United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
August 1981
Air
Guideline Series
Control of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions
from Full-Web Process-
Color Heatset Web Offset
Lithographic Printing
Draft
^^
-------
-------
NOTICE
This document has not been formally released by EPA and should nOt be construed to represent
Agency pOlicy. It is being circulated for comment on its technical accuracy and policy implications.
Guideline Series
Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Full-Web Process-Color
Heatset Web Offset Lithographic
Printing
Emission Standards and Engineering Division
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Off ice of Air. Noise, and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
August 1981
-------
GUIDELINE SERIES
The guideline series of reports is issued by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to provide Information to state and local
air pollution control agencies; for example, to provide guidance on the
acquisition and processing of air quality data and on the .planning and an-
alysis requisite for the maintenance of air quality. Reports published
in this series will be available — as supplies permit - from the Library
Services Office (MD—35), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, or for a nominal fee, from the
lational Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Viriginia 22161.
11
-------
CONTENTS
GUIDELINE SERIES....................... .•.............. .......... ..... . ii
FIGURES........ ..•...•..........•................ ............. ... ... ... v
TABLES. ................ ... ............. ....................... ........ . vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1—1
2.0 PROCESSES AND POLLUTANT EMISSIONS............................... 2—1
2.1 OverviewofthePrinting lndustry...................... 2—1
2.2 Character,sti cs of Heatset Web-Offset Lithography............... 2-1
2.2.1 Infeed Section.................................................. 2—2
2.2.2 PrintIng Units.... ............. ................... 2—7
2.2.3 Dryers and Chill Rolls. •1 • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2—19
2.2.4 Folders,Sheeters,andRerollers. . 2—22
2.2.5 Binding and Finishing..... ................ ...................... 2—22
2.3 Model Presses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2—22
2.3.1 Emission Points......... ........ .................... ............ 2—25
2.3.2 Emissions Distribution................... ........ ...... ......... 2—25
2.4 References[[[ 2—26
3.0 EMISSION CONTROL TECHNIQUES ................... 3—1
3. 1 1 ntr oduct i on. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3— 1
3.2 Material Reformulation.......................................... 3—1
3.2.1 FountainSolutionReformulation......... .3—1
3.2.2 Ink Reformulation...... .. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • •4•••••• • • 3 3
3.3 Add—On Controls. .......... ................ . ....... ........ ...... 3—5
3.3.1 Cooler/Electrostatic Preclpitator............................... 3—5
3.3.2 Incineration. .... ..•..S.. ...*...••. .•.......•... .. ..•s 3—14
3.3.3 Heat Recovery......... ;........................................ 3—20
3.3.4 ReplacementofComb inationDryers...... .........................3—25
3.3.5 ControlofMultiPressOperations... . 3—26
3.4 References............................. ...... . . . ...• . . . .. . 3—28
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ......... •.••...• .•.•...•...•..•. .••.,.• 4—1
4.1 Introduction. ............•..•...•..........•. ........ ........... 4—1
4.2 Air Pollution 4—2
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
4.5 Energy Requirements... . ......... . . . . •........ ,........ . . . .. . . . . . 4—6
4.6 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4—8
5.0 CONTROL COST ANALYSIS . . . ....• • •....... . . . . . . .. . •. . . •..... . . . . 5—1
5.1 Introductlon[[[ 5—1
5.2 Capital Costs..... ..... •...... ...................... ... ........ . 5—2
5.2.1 Purchased Equipment Costs....................................... 5—3
5.2.2 Installation Cost Factors..................................... . 5—4
5.2.3 Direct Installation Costs....................................... 5—16
5.2.4 Indirect Installation Costs...... ... ........ .. . . .. ..... .. . .. . ... 5—17
5.2.5 Total InstalledCapitalCosts...................................5—23
.3 Annualized Costs................................................ 5—25
5.3.1 Indirect Annualized Costs....................................... 5—32
5.3.2 Direct Annualized Costs...... . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5—42
5.3.3 Total Annual i zed Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5—45
5.4 Cost Effectiveness . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . 5—49
5.4.1 Founta1nSolut ionReforrnulat1on........,.,.. ........ .. .... •5_4g
5.4.2 Cooler/ESP’s 5—55
5.4.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange ...... 5—56
5.4.4 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary
seat Exchange •...........•................................... 557
5.5 References .. •.•.•.•......... .. I... ...II••II •sss I .... •....... 557
APPENDIX A — SAMPLE CALCULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . •.... . •.. A—i
A.1 Introduction. . . . . . . •1 . • • • • • . •... . •..... .‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A—I
A.2 Isopropyl Alcohol Evaporation in Pressroom (Chapter 2).......... A—i
A.3 UncontrolledVOCEmiss ions(Chapter2)......... .,.... .A—4
A.4 Degree of Condensation in Cooler (Chapter 3).................... A—4
B .1 Introduction. ....... . . ... B—i
B.2 VOC Emission Factors for Uncontrolled Printing Presses B—i
8.3 VOC Emission Factors for Printing Presses with Control Devices.. B—2
8.4 Methods for Determining Valves To Be Used in Emission Factor
Equations.. ........ •......................... 8—3
8.4.1 Total Ink Consumed . . . . ........ . . . . . 8—3
B .4.2 Total Ink Solvent Consumed...... . 8—4
8.4.3 Total inkSolventRetairiedonweb....... ...... ....B—4
8.4.4 Total High Volatility Organic Compounds Corisumed......... 9—6
8.4.5 Total Water—Free Ink Solvent Recovered.......................... 8—7
-------
FIGURES
2—1 Distribution of Plants by Number of Presses.......... ........... 2—3
2—2 DistributionofPressesbyPressWidth..........................2—4
2-3 Distribution of Presses by Number of Printing Units............. 2—5
2—4 Drawing of a Heatset Web—Offset Press Instaiiation.............. 2—6
2—5 DiagramofaWeb—OffsetPrintingllnit..... . . 2—8
2—6 Schematic ofalypical Inking System............... .... ........ 2—10
2-7 Schematic of a Conventional Dampening System. ............ 2-13
2—8 Schematic of aBrushDampening System ........... 2—14
2—9 SchernaticofaDahlgrenDampeningSystem........................2—15
2—10 High—VelocityHotAirDryer..................................... 2—20
2-11 Combination Direct Flame/High—Velocity Hot Air Dryer............ 2-21
3—1 Cooler/Electrostatic Precipitator....... ... ... . . 3—6
3-2 Degree of Condensation in Cooler/ESP for Modei Presses 3-8
3—3 Cooler/Chiller/Electrostatic Precipitator with Reheat ........,.. 3-10
3-4 Cooler/Electrostatic Precipitator with Automatic Cleaning
System[[[ 3—13
3-5 Thermal lncineratorwithHeatExchanger.........................3—15
3—6 Premix Burner................................... ........ 3—17
3—7 Raw Gas Burner.. . . . . . •. 3—17
3—8 Pure Nozzle Mix Burner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3—17
3_9 Catalytic Incinerator ....... .... 3—19
3—10 TwoPlatesfromHeatExchanger..................................3—21
3—li Catalytic Incinerator with 70 Percent Heat Exchanger............ 3—23
3—12 Catalytic Incinerator with 70 Percent Primary and (Potential)
50 PercentSecondary Heat Exchangers............... 3-24
A—]. DistiliationCurve,Magiesol47Oii.. . A—6
A-2 Uncondensed Vapor in Cooler at 6000 scfm........................ A-b
A-3 Degree of Condensation in Cooler/ESP for Model Presses......... A-li
C-i Purchased Equipment Costs for Catalytic Incineration with 70
PercentPrirnaryHeatExchanger..................... C—2
-------
TABLES
2-1 Model Heatset Web—Offset Lithographic Printing Presses
Equipped with High—Velocity Hot Mr Dryers.................... 2—23
2-2 Model Heatset Web-Offset Lithographic Printing Presses
Equippe4 with Combination Dryers............................. 2—24
4-1 Impacts of Control Techniques on VOC Emissions from Model
Presses. ...... .... •1SISII ••• •.....•..••. .. •. . . .... . ..... •.... 4_3
4-2 Energy Requirements of a Model Press Equipped with a
Cooler/ESP[[[ 4—7
4-3 Energy Requirements of a Model Press Equipped with a Catalytic
Incinerator with aPrimaryHeatExchanger.....................4—7
5-1 Factors in Calculating Capital Costs of Connecting a
Cooler/ESP at a Model Press.... .. . ..•.I...•... .. ........ ••.... 5—5
5-2 Factors in Calculating Capital Costs of Connecting One
Cooler/ESPatlwoModelPresses.................. .............5—6
5-3 Factors in Calculating Capital Costs of Connecting a Catalytic
Incinerator with Primary Heat Exchange at a Model Press....... 5—7
5-4 Factors in Calculating Capital Costs of Connecting One -
Catalytic Incinerator with Primary Heat Exchange to Two
Model Presses. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5—8
5—5 Factors in Calculating Capital Costs of Connecting a Catalytic
Incinerator with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange at a
Model Press....................... .. ... ...... .. . 5—10
5—6 Capital Costs of Connecting a Cooler/ESP to a Model Press....... 5-18
5-7 Capital Costs of Connecting C e Ccoler/ESP to Two Model -
resses........................................... D—l9
5—8 Capital Costs of Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
PrimaryHeat Exchange toaModel Press........................ 5—20
5—9 Capital Costs of Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary Heat Exchange to Two Model Presses.................... 5—21
5-10 Capital Costs of Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange to a Model Press.......... 5-22
5—11 3asesforAnnualizedCostEstimates.............................5—26
5-12 Equipr ent Life Factors and Utilities Used to Calculate
nnualized Costs of Connecting a Cooler/ESP at a Model Press.. 5-27
5-13 Equipment Life Factors and Utilities Used to Calculate
Annualized Costs of Connecting One Cooler/ESP to Two Model
-------
TABLES (Continued)
5-14 Equipment Life Factors and Utilities Used to Calculate
Annualized Costs of Connecting One Catalytic Incinerator
with Primary Heat Exchange at a Model Press................... 5—29
5—15 Equipment Life Factors and Utilities Used to Calculate
Annualized Costs of Connecting One Catalytic Incinerator
with Primary Heat Exchange to Two Model Presses............... 5—30
5-16 Equipment Life Factors and Utilities Used to Calculate
Annualized Costs of Connecting One Catalytic Incinerator
with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange at a Model Press..... 5-31
5—17 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Cooler/ESP to a Model Press —
2000 h/yr Operation........................................... 5—33
5-18 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Cooler/ESP to a Model Press —
4000 h/yr Operation........................................... 5—34
5-19 Annualized Costs for Connecting One Cooler/ESP to Two Model
Presses — 2000 h/yr Operation.. 5—36
5-20 Annualized Costs for Connecting One Cooler/ESP to Two Model
Presses — 4000 h/yr Operation................................. 5—37
5-21 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary Heat Exchange to a Model Press - 2000 h/yr Operation.. 5-38
5—22 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary Heat Exchange to a Model Press — 4000 h/yr Operation.. 5-39
5—23 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary Heat Exchange to Two Model Presses - 2000 h/yr
Operation . . . . . . . . •. . . .. . . •1 • • • • •• . . . . . . •. . •. . . . •1 . • • . 5—40
5—24 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary Heat Exchange to Two Model Presses — 4000 h/yr
0peration................................................ .... 5—41
5—25 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary and Secondary Heat £xchange to a Model Press -
2000 h/yr Operati on. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5—43
5-26 Annualized Costs for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange to a Model Press -
4000 h/yr Operation. . .. 5..44
5—27 Cost Effectiveness for Connecttng a Cool er/ESP to a Model
Press •...........S......... . .ss .• . .e .sIsu•s••sIIss 550
5-28, Cost Effectiveness for Connecting One Cooler/ESP to Two Model
......•..•••••• ••• 5—51
5-29 Cost Effectiveness for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
PrimaryHeatExchangetoaMOdelPreSS........................ 5 —5 2
5-30 Cost Effectiveness for Connecting One Catalytic Incinerator
with Primary Heat Exchange to Two Model Presses............... 5—53
5-31 Cost Effectiveness for Connecting a Catalytic Incinerator with
Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange to a Model Press.. .. 5-54
vii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1q77 require each State in which there
are areas in which the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are
exceeded to adopt and submit revised state implementation plans (SIP’s) to
EPA. Revised SIPs were required to be submitted to EPA by January 1, 1979.
States which were unable to demonstrate attainment with the NAAQS for ozone
by the statutory deadline of December 31, 1982, could request extensions for
attainment with the standard. States granted such an extension are to sub-
mit a further revised SIP by July 1, 1982.
Sections 172(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the Clean Air Act require that
nonattainment area SIP’s include reasonably available control technology
(RACT) requirements for stationary sources. As explained in the “General
Preamble for Proposed Rulemaking on Approval of State Implementation Plan
Revisions for Nonattainment Areas” (44 FR 20372, April 4, 1979) for ozone
SIP’s, EPA permitted States to defer adoption of ‘RACT regulations on a
category of stationary sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) until
after EPA published a control techniques guideline (CTG) for that VOC source
category. See also 44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979). This delay allowed
the states to make more technically sound decisions regarding the applica-
tion of RACT.
Although CTG documents review existing information and data concerning
the technology and cost of various control techniques to reduce emissions,
they are, of necessity, general in nature and do not fully account for
unique variations within a stationary source category. Consequently, the
purpose of CTG documents is to provide State and local air pollution control
agencies with an initial information base for proceeding with their own
analysis of RACT for specific stationary sources.
1—1
-------
2.0 PROCESSES AND POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE PRINTING INDUSTRY
Originally, the term “graphic arts” meant fine arts such as painting
and drawing. In time, the meaning expanded to include various picture
reproduction processes such as engraving, etching, and l•ithographing.
Finally, the graphic arts industry became synonymous with the printing
industry. This diverse industry is characterized by a large number of
small plants and a small number of large plants. Approximately 80 percent
of the commercial printing plants scattered throughout the country employ
fewer than 20 people each. Historically, most of the plants have been in
large metropolitan areas; however, in the last several years, most plants
have been built in nonurban areas.
The four major web printing processes are letterpress, gravure, flex-
ography, and lithography. Discussions of lithographic processes and litho-
graphic inks may be found in several books. 1 ’ 2 ’ 3 ’ 4 This document is con-
cerned with heatset web—offset lithography.
2.2 cHARACTERIsTIcs OF HEATSET WEB—OFFSET LITHOGRAPHY
“Heatset” refers to a class of ‘web—offset lithography which requires
a h ated dryer to solidify (set) the printing inks as opposed to other
lithographic processes which use inks that dry by absorption and by oxida-
tion. “Offset” as used in the lithographic printing industry, refers to
the blanket cylinder which transfers ink from the plate cylinder to the
surface to be printed. “Web” refers to the substrate printed in continuous
roll-fed printing presses.
About 420 printing plants in the United States operate about 1200
heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses. Figure 2-1 shows that
2-1
-------
about 40 percent of the plants are relatively small, having only one press
each, and about 60 percent of the plants have two or more presses each. 5
Although prthting press size may be characterized in various ways, a
common measure of size is the maximum width of the web which can pass
through the press. Figure 2-2 shows that about 3 percent of the presses
are “mini-web” presses, less than 26 inches wide, and about 13 percent
are “half—web”, between 26 and 27 Inches wide. About 84 percent of the
presses are full-web presses, 27 or more Inches wIde. Another cornon
measure of size is the number of printing units in the press. Presses
with three or more printing units are generally referred to as process
color presses. Figure 2-3 shows the distribution of heatset web—offset
lithographic printing presses by number of printing units per press, and
indicates that over 80 percent are process-color presses.
A typical process-color heatset web—offset lithographic printing press
has five sections, as shown in Figure 2-4; each section has a separate
function. The infeed section provIdes for mounting, aligning, and unwind-
ing of the rolls of paper (web) to be run through the press. Each printing
unit sFnultaneously applies a single color to both sides of the web; to-
gether all printing units can overlay colors for a full color image without
forced drying between printing units. The dryer evaporates enough ink
solvent so that the ink, after cooling on the chill rolls, does not trans-
fer to adjacent sheets when the r,inted web is ci t, folded, and stacked.
The press shown in Figure 2—4 has four blanket-to—blanket printing units
(discussed in Section 2.2.2), a high-velocity hot air dryer capable of
drying two webs, and a section where the web is cut and folded to produce
a finished product. This press is capable of several color overlay com-
binations: printing one or both sides of one web with four colors; one or
both sides of two webs with three colors on one web and one color on the
other; or one or both sides of two webs with two colors on each web.
Frequently, printing presses are equipped with five, six, or nore printing
units to increase versatility.
2.2.1 tnfeed Section
Although iany offset lithographic printing presses are sheet-fed,
essentially all corrutercial web—offset lithographic printing presses using
2-2
-------
NUMBER OF PRESSES 5
Figure 21. Distribution Of P cnts By Number Of Presses.
1 75
88
60
50
40
I —.
z
-J
0
3O
0
U .)
Z20
10
0
S 9 10
12 1
6
21
2-3
-------
523
2480
157
76
60
so
40
3o.
z 20
I0•
___
• I.-. • • •
R
“4
I,. I
4
PRESS WIDTH INCHES
Figatre 22. 0istri tion Of P ui.s 3y Press Wwith 5
2 4
-------
Figure 2-3.
NUMBER OF. PRINTNG UNITS
Distribution Of Presses By Number Of Printing Units 5
400
U .’
1 )
1)
‘U
z
2
U.
0
‘U
200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2—5
-------
Weed Prrritrng Units Dryer ChiU Fotder
Sect ion ’ Rol ls
5S 5 5
4 1 — — —
5
. S.. • .
Figure 2—4. Drawing Of A Heatset Web—Offset Press Installation
2-6
Courtesy OF Groornc rTS
Technical Foundation
-------
heatset inks are continuous feed. The infeed section for a web—fed press
extends from the roll stand holding the web to be printed to the first
printing unit, and controls the speed, tension, and lateral position
(sidelay) of the web as it moves from the roll stand to the first printing
unit. A poorly setup paper roll or an improper infeed setting can adversely
affect all other sections of the press. 6
There are single and double roll stands; a double roll stand can feed
two webs to the press at once. An auxiliary stand to hold additional rolls
(usually two) is often added to increase the number of webs that can be run
simultaneously. On the roll stand, the paper roll usually turns with a
shaft inserted through its core; the roll is held on the shaft in an exact
side—to—side position, either by chucks which clamp it In place or by
mechanical expansion of the shaft itself. A brake on the roll shaft controls
the infeed tension. Older roll stands have a simple friction brakeshoe;
newer ones are equipped with electromechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, or
magnetic brakes. Sidelay controls on the roll stand position the web
laterally before it enters the first printing ,unit. Photoelectric or
electronic sensors respond to changes in position of the web, and activate
bars which restore the web to its proper lateral position. 6
There are no VOC emissions from the infeed section.
2.2.2 Printing Units
Lithography is a planographic method of printing; the printing and
nonprinting areas are essentially in the same plane on the surface of a
thin metal plate, and the distinction between the areas is maintained
chemically. When the image plate i made, the image area is rendered
water repellent, and the nonirnage area is rendered water receptive. The
image plate is wrapped ar ünd the plate cylinder. The ink is transferred
first from the image plate to the rubber-covered blanket cylinder and then
from the blanket cylinder to the web. 7
As shown in Figure 2—5, a heatset web—offset lithographic printing
unit has a complex arrangement of rollers for transferring ink from the ink
fountain to the plate cylinder. When the plate cylinder rotates, the image
plate first contacts water (fountain solution) and then ink. The fountain
2-7
-------
Ink Fountain
Dampening
Water
Rollers
Fountain
Web
Blanket
Plate Cylinder
Water
Dampening
Rollers
Dicgram of
Printing Unit.
c Web-Offset
Inking Rollers
Plate Cylinder
Cylinder
Blanket
Cylinder
Fountain
Rollers
Ink Fountain
Inking
Figure 2-5.
2-8
-------
solution wets only the nonimage area of the plate, allowing the ink to
adhere to the image area. Next, the ink on the image plate is transferred
to the rubber-covered blanket cylinder, which prints the image on the web.
Transfer of the image from the image plate to the “intermediate” blanket
cylinder, rather than directly to the web, Is the essential characteristic
of offset printing. The arrangement in Figure 2—5 is commonly called
blanket-to-blanket because each blanket cylinder presses the web against
the other and simultaneously prints both sides of the webd In printing
units which print only one side of the web, one blanket cylinder and all
associated equipment are replaced with an impression cylinder.
The VOC emissions from printing units are primarily due to evaporation
of high volatility organic compounds, such as isopropyl alcohol, which are
frequently added to fountain solutions. The need for ready access to all
parts of the printing units for adjustments, cleaning, roller replacement,
and threading the web precludes the use of hoods for collecting VOC emis-
sions.
2.2.2.1 Inking System - Figure 2-6 represents a typical inking system
for an offset lithographic printing unit. The performance requirements for
such an inking system are stringent. The system must perform the following
functions: (1) “work” the ink from a gel—like consistency to a semi-liquid
state; (2) distribute an even thin film of ink ayound all of the form
rollers; (3) deposit a uniformly thin film of Ink on the image area; (4)
pick up fountain solution from the image plate and emulsify some of it in-
to the ink; and (5) pick up loose particles of foreign matter from the image
plate, and hold them in suspension until the entire system is cleaned. 8
The ink fountain is a reservoir of ink. The roller nearest the ink
fountain is called the fountain roller. A blade which extends from the
bottom of the ink fountain to very close to the fountain roller can be
adjusted to vary the gap between the blade and the roller. The fountain
roller rotates intermittently against the blade, and draws ink through this
gap. Inking systems are becoming available that improve on this design,
but the principle of drawing ink through an adjustable gap remains as a
central design feature. 8
2-9
-------
Four Pain Roller
Form
Roller
Vibrator
Drum
Form
Roller
Figure 2-6. Schematic Of A Typical Inking Sy5rem.
Ink
F unt sn
Thumb
Screw
Rider
Distributor
Ductor
Intermediate
Intermediate
Drum
Intermediate
Plate Cylinder
2-10
-------
As the fountain roller rotates, a resilient ductor presses against it
and picks up ink that has been drawn from the ink fountain. Changing the
amount of rotation of the fountain roller while in contact with the ductor
roller governs the supply of ink across the entire inking system. Changing
the gap between the fountain roller and the blade governs the amount of ink
flow within a specific area along the length of the Image plate. 8
The next series of rolls distributes ink between the fountain roller
and the form rollers, and is designed to work the ink by imparting energy
and motion. Critical to the proper performance of the Inking system is the
inclusion of a sufficient number of Intermediate rollers between the foun-
tain roller and the form rollers, because the number of times the ink film
is split during transfer from roller to roller is a factor in working or
conditioning the ink. Another design feature is the lateral oscillation of
various rollers; this lateral motion, occurring simultaneously with the
normal rotational notion, helps work the ink because the combined motions
induce shear and help reduce “ridging” of the ink through increased lateral
distribution of ink. Rotational distribution is accomplished by using drums
and rollers of differing diameters. The feeding and working of the ink
ensures that the form rollers receive a constant and properly distributed
supply of conditioned ink for each impression the printing unit makes. 8
2.2.2.2 Dampening System - In the printing unit, as mentioned .earlier,
the nonimage areas of the image plate are wet conti’nually with a fountain
solution (water) applied by a dampening system. The image areas of the
image plate are hydrophobic (not receptive to water), but they accept
greasy ink. The nonimage areas are hydrophilic (receptive to water), but
they resist wetting by greasy ink. “ To maintain these properties, the
ima’ge areas must be wetted with ink, and the nonimage areas must be contin-
ually wetted with fountain solution. Although ink-receptive properties of
the image areas are difficult to destroy if the plate is properly made,
water-receptive properties of the nonimage areas can be destroyed within
seconds if the dampening rollers do not contact the image plate. A well-
made image plate on a properly operated press prints a strong sharp image,
and retains perfectly clean nonimage areas for extremely long runs. Clean
2-11
-------
printing provides accurate reproduction even in the extremely small spaces
between dots of a 300-line halftone plate. 8
There are many dampening systems available, but only three of these,
which are In con non use, will be described. A conventional dampening
system for a printing unit is shown in FIgure 2—7. The system has four
basic components: the water pan, a ductor, a metal vibrator, and form
rollers. In the water pan (the fountain), either a brass, chrome—plated,
or cloth-covered pan roller rotates and picks up fountain solution. The
ductor, covered with a fairly thick absorbent cloth (molleton), intermit-
tently contacts the pan roller and soaks up •fountaln solution from the pan
roller. The ductor oscillates between the pan roller and a vibrator.
4hen the ductor contacts the vibrator some of the fountain solution is
transferred and spread by the vibrator evenly over the entire surface of
two dampening form rollers with which it is in constant contact. The
dampening form rollers deposit fountain solution on the nonimage areas
of the image plate just before it passes under the inking form rollers. 8
Two other dampening systems the brush system and the Dahigren system,
are shown in Figures 2-8 and 2-9. In the brush system (Figure 2-8) a
constantly revolving brush (or assembly of narrow brush wheels) contacts
the pan roller and flicks fountain solution onto the vibrator. The speed
of the motor-driven pan roller and the pressure of the brush .rotating
against the pan roller are variable to permit c’ontrol of the amount of
water distributed to the dampening form roller. One adaptation of this
system has “flicker” fingers nountad above and spaced across the full length
of the brush to achieve zonal control of the water fed to the image plate
by adjusting the pressure of Individual flickers against the constantly
rotating brush. 8
The Dahigren system (Figure 2-9), which is in widespread use on heatset
web—offset lithographic printing units, uses the inking system to carry
both fountain solution and ink to the image plate. A steel pan roller
contacts a metering roller and then transfers a film of fountain solution
to the first ink—water form roller. Speed control of the pan roller and
axis skew adjustment between the rubber-covered metering roller and the
steel pan roller control the supply of fountain solution to the first ink—
2-12
-------
Plate
Cylinder
V-Vibrator W-Pah Roller
F- Form Roller D Ductor
Figure 2-7 Schematic Of A conventional Dampening System.
