EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-600/ 7- 84-091
December 1984
Research and
Development
STATUS REPORT ON THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE NAPAP
EMISSION INVENTORY FOR THE
1980 BASE YEAR AND SUMMARY
OF PRELIMINARY DATA
Prepared for
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
Prepared by
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park IMC 27711
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Researth and Development. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technotogy transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmentai Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
a. “specisr Reports
9. MiscellaneOus Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research arid
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA ’s mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentallY-COmPatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects: assessments of. and development of. control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600 /7-84-091
December 1984
STATUS REPORT ON THE
DEV OPM JT OF THE NAPAP
EMISSION INVENTORY FOR THE
1980 BASE YEAR AND
SUMMARY OP PRELIMINARY DATA
by
Douglas A. Toothean, John C. Yates,
and Edward J. Sabo
Engtneertng ScienCe
10521 Rosehaven Street
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Contract No. 68—02—3509
Work Assignment Nos. 40, 57, and 58
Project Officers:
Charles 0. Mann
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
J. David Mobley
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
Prepared for:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Radiation and Office of Research and Development
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
FOREWORD
This report describes the current status of the development of a 1980
emissions inventory for use in the National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program (NAPAP) and presents sitmm*ries of the information collected to date.
It is being distributed at this time primarily for review purposes • While it
describes the methods used to compile the 1980 NAPAP emissions inventory and
gives preltin{r ary results from applying those methods, improvements to the
methods and data used are currently in process. Other changes can be antici-
pated as the review process identifies the need or opportunity for changes.
Thus, it is important to emphasize the interim nature of this report and the
many numbers it contains. The report is being given circulation at this time
to facilitate the review and critique process, not because it is a completed
document suitable for uncritical use. Any use outside of these bounds should
be considered with the utmost caution.
This project was administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) with funding from NAPAP’s Task Group B — Man—Made Sources. The
project has been a cooperative effort involving personnel from both the EPA
Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the EPA. Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS). ORD has the lead responsibility with EPA for
acid precipitation research and represents EPA on Task Group B. OAQPS main-
tains the emission inventory data base used as a primary source of data for
NAPAP and is responsible for developing agency guidance on procedures for
emission inventory data collection. The report has been reviewed and ap-
proved for publication consistent with the above conditions by appropriate
EPA and NAPAP personnel. Comments should be directed to the EPA. Project
Officers, David Mobley, at 919/541—2612, and Chuck Mann, at 919/541—5694.
David J. Bee ’, Chai
NAPAP Task Group B — Man—Made Sources
U.S. Department of Energy
U
-------
AES RACT
This report documents the to—date compilation of a 1980 emissions in..
ventory for use in the National. Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
(NAPAP) • Further improvements will be made to the invsntory7 the data in
this report are preliminary. The current inventory (Version 3.0) contains
point source data for over 50,000 plants with over 201 ,000 emission points
and area source data for the 3,069 counties in the 48 contiguous states and
the District of Columbia. Emissions of 502, NOx, VOC, CO and particulatea
are included in the inventory but the report focuses on 502, NOx,
which are of primary interest for acid deposition research. NAPAP Version
3.0 emissions of SO 2 , NON, and VOC are 27.1, 23.7, and 23.3 million tons
per year, respectively. Summaries of emissions by source category, geo-
graphic region, state, highest emitting plants, fuel. type, season, and
stack height range are presented along with emission density maps and fuel
use sume ries. Emissions in the NAPAP data base are in reasonable agree..
merit with Work Group 38 and Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS) emissions trends estimates. NAPAP fuel use data show reasonable
agreement with fuel. values in DOE’s State Energy Data Report.
Version 3.0 of NAPAP represents a detailed inventory of emissions on
a national scale. Additional improvements are planned, focusing on major
point sources • The bulk of future NAPAP resources will be used to meet the
needs of Eu] .erian modeling activities. New pollutants such as sulfates and
“aonia are required as well as speciatiori of VOC and NOx. Hourly temporal
resolution of emissions and spatial resolution of emissions into small grid
zones covering the contiguous U.S e are also needed for modeling.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Work Assignment Was • 40,
57, aM 58 of Contract No. 68—02—3509 by Engineering—Science (ES), Fairfax,
Virginia, under the sponsorship of the ri.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). This report covers the period from Tanuary 1983 to May 1984.
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD ............ ......... ........••s••••ssss•••e•••s•s•••s•a••s• ii
ABSTRACT . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . a a s . . . a a . . . a a ... a . a a u .. a a a s a s .. iii
FIGURES .,,,,.., ...,., .,, .,,,, . . . .,.. .asss•• ae•s••••ass•••aa•II•a••••• v i.
TABLES ...............................ea. . . . . . .s•ssae•a••saaas•••a •ø• vii
EXECUTIVE SUMbIA.RY ..,...............................•..a.s•sss..,•• .•• viii
1 • I 1TRODUC?ION . .. . •• . . , . . . . , • • . • • . •. . . •• .. .. • • . ,. •.• . •,• •• , .• i—i
Background ......... •...•........••• .... ..........•.... 1—1
Objectivs • . . • • • . . . • • • , , • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • , • • • , • • , , • , • i—i
Project Approach • . . .. . . . • . • . .. . . • . . . . • . . . . . . .• . • . . • . . . 1—i
Report Organization . .. • . . . . •. . . . .• . .. . . . . . . a . e . . . . e.. a 1—3
2. ENISSIONS SUMMARY •.............................,......•s•as 2—1
Introduction • . . •• .. ... , . .. , •. . . . • , • •.. • . . , . ... .. . . . ,.. 2—1
$itm ry of Emissions by State .. .... •.•••. • .•. .. .a ...a. 2—1
s imft ry of Emissions by Source Category ............... 2-1
S11mm ry of Highest Emitting Plants •........e..e.s..s.. 26
snivvvn ry of Area Source Emissions ...................... 2.8
Sim rtary of Emissions by Fuel Type ..................... 2—8
summary of Emissions by Season . .... . .. . •.... .. . ....... 2—8
Sn i va*ry of Emissions by Stack Height Ranges •.......... 2-8
Emission Density Maps . . . ... . .. . .. . .. .. •. ••. .. .. . .. . .. . 2—18
3 • DATA EVALUATION •........................................... 3—1
Introduction ..........................•..•••.••.,....• 3—1
Timaliness of Data . .. . . .... • •• . • .•• .• • . • . • • .. ......... 3—i
Completeness of Plants Represented in NAPAP ........... 3—5
Completeness of Fuel. Use Data ......................... 3—6
Completeness and Validity of Point Source
Stack Data and Coordinates •.•. . • . • . . . . •• . . . . . . . a s • •• 3—1 2
Assessment of the Uncertainty in Emissions
Estimates ..•. ...•.... •.......................s...... 3—13
Comparison of NAPAP Data. with Other References •....... 3—13
Conclusion •.... •......................••.•a...•••..•.. 3—23
References • • a • • a . • • a . a a • • a a a • • a . . • a a a • • a a • • • • a a a a • a a a a 3—24
iv
-------
4. HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAP EMISSION
IN TENT0R’Y ................... ............. .......... ..... .. . 4e1
Introduction . . . •. . . . . .. . . . . e . . •., . ,. . . , , , , . . , , . 4—1
Point Source Conversion . . . . . . . .. a a s s s a a s • a • a s a • e as 4—1.
Area Source Conversion • • . a a a a .. . a. . .a a. . a a e a 5 as I . . . 4—2
Audit ‘ ail Development a a a. a a a a. a a a a . a . a s s as . . a. a a a . s 4 3
Data Base Improvements . a . a a . a a a.. s a a a ii sea a.. a a a a.. a a. 43
References a..... •sasa ...a...a. .a.aa.. a.... a.. isa...... 4—10
5. Ft?!URZ 1 PAP EMISSION INVENTOR! ACTIVITIES ................. 51
Improvements for Remainder of Fiscal Year 1984 ........ 5—1
Fiscal Year 1985 and Future Improvements .............. 5—2
Reporting .... ... •.a.a..a.a.s..sasae. •.a.aa...saa.s..a. 53
APPENDICES
A. !EAR-OF-R OR DISTRIBUTION IN THE aPAP EMISSIONS INVENTORY A-i
3. FU USE CCt4PARZSON B-i
C. DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS AND EMISSIONS WITH I COMPLETZ STACX
DATA C-i
D. DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS AND EMISSIONS WITH INVAUD rJrM OR—
DINATES 0-i
3.’ DISTRIBUTION OF POINTS AND EMISSIONS BY EMISSION ESTIMATION
HOD E-i
F. ARNA SOURCE SEftSONAL ALLCCATION FACTORS POR NAPAP
V
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
2.1 Number of Points arid nissions by SIC Category
for Sulfur Dio d.de ...... .... ......••• ...... ........... 2—3
2.2 Number of Points arid iissions by SIC Category
for Nitrogen Oxides ..... ..•....•••• ... •... ......... .... 2—4
2.3 Number of Points and nisaions by SIC Category
for Vol. Organic Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 25
2.4 Plants itting More than 25,000 Tone SO 2 Annually
in theNAPAP Inventory 221
2.5 muissionDensity Map for 502 ................. .........•. 2—31
2.6 Emission Density Map for NOx •. ... .•• ••••• •••‘•.s•s... 2—32
2.7 Emission Density Map for VOC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2—33
3.1 Number of Points arid Emissions with Respect to
Year of Record for Sulfur Dioxide ,. ..,.,............. 3-2
3.2 Number of Points arid Emissions with Respect to
Year of Record for Nitrogen Oxides .................... 33
3 • 3 Number of Points and Emissions with Respect to
Tear of Record for Vol. Organic Compounds ............. 3—4
vi
-------
TABLES
Number
2.1 National S’u” ry of NAPAP Emissions by State ........,.,. 2—2
2 • 2 Sn’ ry of NAPAP Emissions by OAQPS Emissions Trends
Categories • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2—7
2.3 Swn ary of NAPAP 1980 Area Source Emission Inventory •... 2—10
2.4 Smm.ary of SO 2 and NOx Emissions by Puel Type for
Point Sources . . . .. • • • •• • • • •• . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . 2—1 1
2.5 su . ary of 502 Emissions by Season by State ...........,. 2—12
2.6 S11i ry of Emissions by Season by State ............. 2—13
2.7 snm ry f voc Emissions by Season by State ............, 2—14
2.8 S11mI!lary of SO? Emissions by Stack Height Range
by State ••••••••••••••••••••••••............... . ... ... 2—15
S” ry of NOx Emissions by Stack Height Range
by State . ... ........... ••..... •••........ ..• .. .. .. .. .. 2—16
su ary of VOC Emissions by Stack Height Range
by State ••••I•s•••s••.•••sss••••••s............... .... 2—17
3.1 NAPAP Point Source Emissions of 3—7
3.2 NAPAP Point Source Emissions of NO ..................... 3—8
3.3 NAPAP Point Source Emissions of 17CC 3..9
3.4 s1a 1 ry of NAPAP/S R Puel Comparison .........,,.. .,,,. 3—10
3 • 5 Comparison of NAPAP and WG3B $02 Emissions Estimates
for 1990 .... . . e.. . . ... . .. . . . . . .. .. . . .• . •.. . . .. . .. .. ... 3—14
3.6 comparison of b PAP and WG3B MOx Emissions Estimates
for 1980 3—15
3 • 7 Comparison of NAPAP and OAQPS Emissions Trends
Emission Estimates for 1980 .........,, ., . . . .., ., . .. .,. 3—16
3.8 Comparison of NAPAP and NECRMP Non-(Jtility Point
Source NOx and VOC Emissions • .. . . •. .. ... ..... .. se..... 320
comparison of NAPAP and NECRMP Area Source NOx
voc Emissions . . ••. •. .. . .•.. , •.. . . . •• .. .• .. ........ ... 3—21
Comparison of NAPAP and 1980 N S Emissions of 502,
NO , and VOC 3—22
vii
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A detailed 1980 base year emission inventory has been developed by Task
Group B of the Interagency Task Force en Acid Precipitation to support the
needs of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). This
report contains suwry data free the current version (3.0) of the NA-PAP in-
ventory.
DEVELOPMENT RISTORY OF VERSION 3.0
The NA-PAP data were developed starting with information fros the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA ’s) National Emissions Data System
(NNDS) • These data have been improved by incorporating the latest avail-
able emission factors, substitution of data from the Northeast Corridor
Regional Modeling Project and other more representative of 1980 NESS data,
cross—checking the electric utility data with the 13.5. Department of Energy
(DOE) data compiled by LR. Pechan and Associates, crosscheckinq data with
information from the U.S. -Canada Work Group 38 report, and adding county
centroid latitude and longitude for sources with missing or incorrect C mi-
versal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates • The NA-PAP data are stored
in the Emission Inventory System (BIS) format on the EPA IBM computer at
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The data consist of point source
data for 50, 200 establishments with over 201 ,000 emission points and area
source data for each of 3,069 counties included in the 48 contiguous states
of the U.S. and the District of Columbia. Currently, NAPAP reports emis-
sions of 502, NOx, VOC, particulates, and CO. It is planned to add sni.—
fates, ammonia, and other pollutants in the future • This report focuses
on emissions of NOR, and VOC which are of primary interest for acid
deposition research purposes.
4ISSI0NS SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
The following tables s” rize national emissions of SO 2 , MOx, and ¶1CC
from Version 3 • 0 of NA-PAP. Regional totals of emissions and state totals
of point and area source emissions are also shown. More detailed emissions
sn ry information is presented in Chapter 2, including emissions by state,
the largest emitting plants, emisaions by season and stack height ranges,
and emission density maps.
viii
-------
NAPAP Emissions by Source Category (Preliminary Data )
( 10 U tons/year)
SO
NO
VOC
.
Electric Utilities
17.3
8.1
0.1
ndustrial Combustion
3.7
4.5
1 .0
Residential/Commercial Combustion
0.9
0.7
0.1
Non ferrOu.s Smelters
1.2
eg
Neg
Other Industrial Processes
3.0
1.0
4.5
Transportation
0.9
9.1
8.0
Miscellaneous
0.1
0.3
9.6
Total
27.1
23.7
23.3
NAPAP Emissions by R.qiona (Preliminary Data )
(100 tons/year)
SO, NO 1 , VOC
EPA Region I 0.7 0.6 1.2
EPA Region II 1.2 1.2 1.8
EPA Region III 3.8 2.3 2.1
SPA Region IV 6.5 4.1 4.0
EPA Region V 79 4.8 4.5
EPA Region VI 2.3 5.3 4.0
EPARegion VII 2.0 1.8 1.4
EPA Region VIII 0.8 1.2 0.9
EPA Region I X 1.5 1.7 2.4
SPA Region 5 0.4 0.7 1 .0
31 Eastern Stateeb 22.3 15.1 15.3
Eationa 27.1 23.7 23.3
Includes Continental U.S. only.
b Includes tier of states from Minnesota
south to Louisiana and all states east.
ix
-------
Sational . Suuy of 889A2 Eaiaaiona by St ta (Pr.’t— -nary Data )
(10 tona/ysax)
S0 MO ., VOC
Stat. Point Area !ot*J Point .rc. otai . Point Area Total .
11. 774 76 950 273 252 523 73 331 424
AZ 634 20 844 141 153 294 13 228 241
5 * 59 30 89 65 167 233 14 230 244
416 118 534 455 968 1,323 417 1,691 2,108
CO 114 20 134 137 155 292 21 300 331
CT 31 18 69 41 103 144 44 259 303
0* 105 22 127 36 33 69 26 48 74
DC 11 6 17 5 23 27 1 43
FL 1,124 78 1,202 246 383 629 23 725 748
647 30 877 279 308 567 28 495 523
20 34 20 56 9 83 91 6 205 211
U. 1,360 99 1,459 655 442 1,117 208 768 976
2* . 1,746 134 1,680 536 324 860 117 472 589
356 24 390 167 182 349 31 241 272
*3 198 33 231 302 290 592 81 241 322
ST 1,113 45 1,158 373 231 604 125 280 403
LA 343 158 501 568 253 621 322 299 621
MS 122 12 134 21 43 64 20 73 93
IC 273 23 296 114 144 278 76 270 346
317 43 362 81 184 272 108 444 553
lIZ 844 34 878 378 368 746 238 730 948
242 21 263 229 227 456 63 360 423
MS 234 30 306 99 196 295 52 234 284
IC 1,336 51 1,397 349 358 607 177 429 604
144 22 168 28 102 130 12 203 215
1* 65 12 77 92 118 210 46 119 165
IT 140 7 147 76 47 123 4 73 77
U 102 5 107 30 30 60 20 69 89
NJ 234 69 303 160 274 434 155 563 717
1 8 * 247 11 238 224 83 307 52 109 161
lIT 7*7 77 844 321 437 748 143 988 1,131
IC 621 33 653 302 268 570 108 465 573
M D 95 19 114 103 65 148 2 46 48
01 2.655 50 2,705 665 554 1,219 155 914 1,079
0* 86 16 102 177 285 462 72 297 369
OP. 31 25 56 53 175 228 40 275 319
Pa 1,770 82 1,832 595 487 1,092 240 802 1,042
*2 10 4 14 4 30 36 13 84 97
SC 324 18 342 134 148 302 228 259 487
SD 34 7 41 22 55 77 3 88 91
TI 1,103 31 1,134 336 237 573 137 353 510
U 1,0*1 250 1,341 1,543 1,943 3,486 940 1,710 3,630
UT 59 27 116 80 93 175 11 134 146
VT 3 7 10 1 43 44 4 35 40
vs 334 45 386 160 251 411 105 358 463
200 44 326 131 319 350 48 373 421
WV 1,091 13 1,104 353 121 473 14 124 138
WZ 664 20 68* 203 221 426 75 372 H8
ST 23 249 184 115 299 20 74 94
TotaJ.a 25,001 2,110 27,111 11,566 12,101 23,667 4,962 18,307 23,259
x
-------
NAP P Emissions by Season (Preliminary Data )
(percent of total)
SO,
NO,
VOC
winter
Spring
giim r
Tall
27
24
25
24
26
24
25
25
24
25
26
25
Total (106 tone/year)
27.1
23.7
23.3
NAPAP njssions by Stack Height Range (Preliminary Data )
(percent of total)
Range (Ct)
SO,
VOC
—
0—120
20
34
94
121—240
15
17
5
241—480
22
20
1
>480
43
29
Total (106 tons/year)
25.0
11.6
50
NAPAP County Emission Density Snm sry (Preliminary Data )
Density
SO,
N0 I,
VOC
Counties
Emissions
Counties
Emissions
Counties
Emissions
Range
(ton e/mi 2 )
in
Rang.
(%)
in
Range
(%)
in
Range
(%)
in
Rang.
( 5)
in
Range
(5)
in
Range
(5)
0—10
84
10
78
24
78
27
10—30
6
11
12
19
14
20
30—100
6
25
7
30
6
24
100—1 000
4
51
3
27
2
27
>1000
0
3
0
0
0
2
xi
-------
Comparison of NAPAP, Trends, and Work Group 33 Emissions
of SO, and NO (Preliminary Data )
(10° tons/year)
.
SO,
NO
WG33
Trends
NAPAP
WG3B
Trends
NAPAP
Electric Utilities
17.3
17.1
17.3
6.2
7.1
8.1
Non-Utility Combustion
3.5
3.6
4.6
4.6
4.1
5.2
Non—Ferrous Smelters
1.3
1.3
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
Transportation
0.9
1.0
0.9
9.3
10.5
9.1
Other Sources
3.3
2.7
3.1
1.1
1.1
1.3
Total.
26.3
25.7
27.1
21.2
22.8
23.7
The SO 2 emissions are dominated by electric utilities, primarily• from
coal—fired generating stations located in the eastern U.S • Other signifi-
cant source sectors include industrial combustion (again, mostly from coal),
non—ferrous smelters (primarily copper smelters in the southwestern U.S.),
and other industrial processes (largely petroleum refining, chemicals, ce—
inent plants, and pulp mills ) • For NOX, the largest sources are transporta-
tion (mostly highway vehicles), electric utilities, and industrial combus-
tion. Electric utility emissions result primarily from coal combustion, but
a significant portion also results from natural. gas combustion. For indus-
trial sources, the largest portion of N0 emissions comes from natural gas
combustion. For VOC, emissions result largely from transportation (again
primarily highway vehicles), other industrial processes and miscellaneous
sources • Principal, industrial process sectors include chemicals, petro-
leum refining, petroleum transportation and storage, and a wide variety of
activities involving organic solvent consumption. Miscellaneous sources
include additional organic solvent use not accounted for by point sources
in NAPAP, retail gasoline service stations, and forest wildfires.
