WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES 012020 EJI 07/71
          Inorganic Chemicals
            Industry Profile
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY • RESEARCH AND MONITORING

-------
         WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
The Water Pollution Control Research Series describes
the results and progress in the control and abatement
of pollution in our Nation's •waters.  They provide a
central source of information on the research,  develop-
ment, and demonstration activities in the Environmental
Protection Agency, through inhouse research and grants
and contracts with Federal, State, and local agencies,
research institutions, and industrial organizations.

Inquiries pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Head, Project Reports
System, Office of Research and Monitoring,  Environmental
Protection Agency, Room 801, Washington, B.C. 20^0.

-------
                                                                    07/77
                                                   EPA Region Vlli LIBRARY
                                                       Denver, Colorado
        INORGANIC CHEMICALS INDUSTRY
                   PROFILE (UPDATED)
                 Datagraphics Incorporated
                 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
                  of an original  study by
                 Cyrus Wm. Rice  &  Company
                 Pittsburgh,  Pennsylvania
                           for
              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                    Program #12020 EJI
                       July, 1971
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.75

-------
         EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the
Office of Research and Monitoring of
the Environmental Protection Agency
and approved for publication.  Appro-
val does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
               ii

-------
                            ABSTRACT
     This report presents a description of the inorganic chemical
industry and the costs that the industry would incur in attaining
various levels of pollution abatement over the five-year period
through 1974.  For the study purposes, the inorganic chemical
industry has been defined as including establishments producing
alkalies and chlorine, industrial gases, inorganic pigments,
paints and allied products, fertilizers (excluding ammonia and
urea), inorganic insecticides and herbicides, explosives, and
other major industrial inorganic chemicals.  The report presents
in considerable detail the description of the various production
processes, the waste treatment methods practiced, and the possible
impact that changes in processes might have on the volume and
character of the wastes produced.

     Projections have been based upon the chemical  industry data
in the 1963 and 1967 Census of Manufacturers, the 1967 Manufac-
turing Chemists Association survey, and the 1968 FWPCA study of
the organic chemicals industry.  Costs of treatment are estimated
by year for the levels of treatment corresponding to 27% and 100%
removal of contaminants.  Data from 59 inorganic chemical plants
were obtained as primary input to the study.
Key Words:  Chemical wastes, treatment costs, economics, indus-
            trial effluents, survey, inorganic chemicals.
                             ill

-------
                 TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                     Page
                                                       **

   I.  Summary	      1

  II.  Introduction 	      6

 III.  The Inorganic Chemical Industry	      7

  IV.  Projected Industry Growth	     14

   V.  Wastewater Characteristics 	     18

  VI.  Wastewater Treatment Methods 	     21

 VII.  Industrial Waste Treatment
       Practices Data Form	     30

VIII.  Plant Survey Data	     31

  IX.  Costs of Unit Wastewater
       Treatment Methods	     42

   X.  Costs Versus Effluent Quality
       Relationships. 	     50

  XI.  Projected Industry Costs 	     52

 XII.  Qualitative Manpower Requirements	     70

XIII.  Quantitative Manpower Requirements ....     71



                     APPENDIX

   A.  Inorganic Chemical Industry Survey Data.  .     72

   B.  Inorganic Chemical Industry
       Product Profiles 	     74

   C.  Costs of Unit Wastewater
       Treatment Practices	    141

   D.  Bibliography	    203

-------
                   LIST OF TABLES

                                                     Page

CHAPTER III - THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY

  Table I - Financial Ratios for the
    Chemicals and Allied Products Industry. ...      9

  Table II - Value of Estimated Inorganic
    Chemical Shipments	     10


CHAPTER IV - PROJECTED INDUSTRY GROWTH

  Table I - Production of Inorganic Chemicals . .     15

  Table II - Industry Segmental Growth Rates
    Through 1979	     16

  Table III - Industry Growth Rates
    Geographically Through 1975 	     16


CHAPTER V - WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS

  Table I - Composition of Typical Clean
    Water Effluent	     19


CHAPTER VI - WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS

  Table I - Water Discharge by SIC	     25

  Table II - Employment Distribution	     26

  Table III - Distribution of Water Use .....     27
CHAPTER IX - COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER
             TREATMENT METHODS

  Table I - Treatment Level I, Neutralization
    Costs Including Equalization and
    Sludge Dewatering ...............     47

  Table II - Treatment Level II, Demineralization
    Costs Including Prefiltration and Brine
    Disposal. 	 ......     48
                          vi

-------
               LIST OF TABLES (cont.)
CHAPTER XI - PROJECTED INDUSTRY COSTS

  Table I - Numbers of Inorganic Chemical Plants
    by Water Intake Volume - 1963	     52

  Table II - Water Discharges from Large In-
    organic Chemical Plants - 1968	     52

  Table III - Large Inorganic Chemical Plant Dis-
    charges Other Than to Municipal Sewers -
    1968	     53

  Table IV - Large Inorganic Chemical Plant In-
    takes and Usage, by Purpose, 1968	     54

  Table V - The Inorganic Chemical Industry ...     55

  Table VI - Numbers of Plants in the Inorganic
    Chemical Industry 	     56

  Table VII - Projected Production of Inorganic
    Chemicals, 1968-1974	     57

  Table VIII - The Inorganic Chemical Industry,
    1963-74	     58

  Table IX - Water Use Data, 1958-67	     59

  Table X - The Inorganic Chemical Industry,
    1963-74	     61

  Table XI - 1967 MCA Survey Data, The
    Chemical Industry ... 	     62

  Table XII - Ranges of Chemical Plant
    Production Capacities	     63

  Table XIII - Numbers of Plants in the
    Chemical Industry, 1963	     63

  Table XIV - Chemical Industry Survey Data,
    1967	     64

  Table XV - Chemical Plant Sizes and Dis-
    charges, 1967	     65
                          vii

-------
               LIST OF TABLES (cent.)

                                                     Page

CHAPTER XI (cont.)

  Table XVI - Chemical Industry Discharges,
    1967	     66

  Table XVII - Chemical Industry Costs and
    Manpower, 1969	     66

  Table XVIII - Cumulative Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Capital Costs, 1969-1974 	     67

  Table XIX - Cumulative Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Capital Costs, 1969-1974 	     67

  Table XX - Projected Annual Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Operating Costs	     68

  Table XXI - Projected Annual Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Operating Costs	     68
APPENDIX A - INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
             SURVEY DATA

  Table I	     73


APPENDIX C - COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
             PRACTICES

  Table I	    177
                          viii

-------
                   LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER III - THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY

  Figure 1 - Location of Major Inorganic
    Chemical Plants, SIC Nos. 2812,
    2816, 2819	     13
CHAPTER VI - WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS

  Figure 1 - Wastewater Treatment Sequence. ...     22


CHAPTER VIII - PLANT SURVEY DATA

  Figure 1 - Total 1969 Production - Millions
    of Tons/Year	     33

  Figure 2 - Production - Thousands of Tons/Year.     34

  Figure 3 - Flow - MGD .............     35

  Figure 4 - Major Source of Water	     36

  Figure 5 - Basis of Treatment Decision	     37

  Figure 6 - Year of Construction	     38

  Figure 7 - States	     39

  Figure 8 - Industry Water Use Regions	     40

  Figure 9 - Operating Costs of Treatment
    Facilities Versus Capital Costs 	     41
CHAPTER IX - COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER TREAT-
             MENT METHODS

  Figure 1 - Applicable Ranges of Demineralization
    Units	     43

  Figure 2 - Schematic Layout of Treatment Plant
    for Wastes from the Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Showing Various Possible Com-
    binations of Units	     44

  Figure 3 - Flow Sheet for Neutralization Plant.     45
                          ix

-------
               LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)
APPENDIX B - INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
             PRODUCT PROFILES

  Figure 1 - Flowchart for Diaphragm Caustic
    Soda and Chlorine Cell	     78

  Figure 2 - Flowchart of a Standard Medium-
    Pressure Air-Separation Plant 	     83

  Figure 3 - Flowchart for Titanium Dioxide ...     88

  Figure 4 - Flowchart for Mixing of Paint. ...     89

  Figure 5 - Ammonium Nitrate Plant Locations . .     94

  Figure 6 - Flowchart for 60% Nitric Acid
    from Ammonia	    103

  Figure 7 - Phosphoric Acid Plant Locations. . .    107

  Figure 8 - Typical Flowchart for Sulfur-
    Burning Contact Plant .	    119

  Figure 9 - Ammonium Phosphate Plant Locations .    126

  Figure 10 - Estimated Number of Bulk Blend
    Fertilizer Plants 	    130

  Figure 11 - Estimated Number of Liquid Mixed
    Fertilizer Plants 	 	    132

  Figure 12 - Flowchart for Smokeless Powder. . .    139
APPENDIX C - COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER
             TREATMENT PRACTICES

  Figure 1 - Applicable Ranges of Demineral-
    ization Units . 	 .....    143

  Figure 2 - Schematic Layout of Treatment
    Plant for Wastes from the Inorganic Chemical
    Industry Showing Various Possible Combin-
    ations of Units . .	    144

-------
               LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

                                                     Page

APPENDIX C (cont.)

  Figure 3 - Flow Sheet for Neutralization Plant.    146

  Figure 4 - Cap. Cost of Neutralization Facili-
    ties Excluding Sludge Treatment 	    147

  Figure 5 - Cap. Cost Versus Acidity for 1 MGD
    Plant	    148

  Figure 6 - Capital Cost of Equalization Basins.    149

  Figure 7 - Thickener Parameters for Sludge
    from Neutralization of Acidic Wastes	    152

  Figure 8 - Variation of KQ with Initial Solids
    Concentration 	    153

  Figure 9 - Capital Cost of Thickeners	    156

  Figure 10 - Operating Costs for Lime Neutral-
    ization Including Sludge Dewatering by Vacuum
    Filtration	    158

  Figure 11 - Cost of Filtration Through Sand
    or Graded Media	    160

  Figure 12 - Annual Operating Cost of Deep
    Well Injection Systems for Waste Disposal  .  .    162

  Figure 13 - Capital Cost of Deep Well Injection
    Systems for  Waste Disposal	    163

  Figure 14 - Area of Membranes as a Function  of
    Production Rate		    165

  Figure 15 - Membrane Area Required Versus Feed
    and Product  Flows	    166

  Figure 16 - Power  Consumption as a Function  of
    Production Rate	    167

  Figure 17 - Capital Cost as a Function of
    Production Rate	    168

  Figure 18 - Capital Cost of Reverse Osmosis
    Plant	    170
                          xi

-------
               LIST OP FIGURES (cont.)

                                                     Page

APPENDIX C (cont.)

  Figure 19 - Operating Cost for Reverse Osmosis
    Plant	    171

  Figure 20 - Determination of Total Number of
    Units Required for Treatment	    173

  Figure 21 - Relationship of Plate Area Required
    for a Desired TDS Removal	    174

  Figure 22 - Relationship of Rectifier Size to
    Specific TDS Removal Desired	    175

  Figure 23 - Capital Cost of Membranes, Spacers,
    End Plates, and Electrodes	    179

  Figure 24 - Capital Cost Curves for DC Rectifier
    for Electrodialysis	    180

  Figure 25 - Relationship of DC Energy Required
    for a Desired TDS Removal	      181

  Figure 26 - Operating Cost of DC Energy Re-
    quired for Specific TDS Removal	      183

  Figure 27 - Capital and Operating Costs for
    Electrodialysis Based on Feed Flow to Plant
    at 3000 ppm TDS	    184

  Figure 28 - Capital Cost of Ion Exchange Plant.    186

  Figure 29 - Chemical Cost per Pound TDS
    Removed by Ion Exchange	    187

  Figure 30 - Capital and Operating Cost for
    Multiple Effect Evaporation 	    190

  Figure 31 - Vapor Pressure of Water Versus
    Temperature	    192

  Figure 32 - Evaporation Versus Vapor Pressure
    Differential	    193
                          xii

-------
               LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

                                                     Page

APPENDIX C (cont.)

  Figure 33 - Area Versus Required Evaporation.  .    194

  Figure 34 - Capital Cost Relationship for
    Lagoons	    195

  Figure 35 - Relative Rating Factors Versus Wet
    Bulb Temperatures	    200

  Figure 36 - Cooling Towers	    202
                           xiii

-------
                     CHAPTER I

                      SUMMARY
This report presents a description of the inorganic
chemical industry, and the costs that the industry would
incur in attaining various levels of pollution abatement
over a five year period through 1974.  The cost estimates
have been based upon published data, general data derived
from information in the files of the Contractors on in-
dustrial waste treatment methods and costs, and specific
data from 59 inorganic chemical plants, some of which
were supplied by the Manufacturing Chemists Association.
(The data supplied by the M.C.A. were presented in such
a manner as to render impossible identification of pro-
prietary information relating to a specific plant's
construction, operation, maintenance, or production.)

The inorganic chemical industry has been defined for pur-
poses of this study as including establishments producing
alkalies and chlorine, industrial gases, inorganic pig-
ments, paints and allied products, fertilizers  (excluding
ammonia and urea), inorganic insecticides and herbicides,
explosives, and other major industrial inorganic chemi-
cals.  The complex relationship which exists between
various products and industries, however, make it
extremely difficult to arbitrarily associate certain
products with one category.  The overall output of the
industry, since its products are used for a wide variety
of purposes well removed from the final consumer, depends
upon the level of total economic activity rather than
the economic activity in any one segment of the economy.
Since new mineral sources are discovered infrequently and
usually involve large development expenditures, wide
fluctuations in the gap between demand and readily avail-
able supply are quite common.

Total production in the inorganic chemical industry is
estimated to be 328.7 billion pounds in 1969 and projected
at 455.5 billion pounds in 1974.  While certain segments
of the industry are growing as rapidly as 18% per year,
the historical situation is for a growth rate 1.5 to 2.0
times that of the gross national product.  The overall
price index of inorganic chemicals, however, has fallen

-------
 2.5 percent  in  the recent past.   Thus,  expenditures  for
 pollution control may be of  greater  relative  significance
 than  in other industries where prevailing  rising  prices
 can more readily absorb increased costs.

 The regional growth rates reflect a  continuing  trend to
 move  production facilities closer to raw materials and
 markets.  The industry, as a whole,  is  thus tending  to
 concentrate  in  the Midwest and Southwest.

 Inorganic chemical plants vary greatly  in  size, level of
 technology, product mix, and age.  The  report presents in
 considerable detail the description  of  the various
 production processes, the waste treatment methods
 practiced, and  the possible  impact that changes in
 processes might have on the  volume and  cnaracter  of  the
 wastes produced.  A typical  or average  plant exists,
 however, only in the statistical  sense.  The total costs
 given in this report are for the  construction and opera-
 tion of waste treatment facilities for  the industry  as a
 whole and cannot be used to  determine costs for individual
 plants.  The costs given are for  the waste treatment
 facilities only.  The costs  entailed  in process changes,
 restriction of  plant operations,  sewer  segregation,
 particularly in older plants, are  not included.  Treat-
ment system construction and operating  costs for a
particular plant can only be estimated  by detailed
 engineering studies.

Projections based upon the chemical  industry data in the
 1963 Census of Manufactures, the  1967 Manufacturing
Chemists Association survey, the  1968 FWPCA study of
 the organic chemicals industry, and  the costs of treat-
ment for the two levels of 27% and 100% removal of
contaminants show the following projected operating
costs and cumulative capital investment for wastewater
 treatment.
 PROJECTED CUMULATIVE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY CAPITAL
          COSTS FOR WASTE TREATMENT, 1969-74
              Costs in Millions of Current Dollars
                                                   I/
Removal   1969    1970    1971    1972    1973    1974
  27     314.3    341.7   377.9   420.1   467.7   519.4

 100    1898.8   2062.2  2281.9  2537.1  2823.5  3118.5

-------
  PROJECTED INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY ANNUAL OPERATING
          COSTS FOR WASTE TREATMENT, 1969-74
Removal

   27

   100
             Costs in Millions of Current Dollars =•'
                                                  I/
1969
86.1
165.4
1970
93.6
179.6
1971
103.5
198.7
1972
115.1
221.0
1973
128.1
245.9
1974
142.3
273.2
I/ Based on an average 3.6% annual increase in the price
   level
Contaminated wastewater from the inorganic chemical indus-
try comes primarily from electrolysis and crystallization
brines, washings from filter cakes, spent acid and alka-
lies, and washings from raw materials.  These wastewaters
are generally characterized by dissolved solids and sus-
pended solids.  In addition to contaminated waste streams,
process cooling discharges occur, accounting for 40 to 80%
of the total discharge on the average.  Treatment practi-
ces vary but involve in-plant segregation of contaminated
wastes from uncontaminated cooling waters.

Many waste treatment methods are available depending on
the degree of treatment required, however, equalization,
neutralization, sedimentation and lagooning processes
are most widely used.  Biological treatment is not appli-
cable since the contaminants are primarily dissolved or
suspended inorganic materials.  Plants with small dis-
charges tend to employ only equalization and neutraliza-
tion with total discharge to municipal sewer systems for
joint treatment.  It is estimated that between 10 and 20%
of the process wastewater discharge from the industry is
to municipal systems (7.9% of the total discharge).  No
significant percentage changes in this regard are
expected through 1974.  The inorganic chemical industry
has generally found that in-plant, separate treatment has
economic advantages, particularly when significant quanti-
ties of wastewater are involved.

Data from 59 inorganic chemical plants were obtained
and formatted according to the Industrial Waste Treatment
Practices Data Form, which was developed for the study
"The Cost of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact, Volume
IV," United States Department of the Interior, January,

-------
1969.  The data obtained are given in some detail in the
report in terms of bar graphs and various calculated
parameters relating wastewater volumes, plant production,
and costs.

Key parameters of interest regarding waste treatment costs
are the following:

Average capital cost         $223/1000 gpd
Average operating cost/yr.   $58.49/1000 gpd
Average wastewater flow      16.73 gpd/annual ton of pro-
                             duction
Average capital cost         $3.74/annual ton of production
Average operating cost       $0.98 per year/annual ton of
                             production

An examination of the survey data showed that the reported
bases of waste treatment decisions were generally least
cost, or minimum compliance with pollution control regula-
tions .

The costs of unit wastewater treatment methods were
developed and are presented in the report as a series
of mathematical models and cost function graphs.  These
data were used to calculate capital costs of waste
treatment facilities versus two levels of pollutant
removal for a series of typical plants.  Treatment Level
I was chosen to represent the average treatment employed
in the industry as a whole and is judged to be equivalent
to 27% removal of suspended and dissolved solids.  Treat-
ment Level II represents complete removal of contaminants.
Only two levels were selected because the industrial
wastes are principally inorganic solids that respond only
to physical treatment processes.  Because there are no
intervening technologies, intermediate levels of
efficiency are not distinguishable.  The two levels then
may be viewed as a range bounded on the one side by the
current level of efficiency and on the other by universal
application of advanced treatment practices.  An almost
infinite number of intermediate positions are possible for
the industry as a whole within the range, but only as the
treatment II technology is applied to individual units of
the population.  Unlike the case of organic waste, there
is no series of technological plateaus through which the
whole population may progress.

-------
The following table summarizes the capital and operating
costs in 1969 dollars for the two levels of treatment
chosen:

                             Capital Cost  Operating Cost
    % Removal Contaminants    $/1000 qpd     C/1000 gal

     27 (SS and Acidity)         300           26.0
    100 (TDSJ '                   2185           51.5

-------
                      CHAPTER II

                     INTRODUCTION
This study was performed pursuant to Contract No. 14-12-
592 with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion, United States Department of the Interior.

The primary objective of this study was to acquire data
and develop cost estimates on the waste treatment prac-
tices of selected industrial categories within the in-
organic chemicals industry over the 1970 to 1974 period.
A secondary objective of the study was to further test
and refine as necessary the generalized methodology for
establishing and projecting industry costs which was de-
veloped in the course of work under PWPCA Contract No.
14-12-435 "Projected Wastewater Treatment Costs in the
Organic Chemicals Industry."  This report was transmitted
to the Congress in January, 1969 as The Cost of Clean
Water, Volume IV.

The information contained in this report is not intended
to reflect the cost or waste load situations for any
particular plant.  A generalized framework for analyzing
waste treatment practices has been provided instead.
The data and conclusions should be useful to industry
and to government in their efforts to find and implement
the most efficient ways to reduce pollution of the
nation's water bodies.

The study utilized on subcontract the services of
Resource Engineering Associates, Inc., Stamford, Conn.,
Datagraphics, Inc, Allison Park, Pa., and Gurnham,
Bramer, and Associates, Inc., McMurray, Pa.  Assistance
from the Manufacturing Chemists Association in supplying
data, comments,  and suggestions is gratefully acknowledged,

-------
                     CHAPTER III

           THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
The inorganic chemical industry is not easily definable
in terms of the Standard Industrial Classification  (SIC)
numbers.  However, for the purpose of this study, it was
necessary to define the industry as follows:

     2812 - Alkalies and chlorine
     2813 - Industrial gases (except for organic gases)
     2816 - Inorganic pigments
     2819 - Industrial inorganic chemicals, n.e.c.
     2851 - Paints and allied products
     2871 - Fertilizers (not including ammonia and urea)
     2879 - Inorganic insecticides and herbicides
     2892 - Explosives

The most important of the groups in terms of product value
may be noted as 2819, 2812, and 2871.  However, it is not
sufficient to ignore such groups as 2813 which includes
the important production of nitrogen and oxygen, 2851
which includes the vital surface coatings industry, or
2816 which involves inorganic pigments such as titanium
oxide.  The surface coatings industry is typical of the
relationship which exists between segments of the
inorganic industry and the organic chemical industry.  The
solvents and film formers which are utilized within the
inorganic chemical industry for the production of surface
coatings are important products of the organic chemical
industry while inorganic pigments, primarily oxides and
salts of titanium, iron and other metals are products
which fall into the inorganic industry category.  We have
defined the total product as being part of the inorganic
industry.  However, it is obvious that the complex
relationships which exist between various products and
industries (necessary to the smooth functioning of our
technological state) make it extremely difficult, if not
impossible, to arbitrarily associate certain products
with one SIC category.  Product profiles are given in
Appendix C, along with typical product process flow
sheets.

The overall output of industrial inorganic chemicals,
since they are utilized in a wide range of industries
and for a wide variety of purposes usually well removed
from the final consumer, depends upon the level of

-------
total economic activity rather than economic activity in
any specific segment of the economy.

Changes in consumer preferences or redistribution of in-
come and spending, such as changes in tax levels or
defense spending/ may affect product mixes, but do not
significantly affect total industry output.  In general,
price competition and product substitution are not as
significant in the inorganic chemical industry as in the
organic chemical sector.  However/ changes although slow
to come tend to be quite profound.

Supplies of raw materials frequently vary and, in the
case of certain materials, the industry may face serious
shortages until new raw material sources  (usually ores
or brines) are developed.  The widely fluctuating price
of sulfur over the past ten years is a classic case
resulting from supply fluctuations which can be matched
by mercury, potash and silver, among others.  Since new
sources of minerals are found infrequently and usually
involve relatively large expenditures to develop, wide
fluctuations in the gap between demand and readily
available supply are quite common in the inorganic
chemical industry.

Industrial chemical industries are generally capital
intensive operations (with a few exceptions such as the
paint manufacturing industry), and are characterized by
high productivity  ($75,000 annual output per production
worker), high wages, a low labor turnover, and a con-
tinuing demand for skilled labor.  Most of the plants
operate continuous and must operate at 75 to 85 percent
of capacity to maintain adequate levels of efficiency
and profitability.  Smaller plants generally operate
batch processes and, hence, tend to produce low volume,
high cost, specialized chemicals.  Financial ratios for
the chemical and allied products industry are shown in
Table I.
                             8

-------
                                    TABLE I

         FINANCIAL RATIOS FOR THE CHEMICALS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
               Ratio                    1963    1965    1967    1968
Profits after taxes/sales (%)            7.5     7.9     6.9     6.8
Profits after taxes/net worth  (%}       12.9    14.7    12.6    13.1
Capital expenditure/gross plant  (%}      6.3     8.2     7.6      -
Depreciation/gross plant (%)             6.1     5.8     5.8     6.0
Depreciation/sales (%)                   4.5     4.4     4.5     4.5
Sales/total assets                       1.13    1.13    1.10    1.14
   First half
SOURCE:  U.S. Industrial Outlook, 1970, U.S. Department of Commerce

-------
Profits after taxes as a percentage of sales  in  the
inorganic chemical industry ranged from 6.5 in 1967  to
7.9 in 1964-65.  By comparison, comparable profits
for all manufacturing industries were 5.0 in  1967 and
5.4 in 1968.  It is important to note that while the
inorganic segment attracts less attention than the organic
sector, satisfactory profits are generally associated
with investment in this segment.

The estimated value of inorganic chemical shipments  for
1969 and 1970 are shown in II.
                       TABLE II

     VALUE OF ESTIMATED INORGANIC CHEMICAL SHIPMENTS
                 (1969-70)($ million)

     SIC                 1969                1970

     2812                 792                 832
     2813                 653                 715
     2816                 690                 725
     2819                4305                4500
     2851                3459                3675
     2871-72             1856                1904
     2879                 830                 880
     2892                 517                 533

     SOURCE:  U.S. Industrial Outlook, 1970, U.S.
              Department of Commerce
Further comparisons within the inorganic chemical indus-
try show that the price index for the chemical industry
in mid-1969 was 96.7 on the basis of 1957-59 = 100.   In
1968, the level was 98.8.  The paint industry price
index was 114.4 in 1968 and 118.7 in 1969.  The ferti-
lizer industry price level was 102.3 in 1968 and 88.8
in 1969.  Several factors distinguish the inorganic
chemical industry and its relationship to waste manage-
ment.  Among these are the following:

1.  While certain segments of the industry are growing
    rapidly, the more common situation is for a growth
    rate at 1.5 to 2 times that of the gross national
    product and several of the major chemicals have
    growth curves which might be substituted for a
                            10

-------
    historical projection of industrial growth in
    general.   This strong growth will affect the need
    for pollution control facilities.

2.   Capital investment is generally considerable and,
    because of the nature of inorganic chemistry and
    its long history of relatively unchanging practice,
    rapid technological obsolescence does not occur.
    Consequently, new capacity is not quickly built.
    This industry moves more slowly to increase plant
    capacity than the organic chemical industry
    for example.   Accordingly, the inorganic chemical
    industry with its relatively aged plant in place
    faces relatively high expenditures for added pollu-
    tion control facilities.

3.   The overall price index of chemicals, in contrast
    with the general experience of American industry,
    has fallen two to five percent in the recent past.
    Thus, expenditures for pollution control may be of
    greater relative significance than in other indus-
    tries where prevailing rising prices can more
    readily absorb increased costs.

4.   Inorganic chemical plants tend to be located to
    take advantage of such business factors as the
    availability of raw materials, low cost power, or
    markets.   Considerations relating pollution con-
    trol and plant location have been of minor
    importance in the past.

5.   Many facilities are old and completely depreciated.
    Accordingly, there is little incentive to build
    pollution control facilities to handle wastes from
    an obsolete operation.  Because of the nature of the
    industry, obsolete units remain sufficiently profit-
    able to continue in use.

6.   Characteristically, inorganic chemicals are handled
    in only two or three steps from raw material  (brine
    or ore, usually) to product for use by industry
    elsewhere.  While the inorganic chemical industry
    includes a large number of products and processes
    with the possibility of many different products at a
    particular production site, there are a limited
    number of products which comprise the bulk of the
                           11

-------
value of this industry's production; these are
discussed in detail in Appendix C to this report
along with the wastes generated by their production,
The location of this portion of the industry's
production is shown on Map A.
                       12

-------
                                    LOCATION  OF  MAJOR   INORGANIC  CHEMICAL   PLANTS

                                                    SIC  NOS.   2812,  2816,  2819
t-1
UJ
                       •  over  1000 employees

                       •  500-999 employees

                       •   250 -499 employees
                 This mop represents a compilation, in content  and configuration, of the  location of major  inorganic  chemical plant» classified by SIC 2812.

                 2816. and 2819.  The  source of this information was the  book by Barry R. Lowson, Atlas of Industrial Wattr Ust - A Riport to  flu

                 Woltr fttsourcts Council, Cornell Univertity Water  Resource!  Center. Ithace,  New  York, Publication No. 18, September , 1967. pp. 21,25
                 a 29.

-------
                       CHAPTER  IV

                PROJECTED  INDUSTRY  GROWTH
During the next decade,  the  inorganic chemical  industry
will be characterized by new technology and many new
products.  Many large volume chemicals are likely  to
face changing markets as synthetic materials replace
natural products and one inorganic chemical is  replaced
by another.  Some of the processes that will bring changes
in inorganic chemicals utilization include hydrocracking
in gasoline refining, oxygen use  in steelmaking and in
blast furnaces, holopulping  to eliminate chemical  markets
in papermaking, the use  of hydrochloric acid in steel
pickling, the production of  phosphoric acid from hydro-
chloric or nitric acid,  the  recovery of chlorine from
by-product hydrochloric  acid, the recovery of sulfur com-
pounds from power plant  flue gases, the use of  oxygen in
sparging rivers, streams, and sewers as a pollution
abatement measure.

Inorganic chemicals represent a rapidly growing sector
of the chemical industry.  In the 1963-69 period,  the
production of inorganic  chemicals as measured by the
U.S. Department of Commerce  production index rose  about
12% per year compounded, compared to a 7% rate  for the
previous five years.  Prices in the industry, however,
have risen only 5.3% per year during 1963-68 due to
both competitive pressures and to improved production
efficiencies.

Projected growth in the  industry, for the purposes of
the present study, are best  expressed in terms  of  the
volume of production based upon the tonnages of chemicals
produced.  Growth estimates  have been obtained  from a
study by Resource Engineering Associates, Stamford,
Conn., utilizing an analysis which incorporates estimates
of overall employment, rate  of growth of the economy,
and other economic parameters, as well as specific
characteristics of the industry and marketability  pros-
pects for its products.  These data are considered to
be the most reliable available and are tabulated in
Table I.
                           14

-------
                                             TABLE I


                               PRODUCTION  OF INORGANIC CHEMICALS
                            (millions of  tons unless otherwise noted)
        SIC
                1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
Ul
2812
2813 y
2316
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
24
365
1.20
70
843
41.50
0.20
250
25
420
1.25
72
899
41.80
0.20
264
26
495
1.29
74
944
42.25
0.19
274
28
595
1.37
77
1000
43.94
0.18
282
30
715
1.44
80
1060
46.14
0.18
293
32
850
1.51
84
1124
47.99
0.17
305
34
1000
1.59
88
1191
49.91
0.15
322
        I/ High purity oxygen and nitrogen  only  (billions  of cu«.  ft.)
        2/ Millions of dollars
        3_/ Millions of gallons

-------
The  above  data  are  applicable  to the inorganic chemical
industry as  a whole,  but  rates of growth vary in the
various segments  of the industry and from one geographi-
cal  region to another.  Expected rates of growth over
the  next decade according to industry segment and
according  to geographical region are given in Tables II
and  III.
                        TABLE  II

       INDUSTRY  SEGMENTAL  GROWTH  RATES  THROUGH 1979

       SIC No.              Growth Rate  (%/year)

        2812                         6
        2813                        18
        2816                         5
        2819                         4
        2851                         6
        2871                         4
        2879                         1
        2892                         4

       SOURCE:   REA Projections
The above growth rates are based upon volumes  of  produc-
tion and assume a real growth in the Gross National  Product
of 3.5% per year.
                      TABLE III

         INDUSTRY GROWTH RATES GEOGRAPHICALLY
                     THROUGH 1975

	Region	    Growth Rate  (%/year)

Northeast and Middle Atlantic              4
Southeast                                  6
Gulf Coast                                 5
North Central                            10
Mid South                                10
Mountain States                            4
Pacific Coast                              5

SOURCE:  REA Projections
                           16

-------
The regional growth rates reflect the continuing trend
to move production facilities closer to raw materials
and markets.  The industry will thus tend to concentrate
more'heavily in the Midwest and Southeast.
                            17

-------
                       CHAPTER V

               WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Wastewater  from inorganic  chemical  processing consists
both  of  contaminated  and relatively clean  effluent streams.
In  general,  the contaminated wastewaters are  those taken
from  processes  while  the cleaner wastewaters  are  those  used
for indirect heat  exchange, general washing,  etc.
Contaminated Wastewaters

The major sources of contaminated wastewaters  are  as
follows:

1.  Brines arising  from electrolysis  and  crystallization
2.  Filter cake washings
3.  Waste acid and  alkaline streams
4.  Washing streams containing  substantial  amounts of
    suspended particulate matter

These waters are generally characterized  by dissolved
solids and suspended solids.  Typical sources  are
discussed in connection with the various  processes
described in detail in Appendix C of  this report.


