EPA-450/2-74-018b
October 1974
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
FOR STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE:
ELECTRIC SUBMERGED ARC FURNACES
FOR PRODUCTION OF FERROALLOYS
VOLUME 2: TEST DATA SUMMARY
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
t«search Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
ERRATA
FOR
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE:
ELECTRIC SUBMERGED ARC FURNACES FOR PRODUCTION OF FERROALLOYS
VOLUME 2: TEST DATA SUMMARY
EPA-4SO/2-74-018b
Replace p. 56 with the corrected Technical Report Data Form on the
back of this page.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instruction* on the reverse before completing)
\. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/2-74-Q18b
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-»JO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Background Information for Standards of Performance:
Electric Submerged Arc Furnaces Producing Ferroalloys
Volume 2, Summary of Test Data
5. REPORT DATE
October 1974
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This volume is the second in a series on the standard of performance for electric
submerged arc furnaces producing ferroalloys. This volume summarizes the source
test results and visible emission measurements cited in Volume 1. It describes
the tested facilities (their operating conditions, characteristics of the exhaust
gas streams, and deviations from prescribed test procedures) and summarizes the
results of the particulate matter and carbon monoxide tests.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution, Calcium Silicon
Pollution Control, Ferromanganese Silicon
Standards of Performance, Charge Chrome
Ferroalloys, Svlicomanganese Zirconium
Silicon Metal, High-Carbon Ferrochrome
50% Ferrosilicon, Ferrochrome Silicon, Silvery Iron
65-76% Ferrosilicon, Ferromanganese, Calciijm Carbide
Air Pollution Control
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport}
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
58
Unlimited
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE.
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
56
-------
EPA 450/2-74-OlSb
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
FOR STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE:
ELECTRIC SUBMERGED ARC FURNACES
FOR PRODUCTION OF FERROALLOYS
VOLUME 2: TEST DATA SUMMARY
Emission Standards and Engineering Division
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
October 1974
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the Air
Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the
National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22161.
Publication No. EPA-450/2-74-018b
II
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
INTRODUCTION 1
SUMMARY OF TEST DATA, 3
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES .... 3
SUMMARY OF RESULTS 19
REFERENCES 54
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA SHEET 56
-------
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the source test results and visible
emission measurements cited in Background Information for Standards
of Performance: Electric Submerged Arc Furnaces for Production of
Ferroalloys, Volume 1, Proposed Standards. This volume describes
the tested facilities (their operating conditions, characteristics
of the exhaust gas streams, and deviations from prescribed test
procedures) and summarizes the results of the particulate matter and
carbon monoxide tests.
Facilities are identified by the same coding used in Volume 1.
For example, Table 1 summarizes results of the August 1972 tests of
an electric submerged arc furnace producing ferromanganese, Facility
Al. These same results are also plotted as Furnace Al in Figure VI-1
of Volume 1.
Many of the tests summarized herein were conducted using EPA
Reference Method 5 for determination of particulate matter from
stationary sources-. In these cases, additional measurements were
made to evaluate materials that condense and are collected in the
impingers as the gases are cooled. In the summaries, the "probe and
filter catch" is the particulate emission measurement used in the
figures in Volume 1, and is the basis of the standard. The "total
catch" includes the probe and filter catch plus material collected
in the impingers.
Note: Any reference in this report to commercial products by name
does not constitute an endorsement of the product by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
-------
The other known test method used, the Japanese Industrial Standard
test method, does not use impingers.* Particulate matter is collected
on a filter having a collection efficiency of 99 percent. In this sense,
the particulate catch is analogous to the "probe and filter catch" of
EPA Reference Method 5.
*Japanese Industrial Standards Association, "Methods of Measuring
Dust Content in Stack Gas," JIS Z 8808-1970.
-------
Summary of Test Data
i
A program was undertaken by EPA to evaluate the best particulate
matter control techniques available for controlling emissions from electric
submerged arc (ESA) furnaces producing ferroalloys and calcium carbide.
The data obtained serve as the basis for standards of performance for
ferroalloy furnaces being proposed under section 111 of the Clean Air
Act as amended. Fourteen ESA furnaces with air pollution control were
tested using EPA Method 5 for determination of particulate matter. These
data are supported by reported emission data from seven additional electric
submerged arc furnace facilities. Visible emission data were obtained for
two additional ESA furnaces with air pollution control. Additional back-
ground information was available from the EPA-TFA joing study of atmos-
pheric emissions from the ferroalloy industry.
Of the fourteen controlled furnaces tested using Method 5, seven
were open furnaces, two were semi-enclosed, and five were sealed. A variety
of control systems were used on these furnaces. Data reported by ferroalloy
producers represent emissions from wet scrubber or wet scrubber and
electrostatic precipitator control systems.
All data are graphed for visual comparison in Figures 1 through 6.
Description of Facilities
Al. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing ferromanganese,
30 MW design capacity, equipped with two identical, parallel, three-stage
-------
Warkaus venturi systems. Only one of the parallel venturi systems was
operated during this test series. Water flowrate to the venturi was
approximately 225 gallons per minute. Water was not recirculated to the
scrubber. No fan is used for the venturi system. Aspiration of gases
is provided by water injection at the venturi. Average furnace power
input during the test periods was 26 MW. Tested by EPA using Method 5
with the single exception that the probe was not heated.
A2. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing ferromanganese.
This is the same facility as Al except tests were performed with both the
parallel venturi systems operating. Average furnace power input during
the test periods was 27 MW. Tested by EPA using Method 5 with the single
exception that the probe was not heated.
B. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace, producing silicomanganese,
27 MW design capacity, equipped with a venturi type gas conditioner
followed by a series venturi scrubber. The gas conditioning venturi
operated at about two inches of water pressure drop. The second (series)
venturi operated at a pressure drop of approximately 50 inches of water.
River water was used for the scrubbers and was not recirculated. Combined
water flowrate to both Venturis was estimated as 355 gallons per minute.
Average furnace power input during the test periods was 23 MW. Tested
by EPA using Method 5 with the single exception that the probe was not
heated.
C. Semi-enclosed electric submerged arc furnace producing calcium
carbide, 24 MW design capacity, equipped with a Buffalo Forge centrifugal
-------
type scrubber. Scrubber water flowrate was 450 gallons per minute.
Average furnace power input during the test periods was 23.8 MW.
Tested by EPA using Method 5 with the exception that sampling
was performed at only one point (stack center). Fumes emitted from the
annular spaces around the electrodes are captured by secondary hoods and
emitted uncontrolled to the atmosphere. These emissions were measured
using EPA Method 5 except that sampling times were less than
two hours. Tapping fumes are also captured in a hood to be emitted
uncontrolled to the atmosphere. The tapping fumes were measured using
EPA Method 5 except that only one traverse direction was used
and sampling time was less than 2 hours.
D. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing ferromanganese,
25 MW design capacity, equipped with two identical parallel venturi
systems followed by a common series 25,000 kilovolt wet electrostatic
precipitator. One of the two parallel venturi systems is normally
operated while the other is used as a standby system. Each of the
parallel venturi systems consists of a primary and secondary venturi
scrubber in series. Pressure drop across each venturi is approximately
10 inches of water and water flowrate to each venturi is 160 gallons per
minute. Water flowrate to the electrostatic precipitator is 160 gallons
per minute. Tested by the company using the Japanese Industrial Standard
test method.
E. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing ferromanganese.
Average furnace power input is 25 MW. The air pollution control system
consists of six parallel shaft kilns each followed by a series venturi
-------
scrubber which then manifold the gas stream in common to series Thiesen
scrubber followed by a series demister. Pressure drop across each venturi
is approximately 12 inches of water. Tested by the company using the
Japanese Industrial Standard test method.
F. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing silicomanganese.
Average furnace power input is 29 MW. The air pollution control system
and test method are identical to those for furnace E.
