-------
(piJTi " (Hi)T1xi (3-13)
where:
H^ - Henry's Law Constant at Ti in consistent units
(atm/mole fraction); and
Xj_ - Mole fraction of each compound in the liquid mixture.
Note: If neither Racult's Law nor Henry's Law is considered
to be valid for the compound mixture being considered, a more
complex procedure, beyond the scope of this document, must be
used. Commercial computer programs are available to simplify the
task of calculating vapor-liquid equilibria for nonideal
mixtures.
The calculation of Pi is repeated at the final temperature
conditions, T2; an(* c^e final partial pressure of the gas in the
vessel is calculated:
Pa2 - 760 - E (Pj.)T2 (3-145
By application of the Ideal Gas Law, the moles of gas displaced
is represented by:
A»| - y[ (—-) - (—)1 (3-15)
Rl T! T2
where:
A»J - number of Ib-moles of gas displaced;
V - volume of free space in the vessel ft3;
R - Gas Law constant, 998.9 mmHg ft3/lb-moles °K;
Pa1 - initial gas pressure in the vessel, mmHg;
Pa2 - final gas pressure, mmHg;
T^ - initial temperature of vessel K; and
T2 - final temperature of vessel, K.
The concentration of the VOC in the gas displaced at the
beginning of the event is calculated assuming equilibrium at the
initial vessel temperature. The final concentration of the VOC
3-13
-------
in the final amount of air displaced is calculated assuming
equilibrium at the final vessel temperature. The VOC
concentration in the displaced gas may be approximated by
assuming it is equal to the average of the initial and final
values. The number of moles of VOC displaced is equal to the
moles of gas displaced times the average VOC mole fraction, as
follows:
760-{P.)_
1 T
''a —5 x Af, (3.16)
where:
i?g - Ib-moles of VOC vapor displaced from the vessel being
heated up.
The weight of VOC vented can be calculated by multiplying the
number of moles by the molecular weight. The reader should note
that, at the boiling point of the VOC, this equation goes to
infinity. In a physical sense, the vessel vapor space is filled
entirely with VOC during boiling? the rate of release of VOC is
therefore equal to the total flow of VOC out of the kettle.
Therefore, this equation is not valid at the boiling point of the
VOC. An example of a vessel heatup calculation is presented in
Appendix C.
3.1.5 Gas Evolution.
When a gas is generated as a result of a chemical reaction,
emissions may be calculated by assuming that the gas is saturated
with any VOCs that are in contact with it at the exit
temperature. Emission calculations are analogous to the filled
vessel purging calculations and are calculated using the
following formula to first calculate the rate of gas displaced:
(3-17)
3-14
-------
when V]_ - initial volumetric rate of gas evolution
PT * vessel pressure
E (I^x^) - sum of the products of the vapor pressure and the mole
fraction of each VOC at the exit temperature.
Once V2 is known, it can be inputted into Equation 3-4 to
calculate the emission rate. An example calculation of gas VOC
emissions from gas evolution is presented in Appendix C.
3.1.6 Sparging
Sparging is the subsurface introduction of a gas (typically •
nitrogen or other inert gas) intended to remove by selective
volatilization (stripping) a more volatile minor component from a
liquid mixture of predominantly less volatile material. Common
applications of sparging are the removal of trace quantities of
water or volatile organic solvent from a low volatility (high
boiling point) resin. The removal of low concentrations of
organic solvents from wastewater also may be achieved using air
sparging.
Sparging is a semibatch operation. The sparge tank is
filled or discharged on a batch basis, while the gas is fed
continuously at a steady flow rate for the duration of the sparge
cycle. The subsurface sparger is designed to develop a mass of
small diameter bubbles. The tank may be agitated as well in
order to produce fine bubbles and increase the bubble residence
time. These design features are intended to increase contact
efficiency.
Utilizing fundamental chemical engineering principles and
empirical correlations published in the literature it is possible
to calculate the mass transfer coefficients encountered in
sparging applications. The transfer rate of the component being
stripped out is a function of temperature, composition, liquid
diffusivity, gas rate and agitator power (which determine bubble
-size), and tank geometry (which, along with agitation power,
determines residence time).
For the calculation of equilibrium concentration of VOC in
the exiting sparge gas the earlier discussion of Raoult's Law and
3-15
-------
Henry's Law applies. For simple sparging (low viscosity fluids;
no solids) vapor concentration may approach 100 percent of the
equilibrium value calculated. For complex sparging, an
empirically determined lower value may need to be used.
Unlike continuous flow vapor-liquid separation processes,
with batchwise sparging it is not possible to write a series of
simple analytical equations which define the outlet gas
concentration as a function of inlet concentration and
thermodynamic properties of the compounds. This is because the
liquid flow rate is zero and the composition changes with time.
The problem of estimating the gas composition (hence, VOC
emission rate) at any time during the sparge cycle, or of
determining the amount of sparge gas and sparge time required to
achieve a certain concentration reduction, can, however, be
solved using simple numerical integration. One chooses a small
time increment, one minute, for example, over which to calculate
the gas flow and composition, making the simplifying assumption
that the liquid composition does not change. From the inlet gas
concentration (most likely zero) and the saturated exit gas
concentration, the amount of volatile removed from the bulk
liquid can be calculated, and a new estimate made for the liquid
composition. The calculation of the vapor composition for the
next time "slice" will be made based on this new liquid
composition value. The cumulative quantity of volatile removed
is used for subsequent estimates of the liquid composition.
A graphical representation of the vapor or liquid
composition as a function of sparge time has a characteristic
hyperbolic shape where the composition is asymptotic to zero.
The initial composition is high, as is the stripping rate because
the mass transfer is a function of the composition driving force.
The final composition is low, but a long stripping time is
required to achieve a small decrease in composition because the
driving force is also very low. An example sparging
volatilization calculation is presented in Appendix C.
3-16
-------
3,1.7 Batch Pressure Filtration
Pressure filtration of nonaqueous, volatile, flammable, or
hazardous slurries is typically conducted in a closed vessel.
Generally, VOC's are not emitted during the filtration step, as
there is no venting from the process vessel. However, during the
gas blowing (cake-drying) step of the cycle, or during pressure
release prior to cake discharge, venting occurs and there is
potential for VOC emission.
The gas blowing step is intended to accomplish some
preliminary cake drying by evaporating some of the liquid
filtrate present in the filter cake. This operation is roughly
equivalent to the constant-drying-rate period of operation of a
dryer except that heated gas is not used (except in the case of
some special purpose equipment where heated gas is, in fact,
used). The blowing gas follows the same flow path as the
filtrate, so that it could be vented through the receiving tank.
3.1.7.1 Filter Cake Purging. The emission rate in the
vented purge/blowing gas can be calculated if the cake conditions
at the start and end of this portion of the cycle are known. The
filtrate will be evaporated at approximately a constant rate.
Assuming that the filtrate is 100 percent VOC, the emissions rate
is simply:
W(X.-X.)
ER . L_JL- (3-18)
where:
w - the dry weight of a batch of filter cake;
Xj - the weight fraction of filtrate at the start of the
gas-blowing step?
Xf - the weight fraction of filtrate at the end of the gas-
blowing step;
t - elapsed time of gas blowing; and
ER - emission rate in weight per unit time.
However, one key piece of data required for the above
calculations, namely the filtrate content of the cake before the
3-17
-------
gas blowing, is not usually available. Therefore, this
methodology is of only limited utility.
Since the blowing gas causes the VOC's in the filtrate to
evaporate, the gas stream is partially saturated with vapor, and
approaches vapor-liquid equilibrium as a limit. An assumption of
percent saturation attained enables the calculation of emission
rate.
An example calculation of estimating emissions from filter cake
blowing is provided in Appendix C.
3.1.7.2 Depressurizati$n. Prior to opening a batch
pressure filter for solids discharges, the pressure must be
relieved. In the case of a filter design utilizing a closed
vessel, there is some compressed gas in the vapor space which
will have some degree of vapor saturation of VOC from the
filtrate. Upon depressurization, a fraction of the noncon-
densible gas along with the VOC vapor will be vented. The
estimation of the emission rate from a depressurization event is
a straightforward application of the Ideal Gas Law if certain
simplifying assumptions are made.
If the vessel has been under pressure for some time during
the filter cycle, and no additional noncondensable gas has been
added, then it is reasonable to assume that the gas is saturated
with the VOC vapor at the vessel temperature. To simplify the
calculations, one assumes that the pressure decreases linearly
with time once depressurization has begun, and that the
composition of the gas/vapor mixture is always saturated with VOC
vapor through the end of the depressurization. The estimation of
the emission rate proceeds according to the following steps:
1. Calculate the mole fraction of each VOC vapor species
initially present in the vessel at the end of the
depressurization.
x4 p,
(3-19)
3-18
-------
where :
Pi - vapor pressure of each VQC component I;
P^ m initial pressure of the process vessel in units
consistent with P^ calculations; and
y. - mole fraction of component i initially in the vapor.
2. The moles of VOC initially in the vessel are then
calculated using the ideal gas law as follows:
(V) (P )
L. (3-205
where :
Yvoc - mole fraction of VOC (the sum of the individual
VOC fractions, IYi)
V » free volume in the vessel being depressurized
P1 - Initial vessel pressure
R - Gas constant
T - Vessel temperature, absolute units
3. The moles of noncondensable gas present initially in the
vessel are calculated as follows:
where:
V - free volume in the vessel being depressurized;
Pncx - initial partial pressure of the noncondensible gas,
R » gas law constant, K; and
T - temperature, absolute units.
At the beginning of the depressurization, there are more
moles of noncondensable gas in the vessel relative to the moles
-of VOC in the vessel than at the end of depressurization. At the
beginning of the depressurization, there are:
moles of VOC to noncondensables
3-19
-------
5. At the end of depressurization, there are
"voc
moles of VOC to noncondensables
n2
where:
no * _____ (3-22)
RT
where:
V - Free volume in the vessel being depressurized;
PNC - Final partial pressure of the noncondensible gas,
P- - n x. P . •
*2 *• Ai *i'
R - Gas law constant, and;
T « temperature, absolute.
6. The moles of VOC for the duration of the depressurization
may be calculated by taking an approximation of the average ratio
of moles by VOC to moles of noncondensible and multiplying by the
total moles of noncondensibles released during the
depressurization, or:
nvoc nvoc
2
(3-23)
[n2 - nj.1 * Nvoc
where: NVOC « moles of VOC emitted
7. The moles of VOC emitted can be converted to a mass rate
using the following equation:
NVOC * MWVOC
Ervoc (3-24)
where:
Ervoc - emission rate of the VOC
MWVOC - molecular weight of the VOC
t - time of the depressurization
3-20
-------
An example calculation of emissions from vessel depressurization
is provided in Appendix C.
3.1.8 gmj-saiogs from Vacuum Gene rat j qg ffgijipment
Steam ejectors and vacuum pumps are used to pull vacuums on
vessels and can be sources of VOC and air toxic emissions. Both
come in contact with a stream of gas that potentially contains
pollutants. A steam ejector consists essentially of a steam
nozzle that produces a high-velocity jet across a suction chamber
connected to the vessel being evacuated. The gas from the vessel
is entrained into the motive steam as it passes across the
suction chamber. Both gas and steam are usually routed to a
condenser.
Conventional (mechanical-type) vacuum pumps use a high
boiling point oil to lubricate the moving parts. The VOC's which
*
are present in the gas on the suction side may be partially
condensed in the elevated pressure inside the vacuum pump. This
reduces the amount of VOC emitted in the gas discharge from the
pump, but causes contamination (reduced lubricity) of the pump
oil. For this reason, if a significant amount of VOC is expected
in the gas being evacuated, a liquid ring vacuum pump may be
selected.
In a liquid ring vacuum pump, the vacuum is created by the
rotating motion of a slug of seal fluid inside the pump casing.
The seal fluid is in intimate contact with the gas and VOC being
evacuated. A portion of the seal fluid is ejected with the pump
discharge, so a system for seal fluid recycle and makeup is
required.
Because the seal fluid is in contact with the gas/voc
mixture, mass and heat transfer can occur inside the pump. The
emissions from a liquid ring vacuum pump are, therefore, a
function of the seal fluid temperature and composition, as well
as the inlet gas composition. For purposes of calculation one
may assume that the exiting gas is in equilibrium with the seal
fluid. The seal fluid must be chosen to be compatible with the
gas/VOC being evacuated. In some cases, the seal fluid itself is
a VOC and equilibrium with the exiting gas may result in an
3-21
-------
increase in VOC level from that in the suction side. In other
cases, the seal fluid can act to reduce the VOC level of the gas
stream by absorbing (or condensing, in the case of a cooled seal
fluid system) some of the VOC in the gas being evacuated.
3.1.8.1 Emission Estimation. Emissions from vacuum systems
originate from two distinct sources: 1) the first is the gas at
the vacuum system discharge, 2} the second is the seal fluid or
motive steam. Calculating emissions from the gaseous discharge
of systems that serve to induce vacuums on equipment involves the
estimztion of the amount of air that leaks into the equipment
because of the pressure differential between the inside and
outside of the vessel. Once this air leakage rate is known, the
rate of VOC emissions may be calculated by knowing the vacuum
system discharge outlet temperature and pressure.
The air leakage rate for the equipment may be estimated from
the following equations, which correspond to the leakage created
by metal porosity and cracks and leakage resulting from seals and
components in a system for various vacuum pressure ranges;
1. Leakage from mentalj>orosity and cracks
(For l£P<.10 mmHg} W - 0.026 pO-34y0.60 (3-25)
(For lOsP^lOO mmHg} W - 0.032 p0.26v0.60D (3-26)
(For 100
-------
$ - specific leakage rate for components, Ib/hr/in
(presented in Table A-5 of Appendix A).
3. The total air leakage rate, in Ib/hr» is merely the sum
of the two components W and w.
La - W+w (3-31)
Once the air leakage rate is known, the VOC emission rate,
in Ib/hr, may be calculated using the following equation from the
1978 Pharmaceuticals CTG:4
Se - MWs |f (!W8tem 5- - 15 (3-32)
system " i
where:
Se - rate of VOC emission, in Ib/hr;
psystem * absolute pressure of receiving vessel or ejector
outlet conditions, if there is no receiver;
PA - vapor pressure of the VOC at the receiver
temperature, in mmHg;
La - total air leak rate in the system, Ib/hr; and
29 - molecular weight of air, Ib/lbmole.
An example calculation is provided in Appendix C.
Calculating emissions from seal fluid or motive steam is
analogous to the calculations of VOC emissions from other sources
of wastewater, which is discussed below.
3.2 EVAPORATIVE LOSSES FROM WASTEWATER
Evaporative losses from wastewater that is contaminated with
VOC's has been examined in detail, but currently is not within
the scope of this document. Several publications are available
to aid the readers in calculating emissions from wastewater
treatment systems which include surface impoundments, lagoons,
and basins.5'6'7
3.3 STORAGE TANK EMISSIONS
In general, emissions of VOC's from storage tank working and
breathing losses appear to be no different for continuous
3-23
-------
processes than they are for batch processes. Both types of
losses usually are calculated using EPA-derived storage tank loss
equations for three types of storage tanks: fixed roof, external
floating roof, and internal floating roof. Fixed roof and
horizontal pressure tanks appear to be the most common storage
vessels used in batch processing. Estimation equations for these
tank types and a detailed explanation of their use, may be found
in an EPA reference.8
3.4 EQUIPMENT LEAKS '.
The calculation of emissions of VOC's from leaking process
line components such as valves, pump seals, flanges, and sampling
connections is no different for continuous processes than it is
for batch processes. Emissions tend to be less because the
amount of time that components are actually in VOC service is
less for batch processes than it is for continuous processes.
In the event that no other specific data is available
equipment leak emissions may be estimated using the equipment
leak factors derived for the Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI). These factors are readily
available, and are included in Appendix A in Table A-6.9 It is
also possible to develop unit-specific emission estimates
according to an accepted EPA protocol. The methodology for
developing a specific emission estimate for leaking components is
contained in another reference.10
3.6 REFERENCES
1. McCabe, W., and J. Smith. Unit Operations of Chemical
Engineering, Third Edition. 1976.
2. Ryan, J. L., and S. Croll. Selecting Vacuum Systems.
Chemical Engineering. 88:78. December 14, 1981.
3. Blakely, P. and G. Orlando. Using Inert Gases for Purging,
Blanketing, and Transfer. Chemical Engineering. 91:97-102.
May 28, 1984.
4. EPA-450/2-78-029. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions
from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products.
December 1978.
3-24
-------
5. EPA-450/3-87-026. Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities (TSDF) Air Emission Models.
6. Wastewater and Wastes Enabling Document. Version l.o, July
1992.
7. Industrial Wastewater Volatile Organic Compound Emissions -
Background Information for BACT/LAER Determinations.
8. AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors,
Chapter 12.
9. EPA-453/R-93-026, Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission
Estimates. June 1993.
10. EPA-450/3-88-010, Protocols for Generating Unit-Specific
Emission Estimates for Equipment Leaks of VOC and VHAP.
October 1988.
3-25
-------
4.0 CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
This chapter provides information on the types of emission •
control technologies currently available and in use on typical
batch processes. The discussion is structured so that a general
description of the theory and principles behind the effectiveness
of various common control devices is presented first. Second,
information is provided on the suitability of the various
technologies for controlling VOC's from different batch unit
operations, followed by a section discussing specific
applications. Appendix D contains cost calculations and
assumptions made in evaluating costs of thermal incineration and
refrigeration systems for batch processing emissions.
Because the emission streams produced by batch unit
operations are often of finite duration and the properties of
these streams, such as flow rate, VOC content, temperature, and
pressure, often change during the duration of the emission event,
the system chosen for emission control ideally should be capable
of handling both peak flow and nonpeak situations effectively.
To that end, this chapter also addresses the relative importance
of sizing equipment properly. The following control technologies
are discussed: (1) condensers, (2) scrubbers, (3) carbon
adsorbers, (4) thermal incinerators, (5) vapor containment
systems such as vapor return lines, i.e., "vent-back" lines, and
(6) operational practices that reduce emissions, such as reduced
nitrogen use for blowing lines, elimination of transfer steps in
product or intermediate handling, and elimination of vessel
opening and purging steps.
4-1
-------
4.1 CONDENSERS
Condensers can generally be classified as surface noncontact
and barometric (direct-contact condensers). Surface condensers
are usually shell-and-tube heat exchangers, in which the cooling
fluid flows in tubes and the gas condenses on the outside of the
tubes. Direct-contact condensers are those which allow for
intimate contact between the cooling fluid and the fas, usually
in a spray or packed tower. Although direct-contact condensers
may also be part of a solvent recovery system, an extra
separation step is usually involved in separating what was the
cooling liquid from the newly formed condensate. An exception to
this situation is the direct-contact condenser, which uses
cooling fluid identical to the desired condensate; in this case,
no separation is necessary.
In principle, condensers work by lowering the temperature of
the gas stream containing condensables to a temperature at which
the desired condensate's vapor pressure is lower than its
entering partial pressure. Typical uses for condensers in batch
processing are on reactors and vacuum-operated devices, such as
distillation columns and dryers. Note that condensers servicing
reactors and distillation columns often function in refluxing
material. This refluxing is an integral part of the process, and
therefore these condensers are often not considered to be
emission control devices. Such applications often use secondary
condensers, which operate at still lower temperatures and
function primarily as control devices.
4.1.1 Design
The control efficiency attained by a condenser is a function
of the outlet gas temperature. A typical exhaust gas from a
batch reactor contains a large amount of noncondensable material,
such as air or nitrogen, as well as some fraction of volatile
material. Before this volatile material can condense, the entire
contents of the gas stream must be cooled to the saturation point
of the condensable material. Heat transferred from the gas
stream during this stage is called sensible heat. Cooling the
4-2
-------
gas stream further after complete (100 percent) saturation is
reached causes condensation of the volatile material. Heat
removed from condensation is called latent heat. Both kinds of
heat (which in refrigeration terminology usually are summed and
reported as tons [each ton is 12,000 Itu/hr]) must be considered
in the design of a condenser. Q, the heat requirement may be
calculated by approximating the sensible and latent heat change
when a gas stream containing condensable material is cooled:
* *
Q - mCpAT + mAhv (4-1)
where:
Q « hea't requirement;
m « mass flow rate of material;
C * heat capacity of material cooled;
AT - temperature difference between inlet material
temperature and condensate temperature; and
hv » the latent heat associated with a phase change.
For a surface condenser, the heat transfer area requirement,
A, may be approximated using the following equation:
(4-2)
uaTu,
where:
A - heat transfer surface area;
Q - heat requirement;
U - overall heat transfer coefficient, which is based on
the inside and outside heat transfer, and;
ATjj,! - log mean difference in temperature between the cooling
fluid and the exhaust gas at each end of the shell and
tube exchanger.
Based on the above discussion, it is apparent that the
amount of material that can be condensed from a gas is limited
only by the following factors: (1) the inlet emission stream
4-3
-------
properties, including heat capacity and temperature, and (2) the
heat transfer characteristics of the condenser, including surface
area. By controlling these factors, it follows that nearly any
amount of cooling can be imparted onto a gas stream.
In practice, however, the design of condensers and the
amount of cooling that realistically occurs is based more on
economics. Cooling fluid, for example, can range from water at
ambient temperature to brine, which can be cooled to below the
freezing point of pure water, to a low-temperature refrigerant. '
The colder the cooling liquid required, the more expensive the
system becomes. In some applications, the condensing system is
staged, so that certain condensables that may be present in the
stream, i.e., water, will be condensed out at a higher
temperature. The remainder of the gas can then be cooled further
to condense out lower-boiling-point materials without the problem
of ice formation and subsequent fouling of the heat-transfer
surface. Note that the more elaborate a condensing system
becomes, the higher the cost of operating that system.
It has generally been accepted that condensers are most
effective when applied to gases that contain high percentages of
condensables. This is because a large amount of sensible heat
must be removed from a gas stream containing mostly
noncondensable material in order for the stream temperature to
decrease to the saturation temperature of the condensable.
.Obviously, the farther from saturation a gas stream is, the more
sensible heat must be removed.
Verification of the expected control efficiency of a
condenser is, especially for single-component systems, easier
than the verification of other control technology efficiencies,
such as carbon adsorption, gas absorption, incineration, etc., as
these technologies require that the outlet gas pollutant
concentrations be measured. To verify condenser efficiency, the
outlet gas temperature is the only value that must be known in
addition to the inlet conditions (including flowrate of
noncondensables). By assuming that the vapor phase of the
4-4
-------
material is in equilibrium with the liquid at condenser outlet
temperature, the percent by volume VOC discharged from the
condenser may be calculated by dividing its partial pressure by
the total pressure. In any case, if condenser efficiency cannot
be calculated because the inlet gas conditions are not known, it
is at least always possible to calculate the maximum VOC
equilibrium concentration of the exit gas at outlet condenser
conditions.
Another consideration that must be made when contemplating
the use of a condenser for a particular application is whether
there is an appreciable presence of water vapor in the stream.
There are two reasons for concern in this situation. The first,
which was touched on in the earlier discussion, is that a surface
condenser cannot effectively function below the freezing point of
the water, as ice will form and create an insulatory surface on
the heat transfer surface, keeping the surface temperature above
32°F. The other consideration, which is more subtle but just as
important to the overall effectiveness of the device, is whether
the water will combine with the condensable material to form a
low-boiling-point azeotrope. In such a situation, the saturation
temperature of the azeotrope is lower than the condensing
temperature of either pure compound, and the system must be
designed accordingly.
4.1.2 Specific Systems and Applications
4.1.2.1 Reactor Vent Condensers. Several different types
of condenser systems exist in batch processing applications.
Probably the most common application is the use of the simple
shell-and-tube heat exchanger to control reactor vents. As was
noted in Chapter 2, emissions of VOC's occur from virtually all
reactor processing and transfer steps, including charging,
reaction, discharging, and cleaning. In many cases, these
operations occur while a stream of noncondensable or inert gas is
being used as a purge inside the kettle to keep the vapor phase
from reaching explosive limits. This purge also takes away from
the effectiveness of the condenser as a control device, since the
4-5
-------
vapor fraction of condensable material decreases with the
addition of more noncondensable gas.
Condensers appear to be the most common control devices
cited for reactors. It may be that these devices are relatively
inexpensive and easy to use, since they are easily manifolded for
the use of alternate cooling fluids that may be required for the
diverse gas streams resulting from campaigned equipment.
4.1.2.2 Distillation Columns (Primary and Secondary
Condensers). Shell-and-tube condensers usually are employed as
refluxing devices on batch distillation units. In some cases, a
secondary condenser is used to control the exhaust gas from the
outlet of the reflux condenser. The EPA's OAQPS Guideline Series
for the Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products, December 1978, establishes
the following guideline for surface condenser outlet gas
temperatures on vents from reactors, distillation operations,
crystallizers, centrifuges, and vacuum dryers that emit 6.8 kg/d
(15 Ib/d) or more of VOC:
-25°C when condensing VOC of vapor pressure greater than
5.8 psi (3Gu minHyI
-15°C when condensing VOC of vapor pressure greater than
2.9 psi (150 mmHg)
0°C when condensing VOC of vapor pressure greater than
1.5 psi (77.5 nunHg)
10°C when condensing VOC of vapor pressure greater than
1.0 psi (52 mmHg)
25°C when condensing VOC of vapor pressure greater than
0.5 psi (26 mmHg)
35°Ca when condensing VOC of vapor pressure between 0 and
0.5 psi (0 to 25 nmHg)
aThis requirement for material with a vapor pressure between 0
and 0.5 psi at 20°C was not part of the 1978 CTG but has been
adopted by some States.
4-6
-------
Based on a review of these guidelines, it becomes apparent that
if the streams controlled are not completely saturated with
VOC's, the guidelines offer very little control. The discussion
below provides some basis for these conclusions.
Listed below are VOC's that typically are found in process
vessels such as reactors, dryers, and distillation operations and
their corresponding vapor pressures at 20°C. The corresponding
condenser outlet temperature guidelines as established by the
Pharmaceutical CTG are also listed.
Methanol (MeOH)
Acetone
Toluene
VP in mmHg
at 20°C
95
182
22
Required
condenser
outlet,
temp. , °C
0
-15
35
VP at
outlet,
mmHg
31
30
22a
Percent
volume at
outlet
4
4
3
aBecause the required outlet temperature is higher than the inlet
temperature, no cooling occurs and the stream remains at inlet
conditions.
If the streams entering the condenser are at high
temperatures, then the volume percent of VOC's entering can be
high, maybe close to 100 percent vapor. For these situations,
the condensers prove to be very effective. When a reflux
condenser is used, the condenser isn't considered a control
device, but an integral part of the process. The material being
distilled off cannot be recovered without the cooling that is
imparted on the gas stream from the condenser. If there are no
noncondensables present (i.e., the steam is made up of
100 percent condensable vapors), there are essentially no
emissions at the condenser outlet as long as the condenser is
able to cool the stream below its boiling point temperature.
Therefore, reflux conditions are not considered uncontrolled
4-7
-------
emission events. Atmospheric vent streams created by non-steady-
state distillation operations, however, are.
During periods of unsteady-state operation, such as startup
of an atmospheric distillation operation, there will be
noncondensables present in the gas stream routed to the
condenser. If distillation occurs under vacuum, then some amount
of noncondensables will be present. This amount can be estimated
by knowing or calculating the leak rate into the system (see
Chapter 3 calculations).
,\ secondary condenser may be used to control the above-
described emission events. For example, the volume percentage of
a saturated methanol stream exiting a condenser is 95/760; or
12.5 percent by volume at 20°C. Dropping the temperature of this
stream to 0°C and thereby reducing the outlet volume percentage
to 4 percent yields a control of approximately 70 percent.
4.1.2.3 Dryers
4.1.2.3.1 Vacuum drvers. Batch dryer exhaust streams,
especially vacuum dryer exhaust streams, have been reported to be
controlled by condensers installed prior to the vacuum-generating
devices (i.e., vacuum pumps, steam ejectors). The condensation
of VOC prior to the vacuum-generating device also reduces the VOC
wastewater load since the VOC is removed prior to the point at
which the stream is contacted with the seal water or steam.
The emission stream parameters generally accompanying vacuum
dryers include high concentrations and low flowrates. Over time
the concentration of the emission stream drops off, while the
flowrate usually remains constant.
To illustrate this situation, Figures 4-1 and 4-2 present
typical drying rate curves for batch dryers. Figure 4-1
illustrates the cycle time dependency of the actual solvent
content of the material drying. Figure 4-2 shows how the
emission stream solvent content varies with time.
The curves illustrate that the majority of the solvent is
removed from the material during the early stages of the batch
drying cycle. The corresponding emission rate during these
4-8
-------
% OF TOTAL
SOLVENT
CONTAINED
IN FILTER-
CAKE
TIME
Figure 4-1. Filter cake drying curve.
EMISSION
STREAM
EXHAUST
SOLVENT %
PORTION OF THE DRYING CYCLE
THAT IS CONTROLLED
TIME
Figure 4-2. Dryer emission stream solvent content,
4-9
-------
stages is also considerably higher. If a condenser is the device
chosen for VOC control, it must be sized so that it can handle
the peak VOC flow at the beginning of the cycle. Also note that
the point marked VSAT in Figure 4-2 is the point in the cycle
where the condenser is no longer effective. VSAT is the percent
by volume of solvent in the gas stream corresponding to
saturation at the condenser outlet temperature.
4.1.2.3.2 Convective dryers. The use of simple condensers
for achieving high degrees of VOC control from convective dryers
is also infeasible because the exhaust gas stream will have a
higher volume percentage of noncondensable gas.
4.1.2.4 Crystallizers. Condensers may be used to control
VOC emissions from crystallizers, especially batch vacuum
crystallizers. Such crystallizers employ both surface condensers
and barometric (direct-contact) condensers. Usually, a large
amount of vacuum is necessary to produce crystals at low
temperature. A typical batch vacuum crystallizer vacuum-
generating system is essentially composed of a three-stage steam
ejector system with an intercondenser (usually a barometric water
condenser) after the first stage. Barometric condensers are used
because they are inexpensive from an operating cost standpoint.
However, if the material coming off the crystallizer will become
a concern from the wastewater standpoint, the use of a surface
condenser 'should be considered.
4.1.2.5 Refrigeration Systems for Manifolded Sources.
Shell-and-tube condensers may be used to control VOC emissions
from several combined events. Such applications are usually for
solvent-recovery purposes, since it is often desirable to recover
material that would otherwise be emitted as a VOC. This is
especially true for industries such as the specialty chemicals
and the pharmaceutical industries that require expensive
feedstocks and solvents.
Vapor recovery systems are often designed so that the
recovered material cost offsets the energy and capital costs of
the systems themselves. In many cases, however, the recouped
4-10
-------
recovered material cost is insignificant compared to the cost of
purchasing and operating the recovery systems. In such a case,
the decision to install a solvent recovery system as opposed to
another type of system is based on other factors, such as control
effectiveness and concerns about waste handling and disposal.
While refrigeration systems are not often used solely to
control single vapor displacement events such as reactor charging
and extractor (mixer-settler) charging, they are often feasible
for controlling collected displaced vapors from a number of
sources.
Some facilities that have a large number of storage tanks,
for example, are known to use staged refrigeration systems that
employ pre-cooler sections. Often, the precooler operates at a
temperature just above the freezing point of water. This
condenser (usually an indirect shell-and-tube heat exchanger)
rids the vapor stream of as much water as possible that would
otherwise collect on heat transfer surfaces as ice and lower the
heat transfer potential of colder surfaces. After the vapor
passes through the initial indirect condenser (pre-cooler), it
enters the main condenser section, which can cool the gas stream
to very low temperatures, on the order of -100° to -160°F.
Low-temperature refrigeration' systems such as the one
described above are used to control vapor displacement emissions
from multiple sources such as working losses from a tank farm.
Often, the mixtures are separated by distillation although only
one or two pure components may be recovered for reuse.
Perhaps the most important issue to consider when evaluating
the need for such a system is the required size of the unit. For
the tank farm situation described above or for a number of
process vents from one manufacturing area, the system may be most
effective when it can control the stream having the maximum vapor
inlet loading at peak flow rate. Minimization of noncondensables
in the displacement events is crucial to efficient operation, as
is maintaining a fairly constant vapor loading rate to prevent
4-11
-------
cycling of the refrigeration system's compressors. Cycling also
occurs if the system is oversized for the vapor load.
To prevent cycling and to optimize the efficiency of the
system, the displaced vapors or process vents of finite duration
must be staggered or controlled using orifices or flow
controllers so that the system receives a fairly constant vapor
inlet loading. One such system is currently being used by a
large pharmaceutical manufacturing complex to control displaced
vapors from a tank farm containing approximately 25 tanks. The
emission rate of methylene chloride, the predominant stream
component, has reportedly been reduced by more than 99 percent,
from 357 Ib/hr to 0.7 Ib/hr.1
4.1.2.6 Combination of Vapor Compression and Condensation.
In some situations, condensation is aided by compressing the gas
stream containing VOC's to atmospheric pressure (if the stream is
under vacuum) or to some elevated pressure prior to entering a
condenser. The purpose of this compression step is to condense
out the same amount of material at a higher temperature. For
example, consider the simple calculation used to estimate the
vapor phase mole fraction of the VOC:
(4.3)
" P
*
A low value of Yvoc is desired at the outlet of the
condenser. This can be achieved by reducing the numerator value,
PVOC' bv I°werin9 tne 9as temperature, or by increasing the
denominator, P-pCTAL' by increasin9 tne pressure of the system, or
by a combination of both.
Most applications that use a combination vapor compression-
condensation system use liquid ring compressors. These
compressors are available for numerous ranges of flowrates and
discharge pressures. Liquid ring compressor packages that
include ring seal liquid recirculation systems are currently
available and range in capital cost from approximately $75,000
for a system handling a flowrate of 150 scfm and discharging at a
4-12
-------
pressure of 40 to 60 psig to over $200,000 for a system handling
900 scfm at the same discharge pressure.2 The systems are
usually configured so that the pump comes before the heat
exchanger. However, one pesticide manufacturer uses a
high-pressure liquid ring compressor capable of compressing a gas
to 100 psig in an application to recover methylene chloride from
a solvent vacuum stripping process, following a heat exchanger
that discharges its gases at 4°C. Plant personnel have stated
that prior to installing such a system, the plant was discharging
approximately 2 million Ib of methylene chloride to the
atmosphere each year, of which 85 to 90 percent is now
recovered.
There seem to be a number of applications that could make
use of one form or another of these combination systems. One
such application, which is commercially available, is used to
retrofit a pressure (nutsche) filter to convert the filter to a
dryer. This eliminates VOC emissions from associated transfer
steps and essentially makes the drying process closed-loop,
eliminating virtually all VOC emissions. This system is
described below,
l. Description. Some pharmaceutical facilities make use of
closed-loop drying systems to eliminate emissions of VOC's from
drying steps.4 Figure 4-3 presents a typical closed-loop drying
system. One such system consists essentially of a high-pressure
liquid ring pump in conjunction with two condensers. The system
is designed to be used to dry a filtered product cake using a
recirculating stream of heated inert gas. The most common
application of the system is for recirculating exhaust from
agitated pressure nutsche filters, although the system or some
modification of this system could probably be adapted to use on
most dryer exhaust streams and many streams that contain large
amounts of noncondensables, such as inert purges.
2. Basic operation. Exhaust gas from the dryer or filter
press is drawn into the liquid ring vacuum pump, which compresses
the gas essentially to atmospheric pressure. The gas contacts
4-13
-------
HEATER
(DRYER")
SEAL FLUID
/
EXHAUST GAS
FROM DRYER
VACUUM
PUMP
SECONDARY
HEAT
EXCHANGER
SEAL
_ FLUID
COOLER
COOLING FLUID
SEAL FLUID
HOLDING TANK
Figure 4-3. Closed-loop drying system.
-------
the pump seal fluid in the vacuum pump. At this point, the pump
acts as a contact condenser because the pump seal fluid is
chilled. Pump seal fluid and condensed vapors flow into the seal
fluid holding tank, which is kept cold by a ring liquid cooler
positioned above the surface of the liquid in the tank headspace.
The exhausted gases from the pump are also routed across the ring
liquid cooler, which happens to be a noncontact vertical shell-
and-tube heat exchanger. Some vapors may be condensed from the
exhaust stream at this point since the temperature of the ring
liquid cooler is slightly lower than the temperature of the fluid
in the vacuum pump, especially at the outlet of the pump.
Condensed vapors run down the outside of the tubes and shell
walls to the seal liquid tank. The exhaust gas in the shell of
the ring liquid cooler is routed to yet another shell-and-tube
heat exchanger, which operates at a lower temperature than the
ring liquid cooler. Condensed vapors from this second heat
exchanger are also routed back to the ring liquid holding tank.
The holding tank may be equipped with liquid level sensors and
contain an overflow weir to remove excess ring liquid, which can
ultimately be sent to a solvent recovery unit.
3. Adaptation to drying systems. This type of system may
be fitted onto a pressure filter to dry a product cake, thereby
eliminating some emissions that are created from product
transfer. In addition, the gas stream used to move or vaporize
volatiles, depending upon whether the drying is accomplished
through conduction or convection (most agitated pressure filters
will be more suitable for convective drying), can be recirculated
so that there are no emissions to the atmosphere. In such a
system, a heater would be added to the system after the exhaust
gas cooler to heat the inert stream.
4-15
-------
4.2 SCRUBBERS
4.2.1 General Gas Absorber^
Scrubbers, or gas absorbers, function by providing an
intimate contacting environment for a gas stream containing
material that is soluble in the contacting liquid'. The rate of
mass transfer from the gas to the liquid depends upon a driving
force related to the actual VOC concentrations in the gas and
liquid versus the equilibrium-defined VOC concentration in the
two media at each point along the contacting path. The most
common types of scrubbers found in batch processing industries
are packed towers and spray chambers. For dilute concentrations
of VOC'a, impingement-plate towers, which disperse the vapor
phase into a large number of tiny bubbles within the liquid phase
and therefore increase the surface area contact between liquid
and gas phases, are preferred.5
Gas absorbers are limited primarily by the solubility in the
liquid stream of the material to be transferred to the liquid
stream. Most of the scrubbers found in industry use water as the
scrubbing medium, so the effectiveness of these devices depends
largely on the solubility of the VOC's in water. In general,
compounds containing nitrogen or oxygen atoms that are free to
form strong hydrogen bonds and that have one to three carbon
atoms are soluble; those compounds with four or five carbons are
borderline; and those with six carbon atoms or more are
insoluble.6 Common solvents such as methanol, isopropyl alcohol,
and acetone are very soluble in water. Toluene, on the other
hand, is not. Although a scrubber could be designed to control a
VOC such as toluene, the scrubbing medium would have to be a
nonvolatile organic such as mineral oil. Although such systems
do exist, their cost is relatively high, since it is energy-
intensive to recover separate fractions of mineral oil and VOC,
and the cost of mineral oil precludes the use of a once-through
system. Note that one of the considerations associated with the
use of scrubbers is waste stream disposal and/or treatment.
4-16
-------
Since there is usually the transfer of VOC's to the scrubber
effluent stream when a water scrubber is used to control VOC
emissions, regulators should consider the potential for emissions
of VOC from the wastewater collection and treatment system when
evaluating the control device effectiveness. When VOC loading is
significant, steam stripping of the wastewater may be a viable
and cost effective control. To estimate emissions and evaluate
control effectiveness for wastewater, a recently revised
publication entitled "Control of Volatile Organic Compound
Emissions from Industrial Wastewater." Draft CTG can be used.8
Also existing for control of some pollutants are chemical
scrubbers, which, instead of using a liquid medium to absorb
material out of the gas phase, use the liquid medium to react
with material in the gas phase. A good example is an emergency
destruction scrubber for a compound such as phosgene (COC12)•
Phosgene, when reacted with slightly basic water, hydrolyzes to
HC1 and C02. Although these product gases still require control,
their toxicity is much less than that of the initial reactant.
Chemical scrubbers are often used as emergency back-up devices.
4.2.2 Design
The design of a scrubber involves the estimation of the
ratio of gas-to-liquid mass flow rates and the appropriate amount
of contacting area necessary to achieve the desired removal. A
necessary piece of information, which can be difficult to obtain
without experimental work, is the equilibrium curve depicting
equilibrium mole fractions of the VOC in the solvent in the vapor
and liquid phases at the contacting temperature. The equilibrium
curve, as the name implies, is not a straight line, but
approximations may be used and the curve may be assumed to be
straight in some situations. For water scrubbers, the Henry's
law constant at the water temperature is often used as the slope
of the equilibrium curve.
The estimation of the physical properties of a scrubber
design, such as the number of transfer units (NQQ) and the height
of transfer unit (HQG) for a packed tower, may be estimated based
4-17
-------
on the reported removal efficiency of a system and the reported
liquid-to-gas mass velocities. The IPA publication
EPA-450/3-80-027, Organic Chemical Manufacturing Volume 5:
Adsorption, Condensation, and Absorption Devices, December 1980,
contains the methodology that can be used to estimate such
parameters.9 Note that verifying the efficiency of a scrubber is
more difficult than verifying the efficiency of condenser since
there are more variables to consider and the equilibrium data for
VOC in solvent at the required temperature are not always
available. It is perhaps for this reason that unrealistically
high scrubber efficiencies may sometimes be reported.
4.2.3 Specific Systems and Applicability
Scrubbers often are used in batch processing as secondary
control devices to condensers. Scrubbers may be advantageous to
use on streams that have discontinuous properties such as many of
the emission streams from batch processes since scrubbers in most
cases are not as expensive to operate during off-load times as
other control devices. Although the control efficiency would
decrease with decreasing gas flow rates during off-load times,
the efficiency would pick up -gsin with an increase in gas flow
rate back up to the design value. The following paragraph
describes one specific application for the control of the solvent
isopropyl alcohol (ItA; with a water scrubber through convective
drying.