Clean Wastewaters

Clean waters, which are basically uncontaminated and
can be discharged untreated, are not included  in the
total flows given in wastewater totals.   Cooling water
and steam condensates are the primary sources  of such
water, and a typical breakdown  is given in  Table I.

Also included is an indication  of potential pollutants
and associated sources and concentrations.  Because
these clean wastewaters are relatively uncontaminated
and exert little pollutional effect (except thermal)
on the environment, care must be exercised  to  prevent
their contamination.

The thermal effects cannot be ignored.  Effluent heat
loads can adversely affect the  surface receiving
waters/ causing decreased oxygen solubility and greater
oxygen utilization.  Both of these effects  significantly
                          18

-------
                                    TABLE I

                   COMPOSITION OF TYPICAL CLEAN WATER EFFLUENT
     Water Sources
% of Total
Wastewater
Flow Range (gpm)
          Potential Pollutant
                Sources
Cooling Water
(excluding sea water)
  40 - 80
  100 -  10,000
 (500 - 200,000
 (gal. water ton
  product)
Steam Equipment
    10
   50 -
1,000
Process leaks:
  Bearings, exchangers
   etc.

Water treatment
Scrubbed from air
  through tower
Make-up water
Boiler blowdown
Waste condensate

-------
reduce the ability of the receiving water to assimilate
waste loads.  Through the use of cooling towers, the
quantity of high temperature wastewaters discharged has
been greatly reduced.

The segregation of clean wastewater flows is widely
practiced throughout the inorganic chemical industry/ as
a result of overall wastewater treatment economics and
regulatory requirements.  Although there is a limited
possibility that wastewater flows can be further
reduced by segregating additional clean waters, most
major clean waters are currently collected and either
recirculated or discharged separately in those in-
organic chemical plants with treatment facilities.
Thermal Pollutants

Many process facilities in the inorganic chemical industry
generate large amounts of thermal energy which must be
removed by the circulation of cooling waters or air.
Additional heat is released through the release of hot
brines from evaporators, etc.  Of particular significance
are the gas producing plants because of their need to
discharge the thermal energy extracted from air or
natural gas during their compression and cooling to sub-
zero temperatures.  In many cases, the problems of
thermal pollution are reduced through the use of cooling
towers.  In the latter case, the blowdown from such re-
circulating systems may contain substantial amounts of
chemicals added to the cooling water such as chromates,
zinc, phosphates, bactericides, organics, etc., which
may constitute a pollution problem.

In the case of many industries, there is concerted
effort to produce by-product steam from excess thermal
energy.  In the manufacture of sulfuric acid, for
example, by-product steam is important to process
economics.  In many other cases, however, waste hot
brines and other similar waste flows are held in ponds
for cooling prior to discharge into surface waters.
                           20

-------
                      CHAPTER VI

             WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS
A variety of sequences of wastewater treatment are avail-
able for wastes from inorganic chemical manufacture.
Their use depends on the nature of the waste and treatment
requirements.  These sequences are indicated in Figure 1.
Three typical cases will be presented.  These are:

  I.  Waste-containing dissolved and suspended solids
 II.  An excess thermal energy discharge
III.  Waste-containing dissolved solids


Treatment Sequence I

In this case, the proposed treatment sequence might be:

  Liquid  2-3-4-7-11-15 (Note that 8, 9, and 10 can
                        substitute for 7 and 11)
  Solids  15-14-12-19

In this sequence, the waste flow is equalized and oil
is removed, clarification is used for suspended solids
removal, and the dissolved solids are concentrated and
sent to a deep well for disposal.  The effluent dis-
tillate is then discharged or reused.  The suspended
solids slurry will be thickened, centrifuged, and dis-
posed of in a lagoon.  Alternately, chemical addition
could be used for dissolved solids removal if the dis-
solved ions have a common insoluble salt.  Then the
dissolved ion problem has been converted to a suspended
solids problem and a suspended solids removal and disposal
sequence of 4-15-14-12 would be followed.  It is also
possible to concentrate the dissolved ions by electro-
dialysis, or by ion exchange instead of distillation
and the sequence would be similar to that described
above.

The blowdown from the dissolved solids concentration
step instead of being disposed in a deep well may be
distilled to dryness, solar evaporated, or converted to
a saleable product.
                           21

-------
to
to
          DILUTE
PRETREATMENT
. WASTE WATER
SUSPENDED
SOLID REMOVAL

DISSOLVED
SOLID REMOVAL

LIQUID DISPOSAL

SLUDGE TREATMENT

HEAT REMOVAL

                                          FIGURE  I

                               WASTEWATER TREATMENT  SEQUENCE

-------
Treatment Sequence II

Here the proposed treatment sequence would be:

               17-6-4-13

That is, a cooling tower  (or a spray pond) would be
installed and the cooled effluent discharged or recycled.
If recycling is used, then the blowdown from the system
may be treated by chemical addition and clarification to
remove undesirable components  (especially hexavalent
chrome and zinc added for corrosion control) prior to
discharge.  The suspended matter would then go into a
suspended solids disposal sequence discussed above.


Treatment Sequence III

With a very light suspended solids load but a heavy dis-
solved solids load, the sequence  (with excess acidity)
would be:

               2-1-7-11-13

where neutralizing would be prescribed following equaliza-
tion.  This would be followed by reverse osmosis  (or
distillation, electrodialysis, ion exchange or chemical
addition depending upon the circumstances) and discharge.
The concentrate would be disposed of in a deep well or
evaporated to dryness.

At this point, it is important to note the existence of
two significant treatment sequences of general impor-
tance.  They are:

                                     Treatment Sequence
a) excessive acidity or alkalinity
   streams                                   1
b) many high dissolved solids  streams     2-5-11

The above two treatment sequences are commonly used in
many circumstances in this industry.  These treatment
sequences, of course, do not represent all those used by
the industry but are considered to be the most prevalent.
                          23

-------
Joint Industrial Municipal Treatment

According to the U.S. Department of Commerce's 1968 publi-
cation/ Water Use in Industry, (the most recent available
report), a total of 1.251 trillion gallons of water
(excluding SIC 2879 Inorganic Insecticides and Herbicides)
were discharged from plants of this industry group.  Of
this total, some 98.4 billion gallons, or 7.9%, were
discharged to municipal systems.  These studies, which
are supported by others, indicate that there is tremen-
dous variation within groups.  The study (see Table I)
indicates that the SIC groups 2812, 2819, 2871, and 2892
do not make significant use of municipal systems, un-
doubtedly because of the nature of their discharges (high
chlorides, conservative species, low or high pH) and their
volume as well as the location of the plants.  SIC 2813
and 2851 make extensive use of municipal systems.  The
data for 2813 were not available, but because of the
plant locations and the fact that the waters discharged
are primarily cooling waters, it is estimated that 40
percent goes into municipal systems.  The data on SIC
2879 are inconclusive and that on 2816 indicate that a
significant though not necessarily major percentage of
the plants do use municipal facilities.

The data in Table I apply only to plants reporting water
use of at least 20 million gallons per year or having
more than 100 employees.  The distribution of water use
by SIC categories and plant sizes is shown in Table II
for 1963, the latest available data.  The distribution
of employees is shown in Table III.
                         24

-------
                                         TABLE I

                                WATER DISCHARGE BY SIC (1)
to
en
Inorganic
Industry        SIC

Alkalies        2812
Gases           2813
Pigments        2816
Chemicals       2819
Paints          2851
Fertilizers     2871
Herbicides      2879
Explosives      2892
Total Discharge
(billion gals/yr)

      364.1
       80.8
       91.5
      468.0
        6.5
       97.4
  Not available
      143.1
Discharge to
Municipal Systems
(billion gals/yr)

       47.2
        2.7
        1.0
       42.6
        4.6
        0.3
  Not available
   Less than 50
  million gallons
Percent to
Municipal Sewers

      13.0
       3.3
       1.1
       9.1
      70.8
       0.3

       0.0
     (1)  U.S.  Census Bureau, Census of Manufactures (1968), Water Use in Manufacturing

-------
                                            TABLE II

                                   EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION  (1)
ro
        Number of
        Employees
    1-4
    5-9
   10-19
   20-49
   50-99
  100-249
  250-499
  500-999
1,000-2,499
2,500 and more
                                                SIC
2812
3
1
-
5
5
12
6
6
6
—
2813
130
86
115
110
33
12
1
-
-
-
2816
14
13
11
22
11
12
11
1
3
-
2819
168
85
107
117
92
74
42
21
8
4
2851
468
242
311
350
171
113
36
8
2
—
2871
8
7
14
55
71
40
14
3
1
-
2879
106
62
61
66
23
19
4
2
1
-
2892
31
5
4
13
7
15
5
6
1
5
        (1) U.S. Census Bureau, ibid

-------
to
Number of
Establishments
Reporting
Indicated
Water Use
(mil, gal/yr)

 Less than 1
    1-9
   10-19
   20-99
    100+
                                           TABLE  III

                                DISTRIBUTION OF  WATER USE -  1963
SIC
2812
4
2
1
2
29
2813
197
106
36
33
49
2816
32
13
4
7
20
2819
189
98
39
60
138
2851
981
162
28
38
15
2871
104
50
24
32
31
2879
218
23
2
7
3
2892
28
4
5
4
17
       U.S. Census Bureau, 1963 Census of Manufacturers, Water Use in Manufacturing

-------
The smallest plants tend to discharge effluent to munici-
pal sewers but they also tend to discharge small volumes
of water.  If we assume that they discharge all of their
effluent water to municipal sewers, the figures change as
shown below:
                             Percent to Municipal Sewers
      SIC                    From Table IRecalculated

      2812                       13.0           13.0
      2813                        3.3            4.9
      2816                        1.1            1.3
      2819                        9,1            9.3
      2851                       70.8          100.0
      2871                        0.3            1.0
      2892                        0.0       Not available

Thus, the total discharge on a percentage basis is not
significantly changed and would approximate 8.2 percent
of the total.

It is significant to note that the total percentage, and
that within an SIC group, is not going to increase
significantly in the future.  Spreading municipal systems
and increasing pressure on industry to treat its wastes
will be counter-balanced by restrictions on discharges
into municipal systems which will be especially true
with regard to discharges from the inorganic chemical
industry.  It is likely that waste streams currently
being discharged into municipal systems from this indus-
try's establishments will be reduced because of increas-
ingly stringent sewer restrictions.  The main point is
that there is not much point in co-treating a highly
conservative, dissolved solids waste stream in a facility
designed to treat non-conservative, suspended and
colloidal solids wastewaters.

Sewer restrictions which may bar or establish limita-
tions on chlorides, total dissolved solids, suspended
solids,  heavy metals, color, pH, etc., are the princi-
pal barriers to the acceptance of wastewaters from this
industry into a municipal system.  Economics rarely
play a role since almost any charge levied by a munici-
pality would be cheaper than known techniques for treat-
ing inorganic dissolved solids in most locations where
direct discharge to receiving streams is not permitted.

Rates vary from the infrequent zero cost to a rate on a
par with residential customers up through above average
costs based on surcharges or intentional industrial
burdens.  Charges may run from $0.10-$1.00/1000 gallons
                        28

-------
with a level of $0.30-$0.40/1000 gallons at the 30-50
mgd treatment level believed to be average.

The chemical industry has generally found that in-plant,
separate treatment for neutralization and suspended solids
removal has economic advantages, particularly when
significant quantities of contaminated wastewaters are
involved.  No significant percentage increase in the
amount of wastewaters treated in municipal systems is
expected in the near future.  If complete, water renova-
tion of municipal wastewater becomes common, however,
then joint treatment for this industry's wastewater might
become more common and desirable.
                        29

-------
                     CHAPTER VII

   INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT PRACTICES DATA FORM
The Industrial Waste Treatment Practices Data Form was
developed as a part of the study entitled "Projected
Wastewater Costs in the Organic Chemicals Industry"
under Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Contract No. 14-12-435 and published as a part of "The
Cost of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact - Volume
IV," United States Department of the Interior, January,
1969, and further refined in a subsequent study entitled
"Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile" under Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration Contract No. 14-
12-592 and published as a part of "The Economics of
Clean Water - Volume Three," United States Department
of the Interior, March, 1970.
                          30

-------
                     CHAPTER VIII

                  PLANT SURVEY DATA
The Industrial Waste Treatment Practices Data Form was
used to tabulate data from 59 inorganic chemical plants.
The basic data obtained are tabulated in Appendix B and
are portrayed in the bar graphs of Figures 1 to 9.

From those plants for which adequate information was
available, the following average statistics were calcu-
lated:

  Average production = 280,734 tons per year
  Water use per plant = 27,034,619 gpd
  Wastewater discharge per plant = 4.697 mgd
  Average treatment efficiency = 85%
  Average capital costs of treatment facilities =
    $1,048,578
  Average operating costs of treatment facilities =
    $274,730 per year

  Generalizing the above data:

  Average capital cost = $223/1000 gpd
  Average operating cost = $58.49 per year/1000 gpd
  Average wastewater flow = 16.73 gpd/annual ton of
    production
  Average capital cost = $3.74/annual ton of
    production
  Average operating cost = $0.98 per year/annual ton
    of production

The generally fragmentary nature of the survey data is
indicative of the status of wastewater treatment in
this segment of the chemical industry.  Wastewater
treatment practices tend to be those which reduce gross
pollutants such as acidity, oil, and suspended solids.
The refractory nature of the wastes from most of the
industry's processes would require more advanced treat-
ment technologies than have generally been applied.

The production, capital costs, and operating costs
data reported per plant are judged to be reliable.
Such data are easily obtained from plant records.  The
data reported on wastewater flows, however, are not
sufficiently reliable to be used for projection calcula-
                          31

-------
tions; these data are in error in that contaminated
wastewater flows are not accurately differentiated from
cooling water effluents.

Even though an extensive correlation study was made,
no statistically significant relationships were found
among the various cost-related parameters.  The relation-
ship indicated in Figure 10 showing operating costs of
treatment facilities per ton of annual production as a
function of capital costs of facilities per ton of annual
production is the most useful found; it can be used to
indicate at least order-of-magnitude variations.

Among the plants in the survey sample, production
capacities were generally low while wastewater volumes
reported tended to be high.  Most of the plants employed
more than 100 persons and were less than 10 years old.
The plants were widespread geographically and, accord-
ingly, may be considered to be representative in this
regard.  The bases of treatment decisions for these plants
were generally least cost or minimum compliance with
regulations.  A few decisions were made on the basis of
a projected economic return and only one plant decision
was based on ultimate treatment.
                          32

-------
                           FIGURE  I
a:
<
UJ
V)
2
o


u.
O
O

I-
o
3
a
o
a:
Q.

0>
O
-TOTAL PRODUCTION


-SURVEYED PRODUCTION
              2813   2816   2819   2851   2871   2879

                  STANDARD INDUSTRIAL  CATEGORY
                 2892
                           33

-------
                   FIGURE  2
10   15  20    30   40  50  60  70
              PLANT FREQUENCY
80 85  90    95
98
                 34

-------
Ul
           Tl
              8

                                  I

                                                                                                              --
H
o
a
»
ra

OJ
                Q01    Q05Q1 Q2Q512     5   10     20304050607080    90   95    9899     99B999     9999

                                                            PLANT  FREQUENCY

-------
o
z
U
3
O
U
tr
I-
z
    18



    17
    15


    14
    12


    II
9



8



7



6



5



4



3



2

                 i-t——i • • • I i —ili'' i

                 FIGURE 4
                  HI

        timMiMMttm




                         COOT
                            lo
                                 o:
                                 i^


                             :
                MAJOR SOURCE OF WATER
                     36

-------
                           FIGURE  5
o
z
111

o
UJ

U.

H

<

0.
8
6











     M



        li:
        ::


          •



            {h;



= ?  O  :r
          T-
            -
                  m


                    rrrt
                        :
                        ::

                       iiii


                          1



            »-b~
                      Q.

                      °
                       :n i!:
                  m


                            11LL

                    1








                                 i:tt






                                O


                                P
                                Oz>

                                O UJ
                             .







                            ffi


                                      1





                                          !i:


                                 tffl


                                             E US
                                            141


                                            u
                                            o


                                               • '

                                       i:
                                       .;.;

                                                   •








                                                      :



                                                            .
                                                            ::::




                                              tra

                                                             :
                BASIS OF  TREATMENT  DECISION
                               37

-------
u
z
UJ
z>
a
UJ
cc
                              FIGURE  6
    14



    13



    12
10



 9



 8
    4




    3




    2



     I
            :4
                         I
                              !
      1900-1920 1921-1930 1931-1940  1941-1950 1951-1960  1961-1969

                       YEAR OF  CONSTRUCTION
                              38

-------
                                              FIGURE 7
vo
UJ
3
O
LJ
CE
U.
                                               STATES

-------
                                              FIGURE  8
*».
o
o

UJ

a
UJ
o:
                                      INDUSTRY  WATER  USE REGIONS

-------
o
I-
CE
UJ
Q.


tC.

<
UJ
ac
LJ
O.
(O
H
co
o
o
QL
UJ
Q.
O
      FIGURE 9

  OPERATING COSTS OF

TREATMENT FACILITIES

         VERSUS

     CAPITAL COSTS
                 20     30    40     50    60     70     80

                     CAPITAL  COSTS ($  PER  ANNUAL  TON)
                                            IOO

-------
                         CHAPTER IX

      COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS
Introduction

The composition of wastes from the inorganic chemical indus-
try are very unpredictable, but the types of pollutant in
the waste can be classified under one of the following head-
ings:

     1.  Acidity or alkalinity
     2.  Suspended solids
     3.  Filterable solids
     4.  Dissolved solids
     5.  Temperature

Various combinations of the above types of pollution may
occur in an inorganic chemical waste.  Care must be taken
when discussing these types of pollutants that the correct
references are used, e.g., the total dissolved solids  (TDS)
referred to here refers to TDS after neutralization when
there is no excess acidity or alkalinity, since a large
amount of TDS may be removed or added in the process of
neutralization.

The ranges of the values for pollutants found from the
industry were as follows:

     Process Water

     Flow rate           0.5 mgd to 50 mgd
     Acidity             200 mg/1 (as CaCO3) to 20,000 mg/1
     Suspended solids    0-500 mg/1
     Dissolved solids    1000-150,000 mg/1

     Cooling Water

     Flow rate           Up to 150 mgd
     Temperature range   140°F-180°F

It is evident from many studies of distribution of pollu-
tant concentration with flow rate that the combination of
high pollutant load with high flow rate is improbable.
Thus, generally with high process water flow rates such
as 50 mgd, the probability of having a TDS of 150,000 mg/1
is remote.  For this reason, an envelope of extreme values
                           42

-------
•Cfc
u*
            200,000
             100,000
             50,000
•DEEP  WELL
                                                                  FIGURE  I

                                                           APPLICABLE  RANGES  OF

                                                          DEMORALIZATION  UNITS
           CO
           o

           -J
           o
           CO
           o
           
-------
     NO NEUTRALIZATION FOR DEEP WELL EVAPORATION
                    FILTRATE
                       OR
                    CENTRATE
                              ALTERNATIVE:
                              SETTLING POND
                                Vacuum Filter
                                     or
                                 Centrifuge
                               |    Sludge   |
                                                     DEEPWELL
                                                       OOO  r»
                OR DEMORALIZATION
   DIRECT TO EVAPORATION OR  CONTROLLED DISCHARGE
                                                 EVAPORATION
(alternative
 to deep well)
                                                                            REUSE OR
                                                                            DISCHARGE
                                   FIGURE  2
SCHEMATIC LAYOUT  OF  TREATMENT PLANT FOR WASTES  FROM THE  INORGANIC
 CHEMICAL  INDUSTRY SHOWING  VARIOUS  POSSIBLE  COMBINATIONS  OF UNITS

-------
                                    lime
                                                 Lime storage
                                                                  O Blower
                                                                    /
                        Equalization Basin
                                      filtrate
tn
       5


UIIIIV
slakes
Mixing


Oxidation
Flocculation
Vacuum filter
or
Centrifuge


L
                                                   f
J
                                                Sludge to
                                                disposal
                                                        occasional
                                                        removal of
                                                        sludge after
                                                        drying

            FIGURE 3
                 FLOW SHEET FOR NEUTRALIZATION PLANT
                                                                                      To stream or
                                                                                      demineralization
                                                                                      plant
                            Alternative
                               flow pattern
                         Sludge"
                         settling]	•- To stream
                          pond

-------
of TDS and flow rate that have been considered for cost
calculations are shown in Figure 1.  The following combina-
tions within the triangle and values of acidity were chosen
for this cost study:

     Flow rate           0.5, 1.0, 10.0, 50.0 mgd
     Acidity             500, 1000, 20,000 mg/1  (as CaCOa)
     Suspended solids    100, 500 mg/1
     TDS                 3000, 30,000, 150,000 mg/1

The flow sheet suggested for analysis is shown in Figure
2.  When neutralization of the acidity is not required, the
neutralization plant will be bypassed.  At low acidities
and a low flow rate, it may be more economical to eliminate
neutralization if high TDS must be removed anyway.  This
will depend on the cost structure of the various units, the
quantities of waste, the use to which product wastes may
be used, the economy of brine disposal versus solids dispo-
sal, and other such considerations.

The neutralization plant suggested for cost analysis is
shown in Figure 3, and discussed in Appendix E under
the heading of neutralization.  The plant included aeration
flocculation to precipitate ferrous and other metal ions.
The costs are shown in Table I.

The removal of TDS in any of the five units, i.e., deep
well disposal, reverse osmosis, electrodialysis, distilla-
tion, or ion exchange might require filtration of the
liquid as a pretreatment.

All of the last four processes that were considered will
produce brine.  The concentration of brine produced will
depend first, on the process used, but also on the cost
of brine disposal and on the possible market value of the
usable water produced.

For this study, it was assumed that all brine produced
will be disposed of in deep wells or at a similar cost.
Other disposal methods include disposition to the ocean,
solar evaporation ponds,  and evaporation ponds that use
applied heat.  The process used depends on the location
and the brine concentration, as well as the cost of brine
disposal.  These factors are too unpredictable to be
included in a study and the costs are given based on the
above assumptions.
                            46

-------
                       TABLE I

                   TREATMENT LEVEL I
     NEUTRALIZATION COSTS INCLUDING EQUALIZATION
                 AND SLUDGE DEWATERING
                                         Operating Cost
                                           <71000 gal

                                               15
                                               20
                                               27
                                               29
                                              108
                                              108
                                               14.5
                                               25
                                               26
                                               26
                                              103
                                              103
                                               11
                                               12.5
                                               18
                                               20
                                               10.5
                                               11
NOTE:  Costs based on the sum of unit processes 1, 2,
       3, and 4 in Figure 1.
Flow
mgd
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
50.0
50.0
Acidity
mg/1
500
500
1,000
1,000
20,000
20,000
500
500
1,000
1,000
20,000
20,000
500
500
1,000
1,000
500
500
SS
mg/1
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
100
500
Capital Cost
$1000
120.0
145.0
184.0
190.0
514.0
514.0
183.0
236.0
300.0
320.0
807.0
807.0
1,120.0
1,290.0
1,540.0
1,640.0
3,420
3,980
                           47

-------
                                                                       TABLE II

                                                                  TREATMENT LEVEL II
                                           DEMINERALIZATION COSTS INCLUDING PREFILTRATION AND BRINE DISPOSAL
                                                                   CAPITAL COSTS
                                                                                                                   OPERATING  COST
00


Flow
mgd

0.5




0.5



0.5

1.0







10.0




10.0

50.0



TDS
mg/1

3,000




30,000



150,000

3,000





30,000

3,000




30,000

3,000

Total
Product
Water @
500 mg/1
mgd

0.35
0.25
0.47

0.45

0.167
-
0.25
-
-
-
0.75
0.50
0.95
-
0.9
0.33
0.50
7.5
5.0
8.0
9.5

3.3
0.50
45.0
45.0
Demineraliza-
Brine
Disposal
mgd

0.15
0.25
0.03

0.05

0.33

0.25



0.25
0.50
0.05

0.1
0.67
0.50
2.5
5.0
2.0
0.5

6.7
0.50
5.0
5.0
Filtra-
tion
$1000
66
66
66
66

66
66
66
_
66
66
-
102
102
102
102
-
102
102
102
450
450
450
450
-
450
450
1,350
1,350
tion
Process
No.
6
7
8
10.,
11^X
9
6
7
11
9
6
11
6
7
8
10
11
9
7
9
7
8
9
10
11
7
9
7
9
Brine

Disposal Total
Cost
$1000
430
640
455
1,700
40
806
430
784
40
806
430
40
290
1,120
896
3,020
100
1,610
1,340
1,610
6,700
6,400
9,070
14,800
410
8,400
9,070
29,100
34,700
Cost
$1000
_
360
398
190
-
388

412

397



397
431
360

370
447
430
740
925
646
430
-
1,200
925
925
925
Cost
+35*
670
1,439
1,240
2,551
40
1,701
670
1,704
40
1,713
670
40
529
2,185
1,929
4,700
75
2,810
2,550
2,892
10,651
10,496
13,724
21,160
410
13,567
14,100
42,356
49,920

Filtra-
tion («/
1000 gal)
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5

8.5
8.5
8.5

8.5


7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
-
7.0
7.0
7.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0

Deminerali-
zation
(C/1000 gal)
35.0
40.0
65.0
25.0
5.0
98.0
35.0
75.0
5.0
98.0


25.6
31.0
54.0
33.3

85.0
50.0
85.0
18.5
38.0
38.0
30.0
5.0
25.0
38.0
15.0
22.0

Brine
(-J/1000
gal)
_
18.0
24.0
16.0

16.0
-
29.0

24.0



13.5
18.3
8.5

11.0
20.6
18.3
4.5
8.0
3.0
1.0
-
10.0
8.0
2.0
2.0
Total
Cost
(C/1000
gal)
43.5
66.5
97.5
49.5
5.0
122.5
43.5
112.5
5.0
130.5
43.5
5.0

51.5
79.3
48.8
5.0
103.0
77.6
110,3
26.0
49.0
44.0
34.0
5.0
38.0
49.0
19.0
26.0
               -  For  evaporation ponds,  consider only those states or areas where the evaporation  rate  is  twice  the average
                   annual  rainfall.   Consider land value a nominal $100/acre.  Capital costs in  thousand  dollars.

-------
The literature was searched for the amount of brine pro-
duced by the desalting units under "normal" operating
conditions.  Assumptions were made based on this informa-
tion and the quantities used are shown in Table II,
which presents the capital and operating costs for
various combinations of capacities and processes.  Avail-
able data usually refers to brine production as a by-
product of potable water production and not of waste
treatment as such.  For potable water production, the
disposal of brine is of secondary importance.

Where land is available and the evaporation rate exceeds
the average annual rainfall by a sufficient margin,
solar evaporation ponds will be an economical treatment
method that will not require pretreatment.  Operating
costs will also be low.

In the regions of regular  (as compared with seasonal)
rainfall, it may be more economical to store the waste
in lagoons and discharge to the stream only at
sufficiently high stream flow rates to provide the
necessary dilutions.  This method is limited to a small
number of locations in the country.  The size of the
ponds will be determined by the flow rate and variance
of the stream flow, the TDS content of the stream and
the later use of the stream.  It is difficult to base
a cost function on these factors and for this reason,
only the method is shown.

Cooling water would normally need only to be cooled down
sufficiently so as not to raise the stream temperature
unduly.  Cooling towers may be constructed based on the
mean low flow condition in summer or cooling ponds may
be used if land is cheap.

The calculated costs are summarized in two separate
tables mentioned in the foregoing.  Table I considers
neutralization for Treatment Level I only, and Table II
considers the dissolved solids removal and brine dispo-
sal costs of waste treatment at Treatment Level II.
                           49

-------
                      CHAPTER  X

      COSTS VERSUS EFFLUENT QUALITY  RELATIONSHIPS
The data from the survey of  59 plants was not
sufficiently complete  in regard  to effluent quality  to
construct any statistically  significant relationship
between numbers of plants, and effluent quality
parameters such as acidity,  suspended solids and
dissolved solids.

The methods of treatment currently employed by the
inorganic chemical industry, as  previously discussed,
are quite limited in number  and/  in general, involve as
a group (1) equalization,  (2) neutralization,  (3) floccu-
lation, (4) sedimentation, and  (5) sludge dewatering.
This combination then  is judged  to account for the typical
situation and to be equivalent to approximately 27%  level
of treatment, the reported average industry level.

The nature of the waste substances, inorganic soluble
salts, and the treatment processes available to re-
duce or remove such salts is such that there are,
practically speaking,  no intermediate levels of treatment.
That is to say, treatment for removal of dissolved salts,
if applied at all, produces  a quality of effluent water
equivalent or better than plant  influent supply water.
An increase in the level of  treatment of inorganic chemi-
cal plant effluents thus goes in one step from the 27%
level involved in neutralization and suspended solids
removal to 100% removal of the contaminants.  For design
purposes,  demineralization effluent quality is set at
500 mg/1.

On the basis of the range of volumes of plant effluents
and the foregoing considerations of only two levels  of
treatment, a series of likely design combinations was
constructed, one for each level and the capital and
operating costs determined.  Table I in Chapter IX pre-
sented the cost data for Treatment Level I which, as
previously mentioned,  is judged equivalent to 27% removal.
Table II in Chapter IX presented the cost data for
Treatment Level II which represents 100% removal with
ultimate disposal of the residues.  Figure 2 in Chapter
IX is a schematic diagram showing the generalized layout
for treatment of water from the inorganic chemical
industry.   The numbers identifying each unit process
                           50

-------
correspond to the unit process numbers in Tables I and II.
Note from Figure 2 in Chapter IX that the brine from the
demineralization processes is taken to deep well disposal
or to solar evaporation alternatively.  Figure 1 in Chapter
IX shows the applicable ranges of the alternative de-
mineralization units employed in the construction of Table
II data.

An examination of the information shown in the afore-
mentioned Tables I and II of Chapter IX, coupled with a
judgment as to the typical level of wastes to be
encountered/ leads to the selection of 1000 ppm acidity
and 100 ppm suspended solids as representative of present
practice to establish the basis of industry cost pro-
jections covered in Chapter XI for Treatment Level I.
Similarly, 3000 ppm TDS is judged representative of wastes
for application of Treatment Level II.  In this latter
connection, the capital and operating costs for deminerali-
zation process No. 7 reverse osmosis, were chosen for
projection purposes even though simple deep well disposal
is clearly lower in both costs.