G. Closed top electric submerged arc furnace for the production of
45 percent ferrosi1icon. Calculated furnace size is 17 MW.* The air
pollution control system consists of a w6t inclined duct, a scrubber, and
an atomizing pipe with a 3.5 inch diameter throat. Total system water
flowrate is 185 gallons per minute at a system pressure drop of 80 inches
of water. Test method is unknown.
H. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace for the production of 75
percent ferrosilicon. Average furnace power input is 12 MW. The furnace
is equipped with two parallel venturi scrubbers followed by a common
series mist eliminator. Total water flowrate is approximately 500 gallons
per minute and the pressure drop across each venturi is approximately 12
inches of water. Tested by the company using the Japanese Industrial
Standard test method.
*0obryakov, G. G., Serebryakov, M. Z., and Rychkov, V. P., "Operation
of a Gas Cleaning System on a Closed Top Electric Furnace," Steel in the
U.S.S.R., Page 2, May, 1971.
-------
I. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace for the production of
ferrochrome silicon. The furnace is designed for operation at 26 MW,
and is equipped with two series venturi scrubbers followed by a mist
eliminator. Total pressure drop across both venturi scrubbers is approxi-
mately 58 inches of water. Total water flowrate to both venturi
scrubbers is approximately 400 gallons per minute. Tested by the company
using the Japanese Industrial Standard test method.
J. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace for the production of 50
percent ferrosilicon. The furnace is designed for operation at 25 MW,
and is equipped with two series venturi scrubbers followed by a series mist
eliminator and a series wet electrostatic precipitator. Water flowrate to
each venturi and to the electrostatic precipitator is approximately 100
gallons per minute. Pressure drops across the first and second venturi
are approximately 12 and 24 inches of water, respectively. Tested by the
company using the Japanese Industrial Standard test method.
K. Sealed electric submerged arc furnace producing 50 percent
ferrosilicon. The furnace is designed to operate at 42 MW. During
testing, the furnace operated at an average of 31 MW. The air pollution
control system is the same type as for furnace J. Tested by EPA using
Method 5 with the exception that only the filter was heated.
LI. Open electric submerged arc furnace producing silicomanganese.
Furnace load during the tests averaged 25.1 MW. The air pollution con-
trol system consists of a hood and two parallel venturi scrubbers
-------
exhausting to a single stack. Venturi pressure drop was 57 inches water
gauge. Between 1160 and 1260 gallons per minute of scrubber water was
supplied to each scrubber. Tested by EPA using Method 5
except that sampling was done only on one stack diameter and two of 18
traverse points could not be reached by the probe.
L2. The same furnace and test method as in LI above. Scrubber
pressure drop was 47 inches water gauge and average furnace power load was
27.3MW during these tests.
L3. The same furnace and test method as in LI and L2 above.
Scrubber pressure drop was 37 inches water gauge and average furnace
power load was 27.5 MW during these tests.
M. Open 17MW, Packet-type electric submerged arc furnace producing
silicon metal. The air pollution control system consists of three
parallel open pressure baghouses having monitor discharges. Samples were
collected using four EPAMethod 5 particulate trains operated simul-
taneously, each measuring emissions from 1/4 of the baghouse monitor area.
Three of these areas were sampled at 6 "traverse" points, while the fourth
was only sampled at 2 "traverse" points because of unavailability of a
longer probe. Sampling was not isokinetic. Because of a leak in one bag
in one compartment, test results for the train .using only two traverse
points were high and were omitted. Each baghouse has open grates at
the tube sheet level to allow ambient air to circulate and cool the bags.
Air thermally induced through these grates was measured in every other
compartment of all three baghouses using rotary vane anemometers, and
-------
total induced air flow was estimated. Total inlet gas flow from the
furnace to the three baghouses was also measured. Five percent of the
total inlet gas flow was found to result from leakage of fume from a second
silicon furnace past a closed damper into the control system. Particulate matter
emissions for each run were obtained as the product of the average grain
loading resulting from emissions from the one baghouse and the total gas
flow to the three baghouses.
N. Open, 7-9 MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc silicoman-
ganese furnace. Furnace load during the tests was 7.2 MW. The air pollution
control system consists of a furnace hood, a tapping hood having an esti-
mated capture efficiency of 20 percent, and an Aeronetics scrubber. Fume
from both the furnace and tapping hood is discharged through the scrubber.
Scrubbing water was supplied at 82 gallons per minute. Tested by EPA
using Method 5 except that only 24 traverse points were
used instead of 36 as called for by standard criteria.
0. Open 36MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc furnace
producing 75 percent ferrosilicon. Uuring testing, the furnace load
averaged 22.3MW . The air pollution control system consists of a hood,
settling chamber, and closed pressure bag filter with three stacks. Tested
by EPA using Method 5 except that the probe and filter were not
heated. Sampling was performed on one stack only, and air flows were
measured on the other two stacks. Total emissions were calculated as
the product of particulate concentrations as determined on one stack and
total air flow to the baghouse.
-------
P. Semi-enclosed, 40-50 MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc
furnace producing 50 percent ferrosilicon. Average furnace load during
the tests was 46.5 MW. Air pollution control is achieved using two
parallel venturi scrubbers operating at pressure drops of 70-80 inches
water gauge. Water flow rates are 302 gallons per minute and 422 gallons
per minute to the two scrubbers, respectively. Both scrubbers exhaust
to a common stack where the gas is flared. Tested by EPA using
Method 5 except that the probe and filter were not heated and separate
test trains were used for traverses along each of the two axes. Fumes
emitted through the annular spaces around the electrodes are captured by
a secondary hood and passed directly to the atmosphere. These fumes
were measured using EPA Method 5. Tapping fumes are also
caught in a hood to be emitted uncontrolled to the 'atmosphere. The tapping
fumes were measured using EPA Method 5 except that only one
traverse direction was used. Tests of the fumes emitted through the
annular spaces around the electrodes and from tapping were conducted
about 5 months before tests of the emissions from the venturi scrubbers'
exhaust stack.
Q. Open electric submerged arc furnace producing ferrochrome
silicon. The furnace load was 20 MW during the tests. Air pollution
control is by a hood, spark arrestor, indirect air cooler, and an open
pressure baghouse with a monitor discharge. Tested by EPA using
Method 5 except that sampling was not isokinetic, and samples
were obtained simultaneously by three trains, each evenly spaced along
the length of the monitor and each sampling at one point throughout the
test.
10
-------
R. Sealed, 26 MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc furnace
producing ferrochrome silicon. During tests, the average furnace load
was 18.6 MW. Two venturi scrubbers and a wet cyclone in series provide
air pollution control. Venturi pressure drops are about 8 and 80 inches
water gauge, respectively for the first and second Venturis. Tested by
EPA using Method 5 except that the probe was not heated,
the filter was heated only during runs 2 and 3, and it was necessary to
split the test train by fastening the filter holder to the end of the
probe and connecting the filter to the impingers with a flexible tube.
S. Sealed, electric submerged arc furnace producing high carbon
ferrochrome. The average furnace load during the tests was 18.0 MW. A
closed suction baghouse and flare are used for air pollution control.
Tested using EPA Method 5 except that the probe and filter
were not heated.
T. Open, 40 MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc furnace
producing high carbon ferrochrome. The average furnace load during the
tests was 32.7 MW. The air pollution control system consists of a
furnace hood, a separate tapping hood having an estimated collection
efficiency of 80 percent, a gas conditioning tower, and a 78,000 volt
electrostatic precipitator. Fume from both the furnace and tapping
hood is discharged through the precipitator. Tested by EPA using
Method 5.
