EPA-R4-73-021
FEBRUARY 1973 Environmental Monitoring Series
A Survey of
Emissions and Controls for
Hazardous and Other Pollutants
Office of Research and Monitoring
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
A SURVEY OF EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS
FOR HAZARDOUS AND OTHER POLLUTANTS
by
Dr. A. J. Goldberg
Air Pollution Technology Branch
Technology Division
OFFICE OF RESEARCH & MONITORING
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
A preliminary analysis was undertaken to prepare a control
technology development plan for air pollution problems facing
industry. A literature search was completed (with 144 references)
to estimate toxicity levels of 18 pollutants, and the magnitude of
emissions from industrial emitter types or classes of emitting
processes. A review of control methods organized by pollutants as
well as industry, offensive trades (animal processing), food indus-
try (brewery and cannery), chemical industry (paint and rubber),
metal industry (foundry and metal coating), other (paper textile,
cement, etc.) is included.
Minimum controls were often reported where sites were remote
to populated areas. Emission hazard data is presented in 14 tables
and appendices. Flow charts indicate emission allocations in major
areas of processing. Identification and emission points are shown
for principal emitting processes. The survey recommends that new
R&D should focus on control of non-ferrous emitters, heat and energy
generating sources, open mining milling and materials handling as
well as several lesser industrial sources, particularly those emitting
large amounts of fine particulate material, (less than 2 micron
diameter particles).
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT vl
SECTION I INTRODUCTION 1
SECTION II SCOPE AND MAGNITUDE OF EMISSIONS 8
SECTION III DEFINING CONTROL SYSTEM NEEDS 18
SECTION IV OTHER POLLUTANT PROBLEMS 24
SECTION V SUMMARY 35
SECTION VI BIBLIOGRAPHY 37
APPENDIX A - Hazardous Pollutant Sources
Tabulated by Pollutant 99
APPENDIX B - Hazards Associated with
Candidate Pollutants 122
APPENDIX C - Material Flows through
the Economy 130
APPENDIX D - Process Flow Charts 150
iii
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FIGURE NUMBER
1
TABLE NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
7
8A
8B
FRACTION OF PARTICLES DEPOSITED IN THE
THREE RESPIRATORY TRACT COMPARTMENTS
AS A FUNCTION OF PARTICLE DIAMETER
RETENTION OF PARTICULATE MATTER IN LUNG
IN RELATION TO PARTICLE SIZE
COMPARISON OF PRESUMED SAFE AND AMBIENT
AIR CONCENTRATIONS OF POLLUTANTS FROM
SELECTED SOURCES (LEAD SMELTERS)
MAGNITUDE OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
FROM SELECTED INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
SOURCE OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS - ORDERING
OF EMITTERS - TOTAL TONNAGE OF ALL PRODUCTS
BY OPERATION
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL
EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS
FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
EMISSIONS OF PARTICULATES AND FINE
PARTICULARS AFTER 100% APPLICATION OF
BEST CONTROL DEVICE
CHARACTERIZATION OF GASEOUS AND PARTICULATE
EMISSIONS FOR SPECIFICATION OF CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS
USUAL AIR CLEANER SELECTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL
PROCESSES
TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION OF WET
SCRUBBERS
APPLICATION OF CENTRIFUGAL COLLECTORS
Page
4
5
21
50
55
58
64
74
77
79
82
84
iv
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)
TABLE NUMBER Page
9 USAGE AND EFFICIENCY OF AVAILABLE CONTROL
DEVICES 86
10 ESTIMATED ANNUAL BENZO A PYRENE (BAP)
EMISSIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES 89
11 ODOR EMISSIONS FOR TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT AND ODOR CONTROL DEVICES 92
12 ODOR CONTROL METHODS AND THEIR
EFFECTIVENESS 96
13 ODOR REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES OF CONDENSERS
OR AFTERBURNERS, OR BOTH, VENTING A
TYPICAL DRY RENDERING COOKER 97
14 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY VALUES FOR POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS 98
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This report was prepared by the Office of Research and Monitoring,
Environmental Protection Agency, but the contents incorporate much
information provided from research contractors and grantees. Two
firms which contributed significantly to this survey are: The Mitre
Corporation, EPA contract 68-01-0438, and Midwest Research Institute,
EPA grant 801615.
vi
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Considerable evidence has accumulated to prove that trace
metals and other particulate or gaseous substances present in air
are a threat to human health when ingested in sufficient quantities.
These substances are continually being added to the atmosphere by
industrial operations primarily from combustion sources and from
the metals industries and secondarily from the production of chemi-
cals, ceramics and miscellaneous manufactured end products.
' Efforts are now being expended to define the specific hazards
posed by these emissions. Thus far, three materials have been
designated hazardous in accordance with Section 112 of the Clean Air
Act of 1970.as amended. Another 15 substances have been designated
J'
pollutant candidates by the Administrator of EPA for which control
strategies are to be determined by the end of FY 1974 and standards
promulgated as soon thereafter as feasible. ,
, s
As the hazardous pollutant problem comes more clearly into focus
its seriousness becomes more evident and its dimensions loom larger.
In particular the dangers associated with long term low level exposure
to specific pollutants, for example cadmium and other trace metals as
well as polynuclear organic material are just beginning to be recog-
nized and defined. Among the specific consequences of this exposure
are increased incidences of disease and reduced life spans in the
general population.
It is probable that a number of pollutants are or may come to be
1
-------
generally present In the atmosphere at sufficient levels to consti-
tute a serious hazard. The dangers associated with these pollutants
is compounded because a major fraction of these materials is emitted
in gaseous or fine particulate form which escape the normally used
collection devices, and which also penetrate the natural filters
of the respiratory tract to reach the air spaces of the lung. More-
over, submicron particles are more heavily deposited in the lungs,
the efficiency of deposition approaching 100% as particulate size
decreases. Even those particles that have settled out of the
atmosphere remain of great concern because of their ability to con-
taminate food and water.
The toxic effects of short and long term increase in body
burdens which can be quite severe is reported widely in the litera-
ture. Although quantitative information pointing to specific control
objectives is still being developed, the ultimate need for control
is clear. Our objective is to insure that the technology is avail-
able to guarantee that control.
The difficulty of the control problem for hazardous pollutants
is compounded because the degree of toxicity is generally not pro-
portional to the mass of emissions. Quite possibly very small
amounts of material can have severe effects on human health, not
only because these substances are more potent but because they per-
sist in the atmosphere, are more easily respirable and more readily
retained, in the lungs.
-------
Indications of this are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1
shows a substantial increase in the fraction of particles deposited
in the pulmonary and tracheobronchial systems of the respiratory
system. The retention of particulate matter in the lung (Figure 2)
increases as particle size decreases above the 1.0 micron level at
which point there is a maximum retention rate over 75%. More than
half of all particles in the range of 0.5 to 2.0 microns will be
retained while only a small amount of those particles less than .25
microns or more than 3.0 microns are retained. (It should be noted
that there has been considerable work done using a variety of
methods to generate the date on fractional deposition of particles.
See for example Chapter 9 of Air Quality Criteria for Particulate
Matter, NAPCA January 1969 and references cited.)
Fine particulates can modify weather patterns by acting as
nuclei for condensation or freezing. They absorb and scatter light
and decrease visibility. Visibility reduction is caused primarily
by the 0.1 to 1.0HI radius particles which appear in the atmosphere.
Fine particles may also interfere with solar radiation and can cause
changes in the heat balance of the earth-atmosphere system. Here
too, small changes associated with increasing particle loads may
well have disproportionate long term meterological effects.
Considering these issues and the extent of documentation of the
toxic and otherwise injurious nature of most of these substances,
about which more will be said below, it seems incumbent upon EPA to
-------
Q
W
H
M
to
o
10
MASS MEDIAN DIAMETER, MICRON
10
*DATA FROM NAPCA - AIR QUALITY CRITERIA FOR PARTICIPATE MATTER, p. 115,
FIGURE 1*
FRACTION OF PARTICLES DEPOSITED IN THE THREE
RESPIRATORY TRACT COMPARTMENTS AS A FUNCTION
OF PARTICLE DIAMETER
-------
RETENTION (%)
80
70
.25.50.751.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
PARTICLE SIZE (MICRONS)
5.0
^REFERENCE 34, p. 23 (AND REFERENCES CITED).
FIGURE 2
RETENTION OF PARTICULATE MATTER IN
LUNG IN RELATION TO PARTICLE SIZE*
-------
be as precise as possible in establishing quantitative standards
for ambient air quality and/or emission levels. However, a number
of prerequisites exist before this can be done. The first require-
ment is to specify maximum safe ambient air concentration of each
pollutant and then compare the anticipated control measures required
to meet standards based on this data with control systems in use or
available. On the basis of this comparison, we can identify gaps
in technology necessary to control hazardous pollutants and prepare
an R&D program for this technology.
The effort is now underway to generate the information upon
which to make the aforementioned comparisons. The first stage of
this activity is to determine the distribution and magnitude of
emissions from the chief pollutant sources, the extent of control in
use and the degree to which existing technology can be implemented
to improve the controls.
The second step toward preparation of an R&D program is to
specify the degree to which certain emission sources must be con-
trolled. This requires first that we establish values of ambient air
quality to be regarded as probable goals of a control strategy and
that we relate emission levels from each candidate source to the
target air quality level. Having accomplished this, we can then pro-
ceed to the third step in the R&D problem definition process which is
to state the specific technological achievements necessary to devise
a control system that will restrict emissions to the levels stipulated
as maximal if the air quality targets are to be reached. Based on
6
-------
this problem definition we can outline a program to develop nec-
essary technology.
This report reviews the work done to date in implementing these
three preliminary steps, and delineates the effort yet needed. Thus
far, the bulk of our efforts have been devoted to the first stage
of analysis. This has generated data about the magnitude of emis-
sions as well as some limited chemical and physical data and in-
formation concerning controls. This work is summarized in Section II
of this report. Consideration of steps two and three of the problem
definition effort are given in Section III. Also included is a brief
overview of available control technology. All major types and subtypes
of control device are tabulated along with an indication of the processes
in which they are found and their range of efficacy. Problems
associated with control of hydrocarbons and odors are addressed
briefly in Section IV. Further problem definition work is planned
for each of these two subjects.
Four appendices are included which contain some background
material. Appendix A tabulates emissions for each pollutant.
Appendix B contains a discussion of the hazards associated with
several pollutants for which NAS or other surveys have been published.
Appendices C and D include material flow charts through the economy
and process flow charts respectively.
-------
II. SCOPE AND MAGNITUDE OF EMISSIONS OF POLLUTANTS
The first phase of analysis was to determine how much of each
pollutant was being emitted to the atmosphere and how these emis-
sions were distributed each among the principal industrial sources.
Information was collected from the literature for each of the
following 18 pollutants showing the emissions by weight from over
200 industries.
arsenic lead
asbestos manganese
barium mercury
beryllium nickel
boron POM
cadmium selenium
chlorine tin
copper vanadium
fluorides zinc
The major types of control devices in use in each of these
industries were listed as well as the percent application and average
efficiencies of the controls. This information is summarized in
Table 1 and reordered by pollutant and tabulated in Appendix A.
A word of caution needs to be introduced here concerning the
numbers appearing in all the tables of this report. Although these
represent the best data from the literature sources cited in Table 1
-------
the data are approximate at best, not only because completeness is
impossible in most cases, but because measurement techniques may be
deficient and because conditions are constantly changing. Nevertheless,
the results are adequate to identify key sources of potentially
hazardous pollutants and to establish the relative importance of
certain industries.
We must also emphasize that total amount of emissions is neither
the sole nor necessarily the chief criterion to be used in selecting
problems for further attention. A prime consideration is the toxicity
of the material emitted in a typical location, which depends not
only on the number and sizes of the sources in a given locality, but
also the local topography and meteorological conditions and the
physical layout of the,source. We plan to deal with these factors
case by case as is necessary in a manner to be described more fully
below. *
The number of people affected by a source or group of sources
also bears on the question of R&D strategy. It appears that in
many instances pollution sources are situated near to significant
populations. Each case needs to be looked at separately to determine
whether it is an exception to this.
On the basis of the information on magnitude of emissions in
Table 1, certain points are evident. Mining and materials handling
processes are generally uncontrolled or minimally controlled with few
exceptions as are most combustion sources. Both of these categories
9
-------
can yield a variety of pollutant materials In relatively large
quantities. So called "consumptive processes" represented in the
Table also tend to be relatively uncontrolled, although with the
exception of pesticide, herbicide and fungicide use, the emissions
appear to be relatively negligible. The application and efficiency
of controls in the primary and secondary metals industries is
substantially greater, with the exception of the materials handling
steps, although this varies substantially from case to case.
To generate a clearer perception of the emission problem, we
found the magnitude of emissions from each of the specific emitting
sources within the industrial processes. This information is pre-
sented in Table 2, where pollutant sources are ordered by weight of
emission. The tonnages shown represent the total emissions of all
the potentially hazardous materials considered for Table 1. Emis-
sions from open hearth furnaces head the list of industrial sources
although these are far less than those created by open burning. In
general, emissions from processes within the ferrous and non-ferrous
metal Industries appear high up on the list, as do boilers and burners
of all types used In power plants and elsewhere.
Grouping the various sources of emissions into broader categories
of emission sources. A short list of the major polluting industries
is included below.
10
-------
Principal Polluting Industries
Industry Emissions
Iron and Steel 103,822
Non-Ferrous Smelting 68,002
Industrial Power and 127,839
Heat Generation
Residential Power and 121,714
Heat
Chlorine Production and 56,370
related mfg
Metallurgical Coking 43,380
Incineration 34,307
Phosphate and related 13,330
fluoride emitting
industries
Principal
Pollutants
Ba, Cd, Cu, Pb, Mg, Sn, V,
Zn, Fluorides
As, Cd, Cu, Fluorides, Pb,
Mg, Hg, Se, Zn
As, Ba, Be, B, Cd, Cr, Cu,
Fluorides, Pb, Mg, Hg, Ni,
POM, Se, Sn, Va, Zn
As, Ba, Be, B, Cr, Cu,
Fluorides, Pb, Mg, Hg., Ni,
POM, Se, Sn, Va, Zn
Cl, Hg
POM
B, Cd, Cu, Fluorides, Mg,
Hg, POM, Se, Zn
Fluorides
The Tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix present this information in
a more detailed form.
In addition to the data on weight of emissions shown in Table
2, other factors exist which influence our ultimate choices of
operations for detailed analysis. We should also take into account
the nature of the population exposed to emissions, the mix of pollu-
tants involved and their physical and chemical characteristics.
Table 3 summarizes some of this information for those operations
contributing 90% of the estimated total of hazardous pollutant
emissions. The Table presents a breakdown of emissions by source
for each industry, the number of sources in each category, the total
population in those communities closest to the sources and the basic
11
-------
nature of the pollutants in each case. Although the data on popu-
lation affected is incomplete, to the extent that it is available and
represented in Table 3, it may provide us with some additional
direction in choosing among alternatives.
The last two columns in Table 3 point to an important issue in
control development. This is that in many instances a source will
emit a variety of pollutants in several forms. For example, blast
furnaces in iron and steel production emit varying amounts of seven
trace metals, fluorides and polynuclear organic material. The
emissions are comprised of gases and both gross and fine particulates.
The rated efficiency of all the control devices in use depends in
varying degrees on the particle size distribution of the emitted
stream, because, as is well known most available control devices
are very inefficient in collecting fine particulates, i.e.. those
smaller than 3 microns in diameter.
The extent to which the hazardous pollutant problem is a fine
pollutant problem can be seen from Table A which gives a breakdown
of the fraction by weight of pollutants in each particle size range
emitted by the largest pollution sources. A point to be noted here
is that these measured particle size distributions will differ from
the in situ particle distribution. The difference depends on the
history of the pollutant stream between measurement and release and
on the measurement technique, both of which may promote agglomeration
resulting in changes in size distribution. Even so, in many cases
the fine particulates are a major mass fraction of the materials
which have escaped collection.
12
-------
It should be reemphasized at this point that the hazards posed
by toxic trace materials in fine participate form can be disproportionate
to the mass involved. As mentioned at the outset the persistence
of fine particulates in the atmosphere, their effect on visibility
and meteorology, their ability to penetrate the natural barriers of
the respiratory system to enter deep into the lungs and their rate
of retentivity all contribute to the hazardous character of fine
particulates.
The relative importance of the fine particulate fraction in-
creases if one considers the hypothetical situation in which the
best available controls are applied to all sources. A computation
was made to reflect this situation in order to determine the extent
of the residual emissions problem assuming that the best control
technology were implemented everywhere. The results of this compu-
tation are shown in Table 5. We note first that although there is
some reduction in the total emissions, a large portion of the prob-
lem remains, following 100% application of the best known control
technology. For example, estimated emissions of about 50,000 tons/
year from pulverized coal boilers would be reduced to 20,000 tons/
year if best available technology were universally applied.
It should be remarked, however, that the values presented are
based on the assumption that the device which now gives the best results,
i.e. lowest emissions, can be applied with equal effectiveness to
all sources. While this is generally not the case because sources
may vary considerably, nevertheless, the numbers generated in this
13
-------
way offer us some Insight into the approximate level of control
achievable. Thus, If no reduction In the level of emissions can be
made, this is Indicated in Table 5, in a column showing the mass
emissions expected assuming that the best available controls are
used.
In those cases where some best control technique can be identi-
fied, and where a reduction in the mass of emissions is indicated
the bulk of the improvement is in the large particulate fraction.
The last column of Table 5 shows that generally after the application
of best controls a large fraction of the emissions is in the form
of fine particulates. In several cases this amounts to large tonnages
in absolute terms, which is more significant in view of the fact that
fine particulates may be dangerous even in lesser amounts.
To calculate the estimated emissions for fine particulates
shown in Table 5, it was assumed that the percent of fine particu-
late emissions represented in the fourth column remained unchanged.
It should be noted that here the principal purpose served is to
highlight the key problems rather than to assign immutable numbers
to a situation.
The processes that would be most greatly impacted by universal
application of the best control devices now in use are open hearth
furnaces in the iron and steel industry, blast furnaces used in the
secondary lead, secondary copper and non-ferroalloy industries,
sintering operations for primary metals and Incineration. In each
14
-------
of these cases, the total emissions would be very greatly reduced if
the best control technology were applied. However, as already in-
dicated large numbers of fine particulates would continue to be
emitted.
It appears that on the basis of the foregoing discussion, the
major emitters of hazardous pollutants can be grouped as follows.
1. Processes whose mass emissions will be somewhat reduced
if the best control devices are universally employed, but
for which a residual fine particulate problem would
remain.
open hearth furnaces - iron and steel
municipal incinerators
sintering furnaces - iron and steel, primary zinc
iron ore pellet plants
blast furnaces - secondary lead, secondary copper,
non-ferroalloys
2. Processes whose residual emissions after application of best
conventional technology are principally fine particulates
(less than 5 micron size) (i.e. more than 75%).
Pulverized coal boilers
sintering - primary zinc, primary lead
asphalt blowing
natural gas combustion
oil burners - power plants, industrial
15
-------
blast furnace - primary lead, ferroalloys (also
secondary lead & copper)
3. Processes whose emissions are not principally fine
participates but which are significant in spite of 100%
application of best control.
roasting - primary copper, primary zinc
asbestos ore mining and handling
blast furnaces - iron and steel industry
ore mining and handling - general
4. Particulate emitting processes which are not controlled.
open burning
residential and commercial oil burners
metallurgical coke
oil burners - power plants and industrial
5. Processes whose particulate emission distribution
is unknown.
Open burning
ore mining and handling
oil burner operation
domestic incineration
6. Processes with gaseous emissions.
chlorine liquefaction
bleaching - pulp and paper
16
-------
In view of the different situations represented above we will
have to consider R&D work along a number of different lines in order
to deal with each of the varied groups of processes. The need to
deal with the general fine particulate problem is clear. It will be
necessary to identify and overcome those technological obstacles
which may exist to mar the compatibility of existing processes and
existing best technology. In some cases, best available control is
not adequate even excluding the problems associated with collecting
fine particulates, and in others no controls at all are in use either
because of economic or technological reasons. In still others, the
problems are undefinable because data are absent.
Having thus classified the principal emission sources, we can
then proceed to deal with each in a more definable framework. How-
ever, a key detail necessary to guide our enterprise is a definition
of the degree of control which is essential. This need must be
carefully defined in terms of what is required to safeguard health
and welfare.
17
-------
III. DEFINING CONTROL SYSTEM NEEDS
If we are to anticipate the needs for control technology, we
must first clarify the goals which are to be met In terms of pol-
lutant air concentration levels. Specifically, It is necessary to
know the maximum or most probable safe ambient air quality levels
of each pollutant, and the probable acceptable level of each as
the basis on which emission standards can be proposed.
In spite of the vast literature dealing with toxic effects,
there now exists no good quantitative data concerning safe ambient
air concentrations. At present, the Health Effects Division is
conducting studies to pinpoint hazard levels for a variety of
pollutants. To assist in this, the National Academy of Sciences is
issuing a series of documents dealing with biological effects of
airborne pollutants. Some of the key conclusions of those documents
which have already been released are mentioned below in Appendix B.
Basically, however, nothing in these documents points specifically
to maximum acceptable ambient concentrations or emission levels.
Moreover, the conclusions of the Health Effects Group will not be
forthcoming in time to use them as a basis for FY 1974 Control
Technology R&D program planning. In some instances, it may take
considerably more time to reach agreement on specific figures.
Accordingly, it is necessary for us to somehow anticipate these
figures. That is to say we must establish probable ambient air
quality values or ranges of values to guide our programming efforts.