A feasibility analysis of control devices was conducted on a
dryer exhaust stream containing the solvent IPA. It was
determined that a packed tower water scrubber could achieve at
least 90 percent removal of IPA from the exhaust gas of an
atmospheric dryer. Three meters of packing were determined to be
required, and 0.4 m^ of water per minute under peak conditions
was determined to be necessary for a peak exhaust gas flow rate
of 6,000 acfm with a 0.4 percent IPA concentration.10
4-18
-------
4.3 CARBON ADSORPTION
Carbon adsorbers function by capturing material that is
present in a gas phase on the surface of granular activated
carbon. Adsorbers can be of the fixed-bed design or fluidized-
bed design. Fixed-bed adsorbers must be regenerated periodically
to desorb the collected organics from the carbon. Fluidized-bed
adsorbers are continuously regenerated. Most batch industries
that use carbon adsorbers use the fixed-bed type. Some use
nonregenerative units, which are contained in 55-gallon drums and
are used mostly for controlling odor from small process vents.
Such units are returned to their distributors for disposal after
they can no longer adsorb effectively.
4.3.1 Design
Carbon adsorption is usually a batch operation involving two
main steps, adsorption and regeneration. This system usually
includes multiple beds so that at least one bed is adsorbing
while at least one other bed is being regenerated, thereby
ensuring that emissions will be continually controlled. A blower
is commonly used to force the VOC-laden gas stream through the
fixed carbon bed. The cleaned gas is then exhausted to the
atmosphere. A gradual increase in the concentration of organics
in the exhausted gas from its baseline effluent concentration
level signals it is time for regeneration. The bed is shut off
and the waste gas is routed to another bed. Low-pressure steam
is normally used to heat the carbon bed during regeneration,
driving off the adsorbed organics, which are usually recovered by
condensing the vapors and separating them from the steam
condensate by decantation or distillation. After regeneration,
the carbon bed is cooled and dried to improve adsorption. The
adsorption/regeneration cycle can be repeated numerous times, but
eventually the carbon loses its adsorption activity and must be
replaced. Typically, facilities replace a portion of the carbon
bed on an annual basis.
The efficiency of an adsorption unit depends on the type of
activated carbon used, the characteristics of the VOC, the VOC
4-19
-------
concentration, and the system temperature, pressure, and
humidity. Overall VOC removal efficiencies depend on the
completeness of regeneration, the depth of the carbon bed, the
time allowed for contact, and the effectiveness of recovery of
desorbed organics. Carbon adsorption is not suitable for gas
streams with a high concentration of organics, with organics with
boiling points greater than 2SO°C or molecular weights greater
than 300, with relative humidities greater than 50 percent, with
high levels of entrained solids, or with temperatures over 100CF.
Adsori-ing organics from gas streams with high concentrations of
organics may result in excessive temperature rise in the bed due
to the accumulated heat of adsorption,- this can be a serious
safety problem. High-molecular-weight organics and organics with
high boiling points are difficult to remove from the carbon under
normal regeneration temperatures. The continuing buildup of
these compounds on the carbon greatly decreases the operating
capacity and results in frequent replacement of the carbon.
Plasticizers or resins should also be prevented from entering the
carbon bed, since they may react chemically on the carbon to form
a solid that cannot be removed during regeneration. These
problems can be controlled by the use of a condenser upstream of
the carbon bed to remove the high-boiling-point components or a
carbon bed guard that can be easily replaced on a regular basis.
Entrained solids in the gas stream may cause the carbon bed to
plug over a period of time. These solids are generally
controlled by a cloth or fiberglass filter. Gas streams with
high relative humidities affect the adsorption capacity of the
bed. Humidity control can be achieved by cooling and condensing
the water vapor in the gas stream. The relative humidity can
also be decreased by adding dry dilution air to the system, but
this usually increases the size and thus the cost of the adsorber
required. The adsorption capacity of the carbon and the effluent
concentration of the adsorber are directly related to the
temperature of the inlet stream to the adsorber. Normally, the
temperature of the inlet stream should be below 100°P or the
4-20
-------
adsorption capacity will be affected. Inlet stream coolers are
usually required when emission stream temperatures are in excess
of 100°F.
4,3,2 Applic^foi ], ity
Carbon adsorbers are often used as controls for batch
process operations. At many facilities several VOC sources are
ducted to a single adsorber, since most single emission streams
from batch process operations do not warrant the sole use of an
adsorber. Emissions from reactor vents, separation operations,
dryers, and storage tanks may be often controlled by carbon bed
adsorbers. In many of these applications, the adsorber is
preceded upstream by a condenser. Since condensers are more
efficient on saturated streams and carbon bed adsorbers are more
efficient on dilute streams, a condenser followed by a carbon bed
adsorber can be an effective control system.
Nonregenerative carbon adsorbers may also be useful for
batch process operations. These systems are extremely simple in
design. When the activated carbon becomes spent, it is replaced
with a new charge. The spent carbon can be reactivated offsite
and eventually reused. Carbon canisters, normally the size of
55-gallon drums, can be used to control small vent streams (less
than 500 actual cubic feet per minute [acfm] <500 ft3/min) with
low organic concentrations. They are commonly used to control
emissions from storage tanks and small reaction vents. One
advantage of these systems is that they are immune to normal
fluctuations in gas streams that are common to batch processes.
In fact, most carbon adsorption systems are especially suited for
batch processing, since the beds do not require continuous energy
input (except for a fan to move the gas).
When designing and installing carbon bed adsorber systems,
several safety factors need to be considered. Fixed carbon beds
can spontaneously combust whenever the gas stream contains oxygen
and compounds easily oxidized in the presence of carbon, such as
ketones, aldehydes, and organic acids. Heat generated by
adsorption or by oxidation of VOC in the bed is usually
4-21
-------
transported from the bed by convection. If less convection heat
is removed than is generated, the bed temperature will rise.
Higher temperatures will further increase the oxidation
decomposition, and hot spots exceeding the autoignition
temperature of the carbon may develop in the bed. If an adsorber
is shut down for an extended period and not regenerated
sufficiently upon startup, reintroduction of the VOC-laden stream
may also lead to bed combustion. However, preventive measures
can be taken to ensure safe operation of carbon adsorbers. Using
adequate cooling systems, regularly inspecting valves to prevent
steam leaks, and using adsorbers only on low-concentration
streams all will ensure safe operation. In addition, beds used
for adsorbing ketones should not be dried completely after
regeneration. Although not drying them may reduce adsorption
capacity somewhat, it is an effective safety measure because the
water acts as a heat sink to dissipate the heat of adsorption and
oxidation.
Carbon adsorption systems normally are designed for gas
velocities between 80 and 100 ft/min.11 The maximum rate of
recovery of organics is dependent upon the amount of carbon
provided and the depth of the bed needed to provide an adequate
transfer zone. The required amount of carbon may be estimated
from an adsorption isotherm, which is generally available for
different compounds at various partial pressures.
For all practical purposes, it is difficult to estimate the
efficiency of a carbon adsorption system. EPA has conducted
several studies which show that a control efficiency of
95 percent is achievable for streams containing compounds that
are considered appropriate (see above discussion) for adsorption,
the actual control efficiency attained by a particular system is
largely dependent upon the amount of time elapsed and the amount
of material sorbed since the last regeneration or replacement.12
Note also that it is more difficult to predict the amount of
material that has been sorbed for the intermittent streams with
variable characteristics typical of batch processes than for
4-22
-------
continuous emission streams with constant properties. In some
situations, the VOC's are sorbed out of the gas streams during
peak loading periods and are reentrained during off-peak periods.
In these situations, there is no net control of VOC by the carbon
system. To prevent inadvertent stripping of VOC's during such
periods, air flow should be diverted from the adsorber during
periods of time when there are no VOC emissions.
As mentioned previously, most applications of carbon
adsorbers follow condensers. Because of the highly flammable
nature of many typical solvents, the industry trend is away from
using these devices as primary control devices.
4.4 THERMAL DESTRUCTION
It is usually possible to route process vents to an
incinerator or flare for control. Incineration systems are
usually quite costly and must operate continuouslyi therefore the
use of such systems is limited to those applications where a
number of vents may be controlled. Note also that the byproduct
combustion gases must also be controlled in most cases, thereby
increasing costs.
4.4.1 Flares
Flaring is an open combustion process that destroys VOC
emissions with a high-temperature oxidation flame to produce
carbon dioxide and water. Good combustion in a flare is governed
by flame temperature, residence time of components in the
combustion zone, and turbulent mixing of components to complete
the oxidation reaction.
4.4.1.1 Design. Flare types can be divided into two main
groups: (l) ground flares and (2) elevated flares, which can be
further classified according to the method to enhance mixing
within the flare tip {air-assisted, steam-assisted, or
nonassisted). The discussion in this chapter focuses on elevated
flares, the most common type in the chemical industry. The vent
stream is sent to the flare through the collection header. The
vent stream entering the header can vary widely in volumetric
flow rate, moisture content, VOC concentration, and heat value.
4-23
-------
The knock-out drum removes water or hydrocarbon droplets that
could create problems in the flare combustion zone. Vent streams
are also typically routed through a water seal before going to
the flare. This prevents possible flame flashbacks, caused when
the vent stream flow rate to the flare is too low and the flame
front pulls down into the stack.13
Purge gas (N2, CO2, or natural gas) also helps to prevent
flashback in the flare stack caused by low vent stream flow. The
total volumetric flow to the flame must be carefully controlled
to prevent low-flow flashback problems and to avoid a detached
flame (a space between the stack and flame with incomplete
combustion) caused by an excessively high flow rate. A gas
barrier or a stack seal is sometimes used just below the flare
head to impede the flow of air into the flare gas network.
The VOC stream enters at the base of the flame where it is
heated by already burning fuel and pilot burners at the flare
tip. Fuel flows into the combustion zone, where the exterior of
the microscopic gas pockets is oxidized. The rate of reaction is
limited by the mixing of the fuel and oxygen from the air. If
the gas pocket has sufficient oxygen and residence time in the
flame zone, it can be completely burned. A diffusion flame
receives its combustion oxygen by diffusion of air into the flame
from the surrounding atmosphere. The high volume of flue gas
flow in a flare requires more combustion air at a faster rate
than simple gas diffusion can supply. Thus, flare designers add
high-velocity steam injection nozzles to increase gas turbulence
in the flame boundary zones, drawing in more combustion air and
improving combustion efficiency. This steam injection promotes
smokeless flare operation by minimizing the cracking reaction
that forms carbonaceous spot. Significant disadvantages of steam
use are increased noise and cost. The steam requirement depends
on the composition of the g»s flared, the steam velocity from the
injection nozzle, and the tip diameter. Although some gases can
be flared smokelessly without any steam, typically 0.01 to 0.6 kg
of steam per kg of flare gas is required.
4-24
-------
Steam injection is usually controlled manually by an
operator who observes the flare (either directly or on a
television monitor) and adds steam as required to maintain
smokeless operation. Several flare manufacturers offer devices
such as infrared sensors that monitor flame characteristics and
adjust the steam flow rate automatically to maintain smokeless
operation.
Some elevated flares use forced air instead of steam to
provide the combustion air and the mixing required for smokeless ;
operation. These flares consist of two coaxial flow channels.
The combustible gases flow in the center channel and the
combustion air (provided by a fan in the bottom of the flare
stack) flows in the annulus. The principal advantage of air-
assisted flares is that they can be used where steam is not
available. Air assist is rarely used on large flares because
airflow is difficult to control when the gas flow is
intermittent. About 90.8 hp of blower capacity is required for
each 100 Ib/hr of gas flared.14
Ground flares are usually enclosed and have multiple burner
heads that are staged to operate based on the quantity of gas
released to the flare. The energy of the gas itself (because of
the high nozzle pressure drop) is usually adequate to provide the
mixing necessary for smokeless operation, and air or steam assist
is not required. A fence or other enclosure reduces noise and
.light from the flare and provides some wind protection.
Ground flares are less numerous and have less capacity than
elevated flares. Typically they are used to burn gas
continuously while steam-assisted elevated flares are used to
dispose of large amounts of gas released in emergencies.1
4.4.1.2 Factors Affecting Flare effieiencv.16 Flare
combustion efficiency is a function of many factors: (1) heating
value of the gas, (2) density of the gas, (3) flammability of the
gas, (4) auto-ignition temperature of the gas, and (5) mixing at
the flare tip.
4-25
-------
The flammability limits of the gases flared influence
ignition stability and flame extinction. The flammability limits
are defined as the stoichiometric composition limits (maximum and
minimum) of an oxygen-fuel mixture that will burn indefinitely at
given conditions of temperature and pressure without further
ignition. In other words, gases must be within their
flammability limits to burn. When flammability limits are
narrow, the interior of the flame may have insufficient air for
the mixture to burn. Fuels with wide limits of flammability (for
instance, H2) are therefore easier to combust.
The auto-ignition temperature of a fuel affects combustion
because gas mixtures must be at high enough temperature and at
the proper mixture strength to burn. A gas with a low auto-
ignition temperature will ignite and burn more easily than a gas
with a high auto-ignition temperature.
The heating value of the fuel also affects the flame
stability, emissions, and flame structure. H lower-heating-value
fuel produces a cooler flame that does not favor combustion
kinetics and also is more easily extinguished. The lower flame
temperature also reduces buoyant forces, which reduces mixing.
The density of the gas flared also affects the structure and
stability of the flame through the effect on buoyancy and mixing.
By design, the velocity in many flares is very low; therefore,
most of the flame structure is developed through buoyant forces
as a result of combustion. Lighter gases therefore tend to burn
better. In addition to burner tip design, the density of the
fuel also affects the minimum purge gas required to prevent
flashback for smokeless flaring.
Poor mixing at the flare tip or poor flare maintenance can
cause smoking (particulate). Fuels with high carbon-to-hydrogen
ratios (greater than 0.35} have a greater tendency to smoke and
require better mixing if they are to be burned smokelessly.
Many flare systems are currently operated in conjunction
with baseload gas recovery systems. Such systems are used to
recover VOC from the flare header system for reuse. Recovered
4-26
-------
VOC may be used as a feedstock in other processes or as a fuel in
process heaters, boilers, or other combustion devices. When
baseload gas recovery systems are applied, the flare is generally
used to combust process upset and emergency gas releases that the
baseload system is not designed to recover. In some cases, the
operation of a baseload gas recovery system may offer an economic
advantage over operation of a flare alone since sufficient
quantities of useable VOC can be recovered.
4.4.1.3 EPA Flare Specifications. The EPA has established
flare combustion efficiency criteria (40 CPE 60.18} which specify
that 98 percent or greater combustion efficiency can be achieved
provided that certain operating conditions are met: (15 the
flare must be operated with no visible emissions and with a flame
present; (2) the net heating value of the flared stream must be
greater than 11.2 Ml/son (300 Btu/scf) for steam-assisted flares
and 7.45 MJ/scm (200 Btu/scf) for a flare without assist; and
(3) steam-assisted and nonassisted flares must have an exit
velocity less than 18.3 m/sec (60 ft/sec). Steam assisted and
nonassisted flares having an exit velocity greater than
18.3 m/sec (60 ft/sec) but less than 122 m/sec (400 ft/sec) can
achieve 98 percent or greater control if the net heating value of
the gas stream is greater than 37.3 MJ/scm (1,000 Btu/scf). The
allowable exit velocity for air-assisted flares, as well as
steam-assisted and nonassisted flares with an exit velocity less
than 122 m/sec (400 ft/sec) and a net heating value less than
37.3 MJ/scm (1,000 Btu/scf), can be determined by using an
equation in 40 CFR 60.18.
4.4.1.4 Applicabj. 1 ity. Although flares are not as widely
used for controlling emissions from batch processes as other
control devices--for example, condensers, adsorbers, and
scrubbers--they are adjustable and can be useful for these
processes. In many cases, however, they require a considerable
amount of auxiliary fuel to combust gases that contain dilute
concentrations of VOC's or VOC's that have low heats of
combustion. Flares are capable of handling the highly variable
4-27
-------
flows that are often associated with batch process operations.
Steam-assisted elevated flares may be used to control emissions
from high-concentration, intermittent vent streams. In many
facilities, elevated flares are used to control emissions during
emergency venting or during process upsets, such as startup and
shutdown. These intermittent emissions are characteristic of
normal batch process operations with the exception that they may
be more concentrated than normal batch emissions. Ground flares
have less capacity than elevated flares and are usually used to
burn gas continuously. They should also be easily accessible to
batch processes because of the multiple burner head design, which
can be stage-operated based on gas flow. Ground flares can
operate efficiently from 0 to 100 percent of design capacity.
The burner heads can also be specifically sized and designed for
the materials in the flare gas.
4.4.2 Thermal and Catalytic Oxidizers
Thermal and catalytic oxidizers may be used to control
emission streams of VOC's and air toxics, although they are not
especially suited for intermittent or noncontinuous flows.
Because they operate continuously, auxiliary fuel must be used to
maintain combustion during episodes in which the VOC load is
below design conditions. In some situations where VOC loading in
the gas to be controlled is small, the environmental benefits of
using fossil fuel and creating products of combustion in order to
combust VOC's on an intermittent basis as opposed to releasing
the uncombusted VOC's must be evaluated by considering the
reduction of VOC compared to costs and production of other
pollutants.
4.4.2.1 Thermal Qxidizer Design. Any VOC heated to a high
enough temperature in the presence of enough oxygen will be
oxidized to carbon dioxide and water. This is the basic
principle of operation of a thermal incinerator. The theoretical
temperature required for thermal oxidation depends on the
chemical involved. Some chemicals are oxidized at temperatures
much lower than others. However, a temperature can be identified
4-28
-------
that will result in the efficient destruction of most VOC's. All
practical thermal incineration processes are influenced by
residence time, mixing, and temperature. An efficient thermal
incinerator system must provide:
1. A chamber temperature high enough to enable the
oxidation reaction to proceed rapidly to completion;
2. Enough turbulence to obtain good mixing between the hot
combustion products from the burner, combustion air, and VOC; and
3. Sufficient residence time at the chosen temperature for
the oxidation reaction to reach completion.
A thermal incinerator is usually a refractory-lined chamber
containing a burner (or set of burners) at one end. Discrete
dual fuel burners and inlets for the offgas and combustion air
are arranged in a premixing chamber to thoroughly mix the hot
products from the burners with the process vent streams. The
mixture of hot reacting gases then passes into the main
combustion chamber. This chamber is sized to allow the mixture
enough time at the elevated temperature for the oxidation
reaction to reach completion (residence times of 0.3 to
1.0 second are common). Energy can then be recovered from the
hot flue gases in a heat recovery section. Preheating combustion
air or offgas is a common mode of energy recovery; however, it is
sometimes more economical to generate steam. Insurance
regulations require that if the waste stream is preheated, the
VOC concentration must be maintained below 25 percent of the
lower explosive limit to remove explosion hazards.
Thermal incinerators designed specifically for VOC
incineration with natural gas as the auxiliary fuel may also use
a grid-type (distributed) gas burner.17 The tiny gas flame jets
on the grid surface ignite the vapors as they pass through the
grid. The grid acts as a baffle for mixing the gases entering
the chamber. This arrangement ensures burning cf all vapors at
lower chamber temperature and uses less fuel. This system makes
possible a shorter reaction chamber yet maintains high
efficiency.
4-29
-------
A thermal incinerator, handling vent streams with varying
heating values and moisture content, requires careful adjustment
to maintain the proper chamber temperatures and operating
efficiency. Since water requires a great deal of heat to
vaporize, entrained water droplets in an offgas stream can
increase auxiliary fuel requirements to provide the additional
energy needed to vaporize the water and raise it to the
combustion chamber temperature. Combustion devices are always
operated with some quantity of excess air to ensure a sufficient
supply of oxygen. The amount of excess air used varies with the
fuel and burner type but should be kept as low as possible.
Using too much excess air wastes fuel because the additional air
must be heated to the combustion chamber temperature. Large
amounts of excess air also increase fuel gas volume and may
increase the size and cost of the system. Packaged, single-unit
thermal incinerators can be built to control streams with flow
rates in the range of 0.14 son/see (300 scfm) to about 24 scm/sec
(50,000 scfm).
Thermal oxidizers for halogenated VOC's may require
additional control equipment to remove the corrosive combustion
products. The halogenated VOC streams are usually scrubbed to
prevent corrosion due to contact with acid gases formed during
the combustion of these streams. The flue gases are quenched to
lower their temperature and are then routed through absorption
equipment such as packed towers or liquid jet scrubbers to remove
the corrosive gases.
4.4.2.2 Thermal Incinerator Efficiency. The VOC
destruction efficiency of a thermal oxidizer can be affected by
variations in chamber temperature, residence time, inlet VOC
concentration, compound type, and flow regime (mixing). Test
results show that thermal oxidizers can achieve 98 percent
destruction efficiency lux IUUBL VCC compounds at combustion
chamber temperatures ranging from 700 to 13Q0*C (1,300* to
2370°F) and residence times of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds.18 These data
indicate that significant variations in destruction efficiency
4-30
-------
occurred for C^ to C5 alkanes and olefins, aromatics (benzene,
toluene, and xylene), oxygenated compounds (methyl ethyl ketone
and isopropanol), chlorinated organice (vinyl chloride), and
nitrogen-containing species (acrylonitrile and ethylamines) at
chamber temperatures below 760°C (1400°F). This information,
used in conjunction with kinetics calculations, indicates the
combustion chamber parameters for achieving at least a 98 percent
VOC destruction efficiency are a combustion temperature of 870°
(1600°F) and a residence time of 0.75 sec (based upon residence ;
in the chamber volume at combustion temperature). A thermal
oxidizer designed to produce these conditions in the combustion
chamber should be capable of high destruction efficiency for
almost any nonhalogenated VOC.
At temperatures over 760°C (1400°F), the oxidation reaction
rates are much faster than the rate of gas diffusion mixing. The
destruction efficiency of the VOC then becomes dependent upon the
fluid mechanics within the oxidation chamber. The flow regime
must ensure rapid, thorough mixing of the VOC stream, combustion
air, and hot combustion products from the burner. This enables
the VOC to attain the combustion temperature in the presence of
enough oxygen for sufficient time so the oxidation reaction can
reach completion.
Based upon studies of thermal oxidizer efficiency, it has
been concluded that 98 percent VOC destruction or a 20 ppmv
compound exit concentration is achievable by all new
incinerators. The maximum achievable VOC destruction efficiency
decreases with decreasing inlet concentration because of the much
slower combustion reaction rates at lower inlet VOC
concentrations. Therefore, a VOC weight percentage reduction
based on the mass rate of VOC exiting the control device versus
the mass rate of VOC entering the device would be appropriate for
vent streams with VOC concentrations above approximately
2,000 ppmv (corresponding to 1,000 ppmv VOC in the incinerator
inlet stream since air dilution is typically 1:1). For vent
streams with VOC concentrations below approximately 2,000 ppmv,
4-31
-------
it has been determined that an incinerator outlet concentration
of 20 ppmv {by compound), or lower, is achievable by all new
thermal oxidizers.19 The 98 percent efficiency estimate is
predicted on thermal incinerators operated at 870°C (1600°P) with
0.75 sec residence time.
4,4.2.3 Catalytic Qxid^zer Design. Catalytic oxidation is
also a major combustion technique examined for VOC emission
control. A catalyst increases the rate of chemical reaction
without becoming permanently altered itself. Catalysts for
catalytic oxidation cause the oxidizing reaction to proceed at a
lower temperature than is required for thermal oxidation. These
units can also operate well at VOC concentrations below the lower
explosive limit, which is a distinct advantage for some process
vent streams. Combustion catalysts include platinum and platinum
alloys, copper oxide, chromium, and cobalt.20 These are
deposited in thin layers on inert substrates to provide for
maximum surface area between the catalyst and the VOC stream.
The substrate may be either pelletized or cast in a rigid
honeycomb matrix.
The waste gas is introduced into a mixing chamber, where it
is heated to about 316°C (600°F5 by contact with the hot
combustion products from auxiliary burners. The heated mixture
is then passed through the catalyst bed. Oxygen and VOC migrate
to the catalyst surface by gas diffusion and are adsorbed in the
pores of the catalyst. The oxidation reaction takes place at
these active sites. Reaction products are desorbed from the
active sites and transferred by diffusion back into the waste
gas.21 The combusted gas may then be passed through a waste heat
recovery device before exhausting into the atmosphere.
The operating temperatures of combustion catalysts usually
range from 316" to 650°C (600° to 1200«F). Lower temperatures
may slow down and possibly stop the oxidation reaction. Higher
temperatures may result in shortened catalyst life and possible
evaporation or melting of the catalyst from the support
substrate. Any accumulation of particulate matter, condensed
4-32
-------
VOC, or polymerized hydrocarbons on the catalyst could block the
active sites and, therefore, reduce effectiveness. Catalysts can
also be deactivated by compounds containing sulfur, bismuth,
phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, mercury, lead, zinc, tin, or
halogens.22 If these compounds exist in the catalytic unit, VOC
will pass through unreacted or be partially oxidized to form
compounds such as aldehydes, ketones, and organic acids.
4.4.2.4 Catalytic Oxidizer Control Efficiency. Catalytic
oxidizer destruction efficiency is dependent on the space
velocity (the catalyst volume required per unit volume gas
processed per hour), operating temperature, oxygen concentration,
and waste gas VOC composition and concentration. A catalytic
unit operating at about 450°C (840°F) with a catalyst bed volume
of 0.014 to 0.057 m3 (0.5 to 2 ft3) per 0.47 scm/sec (1,000 scfm)
of vent stream passing through the device can achieve 95 percent
VOC destruction efficiency. However, catalytic oxidizers have
been reported to achieve efficiency of 98 percent or greater.23
These higher efficiencies are usually obtained by increasing the
catalyst bed volume-to-vent stream flow ratio.
4.4.2.5 Applicability of Thsnual and Catalytic Oxidizers.
Incinerators often are used to control multiple process vents
that can be manifolded together. For example, processes that are
contained within one building or processing area are sometimes
tied together and routed to an incinerator. For some of these
vents, a primary control device such as a condenser is located
upstream. Note that the stack gases resulting from combustion
often contain acid such as HC1 and may require an exhaust gas
control device such as a caustic scrubber.
There are also some incineration units that can handle low
flow rates (in the range of 10 to 500 scfm) . These units can be
applied to single emission streams, such as reactor vent
emissions. The presumably high destruction efficiency obtained
for VOC's and air toxics using these devices makes their
application attractive for very toxic substances.24
4-33
-------
4.5 SOURCE REDUCTION MEASURES
4.5.1 Vapor Containment
Probably one of the less expensive and more effective
methods of controlling displaced vapors from such events as
vessel charging and from storage tank working losses is to use
vapor return lines to vent the vapors back to the vessel from
which the liquid was originally taken. Essentially 100 percent
control of the vapors at the point source is achieved, and there.
do not appear to be many adverse effects from the standpoint of
safety or convenience. However, the vessel which receives the
"vent back" must also be controlled. Some facilities use vessels
with flexible volumes, such as balloons, or traditional gas
holders with self-adjusting diaphragms to contain vapors prior to
a control device. Probably the biggest problem relative to batch
processing is that there are many different possibilities at any
given time for equipment configuration, and therefore a manifold-
type system for venting back vapors to the appropriate vessels
would have to be installed.
4,5.2 Limiting the Use of Inert Gas
Obviously, many applications in batch processing require the
use of inert gas for blanketing and purging of equipment for
safety purposes. Oftentimes, the distribution of the nitrogen is
affected through continuous purging of equipment. While purging
achieves the inert atmosphere desired, it is also a source of
emissions because volatile compounds are stripped off and emitted
along the same discharge pathway as the nitrogen exhaust stream.
Limiting emissions from nitrogen purging is achieved by reducing
the amount of nitrogen that is purged. An inert atmosphere can
also be created by establishing, through a series of pressure
transducers and distribution valves, a constant nitrogen,
positive pressure "blanket." However, processing equipment that
does not have the possibility of remaining airtight cannot be
blanketed in this manner. The older style basket centrifuges
requiring inertion during the separation of solid cake, for
example, cannot be blanket-inerted. Therefore, it follows that
4-34
-------
limiting the distribution of nitrogen to constant positive
pressure blanketing operations may require not only capital
expenditures for the distribution system elements (i.e., the
pressure transducers and distribution valves), but perhaps the
replacement of some equipment.
There are other practices, however, such as the blowing of
lines to move material and the sparging of large volumes of
liquids that could be changed so as to reduce the amount of inert
gases in the streams and thereby make the streams more suitable
for control by devices such as condensers.
The blowing of lines with nitrogen to move material, for
example, could be replaced by simple pumping and/or setting the
lines on an incline. Blowing cannot be totally eliminated,
however, because the vapor that may be contained in the vapor
space in the lines may need to be purged at various times before
maintenance.
Also, a recently developed technology for in-line stripping
could conceivably replace the use of large volumes of inert gas
used for sparging. Control of emissions from sparging, as is
shown in Chapter 5, appears to be difficult because of the dilute
volumes of VOC in the exhaust sparge gas. An in-line stripping
system that is installed directly into process piping creates a
large number of very tiny nitrogen bubbles, which results in
maximum gas-liquid interface. One such system tested at a plant
reduced the amount of nitrogen used for sparging from 38,400 to
1,150 scfm and was considerably more efficient.25
An added benefit of limiting the amount of nitrogen that is
used in inerting processing equipment is that the volumetric
flowrates of the exhausts will be diminished, and therefore VOC
concentrations in the exhausts will be less dilute and may
therefore be more cost effective to control or recover using add-
on controls.
4-35
-------
4.5.3 Uae of Closed Processina Equipment
The retrofitting or replacement of older equipment with new
airtight equipment is not only helpful to nitrogen blanketing
applications, but perhaps more importantly, to the processing of
material in entirely closed systems where the possibility of
creating emissions is eliminated altogether. Batch processing
appears to be gravitating to processing equipment that is
versatile and therefore allows for numerous conventional unit
operations such as mixing, reaction, filtration, and drying, to
be conducted in the same vessel. Transfer losses, which can be
very significant, are virtually eliminated, as are some cleaning
operations that would otherwise be required in between processing
runs.26
4.5.4 ^terial Substitution/Improved Separation Techniques
One of the more significant areas of material substitution
in the batch manufacturing industry is the potential substitution
of organic solvents with aqueous solvents, aqueous solvents with
internally contained organic micelles, or supercritical fluids.
Still in developmental stages, the use of aqueous polymeric
systems having an internal micelle structure for hydrocarbons
would allow for reactions to occur wichin the polymer micelles.
Currently, the major problem with these polymers is that their
solubility in water is still too low to be of any practical
utility.27
The possibility of using supercritical fluids (SCF) in
extraction and separation applications is becoming more of a
reality. Supercritical fluids have been shown to be of utility
in separation of organic-water solutions, petroleum fractions,
and activated carbon regeneration. Additionally, a large body of
experimental data has been accumulated on the solubility and
extractability of natural products such as steroids, alkaloids,
anticancer agents, oils from seeds, and caffeine from coffee
beans in various supercritical fluids such as C02, ethane,
ethylene, and N20. Currently, C02 is the most widely
investigated SCF in these applications.
4-36
-------
4.5.5 Improved Process Design
The elimination of intermediate isolation steps, if
possible, can be a significant source of emissions reduction
because filtration and drying steps are eliminated. It is also
likely that some equipment cleaning steps can be eliminated
without negative effects.
4.6 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
1. Shine, B., MRI. Site Visit Report to UpJohn, Kalamazoo,
Michigan. March 30, 1990.
2. Letter from Hawkins, B., Nash Engineering Company, to
B. Shine, MRI. April 2, 1991. Summary of operating data
and budget costs for compressor systems.
3. Telecon. B. Shine, MRI, to D. McKenzie, Union Carbide,
Woodbine, Georgia. Discussion of vapor recompression system
in use at the Woodbine plant. January 5, 1990.
4. Reference 1.
5. Li, Ramon, and M. Karell. Technical, Economic, and
Regulatory Evaluation of Tray Dryer Solvent Emission Control
Alternatives. Environmental Progress. 2(2): 73-78.
May 1990.
6. Solomons, T. W. Graham. Organic Chemistry, 2nd Edition.
New York, John Wiley and Sons. 1976, 1978, 1980. p. 80.
7. Reference 3.
8. Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from
Industrial Wastewater. Draft CTG. September, 1992.
9. Organic Chemical Manufacturing, Volume 5: Adsorption,
Condensation, and Absorption Devices. Publication No.
EPA-450/3-80-027. December 1980.
10. Reference 5.
11. VIC Manufacturing Company. Carbon Adsorption/Emission
Control Benefits and Limitations.
12. Carbon Adsorption for Control of VOC Emissions. Radian
Corporation. June 6, 1988.
13. Organic Chemical Manufacturing Volume 4: Combustion Control
Devices. Report 4. u. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
OAQPS. Publication No. EPA-450/3-80-026. December 1980.
4-37
-------
14. Klett, M. G., and J. B. Galeski. (Lockheed Missiles and
Space Company, inc.) Flare Systems Study. Prepared for
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Huntsville, Alabama.
Publication No. EPA-600/2-76-079. March 1976.
15. Evaluation of the Efficiency of Industrial Flares:
Background-Experimental Design-Facility. U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS. Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina. Publication No. EPA-600/2-83-070.
August 1983.
16. Reference 13.
17. Reed, R. J. North American Combustion Handbook. North
American Manufacturing Company. Cleveland, Ohio. 1979.
18. Memo and attachments from Farmer, J. R., EPA:ESD, to
distribution. August 22, 1980. 29 p. Thermal incinerator
performance for NSPS.
19. Reference 12.
20. Reference 13, Report 3.
21. Control Techniques for Volatile Organic Emissions from
Stationary Sources. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Office of Air and Waste Management. Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/2-78-002.
May 1978. p. 32.
22. Kenson, R. E. Control of Volatile Organic Emissions.
MetPro Corp., Systems Division. Bulletin 1015.
Harleysville, Pennsylvania.
23, Reference 13, Report 3.
24. Letter from Bedoya, J.G., In-Process Technology, Inc. to
B. Shine, MRI. March 28, 1991. Summary of cost and cost-
effectiveness for small incineration units. March 28, 1991.
25. Processor Cuts Costs and Nitrogen Usage With In-Line
Stripping System. Chemical Processing. March 1990.
26. Pipeless Plants Boost Batch Processing. Chemical
Engineering. June 1993.
27. ERRC Update. Progress in the Emission Reduction Research
Center. August 15, 1993.
4-38
-------
5.0 ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The energy and environmental impacts associated with
applying various control options to VOC emissions from batch
processes are presented in this chapter. The options are
described in detail in Chapter 6.
The environmental impacts analysis considers the national
energy burden of operating the control devices used to meet
various options, as well as the national estimate of NO, produced
from the incineration of selected model process emission streams
and from the generation of electricity. Solid wast* and
wastewater impacts were not evaluated because the effects
resulting from the operation of these control devices are
considered negligible.
5.1 ENERGY IMPACTS
Table 5-1 presents the national estimate of energy usage for
each of the options described in Chapter 6. The energy burden
was calculated by estimating the amount of fuel and electricity
required to operate the thermal incinerator and the electricity
requirement for the refrigerated condenser systems for the
applicable model streams. Approximately 10 percent of the total
energy burden shown for each of the options in the table is
related to the condenser systems. The remainder is associated
with the natural gas requirements of the thermal incinerator.
Energy usage for model streams and plants was extrapolated to a
nationwide estimate by considering the number of facilities in
the batch industries covered by this document. Note that there
is no discernable difference in energy between the 98 percent and
95 percent options. This effect occurs because the thermal
5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Optio
n
1
2
3
Description of option
98% control of sggragntsil
process vents that am ant
exempt per njgjeasion lines 1,
4,7
90% control of process vents
95% control of process vents
Uncontroll
ed
emissions,
1.000
Mg/yr
210
210
210
Baseline
emissions,
1,000
Mg/yr
77
77
77
Nationwide
emission
reduction from
baseline,
1,000 Mg/yr
65
52
63
Energy
burden,
I013 Btu/yr
5
2
5
NO
emissions.
1.000
Mg/yr*-b
5
2
5
in
•
10
•Emissions of NOX are from incinerator exhaust and from power plants used to generate the electrical power
fraction of the energy burden.
emission factors:
Incinerators: 200 ppm NOX in exhaust for streams containing nitrogen compounds, and 21.5 ppm NOX in all
tnMH (based on lest data).
-------
incinerator is the significant energy using device and it was
assumed to control emission streams by 98 percent in all cases.
The energy difference in using refrigerated condensation systems
operating at 98 percent and 95 percent efficiency was
insignificant compared to the incinerator energy requirements.
5.2 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
The NOX emissions from thermal incinerators were estimated
assuming that the incinerator flue gas flow rate contained 50 ppm
NOX. This value is in the range of concentration observed for
emission streams from incinerators (see footnote b, Table 5-1).
An alternative emission factor which could have been used is
0.1331b NOX per million Btu of natural gas.1
The NOX emissions from energy generation were calculated
because condensers also use power. Several assumptions were
required. Since the majority of electrical power comes from coal
combustion, and the majority of coal used is bituminous, an
emission factor was developed to related electrical power, in
kilowatt-hours (kWh), to NOX generation. This factor was
developed using an AP-42 emission factor for NOX generation from
bituminous coal combustion. This factor is 14 Ib N0x/ton coal2.
The average net heating value of bituminous coal is 14,000
Btu/lb.3 It was also assumed that coal-fired power plants are
about 35 percent efficient. The emission factor is therefore 5 x
10'3lbs N0x/Jcwh, or:
kWh 3'412 Btu I I lbcoal I ton . 14 Ib NOX
JcWE ' 0.35 ' 14,000 Btu1 2,000 Ib ' ton
Offsets for individual cases can be calculated using the emission
factors presented above.
5.3 WASTEWATER AND SOLID WASTE IMPACTS
Wastewater and solid waste impacts are not expected to be
significant for this source category. Thermal incineration for
halogenated compounds will yield acid gases which typically are
neutralized using caustic scrubbers. The number of streams from
batch processing emissions that potentially would be halogenated
5-3
-------
and incinerated was not estimated, however. For refrigeration
systems, wastewater could be generated from humid waste gas
streams, but this quantity also is not expected to be
significant.
5.4 REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5.0
1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42). Fourth Edition.
September 1991. p. 1.4-2.
2. Reference 1. September 1988. p. 1.1-2.
3. Air and Waste Management Association. 1992. p. 209. Air
Pollution Engineering Manual. 1992. p. 209.
5-4
-------
6.0 DESCRIPTION OF CONTROL OPTIONS
6.1 TECHNICAL BASIS FOR CONTROL OPTIONS
6.1.1 Approach
The methodology used in developing control options is based
on an evaluation of the technical feasibility and costs of
controlling any vent stream that could be emitted to the
atmosphere from a batch process. In order to be able to apply
the options and to defend the rationale that was used to develop
the options for a wide variety of stream characteristics, factors
such as cost effectiveness and control device applicability were
examined for all potential variations in duration of emission
events and emission stream characteristics of flow rate and VOC
concentration. This section presents a discussion of batch
processing emissions and describes the methodology for developing
the options.
6.1.1.1 Batch Processing Emission Stream Characteristics.
In general, there are two qualities that differentiate batch
processing emissions from those of sources operating
continuously. First, batch emission stream characteristics
(e.g., flow rate, concentration, temperature, etc.) are never
constant. Second, the emissions are released on an intermittent
basis. To illustrate these ideas, consider the batch process
shown in Figure 6-1. Eaissions of voc's will occur from this
process from start to finish in the order that the bulk flow of
material and energy occurs. For example, the process begins with
the charging of a VOC material from storage into the weigh tanks.
A displacement of air from the weigh tanks occurs at this point
as a result of being pushed out by the incoming volume of
material. Through vaporization of the VOC liquid across the
liquid-air interface, this air contains some amount of VOC and
thus constitutes an emission event. The event is short-lived,
however, lasting only the time of the charge; the concentration
of voc's in the displaced flow rate will increase to a point
close to saturation by the time the last of the displaced air
6-1
-------
WEIGH
TANK
WEIGH
TANK
MIX
TANK
I
REACTOR
-SOLVENT
CRYSTALUZER
SLURRY
TANK
CENTRIFUGE
DIST.
CENTRIFUGE
SOLVENT
RECOVERY
VACUUM
DRYER
Figure 6-1. Model Batch Process
6-2
-------
leaves the charge tank. As the material moves from the weigh
tanks to the reactor, another displacement occurs that
contributes to emissions of VOC's. This emission event is very
similar to the event created by filling the weigh tank.
Similarly, as the material flows through the process, each piece
of equipment becomes a contributor to VOC emissions through a
distinct series of finite emission events. In some equipment,
such as the reactor, more than one type of emission event occurs;
for example, an event results from charging, heatup, and kettle
purging from this piece of equipment.
In the example process shown in Figure 6-1, consider the
movement of a highly volatile solvent such as diethyl ether
through the process; the emission events that occur as a result
of air displacement have concentrations of VOC's in excess of
50"percent by volume. For the reactor purging event, however,
the concentration of VOC drops as the emission stream is diluted
by high flows of inert gas into and out of the kettle. The
largest source of uncontrolled emissions in this process is the
vacuum dryer, whose emission stream is characterized by an
decrease in VOC concentration and a somewhat steady flow rate
over the course of its drying cycle.
Figures 6-2 and 6-3 prsssr.t the fluctuations in flow rate
and concentration, respectively, that will occur during the batch
cycle. The result of combining the flow rate and concentration
profiles is presented in Figure 6-4, the emissions profile. In
order to give a more vivid illustration of how flow rate,
concentration, and emissions vary in such a batch process,
Figures 6-2, 6-3, and 6-4 have all been placed on the same page,
resulting in Figure 6-5. Note that the time scale for all these
figures is the same. Close inspection of Figure 6-5 reveals that
the concentration and flow rate characteristic of the process
vents vary independently from each other; although there appears
to be a slight trend for the concentration to change inversely
with flow rate.
