SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-600/7-86-005a
February 1986
Research and
Development
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF
NHg INJECTION FOR AN
INDUSTRIAL PACKAGE BOILER
Volume I. Technical Results
Prepared for
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Prepared by
Air and Energy Engineering Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of. control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-86-005a
February 1986
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF NH3
INJECTION FOR AN INDUSTRIAL
PACKAGE BOILER
Volume I
Technical Results
by
C. Castaldini, R. DeRosier, and L. R. Waterland
Acurex Corporation
Energy & Environmental Division
555 Clyde Avenue
ROJ Box 7555
Mountain View, California 94039
EPA Contract No. 68-02-3188
EPA Prbject Officer: R. E Hall
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
for
US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to extend their gratitude to Gordon Turl of
Getty-Mohawk Region in Bakersfield, California who agreed to volunteer the
boiler for the test program and provided valuable technical information. The
support of E. R. Rudio of Getty-Mohawk in operating the ammonia injection
system is also appreciated. Special recognition is also extended to the
Acurex field test team under the supervision of B. C. DaRos, assisted by J. S,
Steiner, R. Rape, R. Best, J. Holm, and M. Chips.
fi
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1
2 INTRODUCTION 2-1
3 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND PERFORMANCE 3-1
3.1 PROCESS PERFORMANCE 3-1
3.2 TEST CONDITIONS 3-2
4 EMISSION RESULTS 4-1
4.1 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROTOCOL 4-1
4.2 CRITERIA POLLUTANTS AND OTHER VAPOR SPECIES
EMISSIONS 4-4
4.3 TRACE ELEMENT ANALYSES 4-7
4.4 ORGANIC SPECIES EMISSIONS 4-9
4.4.1 GI to Cg Hydrocarbons, TCO, and GRAV Analysis . . 4-14
4.4.2 Infrared Spectra of Total Sample Extracts .... 4-16
4.4.3 GC/MS Analysis of Total Sample Extract 4-16
4.4.4 Column Chromatography 4-16
4.5 RADIOMETRIC EMISSIONS 4-20
5 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5-1
5.1 EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT 5-1
5.2 BIOASSAY RESULTS 5-2
APPENDIX A — SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS A-l
APPENDIX B — TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS AND MASS
BALANCES B-l
APPENDIX C — FLOWRATE AND COLLECTION DATA C-l
iii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1-1 Typical Package Boiler Thermal DeNOx Injector Design. . . 1-3
1-2 Thermal DeNOx Performance on the Packaged Industrial
Boiler 1-8
3-1 Thermal DeNOx Performance on Packaged Industrial
Boiler 3-3
A-l Schematic for Continuous, Extractive Sampling System. . . A-2
A-2 Schematic of Particulate Sampling Train A-5
A-3 Schematic of Ammonia Sampling Train A-6
A-4 Controlled Condensation System A-7
A-5 Source Assessment Sampling Train Schematic A-9
A-6 Flue Gas Analysis Protocol for SASS Samples A-ll
A-7 Exhaust Gas Analysis Protocol A-12
A-8 Organic Analysis Methodology A-13
A-9 CI-GS Hydrocarbon Sampling System A-14
A-10 Schematic of Sampling Cylinder Construction A-17
iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
2-1
3-1
3-2
3-3
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-11
5-1
5-2
Boiler Operating Conditions
Criteria and Other Gas Species Emissions
Organic Extract Summary — Test 1 (Baseline) (XAD)
Extract
Summary of Flue Gas Emissions, pg/dscm
Bioassay Results
Boiler Operating Conditions
Fuel Compositions
Boiler Thermal Efficiency
Criteria and Other Gas Species Emissions
Particulate Emissions — EPA Method 5/17
Trace Element Flowrates — Test 2 NHs Injection .....
Summary of Total Organic Emissions in the Flue Gas ...
Summary of IR Spectra of Total Sample Extracts
Compounds Sought in the GC/MS and Their Detection
Limits
Results of GC/MS Analyses
Radiometric Activity of SASS Particulate
Flue Gas Species in Concentrations Exceeding 0.1 of
an Occupational Exposure Limit
Page
1-4
1-6
1-10
1-12
1-14
1-15
2-5
3-4
3-6
3-7
4-5
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-12
4-15
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-19
4-20
5-3
5-3
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Concluded)
Table Page
A-l Continuous Monitoring Equipment in the Mobile
Laboratory A-4
A-2 Gas Chromatograph Specifications A-16
-------
SECTION 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report describes emission results obtained from field testing of a
oil- and gas-fired industrial boiler equipped with the Exxon's Thermal DeNOx
Process for NOX reduction. This work was performed for the Air and Energy
Engineering Research Laboratory (-AEERL) of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) under the Combustion Modification Environmental Assessment (CMEA)
program, EPA contract number 68-02-3188. The objective of the tests was to
evaluate criteria and noncriteria pollutant emission in the flue gas during a
baseline (uncontrolled) condition and a low-NOx (with NH3 injection)
condition.
1.1 SOURCE DESCRIPTION
The boiler tested in the program was a packaged two-drum Zurn keystone
steam generator equipped with an economizer and having a maximum design
capacity of 7.57 kg/s (60,000 Ib/hr) superheated steam at 2.51 MPa (350 psig).
This unit, installed in 1979 at a southern California oil refinery, was
equipped with the manufacturer's sidefire air injection and the Thermal DeNOx
Process developed by the Exxon Research and Engineering (ER&E).
The Thermal DeNOx Process involves the injection of NH3 into the
convective passes of boilers for the selective noncatalytic reduction of NO in
the presence of 02- NO reduction takes place over a temperature range of
870° to 1,200°C (1,600° to 2,200°F). Hydrogen can be added along with the
1-1
-------
to lower the range of reaction temperature to as low as 700°C (1,330°F).
Multiple NH3 injection grids can also be used to allow sustained NOX reduction
performance with boiler load swings.
The boiler tested in this program utilized only one injection grid.
Details of the injection grid were not available because they were considered
ER8E proprietary. However, a typical two-drum boiler installation of a single
grid NHs/Hg injection system is shown in figure 1-1. Saturated steam was
utilized to carry the NH3 to the boiler passes. Hg injection capability was
also available.
Primary environmental concerns with this NOX control technology on
full-scale combustion sources focus on the breakthrough of NH3, and when
sulfur-bearing fuels are burned, NH3 byproducts of ammonium sulfate, (NH3)2 $04
and ammonium bisulfate, NfyHStty.
1.2 BOILER OPERATION AND FUELS
The test program for this unit called for emissions evaluation during a
baseline test (without NH3 injection) and a test with NHs injection for
significant NOX reduction. Table 1-1 summarizes the boiler and NH3 injection
system operations during these two test conditions. During both tests the
boiler manufacturer's sidefire air injection was operational. Boiler
operation was maintained relatively constant to allow a direct comparison
between tests and to isolate the effect of NH3 injection on emissions.
Boiler steam flowrate was approximately 4.0 kg/s (32,000 Ib/hr) for
both tests corresponding to a total heat input of about 13 MW
(45 million Btu/hr). The boiler was fired with refinery gas and residual oil.
The refinery gas contributed about 44 percent of the total heat input.
Typically, refinery gas contributes up to 2/3 of the total heat input for this
1-2
-------
l
oo
(Rear View)
(Plan View)
FIIIIIICO Tub. UanK
llortionlvl lujaclui
— -V —— _ ou>—X
-------
Table 1-1. Boiler Operating Conditions
Parameter
Steam:
Steam fl curate
Drum pressure
Superheater
outlet pressure
Superheater
temperature
Fuels:
Fuel oil flowrate
Refinery fuel
gas flowrate
Fuel oil heat
rate
Refinery fuel
gas heat rate
Total heat rate
Oil /gas heat
Input
Burner Settings:
Fuel oil pressure
Fuel oil
temperature
Atomizing steam
pressure
Refinery fuel gas
pressure
Swirl setting
Furnace Draft:
Window pressure
Furnace pressure
Boiler outlet
pressure
NH^ Injection System:
NH3 flowrate
NH3 header
pressure
Steam carrier
Steam carrier
pressure
Units
,"g/s
(103 Ib/hr)
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
K
cn
l/s
(gpn)
Si;3/s
(103 scfn)
MW
(10s Btu/hr)
, MW
(IDS Btu/hr)
MW
(106 Btu/hr)
Percent
MPa
(psig)
X
(-F)
MPa
(psig)
kPa
(psig)
kPa
(in. H20)
kPa
(in. H20)
Pa
(in. H20)
S/s
(Ib/hr)
MPa
(psig)
kg/s
(Tb/hr)
MPa
(psig)
Test 1«
(Baseline)
4.04
(32.0)
1.96
(270)
1.83
(250)
530
(495)
0.184
(175)
0.166
(21.3)
7.39
(25.2)
5.86
(20.0)
13.2
(«S.2)
56/44
0.41
(45)
366
(198)
0.56
(66)
120
(2.S)
4
0.85
(3.4)
0.35
(1.4)
80
(0.32)
0.105
(832)
0.410
(59.5)
Test 2
(»H3 Injection)
4.00
(31.7)
1.96
(270)
1.83
(250)
530
(495)
0.184
(175)
0.167
(21.2)
7.51
(25.6)
3.86
(ZO.O)
13.4
(45.6)
56/44
0.38
(41)
367
(200)
0.53
(62)
120
(2.5)
4
0.37
(3.5)
0.40
(1.6)
92
(0.37)
1.53
(12.1)
>1.72
(>250)
0.105
U32)
0.410
(59.5)
'Baseline test was performed over a 2-day period. Operating data
represent average values for these 2 days.
1-4
-------
boiler. NHs injection rate during test 2 was 1.53 g/s (12.1 Ib/hr)
corresponding to a NH3/NO molar ratio of about 2.5.
Residual oil and refinery gas analysis results are summarized in
table 1-2. Specific gravity of refinery gas varied from about 0.44 to 0.50
due to variations in the level of hydrogen doping resulting from refinery
process conditions.
1.3 TEST PROGRAM
The program for emission measurements at the two test conditions
conformed to a modified EPA level 1 protocol (reference 1-2). In addition,
measurements for NH3 flue gas emissions were performed to calculate the amount
of unreacted NH3 being emitted under boiler and control system operations
investigated. Flue gas measurements were made at the stack downstream of the
boiler economizer where the gas temperature was approximately 188°C (370°F).
Flue gas measurement included:
• Continuous monitors for NOX, CO, C02, and 02
• Source assessment sampling system (SASS) train sampling for organic
and inorganic pollutant species
• EPA Method 5 with water impingers and an EPA Method 17 backup for
solid and condensible particulate mass emissions
• Controlled condensation system (CCS) for S02 and $03
i
• Grab sample for onsite analysis of gaseous C^ to CQ hydrocarbon by
gas chromatography
« EPA Method 17 with HC1 impinger solutions for ammonia sampling
In addition to this detailed test program, short-term tests varying
NO molar ratio, hydrogen injection, and oil/gas fuel ratio were performed.
The objective of these short-term tests was to map the performance of the
Thermal DeNOx Process over a wide range of system and boiler operating
1-5
-------
Table 1-2. Boiler Operating Conditions
Fuel Component/Properties
Residual Oil (Weight Percent)
Carbon, C
Hydrogen, H
Nitrogen, N
Sulfur, S
Oxygen, 0
Specific gravity
Higher heating value MO /kg
(Btu/lb)
Refinery Fuel Gas (Mole Percent)
Hydrogen, H
Methane, CH4
Ethane, C2Hg
Propane, £3^3
Butane, C^JQ
Pentane, £5^12
C6+
N2
C02
H2S
Specific gravity
Higher heating value MJ/m^
(Btu/ft3)
Combined Fuel (Weight Percent)
Carbon, C
Hydrogen, H
Nitrogen, N
Sulfur, S
Oxygen, 0
Higher heating value MJ/kg
(Btu/lb)
Test ia
(Baseline)
86.53
11.50
0.65
0.47
0.71
0.94
43.87
(18,900)
53.09
28.31
5.94
5.33
4.39
1.57
0.93
0.23
0.20
0.002
0.496
35.32
(948)
81.90
16.69
0.36
0.26
0.40
50.06
(21,570)
Test 2
(NHs Injection)
86.01
12.18
0.63
0.47
0.65
0.94
44.49
(19,170)
53.62
29.70
5.90
5.63
3.58
0.81
0.29
0.24
0.22
0.003
0.455
32.90
(883)
81.50
17.03
0.37
0.28
0.38
50.70
(21,845)
aBaseline test was performed ober a 2-day period. Fuel data
represent average values of fuel analyses for each of the 2 days,
1-6
-------
parameters. For these tests, only continuous monitoring of NOX and 02 was
performed. Results of these short-term tests are illustrated in figure 1-2.
Baseline NOX emissions averaged 235 ppm at 3 percent Q£ for two oil/gas
fuel mixtures investigated. The figure shows that NOX reduction with NH3/NO
ratio depends on the fuel mixture. The system was less effective at the
oil/gas ratio of 56/44 percent heat input basis than at the lower oil/gas
ratio of 37/63 percent (closer to the typical operation of the unit and the
design basis for the NH3 injection grid installed). The addition of hydrogen
did not improve system performance at the lower oil/gas ratio, but resulted in
significant, further NOX reduction to levels below 100 ppm at the higher
oil/gas ratio.
This can be explained by the fact that firing the higher oil/gas ratio
led to lower boiler convective section gas temperatures at the grid location,
thereby decreasing the effectiveness of NH3 alone. Hydrogen injection to
shift the temperature window for the reduction reaction was effective at this
higher oil/gas ratio. For both fuel mixtures, the NOX reduction performance
appears to peak at a NHs/NO ratio of about 2.5 with little or no additional
reduction gained with further increase in NHs injection rate.
Figure 1-2 also indicates the two test conditions where detailed
emissions measurements were performed. These test conditions, indicated by an
I
"X," correspond to the baseline and the low-NOx test. The NHs/NO ratio during
the low-NOx test was about 2.5 with the boiler oil/gas ratio of
56/44 percent.
It is evident that the ldw-NOx, Thermal DeNOx Process operation
selected for in-depth emission evaluation did not correspond to optimum NQX
reduction performance for which the.NHs injection system was designed and is^
capable of delivering. However, the test is representative of maximum
1-7
-------
00
,250
Legend
Boiler heat input = ~13 MW (45 million Btu/hr)
Stack Op = 2.5 to 2.8 percent
O 44 percent refinery gas
56 percent residual oil
D 63 percent refinery gas
37 percent residual oil
• • Hydrogen injection numbers
specify H9/NH-> molar ratio
if known c J
® Test points for detailed
emission measurements
0.5
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
NH3/NO (molar ratio based on inlet NO)
Figure 1-2. Thermal DeNOx Performance on the Packaged Industrial Boiler
-------
performance for the boiler and NH3 injection operating condition indicated
here. The following section summarizes the results of these detailed tests.
1.4 TEST RESULTS
Table 1-3 summarizes criteria and other gas species emissions measured
during the two in-depth tests. The NH3 injection rate of 1.53 g/s
(12.1 Ib/hr), corresponding to a NH3/NO molar ratio of 2.52, resulted in a
41 percent NOX reduction. CO emissions showed no significant change; however,
indications of'higher gaseous hydrocarbons especially in the €4 to Cg range
were recorded. Speculations can only be made as to whether these emission
increases were due to burner conditions (i.e., coking of the oil-burner tip
required nozzle cleaning at each operating shift), change in fuel properties,
or quenching of boiler convective flue gas with NH3 carrier steam.
Conclusions with regard to SOg and $03 cannot be made because of loss of
sample during the baseline test. Test 2, S02 and 503 results account for
about 60 percent of the sulfur in the fuel with the remainder possibly
undetected because of ammonium sulfate formation.
Baseline NHs emissions ranged between 3 to 25 ppm averaging 11 ppm
(0.23 Ib/hr). During If^ injection, unreacted NH3 emissions from two
consecutive measurements ranged between 200 and 600 ppm averaging 430 ppm
(8.4 Ib/hr). A third measurement resulted in NH3 concentrations of 840 ppm
(16.0 Ib/hr). This measurement was considered erroneous because it resulted
in more 1% emitted than actually injected through the grid. Analyses of the
EPA Method 5 and 17 impinger solutions also indicated a high concentration of
NH3 corresponding to a stack concentration of about 6 ppm (0.12 Ib/hr) for
baseline and 360 ppm (7 Ib/hr) for the NHs injection test. These results lend
credence to results obtained with the ammonia emission sampling system.
1-9
-------
Table 1-3. Criteria and Other Gas Species Emissions
Pollutant
As Measured By:
Continuous gas
analyses
Og. percent
063, percent
NOX , ppm
CO, ppm
Wet chemical
methods
S02, ppm
S03, ppm
NH3, ppm
Offsite gas
chromatography
N20
Onsite gas
chromatography
Cj., ppm
C2, ppm
C3, ppm
CA, ppm
Cg, ppm
Cg, ppm
Corrected Emissions
N0xe
CO
S02
S03f
NH39
NTO
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
Total Cj to Cg
Participate Mass
Emissions:
Method 5/17 solid
Method 5/17
condensible
Inorganic
Method 5/17
condensible
organic
Method 5/17 total
SASS solid
Test 1
(Baseline)
2.6
11.7
239
31
NA
NA
U«
53
NO
NO
2.6
Ml
NO
NO
pome
234
30
MA
NA
U
52
—
—
2.5
—
—
—
2.5
-
«.
__
—
—
ng/jd
US
9.0
NA
NA
2.0
25
_
~
1.3
—
~
_
1.3
4.6
10.0
2.9
17.7
2.2
lb/106 Btud
0.263
0.02
NA
NA
0.005
0.056
—
—
0.003
—
—
—
0.003
0.01
0.023
0.007
0.042
O.OOS
Test Z
(MH3 Injection)
2.5
11. S
141
24
82
13
440b
17
0.8
0.6
NO
6.2
S.I
5.0
ppm
137
23
80
13
430
17
0.8
0.6
—
6.0
5.0
4.9
17.0
—
„
-
—
ng/J
67
6.9
55
13
78
8.0
0.15
0.21
—
3.2
4.3
5.0
13.0
1.8
180
0.2
182
2.6
lb/106 8tu
0.16
0.02
0.13
0.03
0.18
0.019
0.0003
0.0005
-.
0.007
0.010
0.012
0.030
0.004
0.42
0.0004
0.43
0.006
emissions ranged from 3 to 25 ppm from three separate flue gas
measurements
bNH3 emissions ranged from 280 to 600 ppn from two separate flue gas
measurements
cDry ppm at 3 percent 02
dOn heat input basis
eAs N02
fAs H2S04
9Arithmetic average
NA — Sample lost in transit
NO — Not detected
1-10
-------
Nitrous oxide (^0) averaged about 50 ppm during baseline and dropped
to 17 ppm during the second test. This 68 percent reduction in ppm ^0
compares with the 41 percent reduction in ppm NOX.
Total particulate matter during the NH3 injection test increased by
more than one order of magnitude. The largest contribution to this increase
was from the inorganic condensate matter collected in the impinger section.
This can be in part explained by ammonia sulfate and bisulfate formed either
in the stack or through the particulate sampling system.