18
-------
We have asked the Health Effects Division to provide us with esti-
mates of ambient air quality levels representing the most stringent,
the least stringent, and the most probable standards that are likely
to be set to determine alternative strategies for R&D. The Health
Effects Division has responded that no information of this type is
available or is likely to be in the near future. In the absence of
any inputs from within EPA, we are soliciting opinions on these
matters from outside consultants. This will enable us to estimate
levels of ambient air concentration which may constitute a hazard
and prepare R&D strategies to develop the controls needed to satisfy
anticipated standards.
More than 20 individuals in medical centers, research laboratories
and universities around the country have been contacted.* Some of
the responses are given in Table 14 along with comparable data for
specific substances measured at selected locations. (See refs. cited
Table 14). Additional responses are anticipated from Individuals
solicited in the survey after they have had time to review the
questions put to them. It is also planned to circulate the responses
among the individuals solicited to generate comment and additional
feedback.
Identifying desirable ambient air quality levels does not In
itself define control requirements. To do so requires that emission
*See MITRE Corporation Working Paper 10144 prepared under
Contract No. 68-01-0438.
19
-------
levels be found which will not cause the desired ambient concentrations
to be exceeded. There is only one sure way to relate emissions to
ambient air quality levels and that is via a controlled experiment in
which cooperation is guaranteed not only from all sources that may
affect air quality in a region but also from the environment. Lacking
these rather rare circumstances we can make use of emission dispersion
models, which if properly calibrated can give reasonable estimates of
the ground level concentrations resulting from specified rates of
emissions.
We propose to utilize these models in establishing emission level
targets for the sources in our study. To gain some quick insights
into the problem, we will treat an individual source emitting against
a fixed background of pollution created by all other major sources
in a region. In this way, we can define chosen ambient standards,
and thereby obtain estimates of the extent of control deficiencies.
This work is underway. As of this writing one model study is
completed for the U.S. non-ferrous smelting industry. The results
of this and subsequent studies for other industries are to be compiled
in a separate report. Some of the initial results of the work are
presented in Figure 3 to illustrate our approach. In Figure 3 axe
plotted average values for the maximum ambient concentration of
selected pollutants at a distance from the source, as a function of
emissions from that source. Parameters of the calculation include
stack height, wind conditions and particle size distribution. Although
20
-------
10
n
O
<
cc
I-
UJ
(J
O
u
O
O
UJ
O
<
oc
UJ
.5
SH = 150 (L) '
F AT =12,000 (L)
SH = 150(L)
FAT = 35,000 (H)
PRESUMED
SAFE LEVEL
FOR LEAD
SH = 300 (M)
F AT = 20,000 (M)
.1
f .«
01
LOWER
BOUND
J
UPPER
BOUND
L
SH = 500(H)
FAT =12,000 (L)
SH = 500(H)
FAT = 35,000 (H)
SH = STACK HEIGHT
F AT = FLOW RATE
dOOOscfm) X
TEMP. CHANGE
AT TOP OF STACK
100
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR LEAD SMELTERS (TONS/YEAR)
FIGURES
COMPARISON OF PRESUMED SAFE AND AMBIENT AIR CONCENTRATIONS
OF POLLUTANTS FROM SELECTED SOURCES (LEAD SMELTERS)
21
-------
information is available which permits us to treat each of the smelters
in this county we have chosen to represent the data for the generic
case encompassing the range of possibilities. This permits us to
abstract a statement of a generic problem calling for the development
of control capability to treat the toughest and most prevelant
conditions. In addition to the ambient concentration curves in Figure 3
we show the range of ambient values identified as acceptable upper
limits by the toxicology experts consulted in our surveys. The
juxtaposition of these two sets of data offers us the opportunity to
discern probable needs and to plan accordingly.
Having defined in some way the extent of controls desired in
terms of limits on the magnitude of emissions, we then confront the
issue which bears directly on the nature of the R&D program, namely,
to what extent is current technology inadequate to the task of meeting
the needs for emission control? Some background information on the
subject of available control systems and the extent to which they might
be used in specific cases has been assembled.
Table 7 gives an overview of the frequency with which the
major pollutant collector types are used in each of some major
industries. In Table 8-A and 8-B, some additional information is
presented for various types of wet scrubbers and centrifugal
collectors respectively. Over twenty types of scrubbers are listed
together with the principal industries in which each is used. On
balance scrubbers show higher efficiencies of collection, than
centrifugal systems more so for the lower size ranges.
22
-------
The usual range of particle sizes effectively removed by
scrubbers, however, is greater than 2 microns. The exception to
this generality is the venturi scrubber which is somewhat more
efficient than other types of scrubbers in the fine particulate
range. Additional data of this type is being assembled to complete
this survey.
More detailed information on the efficacy of control devices
is presented in Table 9. Data are shown relating to the collection
characteristics of a particular device as it applies to the princi-
pal pollutant emitted from a specific source within a specific
process. The best estimates of particle size range involved, dust
loading and efficiencies, are also shown. In each case general
efficiencies are also compared with fine particle collection effi-
ciencies which are Invariably lower, a fact which again illustrates
the need for more effort in this area.
Requirements for additional R&D are also highlighted by those
cases listed in Table 5 where deficiencies in best available control
are called out, or where no effective controls are in use. Those
sources which fit either of the above circumstances and which
contribute to ambient conditions exceeding projected safe levels are
prime subjects for control technology development.
23
-------
IV. OTHER POLLUTANT PROBLEMS
A. Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbon control is a difficult problem because the emission
potential for hydrocarbons pervades industry. Even the sub-class
of polycyclic organic matter may be emitted from nearly all indus-
trial processes. The latter is of great importance in view of the
140
recently published findings of the National Research Council
showing strong statistical evidence linking benzo-pyrenes with rising
rates of lung cancer. Other hydrocarbons generally undergo atmos-
pheric reactions to form compounds responsible for vegetation damage,
eye irritation and visibility reducing aerosols.
The total estimated national emissions of hydrocarbons in 1969
141
were 37,400,000 tons. Although some controls are reported for
petroleum refineries and storage of petroleum products, little if
any control is otherwise exercised. Some of the more important
sources of hydrocarbon emissions are as follows: *
Hydrocarbon Emissions
Petroleum refining
Gasoline distribution and marketing
Chemical manufacturing
Coal coking
More quantitative information is available concerning hydrocarbon
pollutants, which is being organized in a separate report.
24
-------
Fuel Burning
Waste disposal
Food processing
Organic Solvent Emissions
Manufacture and application of protective coatings
Rubber and plastics
Degreasing and cleaning
Dry cleaning
Printing
Some of the generally available methods of control are:
1. Petroleum Refining
Floating roof tanks
Vapor recovery facilities
Covered waste treatment plants
Condensation of emissions
Flaring of purge line
Good operation and housekeeping
2. Chemical Plants
Flame and catalytic afterburning
3. Coal and other Fuel Burning
Hydrocarbon collection
Good maintenance and good combusting
25
-------
4. Waste Disposal
Good incineration procedures
Sanitary landfill
5. Food Processing
Scrubbers
Condensers
Afterburners
6. Organic Solvent Emissions
Incineration
Absorption processes
Condensation
Further definition of the nature of the emission problems is
necessary including identification of specific sources, the magnitude
of emissions in each case and the gaps in available control.
A class of hydrocarbon emissions of major concern are the organic
carcinogens which fall into three main categories, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, polynuclear heterocyclic and oxygenated compounds and
alkylating agents. A number of these have been shown to increase tumor
incidence in animals. A recent NAS study has reported a statistical
correlation between benzo (a) pyrene concentrations in the atmosphere
and incidence of lung cancer in humans.
26
-------
The polynuclear organic materials are found in the atmosphere
primarily as compounds absorbed on soot particles. Their biological
effects are strongly dependent on physical characteristics of the
particles, notably the particle size which determines the extent of
penetration into the lungs. Particles smaller than 2.5 microns
penetrate the normal barriers and are retained in the lung. Per-
centage retention as a function of particle size is shown in Figure
2. Hydrocarbons are eluted from soot particles which have deposited
on the skin or entered into the respiratory tract and the rate of
elution is also strongly dependent on particle size. In addition to
carcinogens, other organic compounds are emitted into the air which
act as irritants to facilitate the activity of carcinogens.
The major stationary emission sources of polynuclear aromatics
are combustion processes including burning of coal, oil, gas and
refuse; and industrial processes. A survey of heat generating sources
ranging from residential heaters to heavy Industrial power boilers
has been conducted to collect emission data so as to identify the
major sources of carcinogenic agents. The emission data for benzo (a)
pyrene, one of the key carcinogens is shown in Table 10. The impli-
cations of this data are discussed in the HEW document Preliminary
Air Pollution Survey of Organic Carcinogens (see also references
cited). The key points with respect to stationary sources are:
(1) Inefficient coal combustion, e.g., in residential and
small industrial coal-fired furnaces is the most important source of BaP.
27
-------
(2) Efficient coal combustion in industrial-process boilers
is not a significant source of emissions.
(3) Inefficient combustion in small incinerators and open
burning results in considerable BaP formation. Efficient com-
bustion in municipal incinerators results in very little BaP
formation.
(4) Direct sampling of effluent from catalyst regenerators
of petroleum catalytic crack units indicates that Houdriflow and
Thermofor (air lift) units can be significant sources of BaP. Use
of CO-waste heat boilers on individual regenerators can reduce these
emissions to negligible amounts.
Polynuclear organics are also emitted from other specific indus-
tries, but these constitute only about 5% of the problem. Over 85%
of polynuclear aromatic emissions are from heat generation processes.
The measures which may be effective in reducing these emissions
include:
Efficient fuel combustion
Use of modern incinerators for all refuse disposal
Use of carbon monoxide waste heater boilers to reduce
emissions from petroleum catalytic cracking units.
Thermal pretreatment of fuels to reduce BaP content.
The brief resume just given does no more than identify some of
the areas of concern and hints at the scope of the problem. Further
problem definition is required including analysis of the emission
28
-------
distribution and character, the efficacy of existing controls and
the delineation of approaches to the problem. A hydrocarbon study
along the lines of the one now in progress for hazardous pollutants
is proposed.
B. Odors
Virtually every industrial process emits some sort of odor, but
only some of those odors are considered offensive. The chemical
composition of these odors varies widely, making it difficult to
collect, identify and determine annual emissions. Certain odors,
such as that from hydrogen sulfide, can be quantified by tons of
hydrogen sulfide emitted. Limited odor emission data is available
and is usually quantified in terms of "odor units". Consequently,
odor control techniques and control efficiency are presented here
rather than trying to incorporate the information into the matrix.
Below are listed some common industrial sources of odors.
Frequently Reported Odor Sources *
Animal Odors
Meat packing and rendering plants
Fish oil odors from manufacturing plants
Poultry ranches and processing
Odors from Combustion Processes
Gasoline and diesel engine exhaust
Coke-oven and coal-gas odors (steel mills)
Poorly adjusted heating systems
* Taken from Ref. 33, Table 19
29
-------
Odors from Food Processing
Coffee roasting plants
Restaurants
Bakeries
Paint and Related Industries
Manufacturing of paint, lacquer, and varnish
Paint spraying
Commercial solvents
General Chemical Odors
Hydrogen sulfide
Sulfur dioxide
Ammonia
General Industrial Odors
Burning rubber from smelting and debonding
Odors from dry-cleaning shops
Fertilizer plants
Asphalt odors (roofing and street paving)
Asphalt odors (manufacturing)
Plastic manufacturing
Foundry Odors
Core-oven odors
Heat treating, oil quenching, and pickling
Smelting
30
-------
Odors from Combustion of Waste
Home incinerators and backyard trash fires
City incinerators burning garbage
Open-dump fires
Refinery Odors
Mercaptans
Crude oil and gasoline
Sulfur
Odors from Decomposition of Waste
Putrefaction and oxidation (organic acids*)
Organic nitrogen compounds (decomposition of protein*)
Decomposition of lignite (plant cells)
Sewage Odors
City sewexs carrying industrial waste
Sewage treatment plants.
The amount of odor emitted is generally represented as the
number of odor units (o.u.). An odor unit describes the number of
dilutions necessary to reduce the odor to a "threshold concentration",
at which odor quality can be recognized by half of the members of an
odor panel. Specifically then, the number of odor units is equal to
the volumes (Scf) of air necessary to dilute the concentration of
odorant in one volume of air to the threshold concentration. Odor
emissions from typical industrial equipment in terms of odor units is
Probably related to meat processing plants.
31
-------
tabulated in Table 11. For each operation typical odor control equip-
ment is also indicated along with the resultant odor concentrations and
odor emission rates. Odor removal efficiencies vary among the various-
ly available devices. Table 12 lists some of the odor control methods
and their effectiveness. Other data on efficiency is shown in Table
11. Typical data for a hypothetical dry rendering cooker is shown in
Table 13.
The extent to which sources of odors are controlled vary from
industry to industry.
To summarize the information we can consider five major
industry categories. Although the figures presented below are the
result of a survey performed in England, the data give some idea
of the effectiveness of control possible in the United States.
143
ANALYSIS OF CONTROL METHODS PRESENTLY EMPLOYED
I Offensive trades)
(animal processing)
II Food industry (brewery,
cannery)
III Chemical industry
(paint, rubber)
IV Metal industry
(foundries, galvanizing)
V Others (paper, refuse,
text ile , cement )
51% controlled
29% controlled
61% controlled
55% controlled
26% controlled
Majority of cases without control are remote from
population.
32
-------
Because of the severity of the problem and the large number of
complaints generated, there has been much attention given to rendering
plants. There are approximately 800 rendering plants in the country
producing both edible and inedible products. The emissions from these
plants vary widely depending on the raw material used and the type of
processing equipment. Generally, the more modern continuous processing
units which are almost completely enclosed cause fewer odor emissions
than the older, smaller batch rendering operations.
There are indications that odorous emissions constitute a hazard
to health. Specific consequences have been reported including adverse
144
respiratory effects, headaches and Increases in frequency of
144
asthma attacks . Accordingly, odor emission problems cannot be
dismissed as merely nuisances, but rather a proper survey and problem
definition is called for. A number of specific questions need to be
addressed. These include:
1. Definition of problem scope - identification of key problems.
2. Identification of uniform and effective methods of odor
measurement and characterization.
3. Definition of control system needs. Evaluation of avail-
able control systems, and determination of potentially
profitable areas for development.
Because of the difficulties associated with measurements and
because of the broad nature of the problem, odor emissions will be
given separate consideration. A document is in preparation to define
33
-------
the broad outlines of the odor emissions problem in somewhat analogous
fashion to the effort in the hydrocarbon area. Based on this it is
hoped that we can proceed with a problem definition study which will
reveal specific needs for R&D in all pertinent areas.
34
-------
V. SUMMARY
The data presented herein show that the ferrous and non-ferrous
metals industries are prime sources of hazardous emissions, as are
a number of processes involving combustion systems. A large percentage
of emissions from controlled sources is in the form of fine particulate
matter, which points up the need for special efforts to develop control
along these lines.
Several major sources appear to be largely or completely
uncontrolled. In some of these cases, for example, ore mining and
handling, no well developed "off-the-shelf" control methods exist,
which can be used directly. In other cases, a universal application
of the best control system will result in eliminating some of the
large particulate emissions. For the latter category, it may be
true that economics, or questions of technological compatibility
between the source and the control system need to be resolved before
universal application of control is possible.
The control of hydrocarbons, and odors which are predominantly
hydrocarbons present special problems, hydrocarbons because of the
range and variety of the problem, odors because of the difficulties
involved in identification and quantification.
At the present time, these two issues are being looked at in
greater detail to prepare the outlines of a program planning effort.
35
-------
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
W. E. Davis and Associates, National Inventory of Sources
and Emissions; Cadmium, Nickel, and Asbestes - 1968
Cadmium - Section I, Feb. 1970, APTD 68, PB 192-250
Nickel - Section II, Feb. 1970, APTD 69, PB 192-251
Asbestos - Section III, Feb. 1970, APTD 70, PB 192-252
W. E. Davis and Associates, National Inventory of Sources
and Emissions: Arsenic. Beryllium. Manganese, Mercury,
and Vanadium - 1968
Arsenic - Section I, June 1971
Beryllium - Section II, June 1971
Manganese - Section II, June 1971
14
Mercury - Section IV, June 1971
Vanadium - Section V, June 1971
W. E. Davis and Associates, National Inventory of Sources
and Emissions; Barium. Boron. Copper. Selenium, and Zinc
1969
Barium - Section I, APTD 1140, PB 210-676
Boron - Section II, APTD 1159, PB 210-677
Copper - Section III, APTD 1129, PB 210-678
Selenium - Section IV, APTD 1130, PB 210-679
Zinc - Section V, APTD 1139, PB 210-680
Litton Systems, Incorporated, Oct. 1969,
Preliminary Air Pollution Survey of:
Aeroallergens, APTD 69-23, PB 188-076
37
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
36
37
Aldehydes, AFTD 69-24, PB 188-081
Ammonia, APTD 69-25, PB 188-082
Arsenic, APTD 69-26, PB 188-071
Asbestos, APTD 69-27, PB 188-080
Barium, APTD 69-28, PB 188-083
Beryllium, APTD 69-29, PB 188-078
Biological Aerosals, APTD 69-30, PB 18 8-08 A
Boron, APTD 69-31, PB 188-085
Cadmium, APTD 69-32, PB 188-086
Chlorine Gas, APTD 69-33, PB 188-087
Chromium, APTD 69-34, PB 188-075
Ethylene, APTD 69-35, PB 188-069
Hydrochloric Acid, APTD 69-36, PB 188-067
Hydrogen Sulfide, APTD 69-37, PB 188-068
Iron, APTD 69-38, PB 188-088
Manganese, APTD 69-39, PB 188-079
Mercury, APTD 69-40, PB 188-074
Nickel, APTD 69-41, PB 188-070
Odorous Compounds, APTD 69-42, PB 188-089
Organic Carcinogens, APTD 69-43, PB 188-090
Pesticides, AFTD 69-44, PB 188-091
Phosphorous, APTD 69-45, PB 188-073
Radioactive Substances, APTD 69-46, PB 188-092
38
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
46
47
48
49
50
Selenium, APTD 69-47, PB 188-077
Vandium, APTD 69-48, PB 188-093
Zinc, APTD 69-49, PB 188-072
Midwest Research Institute, Particulate Pollutant
System Study:
Vol. I - Mass Emissions, May 1, 1971
APTD 0743, PB 203-128
Vol. II - Fine Particulate Emissions, Aug. 1, 1971
APTD 0744, PB 203-521
Vol. Ill - Emissions, Effluents, and Control Practices
for Stationary Particulate Pollution Sources, APTD 0745,
PB 203-522, Nov. 1, 1971
Battelle, Columbus Labs; E. P. Stambaugh, E. H. Hall,
R. H. Cherry, Jr. and S. R. Smothson, Jr.; Topical
Report on Basis for National Emissions Standards on
Cadmium (no date)
Lattelle, Columbus Labs; Control Techniques for Emissions
Containing Chromium. Manganese. Nickel, and Vanadium.
June 9, 1972 —
EPA, OAP, Control Techniques for Mercury Emissions.
January, 1972
EPA, OAP, Control Techniques for Lead Emissions.
(no date)
GCA Corp., Control Techniques for Polycyclic Organic
Matter Emissions. August 1970
EPA, OAP, Control Techniques for Chlorine and Hydrogen
Chloride Emissions. March 1971
TRW Systems Group, Engineering and Cost Effectiveness
Study of Fluoride Emissions Control. Robinson, Graber,
Lusk, and Santy, January 1972. Volumes I and II,
PB 207-506, PB 209-647
39
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
BuMlnes, Pittsburgh, D. C. Diehl, et al.,
Fate of Trace Mercury In the Combustion of Coal.
BuMlnes TPR 54, May 1972, PB 210-226
Oak Ridge National Lab, Environmental Pollution; Use of
Neutron Activation Analysis to Determine the Fate of
Trace Elements from Fossil Fuel Combustion. 1971
CONF-720413-1
Rahn, Kenneth A., Sources of Trace Elements in Aerosols;
An Approach to Clean Air. May, 1971
Joensuu, Oiva I., "Fossil Fuels as a Source of Mercury
Pollution," Science. Vol. 172, June 4, 1971, pp. 1027-28
Minerals Yearbook. 1968. Vol. I-II; Metals. Minerals
and Fuels. U. S. Bureau of Mines, 1969
Mineral Facts and Problems. 1970. U.S. Bureau of Mines,
1970
John A. Danielson (ed.)» Air Pollution Engineering
Manual. Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District,
1967, PHS-999-AP-40
40
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
58
TRW, McLean, Virginia, Engineering and Cost Effectiveness
Study of Flouride Emissions Control. Vol. II. 1972.
59
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1967 Census of Manufactures
Vol. II.
60
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National
Emission Standards Study, Vol I.
61
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National
Emission Standards Study. Vol. II.
62
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National
Emission Standards Study, Vol. III.
63
Engineering Science, Inc., Exhaust Gases From Combustion
and Industrial Processes, 1971.
Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, A Cost Analysis of Air
Pollution Controls in the Integrated Iron and Steel Industry,
1969.
65
Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, A System Analysis Study of
the Integrated Iron and Steel Industry, 1969.
66
Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, Evaluation of Process
Alternatives to Improve Control of Air Pollution from
Production of Coke, 1970.
67
NAPCA, Air Pollution Aspects of Brass and Bronze Smelting
and Refining Industry. 1969.
68
Department of Interior, Mercury Contamination in the Natural
Environment. 1970.
