COMPILATION OF AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION FACTORS
R. L. Duprey
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Bureau of Disease Prevention and Environmental Control
National Center for Air Pollution Control
Durham, North Carolina
1968
-------
The ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERIES of reports was established
to report the results of scientific and engineering studies of man's
environment: The community, whether urban, suburban, or rural,
where he lives, works, and plays; the air, water and earth he uses
and reuses; and the wastes he produces and must dispose of in a way
that preserves these natural resources. This SERIES of reports
provides for professional users a central source of information on the
intramural research activities of the Centers in the Bureau of Disease
Prevention and Environmental Control, and on their cooperative
activities with State and local agencies, research institutions, and in-
dustrial organizations. The general subject area of each report is
indicated by the letters that appear in the publication number; the
indicators are
AP - Air Pollution
RH - Radiological Health
UIH - Urban and Industrial Health
Reports in the SERIES will be distributed to requesters, as supplies
permit. Requests should be directed to the Air Pollution Technical
Information Center, National Center for Air Pollution Control,
Public Health Service, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Washington, D. C. 20Z01.
Public Health Service Publication No. 999-AP-42
ii
-------
PREFACE
This report is a compilation of emission factors developed pri-
marily from technical literature resources and based upon a previous
report on emission factors by M. Mayer entitled "A Compilation of
Air Pollutant Emission Factors for Combustion Processes, Gasoline
Evaporation, and Selected Industrial Processes, " published by the
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health
Service, National Center for Air Pollution Control in May 1965.
Additional sources have been added to this report, and various
revisions have been made in the previously published emission factors
and in the format of the report. Consequently, this report supersedes
the original publication on emission factors. As additional emission
data become available in the literature, the present compilation will
be revised to reflect the newer data and developments.
iii
-------
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
FUEL, COMBUSTION 3
Coal Combustion 3
Gas Combustion 6
Fuel Oil Combustion 6
REFUSE INCINERATION 9
CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY 13
Ammonia Plant 13
Chlorine Plant 13
Nitric Acid Plant 14
Paint and Varnish Manufacturing 15
Phosphoric Acid Plant 16
Phthalic Anhydride Plant 17
Sulfuric Acid Plant 17
FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY 19
Alfalfa Dehydrating Plant 19
Coffee Roasting Plant 19
Cotton Ginning Process 20
Feed and Grain Mills 20
Fish Meal Processing 21
Starch Manufacturing Plant 22
METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY 23
Primary Metals Industry 23
Aluminum Ore Reduction 23
Copper Smelters 24
Iron and Steel Mills 24
Lead Smelters 26
Zinc Smelters 26
Secondary Metals Industry 28
Aluminum Operations 29
-------
Brass and Bronze Smelting 30
Gray Iron Foundry 30
Lead Smelting 31
Magnesium Melting 31
Steel Foundry 31
Zinc Processes 32
MINERAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY 33
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture 33
Asphaltic Concrete Batch Plant 33
Calcium Carbide Plant 34
Cement Manufacturing Plant 35
Ceramic and Clay Processes 36
Concrete Batching Plant 37
Frit Manufacturing Plant 37
Glass Manufacturing Plant 38
Lime Production Plant 38
Perlite Manufacturing Plant 39
Rock Wool Manufacturing Plant 39
Rock, Gravel, and Sand Processing . 40
PETROLEUM REFINERY 41
PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY 43
SOLVENT EVAPORATION AND GASOLINE MARKETING. 45
Dry Cleaning Plant 45
Surf ace-Coating Operations 45
Gasoline Marketing 46
TRANSPORTATION 49
Aircraft 49
Automobiles 50
Diesel Engine Vehicles 52
REFERENCES 53
APPENDICES 63
A, Particulate Control Equipment 63
B, Bibliography on Methodology for Emission
Inventories 64
C. Sources of Information for Emission Inventories 65
-------
COMPILATION OF AIR POLLUTANT
EMISSION FACTORS
INTRODUCTION
Because of the diversity and complexity of the sources of air
pollution, the atmospheres of our metropolitan areas contain numer-
ous chemical substances and their derivatives or oxidation products.
To assess the relative contribution of the sources of air pollution, the
major types arid quantities of pollutants emitted must be determined.
Classification of contaminants involves first distinguishing between
particulates, both liquid and solid, and gaseous emissions. The
gaseous emissions may be further divided into organic and inorganic
gases. The organic gases that are significant air contaminants are
hydrocarbons, aldehydes and ketones, and organic acids. The pri-
mary air contaminants among the inorganic gases are oxides of nitro-
gen, oxides of sulfur, and carbon monoxide. Hydrogen sulfide, am-
monia, chlorine, and hydrogen fluoride are other inorganic air con-
taminants considered in this report.
To assess the air pollution potential of these primary pollutants,
an inventory of air pollution sources must be made. This inventory
can be accomplished by the sampling and analysis of the effluent gases
from industrial processes and combustion sources. From these data
an "emission factor" can be developed. The emission factor is a
statistical average of the rate at which pollutants are emitted from the
burning or processing of a given quantity of material or on the basis
of some other meaningful parameter such as the number of miles
traveled in a vehicle.
-------
The source emission factors presented in this report were com-
piled primarily for use in conducting an air pollutant emission inven-
tory. In some cases, especially some industrial sources, the emiss-
ion factor may be based upon tests conducted on only one installation
or a few installations. The data are presented to be used in making
estimations and, as such, should not be considered as exact. The
emissions from a particular source may vary considerably, depending
upon a number of factors .including sampling technique, analytical
method, and inherent differences in the process. The emission fac-
tors presented herein, however, are the most accurate currently avail-
able.
-------
FUEL COMBUSTION
The burning of coal, fuel oil, and natural gas to produce power
and heat is one of the most important sources of particulates and
oxides of sulfur and nitrogen emissions to the atmosphere. Controls
are available for particulates from coal-fired furnaces, but there are
presently no commercially available control systems for oxides of
nitrogen and sulfur from fuel combustion. The following sections
present detailed emission data for the various types of fossil fuel
furnaces and control systems.
COAL COMBUSTION
Coal is utilized primarily in power plants, industrial processes,
and domestic and commercial space heating in a variety of furnaces,
Particulate emission factors are presented in Table 1 for the various
types of furnaces based on the quantity of coal burned. Particulates
emitted from coal combustion consist primarily of carbon, silica,
alumina, and iron oxide in the fly ash. Their specific gravities aver-
age about 2. 5. The quantity of the particulate emission is dependent
upon the ash content of the coal, the type of combustion unit, and the
control equipment used. Table 2 presents the range of collection
efficiencies for common types of fly ash control equipment. The sec-
tion in the appendix on control equipment may also be used to calculate
emissions from coal-fired furnaces using control equipment.
Gaseous emissions from coal combustion include aldehydes,
carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxides.
The quantities of these pollutants are dependent upon the composition
of the coal, type of combustion equipment, method of firing, size of
the unit, and various other design and operational variables. Table 3
gives average emission factors for the gaseous pollutants in the three
major categories of coal usage. As a rule of thumb, for these three
categories, boiler capacities for power plants are generally above
306-832 0-68—2
-------
Table 1. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR COAL COMBUSTION WITHOUT CONTROL EQUIPMENT8
Type of unit
Pulverized
General
Dry bottom
Wet bottom without
fly ash reinjectlon
Wet bottom with
fly ash reinjectionc
Cyclone
Spreader stoker -
without fly ash reinjection
with fly ash reinjectionc
Al 1 other stokers
Hand-fired equipment
Particulate
per ton of
coal burnedb, lb
16 A
17 A
13 A
24 A
2 A
13 A
20 A
5 A
20
Percent
44 microns
or greater
25 .
25
25
25
10
61
61
70
--
Percent
20 to 44
microns
23
23
23
23
7
18
18
16
--
Percent
10 to 20
microns
20
20
20
20
8
11
It
8
--
Percent
5 to 10
microns
17
17
17
17
10
6
6
4
--
Percent
less than
5 microns
15
15
15
15
65
4
4
2
100
aReference 1.
The letter A on all units other than hand-fired equipment indicates that the percent ash in the coal should be
multiplied by the value given.
Example: If the factor is 1? and the ash content is 10 percent, the particulate emission before the control
equipment would be 10 times 17, or 170 pounds of particulate per ton of coal.
Values should not be used as emission factors. Values represent the loading reaching the control equipment
always used on this type of furnace.
-------
Table 2. RANGE OF COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES FOR COMMON
TYPES OF FLY ASH CONTROL EQUIPMENT3
Type of
furnace
Cyclone furnace
Pulverized uni t
Spreader stoker
Other stokers
Range of collection efficiencies, %
Electrostatic
precipi tator
65 - 99b
80 - 99. 9b
-
-
High-
efficiency
cyclone
30 - kO
65 - 75
85 - 90
90 - 95
Low-
resistance
cyclone
20 - 30
W - 60
70 - 80
75 - 85
Settl ing chamber
expanded
chimney bases
-
20 - 30
25 - 50
.Reference 1.
High values attained with high-efficiency cyclones in series with elec-
trostatic precipitators.
Table 3. GASEOUS EMISSION FACTORS FOR COAL COMBUSTION
(pounds per ton of coal burned)
Type of uni t
Pollutant
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons (CHj
Oxides of nitrogen (NO.)
Oxides of sulfur (S02)
Power plant
0.005
0.5
0.2
20
38Sb
Industrial
0.005
3
1
20
38Sb
Domestic and
commercial
0.005
50
10
8
38Sb
a
Reference 1.
US equals percent sulfur in coal, e.g., if sulfur content is 2 per-
cent, the oxides of sulfur emission would be 2 x 38 or 76 pounds
of sulfur oxides per ton of coal burned.
100 x 10 Btu per hour; industrial boilers are in the range of 10 to
100 x 10 Btu per hour; domestic and commercial boilers are below
10 x 10 Btu per hour capacity.
The emission factors presented can be converted to a Btu basis
using the conversion factor of 26 x 10 Btu released per ton of coal
burned.
-------
GAS COMBUSTION
Natural gas is also utilized in power plants, industrial process
heating, and space heating. Particulate and oxides of sulfur emissions
are insignificant campared with other fossil fuels. Natural gas com-
bustion, however, is a significant source of oxides of nitrogen. Table
4 presents particulate and gaseous emission factors for natural gas
combustion. Particle size can be assumed to be less than 5 microns.
The calculations are based upon a density for natural gas of 0. 052
pound per standard cubic foot and a heating value of 1, 000 Btu per
standard cubic foot. Control equipment has not been utilized to control
emissions from natural gas combustion equipment.
Table 4. EMISSION FACTORS FOR NATURAL GAS COMBUSTION3
(pounds per million cubic feet of natural gas burned)
Pol lutant
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Oxides of nitrogen (N02)
Oxides of sulfur (SO.)
Other organics
Particulate
Type of unit
Power
plant
1
neg.
neg.
390
0.4
3
15
Industrial
process
boi lers
2
0.4
neg.
214
0.4
5
18
Domestic and
commercial
heating units
neg.
0.4
neg.
116
0.4
neg.
19
Reference 2.
FUEL OIL COMBUSTION
Fuel oil is the other major fossil fuel used in this country for
power production, industrial process heating, and space heating.
Fuel oil can be classified as distillate or residual. Distillate fuel oil
is primarily a domestic fuel, but is used in some commercial and
industrial applications where a higher quality oil is required.
Residual fuel is used in power plants and commercial and indus-
trial applications. Residual fuel oil contains higher ash and sulfur
content than distillate fuel oil and is more difficult to burn properly.
Emissions from oil combustion are dependent on type of equipment,
-------
size, and method of firing. Maintenance and operation are also
critical. Table 5 gives emission factors for the major category users.
Note that the commercial category is split into residual and distillate
since there is a significant difference in particulate emissions from
the same equipment depending on the fuel oil used. It should also be
noted that power plants emit less particulate per quantity of oil con-
sumed, reportedly because of better design and more precise opera-
tion of the equipment.
Table 5. EMISSION FACTORS FOR FUEL OIL COMBUSTION3
(pounds per 1,000 gallons of oil burned)
Pol lutant
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Oxides of nitrogen (NO,)
Sulfur dioxide
Sulfur trioxide
Parti culate
Type of unit
Power plant
0.6
O.Olt
3.2
10<4
157Sb
2.1tSb
10
ndustrial and commercial
Res idual
2
2
2
72
157Sb
2Sb
23
Distil late
2
2
2
72
157Sb
2Sb
15
Domestic
2
2
3
12
157Sb
2Sb
8
faReferences 3, *»> 5, and 6.
S equals percent sulfur in oil, e.g., if the sulfur content is 2 percent,
the sulfur dioxide emission would be 2 x 157 or 31^ pounds of sulfur
dioxide per 1,000 gallons of oil burned.
Particulate emitted from fuel oil combustion consists of 10 to 30
percent ash, 17 to Z5 percent sulfates, and 25 to 50 percent cenospheres
formed during combustion. The particulate has a specific gravity of
about 1.0 and is a granular hygroscopic material. Particle size
distribution from oil-fired boilers is extremely variable. The most
typical range is from less than 1 to 40 microns. From 10 to 99. 5
percent by weight have been reported to be less than 5 microns.
Essentially 100 percent of the particles are less than 44 microns. A
typical figure of 50 percent by weight less than 5 microns is recom-
mended for calculations.
-------
-------
REFUSE INCINERATION
Methods of refuse disposal in this country have included primarily
incineration, sanitary land fill, and composting. Incineration, the
most prominent means of disposal, ranges from large municipal
multiple -chamber incinerators to small domestic contrivances. Open
burning with no control over excess air or feed rate is also widely
practiced. Many apartment houses use what is called the flue-fed
incinerator for refuse disposal. Commercial and industrial establish-
ments use single-or multiple-chamber incinerators to burn their wastes.