SASS samples were analyzed for organic content and inorganic trace
elements. Total chromatographable organics, hydrocarbons in the boiling range
of 100° to 300°C (210 to 570°F), measured 0.023 ng/J (90 wg/dscm) for the
baseline and 0.01 ng/0 (40 ug/dscm) for the NH3 injection test. Organics
measured by gravimetry (SRAV) analysis for hydrocarbons having boiling points
greater than 300°C (>570°F) were 0.29 ng/J (1,300 ng/dscm) for the baseline
and 0.059 ng/J (240 ug/dscm) for the NH3 injection test. Infrared spectra of
the gravimetric residue suggests the pressure of aliphatic hydrocarbons and
alcohols for both tests.
The XAD-2 extract of the baseline test, which contained the highest
organic content, was also subjected to liquid chromatography separation.
Table 1-4 summarizes these results. There were no discernable peaks from
fractions 2 through 4. These spectra indicate that, of the 1.2 mg/dscm of
organic matter in the total sample, about 70 percent is aliphatic
hydrocarbons, 20 percent is alcohols, and 10 percent is carboxylic acids.
Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis of sample extracts was
performed to determine the presence and concentration of 58 semivolatile
organic priority pollutants. Of these, the only ones detected were
1-11
-------
Table 1-4. Organic Extract Summary -- Test 1 (Baseline) XAD Extract
Total GRAV
Organics3
mg
mg/dscm
Category'5
Aliphatic
hydrocarbons
Alcohols
Carboxylic
acids
LCI
3.9
0.16
LC2
<0.6
<0.02
LC3
1.2
0.05
LC4
1.9
0.08
LC5
1.6
0.06
LC6
2.5
0.10
LC7
1.6
0.06
Total
12.7
0.51
Assigned Intensity — (mg/dscm)
100 — (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
100 -- (0.16)
0.27
0.07
0.02
aTotal GRAV sample of 31 mg; 20 mg taken for LC with 8.1 mg recovered. Total
mg corrected in LC fractions corrected back to total sample.
bSummary of organic emissions based on IR results
-------
naphthalene, phenanthrene, and phenol In amounts corresponding to flue gas
concentrations generally <1 yg/dscm.
Results of spark source mass spectrometry (SSMS) and atomic absorption
spectrometry (AAS) indicated that inorganic trace elements were not affected
by NHs injection. Major elements having flue-gas concentrations exceeding
50 mg/dscm for both tests included: sulfur, copper, nickel, silicon,
titanium, vanadium, zinc, potassium, cobalt, fluorine, and iron. These
emissions are most likely the result of:
• Inorganic elements in the fuel oil
• Erosion of metal surfaces in the hot combustion gases in the boiler
passes including the NHs injection grid
« Erosion of sampling equipment metal parts
1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Emission Concentrations (flue gas stream species) from both tests were:
» Compared to occupational exposure guidelines as a rough index of
the need for further monitoring
• The flue gas samples collected were subjected to bioassays
Table 1-5 lists those pollutants emitted in the flue gas at levels
greater than 10 percent of their respective guidelines. NOX emissions are
reduced at the expense of increased NH3 emissions. Emissions of several
metals were above their respective guideline limits, however, these emissions
were not impacted by the NOX control technology.
Bioassay tests for health effects were performed on the organic (XAD-2)
extracts collected by SASS. These tests included (reference 1-4):
• Ames assay, based on the property of Salmonella typhimurium
mutants to revert due to exposure to various classes of mutagens
1-13
-------
Table 1-5. Summary of Flue Gas Emissions, Mg/dscm
Species
Criteria Pollutants
and Total Organic
Emissions
CO
NOX (as N02)
SO?
c
Solid particulate
Condensable organic
particulate
Condensable inorganic
particulate
Total volatile
organics (Cj to Cg)
Total chromatographable
organics (Cy to C^g)
Total GRAV organics
Trace Elements
Silver, Ag
Platinum, Pt
Cobalt, Co
Nickel , Ni
Copper, Cu
Calcium, Ca
Beryllium, Be
Chromium, Cp
Phosphorus, P
Tungsten, W
Vanadium, V
Potassium, K
Test 1
(baseline)
36 x 103
457 x 103
NA
7.8 x 103
17 x 103
11 x 103
37 x 103
4.8 x 103
90
f\
1.3 x 103
2.13 x 103
15.7
>50.9
>82.3
>122
551
>0.619
10.3
16.2
103
51.4
72.8
Test 2
(NH3 injection)
28 x 103
270 x 103
218 x 103
307 x 103
6.7 x 103
740
670 x 103
48 x 103
40
240
75
35.7
>61.9
>63.1
>69.3
ND
ND
7.73
13.6
ND
>60.0
498
Occupational
Exposure
Guideline3
55 x 103
6 x 103
5 x 103
18 x 103
1.4 x 104
—
—
__
—
•"•
10
2
50
100
200
1.4 x 103
2
50
100
1 x 103
500
2 x 103
aThreshold limit value, reference 1-3
ND = Not detected
NA = Not available
1-14
-------
« Cytotoxicity assay (CHO) with mammalian cells in culture to measure
cellular metabolic impairment and death from exposure to soluble
toxicants
Table 1-6 summarizes these results which indicate that the XAD-2 organic
extracts were of moderate or less mutagenicity and toxicity.
Table 1-6. Bioassay Results
Sampl e
Baseline XAD extract
NH3 injection XAD extract
Ames
Mutagenicity
Ma
Ub
CHO
Cytotoxicity
Ijb
L|b
aModerate mutagenicity
^Insufficient sample to evaluate, test results indicate
moderate mutagenicity (toxicity) or less
1-15
-------
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 1
1-1. Hurst, B. E. and C. E. Schlecksen, Jr., "Applicability of Thermal DeNOx
to Large Industrial Boilers," Proceedings of the Joint Symposium on
Stationary Combustion NOX Control, Volume V, Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA-600/9-81-028e. NTIS PB 81-236150, July 1981.
1-2. Lentzen, D. E., et al., "IERL-RTP Procedures Manual: Level 1
Environmental Assessment (Second Edition)," Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA-600/7-78-201, NTIS PB 293795, October 1978.
1-3. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Threshold
Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents in the Work
Environment With Intended Changes for 1982, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1982.
1-4. Brusick, 0. J., et al., "IERL-RTP Procedure Manual: Level 1
Environmental Assessment, Biological Tests," EPA-600/18-81-024, NTIS
P8 228966, October 1981.
1-16
-------
SECTION 2
INTRODUCTION
This report describes and presents results for a set of environmental
assessment tests performed for the Air and Energy Engineering Research Labora-
tory (AEERL) of EPA under the Combustion Modification Environmental
Assessment (CMEA) program, EPA Contract No. 68-02-3188. The CMEA started in
1976 as part of EPA's Conventional Combustion Environmental Assessment (CCEA)
program with a 3-year study (NOX EA), EPA Contract No. 68-02-2160, having the
following objectives:
« Identify potential multimedia environmental effects of stationary
combustion sources and combustion modification technology
• Develop and document control application guidelines to minimize
these effects
• Identify stationary source and combustion modification R&D
priorities
« Disseminate program results to intended users
During the first year of the NOX EA, data and methodologies for the
environmental assessment were compiled. Furthermore, priorities for the
schedule and level of effort for developing emission data for the various
source/fuel/control combinations were identified. This effort revealed major
data gaps, particularly for noncriteria pollutants (organic emissions and
trace elements) for virtually all combinations of stationary combustion
2-1
-------
sources and combustion modification techniques. Consequently, a series of
seven environmental field test programs was undertaken to fill these data
gaps. The results of these tests are documented in seven individual reports
(references 2-1 through 2-7) and in the final NOX EA report summarizing the
entire 3-year effort (reference 2-8).
The current CMEA program has, as major objectives, the continuation of
multimedia environmental field tests initiated in the original NOX EA program.
These new tests, using standardized sampling and analytical procedures
(reference 2-9) are aimed at filling remaining data gaps and addressing the
following priority needs:
• Advanced NOX controls
— Evaluation of controls with regard to projected New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS)
— Evaluation of controls designated Best Available Control
Technology (BACT)
• Alternate fuels
« Secondary sources
• EPA program data needs
— Residential oil combustion
— Wood firing in residential, commercial, and industrial sources
-- High interest emissions determination
• Nonsteady-state operations
Stringent NOX regulations in California have led to the application of >
advanced controls which are capable of significant reductions in NOX emission
from stationary combustion sources. Among these controls, noncatalytic
ammonia (NHs) injection, developed by Exxon Research and Engineering Company
(ER&E) as the Thermal DeNOx Process, has been installed on a number of process
2-2
-------
heaters and industrial boilers in Southern California where NOX abatement
requires the application of the best available control technology (BACT)
(reference 2-9).
The Thermal DeNOx Process involves the injection of NH3 into hot flue
gas in a prescribed temperature range from about 870°C (1,600°F) to about
1,200°C (2,200°F). The chemical reaction of NH3 with NOX in the presence of
02 can be summarized by the following two equations (reference 2-9):
NOX + NH3 + 02 + (H2) * N2 + H20 (1)
NH3 + 02 * NOX + H20 (2)
At temperatures above approximately 1,200°C (2,200°F), NH3 oxidizes to form
NOX as shown by equation 2. At temperatures below approximately 870°C
(1,600°F) the rates of both reactions are low, causing the NH3 to leave
unreacted. At the lower range of flue gas temperature, however, the
decomposition of NOX by NH3 can be accomplished by the simultaneous injection
of H2. The addition of H2 together with NH3 tends to extend the effective
temperature range of NOX decomposition to about 700°C (1,300°F).
In industrial and utility boilers, NH3 injection takes place in the
convective tube banks where single or multiple injection grids are located.
i
Although NOX reduction efficiencies of over 90 percent have been achieved in
the laboratory, full-scale applications have resulted in a maximum of 60 to
70 percent efficiency. Temperature and gas velocity gradients, low residence
time at temperature, and degree of mixing are the primary factors which tend
to reduce process performance in full-scale applications.
Potential environmental impacts resulting from application of this
process are primarily associated with emissions of unreacted NH3 and formation
of ammonium sulfate which adds to the total particulate emission from the
2-3
-------
source. Other concerns such as cyanide (HCN) and nitrous oxide (N20)
formation have been addressed by ER&E in the laboratory; however, limited data
exists on full-scale combustion sources. In response to these concerns, a
medium-size industrial watertube boiler designed with NH3 injection was
selected for testing under the CMEA program. The objective of the tests was
to quantify multimedia emission from the boiler operating with and without MH3
injection, thus providing a measure of the environmental benefit of NOX
reduction and potential risks associated with the process. The data presented
in this report quantify flue gas emission and identify pollutants of potential
concern using results from standardized sampling and analytical procedures
(reference 2-10).
Table 2-1 lists all the tests performed in the CMEA effort, outlining
the source tested, fuel used, combustion modifications implemented and the
level of sampling and analysis performed in each case. Results of these test
programs are discussed in separate reports.
2-4
-------
Table 2-1. Completed Tests During the Current Program
TO
en
Source
Spark-Ignited, natural -
gas-fired reciprocating
Internal combustion
engine
Compression Ignition,
dlesel-ftred,
reciprocating Internal
combustion engine
Lovr-N0x, residential,
condensing-heating
system furnished by
Karl sons Blueburner
Systems Ltd. of Canada
Rocketdyne/EPA
low-NOx residential
forced warm air furnace
Description
Large bore, 6-cy Under,
opposed piston, 186-kN
(250 Bhp)/cyl , 900-rpm
Model 38TDS8-1/8
Large bore, 6-cy Under
opposed piston, 261-kW
(35.0 Bhp)/cyl, 900-rpn
Hoder38TDD8-l/8
Residential hot water
heater equipped with
H.A.N. low-NOx burner,
0.55 ml/s (0.5 gal/hr)
firing capacity, con-
densing flue gas
Residential warm atr
furnace with modified
high-pressure burner and
firebox, 0.83 ml/s
(0.75 gal/hr) firing
capacity
Test Points
Unit Operation
-- Baseline (pre-NSPS)
— Increased air-fuel
ratio aimed at
meeting proposed
NSPS of 700 ppm
corrected to IS
percent Oj and
standard atmospheric
conditions
— Baseline (pre-NSPS)
— Fuel Injection retard
aimed at meeting pro-
posed NSPS of 600 ppm
corrected to IS per-
cent 0? and standard
a tmospner 1 c cond 1 1 1 ons
Low-NOv burner design
by H.A.N.
Low-N0x burner design
and Integrated furnace
system
Sampling Protocol
Engine exhaust:
- SASS
— Method 5
— Gas sample (CI-CR HC)
— Continuous NO, NOX> CO,
CO?, 02, CHa, TUIIC
Fuel
Lube oil
Engine exhaust:
— SASS
- Method 8
— Method 5
- Gas sample (Ci-Cg HC)
— Continuous NO, NOX, CO,
C02, 02, CH*. TUHC
Fuel
Lube oil
Furnace exhaust:
- SASS
- Method 8
— Method 5
~ Gas sample (Cj-Cj HC)
— Continuous NO, NOX, CO,
C02, 02. CH4, TUHC
Fuel
Waste water
Furnace exhaust:
— SASS
— Method 8
— Controlled condensation
— Method S
— Gas sample (Cj-Cs HC)
— Continuous NO, NOX, CO,
C02, 02, CH4, TUHC
Fuel
Test Collaborator
Fairbanks Morse
Division of Colt
Industries
Fairbanks Morse
Division of Colt
Industries
New test
New test
-------
Table 2-1. Continued
ro
a\
Source
Pulverized coal-fired
utility boiler,
Conesville station
Nova Scotia Technical
College Industrial
boiler
Adelphi University
industrial boiler
Pittsburgh Energy
Technology Center (PETC)
Industrial boiler
Description
400-HM tangent (ally
fired; new NSPS
design aimed at
meeting 301 ng/J
NOX limit
1.14 kg/s steam
(9,000 Ib/hr) firetube
fired with a mixture
of coal -oil -Mater (COM)
1.89 kg/s steam
(15.000 Ib/hr)
hot water
firetube fired with a
mixture of coal-oil-
water (COM)
3.03 kg/s steam
(24,000 Ib/hr) water tube
fired with a mixture of
coal -oil (COM)
Test Points
Unit Operation
ESP Inlet and outlet,
one test
-- Baseline (COM)
-- Controlled S02
emissions with
limestone Injection
— Baseline (COM)
— Controlled SO?
emissions with
Na2C03 Injection
— Baseline test only
with COM
Sampling Protocol
ESP inlet and outlet
— SASS
— Method 5
— Controlled condensation
— Gas sample (Ci-C6 KC)
— Continuous NO, NOX. CO.
C02, 02
Coal
Bottom ash
ESP ash
Boiler outlet
- SASS
— Method 5
— Method 8
— Controlled Condensation
-- Gas sample (C^Cs HC)
— Continuous 62, CO?.
CO. NOX
Fuel
Boiler outlet
— SASS
— Method 5
— Method 8
— Controlled Condensation
— Gas Sample (C,-C6 HC)
— Continuous 03, cbz. NOX,
CO
Fuel
Boiler outlet
— SASS
- Method S
— Controlled Condensation
— Continuous Oo, 0)9. NOX,
TUHC. CO
— NjO grab sample
Fuel
Test Collaborator
Exxon Research and
Engineering (ERSE)
conducting cor-
rosion tests
Envirocon per-
formed participate
and sulfur
emission tests
Adelphi University
PETC and General
Electric (GE)
-------
Table 2-1. Continued
PO
Source
TOSCO Refinery vertical
crude oil heater
Mohawk -Getty Oil
Industrial boiler
Industrial boiler
Industrial boiler
Description
2.54 Ml /day
(16,000 bbl/day) natural
draft process heater
burning oil/refinery gas
8.21 kg/s steam
(65.000 Ib/hr)
watertube burning
mixture of refining gas
and residual oil
2.52 kg/s steam
(20,000 Ib/hr) watertube
burning wood waste
3.16 kg/s steam
(29,000 Ib/hr)
ftretube with refractory
firebox burning wood waste
Test Points
Unit Operation
— Baseline
— Staged combustion
using air Injection
lances
-- Baseline
-- Ammonia Injection
using the noncatalytic
Thermal DeNOx
Process
— Baseline (dry wood)
— Wet (green) wood
— Baseline (dry wood)
Sampling Protocol
Heater outlet
— SASS
— Method 5
— Controlled condensation
— Gas sample (Cj-Cj HC)
— Continuous (h, NOX, CO,
CO,, HC
-- Nju grab sample
Fuel oil
Refinery gas
Economizer outlet
« SASS
- Method 5. 17
— Controlled condensation
-- Gas Sample (Cj-C6 HC)
— Ammonia emissions
-- N20 grab sample
— Continuous 0?, NO,,
CO, C02
Fuels (refinery gas and
residual oil)
Boiler outlet
- SASS
— Method 5
-- Controlled condensation
— Gas sample (Ci-Cg HC)
-- Continuous 0%, NOX, CO
Fuel
Flyash
Outlet of cyclone parttculate
collector
— SASS
— Method 5
-- Controlled condensation
— Gas sample (C(-Cg HC)
— Continuous 0?, NOX, CO
Fuel
Bottom ash
Test Collaborator
KVB coordinating
the staged com-
bustion operation
and continuous
emission monitoring
New test
North Carolina
Department of
Natural Resources,
EPA IEHL-RTP
North Carolina
Department of
Natural Resources,
EPA IERL-RTP
-------
Table 2-1. Concluded
IN3
00
Source
Enhanced oil recovery
steam generator
Pittsburgh Energy
Technology Center
(PETC) Industrial
boiler
Description
IS MM (SO nil) ton Btu/hr)
steam generator burning
crude oil equipped with
MHI low-NOx burner
3.03 kg/s steam
(24.000 Ib/hr) watertube
fired with a mixture of
coal -water (CUM)
Test Points
Unit Operation
— Performance mapping
-- Low NO), operation
— Baseline test only
with CUM
Sampling Protocol
Steamer outlet
— SASS
— Method 5
-- Method 8
— Gas sample (Ci - C6 IIC)
-- Continuous 02, NOX, CO,
COo
-- H?0 grab sample
Fuel
Boiler outlet
— SASS
- Method 6
- Method B
— Gas sample (C, . C6 HC)
— Continuous 0?, NO., CO,
CO?. TUHC
-- N?0 grab sample
Fuel
Bottom ash
Collector hopper ash
Test Collaborator
Getty Oil Company,
CE-Natco
PETC and General
Electric
-------
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2
2-1. Larkin, R. and E. 8. Higginbotham, "Combustion Modification Controls
for Stationary Gas Turbines: Volume II. Utility Unit Field Test,"
EPA-600/7-81-122b, July 1981.
2-2. Higginbotham, E. B., "Combustion Modification Controls for Residential
and Commercial Heating Systems: Volume II. Oil-fired Residential
Furnace Field Test," EPA-600/7-81-123b, July 1981.
2-3. Higginbotham, E. B. and P. M. Goldberg, "Combustion Modification NOX
Controls for Utility Boilers: Volume I. Tangential Coal-fired Unit
Field Test," EPA-600/7-81-124a, July 1981.
2-4. Sawyer, J. W. ami E. B. Higginbotham, "Combustion Modification NOX
Controls for Utility Boilers: Volume II. Pulverized-coal Wall-fired
Unit Field Test," EPA-600/7-81-124b, July 1981.