41
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'd)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
69
70
71
72
Copley International Corporation, National Survey of the
Odor Problem - Phase I of a Study of the Social and
Economic Impact of Odors. 1970.
Copley International Corporation, National Survey of the
Odor Problem - Phase I of a Study of the Social and
Economic Impact of Odors. Appendix. 1970
Public Health Service, Cincinnati, Ohio, Atmospheric
Emissions from Petroleum Refineries; a Guide for
Measurement and Control. 1960
A. T. Kearney and Company, Chicago, Illinois, Systems
Analysis of Emissions and Emissions Control in the Iron
Foundry Industry. Vol. I, 1971
73
A. T. Kearney and Company, Chicago, Illinois, Systems
Analysis of Emissions and Emissions Control in the Iron
Foundry Industry. Vol. II, 1971
74
A. J. Kearney and Company, Chicago, Illinois, Systems
Analysis of Emissions and Emissions Control in the Iron
Foundry Industry. Vol. Ill, 1971
75
EPA, Durham, Secondary Zinc Industry Emission Control
Problem Definition Study Part I, 1971
76
A. T. Kearney and Company, Air Pollution Aspects of the
Iron Foundry Industry. 1971
77
Arthur D. Little, Inc., Evaluation of Community Odor
Exposure. 1971
78
Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, Mercury in the
Environment. 1971
42
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
79
Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality, Chicago,
Asbestos Air Pollution Control, 1971.
80
Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality, Chicago,
A Study of Environmental Pollution by Lead, 1971.
81
EPA, Air Pollution Control Office, Beryllium and Air
Pollution; An Annotated Bibliography, February, 1971.
82
EPA, OAP, Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources;
Petroleum Refineries - A Bibliography with Abstracts,
July, 1972.
83
EPA, OAP, Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources; Iron
and Steel Mines - A Bibliography with Abstracts, May, 1972.
84
EPA, Environmental Lead and Public Health. 1971.
85
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Air Pollution
and the Kraft Pulping Industry. 1963.
86
EPA, Asbestos and Air Pollution, An Annotated Bibliography,
1971.
87
National Academy of Sciences, Asbestos - The Need for and
Feasibility of Air Pollution Controls. 1971.
88
EPA, Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources; Cement
Manufacturing - A Bibliography with Abstracts, 1971.
89
Economics Priorities Report, Paper Profits; Pollution
Audit 1972. Vol. 3, No. 3, July/August 1972.
43
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
90
EPA, Paint Technology and Air Pollution! A Survey and
Economic Assessment, 1972.
91
EPA, Atmospheric Emissions from Chlor-Alkali Manufacture,
1971.
92
EPA, Chlorine and Air Pollution; An Annotated Bibliography,
1971.
93
National Academy of Sciences, Lead-Airborne Lead in Perspective,
1972.
94
EPA, Air Pollution Aspects of Emission Sources; Municipal
Incineration - A Bibliography with Abstracts, 1971.
95
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Cincinnati,
Ohio, Survey of Lead in the Atmosphere of Three Urban
Communities, 1965.
96
National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio,
Atmospheric Emissions from the Manufacture of Portland
Cement, 1967.
97
Environmental Engineering, Control of Atmospheric Emissions
in the Wood Pulping Industry, Vol. I, 1970.
98
NAPCA, Atmospheric Emissions from Hydrochloric Acid
Manufacturing Processes, 1969.
99
Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, Cadmium in the
Environment - A lexicological and Epidemiological Appraisal,
1971.
44
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
100
Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality, Mercury Vapor
Emissions; Report on Aerial Survey of Sources Potentially
Affecting the Air in Illinois. 1971.
101
Commins (J. A.) and Associates, A Localized Study of Gray
Iron Foundries to Determine Business and Technical Commonalities
Conductive to Reducing Abatement Costs, 1972.
102
Battelle, Columbus Laboratories, Development of a Rapid
Survey Method of Sampling and Analysis for Asbestos in
Ambient Air. 1972.
103
San Diego Water Utilities Department, Sewage Odor Control by
Liquid-Gas Extraction, 1970.
104
Graphic Arts Technical Foundation, Evaluations of Emissions
and Control Technologies in the Graphic Arts Industries, 1970.
105
Air Force Rocket Propulsion Laboratory, Edwards AFB,
Atmospheric Diffusion of Beryllium, 1971.
106
Oak Ridge National Lab, Mercury in the Environment; An
Annotated Bibliography. 1972.
107
Research Triangle Institute, Estimating Population Exposure
to Selected Metals - Manganese, 1969.
108
Arthur D. Little, Systems Study of Air Pollution From
Municipal Incineration, Vol. I, 1970.
109
Arthur D. Little, Systems Study of Air Pollution From
Municipal Incineration, Vol. II, 1970.
45
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
110
Arthur D. Little, Systems Study of Air Pollution From
Municipal Incineration, Vol. III. 1970.
Ill
A. T. Kearney, Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution Control
on the Iron Foundry Industry, Part I, 1971.
112
A. T. Kearney, Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution Control
on the Iron Foundry Industry, Part II, 1971.
113
A. T. Kearney, Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution
Control on the Iron Foundry Industry. Part III. 1971.
114
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Lead, Part I, 1971.
115
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries. Lead. Part II. 1971.
116
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries. Lead. Part III, 1971.
117
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Aluminum. Part I, 1971.
118
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries. Aluminum. Part II. 1971.
119
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Aluminum. Part III, 1971.
120
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries. Copper. Patt I. 1971.
46
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
121
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Copper, Part II, 1971.
122
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Copper, Part III, 1971.
123
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Zinc, Part I. 1971.
124
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Zinc, Part II, 1971,
125
Charles River Associates, The Effects of Pollution Control
on the Nonferrous Metals Industries, Zinc, Part III. 1971.
126
Arthur D. Little, Economic Impact of Anticipated Paper
Industry Pollution Abatement Costs, Part I, 1971.
127
Arthur D. Little, Economic Impact of Anticipated Paper
Industry Pollution Abatement Costs, Part II, 1971.
128
Arthur D. Little, Economic Impact of Anticipated Paper
Industry Pollution Abatement Costs, Part III, 1971.
129
Dunlap and Associates, Economic Impact of Environmental
Controls on the Fruit and Vegetable Canning and Freezing
Industries, Part I. 1971.
130
Dunlap and Associates, Economic Impact of Environmental
Controls on the Fruit and Vegetable Canning and Freezing
Industries, Part II, 1971.
47
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
131
Dunlap and Associates, Economic Impact of Environmental
Controls on the Fruit and Vegetable Canning and Freezing
Industries. Part III. 1971,
132
Dunlap and Associates, Economic Impact of Environmental
Controls on the Fruit and Vegetable Canning and Freezing
Industries. Part IV. 1971.
133
Urban Systems Research and Engineering, Inc., The Leather
Industry; A Study of the Impact of Pollution Control
Costs. Vol. I. 1971.
134
Urban Systems Research and Engineering, The Leather Industry;
A Study of the Impact of Pollution Control Costs, Vol. II, 1971.
135
Urban Systems Research and Engineering, The Leather Industry;
A Study of the Impact of Pollution Control Costs. Vol. III. 1971.
136
Boston Consulting Group, The Cement Industry; Economic
Impact of Pollution Control Costs, Vol. I. 1971.
137
Boston Consulting Group, The Cement Industry; Economic
Impact of Pollution Control Costs. Vol. II, 1971.
138
National Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati,
Ohio, Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants; A Comprehensive
Summary, 1967.
139
National Materials Advisory Board, Trends in Usage of
Cadmium. 1969.
48
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY (CONT'D)
NUMBER
DOCUMENT
140
141
142
143
144
National Academy of Sciences, Biologic Effects of
Atmospheric Pollutants POM (Now being distributed)
Nationwide Emission Estimates for 1969 DAT, EPA,
April 1971
"Chemical Control of Odors" C. E. Anderson, Pollution
Engineering. August 1972, p. 21
"The Control of Offensive Odours: Results of a Survey"
C. Ricketts, Environmental Health. V. 79 no. 5,
May 1971
Rendering Plant Survey - Behur Murthy In-house draft CSD,
NERC, EPA December 1971 (See Refs. cited)
49
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
TABLE 2
SOURCE OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS^ '
ORDERING OF EMITTERS
TOTAL TONNAGE OF ALL PRODUCTS
BY OPERATION
SOURCE TONS
1. Open Burning 4,548,070
2. Open Hearth Furnaces 68,227
3. Pulverized Coal Boiler, Power Plant 51,471
4. Oil Burners, Residential 44,063
5. Metallurgical Coke 43,380
6. Chlorine Liquefaction 43,000
7. Roasting, Non-Ferrous Metals 38,560
8. Incineration 34,307
9. Sintering, Non-Ferrous Metals 33,620
10. Ore Mining and Handling 26,855
11. Asphalt Roofing Materials 23,330
12. Gas Burners, Industrial 20,220
13. Pellet Plants, Iron Ore Preparation 18,200
14. Bleaching,Pulp and Paper 18,000
15. Oil Burners, Power Plants 14,273
16. Oil Burners, Industrial 14,053
17. Blast Furnace 13,352
18. Stoker Coal Boiler, Industrial 13,237
19. Electric Furnace 12,508
20. Gas Burners, Residential/Commercial 10,065
21. Structural Clay Products 9,720
22. Superphosphate Manufacture 8,980
23. Prebake, Aluminum Ore Reduction 8,610
24. Organic Chemicals 8,570
25. Zinc Oxide Manufacture 8,100
26. Reduction, Aluminum 7,620
27. Phosphoric Acid, Wet & Thermal Processes 6,830
28. Gas Burner, Power Plant 6,151
29. Cupola, Gray Iron Foundry 6,151
30. Stoker Coal Boiler, Power Plant 5,994
31. Hydrofluoric Acid Alkylacion 5,800
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
55
-------
32. Distillation, Primary Zinc 5,626
33. Converters, Primary Copper 5,591
34. Expanded Clay Aggregate 5,300
35. Use of Pesticides, Herbicides, Fungicides 4,744
36. Barium Chemicals 4,400
37. Primary Chromium 4,200
38. Electrothermal Phosphorous 4,080
39. Chlorine Manufacture 4,000
40. Pulverized Coal Boiler, Industrial 3,783
41. Petroleum Refining 3,420
42. Sweating Furnace, Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals 3,031
43. Asphalt Paving Material 2,800
44. Barium Milling & Handling ' 2,700
45. Reverberatory Furnace 2,548
46. Boron Chemicals 2,400
47. Basic Oxygen Furnace 2,057
48. Fluxing Chlorine 2,000
49. Cyclone Coal Boiler, Industrial 1,891
50. Glass Manufacture 1,881
51. Cyclone Coal Boiler, Power Plant 1,776
52. Defluorination of Phosphate Rock 1,760
53. Material Handling, Manufacture 1,264
54. Zinc Chemicals 1,130
55. Miscellaneous Chlorine Products 1,000
56. Zinc Galvanizing 950
57. Chlorine Bleach Manufacture 900
58. Lead Alkalyd Chemicals 810
59. Hydrochloric Acid Manufacture 800
60. Frit Production, Glass Manufacturing 700
61. Wire Burning, Secondary Copper 681
62. Residential/Commercial Coal Boilers 657
63. Hydrofluoric Acid Vents 500
64. Manganese Chemicals 470
65. Ceramic Coatings 470
66. Primary Manganese 325
67. Brake Lining Manufacture 312
68. Cement Kilns 270
69. Primary Nickel 246
70. Miscellaneous Copper Products Manufacture 230
71. Application of Paint 215
72. Shingle & Siding Manufacture 205
73. Hydrofluoric Acid Kilns 200
74. Pesticide Manufacture 197
75. Dry Storage Batteries 90
76. Vanadium Refining 81
77. Well Drilling Mud 70
78. Installation of Asbestos Materials 61
56
-------
79. Primary Mercury 55
80. Laboratory Use of Mercury 51
81. Paint Manufacture 42
82. Use of Insulating Cement 25
83. Welding Rods Consumption 23
84. Barton Process, Secondary Lead 20
85. Cotton Ginning 19
86. Asbestos Textiles 18
87. Recovery Furnace, Pulp and Paper 15
88. Spray-on Fire Proofing 15
89. Soap & Detergent Manufacture 13
90. Rotary Furnace 12
91. Secondary Mercury 11
92. Cadmium Paint Pigments 11
93. Refractory Bricks 7
94. Scrap Metal Preparation - Secondary Non-Ferrous Metal 5
95. Beryllium Alloys and Compounds 5
96. Vanadium Chemicals 4
97. Cadmium-Barium Stabilizers 3
98. Miscellaneous Arsenic Chemicals 3
99. Electrical Apparatus Manufacture 3
100. Miscellaneous Copper Metals & Alloys 2
101. Instrument Manufacture 2
102. Pharmaceuticals 2
103. Dental Apparatus 1
104. Cadmium-Nickel Batteries NEC
105. Miscellaneous Cadmium Products NEC
106. Fertilizer Application NEC
57
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
A. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING 90% OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
(1)
OPERATION
INDUSTRY
NO. OF
LOCATIONS
ADJACENT
POPULATION
(MILLION )(3)
POLLUTANT PROPERTIES
PHYSICAL(2) CHEMICAL
Pulverized Coal Boilers
Power Plants
Power Plants
325
Inorganic/metal oxides
Fluorides, Polyorganics
As, Ba, Be, B, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Mn, HR, Ni, Se, Sn,
V, Zn
Open Hearth Furnace
In
00
Blast Furnace
Roasting
Iron & Steel
(no oxygen
lance)
(with oxygen
lance)
Iron & Steel
Ferro-Alloys
Secondary Pb
Primary Pb
Secondary Cu
Primary Cu
Primary Zn
Small Boilers, Oil
(Residential, Commercial) Resident Fuel
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
Gas Fluorides
604 Pp Ba, Pb, Mn, Hg, Sn, V,
Zn oxides , Fluorides,
POM
Fluorides, HF
Ba, Pb, Mn, Mg, Sn, V,
Zn oxides, POM
Fluorides, HF
140 P.P,,, Gas As, Cd, Mn, Hg, Ni, V,
Zn oxides, Fluorides,
POM
53 3.2 P,P Mn, Ni, Zn oxides, POM
64 47.8 P.Pp.Gas As, Pb oxides, POM,
Fluorides
10 0.3 P>FF> Gas As. cd. Pb oxides, POM
Fluorides
20 19.3 P>PF' GaS As> Cd> Zn
19 0.6 P Cu, POM, As, Cd,
Fluorides, Pb, Se
17 0.5 P,P ,Gas Cd, Fluorides, Pb, POM
Se, Zn
44000 P Ba, Be, Cr, Cu, Pb, Mn,
Hg, Ni, POM, Se, Sn, V,
(2) P - Particulates
P_- Fine Particulates (3) Data show total population of large
cities near to known sources.
Gas
PF
Gas
P,PF, Gas
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
A. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING 90% OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
(Continued)
OPERATION
Ore Mining and Handling
Open Burning
Converters
Large Boilers, Oil
Power Plants
Liquefaction
Electric Furnace
Pesticides, Herbicides,
Fungicides, Consumption
INDUSTRY NO. OF ADJACENT (3)
LOCATIONS POPULATION
(MILLION)
Asbestos Mining
Lead Mining
Copper Mining
Borax Mining
Barium Mining
Agri Burning
Forest Fires
Open Burning
Conical Burner
Coal Refuse
Primary Cu
Power Plants
Chlorine MFC
Iron & Steel
Ferro-Alloys
Si 11 comanganese
Pesticides ,
etc. , Use
9 Neg
25
25
6
43
19 0.6
115
39
379
53 3.2
POLLUTANT PROPERTIES
PHYS ICAL ( 2 ) CHEMICAL
P
P
P
P
P
P,P Gas
P, Pi 'Gas
P.PljGas
P ,Gas
P'PF
P
PF
Gas
P'PF
P'PF
P'PF
P,PF
Asbestos, Cr
As, Cd, Pb
As, Cd, Cu, Pb
B
Ba
As, POM
As, POM
As, POM
POM
As, B, POM
As, Cd, Cu, Fluoride,
Pb, POM, Se
Inorganic/Metal Oxides,
Polyorganics
Ba, Be, Cr, Cu, Pb,
Mn, Hg, Ni, Se, V
C2, POM
Ba, Mn, Hg, Zn,
Mn, Ni, POM, V, Zn
Mn, POM
As, B, Cd, Hg, Pb,
(2) P - Particulates
P_ - Fine Particulates
(3) Data show total Population of Large Cities
near to known sources.
Inorganic & Organic
Compounds, Polyorganics
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
A. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING 90% OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
(Continued)
OPERATION
Stoker Coal Boiler,
Industrial
Sintering
Glass Manufacture
Barium Chemicals
Intermediate Boilers,
Oil, Industrial
Cupola
2) P Particulates
P., - Fine Particulates
INDUSTRY NO. OF ADJACENT (3)
LOCATIONS POPULATION
(MILLION)
Industrial 124,000
Fuel
Iron & Steel
Primary Zn 17 0.5
Primary Pb 10 0.3
Glass 249
Manufacture
Barium
Chemicals 11 1.1
Industrial 152,000
Fuel
Grey Iron 1,680
Foundry
POLLUTANT PROPERTIES
PHYSICAL(2) CHEMICAL
P'PF
P.Gas
P.Gas
P.Gas
P,P_
F
No
Hazardous
Except when
Fining ,
Oxidizing,
Color Agents
Added
P,PF
PF
r
P,P ,Gas
C
As , Ba , Be , B , Cr ,
Cu , Fluorides , Pb ,
Mn, Hg, Ni, POM, Se,
Sn, V, Zn
Fluorides, Metal
Oxides, Alkalis
Zn, Pb, Cd, As,
Fluorides
As, Cd, Fluorides,
Pb, Se
As, Ba, B, Se, Zn, Pb
Oxides , Fluorides
Fe,, 03 possible, POM
Ba, POM
As, Ba, Be, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni, POM,
Se, V, Zn
As, Ba, Be, Pb, Mn,
Hg, Ni, V, Zn oxides,
POM, Fluorides
(3) Data show total Population of large cities
near to known sources
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
A. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING 90% OF HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
(Continued)
OPERATION
Incinerators
Stoker Coal
Boiler, Power Plants
Reverbatory Furnace
Boron Chemicals
Barium Milling
and Handling
Bleaching ,
All Processes
Pulverized Coal
Boiler, Industrial
Materials, Handling,
MFC
Petroleum Refining
INDUSTRY NO. OF
LOCATIONS
Incinerators
Power Plants
Primary Cu
Secondary Pb
Primary Pb
Secondary Cu
Boron Chemicals
Barium Milling
and Handling
Bleaching ,
Pulp Mills
Industrial
Fuel
Primary Cu
Primary Zn
Ferro-Alloys
(2) P - Particulates
P_ - Fine Particulates
146
75
19
64
10
20
54
7
35
35,600
19
17
53
263
(3) Data
near
ADJACENT (3)
POPULATION
(MILLION)
0.6
47.8
0.3
19.3
0.8
0.6
0.5
3.2
show total Population of
to known sources
POLLUTANT PROPERTIES
PHYSICAL(2) CHEMICAL
P.Pp.Gas
p.pp
P,PF,Gas
P.PT
P.Pp.Cas
P'PF
P
P
Gas
P,PF,Gas
P
P
P
Pp.Gas
large cities
As, Cd, Cu, Pb, Hg,
POM, Se, Zn
As , Ba , Be , B , Cr ,
Cu, Fluorides, Pb,
Mn, Hg, Ni, POM,
Se, Sn, V, Zn
Cu, Zn, POM, Se, As,
Fluorides, Sb
As, Pb, POM
As, Cd, Fluorides, Pb,
POM, Se
As, Cu, Pb, POM, Se,
Sn, Zn
B
Ba
Cl
As , Ba , Be , B , Cr ,
Cu, Fluorides, Pb,
Mn, Hg, Ni, POM,
Se, Sn, V, Zn
As, Cd, Cu, Fluorides,
Pb, POM, Se
Ni, V, Zn
Pb, POM
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
B. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING ASBESTOS, BERYLLIUM OR MERCURY
(1)
OPERATION
Organic Chemicals
Cyclone Coal Burners,
PP
Basic Oxygen Furnace
Cyclone Coal
Burners, 1C
Paint Consumption
Residential/
Commercial Coal
Brake Lining
Production
Beryllium Alloys
and Chemicals
Shingles,
Sidings, Manufacture
Primary Mercury
Lab Use, Mercury
Asbestos Mat,
Installation
Secondary Mercury
Asbestos Textiles
INDUSTRY NO. OF ADJACENT
LOCATIONS POPULATION
(MILLION)
Chlorine MFC 39
Power Plants 8
Iron & Steel 54
Industrial 17,800
Fuel
Paint
Consumption
Residential 92,000
Fuel
Asbestos 30 20.1
Products
Be Alloys 2 .031
& Chemicals
Asbestos Products
Primary Hg 24
Lab Use, Hg
Asbestos Mat,
Installation
Secondary
Mercury
Asbestos Products
POLLUTANT CHARACTERISTICS
PHYSICAL CHEMICAL
Pp, Gas Cl, Hg, POM
P,P_ As, Ba, Be, B, Cr, Cu,
Fl, Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni,
POM, Se, Sn, V, Zn
P,P Ba, Fluorides, Mn, Hg,
POM, V. Zn
P.P As, Ba, Be, B, Cr, Cu,
Fluoride, Pb , Mn, Hg,
Ni, POM, Se, Sn, V, Zn
Gas Hg, POM
P,P_, Gas As, Ba, Be, B, Cr, Cu,
Fluoride, Pb, Mn, Hg,
Ni, POM, Se, Sn, V, Zn
P Asbestos, Cr
P,P Be, POM
P Asbestos, Cr
Gas Hg
Gas Hg
p Asbestos, Cr
PF, Gas Hg, POM
P Asbestos, Cr
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
-------
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF SOURCE LOCATIONS AND GENERAL EMISSION CHARACTERISTICS
B. OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTING ASBESTOS, BERYLLIUM OR MERCURY
(Continued)
OPERATION
Paint, Varnish,
etc. , MFC
Insulating Cement,
Installation
Recovery Furnace
Fire Proofing
Installation
Beryllium Fabrication
Instrument Manufacture
Electrical Apparatus
Dental Preparations,
INDUSTRY NO. OF ADJACENT POLLUTANT CHARACTERISTICS
LOCATIONS POPULATION PHYSICAL CHEMICAL
(MILLION)
Paint, MFC
Insulating
Cement
Kraft Pulp 35
Milling
Fire Proofing
Be Fabrication
Instrument MFC
Electrical AP
Dental Prep
P,PF,Gas
P
P,PF,Gas
P
P
Gas
Gas
Gas
Ba, Hg, POM, Se, Zn
Asbestos, Cr
Asbestos, Cr, Hg, P01
Asbes tos , Cr
Be
Hg
Hg
Hg
Cons
Pharmaceuticals Use
Pharmaceuticals
Gas
Hg
-------
TABLE It
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(1)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Open Hearth Furnace
No Oxygen Lance
(composite run)
Open Hearth Furnace
Oxygen Lance
(Lime Boil)
Open Hearth Furnace
Oxygen Lance
(composite run)
INDUSTRY
Iron and Steel
Iron and Steel
Iron and Steel
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Typical Electrostatic
Precipitator
Uncontrolled
Typical Electrostatic
Precipitator
Uncontrolled
Typical Electrostatic
Precipitator
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
64. 7% <5u
6.79% 5-10u
11.92 10-ZOu
8.96% 20-44 w
7.65% >44U
58% <5p
34% 5-lOp
2% 10-20p
1% 20-44 u
5% >44u
45% <2u
30% 2-5u
17% 5-10u
8% >10u
72% <2u
18% 2-5vi
6% 5-10v
4% >!Cu
20% <2V
25% 2-5p
24% 5-10u
31% >10u
55% <2p
26% 2-5v
16% 5-10(j
3% >10u
REFERENCES
999-AP-40 A. P. Engineering Manual
Table 67 (Electron Microscope)
Allen et al, 1952: BuMines Inf. Circular 7627
MRI Volume II Figure 8
also
Englebrecht: Proceedings 28th American Power
Conference, April 1966
MRI Handbook - Table 9-3 (Electron Microscope)
Lownie, H. W. and J. Varga, "A System Analysis
Study of the Integrated Iron and Steel
Industry," Battelle, Contract No. PM-22-68-65,
May 1969
McCrone, U. C. et al: "The Particle Atlas"
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1967
MRI Volume II Figure 8
also
Englebrecht: op. cit.