Couriu y Ot Grophic A,,
lecirnicol Fourtdo?uo i
2—13
-------
Is
.
Plate
Cylinder
F - Form Roller
V - VibraPor
WPan Roller
Schemahc Of A Brush Dampening
System
Courtesy Of Groph,c A,,
T.chn,c i
B - Brush Roller
Figure 2-8
2-1’1
-------
Waler Pan
F - Ink -Water Form Roller M - ‘Metering Roller
- Inking Oscillator W Pan Roller
Figure 2-9. Schematic Of A Dohigren Dampening System.
Courtesy Of Gro h,c Arts
T,cknicol Four dotion
Plate
Cylinder
2-15
-------
water form roller. The rotation direction of the plate cylinder in rela-
tion to the inking oscillator enables the fountain solution deposited on
the inking roller-s to contact the image plate before being carried up
into the inking system. 8
The Dahigren dampening system conronly uses fountain solutions con-
taining as much as 25 weight percent isopropyl alcohol as a dampening aid.
As a result of the industry’s experience with isopropyl alcohol in Dahigren
dampening systems, many operators use isopropyl alcohol as a dampening aid
in other dampening systems. 8
Some presses are equipped with systems which refrigerate the fountain
solution, thus reducing isopropyl alcohol evaporation.
2.2.2.3 Printing Inks - Inks consist primarily of pigments and vehi-
cles. Pigments contribute color to the printed image and must exhibit
many features-—for example, light-fastness and resistance to water, organic
solvents, chemical agents, and heat. A typical vehicle, which consists
primarily of a resin and a solvent, contributes the qualities required
for performance on various presses, for adherence to the web, for formation
of precise images, and for rapid drying. 9
All lithographic inks require insoluble pigments as the colorants,
since soluble pigments would dissolve in fountain solution and discolor the
web. Vehicles must be resistant to excessive emusification for the same
reason. Lithographi c inks are generally strong in color to compensate for
the thin films applied by the printing process. Typically, the thickness
of the ink application is roughly half of that applied in letterpress. 1 °
In heatset web-offset lithographic printing, the ink must remain li-
quid in the printing units, and yet must be dry on the paper stock; thus
the vehicle must be capable of changing, through loss of solvent, from a
liquid to a dry state in a short time.
The dry powdered pigments and the liquid vehicles are combined by the
ink manufacturer in mixing and milling processes; however, a good ink is
not made by simply choosing the right ingredients. The working qualities of
an ink-—its performance on the press-—depend primarily on the proportions of
2-16
-------
the right pigments and vehicles and on the care with which they are dis-
persed. Other ingredients may include wetting agents, antiskinning agents,
waxes, and even perfumes. Many inks have 10 or more ingredients In various
proportions (0.5 to 70 percent by weight), depending on the specific in-
gredient and type of ink. 9
Inks are made with a great variety of consistencies. Some are heavy
bodied, like molasses, while others are light or thin, like heavy cream.
Most inks for heatset web—offset lithography are heavy bodfed and usually
thixotropic; that is, when such inks are at rest, they have a rather heavy
gel-like consistency, but when they are worked (for example, by rapid
stirring), they become liquid. Related to body is viscosity, which is
resistance to flow. 9
Tack, the internal cohesive force which resists the splitting of an
ink film between two surfaces, is Important in transferring of ink from
roller to roller, to the image plate, to the blanket, and to the web.
Tack is also important in ink trapping—-the overprinting of successive
inks for multicolor and full-color printing. For good overprinting, the
tack of successive inks must be carefully adjusted. The “first-down” ink
has the most tack, and each successive ink has less. Inks that are too
tacky may pick (pluck or tear) the web surface, or detach the underlaying
Ink film or paper fibers from the web surface. Inks,that have insufflcient
tack may be incapable of producing sharp images--a defect particularly
noticeable in the reproduction of halftone images. 9
Compositions of inks vary, but most inks for heatset web—offset litho-
graphic printing use similar solvent systems. The ink solvent is primarily
a mixture of narrow—cut petroleun fractions, almost all aliphatic, with
boiling ranges of about 220° C (425°F) to 320°C (600°F). Ink solvents with
higher and lower boiling-ranges are available. Typical ink solvents have
an average molecular weight of about 206. Although one of the commonly
used ink solvents consists primarily of C 12 to C 1 5 hydrocarbons, C 11 to C 22
hydrocarbons have been identified. 1 ’ Most ink formulations contain 30 to
50 weight percent ink solvent, but it may be possible to develop inks with
lower ink-solvent content in the future.
2—17
-------
2.2.2.4 Fountain Solutions - Fountain solutions used in web-offset
lithography are composed primarily of water but also contain an etchant
(usually phosphoric acid) to maintain acidity, gum arabic, and a dampening
aid. As mentioned earlier, fountain solution is applied to the image
plate to maintain the hydrophilic properties of the nonimage areas; this
application, however, leads to formation of a water-in—ink emulsion on the
image plate. Maintenance on the image plate of a stable water-in-ink
emulsion, with the correct ink-water balance, is crucial to offset litho-
graphic printing. If too much fountain solution is applied to the image
plate, water marks occur and the print becomes washed out in appearance.
Isopropyl alcohol is widely used as a dampening aid in fountain solu-
tions, although various detergents, surfactants, and proprietary chemicals
are also used. Isopropyl alcohol usage as high as 0.8 kilogram per kflogram
of ink has been reported, 12 but 0.5 kilogram per kilogram of ink consumed
Is more cornon. Where automatic controls are used, the isopropyl alcohol
concentration in the fountain solution is usually maintained at about 20
weight percent. At presses where manual makeup is used, the concentration
generally varies from 25 to 15 percent.
Although isopropyl alcohol provides excellent characteristics to the
fountain solution, it has a normal boiling point of 82°C (180°F) and can
readily evaporate into the pressroom. At most prjnting presses a portion
of the isopropyl alcohol which evaØorates in the pressroom may be exhausted
through the dryer along with the alcohol which evaporates in the dryer;
however the amount carried into the dryer by room air is likely to be
extremely variable. Calculations contained in Appendix A indicate that
about 50 percent of the Isopropyl alcáhol (or dampening aids with comparable
properties) is released In pressroom ventilation and about 50 percent is
released from the dryer exhaust.
Low volatility organic compounds with normal boiling points above 150°C
(300°F) which are used as dampening aids, replacing isoprooyl alcohol, gen-
erally have boiling points in the range of those for ink solvents, so it
is reasonable to assume that insignificant amounts of these evaoorate at
ambient pressroom conditions.
2-18
-------
2.2.3 Dryers and Chill Rolls
Heatset inks, which currently dominate commercial web-offset litho-
graphic printing, require drying and chilling. Evaporating the ink solvent
in the dryer radically increases the ink’s viscosity and leaves pig nent
particles embedded in semisoft binding resins. Cooling the binding resins
with chill rolls solidifies or sets the ink. ’ 3
The printed web enters the dryer from the last printing unit. Evapora-
tion time for the ink solvent in a dryer with air temperatures as high as
260°C (500°F) averages about 0.7 second. The web leaves the dryer with a
surface temperature between 130°C (270°F) and 165°C (330°F), and chill rolls
cool the web to a maximum of about 30°C (about 90°F). 13 Heatset web-offset
lithographic printing presses which print both sides of the web frequently
have one of two major types of dryers in which the web is supported by
tension and by air pressure.
The first type is the high—velocity hot air dryer shown in Figure 2-10.
High—velocity hot air dryers blow high-pressure hot air at both sides of
the web, recirculate much of the heated exhaust ‘ir, and discharge only
enough to prevent buildup of explosive solvent vapor levels. Exhaust fans
pull the mixture of hot air and ink solvent vapor out of the dryer.
The second type is the combination dryer, which uses both high—velocity
hot air and direct flame. The first half of the dYyer usually contains
direct flame nozzles, and the second half contains hot air nozzles, as shown
in Figure 2-11. Some older presses may still be equipped with direct
flame dryers.
The chill roll section positioned after the dryer is an assembly of
driven steel drums with chilled water circulating through them. The hot
web from the dryer passes over these rolls to “set” the ink. Most chill
roll sections have three rollers; some have only two, others have more. 13
Most of the ink solvent evaporates in the dryer. Evaporation of ink
solvent prior to the dryers is insignificant due to the low vapor pressure
of the ink solvent. Essentially all of the ink solvent which evaporates
between the dryer and the chill rolls can be captured by hoods over the
chill rolls.
2-1 9
-------
Figure 2-10. High-Velocity Hot Air Dryer
F )
1)
• • • :‘ rntoke From
Air Bars • Web
Courtesy of TEC
Systems
-------
A.Direct Flame Gas Burner
B.Separating Panel-Top And BottomWebs
C,Exhaust Duct
D.Heating Section For Air Intake
E.Air Impingement Nozzles
F. Hot Air Exhaust Ports
G.Air Scavenger Nozzles
H.Separoting Panel-Top And Bottom Webs
J.lrtsulated Wall
K.Steel Inner Wall
-
S.
I •. ..• . I
Figure 2-11. Combination Direct Flame / High Velocity
Hot Air Dryer.
Photo Courtesy of Sun
Chemical Corporation
2-21
-------
2.2.4 Folders, Sheeters, and Rerollers
The cooled printed web from the chill rolls can be prepared for ship—
ment by rerollingthe web. Most often, however, the press prints several
pages on the web at one time, and thus has a folder, or a sheeter, or both.
The folder receives the printed web, Cuts it, and folds it into an assembly
of pages in the correct sequence (signature). Several signatures, each from
different press runs, may be assembled In the bindery to create a book or
a magazine. Modern folders can produce a wide array of folded signatures.
A sheeter receives the printed web, cuts it into large sheets, and stacks
the sheets for transport to the next processing step or to the customer.
No VOC emissions arise from the cutting, folding, or rerolling opera-
tions.
2.2.5 Binding and Finishing
Although the printed material from the press may be a finished product
after folding or sheeting, additional processing is likely. Most heatset
web-offset lithographic printing plants have a bindery section, separate
from the pressroom.
No VOC emissions arise from the bindery section.
2.3 MODEL PRESSES
The model presses presented in Table 2-1 and’ .Table 2-2 are based on
information obtained in plant visits and contained in publications, 14 and
from discussions with industry representatives, trade associations, and
equipment vendors. Calculations used to obtain uncontrolled VOC emission
rates are in Appendix A.
For a general analysis of the VOC emission reduction effectiveness of
various control techniques and the costs of these techniques, presses O.97m
(38 in.) wide with four printing units each are used to represent the range
of full-width presses corr only used in the heatset web-offset lithographic
printing industry. High—velocity hot air dryers and combi iation dryers
are cornonly used on heatset web-offset lithographic presses; consequently,
both types of dryers are included with the model presses.
To represent the fairly wide variation in annual number of hours of
press operation, two levels are included: 2000 and 4000 hours per year.
2-22
-------
TABLE 2-1. MODEL HEATSET WEB-OFFSET LIThOGRAPHIC PRINTING PRESSES
EQUIPPED WITH HIGh-VELOCITY 1101 AIR DRYERS
Model Model
Press Press
A B
Description of Model Presses
Press width 0.97 in (38 in.) 0.97 in (38 in.)
Press speed 244 rn/mm (800 ft/mm) 244 in/mm (800 ft/mm)
Number of printing units/press 4 4
Ink consumption rate/press 23.7 kg/h (52.2 lbs/h) 23.7 kg/h (52.2 lbs/h)
Isopropyl alcohol consumption rate/press 11.8 kg/h (26.0 lbs/h) 11.8 kg/h (26.0 lbs/h)
Exhaust rate from high-velocity hot 85 Nm 3 /min (3000 scfm) 85 Nm 3 /min (3000 scfm)
air dryer
Exhaust temperature of high-velocity hot 175 °C (350°F) 175 °C (350°F)
air dryers
Uncontrolled emission rates for each press
pressroom: isopropyl alcohol 5.9 kg/h (13.0 lbs/h) 5.9 kg/h (13.0 lbs/h)
ink solvent 0 kg/h (0 lbs/h) 0 kg/h (0 lbs/ti)
dryer exhaust: isopropyl alcohol 5.9 kg/h (13.0 lbs/h) 5.9 kg/h (13.0 lbs/h)
ink solvent 7.6 kg/h ( 16.7 lbs/h) 7.6 kg/h ( 16.7 lbs/h
Total/press 19.4 kg/h (42.7 lbs/h) 19.4 kg/h ( 42.7 lbs/h
Annual hours of operation 2000 h 4000 h 4000 h
Annual uncontrolled emissions for model press 39 Mg/yr (43 tons/y) - 78 Mg/yr (85 tons/y)
-------
TABLE 2-2. MODEL HEATSET WEB-OFFSET LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING PRESSES
EQLJIPP [ D WITH COMBINATION DRYERS
Model Model
Press Press
C 0
Description of Model Press
Press width 0.97
Press speed 244
Nuiriber of printing units/press 4
Ink consumption rate/press 23.1
Isopropyl alcohol consumption rate/press 11.8
in
in/mm
kg/h
kg/h
(38 in.)
(800 ft/mm)
(52.2 lbs/h)
(26.0 lbs/h)
0.97
244
4
23.7
11.8
m
rn/mm
kg/h
kg/h
(38 In.)
(800 ft/mm)
(52.2 lbs/h)
(26.0 lbs/h)
Exhaust rate from combination dryers
170
Nin 3 /mtn
(6000 scfm)
170
Nm 3 /min
(6000 scfin)
‘
Exhaust temperature of combihation dryers
Uncontrolled euuiission rates for each press
pressroom: isopropyl alcohol
ink solvent
135
5.9
0
°C
kg/h
kg/h
(275°F)
(13.0 lbs/h)
(0 lbs/h)
135
5.9
0
°C
kg/h
kg/h
(275°F)
(13.0 lbs/h)
(0 lbs/h)
dryer exhaust: isopropyl alcohol
ink solvent
Total/press
Annual hours of operation
5.9
1.6
1 i4
kg/h
kg/
k Jh
(13.0 lbs/h)
(! i.7 lbs/h)
5.9
1.6
kg/h
kg/h
(13.0 lbs/h)
(16.1 lbs/h
(42.7 lbs/h)
19.4
4000
kg/h
h
(42.7 lbs/h
4000 h
2000
h
Annual uncontrolled emissions for model press
39 Mg/yr
(43 ton /y)
78 Mg/yr
(85 tons/.y)
-------
Four model presses are presented. Each model is full-width, four-
color, and annually operates either 2000 hours or 4000 hours. At each
annual operating rate, the model presses include, as one variation, high-
velocity hot air dryers, and, as another variation, combination dryers.
2.3.1 Emission Points
The two major VOC emission points at heatset web-offset lithographic
printing presses are the printing units and the dryers. If high volatility
organic compounds such as isopropyl alcohol are used in fountain solutions,
significant quantities of these compounds evaporate at the printing units.
Essentially all of the remaining volatile organic compounds from the foun-
tain solution and most of the ink solvent evaporate in the dryers and are
emitted to the atmosphere in the exhausts from the dryers.
2.3.2 Emissions Distribution
Most heatset web-offset lithographic printing inks contain between 30
and 50 weight percent ink solvent, with 40 weight percent ink solvent re-
ported as being a reasonable average. 15 Thus, the, ink solvent percentage
used for the model presses is 40 weight percent. Fountain solutions vary
widely in composition and formulation, especially with respect to the damp-
ening aid; isopropyl alcohol, however, is widely used. For constructing
a worst case model press as the starting point for analysis, a fountain
solution with 25 weight percent isoprapyl alcohol appe rs to be reasonable.
Estimating VOC emissions from the model press required a number of
assumptions. Little quantitative information is available, particularly
for the percentage of ink solvent retained on the web as it exits the dryer.
Discussions with industry representatives, trade associations, and printing
Ink Vendors indicate that the percentage of ink solvent retained on the web
may vary from as little as 15 percent to as much as 50 percent, depending
primarily on the degree of ink coverage, drying conditions, and grade or
type of the paper used for the web. The only published quantitative infor-
mation available on this subject, however, indicates that the percentage of
ink solvent retained on the web is 15 to 20 percent. 16 This study, although
quite limited, did examine a wide variation in ink coverage. Consequently,
the following distribution of ink solvent appears to be reasonable:
2-25
-------
0 20% retained on the web
° 80% evaporated in dryers
° 0% evaporated in the pressroom
Concerning fountain solutions, little quantitative information is
available on the distribution of VOC emissions among various emission
points. However, Isopropyl alcohol is much more volatile than ink solvents,
so significant evaporation into the pressroom can be expected. Based on
calculations in Appendix A, the following distribution for tsopropyl alcohol
emissions seems reasonable: -
° 0% retained on the web
o 50% emitted from dryers
o 50% emitted in pressroom ventilation
Finally, for isopropyl alcohol consumption in fountain solutions, 0.5 kilo-
gram per kilogram (0.5 ib/ib) of ink consumed appears reasonable, as dis-
cussed in Section 2.2.2.4. Total uncontrolled emissions for a model press
are calculated in Appendix A, and shown in Table 2-1 and Table 2-2.
2.4 REFERENCES
1. Strauss, Victor. The Printing tndustry. Washington, D.C., The Print-
ing Industries of America, Inc. 1967. 814 p.
2. Pocket Pal (12th ed.). New York, N. Y., International Paper Company.
1979. 204 p.
3. Lithographers Manual (6th ed.). Raymond Blair and Charles Shapiro,
Eds. Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical Foundation. 1980.
20 sections.
4. Web Offset Press Operating. Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical
Foundation, Inc. 1974. 180 p.
5. Directory of Heat-Set Web Offset Printers and Heat-Set Web Offset
Press Installations. Arlington, Va., Printing Industries of America,
Inc. January 1980. 78 p.
6. Web Offset Press Operating. Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical
Foundation, Inc. 1974. 180 p.
7. Pocket Pal (12th ed.). ew York, N.Y., International Paper Company.
1979. 204 p.
8. Lithographers anual (6th ed.). Raymond Blair and Charles Shapiro,
Eds. Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical Foundation. 1980.
20 sections.
2-26
-------
9. Strauss, Victor. The Printing Industry. Washington, D.C., The Print-
ing Industries of America, Inc. 1967. 814 p.
10. Printing Ink Handbook. Harrison, N.Y., National Association of
Printing Ink Manufacturers, Inc. 1976. p. 25-30.
11. Gadomski, R.R. Report of Findings on Cooperative Test No. 2.
Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical Foundation. October 1973.
p. 185.
12. Letter from Michaelis, Ted, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C., to
Oslan, Robert, Arcata Publications Group, Los Angeles,- Calif. March
18, 1981. Consumption of isopropyl alcohol and printing ink.
13. Web Offset Press Operating. Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical
Foundation, Inc. 1974. 180 p.
14. Economics of Making the Web Offset Equipment Decision. Arlington,
Va., Printing Industries of America, Inc. 1979. 20 p.
15. Telecon. Scarlett, Terry, Sun Chemical Corporation, Northlake, Ill.,
with Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C. November 4,
1980. Composition of printing inks for web—offset lithographic
printing.
16. Gadomski, R. R. Report of Findings on Cooperative Test No. 2.
Pittsburgh, Pa., Graphic Arts Technical Foundation. October 1973.
p. 185.
2-27
-------
(
at fQC tS
1 ’ ,w( o (
fl(C 5h
o 19(
LX
Jw
v jr i
I7
,, R oYC-
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LIBRARY SERVICES OFFICE, MD-35
86 Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
FAX COVER SHEET
Date: ‘1- 1 3 Time: . 3 O
To:
Fax number:
Message:
r S
1 T 3 q
&p-
1 {
i’ b
From: W\ 9
Phone: (919) 54r-2777
Fax: (919) 541-1405
Page I of including cover sheet
-------
3.0 EMISSION CONTROL TECHNIQUES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes techniques for controlling VOC emissions from
process-color heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses, and dis-
cusses the emission reduction capabilities for these control techniques.
As discussed in Chapter 2, there are two principle sources of VOC emis-
sions from process-color heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses.
These sources are isopropyl alcohol or other high volatility organic com-
pounds used as dampening aids in fountain solutions, and volatile organic
compounds used as solvents in printing inks.
Two approaches for controlling VOC emissions from process—color heatset
web-offset lithographic printing presses are material reformulation and
add—on control. It is possible to use material reformulation with add-on
control to achieve greater emission reduction than is possible with either
approach alone.
3.2 MATERIAL REFORMULATION
Two material refornulations which can be used as a means of reducing
VOC emissions in process-color heatsèt web-offset lithographic printing
are fountain solution reformulation and ink reformulation.
3.2.1 Fountain Solution Reformulation
As discussed in Chapter 2, volatile organic compounds are frequently
used in fountain solutions as dampening aids in process-color heatset web-
offset lithographic printing. A common dampening aid is isopropyl alco-
hol. In recent years printers have been motivated to find substitutes for
isopropyl alcohol in the fountain solution due to periods of short supply,
3—1
-------
to the need to reduce costs, and to regulations from the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration which limit personnel exposure to iso—
propyl alcohol in the workroom. 1 As a result, substitute wetting agents
have been developed by printing firms, by suppliers, and by a major
printing industry trade association, the Graphic Arts Technical Founda-
tion. Several firms which market these isopropyl alcohol substitutes
are:
RBP Chemical Corporation, Milwaukee, WI,
Roberts and Porter, tnc., Lake Bluff, IL,
Rosos Research Laboratory, Lake Bluff, IL, and
Union Carbide Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA.
The composition of most isopropyl alcohol substitutes developed for use in
fountain solutions is proprietary. Many are based on compounds called
polyols (for example, ethylene glycol), which are chemically similar to
isopropyl alcohol but more complex in chemical structure.
Factors influencing evaporation of isopropyl alcohol and isopropyl
alcohol substitutes are vapor pressure and concentration in fountain sol-
utions. The vapor pressure of isopropyl alcohol is 3447 Pascal (05 psia)
at 15.5°C (60°F), and, as discussed in Chapter 2, it is frequently used tn
concentrations of 25 weight percent in fountain solutions. Substitutes
for isopropyl alcohol generally have a vapor pressure of less than 690
Pascal (0.1 psia) at 15.5°C (60°F), and are typically used in concentra-
tions of about 2 weight percent or less in fountain solutions. 2 According—
ly, the rates of evaporation of isopropyl alcohol substitutes are signifi-
cantly less than the rate of evaporation of tsopropyl alcohol.
Complete replacement of isopropyl alcohol by substitutes in the foun-
tain solutions has been successfully implemented on a number of process—
color heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses. For example,
eight major printing plants have been identified which print portions in-
cluding both text and illustrations, or all of magazines such as Newsweek,
Business 1eek, Time, Sports Illustrated, National Geographic, and Playboy
on process-color heatset web-offset lithographic pressses without isopropyl
alcohol in the fountain solutions. 3 ’ 4 At these plants, replacement of
3—2
-------
isopropyl alcohol by substitutes at a concentration of 2 weight percent or
less in the fountain solution has been shown to provide entirely satisfac-
tory performance. In some cases minor press modifications, such as adjust-
ing the hardness of the metering rolls, have been necessary, but in many
cases no press modifications were necessary. Industry representatives
state that there are jobs which cannot be produced satisfactorily without
use of some isopropyl alcohol, but no firm data has been presented to
support these statements.
Elimination of high volatility organic compounds used as wetting agents
in fountain solutions could achieve a substantial reduction in VOC emis-
sions, depending on current practice with individual presses. As much as
25 weight percent of isopropyl alcohol or other high volatility organic
compounds would be replaced with 2 weight percent of low volatility foun-
tain solution substitute (20 weight percent of which would be retained on
the web leaving the dryer, as discussed in Chapter 2), resulting in a
reduction of VOC emissions from fountain solutions of slightly more than
90 percent.
3.2.2 Ink Reformulation
The other source of VOC emissions in process-color heatset web-offset
lithographic printing is the organic solvents used in printing inks. As
discussed in Chapter 2, heatset web—offset lithographic printing inks
typically contain about 40 percent by weight of organic solvents. 5 Ink
refornulation to reduce the organic solvent content Is a technique for
reducing VOC emissions from heatset web—offset lithographic printing.
Inks suitable for use on process-color heatset web—offset lithographic
printing presses are limited to a rather narrow range of viscosity and
other rheological properties (body, tack, etc.). Consequently, as the
organic solvent content of a heatset web—offset lithographic printing ink
is reduced, the composition of the ink resins is changed to maintain the
viscosity and other properties of the ink within the suitable range. This
change is generally accomplished by using organic resins of lower molecular
weight, but maintaining pigment concentration at the original level. Such
resins, when dissolved in a lesser weight percent of organic solvent,
3—3
-------
yield a reformulated ink with a viscosity about the same as that of the
Ink before reformulation.
Viscosity, however, Is not the only important property of heatset
web—offset lithographic printing inks. Reformulation of inks to reduce
their organic solvent content may adversely affect other critical proper-
ties of the Ink. In reformulating an ink to include less organic solvent,
the ink manufacturer must maintain each of these properties within accept-
able ranges. This, in turn, tends to limit the degree towhich the organic
solvent content of heatset web—offset lithographic inks can be reduced
through ink reformulation. Based on the use ã modern organic solvent-resin
system technology, Ink manufacturers have been successful in formulating
inks which satisfy many requirements for process-color heatset web-offset
lithographic printing with about 30 percent by weight of organic solvent.
Most ink ianufacturers have been relatively unsuccessful in formulating
heatset web—offset lithographic printing inks with an organic solvent
content significantly below 30 weight percent. 5 ’ 6 However low solvent
inks iight become available in the future.
Since the viscosity, tack, and pigment concentration of low solvent
and high solvent Inks are maintained approximately equal, as described
above, essentially the same ink thickness is deposited when printing with
either low solvent or high solvent ink. Therefo, e, the volume ofink used
tends to be independent of its organic solvent content and, since the ink
density changes only slightly upon reformulation (up to about ÷ 5%), the
weight of ink consumed remains about the same.