Particulate emission factors for uncontrolled incinerators are
presented in Table 6. Table 7 gives collection efficiencies based on
present technology for various devices used on incinerators. Particu-
lates from incinerators burning municipal refuse consist primarily of
fly ash containing carbon. Specific gravity of this material is about
38
2,0. Research studies have shown that particulate emissions from
incinerators are primarily dependent upon underfire air rate and fuel
18
composition regardless of furnace size. Particle size distribution
data presented in Table 6 are based upon a number of tests conducted
Table 6. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR REFUSE INCINERATORS
WITHOUT CONTROL
Type of unit
Municipal Incinerator3
(multiple chamber)
Commercial Incinerator
(multiple Incinerator)
Comnerci al incinerator
(single chamber)
Flue-fed Incinerator
Domestic incinerator
(gas-fired)
Part iculate,
Ib/ton
of refuse
17
3
10
28
15
Percent
44 microns
or greater
1.0
40
40
40
40
Percent
20 to 44
microns
20
20
20
20
20
Percent
10 to 20
microns
15
15
15
15
IS
Percent
5 to 10
microns
10
10
10
10
10
Percent
less than
5 microns
15
15
15
15
15
alnctudes settling chamber, references 7, 8, 9, 10, II, 12, and 13.
bReferences 14, 15, 16, 17, |8, and 19.
CReferences 14, 16, 20, 21, 22, and 23.
References 14, 24, 25, and 26.
References 30 and 31 -
-------
Table 7. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF INCINERATOR
PARTICULATE CONTROL SYSTEMS
(percent)
Type of incinerator
Municipal incinerator
(multiple chamber)
Flue-fed incinerator
Domestic gas-fired
Wetted
baffles
60a
-
Impingement
scrubbers
94"
85d
-
Afterburners,
draft control
75e
60f
Electrostatic
precipitator
9kc
-
Bag-
house
99
-
References 8, 9, 10, 12, 20, 23, and 31*.
Reference 35.
Reference 15-
dReferences 26, 27, 28, and 29.
eReferences 2k and 26.
References 30, 31, and 32.
on municipal incinerators and are applied as representing all incinera-
tor fly ash since no data are available for other types of incinerators.
Gaseous emissions from incinerators are presented in Table 8.
Nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and ammonia are minor compared
with other sources. Some types of incinerators emit significant
quantities of organic material, including aldehydes, hydrocarbons,
organic acids, and carbon monoxide.
Table 8. GASEOUS EMISSION FACTORS FOR REFUSE INCINERATORS
(pounds per ton of refuse)
Pol lutant
4mmon i a
Mdehydes (HCHO)b
Carbon monoxide0
Hydrocarbons (hexane)
Nitrogen oxides (N02)e
Organic acids (acetic)
Sulfur oxides (S02)9
Municipal
Incinerator
0.3
0.3
1
0.3
2
0.6
2
Industrial
and commercial
Multiple
chamber
O.I
0.2
10
0.5
2
3
1
Single
chamber
0.4
1
44
0.8
3
3
2
Flue- fed
No
control
O.I*
3
27
2
0-3
25
0.2
After-
burner
0.*
2
-
-
10
6
0.2
Domes 1 1 c
No
control
0.3
5.5
200
2
1
7
0.1)
After-
burner
0.3
2.5
30
1
2
2
0.4
^References Ig, 20, 30, 36, and 37.
References 11, 12, 16, I?, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 30, 32, 36, and 37-
References 11, 16, 18, 22, 25, 30, 33, and 37-
dReferences 11, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 30, 32, and 37.
eReferences II, 12, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, and 36.
References 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 30, 36, 37, and 39.
References 19, 20, 25, 26, 30, and 36.
10
-------
Open burning is widely practiced, especially in rural areas.
Table 9 gives emission factors for open burning of three general types
of waste material. Both particulate and gaseous emissions are higher
from open burning than they are from more efficient methods of in-
cineration. Ttiese emissions were measured using equipment speci-
40
fically designed to analyze open—burning effluents. No particle size
data are reported in the literature for open burning.
Table 9. EMISSION FACTORS FOR OPEN BURNING3
(pounds per ton of refuse)
Pol lutant
Particulate
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons (hexane)
Nitrogen oxides (NO,)
Organic acids (acetic)
Municipal
refuse
16
0.1
85
5
11
15
Landscape and
agricul ture
refuse
17
0.01
60
2
2
13
Au tomob i 1 e
components
100
0.03
125
5
8
16
References kO, and Al .
Factor can be used for leaves, grass, and various agriculture
wastes such as barley, rice, cotton, fruit tree prunings, and brush.
Includes tires, floor mats, and car seats.
306-832 O-68—3
11
-------
-------
CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY
AMMONIA PLANT
The manufacture of ammonia from natural gas is a potential
source of carbon monoxide and ammonia fumes. To produce 1 ton of
ammonia, 26, 000 cubic feet of natural gas is required. The process
involves reforming natural gas with steam to hydrogen and carbon
oxides. The carbon dioxide is removed by the amine absorption pro-
cess. A mixture of nitrogen and hydrogen in a l-to-3 ratio, carbon
monoxide, argon, and unreacted methane is compressed to 2, 000
pounds per square inch. The residual carbon dioxide and carbon
monoxide are removed by absorption with an ammonical solution of
copper formate. The process gas is then compressed to 5, 000 pounds
per square inch and catalytically reacted to produce ammonia.
The two possible sources of air pollution are the off-gas from
the carbon monoxide absorber and the purge gas from the ammonia
converters and ammonia storage tank vents. One 450-ton-per-day
plant reports 1, 200 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) of 73 per-
cent carbon monoxide and 4 percent ammonia emitted from the carbon
monoxide absorber. At this rate of production 7 pounds of ammonia
and 200 pounds of carbon monoxide are emitted per ton of ammonia
produced. The ammonia is usually removed in packed scrubbers
using water, and the carbon monoxide is utilized in the boiler furnaces
as a supplementary fuel. The purge gas consists of about 2, 000 scfm
of 70 percent ammonia fumes, which is equivalent to 200 pounds
ammonia per ton of ammonia produced. The ammonia is removed in
a series of absorbers and recovered as product. Emissions amount
43
to 0.2 pound per ton of ammonia produced after recovery.
CHLORINE PLANT
Ninety-five percent of the chlorine manufactured in the United
States is by the electrolysis of brine in either the mercury or dia-
phragm cell, which separate the caustic and gaseous chlorine. Hot-
cell chlorine is then cooled and dried in sulfuric acid towers before
13
-------
liquefaction and shipment by tank car or ton containers. Principal
chlorine emissions stem from unliquefied vent gases, which may be
sent to scrubbers for recovery or disposal. Table 10 presents
emission factors for controlled and uncontrolled vent gases for major
, . 44
and minor sources.
Table 10- EMISSIONS FROM CHLORINE MANUFACTURING3
(pounds per 100 tons of liquefied chlorine)
Source
Mercury cell plant - uncontrolled
Diaphragm cell plant - uncontrolled
Water absorber
,b
Carbon tetrachloride absorber
Sulfur monochloride
Caustic or line scrubber
Tank car vents
Storage tank vents
Air-blowing of mercury cell brine
Mercury eel Is
Chlorine gas
k, 000- 16, 000
2,000-10,000
90
30
0.1
1(50
1,200
500
1.5C
Reference W.
bCCl/( loss.
Loss of mercury to atmosphere.
Minor chlorine emissions may also be produced in liquid chlorine
transfer operations, air-blowing of mercury cell brine, and from the
cell room. These emissions may be controlled by ducting to the
liquefaction vent gas scrubber or to a separate scrubber.
NITRIC ACID PLANT
The ammonia oxidation process is the principal method of pro-
ducing commercial nitric acid. It involves high-temperature oxidation
of ammonia with air over a platinum catalyst to form nitric oxide.
The nitric oxide - air mixture is cooled, and additional air is added to
complete the oxidation to nitrogen dioxide. The nitrogen dioxide is
absorbed in water to produce an aqueous solution of nitric acid.
14
-------
The primary pollutants are nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide dis-
charged from the water absorber to the atmosphere. Trace amounts
of acid mist are also present, but are considered insignificant . Small
amounts of nitrogen dioxide are also lost from the acid concentrators
and storage tanks. Average emission from 12 uncontrolled plants is
57 pounds of nitrogen oxides, as NO , per ton of acid produced (100%
basis). Emissions from nitric acid concentrators amount to about 10
pounds of nitrogen oxides, as NO,, per 1, 000 pounds of strong acid
45
produced. Plants using catalytic combustors to treat the tail gas
from the absorber column expect a reduction of about 80 percent with
a reported range of 36 to 99.8 percent. Alkaline scrubbers reportedly
45
reduce nitrogen oxides by about 90 percent.
PAINT AND VARNISH MANUFACTURING
Protective coating manufacturing may include processing natural
or synthetic oils, resins, pigments, solvents, plasticizers, metallic
soaps, or antioxidants. A major component of coatings is the oil or
resin. The manufacture depends on subjecting complex organic mater-
ials to elevated temperatures. During this cooking the basic constitu-
ents decompose and release contaminants to the atmosphere. Losses
depend on composition of mix, rate of heating, maximum temperature,
stirring, method of additive addition, type and extent of blowing, and
length of cooking.
Varnish cooking fume losses average 3 to 6 percent of the feed;
alkyresin production, 4 to 6 percent; cooking and blowing of oils, 1 to
3 percent; and heat polymerization, 1 percent of the feed for uncon-
trolled sources. Composition of the fume consists of organics such
as aldehydes, ketones, phenols, terpenes, and glycerine. Particle
size ranges from 2 to 20 microns. " Scrubbing, incineration, and
catalytic combustion have been used as control methods. An impinge-
ment-type water scrubber reportedly reduced emissions by about 90
percent. A catalytic afterburner reduced emissions from a varnish
cooker by about 85 percent. Direct flame afterburners achieve
better than 90 percent reduction in fume emissions.
15
-------
PHOSPHORIC ACID PLANT
Phosphoric (orthophosphoric) acid is produced by two principal
methods, the wet process and the thermal process. The wet process
is usually employed when the acid is to be used for fertilizer produc-
tion. Thermal-process acid is normally of higher purity and is used
in the manufacture of high-grade chemical and food products.
In the wet process, sulfuric acid and phosphate rock are reacted
in agitated tanks to form phosphoric acid and gypsum. Phosphoric
acid is separated from the gypsum and other insolubles by vacuum
filtration. Usually there is little market value for the gypsum. The
phosphoric acid is normally concentrated from 50 to 55 percent P2°5
by evaporation. When superphosphoric acid is made, the acid is con-
centrated to between 70 and 85 percent P,0 . Emission of gaseous
fluorides, consisting mostly of silicon tetrafluoride with some hydro-
49
gen fluoride, ranges from 20 to 60 pounds per ton of P.,0;. produced.
In the thermal process, phosphate rock, siliceous flux, and coke
are heated in an electric furnace to produce elemental phosphorous.
The gases containing the phosphorous vapors are passed through an
electrical precipitator to remove entrained dust. In the "one-step"
version of the process, the gases are next mixed with air to form
P,0 before passing to a water scrubber (packed tower) to form phos-
Z 5
phoric acid. In the "two-step" version of the process, the phosphorous
is condensed and pumped to a tower in which it is burned with air, and
the P,0,. formed is hydrated by a water spray in the lower portion of
£ 3
the tower.
The principal air contaminant from thermal-process phosphoric
acid manufacturing is P,0 acid mist from the absorber tail gas,
& 5
Trace quantities of nitrogen oxides are also emitted. All plants are
equipped with some type of acid mist collection system. Table 11
presents acid mist emission data for the various types of control
systems. The particle size of the acid mist ranges from 0, 4 to 2. 6
microns, with a mass median diameter of 1. 6 microns.
16
-------
Table 11. ACID MIST EMISSIONS FROM THERMAL PROCESS PHOSPHORIC ACID
(pounds per tons of phosphorus burned)
Collector
Emission
Packed tower
Packed tower plus
wire-mesh mist eliminator
Scrubber plus wire-mesh
mist eliminator
Cyclonic separator plus
wire-mesh mist eliminator
Venturi scrubber plus
wire-mesh mist eliminator
Venturi scrubber
Glass-fiber mist eliminator
Wire-mesh mist eliminator
High-pressure-drop wire-
mesh mist eliminator
Venturi scrubber, cyclonic separator,
and wire-mesh mist eliminator
Electrostatic precipitator
7.0
k.k
8.6
10.8
5.6
3.0
2.7
0.2
1.8
1.8
Reference 50.
PHTHALIC ANHYDRIDE PLANT
Phthalic anhydride is principally produced by oxidizing naptha-
lene vapors with excess air over a catalyst. The resulting gas stream
is cooled, and the phthalic anhydride condenses. The excess air con-
taining some uncondensed phthalic anhydride, maleic anhydride,
quinines, and other organics is vented to the atmosphere. Toproducel
ton of phthalic anhydride, 2, 500 pounds of napthalene and 830, 000
42
scfm of air are required.
Organic emissions (as hexane) from phthalic anhydride plants is
48
reported as 32 pounds per ton of phthalic anhydride produced. Con-
trol with catalytic combustion can reduce this emission by 65 percent.
SULPHURIC ACID PLANT
In the United States, sulfuric acid is produced mainly by the
contact process. Elemental sulfur or sulfur-bear ing materials are
burned in clean air that has been dried by scrubbing with sulfuric acid.
17
-------
Among the sulfur-bearing materials used are iron pyrites, spent acid
and hydrogen sulfide from refinery operations, and smelter off-gases.
The sulfur dioxide produced is further oxidized to sulfur trioxide in the
presence of a vanadium pentoxide catalyst. The sulfur trioxide is then
contacted with 98 to 99 percent sulfuric acid to produce a more concen-
trated acid. The principal emissions are sulfur dioxide and sulfuric
51
acid rnist.
The emissions of sulfur dioxide range from about 20 to 70 pounds
of sulfur dioxide per ton of acid produced and are unaffected by the
presence of acid mist eliminators. Without acid mist eliminators,
emissions of acid mist range from 0. 3 to 7. 5 pounds of acid mist per
ton of acid produced. The use of acid mist eliminators reduces this
emission to some 0. 02 to 0.2 pound of acid mist per ton of acid pro-
52
duced. About 98 percent of the acid mist particles from a commer-
cial contact sulfuric acid plant have been reported to be less than 3
53
microns.
