NAS=NA+NS
NAS?*NAS*2
NRA=MR*2*1
NCA=NC*2*l
NMAX= BCOO
11 = 1
L
- A
n=I2*NTM
4SIMPOC85
SIMPOC86
SIMPOC87
SIMPCC«8
SIMP0089
SIMPOC90
SIMPOC91
SIMPOC92
SIMPOC93
SITUATISIMPOC94
SIMP0095
SIMPOC96
SIMPOC97
SIMPOC98
SIMPOC99
SIMPOIOO
SIMP0101
SIMP0102
FILESIMP0103
SIMP0104
SIMP0105
SIMP0106
SIMP0107
SIMPC108
SIMP0109
SIMP0110
SIMPOlll
SIMP0112
SIMP0113
SIMP0114
SIMP0115
SIM.P0116
SIMP0117
SIMPOH8
SIMP0119
SIMP0120
SIMP0121
SIMP0122
SIMP0123
SIMP0124
SIMP0125
SIMP0126
SIKP0127
SIMP0128
SIMP0129
SIMP0130
SIMP0131
SIMP0132
SIMP0133
SIMP0134
SIMPOI35
SIMP0136
SIMP0137
SIKP0138
SIMP0139
SIMP0140
SIMP0141
SIMPC142
SIMP0143
SIMPC144
SIMP0145
-------
C --- T
C --- G
C --- W
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C --
C ---
C --
C ---
C ---
C ---
C ---
C ---
C --
C ---
C ---
C --- :
C ---
I6=I5*2*NH
P
I7M6*2*NAS
L:A
I8=I7*NT
I8=U8/2)*2+l
fcL
I9=ia+NNV
I9=(l9/2)*2+l
FL
IIO-19+NNV
I10=( I10/2)*2+l
KPRH
Ill=I10+MXPR
lll = (IU/2)*2+l
Wl
Il2=Ill*NNV
Il2=CI12/2)*2+l
H2
I13=I12+NNV
I13=(Il3/2)*2-U
RP
I14=I13+{NRPTS*4}/2+l
DAV
115=1 14+NRPTS
ItND
I16-I15+2*NNV
MA
I17=I16*NM
HT
118=1 17+NM
118=1116/21*2+1
MTOT
Iig=I18*NM*3
I19=(I19/2)*2+l
TEL I
120=1 19+2*MAXA
TfL2
121 = 1 2 o.rru*,.
CALL SlfJ*' LCxm )tX(I2)tXfI3)*X(U)tX(I5)fX(I6),X(I7)(X(IH),X(I9)tSIIMPC220
-------
X(I10).X(I11),X(I12),X(I13),X(I1A),X(I15).X(L16)..X(I17),X(I18),
xm,X(I24).X(I25>,X(I26),X(I27),
X(I2H) I
CALL fRIMP(X(Il),X(I2),X(13),X(K),X(l),Pm,EA(l),ELIl),FL( ll.WPRBI 1) ,CAV(1I,
* U1(1),W?(1)*MA(1),FTI 1).MTUT(1!,A1( 1 1 ,A2 ( 1 1 tB( 1 ) ,HL( I ) tOPP ( 1 1
INTFGeR*2 RP.(l) tIENCt 11
CdfNON NH,N4tNS«NOtNT,NTA,NrAl,NTR,NAS,NR,NCtNPR,NG,NHl«NW2tNAS2t
* NK.NTf'.NTIH.NHltNRA.NCA.NAKP.NH.NCP
COMMON /MAX/ H.AXA,HAXT,NRIV,NRPTSfNN\(,^XA,MXT,fXR,PXE,HXN
CCMKON /UNIT/ K5t K6.K1C tK30
DATA tNO, STAR, eXC/'ENO1.'*1 .'!»•/
DATA PLANK/1 •/
t --- RFAC AND PRINT ECQNCNIC INPUT AND POLLUTANT NAMES
5 IC=0
6 IC=IC+l
REAn(K5,l,ENO=lAO)(S( I ),I=1,LO)
WRITF(K6,2) (S( I ),I=1,10)
L=NTP-( IC-l)*B
ISET=0
IFCL.LE.3) GO TO 7
ISET=1
L=8
7 IPOS=-9
DC 8 1=1, L
IPOS=IPOS+10
CALL ADO(TBL5,S,IPOS,8,NTH,MXN)
8 CONTINUE
IFIIStT.EC.l) GO TO 6
K=0
*RITF(K6,ll)
FCRfATCOFCONfMIC INPUT VARIABLES'/)
CALL NAHKP(TPL5,K,NP)
WKITF.(KA,12)
FCRMATC 'CWATER POLLUTANTS'/)
CALL NAMEP(TPL5,K,Nh)
hKITE(K6«13)
FCRKATCOAIR POLLUTANTS'/)
CALL NAMFP(TPL5,K,NA)
11
12
13
14 FCR^ATCOSOLID POLLtTANTS'/)
CALL NAfEPC TP.L5,K,NS)
15 FCRfATf •CDIJI'^Y POLLUTANTS'/)'
CALL NA^EP( TRL5,K,NC)
17
18
19
FCRI'ATt 'CAVAILAHLF ACTIVITY TECHNCLCGIES ' /)
W:IITF(K6,1')1 (TPLSd ),I =
l«X,7<2X,M) )
C ---
?0
?\
1
ACTIVITY PhSC9IPT|CN
r.i ,f%o=4cusii) ,1 = 1,10)
FUKPATUOAH)
hKlTE(K6,2MS( I),I-1,1C)
T-mfAT(» *«*«*• ,ICAP, '*****')
!MKOPPtS.l,3.ENC,l l.EC.O) GC TC 28
If < IC.f-r.C) C«LL Ai:riTf'l.l,S,2,P»"AXA,fXA)
IHKA.LT.C) CALL tR«C!* « 1 , 1 ,M AX ft. S, 2 ,8 »
SIKP0221
SIHPOP22
SIHP0223
SIKP0225
SIMP0226
SIMP0227
SIPP0228
SIKP0229
SIPP0210
SIPP0231
SI»'P0232
SIHP0233
SIKP023*
SIHP0235
SICP0236
SIPPC237
SIFP0238
SIPPC239
SIfPC2«0
SIMP02AI
SIMPC2A3
SIMP0244
SIPP0245
SINP0246
SIWPC247
SIMP0248
SIMPQ249
SIfP0250
SIHPQ251
SIFP0252
SIVP0253
SIFP0254
SIfP0255
SIKP0256
SIMP0257
SIHP0258
SIMP0259
SIPP0260
SIKP0261
SIHP0262
SIHP0263
SIPP0264
SIHP0265
SIPP0266
SIKP0267
Sir«P0268
SIPP0269
SIWP0270
SIMP0271
SIKP0272
SIHP0273
SIPP0274
SIKP0275
SIMPC276
SIMP0277
SIfP0278
SIMPO279
SIfP0281
SIHPC2R2
SIMP0283
SIHPC2fi
-------
25
28
29
C
30
31
CALL FREAO(S,A,ll,10f7,NTM,IC)
IFUC) 25,21,21
GO TO 20
WRITEtK6,29)
FORMAT! 'OAVAILARLE
*S«/»
CN-SITE POLLUTION ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY
READ POLLUTION TREATMENT MATRICIES - BY COLUMNS
IC=0
REAORES.TA,IER)
IMIFR.EC.I) GO TC' 70 i
KRITFCK30) PROB, I ST,AB,V»INO,U*PRES,TA
SUM TO *,F10.3/)
-------
C --- FIRST INIIIALIZE WATER ARRAYS TC ZERC SIPP0371
; 100 CALL ZEROK4( W,NVi,2 ) SIMP0372
CALL 76ROI?(RP,4,NRPTS) SIWP0373
DO 105 I = l,NRPTS SINP0374
WHITE (23* I) (MJ)*J=l*Nh2) SIMP0375
105 CONTINUE SIHP0376
IN=0 SIHP0377
JP=0 SIKP0378
IPR=0 SIfP0379
NPR=0 SIPP0380
L0=l SIMP0381
IRP=0 SIKP0382
WRITE(K6,119) SLKP0383
119 FURPATCORIVER SPECIFICATIONS'/) SIHP0384
120 IC=0 SIMP0385
121 REAO(K5, I, ENO=140HSU ), 1 = 1,10) SIPP0386
WRITE(K6,2) (S(l), 1=1.10) SIMP0387
IF(IC.HO.O) NPR=NUMBER(S,8,3) SIKP03B8
CALL FREAD(S,V.PRP,ll,10*7,NPR,lC) SIKP0389
IF(IC) 123*121*121 SIMP0390
123 ASUK=0 SIMP0391
00 124 1=1, NPR SIHP0392
ASU^=ASUM-»WPREH) SIKP0293
124 CONTINUE SINP0394
ViRirE(K6*76) ASLf SIHP0395
125 R£AO(K5,l,ENn=140)(S( I), 1=1, 10) SIFP0396
rMITC(K6,2) (S(I)tl-ltlO) SIHP0397
IF(KnMP(S,l,3,END,l).EC.O) GO TO 15C SIMP0398
IF(KOKP(S,1,1,EXC,1).EC.O) GO TC 142 SII*P0399
IF((IPR.NE.O).AND.(IPR.NE.NPR)) GO TC 144 SIfP04CO
126 IPR=0 SIMP0401
IN=IN+1 SIHP0402
CALL LOC(l,INtL*4,NRPTS,0) SIMP0403
CALL SCQ(TBL3,S,2,8,MXR, ID) SIMP0404
IKID.GT.O) GO TG 127 S;IHP0405
CALL ADD(TBL3,S,2,8,NRIV,MXR) SIFP0406
IF(rXR.LT.O) CALL ERROR ( 1, 3,NR IV, S, 2,8 ) SIMP0407
ID=MXR SIPP0408
127 IPS=NUMBER(S,11,3) SIMP0409
IF(IPS.LT.O) GO TO 130 SIKP0410
IF(ID.EQ.LO) GO TC 128 SIMP0411
IRP=0 SINP0412
IN=IN+1 SIHP0413
CALL LOC(i,IN,L,4,NRPTS,0) SIMP0414
128 IRP=IRP+1 SIKP0415
C --- CHECK FOR CORRECT RIVER SEQUENCE SIPP0416
IF(IPS.EO.IRP) GO TC 132 SIKPC417
*WRITE(K6,129) SIMP0418
129 FORPAM «OKASNING, LAST CARD PRINTED HAS AN INVALID SEQUENCE NUMBERS!* P0419
* OR IS OUT OF SEQUENCE. IT WILL BE PROCESSED IN THE SEQUENCE READS IKP0420
*„•/)
GO TO 132
130 IC=-IO
132 RP(L)=ID
IRC^=NUMPER(S,15,3)
GO TC 134
IFIITtSH I'
-------
140 WRIT6fK6,l41> SIMP0446
141 FORMAT!«ONO MORE CARDS HERE FCUND AFTER LAST CARD PRINTED. MORE HSIVP0447
*ERE EXPECTED.*/) SIMP0448
STOP S1MP0449
142 IFIIPR.NE.O) GO TO 143 SIMP045Q
JP=JP*l SIMP0451
CALL LQCIl,lN,L,4fNRPTS,0) SIMP0452
RPIL+34=JP SIMP0453
143 IPR=IPR+1 SIMP0454
IF!IPR.GT.NPR) GO TC 148 SIMP0455
CALL HRCH
-------
CALL FLOW(DPP,EXL,EXD,G(l),J,IL.RP,1) SIMP0521
CALL SKPY(i?PP,WPRR(J)-,LPP,NRPTS,l,0) SIMP0522
CALL MADD(PPP,DAV,DAV,NRPTS,1,0,0) SIMP0523
172 CONTINUE SIPP0524
JPP=JP SIMP0525
175 CCNUNUE SIPP0526
CALL HPADD(DAV,RP,TBL3,H;BLANKtl) SIPP0527
C INITIALIZE ARRAY E TC ZERO SINP0528
DC 195 1=1,NNV SIMP0529
EL(I)=0.0 S1HP0530
CO 195 J=l,NNV SIKP0531
CALL LOC(I,J,IJ,NNV,NNV,0) SIPP0532
EUJ) = 0.0 SINP0533
195 CONTINUE SIMP0534
C READ IN ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES SIPP0535
hRITE(Kb, 199) SIMP0536
199 FORPATCOENDCGENOUS ACTIVITIES1/) SIKP0537
200 IC=0 SIMP0538
ISET*0 SIPP0539
IERRQR=0 SIKP0540
201 REAC(K5,l,FND=240)(S(I),I=l,10) SIPP0541
hRITE(K6,2) (SU ),! = !, 10) SIKP0542
IF(KCKP(S,1,3,END,1).EC.O) GO TO 25C SIWP0543
CALL ASREAD(S,TBLl,TBL2,TBL3,TELA,TBL5,IE,IA,IROW,ICOL,XL, SIKPOS^iA
* IT,IRV,IRR,IKC,H,VS,D,TS,IPOINT,NEA,PRNT, I END,1C,C,I SET,IERROR) SIWP0545
IF(IC) 205,201,201 SIMP05A6
205 IHIERRCR.EC.l) GO TO 2CO SIPP0547
CALL EFAC(EA,A,T,KA,KT,IA,IT,1.) , SIKP0548
HRITE(K6,203) SINP0549
203 FOR"AT(«OEFFECTIV6 {AFTER CN-SITE TREATMENT) POLLUTANT FACTORS GENSIMP0550
*ERAT£D BY THIS ACTIVITY'/) SIMP0551
KRITE(K6,20A)(TBL5(I),I=N"1,NTf) SIMP0552
204 FORHAFI* ',9(3X,A3,3X)) SIKP0553
999 FORKAT(«C«,9(1PE12.6,2X)) SIMP0554
H«ITE(6,<999){fcA(J),J=l,NT) SIXP0555
IF(NEA.EQ.O) GO TO 220 SIMP0556
DC 210 1=1,NEA SI^P0557
CALL LOC(l,I,IJ,2,NNVtO) SIKP0558
F=ttND(IJ) SIMP0559
CALL LnC(H,IE,L,NNV,NNV,0) SIMP0560
K=IFNO(IJ+1) SIHP0561
C PHLLUTANT NAME ERROR CONDITION SIHP0562
IF(K.EQ.O) GO TO 210 SIMP0563
IKK.LT.O) GO TO 207 SIMP0564
E(L)=E(L)+EA(K) SIMP0565
EA(K)=0.0 SIMP0566
.GC TO 210 SIPP0567
207 E(L)=F(L)*1. SIMP0568
210 CONTINUE SIfP0569
IHNEA,EC.O) GO TO 2CO SIKP0570
220 WRITE(22'IE) IA,IROH,ICCL,IRV,IRR,IRC,H,VS,D,TS,IPCINT,PRNT, SI^P0571
* (EAfJ),J=1,NT),(VA(J),J=1,NM),(fT(J),J=1,NM) SIMP0572
HSI Tlf (K6,??l) SINP0573
221 FORf'ATCCEFFECTIVE POLLUTANT FACTORS AFTER SELECTIVE POLLUTANT CISSIKP0574
*Pt:SAL THRCUGH ENDOGENCLS ACTIVITIES'/) SI»*P0575
WRITl(K6.2CA) (T3L5(I),I=MM1,NTF) SIKP0576
W«I TF(6,«399) (tA(J),-'J=|,NT) SINP0577
WKITE(K6,226) SIKP0578
226 FCJRf-'AT(//) SINP0579
GO TO ?CO SIMP05BO
740. Wtl rr-(K6,?4l) SIHPC581
. 241 KWATCCNO MORE CARDS hERE FOUND WHEN READING ENCCGENOUS ACT IVITYSIKP0582
; * CFSCKIPTICNS') SIHP05B3
STHP SIfP0584
C T-'~ Fl.RH (I-E) MATRIX SIfP0585
250 CU 260 1=1,NNV SIMP0586
CPi 260 J = 1,NNV SIMP0587
CAUL LCC( I.J,l.,NNV»KNVtO) SIMP0588
HU.FC.J) GO TO 255 SIPP0589
HL)=-E(L) SIMP0590
GC. T(j
?55 f(L) =
?^O C«'NTlM)t- SICP0593
CAt.1 *lNVCF,N-4V,f)FT,WltV,2> 147 SIMP0594
c HI Af »^X(JG|MnUS ACTIviTIFS SIMP0595
-------
SIMP0596
SIKP0597
SIMP0598
SIMP0599
SIMPOfcCO
SIVPC601
SIMP0602
SIMP0604
SIHP0605
SIHP0606
SINP0607
SIMP0608
fc)UTE(K6,299)
299 FORKAH'OEXOGENtJUS ACTIVITIES'/)
300 IC=C
iser=o
ItRROR=0
301 RF.AD(K5,l,END=5COnS(I),I=l,lC)
KRITE(K6,2)(S(I),1=1,10)
IF(KOPlMS,l,3,HNO,l).EC.O) GO TC SCO
CALL ASREAD(S,TBLl,TBL2,TBL3,TEL<.,TBL5,IE,IA,IRCW,ICOL,XL,
* IT,IRV,IRR,IRC,H,VS,0,TS,IPOINT,NEA,PRNT,IEND,IC,l,ISET,IERRCR)
IF(IC) 305,301,301
305 IFUFRRQR.EC.l) GO TO 3CO
CALL EF"AC,ICCL,IRV,IRR,IRC,H,VS,D,TS,IPOINT,PRNT,
* IFA(J)fJ=l,NT)f(MA(J)fJ=l»NH)f(KT(J),J=l,NM)
CALL SMPY(F.A,XL,EA,NT,1,0)
CALL SKPY(MA,XL,MA, NN,l,0)
CALL SMPYIMT.XL.f'T.NP.l.O)
C --- STCPF ECONOMIC INPUT VARIABLES FOR ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITIES
DC 520 J=1,NM
520
SrPP0636
SIMP063?
