PRELIMINARY
AIR POLLUTION SURVEY
OF
AMMONIA
A LITERATURE REVIEW
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
-------
PREFACE
This document represents a preliminary literature review which is being used as a basis for
further evaluation, both internally by the National Air Pollution Control Administration
(NAPCA) and by contractors. This document further delineates present knowledge of the
subject pollutant, excluding any specific conclusions based on this knowledge.
This series of reports was made available through a NAPCA contractual agreement with
Litton Industries. Preliminary surveys include all material reported by Litton Industries as
a result of the subject literature review. Except for section 7 (Summary and Conclusions),
which is undergoing further evaluation, the survey contains all information as reported by
Litton Industries. The complete survey, including section 7 (Summary and Conclusions)
is available from:
U. S. Department of Commerce
National Bureau of Standards
Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific
and Technical Information
Springfield, Virginia 22151
-------
PRELIMINARY
AIR POLLUTION SURVEY
OF
AMMONIA
A LITERATURE REVIEW
'Sydney Miner
Litton Systems, Incorporated
Environmental Systems Division
Prepared under Contract No. PH 22-68-25
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Raleigh, North Carolina
October 1969
-------
The APTD series of reports is issued by the National Air Pollution Control
Administration to report technical data of interest to a limited readership.
Copies of APTD reports may be obtained upon request, as supplies permit,
from the Office of Technical Information and Publications, National Air
Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, 1033 Wade Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27605.
National Air Pollution Control Administration Publication No. APTD 69-25
-------
FOREWORD
As the concern for air quality grows, so does the con-
cern over the less ubiquitous but potentially harmful contami-
nants that are in our atmosphere. Thirty such pollutants have
been identified, and available information has been summarized
in a series of reports describing their sources, distribution,
effects, and control technology for their abatement.
A total of 27 reports have been prepared covering the
30 pollutants. These reports were developed under contract
for the National Air Pollution Control Administration (NAPCA) by
Litton Systems, Inc. The complete listing is as follows:
Aeroallergens (pollens) Ethylene
Aldehydes (includes acrolein Hydrochloric Acid
and formaldehyde) Hydrogen Sulfide
Ammonia Iron and Its Compounds
Arsenic and Its Compounds Manganese and Its Compounds
Asbestos Mercury and Its Compounds
Barium and Its Compounds Nickel and Its Compounds
Beryllium and Its Compounds Odorous Compounds
Biological Aerosols Organic Carcinogens
(microorganisms) Pesticides
Boron and Its Compounds Phosphorus and Its Compounds
Cadmium and Its Compounds Radioactive Substances
Chlorine Gas Selenium and Its Compounds
Chromium and Its Compounds Vanadium and Its Compounds
(includes chromic acid) Zinc and Its Compounds
These reports represent current state-of-the-art
literature reviews supplemented by discussions with selected
knowledgeable individuals both within and outside the Federal
Government. They do not however presume to be a synthesis of
available information but rather a summary without an attempt
to interpret or reconcile conflicting data. The reports are
iii
-------
necessarily limited in their discussion of health effects for
some pollutants to descriptions of occupational health expo-
sures and animal laboratory studies since only a few epidemic-
logic studies were available.
Initially these reports were generally intended as
internal documents within NAPCA to provide a basis for sound
decision-making on program guidance for future research
activities and to allow ranking of future activities relating
to the development of criteria and control technology docu-
ments . However, it is apparent that these reports may also
be of significant value to many others in air pollution control,
such as State or local air pollution control officials, as a
library of information on which to base informed decisions on
pollutants to be controlled in their geographic areas. Addi-
tionally, these reports may stimulate scientific investigators
to pursue research in needed areas. They also provide for the
interested citizen readily available information about a given
pollutant. Therefore, they are being given wide distribution
with the assumption that they will be used with full knowledge
of their value and limitations.
This series of reports was compiled and prepared by the
Litton personnel listed below:
Ralph J. Sullivan
Quade R. Stahl, Ph.D.
Norman L. Durocher
Yanis C. Athanassiadis
Sydney Miner
Harold Pinkelstein, Ph.D.
Douglas A. Olsen, Ph0D.
James L. Haynes
iv
-------
The NAPCA project officer for the contract was Ronald C.
Campbell, assisted by Dr. Emanuel Landau and Gerald Chapman.
Appreciation is expressed to the many individuals both
outside and within NAPCA who provided information and reviewed
draft copies of these reports. Appreciation is also expressed
to the NAPCA Office of Technical Information and Publications
for their support in providing a significant portion of the
technical literature.
-------
ABSTRACT
Ammonia is a natural constituent of the atmosphere but
exists in concentrations below the level which is hazardous
to humans, animals, plants, or materials. High concentra-
tions of ammonia gas are corrosive to mucous membranes; can
cause damage to the eye, throat, and upper respiratory tract;
and can produce residual damage and even death in humans and
animals. High concentrations are also toxic to most plant
life and have corrosive effects on materials.
Almost all of the ammonia in the atmosphere is produced
by natural biological processes, largely from the decomposi-
tion of organic waste material. Man contributes a compara-
tively small portion of ammonia to the atmosphere, mainly
through combustion and industrial processes involved in the
production or use of ammonia.
Air quality standards for ammonia concentrations have
not been established in the United States. Measurements of
environmental concentrations indicate average levels of
3
approximately 20 |_ig/m •
Wet scrubbers, bag filters, and charcoal filters are
used to control industrial losses of ammonia to the atmosphere.
The economic value of ammonia encourages its conservation in
commercial processes. No economic data are available on
damages caused by ammonia pollution.
Adequate methods are available for the detection and
measurement of ammonia in the atmosphere.
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Total Catalytic Cracking Capacity of Oil Refineries . 15
2. Trends in Electric Utility Fossil Fuel Consumption . 17
3. Motor Gasoline Demand 18
LIST OF TABLES
1. Gross Findings at Autopsy of Rat Exposed to 700,000
|-ig/m3 Ammonia 4
2. Time in Minutes Until 50% Injury to Exposed Plant
Surfaces at 700,000 ug/m3 6
3. Percentage of Leaf Area Marked by Ammonia 7
4. Relative Sensitivity of Weeds to Ammonia 7
5. Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ammonia 9
6. Ammonia Production in 1968 12
7. U.S. Coke Production 13
8. Ammonia Released from Oil Refineries 13
9. Ammonia Emission from Catalytic Cracking Unit
Regenerator Stacks (Los Angeles Refineries) 14
10. Ammonia Emissions from Combustion 16
11. Pounds of Ammonia Discharged Daily in Metropolitan
Area of 100,000 Persons Using Each Heating System . . 17
12. Miscellaneous Ammonia Emissions 20
13. Catalytic Cracking Capacity of Oil Refineries in U.S.A.
(Jan. 1968) 32-
14. Ammonia Emissions from Incineration .33
15. Pounds of Ammonia Discharged Daily in a Metropolitan
Area of 100,000 Persons 34
16. U.S. National Ammonia Concentration 35
17. Concentrations of Ammonia in Air, United States ... 36
i*
-------
CONTENTS
FOREWORD
ABSTRACT
1. INTRODUCTION „ 1
2. EFFECTS ....«, . 2
2.1 Effects on Humans <,.. 2
2.2 Effects on Animals 3
2.2.1 Commercial and Domestic Animals .... 3
2.2.2 Experimental Animals 3
2.3 Effects on Plants ....» 5
2.4 Effects on Materials 8
2.5 Environmental Air Standards 8
3. SOURCES 10
3.1 Natural Occurrence 10
3.2 Production Sources 11
3.2.1 Haber-Bosch Process 11
3.2.2 Coke Plants 12
3.2.3 Oil Refineries . . . „ 13
3.2.4 Metallurgical and Ceramic Plants . . . » 14
3.2o5 Combustion Processes 16
3o3 Product Sources 19
3.4 Environmental Air Concentrations 20
4. ABATEMENT 21
5. ECONOMICS 22
6. METHODS OF ANALYSIS 23
REFERENCES 25
APPENDIX 31
X1
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
The main source of atmospheric ammonia is naturally-
produced ammonia which is released from land and ocean areas.