18
-------
FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY
The volume of production of this industry makes it worth investi-
gating as a source of air pollutants. Dust and odors are the most pre-
valent contaminant emissions from this industry. Only those sources
for which there is quantitative emission data are included herein.
ALFALFA DEHYDRATING PLANT
This type of plant produces an animal feed from alfalfa. The
initial step of drying the alfalfa is usually done in a rotary duct-fired
drier. The dried material is pneumatically conveyed to a primary
cyclone, where heavy trash is removed. A second cyclone discharges
material to the grinding equipment, which is usually a hammer mill.
The ground material is collected in an air-meal separator. The
alfalfa meal may then be conveyed directly to bagging or storage,
pelletized, or blended with other ingredients.
Sources of dust emissions are the primary cyclone and the air-
meal separators. Total loss of product to atmosphere is 1 to 3.5
percent by weight of meal production. The use Of a baghouse as a
secondary collection system can reduce emissions to 0. 005 percent
54
of product. Average particle size varies from 1.5 to 10 microns.
COFFEE ROASTING PLANT
Coffee, which is imported in the form of green beans, must be
cleaned, blended, roasted, and packaged before it is sold to the con-
sumer. The essential ingredients of the roasted beans may be ex-
tracted, spray-dried, and marketed as instant coffee. In the roasting
of coffee, chemical changes, such as a degradation of sugars, bring
out the characteristic flavor and aroma of the coffee. In the indirect-
fired roaster, a portion of the roaster gases is recirculated through
the combustion area for destruction of smoke and odors by oxidation
in the flame. In the direct-fired roaster, gases are vented without
recirculation through the flame. Essentially complete removal of
306-832 O-68—4
19
-------
both smoke and odors can be realized with a properly designed after-
burner. In the cleaner, contaminating materials lighter than the
green beans are separated from the beans by an air stream. In the
stoner contaminating materials heavier than the roasted beans are
also separated from the beans by an air stream. In the cooler, quen-
ching the hot roasted beans with water causes emission of large quan-
tities of steam and some particulate matter. Table 12 summarizes
the emissions from the various operations involved in coffee processing.
Table 12. PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COFFEE ROASTING PROCESSES9
(pounds per ton of green beans)
Process
Roaster
Direct fired
Indirect fired
Stoner and cooler
Instant coffee spray drier
Uncontrol led
7-6
4.2
1.4
Cyclone
2.2
1.2
0.4
1.4b
Reference 55.
Cyclone plus wet scrubber (control always employed).
COTTON GINNING PROCESS
The primary emissions of air pollutants are trash, dust, and
lint from cotton gins and particulates from incineration of cotton
trash. Total particulate discharge from the cotton ginning operation
has been reported as 11.7 pounds per 500-pound bale of cotton. About
c£ c *7
60 percent of the particles were less than 100 microns. '
FEED AND GRAIN MILLS
Dust emissions from feed and grain mills occur from the feed
manufacturing process and the receiving, handling, and storage opera-
tions. The common grains are wheat, barley, corn, oats, rye, flax,
and soybeans. Typical operations in feed manufacturing are cleaning,
rolling, grinding, and blending. The primary source of dust emissions
is the cleaning operation, which removes the chaff and dirt before the
grain is processed. Receiving, handling, and storage operations con-
tribute dust emissions from loading and unloading of trucks, rail cars,
and ships. Other lesser sources of dust emission are conveying belts
58
and storage bins.
20
-------
Overall dust emissions from feed and grain operations have been
estimated as 0. 3 percent of the material produced in a process em-
59
ploying cyclones with 90 percent collection efficiency. Other emis-
sion factors for specific operations in feed and grain mills are included
in Table 13. One test for particle size distribution of grain dust
indicates. 92 percent less than 44 microns, 34 percent 20 to 44 microns,
14 percent 10 to 20 microns, 11 percent 5 to 10 microns, and 3 percent
less than 5 microns, all by weight determination. Specific gravity
was 1. 54.
Table 13. PARTICIPATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR FEED AND GRAIN MILL OPERATIONS3
(pounds per ton of product)
Operation
Wheat air cleaner
(chaff-free)
Alfalfa meal mill
Barley flour mi 1 1
Orange pulp dryer
Col lector
Cyclone
Settling chamber
and cyclone
Cyclone
Cyclone
Particulate emission
0.2
k.O
3.1
11.3
Reference 60.
FISH MEAL PROCESSING
The conventional fish rendering process involves cooking and
pressing the fish, separating the oil from the aqueous fraction of the
squeezing, concentrating the aqueous fraction by evaporation, drying
the meal, and storing the various liquids and slurries. The principal
odorous gases generated during the cooking process are hydrogen
sulfide and trimethylarnine. Emission factors for these pollutants are
included in Table 14.
Table U. EMISSION FACTORS FOR FISH MEAL PROCESSING9
(pounds per ton of fish meal produced)
Pollutant
Tr imethy.lamine
Hydrogen sulfide
Fresh fish
0.32
0.01
Stale fish
3.5
0.2
Reference 62.
21
-------
STARCH MANUFACTURING PLANT
The manufacture of starch from corn can result in significant
dust emissions. In one particular instance starch particles were
collected from 35, 000 scfm of gases coming from a natural-gas direct-
fired flash drier producing 9. 1 tons per hour of starch. Uncontrolled
starch particle emissions were 8 pounds per ton of starch produced.
A centrifugal gas scrubber reportedly reduced emissions to 0. 02
pound per ton of product starch.
22
-------
METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY
The metallurgical industry has been traditionally one of the pri-
mary sources of particulate and sulfur oxide emissions to the atmo-
sphere. As a result, control technology has been developed for con-
trolling emissions from the metals industry. This section is divided
into the primary and the secondary metals industry. The primary
metals refer to production of the metal from ore. The secondarymetals
industry includes recovery of the metal from scrap and salvage and
production of alloys from, ingot. Unfortunately, except for steel, few
quantitative data on emissions are available for primary metals pro-
duction. Emissions from secondary metals operations have been well
established from exhaustive tests in Los Angeles County, California.
PRIMARY METALS INDUSTRY
Aluminum Ore Reduction
Two processes are involved in the present-day production of
aluminum. The Bayer process produces pure alumina from bauxite
ore. The Hall-Heroult process, which reduces the alumina to me-
tallic aluminum, uses an electrolytic cell, commonly known as a pot,
consisting of molten cryolite and other fluoride salts operating at high
temperature to dissolve the alumina. Four tons of bauxite is required
to make 2 tons of alumina, -w&ich yields 1 ton of metallic aluminum.
To produce 1 ton of aluminum, 16, 000 kwh of electricity is required.
During the pot reduction process, the effluent released contains
some fluoride particulate and gaseous hydrogen fluoride. Particulate
matter such as alumina and carbon from the anodes are also emitted.
The fluoride particles range from 0. 05 to 0. 75 micron. About 50
percent of the fluorides are gaseous and 50 percent particulate.
Course particulate emissions, other than fluorides, have been reported
as about 300 pounds per day from an uncontrolled pot furnace. No
actual data on fluoride emissions are available, but from the con-
sumption data on cryolite and other fluoride-containing ingredients
23
-------
an estimated 75 to 85 pounds of fluoride, as fluorine, is emitted per
47
ton of aluminum produced from an uncontrolled process.
Copper Smelters
The primary production of copper in the United States is from
low-grade sulfide ores, which are concentrated by gravity and flota-
tion methods. Copper is recovered from the concentrate by four
steps: roasting, smelting, converting, and refining. The roasting
process removes the sulfur and calcines the ore in preparation for
smelting in a reverberatory furnace. Multiple-hearth roasting is the
most common. Smelting removes other impurities as a slag with the
aid of fluxes. The matte that results from smelting is blown with air
to remove the sulfur as sulfur dioxide. The end product is a crude
metallic copper. A refining process further purifies the metal by air-
blowing and slagging in reverberatory furnaces.
These four major processes emit carbon monoxide, sulfur
oxides, nitrogen oxides, and a fine particulate fume. Sulfur dioxide
emission is about 19 pounds per ton of ore. No quantitative informa-
tion on other emissions was found in the literature.
Iron and Steel Mills
To make steel, iron ore (containing some 60 percent iron oxides)
is reduced to pig iron, and some of its impurities are removed in a
blast furnace. The pig iron is further purified in open hearths,
Bessemer converters, the basic oxygen process furnace, or electric
furnaces. Various alloying metals (chromium, manganese, etc.) are
usually added to produce specialized types of steel.
Blast furnaces are charged with iron ore, coke, and limestone
in alternating layers. To promote combustion, hot air is blown into
the bottom of the furnace. To produce I ton of pig iron requires, on
the average, 1. 7 tons of iron ore; 0. 9 ton of coke; 0. 4 ton of lime-
stone; 0, 2 ton of cinder , scale, and scrap; and 4. 0 to 4. 5 tons of air.
Most of the coke used in the blast furnaces is produced in "by-
product" coke ovens from certain grades of bituminous coal. The
distillation products produced are recovered for sale, and gases
remaining after by-product recovery are used for heating the coke
24
-------
ovens and for other applications elsewhere in the plant. The hydrogen
sulfide gas recovered is usually burned to sulfur dioxide and released
to the atmosphere. Smoke and gases escape during charging, dis-
charging, and quenching operations; the rest of the process is normally
enclosed, but at some plants leakage of smoke and gases occurs be-
cause of poorly fitted oven doors.
Sintering plants convert iron ore fines and blast furnace flue
dust into products more suitable for charging to the blast furnace.
This is done by applying heat to a mixture of the iron-containing
materials and coke or other fuels on a slow-moving grate through
which combustion air is drawn.
In the open-hearth process for making steel, a mixture of scrap
iron, steel, and pig iron is melted in a shallow rectangular basin, or
"hearth," in which various liquid or gaseous fuels provide the heat.
Impurities are removed in a slag. Oxygen injection (lancing) into the
furnace speeds the refining processes, saves fuel, and increases
steel production. Oxygen lancing increases the amount of fume and
dust produced also.
The basic oxygen process, the UD or L/inz-Donawitz process,
is new to the United States, but is gaining increasing application here.
In this process, oxygen blown at high velocity onto the surface of the
molten bath causes violent agitation and intimate mixing of the oxygen
with the pig iron. Electric furnaces are used primarily to produce
special alloy steels. Heat is furnished by direct-arc-type electrodes
extending through the roof of the furnace. In recent years oxygen has
been used to increase the rate and uniformity of scrap meltdown and to
decrease power consumption. Bessemer converters are no longer
used extensively. They are pear-shaped, tilting, steel vessels lined
with refractory brick and clay. Impurities in the molten iron charge
are oxidized by air blown through the metal for about 15 minutes. A
scarfing machine removes surface defects from the steel billets and
slabs before they are shaped or rolled. This is done by applying jets
of oxygen to the surface of the steel and thus removing a thin upper
66
1;?yer of the metal by rapid oxidation.
25
-------
Table 15 represents particle size distribution data for the various
steel mill operations. Emission factors are given in Table 16,
Table 15. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FROM STEEL MILL OPERATIONS3
Operation
Sintering
Blast furnace
Open-hearth
furnace
Electric
furnace
Basic oxygen
furnace
Bessemer
converter
Specific
gravity
—
—
5
4
—
—
Percent
44 microns
and larger
85
68
5
14.5
—
—
Percent
20 to 44
microns
15
—
20
14.5
—
100
Percent
10 to 20
microns
15
—
17
8
'
--
Percent
5 to 10
microns
--
—
22
7-5
0.5
--
Percent
less than
5 microns
—
—
46
70
99-5
--
Reference 66,
Lead Smelters
The ore from which primary lead is produced contains both lead
and zinc. Thus both a lead and zinc concentrate are made by concen-
tration and differential flotation from ore. If substantial impurities
remain, the lead concentrate is roasted in multiple reverberatory
hearth roasters in which sulfur is removed and lead oxide is formed.
The concentrate is then sintered on a hearth to remove additional
sulfur and prepare a suitable material for the blast furnace. In one
case sulfur was reduced from 9 to 3 percent by weight. The lead
sinter, coke, and flux (usually limestone) are fed to the blast furnace,
in which oxide is reduced to metallic lead. The lead may be further
refined by a variety of other processes.
Effluent gases from the roasting, sintering, and smelting opera-
tion contain considerable particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. One
plant reportedly recovers 300 tons per day of lead dust from 800, 000
68
scfm of gases using two parallel baghouses. Sulfur dioxide emis-
sions have been calculated to be about 540 pounds per ton of ore as a
combined average from plants with and without sulfur recovery units."^
Zinc Smelters
As stated previously, most domestic zinc comes from zinc and
lead ores. The concentrated zinc ore is roasted to remove sulfur as
26
-------
Table 16. EMISSIONS FROM STEEL HILLS3
Operation
Blast furnace
S inter Erg roach i ne
Sinter mach ine
discharge - crusher,
Open hearth
(not oxygen tanced)
Open hearth
(wF th oxygen lancej
Electric arc furnace
Basic oxygen furnace
Scarf! ng mach ine
Coke ovens
{by-product type)
Before c
Stack loading,
grains/acf
7-10
0.5-3.0
6.0
Q.I-O.k-1.6
0.1-0. 6-2. S
0. 1-0.11-6.0
5-8
0.2-0.8
No data
ontro>
Pounds per ton
of product
200
5-20-100
22
1.5-7.5-20.0
9-3
4. 5- 10. 6- 37. B
20-W-60
3 Ib/ton of
steel
O.lt of coal
processed
( rough
estimate)
Control
usedb
Preliminary cleaner
(settling chamber or
dry cyclone] c
Primary cleaner
[wet scrubber )c
Secondary cleaner
(E.S.P. or V.S.)C
Dry cyclone
E.S.P. (in series
Dry cyclone
E.S.P.
U.S.
Baghouse
E.S.P.
U.S.
H igh-ef f TCI ency
scrubber
E.S.P.
Baghouse
U.S.
E.S.P.
