kraft pulping - control of trs emissions from existing millse pa-450/2-78-003b oaqps no. 1.2-091...
TRANSCRIPT
P A P C 333- United States Office of Air Quality EPA-45012-78-003b Environmental Protection Planning and Standards OAQPS NO. 1 2-091 Agency Research Triangle Park NC 2771 1 March 1979
Air
GEPA Kraft Pulping
Control of TRS Emissions from Existing Mills
Guideline Series
E PA-450/2-78-003b OAQPS NO. 1.2-091
Kraft Pulping Control of TRS Emissions from
Existing Mills
Emission Standards and Engineering Division
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Air, Noise, and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 2771 1
March 1979
OAQPS GUIDELINE SERIES
The guidance ser ies of reports i s being issued by the Office of Air Qual i ty Planning and Standards (OAQPS) t o provide information t o s t a t e and local a i r pollution control agencies; f o r example, t o provide guidance on the acquisition and processing of a i r quali ty data and on the planning and analysis requis i te for the maintenance of a i r quali ty. in t h i s se r ies will be available - as supplies permit - from the Library Services Office (MD-35), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or , for a nominal fee, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
Reports published
Pub1 i cation No. EPA-450/2-78-003b (OAQPS N O . 1.2-091)
i i
Background Information and Final Environmental Impact Statement
For Existing Kraft Pulp Mills
Type of Actiop: Administrative
Prepared by:
-- - c 5 - 6 / /
(Date) . .- n-. .-- -A^.-
Emission Staddards and Engineering Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
n Approved by:
MAR 15 1979
(Date 1 Assistant Administrator fo r Air,
Noise, and Radiation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460
Final Statement Submit ted t o E P A ' s Office of Federal Activities fo r Review on
(Date)
T h i s document may be reviewed a t :
Central Docket Section Room 2903B, Waterside Mall 401 M Street Washington, D.C. 20460
Additional copies may be obtained a t :
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Library (MD-35) Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
National Technical Information Service 5285 Por t Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161
i i i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pa qe . 1 . Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 TRS Compounds and Their Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Standards of Performance f o r New Stationary Sources . . . . 1.4 Emission Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Health and Welfare Effects of TRS Compounds
2.1 Introduct’on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Effects on Human Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1 Odor Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Effects on Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Effects on Veqetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 We1 fare Effects o f Atmospheric TRS . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.5.1 Effect on Property Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.2 Effects on Paint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.3 Effects on Metals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.6 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 .
3 . Industry Characterization
3.1 Geographic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Integration and Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 International Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 . Process Descri p t i on
4.1 Kraft P u l p i n g Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Description of Individual Process Fac i l i t i e s . . . . . . .
1-1
1-4
1-5
1-6
2-1
2-3
2-6
2-8
2-9
2-9
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-11
3-1
3-1
3-2
4-1
4-4
iv
Page 5 . Emissions
5.1 Nature of Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Uncontrolled TRS Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Typical TRS Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6 . Control Techniques for TRS from Kraft Pulp Mills
6.1 A1 ternative Control Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 Recovery Furnace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.2 Digesters and Multiple Effect Evaporator Systems . . 6.1.3 Lime Kiln . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.4 Brown Stock Washer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.5 Black Liquor Oxidation System . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.6 Smelt Dissolving Tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.7 Condensate Stripper System . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 Summary of Retrofit Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 Installation and Start-up Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7 . Emission Monitorinq and Compliance Testinq Techniaues and Costs
7.1 Emission Measurement Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.1 Emission Monitorinq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.2 Compliance Testinq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8 . Cost Analysis Of A1 ternative Emission Control Systems
5-1
5-3
5-8
6-1
6-1
6-9
6-11
6-13
6-15
6-17
6-18
6-19
6-23
7-1
7-1
7-2
8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
8.2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-3
8.3 Costs of Affected Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-6 8.4 Incremental Costs for Model Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-21 8.5 Aggregate Costs for Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-32 8.6 Cost Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-35
V
. . .
Paqe . 9 . Environmental Impact o f TRS Con t ro l s
9.1 Ai r P o l l u t i o n Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
9.1.1 Annual Air Emission Reductions . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
9.1.2 Annual Air Emission Inc rease . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3
9.1.3 Atmospheric Dispers ion of TRS Emissions . . . . . . . 9-5
9.1.4 Changes i n So l id and Liquid Wastes . . . . . . . . . 9.1 .5 Enerqy Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10 . Emission Guide l ines f o r E x i s t i n g Kraft Pulp Mills
10.1 General Ra t iona le . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 Evaluation o f Indiv idua l Process F a c i l i t i e s . . . . . . . .
10.2.1 Recovery Furnace System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.2 Diges t e r System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.3 Multiple Effect Evaporator System . . . . . . . . . 10.2.4 Lime K i l n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 .5 Brown Stock Washer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 .6 Black Liquor Oxidation System . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.7 Condensate S t r i p p e r System . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.8 Smelt Disso lv inq Tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.9 Excess Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10 .3 Summary of the Ra t iona le f o r S e l e c t i n a the Best Control System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.4 S e l e c t i o n of the Format of the Emission Guide l ines . . . . 10.5 Monitoring Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix A . Summar.y o f Kraf t Mills i n the United S t a t e s
Appendix B . Data Summary
Appendix C . Dispers ion S t u d i e s Results
9-72
9-12
10-1
10-3
10-3
10-7
10-
lo-! 0
10-1 2
10-13
10-1 3
10-14
10-14
10-17
10-13
10-20
vi
1. INTRODUCTION
1 . 1 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT
This document has been prepared i n accordance with regulations established
under Section l l l ( d ) of the Clean Air Act.
EPA has established procedures whereby s t a t e s submit plans t o control existing
sources of "designated pol 1 utants'l . Designated pol 1 u t a n t s are pol 1 utants
w h i i h are not included on a l i s t published under Section 108(a) (National
Ambient Air Quality Standards) o r 1 1 2 ( b ) ( l ) ( A ) (Hazardous Air Pol lutants) ,
b u t t o which a standard of performance forrew sources applies under Section 111.
Under Section l l l ( d ) , emission standards are t o be adopted by the s t a t e s and
submitted to EPA for approval.
designated p o l l u t a n t s from existing f a c i l i t i e s which, i f new, would be
subject t o the standards of performance fo r new stationary sources.
faci 1 i t i e s a re called "designated fac i l i t i e s " .
Under the regulations,
The standards will l imi t the emissions of
Such
In accordance w i t h Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, standards of
performance (NSPS) fo r eight source categories i n the k r a f t pulp industry
were promulgated on February 23, 1978.
for to ta l reduced su l fur (TRS) and par t iculates .
pollutant.
by which the s t a t e s may develop emission s t anda rds for designated f a c i l i t i e s .
The standards include emission l imi t s
TRS i s a designated
This document is therefore being prepared t o es tabl ish c r i t e r i a
1-1
Subpart B of 40 CFR 60 contains the procedures under which states submit
these plans to control existing sources of designated pollutants.
requires the states to develop plans for the control of designated pollutants
within Federal guidelines. As indicated in Subpart B, EPA will publish
guide1 ines documents for development of state emission standards simultaneous
Subpart B
with promulgation of any new source standard of performance for a designated
pollutant. These guidelines will apply to designated facilities which emit
those designated pollutants and will include useful information for states,
such as discussior, of the pollutant's effects, description of control
techniques and their effectiveness, costs, and potential impacts. Finally,
as guidance for the states, recommended emission limits (emission guidelines)
and times for compliance are set forth and control equipment which will achieve
these emission limits is identified.
After publication of the final guideline document for the pollutant in
question, the States will have nine months to develop and submit plans for
control of that pollutant from designated facilities. Within four months
after the date for submission of plans, the Administrator will approve or
disapprove each plan (or portions thereof).
is disapproved, the Administrator will promulgate a plan (or portion thereof)
within six months after the date for plan submission.
provisions of subpart B are basically patterned after Section 110 of the Act
and 40 CFR Part 51 (concerning adoption and submittal of state implementation
plans under Section 110).
If a state plan (or portion thereof)
These and related
As discussed in the preamble to Subpart B , a distinction is drawn
- between designated pollutants which may cause or contribute to endangerment
of pub1 ic health (referred to as "health-related pollutants") and those for
1-2
which adverse e f fec ts on public health have n o t been demonstrated (referred
t o as "welfare-related pol lutants") . For heal th-related pollutants, emission
standards and compliance times in s t a t e plans must ordinarily be a t l ea s t
as s t r ingent as the corresponding emission guidelines and compliance times
i n EPA's guideline documents.
less s t r ingent requirements for par t icular f a c i l i t i e s or classes of f a c i l i t i e s
As provided i n Subpart B , s t a t e s may apply
when economic factors or physical l imitations make such application s ignif icant ly
more reasonable. Such jus t i f ica t ion may include unreasonable control costs
result ing from plant age, location, process design, o r the physical impossibility
of ins ta l l ing the specified control system.
time i f suf f ic ien t jus t i f ica t ion is proven.
unusual time del ays caused by unavai 1 abi 1 i ty of 1 abor , cl imatologi cal factors ,
scarci ty of s t ra teg ic materials, and large work backlogs for equipment vendors
States may also relax compliance
Such jus t i f ica t ion may include
or construction contractors.
For Welfare-related pollutants, s t a t e s may balance the emission guide-
l ines , times fo r compliance, and other information provided i n a guideline
document against other factors of public concern i n establishing emission
standards, compliance schedules, and variances provided tha t appropriate
consideration is g iven t o the information presented in the guideline document
and c*t public hearing(s) required by Subpart B and tha t a l l other requirements
of Subpart B a re met. Where sources of pollutants t ha t cause only adverse
e f fec ts t o crops a re located i n non-agricultural areas, for example, or
where residents of a comunity depend on .an economically marginal plant
for their livelihood, such factors may be taken into account ( in addition t o
those tha t would j u s t i f y variances i f a heal th-related pollutant was involved).
T h u s , s t a t e s will have substantial fqexibi l i ty t o consider factors other than
technology and costs in establishing plans for the control of welfare-related
pollutants i f they wish. 1-3
P
For reasons discussed i n Chapter 2 of t h i s document, the Administrator
has determined t h a t TRS emissions from kra f t p u l p mil ls may cause or
contribute t o endangerment of the public welfare b u t t h a t adverse e f fec ts on
public health have not been demonstrated. As discussed above, t h i s means
t h a t TRS emissions will be considered a welfare-related pollutant and the
s t a t e s will have greater f l e x i b i l i t y i n establishing p l a n s for the control
of TRS thanwould be the case if public health migh t be affected.
This s t a t e guidelines document br ief ly discusses the e f fec ts of reduced
sulfur compounds on health, and on crops, materials, and animals.
process categories hav ing reduced sulfur emissions are discussed.
greatest emphasis, however, has been placed on the technical and economic
evaluation of control techniques t h a t a r e effect ive i n reducing t o t a l reduced
sulfur emissions, w i t h par t icular emphasis on r e t ro f i t t i ng existing mills.
Section 6.2 proposes several control systems available to the s t a t e s . The
costs of these control systems is analyzed i n Chapter 8 , while Chapter 9
assesses the environmental and energy impact o f these control systems. Finally,
a s guidance fo r the s t a t e s , recommended emission l imitat ions are s e t for th
and control equipment which will achieve these emission 1 imitations i s suggested.
1 . 2 TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR COMPOUNDS AND THEIR CONTROL
E i g h t
The
For purposes of new sorces performance standards (NSPS) and the attendant
requirements of Section l l l ( d ) , " to ta l reduced sulfur ' ' (TRS) is the designated
pollutant t o be controlled.
compounds consisting primarily of hydrogen sulf ide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl
sulf ide, and dimethyl disulf ide. Control of TRS emissions a t k r a f t p u l p mills
i s well demonstrated by proper operation of the combustion sources or incinera-
TRS i n t h i s document refers t o a combination of
tion of the exhaust gases.
1-4
- The l i m i t e d i n f o r m a t i o n c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e on t h e h e a l t h and w e l f a r e
e f f e c t s o f TRS g e n e r a l l y dea ls w i t h hydrogen s u l f i d e ( H z S ) .
e f f e c t s a r e n o t i c e a b l e down t o 20 ppmv, b u t t h i s concen t ra t i on i s much
h ighe r than expected i n t h e ambient a i r as a r e s u l t o f even u n c o n t r o l l e d
TRS emissions from k r a f t p u l p m i l l s . H z S a t concent ra t iomdown t o a few
p a r t s pe r b i l l i o n i s recognized as an odor nuisance.
Adverse h e a l t h
The OSHA occupat iona l
exposure maximum for 'H25 i s 29 ppmv, not t o be.exceeded a t any t ime.
1.3 STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NE14 STATIONARY SOURCES
I n accordance w i t h Sec t ion 111 o f the Clean A i r Act, standards o f
performance f o r e i g h t af fected f a c i l i t i e s o r emission sources i n the k r a f t
p u l p i n g i n d u s t r y have been promulgated (Subpart RB o f 40 CFR P a r t 60). These
sources a re t h e recovery furnace ( b o t h s t r a i g h t k r a f t and cross-recovery
furnaces)*, d i g e s t e r system, mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evapora tor system, li,me k i l n ,
brown s tock washer system, b l a c k 1 i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system, smel t d isso lv inc l
tank, and condensate s t r i p p e r system. I n f o r m a t i o n and emission da ta c o l l e c t e d
d u r i n g development o f t he proposed new source performance standards i n d i c a t e
t h a t b e s t demonstrated c o n t r o l technology can l i m i t t h e TRS emissi\ons t o f i v e
p a r t s pe r m i l l i o n by volume d r y gas bas i s f o r a l l new sources except l i m e
k i l n s and cross-recovery furnaces, which can be l i m i t e d t o 8 ~ p m and 25 ppm,
respec t i ve l y .
Water t rea tment ponds, however, a r e n o t covered by t h e proposed NSPS
because data on ac tua l TRS emissions a r e n o t a v a i l a b l e and accura te sampling
methods f o r de termin ing TRS and o t h e r odorous emissions from t rea tment ponds
a r e n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y developed o r demonstrated. Therefore, water t rea tment
ponds w i l l n o t be covered i n t h i s document.
-7
*NOTE: s t r a i g h t k r a f t recovery furnaces and cross-recovery furnaces, unless o therw ise s p e c i f i e d .
Throughout the document, t h e term "recovery furnaces' ' w i l l imply bo th
1-5
1.4 EMISSION GUIDELINES
1.4.1 Recodended TRS Emission Limitations for the States
Emission guidelines fo r control of TRS emissions t h a t may be achieved
by application of best adequately demonstrated technology t o existing f a c i l i t i e s
a re l i s t e d i n Table 1-1. These emission guidelines a re less s t r ingent i n
some cases t h a n the standards proposed for new sources since the application
of the best adequately demonstrated technology for new sources could resu l t
i n excessive control costs a t existing sources. However, emission guidelines
do require the sawe type of control as judged to be best adequately demonstrated
technology for new sources fo r the three major TRS sources (recovery furnace,
digester system, and mu1 t ip le -ef fec t evaporator system). The ju s t i f i ca t ion
for these emission guidelines a re discussed more completely i n Chapters 8 and 9.
Adoption o f these guidelines would r e su l t i n an overall nationwide TRS
emission reduction of about 82 percent.
1-6
Table 1-1. TRS EMISSION GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
Emission Guidel ines 1 A f fec ted Fact 1 i ty
Recovery Furnace 2
01 d Design Furnaces3 20 PPm
New Design Furnaces4 5 PPm
Cross Recovery Furnaces 25 PPm
D i ges t e r Sys tern
Mu1 t i p l e - E f f e c t Evaporator System
5 PPm
5 PPm
Lime K i l n 20% ppm5
Brown Stock Washer System No Cont ro l
Black L i q u o r Ox ida t ion System No Cont ro l
Condensate S t r i p p e r System 5 PPm
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Tank 0.0084 g/kg BLS
'Guidel ines g iven are i n terms of twelve-hour averages, e.g., from
f w ' d i s c r e t e cont iguous twelve-hour per iods of t i m e ,
20ne percent o f a l l twelve-hour TRS averages pe r q u a r t e r year above
midn igh t t o noon. These are n o t " running" averages, b u t are i ns tead
Lhe spec i f i ed l e v e l , under cond i t i ons o f proper ope ra t i on and maintenance, i n t h e absence of s ta r t -ups , shutdowns and mal funct ions, a re n o t considered t o be excess\emissions.
3Furaaces n o t cons t ruc ted w i t h a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l as an o b j e c t i v e (see d e f i n i t i o n s on pages 6-7 and 10-3).
4Furnaces designed f o r low TRS emissions and hav ing s t a t e d i n t h e i r con t rac ts t h a t they were cons t ruc ted w i t h a i r P o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l as an o b j e c t i v e (see d e f i n i t i o n s on pages 6-7 and 10-3)-
5Tw0 Dercent o f a l l twelve-hour TRS averages per qua r te r year above 20 ppm, under c o n d i t i o n s o f proper ope ra t i on and maintenance, i n the absence o f s ta r t -ups , shutdowns and mal funct ions, are n o t considered t o be excess emissions.
~
1-7
2. HEALTH AND WELFARE EFFECTS OF TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR COMPOUNDS
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In accordance w i t h 40 CFR 60.22(b), promulgated on November 1 7 ,
1975 (40 FR 53340), this chapter presents a summary of the available
information on the potential health and welfare effects of t o t a l
reduced sulfur (TRS) compounds and the rationale for the Administrator's
determination tha t TRS i s a welfare-related pollut7nt fo r purposes of
section l l l ( d ) of the Clean Air Act.
The Administrator f i r s t considers potential health and welfare e f fec ts
of a designated pollutant in connection w i t h the establishment o f
standards of performance for new sources of t ha t p o l l u t a n t under
section l l l ( b ) of the Act.
Administrator mus t find tha t the pollutant i n question "may contribute
s ignif icant ly t o a i r pollution which causes o r contributes t o the
endangerment of public health o r welfare" [see section 111 ( b ) ( l ) ( a ) ] .
Because this finding i s , in e f f ec t , a prerequisite t o the same pollutant
being ident i f ied as a designated pollutant under section l l l ( d ) , a l l
designated pollutants will have been found t o have potential adverse
e f fec ts on public health, public welfare, o r b o t h .
Before such standards may be established, the
2- 1
As discussed in section 1.1 o f t h i s document, Subpart B o f P a r t 60
distinguishes between designated pollutants t ha t may cause o r contribute
t o endangerment of pub1 i c health (referred t o as "heal th-related pollutants")
and those for which adverse e f fec ts on public health have no t been
demonstrated ("welfare-related pollutants").
o f the dis t inct ion i s tha t s t a t e s have more f l e x i b i l i t y i n establishing
plans fo r the control of welfare-related pollutants than is provided for
plans i n v o l v i n g heal th-related pollutants.
In general , the significance
In determining whether a designated pollutant i s health-related or
welfare-related for purposes of section 111 ( d ) , the Administrator
'considers such factors as:
pollutant on public health and welfare; (2) potential ambient concentrations
of the pollutant; (3 ) generation of any secondary pollutants for which
the designated pollutant may be a precursor; (4 ) any synergis t ic e f f ec t
with other pollutants; and (5 ) potential e f fec ts from accumulation i n
the environment (e.g., soi l , water, and food chains).
(1) known and suspected e f fec ts of the
I t should be noted tha t the Administrator's determination of whether
a designated pollutant is heal th-related o r welfare-related f o r purposes
of section l l l ( d ) does not a f f ec t the degree of control represented by
EPA's emission guidelines.
Subpart B , EPA's emission guidelines [ l ike standards of performance for
new sources under section 111 ( b ) ] are based on the degree of control
achievable w i t h the best adequately demonstrated control systems (considering
costs) , ra ther than on d i rec t protection of public health or welfare.
For reasons discussed i n the preamble t o
T h i s
2- 2
is true whether a par t icular designated pollutant has been found t o be
health-related o r welfare-related.
tha t f i n d i n g i s the degree of f l e x i b i l i t y t h a t will be available to the
s t a t e s i n establishing plans f o r control of the pol lutant , as indicated
above.
Thus , the only consequence of
Very l i t t l e information i s available on the e f fec ts of the to ta l
reduced sulfur compounds discharged from k r a f t p u l p m i 11 s on human heal t h ,
animals, vegetation, and materials. Almost a l l the information tha t was
found d u r i n g this investigation deals with only hydrogen sulf ide (H2S).
Essentially no information on the health and welfare ef fec ts of the other
reduced sulfur compounds (methyl mercaptan, dimethyl su l f ide , and dimethyl
disulf ide) emitted from kraf t p u l p mil ls was found. Therefore, this
chap e r discusses the e f fec ts of hydrogen su l f ide on y.
sulf de i s the predominant TRS compound emitted by kraf t pulp mills.
2.2
However, hydrogen
EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS O N HUMAN HEALTH’
A t suf f ic ien t ly high concentrations, hydrogen sulf ide i s very toxic
to humans. I t generally enters the human body through the respiratory
t r a c t , from which i t is carried by the blood stream t o various body organs.
Hydrogen sulf ide tha t enters the blood can lead t o blocking of oxygen
t ransfer , especially a t h i g h concentrations.
sulf ide acts as a cel l and enzyme poison and can cause i r revers ib le changes
i n nerve t i s sue .
I n general, the hydrogen
Some of the e f fec ts of hydrogen su l f ide and the a i r concentrations a t
which they occur a re shown i n Table 2-1. A t h i g h concentrations
Table 2-1 EFFECTS OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE INHALATION ON HUMANS
Hydrogen Sulfide Concentration, pg/m (ppm) Effects
1-45 (7.2 x - 3.2 x lo-’) Odor threshold. No reported injury t o health
I O (7.2 Threshold of ref lex e f fec t on eye sens i t iv i ty t o l i g h t
150 (0.10) Smell s l i gh t ly perceptible
500 (0.40)
15,000 (10.0)
30,000 (20.0)
30,000-60,000 (20.0-40.0)
75D,OOO (1 10)
270,000-480,000 (200-350)
640,000-1,120,000 (460-810)
900,000 (650)
1,160,000-1,370,000 (840-990)
1,500,000+ (1 1 OO+)
Smell def ini te ly perceptible
M i n i m u m concentration causing eye i r r i t a t i o n
Maximum a1 lowable occupational exposure fo r 8 hours (ACGIH To1 erance L i m i t )
Strongly perceptible b u t n o t in- tolerable smell. Minimum con- centration causing lung i r r i t a t i o n
Olfactory fatigue i n 2-15 minutes; i r r i t a t i on of eyes and respira- tory t r a c t a f t e r 1 hour; death i n 8 t o 48 hrs
No serious damage f o r 1 hour b u t intense local i r r i t a t i o n ; eye i r r i t a t i o n in 6 t o 8 minutes
Dangerous concentration a f t e r 30 minutes or less
Fatal in 30 minutes
Rapid unconsciousness, respiration a r r e s t , and death, possibly w i t h o u t odor sensation
Immediate unconsciousness and rapid death
2- 4
3 (over 1,000,000 pg/m ), hydrogen s u l f i d e can cause death q u i c k l y by
p a r a l y s i s o f t h e r e s p i r a t o r y center .
q u i c k l y t o uncontaminated a i r and r e s p i r a t i o n i s i n i t i a t e d be fore h e a r t
a c t i o n stops, r a p i d recovery can be expected.
(30,000 t o 500,000 pg/m ), hydrogen s u l f i d e causes c o n j u n c t i v i t i s , lachrymal
sec re t i on , r e s p i r a t o r y t r a c t i r r i t a t i o n , pulmonary edema, damage t o the
h e a r t muscle, psychic changes , d is tu rbed equi 1 i brium, nerve p a r a l y s i s , spasms, unconsciousness, and c i r c u l a t o r y co l lapse. Some common symptoms
are m e t a l l i c tas te , f a t i g u e , d ia r rhea, b l u r r e d v i s i o n , i n tense aching o f
the eyes, insomnia, and v e r t i g o .
However, i f the v i c t i m i s moved
A t lower concent ra t ions
3
The Occupational Safe ty and Hea l th Admin i s t ra t i on (OSHA) has es tab l i shed
a maximum a l lowab le exposure concent ra t ion ( n o t t o be exceeded a t any t ime) 3 f o r hydrogen s u l f i d e o f 30,000 pg/m I n comparison, OSHA has
s e t a maximum a l l owab le exposure concent ra t ion f o r methyl mercaptans o f
(20 ppm).
on l y 15,000 ug/m’ (10 ppm).
Concentrat ions
t o be r e a l i z e d near
o f ambient hydrogen
pe r iod i n 1961 and
3 o f TRS as h i g h as 30,003 pg/m
e x i s t i n g k r a f t pu lp m i l l s .
s u l f i d e concent ra t ion were made du r ing a six-month
962 i n the Lewiston, Idaho, area where the major
(20 ppm) a r? n o t l i k e l y
For example, measurements
c o n t r i b u t o r o f gaseous p o l l u t a n t s was a pu lp m i l l which had o n l y the recovery
furnace c o n t r o l l e d f o r TRS emissions. The l e v e l s o f hydrogen s u l f i d e were
p o l l u t i o n episode i n November
were measured. These l e v e l s
onal exposure concent ra t ion
3 genera l l y l e s s than 15 pg/m . Dur ing an a i r
1961 , peak 2-hour concent ra t ions o f 77 pg/m’
a re w e l l below the maximum a l lowab le occupat
es tab 1 i s hed by OSHA.
2- 5
For the purpose o f eva lua t i ng the a i r po l 1 u t i o n impacts associated
w i t h a l t e r n a t i v e emission l i m i t s (see Chapter 9), d ispe rs ion s tud ies were
performed by EPA on model k r a f t pu lp m i l l s .
t h a t the maximum ground- level ambient concent ra t ion o f hydrogen s u l f i d e
r e s u l t i n g from an u n c o n t r o l l e d 1 arge s i zed (907 megagrams/day) k r a f t p u l p
m i l l would be about 10,300 pg/m (one-hour average).
though much h ighe r than a c t u a l l y measured a t the e x i s t i n g m i l l mentioned
above, i s s t i l l lower than the minimum exposure concent ra t ion t h a t causes
eye i r r i t a t i o n .
These s tud ies i n d i c a t e d
3 Th is l e v e l , even
2.2.1 Odor Percept ion
The odor c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f k r a f t m i l l s i s p r i n c i p a l l y due t o the
presence o f a m i x t u r e o f hydrogen s u l f i d e , methyl mercaptan, d imethy l
s u l f i d e , and d imethy l d i s u l f i d e .
and are de tec tab le a t concent ra t ions as low as 1 p a r t p e r b i l l i o n (ppb).
However, t h e odor percept ion thresholds o f these gases vary cons iderab ly
These s u l f i d e s are ext remely odorous
among i n d i v i d u a l s and apparent ly depend on the age and sex o f t he
i n d i v i d u a l s , the s i z e o f the town where they l i v e , and whether they
smoke.
1 and 45 pg/m
concent ra t ion increases.
The repo r ted odor t hres ho l d o f hydrogen su l f i d e v a r i e s between
3 (see Table 2-2). The odor becomes more i n tense as the
A t very h igh concent ra t ions (H2S above 320,000
pg/m’), the smel l i s n o t as pungent, probably due t o p a r a l y s i s o f t he
o l f a c t o r y nerves.
there i s l i t t l e sensat ion o f odor and death can occur r a p i d l y .
t h i s d u l l i n g o f t h e sense o f smel l c o n s t i t u t e s a major danger t o persons
3
Therefore,
A t hydrogen s u l f i d e concent ra t ions over 1,120,000 pg/m ,
- p o t e n t i a l l y exposed t o h igh concent ra t ions o f hydrogen su l f i de . The
repor ted odor thresholds f o r mettiyl mercaptan, d imethy l s u l f i d e , and
dimethyl d i s u l f i d e a r e shown i n Table 2-3.