In terms of total air content of ammonia, urban-produced
ammonia is of lesser importance, though it may be important
from the air pollution standpoint in localized situations.
The primary source of ammonia air pollution in cities
is the combustion process involved in the combustion of fuels,
incineration of wastes, and use of the internal combustion
engine. Industrial sources emitting ammonia are chemical
plants, coke ovens, and refineries. Other sources are stock-
yards and similar installations, where ammonia is formed by
biological degradation.
-------
2. EFFECTS
2.1 Effects on Humans
Ammonia gas, if inhaled, affects mainly the upper res-
piratory tract, according to Jacobs.30 Only a small percen-
tage of an inhaled dose reaches the lungs at the inhaled
concentration. At high concentrations (1,700,000 ug/m to
4,500,000 (ag/m ), ammonia acts as an asphyxiant. At concen-
3 "3
trations of 280,000 ug/m to 490,000 |ag/m the gas can produce
eye, nose, and throat irritation.
62
Silverman et al. exposed seven adult males to ammonia
gas concentrations of 350,000 |jg/m . Significant effects on
respiration resulted, as well as irritations of the throat
and nose and hypoesthesia.
07
Kustou ran 7-to-8-hour tests to determine the effect
of ammonia on certain physiological and biological indexes
in man. He found that at concentrations of 13,000 |_ig/m3 the
urea and ammonia content of the blood and the urine increased.
In addition, he noted a lowering of the oxygen use factor
and some respiratory depression.
In 1955 Hemeon^ suggested that zinc ammonium sulfate
aerosols were in part responsible for the irritant effects
of the air during the Donora Smog Episode in 1948. Amdur
4
and Corn found that aerosols of zinc sulfate, zinc ammonium
sulfate, and ammonium sulfate produced severe irritation in
guinea pigs. The double salt was the most irritative. They
established that the smaller the particles, the greater the
-------
irritative action and that the aerosols, in conjunction with
sulfur dioxide gas, produced synergistic effects. This
synergistic effect was particularly enhanced when the ammo-
nium sulfate and zinc ammonium sulfate were combined with
sulfur dioxide gas.
2.2 Effects on Animals
2.2.1 Commercial and Domestic Animals
No reports were found on effects of ammonia on livestock,
although they can be expected to be negligible at the low
concentration normally found in urban or rural atmospheres.
High localized concentrations due to accidental releases of
ammonia could cause significant effects.
2.2.2 Experimental Animals
Several studies have been made on the effects on experi-
mental animals both of ammonia alone and of ammonia and carbon
7fi
combinations. Weedon reported that guinea pigs and rabbits
exposed to 1,740,000 |jg/m of ammonia developed acute and
chronic lung lesions. The rabbits were less sensitive than
the guinea pigs, which tolerated around 1,000,000 |_ig/m3.
When Weedon exposed house flies to ammonia concentrations
3
of 700,000 i_ig/m , 6 percent of the flies were killed in 16
•3
hours. He also exposed mice and rats to 700,000 |_ig/m of
ammonia for 16 hours. Two older animals showed some evidence
of slight dyspnea. At the end of the exposure, the eyes of
all the rats and mice were bright, with little or no evidence
of lacrimation. The gross findings at autopsy for one rat
-------
(considered typical of the exposed group), which died 12
hours after exposure are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1
GROSS FINDINGS AT AUTOPSY
OF RAT EXPOSED TO 700,000 |_ig/m3 AMMONIA
76
Findings
Organs (Rat which died 12 hr. after exposure)
Brain Slightly congested
Trachea Not reddened
Lungs Two-thirds distended, many large
hemorrhages, cherry-red, waxy, cut
surface foamy
Heart Much distended
Liver Congested
Gall bladder Not distended
Stomach Moderately distended, few hemorrhages
Intestines Large intestine partly distended
Adrenals Pink
.Kidneys Congested
Peritoneal surfaces Not remarkable
74 3
Weatherby exposed guinea pigs to 118,000 |ig/m of
ammonia and found mild changes in kidneys, spleen, adrenals,
and liver in 18 weeks. No change was found in 12 weeks.
13
J. Dalhamn found that low concentrations of ammonia (2,000
) caused the cilia of the upper respiratory tract of rats
pQ
to stop beating in 8 to 9 minutes. Friberg found that the
process of arresting the cilia was reversible until concentra-
tions around 210,000 lag/m3 of inhaled air were reached.
-------
14 •}
T. Dalhamn and L. Reid exposed rats to 70,000 ng/m° of
ammonia and 7,000 |_ig/m of pulverized carbon in air for 6
months. The severe mucosal damage and impairment of ciliary
activity observed suggested a synergistic effect.
2.3 Effects on Plants
Thornton exposed tomato plants, buckwheat, and tobacco
plants to air concentrations of ammonia of 700; 2,800; 1,000;
44,000; 175,000; and 700,000 |_ig/m3 in air for periods of
1, 4, 15, 60, and 240 minutes. He found that ammonia at
700,000 |ag/m3 caused changes in the pH of tomato plant leaf
and stem tissue but did not cause damage at lower concentra-
tions. He also found that there was some correlation between
pH change and observed injury. The time required to produce
injury to 50 percent of the exposed plant surfaces at 700,000
|jg/m is shown in Table 2. In general, acute injury due to
ammonia is shown by a collapse of tissue without subsequent
loss of chlorophyll. Definite injury was observed on buck-
wheat, coleus, sunflower, and tomato after exposure to 38,000
p.g/m of ammonia for about 1 hour; slight injury was observed
at 11,500 |_ig/m3 after 4 hours; and at 5,600 lag/m3, the plants
were either uninjured or slightly marked after 5 hours. Nearly
all parts of the leaf had a cooked green appearance which
became brown upon drying.^7*64,69-71
73
Treshaw indicated that ammonia can induce glazing and
silvering, particularly of lower leaf surfaces of vegetables.
-------
TABLE 2
TIME IN MINUTES UNTIL 50% INJURY , 71
TO EXPOSED PLANT SURFACES AT 700,000
Part of Plant Plant Time (min)
Leaves Tomato 3
Buckwheat 5
Tobacco 8
Stems Tomato 60
Buckwheat 30
Tobacco 240
9
Benedict and Breen fumigated 10 species of common weeds
which occur throughout the United States in an effort to
develop a method for identifying pollutants causing damage.