2-5. Sawyer, J. W. and E. B. Higginbotham, "Combustion Modification NOX
Controls for Utility Boilers: Volume III. Residual-oil Wall-fired
Unit Field Test," EPA-600/7-81-124c, July 1981.
2-6. Goldberg, P. M. and E. B. Higginbotham, "Industrial Boiler Combustion
Modification NOX Controls: Volume II. Stoker Coal-fired Boiler Field
Test — Site A/ EPA-600/7-81-126b, July 1981.
2-7. Lips, H. I. and E. B. Higginbotham, "Industrial Boiler Combustion
Modification NOX Controls: Volume III. Stoker Coal-fired Boiler Field
Test — Site B/ EPA-600/7-81/126c, July 1981.
2-8. Water!and, L. R., et al., "Environmental Assessment of Stationary
Source NOX Control Technologies ~ Final Report," EPA-600/7-82-034,
May 1982.
2-9. Hurst, B. E. and C. E. Schlecksen, Jr., "Applicability of Thermal DeNOx
to Large Industrial Boilers," Proceedings of the Joint Symposium on
Stationary Combustion NOX (Control — Volume V, EPA-600/9-8l-028e,
July 1981.
2-10. Lentzen, D. E., et al., "IERL-RTP Procedures Manual: Level 1
Environmental Assessment (Second Edition)," EPA-600/7-78-201,
October 1978.
2-9
-------
SECTION 3
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND PERFORMANCE
The boiler tested in the program was a packaged two-drum Zurn Keystone
steam generator equipped with an economizer and having a maximum design
capacity of 7.57 kg/s (60,000 Ib/hr) superheated steam at 2.51 MPa (350 psi)
and 260°C (500°F). The boiler is designed to burn residual low-sulfur fuel
oil and refinery process gas. A typical mix of these fuels is 30 percent oil
and 70 percent gas on a heat input basis. This unit was installed in 1979 at
a southern California oil refinery and equipped with the manufacturer's
si define air injection and the ER&E Thermal DeNOx Process.
The NH3 injection grid was designed for injection of NH3 and H£ with
steam as the carrier. A one-grid injection system was utilized. Details of
the grid are considered proprietary by ER&E and thus were not available for
this study. However, the design is based on pre-1981 technology. Recent
improvements in the process available following this test program permit the
i
attainment of higher NOX reduction efficiencies and better boiler load
following capabilities (reference 3-1).
3.1 PROCESS PERFORMANCE
As indicated in section 2, the NOX reduction performance of the Thermal
DeNOx Process depends on the reaction temperature, the NHs/NO ratio, and the
addition of Hg, among other factors. This performance was mapped during the
test program by conducting several short-term tests varying NH3/NO molar
3-1
-------
ratio, hydrogen injection and the oil/gas heat input ratio. For these tests,
only continuous monitoring of NOX and Og was performed. Results are
illustrated in figure 3-1.
Baseline NOX emissions averaged 235 ppm at 3 percent Og. The figure
shows that NOX reduction with NH3/NO ratio depends on the fuel mixture. The
system was less effective at the oil/gas ratio of 56/44 percent heat input
basis than at the lower oil/gas ratio of 37/63 percent (more nearly the
typical operation of the unit and the design basis for the NH3 injection grid
installed). The addition of hydrogen did not improve system performance at
the lower oil/gas ratio, but resulted in significant, further NOX reduction to
levels below 100 ppm at the higher oil/gas ratio. This can be explained by
the fact that firing the higher oil/gas ratio led to lower boiler convective
section gas temperatures at the grid location, thereby decreasing the
effectiveness of the ammonia alone. Hydrogen injection to shift the
temperature window for the reduction reaction was effective at this higher
oil/gas ratio. For both fuel mixtures investigated, the NOX reduction
performance appears to peak at a NH3/NO ratio of about 2.5 with little or no
additional reduction gained with further increase in NH3 injection rate.
3.2 TEST CONDITIONS
Two test conditions were selected for detailed testing and emission
evaluation. Table 3-1 summarizes the boiler and NH3 injection system
operations during two tests conditions investigated in this study. Flue gas
emissions were evaluated for the baseline condition, no NHs injection but with
sidefire air injection, and for a low-NOx condition with NH3 injected at a
rate leading to significant NOX reduction from the baseline level. Boiler
operation, including fuel mixture, was maintained relatively constant between
3-2
-------
co
CO
Legend
Boiler heat Input = "13 MVJ (45 million Btu/hr)
Stack Op = 2.5 to 2.8 percent
O 44 percent refinery gas
56 percent residual oil
D 63 percent refinery gas
37 percent residual oil
• • Hydrogen Injection numbers
specify H-/NH, molar ratio
1f known c J
Test points
2.0 2.5 3.0
(molar ratio)
3.5
4.0
N
Figure 3-1. Thermal DeNOx Performance on Packaged Industrial Boiler
-------
Table 3-1. Boiler Operating Conditions
Parameter
Steam:
Steam flowrate
Drum pressure
Superheater
outlet pressure
Superheater
temperature
Fuels:
Fuel oil flowrate
Refinery fuel
gas flowrate
Fuel oil heat
rate
Refinery fuel
gas heat rate
Total heat rate
011 /gas heat
input
Burner Settings:
Fuel oil pressure
Fuel oil
temperature
Atomizing steam
pressure
Refinery fuel gas
pressure
Swirl setting
Furnace Draft:
Window pressure
Furnace pressure
Boiler outlet
pressure
Nfh Injection System:
NH3 flowrate
NH3 header
pressure
Steam carrier
Steam carrier
pressure
Units
,kg/s
(10* ib/nr)
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
K
(°F)
I/s
(gpn)
si?3/*
(103 scfh)
MM
(10« Btu/hr)
MU
(10* Btu/hr)
MM
(10° Btu/hr J
Percent
MPa
(psig)
K
(°F)
MPa
(psig)
kPa
(psig)
—
kPa
(in. HZ0)
kPa
(in. H20)
Pa
(in. H20)
9/s
(Ib/hr)
MPa
(psig)
kg/s
(Ib/hr)
MPa
(psig)
Test 1»
(Baseline)
4.04
(32.0)
1.96
(270)
1.83
(250)
530
(495)
0.134
("5)
0.166
(21.3)
7.39
(2S.2)
5.86
(20.0)
13.2
(45.2)
56/14
0.41
(45)
366
(198)
0.56
(66)
120
(2.S)
4
0.85
(3.4)
0.35
(1.4)
80
(0.32)
—
—
0.105
(832)
0.410
(59.5)
Test 2
(NH3 Injection)
4.00
(31.7)
1.96
(270)
1.33
(Z50)
530
(495)
0.184
(175)
0.167
(21.2)
7.51
(25.6)
3.86
(20.0)
13.4
(«.6)
56/44
0.38
(*«
367
(200)
0.53
(62)
120
(2.5)
4
0.37
(3.5)
0.40
(1.6)
92
(0.37)
1.53
(12.1)
>1.72
(>250)
0.10S
(332)
0.410
(59.5)
'Baseline test was performed over a 2-day period. Operating data
represent average values for these 2 days.
3-4
-------
between both tests to allow a direct comparison between tests and to single
out the effects of NH3 injection on emissions.
These two test conditions are also denoted in figure 3-1 by an "X".
The higher oil/gas ratio was selected for these tests to increase levels of
potential pollutants (particulate, sulfur, etc.) thus improving the
detectability levels of the sampling and analytical techniques described
earlier. It is evident, then, that the low-NOx operation selected for
in-depth emission evaluation did not correspond to optimum NOX reduction
performance for which the NH3 injection system was designed and is capable of
achieving. However, the test is representative of maximum performance for the
boiler and NH3 injection operating conditions indicated here.
Table 3-2 summarizes analysis results for both residual oil and
refinery fuel gas. Specific gravity of refinery gas varied from about 0.44 to
0.50 due to variations in the level of hydrogen doping resulting from refinery
process conditions. Boiler thermal efficiency, measured by the heat loss
method, averaged about 85 percent for both tests. As shown in table 3-3, the
largest loss is attributed to the latent heat of water from combustion of
hydrogen contributed primarily by the refining gas.
3*5
-------
Table 3-2. Fuel Compositions
Fuel Component/Properties
Residual Oil (Weight Percent)
Carbon, C
Hydrogen, H
Nitrogen, N
Sulfur, S
Oxygen, 0
Specific gravity
Higher heating value MJ/kg
(Btu/lb)
Refinery Fuel Gas (Mole Percent)
Hydrogen, H
Methane, CH4
Ethane, C2Hg
Propane, C^Hg
Butane, CA^IQ
Pentane, C^H^
Cft*
No
C02
H2S
Specific gravity
Higher heating value MJ/m3
(Btu/ft3)
Combined Fuel (Weight Percent)
Carbon, C
Hydrogen, H
Nitrogen, N
Sulfur, S
Oxygen, 0
Higher heating value MJ/kg
(Btu/lb)
Test la
(Baseline)
86.53
11.50
0.65
0.47
0.71
0.94
43.87
(18,900)
53.09
28.31
5.94
5.33
4.39
1.57
0.93
0.23
0.20
0.002
0.496
35.32
(948)
81.90
16.69
0.36
0.26
0.40
50.06
(21,570)
Test 2
(NH3 Injection)
86.01
12.18
0.63
0.47
0.65
0.94
44.49
(19,170)
53.62
29.70
5.90
5.63
3.58
0.81
0.29
0.24
0.22
0.003
0.455
32.90
(883)
81.50
17.03
0.37
0.28
0.38
50.70
(21,845)
aBaseline test was performed ober a 2-day period. Fuel data
represent average values of fuel analyses for each of the 2 days,
3-6
-------
Table 3-3. Boiler Thermal Efficiency
Heat Loss Efficiency
Heat loss due to dry gas
Heat loss due to moisture in the fuel
Heat loss due to water from H2 combustion
Heat loss due to combustible in flyash
Heat loss due to radiation
Unmeasured losses
Total loss
Efficiency (percent)
Test 1
(Baseline)
5.5
—
8.1
—
0.7
0.5
14.8
85.2
Test 2
(NH3 Injection)
5.6
—
8.2
—
0.7
0.5
15.0
85.0
3-7
-------
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3
3-1. "Improved Exxon Thermal DeNOx Process," Technical Brochure, Exxon
Research and Engineering Company, Florham Park, New Jersey,
April 1982.
3-8
-------
SECTION 4
EMISSION RESULTS
The objective of this test program was to measure the change in organic
and inorganic solid and gas emissions as a result of NH3 injection to reduce
NOX. Therefore, stack gas sampling was performed during two test condtions:
baseline with no NH3 injection and a low-NOx test with NH3 injection. Boiler
operation and fuel mix was kept constant throughout the two test conditions
investigated.
4.1 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROTOCOL
The sampling and analysis procedures used in this test program
conformed to a modified EPA level 1 protocol (reference 4-1). In addition,
measurements for HH% flue gas emissions were performed to calculate the amount
of unreacted NH3 being emitted under boiler and control system operations
investigated. All emission measurements were made in the stack flue gas
downstream of the boiler economizer where the gas temperature was
approximately 188°C (370°F). Flue gas measurements included:
« Continuous monitors for NOX, CO, C02» and 02
• Source assessment sampling system (SASS) train sampling
• EPA Method 5 with water impringers and an EPA Method 17 backup for
solid and condensible participate mass emissions
• Controlled condensation system (CCS) for S02 and $03
4-1
-------
• Grab sample for onsite analysis of gaseous C^ and Cg hydrocarbon by
gas chromatography with flame ionlzation detection
« EPA Method 17 with HC1 impinger solutions for ammonia sampling
» Grab sample for offsite analysis of ^0 by gas chromatography with
electron capture detection
The SASS train collects several kinds of samples for subsequent laboratory
analysis. For these tests, flue gas particulate was collected on a heated
232°C (450°F) filter; flue gas semivolatile organics (nominally Cy+) were
adsorbed onto a porous polymer resin (XAD-2).packed into an organic sorbent
module, volatile inorganic species are trapped in impingers, and nonvolatile
inorganic species collect with the particulate on the filter and in the XAD-2
sorbent. Description and additional information on the SASS and other
sampling systems are presented in appendix A.
The analysis protocol for SASS train samples included:
• Analyzing the filter catch, ashed XAD-2 resin, and the first
impinger solution for 73 elements using spark source mass
spectrometry (SSMS) and for mercury using a cold vapor atomic
absorption spectrometry (AAS) technique
• Analyzing the second and third impinger solutions for arsenic and
antimony using furnace AAS techniques, and for mercury using cold
vapor AAS
• Extracting the XAD-2 sorbent resin in a Soxhlet apparatus using
methylene chloride, concentrating the extract to 10 ml, then
determining the organic content of the extract in two boiling point
ranges: boiling point between 100°C (212°F) and 300°C (570°F) by
total chromatographable organics (TCO) analysis and boiling point
greater than 300°C (570°F) by gravimetry
4-2
-------
• Further concentrating the extract to 1 ml and analyzing for the
58 semi volatile organic priority pollutants by gas chromatography/
mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
The XAD-2 sorbent resin extract was also subjected to liquid
chromatography separation into seven polarity fractions on silica gel to give
compound category composition information. In addition, infrared spectra were
obtained for the gravimetric residues of the extract samples (whole samples
and liquid chromatography fractions), and mutagenicity and toxicity were
evaluated using the level 1 Ames mutagenicity and CHO cytotoxicity tests.
Particulate mass emissions were evaluated with the EPA Method 5
extractive system utilizing a EPA Method 17 in-stack filter. This
configuration was selected over the conventional EPA Method 5, which relies
entirely on an out-of-stack heated filter, to ensure that collected solid
particulate would not be affected by possible contribution of ammonium sulfate
and bisulfate particle deposition in the sampling probe. Particulate
emissions were measured on the in-stack filter and by the front half EPA
Method 5 catch (probe rinse and filter for solid particulate) and by the back
half EPA Method 5 catch (impinger section for condensible particulate). Both
the organic and inorganic fractions of the condensible particulate were
measured using ethyl ether and chloroform extraction of impinger solutions.
Breakthrough ammonia levels were measured by passing filtered flue gas
through a solution of 0.1N hydrochloric acid to form ammonium chloride.
Ammonia levels were measured by specific ion electrodes. The sampling system
is similar to EPA Method 17 with the exception of the impinger solutions which
contain HC1 instead of distilled water.
4-3
-------
4.2 CRITERIA POLLUTANTS AND OTHER VAPOR SPECIES EMISSIONS
Table 4-1 summarizes gaseous and particulate emissions measured during
the baseline and ammonia injection tests. Baseline NOX emissions averaged
234 ppm at 3 percent 03. The HH^ injection rate of 1.53 g/s (12.1 Ib/hr),
corresponding to a NHs/NO molar ratio of 2.52, resulted in a 41 percent NOX
reduction. CO emissions showed no significant change. The effect on sulfur
oxide species cannot be ascertained because emissions were not available for
the baseline test. The average combined sulfur concentration in the two fuels
was 0.28 percent by weight corresponding to an emission rate of 110 ng/J
(0.26 Ib/million Btu) as S02« Gaseous sulfur oxides (S02 + $03) emissions
measured during the NH3 injection test were 73 ng/J (0.17 ID/million Btu) as
SOg accounting for 67 percent of the total sulfur input. The remaining
33 percent was not detected possibly because of ammonium sulfate formation.
Three NH3 samples were taken for each test. Baseline levels ranged
from "3 to 25 ppm with an arithmetic average of 11 ppm (2.1 ng/J). Selective
ion electrode analysis of EPA Method 5 and 17 impinger solutions also
indicated that NH3 was present in the flue gas at a concentration of about
6 ppm (1.2 ng/J). These baseline NH3 emissions were suprising in that no NH3
was injected in the flue gas during this test. However, since some carrier
steam was flowing during the baseline test, it is possible some residual NH3
was injected in the flue gas stream, causing a minor breakthrough as well as a
possible reduction in NOX. This explanation is highly speculative at this
time, however.
During the NH3 injection test, unreacted NH3 emission measurements
ranged from 280 to 600 ppm (52 to 110 ng/J) with an arithmetic average of
about 430 ppm (81 ng/J). The corresponding selective ion electrode analysis
of EPA Method 5 and 17 impinger solutions indicated a stack NH3 concentration
4-4
-------
Table 4-1. Criteria and Other Gas Species Emissions
Pollutant
As Measured By:
Continuous gas
analyses
0?, percent
C02, percent
NOX, ppm
CO, ppm
Wet chemical
methods
S02, ppm
S03, ppm
NH3 , ppm
Offsite gas
chromatography
N20
Corrected Emissions
N0xf
CO
SO?
S039
NH3h
N20
Particulate Mass
Emissions
Method 5/17 solid
Method 5/17 condensible
inorganic
Method 5/17 condensible
Method 5/17 total
SASS solid
Test 1
(Baseline)
2.3 to 3.3 (2.6)a
10.9 to 11.9 (11.7)
232 to 248 (239)
18 to 57 (31)
NA
NA
3 to 25 (ll)b
53
ppmd
234
30
NA
NA
11
52
_ _
—
.-
..
— —
ng/je
115
9.0
NA
NA
2.0
25
4.6
10.0
2.9
17.7
2.2
Ib/million
Btue
0.268
0.02
NA
NA
0.005
0.056
0.010
0.023
0.007
0.042
0.005
Test 2
(NH3 Injection)
2.4 to 2.7 (2.5)
11.4 to 1.8 (11.6)
134 to 152 (141)
19 to 40 (24)
82
13
280 to 600 (440) c
17
ppm
137
23
80
13
430
17
._
—
~
«
— ""
ng/J
67
6.9
55
13
81
8.0
1.8
180
0.2
18c
2.6
Ib/million
Btu
0.16
0.02
0.13
0.03
0.19
0.019
0.004
0.42
0.004
0.43
0.006
^Numbers in parentheses are arithmetic averages of individual measurements
bRange of NH3 emissions from three separate flue gas measurements
cRange of NH3 emissions from two separate flue gas measurements
dOry ppm at 3 percent 02
eOn heat input basis
f As N02
9AS H2S04
"Arithmetic average
NA — Sample lost in transit
4-5
-------
of 360 ppm (66 ng/J). This result tends to support the high NH3 levels
measured with the NH3 sampling system (280 to 600 ppm) keeping in mind that
the HC1 solution of the NH3 sample is more effective in trapping NH3 than the
distilled water of the EPA Method 5 and 17.
An additional NH3 emission measurement made during the low-NOx test
indicated a NH3 concentration of 840 ppm (154 ng/J). However, this result was
disregarded as unjustifiable and was not considered in the estimation of the
average NH3 emission rate. An explanation of the reasoning used in making
this determination follows.
Since in the Thermal DeNOx Process one mole of NH3 is required to
decompose one mole of NO to N£ and h^O, a reduction of 30 ng/J (3.2 Ib/hr) of
the NO, as measured in test 2, would require 17 ng/J (1.8 Ib/hr) of NH3« This
would leave about 95 ng/J (10 Ib/hr) of NHs unreacted, which should be the
upper limit of NH3 breakthrough. This assumption is based on a gas
temperature at the injection grid sufficiently low that the rate of NHs
oxidation would be insignificant. A low gas temperature at the injection grid
was evident from the interpretation of the hydrogen injection test results
shown in figure 3-1. The maximum emission rate of 95 ng/J excludes the
possibility of an emission rate of 154 ng/J measured during one of three
measurements made.