MRI Handbook - Table 9-3 (Electron Microscope)
Lownie, H. W. : op. cit.
McCtone, W.C.: op. cit.
MRI Volume II Figure 8
also
Englebrecht: op. cit.
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Concinued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Pulverized Coal Boiler
Oil Burners
Metallurgical Coke
INDUSTRY
Power Plane
Residential/Commercial
Iran and Steel
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Cyclone - 6 in. dia.
High Efficiency
Cyclone - 6 in. dia.
High Efficiency
Followed By
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Uncontrolled
Uncontrolled
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
15% <3P
10% 3-5 V
17% 5-lOw
23% 10-20 U
16% 20-40 u
19% >40V
38% <3u
14% 3-5 p
15% 5-10w
7% 10-20p
2% 20-40|i
24% >40(i
61% <3u
20% 3-5 u
13% 5-10 u
5% 10-20 u
1% 20-40 u
Neg >40 u
83% <3u
11% 3-5 u
5% 5-10 u
1% 10-20 v
Neg 20-40 u
Neg >40u
Est 90% 47M
REFERENCES
MRI Handbook BAH CO Analysis
MRI Volume II
Figure 3
also
Engelbrecht, Heinz L.: Proceedings 28th
American Power Conference, April 1966
MRI Volume II
Figure 13
also
Burdock: Proceedings 62nd APCA Meeting,
June 1969
Same as above for cyclone and ESP
Reference: MITRE Estimate Based On
Industrial and Power Plant Oil Burners
Reference: MRI Handbook: Private Communi-
cations with Several Steel Companies
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Roasters
Incineration
INDUSTRY
Primary Copper
Primary Zinc
Municipal
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Spray Tower
Plus Wet ESP
Uncontrolled
Cyclone Plus Wet
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Uncontrolled
Medium Energy
Wet Scrubber
Dry Expansion Chamber
Wet Bottom Expansion
Chamber
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
152 <10u
852 >10u
54% <10p
462 >10p
52 <5y
262 5-10u
392 10-12u
30Z >20y
37Z <5p
632 5-10g
Neg 10-20y
Neg >20p
172 <2p
122 2-10w
72 10-20 v
42 20-30 v
602 >30p
722 <2p
282 2-10g
Neg 10-20U
Neg 20-30 p
Neg >30g
Unknown
Unknown
REFERENCES
MRI Handbook
Stairmand, C. J.: Journal of the Institute
of Fuel, 58-81, Feb. 1956
Watkins and Darby: The Application of
Electrostatic Precipitation to the Control
of Fume in the Steel Industry. Scrap Iron
and Steel Institute pp. 24-37
MRI Handbook: BAHCO Analysis
MRI: op. cit.
Burdock: op. cit.
Englebrecht: op. cit.
MRI Handbook: BAHCO Analysis
Kalika, P. W. : How Water Recirculation and
Steam Plumes Influence Scrubber Design.
Chem. En^. , 133-138 July 1969
A. P. Engineering Manual: "Simple Settling
Chambers Collect Particles 40 u or Greater"
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Incineration (continued)
Sintering
INDUSTRY
Municipal (continued)
Domestic
Iron and Steel
CONTROL DEVICE
Spray Chamber
Wetted Wall Chamber
Wetted Wall
Close Spaced
Baffles
Dry Cyclone
Uncontrolled
Peabody Scrubber
Uncontrolled
Fabric Filter
Dry Cyclone
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
622 <2p
22Z 2-lOu
3Z 10-20P
2Z 20-30U
HZ >30P
Unknown
Unknown
52Z <2V
29% 2-10W
8Z 10-20p
22 20-30P
9* >30u
Unknown
Unknown
IX <2p
« 2-10u
1SZ 10-30V
5Z 30-50v
75Z >50p
432 <2u
57Z 2-10P
OZ 10 v
9Z <2u
28Z 2-10 P
46% 10-30W
3Z 30-SOv
14Z >50p
REFERENCES
Stairmand: op. cit.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cic.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
MXI: op. cit.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
Southern Research Institute: The Applica-
tion of Electrostatic Precipltators in
the Iron and Steel Industry. Final Report
NAPCA Contract CPA-22-69-73, June 1970.
(Size Analysis: BAHCO Plus Seive)
Sommerlad, R. S. : Fabric Filtration State
of the Art. Foster Wheeler Corp.
March 1967.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
-------
TABLE It
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVIChS AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Sintering (continued)
Ore Mining and Handling
INDUSTRY
Iron and Steel (continued)
Primary Zinc
Primary Lead
Asbestos
CONTROL DEVICE
Dry Cyclone Plus ESP
Uncontrolled
Fabric Filter Plus
Wet ESP
ESP Plus Wet ESP
Scrubber Plus Wet
Wet ESP
Uncontrolled
Cyclone Plus
Fabric Filter
Cyclone Plus ESP
Uncontrolled
Cyclone Plus Baghouse
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
13% <2V
17% 2-10M
27% 10-30vj
3% 30-50u
40% >50p
100% <10p
100% <10u
100% <10u
100% <10u
15% <10u
85% >10y
100% <10u
0% >10u
81% <10u
19% >10u
100% <40p
Est. 1UUZ
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESS
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Asphalt Blowing
Natural Gas Combustion
Pellet Plants
INDUSTRY
Roofing Material
Industrial
Iron Ore
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Wet Scrubber and
Afterburner
Uncontrolled
Uncontrolled
Fabric Filter
Dry Cyclone
Dry Cyclone Plus ESP
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
Z WEIGHT
18% <5p
22% 5-10p
28% 10-20p
17* 20-50 p
15Z >50p
92Z <5p
5% 5-10p
3% 10-20u
Neg 20-50 u
Neg >50p
100% <5y
1% <2g
4% 2-10p
15% 10-30 p
5% 30-50p
75Z >50p
43% <2p
57% 2-10p
0% >10p
9% <2p
28% 2-10p
46% 10-30p
3Z 30-50p
14% >50p
13% <2y
17Z 2-10p
27Z 10-30u
3% 30-50y
40% >50p
REFERENCES
A. P. Engineering Manual
(Size Analysis: Unspecified)
Schell, T. W. : Cyclone/Scrubber System
Quickly Eliminates Dust Problem. Rock
Products 66-68, July 1968
MRI Handbook (Size Analysis: MRI Estimate)
TRW: Engineering and Cost Effectiveness
Study of Fluoride Emissions Control.
Jan. 1972
Southern Research Institute: op. cit.
(Size Analysis: BAHCO plus SEIVE)
Sommerlad, R. s.: op. cit.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
Watkins and Darby: op. cit.
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Bleaching
Oil Burners
Blase Furnace
INDUSTRY
Pulp and Paper
Power Planes
Industrial
Primary Iron and Sceel
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Alkali Scrubber
Uncontrolled
Uncontrolled
Uncontrolled
* MRI reports particle
Settling Chamber
High Efficiency
Cyclone
ESP
Cyclone Plus ESP
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
All Gas
All Gas
90% lu
90% lu
50%* <74W
50%* >74U
size highly variable
Efficiencies are
highly variable
depending on cham-
ber parameters.
Limit on collec-
tion size is
usually 40u or
greater.
802 <74V
202 >74u
9% 74u
29% <74U
71% >74P
REFERENCE
E.P.A.: Draft, Control Techniques for
Chlorine and Hydrogen Chloride Emissions.
March 1971
MRI Handbook: (Size Analysis: Unknown)
MRI Handbook: (Size Analysis: Unknown)
MRI Handbook: (Size Technique. Unknown)
A. P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
Turner, B. : Grit Emissions Bay Area AFCD
Library Accession 9775
Watkins and Darby: op. cit.
Turner, B.: op. cit.
Watkins and Darby: op. cit.
-------
TABLE U
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESS
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Blast Furnace (continued)
INDUSTRY
Primary Lead
Secondary Lead
Secondary Copper
Ferroalloys
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
High Efficiency
Cyclone
High Efficiency
ESP
Fabric Filter
Uncontrolled
High Efficiency
ESP
Fabric Filter
High Efficiency ESP
Plus Fabric Filter
Uncontrolled
Fabric Filter
Uncontrolled
Medium Energy Wet
Scrubber
Typical Electrostatic
Precifitator
High Efficiency
Cyclone
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
Z WEIGHT
100Z <.3y
„,- Penetra-
tion at <.3p
7Z
jj.
100Z <.4p
._ Penetra-
tion at <.4u
5Z
.25Z
100Z <.Su
_ Penetra-
tion at <.5v
80Z
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Blast Furnace (continued)
Stoker Coal Boiler
Gas Burners
Pulverized Coal Boiler
INDUSTRY
Ferroalloys (continued)
Non-Ferrous Alloys
Industrial or Power
Plant
Residential, Commercial
or Industrial
Industrial
PARTICLE SIZE
CONTROL DEVICE DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
Fabric Filter
Uncontrolled
High Efficiency ESP
Fabric Filter
High Efficiency
Cyclone
Uncontrolled
Cyclone - 6 in.
High Efficiency
Typical Electro-
static
Precipitator
Uncontrolled
High Efficiency ESP
Same as Pou
99% <1^
1% l-20u
100Z <.3n
,, Penetra- ,
™ tion at *•**
5%
96%
9% <10u
10% 10-20 h
17% 20-44 n
54% >44n
68% < 10 u.
.6% 10-20 n
19% 20-44 K
7% >44n
2% < 10 u.
neg. 10-20 u.
3% 20-44 ji
95% > 44 u
100% < 5 H
Avg.5% Penetration
in 0-Su. Range
er Plant Data
REFERENCES
MRI Volume II
A P. Engineering Manual: op. cit.
Allen, C. L., et al.: op. cit. (Size
Analysis: Electron Microscope)
MRI "olume II - Figure 17
MRI Handbook: op. cit. (average of
spreader stoker & underfed stoker)
Burdock: op. cit.
Englebrecht: op. cit
MRI Handbook: op. cit.
MRI Volume II - Figure 17
MRI Handbook: op. cit.
-------
TABLE 4
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED PROCESSES
WITHOUT CONTROL DEVICES AND WITH TYPICAL CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Cyclone Coal Boiler
INDUSTRY
Industrial
or
Power Plant
CONTROL DEVICE
Uncontrolled
Cyclone 6 in.dia.
High Efficiency
Typical Electro-
static
Frecipitator
PARTICLE SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
% WEIGHT
40% < 5 u
25% 5-10 K
16% 10-20 n
11% 20-40 p.
8% >40(i
83% <5H
14% 5-10 V
2% 10-20 V
1% 20-40 pi
neg. > 40 u
67% <5u
19% 5-10 ji
5% 10-20 u
1% 20-40 u
8% > 40 ji
REFERENCES
MRI Handbook: op. cit.
(BAMCO Analysis)
Burdock op. cit.
Englebrecht, op. cit.
-------
TABLE 5
EMISSIONS OF PARTICIPATES AND FINE PARTICULATES AFTER 100Z APPLICATION OF BEST CONTROL DEVICE
(1)
PROCESS
Open Burning
Open Hearth Furnace
No Oxygen Lance
(composite run)
Oxygen Lance
(composite run)
Pulverized Coal Boiler
Oil Burners
Metallurgical Coke
Chlorine Liquefaction
Roasting
Incineration
INDUSTRY
Agricultural
Forest Fires
Refuse Open Burning
Conical Burners
Coal Refuse
Iron & Steel
Iron & Steel
Power Plant
Residential/
Commercial
Iron & Steel
Chlorine &
Alkalis
Primary Copper
Primary Zinc
Municipal
Domestic
BEST DEVICE
IN USE
None
None
None
None
None
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Cyclone olus ESP
None
None
Return Vents &
Alkali Scrubber
Settling, Water
Spray plus ESP
Waste Heat Boiler
plus Cyclone plus
ESP
Medium Energy
Wet Scrubber
Peabody Scrubber
Z BY WEIGHT
FINE PARTICULATE
FOR BEST DEVICE
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
58Z < 5/J
55Z <2^
83Z <3fj
Unknown
4Z
-------
TABLE 5
HUSSIONS OF PARTICULATES AND FINE PARTICULATES AFTER 100% APPLICATION OF BEST CONTROL DEVICE
(Continued)
PROCESS
Sintering
Ore Mining &
Handling
Asphalt Blowing
Natural Gas Combustion
Pellet Plants
Bleaching
Oil Burners
Oil Burners
Blast Furnace
INDUSTRY
Iron & Steel
Primary Zinc
Primary Lead
Asbestos
Mica (Beryllium)
Borax
Manganese
Copper, Zinc, Lead
Barium, Nickel,
Mercury , Vanadium
Roofing Material
Industrial
Iron Ore
Pulp & Paper
Power Plants
Industrial
Iron & Steel
BEST DEVICE
IN USE
Baghouse
Baghouse plus
Wet ESP
Cyclone plus
Baghouse
Cyclone Plus
Baghouse
Cyclone Plus
Baghouse
Baghouse
Baghouse
Baghouse
Scrubber &
Afterburner
None
Baghouse
Alkali Scrubber
None (Except Soot
Blow)
None (Except Soot
Blow)
Cyclone Plus ESP
% BY WEIGHT
FINE PARTICULATF
FOR BEST DEVICE
43% <20
100%
-------
TABLE 5
EMISSIONS OF PARTICULATES AND FINE PARTICULATES AFTER 100% APPLICATION OF BEST CONTROL DEVICE
(Continued)
PROCESS
Blast Furnace
(cont'd)
Stoker Coal Boiler
Gas Burners
Gas Burners
Stoker Coal Boiler
Pulverized Coal
Burner
:y clone Coal Boiler
lyclone Coal Boiler
:oal Boilers
INDUSTRY
Primary Lead
Secondary Lead
Secondary Copper
Ferroalloys
Non- Ferroalloys
Industrial
Residential
Commercial
Power Plane
Power Plant
Industrial
Industrial
Power Plant
Residential
Commercial
BEST DEVICE
IN USE
Cyclone Plus
Baghouse
High Eff ESP
Plus Baghouse
Baghouse
High Eff ESP
High Eff ESP or
Baghouse
High Eff. ESP
None
None
None
High Eff. ESP
High Eff. ESP
High Eff. ESP
High Eff. ESP
None
None
% BY WEIGHT
FINE P ARTICULATE
FOR BEST DEVICE
100% < . 3fJ
100% <.t<(t
100% <.5fl
80%
Unknown
Unknown
%
APPLICATION
OF CONTROL
98%*
100%*
75%
100%*
50%
62% *
0%
0%
0%
872 *
95% *
91% *
71% *
0%
0%
PRESENT
EMISSIONS
TONS
277
1,500
126
4,104
130
13,237
10,065
6,151
5,994
3,783
1,891
1,776
657
EMISSIONS WITH
100% USE OF BEST
CONTROL AVAILABLE
TONS
198
98
22
Unknown
6
1213
503 *»
308 **
1119
1282
501
218
Unknown
Unknown
FINE PARTICIPATE
EMISSIONS WITH 100%
BEST CONTROL - TONS
198
98
22
Unknown
6
24 < 10 u
503 < 5U
308 < 5 H
22 < 10^
1064 < 3u
416 < 5jx
181 < 5(i
Unknown
Unknown
* Best Control Device Not Universally Used.
** Applying High Efficiency ESP as Best Device.
-------
TABLE 6
CHARACTERIZATION OF GASEOUS AND PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR
SPECIFICATION OF CONTROL TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS
A. Physical-chemical properties of effluent.
Bulk Gas
Flow quantity and rate
Temperature
Pressure
Chemical composition and concentrations
Humidity
Variability in flows or system properties
Particulates
Total mass loading
Chemical composition
Mass loading
Size profile (specify measuring technique)
Triboelectric and electrostatic properties
Wettability
Abrasiveness
Density
Stickiness - caking or agglomerative tendencies
Corrosiveness
Hygroscopicity
Reactivity (wet or dry)