Settl ing chamber
Emiss ions can be
minimized through
equipment des ign
and operational
techniques
With control
Stack loading,
gra fns/scf
3-b
0.05-0. 3-0. 7d
0.00 "1-0.008
0.2-0.6
0.01-0.05
O.lt
0.01-0.05
0.01-0.06
0.01
0.01-0.05
0.01-0.06
0.01
0.01-0.0^1
0.01
0.03-0.12
0.05
No data
No data
Pounds per ton
of product
5. 4
0.1-1.1(
2.0
1.0
1.5
0.15
0.15-1.1
0.07
0.2
0.2-l.il
0.2
0.3-0.8
0.1-0.2
0.4
O.ll
No data
No data
Approximate
efficiency, %
60
90
90
90
95
93
98
85-98
99
9fl
85-98
Up to 98
92-97
98-99
99
99
No data
No data
Approximate volume
of gases handled
87,000 scfm for
1000-ton-per-day
furnace
120,000-160,000 scfm
for a 1000-ton-per-
day machine
17,500 scfm for a 10CO-
ton-per-day machine
35,000 scfm for a
175-ton furnace
35,000 scfm for a
175-ton furnace
Highly variable depend-
ing on type of hood
May be about 30,000 scfm
for a 50-ton furnace
Varies with amount of
oxygen blown - 20 to 25
scfm per cfm of oxygen
blown
85,000 scfm for
-------
sulfur dioxide. Metallic zinc can be produced from the roasted ore
by the horizontal or vertical retort process, electrolytic process, or
fractional distillation.
No data are available on the participates from these processes.
Sulfur dioxide emissions have been calculated as 550 pounds per ton of
ore as a combined average from smelters with and without sulfur
recovery units.
SECONDARY METALS INDUSTRY
The secondary metals industry includes smelters recovering
metals from scrap as well as foundries involved in producing castings
from melting ingots and scrap metals. Ferrous foundries include
gray iron and steel casting. The principal nonferrous foundries in-
clude casting aluminum, brass, bronze, lead, magnesium, and zinc.
The principal air contaminant is particulate matter consisting of
smoke, dust, and metallic funies characterized by their small parti-
cle size. Table 17 presents typical particle size distribution data
for secondary metal processing. Control of these emissions requires
highly efficient collection equipment such as baghouses, electrostatic
precipitators, and high-pressure-drop scrubbers. Table 18 presents
emission factors for operations common to all foundries including
aand handling, production of cores, and core oven emissions. Approx-
69
imately 5 pounds of sand is required per pound of metal cast,
Table 1?. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FROM SECONDARY METAL
MELTING OPERATIONS3
Operation
Aluminum smelting
Brass smelting
Bronze smelting
Gray i ron cupola
Lead smelting
Steel electric arc
Steel open hearth
Zinc smelting
Percent
kk microns
or greater
3
-
-
. 48
-
it
6
-
Percent
20 to kk
microns
10
-
-
14
-
8
10
-
Percent
10 to 20
microns
23
-
-
12
2
12
10
-
Percent
5 to 10
microns
30
-
-
8
3
16
12
-
Percent
less than
5 microns
3
-------
Table 18. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR MISCELLANEOUS
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS3
Operation
Foundry sand handling
Core ovens
Shell core machine
Participate emission
0.3 Ib/ton of sand
0.3 Ib/gal of core oil
0.35 Ib/ton of cores
Reference 75-
Aluminum Ope rations
Secondary aluminum operations involve making lightweight
metal alloys for industrial castings and ingots. Copper, magnesium,
and silicon are the most common alloying constituents. Aluminum
alloys for castings are melted in small crucible furnaces. Larger
melting operations use open-hearth reverberatory furnaces. Small
operators sometimes use sweating furnaces to treat dirty scrap in
preparation for smelting. To produce a high-quality aluminum
product, fluxing is practiced to some extent in all secondary alumi-
num melting. Aluminum fluxes are expected to remove dissolved
gases and oxide particles from the molten bath. Various mixtures
of potassium or sodium chloride with cryolite and chlorides of alumi-
num, zinc, and sodium are used as fluxes. Chlorine gas is usually
lanced into the molten bath to reduce the magnesium content of the
aluminum. The chlorine reacts to form magnesium and aluminum
,. ., 73,14
chlorides.
Emissions include fine particulate matter and small quantities
of gaseous chloride and fluorides. Table 19 presents particulate emis-
sion factors for secondary aluminum operations.
Table 19. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR SECONDARY ALUMINUM OPERATIONS9
(pounds per ton of metal processed)
Operation
Chlorination station
Crucible furnace
Reverberatory furnace
Sweating furnace
Uncontrol led
1000b
1.9
*».3
32.2
Baghouse
50.0
-
1.3
3-3
Electrostatic
precipi tator
'
-
1.3
-
aReference 75.
"Pounds per toh of chlorine used.
29
-------
Brass and Bronze Smelting
Brass, an alloy of copper and zinc, may contain up to 40 per-
cent zinc. Bronze is normally an alloy of copper and tin, but the
bronzes referred to here contain lead and/or zinc. Brass and bronze
maybe melted in crucible, electric reverberatory, or rotary furnaces,
Particulate emissions consist primarily of zinc oxide fumes. Table
20 gives emission factors for controlled and uncontrolled furnaces.
Table 20. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR BRASS AND BRONZE
MELTING FURNACES3
(pounds per ton of metal charged)
Furnace
Crucible furnace
Electric furnace
Reverberatory furnace
Rotary furnace
Uncontrol led
3-9
3.0
26.3
20.9
Baghouse
0.7
0.6
1.8
1.5
Reference 75.
Gray Iron Foundry
Three types of furnaces are used to produce gray iron castings.
These include the cupola, electric induction, and reverberatory fur-
nace. Table 21 presents particulate emission factors for gray iron
cupolas and the other foundry furnaces. Gray iron cupolas also emit
about 250 pounds of carbon monoxide per ton of charge. A well-
designed afterburner can reduce this emission to 8 pounds per ton of
, 75
charge.
Table 21. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR GRAY IRON CUPOLAS3
(pounds per ton of metal charged)
Method of control
Uncontrol led
Wet cap
Impingement scrubber
High-energy scrubber
(>60 inch H20)
Electrostatic precipitator
Baghouse
Reverberatory furnace
Electric induction furnace
Particulate emissions
17.il
8
5
3
2.7
2.2
2.0
2.0
References 69, 75, 76, and 77-
30
-------
Lead Smelting
Smelting of lead is accomplished in cupola, pot, and reverbera-
tory furnaces. Sweating furnaces are used to reclaim lead from
batteries and metal for printing type. The other furnaces are used
to produce various lead alloys. Lead furnaces can be a significant
source of particulate and sulfur emissions, as shown in Table 22.
/ Q
Control of particulate is usually by the use of baghouses.
Table 22. EMISSION FACTORS FOR LEAD FURNACES3
(pounds per ton of metal charged)
Type of furnace
Cupola
Pot furnace
Reverberatory and
sweating furnace
Uncontrol led
Particulate
emissions
300
0.1
15*
Sulfur
compounds
64
--
149
Baghouse
Particulate
emissions
5.1
--
L_ }'k
Sulfur
compounds
58
--
129
Reference 75.
Magnesium Melting
Magnesium is generally melted in small pot furnaces to manu-
facture castings. A particulate emission factor of 4. 4 pounds per
75
ton of charge has been reported. No control equipment is used.
Steel Foundry
Secondary processing of steel is accomplished in electric arc,
electric induction, and open-hearth furnaces. Table 23 gives emission
factors for controlled and uncontrolled furnaces.
Table 23. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR SECONDARY STEEL FURNACES3
(pounds per ton of steel charged)
Type of furnace
Electric arc
Electric induction
Open hearth
Uncontrol led
15
0.1
10.6
Baghouse
1.4
--
--
Electrostatic
precipi tator
--
--
0.5
Reference 75.
31
-------
Zinc Processes
The secondary processing of zinc includes zinc galvanizing, zinc
calcining, and zinc smelting and sweating. Table 24 gives particulate
emission factors for these operations.
Table 2>t. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR SECONDARY ZINC PROCESSES3
(pounds per ton of zinc charged)
Operation
Zinc galvanizing kettles
Zinc calcine ki In
Zinc pot furnace
Zinc sweating furnace
Uncontrol led
5.3
88.8
0.1
10.8
Baghouse
--
1 .0
--
O.It
Reference 75.
32
-------
MINERAL PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
Mineral industries include the processing of nonmetallic sub-
stances such as glass, rock, clay, and various other materials. The
principal air contaminants from these operations are particulates.
The following sections detail the nature of these industries and their
contaminant emissions to the atmosphere.
ASPHALT ROOFING MANUFACTURE
Roofing felts are produced by impregnating heavy papers with
asphalt heated to about 400°F in tanks called saturators. As the
sheets pass through the asphalt, droplets of oil distilled from the
asphalt rise from the saturator. Prior to use in the saturators, the
asphalt is subjected to high-pressure air at a rate of several hundred
cubic feet per minute in blowing stills. This process results in emis-
sion of oil fumes. After the asphalt saturation operation, the roofing
material is often covered with roofing granules, which may create a
minor source of dust in the plant.
Particulate emission from asphalt air blowing has been reported
78
as 3, 9 pounds per ton of asphalt. Oil mist emissions from three
asphalt saturators averaged 65 pounds per hour and were seemingly
independent of the size of the operation. Particle size is in the order
of 1 micron.
ASPHALTIC CONCRETE BATCH PLANTS
These plants are commonly called asphalt batch plants. An
asphaltic concrete batching plant generally consists of a rotary dryer,
screening and classifying equipment, an aggregate weighing system, a
mixer, storage bins, and conveying equipment. Sand and aggregate are
charged from bins into a rotary dryer. The dried aggregate at the
lower end of the dryer is mechanically conveyed by a bucket elevator
to the screening equipment where it is classified and dumped into stor-
age bins. Asphalt and weighed quantities of the sized aggregate are
then dropped into the mixer where the batch is mixed and then dumped
33
-------
into trucks for transportation to the paving site. The combustion gases
and fine dust from the rotary drier are exhausted through a precleaner.
This is usually a single cyclone, but twin or multiple cyclones and
other devices are also used. The precleaner catch is discharged back
into the bucket elevator, where it continues in the process with the
main bulk of the dried aggregate.
The exit gas stream of the precleaner usually passes through air
D Q
pollution control equipment. Table 25 details particulate emissions
from uncontrolled and controlled asphalt batch plants. Particulate
size distribution from uncontrolled plants is: about 3 percent greater
than 44 microns , 20 percent 20 to 44 microns, 17 percent 10 to 20
microns, 25 percent 5 to 10 microns and 35 percent less than 5 mic-
80
rons.
Table 25. PARTICULATE EMISSION FACTORS FOR ASPHALT BATCHING PLANTS9
(pounds per ton of product)
Control system
Particulate emission
Precleaner
High-efficiency cyclone
Multiple centrifugal scrubber
Baffle spray tower
Orifice-type scrubber
Baghouse
5
0.8
0.2
0.2
0.08
0.005
aReferences 47, 80, and 81.
CALCIUM CARBIDE PLANTS
In the manufacture of calcium carbide, lime and coke a.re charged
to an electric arc furnace wherein lime is reduced by coke to calcium
carbide and carbon monoxide. About 1, 900 pounds of lime and 1, 300
pounds of coke yield 1 ton of calcium carbide. The molten calcium
carbide is poured into chill cars or bucket conveyors and allowed to
solidify. The finished calcium carbide is dumped into a jaw crusher
followed by a cone crusher to produce a product of desired size. About
75 percent of the total carbide production is used to make acetylene,
34
-------
which is then used to make acetaldehyde, acetic acid, vinyl compounds,
synthetic rubber, rayon, trichloroethylene, and cyanimide. At some
plants calcium carbide is converted to acetylene by reaction with
82
water.
Acetylene, sulfur compounds, and particulates are emitted from
the process. Table 26 contains emission data from one particular
calcium carbide plant in which the materials from the hooded electric
furnaces pass through impingement-type scrubbers before being vented
to the atmosphere through a stack. The electric furnace hood provides
additional ventilation directly to the atmosphere. The emissions from
the furnace room vents are the material that escapes the other systems.
No data on particle size were found in the literature.
Table 26. EMISSION FACTORS FOR CALCIUM CARBIDE PLANT
(pounds per ton of product)
Pol lutant
Acetylene
Sulfur trioxide
Sulfur dioxide
Particulate
Cokeb
drier
—
0.2
0.1
0.2
Electric
furnace
hood
—
—
—
1-7
Furnace
room
vents
1.8
—
--
2.6
Main stackc
(impingement
scrubbers)
--
0.8
1.9
2.0
^Reference 83.
Equipped with cyclone and spray drier.
""Equipped with impingement scrubbers.
CEMENT MANUFACTURING PLANT
Raw materials for the manufacture of cement are ground, mixed,
and blended by either a wet or a dry process. Intne dry process, the
moisture content of the raw materials does not exceed 1 percent; in
the wet process, a slurry of carefully controlled composition is made,
generally having a moisture content ranging from 30 to 50 percent.
After the raw materials are crushed and ground, they are introduced
into a rotary kiln that is fired with pulverized coal, oil, or gas to
produce a temperature of about 2, 700°F. In the kiln the materials
are dried, decarbonated, and calcined to produce a cement clinker.
35
-------
The clinker is cooled, mixed, ground with gypsum, and bagged for
shipment as cement. Dust and fumes in the waste gases of the kiln
are the major sources of air pollution.
Kiln emissions for the wet process of producing cement range
from 15 to 55 pounds of dust per barrel of cement produced, with 38
pounds of dust per barrel of cement produced being a typical value.
In the dry process, the losses range from 35 to 75 pounds of dust per
barrel of cement produced, with 46 pounds of dust per barrel of
cement being a typical value. Degree of control of kiln dust emissions
depends largely upon the type and age of the control system. Typical
collection efficiencies are: 80 percent for multicyclones,90 percent
for old electrostatic precipitators, 95 percent for multicyclones plus
old electrostatic precipitator systems, greater than 99 percent for
multicyclones plus new electrostatic precipitator systems, and greater
than 99. 5 percent for fabric filter units either alone or in combination
with multicyclones.
A typical size distribution of dust from cement kilns is; 8 per-
cent greater than 44 microns, 20 percent 20 to 44 microns, 25 percent
10 to 20 microns, 25 percent 5 to 10 microns, and 22 percent less
84
than 5 microns.