The reason for presenting these profiles is to introduce the
idea that the variable emission stream characteristics of batch
6-3
-------
FLOWRATE PROFILE OF A BATCH PROCESS
154
132
E 110
>-4—
(J
-2- 88
LU
h-
< 66
a:
g 44
u_
22
Reoclor
*/
•V N
Ohr
Vacuum dryer
2.2hr
TIME (24 HOURS)
Distillation J?
w
22.2 hr 24 hr
Figure 6-2. Plowrate profile
-------
o\
I
Ul
CONCENTRATION PRQFII
90
H- B1
ui 72
O
o: 63
bJ
3- 54
, . i
uJ
2 45
13
-J 36
O
> 27
O
0 18
9
o
4^r _A
-Qr ^i*
fc 4%
•jtfy^^
, 1 '
teocloi
r-*-
111
rl
°l f
»il
X^ 1
•v0 1
1 1
n
Qlw 2.2
TIME (24
Vacuum
dryer
Distillqtion
22.2 hr
Solvent
Recovery
24 hr
Figur* 6-3. Coac«atr«tlon profile
-------
at
EMISSION PROFILE OF A BATCH PROCESS
LJ
Ohr
2.2 hr
TIME (24 hours)
Solvent
recovery
24hr
Figure €-4
profile
-------
process vents affect the feasibility of using control devices
currently available in industry. These attributes also
potentially create confusion on the part of plant operators and
regulators concerning how to describe the emission
characteristics (e.g., instantaneous maximums, 8-hr averages,
24-hr averages, or batch cycle averages). In light of these
considerations, it follows that the methodology for development
of options would address questions of control device
applicability, as well as provide meaningful criteria for
determining which streams should be recommended for control. The
methodology development is described below.
6.1.1.2 Control Devices Examined. The cost and feasibility
of controlling typical batch emission streams was examined by
applying typical add-on control devices that are found in
industry. All currently available types of control device* were-
examined, including thermal destruction (thermal, catalytic
oxidizers and flares), refrigeration (condensers), gas absorption
(water scrubbers), and carbon adsorption system*. The final cost
analysis, however, was done based on thermal incineration and
condenser systems. These devices were used exclusively in
examining cost because, among other factors, they can be applied
to a universe of compounds. In many cases, other control devices
might prove to be more cost effective, but generally, they can
not be used universally and therefore the cost impacts of the
option would not be supported for streams containing wide ranges
of compounds. A case in point is the use of a water scrubber to
control steams containing water-soluble VOC's. The cost and cost
effectiveness of this device may be considerably better than that
of an incinerator or refrigeration system affording the same
level of control, but the costs of the option could not be based
on this device because it would only be available for a segment
of potential emission streams. Likewise, carbon adsorption,
which is less costly than thermal incineration and condensation
in many cases, will not control some types of VOC's and therefore
it was also ruled out as a test case for the feasibility
analysis.
6-7
-------
Although thermal incineration and condensation systems are
limited in the types of streams that each can feasibly control,
these limitations are based more on concentration and less in
terms of compound specificity. Additionally, the two devices
complement each other in being able to handle ranges of emission
stream parameters. For example, the condenser option ideally
would be used to control richer streams (>10,000 ppm) while the
thermal incinerator could handle streams that were more dilute
(<10,000 ppm) and largely infeasible to consider for control with
a condenser system. Minor limitations to compound specificity
associated with burning halogenated compounds were considered by
adding the cost of caustic scrubbing and lowering waste gas heat
contents (it was later concluded that this incremental cost was
within the margin of error of the study estimate), while compound
specificity did not appear to be a problem with refrigeration
systems.
Note that although the thermal incinerator and condenser
were used to establish control cost effectiveness curves, tHe
options are not equipment-based, only performance-based.
Therefore, an emission limit would specify a control level
(e.g., 98 percent, 95 percent, 90 percent) and not a particular
control device. Therefore, an operator could elect to use a
water scrubber to meet control requirements in cases where a
water scrubber would achieve the required level of control.
6.1.1.3 Considerations. The first issue considered in
developing options was the sensitivity of the costs of each
control device to the intermittency of emission events. The
primary indicator of cost is cost effectiveness in units of
dollars per megagram VOC controlled ($/Mg). This cost
effectiveness value is obtained by dividing the annualized cost
of the control device ($/yr) by the annual emissions reduction
(Mg/yr). The cost effectiveness decreases (values become higher)
as the amount of time that the emission stream is released to the
atmosphere (on-stream duration) is reduced. This trend is
readily obvious from Figure 6-6, which is a graphical
presentation of cost effectiveness versus vent stream flow rate
6-8
-------
Cost to Control by Thermal Incineration
For VOC Concentration of 1 0,000 ppmv
207.107.
VO
-^35000
> 300CO
stream time
100 1000 10000 1000CO
Maximum Instantaneous Flowrate (scfm)
Figure 6-6. Dependence of control device coat on emiavion intermittency
-------
at a set annual emission rate and set VOC concentration for
different on-stream durations. Notice that the on-stream
duration is directly related to flow rate when the annual
emission rate is constant. Figure 6-6 is based upon a thermal
oxidizer with an assumed control efficiency of 98 percent. The
use of a thermal oxidizer for the analysis presented in
Figure 6-6 is meant only to illustrate the sensitivity of cost
effectiveness with on-stream duration (intermittency). Other
devices, such as condensers and carbon absorbers, also exhibit
similar sensitivity with varying on-stream durations.
Because each control device is often sized according to the
maximum possible flow rate and VOC concentration, devices used in
batch process emission control are usually oversized for the
majority of the time that they are in service. Also, for devices
such' as incinerators and condensers, the annualized cost of
maintaining proper operating conditions (e.g., maintaining
incineration and condenser temperatures) when there is no
material being vented to the devices drives up the cost of
control. Consequently, the cost effectiveness of controlling
batch emissions is generally lower (values are higher) than the
cost of controlling continuous emissions for similar stream
characteristics.
The second consideration that was made in developing the
options was to limit the number of parameters necessary to
determine which streams should be required to be controlled.
Because there is inherent variation in the characteristics of
flow rate and VOC concentration during batch emission events,
eliminating as many parameters as possible (especially those that
vary) will minimize confusion in compliance determinations. For
example, an owner or operator could choose to report an average
concentration of a VOC emission stream, rather than a 'peak'
concentration in order to fall below a concentration cutoff. By
eliminating concentration as a parameter used to determine
applicability, this problem would be circumvented.
6.1.1.4 Approach. The approach chosen uses uncontrolled
annual VOC emissions (expressed as Ib/yr) and average flow rate
6-10
-------
(scfm) to define which streams should be controlled and the level
of control required. This approach considers the impact of
varying VOC concentrations and frequency of emission events, but
does not require their use as parameters to determine
applicability. Generally, the uncontrolled annual emission total
of VOC's from a particular source is more readily available from
material balance and other calculational approaches than is a
detailed minute-by-minute concentration and flow profile, as is
an average flow rate.
6.1.2 Control Options Methodology
6.1.2.1 Cost-Effectiveness Curves. The methodology that
was used to develop the options utilizes the parameters of annual
emissions and average flow rate to identify which streams are
reasonable to control from a cost and technical feasibility
standpoint. Note that the volatility of components of concern is
a sensitivity which requires consideration for design and cost of
the condenser systems. Hence, three regions of volatilities were
considered in the analysis. Low volatility materials are defined
for this analysis as those which have a vapor pressure less than
or equal to 75 mm Hg at 20"C; moderate volatility materials have
a vapor pressure greater than 75 and less than or equal to
150 mm Hg at 20*C and high volatility materials have a vapor
pressure greater than 150 mm Hg at 20*C. In determining
applicability of the requirements to multicomponent VOC streams,
a weighted average of the VOC volatilities should be used to
determine the appropriate volatility range. This weighted
average volatility is defined in Chapter 7 under *Definitions',
and is ultimately used to determine which equation to use.
Figures P-l through F-54 of Appendix F show cost
effectiveness versus flow rate for annual emissions of 30,000,
50,000, 75,000, 100,000, 125,000, and 150,000 lb/yr for various
control levels (i.e., 90, 95, or 98 percent) and volatilities.
Each graph represents the full range of concentrations of VOC's
that might be expected in any given emission stream (from 100 ppm
to 100,000 ppm [the upper concentration examined for toluene, a
low volatility material, is 37,000 ppm]); for simplicity, we can
6-11
-------
call this the "envelope." Note that the 100 ppm line is not
graphed in the curves presented in Appendix F. This line
typically falls between the 1,000 and 10,000 ppm curves, but ends
as the envelope narrows. The width of each envelope is an
indication of how much the cost effectiveness varies with
concentration.
Figure 6-7 is an example of the curves contained in
Appendix F. The figure shows the cost effectiveness of
controlling any stream having » single component or group of
components with a total vapor pressure in the moderate volatility
range (from 75 to 150 mm Hg at 20*C). There are four curves on
the graph: Two of the curves show the cost effectiveness versus
flow rate for control by thermal incineration (abbreviated as
"throx") at concentrations of 1,000 ppmv and 8,750 ppmv. The
other two curves are for condenser control of streams with
concentrations of 10,000 ppmv and 100,000 ppmv. Points along the
curves were established by inputting a constant mass emission
total and a constant concentration into the condenser and thermal
incinerator spreadsheets and plotting the resulting flow rate and
cost effectiveness values corresponding to various durations.
Since the annual emissions are constant at 50,000 Ib/yr, the
flow rate (x-axis) values at any point along the curves are an
indicator of the duration of the emission events. For example,
the left-hand endpoints of the curves represent streams that are
continuous (i.e. in order to emit 50,000 Ib/yr from an emission
point at a concentration or iuu,000 ppmv, the minimum flow rate
for the stream, if it is venting continuously, is around 5 scfm).
As the curves move from left to right (increasing flow rates),
the duration of the emission events decrease, so that points
along the right hand edges of the curves represent short duration
events in which large amounts of VOC's are released at high flow
rates. These "bursts" of emissions are not surprisingly more
expensive to control because they must be sized for large flows,
yet they will only control emissions for short durations. For
some concentrations, points on the upper-right corner of the
6-12
-------
I
M
U)
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
.Vol. (Benzene); Cond.Ctrl.£ff.=90%
20000
SHORT OgRATION EVENTS
100% DURATION. 8760 HOURS
10
100
Flowrate (scfm)
1000
10000
p—TlOOOppmv T8760ppmv —: ClOOOOppmv ClOOOOOppmv
Figure 6-7. Annual maae emission total - 50,000 Ib/yr
Hod. Vol. (Beniene); Good. Crtl. Bff, » 90 percent.
-------
graph may occur less than 10 hours per year; these streams
resemble emergency releases.
Based on the above discussion, it can be seen from
Figure 6-7 that for a process vent emitting 50,000 Ib/yr of VOC,
the cost effectiveness of control is a maximum of $5,000/Mg for a
maximum flow rate of about 400 scfm or less, regardless of
concentration, regardless of duration. At higher flow rates, the
curves begin to rise sharply and the cost effectiveness values
become higher (indicating that they are less feasible to control
from a cost standpoint).
This discussion, then, forms the basis for setting up
option requirements based on annual emissions and flow rate. By
establishing a number of curves for different annual emission
totals (i.e., 30,000, 50,000, 75,000, 100,000, 125,000 and
150,000 Ib/yr), values of flow rate were obtained for an optimum
cost effectiveness range, considering impacts. These annual
emissions, and corresponding flow rates were used as data points
(x was annual emissions and y was flow) for simple regression
analysis to define the line that will represent optional cutoffs
for applicability that could be included in standards.
Note also that the subheading for Figure 6-7 states that
condenser control efficiency is 90 percent. Since both the
thermal incinerator and the condenser cost algorithms were used
to construct each graph contained in Appendix F, there were
varying levels of control efficiency that could be achieved by
the condenser; the thermal incinerator was assumed to be
effective to 98 percent all the time. Therefore, for curves
containing condenser control efficiencies less than 98 percent
(i.e. 90, 95 percent), the overall control level is limited by
the condenser efficiency.
6.2 PRESENTATION OF FLOW RATE REQUIREMENTS
Table 6-1 presents the regression line and data points
obtained from Appendix F graphs for various control levels. Note
that the graphs presented in Appendix F resemble the graph shown
in Figure 6-7. However, the labor and maintenance costs for
graphs shown in Appendix F are for 1 shift per day only, as
6-14
-------
TABLE 6-1. SUM4ARY OP CONTROL OPTION REGRESSION LINE DATA
Volatility
Low
Moderate
High
Control
level
%
98
95
90
98
95
90
98
95
90
Flow rate data points (acfa) for annual man emissions, Ib/yi*
30,000
757
866
449
251
515
334
208
215
50,000
1,787
2.452
1,634
612
1,034
1,082
517
544
369
75,000
3.076
4,043
3,324
1,063
1,682
1,833
XM
955
704
100,000
4.363
5.600
5.113
1,514
2,330
2,776
1.290
1,366
1,039
Jlhii field lifts y-cooidinatea for the corresponding x-coordinales of 75,00
'Annual HUM emissions below this value no control nouind. recanttess o
125,000
5,652
7.158
6,954
1,965
2,978
3,319
1,677
1,777
1,374
150,000
6,939
8,717
8,826
2,416
3,627
4,062
2,063
2,188
1,709
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0, 100,000, 125,000, and 150,01
f flow rate.
Regression line
PR - (0.052)AE-789
PR = (0.065)AE-895
PR - (0.07)AE-1,821
PR = (0.018)AE-290
PR = (0.026)AE-263
PR = (0.031)AE-494
PR - (0 015)AE-236
PR - (0.016)AE-278
PR - (0.013)AE-301
No.
flow
value
Ib/yi*
15,173
13,769
26,014
16,111
10,115
15,935
17,067
17,375
23,153
DO Ib/yr.
I—•
in
The regression line equations presented hern can be incorporatedinto regulations as 'cut-offs." As cutoffs, they would be used to determine
what streams should be contoUed, given an annual mass emission (AB) total and an average flow rate(PR). If the flow rate calculated by the
•cutoff" line equation (when annual mass emission is ••y****} is higher than the avenge flow rale of the stream, then control would be
required to the level specified (98,95, or 90 percent).
-------
opposed to 3 shifts per day labor and maintenance costs assumed
in the construction of Figure 6-7. By using the line equations
presented in Table 6-1, average flow rates can be established
using the annual emission total. Comparison of this "cutoff
with the actual flow rate of the emission source would determine
whether control is required.
The options that were further evaluated for nationwide
impacts based on the curves in Appendix F are presented in
Table 6-1. The regression lines can be used to determine what
streams should be controlled, given an annual mass emission total
and an average flow rate. If the flow rate calculated by the
"cutoff line equation (when annual mass emission is inputted) is
higher than the average flow rate of the stream, then control
would be required to the level specified (98, 95, or 90 percent).
The'assumptions used to arrive at the baseline and uncontrolled
emission numbers, and the industries affected as shown in
Table 6-2 are discussed in the next section.
6.2.1 Discussion of Additional Issues
6.2.1.1 Single st^q«» versus aggregation. The annual
emission total and flow rate cutoffs can be applied either to
single streams or to emission streams resulting from aggregated
sources. Costs for manifolding sources have been considered in
the design and cost calculations. For example, total purchased
equipment costs for the condenser systems were multiplied by an
additional 25 percent to account for manifolding whereas a
300-foot collection main with 10 takeoffs and an auxiliary
collection fan was costed out in the incinerator cost
calculations.
An additional analysis was undertaken to identify whether
there is a level at which the incremental cost of manifolding
individual emission sources is unreasonable compared with the
emission reduction achieved. Simply stated, what level of
emissions would rule out including a source into an aggregate
pool of sources, based on a measure of control achieved over the
cost of manifolding the small source to the central process
control device. This level is identified as the "deminimis"
6-16
-------
level for purpose of the applicability analysis. A deriation of
this deminimis level is presented in Appendix B.
6.2.1.2 Ifaloqenated Compounds. The cost-effectiveness
curves shown in Figures P-l through F-54 are for thermal
incinerators and condensers. The costs are based on using an
incinerator operating at 1600*F, with fractional heat recovery,
and not equipped with an emission control devic*. For
halogenated compounds, such an incinerator might not achieve a
control level of 98 percent, and additionally, acid gas would be
emitted from the combustion process. Consequently, the cost
analysis was repeated using costs based on an incinerator
designed to control halogenated compounds. Such an incinerator
would maintain combustion temperatures at 2000*F, have no
fractional heat recovery, and would be equipped with a caustic
scrubber to control acid gases.
From the curves, the increase in cost effectiveness value*
associated with using a thermal incinerator equipped to control '
halogenated compounds appears to be approximately 1 to $5K/Mg
more costly than using the nonhalogenated compound incinerator.
6.3 IMPACTS OF APPLYING OPTIONS
A model plant approach was used to examine the impacts of
applying the options to industry on a nationwide basis. For the
industries assumed to be covered, emissions streams from small,
medium, and large model plants were evaluated to determine the
level of control required based on the annual emissions and flow
rates specified by various control option regression lines.
Emission reductions over baseline control were evaluated for each
model plant and were extrapolated to a nationwide basis using
Census of Manufacturers Industry Profile data. The nationwide
impacts development is outlined below.
6*3.1 Industries Covered
While the information contained in this document is
generally applicable for batch processes in all or most
industries, the impacts presented are only for selected
industries. These industries and their corresponding Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) codes are presented in Table 6-2.
6-17
-------
TABLE 6-2. PERCENTAGE OF EMISSIONS FROM BATCH PROCESSES
\
SIC code
2821
2834
2861
2865
2869
7.879
SIC description
PUitics materials and resins
Pharmaceutical preparations
Gim and wood chemicals
Cyclic crudes and intermediates
Industrial organic chemicils
Afric jllurrl chenticals
<7800(hn/yr)
14.396
8,432
2,287
223
17.060
92
>0 (hrs/yr)
124,547
I5.4S9
20.415
8.365
173.167
3.912
% Batch
12%
55%
11%
3%
10%
2%
NOTE: Emissions data was obtained from AIRS facility wire* data base search
I
>-^
CO
-------
Note that facilities that make up the industries listed also
potentially use continuous processes; in order to assess what
proportion of eaissions generated in these industries is from
batch processes, the Aerometric Information Retrieval System
(AIRS) Facility Subsystem data base was accessed. For each
applicable SIC code, emissions from process vents were totaled.
Then, a subset of these data, those emissions that were reported
to have durations of less than 7,800 hours per year, were totaled
and divided by the total vent emissions for those SIC codes. The
resulting fraction was taken to be the percentage of total
emissions for each SIC code that would result from batch
processing. From the table, the percentages of emissions
considered "batch" may appear lower than expected; one of the
limitations of using the AIRS database is that only sources with
greater than 100 tons per year are listed. Because many batch
industries are for low-volume chemicals, basing these percentages
on AIRS data probably biases the percentages low.
6.3.2 Model Processes
Figures E-l, E-2, E-3, and E-4 of Appendix E present model
batch processes that are typically found in batch industries.
These model processes were recommended by an industry trade
association for use in evaluating impacts.1 Tables E-l, E-2,
E-3, and E-4 of Appendix E are summaries of emission streams
characteristics resulting from the unit operations shown in the
model batch processes for low, moderate, and high volatility
materials. Emission stream characteristics were calculated based
on data, where possible, and from the vapor-liquid equilibrium
assumptions described Chapter 3. Appendix E also contains all
the calculations and assumptions used to develop model emission
streams, from which only a few were selected to make up the model
batch processes. The emission rates for all unit operations
within the model processes were tabulated for each volatility.
The small, medium, and large model plants are based on multiples
of these model process emission totals. Three model processes
were assumed to represent the small plant, 10 model processes
were assumed to represent the medium-sized plant, and 30 model
6-19
-------
processes were assumed to represent the large plant. A list of
assumptions made in developing each of the model plants is
presented in Tables E-5 through E-8.
6.3.3 Baseline As. gipptions/Extrapolation^
The baseline used in estimating nationwide impacts for
process vents corresponds to the level of control achieved by the
Pharmaceutical CTG. Emissions from the number of batch
facilities in SIC Code 2834 (Pharmaceutical Preparations) were
subject to this control level. The Pharmaceutical CTG contains
condenser exit temperature requirements for five classes of
volatility, and requires 90 percent control on dryers emitting
more than 330 Ib/d. The facilities in the remaining five SIC
codes, 2821, 2861, 2865, 2869, and 2879, were assumed to be
subject to no VOC emission controls for process vents.
Essentially, two extrapolations were done in order to arrive
at nationwide impacts. The first was to evaluate the control
option impacts from the model batch processes and extrapolate to
the small, medium, and large model plants. The second was to
extrapolate the impacts from the small, medium, and large model
plants to the total number of facilities conducting batch
processes nationwide. These extrapolations are discussed in more
detail below.
6.3.3.1 Model Plants. As mentioned before, the small model
plant was assumed to contain three model batch processes; the
medium model plant was assumed to contain 10 model batch
processes, and the large model plant was assumed to contain
30 model batch processes. These values fall within ranges
recommended by an industry trade association.* Tables 1-9
through E-12 of Appendix E present model plant emission totals
for the small, medium, and large model plants assuming (1) no
control at all, and (2) current pharmaceutical control for low,
moderate, and high volatility materials.
Because the model processes are grouped into model plants
that only contain multiples of single processes, the model plants
are not entirely reflective of the batch industries. It is
expected, for instance, that actual plants will have combinations
6-20
-------
of different processes. However, because the estimation of
nationwide impacts is based on an evaluation of the flow rate and
annual emission total of individual processes exclusively, the
groupings are used exclusively to extrapolate nationwide numbers.
Therefore, these "unreflective" groupings do not affect the
correctness of the impact.
6.3.3.2 Nationwide Facilities. Table 6-3 presents data
taken from industry profiles contained in the Census of
Manufacturers and from EPA data on county ozone nonattainment
status. This information was used to extrapolate the model plant
emission totals (under no control, current pharmaceutical
control, and for the various options) to a nationwide basis.
Emissions from the batch industries represented by the SIC
codes in Table 6-3 were estimated by assuming that model
processes 1 through 3 (solvent reaction with atmospheric dryer
[model process 1], solvent reaction with vacuum dryer [model
process 2], and liquid reaction [model process 3]) were evenly
used among the industries covered. The impacts assume that low,
moderate, and high volatility materials are evenly distributed
among the model processes (i.e., 1/3 of the processes use low
volatility materials, 1/3 use moderate volatility materials, and
1/3 use high volatility material?}, Nationwide emissions were
estimated by multiplying the census size groupings by employee
number (i.e., small plant—0 to 19 employees) by model emission
totals to estimate small, medium, and large plant emissions.
Only the total number of facilities located in nonattainment
areas (excluding marginally nonattainment) were considered. The
formulator model process (Figure E-8) was not included in the
nationwide impacts, but is found in some SOCHI batch operations.
6.4 SUMMARY OF OPTIONS AND IMPACTS
Table 6-4 presents the overall reduction in VOC that can be
expected from various options and the national costs associated
with applying the options on a nationwide basis. Options are for
.aggregated sources controlled to SO percent, 95 percent, and
90 percent overall, respectively.
6-21
-------
REFERENCES
1. Letter from Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers
Association (SOCMA) to Randy Mcdonald, EPA/ESD/CPB, providing
comments and recommendations on the Batch CTG. Dated
April 19, 1991.
2. Reference 1.
6-22
-------
7.0 FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN IMPLEMENTATION
OF A RULE BASED ON THE OPTIONS PRESENTED IN THIS DOCUMENT
This chapter presents information for State and local air
quality management agencies to use in developing enforceable
regulations to limit emissions of VOC's from batch processing
operations. The information presented here assumes that the
Agency adopts one of the options presented in Chapter 6. The
information is the same regardless of the option selected.
A unique approach has been developed to determine the
applicability and optimum level of control required for batch
emission sources. Additionally, a model rule with blanks to
allow for choices of options, is included in Appendix G. This
chapter is divided into the following sections: (1) Definitions
and Applicability, (2) Format of the Standards, (3) Testing,
(4) Monitoring Requirements, and (5) Reporting/Recordkeeping
Requirements.
7-1
-------
7.1 DEFINITIONS AND APPLICABILITY
7.1.1 Definitions
The agency responsible for developing a standard must define
the terms that appear in the language for the standard. The
source category of batch processes, for example, requires a
definition of the term "batch" as it is used to describe the mode
of operation of equipment and processes. Another term that will
likely require defining is "vent". The feasibility analysis that
has been described in Chapter 6 applies to any type of gaseous
emission stream (continuous or batch) containing VOC's, as long
as the flowrate and annual mass emission total requirements are
met. Finally, the terms "flowrate" and "annual mass emissions"
also should be defined clearly. Provided below is a listing of
definitions for terms as they are used in this CTG and which are
recommended for State-adopted rules.
Aggregated means the summation of all process vents
containing VOC's within a process.
Annual mass emissions total means the sum of all emissions,
evaluated before control, from a vent. Annual mass emissions may
be calculated from an individual process vent or groups of
process vents by using emission estimation equations contained in
Chapter 3 of the Batch CTG and then multiplying by the expected
duration and frequency of the emission or groups of emissions
over the course of a year. For processes that have been
permitted, the annual mass emissions total should be based on the
permitted levels, whether they correspond to the maximum design
production potential or to the actual annual production estimate.
Average flowrate is defined as the flowrate averaged over
the amount of time that VOC's are emitted during an emission
event. For the evaluation of average flowrate from an aggregate
of sources, the average flowrate is the weighted average of the
average flowrates of the emission events and their annual venting
time, or:
T* (Average Plovrate per emiMion event) (annual duration of emi««ion event)
Flowrate » ** = —- A
(annual duiacion of emiMion events)
7-2
-------
Batch refers to a discontinuous process involving the bulk
movement of material through sequential manufacturing steps.
Mass, temperature, concentration, and other properties of a
system vary with time. Batch processes are typically
characterized as "non-steady-state."
Batch cycle refers to a manufacturing event of an
intermediate or product from start to finish in a batch process.
Batch process train means an equipment train that is used to
produce a product or intermediate. A typical equipment train
consists of equipment used for the synthesis, mixing, and
purification of a material.
Control devices are air pollution abatement devices, not
devices such as condensers operating under reflux conditions,
which are required for processing.
* Emissions before control means the emissions total prior to
the application of a control device, or if no control device is
used, the emission total. No credit for discharge of VOC's into
wastewater should be considered when the wastewater is further
handled or processed with the potential for VOC's to be emitted
to the atmosphere.
Emission events can be defined as discrete venting episodes
that may be associated with a single unit of operation. For
example, a displacement of vapor resulting from the charging of a
vessel with VOC will result in a discrete emission event that
will last through the duration of the charge and will have an
average flowrate equal to the rate of the charge. If the vessel
is then heated, there will also be another discrete emission
event resulting tram the expulsion of expanded vessel vapor
space. Both emission events may occur in the same vessel or unit
operation.
Processesr for the purpose of determining control
applicability, are defined as any equipment within a contiguous
area that are connected together during the course of a year
where connected is defined as a link between equipment, whether
it is physical, such as a pipe, or whether it is next in a series
7-3
-------
of steps from which material is transferred froa one unit
operation to another.
^eai -continuous operations are conducted on a steady- state
mode but only for finite durations during the course of a year.
For example, a steady-state distillation operation that functions
for 1 month would be considered semi-continuous.
pnit operation^ are defined as those discrete processing
steps that occur within distinct equipment that are used to
prepare reactants, facilitate reactions, separate and purify
products, and recycle materials.
Vent means a point of emission from a unit operation.
Typical process vents from batch processes include condenser
vents, vacuum pumps, steam ejectors, and atmospheric vents from
reactors and other process vessels. Vents also include relief
valve discharges. Equipment exhaust systems that discharge from
unit operations also would be considered process vents.
Volatility is defined by the following! low volatility
materials are defined for this analysis as those which have a
vapor pressure less than or equal to 75 mmHg at 20 *C, moderate
volatility materials have a vapor pressure greater than 75 and
less than or equal to 150 mmHg at 20 "C; and high volatility
materials have a vapor pressure greater than 150 mmHg at 20* C.
To evaluate VOC volatility for single unit operations that
service numerous VOCs or for processes handling multiple VOCs,
the weighted average volatility can be calculated simply from
knowing the total amount of each VOC used in a year, and the
individual component vapor pressure, as shown in the following
equation:
_ (MM of VOC cotnoafnt i)
(molaculmz velyht of VQG caapanant
1
i) ]
7-1.2 Applicability
The analysis on which options are based was performed over a
number of industries thought to manufacture a significant
7-4
-------
percentage of total production on a batch basis. These
industries, identified by 4-digit SIC codes, are presented in
Chapter 6. They are: plastic materials and resins (SIC 2821),
pharmaceutical preparations (SIC 2834), medical chemicals and
botanical products (SIC 2833), gum and wood chemicals (SIC 2861),
cyclic cruds and intermediates (SIC 2865), industrial organic
chemicals (SIC 2869), and agricultural chemicals (SIC 2879).
Although the impacts in this document were evaluated based on a
scope limited to these industries, any batch emission point of
VOC's from presumably any industry could be subjected to these
requirements. Note that there are two CTG's, the Air Oxidation
CTG and the Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations CTG,
that cover synthetic organic chemical emissions from continuous
processes. The CTG's also exempt batch or semi continuous
processes. The information in this document applies to the
processes that are exempted because they are not continuous.
This includes semi continuous processes.
The control option requirements presented in Chapter 6
apply to (l) individual batch VOC process vents to which the
annual mass emissions and average flowrate cutoffs are applied
directly, and (2) aggregated VOC process vents for which a
singular annual mass emission total and average flowrate cutoff
value is calculated and for which the option is applied across
the aggregate of sources. The applicability is discussed in more
detail below.
Sources that will be required to be controlled by a control
device will have an average flowrate that is below the flowrate
specified by the cutoff equation (when the source's annual
emission total is input). The applicability criteria is
implemented on a two-tier basis. First, single pieces of batch
equipment corresponding to distinct unit operations shall be
evaluated over the course of an entire year, regardless of what
materials are handled or what products are manufactured in them,
and second, equipment shall be evaluated as an aggregate if it
can be linked together based on the definition of a process.
7-5
-------
To determine applicability of a cutoff option in the
aggregation scenario, all the VOC emissions from a single process
would be summed to obtain the yearly emission total, and the
weighted average flow rates from each process vent in the
aggregation would be used as the average flow rate.
All unit operations in the process, as defined for the
purpose of determining cutoff applicability would be ranked, in
ascending order, according to their ratio of annual emission
divided by average flow rate. Sources with the smallest ratio
would be listed first. This list of sources constitutes the
"pool" of sources within a process. The annual emission total
and average flowrate of the pool of sources would then be
compared against the cutoff equations to determine whether
control of the pool is required. If control were not required
after the initial ranking, unit operations having the lowest
annual emissions/average flowrate would then be eliminated one by
one, and the characteristics of annual emissions and average
flowrate for the pool of equipment would have to be evaluated
with each successive elimination of a source from the pool.
Control of the unit operations remaining in the pool to the
specified level would be required once the aggregated
characteristics of annual emissions and average flowrates met the
specified cutoffs.
By aggregating unit operations, the annual emission totals
are more easily achieved at better cost effectiveness values.
However, a unit operation may have a high emissions to flowrate
ratio, albeit low actual emissions and the cost effectiveness of
controlling such a unit operation may not be reasonable. Such
cases have been evaluated using the cost analysis of ductwork.
Essentially, the costs of ducting can be shown to be dependent on
flowrate of the emission stream and required length of ducting.
The incremental cost analysis for manifolding single unit
operations to a control device are contained in Appendix B.
7.2 FORMAT OP THE STANDARDS
The control options are performance-based standards in the
format of a percent reduction. The cutoff is applied using the
7-6
-------
annual mass emission total and an average vent stream flowrate
(in scfm). These parameters were chosen to determine the
applicability of the cutoff because they were considerably easier
to deal with than concentration or duration of emission events.
Concentration and duration are extremely dynamic variables in
typical batch processing emissions, and, while flowrate and
yearly vent emissions also are dynamic, these parameters are
usually more available. The flowrate from a vent is sometimes
known because the gas-moving equipment (i.e., compressors, vacuum
pumps) that is used to create the venting must be sized.
Flowrates from other batch emission events, such as displacements
and material heating, may be estimated using the Ideal Gas Law.
Specific situations and equations are presented in Chapter 3.
The annual mass emission total also is required for
application of the cutoff to vents. Annual uncontrolled
emissions are frequently reported to State agencies for the
purposes of permit review, state emission inventories, or Federal
programs, such as the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) 313 reporting requirements. For batch process vents,
however, the task of estimating annual emissions may be
complicated by several factors; among them are venting
configurations from multipurpose equipment and variations in
flow, concentrations, and emission stream duration. In such
situations, owners or operators may elect to use material
balances in conjunction with control device efficiencies to
determine potential VOC emissions.
7.3 TESTING
Source testing to measure annual mass emissions and maximum
flowrate for the purpose of determining applicability of a cutoff
is much more complex for batch processes (which have
noncontinuous and, often, multicomponent vent streams) than it is
for continuous processes. The intermittent vent streams also
present serious problems for testing the performance of the
control devices. Each step in a batch process, such as charging
the reactor or operating the dryer, generates gaseous streams
with independently defined characteristics. This is illustrated
7-7
-------
in Chapter 6, where the emission stream characteristics of
flowrate, temperature, duration, and VOC concentration are given
for a model batch process. The gaseous streams from each step
may be vented separately, some or all streams may be combined
before venting to the atmosphere, and some operators may have the
flexibility of using different vents for the same equipment.
In addition to the inherent problems of stack testing at
batch processing facilities, these industries tend to be reactive
to market demands and change product lines much more often than
continuous processing plants. Vent stream characteristics change
with the production of new products. This not only affects the
emission inventory for the plant; it can also affect the
performance of the control device.
Testing may be more realistic for facilities that have all
vents from a single product processing area manifolded together,
and the common vent has a continuous, positive flow. If
measurement of more typical batch process vents (in which flow
and concentration vary independently with time) is required,
several considerations related to measurement techniques must be
made.
In the presence of unsteady or transient gas flows typical
of those found in batch gas streams, gas mass flow measurement
uncertainty can be decreased by utilizing measurement approaches
that separate density effects from velocity effects. In
addition, electronic flow measurement (EFM) must be utilized to
allow mass flow averaging over the event time. Typical
inexpensive gas flow measurement techniques (orifice meters and
pitot-type probes) are velocity head devices. They measure
differential pressure as a function of both the gas density and
the stream velocity. In transient batch-type situations where
density may be changing independent of velocity, this type of gas
flow measurement couples the effects and can potentially
introduce larger uncertainties into the velocity measurement. In
addition, for velocity head devices, EFM systems must be utilized
to eliminate the errors associated with pressure averaging prior
to velocity calculations. This error, often referred to as
7-8
-------
"square root" error, arises from the nonlinear dependence of the
measured variable (pressure) on the stream velocity. In all
measurement devices where this occurs (orifice meters, pitot
tubes, annubars), the time-averaged value of the square root of
the pressure signal does not equal the square root of the time
averaged value of the pressure signal. This inequality
introduces positive bias errors into the flow measurement and can
be eliminated by the use of EFM.
Probes that are most suited for transient batch flow systems
are probably insertion turbine meters and ultrasonic probes.
Both of these probes can have turn-down ratios (ratio of maximum
to minimum measurable flow velocity) of 10-15 to 1 and are true
velocity measurement devices. Both of these probes can be
hot-tapped into existing gas streams, and their uncertainty
levels are equal to or better than pitot tubes in steady flows.
The insertion turbine meter, like all pitot probes, requires a
traverse, which limits its application to transient flows.
However, ultrasonic meters, which are used extensively in
chemical plants, return an average velocity flow across the gas
stream. For this reason, ultrasonic probes can track shorter
transients with less uncertainty because of the elimination of
the need for a traverse at each sample interval.
Simultaneous concentration measurements may be made using
EPA Method 25A, a semicontinuous Method 18 (at close intervals),
or perhaps by using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) technology
(for which no EPA method currently exists), an emerging
technology that has experimentally been demonstrated to measure
multicomponent volatile compounds from a noninvasive standpoint.
The use of EFM's to combine the flow and concentration
measurements and obtain instantaneous mass emissions, as well as
batch mass emissions (integrated over the batch cycle time)
appears to be indispensable for accurate emission measurements of
batch emission streams. However, this testing is more
sophisticated and presumably more expensive than emissions
measurement for continuous, steady-state emission streams.
7-9
-------
Probes that are moat suited for transient batch flow systems
are probably insertion turbine meters and ultrasonic probes.
Both of these probes can have turn-down ratios (ratio of maximum
to minimum measurable flow velocity) of 10-15 to 1 and are true
velocity measurement devices. Both of these probes can be
hot-tapped into existing gas streams, and their uncertainty
levels are equal to or better than pitot tubes in steady flows.
The insertion turbine meter, like all pitot probes, requires a
traverse, which limits its application to transient flows.
However, ultrasonic meters, which are used extensively in
chemical plants, return an average velocity flow across the gas
stream. For this reason, ultrasonic probes can track shorter
transients with less uncertainty because of the elimination of
the need for a traverse at each sample interval.
Simultaneous concentration measurements may be made using
EPA Method 25A, a semicontinuous Method 18 (at close intervals),
or perhaps by using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) technology
(for which no EPA method currently exists), an emerging
technology that has experimentally been demonstrated to measure
multicomponent volatile compounds from a noninvasive standpoint.
The use of EFM's to combine the flow and concentration
measurements and obtain instantaneous mass emissions, as well :.s
batch mass emissions (integrated over the batch cycle time)
appears to be indispensable for accurate emission measurements of
batch emission streams. However, this testing is more
sophisticated and presumably more expensive than emissions
measurement for continuous, steady-state emission streams.
Another alternative is to measure emissions from a single
step in the process to confirm emission estimates based on
equations in Chapter 3. This method also can be costly if
testing is required for the entire duration of the step, from
startup to completion. Sampling periodically throughout the step
may be sufficient to characterize emissions and confirm emission
estimates in some situations.
7-10
-------
saturation). Note that under these conditions, the unit also
will perform at maximum efficiency because the emission stream is
completely saturated. In some cases, the varying incoming
emission stream characteristics make it impossible to meet an
instantaneous control efficiency value, but overall control
efficiency value can be met by controlling the richer peak load
(at higher efficiencies) and by not controlling the emission
streams when the VOC concentration begins to taper off. If vent
stream characteristics or worst-case conditions are known, the
condensation unit can be designed to meet a standard, and a
performance test may not be necessary. Monitoring can be
relatively simple. Temperature monitors can be mounted at the
coolant inlet to the vapor condenser or the gas outlet, and
temperature can be recorded on a strip chart. Flowmeters can
also be incorporated.
Carbon adsorbers are another vapor recovery device that can
be used to meet rule requirements, and if vent stream
characteristics or worst-case conditions are known, a performance
test may not be necessary. Again, a monitoring device should be
used to indicate and record the VOC mass emissions in the exhaust
gases from the carbon adsorber. Of particular concern when using
carbon adsorption systems to control batch emission streams is
the desorption of VOC compounds from the carbon bed to the gas
exhaust when the VOC concentration in the entering gas stream
decreases as it might during a batch emission event. The
adsorber may handle the peak VOC emissions only to desorb them
out during non-peak events, thereby producing an outlet stream
that is more uniform in concentration. Thus, there may be no net
control from the device.
7.5 REPORTING/RZCORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
Records should be kept that record the characteristics of
I
each process vent or group of process vents subject to a rule
that indicate average flowrate and annual mass emission total.
Note that the annual mass emission total combines the mass
emission potential for each emission event with the number of
potential emission events in a year. If there is no permitted
7-11
-------
value, owners and operators must keep records of the number of
emission events that will occur in a year in order to obtain an
accurate mass emission total.
Each facility required to control process vents should keep
a copy of the operating plan for each control device in use. The
operating plan should identify the control method and parameters
to be monitored to ensure that the control device is operated in
conformance with its design. Each facility should keep a record
of the measured values of the parameters monitored. Any
exceedances of the design parameters should be recorded along
with any corrective actions. The air pollution control agency
should decide which of the recorded data should be reported and
what the reporting frequency should be.
7.6' EXAMPLE APPLICATION
Figure 7-1 presents an example analysis. Individual unit
operations, as well as the aggregate process are evaluated using
the regression equations to determine whether control at an
example level (90 percent) is required. The results indicate
that the dryer requires control of 90 percent, as does the
overall process. The uncontrolled annual mass emissions from the
dryer are 36,000 Ib/yr. At this level, emission sources with
flowrates less than 167 scfm (regardless of volatility) would be
required to be controlled to 90 percent. Similarly, the
uncontrolled emissions from the aggregated process are
47,700 Ib/yr. Processes with an average flowrate of 319 scfm or
lower would require control at 90 percent, again regardless of
volatility. In this situation, operators might choose to control
the dryer emissions to a level in excess of 90 percent in order
to meet the overall process control requirement.
7-12
-------
Figure 7-1. Example Analysis
Djknr*tnr
Holding
Tank
Centrifuge
T
Dryer
* 10 packaging
IndwiduaJ
Unit Operation
Average Flowrate hrs/baJch Lbs VOC/balch Ibs/yf
React
Holding Tank
Centrifuge
20sclm
lOscfcn
30scim
3
.25
.5
6
4
29
(@300 days/yr)
1800
1200
8700
30sdm
120
36000
159 Ibs/batch
FR
1002 (low vol)
622 (mod vol)
167 (hi vol)
Aggregated
& 1 bstctVday, 300 days/yr. 47.700 Ibs/yr
. ((20M3)(300)*(10M.25M300)*(30|( 5)(300)*(30M6)(300))
WWBC80O rfOWftflw • mmi _ _..