It is believed that any generalization developed based
upon wide use of large volume deep well disposal for
Treatment Level II would be misleading since such general
application of deep wells is considered impractical.
                           51

-------
                      CHAPTER  XI

               PROJECTED INDUSTRY  COSTS
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's  1963  publication,
Water Use in Manufacturing, inorganic  chemical  plants
reported annual water intake volumes as  shown in Table
I.  These are the  latest  available  data.
                       TABLE  I

        NUMBERS OF INORGANIC  CHEMICAL  PLANTS  BY
              WATER INTAKE VOLUME-1963 (1)

                           INTAKE VOLUMES
               	millions  of  gallons  per year	
SIC            less                            more
No.    Total   than 1    1-9   10-19    20-99   than 100

2812      38       4       21        2       29
2813     421     197     106     36       33       49
2816      76      32      13      4        7       20
2819     524     189      98     39       60      138
2851    1224     981     162     28       38       15
2871     241     104      50     24       32       31
2879     253     218      23      2        7        3
2892      58      28       4      5        4       17
TOTAL   J835    T753     4~58"     I3T      T8~3      3~0~2

(1) U.S. Census Bureau, Census of Manufactures-1963,
    "Water Use in Manufacturing"
Water discharges from large plants  (intakes  of  more  than
20 million gallons per year) are given  in  Table II.
                       TABLE II

         WATER DISCHARGES FROM LARGE  INORGANIC
               CHEMICAL PLANTS-1968 (1)

                            Discharge to
SIC      Total Discharge  Municipal Sewers   Percent to
No.        (109 gal/yr)       (109 gal/yr)      Sewers

2812           364.!            47.2           13.0
2813            8o.8             2.7            3.3
                          52

-------
                    TABLE II  (cont.)
SIC
No.

2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
Total Discharge
 (109 gal/yr)

     91.5
    468.0
      6.5
     97.4
 Not available
    143.1
      Discharge  to
    Municipal  Sewers
      (109  gal/yr)

           1.0
          42.6
           4.6
           0.3
      Not available
    <50 million  gal.
      Percent to
        Sewers

          1.1
          9.1
         70.8
          0.3

          0.0
  (1)  U.S. Census Bureau, Census of Manufactures-1968,
      "Water Use in Manufacturing"
Assuming that all plants having intakes of less  than  20
million gallons per year discharge to municipal  sewers,
the total industry discharge to municipal sewers in
1963 is estimated to have been 48.0 billion gallons.
Discharges from large plants to other than municipal
sewers are given in Table III.
                      TABLE  III
      LARGE INORGANIC CHEMICAL PLANT DISCHARGES
       OTHER THAN TO MUNICIPAL SEWERS-1968  (1)
         No. Of
         Plants

2812         31
2813         65
2816         24
2819        223
2851         32
2871         42
2879   Not  available
2892         21
TOTAL       438
             Discharge
             1Q9 gal/yr
                 316.9
                    .1
                    ,5
    78,
    90,
   425.4
     1.9
    97.1
Not available
   143.1
  1153.1
Average Discharge
  1Q9 gal/yr

    10.22
     1.20
     3.77
     1.91
     0.06
     2.31

     6.81
                                   2.63
 (1)   U.S.  Census  Bureau,  ibid
                           53

-------
Water intakes and usages by purpose are given in Table
IV.
                       TABLE IV

       LARGE INORGANIC CHEMICAL PLANT INTAKES
           AND USAGE, BY PURPOSE, 1968  (1)
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
TOTAL
Billions of Gallons per
Total
Intake
386.4
92.3
95.4
514.8
6.8
113.7
152.3
1361.7
Process
18.9
5.3
21.2
75.2
2.7
24.2
28.0
175.5
Cooling
Other
361.0 6.5
86.5 0.6
68.5 5.7
404.5 35.2
2.9 1.3
64.5 24.9
116.2 8.2
1104.1
82.4
Year
Gross
Use
574.3
193.7
125.8
1432.0
9.8
474.1
186.8
2996.5

Use
Rate
1.49
2.10
1.32
2.78
1.44
4.17
1.23
2.20
(1)  U.S. Census Bureau, ibid
Assuming that contaminated wastewaters will be equivalent
to that withdrawn for process and other non-cooling
purposes, and that percentage disappearances are constant
for all purposes, the total of such wastewaters for large
plants in the industry in 1968 is estimated to have been
237.5 billion gallons to other than municipal sewers.
The average contaminated wastewater discharge from large
plants to other than municipal sewers is thus estimated
to have been 1.485 mgd.  The average discharge to munici-
pal sewers from large plants is estimated to have been
0.616 mgd.

Numbers of plants, values of shipments, and price indexes
for the inorganic chemical industry in 1958, 63, 66, 67,
68 and 69 are given in Table V.
                          54

-------
            TABLE V




THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
SIC
No.
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892

Yr.
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
58
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
No. of
Plants Value of
Total +20 Emp. ($1000)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
37
460
97
678
1,779
279
329
67
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
44
507
98
718
1,701
213
344
92
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
32
178
57
301
600
207
101
58
34
148
52
326
650
198
108
47
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
40
156
60
358
680
184
115
52
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
425,431
262,581
412,011
2,146,254
1,753,923
611,103
347,628
169,699
652,120
425,388
484,768
3,493,870
2,456,361
863,701
476,661
283,298
782,661
549,687
581,774
3,845,232
2,970,403
1,183,321
692,741
469,413
719,800
588,700
549,300
4,248,400
2,911,400
1,196,900
817,000
647,000
754,000
613,000
650,000
4,200,000
3, 221,000
1,091,820
869,288
667,057
Shipments Price Index
($1000- '58) '57-59=100
425,431
262,581
412,011
2,146,254
1,753,923
611,103
347,628
169,699
687,890
448,722
532,127
3,685,517
2,696,335
864,566
477,138
286,160
817,828
574,386
645,698
4,018,006
3,296,785
1,133,449
663,545
468,009
741,298
606,282
602,303
4,375,283
3,192,325
1,168,848
797,852
615,019
766,260
622,967
704,989
4,268,293
3,493,492
1,088,554
866,688
606,415
100.0
100 . 0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
94.8
94.8
91.1
94.8
91.1
99.9
99.9
99.0
95.7
95.7
90.1
95.7
90.1
104.4
104.4
100.3
97.1
97.1
91.2
97.1
91.2
102.4
102.4
105.2
98.4
98.4
92.2
98.4
92.2
100.3
100.3
110.0
               55

-------
                  TABLE V  (Continued)
2812
2813
2816
2819
2851
2871
2879
2892
            No. of Plants   Value of Shipments   Price Index
        Yr. Total +20 Emp.  ($1000)     ($1000- ~58)'57-59=100
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
  792
  653
  690
4,305
3,459
1,149
  924
  687
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,686
,922
,736
  804
  663
  748
4,375
3,751
1,146
  922
  625
,878
,618
,373
,000
,627
,247
,156
,215
 98.4
 98.4
 92.2
 98.4
 92.2
100.
100.
3
3
110.0
Using the data in Table V and assuming that  (1) the num-
ber of plants having water intakes of over 20 million
gallons, (2) those having more than 20 employees, and
(3) the total number of plants will remain in the 1963-67
ratio, numbers of plants are estimated by year in Table
VI.
                       TABLE VI

          NUMBERS OF PLANTS IN THE INORGANIC
                   CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
        Val. of
          Ship
Year  ($1000-'58)

1958   6,128,630
1963   9,669,455
1966  11,617,706
1967  12,099,210
1968  12,417,658
1969  13,037,114
              No. of
              Plants
            (more than
              20 Emp.)

               1,534
               1,563
               1,617
               1,645
               1,672
               1,699
           No. of
           Plants
         (more than
       20 mil.gal/yr)

             476
             485
             501
             510
             518
             527
                   No.  of
                   Plants
                   (Total)

                    3,656
                    3,726
                    3,853
                    3,717
                    3,778
                    3,839
                         56

-------
In Table VII, productions of inorganic chemicals are
given for 1968 and projected by year through 1974.
                        TABLE VII

 PROJECTED PRODUCTION OF INORGANIC CHEMICALS, 1968-1974
                   (millions of tons)

SIC
No.      1968   1969   1970   1971   1972   1973   1974
2812 ,
2813 ±f
2816
2819 .
2851 -'
2871
2879
2892 ±f
24
17,5
1.20
70
3.51
41.5
0.20
0.98
25
20.1
1.25
72
3.74
41.0
0.20
1.04
26
23.7
1.29
74
3.93
42.3
0.19
1.08
28
28.5
1.37
77
4.16
43.9
0.18
1.11
30
34.3
1.44
80
4.41
46.1
0.18
1.15
32
40.8
1.51
84
4.68
48.0
0.17
1.20
34
47.9
1.59
88
4.96
49.9
0.15
1.27
   From Chemical and Engineering News 1968 production and
   Resource Engineering Associates projections
.27 From Resource Engineering Associates projection and
   sp. gr.=1.0
3/ From 1963 production and values and Resource
   Engineering Associates projections
Production in the industry, numbers of plants, and waste
discharges are projected from the above data in Table
VIII.  Numbers of plants were estimated by a detailed
analysis of the total industry production and the ratios
of plant sizes and SIC distributions in 1963.  These
estimates were updated according to the data of the 1967
Census of Manufactures.  Eighty five percent of the total
production is assumed to have been produced in large
plants, as is indicated by the plant capacity data in
Appendix A.
                           57

-------
                                                    TABLE VIII

                                    THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, 1963-74 I/
                                   1963
1968
                                                         1969
1970
                                                                               1971
                                            1972
I/  Based upon 1963 and 1968 water use data and projected production
2/  <20 million gallons per year
3/  >20 million gallons per year
                                                                                                     1973
                                                                  1974
No. of Plants, Total
No. of Small Plants 2/
No. of Large Plants 3/
Production Total
(billion Ibs)
Production, Large Plants
(billion Ibs)
Production, Small Plants
(billion Ibs)
in Municipal Sewer Discharges
00 (billion gal)
Large Plants (billion gal)
Small Plants (billion gal)
Wastewater, Not to Sewers,
Large Plants (bil. gal)
Cooling Hater, Not to Sewers,
Large Plants (bil. gal)
Gross Hater use. Large Plants
(billion gal)
Value of Shipments, Total
(bil. 1958 $)
3458
3012
446

~
-

™
59.0
53.7
5.3
211.8
922.9
2466.0
9.669
3514
3036
478

317.8
270.1

47.1
108.1
98.4
9.7
257.9
1104.1
2996.5
12.418
3574
3088
486

328.7
279.4

49.3
112.2
102.1
10.1
267.7
1145.6
3110.4
13.037
3597
3109
488

345.0
293.3

51.7
117.6
106.9
10.7
280.5
1200.9
3262.2
-
3631
3139
492

368.4
313.1

55.3
125.3
113.9
11.4
298.9
1279.8
3480.1
-
3670
3173
497

395.2
355.9

59.3
134.1
121.9
12.2
320.1
1370.9
3730.3
-
3711
3209
502

424.7
361.0

63.7
143.8
130.7
13.1
343.5
1468.5
4006.0
-
3755
3247
508

455.5
387.2

68.3
154.0
139.9
14.1
367.9
1572.5
4294.0
-

-------
The data in Table VIII are based upon the water uses
reported in 1963 and 1967/ and discharges are estimated
from gross water uses based upon projected production.
In 1968, large plants in the inorganic chemical industry
used (including recirculation) 2996 billion gallons of
water for all purposes and discharged 1362 billion gal-
lons, taking in 1362 billion gallons.  The entire chemical
industry (SIC 28) reported a use of 9416 billion gallons
that year; the inorganic chemical industry thus used
about 31.8% of the total, slightly less than the 32.5%
as earlier reported.  A 1967 survey of the chemical
industry by the Manufacturing Chemists Association (2)
indicated a gross water use of 8340 billion gallons that
year.  These data and the data in Table VIII indicate
water uses in the inorganic chemical industry of 2711 and
2890 billion gallons per year, respectively.  Inorganic
chemicals have shown a long term decrease in percentage
of the overall chemical market from 49.5% in 1958 to 40%
in 1968.

Data from the 1958, 1963, and 1967 Census of Manufactures
and from the 1967 MCA survey are shown in Table IX.  These
data generally apply to large plants in the chemical
industry.

(2) "Toward a Clean Environment," Manufacturing Chemists
    Association, 1967.
                       TABLE IX

                WATER USE DATA, 1958-67


                            1958 I/ 1963 I/ 1967 2_/ 1968 3_/

CHEMICALS & ALLIED PRODUCTS:
  Intake, bil. gal.         3240    3889    4269    4476.2
  Gross Use, bil. gal.      5225    7577    8340    9415.8
  Discharges, bil. gal.     3061    3662    4085    4175.1
  Use Rate                     1.61    1.95    1.95    2.104
  Discharges as % of Use      58.5    48.3    48.9    44.3
                         59

-------
                  TABLE IX  (Continued)
INORGANIC CHEMICALS:
  Intake, bil. gal.
  Gross Use, bil. gal.
  Discharges, bil. gal.
  Use Rate
  Discharges as % of Use
I/
                            1958 I/ 1963 I/ 1967 2_/ 1968 3_/
1287
2466
1134.7
   1
                                         92
                                      46.0
1361.7
2996.5
1153.0
   2.20
  38.5
_   U.S. Bureau of Census, 1963 Census of Manufactures,
    Water Use in Manufacturing
2/  Ref (2) MCA Survey, ibid
3_/  "Water Use in Manufacturing," Census of Manufactures
Table X shows projections of production and discharges
which incorporate all of the above data from Tables VIII
and IX.

Data from the 1967 MCA survey of the chemical industry
are given in Table XI and ranges of plant capacities
in the inorganic chemical industry are shown in Table XII.
Table XII indicates an average plant capacity of 0.783
billion pounds per year and a median capacity of 0.319
billion pounds per year.  This compares favorably with the
1968 average capacity in Table X of 0.565 billion pounds
per year.  The data in Table XI indicate an average dis-
charge from large plants of wastewater to other than
municipal sewers of 0.657 billion gallons per year per
plant in 1967 for the chemical industry as a whole.
                         60

-------
                                    TABLE X

                  THE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, 1963-74 I/


                                 1963  1968  1969  1970  1971  1972  1973  1974

Large Plants, Average Data:

  Production, bil Ibs/yr/plant     -   0.565 0.575 0.601 0.636 0.676 0.719 0.762

  Wastewater, bil gals/yr/plant  0.475 0.539 0.551 0.575 0.608 0.644 0.684 0.724


I/  Ref (1) U.S. Census Bureau, ibid
    Ref (2) Manufacturing Chemists Association 1967 Survey, ibid

-------
                       TABLE XI

                  1967 MCA SURVEY DATA
                THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY (2)
No. of Plants
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment through 1966
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment, 1962-1966
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment, 1967-1971
Annual Operating Cost, 1967
Water Withdrawals
Water Used
Discharge to Surface Waters:
  Cooling Water
  Process Wastewater
Discharge to Public Sewers:
  Cooling Water
  Process Wastewater
Inorganic Waste Discharges:
  To Surface Waters:
    Dissolved
    Undissolved
  To Public Sewers:
    Dissolved
    Undissolved
Total Discharged
Total Discharged with No
  Treatment
987

$385,268,000

$140,640,000

$235,700,000
$59,638,000
11.696 bil. gal/day
22.848 bil. gal/day

9.224 bil. gal/day
1.777 bil. gal/day

0.078 bil. gal/day
0.114 bil. gal/day
135.3 mil. Ibs/day
11.65 mil. Ibs/day

2.156 mil. Ibs/day
0.192 mil. Ibs/day
149.3 mil. Ibs/day

205.1 mil. Ibs/day
(2) Manufacturing Chemists Association 1967 Survey,
    ibid
                          62

-------
                      TABLE XII

   RANGES OF CHEMICAL PLANT PRODUCTION CAPACITIES -'
                                   Capacity Range,
	Product	             tons/day

Caustic Potash                       13.7 - 98.6
Caustic Soda                         300  - 7800
Chlorine                             180  - 7050
Soda Ash                             205  - 10274
Titanium Dioxide                     49.3 - 474
Ammonium Nitrate                     30.1 - 1164
Nitric Acid                          43.8 - 1096
Phosphoric Acid                      47.4 - 1342
Phosphorous                          16.4 - 389
Sodium Dichromate                    41.1 - 247
Sodium Sulfate                       21.9 - 753
Superphosphate                       63.0 - 959
Ammonium Phosphate                   19.2 - 630
Potash                               27.4 - 1699
Calcium Carbide                      54.8 - 822
Hydrofluoric Acid                    27.4 - 137
Sodium Sulfite                       8.2  - 397


—' Industry Product Profiles, Appendix C
Numbers of plants in the chemicals and allied products
industries in 1963 are shown in Table XIII by industry
segments and by intake water volumes.
                      TABLE XIII

   NUMBERS OF PLANTS IN THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, 1963

                        Large Plants    Small Plants
                        (more than 20   (less than 20
                        mil, gal)	   mil, gal)	

Industry Total i/           1129            6382
Organic Chemicals
  Industry 2/                211             550
Inorganic Chemicals
  Industry V                446            2187
Other Industry Segments      472            3645
                         63

-------
_!/  1963  Census  of  Manufactures
2/  Ref  (3)  FWPCA Organic  Chemicals  Industry,  ibid
3/  Present  study

Data  from the 1967 survey of  the  chemical  industry by
the Manufacturing  Chemists Association  as  shown in Table
XI  are extended on an  annual  basis  and  given  in Table
XIV.

                     TABLE XIV

         CHEMICAL INDUSTRY SURVEY  DATA,  1967  (2)
No. of Plants
Total Employment
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment through 1966
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment, 1962-1966
Capital Investment in Wastewater
  Treatment Projected, 1967-1971
Annual Operating Cost, 1967
Annual Manpower Requirements, 1967
Annual Water Intake, bil. gal.
Annual Water Use, bil. gal
Use Rate
Plant Effluents:
  Cooling Water, to Public Sewers,
    bil. gal
  Process Wastewater, to Public
    Sewer, bil. gal.
  Cooling Water, to Surface Waters,
    bil. gal.
  Process Wastewater, to Surface
    Waters, bill. gal.
  Total Effluents, bil. gal
Contaminants in Effluents to
Surface Waters:
  Dissolved Inorganics, mil. Ibs.
  Undissolved Inorganics, mil. Ibs.
  Dissolved Organics, mil. Ibs.
  Undissolved Organics, mil. Ibs.
Contaminants in Effluents to
Public Sewers:
  Dissolved Inorganics, mil. Ibs.
  Undissolved Inorganics, mil. Ibs.
  Dissolved Organics, mil. Ibs.
  Undissolved Organics, mil. Ibs.
987
393,657

$385,268,000

$140,640,000

$235,700,000
$59,638,000
2096.1 man-years
4269
8340
1.95


28.33

41.65

3367

648.6
4085
49370
4252
1284
155.5
786.9
70.1
292
74.8
                          64

-------
                 TABLE  XIV (cont.)

Total Contaminants Produced:
  Inorganics, mil. Ibs.              74857
  Organics, mil. Ibs.                4191
(2) MCA 1967 Survey, ibid
The chemical industry, other than those segments defined
as "inorganic chemicals" and as "organic chemicals,"
includes operations producing inorganic and organic
compounds which appear in effluents.  Assuming  (1) that
process wastewaters from the inorganic chemical industry
contain only inorganic contaminants,  (2) that process
wastewaters from the organic chemical industry contain
only organic contaminants, and  (3) that effluents from
other segments contain proportionate amounts of each
wastewater volume, the characteristics of the industry's
discharge are estimated below in Table XVI from the 1967
MCA survey, the 1963 census data, the 1969 FWPCA study
of the organic chemicals industry, and the 1967 census data,

Table XV shows the estimated numbers of plants and
wastewater discharges in the chemical industry in 1967,
based upon the above three data sources.
                      TABLE XV

       CHEMICAL PLANT SIZES AND DISCHARGES-1967

                            	Industry Segment
                            Inorganic Organic Other Total
Numbers of Plants:
  Total                       3454     833    3542  7829
  Large (>20 mgy)              470     231     485  1186
  Small (<20 mgy)             2974     602    3067  6643
Wastewater, Large Plants:
  Not to Sewers  (bil. gal)     248     333     148    779
Discharge to Sewers
  (bil. gal).                  104    78.2    39.3  221.5
                         65

-------
                         TABLE XVI

              CHEMICAL  INDUSTRY  DISCHARGES-1967
                             Industry  Segment  Discharges
                            Inorganic  Organic  Other  Total

Discharges to Public Sewers:
  Inorganics  (mil.  Ibs)       989.0       -      41.0    1030
  Organics (mil. Ibs)           -      304.5    136.5     441
Discharges to Surface Waters:
  Inorganics  (mil.  Ibs)       48498       -     14925   63423
  Organics (mil. Ibs)           -    1474       256    1730
Using the data in Tables XV  and  XVI  and  the  MCA survey
data, prorating costs and manpower requirements on  the
basis of wastewater discharges and relative  contaminant
removals, the data in Table  XVII are estimated  for  large
plants in the chemical  industry  in 1969.
                      TABLE XVII

      CHEMICAL INDUSTRY COSTS AND MANPOWER-1969

                      	Industry Segment
                      Inorganic  Organic  Other  Total

Investment, mil. $      122.488   399.773   110.291  632.552
Operating Costs,
  mil. $/yr.             18.960    61.880    17.072  97.912
Manpower Use,
  raan-years/yr.           666      2175       601     3442
Assuming, as discussed in Chapter X, that the average
plant in the industry produces wastewaters containing 100
ppm suspended solids, 1000 ppm acidity and 3000 ppm
dissolved solids, and that present practice as defined by
the MCA survey  (27% removal of contaminants) is achieved
by neutralization with equalization and sludge dewatering,
the following unit costs are as shown in Chapter IX for
the typical plant.  Reverse osmosis is the method of
choice for demineralization (100% removal of contaminants)
as indicated by reasonable capital and operating costs.
Deep well disposal and evaporation ponds, although lower
in cost/ are not always applicable due to local conditions
and, hence, were not shown.
                          66

-------
                       Capital Costs
% Removal Contaminants  $/1000 gpd
 27 (SS and Acidity)
100 (TDS)
                   300
                  2185
                             Operating Costs
                               C/1000 gal

                                  26.0
                                  51.5
Assume also that the capital costs involved in discharg-
ing to public sewers are those entailed in removing
suspended solids and neutralizing acidity.  Therefore,
based upon the flows shown in Table X and the above
assumptions on unit capital costs, the capital costs for
the inorganic chemicals industry are estimated as shown
in Table XVIII and XIX.  The capital costs for the 27%
removal level shown in 1969 thus represent the in place
capital for the existing levels of treatment in the in-
organic chemical industry in 1969 dollars.
                      TABLE XVIII
   CUMULATIVE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY CAPITAL COSTS,
                       1969-1974

               Costs in Millions of 1969 Dollars
Removal  1969
  27
 100
        1970
                1971
1972
1973
1974
 314.3   329.8   352.2  377.8
1898.8  1992.4  2127.6 2281.7
                                 405.9   435.4
                                2451.8  2632.4
In terms of current dollars, and using an average of  3.6%
annual increase in the price level, total industry capital
costs are projected in Table XIX.
                      TABLE XIX

   CUMULATIVE INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY CAPITAL COSTS,
                       1969-1974

             Costs in Millions of Current Dollars
Removal  1969
        1970
                1971
 1972
 1973
  1974
   27
  100
 314.3   341.7   377.9   420.1   467.7   519.4
1898.8  2062.2  2281,9  2537.1  2823.5  3118.5
                         67

-------
 It should be underscored that the capital costs shown in
 Table XVIII and in Table XIX for 3.969 are in terms of
 1969 dollars.  The capital costs for the chemical
 industry shown in Table XVII are in terms of sums spent
 over perhaps the preceding 30 years.  Allowing for price
 increases over such a period of time, the costs shown in
 Table XVII for the inorganic segment of the industry
 compare well with that portion of the 1969 costs in Table
 XVIII for the 27% level of treatment attributable to
 large plants.  Assuming that the operating costs
 associated with discharges to municipal sewers at 10
 cents per 1000 gpd, projected industry operating costs
 are given in Table XX in 1969 dollars and in Table
 XXI in current dollars.
                       TABLE XX

          PROJECTED ANNUAL  INORGANIC CHEMICAL
               INDUSTRY OPERATING COSTS

              Costs in Millions of  1969 Dollars
Removal  1969
   27
  100
 86.1
165.4
1970

 90.3
173.4
1971

 96.5
185.1
1972

103.5
198.7
1973

111.2
213.4
                                        1974
119.3
228.9
                      TABLE XXI
         PROJECTED ANNUAL INORGANIC CHEMICAL
              INDUSTRY OPERATING COSTS

               Costs in Millions of Current Dollars
Removal  1969
   27
  100
 86.1
165.4
1970

 93.6
179.6
1971

103.5
198.7
1972

115.1
221.0
1973

128.1
245.9
1974

142.3
273.2
The plant survey data shown in Chapter VIII, based upon
costs per unit of wastewater flow, indicate that the
industry costs to achieve 85% removal of contaminants
other than dissolved solids in large plants in 1969 are
as follows:
                         68

-------
In place capital costs =
     $223 x 1,131,520  (1000 gpd)   = $252,328,960
In place operating costs =
     $58.49 x 1,131,520  (1000 gpd) = $ 66,182,605/year
Addition of the costs associated with discharges to
municipal sewers by small plants show that the total
industry costs for the level of treatment described can
be estimated as follows:


In place capital costs =
     259.5 million dollars
In place operating costs -
     67.0 million dollars per year
The above costs would represent an overall removal of
wastewater contaminants of approximately 23%, i.e.,
85% removal of contaminants constituting 27% of the
total in the wastewaters.  Comparison of these figures
with those in Tables XVIII and XX shows good agreement
and tend to support the projections made.
                         69

-------
                     CHAPTER XII

           QUALITATIVE MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS
Information regarding qualitative manpower requirements
can be found in Chapter XII, pages 76-96 of the study
entitled "Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile," which
was completed under Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration Contract No. 14-12-592 and published as a
part of "The Economics of Clean Water - Volume Three,"
United States Department of the Interior, March 1970.
                          70

-------
                     CHAPTER XIII

          QUANTITATIVE MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS
Information regarding quantitative manpower requirements
can be found in Chapter XIII, pages 97-121 of the study
entitled "Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile," which
was completed under Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration Contract No. 14-12-592 and published as a
part of "The Economics of Clean Water - Volume Three,"
United States Department of the Interior, March 1970.
                          71

-------
               APPENDIX A
INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY SURVEY DATA
                     72

-------
                                                      TABLE I
•J
u>
Plant
Number
00013
00016
00017
00018
00026
00027
00030
00033
00034
00037
00040
00042
00050
00051
00052
00053
00054
00055
00056
00057
00058
00059
00060
00061
00062
00063
00064
Critical
Pollutant
SO4
Acidity
Acidity
—
Acidity
—
ss
Cl
ss
Cl
Oil
-
Temp.
SS
SS
SS
BOO
BOD
SS
-
—
SS
BOD
-
—
BOD
Acidity
                                Efficiency


                                  99
                                  99

                                  99.5

                                  98



                                  73
      95
      95

      90
      45
      99.8

       0
      90
      50
      99
       0
      70
                 Capital    Operating
                 Cost Per   Cost Per
                 1000 GPD   1000 GPD
                 1736.11
                 2083.33
                 1666.67
                    6.92
 260.41

   1.06
   1.29
 411.37
  20.83
  83.33
1500.00
 152.17
 583.33
 116.66
  12.00
   0.00
   5.00
 387.10
 307.69
   0.00
   1.67
            300.00
              1.04
  0.10
  1.28
140.27

  5.55
600.00
  1.04
166.66
 36.66
  1.00
  0.00
  2.50
 32.26
116.92
  0.00
  0.35
                       Capital
                       Cost Per
                       Ton/Year
             2.66
             3.62

            57.80
             1.28
 2.17

22.00
 1.42
 4.15
 1.74
 8.82
 1.44
 0.44
87.50
                                                                      7,
                                                                      6,
  .00
  .00
 0.00
10.00
 0.41
 0.31
 0.00
 0.01
Operating
Cost Per
Ton/Year
-
—
—
10.40
0.19
-
—
—
-
2.00
0.21
1.42
—
5.88
0.58
<0.01
25.00
2.20
0.50
0.00
5.00
0.03
0.12
0.00
<0.01
-
Wastewater
GPD/Ton/
Year
1.53
1.74
18.33
34.68
185.70
336.00
7.21
8.34
7.22
20736.00
166.66
10.09
83.33
105.88
0.96
2.90
150.00
60.00
500.00
40000.00
2000.00
1.07
1.00
42.42
6.48
64.11
          NOTES:  The  following abbreviations are used:
                  BOD
                  SS
                  Cl
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Suspended Solids
Chlorides
                     Temp.
                     SO4
                     Temperature
                     Sulfates

-------
                        APPENDIX B
               INORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
                     PRODUCT PROFILES
Individual Product Profiles
Flowchart of a Standard Medium-Pressure Air-Separation
  Plant
Flowchart for Diaphragm Caustic Soda and Chlorine Cell
Flowchart for 60% Nitric Acid from Ammonia
Typical Flowchart for Sulfur-Burning Contact Plant
Flowchart for Smokeless Powder
Flowchart for Mixing of Paint
Flowchart for Titanium Dioxide
Sources of Data:

  Chemical Profiles
  Oil, Paint and Drug Reporter
  "Future Inorganic Chemical Growth Patterns"
  R. N. Rickles, Noyes Development
  Chemical Week
  Bureau of the Census
  TVA
                               74

-------
SIC 2812 (ALKALIES AND CHLORINE)



Caustic Potash

     	Producer	     Capacity —'

     Allied, Syracuse, N.Y.               30,000
     Diamond, Delaware City, Del.         12,500
     Diamond, Muscle Shoals, Ala.         22,000
     Dow, Pittsburg, Calif.               10,000
     FMC, South Charleston, W. Va.        10,000
     Hooker, Niagara Falls, N.Y.          36,000
     IMC, Niagara Falls, N.Y.             22,000
     Monsanto, Anniston, Ala.             25,000
     Monsanto, East St. Louis, 111.       29,000
     Pennsalt, Calvert City, Ky.           5,000
     PPG, Corpus Christi, Tex.             5,000
     PPG, New Martinsvilie, W. Va.        10,000
                               Total     216,500

     !/ 1000's of tons/year  (90% basis)

     Production:  1969:  180,000 tons  (90% basis)
                  1974:  216,000 tons  (90% basis)

     Uses;   Soaps and detergents  (including use as  tetra-
       potassium pyrophosphate), potassium carbonate
       and other potassium chemicals.

     Processes:  By the electrolysis of potassium  chloride

     Waste Problems:  No major change  is expected.
       See chlorine.


Caustic Soda

     	Producer	     Capacity —'

     Alcoa                                  450
     Allied                               1,200
     Diamond                             2,030
     Dow                                  7,800
     FMC                                    850
     GAF                                    525
     Goodrich                               575
     Hooker                               1,780
                               75

-------
Caustic Soda (cont.)

               Producer
     Kaiser
     Monsanto
     Olin
     Pennsalt
     PPG Industries
     Shell
     Stauffer
     Vulcan
     Weyerhaeuser
     Wyandotte
     Others
                      Capacity —'

                          600
                          350
                        1,870
                        1,100
                        2,860
                          275
                          913
                          330
                          300
                        1,870
                        1,070
                               Total
                       26,748
     JL/ tons/day

     Production:
1969:
1974:
 8,500,000 tons/year
11,500,000 tons/year
     Uses;  Chemicals, pulp and paper, aluminum, rayon,
       textiles, petroleum refining, soap and detergents,
       cellophane.