Total particulate matter measured by the EPA Method 5 and 17 increased
by more than one order of magnitude during the NH3 injection test. The
largest contribution to this increase was from the inorganic condensate matter
collected in the impinger section. Although this large increase of inorganic
condensate is not entirely accountable from a mass conservation viewpoint,
ammonium sulfate and bisulfate formed either in the stack or through the
particulate sampling system contributed to this increase.
4-6
-------
Table 4-2 gives a more detailed summary of particulate emissions. As
indicated, only the probe catch and the inorganic phase of the condensate
showed an increase during the NH3 injection test. All other particulate
catches showed a decrease in emissions. However, the increase in the
inorganic condensate portion of the impingers catch was so significant that
the overall particulate emission increased by about 900 percent. Apart from
the nozzle and in-stack filter^ which are at stack temperature (about 190°C),
the entire sampling system is maintained at or below 120°C (250°F). At these
temperatures, ammonium bisulfate is a liquid which can be trapped in the
sampling system as inorganic matter.
Solid particulate matter sampled with the SASS measured 2.1 ng/J
(0.005 Ib/million Btu) for the baseline test and 2.3 ng/J (0.005 Ib/million
Btu) for the NHs injection test. These emissions are comparable to the sum of
probe and out-of-stack filter results of the Method 5/17 sampling system.
The increase in particulate captured by the Method 5/17 train during
NH3 injection is compatible with the results of analysis of those samples for
NH3. Table 4-3 shows that most of the NH3 capture occurs in the inorganic
condensate. In the NH3 injection test, the total quantity of NH3 recovered
from the inorganic condensate increased by two orders of magnitude. Taken as
a whole, the Method 5/17 analyses indicate that the NH3 is in the vapor phase
of stack temperature and that the increase in condensible particulate agrees
qualitatively with the increase of vapor phase NH3 captured.
4.3 TRACE ELEMENT ANALYSES
The oil and the SASS train samples from exhaust gas were analyzed for
65 trace elements using spark source mass spectrometry (SSMS) and atomic
absorption spectroscopy (AAS). From these analyses, trace element flowrates
normalized to the heat input (ng/J) were calculated for both tests.
4-7
-------
Table 4-2. Participate Emissions -- EPA Method 5/17a
f
00
Test
Baseline •
HI <3
Injection
Percent
change
from
baseline
Solid Participate
Nozzle
Catch
0.557
(3.14)b
0.145
(0.08)
-74
In-stack
Filter
1.52
(8.58)
0.687
(0.36)
-56
Probe
Catch
0.191
(1.08)
0.912
(0.50)
377
Out-stack
Filter
2.44
(13.8)
0.053
(0.03)
-98
Inorganic
Condensate
Iroplnger
Rinse
0.835
(4.72)
0.425
(0.23)
-49
Aqueous
Phase
9.21
(52.0)
179.6
(98.7)
1,900
Organic Condensate
Organic
Phase
2.09
11.8)
0.073
(0.039)
-97
Aqueous
Hash
Organic
Phase
0.871
(4.92)
0.089
(0.049)
-90
Total
Participate
17.71
(100)
182
(100)
4930
alln1ts are ng/J
bNumbers 1n parentheses represent percent of total emissions
-------
Table 4-3. Ammonia Recovery From EPA Method 5/17 Train (ug/dscm as
Test
Basel ine
NH3 injection
Solid
Participate
38
367
Inorganic
Condensate
1,580
165,950
Organic
Condensate
968
71
Tables 4-4 and 4-5 show the results of these calculations. A mass balance,
based on the oil input and flue gas emissions as the only output, is also
1
presented. However, the oil and flue gas flowrates are presented in slightly
different units. Trace element analytical results from the oil are presented
based on the heating value of the oil, while the trace element analytical
results from the SASS train are based upon the total heat input (oil and gas)
to the unit. The mass balance numbers are based upon the flowrates (ug/s) as
listed in appendix B.
Some elemental concentrations are listed as either less than or greater
than a given concentration. The less than signs result from reporting the
element as less than the detection limit for some or all components in the
SASS train. Elements not detected in the fuel oil are listed as ND. The
greater than signs result from a concentration in the sample greater than the
upper quantification limit of the test method.
For the baseline test, Ca, Br, Cl, Cu, F, Si, Ag, S, and W were
detected at concentrations exceeding 100 mg/dscm. For the ammonia injection
test, only K and S exceeded concentrations of 100 mg/dscm.
4.4 ORGANIC SPECIES EMISSIONS
Organic analyses were performed on flue gas samples according to the
EPA level 1 protocol (reference 4-1) as outlined in appendix A. Volatile
4-9
-------
Table 4-4. Trace Element Flowrates — Test 1 Baseline
El ement
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bismuth
Boron
Bromine
Cadmi urn
Calcium
Cerium
Cesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Dysprosium
Erbium
Europium
Fluorine
Gadolinium
Gallium
Germanium
Hafnium
Hoi mi urn
Iodine
Iron
Lanthanum
Lead
Lithium
Concentration (pg/J)
Fuel
Oil
569
—
—
ND
ND
ND
6.82
15.9
ND
1,320
ND
ND
227
20.5
ND
5,230
ND
ND
ND
68.2
ND
9.1
ND
ND
ND
ND
933
ND
13.6
45.5
Output
Flue Gas
7.80
0.0311
<1.64
4.01
<0.152
<0.152
0.223
38.4
<0. 00466
135
3.6
<0. 00311
109
2.52
>12.5
>30.1
<0.152
<0.152
<0.152
105
<0.152
1.91
0.014
<0.152
<0.152
<0. 00621
21.2
<0.152
<0.971
0.518
Mass Balance
Out/ In
0.0243
—
—
>3.13
—
MM
0.0581
4.28
>0. 00364
0.182
>2.81
0.00243
0.850
0.219
>9.77
>0.0102
—
__
--
2.74
^ ^
0.373
>0.0109
__
—
>0. 00485
0.0404
_-
<0.134
0.0202
aDashes indicate trace element concentration was below
the detection limit or had concentrations in the blank
greater than the sample. See appendix B for
detectability levels applicable to each stream.
4-10
-------
Table 4-4. Concluded
Element
Lutetium
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Neodymi urn
Ni ckel
Niobium
Phosphorus
Potassium
Praseodymium
Rubidium
Samarium
Scandium
Selenium
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tantalum
Tellurium
Terbium
Thallium
Thorium
Thulium
Tin
Titanium
Tungsten
Uranium
Vanadium
Ytterbium
Yttrium
Zinc
Zirconium
Concentration (pg/J)
Fuel
Oil
NO
751
45.5
0.455
ND
NO
1,230
ND
751
2,120
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1,480
ND
ND
2.27
5,460
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
205
ND
523
ND
ND
114
11.4
Output
Flue Gas
<0.152
1.28
2.13
<0.0491
6.15
<0.152
>20.2
<0.176
3.99
17.9
<0.152
<0.540
<0.152
<0.176
<0.177
>148
523
—
2.98
>252
<0.154
<0.0249
<0.152
<0.152
<0.152
<0. 00155
<0.128
13.2
25.4
<0.152
>12.6
<0.014
<0.0243
18
0.688
Mass Balance
Out/ In
0.00302
0.0832
<0.572
>4.80
«•«
>0.0293
—
0.00944
0.0150
__
—
--
--
>0.0885
>0.178
>408
--
2.32
>0.0821
— ^
>0.0194
—
—
—
>0. 00121
—
0.115
>2.83
— -
>0.0429
>0.0109
>0.0189
0.280
0.107
aDashes indicate trace element concentration was below
the detection limit or had concentrations in the blank
greater than the sample. See appendix B for
detectability levels applicable to each stream.
4-11
-------
Table 4-5. Trace Element Flowrates ~ Test 2
Injection
El ement
Al umi num
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bismuth
Boron
Bromine
Cadmi urn
Calcium
Cerium
Cesium
Chlorine
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Dysprosium
Erbium
Europium
Fluorine
Gadolinium
Gallium
Germanium
Hafnium
Hoi mi urn
Iodine
Iron
Lanthanum
Lead
Li thi urn
Concentration (pg/J)
Fuel
Oil
561
—
--
ND
ND
ND
ND
22.4
ND
583
ND
ND
135
44.8
ND
2,240
ND
ND
ND
15.7
ND
6.73
ND
ND
ND
ND
1,030
ND
13.5
6.73
Output
Flue Gas
0.0471
0.624
7.6
—
0.00157
—
0.282
0.00784
—
0.314
--
__
1.96
>15.7
>17.6
0.0314
0.0157
0.0157
11.7
— —
1.54
0.0110
__
—
0.00314
—
._
1.43
0.110
Mass Balance
Out/ In
..
—
—
>5.8
—
>0.0012
--
0.0215
>0. 00598
—
>0.239
--
__
0.0746
>12.0
>0.0134
>0.0239
>0.0120
>0.0120
1.28
— —
0.391
>0. 00837
__
—
>0. 00239
—
—
0.181
0.0279
aDashes indicate trace element concentration was below
the detection limit or had concentrations in the blank
greater than the sample. See appendix B for
detectability levels applicable to each stream.
4-12
-------
Table 4-5. Concluded
El ement
Lutetium
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Neodymi urn
Nickel
Niobium
Phosphorus
Potassium
Praseodymium
Rubidium
Samarium
Scandium
Selenium
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tantal urn
Tellurium
Terbium
Thallium
Thorium
Thulium
Tin
Titanium
Tungsten
Uranium
Vanadium
Ytterbium
Yttrium
Zinc
Zirconium
Concentration (pg/J)
Fuel
Oil
NO
336
89.7
0.224
ND
ND
6,050
ND
135
2,240
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
14,600
ND
20.2
2.24
> 10, 500
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
\
ND
ND
202
ND
ND
314
ND
ND
44.8
ND
Output
Flue Gas
0.00157
—
0.473
<0.294
0.0157
0.0471
>16
—
3.45
114
__
0.0157
—
0.0314
0.0991
>14.4
19.0
—
~
>321
— —
0.00157
«
..
--
0.157
0.0628
17.6
—
0.0471
>15.2
0.0298
—
4.28
— ™
Mass Balance
Out/ In
>0. 00120
—
0.00901
<2.24
>0.0120
>0.0359
>0. 00451
—
0.0438
0.0866
__
>0.0120
—
>0.0239
>0.0756
>0. 00169
>14.5
—
~
—
__
>0. 00120
—
—
--
>0.0012
>0.0478
0.149
—
>0. 00359
>0.0829
>0.0227
—
0.163
""
aDashes indicate trace element concentration was below
the detection limit or had concentrations in the blank
greater than the sample. See appendix B for
detectability levels applicable to each stream.
4-13
-------
organic gas phase species having boiling points in the nominal Cj to Cg range
of -160° to 100°C (-260 to 210°F) were measured by multiple analyses of flue
gas samples using onsite gas chromatography. SASS samples were extracted with
methylene chloride in a Soxhlet apparatus. Volatile organic matter with
boiling points in the nominal Cj to C^g range of 100° to 300°C (210° to 570°F)
were determined in the laboratory by total chromatographable organic (TCO)
analysis of the organic module sorbent (XAD-2) and condensate sample extracts.
Nonvolatile organic species with boiling points in the nominal >C^g ran9e °f
>300°C (>570°F) were measured by gravimetric (GRAV) analysis of SASS sample
extracts including filter and probe catches.
Infrared spectrometry (IR) was also performed on GRAV residues to
identify organic functional groups. If total organic content in the sample
exceeded 15 mg, as determined by TCO and GRAV procedures, further analyses by
liquid chromatography (LC), with TCO, GRAV, and IR analyses of the fractions
eluted from the column were performed. Analyses of whole extract samples on
LC fractions by low resolution mass spectrometry (LRMS) were performed in TCO
and GRAV results indicated a stream organic emission concentration of greater
than 0.5 mg/dscm. In addition, gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
analysis of total sample extracts was performed to identify specific
polynuclear aromatic and other organic compounds. A discussion of the
analytical results follows.
4.1.1 Ci to Cfi Hydrocarbons, TCO. and GRAV Analysis
Table 4-6 summarizes total organic emission results for the onsite GC,
TCO and GRAV analyses. The ranges in emission for volatile hydrocarbons shown
reflect the multiple onsite GC analyses performed during each test. The
second test showed a tenfold increase in Cj to Cg emissions from an average
4-14
-------
Table 4-6. Summary of Total Organic Emissions in the Flue Gas
-P.
Organic Emission
Volatile Organic Gases
Analyzed by Qnslte GC:
Cl
C2
C3
C4
CB
C6
Total GI to Ce
Volatile Organic
Material Analyzed by
TCO Procedure:
XAD-2 cartridge and
organic module
condensate
Total C; to GIS
Nonvolatile Organic
Material Analyzed by
GRAV Procedure:
Filter
XAD-2 cartridge and
organic module
condensate
Total >Ci6
Total organlcs
Test 1
Baseline
(mg/dscm)
m
m to 0.7 (0.26)
1.4 to 11 (4.8)
ND
NP
ND
1.4 to 12 (5.1)
0.09
0.09
0.2
1.1
1.3
2.8 to 13 (6.5)
(ng/J)
ND
ND to 0.13 (0.05)
0.34 to 2.6 (1.2)
ND
ND
ND
0.34 to 2.7 (1.3)
0.023
0.023
0.006
0.28
0.29
0.65 to 3.0 (1.6)
Test 2
NM3 Injection
(mg/dscra)
ND to 3.0 (0.55)
0.27 to 1.9 (0.81)
4.2 to 7.3 (5.8)
ND to 81 (16)
ND to 82 (17)
1.9 to 66 (18)
6.4 to 240 (58)
0.04
0.04
0.08
0.16
0.24
6.7 to 240 (58)
(ng/J)
ND to 0.73 (0.13)
0.07 to 0.46 (0.20)
1.0 to 1.8 (1.4)
ND to 20 (4.0)
ND to 20 (4.1)
0.46 to 16 (4.4)
1.5 to 59 (14)
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.039
0.059
1.6 to 59 (14)
ND — not detected
-------
5.1 to 58 mg/dscm. The increase was composed primarily of €4 to CQ compounds.
No 04 to Cs compounds were detected during the baseline test.
Volatile organic emissions as analyzed by the TCO procedure dropped to
half the baseline concentrations during the second test. TCO emissions are
much lower than the volatile emissions measured by onsite GC by approximately
two orders of magnitude.
Nonvolatile organic emissions as analyzed by gravimetric analysis also
decreased from the baseline test to the second test. Total nominal CIG+
emissions were 1.3 mg/dscm for the baseline and 0.24 mg/dscm for the second
test.
4.4.2 Infrared Spectra of Total Sample Extracts
IR spectroscopy was used to identify organic functional groups present
in the SASS samples. The results of the IR analysis of the total extract
samples are summarized in table 4-7. Only the presence of aliphatic
hydrocarbons were suggested by the IR spectra in the filter and XAD extracts
from both tests.
4.4.3 GC/MS Analysis of Total Sample Extract
Capillary column GC/MS analyses of the extracts of flue gas samples
collected by SASS were performed to detect and quantify specific POM and other
organic compounds. The compounds sought in the analyses and their respective
detection limits are listed in table 4-8. The results of the GC/MS analysis
are summarized in table 4-9. The only compounds detected were naphthalene in
the baseline and naphthalene* phenanthrene and phenol in the second test.
Overall, POM emissions were higher during the second test.
4.4.4 Column Chromatography
Only the GRAY portion of the XAD-2 extract from the baseline test had a
high enough organic concentration to warrant LC fractionation. The results of
-------
Table 4-7. Summary of IR Spectra of Total Sample Extracts
Test
Number
1
(baseline)
2
(NH3
injection)
Sample
Filter
XAD
Filter
XAD
Wave Number
(cm-1)
2,980
1,190
2,850
2,990
2,830
2,850
2,900
2,820
Assignment
CH alkane
C-0
C-H alkane
CH alkane
CH alkane
CH alkane
CH alkane
CH alkane
this analysis are presented in table 4-10. With the exception of fraction 2,
the fractionation indicates a relatively even distribution of organics through
all 7 fractions. No comparison with the NH3 injection test is possible for
these results since no other organic analysis yielded enough material to
subject to LC fractionation.
IR spectra were obtained on the GRAV residue of the four fractions of
the LC fractionation of the XAD-2 extracts from the baseline test. Table 4-10
also summarizes those results. There were no discernable peaks from fractions
2 through 4. These spectra indicate primarily the presence of alphatic
hydrocarbons (80 percent of recovered organics), alcohols (20 percent) and
carboxylic acids 10 percent. Such interpretation agree with the expected
results of LC fractionation which predict aliphatics in fraction 1 and
oxygenates in fractions 5 to 7. The IR of the total sample extract for this
GRAV residue indicates only aliphatic hydrocarbons.
4-17
-------
Table 4-8. Compounds Sought In the GC/MS and Their Detection Limits
(ng/pl Injected)
Acid Compounds
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
p-chloro-m-cresol
2-chlorophenol
2,4-di chlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
5 2-nitrophenol
5 4-nitrophenol
5 2,4-dinitrophenol
5 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
5 pentachlorophenol
phenol
Base Neutral Compounds
1,
1,
1
2-dichlorobenzene 1
2-diphenylhydrazine 1
(as azobenzene)
1,3-dichlorobenzene 1
1,4-dichlorobenzene 1
2,4-dinitrotoluene 1
2,6-dinitrotoluene 1
2-chloronaphthalene 1
3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 5
3-methyl cholanthrene 40
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether 1
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether 1
7,12-dimethyl benz(a)anthracene 40
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine 5
N-nitrosodimethylamine MA
N-nitrosodiphenylamine 1
acenaphthene 1
acenaphthylene 1
anthracene 1
benzo(ghi)perylene 5
benzidine 20
benzo(b)fluoranthene 1
benzo(k)fluoranthene 1
benzo(a)anthracene 1
benzo(a)pyrene 1
benzo(c)phenanthrene
bi s(2-chloroethoxy)methane
bi s(2-chloroethyl)ether
bis(2-chloroisopropy!)ether
bi s(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
chrysene
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
di benzo(a,h)anthracene
dibenzo(c,g)carbazole
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
fluoranthene
fluorene
hexachlorobenzene
hexachlorobutadi ene
hexachlorocyclopentadi ene
hexachloroethane
indeno(l,2,3-cd) pyrene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
perylene
phenanthrene
pyrene
5
20
20
20
5
1
40
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
40
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
40
1
1
4-18
-------
Table 4-9. Results of GC/MS Analyses
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Baseline
(yg/dscm)
0.2
<0.04
<0.04
(pg/J)
0.05
<0.01
<0.01
NHs Injection
(wg/dscm)
0.43
0.1
1.2
(pg/J)
0.11
0.03
0.30
Table 4-10. Organic Extract Summary — Test 1 (Baseline) XAD Extract
Total UltAV
Organ Ics*
mg
mg/dscm
Category11
Aliphatic
hydrocarbon
Alcohols
Carboxyllc
acids
LCI
3.9
0.16
LC2
<0.6
<0.02
LC3
1.2
0.05
LC4
1.9
0.08
LC5
1.6
0.06
LC6
2.5
0.10
IC7
1.6
0.06
Assigned Intensity — (mg/dscm)
100— (0.16)
100— (0.06)
100— (0.05)
100— (0.05)
100— (0.02)
100— (0.02)
100— (0.02)
Total
12.7
0.51
0.29
0.02
0.07
«Total GRAV sample of 31 mg; 20 ng taken for LC with 8.1 mg recovered. Total mg collected 1n LC fractions corrected
back to total sample.