CERAMIC AND CLAY PROCESSES
The ceramic and clay processing industries include manufacture
of brick, tile, sewer pipe, pottery, vitreous wares, activated clay,
catalysts, filter aids, and other related materials. Operations usually
involve wet and dry fine grading, processing at high temperature in
kilns or driers, and sometimes chemical treatment. Emission data
are scarce in the literature. Particulate emissions are the primary
atmospheric pollutant emitted from these processes. Fluorides have
been emitted from processes using clays that contain fluoride.
In the manufacture of ceramic clay, a mixture of wet talc,
whiting, silica clay, and other ceramic material is dried in an instant
spray drier. Particulate emissions are reported as 15 pounds per
ton of charge following a cyclone collector. Particulate emissions
36
-------
from manufacture of bisque from crushed scrap tile is reported as 2
pounds per ton of charge following a dynamic centrifugal scrubber.
Particulate emissions from a rotary drier, kiln, and cooler used in
making catalytic material from clay emitted 6 pounds per ton of charge
74
following a multiple-cyclone and spray-scrubber collection system.
There are many other processes in this industry for which no data
were found. No actual particle size data have been reported.
CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT
Concrete batching plants are generally simple arrangements of
steel hoppers, elevators, and batching scales for proportioning rock,
gravel, and sand aggregates with cement for delivery, usually in in-
transit mixer trucks. Aggregates are usually crushed and sized in
separate plants and are delivered by truck or belt conveyors to ground
or other storage from which they can be reclaimed and placed in the
batch plant blankers.
By careful use of sprays, felt, or other filter material over
breathers in the cement silos and canvas curtains drawn around the
cement dump trucks while dumping, dust losses can be controlled.
Aggregate stocks in bunkers are wet down with sprays to prevent
dusting. With careful operation under stringent standards like those
applied in Los Angeles, losses in cement plants can be held to about
0. 025 pound of dust per yard of concrete. Uncontrolled plants have
74
emissions of about 0. 2 pound of dust per yard of concrete handled.
A typical size distribution of the dust from concrete batching
indicates 14 percent greater than 44 microns, 25 percent 20 to 44
microns, 27 percent 10 to 20 microns, 21 percent 5 to 10 microns,
Q C
and 13 percent less than 5 microns.
FRIT MANUFACTURING PLANT
Frit is used in enameling iron and steel or in glazing porcelain
and pottery. In a typical plant, the raw materials - consisting of a
combination of materials such as borax, feldspar, sodium flouride or
fluorspar, soda ash, zinc oxide, litharge, silica, boric acid, and
zircon - are ground dry in pebble mills and then melted in small
37
-------
reverberatory furnaces at about 2300°F. Enamel frit containing
litharge is melted in oil-fired tilting furnaces. Exit gases contain
particulate matter and some fluorides.
Particulate losses in the manufacture of frit consist primarily
of condensed metallic fumes, which averaged about 16, 5 pounds per
ton of charge from six frit smelters ranging in size from 1, 000 to
3,000 pounds capacity. Particle size distribution is about 10 percent
greater than 44 microns, 15 percent 20 to 44 microns, 15 percent 10
to 20 microns, 15 percent 5 to 20 microns, and 45 percent less than
86
5 microns.
Fluoride emissions from frit furnaces averaged 10 pounds, as
Q /
fluorine, per ton of charge from two installations.
A venturi scrubber with a 21-inch water gauge pressure drop
had average collection efficiency of 67 percent for particulates and
86
94 percent for fluorides.
GLASS MANUFACTURING PLANT
About 90 percent of the glass produced is manufactured by the
soda-lime process. Major ingredients are sand, limestone, soda ash,
and cullet. Soda-lime glass is produced in direct-fired continuous
melting furnaces in which the blended raw materials are melted at
2700°F to form glass.
Emissions from the glass melting operation consist primarily of
particulates and fluorides, if fluoride-containing fluxes are used in
the process. Particulate emissions reportedly average about 2 pounds
per ton of glass produced for good operation. Fluoride emissions
can be calculated on the basis of 20 percent of the input fluoride being
R 7
emitted. Particle size distribution for two installations averaged 1
percent 20 to 44 microns, 19 percent 10 to 20 microns, 55 percent 5
to 10 microns, and 25 percent less than 5 microns.
LIME MANUFACTURING PLANT
Lime is produced by calcining various types of limestone in
continuous rotary or vertical kilns. The principal contaminant is
particulate matter from the kiln and also from crushing, screening,
38
-------
and conveying of the limestone. The dust generated by rotary lime
kilns ranges from 5 to 15 percent by weight of the lime produced.
89
Vertical kilns emit about 1 percent by weight of the lime produced.
About 28 percent of the particles are greater than 44 microns, 38 per-
cent 20 to 44 microns, 24 percent 10 to 20 microns, 8 percent 5 to 10
microns, and 2 percent less than 5 microns.
Primary collection is usually accomplished with multiple cyclones,
which reduce emissions from 65 to 85 percent by weight. Wet scrub-
bing systems report efficiencies from 95 to 98 percent. Venturi
89 90
scrubbers have reported efficiency of 99 weight percent.
PERLITE MANUFACTURING PLANT
Perlite, a volcanic rock, consists of oxides of silicon and alum-
inum combined as a natural glass by water of hydration. By a process
called exfoliation, the material is rapidly heated to release water of
hydration and thus expand the spherules into low-density particles
used primarily as aggregate in plaster and concrete. Vertical, hori-
zontal stationary, and horizontal rotary furnaces are used for the
exfoliation of perlite with vertical furnaces being the most numerous.
Cyclone separators are used to collect the product.
Particulate emissions from a perlite expanding furnace are
91
about 21 pounds per ton of charge. Particle size following a cyclone
precleaner is reported as 35 percent greater than 44 microns, 13 per-
cent 20 to 44 microns, 10 percent 10 to 20 microns, 10 percent 5 to 10
92
microns, and 32 percent less than 5 microns.
ROCK WOOL, MANUFACTURING PLANT
Rock (mineral) wool is used mainly for thermal and acoustical
insulation. The cupola or furnace charge is heated to a molten state
at about 3000°F and then is fed to a blow chamber, where steam atom-
izes the molten rock into globules, which develop long fibrous tails
as they are drawn to the other end of the chamber. The wool blanket
formed is then conveyed to an oven to cure the binding agent and then
to a cooler.
39
-------
Particulate emissions from the cupola or reverberatory furnace
consists primarily of condensed fumes with about 60 percent greater
than 44 microns, 27 percent 20 to 44 microns, 10 percent 10 to 20
microns, 2. 5 percent 5 to 10 microns, and 0. 5 percent less than 5
microns. Particulate emissions from the blow chamber, curing oven,
and cooler consist of about 90 percent mineral wool fibers varying
from 5 to 7 microns in diameter and about 0. 5 inch long. Table 27
details particulate emissions from the various uncontrolled mineral
i - 93
wool operations.
Table 27. PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM MINERAL WOOL PROCESSES3
(pounds per ton of charge)
Cupola
Reverberatory furnace
Blow chamber
Curing oven
Cooler
21.6
4.8
21.6
3.6
2.k
Reference 93-
ROCK, GRAVEL, AND SAND PROCESSING
Quarrying, crushing, screening, conveying, handling, and
storage of various types of crushed rock and gravel create dust pro-
blems. Very little information is available on quantitative emission
data from these operations. Particulate losses from crushing have
been reported as 20 pounds per ton of product from a silicon carbide
94
operation. Conveying, screening, and sacking losses from a roof-
ing-granule and poultry-grit rock sizing plant were found to be 1.7
pounds of particulate per ton of product. Particle size distribution
from this operation was found to be 12 percent greater than 44 microns,
18 percent 20 to 44 microns, 20 percent 10 to 20 microns, 20 percent
95
5 to 10 microns, and 30 percent less than 5 microns. Particle size
distribution from a marble jaw crusher indicates 75 percent greater
than 44 microns, 5 percent 10 to 20 microns, 5 percent 5 to 10 microns,
96
and 5 percent less than 5 microns. Storage pile losses due to wind
97
erosion have been reported up to 1 percent of the product.
40
-------
PETROLEUM REFINERY
A modery refinery is a maze of equipment, but the entire opera-
tion can be discussed in terms of separation, conversion, treating, and
blending. The crude oil is first separated into selected fractions (e. g. ,
gasoline, kerosine, and fuel oil). Since the relative volumes of each
fraction produced by merely separating the crude may not conform to
the relative demand for each fraction, some of the less valuable sepa-
ration products are converted to products with a greater sale value by
splitting, combining, or rearranging the original molecules.
In the catalytic cracking operation, large molecules are decom-
posed into lower-boiling fractions by heat and pressure in the pre-
sence of catalysts. At the same time, some of the molecules combine
to form larger molecules. The products of cracking are gaseous
hydrocarbons, gasoline, kerosine, gas oil, fuel oil, and residual oil.
In catalytic reforming, gasoline is used as a feedstock; by mol-
ecular rearrangement, usually including hydrogen removal, gasoline
of higher quality and octane number is produced. The types of re-
forming processes in use include fixed-bed systems with and without
catalyst regeneration, and the fluidized processes.
Polymerization and alkylation are processes used to produce
gasoline from the gaseous hydrocarbons formed from cracking opera-
tions. Polymerization joins two or more olefins, and alkylation unites
an olefin and an isoparaffin. Insomerization is another process used.
In this process the arrangement of the atoms in a molecule is altered,
usually to form branched-chain hydrocarbons.
The products from both the separation and conversion steps are
treated, usually for the removal of sulfur compounds and gum-forming
materials, As a final step, the refined base stocks are blended with
each other and with various additives to meet product specifications.
Emission factors for petroleum refineries are given in Table 28.
41
-------
Table 28. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY3
Processes
Boilers and process heaters
Fluid catalytic units
Moving-bed catalytic
cracking units
Compressor internal
combustion engines
Miscellaneous process equipment
Slowdown system
With control
Without control
Process drains
Wi th control
Wi thout control
Vacuum jets
With control
Without control
Cooling towers
Pipeline valves and flanges
Vessel relief valves
Pump seals
Compressor seals
Others (air blowing, blend
changing, and sampling)
Dimensions of emission factor
Ib hydrocarbon/ 1000 bbl oil burned
)b hydrocarbon/ 1000 ft3 gas burned
Ib particulate/1000 bbl oil burned
Ib particulate/1000 ft3 gas burned
Ib M02/I000 bbl oil burned
Ib N02/I000 ft3 gas burned
Ib CO/1000 bbl oil burned
Ib CO/1000 ft3 gas burned
Ib HCHO/IOOO bbl oil burned
Ib HCHO/IOOO ft3 gas burned
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib partlculate/ton of catalyst circulation
Ib NOj/IOOO bbl of fresh feed
Ib CO/1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib HCHO/IOOO bbl of fresh feed
Ib NHj/IOOO bbl of fresh feed
Ib hydrocarbon/ 1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib partlculate/ton of catalyst circulation
Ib NO,/ 1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib CO/ 1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib HCHO/IOOO bbl of fresh feed
Ib NH3/1000 bbl of fresh feed
Ib hydrocarbons/1000 ft3 of fuel gas burned
Ib N0,/1000 f|3 of fuel gas burned
Ifa CO/1000 ft3 of fuel gas burned
Ib HCHO/IOOO ft3 of fuel gas burned
Ib NHj/IOOO ft3 of fuel gas burned
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl refinery capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl waste water
Ib hydrocarbon/ 1000 bbl vacuum distillation
capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/I ,000,000 gal cooling water
capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/ 1000 bbl refinery capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl refinery capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl refinery capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl refinery capacity
Ib hydrocarbon/1000 bbl refinery capacity
Emission factor
140
0.026
800
0.02
2,900
0.23
neg.
neg.
25
0.0031
220
O.IOb
0.018=
63
13,700
19
5*
87 ,.
0.0dd
5
3,800
12
5
1.2
0.86
neg.
0.11
0.2
5
300
8
210
neg.
130
6
28
11
17
5
10
Reference 98.
Without electrostatic precipitator.
With electrostatic p.rectpi tator.
With high-efficiency centrifugal separator.
42
-------
PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY
Before the cellulose from wood can be made into pulp, the lignin
that binds the cellulose fibers together must be removed. In the kraft
process, this is done by treating with an aqueous solution of sodium
sulfide and sodium hydroxide. This liquor is mixed with wood chips
in a large upright pressure vessel, called a digester, and cooked for
about 3 hours with steam. During the cooking period, the digester is
relieved periodically to reduce the pressure buildup of gases.
When cooking is completed, the bottom of the digester is sudden-
ly opened, and its contents forced into the blow tank. Here, the major
portion of the spent cooking liquor, containing the dissolved lignin, is
drained, and pulp enters the initial stage of washing. From the blow
tank the pulp passes through the knotter, where unreacted chunks of
wood are removed. The pulp is then processed through intermittent
stages of washing and bleaching, after which it is pressed and dried
into the finished product.
Most of the chemicals from the spent cooking liquor are recover-
ed for reuse in subsequent cooks. The spent "black" liquor from the
blow tank is concentrated first in the multiple-effect evaporator and
then in a direct-contact evaporator utilizing recovery furnace flue
gases.
The combustible, concentrated, black liquor thus produced is
burned in a recovery furnace, where the inorganic chemicals to be
recovered fall to the floor of the furnace in a molten state.
The melt, consisting mainly of sodium sulfide and sodium car-
bonate, is withdrawn from the furnace and dissolved with water and
weak causticizing plant liquor in a smelt tank. The "green" liquor
thus produced is pumped into a causticizer wherein the sodium car-
bonate is converted to sodium hydroxide by the addition of calcium
hydroxide. The calcium carbonate produced is converted into calcium
43
-------
oxide in a lime kiln, and is slaked to produce calcium hydroxide for
further use in the causticizer. The effluent solution produced by the
causticizing reaction is known as "white" liquor and is withdrawn and
reused in the digestion process.
Table 29 summarizes the emissions from the various processes
99 100
involved in a kraft pulp mill.