2-6
Table 2-2
ODOR DETECTION THRESHOLD FOR HYDROGEN SULFIDE
(PPmv) 3
i yg/m
PPm
9-45
7.1a
.71 b
15
6.8‘
12-30
1nm3
(.007-.032)
(. 005)
(.0005)
(.017)
t.005)
( . oog-. 022)
0.0021
0.0010
0.0056
Hydrogen s u l f i d e f rom sodium s u l f i d e . a
bHydrogen s u l f i d e gas.
‘Mean va lue r a t i o o f h i g h e s t t o l owes t odor t h r e s h o l d c o n c e n t r a t i o n de tec ted by a l l observers i n success ive t e s t s i s 3.18.
4.5
2.9
23.7
Table 2-3. ODOR THRESHOLDS OF REDUCED SULGUR COMPOUNDS OTHER THAN HYDROGEN SULFIDE 9
9 Compound
Methyl Mercaptan-CH3SH
Dimethyl Sul f i d e - ( CH3)2S
D i me t h y 1 D i su 1 f i de- (CH3 2S2 1 I
2- 7
A t t he ambient ground- level concent ra t ions l i k e l y t o occur near an
u n c o n t r o l l e d k r a f t pu lp m i l l , as determined by EPA d i spe rs ion est imates,
odors would d e f i n i t e l y be p e r c e p t i b l e .
t y p i c a l c o n t r o l s (see Chapter 5 ) would l i k e l y have an odor l e v e l t h a t i s
s l i g h t l y p e r c e p t i b l e .
A k r a f t pu lp m i l l t h a t operates
Most s tud ies d e a l i n g w i t h h e a l t h e f f e c t s o f k r a f t p u l p m i l l odors a re
i nconc lus i ve .
k r a f t p u l p m i l l a re annoyed by t h e odor, and t h a t shor t - te rm e f f e c t s
(vomi t ing , headaches, shortness of b rea th , d i zz iness ) occur i n some
i n d i v i d u a l s a f t e r prolonged exposure.
The s tud ies show t h a t popu la t ions i n the area o f an uncon t ro l l ed
These e f f e c t s have been repo r ted t o
be o f a psychosomatic n a t ~ r e ; ~ however, t he evidence i n t h i s reaard i s n o t
conc lus ive.6 Studies i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e sense o f smel l becomes r a p i d l y
f a t i g u e d i n the presence o f H2S a t l e v e l s above the odor t h ~ e s h o l d . ~ Th is
o l f a c t o r y fa t i gue prevents the odor f rom beina perce ived over the lona
term. &en perception o f t h e odor becomes weaker o r disappears, t he e f f e c t s
o f t he odor a l s o cease. 8
2.3 EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS ON ANIMALS’
Hydrogen s u l f i d e produces about t h e same h e a l t h e f f e c t s i n domestic
animals as i n man, a t approx imate ly t h e same a i r concent ra t ions .
A i r P o l l u t i o n Cont ro l Assoc ia t i on Committee on Ambient A i r Standards s ta ted
t h a t spontaneous i n j u r y t o animals occurs a t 150,000 t o 450,009 ug/m o f
The
3
hydrogen s u l f i d e , These concent ra t ions are, however, much h igher than are
expected t o r e s u l t f rom e x i s t i n g k r a f t p u l p m i l l opera t ion .
2 -8
2.4 EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS ON VEGETATION”
There i s l i t t l e evidence t h a t hydroqen s u l f i d e causes s i a n i f i c a n t
i n j u r y t o f i e l d crops a t environmental a i r c o n d i t i o n s .
Experiments have i n d i c a t e d t h a t l i t t l e o r no i n j u r y occurred t o 29 3 species of p l a n t s when they were fumigated w i t h l e s s than 60,000 pq/m o f
hydrogen s u l f i d e f o r f i v e hours. A f t e r f i v e hours a t 600,000 pq/m3, some
species were i n j u r e d , b u t n o t a l l .
and coleus showed apprec iab le i n j u r y a t concen t ra t i ons o f 600,000 pa/m . A t concent ra t ions between 60,000 and 600,000 pq/m , q l a d i o l u s , rose,
Boston Fern, apple, che r ry , peach
3
3
c a s t o r bean, sunf lower, and buckwheat showed moderate i n - j u rv . Tobacco,
cucumber, s a l v i a , and tomato were s l i a h t l y more s e n s i t i v e .
I n general , hydrogen s u l f i d e i n j u r e s t h e vounaest p l a n t leaves r a t h e r
Youna, r a p i d l v e lonaa t ina t i s s u e s a r e than t h e middle-aged o r o l d e r ones.
t h e most seve re l y i n j u r e d . Typ ica l e x t e r i o r s.ymptoms a r e w i l t i n a w i t h o u t
t y p i c a l d i s c o l o r a t i o n (which s t a r t s a t t h e t i p o f t h e l e a f ) . The scorch ina
o f t.he younqest leaves of t h e p l a n t occurs f i r s t .
2.5 WELFARE EFFECTS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRS
2.5.1 E f f e c t on P roper t y Values 11,12
S o c i o l o g i c a l l y , such noxious odors can r u i n personal and community p r i d e ,
i n t e r f e r e w i t h human r e l a t i o n s i n va r ious ways, discourage c a p i t a l improvements,
lower socioeconomic s t a t u s , and damage a community’s r e p u t a t i o n . Economical ly,
they can s t i f l e , growth and development o f a community.
l a b o r p r e f e r t o l o c a t e i n a d e s i r a b l e area i n which t o l i v e , work, and p lay ;
Both i n d u s t r v and
and t h e n a t u r a l tendency i s t o avo id communities w i t h obvious odor Droblems.
T o u r i s t s a l s o shun such areas.
revenues, p a y r o l l s , and sa les can be d i s a s t r o u s t o a community.
The r e s u l t i n a d e c l i n e i n p r o p e r t y values, t a x
2 -9
I n summary, the presence o f odors may reduce the va lue o f p roper t y
w i t h i n t h e af fected area, dependinq upon the ex ten t t o which t h e odors a re
considered ob jec t i onab le t o the buyer and s e l l e r o f t h e p roper t y .
2.5.2 E f f e c t s on Pa in t 13
Hydrogen s u l f i d e i n the atmosphere r e a c t s w i t h p a i n t c o n t a i n i n a heavy
metal s a l t s i n the pigment and t h e d r i e r t o form a p r e c i p i t a t e which darkens
o r d i s c o l o r s t h e sur face. Lead, mercury, c o b a l t , i r o n , and t i n s a l t s cause
a gray o r b lack d f s c o l o r a t i o n ; cadmium s a l t s cause a ye l lowish-oranae
d i s c o l o r a t i o n . Damage t o house p a i n t caused by hydrogen s u l f i d e emissions
from a k r a f t pu lp m i l l has been repo r ted i n the communities o f Lewiston,
Idaho, and Clarkston, Washington. 14
Lead i s p robab ly t h e most common metal t o e x h i b i t d i s c o l o r a t i o n
caused by t h e fo rmat ion o f b lack l ead s u l f i d e s . The most comnonlv used
wh i te piqment i n t h e pas t was bas i c l ead carbonate.
pigments have now a e n e r a l l y rep laced the use o f l ead carbonate i n t h e p a i n t
i n d u s t r y .
coa t ings because o f t h e added d u r a b i l i t y they impar t t o p a i n t f i l m s .
T i tan ium d i o x i d e
However, l ead pigments cont inue t o be used i n the area o f road
Experiments have shown t h a t o l d lead-base p a i n t s a r e more suscep t ib le
These experiments have a l s o t o hydrogen s u l f i d e damage than a r e new ones.
shown t h a t darkening i s dependent on d u r a t i o n o f exposure and concent ra t ion ,
and can occur a f t e r exposure t o hydrogen s u l f i d e concent ra t ions as low as
75 pg/m f o r two hours.
by hydrogen s u l f i d e depends on:
pera ture and mois ture; ( 3 ) hydrogen s u l f i d e concent ra t ion ; ( 4 ) aae and
c o n d i t i o n o f p a i n t ; and ( 5 ) presence o f o the r contaminants i n t h e a i r .
3 These experiments i n d i c a t e t h a t p a i n t darkenina
(1 ) heavy metal con ten t o f p a i n t ; ( 2 ) tem-
2-1 0
15 2.5.3 E f f e c t s on Metals
Copper and s i l v e r can t a r n i s h r a p i d l y i n t h e presence o f hydroqen
s u l f i d e .
t ime r e s i s t s a t t a c k by hydrogen s u l f i d e . Experiments have i n d i c a t e d t h a t
hydrogen s u l f i d e - s e n s i t i v e metals, such as s i l v e r and copper, w i l l t a r n i s h
when exposed t o hydrogen s u l f i d e concen t ra t i ons above 4 pq/m f o r 40 hours
However, copper t h a t has been exposed t o unpo l l u ted a i r f o r some
3
a t room temperature.
t o occur.
Both mo is tu re and oxygen must be present f o r t a r n i s h i n g
The s u l f i d e c o a t i n g formed on copper and s i l v e r e l e c t r i c a l
con tac ts can inc rease r e s i s t a n c e when t h e con tac ts a r e c losed. I n some
cases, t h i s can r e s u l t i n t h e con tac ts becomina welded shut .
Some a l l o y s of gold, even such a h iah -ca ra t a l l o y as 69 percent ao ld ,
25 percent s i l v e r and 6 pe rcen t p la t inum, w i l l t a r n i s h when exposed t o
hydrogen s u l f i d e . However, a o l d (14-cara t and above) and ao ld l e a f
(95 percent g o l d and above) u s u a l l y w i l l n o t t a r n i s h apprec iab l y f rom
exposure t o atmospheric hydroqen su l f i d e .
Hydrogen s u l f i d e w i l l a t t a c k z i n c a t room temperature. A z i n c s u l f i d e
A t h i q h temperatures, t h e f i l m i s formed which prevents f u r t h e r co r ros ion .
a t t a c k i s q u i t e v igorous.
and a t ambient temperatures, hydrogen s u l f i d e i s n o t c o r r o s i v e t o f e r r o u s
metals.
A t concen t ra t i ons no rma l l y found i n t h e atmosphere
2.6 RATIONALE
Based upon t h e i n f o r m a t i o n prov ided i n t h e preced inq sec t i ons o f Chapter 2 ,
i s i t c l e a r t h a t TRS emissions from k r a f t p u l p m i l l s have no s i a n i f i c a n t
e f f e c t on human hea l th . TRS emissions, however, a r e h i q h l y odorous and
s tud ies show t h a t t h e popu la t i on i n t h e area o f an e x i s t i n a k r a f t p u l p m i l l
2-1 1
i s annoyed by t h e odor. Hydrogen s u l f i d e a l so has e f f e c t s on p a i n t s and
metals a t concent ra t ions t h a t can occur i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f e x i s t i n a k r a f t
p u l p m i l l s .
p u l p m i l l s do n o t c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e endangerment o f p u b l i c hea l th . Thus,
TRS emissions w i 11 be considered a we1 fa re - re1 a ted po l 1 u t a n t f o r purposes
o f Sec t ion 111 (d ) and Subpart B o f P a r t 60.
The Admin i s t ra to r has concluded t h a t TRS emissions from k r a f t
2-1 2
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2
1 . I Preliminary Air Pollution Survey of Hydrogen Sulf ide, A Literature
Review. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. October 1969.
pp 2-4; 29-32.
2. Op Ci ty Reference 1. Table 1.
3. Adams, D. F . , and F. A. Young. Kraft Odor Detection and Objectionability
Thresholds. Washington Sta te University Progress Report on U . S. Public
Health Service Grant. 1965.
4. Leonardos, G . , e t a l . Odor Threshold Determinations of 53 Odorant
Chemicals.
Association. S t . Paul , Minnesota. June 1968.
Presented a t 61st Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control
5 . Pavanello, R . , and D. Rondia. “Odor Nuisance and P u b l i c Health, Part 2 ” .
Water Waste Treatment. June 1971.
6.
I1 1 inois I n s t i t u t e f o r Environmental Quality. PB-233-843. March 1974.
Hydrogen Sul f ide Heal t h Effects and Recommended Air Qual i t y Standard.
7. Sullivan, R . J . Preliminary Air Pollution Survey of Odorous Compounds.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Raleigh, North Carolina.
APTD 69-42. October 1969. pp 8-9.
8. Op C i t , Reference 6. pp 17-22.
9. Op Cit , Reference 1 . pp 6-7.
10. Op Ci ty Reference 1. p 12.
11 . Op Cit , Reference 7 . pp 1-2.
12 . A Study of the Social and Economic Impact of Odors. Copley International
Corporation. EPA Contract No. 68-02-0095. February 1973.
2-1 3
I
z
I
13. Op C i t , Reference 1 . pp 16-19.
14. “A Study of Air Pollution in the In te rs ta te Region of Lewiston, Idaho,
and Clarkston, Washington”. Pub1 i c Health Service Publication 999-AP-8.
1964.
15. Op Cit, Reference 1 . pp 19-20.
2-1 4
3. INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION
3.1 Geographic Distribution
As of December 1975, there were 56 firms operating about 120
kraft pulping mills in 28 states.
and mill capacity is found in the South. Alabama, Georgia, and
Louisiana are the leaders. Alabama has 13 mills and 10 percent
of U.S. mill capacity. Georgia has 11 mills and 13 percent of U.S.
mill capacity. And Louisiana has 11 mills and 11 percent of U.S.
capacity.
industry has occurred mainly in the South.'
modific'ations to existing mills as well as plans for new mills are found in
all sections of the country.
Most U.S. kraft pulping mills
Over the past 20 years, growth in the kraft pulping
However, recent and planned
2
3 .2 Integration and Concentration
Only about 1/3 of the 56 firms are producers of pulp, paper,
and/or paperboard exclusively.
variety of activities. The activities include chemical manufacture,
detergent production, magazine publishing, land development, and can
production.
The others are engaged in a wide
The degree of dependency on kraft pulping and related
activities varies anong these horizontally integrated firms.
International Paper Company derived 55.6 percent of their 1974
sales from pulp, paper, and paperboard production,Ethyl Corporation
derived 11 percent of 1974 sales from pulp and paper operations.
Whereas
Besides being horizontally integrated, the U.S. kraft pulping
industry is highly concentrated. The 6 largest firms in terms of mill
Capacity account for 40 percent of U.S. kraft pulp capacity.
10 largest account for 56 percent of U.S. kraft pulp capacity.
The
3-1
Vertical integration is another characteristic of the U.S. kraft
Only 41 U.S. kraft pulping mills are listed in the pulping industry.
directory o f world market pulp producers.
grade listed is bleached
wood.
The most prevalent kraft
hardwood followed closely by bleached soft-
Moreover, appearance in the directory does not mean the mills'
pulp cannot be used captively.
produced at the designated mills. However, nearly all kraft pulp
(about I30 percent) produced in the U.S. is not marketed but is used
~aptively.~ In fact, 109 kraft pulping mills also have facilities at
When available, pulp for market is
the same location for producing paper and paperboard.
mills cannot always satisfy the kraft pulping requirements of the
paper and paperboard facilities.
from other U.S. and Canadian mills are required to fill the kraft
pulping voids.
3.3 International Inf 1 uence
However, these
Oftentimes, intracompany transfers
The U.S. kraft pulping industry is not devoid o f foreign influence.
Pulp, paper, and paperboard production in other countries, especially
Canada, has a pronounced influence on U.S. kraft pulping firms and
trade balances.
kraft pulp and the fourth leading exporter (behind Canada, Sweden,
and Finland), the U.S. has been a net importer of kraft pulp.
90 percent of the kraft pulp imported to the U.S. comes from Canada.
This is not surprising in view o f the earlier statement about intra-
company transfers and the fact that a third of the U.S. kraft pulp
producers have kraft pulping facilities in Canada.
Although the U.S. is the world's largest producer of
Over
-
The aforementioned industry characterization statements were
derived primarily from Appendix A and Tables 3-1 and 3-2. Appendix A displays
3-2
Table 3-1. SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS: FIRMS-MILL NUMBER AND CAPACITY DISTRIBUTION
Capacity U.S. Mills
Megagram Tons % of U.S. - Firm # U.S. Mills % U.S . Total Per Day Per Day Total
Allied Paper, Inc. (sub. of SCM)
A1 ton Box Board Co. American Can Co. Appl eton Papers , Inc.
(Div. o f NCR) Boise Cascade Corp. Bowa ter , Inc.
1 1 445 (490) <1
1 1 590 (650) <1 2 2 1,125 (1,240) 1 1 1 163 (180) negligible
5 4 3,438 (3,790) 4 2 2 1,360 (1,500) 1
Brown Co. 1 1 635 (700) <1 Champion-International 3 3 2,430 (2,680) 3 Chesapeake Corp. o f Va. 1 1 1,043 (1,150) 1
Container Corp. of Amer. 2 2 2,040 (2,250) 2
Continental Can Co. 4 3 3,355 (3,700) 4 Crown Zel 1 erbach 5.5 5 3,824 (4,216) 4
Consolidated Papers, Inc. 1 1 358 (395) neglibible
(sub. of Marcor)
Diamond Int'l Corp. 1 1 385 (425) negligible Federal Paper Board Co., Inc.
1 1 1,088 (1,200) 1
Fibreboard Corp. 1 1 408 (450) negligible Georgia-Pacific Corp. 4 3 5,007 (5,520) 5 Gilman Paper Co. 1 1 998 (1,100) 1
Great Northern Nekoosa 3 3 2,276 (2,510) 2
Green Bay Packaging, Inc. 1 1 590 (6501 <1 Gulf States Paper Corp. 2 2 794 (875) <1 Hammermill Paper Co. 2 2 777 (856) <1 Hoerner Mal dorf Corp. 2 2 1,950 (2,150) 2
P.H. Glatfelter Co. 1 1 454 (500) negligible
Corp.
Hudson Paper Co. ITT Rayonier, Inc.
1 861 (950) <1 1 1,133 (1,250) 1
Inland Container Corp. 1.5 1 1,100 (1,213) 1
3-3
Table 3-1 (Continued). SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS: FIRMS-MILL NUMBER AND CAPACITY DISTRIBUTION
Capacity U.S. Mills
Megaqram Tons % of U.S. Firm # U.S. Mills % U.S. Total Per Day Per Day Total -
International Paper Co. Interstate Container Corp. Kemberly-Clark Corp. Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co. (Div. of Premoid)
Longview Fibre Co. Louisiana Pacific Corp. MacMi 11 an B1 oedel Ltd. Mead Corp. Mosinee Paper Corp. Olin Kraft, Inc. Owens-Ill inois, Inc. Oxford Paper
(Div. Ethyl Corp.) Packaging Corp. of Amer. (A Tenneco Co.)
Penntech Papers, Inc. Pineville Kraft Corp. Potlatch Corp. Procter & Gamble Co. St. Joe Paper Co. St. Regis Paper Co. Scott Paper Co. Simpson Lee Paper Co. Southland Paper Mills, Inc. Southwest Forest Industries South Carolina Industries (79% owned by Stone Con- tainer Corp. )
(sub. o f Time, Inc.) Temple-Eastex, Inc.
Union Camp Corp. Western Kraft Westvaco Corp. Weyerhauser Co.
Totals 56
14 1 1 1
1 1 1 4 1 1 2 1
1
1 1 2 1 1 4 3.5 1.5 2 1 1
1
3 3 4 7
119
-
12 1 1 1
1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1
1
1 1 2 1 1 3 3 1 2 1 1
1
3 3 3 6
3-4
14,500 500 530 2 90
1,723 635 840
2,837 160
1,043 1,610 530
703
163 800
1,225 81 6
1,180 4,880 2,450 690 81 6 545 61 2
1,180
4,517 1,243 3,858 5,620
95,750
(15,985) 14 (550) <1 (585) <1 (320) <1
(775) <1
negligible <1 1
<1 1 5 3
<1 <1 <1 <1
(1,300) 1
( 4 , 980 1 (1,370) 1 (4,254) 5
5
(6,195) 6 - (105,567)
Table 3-2. SUMMARY INDUSTRY STATISTICS: STATES-MILL NUMBER AND CAPACITY DISTRIBUTION
State
A1 abama Arizona Arkansas California Florida Georgia Idaho Kentucky Louisiana Maine Mary1 and Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Montana New Hamps hi re New York North Carol ina Ohio 0 kl a homa Oregon Pennsyl van i a South Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia Washington Wisconsin
Totals 28
Number o f Mills
13 1 6 4 8
11 1 2
11 6 1 2 2 4 1 1 1 5 1 1 7 3 4 2
% of U.S. Total
1 1 1 5 3 7 9 1 2 9 5 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 6 3 3 2
6 5 4 3 7 6 4 3 - -
119
State Mill Capacity
Megagram Tons % o f U.S. Per Day Per Day Total
9,325 545
4,925 1,732 8 , 400 12,250
860 835
10,570 3 , 583 603 7 50 785
4,270 1,090 635 535
5,125 490
1,450 5,357 780
4 , 983 1,156 4,145 4,127 5,310 1,140 - 95 , 750 (1 05,567)
3-5
kraft mill characteristics. Table 3-1 exhibits mill number and
capacity distribution by firm. Table 3-2 exhibits mill number and
capacity distribution by state.
3-6
k
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3
1. Gu th r ie , John A . An Economic A n a l y s i s o f t h e Pu lp and Paper I n d u s t r y .
I Pullman, Washington, Washington S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1972, pp. 1-15.
2. Van Derveer, Paul D. P r o f i l e s o f t h e Nor th American Pu lp and Paper
I n d u s t r y , Pu lp & Paper. June 30, 1975. pp. 32-33; 36-38; 43-44;
48-49.
3. Wood Pu lp S t a t i s t i c s 36 th E d i t i o n .
American Paper I n s t i t u t e , Inc., October 1972. pp. 63-83.
Pu lp & Raw M a t e r i a l s Group, New York,
3-7
4. PROCESS D E S C R I P T I O N
Manufacturing of paper and paper products is a complex process which is
carried out in two distinct phases:
of the paper.
a material suitable for use in paper, paperboard, and building materials.
the pulping of the wood and the manufacture
Pulping is the conversion of fibrous raw material, wood, into
are
te ,
The fibrous material ready to be made into paper i s called pulp. There
four major chemical pulping techniques: (1) kraft or sulfate, (2) sulf
( 3 ) semichemical, and (4) soda. . .
Of the two phases involved in paper-making, the pulping process is
O f the four major pulping techniques, largest'source o f air pollution.
the
the
kraft or sulfate process produces over 80 percent of the chemical pulp produced
annually in the United States.
4.1 KRAFT PULPING PROCESS
1
Pulp wood can be considered to have two basic components, cellulose and
lignin. The fibers of cellulose, which comprise the pulp, are bound together
in the wood by the lignin. To render cellulose usable for paper manufacture,
any chemical pulping process must first remove the lignin.
The kraft process for producing pulp from wood is shown in Figure 4-1.
In the process, wood chips are cooked (digested) at an elevated temperature and
pressure in "white liquor", which is a water solution of sodium sulfide (NaZS) and
4-1
T No nc o nd e rl s ab 1 es Verli Gases I- Condensate
Weak Black L iquo 1\
Vent Gases Exhaust Gas
ILIQUOR EFFECT I 1 OX I D A T I O N EVAPORATOR I SYSTEM
RECOVEPY FURNACE SYSTEM
I
I I I -----
STACK i I
I Vent Gases
I\ ( Na$03+Na2S) Vent’ Gases
SMEl .T ter---) I D I SSOLVIFIG I TANK
I I
Green L iquo r
Y I
TO t reatment p o n d j
Exha ‘c s t Gases
Fuel I
CAUSTI C I ZI NG ‘L ~~~~~r - i TANK _. i < d i m w
Calcium carbonate mud
( r e c y c l e t o d i g e s t e r )
F igure 4-1. KRAFT PULPING PROCESS
4 -2
sodium hydroxide (NaOH).
the wood.
liquor and washed with water.
The white liquor chemically dissolves lignin from
The remaining cellulose (pulp) is filtered from the spent cooking
Usually, the pulp then proceeds through
various intermittent stages of washing and possibly bleaching, after which
it i s pressed and dried into the finished product (paper).
The balance of the process is designed t o recover the cooking chemicals
and heat. Spent cooking liquor and the pulp wash water are combined to
form a weak black liquor which is concentrated in a multiple-effect evaporator
system to about 55 percent solids.
to 65 percent solids in a direct-contact evaporator, which evaporates water
The black liquor can then be further concentrated
by bringing the liquor in contact with the flue gases from a recovery furnace, or
in an indirect-contact evaporator. The strong black liquor is then fired in
a recovery furnace.
provides heat for generating process steam and converting sodium sulfate (Na2S04)
to Na2S. To make up for chemicals lost in the operating cycle, salt cake (sodium
sulfate) is usually added to the concentrated black liquor before it is sprayed
into the furnace.
a molten smelt at the bottom of the furnace.
Combustion of the organics dissolved in the black liquor
Inorganic chemicals present in the black liquor collect as
The smelt, consisting of sodium carbonate (Fla2C03) and sodium sulfide,
is dissolved in water to form green liquor which is transferred to a
causticizing tank where quicklime (CaO) is added to convert the sodium
carbonate to sodium hydroxide. Formation of the sodium hydroxide completes
the regeneration of white liquor, which is returned to the digester system.
A calcium carbonate mud precipitates from the causticizing tank and is
calcined in a lime kiln to regenerate quicklime.
4-3
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF LNDIVIDUAL PROCESS FACILITIES
4.2.1 Digester System
Mood chips are cooked w i t h Bmfte liquor a t aEiout 170 t o 175°C; and a t 5 pressures ranging from 6.9 t o 9 . 3 x 10 pascals (100 t o 135 psiq). Gases
formed dur ing digest ton are vented t o "re1 ieve" the digester and main ta in
proper cookinq pressure.
and recover turpentine before venting.
the heat and may be used i n some other process.
system:
digester system, the contents of the digester are transferred t o an atmospheric
tank.uusua1ly referred t o as a blow tank.
cooking liquor containing the dissolved l i g n i n i s drained and the pulp i s
transferred to the in i t i a l stage of washing.
from the blow t a n k are piped t o a heat recovery u n i t .
is not applicable t o continuous digester systems.
done i n batch digesters, a1 t h o u g h increasing numbers of continuous diqesters
are being employed i n the industry.
4.2.2 Brown Stock Washer System
A t some mtlls the gases are f i r s t cooled t o condense
The condenser cooling water recovers
There are two types of digester
batch and continuous. A t the end of the cooking cycle i n a ba tch
Here the major po r t ion of the spent
Steam and other qases t h a t flash
This blow o f the diuester
Most kraft pulping i s presently
Pulp from the digester system normally passes through the knotter which
removes chunks o f wood not digested d u r i n g cooking. The p u l p then i s washed
countercurrently w i t h water in several sequential staqes. On leaving each
stage, the pulp is dewatered on a vacuum f i l t e r , and the water drains i n t o
f i l t r a t e tanks. The washers are normally boded t o collect the vapors that
steam off the open washers.
4.2.3 Multfple-Effect Evaporator System
- Spent cooking liquor from the digester system is combined w i t h the 6rom
stock washer discharge to form weak (dilute] 61 ack 1 iquor. Mu1 t i p 1 e-effect
4-4
evaporators a r e u t i l i zed t o concentrate the weak black l iquor from an i n i t i a l
1 2 t o 18 percent so l tds t o a f i n a l level o f 40 t o 55 percent sol ids .
five or s i x evaporation units (effects] make u p the system.
consists of a vapor head and a heatina element.
head o f a previous e f f ec t pass t o the heating element of the followinq e f f ec t .