U. Tightly hooded open furnace producing high carbon ferrochrome.
During tests, the furnace power load averaged 15.0 MW. The air pollution
11
-------
control system consists of the furnace hood, an efficient tapping hood,
and a closed pressure bag filter with three stacks. Fume from both the
furnace and the tapping hood are exhausted to the bag filter. Tested
by EPA using Method 5. Sampling was performed on one
stack only, and air flows were measured on the other two stacks. Total
emissions were calculated as the product of particulate concentration as
measured on one stack and total air flow through all three stacks.
V. Open, 20MW nominal capacity electric submerged arc furnace
producing silicomanganese. Only visible emission readings were obtained
at this facility. The average furnace load during the readings was about
18 MW- The flir pollution control system consists of a hood, a separate
tapping hood, and an open pressure baghouse having a monitor discharge.
Fume from both the furnace and tapping hood is discharged through the
baghouse.
W. Open, 19 to 21 MW electric submerged arc furnace producing silicon
metal. Only visible emission readings were obtained at this facility.
The average furnace load during the readings was about 19.BMW- The air
pollution control system consists of a hood, a separate tapping hood,
a set of hairpin gas coolers, and an open pressure baghouse having a
monitor discharge. Fume from the tapping hood is discharged beneath the
furnace hood where it is captured and conducted to the baghouse with the
rest of the fume.
12
-------
0.05
0.04
1 1
1 1
1 1
" 1 1
1 1
TT ^
(} j i
o h-ri
I-J 1 , ^vrf\ I
Is ifi VV hr
1 ' C H-J-I tJ
C
O
? i i ? i
1
EPA
KEY
A MAXIMUM
"i DATA POINT
IrH AVERAGE
1
u MINIMUM
c DATA POINT
0 COMPANY
DATA
1
O
C
i
1
i
HCH
i
i
O
\
Iri °
0
o
A1A2DEBFSR KG.
1
\J V(l) V-P V V V B V V V-P V V-P
30 - 30 26 25 j 27 32 j 17.4 | 18 26 42 17 28
FeMn SiMn H.C.
FeCr
FeCrSi
50%
FeSi
_J
H V- VENTURI SCRUBBER
w V-P- VENTURI SCRUBBER
., AND ELECTROSTATIC
u PRECIPITATOR
FeSi B-BAGHOUSE
(1) 2 PARALLEL VENTURIS
Figure 1. Paniculate concentrations in control system exhaust from sealed electric submerged-arc furnaces producing ferroalloys.
-------
0.06
0.05
a 0.04
0.03
0,02
0.01
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
FURNACE SIZE, Mw
_
_ h
l*
I
i-*
!«
fa
1
H
R
i '
i i
1 i V
i
^
v
o
i i
-------
ICENTRATION,
;f
o *"
_j
o
cc
Q_
FURW
2UIPME
.SIZE,
PRODI
u.iu
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
kCE
1 1
- KEY -
EPA
^ MAXIMUM -
"i DATA POINT
_ HT! AVERAGE _
! i MINIMUM
9 DATA POINT
I ^
*
! i
ftfv
mmftft I__^^LJ ^»«
II
II
w
1 1
C P
:NT s v V-VENTI
Mw 24 40 s ~ THIES
CT CaCz 50% FeSi
Figure 3. Participate concentrations in control system exhaust from semi-enclosed electric
submerged-arc furnaces producing ferroalloys.
-------
U.iU
0.09
0.08
z
o
8 0.06
LLJ.C
£1 0.05
p 0.04
QC
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
FURNACE
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
1 1
*
KEY
EPA
A MAXIMUM
"i DATA POINT
H-rl AVERAGE
u MINIMUM
9 DATA POINT
__
- &
_ 'c1
1 1
c (1) p (2)
s y V- VENTURI SCRUBBER
FURNACE SIZE, Mw 24 40 S - THIESEN SCRUBBER
PRODUCT CaC2 50% FeSi
(1) DOES NOT INCLUDE 48.2 Ib/hr UNCONTROLLED FUGITIVE FUMES FROM AROUND THE ELECTRODES.
(2) DOES NOT INCLUDE 388 Ib/hr UNCONTROLLED FUGITIVE FUMES FROM AROUND THE ELECTRODES.
Figure 4. Participate emissions (excluding tapping fumes and fugitive fumes) from semi-enclosed
electric submerged-arc furnaces producing ferroalloys.
16
-------
U.1U
0.09
0,08
\
*" >|
£ 0.05
cc
h-
LU
2 "-
0 S
£!~°'04
<
j
o
p
£ 0.03
0.02
0.01
0
FURNA
CONTROL EQUIPME
FURNACE SIZE,
PRODU
' '
t-
Cj
P
D
C
^
^
1 II 1
i
i
f\
\ KEY _
\ EPA
; ft MAXIMUM
ii DATA POINT
; Hrl AVERAGE
? LJ MINIMUM
* DATA POINT
i '
\
i
i
1 (1) CORRECTED FOR DILUTION AIR THERMALLY
; INDUCED THROUGH THE OPEN BAGHOUSES.
^ (2)AP = 57in. W.G. _
(3) A P = 47 in. W.G.
(4)AP = 37 in. W.G.
C ~~
1 t
1
^T 4 DATA ~~
,. W POINTS
T ' C
.
- JL * 6 -
5 DATA *Tf
POINTS C fc
CE LI L2 L3 NT U Q(1) 0 M (1) V- VENTURI SCRUBBER
NT V(2) V(3) V(4) V P B B B B P - ELECTROSTATIC
Mw 27 27 27 7 40 18 20 27 17 B BAg5oM[PE'TAT°R
CT SiMn 1 H.C. 1 FeCrSi 75% 1 Si
FeCr FeSi
Figure 5. Particulate concentrations in control system exhaust from open electric submerged-arc
furnaces producing ferroalloys.
17
-------
3.0
2.5
2.0
i.o
0.5
FURNACE
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
FURNACE SIZE, Mw
PRODUCT
II 1 1 I 1
>,
~~ ^
0 &
~ !i !
0
o;
J ft
5 DATA
POINTS
i i i I i ^
E LI L2 L3 N(D T(D U(D
F V(2) V(3) V(4) V P B
» 27 27 27 7 40 18
f SiMn 1 H.C. I
FeCr
~
p
o o
tt
ID'
1 1 !
Q 0 M
a B B V- VENTURI SCRUBBER
« p- ELECTROSTATIC
20 27 PRECIPITATOR
FeCrSi | 75% 1 Si B- BAGHOUSE
FeSi
Figure 6. Particulate emissions from open electr ic submerged-arc furnaces producing ferroalloys.
18
-------
fable 1
FACILITY Al
Sunmary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol .
C02 - Vol . % dry
02 - Vol . % dry
CO - Vol . % dry
N? and other gases
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at
system discharge -
Particulate Emissions
1
8/16/72
288
26
5121
85
% 2.36
42.9
0.29
56.2
_
control °-<10
% opacity
2
8/16/72
288
27
5463
85
2.90
42.0
0.6
57.4
--
0-<10
3
8/17/7.2
288
27
5377
85
3.13
39.6
o.e
59.8
--
0
4
8/17/72
288
26
5394
85
3.04
41.1
0.6
58.3
--
0
5
8/18/72
288
26
5121
79.3
3.03
42.6
0.8
56.6
0
6
8/18/72
324
27
5453
81.4
3.12
40.5
0.5
59.0
--
0
Averac
--
294
26
5322
83.4
2.93
41.4
0.6
57.9
--
<10
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.023
0.023
1.03
0.040
0.025
0.025
i.n
0.042
0.037
O.Q3C
1.73
0.064
0.039
0.038
1.83
0.068
0.015
0.008
0.70
0.026
0.017
0.009
0.76
0.028
0.011
0.011
0.51
0.020
0.012
0.012
0.57
0.021
0.013
0.013
0.59
0.023
0.015
0.014
0.65
0.025
0.008
0.008
0.40
0.015
0.010
0.009
0.46,
0.017
0.013
0.016
0.83
0.031
0.020
0.018
0.90
0.034
Reference 1.