The ammonia produced spots of cell collapse and death, primar-
ily along the margins of the leaves. With grasses, small spots
developed over the area where the leaf bends, giving a powdery
appearance. The powdery marking increased in the region be-
tween the bend and the tip as the intensity of fumigation was
increased. Table 3 shows the percentage of leaf area marked
<3 o
by ammonia at concentrations of 8,400 (jg/mj and 2,100 ug/m .
Table 4 shows the relative sensitivity of the weeds to ammonia.
g
Barton exposed radish seeds and spring rye seed to
•j q
700,000 ng/m and 175,000 ug/m of ammonia in air. Both dry
and soaked seeds were used in each case. The germination of
soaked radish seeds exposed for as long as 240 minutes to
700,000 ng/m3 of this gas was not only delayed but actually
-------
TABLE 3
PERCENTAGE OF LEAF AREA MARKED BY AMMONIA"
(Four-hour fumigations)
Plant
Concentration of Ammonia
8,400 uq/m3 2,100 uq/m3
3 wk£6 wka6 wka
Moist" Moistb Dry13
3
Moist
6 wkf 6 wkc
Moist:
Dry
,b
Mustard 33 48 8
Sunflower 32 32 2
Lamb' s-quarters 5 20 11
Cheeseweed 5 19 3
Annual bluegrass 6 11 1
Kentucky bluegrass 4 13 1
Dandelion 382
Chickweed 191
Pigweed 242
Nettle-leaf goosefoot 111
15
4
2
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
10
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
8
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
Age of plants.
"Soil condition.
TABLE 4
RELATIVE SENSITIVITY OF WEEDS TO AMMONIA9
Sensitive Intermediate Resistant
Mustard
Sunflower
Lamb's-quarters
Cheeseweed
Annual bluegrass
Kentucky bluegrass
Dandelion
Chickweed
Pigweed
Nettle-leaf Goosefoot
-------
8
reduced. An extension of the treatment period to 960 minutes
killed all of the seeds. A 1-minute exposure had no retarding
effect. The germination of seeds treated in the dry state was
delayed by 240 minutes' exposure.
Rye seeds were more sensitive to ammonia than those of
radish. Exposures of soaked seeds to 700,000 |_ig/m for as long
as 240 minutes resulted in 100-percent kill, while those
o
exposed to 175,000 |_ig/m for 960 minutes had a germination
rate of only 48 percent.
Classes of organisms differ in their sensitivity to
ammonia gas. Leaves are the most sensitive, followed by stems,
fungi, and bacteria, which are intermediately sensitive.
44
Seeds are least sensitive of all to the gas.
2.4 Effects on Materials
Ammonia associated with sulfur dioxide and moisture can
cause crystalline bloom defects on the surface of varnish and
25 1:7
paints, according to Holbrow. In another study, Preston
exposed various metallic surfaces to fine powders in atmospheres
of varying humidities. The character of the resulting corro-
sion was filiform, typical of highly reactive particles in the
atmosphere. Ammonia can also discolor some fabric dyes.
2.5 Environmental Air Standards
The American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists at their 29th Annual Meeting in 1967 recommended
an occupational threshold limit for ammonia in air of 35,000
|j.g/m . The Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Department of the
-------
Navy, has recommended an ammonia threshold limit for 1 hour
of 280,000 |J.g/m . The permissible limit for ammonia in a
submarine during a 60-day dive is around 18,000 i_ig/m . No
ambient air quality standards for ammonia exist for the
United States. However, such ambient air standards exist for
Czechoslovakia, the U.S.S.R., and Ontario, Canada, as shown in
Table 5.
TABLE 5
66
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR AMMONIA
T.
Basic Standard5 Permissible
Location
Czechoslovakia
U.S.S.R.
Ontario, Canada
uq/m3
100
200
3,500
Averaging
Time
24 hr
24 hr
30 rain
ug/m3
300
200
Averaging
Time
30 min
20 min
a
Basic standard for long-term exposure.
Permissible standard not to be exceeded more than once in
any 4 hours.
-------
10
3. SOURCES
The major portion of atmospheric ammonia is produced by
biological processes in land and sea masses, and the gas then
escapes into the atmosphere. Ammonia produced by industry
and as a result of urban activities, though of lesser impor-
tance, may nevertheless be a factor in air pollution in
localized areas. The major source of urban-produced ammonia
is the combustion process which occurs in operation of the
internal combustion engine, combustion of fuels for heating,
and the incineration of wastes. Industrial sources of ammonia
are refineries, fertilizer plants, and organic chemical process
plants. Other minor sources of ammonia arise from biological
degradation in areas where animals are kept, such as stoclc-
yards, and from miscellaneous uses of ammonia in cleaning
both in industry and in the home.
3.1 Natural Occurrence
9! 9
According to Frost and Sullivan, 3.7 x 10 tons of
ammonia are released into the atmosphere annually. Of this
fi
amount, only 4.2 x 10 tons are emitted to the atmosphere as
a result of industrial and urban processes; therefore,
roughly 99.9 percent of the atmosphere's ammonia concentration
32
is produced by natural biological processes. Junge indicates
that the main biological source of ammonia is the decomposition
of organic waste material. Approximately 1.0 g of ammonia per
man per day is produced metabolically. Ammonia is given
off from manure in piggeries and other installations where
-------
11
animals are kept. Ammonia is also generated during treat-
ment of waste water in sewage plants. No information was
found on the quantity of these emissions. Ammonia is also
found in sea water and in volcanic gases.
3.2 Production Sources
Ammonia is produced commercially in chemical process
plants, as a by-product in the manufacture of other chemicals,
mainly in making coke from coal, and as a product of combus-
tion, refining of oils, and other processes.
3.2.1 Haber-Bosch Process
The Haber-Bosch process for the production of ammonia
accounts for over 85 percent of the total commercial yield.
This process involves the combining of hydrogen and nitrogen
gases in the presence of a catalyst. The hydrogen is usually
obtained from water gas (a mixture of carbon monoxide and
hydrogen), and the nitrogen is obtained from the air. Hydro-
gen and nitrogen are combined with the catalyst in the ammonia
generator to form ammonia when heated to temperatures of
450 to 600°C under pressure of 200-1,000 atmospheres.
The world's production of ammonia in 1965 was 26.8
million tons, and this is expected to reach 70 million tons
by 1970.77 In the U.S.A., 7.8 million tons of ammonia were
produced in 1964. By 1968 this had increased to 17.25
fift
million tons. The 1968 ammonia production rates by States
are shown in Table 6.
-------
12
In 1962, there were 64 synthetic ammonia plants in this
country, while in 1964 there were 95. By 1966 this number
had increased to 109.
TABLE 6
AMMONIA PRODUCTION IN 1968
68
State
Texas
Louisiana
California
Mississippi
Arkansas
Iowa
Pennsylvania
Nebraska
Illinois
Ohio
All Other States
Total
Thousand
Short
Tons/Yr
3,150
3,150
1,300
1,250
850
800
625
600
525
450
4,550
17,250
.,34
3.2.2 Coke Plants
In a report on Russian coke ovens, Kapitulskii"'^ states
that the usual ammonia concentration in air samples at the
top of a coke oven during charging was 6,300 to 8,000 tag/in .
This was reduced to 3,500 to 4,400 |ag/m3 by smokeless charging-
that is, diverting the coke-oven gas by vacuum to the gas-
collection main. No data were found on ammonia emissions
from coke-oven plants in the United States.