The e f fec ts a re operated a t successively lower pressures, which causes a
decrease i n the boiling p o i n t of the l i q u o r .
a re condensed rapidly enough to maintain a h i g h vacuum.
condensers a re used: d i r ec t contact condensers and surface condensers. Each
type of condenser i s equipped w i t h a steam e jec tor t o remove noncondensables.
4.2.4 Recovery Furnace System
Usually,
Each e f f ec t
Hot vapors from the vapor
Vapors a f t e r the f inal e f f ec t
Two types of barometric
The purposes of b u r n i n g concentrated black l iquor i n the kraf t recovery
furnace are:
( c ) t o dispose of unwanted dissolved wood components i n the l iquor.
instances, l iquor of 60 to 65 percent sol ids content will b u r n i n a s e l f -
supporting combustion.
(a ) t o recover sodium and su l fu r , (6) t o produce steam, and
In most
The recovery furnace theoret ical ly i s divided into three sections: the
The black l iauor i s drying zone, the reducing zone, and the oxidizing zone.
introduced t o the furnace th rough spray guns located i n the drying zone.
heat i n the furnace i s suf f ic ien t t o evaporate the remaininq water from the
l iquor . The dried sol ids f a l l t o the hearth t o form the char bed.
The
Combustion of the black l iquor char begins on the hearth o f the furnace.
Air for combustion i s supplied by a forced-draft system t o the reducing and
o x i d i z i n g zone of the furnace.
convert sodium su l fa te and other sodium-base sulfur compounds to sodium
Since a reducinq atmosphere i s required t o
4-5
sulfide, only a portion o f the air required for complete combustion is supplied
to the char bed through the lower or primary air ports. The heat released by
the combustion in the zone is sufficient to liquefy the chemicals in the char
and to sustain the endothermic reduction. The liquefied chemical, or molten
smelt, is continuously drained from the furnace hearth.
Air is admitted through secondary and tertiary air ports above the primary
zone to complete the combustion of the volatile gases from the char in the furnace.
There are two main types of recovery furnace systems. The first type
employs a direct-contact evaporator to provide the final stage of evaporation
for the black liquor.
direct contact with the furnace's exhaust gases.
a conventional or direct-contact system. A conventional system is shown in
This is accomplished by bringing the black liquor in
This furnace type is called
Figure 4-2. The second type of recovery furnace system employs an indirect-
contact evaporator as the final evaporation stage; this type is called a
noncontact direct-fired, or "low odor" system. A noncontact system is shown
in Figure 4-3. The majority of the furnace systems in operation are the conventional
type 9
In addition, so-called cross-recovery is practiced at several mills. This
practice is where the waste liquor from neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC)
cooking is combined with the black liquor from the kraft mill prior to burning.
The inorganic content of the NSSC liquor will join the bulk of inorganics
and occur in the smelt from the furnace, substituting for the sodium sulfate
normally added in the kraft recovery cycle to cover losses of chemicals.
4-6
e--+ I I
I - - - ln
w w I
I I e-$%
I I - - - -
1 V ta
I--
m
I
-1 1. IC
4 -7
*I-- X 0
L
r w > S 0 V v
0 0
I I - - - - - - . . - - - I
. I I
f I
I I 4 ?Je
h v)
I
1
2 aJ > 0 u aJ pi
m I d
4-8
4.2.5 Smelt Dissolving Tank
The smelt dissolver is a large tank located below the recovery furnace
hearth.
on the floor of the furnace is dissolved in water to form green liquor in the
tank.
or liquid shatterjet system to break up the smelt stream before it enters the
Molten smelt (sodium carbonate and sodium sulfide) that accumulates
The tank is equipped with an agitator to assist dissolution, and a steam
solution. Contact of the molten smelt with the water causes the evolution of
large volumes of steam, which must be vented.
The sodium carbonate (Na2C03) in the green liquor is converted to sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) in the causticizing tank.
(cao) to the liquor.
with Na2C03; calcium carbonate precipitates out and is converted back into quicklime
in a lime kiln.
This is done by adding quicklime
The quicklime forms sodium hydroxide, Ca(OH)2, which reacts
4.2.6 Lime Kiln
The lime kiln is an essential element of the closed-loop system that
converts green liquor (solution of sodium carbonate and sodium sulfide) to white
liquor. The kiln calcines the lime mud (calcium carbonate which precipitates
from the causticizer) to produce calcium oxide (quicklime, CaO). The quicklime is
wetted (slaked) by the water in the green liquor solution to form calcium hydroxide,
Ca(OH)2, for the causticizing reaction.
The kraft pulp industry typically uses large rotary kilns that are capable
of producing 36 to 360 megagrams (40 to 400 tons) of quicklime per day.
mud is fed in at the elevated end as a 55 to 60 percent solid-water slurry.
mud is contacted by hot gases produced by the combustion o f natural gas or fuel oil
and proceeding through the kiln in the opposite direction. Large motors turn the
entire kiln at low speeds (1-2 rpm), causing the lime to proceed downward thrGugh
Lime
The
4-9
the kiln toward the high-temperature zone (980 to 1090OC; 1800 to 2000°F)
to discharge at the lower end.
upper section, which may be equipped with chains or baffles to give the wet mud
Setter contact with the gases.
agglomerates into small pellets and finally is calcined to calcium oxide
in the high-temperature zone near the burner.
As the mud moves along, it dries in the
As the lime mud moves down farther, it
Fluidized bed calciners are presently being used at four kraft pulp mills,
but the production rate of each kiln at this time is under 136 megagrams (150 tons)
of lime per day.
4.2.7 Black Liquor Oxidation System
Black liquor oxidation is the practice of oxidizing the sodium sulfide in
either weak or strong black liquor to sodium thiosulfate or possibly higher
oxidation states.
from the direct contact evaporator by producing a negligible sodium sulfide
concentration in the black liquor.
air is most often used.
air at two mills.
have been used in singular or multiple stages to provide intimate contact
between the liquor and air.
air at two mills.
between the liquor and air.
4.2.8
Black liquor oxidation is designed to decrease the emissions
In those mills which oxidize black liquor, However, molecular oxygen has been used instead of
Sparging reactors, packed towers, and bubble tray columns
Sparging reactors, packed towers, and bubble tray columns
When digester and multiple-effect evaporator off-gases are condensed,
some TRS gases are partially dissolved in the condensate. To prevent the
release of kraft odor from the water treatment ponds, the TRS compounds can
be stripped from the digester and multiple-effect evaporator condensates
prior to being discharged to the ponds.
are air stripping and steam stripping.
(multiple tray) columns with U large countercurrent flow of air or steam.
The two principal ways of stripping
Stripping can be performed in multistage
4-10
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
1. Atmospheric Emissions from the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Industry,
tPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973, page 5.
Technical Bulletin No. 69, February 1974).
(Also published by NCASI as
4-1 1
F
5. EMISSIONS
5.1 NATURE OF EMISSIONS
The characteristic kraft mill odor i s caused princioally bv a variable
mixture of hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide , and dimethyl
disulfide. All of these gases contain sulfur, which i s a necessary component
of the kraft cooking liquor.
Hydrogen sulfide emissions originate from the breakdown of sodium sulfide,
which i s a component of the kraft cooking liquor. Methyl mercaptan and
dimethyl sulfide are formed in reactions w i t h the wood component lignin.
Dimethyl disulfide i s formed through the o x i d a t i o n of mercaptan groups derived
from the thiolignins.
5.1 . 1 Hydrogen Sul fide
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) i s a weak acidic aas which Dartiallv ionizes i n
The ionization proceeds in two staaes w i t h the formation aqueous solution.
o f hydrosulfide a n d , w i t h increasing pH, sulfide ions
H2S HS- + H+ S= + 2H+ (5-1 1 increasing n H -+
Black liouor contains a hiah concentration o f dissolved sodium sulfide
in strongly alkaline solution.
would hydrolyze t o sodium hydrosulfide. Below oH 8, appreciable unionized
hydrogen sulfide would form as the reaction equilibrium i n equation‘ 5.-1 moves
from r i g h t to l e f t .
If the pH were depressed, the sodium sulfide
I t i s reported t h a t a t a pH of a b o u t 8 .0 , most hydrogen
5-1
sulf ide forms hydrosulfide ions.
there i s very l i t t l e dissolved hydrogen sulf ide i n the l iquor.
Consequently, i n normal black 1 iauor conditions, 1
Due t o the equilibrium between the hydrosulffde ion and water vapor,
hydroaen sulf ide gas can be stripped from black l iquor a t steam vents.
could be, therefore, a s ign i f icant concentration of H2S i n the evaporator
areas of the kraf t mill.
There
Hydrogen sulf ide is formed i n the recovery furnace and lime k i l n as the
sulfur-containing compounds from the black l iouor or lime mud are volat i l ized
and reduced. Hydrogen su l f ide generally represents the 1 araest aaseous emission
from the kraf t process.
5. J .2 Methyl Mercaptan
Methyl mercaptan (MeSH) is a reduced sulfur compound which i s formed
d u r i n g the kraf t cook by the reaction of hydrosulfide ion and the methoxy-lignin
component of the wood: 2
Lign in - OCH3 + HS- + MeSH + Lignin - 0- (5-2)
Methyl mercaptan will a lso dissociate i n an aqueous solution to methyl mercaptide
ion. I t is reported t h a t t h i s dissociation i s essent ia l ly complete above a
pH of 1 ~ 0 , ~ Methyl mercaptan i s , therefore, present i n low concentrations as
a dissolved gas i n the black l iquor. As the pH decreases, MeSH qas i s evolved.
Methyl mercaptan i s primarily emitted from the digester r e l i e f and blow
where i t i s formed, and from the brown stock washers where the pH o f the l iauor
drops below the equilibrium point.
concentration i n the l iquor diminishes.
5.1.3 Dimethyl S u l f i d e
Emissions decrease as the residual 4
Dimethyl Sulfide (MeSMe) i s primarily formed through the reaction o f methyl 2 mercaptide ion w i t h the methoxy-lignin component of the wood:
5 -2
L ign in - OCH3 + MeS--+ L ign in - 0- + MeSMe
Dimethyl s u l f i d e may a lso be formed by the d ispropor t ionat ion o f methyl mercaptan.
A t normal l i q u o r temperature (150-2OO'IF) i t i s h i g h l y v o l a t i l e . It does not, how-
ever, d issoc iate as hydrogen sulf. ide and methyl mercaptan do.
5.1.4 Dimethyl D i s u l f i d e
Dimethyl d i s u l f i d e (MeSSMe) i s formed by the ox ida t i on o f methyl mercaptan
throuqhout the recovery system, espec ia l l v i n ox ida t i on towers:
4 MeSH + 02 2 2 MeSSFle + 2 H20 (5-4)
Dimethyl d i s u l f i d e has a hiqher b o i l i n g p o i n t than any o f the other compounds
and i t s r e t e n t i o n i n the l i q u o r i s therefore greater.
5.2 UNCONTROLLED TOTAL REDUCED SULFUR EMISSIONS
Uncontrol led t o t a l reduced s u l f u r (TRS) emissions are l i s t e d i n Table 5-1
f o r each o f the TRS sources under considerat ion. These emission ra tes are f o r
a 907 megagrams per day (1000 tons pe r day) k r a f t pu lp m i l 1.
a l so l i s t s t y p i c a l gas volume r a t e s f o r each source.
5.2.1 Recovery Furnace System
Table 5-1
TRS emissions are generated both i n the furnace and i n t h e d i rect -contact
evaporator.
hundred p a r t s pe r m i l l i o n (ppm) and as low as 1 ppm depending on the furnace
design and operation.
q u a n t i t y and d i s t r i b u t i o n o f combustion a i r , r a t e o f s o l i d s (concentrated black
l i q u o r ) feed, spray pa t te rn and d rpp le t s i ze o f the l i q u o r fed, turbulence i n
the ox idat ion zone, smelt bed disturbance, and the combination o f s u l f i d i t y
and heat content value o f the l i q u o r fed. The impact o f these var iables on
TRS emissions i s independent o f the absence o r presence o f a d i rect -contact
evaporator.
The furnace-generated TRS concentrat ion i s as h iah as several
Recovery furnace emissions are a f fec ted by the r e l a t i v e
TRS emissions generated i n the d i rect -contact evaporator depend l a r g e l y
on the concentrat ion o f sodium s u l f i d e i n the black l i q u o r . Ac id ic gases such
5-3
as carbon dioxide i n the f lue gas can change the black liquor equilibrium,
result ing i n the release of increased quant i t ies of hydrogen sulf ide and methyl
mercaptan.
Wcuh'trolled TRS emissions from a conventional recovery furngce system
range ftwr 0.75 t o 31 grants per kilogram (1 .5 t o 62 pounds per ton) o f a i r
dried p u l p and average about 7.5 grams per kilogram (15 pounds per ton) of a i r
dried p u l p (ADP) .6 T h i s i s an averaae of about 550 ppm.
5.2.2 Digester System
The noncondensable gases from the relief system and the blow tank vent
contain TRS concenttations as high as 30,000 ~ p m . ~ Both streams a re sometimes
referred t o as digester "noncondensables".
are mainly methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide.
TRS compounds formed i n the diqester
Uncontrolled
TRS emissions f r o m a digester system range between 0.24 and 5.25 g/kq ADP
(0.47 and 10.5 lb/ton ADP) and average about 0.75 g/kg ADP (1.5 lb/ton ADP)
a t a concentration o f 9,500 ppm.' Operating variables tha t a f fec t diqester
TRS emissions include the black l iquor recycle r a t e , cook, duration, cooking
liquor su l f id i ty (percentage of sodium sulfide t o to ta l a l k a l i , Na2S and NaOH,
i n white 1 iquor) , and residual a1 kal i level . 5.2.3 Mu1 tiple-Effect Evaporator System
The noncondensable gases from a mu1 tiple-effect evaporator (MEE) system
consist of a i r drawn i n th rough system leaks and reduced sulfur compounds t h a t
were either i n the di lute black l iquor o r formed d u r i n g the evaporation process.
TRS emissions from the MEE system are as h i g h as 44,000 ppm.8 Uncontrolled
TRS emissions from a MEE system average about 0.5 g/ka ADP (1 .O l b / T ADP) a t
a concentration o f 670C ppm. -
8
The type of condenser used can influence the concentration of TRS emissions.
Certain types of condensers (e. g. direct-contact) allow the noncondensabl e aases
and the condensate t o m i x , which resu l t s i n a limited quantity of hydroqen
5 -4
Table 5-1. TRS EMISSIONS FROM AN UNCONTROLLED 907 GRAMS PER DAY (1000 TONS PER DAY) KRAFT PULP MILL(^)
Typ ica l
F1 ow Rate Exhaust Gas TRS Emission Ranqe Average(2) TRS Emission Rate
Source m3/s (acfm) ppm g/ka ADP ( l b / T ADP) ppm q / s ( l b / h r ) g/kq ADP(lb/T ADP)
Recovery Furnace
Digester System
Mu 1 t i p l e- E f f e c t Evaporator Sys tem
Lime K i l n m
Brown Stock Washer System
Black L iquor Oxidat ion System
Smel t D isso lv ing Tank
Condensate S t r i p p e r System
212(450,000)
3(6,200)
1(2,200)
37 (79,200)
71 (1 50,000)
14( 30,000)
27 (58,100)
2 (4,000)
18-1 303 0.75-31 (1.5-62)
1525-30,000 0.24-5.3 (0.47-1 0.5)
92-44,000 0.01 5-3.2(0.03-6.3)
3-61 3 0.01 -2 .1 (0.02-4.2)
- 0.005-0.5 (0.01 -0.9)
3-335 0.005-0.37( 0.01 -0.73)
5-81 1 0.007-1 .9( 0.01 3-3.70)
- -
550
9,500
6,700
170
30
35
60
5000
7.5( 15 . O )
0.75t1.5)
0.5(1 . O )
0.4(0.8)
0.15( 0.3)
0.05(0.1)
0.1 (0.2)
1.0(2.0)
--
( 1 )Uncontro l led emission data f o r condensate s t r i p p e r s were obtained from Reference 13. were obtained from Reference 5. (*)Average values l i s t e d are ca l cu la ted from data l i s t e d i n P.eference 5 . Reference 5 t o evaluate the opera t ion o f t h e u n i t s f o r which data were repor ted.
Data f o r a l l o ther sources
I n s u f f i c i e n t in fo rmat ion was a v a i l a b l e i n
s u l f i d e and methyl mercaptan gases d i sso l ved i n the water. Th i s reduces the
TRS concen t ra t i on f rom t h e system, b u t increases the s u l f i d e l e v e l i n the
condensate.
t he TRS concen t ra t i on f rom the mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporators .
l e v e l s r e s u l t i n h ighe r TRS emissions. TRS l e v e l s increase w i t h decreasing pH l e v e l s .
5.2.4 Lime K i l n
S u l f i d i t y and pH o f t he weak b lack l i q u o r a l s o have an e f f e c t on
Higher s u l f i d i t y
TRS emissions can be generated i n t h e l ime k i l n p roper and i n t h e downstream
scrubber which i s normal ly i n s t a l l e d t o c o n t r o l p a r t i c u l a t e emissions.
TRS emissions o r i g i n a t i n g i n the l ime k i l n a re a f f e c t e d by the oxygen
conten t o f t he exhaust, t he k i l n l e n g t h t o diameter r a t i o , t h e l i m e mud s u l f i d e
cont.int, cold-end e x i t gas temperature, and simultaneous burn ing o f s u l f u r
bear ing m a t e r i a l s conta ined i n the l i m e mud (e.g., green l i q u o r dregs, t h e
i m p u r i t i e s r e s u l t i n g f rom c l a r i f y i n g t h e green l i q u o r ) . 9
If diges te r and evaporator condensates are used as l ime k i l n scrubber water,
reduced s u l f u r compounds can be s t r i p p e d i n t o the e x i s t gas stream. If the
scrubbing l i q u o r conta ins sodium s u l f i d e , as i t does i n Some i n s t a l l a t i o n s ,
H2S may be re leased i n t h e scrubber as a r e s u l t o f t h e e q u i l i b r i u m s h i f t
caused by the absorp t ion o f C02 i n the l i q u o r . Uncon t ro l l ed TRS emissions from a l i m e k i l n average about 0.4 g/kg ADP
(0.8 l b / T ADP) a t a concen t ra t i on of 170 ppm. TRS emissions from l i m e k i l n s
range between 3 and 600 ppm (0.02 t o 4.2 lb /T ADP) depending on combustion
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the i n d i v i d u a l k i l n s .
5.2.5 Brown Stock Washer System
10
TRS emissions from the brown s tock washers a r i s e p r i m a r i l y f rom t h e
v a p r i z a t i o n o f t he v o l a t i l e reduced s u l f u r compounds. TRS compounds emi t ted
are p r i n c i p a l l y d imethy l s u l f i d e and d imethy l d i s u l f i d e .
5 -6
Uncontrol led TRS emissions from the brown stock washer system average
about 0.14 g/kg ADP (0.27 lb /T ADP) a t a concentrat ion o f 30 ppm.
0.05 g/kg ADP (5-37 ppm) are emit ted from the hood vent and about 0.08 g/kg ADP
(240-600 ppm) are emi t ted from the f i l t r a t e tank (under) vent.
About
11
Brown stock washer TRS emissions are a f fec ted by the wash water source,
water temperature, degree o f a g i t a t i o n and turbulence i n f i l t r a t e tank, and
blow tank pulp consistency.” TRS emissions w i l l increase s i g n i f i c a n t l y i f
contaminanted condensate from the d igester and evaporator systems are used f o r
washing.
the TRS dur ing the washing.
5.2.6 Black L iquor Oxidat ion System
the reduced s u l f u r compounds from the black l i q u o r by a i r passing through the
l i q u o r . Uncontrol led TRS emissions ( p r i n c i p a l l y dimethyl s u l f i d e and dimethyl
d i s u l f i d e ) are i n the range o f 0.005 t o 0.37 g/kg ADP (about 3 t o 335 ppm)
and average 0.05 g/kg ADP (35 ppm).” Oxidat ion systems t h a t use only molecular
oxygen have the advantage o f e m i t t i n g v i r t u a l l y no off-gases because the
t o t a l gas stream re,acts i n the sparge system.
Higher temperatures and a g i t a t i o n r e s u l t i n increased s t r i p p i n g o f
TRS emissions from the ox ida t ion system are created by the s t r i p p i n g o f
Primary fac to rs a f f e c t i n g TRS emissions from black l i q u o r ox ida t ion
systems are the i n l e t s u l f i d e content, the temperature o f the black l i q u o r ,
residence time, and the a i r f l o w r a t e per u n i t volume. TRS emissions tend t o
increase f o r h igher l i q u o r temperatures and greater a i r f low ra tes because of
greater v o l a t i l i t y o f the gases and s t r i p p i n g ac t ion o f the a i r , respect ive ly .
TRS emissions a l s o tend t o increase w i t h increas ing s u l f i d e concentrat ions i n
the incoming b lack l i q u o r and w i t h i n c r e a s h g residence time.
5.2.7 Smelt Dissolv ing Tank
Because of the presence o f a small percentage o f reduced s u l f u r compounds
i n the smelt, some o f these odorous mater ia ls escape the tank w i t h the f lashed
5 -7
steam.
as low as non-detectable.
Uncon t ro l l ed TRS emissions are as h igh as 2.0 g/kg ADP (871 ppm) and 13 The average i s about 0.1 g/kg ADP (60 ppm) .
Several f a c t o r s a f f e c t t h e TRS emissions. Among these a re t h e water
used i n the smel t tank, tu rbu lence o f t h e d i s s o l v i n g water , scrubbing l i q u o r
used i n t h e p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l device, pH o f scrubbing l i q u o r , and s u l f i d e
conten t o f t h e p a r t i c u l a t e c o l l e c t e d i n the c o n t r o l device.”
contaminated condensate i n the smel t tank o r t he scrubber can r e s u l t i n the
The use of
s t r i p p i n g o f TRS compounds i n t o t h e gas stream. Turbulence can increase t h e
s t r i p p i n g a c t i o n . Incr2ased H2S fo rmat ion can occur w i t h a inc rease i n s u l f i d e
conten t o f t h e scrubbing l i q u i d and a decrease i n pH o f t h e scrubbing l i q u o r .
5.2.8 Condensate S t r i p p i n g System
Presen t l y t h e r e a re o n l y f i v e condensate s t r i p p e r s i n ope ra t i on i n t h e
U.S. k r a f t p u l p i n d u s t r y . Actual TRS emission data a r e unava i lab le , b u t TRS
emissions from condensate s t r i p p e r s a r e expected t o be h i g h because t h e condensate
conta ins h igh concent ra t ions o f d i sso l ved TRS compounds.14 The s t r i p p i n g
e f f i c i e n c y i s g rea te r than 95 percent.14 Uncon t ro l l ed TRS emissions a re
est imated t o be about 1 g/kg ADP (5000 ppm) f rom a condensate s t r i p p i n g system. 15
5.3 TYPICAL TRS EMISSIONS
Typ ica l con t ro l l ec i TRS emissions a r e l i s t e d i n Table 5.2 f o r each o f t he
sources under cons idera t ion . These values represent average TRS emissions
from e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s , based on t h e i n f o r m a t i o n l i s t e d i n Appendix A.
Appendix A l i s t s emission r a t e s f o r f i v e sources ( recovery furnaces, l i m e k i l n s ,
d iges ters , mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporators, and brown s tock washers) a t each k r a f t
pu lp m i l l i n t h e Un i ted Sta tes .
the l i t e r a t u r e , s t a t e p o l l u t i o n c o n t r u l agencies, and t h e k r a f t p u l p m i l l s .
I n fo rma t ion i n Appendix A was ob ta ined f rom
Emission r a t e s f o r u n c o n t r o l l ed sources a re average u n c o n t r o l l e d values (See
sec t i on 5.2) f o r t he i n d u s t r y , except where ac tua l l e v e l s a r e known. Con t ro l l ed
5 -8
Table 5-2. TRS EMISSIONS FROM THE EXISTING KRAFT PULP INDUSTRY
Average Uncontvc l e d Level Percent Capacity Typical CBntrol l e d Level Average National Emissions
ppm ( lb /T ADP) " m r a m s g/kg ADP g/kg ADP g l kg AD
Source PPm ( l b /T ALP) Cont ro l led(1) PPm ( l b /T ADP)
Recovery Furnace
Digester System
Mu1 t i p l e - E f f e c t Evaporator Sys tem
Lime K i l n
Brown Stock & Washer System
Black L iquor
m
Oxidat ion System
Smelt D isso lv ing Tank
Condensate S t r i ppe r System
550
9500
6800
170
30
35
60
5000
7.5 (15.0)
0.75 (1.5)
(1 -0)
(0 -8)
( 0 . 3 )
0.5
0.4
0.15
0.05 (0.1)
(0.2)
(2.0)
0.1
1 .o
88.7
58.4
58.6
28.2
2.8
2.1
100
5-70
5
5
5-40
5
0-1 0
-
5
0.075-1.05 (0.1 5-2.1 )
0.01 (0.02)
(0.02) 0.01
0.01 25-0.1 (0.025-0.2)
0.01 (0.02)
0.0-0.01 (0.0-0.02)
-
0.01 (0.02)
92
4050
2920
130
30
35
60
500
1.25 (2.5)
0.32 (0.64)
0.22 (0.43)
0.31 (0.62)
0.15 (0.3)
0.05 (0.1)
(0.2)
(0.22)
0.1
0.11
39 , 000
10,000
6,700
9,700
4,420
1,470
2,940
0.4
( l )Percentage based on m i l l s c o n t r o l l e d by e x i s t i n g s t a t e regu la t ions , p lus in fo rmat ion co l l ec ted dur ing previous surveys.
levels l i s t ed are the actual levels where these were known; otherwise the
applicable s t a t e standard i s l i s t e d .
Table 5.2 a lso gives an estimate of the percentage of f a c i l i t i e s presently
controlled, and the TRS level t o which they a re most frequently controlled.
These estimates on the percent of f a c i l i t i e s controlled are based on exis t ing
or soon t o be adopted s t a t e regulations. The estimates a l so include information
obtained from various surveys of the industry on controlled f a c i l i t i e s which
a re not presently covered by s t a t e regulations.
I n most cases the typical emissions from existing f a c i l i t i e s a r e equal
t o o r near the uncontrolled levels .
emissions from the brown stock washers, smelt dissolving tanks, lime k i l n s ,
and black l iquor oxidation system.
t o some extent by a large percentage o f the industry.
emissions f r o m these sources a re discussed i n the following sections.
A few mills presently control TRS
The other TRS sources have been controlled
The typical TRS
5.3.1 Recovery Furnace System
TRS emissions from d i r ec t contact systems depend on the design and operation
o f the recovery furnace and, i f u t i l i z e d , an oxidation system. A survey of
32 recovery furnace systems where black l iquor oxidation i s not used shows TRS
emissions ranging from 35 t o 1300 ppm, regresentlng 0.75 t o 31 g/kg ADP (1.5 t o
62 lb /T ADP).
units tha t u t i l i z e black l iquor oxidation indicates a broad TRS emission range
o f 0.1 t o 13.0 g/kg ADP (0.2 t o 25.9 lb/T ADP), w i t h an average value of 3.7
g/kg ADP (170 ppm).16 TRS emissions from non-contact systems a re usually
confined t o a narrow range o f about 0.015 t o 0.15 g/kg ADP (1 t o 11 ppm) .
The average is 7.7 g/kg ADP (15.4 1 b/T ADP). A survey of 17
- Based on Appendix A, i t is estimated tha t TRS emissions from about 89
percent of the exis t ing furnaces a re e i the r controlled by black l iquor oxidation
5-1 0
or have been replaced w i t h or converted t o a non-contact system.
It i s a l so estimated t h a t the average na t iona l emission l e v e l i s 1.25 g/kg ADP
(92 PPmv).