The geographic breakdown of 302 emissions shows that EPA Regions IV
and V are the largest contributors, accounting for about 53% of the nation-
al total. Region III also has significant emissions with a 14% centribu-
tion. Th. eastern 31 states account for over 82% of nationwide emissions.
For NOX, Regions IV, V 1 and V I are the highest emitters with 60% of the na-
tional total. Region III is again next with 10% of total emissions • Al-
though not as great a contribution as for 302, the eastern 31 states still
account for about 64% of national emissions. Regions IV, V, and VI are also
responsible for the greatest amount of VOC emissions with 54% of the nation-
al total. The eastern 31 states account for 66% of the nation’s emissions
which is about the same as for NOR. Thus, emissions of all three pollutants
are concentrated in the east, especially those of SO 2 . Substantial variabil-
ity in 302 emissions exists between regions with less difference for NO and
even less for VOC.
xii
-------
The relative importance of point versus area source emissions varies
for each of the three pollutants. Point sources contribute about 92% of
national SO 2 emissions • For NOR, emissions are nearly evenly distributed
with area sources contributing 51%. Area sources, on the other hand, emit
about 19% of total VOC emissions. Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana have
the greatest 802 emissions • Texas, California, and Ohio are the greatest
NO,r emitters while Texas and California have the greatest VOC emissions.
Th. relative contribution of point versus area sources varies from state
to state.
Seasonal variations were dervied from operating data in the point
source inventory and seasonal factors added to the area source file • Power
plant operating data were updated based on monthly fuel use data reported
on FPC Form 4. Seasonal variations are Lees than expected. For 802, the
maximum variation is three percentage points from 24 to 27%. Emissions are
greatest in winter and lowest in spring and differ by 11.9%. The maximum
variation for NO is only two percentage points - 24 to 26%. Emissions are
again greatest in winter and lowest in spring with only a 6.3% difference.
The maximum v riation for VOC is the same as for NOR, 24 to 26%, with an
8.0% difference between the highest season, summer, and the ].owest season,
winter.
Although is it effective plume height that is of greatest interest to
modelers, only stack height data are included in NAPAP. Thus, only emis-
sions by stack height range could be snMhut rjzed for this report. The stack
height ranges were not selected based on any specific criteria but. never-
theless show how emissions vary with height. Emissions of 802 in the three
lowest ranges are similar but emissions from stacks >480 feet in height are
about twice as much as from any other one range. This demonstrates th. dom-
inance of power plants and smelters with respect to SO 2 emissions. NO emis-
sions are a littl. more evenly distributed with th. lowest height range, <120 -
feet, having the greatest emissions followed closely by th. highest range.
Thus, relatively small boilers and internal combustion engines probably emit
slightly more MOm as a group than do power plants. $urly all VOC emissions
com. from the lowest stack height rang. • This indicates predominanc, of eva-
porative point source categories. Thee. data show that nearly all VOC emis-
sions (both point and area) are emitted below 120 feet. Over two-thirds of
the total emissions of NO also is released below 120 feet. On the other
hand, nearly 40% of all is emitted at heights above 480 feet.
The county emission density s ry was derived from data used to gen-
.rate the density maps included in Chapter 2 of the report. The highest
rang. shown on the maps, >100 tons/square mile, is divided into two ranges
in the table for illustrative purposes • For 802, the counties in the two
highest ranges shown in the tabl. result from power plants located in the
east, primarily in the Ohio Valley and Great takes areas. These counties
represent only 4% of those in the nation but have 54% of total emissions.
The two counties with densities over 1 ,000 tons/square mile are Gallia,
Ohio, and Marshall, West Virginia. Both have two power plants that are in
the top 25 emitters in the country. Counties in the lowest density range
represent 84% of all counties but only 10% of total emissions • For NOR,
the counties in the two highest ranges shown in the table result from
xiii
-------
either power plants or highway vehicles. These counties represent only
3% of those in the nation but contribute 27% of total emissions • The only
county with a density over 1 .000 tons/squar. mile is New York City—Manhat-
tan. Counties in the lowest density range represent 78% of all counties
but only 24% of total emissions. Due to the greater area source influence,
NOx emissions are more evenly distributed among th. ranges than are those
for SO 2 . For VOC, the counties in the two highest ranges s1 wn in the ta-
ble result from solvent use and highway vehicles. These counties represent
only 2% of all counties in the nation but contribute 29% of total emissions.
The six countie. with densities over 1 .000 tons/square mile - Manhattan,
Kings (New York), Baltimore, St. Louis, Denver, and San Francisco — are
heavily urbanized with relatively small geographic areas. Counties in the
lowest density range represent 78% of all counties but only 27% of total
emissiong • Since area sources have a greater influence on VOC than on NOx,
emissions of VOC are even more evenly distributed among the density ranges
than are those for NOx.
The comparison of PAP, Trends, and Work Group 33 emissions of SO 2
and N0 shows reasonable agreement. NAPAP total SO 2 emissions are greater
than Work Group 33 by 3% and than Trends by 5.5%. NAPAP and Wçrk Group 3B/
Trends emissions compare well for all categories except non—utility combus-
tion. The difference in this category is due to fuel use differences along
with differences in sulfur content and control efficiency. NAPAP total NOx
emissions are greater than Work Group 38 by 11 .8% and than Trends by 4%.
The greatest difference between } PAP and Work Group 3B occurs for the elec-
tric utility category. Although some of this variation is caused by fuel
differences, most is believed to be a result of different emission factors
and control efficiencies. The differences between NAPAP and Trends occur
for the electric utility, non—utility combustion, and transportation cate-
gories. NAPAP emissions are higher for the first two categories and lower
for th. last. As was the case for the Work Group 38 comparison, some of
the variation is a result of fuel differences but most i. likely to be
caused by different emission factors and control efficiencies. The non—
utility combustion category variation occurs for the cams reasons as the
variation in the utility category except that the non—utility category may
be more affected by fuel, differences • The transportation category varia-
tion occurs because more detailed traffic data are used in developing the
Trends estimate. Although these detailed traffic data are available on a
national basis, only a very few areas in the country maintain data with
this detail. Thus, insufficient detailed data eid st for use in NAPAP.
DATA EVALUATION
Version 3.0 of NAPAP represents the best detailed inventory of emia.-
sione on a national scale that has been developed to date. Nevertheless,
additional. improvements would still be desirable. Over 80% of the NAPAP
emissions truly represent 1980. Over 90% are in the range from 1978 to
1981 • Future efforts to improve NAPAP will, focus on major point sources
that currently do not have a 1980 year of record. missions of SO 2 and NOx
tend to be dominated by a relatively small number of very large sources,
,d ,v
-------
The 1 , 000 largest emitting plants account for about 84% of total SO 2 emis-
sions. The 1,000 largest emitting plants account for about 42% of total
NOx emissions (about 68% of the emissions from all stationary sources).
Many of these large emitting facilities are electric utility plants and
non—ferrous smelters for which extensive quality assurance efforts have
already been performed. A review of the data for other large emitting
plants would be desirable. To a limited extent, this activity can be com-
pleted using NAPAP resources. In addition, EPA is currently working with
selected state agencies to review the top 50 or so largest emitting plants
in each state. Results of this effort may also benefit NAPAP.
One of the principal uses of the NAPAP inventory will be to support
at spheric long range transport and acid deposition modeling activities.
In addition to emissions estimates, these models need location coordinates
and stack parameters for major point sources. Currently, about 80% of point
source 802 and NOx emissions occur at sources with complete stack data and
valid TJTM coordinates. About 2—5% of the sources account for most of the
20% of emissions associated with sources that are lacking some stack param-
eters or valid coordinates. An effort will, be made to collect the missing
data for these sources, if possible. It should be noted that sources with
invalid coordinates have at present a default value corresponding to the
county centroid.
uTuxE AC IVITIES
Th* bulk of the Task Group B emission inventory resources remaining in
?Y 84 and FY 85 will be used to try to improve NAPAP to meet the needs of
Eulerian modeling activities. The Eulerian models under development require
additional pollutants not now in NAPAP, speciation. of VOC and NOx emissions,
hourly temporal resolution of emissions, and spatial resolution of data in-
to small grid zones covering the entire U.S. (48 states and the District of
Coj.nmbia) • At projected resource levels and the requested time frame (Sep-
tember 1984 for a preliminary data set and September 1985 for the final in-
ventory), the Eulerian modeling requirements for an emission inventory will
have to be met using existing computer software to the extent possible, and
perhaps, a number of simplifying assumptions to achieve adequate temporal,
spatial, and species resolution of the data. The quality of emissions es-
timates for additional pollutants to be included may be limited.
Md l . tional activities are planned for NkPAP that would support Eule-
nan modeling, but would, be of interest for other purposes as well • These
include incorporation of emissions data for Canada into NAPAP, coordination
with Task Group A to include natural emissions sources into NAPAP, and a
statistical evaluation of the uncertainty of NAPAP emissions estimates.
Successful completion of these activities is contingent upon the avail..
ability of adequate future funding.
xv
-------
c mER 1
I) RODUCTION
EA CxGROTn4D
In 1980, Congress estabi.ished the National. Acid Precipitation Mesas—
ment Program (NAPAP) to coordinate and expand research relevant to the prob—
].ema posed by acid deposition in and around the United States. The program
is organized and managed through the Interagency Task Force on Acid Precipi-
tation (ITPAP) and ten subordinate task groups coordinating specific techni-
Cal areas of research. One Of the groups is Task Group B which is respon-
sible for man—made sources. A major objective of Group B is the development
and maintenance of detailed 1980 and 1984 emissions inventories to support
acid deposition research and analysis • The mast significant uses of the in-
ventories are for policy analysis and to support both Eulerian and Lagran—
gian long range transport/acid deposition models.
OflJECTIVES
The objectives of the effort reported in this document were to devel-
op the initial 1980 base year emission inventory, evaluate its quality and
canprehensivenesa, and identify actions needed for further refinement of
the data base in the future • The project required development of a central,
quality assured data base of emissions of pollutants of interest for acid
deposition research and sodeling. The data needed consist of accurate eisis—
estim tes for the 1980 base year, disaggregated as appropriate by geo-
graphic region, time period, and chemical species. The area to be covered
iflc1 4e 5 48 contiguous states of the U.S. and the District of Columbia.
Eventually, the ten provinces and two territories of Canada will, be incor-
porated into the data base as well. The pollutants believed to be mast im-
Portant in acid deposition processes (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, pri-
mary sulfate, 1 Cs, * nia, chlorides, fluorides, alkaline dust, and others)
Were to be addressed.
PROJECT APPROAC!
The starting point for the 1980 NAIPAP data base was the 1980 “snapshot
data file of the National Emissions Data System (NEDS), maintained by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. NEDS contains point source data for major stationary sources of
air pollution, as reported to EPA by state air pollution control agencies,
&fld county-level area source data, as estimated by EPA based on published
1—1
-------
references and other statistical information. The area source emissions
account for aLl. mobile sources and small stationary sources not included
in the point source file so as to give a complete accounting of total
emissions from all sources • The bulk of the effort completed thus far
on this project has involved the point source data.
The NEDS inventory covers the entire country and includes the point
source geographic detail desired for ? PAP. Nowever, NEDS is capable of
reporting emissions for only five pollutants (particulates, SO 2 , NOR, VOC,
and CO) and has no capability for reporting emissions for a time period of
less than one year. In addition, even though the point source data from
NEDS are nominally described as being for base year 1980, the NEDS data
base actually contains data with other years of record extending as far
back as 1970 For these reasons, a decision was made to use the isøions
Inventory System (EIS) instead of NEDS to store the ) PAP data base.
5 1 3/P S (for point sources) and EIS/AS (for area sources) include all
NEDS data fields and sore and have the capability of tracking more than
five pollutants. Conversion programs are available to translate NEDS to
SIS and back again. 513 has been installed and has been running success-
fully at EPA’s National Computer Center (EC) for several years. Finally,
the 513 file structure and the 513 retrieval and reporting programs are
especially useful for managing a data base and maintaining an audit trail.
Engineering—Science (ES) was contracted by EPA to convert the WEDS
data to 51$ format, perform a quality assurance review of the data . update
the NAPAP files with appropriate corrections and other data improvements,
and to maintain an audit trail of all changes made to the data base. In
addition, ES has provided copies of the data base and other printed report
snmr ries to the research community.
Quality assurance activities for point sources completed thus far have
involved:
o Incorporating the latest available EPA emission factors.
o Substitution of point source data from NEDS files other than the
1980 “snapahot in order to build a NAPAP data base more represen
tative of 1980.
0 Adding county centroid latitude and Longitude for point sources
with missing U’1 4 coordinates.
o Updating fuel type, quantity and quality data, source classifi-
cation codes (5CC .), control equipment and efficiency, seasonal
throughput, and SO 2 emissions data for electric utilities based
on data files compiled by 5.5. Pechan and Associates from DOE
data sources.
o Comparison of su rized NAPAP emission estimates with similar
data compiled previously by Work Group 3B under the 13.5.-Canada
Memorandum of intent on !rransboundary Air Pollution.
1—2
-------
o Substitution of non—utility point source data for 1 5 northeastern
states, based on data compiled for the Northeast Corridor Regional
Modeling Project (N BMP).
In addition to these improvements, ES has also developed seasonal alloca-
tion factors for area source emissions.
R ORT ORGANIZATION
Chapter 2 of this report a” ” rizes emissions data from the current
version of the NAPAP data base. Chapter 3 presents an evaluation of the
quality of these data. Chapters 4 and 5 discuss the detailed activities
that have been completed to develop the current version of the NAPAP data
base and identify future activities planned to make additional refinements
to the data. Various appendices present additional statistical and graph-
ical information on the current status of the data.
1—3
-------
CHAPTER 2
EMISSIONS SUMI4ART
INT ODUCTI0N
The following tables and graphs contain data obtained fr the current
version of the NAPAP data base. This version (referred to as Version 3.0)
was created in May 1984. This data base contains point source information
for 50,224 plants and 201,131 emission pointa within those plants (an emis-
sion point generally Corresponds to a stack or other defined point of re—
Lease of emissions ) • A total. of 3,069 area source records corresponding to
each of th. counties or county equivalents in the 48 states and the District
of Columhia are also represented.
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS BY STATE
A s” ry of $02, NO , and VOC emissions by state for the MAPPIP inven-
tory i. provided in Table 2,1 • Statewide emissions are divided into point
and area source components to illustrate their relative contribution to to—
tel emissions of each pollutant • Area source emissions represent a small
percentage of total 802 emissions but nearly half of total NO emissions and
more than three-quarter, of total VOC emissions • States with the greatest
$02 emissions are Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. States with the great-
est N0 emissions are Texas, California, and Ohio while for VOC, Texas and
California have the greatest emissions.
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS BY SOtJRCE CATEGORY
Figures 2.1 through 2.3 present point source emissions su arized by
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) . In addition, the number of emit-
ting points according to emission siz. ranges are shown. Electric utilities
are major contributors to total and NOx emissions and this is readily
apparent on the right side of Figures 2.1 and 2.2. Other noteworthy $02
and NO contributors, although much less significant, appear to be within
the chemical, petroleum refining, and primary metals industries, pr.su ably
as a result of fuel, combustion. With regard to VOC emissions, Figure 2.3
indicates that emissions occur from a wide variety of industries with pri-
mary contributors to total emissions being the chemical and petroleum re-.
fining categories, which also have the largest imimber of sources emitting
100 tons per year or more.
2—1
-------
t1 .2 .Z 2.1
NAI’ZONAL SInUlART 0? NAPAP DIXSSZONS 3? 3?A Z (P I NARY DA )
1058/YzAa)
30,
Stat s Point Area TotaL
Point Area
774 76 850 273 232 525 73 351 424
Arizona 324 20 844 141 153 294 13 223 241
Arkansas 39 30 39 65 167 232 14 230 344
California 416 118 334 455 868 1,323 417 1,691 2,108
CoLorado 114 20 134 137 155 292 21 300 331
Coon sctjc at 51 18 69 . 41 103 144 44 259 303
D sl*waxe 105 22 127 36 33 69 25 48 74
Dint. of CaL. 11 6 17 S 23 27 1 43 44
1,124 78 1,202 246 383 629 23 723 748
sorgia 847 30 877 279 308 587 28 495 523
td aho 36 20 55 9 82 91 6 205 211
U.iinois 1,360 99 1,459 685 462 1,117 208 768 976
tfldiana 1,746 134 1,880 536 324 860 117 472 589
366 24 390 167 182 349 31 24’t 272
Kansas 198 33 231 302 290 592 81 241 332
rant_udcy 1,113 45 1,158 373 231 604 125 280 405
onisiana 343 158 501 546 253 321 323 299 631
Mine 133 12 134 21 43 64 20 73 93
Maryland 273 23 296 114 164 278 76 270 346
Maasachus.tts 317 45 363 88 184 272 108 444 552
Mibiqan 844 34 578 378 368 746 238 730 968
Minnesota 242 21 363 229 237 436 63 360 433
Miaaiss.t ipi 256 50 306 99 196 295 52 234 266
Missouri 1,236 61 1,297 349 258 607 177 429 606
4Ont ana 146 22 168 28 102 130 12 203 215
Nebraska 55 12 77 92 118 210 46 119 165
Ns ads 140 7 147 76 47 123 4 73 77
11 1w 8aapskara 102 5 107 30 30 60 20 69 89
New .7.r..y 234 69 303 160 274 434 155 562 717
Nsv Mexico 247 11 258 224 83 307 52 109 161
New York 787 77 864 321 427 748 143 988 1,131
North Caro Lina 631 32 653 302 268 570 108 463 573
North Dakota 95 19 114 103 65 168 2 46 43
2,655 50 2,703 665 554 1,219 165 914 1,079
‘ *Lahosa 86 16 103 177 235 442 72 297 369
Oregon 31 25 56 53 175 228 40 279 319
PsnnayLv*ni 1,770 52 1,852 395 487 1,082 240 802 1,042
Shod. Zsla.M 10 4 14 5 30 36 13 34 97
South CaxeU.ni 324 18 342 154 145 302 228 259 487
South D.kota 34 7 41 22 55 77 3 88 91
Tsnnsss.s 1,103 31 1,134 336 237 573 157 333 510
1,081 60 1,341 1,543 1,943 3,486 940 1,710 2,350
atah 80 27 116 80 95 175 ii 134 145
Verona: 3 7 10 1 43. 44 4 35 40
Virginia 338 48 386 160 251 411 105 358 463
Washington 250 46 326 13t 219 350 48 373 421
Wont Virginia 1,091 13 1,104 352 121 473 14 134 138
Wisconsin 663 30 688 205 221 426 76 372 44
Wyon inq 224 25 249 184 115 209 20 74 94
?ot al.s 25,001 2,110 27,111 11,566 12,101 23,667 4,962 18,307 23,369
2—2
-------
SULFUR DIOXIDE
MILUON TONS PER YEAR
4 1 I I
0 5 tO IS 20
STATES SELECTED:
1Z3 SOURCE INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
NUMBER OF POINTS
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
SIC CODE NAME
0 1-09 AGRICULWRE. FORESTRY. FISH8IC
IO—14 IININC
IS -Il CONSTRUCTION
20-21 FOOD. TOBACCO
22—23 TUI1LE MILLS. APPAREL
24-25 LUMBER. WOOD PRODUCIS
26 PAPER
27 PRINT*4G
29 CHEMICAtS
29 PETROLEUM RL1*IING
50 RUBBER
3% LEATHER
32 STONE. CLAY. CLASS
33 PRIMARY METALS
34 FABRICATED METALS
35-36 MACIUNERY
37 TRANSPORTATION EQUIP
36 4STRUUtNfs
. 59 MISC MANIJIACTURIIG
40-48 TRANSPORTATION. GAS. SAN SERV
49 ELECTRIC UTILItIES
50—S e WHOLESALE. RETAIL
60—67 FUIANCE. U4SURANCE
10—89 SERVICES
91—97 PUBLIC ADUNSTRATION
OTHER. NOT CLASSIfiED
t )
(a
I
I
S
I
r,Ii, —
Vf ’ ff .’ffI OOc
P
,7,,
-
fzz
y ,,,,Joo.
rzz
—8,000 —6.000 —4,000
C
—2.000
Figure 2.1 Number of Pointa and Raissiona by SIC Category (Preliainary Data)
-------
STATES S(LECTED
Z2 SOURCE INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
NUMBER OF POINTS
NITROGEN OXIDES
M I WON TONS PER YEAR
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
SIC CODE NAME
0 -09 AGRICULTURE. FORESTRY. FISHING
bO-*4 MINING
15- 17 GONSIRUCBOH
20-2 ) FOOD. TOSACCO
22—23 IEXTILE MILLS. APPAREL
24-25 I.UMBER. WOOD PRODUCTS
26 PAPER
27 PR INThIC
28 CHEMICALS
29 PETROLEUM RUINING
30 RUU&R
31 LEATHER
32 STONE. CLAY. GLASS
33 PRIMARY METALS
34 FAaRICAT(D METALS
35—36 MAcHINERY
37 IRANSPORIATION EQUIP
38 INSTRUMENTS
39 MISC MANUFACTURING
40-48 TRANSPORTATION. GAS. SAN SERV
49 ELECIRIC U11Lli(S
50—59 WHOLESALE. REIAIL
60—67 FINANCE. INSURANCE
70—89 SERVICES
91—97 PUBUC ADMINISTRATION
OTHER. NOT CLASSIFtO
K)
L
U
I
V7Fff’1’j’,’1W &
1;
y,,,/’Ql
y 77,’AO
r
‘7
IFF FJ1
F
—8.000-6.000 —4,000 —2.000
•0
I I I I
2 4 6 8 10
Figure 2.2 NuWber o Pointe and EMisaions by SIC Category (Preliginarv Data)
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
VOL. ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
MILUON TONS PER YEAR
STATES SELECTED:
• Ifl SOURCE INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS’
— SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
SIC CODE
NAME
01-09 AGRICULTURE, rORISTRY. FISHING
10-14 MVI*IC
IS -Il CONSTRUCTION
20—2* 1000. TOBACCO
22—23 TEXTIE MILLS. APPARa
24-25 LUMBER. WOOD PRODUCTS
26 PAPER
27 PRINTING
28 LItMICAIS
29 PETROLEUM REFININC
30 RUBBER
31 LEATHER
32 STONE. CLAY. GLASS
33 PR WRY METALS
34 FABRICATED METALS
3 5—36 MACHINERY
37 TRANSPORTATION EQUIP
38 INSTRUMENTS
39 MISC MANUFACTURING
40—48 TRANSPORTATION. GAS SAN SERV
49 ELECTRIC VTIIJ1IE
50—59 WHOLESALE. RETAR.