^Summary of organic emissions based on IR results
4-19
-------
4.5 RADIOMETRIC EMISSIONS
Radiometric activities of the particulate catch from the SASS train are
presented in table 4-11. With the exception of alpha emissions from the NH3
injection filter, all activities were very close to those from the filter
blank.
Table 4-11. Radiometric Activity of SASS Particulate
Sample
Filter blank
Baseline filter
NH3 injection filter
Activity (pCi/filter)a
Alpha
24 ± 19
23 ± 18
165 ± 39
Beta
130.8 ± 5.8
133.6 ± 7.9
108.2 ± 47.8
Gamma
<142
~145
<145
aThe ± values are the two sigma Poisson standard deviation
of the counting error
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4
4-1. Lentzen, D. E., D. E. Wagoner, E. D. Estes, and W. F. Gutknecht,
"IERL-RTP Procedures Manual: Level 1 Environmental Assessment (Second
Edition)," Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/7-78-201, October
1978.
4-20
-------
SECTION 5
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This section discusses the environmental considerations on the
industrial boiler tested and discusses the results of bioassay testing of the
flue gas sample collected. Flue gas stream species were compared to
occupational exposure guidelines as a rough index to rank species discharged
for possible further monitoring consideration. Bioassay analyses were
conducted as a more direct measure of the potential health effects of effluent
streams.
5.1 EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT
To obtain a measure of the potential significance of the discharge
streams analyzed in this test program, discharge stream concentrations were
compared to indices which reflect potential for adverse health effects. For
the flue gas discharge, the indices used for comparison were occupational
exposure guidelines, specifically the time-weighted-average threshold limit
values (TLV's) defined by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (ACIGH) (reference 5-1) were used.
Table 5-1 lists those pollutant species emitted in the flue gas at
levels greater than 10 percent of an occupational exposure guideline.
Emissions of silver in the baseline test were almost two orders of magnitude
higher. Platinum and cobalt were also higher.
5-1
-------
Table 5-1. Flue Gas Species In Concentrations Exceeding 0.1 of an
Occupational Exposure Limit
Species
Silver, Ag
NO
S02
Platinum, Pt
Cobalt, Co
Nickel, Ni
CO
Copper, Cu
Ammonia, NH3
Calcium, Ca
Beryllium, Be
Chromium, Cr
Phosphorus, P
Tungsten, W
Vanadium, V
Potassium, K
Concentration (yg/dscm)
Baseline
2,130
457,000
NA
15.7
>50.9
>82.3
36,000
>122
7,800
551
<0.619
10.3
16.2
103
>51.4
72.8
NH3 Injection
75
270,000
218,000
35.7
>61.9
>63.1
28,000
>69.3
309,000
ND
ND
7.73
13.6
ND
>60.0
498
Occupational
Exposure
Gui del i nea
10
6,000
5,000
2
50
100
55,000
200
18,000
1,400
2
50
100
1,000
500
2,000
threshold limit value, reference 5-1
ND — Not detected
NA -- Not available
5-2
-------
5.2 BIOASSAY RESULTS
Bioassay tests were performed on the organic sorbent (XAD-2) extracts
collected by SASS. Bioassay results reported here are for health effects
(reference 5-2). A detailed description of the biological analyses performed
is presented in volume II (Data Supplement) of this report. The health
effects tests were:
» Ames assay, based on the property of Salmonella typhimurium mutants
to revert due to exposure to various classes of mutagens
• Cytotoxicity assay (CHO) with mammalian cells in culture to measure
cellular metabolic impairment and death resulting from exposure to
soluble toxicants
Table 5-2 summarizes the results from the Ames and CHO assays. The
results suggest that the XAD-2 extracts were of moderate or less mutagenicity
and toxicity.
Table 5-2. Bioassay Results
Sampl e
Baseline XAD extract
NH3 injection XAD extract
Ames
Mutagenicity
Ma
CHO
Cytotoxicity
l(b
UD
aModerate mutagenicity
blnsufficient sample to evaluate, test results indicate
moderate mutagenicity (toxicity) or less
5-3
-------
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 5
5-1. "Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents in
the Work Environment with Intended Changes for 1982," American
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. Cincinnati, OH,
1982.
5-2. Brusick, D. J., et al., "IERL-RTP Procedures Manual: Level 1
Environmental Assessment, Biological Tests," EPA-600/18-81-024, NTIS
PB22B966, October 1981.
5-4
-------
APPENDIX A
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
Emission test equipment was provided by Acurex Corporation. Onsite
equipment included a continuous monitoring system for emission measurements of
gaseous criteria pollutants sulfur analysis train (controlled condensation
equipment), the SASS train for particulate sizing and organic species
collection, EPA Method 17 sampling train for total particulate emissions, a
modified EPA Method 5 train for ammonia analysis, and GC/FID for gaseous (Cj
to Cg) hydrocarbon analyses. All flue gas emission sampling was performed at
the stack.
The following sections briefly describe the equipment and sampling
procedures used during the evaluation of the industrial package boiler.
A.I CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEM
Rack-mounted monitors and recorders located in a mobile emission
laboratory were used for continuous measurement of NOX, CO, C02, and 02.
Figure A-l illustrates the continuous flue gas extractive sampling system and
monitors arrangement. Flue gas was drawn through an in-stack filter and a
heated stainless steel probe. From the probe the gas was passed through an
impinger containing an HC1 solution. This was done to remove traces of NH3
thus preventing erroneous NOX reading. From the impinger the sample passed
through a gas conditioning and refrigeration system designed to remove water.
An unheated line was then used to bring the conditioned gas to the monitors.
A-l
-------
1. In situ fitter 0.6u. 99.9999 percent efficient
2. Buct
3. 316 stainless steel probe
4. Four pass conditioner-dryer, 316 stainless steel Internals
5. 3/8-Inch unheated Teflon
6. Teflon-lined sample pump
7. 3/8-inch unheated Teflon
8. Rotameter
9. 1/4-Inch Teflon tubing
10. Calibration gas manifold
11. Calibration gas selector valve
12. Calibration gas cylinders
13. Backpressure regulator
14. Auxiliary analysis port
Duct
Sampling
location
Figure A-l. Schematic for Continuous, Extractive Sampling System
A-2
-------
Calibration gases were used to monitor and correct the drift in the
instruments. The calibration gases follow the same path as the flue gas being
monitored in that both are conditioned at the stack prior to analysis.
Table A-l lists the instrumentation constituting the continuous monitoring and
flue gas extractive sampling system used in this test program. A molybdenum
NO to NOX converter was used instead of the stainless steel converter to
prevent any residual NH3 from converting to NO.
\
A.2 PARTICULATE TESTS
Particulate mass emission tests were performed using a modified EPA
Method 17 train. The modification consisted of the addition of a 142-nm
filter in a heated oven in line between the probe and impinger train. A
schematic of the sampling train used is presented in figure A-2.
A.3 AMMONIA EMISSION
Ammonia emissions were measured using the ammonia sampling train
illustrated in figure A-3. The train consists of a modified EPA Method 17
train with the addition of a heated filter after the probe and the use of
0.1 N HC1 in the first two impingers instead of water. The filters, probe
wash, sample line wash, and impinger solutions were analyzed for ammonia using
a method based upon a specific ion electrode.
A.4 SULFUR EMISSIONS
Sulfur emissions (S02 and 503) were measured using the controlled
condensation system illustrated in figure A-4. This sampling system, designed
primarily to measure vapor phase concentration of 503 as HgSO/^, consists of a
heated quartz probe, a Goksoyr/Ross condenser (condensation coil), impingers,
a pump, and a dry gas test meter. Using the Goksoyr/Ross condenser, the gas
is cooled to the dew point where 503 condenses as h^SO^ S02 interference is
prevented by maintaining the temperature of the gas above the water dew point.
A-3
-------
Table A-l. Continuous Monitoring Equipment in the Mobile Laboratory
Instrument
NO
NOX
CO
C02
02
Sample gas
conditioner
Strip chart
recorder
Principle of
Operation
Chemi 1 umi nescence
Nondispersive
infrared (NDIR)
Nondispersive
infrared (NOIR)
Fuel eel 1
Refrigerant
dry-condenser
Dual pen analog
Manufacturer
Thermo Electron
ANARAD
ANARAD
Teledyne
Hankinson
Linear
Instrument
Model
10 AR
500R
AR500
E-4G-SS
400
Range
0-100 ppm
0-500 ppm
0-1,000 ppm
0-5,000 ppm
0-1,000 ppm
0-20 percent
0-5 percent
0-25 percent
10 scfm
1-10 mV
1-100 mV
0-1 V
0-10 V
A-4
-------
in
-Sample nozzle
.37 nun (diameter)
filter
//-Probe T.C.
Probe
142 liiu (diameter)
filter
Teflon
connecting
line
Empty
"S" type
pilot tube
Ice/water
bath
100 ml
each
Snii th-Greenberg
Proportional
tehipe nature
controllers
AP Magnehenc
gauge
Gas meter thermocouples
Fine adjustment
bypass valve
\
AH orifice
plate ~\
Digital temperature
indicator
Orifice All
Magnehelic
Dry test meter
Control module
Impinger
thermocouple
Silica gel
dessicant
Snii th-Greenberg
inpinger
Vacuum line
Vacuum gauge
4— Coarse adjustment valve
Airtight vacuum pump
Figure A-2. Schematic of Participate Sampling Train
-------
f
Ok
Sample nozzle
Probe T.C.
Probe
\_ "S" type
pilot tube
AP Magnehelic
gauge
It' nil) (diameter)
filter
Proportional
tei.iperaturc
controllers
AH orifice
plate
Digital temperature
indicator
Teflon
jnnectinij
line
Empty
Ice/viater
bath
100 ml
0.1N HCL
Modified
Smi th-Greenberg
implnger
~1
I
I
linpinyer
thermocouple
Silica gel
dessicant
Smi th-Greenbcrg
iiiipinger
Gas meter thermocouples
. Fine adjustment
^ \ l~^ /"bypass valve
Control module
Orifice All
Magnehelic
Dry test meter
Vacuum line
Vacuum gauge
4—Coarse adjustment valve
Airtight vacuum pump
Figure A-3. Schematic of Ammonia Sampling Train
-------
-l/h" quart! noitle
316 stainless steel union
-lll'lh temperature
HIM tint) mantle
Coksoyr/Ross
condenser
Quartz filter holder
Probe l.C.
S/8" quarti prohe V Y
Heavy Hall
1/4" 1.0.
latex tuulnq
I
Heater T.C.
Ihernorenulalor/
reclrcuUlor 'O.I"C
I
Submersible Miter
circulation
Condenser water hath (tl)"C;
YY Yf YY YY
OlijIUl l.C.
readout
Proportional temperature
controllers Gas meter T.C. flue adluslnent
Ive
Vacuum (In;
Vacuum qauqe
Stainless steel
condenser heat
enckmqer
Coane adjustment
valve
Orifice AP
maqnehellc gauge
Air tight vacuum pump
Smith-Oreenberg
Iraplnger (100 irl 31 11
Empty modified Smllh-
•Grcenheri) Implnner
Silica go1 dcslcant trap
I
Control module
Figure A-4. Controlled Condensation System
-------
Sulfur dioxide is collected in a 3 percent hydrogen peroxide solution. Both
S02 and 863 (as ^$04) were measured by titration with a 0.02 N MaOH using
bromphenol blue and barium/thorin as the indicators. A more detailed
discussion of the controlled condensation sampling system is given in
reference A-l.
A.5 N20 EMISSIONS
The stack gas grab samples were extracted into stainless steel cylinders
for laboratory analysis for ^0. For analysis each sample cylinder was
externally heated to 120°C (250°F), then a 1-ml sample was withdrawn with a
gas-tight syringe for injection into a gas chromatograph. The analytical
equipment consisted of a Van'an 3700 gas chromatograph equipped with a 63^
electron capture detector and a 3.65-m (12-ft) stainless steel column packed
with Poropak Super Q, 80/100 mesh. The injector temperature was kept at 80°C,
the detector at 350°C, and the column temperature at 33°C. Elution time for
N20 was approximately 5 min, with a flowrate of 20 ml/min of nitrogen.
A.6 TRACE ELEMENTS AND ORGANIC EMISSIONS
Emissions of inorganic trace elements and organic compounds were sampled
with the source assessment sampling system (SASS). Designed for level 1
environmental assessment (reference A-2). the SASS collects large quantities of
gas and solid samples required for subsequent analyses of inorganic and organic
emissions as well as particle size measurement.
The SASS, illustrated in figure A-5, is generally similar to the system
utilized for total particulate mass emission tests (HVSS) with the exception
of:
• Particulate cyclones heated in the oven with the filter to 230°C
(450°F)
A-8
-------
Filter
10
Stainless
steel
sample
nozzel
Stack T.C.
Stainless steel
probe assembly
1/2" Tefloi)
Hne
Isolation
ball valve
Jaeb
Oven T.C.
Sorbent cartridge
Heater controller
11 , [collector vessejl
Stack I
velocity "TV.
AP magnehelic,
gauges
Orifice All
magnehelic
gauge
Organic module _^
Gas temperature T.C.
1/2" Teflon line
-valve I
W'Tefbnlihe
inrlanCAta *
Imp/cooler trace
element collector •
Impinger
T.C.
-Ice bath
600 grams
^—silica gel
Vacuum pumps
(10 ftJ/M each)
Heavy wall
vacuum line
| Control jnodUlV-^1 J^J^^1
Figure A-5. Source Assessment Sampling Train Schematic
-------
9 The addition of a gas cooler and organic sampling module
• The addition of necessary vacuum pumps
Schematics outlining the sampling and analytical procedures using the
SASS equipment are presented in figures A-6 and A-7. The following briefly
describe analytical procedures used in measuring stack outlet trace elements
and organic emissions.
Inorganic analyses of solid and liquid samples from the SASS train were
performed with spark source mass spectroscopy (SSMS) for most of the trace
elements. Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS) was used for analyses of
volatile mercury (Hg), antimony (Sb), and arsenic (As).
Quantitative information on total organic emissions was obtained by gas
chromatography for TCO and by 6RAV of particulate, XAD-2, and condensate trap
organic extracts. IR and GC/MS were used for identification of organic
functional groups and POM and other organic species in extract samples. LC
into seven polarity fractions, followed by IR, and LRMS of fractions containing
>0.5 mg/dscm were performed to better quantify specific organic species.
Figure A-8 illustrates the organic analysis methodology followed during the
current program.
A.7 G! TO C6 HYDROCARBON SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Samples of flue gas for C^ to 65 hydrocarbon analysis were collected
using a grab sampling procedure. Flue gas was extracted from upstream of the
induced draft fan at the same location used for the controlled condensation
sampling system.
Samples for gaseous hydrocarbon analysis were collected using the
apparatus illustrated in figure A-9. The equipment consisted of a heated,
0.64-cm (1/4-in.) OD pyrex-lined, stainless-steel probe fitted with a 7M
sintered stainless steel filter at the probe inlet. The outlet of the probe
A-10
-------
= n
SAMPLE
3- CYCLONE
ICYtiOMF - - -'
PRCIR? WA?U err —
SOnBENT CARTRIDGE
AQUEOUS CONOENSA7E
£1RCT IMPIMTPH
SECOND AND THIRD
M 2
So 2
$ r§ i
i si § S
i si « I
5 »g S §
M O O O M
^^SpCir
*
\ ,
^x
SPLIT \_
S GRAMS
^ AOUSOUS PORTION
\. ORGANIC EXTRACT
> GRAV
TCO
> LC in tnMS
PAnn/ACID DIGESTION
SSMS
• ^
»m
«, . .. • _
«__ -eV—
COMBINE
x
s~~
TOTALS
2 S
6 1
• If required tuple should be m isldi for btologlcil intlysts tt tins point.
1Tli(i sttp Is rewind to define the toul MSS of pirtlcutttt ntelt. If tke suvle eioeds
10> of the toul cyclone
-------
ro
Figure A-7. Exhaust Gas Analysis Protocol
-------
Organic Extract
or
Jeat Organic Liquid
TCO Analysis
Concentrate
Extract
GC/MS Analysis,
POM, and other
organic species
Infrared Analysis
Gravimetric
Aliquot containing
15-100 mg
Repeat TCO
Analysis
if necessary
o\
-------
0.7 yni sintered stainless-steel filter
1/4-in. stainless-steel
probe
Teflon diaphragm pump
Pressure gauge
Inlet valve
500-cm stainless-steel
sample cylinder
_l\\\\\\\\\\t\tt\\V\\\\\Xl\I
/
Ceramic insulation -/
and heat tape
Resistive heat tape
Outlet
valve
1
Thermocouple
Proportional
voltage
controller
Figure A-9.
Hydrocarbon Sampling System
-------
was directly attached to a diaphragm vacuum pump which was in turn attached to
a 500-ml stainless steel heated sampling cylinder. The sampling bulb was
insulated with heat tape powered by a varying voltage controller. The heating
jacket kept the sample gas above the dew point to minimize sample loss due to
water condensation. A detailed schematic of the sampling bulb is shown in
figure A-10.
Prior to sampling, the gas bulb was purged with stack gas for 3-min and
then sealed. The trapped flue gas was then analyzed onsite with a Varian Model
3700 gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with flame ionization detector. Table A-2
lists the design specifications of the Varian GC. A 1.85-m (6-ft) long,
0.32-cm (1/8-in.) diameter stainless-steel column packed with Porapak Q 60/80
mesh was used to separate the hydrocarbons into their respective components
(GI to Cg). The GC was calibrated with repeated injections of a Scott
Specialty standard gas containing Cj to CQ hydrocarbons (each having a
concentration of 15 ppm). The chromatographic responses for the standards and
the samples were recorded on a Hewlett Packard Model 3390A reporting
integrator.
A-15
-------
Table A-2. Gas Chromatograph Specifications
Varian Model 3700 Gas Chromatograph
Sensitivity
Zero range
Noise (input capped)
Time constant
Gas required
1 x 10~12 A/mV at attenuation 1 and
range 10~12 A/mV
-lO'11 to 10'9 A (reversible with
internal switch)
5 x lO"15 A; 0.5 uV peak to peak
220 ms on all ranges (approximate Is
response to 99 percent of peak)
Carrier gas (helium), combustion air,
fuel gas (hydrogen)
A-16
-------
Ceramic fiber insulation
*-••-*•'•'•'-**••"•"*••"-''•«'•* ••>>••' • *>r-"*.-aJ*-~<.->.'Z ............. .i-".-.^s-...
Thprmnrnunlo -»
Thermocouple
Heat tape
Stainless-steel sample valve
Stainless-steel
sample valve
Figure A-10. Schematic of Sampling Cylinder Construction
-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A
A-l. Maddalone, R., and N. Gainer. "Process Measurement Procedures:
Emissions," EPA-600/7-79/156, July 1979.
A-2. Lentzen, 0. E., et al.s "IERL-RTP Procedures Manual: Level 1
Environmental Assessment (Second Edition)," EPA-600/7-78-201, October
1978.