     Processes;  Caustic soda is manufactured primarily
       from salt in electrolytic cells.  A full discussion
       is included under chlorine.

     Waste Problems:  See chlorine.
Chlorine
     Alcoa
     Allied
     Diamond
     Dow
     DuPont
     Ethyl
     FMC
     Frontier
     GAP
     Goodrich
     Hooker
               Producer
                      Capacity —'
                          415
                        1,100
                        1,850
                        7,050
                          180
                          625
                          765
                          415
                          475
                          520
                        1,800
                             76

-------
Chlorine (cont.)

     	Producer	     Capacity =/

     IMC                                    180
     Kaiser                                 500
     Monsanto                               310
     Olin                                 1,700
     Pennsalt                             1,000
     PPG Industries                       2,600
     Shell                                  200
     Stauffer                               700
     Vulcan                                 300
     Wyandotte                            1,700
     Other                                1,300
                               Total     25,685
     I/ tons/day

     Production;   1969:   8.6 million tons/year
                  1974:  12.0 million tons/year

     Uses;  Organic chemicals, inorganic chemicals, paper
       industry,  cyclic intermediates, sanitation, anti-
       freeze, chlorofluoro carbons, plastics.

     Processes;  Chlorine and caustic soda are produced
       by the electrolysis of brine.  As an alternative,
       caustic potash may be produced by the electrolysis
       of potash.  Other sources of chlorine are from the
       manufacture of hydrochloric acid and sodium.
       Neither method is important.

       Two basic methods are involved.  The production is
       divided between the diaphragm and mercury cells and
       there is no expected change in the distribution.
       In a typical diaphragm cell, the nearly saturated
       brine solution at 60-70°C is fed to the anolyte
       which flows through the diaphragm to the catholyte
       where the caustic is formed.  Chlorine is formed at
       the anode.

       In the mercury cell, mercury flowing along the
       bottom of a steel trough forms the cathode.  The
       anodes are horizontal graphite plates.  Brine at
       290 gms/liter is fed to the cell.  A sodium
       amalgam is formed with the mercury at the cathode
       and is decomposed external to the cell by the
       addition of water.  Hydrogen is produced as a by-
       product of this latter action.
                             77

-------
                    FIGURE  1
                        BRINE
                        HEATER
                                                                  ELECTROLYTIC
                                                                  CELL -I
                                                           MULTIPLE
                                                           EVAPORATORS
                                   CHEMICALS
                BRINE
                        STEAM
                                   BRINE PURIFICATION
                          Ca,Mg OUT
CO
                           *#
                           ##
DRYING TOWER

  fWET  CHLORINE
BRINE
HEATER
nnnnnj
STEAM
N
:
) CH
\ 	 	 nn



1
1
LORtNE
m Eft






r
L
                                                                   HYDROGEN OUT
REFRIGERATION  MACH.}
                                                       SOME H20 OUT
                          -CAUSTIC FOR
                           SPECIAL PURIFICATION
                           CRYSTALLIZER
                                  'CENTRIFUGAL
                                                                                                                     FILTER
                                                                                                                             WASH
                                                                                                                          SALT TO
                                                                                                                           BR INE
        LIQUEFIED
        CHLORINE
                                                                    SALT OUT
                                                                 FINAL  EVAPORATION
                                               WEAK
                                              CAUSTIC
                                              STORAGE
                                                CAUSTIC NOT SPECIALLY
                                                PURIFIED
                                                                                                                     LIQUID
                                                                                                                     CAUSTIC
                                                                                                                      SALES
                                                                   DRUMS   FLAKES
                                                                     FOR  SALE
                              FLOWCHART  FOR  DIAPHRAGM  CAUSTIC  SODA  AND  CHLORINE   CELL
                                 This  flow chart  is selectively  reproduced in content and configuration  from  Figure 13.7
                                 in the book by  R. Norn's  Shreve,  Chemical Process Industries,  Third Edition,  New
                                 York,  Me Grow  - Hill Book Company,  1967, p. 236

-------
  Brine purification is necessary to produce a high
  grade caustic in the diaphragm process.  Calcium,
  iron magnesium and sulfate ions are precipitated.
  In the diaphragm process, the cell liquor, contain-
  ing 50% of the sodium chloride, is concentrated.

  The salt precipitates and is reused following wash-
  ing.  Special purification of the caustic may be
  necessary and this usually produces considerable
  sludge.

  It is necessary to dry the chlorine, and this is
  accomplished by contact with a concentrated
  sulfuric stream.

  The mercury cell produces, without all of the major
  purification problems, a high purity caustic and
  chlorine.  This eliminates the major waste problems
  except those arising from chlorine drying.

  No significant change is expected in this process.

Waste Problems;  The waste problem common to both
  systems is the waste sulfuric acid stream which
  amounts to about 1,000,000 gpd/100 tons/day of
  chlorine.  Such a stream  (1,000,000 gpd) would
  contain about 2000 pounds of sulfuric acid and 200
  pounds of chlorine.  Regeneration of this stream
  is quite possible by evaporation and steam
  stripping of the chlorine.  This would permit use
  of the chlorine for sterilization purposes.

  Other wastes arise from the discharge of waste
  brine as a slipstream.  This may amount to 1-5%
  of total brine throughput.  Improved brine puri-
  fication techniques could reduce these practices.
  The waste brine could be utilized in a small
  mercury cell to produce chlorine or for the
  regeneration of ion exchange systems.  The waste
  brine from a mercury cell contains some mercury
  which requires physical separation for removal.
  Economics usually justifies removal.

  The sludges collected from the purification of
  brine also create a problem, and current techniques
  involve land disposal or discharge to a water
  body.  No major processing changes are anticipated.
                        79

-------
Soda Ash
     	Producer	          Capacity I

     Allied, Baton Rouge, La.  (S)                785,000
     Allied, Green River, Wyo. (N)               550,000
     Allied, Syracuse, N.Y.  (S)                1,000,000
     American Potash, Trona, Calif. (N)          160,000
     Diamond Shamrock, Painesville, O.  (S)       800,000
     Dow,  Freeport, Tex. (S)                      75,000
     FMC,  Green River, Wyo.  (N)                1,250,000
     Olin,  Lake Charles, La.  (S)                3,750,000
     Olin,  Saltville, Va.  (S)                    400,000
     PPG,  Barberton,  O.  (S)                      600,000
     PPG,  Corpus Christi, Tex. (S)               240,000
     Stauffer,  Green River, Wyo.   (N)              800,000
     Stauffer,  Westend, Calif. (N)               160,000
     Wyandotte, Wyandotte,  Mich.   (S)              800,000
                                    Total      7,995,000

     V tons/year     (S) synthetic;   (N) natural

     Production;  1969:  7,000,000 tons
                  1974:  9,000,000 tons

     Uses;   Glass,  chemicals, pulp and paper/ soap and
       detergents,  aluminum, water treatment.

     Processes:  About 30%  of the current production of
       soda ash is  obtained naturally  through the mining
       of  trona (sodium sesquicarbonate).  Some amount is
       recovered through the calcination of natural
       alkali brines  in California. Neither technique
       produces significant quantities of waste.   The
       mining operation does produce  the usual solid waste
       problems and any brine operation produces  a waste
       brine solution.   The location of these areas makes
       their impact upon the environment relatively
       insignificant.

       The  Solvay process uses brine,  limestone and coke
       or gas as the  raw material. Brine is purified as
       previously noted (see chlorine).  Ammonia  is
       dissolved in the purified  brine and this solution
       is carbonated  with carbon  dioxide produce  by the
                             80

-------
decarbonation of limestone by calcining the stone
mixed with coke.  This produces a moist sodium
bicarbonate which is calcined to soda ash.  The
ammonia is recovered from the filtrate  (sodium
bicarbonate unit) by addition of quick lime to the
system.  The ammonia and carbon dioxide are
recovered and recycled.

The recovery of ammonia produces a waste stream
(1-2000 gals/ton) which contains ammonia (2-4 kgms
of (NH4)2 804 per ton of 58% soda ash) and sub-
stantial amounts of calcium chloride  (0.3 tons/ton
of 58% Na2) and some calcium sulfate and calcium
carbonate.  While some calcium chloride is
recovered by distillation, this practice is not
sufficiently prevalent to prevent it from being a
major pollution problem.

Since calcination involves dust control, there is
the likelihood of a discharge containing a large
concentration of suspended solids from a scrubber
or where water is used for conveying fly ash.

It is expected that more natural soda ash will be
utilized, but no major changes in the manufacture
of soda ash by the Solvay process are anticipated.
                      81

-------
SIC  2813  (INDUSTRIAL  GASES, EXCEPT  FOR  ORGANIC  GASES)
Nitrogen

     Producers;  The number  of nitrogen  and  oxygen  produc-
       ing plants is quite large  and  capacities  of  either
       individual plants or  companies  are  not  available.
       These plan to be generally located  in areas  of  high
       user demand.

       Major producers are:

         Air Products and Chemicals -  20%  of market
         Airco - 20% of market
         Big Three Industrial Gas
         Burdett Oxygen
         Chemetron - National Cylinder Gas
         Union Carbide - Linde Division  -  40%  of market

     Production;  1969:  130,000  million cubic feet
                  1974:  370,000  million cubic feet

     Uses:  Chemical and drug production,  steel  and metal
       production, electronics, aerospace, cryogenics.

     Processes;  Both oxygen and  nitrogen  are  produced
       primarily through the medium pressure liquification
       and rectification of air.   The  process  can produce
       a variety of products including high  purity  oxygen
       and nitrogen and low purity oxygen.   The  process
       naturally has many variations,  but  it is  expected
       that there will be no substantial changes in the
       method of production.

     Waste Problems;  The major problem  associated  with
       this process is related to the  discharge, with  the
       cooling waters, of waste compressor oils.  The
       quantity of such oils may  vary  greatly  from  plant
       to plant depending on compressor  type,  size, and
       age.  In-plant control is  not only possible, but
       feasible.  This is best done by skimming  in  the
       sumps.
Oxygen

     Producers;   See nitrogen.
                              82

-------
             NITROGEN
CO
u»
             OXYGEN
             WASTE
                             COMPRESSOR
                                  DRIER
                    C02 SCRUBBER
                                                                                      FIGURE
EXCHANGERS


SUBCOOLER
                                                     EXPANDER
                                                                                   ^LOW-PRESSURE
                                                                                   ^COLUMN
                                                                                     ^VAPORIZER
                                                                                              FILTERS^
                                   AUXILIARY
                                   VAPORIZER

                                  HIGH
                                  PRESSURE
                                  COLUMN
                                                                                     OXYGEN
                                                                                     SEPARATOR
                  FLOWCHART  OF A  STANDARD MEDIUM-PRESSURE AIR-SEPARATION PLANT

                       This flow chart is selectively reproduced  in content and configuration from  Figure 7.7 in
                       the book by  R. Norris Shreve, Chemical Process Industries, Third Edition,  New  York,
                       Me Grow - Hill Book Company, 1967,  p. 109

-------
Production;  High Purity  (99.5-100%)
  1969:    260,000 million cubic feet
  1974:    520,000 million cubic feet

             Low Purity
  1969:  1,900,000 tons
  1974:  3,800,000 tons

Uses_:  Chemical production, steel production, medi-
  cal.

Processes;  See nitrogen.

Waste Problems;  See nitrogen.
                        84

-------
SIC 2816 (INORGANIC PIGMENTS)
Barites

     Producers;   Produced by:
       Chemical Products Corporation, Cartersville, Ga.
       Chicago Copper and Chemical Corporation, Blue
         Island, 111.
       The Great Western Sugar Corporation, Johnstown,
         Colo.
       Holland-Suco Color Corporation, Huntington, W. Va.
       FMC, Modesto, Calif.
       Mallinckrodt Chemical, St. Louis, Mo.
       Ozark Smelting and Mining, Coffeyville, Kan.
       PPG, New Martinsville, W. Va.

       Capacities are not available.

     Production;  1969:    950,000 tons
                  1974:  1,300,000 tons

     Uses;  White pigment.

     Processes;   Barites is recovered as a mineral which
       may be converted to a soluble salt, such as the
       chloride or the sulfide, by thermal reduction.  The
       sulfate is then produced by the addition of a
       sulfate such as sodium sulfate.  The resulting
       filtrate is a solution of the resulting chloride
       (usually sodium) on an equivalent mole basis.
       Thus, the discharge will be a brine solution.  No
       major process change may be expected in the near
       future and no process improvement is considered
       likely.
Calcium Carbonate

     Producers;   Produced by:
       Allied, Baton Rouge, La.
       Allied, Green River, Wyo.
       Allied, Syracuse, N.Y.
       American Potash, Trona, Calif.
       Diamond Shamrock, Painesville, 0.
       Dow, Freeport, Tex.
       FMC, Green ftiver, Wyo.
                            85

-------
       Olin, Lake Charles, La.
       Olin, Saltville, Va.
       PPG, Barberton, 0.
       PPG, Corpus Christi, Tex.
       Stauffer, Green River, Wyo.
       Stauffer, Westend, Calif.
       Wyandotte, Wyandotte, Mich.

       Capacities are not available.

     Production;  1969:  180,000 tons  (estimated)
                  1974:  240,000 tons

     Uses;  Pigment, filler, neutralization, soaps, abra-
       sives, agriculture.

     Processes;  Whiting is used as a filler and pigment.
       It is prepared by wet grinding and levigating
       natural chalk.  This process produces a waste which
       contains large amounts of suspended solids.
       Artificial whiting arises through the reaction of
       calcium chloride with sodium carbonate forming a
       milk of lime suspension.  The filtrate from this
       suspension is high in suspended solids.  Use of
       polyelectrolytes will increase recovery of this
       product.
Iron Oxide Pigments

     Producers;   Not available

     Production;
       1969:  Natural Brown Iron Oxides
                      Umbers
                      Red Iron Oxides
                      Sienna
                      Yellow Ocher
                      Sienna
                                   Subtotal
         Manufactured Black
                      Brown
                      Red
                      Yellow
                                   Subtotal
                                      Total
 13,000 tons
  5,000 tons
 35,000 tons
  1,000 tons
  5,000 tons
  1,000 tons
 60,000 tons

  4,000 tons
  5,000 tons
 32,000 tons
 24,000 tons
 65,000 tons
125,000 tons
                             86

-------
       1974:  160,000 tons

     Processes and Waste Problems;  These products are made
       in dry thermal processes or are produced from natural
       clays, etc.  Therefore, except for waste slurries
       and equipment washouts, no serious waste problems
       exist.  The discharge of highly colored turbid solu-
       tions from clay-mining sites is most serious
       locally.
Titanium Dioxide
               Producer
     American Potash, Hamilton, Miss.  (C)
     Cabot, Ashtabula, O. (C)
     Cyanamid, Piney River,  Va.  (S)
     Cyanamid, Savannah, Ga.  (C,S)
     DuPont, Antioch, Calif.  (C)
     DuPont, Baltimore, Md.   (S)
     DuPont, Edge Moor1, Del.  (C,S)
     DuPont, New Johnsonville, Tenn.  (C)
     Glidden, Baltimore, Md.  (S)
     National Lead, Sayreville, N. J.  (C,S)
     National Lead, St. Louis, Mo.  (S)
     New Jersey Zinc, Gloucester City,
       N. J.  (S)
     PPG, Natrium, W. Va. (C)
     S. Williams
                                    Total
                           Capacity —

                             30,000
                             20,000
                             18,000
                             92,000
                             27,000
                             40,000
                            100,000
                             68,000
                             56,000
                            173,000
                            108,000

                             46,000
                             18,000
                             25,000
                            821,000
     I/ tons/year (C)  chloride process;  (S) sulfate process
     Production:
1969:  650,000 tons
1974:  800,000 tons
     Uses;   Varnish and lacquer, paint, floor coverings,
       rubber, coated fabrics, printing ink.

     Processes;   Titanium dioxide is produced by either of
       two processes.  The older process is the digestion
       of ilraenite ore in sulfuric acid.  The heat of the
       reaction evaporates the water.  Water is added
       dissolving the titanium and iron sulfates.  The
       ferric ions are reduced with scrap and the solution
       is clarified.  Fifty percent of the iron is re-
                             87

-------
                  FIGURE 3
oo
00
GROUND
ILMENITE
ORE

STRONG
H2S04
HYDR
PREC
	
i
2 THICKENERS-
WAT CD



*
0) DIGE
(2)DISS
(3) RED!
«
*"" 1 'J//'*J
>^ 1 	
1
rmi
                                          STEAM
                                       RESIDUE
                                       TO
                                       POSSIBLE
                                       RECOVERY
                    EVAPORATOR
                        CRYSTALLIZER
| ^CENTRIFUGAL
FERROUS
SULFATE
SEPTAHYDRATE
6
s


X
1 1
i
/-
FILTRATE
TO H2S04
AND  FeS04
RECOVERY

  TITANIUM'
  HYDRATE
                                                                  WATER
                                                                        fl
                                                            TO STACK  OR  PRECIPITATOR
                                                                OIL-FIRED KILN
                                                                                       DISPERSING
                                                                                       AGENTS
                                                                                       {WATER
                                                                                      •i'
                                                                            HYDRO-
                                                                            SEPARATOR'
                                                                          ••   1 A	1	
                                                                               I fJfJffJ/fffl/'Fff{ftf**ftffff
                                                                                                        REPULPER
                                                                                           REAGENT
                                                                                           FOR  pH
                                                                                           CONTROL
                         CLARIFYING  FILTER
                                                                 FILTRATE TO |
                                                                 SETTLING
                                                                 FOR  Ti02
                                                                 RECOVERY
                                                                             STEAM ROTARY
                                                                                DRYER^
                                                              AIR SEPARATION
                                                              PULVERIZER
                                       FLOWCHART  FOR  TITANIUM DIOXIDE

                        This flow chart  is selectively reproduced in content  and  configuration from Figure 24-9
                        in the book  by R. Norris Shreve, Chemical Process  Industries, Third Edition, New  York,
                        Me Grow-Hill Book  Company, 1967, p. 438

-------
            FIGURE  4
oo
                                                              TINTING
                                                                 a
                                                              THINNING
                                                                TANK
                          PLATFORM
                          SCALE
                                                                           LABELING
                                                                           MACHINE
                                                                                      FILLING, p MACHINE
                             Jini
                                                                            (T
                                                                                   nnnnnn
1
BELT CONVEYOR
t
CARTON
PACKAGING * -NIPPING
GRINDING MILLS
                                   FLOWCHART  FOR MIXING  OF  PAINT

                     This flow chort  is selectively reproduced in content  and configuration from Figure 24.1 in
                     the book by R. Norn's Shreve, Chemical Process  /ne'ui.-trfes, Third Edition, New  York,
                     Me Grow-Hill Book Company, 1967,  p. 428

-------
       moved by crystallization of ferrous sulfate.  The
       titanyl sulfate is hydrolyzed and crystallized and
       filtered and washed.

       The newer chloride process involves the oxidation
       in a flame of titanium chloride produced by the
       chlorination, in the presence of coke of rutile
       ore or slag.  Chlorine is recovered.  The chloride
       process is expected to become the more standard
       one if supplies of rutile and slag hold out.

     Waste Problems:  The sulfate process generates
       considerable quantities of wastewater effluents.
       The principal sources are the wash waters from
       the washing of the titania and the overflow from
       the thickeners earlier in the process.  Both steps
       are necessary but it seems likely that some
       reuse of the wash waters can be provided for.
Zinc Oxide
     Producers;   Major producers are:
                 American Zinc
                 Eagle Picher
                 New Jersey Zinc
                 St. Joseph Lead

                 Capacities are not available.

     Production;   1969:  195,000 tons
                  1974:  220,000 tons

     Processes;   The American process produces zinc oxide
       directly  from ore franklinite.  The ore is mixed
       with coal and heated.  The zinc oxide is reduced
       to zinc which is then oxidized to zinc oxide in
       cyclones  and bag filters without wet wastes.

       The French process involves the vaporization of zinc
       in a retort with indirect heat and carbon monoxide
       gas.  The zinc and carbon monoxide are oxidized to
       carbon dioxide and zinc oxide.  The process is dry.

       The Electrothermic process is similar to the
       American  process except that the furnace is
       electrically heated.
                             90

-------
Aluminum Sulfate

     Producers;  Allied
                 American Cyanamid
                 DuPont
                 Essex
                 Monsanto
                 Olin
                 Stauffer

     Production;   1969:  1,090,107 tons
                  1974:  1,250,000 tons

     Uses:   Water treatment, paper sizing, dye industry.

     Production;   Aluminum sulfate, while commonly called
       alum, Is" not a true alum.  True alums are a double
       sulfate of aluminum or chromium and a monovalent
       metal or radical.

       Aluminum sulfate is made by the reaction of 60 Be1
       sulfuric acid with bauxite following grinding.
       The  liquor is treated by the addition of barium
       sulfide to remove  iron and is then clarified and
       solidified.   Production means are not likely to
       change in  the near future.

     Waste  Problems;  The major wastes are slurries of
       solids collected in the thickener decanters.
       These solids can easily be collected and con-
       trolled.   No major change in the amount of wastes
       is expected.
                            91

-------
Ammonium Nitrate
                AMMONIUM NITRATE PLANTS
                     UNITED STATES
        Company
Agway, Inc.
Allied Chemical Corp.
American Cyanamid Co,
Apache Powder Co.
Arkla Chemical
Armour Agricultural
  Chemical Company

Calumet Nitrogen Co.
Carolina Nitrogen Co.
Central Nitrogen Co.
Cherokee Nitrogen Co.
Chevron Chemical Co.
Columbia Nitrogen Co.
Cominco American, Inc.
Commercial Solvents
  Corporation

Escambia Chemical
  Corporation
Farmers Chemical
  Association
Farmland Industries
Fel-Tex, Inc.
Gulf Oil Corp.
Hawkeye Chemical Co.
Hercules, Inc.
     Location
Olean, N.Y.
Geismar, La.
Hopewell, Va.
Omaha, Nebr.
South Point, O.
Hannibal, Mo.
Benson, Ariz.
Helena, Ark.

Cherokee, Ala.
Crystal City, Mo.
Hammond, Ind.
Wilmington, N.C.
Terre Haute, Ind.
Pryor, Okla.
Fort Madison, Iowa
Kennewick, Wash.
Richmond, Calif.
Augusta, Ga.
Beatrice, Nebr.

Marion, 111.
Sterlington, La.

Pace, Fla.

Tyner, Tenn.
Lawrence, Kans.
Fremont, Nebr.
Henderson, Ky.
Pittsburg, Kans.
Vicksburg, Miss.
Clinton, Iowa
Donora, Pa.
Hercules, Calif.
Louisiana, Mo.
Capacity-
1966
(thousand
tons)	

   105
   385
   400
    98
   235
   140
    30
   150

   128
   111
    55
   161
   134
    45
    70
    61
    55
   208
   200
   148

   100

   180
   208
    34
   105
   360
    43
   153
   • • •
   140
   425
                             92

-------
Ammonium Nitrate  (cont.)
         Company
                              Location
Illinois Nitrogen,  Inc.
Kaiser Chemical Co.
Ketona Chemical Corp,
Mississippi Chemical
  Corporation
Mobil Chemical Co.
Monsanto Co.

Nipak, Inc.
Nitram, Inc.
Nitrin, Inc.
Northern Chemical
  Industries
Olin Mathieson
  Chemical Co.
Phillips Chemical Co.
St. Paul Ammonia Corp.
Smith Chemical Co.
Solar Nitrogen
  Chemicals Co.

Terra Chemicals
  International
Texaco, Inc.
Union Oil of Calif.
U.S. industrial
  Chemicals Co.
U.S. Steel Corp.
Valley Nitrogen
  Producers

Wycon Chemical Co.
Marseilles, 111.
Bainbridge, Ga.
North Bend, Ohio
Savannah, Ga.
Tampa, Fla.
Ketona, Ala.

Yazoo City, Miss.
Beaumont, Tex.
El Dorado, Ark.
Luling, La.
Kerens, Tex.
Tampa, Fla.
Cordova, 111.

Searsport, Maine

E. Alton, 111.
Beatrice, Nebr.
Etter, Tex.
Kennewi ck, Wash.
Pine Bend, Minn.
Douglas, Ga.

Joplin, Mo.
Lima, Ohio

Port Neal, Iowa
Lockport, 111.
Brea, Calif.

Tuscola, 111.
Geneva, Utah

El Centro, Calif.
Helm, Calif.
Cheyenne, Wyo.
            Total
Capacity-
1966
(thousand
tons)	

   132
    50
    95
   198
    54
    39

   296
   200
   280
   290
    56
   140
   110

    25

    50
    11
   240
    20
    88
   110
    75

   145
    95
    60

    88
    90

    88
    35
    37
 7,874
Source:  TVA
                            93

-------
                    AMMONIUM NITRATE  PLANT  LOCATIONS
                                   FIGURE 5
VD
        A NEW PLANT

-------
     Production;   1969:   5,200,000  tons
                   1974:   6,300,000  tons

     Uses_:  Fertilizer, explosives.

     Processes;  While some ammonium nitrate  is manu-
       factured by the old batch method, the  vast
       majority is manufactured by  one of a variety of
       continuous  processes.  All processes involve
       the direct  contact of preheated ammonia and
       nitric acid, separation of the gaseous water,
       and prilling or flaking by melting.  While
       various modifications are continuously being
       brought into use,  no basic changes are expected.

     Waste Problems;  Washdown produces substantial
       amounts of  nitrogen rich wastewaters.  Additional
       amounts are associated with  scrubber blowdowns
       and from cooling water.  Improved plant mainten-
       ance would  assist  in controlling this problem.


Ammonium Sulfate

     Producers;  A detailed list is not available because
       of the large number of by-product producers, but
       producers include:

       Alabama By-Products         Interlake Steel
       Allied Chemical             Olin
       American Cyanamid           Phillips
       Bethlehem Steel             Shell
       C. F.  & I Steel             Simplot
       Chevron                     Sinclair
       Columbia Nitrogen           Sunray
       DuPont                      U.  S.  Pipe
       Graver                      U.  S.  Steel
       Inland Steel

     Production;   1969;   2,715,000 tons
                  1974;   3,000,000 tons

     Uses:   Fertilizer
                            95

-------
     Processes;  About 35% of the production is associated
       with the direct reaction of ammonium salts such as
       the carbonate with sulfuric acid.  Some is made by
       the use of gypsum in place of the sulfuric acid.
       Major discharges involve solid slurries of by-
       product materials.

       Major amounts of ammonium sulfate are made during
       the recovery of ammonia from coke oven gas.  About
       40% of the total production is involved with the
       actual recovery of by-product ammonia from a
       variety of other processes.  A plant in California
       is being built based on the reaction of gypsum and
       ammonia.  To summarize, most of the ammonium sul-
       fate produced in this country is a result of
       attempts to control atmospheric pollution.  No
       change in production pattern is expected to occur.

     Waste Problems;  As indicated above, no major waste
       problem exists.
Calcium Carbide
                 Producer	   Capacity —
     Airco, Calvert City, Ky.               300,000
     Airco, Keokuk, Iowa                     36,000
     Airco, Louisville, Ky.                 150,000
     Midwest Carbide, Keokuk, Iowa           50,000
     Midwest Carbide, Pryor, Okla.           30,000
     Pacific Carbide, Portland, Ore.         20,000
     Union Carbide, Ashtabula, Ohio         228,000
     Union Carbide, Niagara Falls, N. Y.    210,000
     Union Carbide, Portland, Ore.           32,000
     Union Carbide, Sheffield, Ala.          60,000
                                   Total  1,116,000
     I/ tons/year

     Production;  1969;  920,000 tons
                  1974:  900,000 tons

     Uses;  Production of acetylene.

     Processes;  Calcium carbide is prepared from quicklime
       and carbon  (usually coke, petroleum coke or anthra-
                           96

-------
       cite) at 2000-2200°C in a furnace related to the
       familiar arc furnace.  No major process change is
       expected but the use of carbide-based acetylene is
       expected to be reduced in the future.

     Waste Problems;  Since the process is not a wet
       process, the only major discharges are associated
       with wastewaters used to scrub furnace and kiln
       effluents.
Hydrochloric Acid

     Producers;   Most HC1 is produced as a by-product from
       the production of carbon tetrachloride and other
       chlorinated hydrocarbons, PVC, ethylene oxide, and
       phenol.  (See "Projected Wastewater Treatment Costs
       in the Organic Chemicals Industry," Department of
       the Interior.)  Major producers of anhydrous HC1
       are:

       Detrex                     Morton
       Diamond Shamrock           Shell
       Dow                        Stauffer
       Hooker                     Vulcan
       Montrose

       Major producers of aqueous HC1 are:

       Allied             Hooker       Pennsalt
       Arkla              Mobay        PCA
       Baker              Monsanto     Reichhold
       Cabot              Mont         Shell
       Detrex             Morton       Stauffer
       Diamond Shamrock   Olin         Velsicol
       Dow                PPG          Vulcan
       DuPont             Pearsall     Wyandotte
       GAF

     Production:   1969:  1,800,000 tons
                  1974:  2,200,000 tons

     Uses:   Oil well activation,  chemical production,  steel
       pickling, monosodium glutamate and starch hydrolysis,
       metal cleaning.
                           97

-------
Processes:  The major portion of HC1 currently produced
  (85%) is a by-product of the chlorination of hydro-
  carbons.  However, it is expected that the amount of
  by-product HC1 available will be greatly decreased
  in the future for several reasons.  These include:

  1.  The practice of oxychlorination is increasing
      rapidly and this, in a balanced system, can
      eliminate the presence of waste HC1.

  2.  Most vinyl chloride plants employ oxychlorina-
      tion and do not produce major amounts of waste
      acid.

  3.  A new process, based on a modification of the
      old Deacon process, as developed by Kellogg,
      is expected to produce large amounts of chlorine
       (note impact on chlorine under #2812) and con-
      sume substantial amounts of by-product acid.

  There are sufficient amounts of waste acids avail-
  able so that the short term supply will not be a
  problem.

  Three other sources of supply are as follows:

  1.  Direct burning of chlorine in a small excess of
      hydrogen.  This is followed by the adsorption
      of HC1 in water, followed by stripping to pro-
      duce a high purity HC1.

  2.  The reaction of salt and sulfuric acid in a
      high temperature furnace.  Sodium sulfate is
      formed as a by-product.  Adsorption of the acid
      in water takes place with removal of salt and
      acid in a coke tower.

  3.  A Hargreaves-type operation which involves the
      reaction of salt, sulfur dioxide, oxygen and
      water to form sodium sulfate and acid.   (This
      process is used by only one plant.)

Waste Problems;  In the salt acid reaction, the wash-
  ing out of the coke tower produces a waste stream
  of acid and salt.  Improved furnace design would
  cut down on the amount of carryover.
                      98

-------
       In the salt-acid process, as in the Hargreaves
       reaction/ a stream of weak sulfuric amounting to
       50-90 Ibs/ton 20° Be1 hydrochloric acid is pro-
       duced.

       Weak hydrochloric acid is also wasted from the
       system.
Hydrofluoric Acid

     	Producer	    Capacity I/

     Alcoa, Point Comfort, Tex.             25,000
     Allied, Baton Rouge, La.               15,000
     Allied, Geismar, La.                   15,000
     Allied, Nitro, W. Va.                  20,000
     Allied, North Claymont, Del.           25,000
     Allied, Port Chicago, Calif.           12,000
     DuPont, Deepwater Point, N. J.         15,000
     DuPont, Strang, Tex.                   50,000
     Essex, Paulsboro, N. J.                11,000
     Harshaw, Cleveland, Ohio               10,000
     Kaiser, Gramercy, La.                  15,000
     Olin,  Joliet, 111.                     12,000
     Pennsalt,  Calvert City, Ky.            18,000
     Reynolds,  Bauxite, Ark.                40,000
     Stauffer,  Houston, Tex.                18,000
                                  Total    301,000
     I/ tons/year
     Production;   1969:   310,000 tons
                  1974:   420,000 tons

     Uses;   Fluorocarbons,  aluminum,  petroleum alkylation,
       stainless  steel pickling, AEC  work.