60—67 FINANCE. INSURANCE
70—89 SERVICES
91-97 PUBUC AO*IINISTRATION
OTHER. NOT CLASS* ’I(D
tJ
“I
Figure 2.3 Nuaber of Points and Baissions by SIC Category (Preliminary Data)
-------
A summary of NAPAP point and area source emissions by OAQPS emissions
trends categories is shown in Table 2.2. Five main categories are included
with subcategory emissions shown as appropriate. For the transportation
category, which is a significant emitter of both NO and VOC, hiqhway vehi-
cles contribute about 77% of NO emissions and 86% of VOC emissions. Sta-
ti3nary source fuel combustion produces the greatest amounts of SO 2 and
N0 with the electric utility subcategory emitting nearly 80% of the SO 2
and 61% of the The industrial combustion subcateqory is also sig-
nificant. Industrial. processes emit substantial. amounts oi both SO 2 and
VOC. Only electric utilities emit more SO 2 and only highway vehicles and
miscellaneous solvent use have greater VOC emissions. The solid waste and
miscellaneous categories are of lesser importance except for the VOC con-
tribution made by miscellaneous solvent use.
SUMMARY OF HIGHZST E 4rT’rING PLANTS
In any emission inventory to be used for atmospheric modeling, it is
useful to know which sources are the highest emitters of each pollutant
of concern because they may have a substantial impact on modeling results.
By ranking the souxces and summing their contributions to total emissions,
an idea of the number of sources it takes to account for a. certain perceni—
age of total point source emissions can be obtained. A summary of such in-
formation for 302, NOx, and VOC is as follows:
Cumulative
Number of Plants —
Ranked from Highest Cumulative Emissions Minimum Plant Size
to Lowest Emissions ( percent of total) ( tons/year )
SO 2 : 50 35 95,700
206 65 25,000
905 90 3,200
1,679 96 1,000
16,963 100 1
50 24 37,900
340 65 7,350
1,440 90 920
2,900 96 250
18,769 100 1
VOC: 50 20 11,200
655 65 1,400
3,176 90 190
4,168 95 100
20,895 100 1
2—6
-------
TABLE 2.2
SUKNPI R! OF MAPAP EMISSIONS B OAQPS EMISSIONS
TBENDS CPIT ORIES (PP.ZLIMINAR! DATA)
(iO TONS/YEAR)
- SO NO VOC
Transportation
Highway Vehicles 422 7,024 6,821
Air 12 117 175
Railroad 1 27 825 200
Vessels 231 138 417
Other Off—Highway 79 992 352
Subtotal 871 9,096 7,965
Stationary Source
Fuel Cotnbuation
Electric Utilities 17,324 8,117 71
Industrial 3,707 4,484 1 ,005
Commercial/
Institutional 686 347 18
Residential 191 357 39
Subtotal 21,908 13,305 1,133
Industrial Processes 4,269 921 4,541
Solid Waste Disposal
Incineration 46 42 374
Open Burning 9 67 354
Subtotal 55 109 728
Miscellaneous
Forest Fires 5 1 39 837
Other Burning 3 97 482
Miscellaneous
Organic Solvent — — — 7,583
Subtotal 8 236 8,902
Total 27,111 23,667 23,269
2-7
-------
The Locations of plants emitting more than 25,000 tons of SO 2 per year are
shown in Figure 2.4.
SUMMARY OF AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS
Area source emissions by source category are shown in Table 2.3. For
sulfur dioxide, the primary contribution to total area source emissions
(over 57%) results from fuel combustion at stationary sources, while for
nitrogen oxides it is the mobile sources that contribute heavily (over 75%)
to total area source emissions. For VOC, the primary contribution (over
78%) is from gasoline vehicles, solvent purchased, and gasoline marketed.
Area source emissions represent 8% of total 502 emissions, over 51% of
total NO emissions, and 79% of all ‘ ICC emissions in the NAPAP inventory.
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS 3! FUEL TYPE
Table 2.4 shows a national summary of SO 2 and NOx emissions by fuel
type front the NAPAP inventory. As expected, SO 2 emissions are largely
the result of coal combustion. For NOx, most emissions result from coal
combustion, but natural gas and to a lesser extent, fuel oil, also con-
tribute significantly to NOR. This table represents only emissions from
point sources. For area sources, SO 2 emissions are rn&ll. NO area
source emissions come mostly from highway vehicles consuming gasoline
and diesel fuel.
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS BY SEASON
Tables 2.5 through 2.7 show SO 2 , NOR, and VOC emissions for each
state by season. These were derived from the NAPAP inventory using the
seasonal throughput percentages shown on each point source record in the
file end the area source seasonal allocation factors for each county as
shown in Appendix F. Although some variations occur from state to state,
nationwide emissions of 802 and Max are greatest in the winter months fol-
lowed by the summer months. Emissions in the spring and fall are somewhat
less and roughly equivalent. Winter emissions of 802 are higher than those
in eummer by about 6 • 5% and than those in the months with lowest emissions
(spring) by 11 .9%. Winter emissions of NOx are higher than those in summer
by only 1 • 3 and than those in the season with lowest emissions (spring) by
6.3%. Emissions of ‘ I CC are greatest in the summer months followed closely
by the fail (less than 1% difference) • Summer emissions of VOC are higher
than those in the months with lowest emissions (winter) by 8.0%.
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS BY STAC1 HEIGHT RANGES
Tables 2.8 through 210 show SO 2 , NOx, and VOC emissions according
to stack height ranges for each state. The stack height ranges were cho-
Sen somewhat arbitrarily but adequately demonstrate how emissions vary
2—8
-------
Figure 2.4 Plants Emitting Uore Than 25, 000 Tons SO 2 Annually in the
tIAPAP Inventory (Preliatnary Data)
1..,
-------
TABLE 2.3
SUMMARY OF NAPAP 1980 AREA SOURCE EMISSION XNVENTORY
(PRELIMINARY DATA)
CIO TONS/YEAR)
Sulfur Nitrogen Volatile
Area Source Dioxide Oxide Organic
Category Description EMissions Emissions Entissior-
Re8identiai. Fuel Use 191 357 39
C nmercial Fuel Use 390 211 7
Light Industrial Fuel 632 2,123 727
Use
Incineration/Burning 18 78 667
Highway Vehicles — 220 5,029 6,740
Gasoline
Diesel Fuel Ui 408 3,812 633
Aircraft 12 117 175
Vessels 231 138 417
Solvent Purchased 6,618
Gasoline Marketed -— 965
Miscellaneous Burning — 8 236 1,319
Total. 2,110 12,101 18,307
Note: State totals of area source emissions are given in
Table 2.1.
2—1 0
-------
TABLE 2.4
SUMMARY OF SO 2 AND NOx EMISSIONS BY FU TYPE
FOR POINT SOURCES (PR IMINARY DATA)
(i0 3 TONS/YEAR)
- Fuel. SO,
Anthracite Coal 63 26
Bituminous Coal 17,076 6,702
Lignite Coal 373 374
Residual Oil 2,680 1,369
Distillate Oil 496 670
Natural Gas 475 b 1,664
Process Gas 98 50
Coke 8 5
Wood 15 77
Othera 27 7
Total 21,311 10,944
a Includes LPG, bagasse, solid waste, and li-
quid waste used as fuel.
b Value higher than expected as a result of EIS
data 5U ry limitations (see note below).
NOTE: Based on first SCC encountered for each
emission point.
2—11
-------
TABLZ 2.5
3U1U R1 0? 302 DII53Z0NS B! 3V 50 I B! STATE (PPJ.314230RY 04TA)
(10 T J8/’fEAR)
Ststs Wint.ra spriag e ?ot&L
k.Lmbaa& 225 179 225 221 850
Azizona 251 251 153 189 844
k..nsaa 22 20 26 21 89
Ca. ] .i2eraia 136 129 135 134 534
Co].ersdo 37 31 32 34 134
Conn.cticut 22 16 14 17 69
DsLawsrs 34 31 29 33 127
DiSta O Ce ] .. 8 3 3 3 17
florida 293 294 336 279 1,202
G.ergta 219 191 250 209 877
IdaI o 19 15 7 15 56
11inoLs 405 340 372 342 1,459
tadiana 507 450 470 453 1,880
103 90 110 87 390
ansa.a 59 51 65 56 231
K.atucky 305 249 318 286 1,158
Louiaiaas 147 131 105 110 501
isins 39 37 27 31 134
z axy1aM 90 73 71 62 296
i4aa.aa uautta 108 101 89 64 362
239 214 219 206 870
78 63 58 59 263
4tssiaaippi 79 70 78 79 306
337 286 370 304 1,297
59 57 25 27 168
l.braaka 21 21 21 14 77
Ns ada 34 39 38 36 147
l ieu liaspehirs 31 26 23 27 107
law Jersey 90 67 68 78 303
l isvliuxice 65 61 86 66 258
law !or 255 205 199 205 864
liorth CaroLina 173 157 172 151 853
tiorth Dakota 31 27 25 31 114
Ohio 750 629 672 654 2,705
OkLahc a 27 26 21 28 102
Orsqon 14 13 13 16 56
?eansyL’ aaia 481 423 474 472 1,852
Sheds ZS ] . and 4 3 4 3 14
South CaroLina 88 79 95 80 342
South Dakota 11 14 5 11 41
Tsnnass.a 310 237 309 238 1,134
Tax is 343 310 344 336 1,341
30 30 27 29 116
V. ont 3 3 2 2 10
Virginia 110 86 95 95 386
W.ahinq n 86 81 72 87 326
feet VIrginia 293 273 271 267 1,104
B.tscenaia 189 176 170 153 688
¶iyouing 66 38 59 66 249
Totals 7,325 6,451 6.840 6,494 27,111
Osaesb. — ?sbr ry June — Auqiat
b sarch — iay 4 s.pt. er Novsabsr
2—12
-------
TAS&Z 2.6
SUMJIA*Y 01 DIZSSIONS ST S S0N ST S?? T* (PR .D XNAaT DAT&)
(10 T01I5/YZA&)
Stata WLnt.r’ Sp 1jaq Su 0
11 k 135 119 138 133 525
Ariaoat 74 69 81 70 294
61 55 63 53 232
CaLiZOzuia 330 322 337 334 1,333
Colorado 77 69 72 74 292
coou.aticut 40 3 33 37
os1a x. 18 16 17 18 69
Out. at Cal. 8 7 6 6 27
florida 155 159 167 148 629
Gsergia 146 141 156 144 587
dabo 19 29 23 24 91
296 272 279 270 1,117
237 211 210 202 860
lows 93 84 96 86 349
152 138 153 147 592
sntuaky 153 139 161 151 604
203 19 5 214 206 831
4aias 1? 16 15 16 64
l .rylaad 76 68 68 66 278
4*lU a OhUaatts 73 68 65 64 272
MLa iqsn 202 183 177 184 746
Ij s t 118 113 112 113 456
Iliasisaippi 75 68 74 78 295
152 143 162 150 607
28 33 33 36 130
33 55 55 47 210
84 ,44* 27 32 33 31 123
flew Saapihixs 16 14 14 16 60
84w 1srs.y 117 105 104 108 434
flew Mexico 80 72 79 76 307
flaw Toth 208 178 180 182 748
forth CarolLna 147 140 147 136 370
North Dakota 43 37 40 48 168
Ohio 331 292 299 297 1,319
Oklah 118 112 117 115 442
0 1 590* 53 56 58 61 238
Pseasylwsais 210 236 272 274 1,082
thedsIsland 9 9 9 9 36
South CaroU.ns 76 76 78 72 302
South Dakota is 19 18 21 77
Tonn.ss.. 150 135 148 140 573
Tsws• 852 833 924 877 3,486
Jtah 44 43 43 45 175
V.raeat 10 11 12 11 44
Virginia 109 96 103 103 411
Washington 89 93 74 94 350
Wiat Virginia 126 115 117 113 473
Wisconsin 113 105 106 102 426
Wyosinq 78 69 73 79 299
6,088 5,703 6,007 5,869 23,667
a - ?sbrns Juns - 7 .aaquae
b Mirth — s y d 84Ptaab.r - Novsab.r
2—13
-------
TA*LZ 2.7
3 PhUPT OF VOC IIZSONZ ST SV 8OM 57 ST5 Z (PR .2NXNAU DATA)
(10 TO$8/TW)
Stats Ilintar’ Suur ?a l i Total
&la a 102 107 109 106 424
P.rizona 54 60 64 63 241
Ar*a saa 36 59 67 62 244
California 495 328 544 541 2,108
Coi.or o 72 73 88 36 321
Connscticut 75 73 76 77 303
is is is 20 74
Dtat. of CoL. 10 12 12 10 44
Florida 188 200 180 180 748
G.orgia 121 146 123 133 523
idaho 27 55 64 65 211
Illinois 237 242 249 248 976
XndLan 155 146 150 138 389
tO I 66 66 69 71 272
______ 77 79 83 83 322
x.ntucky 92 94 112 107 . 405
Z.ouistaaa 161 152 154 154 621
Mains 22 22 25 24 93
Maxyland 82 85 90 39 346
MsmnoohUa.tt* 136 136 140 14.4 352
Midligan 236 240 247 245 968
4ii’ eota 98 101 115 109 433
Mississippi 68 73 72 73 28*
Missouri 143 148 159 156 606’
I’aatsos 28 38 64 63 215
Nsbta*k* 39 39 43 44 165
M.vada 17 17 21 22 77
Nsw Saap.bir. 22 21 23 23 89
Mr. Jurusy 178 179 180 160 717
5 5w Mssjae 41 42 41 37 161
Maw Toxic 378 279 290 284 1 ,131
Notth Carolina 136 146 144 147 573
Marsh Qakota 11 11 13 13 41
Ohio 266 267 275 271 1,079
Okinhoso 90 91 90 58 369
Ox.gon 63 84 64 68 319
PannsyL .nia 238 255 267 262 1,042
24 24 23 24 97
South Carolina 115 130 120 122 467
South Dakota 15 13 32 29 91
Tsnnsss.s 123 125 129 131 510
T a$ 622 621 714 693 2,650
at .*h 34 38 36 37 145
10 10 10 10 40
virginia 114 115 118 116 463
Wa.hinqton 86 13* 91 106 431
Mast Virginia 32 33 37 36 133
Wisconsin 104 110 120 114 443
Wycsinq 21 21 26 26 94
Totals 5,522 5,786 6,003 5,958 23,269
Dsus .r Fsbroa .zy JuaS - August
b $u!sh p y d S.ptuab.X - Woveabar
2—14
-------
W.Z 2.8
OP S0 UStO ST $ X UXG3 81310$ ST S?ATZ (P .Zz41)1ARY DATA)
T0$$/1Z1.&)
Stats Ra qs I Ranqe 2 Rang. 3 Rang. 4 Tota).
1.jha _ aa 83 123 166 402 774
Arizona 63 25 63 671 824
Arkansas 12 32 5 10 59
California 262 104 34 16 416
Colorado 35 26 38 15 114
Conn.ctiout 13 9 35 4 51
Dalaware $ 37 55 5 105
Dint. o Cal.. 2 6 3
FlOrida 431 178 297 218 1,124
G.orgia 32 62 57 696 847
Zdsko 7 9 1 19 36
tIlinois 629 183 114 434 1,360
tndiana 367 150 355 874 1,746
152 104 110 0 366
192 0 0 6 198
Keet1a y 114 37 199 767 1,113
Louisiana 182 143 13 S 343
lain. 37 54 31 0 123
tarJ.aad 32 27 26 188 273
iqasuackusetts 99 25 Ii? 76 317
95 134 233 382 844
82 62 25 73 242
uia.uippi 36 71 106 43 256
33 115 441 642 1,236
Mat ana 22 27 19 78 146
35 3$ 3 9 65
Sevada 7 6 0 127 140
Rev Rlapahias 12 33 58 0 102
Rev Jersey 108 75 51 0 234
Rev Resize 45 35 54 $3 247
Rev ‘(ark 234 152 289 112 787
$orth CaroLina 228 159 97 137 621
$orth Dakota 77 1 5 0 0 95
Ohio 114 222 660 1,659 2,655
Ok l aheea 28 30 19 9 86
Oregon 23 6 2 0 31
105 272 329 1,064 1,770
#hod.ZaIand 4 3 3 0 10
South Carolina 58 104 182 0 324
South Dakota 7 0 0 27 34
?enflS$I 65 113 302 624 1,103
424 233 305 99 1,081
3ta1t 81 21 0 17 59
versone 2 1 0 0 3
Virginia 131 104 103 0 336
washington 61 30 77 112 280
wont Virginia 41 139 104 807 1,091
Wisconsin 45 159 279 182 666
Wyo.Lnq 37 82 46 59 224
‘rota.ta 4,956 3,786 8,508 10,751 25,001
Stack Faight Maq .