A-18
-------
APPENDIX B
TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS AND MASS BALANCES
Symbols appearing in the tables:
dscm Dry standard cubic meter at 1 atm and 20°C
meg Microgram
ppm Parts per million by weight
ng/J Nanogram per joule heat input
< Less than
> Greater than
N Element not analyzed
U Unable to determine
Trace elements having concentrations less than the detectable limit or
having a blank value greater than the sample value were given an arbitrary
concentration of zero. Values in the form A < x < B were determined by letting
elements reported as less than concentration be represented by a concentration
of zero for the low value and the reported concentration as the high value.
Detectability limits for the various samples were the following:
• Particulate <0.001 wg/cm2
• Filter XAD-2 <0.2 ug/g
o Impingers <0.002 ug/ml
• Fuel oil <0.1 ug/g
At standard conditions of 20°C (68°F) and 1 atm, one gram mole of an ideal gas
occupies 24.04 liters.
B-l
-------
PPM
ELEMENT
ALUPINUM
ANTIMCNV
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BORON
BRCMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
MLHAnK
UASLLIUE
PPM
FUEL OIL
.25CE+02
.0 6*00
.0 E + 00
<.1COE+00
<.1COE+00
<.1GOE+00
.3COE+00
.7COE+00
<.IGOE+00
.5EOE+02
<. IOOE+00
<. 1006*00
.ICOE+02
.9 00 E+00
<. IOOE+00
FILTER
U.C E*00
.162E»02
.0 E»CO
.0 E*00
.0 E+00
..803E«-04
.0 E*CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.810E+02
.0 E+00
U.O E+00
XAG-2
1ST IPPINGER C UMC 2NU (. 3RD IMPINOLKS
.610E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.200E+C1
<.1COE+00
<.IOOE+00
.0 E+00
.300E+02
<.IOOE+00
.110E+02
.2UOE+01
<.IOOE+00
.130E+02
.0 E+00
<.IOOE+00
.^OOE+OL
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
.700E+OL
<.IOOE+00
.400E+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
.500E+01
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
.300E+00
<.IOOE+00
.100E+01
.160E+01
<.150E+00
.310E+01
<.IOOE+00
.200E+01
<.IOOE+00
<.IOCE+00
<.IOOE+00
.300E+01
.300E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+OQ
.0 E+00
.600E-01
<.1CCE-02
<.1CCE-02
.600E-02
.0 £+00
<.10CE-02
.50CE+01
<.ICOE-02
<.100E-02
.380E+01
.720E-01
.40CE-02
.390E+00
<.10CE-02
<.IOOE-02
<.100E-02
.39IE+01
<.100E-02
.90CE-02
<.100E-02
<.IOOE-02
<.100E-02
<.100E-02
<.IOOE-02
<.100E-02
0.6 ICE+00
<.IOOE-02
.400E-01
.300E-02
<.10CE-02
.0 E+00
.100E-02
.10CE-02
.900E-01
<.100E-02
.94CE-Q1
<.200E-02
<.1CCE-C2
<.1CCE-02
.0 E+00
<.ICC£-02
.0 E+00
N.O E+CO
<.5006-02
<.iCOE-Cl
N.O E+CC
N.O £+00
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.G
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
E+00
E + CO
E + 00
E+00
E + CC
E+00
E + 00
E + CO
E+00
E + CC
E+00
E+00
E + CC
E + GO
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+CO
E+CO
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+OC
E+CO
E+CO
E+OG
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+CC
.100E-02
N.G E+CC
N.O E+OC
N.O £+00
N.O E+CO
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
E+00
E + CC
E+CO
E+OG
E + CC
-------
PPM
ELEMENT
PRASEODYMIUM
RHENIUM
RHCDIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SCDIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
TIN
_ TITANIUM
I TUNGSTEN
" URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
PPM
MbhAnK
OASELINE
FUEL OIL
<.1COE+00
<.ICOE«-00
<.IOOE+00
<.IOOE+00
<.KCE + 00
<.ICOE+00
<.ICOE»00
<.100E+00
.650E+02
<.1CCE»00
<.200E+00
.IOOE+00
.2AOE+03
<.ICOE»00
<.1COE+00
<.UOE+00
<.100E+00
<.700E+00
<.100E+00
<.IOOE+00
.900E+01
<.7COE+00
<.5COE»00
.230E*02
<.100E+00
<.100E«-00
.5COE+01
.500E*00
FILTER
.0 E»00
.0 E+CO
.0 E*00
.0 E*00
.0 E*CO
.0 E*00
.0 EtOO
.5S1E<-02
U.O E*CO
.0 E+00
<.eic£+co
. 130E*02
.0 E*CO
.0 EtOO
.0 E+00
,aioE*cc
.0 E*00
U.O E*00
<.891E*01
.0 E»00
.729E*01
.0 E*00
.0 E«CO
.0 E»00
XAD-2
1ST IKPINCEK C CMC 2ND C 3KO IHP1NGEHS
<.100E*l)0
<.100E«-00
<.IOCE+GO
<.100E»00
<.IOOE+00
<.ICOE*00
<.100E»00
<.10QE*00
.103E+03
.37TE*03
.0 E*00
.2lOE»Ol
.600£f01
<. 1COE«-00
<.100E*00
<.100E«-00
<.10CE*00
<.tOOE*00
<.10QE*00
<.100E+00
.900E*01
. 198E*02
<.100E*00
.500E*00
<.10CEK)0
<.100E»00
.0 E«-00
.500E«00
<.10CE-C2
<.100E-02
<.ICCE-02
<.17CE-C1
<.100E-02
<.ICCE-02
<.200E-02
.0 E+00
.100E»OC
.LTOE+Ol
U.O E+00
.12CE-01
>.990E+Ol
<.ICCE-02
<.LOCE-02
<.100E-02
<.IOCE-02
<.IOOE-02
<.IOOE-02
.0 E+00
.700E-01
<.1COE-02
<.IOOE-02
.100E-02
<.1COE-02
.1OOE-02
.7
-------
CD
I
MASS/HRAT INPUT
ELEMENT
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARRM
BEPHLIUP
BISMUTH
BGRCM
BRCKIK'E
CAOfIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
CQOALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GADCLIMUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIUM
HOLMIUM
IODINE
IRIOIUM
IRCf>,
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MOLYBDENUM
NEGDYHIUH
NICKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PHCSPHCRUS
PLATINUM
POTASSIUM
NG/J
MCHAnK
BASELINE
FILTER
.0 E+00
.311E-04
.1406-02
.0 E+GC
.C E+CC
.0 E+OC
.777E-C4
.4666-04
.4666-05
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.3116-05
.0 E+00
.777E-C3
> .155E-01
.0 E+OC
.0 E+OC
.0 E+ac
.0 E+ac
.0 E+00
.I18E-02
.0 E+OC
.C E+CC
.0 E+00
.621E-05
.C E+00
U .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.621E-04
.0 E+00
J .0 E+CC
.621E-04
< .311E-05
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
> .154E-01
.0 E+CC
.C E+CC
.0 E+CC
.155E-C3
.0 E+OC
li .C "E
XAD-2
.780E-02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.2566-02
< .128E-03
< . 128E-03
.0 E+00
,38«E-01
< .128E-03
.141E-01
.358E-02
< .120E-03
.1666-01
.0 E+00
< .1286-03
.5UE-02
< .128E-03
< .1286-03
< . 128E-03
.8956-02
< . 128E-03
.5116-03
< .1286-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
< .1286-03
< .1286-03
< .1286-03
.639E-02
< .1286-03
< .128E-03
•384E-03
< .1266-03
.128E-02
.2056-02
< .192E-03
.3966-02
< .1286-03
.256E-02
< .128E-03
< .12BE-03
< .1286-03
.3B4E-02
.384E-02
.179E-01
1ST IMP1NGER & CMC
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
. .1466-02
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
.146E-03
.0 E+00
< .243E-04
.1216+00
< .243E-04
< .2436-04
.9226-01
.175E-02
.971E-04
.946E-02
< .243E-04
< .2436-04
< .2436-04
.9636-01
< .2436-04
.2186-03
< .2436-04
< .243E-04
< .2436-04
< .2436-04
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
0 .148E-01
< .243E-04
.971E-03
.7286-04
.0 E+00
.2436-04
.2436-04
.218E-02
< .2436-04
.2286-02
< .4856-04
< .243E-04
< .2436-04
.0 E+00
< .2436-04
.0 E+00
2ND 6
K
3RD 1
.C
MPINUI
E+00
< .124E-U3
< .49UE-03
K
N
K
N
N
K
to
N
K
K
K
k
tt
K
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
*
*
K
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.C
.C
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
-.0
.C
.C
.0
.C
.C
.0
.0
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.2496-04
h
K
K
N
K
K
|v
K
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
STACK GAS
.78Qt-02
.3UE-C4O<.i:>5E-03
.140E-02 .125E-01
> .301E-01
< .152E-03
< .1526-03
< .152E-03
.105E+00
< U52E-03
.1S1E-02
.140E-04 .2C2E-01
< .176E-03
< .152E-03
< .152E-03
.399E-02
.386E-02
.17SE-01
-------
CD
I
cn
MASS/HEAT INPUT
ELEMENT
PRASEODYMIUM
RHENIUM
RHODIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SCCI UP
STFCMIUH
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
HOHAViK
BASELINE
NG/J
FILTER
.0 E+00
.0 E + OC
.0 E+CO
.0 E+OC
.0 E+CC
.0 E+CO
.0 E+OC
.113E-02
> .U3E-CI
.0 E+CC
.0 E+00
.435E-02
.155E-05
.249E-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.155E-C5
.0 E+00
U .0 E+OC
< .171E-04
.0 E+OC
> .120E-OI
.UOE-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
XAC-2
.128E-03
.12BE-03
.128E-03
.128E-03
.128E-03
< .128E-OJ
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
.132E+00
.482E+CO
.0 E+00
.2686-02
.767E-02
< .128E-03
< .1286-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
.115E-01
.253E-01
< .128E-03
.639E-03
< .128E-03
< .128E-03
.0 E+00
.639E-03
1ST IMPINCER I OMC 2ND C 3R0 IMPINUERS
< .243E-04
<
< .413E-03
< .2*36-04
< .'iU5E-0'i
.0 E+00
.243E-02
.413E-01
U .0 E+00
.291E-03
> .24CE+CO
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
.0 E+00
.170E-02
< .243E-04
< .243E-04
.243E-04
< .243E-04
.2436-04
.180E-01
.485E-04
N
N
N
K
N
N
iv
iv
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
K
K
N
K
N
N
N
N
N
N
ft
.C
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.C
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.C
E + CO
6*00
E+00
E+00
£ + 00
E+00
E-»00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
STACK GAS
< .15 .148E+00
.523E+00
.0 E + 00
.2S8E-02
> .2526*00
< .154E-03
.249E-04OK.177E-03
< .152E-03
< .152E-03
< .152E-03
.155E-05 .I26E-01
. 140E-04
-------
.i Ml A?
'IAM.LI .1
NC/J
00
ALUMINUM
ANT IMC-NY
ARSENIC
SAP! UN
BEKtLLlL-M
UISMLTH
BCJKON
8RCMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLCPINE
CHRCHIUP
CCBALT
CCPPEP
DYSPRCSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GACGUN1UM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GCLD
HAFNIUM
HCLMIUH
IODINE
1RIDIUM
IRCN
LAMHANUH
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTE1IUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
FUEL CIL
.S69E»OC
.0 L*00
.C E»OC
< .227E-02
< .22/E-C2
< .227E-02
.6t)2E-C2
.159E-CI
< .227E-02
.132E»01
< .227E-02
< .227E-C2
.227£»00
.205E-01
< .227E-02
.523E»Ol
< .227E-Q2
< .227E-02
< .2276-02
.682E-CI
< .227E-02
.9IOE-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-Q2
< .227E-Q2
< .227E-C2
< .227E-02
.933E+00
< .227E-02
.136E-01
.455E-C1
< .227E-02
,751E*CC
STACK GAS
./60E-02
.311E-0'V .125E-01
> .301E-01
< .1526-03
< .1526-03
< .152E-03
.105E*00
< .152E-03
.1916-02
.140E-04C1
.615E-02
< .152E-C3
> .2026-01
< .1766-03
.I52E-03
.152E-03
.JS9E-02
.38CC-02
.17SE-CI
-------
MASS HEAT INPUT
ELEMENT
PRASECCYP1UP
RHEMUM
RHCCIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFLR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
TMCPIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
MUHAWK
BASELINE
NG/J
FUEL CIL
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
.14BE+01
< .227E-C2
.-455E-OZ
.227E-02
.546E+C1
.227E-C2
.227E-02
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
< .159E-01
< .227E-02
< .227E-02
.2056+00
.L59E-C1
.U4E-01
.523E+00
.227E-02
.22TE-02
.114E+OC
.114E-OI
STACK GAS
< .IS2E-03
< .152E-03
< .152E-03
< .5<»OE-03
< .152E-03
< .1526-03
< .176E-03
,113E-03 .148E+00
-523E+CC
.0 E*00
.2SBE-02
> .252E+00
< .154E-03
< .152E-03
< .IS2E-03
< .152E-03
< .12BE-03
.132E-01
.254E-01
.152E-03
.126E-01
.1*OE-04
-------
CONCENTRATION
ELEMENT
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BAR I If
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BCRCN
BRDHINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMUM
COBALT
COPPER
OVSPRCSIbM
ERBIUM
EOPCPIUN
FLUORINE
_ GADCLINIUM
i CALLIUM
00 GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIIM
HOLMIOM
IODINE
IRICIUM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURV
MOLYBDENUM
NEUDYKIUM
NICKEL
MCBIUH
CSPIUM
PALLADIUM
fHCSPhCRUS
PLATINUM
POTASSIUM
HASEL1NE
MCG/OSCM
MLTER
U
.0 E+00
.126E+CC
.5686*01
.C E + CC
.C E + CC
.0 E+CC
.316E+00
.190E+00
.190E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.126E-01
.0 E+OC
.316E+C1
> .506E+C2
) .6326+02
.0 6+OC
.0 E+00
.0 6+00
.0 E«00
.0 E*00
.4806+01
.S69E-01
.0 E + CO
.0 E+OC
.0 6+00
.253E-C1
•0 E+00
J .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E*00
.253E+00
.0 E«OQ
J .0 E+OG
.253E+CG
< .126E-Q1
.0 E»CC
.0 E+OC
> .627E+02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.632E+00
.0—E*.OC
J .C E+00
XAD-2
.317E+02
.0 E+00
.C E+00
.104E+02
< .520E+00
< .52CE+00
.0 E+00
.156E+03
< .S20E+00
.572E+02
.146E+02
< .520E+00
.676E+02
.C E+00
< .52CE+00
.20BE+02
< .52C6+00
< .52CE+00
< .52CE+00
.364E+02
< .5206*00
.2086+01
< .520E+00
< .52CE+CO
< .52CE+00
< .5206+00
< .520E+00
< .520E+00
.260E+02
< .520E+00
< .5206*00
.156E+01
< .520E+00
•520E+01
.8326+01
< .780E+00
.161E+02
< .52CE+00
< .52CE+CO
< .52CE+CO
< .520E+JO
.1S6E+02
.156E+02
.72UE+02
1ST IMPINUER C CMC 2ND G 3ft 0 IMPINGERS
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.593E+C1
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
.593E+00
.0 E+00
< .98BE-01
.494E+03
< .988E-01
< .986E-0-1
.375E+03
.7UE+01
.395E+00
.385E+02
< .988E-01
< .96BE-01
< .98BE-01
.3926+03
< .9886-01
.889E+00
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
< .9886-01
< .9B8E-01
< .9B8E-01
< .9886-01
0 .6026+02
< .988E-01
.395E+01
. .2966+00
< .9886-01
.0 E+00
.988E-01
.9886-01
.U89E+01
< .9886-01
.9286+01
< .198E+00
< .988E-01
< .9886-01
.0 E+00
< .988E-CI
.0 E+00
K
<
<
N
N
,N
ft
K
K
N
K
fc
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
K
K
ft
N
N
N
h
N
*
N
b
ft
fi
K
.0
E+00
.506E+00
.202E+01
.0
.0
.0
.G
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.C
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.C
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
6+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
6+00
E+00
6+00
E+00
6+00
E+00
6+00
6+00
6+00
6+00
E+00
E+00
6+00
6+00
E+00
.1016+00
Ik
It
N
*
N
N
N
N
N
.0
.0
.C
.0
.C
.C
.C
.C
.C
6+00
E+00
6+00
6+00
6+00
6+00
E+00
6+00
E+00
STACK GAS
.317E+02
.126E+00 .5CSE+02/
> .122E+03/
< .619E+00/
< .619E+00
< .6196+00
.4286+03 •
< .61SE+00
.777E+01/
,569£-01 .823E+02/
< .716E+00/
< .619E+GO
< .619E+00
.151E+02
.72BE+02/
-------
cp
CONCENTRATION
ELEMENT
PRASEOOtHIUM
RHEMUH
RHCDIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHEMUH
SAMARIUH
SCANOIUH
SELEMUH
SILICON
S IL VER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
T AN 1 ALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THCRIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITAMUN
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANACIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
MOHAWK
BASELINE
HCG/DSCM
FILTER XAO-2
.C E«-QC
.C E + CC
.C E + CC
.0 E + 00
.0 E+00
.0 E + CC
.0 E+00
.462E+OC
> .582E+C2
.120E+OC
U .0 E+00
.0 E+OC
> .L77E+02
< .632E-02
.101E+CC
.0 E + CC
.C E+CC
.0 E+OC
.632E-02
.0 E+00
U .0 E+00
< .695E-01
.0 E+OC
> .487E+02
.569E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E + 00
.0 E + 00
< .52CE+00
< .52CE+00
< . 52CE»CO
< . 520E*CO
< .5206*00
< . 5ZCE*00
< .520E*00
< .520E+00
.0 E*00
.109E+02
.312E*02
< .52CE+00
< .52CE»CO
< . 52CE*CO
< .52CE+00
< .520E+CO
< .52CE+00
< .520E+00
.103E+03
< .S20E+00
.260E+01
< .5206*00
< .520E+00
.0 E*CO
. 26CE*01
1ST IMP1NGER C CMC 2ND C 3RD IMPINGEKS
< .988E-01
< .9H8E-01
< .988E-01
< .16BE*01
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
< .198E+00
.0 E*00
.988E+01
. 168E+03
U
0 E*00
.119E*01
> .97BE+03
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
< .988E-C1
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
.0 E+00
.691E*01
< .988E-01
< .988E-01
.988E-01
< .988E-01
.98BE-01
.731E*02
.IS8E+00
N
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
It
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
N
N
IS
N
N
N
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.C
.C
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.C
.0
.C
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
E*00
E*00
E*00
E*QO
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
STACK GAS
< .619E+00"'
< .6196*00
< .6lSE*00 /
< .22CE*01-'
7
< .M8E+00
.213E*04 .