     Processes;   HF is prepared by heating,  in kilns, the
       ore-fluorspar (CaF2)  with sulfuric acid.  The
       gaseous  HF is either absorbed  in water or liquified,
       employing  refrigeration to obtain the anhydrous
       product.

     Waste  Problems:   Not significant except in washout
       where fluoride concentrations  can be  a serious prob-
       lem.
                            99

-------
Hydrogen Peroxide

     	   Producer	     Capacity —'

     Allied, Syracuse, N. Y.                4,000
     DuPont, Memphis, Tenn.                25,000
     FMC, Buffalo, N. Y.                    6,000
     FMC, South Charleston, W. Va.          8,000
     FMC, Vancouver, Wash.                  6,000
     Pennsalt, Wyandotte, Mich.             1,750
     Pittsburgh Plate, Barberton, Ohio      3,750
     Shell, Norco, La.                     17,000
                                Total      71,500
     I/ tons/year

     Production;  1969:   70,000 tons
                  1974:  100,000 tons

     Uses;  Textiles, paper and pulp, plasticizers, chemi-
       cals .

     Processes:  Hydrogen peroxide is manufactured by one
       electrolytic and two organic oxidation processes.
       Sulfuric acid is electrolyzed to peracid  (H2S2O8)
       which hydrolyzes to sulfuric acid and peroxide.

       The organic processes center on 2-ethylanthraquinone
       which is oxidized to produce peroxide and recycle-
       able quinone and isopropyl alcohol.  The latter are
       oxidized at modest temperatures and pressures to
       peroxide and acetone.

     Waste Problems;  The electrolytic process produces a
       stream of dilute sulfuric acid.  The organic based
       processes will probably produce a waste stream from
       the distillation column.
Lime
     Producers:  There are some 210 lime producing plants
       located wherever there are significant limestone
       deposits.  This list is too exhaustive for display
       here.  Refer to "Minerals Yearbook," U. S. Bureau
       of Mines, for a complete listing.
                           100

-------
      Production;   1969:

                   1974:
       Quicklime  -  14,000,000  tons
       Hydrated   -   3,000,000  tons
       Total      -  19,000,000  tons
      Uses;   Agriculture,  chemical  manufacture,  pulp manu-
        facture,  tanning,  steel  and cement manufacture,
        water treatment,  soap  manufacturing,  construction.

      Processes:   Thermal  decarbonation  of limestone or
        calcium carbonate  sludge usually in a shaft kiln
        or a  rotary  kiln but also in a fluidized bed kiln.

      Waste Problems;   These generally arise  if  solids cap-
        ture  is  by wet  scrubbing.   Conversion to a dry
        capture  system  such as bag  filters would eliminate
        the problem.
Nitric Acid
     Producers:
	Company

Agway
Allied
American Cyanamid
Ark la
Armour
Atlas
Celanese
Central Farmers
Central Nitrogen
   Plant Location

Clean, N.Y.
Buffalo, N.Y.
Geismar, La.
Hopewell, Va.
La Platte, Nebr.
Newell, Pa.
South Point, O.

Bound Brook, N.J.
Hannibal, Mo.
Willow Island, W. Va,

Helena, Ark.
Cherokee, Ala.
Crystal City, Mo.

Joplin, Mo.
Tamaqua, Pa.

Bay City, Tex.
Fremont, Nebr.
Terre Haute, Ind.
                                         Estimated capacity
                                          C68)  (1,000  tons/
                                                year)
Plant
60
25
200
250
90
60
240

25
110
27

90
110
100

122
24

77
31
133
Co. Total
60






865



162
90


210


146
77
31
133
                           101

-------
Nitric Acid  (cont.)
     Company
   Plant Location
Cherokee
Chevron
Collier
Columbia Nitrogen
Cominco
Commercial Sol-
  vents
Cooperative Farm
  Chems.
DuPont
El Paso
Escambia
Farmers'  Chemical
Grace
Gulf
Hawkeye
Hercules
Estimated capacity
('68) (1,000 tons/
      year)	
 PlantCo. Total
Prior, Okla.
Ft. Madison, La,
Kennewick, Wash,
Richmond, Calif.

Brea, Calif.
Augusta, Ga.
Beatrice, Nebr.

Marion, 111.
Sterlington, La.
Lawrence, Kans.
Barksdale, Wis.
Belle, W. Va.
Birmingham, Ala.
DuPont, Wash.
Gibbstown, N.J.
Louviers, Colo.
Old Hickory, Tenn,
Orange, Tex.
Victoria, Tex.
Seneca, 111.
Wabash, Ind.
Odessa, Tex.
Pensacola, Fla.
Tyner, Tenn.
WiImington, N. C.
Henderson, Ky.
Pittsburg, Kans.
Vicksburg, Miss.

Clinton, La.
Bessemer, Ala.
Hercules, Cali f.
Kenvil, N.J.
Louisiana, Mo.
Parling, N.J.
Donora, Pa.
Illinois Nitrogen  Marseilles, 111.
   65
   94
  130
   85

   47
  162
  135

   50
  163
  485
   20
   82
   20
   20
  350
   15
   44
  180
  120
  215
  150
   63
   90
  170
  164
   85
  281
   85

  125
   20
   65
   16
  400
   53
  120

  120
   65
  309
   47
  162
  135
  213

  485
1,216
   63
   90
  170
  164
  451
  125
                                 674
                                 120
                           102

-------
               FIGURE  6
                                STEAM
                AMMONIA
                                                                                               ABSORPTION
                                                                                               COLUMN
                 AIR
                 INTAKE
                 FILTER
O
OJ
                                                      CONDENSED  STEAM
                                                      MAKE UP WATER
                         ABS. COL.
                         FEED TANK
                              VAPORIZER
                                                          •^
          AMMONIA
          SOLENOID
          VALVEv
                                                                       ABS. COL.
                                                                       FEED PUMP
                      COOLING
                      WATER
   MIST
   SEPARATOR

          GAS
       ,	,MIXER
COOLING
                                                              COOLER
                                                              CONDENSER
'AMMONIA
IFEEDER
i	
                                                                       PLATINUM
                                                                        FILTER
                          WASTE
                           HEAT
                          BOILER
         •IRQ  r	
                                                                                                     COOLING
                                                                                                     WATER
                                                                   HNOS TO
                                                                   STORAGE
   COMPRESSOR  I
(ELECTRIC MOTOR)!
                   EXPANDER
                                                                                          COOLING  WATER
                                                                                          RETURN PUMP
                                                                 BLEACHING  AIR
                                                                 SOLENOID  VALVE
                                       'TERMINAL BOX
                              FLOWCHART  FOR  60%  NITRIC ACID FROM  AMMONIA

                        This flow  chart is selectively reproduced in content and configuration from Figure 16.9
                        in the  book by R. Norris Shreve, Chemical Process Industries,  Third Edition, New
                        York,  Me  Grow-Hill  Book  Company,  1967,  p. 3IS

-------
Nitric Acid  (cont.)
     Company
Kaiser
Ketona
Miscoa
Mob ay

Mobil
Monsanto
Nipak
Nitram
Nitrin
Northern Chemi-
  cal Industries
Olin Mathieson
Phillips Chemical
St. Paul Ammonia
    Plant Location
 Bainbridge, Ga.
 North Bend, 0.
 Savannah, Ga.
 Tampa, Fla.

 Ketona, Ala.
 Yazoo City, Miss.
 New Martinsville,
   W. Va.
 Beaumont, Tex.
 El Dorado, Ark.
 Luling, La.
 Pensacola, Fla.

 Kerens, Tex.
 Tampa, Fla.
 Cordova, 111.

 Searsport, Maine
 Lake Charles, La.
 Kennewi ck, Wash.
 Beatri ce, Nebr.
 Etter, Tex.
 Pasadena, Tex.
 Pine Bend, Minn.
Estimated capacity
{'68) (1,000 tons/
	year)	
 Plant  Co. Total

   47
   84
  162
   42
   36
  388

   50
  154
  275
  270
  258

   50
  120
   95

   25
   95
   43
    9
  164
   13
  100
335
 36
388

 50
154
803
 50
120
 95

 25
 95
100
     Production:
1969:  6,140,000 tons
1974:  7,000,000 tons
     Uses:   Fertilizers, chemicals, photoengravings,
       explosives.

     Processes;   Nitric acid is produced by the catalytic
       air oxidation of ammonia.  Nitric oxide is absorbed
       in water and oxidized.  Higher strength nitric acid
       is produced by breaking the azeotrope with either
       sulfuric acid or magnesium nitrate.  No significant
       changes are expected in the production of nitric
       acid.
                            104

-------
      Waste Problems:  Major problems are associated with
        cooling water blowdown and area washdown which may
        contain troublesome amounts of nitric acid.
•Phosphoric Acid
     Producers
     Location
 Allied Chemical
 American Agricul-
   tural  Chem.
 American Cyanamid
 American Potash
 Arkla  Chemical
 Armour Agricul-
   tural

 Borden
Bunker Hill
Central Phos-
  phates
Coastal Chemical
Consumers Co^
  operative
Des Plaines
  Chemical
El Paso Natural
  Gas
Farmers Chemical
Freeport Sulfur
W. R. Grace

National Phos-
  phate

IMC
New Jersey Zinc
Nipak
NW Cooperative
  Mills
 E.  St.  Louis,  111
 N.  Claymont,  Del.
 Geismar,  La.

 Pierce, La.
 Brewster,  Fla.
 Trona,  Calif.
 Helena, Ark.

 Bartow, Fla.
 Ft. Meade, Fla.
 Piney Point,  Fla.
 Streator,  111.
 Texas City, Tex.
 Kellogg,  Ida.

 Plant City, Fla.
 Pascagoula, Miss.

 Pierce, Fla.

 Morris, 111.

 Conda, Ida.
 Joplin, Mo.
 Uncle Sam, La.
 Bartow, Fla.
 Joplin, Mo.

 Taft, La.
Marseilles, 111.
Bonnie, Fla.
Depue,  111.
Tulsa,  Okla.

Pine Bend, Minn.
Capacity  (tons
100% P205/yr)

   36,200
   36,200
  159,300

  216,000
  148,800
Not Available
   50,000

   85,000
  188,000
  165,000
   24,000
   60,000
   24,500

  200,000
  175,900

  200,000

   50,000

  100,000
   55,000
  540,000
  415,000
   35,000

  207,000
  103,500
  500,000
  150,000
   21,000

   32,000
                            105

-------
Phosphoric Acid  (cont._)
    Producers
     Location
Occidental
  Petroleum
Best Fertilizer
Olin Mathieson

Phosphate Chemi-
  cals
F. S. Royster
  Guano
J. R. Simplot
Mobil Chemical
Western Phos-
  phates
Swift
Tennessee Corp.
TGS
U.S. Industrial
  Chemicals
Valley Nitrogen
Western States
  Chem.
 Hamilton Co.,  Fla.
 Lathrop, Calif.
 Joliet, 111.
 Pasadena, Tex.

 Pasadena, Tex.

 Mulberry, Fla.
 Pocatello, Ida.
 Nichols, Fla.

 Garfield, Utah
 Agricola, Fla.
 E. Tampa, Fla.
 Aurora, N. C.

 Tuscola, 111.
 Helm, Calif.
Capacity (tons
100% P205/yr)
  207,000
   17,300
  127,000
  217,500

   50,000

  130,000
  265,000
  125,000

   70,000
  126,300
  490,000
  347,000

   40,000
   50,000
 Point Chicago, Calif.    90,000
              Total    5,807,500
1969:  4,926,000 tons (100% P205)
1974:  5,900,000 tons (100%
     Production:
     Uses:  Fertilizer, detergents, food.

     Processes:  Phosphoric acid is produced by two methods.
       One method involves the hydrolysis of phosphorous and
       will be discussed under phosphorous.  The most common
       approach is responsible for some 80% of the total
       production; this is from the acidulation of phosphate
       rock.  Usually the acidulation involves the use of
       sulfuric acid.  The acid is concentrated while the
       by-product, gypsum, is filtered and washed.
                            106

-------
            PHOSPHORIC  ACID PLANT  LOCATIONS
                         FIGURE 7
FURNACE  PHOSPHORIC  ACID
WET PROCESS  PHOSPHORIC ACID
NEW WET  PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT

-------
       Alternative  routes  involve  the  use  of nitric or
       hydrochloric in  place  of  sulfuric.   This  approach
       is not  likely to make  any impact on acid  production

       The  swing  towards production  of a more usable by-
       product in the form of the  hemihydrate will  have  a
       major impact upon waste treatment.   On the other
       hand, increasing pressure relative  to air pollution
       will increase the removal of  fluorides and thereby
       increase waste streams.

     Wajste Problems;  Waste arises from at least four
       sources in the process.   The  primary source  is the
       waste gypsum from the  acidulation.   This  semi-solid
       waste may  contain quantities  of phosphoric and
       sulfuric acid.   The development of  techniques for
       utilizing  the waste product should  greatly reduce
       the magnitude of  the problem.

       The second source is the  water  from the scrubbers
       which contain large amounts of  acid fluorides.
       By-product use would appear to  be the answer here,
       as well.   Increasing amounts  are  utilized as a
       source  for fluoride chemicals.

       This third waste  source is the  sludge of  aluminum
       and iron phosphate  sludge produced  by the post
       precipitation of  the acid.  This  may amount  to
       1-5% of production.

       A fourth source  involves  the  tailings from the  rock
       beneficiation.  No  change in  these  waste  sources  is
       anticipated.
Phosphorus
                                         Capacity
	Producers	 	Location	(tons/year)

Continental Oil    Pierce, Fla.             30,000
                   El Paso, George-
                     town, Ida.             21,000
FMC                Pocatello, Idaho        142,000
Hooker             Columbia, Tenn.          68,500
Mobil (V-C)        Charleston, S. C.        10,000
Mobil (V-C)        Mt. Pleasant, Tenn.      20,000
Mobil (V-C)        Nichols, Fla.             6,000
                            108

-------
Phosphorus  (cont.)

                                           Capacity
      Producers      	Location	(tons/year)
Monsanto             Columbia, Tenn.         110,000
Monsanto             Soda Springs, Idaho     120,000
Stauffer             Mt. Pleasant, Tenn.      80,000
Stauffer             Silver Bow, Mont.        30,000
Stauffer             Tarpon Springs, Fla.     12,500
TVA                  Wilson Dam, Ala.        110,000
                                     Total   760,000

     Production:  1969:  610,000 tons
                  1974:  740,000 tons

     Uses;   Sodium tripolyphosphate, phosphoric acid,
       other sodium phosphates, calcium phosphates,
       tetrapotassium pyrophosphate, sodium metaphosphate.

     Processes;  Phosphate rock is mixed with sand and coke,
       sintered and introduced into an electric furnace.
       After heating at elevated temperature, slag and
       ferrophosphorous is drawn off.  Phosphorous vapor is
       drawn off and condensed.  Phosphorous is oxidized to
       ^2^5 which is cooled and hydrated, filtered and
       purified.

     Waste Problems:  A stream containing a significant
       amount of phosphorous  (1% of production) is known as
       "phossy" water.  The phosphorous may be settled,
       thickened and recycled.  The filtration of the acid
       also produces a waste sludge of acid which causes a
       disposal problem.  No major processing changes are
       anticipated.
TKPP

        Producer     	Location	  Capacity =/

     FMC             Carteret, N. J.          10,000
     FMC             Newark, Calif.            2,500
     Hooker          Jeffersonville, Ind.      5,000
     Mobil (V-C)     Fernald, Ohio            12,000
     Monsanto        Carondelet, Mo.          15,000
                            109

-------
TKPP  (cont.)

        Producer     	Location	  Capacity —'

     Olin            Joliet, 111.              5,000
     Stauffer        Chicago Heights, 111.     7,500
     Stauffer        South Gate, Calif.        2,500
                                      Total   59,500

     I/ tons/year

     Production:  1969:  48,500 tons
                  1974:  60,000 tons

     Uses;  Liquid detergent builder.

     Procejssgs t  TKPP is prepared by the reaction of phos-
       phoric acid and potassium carbonate to produce
       dipotassium-phosphate which is calcined to TKPP.

     Waste Problems:  Not significant.


Sodium Metal

        Producers	Location	  Capacity —'

     DuPont           Memphis,  Tenn.            70
                      Niagara Falls, N.Y.       84
     Ethyl            Baton Rouge, La.          90
                      Houston,  Tex.             60
     National
       Distillers     Ashtabula, Ohio           56
                                      Total    J60"

     I/ million Ibs/year

     Production;  1969:  165,000 tons
                  1974:  200,000 tons

     Uses;  Tetraethyl and tetramethyl lead,  potassium,
       sodium peroxide, sodium cyanide.

     Processes;   Electrolysis of fused sodium chloride.
       The crude sodium is filtered at 105-110°C.
                            110

-------
     Waste Problems:  Since the process is run dry, waste
       problems are limited to washouts, spills and filter
       cake discharge.
Sodium Bicarbonate

        Producer     	Location	  Capacity —'

     Church & Dwight Syracuse, N. Y.         100,000
     Church & Dwight Green River, Wyo.        40,000
     Diamond         Painesville, Ohio        28,000
     Olin            Saltville, Va.           23,000
     PPG             Barberton, Ohio          40,000
     Wyandotte       Wyandotte, Mich.         30,000
                                    Total    261,000
     I/ tons/year

     Production;  1969:  205,000 tons
                  1974:  235,000 tons

     Use s;  Food, chemicals, drugs, fire extinguishant,
       soap and detergents, leather, textile, and paper.

     Processee?;  Sodium bicarbonate is not made by refining
       the crude sodium bicarbonate from the Solvay process,
       A saturated solution of soda ash (natural or
       synthetic) is prepared and is carbonated with CO2 in
       a tower.  The suspension is filtered, washed,
       centrifuged and dried.

     Waste Problems;  Major problem is the blowdown of the
       filter cake and filter cake washups.   No significant
       process changes are expected and no change in the
       nature of pollutional problems seems  likely.
Sodium Bichromate

         Producer	  	Location	  Capacity =/

     Allied              Baltimore, Md.          90,000
     Diamond Shamrock    Kearny, N.J.            15,000
     Diamond Shamrock    Painesville, Ohio       50,000
     Hercules            Glen Falls, N.Y.        16,000
     Pittsburgh Plate    Corpus Christi, Tex.    35,000
                                        Total   206,000
     I/ tons/year
                           111

-------
     Production:  1969:  150,000 tons
                  1974:  165,000 tons

     Uses;  Pigments, leather tanning, chromic acid, metal
       treatment, textiles and dyes.

     Processes;   The raw material is a chromium iron oxide
       containing about 50% Cr2O3.  The ore is ground to
       200 mesh, mixed with limestone and soda ash and
       heated to 2200°F in a strongly oxidizing atmosphere.
       The mass is leached with hot water to remove the
       soluble sodium chromate.  The solution is acidified
       to convert the chromate to dichromate.  The sodium
       sulfate crystallizes out and the solution is sent
       to crystallizers to recover the dichromate.  No
       process changes are expected.

     Was te Problems:   The solution coming off the
       crystalTizer s  contains about 0.1 ton of Na2S04 per
       ton of sodium dichromate and minor amounts of
       sodium dichromate and chromate.  Use of ion exchange
       and other concentrating systems could permit re-
       covery from this system.
Sodium Chloride .

     	Producers	           Capacity —^

     Morton                                      6
     International                               4
     Diamond Crystal                             2.5
     Leslie                                      1.5
     Other salt companies                        5

     Total noncaptive capacity                  19
     Captive to chemical companies              22
     Total salt and brine                       41

     I/ million tons/year
     Production;   1969:  43,000,000 tons
                  1974:  57,000,000 tons

     Uses:   Production of chlorine, caustic, soda ash, other
       chemicals,  highway use, food, feed, water condition-
       ing.
                           112

-------
     Processes;  Salt is obtained in three fashions:  one
       by solar evaporation of sea water or western lake
       brines; another from well brine and a third by the
       mining of rock salt.  It is necessary to remove
       calcium and magnesium chlorides, usually by under-
       taking evaporative concentration followed by filtra-
       tion of the precipitated salts of Mg and Ca.  The
       process may undergo some modification but major
       changes are not likely.

     Waste Problems;  Wastewater results from two sources.
       One is the deposits of calcium and magnesium salts
       which are removed in the process.  This slurry can
       amount to 3-5% of the total process flow.

       The second source is the slip stream removed to
       control impurities in any recycling system such as
       the Alberger method.  Use of a concentrating or an
       ion control system may be effective in controlling
       this problem internally.
Sodium Silicate

     	Producer	            Capacity —

     Allied                                    105,000
     Amerace                                    25,000
     Chemical Products                          10,000
     Diamond                                   230,000
     DuPont                                    150,000
     Grace                                      65,000
     Philadelphia Quartz                       225,000
     Philadelphia Quartz (Calif.)               35,000
     Pittsburgh Plate                           60,000
     Proctor & Gamble                           20,000
     Twin Chemical                              15,000
                                    Total      940,000
     I/ tons/year

     Production;   1969:  640,000 tons
                  1974:  750,000 tons

     Uses;  Catalysts and silica gels, soaps and detergents,
       boxboard adhesives,  pigments, water, paper and ore
       treatment.
                           113

-------
     Processes:  Sodium silicates are prepared by fusing
       sodium carbonate and silica sand in a glass melting
       furnace at about 1300°C.  If the product is to be
       sold as a solution/ it is dissolved by steam
       injection.  No process change is anticipated.

     Waste Prob1ems:   None except washdown.
Sodium Sulfite
         Producer
     Allied
     Allied
     Koppers
     Monsanto
     Reichhold
     Stauffer

     I/ tons/year
            Location
     El Segundo, Calif.
     N. Claymont, Del.
     Petrolia/ Pa.
     Monsanto, TiJ..
     Tuscaloosa, Ala.
     South Gate, Calif.
                   Total
Capacity —'

    5,000
   10,000
   25,000
   62,500
  145,000
    3,000
  250,500
     Production:
1969:  230,000 tons
1974:  240,000 tons
     Processes;  Direct contact between SO2 and soda ash
       followed by boiling off of C02-  Sesqihydrate is
       precipitated.   Another source is as a by-product in
       the preparation of phenol by the fusion of sodium
       benzene sulfonate with caustic (See "Waste Water
       Treatment Costs in the Organic Chemical Industry,"
       U.  S.  Department of the Interior).

     Uses;  Sulfite pulping, water treatment, photo grade.

     Waste Problems;   The waste solution contains a
       saturated solution of sulfite which has an
       immediate oxygen demand if released to the river.
       Additional recycling and reuse is possible and,
       if  practiced,  dumping may be eliminated.
                            114

-------
Sodium Sulfate
     	Producer	            Capacity —'

     Allied (B)                                   45,000
     American Cyanamid (0)                       13,000
     American Enka (R)                           56,000
     American Potash  (N)                         250,000
     Beaunit (R)                                  42,000
     Climax Chemical  (M)                          35,000
     Diamond Shamrock (B)                        50,000
     DuPont (M)                                   30,000
     FMC (R)                                    275,000
     Hercules (B,M)                               25,000
     Huber  (0)                                     8,000
     Industrial  Rayon (R)                        36,000
     Koppers (0)                                  15,000
     Lithium Corporation  (0)                      15,000
     Monsanto (0)                                 35,000
     Morton Chemical  (M)                         120,000
     Ozark-Mahoning (N)                          200,000
     Stauffer (N,0)                              200,000
     U.  S.  Borax (0)                              30,000
     Miscellaneous                               25,000
                                    Total     1,505,000
     I/ tons/year

     B-Bichromate;  0-Other; R-Rayon or Cellophane;
     N-Natural;  M-Mannheim or Hargreaves

     Production;   1969:   1,500,000 tons/year
                  1974:   1,800,000 tons/year

     Uses;   Sulfate  pulping,  detergents, glass.

     Processes;   Much of  the  sodium sulfate is from by-
       product sources discussed elsewhere.  Glauber's
       salt (Na2SO4.1OH2O) is made by dissolving salt cake
       in mother liquor,  adding of CaCl2 and lime.  The
       Mg,  Ca and Fe  are  permitted to settle and the mud
       washed.   Crystallization takes place in pans and
       anhydrous  sodium sulfate is prepared by dehydrating
       Glauber's  salt. No new sources or processes are
       anticipated.

     Waste  Problems;   Disposal of the mud is the primary
       problem and in-plant control would have little
       impact on  this  problem.
                            115

-------
Sodium Tripolyphpsphate

	Producer	

Allied
AAC
FMC
PMC
FMC
FMC
Hooker
Hooker
Hooker
Monsanto
Monsanto
Monsanto
Monsanto
Monsanto
Olin
Stauffer
Stauffer
Stauffer
Stauffer
Virginia-Carolina
            Location
I/ tons/year

     Production:
      N. Claymont, Del.
      Carteret, N. J.
      Carteret, N. J.
      Green River, Wyo.
      Lawrence, Kans.
      Newark, Calif.
      Adams,  Mass.
      Dallas, Tex.
      Jeffersonville, Ind.
      Augusta, Ga.
      Carondelet, Mo.
      Kearny, N.  J.
      Long Beach, Calif.
      Trenton, Mich.
      Joliet, 111.
      Chicago, 111.
      Chicago Heights, 111,
      Morrisville, Pa.
      South Gate, Calif.
      Fernald, Ohio
                   Total
Capacity ±/
1969:  1,200,000 tons
1974:  1,600,000 tons
  30
  40
 150
  50
  75
  50
  25
  25
  75
  25
 100
  75
  25
  75
 140
  40
  25
  75
  50
  50
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
                                              1,200,000
     Uses:   Detergents.

     Processes;  The sodium phosphates are made primarily
       from furnace acid and soda ash which are reacted
       in a mix tank and dried in a rotary or spray drier
       and dehydrated in a calciner.  This is followed by
       annealing and cooling in a tempering unit.

     Water Problems;  Scrubber waters and vessel washouts
       are major sources of polluted wastewaters.
                             116

-------
 SIC 2819  (INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC CHEMICALS)


 Aluminum  Chloride Anhydrous

      	Producer	          Capacity ~

      Allied,  Elberta,  N.  Y.                      9,000
      Dow,  Freeport,  Texas                       5,000
      Hercules Alelor,  Ravenna,  Ohio             2,400
      Pearsall,  LaPorte, Texas                    4,000
      Pearsall,  Phillipsburg, N.  J.               6,000
      Stauffer,  Baton Rouge, La.                  8,000
      Stauffer,  Elkton, Md.                       8,000
      Van  de Mark,  Lockport, N.  Y.                2,500
                                     Total      44,900
      I/ tons/year

      Production;   1969:   34,000  tons
                   1974:   44,000  tons

      Uses:  Ethylbenzene  catalyst,  dyestuffs, detergent
       alkylate,  ethyl chloride, Pharmaceuticals.

      Processes;   The reaction  involves the direct contact
       of chlorine vapor  with molten aluminum.   Chlorine
       is fed below  the surface  of  the aluminum and the
       product  sublimes and is collected by condensing.
       No change  is  expected in  processing methods.

      Waste Problems;  The major  discharge is a  chlorine
       containing wastewater which  could be utilized  as a
       treatment chemical.  Recovery of the chlorine  by
       rectification is feasible.
Sulfuric Acid

    New Plants Built Since 1966 Include The Following:

	Producer	  	Location	  Capacity —'

Acid, Inc.             Bonnie, Fla.            2,000,000
Arkla Chemical         Helena, Ark.              180,000
American Cyanamid      Linden, N. J.             250,000
                              117

-------
Sulfuric Acid  (cont.)

	Producer	

American Oil Co.
Allied
American Smelting &
  Refining Co.
American Zinc
Borden Chemical
Bunker Hill
DuPont

Freeport Sulfur
W. R. Grace
Kennecott Copper

Mo. Lead Smelting
National Zinc
Olin
Sinclair
Stauffer
Stauffer
Tennessee Corp.
Texaco
Texas Gulf Sulfur

I/ tons/year
          Location
     Texas City/ Tex.
     Geismar, La.

     Haydon, Ariz.
     Monsanto, 111.
     Columbus, Ohio
     Plant City, Fla.
     Kellogg, Idaho
     Burnside, La.
     Memphis, Tenn.
     Uncle Sam, La.
     Bartow, Fla.
     Hayden, Ariz.
     Salt Lake City, Utah
     Iron Co. , Mo.
     Bartlesville, Okla.
     Shreveport, La.
     Ft. Madison, Iowa
     Houston, Texas
     Martinez, Calif.
     Augusta, Ga.
     Port Arthur, Tex.
     Lee Creek, N. C.
                   Total
Capacity —'
   150,000
   720,000
   250
   146
    64
   385
   100
   540
    75
 1,725
   385
   270
   505
    75
   100
   125
   540
   720
   360
   135
    92
 1,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
10,892,000
Major merchant producers include:

     Stauffer Chemical
     Allied Chemical
     DuPont
                 American Cyanamid
                 Tennessee Corporation
     Production:
1969:  28,000,000 tons
1974:  34,000,000 tons
     Uses;  Fertilizer, chemical production, iron and steel
       pickling, food, petroleum products, metallurgy,
       TiO2 production, (NH4)2 804, alum, rayon.

     Processes;  Two processes have been used for the
       production of sulfuric acid - the chamber process
       and the contact process.  Since no new chamber
       processes have been built for perhaps 30 years, the
                             118

-------
FIGURE  8
AIR INTAKE
SILENCER
OR FILTER
                                                                                     EXIT GAS
                                                                                       STACK
 98-99%  »
 ACID  TO
 STORAGE
          ABSORBING
          TOWER
                 MELTER -
                 SETTLER
                                                                      CIRCULATING
                                                                         TANK
     ••-OLEUM  TO
       STORAGE
                                                                                        OLEUM  PUMP
VOLEUM COOLER
             TYPICAL  FLOWCHART  FOR  SULFUR-BURNING  CONTACT  PLANT
             This  flow chart is  selectively  reproduced  in content and  configuration from Figure 19.4
             in the book by R.  Morris Shrewe,  Chemical Process Industries,  Third Edition, New York
             Me Graw-Hill Book Company, 1967,  p. 330                                        '

-------
  following discussion will center on the contact
  process.  In this process, either sulfur or SC>2 may
  be the starting point.  If sulfur is the starting
  point, it is melted and burnt with air to SO2.  The
  S02 must be filtered and converted catalytically to
  803.  503 is absorbed in strong sulfuric acid.
  Present process changes are directed towards  the
  improvement in conversion and recovery because of
  the air pollution problem.

Waste Problems;  Primarily from vessel cleanout, and
  slab washdown as well as discharge of cooling
  waters.
                        120

-------
SIC 2851  (PAINTS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS)
Paints, and Allied Products

     Producers;  There are several hundred paint companies
       with several thousand paint plants scattered through-
       out the country.  Paint production tends to be a
       local product because of the high transportation
       charges.  However, Ohio, Illinois, New Jersey and
       California are major paint-producing centers.
       Among the leading concerns are the following:
            DuPont
            National Lead
            Sherwin-Williams
            Glidden
            Moore
            Devoe and Reynolds-Celanese
     Production;

Paint and Varnishes, Total

Trade Sales
     Paint and Varnish
     Lacquer
     Trade Sales, Total

industrial Product Finishes
     Paint and Varnish
     Lacquer
     Industrial Product
       Finishes, Total
1969 (gal)
904,000,000
438,000,000
 11,000,000
449,000,000
360,000,000
 95,000,000

455,000,000
            PPG
            DeSoto
            Mobil
            Inmont
            Cook
  1974 (gal)
1,196,000,000
  587,000,000
   15,000,000
  602,000,000
  482,000,000
  112,000,000

  5947000,000
     Processes;  The manufacture of paints involves
       primarily mixing in tanks although grinding mills,
       sand mills, high-speed stone mills and high-speed
       agitators are being increasingly used in these
       systems.  The process is batch type.  Finally, color
       may be added in a tinting and thinning tank before
       packaging.