-------
13
In 1966 about 66 million tons of coke were produced per
year in this country in 66 coke-oven plants. The value of
the coke at the coke oven was estimated to be $1,144 million.
The production rate of coke from 1957 to 1968 is shown in
Table 7.
TABLE 7
U.S. COKE PRODUCTION47
Year
1957-1959
1964
1965
1966
Tons/Year
60.5 x 106
60.9 x 106
65.2 x lof
66.0 x 10
No. of Oven Slots
15,993
14,639
14,357
14,720
3.2.3 Oil Refineries
The main source of ammonia in oil refineries is from the
catalyst regenerators in the catalytic cracking plants. The
ammonia releases from oil refineries are given in Table 8.
TABLE 8
g
AMMONIA RELEASED FROM OIL REFINERIES
Lb/100 Bl
Source of Fresh Feed
Compressor-Internal Combustion 0.2
Fluid-Bed Catalytic Cracking Units 54.0
Thermofor Catalytic Cracking Units 5.0
Table 9 gives the ammonia emissions from regenerator stacks
in catalytic cracking units of the Los Angeles area refineries.
-------
14
At the time the data were compiled, there were 18 refineries
in the Los Angeles area with a combined capacity of 700,000
barrels of crude oil per day.
TABLE 9
AMMONIA EMISSION FROM CATALYTIC CRACKING
UNIT REGENERATOR STACKS®
(Los Angeles Refineries)
Unit Type ug/ni^ Tons/Day
Fluid bed 47,000-470,000 4.2
Thermofor 20,000-72,000 0.2
In 1960 there were approximately 300 oil refineries dis-
tributed throughout the U.S.A. The catalytic cracking capa-
city of these refineries was 3.7 million barrels per day of
fresh feed plus 1.1 million barrels per day of recycle.
By 1968 there were around 270 refineries in the U.S.A., with
a catalytic cracking capacity of 4.1 million barrels per day
0 0 fi7
of fresh feed and 1.6 million barrels per day of recycle.
The total catalytic cracking capacity from 1960 as projected
to 1969 is shown in Figure 1. The cracking charge capacity
and the States in which the units were located in January 1968!
are shown in Table 13 in the Appendix.
3.2.4 Metallurgical and Ceramic Plants
28
Typical exhaust emissions f
and ceramic plants are as follows:
28
Typical exhaust emissions from some metallurgical
-------
15
From nonferrous foundries:
per plant producing 50 tons of
castings per day
From gray iron foundries:
per plant producing 200 tons of
castings per day
From stone, clay, and glass plants
per cement plant producing
4,830 barrels per day
0.002 tons of ammonia
0.023 tons of ammonia
0.17 manufacturing tons
6.0
5 5.5
1
d 5.0
5
4.5
< 4.0
1960 1961 1962 1963
* BARRELS PER STANDARD DAY
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968 1969
FIGURE 1
Total Catalytic Cracking Capacity of Oil Refineries
61
-------
16
3.2.5 Combustion Processes
Ammonia is produced as a result of combustion, mainly
from the use of fossil fuels and incineration of waste materi-
als. These sources generally result in direct emission of
the ammonia into the atmosphere.
The emission of ammonia from internal combustion engines
has been estimated at 2.0 lb/1,000 gallons burned for gasoline
O £^
enginesH/26/43 an(j for aiesei engines. The total ammonia
emitted daily into the atmosphere of Los Angeles from the
combustion of gasoline in 1953 was estimated at 5.0 tons a
day. The rates of emissions of ammonia from various categories
of fossil fuels is presented in Table 10.
TABLE 10
AMMONIA EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION11'26/59
Combustion Source Amount of Emission
Coal 2 Ib/ton
Fuel oil 1 lb/1,000 gal
Natural gas 0.3 - 0.56 lb/106 ft3
Bottled gas (butane) 1.7 lb/106 ft3
6 3
Propane 1.3 lb/10 ft
Wood 2.4 Ib/ton
Forest fires 0.3 Ib/ton
The amounts of ammonia discharged daily from domestic
heating sources using each fuel in a metropolitan area of
100,000 persons are given in Table 11.
-------
17
TABLE 11
POUNDS OF AMMONIA DISCHARGED DAILY IN METROPOLITAN AREA
OF 100,000 PERSONS USING EACH HEATING SYSTEM18
Domestic Heating Fuel
Total Pounds
Coal
Oil
Gas
2,000
800
0.3
In 1967 the total consumption of fossil fuel in the
U.S.A. comprised almost 5 million barrels of oil, around 19
18
trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 550 tons of coal.
The trends of fossil-fuel consumptions in the utility industry
alone are shown in Figure 2.
DC
£ 10.000
g
ED
1.000
*•
100
z
0
-1 10
1-
1
^
V
x==^ — "*
,--*"
*
**^S**~~r
_, — » •
w- -*^^
^^ ^ — "
^^^
p— — =
K^ — ••••
— ^--
f*OAI
GAS
1950
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
FIGURE 2
Trends in Electric Utility Fossil Fuel Consumption
18
-------
18
The demand in the United States for gasoline topped
5 million barrels per day in 1968 and is expected to reach
5.5 million barrels per day in 1969. The trend in gasoline
demand between 1959 and 1968 is shown in Figure 3.
6
g
_i
_j
5 4
I I I I I
J I
1959 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68
* BARRELS PER STANDARD DAY
FIGURE 3
Motor Gasoline Demand19
The emission of ammonia from incineration of solid
wastes is shown in Table 14 in the Appendix. The total
ammonia emitted from domestic and industrial solid waste
disposal that might be expected from a metropolitan area of
100,000 population, using several methods of disposal, is
shown in Table 15 in the Appendix.
The United States produces at the present time about
170 million tons of refuse per year, of which about 15
percent is incinerated. In 1980, about 260 million tons per
year of refuse will be produced, and the percentage to be
incinerated is expected to increase about 50 percent. The
-------
19
expenditure for incinerators in 1966 was 50 million dollars.
This figure is expected to rise to 100 million dollars by
1980.21
3.3 Product Sources
Ammonia is used as a raw material in the production of
nitric acid, fertilizers, and the syntheses of hundreds of
organic compounds, including many drugs, plastics, and dyes.
Approximately 85 percent of the ammonia is used as anhydrous
ammonia fertilizer or as a raw material for other fertilizer
production.
Very little information is available on ammonia emissions
from these plants. It has been reported that 2,600 tons of
ammonia per year are released from a fertilizer plant in
South Point, Ohio.28 Another reference reported that 0.078
tons of ammonia are released for each plant consuming 109
58
BTU/day in the chemical and allied products industry.
79
Burakhovitch made air pollution surveys in the vicinities
of chemical plant complexes in Russia. The plants involved
produced mineral fertilizers, synthetic monomers, ammonia
alcohols, plastics, and nitric acid. Sampling sites were
situated at 2,000 and 4,000 meters from the principal dis-
charge sources. The ammonia concentrations measured showed
a significant reduction of ammonia pollution between 1963 and
1964, attributable to the construction of waste-gas absorbers
in the nitric acid plant and improvement in ammonia manufac-
turing technology by the changeover to natural gas.