SIMP0638
SIMP0639
SIMP0640
SIHP06A1
SIVP06A2
SIMP06A3
SIMP06AA
SIMP06A6
ONSIVP06A7
SIWP0648
SIKP0649
SIfP0652
SIMPC653
SIPPC654
SIHP0655
SIKPOft56
SIKP06.57
SIHP0658
SIPP0659
Sir'POfc60
SIKP0661
SIMP0662
SIKP0663
SIHP0664
SIMP0665
CALL LOCI .J*?,L,NC,3,C)
MTnT(H=MTCT(l. )+MT(J)
ClNriNUF
CAI L PMUVEl UtlKtlhtlCCLtf A, IRV, IRR, IRC,RP, W,P,WPRR f DAV,DPP,
II'Ll. rnL3,TPl/«,THL5,Al,A2,B,G,HL,H,VS,D,TS,IPOINT,PSUM,PRNT)
SIfPOC67
SINP0669
SICPC670
1A8
-------
ROM COLUMN DISCHARGE
DEFICIT*/
(KG/DAY)
(MG/LP//)
DISSCLVEO
(HG/L)
590 CONTINUE
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE PRINTP(E,A,T,G,WtP,EA,EL,FL,HPRB,Wl,W2,RP,DAV,IENDfMA,
* MT,MTOT,TRL1,TBL2,TBL3,TBL4,TBL5,AI,A2,B,HL,OPP)
REAL*8 E{l),DET,S(lC),TBLUl),TfiL2{l),T8L3m,TBL4m,T8L5m
REALM A(l),Tm,Gm,Ml),P(l),EAm,ELm,FLU),HPRBm,DAVm,
* fcl(l)fh2m,NAm,PTm,MTOTmtAim,A2(l)tBm,HL*NPR+J
READ125MP) FL,VL,TM»PR
SUM=SUM+HPRBtJ)*CSfTN,PR)
240 CONTINUE
250 REAp(23'I)(H(J)tJ-ltNH2)
CALL LOC(K*2tK»NHf2tO)
OOX=SUM-W(MI
CALL LCC(K,l,HK,NK,2,0)
HRITE(K6V251) TBL3(IRIV),RP(L+l>,RP(L+2),W(MM),OCX,SUF,W(M)
251 FORKAT(« •,A3,2(2X,I3),4(3X,1PE16.5))
300 CONTINUE
400 CONTINUE
IF(NOP.EO.l) GO TO 755
TOO MRITE(K6,?01)
701 FURHATCOAIR AND SOLID POLLUTANTS*/)
00 750 1=1,NR
DO 750 J=l,NC
CALL LCC(I,J,L ,NR,NCV0)
READ124'L) (P{JJ)
HRITEiK6,25) I,J
SIMP0671
SIMP0672
SIMP0673
SIMP0674
SIMP0675
25 FORMAT!'GROW
MUTE
-------
AIU)=P(LL)
790 CONTINUF
KKM + NM+NW
WRITE(K6,795) TBL5IKK)
795 FCRMATI'OPOLLUTANT : »,A8)
CALL M.XOUT(I,Al,NR,NC,0,60,132,l)
800 CONTINUE
805 WRITEIK6.890)
890 FORMATl'OFCONOMIC INPUT VARIABLES - FINAL REGIONAL LEVELS'/)
HRITE(K6,899)(TRL5(I),I=1,NM)
899 FORMATI26X,7(3X,A8,3X))
DO 891 1=1,NM
CALL LOCI 1,1,LI,NM,3,0)
CALL LOC(T,2,L2,NM,3,0)
CALL LOCI I,3,L3,MM,3,0)
HTOT(L3)=MTOT.(Ll).+ MTOTIL2)
891 CONTINUF
HRITE(K6,892HMTOT(I),I = 1,NM,)
892 FCRMATCOCUE TO ACTIVI TIES' ,8X,7( 1PE12.6, 2X )/ (26X, 71 1PE12.6, 2X ) ))
00 893 1=1,NM
CALL LOCI 1,2,L2,NM,3,0)
MTOHI) = MTOTCL2)
893 CONTINUE
WRITFCK6,89<,)|MTOT(I),I = 1,NM)
894 FORMATCOCUE TO flN-SITE TREATMENT ' ,7 11PE12.6,2X )/126X,711PE12.6,
* 2X)M
00 895 1=1,NM
CALL LOCI 1,3,L3,NM,3,0)
MTOT(I)=MTOTIL3)
895 CONTINUE
V.RI1E (K6, 896) (M.TOH I ),! = !,NM)
896 FORMAT(«OTOTAL',20X,7(1PE12.6,2X)/(26X,7{IPE12.6,2X))) ,
RETURN'
END
SUBROUTINE ASREAD (S,TBL1,TBL2,TBL3,TELA,TBL5, IE, IA,IROVi, ICOL,XL,
* IT.IRV, IRR,IRC,H,VS,D,TS,IPOINT,NEA,PRNT,IEND, 1C, IP, I SET, I ERROR)
C THIS SUBROUTINE REACS IN ACTIVITY SPECIFICATION
C IP=0 ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITY
C IP=1 EXOGENCUS ACTIVITY
REAL*8 S(l),FNUM8R,TBLlll),TBL2(l),TBL3ll),TBL4(l),TBL5ll),STAR
COMMON NV»,NA,NS,ND,NT,NTA,NTAl,NTR,NAS,NR,NC,NPR,NG,NWl,Nfc2,NAS2,
* NMtNTM,NTRM,NMl,NRA,NCA,NARP,NH,NOP
COMMON /MAX/ M.AXA,MAXT,NRI V,NRPTS ,NNV,MXA,MXT,MXR,MXE,KXN
COMMON /UNIT/ K5,K6,K10,K30
INTFGER*2 IEND(1)
DATA STAR/1* /
IF(IC.GT.O) GO TO 35
IM IP.EC.l) GO TO 20
CALL SECtTBLl,S,11.8,MXA,IA)
IF(IA.GT.O) GO TO 10
IPOS=11
11 CALL ERROR12,1,MAXA,S,IPOS,8)
WRITE(K6,12)
12 FnRMAT(«OTHIS ACTIVITY WILL BE IGNORED')
IERRCR=1
GO TO 30
10 CALL SECITBLA,S,2,8,MXE,IE)
IFUE.GT.O) GO TO 30
CALL ACD(TBL4,S,2,8,NNV,MXE)
IF(MXt.LT.O) CALL ERROKI1,4,NNV,S,2,8)
IF. = MXfc
GO TO 30
20 CALL SFOITBL1,S,2,8,MXA,IA)
IFIIA.GT.O) GO TO 25
IPCS=?
GC TO 11
?5 XL=FNUMHR(S,ll,fl)
30 IROV»=NUMRJR( 5,20,3)
SIKPC746
CALL ShCCTP.L2,S,28,8,M.XT,IT)
iMir.GE.O) r,l! TC 32
CALL |HROW(?f?f'/ftXT,St28,8)
S|MPOr/,B
SIMPOJ',-}
SIMP07SO
SIMP07SI
SlMP07«i?
SIMP07S3
SIMP0754
SIMP0755
SIMP0756
SIMP07S7
SIMP0758
SIMP0759
SIMPQ7f.O
SIMP0761
SIMP0762
SIMP0763
SIPP0764
SIMP0765
SIPP0766
SIMP0767
SIPP0768
SIKP0769
S1^P077C
SIMP0771
SIMP0772
SIMP0773
SIKP077A
SIMP0775
SIMP0776
SIMP0777
SIMP0778
SIMP0779
SIMP0780
SIMP0781
SIMP07B?
SIMP0783
SIKP078A
SIMP0785
SIMP0786
SIMP0787
SIMP0788
SIMP0789
SIMP0790
SIMP0791
SIM.P0792
SIMP0793
SIM.P079A
SIMP0795
SIHP0796
SIMP0797
SIMP0798
SIMP0799
SIMP08SO
SIMP0801
SIMP0602
SIMP0803
SIKP0804
SIM.P0805
SIMP0806
SIMP0807
SIMP0808
SIMP0809
SIMP0810
SIM.P0811
SIMP0812
SIMP0813
SIMP081A
SIMP0815
SIMP0616
SIMP0817
31
I1=G
ACTIVITY ATTEMPTED WILL. BE IGNORED')
150
SIMP0819
-------
150
32 CALL SEQtTBL3,S,37,8,FXR,IRV)
IF(IRV.GF.O) GO TO 34
CALL ERROR<2,3,NRIV,S,37,8)
33 f-URMAH'OIF WATER POLLUTANTS WERE TO BE MOVED INTO THIS RIVER,
*Y WILL BE IGNORED.1 J
IRV=0
34 IRR=NUMBER(S.46,3)
IRC=NUMBER(S,bO,3)
IPOINT=NUMBER
-------
K5.K6,K10,K30
/UNI?/
DATA PP /»p»/
IMKa*P«PHNftl,l,Pptl).NF.O) GO TO
MRirFIKA.?5l) TDLHIA), IROW,ICOL
K1RMA1 MOPRINI CF OISPLRSfcO WftfER
3CO
ANC
300
•••Aft1 LOCATED AT RCfc «,I3,« AND CCLLfN
POLLUTANTS
,I3//)
FOR ACTIVITY
SIMP0896
SIHP0897
SIMP0898
SIPP0899
SIPP0900
SIMP0901
SIPP0902
3A2
AIR
,IL* nrwi' i r i i wM I
TO 380 1=1,NW
ir-(tAU).hC.O.O) GO TC 380
CALt WATFRm,EAU),IRV,IRR,IRC,PRNT,RP,HPRB,DAV,CPP,W,G.TBL3,IER)SIMP0904
IMlER.IiG.O) GO TC 380 SIMPQ9C5
WR|fUK6,.142) THLl(lA),IROW,ICOL, TBL3(IRV),IRR,IRC SIMP0906
FURFATCCINVAlin RIVER SPECIFICATION FCR ACTIVITY : «
• AND*/* COLUMN «,I3,«
380
C
400
* AT ROW »fI3t« AND COLUMN «
* 13,
•OREO.*//)
GC TO 4CO
CONTINUE
CHECK TO SEE
tI3,«. THE RIVER
NOT FOUND. hATER
: 'tA8,
POLLUTANT
IF ANY REMAINING AIR OR SCLID POLLUTANTS
1=1, MAS
420
C
500
506
540
550
600
C
c —
DC 410
K=I*NW
Sl!M=SUM+EA|K)
CONTINUE
IF(SUM.EC.O) GO TO SCO
CALL LOC( IROW,ICOL,L,NR,NC,C)
RFACI24*L)
-------
END
SUBROUTINE WATER1 ( IPOL.'XLCAD, IRIV, IRCH, ICCL ,PRNT,RP,HPR8,
* DAV,DPP,H,G,rBL3,IER)
C --- XLOAO IS BOO (KG PER CAY)
REAL*8 TRL3U)
R£AL*4 HPRBl I ) ,OAV( I ) , DPP< D,M(l)fG(l)
INTEGER*2 RP { 1 )
COMMON NW,NA,NS,ND,NT,NTA,NTAlfNTR,NAS,NR,NC,NPR,NG,NHl,NW2,NAS2,
* NM,NTM,NTRM,NM1,NRA,NCA,NARP,NH,NCP
COMMON /MAX/ MAXA, MAXT, NR IV,NRPTS ,NNV ,MXA ,MXT, MXR, MXE,MXN
COKHON /UNIT/ K5,K6, K10.K30
CALL LOAOPt IL,XLnAD,IRIV,IROW,ICOL,RP, IPCL,0, IER)
IF(ieR.EC.l) GO TC 2CO
CALL ZEROR4(DAV,NRPTS, I)
00 100 1=1, NPK
CALL ZEROR4(DPP,NRPTS,1)
CALL FLOWCOPP.XLOAD, 0.0 ,G( 1 ) , I, IL ,RP,0 )
90 CALL SMPYlDPPtWPRRU ) , DPP,NRPTS, 1 ,0 »
CALL MADO(DPPfOAVtOAVfNRPTSfltOtO)
100 CONTINUE
CALL fcPADD(OAV,RPTTEL3tfctPRNT,IPGL)
200 RETURN
END
RHAL FUNCTION DEOXK (FKO, TO, T)
IF(FKO.EQ.O) FKO=.39
IF(TO.EO.O) T0=20.
IF! (T.GE.O).AND.(T.LT.7.5) ) THETAK=1.15
IF((T.GE.7.5).AND.(T.LT.15.0) ) THETAK=1.11
IF((T. GE. 15.0). AND. (T.LE. 30.0) J THET/>K=1.05
IF(T.GT.IO.O) THETAK=.97
OfcOXK=FKO*THETAK**(T-TO>
RETURN
END
REAL FUNCTION REOXR (RO.TO, T, ICLASS)
IF(TO.EQ.O) T0=20.