5.3.2 Digester and Mu1 t i p l e - E f f e c t Evaporator Systems
The d iges ter and mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporators w i 11 be considered together
because t h e i r emissions are normally combined f o r treatment. U n t i l recent ly ,
the noncondensable gases were i n most cases vented t o the atmosphere uncontrol led.
However, several m i l l s now inc ine ra te the gases t o con t ro l odors. Most CmOn1Y,
the gases are burned i n the l ime k i l n .
reduce TRS emissions t o l ess than 5 ppm (0.0075 g/kg ADP).
t h i t approximately 58 percent o f the m i l l s are i n c i n e r a t i n g these gases o r a re
i n s t a l l i n g systems t o i nc ine ra te these noncondensables. White l i q u o r ( caus t i c )
scrubbers are used a t a few m i l l s . These scrubbers are on ly e f f e c t i v e in
removing hydrogen s u l f i d e and methyl mercaptan. TRS emissions from these
scrubbers a r e estimated t o be aboht 0.5 g/kg ADP (1 lb /T ADP).
Based on EPA tests,17 i n c i n e r a t i o n can
It i s est imated
Based on Appendix A, t he average na t i ona l emission r a t e from d iges te r
systems i s ca lcu la ted t o be 0.32 g/kg ADP (0.64 lb /T ADP). The average
na t iona l emission r a t e from mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporators i s ca lcu la ted t o be
0.22 g/kg ADP (0.43 lb /T ADP).
c o n t r o l l e d t o 5 ppm and 42 percent being uncontrol led.
5.3.3 Lime K i l n
These values are based upon 58 percent being
TRS emissions from a l ime k i l n i n s t a l l a t i o n are dependent on the operat ion
o f the k i l n , the mud washing e f f i c i e n c y , and the type o f water used i n the
scrubber. Only about 28 percent (See Appendix A) o f the k i l n s a re a c t u a l l y
operated t o con t ro l TRS emissions. This percentage i s most ly based on k i l n s
affected by e x i s t i n g s t a t e o r l o c a l regu la t ions . Based on t h i s percentage o f
5-1 1
controlled kilns, the calculated average national emission ra te fo r lime kilns
is 0.31 g/kg ADP (130 ppm).
5.3.4 Condensate S t r i p p i n g System
All the condensate s t r ippers i n operation are controlled fo r TRS emissions.
Incineration i s the control technique used a t four mills. The TRS emissions
from these sources are estimated t o be 5 ppm as mentioned i n section 5.3.2.
A caustic scrubber is ut i l ized a t the remaining one mill, b u t no data i s
available on the TRS emissions.
The average national emission r a t e i s estimated t o be 0.11 g/kg ADP
(0.22 lb/T ADP). T h i s is based on 5 ppm TRS being achieved a t 4 mills and
50 percent control a t the mill t ha t uses a caust ic scrubber.
5.3.5 Brown Stock Washer Systems, Black Liquor Oxidation Systems, and Sinel t Dissolving Tanks
These three sources are generally no t controlled for TRS emissions.
However, two U.S. mills incinerate the vent gases from the brown stock washer
systems. Two other U.S.mills use molecular oxygen i n their black l iquor
oxidation system, which results i n no vent gases and no TRS emissions.
mill i s controlling TRS emissions from the brown stock washers by a chlorine
!&e
scrubber. One other mill is controlling TRS emissions from their brown stock
washers and black l iquor oxidation system by a chlorine gas injection system.
5-12
- REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5
1 .
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12-.
13.
Shih , T . T . , H r u t f i o r d , B . F . , Sarkanen, K , V . , and Johanson, L . N . ,
Hydrogen S u l f i d e Vapor-Liquid E q u i l i b r i u m i n Aqueous Systems As a
Function of Temperature and pH, TAPPI, 50(12) , 630-4, 1967.
McKean, W . R . , H r u t f i o r d , B . F., Sarkanen, K . V . , Kinetic Analys is o f
Odor Formation i n the Kra f t Pulping P rocess , TAPPI, 48 (12) , 699-703, 1965.
Sh ih , T . > T . , H r u t f i o r d , B . F . , Sarkanen, K. V . , Johonson, L . N . ,
Methyl Mercaptan Vapor-Liquid Equi l ibr ium i n Aqueous Systems As a
Function of Temperature and pH, TAPPI, 50 (12) , 634-8, 1967.
Control o f Atmospheric Emissions i n the Wood Pulping Ifidustry, Environ-
mental Engineering Inc . , and J . E . S i r r i n e Company, Final Report , EPA
Con t rac t No. CPA-22-69-18, March 15 , 1970.
Atmospheric Emissions from the P u l p and Paper Manufacturing I n d u s t r y ,
EPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973.
Bu l l e h i n No. 69, February 1974).
Reference 5 , Table 14.
Reference 5 , Table 3.
Reference 5 , Table 7.
Buggested Procedures f o r the Conduct o f Lime K i l n S t u d i e s t o Define
Emissions o f Reduced S u l f u r Through Control o f K i l n and Scrubber Opera t ing
V a r i a b l e s , NCASI Spec ia l Report No. 70-71 , January 1971.
Reference 5. Table A-5.
Fac to r s Affecting Emission o f Odorous Reduced S u l f u r Compounds from
Miscellaneous Kra f t Process Sources , NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 60,
March 1972.
Reference 5 , Table 21.
Reference 5.
(Also pub1 i s h e d by NCASI a s Technical
5-1 3
14. Butryn, 6 . L . and Ayers, K. C . , Mead Experience i n Steam St r ipp ina
Kraft Mill Condensate, presented a t TAPPI Environmental Conference,
May 14-16, 1975.
15. Air Emission - Control Program For Hoerner Waldorf Corporation Mill
Expansion Pissoula , Montana, submitted by Hoerner Waldorf Cornoration
t o Montana S t a t e , March 1 2 , 1974.
16. Reference 5 , Table 15.
17. Malodorous Reduced Su l fu r Emissions From Incinerat ion o f Non-condensable
Off-gases, EPA Test Report 73-KPM-1A.
5-14
6. CONTROL TECHNLQUES FOR TRS FROM KRAFT PULP MILLS
6.1 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL T€CHNIQU€S
The v a r i o u s c o n t r o l techniques t h a t have been o r can be app l i ed
t o the emission sources af fected by NSPS are discussed in t h i s sect ion.
The a f fec ted sources a r e the recovery furnace, d i g e s t e r system,
m u l t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporator system, l ime k i l n , brown stock washer
system, 6 lack l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system, smelt d i s s o l v i n g tank, and
condensate s tri pper system. The appl i cabi 1 i ty and e f f e c t i veness o f the
c o n t r o l techniques when r e t r o f i t t e d on e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s i s a l so
discussed. Table 6-1 summarizes the c o n t r o l techniques and corresponding
TRS l e v e l s achievable f o r each source o f TRS. Sect ion 6.2 discusses
a l t e r n a t i v e c o n t r o l systems f o r e n t i r e k r a f t pu lp m i l l s . R e t r o f i t
models are presented wkich pe rm i t est imates t o be made of r e q u i r e d
costs f o r r e t r o f i t t i n g e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s w i t h the a1 t e r n a t i v e
c o n t r o l systems.
6.1 ..l Recovery Furnace System
TRS emissions from a recovery furnace system can o r i g i n a t e i n the
recovery furnace i t s e l f , o r i n the d i r e c t con tac t evaporator if t h i s
type of evaporator is , used.
have d i r e c t contact evaporators. About 75 percent of the new recovery
furnaces t h a t have been i n s t a l l e d i n the l a s t 5 years are, however, of
the non-contact design.
Most e x i s t i n g recovery. furnace systems
I n these furnaces, the furnace f l u e gases
- never d i r e c t l y con tac t t h e b l a c k l i q u o r and TRS cannot be formed i n the
6 -1
Table 6-1. TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROLLING TRS EMISSIONS FROM SOURCES IN A KRAFT PULP MILL
Control Achievable TRS Source Technique Leve 1
Recovery furnace
D i ges ter system
Mu1 tiple-effect evaporator system
Lime k i I n
Brm stock washer system
Black liquor oxi dation system
Smelt dissolving tank
Condens ate s tri ppi n g system
Process controls + bl ack 1 iquor oxidation
Process controls 3. conversion to non-contact evaporator
Caus ti c scrubbing
Incl nerati on
Caustic scrubbing
In ci nera ti on
Process controls
Process controls + good mud washing
Process controls, good mud washing + caustic scrubbing
Inci nerati on
Molecular oxygen
Incineration
Fresh water usage
Caus ti c scrubbing
Incineration
20 ppm (Old desi n '
5 ppm (New desi n2 furnaces 3 furnaces 3
furnaces 3 furnaces 3
25 ppn (Cross recovery
20 ppm (Old desi n
5 ppm (New desi n
furnaces )
25 ppm (Cross recovery furnaces )
7,000 ppm3
5 Ppm
350 ppm3
5 Ppn
40 Ppm
20 Ppm
5 Ppm
0 PPm
5 PPm
0.0084 g/kg BLS
- 5 PPm
lOld - design furnaces are defined as furnaces without welded wall or membrane wall
2 N e w - design furnaces are defined as furnaces w i t h welded wall or membrane wall
3Calcul ated based upon scrubber removing only hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan
construction or emission-control designed a i r systems.
construction and emission-control designed a i r systems.
and using reference 5 to determine percent of hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan Present I n vent stream.
6-2
evaporator.
1967.
The non-contact furnace was f i r s t introduced i n
Several operating and design variables that have Some ef fec t on,
or relationship t o , t h e generation of TRS emissions, i n a recovery
furnace have been identi-fied. These include the quantity and manner
of introduction of comhustion a i r , the rate of solids (concentrated
black liquor) feed, the degree o f turbulence in the oxidation zone,
the oxygen cortent of the f lue gas, the spray pattern and droplet
s ize of the liquor fed the furnace, and the degree of disturbance of
the smelt
absence or presence of a d i rec t contact evaporator.
evidence t h a t sulf ide content of the liquor combusted i n the furnace
T h e e f fec t of these variables is independent o f the
There i s no
bears any relationship to the TRS emissions from the recovery furnace.
This i s not t o be confused, however, w i t h sulfur compounds generated
or stripped in a d i rec t contact evaporator.
The age of existing furnaces has been reported to be a s ignif icant
indicator of the furnace's a b i l i t y t o control TRS emission^.^ typical l i fe of a recovery furnace i s considered t o he 25
GL,ierally,the
controls and instrumentation that a s s i s t the operator i n maintaining
close control of the process.
recent manufacturers' impravements., such as new. means of introducing
a i r , f l e x i b i l i t y i n distributing a i r i n the furnace and means to change
a i r velocity a t injecti-on ports.
was made t o recovery furnaces i n l a te 1964.
(The
age re f lec ts an absence or lack of refinement i n
Also, older furnaces may not incorporate
6 Furthermore, a major design change
This change consisted of
6 -3
instal l ing a membrane between the wall tubes located i n front o f the
furnace's wall insulation. T h i s design change made the furnace a i r -
t i g h t . The wall insulati.on on furnaces wi thout this membrane w a l l
concept tends t o deteriorate.
T h i s i n t u r n affects. the combustion i n the furnace and reduces
s ignif icant ly the capabili ty of the operator t o control TRS emissions.
These older recovery furnaces could be modified t o incorporate
these new design features b u t the modifications wuld be extremely
expensive.
made.
T h i s allows a i r to leak i n t o the furnace.
7
HoMver, changes i n operating procedures can more easi ly be
T k r e are two control techniques to reduce TRS emissions from the
d i rec t contact evaporator: black 1 iquor oxidation and conversion t o
a non-contact evaporator.
between the combustion gases and black liquor that normally generate
hydrogen sulfide.
Na2S203 i n the black liquor before i t enters the d i rec t contact
evaporator.
contact between furnace gases and black liquor i s eliminated, and
hydrogen sulfide formation is prevented.
Black 1 iquor oxidation inhibi ts the reactions
This is accomplished by oxidizing the Na2S to
In converting t o a non-contact evaporator, the d i rec t
There are several modes. of operation of hlack liquor oxidation
The black liquor i s sometimes oxidized before being systems..
concentrated i n the mu1 t iple-effect evaporators (weak black liquor
oxidation), sometimes following evaporation [strong black liquor
oxidation) and sometimes both, before and af te r . Air i s the normal
oxidizing agent, 6ut molecular oxygen is also used Khen available on
s i t e . Air sparg ing reactors are the most comnon units, b u t
6-4
packed towers and buhhle tray towers are a l s o used.
In modifying an existing recovery furnace w i t h a d i rect contact
evaporator t o a non-contact design, a black liquor evaporator
Cconcentrator) and a second feed Mater economizer i s necessary.
addition, elimination of the existing d i rec t contact evaporator wi l l
resul t i n an increased par t iculate concentration discharge from the
furnace system into tfie particulate control device. To maintain
particulate emissions a t the original l eve1 , i t may be necessary
t o replace the existing collector w i t h a new higher efficiency
precipitator or ins,tall an additional secondary collector,
I n
This
conversion to a non-contact d e s i g n has been accomplished by a t l eas t
Two p u l p mills .
A t one recovery furnace system, erected in 1966, where the
conversion was made, TRS emissions decreased from approximately 400
ppm t o about 10 ppm.’ Modifications also included changes t o the
operation of the furnace, such as oxygen content and a i r distribution.
Therefore, a portion of the TRS reduction i s a t t r ihutable to decreased
emissions of TRS from the furnace system.
TRS emissions from di rec t contact systems depend on the design
and operation of the recovery furnace and the black liquor oxidation
system.
hetween oxidation efficiency and TRS emissions, presented i n Table 6-2.
Since these samples were taken a t stacks on new recovery furnaces, the
furnace TRS contribution i.s assumed t o be negligible.” The data
An analysis. of 200 s,tack gas samples shoved the relation
show a clear relationship between oxidation efficiency and TRS
6 -5
Table 6-2
Re la t ionsh ip of Oxi\dati,on E f f i ~c iency and t$S Emis,si.ons 11
Oxi,dati.on Nuroher tL,S Emi\ssions E f f i c i e n c y , o f g ~s /Ks 'Pu lp" -~ - ' - Lb S/Ton Pulp Percent Sam? 1 es - Max -. Min Mean -. & & - Mean
80-85
85 -90
8
15
4.1 0.75 2.3 8.1 1.5 4.6
3.0 Q.05 1.6 6.0 0.1 3.2
9a-94 29 3.3 0.25 1.2 6.6 0.5 2.4
94-96 18 2.2 0.05 0.9 4.3 0.1 1.8
96-98
98-99
15
19
1.4 0.05 0.65 2.8 0.1 1.3
1.1 o.a 0.35 2.1 0.0 0.7
99-1 oa 96 1.6 0.0 0.2 3.2 0.0 0.4
6 -6
emissions.
eliminated by conversion t o a non-contact type system.
Emissions from the direct contact evaporator will be
TRS emission tes ts conducted d u r i n g the NSPS development program
indicate t h a t TRS emissions from new recovery furnaces can be control led
t o a t least 5 ppm.12 During the NSPS program, three recovery furnaces
( two direct contact systems and one non-contact system) were tested
by EPA.
ppm (6 t es t s , each 4-hours) 0.6 ppm (-6 t es t s , each 4-nours), and
3.9 ppm (5 t e s t s , each 4-hours).
greater Cabout 7 ppm) than 5 ppm.
TRS emissions averaged from the individual furnaces are 1.4
Only one 4-hour t e s t showed emissions
One furnace manufacturer indicates t h a t many recovery furnaces built
since 1965 are basically the same design as new furnaces bui l t today, and
that these should also be capable of achieving 5 ppm TRS with good process
control and e i ther black liquor oxidation o r conversion t o a non-contact
evaporator. These exi s t i nq recovery furnaces , defined as "new des i an"
furnaces, were desiqned for low TRS emissions ( i .e . , incorporates manufacturer's
improvements) and will have stated i n their contracts that these furnaces
were constructed with air pollution control as an objective. Recovery
furnaces, mainly those built before 1965, that were n o t constructed w i t h
a i r pollution control as an objective, have a somewhat different desisn,
as mentioned previously, and are n o t capable of achievinq 5 ppm TRS
(4-hour average basis). These furnaces, defined as "old desiqn" furnaces,
14
6-7
can generally achieve abou t 15 t o 20 ppm TRS w i t h good process control
and black l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n o r conversion t o a non-contact evaporator.
This TRS level (15 t o 20 ppm) i s presently being achieved by existing
recovery furnaces (see AppendixB) , many b u i l t before 1965, i n those 16
s ta tes which have TRS regulations of 17.5 ppm (daily averaqe). Some
existing furnaces may have d i f f icu l ty achieving even this level (20 ppm)
i f they are operating a t a much hiqher f i r inq ra te t h a n oriqinally
designed or do not have suff ic ient combustion control capabili ty.
15
Cross recovery liquors are somewhat different than s t ra iqht kraf t
l i q u o r , and, therefore, i t i s possible tha t the TRS emissions from a cross
recovery furnace are not controllable t o the same degree as are those from
the s t ra ight kraf t furnace.
may be higher from cross recovery furnaces.17 The f i r s t re la tes to the
sulfur content of the liquor which i s higher w i t h this process t h a n i n
s t ra ight kraft processes.
of the black liquor i s lower t h a n found in s t ra ight k r a f t mills .
because the NSSC process gives higher p u l p yields than the kraft process
and, as a consequence, the spent liquor associated w i t h the YSSC process
contains less organic content.
with kraft black liquor.
excess oxygen available i n cross recovery furnaces t o oxidize the relat ively
large quantit ies of vo la t i le sulfur compounds given off as a consequence
of the heavy sulfur loading and lower furnace operatina temperatures.
enough excess oxyqen i s supplied to completely oxidize a l l vo la t i le sulfur
compounds, a sticky d u s t problem will develop which can p l u g u p the
precipitator and render furnace operation impossible.
There are three reasons why TRS emissions
In cross recovery operations, the heat content
T h i s i s
Therefore, i t s R t u value i s lower as compared
The t h i r d reason pertains to the rest r ic t ion on
I f
6-8
Based on a study18 conducted on one cross-recovery furnace, cross-.
recovery furnaccs which experience a r w n l i q u o r s u l f i d i t i e s i n excess o f
28 percent and l i q u o r mixtures o f more than 7 percent NSSC on an a i r dry
ton basis can no t achieve the same TRS l eve l s as s t r a i g h t k r a f t recovery
furnaces. Emission data reported i n the study i nd i ca te t h a t TRS emission
l eve l s of 25 ppm, corrected t o 8 percent oxygen, can be achieved from
we1 1 -contro l l e d cross-recovery furnaces.
A recent ly developed cont ro l technique f o r recovery furnaces i s a1 ka l i n e
adsorption w i th carbon ac t iva ted ox ida t ion o f the scrubbing so lu t ion .
P i l o t p l a n t studies i nd i ca te t h a t t h i s technique can reduce TRS emissions
from 20 t o 2500 ppm t o between 1 and 10 ppm.” Reduction i n p a r t i c u l a t e and
SO
t o cont ro l TRS emissions on those o lder e x i s t i n g furnaces o r cross recovery
furnaces which do no t have the combustion cont ro l c a p a b i l i t y f o r low TRS
emissions.
load on o lder e x i s t i n g furnaces t h a t are no t capable o f achievinq the
necessary TRS regulat ions.
emissions are a lso repor ted ly achieved. This technique could be used 2
This technique could prevent the need t o replace o r reduce the
6.1.2 Digester and Mu1 t i p le -E f fec t Evaporator Systems
The d igesters and mu1 t i p le -e f fec t evaporators w i l l be considered
together because non-condensable gases discharged from these two
sources are nermally combined f o r treatment.
i nc ine ra t i ng the gases. t o destroy odors.
burned i n the l ime k i l n .
are a lso used, e i t h e r as hackup fo r the k i l n when i t i s shutdown, o r
as the fu l l - t ime cont ro l deyice.
A t l e a s t h a l f the m i l l s are
Most commonly, the gases are
However, a few special gas-f ired inc inera tors
R e t r o f i t t i n g an exi.st ing m i l l t o handle and inc inera te these
non-condensable gases i s apparently no s i g n i f i c a n t problem.
i t is, simply a mat te r of duct ing the gases t o the k i l n o r i nc ine ra to r
and i ns t a l 1 i ng necessary condensers and gas hol ding equipment .
Generally, -
The
6-9
non-condensable gases are added t o the primary a i r t o t h e k i l n .
This r e t r o f i t s i tuat ion has now been performed a t over s i x t y mil ls .
T h e blow gases from batch digesters are generated i n strong
hursts that normally exceed the capacity o f the lime k i l n .
reason, special gas handling equipment has been developed t o make
the gas flows more uniform?OAdjustable volume gasholders, with
movable diaphragms o r floating tops, receive the gas surges, and a
small steady stream i s 61ed t o the k i l n .
gasEs form exploeive mixtures i n a i r , possible explosion hazards
have been minimized b y the development of appropriate gasholding
For th i s
Although the non-condensable
. S y s t e m s , flame ar res tors and rupture disks i n the gasholding ducts,
and flame-out controls a t the lime k i l n . Incineration of these
the lime k i ln i s par t icular ly
red t o achieve effective
gases i n exis t ing process equipment
a t t rac t ive since no additional fuel
emission control.
Scrubbers are used a t a few ex 11s. Uhite l iquor, the
usual scrubbing medium, i s effective f o r removing hydrogen sulfide and
methyl mercaptan, but n o t dimethyl su l f ide o r dimethyl disulfide.
A t l e a s t 3 mills
cl1 recover sulfur, ( 2 ) condense steam, and (3) remove turpentine
vapors and mist, therehy reduci.ng the explosion hazards.
21
scrub the noncondensable gases before incineration to:
Combustion of noncondensahle gases i n a lime k i l n or gas-fired
i.ncineaator provides nearly complete destruction of TRS compounds.
Dur ing an EPA test (conducted f o r NSPS) on a separate incinerator
burning noncondensahles from a digester system and a multiple e f fec t -
such as
i s requ
s t i n g m
6-1 0
evaporator system, the residual unburned TRS was less t h a n 5 ppm
(0.01 g / k g A D P ) The TRS t e s t resul ts (4-hour averages) of the
four t e s t s conducted ranged betKeen 0.5 and 3.Q ppm, and averaged
1 .5 ppm (dry gas basis) .
operating a t 1000°F (measuredl with a calculated retenti.on time for
the gases of a t l eas t 0.5 seconds.
22 .
During the t e s t s , the incinerator was
Scrubber eff ic iencies are much lower than properly operated
incinerators because only hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan
react with the alkaline medium.
gases i s highly variable, b u t on the average hydrogen sulfide and
methyl mercaptan comprise about half the TRS compounds.
emissions are 9,500 ppm from the digester system and 6700 ppm
from the mu1 t iple-effect evaporator system.z4
i s only effect ive in controlling hydrogen sulf ide and methyl mercaptan,
alkaline scrubber eff ic iencies are roughly only 50 percent.
TRS emissions from a scrubber are calculated t o be about 0.63 g /kg ADP
(0.59 g / k g ADP f r o m digester system and 0.04 g /kg ADP from multiple-
effect evaporator system1 or abut-7500 ppm.
The composition of noncondensable
23 Uncon t ro l l ed
Since caustic scrubbing
6 . i . 3 Lime Kiln
TRS emissions, principally hydrogen su l f ide , can originate from
two areas i n the lime kiln ins ta l la t ion , the lime kiln proper and a
scrubber tha t serves as the particulate control device.
from the lime kiln instal la t ion are controlled by maintaining proper
process conditions.
in an industry (National Council of the Pulp and Paper Industry for
Air and Stream Improvement) study 25include the temperature a t the
TRS emissions
The most important parameters that were identified
6-1 1
c o l d end ( p o i n t of exhaust discharge) of the k i l n , the oxygen
content of the gases l e a v i n g the k i l n , the s u l f i d e content of the
lime mud fed t o the k i l n , and the pH and s u l f i d e content of the
water used i n a p a r t i c u l a t e scrubber.
used as the scrubbing medium, tke exhaust gases could s t r i p o u t the
d i sso l ved TRS and increase the TRS emissions from the l ime k i l n
i n s t a l l a t i o n .
can reduce the TRS emissions from a l i m e k i l n .
If contaminated condensate i s
Scrubbing t h e exhaust gases with a c a u s t i c s o l u t i o n 26
The amount of r e t r o f i t t i n g necessary t o achieve proper process
cond i t i ons depends on t h e design of the e x i s t i n g k i l n i n s t a l l a t i o n .
If the e x i s t i n g k i l n does n o t achieve s u f f i c i e n t oxygen l e v e l s ,
increased f a n c a p a c i t y o r changes t o the scrubber system may be
necessary t o increase t h e a i r f low through the k i l n . Molecular
oxygen can a l s o be used t o rep lace a p o r t i o n o f the combustion a i r
t o increase oxygen l e v e l s . A d d i t i o n a l l ime mud washing capac i t y may
a l s o be necessary t o reduce t h e s u l f i d e content o f t h e mud and
thereby reduce TRS emissions. This may r e q u i r e replacement o f
e x i s t i n g c e n t r i f u g e s w i t h more e f f i c i e n t vacuum drum f i 1 t e r s , and
the a d d i t i o n o f another mud washing stage.
p r e s e n t l y us ing condensate t h a t contains d i sso l ved reduced s u l f u r
compounds f o r a scrubhi ng medium would have t o e i t h e r i n s t a l 1 a
condensate s t r i p p e r t o remove t h e d i sso l ved TRS p r i o r t o the scruhber
o r rep lace the condensate w i t h f r e s h water.
*
Furthermore, a m i l l
TRS emissions from e x i s t i n g l ime k i l n s range from about 0.01 t o
2.0 g/kg ADP ( 4 t o 840 ppml, depending on the degree o f c o n t r o l , w i t h
6-1 2
an average of about 0.4 g/kg ADP (168 ppm) . 27 EPA t e s t s (conducted
f o r NSPS development) on t x o l ime k i l n s i n d i c a t e t h a t l ime k i l n TRS
emissions can be reduced t o below 20 ppm (12-hour averaqe) us ing process c o n t r o l s .
Another l ime k i l r , us ing c a u s t i c scrubbing i n a d d i t i o n t o process
c o n t r o l i s capable, based on EPA r e s u l t s , o f TRS emissions helow 8
ppm (12-hour average). When t e s t e d by EPA, a l l t h ree l i m e k i l n s were burn ing
non-condensable gases from the d i g e s t e r system and mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t
evaporator system.
It appears t h a t e x i s t i n g l i m e k i l n s can be r e t r o f i t t e d t o a l s o
achieve low TRS emissions.
i n s t a l l a t i o n s have r e p o r t e d l y heen reduced from over 100 ppm t o l ess
than 20 ppm by modify ing the l i m e mud washing systems and making
adjustments i n the process o p e r a t i o n . 28
TRS emissions from two e x i s t i n g l ime k i l n
However, t he TRS l e v e l s
t o which e x i s t i n g k i l n s can fie r e t r o f i t t e d depends on the l oad a t
which the k i l n i s no rma l l y operated.
s u f f i c i e n t l y over design capaci ty , i t may be very d i f f i c u l t t o o b t a i n
the oxygen l e v e l s necessary f o r low TRS emissions [about 20 ppm).
Discussions w i t h the k r a f t i,ndustry i n d i c a t e t h a t TRS emissions from
these l i m e k i l n s can be reduced, however, t o ahout 40 ppm.
If the k i l n i s operated
6.1.4 Brown Stock Masher System
Near ly a l l e x i s t i n g k r a f t m i l l s vent t he hr0w.n stock washing
system gases d i r e c t l y t o the atmosphere w i t h o u t c o n t r o l .
l e a s t three m i l l s i n the Uni ted States and Candda, and one
i n Sweden, u t i l i z e t h e gases as combustion a i r i n a recovery furnace.