Table 29. EMISSION FACTORS FOR KRAFT PULPa
(pounds per ton of dry pulp produced)
Source
Digester
blow system
Smelt tank
Lime ki In
Recovery
furnace0
Multiple-
effect
evaporator
Oxidation
towers
Hydrogen
sulf ide
0.1-0.7
n.a.b
1
3-6
3-6-7.0
0.7
1.2
0-0.5
n.a.b
Methyl
mercaptan
0.9-5.3
n.a.b
Neg.
5
n.a.b
n.a.b
0.04
0.003-0.030
n.a.b
Dimethyl
sulfide
0.9-3.8
n.a.b
Neg.
3
n.a.b
n.a.b
b
n.a,
Neg.
0.1
Paniculate
pol lutants
Neg.
20
5
1-2
18.7
150
7-16
12-25
Neg.
Neg.
Neg.
Type of control
Untreated
Uncontrol led
Water spray
Mesh demister
Scrubber
(approximately
80? efficient)
Primary stack
gas scrubber
Electrostatic
precipi tator
Venturi scrubber
Untreated
Black 1 iquor
oxidation
Black liquor
oxidation
References 99, and 100.
bNot available.
Gaseous sulfurous emissions are greatly dependent on the'oxygen content
of the flue gases and furnace operating conditions.
44
-------
SOLVENT EVAPORATION
AND GASOLINE MARKETING
DRY CLEANING PLANTS
Almost all dry cleaning is performed with three solvents: tetra-
chloroethylene, Stoddard solvent, and safety 140°F solvent. Stoddard
solvent has a minimum flash point of 100°F and a distillation range
within 100° to 410°F. Safety 140°F solvent has a minimum flash point
of 140°F, thus lessening the explosion hazard.
Chlorinated hydrocarbons are widely used as cleaning solvents.
They are nonflammable and dissolve greases and oils rapidly, in-
cluding substances not soluble in petroleum solvents. Tetrachloroethy-
lene (perchlorethylene) is the most widely used chlorinated dry clean-
ing agent. Because it is expensive and a health hazard, tetrachloro-
ethylene is often recovered by use of carbon adsorption beds.
Table 30 gives emission factors for chlorinated and nonchlorinat-
ed hydrocarbon dry cleaning solvents based upon data received from
,.,. t 101, 102
three different areas.
SURFACE-COATING OPERATIONS
Organic solvent is lost from surface-coating operations as a
result of evaporation and vaporization during the spraying application
and the subsequent baking or drying. Spraying and other surface-
coating operations are generally uncontrolled, thus the solvent vapors
are released to the atmosphere. Some of the industries involved in
surface-coating operations are automobile assemblies, aircraft com-
panies, container manufacturers, furniture manufacturers, appliance
manufacturers, job enamelers, automobile repainters, and plastic
products manufacturers. All solvents consumed in surface coating
are normally released to the atmosphere.
45
-------
Table 30. EMISSION FACTORS FOR DRY CLEANING PLANTS3
Ch 1 o r- hyd roca rbons
emitted, tons/day
Petroleum solvents
emitted, tons/day
Total
Ciothes cleaned/capita,
Ib/yr
Chlor-hyd roca rbons
emitted/capita, Ib/yr
Hydrocarbon vapors
emitted/capita, Ib/yr
Total organic solvents
emitted/capita, Ib/yr
Los Angeles,
January 1963
15
20
35
18
1.7
2.2
3-9
Kent County,
Michigan, 1965
0.3
0.7
1
25.1
1.8
2.2
4.0
BAAPCDd
1963
7-9
11.5
19.4
18.3
1.5
2.3
3.8
.References 101 and 102.
Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District data; population
covered, 6,492,000.
.Kent County, Michigan, data; population covered, 363,167.
San Francisco Bay Area Air Pollution Control District data; population
covered, 3,691,000.
GASOLINE MARKETING
A study of the typical pattern of motor gasoline storage and
handling reveals five major points of gasoline emission:
1. Breathing and filling losses from storage tanks at
refineries and bulk terminals.
2. Filling losses from loading tank conveyances at re-
fineries and bulk terminals.
3. Filling losses from loading underground storage tanks
at service stations.
4. Spillage and filling losses in filling automobile gas
tanks at service stations.
5. Evaporative losses from the carburetor and gas tank
of motor vehicles,
Breathing loss has been defined as the loss associated with the
thermal expansion and contraction of the vapor space resulting from
the daily temperature cycle. Filling loss has been defined as the
vapors expelled from a tank (by displacement) as a result of filling.
104
46
-------
Splash and submerged fill have been defined by R. L. Chass,
et al. , as follows: "In splash fill the gasoline enters the top of
the fill pipe and then has a free fall to the liquid surface in the tank.
The free falling tends to break up the liquid stream into droplets. As
these droplets strike the liquid surface, they carry entrained air into
the liquid, and a (boiling) action results as this air escapes up through
the liquid surface. The net effect of these actions is the creation of
additional vapors in the tank. In submerged filling, the gasoline flows
to the bottom of the tank through the fill pipe and enters below the
surface of the liquid. This method of filling creates very little dis-
turbances in the liquid bath and, consequently, less vapor formation
than splash filling. "
Emission factors are given for both cone-roof and floating-roof
storage tanks, as well as for splash and submerged fill in tank vehicles
and service station tanks. The degree to which floating roof tanks and
submerged fill are utilized varies from place to place. Ideally, the
gasoline evaporative emissions should be calculated on the basis of
the percentage of local utilization of submerged fill and floating-roof
tanks. If this is not known, then 75 percent floating-roof tanks and
50 percent submerged fill should be assumed, The effect of vapor-
recovery loading arms or tank compression systems has not been
considered.
An average emission factor for hydrocarbons from uncontrolled
cone-roof gasoline storage tanks is 47 pounds per day per 1, 000
barrels of storage capacity. For floating-roof tanks storing gasoline,
a typical hydrocarbon emission is 4. 8 pounds per day per 1, 000
104
barrels of storage capacity. Table 31 summarizes the emission
factors for gasoline evaporation at the other four points of emission.
47
-------
Table 31. GASOLINE EVAPORATION EMISSION
Point of emission
Fi 11 ing tank vehicles
Splash fill
Submerged fi 11
50% splash fill and
50% submerged fi 11
Filling service station tanks
Splash fill
Submerged fi 1 1
50% splash fill and
50"% submerged fill
Filling automobile tanks
Automobile evaporation losses
(gas tank and carburetor)
lb/1000 gal of
throughput
8.2
4.9
6.4
11.5
7.3
9.4
11.6
92
Percent emission
losses, by volume
0.14
0.08
0.11
0.19
0.12
0.15
0.19
1.50
^References 105, 106, 107, and 108.
An average gasoline specific gravity of 0,73 is assumed.
48
-------
TRANSPORTATION
Air contaminant emissions from mobile sources are similar to
those from other combustion sources, but tend to emit larger quanti-
ties of carbon monoxide and organic matter. They emit significant
quantities of oxides of nitrogen and also particulate matter. The
following sections detail air pollutant emissions from aircraft, auto-
mobiles, and diesel trucks and buses.
AIRCRAFT
Emissions are presented for the three major types of commer-
cial aircraft: jet, turboprop, and piston-powered engines. Emission
factors are presented on the basis of pounds per flight where a flight
is a combination of a landing and a take-off. These factors, shown in
Table 32, are combined and averaged figures for emissions during all
phases of aircraft operation (taxi - take-off, climb-out, approach, and
landing) that take place below the arbitrarily chosen altitude of 3, 500
feet. Emissions at cruise altitude (above 3, 500 feet) are not of con-
cern in conducting an emission inventory.
Table 32. EMISSION FACTORS FOR AIRCRAFT BELOW 3,500 FEETa
(pounds per flight)'5
Types of emission
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons (C)
Oxides of nitrogen (N02)
Participates
Jet aircraft,
four enginec' d
Conventional
It
35
10
23
Ik
Fan-Jet
2.2
20.6
19.0
9.2
7.*
Turboprop
aircraft
Two
engine
0.3
2.0
0.3
1.1
0.6
Four
engine
1.1
9.0
1.2
5.0
2.5
Piston-engine
aircraft
Two
engine
0.2
13A.O
25.0
6.3
0.6
Four
engi ne
0.5
326.0
60.0
15.*
}.k
References 110, 111, and 112,
A flight Is defined as a combination of a landing and a take-off.
cNo water injection on take-off.
For three-engine aircraft, multiply these data by 0.75 and for two-
engine aircraft, multiply these data by 0.5.
49
-------
Data were obtained for fuel consumption in the three major
classes of aircraft so that emissions may be calculated in terms of
pounds per gallon of fuel consumed. Four-engine jet aircraft use
about 630 gallons; four-engine turboprops about 625 gallons; four-
engine pistons about 117 gallons; and two-engine pistons about 48 gal-
lons per flight. A flight is the combination of a landing and a takeoff.
Electron micrographs of aircraft exhaust particulates are very
similar to those from automobiles. These particulates can be assurn-
113
ed to be all less than 5 microns.
AUTOMOBILES
Automobile exhaust gases are the major source of hydrocarbons,
oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide emissions to the atmosphere
in our metropolitan areas. Controls have been developed to reduce
hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. These controls have
been installed on new model cars in California since 1966 and will be
installed on new cars throughout the nation beginning with the 1968
model year.
Table 33 presents emission factors for uncontrolled automobile
exhaust. These factors are expressed in three different ways to
facilitate calculations in emission inventories. These are average
emission factors based upon an average route speed of 25 miles
116
per hour in urban areas.
Table 33. EMISSION FACTORS FOR AUTOMOBILE EXHAUST3
Type of emission
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons (C)
Oxides of nitrogen (N02)
Oxides of sulfur (S02)
Organic acids (acetic)
Particulates
Emissions
pounds per 1000
vehicle-mi les
0.3
165.0
12.5
8.5
0.6
0.3
0.8
pounds per 1000
gal Ions of gas
k
2300
200
113
9
k
12
pounds per
vehicle-day
0.007
if. 160
0.3&3
0.202
0.016
0.00?
0.022
aReferences 83, 114, 115, and 116.
50
-------
A representative urban vehicle is estimated to drive 3. 25 trips
per day of 8 miles in length each. The average automobile travels
11 8
about 14. 4 miles per gallon of gasoline consumed.
Emissions from automobiles are highly variable, depending upon
geographical location and local driving patterns. In high-altitude
cities, as measured in Denver, Colorado, hydrocarbon emissions are
30 percent greater, carbon monoxide 60 percent greater, and oxides
of nitrogen 50 percent less than those in low-altitude cities, as
measured in Cincinnati and L/os Angeles. To account for differ-
ences in local traffic patterns, emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide may be calculated from the data presented in Table 34,
which gives carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions for various
average route speeds and types of roads. Oxides of nitrogen are not
dependent upon route speed, but upon fuel-to-air ratio, which averages
about 12. 8. 116
Table 3*». EMISSION FACTORS FOR AUTOMOBILE EXHAUST3
(pound per vehicle-mile)
Route type
Business
Residential
Arterial
Rapid transit
Average route
speed, mph
10
18
2k
>*5
Hydrocarbons
0.023
0.015
0.013
0.0085
Carbon monoxide
0.35
0.21
0.17
0.10
Reference 119.
Expressed as carbon as measured by flame ionization detector.
Road tests conducted in five cities on 1966 automobiles equipped
with exhaust control devices indicated a 35 percent reduction in hydro-
•carbons, 67 percent reduction in carbon monoxide, and a 26 percent
increase in oxides of nitrogen emissions. In the high-altitude city
(Denver), hydrocarbons decreased 46 percent, carbon monoxide de-
creased 47 percent, and oxides of nitrogen increased 241 percent.
Another source of hydrocarbon emissions, if uncontrolled, is
the engine crankcase blowby. Hydrocarbon emissions from an un-
controlled vehicle is about 0.2 pound per vehicle-day. Since 1963
120
51
-------
essentially all new cars throughout the Nation have been equipped
with crankcase blowby control systems, which have been approximate-
116
ly 90 percent effective in reducing hydrocarbon emissions. Fuel
evaporative emissions from the automobile are covered in the gasoline
marketing section of this report.
Particulate emissions from automobiles consist of carbon par-
ticles, lead compounds, motor oil, and nonvolatile reaction products
formed in the combustion zone from motor oil. Participates emitted
from the exhaust are essentially all less than 5 microns in size.
Automobiles, however, contribute significantly to particulate pollu-
tion problems, since aerosols are formed in the reaction products
from hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the photochemical re-
122
action.
DIESEL ENGINE VEHICLES
Emissions from diesel engine vehicles can be calculated from
data presented in Table 35. Note that emissions of carbon monoxide
and hydrocarbons are lower; but emissions of nitrogen oxides, alde-
hydes, oxides of sulfur, organic acids, and particulates are higher
than the corresponding emissions from the gasoline engine.
Particle size from diesel exhaust is estimated as 62. 5 percent
124
less than 5 microns and 37. 5 percent 5 to 20 microns. No control
systems have been developed for diesel exhaust emissions.
Table 35. EMISSION FACTORS FOR DIESEL ENGINES3
(pounds per 1,000 gallons of diesel fuel)
Type of emission
Aldehydes (HCHO)
Carbon monoxide
Hydrocarbons (c)
Oxides of nitrogen (NO.)
Oxides of sulfur
Organic acids (acetic)
Particulate
Emission factor
10
60
136
222
JfO
31
HO
References 83, 122, and 12-3-
52
-------
REFERENCES
1. Smith, W. S. Atmospheric emissions from coal combustion.
Public Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-24. National
Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Apr. 1966.
2. Weisburd, M. I. Air pollution control field operations manual -
a guide for inspection and control. Publication No. 937. U. S.
Government Printing Office. Washington, D. C. 1962.
3. Smith, W. S. Atmospheric emissions from fuel oil combustion -
an inventory guide. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publica-
tion No. 999-AP-2. National Center for Air Pollution Control.
Cincinnati, Ohio. Nov. 1962.
4. Chass, R. L. and R. E. George. Contaminant emissions from
the combustion of fuels. JAPCA. 10:34-44. Feb. 1960.