Toxicity
Optical properties
B. Properties of the Process Source.
Configuration
Effluent flow design characteristics
Variations in process capacity (frequency & rate of change)
Space available in vicinity of source
Special operating or safety considerations
Reliability & maintainability (MTBF, MTBM)
Source location - geography, topography, demography
77
-------
TABLE 6
CHARACTERIZATION OF GASEOUS AND PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR
SPECIFICATION OF CONTROL TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS
(Continued)
Economics
Product cost
Costs of existing control technology
Contribution of source to be controlled to final product cost
Impact of source on local economy
Waste disposal problems
78
-------
TABLE 7
USUAL AIR CLEANER SELECTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
Operation
Ceramics
Raw product handling
Fettling
Refractory sizing
Glaze and vitreous enamel spray
Chemicals
Material handling
Crushing, grinding
Pneumatic conveying
Roasters, kilns, coolers
Coal Mining and Power Plant
Material handling
Bunker ventilation
Dedusting, air cleaning
Drying
Fly Ash
Coal-burning:
Chain grate
Stoker fired
Pulverized fuel
Wood-burning
Foundry
Shake out
Sand handling
Tumbling mills
Abrasive cleaning
Cyclones
Rare
Rare
Seldom
pray No
Occasional
Often
Usual
Occasional
Rare
Occasional
Frequent
Rare
No
Rare
Rare
Occasional
Rare
Rare
Nu
No
Collector
High-
Efficiency
Cyclones
Seldom
Occasional
Occasional
No
Frequent
Frequent
Occasional
Usual
Occasional
Frequent
Frequent
Occasional
Rare
Usual
Frequent
Occasional
Rare
Rare
No
Occasional
Types Used
Wet
Collectors
Frequent
Frequent
Frequent
Usual
Frequent
Frequent
Rare
Usual
Frequent
Occasional
Occasional
Frequent
No
No
No
No
Usual
Usual
Frequent
Frequent
in Industry
Fabric
Filter
Frequent
Frequent
Frequent
Occasional
Frequent
Frequent
Usual
Rare
Frequent
Frequent
Often
No
No
No
No
No
Rare
Rare
Frequent
Frequent
High-
Voltage
Electrostatic
Precipitators
No
No
No
No
Rare
No
No
Often
No
No
No
No
No
Rare
Frequent
No
No
No
No
No
-------
TABLE 7
USUAL AIR CLEANER SELECTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
(Continued)
Operation
Collector Types Used in Industry
Cyclones
High
Efficiency
Cyclones
Wet
Collectors
Fabric
Filter
High
Voltage
Electrostatic
Precipitators
oo
o
Grain Elevator, Flour and
Feed Mills
Grain handling Usual Occasional
Grain dryers No No
Flour dust Usual Often
Feed mill Usual Often
Metal Melting
Steel blast furnace Frequent Rare
Steel open hearth No No
Steel electric furnace No No
Ferrous cupola Rare Rare
Nonferrous reverberatory No No
Nonferrous crucible No No
Metal Mining and Rock Products
Material handling Rare Occasional
Dryers, kilns Frequent Frequent
Cement rock dryer Rare Frequent
Cement kiln Rare Frequent
Cement grinding Rare Rare
Cement clinker cooler Occasional Occasional
Metal Working
Production grinding, scratch
brushing, abrasive cutoff Frequent Frequent
Portable and swing frame Frequent Rare
Buffing Frequent Rare
Toolroom Frequent Frequent
Cast iron machining Rare Frequent
Rare Frequent No
No No No
Occasional Frequent No
Occasional Frequent No
Frequent No Frequent
Doubtful Possible Probable
Considerable Frequent Rare
Frequent Occasional Occasional
Rare -
Rare Occasional -
Usual Considerable -
Frequent Rare Occasional
Occasional Frequent Occasional
Rare Considerable Considerable
No Frequent Rare
Considerable Considerable No
Frequent Rare No
Frequent Rare No
Frequent Frequent No
Considerable Considerable No
-------
TABLE 7
USUAL AIR CLEANER SELECTIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
(Continued)
Collector Types Used in Industry
Operation
Cyclones
High
Efficiency
Cyclones
Wet Fabric
Collectors Filter
High
Voltage
Electrostatic
Precipitators
Pharmaceutical and Food Products
Mixers, grinders, weighing,
blending, bagging,
packaging Rare Frequent
Coating pans Rare Rare
Frequent
Frequent
Frequent
Frequent
Plastics
Raw material processing
Plastic finishing Frequent
Rubber Products
Mixers No No
Batchout rolls No No
Talc dusting and dedusting No No
Grinding Often Often
Frequent
Usual
Frequent
Frequent
Usual
Frequent
Usual
Often
No
(See comments under chemicals)
Frequent Frequent Frequent No
No
No
No
No
-------
TABLE 8-A
TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION OF WET SCRUBBERS
oo
IS]
Scrubber Type
Spray Chambers
Spray Tower
Centrifugal
Impingement Plate
Venturi
Venturi Throat
Flooded Disk
Multiple Jet
Venturi Jet
Vertical Ventury
Packed Bed
Fixed
Flooded
Typical Application
Dust Cleaning, Electroplating, Phosphate
Fertilizer, Kraft Paper, Smoke Abatement
Precooler, Blast Furnace Gas
Spray Driers, Calciners, Crushers,
Classifiers, Fluid Bed Processes,
Kraft Paper, Fly Ash
Cupolas, Driers, Kilns, Fertilizer,
Flue Gas
Pulverized Coal, Abrasives, Rotary Kilns,
Foundries, Flue Gas, Fertilizers, Lime
Kilns, Roasting, Titanium Dioxide Pro-
cessing, Odor Control, Oxygen Steel Making,
Coke Oven Gas, Fly Ash
Fertilizer Manufacture, Odor Control, Smoke
Control
Pulverized Coal, Abrasive Manufacture
Fertilizer Manufacturing, Plating, Acid
Pickling
Acid Vapors, Aluminum Inoculation, Foundries,
Asphalt Plants, Atomic Wastes, Carbon Black,
Ceramic Frit, Chlorine Tail Gas, Pigment
Manufacture, Cupola Gas, Driers, Ferrite,
Fertilizer
Usual Range of Normal Draft Maximum
Particle Sizes, Loss Efficiency
K Inc. Water %
>10.0
> 2.5
->0.5
>0.5
>10.0
> 2.5
3/4-2
2-6
6-80
6-70
1-6
2-8
85
95
99+
99+
85
95
Fluid (Floating)
Ball
Kraft Paper, Basic Oxygen Steel, Fertilizer,
Aluminum Ore Reduction, Aluminum Foundries,
Fly Ash, Asphalt Manufacturing
-------
TABLE 8-A
Scrubber Type
TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION OF WET SCRUBBERS
(Continued)
Typical Application
Usual Range of
Particle Sizes,
Normal Draft
Loss
Inc. Water
Maximum
Efficiency
Z
Self-Induced Spray
Mechanically-Induced
Spray
Disintegrator
Centrifugal Inline
Fan
Wetted Filters
Dust, Mist Elimina-
tors, Fiber
Filters
Wire Mesh
Baffles
Packed Beds
Coal Mining, Ore Mining, Explosive Dusts,
Air Conditioning, Incinerators
Iron Foundry, Cupolas, Smoke, Chemical
Fume Control, Paint Spray
Blast Furnace Gas
Metal Mining, Coal Processing, Foundry,
Food, Pharmaceuticals
Electroplating, Acid Pickling, Air
Conditioning, Light Dust
Sulfuric, Phosphoric, and Nitric Acid Mists;
Moisture Separators; Household Ventilation;
Radioactive and Toxic Dusts, Oil Mists
Sulfuric, Phosphoric, and Nitric Acid Mists;
Distillation and Absorption
Coke Quenching, Kraft Paper Manufacture, Plating
Sulfuric and Phosphoric Acid Manufacture,
Electroplating Spray Towers
-------
TABLE 8-B
APPLICATIONS OF CENTRIFUGAL COLLECTORS
Operation or Process
Crushing, Pulverizing, Mixing,
Screening
Alfalfa Feed Mill
Barley Feed Mill
Wheat Air Cleaner
Grain Elevators
Drying, Baking
Catalyst Regenerator (Petroleum)
Detergent Powder Spray Drier
Orange Pulp Feed Drier
Sand Drying Kiln
Stone Drying Kiln
Mixing Fluids
Asphalt Mixing
Bituminous Concrete Mixing
Polishing, Buffing, Grinding,
Chipping
Grinding (Aluminum)
Grinding (Iron
Grinding (Machine Shop)
Surface Coating
Rubber Dusting
Surface Treatment - Physical
Abrasive Cleaning
Abrasive Stick Trimming and
Shaping
Casting Cleaning with Metal
Shot, Sandblasting and Tumbling
Foundry Tumbling
Truing and Shaping Abrasive
Products
Air Contaminant
Alfalfa Dust
Barley Flour Dust
Chaff
Grain Dust
Catalyst Dust
Detergent Powder
Pulp Dust
Silica Dust
Silica Dust
Sand and Gravel Dust
Sand and Stone Dust
Aluminum Dust
Iron Scale and
Dust
Sand
Fluffy Zinc Stearate
Talc Dust
Silicon Carbide and
Alumina Dust
Metallic and Silica
Dust
Dust
Silicon Carbide and
Alumina Dust
Type of Air
Cleaning
Equipment
Collector Efficiency,
Wt. %
Cyclone, Settling 85
Chamber
Cyclone 85
Cyclone 85
Cyclone 85
Cyclone, ESP 95
Cyclone 85
Cyclone 85
Cyclone 78
Cyclone 86
Cyclone 50-86
Cyclone, Scrubber 95
Cyclone 89
Cyclone 56
Impeller Collector 91
Impeller Collector 78-88
Cyclone 93
2 Parallel Cyclones 51
Impeller Collector 97-99+
Impeller Collector 99
Cyclone 58
-------
TABLE 8-B
APPLICATIONS OF CENTRIFUGAL COLLECTORS
(Continued)
Type of Air
Cleaning Collector Efficiency,
Operation or Process Air Contaminant Equipment Wt. %
Woodworking, Including Plastics
Rubber, Faperboard
Mill Planing Wood Dust and Chips Cyclone 97
00
Ln
-------
TABLE 9
Control Device
Wet Scrubber
a. Cyclonic Spray
Scrubber
(Pease-Anthony
Type)
Source
USAGE AND EFFICIENCY OF AVAILABLE CONTROL DEVICES
Type of Pollutant
Particle Size
Range M
Boiler flue gas
Blast furnace (Iron)
Lime kiln (Kraft mud)
Lime kiln (raw stone)
Reverbatory lead furnace
Rotary dryer
Fly ash (pulverized coal) >2.5
Iron ore coke 0.5-20
Lime 1-25
Lime
Lead compounds
Ammonium nitrate
Superphosphate den and mixer
b. Venturi Scrubber Iron and Steel Industry
Gray iron cupola
Oxygen steel converter
Steel open hearth furnace (scrap)
Steel open hearth furnace
(oxygen lanced)
Blast furnace (iron
Electric furnace
Electric furnace
Rotary kiln-iron reduction
Crushing and Screening
Chemical Industry
Acid-humidifled SO.
(a) Scrub with water
(b) Scrub with 40% acid
Acid concentrator
Copperas roasting kiln
Chlorosulfonic acid plant
Phosphoric acid plant
Titanium chloride plant,
titanium dioxide dryer
Fluorine compounds
Iron, coke, silica dust
Iron oxide
Iron and zinc oxide
Iron oxide
Iron ore and coke dusc
Ferro-manganese fume
Ferro silicon dust
Iron, carbon
Taconite iron ore dust
Sulphuric acid mist
Sulphuric acid mist
Sulphuric acid mist
Sulphuric acid mist
Orthophosphoric acid mist
Titanium dioxide, hydrogen
chloride fumes
2-40
large, unstable
agglomerates
Mist
0.1-10
0.5-2
0.08-1.00
0.02-0.50
0.5-20
0.1-1
0.1-1
0.5-50
0.5-100
Dust Loading
(grains/ft )
Inlet
Outlet
Efficiency %
Total Mass
0.49-2.58 0.02-0.046 88-98.8
3-24 0.03-0.08 99
0.5-1
7.7
9.2
0.5-2
...
0.14
1-2
8-10
0.5-1.5
1.0-6.0
3-24
10-12
1-5
3-10
5-25
0.13
0.176
0.058
0.087
0.325
0.084
1-5
0.25
0.08
0.023-0.04
...
0.003
0.05-0.15
0.05-0.08
0.03-0.06
0.01-0.07
0.008-0.05
0.04-0.08
0.1-0.3
0.1-0.3
0.005-0.01
0.0007
0.0012
0.0014
0.0009
0.0034
0.0016
0.05-0.1
97
99
95-98
99+
97.8
95
98.5
95
99
99
99
92
99
99.9
99.4
99.3
97.5
99
98.9
98
95
-------
TABLE 9
USAGE AND EFFICIENCY OF AVAILABLE CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
Control Device
(b) Venturi Scrubber
(concluded)
Source
Spray dryers
Flash dryer
Non-Ferrous Metals Industry
Blast furnace (sec. lead)
Reverberatory lead furnace
Ajax furnace - magnesium alloy
Zinc sintering
Reverberatory brass furnace
Mineral Products Industry
Lime kiln
Lime kiln
Asphalt stone dryer
Cement kiln
Petroleum Industry
Catalytic reformer
Acid concentrator
TCC catalyst regenerator
Fertilizer Industry
Fertilizer dryer
Superphosphate den and mixer
Pulp Hills
Lime kiln
Recovery furnace
Type of Pollutant
Detergents, fume and odor
Furfural dust
Lead compounds
Lead and tin compounds
Aluminum chloride
Zinc and lead oxide dusts
Zinc oxide fume
Lime dust
Soda fume
Limestone and rock dust
Cement dust
Catalyst dust
Sulphuric acid mist
Oil fumes
Ammonium chloride fumes
Fluorine compounds
Lime dust, soda fume
Salt cake
Particle Size
Range n
0.1-1
0.1-1
0.1-0.8
0.1-0.9
0.1-1
0.05-0.5
1-50
0.3-1
1-50
0.5-55
0.5-50
0.05-1
0.1-50
Dust Loading
(grains/ft3) Effic
Inlet
-
1-1.5
2-6
1-2
3-5
1-5
1-8
5-10
0.2-5
5-15
1-2
0.09
0.059
0.330
0.1-0.5
0.134
2-10
4-6
Outlet Total
-
0.05-0.08
0.05-0.15
0.12
0.02-0.05
0.05-0.1
0.1-0.5
0.05-0.15
0.01-0.05
0.05-0.15
0.05-0.1
0.005
0.0014
0.0035
0.05
0.0024
0.01-0.15
0.4-0.6
iency
Mass
95
95
99
91
95
98
95
99
99
98
97
95
97.5
98
85
98
99
90
-------
Control Device
c. Impingement
Baffle
Scrubber
Electrostatic
Precipitator
oo
o>
TABLE 9
USAGE AND EFFICIENCY OF AVAILABLE CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
Source
Rotary lime kiln gas, paper plant
Gas from Pyrite roaster
Gas from blast furnace:
Basic iron
Silvery iron
Tail gas in carbon black plant
Boiler flue gas
Electric utility power plants
Iron and Steel
Sinter Plant
Blast Furnace
EOF
Electric Arc
Cement
Kilns
(wet)
(dry)
Incinerator
(German Data
Petroleum
Catalyst Regen.
Forest Products
Kraft-Recovery Furnace
Lime Manufacturing
Kiln
Iron Foundry Cupola
H2SO^Manufacture
Contact Process
Type of Pollutant
Fly ash
Sinter dust
Iron ore and coke dust
Metal oxides
Metal oxides
Ca and Si oxides
Ca and Si oxides
Ca and Si oxides
Varied
Oxides of alumina
Sodium sulfate and
carbonate
0.1-40
10 (mean)
0.1-5.0
90% <0.5
50%<8
17%< 2
<1-30
50% < 2
Dust Loading
Particle Size
Range u
(grains/ft )
Inlet
15
30
5
5
1
5
Outlet
0.30
0.03
0.05
0.08
0.05
0.03
Efficiency %
Total Mass
98
99
99
80
95
94
CaCO-, CaO 50%< 20
Metal oxides and coke dust <1 - 100
H_SO,mist
2 4
30%< 2
1-6
3-8
2-23
1/2-10
0.02-0.8
0.02-0.1
0.1-3.0 0.05-0.01
0.05-0.7 0.005-0.08
2-10
0.1-3
0.06-0.09
95-99
95-98
94-98
99.2-99.7
92-97%
1-70 0.03-0.73 93.0-99.8
14 0.02 99.86
17 0.05 99.6
2-9 0.005-0.03 98.6-99.9
0.02-1.0 97-99%
85-97
95%
95-99.7%
99.9
Thermal Process
H.PO.mist
3 4
50% < 2
7-4,000
0.08-10
96-99.9+
-------
TABLE 10
ESTIMATED ANNUAL BENZO(A)PYRENE ( BAP ) EMISSIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES
(Continued)
Source
Estimated BaP
Emission
Rate
Estimated Annual
Consumption
or Production
Estimated Annual
BaP Emission
(tons)
Industries
Petroleum catalytic
Cracking (catalyst regeneration)
FCCa
(i) no Co boiler
(ii) with CO boiler
HCCC
(i) no CO boiler
(ill with CO boiler
TCCa (air lift)
(i) no CO boiler
(ii) with CO boiler
CC (bucket lift)
(i) no CO boiler
(ii) with CO boiler
Asphalt road mix
Asphalt air blowing
Carbon-black manufacturing
Steel & Coke manufacturing
Chemical complex
(ug/bl)
(106 bl)
240
14
218,000
45
(ug/bl)
90,000
<45
<31
50 pg/ton
< 10.000 PR/ ton
790
790
23.3
43.3
(106 bl)
131
59
119
0
187,000 tons
4,400 tons
0.21
0.012
5.6
0.0024
13.0
< 0.0029
0.0041
0
0.000010
< 0.000048
Atmospheric samples indicate that BaP Emissions
from these processes are not
extremely high
Total
18.8
-------
TABLE 10
ESTIMATED ANNUAL BENZO(A)PYRENE ( BAP ) EMISSIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES
Source
Heat generation
Coal
Residential
(i) hand-stoked
(ii) underfeed
Commercial
Industrial
Electric generation
Oil
Gas
Total
Refuse burning
Incineration
Municipal
Commercial
Open burning
Municipal refuse
Grass, leaves
Auto components
Total
Estimated BaP
Emission
Rate
(ug/106 Btu)
1,400,000
44,000
5,000
2,700
90
200
100
(ug/ton)
5,300
310,000
310,000
310,000
26,000,000
Estimated Annual
Consumption
or Production
(1015 Btu)
0.26
0.20
0.51
1.95
6.19
6.79
10.57
(106 tons)
18
14
14
14
0.20
Estimated Annual
BaP Emission
(tons)
400
9.7
2.8
5.8
0.6
1.5
1.2
421.6
0.1
4.8
4.8
4.8
5.7
20.2
* Reproduced from Litton Report (Ref. 34)
-------
TABLE 10
ESTIMATED ANNUAL BENZO(A)PYRENE ( BAP ) EMISSIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES
(Continued)
Source
Motor vehicles
Gasoline
Automobiles
Trucks
Diesel
Total
Total (all sources tested)
Estimated BaP
Emission
Rate
(wg/gal)
170
>460
690
Estimated Annual
Consumption
or Production
(1010 gal)
4.61
2.01
0.257
Estimated Annual
BaP Emission
(tons)
8.6
>10
2.0
>20.6
481
FCC: fluid catalytic cracker.
CO boiler: carbon monoxide waste heat boiler.
HCC: Houdriflow catalytic cracker.
TCC: Thermo for catalytic cracker.
-------
TABLE 11
ODOR EMISSIONS FROM TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT AND ODOR CONTROL DEVICES
Type of Equipment
or Operation
Rendering cooker
Rendering Cooker
(Blood drying)
Dry batch type
Rendering cooker
(Edible charge)
Dry batch type
Wet Batch type
Continuous type
Odor Levels and Emission
Rates, Uncontrolled
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentration
Range
(ou/scfa)
5,000
to
500,000e
(Mode 50,000)
10,000
to
l.OOO.OOO6
2,500!"
350h
650 to 7,000 '
Modal
Odor
Emission
Rate
(ou/min )
25,000,000
Not
measured
70,000h
Odor Levels and Emission Rates. Controlled
Type of
Odor
Control Equipment
Direct-Fired (DF)*
Surface
condenser**
Jet condenser
followed by a
D-F after-
burner*
Surface condenser
followed by a
D-F after-
burner*
Jet (or contact
condenser)**
Vent Gas . Odor
Odor _ Emission
Concentration Rate ,
(ou/scfa) 1 (ou/min )
100 to 150
(Mode 120)
100,000
to
10,000,000
(Mode
500,000)
20 to 50
(Mode 25)
50 to 100
(Mode 75)
2,000
to
20,000
(Mode 10,000)
90,000
12,000,000
2,000
6,000
70,000
Temperature
and ,
Efficiency
1,200°F
99+%
80°F
Negative
1 , 200"F
99+%
1,200"F
99+%
80°F
80%
Reproduced from Litton Report (Ref. 34)
-------
TABLE 11
ODOR EMISSIONS FROM TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT AND ODOR CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
Type of Equipment
or Operation
Fish-meal drier
Air blowing of
fish oils
Air blowing of
linseed oil
Varnish cooker
batch type
Odor Levels and Emission
Rates, Uncontrolled
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentration
Range
(ou/scfa)
1,000 to
5,000
(Mode 2,000)
10,000 to
70,000
(Mode 50,000)
Estimated)
120,000h
10,000 to
200,000e
(Mode 25,000)
Modal
Odor
Emission
Rate •
(ou/min )
50,000,000
30,000,000
not
measured
10,000,000
Odor Levels and Emission Rates, Controlled
Type of
Odor
Control Equipment
Packed column
type scrubber**
Chlorination"'
plus packed col-
umn scrubber**
Direct-fired
afterburner*
Direct-fired
afterburner*
Recirculating
spray contact
scrubber fol-
lowed by a DF
afterburner*
Recirculating
spray (contact)
scrubber**
Direct fired
afterburner*
Recirculating
spray (contact)
scrubber**
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentration
(ou/scfa)
?nn to
1,000
(Mode 400)
30 to 50
(Mode 40)
25 to 75
(Mode 50)
(Estimated)
2,000
10 to 25
(Mode 20)
20,000
100 to 400
(Mode 250)
ioo,oooh
Emission
Rate .
(ou/min )
10.000,000
1,000,000
50.0001
not
measured
10,000
not
measured
100.000
not
measured
p
Temperature
and .
Efficiency
70°F
80%
70°F
98%
1,200°F
99+%
1,200°F
97.5%
1,200°F
99+%
1,200"F
99%
-------
TABLE 11
ODOR EMISSIONS FROM TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT AND ODOR CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
Type of Equipment
or Operation
Lithographing oven
metal decorating
Coffee roaster
batch type
Coffee roaster
continuous type
Bread baking oven
Tallow hydrolyzer
Odor Levels and Emission
Rates. Uncontrolled
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentration
Range
(ou/scfa)
700 to
10.0003
(Mode 3,000)
300 to
30,000e
500 to
1,000J
(Mode 1,000)
(Estimated)
i,oooh
Not
measured
Modal
Odor
Emission
Rate .
(ou/min )
15,000,000
3,000,000h
(Estimated!
3.000.0001
Not
measured
Not
measured
Odor Levels and Emission Rates, Controlled
Type of
Odor
Control Equipment
Direct-fired
afterburner*
Catalytic
afterburner*
Direct-fired
afterburner
Direct-fired
afterburner*
Surface
condenser fol-
lowed by a
direct-fired
afterburner*
Surface
condenser**
Vent Gas
Odor
Concent rat ion
(ou/scf )
50 to 500
(Mode 200)
450*'
3.000h
150 to
15,000"
300 to
1,000
(Mode 350)
(Estimated)
2,000,000
2,000
750
150
70
6,000
Odor
Emission
Rate b
(ou/min )
1.200.000
2,300,000
l,700,000h
(Estimated)
1.200.0001
Not
measured
Not
measured
c
Temperature
and .