1 0—120 feet
2 121—240 feet
3 241—480 feet
4 >480 feet
2—15
-------
TABLZ 2.9
SU*41U.RT 0? tI53Z0W ST STACZ ZZGK? M$GZ ST ST 2’Z (PW XMINA&T O&V )
C1o tOli$/W.*)
Ranc. I R*nq. 2 Maqs 3 Raag 4_ ‘ota J
Al ahaa 53 38 38 154 273
34 7 14 86 ¶41
Az*an.S 11 22 5 27 65
Ca1J.for ia 246 175 29 4 455
CoJ.arMO 52 23 43 19 137
c. t icut 10 3 20 3 41
0.3 avatu 3 15 16 2 36
0tat.otC t. 1 3 1 0 5
79 39 72 56 246
U.orqta 24 23 24 208 279
3daho 6 2 1 0 9
275 54 74 252 655
X dLaaa 141 66 106 223 536
58 46 63 0 167
282 0 0 20 302
Kantucky 43 17 64 249 373
Louisiana 338 181 19 30 564
Mains 7 9 5 0 21
I4aryland 21 16 21 56 ¶14
Maaesc3tuesttl 45 6 23 14 88
MiC’tiq*’ 59 58 i44 117 378
4inn..ota 111 20 23 70 229
Mi.sia*ippi 22 32 23 11 99
Miasouzi 36 29 88 t96 349
Montana 13 6 10 0 29
Ma zaLt a 44 21 2 25 92
14 7 1 54 76
Mow aeaçshtre 2 10 18 0 3Q
Now 7eznsy 76 62 22 0 160
blow Ms .co 106 3 115 0 224
sow York 107 67 110 37 321
Noxth Carolina 96 65 60 81 302
Notth Qakota 84 19 0 0 103
Ohio 44 63 166 392 665
Ok l al a 25 87 45 10 177
Or.qon 38 10 5 0 53
PsnnayLvania 50 108 115 322 595
blhad.alasd 2 2 2 0 6
South aroU.na 20 54 80 0 154
South Oahoan 3 2 0 17 22
63 31 91 151 335
921 324 195 103 1,343
Utah 38 14 5 23 80
1 0 0 0
7irqinia 42 41 51 0 160
Nuh inqtou 30 21 90 0 131
West Vtrginia 25 44 33 245 352
Wisconsin 22 43 73 64 208
wyoming 43 24 49 58 184
3,885 2,013 2,269 3,399 11,366
StOCk Sei0ht ROnOS
1 0—120 foot
2 131—240 test
3 341—480 feet
4 >480 test
2—16
-------
$LZ 2.10
SU14M R1 0 ? VOC ItSSZ0 SY S CZ NEX’ LT ZAMOZ 8Y ST&TZ (PR $ZN&*! DXA)
1V $/T!1&)
Stat. $maq. I Rmtq. 2 R*a s 3 Ranqe 4 Thtal
; 1,haua 67 4 1 1 73
12 0 0 1 13
A a fl.U 13 1 0 0 16
411 5 1 0 417
Col.orado 20 1 0 0 31
Connsotic it 44 0 0 0 44
34 1 I 0 26
Djst.otCoj.. 0 1 Q 0
Florida 21 2 0 0 23
0.orqta 22 4 1 1
Xdabo 5 1 0 0 6
206 1 0 1 206
r diana 112 3 1 1 111
28 2 1 0 31
XsnaIs 81 0 0 0 81
1t4 10 0 1 125
Loui*i*na 289 32 1 0 322
20 0 0 0 20
MaxyIand 60 1 15 0 76
P’aaanchuatts 101 7 0 0 108
Nichiqen 234 9 9 0 238
Min .sota 62 1 0 0 43
ai*sisstppt 42 9 1 0
t4iaso t 176 0 1 0 177
11 1 0 0 12
NsbrsUa 0 0 0 46
4 0 0 0 4
sw .pshiz* 20 0 0 0 20
sv a•rssy 147 7 0 1 155
Now No co 52 0 0 0
135 7 0 I *43
North CaroLian 100 7 1 0 10*
sorth Dakota 2 0 0 0 2
139 17 7 2 165
oa.l a 18 3 1 0 73
Orugot 38 2 0 0 40
Pennsylvania 221 11 1 1 340
lhod.Z s land 13 0 0 0 *3
$o%ath caro .ian 221 1 0 0 22*
Sa tb 3 0 0 0 3
135 20 0 2 157
Ta 1 877 60 3 0 940
10 1 0 0 11
4 0 0 0 4
Vtxgtnti 101 4 0 0 105
wup4ngton 36 *2 0 0 41
w.st Virqinia 7 3 3 1 14
Wisconsin 70 4 1 1 16
Wyasing 19 20
t’otai.a 4,145 356 46 15 4.962
1 0—120 lust
2 121—240 lust
3 241—4*0 fast
4 )480 lust
2—17
-------
according to stack height. On a nationwide basis, stacks greater than
480 feet in height emit about twice as much SO 2 as stacks in any one of
the other ranges. Emissions Of NOx are more evenly distributed with the
greatest contribution from stackS of 120 feet or less in height. Nearly
all VOC emissions (94%) come from stacks in the lowest range. Variations
in the amount of emissions from each range occur from state to state for
SO 2 and NOx due primarily to differences in source category and fuel nix.
ENISSION DENSITY MAPS
Figures 2.5 through 2.7 show densities of SO 2 , NOx, and VOC emissions
by county. The density ranges were chosen to highlight the relatively few
counties with the highest omission densities. For the most part, the
shaded counties on the SO 2 map represent power plant or smelter locations.
The greatest SO 2 densities occur in the Ohio Valley and Great Lakes areas
as well as in other scattered eastern locations • The shaded counties on
the VOC map correspond primarily to population centers and concentrations
of industries such as petroleum refining and petrochemicals. The shaded
counties on the NOx map represent a cross between those shaded on the SO 2
and SIOC maps since the majority of NO emissions come from highway vehicles
and power plants. For all three pollutants, the shaded counties, although
relatively f ow in number, account for the bulk of nationwide emissions.
2—18
-------
‘a
TPY/SQ. MILE
0—1 I—lU 10—30 >30
I . -
Figure 2.5 1980 SO 2 County Emission Density Map (Preliminary Data)
-------
0
TPY/SQ MILE
0—3 3—10 10—30 >30
I .
Figure 2.6 1980 NO County Emission Density Map (Preliminary Data)
-------
t )
TPY/SQ.
MILE
0—3 3—10 10—30 >30
Figure 2.7 1980 VOC County Emission Density Map (Prelia&inary Data)
-------
CHAPTER 3
DATA EVALUATION
INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter presented a st IrnI ary of the data currently avail-
able from the NAPAP data base. This chapter Will address efforts completed
thus far in improving the quality of the data an I provide at least a quali-
tative assessment of the current state of the data base.
Ideally, the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the PAP data
(or any other emission inventory data base for that matter) would be mea-
sured by standard quantitative statistical techniques. Unfortunately, there
are problems in determining the accuracy of an emission inventory since true
issions values against which calculated emissions estimates could be com-
pared will probably never be known. Assessing the completeness (i.e., are
all. emission sources included, are all. requi red data items present, etc.)
of th. data is possible to some extent, but it is difficult to define mea-
sures for completeness in some cases. For NAPAP, it is fairly straightfor-
ward to determine the timeliness of the data, since the stated objective
of the NAPAP project was to develop an inventory solely for the 1980 base
year.
TIMELINESS OF DATA
Figures 3.1 through 3 • 3 illustrate the distribution of total. emissions
by year of record in NAPAP for SO 2 , NO , and VOC emissions. The year of
record is indicated in the EIS/PS masterfile at each of the plant, point,
and process levels • The distribution of emissions shown in Figures 3 • 1
through 3.3 refers to the specified year of record for emission points,
since emissions estimates are stored at the level in EIS.
The original source of NAPAP data, a 1980 NEDS snapehot file, actually
consisted of records which reflect years dating from before 1973 to after
1981, A primary objective in the development of the NAPAP inventory wa
to inkø it more representative of 1980, the intended base year • A munber
of improvements were made to the data as discussed in Chapter 4, many of
which affected the year of record. The results of these changes are ap-
parent in Figures 3.1 and 3.2. Whereas the distribution of the number
of points by year of record (on the left) was not expected to change much
from the original distribution, the distribution of emissions by year of
record (on the right) does show a narrowing about 1980, because the sources
reviewed and updated were the largest contributors • These distributions
3-1
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NUMBER OF POINTS
10.000 -
5.000
--__ __
J3 73 14 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 >81
25,000,000
20 ,000.000
15.000.000
10.000,000
5,000,000
V
SULFUR DIOXIDE
ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN TONS
p p,tr .
<73 73 74 15 76 11 78 79 80 81 >81
SOURCE INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
STATES SELECTED: SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
Figure 3 i Number of Points and Ernissiona with Respect to Year of Record
(Preliminary Data)
0
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NITROGEN OXIDES
NUMBER OF’ POINTS ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN TONS
tS,000
8 ,000 ,000
10 ,000
8.000 ,000
//
//
1,000 .000
5.000’ /
7/ .
2.000,000
LJL ____ -,
(73 73 74 75 16 77 78 79 80 81 >81 13 73 74 75 76 71 78 19 80 8$ >81
I SOURCt INTENSITY 1—24 IONS
STATES SELECTED: SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
Figure 3.2 Number of Points and Emissions with Respect to Year of Record (Preliminary
Data)
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
2S .000
I
(73 73 74 75 76 77
STATES SELECTED:
I
I I I
78 19 80 SI >81
Figure 3 3 Number of Points and Emissions with Respect to Year of Record (Preliáinary
Data)
NUMBER 01 POINTS
VOL. ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
ANNUAL [ MISStONS tN TONS
20,000
15.000
I0.000
5 ,000
0•
1 ,000 ,000
<73 73
iø is so s >81
1Z SOURCE INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
4 SOURCE INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
SOURCE INTENSITY >99 TONS
-------
illustrate that sources emitting less than 100 tons per year contribute lit-
tle to total SO 2 and NO emissions. Since the review process focused on
emitters of $02 arid NOx, the distribution of VOC emissions, as illustrated
by Figure 3.3, ii not quite as narrow.
These results show that for SO 2 and NOx, NAPAP emissions estimates are
well representative of 1980. Over 80% of total emissions of these po].1.u—
tants have an indicated year of record of 1980. about 95% of total emis-
sions fall within the range from 1978—1981 • Pot VOC, it is evident that
for point sources the NAPAP data are not well representative of 1980 since
only about one fourth of point source emissions have a 1980 year of record.
Total VOC emissions are much more representative of 1980, however, since the
majority of VOC omissions are from area sources and all area source data in
NAPAP are representative of 1980. Thus, over 80% of total VOC emissions are
representative of 1980, and over 90% are within the range from 1978—1981.
Future NAPAP quality assurance efforts will focus on major emission points
with year of record not equal to 1980 in order to try to improve the time-
liness of NAPAP data.
A year of record distribution for plant, point, and process level data
for NAPAP point sources is shown as Appendix A. This is not particularly
useful in evaluating the year of record of emissions estimates, but may be
informative to users interested in the year of record of other data elements
stored in NAPAP. Appendix A shows that the modal year of record for point
and process data is 1980, but that a considerable number of records have a
year of record between 1977 arid 1979. This does not necessarily indicate
a problem since all point and process level data would not be expected to
change on an annual basis • Data last updated for stack parameter! in 1977
may still be valid for 1980 for example. Plant level data are evenly dis-
tributed over many years. This is to be expected since plant level data
(plant name, address) are likely to change only occasionally. Plant level
data are totally irrelevant to emissions estimates.
CCI1PLETENESS OF PLANTS REPRESENT U I NAPAP
As a result of the extensive cross-checking that has been performed
on fossil fuel—fired electric utility plants and primary copper smelters,
it is certain that virtually all of these plants are included in the NAPAP
point source file • The only plants that might be missing are small elsa-
trio utility plants eased only for peak load generation or as standby units.
Secause of the infrequent use of these plants, their emissions are likely
to be small. Similarly, for other major industrial categories such as
petroleum refineries, iron and steel mills, cement plants, etc., the com-
pleteness of the NAPAP point source file should be virtually 100%. Since
these sourc. categories have not been cross-checked with other informa-
tion sources, there could be a few isolated instances wttere major emit-
ting plants are missing.
Overall, the point source emissions of $02 and NO tend to be dom-
inated by a relatively small number of very large sources as shown in
3—5
-------
Tables 3.1 and 3.2. Most of these vary large plants are electric utilities
and primary smelters. The plants most likely to be missing from NAPAP emit
less than 100 tons per year. For SO 2 and NOx any such missing plants prob-
ably have a negligible impact on total emissions • The only instance in
which such plants. would be significant would be if there were large concen—
trations of small plants in a particular area that have not been included
in NAPAP.
For VOC, the impact of small plants on total emissions is more likely
to be significant. There are relatively few extremely large VOC sources
as shown in Table 3.3. More of the total emissions are likely to come from
sinai]. and dium sized sources. As a result of the extensive effort under-
taken in the N RMP project, the completeness of VOC sources in the north-
eastern U.S. is likely to be much better than for the rest of the country.
Outside of the NECPMP domain, the completeness of the NAPAP file for VOC
sources is dependent upon the completeness of the original NEDS data in-
put to NAPAP • This is likely to be inconsistent, as some state and local
agencies have done a more thorough job of reporting VOC sources to NEDS
than others.
COMPLETENESS OF FUEL E DATA
Because fuel usage is an important factor in determining SO 2 and NOx
emissions, fuel consumption s1 arjzed from the NAPAP inventory has been
c pard to 1980 fuel delivery data published in the State Energy Data Re-
port (8ZDR) by DOE (Reference 1) • Separate tables for the electric utility
sector, the industrial sector, and the commercial sector are shown in Ap-
pendix B. Each table ii broken down by state for five main types of fuels.
In addition, there is a graph showing the distribution of each fuel among
the various end use sectors • Table 3,4 contains a s” ry of the NAPAP/
S R fuel comparison in Appendix B.
The fuel comparison e’ ry in Table 3 • 4 shows reasonable agreement.
For bituminous coal and lignite, the NAPAP total is higher by 5.7%. The
electric utility sector shows the beet agreement with NAPAP being 4.5%
higher. The industrial and cr .1,rcial categories do not agree quite as
closely but consume much less coal and are therefore less significant.
For natural gas, the NAPAP total is higher by about 16% primarily due to
the differenc. in the industrial sector • The utility and comae roiaj. sec-
tor natural gas values compare well. NAPAP fuel oil values are higher for
each sector; the owera].l differenc. is a little less than 14%. The fuel
oil value for each of the three sectors is higher in NAPAP by about the
same percentage.
Coal use values in Table B .1 for electric utilities show the best
agreement for any sector. The values are identical in a number of cases
and vary in small amounts in most others • The values for gas are also in
close agreement. For fuel oil, agreement is usually good, although there
is more variation on a nationwide baeis than for coal and gas • In general,
NAPAP values exceed the fuel delivery amounts reported in SEDR.
3—6
-------
PAP POINT SOURCE
TABLE 3.1
IZSSZ0NS 02’ 802 ( NAR! DATA)
Size Range
(tonsJyear)
10,000 +
5,000 — 9,999
2,500 — 4,999
1,000 — 2,499
500 — 999
250 — 499
100 — 249
1 — 99
AU Points
No. of
Ernie. ion
Points
519
371
513
1 , 262
1,417
2,019
3,506
39,173
201,131
Cumulative No.
of Emission
Points
519
890
1,403
2,665
4, 08
6,101
9,607
48,780
201,131
Cumulative Percent
of Total Emissions
63 • 4
73.9
81.1
89.0
9219
95 • 8
98.1
100.0
100.0
Size Rang.
(tons/year)
No of
Plants
Cumulative No.
of Plants
Cumulative Percent
of Total Emissions
10,000 +
430
430
79.0
5,000 — 9,999
279
709
86.8
2,500 — 4,999
338
1,047
91.6
1,000 — 2,499
632
1,679
95.6
500 — 999
610
2,289
97.3
250 — 499
778
3,067
98.4
100 — 249
1,319
4,386
99.3
1 — 99
12,577
16,963
100.0
All Plants
50,244
50,244
100.0
3—7
-------
NAPAP POINT SOURCE
TABLE 3.2
U4ISSIONS OF NO (PREE IMINARY DATA)
Size Range
( tons/year) -
10,000 +
5,000 — 9,999
2,500 — 4.,999
1,000 — 2,499
500 — 999
250 — 499
100 — 249
1 — 99
All Plants
No. of
Plants
256
222
297
595
625
911
1,483
14,380
50,244
Cumulative No.
of Plants
256
478
775
1 , 370
1 ,995
2,906
4,389
18,769
50,244
Size Range
(tons/year)
10,000 +
5,000 — 9 999
2,500 — 4,999
1,000 — 2,499
500 — 999
250 — 499
100 — 249
1—99
ALL Points
No. o
nission
Points
215
277
437
855
1,148
1,907
3,790
47,339
201, 1 31
Cumulative No.
of ise ion
Points
215
492
929
1 , 784
2,932
4,839
8,629
55,968
201,131
Cumulative Percent
of Total Emission3
35.1
51.7
65 • 0
76 • 6
83.5
89.3
94.5
100.0
100.0
Cumulativa Percent
of Total iissions
58,6
72.2
81.3
89,4
93.2
96,0
98.0
100.0
100.0
3—8
-------
NAPAP POINT SOURCE
TABLE 3.3
EMISSIONS OP VOC (PRELIMINARY DATA)
Size Rang.
(tuna/year)
10,000 +
5,000 — 9,999
2,500 — 4,999
1,000 — 2,499
500 — 999
250 — 499
100 — 249
1 - 99
AU. Points
N. of
Emission
Points
25
85
164
591
825
1,537
3,544
66,655
201 , 131
Cumulative No.
of Emission
Points
25
110
274
865
1,690
3,227
6,771
73,426
201,131
Cumulative Percent
of Total Emissions
8.9
20.7
31.9
50 • 0
61.5
72 • 4
83 • 4
100.0
100,0
Size Range
(tonsJy.ar)
NO.Of
Plants
Cumulative No.
of Plants
Cumulative Percent
of Total Emissions
10,000 +
62
62
22.6
5,000 — 9,999
122
184
39.9
2,500 — 4,999
210
394
55.0
1,000 — 2,499
498
892
•
70.5
500 — 999
683
1,575
80.1
250 — 499
1,084
2,659
87.8
100 — 249
2,109
4,768
94.5
1 — 99
16,127
20,895
100.0
AU. Plants
50,244
50,244
100.0
3—9
-------
TABLE 3.4
SUMMARY OF )Th PAP/SEDR FUEL COMPARISON (PR IMINARY DATA)
Electric Utility
Sector
Industrial
Sector
Commercial.
Sector
SEDR
NAPAP
SEDR NAPAP
S R NAPAP
Anthracite Coal.
cia 3 tons)
951
788
1,189 677
612 1,115
Bituminous Coal.
and Lignite
io tons)
568,045
592,636
59,161 68,645
3,203 4,987
Natural Gas
ft 3 )
3,652
3,891
8,102 10,157
2,594 2,564
Diatillate and
Residual Fuel
(i0 3 barrels)
408,196
472,525
437,190 497,101
177,706 194,015
.
3—10
-------
For the industrial sector (Table B.2), fuel oil amounts c tpare as
well as for the electric utility sector but the coal and gas quantities
do not. In theory, the NEDS 1980 “snapshot” inventory for point and area
sources reflects the same fuel usage as the 1980 SEDR. This is due to the
technique used in NEDS for determining area source fuel use. Fuel deLive-
ries reported by DOE for the industrial sector in each state are used as
a control total • Fuel usage for industrial point sources in NEDS is d.—
termined for each state and subtracted from the DOE total to obtain area
source fuel use. The differences shown in Appendix B exist partly because
other NEDS and MECBMP point source data have been substituted without a].-
tering the area source fuel usage • Also, when the fuel balance is made,
the NEDS point source fuel usage for some states may exceed the DOE total
resulting in no area source fuel consumption. No downward adjustment in
NEDS point source fuel. usage is made for consistency with the DOE total.
Mother probable difference is that the SEDR amounts include fuel delive-
ries for all purposes, not just fuel combustion in boilers, turbines, in-
ternal combustion engines, etc • SEDR amounts include feedstocks, but the
proportion for such uses is not identified. In NAPAP, feeds tack uses of
fuel. are normally not shown in the inventory or at least are not classified
as fuel consumption. For coal use, SEDR values were adjusted to exclude
coal consumed for coke production (as obtained from Reference 2) to be con-
sistent with NAPAP. The coal. values do not vary greatly except for Michi-
gan where the NAPAP value is about twice the SEDR quantity. For natural
gas, SEDR and NAPAP are in reasonable agreement except for California and
Ohio • These are probably due to an loue data values in NAPAP, which
need further investigation to correct. For oil use, overall agreement
is goad but California and Louisiana values are significantly higher in
NAPAP • In general, NAPAP va ].uee are somewhat higher for all fuels than
SEDR.
For the commercial sector (Table 3.3), overall agreement between SEDR
and NAPAP for natural gas and fuel oil ie reasonable. High coal values in
PAP for Indiana, New York, and Ohio cause the national total to exceed
the SEDR total. NAPAP values for coal and fuel oil are generally higher
than SEDR. This is probably due mostly to the age of the )aPAP data, some
of which still represents years prior to 1980.
In sumeary, differences between PAP and the SEDR result far several.
reasons • The original NEDS fuel, balance has been altered by making point
source but no corresponding area source modification., Feedetock fuel, is
included in the SEDR for the industrial category. It appears that both
fuels (distillate versus residual oil) and user categoric. may be incor-
rectly classified in NAPAP. Also, same of the fuil data in NAPAP does not
represent 1980 conditioui. Further investigations into the largest fuel
discrepancies are planned along with some adjustment for the area source
inventory as needed.