       Varnish is a solution of a resin in a drying oil
       or solvent (shellac).  This is accomplished by
       mixing; in some cases, by heating.  Finally, the
       final product is clarified by filtration or
                             121

-------
  centrifugation followed by aging in large tanks
  to precipitate grit particles.

  There has been little change in the manufacture
  of paints for a century or more and none is
  expected.

Waste Problems;  The major problems arise from tank
  washings and dumpings.  The presence of latex is
  a specially difficult problem but collection and
  recycle of the latex is completely possible as is
  the multiple reuse of wash waters.
                        122

-------
SIC  2871  (FERTILIZERS)
Fertilizers

     Producers:  Fertilizers are generally made by a large
       number of production facilities located throughout
       the country.  The basic ingredients include:  potash,
       ammonia, ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate,
       ammonium phosphates, plus other phosphate products
       all of which are prepared in a limited number of
       large production facilities.  Most of these have
       already been discussed under SIC 2819 but several
       including potash, super phosphate, triple super
       and mixed fertilizers will be discussed in this
       section.
          CONCENTRATED SUPER-PHOSPHATE PLANTS
                    UNITED STATES
       Company
American Cyanaraid
Armour Agr. Cheru. Co.
Borden Chem. Co.
Central Phosphates
Cities Service Oil
Coastal Chemical
Continental Oil
El Paso Natural Gas
Farmland Industries
W. R. Grace & Co.

Int. Minerals & Chem.
Kerr-McGee
Mobil Chemical
Occidental Agrilcul.
Phillips Chemical
F. S. Royster Guano
J. R. Simplot
Stauffer Chemical

Swift & Company
Tenn. Valley Authority
Texas Gulf Sulfur
                              Location
                        Brewster, Fla.
                        Ft. Meade, Fla.
                        Port Mantee, Fla.
                        Plant City, Fla.
                        Tampa, Fla.
                        Pascagoula, Miss.
                        Pierce, Fla.
                        Georgetown, Idaho
                        Lakeland, Fla.
                        Joplin, Mo.
                        Ridgewood, Fla.
                        Bonnie, Fla.
                        Baltimore, Md.
                        Nichols, Fla.
                        White Springs, Fla.
                        Pasadena, Tex.
                        Mulberry, Fla.
                        Pocatello, Idaho
                        Garfield, Utah
                        Tacoma, Washington
                        Agricola, Fla.
                        Muscle Shoals, Ala.
                        Lee Creek, N.  C.
                                        Total
 Capacity
Cthou.  tons)

    180
    113
     33
    155

    165 I/
    135 y
    180
     55
     36
     32
    350
    203
    • • •
    130
    188
     45 y
    170
     92
     45
     23

     77 2/
     27 ±/
    167
I/
                                                2,601
    Idle facilities
    High- analysis 54% P2Os material
                            123

-------
        AMMONIUM AND DIAMMONIUM PHOSPHATE PLANTS
                      UNITED STATES
        Company
       Location
AFC, Inc.
Allied Chemical
American Cyanamid
Arizona Agrochemical
Arkla Chemical
Armour Agri. Chem.

Borden Chemical
Bunker Hill
Central Phosphates
Chevron Chemical
Cities Service Oil
Coastal Chemical
Colorado Fuel & Iron
Continental Oil
Des Plaines Chemical
Dominguez Fertilizer
El Paso Nat. Gas
Farmland Industries

Ford Motor
W. R. Grace
Hooker Chemical

Int. Min. & Chem.
Kaiser Steel
Mobil Chemical
Monsanto
Nat. Dist. & Chem.
N. J. Zinc
Nipak/ Inc.

NW Coop. Mills
Occidental Agri.
Edison, Calif.
Geismar, La.
Brewster, Fla.
Chandler, Ariz.
Helena, Ark.
Bartow, Fla.
Cherokee, Ala.
Port Manatee, Fla.
Streator, 111.
Texas City, Tex.
Kellogg, Idaho
Plant City, Fla.
Ft. Madison, Iowa
Kennewick, Wash.
Richmond, Cali f.
Tampa, Fla.
Pascagoula, Miss.
Pueblo, Colo.
Pierce, Fla.
Morris, 111.
Long Beach, Calif.
Soda Springs, Idaho
Lakeland, Fla.
Joplin, Mo.
Dearborn, Mich.
Henry, 111.
Joplin, Mo.
Ridgewood, Fla.
Marseilles, 111.
Taft, La.
Bonnie, Fla.
Fontana, Calif.
Nichols, Fla.
Luling, La.
Danville, 111.
Depue, 111.
Kerens, Tex.
Tulsa, Okla.
Pine Bend, Minn.
White Springs, Fla.
Lathrop, Calif.
Plainview, Tex.
Capacity
(thousand
tons/year)

   28

   91
   18

   15
   75
   85
   25
   45
   15
   NK y
   NK y
   NK I/
   NK V
  179
  120
    7 ±/
   46
   34
   15
   30
  147
   67   ,
   10 I/
  100
   20
  174
   69
  175
  230
   15
   77
  120
   15
  124
   46
   20
   69
  115
   10
    9
                             124

-------
AMMONIUM AND DIAMMONIUM PHOSPHATE PLANTS  (cent.)
      Company
Olin Mathieson Chem.
Phosphate Chemicals
F. S. Royster Guano
Shell Chemical
J. R. Simplot
Stauffer Chemical
Swift
Tennessee Farmers
Tennessee Valley Auth.
Texas Gulf Sulfur
Union Oil of Calif.
Valley Nitrogen Prod.
Western States Chem.
                            Location
                        Pasadena, Tex.
                        Houston, Tex.
                        Mulberry, Fla.
                        Pittsburg, Calif.
                        Pocatello, Idaho
                        Garfield, Utah
                        Agricola, Fla.
                        Sheffield, Ala.
                        Muscle Shoals, Ala.
                        Lee Creek, N. C.
                        Brea, Calif.
                        Helm, Calif.
Capacity
(thousand
tons/year)

   200
    69
                        Nichols, Calif.
                                         Total
I/ Nitric phosphate process
£/ Diammonium phosphate 21-53-0 analysis
    91
    80
    69
    NK V
    15 2/
   105
    12
    35
    NK V
                                                3,169
                             125

-------
                  AMMONIUM PHOSPHATE  PLANT  LOCATIONS
                                FIGURE 9
to
       A NEW  PLANT

-------
                 PHOSPHATE ROCK MINES
                     UNITED STATES
       Company
   Location
American Cyanamid
Armour Agr. Chem.

Armour Agr. Chem. &
  Freeport Sulfur
Borden Chemical
Cities Service
Continental Oil
W. R. Grace
Int. Min. & Chem.

Kerr-McGee, Inc.
Mobil Chemical
Occidental Agril.
Swift & Co.
Texas Gulf Sulfur
Armour Agril. Chem.
Hooker Chemical
Mobil Chemical
Monsanto
Presnell Phosphate
Stauffer Chemical
Tennessee Valley Auth,
Florida
Brewster
Amour
Lake Hancock

Ft. Meade
Teneroc
Ft. Meade
Pierce
Bonny Lake
Bonnie
Kingsford
Brewster
Ft. Meade
White Springs
Watson
Silver City

North Carolina
Lee Creek

Tennessee
Columbia
Columbia
Mt. Pleasant
Columbia
Columbia
Mt. Pleasant
Knob Creek
Franklin
Capacity
(thousand
short tons)
   3,650
   1,500


   2,000
   1,500
   2,000
   6,500
   1,550
   6,000
   2,000
   1,500
   5,700
   3,000
   2,325
   3,000
      90
     750
     200
   1,000
     700
     600

     200
Cominco Ltd.

El Paso Nat. Gas
Monsanto
Mountain Fuel Supply
New Idria Mining
  & Chemical
George Relyea
J. R. Siraplot
Western States
Garrison,Mont.
Phillipsburg, Mont.
Soda Springs, Idaho
Ballard, Idaho
Soda Springs, Idaho

Bakersfield, Calif.
Garrison, Mont.
Fort Hall, Idaho
Soda Springs, Idaho
   1,050

     400
     500
      NK

      NK
     100
   1,600
                            127

-------
PHOSPHATE ROCK MINES  (cont.)

                                               Capacity
                                               (thousand
	Company	     Location	   short tons)

Stauffer Chemical       Hot Springs, Idaho
                        Montpelier, Idaho
                        Cherokee, Utah             400
                        Vernal, Utah               200
                        Leefe, Wyo.                350
                        Melrose, Mont.             600
                        Total United States     51,165
                            128

-------
      ESTIMATED NUMBER OF BULK BLEND PLANTS IN THE
                      UNITED STATES
       State
 Maine
 New Hampshire
 Vermont
 Massachusetts
 Rhode Island
 Connecticut

 NEW ENGLAND

 New York
 New Jersey
 Pennsylvania
 Delaware
 Maryland
 West Virginia

 MIDDLE  ATLANTIC

 Virginia
 North Carolina
 South Carolina
 Georgia
 Florida

 SOUTH ATLANTIC

 Ohio
 Indiana
 Illinois
 Michigan
 Wisconsin
 No. of
 Plants
  1966

    3
    1
    3
    5
    5
   21

   39
   20
   44
    7
   26
  _ 1

  137
  255

  100
  235
  428
   55
   82
EAST NORTH CENTRAL  900
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas

WEST NORTH
  CENTRAL
State
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
EAST SOUTH CENTRAL
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
WEST SOUTH CENTRAL
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
No. of
Plants
1966
35
17
37
18
107
50
23
56
125
254
11
43
29
53
15
13
27
— _
           MOUNTAIN
Washington
Oregon
California

PACIFIC
                    191
174
           Total Continental
             U.S.             37149
           Hawaii                 4
           TOTAL U.S.
                  3,153
1,110
                           129

-------
           ESTIMATED NUMBER  OF BULK  BLEND FERTILIZER  PLANTS

                                  FIGURE 10
                                                           137 a  MIDDLE
                                                              ATLANTIC
OJ
o
       HAWAII - 4
                                  WEST NORTH  EA'"ST
                                    CENTRALS  CENTRAL
MOUNTAIN
   x-^"-

   191
                                                   AST

                                                clNTRAL— ATLANTIC
                                  WEST  SOUTH
                                    CENTRAL
                                                                      NEW
                                                                    ENGLAND
                                 TOTAL - 3, 153

-------
      ESTIMATED NUMBER OF LIQUID MIX PLANTS IN THE
                     UNITED STATES
       State
 Maine
 New  Hampshire
 Vermont
 Massachusetts
 Rhode  Island
 Connecticut

 NEW  ENGLAND

 New  York
 New  Jersey
 Pennsylvania
 Delaware
 Maryland
 West Virginia

 MIDDLE ATLANTIC

 Virginia
 North Carolina
 South Carolina
 Georgia
 Florida

 SOUTH ATLANTIC

 Ohio
 Indiana
 Illinois
 Michigan
 Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Kansas

WEST NORTH
  CENTRAL
No. of
Plants
 1966
   2
   4
   6
   5
   8
   1
   6
  26

  11
  11
   7
  12
  2T_

  68

  29
 129
 154
  12
  15
EAST NORTH CENTRAL  339
  41
  85
  63
   5
   7
  49
 125
 375
State
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
EAST SOUTH CENTRAL
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
WEST SOUTH CENTRAL
Montana
Idaho
Wyoming
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Nevada
MOUNTAIN
Washington
Oregon
California
PACIFIC
Total Continental
U.S. 1
Hawaii
No. of
Plants
1966
7
3
6
35
19
15
24
67
125
4
24
5
16
1
19
1
_2
72
55
17
109
181
,229
2
TOTAL U.S.
1,231
                           131

-------
            ESTIMATED  NUMBER OF  LIQUID MIXED  FERTILIZER  PLANTS

                                      FIGURE 11
U)
NJ
         HAWAII - 2
                                                                  MIDDLE
                                                                 ATLANTIC
                                    WESTITORTH
                                     CENTRAL
                                     LLNIKAL
                          MOUNTAIN
                                                    AST
                                                  SOUTH
                                                 CENTRAL
 SOUTH
ATLANTIC
                                   WEST SOUTH
                                     CENTRAL
                                                                       NEW
                                                                     ENGLAND
                                   TOTAL  - 1,231

-------
Production;  (100% APA)

                                          Other
       Normal     Triple       Ammonium   Phosphatic
       Super      Super        Phosphates Fertilizer

 1969  913,000    1,390,000    1,651,000
 1974  900,000    1,800,000    2,200,000

Processes;  Superphosphate is solubilized phosphate
  rock in which the rock is acidulized with sufficient
  acid to convert the rock to monocalcium phosphate
  and gypsum.  No separation is made.  The waste
  products and processes except for the gypsum are
  similar to those generated in the production of
  phosphoric acid.

  Concentrated superphosphate is produced by the
  reaction of phosphoric acid with phosphate rock
  producing Ca (H2P04)2«  No gypsum is produced.
  The reaction takes place in a rotating granulator.
  The major waste products are the scrubber waters
  from the granulator and subsequent cooler exhaust
  gas scrubbers which contain some phosphoric and
  considerable  amounts of silico fluorides for which
  a considerable market exists.  The condensate from
  the acid preheater can be used for scrubber water
  to close loop the system.  Normal super production
  is being superseded by triple production.

  Phosphate rock handling results in a heavily turbid
  water flow.  Solids settling is usually practiced.

  Ammonium phosphate is produced by the direct contact
  of phosphoric acid and ammonia.  Vessel washout is
  the major pollutional source.

  Liquid  mix an,d dry mix plants involve the blending
  of fertilizer base materials such as superphosphate,
  urea,  ammonium nitrate,  ammonium phosphate and
  potash  thereby producing the final product.   Vessel
  washout is the major pollutional problem.

  Potash  is produced from sedimentary deposits of
  syluinite (a  mixture of  K Cl and Na Cl)  and  lang-
  beinite (K2S04*2MgS04),  primarily.   Langbeinite is
  processed to  produce potassium sulfate.   The Trona,
                     133

-------
 California,  salts  are  another  important salt.
 Solar  evaporation  at Great  Salt  Lake  is also
 practiced.   The biggest  single source of new potash
 is  the deep  deposit in Saskatchewan,  Canada which
 will be developed  by conventional  and solution
 mining.

 Some of the  potash is  produced by  fractional
 crystallization but the  syluinite  deposits are
 handled by either  soap flotation or fractional
 solution.  In both processes, slimes  and reject
 salt solutions are present  to create  pollution
 problems.  The reject  salt  solutions  may contain
 small  amounts of flotation  agents  such as starch
 and amines.  It is possible through the careful
 use and selection  of these  agents  to  minimize
 losses.  Reuse and recovery of the slimes and salt
 solutions may be practiced.  Of  course,  since
 great  stretches of land  are available,  disposal is
 not generally a problem.  In Europe,  the great
 potash mines of the Alsace  are one of the main
 polluters of the Rhine.  Recovery  of  the salt is
 totally feasible.  The present trend  is  towards
 partial solution of KC1  as  practiced  in  Canada
 since  this area will be  the major  source in
 the next decade.

 Complex fertilizer is  prepared by  reaction of
 ammonia, phosphoric acid, nitric acid and phosphate
 rock in acidulation tanks.  The  final  slurry is
mixed with potassium chloride (potash).  The
product may be spherodized, granulated or coated.
A dust collector is used to recover fines.

 Generally, the entire  system is  kept  dry for process
 reasons but vessel and slab washdowns produce waste-
water problems.  Fluorine in fume  scrubbing water
may be a problem.

TVA has been successful  in developing direct
 ammination and acidulation processes  aimed at pro-
ducing higher concentration fertilizers.  Most of
 these processes are carried out dry,  but this is
not the universal practice and those  processes
 carried out in a wet state create  steady waste
 streams.  The trend towards high analysis ferti-
 lizer is expected  to continue in the  future.
                    134

-------
                    POTASH PLANTS
               UNITED STATES AND CANADA
      Company
      Location
American Metal
  Climax
Am. Potash & Chem,
U.S. Borax & Chem.
Agri. Minerals
Dow Chemical
N. Am. Cement
Int. Min. & Chem.
Calium Chemicals

Potash Corp. of Am.
U.S. Borax & Chem.
United States

Carlsbad, N. M.
Trona, Calif.
Carlsbad, N. M.
Carlsbad, N. M.
Wendover, Utah
Carlsbad, N. M.
Ogden, Utah
Carlsbad, N. M.
Carlsbad, N. M.
Moab, Utah
Carlsbad, N. M.
Davenport, Calif.
Midland, Mich.
Security, Md.
              Total

Canada
Lanigan, Sask,
Delisle, Sask.
Saskatoon, Sask.
Esterhazy, Sask.
Belle Plaine, Sask.
Viscount, Sask.
Lake Patience, Sask.
Saskatoon, Sask,
               Total
Total North America
1969 Capacity
(thou. tons)
     600
     235
     450
     450
      66
     300
     270
     350
     620
     350
     550

      10
                                                4,251
     600
     600
     600
   2,460
     360
     720
     430
     900
   6,670
  107921
                           135

-------
SIC 2879 (INORGANIC PESTICIDES)


Inorganic Pesticides

     Producers:  Data not available

     Production;  (tons/year)   1969	1974
       Arsenic compounds        6,000    5,000
       Sulfur                 210,000  150,000

     Processes and Waste Problems;  In general, inorganic
       compounds have been replaced by organic compounds.
       The major inorganic pesticides are the following:

       lead arsenate
       sulfur
       carbon bisulfide
       hydrogen cyanide
       fluorine
       lime-sulfurs
       Bordeaux mixture
       mercury chlorides
       sodium chlorate
       sodium arsenite
       ammonium sulfamate

       This review does not consider the organophosphorous
       compounds which are gaining major importance in the
       industry.  Neither will this review detail many of
       the above listed chemicals because their use in this
       particular application is minor compared to other
       uses for them.

       Lead arsenate is prepared from lead oxide which is
       dissolved in acetic and nitric acid and arsenic
       acid is added.  Lead arsenate is removed by filtra-
       tion.   The mixture of nitric and acetic acid is
       reused three times.  Thus, 0.15 pounds of nitric
       acid per pound of product and a similar amount of
       acetic acid is discarded or must be treated and
       recycled.  It is obvious that recycle would result
       in greatly reduced waste problems.

       Sulfur is made by milling sulfur to 325 mesh,
       emulsifying molten sulfur, heating mixtures of
                           136

-------
sulfur with bentonite and using flotation sulfur
obtained from the recovery of the element from
hydrogen sulfide from gases.  Washout streams con-
taining fine sulfur particles can be recovered.

Lime-sulfur is prepared by boiling a mixture of
lime, sulfur and water to a dry mixture.

Bordeaux mixture is prepared by mixing copper
sulfate, lime and water.  Both lime sulfur and
Bordeaux mixture are generally prepared in the
field and wastewater problems are not significant,

Mercury chlorides are prepared in the following
fashion.Mercuric chloride is prepared by the
direct reaction of mercury and chlorine and
mercurous chloride is made by reducing mercuric
chloride with mercury.  Wastewater problems
result from vessel washout.

Considering the fading nature of the industry, no
process changes are expected.
                    137

-------
SIC 2892 (EXPLOSIVES)


Explosives

     Producer:   Data not available

     Production;  1969:  {$)  264,000,000
                  1974:  ($)  322,000,000
                  (weight data not available)

     Processes  and Waste Problems;  Nitrocellulose is
       prepared first by boiling cotton linters in dilute
       caustic  and bleaching with chlorate.  The cotton
       is then  dried and nitrification with nitric acid
       and sulfuric acid takes place in a nitrator.
       The charge is dropped into a centrifuge for drying.

       Two waste problems exist.  The kiering caustic
       solution must be dumped from time to time and this
       is a serious waste load.   Regeneration of the
       caustic  solution by dialysis or other membrane
       processes is possible but not practical.

       The waste acid amounts to 0.5 pounds of sulfuric
       and 0.35 pounds of nitric.  Some of this acid is
       sent for concentration, some is sold and the
       remainder is discharged.   Reuse of this acid should
       be possible if careful measures are taken.

       Naturally, washouts  of vessels and slabs can also
       produce  major waste  treatment problems.

       Smokeless powder is  washed and beaten to remove
       free acid and destroy  any unstable sulfate  esters
       that may have been formed.  The final product is
       colloidized by mixing  with alcohol, ether,
       diphenylamine and other modifying agents.   Again,
       the  washing of the nitro  cellulose produces a
       waste containing sulfuric and nitric acid which can
       be reclaimed in a fortifying plant.

       TNT  is produced by the three stage nitrification
       of toluene followed  by soda ash and sodium  sulfate
       washes.   The  wash water contains considerable
       amounts  of alkalies  and sodium dinitrosulfanates.
                           138

-------
M
U)
VO
                            DEHYDRATING
                            PRESS
                                                                          FIGURE  12
                 WATER-WET
               NITROCELLULOSE
                 12.5-12.7% N2
                   ETHYL
                  ALCOHOL

ETHYL
ETHER


1

— <
^
DIPHENYLAMINE
  OR OTHER
 STABILIZER
                                                                 GRAINING
                                                                 PRESS
                                                                BLENDING
                                                                  TOWER
                                    DOUBLE -ARM
                                    MIXER
  BLOCKING
   PRESSES
                                                                        SOLVENT  DRYER




                                                                          U   P    U  n
WARM  AIR   HOT   COLL
           COIL  COIL
                                                                                                       MIXED  SOLVENTS
                                                                                                       AND WATER
                      * NOTE: ASTERISKS DENOTE  EQUIPMENT CONNECTED TO SOLVENT RECOVERY SYSTEM


                                             FLOWCHART  FOR  SMOKELESS  POWDER

                              This flow chort is  selectively reproduced  in content and  configuration  from  Figure  22.4
                              in the  book  by R.  Norris Shreve,  Chemical Process  Industries,  Third Edition, New York,
                              Me  Graw-Hill  Book Company,  1967, p. 390

-------
Ammonium nitrate - Fuel oil  (AN) are produced by
mixing and shaping of the two ingredients.  A
major waste source is from the washing of the
equipment, thereby producing a waste stream con-
taining oil and a high nitrogen content.

Nitroglycerin and dynamite.  Nitration of the
glycerin takes place in the presence of sulfuric
acid.  The nitroglycerin is separated from the
spent acids and washed several times.  The spent
acid is recycled and fortified.  About 80 pounds
of sulfuric and 160 pounds of nitric are wasted
from the system per ton of nitroglycerine.
Dynamite is made by adsorbing nitroglycerine on
agents such as wood flour, ammonium nitrate or
sodium nitrate.  Nonfreezing dynamite can be
made by the addition of ethylene glycol dinitrate
to lower the freezing point of nitroglycerine.
A typical waste from a dynamite-nitroglycerine
facility has the following composition:  pH-7,
COD-350 ppm, TDS-10,800 ppm, SS-40, sodium-150,
ammonia-nitrogen-1270 ppm, nitrate nitrogen-550
ppm, sulfates-1000 ppm.
                    140

-------
                 APPENDIX C
COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PRACTICES
             Neutralization
             Deep Well Disposal
             Reverse Osmosis
             Electrodialysis
             Ion Exchange
             Multiple Effect Evaporation
             Solar Evaporation
             Cooling Towers
                        141

-------
     COSTS OF UNIT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PRACTICES
An envelope of extreme values of TDS and flow rate that
have been considered for the subsequent cost calculations
are shown in Figure 1.  The following are the combina-
tions within the triangle of flow, acidity, suspended and
dissolved solids chosen for the study:

     Flow rate           0.5, 1.0, 10.O/ 50.0 mgd
     Acidity             500, 1000, 20,000 mg/1  (as CaC03)
     Suspended solids    100, 500 mg/1
     TDS                 3000, 30,000, 150,000 mg/1

The flow sheet used for the cost calculations is shown in
Figure 2.  When neutralization is not required, the
neutralization portion will be bypassed.
                              142

-------
 200,000
  100,000
  50,000
                        •DEEP  WELL
                                                      FIGURE I
                                               APPLICABLE  RANGES OF
                                              DEMINERALIZATION  UNITS
CO
0
o
en
-i  10,000 ii
CO
5
    5,000
                         DISPOSAL
                                      VAPOR AT ION

                                             ENVELOPE  OF TDS
                                                   COMBINATION
               il^REVERSE OSMOSIS
                   DISTILLATION
                                           ICTRODIALYSIS
                             I.O              5.0    10.0
                             PLANT CAPACITY ( MGD)
                                                                50.0   100.0

-------
    NO NEUTRALIZATION FOR DEEP WELL EVAPORATION
                                                        DEEPWELL
                                                           OOO
                          Reverse
                          Osmosis
                 OR DEMINERALIZATION
                                                      Mixed
                                                      Media
                                                      Filter
Primary
Sediment
Equalization
                          Flocculation
Electrodialysls
Neutralization
                                ALTERNATIVE:
                                SETTLING POND
                                                    EVAPORATION
                     FILTRATE
                        OR
                     CENTRATE
         (alternative
          to deep well)
                                  Vacuum Filter
                                       or
                                   Centrifuge
                                                                  Ion Exchange
                                                     Evaporation
                                                                                  REUSE OR
                                                                                  DISCHARGE
   DIRECT TO EVAPORATION OR CONTROLLED DISCHARGE
                                     FIGURE  2
SCHEMATIC LAYOUT OF  TREATMENT  PLANT FOR  WASTES  FROM THE  INORGANIC
 CHEMICAL  INDUSTRY  SHOWING  VARIOUS  POSSIBLE  COMBINATIONS  OF  UNITS

-------
NEUTRALIZATION

Neutralization of inorganic industrial wastes  usually
implies the use of some form of lime for  the neutralization
of acidic wastes or sulfuric acid for the neutralization  of
alkaline wastes.  Acidic wastes are more  prevalent  and
neutralization presents more of a problem with such wastes.
All forms of inexpensive neutralizing material produces
sludge which is difficult to dewater.  For large  scale
Plants, economy requires the use of some  form  of  lime or
limestone for treatment.  Hydrated lime has been  used
extensively for neutralization of acidic  wastes but recent
studies (1) seem to indicate that greater economy could
be achieved by the use of limestone, both from the  view-
point of lower cost of the alkali combined with a lower
cost of sludge dewatering (2).  Few cost  figures  are
available for limestone treatment facilities,  and for the
Purpose of this study, only hydrated lime treatment will
be considered.

Neutralization with lime combined with aeration will remove
iron as a necessary consequence since the solubility of
ferric ions decreases rapidly above a pH  of 3.0.  Mangan-
ese, alumina, and silica, as well as many of the  heavy
toetal ions, also are removed by lime neutralization result-
ing in a decrease in total hardness.

The capital costs were calculated for a flow sheet  shown
in Figure 3.   Equalization capacity is required to  supply
a constant flow of waste to the flash mixer.   Lime  from
the lime storage tank is fed into the slaker together with
some clarified effluent.  Lime slurry from the slaker is
added to the waste stream in a flash mixer.  After  flash
fixing, the mixture is flocculated and aerated.   Next the
^aste is thickened in a clarifier-thickener or in a
sludge settling pond.   The underflow from the  thickeners
with 2% to 3% solids may be passed on to  a vacuum filter
     Mihok, E. A., et al "Mine Water Research-The Lime-
     stone Neutralization Process, U.S. Bureau of Mines
     R.I.  7191, September, 1968.

     Rice  & Company, "Engineering Economic Studies of
     Mine  Drainage Control Techniques," Appendix B to
     Acid  Mine Drainage in Appalachia,  A Report by the
     Appalachian Regional Commission.
                              145

-------
                      lime
— ""^ Lime storage
i .


Lime >
slakes
"} Blower
» Eaualiiatinn Rnsin PI Oxidation

	 flash Mi
filtrate
Vacuum filter
Centrifuge

*
Flocculation
xmg

k
'I
1
1
1
^ /ClarifieA 1
i VThlckenery
: ^
i 	
^/

1 —
1
1
-1
                                                                       To stream or
                                                                       demineralization
                                                                       plant
                                  Sludge to
                                  disposal
                                          occasional.
                                          removal of
                                          sludge after
                                          drying

FIGURE  3
    FLOW  SHEET  FOR NEUTRALIZATION PLANT
    [Alternative
       flow  pattern
/Slu dge
(settling)	
  pond
To stream

-------
  1000
                      FIG.  4


                      CAP  COST OF NEUTRALIZATION


                      FACILITIES  EXCLUDING

                      SLUDGE  TREATMENT
o
o
o
(A
O
O

0.
<
o
   100
                  FROM RICE REPORT (2)

                  FROM BARNARD THESIS(4)
    10
                    J—I  I  I I I
_L
                             1.0                     10.0

                                PLANT  CAPACITY  MGD

-------
                                HYDRATED  LIME TREATMENT PLANT
   FIGURE 5

       CAR COST VS ACIDITY FOR I M6D   PLANT (INCLUDING SLUDGE DISPOSAL)

                                 (FROM OPERATION YELLOWBOY) (2)
                 10,000
               O
               O
               O
00
               K-
               co
               o
               o  1000

               o:

               o
                  000
                         iii
                     100
1000           10,000

ACIDITY, ppm (AS CaC03)
100,000

-------
        o
        o
        o
vo
CO
o
o
        Q.

        <
        O
             1000
              100
              40-
                X
                            1.0
                                         10.0
50.0
                                     VOLUME OF  BASIN (IN MILLION GAL.)
                FIG. 6  CAPITAL COST OF EQUALIZATION BASINS REF. (3)

-------
or  a  centrifuge  for  dewatering or may be discharged to a
dewatering  pond.   Sludge  will  be  dewatered mechanically
to  approximately  20% solids  at which  consistency it can be
trucked  to  disposal.   If  abundant land is available, the
waste will  be  discharged  from  the flocculator directly into
a settling  pond.   If land is scarce but available within
pumping  distance,  only the thickened  sludge will be settled
in  a  pond.

Costs for hydrated lime treatment of  acid drainage includ-
ing sludge  disposal  by thickening and disposal of the
slurry in ponds are  presented  in  a report on the economics
of  acid  mine drainage  (2).   These cost curves show a
decrease in the unit capital cost of  neutralization
facilities  with increase  of  acidity,  but no such decrease
in unit  cost with  increase in  the volume of waste treated
daily.   This is contrary  to previous  findings (4)  that
the overall cost increase is proportional to flow rate to
the power of 0.83  (see Figure  4).  Combining these two
values,  the general  overall cost  for  neutralization,
thickening  and sludge  holding  ponds can then be  expressed
as:

    Capital Cost  (in  $1000}=172 Q0.83A0.79  (gee  Figure 5)
      where
                 Q = flow rate  in mgd
                 A = acidity in mg/1

From available cost  curves for  (1) the  equalization basin,
(2) lime plant, mixes  and flocculator (3)  the clarifier
thickener and  (4)  the  vacuum filter or  centrifuge,  it was
also possible to synthesize the cost  for  full sludge  de-
watering.