IF(ICLASS.EQ.l) R0=.5
IF(ICLASS.EQ.2) RO=-7
IFUCLASS.EC.3) R0=1.0
IF(ICLASS.EC.A) R0=1.6
REOXR=RO*EXP(.024*(T-TO)
RETURN
END
REAL FUNCTION CS(T,P)
CS=(P/760.)*(14.652-A.1022E-1*T+7.9910E-3*T**2-7.7774E-5*T**3)
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE STPH(DQD, XLN»XL, COX, FK,FR , CIST, V)
C --- STREETER-PHELPHS MODEL
C --- DCD IS DISSOLVED OXYGEN DIFICIT AT NEXT POINT
C --- XLN IS EFFECTIVE RESIDUAL LCAD AT NEXT PCINT (MG/L)
C --- XL IS. INITIAL LCAD
C ---- DOX IS. INITIAL DEFICIT
C --- FK IS DIGXYGHNATICN CONSTANT
C --- FH IS REnXYGENATION CONSTANT
C --- OlSf IS niSTANCT! RETfcEEN POINTS
C --- V IS RIVER- VELOCITY
C --- T IS llVf:
T=DIST/V
DCn=( «FK*XL)/(FR-FK)
XLN=XL*CXP{-FI<*T)
RhTUKN
END x
SLBROLriNE FLCK (HPP, XLCAD, EXOGC,S ICE , IP, IL.RP, IT YPE )
C --- ITYPE=l — FXOGhNDUS LLAD
C --- IIYPF=0 — PDO CONTRieLTION (KG PER CAY)
RCAL*4 OPP(l)
INTf-GfcR*? RP(I)
CUMMQN NW,NA,NS,ND,NT,NTA,NTA1,NTRTNAS,MR,NC,NPR,NG,NWI,NW2,NAS2»
* N»',Mrf,NTRMfN''lf N?A,NCA,NAKP,NH,NCP
CCffUN /MAX/ MAXA,MAXT,NRIV,NRPTS,NNV,VXA,MXT,NXR,fXE,MXN
C --- St T I TO LCAO POINT "
I-IL
CALL LGCl I, I,L,A,NRPTS,0)
I5,FF=0
153
EXP (-FK*T )-EXF (-FR*T ) ) 4CCX*EXP (-FR*T
SIPPCS71
SIMP0972
SIMP0973
SIMP0974
SIPP0975
SIPP0976
SIMP0977
SIPP0978
SIKPCS79
SIMP0980
SIMP0981
SIMP0982
SIMPOS83
SIMP0984
SIMP0985
SIKP0986
SIMPC987
SIMP0988
SIPPC989
SIMPC990
SIMP0991
SIMP0992
SIKP0993
SIMP0994
SINP0995
SIMP0996
SINP0997
SIMP0998
SIfP0999
SIMP1COO
SIMP1C01
SIMP1C02
SIMP1CC3
SIMPIC04
SI^PICOS
SIKPIC06
SIMP1CC7
SIMP1CC8
SIMP1C09
SIMP 1010
SIMPlCli
SIMP1012
SIVP1C13
SIMP 1014
SIMP1C15
SIMP1C16
SIMP1C17
SIMP1018
SIKP1C19
SIMPIC20
SIPPIC21
SIMP1C22
SIKP1C23
SIMP1C24
SI^PIC25
SIMP1C26
SIMPIC27
SIMP1C28
SIPP1C29
SIMP1C30
SIHP1C31
SIMP1C32
SIKPIC33
SIMP1034
SIfPlC35
SINP1036
SIMP1C37
SIKP1C3B
SIPP1C39
SIMP1C40
SINPIC41
SIKPIC42
SIPPIC43
SIMP1C45
-------
C ---
16
C ---
20
C ---
19
21
C ---
22
C ---
C ---
C ---
30
DOX=EXOGD
LROW=RP(L+l)
LCGL=RP(L+2)
IRAP=-1
CALCULATE RANDOM ACCESS SEC FOR RIVER CHARACTERISTICS
1RA=(RP(L*3)-1)*NPR+IP
It SAME AS PREVIOUS RIVER STRETCH, CC NCT REREAD SAME NUMBERS
lf( IRA. EC. IRAP) GO TO ?0
RtAD(25MRA) FL,VL, TM, PR.FKO, TO, I CLASS
FK=DECXK(FKO,TO,TM)
FR=ReoxR(RO,TO,TM,ICLASS)
IFdSET.EC.O) GC TO 21
ADJ=l.
IF(FL.GT.PFL) AOJ=PFL/FL
XL=XLN*AOJ
DCX=DCD*ADJ
STORE CONTRIBUTION TC DISSOLVED OXYGEN DEFICIT AFTER FLCW
DPP(I)=DOX
GO TO 22
ISET=l
IF(ITYPE.EQ.l) GO TC 19
XL=XL/FL
FIND NEXT POINT
1=1*1
CALL LOCI l,I,L,4,NRPTS,0)
A POSITIVE RIVER ROW INDICATES SAME RIVER
IKRPU+n.GT.O) GO TC 30
A ZERO RIVER SEC INDICATES
IMRP(L).tC.O) RETURN
POLLUTANTS NOW FLOW INTO A NEW RIVER
I=RP(L)
CALL LOC( l»I,L,A,NRPTS,0)
NRCW=RP(L+l)
NCOL=RP(L-»2)
X=(IABS(LRCW-NROV»M*SIDE
Y=UABS(LCOL-NCOL))*SIDE
SIMP1046
SIMP1C47
THAT RIVER DCES NOT EMPTY INTO
C --- CHFCK fO AVOID OVERFLOW
IF(UOX.LE.l-Ofc-20) DCX=0.0
IF(XL.Le.l.OH-20) XL=C.O
IF-UDOX.EC.O.O).AND.(XL.EC.O.O)) RETURN
CALL STPH(nOD,XLN,XL,DCX,FK,FR,DIST,VL)
PFL=FL
LROW=NROH
LCOL=NCOL
GO TO 16
END
SUBROUTINE LOAOPdL,BGD,IRIV,IROW,ICCL,RP,IPOL, I TYPE, I ER I
RtAL*4 Wll)
INTfFGER*? RP(2)
CIJMKON NVf,NA,NS,MD,NT,NTATNTAl,NTR,NAS,NR,NC,NPR,NGtNWl,NH2,NAS2,
* NM,NTM,NrRM,NMltN«A,NCA,NARP,Nh,NCP
COMNON /MAX/ MAXA,MAXT,NRIV,NRPTS,NNV,MXA,MXT,MXR,MXE,MXN
ItR=0
C --- FINH LOAH POINT
rr ic i=ifNHPis
CALL LOC( 1. I,L,A,NRPTS,0)
IF{ (IRIV.LC.R^(L) ).AND. ( I RC*. EC.RP ( 1+ 1 M . AND. < ICCL .EC .RP (L + 2M)
* GO TO Ib
10 CCNMMJE
SIMP1C49
SIMPIC50
SIMP1C51
SIMPIC52
SIHP1C53
SIMP1C54
SIMP1055
SIMP1056
SINPIC57
SIMP1058
SIMP1C59
SIMP1C60
SIMPIC61
ADJUSTMESIMP1C62
SIMP1C63
SIMP1064
SIMP1C65
SIMP1C66
SIMP1C67
SIMPIC68
SIMP1C69
SIMP1C70
SIMPIC71
SIMP1072
ANY OTHESIMP1C73
SIMP1074
SIMPIC75
SIMP1C76
SIMPIC77
SIMPIC78
SIMP1C79
SIMP1C80
SIMP1C81
SIMP1C82
SIMP1C83
SIMP1C8A
SIMP1C85
SIMP1G86
SIMP1C87
SIMP1088
SIMPiCfl9
SIMP1C90
SIMP1091
SIMP1C92
SIMPIC93
RJ-.TLRN
15
C ---
IOC
hC.il GO TC ICC
C«NI«IBUTION (KG)
IFdfYPH
STOPE »G
R«-Ar(23l
CALL LOC( H'nL,l,L,NRPTSt2tCI
Vid IsW
SIMP1C95
SIMPIC96
SIMP1C97
SIMP1C98
SIMPIC99
SIMP1100
SIMPHCl
SIMP1102
SIMP1IC3
SIMP1104
SIMP11C5
SIMP1106
SIMP1107
SIMP1108
SIMPHC9
SIMPU10
SIMPIlll
SIMP1112
SIMPH13
KI..TIKN
tf.r
Sir"f;i.ii\i
Rl Al *f nM.
, TBL3,V»,P«NTt IPCL)
SIMP1115
SIMPU16
SIMP1117
SIMP111H
SIWP1119
SIMP 1120
-------
COMMON NW,NA,NS,NOtNT,MA,NTAl,NTR,NAS,NR,NC,NPR,NG,NWl,NH2,NAS2, SIMP 1121
* NM,NTMfNTRMtNKlTNRAfNCA,NARPfNH,NOP SIMP1122
COMMON /MAX/ MAXA,MAXT,NRIV.NRPTS,NNV,MXA,MXT,MXR,MXE,KXN SIMP1123
COMMON /UNIT/ K5,K6,KIO,K30 SIMP1124
DATA PP/«P«/ SIMP1125
IF(KOMP(PRNT,l,l,PP,l).NE.O) GO TO 102 SIMP1126
WRITE(K6,lOl) SIMP1127
101 FORMATC 'DRIVER ROK COLUMN CONTRIBUTION TO DISSOLVED OXYGEN DESIMPUP8
*FICIT'/)
102 DO 150 I=l,NARP
IF(DAV( p.EQ.0.0) GC TC 150
CALL LQC(l,l,L,4,NRPTS,0)
IF(KOMP(PRNT,l, l,PP,iJ.NE.O) GO TC 1C5
K=RP(L)
WRI TE(K6,103) TBL3 (K ) , RP(L+1 ) ,RP (L+2 ) ,CAV ( I)
103 FCRMATC « , A8.2J2X, 131 ,5X, 1PE15.6 )
105 READ<23« I) ( W ( J ) , J=l ,Nfc2)
CALL LOC( IPOL,2,L,NW,2,0)
150
WRITE (23* I) IN'D, I POINT, ISTA6,U,
* l',TA,LO,T,H,VS,n,TS,It-R»
DATA
DATA
I'-jCf XM2)
/UMT/ K5tK*>
r-l • , • S ' f '
K10,K30
t'.« W'i
SIMP1129
SIMP1130
SIMP1131
SIMP1132
SIMP1133
SIMP1134
SIMP1135
SIMP1136
SIMP1137
SIMP1138
SIMP1139
SIMP1140
SIMP1141
SIMP1142
SIMP1143
SIMP 11^4
SIMP1145
SIMP11A6
SIMP 1147
SIMP1148
SIMP1149
SIMP1150
SIMP1151
SIMP1152
SIMP1153
SIMP115A
SIMP1155
SIMP1156
SIMP1157
SIMP1158
SIMP1159
SIMP 1160
SIMP1161
SIMP1162
SIMP1163
SIMP1164
SIMP1165
SIMP1166
SIMP1167
SItP1168
SIMP 1169
SI HP 1170
SIMP 1171
SIMP 1172
SIMP1173
HRSSINP1174
SIMP1175
SIMP1176
SIMPH77
SIFP1178
SIMP1179
S!H»UBO
SIHP1181
SIMP11B2
SIMP1183
S1MPH84
SIMP1185
SIMP1186
SIKP1187
SIMP1188
SIMP11B9
SIMP 1190
SINPH91
SIMP 1192
'Nh'.'NW'.'SE'.'SVl'/
,OfO,l»-ItO,0,l,0,-l.l,0,0,l,l,0,l,-i,l,l,l,l,-l,l,-l,SIMpll95
155
-------
* -lt-l,l.-l,l,i,i/
I HF.*ESHlH,ISTAB,VS,D,U,PtTS,TA»
FL=ORL(LO,ISTAe)
CALL SIG(SIGY,SIGZ,StXL,ISTA8,IPOINTtFL,l)
ItR=0
CC 5 I=lf8
IFIWIND.EO.HDUM GC TO 9
5 CONTINUE
IER=1
RETURN
9 CALL LCC( 1,1,1,4,8,0)
IX=INOEX(L>
JX=INDEX(L+ll
IY=INCEX(L+2)
JY=lNOEX(L+3)
DIST=S/2
IFU.GT.4) DIST=S/SQRT(2. )
1 = 0
10 1=1+1
IR=IRCW2-M*IX
IC=ICOL2+I*JX
IFUTESTl IR,IC,NRA,NCA>) 200*15,15
15 X=OIST*I
CALL SIGl SIGY,SIGZ,S,X,ISTAB, IPCINT,FL,0)
CALL CALTUCAL,X,XL,THETA)
SIMPH96
SIFPU97
SIMP1198
SIHP1199
SIHP1200
SIHPI2CI
SIHP1202
SIHP1203
SIMP120A
SIKP1205
SIKPU06
SIFP120?
SIMP1208
SIMP1209
SIMP1210
SIKP1211
SIMP1512
SIMP1213
C --- FLR THE KIND DIRECTIONS NE,NW,SE,ANC SH, THE FOLLOWING AL60RTHM
C --- NCT CALCULATE VALUES FCR ALL THE E VALUES. IT CALCULATES ONLY
C --- THOSE SUBSEQUENTLY USED IN IHE SUBROUTINE AVG.
J=-l
20 J=J+1
IFU.GT.I) GO TO 10
IFCIISET.EC.D.AND.IJSET.EQ.m GO TC 10
Y=OIST*J
GO TO (30,40,50),ICAL
30 APD=CHll(X,Y,0,SIGY,SIGZtU,hE,TI
GO TO 60
40 APO=CHl2IX,YtO,SIGY,SI.GZ tU,FLfTJ
GO TO 60
50 APO=THETA*CHIl{X,Y,Q,SIGY,SIGZfU,HE.TI+(l-ThETA)*CHI2CX,Y,QfSIGY
* SIGZ.UfFLiTl
60 IR1=IR*J*IY
IC1=IC*J*JY
IF (I TEST ( IRI,IC1,NRA,NCA) J 90,70,70
70 CALL LOCI IR1, IC1,L.NRA,NCA,0)
BCL>=APD
75 IRl=IR-J*IY
ICl=IC-J*JY
IF(ITEST(IR1,IC1,NRA,NCAJ J 100,80,8C
80 CALL LCCC IR1, IC1,L,NRA,NC4,0)
BIL»=APO
GO TO 20
90 ISEl=l
GO TO 75
100 JSCT=1
GO TO 20
200 RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE AIRCHR (S.PRCB, ISTAB,hINC,t,PRES, TA, IER )
REAL*8 S( ll.
SIHP1215
SIMP1216
SIKP1217
SIMP1218
SIKP1219
SIMP1220
SIMP1221
SIMP1222
OOSIKP1223
SIHP122A
SIMP1225
SIPP1226
SIKP1227
SIHP1228
SIHP1229
SIMP1230
SIHP1231
SIMP1232
SIKP1233
SIMP1234
SIMP1235
SIMP1236
SIMP1237
SIMP1238
SIKP1239
SIMP12AO
SIMP1241
SIMP1242
S IMP 1243
SIHP124A
SIKP1245
SIMP1246
SIHP1247
SIMP1248
SIMP1249
SIMP1250
SIKP1251
SIMP1252
SIHP1253
SIMP1254
SIHP1255
SIMP1256
SIfPl257
/UNIT/ K5,K6,K1C,K30
DATA wO/» N',' S',f £••• h'.^NE*. «NW • . • SE* . *SK«/
DATA BLANK/' •/
IER=0
ISTAO=NUf»BERfS,25.n
CALL J»nVI:CBLArjK,lf4»WlND,l)
CALL FOVHS,29,2,V«INC,I )
31,101
SIMP1259
SIHP1260
SIPP1261
SIKP1262
SIHP1263
SIMP 1264
SIFPI265
SIWP1266
SIKP1267
SIMP1268
cr •> 1 = 1,H
lKrINO.(-g.wD(I ) ) GC Tf 9
156
SIMPl2t70
-------
6
7
B
9
110
111
200
AN INVALID WIND DIRECTION.1)
FOR THIS PROBABILITY NOT CALCULATED.1)
UO,2CO,2CC
10
C
C
C ——-
CONTINUE
KRirt(K6,6) WIND
FORKAT(«0»,A2,» IS
WRI FE(K6,H)
FCRFATM AIR DIFFUSION
I ER= I
IF(I TEST(ISTAR»ISTAB»6,6))
CALL MOVE(S,25,-1,X,1)
WRITE(K6,111) X
FCRPATCOSTABILITY CLASS ',A1 ,« NOT DEFINED.')