The impact on emissions of these discrepancies in fuel use is signif i-
cant, but does not appear to be a major problem. Discrepancies in emissions
are smaller than the discrepancies in fuel use • The problem is most appar-
ent in the emissions for the non-utility combustion category. From Table
3.7 it can be seen that the 502 and NOx emissions in }ThPAP are 25—30% higher
3—11
-------
than OAQPS emissions trends values. If all of this discrepancy were assumed
to be attributable to errors in fuel use, the effect on total emissions is
that NAPAP would be less than 3% higher than the OAQPS trends values. It is
difficult to determine exactly how much of the difference is due to differ-
ences in fuel use and how much is due to other factors, such as differencea
in emission factors, fuel sulfur content, control efficiencies and the in-
herent imprecision of the emission estimating methodologies. For the non—
utility combustion category, it is likely that discrepancies in fuel use
are responsible for a major portion of the discrepancy in emissions, For
the electric utility sector, differences in fuel use could also be respon-
sible for differences in NOx and VOC emissions. For utilities, however,
the differences in fuel use are fairly minor as the result of quality as-
surance work- that has been completed. Most of the differences in emissions,
particularly for NO from utilities, are more likely to be due to differ-
ences in emission factors arid methodology.
COMPLETENESS AND VALIDIT! OF POINT SOURCE STACK DATA AND COORDINATES
Because of the importance of emission release height and plume rise
in modeling, a test was applied to NAPAP stack data to judge its quality
in terms of ccmpleteness. Sources had to fulfill one of the following
conditions:
o Stack height, diameter, exhaust temperature, and flow rate (or
velocity) values had to be present or
o A plume height value had to be present.
A plume height is used for fugitive sources that do not vent through a
stack. If the source failed both conditions, it was judged to have incus—
pleta stack data. Of course, more detailed tests can be performed once
the missing or invalid data are updated.
Th. results of the test are presented in Appendix C. About 25—30%
of the points with emissions greater than zero had incomplete stack data.
However, the number of 100—ton—per—year sources with incomplete data waa
only 2—5% of all non—zero emitters • The contribution from sources with
incomplete data and emissions of less than 100 tons p .r year is ins ignif i—
cant. This shows that to reduce the amount of emissions associated with
incomplete stack data by 10—35%, only about 2—5% of the sources must be
reviewed. Appendix C also includes a figure showing the states that have
a high percentage of missing stack data for sources emitting over 100 tons
per year of SO 2 .
A similar teat was performed on the location coordinates ( 1TM zone,
easting, and northing), except that further testing was done using a range
of acceptable values for each state. The results are presented in Appen-
dix D. The situation is similar to stack data in that to get a substan-
tial improvement in the amount of emissions associated with complete data,
only a small percentage of the total number of sources must be reviewed.
3—1 2
-------
It should be pointed out that, for sources failing the test, a coordinate
representing the county centroid in latitude/longitude is usually available,
ASS ES 4ENT OF THE UNCERTAINTY IN EMISSIONS ESTIMATES
As previously stated, determination of the accuracy of emission inven-
tory data cannot rsadilybe determined due to the absence of true emission
values against which calculated emission inventory data values could be com-
pared. The closest thing to true emission values that are available are
continuous emission monitoring (CEM) results • CEM data are not available
to a great extent, but some data, particularly for the electric utility
sector, are available and could possibly be used to improve the accuracy
of PAP. At least these data would provide a much better temporal reso-
lution of emissions for the specific plants that have CEM equipment in-
stalled. It would be desirable to acquire existing Ca4 data for use in
NAPAP.
An evaluation of the uncertainty, or imprecision, of emission esti-
mates in NAPAP is practical. Brookhaven National laboratory has developed
a draft report (Reference 3) with a proposed procedure for analyzing the
uncertainty of the NAPAP emissions inventory. The approach relies upon
statistical formulas, based on probability theory, to evaluate the propa-
gation of errors in emission inventory calculations. Pull-scale implemen-
tation of this procedure in FY 85 is contingent upon availability of funds.
COMPARISON OP NAPAP DATA WITH OTHER REFERENCES
In the absence of a more formal procedure for evaluating the uncer-
tainty of the NAPAP inventory at present, another approach is to compare
PAP results against other published emissions estimates to determine if
the NAPAP data appear to be reasonable • Published reports t1 at have been
widely circulated include the OAQPS emissions trends report (Reference 4)
and the 0.5.-Canada Work Group 3B report (Reference 5). NAPP .P emissions
estimates are compared with data from these references in Tables 3.5
through 3.7.
Work Group 3B
The Work Group 39 inventory largely reflects a “top-down” approach.
lit this approach, emissions estimates are developed based on published
references for fuel use, industrial production and other source activity
levels that are usually reported at the state level or are apportioned to
the state level from national level data. These data are used with nation-
al or state average estimates of average emission factors, fuel sulfur con-
tents, and control efficiencies to calculate emissions. The advantages of
this approach are that it is comprehensive (i.e., the total emissions from
all sources in a particular source category are easily accounted for) and
not resource intensive • The latter advantage was the overriding concern
for the Work Group 3B inventory which had to be developed in an extremely
short time frame. The disadvantages of this approach are that detailed
3—13
-------
1.LI 3.5
09J4PA*XSC or I APAP A1 $038 3O 04233208$ t6TIN.T V0& 1 980k n zsxaaat DATA)
(103 T0NS/ Ak)
X1.ctr ie lIon—UtiLity Ion—F.rrowa ?r4n.pox Oth.r Stat.
UUi.iti.. C0a itjon 5.Ltara tktion Soorre, Thtal
Stat. 7103* 8*9*2 8033 8*9*2 8038 8*2*2 8631 8*8*2 803* 8*2*2 ¶403 5 8*2*2
*l abaaa
CaJ.tfo ri tta
Colorado
QelA rU
Out. at CaL.
Florida
3sargia
tdaha
tilinoiS
ZAdiana
towa
Xantu
Kentucky
Louiaiana
Main.
Maryland
M*aI a tuI.tta
Mt ns.ot a
Miuiaa ppi
4isso att
l I ont .na
Mabra.ka
Maw flnap.l ir,
Maw
$u,, Mexico
New York
NOrth Cirolin
North 94kota
Ohio
Ok3AnoMa
Or.qon
Pnrey lvsnia
Rhod. I a land
Sooth Carolina
30ut1% Dakota
T.x*a
Utah
VLrqini .
Washington
4s t Virginia
Wt.aonajn
Wyois
TotaL
343 544 86 200 2 0 14 17 114 89 159 830
8$ 87 9 14 732 D 668 9 9 22 66 860 644
21 27 32 27 14 0 70 10 19 25 102 99
78 78 56 154 0 0 100 104 212 194 446 534
78 77 24 28 0 0 70 11 20 18 132 134
32 32 35 31 0 0 S 5 0 72 69
32 52 24 41 0 0 2 2 29 32 109 121
S 6 S 9 0 0 1 I t I 73 17
726 727 91 133 0 1 43 44 229 291 1,095 1,202
737 137 44 18 0 0 21 23 38 39 840 817
0 0 11 19 19 19 4 4 73 14 41 54
1,126 1,128 188 177 0 0 32 31 123 723 1,471 1,459
1,540 1,540 290 240 5 0 32 21 151 79 2,008 1,880
231 236 57 77 0 0 12 12 29 65 329 390
ISO 150 11 27 0 0 15 14 41 40 223 231
1,008 1,009 64 63 1 0 14 76 26 70 1,121 1,158
23 25 76 252 6 21 31 34 764 167 304 501
16 16 65 98 0 0 4 3 10 11 95 134
223 223 54 36 6 0 15 75 38 22 334 296
214 276 58 14 2 0 9 10 I 2 344 362
363 363 154 761 53 53 20 19 96 82 868 878
117 118 44 44 0 0 14 15 25 26 260 263
129 ‘29 4* 10 0 0 18 26 90 91 255 306
1,141 1,140 55 82 30 31 79 14 56 28 1,301 1,397
23 22 25 25 86 77 4 4 24 37 164 16$
50 50 4 7 0 0 10 8 Ii 12 75 77
34 39 3 93b 95 3 4 4 4 13$ 141
80 81 10 23 0 0 2 2 1 1 93 107
110 110 75 109 -0 0 25 28 49 56 279 303
85 3 4 2 6 63 33 10 7 109 77 269 258
4*0 419 335 305 6 0 38 37 85 43 944 364
435 433 714 153 7 0 78 16 32 47 602 653
84 83 13 19 0 0 5 5 3 7 107 114
2,112 2,173 311 3*9 7 1 35 39 122 103 2,641 2,705
38 38 15 24 0 0 13 3 55 37 121 102
3 3 25 28 4 0 13 13 13 12 60 56
1,464 1,446 234 235 3 3 37 35 262 110 2,022 1,852
5 5 8 7 0 0 2 1 0 I 15 14
213 213 84 91 0 0 10 9 19 29 326 342
39 29 3 3 0 0 4 3 3 4 39 41
934 934 83 133 6 0 17 77 31 31 1,077 1,134
303 303 107 305 87 53 96 95 684 583 1,277 1,341
22 22 16 37 4 5 4 7 24 43 72 178
1 0 S 4 0 0 1 3 0 1 7 10
144 787 742 754 0 0 23 21 30 46 3*7 336
69 69 41 65 107 114 21 19 34 59 272 326
944 944 84 99 9 0 1 7 44 54 1,088 1,104
484 479 107 157 0 0 15 13 30 39 638 688
118 121 30 49 0 0 7 9 29 70 184 249
17,323 11,324 3,493 4,384 1,353 1,234 872 871 3,281 3,108 36,331 27,111
sq i• d.fi in 803$ r.çext. *2*2 vaIn.. cat .qorl ,z .d based on fi 3t 9CC Innount.red for .ack e*isaton
9oint.
b !aireion. in 8033 aury TabLe 3.2.7 adjua to ref Lect ..z. macrat. value. for copp.r sit.rs in taDlu
0.2.3.
3-14
-------
7).IL* 3.6
Stat.
lWA&XS0I or I PAP A$O W031 NO 1ISSI01iI SOTIMATRI I98Q (39JL,DIXN&&T DAV.
i 3 TCW$/!!*&)
E3ao ic Iot ..Utiltty Oon—fsrrou . asi.pox— Oth.r 3tat
Uttl.tti.. CoWiatton Sm.3.t.ri tatton S OQFO.. Total
WG39 )l P1P WOB - *Th9A9 *4033 N&PAP W031 11R AP W033 WAP P 11033 MAP2P
Mka aa
California
Co lor o
Coim.atiaut
Dint. of Cot.
Fiorida
C.orqia
ritano
ZZ .Uj20ti
odian .
o s
W i ...
tant I7
out i an a
wadtua.ttl
43.c liiqsn
ninasiota
Miauil$tppt
Missouri
)4O 1*talI*
*t.v*da
øv laspubirs
1 3 1w Jsrisy
law M.ZiC0
1* 5w YorX
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ok l ahasi
p.iu i .y ivsn i a
Rhod .2a46
South Carolina
South Dakota
T.nns....
?az .a
Dtah
Vlrm nt
ws.hinqton
1 3 1st Virpiglia
WtacOflhifl
Wyo.iaq
172 206 63 106 0
91 t20 40 32 0
26 49 45 50 0
115 183 205 246 0
06 105 67 51 0
20 27 23 27 0
19 2* 9 13 0
1 2 6 5 0
214 236 32 33 0
139 230 39 70 0
0 0 14 11 0
416 542 129 133 Q
361 432 99 113 0
98 133 47 41 0
06 176 151 231 0
212 32* 67 50 0
98 185 552 346 0
1 4 13 20 0
61 78 37 51 0
57 86 37 18 0
238 270 131 144 0
112 200 33 51 0
50 59 79 93 0
237 302 50 45 0
33 14 22 *3 0
40 71 22 20 0
43 74 4 4 0
24 26 4 6 0
66 99 68 71 0
80 132 109 93 0
130 II? 139 175 0
214 253 50 67 0
53 99 11 Ii 0
5*6 534 162 194 0
lOS *36 216 143 0
3 4 iS 50 0
391 490 164 *40 0
3 3 5 $ 0
$4 10$ 39 54
21 20 3 4 0
200 241 60 77 0
522 921 1,113 1,465 0
39 59 33 36 0
1 0 2 3 0
62 90 65 73 0
25 25 32 41 0
302 311 54 64 0
*45 147 57 73 0
103 *42 73 11 0
6,214 8,117 4,543 5,138 0
164 184
119 120
*31 126
820 743
115 134
90 86
22 26
14 19
347 356
236 253
52 54
425 400
280 276
146 ‘*0
116 *60
183 200
190 193
42 33
143 143
138 156
302 300
201 94
125 120
234 231
63 66
134 101
35 43
27 27
246 235
97 77
383 371
253 233
60 51
43* 451
181 160
144 146
434 407
2$ 24
127 12$
58 45
224 218
744 769
65 69
22 41
250 217
193 1*1
$7 06
208 193
69 18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
3* 29 430 325
6 21 25$ 194
15 7 217 2.32
85 149 1,225 T 323
9 13 277 292
1 2 *34 144
2 2 52 69
1 1 22 27
35 14 644 629
30 26 494 587
15 26 31 91
35 43 1,005 1,117
33 39 773 860
10 9 321 349
24 19 437 392
9 26 531 604
89 97 929 321
3 2 59 64
7 1 240 278
2 30 254 272
29 32 650 746
8 9 374 456
31 23 265 295
27 29 568 601
13 32 126 130
9 6 1 2*0
1 2 83 123
1 1 56 60
26 23 406 434
4 S 290 307
3$ 15 880 74$
19 *5 536 570
1 123 168
29 32 1,145 1,219
24 23 526 462
20 26 192 228
49 45 1,038 1.082
1 1 37 36
10 14 260 302
7 8 $9 17
23 37 517 573
*63 211 3544 346$
7 11 144 175
0 1 25 44
28 31 405 411
39 37 289 350
9 12 452 413
1* 14 421 426
8 255 299
lot .l
Cat.qort.a deftoud in 1103* taport. 8U P v.t .a aat.qorta.$ basso on Strut 300 .ncount.rud for sa t asia—
stea point.
1 9,319 6,094 1,072 1,265 21,138 23.667
3—1 5
-------
TABLE 3.7
COMPARISON OF NAPAP P 1 ND OAQPS EMISSIONS TRENDS
EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR 1980 (PRELIMINARY DATA)
(10 TONS/YEAR)
Category
SO,
NO
VOC
Trends
NAPAP
Trends
NAPAP
Trends
NAPAP
Electric
Utilities
17,090
17,324
7,084
8,117
46
71
Non-Utility
Combustion
3,572
4,584
4,068
5,188
1,933
1,062
Non-Ferrous
Smelters
1,332
1,224
0
1
0
0
Transportation
1,006
871
10,500
9,096
7,299
•
7,965
Other Sources
2,695
3,108
1,112
1,265
13,705
14,171
Total
25,695
27,111
22,764
23,667
22,983
23,269
3—16
-------
plant level data needed for modeling are not available and because of the
requirement to assume national average emission factors and control levels
in most instances, the probable errors in the results increase as the emis-
siona are disaggregated to smaller geographic areas. An exception to the
top—down approach in the Work Group 33 inventory was SO 2 emissions for
electric utilities which were developed from plant—specific data by 8.3.
Pechan and Associates.
The Work Group 33 data were based to a great extent on WEDS snimn ry
data which were not as representative of 1980 conditions as the WEDS in-
ventory used for NAPAP. Both NAPAP and Work Group 38 used 1980 electric
utility data from 8.3. Pechan and Associates. Industrial combustion emis-
sions in Work Group 38 were based on 1979/1980 state—level fuel deliveries.
Average uncontrolled emission factors and sulfur contents with AP—42 emis-
sion factors were used to estimate emissions • On the other hand, NAPAP
emissions were calculated from fuel consumption, fuel quality, and control
equipment data supplied by individual plants for each combustion unit. In-
dustrial process emissions in Work Group 33 were based on estimates of pro-
duction rates for process groups and AP—42 emission factors supplemented by
NEDS srnrn ry data. Operating and control equipment data provided by the
plants for each emission point were used to estimate emissions in NAPAP.
In comparing emissions from Work Group 33 and NAPAP, the simplifying as-
sumptions and lack of detail employed in compiling the Work Group 38 data
should be recognized.
Table 3.5 compares 502 emissions for five source categories and pro-
vides tal emissions for each state • Total U.S • emissions in NAPAP are
higher by 3.0%. NAPAP emissions for the nation are greater for only the
non—utility combustion category. State to state differences in emissions
are sometimes greater than those for the nation but none of the differences
are large in terms of emissions. The percent differences in a few cases
are, however, sufficiently large to warrant investigation. The footnote
in the tables relates to the problem of attempting to summarize NAPAP emis-
sions data. The only available means is to use the SCC as a retrieval and
summarization technique. In cases that multiple SCCa exist for a source,
emissions are assigned to the first one encountered. When the SCC is not
correct, emissions are assigned to an incorrect category.
Table 3.6 compares NAPAP and Work Group 33 NO emissions. Total U.S.
emissions in NAPAP are higher by 11 .8%. NAPAP emissions for the nation
are less for only the transportation category. As was the case for 502,
state—to—state differences are sometimes larger than on a national basis
but th. differences are not great in terms of omissions with the exception
of Texas • The percent differences are in a few cases large enough to war-
rant investigation. However, the differences are not of the same magnitude
and sign as for SO nor do they necessarily occur in the same instances.
OAQPS nissions Trends
NAPAP emission estimates are compared with C QPS emissions trends
estimates for 1980 in Table 3.7. Since the OAQPS trends report gives only
national emissions, only national totals can be compared. The OAQPS trends
3—17
-------
data also includes Alaska and Hawaii, but these states have a small impact
on national emissions • The NAPA? SO 2 emission estimates are 5 • 5% higher
than the OAQPS emissions trends estimates NAPAP estimates of SO 2 from
non—utility combustion and other sources are high compared to OAQPS trends
values. Note that there is close agreement between OAQPS trends and Work
Group 38 data for these categories • This suggests that there may still
be some problems with the 1ThP?P data that require investigation, although
both the OAQPS trends and Work Group 33 inventories reflect a 0 top-down’
approach and used similar methodologies. For the non—utility sector, ad-
ditional refinement of the NAPAP data are needed. For the utility sector,
emissions agree very closely. The trends estimate is about 1 .4% lower than
NAPAP. For other source categories, emissions of SO 2 generally agree with-
in + 1 0%. Considering the relatively small contribution to total emissions
from these sources, this difference is not seen as a serious problem.
For NOR, NAPAP is 4.0% higher than the OAQPS emission trends, a very
good overall agreement. Emissions estimates for electric utilities and
transportation sources are not in close agreement, however. When added
together, differences in emissions cancel each other out so that total
emissions are close. For electric utilities, there is enough uncertainty
associated with the NOx estimates to cause doubt about which estimate is
the best. Both IPAP and Work Group 3B differ from the ( QPS trends esti-
mate by 1O I 5%. Considering the relative importance of thi3 source cate-
gory to total NO. emissions, greater confidence is needed. Hopefully, NOx
emissions estimates from E.H. Pechan and Associates should be available
soon and should be helpful in resolving discrepancies between existing
data bases. For non-utility combustion sources, NAPAP is higher than
trends and Work Group 38. The Work Group 3B estimates do not agree as
closely with trends estimates for NOx as they do for 502. Both .PAP
and Work Group 38 differ from trends due most likely to discrepancies in
fuel use and differences in emission factors and control device efficien-
cies. For transportation sources, the NAP P and Work Group 3B estimates
are close • However, both are lower than the OAQPS trends estimats. The
OAIQPS trends estimate is based on up—to—date emission factors a id refined
estimates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) • The OAQPS trends estimate may
overestimate emissions slightly, but is probably a more accurate estimate
of national. omissions than either NAPPIP or Work Group 38. The Work Group
33 data are based on outdated emission factors aid inadequate VMT data.
The NAPAP data have updated emission factors but still lack adequate VMT.
More detailed estimates of Wft by vehicle classification by road speed
category are needed to improve NAPAP. Unfortunately, such data are known
to be available for only a very few areas. Until sore VM’I’ data can be ob-
tained, or the basic WEDS procedure that NAPAP to lies upon for calculation
of emissions is modified to better compensate for the lack of adequate VMT
data, the NAPAP emission estimates Will continue to be deficient.