Dryer temperatures are adjusted so that the printed web leaving the
chill rolls and the folder will not adhere to the ink (set off) on the
adjoining page when stacked or folded. This stage of dryness is generally
independent of the original organic solvent content of the Ink. Accord-
ingly, the amount of organic solvent remaining on the printed web should
be fairly independent of the organic solvent content of the ink. Conse-
quently, use of Inks with an organic solvent content of 30 percent by
weight, instead of 40 percent by weight, would reduce VOC emissions from
the dryer by about 30 percent.
3-4
-------
3.3 P DD-ON CONTROLS
The two major add-on control systems that have been used successfully
to reduce VOC emissions from process-color heatset web-offset lithographic
printing presses are:
cooler/electrostatic precipitator (cooler/ESP) systems, and
o incinerator systems.
The following discussion describes the use of this equipment to control
VOC emissions from process-color heatset web-offset lithographic printing
presses.
3.3.1 Cooler/Electrostatic Precipitator
A cooler/ESP is means for controlling VOC emissions from organic
solvents evaporated from the ink in the dryers at process—color heatset
web-offset lithographic printing presses. In a typical system (Figure 3-1),
the dryer exhaust gases pass over a finned tube heat exchanger (cooler)
which cools the gases and partially condenses the organic solvent evaporated
from the ink in the dryers. Generally, a cooling tower supplies cooled
water to the heat exchanger. Some of the condensed organic solvent is
deposited on the finned tubes within the heat exchanger. Some of the con-
densed solvent, however, remains suspended as an aerosol in the gas stream,
and passes into the charged electrical field maintained within the ESP.
The aerosol droplets become charged, and are attracted to and deposited on
the oppositely charged grid plates within the ESP. 7
Some industrial installations of cooler/ESP’s have an air-to-air plate
heat exchanger preceding the finned tube heat exchanger. Ambient air is
blown through the plates of the heat exchanger, while the hot dryer gases
pass over the plates. The temperature of the dryer exhaust gases are
significantly reduced, thereby reducing the cooling burden on the water-
cooled finned tubes and on the cooling tower.
Organic solvents not condensed in the cooler are not removed from the
gas stream by the control system. Consequently, the overall efficiency of
this control system depends on the degree of condensation of organic sol-
vents attained in the cooler. This is determined by the vapor-liquid
equilibrium properties of the organic solvents, by the temperature to
3—5
-------
Fan
Exhaust Gas
From Dryers
Cooling
Water
Figure 3-1. Cooler / Elecfrostctic Precipitaior.
Exhaust
Gas
Cooled
Exhaust
Gas
Cooler
Dryer (Finned lube
Exhaust Heat Exchan’ger)
Iwo - Stage
Electrostatic
Preciplicior
3-6
-------
which the gas stream from the dryer is reduced, and by the initial con-
centration of organic solvents in the gas stream from the dryers.
Figure 3-2 illustrates the effect of temperature and the effect of
initial concentration on the degree of solvent condensation attained in the
cooler. This figure is based on the model presses outlined in Chapter 2
and on the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) boiling curve
for a typical organic solvent found in heatset web-offset lithographic
printing inks. The details of the calculations performed to generate this
figure are outlined in Appendix A.
As shown in Figure 3-2, the degree of condensation increases as the
temperature of the gas stream decreases. The effect of initial concentra-
tion is shown by the difference in degree of condensation fronT the exhaust
gas streams of high-velocity hot air dryers and combination dryers. As
discussed in Chapter 2, high—velocity hot air dryers discharge a much lower
volume of exhaust gas than combination dryers. As a result, the initial
concentration of organic solvent in the gas stream from high-velocity hot
air dryers is much higher. Since the equilibrium concentration of organic
solvent remaining in the gas stream is fixed by the temperature to which
this gas stream is cooled (assuming this temperature is below the dew-point
of the organic solvent), the lower volume of exhaust gases discharged from
high-velocity hot air dryers contain, after cooling less organic solvent
than contained in the higher volume o f exhaust gases discharged from combi-
nation dryers. Consequently, the degree of condensation is greater on high-
velocity hot air dryers than on combination dryers.
Most cooler/ESP’s currently in operation on process-color heatset web-
offset lithographic printing presses cool the gas stream discharged from
the dryer to about 38°C (100°f). Figure 3—2, based on calculations in Appen-
dix A, shows that at 38°C (100°F) about 65 percent of the organic solvent
contained in the gas stream would be condensed from exhaust streams of model
plants equipped with high—velocity hot air dryers, and about 50 percent
would be condensed from the exhaust streams of model plants equipped with
combination dryers. Figure 3-2 also shows that the amount of organic
solvent condensed could be increased if the gas stream temperature were
decreased further. This could be accomplished through use of additional
3—7
-------
90
70
60
40
30
20
0
(
10
50)
20
(70)
30
(85)
40
(105)
50 60
(125)
GAS STREAM
TEMPERATURE
IN Co
OLER,°C (°F)
Figure 3-2.
Degree of Condensot on in Cooler/ESP
for Model Presses
,hVe lo c i ly
ryers
80
I
0
(I- )
z
LU
z
0
050
Combination
Dryers
LU
LU
0
LU
3-8
-------
cooling stages in the cooler. The additional condensation of the organic
solvents would lead to more efficient VOC removal in the cooler/ESP.
Exhaust gases from the dryers on process-color heatset web-offset
lithographic printing presses contain significant amounts of water vapor.
The water originates from fountain solution transferred to the web and
evaporated in the dryers, from combustion of fuel for heating the dryers,
from evaporation in the dryers of some of the water in the paper (web), and
from the water content (humidity) of the fresh air taken into the dryers.
Cooling of the gas streams in a cooler/ESP to a temperature at which
significant amounts of organic solvents condense also leads to condensa-
tion of a significant amount of water. Condensed water, or “free moisture”
as it is more commonly termed, contributes to arcing in the ESP. As the
presence of free moisture in the gas stream increases, arcing increases.
Although a well-designed ESP tolerates some arcing during operation, exces-
sive arcing between the plates and wires in an ESP can lead to wire failure
and subsequent loss in ESP performance. Accordingly, in many cases the
ESP of cooler/ESP systems is designed to shut down automatically when
excessive arcing occurs.
Because of this potential for excessive arcing in the ESP, most exist-
ing cooler/ESP systems, as noted above, have been designed to operate at a
temperature of about 38°C (100°F) in the cooler. ‘ Experience has shown
that the amount of free moisture contained in the gas stream entering the
ESP at this temperature is low enough to avoid this problem.
Recently, however, a cooler/ESP system of advanced design has been
placed into operation on a process-color heatset web—offset lithographic
press. This cooler/ESP incorporates a design feature referred to as a
“reheat” section installed between the cooler and the ESP. 8
The basic design features of this cooler/ESP are shown in Figure 3-3.
Cool water from a cooling tower and chilled water from a refrigeration unit
are supplied to cooling sections of sufficient size and design to cool the
dryer exhaust stream to about 15°C (60°F). Most of the organic solvent and
substantial amounts of water contained in the gas stream condense on the
finned tubes of the heat exchanger. This water/organic solvent condensate
is collected and drawn off at this point. From the cooling section, the
3-9
-------
Figure 3-3.
Cooler / C hit ten Electrostatic Precipitator
With Reheat.
Cooling Chilled
Water Water
H
1111 H H
Cooler
Exhaust
Gas
Reheat
Coils
9iil let
Dryer
Exhaust
Fan
Iwo -Stage
Electrostatic
Precipitator
Exhaust Gas
From Dryers
-------
gas stream passes through a reheat heat exchanger. As the gas stream
temperature is increased, the amount of free moisture is decreased through
re-evaporation of some of the condensed water remaining in the gas stream.
The gas stream then passes into the ESP section, where most of the organic
solvent aerosol remaining in the gas stream is electrically charged and
deposited on the ESP plates. 8
Operation of this unique cooler/ESP system has shown that reheat of
the gas stream from the cooler is successful in preventing excessive arcing
in the ESP. Although the nature of the heat source for the reheat section
in this advanced design cooler/E$P is proprietary, steam or returned cool-
ing water heated by the incoming hot dryer exhaust gases in the cooler sec-
tion heat exchanger could be used as a heat source. 8
For the case of high-velocity hot air dryers, Figure 3—2 shows that
the degree of condensation of a cooler/ESP operating at 15°C (60°F) should
be about 85 percent. The overall control efficiency of the cooler/ESP
system described above has been measured as about 90 percent. 9 Although
the test method used to obtain this efficiency differs from EPA Reference
Method 25 in analytical treatment of the collected VOC emissions, both
r ethods ce j n :z-j genL :apping with a dry ice b ach . 1 ° Eecause of the
differences in analytical methods, no firm conclusions can be drawn from
these test results. However, both predicted and measured efficiencies
indicate that VOC control levels of about 85 percent can be achieved by using
a cooler/ reheat/ESP system.
An earlier pilot-plant study of cooler/ESP efficiency in controlling
VOC emissions from full-color heatset web—offset lithographic printing also
reports moderately high levels of control. 11 For three separate performance
tests, overall VOC control efficiencies were reported as averaging about
80 percent. This pi1ot-plan study utilized a modification of EPA Reference
Method 5, condensing organics from the gas streams at ice bath temperature,
0°C (32°F). EPA Reference Method 25 condenses organics from gas streams
at dry-ice temperature, -80°C (-110°F). Severe operating difficulties
were encountered during these pilot—plant studies, but recent comercial
Installations of improved design demonstrate that cooler/ESP operation
is feasible over prolonged operating periods. No firm conclusions can be
3—11
-------
drawn from these pilot-plant tests. However, the test results indicate
that high VOC control levels can be achieved using a cooler/ESP system.
As described above, In the normal operation of a cooler/ESP, ink sol-
‘/ent condenses and is deposited on the finned tubes in the cooling sections
and on the plates of the ESP. The ink solvent condensate carries with it
small amounts of particulate matter, partially oxidized organic solvents
and resins, and other relatively viscous materials. Drainage of this resi-
due from the finned tubes of the cooling section and fr m the ES ? plates
is slow and incomplete. Unless cleaned frorn the finned tubes and ESP
plates, a varnish—like deposit can build uçi This deposit can effectively
insulate the finned tubes and ESP plates from the gas stream containing
the organic solvent vapors. If this Is allowed to occur, both the cooling
and collection efficiencies of a cooler/ESP can decreasi dramatically,
leading to a substantial reduction in VOC emission control efficiency.
Many installations incorporate a conventional filter in the exhaust
gas stream between the dryer and the cooler/ESP which removes particulate
matter and debris from the exhaust gas stream and thus reduces the amount
and rate of fouling of the heat exchanger surfaces and ESP plates. Exper-
ience with existing installations of these filters shows that weekly main—
tenance, by cleaning O( replacement, is typically required to ensure proper
performance.
To maintain high VOC emissloh’ control efficiency, however, regular and
frequent cleaning of residues from the finned tubes and ESP plates is never-
theless necessary. CoolerfES?’s at process-color heatset web—offset litho-
graphic printing presses frequently require cleaning every one to two weeks
to maintain design performance. Cleaning can be accomplished manually with
hot detergent solutions.
Automatic cleaning systems, as shown in Figure 3—4, are also in use.
The systems have a heated holding tank for detergent solution, pumps for
circulation and pressurization of etargent solution, a series of nozzles
positioned so that the nozzle discharge iipinges on the finned tubes of the
cooling section and on the plates of the ESP, and a filter and settling tank
to remove spent detergent solution and particulate matter. Automatic valves
3-12
-------
Figure 3-4. Cooler! Electrostatic Precipitator
With Automatic Cleaning System.
Spent
Detergent
So’ution
Cooling
Water
1’
-dJ
Two-Stage
Electrostatic
Precipito or
3—13
-------
control the flow of detergent solution to either the cooling coils or the
ESP plates. The cleaning system is normally started manually, but cleaning
proceeds automatiàally to the end of the cleaning cycle.
As an alternative to cooler/ESP systems, there are cornercially avail-
able condensation systems in which the ESP is replaced with a demister
or with a micro filter packed with materials such as dimensionally sta-
bilized mesh. One such system Is reported to have been in successful
operation for over a year at a heatset web-offset lithographic printing
press, but no performance data are available on the efficiency of this or
of other similar units. 12
3.3.2 incineration
Incineration is an effective means of add—on control frequently used
for reducing VOC emissions from process—color heatset web-offset litho-
graphic printing presses. Two types of incineration are described below:
theTmal (direct flame), and catalytic. Although the VOC’s emitted from
the dryers on process-color heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses
are combustible materials, proper control of time, temperature, and turbu-
lence is necessary for e tcient incineration.
As a result of increased fuel costs in recent years, equipment vendors
have developed energy recovery systems that are combIned with incinerators
to recover a major portion of the heat contained in the incinerator exhaust
gases.
3.3.2.1 Thermal Incineration - Thermal incinerators installed at process-
color heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses usually consist
of an oxidation chamber, a burner, and a heat exchanger, as shown in
Figure 3-5. The dryer exhaust gases are introduced into the incinerator
where proper conditions of time, temoerature, and turbulence are achieved
to oxidize the VOC’s. The oxidation chamber of incinerators commonly used
on process—color heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses is typi-
cally a simple afterburner lined with refractory material. Three tyoes
of natural gas burners are frequently used: premix, pure nozzle mix, and
raw gas burners. The least expensive and most common is the raw gas
burner.
3-14
-------
Exhaust Fan
Figure 3-5. Thermal Incinerator with Heat Exchanger.
Dryer
Exhaust
Gases
Incinerator
Cooled
Clean
Gases
Hot Clean
Gas
Preheated Dryer Exhaust Gas
‘Heat Exchanger
3—15
-------
In the premix burner (Figure 3—6), combustion air is forced through a
a venturi mixer, creating a partial vacuum at the venturi throat. Natural
gas passes through a regulator and is Introduced Into the mixer throat
where the venturi action provides thorough air/gas mixing. Since all of
the air for combustion Is Introduced at the venturi mixer, good combustion
does not depend upon the oxygen content of the dryer exhaust gases. The
turn down ratio (the ratio of maximum burner output to minimum burner
output) of this type of burner Is generally about 4:1, wi th the exception
of one modified premix burner design which has a turn down patio of 10:1.10
Premix burners are subject to partial plugging of the burner orifices,
especially in the presence of paper dusts. This in turn may result in back-
firing and’ more frequent cleaning may accordingly be required for the
premix burner than the raw gas and pure nozzle mix- buri ers described
beT ow. 13
In the raw gas burner (Figure 3—7) natural gas is fed directly to the
burner orifices, and all of the oxygen required for combustion is supplied
by the dryer exhaust gases. If insufficient oxygen is present in the
dryer exhaust gases, or if the velocity of the dryer exhaust gas stream
past the burner is too low, burning may propagate far into tne incinerator
chamber or the flame nay be extinguished completely. Because of relatively
poor mixing, a large excess volume cf oxygen—carrying dryer exhaust gas is
required. The turn down ratio of the raw gas butner varies from 25:1 to
about 10:1.13
In the pure nozzle mix burner (Figure 3-8), the correct amount of com-
bustion air and natural gas are mixed at the burner orifice ports, but the
mixing is shielded from the dryer exhaust gas stream. This shielded mixing
results in complete combustion of the natural gas with a minimum supply of
air and eliminates the possibility 0 f backfiring or flame out. As shown
in Figure 3—8, the flame extends out into the combustion chamber, where
‘IOC oxidation takes place. Very high turn down ratios of up to 40:1 are
possible, and the volume of dryer exhaust gases required for proper burner
operation is minimized. 13 This provides good flexibility in dryer opera-
tion, permitting the number of dryers exhausting to the incinerator to be
iaried readily.
3-16
-------
A AYYY
Dryer
Exhaust
Gases
Ve n t U r i
Mixer
Dryer
Exhaust
Gases
Dryer
Exhaust
Gases
‘ Flame
Combustible Air/Gas Stream
-4--—-- Regulated ‘Gas Supply
Combustion Air
Figure 3-6. Premix Burner
Y x x
Figure 3-7.
Figure 3-8.
- < Flame
Profile Plates
Regulated Gas Supply.
Raw Gas Burner
Air/Gas Mixing Zone
d Gas Supply
Combustion Air
Pure Nozzle Mix Burner
rx
‘—4
Flame
3-17
-------
The main disadvantage of thermal incineration is the large amount of
auxiliary fuel required to maintain the high temperatures needed for oxi-
dizirig the VOC emissions. To satisfy safety and insurance requirements,
the concentration of VOC’s in the dryer exhaust gases should be maintained
at 25 percent LEL or below.
tnk solvents and other volatile organic compounds in the dryer exhaust
gases will oxidize with about 90 percent conversion efficiency if a temper-
ature of 700°C (1,300°F) and a residence time of 0.3 to 0.5 seconds are
achieved. To attain conversion efficiencies as high as 98 percent, incin-
erators may be operated at temperatures of 760 to 870°C (1,400° to 1,600°F)
and a residence time of 0.75 seconds. 14
3.3.2.2 Catalytic Incineration - Catalytic incinerators differ from ther-
mal incinerators In that catalysts are used to promote efficient oxidation
of VOC emissions at lower temperatures. The catalyst increases the rate
of VOC oxidation at the lower temperature.
Catalytic incinerators contain a preheat section and a chamber which
contains the catalyst. A typical catalytic incinerator is illustrated in
Figure 3-9. The preheat section, which raises the temperature of the
incoming dryer exhaust gases to 320° to 480°C (600° to 900°F), consists of
a burner 1 as descrfbe6 in the preceding section, followed by a mixing
zone. The temperature increase in the preheat se,ction is sufficient for
VOC’s to be oxidized catalytically.” The gas stream leaves the catalyst at
an elevated temperature of 430° to 590°C (800° to 1100°F). 15
The catalyst most cornonly used in catalytic incinerators currently
installed at process—color heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses
is a pelletized metal oxide or less frequently, a member of the platinum
series of metals supported either on metal or matrix elements (ceramic
honeycombs or rods), or on aluminum pellets. Performance of the catalyst
depends on the condition of the incoming dryer exhaust gasses and on resi-
dence time of dryer exhaust gases in the catalyst bed. Efficiency of the
catalyst is a function of the temperature, composition, and concentration
of the VOC being oxidized.
Since the high temperatures normally required for a thermal incinerator
3-18
-------
Exhausf Fan
Figure 3-9. Catalytic Incinerator.
Cooled
Clean
Gas
Dryer
Exhaust
Gases
Catalyst
Preheater Cells
Hot Clean
Preheated Dryer Exhaust Gases
Heat Exchanger
3-19
-------
are not required for a catalytic incinerator, auxiliary fuel consumption
is lower than for thermal incineration. However, the resulting lower
operating fuel cost must be balanced against the high initial capital cost
of the catalyst bed. 15
In operation of a catalytic incinerator, catalyst surfaces can become
masked or covered by resins or oxides, or can become poisoned by metals
such as mercury, arsenic, zinc or lead. Normal maintenance Includes annual
or semi-annual inspection and cleaning of the catalyst bed, and periodic
replacement when the catalyst efficiency drops below a predetermined
value, usually after about 5 years of normal operation. Catalytic inciner-
ators tailored to the needs of process-color heatset web—offset lithographic
printing presses offer accessible and easily maintained catalyst beds,
and incorporate highly efficient heat recovery systems.
Properly operated and maintained catalytic incinerators are capable
of achieving 90 percent reduction of VOC emissions in the dryer exhaust
stream. 14
3.3.3 Heat Recovery
An effective method of reducing fuel costs for thermal or catalytic
incineration is through recovery of useful heat from the incinerator dis-
charge gas. The recovered heat may be used to preheat the dryer exhaust
before incineration, to preheat the dryer Inlet afr, or, in some cases, to
produce steam for space heat or for production processes. Described below
are three heat recovery systems commonly installed on incinerators of
process-color heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses.
Most incinerators used with process-color heatset web—offset litho-
graphic printing presses have a plate heat exchanger for transferring about
40 percent of the available heat In the incinerator discharge to the gas
stream entering the incinerator which significantly reduces operating
costs for the incinerator. A typical installation of a thermal incinera-
tor and a plate heat exchanger is shown in Figure 3-5. Figure 3-10 shows
two plates from a typical plate heat exchanger. Plate heat exchangers
are designed so that the individual plates may be stacked into banks to
orovide adequate heat transfer surface area. Hot gases discharged from
the incinerator are directed over the outside walls of the heat exchanger
3—20
-------
Two Plates From
Cool Air Or Gas
Heat Exchanger.
Hot
Gas
Figure 3-10.
3-21
-------
plates, and the air to be heated is directed through the inside passages
of the plates. 16
Although heat exchangers are being used successfully at thermal incin-
erators operating in process-color heatset web-offset lithographic printing
presses, recovery of more than 40 percent of the available heat from the
thermal incinerator discharge has generally been unsuccessful. 16 Autoigni-
tion of the VOC contained in the dryer exhaust gas stream at the higher tem-
peratures occasionally experienced at low gas flow may resu t in plate “hot
spots” and “burn out”. Although materials of construction are comercially
available which would resist high temperature .fa11ure, these materials are
generally too expensive for use In this application.
Catalytic incinerators, as-noted earlier, operate at loweç temperatures
than thermal incinerators. The correspondingly lower exhaust temperatures
from catalytic incinerators allow a higher level of heat recovery without
autoignition of the dryer exhaust gases. Figure 3—11 shows a typical
arrangement of a heat exchanger on a catalytic incinerator. This arrange-
ment is capable of recovering 70 percent of the total heat added to the
incineration system. 17
Even greater heat recovery efficiencies are possible through the use
of two heat exchangers. 17 Figure 3-12 shows a typical arrangement of pri-
mary and secondary heat exchangers on a catalytic incinerator. tn this
arrangement, the primary heat exchenger preheats the dryer exhaust gas
stream, while the secondary heat exchanger recovers additional heat from
the incinerator exhaust stream. Heat recovered in the secondary heat ex-
changer is used to pre—heat sane of the air to the dryer. In typical in-
stallations, this dryer make—up air ‘is drawn from a hood positioned over
the chill roll section of the heatset web-offset lithographic press, thus
reducing or eliminating uncontrolled VOC emissions from the chill roll
section. The secondary heat exchanger Is sized to recover additional
heat, based on required temperature of makeup air to the dryer. Typically
in systems of modern design tailored to the requirements of the heatset
web-offset lithographic printing industry, the additional heat recovery is
at least 30 percent and potentially can be as high as 50 percent, for an
overall heat recovery efficiency of 100 to 120 percent. Efficiencies in
3-22
-------
Burner
Figure 3-11.
Catalyiic Incinerator With 70 Percent
Heat Exchanger
• Incinerator
Exhaust
Heat
Exchanger
70%
Dryer
3—23
-------
Fan
Incinerator
Exhaust
I
Figure 3—12. Catalytic Incinerator With 70 Percent
Primary And (Potential) 50 Percent
Secondary Heat Exchangers
Burner
S.,
Dryer
Exhaust
Fan
Primary
Heal
Exchanger
70%
Dryer
Chill
Roll
Stand
3- 2t1
-------
excess of 100 percent are possible because of the heat gained in oxidation
of the VOC emissions in the dryer exhaust gas.
3.3.4 Replacement of Combination Dryers
As mentioned in Chapter 2, recently installed process-color heatset
web-offset lithographic printing presses are equipped with high—velocity
hot air dryers. However, a number of process-color heatset web-offset
lithographic printing presses (especially older ones), are equipped with
combination dryers. In the model presses described in Chapter 2, the
exhaust gas discharge rate from each combination dryer is 170 normal cubic
meters per minute (6000 scfm), while that from each high-velocity hot air
dryer is 85 normal cubic meters per minute (3000 scfrn). In high-velocity
hot air dryers, the heated exhaust gas is recirculated with •exhaust gas
discharge maintained to assure that the VOC concentration of the exhaust
gas stream is below 25 percent LEL. In combination dryers, there is less
recirculation of the exhaust gas stream.
Since the volume of exhaust gas from high-velocity hot air dryers is
about one—half that from combination dryers, the size of the cooler/ESP or
incinerator required for VOC emissions control of the dryer exhaust gases
is smaller, with lower capital and operating costs. Also, as shown in
Figure 3-2, a cooler/ESP system is capable of operating at a higherdegree
of condensation on high-velocity hot air dryers than or combination dryers.
In addition to lower costs for VOC emission control, the basic oper-
ating cost for high—velocity hot air dryers is significantly less than
that for combination dryers. The fuel requirements of high-velocity hot
air dryers, for example, are only about 70 percent for those for comparable
combination dryers. Consequently, many process-color heatset web-offset
lithographic printing press operators are considering replacing or have
already replaced combination dryers with high—velocity hot air dryers to
realize the savings from reduced fuel consumption.
Both high-velocity hot air and combination dryers are modular units
which generally incorporate all controls and instrumentation required for
their operation. Thus, existing combination dryers can be replaced with
high-velocity hot air dryers, the major physical consideration is spacing
3—25
-------
of the replacement dryer within the overall printing press line. Correct
spacing, in most cases, can be achieved by relocation of the chill rolls
and the folding equipment of the press.
3.3.5 Control of Multipress Operations
Emissions from more than one press may be manifolded to and controlled
by a single control device. A few installations exist, for example, in
which a cooler/ESP, or an Incinerator, controls VOC emissions from two
heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses. 18 In :other segments
0 f the printing industry (for example, rotogravure), control with a single
incinerator of VOC emissions from more than one printing press is a frequent
practice . 19 ’ 2 ° According to manufacturers of incineration equipment and to
representatives of the printing industry, no insurmountable technical prob-
lems exist which prevent mariifolding dryers of printing presses, including
heatset web—offset lithographic presses, to a single incinerator . 21 Major
areas of concern in the design and use of such equipment are:
C unstable and erratic performance of the incinerator as a result of
variations in exhaust gas flow rate due to shutdown of one or more
of the printing presses exhausting to the incinerator,
° incinerator failure resulting in shutdown of all the printing presses
controlled by that incinerator, and
° creation of an unsafe operating condition through failure to purge
dryers prior to start up, or during start up or shutdown of one or
more of the dryers exhausting to the inciner tor
Facilities operating In this and other industt ies have overcome each
of these problems. Some incinerators will perform erratically if gas flow
rates or hydrocarbon concentrations deviate significantly from design con-
ditions, but these problems in catalytic incinerators are usually caused
by the limited turndown ratios of the ’natural gas burner which preheats the
incoming gas. Natural gas burners are available with 40:1. turndown ratios
which are adequate to cover the ranges necessary if two or more printing
presses were manifolded to one control system. 22
The vast majority of the States provide for continued operation during
equipment malfunction. 23 These provisions usually require that nal functions
be reported promptly, and that repairs be Initiated as rapidly as possible,
but continued operation of the facility is usually permitted for reasonable
periods of time.