. 26scfm
90%coolro<:
FR - 07(tos^yr) -1821
FR - ,031(ibs/yrH94
FR - 013(lbs/yr)-301
@47700 Ibs/yr
FR
kiwvol 1518
mod vol
Nvol
985
319
Conclusions: Would require control of dryer at 90% and overall process at 90%
-------
APPENDIX A
PHYSICAL DATA
-------
TABLE A-l. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF COMMON AIR SUBSTANCES
Off ink liquid
Petroleum liquid!**
OMoliiieRVPI3
OMolim RVP 10
Oeeoline RVP 7
Crude oil RVP 5
Jet Nephdu (JP-4)
lei keroeene
DiMilUle fuel No. 2
RMidiul oil No. 6
Volatile organic liquid*
Acetone
AcetonUrile
Acrykmitrile
AMylekohol
Allyl chloride
Ammonium hydroxide 28.1 percent •ohrtion
Benzene
n- Butyl chloride
Carbon diwlfide
Cerbon lelrachloride
Chlnmform
Chloroprene
V.por
moleculer
weight
62
66
61
SO
to
130
130
190
58 1
41.1
53.1
51.1
765
35.1
71. 1
926
76.1
1531
119.4
185
Liquid
demity,
Ih/gil
•160'F
56
56
56
7.1
6.4
70
7.1
79
6.6
6.6
6.8
7.1
7.9
7.5
7.4
74
106
134
125
80
Condenied
vepor
demity,
lh/g«l it
60*F
40*F
True vipor preMire in pew et:
50'F
60"F
49
51
5.2
4.5
5.4
6.1
6.1
6.4
47
34
2.3
18
08
00041
0.0031
0.00002
5.7
4.2
2.9
2.3
10
0.0060
00045
000003
66
66
6.8
7.1
79
7.5
7.4
7.4
106
13 4
12 5
80
1.7
0.6
0.8
O.I
3.0
5.1
06
07
3.0
0.8
1.5
18
2.2
0.8
1.0
0.2
3.8
6.6
0.9
1.0
3.9
I.I
19
2.3
6.9
5.2
35
28
13
00085
00074
0.00004
TO'F
8.3
62
4.3
34
1.6
0.01 1
0.0090
0.00006
2.9
II
1.4
0.3
4.8
8.5
1.2
1.3
4.8
1.4
25
2.9
3.7
1.4
1.8
0.4
6.0
10.8
1.5
1.7
60
1.8
3.2
3.7
80'F
90*F
9.9
7.4
5.2
4.0
1.9
0015
0012
0.00009
11.7
88
6.2
4.8
24
0.021
0.016
000013
4.7
19
2.4
0.5
7.4
13.5
20
2.2
7.4
23
4.1
4.6
5.9
2.5
31
0.7
9.1
16.8
2.6
2.7
92
30
52
57
lOO'F
13.8
10.5
7.4
5.7
2.7
0.029
0022
000019
7.3
3.1
4.0
1.0
no
20.7
33
35
11.2
38
63
70
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
Offwk liquid
CyclctwurM
CyclofMnUm
i.l-DkMonM*M«e
1.2 Dichloro««h.n.c
ei^ 1 ,2 Didiloro-hyUn.
mw-1 ,2-DkMoKMtfiylm*
DMiytMlMr
DMiyluniM
Diitopmpy) «ther
1,4-DKMMM
Oipropy! Mhor
ElhytMMttte
Ethyl *ciyt*te
EAyLlcohol
Fraooll
n-Htpum
HeuiM*
bobutyt alcohol
Itnpmpyl ilcnhot
Meihyl aceUlc
Methyl *crylile
Methyl »lci.hi>l
Vapm
molecular
weight
14.2
70.1
W.O
W.O
«,0
97.0
74.1
73.1
1072
U.I
102.2
M.I
100.1
46.1
IJ7.4
1002
16.2
741
601
74.1
16 1
320
Liquid
((entity,
IWg»l
M60°F
6.5
6.2
9,9
105
lO.t
IO.S
60
59
61
i.7
6.3
7.6
7.1
6.6
125
5.7
55
6,7
6.6
7.1
to
66
Condenied
v«por
dcntiry,
lh/g«l il
60"F
6.5
6.2
9.9
10.5
101
105
6.0
S.9
6.1
t.7
6.3
7.6
7«
6.6
12.5
5.7
5,5
6.7
66
7.t
*0
66
40*F
0.7
2.S
1.7
0.6
15
2.6
4,2
1.6
12
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.2
0.2
7.0
03
1.1
0.06
02
1.5
06
07
True v*por pre«ure in ptit tH:
50«F
0.9
3.3
2.2
O.I
2.0
34
5.7
20
1.6
0.3
0.6
0,1
0.3
04
l.t
04
1.5
01
03
20
01
10
60*F
1.2
4.2
2.9
1.0
2.7
4.4
7.0
29
2.1
0.4
01
1.1
0.4
0.6
10.9
OS
1.9
01
0.6
2,7
1.0
14
TO'F
1.6
5.2
3.7
1.4
3.5
5.5
1.7
3.9
2.7
0.6
11
l.S
0.6
0.9
13.4
O.f
2.4
0.2
0.7
3.7
1.4
20
WF
2.1
6.5
4.7
1.7
4.4
6.1
104
4.9
3.5
O.I
1.4
1,9
O.I
IJ
16.3
1.0
3.1
0.3
0.9
47
l.t
26
90'F
2.6
I.I
5.9
22
5.6
1.3
13.3
61
4.3
11
1.9
2.5
II
1.7
197
12
3.9
0.4
1.3
S.t
2.4
35
100*F
1.2
9.7
T.4
21
61
10.0
•oil*
7.5
5.3
1.5
23
3.2
1.5
2.3
236
16
4.9
05
It
70
31
45
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
Organic liquid
Methylene diloffivfl
Methyl cyclopentane
Methyl ethyl krtone
Methylmethacr /late
Methyl pmpyl *her
n-Pentanec
n Propxlsmine
Ptopyl chkwid, c
Tettbutyl akohol
U.I-Trichloroethane
Tnchloroethykne
Toluene
Vinylecetate
Vinyledene chlood*
Vapor
mnleculir
weight
§49
M.I
72.1
100
74 1
7i.2
5» 1
71.5
74.1
1334
131 4
92 1
16.1
965
Liquid
density,
fc/gal
•160-F
II. 1
6.3
67
79
62
53
60
d
66
112
123
7.3
7.8
10.4
Condensed
vapor
density.
Ib/gal si
60-F
II. 1
6.3
67
7.9
62
53
6.0
d
d
11.2
123
73
7§
10.4
True vapor pressure in psis tl:
40*F
3.1
0.9
07
0.1
37
43
25
21
02
09
05
02
07
50
50'F
4.3
12
0.9
0.2
4.7
5.5
3.2
35
0.3
1.2
0.7
0.2
1.0
63
60'F
54
1.6
1.2
03
61
61
4.2
45
0.4
16
09
03
1.3
7.9
TO'F
6.1
2.2
15
06
7.1
15
5.3
5.6
0.6
2.0
1.2
0.4
1.7
9.1
IO*F
1.7
2.9
2.1
01
94
10.5
65
7.0
09
2.6
1.5
0.6
2.3
II I
90*F
10.3
3.6
2.7
II
11.6
121
S.O
1.7
1.2
3.3
2.0
O.t
3.1
153
lOO'F
13.3
4.5
3.3
1.4
137
156
96
10.6
1.7
4.2
2.0
1.0
40
232
*RVP => Reid vtpor pressure.
••Vapor pressures calculated from pafM D-212 throufh D-2IS of •Handbook of Physic, and Chemistry." 67«h Edition.
cDala unavailable.
Source. Hazardous Waste Trealmeot, Storage, and Disposal Facilities fTSDF) Air Emission Models. EPA^SO/3 17426. December 1987.
-------
TABLE A-2. VAPOR PRESSURE - EQUATION CONSTANTS
NO FORMULA
1 C2H40
2 C2M50N
3 C2H3N
4 C8H80
5 C3H40
6 C3H5NO
7 C3H402
8 C3H3*
9 C3H5CL
10 C6H7N
11 C7H9NO
12 C6H6
13 C7M5CL3
H C7H7CL
IS C12N10
16 C2H4C120
17 CHII3
18 C4H6
19 C6H110N
20 CS2
21 CCU
22 C2H3CL02
23 C8H7CLO
24 C6H5CL
25 CHCL3
26 C4H5CL
77 C7H80
2?
29 C7N80
30 C7H80
31 C9H12
32 C6H4CL2
33 C4M8CL20
34 C3H4CL2
35 C4H11N02
36 C8H11N
37 C4H1004S
38 C14H20N
39 C3H7N
40 C2NBM2
41 C10M1004
42 C2H6S04
43 C6N3N204
44 C7H6N204
45 C4H8O2
46 C12H12K2
47 C3H5CLO
48 CSH802
49 C8H10
SO C2H5CL
NAME
ACITAL01NYOE
ACETAMIDE
ACETON1TRIL1
ACETOPNtMNl
ACROLE1N
ACRYLAMID1
ACRYLIC ACID
ACRYLONITRILl
ALLTL CHLORIDE
ANILINE
0-ANIS101NE
KNZENE
KNZOTR I CHLORIDE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
•IPHENYL
•IS(CMLORCMETHYL)ETHER
tROMOFORM
1,3-BUTADlENE
CAPROLACTAM
CAR80M OISULFIDE
CARBON TETRACHLORIOE
CHLOROACETIC ACID
2-CHLOROACETOPHENONE
CHLOROBENZENE
CHLOROFORM
CHLOROPRENE
M-CRESOL
CRESOLS/CRESYLIC ACIOdSOMERS
0-CRESOL
P-CRESOL
CUMEHE
1,4-DICNLOROBENZENE
OICHLOROETHYL ETHER
1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE*
OIETHANOLAMINE
N.N-DINETYLANIL1NE
D1ETHYL SULFATE
DIMETHYLBENZ1D1NE
DIMETHYL FORMAMIDE
1,1-DIMETHYLHYORAZlNE
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
DIMETHYL SULFATE
2,4-DlNITROPH€NOL
2.4-DlNITROTOCUtNE
1,4-DlOXANl
1,2-OIPHMYLNYMAZINl
EPICHLORONYDRIN
ETHYL ACRYLATE
ETHYLBENZENE
ETHYL CHLORIDE
In P • A • 8/T * C In T • 0 Te (P • m H|, T • K)
A I C 01 THIN TNAX
201.1772 -8.47861*03 -3.15481*01 4.63141-02 1 150.15 441.00
127.5872 -1.19*1E*04 -1.60681*01 1.1880E-05 2 354.15 494.30
53.4092 -S.ttUC«03 -5.49$4E*00 5.3634C-M 2 229.32 545.50
127.9772 -1.03«SE*04 -1.72»4E*01 1. 47791-02 1 292.80 701.00
133.5072 -7.12271*03 -1.94381*01 2.6447E-02 1 115.45 506.00
39.1412 -1.0231E*04 -1.71391*00 »7.«5 4*5.75
53.0992 -7.21801*03 -4.8«13f*00 1.0060E-03 1 216.65 615.00
82.7112 -6.39271*03 -1.01011*01 1.0891E-05 2 116.63 535.00
38.1982 -4.30841*03 -3.1322*00 1.11711-17 6 138.65 514.15
286.3872 -1.65041*04 -4.2763f*01 3.99181-02 1 267.13 699.00
»••• •••* *••* •»•• •••• • • •
73.1572 -6.275SE*03 -8.4443E*00 6.2600E-06 2 278.68 562.16
50.6272 -7.4190E*03 -4.6313E*00 1.7396C-18 6 268.40 737.00
49.8582 -7.1698E*03 -4.4836E*00 1 .38588 -18 6 234.15 686.00
122.1472 -1.23211*04 -1.4955E*01 5.60S6E-06 2 342.37 780.26
56.1552 •6.39841*03 -5. 49724*00 8.2034E-18 * 231.65 579.00
53.1752 -6.76331*03 -5.05141*00 2.96S3E-18 6 281.20 696.00
69.2092 -4.58001*03 -8.2922C*00 1.18206-05 2 164.25 425.37
69.2792 -1.0*69E*04 -6.89441*00 1.2113E-18 6 342.3* 806.00
57.9042 -4.70631*03 -6.77941*00 8.0195E-03 1 161.11 552.00
73.5462 -6.1281E*03 -8.57631*00 6.8461E-06 2 250.33 556.35
98.2572 -1.058SE*04 -1.13481*01 4.14351-06 2 333.15 686.00
.... .... .... .... . ... ...
44.7492 -5.94081*03 -3.93911*00 1.14171-06 2 227.95 632.35
130.3672 -7.47461*03 -1.87001*01 2.19091-02 1 209.63 536.40
42.9902 -4.7595E*03 -3.79961*00 1.17261-17 6 143.15 525.00
242.9872 -1.60601*04 -3.50831*01 2.88001-02 1 285.39 705.65
1 MIXTURES) •••• ••••
205.9872 -1.39281*04 -2.94831*01 2.51821-02 1 304.19 697.55
282.9872 -1.75401*04 -4.16371*01 3.61711-02 1 307.93 704.65
82.7612 -8.33401*03 -9.35671*00 1.36001-17 6 177.14 631.15
83.4172 -8.46341*03 -9.63081*00 4.58331-06 2 326.14 684.75
• • • • ••*• ••»• •••• •»*• •••
44.1267 -5.33471*03 -3.95721*00 6.96741-18 6 191.50 577.00
281.1172 -2.03601*04 -4.04221*01 3.2378E-02 1 301.15 542.04
46.4592 -7.16001*03 -4.01271*00 8.1481E-07 2 275.60 687.15
86.4342 -9.2791E*03 -1.03401*01 6.86751-03 1 248.00 483.00
.... .... .... .... . ... ...
110.7172 -9.85381*03 -1.33931*01 2.18671-17 6 212.72 647.00
•••• »••* •*•• •*•• ••*» ••»
66.1802 -1.05341*04 -6.42981*00 1.08041-18 * 272.15 766.00
78.1512 -8.87191*03 -8.5921E*00 1.89411-06 2 241.35 758.00
• •»• ••*• •••• * *• * ••*• •••
26.7022 -6.92591*03 -1.64*81*00 3.67251-03 1 343.00 814.00
47.3782 -5.67771*03 -4.3*451*00 1.9*261-0* 2 284.95 587.00
89.6402 -1.278SE*04 -9.5*731*00 1.***0t-18 * 404.15 573.00
57.0212 -6.64201*03 -5.62521*00 1.22801-06 2 215.95 610.00
126.6672 -8.26721*03 -1.76941*01 1.85381-02 1 201.95 553.00
83.3532 -7.691 1E*03 -9.79701*00 $.93101-06 2 178.15 617.17
6!>.2*&2 -4.78671*03 -7.53871*00 9.33701-0* 2 134.80 4*0.35
From "Henry's Law Constant for HAP's." Carl Yaws. Prepared for the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Final Report. September 30, 1992.
A-4
-------
TABLE A-2. (continued)
NO FORMULA
51 C2H48R2
52 C2H4CL2
S3 C2HA02
54 C2H40
55 C2H4CL2
56 CN20
57 C4H1002
58 C4H1002
59 C8H1604
60 C6H1203
61 C6MU03
62 C5H1003
63 C8H1B03
64 C6H1403
65 C3H802
66 C6N1202
67 C8H1002
68 CSH1202
69 C8M1803
70 C6HU02
71 C«H1 804
72 C8H15Q3
73 C6CL6
74 C4CL6
75 C2CL6
76 C6N14
77 C8H602
78 C9H140
79 C4H203
80 CM40
81 CH3IR
82 CH3CL
83 C2H3CL3
84 C4H80
85 CN6M2
86 C6H120
87 C2H3NO
88 C5N802
89 CSH120
90 CH2CL2
91 C15H10K202
92 C13H14H2
93 C10H8
94 C6M5N02
95 C6H5H03
96 C3H7NG2
97 C6H60
98 C6M8N2
99 COCL2
100 C8H403
NAME
1THYL1H1 01MOM1D1
CTNTLENC DICNLOR1DI
ETNTLEHE GLYCOL
ETHYLENE OXIDE
1THYLIOM1 BICHLORIDE
FCftNALDEMYDE
ETNTLEHE GLYCOL DINETNTL ETHER
ETHTLEHE 6LYCOL MON01WL ETHER
OIETMTLEHE 6LTCOI WHOCTHTL ETHER ACETATE
ETHTLEHE 6LYCOL NONOETHYL ETHER ACETATE
DIETHTLEHE 6LYCOL MOHOETHYL ETHER
ETHYLEHE GLYCOL MOHOMETHYL ETHER ACETATE*
DIETHYLEHE CLYCOL MXM08UTYL ETHER
01 ETHYLEHE CLYCOL DIMETHYL ETHER
ETHYLEHE GLYCOL MONOMETHYL ETHER
ETHYLEHE CLYCOL MONOPROm ETHER
ETHYLEHE GLTCOL MOHOPHEHYL ETHER
DIETHYLEHE GLYCOL MOMOMETHYL ETHER
DIETHYLEHE GLYCOL DIETHYL ETHER
ETHYLEHE GLYCOL MOH08UTYL ETHER
TRIETHYLEHE GLYCOL DIMETHYL ETHER
ETHYLEHE GLYCOL MON08UTYL ETHER ACETATE
HEXACHLOR08EHZEHE
HEXACHLOR08UTADIEHE
HEXACHLOROETHAHE
HEXAHE
HYDROOUIHONE
ISOPHORONE
MALE 1C AHHYDR10E
METHAHOL
METHYL BROMIDE
METHYL CHLORIDE
METHYL CHLOROFORM
METHYL ETHYL KETOME
METHYL HYORA21HE
METHYL iSOtUTYL KETOHE
METHYL ISOCYAHATE
METHYL METHACRYLATE
METHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER
METHYLEHE CHLORIDE
METHYLEME 01PH1HYL 01 ISOCYAHATE
4,4-METHYLEHEDlAHILlHE
NAPHTHALlNi
HITROBEHZEHE
4-HITRQPHtHOL
2-HITROPROPAH1
PHENOL
P-PHEMYLENtDIAfUNl
PHOSGfMf
PHTHAL1C AHHYDRIDE
In P • A %1/T %C In T %D Tf If • m Hf, T - C)
At C DC TNI« TMAX
38.8582 -5. $1771*03 -3.01911*00 8.26641-07 2 2S2.8S 650.15
111.4972 -7.3230E*03 -1.53701*01 1.6794E-02 1 237.69 561.00
189.7472 -1.4615E»04 -2.54331*01 2.0140E-05 2 2*0.15 645.00
91.9272 -5.43308*03 -1.25171*01 1.608W-02 1 160.71 4*9.15
76.8602 -6.0103E*03 -9.133*1*00 8. 59*01-06 2 176.19 $23.00
96.6172 -4.91721*03 -1.37*51*01 2.2031E-02 1 111.1$ 408.00
80.1902 -*.37Z2f*03 -1.00831*01 f. 94991-03 1 213.15 536.15
2*6.7972 -1.3*45E*04 -4.09001*01 4.109*1-02 1 113.00 5*9.00
105.8972 -9.90511*03 -1.37291*01 1.2203E-02 1 2U.15 6*0.00
79.6572 -8.*7B3t*03 -1.72441*00 1.04591-17 * 211.45 597.00
250.9672 -1.71*41*04 -3.4*991*01 2.5107E-05 Z 230.00 632.00
80.0053 -8.6783C*03 •8.72441*00 1.04391-17 * 211.45 597.00
173.6772 -1.57121*04 -2.19011*01 2.15*91-17 « 205.15 654.00
78.2492 -8.28411*03 -1.6*871*00 1.9*291-17 * 203.15 432.91
353.1672 -1.63901*04 -5.54501*01 *.*I«1I-02 1 225.00 5*4.00
65.3342 -7.77121*03 -6.69*41*00 2.239K-17 * 113.15 582.00
•••• *»•* •••• *••* • ••• *»•
428.7372 -2.1730E*04 -6.64 161*01 6.9903E-02 1 250.00 630.00
71.59*2 -8.5825E*03 -7.68471*00 3.60091-06 2 228.15 624.00
110.6072 -1.0705E*04 -1.31401*01 2.97811-17 * 203.15 600.00
98.8572 -1.1*331*04 -1.10671*01 6.22088-18 « 229.35 *51.00
**.• •*•• •»•• •••• • ••» •*•
158.3372 -1.8324E*04 -1.1*991*01 2.39021-11 « 501.70 125.00
81.9512 -9.52801*03 -9.0*0*1*00 1.3SME-0* 2 252.15 741.00
430.2172 -2.72201*04 -«.0495t*01 3.01*51-0$ 2 459.95 512.25
160.5772 -1.35331*03 -2.39271*01 2.94A91-02 1 177.84 507.43
105.9772 -1.215*1*04 -1.26771*01 6.91201-03 1 444.65 822.00
78.1382 -8.112*1*03 -9.51171*00 1.17141-03 1 265.05 715.00
63.9872 -7.722*1*03 -7.20171*00 7.01*91-03 1 326.00 710.00
105.0372 -7.47131*03 -1.39111*01 1.52111-02 1 175.47 512.58
67.6932 -4.*98*E*03 -7.996*1*00 1.15531-05 2 179.47 467.00
59.2372 -4.0301E*03 -6.71511*00 1.02101-05 2 175.43 416.25
14.1522 -6.54421*03 -1.02051*01 8.53481-06 2 242.75 545.00
109.8472 -7.13008*03 -1.51141*01 1.72341-02 1 186.48 535.50
•••• •••* ••** »••• »*•» *••
147.8072 -1.00341*04 -1.976*1*01 1.A35SE-05 2 119.15 571.40
41.7632 -4.455*1*03 -3.63391*00 1.50241-17 * 256.15 505.00
246.1372 -1.21441*04 -3.76541*01 4. 28731-02 1 224.95 564.00
50.9112 -5.13011*03 -4.9*171*00 1.97*51-17 * 1*4.55 497.10
74.9742 -5.79471*03 -1.10151*00 7.64321-06 2 171.01 510.00
71.9502 -1.3*041*04 -7.14291*00 4.00251 -11 * 311.20 609.00
* • • • »*•• •«•• • » • * •••• •••
10.3972 -9.0*221*03 -9.0*411*00 3. 58051 -06 2 353.43 748.35
85.5522 -9.74411*03 -9.52211*00 7.5*591-11 ft
* • * * *• * » *••• •••• • • * • »•*
51.5512 -6.29031*03 -4.14*21*00 9.22731-11 * 111.13 594.00
54.1172 -1.05001*03 -4.19901*00 2.1001-04 1 314.0* 694.25
79.0322 -1.13411*04 -1.17*91*00 1.57*11-11 « 413.00 796.00
107.4272 -5.67741*03 -1.53511*01 2.12501-02 1 145.37 455. 00
70.5352 -1.93021*03 -7.1*711*00 5.9*031-0* 2 404.15 791.00
A-5
-------
TABLE A-2. (continued)
NO FORMULA
NAME
In P • A * i/T * C In T * 0 T"
If • m H|, T
I TMIH TMM
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
C3H402
C3H60
C3N6CL2
C3N60
canto?
C8H8
C2H2CL4
C2CL4
C7N8
C7M10N2
C9H6N202
C7N9N
C6H3CL3
C2K3CL3
C2HCL3
C6H3CL30
C6H15H
C8H18
C4N602
C2H3CL
C2H2CL2
C8H10
C8H10
C8H10
KTA-PMPIOLACTONE
PtOPIOMALOEHTDE
PtOPYLENE OICNLORIOE
PROPYLENE 0X108
•UINON8
STYRENE
1 ,1 ,2,2-Tf TRACHLOROETNAN8
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
2. 4- TOLUENE DIAMINE
2,4-TOLUENE OIISOCYAMATE
0-TOLUJDINE
1,2,4-TRICNLOR08ENZENE
1.1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
TRICHLROETHYLENE
2.4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
TRIETHYLAMINE
2,2,4-TRIMETHYLPENTANE
VINYL ACETATE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIOENE CHLORIDE
XYLENES (ISONERS C MIXTURES)
M-XYLENE
0-XYLENE
P-XYLENE
59.6992 -7.82048*03
60.
49.
88
* •
128
129
53
78
100
95
222
35
57
54
• •
51
115
43
121
.
,
.
,
4
•
,
B
m
2442 •
2312 •
7372 •
*
6272 •
4872 -
8712 •
4662 -
9772 -
0812 •
3572 •
9082 •
7592 -
5102 •
*
6572 -
9172 •
0492 •
9572 •
67.7482 -
• -
79
85
138
•
m
.30958*03
.67748*03
.05808*03
....
.26558*03
.02738*04
.19128*03
.99508*03
.26488*04
.16598*04
.44248*04
.65918*03
.30178*03
.47166*03
....
.68198*03
.55008*03
.24628*03
.76018*03
.44818*03
- ....
8542 -7.59418*03
.7512 -7.9608E*03
.2772 -9.24708*03
•5.78088*00
•6.52898*00
•4.60638*00
•1.11048*01
....
-1.76098*01
•1.65568*01
•5.33128*00
•9.16358*00
•1.14728*01
-1.05838*01
-3.22638*01
-2.55498*00
•5.91828*00
•5.82758*00
• * • »
•4.96158*00
•1.61118*01
•3.63608*00
•1.79148*01
•7.56978*00
....
•9.25708*00
•1.01268*01
-1.94418*01
3.06898-18
5.86118*06
9.02128*18
1.26708-05
*•• •
1.53918-02
9.30818-06
2.12698-06
6.2250E-06
2.90078-06
4.15438-18
2.86621-02
4.69368-04
2.72418-06
4.50988-03
....
1.23638-17
1.70998-02
4.37988-18
2.49178-02
7.09228*17
» • • *
5.55008*06
6.01508-06
1.9084E-02
6
2
6
2
•
1
2
2
2
2
6
1
1
2
1
•
6
1
6
1
6
•
2
2
1
239.75
193.15
172.71
161.22
• *»
242.54
229.35
250.80
178.18
371.25
M7.04-
249.47
290.15
236.50
188.40
...
138.45
165.78
180.35
119.36
10.59
*••
225.30
247.98
286.41
685.00
496.00
572.00
482.25
• * *
648.00
645.00
620.00
591.79
804.00
737.00
694.15
725.00
302.00
571.15
...
535.15
543.96
524.00
431.55
482.00
...
617.05
630.37
616.26
• • EttiMttd vcluts for eotfficitnts in vapor prtuurt •quation.
In • natural logarithm
Prinary data tourca: Oaubart, T. E. and R. P. Darotr, D*U COMPILATION or PROPERTIES Of PURE COMMUiBt. Parts 1,2,3
and 4, Svcplanams 1 and 2, D1PP* Project, AJChE, Haw York, NY (1985*1992).
loo P •
NO
11
33
40
67
72
85
116
FORMULA
C7H9NO
C4N8CL20
C2H8N2
C8N1002
C8M1503
CH6N2
C6N3CLSO
NAME
0-ANISIOINE
OICNLOR08TNYL ETHER
1 , 1 -OIM8TNYLNYWU2INE
8TNTL8N8 OLYCOL NONOPNENYL ETHER
8TNYLEN8 SLYCOL MM08UTYL ETHER ACETATE
METHYL NYORA2IN8
2.4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOt
A
8
7
7
7
7
6
7
.30799
.69239
.58826
.15937
.21589
.84297
.82316
lot • lofaHtha to bata 10
A • 8/(T*C) (» • a» Nf ,
8
2475
1990
1388
1767
1659
1115
2420
VAPOR
.780
.755
.510
.871
.242
.190
.564
MEi
C
237.
235.
232.
168.
191.
191.
237.
Ml.
TMIH
134
347
537 «
070
339
648
476
Oata
61
23
•35
25
25
2
72
Oool
T - C)
TMAX
218
178
20
245
. 192
25
252
i **ttal
Co*any, Tokyo. Japan (1976)
Primary data aourca for 67 and 72:
Zurse. CO., editor, 6LYCOLI. Rainheld Htoliahir* Corp.
York, NY (1953).
A-6
-------
TABLE A-3. SUMMATION OF DATA FOR HENRY'S LAW CONSTANT
NO FORMULA
1 C2H40
2 C2HSON
3 C2H3N
4 C8H80
5 C3H40
6 C3H5NO
7 C3H402
8 C3H3N
9 C3HSCL
10 Ca*7N
11 crH9NO
12 C*H6
13 C7HSCL3
14 C7H7CL
IS C12H10
1* t?M^ri ?n
iw wcnvwkcv
17 CHBR3
18 C4H6
19 C6H110N
20 CS2
21 CCL4
22 C2H3CL02
23 C8H7CLO
24 C6H5CL
25 CHCL3
26 C4H5CL
27 C7H80
29 C/H80
30 C7H80
31 C9H12
32 C6H4CL2
33 C4H8CL20
34 CJH4CL2
35 MH11N02
36 C8H11N
37 C4H1004S
38 C14H16N2
39 C3H7NO
40 C2H8N2
41 C10H1004
42 C2H6S04
43 C6H3N204
44 C7H6N204
45 C4H802
46 C12H12M2
47 C3HSCLO
48 CSH802
49 C8H10
SO C2H5CL
NAME
ACETALDEHYDE
ACETAMIDE
ACETONITRILE
ACETOPHENONE
ACROLEIN
ACRYLAMIDE
ACRYLIC ACID
ACRYLONITRILE
ALLVL CHLORIDE
ANILINE
0-ANISIDINE
BENZENE
BENZOTRICHLORIDE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BIPHENYL
• t c/rui flOflHCTUVl )ETUF>
• J >V WnklMl^^ inikJEInCK
BROMOFORM
1,3-SUTADIENE
CAPROLACTAM
CARBON DISULFIDE
CARBON TETRACHLOR1DE
CHLOROACETIC ACID
2-CHLOROACETOPHENONE
CHLOROBENZEHE
CHLOROFORM
CHLOROPRENE
M-CRESOL
CarECm C /(*•)•? C VI IT a\f*tfW t CHiiTt C
W%E»UL»/WH8>*T L 1 W Aw III V 1 •UnCKa
O-CRESOL
P-CRESOL
CUMENE
1,4-DICHLOROSENZENE
DICHLOROETHYL ETHER
1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE
DIETHANOLAMINE
N,N-DIMETYLANILIHE
OIETHYL SULFATE
DIMETHYLBENZIOIME
DIMETHYL FORMAMIDE
1,1-D1METHYLHYDRA2INE
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
DIMETHYL SULFATE
2,4-DIHITROPHENOL
2,4-DINITROTOLUENE
1.4-DIOXANE
1,2-OIPHEHYLHYDRAZIHE
EP1CHLOROHYORIH
ETHYL ACRVLATE
ETHVLSENZENE
ETHYL CHLORIDE
Honry'e Law Constant,
H 8 25 C
4.8730000
0.0000986
1.1076388
0.5089400
4.5711400
0.0000145
0.0223962
5.4484900
515.4180500
0.0977600
0.0092393
308.3400000
54.5177107
17.7286753
22.6700000
29.5600000
3961.1453000
0.0001639
1064.0713500
1677.7900000
0.0036272
1.5713000
209.4500000
221.3300000
51.6355560
0.0394800
0.0911500
0.0396800
727.7800000
176.1100000
1.1390000
197.2200000
0.0000001
0.7701322
0.3405000
0.1780100
0.0098341
0.0910756
0.0548542
0.2226700
0.4756000
0.3996900
0.3079797
0.0135700
1.8590400
14.1169500
437.8100000
67?.. 2200000
H • ata/aoi fraction
8AS1S
txpariaantal
UNIFAC
VIE Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
UNIFAC
VLE Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
UNIFAC
Exporiaantal
UNIFAC
UNIFAC
Eiporiaantal
•A^A»I i ^k
••action nun Matar
ExpoHaantal
Solubility Data
UNIFAC
Solubility Data
Exporiaantal
UNIFAC
Solubility • EstiMtM
Exporlaamal
Expartftantal
UNIFAC
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Eipariaantal
E«poria*ntal
Solubility Data
Exporiaantal
UNIFAC
UNIFAC
Solubility Data
Solubfllty • EatiMtod
VLE Data
VLE Data
UNIFAC
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
VLE Data
Solubility • EatiMtad
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Exporiavntal
Experiaantal
To convert from H in atm/vol fraction to:
H in atm/ (mol/m3), divide by 55,556
H in mmHg/mol fraction, multiply by 760
H in psia/mol fraction, multiply by 19.7
H in kPA/mol fraction, multiply by 101.325
H in kPa/mol/m3), multiply by 101.325/55,556
Source: Carl Yawi, "Henry's Law Constant for HAPs",
September 30, 1992.
Final Report.
A-7
-------
TABLE A-3. (CONTINUED)
NO FORMULA NAME
Honry't Law Cow tint. N • ataVasl fraction
N 8 25 C IASIS
51 C2H48R2 ITNTLCHC DIIMNIDC 36.1100000
52 C2H4CL2 ETHYLENE 01CHLORIDE 65.3800000
S3 C2H602 fTHVLINE 6LVCOL 0.0001051
Si C2H40 BTNVLENE OXIDE 13.2280773
55 C2M4CL2 ETNYUDENE 01CHLORIDE 312.2300000
56 CM20 FORMALDEHYDE 0.0187000
57 C4H1002 BTHYLENE CLVCOL DIMETHYL ETHCR 1.9*71264
58 C4H1002 ITHYLENE CLTCOL MJNOETMYL fTMEt 0.0409170
59 C8N1604 OIETHVLENE CLYCOL NOMOETKYL ETHER ACETATE 0.035840*
60 C6H1203 ETHYLENE CLYCOL NONOETHYL ETHER ACETATE 0.0986300
61 C6H1403 OIETNYLEHE CLYCOL MOHOETNYL ETHER 0.0026793
62 CSH1003 ETHYLENE CLVCOL NONOMETHYL ETHER ACETATE* 0.1218685
63 C8H1803 OIETHYLENE CLYCOL MONOtUTYL ETHER 0.0012481
64 C6H1403 OIETHVLEME CLVCOL DIMETHYL ETHER 0.0837496
65 C3H802 ETHYLENE GLYCOL MONOMETHYL ETHER 0.0405801
66 C6H1202 ETHYLENE fiLYCOL MONOPROm ETHER 0.0474169
67 C8H1002 ETHYLENE GLVCOL HONOPHENYL ETHER 0.0037600
68 CSH1202 OIETHYLENE CLYCOL NONOMETHYL ETHER 0.0022577
69 C8H1803 OIETHYLENE CLVCOL OIETHYL ETHER 0.1189224
70 C6H1402 ETHTLENE CLYCOL NONOBUTYt ETHER 0.0292288
71 C8H1804 TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL DIMETHYL ETHER 0.0025951
72 C8H1503 ETNYLENE GLVCOL NONOtUTYL ETHER ACETATE 0.2746400
73 C6CL6 NEXACHLOROKM2ENE 94.4500000
74 C4CL6 HEXACHLOR08UTADIENE 572.2300000
75 C2CL6 HEXACHLOROETHANE 463.8900000
76 C6H14 NEXANE 42667.0100000
77 C8H602 NYOROOUINONE 0.0000800
78 C9H14O ISOPHORONE 0.3682100
79 C4H203 MALE1C ANHYDRIDE 0.0121651
80 CH40 METHANOL 0.2885032
81 CH38R METHYL 8ROMIDE 381.0578800
82 CH3CL METHYL CHLORIDE 490.0000000
83 C2H3CL3 METHYL CHLOROFORM 966.6700000
84 C4H80 METHYL ETHVL KZTONE 7.2200000
85 CH6N2 METNYL HYDRA2INE 0.0248008
86 C6H120 METNYL IS08UTYL KETONE 21.6700000
87 C2H3NO METNYL I80CYANATE
88 CSH802 METHYL NETNACRVLATE 7.8317700
89 C5H120 METNYL TERT-8UTYL ETHER 30.8401800
90 CH2CL2 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 164.4500000
91 C15H10N202 METHYLENE DIPHENYl DIISOCYANATE" 0.0026600"
92 C13N14N2 4,4-METHYLENE»IANILINE 0.0284900
93 C10H8 NA^NTHALENf 26.8300000
94 C6H5N02 HITROKNUME 1.3300000
95 C6H5N03 4-NITROPHENOL 0.0064600
96 C3H7N02 2-NITMMOMME 6.6111800
97 C6N60 WENOL 0.0722000
98 C6N8N2 f-rNENVLEMfDIANINC 0.0007700
99 COCL2 PHOSGENE" 780.0225300"
100 C8H403 MTHALIC ANHYDRIDE 0.0441500
Exp*r
-------
TABLE A-3. (CONTINUED)
Nenry'a LM Constant, N • atm/mol fraction
NO
NAME
• 25 e
•AS It
101 C3H402
102 C3H60
103 C3H6CL2
104 C3H60
105 C6N402
106 C8N8
107 C2H2CL4
108 C2CL4
109 C7M8
110 C7H10N2
111 C9H6N202
112 C7H9N
113 C6H3CL3
114 C2H3CL3
115 C2HCL3
116 C6HSC130
117 C6H15N
118 C8H18
119 C4H602
120 C2H3CL
121 C2H2CL2
122
123 C8H10
124 C8M10
125 C8H10
8ETA-PROPIOUCTONE
MOPIONALDEMVDE
WWmENS DtCNLORlDE
MOTYLENE OXIDE
QUINONE
STYRENE
1 , 1 ,2, 2 -TETRAD'- 5*9* TWIXf
TETRACMLOROETHYLEME
TOLUENE
2,4-TOLUENE DiANINE
2,4-TOLUENE DIISOCYANATE**
0-TOLUIDINE
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZEN*
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
TRICHLOROTHYLENE
2,4,5-TRlCHLORVHENCX.
TRIETHYLAMINE
2,2,4-TRIMETHYL*EHTANE
VINYL ACETATE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIDENE CHLORIDE
M-XYLENE
0-XYLENE
P-XYLENE
0.0063801
3.3224900
158.7100000
19.7742986
0.0576800
144.7155400
13.8000000
90.3400000
356.6700000
0.0000742
0.0091900**
0.1344600
106.6700000
45- 7/00000
566.6700000
0.4841100
6.9428000
185451.3318600
28.2111800
1472.2300000
1438.9000000
413.3400000
270.5600000
413.3400000
UNIFAC
Solubility Data
Experimental
VIC Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Oata
Experimental
Experimental
Experimental
UNIFAC
Solubility • Estimated
Solubility Oata
Experimental
Experimental
Experimental
Solubility Oata
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Solubility Data
Experimental
Experimental
Experimental
Experimental
Experimental
Not**:
1. • • EsttMtad valuta for coefficient! in vapor pressure aquation.
2. *• • Reacts with water.
3. For basis of UNIFAC, the estlswtion of the activity coefficient at infinite dilution Makes use of
the aroup contribution contribution Mthod using the UNIFAC equatiena (Qa*hl
-------
TABLE A-4. VALUES OF THE GAS CONSTANT R IN PV = n RT
N
gm mol
gra mol
gm mol
gm mol
gm mol
gm mol
Ibmol
Ib mol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Temp.
K
K
K
K
K
K
°R
"R
•R
°R
•R
K
K
Pressure
aim
•tin
nun H£
bar
kg/cm2
kP»
aim
in. Hg
mm Hg
Ib/in.2
Ib/ft2
•Im
mm Hg
Volume
liter
cm3
liter
liter
liter
m3
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
R
0.082057477
82.057
62.364
0.083145
0.084784
0.0083145
0.73024
21.850
554.98
10.732
1545.3
1.3144
998.97
n
gm mol
gm mol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Ibmol
Temp.
K
K
°R
•R
°R
°R
Energy
calorie
joule
Btu
hp-h
Kw-h
ft-lb
R
1.9859
8.3145
1.9859
0.00078048
0.00058200
1545.3
Source: Engineering Data Book. Gas Processors Suppliers Association, Ninth Edition.
-------
TABLE A-5. SPECIFIC LEAK RATES FOR ROUGH VACUUM SYSTEM
COMPONENTS
Component
6 - specific
leak rate, Ib/h/in.
Static seals
0-ring construction
Conventional gasket seals
Thermally cycled static seals
t<200°F
200400°F
Motion (rotary) seals
0-ring construction
Mechanical seals
Conventional packing
Threaded connections
Access ports
Viewing windows
0.002
0.005
0.005
0.018
0.032
0.10
0.10
0.25
0.015
0.020
0.015
Valves used to iolate system
Ball
Gate
Globe
Plug- cock
Valves used to throttle control
gas into vacuum system
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.25
aAssumes sonic (or critical) flow across the component.
Source: Chemical Engineering, &&:7B, December 14, 1981
A-ll
-------
TABLE A-6.
AVERAGE EMISSION FACTORS FOR FUGITIVE
EMISSIONS IN SOCMIa
Equipment component
Pump seals
Light liquid
Heavy liquid
Valves
Gas
Light liquid
Heavy liquid
Compressor seals
Safety relief valves- -gas
Flanges
Open-ended lines
Sampling connections
"Average" SOCMI factors,
Kg/h/ source
0.0199
0.00862
0.00597'
0.00403
0.00023
0.228
0,104
.00183
0.0017
0.0150
aThese factors are appropriate for estimating emissions when no
other data (i.e., leakage rates) are available.
Source: EPA-953/R-93-026. June 1993.
A-12
-------
APPENDIX B.
CALCULATIONAL ISSUES
-------
-------
APPENDIX B.
CALCULATIONAL ISSUES
This appendix contains calculational issues encountered
during the development of this document. An examination of the
degree of saturation with VOC of a purge gas stream exiting a
vessel containing VOC, and a discussion of an incremental cost
analysis of manifolding single unit operations to a control
device is provided below.
Calculational Issue 1; Degree of Saturation of a Purgg .
Stream. The degree of sat Luxation Mas examined for purges of
quiescent vapor- liquid interfaces and agitated gas sparging.
Based on the results obtained from various mass transfer
correlations, the expected saturation fraction ranges from 0 to
100 percent for the range of conditions examined. The
calculations show that typical batch purging (at flowrates of 20
to 30scfm) over quiescent surfaces yields fractional saturation
values of less than 10 percent, whereas purging of agitated
sparging yields values of 80% or better. The discussions below
present the theory and calculations relating to these findings.
I. General
If the vaporized liquid is a single component, or for dilute
concentrations in a solvent, then the rate of mass transfer of
the liquid across the liquid-vapor interface will only be a
function of the diffusion through the vapor "boundary layer"
film. The mass transfer is said to be "gas phase controlled."
