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

-------

-------

-------

-------