3-26
-------
Most heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses are equipped
with two completely isolated dryer sections, both dryer sections connected
to a single cont ol device. It Is comon practice to ignite one dryer
burner with the discharge ducted to an operating incinerator or cooler/ESP,
and with the other dryer operating. However, if additional isolation is
required, it is possible to provide ducts and automatic valves interlocked
with the dryer flame control system, so that all dryer emissions are auto-
matically vented to atmosphere until proof of flame in the dryer is esta-
blished. No significant change in emissions is expected from this design
modification because ink solvent is not evaporated from the web if there
is no flame. Efficiency of cooler/ESP systems is increased because dryers
which are not operating are not connected to the exhaust system, thus in-
creasing concentration of organic compounds in the cooler! ESP inlet gas
stream. Operating cost of incinerators is similarly decreased because
inoperative dryers are not vented through the incinerator, thus reducing
the mass of gas which is heated.
Manufacturing firms which have designed and installed incinerators for
control of VOC emissions from more than one rotogravure printing press have
incorporated automatic controls and instrumentation which provide for safe
purging of the dryer ovens to atmosphere at startup or when bringing a
printing press on stream during Incinerator operation, and for automatic
burner turndown when a printing pressis shut down during incinerator opera-
tion. One incinerator manufacturer, for example, has installed equipment
which controls dryer exhaust gas streams from seven rotogravure presses
and which provides about 90 percent heat recovery by recirculating the hot
incinerator exhaust to the printing press dryers. 19 Installations of this
type have been approved for operation under applicable fire and safety codes
and by major industrial insurance firms.
3.4 REFERENCES
1. u.s. Department of Labor. General Industry Standards. OSHA
Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR 1910, Subpart Z, Table Z-1,
p. 542). OSHA 2206, Nov 7, 1978.
2. ITechfountu Lithography. Technical Product Bulletin. New York,
N.Y., Union Carbide Corporation. January 1980. 6 p.
3-27
-------
3. Letter from Bertholdt, A. R., Rosos Research Lab, Lake Bluff,
Ill., to Michaells, Ted, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C. Feb-
ruary 4, 1981. Use of fountain solution substitute in
heatset web—offset lithography.
4. Letter from Mlchaelis, Ted, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C.,
to Gore, L ., W. A. Krueger Co., Jonesboro, Ariz. April 4, 1981.
Heatset web—offset lithographic printing of magazines without
isopropyl alcohol in fountain solution.
5. Letter from Wilson, W. E., Capitol Printing Ink.Co. Inc. Wash-
ington, D.C., to Decker, Donald, Engineering-Science, Durham,
N.C. April 15, 1981. CompositIon of printing inks for heatset
web-offset lithography.
6. Letter from Scarlett, Terry, Sun Chemical Corporation, North—
lake, Ill., to Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C.
November 4, 1980. Composition of heatset web-offset litho-
graphic printing inks.
7. Poly—Stage Precipitator. Technical Bulletin. Brooklyn, N.Y.,
Beltran Associates Inc. 1979. 5 p.
8. Letter from Mlchaelis, Ted, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C. , to
Gagnon, Michael, Henlex Inc., Montreal, Quebec. February 23,
1981. DesIgn and installation of cooler/electrostatic precipi
tator.
9. Letter from Gagnon, Michael, Henlex Inc., Montreal, Quebec, to
Michaelis, Ted, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C. April 17,
1981. Test results of VOC emission control efficiencies for
cooler/electrostatic precipitator.
10. Allie, Serge, and Robert Ranchoux. Stack Sampling of Organic
Compounds: Application to the Measurement of Catalytic Inciner-
ator Efficiency. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Assoc-
iation. 30(7):792-94. July 1980.
11. Fremgen, Robert D. Monito’ring and Testing of Effluents from Letter-
press and Offset Printing Operations. Dayton, Ohio, Dayton Press
Inc. Septe.mber 1975. 15 p.
12. Letter from Friedrich, Henry E., MMT Environmental Products Inc.,
St. Paul, Mlnn. to Mfchaelis, Ted, Engineering-Science, Durham,
N.C. February 25, 1981. Performance of filter condensation
systems.
13. Know Your Burners. TEC Engineering Bulletin No. 7202. De Pere,
Wis., TEC Systems Inc. 4 p.
14. Memorandum from Mascone, David C., EPA Chemical and Petroleum
Branch (CPB), Research Triangle Park, 1.C., to Farmer, Jack .,
3-28
-------
CPB, Research Triangle Park, N.C. June 11, 1980. 10 p. Thermal
incinerator performance for NSPS.
15. Rolke, R. W., R. D. Hawthorne, C. R. Garbett, E. R. Slater,
T. 1. Phillips, G. 0. lowell. Afterburner Systems Study. EPA
R2-72-062. August 1972. p. 55-84.
16. Rolke, R. W., R. D. Hawthorne, C. R. Garbett, E. R. Slater,
1. 1. Phillips, G. 0. lowell. Afterburner Systems Study. EPA
R2-72-062. August 1972. p. 89-98.
17. Letter from Strand, Philip, TEC Systems Inc., De Pere, Wis., to
Michaelis, Ted, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C. March 25,
1981. Applications of dryers and heat exchangers to heatset
web-offset lithography.
18. Michaelis, Ted. Trip report. Los Angeles, Calif., Medallion
Graphics. August 16, 1980.
19. Telecon. Bellegia, Faust, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C.,
with Taney, Donald, Reeco Regenerative Environmental Equipment
Co. Inc., Morris Plains, N. J. March 20, 1981. Control of
multiple rotogravure ovens with a single incinerator.
20. Telecon. Bellegia, Faust, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C.,
with Mansey, Larry, Pacific Paperboard Co., Stockton, Calif.
March 20, 1981. Control of multiple printing presses with a
single incinerator.
21. Telecon. Bellegia, Faust, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C.,
with Elliot, Tony, Hirt Combustion Engineers, Montebello, Calif.
March 20, 1981. Control of multiple printing presses• with a
single incinerator.
22. Know Your Burners. TEC Engineering Bulletin No. 7202. De Pere,
Wis., TEC Systems Inc. p. 3.
23. Survey of State Malfunction Regulations (table). Pollution
Engineering 13(4):29. April 1981.
3-29
-------
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
A reduction in VOC emissions to 0.3 kilograms per kilogram of ink
consumed is considered representative of reasonably available control
technology (RACT) for full-web process-color heatset web-offset lithographlc
printing presses. This emission limit is based on elimination of high volatility
organic compounds from the fountain solutions; however, it could also be achieved
through the use of other control techniques. Incineration of the exhaust gases
discharged from the dryer and reduction in the concentration of high volatility
organic compounds in the fountain solutions to 12 percent or less by weight,
or condensation of ink solvent from the exhaust gases discharged from the dryer
and reduction in the concentration of high volatility’organic compounds in the
fountain solutions to 7 percent or less by weight, for example, could also
achieve this reduction in VOC emissions.
If additional emission control is considered necessary, further reductions
in VOC emissions could be achieved through elimination of high volatility
organic compounds from the fountain solutions and control of emissions from
the dryer. Where an existing ink solvent condensation control system, such
as a cooler/ESP, has been installed on the dryer, VOC emissions could be
reduced to 0.2 kilogram per kilogram 0 f ink consumed. Proper operation and
maintenance, with possibly some upgrading, of the condensation control system
in combination with elimination of the high volatility organic compounds from
the fountain solutions would reduce VOC emissions to this level. Where no
4—1
-------
emission control system has been installed on the dryer, or where an incineration
system has been installed, VOC emissions could be reduced to 0.05 kilogram
per kilogram of ink consumed. Incineration of the exhaust gases discharged
from the dryer in combination with e1imination of high volatility organic
compounds from the fountain solutions would reduce VOC emissions to this level.
4.2 AIR POLLUTION
Uncontrolled VOC emissions from the model full-web process—color
heatset web-offset lithographic printing presses in Chapter 2 are
estimated to be 0.82 kilogram per kilogram of ink consumed. Both fountain
solutions and inks contain VOC. Evaporative losses of high volatility
organic compounds from the fountain solutions are split between pressroom
ventilation as fugitive emissions, and the dryer as VOC emissions.
About 80 percent of the VOC in the ink applied to a model press evaporates
in the dryer, and leaves the dryer as VOC emission.
As discussed in Chapter 2, about 50 percent of the high volatility
organic compounds used in the fountain solution is probably emitted in
pressroom ventilation, and the rernainina 50 percent is probably emitted
in the dryer exhaust. Thus, If 0.5 kilogram of high volatility organic
compounds is used in the fountain solution per kilogram of ink consumed,
about 0.25 kilogram of these high volatility organic compounds per
kilogram of Ink consumed is released {n pressroom ventilation. The
remaining 0.25 kilogram of these high volatility organic compounds per
kilogram of ink consumed plus 0.32 kilogram of Ink solvent per kilogram
of ink consumed is released from the dryer.
Uncontrolled and controlled emission rates are summarized in Table
a-i for the full-web process-color heatset web-offset lithographic model
printing presses in Chapter 2. As shown, each of these model printing
presses enerate uncontrolled VOC emissions of about 24 megagrams per
year for 2000 hours of operation and about 48 megagrams of VOC emissions
4—2
-------
TABLE 4.1 IMPACTS OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES ON VOC EMISSIONS FROM MODEL PRESSES
Emis
sions
Control
Technique
Press
Usage
(hr/yr)
Fountain
Solution.
(mg/yr)
Ink Solvent
(mg/yr)
Total
(mg/yr)
Percent
Reduction
(%)
Uncontrolled
2000
4000
24
48
15
30
39
78
-
-
Note a.
2000
4000
0
0
15
30
15
30
61
61
Note b.
2000
4000
0
0
9
18
9
18
77
77
Note c.
2000
4000
0
0
2
4
2
4
95
95
Notes:
a. Elimination of high volatility organic compounds from press fountain solutions.
b. Elimination of high volatility organic compounds from press fountain solutions plus
use of cooler/ESP on press dryer. Emissions reduced to 0.2 per kg of ink consumed.
c. Elimination of high volatility organic compounds from press fountain solutions plus
use of catalytic incineration on press dryer. Emissions reduced to 0.05 kg per
kg of ink consumed.
-------
per year for 4000 hours per year of operation due to evaporation of high
volatility organic compounds from the press fountain solutions. In
addition, each of these model printing presses generate uncontrolled
VOC emissions of about 15 megagrams per year for 2000 hours of operation
and about 30 megagrauis of VOC emissions per year for 4000 hours of
operation due to evaporation of Ink solvent in the press dryer.
The elimination of high volatility organic compounds, such as
isopropyl alcohol, from the fountain solutions used on the p ess could
reduce uncontrolled VOC emissions by about 61 percent. If, in addition,
a cooler/ESP were used to condense ink solvent evaporated in the dryer,
VOC emissions could be reduced by about 77 percent. If an in inerator,
rather than a cooler/ESP were used to control emissions front the dryer,
VOC emissions could be reduced by about 95 percent.
As mentioned in Chapter 3, high—velocity hot air dryers have about
half the air throughput of combination dryers, and therefore require
less natural gas to heat the dryer air. Because of the economic advantages
of reduced fuel consumption, many plants have replaced combination
dryers with high-velocity hot air dryers. Because df lower exhaust gas
flowrate, replacement of combination dryers with high-velocity hot air
dryers could reduce the costs of air pollution control.
Secondary pollutants in the form of nitrogen oxides are released
from the combustion of natural gas. 1 Thus, replacing a combination
dryer with a high-velocity hot air dryer would decrease nitrogen oxides
emissions from 320 kilograms to 190 kilograms per year for 2000 hours of
operation, and from 650 kilograms oer year to 380 kilograms per year for
4000 hours of operation. tnstallation of a cooler/ESP does not contribute
to nitrogen oxide emissions.
If a catalytic incinerator rather than a cooler/ESP is used to
control VOC emissions, discharge of nitrogen oxides from the incinerator
4-4
-------
would be 35 kilograms per year for 2000 hours of operation and 65 kilograms
per year for 4000 hours of operation if the printing press is equipped
with a high-velocity hot air dryer. If the printing press is equipped
with a combination dryer, nitrogen oxides discharge from the incinerator
would be 100 kilograms per year for 2000 hours of operation and
195 kilograms per year for 4000 hours of operation.’
4.3 WATER POLLUTION
No liquid waste would be generated by reducing the use of high
volatility organic compounds in the fountain solutions.
Liquid wastes would be generated, however, from installation of a
cooler/ESP to control VOC emissions from the dryer due to condensation
and collection of ink solvent and water vapors. High volatility organic
compounds in the fountain solutions which evaporate in the dryer would
probably not condense because of their low boiling points. Therefore,
the liquid effluent from the cooler/ESP would essentially be an immiscible
mixture of ink solvent and water. Normally, the liquid effluent drains
from the cooler/ESP through a conduit to a collecting reservoir such as a
55-gallon drum; this drum is also commonly used for storage and transportation. -
As mentioned, the liquid components are essentially immiscible, and thus could
be separated by the gravity decanter. After the ink solvent has been
decanted, the water remaining probably does not contain components that would
qualify it as hazardous waste, so the water could be discharged into the public
sewer system. However, the water might contain small quantities of
dissolved materials which could increase the biological oxygen demand (BOO)
or chemical oxygen demand (COD) of the plant discharge, resulting in surcharges
from local sewer authorities. The ink solvent could be sold as a heating oil, and
thus would not be classified as a hazardous waste. 2 Small quantities of
hazardous liquid wastes would result from washing the cooler/ESP.
No liquid waste would be generated by installation of an incinerator.
4-5
-------
4.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
No solid waste would be generated by reducing use of high volatility
organic compounds in the fountain solutions.
Some cooler/ESP systens are equipped with disposable air prefilters.
However, washable filters could be used, in which case there would be no
solid waste.
No solid waste is generated by installation of an incinerator.
4.5 ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
No change in energy requirements would result from reducing use of high
volatility organic compounds in the fountain solutions.
Tables 4—2 and 4-3, sunmarize the energy requirements for control systems
connected to a press with various types of dryers. Electrical energy will be
required at a cooler/ESP for the electrostatic precipitator, for cooling water
pumps, for. cooler/ESP exhaust fans, and for the coolina tower fan.
Energy in the form of natural gas will be required at an incinerator
to heat the gas to combustion temperatures. The incinerator will require
additional electrical energy for exhaust fans.
Energy savings will result whe’re a combination dryer is replaced with
a high—velocity hot air dryer because of reduced gas usage at the dryer.
The total energy usage for a model printing press equipped with a high—
velocity hot air dryer connected to a’cooler/ESP would be 52,000 megajoules
per year (MJ/yr) for 2000 hours per year of operation and 93,0CC riegajoules
per year for 4000 hours per year of operation--equivalent to 1800 megajoules
per megagram (Md/Mg) of emission reduction.
Total energy usage for a model printing press equipped with a combina-
tion dryer connected to a cooler/ES ? would be 84,000 negajoules per year for
2000 hours per year of operation and 150,000 megajoules per year for 4000
hours a year of operation-—equivalent to 2900 megajoules per inegagram of
emission reduction and 2000 hours per year of operation and 1600 rnegajoules
per negagran for 4000 hours per year of operation.
4-6
-------
TABLE 4-2. ENERGY REQUIREMENTS OF A MODEL PRESS EQUIPPED WITH A
COOLER/Espa
Total energy
Total usage/Mg of
Press Natural Electricity energy emission
Dryer Type Usage, gas usage, usage, usage, reduction,
h/yr Md/yr Md/yr Md/yr Md/Mg
High velocity 2000 - 52,000 52,000 1,800
hot air 4000 - 93,000 93,000 1,600
Combination 2000 - 84,000 84,000 2,900
4000 - 160,000 160,000 2,700
Combination
replaced with 2000 (1,900,000) 52,000 (1,800,000) (63,000)
high-velocity 4000 (3,800,000) 93,000 (3,700,000) (63,000)
hot air
a Calculations based on cooler/ESP being 50% efficient in collecting ink
sol vent.
TABLE 4-3. ENERGY REQUIREMENTS OF A MODEL PRESS EQUIPPED WITH A CATALYTIC
INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGERd
Total energy
Total usage/Mg of
Press Natural Electricity ‘ energy emission
Dryer Type Usage gas usage, usage usage, reduction,
h/yr Md/yr Md/yr Md/yr Md/Mg
High-velocity 2000 600,000 50,000 650,000 17,000
hot air 4000 1,200,000 100,000 1,300,000 17,000
Combination 2000 1,800,000 89,000 1,900,000 51,000
4000 3,600,000 180,000 3,800,000 51,000
Combination
replaced with 2000 (1,300,000) 50,000 (1,200,000) (33,000)
high-velocity 4000 (2,600,000) 100,000 (2,500,000) (33,000)
hot air
a Calculations based on incinerator being 90% efficient on all dryer VOC.
Heat exchanger is 70% effective.
4-7
-------
The total energy savings for a model printing press originally equipped
with a combination dryer, but replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer
connected to a cooler/ESP would be 1,800,000 rnegajoules per year for 2000
hours per year of operation and 3,700,000 megajoules per year for 4000 hours
per year of operation--equivalent to an energy reduction of 63,000 mega-
joules per megagram of emission reduction for 2000 hours per year of oper-
ation and 2700 megajoules per megagrain for 4000 hours per year of operation.
As discussed in Chapter 3, a modern catalytic Incinerator connected to
a model printing press is equipped with a 70 percent effective primary
heat exchanger. The heat recovered from incinerator exhaust is used to
preheat incinerator inlet gas.
The total energy usage for a model printing press equipped with a high—
velocity hot air dryer connected to a catalytic incinerator with a primary
heat exchanger would be 650,000 megajoules per year for 2000 hours per
year of operation and 1,300,000 megajoules per year for 4000 hours per
year of operation--equivalent to 17,000 megajoules per rnegagram of emission
reduction.
The total energy usage for a model press equipped with a combination
dryer connected to a catalytic Incinerator with a primary heat exchanger
would be 1,900,000 rnegajoules per year for 2000 hours per year of operation
and 3,800,000 rnegajoules per year for 4000 hours per year of operation--
equivalent to 51,000 megajoules per megagram of emission reduction.
The total energy savings for the model printing press originally equip-
ped with a combination dryer but replaced with a high-velocity hot air
dryer connected to a catalytic incinerator with a primary heat exchanger
would be 1,200,000 megajoules per year for 2000 hours per year of operation
and 2,500,000 megajoules per year for 4000 hours per year of operation-—
equivalent to an energy reduction of 33,000 megajoules per rnegagram of
emission reduction.
4.6 REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors. AP-42. Research Triangle Park, LC. August
1977. p. 1.4—2
2. Telecon. Poppiti, Jim, EPA Administration for Water and Hazardous
Materials Assistance, washington, D.C., with Hays, ?hillip, Engin-
eering-Science, Durha ,, D.C. February 3, 1981. Determination
of ink solvent as a hazardous waste.
4-8
-------
5.0 CONTROL COST ANALYSIS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The bases for both the installed capital costs and the annualized costs
associated with control of VOC emissions from full-web process-color heatset
web-offset lithographic printing presses are explained below to allow the
reader to develop a preliminary control cost estimate for any size facility.
(Graphs of purchased equipment costs and total annualized costs for catalytic
incinerators with primary heat exchange as a function of printing press
size are in Appendix C.) The emission control costs and cost effectiveness
for plants connecting one or two printing presses to a catalytic incinerator
equipped with both primary and secondary heat exchange are also in this
chapter. All costs in this chapter have been updated to June 1980 dollars by
the use of cost indices.
Combination dryers occasionally found at older heatset web-offset
lithographic printing presses are gradually being phased out because newer
high-velocity hot air dryers decrease fuel usage. Since most of the air in a
high-velocity hot air dryer is r circu1ated, the exhaust rate is only about
85 normal cubic meters per minute for each dryer on a model press. Compared
to about 170 normal cubic meters per mjnute for each combination dryer.
Savings realized from decreased natural gas usage are enhanced because a
smaller cooler/ESP or incinerator is required to control VOC emissions in
the dryer exhausts. Because many printing plants have found dryer replacement
economical, this chapter includes costs for replacing combination dryers
5—1
-------
with high—velocity hot air dryers at the same time that control devices
are being installed.
Catalytic incinerators with primary heat exchange can be connected to
any heatset web-offset lithographic printing press; therefore costs for
catalytic incinerators with primary heat exchange are presented for both
single press and multipress Installations. Catalytic incinerators with
both primary and secondary heat exchange usually cannot be connected to
combination dryers or to some high—velocity hot air dryers; therefore costs
for catalytic incinerators with primary and secondary heat exchange are
for the single press high—velocity hot air dryer, and for the single press
dryer replacement cases.
5.2 CAPITAL COSTS
Installed capital costs represent the total investment required to
install equipment to reduce VOC emissions at existinq printing presses.
This investment includes the delivered equipment costs and the installation
costs of the control device and auxiliary equipment.
No capital costs would be associated with elimination 0 f high volatility
organic compounds from the press fountain solutions.’ Consequently, any capital
costs associated with VOC emission control at heatset web-offset lithographic
printing presses would be due to installation of emission control systems
on the dryer(s) associated with the press.
Combination dryers are being replaced with newer, more energy efficient
high-velocity hot air dryers. Moreover, the newer design of high-velocity
hot air dryers allows increased drying rates, and thus Increased press
speeds, and decreased energy consumption. Because many plants are likely
to replace these older dryers with the newer ones, capital costs of such
conversions are in this chapter.
5—2
-------
5.2.1 Purchased Equipment Costs
Purchased equipment costs include all costs of equipment delivered to
the job site, ready for installation; these costs are usually based on a
package from a single supplier.
5.2.1.1 Cooler/ESP’s — Cooler/ESP purchase costs obtained from vendors
include the costs of (1) a water—cooling tower with water-circulating pumps,
and controls, (2) gas-to-water finned tube heat exchangers, (3) E$P’s,
(4) a dryer exhaust fan, (5) a complete cleaning unit, and (6) motor starters
and controls) Additional purchased equipment costs include taxes and
freight charges. Total purchequipment cost of one cooler/ESP for
connection to a model printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer
would be about $37,700. Total purchased equipment cost of one cooler/ESP
for connection to a model printing press equipped with a combination dryer
would be about $57,300.
High-velocity hot air dryer purchase costs obtained from vendors in-
clude the costs of (1) the dryer, (2) all necessary fans and motors, (3) a
gas burner, (4) all controls and interlocks, and (5) manual and automatic
dampers. 2 Total urchased equipment cost of one cooler/ESP plus a high—
velocity hot air dryer for connection to a model printAng press would be
about $122,000.
Total purchased equipment cost of one cooler/ESP for connection to
two model printing presses equipped with high-velocity hot air dryers
would be $57,300. The total purchased equipment cost of one cooler/ESP for
connectthn to two presses equipped with combination dryers is about $75,000.
Total purchased equipment cost of one cooler/ESP for connection to two
model printing presses plus two high-velocity hot air dryers would be
$225,900.
5.2.1.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — Catalytic in-
cinerator purchase costs obtained from vendors include the costs of
(1) the initial catalyst charge, (2) the incinerator housing, (3) a gas
preheater, (4) a 70 percent heat exchanger (5) an exhaust fan, and (6) all
necessary automatic controls. 3 Additional purchased equipment costs in-
clude taxes and freight charges. Total purchased equipment cost of one
5-3
-------
catalytic incinerator for connection to a model printing press equipped with
a high-velocity hot air dryer would be about 580,700. Total purchased
equipment cost for a catalytic incinerator connected to a model printing
press equipped with a combination dryer would be about 5112,300. Total
purchased equipment cost of one catalytic incinerator for connection to a
model printing press plus a high-velocity hot air dryer would be about
$165,000.
Total purchased equipment cost of one catalytic incinerator with pri-
mary heat exchange for connection to two model printing presses equipped
with high-velocity hot air dryers would be . $112,300. Total purchased
equipment cost for one catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange
for connection to two model printing presses equipped with combination
dryers would be $170,200. Total purchased equipment cost of one catalytic
incinerator with primary heat exchange for connection to two model printing
presses plus two high—velocity hot air dryers would be $280,900.
5.2.1.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange
Catalytic incinerator purchase costs obtained from vendors include the costs
of (1) the initial catalyst charge, (2) the incinerator housing, (3) a gas
preheater, (4) a 70 percent primary heat exchanger, (5) a 50 percent secon-
dary heat exchanger, (6) an exhaust fan, and (7) all necessary automatic
controls. 3 Additional purchased equipment costs include taxes and .freight
charges. Total purchased equipment cost of one catalytic incinerator with
primary and secondary heat exchange for connection to a model printing press
equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer would be $87,700. Total
purchased equipment cost of one catalytic incinerator with primary and
secondary heat exchange for connection to a model printing press plus a
high—velocity hot air dryer would be $172,000.
5.2.2 Installation Cost Factors
Cost factors are the bases for estimating capital costs of installing
control equipment to model heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses.