As the purge gas pd.»e<=o over tha surface of the volatile
liquid, vapor will diffuse into the bulk of the gas where it will
mix by convection and eddy currents. The driving force for
diffusion is the concentration difference of the interface (which
is the saturation or equilibrium. concentration in the vapor) and
the bulk gas phase. The resistance is the diffusivity of the VOC
in the gas. The flux, or flow cf material across the interface
is the rate of vaporization and becomes the VOC content of the
exiting purge gas. The flux (I) is related to the diffusivity
and the concentration driving force as follows:
) (yry) (B-i)
where :
I - flux, gmol/m2 hr
BT - the thickness of the boundary layer, m
Dv - the diffusivity, rnVhr
pm m the molar gas density, gmol/m3
(y.-y) . the concentration difference in mole fraction.
B-l
-------
Since B.J. is not usually known, other forms of this equation are
more convenient where a term k is defined as the mass transfer
coefficient, and is empirically related to diffusivity,
viscosity, density, and the geometry of the system. The
governing equation then becomes
I - N/A - k(yry) (B-2)
where N is the number of moles of VOC transferred across the
interface of area A per unit of time, in the previous units, N
would be in gmols/hr.
II. Inerj; ......... ff«. ..... Pegging of Quiescent Solvent .............. Ppols
The geometry of the headspace of a storage tank or reactor
with contents at rest, where the purge gas is moving across a
quiescent surface of liquid, resembles evaporation from an open
pool. MacKay and Matsugu determined an empirical correlation for
the mass transfer coefficient for evaporation from a pool where
one of the terms is windspeed. In the case of tank purging, this
would be analogous to the superficial velocity of the sweep gas
across the liquid pool surface.
The k value calculated by the MacKay and Matsugu correlation
has units corresponding to the following equation for mass
transfer flux:
I - N/A - k[(pi-P)/RT] CB-3}
where k » m/hr in this example, and the term [(p£-P)/RT) reduces
to pi/RT to maximize the concentration driving force,- this term
is in units of gmols/nr .
This equation is based on a moles per volume concentration
gradient driving force rather than a mole fraction (y^, y)
driving force. The equation for k, the mass transfer
coefficient, in m/hr, is as follows:
k - .029 V-7BD~*'Ll$Sc~'6'7 (B-4)
where :
NSc " tne dimensionless Schmidt number which relates the
diffusivity and gas viscosity, calculated to be 1.86
for nitrogen at these conditions.
M » viscosity, g/m * hr (multiply Centipoise [CP] by 3,600
to obtain this value;
ft » density g/m3;
B-2
-------
Dv - diffusivity, m2/hr;
U - the wind velocity (meters/hr) equal to the purge rate
in m3/hr, divided by [(.707)(tank diameter,m) (vapor
space height, m) ] ; and
D - the pool diameter (meters).
To use this equation for evaporation in a tank head space,
the pool diameter was taken to be the tank diameter.
The average velocity across the surface of the liquid is
calculated to equal the flowrate divided by the term I (.707)
(diameter)(height)]. The correction of .707 was calculated to
account for tank geometry. It describes the average velocity of
the material'as it passes through the average available cross -
sectional area.
Figures B-l and 1-2 are the graphical presentation of the
results of using the MacKay and Matsugu correlation for
estimating the rate of vaporization of toluene into a nitrogen
purge gas stream for several different tank sizes and at two
different temperatures. The composition of the exiting purge
stream was calculated by material balance; the percent of -
saturation level is also shown. Even for a low purge rate of
only 0.1 acfm across a small head space of an 8 ft diameter tank
(typical for 3,000 to 6,000 gal storage), only 5 percent of
saturation is attained.
Based on using the MacKay and Matsugu method it is clear
that purge gas streams are substantially below the saturated
level of VOC. Therefore, the assumption of saturation predicts
much higher VOC loadings to the control device than could
realistically be expected.
In a variation from the MacKay and Matsugu approach, the
geometry of the vapor space of a purged tank may also be
considered to be similar to that of a wetted wall column where
the area of wetting is the surface area of the tank contents, and
the diameter of the column would become the effective diameter
(not the pool diameter) of the cross-section of the tank head
space through which the purge gas sweeps at a calculated
superficial velocity. Gilliland and Sherwood proposed the
following correlation for wetted-wall columns
Nsh - 0.023 NRe°-81NSc°«44 (3-5)
where:
Ngh • kD6M/pDv (NSc) as defined above
NRe - De
B-3
-------
0
I
4.5
# 3.5
2
i 3
CD
I 2.5
o
uu _
u. 2
O
1 1-5
o
I 1
0.5
?100
-•^
1CK)
300 500 700
PURGE FLOWRATE (acfm)
900
1100
Figure B-l. Mackay/Matsugu method for toluene at 25C,
-------
03
I
in
100
300 500 700
PURGE FLOWRATE (acfm)
900
1100
DIA=SH.VSpace=10tt
pw=8H-VS»>il'
Figure B-2. Mackay/Matsugu method Cor toluene at 50C, VP-94.3n.nHg.
-------
The mass transfer coefficient, k, is contained in the
Sherwood Number, Ngn, which relates equivalent diameter, D_? gas
molecular weight, M; gas density, p; and vapor diffusivity, Dv.
The Gilliland-Sherwood equation can be rearranged to solve
directly for k; the units are moles per area per time.
The area of mass -transfer is the area of the surface of the
tank contents. The driving force is the difference between the
vapor concentration at the interface (assumed to be the
saturation value) expressed as a mole -fraction, and the bulk gas
composition (which is essentially sero) . The rate of evaporation
is thus expressed as
N/t - kACy^y) (B-7)
Knowing the purge gas flow rate and evaporation rate, the
composition of the exit gas can be calculated by material balance
and compared to saturation composition.
A series of calculations were done using the wetted wall
correlation for a storage tank of toluene being purged with
nitrogen. Figures B-3 and B-4 are the graphical representations
of the data. As with the MacKay and Matsugu approach, very low •
values of percent of saturation are obtained. For example, a low
purge rate of 0.1 acfm across a small head space of an 8 foot
diameter tank results in only 7.3 percent of saturation.
The calculated percentages of saturation equilibrium for
most flowrates and vessel vapor spaces using both the wetted wall
equations and the MacKay -Matsugu correlation yield low values, in
the range of 0 to <10 percent, with most values below 5 percent,
A conservative assumption for calculating the purge equilibrium
fraction, therefore, would be to assume 10 percent. Note that,
as the superficial velocity increases, k increases. As flow rate
is increased, velocity also increases, but more inert gas is
introduced to the system, thereby decreasing the percent
equilibrium.
He can consider both equations bounded by the realistic
superficial velocity across the liquid surface. Figure B-5 shows
graphically the differences in values obtained for percent
equilibrium for the MacKay-Matsugu correlation versus the Wetted
Wall method. As the vapor space decreases (increasing
superficial velocity), the percentage of equilibrium increases,
especially in the low purge rate range. For vapor space values
of 0.5 feet or less, the equations begin to approach higher
values as the superficial velocity increases. In most purge
situations, however, the vapor space above the vessel will be
greater than 0.5 feet and the assumed 10 percent equilibrium
fraction will be realistic.
B-6
-------
L-Z
PERCENT OF EQUILIBRIUM (%)
H-
03
(D
CD
I
f
a
(D
rr
rr
(D
a
«
M
M
a
3
(D
("T
rr
0
a
H)
O
^
rr
O
C
n>
(D
in
n
<
H
to
vo
vo
1
*
i
II
3
y*
I
II
3
+
i
=
w
^
?>
II
s
I
II
i
<
II
S
i
M
3
J£
5
a
II
i
i
^•k
8-
CO
•s§J
C
3]
0
m
?
o m
1S
i^
m
L
o-
o
CD
§"
^^
«A
o -^ ro co 4:
Dui-^cnrobicocnAu
i i i i i i i i
i iw— w
>T f^V _-
•x/ X^
/ >x'
f /?
/ //
/ / •
//
//
;
' /
1 I1
:
//
1 /,
/ /;
I
t
1
I
I
1
>
t
i-
-------
8-a
PERCENT OF EQUIUBRIUM (%)
n
BJ
I
£>
rr
rr
(D
a
$
(t>
rr
rr
O
a
rr
O
M
c
01
(D
o
n
T3
tn
o
O
II
10
*
i
ii
3
3
p -^ ro
en -* en ro en co
O
O
-------
00
I
VO
-100
100
300 500 700
PURGE FLOWRATE (acfm)
900
1100
-X- M/M VSpace=4B -I- M/M VSpace=2lt
il WW VSpace=4fl -X- WW VSpace=2fl
M/M VSpaca=0.5ft
WW VSpaca=0 Stt
Figure B-5. Mackay/Matsugu -Wetted Wall" toluene at 25C=29.9 mmHg, diameter=8 ft
-------
t In the case of mixed liquids (two or more components) the
estimation of the mass transfer rate is somewhat more complex as
it requires calculation of both the gas phase mass transfer
coefficient, as explained above, and a liquid phase mass transfer
coefficient. The liquid phase coefficient takes into account the
rate of diffusion of the more volatile component through a film
of the less volatile component, to the vapor-liquid interface
where it can evaporate.
Furthermore, with binary or multicomponent liquid mixtures
the mass transfer driving force is no longer simply expressed as
the pure component vapor pressure divided by the total pressure
The equilibrium partial pressure is the driving force, but the ";
calculation of that term is related to the liquid composition
The simple correction factor implied by Raoult's Law is to " '
multiply the vapor pressure by the mole fraction in the liquid
However, in many real situations (e.g., dilute aqueous solutions
of sparingly soluble organic solvents), the materials are hiqhlv
nonideal, and application of Raoult's Law leads to substantial
under estimation of the equilibrium vapor concentration of minor
components.
The use of empirically determined Henry's Law constants for
the estimation of vapor phase concentrations is a practical way •
to approach calculation of a realistic mass transfer driving
force. This methodology is described in previous sections In
extreme cases of nonideality, the partial pressures of a mixture
of compounds is greater than the vapor pressure of any of the
pure compounds. This phenomenon is more readily observed where a
mixture forms a low-boiling azeotrope. Obviously, in such cases
application of empirical correlalions (such as Henry's Law) is
necessary for an accurate calculation of driving force.
But, in the case of purging of mixed liquids a second
component in the liquid phase seriously decreases the value of
the liquid mass transfer coefficient. Therefore, although the
actual mass transfer driving force may be somewhat greater than
estimated for a pure component, the overall mass transfer rate
will not be, and the use of the fractional approach to
equilibrium will be valid.
Ill- Inert N2 Purging of Agitated Vessels
A. Sparging
Agitated vessels can be evaluated in the same way using mass
transfer coefficients for stirred tanks. The coefficient of mass
transfer through broken interfaces during sparging is given by
the equations:
B-lO
-------
(B-8)
(fV)0.25
kL = 1.0 -'
0.67
NSC
where :
(B-9)
Tf DT HL
kL « mass transfer coefficient, m/s;
V - m/s;
Ngc « Schmidt No. of the sparge gas;
N - impeller speed, RPS;
Di - impeller diameter, m;
YN - impeller power factor;
DT « tank diameter, m; and
HL - liquid depth, m.
Notice that mass transfer at this interface is liquid-phase
controlled.
The amount of mass transfer that can occur is a function of
the characteristics of the agitation scenario, including impeller
size and speed. As an approximation, the tank with a five- foot
diameter and a 6 f t . vapor space height containing toluene at
25 °C was assumed to have an agitator with a 1 ft diameter
impeller rotating at 0.5 revolutions per second. In absence of
real data the power number was assumed to be 1.6, corresponding
to a typical value in solid- liquid dispersion.
Using the sparge velocity as in other examples for purge
velocity (i.e., flowrate divided by area of flow), much higher
values of mass transfer coefficients are obtained. Saturation
values for low sparge rates are considerably higher. For
100 acfm,. the expected fraction of saturation was calculated to
be 30 percent. Figure B-6 illustrates the values of percent
equilibrium verses purge flowrate for this agitated sparge
system. Table B-l is the data in tabular form.
B-ll
-------
tu
i
H
to
I
D
CT
HI
8
-------
TABLE B-l. PURGE EQUILIBRIUM CALCULATION RESULTS FOR FIGURE B-6.
FtePURQEOAS
Mw« Trwwtat Ttwough Broton MMtaCM injIlHiif Puro*|
01 OK 92
W
i
H«
U>
WMM! GonHQunfloft*
OMU.
vhptjMM
Agitator Poww
Puf(l» Super.
Flow nut VWoc.
ACFM
01
1
10
2O
30
40
90
•0
70
•0
90
100
200
300
400
500
1000
VMC
0.0001
ooooo
00079
0.0197
0023*
00314
003*3
00471
00560
00626
00707
00766
0.1S72
0.2387
O3143
0.3626
0.7096
9
•
8V~0.78
w/hf
01478
08010
9.3668
• 2188
126482
19.6300
188386
21 7186
244039
27.1022
2*. 797B
323500
909402
76.2130
66.3693
1139167
164.6262
PracMcUqutd
R NMM: TOLUENE
II Twnp 29
VP 206
NGc 1.66
0*
"•Oil NSc N3cfl kn
m Hollo
0859
0859
4859
0.899
0.699
0.699
0.699
0.699
0699
0699
0.699
0.699
0699
0.699
0.699
0699
0699
492
492
.492
492
492
.492
.492
.492
492
.492
492
.492
.492
.492
.492
492
.492
~')67
1 ?84
1 264
1284
1 284
1284
1.264
1.264
1264
1284
1264
1.264
1.264
1.264
1.264
1264
1.264
1.264
m/tr
O002'
00161
00867
01683
0.2325
02810
0.34ft!
03682
0.4902
04687
09477
0.9647
1.0211
1.4006
1 7934
20687
3.9632
D*gC
mmHg
1
•IffloV
inZ/hr
80828
14 3361
254872
30 1214
335561
380584
38 1271
388052
41 4731
42.6808
441824
493411
938166
96.6722
641216
67.6007
60.6281
N
•xnol/
hr
00324
00676
01025
Oi219
01348
Q145O
01633
01604
01687
01724
01779
01623
02166
02386
02976
02726
03241
bnfwllw Oiam (m):
POWM Number:
AQNSfM«d|r|M):
Purg» y
IbmoV @«xM
hr
001M
0 1531
1 5312
30623
49839
8 1247
7.6958
61870
107162
122484
137809
193117
306234
496391
612466
769969
193.1166
molfr
211887
037644
006884
003B8G
002837
002367
O.O2002
001748
0.01996
001407
001286
0.01160
0.00706
000922
000421
000396
000212
0.3048
1.6
0.9
y
•quN
molfr
003834
003834
003834
0.03834
003834
003634
0.03634
0.03834
0.03834
OO3634
O.O3634
003634
003634
0.03634
0.03634
003634
003834
Pwcwil
of
Equi
5381
897
170
101
79
60
91
44
40
36
33
30
16
13
11
6
9
Liquid D*»»M:
Pwcvfit EfMMon
of
Stafeii
6781855
273W79
627*138
382*888
26-5266
2.312019
1.062716
1.716161
1.931676
1.367736
1.271601
1.1764
0.702644
0916907
0.416106
0394791
0.21124
(KI2/WC3)
6.286-07
828E-07
828E-07
6.26E-07
6.26E-07
620E-07
6.26E-07
6.29E-07
6.26E47
626E-07
6.26E-07
6.26E-07
6.26E-07
620E-07
6.26E-07
626E-07
6.26E-07
3
k
««/•!
0.001363
0002477
0004404
0005236
OOO9786
0.006226
0.000966
0.006663
0.007164
0.007407
0.007626
0.007632
0.006314
0.010306
0.011076
0.011712
0013626
k
-------
i
M
*.
#
oc
CD
O
UJ
u.
O
UJ
O
DC
UJ
Q.
9j
8
7-
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
PURGE FLOWRATE (acfm)
Figure B-7. Non-Sparge Agitated purge typical impeller scenario.
-------
B. Agitated Purging
Mass transfer at gas -liquid agitated interfaces during
nitrogen purging was also examined using the following liquid
phase mass transfer coefficient:
.0256
Figures B-7 and B-8 are the results of examining two different
agitation scenarios. The first scenario, labelled the "typical"
impeller scenario, is identical to the sparge impeller example
discussed previously. It considers the use of a 1-foot diameter
impeller rotating at .5 revolutions per second. YN, the power
factor, is 1.6. The second scenario, presented in Figure B-8,
considers the use of a 2 -foot diameter impeller, rotating at 2
revolutions per second. The power factor also is higher, at 6.6.
This scenario is termed "worst case", as an approximation of the
maximum turbulence encountered during such a situation. Notice
that values approaching 80% saturation are shown corresponding to
typical purge flowrates of 20 to 30 scfm in Figure B-8 (data in
Table B-3) . Saturation values are much lower for the typical
impeller scenario in Figure 1-7 (data in Table B-2) .
IV. Conclusions
The degree of saturation with VOC of a purge gas stream
exciting a vessel containing VOC is highly dependent upon
specific vessel geometries and liquid-vapor interface conditions.
Values approaching complete saturation are not unrealistic for
systems utilizing severe agitation or sparging, while much lower
fractional saturation levels are expected for non-agitated
purging events.
In order to provide a conservative, yet realistic approach
to estimating the degree of saturation of an inert gas purge, the
following guidelines are recommended:
1} for purge flowrates less than 100 scfm, assume that the
vent streams exiting streams are completely saturated
with VOCs.
(2) for purge flowrates greater than 100 scfm, assume that
the vent streams exiting the vessel are 25% saturated
with VOCs.
B-15
-------
OS
100200 300 400 500 600 700 800900 1000
PURGE FLOWRATE (acfm)
Figure B-8. Non-Sparge Agitated Purge worst case impeller scenario.
-------
TABLE B-2. PURGE EQUILIBRIUM CALCULATION RESULTS FOR FIGURE B-7.
ot
MM* Tramfer Through Breton
WWKMUQM Sparging: Typtcal
(Agitated Putg»)
td
I
VMMlConMguraMan:
Own.
V«p8p*M
Agitator Poww
Purge Supw.
FtowM* VWac.
ACFM
0.1
1
10
20
30
40
60
•0
70
•0
00
too
200
300
400
600
1000
WMC
0.0001
0000*
0007*
00167
0023*
0.0314
003*3
0.0471
00060
00*0*
0.0707
0.079*
01672
02367
03143
0.3929
0798*
6
8V~07*
m/hr
0147*
08010
63888
02180
126482
15*300
1*.*3M
21.71**
244939
271922
29.7979
32.3900
6654*2
7*2130
96.3993
113.91*7
1*4.9292
II
ft
Dt
"•Oil
m
0.959
0935
0955
0*55
0956
0906
0956
0965
0.895
0955
0955
0959
0.099
0*55
0*55
0.999
0*55
PTOCM* Liquid:
NMW: TOLUENE
Twnp 25 OegC
VP 200 mmHg
NSc 188
1
NSc NScR km gmol/
Rfttto ~067
1.492
1492
1.492
1.492
1.492
1.462
1.492
1.492
1.492
1.452
1.452
1.492
1.492
1.462
1.492
1.492
1.492
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
2*4
.2*4
.2*4
2*4
.2*4
2*4
2*4
2*4
.2*4
2*4
m/hr
00027
00164
0.0087
0 1885
02325
02010
03483
03002
04502
04007
05477
05*47
1.0211
1.400*
1 7534
208*7
35*32
m2/hr
1.2201
1.2201
1 2201
12201
12201
1 2201
12201
1.2201
1.2201
1.2201
1.22*1
122*1
122*1
1.22*1
122*1
1.2201
1.2201
N
IbmoV
hr
00040
00040
00040
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
00049
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
0004*
Poww Number.
AgNSp**d(rp*)
IbmoV 0«xtt
hr
00153
01531
1 5312
30823
45*35
8.1247
78558
8 1870
1071*2
122494
137805
15.3117
30*234
45*351
•1240*
7*99*9
153.11*9
modi
03228*
003227
000323
0001*1
00010*
0000*1
000085
000054
000048
000040
000038
000032
0.0001*
000011
0.0000*
00000*
0.00003
0.304*
1.8
OS
•quH
molfr
003934
003034
003034
003034
003034
OO3034
OO3034
OO3034
003*34
O 03034
003*34
0.03*34
0.03934
003*34
003*34
003*34
0.03*34
Pwcont
of
Equd
820
82
•
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
Liquid D*p
Percent
of
Streem
243*851
3.12002*
0.321*52
0.1*1096
0.10744*
0.0*0*0*
006449*
0.063793
0.04*077
0.04032
0.039*42
000225*
0.01*132
0010769
000*0*7
000*493
0.003227
Hi (m):
EpcHon
-------
TABLE B-3. PURGE EQUILIBRIUM CALCULATION RESULTS FOR FIGURE B-8.
FNrPURGEGAS
01-D*c-B2
W
I
»-•
00
•MM irarwi
Without GM
1
1
Agitate POM
Pl*0*
Flow MB
ACFM
0.1
1
10
20
30
40
SO
60
70
•0
00
100
200
300
400
900
1000
BpMObif.:
XMK.
tapSjMC*
m
Super.
\Moc.
WMC
0.0001
0.000*
0.007*
0.0167
0.023*
0.0314
O.OM9
0.0471
00000
00*2*
0.0707
0078*
01872
O.tSST
0.9143
0.3J2*
0.7*5*
Won! CM*
5
•
mfi*
0.147*
0.8810
6.3*8*
• 21*8
12*4*2
15.1300
188306
21.71*8
24.4*35
27.1*22
28.7878
32-3500
86.54*2
70.2130
883883
113.61*7
18482*2
II
8.
0*
~-0.11
m
0.055
0855
0889
0.855
0869
0859
0895
0.865
0888
0865
0885
0.055
0*65
0055
0.805
0.855
0895
•••arufv
•rootMlk
M
T«
W
M
NSc 1
RMo -
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1.452
1452
1452
1.452
•I
«td:
MM: 1
•up
i
>c
ttcfl
067
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.2*4
.284
.2*4
.2*4
2*4
.2*4
.2*4
FOtUENE
25
20.*
1*8
km
m/hr
O.OO27
0.01*4
0.0887
01689
0.2325
0.2310
0.3463
0.3882
0.4502
0.4087
0.5477
0.5847
10211
1.4X0
1.7534
2.0887
3.5*32
D*gC
mmHg
1
gmoV
m2*r
24.3154
24.3154
24.3154
243154
243154
243154
243154
243154
24.3154
243154
243154
24.3154
24.3154
243154
243154
243154
243154
N
tomoV
hr
00877
00877
00877
00077
0.0877
0.0877
0.0877
0.0877
0.0877
00877
0.0877
00877
00877
O0877
00877
00877
0.0877
ImpttUiDU
Power Num
AgKSpMd
txnoV
hr
00193
01931
1 5312
3O623
45835
6 1247
76596
81670
107182
122484
13.7005
153117
30.6234
45*351
61246*
7655*5
153.1166
m (ml
• ii liii)*
b*
(IP*
e«
-------
raTrulational laaue 2: Incremental Coat Analysis of Manjfp]r?ing
Single Unit Operations to a Control Device
I. General
The incremental cost effectiveness of manifolding single
unit operations to a control device was examined. Ductwork
diameter for an emission source to a control device was estimated
by assuming an average surficial velocity through the duct to be
2,000 ft/min. The duct costs are based on stainless steel,
circular duct prices. The analysis describes ductwork cost as a
function of length of ducting and emission source flowrate.
Calculations are provided below. The results of the analysis
show a minimum level of 500 pounds per year of VOC emissions is
necessary to yield an incremental cost effectiveness comparable
to the average cost effectiveness of RACT. This is the deminimis
level for applicability of RACT to any single unit operation.
Figure B-9 shows the incremental ducting analysis results for
0 to 300 feet of duct versus mass emissions. Table B-4 is the
cost analysis data.
Calculations
Assume:
Velocity - 2,000 ft/min
Flowrate - (Area)(velocity)
Flowrate « Ur2) (2,000 ft/min)
Flowrate _ d2
7T
2,000 ft/min 4
d(ft) - v/v3.CCS4) (Flowrate)
B-19
-------
w
to
o
1500
1250
1000
§ 750
500
250
Incremental Ducting Analysis
CO
c
o
'to
to
E
LU
c
c
100 200
Length of pipe (ft)
300
Fr=10acfm
Fr=20acfm
Fr=50acfm
Figure B-9. Incremental Ducting Analysis Results
-------
TABLE B-4. COST ANALYSIS DATA
W
Cos! Analysis - ManNoMng Co* Angsts
Ftownfte
(•dm)
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
20
50
50
50
SO
0
100
200
300
0
100
200
300
0
100
200
300
FOB Cost
Tol*
(June 92$)
1174385
1430529
1686.674
1942818
1182414
1544657
19069
2269143
1198346
1771 102
2343859
2916615
TCI
(June 1992)
2009372
2447636
2885899
3324162
2023111
2642908
3262706
3882504
2050369
3030356
4010342
4990328
Annualzed
-
407.4002
496.2581
586.116
6739738
4101857
5358497
661.5137
7871777
4157124
614.4046
813.0969
1011 789
MO Cap
0.2037
0248129
0292558
0336987
0205093
0.26792S
0330757
0393589
0207856
0307202
0406548
0505895
Lbs
448.6787
546.5398
6444009
7422619
451.7464
5901428
7285393
8669358
457833
6766571
8954811
1114.305
-------
Costs
Manifold costs include ductwork, damper, and elbows. Below
are the costs for the individual components for a manifold.
Stainless Steel Round Duct
A 0.25 inch-thick stainless steel duct is the first component
of the manifold. The cost of this duct is based on the amount of
steel required, as decided in Chemical Engineering magazine.
Volume - 27rRL(t)
- (2TT) (D/2) (L) (°'25/12)
Specific
Gravity Stainless - .291b/in3
_ / .2SnDL\ ( .29Ib \ 112inches\3
"\ 12 /Unches3J\ ft /
Ibs steel - (32.8) (D) (L)
where,
D * ^(0.00064)(Flowrate)
So,
$/ft = (32. 8)^0.00064 Flowrate)
The price of stainless steel is $1.03/lb
- (32.8) ($1.03/lb) (0.0253) (Flowrate)-5
- 0.85 (Flowrate)0'5
This cost is adjusted to June 1992 dollars by the ratio of
indices of 359-6/376.3.6
$/ft - 0.81 (Flowrate)0-5
Damper:
The cost of a stainless steel circular damper was estimated
from a graph in the EAB Cost Manual.7 Several points were taken
B-22
-------
from the graph of diameter of damper, versus dollars. These
points were:
D(in) £
20 2,300
30 3,200
40 4,000
50 5,000
60 6,300
A regression line was developed from this data.
Y « 98(D) + 240
This line was multiplied by a factor, 3, to get the cost for
a stainless steel damper, in accordance with the referenced
manual.
Y - 294(D) + 720
Cost was adjusted to June 1992 dollars from December 1978
dollars using appropriate indices.8
/35S.7 \
Y - 294(D) + 720 ^ /223.7J
Y($/damper) - 471(D) + 1,155, where D is in inches
D(ft) = v'O. 00064 Flowrate,
So,
$/damper = (47l)J ° • °i°2°64 (Flowrate) +1,155
- (3.45)(Flowrate)0'5 + 1,155
Elbows
Two elbows are assumed to be needed for each source. Costs
were based on Chemical Engineering Magazine article.
$/elbow - (0.81)(1.65)(Flowrate)0-5
- 1.34 (Flowrate)0-5
B-23
-------
Total cost of manifold is therefore:
[.81 (FR)-5] • (Feet of Duct)
+ 1.34 (FR)'5 (2) + 3.45 (FR)-5 + 1,155
(Free on Board)
FOB Prices are corrected to Total Capital Investment (TCI) using
the following elements:
Inst, Sales Tax, Freight - (.18)(FOB$)
(PEC) - (1.18 FOB)
Purchased Equipment Cost
Direct Costs:
.9
Foundation
Handling
Electrical
Piping
Insulation
Painting
(.08)
(.14)
(.04)
(.02)
(.01)
(.01)
(PEC)
(PEC)
(PEC)
(PEC)
(PEC)
(PEC)
Indirect Costs :
Engineering
Construction and
Field Expense
TCI « (FOB) +
TCI « FOB (1 + .18
TCI - 1.711 FOB
- .3 (PEC)
)
- (.10)(PEC)
- (.05)(PEC)
- .15(PEC)
(.18)(FOB)
+ (.3) (1.18) (FOB)
.354 + .177)
Indirect
Annual Costs11
Admin.
Prop. Tax
Insurance
Cap Rec.
(.15)(1.18FOB)
2% TCI
1% TCI
1% TCI
(.16275) (10 yrs, 10%)
B-24
-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX B
l. Hawg, S. T. Toxic Emissions from Land Disposal Facilities,
Environmental Progress. 1:46-52. February 1982.
2. Makay, D., and R. S. Matsugu, "Evaporation Rates of Liquid
Hydrocarbon Spills on Land and Water, " Can. J. Chemical,
Engineering. 51:434 (1S73).
3. Gilliland, E. R., and T. K. Sherwood, Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry. ££:516 (1934).
4. Agitation in Multiphase 3y»'cems, Hydrocarbon Processing.
July 1979.
5. Chemical Engineering, May 1990, p. 127.
6. Chemical Engineering, September 1992, cost index.
7. Neveril, R. B., Card, Inc. Capital and Operating Costs of
Selected Air Pollution Control Systems. EPA450/5-80-002.
December 1978.
8. Reference 6.
9. OAQPS Control Cost manual, EPA 450/3-90-006, January 1990.
10. Reference 10.
11. Reference 10.
B-25
-------
APPENDIX C.
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
-------
-------
Example 1.
Example 2,
Example 3.
Example 4.
Example 5.
Example 6.
Example 7.
Example 8.
Example 9.
Example 10.
Example 11.
Vapor displacement of a single component liquid
Vapor displacement of a homogenous mixture
Tank/reactor heatup losses
Empty tank and reactor purging
Pilled tank and reactor purging
Sparging volatilization
Vacuum dryer emissions
Atmospheric dryer emissions
Vessel Depressurization
Emissions from a steam ejector
Emissions from equipment leaks
C-l
-------
f 1. Vapor displacement of a homogenous liquid
A 5,000-gallon reactor is to be filled at ambient conditions
(25CC and 1 atm) with 3,600 gallons of benzene. The fill rate is
60 gallons per minute and the reactor vent is open to the
atmosphere. Calculate VOC emissions from this event.
Solution
Step 1. Define the conditions of the displaced gas:
Temperature - 298K (25°C - ambient)
Pressure - 1 atmosphere (760 mmHg, 14.7 psia)
Volumetric rate of displacement - 60 galIons/minute
Step 2. Calculate the vapor phase mole fractions of the
components in the displaced gas:
In this situation, benzene is the only component in the
liquid, therefore x± in equation 3-9 is 1.
Using Raoult's Law:
x-^P*
yi - —
where:
X
P* (vapor pressure of benzene at 25°C [77°F]) - 1.9 psia,
(From Table A-2.)
PT - 1 atm (14.7 psia)
U1.9 psia) _ 0
yi (14.7 psia)
Therefore, the gas in the vapor space will be 13 percent by
volume benzene.
Step 3. Calculate the emission rate:
(Yi) (V) (PT) (Mw)
ER * (R) (T)
C-2
-------
(0.13) (60 gal/min) (1 atm) (78 Ibmol) I — r]
ER = J7.48 gal|
(1.3144 atm ft3/lbmol K) (298K)
ER - 0.21 Ib/min benzene
Since there are 3,600 gal of benzene to be charged, the event
will take
3,600 gal ..
60 galAnin - 60 min
Therefore, total benzene emissions for this event are:
(0.21 Ib/min)(60 min/event) - 12.6 Ib/event
C-3
-------
Example 2. Vapor displacement of a homogenous (miscible) mixture
A 50-50 volume percent solvent mixture of heptane and
toluene is charged to a surge tank at the rate of 300 gal/min. A
total of 1,500 gal is charged. The mixture temperature is 20°C.
Calculate emission rates for both mixture components.
Solution
Step 1. Define conditions of the displaced gas:
1. Temperature of displaced gas: 20°C;
2. Pressure - 1 atm (14.7 psia, 760 mmHg); and
3. Rate of displacement - 300 gal/min.
Step 2. Calculate vapor phase mole fraction:
voc
Heptane
Toluene
Molecular
weight,
Ib/lbmole
100
92
Density,
Ib/gal
5.7
7.3
Gallons
charged
750
750
Pounds
4,275
5,475
TOTAL
Ibmoles
42.8
59.5
102.3
xi
0.42
0.58
1.0
P* heptane 9 20°C (68°F) - 0.7 psia
P* toluene ® 20eC (68°F) - 0.4 psia
xi(P*)
Heptane:
Toluene:
(0.42) (0.7 psia)
(14.7 psia)
020 - V
-020 yheptane
(0.58)(0.4 psia)
(14.7 psia)
0.016
^toluene
C-4
-------
Step 3. Calculate emission rate:
ER
heptane
(0.020) (300 gal/min) (1 atm) (100 Ib/lbmol) ft I
ER - |7.48 gal|
heptane 1.3144 atm ft3/lbmol K) (293K)
E_ - 0.21 Ib/min
heptane
(y (V) (P ) (M )
toluene) T w
E -
R R
toluene T
(0.016) (300 gal/min) (1 atm) (92 Ib/lbmol) ' ft
, _ -*8 gal
toluene c -a i
ft
v
[ Ibmol K J
ER -0.15 Ib/min
toluene
Therefore, total emissions for the event
Heptane: (0.21 Ib/min) (5 min) - l Ib
Toluene (0.15 Ib/min) (5 min) « 0.75 Ib
C-5
-------
Example 3. Tank/reactor heatup losses
A 2,000 gal reactor, 75 percent full of a solution of a raw
material in toluene is heated from 20°C to 70°C. The reactor is
vented to the atmosphere during the heatup; how much toluene will
be emitted?
Solution
Since the liquid is mostly toluene, a simplifying assumption
is that the partial pressure of toluene in the headspace is equal
to the vapor pressure. At. 20°C, the vapor pressure of toluene is
22 mmHg; at 70°C it is 200 mmHg. The head space of the reactor ;
is 500 gal or 66.8 ft3. The temperatures must be expressed in '
absolute units K. The gas constant, R, in appropriate units
{from Table A- 3) is 998.9 mmHg-f t/lbmol- °K.
toluene emitted is then directly calculated:
The weight of
66.8 ff
998 9
'
ft
Ibmol K
760-22 mmHg
(273*20)K
760-200 mmHgu
(273*70) K JJ
0.0592 Ibmoles non-VOC gas displaced
22 mmHg\ / 200 mmHg
0.01195 lbmoles toluene
1.06 Ib toluene
(92.13 Ib toluene/lbmole!
C-6
-------
Example 4. Empt;y t;ank and reactor purging
A 2,000 gallon reactor vessel was cooled to 20°C and the
contents, in acetone solvent, were pumped out leaving only
vapors. If this vessel is then purged with 1,000 scf of nitrogen
at 20°C, how much VOC (acetone) will be contained in the vented
nitrogen?
Solution
At 20°C the vapor pressure of acetone is 182 mm Hg. Thus,
the initial concentration can be calculated from Ideal Gas Law:
PV - nRT
n/V » P /RT
Concentration of acetone - pacetonel%'/'RT
MW « 58.08 Ib/lbmol
R - 998.9 mmHg ft3/lbmol K
T « 273+20 - 293K " '
P m 182 mmHg (partial pressure of acetone
equals vapor pressure, since acetone
is the only component)
c » (182 mmHg)(58.08 Ib/lbmol) _ Q.036 lb/ft3
1 (998.9 mmHg ft 3/lbmol K) (293K)
(Cj - Initial concentration in the reactor vessel)
The number of volume changes of inert gas is as follows:
[1,000 scf][(273+20)/273J - 1,073 acf
(2,000 gal)(ft3/7.48 gal) - 267 ft3
1,073/267 •» 4 (vessel volume changes - 4.0)
Plugging the values back into equation 3-14 yields:
Cf/Ci " (0.37)4*° - 0.0187 lb/ft3
Thus, Cf » 0.0187(0.036) - 0.000673 lb/ft3
Emissions - (vessel volume)(C^-C*)
- 267 ft3 (0.000673 lb/ft3)
- 9.43 Ib
C-7
-------
Example 5. Filled Tank and Reactor purging
A tank containing methancl at 25°C is purged with a 30 scfm
stream of nitrogen. Calculate the emission rate of methanol
during the purge.
VPMEOH at 25°c * 128
. 128 , >20
760-128
(30 scfm) ( *mole^ ) f. 20 moles MEOHJ/ 32 Ib \ . >5 lbs/min mou
\359 scfm/ I Ib mole N2 I \l mole/
C-8
-------
6. Calculation of Sparoino Volatilization
A 1,000-gal tank of wastewater containing 0.025 wt% toluene
is to be air sparged to remove the toluene to a concentration
level of less than 20 ppb (by weight) to permit discharge to a
municipal sewer system. Ambient air is to be used; the design
temperature is 20°C. Toluene-water vapor-liquid equilibrium at
20eC can be approximated using a Henry's Law constant of 370 atm
(Henry's Law constants are listed in the Appendix).
Approach; Use l minute time slices, assume a sparge rate,
calculate time required to achieve concentration objective,
adjust sparge rate until reasonable cycle time is calculated.
Because of standard geometry of 1,000-gal tank, and modest gas
rates, 100 percent of equilibrium concentration can be assumed.
Table C-l summarizes the results of the calculations made using a
personal computer spreadsheet program. With 7S acfm of sparge
gas, the desired concentration of 20 ppb toluene is achieved in
55 minutes of sparging. The table clearly shows that the bulk of
the VOC is removed during the early part of the cycle: one-half
of the total toluene is removed in the first 3 minutes, and
90 percent is removed after 13 minutes. This typical
concentration profile for batch sparging makes the selection of
control technology (described elsewhere in this report) somewhat"
challenging.
C-9
-------
TABLE C-l. SPARGING VOLATILIZATION
•T»nk Volume 1000 Gal
Moles of H20 462.26 Ib-nol
•Sparge Rate 75 acfm
0.19465 ttmol/nin
•System Temp 20 Deg C
•Pressure 760 MI Hg
•Dissolved VOC Toluene
•Initial Conc'n 0.02SXtrt X
Moles of VOC 0.02260147
O.OOSXaol X
•HU of VOC 92.14
•Henry's Const. 370 atn
•Exit Gas Equil. 100. OCX
•Time Slice 1 win
Tim* Increment 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
8
7
5
5
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
9
7
x-bulk
.000048
.000041
.000034
.000029
.000024
.000020
.000017
.000014
.000012
.000010
.000008
.000007
.000006
.000005
.000004
.000003
.000003
.000002
.000002
.000001
.000001
.000001
.000001
.941-07
.396-07
.096-07
.986-07
.056-07
.266-07
.606-07
.046-07
.566-07
.176-07
.836-07
.546-07
.306-07
.106-07
.286-Ofl
.846-06
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
y-exit
.018090
.015271
.012892
.010883
.009188
.007756
.006548
.005527
.004666
.003939
.003325
.002807
.002370
.002000
.001669
.001425
.001203
.001016
.000857
.000724
.000611
.000516
.000435
.000367
.000310
.000262
.000221
.000186
.000157
.000133
.000112
.000094
.000080
.000067
.000057
.000048
.000040
.000034
.000028
•mo Is out cum out
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
.003521
.002972
.002509
.002118
.001788
.001509
.001274
.001076
.000908
.000766
.000647
.000546
.000461
.000389
.000328
.000277
.000234
.000197
.000166
.000140
.000119
.000100
.000084
.000071
.000060
.000051
.000043
.000036
.000030
.000025
.000021
.000018
.000015
.000013
.000011
.000009
.000007
.000006
.000005
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
.003521
.006494
.009003
.011122
.012910
.014420
.015695
.016771
.017679
.018446
.019093
.019640
.020101
.020491
.020819
.021097
.021331
.021529
.021696
.021837
.021956
.022057
.022141
.022213
.022273
.022324
.022368
.022404
.022435
.022461
.022482
.022501
.022516
.022530
.022541
.022550
.022558
.022565
.022570
new x-b
0.000041
0.000034
0.000029
0.000024
0.000020
0.000017
0.000014
0.000012
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
9.946-07
8.396-07
7.096-07
5. 986-07
5.056-07
4.266-07
3.606-07
3.046-07
2.566-07
2.176-07
1.836-07
1.546-07
1.306-07
1.106-07
9.28E-08
7.84£-08
6.62E-08
wt fr
2.116-04
1.786-04
1.SOE-04
1. 276-04
1.076-04
9.056-05
7.646-05
6.4SE-OS
5.446-05
4.606-05
3.886-05
3.286-05
2.776-05
2.336-05
1.976-05
1.666-05
1.406-05
1.196-05
1.006-05
8.456-06
7.136-06
6.026-06
5.086-06
4.296-06
3.626-06
3.066-06
2.S8E-06
2.186-06
1.846-06
1.556-06
1.316-06
1.116-06
9.356-07
7.896-07
6.666-07
5.626-07
4.756-07
4.016-07
3.386-07
Percent
fteaoval
15.580X
28.733X
39.837X
49.210X
57.123X
63.804X
69.443X
74.204X
78.223X
81.616X
84.480X
86.898X
88.939X
90.663X
92.118X
93.346X
94.382X
9S.258X
95.996X
96.6202
97.147X
97.591X
97.967X
98.283X
98.551X
98.777X
98.967X
99.128X
99.264X
99.379X
99.475X
99.557X
99.626X
99.684X
99.734X
99.775X
99.810X
99.840X
99.865X
C-10
-------
TABLE C-l. (Continued)
39 6.626-08 0.000024 0.000004 0.022S7S 5.586-08 2.866-07 99.886X
40 5.586-08 0.000020 0.000004 0.022579 4.71E-08 2.4K-07 99.904X
41 4.71E-08 0.000017 0.000003 0.022583 3.986-08 2.046-07 99.919X
42 3.98E-08 0.000014 0.000002 0.022585 3.36E-08 1.72E-07 99.931X
43 3.366-08 0.000012 0.000002 0.022588 2.84E-08 1.456-07 99.942X
44 2.846-08 0.000010 0.000002 0.022590 2.39E-08 1.221-07 99.95U
45 2.39C-08 0.000008 0.000001 0.022592 2.02E-08 1.036-07 99.959X
46 2.02E-08 0.000007 0.000001 0.022593 1.716-08 8.73E-08 99.965X
47 1.716-08 0.000006 0.000001 0.022594 1.446-08 7.37E-08 99.971X
48 1.446-06 0.000005 0.000001 0.022S9S 1.22E-00 6.226-08 99.975X
49 1.226-08 0.000004 0.000000 0.022596 1.036-08 S.25E-08 99.979X
50 1.03E-08 0.000003 0.000000 0.022597 8.676-09 4.436-08 99.982X
51 8.67E-09 0.000003 0.000000 0.022598 7.32E-09 3.746-08 99.985X
52 7.32E-09 0.000002 0.000000 0.022598 6.186-09 3.166-08 99.987X
S3 6.186-09 0.000002 0.000000 0.022599 5.216-09 2.67E-08 99.989X
54 5.21E-09 0.000001 0.000000 0.022599 4.406-09 2.2SE-08 99.991X
55 4.40E-09 0.000001 0.000000 0.022599 3.726-09 1.906-08 99.992X
56 3.72E-09 0.000001 0.000000 0.022600 3.146-09 1.606-08 99.994X
57 3.146-09 0.000001 0.000000 0.022600 2.6SE-09 1.35E-08 99.995X
58 2.656-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022600 2.246-09 1.146-08 99.995X
59 2.246-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022600 1.896-09 9.656-09 99.996X
60 1.896-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022600 1.596-09 8.156-09 99.997X
61 1.596-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022600 1.356-09 6.886-09 99.997X
62 1.356-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022600 1.146-09 5.816-09 99.998*
63 1.146-09 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 9.596-10 4,906-09 99.998Y
64 9.596-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 8.096-10 4.146-09 99.998*
65 8.096-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 6.836-10 3.496-09 99.999X
66 6.836-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 5.77E-10 2.956-09 99.999X
67 5.776-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 4.876-10 2.496-09 99.999X
68 4.876-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 4.116-10 2.106-09 99.999X
69 4.116-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 3.476-10 1.77E-09 99.999X
70 3.47E-10 0.000000 0.000000 0.022601 2.93E-10 1.50E-09 99.999X
C-ll
-------
gxample 7. Vacuum dryer emissions
Example: Consider the following example of a double -cone
dryer operating at 15 inches of mercury, with an air- leakage rate
of 15 scfm. The temperature inside the dryer is 60"F. Three
hundred pounds of product cake, initially containing 25 percent
by weight acetone are dried to less than 1 wt% solvent over the
course of 8 hours. Calculate the maximum VOC emission rate.