However, a t
The furnace systems handl ing these gases are newer furnace systems
6-1 3
which were designed t o burn the washer gases.
( n o t designed f o r burn ing these gases) has y e t been used t o i n c i n e r a t e the
washer gases.
No e x i s t i n g recovery furnace
As discussed i n sec t i on 6.1.2 t h e r e s i d u a l TRS a f t e r i n c i n e r a t i o n i s
Since t h e gas volume from t h e very low, l e s s than 5 ppm (0.01 g/kg ADP).
washer drums i s l a rqe , about 112 m /Mq (150 CFWJTPD), t h e most l i k e l y
equipment f o r combustion i s a recovery furnace o r power b o i l e r .
due t o t h e i r l a r g e volume, would have t o supplement t h e recoverv fu rnace ' s
combustion a i r requirements. Even i f t h e washers were enclosed w i t h t i a h t
3 29
The oases,
hoods, t h e gas volume would be too l a r a e t o burn i n a l i m e k i l n . The
ac tya l gas volume handled a t one m i l 1 i s 75 m3/Mg (100 CFMITPD) , The
volume t h a t would need t o be handled a t o the r e x i s t i n g m i l l s can be h
o r lower depending upon t i gh tness of hooding and degree o f condensing
gas
qher
The vent gases from t h e f i l t r a t e tank are cons iderab ly smal le r i n
volume, about 4 .5 m3/Mg (6 CFM/TPD).30 Th is stream i s s u f f i c i e n t l y small
f o r combustion i n a l ime k i l n , o r blended w i t h t h e hood vent gas and
burned i n a recovery furnace.
I n c i n e r a t i o n of t h e washer gases i n a recovery furnace w i l l n o t
a f f e c t furnace opera t i on prov ided t h e mois tu re content o f t h e qases
i s n o t too c ~ r e a t . ~ '
s u l f u r emissions and produce unsafe opera t i ng cond i t i ons .
( furnace) temperature decreases almost 1 i n e a r l y w i t h increased conten t
o f vapor ized water i n t h e combustion a i r because o f sens ib le heat
losses. Wi th decreased bed temperatures, SO2 emissions increase a t a
r a p i d r a t e and reduced s u l f u r compounds become i n c r e a s i n q l y d i f f i c u l t
High mois tu re conten t can increase aaseous
Red
6-14
t o control .32
extremely dangerous conditions such as smelt-water explosions.
Water entrained i n the combustion qases can create
One furnace manufacturer recommends t h a t the washer gases be
incinerated only i n the secondary o r t e r t i a ry a i r zones of the furnace.
This would keep the moist washer gases away from the smelt bed.
the gases only i n the secondary or t e r t i a ry zones may af fec t the f l ex ib i l i t y
of the recovery furnace,
Burning
however, since the operator would n o t have the 33 ab i l i t y t o vary the a i r f low ra te to each zone.
High moisture content would resu l t i n an increase i n gas flow and
reduce the capacity of the recovery furnace.
An a l ternat ive to incineration of brown stock washer gases is
chemical scrubbing.
mentioned, i s only effect ive i n controlling hydrogen sulfide and methyl
White 1 iquor (caustic) scrubbing, as previously
mercaptan.
system are principally dimethyl sulf ide and dimethyl disulfide.34 A
more effect ive system i s reportedly a chlorination-caustic scrubbinq
system.
However, the TRS emissions from a brown stock washer
I n t h i s system, the chlorine absorbs and oxidizes the dimethyl
sulfide and dimethyl disulfide.35 This technique was instal led a t one
mlll i n February 1976 and t e s t s conducted a t t h a t time demonstrated TRS
emissions o f less t h a n 5 p ~ m . ~ ~ Another technique i s chlori,ne 9as injection.
T h i s technique is used a t one mill and t e s t s conducted demonstrated TRS
emissions of less t h a n 5 ppm and a control efficiency of 80 percent. 37
6.1.5 Black Liquor Oxidation System,
The vent gases from nearly a l l existinq black l i q u o r oxidation ( B L O )
systems are emitted direct ly t o the atmosphere w i t h o u t control.
6-1 5
One control technique i s incineration. Incineration has proved
highly effective i n controlling similar streams i n some mi l l s , for
example, the vent gases from p u l p washing systems, the noncondensable
gases from digesters and mu1 t iple-effect evaporators , and vent qases from
condensate s t r ippers .
the recovery furnace or power boiler i s most l ike ly , since the BLO gas
volume i s usually too large t o be handled by an existing k i l n .
would resu l t i n no s ignif icant fuel penalty.
Similar t o the p u l p washing system, incineration i n
This
Because of the h i g h moisture content of the RLO gases, i t would be
necessary to use condensers to reduce the moisture content before
b u r n i n g , especially i f the moist washer gases are burned i n the same
furnace. Incineration of these moist qases i n the furnace would probab1.y
cause increased corrosion problems i n the forced-draft fan ductwork and
the forced-draft fan i t s e l f . This would probably necessitate the replace-
ment of this equipment w i t h corrosion-resistant equipment.
forced-draft fan may be necessary t o handle the increased mass flow due
to the h i g h moisture content of the gases, even a f t e r usinq condensers.
The recovery furnace operation should not be adversely affected by
A larqer
38
b u r n i n g the BLO gases, even i n combination w i t h the washer gases,
provided the moisture content i s suff ic ient ly reduced and the qases are
burned h i g h i n the f ~ r n a c e . ~ ’ Since the BLO gases are deficient i n oxygen,
one furnace manufacturer suggests b u r n i n g them i n the sec0ndar.y o r
t e r t ia ry a i r zone b u t s t a t e s tha t the gases should s t i l l contain
suff ic ient oxygen t o preclude adversely affecting the furnace operation.
6-1 6
As mentioned i n Section 6.1.4, the operational f l ex ib i l i t y of the furnace i s
reduced because a p o r t i o n (BLO gases and washer gases) of the t o t a l combustion
secondary and te r t ia ry air zones and
when a i r i n th is zone is needed t o
a i r must always be introduced i n t o the
cannot be used i n the primary a i r zone
a d j u s t furnace operation.
Emissions will be reduced t o low
burned. Since these gases contain the
evels i f oxidation vent qases are
same TRS compounds present i n the
digester and mu1 t iple-effect evaporator off-qases which EPA tested a f t e r
incineration, TRS combustion residuals of the BLO vent qas will be less t h a n
A second control technique is the use of molecular oxygen i n oxidation
systems instead of a i r . A t l e a s t two mills i n the United States now oxidize
black liquor by pumping oxygen direct ly into the black liquor l ines . There
are no vent gases from this closed system. The economic f eas ib i l i t y of such
a system depends largely on the price and ava i lab i l i ty o f oxygen.
Another technique i s chlorine gas injection. This technique is used a t
one mill on the vent gases from primary oxidation system. Tests conducted
demonstrated TRS emissions of less than 5 ppm and a control efficiency o f 40 95 percent.
6.1.6 Smelt Dissolving Tank
Smelt dissolving tank TRS emissions are governed by process condi-
tions; t h a t i s ; the presence of reduced sulfur compounds e i ther i n the
smelt or the water.
choice of water i n the smelt d i s s o l v i n g tank or the particulate control
device.
The principal control o p t i o n available i s the
Clean water, low i n dissolved sulfides, i s preferable, although
6-1 7
low emissions have been repor ted w i t h nea r l y a l l process streams. a4
I f TRS emissions a re h iqh and no p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l dev ice (scrubber)
i s used, a wet scrubber (e.q., packed tower) can be used t o c o n t r o l t he
TRS emissions.
emissions. One m i l l r e p o r t e d l y reduced TRS emissions over 95 percent
This scrubber would a l s o r e s u l t i n c o n t r o l l i n g p a r t i c u l a t e
f rom a l e v e l o f about 0.19 g/kg o f b lack l i q u o r s o l i d s (BLS) (0.56 l b / T ADP)
when a packed scrubber tower was i n s t a l l e d . 42 .
TRS emissions from smel t d i s s o l v i n g tanks are normal ly low and average
about 0.007 g/:.g BLS (0.02 l b / T ADP).43 EPA t e s t s on two smel t d i s s o l v i n g
tanks i n d i c a t e TRS emissions below 0.0084 g/kg BLS (8 ppm).
These l e v e l s can be achieved on bo th new and e x i s t i n g smel t tanks.
Both these smel t tanks have wet scrubbers f o r c o n t r o l 1 i n g p a r t i c u l a t e s .
Weak wash l i q u o r was used as t h e scrubbing medium i n bo th scrubbers.
6.1.7 Condensate S t r i p p i n g System
In a t l e a s t f o u r Un i ted States m i l l s , d i sso l ved s u l f i d e s and o the r
vo l a t i 1 e compounds a re s t r i p p e d f rom the d i ges t e r and evaporator conden-
sates p r i o r t o d ischarge t o t rea tment ponds. One m i l l , which uses steam
as the s t r i p p i n g medium, discharges the gases from t h e s t r i p p e r column
t o a l ime k i l n . Two m i l l s use a i r as t h e s t r i p p i n g medium. One o f these
inc ine ra tes the s t r i p p e r gases i n a separate i n c i n e r a t o r , w h i l e t h e o the r
i n c i n e r a t e s the gases i n the recovery furnace. One m i l 1 , which uses steam,
i s p r e s e n t l y scrubbing t h e s t r i p p e r gases w i t h w h i t e l i q u o r , b u t t h i s
technique i s n o t as e f f e c t i v e as i n c i n e r a t i o n . 44
As mentioned i n Sect ion 6.1.2, i n c i n e r a t i o n has proven t o reduce
~ TRS l e v e l s f r o m d i g e s t e r and mu l t i p le -e f fec t evaporator systems t o l e s s
than 5 ppm. Since the vent gas f r o m condensate s t r i p p e r s conta ins the
6-18
same TRS compounds present i n the digester and multiple-effect
evaporator aases, TRS emissions in the condensate s t r ipper gases a f t e r
incineration can be reduced t o 5 ppm (0.01 g / k q A D P ) .
6.2 SUMMARY OF RETROFIT MODELS
Section 6.1.1 through Section 6.1.7 have examined the various
control techniques tha t can be applied to each source o f TRS emissions and
have quantified the emission levels t h a t can be achieved by applyinq
these control 5.
al ternat ive control techniques will be discussed in Chapters 8 and 9 ,
respectively.
Simultaneously to the various TRS sources in the en t i r e mill , various
a1 ternat i ve control systems (retrof i t model s 1 were devel oped.
a l ternat ive systems chosen range from controllinq each TRS source to the
best achievable level , t o controllinq only the major TRS sources with
techniques less effect ive than best available technology. The six
r e t r o f i t models that use al ternat ive control systems are l i s t ed i n
Table 6-2. These six control systems were selected because the
differences between systems r e f l ec t major differences in the types
and costs of r e t r o f i t s tha t would be carried out a t an existinq kraft
mill. The economic and environmental impacts of these r e t r o f i t models
will be analyzed i n conjunction w i t h the present controls already
instal led a t each existing kraf t p u l p mill .
are discussed bel ow.
The economic and environmental impact of applying these
In order t o assess the impacts of applying controls
The
The s ix control systems
Retrofit Model No. 1: All eight TRS sources are controlled t o
- the level of best available control technology. This s.ystem will
6-19
Table 6-2, POSSIBLE CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
Source No, 1 Control Systems/emission level (ppm)
No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6
Recovery furnace Process control +
Digester system Incineration/5 ppm
Mu1 ti pl e-effect Inci neration/5 ppm
BL0/5 ppm
evaporator system
Q, Lime kiln Process controls N + caustic scrub- I
0 bing/8 ppm
Inci nerat i on/5ppm Brown stock
Black liquor Inci neration/5 ppm
Smelt dissolving Frpzh wa+ar/P DM): I. 0084 g/kg BLS I
Condensate Incineration/5 ppm
washer system
oxidation system
tank
stripper system
Process control +
Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm
BL0/5 ppm
Process controls t caustic scrub- bing/8 ppm
No control
No control
Fresh water/8 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm
Process control + Process control t Process control + Process control +
Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm
Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm
BL0/5 ppm BL0/20 ppm* BL0/20 ppm* BL0/20 ppm*
Process controls Process controls/ Process controls/ Process controls/
bing/8 pDm
No control No control No control No control
+ caustic scrub 20 PPm 40 PPm 40 P P ~
No control No control No control No control
Fresh water/8 ppm Fresh water/8 ppm Fresh water/8 PPm Fresh water/8 PPm
Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm Incineration/5 ppm
*The 20 ppm levels applies to old design furnaces; new design furnaces can achieve 5 ppm with application of the same control technology (two-stage BLO).
resu l t i n the lowest TRS emissions from a kraf t p u l p mill and wi l l
require instal la t ion of a new furnace i f the existinq furnace i s
re la t ively o l d and cannot achieve 5 ppm TRS. In most cases, th i s
system will also requi
and the improvement or
order t o achieve a TRS
from the smelt d i s so lv
e caustic addition t o the existinq scrubber
replacement of the lime mud washing f a c i l i t y i n
level o f 8 ppm from the lime k i l n . TRS emissions
ng tank will be controlled by using fresh water
i n the t a n k and the particulate control device. Incineration will be
used t o control TRS emissions from the digester system, multiple-effect
evaporator system, brown stock washer system, black liquor oxidation
System and condensate s t r i p p i n g system.
multiple-effect evaporators and condensate s t r ippers will be incinerated
i n the lime kilns.
for purposes of impact analysis are assumed t o be burned i n a separate
incinerator since no existing recovery furnace has been modified to
handle these gases.
The gases from the digesters,
The gases from the washers and oxidation system
Retrofit Model No. 2: This control system i s similar t o
Retrofit Model No. 1 except t ha t the vent gases from the washer system
and the BLO system are not incinerated. T h i s system was chosen as
a model because, based on the economic analysis performed for NSPS
development, these two smaller TRS emission sources are less cost effective
to control than the other sources. I t i s assumed t h a t these two sources
would be combined for treatment.
related to the cost of controlling the other source because one
incinerator would be instal led to handle b o t h gas streams.
modifications made to an existing mill would generally be the same
whether b o t h o r only one of these sources i s controlled.
The cost of controlling one source i s
Therefore,
6-21
R e t r o f i t Model No. 3: Th i s c o n t r o l system i s s i m i l a r t o R e t r o f i t
Model No. 2 except t h a t l e s s e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l of t h e recovery furnace
i s allowed, r e s u l t i n g i n a h ighe r TRS l e v e l f rom t h i s u n i t . Th i s system
was chosen because t h e h ighe r TRS l e v e l (20 ppm) w i l l a l l o w ma in l y o l d e r
recovery furnaces (most ly those b u i l t be fo re 1965) t o remain i n operat ion.
The 5 ppm l e v e l as requ i red i n R e t r o f i t Models No. 1 and No. 2 would
probably r e q u i r e these o l d e r furnaces t o be replaced.
o f Models No. 1 and 2, i f furnace replacement i s necessary, w i l l be
s u b s t a n t i a l l y g rea te r than t h a t o f Model No. 3.
The c o s t impact
R e t r o f i t Hodel No. 4: This c o n t r o l system i s s i m i l a r t o r e t r o f i t
.Model No. 3 except t h a t t h e l i m e k i l n TRS l e v e l has been re laxed from
8 to 20 PDm.
l e v e l w i t h o u t u s i n g c a u s t i c scrubbing.
This system would pe rm i t many k i l n s t o achieve t h i s
The TRS emissions f rom the l i m e
k i l n would be c o n t r o l l e d by process c o n t r o l s and r e q u i r e the l i m e mud
washing f a c i l i t y t o be improved o r replaced. Caust ic scrubbing would
be a major expense i f t h e c a u s t i c cannot be used i n the p u l p i n g process
o r a wet scrubber i s n o t a l ready used f o r p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l .
R e t r o f i t Model No. 5: This c o n t r o l system i s s i m i l a r t o
R e t r o f i t Model No. 4 except t h a t t he l i m e k i l n TRS l e v e l has been
re laxed from 20 t o 40 ppm.
achieve the l e v e l w i t h o u t mod i f y ing t h e l i m e mud washing i n s t a l l a t i o n .
TRS emissions from t h e l i m e k i l n s would be c o n t r o l l e d by us ing process
c o n t r o l s on the k i l n i t s e l f . M o d i f i c a t i o n s t o t h e mud washing system
are a major expense (see Chapter 8) i n c o n t r o l l i n g TRS emissions from an
e x i s t i n g k r a f t p u l p m i l l .
This system would pe rm i t many k i l n s t o
6-22
Retrofit Model No. 6: This system i s similar t o Retrofit Model
No. 5 except that a l l recovery furnaces are controlled t o 5 ppm TRS
rather than 20 ppm.
on the impacts i n relaxing controls on the lime kiln (Model No. 5 ) in
comparison t o relaxing controls on the recovery furnace (Model No. 3) .
This system was chosen t o determine the differences
6.3 INSTALLATION AND START-UP TIME
The amount of time necessary t o r e t r o f i t an existing k r a f t mill
depends on what TRS sources are to be controlled and what technologies
are to be used.
ments t o implement a given control technology can vary widely depending
vpon such factors as space l imitations, weather conditions, lack of
available u t i l i t i e s , delays i n equipment delivery, and time required to
devel op engineering data.
I t should also be pointed out that actual time require-
Table 6-3 presents estimates of the normal length of time required
t o r e t r o f i t the various sources i n order to b r i n g them i n t o compliance.
Table 6-3 shows tha t the time necessary for i n i t i a l design and approval
can vary from 6 months to 3 years, depending on the source and the
complexity of r e t ro f i t t i ng tha t source. T h i s time period includes:
a. Engineering design of the overall project;
b. Project fund approval ;
c. Control agency approval ;
d . Order placement.
Table 6-3 also presents estimates of the amount of time required
for instal la t ion of the necessary equipment. This time i s for the
6-23
Table 6-3. DESIGN AND INSTALLATION TIMES*
. Design and approval** Instal lation***
TRS source (months ) (months )
Recovery furnace 18-36 12-36
Digester system 6 18
Mu1 t iple-effect evaporator sys tem
6 18
Lime k i l n 6-24 24
Brown stock was her sys tem
Black liquor oxi da t i on system
Smelt dissolving tank
Condensate s t r i p p i n g system
6-24 12-1 5
6 1 2
6 18
6 18
qased on discussions w i t h various companies and manufacturers. The actual times o f aooroval and ins ta l la t ion may over-lar, to some extent.
**This time period includes: engineering design of the overall project; project fund approval ; control agency approval ; and order p l acement.
***From the order date t o start-up (start-up excldded).
6-24
period from the order date t o start-up (start-up excluded).
time varies from a b o u t one year for instal l ing black liquor oxidation system
t o three years for instal l ing a new recovery furnace.
This instal la t ion
6-25
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6
1 .
Furnace and Direct Contact Evaporator, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 44,
December 1969.
Factors Affecting Reduced S u l f u r Emissions from the Kraft Recovery
2.
Compounds from a Kraft Recovery Furnace, Thoen, G. N. , De Haas G. G .
Tallent, R. G . , and Davis, A. S . , TAPPI, 51(8):329-333, August 1968.
3. Op. ci t. , Reference 1 , page 28.
The Effect of Combustion Variables on the Release of Odorous Sulfur
4. Op. ci t., Reference 1 , page 31.
5. Meeting Report - Babcock & Wilcox Company and EPA, Durham, NC,
May 1 , 1975.
6. Op. c i t . , Reference 4.
7. Op. c i t . , Reference 5.
8. Op. c i t . , Reference 5.
9. Improved Air Pollution Control fo r a Kraft Recovery Boiler:
Recovery Boiler No. 3, Henning, K . , Anderson, W. , and Ryan, 3. , EPA
Report No. 650/2-74-071-a, August 1974.
Modified
10.
Industry, NCAS; Technical Bulletin No. 39, December 1968.
11.
Survey of Current Black Liquor Oxidatlon Practices i n the Kraft
Op. c i t . , Reference 10, Table 6.
12. Standards Support and Environmental Impact Document , Vol ume 1 :
Proposed Standards of Performance fo r Kraft P u l p Mills, Environmental
Protection Agency , September 1976.
13. Letter from J . W. Kisner of Babcock & Wilcox Company t o James
Eddinger of EPA, dated May 2 7 , 1975.
14.
NAPCTAC meeting i n Raleigh, North Carolina, on March 3, 1977.
Presentation given by Jul ius Gommi of Combustion Engineering a t the
6-26
E
15. Op. c i t . , Reference 13.
16.
Ecology and the Oregon Department of Envi ronmental qual i ty . 17.
Container Corporation of America, March 9, 1977.
18. Op. c i t , , Reference 17, page 2.
Ecology and the Oregon Department of Environmental Qual i ty.
19. Considerations in the Design for TRS and Part iculate Recovery from
Effluents of Kraft Recovery Furnaces, Tel ler , A. J . , and Amberg, H . R . ,
Preprint, TAPPI Environmental Conference, May 1975.
20.
Kraft Industry, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 34, November 1967.
Monthly Reports obtained from the Washington Department of
A Report on the Study of TRS Emissions from a NSSC-Kraft Recovery Boiler,
Current Practices i n Thermal Oxidation of Noncondensable Gases i n the
21.
EPA-450/1-73-002, September 1973.
Bulleton No. 69, February 1974.)
22.
Off-Gases, EPA Test Report No. 73-KPM-lA, 1973.
23.
24.
25.
Emissions of Reduced Sulfur Through Control of Ki ln and Scrubber Operating
Variables, NCASI Special Report No. 70-71, January 1971.
26.
Adams, A. B . , TAPPI, September 1974.
27. Op. c i t . , Reference 21, Table A-5.
Atmospheric Emissions from the P u l p and Paper Manufacturing Industry,
( A l s o published by NCASI as Technical
Malodorous Reduced Sulfur Emissions from Incineration of Noncondensable
Op. ci t., Reference 21 , Tables 3, 5, and 7.
Op. c i t . , Reference 21, Tables 3, 5, and 7.
Suggested Procedures f o r the Conduct of Lime K i l n Studies t o Define
Kraft Odor Control a t Mead Papers, Ayers, K. C. , Clutter, L. W . , and
- 28. Trip Report on Vis i t t o the Champion International Mill i n Pasadena,
Texas, on April 4 , 1975.
6-27
Factors Affecting Emission of Odorous Reduced Sulfur Compounds 29. ----- II_ ----_- ll---ll_--
from Miscellaneous Kraft Process Sources, WAS1 Technical Bulletin
No. 60, March 1972.
30. Op. c i t . , Reference 29.
31. Op. c i t . , Reference 13.
,32. Letter from S. T. Po t te r ton of Babcock & Wilcox Company t o James
Eddinger of EPA, dated July 23, 1974.
33. Op. c i t . , Reference 5.
34. Op. ci t. , Reference 29, page 6.
35. Letter from H. M. Patterson of Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality to James Eddinger of EPA, dated A p r i l 4, 1975; and l e t t e r from
L . A. Broeren of Crown Zellerbach Corporation to Doug Ober o f Oregon
Department of Environmental Qual i ty , dated January 10 , 1975.
36.
of Environmental Quality and James Eddinger of EPA on December 6 , 1976.
37.
Control Distr ic t .
38. Letter from Russell Blosser o f NCASI t o Paul Boys of EPA dated
November 17, 1972.
39. Op. c i t . , Reference 19.
40. Op. c i t . , keference 37.
Telephone conversation between Chuck C1 inton of Oregon Department
Monthly Reports obtained from the Humboldt County Air Pollution
41. Op. c i t . , Reference 3, Table 25.
42.
Company and James Eddinger of EPA on July 19, 1973.
43. Op. c i t . , Reference 47.
Telephone conversation between Richard Labrecque of S. D. Warren
- 44. Private communication between Arthur Plummer of Chesapeake Corpor-
ation and James Eddinger of E P . l on February 13, 1975.
6-28
CHAPTER 7 . EMISSION PIONIJORING AND COMPLIANCE TESTING TECHNIQUES AUD COSTS
T h i s chapter discusses the various monitoring and compliance tes t ing
methods tha t have or could be used i n the kraft p u l p industry, and also
discusses the rationale leading t o the selection of the reference t e s t
method used for the TRS source t e s t s conducted during the SPNSS development
program.
7.1 EMISSION MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
7.1.1 Emission Monitoring
Performance specifications for oxygen continuous monitors have a1 ready
been published in 40 CFR, Par t 60, Appendix B y Performance Specification Three,
b u t i t has not been demonstrated that these monitors will perform i n the same
manner when used a t a kraf t p u l p mill.
t o believe that they will not be able t o meet these requirements.
commercially available instruments are capable of meeting the performance
specifications.
range of $9,000 t o $11,000.
There i s , however, no technical reason
A number of
The cost of one of these instruments, instal led, i s i n the
Equipment is also commercially available fo r temperature monitoring.
can be accomplished using a thermocouple, electronic cold junction, and a
mil l ivol t s t r ip-chart recorder.
less t h a n $2,000.
This
A system such as this could be purchased for
Instrumentation i s also available for continuously monitorina
the pressure loss of the gas stream through the scrubber and for monitoring the
scrubbing liquid supply pressure t o the scrubber.
7-1
-
A t present, there are several types o f instruments t h a t have been used
However, some questions t o successfully measure TRS on a short-term basis.
remain a b o u t the i r r e l i a b i l i t y for d a t a gathering on a continuous basis.
GC technique described in Method 16 was n o t designed t o be used as a continuous
monitor and i t s su i t ab i l i t y for t h i s purpose has n o t yet been evaluated.
There are other systems which have been used on a long-term basis b u t necessary
maintenance and quality control procedures to insure that these monitors are
The
operating properly are s t i l l being developed,
cooperation with the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement t o evaluate
Work i s presently underway in
a number of different types of systems fo r the i r su i t ab i l i t y as continuous
monitors.
fo r TRS monitors.
7.1.2 Compliance Testing
7.1.2.1 TRS Compounds - The need for an effective t e s t method for measurement
of reduced sulfur emissions from stationary sources resulted from a new source
performance standard (NSPS) program t o establish performance standards for a
variety of kraf t mill u n i t processes with respect to malodorous emissions.
U1 timately, t h i s should resu l t in pub1 ished performance specifications
As
with previous NSPS programs, t e s t methodology was needed t o gather:
data which would demonstrate emission limitations attainable through the use
( a ) accurate
of best available emission control systems; and ( b ) enough sampling and analytical
data such that a reference method for performance testing could be prescribed.
A t the inception of the NSPS kraft mill program in January 1972, a survey
was made t o evaluate existing t e s t methods for potential use. This survey
included a review of the l i t e r a tu re , contact w i t h mill personnel, and review of
previous research and evaluation of analytical techniques by the Environmental
Protection Agency ( E P A ) . Since the degree to which methods are available for
f i e ld use in odor measurements i s direct ly related t o the complexity of the
odorant mixture t o be measured, i t was fortunate t h a t the nature of emissions
7-2
from kraf t p u l p i n g operations had been well-defined.
primarily of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and fou r reduced sulfur compounds
hydrogen sulf ide (H2S) , methyl mercaptan (CH3SH), dimethyl sulfide (DMS) ,
and dimethyl disulfide (DMDS). These compounds are highly reactive,
particularly the H2S-S02 mixture which may form elemental sulfur, and are
present i n low concentrations i n well-controlled sources. In addition, the
sources of these emissions (recovery furnaces, lime kilns , smelt dissolving
tanks , digesters , mu1 t iple-effect evaporators , washer systems , oxidation
Emissions consist
-
systems, and condensate s t r ippers) are characterized by high temperatures and
moist, particulate-laden eff luent streams.
After careful consideration, i t was determined that an additive total
reduced sulfur (TRS) standard, ref lect ing a l l sulfur compounds present minus
SO , was desired.
t i o n s , a f i e ld method which could measure reduced sulfur compounds, e i ther i n d i -
Considering th i s and the previously mentioned source condi- 2
vidual ly or col 1 ectively , was sought.