WRITE(K6,8)
IER=l
RETURN
END
REAL FUNCTION F.SH(H,ISTAB,VS,D,U,P,TS,TA)
IHO.EO.-l.) GO'TO 10
ESH=H+(l.4-0.1*ISTAB)*H(VS*D)/U)*(1.5+2.68E-3*P*((TS-TA)/TS)
S IG I SIGY,SIGZ ,S ,X, I STAB, I FCI NT ,FL, ICALL)
SIMP1271
SIHP1273
SIPP1274
SIKP1275
SIMP1276
SIPP1277
SIMP1278
SIMP1279
SIHP1280
SIKP1281
SIMP1282
SIKP1283
SIMP1284
SIKP1285
ESH=H
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE
ICALL=0 CALCULATES
ICALL=1 CALCULATES
REAL*4 STAB(30)
ALPHA
DATA STAB/
STANDARD DEVEATICNS BASED CN X
XLt CRITICAL MXING LAYER DEPTH - PLACES
A
.GDI,
.046,
.119,
2.61C,
2.61C,
2.610,
B
1.890,
I. 110,
.915,
.450,
.450,
.450,
C
9.6,
2.0,
O.C,
-25.5,
-25.5,
-25.57
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
BETA
.450, .889,
* .285, .912,
* .177, .924,
* .III, .928,
* .111, .928,
* .111, .928,
L=tISTAB-l)*5+l
IF(ICALL.EO.l) GO TO 1C
IFUPOINT.EQ.l) GO TO 5
SIGY=STARIL)*X**STAB(L+l)
GO TO S
5 SIGY=STA8(L)*(X+((S/(4.3*STAB(L)))**(l./STAB(L-H
8 SIGZ=STAB(L+2)*X**STAB(L+3)+STAB(L+4)
RETURN
10 X=((.47*FL-STAB»L+4) )/STAB(L+2))**(l./STAB(L+3))
RETURN
ENO
REAL FUNCTION CHIUX,Y,CtSIGY.SIGZ,U,HE,T)
•— X=DISTANCE IN X(hTND) DIRECTION
— Y=DISTANCE IN PERPENDICULAR hlND DIRECTICN
•— Q=SOURCE STRENGTH (G PER SEC)
U=HEAN WIND SPEED
HE=EFFFCTIVE HEIGHT CF'RELEASE
r— T=HALF LIFE OF THE PCLLUTANT IN HOURS
CHIl=(0/(3.l4159*SIGY*SIGZ*t))*EXP(-.5*(Y/SIGY)**2
* -.5*(HE/SIGZ)**2)*EXP ((-.693*(*/U))/(3600*T ) )
RETURN
ENO
REAL FUNCTION CHI 2(X,Y,C,SIGY,SIGZ,U,FL,T)
-— X=DISrANCt; IN XIV.IND) DIRECTION
— Y=DISTANCF IN PERPENDICULAR KIND DIRECTICN
-— C=SCUi
-------
10
20
10
SUBROUTINE C ALT( ICAL,XCIST, XL.THETA)
IFCXD1ST.LE.XL) GO TO 10
XL2=2*XL
IKXOIST.GE.XL2) GO fC 20
ICAL=3
THETA=
RETURN
ICAL=l
RETURN
ICAL=2
RETURN
END
INTEGER FUNCTION ITEST< IR,IC,NRA,NCA)
ITEST=l
IFtUR.LT.D.OR.f IR.GT.NRA)) GO TO 1C
IFC tIC.LT.D.QR.UC.GT.NCAn GO TO 1C
RETURN
ITEST=-l
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE AVG (R, B,NR,NC,NRA,NCA)
REAL*4 R(1),B(1)
DC SO 1=1, NR
00 50 J=l,NC
CALL LOC( I,J,L,NR,NC,0)
CALL LOC(2*I-i,2*J-l,Ll,NRA,NCA,0)
CALL LGC<2*I-1,2*J-U,L2,NRA,NCA,0)
CALL LOC(2*I,2*J,L3,NRA,NCA,0)
50
10
12
15
20
20
R(L)=RfL)/5.
CONTINUE
RETURN
END
SUBROUT INE SEO C TABLE, S, I POS, I LNG, N, I SEC >
REAL*8 TABLEIl),S(l), BLANK
DATA BLANK/* •/
IF(KOKP(S,IPGStILNG,BLANX,l).EQ.O) GC TG 15
IFCN.LE.O) HO TO 12
OG 10 1=1, N
IPS=II-l!*ILNG+l
IF(KOMP(S,IPQS,ILNG, TABLE, IPS). EC. OJ GO TO 20
CONTINUE
ISEQ=-l
RETURN
ISEC=0
RETURN
ISEQ=I
RETURN
END
SUBROUT INE AOO ( TABLE, S, IPOS , ILNG ,MAX ,N)
REAL*8 TABLEU),S<1)
N=N+1
IF(N.GT.HAX) GO TO 20
IPS=(N-H*ILNG+1
CALL MOVE(S, IPOS, ILNG, TAELE, IPS)
RETURN
N=-l
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE 7EROR4CS,NR,NC)
ReAL*4 SCI)
00 20 1=1, NK
rn 20 J=I,NC
CALL LOC( I,J,IJ,NR,NC,0)
20 COKTIMJF.
END
SLP10UTINE ZEKOI2(S,NR,KC)
PJT»CtR*2 S(D
CC ?0 I=l,M^
P« 70 J=l,NC
CALI LCC( I,J,IJ,NR,NC,C)
SIMP1346
SIHP1347
SIFP1348
SIMP1349
SIMP1350
SIPP1351
SIHP1352
SIHP1353
SIMPi'355
SIHP1356
SIPP1357
SIHP1358
SIKP1359
SIHP1360
SIHP1361
SIHP1362
SIfP1363
SI HP 1364
SIfP1365
SIMP1366
SIMP1367
SIMP1368
SIHP1369
SIMP1370
SIPP1371
SINP1372
SIHP1373
SIMP1374
SIHP1375
SIMP1376
SIHP1377
SINP1378
SIHP1379
SIWP1380
SIHP1381
SIPP13B2
SIKP1383
SIHP1384
SIHP1385
SIMP1386
SIKP1387
SIHP1388
SIHP1389
SIHP1390
SIMP 1391
SIPP1392
SIPP1393
SIfP1394
SI HP 1395
SIPP1396
SIPP1397
SIfP13<58
SIHP1399
SIMP14CO
SI HP 1402
SIHP1403
S.IMP1405
,SIHP14C6
I SIfP1407
SIMPH09
SINP1410
SIMP1412
SIKP1416
SINP141?
20
158
SIMP1420
-------
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
c —
I TYPE
1 ••
2 ••
ITPLE
1 <
2
3
4
5
REAL*«
COMMON
SIMP1438
SIPP1A39
SIMP1440
SIHP1AA1
•ENDOG-AC'.'POLLUTNT'/
SIMP1448
SIMP1449
SIMP1450
',A8,« A ',A8,« YCU HAVE EXCEEDED THE MAXIMSIMP1451
THE PRCGRAM - CHECK YOUR SET UP THEN HAVE MAXISIMP1452
PROGRAM. THIS RLN IS NOW TERMINATED.')
RfcTURN SIMP1471
ENO SIMP1472
SUBROUTINE NAMEP(TBL,K,N) SIMP14P3
RCAL*0 TBL(l) SIMPI474
COMMON /UNIT/ K5,X6,K10 SIMP 1425
IFIN.HO.0) GO TO 20 SIMP1476
00 10 I=l,N SIMP142/
K=K»1 SIMP1478
HRITF.(K6,6) TBL(K) SIMP1429
6 FCRMAT(5X,A8) SIMP1430
10 CONTINUE SIMP1431
20 RETURN SIMP1432
ENO SIMP1433
SUBROUTINE ERROR(I TYPE,ITBLE,MAX,S,IFCS,ILNG) SIMP1434
SIMP1435
= ADO - EXCEEDS MAXIMUM ALLOHEC SIMP1436
> SEO - NOT FOUND
• ACTIVITY
= TRANSFORATICN ACTIVITY
' RIVER
: ENDOGENOUS ACTIVITY
= POLLUTANT NAMES
S(1),NAME,TYPE(5)
/UNIT/ K5,K6,K1C
DATA NAME/1 •/
DATA TYPE/'ACTIVITY'.'TRMATRIX'.'RIVER1,
CALL NOVE(S,IPOS,ILNG,NAME,1)
GO TOdO,50),ITYPE
10 WRITE(K6,ll) NAME,TYPE(ITBLE),MAX
11 FORMATCOWHILE READING '-AR.» A «.Afl.«
*UM («,I5,'J SET FOR
*MUM»/f INCREASED IN PROGRAM. THIS RLN IS NOW TERMINATED.') SIMP1453
STOP SIMP1454
50 WRITF.(K6,51) NAME.TYPEdTBLE) SIMP1455
51 FORMATl'0',AS, • A ',A8,«, NCT PREVICLSLY DEFINED AS REQUIRED.') SIMP1456
RETURN" SIMP1457
ENO SIMP1458
SUBROUTINE MATPDIE,NR,NC,MAXR,MAXC) SIMP1459
REAL*8 Ed) SIMP1460
COMMON /UNIT/ K5,K6,K1C,K30 SIMP1461
DO 10 J=1,NC SIMP1462
CALL LCC(1,J,IJ,MAXR,MAXC,0) SIMP1463
IJE=IJ+NR-i SIMP1464
WRITE (K6,l)( Ed >,IMJ,IJE) SIMP 1465
I FCRMAK'O'.IOFIO.B) SIMP1466
10 CONTINUE SIMP1467
RfcTURN SIMP1468
END SIMP 1469
SUBROUTINE FREAOCS,T,IS,IL,N,NT,1C) SIMP147C
C S IS CHARACTER STRING CF LENGTH 80 SIMP1471
C T IS RESULTANT VECTCR CF FLOATING PCINT NUMBERS SIMP1472
C IS IS STARTING POSITION CF FIRST NUMBER SIMP1473
C IL IS LENGTH OF EACH NUMBER . SIMP1474
C N IS NUMBER OF NUMBERS TO READ PER CARD SIMP1475
C Nf [S TOTAL NUMBER CF NUMBERS TC REAC INTO THE VECTOR SIMPL476
C ic IS COUNTER FOR NUMBER OF CARDS READ - THIS MUST RE SET TO ZERO SIMP1477
FIRST REAC. fHE PRCGRAM HILL SET 1C TC -1 WHEN ALL IS READ INTO TSIMP1478
VbCTOK SIMP1479
R*:AL*8 Sd),FNUMRR SIMP1480
RFAL*4 Td) SIMP1481
CC 50 1=1,N SIMP1482
K=N*IC*I SIMP1483
It*CS=d-l)*IL+lS SIMP1484
r(K)=FNUMBR(S,IPOS,IL) SIMP14R5
IF(K.GE.NT) GO TO 6G SIMP14E6
50 CUNTINUF. SIMP1487
IC=IC+l SIMP1488
RCTURN SIMP14B9
60 IC=-1 SIMP1490
RtTbRN SIMP1491
tNP SIMP1492
Kl AL FUNCTION FNUMBR*8(S,IPl.S,ILNG) SIMP1493
RKAI*H S(I),F ,H" SIMP 1494
DATA ALPHA/'.- •/ _g SIMP1495
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
IPOSl=IPCS+ILNG-l
ISf TaC
00 20 IMPOStlPOSl
IF|KOM.P(S,I,l,ALPHA,2).EQ.O) GO TO 15
IF(KCMP(S,I»l,ALPHA,l).EC.O) GO TO 3C
GO TO 20
15 ISET»l
CALL MOVE(ALPHAt3,lvS,I)
20 CONTINUE
ID=NUMBER(S,IPOS,ILNG) *
FNUMBRsID
GO TO 50
30 IPOS2*I+1
ILNGl-I-IPOS
ILNG2=ILNG-tLNGl-l
IF(ILNGl.LE.O) GO TO 60
IO=NUM.BER(S,IPOS,ILNGl)
FNUMBRMO
F=FNUMBR
40 If ( ILNG2.LE.O) GO TO 50
ID=NUMBEfR(S«IPOS2tILNG2)
FR=ID ,
FR=FR/10**ILNG2
IF(ISHT.EQ.l) FR*-FR
FNUf-BR=F+FR
50 IF( ISET.EQ.l ) FNUMBR=-FNUMBR
RETURN
60 F=0.0
GO TO 40
END
'
SUBROUTINE LOC •
PURPOSE
COMPUTE A VECTOR SUBSCRIPT FOR AN ELEMENT IN A MATRIX OF
SPECIFIED STORAGE MODE ,
s
USAGE
CALL LOC (It JfIRtNtM,MS>
DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS
I - ROW NUMBER CF ELEMENT
J - COLUMN NUMBER OF ELEMENT
IR - RESULTANT VECTOR SUBSCRIPT
N - NUMBER CF RCWS IN MATRIX
M - NUMBER OF COLUMNS IN MATRIX
MS - ONE DIGIT NUMBER FOR STCRAGE MODE OF MATRIX
0 - GENERAL
1 - SYMMETRIC
2 - DIAGONAL
,
REMARKS
NONE
SUBROUTINES AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REQUIRED
NONE ' <
METHOD
MS=0 SUBSCRIPT IS COMPUTED FCR A MATRIX KITH N*M ELEMENTS
IN STORAGE (GENERAL MATRIX)
MS=1 SUBSCRIPT IS COMPUTED FCR A MATRIX KITH N*(N+l)/2 IN
STORAGE (LPPER TRIANGLE CF .SYMMETRIC MATRIX). IF
ELEMENT IS IN LOKER TRIANGLLAR PORT ICNf SUBSCRIPT IS
CORRESPONDING ELEMENT IN UPPER TRIANGLE.
MS=2 SUBSCRIPT 1$ COMPLIED FCR A MATRIX KITH N ELEMENTS
IN STORAGE (DIAGONAL ELEMENTS OF BIAGCNAL MATRIX). •
IF ELEMEM IS NOT CN CIAGCNAL (AND THEREFORE NOT IN
STORAGElt IR IS SET TC ZERO.