Efficiency
1,200°F
95%
1.000WF"
800°F
1,100°F
50%
900°F
65%
940°F
1,100°F
1,200°F
1,300°F
1.400°F
-------
TABLE 11
ODOR EMISSIONS FROM TYPICAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT AND ODOR CONTROL DEVICES
(Continued)
Type of Equipment
or Operation
Phthalic anhydride
manufacturing unit
Odor Levels and Emission
Rates, Uncontrolled
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentration
Range
(ou/scfa)
1,800 to
3,500J
(Mode 2,500)
Modal
Odor
Emission
Rate
(ou/min )
15,000,000
Odor Levels and Emission Rates, Controlled
Type of
Odor
Control Equipment
Direct-fired
afterburner*
Catalytic
afterburner*
Catalytic
afterburner*
Vent Gas
Odor
Concentratior
(ou/scfa)
45 to 120
(Mode 75)
1,800
180
Odor
Emission
Rate
(ou/min )
500,000
11,000,000
1,100,000
Temperature
and
Efficiency
1,200°F
97%
745"F
27%
815"Fm
93%
vo
in
odor concentration.
^Afterburner odor control devices.
**Nonafterburner odor control devices.
fodor units per standard cubic foot (at 70°F and 14.7 psia).
Odor units discharged per minute, based on average volumetric discharge rate and modal
GTemperature of gases after leaving flame-contact zone (afterburners); temperature of
vent gases in other cases.
Odor control efficiency, on a modal odor concentration basis.
.Odor concentrations in batch processes vary with materials charged and phase of operation.
Surface condensers increase odor concentrations in the vent gases but reduce total odor
emission rates.
^Hundred-fold increase from beginning to end of cycle.
.One test only.
Samples collected from several points of odor emissions.
JIn continuous processes, odor concentrations vary with temperatures maintained and
materials charged.
"'Chlorine (20 ppm) mixed with drier off-gases, which are then scrubbed.
chlorine increases odor concentrations.
Estimated from two tests only.
""Maximum temperature at which this catalytic unit can operate.
More or less
n,
Outlet odor concentration rises and falls with inlet odor concentration.
The surface condenser is an integral part of the hydrolyzing unit.
temperature incineration increases odor concentration above condenser vent level.
Note that low
-------
TABLE 12
(143)
ODOR CONTROL METHODS AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS
Control Method
Efficiency
Adsorption by activated carbon
Filtration (dry scrubbing)
Absorption with water
Absorption w/chlorinated water
Absorption w/hypochlorite
Absorption w/proprietary chemicals
in water
Electrostatic precipitation
Direct flame incineration
Catalytic combustion
(i.e., 'Decatox')
Masking w/chemicals
Neutralisation or counteraction
with chemicals
80%
75%
71%
80%
80%
27%
100%
47%
57%
96
-------
TABLE 13**
ODOR REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES OF CONDENSERS OR AFTERBURNERS.
OR BOTH. VENTING A TYPICAL DRY RENDERING COOKER*
Concentra-
tion (odor
unlts/scf)
50,000
Emission
Rate (odor
units/inin)
25,000,000
Condenser
Type
None
Surface
Surface
Contact
Contact
Condensate
Temperature
(°F)
80
140
80
140
Afterburner
Temperature
(°F>
1,200
None
1,200
None
1,200
Concentrat ion
(Odor units/
sfc)
100 to 150
(Mode 120)
100,000 to
10 million
(Node 500,000)
50 to 100
(Mode 75)
2,000 to
20,000
(Mode 10,000)
20 to 50
(Mode 25)
Modal Emission
Rate (odor
units/min)
90,000
12,500,000
6,000
250,000
2,000
Odor
Removal
Effi-
ciency
%
99.40
50
99.98
99
99.99
*Based on a hypothetical cooker that emits 500 scfra of vapor containing 5 percent
noncondenslble gases.
**From Reference 33.
-------
AMBIENT AIR OUALirr VALUES FOR POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
ug/m3 Except At Noted
ELEMENT
ARSENIC
As
ASBESTOS
BARIUM
Bd
BLRULIUH*
Be
HORUN
H
lAUMlUM •
Cd
CHLORINE
ri
CHROMIUM
Cr
COPPER
Cu
FLUORIDES
F
LEAD •
Pb
MANGANESE •
Mn
MERCURY
KB
NICKEL •
Nl
POM
SELENIUM
Se
TIN •
Sn
VANADIUM
V
ZINC
Zn
rOXICITY
FACTOR (I)
1
N
N
1
V
r
N
E
E
E
T
C
T
r
N
T
E
E
nPSERVED VALUES
MAXIMUM '3 MINIMUM3'*
1 1(1 1 00
uiu/ uuoty
11 1 Oil
10 / .'70
1 20 1 !•>
1 B9 / 16
10 00 / 20
1 44 / OB
12 / 76
10 /.Ol
1 30 / 024
2 80 / 77
WOil 0000)
01 / OOOi
006 / 0002
01 1 002
OS / OS
01 / 006
01 / 006
006 / 002
003 / OOOS
2 / 000]
ESTIMATE
iTiS WORKDAY TIME-
lo°- WEIGHTED AVG.
S
OS fiber/
ml
S
02
100
oxide
fume CL
, soluble salts
I dust
10
, soluble
' salts
._ metallic >
Inaoluble salts
1 fume
10 dust
25
2
SO CL
S
10
2
20
1 orgsnlc
S fume
5 dust Cl
SO
SCHROEDER(6)
3 Nov 72
IS
200
0
0
1
10
S
1,
1
01
1
01
10.
SAFE LEVEL?5
CHRISTENSENC6)
1 Nov 72
10
1 fiber/
ml
10
I
1
10
10
10
100
10
20
1
10
10
20
10
10
ELXINS(6)
22 Nov 72
10
.1 fiber/
ml
»
001
so
S.
10
10
10
so
5
25
2
10
10
20
S
so
(1)N - Non-toxic
T • Toxic
L - Essential
"'Schroeder. H . "A Sensible Tssk of Air Pollution by Metals "
'3)Alr Quality Data for 1967 (Rev '71) EPA, p S
(1>By Emission Spectogreph Method for Metals Ashed with Low
Temperature Oxygen Pleama Acher
(*'24 Hr sversges except as noted
CL-Celllng Halt boundary value
(>>Henry A Schroedir. M D., Professor
of Physiology, Emeritus DsrUuuth
Kedlcal School
Herbert E Chrlaunsen. D Sc
Head. Toxlclty and Reiearch Analysis
Branch, HI05H
Harvey B Elklna, M D , Division
of Occupational Hygiene, Department
of Labor and Industries. Commonwealth
of Maasschustetts
98
-------
APPENDIX A
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES TABULATED BY POLLUTANT
This appendix contains a series of tables which reproduce the
data presented in Table 1 summarizing the total emissions by weight.
Here, the information is arranged so that the distribution of
emissions for each pollutant is identified and collected separately
for quick reference.
99
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
ARSENIC
U)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Mining <1 NEC
Phosphate Rock NEG NEC
Primary Copper
Roasting 900 10.07
Reverberatory Furnaces 400 4.48
Converters 1,150 12.87
Material Handling 250 2.80
Primary Zinc
Roasting 1,390 15.55
Primary Lead
Sintering
Blast Furnace
Reverberatory Furnace
Gray Iron Foundary
Cotton Ginning
Non-Ferrous Alloys
Phosphoric Acid
Glass Manufacture
Wood Preservatives
Miscellaneous Arsenic
Chemicals
Arsenic Pesticide Pro-
duction
Pesticide, Herbicide,
Fungicide Use
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial Coal 6 0.07
TOTAL 8,939 100
285
80
11
97
19
NEG
NEG
638
NEG
3.3
197
2,925
429
49
15
19
67
9
NEG
3.19
0.90
0.12
1.09
0.21
NEG
NEG
7.14
NEG
0.04
2.20
32.72
4.80
0.55
0.17
0.21
0.75
0.10
NEG
(1) Source: The I1ITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results 10°
EPA Contract No. 63-01-0438
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
ASBESTOS
(1)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Asbestos Mining 5,610 89.6
Kraft Pulp Mill
Recovery Furnace 15 0.24
Sulfite Pulp Mill NEC NEC
Asbestos Products
Brake Lining Production 312 4.98
Shingle & Siding Production 205 3.27
Asbestos Textile Production 18 0.29
Installation of Asbestos Con-
struction Material 61 0.97
Spray on Steel Fire Proofing 15 0.24
Insulating Cement Application 25 0.40
TOTAL 6,261 99.99
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
101
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES(1)
BARIUM
Amount
Source in Tons
Barium Mining
Blast Furnace
Open Hearth
Basic Oxygen Furnace
Electric Arc Furnace
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola
Glass Manufacture
Barium Milling & Handling 2,
Barium Chemicals 4,
Paint, Varnish, etc.
Manufacture
Well Drilling Mud
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 2,
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
S token Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal
Oil
TOTAL 10,
30
112
38
20
36
SO
40
700
400
30
70
311
266
80
29
102
358
51
22
32
49
826
% This
Pollutant
0.28
1.04
0.35
0.19
0.33
0.46
0.37
24.94
40.64
0.28
0.65
21.35
2.46
0.74
0.27
0.94
3.31
0.47
0.20
0.30
0.45
100.02
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
102
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
BERYLLIUM
(1)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Mica, Feldspar Mining NEC NEC
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola 4 2.77
Ceramic Coatings NEC NEC
Beryllium Alloys & Compounds 5 3.64
Beryllium Fabrication NEC NEC
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 86 59.62
Stoker Coal 10 6.93
Cyclone Coal 3 2.08
All Oil 2 1.39
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 8 5.55
Stoker Coal 13 9.01
Cyclone Coal 2 1.39
All Oil 2 1.39
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 1 0.69
Oil 8 5.55
TOTAL 144 100.01
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
103
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
BOROK
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Borax Mining 100 1.05
Glass Manufacturing 1,000 10.55
Boron Chemicals 2,400 25.32
Ceramic Coatings 470 4.96
Soaps and Detergent Manufacturing 13 0.14
Use of Pesticides, Herbicides,
and Fungicides 1,800 18.99
Sewage and Sludge Incineration 20 0.21
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 2,655 28.01
Stoker Coal 304 3.21
Cyclone Coal 91 0.96
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 118 1.25
Stoker Coal 413 4.36
Cyclone Coal 59 0.62
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 37 0.39
TOTAL 9,480 100.02
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
104
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES (1)
CADMIUM
Amount
This
Source
Copper Mining
Zinc Mining
Lead Mining
Primary Copper
Roasting
Reverberatory Furnace
Converters
Material Handling
Primary Zinc
Roasting
Sintering
Distillation
Material Handling
Primary Nickel
Primary Lead
Sintering
Blast Furnace
Reverberatory
Material Handling
Secondary Copper
Sweating Furnace
Blast Furnace
Iron & Steel
Blast Furnace
Non-Ferrous Alloys
Furnaces
Material Handling
in Tons
NEC
<1
NEC
229
94
270
59
666
284
90
NEC
NEC
66
19
3
NEC
70
55
Pollutant
NEC
0.01
NEC
7.59
3.12
8.95
1.96
22.07
9.41
2.98
NEC
NEC
2.19
0.63
0.10
NEC
2.32
1.82
1,000
3
NEC
11
Cadmium Paint Pigments
Cadmium-Barium Plastic Stabilizers 3
Cadmium-Nickel Batteries <1
Miscellaneous Cadmium Products <1
Use of Pesticides, Herbicides and
Fungicides <1
Fertilizer Application
Incinerators
95
33.14
0.10
NEG
0.36
0.10
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.02
3.15
TOTAL
3,018
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation 105
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
100.06
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
CHLORINE
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Chlorine Fluxing
Non-Ferrous Metals 100 0.13
Iron and Steel 1,900 2.43
Bleaching, Pulp and Paper 18,000 23.02
Chlorine Industry
Manufacture 4,000 5.12
Liquefaction and Handling 43,000 54.99
Organic Chlorine Chemicals 8,500 10.87
Hydrochloric Acid Manufacture 800 1.02
Bleach Manufacture 900 1.15
Miscellaneous Chlorine
Products 1,000 1.28
TOTAL 78,200 100.01
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
106
-------
sOURCES
CHROMIUM
Amount
Source in Tons
Asbestos Mining
Kraft Pulp Mill
Recovery Furnace
Sulfite Pulp Mill
Prinary Chromium Production
Asbestos Products
Refractory Brick Production
Installation of Asbestos Material
Spray-on Fire Proofing
Use of Insulating Cement
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 5
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
Ail Oil
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal
Oil
8
NEG
NEC
4200
NEC
7
NEG
NEC
NEG
,571
640
192
22
247
864
123
17
77
38
% This
Pollutant
0.07
NEG
NEG
34.98
NEG
0.06
NEG
NEG
NEG
46.40
5.33
1.60
0.18
2.06
7.20
1.02
0.14
0.64
0.32
TOTAL 12,006
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
107
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
(1)
COPPER
Amount % This
in Tons Pollutant
Source
Copper Mining 190 1.41
Primary Copper
Roasting 2,900 21.54
Reverberatory Furnace 1,243 9.23
Converters 3,729 27.70
Material Handling 828 6.. 15
Secondary Copper
Scrap Prepatation 5 0.04
Wire Burning 155 1.15
Sweating Furnace 15 0.11
Blast Furnace 15 0.11
Smelting, Reverberatory 15 0.11
Smelting, Rotary 5 0.04
Iron and Steel
Blast Furnace 1,070 7.95
Open Hearth Furnace 1,550 11.51
Basic Oxygen Furnace 70 .52
Electric Arc Furnace 70 .52
Gray Iron Foundry 50 .37
Miscellaneous Copper Metals
and Alloys 2 0.02
Miscellaneous Copper Chemicals
and Products 230 1.71
Incinerators 460 3.42
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 585 4.35
Stoker Coal 67 0.50
Cyclone Coal 20 0.15
All Oil 15 0.11
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 26 0.19
Stoker Coal 91 0.68
Cyclone Coal 13 0.10
All Oil 11 0.11
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 8 0.06
Oil 25 0.19
Total
13,463
(1) Source:
108
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438"
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
FLUORIDES
Amount
Triple Superphosphate
% This
Source
Iron Ore Pellet Plants
Defluorination of Phosphate
Rock
Primary Aluminum
Reduction, H.S. Soderberg
Reduction, V.S. Soderberg
Prebake
Primary Copper
Roasting
Reverberatory Furnaces
Converters
Material Handling
Primary Zinc
Roasting
Sintering
Distillation
Primary Lead
Sintering
Blast Furnace
Dross Reverberatory Furnace
Iron and Steel
Sintering
Blast Furnace
Open Hearth
Phosphoric Acid Production
Hydrofluoric Acid Production
Hydrofluoric Acid Alky la t ion
in Tons
18,200
1,760
5,160
2,460
8,610
200
86
257
57
.
127
55
18
150
40
10
18,200
2,800
25,400
6,830
700
5,800
Glass Manufacture, Frit Production 700
Expanded Clay Aggregate
Preparation
5,300
Diammonium Phosphate Preparation 280
Pollutant
11.36
1.10
3.22
1.54
5.37
0.13
0.05
0.16
0.04
0.08
0.03
0.01
0.09
0.03
0.01
11.36
1.75
15.85
4.26
0.44
3.62
0.44
3.31
0.18
Preparation
Normal Superphosphate
Preparation
Electrothermal Phosphorous
Preparation
3,780
4,970
4,080
2.36
3.10
2.55
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation 109
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
FLUORIDES (Continued)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Cement Kilns 270 0.17
Structural Clay Products 9,720 6.07
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 24,696 15.41
Stoker Coal 2,839 1.77
Cyclone Coal 852 0.53
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 1,092 0.68
Stoker Coal 3,830 2.39
Cyclone Coal 547 0.34
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 342 0.21
TOTAL 160,218 100.01
110
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
LEAD
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Copper, Zinc, Lead Mining 345 3.72
Primary Copper
Roasting 127 1.37
Reverberatory Furnaces 54 0.58
Converters 163 1.76
Material Handling 36 0.39
Primary Zinc
Roasting 159 1.71
Sintering 68 0.73
Distillation 23 0.25
Primary Nickel 246 2.65
Primary Lead
Sintering 510 5.49
Blast Furnace 136 1.47
Dross Reverberatory Furnace 68 0.73
Secondary Copper
Wire Burning 390 4.20
Sweating Furnace 42 0.45
Blast Furnace 42 0.45
Smelting, Reverberatory 42 0.45
Smelting, Rotary 4 0.04
Secondary Lead
Scrap Preparation NEC NEG
Blast Furnace 1,500 16.16
Reverberatory Furnace 500 5.39
Pot Refining NEG NEG
Barton Process 20 0.22
Iron and Steel
Open Hearth 150 1.62
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola 1
Petroleum Refining 1
Lead Alkyl Chemicals
Cadmium-Nickel Battery Production
Use of Pesticides, Herbicides,
Fungicides
Incinerators
,400
,250
810
2
NEG
320
15.08
13.47
8.73
0.02
NEG
3.45
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
111
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
LEAD (Continued)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 614 6.62
Stoker Coal 71 0.77
Cyclone Coal 21 0.23
All Oil 7 0.08
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 27 0.29
Stoker Coal 95 1.02
Cyclone Coal 14 0.15
All Oil 5 0.05
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 9 0.10
Oil 12 0.13
TOTAL 9,280 100.02
112
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
MANGANESE
Amount % This
Source in^Tons Pollutant
Manganese Mining 5 0.03
Primary Manganese Preparation 325 1.71
Iron and Steel
Blast Furnace 1,000 5.27
Open Hearth Furnace 1,660 8.74
Basic Oxygen Furnace 1,060 5.58
Electric Arc Furnace 620 3.26
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola 2,770 14.58
Ferro-Alloy Preparation
Blast Furnace
Electric Furnace
Non-Ferrous Alloy Preparation
Furnaces
Material Handling
Silico Manganese Preparation
Electric Furnace
Manganese Chemical Preparation
Dry Storage Battery Production
Welding Rod Production
Sewage and Sludge Burning
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal
Oil
TOTAL
1,113
3,669
60
NEC
4,164
300
90
24
175
1,409
162
49
2
62
218
31
2
20
3
18,993
5.86
19.32
0.32
NEC
21.92
1.58
0.47
0.13
0.92
7.42
0.85
0.26
0.01
0.33
1.15
0.16
0.01
0.11
0.02
100.10
(1) Source: The. MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01--0438
113
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
MERCURY
Source
Amount
in Tons
Mercury Mining
Chlorine Fluxing, Non-Ferrous
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
% This
Pollutant
0.33
Metals
Secondary Mercury
Pulp and Paper Industry
Organic Chlorine Chemical
Preparation
Paint, Varnish, Lacquer Production
Instrument Manufacture
Electrical Apparatus Manufacture
Dental Preparations Manufacture
Use of Pesticides, Herbicides,
Fungicides
Use of Pharmaceuticals
Laboratory Use of Mercury
Consumption of Paint
Incinerators
Sewage and Sludge Burning
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal
Oil
TOTAL
55
11
NEC
70
1
3
3
1
19
3
51
215
135
11
150
17
6
1
6
23
3
1
2
3
792
6.94
1.39
NEC
8.86
0.13
0.33
0.38
0.15
2.4jO
0.33
6.44
27.15
17.04
1.39
18.94
2.15
0.76
0.13
0.76
2.90
0.38
0.13
0.25
0.38
114
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
(1)
NICKEL
Source
Nickel Mining
Iron and Steel
Blast Furnace
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola
Ferro-Alloys
Blast Furnace
Electric Furnace
Non-Ferrous Alloys
Furnaces
Material Handling
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial
Coal
Oil
TOTAL
Amount
in Tons
% This
Pollutant
0.03
100
79
491
98
64
NEG
87
10
3
1,441
7
23
3
1,139
3
2,435
1.67
1.32
8.20
1.64
1.07
NEG
1.45
0.17
0.05
24.08
0.12
0.38
0.05
19.03
0.05
40.69
5,985
100.00
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
115
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES^1'
POM
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Iron and Steel
Metallurgical Coke 43,380 0.90
Asphalt Industry
Paving Material Preparation 2,800 0.06
Roofing Material Prepar-
ation 23,230 0.48
Petroleum Refining 2,170 0.05
Incineration
Industrial 2,228 0.05
Domestic 730 0.02
Auto Body 14,602 0.30
Conical Burner 212,211 4.42
Open Burning 526,843 10.98
Agricultural Burning 2,161,142 45.05
Natural Fires, Forest 1,433,712 29.89
Natural Fires, Urban 6,060 0.13
Municipal 682 0.01
Coal Refuse 193,500 4.03
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 8,980 0.19
Stoker Coal 1,032 0.02
Cyclone Coal 310 0.01
All Oil 7,675 0.16
All Gas 6>151 0.13
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 1,896 0.04
Stoker Coal 6,635 0.14
Cyclone Coal 948 0.02
All Oil 10,001 0.2i
All Gas 20,220 0.42
Residential/Co niinercial
Coal 66,796 1.39
Oil 33,105 0.69
Gas 10,065 0.21
TOTAL 4,797,104 100.00
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
116
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
(1)
SELENIUM
Amount
in Tons
17
8
22
5
27
Source
Primary Copper
Roasting
Reverberatory Furnace
Converters
Material Handling
Primary Zinc
Roasting
Primary Lead
Sintering
Blast Furnace
Secondary Copper, Zinc, Lead
Glass Manufacture
Paint, Varnish, Lacquer Manufacture 1
Incineration
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Tndustrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal
Oil
% This
Pollutant
1.99
0.94
2.57
0.59
3.16
5
2
1
203
e 1
1
360
41
12
19
16
56
8
14
5
32
0.59
0.23
0.12
23.74
0.12
0.12
42.11
4.80
1.40
2.22
1.87
6.55
0.94
1.64
0.59
3.74
TOTAL
855
100.03
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
117
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
(1)
Source
Iron and Steel
Open Hearth
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
Residential/Commercial
Coal
All Boilers, Oil
TOTAL
TIN
Amount
in Tons
260
68
8
2
3
11
2
1
1
356
% This
Pollutant
73.03
19.10
2.25
0.56
0.84
3.09
0.56
0.28
0.28
99.99
(1) Source:
The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
118
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
VANADIUM
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Vanadium Refining 81 0.45
Iron and Steel
Blast Furnace 63 0.35
Open Hearth Furnace 166 0.93
Basic Oxygen Furnace 7 0.04
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola 1 0.01
Ferro-Alloys
Electric Furnace 115 0.64
Material Handling 29 0.16
Non-Ferrous Alloys
Furnaces 3 0.02
Vanadium Chemical Preparation 4 0.02
Ceramic Coating Preparation NEC NEC
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal 1,013 5.67
Stoker Coal 116 0.65
Cyclone Coal 35 0.20
All Oil 4,930 27.58
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 45 0.25
Stoker Coal 158 0.88
Cyclone Coal 23 0.13
All Oil 2,740 15.33
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 14 0.08
Oil 8,330 46.61
TOTAL 17,873 100.00
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
119
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
ZINC (Continued)
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Industrial Boilers
Pulverized Coal 109 0.07
Stoker Coal 382 0.25
Cyclone Coal 55 0.04
All Oil 99 0.07
Residential/Commercial Boilers
Coal 34 0.02
Oil 221 0.15
TOTAL 150,656 100.04
120
-------
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANT SOURCES
ZINC
Amount % This
Source in Tons Pollutant
Zinc Mining 72 0.05
Primary Zinc
Roasting 31,818 21.13
Sintering 13,637 9.05
Distillation 4,545 3.02
Zinc Oxide Production 8,100 5.38
Secondary Copper
Wire Burning 135 0.09
Sweating Furnace 14 0.01
Blast Furnace 14 0.01
Smelting, Reverberatory
Furnace 14 0.01
Smelting, Rotary Furnace 3 NEC
Secondary Zinc
Sweating Furnaces 2,890 1.92
Distillation Furnaces 950 0.63
Iron and Steel
Blast Furnace 1,070 0.71
Open Hearth Furnace 39,000 25.89
Basic Oxygen Furnace 900 0.60
Electric Arc Furnace 7,400 4.91
Gray Iron Foundry
Cupola 1,700 1.13
Ferro-Alloys
Blast Furnace
Electric Furnace
Material Handling
Zinc Galvanizing
Zinc Chemical Preparation
Paint, Varnish, Lacquer
Manufacture
Incineration
Power Plant Boilers
Pulverized Coal
Stoker Coal
Cyclone Coal
All Oil
2,500
500
NEC
950
1,130
10
29,450
2,457
282
85
130
1.66
0.33
NEC
0.63
0.75
0.01
19.55
1.63
0.19
0.06
0.09
(1) Source: The MITRE Corporation
Preliminary Results
EPA Contract No. 68-01-0438
121
-------
APPENDIX B
HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH CANDIDATE POLLUTANTS
In varying degrees, all of the pollutant candidates discussed
herein may contribute to illness or death. Consequently it is reason-
able to anticipate that, particularly the more dangerous of these may
be dealt with as hazardous air pollutants as defined by the Clean Air
Act.