19
-------
Tab] e2
FACILITY A2
Summary of Results
Run Number 1 2 Average
Date 8/20/72 8/21/72
Test Time-minutes 327 294 310
Average Power Input- 27 27 27
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 5653 5464 5559
Temperature - °F 87 83 85
Water vapor - Vol. % 2.30 2.22 2.26
C02 - Vol. % dry 38.4 38.2 38.3
02 - Vol. % dry 1.1 l.o 1.0
CO - Vol. % dry 60.6 60.8 60.7
N~ and other gases -
c Vol. X. dry
Visible emissions at control 0 00
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF Oi022 0.010(1^ 0.016
gr/ACF 0.016(1) °-010 0.013(1)
Ib/hr 0.79 0.49 0.64
Ib/Mw-hr 0.029 0.018 0.024
Total catch
gr/DSCF 0.017^ 0.011^ 0.014^
gr/ACF 0.017 0.011 0.014
Ib/hr 0.84 0.51 0.68
Ib/Mw-hr 0.031 0.019 0.025
(1) Two stacks sampled simultaneously. -These numbers are weighted to correct
for unequal flows in each system.
Reference T.
20
-------
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol.
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N« and other gases -
Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control o
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
8/23/72
32°
23
2339
107.2
2.62
13.-4
0.4
86.2
Table 3
FACILITY B
Summary of Results
2 3 Average
8/23/72 8/24/72
320 320 320
22.5 23 23
2488 2425 2417
H7.8 108.1 m.O
2.65 2.63 2.65
13.2 13.3 13.3
0.4 0.9 0.6
86.4 85.8 86.1
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
lb/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.011
0.010
0.23
0.010
0.012
0.012
0.25
0.011
0.008
0.007
0.17
0.008
0.009
0.008
0.19
0.008
0.011
0.011
0.23
0.010
0.012
0.011
0.26
o.on
0.010
0.009
0.21
0.009
0.011
0.010
0.23
0.010
Reference 1-
21
-------
fable 4
FACILITY C
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N2 and other gases - Vol %
dry
Visible emissions at control 0
system discharge % opacity
Partlculate Emissions^)
1
2/23/72
60
24.0
1585
100
1;83
--
il 0
2
2/24/72
60
23.8
1585
100
1.28
0
3
2/24/72
60
23.5
1585
100
0.98
--
__
0
Average
--
60
23.8
1585
100
1.36
1.5
6.0
27.5^)
0
Probe and filter catch
gr/OSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/OSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.040
0.037
0.533
0.022
0.0425
0.0449
0.577
0.024
0.020
0.019
0.266
0.011
0.0311
0.0328
0.423
0.018
0.031
0.029
0.413
0.018
0.0342
0.0361
0.464
0.020
0.030
0.028
0.404
0.017
0.0359
0.0379
0.488
0.021
(1) Estimated. Carbon monoxide concentrations were higher than could be
measured using the Orsat analyzer.
(2) Uncontrolled emissions at the electrode averaged 48.2 Ib/hr.
Reference 2.
22
-------
Table 5
FACILITY D
Seminary of Results
Kun Number "I
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input- 26
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 3500
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry 50
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry 40-44
N9 and other gases - 6-10
c Vol. %. dry" ' /
Visible emissions at control °
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF 0.002
gr/ACF
Ib/hr 0.055
Ib/Mw-hr 0.002
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
(1) Hydrogen content of the gas is 3 to 4-percent.
Reference 3.
23
-------
Table 6
FACILITY E
Sunmary of Results
Run Number ^
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input- 25
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 350°
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N9 and other gases -
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control °
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF °-005
gr/ACF
Ib/hr O-150
Ib/Mw-hr °-006
Total catch
*
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Reference 3.
24
-------
Table 7
FACILITY F
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
29
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
2900
C02 - Vol. % dry 20
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol .
C02 - Vol. % dr
02 - Vol. % dry -
CO - Vol. % dry 75
N~ and other gases - 4
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control ^
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF °-°°2
gr/ACF
Ib/hr °-050
Ib/Mw-hr °-002
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Reference 3.
25
-------
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input- ^
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 130°
Temperature - °F 86
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry 80-97
N~ and other gases -
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF °-009
gr/ACF
Ib/hr O-100
Ib/Mw-hr °-006
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Table 8
FACILITY G
Summary of Results
I
Reference 4,
26
-------
Table 9
FACILITY H
Summary of Results
Run Number "I
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input- 12
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 112°
Temperature - F
Water vapor - Vol . %
C02 - Vol. % dry K3
02 - Vol . % dry 1 -°
CO - Vol. % dry 79.5
N? and other ases - 9. 2
* Vol. %
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF °-035
gr/ACF
Ib/hr °-336
Ib/Mw-hr °-028
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
lb/Mw-h.p
"(T)~ Gas is 1.7 percent methane and hydrocarbons.
Reference 3.
27
-------
Table 10
FACILITY I
Summary of Result^
Run Number 1
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts 26
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 2900
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry 3
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry 85
N« and other gases -
£ Vol. % dry 07
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Partial late Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF 0.011
gr/ACF
Ib/hr 0.272
Ib/Mw-hr 0.010
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF . ~
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
(1) Gas is 8 percent hydrogen.
Reference 3.
28
-------
Table 11
FACILITY J
Summary of Results
Run Number '
Date
Test Time-minutes
Ayerage Power Input- . 25
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM 7000
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry 13
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry 73
N9 and other gases -
c Vol. % dry (1)
Visible emissions at control 0
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF 0.005.
gr/ACF
Ib/hr 0.300
Ib/Mw-hr 0.012
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
(1) Gas is 6 percent hydrogen.
Reference 3.
29
-------
Table 12
FACILITY K
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N9 and other gases -
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Prooe and "filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
1
10/18/73
315
30.7
5130
173
24.3
7.0
0.0
93.0
0.0018
0.0012
0.08
0.0025
0.111
0.074
4.88
0.159
2
10/19/73
360
29.8.
5084
146
23.0
7.2
0.2
92.6
0
0.0023
0.0016
0.10
0.0034
0.094
0.066
4.07
0.137
3
10/20/73
360
32.4
5060
151
17.3
8.5
0.3
91.2
0
0.0013
0.0010
0.06
0.0019
0.111
0.084
4.81
0.148
Average
345
31.0
5091
157
21.5
7.6
0.2
92.3
0.0018
0.0013
0.08
0.0026
0.105
0.075
4.59
0.148
Reference b.
30
-------
Table 13
(0(2)
FACILITY LI
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
" megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol .
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N? and other gases
* Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at
system discharge -
Participate Emissions
1
7/27/71
80
29
113,000
140
% 18.5
2.1
19.2
78.7
control - -
% opacity
(3)
2
7/29/71
80
25
112,200
140
15.4
3.4
18.3
--
78.3
*
3
7/30/71
80
20
122,100
118
12.9
1.9
18.6
--
79.5
*.
4
7/31/71
95
24
116,900
139
15.8
2.8
18.8
--
78.4
_ _
5
7/31/71
90
27.5
110,200
140
17.2
3.3
18.4
--
78.3
_ _
Average
--
85
25.1
114,860
135
16.0
2.7
18.7
--
78.6
_ _
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.0103
0.00728
9.97
0.34
0.0166
0.0117
16.1
0.56
0.00710
0.00520
6.83
0.27
0.0110
0.00805
10.5
0.42
0.0107
0.00839
11.2
0.56
0.0122
0.00956
12.8
0.64
0.00813
0.00594
8.14
0.34
0.00967
0.00706
9.68
0.40
0.00889
0.00902
0.00684 0.00673
8.39
0.31
0.0105
0.00807
9.91
0.36
8.91
0.36
0.0120
0.00889
11.8
0.48
(1) Sampling was performed along one axis only.