-------
20
In dilute solutions ammonia is used domestically, com-
mercially, and industrially as a cleansing agent. Ammonia
is also used in developing drawing reproductions. Table 12
shows the emissions of ammonia when used for cleaning machinery
and developing reproductions of drawings.
TABLE 12
MISCELLANEOUS AMMDNIA EMISSIONS
58
Remarks
Manufacturing of machinery-
cleaning with ammonia
Developing plans and repro-
ductions with ammonia
10,500 Sporadic task
(one timers
hours per week)
5,600 Sporadic
Little information was found on the ammonia concentration
25
xn the air in the home. Holbrow observed that the ammonia
concentration inside houses in England may rise to several
times that in the outside air and may even approach that of
sulfur dioxide.
3.4 Environmental Air Concentrations
The average concentration of ammonium compounds in the air
in urban areas is approximately 20 |jg/m3. ' ' The back-
ground concentration of ammonium in the lower troposphere is
3 3
about 6 |ag/m in the mid-latitudes and 140 ng/m near the
59
equator. Data on atmospheric concentrations of ammonium
for various cities of the United States are presented in
Tables 16 and 17 in the Appendix.
-------
21
4. ABATEMENT
No information has been found on the abatement of ammonia
as such in air pollution; however, methods used to abate other
pollutants with which it is associated also reduce the quan-
tity of ammonia that reaches the atmosphere. For example, in
smokeless charging of coke ovens (that is, collecting the
bulk of escaping coke-oven gas, coal dust, and tar by vacuum
during coke-oven charging), the ammonia emissions to the
34
atmosphere are cut in half.
In incineration systems where wet scrubbers are used to
remove fly ash, the ammonia in the gas stream leaving the
incinerator should also be reduced. However, no information
was found on this subject.
In the chemical industry, where ammonia is used as a raw
material, its recovery is a matter of fundamental economic
importance; methods have .therefore been designed to minimize
its loss. For high concentrations of ammonia, gas wet scrub-
bers can be used. For ammonia concentrations in air between
approximately 16 to 27 percent (flammable range)->° the gas
can be flared. Impregnated activated charcoal has been used
to remove ammonia from the air in laboratories that use
animals in research and in other places where animals are
40
kept in large numbers. Where the ammonia occurs as a
solid—as ammonium sulfate in the fertilizer industry for
instance—conventional methods for solids removal can be used
such as bag filters, electrostatic precipitators, and wet
scrubbers.
-------
22
5. ECONOMICS
In the future, greater emissions of ammonia to the
atmosphere may be expected as a result of increases in incin-
eration, fuel oil usage, catalytic cracking, and gasoline
consumption. These added emissions should be offset by the
growing number of improved abatement systems installed prin-
cipally to reduce emission of other substances, such as
particulates, hydrocarbons, and sulfur dioxide. However, no
information has been found on the effectiveness of these sys-
tems in removing ammonia, or on the number of abatement
systems to be installed.
The economic impact of ammonia pollution on humans, plants,
and animals is expected to be minimal since at normal atmo-
spheric concentrations the ammonia will have little or no
deleterious effect. Localized accidental emissions of ammonia
in high concentrations could have serious economic impact
resulting from death or sickness of animals or humans and
damage to plants. No information has been found on the eco-
nomic costs of ammonia air pollution or on the costs of its
abatement.
Data on production and consumption of ammonia are pre-
sented in Section 3.
-------
23
6. METHODS OF ANALYSIS
The primary method used in air pollution for analyzing
for ammonia in air is the Nessler colorimetric method. '2/
The sample is collected by passing the air through a standard
impinger containing 0.1N sulfuric acid. The collected sample
is then contacted with Nessler's reagent and examined in a
colorimeter. If a cloudy solution forms after the addition
of Nessler's reagent, alkaline Rochelle salt is added to clear
9Q
it up.^y
To obtain more accurate results prior to Nesslerization,
the acidic sample may be made alkaline and the ammonia dis-
7
txlled into a receiver containing .02N sulfuric acid.
Nessler1s reagent is then added, and the sample is analyzed
colorimetrically. The Nessler colorimetric method of analysis
gives the total ammonia content of the air: i.e., both
gaseous and particulate components. Equipment based on Nessler's
2
method has been developed for automatic analysis.
Another method utilized for analyzing for ammonia is the
indophenol blue technique. The sample is collected as out-
lined above. It is then contacted with alkaline phenol and
sodium hypochlorite, which turns it blue-green. The sample
\
color is then read on a colorimeter. The ammonia determined
is the total ammonia and ammonium in the sample. This method
was developed for controlled atmosphere applications but can
be applied to air pollution work. The indophenol blue tech-
nique has also been adapted for use in automatic ammonia
35
analyzers.
-------
24
63
Smolczyk showed that paper impregnated with phenol-
phthalein will change color in air in the presence of 10 to
Q ^fi
100 ppm (7,000-70,000 |jg/mj) of ammonia gas. Korenman
used impregnated diazotized alpha or beta-naphthylamine to
test for ammonia.
Canibi indicated that ammonia samples with as little
o
as 0.01 ppm (7 |_ig/m ) ammonia can be analyzed by titrating
directly with standard solutions of sodium hydroxide and
sulfuric acid. In addition, industrial methods based on
42
infrared analysis and colorimetric techniques are used
for ammonia analysis.
-------
25
REFERENCES
1. Air Pollution Manual, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education,
and Welfare, Public Health Service Publication No. 99
AP-40, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
(1967).
2. Air Quality Data from the National Air Sampling Networks
and Contributing State and Local Networks, 1964-1965,
U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service, Division of Air Pollution, Cincinnati,
Ohio (1966).
3. Air Resources of Utah, Prepared by the Utah Legislative
Council Air Pollution Advisory Committee (June 1962).
4. Amdur, M. O., and M. Corn, The Irritant Potency of Zinc
Ammonium Sulfate of Different Particle Sizes, Am. Ind.
Hyq. Assoc. J. 24_:326 (1963).
5. Annual Report, Department of Air Pollution Control,
City of New York (1962).
6. Atmospheric Emissions from Oil Refineries, Public Health
Service Publication No. 763, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. (1963).
7. Atmospheric Pollution in the Great Kanawha River Valley
Industrial Area, West Virginia Department of Health,
Bureau of Industrial Hygiene (1952).
8. Barton, L. V., Toxicity of Ammonia, Chlorine, Hydrogen
Cyanide, Hydrogen Sulfide and Sulfur Dioxide Gases. IV.
Seeds, Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. 11_(5):357 (1940).
9. Benedict, H. M., and W. H. Breen, The Use of Weeds as a
Means of Evaluating Vegetation Damage Caused by Air
Pollution, Proc. Nat. Air Pollution Symp., 3rd, Pasadena,
Calif. (1955).
10. Cambi, P., Sampling, Analysis, and Instrumentation in
the Field of Air Pollution, World Health Organization
Monograph Series #46, Geneva (1961).
11. Chambers, L. A., Transportation Sources of Air Pollution -
Comparison with other Sources in Los Angeles, Proceedings
of the National Conference on Air Pollution, Public
Health Service Publication No. 654, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1959).
12. Cornet, I., Material Damage, Combustion Generation Air
Pollution (June 1967).