7.1.2.1.1 Methods surveyed - A review of the l i t e r a tu re revealed that
analytical methods f e l l into four main categories: colorimetry, d i rec t
spectrophotometry, coulometry, and gas chromatography. Although most of the
methods surveyed were developed fo r measurement of ambient concentrations, this
d i d not preclude the i r possible application t o the measurement of stack emissions.
Colorimetry - A sample is bubbled through a solution which
selectively absorbs the component o r components desired.
i s then reacted w i t h specific reagent to form a character is t ic color which i s
measured spectrophotometrically.
The absorbed compound
An example o f a colorimetric method i s the methylene blue
method which involves the absorption of TRS compounds i n an alkaline suspension
7-3
of cadmium hydroxide t o form a cadmium sulfide precipitate.
i s then reacted with a strongly acidic solution of N , N , dimethyl-p-phenylene-
diamine and f e r r i c chloride t o give methylene blue, which i s measured spectro-
photometrically. Automated sampling and analytical t ra ins using sequen ia l
techniques are available for this procedure.
sampling applications include variable collection efficiency, range lim t a t i o n s ,
and interferences from oxidants.
The precipitate
Inherent deficiencies for stack
Another colorimetric method i s the use of paper tape samplers
impregnated w i t h e i ther lead acetate or cadmium hydroxide.
react specif ical ly w i t h H2S and the resul tant colored compound can be measured
djrect ly w i t h a densitometer.
TRS compounds unless they were a l l reduced quantitatively to H2S. I n addition,
the range is limited and the method suffers from l igh t sens i t iv i ty , fading, the
necessity for precise humidity control, and var iab i l i ty i n tape response.
These compounds
Tape samplers would not be appropriate for a l l
Spectrophotometry - The use of infrared and mass spectro-
photometry and other sophisticated spectroscopic methods for analysis of
individual odorants is well established. However, these methods were considered
expensive, time consuming, and not sui table for routine f i e ld applications.
One promising method i n this area was split-beam ul t raviolet
spectrophotometry, which u t i l i ze s the strong absorption of u l t rav io le t radiation
a t 282 nm by SO2.
and sp l i t into two streams.
furnace where sulfur constituents are oxidized to SO2 and then through an
optical cel l where i t s absorbance i s measured.
a dummy furnace and then into a reference optical c e l l . The difference i n
abosrbance values between the two ce l l s is a measure o f the non-S02 sulfur
In this method, the gas sample i s mixed w i t h a i r , f i l t e r e d ,
One stream passes through a ca ta ly t ic oxidation
The second stream passes through
7-4
constituents in the sample stream.
in the range of 10 t o 2500 ppm.
The system i s capable of S02/TRS concentrations
Since well-controlled kraf t mill sources f a l l
below the minimum range of 10 ppm, this method was considered n o t applicable.
Coulometry - Coulometric t i t r a t i o n i s based on the principle
of e lectrolyt ical ly generating a selected t i t r a n t i n a t i t r a t ion ce l l . The
t i t r a n t may be a f ree halogen (bromine or iodine) i n aqueous solution as an
oxidizing agent, or a metal ion ( s i l v e r ) , as a reducing agent.
current required to generate the t i t r a n t , as i t is consumed, i s a l inear
measure of the concentration of reactive compounds i n the gas sample.
The e lec t ro ly t ic
Gas Chromatography - This system i s based on the ab i l i t y of
the gas chromatographic col umns t o separate individual sul fur compounds, which
are then determined individually by various analytical techniques. The most
sensit ive determination i s the flame photometric detector (FPD) .
involves measurement of l i g h t emitted from the excited SO2 species formed when
a sulfur compound i s burned i n a hydrogen-rich flame.
This technique
7.1.2.1.2 Methods used for data gathering -
Analytical Techniques - Based on the survey, the GC/FPD
technique was considered to be the most promising and was selected for f i e l d
evaluation. A t several of the plants, the coulometric t i t r a t o r was also t r ied
since th i s instrument was widely used by the industry a t the time.
Sample Collection - Considering the sulfur compound react ivi ty ,
high moisture, and presence of particulate matter, EPA developed a special
sample handling system.
steel sheath with i n l e t ports perpendicular to the stack wall.
I t u t i l i ze s a sampling probe enclosed i n a s ta inless
A deflector
7-5
shield i s fixed on the underside to def lect the heavier particles while the
proble is packed w i t h glass wool t o trap f iner par t ic les . Teflon t u b i n g
heated t o 250°F i s used t o carry the sample from the probe to a dilution
system where the sample is routinely diluted 1:9 with clean dry a i r .
heated sample l ine prevents condensation and teflon does not react w i t h sulfur
compounds. After the sample is diluted i n a heated dilution box, i t s moisture
content is reduced so tha t the dew point i s below ambient temperature, preventing
condensation and sample 1 oss d u r i n g analysis.
The
Calibration of Instruments - For delivery to and calibration
of analytical instruments, a special system containing premeation tubes w i t h
appropriate concentrations of SO2, H2S, DMS, DMDS, and CH3SH were instal led
into the sampling and analytical system. These gas permeation tube standards
were developed by EPA personnel specif ical ly for use w i t h GC systems.
Field Evaluation - Since 1972, EPA has used the sample
delivery system, dilution system, calibration system, and the GC/FPD methods
a t a number of kraf t mills. Two separate GC/FPD systems were employed t o
f a c i l i t a t e the rapid analysis of both h i g h and low molecular weight sulfur
compounds.
simultaneously resolved DMDS and other h i g h molecular weight homologs.
ensure rel iabi 1 i ty 7f the data , the GC/FPD systems were frequently cal i brated
One system resolved H2S, SO2, CH3SH, and DMS, while the other
To
w i t h standards of each of the sulfur compounds.
Field experience has shown t h a t the GC/FPD method i s the
most re l iable , sensit ive, and precise for determination of TRS.
a1 so been substantiated via verbal communications w i t h industry experts.
T h i s has
There, may, however, be some loss of precision i n using this method on
sources having h i g h levels of SO2 i n compari ;on LO the level of TRS.
Further developmental work i s underway t o eliminate this problem and the
necessary changes wi l l be made i n Method 16 as soon as the work i s completed.
7-6
Conversely, at six o f these kraft mills; two different
coulometric instruments have yielded poor results, possibly due to the low
concentrations encountered and operationai problems. This instrument is
unacceptable for compliance testing.
7.1.2.1.1 Compliance method - As the result o f field experience of
testing TRS compounds at kraft mills, Method 16 was prepared for determining
compliance with new source performance standards. This method requires
use o f a GC/FPD system using the same measuring principle as used for
the data gathering y-ocess.
required dilution system, calibration techniques, and instrumentation that
was considered necessary to insure accuracy, precision, and reliability
Design specifications for the
are specified.
7-7
8. COST ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS
8.1 Introduction
The purpose of t h i s chapter i s t o develop estimates of r e t r o f i t costs
for al ternat ive emission control systems for reduction of total reduced
sulfur (TRS) emissions a t existing kraft p u l p mills .
costs will be developed for a1 ternative controls on each affected f a c i l i t y
on three sizes of kraft p u l p mills: 500, 1000, and 1500 ton per day mills.
Following this, aggregate costs will be presented for s ix a1 ternative emission
control systems on a 1000 TPD kraft pulp mill .
analysis fo r estimating industry-wide costs will be presented.
Capital and annualized
Finally, a summary of an
The determination of incremental costs for the various control a l -
ternatives over s t a t e regulatdons for kraft mill sources i s a c r i t i ca l
element i n this analysis.
which vary widely i n t he i r effectiveness of reducing TRS emissions.
var iab i l i ty i n regulations from s ta t e t o state has been taken into account
i n the determination of total industry costs.
Some 28 s ta tes w i t h kraft mills have regulations
The
Throughout this chapter the terms capital cost and annualized cost
a re used; therefore, a brief definit ion i s i n order.
includes a l l the items necessary to design, purchase, and r e t r o f i t e i ther
a control device or process equipment necessary to achieve the emission
reduction. The capital cost includes the purchase of a l l factory assembled
equipment, such as a recovery furnace boiler, black liquor oxidation system
components, incinerator, and so forth; ancil lary items, such as fans, instru-
mentation, pumps; equipment ins ta l la t ion cost including demolition, s i t e
clearance, piping, w i r i n g , and the cost of engineering, construction
overhead, and contingencies. Capital costs are reported i n third quarter
The capital cost
8- 1
1976 d o l l a r s . The annualized cost of a r e t ro f i t project, whether i t be a
control device o r replacement of process equipment, i s a measure of wha t
i t costs the company t o own and operate t h a t system. The annualized cost
includes direct operating costs such as labor, u t i 1 i t i e s and maintenance;
and capital related charges such as depreciation, interest , administrative
overhead , property taxes , and insurance. The actual costs experienced by
individual mills may vary considerably and often are d i f f icu l t t o collect .
Nevertheless, attempts must be made t o determine reasonable estimates of
these costs. The following values were chosen as typical and should pro-
vide a reasonable estimate of the annualized costs o f the r e t ro f i t control
requirements. Operating labor i s charged a t a rate of $6 per hour w i t h
supervision a t $8 per hour. Electricity i s assumed t o cost 2.5 cents per
kilowatt-hour. Fuel costs are assessed a t $2.00 per million BTU, For
purposes of estimating annualized costs, 328.5 operating days per year
were assumed.
Recovery furnaces and 1 ime kil ns t h a t would constitute replacements
necessary t o achieve TRS reduction are no t allocated any charges for main-
tenance and repair. The reason for t h i s is that such maintenance costs
incurred for rep1 -cement would be offset by maintenance charges foregone
i n scrapping the old equipment.
For gas collection and p i p i n g systems, including incinerators, main-
tenance costs are assessed a t 2 percent of capi ta l jnwestment. For
black liquor oxidation systems and oxygen plants, a charge of 4 percent of
capital investment i s expensed.
8-2
i
Capi ta l charges have been calculated on the basis o f 100 percent
debt f inanc ing and recovery o f c a p i t a l by uniform per iod ic payments
( cap i ta l recovery fac to r ) . Rate o f i n t e r e s t f o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l lending
i s assumed t o be 10 percent. The economic l i f e assumed f o r a l l equipment
i s 15 years.
percent. Administrat ive overhead costs i nvo l v ing records keeping,
monitoring, e tc . are also assessed a t a r a t e o f 2 percent.
8.2 Methodology
Property taxes and insurance are assessed a t a r a t e o f 2
The a f fec ted f a c i l i t i e s and cont ro l systems were previously discussed
i n Chapter 6.
emission reductions, as ou t l i ned i n Table 6-2, a re summarized i n Table 8-1
The r e t r o f i t con t ro l techniques t h a t can achieve the necessary
f o r each a f fec ted f a c i l i t y and cont ro l system. These cont ro l techniques
were based on ce r ta in assumptions, which r e f l e c t t h e content o f informat ion
ava i l ab le f o r est imat ing r e t r o f i t costs. These assumptions w i l l be d i s -
cussed i n d e t a i l i n the fo l l ow ing subsections f o r each af fected f a c i l i t y .
The cost informat ion on r e t r o f i t con t ro ls f o r recovery furnaces nresented
i n t h i s chapter appl ies t o cross-recovery furnaces as we l l as s t r a i g h t k r a f t
recovery systems. However, there i s one precaution t h a t should be noted.
T!?e app l i ca t i on o f the cont ro l techniques f o r s t r a i g h t k r a f t recovery furnaces
as discussed here and i n Chapter 6 w i l l n o t necessar i ly r e s u l t i n the same
achievable emission l eve l s f o r cross-recovery furnaces as reported i n t h i s
chapter.
For cost est imat ing purposes, a l i s t of m i l l cha rac te r i s t i cs was
compiled f o r each k r a f t pu lp m i l l i n the United States.
com?iled includes K r a f t production capacity; number, capacity, manufacturer,
basis design ( d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t contact ) and year o f manufacture o f the
recovery furnace; the number and production r a t e f o r l ime k i l n s ; the number,
The in format ion
8- 3
SOURCE
Recovery Furnace
Table 8-1. SUMMARY OF RETROFIT CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR ALTERNATIVE CONTROL SYSTEMS ON EXISTIilG KRAFT MILLS
CONTROL SYSTEMS
1 2 3 4 5
a ) Replace Furnaces Same as a ) Replace Furnaces Same a s Same a s
b) Add 2nd Stage Black >lo y r s . of age 1 '20 yrs . of age 3 3
b ) Add 2nd Stage Black Liquor Oxidation l iquor oxidation f o r (IncludiRg furnaces a l l o ther furnaces. < l o y r s . of age) . Also A1 so improve furnace
inprove furnace a i r a i r d i s t r ibu t ion . d i s t r ibu t ion
Digester System Incinerat ion Incinerat ion Incinerat ion Incinerat ion Incinerat ion
Inci nera t i on Inci nerat ion Incinera t i on Incineration Mu1 t i p l e Effect Evaporators Incinerat ion
Lime K i l n
Y P
a ) Increase Lime Mud Same as Same a s Washing Capacity 1 1
b) Increase fan cap.
c ) m a caus t ic to
& Monitor Oxygen a n d temp. ( k i l n )
ki ln scrubber
a ) Increase Lime . a ) Increase Fan Mud Washing Cap. & Monitor Capacity Oxygen and
b) Increase Fan temp. (Kiln) Cap. & Monitor oxygen p1 temp(ki1n)
Brown Stock Washer System Incinerat ion No Control No Control No Control No Control
Black Liquor Oxidation Mol ecul a r Oxygen No Control No Control
Smelt Dissolving Tank Subs t i tu te f resh Same a s Same as
Condensate Str ipping Incinerat ion Incinerat ion Inc i nerat i on System
System Vents
water f o r condensate 1 1
No Control No Control
Same as Same as 1 1
Inc inera t ion Incinerat ion
6
Same as 1
Incineratioil
Incinerat i or,
Same as 5
'.No Control
No Control
Same as 1
Inc inera t i or-)
:I
I
type, and TRS contro l s f o r mu1 t i p l e e f f e c t evaporators and digesters;
and the number o f brown stock washing systems and number o f washing stages
per system. and
Lockwoods' d i r e c t o r i e s and updated wherever possible f r o m contacts w i t h
pu lp and paper companies.
M i l l capacity and other data were compiled from Posts'
The approach used t o estimate r e t r o f i t con t ro l costs i s as fo l lows.
The National Council f o r A i r and Stream Improvement (NCASI) was ca l l ed
upon to provide EPA both the contacts w i t h i n i nd i v idua l paper companies
fo r sources o f cos t data and t h e technica l parameters, o r guidel ines, ( 3 )
for est imat ing costs.
personnel f o r est imat ing costs. The fo l lowing 8 companies were selected
and contacted t o provide maximum coverage i n terms o f m i l l s and capacity:
These gu ide l ines were a lso made ava i l ab le t o i ndus t r y
(a) In te rna t iona l Paper
(6) Weyerhaeuser
(c) Georgia P a c i f i c
(d) Westvaco
(e) Boise Cascade
(f) S t . Regis
(9)
(h) Mead Corpora t i,on
Western K ra f t ( W i l lamette Indus t r ies )
Actual corporate data covering both costs and m i l l cha rac te r i s t i cs were
provided f o r 42 m i l l s by these companies. This coverage cons t i tu tes 35
percent o f t he number o f t o t a l m i l l s and about 41 percent o f t o t a l U.S.
capacity.
furnaces i n the U.S.,were contacted t o provide informat ion on ages o f
ex i s t i ng furnaces, as we l l as the cos t of new furnaces. In-house informa-
t i o n was used t o generate cost estimates, which were then used as a forum
f o r discussion dur ing v i s i t s w i t h the corporate s t a f f of the e igh t paper
companies. The t ime for the data gather ing phase was the second quarter
of 1975.
Two b o i l e r manufacturers, who have b u i l t a l l the k r a f t recovery
-
8-5
The data received from the paper companies were analyzed for regression
The next step was t o develop model
500 tons per day, 1000 tons per
These model plant costs i n
poss ib i l i t i es w i t h mill characterist ics.
plant costs fo r the f o l l o w i n g model mills:
day, and 1500 tons per day production capacity.
combination with the information on mill character is t ics and furnace age
were used t o estimate costs for the remaining 65 percent of the mills i n
the U.S.
8.3 Costs for Affected Fac i l i t i es
8.3.1 Recovery Furnaces
The major problem from the standpoint of TRS emission i n existing
kraft mills i s associated w i t h the b u r n i n g o f black liquor i n d i rec t
contact recovery furnaces.
( 1 ) close monitoring and control of the process variables i n the recovery
furnace a n d , ( 2 ) oxidizing the black l iquor t o reduce the sulfides content
The methods used t o reduce these emissions are:
before evaporation of the black l iquor i n the d i rec t contact evaporator.
Control of the process variables depends s ignif icant ly upon the original
design and configuration of the recovery furnace.
c r i t i ca l factor i n determining the extent of r e t r o f i t costs.
Hence, furnace age is a
Recovery furpaces , including both d i rec t contact and indirect contact ,
of new design - as defined i n ChaDter 6 - are capable of achievinq a 5 ppm
level of TRS without any additional costs for process controls, as indicated
i n Chapter 6 .
as f l ex ib i l i t y i n a i r dis t r ibut ion and the membrane insulation between wall
Many of those process controls discussed i n Chapter 6 , such
tubes, are inherently designed i n most furnaces constructed since 1965.
w i t h a d i rec t contact furnace of the design jus t mentioned are assumed to
incur costs only for a second stage o f black l iquor oxidation as the
rqills
8-6
requirement for achieving a 5 ppm level of TRS from the to ta l recovery
furnace affected f a c i l i t y . Mil 1s with indirect contact furnaces are
assumed t o achieve the 5 ppm w i t h o u t any additional costs.
indirect contact furnace design concept has been commercially available
only since 1967.
Note tha t the
Recovery furnaces bu i l t prior t o 1965 are assumed t o be incapable of
achieving a 5 ppm level of TRS despite any attempts t o achieve the most
e f f i c i en t black liquor oxidation system.
i s related t o the e a r l i e r design o f the furnace i t s e l f , which was not con-
ducive toward reduction of TRS t o low levels. Therefore, the control
strategy for a 5 ppm level would require the replacement of the recovery
furnace, which const i tutes the r e t r o f i t cost. For furnaces bui l t
between 1955 and 1965, the 20 ppm level i s assumed t o be achievable, according
t o NCASI guidelines and discussion i n Chapter 6 . The only costs incurred
are those associated with adding a second stage of black l iquor oxidation.
For furnaces b u i l t prior t o 1955, the r e t r o f i t costs assumed include re-
placement of the furnace plus a complete 2-stage black liquor oxidation for
The key element in the assumption
b o t h the 5 ppm and the 20 ppm control
w i t h NCASI guide1 ines.
Another important factor besides
need for additional black 1 iquor b u r n
levels . T h i s assumpt
age tha t would a f fec t
ng capacity. In part
on i s i n accord
costs i s the
cu lar , mills
t ha t have not added a recovery furnace since 1965 may be overloading fur-
naces with black l iquor from a design standpoint.
t o h i g h TRS emissions.
1965 and appear t o have underrated furnace capabi l i ty , according t o
available data on mill charac te r i s t ics , a re assumed t o add additional
Such a practice leads
Mills tha t have furnaces bui l t between 1955 and
8-7
black l i q u o r burning capacity i n order t o achieve the 20 ppm strategy.
Therefore, such mills would have t o purchase a new furnace in order t o
achieve the 20 ppm level.
Additional guidelines were developed by NCASI t o provide these com-
panies technical parameters for black liquor oxidation as a complement t o
process controls i n the recovery furnace toward achieving the 5 ppm and
the 20 ppm levels.
The guidelines used for estimating coSts of black liquor oxidation
requirements are stated as follows.
of best technology consists of:
stage of oxidation, (6) retention time o f f ive hours for bo th stages com-
bined, (c) stand-by blower capacity, and (d) monitoring of both oxidizing
a i r and l iquor flow ra tes . The NCASI provided these guidelines to each
company, which i n t u r n was t o assess i t s requirements re la t ive t o t he i r
existing oxidation system capabi l i t ies .
The oxidation system representative
(a) two-stage oxidation w i t h a t l eas t one
The costs presented i n Table 8-2 for model plants were analyt ical ly
derived from the resu l t s received for some 42 mills.
furnaces i n 17 mi l l s , which management f e l t may be required, correlated
reasonably well w i t h mill s ize as a parameter.
from various companies fo r oxidation requirements as to the condition o f
existing oxidation systems, su l f id i ty of black l iquor, and level o f ex-
perience acquired w i t h development of highly e f f i c i en t oxidation systems
d i d not correlate well w i t h mill s ize . This resu l t occurred despite the
specific guidelines s e t for th by NCASI t o the managerial s t a f f o f the 8
Cost data for recovery
Conversely, data received
- companies. A probable explanation i s that the nature of mi71 operations
and mil 1 lay-out vary widely, which affect costs significantly.
8- 8
Tab1 e 8-2. RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR RECOVERY FURNACES
I CD
M i l l Size, TPD
Cap i ta l Costs ($)
Annual i z e d Costs ($/Yr. )
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
~~
M i l l Size. TPD
500 1000
600 , 000 1,000,000
153,000 242 , 000
0.93 0.74
Cap i ta l Costs ( $ )
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
A. Furnace Replac
500
13,400,000
2,270 , 000
13.82
0 1 men t
1000
23 , 300,000
4,000,000
12.18
1500
32 , 200,000
5,470,000
11.09
1500
1,500 , 000
360,000
0.73
(1 ) Contro l s t ra tegy requ i red t o achieve 5 ppm f o r m i l l s whose furnaces were b u i l t p r i o r t o 1965.
( 2 ) Contro l s t r a t e g y requ i red t o achieve 20 ppm f o r furnaces b u i l t s ince 1955.
Costs i n c l ude secondary 61 ac k 1 i quor ox ida t i on .
assumed unable t o achieve 20 ppm; r e q u i r e replacement. Pre-1955 furnaces are
8.3.2 Digesters and Mu1 t i p l e Effect Evaporators
The control technique for achieving a 5 ppn level i s incineration o f
the noncondensi bl e TRS compounds emitted from various vents.
of the r e t r o f i t project involves the collection of the noncondensibles and
p i p i n g them t o the incineration point, as well as necessary upgrading o f
The nature
the blow heat recovery system associated w i t h the digesters .
incineration p o i n t i s the lime k i l n ; however, i n some s i tua t ions , a separate
incinerator may be used as the back-up for the lime kiln or as the regular
control device.
Normally, the
Data gathered from the selected paper companies d i d no t reveal any
s ignif icant correlation of cost w i t h mill size. The probable explanation
of th i s are the number o f digesters , t he i r spatial arrangement, condition
of blow heat recovery system, and type of gas hold ing system,
weak correlation of costs w i t h capacity estimates were made for model plants
t o represent three conditions:
requirements only (low r e t r o f i t penalty]; (21 batch digesters w i t h extensive
piping , refurbished blow heat recovery, and separate incineration; (h igh
r e t r o f i t penalty) and (3) continuous digesters . Mu1 t i p 1 e e f fec t evaporator
vents are assumed t o be combined w i t h the digester vents for a l l three cases.
The costs for incineration are presented i n Table 8-3.
for e l ec t r i c i ty and fuel were developed from da ta by an engineering con-
struction company. (5)
noncondensible TRS emissions are based on use of a separate incinerator as
a stand-by control device for 33 days, o r ten percent of the time.
Despite the
(1 ) batch digesters w i t h extensive piping
U t i l i t y requirements
Fuel consumption assumed i n Table 8-3 for destruction of
This
- represents an assumed dura t ion of downtime fc; the lime k i l n for maintenance
when the kiln becomes unavailable as a control device for incinerating TRS
emissions.
8-10
Table 8-3. RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR DIGESTERS AND MULTIPLE EFFECT EVAPORATORS
Mill Size, TPD
A. Batch Digesters - Low Retrof i t Penal
500
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ($)
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
500 1000
400,000
96,000
0.58
Mill Size
1000
900 , 000
210,000
0.64
500 1000 1500
B. Batch Digesters - High Retrofit Pena I I
03 Capital Costs ($ ) d d
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr. )
Annualized Costs per Ton ( $ / T )
900,000
207 , 000
1.26
2,000,000
452 , 000
1.38
1500
1,600,000
360,000
0.73
1500
3 , 500,000
773,000
1.57
Capital Costs ( $ )
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
300,000
67 , 000
0.41
400,000
96 , 000
0.29
500,000
125,000
0.25
I
(1) Includes provision for extensive p i p i n g only.
(2) Includes blow heat recovery system, extensive p i p i n g , separate incinerator.
8.3.3 Brown Stock Washers
The control technique fo r achieving the 5 ppm level of TRS emissions
from washer vents i s incineration.
e i ther i n the recovery furnace or a separate incinerator.
The incineration may be carried out
As pointed o u t
i n Chapter 6 , incineration i n an existing recovery furnace may r e s t r i c t
the operation of the recovery furnace. The gas flows from the washer
system are too great for the lime k i l n t o incinerate. For some mi l l s , a
separate incinerator may be the only available control device to t r e a t the
washer vent gases. a
t ion requirements of 100 scfm/TPD, a parameter which i s documented In
Chapter 6. The basis for estimating hooding and ducting requirements
was information provided from NCASI for actual r e t r o f i t s i tuat ions.
The capital costs for a separate incinerator were developed from data by
the Industrial Gas Cleaning Ins t i tu te (7) for an incinerator [ w i t h h e a t
recovery) appl ication on an asphalt saturator plant.
Preliminary EPA costs were developed in-house on the basis of ventila-
(6)
The prel iminary EPA
costs were dissiminated t o the selected g roup o f paper companies for comment.
T h e responses from these companies was assimilated into revision of the
estimates, w h i c h are presented i n Table 8-4.
I t must be pointed out t h a t some unusual r e t r o f i t problems can occur
a t specific mills, where hooding brown stock washers may be constrained
severely by space l imitations.
the wash ing b u i l d i n g and reconstruction may be required.
In such mil ls , demolition of portions o f
I n other mi l l s ,
- the washers may have to be replaced w i t h semi-closed drum washers. For
these s i tuat ions, r e t r o f i t costs may be much higher than those estimates
presented i n Table 8-4.
8-12
Table 8-4. RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR BROWN STOCK WASHERS
M i l l Size, TPD 500 1000 1500
Cap i ta l Costs ($ )
Annual ized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
1,600,000
900 , 000
5.48
2 , 500,000
1,670,000
5.08
3,200,000
2,400,000
4.87
M i l l Size, TPD
Cap i ta l Costs ($)
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs Per Ton ($/T)
B. Des t ruc t i on i n
50 0
900 , 000
192,000
1.17
ecovery Furnace
1000
1,500,000
326 , 000
0.99
1500
1,900,000
423,000
0.86
For separate incineration, a fuel penalty of 1.76 million BTU per
ton p u l p was used. The basis for this i s 22 million BTU per hour for a
30,000 scfm incinerator u t i 1 izing primary and secondary heat recovery. (8)
Responses from the industry indicated that this fuel penalty i s j u s t
s l igh t ly above the industry average. I t should be pointed out t h a t fuel
requirements would be sensit ive t o ventilation rates of the washers, the
degree o f heat recovery, and use of catalyst t o reduce ignition temperature.
The use o f catalyst was not assurled fn the above estimate.
8'.3.4 Lime Kilns
Three levels of control a r e being considered for t h i s affected
faci l i ty . The level of 40 ppn represents process controls o f adding
more air and raising the cold-end temperature o f the kiln by 100" F.