(2) Scrubber pressure drop of 57 inches W.G.
(3) Does not include uncontrolled -tapping fumes which are 19 to 48 Ib/hr during
tapping.
Reference 6.
31
-------
Table 14
(D(2)
118,100
135
16.1
3.0
18.6
115,000
127
18.2
3.2
18.6
121,100
134
15.3
3.4
18.5
118,070
132
16.5
3.2
18.6
FACILITY L2
Summary of Results
Run Number 12 3 Average
Date 8/1/71 8/2/71 8/2/71
Test Time-minutes 90 90 90 90
.Average Power Input- 27.5 27.0 27.5 27,3
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
Hy and other gases - 78.4 78.2 78.1 78.2
Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Partjculate Emissions ^'
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
(1) Same as facility LI except the scrubber pressure drop was only 47 inches w.g.
(2) Sampling was performed along one axis only.
(3) Does not include uncontrolled tapping fumes which are 19 to 48 Ib/hr during
tapping.
Reference 6.
0.0150 .
0.0111
15.2
0.55
0.0180
0.0132
17.7
0.66
0.0114
0.00831
11.8
0.43
0.0148
0.0109
14.9
0.55
0.0170
0.0126
17.2
0.63
0.0197
0.0144
19.4
0.72
0.0131
0.00955
13.6
0.49
0.0166
0.0122
16.7
0.61
32
-------
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
CO 2 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N? and other gases -
* Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions^'
Profae and "filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Table 15
FACILITY L
Summary of Results
1
8/3/71
90
28.0
2
8/3/71
90
27.0
3
8/4/71
90
27.5
78.0
78.2
78.2
Average
90
27.5
114,300
130
17.6
3.2
18.8
112,000
133
16.7
3.2
18.6
103,200
132
17.6
3.1
18.7
109,830
132
17.3
3.2
18.7
78.1
0.0138
0.0100
3.5
0.48
0.0369
0.0270
35.4
1.31
0.0798
0.0576
70.6
2.57
0.0435
0.0315
39.8
1.45
0.0144
0.0104
14.1
0.50
0.0445
0.0326
42.7
1.58
0.0849
0.0613
75.1
2.73
0.0479
0.0348
44.0
1.60
(1) Same as facilities LI and L2 except the scrubber pressure drop was only 37
inches w.g.
(2) Sampling was performed along one axis only.
(3) Does not include uncontrolled tapping fumes which are 19 to 48 Ib/hr
during tapping.
Reference 6.
33
-------
Table 16
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input -
Megawatts
Stack Effluent
FACILITY M
Summary of Results
1
1/17/72
367
17
,(1)
581,150
180
0
Flow rate - USCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol
C02 - Vol.X dry
02 - Vol.* dry
CO - Vol.35 dry
N? and other gases -
^ Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - %
opacity 0
12}
Pajrt leu late Emissions^ '
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF 0.0025
gr/ACF 0.0021
Ib/hr 12.5
Ib/Mw-hr 0.735
Total catch
gr/USCF 0.0032
gr/ACF 0.0026
Ib/hr 16.3
Ib/Mw-hr 0.959
2
1/18/72
360
17
631,550
220
0
-
-
-
0
0.0018
0.0014
9.75
0.574
0.0039
O.OQ30
21.1
1.24
3
1/20/72
292
17
619,550
200
0.37
0.2
20.7
79.1
0
0.0017
0.0016
9.03
0.531
0.0046
0.0037
24.4
1.44
Average
-
340
17
610,750
200
0.12
-
-
-
0
0.0020
0.0017
10.4
0.613
0.0039
0.0031
20.6
1.21
(1) Total flow from all three baghouses including cooling air induced through open
grates surrounding the tube sheets.
(2) Does not include uncontrolled tapping fume.
Reference 7.
34
-------
Table 17
. FACILITY N
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N9 and other gases -
.Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
1
2/1/72
138
7.2
16,390
137
10.3
4.3
16.9
78.8
trol 0
2
2/2/72
108
7.2
15,500
131
15.5
4.0
17.2
78.8
0
3
2/2/72
103
7.2
15,500
131
15.5
4.0
17.2
78.8
0
Averag
--
116
7.2
-.15,960
133
13.8
4.1
17.1
78.8
0
Probe and filter
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
catch
0.0403
0.0340
5.83
0.81
0.0489
0.0386
7.08
0.98
0.0932
0,0701
12.38
1.7
0.101
0.0759
13.42
1.9
0.102
0.0767
13.55
1.9
0.107
0.0804
14.21
2.0
0.0785
0.0603
10.59
1.5
0.0856
0.0650
11.57
1.6
0) Partial control of tapping fume exists. Results include the controlled
tap fume. Estimated capture efficiency of the tapping hood is
20 percent.
Reference 8.
35
-------
Table 18
FACILITY 0 , .
Summary of Results '
Run Number 1 ^ '
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N~ and other gases -
£ Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control <_ 15
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
Average
10/11/73
108
23.0
10/11/73
108
22.9
10/12/73
144
22.8
10/12/73
144
21.3
10/12/73
144
21.5
130
22. .3
(3)
(4)
%
mt
162713
359
1.7
1.6
19.7
0.0
78.7
164749
367
2.2
1.6
19.7
0.0
78.7
153126
388
1.9
\7
19.9
0.0
78.4
147235
389
2.0
1.7
19.9
0.0
78.4
148710
393
1.9
1.7
19.9
0.0
78.4
157886
379
1.9
1.7
19.8
0.0
78.5
15
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.01712 0.01724
0.01098 0.01089
25.44 24.34
1.11 1.06
0.03090 0.02993
0.01982 0.01891
43.09 42.26
1.87 1.85
(1) One stack of three on the baghouse was
other two.
(2) Did not
include a complete tap.
0. 01724
0. -01 065
22.62
0.99
0.02469
0.01524
32.40
1.42
sampled
0.01570
0.00967
19.81
0.93
0.02528
0.01557
31.90
1.50
0.01724
0.01058
21.97
1.02
0.02374
0.01458
30.26
1.41
. Gas flow rates were
0.01691
0.01055
22.84
1.02
0.02691
0.01682
35.98
1.61
measured on the
(3) Total from baghouse.-
(4) Of stack
(5) Does not
sampled.
include uncontrolled tap fumes
. Mass
emissions
were calculated as the
product of the concentration measured on one stack and the total gas flow.
Reference 9.
36
-------
Table 19
FACILITY 0
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS^1'
Date: 10/11/73
Type of Plant: Submerged arc 75% ferrosilicon furnace
Type of Discharge: 3 stacks Distance from Observer to Discharge Point: ^ 200 ft
Location of Discharge: Baghouse Height of Observation Point: Ground level (
Height of Point of Discharge: ^ 100 ft Direction of Observer from Discharge Point: Southwest
Description of Background: Sky
Description of Sky: Clear with occasional clouds.
Wind Direction: From Southeast
Color of Plume: White
Interference of Steam Plume: None
Duration of Observation: 1 "" 48 min.
Wind Velocity:
Detached Plume:
0 to 10
No
mi/hr
Sunmary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
(2)
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
Min.
106
14
1
0
Sec,
0
0
0
0
Opacity,
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
80
35
90
95
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Ooacitv
Min.
Sec.
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
20
15
in
jl
_L
J_
_L
J_
o
10
20
30
40
50
80
90
100
no
60 70
TIME, minutes
(1) Observer not qualified.
(2) Tha highest reading from the 3 stacks is reported. Observations were made concurrently
with Run Number 2, Table 18.
Reference 9.
37
-------
Table 20
FACILITY P
Summary of Results
1
7/19/72
60
. 46.
7307
152
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - F
Water vapor - Vol. %
% dry
a dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N7 and other gases -
" Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control --
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions
(2)
(2)
C02 - Vol.