Table 5 —1 shows the installation cost factors for installing one cooler/ESP
at a model printing press plus the cost factors for replacing combination
dryers with high-velocity hot air dryers. Table 5—2 shows the factors
for installing one cooler/ESP at two model printing presses. Tables 5—3
and 5-4 show the installation cost factors for installing catalytic incin-
erators with primary heat exchange plus the cost factors for replacing
5-4
-------
TABLE 5-1. FACTORS IN CALCULATING CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING A
COOLER/ESP AT A MODEL PRESS
- Percentage of Purchased Equipment Costs
Capital Costs High-velocity Combin- Combination dryer
hot air ation replacementa
dryer dryer cool erIESP dryer
Purchased Equipment Costs 100% 100% 100% 100%
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports 5 5 5 9
Erection and handling 50 50 50 6
Electrical and mechanicaib 22 22 22 15
SUBTOTAL 77• 77 77
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervisiond 26 26 26 22
Construction and field expensese 31 31 31 22
Construction fee 12 12 12 10
Contingencies 4 4 4 3
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS 15O 1509 iso 87
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS 250% 250% 250% 187%
a Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
b Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed
in GARD manual, December 1978.
C Reference 4. -
d Includes the item model study listed in GARD manual, December 1978.
e Includes the items startup and performance test listed in GARD manual,
December 1978.
f Based on indirect installation factors from GARD manual, December 1978.
g Based on installation factors from GARD manual, December 1978.
5—5
-------
TABLE 5-2. FACTORS IN CALCULATING CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE
COOLER/ESP TO TWO MODEL PRESSES
Percentage of Purchased Eouipment Costs
Capital Costs High-velocity Combin- Combination dryer
hot air ation replacementd
dryers dryers cool er/ESP drye
Purchased Equipment Costs 100% 100% 100% 100%
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports 5 5 5 9
Erection and handling 54 53 54 6
Electrical and rnechanlcalb 39 35 39 15
SUBTOTAL
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervisiond 34 32 34 22
Construction and field expensese 37 36 37 22
Construction fee 19 17 19 10
Contingencies 4 4 4 3
SUBTOTAL 1 17
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS I.g2 1 82g 1 92g 87
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS 292% 282% 292% 187%
a Combination dryers replaced with high—velocity hot air dryers.
b Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed
in GARD manual, December 1978.
C Reference 4.
d Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
e Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual,
December 1978.
Based on indirect installation factors from GARD manual, December 1978.
g Based on installation factors from CARD manual, December 1978.
5—6
-------
TABLE 5-3. FACTORS IN CALCULATING CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING A CATALYTIC
INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE AT A MODEL PRESS
Percenta e of Purchased Equipment Costs
Capital Costs High-velocity Cornbin- Combination dryer
hot air ation replacementa
dryer dryer incinerator dryer
Purchased Equipment Costs 100% 100% 100% 100%
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports 7 7 7 9
Erection and handling 6 6 6 6
Electrical and mechanicaib 10 10 10 15
SUBTOTAL 23
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervisiond 4 4 4 22
Construction and field expensese 11 10 11 22
Construction fee 5 5 5 10
Contingencies 3 3 3 3
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS 46 45 46 g 87
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS 146% 145% 146% 187%
a Combination dryer replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
b Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed
in GARD manual, December 1978.
C Reference 4.
d Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
e Includes the items startup and performance test listed in GARD manual,
December 1978.
Based on indirect installation factors from GARD manual, December 1978.
g Reference 5.
5—7
-------
TABLE 5-4. FACTORS IN CALCULATING CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC
INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO TWO MODEL PRESSES
Percen tage
Capital Costs High-velocity
hot air
dryers
of Purchased Eauipment Costs
Combin-
atlon
dryers
Combination dryer
rep lacementa
incinerator drye7
Purchased Equipment Costs
100%
100%
100% 100%
Direct Installation Costs
7
6
7 9
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
Electrical and rnechanicalb
8
18
7
17
8 6
18 15
SUBTOTAL
8
14
7
13
8 22
14 22
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervisiond
Construction and field expensese
Construction fee
8
7
7 10
Contingencies
SUBTOTAL
3
2
2g
3 3
•S7
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
56
59 g
669. 87
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
166%
159%
166% 187%
a Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
b Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed
in CARD manual, December 1978.
C Reference 4.
d Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
e Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual,
December 1978.
f Based on indirect installation factors from CARD manual, December 1978.
g Reference 5.
5-8
-------
combination dryers with high—velocity hot air dryers. Table 5-5 shows
installation cost factors for installing a catalytic incinerator with
primary and secondary heat exchange at a model printing press. All tables
express the installation cost factors as percentages of purchased equip-
ment costs.
Direct installation cost factors include cost factors for foundations
and supports, erection and handling, and electrical and mechanical. “Foun-
dations and supports” includes excavation and concrete bases for units at
ground level, bases or footings, and all steelwork to support elevated equip-
ment. “Erection and handling” includes unloading and storing all equipment
and moving the equi rient to the installation location. “Electrical and
mechanical” includes all costs of purchasing and installing ductwork,
piping, electrical controls and wire and conduit which are not shop fabri-
cated as part of major equipment, and includes cost of field insulation
and painting.
Indirect installation cost factors include costs for construction and
field expenses and for engineering, supervisory, and construction fees.
Contingencies are included as a separate cost factor item. “Engineering
and supervision” includes costs of preliminary studies, project design,
and procurement. “Construction and field expenses” includes field supervi-
sion, startup costs, operator training, and acceptance and performance
testing. “Construction fee” is the construction contractors charge for
profits, overhead, and other field .office charges.’ “Contingencies” are
allowances for estimating inaccuracies, unexpected construction problems,
design inaccuracies, or other unexpected occurrences.
Total installation cost factors obtained from vendors and users for
connecting one cooler/ESP to one printing press range from about 50 to 150
percent of purchased equipment costs. 6 ’ 7 ’ 8 However, there is little Inform-
ation available on the exact breakdown of these factors into their individual
components. The CARD manual, 9 developed by EPA for estimating the costs of
various air pollution control systems, suggests an installation cost factor
of 124 percent of purchased equipment costs for installation of an ESP-—well
within the range of the vendor/user experience noted above. The CARD factor
was increased to reflect a total installation cost factor of 150 percent
of purchased equipment to obtain a “worst case.” For connecting one cooler!
ESP to two printing presses, the cost factor was increased to include addi-
tional ductwork needed to connect two printing presses to one cooler/ESP
5-9
-------
TABLE 5-5. FACTORS IN CALCULATING CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING A CATALYTIC
INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE AT A
MODEL PRESS
Capital Costs
Percentage of Purchased Eguioment Costs
High—velocity
hot air
dryer
Combination dryer
reolacementa
incinerator dryer
Purchased Equipment Costs
100%
100% 100%
Direct Installation Costs
7
7 9
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
Electrical and mechanicaib
7
10
7 6
10 15
SUBTOTAL
5
11
5 22
11 22
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervisiond
Construction and field expensese
Construction fee
5
5 10
Contingencies
SUBTOTAL
3
24
3 3
S7
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
4 8
48 g 87
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
148%
148% 187%
a Combination dryer replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
b Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed
in CARD manual, December 1978.
C Reference 4.
d Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
e Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual,
December 1978.
Based on indirect installation factors from CARD manual, December 1978.
g Reference 5.
5-10
-------
and to include blowers and ductwork needed to bypass each dryer during
natural gas ignition periods. Cost of the additional ductwork was based
on ductwork at a recent installation. 10 Cost of the bypass equipment is
based on blower and damper costs obtained from vendors, 11 ’ 12 and on
GARD manual factors for cost of blower installation and ductwork. 9
A model printing press replacing a combination dryer with a high-
velocity hot air dryer would Incur additional expenses for replacing the
dryer. Tables 5-1 through 5-5 express cost factors for installation of
the new dryer as percentages of the purchased equipment costs for the
r epi acement dryer.
Direct installation cost factors for replacing a combination dryer
with a high-velocity hot air dryer were obtained from a contractor’s
estimate 4 —-a total direct installation cost factor of 30 percent of the
purchased equipment cost of the high-velocity hot air dryer.
Indirect installation cost factors for replacing combination dryers
with high—velocity hot air dryers were based on indirect installation cost
factors obtained from the GARD manual, because vendor and user estimates for
indirect installation costs for replacing a combination dryer with a high-
velocity hot air dryer were not available. The total indirect installation
cost would be 57 percent of the dryer purchased equipment cost.
5.2.2.1 Cooler/ESP’s — Factors used in calculating capital costs of cooler!
ESP installations are in Tables 5—1 and 5-2. The direct installation cost
factor for installing and connecting a cooler/ESP at a model printing press
using a high—velocity hot air dryer would be 77 percent of the purchased
equipment cost. For a model printing press using a combinatior dryer, the
direct installation cost factor would be 77 percent of the purchased equip-
ment cost for installing and connecting the cooler/ESP to the dryer.
The indirect installation cost factor for installing and connecting a
cooler/ESP at a model printing press using a high-velocity hot air dryer
would be 73 percent of the purchased equipment cost. For a model printing
press using a combination dryer, the indirect installation cost factor
for installing and connecting the cooler/ESP to the dryer would be 73
percent of the purchased equipment cost.
The total installation cost factor is the sun of the direct and in-
direct installation cost factors. At a model printing press installing a
5-11
-------
cooler/ESP, total Installation cost factors would be 150 percent of the
purchased equipment cost for a model printing press using a high—velocity
hot air dryer and for a model printing press using a combination dryer.
The direct installation cost factor for installing a cooler/ESP con-
nected to two model printing presses using high—velocity hot air dryers
would be 77 percent of the purchased equipment cost for installing and
connecting the cooler/ESP to the dryers plus 21 percent of the purchased
equipment cost for equipment, ductwork, and dampers required to bypass each
dryer during gas ignition-—a total of 98 percent of purchased equipment
cost. For two model printing presses using combination dryers, the direct
installation cost factor would be 77 percent of the purchased equipment
cost for installing and connecting the cooler/ESP to the dryers plus 16
percent of the purchased equipment cost for equipment, ductwork, and damp-
ers required to bypass each dryer during gas ignition-—a total of 93 per-
cent of purchased equipment cost.
The indirect installation cost factor for installing a cooler/ESP for
connection to two model printing presses using high—velocity hot air dryers
would be 73 percent of the purchased equipment cost for installing and con-
necting the cool er/ESP to the dryers plus 21 percent of the purchased equip—
rnent cost for equipment, ductwork, and dampers required to bypass each
dryer during gas ignition——a total of 94 percent of purchased equipment
cost. For two model printing pres es using comb(nation dryers, the in-
direct installation cost factor would be 73 percent of the purchased equip-
ment cost for installing and connecting the cooler/ES? to the dryers plus
16 percent of the purchased equipment cost for equipment, ductwork, and
dampers required to bypass each dryer during gas ignition-—a total of
89 percent of purchased equipment cost.
Total installation cost factors for connecting one cooler/ESP to two
model printing presses would be 192 percent of purchased equipment cost for
two printing presses using high—velocity hot air dryers and 182 percent of
purchased equipment cost for two printing presses using combination dryers.
5.2.2.2 Catalytic rtcinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — Factors used
in calculating caoital costs of catalytic incinerators with primary heat
exchange installations are in Tables 5—3 and 5—4. The direct ins:alla—
tion cost factor for installing a catalytic incinerator with primary heat
5-12
-------
exchange and connecting it to the dryer at a model printing press using a
high-velocity hot air dryer would be 23 percent of the purchased equipment
cost. For a model- printing press using a combination dryer, the direct
installation cost factor would be 23 percent of the purchased equipment
cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and connecting it to the
dryer.
The indirect installation cost factor for installing a catalytic in-
cinerator with primary heat exchange and connecting it to the dryer at a
model printing press using a high-velocity hot air dryer would be 23 percent
of the purchased equipment cost. For a model printing press using a combi-
nation dryer, the indirect installation cost factor would be 22 percent of
the purchased equipment cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and
connecting it to the dryer.
Total installation cost factors for connecting one catalytic inciner-
ator to one printing press, based on information obtained from users, 5
would be 46 percent of the purchased equipment cost for a printing press
using a high-velocity hot aiY dryer and 45 percent of the purchased equip-
ment cost for a printing press using a combination dryer. Total installa-
tion cost factors for connecting two printing presses to one catalytic
incinerator with primary heat exchange include allowances for cost of
additional ductwork to connect two printing presses to one catalytic incin-
erator and for costs of blowers, dampers, and ductwork to bypass dryers
during natural gas ignition periods. Cost of ductwork for installing two
printing presses to one catalytic incinerator would be twice the cost of
installing one printing press. 1 ° Cost factors for installing the dryer
bypasses were based on blower and damper costs obtained from vendors 11 ’ 12
plus blower installation and ductwork costs obtained from the CARD man-
ual. 9
The direct installation cost factor for connecting one catalytic In-
cinerator with primary heat exchange to two model printing presses using
high-velocity hot air dryers would be 23 percent of the puv chased equipment
cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and connecting it to the
dryers plus 10 percent of the purchased equipment cost for equipment,
ductwork, and dampers required to bypass each dryer during gas ignition—-a
total of 33 percent of purchased equipment cost. For model printing presses
using combination dryers, the direct installation cost factor is 23 percent
5-13
-------
of the purchased equipment cost for installing the catalytic incinerator
and connecting It to the dryers plus 7 percent of the purchased equipment
cost for equipment, ductwork, and dampers required to bypass each dryer
during gas ignition—-a total of 30 percent of purchased equipment cost.
The indirect installation cost factor for connecting one catalytic
incinerator with primary heat exchange to two model printing presses using
high—velocity hot air dryers would be 23 percent of the purchased equip-
ment cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and connecting it to
the dryers plus 10 percent of the purchased equipment cost for equipment,
ductwork, and dampers required to bypass each dryer during gas ignition-—a
total of 33 percent of purchased equipment cos . For model printing presses
using combination dryers, the indirect installation cost factor would’ be 22
percent of the purchased equipment cost for installing the catalytic incin-
erator and connecting it to the dryers plus 7 percer t of the purchased
equipment cost for equipment, ductwork, and dampers required to bypass
each dryer during gas ignition-—a total of 29 percent of purchased equip-
rient cost.
The total installation cost factors for connecting one catalytic incin-
erator with primary heat exchange to two model printing presses (sum of
direct and indirect cost factors) would be 66 percent of the purchased
equipment cost for facilities using high—velocity hot air dryers and 59
percent of the purchased equipment cost for facilities using combination
dryers.
Plants replacing combination dryers with high-velocity hot air dryers
would incur additional expenses for replacing the dryer. Tables 5—3 and
5-4 also show cost factors for installation of the new dryer expressed as
percentages of the purchased equipment costs for replacement dryers.
Direct installation cost factors used in replacing combination dryers
with high—velocity hot air dryers were obtained from a contractor’s esti-
mate 4 --a total direct installation cost factor of 30 percent of the
purchased equipment cost of the high-velocity hot air dryers.
tndirect installation cost factors for replacing combination dryers
with high-velocity hot air dryers were based on indirect installation
cost factors obtained from the G D manual, because vendor and user esti-
mates for indirect installation costs for replacing combination dryers
with high—velocity hot air dryers were not available. The total indirect
installation cost was estimated to be 57 percent of the dryer purchased
equipment cost.
5—14
-------
5.2.2.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange -
Factors used in calculating capital costs of a catalytic incinerator with
primary and secondary heat exchange are in Table 5-5.
Total installation cost factors for connecting one catalytic incinera-
tor with primary heat exchange to one printing press are based on informa-
tion obtained from users. 5 Total Installation cost factors for connecting
one catalytic incinerator with primary and secondary heat exchange include
allowances for cost of additional ductwork (from the chill, roll hood to
the secondary heat exchanger and from the secondary heat exchanger to the
dryer) and for the cost of a blower. These cost factors were based on
blower costs obtained from vendors, ’ 12 plus blower installation and
ductwork costs obtained from the GARD manual. 9
The direct installation cost factor for installing a catalytic incin-
erator with primary and secondary heat exchange at a model printing press
using a high-velocity hot air dryer would be 21 percent of the purchased
equipment cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and connecting it
to the dryers plus 3 percent of the purchased equipment cost for ductwork
and blower required to interconnect chill roll hood, secondary heat exchang-
er, and dryer--a total of 24 percent of purchased equipment cost.
The indirect installation cost factor for installing a catalytic incin-
erator with primary and secondary heat exchanger at ,a model printing press
using a high—velocity hot air dryer ‘would be 21 percent of the purchased
equipment cost for installing the catalytic incinerator and connecting it
to the dryer plus 3 percent of the purchased equipment cost for ductwork
and blower required to connect chill roll hood, secondary heat exchanger,
and dryer--a total of 24 percent of purchased equipment cost.
The total installation cost factor (sum of direct and indirect cost
factors) would be 48 percent of the purchased equipment cost for a model
printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
Model printing presses replacing a combination dryer with a high-
velocity hot air dryer would incur additional expenses for replacing the
dryer. Table 5-5 expresses cost factors for installation of the new dryer
as percentages of the purchased equipment costs for the replacement dryer.
5—15
-------
Direct installation cost factors for replacing a combination dryer
with a high-velocity hot air dryer were obtained from a contractor’s esti—
nate, 4 a total direct installation cost factor of 30 percent of the purchased
equipment cost of the high—velocity hot air dryer.
Indirect installation cost factors for replacing a combination dryer
with a high-velocity hot air dryer were based on indirect Installation cost
factors obtained from the GARD manual, because vendor and user estimates for
indirect installation costs for replacing a combination dr yer with a high—
velocity hot air dryer were not available. The total indirect installation
cost was estimated to be 57 percent of the dryer purchased equipment cost.
5.2.3 Direct Installation Costs
Direct installation costs in Tables 5—6 through 5—10 vary with site—
specific characteristics such as structural design of the roof, length of
the ductwork and piping, and labor and material costs.
5.2.3.1 Cooler/ESP’s — Direct installation costs for one cooler/ESP
would be $29,000 for connecting a cooler/ESP to a model printing press
equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer, $44,000 for a model printing
press equipped with a combination dryer, and $54,600 for connecting a
cooler/ESP and replacing’a combination dryer with a high-velocity hot air
dryer.
Direct installation costs for’connecting one cooler/ESP to two model
printing presses would be $56,100 for connecting a cooler/ESP to two model
printing presses equipped with high—velocity hot air dryers, $69,900 for
the model presses equipped with combination dryers, and $107,300 for con-
necting a cooler/ESP and replacing combination dryers with high—velocity
hot air dryers.
5.2.3.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange - Direct instal—
lation costs for connecting a catalytic incinerator with primary heat ex-
change, based on costs at a recent single press Installation, would be
$13,500 for a catalytic incinerator at a model printing press equipped
with a high—velocity hot air dryer, $25,300 for a model printing press
equipped with a combination dryer, and $44,100 for replacing a combination
dryer with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
5—16
-------
Direct installation costs for connecting one catalytic incinerator
with primary heat exchange to two model printing presses were based on
(1) costs at a recent single press Installation, (2) doubling the cost of
ductwork, and (3) adding the cost for equipment, ductwork, and dampers
required to bypass each dryer during gas ignition periods at the dryers.
Direct installation costs would be $37,100 for a catalytic incinerator
connected to two model printing presses equipped with high-velocity hot
air dryers, $51,000 for model printing presses equipped with combination
dryers, and $88,300 for replacing combination dryers with high—velocity
hot air dryers.
5.2.3.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange —
Direct installation costs for installing a catalytic incinerator with pri-
mary and secondary heat exchange on a model printing press were based on
(1) costs at a recent primary heat exchange installation, (2) cost of duct-
work from chill roll hoods to secondary heat exchanger to dryer, and (3)
cost of an additional blower. Direct installation costs would be $21,000
for a catalytic incinerator with primary and secondary heat exchange at a
model printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer and $46,600
for replacing a combination dryer .wlth a high-velocity hot air dryer.
5.2.4 Indirect Installation Costs
Indirect installation costs in Tables 5-6 through 5-10 are incurred
by the facility, not for a specific ‘equipment item but for startup, con-
struction, and field expenses and for engineering, supervisory, and con-
tractor fees. Contingencies are a separate cost item.
5.2.4.1 Cooler/ESP’s — Total indirect installation cost for a cooler/ESP
would be $27,500 for a model printing press equipped viith a high—velocity
hot air dryer, $41,800 for ainodel printing press equipped with a combina-
tion dryer, and $75,900 for replacing a combination dryer with a high—
velocity hot air dryer.
Total indirect installation cost for one cooler/ESP connected to two
model printing presses would be $53,900 for model presses equipped with
high-velocity hot air dryers, $66,800 for model presses equipped with
combination dryers and $150,700 for replacing combination dryers with
high—velocity hot air dryers.
5—17
-------
IABLI 5-6. CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING A COOLER/ESP TO A MODEL pREs sa
a
I)
C
(1
e
f
9
h
‘in
U)
Capital Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer replacernentb
cooler/ESP
dryer
total
Purchased Equipment Costs
$37700c
$51,300C
$37,700C
$843 0 0d
$122000
Direct Installation Costs
1,900
2,900
1,900
7,600
9,500
Foundations and supports
Erection and handlIng
18,800
28,600
18.800
5,100
23,900
Electrical and niechanlcale
SUBTOTAL
8,300
29,000
12,500
44,000
8,300
29,000
12,900
25,60O
21,200
54,600
Indirect Installation Costs
9,800
11,700
14,900
17,700
9,800
11,700
18,600
18,700
28,400
30,400
Engineering and supervisIon 9
Construction and field expensesh
Construction fee
4,500
6,900
4,500
8,400
12,900
Contingencies
SUBTOTAL
1,500
21,500
2,300
41,800
1,500
27,500
2,100
48,40a3
4.200
75,900
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
$56,500’
$85,800’
$56 5OO
$74,000
$130,500
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
$94,200
$143,100
$94,200
$158,300
$252,500
——-——---,-
Costs in June 1980 dollars.
Coiiihiriation dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
Reference 1.
Refer ence 2.
Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
Reference 4.
Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
Includes the items startup and per foriiiance test listed in CARD manual, December 1918.
Ilased on information from vendors and users; installation cost = 150% of purchased equipment cost
for single press.
J Indirect installation costs based on 51% of the purchased equipiiient costs, CARD manual, December 1918.
-------
TABLE 5-7. CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE COOLER/ESP TO TWO MODEL pRESSESa
Capital Costs
high-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer replacementb
cooler/ESP
dryer
total
Purchased Equipment Costs
$57,3 0 0 C
$75,000c
$57,300c
168 , 600 d
$225,900
Direct Installation Costs
S
2,900
3,800
2,900
15,200
18,100
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
30,900
39,500
30,900
10,200
41,100
Electrical and mechanicale
SUBTOTAL
22,300
56,100
26,600
69,900
22,300
56,100
25,800
51 , 200 f
49,100
107,300
Indirect Installation Costs
19,500
21,200
24,000
26,700
19,500
21,200
37,200
37,400
56,700
58,600
Engineering and supervision9
Construction and field expensesh
Construction fee
10,900
13,100
10,900
16,800
27,700
Contingencies
2,300
3,000
2,300
5,400
7,700
SUBTOTAL
53,900
66,800
53,900
96,800J
150,700
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
$11O,0001
$136,700 1
$110, 000 i
$148,000
$258,000
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
$167,300
$211,700
$167,300
$316,600
$483,900
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
C Reference 1.
d Reference 2.
e Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed in GARD manual, December 1978.
f Reference 4.
g Includes the Item model study listed In CARD manual, December 1978.
Ii Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
1 Based on information from vendors and users; installation cost = 150% of purchased equipment cost
for single press (CARD estimates) + $24,200 for installing equipment and controls for inter-
connecting one cooler/ESP to two presses.
3 Indirect installation costs based on 57% of the purchased equipment costs, CARD manual, December 1978.
-------
TABLE 5-8.
CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR
TO A MODEL PRESSa
WITh PRIMARY HEAT EXChANGE
Capital Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Conibinat ion
dryer
Combination dryer replaceirientb
incinerator dryer total
Purchased [ qtripment Costs
$80.7 00c
$1 12,300c
$80,700c $84300d
$165,000
1978.
manual, December 1978.
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
Electrical and uiechanicale
SUBTOTAL
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervision 9
Construction and field expensesil
Construction fee
Contingencies
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
FOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
5,600
8.000
5,600
7,600
13,200
4,800
6,800
4,800
5,100
9,900
8,100
18,500
10,500
25,300
8,100
18,500
12,900
256OO
21,000
44,100
3,200
4,300
3,200
18,600
21,800
8,900
12,150
8,900
18,100
21,600
4,000
4,900
4,000
8,400
12,400
2,400
TB U
3,350
24,Th IJ
2,400
T ,5OO
2,700
48,4001
5,100
6&90 0
$37,000)
$50,000i
$37,000)
$14,000)
$111,000
$117,700
$162,300
$117,100
$158,300
$276,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with a high-velocity hot air d,yer.
C Reference 3.
Reference 2.
e Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting
Reference I.
9 Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
h Includes the items star tup and performance test listed in CARD manual, December
Indirect insLallatlon costs based on 57% of the purchased equipment costs, CARD
3 Reference 5.
listed in CARD manual, December 1918.
-------
WITH PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE
r
I- .
TABLE 5-9.
CAPITAL COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR
TO TWO MODEL pRESSESa
Capital Costs
111gb-velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combination
dryer replacementb
incinerator
dryer
total
Purchased Equipment Costs
$112,300c
$ 1 70200d
$112,300c
$168,600e
$280,900
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
Electrical and mechanical
SUBTOTAL
7,900
9,000
20,200
37,100
10,200
11,900
28,900
51,000
7,900
9,000
20,200
37,100
15,200
10,200
25,800
51,2009
23,100
19,200
46,000
88,300
Indirect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervision t ’
Construction and field expenses’
Construction fee
ContingencIes
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
9,000
15,750
9,000
3,350
37,100
4 , 200 k
11,900
22,100
11,900
3,400
49,300
1 oo , 3 ook
9,000
15,750
9,000
3,350
31,100
$74,200’
37.200
37,400
16,800
5,400.