The cost curve for equalization basins  (shown in  Figure 6)
is based on findings by Chow (3)  and  additional  costs
determined  by Barnard  (4).
(2)  Rice, ibid

(3)  Chow, C. S., Malina, J. F. and Eckenfelder, W. W.,
     "Effluent Quality and Treatment Economics," Report
     published by the Center for Research in Water Re-
     sources Technical Report EHE 07-6801, CRWR 28,
     The University of Texas at Austin.

(4)  Barnard, J. L., "Treatment Cost Relationships for
     Wastes from the Organic Chemical Industry," M.S.
     Thesis, The University of Texas at Austin, June, 1969
                              150

-------
 The cost curve for the lime plant mixer and flocculator is
 based on costs extracted by Barnard (4)  and additional
 costs obtained from Operation Yellow Boy (2).   These
 curves shown little variation with acidity which influences
 mainly the sludge handling units, but they are dependent
 on  the plant size.

 Costs for the clarifier thickener were based mainly on
 flow since clarification and thickening is combined into
 one unit.   Clarification requires a minimum overflow rate
 for effluent control and this will determine the size of
 the unit.   The amount of thickening obtained is then
 calculated from zone settling considerations to determine
 the consistency of  the thickener  underflow.  Costs were
 obtained from the Mine Drainage Report (2)  and calculated
 from parameters obtained from a laboratory study of
 neutralized acid wastes.

 The size of the clarifier  itself  is based  on an overflow
 rate  of  700 gpd/ft2.   in order to produce  an effluent
 suitable for  further use or  treatment,  it  will be
 necessary  to  use polymers  to  reduce the  suspended solids
 in  the effluent and  to filter the effluent.  The thickener
 design was  based on  values  from laboratory  studies (5)  as
 shown  in Figures 7 and 8.

 The design  is  based  on the  following mathematical model
 by  Edde  and Eckenfelder  (6):

                  Cu _   = kB
                  Ci        (ML)n

where
      Cu = solids concentration of the underflow in mg/1
      Ci - influent solids concentration in mg/1
      ks = constant depending on Ci as shown in Figure 8
      ML = mass loading in Ibs. solids per day/sq. ft. of
             tank surface
(2)   Rice, ibid

(4)   Barnard, ibid

(5)   Atlas Chemicals, Marshall, Texas, Private Report.

(6)   Edde, H.,  and Eckenfelder, W. W., "Theoretical Concept
     of Gravity Sludge Thickening," Presented at 40th
     Annual Conference of the Water Pollution Control
     Federation, New York, New York, October 8, 1967.
                            151

-------
Ul
10
           30
           20
            to
       016
FIG.7   THICKENER  PARAMETERS FOR SLUDGE

    	FROM NEUTRALIZATION OF ACIDIC WASTES
                   i    i
      1111
                                   10
                     20    3O   40  50 60 7O
                              MASS  LOADING  (Ibs/ft2-day)
                                     REFC5)

-------
Ul
U)
m




7O
fin
Ov
f>O
40
3O
•j\j
?0
in
1 w
O






\
\





Fl
G. 8


VARIATION OF KB WITH INITIAL
SOLIDS CONCENTRATION
F




V
y
X
^

EF(5)







"^-^



















*



























                                                   8
                                                   10
12
                           INITIAL  SOLIDS CONCENTRATION  Cj   (lOOOmg/l)

-------
This model will be applied  to determine  the  underflow solids
discharged to the vacuum  filter or  centrifuge.

Sludge Dewatering

The cost functions used for the calculation  of  costs  for
vacuum filters and centrifuges are  based on  those  applied
by Quirck  (7) for industrial wastes.  The  unit  capacity
or loading factor for vacuum filters, expressed as Ib.
solids per hour through one square  foot  Ibs/hr will be
                                         (sq.  ft.J
determined from experimentally determined  values (5).  The
cost function for centrifuges gives:

  Capital Cost  ($)n=4n
    15,700 x  (HP) U**U  (adjusted  to ENR  1285)

The required horsepower is based  on 1 HP per  1  gpm of
sludge dewatered.  Cost function  for vacuum  filters.

  Capital Cost  ($) =
    4820 x (area) 0«58 where the  area of filter is deter-
    mined by load factor.

Example of Cost Calculation for Plant Using Mechanical
Dewatering	

     Flow rate            1.0 mgd
     Acidity              2000 mg/1 as CaCC-3
     Suspended solids     200 mg/1
     Precipitable metal
       salts              200 mg/1

The basicity of hydrated  lime (2) is 0.71.  For every 1 gm
acidity neutralized 0.76  gm of lime is used to  produce
                    OTTT
1.36 of CaSO4.  The basicity factor of 0.71 is  probably
due to some unreactive part of the  lime  that  will  end up
with the sludge.  Assuming that the main product of
(2)  Rice, ibid

(5)  Atlas Chemicals, ibid

(7)  Quirck, T. P., "Application of Computerized Analysis
     to Comparative Costs of Sludge Dewatering by Vacuum
     Filter and Centrifuge," Report Quirck, Lawler and
     Matusky Engineers, New York.
                             154

-------
neutralization is CaSC>4, the concentration  of  the  salt  in
the effluent will be determined by  the  solubility
product.   (Ca+4~) (SOj) = 10 x 10~6,  thus  the molar  concen-
ration of CaS04  in solution would be  0.00315 molar or
428 mg/1.  Metal precipitates will  add  to the  sludge as
will initial suspended solids.  These values are normally
not high.  Where suspended solids are high, they will be
dealt with separately under the cost  function.  As some
metals will precipitate during neutralization,  these will
be added to the  total acidity for the purpose  of this
study.

Thus, total sludge produced given by  sludge (mg/1)  =
1.36 x acidity

        +0.31 x  acidity for unreactive  lime constituents
        +15% of  acidity for metal ppts
        -428 mg/1
        =1.36 x  2000 + 0.31 x 2000  +  0.15 x 2000 - 428  =
         3400 mg/1

Assume sludge production 1.7 x acidity.
Equalization for 6 hours, i.e., basin size  0.25 MG
  From cost curve, Capital Cost = $20,000
Neutralization installation
  From Figure 4 Capital Cost = $54,000
Thickener - clarifier
Prom Figure 9 Capital Cost = $110,000
Assume
Underflow solids concentration 2% solids
Volume of sludge produced = 3400 x  8.33  = 170,000  gal/day
                            0.02 x  8.13

Vacuum filter        Lf = 2.5 Ibs/day based on  Ref  (7)
                              sq. ft.

        Filter area = 3400 x 8.33
                       2.5 x 16

                    = 710 sq. ft. for 16 hrs/day operation

Capital Cost = $4820 x (710)°-58

             = $216,000

Capital Cost of Centrifuge

      Sludge volume = 170,000 gpd
                    =142 gpm for a 20 hour day
                             155

-------
UI
en
        O
        O
        O
        O
        o
ouu
500
400
300
ZOO
100
50
40
30
20
0.
FIG. 9 CAPITAL COST OF THICKENERS ^ ^




-
^
/
' 9
REF (2)


X
X





X






fX






x
- ••





X
f
>
r j -





X
X





1 1 1 1

1 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4JO 5.0 10 O
                                 PLANT  SIZE  (MGD)

-------
which requires 142 HP
      Capital Cost = $15,700 x  (142)°-40
                   = $114,000

The cost of the vacuum  filter is much higher  than  for  the
centrifuge but there will be a  substantial  saving  in the
operating cost as little chemicals will be  required to
achieve the desired results.  The capital cost  for vacuum
filtration will be used here.

Total cost  (excluding trucking)

               Equalization          20,000
               Neutralization        54,000
               Thickener clarifier   110,000
               Vacuum filter         216,000
                                     400,000

Add 35% for site preparation
pipework, etc.                       140,000
                                   $540,000

Calculating a range of  values for flow Q from 0.5  to 50
mgd and for acidity A from 500 mg/1  to 10,000 mg/1, the
following cost model was found:

    Capital Cost  (in $1000) = 300 x  Q0.71A0.34

The acidity seems to be less of a factor in this model
but only because trucking or other disposal of  the filter
cake has been included  in the total  calculated  costs.
Also, the operating cost will be much higher  than  for
lagooning of the sludge.  Although the capital  costs
will be lower, the total annual cost for mechanically
dewatered sludge will be high.

Operating costs were determined from the acid mine drain-
age report without sludge disposal and the  operating costs
of vacuum filters were  added to that.  The  resultant
curves are shown in Figure 10.

Suspended Solids

The sludge produced from the lime neutralization process
has more definite properties than the sludge  produced  by
the settling of other suspended matter.  It was assumed
that at worst the suspended solids will have  the same
properties and for this reason, it was lumped together
with acidity in the calculation of total costs.
                             157

-------
U1
CO
4\J\J
J
O
^^ a f\
o ^o
. ^
-». 60
— 50
K 40
U>
8 30
Z 20
1- 20
<
o:
UJ
0.
o
10
l(
OPERATING COS
(COST









TS FROM RICE REPORT (2)
5 FOR DEWATERING ADDE







/>




^
^^
^x* ^
/ ^
s/
f
I i l
.
/•v
tf. W^^
Oi^"^ C
X ^$$
\9^"^



i i i r
r^
^rV*
ptf"*"
t**





i t
)0 500 1,000 5000 10,000
                                 NET ACIDITY mg/L

          FIGURE 10
              OPERATING COSTS FOR  LIME NEUTRALIZATION INCLUDING
              SLUDGE  DEWATERING BY VACUUM FILTRATION

-------
Filtration

The cost values used for filtration were obtained from
Smith's  (8) curves and they are reproduced in Figure 11,
The capital costs and operating costs were calculated
at ENR index 1285.
(8)   Smith,  R.,  "Cost of Conventional  and Advanced Treat-
     ment of Wastewater, Journal Water Pollution Control
     Federation,  Vol.  40, 69,  September,  1968.~~
                            159

-------
 2000
 1000
O
O
O
CO 100
(0
O
u




£

OL
<
u
                                                    0.01

                      1.0                10.0          50.0


                  DESIGN CAPACITY (MOD)


FIGURE II.  COST OF  FILTRATION  THROUGH SAND OR  GRADED MEDIA


                    AFTER  SMITH (8)

-------
DEEP WELL DISPOSAL

The capital cost and operating cost for deep well  injection
systems are presented  in the attached Figures  12 and  13.
These costs are presented  for different flow rates as well
as casing head pressures.  The capital costs are expressed
in terms of total capital  investment and the operating
cost is expressed on an annual basis.  In order to develop
usable curves, it is necessary to select typical geologi-
cal and hydraulic systems  (9).  Therefore, the following
items were constant:

    Depth
    Effective Thickness
    Porosity
    Permeability
    Reservoir Pressure of  the Disposal Horizon

The diameter of the injection stream was also held constant
and for this particular example was seven inches.   The
geological characteristics assumed were based on evaluation
of existing data and are valued to represent the conditions
at more than 50 percent of the existing installations.  The
operating costs are based on a power cost of 0.005 dollars
per kilowatt hour, an  interest rate of five percent and a
payout period of 20 years.

The ENR building cost  index of 700 was used for estimating
the capital cost.  These cost flows include minimal ser-
vice treatment.  If service treatment greater than filtra-
tion is required, the cost of the additional unit  process
must be added to the capital and operating cost shown in
Figures 12 and 13.

In order to convert costs to 1969 values with ENR  index
1285, the values from the curve were multiplied by 1.84.
(9)  Moseley, J. C., and J. F. Malina, Jr., "Relationships
     Between Selected Physical Parameters and Cost
     Responses for the Deep-Well Disposal of Aqueous Indus-
     trial Wastes," Report published by the Center for
     Research in Water Resources, Technical Report, EHE-
     07-6801, CRWR-28, The University of Texas at Austin,
     (August, 1968).
                             161

-------
   100
    90
    80
—   70
tr

<
UJ
o
o
o
o
    60
Q.   50

O
   40
   30
                                       INJECTION

                                       PRESSURE
           0.2     0.4     0.6     0.8


                   FLOW RATE (MOD)
                                         1400 psi
                                         1000 psi
                                         600 psi
  0 psi
1.0
        FIG. 12


        ANNUAL OPERATING COST OF DEEP WELL

        INJECTION  SYSTEMS  FOR WASTE DISPOSAL
                          162

-------
    280
~   260
O
O
O
    240
220
   200
    ISO
(0
O
O



g
0.
<
O
            0,2
               0.4
0.6
0.8
                FLOW RATE  (MGD)
                                    INJECTION

                                    PRESSURE



                                    1400 psi


                                    1000 psi



                                    600 psi





                                      0 psi
1,0
          FIGURE 13

          CAPITAL COST OF  DEEP WELL

          INJECTION  SYSTEMS  FOR

          WASTE  DISPOSAL
                     163

-------
REVERSE OSMOSIS

The curves actually used for cost calculation were obtained
from the Acid Mine Drainage Report  (2) and they are repro-
duced in Figures 14-17.  The pretreatment and brine disposal
required was considered separately.  These curves gave
generalized cost figures.  If more accurate assessments
are required, one can calculate the yield and the actual
membrane size required.  This is demonstrated below.  For
a high total dissolved solids content, it is necessary to
make an assumption as to the number of units required to
produce the desired effluent.  Also, the feasibility of
rejection of brine at certain levels should be considered.
From the viewpoint of producing palatable water only, one
may reject a large quantity of brine for every unit of
water produced if brine disposal presents no problem.  How-
ever, when brine disposal does present a problem, the
amount produced must be minimized.  For disposal for treat-
ment purposes, both the value of the water produced and the
cost of brine disposal will determine the degree to which
the concentration of the brine must be increased or, con-
versely, the total volume of the brine decreased.

The curves (Figures 14-16) were plotted from actual data
of pilot and demonstration plants.  The membrane area
required depends on many factors including:  membrane
characteristics (salt rejection, porosity, etc.), applied
pressure, water characteristics, and the feed flow.

The capital costs quoted here are for the entire plant
including installation.  However, the operating costs
are for power consumption only.  Membrane replacement
costs have been estimated at $0.35/1000 gal. of product
flow.  The estimated overall projected figure would be
.35 + .98 = $1.33/1000 gal of treated water (10).  This
is a very conservative estimate and does not consider
future improvements in membrane technology.

The operating costs do not include pretreatment to remove
undesirable pollutants such as iron, manganese, organics,
etc., and do not consider ultimate disposal of the brine.
(2)  Rice, ibid

(10) Spiegler, K. S., Principles of Desalination, Academic
     Press, (1966).
                               164

-------
o\
Ul
       CM
       I-'
       u.



       o
       0
       UJ
       UJ
       u_
       Ul
       (E
           10,000
0.30
                            J_
                                          FIG. 14
                                          AREA OF MEMBRANES AS
                                          A FUNCTION OF
                                          PRODUCTION RATE
                                       REF: "SALINE WATER
                                         CONVERSION  REPORT;*
                                         U.S. DEPT. OF SALINE
                                         WATER  (1967)
     0.40               o;so

PRODUCTION  FLOW/ FEED FLOW
                                                                     0,60

-------
en

-------
o\
            O
            O
            O
            O
            I-
            v>
            z
            O
            O

            DC
            Ul

            O
            Q_
w
90
80
70
6O
50
40
30
20








-
































••*








^>
•

















N








<
S
(







»
*v
\
\
FIG. 16
pnu/pp
AQ A pi
PRODUC
REF (1C

\
CONSUMPTION
JNCTION OF
TION RATE.
» SPIEGLER, ibid



                                           5  6 7 8 9 10
20
30  40
                             PRODUCTION RATE (gpd/ft.2)

-------
   FIG. 17
   CAPITAL COST AS A FUNCTION
   OF PRODUCTION  RATE
   REF. (10) SPIEGLER,ibid
3.O
2,0
•o
&
o»
4fe
~1.0
1-
en
O
o
^0.5
H
a.
<
o
0.3
0.2
O.I


-
-


i





\
\





\
\


i i i i


\
\





S ©
\





\

PROD. RATE  (gpd/ft2)
          168

-------
The  latter was considered  separately  for calculating  the
cost of treatment.

Most work with reverse osmosis has been concerned with
TDS  levels of 1000-5000 mg/1.  Thus,  the plots  presented
are  based on these ranges.  Higher levels of  TDS would
probably require much more  specific surface for equivalent
removals, thus increasing  capital expenditures.  Also,
maintenance costs would be  increased  due to increased
scaling, etc.

  I.  REQUIRED DATA:  Plant Flow, Removal Desired Produc-
      tion Flow  (amount of plant flow to be recovered
      through membrane)

      If plant flow = 1 mgd and a recovery factor of  60%
        is desired, then the production flow  =  600,000
        gpd - 0.60 mgd waste flow = 0.40 mgd

      At influent concentration of 5000 mg/1  TDS and  a
      desired effluent of 500 mg/1, the desired removal
      or fractional "cut" would be 0.90.

 II.  SIZE OF PLANT AND POWER CONSUMPTION

      Product flow = 0.60 mgd
      Prod/Feed = 0.60
      From Figure 14:  Area/Feed flow = 102,000 ft2/mgd
      .-.  Total Area = 102,000 ft2
      check:   From Figure 15: @ Prod.  Flow -  600,000  gpd,
              Area = 102,000 ft2
      Production rate = 600,000/100,000 =6.0 gpd/ft2
      From Figure 16:  Power = 44 KW-hr/k gal = 44,000
        KW -  hr/day

III.   COSTS

      Capital Cost

         Production rate =5.0 gpd/ft2
      .'.From Figure 17:
         Capital Cost =1.20 $/gpd + 106 gpd

      Operating Cost

         Power Consumption = 44,000  kw-hr/day (Figure 16)
      .*.@  $0.015/kw-hr
         Power Cost = $660/day
                              169

-------
  10.0
CO

o
   1.0
        FIGURE 18
        CAPITAL  COST OF REVERSE OSMOSIS
        PLANT
        REF (2)  RICE, ibid
CO
O
O
CL
<
O
               i   t  i  i i i  i
           i   111(11
    0.1
i.o
IOJO
                             PLANT  CAPACITY
                                 (MOD)
30.0

-------
  10.0
O
O
O
o
o

o
z
cc.
Ill
a.
o
s
Ul
UJ


CO
TIG. I9

 OPERATING COST FOR REVERSE OSMOSIS PLANT

 REF(2) RICE, ibid
                          i.O                    10

                     TREATMENT  PLANT  CAPACITY

                               (MGD)

-------
ELECTRODIALYSIS

Cost figures for electrodialysis were difficult to obtain
because this method is mostly used where brine disposal
does not represent a problem or very high concentrations
of effluent brine or not necessarily required.  As a
treatment method to concentrate and thus reduce the volume
of brine produced, a slightly increased number of cells
will have to be used and a proper balance between brine
produced and usable water production will depend on the
need or cost of the clean water as well as the cost of
brine removal.  To get some idea of the number of units
required to concentrate waste streams and produce a
product effluent of less than 500 mg/1 total dissolved
solids, a study was made of existing data (11) to produce
the set of curves in Figure 20.  This will give some
idea of the number of units required and the relative
amounts of effluent and brine produced.  With recircula-
tion of the waste through the cells the concentration
in each cell will reach an equilibrium value which is
not easy to calculate.  Certain values were assumed and
the units calculated according to this.  Using basic
design parameters, the size of the plant was calculated
for waste with varying values of total dissolved solids.
These values were then used for calculating the final
capital costs.  From Figure 22, the volume of brine was
calculated and the cost of disposal of the brine was
added to the cost of treatment.
Design Equations

 I.  nAp = 1000 Fd F(2K2Cdif +

           CE  (i/Cd)0(2K2Cdi (1-f) + K!Y)

     nAp = effective transfer area, cm^  (n=number of
             individual cell pairs)
       f = fraction of total cut through filter  (the TDS
             removal factor) (measure of approach to
             polarization and film diffusion limitations)
             should stay less than 0.5
(11)  Electrodialysis in Advanced Waste Treatment, FWPCA
      Publ. No. WP-20-AWTR-8.  Water Pollution Control
      Research Service  (1967).
                               172

-------
W
                   9000  6000  4900  3300  2200
I5OO
                                                  1000   50C
                         APPROXIMATE UNIT OPERATIONAL LEVELS

FIGURE 20                      'N m9/l  TDS'
   DETERMINATION OF  TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS REQUIRED FOR
   TREATMENT

-------
         10,000
-4
*>.
           500.
              0.0
                                                    1,000
                                                     50,000 IDS
                                                        10,000 IDS
                                       DS
                                                   F1G.2I
                                     RELATIONSHIP OF PLATE
                                     AREA REQUIRED FOR  A
                                     DESIRED TDS  REMOVAL
                                     (ELECTRODIALYSIS)
                                      REF. (H)	
0.)
0.2     0.3     0.4
     TOTAL  CUT  f
0-5
                                                         0.6

-------
100,000
 10,000
UJ
N
cc
UJ
C
  1,000
   100
            O.I
                                         100,000 IDS
                                         50,000 TDS
                             FIG. 22
                                RELATIONSHIP OF
                                RECTIFIER  SIZE TO
                                SPECIFIC  TDS REMOVAL
                                DESIRED
                                (ELECTRODIALYSIS)
                                REE (II)
0.2     0.3     0.4

 TOTAL CUT, f
                      10,000
                                         1,000 T
        TDS
                             DS
0.5     0.6
                           175

-------
                i = Cde)/Cdi

             Faraday's constant, 96,500 coulombs/equivalent

             current density, ma/cm^

             influent dilute stream flow rate, liters/sec

             influent dilute stream concentration, equiva-
               lent/liter

     Cci   = concentrated stream concentration equivalent/
               liter

     kl,k2 = constants depending on various membranes,
               solutions, and temperature parameters
               ki/ca = a solution resistance term
               k2    = a membrane resistance term

     Y     = 1 + (l^f-)g.      (i/Cd)   = a measure of approach
                 (gf+1)           °   polarization.  Thus,
                                      there is an upper
                                      limit to this ratio.

     z     = in
                (l-gf)

     g     - Cdi/Cci

     CE    = current efficiency
II.  Vp    = Ji/Cd)o


     Vp    = potential drop across membranes, volts

     I     = Fd F f Cdi
                nCE

     DC power requirement = P = (Vpl) in kva
                               176

-------
TABLE I




SUMMARY
Influent
TDS
1,000



10,000



50,000


100,000




f
0.50
.35
.25
.10
0.50
.35
.25
.10
0.50
.20
.10
0.50
.35
.25
.10
Plate Area
(ft2)
5,180
3,110
2,038
731
6,120
3,440
2,177
742
6,560
1,678
745
6,640
3,585
2,270
747
DC Energy
(kw-hr)
988
742
553
235
26,200
21,600
17,800
8,220
494,000
307,000
171,000
1,890,000
1,710,000
1,450,000
649,000
ED Unit
Cost $
45,380
27,160
17,830
6,400
53,600
30,140
19,040
6,480
57,450
14,690
6,503
58,150
31,410
19,860
6,531
Rectifier
Cost
2,500
1,875
1,400
595
66,100
54,600
45,000
20,800
1,250,000
776,000
431,000
4,770,000
4,330,000
3,550,000
1,641,000
Operating
Cost
DC Energy
Cost $/MGD
9.88
7.42
5.53
2.35
262
216
178
82
4,940
3,070
1,710
18,900
17,100
14,050
6,490

-------
Example:  10 mgd plant
          TDS = 1000 mg/1
          Normality = 0.01 equiv./liter

  Allowable effluent concentration =600 mg/1

  .*. f = 1000 - 600/1000 = 0.40

Capital Considerations

From Figure 21:  Area of plates
                   = 3,700 ft2/mgd + 10 mgd
                   = 37,000 ft2 total

From Figure 22:  Rectifier size
                   = 30.25 ku-a/mgd + 10 = 302.5 ku-a

From Figure 23:  Capital cost of plates, spacers, membranes
                 and electrodes
                   = 31.500/mgd
                   = $315.000 total

From Figure 24:  Capital cost of rectifier
                   = $2100/mgd + 10 mgd
                   = $21,000 total

Capital Cost = $315,000 + $21,000 =             $336,000

Stack hardware = $500/mgd =                        5,000

10% installation = 0.10  (341,000) =                3,410

Auxiliary equip, (installed @ 40%)
  pumps, valves and fittings,
  control panels, acid tanks,
  conduct = 20.000/mgd =                         200,000
  (10% miscellaneous included)
                                       Total ±f $544,400

I/ exclusive of building, spare parts, etc.

Operating Condi tions

From Figure 25:  DC Energy Requirements
                   =840 kw-hrs/mgd
                   = 8400 kw-hrs
                              178

-------
h-
(O
o
o
5Z
<
o
     IOO.OOO
               FIGURE 23
      50,000



      40,000
      30,000
20,000
10,000
       5000
. CAPITAL CO
- SPACERS, Et
- ELECTRODE*
- REF. (II)




: |



/
*
ST OF
/



^--100,
• CO
• 5O,
i f\
1 Oi
lOrtft '




000 T
000 T
000 T
ros



)S
OS
DS
           0.0
             O.I
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
                                   TOTAL  CUT  f

-------
10,000,000
1,000,000
 V)
 o
 o
 100,000
 a.

 o

 ae
 111
 U
 UJ

 £C


 10,000
  1,000
     0.0
                     FIG. 24
          CAPITAL COST  CURVES

          -FOR DC RECTIFIER  FOR—

           ELECTRODIALYSIS   REF(H)
                                             100,000 TDS
0.2     0.3     O.4

  TOTAL CUT, f
                                             50,000 TPS
                         10,000 TDS
                                             1,000 TDS
0.5
0.6
                               180

-------
tOOOO.OOOr
1,000,000
 100,000
 o
 en
 UJ

 UJ
 o
 Q
 (0,000
  1,000
     0.0
ai
                                          •100,000 IDS
                                         5QOOOTDS
         FIGURE 25
         RELATIONSHIP OF DC ENERGY
         REQUIRED FOR  A DESIRED   -
         IDS REMOVAL
         (ELECTRODIALYSIS) REF (II)
0.2     03     0.4    0.5

   TOTAL CUT, f
                                              0.6
                         181

-------
From Figure 26:  DC Energy Operating Costs @  $0.01/kw-hrs
                   ~ 8.40/mgd
         Total I/  = $8.40/day

Costs for 0.5 mgd wastewater at 3000 mg/1 total dissolved
solids.

From Figure 20, the following units would be  required to
deliver equal volumes of product water at 500 mg/1 total
dissolved solids and brine at 10/000 mg/1.
    Approximate
       Feed
   Concentration

       3,000
       2,200
       1,500
       1,000
       4,900
       6,000
# Units/
  mgd

  2.8
  2.0
  1.4
  0.7
  1.8
  1.0
Cost/
Unit

58,000
52,000
50,000
47,000
70,000
78,000
                          Plus 25% for pumps
Total
Cost

 81,000
 52,000
 35,000
 16,000
 63,000
 78,000
325,000
 81,000
406,000
These costs were obtained from costs calculated from the
fundamental design equations.  Similar costs evaluated
for other points and those were plotted on Figure 27.

Values for operating costs were calculated as shown in the
Appendix and the values also are shown in Figure 27.  One
value obtained from Ref.  (12) is shown to be within the
calculated range of operating costs.
I/ Must include maintenance costs:
     Membrane replacement = 4 sets/25 years
     Spacer replacement = 4 sets/25 years
     Anode maintenance - $200/stack year
     Other maintenance = 1-1/2% of capital investment/year
     Labor = 2 man-hrs./day plus 100 man-hrs. per stack year
     Other operating costs would be acid or alkali additions
       to maintain a suitable pH.

(12) Lacey, R. E. , Lang, E. W., and Huffman, E. L.,
     "Economics of Demineralization by Electrodialysis,"
     Saline Water Concession II.  Advances in Chemistry
     Series 38.  American Chemical Society, 1155 16th St.,
     N.W., Washington, D.C., 1963.
                             182

-------
100,000
        FIGURE 26
        OPERATING  COST OF  DC ENERGY
        REQUIRED  FOR SPECIFIC
        TDS REMOVAL
           (ELECTRODIALYSIS)   REF. (II)
 10,000
                   TOTAL CUT, f
                         183

-------
 FIGURE  27

    CAPITAL AND OPERATING  COSTS  FOR
    ELECTRODIALYSIS BASED ON FEED FLOW
    TO  PLANT  AT  3000 ppm T. D.S.
 10.0
CD
CO
o
o
10
a.
<
o
  O.I
   O.I
                                         100.0 ^
                                             o
                                             o
                                             o
                                             V)

                                             CO
                                             o
                                             o

                                             o
                                           10.0  =
                                             o:
                                             UJ
                                             a.
                                             o
                       B COSTS AS CALCULATED
                       * FROM REFEREN
                         LACEY, ibid
                  1.0              10.0  20.0


                   PLANT SIZE  (MGD)
                           184

-------
ION EXCHANGE

The cost of ion exchange plants  is dependent  on  the  total
volume of waste treated but  also to a  large extent on  the
total amount of dissolved  solids removed or exchanged  since
the flow rate through the  media  remains fairly constant.
The regenerant chemical cost will also be  in  direct  propor-
tion to the rate of electrolyte  removal.   The water  used
for the wash cycle may for the purpose of  treatment, be
returned to the filter and recycled and will  thus be added
to the waste stream.  The  waste  stream will be very  concen-
trated and provide a possibility of recovery  of  chemicals
if such chemicals have any commercial  values.

The cost curves in Figure  28 were obtained from  the  Acid
Mine Drainage Report  (2) for the Nalco process for an
influent TDS of 1500 mg/1.   The  curve  for  the Desal  Process
was obtained from Kunin, et  al  (13).

The No. 3 curve in Figure  28 was calculated on the basis
of the increased capacity  required for the increased ion
concentration in the waste.

Operating costs for ion exchange were  obtained from  various
sources and pieced together  to give a  reasonable estimate
of the total operating costs.  Costs for chemicals used
per Ib. of TDS removed varies with the initial concentra-
tion of the solids in the  influent.  The curve in Figure
29 was drawn from the following  information:

         Influent TDS       Chemical Cost per Pound
           (mg/1)	       	TDS  Removed	

             200              10.2  Ref (14)
             354               4.05 Ref (14)
            1000               2.0  Ref (15)
(2)    Rice/ ibid
(13)   Kunin, R. , et al "Desal Process-Economic Exchange
      System for Treating Brackish and Acid Mine Drainage
      Waters and Waste Effluents," Chemical Engineering
      Progress Symposium Series No. 90, Vol. 64, AICHE,
      1968.
(14)   Levendusky, et al "An Innovation in Ion Exchange,"
      Industrial Water Engineering, Vol. 2, 11, Nov., 1965.

(15)   Lyons, D., M.S. Thesis, University of Texas at Aus-
      tin,  1969.
                             185

-------
       10.0-
CO
a\
        LO-
O
o

-I

£

Q.
<
O
        0.1-
         O.I
                     I  I  I  I  I I I
                                                    DE
                                                 SAL PROCESS  REF. (13)
ID NALCO PROCESS  REF. (14)


(D ESTIMATED
                                 I	I
                i   l  I I  i I I
                          1.0                    10.0


                         PLANT  CAPACITY (MGD)
            FIGURE 28   CAPITAL COST OF  ION  EXCHANGE  PLANT

-------
      10



  »»••
  00  9




      8




      7




      6




      5




      4
O
UJ


1
UJ
£E

CO
O
I-
 »
CD
_I

o:
UJ
o.
  o
  O   3
  O
                1000
                       2000
3000
               INFLUENT DISSOLVED SOLIDS


                      (mg/l)
FIG. 29  CHEMICAL  COST PER POUND  TDS REMOVED
                BY  ION  EXCHANGE
                          187

-------
The total operating cost for an influent TDS of 3000 mg/1
was calculated as follows:

  For 0.5 mgd - 2500 rag/1 removed for effluent concentra-
    tion of 500 mg/1

  Chemical Costs:
    0.001 x 1.5 x 2500 x 8.33 = 31.2C/1000 gal.
    Other Costs

      Labor
      Material
      Chemicals
      Utilities
    For 1.0 mgd

      Labor
      Material
      Chemicals
      Utilities
    For 10.0 mgd

      Labor
      Material
      Chemicals
      Utilities
 1.1
 1.4
31.2
 1.3
3T70 $/1000 gal.
 0.9
 1.2
30.0
 1.2
33.3 C/1000 gal.
 0.1
 0.9
27.0
 1.0
  '.6 C/1000 gal.
                             188

-------
MULTIPLE EFFECT EVAPORATION

The capital and operating costs for multiple effect
evaporation was obtained from the report "Cost of Purify-
ing Municipal Wastewater by Distillation."  Environmental
Health Series, Report No. AWTR-6, U.S. Department of HEW
(1963).  The costs were based on product water and from the
above report, it appears that approximately 10% brine is
produced.  Few operating costs were available.  Additional
points were obtained from a report in the 1965 report
"Saline Water Conversion Report," U.S. Department of the
Interior, Office of Saline Water.