02 - Vol. <
Probe and 'filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.0573
0.0468
,(2)
(2)
(2)
3.60V
0.0783
0.0679
0.0555
4.25
0.0924
(2)
(2)
(2)
)
(2)
7/19/72
60
47 .
7258
149
.6.38^'
2.00
1.20
96.8
6.69
2.80
2.00
95.2
(2)
(2)
(2)
0.0580
(2)
0.0475
, Cn(2)
(2)
0.0766
0.0695
0.0568
4.35
0.0926
(2)
(2)
(2)
)
(2)
Average
60
46.5
7283
151
6.54
2.40
1.60
96.0
0.0577
0.472
3.60
0.0775
0.0687
0.0562
4.30
0.0925
(1) Exluding tapping emissions and fugitive emissions from the electrode holes
which averaged 388 Ib/hr (probe and filter catch) during a previous test of this
facility.
(2) Two test trains, one on each traverse, were 'used. Values are averages of
measurements obtained by each test train.
References 2 and 10,
38
-------
Tabld 21
FACILITY Q(1^
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
.Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
1
8/31/71
120
20
2
9/1/71
120
20
(2)
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N? and other gases -
* Vol. % dry
(3)
383,000
165
1.03
0.5
20.6
383,000
175
0.527
0.5
20.6
78.9
Visible emissions at control -/
system discharge - % opacity
Participate Emissions
T4)
Probe and filter catch
lb/hr(5>
"Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
-(3)
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
(3)
(5)
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
(1)
0,0033
0.0028
n
0.55
0.0115
0.0095
37.9
1.9
78.9
0,0029
0.0024
9.4
0.47
0.0099
0.0082
32.5
1.6
3
9/1/71
180
20
383,000
176
0.403
0.5
20.6
78.9
0.0018
0.0014
5.8
0.29
0.0055
0.0045
18.1
0.91
Average
140
20
383,000
172
0.653
0.5
20.6
78.9
0
0.0027
0.0022
8.7
0.44
0.0090
0.0074
29.5
1.5
Testing was not isokinetic and was conducted simultaneously by three trains each at
a single point in the baghouse monitor. "Results do not include uncontrolled tap
fumes.
(2) Obtained as sum of inlet air flow rate and induced baghouse cooling air measured with
a vane anemometer.
(3) Average of measurements of three trains at three points in the baghouse monitor.
(4) Visible emission readings were obtained on February 20, 1974 for 4 hours.
(5) Based on average grain loading and total air flow at the baghouse exhaust.
Reference 11.
39
-------
Table 22
FACILITY Q
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
(1)
Date: 2/20/74
Type of Plant: Submerged Arc Ferrochrome Silicon Furnace
Type of Discharge: Monitor Distance from Observer to Discharge Point: -v 300 ft
Location of Discharge: Top of baghouse Height of Observation Point: Ground level
Height of Point of Discharge: " 60 ft Direction of Observer from Discharge Point: East
Description cf Background: Sky
Description of Sky: Overcast with some periods of clear sky especially near the end of the
observations.
Wind Direction: From West and Northwest
Color of Plume: -
Interference of Steam Plume: None
Duration of Observation: 4 hours
Summary of Data:
Wind Velocity: -v 10
Detached Plume: No
mi/hr
Skett
I
o
&
t
S
cu
o
Opacity, Total Time Equal to or Greater Opacity, Total Time Equal to or Greater
Percent Than Given Opacity Percent Than Given Opacity
' Mln. Sec. Kin. Sec.
5 Emissions were 0 percent opacity
10 throughout the observation period. ,.
!« 70
20 75
25 80
30 85
35 90
12 95
S 100
:h Showina How Ooac1t.y Varied Mttfc Tine:
I I I I
I I I
1 2
TIME, hours
(1) Two observers made simultaneous readings.
References 12 and 13.
-------
Table 23
FACILITY R
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N? and other gases -
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - '% opacity
Particulate Emissions
1
10/4/73
240
18.1
1675
78
5.1
0.9
0.2
98.9
2
10/4/73
240
.18.2
1925
102
5.5
0.9
0.2
98.9
3
10/5/73
240
19.5
2028
92
4.6
3.1
0.6
96.3
Avera<
--
240
18.6
1876
91
5.1
1.6
0.3
98.0
Probe and 'filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.01041
0.00977
0.15
0.00826
0.01063
0.00998
0.15
0.00843
0.01132
0.010.13
9.19
0.01026
0.01248
O.OU18
0.21
0.01131
0.01051
0.00966
0.18
0.00937
0.01124
0.01034
0.20
0.01002
0.01075
0.00985
0.17
0.00930
0.01145
0.01050
0.19
0.00992
Reference 14.
-------
Uate:
Type of Plant:
Type of Jischarge:
Location of discnarge:
scruDoer
rieignt of Point of Jischarge: 'I25 ft.
Jescription of Background: Sky
Table 24
FACILITY R
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
10/3/73 through 10/6/73
Sealed, Submerged Arc Ferrochrome Silicon Furnace
Flare Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Stack,. Exhaust from Height of Observation Point:
30 to 80 ft.
-125 ft.
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point: --
Description of Sky:
Wind Jirection:
Color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plun*:
Duration of Observation:
Overcast except on
10/6/73 when it was clear
Generally from ijorth
Wind Velocity:
Detached Plume:
4.5 to 13 mi/nr
Ho
1 hour on each day, 4 hours total.
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
Hin.
Sec.
Emissions were 0 percent
opacity throughout the
observation periods.
Summary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
6
U
16
20
25
30
36
40
46
50
Sketcn Showing How Jpacity Varied With Time:
Opacity,
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
Min.
Sec.
-fr
10/3/73
1 " 0 1 0 1
10/4/73 10/5/73 10/5/73
TIME, hours
Reference 14.
42
-------
Table 25
FACILITY S
Surmiary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol .
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol . % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N7 and other gases
c Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at
system discharge -
Participate Emissions
1
10/4/73
240
17.2-
2169
92
% .5-2
1.5
0.5
98.0
-
control 0
% opacity
2
10/5/73
240
16.8
2231
275
0.0
2.4
0.2.
97.4
""
0
3
10/8/73
240
18.0
»
2037
114
10.7
2.0
0.5
97.5
~
0
4
10/8/73
240
18.4
2532
123
10.1
2.8
0.3
96.9
0
5
10/9/73
240
19.5
2689
119
6.8
3.3
0.3
96.4
""
0
Avera
...
O f; : 1
C-T /
18..0
2332
145
6.6
2 A
0.4
97.2
~ ~
g
Probe and 'filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
0.0166
0.0153
0.31
0.0180
0.0189
0.0173
0.35
0.0204
0.0448
0.0325
0.86
0.0510
0.0514
0.0373
0.98
0.0585
0.0354
0.0293
0.62
0.0344
0.0383
0.0317
0.67
0.0371
0.0311
0.0256
0.68
0.0367
0.0334
0.0274
0.73
0.0394
0.0316
0.0274
0.73
0.0374
0.0365
0.0315
0.84
0.0431
0.0319
0.0260
0.54
0.0355
0.0357
0.0290
0.7"!
0,0397
Reference 15.
43
-------
Table 26
FACILITY S
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
uate:
Type of Plant:
Type of Uischarge:
Location of uiscnarge: Stack, Exhaust From
Sagfiouse
Height of Point of iJisciiarge: -100 ft.
Description of background:
1U/8/73 - 10/9/73
Sealed, Submerged Arc High Carbon Ferrochrome Furnace
Flare Distance form Observer to discharge Point:
Height of Observation Point:
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
Sky
150 ft & 90 ft.
(2 locations)
Ground level
Northwest
inscription of Sky:
Wind direction:
color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plume:
Duration of joservation:
lO/b/73 - Overcast
lu/9/73 - Clear
Varied
iJone
Wind Velocity: 0 to 2 mi/hr
Detached Plume: Visible emissions were read at the tip
of the flame.
lu/8/73 - 12:40 p.m. to 12:52 p.m. and 2:13 p.m. to 2:25 p.n, (24 minutes)
10/9/73 - 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (3 hr. 30 min.)