The total amount of acetone dried from the
product cake is:
300 Ibcake, 0.25 lb acetone , ?5 lb acetone (initially)
Ib cake
. •. 300-75 - 225 lb product in cake
The amount of acetone remaining at the end of the cycle is:
0.01
x * (0.01) (225+x)
x - 2.25*0.01x
O.S9x - 2.25
x - 2.3 lb acetone (at end of cycle)
.*. Therefore, the total amount of acetone removed from the
drying cycle is:
75-2.3 - 72.7 - 73 lb
Average emission rate over the drying cycle is:
(73 lb/8 h) (1 h/60 min) - 0.15 Ib/min
average dryer emission rate
The initial drying rate is two times the average rate,
assuming a straight -line decline.
Maximum (initial drying rate)
(2)*(0.15) - 0.30 Ib/min
- 58
Therefore, the molar flow of acetone is
(0.30 Ib/min) {lbnol/58 lb) (60 min/hr) - 0.31 Ibmol/h
C-12
-------
The airflow (leakage) is given as 15 scfm where 359 scf (at
0°C and 1 atm) is l mole. Therefore, the airflow is
(15 scf/min)(lbmol/359 scf)(60 min/h) - 2.51 Ibmol/h
Therefore, the uncontrolled emission stream at the start of
the drying cycle is estimated to be:
Component
Acetone
Air
T 0 T 'A L
Ibmol/h
0.31
2.51
2.82
mole fraction
0.110
0.890
1.000
This rate represents the maximum VOC emission rate during the
cycle.
C-13
-------
Example 8. Atmosphere dryer emissions
gxample. A tray dryer uses 6,000 acfm of heated air (65°C)
over a period of 6 hours to remove isopropyl alcohol (IPA) from a
batch of solids. Each batch consists of 1,000 pounds of material
containing 40 percent (by weight) solvent. The final product
contains less than 0.6 percent solvent. Calculate the total
uncontrolled VOC emissions per drying cycle and the maximum VOC
emissions rate.
Mass balance over the drying cycle:
(1,000 Ib cake)(0.40 Ib iPA/lb cake) - 400 Ib IPA initially
Quantity of bone-dry solids - 1,000-400 « 600
Amount of IPA remaining:
x/600+x - 0.006
.•. x - 3.6 Ib IPA
Amount of IPA removed is:
400-3.6 - 396 Ib (MW - 60.09)
Average emission rate » 396 lb/6 h - 66 Ib/h
Assume initial rate - 2* average rate
- (2)(66) - 132 Ib/h
(132 Ib/h)(lbmol/60.09 Ib) - 2.20 Ibmol/h
Calculate composition of uncontrolled emission stream at start of
drying cycle:
Airflow:
(6,000 acf/min)(60 min/h)(lbmol/359 scf)(273/273*65)scf/acf - 810
Ibmol/h
Component
IPA
Air
TOTAL
Ibmol/h
2.20
e;o,oo
812.2
mole fraction
0.0027
0.9973
1.0000
Knowledge of, or an estimate of (as above) the uncontrolled
outlet stream composition is necessary to select an appropriate
control technology. One should note that the mole fraction of
the VOC is considerably lower (approximately two orders of
magnitude) in the convective oven exhaust than in the vacuum oven
(previous example).
C-14
-------
Example 9. Vessgl Depressurization
A 1,000 gallon nutsche filter is used to compress a slurry
containing acetone and inerts at 80°F (26.7°C). A pressure of
35 psig is imparted onto the slurry until the desired filtration
is achieved (approximately 40 minutes). The nutsche filter is
then depressurized prior to discharging of its contents.
Calculate the emission rate of acetone resulting from this step.
Step l. Ratio of acetone to air initially present in the vessel
and after depressurization;
35 psig = 49.7 psia ( 76° zmM? \ • 2,570 rnnHg
\14.7 psza/
n*cecon« _ 246
nair 760-246
=0.48 (after depressurization)
Step 2. Calculate moles noncondensable gas in the vessel
initially and after depressurization;
(Assume free volume equals 1/2 of the total volume)
(500 gallons) - £H - , (2.570 mrnHgr - 246 mmHg)
ft3 (30QJC)
<
Ibmol K
Nx - 0.523 Ibmcl
Holes of nonconueii&aLle gas at the end of depressurization;
(500 gallons) L — nft ^ - (760-246 mmffg)
» _ [7.48 gallons! _ _
'998.9 rmHg * ft3
lianol K
(300JC)
n.2 • 0.11 Ibmoles of ncncondensable gas
moles acetone
Step 3. Average ratio of throughout the
moles air
depressurization;
C-15
-------
0-106 * O-48 = 0.293
Step 4. Calculate Ib acetone emitted:
Total moles noncondensable (non-acetone) released:
0.52 - 0.11 - 0.41 Ib moles
Total Ib acetone released:
0.41 moles nan acetone (0.293 moles «cetone\ / 581* acetone
\ moles non-acetone / \ moles acetone
= 7 Ib/event
- 0.17 Ib/min (1 event = 40 minutes)
C-16
-------
Example 10. Emissions from a Steam Ejector
A double-cone batch dryer (volume of 20 ft3) operates at
74 mmHg. A steam ejector is used to pull a vacuum on the dryer.
System components are listed below. A solvent recovery condenser
operating at 20°C precedes the ejector. The solvent is methanol.
W leakage
W - 0.032 p°-26 v°-60 P [-] torr
W » 0.032(74)°'26 (20)°'6° V [-] ft3
W - 0.59 Ib/h W [-] Ib/h
W leakage (see Table A-9 for component-specific leak rates)
Assume system has:
2 seals (rotary) ® 0.10 0.20
10 threaded connections 9 0.015 0.15
2 access ports 9 0.020 0.04
1 view window ® 0.015 0.015
10 valves « 0.03 0.30
1 control gas valve « 0.25 0.25
0.955 Ib/h/in.
For 4 in. fittings:
W - 1.2 7TD0P0'26
W = 1.2 7T(4) (0.955)74°-26
W - 44 Ib/h
.-. Total in-leakage (La) - 44+0.59 - 44.6 Ib/h
as cfm if (379 scf/mol)(mol/29 Ib) - >582.8 ft3/h
- 9.7 scfm
C-17
-------
VOC emissions:
system
32 JJb MeOH\ I 44.6 iJb air/h \
Ibmol
760
29 IJb
(760-95)
- 1
(VPMeOH at 20°C - 95 ramHg)
.•. SE - 7.03 Ib MeOH/h
C-18
-------
-U-. Calculation of Emigaiona from Equipment
Estimate VOC emissions from a facility process having the
following components in light liquid service 100 percent of the
time.
1 pump
18 flanges
1 gas valve
5 liquid valves
1 sampling connection
3 open-ended lines
Solution
Multiply by equipment leak factors found in Table A-6.
Equipment leaks
1 pump
(0.0199 kg/h)(1) 100 percent service
18 flanges
(0.00183)(18) 100 percent service
1 gas valve
(0.00597)(l) 100 percent service
1 S.C.
(0.0150)(1) 100 percent service
3 O.E.L.
(0.0017) (3) 100 percent service
0.07887 Jcg/h (h/3,600 s) - 2.2xlO-5 kg/s
ko/h
0.0199
0.0329
0.00597
0.0150
0.0051
0.07887
C-19
-------
-------
APPENDIX D.
COST CALCULATIONS
-------
-------
Background Information/Introduction to
Control Device Model Calculations
The attached documentation details the calculations and
assumptions that were used to arrive at the control device cost
effectiveness curves used to set RACT. The documentation
.requires some preliminary discussion of certain issues because of
the complexity of the approach. This preface is intended to
provide this necessary background. Note also that the basis for
much of the assumptions used in estimating costs is the fourth
edition of the OAQPS Control Cost Manual, prepared by the
Emission Standards Division of the Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Discussion
Time Variation
One of the major ideas behind RACT for batch processes is
the consideration of on-stream emission event duration. The
calculations assume a certain mass emissions value, in Ibs/year.
Mass emissions is really the annual VOC emission rate from the
batch process vent(s) considered to be controlled. By making
mass emissions an input variable, and by setting the VOC
concentration and the emission stream flowrate (i.e., these
parameters are also input), the models are designed to calculate
a value of on-stream emission event duration, which we call "time
var." This "time var" value is used throughout the model to
calculate control device costs and cost effectiveness. The "time
var" or time variation field should not be confused with the
initial duration input as 60 minutes. It was assumed that each
event took 60 minutes initially to calculate emissions per event
and heat load per event, but considered the number of events per
year that would actually be occurring using time var (which is
the fraction of continuous emissions). Note, also, that
operation and maintenance costs are calculated on a per shift
basis.
For those combinations of mass emissions and flowrate that
yielded time var values of less than .33, only 1 shift per day
was assumed. For time var between .33 and .66, 2 shifts per day
were assumed, and 3 shifts per day were assumed for time
var >.66.
D-l
-------
Condenser Model Calculations
The calculations below can be cross-referenced with the
example condenser model spreadsheet, which is included as an
attachment to this set of calculations.
1. Input Variables - Emission Stream Characteristics
.
Inputs Cell I.D.
1,000 a. Flowrate, (acfm) : H7
25 b. Temperature, (°C) : H8 (Default is 25°C)
760 c. Pressure, (mmHg) : H9 (Default is 760 mtnHg)
60 d. Duration, (min) : H10 (Default is 60 minutes)
30.37 e. VOC volume percent*: Hll (Default is saturation)
90 f. Required condenser
control efficiency, (%) : J6
100,000 g. Mass emissions, (Ib/yr) : M14
*This field is considered an input field although the
spreadsheet is designed to calculate this value for saturation.
In our analysis, we multiplied the saturation value by a fraction
that would result in our desired concentration values (i.e.,
1,000, 8,750, 10,000, and I00,000ppmv for the cost effectiveness
curves) .
For example, volume percent is calculated in the example in
the following manner:
10 ~ ($BW$11 - ($BX$11/(K8-$EY$11) } )/H9 (1)
where :
$BW$ll m 7.117 (Antoine Coeff 'a' for acetone);
$BX$11 - 1210.595 (Antoine Coeff 'b' for acetone); and
$BY$11 - 229.664 (Antoine Coeff 'c' for acetone).
where :
the Antoine 's equation Is of the form:
10910 ••* • • -
where :
P * » vapor pressure of component a, mmHg
a, b, c - Antoine' s coefficients for component a
t - temperature, °C
D-2
-------
Equation 1 is the vapor pressure/total pressure where vapor
pressure equals:
10* [log10Pa* - a - b/(c + t)]
Pa* - 10* [a - b/(c + t)]
So, 10" [$BW$11 - ($BX$11/(H8 •(• $BY$11))) - Pa*
Volume percent - [Pa*/total pressure (H9 - 760)]
• Hll - 30.37% (in the example)
Non-condensable Volume Percent. (%): (Cell H16)
Because* the gas stream contains a portion that is
condensable material and a portion that is noncondensable
material and the fraction of the stream that is condensable
material was calculated above the remaining portion of the stream
is easily calculated as below:
- 1 - Hll
« l - Volume percent (calculated above)
- 1 - .3037 - .6963 - 69.63%
Emissions. (Ibs/event): (Cell H17)
This equation uses the ideal gas law to estimate the
emissions of the VOC (acetone in the example) per event before
the condenser is applied.
Hll • H10 * H7 • H9/O98.97 * (H8 + 273))*$BZ$11
where:
$BZ$11 - Molecular weight of VOC; acetone - 58 Ib/lbmol; and
998.97 - Universal gas constant, (rnmHg ft3/lbmol K) .
- .3037*60 min*l,000 acfm*760 mmHg/(998.97*(25+273))*58
- 2,702 Ibs/event
Partial Pressure at Exit Stream. (mmHa): (Cell J9)
The above calculations are used to estimate the uncontrolled
waste gas composition. The spreadsheet will estimate control
costs for a desired control efficiency or exit condenser
temperature, if specified. If control efficiency is specified,
as it was in this cost analysis, the spreadsheet calculates the
required exit partial pressure of the waste gas, which is the
saturation vapor pressure at the exit condenser temperature.
D-3
-------
For this example, the condenser control efficiency, jg » 90%
90 percent control for a condenser means the following:
VOCIN
NON COND IN
Y
VOCOUT
4
Y
VOCCOND
[YVOC IN] [FLOWRATE]/RT * MOLES VOC IN
[1 - Y VOC IN] IFLOWRATE]/RT » MOLES NONCONDENSED
MOLES VOC OUT « (1-CONTROL EFF.)(MOLES VOC IN)
After manipulation and cancelling these equations are reduced to:
(1 - CONT. EFF)(Y
Y - . ,,/y-™
LOGOUT 1 - Y VOCIN • CONT. EFF
This is the same equation as the one contained in cell J9,
except that the equation in cell J9 is multiplied by 760 mmHg, the
assumed total pressure of the system, atmospheric in thsi case,
The resulting value is the partial pressure of the VOC component.
- 760 mmHg*(.3037(1-.9))/{I-.3037*.9}
- 31.77 mmHg
Required Condenser Exit ..Temperature. (C) ; (Cell... J121
Substituting the partial pressure back into Antoine's
equation, yields a temperatuere at which 90 % control is achieved.
- C Or t - -rr ° -.». - C
(log P* - a) w w* - - (a - logP*)
The formula in cell J12 is:
(($BX$11/($BW$11-LOG(J9))-$BY$11)}
So, substituting the values from the example condenser model
spreadsheet into this equation:
- ((1210.595/(7.117-LOG10(31.77))-229.664))
D-4
-------
» 14.06 C
Condenser Exit Flowrate (variable) . (ft^/min) r (Cell Hifi)
This formula takes into account the ratio of the volume
percent of noncondensables entering the condenser and the volume
percent of noncondensables exiting the condenser along with the
equation: P^V^/^ - P2V2/T2' Solvin9 for V2*
The formaula in cell address H18 is:
H7 * H16 * (((1.8 * $CE$6) + 32) + 460)/(((1.8 * H8) + 32)
+ 460) * H9/$CH$6/ 11-H19)
where :
$CE$6 « Condenser Exit Temperature, ( C) ;
$CH$6 - Compressor Pressure, (mmHg) ; and
H19 - Condenser Exit Volume Percent, (%) .
So, substituting the spreadsheet values into this equation: is
- 1,000 acfm*.6963*(( (1.8M-14.06 C) ) +32) +460) / ( ( (1. 8*
25 C)+32)+460)*760 mmHg/760 mmHg/ (1- .0418)
« 631 cfm
Condenser Exit Volume Percent. (%) ; (Cell H19)
This field substitutes back into Antoine's equation the
required exit condenser temperature, which is given in $CE$6.
p ._ • - /D . » v
partiax' - LOCCU. oui
10*($BW$11 - ($BXSll./($CE$fi + $BY$11) ) )/$CH$6
where :
$CH$6 - Total Pressure. (mmHg) .
So, substituting the values from the example condenser model
spreadsheet into this equation:
- 10A(7. 1175- (1210. 595/(-14. 06 C+229 .664) ) ) /760 mmHg
- .0418 - 4.18%
Constant Properties Exit. (Ibs VOC/event) : (Cell H2Q)
Using the ideal gas law this equation calculates the
emissions per event aluei. uue condenser:
H19 • H18 • $CH$6 • $BZ$ll/(998.97 * $CF$6) • H10
D-5
-------
where:
$CF$6 • Condenser Exit Temperature, K.
So, substituting the values from the example condenser model
spreadsheet into this equation:
- (.0418*631 cfm*760 mmHg*58 Ib/lbmol) / (998.97*258.94) *60
- 270 Ibs VOC/event
Condenser Ccntro. Efficienc. (%) ; (Cell H2H
This cell provides for the calculation of the condenser
control efficiency, but it is not used in this example because the
efficiency was input in the analysis.
Condenser Heat Load. (BTU/event): (Cell H221
Cell H22 calculates the condenser heat load, in terms of
sensible heat and latent heat of cooling the stream down to the
desired temperature.
Heat load is made up of: (l) latent heat of condensation for
the material condensed, (2) sensible heat of cooling of the
noncondensables, and (3) sensible heat of cooling of the
condensables.
o
Sensible heat is calculated as m Cp AT
o
Latent heat is calculated as mHv
where:
^sensible - m cp T' and
^latent " m Hv
where:
m - mate rate;
Cp - heat capacity;
Hrl - heat of vaporization; and
T » range of cooling.
1st Term: (Sensible and latent heat of condensables)
((H17 - H20) * ($CB$11 + $CA$11 * (H8 - $CE$6) * 1.8)}
where:
H17 - H20 - Ib VOC condensed - 2702 - 270.2 - 2431.8 Ib/event;
$CB$11 » 220 (BTU/lb, H^p of acetone) ; and
$CA$11 • 0.3 (Cp acetone, BTU/lbeF), assumed constant.
D-6
-------
So, substituting these values into the 1st part of the equation in
cell H22:
Heat load (condensed) - (2702 - 270.2) 1220 (BTU/lb)
+ 0.3 BTU/lb°F (25-(-14.06))*1.8] - 586,288 BTU/event
2nd Term: (Sensible heat of condensables that were not condensed,
calculated in Cell H205
The 2nd part of the heat load equation as it appears in the
condenser model is:
(H20*$CA$11*(H8-$CE$6)*1.8)
So, substituting the correct values into the equation:
- (270.2*0.3(25-(-14.06))*l.8) - 5699 BTU/event
3rd Term: (Sensible heat of noncondensables)
The 3rd part of the heat load equation as it appears in the
condenser model is:
- H18*(1-H19)*H9/(998.97*($CE$6+273)*29*H10)*$CA$20*(H8-
$CE$6)*1.8))
where:
$CA$20 « BTU/lb°F for air, .24.
So,
- 631 cfmMl-0.0418)*760 mmHg/ (998.97* (-14.06+273) *29*60) «.24
M25- (-14.06)*!.8) )
- 52,517 BTU/event
Therefore the sum of the three terms is 586,288 + 5,699 + 52,517 -
644,504 BTU/event. The spreadsheet calculated a slightly
different value, 644,613 BTU/event. However, rounding is the
reason for the difference in the values.
D-7
-------
Condenser Heat Load During Non-Events. (BTU/event); (Cell H23)
Assumed 10 percent of heat load during events to keep the
heat exchanger surfaces cold and to account for heat losses.
Tons; (Cell H24)
Calculated Annual Refrigeration requirements based on
on-stream time.
[Time var]
where :
8,760/12,000 BTU/hr/ton
- tons refrigeration used to calculate annual energy costs
- 5.57
Refrigeration Unit Cost (DIFF TEMP). (S); (Cell H27)
The refrigeration cost is based on the heat load and
temperature. The cost for a refrigeration unit are given in 10°F
increments from 40°F to -70eF, and a 30°F increment between -70°F
to -100eF. A Quattro Pro macro that checks the required condenser
exit temperature appears on the right side of the condenser model
spreadsheet underneath the "\t\". The group of numbers under the
macro are the refrigeration unit costs given the calculated tons
of refrigeration required. Below are the actual equations that
produce the Purchased Equipment Cost (PEC) for refrigeration units
at different temperatures.
Temp.. °F Cost Equation
40 1,451(Tons) * 10,817
30 1,820 (Tons) + 11,064
20 2,340 (Tons) + 11,021
10 3,197 (Tons) + 13,972
0 4,013 (Tons) + 14,427
-10 5,582 (Tons) + 13,431
-20 7,560 (Tons) + 13,451
-30 4,334 (Tons) + 40,089
-40 5,459 (Tons) + 40,082
-50 6,704 (Tons) + 39,993
-60 7,152 (Tons) * 43,640
D-8
-------
-70 8,938 (Tons) + 41,713
-100 17,798 (Tons) + 46,906
The required condenser exit temperature for the stream
contained in the example condenser model spreadsheet is -14.06°C
which equals approximately 7°F. So, the equation for 0°F would be
used to estimate the PEC of the refrigeration unit as below:
4,013 (Tons) + 14,427
where:
Tons « the tons of refrigeration required during an event
Sizing the condenser refrigeration unit based on the heat
load calculated during an event provides the "worst-case" costs
because this would be the maximum heat load encountered by the
condenser during any given time throughout the year.
So,
4,013 (H22/H10*60/12,000) + 14,427
Substituting the values in the example into this equation:
« 4,013 (644,613/60*60/12,000) + 14,427
- $229,996
Total System Costs (1.25*Unit Cost). (S) : (Cell H32)
1.25 * PEC, to account for precooler and auxiliary equipment.
- 1.25 * $229,996 - $287,495
TotalCapital ^nvestmept(TCI). (S) : (Cell H33)
1.74 * total system costs* 1.25 [3rd quarter, 1990]
where,
1.74 factora installation for nonpackaged systems
25 percent covers manifolding
Direct Costs
Operating li&QX (S) : (Cell H35)
- 0.5 hours/Bhift*$15.64/hour*H51*H52
where:
$15.64/hr is operating labor rate;
H51 - shifts/day; and
H52 - days/year.
D-9
-------
So, substituting the values for the example into this equation:
. 0.5*15.64*1*365
- $2,854/year
Supervisory Labor (S); (Cell H36)
- 1.15*H35
So, substituting the values fron the example into this equation:
- 1.15 • $2,854/year
- $3,282/year
Maintanence Labor ($): (Cell H37)
-0.5 hour/shift*$17.21/hour*H51*H52
where:
$17.21 - maintanence labor rate.
So, substituting the values from the example into the equation:
- 0.5*17.21*1*365
- $3,141/year
Maintanence Materials ($); (Cell H38)
« H37
- $3,141/year
Electric Compressor Motor. ($); (Cell H39)
Electricity requirements were based on the average tons of
refrigeration required during a year and refrigeration
temperature.
kw/Ton T (°F)
1.3 40 We used a regression line, where
2.2 20
4.7 -20 T - - 13.08 (kw/ton) + 43.16
5.0 -50
11.7 -100 r2 correlation to these data
points - 0.955
The regression line was used to obtain (kw/ton).
So,
D-10
-------
« { ( ($CB$6*1.8+32')-43.l6)/-13.08)*H24*8,760*.059/0.85
where:
$.059 - Cost/kwhj and
0.85 - Efficiency of motor.
So, subsituting the correct values into the equation:
- (( (-14.06*1.8+32)-43.16)/-13.08)*5.57*8,760*.059/0.85
- $9,449
Overhead. (S): (Cell H40)
« .6*sujn(H35. .H38)
where:
H35 - H38 - the costs of operating, supervisory, and
maintanence labor and maintenance materials.
So, substituting the correct values into the example equation;
- $7,451/year
Capital Recovery. (S); (Cell H41)
Assume 15-year life, 10 percent interest
- .1315*H33
. $82,227
General _Adminis5ra.t4ygtT$.::ss. Insurance,. (SI ; (CeljlHf2)
- .04*H33
- $25,012
Total Annualized Cost. ($): (Cell H43)
The total annualized cost is the sum of all the direct costs.
- $136,558/yr
Mg/yr Controlled; (Cell H44)
- (M14*0.454/1000}*J6
- (100,000*0.454*1(000}*0.9
- 40.86 Mg/yr
D-ll
-------
Effectiveness (S/MO): (Cell H45)
- H43/H44
- 136,558/40.86
- $3,342/Mg
Calculation of Time Variation: (Cell M17)
- M17*998.97*293*(1/60)*(1/8,760)*(1/$BZ$11)/H11/(H6*760)
So, substituting the correct values into the equation:
- 100,000*998.97*293/60/8,760/58/.3037/(1,000*760)
- 0.00415
D-12
-------
CONDENSER MODEL SPREADSHEET
D-13
-------
(ON DENSER MODI :i.
PARAMETERS:
Ftnwiate. (vfm)
I Inwialr. (acfml
Irmprralwr. |l>rg C)
Prruwr. I mm) IK)
Duration. (mini
VOC. (vol*!-)
V(K.(ppmv)
CALCULATIONS:
I 000
1. 000
25
7MI
M)
101.711
Hrquirrd < 'ondrmrr Cnnlrnl I (lie Kncy. (T)
Wr
Partial Piruurral l-Jiil Slrram.
11 7*77
C'ondrnrr I »H Irmprialurr. ((')
140*
Mau Fmiuionv
100.000
Non-roBdcMuMr Vnlmnt PrrrciM. (T ):
FrmuinM. (Mn/rvriil)
Condemn liih Ho*t»R(v»n»Wc». (in/mm)
( andrmrf Kill Vnhimr Prirrnl. \"< )
rotHlanl Pmprrim lul. (NK VtM'/rwnl)
t oncrmcr < ontiol l;f f trirnry. (T |
I onArmrt I lr»l I nad. ( HI I l/rvrnl I
( 'urn rmrt I Iral t.n*d Ounnf NOB t-wnlv (im l/fvrnl)
I 'onftnsrt I Iral l.iud |l»m|. 1 1 2 000 Mil I/hi)
IVH« T
oM (1)11 1 1 1 MP) (t)
COSTS:
Total Sytlm CmH ( I 25M Iml Cosl). (1)
'lolal ( Jptlal Invrslmrnl fl< '
f. |$(
Mamlanrurr l^bnf, (t)
Mamlanrncr Malrriak. (t)
Orloc <'ompf«MH Motor. (J>
Ovrihr*d.(S)
( apilal Rccovny. It)
Grnrr al Admrnalraliw. Tun. Imwanrr. ($)
TCJTAI. ANNVIAI I/H)«)S1.(J|
II ID
HMI FAC'IKRS
rvrnK/ihill
da>>.'yrai
• ; ol Him-
2.702
4111%
270 2*
1 inv Variation
000415
t>4.4M
5 57
1241
I 112
J2H7.40S
1*21.102
J2JS4
SV2H2
SVI4I
11 Ml
10440
M2.227
S2S.OI2
40 W.
$1.142
0 H2<>2
I
IIINISM
IIINIIC'
\l\
40 (ilconlrmp>=40|/F( FORMI-IJ27-(Q
V) (il cnnlrmp> = »|/F.CFORM2 - 1127 - ((}
20 III t onlrmp> = 201/1 (H)RMJ 1127- I(J
10 (if conlrmp > = IO|/F( FORM4 -1127 ~ |Q
0 III conlrmp> =«|/FC FORM5 ~ 1127 ~ = IO|/F.t:FORM*-H27- |
20 |ilconlrmp> = 2«|/EC FORM7-1127' (
10 (ilconl«np>= V)|/FrF()RM|-|l27-(
40 (ifconlemp>=40)/tC:FORM»-|H7~(
50 (iJco=50J/ErUI>l~H27-JO
M (ilcontrn.p> = 40)/F( IIIA2~ 1127-(O
70 (ilronl<-mp>= 70)/FrlH^J~H27- (Q
100 lf<:\ II j\4 - IU7 - (QUIT)
40 U7«l 401
10 IOMM 25
20 IV.7204*
10 IH5707 54
0 22«9%2
10 1112*13
20 41
-------
Al |WI(.||| .») ( ( INI II NSI It Ml II )l I
A4 |WI(.||I .'I PAKAMI II MS
IS |W|S| Hri|ililrJ < • •mh-nsrl < onliol I ((» K-m v. ('', I
A(> |WI«i| ll.mi.iir (Minn
I M> I.O||WM| KHHI
A' |WI(,| lliiwMlr. laclml
II' »
A* |WI»| •(rmrx-i.tlurr (IVj I I
II* I.O||WI4|.'S
J* |W|S| 'I'arlial Pir\suic al l-nl Sliram. (minll|>)
A< |WI*| Tir«uir. (mmll|>)
ll« (.fl)|WI4|'MI
A10 |W|fc| DwalMMi. (mini
Illll |.n)|WI4|MI
AII |wi*| v/yi|
MM i.o»|Wl*| innono
A I* |WIA| •Non-roiMlrmaMr Vohimr Pritrnl. (T)
III* (P'||WI4|I Illl
Al' |Wlh| l-nw»imiv (Iht/rvrnll
III' l.n||WM| «IIIIMIIO*HOWII4/(««(«7>(ll«t27))l>tH71ll
JI7 |W|S|-|nnrVarialimi
Ml' |hS)
AIK |Wlh|'( ondrmri I ill KlmnalrlvaruMr). (llVmn)
MIS |0||WI4|
Al<> |W|I.|'( ivixlrmri Kill VoKmw PrirfM. |T)
Mil (P'l|WI4|in-($MWlll ($HXtll/(t i . I
11'I iP(i||\VII|i.i|liillll' 11 ill III'I-II ii Illl' 11.1« III 'I
-------
A2> |WI*|Vondrmrrlleall.«»MHTU'»vr»l|
A2» |WI*| I ondmsrc Ikal tani During Nwi-l-vriih. (IH I l/rvcnlt
im |.0(|WI4|Oril22
A>4 |Wlf.| ( ondriwf lit* I o«J (lom» ( lt«W BIT l*f I
A1V |WI6| 'IVha T
K25 |WIO|M
A2* |WI(k| XJ<:(K)I, (Ib/lir):
112* t.O||WI4| »H
A27 |W|f,| Rcl rigrnlin* Unit TxMl (DIFF TEMf). (t)
1 127 (< -0) |WU| (401 V = 40|/l ( F< >KMI - 1127 -
J2« |IO»|W|S|W
K2X |WIO| (ilroiil*mp> = Vll/l< KIRM2-II27-
J2<» (in||WIS|20
K2» |WIO| (1lc=»l'W FORMS -1127-
AJ2 |Wlfc| T«rt»l Syjlrm t:«h (I 25'HnH <'o»«l. (*•
1112 t= IO|/F,(TORM6-H27-
M\ |WI*| Tirtjl ( apHil Invnlmnl (I* K (*l
im <(0||WI4| I 74MI32M 25
J« (FO||WIS| 20
Ml |WIO|'(if cwrtemp>= 20I/FCFORM7-M27-
AM IWIH'DIUWTttKIS:
JVI |FO||WIS| W
KM |WH)ritfco«l»iiip>= M|(H:FORMf-H27-
J1S (|0)|W|S| 40
K^ |WII>| (il«on(»mp>=
AVi |WI(.| NupcivKoo I ahcM. (tl
||1«, |( 0||WI4|I I^'IIIS
n* ti- M»|H
II"
-------
,\M |WI«.| Mainunrnrr I ahot. (Si
IIW |(«||WU|OSM72IMIM>II<2
IU |III(|W|S| Ml
KU |Win|'|riroiitrmp>= MI/H III.
AW |WI*| •Mainlmrntc MjtriwK (t)
III* <<0||WI4| 4 IH7
JM (H>»|WIS|-70
KW |WIO|(rtconl«iip>=70|/lrUI.AJ- 1127 -(OUR)
AW |WI*| TVrlnr Comprruoc MofcM. It):
I iw ic«i |WM| «(tt:FJ** 1 1 » «»•« I*V-I3 e»)*H2«*i760'o n«(o gs
jw ihoi|wis| ion
K W |WIO| Vl-rUI .A4 - H27 - J
AM |WI»| T>vrriKad. (t)
A4I |WI»|t>,.uJ Rrr»wiy.(t)
(Ml «H>|WI4|OIH5*:|V1
A42 |WIA| X it w»l Adminnlralivr. Tun. Iwurwre. (t)
1142 |(tl||WI4!OIMMM
,\n |wi«.| it; i AI. ANNIIAI ,i7i;nri>sT. d»
1141 ((H||W|-l|(SSHM(lin 1142)
.141 l.-Mi'IF(IISI>l.-.H4VH44M
J4V tl nill'MI I fHIOl i 4im*<>,
-------
AM
MSI |W|4|(al|(M|7< = OM.|fti|l|MI?< =0 U.I.2H.M
JM lln)|W|S| 40
KM |wio|tvw(Sil*J2/*lBio**o/i2om>H*H»*2i
11^2 |WI4| MS
JS2 (IO)|WIS| 10
KS2 |WIO|(*7»M'(Sllt;2.tmiO'*4VI2«ftO)t W*Jl
AM |WU| n of timf :
II" (I S||WI4| 4lll(MO*IIMfll$IMISM7«0
AM |WI»| Dlia,\1K)N
1154
JM |l:«) |WIS| 70
K54
|WIO| (l77W
-------
A(>7: <>|K-r;il<>r (t)
I hi ((1l)|W|S|O.S*|S.(hl'l I7'l IK
A(>8: 'Supervisory I ahor. ($):
II.8:(C<»)|W|S|0|SM<.7
Af»4»: 'Mimiancncc I ;trmr, ($):
I6'» :(CO)|W|S|OS« 17.21*1 I7M 18
A70:'M:ilcri;ik,(S):
I7» (CO)|W|S| IMW
A72: •llhlilics:
A71: 'Natural (ius,(S):
IIV (dl)|W|S| +| 42/|tNN»WJ
(i7^: '(S.1.VKNNISCT)
A74: 'l-lcclrkily, ($):
|-74: (CO) |WI.S| (MNNIII7M 4I*29/0.6*0.059'8760
(i74: '(S'W/kwh)
174: ••• (-HANOI: DI-I.IP IOR DIIFI-NI;RGY RIX-O ••
A75: 'Blu:
175: (,0)|W|5|((l7Vin(MI/\V892)+(|-74/«.O.S9*MI2 I))
A76:rl(Mill Died Cosl,(J):
176: (( 0)|W|S| l*Ca>SUM(l67..l74)
A78: 'Indirect Annutil Costs:
A79:'()vcrhcad,($):
179: (CO) |W|S|06'(
A80: 'Administrative, ($):
I HO ((-0)|W|S|»02M62
AMI: 'Properly lax, (S):
IKI (OI)|W|S|OOri(>2
A82: 'Insurance, ($):
IH2((1))|WIS|OOIM62
A8V 'Capilal Recovery, (S):
IXV(CO)|WI5|O.I627VI62
A8.S: Toliil Annuuli/ed Cosl, (S):
I-K5. (CO)|W|S|
-------
-------
CAPITAL COST CALCULATIONS:
Dirccl Costs
l-quipmcnt Cost (Kecouperalive Incin ),($):
Auxiliary l-quipmcnt (Ductwork, Slack), ($):
Auxiliary Collection I an, ($):
Instrumentation, ($).
Saks Tax, ($):
l-rcight, ($):
TOTAL I'UKCIIASKD liQUIP COST($):
Dirccl Installation Costs, ($):
Indirect Costs, ($):
$2.701
Jft.274
$44,420
$45,
-------
THERMAL INCINERATOR MODEL
PARAMETERS:
llowriilc, (scfm):
Waste (ias VOC Concentration, (ppmv):
I Icaling Value c>f VOCs, (Hlu/scf):
l-ncrgy Recovery, (%):
Incincraiof Operating Temperature, (F):
Wasic (iiis Temperature, (l;):
Prchcaicr Tcmpcralurc, (!•"):
Molecular Weight of VOC:
Molecular Weight of Gas:
Durulion, (min):
l-vcrm/Shifl:
Shifts/Day:
Days/Year:
Time Variation:
I .cngih of Collection Main, (ft ):
Number of Manifolded Sources:
Step I: Calculate Total Waste Gas Now
Oxygen (O2) Content of Waste Gas, (volume %):
Dilution Air Required for Combustion, (scfm):
Dilution Air for Safely, (scfm):
Total (iiis llowrale, (scfm):
UNI
Ill.tNN)
2,(NMI
70
I. MM
70
6450
0.60
8
I
V.S
0.2X401
.TOO
10
2079
0.00
14.29
114.2V
VOC's Controlled, (Mg/yr):
11.12
Cost l-ffeciivcness, (S/Mg).
S4.9W
Mass (-missions, (Ih/yr):
25,00(1
Time Variation:
02H40
I ncrgy, (Blu/Mg):
48,616,308
Step 2: Heal Content of Waste Gas, (Ulu/scf):
Step 3: Calculate Gas Temp, l-xil Prchcaicr, (l;):
Step 4: Calculate Auxiliary l:ucl Required, (scfm):
for events
Step S: Calculate KMal (ias llow, (scfm):
for events
('alculaic Maximum Auxiliary (ias llow, (scfm):
(';iliul.uc Maximum liH.-ilGas llow,(scfm):
( .ikiil.ilcd Annual Gas I low. (ufy):
I7..SO
1,141(10
0.110
114 &
ISS
M5«4
SK4.2K2
-------
CALCULATIONS
CONDENSER COMPRESSOR P
EXIT TEMPERATURE
ANTOINE'S EO COEFFICIENTS
(Q (K)
-14.11644 258.9J56
760
VOC A B
MW Cp hv
Acetone 7.117 1210.595 229.664 58.0S 0.1004 220.127
NITROGEN
0.24
-------
BVI: 'CALCULATIONS
CE2: 'CONDENSER
CH2: 'COMPRESSOR PRESSURE
CE* 'EXIT
CF3: TEMPERATURE
BV5: 'ANTOINE'S EQ COEFFICIENTS
CE5: ~(C)
CF5: ~(K)
CE6:+JI2
CF6: +SCES6+273
CH6: 760
BV8: 'VOC
BW8: 'A
BX8: 'B
BY8: 'C
BZX: 'MW
CA8: 'Cp
CB8: 'hv
BVIIr'Acclonc
BWII:7.H7
BXH: I2I0.5W
BY II: 224.664
BZ 1 1:58(18
CBI I: 22(1.127
BV20: 'NITROGEN
CA20. 0.24
-------
Thermal Incineration Model Calculations
The calculations below can be cross-referenced with the
example thermal incinerator model spreadsheet, which is included
as an attachment to this set of calculations.
l. The information necessary to calculate incinerator costs
for any given situation is listed under "Parameters" in the
spreadsheet. This data is also listed below:
Example Cell '
inputs I* P.
100 1.. Flowrate, (scfm) ; F6
10,000 2. Waste Gas VOC Concentration; F7
2,000 3. Heating Value of VOC's, (Btu/scf); F8
70 4. Energy Recovery, (%); P9
1,600 5. Incinerator Operating Temperature, (°F) ; Fio
70 6. Waste Gas Temperature, (°F); • Fll
7, Preheater Temperature, (°F); P12
64.5 8. Molecular Weight of VOC; P13
.6 9. Duration, (min); P14
8 10. Number of events per shift; F15
1 11. Number of shifts per day; F16
365 12. Number of days per year; and F17
25,000 13. Mass Emissions, (Ib/yr). F18
There are also several fields in the "Parameters" section
which do not contain information that must be input for each
given case. They are:
a. Molecular Weight of Gas; (Cell F14)
This value is calculated from the input VOC concentration
and the molecular weight of the VOC as below:
MW_ag - fVOC Cone (ppmv)1 x MWVQC] + Fd-VOC Cone {ppmv})1 x
1 x 10s 1 x 106
The formula contained in the example thermal incinerator model
is:
F7/1,000,000*F13-M1-F7/1,000,000)*29
D-21
-------
So, substituting the coreect values into the equation:
- 10,000/1,000,000*64.5+(1-10,000/1,000,000)*29
- 29.36 Ib/lbmole
b. Time Variation; (Cell J15)
This field is used to calculate the fraction of time that
the event occurs over a year (continuous maximum of 8,760 hours).
In other words, if the event lasts 0.6 minutes and occurs 8 times
a shift, 3 shifts per day, 365 days per year, the time variation
equals 1 percent.
c. Length of Collection Main and Number of Manifolded
So_yre e, s ; (Ce 11 s F2 0. F21)
These fields were inserted to cost out the collection main.
Because we have no specific situation, we assumed the collection
main would be 300 feet in length and have 10 takeoffs (sources).
These values remained constant during our analysis, although real
data could be input for any given situation.