For VOC, NA PPP and OAQPS emissions trends total emissions agree very
closely. For the non—utility combustion and transportation sectors, some
differences are apparent, however. NAPAP emissions for transportation are
somewhat higher than OAQPS trends estimates, primarily because of differ-
ences in highway vehicle emissions. These differences are caused by the
lack of adequate VNT data for individual counties, as described earlier
3—18
-------
for NO emissions. For non—utility combustion, the difference in emissions
relates primarily to the residential combustion of wood • The data contained
in MAPAP are based on 1980 NEDS data. For 1981, NEDS data were revised to
consider more recent estimates of the amount of wood burned (Reference 6)
and the latest available emission factors (Reference 7) • The OAQPS trends
report is consistent with these most current references. However, NAPA2
still contains 1980 NEDS data which yield substantially lower estimates of
vôc emissions from residential wood combustion (13 x 1 3 tons/year in 1980
NEDS versus 1,760 x i0 3 tons/year from OAQPS trends report).
NECRMP and NEDS
The ) PAP data may also be compared with NECR4P and NEDS inventories
for 1980. The main purpose in doing this comparison would be to verify
that the original NEDS and NECRZ4P data loaded into NAPAP were successfully
converted. This process is described in more detail in Chapter 4. Since
the current NAPAP inventory has bad other changes made to it since conver-
sion and emission factors used in NAPAP may not be the same as those used
in th NEXRMP, it should not be expected that NAPAP point source data would
agree with the original NEDS and NECR)IP data that were used. Nevertheless,
it may be of interest to compare, for the purpose of frame of reference,
the NAPAP, NEDS, and NECRMP data for the appropriate source categories,
pollutants, and states • These comparisons are shown in Tables 3.8 and
3.10.
A comparison of NAPAP and N BMP area source emissions may be of more
interest. This result is shown in Table 3.9. A future action item for
NAPAP is to consider substituting N 1 4P area source data into NAPAP to
go with the NECRMP point source data that have already been substituted.
As shown in Table 3.9, NO area source estimates are usually very similar.
The largest discrepancies occur in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.
For VOC, NAPAP data are consistently higher than NECRI4P • This can be at-
tributed mainly to the NEDS area source organic solvent emissions that have
been loaded into NAPAP. The methodology used for NEDS in 1980 probably
overestimates area source organic solvent emissions. If these data were
adjusted to be consistent with the current NEDS area source methodology,
there should be closer agreement between NEC1 4P and NAPAP.
Other Inventories
Other previously compiled and widely used emission inventories include
the Sulfate Regional Experiment (SURE) and the Multi—State Atmospheric Po-
wer Production Pollution Study (MAP3S). A comparison of these inventories
with NAPAP data is not appropriate, however • Both of these data bases were
compiled in earlier years using emiseion factors and inventory procedures
that are now obsolete • Also, neither of these inventories represent a 1980
base year, so comparison to 1980 NAPAP data would not be appropriate. Work
Group 33 included preliminary estimates of VOC emissions but these have not
been compared with NAPAP data • The Work Group 3B VOC estimates, being pro—
limiriary in nature, used preliminary estimates of 1980 VMT and emission
factors. Aa a result, these data are not as good as the final 1980 NEDS
3—19
-------
TABLE 3.8
COMPARISON OF NAPAP AND NECRMP NON—UTILITY POINT SOURCE
NO AND VOC 4ISSIONSa (PRELIMINARY DATA)
(iO TONS/YEAR)
State
NO
VOC
NECRMP
NAPAP
NECRMP
NAPAP
Connecticut
18
14
34
44
Delaware
8
8
21
26
District of Columbia
3
3
2
1
Maryland
46
36
77
76
Massachusetts
46
20
112
107
New Hampshire
4
4
20
20
New Jersey
97
61
156
153
Now York
177
134
171
142
Pennsylvania
161
105
258
238
Rhode Island
2
3
13
13
Vermont
1
1
5
4
Totals
563
389
869
824
• a Ref i.ects only the states wholly included in the NECRX4P study area.
b Assumes non—utility point source emissions represent all NECRMP
source categories except utility boilers. NECPiIP does not report
specific emissions for any electric utility internal combustion
engines, so any emissions from such sources are included in the
non—utility category. This may cause cited NECRMP value to be
overestimated in some cases.
3—20
-------
TABLE 3.9
COMPARISON OP NAPAP AND NECRMP AREA SOURCE
NO AND VOC EMISSIONSa (PR IMINARY DATA)
(10 TONS/YEAR)
State
NC ,,
VOC
NECRMP 0
NAPAP
NEC ZdPD
NAPAP
Connectic Ut
113
103
168
259
Delaware
41
33
36
48
District of Columbia
16
22
21
43
Maryland
157
164
198
270
MassaChusetts
266
184
236
444
New hampshire
45
30
59
69
New Jersey
349
274
415
562
New York
587
427
652
988
pennsylvania
491
487
466
802
Rbode Island
49
30
49
84
Vermont
26
43
3
36
Totals
2,140
1,797
2,334
3,605
a Reflects only the states wholly tnc].uded in the NECRNP study area.
b Reference 8.
3—21
-------
TABLE 3.10
COMPARISON OP NAPAP AND 1980 NEDS EMISSIONS
OP SO 2 , NOx, AND VOC (PRELIMINARY DATA)
(iO TONS/YEAR)
SO
NO 1 r
VOC
}J $a
NAPAP
NEDS
NAPAP
NEDS
NAPAP
Point Sources
17,676
17,324
8,041
8,117
89
71
Electric
Utilities
Non—Utility
Combustion
3,540
3,371
2,607
2,497
200
289
Other
5,264
4,306
852
952
5,289
4,602
Subtotal
Point Source
26,480
25,001
11,500
11,566
5,578
4,962
Area Sources
1,215
1,213
2,662
2,691
760
773
Non—Utility
Combustion
Transportation
901
871
9,262
9,096
8, 188
7,965
Other
27
26
316
314
9,597
9,569
Subtotal
Area Source
2,143
2,110
12,240
12,101
18,545
18,307
Total AU Sources
28,623
27,111
23,740
23,667
24,123
23,269
a Reference 9. NEDS totals have been adjusted to exclude Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Is lands so that both NEDS
and NAPAP represent the same geographic area.
3—22
-------
estimates of area source emissions upon which the PAP data are based, and
therefore no comparison is appropriate.
C0 CL 3S ION
Many improvements have been made to the Z PAP inventory since the ini-
tial creation of the file in 1983. The current Version 3.0 of NAPAP repre-
sents the beat available detailed inventory compiled to date on a nationwide
scale. Still more improvements would be desirable. Chapter 5 discusses
plans for addressing some of these • The addi tional efforts planned for the
remainder of PT 84 should be successful in eliminating some of the more ob-
vious problems with the NAPAP inventory. Resource limitations will prevent
all potential problems from being adequately investigated and resolved, how-
ever.
NAPAP has benefited from previous inventory efforts such as the U.S.—
Canada Work Group 38 study, NEC1 14P, and E.H. Pechan analyses of electric
utility data. Results of these studies have been incorporated i;to NAPAP.
Future NAPAP quality assurance activities will focus on eliminating or min-
imizing remaining data gaps or inconsistencies. Efforts will be directed
toward a review of the largest emitting sources to obtain correct and time-
ly emissions estimates, fuel use data, stack data, and grid coordinates.
For area sources, little quality assurance work has been done so far.
Resolution of NAPAP and NECBMP area source emission differences and modifi-
cation of data for reSidential wood use, highway vehicles, and organic aol-
vent use to be compatibl, with current N S methodology would be desirable.
version 3 • 0 of NAPAP should be adequate to meet many user ‘a needs for
both summary and detailed emissions data. By far the greatest challenge
remaining is to upgrade the NAPAP inventory to meet Bulerian modeling re-
quirements. The addition of more pollutants, development of finer spatial
and temporal allocation procedures, and associated data processing and qual-
ity assurance activities required for each of these tasks are major concerns.
These activities may prove to be very cumbersome and costly. Completion of
these activities is of very high priority for the remainder of F? 84 and F?
85, but is contingent upon the availability of adequate funds.
3—23
-------
CHAPTER 3
REFERENCES
1 • State Energy Data Report , 1960 through 1981, DOE/EIA—021 4(81), U.S.
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington,
D.C., June 1983.
2. Coke and Coal Chemicals in 1980 , DOE/EIA—0120(80), U.S. Department of
Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C., November
1981.
3. Uncertainty Analysis of the NAPAP Inventory , Report on Task I (Draft),
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, May 1984.
4. National Air Pollutant Emission Estimates, 1940—1984 , EPA—450/4—83 —024,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, February 1984.
5. Emissions, Costa and Engineering Assessment Work Group 3B Final Report ,
U.S.-Canada Memorandum of Intent on Transboundary Air Pollution, June
19 82.
6. Estimates of U.S. Wood Energy Consumption from 1949 to 1981 , DOE/EIA-
0341, U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration,
Washington, D.C., August 1982.
7. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors , Supplement 14 to Publi-
cation AP—42, U • S • Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, May 1983.
8 • Northeast Corridor Regional Modeling Project, Volume XVIII, Inventory
Review and Evaluation , EPA—450/4—82—01 3r, Prepared for U.S Environ-
mental. Protection Agency by GCA Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts,
October 1982.
9. 1980 National Emissions Report of the National Emissions Data System ,
EPA—450/4—82—O1 0, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Tri-
angle Park, North Carolina, August 1982.
3—24
-------
CHAPTER 4
HISTOR! OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NAPAP EMISS 0N INVENTORY
INTRODLJCTZON
Activities by ES to create the initial detailed NAPAP emission invert—
tory for base year 1980 began in January 1983. The first actions required
were to convert the existing N S data into EIS format. Conversion of point
source data was relatively straightforward and was accomplished within two
r,inths from project inception. Conversion of area source data was more dif—
ficult and required more time and resources to complete. Once the conver-
sion of data was accomplished, various comparative assessments of the data
were initiated. These assessments resulted in the completion of a number
of NAPAP inventory improvements. A preliminary version, incorporating the
results of the initial assessment exercise, was available in August 1983.
Additional revisions were made to the data and the resulting Vers ion 1 .0
was made available to users, particularly to support testing of Lagrangian
models, in November 1983. Version 210 was made available to users in Jan—
uary 1984. Version 3.0, representing the current NAPAP inventory, was com-
pleted in May 1984 • The activities pa rfarmed to create Version 3 • 0 are des-
cribed in detail in the following sections.
P0 IN? SOURCE ‘ 3NVZRSION
A goal of the initial conversion of the 1980 NEDS point source snapshot
file to HIS/PS format (Reference 1) was to maintain equivalency between emis-
sion totals in N S and HIS. However, reporting differences between the two
processing systems caused state emission totals to disagree in some cases by
a subetantial percentage.
One reporting difference involved sources under construction and sources
that had ceased operation. In HIS/PS, emission estimates are reported re-
gardless of operational staths, while NEDS reports zero emissions for sources
which are closed or under construction. Another reporting difference involved
sources where there were insufficient data to complete an emission calcula-
tion but where an estimate had been entered by hand. In NEDS, zero emissions
are reported while HIS reports the estimate entered by hand in the NEDS file.
These reporting differences have not been resolved but are being investigated
with EPA.
isaion differences were not totally eliminated due to the required ef-
fort in reviewing all affected sources, but efforts were made during the con-
version process to minimize them. For most states and pollutants the NAPAP
4—1
-------
and N S emissions were nearly identical. In some cases 1 the difference
was 1% or more and in a few instances, the difference was as high as 15%.
Because many improvements have and will continue to be made to the ThPAP
data base, the significance of differences between NEDS and the original
NPPAP inventory should eventually become unimportant. The EAPAP data were
compared with other data sources to try to get the best available emissions
estimates as previously discussed in Chapter 3.
AREA SOURCE Q)NVERSION
The National Yaissions Data System (NEDS) served as the starting point
for the development of the NAPAP area source inventory in EIS/AS format (Re-
ference 2) • The NEDS—to—EIS/AS conversion program was used to generate EIS/
AS transactions from the NEDS file. Since there was no conversion program
for area source emission factors, ES developed one arid used it to access the
NEDS area source emission factor file on the UNIVAC machine at }Z C. EIS/AS
emission factor transactions were produced, recorded on magnetic tape, arid
transferred to the M machine for creating the area source masterfile.
The transactions contained emission, factors for area source categories
in a nation 1-state-county hierarchy; that is, if a county—level emission
factor did not exist for a particular category, then a state—level or f i—
naU.y a national-level emission factor was included. Exceptions to this
were the factors for construction arid miscellaneous wind erosion which were
not available at the national level. The EIS/AS emission factor insertion
program had to be modified to accept this three—tier structure. It had pre-
viously been able to handle only two tiers of factors • The modified program
still operates art a two—tier structure in that when county factors are not
available, national—level factors are applied unless state—level factors
exist.
After running a sii mary program to compare emission totals, it was
discovered that the category “vehicle miles traveled” was blank or zero in
many states. Activity levels for this category had not been provided in
the NEDS area source base file. It was learned that these estimates are
routinely calculated from auxiliary vehicle files when the NEDS st1r’ ry
program executes, but that they are not stored in the NEDS file. There-
fore, ES developed a program to read the N S file, calculate and insert
VMT where required, and to output the modified file.
After the v qi’ data had been inserted onto the NEDS cards, the conver-
sion process continued and an initial version of the NAPAP EIS/AS master—
file was created. Snm ary printouts were obtained arid county total emis-
sions were compared to the area source siimi ries from NEDS supplied by
NADB. Differences were found in the totals which could not be explained
without obtaining more detailed information from WEDS. ES obtained WEDS
county level emission data for each area source category from NADS.
After reviewing the data provided by NADS, ES was able to determine
why WEDS arid ZIS emissions data were inconsistent. WEDS makes an internal
adjustment to accowrt for the fact that the units on the county activity
4—2
-------
values are not equivalent to the ‘ mi ts in the emission factor file.. The
emission factor file units correspond to the units used in AP—42 while the
units on the data cards were defined to provide sufficient spaces to enter
the activity value for each county in the country. The ratio of the unite
(cards/file) varies from a factor of 10 to a factor of 1000. ES was able
to correct this difference by sodifying the conversion program to produce
the same units for the EIS activity values as used in the NEDS emission
factor file.
After the ZIS/AS inasterf lie was created, snm ary reports were gene-
rated and compared to the NEDS summaries • The emission totals in NEDS and
NAPAP generally differ by only 1-2% on a county basis for sulfur dioxide
and oxides of nitrogen. There is also good agreement between the two
files for each area source category.
AUDIT TRAIL DEVELOPMENT
As a result of the improvements made to NAPAP based on data obtained
from other sources, the NAPAP inventory is no longer a totally NEDS-ori—
ginated file • Some means must be available for determining the source of
information for the improvements. ES devised a system whereby comments of
any size and nature can be carried along with each point to describe data
sources and assumptions as necessary. The scheme uses a sodified version
of the EIS/PS file maintenance program to take advantage of EIS/PS Segment
3, a free-format field providing for up to 99 criuments of 999 lines each,
with each line capable of storing 102 characters • Presently, this scheme
requires manual coding of transactions containing the comments to be in-
cluded. It is anticipated that future improvements to the NAPAP file main-
tenance program will include automatic generation of audit trail comments,
n addition to comments maintained in the computer file, a paper trail is
being maintained to identify updates that have been made and substitutions
of blocks of data from other rion—NEDS sources.
Periodic reports, such as this document, are planned to keep users
informed of the progress made in updating the NAPAP data files • Also,
users will be routinely notified when new versions of the NAPAP inventory
are available.
DATA BASE IMPROVEMENTS
In an effort to improve the quality of the NAPAP data base, updates
were initiated to address areas where the NEDS inventory was known to be
deficient. The updates included substitution of other NEDS data more re-
presentative of 1980, incorporation of the most recent EPA emission factors,
addition of location coordinates for those sources with erroneous or miss-
ing coordinates, replacement of fuel data for major utility boilers using
1980 rederal Power Commission (FPC) data, replacement of copper smelter da-
ta with those from Work Group 3D, substitution of selected data with that
from the Northeast Corridor Regional Modeling Project, and addition of sea-
sonal factors to the area source inventory. The data sources used to make
4—3
-------
NAPAP improvements, although not perfect, are believed to be the best avail-
able. The following sections give further information concerning these im—
provements.
Substitution of Other NEDS Data
The NEDS inventory is dynamic in that it is constantly being updated
with information submitted by the states • However, because of manpower and
resource limitations at the state level, not all records can be updated
every year. As a result, there is a distribution of record dates spanning
several years • EPA ’s National Air Data Brandi (NADB) (North Carolina) rou-
tinely archives a “snapshot TM copy of the file every year for future refer-
ence, and the snapshot file most representative of 1990 served as the source
for creation of the initial NAPAP inventory. However, NEDS data more repre-
sentative of 1980 ware obtained for 12 states frQn previous snapshot files
and subsequent state subinittals. ES replaced the NAPAP data for entire
states with these NEDS data.
Incorporation of Most Recent EPA Emission Factors
After initial creation of the NAPAP inventory, Supplement 14 to AP-42
(Reference 3) was released with new and updated emission factors for a va-
riety of processes. Using standard EIS/PS routines, ES replaced emission
factors stored in the masterfile with the new values obtained from NADB
and recalculated emission estimates for sources there an estimation method
of ‘3’ indicated that computer-automated emission calculations should be
performed. The Supplement 14 emission factors were applied to the sup-
plementary NEDS data discussed in the previous section as well as to the
Northeast Corridor data covered in a subsequent section of this chapter.
Addition of Location Coordinates
Because source location is a critical input to acid deposition models,
a study was undertaken by EPA’s Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory
to improve the accuracy of NAPAP source location data • The procedure used
was simply to determine if the location specified by the coordinates of
a source was within the boundaries of the county specified in the source
identification key. For sources with missing location data or with loca-
tion data outside the county, EIS/PS transactions were prepared to substi-
tute the location of the county centroid. ES then processed these trans-
actions rthich added latitude and longitude coordinates to the masterfile
and blanked out any existing U ’ 4 location data.
Power Plant Update
In the United States, the electric utility industry is responsible for
approximately two—thirds of the sulfur dioxide emissions and a substantial
portion of nitrogen oxide emissions • Thus, it is desirable to update power
plant data in NAPAP using the best available information.
4—4
-------
Data Sources
The power plant data of greatest concern are fuel type and quantity,
fuel quality, and combustion configuration. In addition, information on
any controls applied to fuel—based emissions is important. Since the power
plant data in NAPAP exists on an emission point level., a detailed data base
at the combustion unit level was required. To obtain the needed informa—
tton, a number of data sources were used.
The majority of the information was obtained from the 1980 electric
utility unit inventory compiled from FPC data by E.H. Pechan and Associates
(Reference 4) under a contract to the Universities Research Group on Energy
(URGE) • URGE, led by the University of Illinois, was established to develop
a comprehensive modeling framework to address acid deposition concerns re-
lated to the electric utility industry. The unit inventory provided 4ata
for each of the larger units in the electric utility industry. The smaller
units (those with less than 25 megawatts output) were aggregated into “gene-
ric” units at the state level. The generic units were not considered for
this update. There were approximately 20 data elements taken from the unit
inventory to update PAP:
o Fuel type (primary and secondary)
o Fuel quality (ash—sulfur content, heating value)
o Fuel amount
o Combustion unit type
o TSP, 302, and NOX control data
o Unit heat input capacity
Another data source used in the NAPAP update was the FPC data. Monthly
fuel usages reported on FPC Form 4 by power plants (obtained from E.R. Fe—
chan and Associates) were input to a computer program to generate a seasonal
breakdown of fuel usage. These seasonal percentages were used to update an-
nual throughput fields in NAPAP.
A third data source used in updating NAPAP was the inventory of power
plants published by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (Reference 5) This
data source was used to cross-reference plants in NAPAP with those in the
unit inventory. DOE’s publication was also helpful in cross-checking the
fuel and prime mover type for a given facility.
The final data source used for the update was the La. Pechan electric
utility plant invento y (Reference 6) • ES made use of the plant total 1980
so 2 emissions reported by Pechan to update NAPAP.