.121E«02 ^
> .IC3E*0'« S
< .625E*OOy
.101E«00 .SI4E + 02/
.569E-01OK.676E+00
.988E-01OK.619E+00*
.731E + 02A
.280E»Ol/
-------
I'A Ml INI
U .C F»CC
CO
I
4MICCNV
AHSEMC
BAM KM
BEPVIUUM
BISMUTH
BOPC^
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUP
CHLCRINE
CHOCMIUH
CCBALT
CCPPEB
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GACCLIMUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIUM
HOLMIUH
ICOIKE
IRIDIUM
IRCK
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCtRtr
MOLYBDENUM
NECDVPIUN
NICKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PHCSFHCRUS
PLATINUM
PCJTASS1UM
U
.l«9E»02
.0 E*GC
.0 E+00
.0 E+CC
.105E+01
.631E+CO
.631E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+OC
.421E-C1
.0 E+CC
.105E+02
5 .168E+03
> .210E+03
.0 E+OC
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.160E+02
•I89E+GC
.0 E+OG
.C E+00
.0 E+OC
.842E-01
.0 E+00
U .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.842E+OC
.0 E+00
J .0 E+CC
.842C+CC
< .421E-01
.C E+QO
.0 E+CC
> .2C9E+C3
.C E+CC
.C E+CC
•C_ E+CC
.210E+01
.0 E+00
J .0 E+CC
XAO-2
. lCtC»03
.0 E+QO
.C E*00
.346E*02
< .173EKH
< .1I3E+C1
.0 E+00
.519E+03
< .173E+01
.1SCE+C3
.485E+02
< .173E+C1
.22EE+03
.C E+GO
< .173E+01
.692E+02
< .173E+01
< .1736+01
< .173E+01
.121E+03
< .173E+01
.692E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
< . 173E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
.866E+02
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
.519E+01
< .173E+01
.173E+02
.277E+C2
< .26CE+01
.537E+C2
< .173E+OL
.344E+C2
< .173E+01
< .173E+C1
< .113E+G1
.51SE+02
.519E+02
.242E+03
ISI IHIMNliEH C CMC 2ND t 3K 0 IMflNGERS
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.II9FE+02
< .32SE+CO
< .329E+00
.197E+01
.0 E+00
< .329E+00
.164E+04
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
.125E+04
.237E+02
.131E+C1
.128E+03
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
.130E+04
< .329E+00
.296E+01
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
0 .200E+03
< .329E+00
.131E+02
.986E+00
< .329E+00
.d E+00
.329E+00
.329E+00
.296E+Q2
< .329E+00
.309E+02
< .657E+CO
< .329E+00
< .329E+CO
.0 E+00
< .329E+CC
.0 E+00
N
.0
E+00
< .1686*01
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
N
N
fv
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
.0
.0
.0
.c
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.c
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.c
.0
.0
.0
.0
tc ^w i
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + CO
E+GO
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.337E+00
N
N
N<
N
N
N
N
N
N
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.c
.0
.c
.c
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
STACK UAS
.IC6E+03
.42lE«00 .4C6E+03
< .2G6E+01
< .2C6£*Ol
< .206E+01
.1436*04
< .2UE + 01
.25SE+02
.189E*00 .274E+03
< .239E+01
< .20t£*0l
< .2C6E+01
.51CC+02
.5J3E+C2
.242E+03
-------
HASS/TIKE
ELEMENT
PRASEODYMIUM
RHENIUM
RHCOIUM
RUHIOIUK
RUThEMUM
SAMARIUM
SCA^CIUM
SELEMUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIUM
S1RCNTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORILM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
MUHAHK
UASELINE
PCU/SEC
FILTER XAD-2
.0 E+CG
.0 E+00
E+CC
E+CC
E+00
.C
.C
.0
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.154E+OL
> .I94E+03
.400E+OC
U .0 E+00
.0 E+00
> .589E+C2
< .210E-01
.337E+OC
.0 E+OC
.0 E+OC
.0 E+OC
.210E-01
•0 E+CO
U .0 E+OC
< .231E+OC
.0 E+OC
7 .162E+03
U89E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
< .173E+C1
< .173E+01
< .173E+CI
< .173E+01
< .173E+C1
< .173E+C1
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
.176E+04
.653E+04
.0 E+00
.364E+C2
.10"»E*03
< .I73E+01
< .173E+01
< .IT3E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+C1
< .173E+01
. 156E+C3
.343E+03
< .1736+01
.866E+01
< .173E+01
< .173E+01
.0 E+00
.B66E+01
1ST IMPINGEft C CMC 2ND C 3RD 1HPINGEPS
< .32SE+00
< .32VE+00
< .329E+00
< .559E+C1
< .329E+CO
< .329E+00
< .657E+00
.0 E+00
.329E+02
.559E+03
U .0 E+CO
.394E+01
> .325E+C4
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
.0 E+ 00
.230E+02
< .329E+00
< .329E+00
.329E+CO
< .329E+CO
.329E+CO
.243E+03
.657E+00
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
h
H
N
N
N
It
N
fc
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
K
K
.0
.0
.0
.C
.C
.C
.C
.C
.C
.C
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E»00
E+00
E+00
E*-GO
E*00
E*CO
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E+CO
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
£+00
E+00
STACK GAS
< .206E+01
< .206E+01
< .20£E+Ol
< .722E+01
< .2C6E+01
< .2C6E+01
< .23SE+CI
. 3276*01
> .2CIE+0*
.0 E + 00
.4C3E+C2
> .3<2E+04
< .2CGE+01
.337E+00 .IUE + 03
, 189E+00
-------
HI HAWK
7"
HCli/MC
CLtMCKT
ALUMINUM
ANTIriCNV
ARSENIC
BARUM
BERVLLIUM
8ISHLTH
BORON
BRCMINE
CADM IUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLtGRINE
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GCLD
HAFNIUM
i
HCLHIUM
ICCINE
IRIQ1UM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTE MUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGAKESE
MERCURY
f> OL VBOENUM
NEOCYMIUH
NICKEL
ft ICBIUM
CSKIUH
PALLADIUM
PHQ5PHQKUS
PLATINUM
POTASSIUM
FUEL CIL
.0 E*00
.0 E«CC
.173E*C2
.173E*C2
.520E*C2
.173E»02
.101E»05
.173E*02
.173E*02
.156E+C3
< .173E*C2
.399E*05
< .173E*C2
< ,173E*Q2
< .173E+C2
•920E+C3
< .173E«-02
< .I73E+02
< .173E»02
< .173E*02
< .173E+02
< .1736*02
< .173E*02
< .173E*C2
.10AE+03
.3*7E*03
< .173E*02
.572E*C*
.3 .274E«03
< .239E*J1
< .206E01
< .206E«01
.5*0£»02
.523E+02
.2«2E*C3
-------
MASS/TIME
ELEMENT
PRASECCVPIUH
RhEMUM
RHCCIUM
RU6ICIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCCNIUM
MOHAWK
BASELINE.
MCG/SEC
FUEL GIL STACK GAS
< .173E*02
< .173E*02
< .173E*02
< .1736*02
< .113E+C2
< .17JE+C2
< .l?3E*C2
< .173E+02
.U3E + C5
< .173E»C2
< .347E+02
.173E+02
.416E+05
< .173E*C2
< .173E*02
< .113E+C2
< ,173E*02
< .121E+03
< .173E»02
< .173E+02
.121E»03
.867Ei02
< .173E*C2
< .173E+C2
.867E*C3
.867E*02
< .2CtE»Cl
< .206E01
< ,206E»01
< .732E»Ol
< .20tE»01
< .206E»01
< .239E+01
.15 . 20lE»0'i
.70SE4-04
.0 E«00
> .242E+04
< .208E+C1
. 337E«-GO .171E+C3
.189E*00
-------
POHAVtK
UASELINE
ELEMC-NI
HEATLK NASS UALANCE
IN = FUEL CH CUT = STACK GAS KEf-JNERY G«S NUT SAMPLED
TUTAL IN TUTAL OUT
MASS UALANCE(CUT/lNi
OD
1
1™"*
•fe
ALCMlf.'U'l
ANTIMCMY
AKSENIi:
BAH IUM
BEHrLLlUM
OISPUTH
6CKN
URCPINE
CAOM1L-M
CALCIUM
CEMUK
CESIUM
CHLCRINE
CHKCMIUM
CCBALT
CCPPEP
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUCP1NE
GADCLIN11M
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
COLO
HAFNIUM
HCLMRM
IQJINE
I R 1 .) 1 U'l
IHLtl
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHUH
LUTETIUH
MANGANESE
MEKCURY
NCLYfiCCNUM
NELCYM1UM
NICKEL
N1G011M
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PhCSPHCRUS
5J:!JS:S!
X<.173£»02
.*121E + 03
.1016+05
X<.173E»02
.I5t£*03
.3SSE+05
X<.173E+C2
X<.173EtC2
X<.i73E»02
.520E+03
X<.173E*02
X<.173Ei02
X<.173E»02
X<. 173E*02
X
-------
IN
ELEMENT
as
i
en
PRASEODYMIUM
RHENIUM
RHODIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANCIUM
SELEMUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THCRIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
MUHAHK
BASELINE
HEATER MASS BALANCE
FUEL CIL CUT = STACK GAS
TCTAL IN
X<.173E»02
X<.173E»02
X<.173E*02
X<.173E*02
X<.173E+02
X<.173E+02
X<.173E«02
XC.173E+02
.113E+05
.173E+02
.4I6E+05
X<.173E+02
X<.347E»02
.847E+03
.867E*02
X<.173E»02
X<.173E*02
X<.173E+02
X<.173E+02
X<.121£*03
X<.173E»02
X<.I73E+02
X<.121E»03
X<.867Et02
',
X<.173E*02
173E*C2
REFINERY CAS NOT SAMPLED
TOTAL (JUT
X<.206E*01
X<.206E«-01
X<.206E*01
X<.732E*01
X<.206E*01
X<.206E»Ol
X<.239E»01
.154E+Ol
-------
CD
I
CT>
PPM
ELEMENT
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BORON
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CER IUH
CESIUM
CNLCRINE
CHRCMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GAOCLIN1UH
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIUM
HCLH1UH
IODINE
1RIDIUM
IRCN
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUN
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
PCLYBDENUH
NEUOYMIUM
NICKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLACIUM
PASEODYMIUM
PHCSPHURUS
PLATINUM
FUEL OIL
.2SOE+C2
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
<.ICOE+00
<.100E+00
<.ICOE+00
<.ICOE+OO
.lOOE+Ol
<.1COE*00
.260E+02
<•1COE+00
<.100E+00
.6COE+01
.2COE+01
<.1COE+00
.IOOE+03
«C.1C06+00
<.100E+00
<.IOOE+00
.7COE+00
<.100E+00
.3COE+00
<.1COE+00
<.UOE+OO
<.1COE+00
<.1COE+00
<.100E+00
<.1CO£+00
.4606+02
<.1006+00
.6COE+00
.3006*00
<.1COE+OQ
.1506*02
.4COE»Ol
.1COE-01
<.IOOE+OO
<.1COE+00
.270E+03
<.ICOE*00
<.1COE*00
<.ICOE+00
<.100E+00
.tCCE+01
•2COE+02
PPM
MOHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
FILTER
U.O E*00
.274E+C2
.363E»03
.0 E*00
.913E»00
.0 E«00
.164E»03
U.O E*00
,183E»03
.0 E*CO
.0 E»00
,365E*03
. 183E*02
.S13E«01
.913E*01
.0 EtOO
.0 E»00
.876E*03
.63SE*Ol
.0 E+00
.0 EtOO
.0 E*00
.1836+01
.0 E+CO
U.O EtOO
.0 E+00
.831E+C3
.639E+02
.913E+00
U.O E*CO
.128E+03
<.146E+C2
.913E+01
.0 E«00
.0 E*CO
.C E+CC
.0 E*00
.C E*CO
XAO-2
1ST IMPINUER t CMC .2ND £ 3RD IfPINGERS
.0 E*00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.200E. + 01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E +00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
6+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
6+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
<.1606+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.700E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 £+00
.100E-01
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.4206-01
.0 E+00
.60CE-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.3706+00
.0 E+00
.1006-02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
E+00
E+00
.0
.0
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 £+00
.0 E+00
.8COE-02
<.120E-02
.0 E+00
.0 6*00
.1406-01
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
N.O E+GG
<.500E-d2
<.200E-01
N.O E+00
N.O E+00
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
E+00
E+00
E + CO
E + OO
E*00
E + 00
E«00
E + 00
E + 00
E«00
E + 00
E*00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + OC
f«00
E+00
E+CO
E+00
E + 00
6*00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + CO
E+00
f+00
<.100E-02
N.O E+00
N.O E*CO
N.O E+OC
N.O E+00
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
E+CO
E+00
E*CC
E«CC
£*00
-------
CD
PPM
ELEMENT
POTASSIUM
RHCNIU1
RHODIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THCR I UN
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URAMUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
VTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIKCCNIUH
PP1
FUEL CIL
.ICOE+03
<.ICOE+00
.C E+00
<.1COE+9Q
<.1C3E+00
<.1COE+00
<. 100 E+00
<.IOOE+00
.t50E+03
<.ICOE«00
.SCCE+OO
.1COE+00
>.410E+03
<. 1COE+00
<.ICOE+OO
<.IOOE+00
<.UCE + 00
<.700E+00
<.IOOE+00
<.KO£*00
.900E+01
<.1COE+00
<.100E+01
.1406+02
HUHAwK
NM3 INJECTION
FILTER
U.O E*CO
.0 E«00
.0 E*00
.913E»C1
.0 E*00
.0 E*CO
.183E»C2
.393E»02
.0 E»CO
U.O E»00
•0 E+CC
.0 E»00
.0 E»00
.0 E*00
.0 E+CO
.913E>00
.365E*02
U.O E«00
.0 E+CO
.2I4E+C2
<.100E+00
.2COE*01
<.ICOE*00
. 173E»02
.0 E»00
.175E+04
.C E+CO
XAD-2
1ST IMP1NGER & UHC 2ND C 3RD
.0 E+00
.0 e+oo
.0 E»QO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
E+00
E+00
.0
.0
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.700E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+GO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.IOCE-02
.0 E+00
.6CCE+CO
U.O E+00
.0 E+00
>.990E»Ol
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.27CE+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.400E-01
.0 E+00
N.O
K.O
N.C
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
N.O
E + CO
t + CC
E + CO
E + OC
E+00
E+CC
E+00
E + CO
E + 00
E+00
E + CC
E+00
E + 00
E + CC
E+OC
E + 00
E + 00
£+00
E + CC
E+OC
E+00
E + CC
E+00
E + CO
E + CO
E+00
E+CO
E + CC
-------
CO
I
M4SS/HCAT INW
ELEMENT
ALLPIKUP
ANT1MCNY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
00 RON
BRCMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLCRlJvE
CHRCM1UM
CCBALT
CCPPER
OYSPRCSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GOLD
iHAFMUM
HOLMIUM
ICDINE
IRIOIUM
I RUN
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTE1IUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
HCLYBOEMM
NECDYMIUP
MCKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLACIUM
PASEOCYM1UM
PHGSPHOKLS
PLATINUM
f ILTER
NG/J
MCJHAMH
NH3 INJECI I1JN
XAD-2
U .C E + OC
.471E-C4
.624E-03
.471E-02
.0 E + OC
.15TE-05
.0 E + 00
.282E-Q3
.704E-CS
U .0 E»00
.314E-03
.0 E+00
.0 E + CC
.628E-03
> .157E-01
> .157E-01
.314E-04
.157E-C4
.157E-04
.0 E+OC
.0 E+00
.151E-C2
.UOE-C4
.0 E+CG
.0 E+CC
.0 E+QO
.3L4E-05
.0 E+00
J .0 E+00
.0 E+OC
.U3E-02
.UOE-03
.157E-C5
J .0 E+CC
.220E-C3
< .251E-C4
.157E-C4
.471E-C4
> .155E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0. E+OG
eO E+00
.345E-C2
.C E+OC
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.C E+00
.258E-02
.0 E+00
E+00
t+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
0 E+00
0 E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
< .207E-03
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.904E-02
1ST IMP1NGER & OMC 2NC C 3K C IMPINGfcRS
.0 E+00
.3 E+00
.0 E+CO
.317E-03
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
E+00
E+00
.0
.0
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
. 133E-02
.0 E+00
.190E-02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.U7E-01
.0 E+00
.317E-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
E+00
E+00
.0
.0
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.253E-03
< .3BOE-04
.0 E+GO
.0 E+CO
.443E-C3
.0 E+00
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
r> .0 E«OO
< .121E-03
< .4836-03
N .C E+00
K .C E+00
N .C E+00
N .0 E+00
* .0 E+00
A .0 E+00
h .0 E+00
K
N
N
N
N
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.C E+00
.0 E+00
. 0 E+00
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
* .0 E+00
It .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
ft .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
< .241E-04
N .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
K .C E+00
K
N
N
N
N
N
N
.0
.C
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 £+00
E+00
E+00
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
STACK GAS
.0 E+00
. .IUE-01
.314E-04
.157E-04
.151E-04
.117E-01
.0 E+00
.154E-02
.UOE-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.3ME-05
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
. U3E-02
.UOE-03
.157E-05
.0 E+00
.473E-03
< .294E-03
.157E-04
.471E-04
> .ItCE-Ol
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.345E-02
.904E-02
-------
co
MASS/hHAT IM'UT
EU'«NT
POTASSIUM
RMMUM
BHfClUM
RUKIUIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAKAAIUH
SCANDIUM
SELENIU*
SILICCN
SILVER
SODILM
SIRCK1IUN
SULFLR
TANTALUM
TELLLRIUf
TEHDIliH
THALLIUM
THCRIUH
THULIUM
TIN
TITAMUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
VTIERB10M
YTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIHCCNIUM
NG/J
ULTER
CCHAHK
NH2 1NJECT1DN
XAO-2
U .0 E+CC
.0 C+00
.0 E+00
.157E-C4
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.3ME-04
> *U<«E-01
.0 E+OC
lj .0 E+00
.0 E+CC
> .753E-C2
.0 E+00
.157E-C5
.0 E+00
.C E+CC
.0 E+CC
.15TE-05
.6286-04
U .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.471E-C4
> .1526-01
.0 E+CC
.301E-C2
.0 E+00
.114E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E+JO
.0 E+JO
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0 E+00
.C E+00
E+JO
E+00
E+00
.C
.0
E + CO
E + 00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
E + 00
E+00
E+00
.0
.0
.0
.904E-02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E«00
.C E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
1ST IMPINGED G OMC 2NC C 3RD IMPlNbERS
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E + CO
E+00
E+00
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.190E-01
U .0 E+00
.0 E+00
> .314E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.8556-02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.127E-02
.0 E+00
H
N
N
t-
K
N
K
N
t
N
N
N
N
rs
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
fv
N
K
N
N
N
N
.0
.C
.C
.C
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
• 0
.0
.C
E + 00
E + CO
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
e+co
£+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
STACK GAS
.114E+00
.0 E+CO
.C 6+00
.ISJE-O't
.0 E + 00
.0 E»CO
> .I'i'tE-Ol
.190E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E»00
> .321E+00
.0 £+00
.157E-05
.0 EiOO
.0 E+00
.0 E»00
.157E-05
.62BE-04
. IUE-01
.0 E + 00
> .1526-01
.29BE-04
.0 E + 00
.428E-02
.0 E+00
-------
HASS/HEAT INPUT
ELEMENT
ALCCIKUM
AMIPCNY
ARSEMC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BORON
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUCRINE
DO GAOCLIN1UM
", GALLIUM
O
GCLC
HAFNIUM
HCLMIUM
ICOINE
IRIOIUM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
L I THIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MOLYBDENUM
NECOYRlliH
NICKEL
NICBILM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PTSSEGDVMIUM
PHCSPWmS
PLATINUM
NC/J
FUEL CIL
.561E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
< .224E-02
< .2246-02
< .224E-02
< .224E-02
< I224E-C2
< .224E-C2
< .224E-02
.135E+CC
.448E-01
< .224E-C2
.224E+01
< .224E-Q2
< .224E-02
< .224E-02
.15TE-01
< .224E-02
.673E-C2
< .224E-Q2
< .224E-02V
< .224E-02
< .224E-02
< . 2 24 6-02 -V
< .224E-027
.103E+01
< .224E-02
.135E-01
.673E-C2
< .224E-02
.336E+00
.897E-01
.224E-03
< .224E-02
< .224E-C2
.605E+01
< .224E-C2
< .224E-02 1
< .224E-C2 '
< .224E-.C2 "'
.135E+GC
NtJHAhK
NH3 INJECTION
STACK GAS
,C E+00
I624E-03 .157E-C1
> . 176E-CI
. 314E-04
. 157E-C4
.157E-04
. H7E-01
.0 E+00
. 154E-02
.110E-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.314E-05
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.143E-02
.110E-03
.157E-05
.0 E+00
.473E-C3
< .294E-C3
. 157E-C4
.471E-C4
> . ItCE-Cl
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+GO
.345E-02
.904E-02
-------
MASS/HCAT INPUT
ELEMENT
POTASSIUM
RHENIUM
RHCDIUM
RUB1DILM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELEMUP
SILICON
SILVER
SCCIUH
STRCKTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANACIUM
VTTERBIUH
YTTRIUM
ZINC
IIRCCNIUM
NG/J
FUEL CIL
.22*E+Ol
< .224E-C2 '
.0 E + CC
< .224E-C2
< .224E-C2 +
< .224E-02
< .224E-C2
< .224E-02
.146E+02
< .224E-02
.202E-01
.224E-02
> .105E+02
< .224E-C2
< .224E-02
< .224E-OZ
< .224E-02
< .15IE-01
< .224E-C2
< ..224E-02
,202E»OC
< .224E-02
MCHAUK
NH3 INJ6CTICN
STACK GAS
.114E»00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.157E-04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.3KE*00
< .224E-02
< .224E-02
.-V4BE-01
< .224E-02
.991E-04
.144E-01
.0 E»00
.0 E«00
> .321E+00
.0 E+00
.157E-C5
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.C E+00
.157E-05
.62BE-04
. 176E-01
.0 E+CO
.471E-04
> . 152E-01
.296E-04
.0 E+CO
.428E-02
.0 E+00
-------
(X
ro
CONCEMKAT ICN
ELtMENT
4LUCINUN
ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BEMUIIM
BISMUTH
BORON
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUP
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBKM
EUROPIUM
FLUCfllNE
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
COLO
HAFNIUM
HdLMIUM
IODINE
IRIDIUM
IRON
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUf
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MCLYBCENUM
NECOYP1UM
NICKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PASEODYMIUM
PHCSPHCRLS
PLATINUM
U
ML TCP
I .0 E+00
.186E+GC
.246E+01
.186E+C2
.C E+CC
,ei9E-C2
.0 E+GC
aiiE+ci
.310E-01
.0 E+OG
.124E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.248E+01
3 .619E+C2
> .618E+02
.124E+CC
.619E-OI
.619E-C1
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.594E+01
.433E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.124E-OI
.0 E+CC
I .0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.563E+01
.433E+CC
.619E-02
I .0 E+OC
.867E+OC
< .<39CE-01
.619E-01
.186E+00
> .6UE+02
.0 E+CC
.0 E+OC
.0 E+CC
.0 E+CC
.136E+C2
.0 E+CC
NII2 INJCCTION
M
XAU-2
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.102E»02
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.C E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
0 .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.C E+00
.0 E+00
.G E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
< .815E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.G E+00
.G E+CC
.35JE + C2
15.1 IMPINGER C OMC 2ND 6 3R 0
.0 E+00
.0 £+00
.0 E+00
.125E+01
.0 £+00
i
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E + 00
.U E + 00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.525E+QI
.0 E + 00
.750E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E + 00
.0 E+00
.462E+02
.0 E+QO
.125E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E + 00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E + 00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.100E+01
< .150E+CO
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.175E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+CO
.0 E+00
N
.C
E+00
< .476E+00
< .190E+01
N
N
N
N
N
N
K
N
K
h
N
K
t,
N
K
N
N
N
ti
N
N
K
fc
N
K
N
N
K
N
N
N
N
<
K
N
K
*
K
K
t\
N
N
.0
.C
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.G
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
.S52E-CI
.0
.0
• 0
.0
.0
.0
.0
•.0
.C
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + CO
S1ACK GAS
.0 E+00 /
186E*CO .619E+02 /
.124E+00
.619E-01
.61SE-01
.0 E + 00/
.6G7E + OL/
,*33E-Ol/
.0 E+CO*
.0 E + 00/
.0 E+00V
.0
.0 E+00/
.0 E+00/
.563E+01 .631E+02 «
.0 E+00/
.0 E + 00 »'
.0 E+00 /
.136E+02/
.357E+C2 -
-------
I •'
a i
>,
1C AM; ID*
SILICON
SHVtK
SCC I IN
SINCMIUM
SUlfUB
I AM HUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
130
I
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIOM
VANADIUM
VTTER8IUM
VTTRIUH
/INC
ZIRCONIUM
CCHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
HCG/USCM
XAC-2
.0 E+00
.0 E+OC
.C E»CC
.6I9E-C1
.0 e+cc
.0 E+00
.266E+CO
.0 E»CC
U .0 E+CC
.0 EtOO
) .297E+02
.0 E«00
.619E-02
.0 E*00
.0 E+OC
.0 E+00
.619E-C2
.0 E+00.