5. MacChee, R. D. , J. R. Taylor and R. L. Chaney. Some data
on particulates from fuel oil burning. Los Angeles County Air
Pollution Control District. Presented at APCA Semiannual
Technical Conference. San Francisco, Calif. Nov. 1957.
6. Taylor, F. R. et al. Final report on emissions from fuel oil
combustion, Scott Research Laboratories. Perkasie, Pa.
Mar. 1963.
7. Walker, A, B. and F. W. Schmitz. Characteristics of furnace
emissions from large mechanically stoked municipal incinera-
tors. 1966 National Incinerator Conference. ASME. New
York, N. Y. May 1966.
8. Jens, W. and F. R. Rehm. Municipal incineration and air
pollution control, 1966 National Incinerator Conference. ASME.
New York, N. Y. May 1966.
9. Rehm, F. R. Incinerator testing and test results. JAPCA.
6:199-204. Feb. 1957.
10. Stenburg, R. L. et al. Field evaluation of combustion air
effects on atmospheric emissions from municipal incinerators.
JAPCA. 12:83-89. Feb. 1962.
11. Lenehan, J. W. Air pollution control in municipal incineration.
JAPCA. 12:414-17,430. Sept. 1962.
12. Smauder, E. E. Problems of municipal incineration. Presented
at 1st meeting APCA, West Coast Section. Los Angeles, Calif.
Mar. 1957.
53
-------
13. Walker, A. R. Electrostatic fly ash precipitation for municipal
incinerators - a pilot plant study. Proceedings of 1964 National
Incinerator Conference. ASME. New York, N. Y. May 1964.
14. Doege, H. F. The effect of using the auxiliary gas correction
for the calculation of pollutant concentrations from incinerator
emissions. Bay Area Air Pollution Control District. San Fran-
cisco, Calif. Sept. 1962.
15. Gerstle, R. W. Unpublished data. Incinerator tests. National
Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Feb. 1967.
16. Hangebrauck, C. V. et al. Emission of polynuclear hydrocar-
bons and other pollutants from, heat generation and incineration
sources. JAPCA. 14:267-78. July 1964.
17. Unpublished data. New York City Department of Air Pollution
Control. New York, N. Y. Nov. I960.
18. Rose, A, H. Jr., et al. Air pollution effects of incinerator
firing practices and combustion air distribution, JAPCA.
8:297-309. Feb. 1959.
19. Sableski, J. J. Unpublished data. Multiple^chamber incinerator
tests. National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati,
Ohio. 1967.
20, Kanter, C, V. et al. Techniques of testing for air contaminants
from combustion sources. JAPCA. 6:191-8. Feb. 1957.
21. Chass, R. L. and A. H. Rose. Discharge from municipal in-
cinerators. Air Repair. 3:119-23. Nov. 1953.
22. Johnson, H. C. et al. Emission and performance characteris-
tics of various incinerators in the San Francisco Bay area.
Presented at 58th Annual Meeting of APCA, Houston, Texas.
June 1964.
23. Gerstle, R. W. Unpublished data. Revision of emission factors
based on recent stack tests. NCAPC. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
24. Sableski, J. J. Flue-fed apartment incinerators. Los Angeles,
California Air Pollution Control District Engineering Manual.
USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-40.
Cincinnati. Ohio, 1967.
pp 284-86. 1963.
25. Kaiser, E. R. et al. Performance of a flue-fed incinerator.
New York University, College of Engineering. Technical Re-
port 552. 1. Mar. 1958.
54
-------
26. Kaiser, E. R. et al. Modifications to reduce emissions from a
flue-fed incinerator. New York University, College of Engineer-
ing. Technical Report 552. 2. June 1959.
27. Anon. Air pollution studies at the Robert P. Taylor Homes
Project of the Chicago Housing Authority. Wisconsin Chemical
and Testing Company. Milwaukee, Wis. Aug. 1962.
28. Anon. Air pollution studies for the New York Housing Authority.
Wisconsin Chemical and Testing Company, Milwaukee, Wis.
Dec. 1965.
29. Braverman, M. M. Incinerator source test report. New York
City Department of Air Pollution Control. Apr. I960.
30. Engdahl, R. B. and G. M. Hein. A study of effluents from
domestic gas-fired incinerators. American Gas Association.
Cleveland, Ohio. June 1959.
31. Sterling, M. Air pollution control and the gas industry. JAPCA.
11:354-61. Aug. 1961.
32. Anon. Domestic incinerator report. Air Pollution Control
Section, City of Philadelphia. Feb. 1963.
3,3. Anon. Air currents. Bay Area Air Pollution Control District.
Vol 2, No. 2. Sept. 1960.
34. Anon. A field study of performance of three municipal incinera-
tors. University of Califormia, Berkley. Technical Bulletin
6:41. Nov. 1957.
35, Walker, A. B. Air pollution control equipment for incinerators.
Proceedings of MECAR Symposium. Incineration of Solid
Wastes. New York, N. Y. Mar, 1967.
36. Anon, The smog problem in Los Angeles County. Stanford
Research Institute. Distributed by Western Oil and Gas Assor
ciation. Los Angeles, Calif. Jan. 1954.
37. Sableski, J. J. Unpublished data. Characteristics of emissions
from incineration equipment. National Center for Air Pollution
Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. June 1967.
38. Pascual, S. J. and A. Cieratti. Fly ash control equipment for
municipal incinerators. Proceedings of 1964 National Incinera-
tor Conference. ASME. New York, N. Y. May 1964.
39. Williamson, J. E. and W. F. Hammond. Interim guide to good
practice for selected incinerators for Federal Facilities. Con-
tract No. PH 27-66-139. National Center for Air Pollution
Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Feb. 1967.
55
-------
40. Gerstle, R. W. and D. A. Kemnitz. Atmospheric emissions
from open burning. Presented at 60th Annual Meeting of APCA.
Cleveland, Ohio. June 1967.
41. Darley, E. F, et al. Contribution of burning of agricultural
wastes to photochemical air pollution. Presented at 59th Annual
Meeting of APCA, San Francisco, Calif. June 1966.
42. Faith, W. L. , D. B. Keyes and Q. L. Clark. Industrial chemi-
cals. 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, N. Y.
1965.
43. Burns, W. E. and R. R. McMullan. No noxious ammonia odors.
The Oil and Gas Journal. 129-131. Feb. 25, 1957.
44. Knudsen, J. C. Private communication. National Center for
Air Pollution Control. June 30, 1967.
45. Atmospheric emissions from nitric acid manufacturing processes.
Manufacturing Chemists' Association, Inc. and Public Health
Service Cooperative Study Project. National Center for Air
Pollution Control. Publication No. 999-AP-27. Cincinnati,
Ohio. 1966.
46, Mills, J. L. et al. Design of afterburners for varnish cookers.
Proceedings of 52nd Annual Meeting of APCA. Los Angeles,
Calif. June 1959.
47. Kenline, P. A. Unpublished report. Control of air pollutants
from the chemical process industries. Robert A. Taft Sanitary
Engineering Center. Cincinnati, Ohio. May 1959.
48. Bolduc, M. J. et al. Systematic source test procedure for the
evaluation of industrial fume converters. Presented at 58th
Annual Meeting of APCA. Toronto, Canada. June 1965.
49. Grant, H. O. Pollution control in a phosphoric acid plant.
Chemical Engineering Progress. 60:No. 1. Jan. 1964.
50. Atmospheric emissions from thermal process phosphoric acid
manufacturing. Cooperative Study Project - Manufacturing
Chemists' Association, Inc. and Public Health Service. National
Center for Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967,
51. Air Pollution. Volume II. A. C, Stern, Ed. Academic Press.
New York, N. Y. 1962.
52. Atmospheric emissions from sulfuric acid manufacturing pro-
cesses. Cooperative Study Project - Manufacturing Chemists'
Association, Inc. , and Public Health Service. Publication No.
999-AP-13. U. S. Government Printing Office. Washington,
D. C. 1965.
56
-------
53, Gillespie, G. R. and H. F. Johnstone. Particle size distribu-
tion in some hygroscopic aerosols. Chemical Engineering
Progress. 51:74F-80F. Feb. 1955.
54. Anon. Process flow sheets and air pollution controls. Ameri-
can Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Com-
mittee on Air Pollution. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1961.
55. Partee, F. Air pollution in the coffee roasting industry.
USDHEW. Public Health Service. National Center for Air
Pollution Control. Publication No. 999-AP-9. Cincinnati,
Ohio. Rev. 1966.
56. Anon. Air-borne particulate emissions from cotton ginning
operations. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Taft Sanitary
Engineering Center. Cincinnati, Ohio. I960.
57. Anon. Control and disposal of cotton ginning wastes. A sympo-
sium sponsored by National Center for Air Pollution Control and
Agricultural Research Service. Dallas, Texas. May 1966.
USDHEW. Public Health Service. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
58. Cote, W. A. Grain dust emissions and our atmosphere.
National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Presented at Grain and Feed Dealers National Association Air
Pollution Symposium. Washington, D. C. Jan. 1967.
59. McLouth, M. E. and H. J, Paulus. Air pollution from the
grain industry. JAPCA. 11:313-17. July 1961.
60. Larson, G. P. et al. Evaluating sources of air pollution. In-
dustrial and Engineering Chemistry. 45:1070-74. May 1953.
61. McGinnity, J. L. Unpublished data. National Center for Air
Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. May 1967.
62. Summer, W. Methods of air deodorization. Elswier Publishing
Co. New York, N. Y. pp 284-86. 1963.
63. Storch, H. L. Product losses cut with a centrifugal gas scrub-
ber. Chemical Engineering Progress. 62:51-4. Apr. 1966.
64, Rothman, S. C. Engineering control of industrial air pollution:
state of the art, 19&6. Heating, Piping, and Air Cbnditioning.
pp 141-47. Mar. 1966.
65. Rohrman, F, A. and J. H. Ludwig. Sources of sulfur dioxide
pollution. Chemical Engineering Progress. 61:59-63. Sept.
1965.
66. Schueneman, J. J. et al. Air pollution aspects of the iron and
steel industry. National Center for Air Pollution Control.
Cincinnati, Ohio. June 1963.
57
-------
67, Anon. Iron and steel making process flow sheets and air pollu-
tion controls. American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists. Committee on Air Pollution. 1014 Broadway,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1961.
68. Goodwin, D. R. Trip report - St. Louis, Mo. National Center
for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. June 18, 1964,
69. Crabaugh, H. C. et al. Dust and fumes from gray iron found-
ries - how they are controlled in Los Angeles County. Air
Repair. Nov. 1954.
70. Hammond, W. F. , K. D. Luedthe, and J. T. Nance. Steel
manufacturing processes. Los Angeles, California Air Pollu-
tion Control District Engineering Manual. USDHEW. Public
Health Service, Publication No. 999-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio.
1967.
71. Hammond, W. F. , J. T. Nance, and E. F. Spencer. Brass
and bronze furnaces. Los Angeles, California Air Pollution
Control District Engineering Manual. USDHEW, Public Health
Service, Publication No. 999-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
72. Hammond, W. F, Unpublished data. Secondary non-ferrous
metallurgical operations. Los Angeles County Air Pollution
Control District. Presented at Air Pollution Control Institute,
University of Southern California. Los Angeles, Calif. Nov.
1966.
73. Anon. Technical progress report, Control of Stationary Sources,
Vol. I. Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. Apr.
I960.
74. Allen, G. L, et al. Control of metallurgical and mineral dusts
and fumes in Los Angeles County. Bureau of Mines Information
Circular 7627. Washington, D. C. Apr, 1952.
75. Hammond, W. F. Unpublished report. Air contaminant emis-
sions from metallurgical operations in Los Angeles County.
Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. Presented
at Air Pollution Control Institute. University of Southern Cali-
fornia. Los Angeles, Calif. July 1964.
76. Hammond, W. F, and J. T. Nance. Iron casting. Los Angeles,
California Air Pollution Control District Engineering Manual.
USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-40.
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1967.
77. Kane, J. M. Equipment for cupola control. American Foun-
dryman's Society Transactions. 64:525-531. 1956.
58
-------
78. Von Lehmden, D. J, et al. Polynuclear hydrocarbon emissions
from selected industrial processes. JAPCA. 15:306-312. July
1965.
79. Weiss, S. M. Asphalt roofing felt saturators. Los Angeles,
California Air Pollution Control District Engineering Manual.
USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-40.
Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
80. Danielson, J. A. Control of asphaltic concrete batching plants
in Los Angeles County. JAPCA. 10:29-33. Feb. I960.
81. Danielson, J. A. Unpublished test data, Los Angeles County
Air Pollution Control District. Presented at Air Pollution Con-
trol Institute. University of Southern California. Los Angeles,
Calif. Nov. 1966.
82. Schueneman, J. J. Unpublished report. Control of air pollu-
tants from industrial processes. University of Michigan,
College of Engineering. May 1959.
83. Anon. The Louisville air pollution study. USDHEW. Public
Health Service, R. A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center.
Cincinnati, Ohio. 1961,
84. Kreichelt, T. E. , D. A. Kemnitz, and S. T. Cuffe. Air pollu-
tion aspects of portland cement manufacture. USDHEW, Public
Health Service Publication No. 999-AP-17. National Center for
Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
85. Vincent, E. J. and J. L. McGinnity. Concrete batching plants.
Los Angeles, California Air Pollution Control District Engineer-
ing Manual. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication No,
999-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
86. Spinks,- J, L, Frit smelters. Los Angeles, California Air
Pollution Control District Engineering Manual. USDHEW.
Public Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-40. Cin-
cinnati, Ohio. 1967.
87, Semrou, K. T. Emission of fluoride from industrial processes -
a review. JAPCA. 7:92-108. Aug. 1957.
88. Hetziet, A. B. and J. L. McGinnity. Glass manufacture. Los
Angeles, California Air Pollution Control District Engineering
Manual. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication No,
999-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
89. Lewis, C. J. The lime industry's problem of airborne dust.
Presented at 64th Annual Convention of the National Lime
Association. Phoenix, Ariz. Apr. 1966,
59
-------
90. Blackmore, S. S. Dust emission control program. Union
Carbide Corporation, Metals Division. Presented at 57th
Annual Meeting of APCA. Houston, Texas, June 1964.