96,8003
$148,000
46,200
53,150
25,800
8,750
133,900
$222,200
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
$186,500
$270,500
$186,500
$316,600
$503,100
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
C Reference 3.
d Based on “six tenth factor” equation: COSta = COStb (capacity of a/capacity p1 b).° 6
e Reference 2.
f Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed in CARD manual. December 1978.
9 Reference 4.
t Includes the item model study listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
1 Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
3 Indirect installation costs based on 57% of the purchased equipment costs, CARD manual, December 1978.
k Reference 5. Also Includes $24,200 for installing equipment and controls for interconnecting one
catalytic incinerator to two presses.
-------
WiTH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY
TABLE 5-10.
CAPITAL COSTS Of CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR
HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESSa
Ca 1 ) coSt S
High—velocity
hot air dryer
Combination dryer replacemerbtb
incinerator dryer total
Pur chased Equipment Costs
$87,JOOC
6,100
6,100
8,800
2 1,OOO
$81,700C $84300d $172,000
6,100
6,100
8,800
2L0 00
7,600
5,100
12,900
25 , 600
12,700
11,200
21,700
46,600
TOTAL INSTALLED CAPITAL COSTS
$129,700
$129,100 $158,300
$288,000
a high-velocity hot air dryer.
manual, December 1978.
Direct Installation Costs
Foundations and supports
Erection and handling
Electrical and mechanicaic
SUBTOTAL
Ind ect Installation Costs
Engineering and supervision9
Construction and field expensesh
Construction fee -
Contingencies
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL INSTALLATION COSTS
9,600
9,600
18,700
28,300
4.400
4,400
8,400
12,800
2,600
2,600
2,700
48,4G0
5,300
69,4o0
$42,000J
$42000J
$74,000
$116,000
Costs in June 1080 dollars.
I) CouuIblndtlon dryer replaced with
C Reference 3.
d I eference 2.
e Includes the items electrical, piping, insulation, and painting listed in GARD
Reference 4.
9 Includes the item model study listed In GAI1D manual, December 1918.
h Includes the items startup and performance test listed in CARD manual, December 1978.
indirect installation costs based on 57% of the purchased equipment cOsts, CARD manual
3 Reference 5.
, December 1978.
-------
5.2.4.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange - Indirect in-
stallation costs for a catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange
would be $18,500 for installation at a model printing press equipped with
a high—velocity hot air dryer, $24,700 for a model press with a combination
dryer, and $66,900 if the combination dryer is replaced with a high-velocity
hot air dryer.
Indirect installation costs for one catalytic incinerator with pri-
mary heat exchange would be $37,100 for installation at two model printing
presses equipped with high-velocity hot air dryers, $49,300 for model
presses equipped with combination dryers, and $133,900 if the combination
dryers are to be replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
5.2.4.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange -
Indirect installation costs for a catalytic incinerator with primary and
secondary heat exchange would be $21,000 for connection to a model printing
press equipped with a high—velocity hot air dryer and $69,400 if the combi-
nation dryer is replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
5.2.5 Total Installed Capital Cost
Total installed capital cost is the sum of purchased equipment cost,
direct installation cost, and indirect installation cost (total instal-
lation cost).
5.2.5.1 Cooler/ESP’s — As shown in ‘Table 5-6 the total installed capital
cost for a cooler/ESP at a model printing press equipped with a high-
velocity hot air dryer would be $94,200, which includes purchased equipment
cost 0 f $37,700 and total installation cost of $56,500. The total installed
capital cost of $143,100 for a coolerfESP at a model printing press equipped
with a combination dryer would include purchased equipment cost of $57,300
and total installation cost of $85,800. Replacing a combination dryer with
a high-velocity hot air dryer would add $84,300 for the purchase cost of
the ne’, dryer and $74,000 for installation. Thus the total installed capi-
tal cost would be $252,500 for the cooler/ESP and the replacement dryer.
As shown in Table 5—7 the total installed capital cost for a cooler!
ESP connected to two model printing presses equipped with high-velocity
hot air dryers would be $167,300, which includes purchased equipment cost
of S57,300 and total installation cost of $110,000. The total installed
5-23
-------
capital cost of $211,700 for a cooler/ESP at two model printing presses
equipped with combination dryers would include purchased equipment cost of
$75,000 and totaV installation cost 0 f $136,700. Replacing combination
dryers with high-velocity hot air dryers would add $168,600 for the purchase
cost of the new dryers and $148,000 for installation. Thus the total
installed capital cost would be $483,900 for the cool er/ESP and the replace-
ment dryers.
5.2.5.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — As shown in
Table 5-8, total installed capital cost of a catalytic Incinerator with
primary heat exchange at a model printing press equipped with a high-
velocity hot air dryer includes purchased equipment cost of $80,700 and
total installation cost of $37,000, for a total installed capital cost of
$117,700. Total installed capital cost for installing a catalytic inciner-
ator with primary heat exchange on a model printing press equipped with a
combination dryer would Include purchased equipment cost of $112,300 and
total installation cost of $50,000, for total installed capital cost of
about $162,300. Facilities replacing a combination dryer with a high-
velocity hot air dryer would have additional capital cost of S84,300 for
the new dryer and additional total installation cost of $74,000—-a total
Installed capital cost of $276,000 for the catalytic incinerator and the
repi acernent dryer.
As shown in Table 5—9, total in”stalled capital cost of a catalytic in-
cinerator with primary heat exchange connected to two model presses equipped
with high—velocity hot air dryers includes purchased equipment cost of
$112,300 and total installation cost of $74,200, for a total installed capi-
tal cost of $186,500. Total installed capital cost for installing a cataly-
tic Incinerator with primary heat exchange to two model presses equipped
with combination dryers includes purchased equipment cost of $170,200 and
total installation cost of $100,300, for a total installed capital cost of
about $270,500. Facilities replacing combination dryers with high-velocity
hot air dryers would have an additional capital cost of $168,600 for the
new dryers and additional total installation cost of $148,000, for a total
installed capital cost of $503,100 for the catalytic incinerator and the
replacement dryers.
5-24
-------
5.2.5.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange —
As shown in Table 5—10, total installed capital cost of a catalytic incinerator
with primary and secondary heat exchange connected to a model printing press
equipped with a high—velocity hot air dryer would include purchased equipment
cost of $87,700 and total installation cost of $42,000, for a total installed
capital cost of $129,700. Facilities replacing a combination dryer with
a high-velocity hot air dryer would have an additional capital cost of $84,300
for the new dryer and additional total installation cost of $74,000, for a
total installed capital cost of $288,000 for the catalytic incinerator and
the replacement dryer.
5.3 ANNUALIZED COSTS
No direct or indirect costs are associated with reduction of the
concentration of high volatility organic compounds in press fountain
solutions. Consequently, the annualized costs of VOC emission control
would be due to installation of equipment to control emissions from the
dryer.
Annualized costs include the total annual expenditures (direct and
indirect) required to purchase, install, operate, and’maintain the control
equipment. At presses replacing combination dryers, additional annualized
costs would include the total annual expenditures required to purchase,
install, operate, and maintain new high—velocity hot air dryers, minus
the direct annual expenditures required to operate and maintain combination
dryers. Replacement of combination dryers with high—velocity hot air dryers
would lead to decreases in natural gas consumption and to cost savings. Bases
for estimating annualized costs are outlined in Table 5—11, and design
parameters such as equipment life and utilities cost are shown in Tables 5—12
through 5—16. Dryers have a 15—year life, 13 incinerators and cocler/ESP’s
have a 10—year life, and catalysts have a 5—year life. 14
5—25
-------
TABLE 5-11. BASES FOR ANNUALIZED COST ESTIMATES
I tern
Indirect Annualized Costs
5-year capital recovery factor
10-year capital recovery factor
15-year capital recovery factor
Annual charges for taxes,
administration, & insurance
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance labor
latural gas
El ectricity
Water
a Reference 14.
0.04 x installed capital cast
$10. 90/h
$O.085/Nm 3 (52.40/1000 scf)
$0. 049/kWh
$0.21/rn 3 (S0.79/l000 gal)
Cost basisa
0.2638
0.1628
0.1315
x catalyst replacement cost
x installed capital cost
x installed capital cost
5—25
-------
TABLE 5-12. EQUIPMENT LIFE FACTORS AND UTILITIES USED TO CALCULATE
ANNUALIZED COSTS OF CONNECTING A COOLER/ESP AT A MODEL PRESS
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer
replacernenta
Indirect Costs
life
(yrs)
10 b
NA
10 b
NA
10 b
1 SC
Cooler/ESP equipment
Dryer life (yrs)
Direct Costs
Maintenance labor (h)
Natural gas (Nn 3 /h)
Electricity (kWh)
Water (m 3 /yr)
-
—
-
-
2000
4000
2000
4000
2000
4000
2000
4000
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
17 4d
174d
NA
NA
14,4OO
25 , 9 oo
1,51O
2,9809
1 74d
1 74d
NA
NA
22,OOO
42 , 000 f
2,990 J
5,94Og
1 74d
1 74d
(27.3)e
(27.3)e
14,4OO
25 , 9 oof
],51 0g
2,980g
a Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
b Reference 14.
C Reference 13.
d Reference 15.
e Based on calculations of natural gas savings due to replacing a combina-
tion dryer with a high-velocity hot air dryer by Hays, Phil, Engineering-
Science, April 1981.
f Reference 1.
g References 1 and 16.
5-27
-------
TABLE 5-13. EQUIPMENT LIFE FACTORS AND UTILITIES USED TO CALCULATE ANNUALIZED
COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE COOLER/ESP TO TWO MODEL PRESSES
High-velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combinati on
dryer
replacementa
Indirect Costs
life
(yrs)
1 b
NA
j b
NA
1 b
15C
Coo1er/ $P equipment
Dryer life (yrs)
Direct Costs
Maintenance labor (h)
Natural gas (Nm 3 /h)
Electricity (kwh)
Water (m 3 /yr)
-
-
-
-
2000
4000
2000
4000
2000
4000
2000
4000
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
174d
174 d
NA
NA
22 ,ooo
42 ,OOO
2,99O
5,94O
1 74d
174 d
NA
NA
41 , 300 f.
8 O, 5 OO
s,g4og
u,800g
1 74d
174 d
(54.6)e
(54.6)e
22 , 000 f
i 2,OOOf
2,g9og
5,g4og
a Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
b Reference 14.
C Reference 13.
d Reference 15.
e Based on calculations of natural gas savings due to replacing a combina-
tion dryer with a high—velocity hot air dryer by Hays, Phil, Engineering—
Science, April 1981.
Reference 1.
g References 1 and 16.
- 29
-------
TABLE 5-14. EQUIPMENT LIFE FACTORS AND UTILITIES USED TO CALCULATE ANNUALIZED
C. t’STS OF CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY HEAT
EXCHANGE AT A MODEL PRESS
High—velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer
replacementd
Indirect Costs
Incineration equipment
Catalyst life (yrs)
Dryer life (yrs)
life
(yrs)
10 b
b
NA
10 b
5b
NA
10 b
b
l5
Direct Costs
Maintenance labor (h) — 2000
4000
Natural gas (Nm 3 /h) - 2000
4000
Electricity (kIilh) — 2000
4000
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
h/yr
27d
1 d
8.5
8. S e
14,0009
28,0009
32d
56 d
25.6e
2 5.se
24,800g
49,6009
27d
1 d
( i a . B)f
( 18 . 8 )f
14,OO0
28,0009
a Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
b Reference 1.4.
c Reference 13.
d Reference 17.
e Based on calculations of natural gas requirements for catalytic incinera-
tors with 70% heat recovery by Hays, Phil, Engineering-Science, April 1981.
Based on calculations of natural gas savings due to replacing a combina-
tion dryer with a high-velocity hot air dryer minus the natural gas re-
quirements for catalytic incinerators with 70% heat recovery by Hays, Phil,
Engineering—Science, April 1981.
9 Reference 3.
5-29
-------
TABLE 5-15.
EQUIPMENT LIFE FACTORS AND UTILITIES USED TO.CALCULATE ANNUALIZED
COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY HEAT
EXCHANGE TO TWO MODEL PRESSES
High-velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combination
dryer
replacementa
Indirect Costs
Incineration equipment
Catalyst life (yrs)
Dryer life (yrs)
life (yrs)
lOb
5 b
NA
iOb
5 b
NA
1 b
5 b
1 5C
Direct Costs
Maintenance labor (h)
Natural gas (Nm 3 /h)
Electricity (kWh)
- 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
- 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
- 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
•
32 d
56d
17.O
17.oe
24,800g
49,600g
1 7 4 d
174d
51.2
5j•3e
37,600h
75,200h
174 d
174d
( 37 . 5 )f
( 37 . 6 )f
24,800g
49,600g
a Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
b Reference 14.
C Reference 13.
d Reference 17.
e Based on calculations of natural gas requirements for catalytic
tors with 70% heat recovery by Hays, Phil, Engineering—Science,
Based on calculations of natural gas savings due to replacing a
tion dryer with a high—velocity hot air dryer minus the natural
quirements for catalytic incinerators with 70% heat recovery by
Engineering-Science, April 1981.
g Reference 3.
h Based on “six tenths factor” equation: COSta = COStb (capacitya/capacityb)° 6
incinera—
April 1981.
combina-
gas re—
Xays, Phil,
5—30
-------
TABLE 5-16. EQUIPMENT LIFE FACTORS AND UTILITIES USED TO CALCULATE ANNUALIZED
COSTS OF CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH PRIMARY AND
SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE AT A MODEL PRESS
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combi nation
dryer
replacernenta
Indirect Annualized Costs
Incineration equipment Tife (yrs)
Catalyst life (yrs)
lob
5 b
lob
5 b
Dryer life (yrs)
NA
15C
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance labor (h) - 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
Natural gas (Nrn 3 /h) - 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
Electricity (kWh) — 2000 h/yr
4000 h/yr
2 7d
sid
( i .5)e
(i.5)e
l9,2O0
38 , 4 00 f
27d
Bid
(20.3)8
(20.318
19,200t
3 8 , 4 0 0 f
a Combination dryer replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
b Reference 14.
c Reference 13.
d Reference 17.
e Based on calculations of natural gas requirements for catalytic incinera-
tors with 70% heat recovery by Hays, Phil, Engineering-Science, April 1981,
minus the natural gas savings in the dryer due to secondary heat recovery by
Strand, Phil, TEC Systems Inc., March 1981.
Reference 3.
5—31
-------
5.3.1 Indirect Annualized Costs
Indirect annualized costs due to purchasing and installing rather
than to maintaining and operating the emission control equipment, would
include not only expenditures for taxes, administration, and insurance
but also costs due to capital recovery.
For annualized cost estimates, capital recovery costs were estimated
by using a capital recovery factor (CRF), which is a function of interest
rate and useful equipment life.
CRF = 1(1 +
(1 + 1)’ — 1
where i annual interest rate, expressed as a decimal, and
n = economic life of the equipment, in years.
The interest rate was assumed to be 10 percent throughout the life of the
control equipment. 14 Cooler/ESP’s and catalytic incinerators were assumed
to have an average 10—year life; 14 high—velocity hot air dryers were assumed
to have an average 15—year life; 13 and the catalyst used in incinerators
was assumed to have an average 5—year life. 14 The resulting CRF’s are
0.1628 for coaler/ESP’s and catalytic incinerators; 0.1315 for high—
velocity hot air dryers; and 0.2638 for catalyst. Annualized capital
recovery costs were estimated by multiplying total installed capital costs
by the CRF’s.
Expenditures for taxes, administration, and insurance were esti-
mated to be 4 percent of the total installed capital costs. 14 Taxes,
administration, and insurance, however, were not included in the cost for
replacing an existing combination dryer with a high—velocity hot air
dryer because exchange of equipment does not significantly affect this
cost. -,
5.3.1.1 Cooler/ESP’s — As shown In Tables 5-17 and 5-18, indirect annua-
lized costs of installing a cooler/ES? on a model printing press equippec
with a high-velocity hot air dryer would be $15,000 for capital recovery
plus $4,000 for taxes, administration, and insurance, for a total of
S19,000. Indirect annualized costs of installing a cooler/ESP on a model
printing press equipped with a combination dryer would be $23,000 for capi-
tal recovery plus $6,000 for taxes, administration, and insurance, for a
total of $29,000. At a press replacing a combination dryer with a high-
-------
TABLE 5-17. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING A COOLER/ESP TO
A MODEL PRESS - 2000 h/yr OPERATIONS
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$94,200
$143,100
$252,500
Indirect Annualized Costs
15,000
NA
4,000
19,000
23,pOO
NA
6,000
29,000
15,000
21,000
4,000
40,000
Capital recovery (cooler/ESP)
Capital recovery (dryer)
Taxes, administration, insurance
SUBTOTAL
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance
natural gas
Electricity
WateyC
SUBTOTAL
2,000
NA
1,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
NA
1,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
(5,000)
1,000
2,000
0
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$24,000
$34,000
$40,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
C Includes cost of detergent for cleaning.
5-33
-------
TABLE 5-18. MINUALIZEO COSTS FOR CONNECTING A COOLER/ESP TO
A MODEL PRESS - 4000 h/yr OPERATtONa
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer
reolacemerttb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$94,200
S143,100
$252,500
Indirect Annualized Costs
15,000
23,000
15,000
Capital recovery (ccoler/ESP)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
NA
21,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
4,000
6,000
4,000
SUBTOTAL
19,000
29,000
40,000
Direct Annualized Costs
2,000
2,OQO
2,000
Maintenance
Natural gas
NA
NA
(9,000)
Electricity
1,000
2,000
1,000
.1aterC
2,000
3,000
2,000
SUBTOTAL
5,000
7,000
(4,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$24,000
$36,000
$36,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryer replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer.
C Includes cost of detergent for cleaning.
5-34
-------
velocity hot air dryer, additional indirect annualized costs for installing
the dryer would be $21;000 for capital recovery, for a total of $40,000
for the cooler/ESP and the new dryer.
As shown in Tables 5-19 and 5-20 indirect annualized costs of connecting
one cooler/ESP to two model printing presses equipped with high-velocity
hot air dryers would be $27,000 for capital recovery plus $7,000 for taxes,
administration, and insurance, for a total of $34,000. Indirect annualized
costs of connecting one cooler/ESP to two model printing presses equipped
with combination dryers would be $35,000 for capital recovery plus $8,000
for taxes, administration, and insurance, for a total of $43,000. At
model printing presses replacing combination dryers with high-velocity
hot air dryers, additional indirect annualized cost for installing the
dryers would be 42,000 for capital recovery, for a total of $76,000 for the
cooler/ESP and new dryers.
5.3.1.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — Indirect an-
nualized costs, shown in Tables 5-21 and 5-22, of installing a catalytic
incinerator with primary heat exchange on a model printing press equipped
with a high—velocity hot air dryer would be $24,000 for capital recovery
plus $5,000 for taxes, administration, and Insurance-—or $29,000 total.
Indirect annualized costs of installing a catalytic incinerator on a
model printing press equipped with a combination dryer would be $35,000 for
capital recovery plus $6,000 for taxes, administration, and insurance, for
a total of $41,000. At facilities replacing a comb’ination dryer with a
high-velocity hot air dryer, additional indirect annualized cost for
installing the dryer would be $21,000 for capital recovery, for a total of
$50,000 for the catalytic incinerator and the dryer.
Indirect annualized costs, shown irt Tables 5-23 and 5-24, 0 f connect-
ing one catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange to two model print-
ing presses equipped with hi.gh—velocity hot air dryers would be $39,000
for capital recovery plus $7,000 for taxes, administration, and insurance——
or $46,000 total. Indirect annualized costs of connecting one catalytic in-
cinerator with primary heat exchange on two model printing presses equipped
with combination dryers would be $61,000 for capital recovery plus $11,000
for taxes, administration, and insurance, for a total of $72,000. At plants
replacing combination dryers with high-velocity hot air dryers, additional
indirect annualized cost for installing the dryers would be $42,000 for
capital recovery, for a total of S88,000 for the catalytic incinerator and
the dryers.
5—35
-------
TABLE 549. ANNUAL EZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING ONE COOLERfESP TO
TWO MODEL PRESSES - 2000 h/yr OPERATIONa
Annualized Costs
High—velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combination
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$167,300
$211,700
$483,900
Indirect Annualized Costs
27,000
.
35,800
27,000
Capital recovery (cooler/ESP)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
NA
42,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
7,000
8,000
7,000
SUBTOTAL
34,000
43,000
76,000
Direct Annualized Costs
2,000
2,000
2,000
Maintenance
Natural gas
NA
NA
(9,000)
Electricity
WaterC
1,000
2,000
2,000
3,000
1,000
2,000
SUBTOTAL
5,000
7,000
(4,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$39,000
$50,000
$72,000
Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high—velocity hot air dryers.
C Includes cost of detergent for cleaning.
5-36
-------
TABLE 5-20. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING ONE COOLER/E$P TO
TWO MODEL PRESSES - 4000 h/yr OPERATIONa
Combination
Annualized Costs High-velocity Combination dryer
hot air dryers dryers replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost $167,300 $211,700 $483,900
Indirect Annualized Costs
Capital recovery (cooler/ESP) 27,000 35,000 27,000
Capital recovery (dryer) NA NA 42,000
Taxes, administration, insurance 7,000 8,000 7,000
SUBTOTAL 34,000 43,000 76,000
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance 2,000 2,000 2,000
Natural gas NA NA (19,000)
Electricity 2,000 4,000 2,000
WaterC 3,000 4,000 3,000
SUBTOTAL 7,000 10,000 ( 12,000 )
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST $41,000 $53,000 $64,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
C Includes cost of detergent for cleaning.
5—37
-------
TABLE 5-21. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESS - 2000 h/yr OPERATIONa
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Combination
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$117,700
$162,300
$276,000
Indirect Annualized Costs
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
Taxes, administration, insurance
SUBTOTAL
24,000
NA
5,000
29,000
.
35,800
NA
6,000
41,000
24,000
21,000
5,000
50,000
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
Natural gas savings (dryer)
Electricity
SUBTOTAL
2,000
1,000
NA
1,000
4,000
2,000
4,000
NA
1,000
7,000
2,000
1,000
(5,000)
1,000
(1,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$33,000
$48,000
$49,000
a Costs In June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
5-38
-------
TABLE 5-22. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESS - 4000 h/yr OPERATION8
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
Comb inati on
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$117,700
$162,300
$276,000
Indirect Annualized Costs
24,000
35,000
24,000
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
NA
21,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
5,000
6,000
5,000
SUBTOTAL
29,000
41,000
50,000
Direct Annualized Costs
4,000
4,000
4,000
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
Natural gas savings (dryer)
3,000
NA
9,000
NA
3,000
(9,000)
Electricity
SUBTOTAL
1,000
8,000
2,000
15,000
1,000
(1,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$37,000
$56,000
$49,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
5-39
-------
TABLE 5-23. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO TWO MODEL PRESSES 2000 h/yr OPERATIONa
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combination
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$186,500
$270,500
$503,100
Indirect Annualized Costs
39,000
61,000
39,000
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
NA
42,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
1,000
11,000
7,000
SUBTOTAL
46,000
72,000
88,000
Direct Annualized Costs
2,000
3,000
2,000
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
3,000
9,000
3,000
Natural gas savings (dryer)
Electricity
NA
1,000
NA
2,000
(9,000)
1,000
SUBTOTAL
6,000
14,000
(3,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$52,000
S86,000
$85,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high—velocity hot air dryers.
5-40
-------
TABLE 5-24. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO TWO MODEL PRESSES - 4000 h/yr OPERATIONa
Annualized Costs
High—velocity
hot air dryers
Combination
dryers
Combination
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$186,500
$270,500
$503,100
Indirect Annualized Casts
39,000
61,OO
39,000
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
NA
42,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
7,000
11,000
7,000
SUBTOTAL
46,000
72,000
88,000
Direct Annualized Costs
4,000
5,000
4,000
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
Natural gas savings (dryer)
6,000
NA
17,000
NA
6,000
(19,000)
Electricity
2,000
4,000
2,000
SUBTOTAL
12,000
26,000
(7,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$58,000
$98,000
$81,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
5-41
-------
5.3.1.3 Catalytic tncinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange —
Indirect annualized costs, shown in Tables 5—25 and 5—26, of installing a
catalytic incinerator with pYirnary and secondary heat exchange on a model
printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air dryer would be $26,000
for capital recovery plus $5,000 for taxes, administration, and insurance——
or $31,000 total. At plants replacing a combination dryer with a high-
velocity hot air dryer, additional indirect annualized cost for installing
the dryer would be $21,000 for capital recovery, for a total of $52,000
for the catalytic incinerator and the dryers.
5.3.2 Direct Annualized Costs
Direct annualized costs in Tables 5-17 through 5—26 include all expen-
ditures for maintaining and operating emission control equ prnent. For a
cooler/ESP, maintenance costs are primarily labor for weekly removal of
ink-solvent and varnish deposits from cooler plates and coils and from all
ESP surfaces. 15 Detergent must be mixed with water, operation of the
automatic cleaning system must be monitored, and high-voltage wires must
be replaced occasionally. Operating costs of a cooler/ESP include the
cost of electricity for operating fans, pumps, and the ES? and the cost of
water for the cooling tower makeup and for cleaning. Cost of heating the
cooling water was included in the electricity cost, and cost of detergent
was included in the water cost.
Heating requirements for a high—velocity hot air dryer are signifi-
cantly less than those for a combination dryer. For presses where combina—
tfon dryers are replaced w1th high—velocity hot air dryers, the differences
in gas costs are shown in Tables 5—17 through 5—26 as natural gas savings
which reduce total annualized costs.
For catalytic incinerators, maintenance costs are primarily labor
charges for occasional repair of Incinerator refractories, for cleaning
burners, for annual maintenance of the catalyst beds, and for replacement
of the catalyst every 5 years. Operating costs include the cost of elec-
tricity for operating exhaust fans and the cost of natural gas for heating
the exhaust gas stream to reaction temperature.