Adding a fan and instrumentation are assumed to be the required cost
items,
available costs for fans and instrumentation. These costs were then
In-house EPA estimates of costs were generated on the basis of
reviewed w i t h industry personnel for comparison w i t h actual modification
costs f o r lime kilns.
The level of 20 ppm represents the combination of good lime mud
washing and control of the kiln process variables. Costs were provided
by companies on the basis of replacing centrifuges w i t h vacuum drum
f i l t e r s and adding another mud washing stage.
cost estimating purposes were approximately 0.5 f t / t o n pulp for f i l t r a -
t ion and 1 2 t o 21 hours o f retention i n the c l a r i f i e r stage.
NCASI guide1 ines") for 2
The level of 8 ppm represents the addition of caustic t o the lime
k i ln scrubber as a complement to the aforementimed requirements for
achieving 8 ppn. The costs for caustic addition are assumed t o be the
same as those reported i n the Standards Support and Environmental Impact
Statement. (1 01
8-14
The capital and annualized costs for the three control levels are
presented i n Table 8-5.
should be discussed.
costs for process controls was based on use of 142 million BTU fuel for a
1000 ton per day mil l .
There are three points concerning Table 8-5 t h a t
F i r s t , the fuel penalty assumed i n the annualized
T h i s i s the enthalpy requirement t o raise t h e
cold-end temperature of the k i l n 100" F. Second, e i ther process controls
or combined process controls w i t h mud washing may not achieve the 40 ppm
level.
and would have t o add another lime kiln u n i t .
industry indicate that a k i l n addition i n the range of 160-200 TPD (CaO
basiS) seemed typical , regardless of mill size.
are $3 million; and annualized costs , $510,000.
I n this circumstance, the mill may be short on lime b u r n i n g capacity
Results from surveying the
Capital costs for the kiln
For th i s mil l , the k i l n
addition plus process controls on the existing kiln would be the requirement
t o achieve 40 ppm.
Lastly, the costs i n Table 8-5 are presented t o demonstrate r e t r o f i t
problems w i t h mud washing.
To take account of this , costs were estimated for a low r e t r o f i t and a h i g h
r e t r o f i t case.
be rnlated to space l imitation, replacement o f the en t i r e washing system,
or changing condensate wash water t o fresh water by addition of a condensate
Results from the industry survey varied widely.
Some o f the problems associated w i t h h i g h r e t r o f i t costs may
stripper.
8.3.5 Black Liquor Oxidation Vents
The control techniques for achieving the 5 ppm level o f TRS emissions
from black l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system vents are incineration and the use of
mol-ecular oxygen for oxidation. The vent gases may be combined w i t h the
brown stock washer vents and destroyed i n the recovery furnace or separate
8-15
Table 8-5. RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR LIME KILNS
A . Process Contro ls (1 1 M i l l Size, TPD 500 . 1000 1500
Capi ta l Costs ( $ ) 75,000 100,000 200,000 Annual i zed Costs ($/Yr. ) 54,000 107,000 175,000 Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T) 0.33 0.33 0.36
B. Mud Washing Capaci ty - Low R e t r o f i t Penal ty (2) M i l l Size. TPD 500 1000 1500
Cap i ta l Costs ( $ ) Annualized Costs ($/Yr. ) Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
480,000 730 , 000
91,200 139,000 0.56 0.42
950,000 181,000
0.37
i
C. Mud Washing Capaci ty - High R e t r o f i t Penal ty (3 ) 9" 4 m
M i l l S ize, TPD 500 1000 1500
C a p i t ~ l Costs ( 8 ) 960 , 000 1,460,000 ~,900,000 Annualized Costs ($/Yr.) 182,000 278,000 362 , 000 Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T) 1.11 0.85 0.73
D. Caust ic Add i t i on N i l 1 Size, TPD 500 1000 1500
Cap i ta l Costs ( 8 ) -0- -0- -0-
Annual i zed Costs ( $ / Y r. ) 3000 6000 9000 Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T) 0.02 0.02 0.02
(1 ) I n some s i t u a t i o n s , m i l l s may be sho r t on l i m e burning capaci ty . Typica l capac i t y requirements m igh t be on the order o f 160 t o 200 TPD CaO, which was fouund t o be independent of m i l l s ize, Cap i ta l costs would be $3 m i l l i o n ; annualized costs of $510,000 per year.
(2 ) Includes on ly a d d i t i o n a l f i l t r a t i o n and c l a r i f i e r capaci ty . (3) Includes condensate s t r i p p e r f o r removal o f TRS from water used f o r mud washing and/or charges
f o r space 1 i m i t a t i o n .
incinerator. However, incineration costs f o r the BLO vents will be con-
sidered separately from the brown stock washers.
Costs f o r incineration i n recovery furnaces were taken from the costs
developed for new sources. ( ' ' I Very few responses were received from indus-
t r y , b u t one company d id report similar costs , ('*) which were found t o be
comparable w i t h EPA estimates.
developed on the basis o f a 26,000 scfm incinerator required for a 1000
ton per day mil l .
Costs for separate incinerators were
The source of the basic cost information was information
provided by the Industrial Gas Cleaning Inst i tute . (13) Costs for a 500 t o n
per day and 1500 t o n per day were developed by using a scale factor of 0.3.
Fuel requirements were calculated t o be 19 m i l l i o n BTU per hour for the
26,QOO scfm incinerator on the basis of u s i n g primary and secondary heat
recovery. No casts for separate incineration were reported from industry.
Costs fo r molecular oxygen were developed on the basis of 45 tons
oxygen per 800 ton p u l p produced. (14)
pressure oxygen plants were obtained from Airco, Inc. (15) The energy con-
sumption for use of molecular oxygen is assumed t o be 20 kilowatt-hours per
Capital costs for skid-mounted low-
t o n of p u l p , or 380 kilowatt-hours per ton o f oxygen produced, (16)
A sumnary of capital and annualized costs f o r control of black l iquor
oxidation vents i s presented i n Table 8-6.
recovery furnace should re f lec t minimal r e t r o f i t problems, On the other
The costs for incineration i n a
hand, separate incineration and molecular oxygen should represent h i g h
r e t r o f i t costs.
8.3.6 Smelt Dissolving T a n k
The control s t ra tegy for achieving 8 ppm is the use of fresh water i n
a scrubber. T h i s scrubber should already be installed i n most mil ls because
of s t a t e regulations for controlling particulates. The use o f fresh water
8-17
Table 8-6. RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR BLACK LIQUOR OXIDATION VENTS
I I Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ( $ )
Annualized Costs ($/Yr. )
Annualized Costs per Ton ($/T)
1000
330,000
96,000
0.29
500
220,000
60,000
0.37
1500
432,000
133,000
0.27
Mill Size , TPD 500
Capital Costs ($) 400,000
Annualized Costs ($/Yr.) 233,000
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T) 1.42
1000 1500
560,000 700,000
420,000 605 , 000
1.28 1.23
Mill Size, TPD
Capital Costs ( 8 ) Annualized Costs ($/Yr.)
Annual ized Costs per Ton ($/T)
1000
1,640,000
509,000
1.55
500
1,080,000
309,000
1.88
1500
2,100,000
645,000
1.31
is the only additional requirement which may be needed t o reduce the
effect ivel y.
I t i s expected t h a t costs associated w i t h use of fresh water \nl
TRS
11 be
small.
particulate scrubbers on this affected f a c i l i t y on one mi l l ,
this example, no other cuinpany reported any cost for s u b s t i t u t i n g fresh
water for process water w i t h h i g h sulfides content.
8.3.7 Condensate Strippers
Dur ing the survey, one company provided cost data fo r i n s h a l l i n g
Other t h a n
T h
i n the
furnace
co nden s
densate
control technique for achieving the 5 ppm level i s incineration
ime k i l n for steam s t r i p p i n g and incineration i n the recovery
for a i r s t r i p p i n g .
t e strippers.
s t r ipper vents.
Only five mills i n the U.S. presently employ
Four o f these mil ls are presently incinerating con-
Those mil ls t h a t may decide t o ins ta l l condensate s t r ippers i n the (171 future are assumed to incur costs similar t o reported costs for new sources.
Those costs which a re i n 1976 d o l l a r s are summarized i n Table 8-7. These
costs include a fan, duct, seal pot, and flame arrester w i t h the incinera-
t i o n p o i n t being the lime k i l n . No r e t r o f i t penalty has been assigned
because there are very few condensate s t r ippers i n existing mills.
controls fo r new str ippers should incur minimal r e t r o f i t costs. However,
i t s t i l l i s possible tha t some r e t r o f i t penalty could be incurred i f prior
provisions have not been made t o tap i n t o the mill's p i p i n g system for
venting other noncondensibles t o an incineration point w i t h i n the mill .
Future
8-19
Table 8-7. CONTROL COSTS FOR COND'ENSATE STRIPPER
1000 500 I
Tu Mill S ize , TPD O /
1500
Capital Cost ($)
Annualized Costs
Annualized Costs
16,200
6',30O , I
0.04
22,700
7,800
0.02
28,100
8,900
0.02
8.4 Incremental Costs For Model Mills
The purpose of t h i s section i s t o present incremental control costs
over requirements fo r s t a t e regulations, on a total m i 11 basis.
in to account the interrelationships involved w i t h the many s ignif icant
To take
factors in estimation of r e t r o f i t costs, three model mill s i tuat ions will
be ut i l ized t o depict costs. These model s i tuat ions are described as
follows:
( 1 ) a post-1965 modern mill
( 2 )
( 3 )
The modern mill has a recovery furnace of modern design that can
an old (pre-1965) mill w i t h low r e t r o f i t penalty
an old (pre-1965) mill with h i g h r e t r o f i t penalty a
achieve the 5 ppm level under good operating conditions. The black liquor
b u r n i n g u n i t may be ei ther a direct contact furnace or an indirect contact
furnace.
1967.
will be fo r secondary black liquor oxidation t o assure achievement of the
5 ppm level.
The l a t t e r type of furnace has been instal led in mills only since
Only the d i rec t contact furnace will incur any control costs, which
As f o r as the remaining affected f a c i l i t i e s , only low retro-
f i t costs are assumed t o be incurred.
The old mill bu i l t before 1965, w i t h low r e t r o f i t penalty, i s assumed
t o have a recovery furnace(s) capable o f achieving the 20 ppm level.
Furnace replacement costs would be incurred only for a 5 ppm system.
the remaining affected f a c i l i t i e s , low r e t r o f i t costs would be associated
wi t h addi t i on of controls .
On
The old mill bu i l t before 1965, w i t h a high r e t r o f i t penalty, i s
assumed t o have a recovery furnace(s) t h a t cannot achieve the 20 ppm
level. This may be due t o a very old furnace, greater t h a n 20 years of age,
2-21
o r i n s u f f i c i e n t b lack l i q u o r burn ing caPaci ty.
cond i t i on i s t h a t a new furnace w i l l be requ i red f o r a l l c o n t r o l systems.
The remaining af fected f a c i l i t i e s w i l l i n c u r h igh r e t r o f i t costs w i t h t h e
a d d i t i o n o f con t ro l .
The r e s u l t o f t h i s
The nex t lmpor tant f a c t o r i n f l u e n c i n g incremental costs i s t h e
v a r i a b i l i t y i n s t a t e regu la t i ons .
emission con t ro l regu la t i ons f o r e x i s t i n g sources. One s e t o f costs w i l l
be presented fo r such s ta tes .
which c a l l f o r c o r t r o l s on e x i s t i n q recovery furnaces and i n c i n e r a t i o n o f
noncondensible gases from miscel laneous sources such as d iges te rs , mu1 t i p l e
6 f fec t evaporators, and condensate s t r i p p e r s . Another s e t o f incremental
costs w i l l be presented f o r such s ta tes . Very few s ta tes , perhaps one or
two, r e q u i r e con t ro l s on exl ’st inq l ime k i l n s , and no s ta tes r e q u i r e con t ro l s
on e x i s t i n q brown s tock washers and b lack l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system vents.
Some s ta tes w i t h pu lp m i l l s have no
Many s ta tes w i t h pu lp m i l l s have r e g u l a t i o n s
Tables 8-8 and 8-9 present incremental costs f o r a modern m i l l under
t h e two r e g u l a t o r y s i t u a t i o n s as descr ibed e a r l i e r . Cap i ta l and annua-
l i z e d costs a re presented for t h e s i x a l t e r n a t i v e c o n t r o l systems d e t a i l e d
i n Table 8-1.
contact recovery furnace designs.
l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system vents, costs a re presented on ly f o r d e s t r u c t i o n i n
a separate i n c i n e r a t i o n .
n o t be w i d e l y app l i cab le due t o at tendant problems of i n f l e x i b i l i t y and
poss ib le explosions, as po in ted o u t i n Chapter 6.
Costs a re presented f o r t h e d i r e c t con tac t and i n d i r e c t
For brown s tock washers and b lack
Dest ruc t ion o f TRS i n the recovery furnace may
Where no regu la t i ons e x i s t (Table 8-8) , incremental annual ized c o n t r o l
- costs f o r t h e model m i l l wi th t h e d i r e c t contact recovery furnace range
from $1.73 per ton f o r c o n t r o l system 6 t o $8.53 per t o n f o r system 1. For
8-22
Table 8-8. INCREMENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPD MODERN MILL (BUILT AFTER 1965) Location: S ta te w i t h No Regulat ions
No. 1
U n i t CaDital Anpualized Annualized
costs cos ts cos ts j$lOOO) ($looO/yr) ($/TI
A. Recovery Furnace
a) D i r e c t Contact 1,000 242 0.74 b) I n d i r e c t Contact 0 0 0
B. Batch Digester and (1)
C. Brown Stock Washers (2)
System Ventsyz) ( D i r e c t Contact Only)
E. Lime K i l n (3)
M u l t i p l e E f f e c t Evaporator 900 21 0 0.64
2,500 1,670 5.08 D. Elack L iquor x ' d a t i o n 560 420 1.28
830 252 0.77 F. Condensate St r ipper 23 8 0.02
03 TOTAL COSTS r\) a) D i r e c t Contact 5,813 2,802 8.53 w b ) I n d i r e c t Contact 4,253 2,140 6.51
I
No. 2
Cap i ta l Annual i zed Annual i zed costs cos ts cos ts
~ $ 1 0 0 0 ) ($lOOO/yr) ($IT)
U n i t
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
900 210 0.64 0 0 0 0 0 0
830 252 0.77 23 8 0.02
2,753 71 2 2.17 1,753 470 1.43
No. 3
U n i t Cap i ta l Annualized Annualized cos ts costs costs I810001 I$1ooO/yr) ($/T)
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
900 21 0 0.64 0 0 0 0 0 0
830 252 0.77 23 8 0.02
2,753 71 2 2.17 1,753 470 1.43
No. 4 No. 5
A . Recovery Furnace
a) D i r e c t Contact 1,000 242 0.74 b ) I n d i r e c t Contact 0 0 0
B. Batch Digester and (1 1
C. Brown Stock Washers (2 ) 0 0 0
Udation
Mu1 ti pl e Effect Evaporator 900 21 0 0.64
. o 0 0 D . Black L iquor
E. Lime Ki ln( ' ) 830 246 0.75
System Vents ( D i r e c t Contact Only)
F. Condensate S t r i p p e r 23 8 0.02
TOTAL COSTS a) D i r e c t Contact 2,753 706 2.15 b) I n d i r e c t Contact 1,753 464 1.41
- . - - . .
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
900 21 0 0.64 0 0 0
- 0 0 0
100 107 0.33 23 8 0.02
2,023 567 1.73 1,023 325 0.99
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
900 21 0 0.64 0 0 0
0 0 0
100 107 0.33 23 8 0.02
2,023 567 1.73 1,023 325 0.99
( 1 ) Low r e t r o f i t penal ty (2 ) Des t ruc t ion i n separate i n c i n e r a t o r ( 3 ) Low r e t r o f i t penal ty
Table 8-9. IEICREHENTAL RETROFIT CONTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPD MODER MILL (WILT AFTER 1965) State w i t h Typical Regulat ionsyl
aJ N P
Locat ion:
No. 1
U n i t Cap i ta l Annualized Annualized
costs costs costs I$lOOO) ($1000/yr) ($/T)
A. ,Recovery Furnace
a) D i r e c t Contact 1,000 242 0.74 b) I n d i r e c t Contact 0 0 0
M u l t i p l e E f f e c t Evaporator 0 0 0 B. Batch Digesters and
C. Brown Stock Washers ( * ) 2,500 1,670 5.08 D. Black L iquor x i d a t i o n 560 420 1.28
System Vents 'I 2) (D i rec t Contact Only)
E. Lime K i l n ( 3 ) 830 252 0.77 F. Condensate S t r i ppe r 0 0 0
TOTAL COSTS a ) D i r e c t C o n t x t 4,890 2,584 7.87 b) I n d i r e c t Contact 3,330 1,922 5.85
- No. 4
A. Recovery Furnace
a) D i rec t Contact 0 0 0 b ) I n d i r e c t Contact 0 0 0
M u l t i p l e E f f e c t Evaporator 0 0 0 C. Brown Stock Washers (2) 0 0 0 D. Black L iquor x da t i on '0 0 0
B. Batch Digester and
System Vents (121 (D i rec t Contact Only)
E. Lime K i l n ( 3 ) 830 246 0.75 F. Condensate S t r i ppe r 0 0 0
TOTAL COSTS a) D i r e c t Contact 830 246 0.75 b) I n d i r e c t Contact 830 246 ' 0.75
No. 2
U n i t Capi ta l Annualized Annualized costs costs costs
i$lOOO) l$1000/yr)- ($ /T I
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
'0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
83 0 252 0.77 0 0 0
1,830 494 1.50 830 252 0.77
No. 3
U n i t Cap i ta l Annualized Annual i zed
costs costs costs ($1000) j$1000/yr) ($/T)
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
830 252 0.77 0 0 0
830 252 0.77 830 252 0.77
1;o. 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
100 107 0.33 0 0 0
1 OG 107 0.33 100 107 , 0.33
No. 6
1,000 242 0.74 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
100 107 ' 0.33 0 0 0
1,100 349 1.07 100 107 0.33
(1) A t y p i c a l s ta te i s assumed t o requ i re 20 ppm f o r t he recovery furnace and inc ine ra t i on (5 ppm) o f TRS emissions from digesters, m u l t i p l e
( 2 ) Des t ruc t ion i n separate inc inera tor .
( 3 ) LOW r e t r o f i t penal ty
e f f e c t evaporators , and condensate s t r ippers .
the indirect contact furnace, the model mill incurs incremental annualized
control costs ranging from $0.99 per t o n for system 6 t o $6.51 uer t o n
for system 1 . In states w i t h the typical composite of regulations (Table
8 - 9 ) , incremental annualized control costs range from $1.07 per t o n for
system 6 t o $7.87 per ton for system 1 in a mill with a direct contact
furnace. For the mill with the indirect contact furnace, incremental
annualized costs for these respective systems range from $0.33 per t o n t o
$5.85 per ton.
For modern mills, the most significant cost i s t h a t associated with
incineration of brown stock washer gases.
- faci l i ty alone i s $5.08 per ton for system 1 (Table 8-8 and 8-9) of which
$3.59 oer t o n i s a fuel penalty. The fuel penalty would not be incurred
in some mills where the washer qascs can be incinerated in a recovery furnace.
I t should be noted t h a t the rather significant $1.28 per ton cost for
controlling black liquor oxidation system vents only occurs for the mill
with a direct contact furnace.
Tables 8-10 and 8-11 present control costs for an old mill with a low
The control of this affected
retrof i t penalty. Capital and annualized costs are presented for the
six alternative control systems detailed in Table 8-1. The costs for
control of brown stock washers and black liquor oxidation system vents i s
based on separate incineration.
assumed t o be required for systems 1 , 2 , and 6. Furthormore, the furnace
i s assumed t o have ample capacitv t o support the mill 's normal production
needs. This assumption eliminates any consideration of additional furnace
investment for systems 3, 4 , and 5.
The replacement of the recovery furnace i s
Where no s ta te regulations exist (Table S-lC)), incremental annualized
8-25
Table 8-10. INCREMENTAL RETROFIT COVTR9L COSTS FOR A 1090 TPD OLD MILL (BUILT BEFORE 1965) - LOW RETROFIT PENALTY ‘ Locat ion: S ta te w i t h No Requlat ions
No. 1 Unit
Cap4 t a l Annual 1 zed Annualized costs costs costs
($1099) ($lr)O?/yr) ($/T)
A. Recovery FurnaceI l ) 23,300 4,000 12.18
8. Batch Digester and M u l t i p l e E f f e c t Evaporators 900 ’ 211) 9.64
C. Brown Stock Washers (2) 2,500 ., ,670 5.08
9. Black L i q u o r O r i j a t i o n System Vents 560 420 1.28
E. Lime Ki ln 839 2 52 n. 77
F. Condensate S t r i ppe r 23 8 0.02
28,113 6,560 19 :97 TOTAL COSTS
-- 01 No. 4
A. Recovery Furnace(’ 1,000 242 i. 74
C. Brown Stock Washers(2) 0 0 9
B. Batch Digester and M u l t i p l e E f fec t Evaporators 900 210 9.64
D. Black Liquor x ida t i on System Vents 1 2) 9 1) 9
E. Lime K i l n 890 246 ‘1.76
F. Condensate S t r i ppe r 23 8 9.02
TOTAL COSTS 2,753 706 2 . 1 5
No. 2 , U n i t
Cap i ta l Annual i zed Annual i zed costs Costs Costs
I $ i 9 3 9 j ($19r)7/yr) ($/T)
23,300 4,030 12.18
9VJ 21 9 0.64
9 3 3
0 3 0
839 252 0.77
23 8 0.92
25,953 4,470 13.61
Yo. 5
1,090 242 rJ. 74
900 210 0.64
0 3 0
0 0 0
10’0 197 0.33
23 8 0.92
2,923 567 1.73
No. 3 U n i t
Annual i zed Caai t a l Annual i zed costs costs costs
I$ l997) - ($l09O/yr) ($/T)
1,090 242 0.74
0.64
3 0 0
939 210
9 9 0
830 2 52 9.77
23 R 0.02
2,753 712 2.17
Vo. 6
23,390 4,093 12.18
903 213 9.64
9 3 0
9 0 0
100 107 0.33
23 8 0.02
24,323 4,325 13.17
Recovery f u m i c e would be a d i r e c t contact furnace on ly (2) Destruct ion i n separate i nc ine ra to r
Table 8-11. INCREMENTAL RETqOFIT COIITROL COSTS'FOR A 1000 TPD OLD MILL (BUI BEFORE 1965) - LOW RETROFIT PEIIALTY Location: S ta te w i t h Typical Regulations 1
U n i t Capital Annualized Annualized costs costs costs
( $ 1 0 0 0 ~ l$1000/yrl ($/TI
h l 1
U n i t Capital Annualized Annualized costs cos ts costs
($1000) j$1000/yr) ($/TI
A. Recovery Furnace 23,300 4,000 12.18 B. Batch Digesters and
C. Brown Stock Washers (2) 2,500 1,670 5.08 Multiple Effect Evaporators 0 0 0
Unit Capital Annualized Annualized
costs Costs costs i$lOOO) I$1000/yr) ($/TI
D . Black Liquor Oxidation 560 420 1.28 System ~ e n t s ( 2 )
E. Lime Kiln F. Condensate Stripper
830 252 0.77 0 0 0
TOTAL COSTS 27,190 6,342 19.31
23,300 4 , 000 12.18
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
830 252 0.77 0 0 0
24,130 4,252 12.95
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
830 252 0.77 0 0 0
830 252 0.77
A. Recovery Furnace B. Batch Digesters and
Mu1 t i p l e Effect Evaporators C . Brown Stock Washers (2)
E . Lime Kiln F. Condensate Stripper
No. 4
U n i t Capital Annualized Annualized costs cos ts costs
($1000/yr) ($1000) ($/TI
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
830 246 0.75 0 0 0
TOTAL COSTS 830 246 0.75
No. 5
U n i t Capital Annualized Annualized Costs cos ts cos ts
($1000) :$100c;/yr) ($/TI
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
100 107 0.33 0 0 0
100 107 0.33
No. 6
Unit Capital Annualized Annual ized
costs costs costs ($1000) ($1000/yr) ($/TI
23,300 4,000 12.18
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
100 107 0.33 0 0 0
23,400 4,107 12.51
(1) A typical s t a t e i s assumed to require 20 ppn f o r the recovery furnace and incineration (5 ppm) o f TRS emissions from digesters, multiple e f f ec t
(2) Destruction in separate incinerator.
evaporators, and condensate s t r ippers
I
costs range f rom $1.73 per ton t o $2.17 per ton fo r systems 3, 4, and 5.
The incremental annualized costs f o r systems 1, 2, and 6 range from $13.17
t o $19.97 per ton. The replacement o f the recovery furnace i s responsible
f o r $12.18 per ton o f these costs.
I n a s t a t e w i t h t y p i c a l regulat ions, incremental annualized costs
range from $0.33 t o $0.77 per ton f o r systems 3, 4, and 5.
1, 2, and 6, incremental annualized costs range from $12.51 per ton t o
$19.31 per ton, t he most expensive being system 1.
replacement i s responsible f o r $12.18 per ton.
For systems
Again, recovery furnace
Tables 8-12 and 8-13 present cont ro l costs for the o l d model m i l l w i t h
a t he i nc iden ta l h igh r e t r o f i t penal ty. Capi ta l and annualized costs are
presented f o r t he s i x a l t e r n a t i v e cont ro l systems s i m i l a r t o the previous
models. Costs of con t ro l f o r t he washer gases and t h e ox ida t ion vents i s
based on separate i nc ine ra t i on . The const ruct ion o f new furnace s ized t o
support the e n t i r e 1000 ton per day m i l l i s assumed i n the cost estimates
f o r :
con t ro l systems 1, 2, and 6 i n s ta tes w i th t y p i c a l regulat ions.
o f t he h igh r e t r o f i t costs f o r t h i s model m i l l i nvo lve the c o n t r o l l i n g o f
t he digestors/evaporators and t h e l ime k i l n .
w i t h the l ime k i l n , namely add i t iona l requirements f o r l ime mud washing
and add i t iona l l ime burn ing capacity, have been taken i n t o account f o r t h i s
model m i l l . I n summary, Table 8-12 would represent the worst s i t u a t i o n - - an o l d m i l l w i t h i nc iden ta l h igh r e t r o f i t penal t ies i n a s t a t e w i t h no
regulat ions.
(1) a l l con t ro l systems i n s ta tes w i t h no regulat ions, and (2)
The aspects
The two fac to rs associated
Where no regu la t ions e x i s t (Table 5-12), incremental annualized costs - range from $15.46 per ton f o r system 6 t o $22.68 per ton f o r system 1.
furnace costs are responsible f o r $12.18 per ton o f these costs.
New
I n
8-28
A.
B.
c. 0.
E.
F.
(1 1 Recovery Furnace
Table 8-12. INCREMtl.(TAL RETROFIT COtiTROL COSTS FOR A 1000 TPU OLD IlILL (BUILT CEFORI: 1965) 1 HIGH RETROFIT PEI!ALTY Locat ion: State K i t h No Regulat ions
No. 1 No. 2 No. 3
Un i t U n i t U n i t Cap i ta l Annualized Annual ized Capital Annual i zed Annualized Capital Annualized Annualized
costs costs costs costs costs costs costs costs costs ($1000) I $ 1 0 0 0 / y r l ($/TI l$loOO). ($1000/y r l ($/T) ($1 000) J$lOOO/yr) ( $ / T I
23,300 4,000 12.18 23,300 4,000 12.18 23,300 4,000 12.18
2,000 452 1.38 2,000 452 1.38 2 , 000 452 1.38 R a t c h n i y s t c r and
Brown Stock Washers
M u l t i p l e E f f e c t Evaporator (2 ) 2,500 1,670 5.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 .