.C E+CO
.186E*CC
.tCOE*02
.118E«-OC
.0 E*QO
.U9E»02
.0 E»00
.0 E»00
.0 E*00
.0 E+OQ
.a E»OO
.0 E»00
.0 E*00
.C E+CC
.0 E+CO
.0 E»CO
.0 E+00
.0 £*00
.0 E»00
.0 E»00
.0 E*00
.0
.0
.0
.0 E»00
,0 EtOO
E*JO
E+00
E*00
.357E+C2
.C E*00
.0 E*00
.0 E+00
.0 6*00
.0 E»00
.0 E»00
.0 EiOO
1ST
U
C OHC 2NU C 3RD IMPINGtflS
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E«00
E+00
E+JO
E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.125E+00
.0 E+00
.750E+C2
.0 E+QO
.0 E+00
> .124E+G4
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
.337E+02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.500E+01
.0 E+00
K
K
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
IV
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.U
.0
.0
.C
.C
. C
.C
.C
.0
.C
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E + CO
E+OJ
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E + 00
E+00
E+00
E+00
iTACK CAS
.0
.0 E*OJ'
.6I9E-01'
.0 E«0d'
.
.12 .12JE+C* /
.C fc + CO^
.61SE-02 ^
.0 E+00
.0 E + 00./
.0 E + 00/
.619E-02
.694E+02/
.0 E+00 •
.l86E»OOv/
> .60CE+02/ .
.11HE+00 4
.0 £+00 ^
.USE + 02 y
.0 E + 00/
-------
MASS/TINE
ELEMENT
ALUHINUN
ANTIMONV
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUH
BORON
BRCMINE
CADMIUH
CALC IUH
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUCRINE
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIUM
HOLMIUH
IODINE
IRIOIUM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MOLYBDENUM
NEOCVM1UM
NICKEL
NIOBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PASECOYMIUM
PHOSPHORUS
PLATINUH
MOHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
MCG/SEC
FILTER XAD-Z
1ST IMPINGER C OMC 2ND t 3RD IMPINGERS
U
.0 E+00
.622E»00
.825E+01
.622E+02
.0 E + OC
.2Q7E-01
.0 E*00
.373E+01
.104E+00
.0 E+00
.415E+01
.0 E*00
.0 E«00
.B30E+01
> .207E+03
> .207E+03
.419E+OC
.207E+00
.207E+00
.0 E*00
.0 E+00
.199E*02
.145E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•0 E*00
.4156-01
.0 E+00
U .0 E+00
.0 E+Ofl
.1B9E+02
.1451*01
.207E-01
U .0 E+00
.2906+01
< .332E+00
.207E+OG
.622E+00
> .206E+03
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+OC
.0 E+00
.456E+G2
.0 E+OC
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.341E+02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
0 .0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
< .273E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.119E+03
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.419E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•176E+02
.0 E+00
.2S1E+02
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.155E+03
.0 E+00
.419E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
•0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.335E+01
< .502E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.S86E+01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
K .0 E+00
< .159E+01
< .63BE+01
N .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
N
N
N
N
fc
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
• 0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
• 0
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
E+00
< .319E+00
h .0 E+00
N .d E+00
N .0 E+00
K .0 E+00
K .0 E+00
K .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
K .0 E+00
N .0 E+00
STACK GAS
.0 E+00
.622E+00 .207E+03
> .232E+03
•41SE+00
.207E+00
•201E+00
•195E+03
.0 E+00
•2G3E+02
.14SE+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.4156-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.189E+02
.145E+01
.207E-01
.0 E+00
•625E+01
< .3fl8E»Ol
.2C7E+00
.622E+00
) .211E+03
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.4S6E+02
.119E+03
-------
MASS/HIE
MCHAHK
NH3 INJECTION
MCG/SEC
FILTER XAO-2
DC
I
re
ui
MOO IUM
RUBIDIUM
HUIHENIUN
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SIIICCN
SILVER
SODIUM
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TAMALUH
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THOR IUM
TNUL IUM
TIN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
VTTRIUM
ZINC
ZIRCONIUM
U
.0 E+00
.0 e»oo
.0 E*00
.2076*00
.0 E+OC
.0 E+00
.415E+OC
.B92E+OC
> .1916*03
.0 E+00
U .0 E+OC
.0 E+OC
> .995E+02
.0 E+00
.207E-01
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.207E-01
.830E+OC
U
0 E+00
.0 E+00
.622E+OC
> .201E+03
•394E+00
.0 E+00
.398E+02
.0 E+00
.150E+04
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.I19E+03
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
.0 E+00
1ST IMPINGER £ OMC 2ND C 3RD IMPINGERS STACK GAS
.0 E+00 N .C E+00 .150E+04
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 f. .C E+00 .0 E + 00
.0 E+00 * .0 E+00 .207E+00
.0 E+00 ft .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 K .0 E+00 .M5E + 00
.419E+00 N .0 E+00 .1316+01
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 > .1S1E+03
.2S1E+03 N .0 E+00 .2516+03
U .0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
> .415E+04 N .0 E+00 > .424E+04
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .207E-01
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 h .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 fc .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .2076-01
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .830E+00
.1136+03 K .0 E+00 .232E+03
•0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .622E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 > .201E+03
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .394E+00
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
.167E+02 N .0 £+00 .566E+02
.0 E+00 N .0 E+00 .0 E+00
-------
ro
i
MASS/TIME
ELEMENT
AlUKIMJH
ANTINONV
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BORON
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLORINE
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
DYSPROSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINt
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM „
GERMANIUM
GOLD
HAFNIUM
HOLMIUM
IODINE
IRIDIUM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTE1IUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MOLYBDENUM
NECCYMIUM
NICKEL
N1CBIUM
OSMIUM
PALLADIUM
PASEOCYMIUM
PHOSPHORUS
PLATINUM
MOHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
MCG/S6C
FUEL OIL STACK GAS
.4346*04
.0 6*00
.0 6*00
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
.1736*03
< .1736*02
.4516*04
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
.1046*04
.347E*03
< .1736*02
.1736*05
< .173E*02
< .1736*02
< .173E*02
.121E*03
< .1736*02
.5206*02
< «173E*02
< .1T3E*02
< ,173E*02
< .173E*02
< .173E*02
< .173E*02
.7986*04
< .1736*02
*l046*03
.5206*02
< .1736*02
.2606*04
.6946*03
.173E*01
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
.4686*05
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
< .1736*02
.104E*04
.347E*04
.0 6*00
,6226*00 .2076*03
> .2326*03
.4156*00
.2076*00
.2076*00
.1556*03
.0 E*00
.2036*02
.1456*00
»0 6*00
.0 6*00
.0 6*00
.415E-01
.0 E*00
.0 6*00
.0 e*oo
.1896*02
.1456*01
.2076-01
.0 6*00
.6256*01
< .3886*01
.2076*00
.6226*00
) .2116*03
.0 6*00
.0 6*00
.0 6*00
.0 6*00
.4566*02
.1196*03
-------
MASS/TIME
ELEMENT
POTASSIUM
RHEMUM
RHCD1UH
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SODIbH
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TANTALUM
TELLURIUM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
THULIUM
TIN
T TITANIUM
£0 TUNGSTEN
^ URANIUM
VANADIUM
YTTERBIUM
VITRIIM
ZINC
IIRCCNIUM
MCHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
MCC/SEC
FUEL CIL STACK GAS
.173E+05
< .173E»02
.0 E+CC
< .L73E+02
< .U3E + C2
< .173E+02
< .173E+02
< .173E+C2
,113E+Ct
< .173E+C2
,156E*C3
,173E»C2
< . 173E+02
< .173E*OZ
< .173E*02
< .121E»03
< .173E+Q2
< .173E*02
.156E+04
< .173E*C2
< .173E»C3
< .173E+C2
< ,173E*02
.3^7E*03
< ,173E*02
.150E»04
.0 E*00
.0 E»00
.207E»00
.0 E+00
.0 E»00
.
-------
cc
I
ro
IN
ELEMENT
ALUMINUM
ANTIMONY
APSEMC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
BISMUTH
BCRCN
BROMINE
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CERIUM
CESIUM
CHLCPINE
CHPOHIUN
COBALT
COPPER
OVSPBCSIUM
ERBIUM
EUROPIUM
FLUORINE
GADOLINIUM
GALLIUM
GERMANIUM
GCLD
HAFNIUM
HCLMIUM
IODINE
IPIDIUM
IRON
LANTHANUM
LEAD
LITHIUM
LUTETIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
MERCURY
MOLYBCENUM
NECDYMIUM
NICKEL
NIOBKM
OS"UUM
PALLADIUM
PASECDYH1UH
FHCSPHCkUS
MCHAhK
NM3 INJECTION
HEATER PASS BALANCE
FUEL OIL OUT = STACK GAS REFINERY CAS NOT SAMPLED
TOTAL IN TOTAL OUT
.1T3E+03
X<.U3E + 02
X<.173E+02
X<.173£+02
X<.173E»02
3
X<.173E»02
.451E+04
X<.173E»OZ
X<.173E+02
.347E*03
X<.I73E*C2
.173E+05
X<.173E+02
X<.173E+02
X<. 173E+02
.121E+03
X<.173E+02
.520E+02
.798E«04
X<.173E»02
X<.173E»02
X<.173E*02
X<.173E»02
X<.173E»02
X<.173E»02
»
X<.173E*02
.104E*03
.520E»02
X<.173E*02
.173E*01
X<.173E*C2
X<.173E*02
X<.173E*02
X<.172EtOZ
X<.I73E+02
i
,622E*00
-------
10
IN =
ELEMENT
POTASSIUM
RHENIUM
RHOCIUM
RUBIDIUM
RUTHENIUM
SAMARIUM
SCANDIUM
SELENIUM
SILICON
SILVER
SOOltH
STRONTIUM
SULFUR
TAN1ALUM
TELLURllM
TERBIUM
THALLIUM
THORIUM
TO THULIUM
MOHAWK
NH3 INJECTION
HEATER MASS BALANCE
FUEL OIL CUI = STACK GAS
TCTAL IN
TITANIUM
TUNGSTEN
URANIUM
VANADIUM
VTTERBILH
YTTRIUM
ZINC
2IPCCMUM
,173E*05
X<.173E»02
X<.173E«-C2
X<.1T3E*02
X<.173E+02
X<.173E+C2
X<.173E+02
.U3E+06
X<.173E«02
.I56E+G3
.173E+C2
.815E+05
-------
APPENDIX C
FLOWRATE AND COLLECTION DATA
Fuel oil flowrate
Fuel gas flowrate
Heat input
Fuel oil
Refinery gas
Total
Flue gas flowrate
Gas collected
SASS
Method 5/17
02, percent dry
Moisture, percent
Units
g/sec
(Ib/hr)
M3/sec
(103 scfh)
MW
(million Btu/hr)
MW
(million Btu/hr)
MW
(million Btu/hr)
dscm/sec
(dscfm)
dscm
(dscf)
dscm
(dscf)
Baseline
173.5
(1,375)
0.166
(21.1)
7.39
(25.2)
5.86
(20.0)
13.2
(45.2)
3.328
(7,051)
24,992
(882.58)
1.9900
(70.277)
2.6
15.8
NH3 Injection
173.4
(1,375)
0.167
(21.2)
7.51
(25.6)
5.86
(20.0)
13.4
(45.6)
3.350
(7,098)
25,523
(901.34)
1.8382
(64.915)
2.5
17.7
At standard conditions of 20°C (68°F) and 1 atm, one gram-mole of an
ideal gas occupies 24.04 liters
C-l
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-86-005a
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Environmental Assessment of NHg Injection for an
Industrial Package Boiler; Volume I. Technical
Results
5. REPORT DATE
February 1986
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
C. Castaldini,
R. DeRosier, and L. R. Waterland
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
TR-83-139/EE
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO ADDRESS
Acurex Corporation
Energy and Environmental Division
P.O. Box 7555
Mountain View, California 94039
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-3188
T2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO AOORESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT ANO PERIOD COVERED
Task Final; 1/83 -1/84
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES AEERL project officer is Joseph A.
919/541-2920. Volume II is a Data Supplement.
McSorley, Mail Drop 65,
is. ABSTRACT
repOrt discusses emission results from comprehensive flue gas sam-
pling of a gas- and oil-fired industrial boiler equipped with Exxon's Thermal DeNOx
Ammonia Injection Process for NOx reduction. Comprehensive emission measure-
ments included continuous monitoring of flue gas emissions; source assessment sam-
pling system (SASS) tests; EPA Method 5/17 for solid and condensible particulate
emissions and ammonia emissions; controlled condensation system for SO2 and SO3;
and N2O emission sampling. Ammonia injection at a NH3/NO molar ratio of 2. 52
gave a NOx reduction of 41% from an uncontrolled level of 234 ppm to a controlled
level of 137 ppm. NH3 emissions increased from 11 ppm for the baseline to an aver-
age of 430 ppm for ammonia injection. Nitrous oxide, N2O, was reduced 68% from
a 50 ppm baseline level to a 17 ppm controlled level. Total particulate emissions
increased by an order of magnitude from a baseline of 17. 7 ng/ J to a controlled
level of 182 ng/J. This increase is in part attributed to formation of ammonia sul-
fate and bisulfate from residual ammonia and SOx. Total organic emissions were at
a moderate level and showed a relative concentration in the nonvolatile category.
Organic emissions of CO and trace inorganic elements were not significantly affec-
ted by ammonia injection.
7.
KEY WORDS ANO DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Pollution
Nitrogen Oxides
Ammonia
Flue Gases
Boilers
Natural Gas
Residual Oils
Sampling
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Package Boilers
Industrial Boilers
Thermal DeNOx
13B
07B
21B
ISA
21D
14B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
112
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
C-2
------- |