5.3.2.1 Cooler/ESP’s - Total direct annualized costs for a cooler/ESP
5-42
-------
TABLE 5-25. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESS -
2000 h/yr OPERATION 8
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
Combination
dryer
replacernentb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$129,700
$288,000
Indirect Annualized Costs
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
Taxes, adr iinistration, insurance
SUBTOTAL
26,000
NA
5,000
31,000
26,000
21,000
5,000
52,000
Direct Annualized Costs
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
Natural gas savings (dryer)
Electricity
SUBTOTAL
2,000
1,000
(2,000)
1,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
(7,000)
1,000
(3,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$33,000
$49,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
5-43
-------
TABLE 5-26. ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESS -
4000 h/yr OPERATI0N
Combination
Annualized Costs
High-velocity
hot air dryer
dryer
replacementb
Total Installed Capital Cost
$129,700
$288,000
Indirect Annualized Costs
26,000
26,000
Capital recovery (incinerator)
Capital recovery (dryer)
NA
21,000
Taxes, administration, insurance
5,000
5,000
SUBTOTAL
31,000
52 , 00U
Direct Annualized Costs
4,000
4,000
Maintenance
Natural gas (incinerator)
3,000
3,000
Natural gas savings (dryer)
Electricity
(3,000)
2,000
(12,000)
2,000
SUBTOTAL
6,000
(3,000)
TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
$37,000
$49,000
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Corribf nation dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
P
-------
installed at a model printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air
dryer would be $5,000 for 2000 hours per year of operation as well as for
4000 hours per year of operation. If the cooler/ESP were installed at a
model printing press equipped with a combination dryer, total direct ann-
ualized costs would be $5,000 f r 2000 hours per year of operation and
$7,000 for 4000 hours per year of operation. If the combination dryer were
replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer, total direct annualized
savings for the cooler/ESP and the dryers would be negligible for 2000 hours
per year of operation and $4,000 for 4000 hours per year of operation.
Total direct annualized costs for one cool er/ESP connected to two model
printing presses equipped with high-velocity hot air dryers would be $5,000
for 2000 hours per year of operation and $7,000 for 4000 hours per year of
operation. If the coolerfESP were connected to two model printing presses
equipped with combination dryers, total direct annualized costs would be
$7,000 for 2000 hours per year of operation and $10,000 for 4000 hours per
year of operation. If combination dryers were replaced with high-velocity
hot air dryers, total direct annualized savings for the cooler/ESP and the
dryers would be $4,000 for 2000 hours per year o operation and $12,000
for 4000 hours per year of operation.
5.3.2.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — Total direct
annualized costs for a catalytic incinerator with primary heat e change
installed at a model printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air
dryer would be $4,000 for 2000 hours per year of operation and $8,000 for
4000 hours. If the catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange were
installed at a model printing press equipped with a combination dryer,
total direct annualized costs would be $7,000 for 2000 hours per year of
operation and $15,000 for 4000 hours per year of operation. If the combina-
tion dryer were replaced with a high—velocity hot air dryer, total direct
annualized savings for the incinerator and the dryers would be $1,000 for
2000 hours per year of operation as well as for 4000 hours per year of
operation.
Total direct annualized costs for a catalytic incinerator with primary
heat exchange connected to two model printing presses equipped with high-
velocity hot air dryers would be $6,000 for 2000 hours per year of operation
5-45
-------
and $12,000 for 4000 hours. If the catalytic incinerator with primary
heat exchange were Installed at two model printing presses equipped with
combination dryers, total direct annualized costs would be $14,000 for 2000
hours per year of operation and 526,000 for 4000 hours per year of operation.
If the combination dryers were replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers,
total direct annualized savings for the incinerator and the dryers would be
$3,000 for 2000 hours per year of operation and 57,000 for 4000 hours per
year of operation.
5.3.2.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange -
Total direct annualized costs for a catalytic incinerator with primary and
secondary heat exchange installed at a model printing press equipped with
a high—velocity hot air dryer would be $2,000 for 2000 hours per year of
operation and 56,000 for 4000 hours per year of operation. tf the combina-
tion dryer were replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer, total direct
annualized savings for the incinerator and the dryer would be $3,000 for 2000
hours per year of operation as well as 4000 hours per year of operation.
5.3.3 Total Annualized Costs
Total annualized costs are functions of press usage. Tables 5-17
through 5—25 si.rnimarize these costs for the model heatset web—offset litho-
graphic printing presses (Chapter 2).
5.3.3.1 Cooler/ESP’s - As shown In Tables 5—17 a.n’d 5-19, total annualized
costs for installing a cooler/ESP on a model printing press equipped with
a high—velocity hot air dryer would be about $24,000 for a model printing
press which operates either 2000 or 4000 hours per year. Ef the model print-
ing pressses were equipped with a combination dryer, total annualized costs
for installing a cooler/ES? would be $34,000 for a press which operates
2000 hours per year and $36,000 for a press operating 4000 hours per year.
When an existing combination dryer is replaced with a high—velocity
hot air dryer, additional annualized costs result from the purchase and
installation of the high-velocity hot air dryer. Replacement of the
combination dryer, however, leads to a savings due to reduced fuel con-
sumption in the dryer. As shown in Tables 5—17 and 5-8, total annualized
costs for replacing an existing combination dryer with a high—velocity
hot air dryer and then installing a cooler/ES? on the high-velocity hot
5-46
-------
air dryer would be about $40,000 for a model printing press which operates
2000 hours per year and about $36,000 for a model printing press which op-
erates 4000 hours per year.
As shown in Tables 5—19 and 5—20, total annualized costs for install-
ing one cooler/ESP on two model printing presses equipped with high-velocity
hot air dryers would be about $39,000 for model printing presses which
operate 2000 hours per year and about $41,000 for model printing presses
which operate 4000 hours per year. If the model printing- presses were
equipped with combination dryers, total annualized costs for two model
printing presses connected to one cooler/ESP would be $50,000 for presses
which operate 2000 hours per year, and $53,000 for presses operating 4000
hours per year.
When existing combination dryers are replaced with high—velocity
hot air dryers, additional annualized costs result from the purchase and
installation of the high-velocity hot air dryers. Replacement of the com-
bination dryers, however, leads to a savings due to reduced fuel consump-
tion in the dryers. As shown in Tables 5-19 and 5-20, total annualized
costs for replacing two existing combination dryers with high-velocity
hot air dryers and then installing a coolerfESP on the high-velocity hot
air dryers would be about $72,000 for model printing presses which operate
2000 hours per year and about $64,000 for model printing presses which
operate 4000 hours per year.
5.3.3.2 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange - Total annual-
Ized costs for installing ne catalytic incinerator with primary heat ex-
change on a model printing press equipped with a high-velocity hot air
dryer would be about $33,000 for a model printing press which operates
2000 hours per year and about $37,000 for a model printing press which
operates 4000 hours per year. If the printing press were equipped with
a combination dryer, total annualized costs for a press equipped with a
catalytic incinerator would be $48,000 for a model printing press which
operate 2000 hours per year and $56 000 for a model printing press operat-
ing 4000 hours per year.
Ihen an existing combination dryer is replaced with a high—velocity
hot air dryer, additional annualized costs result from the purchase and
5-47
-------
installation of the high—velocity hot air dryer. Replacement of a combina-
tion dryer, however, leads to a savings due to reduced fuel consumption In
the dryers. As shown in Tables 5-21 and 5—22, total annualized costs for
replacing an existing combination dryer with a high-velocity hot air dryer
and then installing a catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange on
the high-velocity hot air dryer would be about $49,000 for a model press
which operates 2000 hours per year and the same for a model press which
operates 4000 hours per year.
Total annualized costs for connecting one catalytic incinerator with
primary heat exchange to two model printing presses equipped with high—
velocity hot air dryers would be about $52,000 for model printing presses
which operate 2000 hours per year and about $58,000 for model printing
presses which operate 4000 hours per year. If the printing presses were
equipped with combination dryers, total annualized costs for two printing
presses connected to one catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange
would be $86,000 for model presses which operate 2000 hours per year and
$98,000 for model presses which operate 4000 hours per year.
When existing combination dryers are replaced with high-velocity
hot air dryers, additional annualized costs result from the purchase and
installation of the high—velocity hot air dryers. Replacement of the com-
bination dryers, however, leads to a savings due to reduced fuel consumption
in the dryers. As shown in Tables 5—23 and 5-24,’ total annualized áosts
for replacing two existing combination dryers with high-velocity hot air
dryers and then installing a catalytic incinerator with primary heat ex-
change on the high—velocity hot air dryers would be about S85,000 for
model printing presses which operate 2000 hours per year and about $81,000
far model printing presses which operate 4000 hours per year.
5.3.3.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange —
As shown on Tables 5—25 and 5—26, total annualized costs for installing a
catalytic incinerator with primary and secondary heat exchange on a model
printing ress equipped with a high—velocity hot air dryer would be about
$33,000 for a model printing press which operates 2000 hours per year and
about $37,000 for a model printing press which operates 4000 hours per
year.
5-48
-------
When an existing combination dryer is replaced with a high—velocity
hot air dryer, additional annualized costs result from the purchase and
installation of the high-velocity hot air dryer. Replacement of the
combination dryer, however, leads to a savings due to reduced fuel
consumption in the dryer. As shown in Tables 5—25 and 5-26, total
annualized costs for replacing an existing combination dryer with a
high-velocity hot air dryer and then installing a catalytic incinerator
with primary and secondary heat exchange on the high-velocity hot air
dryer would be about $49,000 for a model printing press which operates
2000 hours per year as well as for a model press which operates 4000
hours per year.
5.4 COST EFFECTIVENESS OF CONTROL EQUIPMENT
The cost effectiveness of control equipment is the net annualized
cost per megagram of emission reduction. Cost effectiveness is calculated
by dividing the total annualized cost of control equipment by the annual
emission reduction achieved by that control equipment. Cost effectiveness
of control equipment for model heatset web-offset lithographic printing
presses (Chapter 2) is summarized in Tables 5-27 through 5—31. Cost
effectiveness per megagram of emission reduction would improve for
printing presses larger than the model printing press, for printing
presses operating more than 4000 hours per year, and at printing plants
which connect more than two printing presses to a single control device.
5.4.1 Fountain Solution Reformulation
The cost effectiveness for reformulating press fountain solutions
to eliminate high-volatility organic compounds, such as isopropyl alcohol,
would be zero dollars per megagram of emission reduction. Although
eliminating the use of high volatility organic compounds by themselves
would contribute to a cost savings, in most cases these materials would
have to be replaced by other fountain solution additives with similar
5—49
-------
IABLE 5-21. COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR CONNECTING A COOLER/ESP TO A MODEL pREssa
Emissions Cost
reduction, effectiveness,
Press Total Mg/yrC
Dryer type usage, annualized cost, Total Ink Total Ink
li/yr S/yr ernlsslonsd solvente emlssiorisd solvente
high-velocity hot air 2000 $24,000 29 6 $830 $4250
4000 24,000 59 11 410 2100
(JI
C)
Combination 2000 34,000 29 6 1170 6000
4000 36,000 59 11 610 3130
Coiribination replaced 2000 40,000 29 6 1380 7070
with hiqh-velocity 4000 $‘36,000 59 11 $610 $3130
hot airb
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryev .
C Based on emissions being limited to 0.2 Kq/Kg ink consumed.
1 Eiuiissions reduction of isopropyl alcohol plus ink solvent.
e i s iw reductions of ink solvent only.
-------
TABLE 5.28
COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR CONNECTING ONE COOLER/ESP TO TWO
MODEL pREssEsa
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
b Combination dryers replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
C Based on emissions being limited to 0.2 Kg/Kg Ink consumed.
d [ missions reduction of isopropyl alcohol plus ink solvent.
e Emissions reduction of ink solvent only.
U’
-I
Emissions
Cost
reduction,
effectiveness,
Press
Total
Mg/yrC
$/Mg
Dryer type
usage,
h/yr
annualized
$/yr
cost,
Total Ink
emissionsd solvente
Total
emissionsd
Ink
solvente
High-velocity hot air
2000
4000
$39,000
41,000
59 11
118 23
$660
350
$3380
1790
Combination
2000
4000
50,000
53,000
59 11
118 23
850
450
4360
2310
Combination replaced
2000
72,000
59 11
1220
6250
with hi 9 h-velocity
hot airD
4000
$64,000
118 23
$540
$2770
-------
TABLE 5-29 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL pRESSa
Emissions Cost
reduction effectiveness,
Press Total Mq/yrC $/Mg
Dryer type usage, annualized cost, Total Ink Total Ink
___ h/yr $/yr emlssionsd solvente emissionsd solvente
high-velocity hot air 2000 $33,000 36 13 $915 $2540
4000 37,000 73 26 510 1420
Combination 2000 48,000 36 13 1330 3690
4000 56,000 73 26 770 2150
Coiiibination replaced 2000 49.000 36 13 1360 3770
with hitjh-velocity 4000 $49,000 73 26 670 1880
hot airh
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
I) Combination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
C Based on emissions being limited to 0.05 Kg/Kg ink consumed.
(I Emissions reduction of isopropyl alcohol plus ink solvent.
e Euiiisslons reduction of ink solvent only.
-------
.
Emissions
Cost
reduction,
effe
cti veness,
Press
Total
Mq/yrc
$/Mg
Dryer type
usaqe,
h/yr
annualized
$/yr
cost,
Total Ink
emissionsd solvente
Total
emissionsd
Ink
solvente
High-velocity hot air
2000
4000
$52,000
58,000
72 26
146 52
$720
400
$2000
1120
Combination
2000
4000
86,000
98,000
72 26
146 52
1190
670
3310
1880
Combination replaced
2000
85,000
72 26
1180
3270
with hi9h-veloclty
hot airD
4000
$81,000
146 52
550
1560
a Costs in June 1980
b Combination dryers
C Based on emissions
(I Emissions reduction
e Emissions reduction
dollars.
replaced with high-velocity hot air dryers.
being limited to 0.05 Kg/Kg ink consumed.
of isopropyl alcohol plus ink solvent.
of ink solvent only.
TABLE 5-30
COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR CONNECTING ONE CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO TWO MODEL pRESSESa
(71
( )
-------
TABLE 5-31 COST EIFECTIVENESS FOR CONNECTING A CATALYTIC INCINERATOR WITH
PRIMARY ANI) SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE TO A MODEL PRESSa
Emissions
Cost
reduction,
effe
ctiveness,
Press
Total
Mg/yrC
$/Mg
Dryer type
usaqe,
h/yr
annualized
S/yr
cost,
Total Ink
emissionsd solvente
Total
ennssionsd
Ink
solvente
high-velocity hot air
‘-2000
4000
$33,000
37,000
36 13
13 26
$920
!iIO
$2540
1420
Couuihinat ion replaced
2000
49,000
36 13
1360
3770
with hi il -velocity
hot air 1
4000
$49,000
73 26
670
1880
a Costs in June 1980 dollars.
I) Coiuubination dryer replaced with a high-velocity hot air dryer.
C Based on emissions beinq liuiulted to 0.05 Kq/Kq ink consumed.
d Euiiissions reduction of isopropyl alcohol plus ink solvent.
e E OflS reduction of ink solvent only.
-------
cost but lower volatility. As a result, there would qenerally be no net
savings nor net cost increase. In a few cases, the fountain solution
metering rollers may need to be replaced. However, these rollers
have to be replaced periodically as the hardness of the roll changes with
use. Since these rollers are routinely replaced periodically, this is
not considered a cost associated with fountain solution reformulation.
5.4.2 Cooler/ESP’s - Installing a cooler/ESP on a model printing press
using a high-velocity hot air dryer as shown in Table 5-27, would result
in a cost effectiveness of about $4250 per megagram of ink solvent
emission reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation and about $2100
per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per year
of operation. Installing a cooler/ESP on a model printing press equipped
with a combination dryer would result in a cost effectiveness of about
$6000 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hours per
year of operation and about $3130 per megagram of ink solvent emission
reduction for 4000 hours per year of operation. Replacing an existing
combination dryer with a high-velocity hot air dryer and then installing
a cooler/ESP would change the cost effectiveness to about $7070 per
megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hojirs per year of
operation and to about $3130 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction
for 4000 hours per year of operation.
Connecting one cooler/ESP to two fllQdel printing presses using hich-
velocity hot air dryers would result in a cost effectiveness as shown in
Table 5-28 of about $3380 per megagram of ink solvent a’nissfon reduction for
2000 hours per year of operation and about $1790 per meoagram of ink solvent
emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of operation. Connecting one cooler/ESP
to two printing presses eouipped with combination dryers would result in a cost
effectiveness of about $4360 per negagram of ink solvent emission reduction for
2000 hours per year operation and about $2310 per megagrarn of ink solvent emission
reduction for 000 hours per year of operation. Replacing existing combination
dryers with high—velocity hot air dryers and then installing a cooler/ESP would
5—55
-------
change the cost effectiveness to about $6250 per megagram of ink solvent emission
reducting for 2000 hours per year of operation and to about $2770 per megagram of
ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of operation.
5.4.3 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary Heat Exchange — Installing a
catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange at model printing press using
a high-velocity hot air dryer as shown in Table 5—29, would result in a cost
effectiveness of about $2540 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for
2000 hours per year of operation and about $l.420 per rnegagram of ink solvent
emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of operation. Applying a ‘catalytic
incinerator with primary heat exchange to a model printing press using a
combination dryer would result in a cost effectiveness of about $3690 per
megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hours per year operation and
about $2150 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per
year of operation. Replacing an existing combination dryer with a high-velocity
hot air dryer and then applying a catalytic incinerator with primary heat
exchange would change the cost effectiveness to about $3770 per rnegagrani of
ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation and to
about $1880 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for t000 hours per
year of operation.
Connecting one catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange to two
model printing presses using high-velocity hot air dryers as shown in Table 5-30,
would result in a cost effectiveness of about $2000 per megagram of ink solvent
emission reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation and about $1120 per
rnegagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of operation.
Connecting one catalytic incinerator with primary heat exchange to two model
presses using combination dryers which result in a cost effectiveness of about
$3310 per megagrarn of ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hours per year
operation and about S1880 per rnegagram of ink solvent emission reduction for
1000 hours per year of operation. Replacing two existing combination dryers
5—56
-------
with high—velocity hot air dryers and then connecting one catalytic incinerator
with primary heat exchange changes the cost effectiveness to about $3270 per
megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation
and to about $1560 per megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours
per year of operation.
5.4.4 Catalytic Incinerators with Primary and Secondary Heat Exchange -
Connecting one catalytic incinerator with primary and secondary heat exchange to
a model printing press using a high—velocity hot air dryer would result in a
cost effectiveness of about $2540 per megagram of ink solvent emission
reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation and about $1420 per
megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of
operation as shown in Table 5—31. Replacing an existing combination
dryer with a high—velocity hot air dryer and then applying a catalytic
incinerator with primary and secondary heat exchange would change the
cost effectiveness to about $3770 per megagram of ink solvent emission
reduction for 2000 hours per year of operation and to about $1880 per
megagram of ink solvent emission reduction for 4000 hours per year of
operation.
5.5 REFERENCES
1. Letter of verification from Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham,
N.C., to Rousseau, Paul, Beltran Inc., New York, N.Y. April 1981. 1 p.
CoolerfESP purchase and operating qosts.
2. .Letter from Brodhagen, Mike, TEC Systems Inc., De Pere, Wis., to Hays,
Phillip, Engineering—Sctence, Durham, NC. February 1981. 2 p.
Purchase costs of dryers and incinerators for heatset web—offset lith-
ographic presses.
3. Letter from Strand, Philip, TEC Systems Inc., De Pere, Wis., to Michaelis,
Ted, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C. March 1981. 12 p. Purchase
costs and specifications of incinerators.
4. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C., to Huber,
Fred, Applied Web Services, Chicago, Ill. February 1981. Direct
installation costs for high—velocity hot air dryers.
5. Letter from Oslan, Robert, Arcata Publications Group, Los Angeles, Ca-
lif., to Michaelis, Ted, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C. October
1980. 2 p. Press operating parameters, and installation and main-
tenance costs of catalytic incinerators.
5—57
-------
6. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C., to Digate,
Joe, Lehigh Cadillac Printing, Chicago, Ill. February 1981. Cooler!
ESP installed capital costs.
7. Letter of verification from Hays, Phi flip, Engineering—Science, Durham,
N.C., to Baley, Bill, Lehigh/Steck Warlick, Dallas, lex. February
1981. 1 p. Cooler/ESP installed capital costs.
8. Telecon. Memering, Larry, United Air Specialists, Cincinnati, Ohio, to
Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C. November 1980. Cooler/
ESP installation costs.
9. CARD Inc. Capital and Operating Costs of Selected Air Pollution Control
Systems. EPA contract No. 68-02—2899. December 1978. p. 3-11.
10. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C., to Oslan,
Robert, Arcata Publications Group, Los Angeles, Calif. April 1981.
Ductwork costs.
11. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C., to Clark,
John, John Clark Co., Greensboro, N.C. March 1981. Blower costs.
12. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C., to Strand,
Philip, TEC Systems Inc., De Pere, Wis. April 1981. Installed costs
of automatic dampers.
13. Telecon. Hays, Phillip, Engineering-Science, Durham, N.C., to Brod—
hagen, Mike, TEC Systems Inc., De Pere Wis. March 1981. Equipment
life 0 q high—velocity hot air dryers.
14. Memorandi n and attachment from Vatavuk, William, EPA Strategies and
Air Standards Division, Durham, N.C., to Port,er, Fred, EPA Emissions
Standards and Engineering Divtsion, Durham, 1.C. September 1980. 14
p. Factors for developing CTGD costs.
15. Telecon. Mernering, Larry, United Air Specialists, Cincinnati, Ohio,
to Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham, N.C. January 1981.
Cooler/ES? maintenance practices.
16. Personal conversation. Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham,
N.C., with Hewitt, Richard, Gene Hewitt Co. Inc., Raleigh, N.C.
March 1981. Cooling tower requirements for cooler/ESP’s.
17. Letter of verification from Hays, Phillip, Engineering—Science, Durham,
N.C., to Finch, Bob, W. A. Krueger Co., Scottsdale, Ariz. April
1981. 1 p. Maintenance labor requirements for catalytic incinerators.
5-58
-------
APPENDIX A
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
A.1 INTRODUCTION
Appendix A describes procedures and samples of calculations used to
prepare this CTG.
A.2 ISOPROPYL ALCOHOL EVAPORATION IN PRESSROOM (CHAPTER 2)
It was observed that the isopropyl alcohol concentration in fountain
solution may vary from 30 to 15 percent by weight at heatset web-offset
lithographic printing presses not equipped with automatic concentration con-
trols. Variation in concentration is extreme, so the calculations were
based on a narrower range of 25 to 15 percent at 15.5°C (60°F)—-the lowest
temperature expected, even in refrigerated fountain solution control sys-
tems.
Isopropyl alcohol/water mixtures do not behave like ideal mixtures
during evaporation; activity coefficients were determined using three-
suffix Margules binary equations (Section 13, Perry’s Chemical Engineers
Handbook 4th ed.). Partial pressure (P ) data were also found in the
handbook.
1. Determine initial and final mole fractions of isopropyl alcohol and
water.
Initial condition, 25% isopropyl alcohol by weight
No. of Mole
Component MW % Wt. moles fraction
Isopropyl alcohol 60.10 25 0.416 0.0909
Water 18.02 75 4.16 0.9091
100% 4.576 1.0000
A-i
-------
Final condition, 15% isopropyl alcohol by weight
No. of Mole
Component MW % Wt. moles fraction
Isopropyl alcohol 60.10 15 0.25 0 .0503
Water 18.02 85 4.72 0.9497
1 00% C9T 1 .0000
2. Determine P at 15.5°C.
P 1 (isopropyl alcohol) = 24 m m Kg, and Pz(water) = 13.2 mm Hg.
3. Determine the activity coefficients (three-suffix Margules equations).
log i 4cA 12 + 2X 1 (A 21 - A 12 )], and
log ‘ (2 x [ A 2 1 + 2X 2 (A 12 - A 21 )]
where vi and v2 activity coefficients of isopropyl alcohol and
water, respectively;
X 1 and X 2 are liquid mole fractions of isopropyl alcohol
and water, respectively;
A 1 2 and A 21 are binary constants.
For the isopropyl alcohol/water mixture, A 1 2 a 1.342, and A 2 1
a 0.492.
Using the above equations and the liquid mole fraction found in
step 1, determine the activity coefficients.
At 25% isopropyl alcohol,’’
log y a o.9a91 2 [ 1.042 + 2(0.0909)(0.492 - 1.042)], = 6.005.
log ‘(2 = 0.0909 2 E0.492 + 2(0.9091)(l.042 - 0.492)], 2 = 1.029.
At 15% isopropyl alcohol,
log 11 = O.94972 [ 1.042 + 2(Q.0503)(O.492 - 1.042)], q a 7.761.
log 12 = 0.05032 [ 0.492 + 2(0.9497)(1.042 — 0.492)], 1.009.
4. Determine the mole fraction of Isopropyl alcohol in the vapor phase.
At 25% isopropyl alcohol and 15.5°C , calculate total partial pressure
(P’j.
P Yj p 1 x 1 “2 P 2 X 2
a 5.0O5(24)(0.0909) + 1.029(13.2)(0.9091)
a 13.10 + 12.35
a 25.45 mm Hg.
A-2
-------
Then calculate the vapor mole fraction, Y 1 .
13.1/25.45 0.515.
At 15% isopropyl alcohol and 15.5°C, calculate P and Y 1
P = 7.761(24)(0.0503) + 1.009(13.2)(0.9497)
= 9 37 + 12.65
= 22.02 mm Hg.
V 1 = 9.37/22.02 = 0.426
5. Assume that the vapor and the liquid phase mole fractions are linearly
related in the range of 25% to 15% isopropyl alcohol:
V 1 = mXj + b. Find m and b from previous data.