SUBrtOUTINF LCC ( 1 1 J* IRf ^>t M»MS )
160
SIMP1496
SIMPH97
SI HP 1 4 98
SIMP1499
SIMP1SCO
SIMP1501
SIMP1502
SINP1503
SIMP1504
SINP1505
SIMP1E06
SIMP1507
siMPisoa
S1MP1509
SIMP1510
SIMP15U
SIMP1S12
SIMP1513
SIMP1SH
SIMP1515
SIMP1516
SIMP1517
SIMP1518
SIMP1519
SIMP1520
SIMP1521
SIMP1522
SIMP1523
SIMP1524
SIM.P1525
SIMP1526
SIWP1527
SIMP1S28
SIMP 1529
SIMP1530
SIMP1531
SIMP1532
SIMP 1533
SIMP1S34
SIMP1535
SIMP1536
SIMP1537
SIMP1S38
SIMP1539
SIMP1540
SIMP1541
SIMP1542
SIMP1543
SIMP154A
SIMP1545
SIMP15A6
SIMP1547
SIMP15A8
SIM.P1549
SIMP1S50
SIMP1551
SIMP1552
SIMP1553
SIMP1554
SIMP1555
SIMP1556
SIMP1557
SIMP1558
SIMP1559
SIMPlSfiO
SIMP1561
SIMP1562
SIMPI563
SIMP156A
S IMP 1565
SIMP1566
C IMP 1 567
• J .A 1 ' r J. J **
SIMP1568
SIMP 1^69
SIMP1670
-------
JX=J
IMMS-l) 10,20,10
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
e
c
10
20
22
2A
30
32
36
GO TO 36
IFIIX-JX) 22,24,24
IRX = IX+UX*JX-JX>/2
GO TO 76
IRX=JX*(IX*IX-IXI/2
GO TO 36
1RX=0
IFIIX-JX) 36*32,36
IRX=IX
IR=IRX
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE OGMPRD
PURPOSE
MULTIPLY TWO GENERAL MATRICES TO FCRM A RESULTANT GENERAL
MATRIX WHERE FIRST MATRIX IS CCUBLE PRECISION
USAGE
CALL OGMPRD
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
10
PURPOSE
MULTIPLY TWO GENERAL MATRICES TC FCRM A RESULTANT GENERAL
MATRIX
USAGE
CALL GMPRD(A,BtRtN,M,L)
DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS
A - NAME OF FIRST INPUT MATRIX
8 - NAME OF SECOND INPUT MATRIX
R - NAME OF OUTPUT MATRIX
N - NUMBER OF ROWS IN A
H - NUMBER OF CCLUVNS IN A ANC RCWS IN B
L - NUMBER OF COLUMNS IN B
REMARKS
ALL MATRICES MUST BE STORED AS GENERAL MATRICES
MATRIX R CANNOT BE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS MATRIX A
MATRIX R .CANNOT BE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS MATRIX B
NUMBER OF COLUMNS OF MATRIX A MUST BE EQUAL TO NUMBER OF
OF MATRIX B
SUBROUTINES AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REQUIRED
NONE
METHOD
THE M BY L MATRIX B IS PREMULTIPLIED BY THE N BY M MATRIX
AND THE RESULT IS STORED IN THE N BY L MATRIX R.
SUBROUTINE GMPRO(A,B«RtN,M,L)
DIMENSION A(l),B(l),R(l)
IR=C
IK=-M
DO 10 K=1,L
IK=IK+M
DO 10 J=ltN
IR=IR+1
JI=J-N
IP=IK
RUR) = 0
DO 10 I=ltM
JI=JI*N
IB=IB*l
R(IR)=RUR)+A(JI)*B(IB)
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE MINV
PURPOSE
INVERT A MATRIX
USAGE
CALL MlNV(A,N,0,LfM)
CESCRIPTIC^ OF PARAMETERS
A - INPUT MATRIX, DESTROYED IN CCMPUTAT ION, AND REPLACED BY
RbStLTANT INVERSE.
N - CRCER OF MATRIX A
D - PEStLTANT DETERMINANT
L - WORK VECTOR CF LENG1H M
M - KORK VECTCR CF LfcNGTH N
REMARKS
MATRIX A MUST HF A GENERAL MATRIX
AND FUNCTION SUBPRCGKAMS RFCUIRED
162
NONt
SIMP1646
SIMP1647
SIMP1648
SIMP 1649
SIMP1650
SIMPU51
SIMP1652
SIMPU53
SIMP1654
SIMP1655
SIMP1656
SIMP1657
SIMP1658
SIMP1659
SIMP1660
SIMP 1661
SIFP1662
SIMP1C63
SIM.P1664
SIMP1665
ROWSIMP1666
SIMP1667
SIMP1668
SIMPU69
SIMP1670
SIMP1671
SIMP1672
SIMP1673
SIMP1674
SIMP1675
•SIMP1676
SIMP1677
SIMP1678
SIMP 1679
SIMP1680
SIMP1681
SIM.P1682
SIMPU83
SIMP1684
SIMP1685
SIMP1686
SIMP1687
SIMP1688
SIMP1689
SIMP1690
SIMP1691
SIMP1692
SIMP1693
SIMP1694
SIMP1695
SIMP1696
.SIMP1697
SIMP1698
SIMP 1699
SIMP1700
SIMP1701
SIMP1702
SIMP1703
SIMP1704
SIMP1705
SIMP1706
SIMP1707
SIMP1708
SIMP1709
SIMP1710
SIMP1711
SIMP1712
SIMP1713
SIMP1714
SIMP 1715
SIMP1716
SIMP17I7
SIMP1718
SIMP1719
SIMPH20
-------
c
c
c
c
c
r
»*
c
c
r
V
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
f
%»
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
METHOD
THF STANDARD GAUSS-JORDAN METHOD IS USED. THE DETERMINANT
IS ALSO CALCULATED. A DETfRMINANT OF ZERO INDICATES THAT
THE MATRIX IS SINGULAR.
SUBROUTINE MINVt A,N,0«L ,M)
DIMENSION A( 1),L( l),H(l)
IF A DOUBLE PRECISION VERSION OF THIS ROUTINE IS DESIREOf THE
C IN COLUMN 1 SHOULD BE REMOVED FRCM THE DOUBLE PRECISION
STATEMENT WHICH FCLLChS.
DOUBLE PRECISION A, C,BIGA,HOLD
THE C MUST ALSO BE REMOVED FROM CCUBLE PRECISION STATEMENTS
APPEARING IN OTHER ROUTINES USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS
ROUTINE.
THE DOUBLE PRECISION VERSION OF THIS SUBROUTINE MUST ALSO
CONTAIN DOUBLE PRECISION FCRTRAN FUNCTIONS. ABS IN STATEMENT
10 MUST BE CHANGED TC DABS.
SEARCH FOR LARGEST ELEMENT
0=1.0
NK=-N
DC 80 K=l»N
NK=NK+N
L(K»=K
M(K1=K
KK=KK+K
EIGA=A(KK)
DC 20 J=K,N
IZ=N*(J-1 J
DC 20 I=K,N
IJ=IZ+I
10 IF(CABS(BIGA)-DARSIA(IJ>H 15t20t20
15 BIGA=A(IJ)
LIK)=I
H(K)=J
20 CCNTINUR
INTERCHANGE ROWS
J=L(K)
IF(J-K) 35,^5,25
25 KI=K-N
00 30 I=l,N
KI=KI*N
HOLr=-A(KI)
JI=KI-K*J
-A(KI)=A'UI)
30 AIJI) =HCLD
INTERCHANGE COLUMNS
35 I=PIK)
IHI-K) 45.Ab,3H
10 JP=N*CI-1)
. 00 AC J=l tN
JK=NK*J
JI = J1>+J
HCLI:=-A(JK)
A(JK)=A(Jl)
«0 A(JD =HOLO
, • nivinr- coLu^^ P* MINUS PIVOT (VALUE CF PIVOT ELFMENT is
"'','•; CCINTAINH) IN Wlr.A)
1£1
SIMP1721
SIMP1722
SIHP1723
SIMP1724
SIMP1725
, SIMP 1 726
SIMP1727
SIMP1728
SIMP1729
SIMPU30
SIMP 17 31
SIMP1732
SIMP1733
SIMP173A
SIMPI735
SIMP1736
SIMP1737
SIMP1738
SIMP1739
SIMP1740
SIMP1741
SIM.P1742
SIMPI743
SIMP1744
SIMP1745
SIMP1746
•SIMP1747
SIMP17A8
SIMP 1749
SIMP1750
SIMP1751
SIMP1752
SIMP1753
SIMP1754
SIMP1755
SIMP1756
SIKP1757
SIMP1758
SIMP1759
SIMP1760
SIKP1761
SIMP1762
SIMP1763
SIMPI764
SIMP1765
S1MP1766
SIMP1767
SIMP1768
SIMP 17 69
SIMP1770
SIMP1771
SIMP1772
SIMP1773
SIMP1774
SIMP1775
SIMP1776
SIMP1777
SIMP1778
SIMP1779
SIMP1780
SIMP1781
SIMP1782
SIMP1783
SIMP1784
SIMP1785
SIMP1786
SIMP1787
SIMP1788
SIMP1769
SIMP1790
SIMP1791
SIMP1792
SIMP1793
SIMP1794
SINP1795
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
r.
c
c
c
45
46
48
50
55
60
62
65
70
75
80
100
105
108
'110
120
125
130
150
IFfBIGA) 48,46,48
0=0.0
RETURN
DO 55 1 = 1, N
IFtl-K) 50,55,50
IK=NK+I
AIIK)=A(IK)/(-BIGA)
CONTINUE
REDUCE MATRIX
*
00 65 I=1,N
IK=NK*I
HOLD=A( IK)
IJ=I-N
DO 65 J = 1,N
IJ=IJ+N
IF(I-K) 60,65,60
IFCJ-K) 62,65,62
KJ=IJ-I+K
A(IJ)=HOLD*A(KJ)+A(IJ)
CONTINUE
DIVIDE ROW BY PIVCT
KJ=K-N
00 75 J=1,N
KJ=KJ+N
IF(J-K) 70,75,70
ACKJ)=A(KJ)/BIGA
CONTINUE
PRODUCT OF PIVOTS
0=0*6 1 GA
REPLACE PIVOT BY RECIPROCAL
A(KK)=1.0/BIGA
CONTINUE
FINAL ROM AND COLUFN INTERCHANGE
K=N
K=
-------
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
r.
C
r.
r.
C
RESULTANT MATRIX
USAGE
CALL SMPY(A,C,R,N,M,HS)
DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS
A - NAME OF INPUT MATRIX
C - SCALAR
R - NAME OF OUTPUT MATRIX
N - NUMBER OF ROWS IN MATRIX A AND R >
M - NUMBER OF COLUMNS IN MATRIX A AND R
MS - ONE DIGIT NUMBER FOR STORAGE MODE OF MATRIX A (AND R)
0 - GENERAL
1 - SYMMETRIC
2 - DIAGONAL
REMARKS
NONE
SUBROUTINES AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REQUIRED
LCC
METHOD
SCALAR IS MULTIPLIED BY EACH ELEMENT OF MATRIX
SUBROUTINE SMPY( A,C,R,N,M,MS)
DIMENSION A( 1),R(1)
'COMPUTE VECTOR LENGTH, IT
CALL LOC(NfM(IT,N,M,MS)
MULTIPLY BY SCALAR
DO 1 1=1, IT
R(I)=A(I)*C
Rf-TURN
END
SUBROUTINE MXOUT
PURPOSE
PRODUCES AN OUTPUT LISTING OF ANY SIZED ARRAY ON
LOGICAL UNIT 6
USAGE
CALL MXOUTCICCDE, A,N,M,MS?L INS, IPOS, ISP )
DESCRIPTION CF 'PARAMETERS • ,
ICODE- INPUT CODE NUMBER TO BE PRINTED ON EACH OUTPUT PAGE
A-NAME Cf OUTPUT MATRIX*
N-NUMBER OF HOWS IN A
M-NUfPER CF COLUMNS IN A
MS-STORAGE MODE CF A hHERE MS=
0-GENERAL
1-SYMMETRIC
2!-niAGCNAL
LINS-NUMBFR OF PRINT LINES ON THE PAGE (USUALLY 601
IPOS-NUMBER CF PRINT POSITIONS ACROSS THE PAGE (USUAlLY 132
ISP-LINH SPACING CODE, 1 FOR SINGLE SPACE, 2 FOR COUBLE
SPACE
REMARKS
NONE
suetnuMNf-s AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REQUIRED
LCC
METHOD
THIS SUHUllUTJN^ CRfATES A STANDARD OUTPUT 1ISTING OF ANY
SI7F.D AK4AY M1H ANY STORAGE PfC|. EACH PAGE IS HEADED KITH
SIMP1871
SIMP1872
SIMP1H73
SIMP1874
SIMP1875
SIMP1876
SIMP1677
SIMP1878
SIMP1879
SIMP1880
SIMPl£81
SIMP1882
SIMP1883
SIMP1884
SIMP1885
SIMP1886
SIMP1687
SIMP1888
SIMP1889
SIMP1890
SIMP1891
SIMP1892
SIMP 1893
SIMP1894
SIMP1895
.SIMP 1896
SIMP 1897
SIMP1898
SIMP1899
SIMP1900
SIMP15C1
SIMP1902
SIMP19C3
SIMP1904
SIMP1905
SIMP1906
SIMP19C7
SIMP1908
SIMP1909
SIMP1910
SIMP1911
SIMP1912
SIMP1913
SIMP191A
SIKP1915
SIMP1916
SIMPIS17
SIMP1918
SIMP1519
SIMP1920
SIMP1921
SIMP1922
SIMP1923
SIMP192A
SIMP1925
SIMP1926
SIMP1S27
SIMP1928
SIMP1S29
SIMP1930
SIMP1931
SIMP1932
ISIMPIS33
SIMP193A
SIMP1935
SIMP1936
SIMP1937
SIMP1938
SIMP1939
SIMP1940
SIMP19A1
SIMP1942
SIMP1943
SIMP1944
SIMP1S45
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
f.
c
f.
f.
c
RESULTANT MATRIX
USAGE
CALL SKPY(A,C,R,N,M,MS)
DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS
A - NAPE OF INPUT MATRIX
C - SCALAR
R - NAME CF CUTPUT MATRIX
N - NUMBER OF RCWS IN MATRIX A ANC R
H - NUMBER OF CGLLMNS IN MATRIX A AND R
MS - ONE DIGIT NUMBER FOR STORAGE MODE OF MATRIX A (AND R)
0 - GENERAL
1 - SYMMETRIC
2 - CIAGCNAL
REMARKS
NONE
SUBROUTINES AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REQUIRED
LCC
KEFHOD
SCALAR IS MULTIPLIED BY EACH ELEMENT OF MATRIX
SUBROUTINE SMPY( A,C.,R, N, M,MS)
DIMENSION Ad)tR(l)
COMPUTE VECTOR LENGTH, IT
CALL LOC(N*M,IT,N»M«MS)
MULTIPLY BY SCALAR
DO 1 1=1, IT
RU)=AU)*C
RETURN
END
SUBROUTINE MXOUT
PURPOSE
PRODUCES AN OUTPUT LISTING OF ANY SIZED ARRAY ON
LOGICAL UNIT 6
USAGE
_£ALL MXOUTUCCDEf A,N,F,MS,L INS, IPCS.ISP)
DESCRIPTION Cf PARAMETERS
ICODE- INPUT COUE NUMBER TO BE PRINTED ON EACH OUTPUT PAGE
A-NAME CF OUTPUT MATRIX
N-NUMRER OF ".OhS IN A
M-NUPPER CF CCLUPNS IN A
MS-STORAGE MODE CF A KHERf MS=
0-GENfRAL
I- SYMMETRIC
2-HlAGCNAL
LINS-NUMRFR OF PKINT LINES ON THE PAGE (USUALLY 60)
IPOS-NbKRER fF PRINT PCSIUCNS ACRCSS fl-E PAGE (USUALLY 132
ISP-UN4 SPACING CODE, 1 FOR SINGLE SPACE, 2 FOR CCUBLE
SPACE
REMARKS
NONE
SUt"
SIMP1936
SIMP1937
SIMP1938
SIMP1939
SIMP1940
SIMPI941
SIMP19'i2
SIMP1943
SIMP19^^
SIMP1S45
166
-------
c
c
c
c
r
w
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
r.
r.