2. Calculations
The calculations done by the spreadsheet are presented
below:
Step 1: Calculate Total Waste Gas Flow
a. 0^ Content of Waste Gap, (volume %) . (Cell F25).
This equation assumes that the waste gas is composed of air
and VOC's. Air contains 21% oxygen, on average. Therefore, 02
content can be expressed as:
(1 - VOC conc/1 x 106) • 0.21 • 100
b. Dilution Air Required for Combustion, (scfm); (C^ll £26)
The OAQPS Control Cost Manual states that there must be at
least 20 percent 02 in the waste gas for combustion to occur
(p. 3-24). An average of 3.96 moles of 02/mole of VOC was found
to be an acceptable ratio to express 20 percent 02.
c. Dilution A^ir Required for Safety, (scfm); (Cell F27)
According to the OAQPS Cost Manual, p. 3-26, safety codes
require that the maximum VOC concentration in the waste gas
stream not exceed 25 percent of the lower explosive limit of the
organic compound when a preheater is used. We assumed that a
reasonable LEL value for common compounds was about 3.5 percent,
D-22
-------
or 35,000 ppmv streams; 25 percent of 3.5 percent corresponds to
a value of 8,750 ppmv.
This LIL value was derived from the following data:
Compound LEL (ppmv)
Acetone
Benzene
Ethanol
Ethlene
Ethylene
H2
H25
Methane
Methanol
Propylene
26,000
14,000
33,000
28,000
28,000
4«* ** /% *
U , UUU
43,000
50,000
67,000
24,000
Average - 35,000 ppmv
0.25 (35,000) - 8,750
Therefore, additional air must be added to the waste gas to
dilute the waste gas VOC concentration to 8,750.
This formula for calculation of dilution air was derived in
the following way:
VOC cone (ppmv) 6
[ , ] [fiowrate] - 8,750/1 x 10
1 x 106
.- waste gas dilution dilution -»
L fiowrate + combust, iow aii •*• safety airj
By cancelling and aicu-kipulation, this formula reduces to:
(Dilution
Dilution combustion
safety » (Fiowrate) (PPMVOC) - 8.750 • (Fiowrate) - 8.750*
air 8,750
d. Calculafcg Total Gas Flow, (scfm) : (Cell F28)
This field calculates the total amount of gas flowing into the
incinerator during the emission event, the total gas is composed of;
Input flow (waste gas) * dilution air for combustion +
dilution air for safety
D-23
-------
Step 2; Calculate Heat Content of the Waste Gas. (Btu/acf):
(Cell F32)
The formula for this field is:
VOC Initial
[ -] [Flowrate]
Totai°Ga8 Flow * VOC heat content
- Btu/scf
Step 3; Calculate Gas Temperature Exit Preheater. (F): (Cell
F34)
From the OAQPS Cost Manual, the preheater temperature is related
to the fractional energy recovery and the incinerator operating
temperature and waste gas inlet temperature by the following equation:
T - T •
•••wo Awi
Energy Recovery « = =—
1fi " ivi
where, Two - Gas preheater exit temperature
Twi * Waste gas inlet temperature
Tfi - Incinerator operating temperature
This equation is manipulated to
Energy Recovery * /T T .\ . T . m T
ai-5-g * (Tfi Twi) + Twi - iwo
in the spreadsheet.
4: Calculate Auxiliary Fuel Required, (scfm) ; (Cell F36)
The equation for auxiliary fuel is presented on pages 3-32 of the
OAQPS Cost Manual. It is:
tPaf Qaf " 'wo QWO ^Cpm air (1.1 Tfi - TWQ - 0.1 Tref) - (-Ahcwp)]
- l.lCpm air (Tfi - Tref)
D-24
-------
where: paf - density of methane, 0.0408 lb/ft3 « 77°F, 1 atm
Qaf - natural gas flowrate, scfm
pwo - pwi » density of the waste gas, • 77°F, i atm
(0.0739 Ib/scf • 77«F, l atm)
Cpm air - mean heat capacity of air
Assume 0.255 BTU/lb°F (the mean heat capacity of air
between 77°F and 1,375°F)
Tref * Taf * temP- ambient ;
(Temp, auxiliary fuel) « 77°F
- Ahcwo - heat content of the waste stream, BTU/lb
- Ahcaf - heat content of natural gas, 886 BTU/lb
(21,502 BTU/lb)
Step 5: Total Gas Flow - Total Waste Gas Flow +
Auxiliary Fuel, (scfm): (Cell F38)
Maximum Auxiliary Gas Flow
This field considers the amount of auxiliary fuel necessary to
keep the incinerator working in the absence of a VOC emission stream.
In other words, during the period of time when there is not an
emission event in the incinerator. This equation is similar to the
one used above, except that - Ahcwo is 0.
The maximum total gas flow equals the amount of necessary
auxiliary fuel when there is no VOC plus the total amount of waste gas
from Step 1 (d).
*
The calculated annual gas flow, in standard cubic feet per year
(SCFY) is the amount of natural gas that is required in the
incinerator in a year, considering the weighted average of the gas
flow during emission events and without emission events.
Capital Cost Calculations
Equipment Costs. (Based on p. 3-44 of the OAQPS Cost Manual)
Equipment costs for recuperative incinerators depend on the total gas
flow through the incinerator to some power multiplied by a constant.
For 70 percent heat recovery, the equation is:
EC - 21,342
The minimum flow through the incinerator was assumed to be
500 scfm. The equipment cost was multiplied by cost indices of
(357.5/340.1) to correct equipment costs to October 1990, dollars.
D-25
-------
Auxiliary Equipment (duct work, stack). The costs for auxiliary
equipment were originally taken from an article in the May 1990,
Chemical Engineering and assuming 1/8 inch carbon steel and 24 inch
diameter with two elbows per 100 feet; and one elbow per source. We
assumed that there would be 10 sources manifolded to a 300 foot
collection main. The cost was adjusted on indices of (357.5/352.4).
Auxiliary Collection Fan
The auxiliary collection fan is sized on a minimum gas flowrate
of 500 scfm. The equation is:
$ - 79.1239 • [Total gas flow from Step 1 (d)]°*5612 *
(357.5/342.5)
(based on the 1988 Richardson Cost Manual)
Instrumentation 10 percent of purchased and auxiliary
equipment
Sales tax 3 percent of purchased and auxiliary
equipment
Freight 5 percent of purchased and auxiliary
equipment
Total purchased equipment - sum of the above factors
Direct costs * 30 percent of total purchased equipment
Indirect costs - 31 percent of total purchased equipment
Total Capital Investment. If the maximum total gas flow is less
than 20,000 scfm, then the installation costs are 25 percent of the
purchased equipment costs. If not, then the installation costs are
61 percent of the purchased equipment costs (from p. 3-51 of the OAQPS
Cost Manual).
Annual!zed Costs
Operator: $15.64/hr x 0.5 hr/shift x shifts/day x day/year
(Assume that 3 shifts/day, 365 days/year)
Supervisor: 15 percent of operator
Maintenance: $17.21/hr x 0.5 hr/shift x shifts/day x day/year
Material: 100 percent of maintenance
Natural gas: Yearly natural gas usage (scfy) x S3.3
1,000 scf
D-26
-------
Electricity:
From pages 3-55 of the OAQPS Cost Manual
Power^ 1.17 x 10"4 QtocAP
fan * =
Where:
Qcot - maximum gas flow
AP - pressure drop, in H20 (Assume 29 in H20; 19 inches
for the preheater and 10 inches for ducting)
E - efficiency
P - power, in KW
$.059/kwh •* electricity cost
Total Direct Costs:
Sum of labor, materials, natural gas, electricity
Indirect: Overhead: 60 percent of labor and materials
Administrative: 2 percent of total capital investment
(TCI)
Prop Tax: 1 percent of total capital investment
(TCI)
Insurance: 1 percent of total capital investment
(TCI)
Capital Recovery Factor:
10 percent, 10-year life .16275 (TCI)
D-27
-------
THERMAL INCINERATOR MODEL SPREADHSEET
D-28
-------
Al |l 2| III! KMAI IN( INI KAIOK MODI I
A4:|I2|TAHAMI-TI-KS:
(JV
JS: |WH| 'VOrii Controlled. (Mg/yr):
Ad: Tlowraic, (scfm):
1<>: (I 2)|WH|OWMI •04S4/IIKIO
A7: 'Waste Gas V(X' Concentration, (ppmv):
I7:(,0)|W|S| KMNNI
AR: 'Healing Value of V(M'\ (Blu/stf):
CH:(.0)|Wl5|2INNI
J8: |W l^| 'CUM 1-lffectivcncM, ($/Mg):
A4>: 'l-ncrgy Recovery, (%):
A 10: 'Incinerator Operating Temperature, (F):
I !«:(,(») |W|S| KtOO
All: 'Waste (Sas 1 cmpcraiure, (!•'):
I II:(,0)|WIS|70
J 1 1: |WI3| 'Maw l-mivikms, (Ih/yr):
A 12: Trchcalcr Tcmperalure, (l:):
J 12 (,(l)| Wn|2SUIO
AH: 'Mirfccular Weight of VOC:
I IV(I2)|W|S|64.S
A 14: 'Molecular Weight of (iav
I 14 (I;2)|WIS| +l-7/IINNNNMI>l:n + (l
J 14: |WI^| Time Variation:
A 15: 'Duraliim, (min):
I I5:(F2)|WI.S|0.6
JI5: (l'4)|Wn| <-MI'*(«»8.97'29.1)'(l/60)*(l/«760)*(
A 16: 'I vents/Shift:
I Ki:(,0)|W|S|8
A 17: Shifts/Day:
I 17: (,0)|WI5|(«'IF(FI9<=0.66,((&'IF(FI9<=0.^,I,2)),1)
JI7:|W|^|>|-:ncrgy.(Hiu/Mg):
A 18: Days/Year:
I I8:(,0)|W|S|V»5
JI8:(,0)|WI^| +I-7VJA
A I1': Time Variation:
A2II. 'I cnj;ih of ( 'ollcclion Main, (ft):
F20:(,»)|W|S|MO
A2I 'Number of Manifolded Sources:
I2I:(.0)|W|S| Ml
A2V 'Step I: Calculate I *
-------
A2r.: 'Dilution Air Required fur Combustion, (Ntf
l26:(,2)|WI';|(«.||((l25/llll»MI()W/V»2)<(VtH': ' f«r cvcnis
A40: 'Calculate Maximum Auxiliary (ias Mow, (scfm)
r40:(.2)|WI5|<.H|-U8MTO»(0.2tt^l.lM;IO.|^^
A4I: 'Calculate Maximum Total (ias Mow, (scfm):
I4I:(,2)|WI5|-H-40+I7S
A42: 'Calculated Annual Gas IHow, (scfy):
I 42: (,«) |WI5| ( + I;40'(l-ri9)+«:%*l-|9)'«»*87f10
A45: |.:
A47: |l 2| 'CAPR AI.C()STCAI.CUI.AriC)NS:
A49: 'Direct C««ts
A5II: 'l-quipmcnl C«KI ( Rccouperalive lncin.),($):
l\MMC1l)|W|S|(a1l-XI;4l<5(W,(2IM2^(5fK))^(0.25))MW.5/^(M)),(2l242M(|-4l)-((K2S))'(^V.5/^^
A5 1: 'Auxiliary I equipment (Duct work, Slack), (S):
I 51: ((1l)|WI5|(((2IO»24"0.8W)-f(2M.52*24A l.4^))*(l 20/HHt) + (l 2I'4.S2'24" I 4^))'(W S/3S2.4)
A52: 'Auxiliary Colteclton Fan, (S):
'Insirumcnialion, ($):
A54: 'Sales lux, ($):
l54:(CO)|WI5|O.OV(l:50+T5
A55: 'lTcighl.'(S):
I55:(CO)|WI5|005'(I;5»+I;5I + I'52)
A57: '101 Al I'lIRt IIASI-DI-OIMP COST ($):
I 57: (( ll)|WI5| I*(«'SUM(I-50.K55)
A5'>: 'Dirccl Insiallalion Cosls, ($):
I;5«»:(C»)|WI5|0.1M;S7
AMI Indirctl Cosls, ($):
I-WI ((0)|W|5|OM'I 57
A(>2: "loial Capital Invcslmeni ( TCI), (\):
A(»4:|I2| ANNIIAI I I I) (OS I (Al (HI A I IONS:
-------
APPENDIX E.
MODEL PLANTS
AND
MODEL EMISSION STREAM CALCULATIONS
-------
-------
i
is
if
s
u
0)
iJ
C31
E-l
-------
12
I
0)
I
o
CN
i
Dfl
0)
E-2
-------
WEIGH
TANK
,
WEIGH
TANK
MIX
TANK
•SOLVENT
Figure E-3. Model batch process for liquid reaction
E-3
-------
oc
HI
II
LU
U
> i-
ca
0)
M
g.
•H
Cu
E-4
-------
TABLE E-l.
EMISSION STREAM CHARACTERISTICS FOR SOLVENT REACTION MODEL PROCESS
WITH ATMOSPHERIC DRYER
• of
unM op» per CalcuUtioii fo* I
model bMdi MulanenltOB
Kminiun
Slrc.ro
VOC
How Rale Temp Uuiilum V»K
(De| C) (mm) (vol %)
LoMuiom NO CONTROL
It»/Wc«i MauFhu
(Note I)
CPC(N«e2)
9.29
(2000-ploB vcMel)
LOW VOLATILITY II 20 15 0.6% 0.29 164
MODERATE VOLATILITY II 20 IS 12.6% 2.12 26.01
HIGH VOLATILITY II 20 IS 57.9% 30.02 277.66
TOTAL DISPLACEMENT EMISSIONS LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
2.64
26.01
277.66
727.02
7172.21
76355.65
2.64
7.12
30.54
727.02
2151.61
1399.12
M
I
l/l
REACTORS
Ch*lfM| W/jplMf C
Heat-up W^WfC
Reaction
Empty React
TOTAL REACTOR EMISSIONS
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
30
30
30
30
30
30
ISO
ISO
ISO
100
100
100
20
20
20
20 to 30
20 lo 30
20 lo 30
37
37
37
20
20
20
IS
15
15
5
5
5
3
3
3
1
1
1
0.1%
3.1%
I4.S%
0.5%
7.5%
27.2%
0.1%
2.7%
12.1%
0.12
1.17
12.51
O.I
0.52
5.13
0.39
2.65
22.19
0.06
0.5
IJ
a 12
1.17
12.51
a 10
0.52
5.13
a 39
2.65
22.19
aw
a so
1.50
0.12
1.17
12.51
0.10
0.52
5.13
0.39
2.65
22.19
0.06
0.50
1.50
II4.M
1332.65
11365 JO
0.12
1.17
5.63
0.10
0.52
1.15
0.39
1.35
5.33
0.06
0.32
1.26
114.01
925.91
3K6.79
-------
TABLE E-l. (continued)
• of Emiuioi EniMMM NO CONTROL CPC(Noie2)
MM apt per CtlmUtiai for I Sucm How Rue Temp. Duration VOC EmiitioM IbiAMch MMtHw MuiHux
•oddhtfdi «*openlk» VOC <«cfm) (DrgC) (mm) (vol%) H*VCM (Note I) fcc/tadi •>•*«<*
CENTRIFUGES
LMdu«A¥iMi« w/neitMt LOW VOLATILITY 3 20 30 0.1% 0.02 0.05 O.OS 0.05
MODERATE VOLATILITY 3 20 30 3.1ft 023 0.47 0.47 0.47
HIGH VOLATILITY 3 20 30 14.5% 2.50 3.00 500 2.25
C*ke amniAnkwdinc LOW VOLATILITY 20 20 3 0.1% 002 0.09 0.03 003
w^MTfc- 3mm MODERATE VOLATILITY 20 20 3 3.1% 016 0.31 0.31 031
HIGH VOLATILITY 20 20 3 14.5% 1.67 3.34 3.34 1.50
TOTAL CENTRIFUGE EMISSIONS LOW VOLATILITY 21.13 2113
(ta-lMch/yeM) MODERATE VOLATILITY 2I5.M 215.51
HIGH VOLATILITY 2292.96 1031.13
DRYERS
Tray Dfycf
CoMveaive-Mot of cycle LOW VOLATILTTY 6000 65 60 a 3% 200 200.00 200.00 2000
MODERATE VOLATILITY 6000 65 60 01% 200 200X10 200.00 20.00
HIGH VOLATILITY 6000 65 60 0.3% 200 200.00 200.00 2000
Canredive-MtUfc of cycle LOW VOLATILITY 6000 65 240 ttl% IM 110.00 110.00 11.00
MODERATE VOLATILITY 6000 65 240 0.2% IK IM.OO IMLOO 1100
HIGH VOLATILITY 6000 65 240 0.1% 110 I WOO IMOO 11.00
Canveciive-eatfafcyck LOW VOLATILITY 6000 65 60 ttO% 20 20.00 20.00 200
MODERATE VOLATIUTY 6000 65 60 0.0% 20 20.00 20.00 2.00
HIGH VOLATILITY 6000 65 60 0.1% 20 20.00 20.00 2.00
TOTAL DRYER EMISSIONS LOW VOLATIUTY 110000 11000
(ftM4>McVye*r) MODERATE VOLATILITY 110000 HOOD
HIGH VOLATIUTY 110000 11000
-------
SSI MS
££«£!
Oil
10 1
600
ZSO
100
WWI
0»VI
96 J
CCO
KO
iO'o
09 Wl
OT91
96 J
II0
KQ
100
t*?i'
>^I
«-n
HO
mn
100
%009
10HLNOO IVOLLnaOVWl VHd 1NTOHTO
AUIimOA HOI11
AirmVTOA 3J.VJHOOW
AinUVTOA *(/1
AU.1U.V10AHOIH
i
w
..
AinilVTOA aiVJHOOW
AJJIlLVTOAMCri
AJLHULVTOA/Wn
SNOISSiWg NOUVTILLSKnVXQl
1 d»is <*W»?S • li.do -WMUIY
-««.«lo »otuiv
. ii.do WMM y
,
I dans dmms - M° •»»«•¥
I iS (hums • u.do
(ii ION) Nonmusw Haivg
(HIHI)
TOH1NO3ON
3OA
uwwrs
UultllUTj
-------
Ml
^ M -
c: t 3 2 R
e — in o b
Rwtcv *
•nm p
e — in b
8 »
S^
» <^
25?=
eom
b b -
§
<
W
«
Cd
J
O
CO
•6 c
] §s
a R
b - 2 b b «i b « a b b -
5 I £!
K 55 ef r4 2
CO
u
rH ^
<*>
w -1*
uw
*. 03
%%
CO
CO
H
If II
3
d.
838
]i-
ESS
III III III III
a s s
338 225 SRR
888
SSS SSS 8 S ? 888
i
2 p
ill
U
U
*j:
1 2
ll
s! 5
I I !
I I 1
E-8
-------
TABLE E-2. (continued)
• of
MM apt per Cilcvbiiai for I
model btfcfc Mil operation
Emiuion
Strewn
VOC
Flow Rue Temp. Pieiiure Duration Vl>C
(•cfm) (DejQ (nun Hg) (m.) (vol%)
Kmittiani NO CONTROL
-------
TABLE E-2. (continued)
tot
IBM cfM per
MOddlMlCll UMt
for I
VOC
Flow Rile Temp. Prctture Duration VOC
(•dm) (DtjC) (mm H|) (min) (vol%)
NO CONTROL CPC(Na«e2)
MM. Fhu Matt Pha
(Noel) HM/bMdi •>•*«<*
M
BATCH DISTILLATION
Alma*, op'a - Surtup Step I
Alma*, op'" - Startup Step 2
Almot. ap'a - Suitup Stop I
Alma*, ap'n - Startup Stop 2
AUIKM. op'* - Sunup Stop I
Atom, op'a - Startup Stop 2
TOTAL DISTILLATION EMISSIONS
LOW VOI-ATIIJTY 1.4
LOW VOLATILITY 12.6
MODERATE VOLATIIJTY 55
MODERATE VOLATIIJTY 14.4
HIGH VOLATILTIY 28.9
HIGH VOLATILTIY 39 9
LOW VOLATIIJTY
MODI-RATE VOLATIIJTY
MIOH VOLATILITY
25
25
25
760
760
760
760
760
760
5
60
5
45
5
30
0.7%
0.7%
14.3%
16.1%
60.0%
72.1%
0.01
0.52
0.33
596
16.4
164.6
«.OI
0.52
033
5.96
16.40
164.60
0.01
0.52
0.33
5.9*.
16.4)
1641«
145 5
1729/5
49775
001
052
009
2.03
180
14.11
145.75
5*0.855
456995
No* I:
Attune I
Note 2:
CPC = CURRENT PHARMACEUTICAL CONTROL
-------
TABLE E-3. EMISSION STREAM CHARACTERISTICS FOR
LIQUID REACTION MODEL PLANT
• of
IM* op* per Cakvltf ioa far I
model (Mch (MM opentioa
67)
TOTAL DISPLACEMENT EMISSIONS
Eminion
&!«••
VOC
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
Flow Rue
(•elm)
II
II
II
Tanp.
(Dr. Q
20
20
20
DuittiOB
(min)
15
IS
IS
VOC
(vd%)
06%
12.6%
57.9%
E«iwioM
fcfcvc*
029
2.12
30.02
EmiuioM
MM/b*dl
(Ntfcl)
1.79
17.62
1*7.61
NO CONTROL
MM*HH
kWbMdi
1.79
17.62
117.61
491.23
4*46.14
51591.65
CPC(Nole2)
MuiHw
IMMdl
1.79
5.29
20.64
491.23
1453.14
5675.0*
REACTORS
I Empty Reactor PM|Mf
TOTAL REACTOR EMISSIONS
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HKJH VOLATILITY
30
30
30
30
30
30
150
150
150
100
100
100
20
20
20
20 lo 30
20 to 30
20lo30
37
37
37
20
20
20
15
15
15
5
5
5
3
3
3
1
1
1
0.1%
3.1%
14.5%
(15%
7.5%
27.2%
0.1%
17%
12.1%
0.12
1.17
12.51
0.1
0.52
5.13
OJ9
2.65
22.19
0.06
05
1.3
0.12
1.17
12.51
0.10
052
5.13
0.39
245
22.19
0.06
050
150
012
1.17
12.51
010
052
5.13
O39
2.65
22.19
O06
OJO
1.50
IM.M
1332.65
1136550
0.12
1.17
5A3
0.10
0.52
1.15
0.39
1.35
5.33
006
032
1.26
1*401
925.91
3166.79
-------
AJJ1LLVTOA HOIH
**» 01* 5£ 6££1 11 iii i ir*i«A 31 yuan rim <*• ifr>ni« • » -i ^
«sn ,t,r. ,,™,w^«* Minm s^«)^ssIwaNoavniLLSKnvioi
If»l 09 Wl 09WI VWI *•!£ « « 6« AU.1U.VTOA HOIH
011 °*91 <*™ ^i «OT» « 6R AUL1U.VTOAHOIH I«b^*ili.is-«[*»T»«iV 1
10 Z %S ws %s **91 S» $t »l AiniLVTOA UVH3K1ON cd*SN) NOlLVTllLStd HOLVB
(wui) O*»a) (WJM) DOA
30A
TOH1NO3ON
-£-g
-------
TABLE E-4. EMISSION STREAM CHARACTERISTICS FOR
FORMULATOR MODEL PLANT
• of
unit dpi per
MOddlMldl
4.5
&lcul«M»farl
•MtopeoUM
TOTAL DISPLACEMENT EMISSIONS
Kmittion
SlICMI
VOC
Flow Rue Tnq>. Duration VOC En*
(Dt»C) (mm)
IX)W VOLATILITY II
MODERATE VOLATILITY II
HIGH VOLATILITY II
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
20
20
20
15
I)
I)
0.6% 0.29
124% ZK
57.9% 30.02
Eariuiam NO CONTROL
MM***
(Note I)
1.29
12.69
135.08
1.29
12.69
13501
353.69
3419.22
37145.99
REACTORS
M
i
I-*
UJ
TOTAL REACTOR EMISSIONS
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
30
30
30
30
30
30
150
150
150
100
too
100
20
20
20
20 to 30
20 to 30
20 lo 30
37
37
37
20
20
20
15
15
IS
5
5
S
3
3
3
1
1
1
01%
3.1%
143%
0.5%
7.5%
27.2%
0.1%
2.7%
12.1%
0.12
1.17
1251
0.1
tt 52
5.13
0.39
165
22.19
0.06
OJ
IJ
0.12
1.17
12.51
0.10
. 0.52
5.13
0.39
2.65
22.19
0.06
0.50
IJO
a 12
1.17
12.51
a 10
052
5.13
a 39
165
22.19
0.06
0.50
1.50
IM.M
1332.65
11365.50
Note I:
Airame I
-------
TABLE E-5. ASSUMPTIONS FOR SOLVENT REACTION MODEL PLANT
WITH ATMOSPHERIC DRYER
Basis:
A. Equipment required for each solvent reaction model batch process
1 reactor @ 2,000 gallons
2 weigh tanks @ 1,000 gallons
1 mix tank @ 2,000 gallons
1 crystallizer @ 3,000 gallons
1 slurry tank @ 3,000 gallons
2 centrifuges @ 200 ft3 each
1 distillation unit @ 2,000 gallons
1 solvent recovery tank @ 1,500 gallons
1 atmospheric dryer @ 300 ft3
B. Operation
Small plant has 3 "model batch process"
Medium plant has 10 "model batch processes"
Large plant has 30 "model batch processes"
Each batch is run 1 X per day
Plant operates 275 days per year
C. Chemistry
For calculations:
vapor pressure equivalent to:
Low volatility solvent n-butanol
Moderate volatility solvent methanol
High volatility solvent ether
E-14
-------
TABLE E-6. ASSUMPTIONS FOR SOLVENT REACTION MODEL PLANT
WITH VACUUM DRYER
Basis:
A. Equipment required for each solvent reaction model batch process
1 reactor @ 2,000 gallons
2 weigh tanks @ 1,000 gallons
1 mix tank @ 2,000 gallons
1 crystallizer @ 3,000 gallons
1 slurry tank @ 3,000 gallons
2 centrifuges @ 200 ft3 each
1 distillation unit @ 2,000 gallons
1 solvent recovery tank @ 1,500 gallons
1 vacuum tray dryer @ 300 ft3
B. Operation
Small plant has 3 "model batch process"
Medium plant has 10 "model batch processes"
Large plant has 30 "model batch processes"
Each batch is run 1 X per day
Plant operates 275 days per year
C. Chemistry
For calculations:
vapor pressure equivalent to:
Low volatility solvent n-butanoi
Moderate volatility solvent methanol
High volatility solvent ether
E-15
-------
TABLE E-7. ASSUMPTIONS FOR LIQUID REACTION MODEL PLANT
Basis:
A. Equipment required for each solvent reaction model batch process
1 reactor @ 2,000 gallons
2 weigh tanks @ 1,000 gallons
1 mix tank @ 2,000 gallons
1 surge tank @ 3,000 gallons
1 distillation unit @ 2,000 gallons
1 solvent recovery tank @ 1,500 gallons
B. Operation
Small plant has 3 "model batch process"
Medium plant has 10 "model batch processes"
Large plant has 30 "model batch processes"
Each batch is run 1 X per day
Plant operates 275 days per year
C. Chemistry
For calculations:
vapor pressure equivalent to:
Low volatility solvent n-butanol
Moderate volatility solvent methanol
High volatility solvent ether
E-16
-------
TABLE E-8. ASSUMPTIONS FOR FORMULATION MODEL PLANT
Basis:
A. Equipment required for each fomulation model batch process
1 reactor @ 2,000 gallons
2 weigh tanks @ 1,000 gallons
1 mix tank @ 2,000 gallons
1 surge tank @ 3,000 gallons
1 closed in-line process filter (no emissions)
B. Operation
Small plant has 3 "model batch process"
Medium plant has 10 "model batch processes"
Large plant has 30 "model batch processes"
Each batch is run 1 X per day
Plant operates 275 days per year
C. Chemistry
For calculations:
vapor pressure equivalent to:
Low volatility solvent n-butanol
Moderate volatility solvent methanol
High volatility solvent ether
E-17
-------
TABLE E-9.
EMISSIONS FROM SOLVENT REACTION MODEL PLANT
WITH ATMOSPHERIC DRYER
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONSflbs/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALL/NC
333,236
361350
749367
SMALL/CPC
36.236
44,621
86.603
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
1,109,676
1.203.296
2,495393
MEDIUM/CPC
120,666
148,590
288388
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
3332360
3.613302
7,493.673
LARGE/CPC
362360
446,215
866,031
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONS(tons/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALL/NC
166.62
180.68
374.68
SMALL/CPC
18.12
22.31
43.30
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
554.84
601.65
1247.70
MEDIUM/CPC
60.33
74.29
144.19
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
1666.18
1806.75
3746.84
LARGE/CPC
181.18
223.11
433.02
NC« No Control
CPC » Current Pharmaceutical Control
1. For surface condensers on sources emitting:
-25C for VP>300mmHg
-15C for 150
-------
TABLE E-10.
EMISSIONS FROM SOLVENT REACTION MODEL PLANT
WITH VACUUM DRYER
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONS(lbs/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALUNC
180.611
208.725
596.742
SMALL/CFC
20.974
29,359
71341
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
601.435
695.055
1.987,152
MEDIUM/CPC
69,842
97.765
237.564
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
1,806.110
2.087.252
5.967,423
LARGE/CPC
209.735
293.590
713.406
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONS(tons/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALUNC
90.31
104.36
298.37
SMALL/CPC
10.49
14.68
35.67
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
300.72
347.53
993.58
MEDIUM/CPC
34.92
48.88
118.78
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
903.06
1043.63
2983.71
LARGE/CPC
104.87
146.79
356.70
NC« No Control
CPC • Cunent Pharmaceutical Control
1. For surface condensers on sources emitting:
-25CforVP>300mmHg
-15C for 150
-------
TABLE B-ll. EMISSIONS FROM LIQUID REACTION. MODEL PLANT
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONS(lbs/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALL/NC
2,463
23,726
338.196
SMALL/CPC
2.463
8,882
42335
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
8,202
79.006
1.126.194
MEDIUM/CPC
8002
29.576
140,977
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
24.632
237 056
3381.965
LARGE/CPC
24.632
88.818
423355
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONS(tons/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALL/NC
1.23
11.86
169.10
SMALL/CPC
1.23
4.44
21.17
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
4.10
39.50
563.10
MEDIUM/CPC
4.10
14.79
70.49
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
12.32
118.63
1690.98
LARGE/CPC
1232
44.41
211.68
NC« No Control
CPC » Cunent Pharmaceutical Control
1. For surface condensers on sources emitting:
•25CforVP>300minHg
•15C for 150
-------
TABLE E-12. EMISSIONS FROM FORMULATION MODEL PLANT
MODEL PLANT EMISSIONSflta/yr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALL/NC
1.613
14.466
145,534
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NO
5.372
48.170
484.630
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
16,133
144.656
1.455345
MODEL PLANT EMJSSIONS(tonVyr)
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
SMALUNC
0.81
7.23
72.77
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
MEDIUM/NC
2.69
24.09
242.31
LOW VOLATILITY
MODERATE VOLATILITY
HIGH VOLATILITY
LARGE/NC
8.07
72.33
727.67
NC-No Control
E-21
-------
350 cral
ft3
7.48 gal
15 min
Model Emission Stream Calculations
OPERATION REFERENCE 2.1.1
Reactors
2.1.1.2.1 charging without purge
Assume reactor volume of 500 gallons (350 gallons to fill)
Filling occurs at 20°C (Room Temperature)
Flowrate
ft3/min
cnin
A. Low volatility (n-Butanol)
- % VOC
4.4 mmHg/760 mmHg - 0.0058 - 0.6%
Total Ib VOC. event
(4.4 mmHg)(3.12 ft3/min) (74 Ib/lbmol)(15 min/event)
998.97 mmHo-ft3 (293K)
Ibmol•K
- 0.05 Ib/event
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
% VOC
92 mmHg/760 mmHg - 0.121 - 12.0%
Total Ib VQC. event
(92 mmHa)(3.l2 ft3 /min) (32 Ib/Ibmol)(15 min/event)
f 998.97 mmHa-ft3; (293K)
Ibmol•K
» 0.5 Ib/event
C. High volatility (ether)
% VOC
442 mmHg/760 mmHg « 0.582 - 58.0%
E-22
-------
Total Ib VOC. event
(442 mmHo)(3.12 ft^/min) (74 Ib/lbmol)(15 min/event)
998.97 mmHa-ft3 (293K1
Ibmol•K
- 5 Ib/event
2.1.2.2.1 gha,rgincr with purge
flow rate out of reactor * purge rate
A. Low volatility (n-Butanol)
% VQC
4.4 mmHg/760 mmHg - 0.0058 « 0.6%
Assume 10% of saturation
(0.10) (0.6) - 0.06%
Total Ife VOC. evens
(760 nrnHcrl (0.00061 (30 ft3/min) (74 Ib/lbmol) (15 min)
998.97 mmHer-ft3 (293K)
Ibmol•K
- 0.05 Ib/event
1. Medium volatility (methanol)
% VQC
92 mmHg/760 nsnHg - 0.121 - 12.0%
Assume 10% of saturation
(0.10)(12.0) « 1.2%
Total Ib VOC. event
(760 mmHcr) (O.Q12) (30 ft3/min) (32 Ib/lbmol} (15 min)
998.97 mmHQ*ft3 (2931O
Ibmol•K
« 0.45 Ib/event
E-23
-------
C. High volatility (ether)
% VOC
442 mmHg/760 mmHg - 0.582 - 58.0%
Assume 10% of saturation
(0.1) (58.6) - 5.8%
Total Ib VOC. event
(760 rnmHo)(0.058)(30 ft3/min) (74 Ib/lbmol)(15 min)
998.97 mrnHa-ft3 (293K)
Ibmol-K
- 5.0 Ib/event
2.1.1.2.2 Heatup without purge
Assume reactor volume is 500 gallons. (Headspace is
150 gallons)
A. Low volatility (n-Butanol)
Flow rate. Emissions
VP of n-butanol 9 30 percent - 17.8 mmHg
(150 aal) ft
An « 7.48 aal j ( (760 - 4.4) mmHcr - (760 - 17.8) mmHoj
998.97 mmHa-ft3 ' (273 + 20)K (273 + 30)K
Ibmol•K
An - 0.0026 Ibmoles gas displaced
0.0026 Ibmole gas displaced
379 ff
Ibmol
• 1 ff3 displaced
1 ft3/5 min » 0.2 ft3/min displaced (average flow rate)
nt - r 4.4 i mmHg + < 17.8 > mmHg < 0.0026 Ibmoles-,
760 - 4.4 760 - 17.8 l gas displaced
2
nt - 0.000039 Ibmoles n-Butanol (MW - 74 Ib/lbmol)
(0.000039 Ibmol n-butanol)(74 Ib/lbmol)
nt m 0.003 Ib n-Butanol
E-24
-------
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
Flow rate. Emissions
VP of methanol « 30°C - 165 mmHg
(150 gal)( )
7.48 aal ^ ( (760 - 92) mmHa - (760 - 165)
998.97 mmHa-ff» (273 + 20)K (273 + 30)K
Ibmol•K
AIT. • 0.00634 Ibmoles gas displaced
0.00634 Ibmolea
379 ff
Ibmol
-0.48 ft3/min
5 min
92 165
•) mmHg + ; ] mmHg
760 - 92 760 - 165
n -
t
nt - (0.0013 Ibmol methanol) (32 lb/ Ibmol)
nt - 0.0013 Ibmoles methanol (MW « 32 Ib/lbmol)
nt - 0.04 lb methanol
C. High volatility (ether)
Flowrate. Emissions
VP of ether • 30°C - 661 mmHg
f fl5Q qal) 7-4fl ga i t
998.97 mmHa.ff* (273+20)K (273+30)K
Ibmol 'K
0.0152 Ibmoles gas displaced
E-25
-------
f 442 1 mmHg •»• ' 661 ; mmHg rO.0152 Ibmolesi
760 - 442 760 - 661 gas displaced
nt « 0.0613 Ibmoles ether (MW - 74 Ib/lbmol)
(0.0613 Ibmol ether)(74 Ib/lbmol)
nt - 4.5 Ib ether
2.1.1.2.2 Heatup with purge
Assume flow rate - 30 acfm and 10% of saturation
- Temperature increases from 20 to 30°C
A. Low volatility (n-Butanol)
(0.10) (30 acfm) (4.4 mmHa) _ 0>000045 lbmol/min (initial)
998.97 mmHg-ft3,,Q7in
Ibmol-K J (293K)
(0.10)(30 acfm)(17.8 mrnHg) m Of000176 ibmoi/min (final)
998.97 mrnHg-ft > ,,n,v»
Ibmol-K J (303K)
Calculate average
(0.000045 + 0.000176) Ibmol/min
2
- 0.00011 lbmol/min n-butanol (MW • 74 Ib/lbmol)
0.00011 Ibmol n-butanol
mm
74 Ib
Ibmol
(0.008 Ib/min)(5 min) « 0.04 Ib n-butanol
E-26
-------
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
(0.10) (30 «cfm)(92 mmHg) m 0.000943 lbmol/min
998.97 mmH-ft4. ,,0,,,.,
- lbmol.K > (293K)
(0.10) (30 acfm)(165 mmHgJ , 0.00164 lbmol/min (final)
i 998.97 mmHg.ft^ {3Q3K)
Ibmol-K J (303K)
Calculate average
(0.000943 + 0.00164) Ifcmol/min
2
- 0.00X3 lbmol/min methanol (MW - 74 Ib/lbmol)
0.0013 Ibmol methanol! 74 lb
nun I Ibmol
(0.04 lb/min) (5 min) » 0.2 lb methanol
C. High volatility (ether)
(0.10) (30 acfm)(442
998.97 mmHg.ft-%
^ J
lbmol/min
(0.10) (30 acfm)(661 mmHg) m Q ^^ lbmol/min (final)
Calculate average
(0.0045 + 0.0066) lbmol/min
2
- 0.00555 lbmol/min ether (MW - 74 Ib/lbmol)
0.00555 Ibmol ether
74 lb
Ibmol
- (0.411 lb/min)(5 min) - 2 lb ether
E-27
-------
2.1.1.2.2 Reaction with purge
This event actually is the purging of a reactor prior to
charging (or sampling).
Assume temperature - 310K and 10% cf saturation
A. Low volatility (n-Butanol)
VP n-butanol « 310K - 16 mmHg
(0.10)(150 acfm)(16 mmHg) _ 0_OOQ77 lbmol/min
, 998.97 mmHg-ff% ,,,nin
Ibmol-K(310K)
- 0.00077 lbmol/min n-butanol (Mtf - 74 Ib/lbmol)
0.00077 Ibmol n-butanol|74 Ib
min !Ibmol
- (0.057 Ib/min)(3 min) - 0.17 Ib n-butanol
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
VP methanol at 310K - 229 mmHg
(0.10) (150 acfm)(229 mmHa) , 0>(m lbmol/min
998.97 mmHg-ft3 ,*,nv\
- Ibmol -K ' (310K)
- 0.011 lbmol/min methanol (MW - 32 Ib/lbmol)
0.011 Ibmol methanol: 32 Ib
min j Ibmol
- (0.355 Ib/min) (3 min) - 1.1 Ib methanol
C. High volatility (ether)
VP ether at 310K - 760 inmHg
- (0.10X150 acfm)(760 mmHg) m 0.03 6 8 lbmol/min (initial)
.998.97
Ibmol-K
- 0.0368 lbmol/min ether (MW - 74 Ib/lbmol)
E-28
-------
0.0368 Ibmol ether|74 Ib
minSIbmol
« (2.72 Ib/min)(3 min) - 8.2 Ib ether
2.1.1.2.3 Reactoy vacuum transfer
Vacuum transfer would typically occur when transferring the
contents of a 55 gallon drum to a reactor. The emissions would
result from displacing air saturated with VOC's out of the
reactor prior to drawing in new product.