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 defines a
hazardous air pollutant as one "to which no ambient air quality stan-
dard is applicable and which in the judgment of the Administrator may
cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in
serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness." For
those substances which the Administrator chooses to classify as
hazardous, the law states that he shall "establish any such standard
at the level which in his judgement provides an ample margin of safety
to protect the public health from such hazardous air pollutant."
Herein lies a matter of considerable impact. To ascertain
whether standards to be applied provide any safety margin it is neces-
sary to know, at least in approximate terms, where lies the level of
incipient hazard. This information is not generally known in suffi-
ciently useful detail although the literature on health effects and
toxicity of specific substances is large. In an effort to assist EPA
in determining hazard levels, the National Academy of Sciences is pre-
paring a series of documents on selected pollutants. Certain other
122
-------
summary documents are available.
Those that have been published to date include the following sub-
stances:
Beryllium Lead
Mercury Fluorides
Asbestos Cadmium
The current status of information concerning other pollutants is
as follows:
Nickel
Vanadium First draft of NAS
Manganese Report in preparation
Chromium
POM (BaP) NAS Report on Order
^nC . Current Year Studies
Chlorine Available in about 15 Months
Copper
Arsenic Report expected Mid-FY 73
Some of the basic portions and conclusions concerning the
hazardous potential of pollutants concerning which documents have
issued are now summarized.
Mercury, Beryllium and Asbestos
The health hazards presented by each of these three substances are
reviewed in a document released by EPA as background for proposed
national emission standards. Specific serious illnesses have been
associated with each. For mercury and beryllium specific ambient air
concentrations have been identified so that with the aid of dispersion
models emission standards could be set.
123
-------
Although no quantitative air quality standards could be set for
asbestos, the results of epidemiological and other studies prompted
a decision to propose a standard calling for the greatest practicable
degree of control over all asbestos emissions.
Lead
Extent of Pollution
2
The NAS Report on lead concludes that there has been substantial
lead contamination of the total environment, i.e. air, soil, and
water. The larger portion of this has been contributed by the lead-using
industries rather than by automobile emissions. However, the results
of an APCO survey of emissions in 1968 reveal that only 2% of the lead
emitted directly to the atmosphere comes from the industrial sources,
while the remainder is from burned lead alkyls. Moreover, it has been
found that the concentration of lead in ambient air correlated with
the density of automobile traffic. Urban airborne lead concentrations
were higher than concentrations in rural areas, with the larger cities
showing higher values than the smaller.
Emission Source Lead Emitted. Tons/Year
Gasoline combustion 181,000
Coal combustion 920
Fuel oil combustion 24
Lead alkyl manufacturing 810
Primary lead smelting 174
Secondary lead smelting 811
Brass manufacturing 521
Lead oxide manufacturing 20
Gasoline transfer 36
Total 184,316
124
-------
Generally, lead concentrations decrease rapidly with distance
from the source although the smaller particles (< 2y in diameter) can
remain in the atmosphere for long periods of time and can become
widely dispersed. In fact, it is a consequence of this dispersive
effect that the urban air concentrations of lead has been increasing
only slowly over the long term.
Our concern is with that portion of the airborne lead emanating
from stationary sources. Although this represents only an estimated
2% of the total in this category the amount of material in- question
is in excess of 3,000 tons/year much of which comes from a relatively
few locations so that local conditions may be found which require
correction. A case in point is represented by lead smelters, in
whose vicinity very high levels of lead have been found both in the
air and in the soil .
The NAS report devotes considerable space to documentation of the
5 4
deleterious effects of ingested lead on humans and animals leaving
no doubt as to the dangers involved. Although a number of sources of
lead poisoning were described by the report, it was generally con-
cluded that for the bulk of the population lead in the air posed no
identifiable threat . However, it is possible that the combined effects
of normal intake levels in food and water and abnormal concentrations
in the air can create hazardous circumstances.
Thus, the NAS reports that in urban settings, man is "...possibly
exposed to hazardous circumstances relative to atmospheric lead
125
-------
pollution, occupational exposures In the lead-using industries excepted.
The high concentrations of lead in urban air and on the surfaces of
parks and streets constitute a source of intake additional to the
usual dietary sources and in special circumstances may be a sub-
stantial source."
Any further increase in lead concentrations caused by local indus-
trial sources would add to the already high rates of intake and thereby
increasing the body burden of lead, and contributing to short and
long term adverse health effects. Accordingly, the prospect of stan-
dards for and controls over lead emissions is a likely one so that
sources of lead emissions merit would rank high among the candidates
for consideration under the control technology programs.
Fluorides
Evaluation of Hazard
g
The NAS report on fluorides presents the following general
9
conclusion .
"It is evident that the more important aspect of
fluoride in the ambient air is its effect on vege-
tation and its accumulation in forage in amounts
that lead to harmful effects in cattle and other
animals. A comparison of current levels of fluo-
rides in the community atmosphere with the concen-
trations required for injury to vegetation and
cattle suggests that the hazard to these receptors
is limited to particular areas.
Current knowledge indicates that air borne
fluoride presents no direct hazard to man, except
in industrial exposure. However, through the com-
mercial, aesthetic, and ecologic functions of plants,
fluoride in the environment may indirectly influence
man's health and well being."
126
-------
Also, the indication is given that airborne fluoride concen-
trations which do not affect plant life offer no threat to human
life. However, fluoride pollution may result in severe damage to
crops and other plant life as well as to animals feeding on contami-
nated vegetation . A number of instances are cited documenting
cases of damage from airborne fluorides in the vicinity of phosphate
mining operations and aluminum manufacturing operations.
Cadmium
Exposure to cadmium oxide fumes and dust have been responsible
12
for incidences of emphysema, bronchitis and general lung damage.
Cadmium in food or beverages has been responsible for cases of acute
13
poisoning . Long-term exposure to CdO fumes and dust will result
in kidney damage and consequent damage to bone structure. Other
adverse effects of long-term exposure which have been noted are
anemia and liver disfunction.
One manifestation of chronic cadmium poisoning is the Itai-Pitai
disease found among Japanese. The main cause of this disease is con-
tamination of rice probably as a consequence of irrigation with river
water heavily contaminated by Cadmium . It is also suspected that
14
Cadmium is carcinogenic in humans . However, further evidence is
required to prove this point.
Cadmium in the environment is a particularly serious hazard be-
cause cadmium will accumulate in the body. For example, the "standard
man" in the U.S. accumulates about 30 mg. of Cd over a 50 year period.
127
-------
Absorption occurs primarily directly from the lungs which retain
between 10 and 40 percent of the inhaled cadmium. The total amount
retained depends in large measure on particle size distribution and
obviously on the concentration level as well. In areas around
cadmium emitting factories the concentrations will be several hundred
times greater than those found elsewhere
128
-------
APPENDIX B
REFERENCES
'Background Information - Proposed National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Asbestos. Beryllium. Mercury
EPA, GAP, RTF, N.C. 12/71 (NTIS:PB 204876)
2
Biologic Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants; Lead (Airborne Lead
in Perspective) NAS Washington D.C. 1972
3
R.E. Engel, et al., Environmental Lead and Public Health
APCO, RTP, EPA, March 1971
4
NAS Lead Document - Chapter 4
5ibid. Chapter 5
6ibid. p. 209
7ibid. pp.104-144
Q
Biologic Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants: Fluorides
National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C. 1971
9ibid. p. 240
10ibid. p. 221
Uibid. pp. 34-41
12
Lou Friberg, et al., Cadmium in the Environment. A Toxicological
and Epidemiological Approval. Karolenska Institute, Stockholm,
Sweden, April 1971
13ibid. Chapter 6
14ibid. Chapter 7
15ibid. Chapter 8
16ibid. Chapter 6
17ibid. p. 3-3
129
-------
APPENDIX C
MATERIAL FLOWS THROUGH THE ECONOMY
This section contains flow charts prepared by The MITRE
Corporation for each of the pollutant candidates showing the paths
of each through the economy from mining through end use and waste
disposal. The primary emission sources are shown as are the
estimated magnitudes at each point in the process. This material
was assembled during the course of the work and is included here as
a useful reference.
130
-------
CLASS (638 TONS)
MANUFACTURE
PESTICIDE1
MANUFACTURE
(196 TONS)
PESTICIDE
(2925 TONS)1
COTTON GINNING1
(34S TONS)
WOOD PRESERVATIVE1
MANUFACTURE (NEC)
NONFERKOUS ALLOY
OPERATIONS (NEC)
MANUFACTURE*
OF PHOSPHORIC
ACID (UNKNOWN)
IRON FOUNDRIES1
(97 TONS)
HANDLING DURING1
OTHER MANUFACTURING
PROCESSES (3.3 TONS)
1.,
'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS
- ARSENIC." U. E! DAVIS AND ASSOCIATES, MAY 1971
I
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF ARSENIC AND
ITS COMPOUNDS," LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969
MITRE.
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
2 TONS
4466 TONS
934 TONS
3668 TONS
347 TONS
9417
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- ARSENIC -
-------
MINING & HILLING
(3610 TONS)1
IMPORTED
ASBESTOS3
(NONE)
TEXTILE1 (18 TONS)
MANUFACTURE
PAPER1 (15 TONS)
MANUFACTURE
BRAKE LINING1
(318 TONS)
EMISSIONS ARE
NOT INCLUDED
MANUFACTURE OF
ASBESTOS CEMENT
PRODUCTS (205 TONS)J
MANUFACTURE OF
OTHER ASBESTOS^
BLD MATERIALS
(UNKNOWN)
CONSTRUCTION
OF BUILDINGS
(61 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
STEEL FIREPROOFING
(UNKNOWN)3
APPLICATION OF
STEEL FIREPROOFING
(15 TONS)1
INCINERATION &
DESTRUCTION BY
FIRE (UNKNOWN)3
5610
TONS
MANUFACTURE AND
APPLICATION OF
INSULATING CEMENT
(UNKNOWN)
556 TONS
WEARING AWAY
CEMENT (25 TONS)1
101 TONS
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
£267
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - ASBESTOS," W. E DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES, FEBRUARY 1970.
PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF ASBESTOS, LITTON SYSTEMS,
OCTOBER 1969
3MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- ASBESTOS -
-------
MINING1
(30 TONS)
MILLING1
(2700 TONS)
IMPORTED
BARIUM
30 TONS
(NONE)
2700 TONS
TONS)1
RUBBER PRODUCTS1
PRODUCTION (NEC)
IRON FOUNDRIES1
(50 TONS)
STEEL PRODUCTION
(200 TONS)1
4790 TONS
COAL (4000 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
OIL1 (100 TONS)
COMBUSTION
4100 TONS
-
INCINERATION3
(UNKNOWN)
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
11,620
I I
"NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - BARIUM," W E DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES. MAY 1972. I
2PRELIMINAHV AIR POLLUTION SURVFY OF BARIUM AND ITS OO'IPOUNDS, LITTON
SYSTEMS, INC , OCTOBER 1959. I
3MITRE . I
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- BARIUM -
-------
MINING
(NEC)1
IMPORTED
BERYL ORE
(NONE)3
MANUFACTURE OF
BERYLLIUM METAL.
ALLOYS & COMPOUNDS
(5 TOMS)1
BERYLLIA CERAMICS
MANUFACTURE
(NEC)l
BERYLLIUM & ALLOYS
FABRICATION
(NEC)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(4 TONS)1
GOAL (147 TONS}1
COMBUSTION
OIL (8 TONS)
COMBUSTION
INCINERATION
(NEC)1
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
NEC
5 TONS
4 TONS
155 TONS
NEC
164
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - BERYLLIUM," W. E. DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES, SEPTEMBER 1971.
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF BERYLLIUM AND ITS COMPOUNDS,"
LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- BERYLLIUM -
-------
MINING1
(100 TONS)
REFINING AMD
PRODUCING
COMPOUNDS
(2400 TONS)1
IMPORTED
BORON
(NONE)3
CLASS* (1000 TONS)
MANUFACTURE
CERAMIC1
COATINGS (470 TONS)
IRON FOUNDRIES
(UNKNOWN)2
MANUFACTURE OF
FERTILIZER &
PESTICIDE
(UNKNOWN)3
MANUFACTURE OF
CLEANING AGENTS
(13 TONS)1
NONFERROUS3
METAL OPERATIONS
INCL. REFINING
FERTILIZER AND
PESTICIDE
APPLICATION1
(1800 TONS)
USE OF
CLEANING ARENTS
(NEC)3
INCINERATION OF
SEWAGE 6 SLUDGE
(20 TONS)
100 TONS
2400 TONS
1483 TONS
COAL1 (4700 TONS)
COMBUSTION
OIL3 (40 TONS)
COMBUSTION
6540 TONS
20 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
10.543
"NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - BORON." W. E DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES, JUNE 1972.
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF BORON AND ITS COMPOUNDS, LITTON
SYSTEMS, INC , OCTOBER 1969.
'MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PPIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- BORON -
-------
MANUFACTURE OF
ZINC MINING
(NEG)l
IMPORTED
ORES
(NONE)3
Cu , Pb , Zn
(10SO TONS)
SECONDARY Cu
(FROM AUTOMOBILE
RADIATORS) (125 TONS)
OTHER
REPROCESSING
(17 TONS)
IMPORTED
CADMIUM
(NONE)3
-
-
FUNGICIDES &
FERTILIZERS (NEC)3
PIGMENT
MANUFACTURE
(11 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
(3 TONS)1
CADMIUM ALLOY
(3 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
NICKEL- CADMIUM
BATTERIES (NEC)1
ELECTROPLATING
(NEC)1
STEEL PRODUCTION
USING SCRAP
NEC
(NONE)3
1192 TONS
-
INEGJ-
STEEL PRODUCTION
USING SCRAP
(1000 TONS)1
1017 TONS
1 TON
95 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
2305
APPLICATION 0"
FUNGICIDES &
FERT1LIZERSU TON)1
INCINERATION
(95 TONS)1
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - CADMIUM, W E. DAVIS AND
ASSOCIATES," FEBRUARY 1970
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF CADMIUM AND ITS COMPOUNDS," LITTON
SYSTEMS. INC., OCTOBER 1969
3MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- CADMIUM -
-------
CHLORIDE
COMPOUNDS
(NONE)2
HYDROCHLORIC
ACID MANUFACTURE
(800 TONS)1
ELECTROLYTIC
MANUFACTURE OF
CHLORINE
(4000 TONS)1
ORGANIC
CHLORINATIONS
(8500 TOMS)1
PULP
BLEACHING
(18,000 TONS)1
CHLORINE
FLUXING
(2000 TONS)1
BLEACH
MANUFACTURING
(900 TONS)1
OTHER CHLORINE
PRODUCT
MANUFACTURING
(1000 TONS)1
CHLORINE
LIQUEFACTION &
HANDLING
(43,000 TONS)1
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
NONE
4800 TONS
73,400 TONS
78,200
lnCONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR CHLORINE & HYDROGEN CHLORINE EMISSIONS," EPA
2"PREL1MINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF CHLORINE GAS," LITTON SYSTEMS,
INC., OCTOBER 1969
3MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRI'IARY EMISSION SOURCES
- CHLORINE -
-------
IMPORTED
CHROMITE ORE
(NONE)
METALLURGICAL
PROCESSING
(4200 TONS)1
ASBESTOS
MINING
(8 TONS)3
MANUFACTURE OF
REFRACTORY BRICKS
(7 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
CHROMATES &
OTHER CHEMICALS
(UNKNOWN)2
APPLICATION OF
PRIMER PAINTS i
DIPS (UNKNOWN)2
CHROME
PLATING
(UNKNOWN)2
APPLICATION AS
FUNGICIDES I WOOD
PRESERVATIVES
(UNKNOWN)2
COAL (7715 TONS)
COMBUSTION3
INCINERATION
(UNKNOWN)3
8 TONS
4200 TONS
7 TONS
OIL (77 TONS)
COMBUSTION3
7792 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
I(TONS)
12007
^'CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR EMISSIONS CONTAINING CHROMIUM, MANGANESE, NICKEL, AND
VANADIUM," BATTELLE
PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF CHROMIUM AND ITS COMPOUNDS, LITTON
SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969.
'MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- CHROMIUM -
-------
HIKING
(190 TONS)1
190 TONS
SMELTING AND
(8700 TONS)1
SECONDARY
COPPER (210 TONS)1
PRODUCTION
IMPORTED
COPPER
(NONE)2
8910 TONS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
COPPER METAL
FABRICATION
(2 TONS)1
MISC USES OF
(230 TONS)1
CONSTRUCTION OF
(SEE MISC)1
USED IN INDUSTRIAL
MACHINERY PARTS
I ELECTRICAL EQUIP
(SEE MISC)1
USED FOR SEED
TREATMENT &
FUNGICIDE
(SEE MISC)
ELECTROPLATING
(SEE MISC)
CLASS
MANUFACTURE
(SEE MISC)1
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(2760 TONS)
IRON
FOUNDRIES
(50 TONS)
3042 TONS
-
-
-
-
-
-
COAL (1030 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
OIL (50 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
1080 TONS
-
INCINERATION OF
SEWAGE, SLUDGE, &
REFUSF. (460 TONS)
460 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
13,682
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - COPPER," U E. DAVIS, A"RIL 1972.
2MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOUPCES
- COPPER -
-------
FLUORSPAR
MINING
(UNKNOWN)1
HYDROFLUROIC2
ACID PRODUCTION
& ALKYLATION
(6500 TONS)
HILLING i
FLOTATION
(UNKNOWN)1
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(64,600 TONS)2
PRIMARY ALUMINUM
PRODUCTION
(16,230 TONS)2
STRUCTURAL
CLAY PRODUCTION
(9720 TONS)2
IMPORTED
FLUORSPAR
(NONE)1
PHOSPHATE
(UNKNOWN)1
UNKNOWN
Cu, Pb, Zn
SMELTING &
REFINING
(1000 TONS)2
PROCESSING OF
PHOSPHATE ROCK
(21,300 TONS)2
28,800 TONS
-
-
-
EXPANDED CLAY
AGGREGATE PRODUCTION
(S300 TONS)2
OPAL CLASS
(3320 TONS)2
ENAMEL FRIT
PRODUCTION
(700 TONS)2
CEMENT
MANUFACTURE
(270 TONS)2
100,140 TONS
-
-
COAL (34,200 TONS)
COMBUSTION2
34,200 TONS
-
INCINERATION
(UNKNOWN)3
UNKNOWN
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
163,140
SlINERAL FACTS AND PROBLEMS. BOM
ENGINEERING AND COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY OF FLUORIDE EMISSIONS CONTROL.
3NITRE.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- FLUORIDES -
-------
ORE CRUSHING
(345 TONS)1
345 TONS
PRIMARY LEAD
(680 TONS)1
SECONDARY LEAD
(2000 TONS)1
IMPORTED
(NONE)3
LEAD OXIDE
(20 TONS)1
PRIMARY ZINC
SMELTING
(250 TONS)1
PRIMARY COPPER
SMELTING
(380 TONS)1
3330 TONS
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(150 TONS)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(WOO TONS)1
BRONZE I BRASS
FOUNDRI ES
(520 TONS)1
PETROLEUM
(1250 TONS)2
MANUFACTURE OF
(UNKNOWN)1
LEAD ALKYL
MANUFACTURE
(810 TONS)1
A130 TONS
-|
EMISSIONS ARE
FROM MOBILE
SOURCES NOT
INCLUDED3
EMISSIONS ARE
FROM MOBILE
SOURCE NOT
INCLUDED3
COAL (850 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
OIL (24 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
874 TONS
MUNICIPAL
(320 TONS)1
320 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
8999
IMCONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR LEAD EMISSIONS," EPA
^ITRE
•'MINERAL FACTS AND PROBLEMS. BOM.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- LEAD -
-------
MINING
(5 TONS)1
MANGANESE
ORE IMPORTED
(NONE) 3
1
-
-
FERROMANGANESE
PRODUCTION
(4782 TONS)1
SILIOOMANCANESE
PRODUCTION
(4164 TONS)1
-
-
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(4340 TONS)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(2770 TONS)1
WELDING ROD
MANUFACTURE
(24 TONS)1
NONFERROUS ALLOY
MANUFACTURE
(60 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
DRY CELL BATTERIES
(90 TONS)!-
MANGANESE CHEM-
ICAL PRODUCTION
(300 TONS)1
5 TONS
9271 TONS
7584 TONS
L_
OIL (7 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
1957 TONS
175 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
18,992
COAL (1950 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
SLUDGE &
SEWAGE BURNING
(175 TONS)1
V E. DAVIS - "NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - MANGANESE."
W. E. DAVIS AND ASSOCIATES. AUGUST 1971.
ZLITTON - "PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF MANGANESE AND ITS COMPOUNDS,"
LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- MANGANESE -
-------
PRIMARY MERCURY
|— PRODUCTION -i
SECONDARY MERCURY
(11 TONS)1
IMPORTED
(NONE)3
IMNATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - MERCURY,"
ASSOCIATES, SEPTEMBER 1971 1
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF MERCURY AND ITS COM"
SYSTEMS, INC , OCTOBER 1969.
3MITRE
—
PAINT
MANUFACTURE
(1 TON)1
INSTRUMENT
(3 TONS)
USE AS SPRAYS &
FUNGICIDES
(19 TONS)1
ELECTRICAL APPARATUS
(3 TONS)1
AMALGAMATION
OPERATIONS
(NEC)1
HANDLING OF DENTAL
(I TON)1
MANUFACTURE OF
CHLORINE
(70 TONS)1
1
W. E DAVIS AND
OUNDS," LITTON
3 TONS 66 TONS 97 TONS
APPLICATION
OF PAINT
(215 TONS)1
GENERAL
LABORATORY USE
(51 TONS)1
—
USE OF (3 TONS)1
PHARMACEUTICALS
COAL (255 TONS)
COMBUSTION1
OIL (5 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
-
529 TONS
MUNICIPAL 1
•— INCINERATION
(11 TONS)1 1
SEWAGE & SLUDGE
(11 TONS)1
OTHER DISPOSAL OF
_ MERCURY CONTAINING
ITEMS (124 TONS)1
146 TONS
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
841
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- MERCURY -
-------
MINING
(SEE PRIM.
SMELTING)1
PRIMARY NICKEL
(248 TONS*)1
SECONDARY1
(SEE PRIM. SMELTING)
IMPORTED
NICKEL-
(NONE)
-
-
-
-
-
-
STAINLESS (, HEST
RESISTING STEEL
PRODUCTION
(442 TONS)1
ALLOY STEEL
PRODUCTION
(147 TONS)1
ELECTROPLATING
(NEC)1
MANUFACTURE OF
BATTERIES (2 TONS)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(79 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
OTHER STEEL
(100 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
OTHER ALLOYS
(64 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF
CATALYSTS
(NEC)1
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOUPCES AND EMISSIONS - NICKEL," 1J F DAVIS AND
ASSOCIATES, FEBRUARY 1970 * INCLUDES EMISSIONS "ROM 'lINI-Jn & SEC01DARV
SMELTlNr I
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF NICKEL AND ITS CO-BOUNDS,11 LITTON
SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969 I
3MITRE. I
COAL (100 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
OIL (4970)1
COMBUSTION
INCINERATION
(UNKNOWN)3
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
UNKNOWN
24? TONS
834 TONS
5070 TONS
UNKNOWN
6152
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- NICKEL -
-------
PETROLEUM
REFINING1
COKE
MANUFACTURE
METAL
REFINING 1
MANUFACTURE OF
PRODUCTS1
MANUFACTURE
PRODUCTS1
PULP & PAPER
PRODUCTION1
CHEMICAL
PRODUCTION1
FOOD
PROCESSING1
MANUFACTURE
PRODUCTS1
MANUFACTURE
PRODUCTS1
OIL
COMBUSTION1
COAL & COKE
COMBUSTION1
CAS
COMBUSTION
WOOD
COMBUSTION1
—
INCINERATION
SEWAGE &
SLUDGE
BURNING1
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING ORI'IARY EMISSION SOUPCES
- POM -
-------
COPPER
(NEC)
NEC
SMELTING AND
(85 TONS)1
SECONDARY
(1 TON)1
IMPORTED
SELENIUM
(NONE)3
86 TONS
-
-
GLASS (203 TONS)1
MANUFACTURING
MANUFACTURE OF
ELECTRONIC
EQUIPMENT
(NEC)1
MANUFACTURE OF
DUPLICATING
MACHINES (NEC)1
MANUFACTURE OF
PIGMENTS (1 TON)1
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
<1 TON)1
205 TONS
COAL (630 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
OIL (65 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
695 TONS
-
-
-
INCINERATION
OF REFUSE
(NEC)1
NEC
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
986
IMNATIONAL INVENTORY or SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - SELENIUM," u. E DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES. APRIL 1972.
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF SELENIUM AND ITS COMPOUNDS,"
LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- SELENIUM -
-------
IMPORTED TIN
(NONE) 2
PRIMARY TIN
(UNKNOWN)1
SECONDARY
TIN SMELTING
(UNKNOWN)1
IMPORTED
TIN
(NONE)2
BRASS & BRONZE
PRODUCTION
(UNKNOWN)1
TIN PLATING
(UNKNOWN)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(UNKNOWN)1
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(260 TONS)1
COAL1 (116 TONS)
COMBUSTION
OIL (1 TON)1
COMBUSTION
INCINERATION
(UNKNOWN)1
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
260 TONS
117 TONS
377
MINERAL FACTS AND PROBLEMS. BOM
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
TIN
-------
MINING AND
MILLING
(81 TONS)1
IMPORTED
VANADIUM ORE
(NONE)3
FERROVANADIUM
PRODUCTION
(144 TONS)1
IMPORTED
VANADIUM
(NONE)3
IRON & STEEL
PRODUCTION
(236 TONS)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(1 TON)1
MANUFACTURE
OF CATALYTSTS
(2 TONS)1
GLASS & CERAMICS
MANUFACTURE
(NEG)l
VANADIUM CHEMICALS
MANUFACTURE
(UNKNOWN)2
NONFERROUS ALLOYS
MANUFACTURE
(3 TONS)1
COAL (1750 TONS)
COMBUSTION1
OIL (17.000 TONS)1
COMBUSTION
INCINERATION
(UN KNOW)3
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
81 TONS
144 TONS
242 TONS
18,750 TONS
19,217
^'NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - VANADIUM," W. E. DAVIS
AND ASSOCIATES, JUNE 1971.
2"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF VANADIUM AND ITS COMPOUNDS,"
LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., OCTOBER 1969.
3MITRE.
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- VANADIUM -
-------
MINING
(72 TONS)
ZINC
SMELTING
(30,000 TONS)1
SECONDARY ZINC
PRODUCTION
(3800 TONS)
IMPORTED
ZINC SLAB
(NONE)3
ZINC OXIDE
PRODUCTION-PART OF
RUBBER MANUFACTURE
PROCESS (8100 TONS)1
DIE CASTIHr
(3000 TONS)1
ZINC
GALVANIZING
(950 TONS)1
SHERARDIZINC I
ELECTROLYTIC
DISPOSITION (NEC)'
OROCESSINT OF BRASS
I BRONZE (MELTING t
FINISHING) (180 TONS)1
MANUFACTURF OF
ZINC SULFATE
(30 TONS)1
ROLLED ZINC AND
ITS PRODUCTS
(NEC)1
IRON 6 STEEL
PRODUCTION
(48.370 TONS)1
IRON FOUNDRIES
(1700 TONS)1
MANUFACTURE OF CLASS
CERAMICS. FLOOR COVERING
ETC (1000 TOSS)1
HEAR OF RUBBER TIRES
EMISSIONS FROM MOBILE
SOURCES-NOT INCLUDED3
PHOTOCOPYING
(NEC)3
COAL (1310 TO1S)1
COMBUSTION
OIL (450 TOSS)1
COMBUSTION
INCINERATION OF
SEWAGE t SLUDGE
(1750 TONS)1
INCINERATION OF
REFUSE
(26.200 TONS)1
INCINERATION
OF COPIES ,
(1500 TONS)
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(TONS)
72 TONS
61.900 TONS
55.240 TONS
4760 TONS
151.422
'"NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES AND EMISSIONS - ZINC," U E DAVIS AND
ASSOCIATES. MAY 1972
'"PRELIMINARY AIR POLLUTION SURVEY OF ZINC AND ITS COMPOUNDS." LITTON
SYSTEMS, INC . OCTOBER 1969
'MITRE
MATERIAL FLOW THROUGH THE ECONOMY SHOWING PRIMARY EMISSION SOURCES
- ZINC -
-------
APPENDIX D
PROCESS FLOW CHARTS
In this section are collected a series of flow charts prepared
by The MITRE Corporation for each of the largest emitting processes
which were identified during the course of the study. On each
chart the major and minor points of emission are identified.
150
-------
BENTONITE
TO STEEL
MILL
TO STEEL
MILL
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
** MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
BASIC OPERATIONS - IRON ORE PELLET PLANT
-------
in
ho
SALT WATER
1 1
^ BRINE
* PREPARATION
1
ALTERNATING TRANSFORMER DIRE
* AND
CURRENT CUR
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
#* MAJOR EMISSION POINT
*** MERCURY EMISSION POINT
RECOVERED BRI1
COMPRESSOR
t
COOLER
t
\
:CT t DTAF
TYPE
RENT
1
t
»2
C12
r^
HRAGM
CELL
>
CELL
LIQUOR
STORAGE
^E
->
-*
*#*
COOLER
MERCURY
FOR
ELECTRODES
-^ DRYER
^
COMPRESSOR -
^•K-
CHLORINE
STORAGE
HOT CAUSTIC
VACUUM
EVAPORATOR
i
SALT
SEPARATOR
^
SLURRY
TANK
1
LIQUOR 1
COOLER
^
CAUSTIC
STORAGE
TANK
ATMOSPHERE
f**
fc BLOW GAS
F ABSORBER
SOURCE: ENGINEERING SCIENCE, INC.
OPERATIONS - DIAPHRAGM CELL CHLOR-ALKALI
-------
OTT OR PA<;
FIRED
PRIMARY
OIL OR GAS
FIRED
SECONDARY
BURNER
^
*
MANUAL
CHARGING
1
CHARGING
CHUTE
I
PRIMARY
BURNING
CHAMBER
i
SECONDARY
RIIRNTNr
CHAMBER
i
EXHAUST
FLUE
AND
STACK
PRIMARY
DRAFT
d
fc 9ti
* MANUAL T
ASH
REMOVAL
r~ ~i
' AFTERBURNER
* "~ (OPTIONAL)
L_ J
I **
ATMOSPHERE
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
#* MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: AIR POLLUTION ENGINEERING MANUAL
153
BASIC OPERATIONS - TYPICAL APARTMENT HOUSE TYPE INCINERATOR
-------
TO
ATMOSPHERE
**
AIR-BLOWING
TANK
GAS FURNACE
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
* * MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: AIR POLLUTION ENGINEERING MANUAL
TO
ATMOSPHERE
OIL
KNOCKOUT
TANK
STACK
FINISHED
PRODUCT
STORAGE
BASIC OPERATIONS - TYPICAL ASPHALT AIR-BLOWING PROCESS
-------
in
In
REVERBERATOR*
FURNACE
ATMOSPHERE
**
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
BASIC OPERATIONS - PRIMARY COPPER SMELTING
-------
ATMOSPHERE
ALUMINA
*
ROOM
AIR
1
—
4 J
t
CONTROL
HOOD
-, |
PREBAKE
ANODE
CELL
V.
ROOF
MONITOR
J
t
ROOM
AIR
1
JL
CONTROL
HOOD
4
~]_
i
HORIZONTAL
SODERBERG
CELL
V.
CONTROL
DEVICES
ROOM
AIR
ELECTRIC
POWER
ATMOSPHERE
**
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
* # MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MITRE
BASIC OPERATIONS - PRIMARY ALUMINUM
-------
RAW
MATERIALS
WASTE
DISPOSAL
*
MILLING
FILTER
1
SETTLING
TANKS
i
>w
WASTE
DISPOSAL
ATMOSPHERE
4**
I
**
DRYER
\
p
ROTARY
KILN
:AT|
i
UNBLEACHED
CLAY
AIR &
REACTION
GASES
'*
REACTOR
CHAMBER
1
t
BLEACHED
CLAY
*
POSSIBLE ,
CONTROL '
DEVICES
1 1
-^ BAGGING
+
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
%* MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
ATMOSPHERE
STORAGE
AND/ OR
SHIPMENT
157
BASIC OPERATIONS - RAW CERAMIC CLAY MANUFACTURE
-------
in
CD
RAILROAD
CAR
OIL
TANKERS
OIL
TRUCKS
OIL
PIPELINE
GAS
PIPELINE
* »
+
-u
*
COAL
STOCKPILE
OIL
STORAGE
* ft.
FURNACE
FEEDING
MECHANISM
OIL PUMPS
*
FURNACE
1
ASH
1
ASH *
DISPOSAL
»-
CONTROL
DEVICES
1 Ll
ASH
1
ASH *
DISPOSAL
»-
(OCNI
ATMOSPHERE
STACK
t
FORCED
DRAFT
FAN
;)_
LIQUID
WASTES
ANY SINGLE OR COMBINATION
OF FUELS POSSIBLE
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
## MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MITRE
OPERATIONS - POWER PLANT COMBUSTION
-------
PHOSPHATE
ROCK
Ls
k
~1
J
SULFURIC
ACID
r
MIXER
J
,
DEN
\
,
CURING
1
p
GRINDER
*
J
^^^m
•i^M
*
ATMOSPHERE
f * *
CONTROL
DEVICES ^
ATMOSPHERE 4k |
A ^ J POSSIBLE
T * * 1 CONTROL
1 niTUTPPC
fWWPDrtT 1 LJCiV J. V^CiO i
^ UJNIKUL AMMONIA ' — J
"* DEVICES Hi-muniA
I T
It T* *T t*
fc AMMONIATOR fc DRYER ^ TOOT.KF ..* SCREENING
P GRANULATOR P ' * uUlLLNINU
_^ RUN OF PILE 1 r
P PRODUCT GRANULATED
PRODUCT
_^ D Anr-rikT/^ ^" cuTnnTwr1
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
*# MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
BASIC OPERATIONS - NORMAL SUPERPHOSPHATE MANUFACTURE
-------
s
iAUAJ.lt
NaOH
LIME
STEA
,
r*
GRINDING
OR Na2C03 _
(IF USED) »
RECOVERED fc
STEAM
EXPANSION
1
r
DILUTION
i
* MINOI
* MAJO
SOITRPF
--
h
I EMISS
R EMISS
? MTJT
ION POINT
JION POLN1
MIXING *
t
\
\.
t
REHEATING
^
SOLUTION OF
ALUMINA
UNDER
PRESSURE
SEPARATION OF
RED MUDS
If
WASHING OF
RED MUDS
^
RED MUDS
TO WASTE
4-i
4-
i
tATION
T
^ TEMPERATURE
* EXCHANGE
i
^ FINAL
^^ FILTERING
\.
^ PRECIPITATION ^
1AL (OH)3
PRIMING
SEPARATION OF
A1(OH)3
•WASH WATER p-GAS OR FUEL OIL 1 ^-WASH WATER
CALCIli
\
CALCINED
ALUMINA
f**
COMMERCIAL
WASHING OF
A1(OH)3
BASIC OPERATIONS - MANUFACTURE OF ALUMINA
-------
COAL
TRUCK
*
COAL
STOCKPILE
%
FURNACE
FEEDING
MECHANISM
OIL
TRUCK
GAS
PIPELINE
OIL
STORAGE
USUALLY GRAVITY
FEED
FURNACE
ATMOSPHERE
T**
STACK
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MITRE
BASIC OPERATIONS - COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL COMBUSTION
-------
IRON
ORE
BLAST ##
OR
ELECTRIC
FURNACE
**
FERROALLOY
INGOTS
GRINDING
FINISHED
INGOTS
#MINOR EMISSION POINT
MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MITRE
162
BASIC OPERATIONS - FERRO-ALLOYS (INCL. SILICOMANGANESE)
-------
ATMOSPHERE
f**
STACK
t
STACK
CONTROL
DEVICES
j
r ASH ' r "
| REMOVAL 1 1 _.
| (OCNL) 1 1 ,,
l_ _J l_ k
TRUCK *
UNLOADING
4
STORAGE
PIT
1
GRAB #
BUCKET
4-
CHARGING *
HOPPER
^
FEEDING
AND
DRYING
STOKER
FORCED
FAN
1
PRIMARY
COMBUSTION
^ ASH
* CONVEYOR
| |
SECONDARY
COMBUSTION
ASH *
REMOVAL
QUID 1
kSTE |
MOVAL j
)CNL) j
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
## MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE:
AIR POLLUTION
ENGINEERING
MANUAL
163
BASIC OPERATIONS - TYPICAL MUNICIPAL INCINERATOR
-------
RAILROAD
CAR
COAL
TRUCK
OIL
TANKERS
OIL
TRUCKS
OIL
PIPELINE
GAS
PIPELINE
••M
••••
MPH
*
*
»-
COAL
STOCKPILE
OIL
STORAGE
*
^
FURNACE
FEEDING
MECHANISM
OIL
PUMPS
*
»-
fc
COMBUSTIBLE
WASTE
GAS FROM
PROCESS
ATMOSPHERE
1**
STACK
1 (OCNL) 4
»' r oci
FURNACE
1
ASH
1 KOI
fc CONTROL 1 ppj
L--I
ICED 1
4PT 1
" DEVICES 1 WAM 1
| * _ i
1 (OCNL)
V
ASH WASTE
^ ^
ASH *
DISPOSAL
ASH *
DISPOSAL
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
##MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MITRE
BASIC OPERATIONS - INDUSTRIAL COMBUSTION
-------
Mg(HS03)2 + H2S03 COOKING LIQUOR
TO ATMOSPHERE
CHIPS
| ** MgO SLURRY
TO STACK
COOLED GASES
DIGESTER
BLOW
SPENT LIQUOR
PULP
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
* # MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
M
ABS.
TOWER
t t
^Mi
\ t
ABS.
TOWER
t tJ
Mg(HS03)2
BASIC OPERATIONS - SULFITE PULPING PROCESS, MAGNESIA BASE
-------
> FROM THE MINE SITE
ST **
NACE
*
SCRAP
PILE
Iff*
1
**
OPEN
HEARTH
FURNACE
»!
i
r yf 1
t
•**
BASIC
OXYGEN
FURNACE
\
t
r
*#
ELECTRIC
ARC
FURNACE
QUENCHING
TOWER
*
-^
COKE**
OVEN
-*
COAL
PILE
*
-^
RR
CAR
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
*•* MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
FURTHER
PROCESSING
BASI
PERATIONS - IRON & STEEL INDUSTRY
-------
# MINOR EMISSION POINT
## MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
BASIC OPERATIONS - PRIMARY ZINC SMELTING AND ZINC OXIDE MANUFACTURE
-------
CHIPS
1
STEAM FOR PROCESS
AND POWER
MULTIPLE-EFFECT
EVAPORATORS
SULFUR BURNER AND
GAS COOLER
* MINOR EMISSION POINT
# MAJOR EMISSION POINT
SOURCE: MRI
BASIC OPERATIONS - SULFITE PULPING PROCESS, AMMONIA BASE
------- |