The capital and operating costs are shown in Figure 30.
                            189

-------
vo
o
                                                                o
                                                                o
                                                                o
                                                            0.05
                                                                12
                                                                (O
                                                                o
                                                                o
                                                                CD
o:
UJ
Q.
o
                             10.0                 100.0
                       PLANT SIZE MGD (PRODUCT WATER)
                                                            0.02
              FIGURE 30

                CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST FOR  MULTIPLE

                EFFECT EVAPORATION (DISTILLATION)

-------
SOLAR EVAPORATION

Pond evaporation would only be considered in areas where
the land is cheap and the net evaporation exceeds the net
rainfall by a sufficient margin so as to keep the
evaporation ponds within reasonable limits.  An example
of such a calculation is given below.  No areas of pond
required are calculated and land value is assumed to be
a minimal $100/acre.  The costs for construction of the
ponds shown in the curve in Figure 34 does not include the
cost of land.

Example:
  Industry located in Austin, Texas
    Discharge -0.1 mgd high solids. T° @ 140°F

  METHOD 1 - Average conditions (long term)  (Empirical
             approach)

  Determine annual precip.  from U.S. Weather Bureau data -
    32"

  Determine annual lake evaporation from U.S. Weather
    Bureau = 60"

  Net evaporation - 60-32 = 28"/yr or .0735"/day

  From Figure 33 enter @ evaporation/day = .074

  Read chart @ acres/mgd =  520

  Average required = .1 x 520 = 52 acre

  (values are 50% occurrence values).

  METHOD II - short term conditions -  (Rational Approach)

  (1)  from local weather bureau,  or compiled data (17)
      Determine  (95% occurrence value)
(16)   The Nation's Water Resources,  USGPO, Washington, D.C.,
      1968,  Part 1.

(17)   Evaluated Weather Data for Cooling Equipment, Flow
      Products  Company, Santa Rosa,  Calif. (1958)
                             191

-------
\o
ro
                                  COX CHART

                           REF(I8) HIMELBLAU, ibid

                VAPOR PRESSURE OF WATER VS TEMPERATURE
       0.10
  1.0                  10.0

VAPOR PRESSURE, INCHES Hg
(TO
                                                       FIGURE 31

-------
                 10.0
vo
                >-
                <
                Q
                o
                Q.

                §
                Id  O.I

                CO
                UJ

                o
                z
                  O.oi
                    O.I
                       EVAPORATION

                            VS

                       VAPOR  PRESSURE

                       DIFFERENTIAL  REF(I7)
                                                     where O 0.55W
                        and W= wind velocity,
                               mph
                    L Jl^
    >:
    <
    a:
    o
    Q.
                                             100
                                                en
                                                LJ
         1,0                10

VAPOR PRESSURE DIFF, Ae (inches Hg)
 10
IOO
                                                                           FIGURE 32

-------
               10,000
                                     1.0
                         INCHES WATER
                         EVAPORATION
                1000
vo
*>.
            O
            CD
CO
UJ
tt
O
                 IOO
                  101	
                   0.01
                                         10.0
                         PER  DAY
                                      FIGURE  33
                          AREA VS
                          REQUIRED  EVAPORATION
                          REF. (17)
100.0
~qio
                                          \
    o
    (D
                                                                         a
                                                            O.I
                                                    U	I
                        0.10               1.00
                 INCHES WATER EVAPORATION /DAY
 10.0

-------
   10            20
    SURFACE AREA (IN ACRES)
           FIGURE  34
CAPITAL COST RELATIONSHIP FOR
       LAGOONS REF (4)
30
          195

-------
    (a)  temperature range
          wet bulb temp 77°  (Figure 19, Ref.  17)
          dry bulb temp 95°  (Figure 75, Ref.  17)
    (b)  wind speed - 15 mph  (Figure 73, Ref.  17)
    (c)  relative humidity -  45%  (psychrometric  chart
          Figure 69, Ref. 18)

  (2)  From Figure 31

       Determine vapor pressures
        water @ 140° = 5.8"
        Atmosphere @ 95°F =  1.67 x  .45 =  .75
            = 5.8 - .75 = 5.05
        From Figure 32 Evap. = 5.8"/day

  (3)  From Figure 33 @ 5. 8 "/day evap.
        read acres/mgd = 6.8 acre/mgd
        @ .1 mgd - require  .68 acre

Controlled Discharge  (19)

Example :

  Industry flow @ 200 mgd   308 cfm
  Cone @ 1000  TDS = Ci
  Stream flow @ 1200 cfs  (775 mgd) mean annual  flow =  SF
  Cone @ 100 ppm TDS - Cs
  Coefficient variation @
  Allowable stream concentration 500 ppm TDS =  Ca
  Based upon concentration  factor -
  allowable ratio = II? = Ca-Cs
                    SF   Ci-Ca

  or, IF =  500-100 = 400 = .8
      SF   1000-500   5"00i
(17)  Flow Products Co., ibid

(18)  Himelblau, D. M., "Basic Principles and Calculations
      in Chemical Engineering," Prentice Hall,  Inc.,
      England, New Jersey, 1967.

(19)  Industrial Waste Guide on Thermal Pollution, U.S.
      Department of the Interior, FWPCA, Pacific Northwest
      Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, September, 1968.
                               196

-------
  . *.  @  any  time,  industrial flow can be 80% of stream
  flow or, stream  flow must be 125% waste flow

From  flow duration  curve (USGS)

 (1) determine  84% occurrence value and 16% occurrence
    value
 (2) calculate  average ratio between these values and
    50% occurrence  value (Mode) ; this is Sigma (G)  or
    standard geometric deviation.
 (3) Determine  coefficient  of variation = sigitia
                                           mode
 (refer  to fraction  of flow duration curve)

Example - 50%  value - 1200 cfm

85% value - 7100  cfm
16% value - 280 cfm
  = 7100 =5,9  1200  = 4.3,  G Avg  =5.1
                ~~~
plotting geometric normal distribution
  low  (16%) @ 1200 +-  5.1 =  234  high  (84%)  @  1200 x 5.1
    6120

Coef of variation = 280  =  .233
                   1200
or
    1200 = .17
    7100.
average = .23 +  .17   * .20
Entering draft/storage @ ratio  industry  flow  to  stream
flow
      IF/SF = 200/775 =  .257

and cost of variability @  .25
      Storage factor = .063 MAG
        .063 x 775 mgd = 488 MG

Storage required
  488 mgd x 365 days = 17,800 MG or 89 days

(4)  from flow duration curve,  flow of 318 cfra would be
     exceeded approximately 80% of the time
(5)  allowing for dilution factor storage must be
     minimal by 25% or 17,800 mg x 125%  = 22,300 MG
                             197

-------
Note:  No consideration  of  rainfall  and evaporation has
been made; each  individual  application should consider
these factors separately.

Cooling Ponds

Temperature drop through a  pond

   (1) To = {Ti-E)e"a +E
  where
  To = outlet temperature °F
  Ti = inlet temperature °F
   (2) a1 = KA	
           pCpQi

where
  a* - decay e                       ?     -1
  K = energy exchange coef.  (BTU ft    day  )
  A = pond area  (ft2)
  P = water density (62.4#  ft"3)
  Cp = specific heat function  (1BTU  lb""1°F"1}
  Qi = influent flow  (ft3 day"~i)
  E = equilibrium

Solving for K = 157 +  (0.26 +  B)  (bW)

where
  W = wind speed in mph
  b = experimental evaporation coef.
  B = proportionality coefficient
  from E(°F)  B(mmHg-J-)
  50-60  0.405
  60-70  0.555
  70-80  0.744
  80-90  0.990

Example
  Assume b = 12
  K = 118
  To = 80°F
  E = 769 °F

from eq. (1)
  80 = (93-769)e~a< + 76.9
  e-a< = 0.193
  a1 = 1.65
  Eq. (2)
  a1 =           118A
        (62.4)(ir(1500)(24)(3600)
  a1 =  (1.46 x 10-8) A=1.65
  A = 11.3 x 10? ft2
  A = 2590 acres
                               198

-------
COOLING TOWERS

Parameter affecting  cooling  tower  costs  are  (Ref.  20)
(1) Wet bulb  temperature  - WBT
(2) Approach  (CWT-WBT) =  A
(3) Range  (HWT-CWT)  = R

where :
  CWT is cooled water temperature
  HWT is hot  water temperature        °F
  WBT is web  bulb temperature

Example :
  An industry is located  on  a stream  having  an  average  dry
weather flow  of 1 cfm and a  dry weather  temperature  averag-
ing 70 °F.  Industrial discharge totals 400 gpm  at  110 °F.
Local regulations limit temperature rise to  10 °F.

By dilution alone, allowable discharge temperature can  be
computed by the relationship:

  TM = Ti Qi  + Ts Qs  where
          Qi  + Qs

or,
  Ti = Tm  (Qi + Qs)  - TsQs
                Qi

so, allowable discharge temp.

  Ti = 80(400 -I- 450) - 70 (450)  = 91°
and the cooling tower must lower the water temperature
from 110°F to 91°F, or a range of approximately 20°.  From
local data (U.S. Weather Bureau) the average wet bulb
temperature is 70° giving an approach of approximately
20°

Entering Figure 35 @ range of 20°, approach of 20°, and
WBT of 70° - the relative rating factor of .8.

Using a cost factor of $10.00 per gpm (Ref. 20 + cost
index increase)

The capital cost in 1000 x 400 gpm x .8 = $3,200
(20)  Cootner, P. H., Lof, Go. O.7 "Water Demand for Stream
      Electric Generation," John Hopkins Press, Baltimore,
      Maryland, 1965, p. 69.
                               199

-------
cc
o
3.0
2.0
1.0
O 3 -
°*9o.e
0.7
0.6
05
04
3.0
2.0
no1'0
0>lT
0.7
0,6
0.5
4.0
3.0
2.0
nj.o
03 —
n fl
07
OA
0.5

-


















«
^






*^
•>,








•»»
•^^



•N^

*^^
"^






^^
^*.


^^•^^



"""te

^^.
" 	 ^

"**—,,



^^
"*!•»._.,
^-^






•^»^^^
APPI
^VAL



^**^v



*^,
APPR
"^VA


"^^^




^ —
"v^_






' 	
^OAC
UES


H "

^^*»


~^»


^^
OA&ir
LUES

^

k-v*>.


^--,
APP
^»^^

*-, 	
^^N

**-.
^**^
^

*»-
^s

"^

^
ROA(
ALUI
•**^^

•^^

WPL
R
V

•^^



^**^

•*^


^,


*^^^
*^^
*-^_

**-,_
:H •
s
^^^

~*»,^_

^
r
FIG. 35
ELATIVE
/ET BUL

"5°



I A
IU
-I'S0



*-^




•*^.

••^


^

•**

F
: R/S
V
.B 1


'ID- f

RANGE





5°F
l?^~


\*\°
ID
20°

5°F
o°-


5*

20°



















TING FACTORS
s
'EMPERATURES











iKotr

DAKIAT





-20°F 	

RANGE


UJ
>
UJ
CL
     50  55   00  63  70  75  80  85   90  95  100


               WET  BULB  TEMPERATURE °F
                           200

-------
Operating  Cost

Cooling  tower operating  costs
Losses = 0.00112  R
Chemical = .033 Y +  17
                     C
Acquisition = Wa
Power =  (0.14K +  0.005A)p

where:
  R - range, °P
  Y = alkalinity,  ppm CaCOs
  C = concentration  factor
  Wa = cost of water/1000 gal.
  K - Relative factor
  P = Power costs  in C/KWH
  A = pumping head in

Total operating costs -  (C/1000 gal)
  when C=l, assuming Wa=10<:/1000 gal, power  @  1C/KWH  and
allowing 0.5 KWH consumption for lifting 1000  gallon
100 feet (approximatey 85% efficiency).

Operating Cost » 0.00112 R (.033 Y + 17) + 10  +  (.14K +
  .005A)

Example using graph in Figure 36:

  Cooling tower operating under @ 20° range with a rela-
tive rating factor of 1.0, alkalinity of 1000, and
assuming 100 foot operating head, cost/1000 gal= 2$,
assume 100,000 gpd flow, then operating cost - 2£ x
100 * $200/day.
                              201

-------
ro
o
to
           O
           O
           O
t-
U)
O
O
           z
           K-
           <
           cr
           LU
           Q_
           o
               5.0
               4.0
               2.0
               0.6
               0.5
                           FIG. 36	

                           COOLING  TOWERS
                                                 JRANGE
                                                           JJANGE.
                                                        10_ ALKjgQgi^
                 0.0
                0.5
 1.0        1.5        2.0       2.5

RELATIVE  RATING   FACTOR, K

-------
 APPENDIX D
BIBLIOGRAPHY
        203

-------
                      BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1.  Lawson, Barry L., "Atlas of Industrial Water Use,"
     Cornell University, Water Resources Center, Publica-
     tion No. 18, September, 1967, 47 pages.

 2.  Grant, H. 0., "Pollution Control in a Phosphoric Acid
     Plant," Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 60, No.
     1, January, 1964, pp. 53-55.

 3.  "Pollution-Causes, Costs, Controls," Chemical and
     Engineering News, Vol. 47, No. 24, June^ 97 T9 69,
     pp. 33-68.

 4.  "Toward a Clean Environment," Manufacturing Chemists
     Association, 1967, 24 pages.

 5.  Sener, Ismail, "What Value Water"?  Industrial
     Development, October, 1968, pp. 13-16"^

 6.  "Phosphate-Florida's Hidden Blessing," Florida
     Phosphate Council, 1966, 30 pages.

 7.  "Waste Control at Dow-Midland," The Dow Chemical
     Company, 1968, 20 pages.

 8.  Davis, C. H., Meline, R. S., Graham, G. H., Jr./
     "Plant Production of Nitric Phosphates by the TVA
     Mixed Acid Process," American Institute of Chemical
     Engineers, 63rd National Meeting, February 18-21,
     1968, Preprint 15C, 26 pages.

 9.  "Projected Wastewater Treatment Costs in the
     Organic Chemical Industry," The Cost of Clean Water
     and Its Economic Impact, Vol. IV," Federal Water
     Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department
     of the Interior, 1969, 190 pp.

10.  "U.S. Industrial Outlook-1967," U.S. Department of
     Commerce, December, 1966, 212 pp.

11.  Robertson, John H., "Handling and Disposal of
     Chemical Wastes," Industrial^Water Engineering,
     July, 1969, pp.  26-29.
                             204

-------
                  BIBLIOGRAPHY  (cont.)
 12.   "Water  Use  in  the Chemical  Industry,"  ORSANCO's  Chemi-
      cal  Industry Committee,  Industrial Water Engineering,
      December, 1967,  pp.  16-20.

 13.   Cecil,  Lawrence  K.,  "Water  Reuse  and Disposal/1
      Chemical Engineering, May 5,  1969, pp.  92-104.

 14.   "New Process May Reshape Chlorine Industry," Chemical
      and  Engineering  News, May 5,  1969, pp.  14-15.

 15.   "Chemical Makers Up Ante for  Pollution," Chemical
      and  Engineering  News, May 10, 1969, pp. 9.

 16.   "Big Push on Pollution," Chemical Week, May 23,  1964,
      pp.  33-34.

 17.   "More Money for  Pollution Control," The Conference
      Board Record,  September, 1968, pp. 26-29.

 18.   "$1.3 Billion  Set for Pollution Control in 1969,"
      Chemical and Engineering News, August  19, 1968,  pp.
      20-21.

 19.   "Pollution-What  Industry is Doing to Control It,"
      Farm Chemicals,  September,  1964,  pp. 16-26.

 20.   "The Chemical  Industry Facts Book," Manufacturing
      Chemists Association, Inc., Fifth Edition, 1962.

 21.   "Water Management:  What it is and Why it is
     Essential Now,"  Cyanamid Magazine, Summer, 1966.

 22.  Lucht, Robert A., "Chemical Age 50th Anniversary - An
      Inorganic Revolution," Chemical Age, March 28, 1969,
     pp. 27-28.

 23.  Conklin, Howard L.,  "Water Requirements of the Carbon-
     Black Industry," Geological Survey,  U.S. Department
     of the Interior, Paper 1330-B, 1956, 25 pages.

24.  Badger,  W.  L.,  and Baker, E. M.,  "Inorganic Chemical
     Technology," McGraw-Hill Chemical Engineering Series,
     1941, 237 pages.

25.  Majewski, F.,  "The Treatment of Wastes at the Rohm
     & Haas Company," Proceedings of the  Eighth Industrial
                            205

-------
                BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont.)
     Waste Conference, Purdue University, May 4, 5, and
     6, 1953, pp. 328-345.

26.  "A Study to Determine the Costs of Water in Industrial
     Uses," Office of Water Resources Research, U.S.
     Department of the Interior, 1968, 159 pages.

27.  "Demineralizer Aids in Production of Food Grade
     Phosphoric Acid," Water and Sewage Works, Vol. 115,
     No. 1, January, 1968, pp.44-46.

28.  Sheldon, E. K., "Inside View of a Modern, Complete
     Alum Plant," Chemical Engineering, March 20, 1961,
     pp. 132-135.

29.  Chopey, N. P., "Fresh Ideas Improve Urea Process,"
     Chemical Engineering, July 10, 1961, pp. 116-118.

30.  Specht, R. C., "Disposal of Wastes from the Phosphate
     Industry," Journal of the Water Pollution Control
     Federation, September, 1960, pp.964-974.

31.  Ellwood, Peter, "Nitrogen Fertilizer Plant Integrates
     Dutch and American Know-How," Chemical Engineering,
     May 11, 1964, pp. 136-138.

32.  Labine, R. A., "Converting Waste Sludge Acid to
     H2SO4," Chemical Engineering, January 11, 1960,
     pp. 80-83.

33.  Arnold, Jr., T. H. and Chopey, N. P., "New Ideas
     Refresh Alumina Process," Chemical Engineering,
     November 28, 1960, pp. 108-111.

34.  Guccione, Eugene, "Silver Nitrate from New Plant
     99.9999% Pure," Chemical Engineering, August 5,
     1963, pp. 86-88.

35.  Spealman, Max L., "New Route to Chlorine and Salt-
     peter," Chemical Engineering, November 8, 1965,
     pp. 198-200.

36.  Baker, J. E. and Burt, R. D., "Startup and Operating
     Problems in Chlorine Plants," Chemical Engineering
     Progress, Vol. 63, No. 12, December,1967, pp.47-
     52.
                            206

-------
                  BIBLIOGRAPHY  (cont.)
 37.  Rogers, W. R.  and Muller, K.,  "Hydrofluoric Acid
     Manufacture,"  Chemical Engineering Progress,
     Vol.  59, No.  5, May,  1963, pp.  85-88.

 38.  "A Giant Goes  into Action," Chemical Week, Vol. 103,
     No. 18, November 2, 1968, pp.  51-52.

 39.  "Sodium Proves Cheap  Key to Unlock Titanium,"
     Chemical Engineering, October  9, 1967, pp. 126-128.

 40.  Hensinger, C. E., Wakefield, R. E., and Glaus, K. E.,
     "New  Roasters Spur Production  of Sulfuric Acid and
     Zinc  Oxide Pellets,"  Chemical  Engineering, Vol. 75,
     No. 12, June  3, 1968, pp. 70-72.

 41.  Sandors, Howard J., Gardiner,  William C., and Wood,
     Joseph L., "Mercury Cell Chlorine and Caustic,"
     Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 45, No.
     9, September, 1953, pp. 1824-1835.

 42.  Bixler, Gordon H. and Sawyer,  D. L,, "Boron Chemicals
     from  Searles Lake Brines," Industrial and Engineering
     Chemistry, Vol. 49, No. 3, March, 1957, pp. 322-333.

 43.  Reese, Kenneth M. and Cundiff, W. H., "Alumina,"
     Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 47, No. 9,
     September, 1955, pp. 1672-1680.

 44.  Shearon, Will H., Jr.  and Dunwoody, W. B., "Ammonium
     Nitrate," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.
     45, No. 3, March, 1953, pp.  496-504.

 45.  Hester, Albert S. and Diamond, Horace W.,  "Salt
     Manufacture," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry,
     Vol.  47, No.  4, April, 1955, pp. 672-683.

 46.  Haines, Harry W., Griffin,  Don and DeValle, A. J.,
     "Resin and Paint Production - 1954 Style,"
     Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 46, No.
ering c
.  2010-
     10, October, 1954, pp. 2010-2022.

47.   Dorsey, J. J.,  Jr., "Ammonium Nitrate by the Stengel
     Process," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.
     47, No. 1, January, 1955, pp.Il-l?!
                            207

-------
                 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont.)
48.  Dorsey, J. J., Jr. and Kaufman, J. T., "Stengel
     Process Ammonium Nitrate," Industrial and Engineering
     Chemistry, Vol. 46, No. 4, April, 1954, pp. 622-632.

49.  Barber, J. C., "Waste Effluent; Treatment and Reuse,"
     Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 65, No. 6, June,
     1969, pp. 70-73.

50.  Allgood, H. Y. , Lancaster, F. E., Jr., McCollum, J. A.
     and Simpson, J. P., "A High Temperature Superphosphate
     Acid Plant," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry,
     Vol. 59, No. 6, June, 1967.

51.  Barber, J. C., "The Cost of Pollution Control,"
     Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 64, No. 9,
     September, 1968, pp. 78-82.

52.  Peschiera, Lincoln and Freiherr, Frank H., "Disposal
     of Titanium Pigment Process Wastes," Journal of the
     Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol.  40, No. 1,
     January, 1968, pp. 127-131.

53.  Horn, W. R. and Fouser, N. D.7 "Production of 18-46-0
     Fertilizer - A Comparison of Processes,"  Chemical
     Engineering Progress, Vol. 62, No. 7, July^1966,
     pp. 109-113.

54.  Segar, T. W., "Improved Route to Phosphoric Acid,"
     Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 62, No. 2,
     February, 1966, pp.  123-126.

55.  Wilson, Frank W.,  "Handling the Industrial Waste Prob-
     lem in an Ammonia and Nitrogen Fertilizer Solutions
     Plant," Proceedings of the Fourteenth Industrial Waste
     Conference, Purdue University, May 5, 6,  and 1, 1959,
     pp. 396-401.

56.  Siegmund, J. M., "Production, Handling, and Shipping
     of Elemental Fluorine," Chemical Engineering Progress,
     Vol. 63, No. 6, June, 1967, pp. 88-92.

57.  Horton, John P., Malley,  J. Douglas, and  Bays, Harold
     C., "Processing of Phosphorus Furnace Wastes,"
     Sewage and Industrial Wastes, Vol. 28,  No. 1,  January,
     1956, pp. 70-77.
                             208

-------
                 BIBLIOGRAPHY  (cont.)
58.  Young, D. C. and Scott, C. B. ,  "Wet-Process Poly-
     phosphoric Acid," Chemical Engineering Progress,
     Vol. 59, No. 12, December, 1963, pp. 80-84.

59.  "Standardized Procedure for Estimating Costs of Con-
     ventional Water Supplies," Office of Saline Water,
     U.S. Department of the Interior, October, 1963,
     87 pages.

60.  "Chemical Guide to the United States, 1967," Noles
     Development Corporation, 1967,  139 pages.

61.  Bramer, H. C. and Gurnham, C. F., "Integrating Water
     Utilization and Waste Treatment - The Use of Systems
     Analysis in the Steel and Chemical Industries,"
     Presented at the 41st Annual Conference - Water
     Pollution Control Federation, September 23, 1968.

62.  Koenig, Louis, "The Cost of Water Treatment by
     Coagulation, Sedimentation, and Rapid Sand Filtra-
     tion," Journal of American Water Works Association,
     March, 1967, pp. 290-336.

63.  Eckenfelder, Jr., W. Wesley, "Industrial Water
     Pollution Control," 1966, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 275
     pages.

64.  Smith, Robert, "A Compilation of Cost Information
     for Conventional and Advanced Waste Water Treatment
     Plants and Processes," Federal Water Pollution
     Control Administration, U.S. Department of the
     Interior, December, 1967.

65.  Gallagher, John T. , "Rapid Estimation of Plant Costs,"
     Chemical Engineering, December 18, 1967, 8 pages.

66.  Rickles,  Robert N., "Waste Recovery and Pollution
     Abatement,"  Chemical Engineering,  February 18, 1963,
     10 pages.

67.  "Summary Report Advanced Waste Treatment, July,
     1964-July, 1967," Federal Water Pollution Control
     Administration,  U.S.  Department of the Interior,
     Water Pollution Control Research Studies, Publica-
     tion No.  WP-20-AWTR-19, 1968,  96 pages.
                              209

-------
                 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont.)
68.  Partante, Robert, "A Guide to Treatment Costs,"
     Industrial Water Engineering, April, 1968, pp. 32-35.

69.  Partridge, Everett P., "The Cost of Control,"
     Industrial Water Engineering, February, 1968, pp. 16-
     20.

70.  "Chemical Engineering Cost File," Chemical Engineering
     Editor.

     Volume 1 - Cost File    1- 21  Jan., '58 - Dec., '59
     Volume 2 - Cost File   22- 47  Jan., '60 - Dec., '60
     Volume 3 - Cost File   48- 60  Jan., '61 - Dec., '61
     Voluem 4 - Cost File   61- 72  Jan., '62 - Dec., '62
     Volume 5 - Cost File   73- 84  Jan., '63 - Dec., '63
     Volume 6 - Cost File   85- 96  Jan., '64 - Dec., '64
     Volume 7 - Cost File   97-107  Jan., '65 - Dec., '65
     Volume 8 - Cost File  108-119  Jan., '66 - Dec., '66
     Volume 9 - Cost File  120-132  Jan., '67 - Dec., '67

71.  Hackney, J. W., "How to Appraise Capital Investments,"
     Chemical Engineering, May 15, 1961, pp. 145-164.

72.  Hackney, J. W., "Capital Cost Estimates for Process
     Industries," Chemical Engineering, March 7, 1960,
     pp. 115-130.

73.  Hackney, J. W. , "Estimating Methods," Chemical
     Engineering, April 4, 1960, pp. 119-134.

74.  Arnold, Thomas H., "New Index Shows Plant Cost Trends,"
     Chemical Engineering, February 18, 1963, 10 pages.

75.  Foches, M. C. and Witt, P. A., "Estimating Cost of
     Waste Disposal," Hydrocarbon Processing, August,
     1965, Vol. 44, No. 8, pp. 153-158.

76.  Steen, J. H., Majewshi, F. M., and lezzi, T., "Waste
     Treatment at a Large Chemical Manufacturing Plant,"
     Sewage and Industrial Wastes, Vol. 28,  No. 11,
     October, 1956, pp. 1247-1265.

77.  Jenkins, George F.,  "Process Wastes from Chemicals
     Manufacture," Sewage and Industrial Wastes, Vol. 27,
     No. 6, June, 1955, pp. 715-727.
                             210

-------
                  BIBLIOGRAPHY  (cont.)
 78.   Bosworth,  D.  A.,  "Installed  Costs  of Outside Piping,"
      Chemical Engineering,  March  25,  1968, pp.  132-133.

 79.   Henkel, H.  O.,  "Deep Well  Disposal of Chemical  Waste
      Water," Power,  March,  1968,  pp.  82-85.

 80.   Hasolbarth, J.  E.,  "Updated  Investment Costs for 60
      Types of Chemical Plants," Chemical Engineering,
      December 4, 1967, pp.  214-2l5~I

 81.   Laffey, E.  T.,  "The Incineration of Chemical Wastes/1
      Industrial  Water Engineering, June,  1968,  pp. 28-31.

 82.   George, Apfel,  "Estimating Costs of High-Rate
      Clarifiers  and  Softeners," Petrochemical Industry,
      June, 1959, pp. 23-26.

 83.   "Pollution-Causes, Costs, Controls,"  Chemical and
      Engineering News, June  9, 1969,  pp.  33-68.

 84.   Smith, Robert,  "Cost of Conventional  and Advanced
      Treatment of  Wastewater," Journal  of  the Water
      Pollution Control Federation, Vol.  40,  No.  9,
      September,  1968, pp. 1546-1574.

 85.   "Construction Cost Requirements  for Water  and Waste-
     water," Public Works, December,  1967,  pp.  112-113.

 86.  Annual Reports of Selected Firms in the Inorganic
     Chemical Industry.

87.  "U.S. Industrial Outlook - 1970,"  U.S. Department
     of Commerce, December, 1969, 486 pages.

88.  "Water Use in Manufacturing/" 1967 Census of Manu-
     factures,  Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department  of
     Commerce,  Publication No.  MC 67(1)-7, 361 pages.

89.  "Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile," The Economics
     of Clean Water,  Volume Three, Federal Water Pollution
     Control Administration, U.S.  Department of the Interior,
     March,  1970, 467 pages.
                              211
                                      * U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 19TO O - 384-038

-------
1
Accession Number
w
5
Q Subject Field & Group
05D
SELECTED WATER RESOURCES ABSTRACTS •
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
Organization
         Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
     Title
         Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile( Updated)
  ] Q Authors)
                                16
Project Designation

EPA Project  12020 EJI
                                      O1  Note
     Citation
  23
Descriptors (Starred First)
             ^Chemical Wastes, "^Economics,  Industrial Wastes
  25
Identifiers (Starred First)
            ^Inorganic Chemicals, ^Treatment Costs, Survey
 27
     Abstract
     This report  presents a description of the inorganic chemical  industry and the costs
"that the industry would incur in attaining various levels of pollution abatement over the
five-year period  through 1974.  For the study purposes, the inorganic  chemical industry
has been defined  as including establishments producing alkalies and chlorine,  industrial
gases, inorganic  pigments, paints and allied products, fertilizers (excluding  ammonia and
^ea), inorganic  insecticides and herbicides, explosives, and other major industrial in-
organic chemicals.  The report presents in considerable detail the description of the
Carious production processes, the waste treatment methods practiced, and  the possible
impact that changes in  processes might have on the volume and character of the wastes
Produced.
            have been based upon the chemical industry data in the 1963 and 1967 Census of
toanuf acturers, the 1967 Manufacturing Chemists Association survey, and the 1968 FWPCA study
°f the organic chemicals industry.   Costs of treatment are estimated by year for the
levels of treatment corresponding to 21% and 100# removal of contaminants.  Data from
59 inorganic chemical plants were obtained as primary input to the study.
        Dr. Henry C. Bramer
                               Institution
                                  Datagraphics,  Incorporated
  WR;102 (REV. JULY 1969)
  WRSIC
                        SEND. WITH COPY OF DOCUMENT. TOl WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
                                                 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20240

                                                                          * 5POI 1970-389-830

-------