Methodology
A major task in using Pechan’s data was to determine a one—to—one
correspondence between plants listed in the unit inventory and those con-
tained in NAPAP • It was even more difficult to match combustion units in
the unit inventory with emission points in NAPAP. The unit inventory is
arranged by Federal Information Processing Service (PIPS) code whereas
NAPAP uses SAROAD state and county codes. Plants are identified by plant
4—5
-------
name in the unit inventory whereas N PAP lists them by company name and
address. Matches were made or confirmed using the DOE inventory of power
plants and art Ph/NADB list of NEDS identification numbers and correspond-
ing plant names from the unit inventory. Once a plant was matched, emis-
sion points within the plant ware matched with individual combustion units
on the basis of unit design capacity, -type of unit, and type of fuel being
bdrned. The DOE publication also provided primary and secondary fuel data
for each unit which was used as necessary for matching. Once a plant and
the units within a plant ware matched, the updating process was initiated.
Fuel amount, ash and sulfur content, combustion unit capacity, source class—
if ication code, and control equipment data were updated using data in the
unit inventory. Data for boiler units not matched in NAPAP were accounted
for by either adding a new emission point or adding the fuel amount to sim-
ilar units at the plant. Only a few plants and combustion units within a
plant with relatively insignificant fuel use could not be matched.
The unit inventory also provided information about control equipment.
For ‘L’SP and SO 2 , the type of control, equipment and control efficiency was
obtained directly from the unit inventory. However, information about the
effectiveness of the MOx control equipment was not provided. The NOx con-
trol equipment efficiency had to be determined on the basis of published
data and engineering judgement. In many cases the unit inventory contained
three (primary, secondary, and tertiary) types of NO control equipment.
Only two of these ware entered into NAPAP because only two data fields (pri-
mary and secondary) are available per pollutant for control equipment codes.
This haa no impact on emissions because control efficiency is still speci-
fied in NAPAP. Tertiary control equipment cannot be indicated, however,
due to the limitation of the EIS/PS system design.
To determine seasonal throughput, monthly fuel use data contained on
FPC Form 4 were aggregated into seasonal and annual totals and the percen-
tages by season were calculated • Form 4 data are reported by fuel. typ. and
prime mover type for each plant. Since combustion unit-specific informa-’
tion was not available, the same seasonal breakdown was used for all, emis-
sion points within a plant using the same type of fuel. When units burned
multiple fuels, the relative amount of each fuel burned was considered in
calculating seasonal percentages.
Because emission factors in ElS are selected on the basis of source
classification code (8CC), it is important to ensure the accuracy of SCCs.
The unit inventory contains information on burner type which was used as
necessary to update the SCCs in the NAPAP data base. The NO emission fac-
tors were of special concern since burner type can affect emissions by a
factor of two.
There were a number of cases in which data contained in the unit inven-
tory appeared to be unreasonable • There were, for example, boilers burning
coal. with high ash corttent but no TSP control equipment and boilers burning
fuel. with unreasonably high ash or sulfur content. In cases like these,
NAPAP data from the. emission point, from other emission points within the
same plant, or from similar plants were used for the update. Pechan and
4—6
-------
Associates is currently in the process of revising the unit inventory, and
it is presumed that any problems of this type will be eliminated.
In NAPAP, there were many emission points with emission estimation
method codes of 1, 4, and 5 (source test, guess, or special non—EPA emis-
sion factor) and no indication as to how emission factors were derived and
used. As a result, all, estimation method codes except those for SO 2 were
changed to ‘3’ so that emission estimates would be generated by EIS using
AP—42 emission factors and updated information on fuel amount and quality
and control efficiency.
A few assumptions made in the NAPAP update are Listed below:
o The unit inventory did not contain data on coal type; therefore,
coal was assumed to be bituminous coal unless it was listed other-
wise in NAPAP.
o Distillate oil identified as a primary fuel in the unit inventory
was assumed to be residual oil because the oil type codes in the
unit inventory were found to be inaccurate in most caaes.
o Fuels listed as light oil or distillate in the unit inventory and
in the DOE inventory were assumed to be #2 oil.
Alter the unit inventory updates were complete, ES then used the plant—
level SO 2 emission estimates from the Pechan plant inventory (Reference 6)
to update NAPAP • Plant total emissions were allocated to each emiseion
point on the basis of its percentage of plant total emissions in NAPAP.
The Pechan plant inventory did not provide estimates of NO,h or VOC emis-
sions.
Work Group 38 Copper Smelter Updates
The nissiona, Costs, and Engineering Assessment Work Group 38 was es-
tablished to provide engineering support for the U.S.-Canada Agreement on
Transboundary Air Pollution. One of the tasks assigned to Work Group 33
was to determine 1980 emission rates from copper smelters in the U.S. Since
there are only 15 such facilities in the U.S., data specific for 1980 were
obtained for each smelter. The copper smelters in the NAPAP file were up-
dated to agree with the sulfur dioxide emission rates in the Work Group 38
report (Reference 7). Updates were made to process rates and control off i—
ciencies when possible based on the Work Group 3B data.
Substitution of NECPJiP Data
As part of the Northeast Corridor Regional, Modeling Project (N3RMP)
(Reference 8), EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards developed
an annual point source inventory in EIS/PS format using data supplied di-
rectly from the states, from NEDS, and from other supplemental data bases.
The NECRMP area includes all, or portions of, the following states:
4—7
-------
o Connecticut o New Hampshire o Rhode Island
o Delaware a New Jersey a Vermont
o Maine (portion) o New York o Virginia (portion)
o Maryland o Ohio (portion) o Washington, D.C.
o Massachusetts a Pennsylvania o West Virginia (portion)
Because of th qualityassurance (QA) efforts that were included in the
MECRMP point source development and because the NECPI4P data represent a
1980 time period, the NECRNP data for NO and VOC is generally considered
to be of better quality than the original NAPAP data. All of the NECRZ4P
data, with two exceptions discussed below, were used to replace the car-
responding NAPAP data.
N 1 4P data for utility combustion units greater than 25 megawatts
wer not substituted into the NAPAP inventory. Data for those units were
obtained from the unit inventory discussed in a previous section • Thus,
NECRNP data were used only for those power plants that do not have any
combustion units exceeding 25 megawatts in capacity.
Since the NECRMP inventory was to be u8ed for photochemical oxidant
modeling, QA checks focused primarily on sources of VOC and NO . ES per-
formed a limited QA review of SO 2 data by comparing the NECRMP data with
the corresponding data in the NAPAP inventory. The important parameters
that were reviewed included:
o SO 2 emission rate
o Emission estimation method
o Year of record
o Fuel—process rate
o Emission factor
The ES review included each emission point with more than 0, 1% of the to-
tal SO 2 emissions in the NECRMP area. There were 315 points in the NAPAP
inventory and 302 in the NECRZ4P inventory that were reviewed • About two
thirds of these points were utility combustion units greater than 25 mega-
watts that were updated using the unit inventory. Data for the remaining
points from both inventories were compared to determine which data should
be included in the next generation of the NAPAP inventory.
Generally, the NECRI4P data was judged to be of better quality than
the original NAPAP data. For example, the NECPI4P inventory had data repre—
sentative of 1980 for Allegheny County in Pennsylvania, while the original
NAPAP contained mostly 1970—1915 data. For several plants, however, the
data contained in the original NAPAP was considered better than the NECRMP
data • As an example, one organic chemical plant in Maryland had a process
rate of 9,999,999 tons per year, resulting in 135,000 tans of emissions per
year. NAPAP had a process rate of 100,000 tons per year and an emission
rate of 3,390 tons of SO 2 per year. For a few other facilities, NECRMP
contained indus ia1. fuel use values that were 1,000 times larger than in
NAPAP, and the NAPAP data was thought to be more accurate. For several
4—8
-------
other plants, NAPAP contained 1980 data where NECRMP had 1978 or 1982 data.
As a result of the QA comparison, 30 plants in NAPAP had data that appeared
to be better than the NECPt4P data.
Addition of Seasona.]. Factors for Area Sources
Seasonal allocation factors were developed and added to the NAPAP EIS/
AS file for each of the 64 area source categories and for each county. These
factors were derived mainly from Volume XVII of the NECRP4P report and from
Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories for VOC, Volume II
(Reference 9). The area source categories, the seasonal allocation factors,
and the allocation level are shown in a table in Appendix F. State—epeci..
fic factors were used where available with national averages used in other
cases.
4—9
-------
CHAPTER 4
REPERENCES
1 • The Emissions Inventory System/Point Source User’s Guide , EPA—450/4—80—
01 0, U.s • Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Plan-
ning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1980.
2. The Emissions Inventory System/Area Source User’s Guide , EPA—450/4—80—
009, U.s. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Plan-
ning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1980.
3. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors , Publication No. AP—42,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1983
(through Supplement No. 14).
4. Electric Utility Unit Inventory: Database Technical Documentation ,
prepared for University of Illinois at Champaign—Urbana by LH. Pechan
and Associates, Springfield, Virginia, May 1983.
5. Inventory of Power Plants in the United States , DOE/EIA—0095(81), U.S.
Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington,
D.C., September 1982.
6. Estimates of Sulfur Omide Emissions from the Electric Utility Industry ,
Volume I: Suuim ry and Analysis, prepared for the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency by E.H. Pechan and Associates, Springfield, Virginia,
July 1982.
7. Emissions, Costs and Engineering Assessment , Work Group 3B of United
States-Canada Memorandum of Intent on ‘rransboundary Air Pollution,
Final Report, June 15, 1982, Work Group Co-Chairmen Martin E. Rivers
(Canada) and ICurt W. Riegel. (United States).
8. Northeast Corridor Regional Modeling Project, Annual Emission Inven-
tory Compilation and Formatting , Volumes I through XVIII, EPA-450/4—
82—013a through r, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
October 1982.
9. Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories for Volatile
Organic Compounds , Volume II: Emission Inventory Requirements for
Photochemical Air Quality Simulation Models, EPA—450/4—79—018, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, September 1979.
4—10
-------
CE .PTER 5
FUTURE MPPAP EMISSION INVENTORY ACTIVITIES
Literally thousands of updates have been processed by ES to generate
the current NAPAP inventory. The updates have resulted in a significant
improvement over the original data base. It is recognized, however, that
Q activities should continue in order to further improve the 1980 NAPAP
data base • Current plans call for updates to be made on a continuing ba-
sis through the remainder of this year.
The 1980 NAPAP data base has been extended to provide the seasonal
resolution required for Lagrangian modeling. Seasonal throughput percen-
tages have been updated for electric utility combustion units with capa-
cities of 25 megawatts or greater and seasonal factors have been developed
for area sources and entered into the data base • Further resolution of
the existing inventory will, however, be necessary to produce the emis-
sions input necessary for Eulerian modeling. Future data base activities
are briefly discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
IMPROVEMENTS OR REMAINDER OF FISCAL YEAR 1984
Further improvements to the NAPAP data base are expected to originate
from QA efforts by ES and others and visits to a number of state agencies
to verify/update data for the largest sources. Although the QA efforts are
yet to be completed, the following types of activities are anticipated:
o Incorporation of improved unit inventory data for power plants.
o Investigation of large facilities with years of record other than
1980.
o Resolution of discrepancies between NAPAP and NEXRMP area sources.
o Collection of missing UTM and stack data for point sources with
large SO 2 or NO emissions.
o Addition of latitude and longitude locations for point sources and
area source county centroid coordinates.
It is expected that data base reviewers and users will identify other prob-
lems for investigation.
5—1
-------
The state visits presently consist of examining data maintained by 18
of the state agencies. The 50 largest non—utility emitters of 802, N0
and VOC (100 tons per year cutoff) viii be considered in each state. Data
currently in NAPAP will be compared to data gathered during the visit and
any updates necessary for key data fields viii. be made.
nission inventory data to support development of Eulerian ntodels has
been requested to be available by October 1984. The preliminary model re-
quires the development of grid—level (grids defined as 1/4 degree longitude
by 1/6 degree latitude) emissions estimates, and temporal resolution to ty-
pical weekdays and weekend days for each season, each disaggrege ted into
24 one—hour segments • The area to be covered is the 48 contiguous states
or the 15 states in the ffECBMP domain at a minimum. Pollutants to be in-
cluded are at a minimum SO 2 , NO, NO 2 , ten VOC species categories, primary
sulfates, and mmor&ia. Also desired are emissions of CO, alkaline dust,
graphitic and organic carbon, iron, manganese, Ed, and 1 • A major por-
tion of the remaining F’! 84 resources will be devoted to trying to provide
at least the minimum data needed for Eulerian modeling.
FISCAL YEAR 1985 PND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
It is anticipated that the bulk of the NAPAP emission inventory re-
sources for F’! 85 will be spent to support Eulerian modeling requirements.
The funding level that is available for FY 85 will determine the extent to
which refinements to the inventory can be completed. The addition of more
pollutants, expansion of the geographic domain to include all 48 contiguous
states and Canada, and additional temporal resolution of the data may be
required.
Another activity planned for F’! 85 is coordination with Task Group A
for the inclusioit of natural emissions into NAPAP. Of particular concern
for Etilerian modeling activities would be estimates of biogenic emissions
of amw nia, VOC, and sulfur.
A procedure for evaluating the uncertainty of the emissions data in
NAPAP is being developed by Brookhaven National Laboratory. Assuming that
adequate funds will be available to implement this procedure in F? 85, the
results of the analysis should indicate areas of the NAPAP inventory that
are in need of improvement. Follow—up quality assurance activities to ad-
dress the areas of greatest uncertainty wo iid then be appropriate.
Other activities that have been proposed for improvement of the NAPAP
inventory contingent upon the availability of adequate funds are:
o Expanded quality assurance activities, including review and veri-
fication of NAPAP data by the states.
o Incorporation of continuous emission monitoring (Cfl4) data to im-
prove the accuracy and temporal resolution of emissions data for
the largest point sources.
5—2
-------
o Additional source testing for development of emission factors, parti—
cular].y for the additional pollutants required for Eulerian modeling
that are not currently in }ThPAP.
o Begin development of an updated NAPAP inventory for a year of record
i re recent than 1980. Originally, davelopeent of an inventory for
base year 1984 was planned.
o To the extent possible, coordinate NAPAP emission inventory activi-
ties with other related work (such as emission inventory data being
developed for EPRI).
REPORTING
ES has released versions of the NAPAP data base to all. members of the
user community who have requested it. Various smnmaries of the inventory
have been generated based on user requests. Members of the user community
have been informed of the fact that further updates are planned for the
1980 NAPAP inventory and that the inventory has not been peerreviewed and
approved for release by EPA and Task Group B. Usere have been asked to re—
cognize the unofficial, status and non—finalized form of the inventory when
making use of the data supplied. Tabular summaries and graphical displays
have been prepared for several meetings to identify the status of the in-
ventory. This report documenting ES activities on the NAPAP data base has
been developed. In the future, requests for NAPAP reports will be coordi-
nated by the EPA National Air Data Branch (NADB) at Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina • ES will continue to provide technical assistance in filling
these requests, as necessary. when significant improvements have been made
to the data base, revised documentation will be compiled for dissemination.
Although data base modifications will be made on a continual basis, it will
take about four to six months before the accumulated changes result in a
significant improvement. At that time, a new version of the data base in-
cluding documentation will be released. Significant changes from the pre-
vious version of the data base will be identified.
5—3
-------
APPENDIX A
YEAR-OF-RE RD DISTRIBUTION IN ThE
NAPAP EMISSIONS INVENTORY
A-i
-------
80.000
60,000
40,000-
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
Legend
Z2 PLANT DATA
POINT DATA
E PROCESS DATA
20,000-
VA
0-
—J
-)‘
U)
0
C)
Li
0
c x
Li
z
iv y yj, .
t1
c 3 1 c 1 ’ i 5 ’ \c 1 i1
STATES SELECTED:
Figure A.1 Year—of-Record Distribution in the HAPAP Emissions Inventory (Preliminary Data)
-------
APPENDIX B
FU 4 USE COMPARISON
1P ,*L1 a.1
ror. au St*3*I$09 P08 . T1XC (J?ZUT! 8 T08 (P* .DI2bI3U DkV )
5ttua .nG.a Coa.J 01 ,sttl .letu .*
katlw.att. Cø.. aM !..tqn t. Mao i&L Ou Pst6i L V *.*.
( 10 tans) ( 103 tOSi.) ti ft 3 ) ( 103 b z .1a1
3808 *
(10501 1PAPb 119*0 ) 8838 pb (1980) s,.,kpb ioea *IUI ,Pb
A1aba 0
krizon* 0
Arkansas 0
CaXiforiU.a 0
Col. atado 13
0
0.3.umEe 0
of 0a3 ,ombia 0
?tos tds 0
Osnsqii 0
0
Uine 0
tadians 0
13
0
X.ntucky 0
0
Main. 13
MarpLand 0
M a ssa UaUtts 13
0
MtnnSSOt a 0
MLz* iSItppL 0
Mi ssouri 0
Mantafla 0
Pabruks 0
!4vad* 0
Maw Maaputttr.
Maw 0
Maw Maxine 0
Maw Tent 0
Month arO1in* 13
North Dakota a
tio 0
*2ahons 13
orson. 0
P in yLisni s 951
Shod. taisM 0
South Carolina 0
SG th Dakota 0
0
0
Otak • 0
V. aont 0
lt nqinia 0
WuftLngton 0
Isat Virqini& 0
wisconsin 0
wY_
0 19.593 19,617 1 131 49
0 10,916 *0.916 50 49 1,622 1,8*3
13 1,774 1,393 59 66 3.285 3.163
0 0 0 519 528 65,222 65.412
0 10,12? 10,121 32 37 444 560
0 0 45 •— — 21.596 23.728
0 942 1,036 7 8 6,018 6,301
0 0 0 0 0 1,572 1,573
0 8,785 6.336 66 169 73,194 75,500
0 21.191 21.287 4 8 1,085 873
0 0 0 . . . . 0 0 0
0 34,611 36,482 19 20 13,608 14,016
0 33,664 34.961 2 2 730 637
0 10,745 13,188 7 7 231 356
0 10,034 10,633 101 118 815 991
0 24,3*3 26,455 3 2 227 225
0 0 0 423 471 8,370 9,466
o 0 0 0 0 3,6*0 2.61*
0 5,906 5,908 3 3 9,250 9,634
0 676 676 3 3 46,342 47,114
0 22,150 22,749 26 25 10,400 10,504
13 12,6*0 15,646 8 6 529 463
0 3,072 3.055 95 80 5,149 5,177
0 23.168 23.3*8 15 8 567 461
0 3,352 3,352 4 4 59 11
0 4.702 6,058 12 15 262 311
0 4,064 4,064 2* 27 2,453 2,333
13 1,0*0 1,0613 — — 4,386 5,007
0 2,545 7,263 80 103 15,740 68,271
0 11,406 10,004 56 5* 391 205
0 6,444 6,278 124 126 64,847 66,925
o 23,920 23, 758 2 1 561 405
0 *1,618 *5,207 — 0 6 6 60
0 46,331 50,434 5 3 2,248 2,497
0 5,752 5,275 330 309 59 25
0 4*5 415 0 110 35
78* 41.515 42,873 3 1 *9,464 20.966
0 0 0 2 3 1,663 1,804
0 7,927 1,927 S 4 2,647 2,601
0 3.683 2,836 — —0 67 83
0 21,679 21,879 1 0 406 323
0 45,351 45,351 1,430 1,598 1,706 1,924
0 4,895 5,336 5 8 126 184
0 9 0 63 08
0 5,560 3,621 2 2 15,379 *6,195
13 4,950 4,963 I 1 232 240
0 21,499 20,603 0 ....C 603 358
0 13,229 13,507 14 11 567 584
O 13,498 *4,5*0 — C C 123 189
951 768 548,045 592,638 3,652 3,891 400,194 472,525
£ Stars Mo.rqy Data Rport. 1960 thrauqh 1981, £n.rqy 1aforn.tion Mstnistration, Washington.
D.C., Jun. 1953.
b Marional 4Ci4 PT.Cipita%4o Asuisiaxat Prograx. d.ts rsgrs..ntatl.va of 1980.
a Maprssenta susU, non—sire ai ,a*.