-------
26
13. Dalhamn, J., Mucous Flow and Ciliary Activity in Trachea
of Healthy Rats and Rats Exposed to Irritant Gases,
Acta Phvsiol. Scand. Suppl. 123;136 (1956).
14. Dalhamn, T., and L. Reid, "Ciliary Activity and Histo-
logic Observations in the Trachea After Exposure to
Ammonia and Carbon Particles," in Inhaled Particles and
Vapors, vol. II, C. N. Davies, Ed. (London: Pergamon
Press, 1965).
15. Deadly Gases in Piggeries, German Research Service
5_(5):9 (1966).
16. Eliassen, R., Domestic and Municipal Sources of Air
Pollution, Proceedings of the National Conference on
Air Pollution, Public Health Service Publication No. 654,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1959).
17. Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1966).
18. Evans, R. K., et al. Energy Demands, A Special Report,
Power 112 (1968).
19. Forecast Review, Oil Gas J. (Feb. 1968).
20. Friberg, L. Studies on Absorption of and Reaction to
Inhaled Particles, Institute of Hygiene, Karolinska
Institute, Stockholm (1963).
21. Frost and Sullivan Inc., 106 Fulton St., New York, N. Y.,
CAMP Reports on Air Pollution (1969)
22. Gardner, F. J., 1968 - a Good Year for Petroleum, Oil Gas
J. 66_:53 (1968).
23. Hilleboe, H. E., A Review of Air Pollution in New York
State, N.Y. State Air Pollution Control Board (1958).
24. Hemeon, W. C. L., The Estimation of Health Hazards from
Air Pollution, A.M.A. Arch, of Ind. Health 11:307 (1955).
25. Holbrow, G. L., Atmospheric Pollution: Its Measurement
and Some Effects on Paint, J. Oil Colour Chemists' Assoc.
45_:701 (1962).
26. Hovey, H. H., et al., The Development of Air Contamina-
tion Tables for Non-Process Emissions, J. Air Pollution
Control Assoc. 16.(7):362 (1966).
27. Industrial Air Pollution Control, Engineering Data File.
Heating, Piping, Air Conditioning 3_9_(3):179 (1967)
-------
27
28. Ironton, Ohio, Ashland, Kentucky, Huntington, West
Virginia Air Pollution Abatement Activity, Pre-Conference
Investigations, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and
Welfare, National Center for Air Pollution Control
Publication APTD-68-2 (1968).
29. Jacobs, M. B., The Chemical Analysis of Air Pollutants
(New York: Interstate Publishers, 1960).
30. Jacobs, M. B., Health Aspects of Air Pollution from
Incinerators, Proceedings of the 1964 National Incinera-
tor Conference, New York, American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Incinerator Committee (1964).
31. Joint District, Federal and State Project for Evaluation
of Refinery Emissions, Manual on Emission to the Atmo-
sphere from Petroleum Refineries, Los Angeles County
Air Pollution District (1955).
32. Junge, C. E., Air Chemistry and Radioactivity (New York:
Academic Press, 1963).
33. Kaiser, E. R., et al., Performance of a Flue-Fed Incin-
erator, J. of Air Pollution Control Assoc. 9:2 (1959).
34. Kapitulskii, E. H., A Comparison of the Hygiene Char-
acteristics of the Smokeless and Ordinary Methods of
Charging Coke Ovens, Coke Chem. USSR, No. 8 (1966).
35. Kawasaki, E. H., et al., Application of the Autoanalyzer
for Atmospheric Trace Contamination Analysis in Close
Environmental Systems, Presented at the Technician
Symposium, Automation in Analytical Chemistry, New York
(Oct. 1967).
36. Korenman, I. M., Detection of Ammonia in the Air,
Z. Analv. Chem. 20:115 (1932).
37. Kustou, U. U., Means of Measuring the Maximum Allowable
Concentrations of Toxic Products of Natural Human
Metabolism, NASA Technical Translation, National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C.
(Oct. 1967).
38. Landsberg, H. E., Session 1, City Air - Better or Worse,
Symposium, Air Over Cities, Second Report A62-5, Public
Health Service, Cincinnati, Ohio (1961).
39. Ledbetter, J. O., Air Pollution from Waste Water Treat-
ment, Water Sewage Works 113(2) (1966).
-------
28
40. Lee, D., Removal of Reactive Light Gases with Impreg-
nated Activated Charcoal, Fourth Annual Technical
Meeting and Exhibit of the American Association for
Contamination Control, Miami Beach, Florida (May 1965).
41. Lodge, J. P., and J. B. Pate, Atmospheric Gases and
Particles in Panama, Science 153:408 (1966).
42. Louw, C. W., Atmospheric Pollutants and Chemical Analysis,
CIR Special Report SM 062, UDC 614.71: 543.27, Pretoria,
South Africa (1966).
43. Mayer, M., A Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Fac-
tors for Combustion Processes, Gasoline Evaporation and
Selected Industrial Processes, Public Health Service,
Division of Air Pollution, Cincinnati, Ohio (May 1965).
44. McCallan, S. E. A., and C. Setterstrom, Toxicity of
Ammonia, Chlorine, Hydrogen Cyanide, Hydrogen Sulfide,
and Sulfur Dioxide Gases. I. General Methods and
Correlations, Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. 11(5):325
(1940).
45. McGill, P. L., Techniques Employed in the Analysis of
Los Angeles Smog, Proceedings of the First National Air
Pollution Symposium (1949).
46. McGill, P. L. et al., Air Pollution Handbook (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1956).
47. Minerals Yearbook, vol. 1-11, Metals, Minerals and Fuels,
Bureau of Mines, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington,
D.C. (1966).
48. Morgan, G. B., et al., Automated Laboratory Procedures
for the Analysis of Air Pollutants, Presented at the
59th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Associ-
ation, San Francisco, California (June 1966).
49. Morgan, G. B., An Evaluation of an Automated Laboratory
Program for Air Pollution Analysis, Presented at the
1967 Technician Symposium on Automation in Analytical
Chemistry, New York, (Oct. 1967).
50. Morgan, G. B., New and Improved Procedures for Gas
Sampling and Analysis in the National Air Sampling
Network, J, of Air Pollution Control Assoc. 17:5 (1967).
51. MP & E's Guide to Air Pollution Control Methods, Modern
Power and Engineering 6^:6 (1966).
-------
29
52. National Air Surveillance Report - Mid-Year Report,
Public Health Service, National Center for Air Pollution
Control, Cincinnati, Ohio (1967).
53. Overview 1969 - A Special.Report, Oil Gas J. 66_:47 (1968).
54. Pate, J. B., et al., Atmospheric Trace Constituents
in Humid Tropics. IV. Environmental Measurement of
Ammonia, Preprint. Presented at 9th Conference on
Methods in Air Pollution and Industrial Hygiene Studies,
Pasadena, Calif. (Feb. 1968).
55. Patt, R. E., and R. E. Collumbine, Toxicity of Some
Atmospheric Pollutants, Brit. Med. J. 4998:913 (1958).
56. Perry, J. H., Chemical Engineers Handbook (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1950).
57. Preston, J., Atmospheric Corrosion in Nuclei, J. Appl.
Chem. 6.:26 (1956).
58. Rispoli, J. A., Fight Against Air Pollution in Argentina -
Education, Legal and Technological Aspects, Paper 68-175,
Presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Air Pollu-
tion Control Association, St. Paul, Minn. (June 1968).