Total Time tqual to or Greater
Than Si yen Opacity
liin.
Sec.
Emissions were u percent opacity
throughout the observation
periods.
Summary of Data.
u^aci ty,
Percent
5
lu
lo
20
2b
30
33
40
t3
SI)
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied Witn lime:
Opacity,
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
60
85
90
95
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
0 1
101,73
Min.
Sec.
2 3
10/9/73
TIME, hours
CD,
(2)
Ooserver not qualified.
Keauings were made concurrently with quantitative emission measurements. See Table 25.
Reference 15.
44
-------
Table 27
FACILITY T
Summary of Results
Run Number
Date
Test Time-minutes
Average Power Input-
" megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM
Temperature - °F
Water vapor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol . % dry
CO - Vol. % dry
N7 and other gases -
£ Vol. % dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Parf-im late Fmi en' «««>'
1
9/21/71
360
32.2
148,400
219
8.4
1.6
20.2
78.2
<5
2
9/22/71
360
33.4
159,000
217
9.5
2.4
19.8
77.8
<20
3
9/23/71
360
32.5
161,000
215
8.9
2.2
19.4
78.4
<20
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
Total catch
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/Mw-hr
1.22
0.47
0.53
Average
360
32.7
156,130
217
8.9
2.1
19.8
78.1
<20
0.0286
0.0207
36.3
1.13
0.00916
0.00656
12.5
0.37
0.01032
0.00748
14.2
0.44
0.0160
0.0116
21.0
0.65
0.0310
0.0224
39.4
0.0115
0.00824
15.7
0.01247
0.00904
17.2
0.0183
0.0132
24.1
0.74
(1) Partial collection of.tap fumes exists. Collected tap fume is added to the
furnace gas and is controlled by the same control device as the furnace
gas.
(2) Based on one five minute period of observation during run 1.
Reference 16
45
-------
Table 28
FACILITY U
Sumnary of Results
(1)
Run Number 1
Date 10/10/73
Test Time-minutes 300
.Ayerage Power Input- 14.9
megawatts
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM(2) 62540
Temperature - °F(3) 489
Water vapor - Vol. % 2.3
C02 - Vol. % dry 3.0
02 - Vol. X dry 19.9
CO - Vol. % dry
N? and other gases - 77.1
c Vol. X dry
Visible emissions at control
system discharge - % opacity
Particulate Emissions ^
Probe and filter catch
gr/DSCF 0.00126
gr/ACF 0.00069
Ib/hr 0.675
Ib/Mw-hr 0.0453
Total catch
gr/DSCF 0.00552
gr/ACF 0.00303
Ib/hr 2.73
Ib/Mw-hr 0.183
(1) One stack of three on the
measured on the other two
(2) Total from baghouse.
(3) Of stack sampled.
2
10/10/73
300
15.3
60630
496
2.2
2.9
19.8
77.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4.
0.
3
00.113
00061
585
0382
00931
00509
84
316
baghouse
f
3
10/13/73
300
15.5
57700
4 5
10/14/73 10/14/73
300 300
15.1 14.4
55120 58160
480
3.3
2.6
2Q.
--
77.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.
0.
1
3
00066
00036
328
0212
00517
00279
55
165
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
489
2.9
2.6
20.1
77.3
0
.00073
.00039
.343
.0227
.00552
.00297
.60
.172
was sampled. Gas
(4) Includes controlled tap fumes which are captured by
emissions were calculated
as
stack and the total gas flow
the product of
.
450
2.4
3.5
19.8
76.7
0
0.00138
0.00078
0.686
0.0476
0.00600
0.00338
2.99
0.208
flow rates
the tapping
Average
300
15.0
58830
481
2.6
2.9
19.9
_-
77.1
0
0.00103
0.00057
0.523
0.0350
0.00630
0.00345
3.14
0.209
were
hood. Mass
the concentration measured on one
Reference 17.
46
-------
Table 29
FACILITY U
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Date:
Type of Plant:
Type of Jiscnarge:
Location of discharge:
10/10/73 and 10/14/73
Submerged Arc Hign Caroon Ferrochrome Furnace
3 stacks Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Baghouse Height of Observation Point:
Heigiit of Point of Iris charge:10G ft.
Description of Background
Direction of observer from uischarge Point:
20 to 30 ft.
90 to 100 ft.
Varied
inscription of Sky:
Observations were made
against the dark background
of distant mountains and
against the sky at various
times.
Varied from clear to partly cloudly.
Variable
.Jind Liirectioii:
Color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plume: None
Duration of Observation: 10/10/73 - 7 iirs.
10/14/73 - 5 3/4 hrs.
Wind Velocity: 0.9 to 11 mi/hr
Detached Plume: Ho
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
hin.
Sec.
Emissions were 0 percent
opacity throughout the
observation periods.
Summary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
10
20
30
35
40
45
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
Opacity,
Percent
DS
60
6b
70
75
90
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
f'h'n.
Sec.
"
IL.
1 4 6
10.10-73
//r
TIME, hours
2 4
1014/73
-------
Table 30
FACILITY V
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
(1)
Date:
Type of Plant:
Type of uisaiarge:
Location of Discharge:
Height of Point of Jiidiarge:
Description of Background:
2/26/74
Suoinergeci-Arc Silicomanganese Furnace
Monitor Distance from Observer to Discharge Point: *300 ft.
Top of Baghouse Height of Observation Points:
~60 ft. Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
Sky
I and 20 ft.
2 places used)
outheast
jescription of Sky:
dind Direction:
Color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plume:
uuration of Observation:
Summary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
a
10
li
20
2*
30
33
60
Initially overcast, but
clear by about 11:30 a.m.
From South
Brown
.ione
10:20 a.m. to 4:20 p.m.
(360 minutes)
',iind Velocity:
Detached Plume:
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Tiian Given Opacity
din.
35T
275
14
1
0
Sec.
-31T
0
0
30
30
0
Opacity.
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0 to 5 mi/hr
No
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Tnan Given Opacity
Mm.
Sec.
Sktitcn knowing dow opacity Varieu ,iiti time:
.(2)
30
20
u
0)
TIME, hours
Two observers made simultaneous readings. The greater of their readings was used. Relatively high
visible emissions are credited to numerous small leaks in bags.
'average values for 3-minute periods were plotted.
References 13 anJ It).
48
-------
Table 31
FACILITY V
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS^1'
Date:
Type of Plant:
Type of uiscnarge:
Location of uischarga:
Height of Point of Discharge:
Description of Background:
Description of Sky:
Wind Direction:
Color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plume:
Duration of Observation:
Summary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
3
1J
lo
20
26
30
35
40
4ii
60
2/26/74
Submerged-Arc Silicomanganese Furnace
Fume escaping Tapping Hood/Distance from Observer to Discharge Point: 40 ft.
Tapping Hood Height of Observation Point: 0 ft.
5 ft. Direction of observer from Discharge Point: East
Readings were made inside the furnace
building against a background of the
furnace and various other surfaces
behind the hood.
Not Applicable
done Wind Velocity: None
Brown Detached Plume: ;jo
None
Two taps of 19 and 30 minutes duration, respectively.
ODservation.
Total of 49 minutes of
Total Time tqual to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
I'll n .
14
10
5
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
Sec.
30
0
15
30
0
0
0
0
45
30
Opacity,
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Gi ven Opaci ty
itm.
0
0
0
Sec.
45
30
0
Sketcn Snowing How )pdci t> Varied With Time:
.(2)
10
(FIRST TAP)
20
(
10
(SECOND TAP)
TIME, minutes
20
Two observers nude simultaneous readings. Trie greater of thair readings is reported.