Air displaced; assume 500 gallon reactor
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
Initial air
(760 ntmHg) (500 gal/7.48 gal/ft3) m 0>1735 ibmol
,998 97 mmHs-ft3, (293R)
lomol • K
Final air
(100 tnmHg) (500 gal/7.48 gal/ft3) m QfQ22B Ibmol
998.97 mmHg-ft3 ,-a,»»
ii , „ ,; \4y3fi*l
Ibmol • K
0.1735 Ibmol - 0.0228 Ibmol « 0.1507 Ibmol
Flow rate
0.1507 Ibmol
10 mm
•5 •JQ ft- ^ -3
T'-LT - 5.7 ftVmin
Ibmol
VOC emissions
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
VP « 20°C - 4.4 mmHg
Assume saturation? volt ranges from 0.6 to 4.4
Total VOC emissions based on average volt
(0,6 + 4.4)/2 - 2.5 volt
(0.1512 Ibmol)(0.025)(74 Ib/lbmol) - 0.3 Ib n-butanol
E-29
-------
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
VP • 20 °C - 92 rnmHg
92 mmHg/760 mmHg - 12.1 volt
92 mmHg/100 mmHg • 92 volt
Total VOC emissions based on average volt
(12.1 + 92} 12 - 52.1 volt
(0.1512 Ibmol) (0.52) (32 lb/lbmol) - 2.S Ib methanol
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
VP m 20°C - 442 mmHg
442 mmHg/760 mmHg - 58.2%
Assume 100 volt at 100 mmHg
(58.2 + 100)/2 » 79.1 volt
(0.1512 Ibmol) (0.791) (74 Ib/lbmol) - 8.9 Ib ether
2.1.1.2.3 Pressure transfer
Pressure transfers often consist of "blowing" lines to rid
them of solvent. Assuming a typical situation involves 30 ft of
3.5 inch flexible line containing it residual solvent, the amount
of solvent evaporated from each line is:
_ 3.5 in 2
' 12 in./f'tJ (30 ft) - 2 ft3 material
2
(2 ft3) (0.01) - 0.02 ft3 in liquid form
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
VP * 20°C - 4.4 mmHg
Specific gravity - 0.81
l50 ft w 4. 4 rnrnHg-! ,_j_i
- H760 l (mm) -
0.02
760 mmHg
0.087 x min - 5.26 ft3 gas
x - 60 minutes (assuming lot saturation of the stream)
E-30
-------
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
VP « 20°C - 92 mmHg
Specific gravity - 0.792
0.02 tt(i (0.792)(l(-l (293K)
1,82 x min - 11.9 ft3 gas
x « 6 . 5 minutes
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
VP 9 20°C - 442 mmHg
Specific gravity - 0.8
in in 15°gt3' ' 442
(0'10)
.
mn 760 mmHg
0 02 ft3-62-4 lb: {0 B)^lbmolw 998.97
0.02. tt , M0.8)
lbmol-K
8.72 x min - 5.2 ft3 gas
x - 0.596 minutes
2.1.1.2.3 Empty reactor purging
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
c m (4.4 mmHg)(74 Ib/lbmol)
10Wi r 998.97 mmHg-ft3j (293K)
Ibmol • K
- 0.0011 lb/ft3
Standard industry practice (Chapter 3)
(500 gal)(ft3/?.48 gal) - 67 ft3
100 ft3/67 ft3 - 1.5 vessel volume changes
E-31
-------
- (0.37)1-5 - 0.22
(0.0011 lb/ft3)(0.22) - 0.000242 lb/ft3
Emissions - 67 ft3 (0.0011 lb/ft3 • 0.000242 lb/ft3} « O.OS7 Ib
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
(92 mmHg)(32 Ib/lbmol) 3
- 0.0101 lb/ft
998.97 ranHg.ft3
{ - ) (293K)
Ibmol-K
Emissions - 67 ft3 [0.0101 lb/ft3 - 0.22(0.0101 lb/ft3} J
« 0.53 Ib
Ct High volatility (diethyl ether)
(442 mmHg) (74 Ib/lbmol) m Q ^^ Ib/ffc3
,998.97 mmHg. ft3, ly^K\
Ibmol-K J t293K)
Emissions - 67 ft3[0.1H8 lb/ft3 - (0.22) (0.1118 lb/ft3)]
- 5.84 Ib
Exhaust composition
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
0.000242 Ib butanol, , Ibmol^ , 998.97 mmHg-ft3, ,-Q,^
j l 74~T1J [ lbmol-K J (2i3K)
760 mmHg
B. Medium volatility (methanol )
°'00126
0.00222 Ib methanol -, r Ibmoli , 998 .97 mmHg-ft3 , ««.,-.»
3 J l 32~IBJ l ibmol-K - J (293K)
0.027
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
r 0.0246 Ib diethyl ether, , lbmol^ , 998.97 mmHg•ft3^ ,-„,-»
ft3 air Jl7lTIBn Ibmoi-K - J (253K}
- 0.128
E-32
-------
2.1.2.1 Depressurization of a nutpche filter
See example C-14. Assume volume of filter is 1,000 gallons,
A total of 0.403 moles of gas are emitted from the filter in a
40 minute period. For simplicity, we have to assume that the
flowrate is constant over the duration of the filtration,
although we know it will decrease with decreasing pressure.
Midpoint of pressure range • 1,665 mmHg
(0.403 Ibmol) (3BBntlnT¥?'ft H300K) ,
(Ibmol-K) ' , fl ,,. ,_.j_3
1|665 mmHg-40 min " 1'8 ft /min
The range is from 1.2 to 4.0 ft3/miri
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
VP 9 27°C - 6.5 mmHg
(0.403 Ibmol)(6.5 mmHg/2,570 mmHg)(74 Ib/lbmol) - 0.08 Ib
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
(0.403 Ibmol)(143 mmHg/2,570 mmHg}(32 Ib/lbmol) - 0.72 Ib
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
(0.403 Ibmol)(596 mmHg/2,570 mmHg)(74 Ib/lbmol) - 6.92 Ib
2.1.2.1 Filtercake purging
Assume 25% of saturation
N2 stream at 293K
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
3
(0.25)(4.4 mmHg)(100 ft /min)(30 min)
« 0.0113 Ibmol (0.8 Ib)
998.97 SinHf-ft3
f )(293K)
Ibmol-K
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
[1
"3
(0.25) (92 mmH? (100 ft3min) (30 min)
998.97 mmHg. ft (293K,
Ibmol -K j U93K)
E-33
-------
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
(0.25) (442 mmHg) (100 f f /min) i3u min) „ 1>13 ibmoi (83.8 Ib)
.998.97 mmHg-ft3^ I90,ri
1 - (lbmol-K) J (293K}
2.1.2.2 Heated filtercake purging
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
VP • 100°C - 390 mmHg
Assume 25% saturation
, 390 mmHg-, ,
(0.25)1 760 mmHgJ (760 mmHg) (100 ft /min) (30 min) Q g lbmol
' 998.97
1 (lbmol-K)
B. " Medium volatility (methanol)
VP « 100°C > 760 mmHg
(0.25) (760 mmHg) (100 ft3/min) (30 min) „ 1<53
, 998.97 inmHq-ft3^ ,^^^
[ lbmol K j (373K)
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
(0.25) (760 mmHg) (100 ft3/min) (30 min) . 1>53
- 998.97 mmHg-ft? ,,-,.,«
1 - lbmol -K - J (373K)
2.1.2.3 Centrifuge loading/spinning
Same as filtercake purging - but smaller flow rate
flowrate - 3 acfm
duration -30 minutes
Exhaust composition
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
(0.25) (3 ft3/min) (4.4 mmHg) (30 min) (74 Ib/lbmol
0.025 Ib
E-34
-------
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
(0.25) (3 ft3/min) (92 mmHg) (30 min) (32 Ib/lbmol) . ___ ..
•a » U.2Z6 ID
, 998.97 mmHq-ftf ,-Q»IM
lbmol-K J 1293K)
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
(0.25) (3 ft3/min) (442 mmHg) (74 Ib/lbmol) (30 min) _ c, ..
•a ' » *.51 ID
( 998;97 .
1 (Ibmol-Kf J
Filtercake cutting/unloading with purge
Same as centrifuge loading/spinning - but larger flow rate
flow rate - 20 ft3/min
duration - 30 minutes
A. Low volatility (n-butanol)
(0.25) (20 ft3/min) (4.4 mmHg) (30 min) (74 Ib/lbmol) _ Q
998.97 mmHg-ft3. (? .
lbmol-K j (293K)
B. Medium volatility (methanol)
(0.25) (20 ft3/min) (92 mmHg) (30 min) (32 Ib/lbmol) . _. ..
•> * ' » 1.51 ib
.998.97 mmHg-ft-% ,,Qlirx
lbmol-K J {293K)
C. High volatility (diethyl ether)
(0.25) (20 ft3/min) (442 mmHg) (74 Ib/lbmol) (30 min) lg 8 ^
2.1.3 Vacuum drying - Blender Dryer
The emission stream characteristics for this unit operation
are based on data that was reported from industry. A total of
160 Ib of MeOH over the entire cycle (6 hours) was reported to be
emitted. We assume that 100 Ib was emitted over the first
2 hours, 50 over the next 3 hrs, and 10 in the last hour.
Because the vapor pressure of MeOH and acetone exceeded the
minimum operating pressure in the dryer (50 mm) at 40°C, the
solvent was assumed to be boiling off the product the entire
time.
E-35
-------
This calculation is consistent with Example 6 of Chapter 3 .
The average emission rate over the drying cycle is:
160 lb/6 hr m 26.7 Ib/hr
Assuming the initial (max) emission rate is twice the
average, then 53 lb/hr should be emitted over the initial drying
period, which is consistent with 100 Ib over the first 2 hours.
TftAY Dryey
Again, the solvents were effectively "boiling off" the '
product because of the low dryer operating pressure. Pressure
was reported to be in the range of 150 mmHg to 20 mmHg. The
cycle time for this dryer is 36 hours.
215 Ib total e 1K/V,,.
36 hours -- 6 lb/hr
* We assumed twice this rate for the initial 6 hours, or
(6) (2} (6) - 72 Ib
The emissions over the remainder of the cycle are: 143 Ib.
We assumed that the last 6 hours of the cycle only contributed to
10 Ib, and therefore emissions over the middle of the cycle are
143 - 10 m 133 Ib over 24 hours.
Convegtive Dryqrp
TRAY Dryer
The documentation for this model emission stream comes from
p. 75 of Environmental Progress Magazine. May 1990, in which
180 'hg of solvent must be evaporated over the course of an entire
drying cycle. Assuming 50 percent of the total material
evaporated during the cycle comes off in the first hour, the
hourly emission rate is 90 kg (200 lb/hr) during the first hour.
Assuming the last hour of the drying cycle tubes care of
5 percent of the total solvent, or 9 hg (20 lb/hr) , then the
middle part of the cycle, which lasts four hours emits 180 hg -
90 - 9 - 81 kg (180 Ib) or 45 lb/hr.
The volume percentage of VOC in the exit gas was calculated
for all cases of volatility according to the difference in
molecular weights of the low, moderate, and high volatility
materials .
(200 lb/hr) ( >ibK) (338 K)
- 1,200 ft3/hr [gnhLj - 20 ft3/min
71 0 mmHg
[gn
% vol - (20)/60006i
E-36
-------
Rotary Dryer
Reported solvent exhaust rate was 15.5 Ib/cycle. Flow rate
was 1.8 acfm.
We assume 90 percent emitted over the first 6 hours (which is
1/4 of the cycle). We assume 9 percent of the emissions were
emitted over the next 12 hours, and that the remaining 1 percent
was evaporated over the last 6 hours of the cycle.
Calculation of Vol %:
(15.5 Ib)(0.90) - 14 Ib
(14 lb)/(6 hr) - 2.3 Ib/hr
3
i OQ^ if ^ •a
! IZ»J IW 27.9 ftj/hr
or
•-> -s -.*- /i—* • Ibmol. ; 998.97 mmHg-ft' > ,^n^ «» ,
.2.3 ip/hr) i 33^.-. ibmol K -^293K^ 27.9 ft3/hr
760 "^S " 0.46 ft3/min"
0.46 ft3/min _ 25 Q%
1.8 ft3/min
VACUUM SYSTEMS
Vacuum pump - liquid ring type
Event; Vacuum system (reactor or crystallizer or solvent -
removal batch still, etc.) where single VOC is being evaporated,
condensed, and some vapors pulled from the system via the air in-
leakage. Our example is toluene boiling at 74 mmHg (45°C)
Assumption: Stream will be saturated in the VOC - either
from the process, or if not, from the intimate contact of n/c gas
with the seal fluid in the vacuum pump
Basis for noneondensable gas flow - Appendix C - Example 9
in*leakage estimates of 9.7 scfm
If toluene is the seal fluid/process fluid
Temp at discharge of pump is 25° - cooler on seal fluid
VP toluene - 28.4 mmHg
Discharge of vac. pump is to atmosphere at 760 mmHg
moles of air - ^ x f|f - 0.02475 moles air/min
359 ftVlbmol
Y - - 0.03737 MW toluene - 92
E-37
-------
. 0.02475 §19S x f x 0.03737 X . 5.1 !b/hr
Steam- jet
Assume noncondensable gas in- leakage is saturated at 45°C
with toluene
In- leakage - 44.6 lb/hr (9.7 sefm)
Using
_ ._. La , sys _ ,%
SE " ""VOL 23 [ ' " 1]
x iiii 760
x
- 15.26 lb/hr
Composition of uncontrolled emission stream must have
motive steam included
From Perry's (4th) pg. 6-31 Using 100 psi steam
P 76°
,
.3
pob 74
0.0143
entrainment - roughly ..
0.06 wb
^""^
0.06 lb air/lb steam
In example problem 10, Appendix c, air at 9.7 scfm is
equivalent to 44.6 lb/hr
.*. steam required 1/0.06 x 44.6 - 743 lb/hr (if single
stage)
Mt. fr. mw moles mole fractions
92.54 H20 743 lb 18.02 41.23 0.9603
1.90 Tol 15.26 92 0.1659 0.00386
5.56 Air 44.06 29 1.S379 0.03582
802.86 42.9338 0.99998
E-38
-------
Batch distillation - atmospheric - heat up to boiling point
Solvent BP VP « 25°C
n-butanol 117° -118° 5.6 mmHg
Methanol 64.7°C 128 mmHg
Ethyl ether 34.6°C 553 mmHg
Suppose we heat up a distillation kettle to boiling point -
in theory - all the air will be expelled - and will pass through
the primary condenser. Initially, the material will be saturated
at starting temperature of 20 8C.
When heated up to 25" and above - the primary condenser will
cause condensation and discharge gas stream will be saturated at
25°C.
Emissions from the heatup of the kettle and during the actual
kettle distillation are calculated as follows:
Assume Batch still is 4 ft diameter x 30 ft high
volume - 377 ft3
Using the heatup formula from Chapter 3, (for butanol)
377 760 - 4.4 760 - 5.6
998.9 273 + 20 273 •*• 25
2.57884 - 2.53154
- 0.3774 x 0.047296
- 0.01785 moles total noncondensable gas emitted during heatup
4.4 + 5.6
*S » 76° ' 4'4 — 76° ' 5'6 x 0.01785 x 71.2 « 0.0081 lb during
heatup
For MeOH use 92 and 128 mm 2.27986 - 2.1208 •* 0.06003 total
moles gas expelled during heatup
For ether use 442 and 553 1.08532 - 0.69463 -» 0.1474 total
moles gas expelled during heatup
At 25° -» BP all the remaining noncondensable (n/c's) are
vented at saturation level
Volume of system 377 ft3 - 0.9790 moles
E-39
-------
Butanol
0.9790 - 0.01785 discharged during heatup
« 0.9611 x 392 - 377 acf
at 25° VP - 5.6
Y - 5.6/760 - 0.007368
Pounds butanol discharged - 0.9611 x 0.007368 x 74.12
• 0.525 + 0.0088 • 0.534 Ib (total pounds discharged)
Methanol
' at 25° VP - 128
Y - 128/760 - 0.1684
Ratio of VOC to nc - 128/(760 - 128) - 0.2025
Moles of VOC discharged - moles of n/c x ratio
Moles noncendensable - 0.9790 - 0.060 moles discharged during
heatup - 0.919 x ratio
- 0.919 x 0.2025
- 0.186 moles
0.186 x 32 - 5.96 Ib (+0.327 Ib during heatup)
Gas flow during 2nd step of process (during distillation):
0.919 + 0.186 moles - 1.105 moles
At 25°C - 433 acf -i- 30 min - 14.4 acfm
Ether
at 25° VP - 553 Y - 553/760 - 0.728
Ratio of VOC to NC: 553/(760 - 553) - 2.671
NC flow: 0.979 - 0.1474 - 0.8316
Moles of VOC discharged - moles of NC x ratio
• 0.8316 x 2.671
E-40
-------
- 2.221 moles
x 74.12 (mw) - 164.6 Ib
Gas flow: 0.8316 + 2.221 - 3.053 moles
3.053 x 392 - acf/30 min - 39.89 acfm during 2nd step of
process
Summary
BuUnol
Heatup
20-25
25->BP
N/C
venting
MeOH
Heat
Vent
Ether
Heat
Vent
Flow rate
1.4
12.6
5.5
14.4
28.9
39.9
Temp
20-25
25
20-25
25
20-25
25
Prott
760
760
760
760
760
760
Dur
5
60
5
45
5
30
VOC
0.66
0.74
14.5
16.8
60
72.8
N/C
99.34
99.26
85.5
83.2
40
27.2
Ib/
event
0.01
0.52
0.33
5.96
16.4
164.6
E-41
-------
-------
APPENDIX F.
MASS EMISSIONS CURVES
-------
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
CD
i£
V)
5
F 3
O O
LU £
t t-
LLI
CO
O
O
10
0
T 1 1 I Mill—
10
T I I I I I I M 1 1 1 I Mill
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T 1—T
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cdnd. Crtl. Eff.=90%
CO
LJJ '5?
Z P
LLJ
LJJ
LL
Li.
LLJ
CO
O
O
| 15
O
x:
^ 10
0
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
O)
25
CO
co ^
III ^
z "P
LLJ c
20
O
in
>
H
U_
LLJ
CO
O
O
10
I I I I
I I I I I I I I
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
g
COST E
Annual Mass Emission Total=10O.OOOIb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
25
Si
co ^ 20
LU ^f
z ?
S §
§ 1
ui t 10
0
o
100
FLOWRATE(scfm)
1000
10000
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
C37000ppmv
I
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,OOOIb/vr
Low Vol. (Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
I
Ul
0
1
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv - - C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
O)
25
V)
ui
20
^
15
O O
10
LLI
O
O
0
T 1 1 i Mill 1 1—I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I INN 1 \—I I I I I I
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
HOOOppmv T8750ppmv ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
25
o>
w ,-. 20
CO CO
LU
z
LU
;> w 15
iu
CO
O
O
Hri
1 0
0
I I
10
I I I I I I
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
10000
T1 oooppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
C1 OOOOOppmv
l
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
25
D)
20
CO x-x
CO CO
UJ 13
z c
UJ CO
F 1 15
o o
UJ H
u_ •
u. O 4A
uj 10
CO
O
O
5-
0
1—i—i i i M n—
1 10
T 1—i i i i M i—
100
T r
1000
10000
FLOW/RATE (scfm)
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
f*4 l\f\t\f\r\r\tm\l
UiUUUUppiiiV
CIQQOQQDDmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
O)
s§-
CO ^
CO CO
LIJ TJ
7 ly S
*° > CO
I- 13
O O
LiJ
LL
LL
UJ
CO
O
O
10
0
10
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
1 1 1 1 1
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
CO ^
CO CO
UJ T3
u m
> CO
H D
O O
HI
U_
LL
111
fc
o
o
15
0
II i i i i i i in i i i r
10 100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
I I I I
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
CO ^-v
CO CO
UJ T3
w ol
> CO
I- U
o o
UJ JC
LU
CO
o
o
15
0
10
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
10000
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
25
O>
7
w ^ 20
CO (0
UJ T3
z c
UJ co
£ § 15
o o
UJ
10
o
o
1 1 1 | I I I II 1 1 1 I Mill 1 1 1 I Mill 1 I I I I I I I
1 10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
HOOOppmv T8750ppmv ClOOOOppmv - ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
O)
U»
I I 1 1 I I I I I
1—I—I I I 11II 1—I—I I I III
1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
30
CD
25
ULJ
(0
a
20
15
O
ill
10
LU
CO
O
O
0
;
-\ 1—i i i M 11 1 1—I I I I I i i 1 1—I I I M M 1 1—I I I I 11
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
*1
I
35
a)
rn
\*j
LJLJ
Z
LU
LU
LL
LL
LU
CO
O
ou~
T3
W 1R
OT IO
O
I—
^-*' 1 0
-
n
<
/
/
/
/
[ i
I i
/ /
/' >/
::^^^
1 1 Illllll 1 1 Illllll 1 1 Illllll 1 1 Illlll
10 100 1000 10C
FLOWRATE(scfm)
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
a\
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
35
•«•
5
CO
CO
wy
LLJ
z
LU
h-
o
LU
U_
U_
111
J-
co
0
I/T
T3
03
tf\
VJ
o
t
OU~
OA-
^U
•1 C_
ID
in
IU
•
0_
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ ,
/ /
/ /
/
/
* /** -x
/' /* ^^
/* /• x^
/
_.x..--''',-''^
....I ^^-^^^
i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i 1 1 1 1
10 100 1000 10C
FLOWRATE(scfm)
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
C1OOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
O)
I
M
«J
CO
S3
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,OOQlb/yr
HLVol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=90%
ei-a
— j COST EFFECTIVENESS($/Mg)
30-r
25-
^ 20-
(0
CO „
§ 15-
^ 10-
5
0
— T10C
_.. -4-
rn zzl
/
/
• " _4/
:^^
1 ' ' ' ""Vo 160 ' 1000 ibooo
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T-n-»«rr»~^^«»» r^ 1 Annnnnnnv C100000DI
)0ppmv T8750ppmv uiuuuuppinv WIWUWMW^
>mv
-------
u>
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
O)
10 100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Low Vol.fToluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
g
Si
ST
ffj ^ 20
UJ (O
^ T3
•n
I
COST EFFECTIVE
§ 15
O
10
Q-\ 1—i—i i i 11 ii
1 10
T 1—I I I I I I I
100
Tooo
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
HOOOppmv
"T"^*"Tr"^\— •. ,n *^«^ft m
T8750ppmv
f^-i nnnnr\nm\/ C\*V7r\
L»lUUUUppiiiv wo/u
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
O)
25
V)
.
LJ v
* I
20
^
O o
LU
10
LJJ
O
O
' I I I I Ml 1 1—I I I I I I I 1 1 1 | I I i || 1 1—| MM!
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
HOOOppmv T8750ppmv ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,OOOIb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
1
10 100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
O)
25
CO
ft ~ 20
LLJ (0
* I
p § 15
Q O
LLI
10
in
O
O
T 1 1 | I I I I I 1 1—I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I Mill 1 1—I I I I I I
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
TlOOOppmv T8750ppmv ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
O)
25
CO
fft
LLI
z
0)
o
20
LU
10
O
O
0
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
I I I I I I
10000
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
CD
T 1 1 I I I I II 1 1 1 I I I I I
1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1 1 uuuppmv
T8750ppmv
—
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,0001b/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
O>
I 1—I I 1 I IH
I 1—I I I I I I I
1000
10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
f*4 f\t\r\f\r\r\mil — '
uiuuuuppniv
— C100000DDIT1V
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
25
CO x-^
CO CO
UJ T3
z c
7 w co
N> > CO
" & 8
UJ
u_
u.
UJ
CO
o
o
15
10
0
T I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I II 1 1 1 I I I I M 1 1 1 I I M I
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,OOOIb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
25
01
co _ 20
CO CO
III T3
7 1 I
s 5 8
LU
CO
O
o
10
0
—r
L
1 ! I Mill—
10
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
! - , — I I I I I II
1000
1 — I — 1 I I I 1 1
10000
TlOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol. (Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
~ 25
CD
CO CO
111 T3
Z C
W CO
o o
LLI
CO
O
O
20
15
10
0
LL
/ s'
~\ 1—I I I I I I I 1 1—I I I I II I 1 1—I I I II II 1 \—| I I | | |
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
25
UJ
o
en
CO 0)
HI T3
z c
HI CO
o o
LJJ x:
o
o
20
10
0
1
TT 1 1 1 I I I I I I
10 100
T 1 1 I I I
1000
10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
O)
25
CO
<0
UJ
20
^U
LU
LU
CO
O
O
15
10
0
>•
/
/ /
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
I I I T \\\
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
CD
CO
LU co
O Q
LU
CO
O
o
I 1 1 I Mill
I 1—I—I I I 111
I 1 1 I IMM
10
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
CO
8 -s
Z -a
, £ §
I ^
OJ
u>
CO
O O
LU £
ML t
LU
CO
O
O
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
10
Illllll
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
I
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
CO
LU
« LU C
7 > co
£ ^ S2 15
O
Qj jE
LL t
LU
CO
O
O
0
i i 1111—
10
T 1—r
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,0001 b/yr
HLVol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
g
2i
v>
& x~s
in *u?
z "2
ID £
25
7 > 8 15
X H 5 I0
O o
ID £
t fc
ID
CO
O
O
10
FLOWRATE(scfm)
/
T 1 1 i Mill 1 1—I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I II 1 I I Mill
\Q100 1000 10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv ClOOOOOppmv
-------
I
UJ
en
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=95%
30
O)
tf> _
LLJ In
Z T3
111
sa
O O
uj £
t *=•
UJ
CO
O
o
10
100
FLOWRATE(scfm)
1000
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Low Vol.fToluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
D)
<£
V)
<*> ^s
LU To
Z "£
> «
P 3
O O
w E.
t •=-
LJJ
CO
O
o
10
1 Illl
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
O)
to
"1
i, H
oo Q
LL
LU
CO
O
O
T 1 I I I I I II 1 1 I I I I III 1 1 1 I I I I I I « 1 I I 'I ' ^
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
HOOOppmv T8750ppmv ClOOOOppmv — C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
o
o
COST EFFECTIVENESS($/Mg)
ou-
oc
£&-
or\
x-x £\J-
co
T3
CO 1C
w 15-
O
^—^ •< A
10-
-
/\
/
/^
__ _— — ^^^
"1 i'o 160 iobo ioooc
FLOWRATE(scfm)
•
T-mnnr\i-kr«»/ TQTdrir»r>m\/ f1 nnnnnninv f"^70OOnniTN
I lUUUppmV lo/ouppniv oiutiuuppinv v/vif wv/ppnn
/
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,OOOIb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
g
Si
u>
UJ 'oT
z "2
> 5
p 3
O O
uj £
t fc
LU
CO
O
o
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
•
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Low Vol.fToluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
O)
25
V)
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Low Vol.(Toluene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
O)
2t
CO
co ^ 20
LLJ <0
z "2
> s HC
„ ^: co 15
HI I —•• • **
B S 1
£6
LU
CO
O
O
1
T 1 I I I I II—
10
T 1—I—I I I I I I
100
1000
10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv C37000ppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
CD
T 1 1 | | | I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I II 1 1 1 I III!
10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
o>
7
CO CO
UJ T3
Z C
UJ OS
> to
i- u
o o
UJ JZ
UL I—
^
UJ
(O
O
O
i 1—i i M M i
I 1—i i i i i ii
10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
HOOOpprnv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol. (Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
0)
I
*l
U1
CO CO
Lil T3
^ §
> CO
5 8
uj x:
u_
UJ
CO
O
o
10
0
'
1—i—i i 11111 1—i—i i 11111 1—i—i i i M M 1—i—i i 1111
i 10 100 1000 10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
25
CO CO
ai "o
«i Z C
1 W CO
o o
20
15
10
CO
O
O
0
I I I I I I I
10
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
7 /
/ /
/
10000
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
•*)
I
O)
(/) (0
UJ T3
LU a)
P 13
O O
LU
LL
20
ui *-' 10
fe
O
O
f/
10
1 1 1 1 1 1
100
FLOWRATE (scfm)
1000
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv ------------ ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Mod.Vol.(Benzene); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
CD
I 1 1 I Mill
I 1 1 I I I I I I
1 1 1 I Mill
10000
FLOWRATE (scfm)
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
.. . f~* 4 r\f\r\r\r\r\m\i ~ — fl1 fWWlnttinx/
v^lUUUUppmv w i VAJv»v/ujJ|Ji i iv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=30,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
O)
25
CO
ffj
LU
0)
1 >
* h-
O
UJ
20
15
lv/
10
UJ
O
O
1
7
77
n
10
100
FLOWRATE(scfm)
I I i I III 1—I—I I I I I
1000 10000
T1OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=50,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
O)
1
10
100
FLOWRATE(scfm)
1000
10000
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=75,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
30
O)
25
UJ
20
u
fc
111
15
10
LJJ
CO
O
O
0
7
10
100 1000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
10000
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
I
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=100,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
*i
I
en
T 1 | M I I I
10
T 1—| | | | I I I
100
1 1 I I I I II
1000
I I I I I I
10000
FLOWRATE(scfm)
T1 OOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=125,OOOib/yr
Hi.VoI. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
in
(*>
*3
UJ
LU
u.
LL.
UJ
CO
O
O
30-r
J"%^%
^ 20-
-T ^ f"
w 15-
o
t. _^ ^ ^%
*•— 10-
-
0
— T10C
±
II
/
/
_ :^^
1 Vo 160 1600 ibooo
FLOWRATE(scfm)
_.___-. o-mnnrir»r»m\/ - O'lnnflOOnr
fOppmv — T8750ppmv CiOOuupprnv uiuuuuupf
>mv
-------
Annual Mass Emission Total=150,000lb/yr
Hi.Vol. (Acetone); Cond. Crtl. Eff.=98%
*3
•«•
2
c/T
f/\
*jj
LU
Z
LU
fc
LU
LJL
Li.
LU
CO
O
O\J~
OC_
4lO
TJ
S 1*
OT U)-
O
^— ' -in
lU"
-
n
f
//
//
/ /
/xX
/' .'
//
//
^i^^
] | I 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TTT^ *
10 100 1000 10C
FLOWRATE(scfm)
HOOOppmv
T8750ppmv
ClOOOOppmv
ClOOOOOppmv
-------
APPENDIX G. BATCH PROCESSING EXAMPLE RULE
G.I INTRODUCTION
This appendix presents an example rule limiting volatile
organic compound emissions from batch processing operations. The
example rule is for informational purposes only. The purpose of
the example rule is to provide information on the factors that
need to be considered in writing a ruie to ensure that it is
enforceable. The example rule is provided below. Sections
include applicability, definitions, control requirements,
performance testing, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements.
G.2 APPLICABILITY
(a) The provisions of this rule apply to process vents
associated with batch processing operations. The scope of
affected industries is limited to those industries in the
following standard industrial classification (SIC) codes: 2821,
2833, 2834, 2861, 2865, 2869, 2879.
(b) Exemptions from the provisions of this rule except for
the reporting and recordkeeping requirements listed in
Section G.8 are as follows:
(1) Combined vents from a batch process train which have an
annual mass emission total of 10,000 Ib/yr or less.
(2) Single unit operations which have annual mass emissions
of x Ib/yr or less.
G.3 DEFINITIONS
The agency responsible for developing a standard must define
the terms that appear in the language for the standard. The
source category of batch processes, for example, requires a
definition of the term "batch" as it is used to describe the mode
G-l
-------
of operation of equipment and processes. Another term that will
likely require defining is "vent". The feasibility analysis that
has been described in Chapter 6 applies to any type of gaseous
emission stream (continuous or batch) containing VOC's, as long
as the flowrate and annual mass emission total requirements are
met. Finally, the terms "flowrate" and "annual mass emissions"
also should be defined clearly. Provided below is a listing of
definitions for terms as they are used in this document.
Aggregated means the summation of all process vents
containing VOC's within a process.
Annual mass emissions total means the sum of all emissions,
evaluated before control, from a vent. Annual mass emissions may
be calculated from an individual process vent or groups of
process vents by using emission estimation equations contained in
Chapter 3 of the Batch CTG and then multiplying by the expected
duration and frequency of the emission or groups of emissions
over the course of a year. For processes that have been
permitted, the annual mass emissions total should be based on the
permitted levels, whether they correspond to the maximum design
production potential or to the actual annual production estimate.
Average flowrate is defined as the flowrate averaged over
the amount of time that VOC's are emitted during an emission
event. For the evaluation of average flowrate from an aggregate
of sources, the average flowrate is the weighted average of the
average flowrates of the emission events and their annual venting
time, or:
. _, T* (Average Flowrate per emi««ion event) (annual duration of emiMioa event)
Average Flovrate » •<•*——
£ (annual duration of eaiMlon event*)
Ba£cJi refers to a discontinuous process involving the bulk
movement of material through sequential manufacturing steps.
Mass, temperature, concentration, and other properties of a
system vary with time. Batch processes are typically
characterized as "non-steady-state."
Batch cycle refers to a manufacturing event of an
intermediate or product from start to finish in a batch process.
G-2
-------
refers to a manufacturing event of an
intermediate or product from start to finish in a batch process.
Batch orocMa traiq means an equipment train that is used to
produce a product or intermediate. A typical equipment train
consists of equipment used for the synthesis, mixing, and
purification of a material.
Control aevicei are air pollution abatement devices, not
devices such as condensers operating under reflux conditions,
which are required for processing.
Emissions bafgr^ control means the emissions total prior to
the application of a control device, or if no control device is
used, the emission total. No credit for discharge of VOC's into
wastewater should be considered when the wastewater is further
handled or processed with the potential for VOC's to be emitted
to the atmosphere. ~;-
SmiiilQa event.! can be defined as discrete venting episodes
that may be associated with a single unit of operation. For
example, a displacement of vapor resulting from the charging of a
vessel with VOC will result in a discrete emission event that
will last through the duration of the charge and will have an
average flowrate equal to the rate of the charge. If the vessel
is then heated, there will also be another discrete emission
event resulting from the expulsion of expanded vessel vapor
space. Both emission events may occur in the same vessel or unit
operation.
Pracmmmmm . for the purpose of determining RACT
applicability, are defined as any equipment within a contiguous
area that are connected together during the course of a year
where connected is defined as a link between equipment, whether
it is physical, such as a pipe, or whether it is next in a series
of steps from which material is transferred from one unit
operation to another.
Sgffl4-CP.a6iau.Qyg operations are conducted on a steady- state
mode but only for finite durations during the course of a year.
For example, a steady-state distillation operation that functions
for 1 month would be considered semi -continuous.
6-3
r
-------
Unit operations are defined as those discrete processing
steps that occur within distinct equipment that are used to
prepare reactants, facilitate reactions, separate and purify
products, and recycle materials.
Vent means a point of emission from a unit operation.
Typical process vents from batch processes include condenser
vents, vacuum pumps, steam ejectors, and atmospheric vents from
reactors and other process vessels. Vents also include relief
valve discharges. Equipment exhaust systems that discharge from
unit operations also would be considered process vents.
volatility is defined by the following: low volatility
materials are defined for this analysis as those which have a
vapor pressure less than or equal to 75 mmHg at 20"C, moderate
volatility materials have a vapor pressure greater than 75 and
less than or equal to 150 mmHg at 20*C; and high volatility
materials have a vapor pressure greater than 150 mmHg at 20*C.
To evaluate VOC volatility for single unit operations that
service numerous VOCs or for processes handling multiple VOCs,
the weighted average volatility can be calculated simply from
knowing the total amount of each VOC used in a year, and the
individual component vapor pressure, as shown in the following
equation:
W«ight»
Av«iag«
Volatility A r (amtm of VOC ccapoamat i) \
fa [ (aoi»cuJ«z vmight at VOC caffootac 3.) ]
G.4 CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
For individual process vents, or for vent streams in
aggregate, within a batch process, having an actual average flow
rate below the flow rate value calculated by the cutoff equations
when annual mass emissions are input shall reduce emissions by
X percent. The cutoff equations are specific to volatility.
See page 6-18.
For aggregate streams within a process, the control
requirements must be evaluated with the successive ranking scheme
described on page 7-5 until control of a segment of unit
G-4
-------
operations is required or until all unit operations have been
eliminated from the process pool.
G.5 (a) DETERMINATION OF UNCONTROLLED ANNUAL EMISSION TOTAL
Determination of the annual mass emissions total may be
achieved by engineering estimates of the uncontrolled emissions
from a process vent or group of process vents within a batch
process train and multiplying by the potential or permitted
number of batch cycles per year. Engineering estimates should
follow the guidance provided in this document. Alternatively, if
an emissions measurement is to be used to measure vent emissions,
the measurement must conform with the requirements of measuring
incoming mass flow rate of VOC's as described in
G.6 (2) and (3) (i,ii).
G.5(b) DETERMINATION OF AVERAGE FLOW RATS
To obtain a value for average flowrate, the owners or
operators may elect to measure the flow rates or to estimate the
flow rates using emission estimation guidelines provided in
Chapter 3. For existing manifolds, the average flow rate is
often the flow that was assumed in the design. Regulators should
be aware that oversized gas moving equipment used in manifolds
may exempt many unit operations and batch processes from the
cutoff requirements because the flowrates will exceed those
described by the cutoff equations. Industry should have the
burden of proving that the manifold flowrates are consistent with,
emission sources and not oversized. If measurements are to be
used to estimate flow rates, the measurements must conform with
the requirements of measuring incoming volumetric flow rate as
described in G.6(b)(2).
G.6 PERFORMANCE TESTING
(a) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the
control requirements of this rule, the process unit shall be run
at full operating conditions and flow rates during any
performance test.
(b) The following methods in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A, shall
be used to comply with the percent reduction efficiency
requirement listed in G.4.
G-5
-------
(1) Method 1 or 1A, as appropriate, for selection of the
sampling sites if the flow measuring device is a rotameter. No
traverse is necessary when the flow measuring device is an
ultrasonic probe. The control device inlet sampling site for
determination of vent stream VOC composition reduction efficiency
shall be prior to the control device and after the control
device.
(2) Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D, as appropriate, for
determination of gas stream volumetric flow rate flow
measurements should be made continuously.
(3) Method 25A or Method 18, if applicable, to determine
the concentration of VOC in the control device inlet and outlet.
(i) The sampling time for each run will be the entire
length of the batch cycle in which readings will be taken
continuously, if Method 25A is used, or as often as is possible
using Method 18, with a maximum of 1-minute intervals between
measurements throughout the batch cycle.
(ii) The emission rate of the process vent or inlet to the
control device shall be determined by combining continuous
concentration and flow rate measurements at simultaneous points
throughout the batch cycle.
(iii) The mass rate of the control device outlet shall be
obtained by combining continuous concentration and flow rate
measurements at simultaneous points throughout the batch cycle.
(iv) The efficiency of the control device shall be
determined by integrating the mass rates obtained in ii and iii,
over the time of the batch cycle and dividing the difference in
inlet and outlet mass flow totals by the inlet mass flow total.
G.7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(a) The owner or operator of an affected facility that uses
an incinerator to seek to comply with the VOC emission limit
specified under G.4 shall install, calibrate, maintain, and
operate according to manufacturer's specifications the following
equipment.
(1) A temperature monitoring device equipped with a
continuous recorder and having an accuracy of ± 0.5*C.
G-6
-------
(i) Where an incinerator other than a catalytic incinerator
is used, a temperature Monitoring device shall be installed in
the firebox.
(ii) Where a catalytic incinerator is used, temperature
monitoring devices shall be installed in the gas stream
immediately before and after the catalyst bed.
(b) The owner or operator of an affected facility that uses
a flare to seek to comply with G.4 shall install, calibrate,
maintain and operate according to manufacturer's specifications
the following equipment:
(1) A heat sensing device, such as an ultra-violet beam
sensor or thermocouple, at the pilot light to indicate continuous
presence of a flame.
(c) The owner or operator of an affected facility that uses
an absorber to comply with G.4 shall install, calibrate,
maintain, and operate according to manufacturer's specifications
the following equipment.
(1) A scrubbing liquid temperature monitoring device having
an accuracy of ±1 percent of the temperature being monitored
expressed in degrees Celsius or ±0.02 specific gravity unit, each
equipped with a continuous recorder, or
(2) An organic monitoring device used to indicate the
concentration level of organic compounds exiting the recovery
device based on a detection principle such as infra-red
photoionization, or thermal conductivity, each equipped with a
continuous recorder.
(d) The owner or operator of an affected facility that uses
a condenser or refrigeration system to comply with G.4 shall
install, calibrate, maintain, and operate according to
manufacturer's specifications the following equipment:
(1) A condenser exit temperature monitoring device equipped
with a continuous recorder and having an accuracy of ±1 percent
of the temperature being monitored expressed in degrees Celsius
of ±0.5*C, whichever is greater, or
(2) An organic monitoring device used to indicate the
concentration level of organic compounds exiting the recovery
G-7
-------
device based on a detection principle such as infra-red,
photoionization, or thermal conductivity, each equipped with a
continuous recorder.
(e) The owner or operator of an affected facility that uses
a carbon adsorber to comply with G.4 shall install, calibrate,
maintain, and operate according to manufacturers specifications
the following equipment:
(1) An integrating steam flow monitoring device having an
accuracy of ±10 percent, and a carbon bed temperature monitoring
device having an accuracy of ±1 percent of the temperature being
monitored expressed in degrees Celsius or ±0.5*C, whichever is
greater, both equipped with a continuous recorder, or
(2) An organic monitoring device used to indicate the
concentration level of organic compounds exiting the recovery
device based on a detection principle such as infra-red,
photoionization, or thermal conductivity, each equipped with a
continuous recorder.
G.8 REPORTING/RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
(a) Each batch processing operation subject to this rule
shall keep records for a minimum of two years of the following
emission stream parameters for each process vent contained in the
batch process:
(1) The annual mass emission total, and documentation
verifying these values; if emission estimation equations are
used, the documentation shall be the calculations coupled with
the expected or permitted (if available) number of emission
events per year. If the annual mass emission total is obtained
from measurement in accordance with G.6, this data should be
available.
(2) The average flow rate in scfm and documentation
verifying these values;
(b) Each batch processing operation subject to this rule
shall keep records of the following parameters required to be
measured during a performance test required under G.4, and
required to be monitored under G.6.
G-8
-------
(1) Where an owner or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart seeks to demonstrate coapliance with 6.4 through use
of either a thermal or catalytic incinerator:
(i) The average firebox temperature of the incinerator (or
the average temperature upstream and downstream of the catalyst
bed for a catalytic incinerator), measured continuously and
averaged over the same time period of the performance testing,
and
(2) Where an owner or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart seeks to demonstrate compliance with 6.4 through use
of a smokeless flare, flare design, (i.e., steam-assisted, air-
assisted or nonassisted), all visible emission readings, heat
content determinations, flow rate measurements, and exit velocity
determinations made during the performance test, continuous
records of the flare pilot flame monitoring, and records of all
periods of operations during which the pilot flame is absent.
(3) Where an owner or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart seeks to demonstrate compliance with 6.4:
(i) Where an absorber is the final control device, the exit
specific gravity (or alternative parameter which is a measure of
the degree of absorbing liquid saturation, if approved by the
Agency), and average exit temperature of the absorbing liquid,
measured continuously and averaged over the same time period of
the performance testing (both measured while the vent stream is
routed normally), or
(ii) Where a condenser is the control device, the average
exit (product side) temperature measured continuously and
averaged over the same time period of the performance testing
while the vent stream is routed normally, or
(iii) Where a carbon adsorber is the control device, the
total steam mass flow measured continuously and averaged over the
same time period of the performance test (full carbon bed cycle),
temperature of the carbon bed after regeneration (and within
15 minutes of completion of any cooling cycle(s), and duration of
the carbon bed steaming cycle (all measured while the vent stream
is routed normally), or
6-9
-------
(iv) As an alternative to D.7(b)(4)(i), (b)(4)(ii) or
(b)(4)(iii), the concentration level or reading indicated by the
organic monitoring device at the outlet of the absorber,
condenser, or carbon adsorber, measured continuously and averaged
over the same time period of the performance testing while the
vent stream is routed normally.
G-10
-------