B—i
-------
7ABLZ 5.2
PVJU. II I PARIS08 FOR 25DUS29 M. S TOR (P 2 U 0S Vi)
Ant scita CoaL
(10 tuna)
Bitu .i
aM
(10
flous Coa.L
r.Lgn .ts
tons)
5a raI 3am
(1O ft 3 )
0iatUL t. az
tamidual. Fu.3.
iø3 barrtLa)
SZD R’
SEDR
SZD*
s R’
Stat. (1980)
1U.P APb
(1980)
pa p Lpb
(1980)
NIU’AP
(1980)
q5JJi pb
11h a 14 0 2,326 2,441 171 201 7,143 13,315
0 0 638 655 38 60 3,724 2,445
Arkansas 0 0 364 362 126 139 4,982 3,151
Ctfornia 0 0 1,471 1,393 486 1,019 28,130 55,820
C ol.orado 0 0 892 t,135 60 69 5,623 5,299
Connouticiat 4 10 0 0 20 26 9,918 11,952
0sLa zs 1 4 198 198 13 31 2,424 3,310
Dis ict of Co1 ia 0 0 23 56 1 1 246 213
florida 0 0 792 788 102 114 20,750 22,014
.orqia 0 202 764 808 155 169 9,354 10,724
Zda 0 0 414 561 32 39 2,335 943
Linois 19 3 3,594 3,330 349 434 20,440 21,186
Indian a I 0 4,418 5,026 245 284 17,037 14,592
Iowa 10 0 1,457 1,450 113 127 4,971 1,581
0 0 337 335 191 249 4,480 1,873
x.ne acky 28 0 1,763 1,863 66 134 7,290 3,794
Louisiana 0 0 108 110 1,182 1,150 20,906 47,096
4 1 103 94 1 1 4,809 11,551
NarylaM 3 9 738 773 54 137 5,966 6,339
19 0 94 94 29 43 4.349 9.853
Mt i n 9 0 3,802 7,564 249 273 8,017 10,022
nas.ota 0 0 1,040 1, 176 101 93 7,526 3,094
Mississippi 0 50 54 54 79 120 5,699 5,337
2 0 1,384 1,486 78 217 5.405 5,655
Pbntana 0 0 183 182 20 33 5,943 4,623
5eb aaka 0 0 292 291 52 60 3,440 774
Sevada 1 0 137 136 7 8 652 362
bin biaap.hir. 1 1 10 10 1 2 1,481 2,927
New Jati.y 22 0 12 104 63 120 25,033 26,628
New N ico 0 1 7 65 74 101 3,054 1,324
New Yorlc 110 9 2,621 3,182 114 87 24,154 29.940
North CaroLina 0 0 1,378 1,868 86 95 12,599 20,360
orta Dakota 0 0 591 588 2 6 2,775 1,176
29 0 5,834 6,487 321 597 18,269 15,129
t3klaAc.a 0 27 426 532 246 301 4,407 1,946
Or.qoa 0 0 227 260 39 45 6,520 4,654
PennsyL vania 879 349 4,001 4,037 337 376 22,683 27,937
Rbod_s Inland 1 0 3 3 5 S 1,069 1,173
South C 3 .1 . a 3 0 1,819 2,262 92 95 6,120 8,946
South kota 0 0 128 127 5 6 1,735 241
Funnousse 16 0 2,348 2,866 123 185 5,697 3,529
rex .. 1 0 2,295 2,360 2,163 2,336 36,279 32,156
0 0 489 442 51 60 4,606 3,040
V. at 3 0 2 2 2 2 736 503
Virginia 3 3 2,973 3,131 55 74 3,776 12, 181
Wesflinqton 0 0 352 284 64 69 10,888 7,345
West Virginia 3 0 2,110 2,726 59 73 5,043 5,193
Wisconsin 1 0 2,059 2,360 130 141 5,028 4,878
W ainq 0 0 1,670 2.338 48 91 8,399 6,612
1,189 677 59,161 68,643 3,102 10,157 437,190 497,101
Stat. Neergy Data Paport. 1940 throuqk 1981, isrqy Infoaxation M ’i{atration, Washington,
o.c., 3kaa 1903. Nay inc3nd. fuel us.d as faMstuck. S R data vera ad ustsd to exclude
coJw plants.
b N on&j Acid Precipitation A.us..nsnt Proqrss, data representative Cf 1900.
8—2
-------
!UE. It s! PA& S I ?Oft It0bU E C?.L S 0R (P*. 4ZN .aY Dk7A)
Anthracite Coal.
(10 ton.)
8itoain us Co&L
and Liqnita
(10 tons)
NaWaxal Gas
(10 ft )
DiatiUnt. and
Residual. Fuel.
(‘T0 bax .1s)
SECRI
SEDR’
S R 8
Stats (1900)
NAP,,h
(1980) NAPUb
(1980)
MaP1 ph
(1980)
Alahaun 7 21 141 121 29 29 644 1,744
Arizona 0 0 0 48 27 28 280 317
Arkansas 0 0 4 2 31 - 31 549 1 ,028
CaLifornia 0 2 3 3 260 269 10,036 10.870
Colorado 0 0 67 74 67 67 342 294
Connacticut 2 a 1 1 20 23 4,076 7,91
Oe La ,srs 1 2 1 0 3 4 4,899 4,974
0is ict of CoJ. ia 0 0 73 149 13 4 684 1,648
florida 0 0 7 10 30 39 3,402 2,872
Georgia 0 0 15 22 59 59 325 594
Idaho 0 0 76 76 6 7 705 733
I lLinois 10 60 103 48 228 128 4,733 5,208
Indiana 0 2 148 493 70 71 4.416 4,864
S 33 61 81 SI 51 330 1,301
Rensas 0 0 3 4 59 60 360 637
rantucky 15 72 174 117 39 45 2,651 3,428
Louisiana 0 0 3 4 40 40 13,365 18,878
Main. 2 10 3 21 1 1 2,522 2,190
MaryLand 2 3 19 30 30 17 4,024 3.334
Massachusetts 10 49 27 41 53 53 12.344 12,481
IU.chigan 5 29 206 318 190 198 3,348 4,333
I nnota 0 0 96 180 64 69 1,473 2,556
MissisE.ppi 0 0 1 0 21 21 3,429 3,493
Misuouri 1 0 55 187 76 77 1,555 2,355
MOntana 0 0 9 6 14 14 353 487
Nebraska 0 0 13 17 43 43 204 851
Nevada 0 2 2 3 10 10 360 911
N w Nanpabir. 0 0 0 0 4 5 1,416 1,462
New Jersey 12 21 0 0 60 51 20.117 32,044
N Nesico 0 0 30 42 25 24 133 789
New York 36 16 89 421 162 205 39,923 24,195
North Carolina 0 0 116 80 26 28 2,164 3, 431
North Dakota 0 0 96 136 II 9 1,042 1,773
Ohio 13 50 349 925 166 167 2,971 3,576
Olija bc.a 0 0 20 30 47 4$ 345 433
Orsqon 0 0 11 13 15 15 2.668 2.764
433 670 2*0 209 118 110 7,379 5,787
1 3 0 0 7 7 797 1,162
Soneb Carolina 2 16 133 150 23 23 516 196
Suoth Dakota 0 0 11 36 9 8 384 611
Ysonussas 30 144 101 44 59 1,063 1,445
Yarns 0 2 1 3 169 168 8,411 10,595
Ittab 0 0 159 205 —o 2 2,079 2.119
Veruont 2 7 0 0 1 1 867 334
Virginia 2 1 120 • 135 38 42 2,077 5, 142
Washington 0 0 108 4 31 31 1,499 4,275
Wait Virginia i 87 17 22 22 257 388
Wisconsin 0 0 34 192 77 77 1,712 3,192
Wynsinq 0 0 71 ¶33 5 4 455 550
total. 612 1,115 3,203 4,987 2.594 2,564 171,706 194,013
a Stats Ma.rgy Data lepore, ¶960 thrcr.aqb 1961 • Maseqy Znfor atio M— - stration, Washinqton,
D.C.. JUne 1983.
b National. Acid Precipitation Asseausont Proqras, data rsprea.neatiis nd 1980.
C Reprs.snta insil, non—tern value.
3—3
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
226 UNITS
4443 UNITS
119 UNITS
$3957 UNITS
17197 UNITS
26448 UNITS
1674 UNITS
307 UNITS
1673 UNITS
984 UNITS
132 UNITS
63 UNITS
131 UNITS
ANTHRACITE COAL
BITUMINOUS COAL
UGNITE
RESIDUAL OIL
DISTILLATE OIL
NATURAL GAS
PROCESS GAS
COKE
WOOD
UQ. PETROLEUM GAS
BAGASSE
SOLID WASTE
liQUID WASTE
V//////7, i
_ T ]
1—
V ’//z— 1
—______
‘I
1.6 IO
596.1 I0 6 yoe s
56.5
28.8 iO GAL
11.5
40.0 IOIZ 3
7.6 iOI 2 3
8.9 l0 TO 8
51.6 106 5OI B
0.3 i ’ GAL
4.6 $06 T018
5.2 io 6
I.? l0 GAL
Figure B.1
Distribution of Fuel. Consumption Among Five Use Categories
(Preliminary Data)
PERCENT OF
TOTAL UNITS
PERCENT OF
TOTAL FUEL CONSUMPTION
\\\1 -I
____I
I.
rT3
I
iiiri
I”T
I I I I I I
O 20 40 60 80 $00
STATES SELECTED:
I —--1 I I I I
0 20 40 60 80 100
AUX.
1i INDUSTRIAL PROCESS FUEL
t COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
INDUSTRIAL BOILERS
ELECTRIC UTIliTIES
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NUMDER OF POINTS
WITH NON—ZERO EMISSIONS
80919 POINTS II 1SUSPCNDD PARIICULAT(Sf
32383 POINTS CAROON MONOXIDE
39173 POINTS SULFUR DIOXIDE
47399 POINTS NITROGEN OXIDES
66655 POINTS - - fOL ORCANIC COMPOUND{
80 100 0
I
n
I
-a
—S
-flw
I I I I
o 20 40 60
PERCENT
TOTAL EMISSIONS
6
I
5.2 106 yn
9.9 %0
25.0 106
U.S 106
5.0 10 TOIlS
STATES SELECTED:
0
H
I: - ’
N
14 1 - f
0)0)
a
Ti)
I- I
0)
H
0
I I Ij I
20 40 60 80 tOO
PERCENT
INCOMPtETE/INTENSITY 1 -24 TONS
INCOMPLETE/INTENSITY 25-99 TONS
— INCOMPLETE/INTENSITY >99 TONS
I J COMPLETE STACK DATA
Figure C.1 Distribution of Points and Emissions with Complete/Incomplete
Stack Data (Preliminary Data)
-------
Figure C.2 Percent of SO 2 nissions from OO-Ton Emitters with Incomplete Stack
Data in the NAPAP Emissions Inventory (Preliminary Data)
£L CL I (J ‘10 t 2 iO 3C 30
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NUMBER OF POINTS
WITH NON—ZERO EMISSIONS
8og4 POINTS SUSPCNOCO PARTLCULATES [
3383 POINTS CARBON IONOXIDL
39 173 POINTS SULFUR O1OXI0
47399 POINTS NITROGEN OXIDES
66655 POINTS 1OL ORGANIC
I
I
—1
TOTAL EMISSIONS
5.2 106
., io 6 i ws
25.0 106
11.6 I0 1o ls
5.0 106 IONS
I -, -1— —-1 , . I • I I
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 tOO
PERCENT PERCENT
fZ3 INVALID/INTENSITY 1—24 TONS
SJAT S Sfl.LCT(D: 8 INVAUD/INTENSITY 25—99 TONS
1NVALID/INTENS 1TY >99 TONS
tJ VAUD UTU DMA
figure D.1 Distribution of Points and Ei*issions with Valid/Invalid UTh Data
(Preliainary Data)
I
a
to
HH
fr4H
9
-------
Figure D.2
QC Check for Location (Preliminary Data)
Percent of SO 2 I 1eeione from
100-ton I ittera with Incomplete
0Th t)eta in the NAPAP t iuion.
lnve ii tory
rLIcLss ‘so 50- 30
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NUMBER OF PO%NTS
ESTIMATION METHOD CODES s io
5 0U Sd •NICN$•EV 5— 14 EONS
£ s.umct UUENSIEV as—SI IONS
1 sOvact $SISCUSIEV ,$S bus
20.000.000
IS 000.000
I0.000.000
s.000.000
SULFUR DIOXIDE
ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN TONS
. L
U U U I I I
1234567
si*rs S(L(CJ(D:
Figure E.1 Number ot Points and Emissions with Respect to Emission Estimation Method
(Preliminary Data)
0
H
to
to
H
to
H
too
HZ
* 5 1
Ii
2S.000
20 .000-
‘s.000
t;i
-4
0.000’
I $TAC$ IC$I
2 AT(UM. IALAHCt
3 (PSi LIIISSION 1ACIO
4 (HS N(LR $4G IUDGEMINI
S LOCAL (MISSION IACTO*
UNDER CONIRUCIIOI4
1 CEASED OPCIAHON
5.000
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CONTIGUOUS STATES
NITROGEN OXIDES
NUMBER OF POINTS ANNUAL (MISSIONS IN TONS
30.000 ESTIMATION METHOD CODES, 2 , 000000
r I STACK JEST
lO.0 00. 000.
/ 2 MAtERIAL SALANCE
/
/
/ S (PA (MISSION fACtOR
20.000 /
/ 4 ENGINEERING JUDG(U(Nf 8,000.000
/
/
/ S LOCAl. (MISSION EACTOR
• UNDER CONJRUCTION
IN /
6,000,000 -
I
7 CEASED OPERATION
Io.000
4.000.000
2.000.000
$OUICL I$I(MI$fr 1$—IS tONS I
__________ — 50 1 1 1CC INI(N$ttV S$ tONS
- --
1234567 1234567
STATES SELECTED:
Figure E.2 Number of Points and Emissions with Respect to Emission Estimation Method
(Preliminary Data)
-------
POINT SOURCES
48 CON1IGUOLJS STATES
VOL. ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
NUMBER OF POINTS ANNUAL EMISSIONS IN TONS
30 0Oo ESTIMA110N METhOD CODES 2.00000o
I
a uuuw. i*usa
3 £?4 £U(S iO (AC1O*
20000
4 ( IGIMlI l$a JL*U4)*Q43
S LOCAL WISSION rAc,oa
U$WCI COR(ICU0
,.Oo&oo0
‘I _____________
10.000
/ 500.000
I £t& (O OPtUJ1ON
r •l , Il V 1-i l t I j’
Z )Si I rn,L in,
0
1231567
SlAtES 5J1CCTEO:
Figure E.3 Number ot Pointa and aisatoua with Reapect t Emioeion Estimation Method
(Preliminary [ Jata)
-------
APPENDIX F
PR1A SOURCE SEASONAL ALLOCATION FACTORS FOR NAPAP
aLz ?.1
.m $O SWOU&t £&LOCATWI ractcu 90* iam n wiau DA )
Z/A*
C t.qoxy
9 r
Cat.qory
0.scrtpt ion
AUOcatica Factor
LUecatton
01-06
lasLdactiaJ. Foal. Os.
6s.Sinq 1.g s. days for 1960 at tiptoe. ativustat. ut.
07-12
C ./!mt. Poei Ose
SI Iat GCU thtt 3’SSC. 750 titifors for oe .thU with 7 <66.! 19*0 data
Stat.
I 3—20
2adas ia.L 9oa4. 1 e
Osifars
tsuoo a .
21-23
On—sits Laciasration
Os41O
24.26
27-30
31-34
35—36
33
40-43
44
45
44
47
41
OpO X1*i
1.0 ! t.icUas
160! OsI6Lta .
1407 5Ojjfl
ogf—Niqnvay ssLLaa
60! 0tum . .
Of t —5iq y .
act i55 5
I4 jJ .tacy 1.70 ’s
Ottil 70’ s
tyo’a
coaL ‘
Osig *
*iq y usa of q.uoU ns by 6005h$ . 1910 LqIw y Statistics)
5*0557 Us. OS qas.U.a. by 60nths—I9S0 csiqm..y stattatica)
aiqhvsy usa of gsso14,a. b7 oeft5*a—1960 {Iiqfl55y St&ttitics)
*stionai aisrips Cw—20. sp— s, SO—3d, 4.25) •
?ri55t . SM ccsrtiai us. at p.ciaj, f iis..1940 (*iqbs.y Statistics)
IfottQ aesrips (5—20, SP—2 5, 50—30 . A—25)
Osifora
OsitOla
Os it 060
ci . t toeraps (5.22. 11.23, 10—26, 4.24)
Osifocs
O s <
at.
Stats
Seats
s. .l_ _._t
ttos aJ.
!I p4. . t
50
SI
53
53
OiL ‘1oe 5Sl.*
lasidnal. Oi3. Ve .ss4J
s*1js. ¶IsuSsJ.i
SoiruOt Pur asM
Osiloru
Os sru —
OsifOll 4t 1ip 6065146 t*tc)t hats 7 >41’ !
Osiforu
stats
54
55
Ossolin. I4SdtsCM
dnpsvsd so a
5*0 7 usa of qausUas by oen —t9ao
5—0% is 4t54ttt susacoal. 0.04 Loan sctpit*tic d&t*
Stat s
Star.
54
Ospa60d Air Strip
5.0% in 60Swbsit , s .ss.n.J. 0.01 in aLpttation 4ata
State
51
Con.t roatl.Ofl
tfotions.t as.raq. 15—20w 11—25. 50—30. — )
5$
r iM
Osif.r .
Itational.
59
Land TiLLing
Ositoru
60
?tuset SLid Firsu
Aa1 5/5/50/40 (5 sp)
61
ItsnsqM uinq
As. ‘0/70/0/20 (* )i4P)
62
53
s.rn.inq
(5-0, 51.40. 50-0 A—SO) oee.pt itatsu (0 u 19
(14—0, 51—50. 55-0. A-SO)
Iiaticns.L
64
Stauc aL Ftroe
Os4tOr s
anaL
(1071 1 4 ‘onifaru’ aUorutidn factat sums.. a cocstsnt ( .s,sL at suiaaio tzqP .. thu ?*as. Thu is sis.*tiaL1
a t.fati Lt ..Ucontios SOT cat.qsti o e to 4Ii 4.5 L aa. la.4 tft 5t iJ VOTiSSLOOS s.u .14 be ainjaaL.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Picase reed IMW’Ac#ous on the revene t)efore conTp!ennR)
1, REPORT NO.
EPA— 800/7— 84—091 12.
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSIOt NO.
4. rirLe AND sueriri. Sta .tu Report on the Deveio m iiUoU
the NAPAP EmiSsion b ventory for the 1980 Base Year
and Summary of Prelim4nary Data
5. REPORT OATE
December 1984
0RM 1 ORGANIZATION CODE
7. A(JTHOR($
Douglas A. Toothman. John C. Yates. and
Edward J. Sabo
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
June 1984/9258.00 /91B, 92-N
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Engineering- Science
10521 Rosehaven Street
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
10. PRCaORAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-3509, Tasks 40,
57, and 58
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 2’7711
13. TYPE OF R P
Status; 118 R 1 A 78 P MIOO COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/60 0/13
1 5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES EPA project officers are: Charles 0. Mann (OAQPS), Mail Drop
14, 919/541-5694) and J. David Mobley (IERL, Mail Drop 61. 919/541-2612).
fL ABSTRACT The report documents the compilation of a 1980 emissions inventory for use
in the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). The current inven-
tory (Version 3.0) contains point source data for over 50, 000 plants (with over 201, -
000 emission points) and area source data for the 3,089 counties iii the 48 contiguous
states and the District of Columbia. Emissions of S02, NOx, VOC, CO. and parti-
culates are included in the inventory, but the report focuses on S02, NOx, and VOC
which are of primary interest for acid deposition research. NAPAP Version 3.0
emissions of S02 , NOx, and VOC are 27. 1, 23. 7, arid 23.3 million tons per year,
respectively. Summaries of emissions by source category, geographic region, state,
fuel type, season, and stack height range are given, along with emission density
maps and fuel use summaries. Emissions in the NAPAP data base are in reasonable
agreement with Work Group 3B and EPA/OAQPS emissions trends estimates. NAPAI
fuel use data show reasonable agreement with fuel values in DoE’ a State Energy Data
Report. Version 3.0 of NAPAP represents a detailed inventory of emissions on a
national scale; however, it should be noted that additional improvements are planned.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
OESCRIPTORS
b.IOENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
C. COSATI Field/Group
Pollution Nitrogen Oxides
Acidity Volatility
Precipitation (Meteorology)
Assessments Organic Compounds
Inventories
Sulfur Dioxide
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Acid Precipitation
NAPAP
Volatile Organic Corn-
pounds
13B
07D 20M
04B
14B 07C
l5E
07B
13, OISTRI8UTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThLT Repo,’,
Tjnclass If led
21. NO. OF PAGES
91
20..SECURITYCLASS(Thispage) —
Unclassified
. RICE
EPA Form 2220.1 ( 5.13)
F-2
------- |