THE CODE NUMBER, DIMENSIONS AND STORAGE MODE CF THE ARRAY.
EACH COLUMN AND RCW IS ALSO HEADED WITH ITS RESPECTIVE
NUMBER.
SUBROUTINE MXOUT i ICODfc,A,N,M ,MS, L INS, I PCS, ISP )
DIMENSION A(l),e(R)
1 FORMAT(lHl,5X, 7HMAWIX ,I5,6X,I3,5H RCWS.6X, 13, 8H COLUMNS,
18X,13HSTORAGE MODE , 1 1.8X.5HPAGE ,I2,/)
I FORMAT!//)
2 FORMAr!12X,8HCOLUMN , 7( 3X , 13, 10X J )
3 FORMAT! 1H )
4 FORMAT!1H ,7X,4HROH , I3,7!E 16.6 ) )
4 FORMATUH ,7X»4HROU , 13,7! 1PE16.6) )
5 FORMATTING, 7X.4HROW , 13,7! E16.6 ) )
5 FORMAT! !HC,7X,4hROW , 13,7! 1PE16.6JJ
J=l
I.RITE HEADING
NEND=IPOS/16-1
LEND=!LINS/ISP)-2
IPAGE=l
10 LSTRT=l
20 WRITE(6,1HCOOE,N,M,MS,!PAGE
20 WRITE(6,1 )
JNT=J+NEND-1
IPAGE=lPAGE+l
31 IF!JNT-M)33,33,32
32 JNT=M
33 CONTINUE
WR1 TE (6, 2 ) ( JCUR, JCUR=J , JNT )
IFIISP-1) 35,35,40
35 WRITEI6,3)
40 LTEND=LSTRT+LEND-1
DO 80 L=LSTRT,LTENO
FORM OUTPUT ROW LINE
DC 55 K=1,NENO
KK=K
JT = J+K-1
CALL LOC1L,JT,IJNT,N,M,MS)
B!K|=C.O
IF!IJNTJ5C,50,45
45 B(Kl=At IJNT)
50 CONTINUE
CHECK IF LAST COLUMN. IF YES GC TC 60
iriJT-M) 55,60,60
55 CONTINUE
END OF LINF, NOW WRITE
60 IFUSP-1)65,65,70
65 V.*I Tf-!6,4)L,!B! JK>, JV.= 1,KK)
GC TO 75
70 KHITF.I6,51L,CB!JK),JV=1,KK)
IF END .OF «OKS,GO CHECK COLUMNS
75 IHN-L)85,fl5,80
PO CONTINUE
»-NU HF PAGt, NOW CHfCK FCR MCRE CLTPUT
LST?»T=LST«T4LfcNC
&0 TO ? C
fNll OF CnLI.KNSt 'Hl K "ETLRN
SIMP1946
SIMP1947
SIMP1948
SIMP1949
SIMP1951
SIMP1952
SIMP1553
SIMP1954
SIMP1955
SIMP1956
SIMP1957
SIMP 19 58
SIfP1959
SIMP1960
SIMP1961
SIMP1962
SIMP1963
SIMP1964
SIMP1965
SIMP1966
SIMP1967
SIMP 1968
SIMP1969
SIMP1970
SIMP1971
SIMP1972
SIMP1973
SIMP1974
SIMP1975
SIMP1976
SIMP1977
SIMP1978
SIMP1979
SIMP1980
SIMP1981
SIMP1982
SIMP1983
SIMP1984
SIMP1985
SIMP1986
SIMP1987
SIMP1988
SIMP1989
SIMP1990
SIMP1991
SIMP1992
SIMP1993
SIMP1994
SIMP1995
SIMP1996
SIMP1997
SIMP1998
SIMP1999
SIMP2COO
SIFP2COI
SIMP2C02
SIMP2C03
SIMP2C04
SIMP2CC5
SIMP2C06
•SIMP-2CC7
SIMP2G08
SIM.P2C09
SIMP2C10
SIMP2C11
SIMP2C12
SIMP2C13
SIMP2014
SIMP2C15
SIMP2C16
SIMP2C17
SIKP2C18
<;tMP9riQ
ir (jT-M)qc»')5»'*5
167
;iMP7n?o
-------
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
t
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
90 J=j r« i
GO 10 10
95 RKTURN
END
.
SUBROUTINE MADD
PURPOSE
ADO TWO MATRICES ELEMENT BY ELEMENT TO FORM
MATRIX
• USAGE
CALL MADD(A,B,R,N,M,MSA,MSB)
DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS
A - NAME CF INPUT MATRIX
B - NAME OF INPUT MATRIX
R - NAME CF CUTPUT MATRIX
N - NUMBER OF ROWS IN A,B,R
M - NUMBER OF COLUMNS IN A,B,R
MSA - ONE DIGIT NUMBER FOR STORAGE MODE OF
0 - GENERAL
1 - SYMMETRIC
2 - DIAGONAL
MSB -,,SAME -AS -MSA- EXCEPT FOR MATRIX B
REMARKS
NONE
SUBROUTINES AND FUNCTION SUBPROGRAMS REGUIRED
LOG
t
METHOD
RESULTANT
MATRIX A
STORAGE MODE CF CUTPUT MATRIX IS FIRST DETERMINED. ADDITION
OF CORRESPONDING ELEMENTS IS THEN PERFORMED
THE FOLLOWING TABLE SHOWS THE STORAGE MODE
.
CF THE OUTPUT
MATRIX FUR ALL COMBINATIONS CF INPUT MATRICES
A B
GENERAL GENERAL
GENERAL SYMMETRIC
GENERAL OIAGCNAL
SYMMETRIC GENERAL
SYMMETRIC SYhMETRIC
SYMMETRIC DIAGONAL
DIAGONAL GENERAL
DIAGONAL SYMMETRIC
DIAGONAL OIAGCNAL
SUBROUTINE MADD ( A,B,R,N,M,MSA,MSB )
DIMENSION A(l),fi(l),R( I)
DETERMINE STORAGE MCCE OF CUTPUT KATRIX
IFU'SA-MSB) 7,5,7
5 CALL LOC(N,M,NM,N,M,MSA)
GC TO 100
7 MTFST=MSA*MSB
MSR=0
IFJMTEST) 20,20,10
10 FSR=l
20 IF(MTEST-2) 35,35,3C
30 MSR=2
LCCAIE ELEMENTS AND PERFORM ADDITION
35 DC 90 J=l,M
DU 90 1=1, N
C'.LL LTCJ i,Jt I.M,N,M,MS»O
R
GENERAL
GENERAL
GENERAL
GENERAL
SYMMETRIC
SYMMETRIC
GENERAL
SYMMETRIC
DIAGONAL
SIMP?C?l
SIKP7C?2
S IMP?C? j
SII*P?C?4
SIPP?C?5
S I PP?C?6
SIMP?C?7
SIMP2C28
SIMP7C29
SIMP2C30
SIMP?C31
SIMPPC32
SIMPP033
SIMP2C3A
SIMP2C35
SIMP2C36
SIMP2C37
SIMP2C38
SIMP2C39
SIFP2CAO
SIKP2C41
SIMP2C42
S IMP2C43
SIMP2C44
SIHP2C45
SIMP2C46
SIMP2C47
SIMP2C48
SIMP2C49
SIMP2C50
SIMP2C51
SIMP2C52
SIMP2053
SIMP2C54
SIMP2055
SIMP2C56
SIMP2C57
SIMP2C58
SIMP2C59
SIMP2C60
SIMP2C61
SIMP2C62
SIMP2C63
SIMP2C6A
SIMP2C65
SIMP2C66
SIMP2067
SIMP2C68
SIMP2C69
SIMP2C70
.SIMP2C71
SIMP2C72
SIMP2C73
SIMP2C74
SIMP2C75
SIMP2C76
SIMP2P77
SIMP2C78
SIMP2C/9
SIMP2C80
SIMP2C81
SIMP2C82
SIMP2C83
SIMP2C84
SIMP2CB5
SIMP2C86
SIMP2C87
SIMP2C88
SIMP2C89
SIMP2C90
SIMP2C91
SIMP2C92
It ( IJ«) 40,90,40
40 CALL tcctI«J»'JA.N.M.MSAI
AI L-O.O
168
SIMP2C95
-------
c
c
c
IHIJA) 50,60.50
50 AEL=A(IJA)
60 CALL LOC(ITJ, I JB,N,H,MSH)
BEL=0.0
ir(IJB) 70,80,70
70 RLL=B(IJR)
80 R(IJR)=ABL*BEL
90 CONTINUE
RETURN
ADO MATRICES FOR OTHER CASES
100 DO 110 1=1,NM
110 R(I)=A(I)+B(I)
RETURN
END
NUMBER START 0
BC 15,121151
DC X»7- .
DC CL7«NUVBERt
STM 14,12,12(13)
BALR 10,0
USING *,10
N=NUMBER(A,IPOS,ILNG)
ILNG PAY NOT EXCEED 15
LM 2*4,0(1)
L 3,0(3)
L 4,0(4)
LR 5,4
BCTR 5,0
LR 6,3
BCTR 6,0
AR 2,6
STC 4.PM+1
PM MVC V>GRK(G),0(2)
LA 2,WORK
LR 9,2
LR 7,4
LA 8*1
LOOP CLI 0(9),C1-*
BNE NXT1
MVI 0(9),C«0«
LNR 8,8
B TST
NXTl CLI 0(9),C'+f
BNE TST
HVI 0(9),C»Of
1ST CLI 0(9),C« •
BNE TST3
MVI 0(9), ^0*
TST3 A 9,=F'1«
BCT 7,LOOP
BCTR 9,C
LTR 8,H
BP BYBY
LR 9,2
AR 9,5
GI 0(9),X«DO»
B CYCY
BYBY 01 C(9),X'CO»
CYCY L 9,=F«15«
SLA 9,4(0)
AR 9,5
STC 9.PCK+1
PCK PACK CBL,0(0.2)
CVB n,nRL+8
LTR 8,ri
RP AKNO
LNR 0,C
LK ?.12,28(13)
169
SIPP2C96
SIKP2C97
SIPP2C98
SIKP2C99
SIPP21CO
SIMP2101
SIPP^'102
SIMP2103
SI HP2104
SIMP2105
SIKP21C6
SIMP2107
SIKP21C8
SIMP2109
SIKP2110
SIMP2U1
SIPP2112
SIMP2113
SIKP2114
SIFP2115
SIMP2116
SIMP2117
SIPP2118
SIMP2U9
SIHP2120
SIMP2121
SIPP2122
SIMP2123
SIMP2124
SIMP2125
SIMP2126
SIMP2127
SIMP2128
SIMP2129
SIMP2130
SIMP2131
SIMP2132
SIKP2133
SIFP2134
SIMP2135
SIMP2136
SIMP2137
SIMP2138
SIMP2139
SIFP2140
SIMP2141
SIFP2142
SIMP2143
SIMP2144
SIMP2145
SIMP2146
SIMP2147
SIMP2148
SIMP2149
SIPP2150
SIMP2151
SIKP2152
SIMP2153
SIPP2154
SIMP2155
SIMP2156
SIMP2157
SIKP2158
SIMP2159
SIPP2160
S1MP2161
SIPP2162
SIMP 2163
SIMP2164
SIMP2165
SIMP2166
SIMP2KS7
SIMP2168
SIMP2169
SIPP2170
-------
PVI l?(l)).X*FM
ICR 15, 14
m>.t os ?p
WORK PS CL16
»NO Nt'^TUR
KCKP STAR1 0
nc I5,icu5)
re K'51
re ci5|KC"P1
STM 14,fl,12(13)
RALR 8,0
USING
FORTRAN SUBROUTINE FOR CHARACTER CCfPARISCN
USAGE GIVEN BY
K=KOMP(A1,IPOSI,ILNC1,A2,IPCS2)
THE ILNG1 CHARS(BYTES) STARTING AT ADDRESS A1+UPCS1-1)
ARE COMPARED AGAINST THE ILNG1 CHARS(OYTfcS) STARTING AT ADDRESS
A2*(IPGS2-l)
SINP2171
RESULT:
K=-l IF LESS THAN
K=0 IF l-CUAL
K=l If- GREATER THAN
Al AND A? PAY BE DIMENSIONED OR UNDIVENSICNED
*
*
*
*
*
*
******<.*** <=***t*** *****«*#*************«************#******
SR 0,0
LH 2,6.0(1)
L 3,0(3)
L 4,0(4)
I 6,0(6)
LA 7,1
SR 3,7
SR 6,7
AR 2,3
AR 5,6
S«< 4,7
STC 4,fVC+l
HVC CLC 0(0,2),0(5)
CE FINE
BL NEG
LR 0,7
B FINE
NFG S'R 0, 7
FINE LM ?t8,28l13)
^VI 12(13),X«FFI
RCR 15,14
rwn KGNP
PCVE START 0
RC l«i,12(15)
nc x«7«
OC CL7«VCVt'
ST^ 14, P,12(13)
RALR 8,C
USING *,H
USAGE:
CALL «*OVF(Ai,IPOSl,LNGl,A2,IPCA2)
S IMP | \Gl CMPACTFRS AT A1+(I PCS 1-1 )
A?*( IIM:<;?-I )
* Rf SUITS U'O'I'MJICTAPLE IF
*
CVERLAP
SIHP2173
SIMP2174
SIHP2175
SIKP2176
SIMP2177
SIPP2178
SIPP2179
SIKP2180
SIMP2181
SIfP2182
SIKP2183
SIKP2184
SIMP 2 18 5
SIKP21H6
SIKP2187
SIFP2188
SIMP 2 189
SIPP2190
SIKP2191
SIKP2192
SIMP2193
SIHP2194
SIKP2195
SIFP2196
SIMP2197
SIHP2198
SI HP 2 199
SIHP2200
SIKP2201
SIMP2203
SIFP2204
SIKP2205
SIFP22C6
SIKP2207
SIHP2208
SIMP2209
SIKP2210
SIMP2211
SIKP2212
SIKP2213
SIKP2214
SIKP2215
SIHP2216
SIMP2217
SIKP2218
SIKP2H9
SIKP2220
SIMP2221
SIHP2222
SIHP2223
•S1PP2224
SIKP2225
:SIKP22?6
SIHP2227
SIPP2228
SI^f'2229
SIKP2230
SIfP223l
SIKP2232
SIf'P2233
SIPP2234
SIMP2236
SIVP2237
SIPP2P39
170
SIfP22'.2
SIMP?//«1
SIMP 2 2'' *
-------
L A,0(A)
L 6,0(6)
LA 7,1
SR A, 7
STC A,MVOl
AR ?,3
SR ?,7
AP 5,6
SR 5,7
HVC KVC 0(0,5),0(2)
LM 2,ti,?6(13)
MVI 12(13),X«FF«
PCR 15,LA
END NOVE
SIMP22A6
SIMP22A8
SIMP22A9
SIMP2250
SIHP2251
S1MP2252
SIMP2253
SIMP225A
SIMP2256
SIMP225?