59. Robinson, E., and R. C. Bobbins, Sources, Abundance and
Fate of Gaseous Atmospheric Pollutants, Stanford Research
Institute (Feb. 1968).
60. Sawicki, E., Airborne Carcinogens and Allied Compounds,
Arch. Environ. Health 14 (1967).
61. Sharmont, D. H., What is Cat Crackings Role in U.S.
Today, Oil Gas J. 66:2 (1968).
62. Silverman, L., et al., Physiological Response of Man to
Ammonia in Low Concentration, J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicology
31 (1949).
I
63. Smolczyk, E., and H. Cabler, Chemical Detection of
Respiratory Poisons, Wasser Abwasser 28:95 (1930).
64. Stern, A. C., Air Pollution, Vol. I - Air Pollution and
Its Effects (New York:Academic Press, 1968).
65. Stern, A. C., Air Pollution, Vol. II - Analysis, Moni-
toring, and Surveying (New York: Academic Press, 1968).
-------
30
66. Stern, A. C., Air Pollution, Vol. Ill (New York:
Academic Press, 1968).
67. Survey of Operating Refineries in the U.S.A., Oil gas J.
66;2 (1968).
68. Sweaney, N., Here's What 0sers Pay for Ammonia, Hydro-
carbon Process. Petrol. Refiner 47:9 (1968).
69. Thomas, N. D., Gas Damage to Plants, Ann. Rev. Plant
Phvsiol. 2. (1951).
70. Thomas, N. D., Effects of Air Pollution on Plants,
World Health Organization Monograph Series No. 46,
Geneva (1961).
71. Thornton, N. C., and C. Setterstrom, Toxicity of Ammonia,
Chlorine, Hydrogen Cyanide, Hydrogen Sulfide and Sulfur
Dioxide Gases. III. Green Plants, Contrib. Boyce Thompson
Inst. 1^:343 (1940).
72. Threshold Limit Values for 1967, Adopted at the 29th
Annual Meeting of the American Conference of Govern-
mental Industrial Hygienists, Chicago, 111. (May 1967).
73. Treshaw, M., Evaluation of Vegetable Injury as an Air
Pollution Criterion, J. Air Pollution Control Assoc.
15:6 (1965).
74. Weatherby, J. H., Chronic Toxicity of Ammonia Fumes by
Inhalation, Proc. Soc. Explt. Biol. Med. 81 (1952).
75. Webb, P., Bioastronautics Data Book, rev. ed. (Washington,
D.C.: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1954).
76. Weedon, F. R., et al., Toxicity of Ammonia, Chlorine,
Hydrogen Cyanide, Hydrogen Sulfide and Sulfur Dioxide
Gases. V. Animals, Contrib. Boyce Thompson Inst. 11 ;365
(1940).
77. Yearbook of Science and Technology (New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1967).
78. Yocom, J. E., The Deterioration of Materials in Polluted
Atmospheres, J. Air Pollution Control Assoc. 8.:203 (1958).
79. Burakovich, M. S., Atmospheric Pollution by Discharges
from Chemical Plants, Hva. and Sanit. 31 (1966)
-------
APPENDIX
-------
32
APPENDIX
TABLE 13
68
CATALYTIC CRACKING CAPACITY OF OIL REFINERIES IN U.S.A.
(January 1968)
State
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Barrels
Fresh Feed
28,500
431,800
15,500
62,000
13,000
287,780
211,700
139,550
47,500
472,710
54,000
40,000
55,500
36,000
40,800
245,445
11,200
33,000
20,500
182,200
178,650
229,200
11,000
1,138,065
42,200
25,000
80,775
5,000
42,025
per day
Recycle
10,200
173,570
8,500
44 , 000
108,315
70,900
82,250
5,500
133,845
31,150
14,500
33,500
18,000
36,900
93,780
7,000
9,000
10,300
91,800
84,025
79,460
4,000
356,965
19,250
15,000
30,600
5,000
16,610
Total 4,180,600 1,599,120
-------
33
APPENDIX
TABLE 14
18,24,25,27,59
AMMONIA EMISSIONS FROM INCINERATION
3 Ib/ton of
Combustion Source ug/m material burned
Gas-fired domestic incinerators
shredded paper and domestic wastes <4,000
Older units
shredded paper 4,000
Municipal incinerators
spray chamber (Alhambra, Calif.) 20,000 0.3
multiple chamber 0.4
Other incinerators
Single chamber 400 0.3-0.5
Wood waste 800
Backyard paper and trimmings 45,000 1.8
Backyard 6 ft| paper 3,000 0.1
Backyard 6 ft3 trimmings 100,000 4.4
Open dump burning 2. 3
Large gas-fired industrial units 400
Flue-fed apartment incinerators 0.4
-------
34
APPENDIX
TABLE 15
POUNDS OF AMMONIA DISCHARGED DAILY FROM INCINERATION
IN A METROPOLITAN AREA OF 100,000 PERSONS22
Source , Total Pounds
Domestic disposal
Backyard burning 345
Apartment incinerator 24
Municipal disposal
Incineration 45
Burning dumps 345
Sanitary land fill Trace
-------
35
APPENDIX
TABLE 16
40 41 42
U.S. NATIONAL AMMONIUM CONCENTRATION ' '
Measurements
Average Maximum
Location Year uq/m3 uq/m3
National Average
(National Air Surveil-
lance Measurements) 1964-65
New York City 1955-57
1955-60
1955-62
1
20
30
20
75
260
110
70
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 17
CONCENTRATIONS OP AMMONIUM IN AIR, UNITED STATES
42
Location
Alabama
Mobile
Alaska
Anchorage
Arizona
Phoenix
Tucson
Arkansas
Little Rock
California
Bakersfield
Bur bank
Los Angeles
Oakland
Pasadena
Sacramento
San Diego
Santa Ana
Santa Barbara
Dist. of Col.
Washington
Georgia
Atlanta
Year
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1963
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
No.
of
Samp.