At V 1 = 0.515, X 1 0.0909, and 0.515 = m(0.0909) + b
At V 1 0.426, X 1 = 0.0503, and 0.426 = m(0.0503) + b
Solving for m and b, m = 2.19, and b 0.316.
= 2.19X 1 + 0.316.
6. Determine moles of fountain solution (W) remaining if W° = 100 moles
of 25% isopropyl alcohol fountain solution evaporated to 15%. This
process is identical to simple batch distillation as described in
Perry, 4th ed. The governing equation is:
in W = in W = C dXi = C dX
T J Yi - J(m_ 1)X 1 + b
1 in b + (me— 1) ; X 1 = 0.0503, and = 0.0909.
rn-i b+(m-1)X 1
I In 0.316 + 1.19(0.0503 )
1.19 0.316 + 1.19(0.0909 )
Thus W = 90.4 moles remain.
7. Determine the percentage (%) of isopropyl alcohol evaporated.
Initial lbs isopropyl alcohol total moles x mole fraction x MW
= 100 x 0.0909 x 60.1 = 546 lb.
Final lbs isopropyl alcohol = 90.4 x 0.0503 x 60.1 273 lb
Thus 5465 6273 x 100% = 50% evaporated.
Thus, 50 percent of the isopropyi alcohol consumed is evaporated
into the pressroom at the dampening system. Additional isopropyl alcohol
A-3
-------
is evaporated ‘into the pressroom at each printing unit and from the web be-
tween each printing unit, but is offset by that part of the pressroom air
which is carried into the dryer as makeup air. Neither of the additional
amounts can be determined; however the two offset each other, so it is
reasonable to use 50 percent as the split between isopropyl alcohol which
is emitted in pressroom ventilation and that which is emitted from the
dryer.
A.3 UNCONTROLLED VOC EMISSIONS (CHAPTER 2)
The parameters used in calculating uncontrolled VOC emissions for
the model heatset web—offset lithographic printing press are:
Ink consumption rate 23.7 kg/h (52.2 lb/h)
Isopropyl alcohol consumption rate 11.8 ‘kg/h (26.1 lb/h)
Annual hours of operation 2000 h/yr
Based on Section 2.3.2, the printing ink contains 40 percent ink solvent
by weight; 20 percent of the ink solvent is retained on the web, and the
remaining 80 percent is evaporated in the dryer. Of the isopropyl alcohol
consumed, 50 percent ‘is emitted in the pressroom ventilation, and 50 per-
cent is emitted in the dryer discharge. At the uncontrolled model press,
all isopropyl alcohol is emitted as VOC.
Total hourly uncontrolled VOC emissions from, a model press include
include those from ink solvent and from isopropyl alcohol.
(23.7 kg/h x 0.40 x 0.80) + 11.8 kg/h = 19.4 kg/h.
Annual uncontrolled VOC emissions for a model press operating 2000 hours
per year are:
19.4 kg/h x Mg/10 3 kg x 2000 h/yr 38.8 Mg/yr.
Thus the VOC emissions for a model press operating 4000 hours per year
would be 77.6 Mg/yr.
A.4 DEGREE OF CONDENSATION tN COOLER (CHAPTER 3)
Magiesol 47 oil is frequently a major comoonent of the solvents in
heatset web-offset lithographic inks; therefore, this oil was selected as
the basis for calculations. Magiesol 47 has an average rnolecular weight
of 206 and a specific gravity of 0.801. If the ink is 40 percent solvent
A-4
-------
by weight and if 80 percent of the solvent is evaporated in the dryer,
52.2 lb/h x 0.40 lb/lb x 0.80 = 16.7 lb/h.
Thus 16.7 pounds of ink solvent would enter the cooler.
A four—component ink oil containing straight chain compounds with
even carbon numbers was selected as the model. According to the Magiesol
47 ASIM distillation curve in Figure A—i, the initial boiling point (IBP)
is 238°C and the final boiling point is 273°C. Hexadecan (C16H34) boils
at 288°C, and tetradecane (C 14 H 30 ) boils at 253°C; therefore the the model
ink oil should contain some C16H34 and C 1 4H3 0 to provide a final boiling
point near 273°C. Decane (C 10 H 22 ), which boils at 174°C, is necessary
in a mixture of C 10 H 22 , C 12 H 26 , C 1 4H 30 , C 15 H 34 to achieve an IBP of 238°C.
For the four-component model with even numbers of carbon molecules
(C 10 , C 12 , C 1 4, and C 15 ), use the following procedure.
1. Determine the mole fractions of Cj , Cj2 , C 1 4, and C 1 5.
a. Assume that only C 14 and C 16 exist at 265°C, and find C 14 :C 16 .
b. Assume that only C 12 , C 1 , and C 16 extst at 245°C, keep C 1 4:C 16
constant, and find C 12 :C 14 :C 15 .
c. Keep C 12 :C 14 :C 15 constant, and find the C 10 molar ratio at IBP.
d. Assume that partial pressures (P ) vary with the Antoine equation
lnP 1 =A- [ B/(t+C)
where A, B, and C are empirical constants and where t is ex-
pressed in degrees Centigrade (°C) and P 1 is expressed in mill-
imeters of mercury (mm Hg).
e. Use tables of vapor pressure of pure substances (e.g., in Perry’s
Chemical Engineers Handbook) to find A, B, and C by solving the
3x3 matrix. For example, ‘substituting the following data into
Antoine’s equation gives three equations for C 10 H 22 .
P ,mHg t °C
10 5 .7 in 10 = A — [ B/C 55.7 + C)]
100 108.6 ln 100 = A - [ B/(108.6 + C)]
760 174.1 in 760 = A - [ B/(174.1 + C)]
Solving for A, B, C: A = 17.32, B = 4391, and C = 237.
The equations for C 10 , C 1 2, C 14 , and C 16 are:
A-S
-------
275
260
LU
LU
LU
0 20 40 60 80
PERCENT
DISTILLED
Figure A-i.
Distil lahori
47 Oil.
270
265
255
250
245
240
235
100
Curve, Magiesol
Source: Magie Bros. Oil Co.
A-6
-------
• _i, , 4391
ii. in rir — a ,. — ________
J J t+237
— 4514
i ,. in — ii.iu - _______
t+2 15
C 14 : in P 14 = 16.19 - ______ ‘ and
C 16 : in p 6 = 14.83 - 3268
t + ill
f. Calculate the mole fractions of Cj , C 12 , C 14 , and 16•
The sum of the products of mole fraction times P 1 for each com-
ponent must equal 760.
At 265°C, p 14 = 1002, and P 16 = 463.
Let x = mole fraction of C 14 and (1 - x) = mole fraction of
C 16 .
1002(x) + 463(1 — x) = 760, thus x = 0.55 and 1 - x 0.45.
C 14 :C 16 = x:(1 — x) = 0.55:0.45 1.22.
At 245°C, p 12 = 1461, p 14 = 641, and P 16 = 284.
Let x = mole fraction of C 12 , y = mole fraction of C 1 6, and
1.22y = mole fraction of C 14 .
‘1461(x) + 641(1.22y) + 284y = 760, thus x + 1.22y + y = 1, and
y = 0.32, 1.22y = 0.39, x = 0.29.
F
At 238°C, P 10 = 3203, P 2 = 1250, p 14 = 539, and P 16 = 235.
Let x = mole fraction of C 10 , y = mole fraction of C 12 ,
39y = mole fraction of C 1 i,, and 32y = mole fraction of C16.
CiO: x = 0.046 mole fraction C 1 2: y = 0.277 mole fraction
C 1 4: 39y = 0.372 mole fraction C 1 5: = 0.305 mole fraction
29
2. Determine the pounds per hour of uncondensed vapor.
Calculate the mole fraction of each component condensed, by using the
material balance equation below and by iterating on L (total moles of
liquid) by trial and error until the equation is satisfied at each
temperature plotted (Figure A—2).
A- 7
-------
lb—mci/h of component i in initial gas stream = 1
L + (mole fractfon of component i)(total lb—mcI/h of gas stream)
a. Calculate the lb—mci/h of each component tn initial gas stream.
Molecular weight (MW) of each component
C 13 142.3 ib/ib—mol
C 12 170.3 lb/lb—mci
= 198.4 ib/ib-mol
C 1 6 = 226.4 lb/lb-mci
Average molecular weight (avg MW) of each component; initial vapor
has same composition as solvent.
Avg MW =E(mole fraction of component i)(MW of component i)
1
= 0.046(142.3) + 0.277(170.,3) 0.372(198.4) + 0.305(226.4)
= 196.6.
Total lb—mci/h total lb/h + lb/lb-mci = 16.704/196.6 = 0.0849.
The lb-mol/h of each component = (mole fraction)0.0849.
C1Q: 0.046 x 0.0849 0.0039 lb-mci/h
C 12 : 0.277 x 0.0849 0.0235 lb-mol/h
C 14 : 0.372 x 0.0849 = 0.0316 lb-mci/h
C15: 0.305 x 0.0849 0.0259 lb-mcI/h
b. Calculate the lb—mci/h of total gas stream.
lb—mol/h air = 6000 scfm x 0.075 1b/ft 3 @ 0°F x 60 mm x 1 lb-mcI
h 28.952 lb
933 lb—mci/h 0 f air.
For the total gas stream,
933 ÷ 0.0849 933 lb—mol/h.
c. Iterate on L to satisfy each temperature.
Mole fraction = 4 total pressure.
At 1lo°F(43.rC), P 10 5.23, 12 = 0.687, P = 0.065, and
P 16 0.0017.
( 5.23, 0.687, 0.065, 0.0017)933 = (6.42, 0.843, 0.080, 0.0021).
760
Try L 0.04:
A-a
-------
0.0039 + 0.0235 + 0.0316 + 0.0259
0.04 + 6.42 0.04 + 0.84 0.04 + 0.08 0.04 + 0.0021
= 0.0006 + 0.027 + 0.263 + 0.615 = 0.905 1.
Try L = 0.035: 0.0006 + 0.027 + 0.275 ÷ 0.698 = 1.000 = 1.
d. Calculate lb/h of each component.
mol/h liquid = L x mole fraction liquid
C 10 : 0.035(0.0006) = 0.00002 mci/h liquid
C12: 0.035(0.027 ) 0.0009 mol/h liquid
C 14 : 0.035(0.275 ) = 0.0096 mol/h liquid
C 15 : 0.035(0.698 ) = 0.0244 mol/h liquid
0.0349
mol/h vapor = initial mol/h vapor — mol/h liquid
Cia: 0.0039 - 0.00002 0.00388 mol/h liquid
C 12 : 0.0235 - 0.0009 = 0.0226 mol/h liquid
C 1 4: 0.0316 — 0.0096 = 0.0220 mol/h liquid
Cl6: 0.0259 — 0.0244 0.0015 mel/h liquid
0.0500
lb/h vapor = lb/mol/h x lb/lb—mel
CiO: 0.0039(142.3) = 0.55 lb/h vapor
C 12 : 0.0226(170.3) = 3.85 lb/h vapor
C 1 4: 0.0220(198.4) = 4.36 lb/h vapor
C16: 0.0015(226.4) 0.34 lb/h vapor
9.10
The results of step 2 are plotted in Figure A-2.
3. Determine the degree of condensation (%) in the cooler at 43.3°C.
•lb/h condensed vapor - lb/h initial x 100
lb/h initial vapor
16.704 - 9.10 x 100 46%
16.704
The results of step 3 are plotted in Figure A-3 (Fig. 3-2 in text).
Repeat the procedure for other temperatures to establish the degree-
of-condensation curves.
A- 9
-------
Inlet Conditions
Mole
Fraction
.046
.277
.372
____ . 305
1.000
lb/hr
.55
4.00
6.27
5.86
16.68
27,000
C 10 H 22
C 12 H 26
C 14 H 30
C 16 H 44 _____
SUBTOTAL
AIR _______
TOTAL 27,016.68
Cl
I I — I I
Figure A-2.
30
35
40
(86)
(95)
(104)
TEMPERATURE IN COOLER, C
Uncondensed Vapor in Cooler
At 6000 scfm.
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Told
U-
U
a
0
0
-j
0
I
U 1
oJ
C,,
cq.jl
q I
CI
F
a
C 10
0
20 25
(68) (77)
GAS STREAM
45
(113)
(F)
A- 10
-------
90
80
I
I—
‘I ,
z
uJ
zoo
0
L)
05Q
LIJ
LU
uJ
30
20
0 10
20
30
40
50 60
(50)
(70)
(85)
(105)
(125)
GAS STREAM TEMPERATURE IN COOLER,°C (°F)
Figure A-3. Degree of Condensation in Cooler/ESP
for Model Presses
H ig hVe o ci ty
Hot Air Dryers
Combination
Dryers
A-il
-------
APPENDIX B
EMISSIONS AND EMISSION FACTORS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Emission factors that can be used to calculate emissions are herein
developed for four cases: uncontrolled heatset web—offset printing presses
using or not using high volatility organic compounds and controlled heatset
web-offset printing presses using incinerator or cooler/ESP systems. Meth-
ods for determining the values defined in the emission factor equations
can be used to quantify total emissions from the printing press ink, solvent
consumed during the printing process, ink solvent retained on the web, or
ink solvent recovered as water—free solvent. Emission rates for each case
can be determined by multiplying the emission factor by the weight of ink
consumed during a specific time interval.
Emission factors vary from job to ,job, and vary for different presses
doing similar jobs in the same plant; therefore, it is best to calculate
emission factors fran emissions data gathered over a 1-month period. Data
may be gathered and certified by the owner or operator of a facility, and
submitted for demonstration of compliance with applicable regulations.
B.2 VOC EMISSION FACTORS FOR UNCONTROLLED PRINTING PRESSES
VOC emission factors for heatset web-offset lithographic printing
presses using isopropyl alcohol or other high volatility organic compounds
(materials with normal boiling point of 150°C (300°F) or lower) can be
determined by the equation:
E = I - W + H Equation B—i
where E total VOC emitted, k
total ink consumed, kg
3—1
-------
I a total ink solvent consumed, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
w total Ink solvent retained on web, , and
total ink consumed, kg
H total high volatility organic compounds consumed, kg
total ink consumed, kg
Thus, for the model press in Section 2.3.2, a Q.d., W 0.08, H 0.5,
and
E = 0.4 - 0.08 + 0.5 a 0.8. Equation B-2
If no high volatility organic compounds are used, H = 0; thus ‘for the
model press in Section 2.3.2,
E = 0.4 - 0.08 = 0.3. Equation 3-3
3.3 VOC EMISSION FACTORS FOR PRINTING PRESSES tIITH CONTROL DEVICES
VOC emission factors for heatset web-offset lithographic printing
presses equipped with incineration systems can be determined by:
E = (1 - m)H + (I-n)(t — W + mH) Equation B-4
where E total VOC emitted, kg
total ink consumed, kg
total ink solvent consur red, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
w = total ink solvent retained on web, kg
total ink consumed, kg
total high volatility org ic compounds consumed, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
fraction of high volatility organic compounds carried into
dryer, and
n efficiency of control device, expressed as a fraction.
Values for I, W, and H may be determined by using methods described later
in Section 3.4. For m, the 0.5 developed in Appendix A.2 may be used. The
n for a properly designed and operated incineration system would be at least
0.9. Higher factors may be used if tests da onstrate greater efficiency.
B -2
-------
Because isopropyl alcohol or other high volatility organic compounds
are not effectively removed by cooler/ESP or similar systems, emission
factors for heatset web—offset lithographic printing presses connected
to such devices can be determined by:
E=I-W+H—R. EquationB—5
where E = total VOC emitted, kg
total ink consumed, kg
= total ink solvent consumed, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
w total ink solvent retained on web, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
H = total high volatility organic compounds consumed, kg and
total ink consumed, kg
R = total water-free ink solvent recovered, kg ,
total ink consumed, kg
Methods for determining the values for Equations B—i through B—5 are pre-
sented below in Section B.4.
3.4 METHODS FOR DETERMINING VALUES TO BE USED IN EMISSION FACTOR EQUATIONS
The weights or fractions for the emission factor equations can be
determined separately using the following methods.
B.4.i Total Ink Consumed
Total weight of ink consumed may be determined directly by measuring
weight, or indirectly by first measuring the volume of each ink consumed
at the heatset web—offset lithographic’ printing presses and then multiplying
each volume consumed by the density of that ink. Ink is usually delivered
to heatset web offset litho ’graphic printing plants in 40 pound drums or in
five pound containers called kits.
8.4.1,1 Direct Weight of Ink Consumed — The drums or kits of each type and
color of ink used may be weighed at the beginning of a test period, and
the empty and partially empty ones may be weighed at the end of the test
period. If ink fountains were empty at the beginning of the test period
they, should be empty at the end of the test period, thus the weight of
8—3
-------
ink removed would be added to the weight of ink remaining in the drums or
kits. The difference in weights of each Ink at the beginning and at the
end of the test period is the weight of that ink consumed. The sum of
the weights of all inks consumed is the total ink consumed.
8.4.1.2 Indirect Volume of Ink Consumed — When ink is delivered in kits
rather than drums, it is easier to weigh the ink consumed (Section 8.4.1.1).
When ink is delivered in drums, the ink is usually pumpeq to the printing
press. The ink fountains should be filled to the same level at the begin-
ning and end of each test period. If flow meters are connected to the Ink
pumps, the volume of each ink consumed may be measured directly. If no flow
meters are available, the volume of ink consumed may be determined by first
measuring the internal areas of the drums and the level cf:each ink at the
start and end of the test period and then multi plying the internal area by
difference in ink level for each ink.
Density of each ink used may be certified by the ink manufacturer, or
may be determined by EPA Test Method 24. The volume of each ink consumed
multiplied by the density of that ink is the weight of that ink consumed.
The sum of the weights of all inks consumed is the total weight of ink con-
sumed.
3.4.2 Total Ink Solvent Consumed
Percentage of volatile organic organic content by weight of each ink
used may be certified by the manufacturer, or may be determined by EPA Test
Method 24 using Procedure B of ASTM Method 0-2369-81, but the heating time
should be 3 hours at 110 0 C.
The weight of each ink consumed during the test period multiplied by
the percentage of volatile content (expressed as a fraction) is the weight
of ink solvent for each ink. Total ink solvent consumed is the sum of the
weights of ink solvent in all inks consumed during the test period.
3.4.3 Total Ink Solvent Retained on Web
Determination of ink solvent retained on web would require analysis
of nany samples. However, as stated in Chapter 2 retention on the web of
20 cercen of total ink solvent consumed appears to be reasonable. Thus,
W = 0.2 1 Equation 3-5
B-I
-------
could be used unless the procedures described below demonstrate some other
value.
Special care should be taken in collecting the samples, packaging them
for transportation to the laboratory, and testing them in the laboratory.
B.4.3.1 Collecting Samples - Samples should be handled carefully to avoid
contamination from ink, oil, or grease. Samples of finished product should
be collected at approximately 2-hour intervals during each job being run
during the test period. At least one sample should be tiken from each
job. Each sample should be taken while the printing press is being run
at normal speed and normal dryer temperatures, which may differ at each
press from job to job. Each sample should consist of at least five
signatures, sheets, or sections of product web--equivalent to. one blanket
roll in circumference. If the printing press is producing more than
one product line, such as two signatures in parallel (even if they are
identical), samples should be taken from each product line.
One unprinted blank sample of the web being used on each job should
be collected. If possible, the sample should be taken from the web which
has passed through the printing press at normal speed and the dryer at op-
erating temperatures; however web taken from the roll may be used if it
is impractical to obtain web which has passed through the dryer.
B.4.3.2 Packaging Samples — Immediately after collection, the samples
should be folded to a convenient size, stacked, and wrapped in “virgin”
oil-free aluminum foil. (Aluminum foil sold at normal retail outlets has
a thin coat of lubricant which might contaminate the sample.) All edges
of the package should be sealed with pressure sensitive tape.
The total number of signatures, sheets or printed sections (accept-
able or not acceptable) produced during each job should be noted.
B.4.3.3 Testing - Ink solvent can be extracted from the paper by a
soxhiet extraction using pentane as the solvent. One printed or unprinted
signature, sheet, or section of product web is taken from the center of
each stack of samples collected, shredded, and loosely packed in the
thimble of a soxhiet apparatus. 350 ml of nanograde pentane are added to
the apparatus, and the extraction is run for four hours. After extraction
B-S
-------
the pentane is evaporated to less than 10 ml at room temperature, and
then diluted to exactly 10 ml with nanograde pentane.
Extracts are analyzed In a gas chromatograph. The gas chroinatograph
must be calibrated with ink solvent essentially identical to the solvent
mixture used in the ink. Samples of ink solvent may be obtained from the
ink manufacturer. Successful results have been obtained using a Perkin
Elmer 990 gas chromatograph with a flame ionization detector. The column
was a 4 ft by 1/8 in 0.0. nickel tube packed with 3% SP2lOOon 100/120 mesh
supelcoport. The Injection port and manifold were held at 350°C. The col-
umn was programed at ambient temperature fo.r 3 minutes, then increased to
325°C at 12°C per minute. The carrier gas was nitrogen at 30 cc per min-
ute.
8.4.3.4 Calculations — The gas chrornatograph area resulting from each
unprinted blank sample Is subtracted from the area of each printed sample
from the same job. The net areas are then compared with chromatograph
areas of known ink solvent concentration samples to determine ink solvent
concentration in each printed sample extract. Ink solvent concentration
is multiplied by extract volume (10 ml) to give the weight of ink solvent
retained on a sample signature. If more than one printed sample is taken
during a job 1 the weights of ink solvent retained an a sample determined
for each sample are averaged to give the weight cf ink solvent retained
on a sample for that job. Weightpf ink solvent S-etained on a sample is
multiplied by total number of signatures, sheets or section of product
(acceptable and unacceptable) produced on a job to give total weight of
ink solvent retained on the web during that job. The sum of the weights
of ink solvent retained on the web f r each job during the test period is
the tot3l ink solvent retained on web.
8.4.4 Total High Volatility Organic Compounds Consumed
High volatility organic compounds are those organic compounds with
normal boiling points of 150°C (300°F) or lower. These compounds are
used as dampening aids in the fountain solutions of same heatset web-
offset lithographic printing presses. Isopropyl alcohol is a commonly
used high volatility organic compound.
3-6
-------
Some heatset web-offset lithographic printing plants purchase con-
centrates and then dilute them to produce fountain solutions. The con-
centrates may not contain any high volatility organic compounds. Some
plants purchase concentrates, dilute them with water 1 and add high vola-
tility organic compounds. Other plants purchase components and then
dilute them with water to produce fountain solutions. Manufacturers
usually maintain the composition of their fountain solutions and concen-
trates as trade secrets; however they can certify the total weight percent
of high volatility organic compounds without revealing details of the
formul ation.
The weight of each high—volatility_organic_compound_bearing component
of fountain solution used during the test period can be determined by weigh-
ing the component containers at the beginning and end of the test period
and by multiplying the difference in weights of each component by the
weight percent (expressed as a fraction) of high volatility organic com-
pounds of that component to produce the weight of high volatility organic
compounds of each component. The sum of the weights of high volatility
organic compounds in all components is the total weight of high volatility
organic compounds consumed.
B.4.5 Total Water-free Ink Solvent Recovered
Ink solvent from condensation systems such as cooler/ESP 1 s usually
drains into drums. Some systems are equipped with automatic decanters
which separate recovered ink solvent from condensed water. If necessary,
an automatic decanter can be inexpensively fabricated from a 55-gallon
drum. Care should be taken to avoid toss of ink solvent due to spillage,
not to overfill the drums, and to avoid loss of solvent while moving the
draih connection from one drum to another.
Water-free recovered solvent can be drained into previously weighed
drums and the drums can be weighed again after filling. The sum of the
differences in weights between full and empty drums is the weight of total
water-free recovered ink solvent.
B- 7
-------
APPENDIX C
PURCHASED EQUIPMENT COST AND TOTAL ANNUALIZED COST
FOR CATALYTIC INCINERATION
Figure C-i shows equipment purchase price for catalytic incineration
syst 1s with 70 percent primary heat recovery connected to high—velocity
hot air dryers and to combination dryers for varying heatset web-offset
press sizes. Figure C—2 shows total annualized cost for those incineration
systems operating 2000 hours per year and 4000 hours per year.
Printing press size is based on design or maximum printed surface area
rate. This may be calculated by multiplying press width (feet) by web
speed (feet per minute) and then multiplying the product by two if the
press prints both sides of the web simultaneously. If more than one press
is connected to a single catalytic incinerator) the sum of the printed
surface areas may be used.
Costs are based on data supplied by equipment r anufacturers.
C-i
-------
/
/
/
/
/
/
140- /
/
120- /
“l00 -
I-
(I ,
0
0
-80
z
LU
60 High—Velocity Hot Air Dryer
LU — — Combination Dryer
LU
U)
40 - NOTES:
0 0
One incinerator connected to one heotset
0.. web—offset lithographic printing press.
20 - b June 1980 dollars.
I I I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
PRINTED SURFACE AREA, 1000 ft 2 /rnin
Figure C—I. Purchased Equipment Costs for Catalytic
Incineration with 70 Percent Primary
a
Heat Exchanger
LEGEND
C -2
-------
LEGEND
Combination Dryer— 4000h/yr Operation
— — — Combination Dryer— 2000h/yr Operation
— — — — — High—Velocity Hot Air Dryer — 4000h/yr Operation
—— High—Velocity Hot 4 Air Dryer —2000h/yr Operation
/
/
/
/
/
.,
//
/
/
/
2 4 6
PRINTED SURFACE
/
/
/ /
/
,// /
NOTES:
a One incinerator
connected to one
heatset web—offset
lithographic printing
press.
June 1980 dollars.
I I I t
8 10 12
AREA, 1000 ft 2 /min
b
14
Figure C—2. Total Annualized Cost for Catalytic Incineration
With 70 Percent Primary Heat Exchangera
/
/
0
0
0
C ,
C,)
0
C.)
U i
N
-J
4
z
z
4
-J
4
I-
0
I-
70
60-
50-
40-
30
20o.
/
/
6’
/
/
I,
C-3
------- |