91. Sableski, J. J. Unpublished data. Perlite expansion furnace.
National Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio.
July 1967.
92. Vincent, E, J. Perlite expanding furnaces. Los Angeles,
California Air Pollution Control District Engineering
Manual. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publication
No. 999-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
93. Spinks, J. Li. Mineral wool furnaces, Los Angeles,
California Air Pollution Control District Engineering
Manual. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publica-
tion No. 99-AP-40. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1967.
94. Anon. Inventory of air contaminant emissions. New York State
Air Pollution Control Board. Albany, N. Y. Nov. 1964.
95. Sableski, J. J. Private communication. National Center for
Air Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1967.
96. Knudsen, J. C. Unpublished data. National Center for Air
Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. July 21, 1966,
97. Mineral and metallurigical emissions. In: Air Pollution.
A. C. Stern, Ed, Academic Press. New York, N.' Y. 1962.
98. Anon. Atmospheric emissions from petroleum refineries - a
guide for measurement and control. USDHEW. Public Health
Service. Publication No. 763. I960.
99. Kenline, P. A. and J. M. Hales. Air Pollution in the kraft
pulping industry. USDHEW. Public Health Service. Publica-
tion No. 999-AP-4. Cincinnati, Ohio. Nov. 1963,
100. Anon. A study of air pollution in the interstate region of Lewis -
ton, Idaho, and Clarkston, Washington. Public Health Service.
Publication No. 999-AP-8, Cincinnati, Ohio. Dec. 1964.
101. Grouse, W. R. and N. F. Flynn. Organic emissions from the
dry cleaning industry. Unpublished Bay Area Air Pollution
Control District report. San Francisco, Calif. 1965.
102. Smith, M. D. Unpublished data. Michigan State Department of
Health, Dry Cleaning Plant Survey. Kent County, Mich. Dec.
31, 1965.
103. Lunche, R. G. et al. Emissions from organic solvent usage in
Los Angeles County. JAPCA. 1:275-283. Feb. 1958.
60
-------
104. Anon. Evaporation loss from fixed-r.oof tanks, American
Petroleum Institute Bulletin 2518. Division of Technical Ser-
vices. New York, N. Y. June 1962.
105. Chass, R, L. et al. Emissions from underground gasoline
storage tanks. JAPCA. 13:524-30. Nov. 1963.
106. Anon. Loading and unloading speeds for gasoline delivery
trucks. American Petroleum Institute Bulletin 1605. Evapora-
tion Loss Committee. New York, N. Y. Oct. 1961.
107. MacKnight, R. A. et al. Emissions of olefins from evaporation
of gasoline and significant factors affecting production of low
olefin gasolines. Unpublished Los Angeles Air Pollution Control
District report. Los Angeles, Calif. Mar. 1959.
108. Anon. Clean Air Quarterly. 8:10, State of California, De-
partment of Health, Bureau of Air Sanitation. Mar. 1964.
109. Anon. Evaporation loss from floating roof tanks. American
Petroleum Institute Bulletin 2517. New York, N, Y. Feb. 1962.
110. Lozano, E, R. , W. W. Melvin, and S. Hockheiser. Air pollu-
tion emissions from jet engines. Presented at 60th Annual
Meeting of APCA. Cleveland, Ohio. June 1967.
111. Lemke, E. E. et al. Air pollution from aircraft in Los Angeles
County. Los-Angeles County Air Pollution Control District.
Los Angeles, Calif. Dec. 1965.
112. Johnson, H. C, and N. E. Flynn. Report on automobile, diesel,
aircraft, and ship emissions in the Bay Area Air Pollution Con-
trol District. Unpublished report. San Francisco, Calif. Jan.
1964.
113. Nolan, M. Air pollution around John F. Kennedy International
Airport, USDHEW. National Center for Air Pollution Control.
Cincinnati, Ohio. Apr. 1966.
114. Chass, R. L. et al. Total air pollution emission in Los Angeles
County. JAPCA. 10:351. Oct. 1960.
115. Rose, A. H. Jr. , et al. Comparison of auto exhaust emissions
from two major cities. JAPCA. 15:8. Aug. 1965,
116. Rose, A, H. Jr. Summary report of vehicle emissions and
their control. USDHEW. Public Health Service. National Cen-
ter for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Oct. 1965.
61
-------
117. McMichael, W. F. and A. H. Rose Jr. A comparison of
automotive emissions in cities at low and high altitudes. APCA
Annual Meeting. Toronto, Canada. June 1965.
118, Anon. Automobile facts and figures. Automobile Manufacturers
Association, Inc. 320 Center Building, Detroit, Mich. 1965.
119. Anon. Automotive air pollution. Second Report of the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare to the United States Congress.
U. S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D. C. 1965.
120. McMichael, W. F. , R. E. Kruse, and D. M. Hill. Performance
of exhaust control devices on 1966 model passenger cars. Na-
tional Center for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio.
Presented at Annual Meeting of APCA. Cleveland, Ohio. June
1967.
121. McKee, H. C. and W. A. McMahon. Automobile exhaust parti-
culate - source and variation. JAPCA, 10:456-62. Aug. 1963.
122. Wohlers, H. G. and G. B. Bell. Literature review of metro-
politan air pollutant concentrations. Stanford Research Institute.
Menlo Park, Calif. Nov. 1956.
123. California Department of Public Health. The dies el vehicle and
its role in air pollution. Report to California Legislature. Dec.
1962.
124. Grouse, W. P. et al. The estimation of air pollution emissions
in a regional air pollution control district. Bay Area Air Pollu-
tion Control District. Presented at 52nd Annual Meeting of
APCA. Los Angeles, Calif. June 1959.
125. Stairmand, C. J. The design and performance of modern gas
cleaning equipment. Journal of the Institute of Fuel. Vol. 29.
1956.
126. Stairmand, C. J. Removal of grit, dust, and fume from exhaust
gases from chemical engineering processes. The Chemical
Engineer, .pp 310-326. Dec. 1965.
62
-------
APPENDICES
A, PARTICULATE CONTROL EQUIPMENT
In the process of conducting an emissions inventory, the collec-
tion efficiency for controlled sources of air pollution must sometimes
be determined. Where possible this information has been included in
the report for the specific source and application of control equipment,
Since this information is not complete, information in this section on
particulate control equipment ca-n be used to determine collection
efficiency in those cases where applicable data are not available.
Table A-l presents collection efficiency data for particulate
control equipment. These data have been based on a standard silica
Table A-l. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY OF PARTICULATE CONTROL EQUIPMENT3
Col lector type
Baffled settling chamber
Simple cyclone
Long-cone cyclone
Multiple cyclone - 12-in.
diameter
Multiple cyclone - 6-in.
diameter
Irrigated long-cone
cyclone
Electrostatic
precipi tator
Irrigated electrostatic
precipitator
Spray tower
Self- induced spray
scrubber
Disintegrator scrubber
Venturi scrubber, 30-in.
pressure drop
Wet impingement scrubber
Baghouse
Efficiency, %
Overall
58.6
65.3
84.2
74.2
93.8
91.0
97.0
99.0
94.5
93.6
98.5
99.5
97-9
99.7
0-5
7.5
12
40
25
63
63
72
97
90
85
93
99
96
99-5
5-10
22
33
79
54
95
93
94.5
99
96
96
98
99-5
98.5
100
10-20
*3
57
92
74
98
96
97
99-5
98
98
99
100
99
100
20-44
80
82
95
95
99-5
98.5
99.5
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
>44
90
91
97
-98
100
100
too
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
References 125 and 126.
-------
dust with a particle density of 2.7 grams per cubic foot and with the
following particle size distribution:
Particle size range,
microns Percent by weight
0-5 20
5-10 10
10-20 15
20-44 20
>44 35
This standard dust is similar to that from coal-fired furnaces.
These are based upon proper design and installation, and thus collec-
tion efficiencies are probably optimistic in terms of actual practice
in some instances.
B. BIBLIOGRAPHY ON METHODOLOGY FOR EMISSION.-INVENTORIES
1. Anon. Procedure for Conducting Comprehensive Air Pollution
Surveys. New York State Department of Health. Bureau of Air
Pollution Control Services. Albany, N. Y. Aug. 1965.
2. Crouse, W. R. et al. The Estimation of Air Pollution Emissions
in a Regional Air Pollution Control District. Bay Area Air Pollu-
tion Control District. San Francisco, Calif. Proceedings, of the
52nd Annual APCA Meeting, Los Angeles, Calif. June 1959.
3. Chass, R. L. Procedures and Techniques used in Inventorying
Air Pollution Sources in Los Angeles County. Los Angeles
County Air Pollution Control District. Presented at the Seminar
on Air Pollution Problems, R. A. Taft Sanitary Engineering
Center. Cincinnati, Ohio. Oct. 1957.
4. Chass, R. L. et al. Total Air Pollution Emissions in Los Ange-
les County. Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District,
Presented at 52nd Annual APCA Meeting, Los Angeles, Calif.
June, 1959.
5. Dammkoehler, A. R. Inventory of Emissions for the City of
Chicago. Chicago Department of Air Pollution Control. Pre-
sented at 58th Annual APCA Meeting. Toronto, Canada. June
1965.
6. Anon. Industrial and Fuel Use Questionnaires. St. Louis Inter-
state Air Pollution Study. National Center for Air Pollution
Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. June 1964.
64
-------
7. Anon. Industrial Process and Commercial Fuel Use Question-
naires - Kanawha Valley Air Pollution Study. National Center
for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1965.
8. Anon. Application for Certificate of Operation. Manufacturing
Inventory. City of Chicago Department of Air Pollution Control.
Chicago, 111.
9. Anon. Confidential Industrial Questionnaire. Mid-Willarnette
Valley Air pollution Authority. Salem, Ore.
10. Ozalins, S. and R. Smith. A Rapid Survey Technique for Esti-
mating Community Air Pollution Emissions. USDHEW. Public
Health Service. Publication No. 999-AP-29. National Center
for Air Pollution Control. Cincinnati, Ohio. Oct. 1966.
11. Grouse, W. R. and N, E, Flynn. Source Inventory IBM System
for Particulate and Gaseous Pollutants. JAPCA. 17:508-11
Aug. 1967.
C. SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR EMISSION INVENTORIES
Fuel Combustion
1. United States Census of Housing, I960, State and Small Areas.
U. S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D. C.
2, United States Bureau of Census.^ Census of Manufacturers, Fuel
and Electric Energy Consumed in Manufacturing Industry. 1963.
3. National Coal Association. Steam-Electric Plant Factors. 1130
Seventeenth Street, N. W. , Washington 6, D. C. (Annual).
4. U. S. Bureau of Mines. Bituminous Coal and Lignite Distribution
and Markets. Mineral Industries Su'rveys. Washington, D. C.
(Annual).
5. U. S. Bureau of Mines. Bulletin 446. Typical Analysis of U, S.
Coals. Bulletin RI 6461. Analysis of Tipple and Delivered Sam-
ple of Coal Collected During the Fiscal Year. Washington, D. C.
(Annual).
6. McGraw Hill Publishing Co. The Keystone Buyers Guide. New
York, N. Y. 1963.
7. Blake, O. C. U. S. Bureau of Mines. Burner Fuel Oils, Min-
eral Industries Surveys. Washington, D. C. (Annual).
8. American Petroleum Institute. Petroleum Facts and Figures.
1271 Avenue of the Americas. New York 20, N. Y. (Annual).
9. Local Fuel Suppliers, Major Fuel Users and Fuel Use Question-
naires are primary sources of information.
-------
Refuse Combustion
1. American Public Works Association. Refuse Collection Practice,
3rd Ed. Public Administration Service. 1313 East Sixtieth
Street, Chicago, 111. 1966.
2. Incinerator Manufacturers and the Incinerator Institute of Ameri-
can Supply Information on Incinerators in an Area.
3. Proceedings of 1966 National Incinerator Conference. New York.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. United Engineering
Center. 345 East 47th Street, New York, N. Y.
4. Local Health and Sanitary authorities, Municipal Permit Systems
and Private Scavenger Companies.
Chemical Process Industry
1. Facts and Figures for the Chemical Process Industries. Chemi-
cal and Engineering News. (September-Annual).
2. Industrial Chemicals by W, L. Faith et al. John Wiley and
Sons. New York, N. Y. 1965.
Metallurgical Industry
1. Metal Statistics - American Metal Market. 525 West 42nd Street,
New York, N. Y. (Annual)
2. Directory of Iron and Steel Works of the United States and Canada,
Thirtieth Ed. American Iron and Steel Institute. 150 East 42nd
Street, New York, N. Y. 1964.
Mineral Products Industry
1. Mineral Facts and Problems. U. S. Bureau of Mines. Washing-
ton, D. C. 1966.
2. McGraw Hill Publishing Co. The Keystone Buyers Guide. New
York, N. Y. 1963.
Petroleum Refinery
1. American Petroleum Institute. Petroleum Facts and Figures.
1271 Avenue of the Americas. New York. N. Y. (Annual)
2. U. S. Chemical and Petroleum Plants. Noyes Development
Corporation, 188 Mill Road, Park Ridge, N. J.
3. U. S. Refineries: Where, Capacities, Types of Processing.
Oil and Gas Journal. (Annual).
66
-------
Pulp and Paper Industry
1. Lock-wood's Directory of the Paper and Allied Trades. Lock-
wood Publishing Company, Inc. 49 West 45th St. , New York,
N. Y. (Annual).
Gasoline Marketing
1. State Tax Reports and Surveys of Bulk Gasoline Terminals can
provide information on gasoline usage.
2. American Petroleum Institute. Petroleum Facts and Figures.
1271 Avenue of the Americas. New York, N, Y. (Annual)
Transportation
1. Automobile Facts and Figures. Automobile Manufacturers
Association. 320 New Center Building. Detroit, Mich. (Annual).
2. Motor Truck Facts. Automobile Manufacturers Association.
320 New Center Building. Detroit, Mich. (Annual).
3. FAA Air Traffic Activity. Federal Aviation Agency, Calendar
Year 1964. Washington, D. C.
4. Local Traffic Control Agencies can provide useful information on
traffic patterns.
U.B. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1944 o—
67
-------
-------
-------
------- |