SIPP2258
SIMP2259
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDICES
Appendix ; Jata Bank
Table
Residual Generation Coefficients
Food and Kindred Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P HC
12,066
9,653
7,239
SO
x
__
—
--
CO
-.
--
NO
X
__
—
--
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
9,420
7,065
2,355
HC
66
50
33
SO
X
5,974
4,481
2,987
CO
175
131
86
NO
X
1,928
1,446
964
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
25,780
19,335
12,890
SS
39,569
29,677
19,785
DS
7,218
5,053
3,609
WW
22.0
20.9
16.5
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib le
Total
74,239
51,968
44,546
172
-------
Table Tla
Residual Transformation Coefficients; Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H' L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Jecondarv Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
173
-------
Table Tib
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99 (BOD)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
•
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta.
174
-------
Table Tic
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
l
P SO NO HC CO SW
2t 3v
175
-------
Table P2
Residual Generation Coefficients
Tobacco
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative .Production Processes
Other "than Heat said Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
.._ __ __ _. --
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
4,609
3,457
1,152
HC
30
23
15
SO
X
2,494
1,871
1,247
CO
84
63
42
NO
X
673
505
337
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
• —
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombustible
Total
,
176
-------
Table T2a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* HI L H L Ti L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
00 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
177
-------
Table I2b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentat ion
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS
0
Sludge
35 (BOD)
9 (SS) + 1(DS)
.1
.05
.95 .9 (BOD) + .95(SS) + .5(DS)
.01 .01 .5 .99 (BOD)+ .99 CSS)*. 5 (DS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO EC CO t SW*
•o. 2£ . _ ' .
* For further treatment of P and SW . see 3-Ta.
178
-------
Table T2c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
r
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7<(P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
sw
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
'
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
J\. Jt
179
-------
Table
Residual Generation Coefficients
Textile Mill Products
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P HC
SO CO
X
NO
X
—
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
13,745
10,309
3,436
HC
101
76
51
SO
X
347,482
260,612
173,741
CO
261
196
131
NO
X
2,667
2,000
1,334
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD; '
21,400
21,400
19,260
SS DS
24>502
22,052
20,827
WW
39.43
37.46
35.49
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib 1 e
Total
180
-------
Table T3a
Residual Transformation Coefficients; Air
Air Pollutant Trans format: ion Factors .far. Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
'
p sa NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom1 Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
181
-------
lable T3b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentat ion
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS
0
Sludge
35 (BOD) + .9 (SS)+1(DS)
.05
.95
.95(SS) + -5(DS)
.01
.01 .5 ,99(BOD) + .99(SS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW . see 3-Ta,
182
-------
Table T3c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7 (P)
.8 (?)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 CP)
.9 CP)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
j£ X,
183
-------
Table
Residual Generation Coefficients
Apparel and Related Products
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
— M MM • M MM MM
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
715
536
179
HC
6
5
3
SO
X
668
501
334
CO
1
0.8
0.5
NO
X
200
150
100
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
—
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib 1 e
Total
MM
184
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
C0 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
185
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35 (BOD) + . 9 (SS)-H(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .9!
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
186
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
sw
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Prccipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
•7!(P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99CP)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
JC JC
187
-------
Table P5
Residual Generation Coefficients
Lumber and Wood Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO CO
X
NO
X
—
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
2,617
1,963
654
HC
29
22
'15
SO
X
3,355
2,516
~ 1,678
CO
58
44
29
NO
X
1,039
779
520
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
--
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib 1 e
Total
2, 518, 295 l
2,014,636
1,762,807
188
-------
Table T5a
Residual Transformation Coefficients; Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H' L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
,99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS ..SW
XX
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
189
-------
Table T5b •
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
• & Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.1
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9
.95(SS)-i-.5(DS)
.5 .99(BOD)+.99(SS) + .
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta',
190
-------
Table T5c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
IS
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
•95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
Jtii 3t
191
-------
Table P6
Residual Generation Coefficients
Furniture and Fixtures
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: .Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation .
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
5,675
4,256
1,419
HC
38
29
19
80
X
3,319
2,489
1,660
CO
104
78
52
NO
X
976
732
488
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
~~
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombustible
Total
254,861
, 203,889
178,403
192
-------
Table T6a
Residual TransformationCoefficients; Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO
X X
L* H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
•
HC ' C0 Solid Waste
H L H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.9S(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0 0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
193
-------
Table T6b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -^ Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35 (BOD) + . 9 (SS)-H(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9 (BOD)+ .95 (SS)-
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99 (BOD)+.99 (SS)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
3t A.
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
194
-------
Table T6c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
/
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
;7 CP)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
•95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary' Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC . CO SW
X X >
,
195
-------
Table P7
Residual Generation Coefficients
Paper and Allied Products
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
29,882
31,376
32,870
HC
__
--
. --
SO
X
__
—
CO
34,500
36,224
37,949
NO
x
__
—
--
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
65,275
48,956
16,319
HC
445
334
223
SO
X
39,115
29,336
19,558
CO
1,206
905
603
NO
X
.11,366
8,525
5,683
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
144,708
166,414
180,885
SS
73,582
73,582
77,261
DS
315,784
299,995
299,995
WW
374.73
412.20
449.67
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombustible
Total
254,861
263,329
274,778
196
-------
Table T7a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H1 L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
-
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
•9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
-
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
XX
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
197
-------
Table T7b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35 (BOD) + . 9 (SS)+1(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9 (BOD) + . 95 (SS)
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99(BOD)+.99(SS)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta
198
-------
Table T7c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOx
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
.
P SO NO HC CO SW
3t Ji
199
-------
Table P8
Residual Generation Coefficients
Printing and Publishing
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P HC
SO CO NO
X X
__
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
582
437
145
HC
6
5
3
SO
X
724
543
362
CO
13
10
7
NO
X
271
203
136
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOO
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
__
--
--
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib le
Total
388,181
349,363
329,953
200
-------
Table T8a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H' L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
00 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
• 7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
201
-------
Table T8b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35 (BOD)*. 9 (SS)+1(DS)
Screening
Sedimentat ion
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9 (BOD) + . 95 (SS) •
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99 (BOD)+. 99 (SS)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW . see 3-Ta,
202
-------
Table T8o
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.r (p)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Bumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Watef Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Medi£
P SO NO HC CO SW
x> *t
203
-------
fable P9
Residual Generation Coefficients
Chemical and Allied Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
4,717
5,715
5,398
EC
17,237
15,513
15,558
SO
X
12,882
11,594
11,594
1
CO .
10,886
9,798
9,798
NO
X
3,629
3,266
3,266
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
51,615
38,710
12,905
HC
324
243
162
SO
X
26,371
19,778
13,186
CO
937
701
469
NO
X
•9,127
6,835
4,564
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
121,470
97,175
91,101
SS
23,792
20,224
19,034
DS
647,832
485,850
453,400
WW
101.73
111.90
116.98
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib le
Total
74,281
81,712
85,422
204
-------
Table T9a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
00 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
•7 (P) .2 (P)
•8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
205
-------
Table T9b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
« «
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS
0
Sludge
35(BOD)
(SS)-H(DS)
.01
.05
.01
.95
.95(SS) + .5(DS)
.5 .99(BOD)-«-.99(SS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
/
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
Jt 4f£
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta.
206
-------
Table T9c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
.from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
X
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:r (p)
.8 (P)
.95 m
.99(P)
•9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
207
-------
Table P10
Residual Generation Coefficients
Petroleum and Coal Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other -than. .Heat and; Power Generation.
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
32,583
34,212
30,954
HC
150,195
165,214
135,175
SO
x
106,722
117,394
96,050
11. \ I • r i i
CO
94,874
104,361
85,386
NO
x
1,307
1,437
1,176
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Hea.te.and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
4, 197
3,148
1,049
HC
40
30
20
SO
x
4,576
3,432
2,288
CO
91'
68
46
NO
x
7,090
5,318
3,545
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
10,560
11,088
8,448
SS
9,716
9,716
8,258
DS
15,397
16,937
12,317
WW
43.76
48.13
37.19
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
-
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Npncombustible Total
* --:
208
-------
Table TlOa
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*'
.30
.20
i
- .05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
II L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
-9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
209
-------
Table TlOb
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
.& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.1
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9
.95(SS)-»-.5(DS]
.5 ,99(BOD)+.99(SS) + .
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO, HC CO SW*
X ' X_,
*
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta
210
-------
TabJle TlOo
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~ '' from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
,, 7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOx
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
•'7! (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
•95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia feesidual Transformation Coefficients
Open Pumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
X X
211
-------
Residual Generation Coefficients
Rubber and Plastic Products
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
« •• •» *• •» M ••*• •* *»
* -1
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes^
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
18,044
13,533
4,511
HC
120
90
60
SO
X
10,264
7,698
5,132
CO
330
248
165
t
NO
X
2,922
2,192
1,961
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,637
1,637
1,637
SS
2,046
2,046
2,046
DS
—
ww
6.73
6.73
6.73
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
1
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombustib le
Total
202,214
222,436
V232,546
212
-------
Table Tlla
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -r PrimarV Residual Transformation Coefficients
*
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitatpr
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P £0 NO
- * x
L* ff L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
HC co Solid Waste
H L H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (*>)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
-9 (P) .8 (P)
0 0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
' ' ':-•', .' •- L. ' , -' •_,'• ,.'• ' .' '" ' '-. , .
' J ",
P SO •••••;#)• HC CO SS ,SW
x ,rx
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Ef£ici0iw:y
213
-------
Table Tlib
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
*& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35 (BOD)+ .9 (SS)-H(DS)
.1
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9
.5
.95(SS) + .5(DS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW .see 3-Ta,
214
-------
Table Tile
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:r (p)
.8 (P)
.95CP)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
j£ 2C
215
-------
Table P12
Residual Generation Coefficients
Leather and Leather Products
Unit of activity:
Level of pollutants:
Level of waste water:
Million dollars of output
Kilograms
Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
__
--
•• mm
HC
•» mm
--
—
SO
X
__
--
--
CO
__
--
•• mm
NO
x
....
--
--
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
6,817
5,113
1,704
HC
51
38
"26
SO
X
4,866
3,650
2,433
CO
130
98
65
NO
X
4,928
3,696
2,464
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
•• mm
ww
7.88
r. 6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombust ib le
Total
mm mm
216
-------
Table T12a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
217
-------
Table T12b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9 (BOD)+.95(SS)+.5(DS)
.5
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta
218
-------
Table T12o
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
.7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
/
P SO NO HC CO SW
X X
219
-------
Table P13
Residual Generation Coefficients
Stone. Clay and Glass Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO CO
X
NO
X
132,074
118,867
118,867
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
22,216
16,662
5,554
HC
421
316
211
SO
X
35,102
26,327
17,551
CO
1,195
896
598
NO
X
•13,025
9,769
6,513
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
—~
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombus t ib le
Total
158,524 .
174,376 "
190,227
220
-------
Table T13a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 fP) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
221
-------
Table T13b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sed imentat ion
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS
0
Sludge
35 (BOD) + .9 (SS)-H(DS)
.01
.05
.01
.95
.5
95(SS)H-.5(DS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
/-
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
222
-------
Table T13o
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:7-(p)
.8 (P)
.95 m
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
•2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
.
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
X X
N
223
-------
Table P14
Residual Generation Coefficients
Primary Metal Industries
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
40,337
46,387
50,421
BC
...»
SO
x
72,745
83,657
90,932
CO
11,151
12,824
13,939
NO
x
— „
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation'
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
27,063
20,297
6,766
HC
200
150
100
SO
x •
18,823
14,117
9,912
CO
515
386
258
NO
X
7,023
5,267
3,512
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
6,267
6,267
6,267
SS
61,358
55,222
52,154
DS
81,593
81,593
81,593
WW
157.76
173.54
189.32
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
/
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombust ib le
Total
37,279
41,007,,
44,734 (
224
-------
Table Tl*fa
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes— Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H' L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
•7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
,.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open -Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
225
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coeff±c±ents: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)-H(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9 (BOD)+. 95 (SS)-
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99 (BOD)+.99(SS)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
•
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta.
226
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
i /
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficient's
from Solid Waste to Other Media~~
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
,80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:'T (p)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
*
227
-------
Table P15
11
Residual Generation Coefficients
Fabricated Metal Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power. Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
_»
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
3,292
2,469
823
HC
29
22
15
SO
X
3,076
2,307
1,538
CO
67
50
34
NO
X
1,105
829
553
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS WW
7.88
6.31-
6.31
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
*
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncombustible
Total
-
228
-------
Table T15a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H' L H . L H L
.80
.70
/
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
-
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
229
-------
Table T15b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes —Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
»
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.1
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9 (BOD)+.95(SS)+.5(DS)
.5 .99(BOD) + .99(SS)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta. .
230
-------
Table T15o
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media'
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X » X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:T (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash tp Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
a X.
X
231
-------
Table P16
Residual Generation Coefficients
Machinery. Except Electrical
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
EC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
—
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
5,344
4,008
1,336
HC
40
30
20
SO
X
3,713
2,785
1,857
CO
102
77
51
NO
X
1,149
862
575
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
643
611
578
SS
536
429
402
DS
__
--
—
WW
2.87
2.29
2.29
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib le
Total
• M
232
-------
Table Tl6b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste. (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
233
-------
Table Tl6b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
.Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD) + .9 (SS) + 1(DS)
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9 (BOD) + .95 (SS) + . 5(DS;
.5 . 99 (BOD)+ . 99 (SS) + . 5
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
X X
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
234
-------
Table Tl6c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies'-~- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~from Solid Waste to Other Media~
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
p
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber-
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:r (p)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
•3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
3C X.
i
235
-------
Table P17
Residual Generation Coefficients
Electrical Machinery
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P HC
SO CO
X
NO
x
1
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
3,488
2,616
872
HC
26
20
13
SO
X
2,460
1,845
1,230,
CO
67
50
34
NO
X
774
581
387
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
941
894
847
SS
269
215
202
DS
__
--
—
ww
4.52
3.62
3.62
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ambus t ib le
Total
__
236
-------
Table T17a
Residual Transformation Coefficients; Air
Electrical nachiner.y
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* H L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
00 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
•8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) ,95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
237
-------
Table T17b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
.1
DS Sludge
0 .35CBOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.01
.05
.01
.95 .9 (BOD)+.95(SS)+.5(DS)
.5
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
238
-------
Table T17c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:r- (?)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
\
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
X X
239
-------
Table P18
Residual Generation Coefficients
Transportation Equipment
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste vater: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emis8ior\st frgm. Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Bower Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
HC
SO
X
CO
NO
x
—
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
4,908
3,681
1,227
HC
33
25
17
SO
x
2,854
2,141
1,427
CO
90
68
45
NO
X
844
633
422
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
891
846
802
SS
__
^ M
^•B
DS
• . --
••-.-'
— —
ww
4.55
3.64
3.64
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production.Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
Noncorabustible Total
•• mt
mm mm
240
-------
Table T18a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
L* ff L H L H L
.80
.70
. . -
.10 ,
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
C0 Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
.7 (P) .2 (P)
.8 (P) .3 (P)
.95(P) .9 (P)
.99(P) .95(P)
.9 (P) .8 (P)
0
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
-
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
241
-------
Table T18b
Residual Transformation Coefficients; Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes .-- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
PrimaryTreatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS
DS Sludge
0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.1
.05
.95 ,9 (BOD)+.95(SS)+.5(DS)
.01 .03, ,5 .99(BOD)+.99(SS) + .