(ii)Tne tap hood was raov*i aside for the last 45 seconds of the second minute and the first
13th minute of cue observations during the first tap.
References 13 and 18.
<*r of tho
seconds °T tne
49
-------
Facility V
Summary of Results
(Visible emissions only)
Visible emissions were read at this facility on February 26, 1974.
Visible emissions from the baghouse monitor did not exceed 25 percent
opacity, but visible emissions occurred quite steadily at 5 to 15 percent
opacity throughout the 6 hours of readings. These relatively high visible
emissions (for a baghouse) are attributed to numerous small leaks in the
bags. The baghouse was inspected, and several minor bag leaks were found.
Two compartments were quite dusty on the clean side, and a third was
noticeably so.
Visible emissions from the roof monitor of the building reached a
maximum of 15 percent opacity, but were greater than 0 percent opacity for
less than 8 minutes during the six-hour observation.
The furnace hood was observed for about 1 1/2 hours, and furnace
hood capture efficiency was consistently estimated as 100 percent.
Two tapping periods were observed, and visible emissions which
escaped the tap hood were read. During the first tap period, the hood
was moved away twice for unknown reasons; firs't, for about 45 seconds during
the second minute of the tap, and, secondly, for about 45 seconds during
tne thirteenth minute of the tap. During the first tap, visible emissions
escaping the tapping hood ranged from 25 to 60 percent opacity during the
first two minutes while the tapping hood was in place. Thereafter, visible
50
-------
emissions did not exceed 20 percent opacity (one reading) and were 0 percent
opacity most of the time. The tapping hood was in place throughout the
second tap. During the second tap, maximum visible emissions escaping
the tapping hood did not exceed 15 percent opacity, and were 0 percent
opacity most of the time.
References 13 and 18.
51
-------
Date:
Type of Plant:
Type of Discnarge:
Location of Discharge:
Height of Point of Discharge:
Description of Background:
Description of Sky:
Wind Direction:
Color of Plume:
Interference of Steam Plume:
Duration of Observation:
Summary of Data:
Opacity,
Percent
Table 32
FACILITY W
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
11
2/22/74
Submerged Arc Silicon Metal Furnace
Moni tor
Top of Baghouse
^75 ft.
Sky
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point: ^500 ft.
Height of Observation Point: 20 ft.
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point: South
Variable sky conditions ranging from low dark clouds to clear. Some rain
ranging from light to heavy. Times when weather conditions prohibited
accurate visible emission readings are omitted from this summary.
vlS to 25 mi/hr
Varied, from West
and North
White
None
4 hr, 28 rain.
Wind Velocity:
Detached Plume:
No
Total Time Equal to or Greater
Than Given Opacity
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Mi_n.
7
5
0
Sec.
30
30
0
Opacity,
Percent
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Total Time Equal to or Greater
JThan Given Opacity
Min.
Sec.
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
£
o
ID
TIME, hours
(1) Two observers made simultaneous readings. The greater of their readings 1s reported.
References 13 and 19.
-------
Facility W
Summary of Results
(Visible emissions only)
Visible emissions were read at this facility on February 22, 1974.
Visible emissions from the baghouse monitor were observed for 6 hours,
but during this time, there were several periods when weather conditions,
or fume from uncontrolled furnaces made reading visible emissions impossible.
During the time readings were possible, visible emissions from the baghouse
monitor did not exceed 10 percent opacity and were 0 percent opacity most
of the time. When visible emissions did occur, they were localized at one
end of the baghouse monitor. On inspection of the baghouse, some leaking
bags were observed. Eight bags in two compartments were replaced while
the observations were being made.
An uncontrolled furnace existed in the same building as the controlled
furnace. Visible emissions from the building roof monitor probably result
from tapping the uncontrolled furnace or from pouring of the alloy. Visible
emissions from the building monitor were observed at up to 20 percent
opacity, but the building monitor was obscurred most of the time by dust
from uncontrolled furnaces.
The furnace hood was observed for 30 minutes, and the furnace hood
capture efficiency was estimated to be 100 percent.
The tapping hood was observed for part of one tap, and it appeared to
achieve complete collection of the tapping fume.
References 13 and 19.
53
-------
REFERENCES
1. Kelly, Winton E., EPA."Emissions from Electric-Arc Ferroalloy Furnaces
at [Facilities Al. A2, and B]," June, 1973, EMB Project No. 72-PC-15.
2. Emission Test Report for Facilities C and P., prepared for EPA by
Resources Research, Inc., Contract No. CPA 70-81. June, 1972. Test
No. FA-7.
3. Durkee, Kenneth R., EPA, International Trip Report, "Survey of Japanese
Ferroalloy Furnaces," August 9, 1973.
4. Dobryakov, G. G., Serebryakov, M. Z., and Rychkov, V. P., "Operation
of a Gas Cleaning System on a Closed Top Electric Furnace," Steel in
the U.S.S.R., page 2, May, 1971.
5. "Air Pollution Emission Test, Part I," for Facility K, June, 1974.
EMB Report No. 73-FEA-07.
6. Emission Test Report for Facilities LI, L2, and L3., prepared for
EPA by Resources Research, Inc., Contract No. CPA 70-81. Test No. FA-2.
7. Emission Test Report for Facility M., prepared for EPA by Resources
Research, Inc., Contract No. CPA 70-81, Test No. FA-5.
8. Emission Test Report for Facility N., prepared for EPA by Resources
Research, Inc., Contract No. 70-81, Test No. FA-6.
9. "Air Pollution Emission Test" for Facility 0, June, 1974. EMB Report
No. 73-FEA-5.
54
-------
10. Emission Test Report for Retest of Facility P, prepared for EPA by
TRW Transportation and Environmental Operations, Contract No. 68-02-0235,
EMB Test No. 72-PC-14.
11. Emission Test Report for Facility Q, prepared for EPA by Resources
Research, Inc., Contract No. 70-81, Test No. FA-3.
12. Seiffert, Randy D., EPA, "Trip Report for Visit to [Facility Q],"
March 13, 1974.
13. Letter and attachments from Lawrence Katzman, Walden Research Division
of Abcor, Inc., to Randy D. Seiffert, EPA, March 12, 1974.
14. "Air Pollution Emission Test" for Facility R, June, 1974. EMB Report
No. 73-FEA-08.
15. "Air Pollution Emission Test" for Facility S, June, 1974. EMB Report
No. 73-FEA-09.
16. Emission Test Report for Facility T., prepared for EPA by Resources
Research, inc., Contract No. 70-81, Test No. FA-4.
17. "Air Pollution Emission Test" for Facility U, June, 1974. EMB Report
No. 73-FEA-10.
18. Seiffert, Randy D., EPA, "Trip Report for Contractor Visible Emission
Readings at [Facility V]," March 13, 1974.
19. Seiffert, Randy, D., EPA, "Trip Report for Visit to [Facility W],"
March 13, 1974.
55
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/2-74-Ol8b
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Background Information for Standards of Performance:
Electric Submerged Arc Furnaces Producing Ferroalloys
Volume 2, Summary of Test Data
5. REPORT DATE
October 1974
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO,
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14, SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This volume is the first in a series on the standard of performance for electric
submerged arc furnaces producing ferroalloys. This volume provides background
information and the rationale used in the development of the proposed standard
of performance. The economic and environmental impacts of the standard are
discussed.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution, Calcium Silicon
Pollution Control, Ferromanganese Silicon
Standards of Performance, Charge Chrome
Ferroalloys, Silicomanganese Zirconium
Silicon Metal, High-Carbon Ferrochrome
50% Ferrosilicon, Ferrochrome Silicon, Silvjery
65-76% Ferrosilicon. Ferromanqanese^ Calcit
Air Pollution Control
Iron
n Carbide
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport/
21. NO. OF PAGES
Unlimited
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
56
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 - 640-877/618 - Region 4
------- |