26
24
25
25
25
25
24
25
25
26
26
25
25
25
26
26
Min
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
Microcrrams Per Cubic Meter
Frequency Distribution-Percent
I'D
.2
.3
.3
.1
.2
.4
.1
.1
.1
.3
.1
20
.1
.1
.1
.4
.4
.6
.2
.2
.6
.1
.1
.1
.3
.1
.1
30
.1
.1
.1
.1
.5
.7
.9
.2
.3
.7
.2
.2
.2
.4
.2
.1
40
.2
.1
.1
.1
.5
.7
1.8
.3
.3
1.3
.2
.2
.2
.4
.3
.1
50
.2
.1
.2
.2
.6
.8
2.1
.4
.3
1.8
.3
.3
.3
.5
.5
.1
60
.3
.1
.2
.2
.8
1.4
3.1
.5
.3
3.2
.4
.3
.3
.7
1.1
.2
70
.4
.2'
.3
.2
1.0
2.0
3.7
.9
.4
3.9
.5
.4
.8
1.2
1.5
.2
80
.9
.2
1.3
.3
1.1
2.4
4.6
1.5
.4
5.4
.8
.8
1.5
2.1
2.0
.2
90
1.5
.3
3.9
.6
1.3
5.4
7.5
2.9
.9
6.1
1.1
2.4
3.9
3.4
2.9
.3
Max
2.2
.4
4.7
2.0
2.8
13.5
10.5
8.9
5.4
17.9
2.5
2.8
8.4
5.0
6.2
.6
Arith
Mean
.5
.2
.8
.3
.8
2.0
3.0
1.1
.7
3.3
.5
.7
1.3
1.1
1.3
.2
Geom
Mean
.3
.2
.3
.2
.7
1.1
1.9
.5
.4
1.8
.4
.4
.5
.7
.6
.2
(conti
Std
Geom
Dev
2.74
1.59
3.64
2.18
1.95
2.79
3.01
3.16
2.16
3.20
2.34
2.73
3.82
2.52
3.85
1.80
nued)
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 17
CONCENTRATIONS OP AMMONIUM IN AIR, UNITED STATES (Continued)
Location
Hawaii
Honolulu
Illinois
Mo line
Peoria
Rock Island
Indiana
liHrsafl Q\7l 1 1 P>
CftVdiio ¥••• dciLcs
Fort Wayne
Muncie
South Bend
Terre Haute
Iowa
Dubuque
Kansas
Kansas City
Kentucky
Ashland
Covington
Louisville
Louisiana
Baton Rouge
Maryland
Cumberland
Year
1964
1964
1964
1964
1 Qfid
X yv*t
1964
1963
1963
1963
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1963
No.
of
Samp.
26
24
23
25
n-a
zo
25
-25
26
24
26
25
24
24
21
26
26
Min
.1
.4.
.1
.1
.1
,1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
1
Microarams Per Cubic Meter
Free
10
.4
.2
.2
.1
1
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
1
20
.1
.6
.3
.2
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
1.1
.2
.2
.1
uencv Distribute
30
.1
.7
.3
.3
.2
.3
.3
.1
i
2.4
.2
.3
.1
.1
40
.1
.8
.3
.3
.2
.4
.3
.1
3.2
.4
.5
.1
2
50
.1
.2
1.0
.4
.4
.3
.3
.9
.5
.2
5.0
.8
.6
.1
i
.2
60
.1
.2
1.2
.5
.5
.7
.7
1.1
.6
.2
6.4
1.0
.8
.2
.3
on-Percent
70
.1
.2
1.4
.7
.7
.0
1.3
1.8
.7
.3
11.2
1.3
1.5
.2
.5
1 80
.1
.2
1.5
.8
2-7
. /
1.1
1.1
3.4
3.4
1.1
.3
19.4
1.8
2.4
.3
.7
i 90
.1
.3
3.4
.9
4n
• U
1.0
2.3
7.5
7.5
1.5
.5
43.2
2.4
3.9
.4
1.8
Max
.2
1.3
5.8
1.5
1 •> "7
12. /
3.4
6.5
10.8
9.6
6.4
1.7
75.5
4.8
7.9
.7
6.1
Arith
Mean
.1
.2
1.4
.5
1Q
«y
.7
.9
2.0
2.3
.9
.3
12.7
1.1
1.5
.2
.8
Geom
Mean
.1
.2
1.1
.5
.5
.5
.6
1.0
.6
.2
4.5
.7
.8
.2
.3
Std
Geom
Dev
1.48
1.80
2.02
1.79
3C O
.32
2.30
3.06
6.99
4.02
2.42
2.09
5.70
2.77
3.32
1.87
3.21
co
(continued)
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 17
CONCENTRATIONS OF AMMONIUM IN AIR, UNITED STATES (Continued)
Location
Michigan
Flint
Grand Rapids
Muslcegon
Minnesota
Minneapolis
St . Paul
Missouri
Kansas City
Nevada
Reno
New Jersey
Bayonne
Camden
Jersey City
New Mexico
Albuquerque
North Carolina
Charlotte
Year
1963
1963
1963
1964
1964
1964
1963
1963
1964
1963
1964
1964
No.
of
Samp.
23
24
26
26
26
25
24
24
26
25
26
25
Min
.1
.1
.1
.1
.3
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.2
Microcjrams Per Cubic Meter
Frequency Distribution-Percent
10
.1
.1
.3
.1
.2
.2
.1
.2
20
.1
.1
, 1
.1
.3
.1
.2
.5
.5
.1
.2
30
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.4
.1
.6
.8
1.1
.2
.3
40
.1
.1
,1
.1
.2
.4
.2
1.4
2.0
1.8
.2
.3
50
.2
.2
.2
.1
.3
.5
.3
2.1
3.4
3.4
.2
.3
60
.2
.2
.2
.2
.4
.5
.5
2.7
5.4
4.9
.4
.4
70
. .2
.2
.2
.2
.7
.6
.6
4.9
6.4
5.3
.5
.5
80
.3
.3
.3
.3
.8
.6
.9
5.4
7.5
6.4
.5
1.4
90
.4
.4
.6
.3
1.4
.6
1.8
8.8
10.9
7.5
.6
2.4
Max
.5
1.1
1.2
1.0
4.7
.9
4.7
12.4
17.5
13.4
2.6
3.8
Arith
Mean
.2
.2
.3
.2
.7
.5
.7
3.4
4.7
3.8
.4
.8
Geoir
Mean
.2
.2
.2
.2
.4
.5
.4
1.6
2.2
2.1
.3
.5
Std
Geom
Dev
1.61
1.84
1.94
1.91
2.93
1.35
2.94
4.49
4.56
3.65
2.21
2.46
(continued)
CO
to
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 17
CONCENTRATIONS OF AMMONIUM IN AIR, UNITED STATES (Continued)
Location
Ohio
Columbus
Dayton
Lorain
Stuebenville
Youngstown
Pennsylvania
Altoona
Puerto Rico
Guayanilla
Texas
Houston
Utah
Salt Lake City
West Virginia
Huntington
Wisconsin
Milwaukee
Wyoming
Cheyenne
Year
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1963
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
1964
No.
of
Samp.
26
26
25
24
25
22
26
24
24
24
26
23
Min
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
Microcrrams Per Cubic Meter
Freauencv Distribut
10
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
20
.1
.1
.1
.6
.2
.2
.2
.2
30
.2
.2
.2
.9
.3
.3
.1
.2
.1
.2
.1
40
.2
.2
.2
1.5
.4
.4
.1
.2
.1
.3
.1
50
.4
.2
.3
1.8
.5
.6
.1
.3
.1
.4
.1
.1
60
.5
.3
.3
2.0
.6
1.1
.1
.3
.2
.5
.1
.1
.on-Percent
70
.6
.5
.5
2.7
1.0
1.8
.2
.3
.3
.8
.2
.1
80
.7
.7
.8
3.4
1.5
5.9
.2
.4
.5
1.3
.3
.1
90
.9
1.3
2.9
6.4
2.1
6.4
.2
.4
1.5
5.4
.5
.1
Max
1.4
4.1
10.0
10.2
8.8
13.7
.3
.5
1.9
11.5
.9
.1
Arith
Mean
.5
.6
1.1
2.5
1.2
2.5
.2
.3
.4
1.5
.2
.1
Geom
Mean
.4
.4
.4
1.5
.6
.9
.2
.3
.2
.6
.2
.1
Std
Geom
Dev
2.07
2.42
3.31
3.38
3.19
4.35
1.53
1.41
2.78
3.41
2.06
1.02
CO
------- |