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
, From Sludge to Other Media
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
P* SO NO HC CO SW*
*** ^» >
•
* For further treatment of P and SW , see 3-Ta,
242
-------
Table T18c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
from Solid Waste to Other Media ~~
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
'
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KG/MT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrbstatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner-
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
i ' i
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:T"!
.8
.95
.99
.9
0
m
m
m
CP)
(p)
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
X. X
243
-------
Table P19
Residual Generation Coefficients
Instruments and Related Products
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Other than Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P HC
SO
X
CO
NO
X
__ __ __ __ _ _
Air Pollutant: Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Heat and Power Generation
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
P
6,596
4,947
1,649
HC
47
,35
24
SO
X
4,211
3,158
2,206
CO
123
92
62
NO
X
1,194
896
597
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
BOD
1,381
1,312
1,243
SS
3,294
2,635
2,470
DS
•• •»
WW
7.88
6.31
6.31 ,
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process 1
Process 2
Process 3
Combustible
None ombus t ib le
Total
.
244
-------
Table T19a
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Air
Air Pollutant Transformation-Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -*• Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Preqipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO • NO HC
X X
L* H' L H L H L
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60 '
0
co Solid Waste
H L (Bottom Ash)
•7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SS .SW
X X
*H: High Efficiency
L: Low Efficiency
245
-------
Table T19b
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Water
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes — Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Primary Treatment
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
& Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
BOD
.65
SS DS Sludge
.1 0 .35(BOD)+.9 (SS)+1(DS)
.1
.01
.05 .95 .9 (BpD)+.95CSS)+.5(DS)
.01
.5 .99(BOD)+.99(SS)+.5(DS}
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Incinerator
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
From Sludge to Other Media
P* ' SO NO HC CO SW*
XX
* For further treatment of P and SW . see 3-Ta
246
-------
Table T19c
Residual Transformation Coefficients: Solid Waste (Combustible)
Solid Waste Transformation Factors for Alternative Control
Technologies -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
~from Solid Waste to Other Media
Incinerator
Incinerator
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
SOX
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOx
KG/MT
1
1
SW
KGYMT
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Particulate to Other Media
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
P SO NO HC
X X
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0
CO
:r (p)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
0
SW
.2 (P)
.3 (P)
.9 (P)
.95(P)
.8 (P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
From Bottom Ash to Other Media
P SO NO HC CO SW
2C Jt
247
-------
Table P20
Residual Generation Coefficients
Household
Level of activity: Number of housing units
Level of pollutants-7 Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emission Factors for Single and Multiple Housing Units
P HC SO CO
Single Dwelling Units
Multiple Dwelling Units
Water Pollutant Discharge Factors for
High, Middle, Low Income Housing Units
Units BOD SS DS WW
High Income Housing
Middle Income Housing
Low Income Housing
Solid Waste Generation Factors for
High, Middle, Low Income Housing Units
Units Combustible Noncombustible Total
High Income Housing
Middle Income Housing
Low Income Housing
248
-------
Table P21
Residual Generation Coefficients
Agriculture
Unit of activity: Million dollars of output
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Level of waste water: Million liters
Air Pollutant Emissions from Alternative Production Processes
Process
Process
Process
1
2
3
P HC SOX CO NOX
Water Pollutant Discharges from Alternative Production Processes
Process
Process
Process
1
2
3
BOD SS DS WW
Solid Waste Generation from Alternative Production Processes
Process
Process
Process
1
2
3
Combustible
Noncombustible
Total
249
-------
Table P22
Residual Generation Coefficients
Transportation
Unit of activity: Number of vehicles
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Air Pollutant Emission Factors for Different Vehicle Types
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
Passenger Car
Passenger Bus
Truck
Aircraft
250
-------
Table P23
Residual Generation Coefficients
Electric Power Plant
Unit of activity: BBU
Level of pollutants: Kilograms except heat
Level of waste water: Million liters
Heat:
Air Pollutant Emission Factors for Alternative Fuel Types
SO,
NO,
HC
CO
Coal:
High sulfur content
Average sulfur content
Low sulfur content
Oil
Gas
Nuclear Power
Water Pollutant Discharge Factors
Fossil fuel
Nuclear power
Heat SS DS WW
Solid Waste Generation Factors
Fossil fuel
Nuclear power
Combustible
Noncombustible
251
-------
Table P2*f
Residual Generation Coefficients
Municipal Incinerator
Unit of activity: Metric tons
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Air Pollutant Generation Factors
for Alternative Incinerator Types
Incinerator Type
Multiple Chamber
Multiple Chamber
With Water Spray
P
KG/MT
15
7
HC
KG/MT
.75
.75
s°x
KG/MT
.75
.75
CO
KG/MT
17.5
17.5
NOX SW
KG/MT KG/MT
1
1
252
-------
Table T24a
Residual Transformation Coefficients
Municipal Incinerator
Air Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficients
Settling Chamber
Cyclone
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubber
Afterburner
P
H*
.30
.20
.05
.01
.10
SOX NOX HC CO Solid Waste
L*HLHLHLHL (Bottom Ash)
.80
.70
.10
.05
.20 .10 .20 .40 .60
0 0
.7 (P)
.8 (P)
.95(P)
.99(P)
.9 (P)
.2
.3
.9
.95
.8
(P)
(P)
(P)
CP)
(P)
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Solid Waste (Bottom Ash) to Other Media
P
sox N0x HC co ss sw
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
Discharge to
Water Bodies
253
-------
Table PZ5
Residual Generation Coefficients
Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant
Unit, of Activity: Million liters of Waste Water
Level of pollutants: Kilograms
Water Pollutant Factors for Different Levels
of Concentration of Waste Materials
BOD SS DS
High concentration
Average concentration 140
Low concentration
254
-------
Table
Residual Transformation Coefficients
Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant
Water Pollutant Transformation Factors for Alternative Treatment
Processes -- Primary Residual Transformation Coefficient?
BOD SS DS Sludge
Primary Treatment .65 .1 0 .35 (BOD)+ .9 (SS)+1(DS)
Screening
Sedimentation
Neutralization
§ Storage
Chemical Addition
Secondary Treatment .1 .05 .95 .9 (BOD)+.95(SS)+.5(DS)
Activated Sludge
Trickling Filter
Tertiary Treatment .01 .01 .5 .99(BOD)+.99(SS)+.5(DS)
Activated Carbon
Iron Exchange
Intermedia Residual Transformation Coefficients
From Sludge to Other Media
P* SOX NOX HC CO
Fluidized Bed
Incinerator .47 .01 .006
Multiple Hearth
Atomized Suspension
and Firing
Wet Air Oxidization
Open Dumping
Sanitary Landfill
SW*
.514 (Sludge)
*For further treatment of P and SW, see 3-Ta,
255
-------
SECTION IX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Air Quality Implementation Planning Program. TRW, Washington, B.C. 1970.
Alonso, W. Location and Land Use. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1965.
Ayres, L., Gutmanis, I. and Shapanka, A. Environmental Implications of
Technological and Economic Change for the United States, 1967-2000:
An Input-Output Analysis. IRT, Washington, B.C. December 1970.
Ayres, R.U., Kneese, A.U. "Production, Consumption, and Externalities."
AER, Vol. 59, No. 3 (June, 1969), 282-297.
Baumol, W.J., and Bradford, D.F. "Detrimental Externalities and Non-
convexity of the Production Set." Economica, Vol. 39 (May, 1972).
Boulding, Kenneth E. "The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth."
Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy, edited by H. Janet.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1966.
Burton, C.L. "Quant i tat ion of Stack Gas Flow." Vol. 22, No. 8, APCA,
August, 1972.
Compilation of Air Poliotant Emission Factors, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1972.
Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study; Preliminary Report and Findings,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of
Interior, Washington, D.C.
Dorfman, R» and Jaeoby, H. "A Model of Public Decisions Illustrated
by a Water Pollution Problem," in U.S. Congress Joint Economic Com-
mittee, The Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expenditures; The
PPB System. Vol. 1, GPO, Washington, D.C., 1969.
. i
Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr. "Economics of Wastewater Treatment," Chemical
Engineering, August, 1969.
Evans, S.C. "Practical Aspects of Sewage Treatment: .The Pros and Cons
of Forty Years' Experience of Water Pollution Control," Water Pollu-
tion Control, 1973.
256
-------
Environmental Quality. The Second Annual Report of the Council on
Environmental Quality, 1971.
Environmental Quality. The Third Annual Report of the Council on
Environmental Quality, 1972.
Fair, G.M., Geyer, J.C. and Okun, D.A. Elements of Water Supply
and Wastewater Disposal. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1971.
Fair, G.M., Geyer, J.C. and Okun, D.A. Water and Wastewater Engineering.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968.
Forrester, J.W. Urban Dynamics. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1969.
Forrester, J.W. World Dynamics. Cambridge: Wright-Allen Press, 1971.
Graves, G.W., Hatfield, G.B. and Whinston, A.B. "Mathematical Pro-
gramming for Regional Water Quality Management." Vol. 8, No. 2,
Water Resources Research, April, 1972.
Hanna, Steven R. "A Simple Method of Calculating Dispersion from
Urban Area Sources." Vol. 21, No. 12, APCA, December, 1971.
Hershaft, Alex. "Solid Waste Treatment Technology." Vol. 6, No. 5,
ES&T, May, 1972.
Ingram, G., et al. The Detroit Prototype of the NBER Urban Simulation
Model, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, 1972.
Isard, W., et al. Ecologic-Economic Analysis for Regional Development.
New York: The Free Press, 1972.
Isard, W., et al. "On the Linkage of Socio-Economic and Ecological
System." The Regional Science Association Papers, 21 (1968).
Jacoby, H. and Loucks, D. "Combined Use of Optimization and Simula-
tion Models in River Basin Planning." Water Resources Research,
Vol. 8, No. 6, 1972.
_!
James, G.v. Water Treatment. London: The Technical Press, 1965.
Jarrett, Henry. Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy. Washington,
D.C.: Resources for the Future, Inc., 1966.
Kneese, A., Ayres, R., and D'Arge, R. Economics and the Environment,
A Materials Balance Approach. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1970.
257
-------
Kneese, A.V. and Bower, B.T., ed. Environmental Quality Analysis;
Research Studies in the Social Sciences. Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1972.
Kneese, A.V. and Bower, B.T. Managing Water Quality; Economics.
Technology, .Institutions. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1966.
Leontief, W. "Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure:
An Input-Output Approach." The Review of Economics and Statistics,
(August, 1970), 262-271.
Levin, A.A., Birch, T.J., Hillman, R.E. and Raines, G.E. "Thermal
Discharges: Ecological Effects, Vol. 6, No. 3, Environmental
Science and Technology, March, 1972.
McGanhey, P.H., and Middlebrooks, E.J. "Wastewater Management,"
Water and Sewage Works. July 1972.
Man's Impact on the Global Environment; Assessment and Recommenda-
tions for Action. Report of the Study of Critical Environmental
Problem's, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972.
Meadows, D.H. et al. The Limits to Growth. New York: Universe Books,
1972.
Mills, E-S. "An Aggregate Model of Resource Allocation in a Metro-
politan Area," American Economic Review Proceedings, Vol. 57 (May
1967), 197-210.
Minnick, V.P. "Putting Industrial Sludges in Place." Vol. 5, No. 8,
Environmental Science and Technology, August, 1971.
t
Noll, R.G. and Trijours, S. "Mass Balance, General Equilibrium, and
Environmental. Externalities." American Economic Review, Vol. 61
(September 1971), 730-35.
O'Connor, .Donald J. "The Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Dis-
solved Exygen in Streams." Water Resources Research, Vol. 3, No. lj
1967.
Paik, Inja. Economic Information for Environmental Quality Management.
National Technical Information Service, G.P.O., June 1972.
Peltzman, S., and Tideman, T.N. "Local vs. National Pollution Control:
Note." American Economic Review, Vol. 62 (December, 1972), 959-63.
258
-------
Reeve, D.A.D. and Harkness, N. "Some Aspects of Sludge Incineration."
Water Pollution Control. 1972.
Ridker, Ronald G. Economic Costs of Air Pollution, New York: F.A.
Fraeger, 1970.
Russell, C. and Spofford, W. "A Quantitative Framework for Residuals
Management Decisions," in Environmental Quality Analysis: Theory and
Method in the Social Sciences, edited by A.V. Kneese and B.T. Bower,
Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1972.
Siegel, Richard D. "Measurement of Aircraft Engine Pollutant Emission."
Vol. 22, No. 11, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association,
November 1972.
Silveston, P.L. "Simulation of the Mean Performance of Municipal Waste
Treatment Plants." Vol. 6, Water Research Pergamon Press, 1972.
Simulation of Water Quality in Streams and Canals, Texas Water Develop-
ment Board, Austin, Texas, 1971.
Solid, A Special Report, Vol. 4, No. 5, Environmental Science and
Technology, May, 1970.
Stern, Arthur C., ed. Air Pollution. New York: Academic Press, 1968.
Stern, Arthur C., ed. Proceedings of Symposium on Multiple-Source
Urban Diffusion Models, U.S. EPA, 1970.
The Economics of Clean Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.
Thoss, R. and Wiik, K. An Empirical Linear Model for Water Quality
Management -- Pilot Study for Four Regions in the Ruhr Basin, Paper
presented at the International Economic Association Conference on
Urbanization and Environment, Copenhagen, 1972.
Tucker, R.J. and Goodman, A.S. "Streamflow Routing for Water Pollution
Studies." Vol. 5, Water Research Pergamon Press, 1971.
Turner, Bruce. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1970.
259
*U.& GOVERNMiNT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 582-414/97 1-3
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
/. Report No.
2.
T^f
w
The Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model
^5. Report Date
Inja K. Paik, John Harrington, Jr., F. W. McElroy
Georgetown University
Economics Department
Washington, D. C.
& For forming Organization
Report No.
J(i. Project tfi.
Cjr.rractf Grant No.
801411
•IS. Type ./ Report and
Period Covered
Final
75.
• jv.-jiic* Environmental Protection Agency Report
Number EPA-600/5-7U-020» February 1974
16. Ab.-tract
The primary objective of the project was to develop a prototype multi-pollution model
for a typical metropolitan region. This report includes the basic design and some of
the results of initial testing of the model. The Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model,
or IMMP, views environmental pollution as a set of interrelated problems — the solu-
tion of which requires examination of all types of pollution jointly and simultaneously—
and attempts to seek an overall solution to environmental resource management. The
model embodies the trade-offs among different forms of residuals disposed finally in
the environment that are effected by alternative land use policies, production processes,
pollution control strategies and methods. Thus, the Land Use submodel relates various
land use policies to the distribution of the sources of environmental pollution; the Re-
siduals submodel relates alternative levels of pollution generating activities, input
mixes, production processes of various activities and the alternative treatment processes
associated therewith to the magnitude, composition and distribution of pollutants; and
Disposal-Dispersion submodel relates pollution emissions at source to (ambient) environ-
mental quality at destination. The model provides a comprehensive framework in which
to test and evaluate a wide range of strategies for planning, managing and controlling
our environmental resources.
17a. Descriptors
Environmental Resource Management; Land Use Submodel; Residual Management Submodel;
Dispersion Submodel; Integrated Multi-Media Pollution Model.
17b. Identifiers
;7c. COWRR Field & Group
IS. Av?.
------- |