560 420 1.28 0 0 0 0 0 0
(3) 4,560 901 2.74 4,560 ' 901 2.74 4,560 901 2.74 Lime K i l n
23 8 0.02 23 8 0.02 23 8 0.02 Condensate S t r i ppe r
TOTAL COSTS 3z ,943 /,451 LZ. b8 L9,883 S,Jb l 1 6 . 2 LY ,883 5,361 16.32
I No. 5 No. 6 No. 4 n ,300 .D A. Recovery Furnace 4.000 12.18 23,300 4,000 12. I8 n , 3 0 0 4 ,00u IZ. 18
2,000 452 1.38 2,000 452 1.38 2,000 452 1.38
_- m N
B. Batch Digester and
C. Brown Stock Washers
0. Black L iquor x 'da t ion
E. Lime K i l n
F. Condensate S t r i ppe r
Mu 1 t i p l e Effect Evaporator
(2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 System Vents 921 .
(3) 4,560 896 2.73 3,100 61 7 1.88 3,100 61 7 1.88
23 8 0.02 23 8 0.02 23 8 0.02
TOTAL COSTS cy, 883 5,355 16.30 28,401 5 , 071 15.46 28,401 5,071 15.46
(1 ) Recovery furnace - d i r e c t contact only.
(2) Des t ruc t ion i n separate i nc ine ra to r .
(3 ) High r e t r o f i t expenditures f o r t he fo l low ing :
Furnace w i t h an assumed age exceeding twenty years would have t o be replaced fo r each cont ro l strategy.
add i t i on o f a new l ime k i l n f o r each con t ro l s t ra tegy and add i t i on o f condensate s t r i p p e r f o r s t ra tegy numbers 1 through 4.
A . ile*.overy Furnace
E. Sa ch D iges te r and
C . Br,:in Stock Washers
3 E: c k L i q u o r x i d a t i o n
'hl t i 01 e E f f e c t Evaporators
( 2 )
:) stem Vents 9 2)
i. L i e K i l n ( 3 )
F. Co densate S t r i p p e r
No. 2 I No. 1
I S 1 000) I S 1 000/yr 1 ( $ / T I
23,300 4,000 12.16
0 0 0
2,500 1,670 5.08
560 420 1.28
4,560 901 2.74
0 0 0
U n i t 1 U n i t
( $ / T I ($1000) (b1000/yr)
12.18 23,300 4,000
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
4,560 901 2.74
0 0 0
--
TOTAL COSTS 30,920 6,991 21.28
-. - co - 0 w No. 4
U n i t C a p i t a l Annual ized Annualized
cos ts c o s t s cos ts j $1 000) ($1 0@0/yr ) ($/T f
A . R e r w k r y Furnace 0 0 0
P. Gatch Diges te r and M u l t i p l e 0 0 0
0 0 0
- f f e c t Evaporators
( 2 ) C. Br, ./n Stock Washers
?3fa D. El,.k L i q u o r 0 l v s t e m Vents
0 0 0
E. Li i , : K i l n ( 3 ) 4,560 896 2.73
F. Cor lensate S t r i p p e r 0 0 0
TOTAL I O S T S 4,560 896 2.73
27,860 4,901 14.92
No. 5 - U n i t
Cap i ta l Annual ized Annual i z e d cos ts cos ts cos ts
l$lOOO). ($1000/yr) ( $ / T I
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
3,100 617 1.88
0 0 0
3,100 61 7 1.88
' U n i t Cap i ta l Annual i zed Annual i zed
cos ts Costs cos ts ($1000) ($1000/yr) ( $ / T I
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
4,560 901 2.74
0 0 0
4,560 901 2.74
No. 6
U n i t C a p i t a l Annual lzed Annual ized
cos ts cos ts Costs (S/T I ($1000) ( $ 1 0 0 0 / y r l
23,300 4,000 12.18
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
3,100 61 7 1.88
0 0 0 '
26,403 4,617 14.05
( 1 ) A y p i c a l s t a t e i s assumed t o r e q u i r e 20 ppm f o r t h e recovery furnace and i n c i n e r a t i o n (5 ppm) o f TRS emissions from d iges te rs , m u l t i p l e e f fec t e: !p3rators, and condensate s t r i p p e r s .
(213 5 i r u c t i o n i n separate i n c i q e r a t o r ( 2 ) i gh r e t r o f i t expcnd i tu res =or t h e f o l l ow inc : a d d i t i o n o f a new l i m e k i l n f o r rach c o n t r o l systeiii and a d d i t i o n o f
' w !ensate s t r i p n e r f o r sYstel,, numbers 1 througb 4. .
s ta tes w i t h typi cal regul a t i ons , the incremental annual i zed costs ranqe
from $14.06 per ton t o $21.28 per ton for control systems 1 , 2 , and 6 ,
with system 1 being most expensive. For control systems 3 , 4, and 5 , t'7e
incremental annualized costs range from $1.88 per ton t o $2.74 per t o n .
From the previous discussion on old mi l l s , the most s ignif icant
factor tha t frequently re-appears i n the to ta l mill costs has been require-
ments for new recovery furnace investment. Up t o t h i s p o i n t a l l capital
related charges dssociated w i t h purchasing, i n s t a l l i ng , and ownershiP of
the recovery furnace have been presented as control costs. However, the
recovery furnace i s a productive capital asset i n the sense that i t
coneributes t o the economics of p u l p production w i t h recovery of ensrq,y
and chemicals.
deducted from the control costs. However, i t is ver.y d i f f i c u l t t o estimate
th i s credi t on a source by source basis i n terms of dollars per ton.
Consequently, some credi t for a productive asset should be
Therefore , no c red i t was deducted.
The extent of credi t t o be deductible i s very source specific. The
amount of credi t would depend on the remaining economic 1 fe o f existing
furnace equipment. I n a specif ic mill the recover,y furna e could be very
old. l i ke th i r ty years of age, and very inef f ic ien t .
probably be scheduling for the replacement of the old furnace i n the near
future. Here, the replacement cost should be treated as a normal produc-
t ive asset w i t h no c red i t given for control costs.
recovery furnace may have a s ignif icant amount of residual economic l i f e ,
say 15 years.
force the scrapping and replacement of t h i s recovery furnace.
s i tua t ion , the capital value foreaorle i n scrappinq the furnace sClould be
Such a mill would
In another mill , a
Suppose a s t a t e should require a 5 ppm level which would
In th i s
8-31
the approximate control cost .
In a similar vein, mills t h a t tend t o overload
be required t o provide a d d i t i o n a l black liquor burn
TRS emissions. The incremental capacity suff ic ient
recovery furnaces may
ng capac ty t o reduce
t o reduce the emissions
t o a sat isfactory level should be the approximate control cost although a
mill would in s t a l l a complete new recovery u n i t which would exceed the
necessary incremental capacity.
8.5 Aggregate Costs For Industry
I n this section the estimated incremental control costs are reported
for the existing kraft p u l p industry for the six al ternat ive emission
control systems outlined i n Table 8-1.
these costs for each individual mill on the basis o f the best technical
information avai lab1 e for each mi 11 regarding production r a t e s , furnace
capacity and age, type of controls used, status of s t a t e regulations, and
other technical parameters. Section 8.3, Costs For Affected Fac i l i t i es ,
which relates control costs as a function of mill s i ze was used t o make
the estimates.
considered sui table t o estimate to ta l industry costs because o f the wide
vari abi 1 i ty i n m i 11 characterist i cs and s ta te regul atory requirements.
ever, the two approaches should give consistent resul ts .
the model mill approach w i t h the results obtained by the individual mill
approach does support this claim.
The approach used was t o estimate
The model mill approach as outlined i n Section 8.4 was n o t
How-
Verification of
Actual cost information received from 42 mills d u r i n g the EPA industry
survey was used t o derive the Section 8.3 costs.
Qf capital and annualized were made individually for 77 mills which were not
contacted in the industry survey.
From these costs , estimates
The costs for these mills were then
5-32
combined with the actual costs received for the 42 surveyed mills t o
derive industry to ta l s .
The summary of industry incremental costs are reported in Table 8-14
for each system. Capital and annualized costs are presented for industry
totals and on a unit basis. I n addition, incremental capital costs are
related t o mill investment as a measured percentage. The investment for a
battery limits mill i s $150 million in 1976 dol lars , which was derived
from a study for EPA's Office of S o l i d Waste Management.('*) Similarly,
incremental annualized costs are related t o the market p u l p price as a
measured percentage.
quoted contract price for domestic bleached kraft pulp. ( I 9 )
represents the average of pulps derived from hard and softwoods.
The price used was $330, which i s the currently
This price
The i ndustry-wi de incremental annual i zed control costs range from
$1.99 per ton for system 5 t o $12.72 per ton f o r system 1.
ton figure i s predicated on the basis of replacement of 18 recovery
furnaces and 3 lime kilns.
basis of replacement of 63 recovery furnaces and 33 lime kilns.
be noted tha t systems 3 and 4 would require replacement of 18 recovery
furnaces and 33 lime kilns.
market pulp price are 0.6 percent for system 5 ($1.99 per ton ) and 3.9 percent
for system 1 ($12.72 per t o n ) .
The $1.99 per
The $12.72 per t o n figure i s predicated on the
I t should
The corresponding percentages in relation to
Capital requirements for incremental controls range from $10.32 per
ton capacity for system 5 t o $46.20 per ton for system 1.
requirements for new mill investment, these estimates amount t o 1 .8 percent
I n relation t o
for system 5 and 8.1 per cent for system 1. - The approach used t o develop industry-wide costs represents a composite
8-33
Table 8-14. Stmary o f Idustry Xmvwemtrl Contml Coats *r Six Alternatives Control Strategies
Total Capi ta l ($1 OO'I)
Capital , per ton capacity ($ /T)
Capital, as a percent of new mill(1)
Total Annualized Costs (? ($1000/yr) w P
U n i t An; ialized Costs ($ /T)
Annualized costs , as a percenf2yf market pulp price
40. 1
1,6C12,000
46.20
8.1
441,000
12.72
3.9
No. 2
1,275,000
36.78
6.5
237,000
6.84
2.1
No. 3
495,000
14.27
2.5
94,300
2.72
9.8
No. 4
49 5,000
14.27
2.5
93,600
2.70
0.8
No. 5
358,090
10.32
1.8
69,000
1.99
0.6
No. 6
1,148,000
33.11
5.8
200,000
5.76
1 . 7
(1)Capital Costs for New Battery Limits 809 TPD Mill i s $150 mill ion, or $570 per ton (1976 dol la rs ) Source: Arthur D. L i t t l e , Reference 18.
(2)Market pulp price is $330 per ton, based on fourth quarter 1976 prices for domestic kraft bleached pulp. Source: Paner Trade Journal.
of many different types of s t a t e regulations and the individual character
of 119 mil ls . Al though the model mill approach in Section 8.4 was
considered inappropriate t o estimate industry costs , there should be some
linkage between the industry-wide costs and the model mill costs on a un i t
basis.
costs in Table 8-14 f a l l about midway between cost requirements for a
modern mill i n a s t a t e with typical regulations (Table 8-9) and for an old
mill with low r d t r o f i t penalty in a s t a t e w i t h no regulations (Table 8-10)
for systems 1 , 2 , and 6 . Industry-wide costs i n Table 8-14 are somewhat
higher than the costs reported for an old mill (Table 8-10) for systems
3 , 4 , and 5. A conclusion would be t h a t there i s some reasonable agreement
i n the magnitude of the costs developed from the two separate approaches.
8.6 Cost-Effectiveness
A comparison of the two approaches revealed t h a t the industry-wide
An analysis was made t o evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the six
alternative emission control systems i n terms of t he i r contribution t o
reducing national TRS emissions. The cost-effectiveness technique i s a
useful tool i n selecting an appropriate control system a s a recommended
guideline. I n this selection, those control systems tha t have significantly
h i g h control costs i n terms of the i r pollutant removal are rejected as
viable control recomnendations. I t should be strongly emphasized t h a t the
cost-effectiveness approach for recomnending controls i s only applicable
for welfare-related I l l -d pollutants, such as TRS.
pollutants , an economic impact analysis i s a requirement for determining
affordabi 1 i ty o f best control s .
For health-related I l l -d
The industry aggregate annualized control costs presented in Table
8-14 and the national emission reduction d a t a reported i n Table 9-2 were
8-35
used t o make the cost-effectiveness calculations. The resu l t s are
presented i n Table 8-15. The control systems are ranked in ascending
order i n terms of emission reduction and costs , s ta r t ing w i t h system 5 as
the l e a s t expensive. Two calculations o f cost-effectiveness are presented
for each control system i n columns (E ) and ( F ) . The calculation in
column ( E ) simply represents the costs per t o n removed by a par t icular
control system. The calculation in column ( F ) represents the marginal costs
per ton removed by a par t icular control system re la t ive t o a system of
lower ranking. The marginal cost calculation i s a more sensi t ive indicator
in revealing the more expensive control system. For example, in Table
8-15, system 6 costs $75,500 per ton marginally.
s ign i f icant than the $1750 for system 3 or $11,180 fo r system 4.
T h i s i s much more
With
respect t o actual cost per ton, system 6 costs $3000 per ton, which i s
s ignif icant ly higher, t o a lesser degree, than the approximate $1400 per
ton for systems 4 and 3 .
Based on the data in Table 8-15, i t would seem reasonable t o r e j ec t
control systems 6 , 2 , and 1 as n o t being cost-effective. System 5 might be
considered a minimal s t ra tegy, costing $1060 per ton.
and 3 cos t somewhat more, about $1400 per ton, which would not seem t o be of such
Control systems 4
a magnitude t o preclude consideration of these control systems as a viable
control technology.
8-36
Control System
Table 8-1 5. COST EFFECTIVENESS DATA FOR ALTERNATIVE CONTROL SYSTEMS
A
National Emission Redu c t i on ton s/y r .
65,000
67 , 200
67 , 600
69 , 000
71,500
77,700
B
Marginal Emi s si o n Reduct ion tonslyr.
65,000
2,200
400
1 ,400
2 , 500
6,200
C I n du s t r y
Annual i zed Control
costs $1 000/yr
69 , 000
93 , 600
94 , 300
200,000
237,000
441,000
D Marginal
Annualized Control costs
$1 000/yr.
69 , 000
24,600
700
105 , 700
37,000
204,000
E Annualized Costs per ton Removed
($/ ton> (C) '(A ,
1,060
1,390
1,395
3 , 000
3,315
5,675
~
F
Marginal Annual i zed Cost per ton Removed
(D) '( B ) ,$/ton
1,060
11 ,180
1,750
75,500
14,800
32,900
References f o r Chapter 8
1 . Post 's 1973 P u l p and Paper Directory,Miller Freeman Publications, Inc., San Francisco.
2. Lockwood's Directory of the Paper and Allied Trades, Lockwood Publishing Co., New York, 1974.
3. Correspondence from Mr. Russell Blosser, National Council f o r Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., t o Mr. Frank L. Bunyard, EPA, OAQPS, A p r i l 22, 1975.
4. See Reference 3.
5. Correspondence f r o m Mr. C . T . Tolar, R u s t Engineering Co., Birmingham, Ala., t o Mr. Paul A . Boys, October 20, 1972.
6. Correspondence from Mr. Russell Blosser, National Council f o r Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., t o Mr. Paul A. Boys, November 17, 1972.
7. Air Pollution Control Technology and Costs: Seven Selected Emission Sources , .I_?dustrial Gas Cleaning Institute, EPA-450/3-74-060, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., December, 1974.
8. Report of Fuel Requirements, Capital Cost and Operating Expense f o r Catalytic and Thermal Afterburners , CE Air Preheater f o r Industrial Gas C1 eaning Ins t i t u t e , EPA-450/3-76-031 , National Technical Informa- t ion Service, Springfield, Va., September 1976.
9. See Reference 3.
10. Standards Support and Environmental Impact Statement - Volume I : Proposed Standards o f Performance f o r Kraft P u l p Mil l s , EPA-450/2-76-014a National Technical Information Service, Springfield , Va. , September 1976.
11. See reference ' 0.
12. Correspondence from Mr. Joe Kol berg , Boise Cascade, t o Mr. Frank L . Bunyard, OAQPS, EPA, May 1975.
13. See reference 8.
14. See reference 5.
15. Telephone conversation from F. L . Bunyard, OAQPS, EPA, t o George Horvat , Airco , Inc. , December 30, 1974.
8-38
I
16.
17.
18.
19.
Investment and Operat ing Cost Data f o r Low Pressure Oxygen P lan t A p p l i c a b i l i t y t o Non-Ferrous Meta l lu rgy , Volcan - C inc inna t i , EPA Cont rac t No. 68-02-2099, Task No. 2, September 29, 1972.
See reference 10.
Ana lys is o f Demand and Supply f o r Secondary F i b e r i n t h e U.S. Paper and Paperboard Indust ry , Volume 2: Sec t ion I X - Process Economics, A r t h u r D . L i t t l e Report f o r Contract #68-0l-02220, Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency, O f f i c e o f Sol i d Waste Management Programs, March, 1975.
Paper Trade Journal ? January 1 , 1977.
8- 39
a
9. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF TRS CONTROLS
niques and contro
on the impacts on
for a re la t ive ly
a national basis.
The environmental impacts discussed are for each of the control tech-
systems mentioned in Chapter 6 . This includes discussions
a i r , water, and sol id waste pollution and energy consumption
arge kraf t pulp mill (907 megagrams of pulp per day) and on
9.1 A I R POLLUTION IMPACT
9.1.1 Annual Air Emission Reductions
Instal la t ion of the various control techniques described in Section 6.1
are estimated t o reduce TRS emissions from the exis t ing kraf t industry by
the amounts indicated in Table 9-1. Emission reductions range from 20.6
percent for digester systems t o 96 t o 97 percent for digester systems and lime
kiln systems. All values presented in Table 9-1 are based on information
presented in Chapters 5 and 6 and Appendix A of t h i s study.
The following procedure was used t o a r r ive a t the numbers l i s t e d in
Table 9-1. The values l i s t e d in Column 2 (Current National Average Emission
Rate) were previously mentioned in Chapter 5 and are based on the information
l i s t e d in Appendix A .
various kraf t pulp mil ls and s t a t e control agencies. Column 5 presents the
percentage of exis t ing f a c i l i t i e s presently using the control techniques
described in Column 2 as based on the information l i s t e d in Appendix A.
values in Column 6 were developed by applying the emission level achievable by
Information in Appendix A i s based upon discussions with
The
9-1
TABLE 9-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE
VARIOUS TRS SOURCES I N A KRAFT MILL
Source . . - -. . . . - - - . - - . - - - - - - - _ _ - Recovery Furnace
Digester
Mu1 t ip le-ef fect Evaporator
Lime Ki ln
W
N
Brown Stock Washer
Black Liquor Oxidation
Smelt O i ssolving Tank Condensate Strippers
System
System
Current National 9!!9-_40_4
1.25 1.25 0.32 0.32 0.22 0.22 0.31 0.31
0.31
0.15
0.05 0.05 0.10 0.11 0.11
Averaqe Emission ( WT A O P L
Control .__ ____-I -I Technique -
(2.5) 8LO ( 20 P P I (2.5) BLO ( 5 ppm) (0.64) Scrubber (0.64) Incineration (0.43) Scrubber (0.43) Incineration (0.62) 1) Process Controls (0.62) 2) Process Control 6 High
(0.62) 3) Process Controls. High E f f . Mud Washing
E f f . Mud Washing & Caustic Scrubbfng
(0.3) Incineration
(0.1) ' Incineration (0.1) Molecular Oxygen (0.2) Fresh Water (0.22) Incineration (0.22) Scrubber
Emission Level Achievable With
Control Technique g/Kg ADP (# T/ADP)
0.31 (0.6) 0.08 (0.15) 0.59 (1.17)
0.04 (0.08) 0.01 (0.02)
0.01 (0.02) 0.10 (0.2) 0.05 (0.a)
I of Capacity Not Presently Achieving This
Level
35.7 86.9 41.8 42.4 41.4 45.9 71 .8 90.5
Estimated Average National Ei ission I f Control Technique i s Required g/Kg ADP ( W T/ADP)
0.25 (0.5) 0.08 (0.15) 0.26 (0.51)
0.03 (0.05) 0.01 (0.02)
0.01 (0.02) 0.09 (0.18) 0.05 (0.1)
0.021 (0.04) 99.4 0.021 (0.04)
0.01 (0.02) 99.1 0.01 (0.02)
0.01 (0.02) 98.0 0.01 (0.02) 0 (0) 98.0 0 (0) 0.013 (0.025) -- 0.01 (0.02) o.oi (0.02) 20 0.01 (0.02) 0.5 (1.0) 0 0.11 (0.22)
I Emission Rr4c t i on
Nationally Achieved
80.0 94.0 20.6 96.9 89.1 95.3 71.0 84.0
92.0
93.3
80.0 100.0 87.5 90.9 0
National Emission Reduction M/year (tons_/y_e_arl
31,200 (34.400) 36,690 (40.450) 2.040 ( 2,250) 9,300 (10,700) 5,940 ( 6,550) 6,400 ( 7.050) 6,900 ( 7,600) 8,900 ( 9,800)
9.300 (10,250)
4,350 ( 4,800)
1.270 ( 1,400) 1,540 ( 1,700) 2.800 ( 3,100) 3,130 ( 3,450)
0 (0)
a p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l dev ice (Column 4 ) t o those e x i s t i n g m i l l s which a r e n o t
p r e s e n t l y a c h i e v i n g t h a t l e v e l , as l i s t e d i n Appendix A, and c a l c u l a t i n q t h e
n a t i o n a l average emiss ion l e v e l t h a t would r e s u l t . Column 7 (Percent Emission
Reduct ion Achieved N a t i o n a l l y ) i s t h e p e r c e n t d i f f e r e n c e between Columns 2 and 6.
The n a t i o n a l emiss ion r e d u c t i o n achieved by a s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l dev ice (Column 8 )
was c a l c u l a t e d by m u l t i p l y i n g the d i f f e r e n c e between Columns 2 and 6 by t h e annual
k r a f t p u l p p r o d u c t i o n r a t e (31,196,000 megagrams/year).
Table 9-1 shows +.hat t h e g r e a t e s t r e d u c t i o n o f TRS emissions i s achieved
b y c o n t r o l l i n g t h e recovery fu rnace system w i t h t h e d i g e s t e r system, l i m e k i l n ,
mu1 ti p l e - e f f e c t evapora tor system, brown s t o c k washer system, smel t d i sso l v i n g
tank, b l a c k l i q u o r o x i d a t i o n system and condensate s t r i p p i n g system f o l l o w i n g
i n decreas ing impact .
Table 9-2 shows t h e impact o f t h e v a r i o u s c o n t r o l systems mentioned i n
Sec t ion 6.2.- For example, i f System No. 1 ( b e s t a v a i l a b l e technology as
d e f i n e d f o r NSPS) was a p p l i e d t o each source, t h e TRS emissions f rom t h e k r a f t
i n d u s t r y would be reduced by about 70,500 megagrams
per y e a r ) o r 94.2 percent .
impact b u t would s t i l l reduce TRS emiss ions by about 59,000 megagrams p e r
y e a r (65,630 tons p e r y e a r ) o r 78.8 percent . Cont ro l o f f o u r sources i n a
k r a f t m i l l account f o r a ma jor p o r t i o n o f t h e impact achieved by each o f t h e
c o n t r o l systems. These f o u r sources a r e t h e recovery furnace, d i g e s t e r system,
m u l t i p l e - e f f e c t evapora tor system, and t h e 1 ime k i l n .
9.1.2 Annual A i r Emission Increase
p e r y e a r (77,700 tons
System No. 5, i f app l ied , would r e s u l t i n the l e a s t
II_-~-.
The o n l y c o n t r o l techniques mentioned i n Chapter 6 t h a t would apparent ly
r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s i n g t h e emiss ion r a t e s o f o t h e r p o l l u t a n t s i s t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n
o f t h e vent gases f rom t h e brown s t o c k washer systems and t h e b l a c k l i q u o r
9-3
TABLE 9-2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF VARIOUS CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
Estimate Average Na t i onal TRS Emission With % Emission
Control Con t r o 1 Sys tem Emission Reduction Sys t em g/Kg ADP ( # T ADP) Re du c t i on* megagramslyear ( tons/year )
No. 1 0.14 (0.28) 94.2 70,500 (77,700)
No. 2 0.32 (0.64)
No. 3 0.44 (0.87)
No. 4 0.45 (0.89)
No. 5 0.51 (1.02)
No. 6 0.40 (0.79)
86.7
81.9
64,900 (71 ,500)
61,300 (67,600)
81.5 61,000 (67,200)
78.8 59,000 (65,000)
83.5 62,600 (69,000)
* Based on a cur ren t con t ro l l e v e l o f 2.4 g/Kg ADP (4.8 l b / T ADP).
9-4
oxidation systems i f these gases are burned in a separate incinerator .
emission rates of nitrogen oxides ( N O x ) a n d su l fur dioxide (SO2) from a mill
would increase by the amounts emitted from t h i s separate incinerator.
natural gas was f i red in the incinerator a t a 907 metric tons per day (1000
tons per day) mi l l , the NO and SO2 emissions resul t ing a re estimated t o be
160 and 220 kilograms per day (350 and 480 pounds per day), respectively.
These are in comparison with a TRS reduction of 180 kilograms per day (400
pounds per day).
of natural gas, the NO, and SO2 emissions resul t ing are estimated to be a b o u t
380 and 1040 kilograms per day (840 and 2280 pounds per day), respectively.
Using a gas-fired or o i l - f i r ed incinerator t o b u r n these gases i s a r e a l i s t i c
a l te rna t ive since the industry f ee l s t h a t burning these gases safely i n a
The
If
X
Furthermore, i f fuel o i l ( 1 % su l fur content) was used instead
recovery furnace has n o t ye t been demonstrated.
burned in a-recovery furnace or power boi le r , no increase in the SO2 or NOx
emissions from these sources are expected.
No increase i n other pollutants i s expected from burning the noncondensable
However, i f these gases were
gases from the digester systems, multiple-effect evaporator system or condensate
s t r ipper system since these gases will normally be burned in a lime kiln a s
p a r t of the normal combustion a i r . SO2 generated should be absorbed by the
lime dust (calcium oxide) present in the kiln.’ The scrubbers used on most
lime kiln systems also are e f fec t ive gas removal system.
emitted from the kiln system f o r t h i s reason.
Very l i t t l e SO2 i s
9.1.3 Atmospheric Dispersion of TRS Emissions
4 disDersion ;Inal.ysis was made on model kraf t pulp mills t o evaluate the
impact of the various control techniques and r e t r o f i t systems on ground-level
TRS concentration downwind of a k raf t pulp mil l .
average design and layout as shown in Figure 9-1 , and included the eight
The models chosen were o f
9- 5
FIGURE 9-1. Typfcal P l a n t Layout (1001 ton per day kraft pu lp mill)
W I m
.
i TREATMENT PONO
!4 -25
.-loo-
0
H = 50 Stacks : - 24--C ---
a t 1. Recovery Furnace 2. Smelt Dissolving
Tank 3. Lime Kiln 4. Digesters 5. Evaporators 6. Brown Stock Washers
m
7. Oxidation System 8. Condensate Stripper
'00
T P I K @ - > A = 40' , F = 60' B - 75' C 15' C = 50' H = 10' D = 35' J = 12' E = 60' K = 20'
E
affected f a c i l i t i e s being considered. Modeling was performed f o r mil ls of
500, 1000, and 1500 tons per day of a i r -dr ied pulp (ADP) produced, a range
within which the majority of k ra f t pulp mill capaci t ies f a l l .
Maximum ground-level concentrations of TRS were determined f o r the emission
ra tes corresponding t o each control technique and system. The concentrations
decreased predictably w i t h decreases in the emission r a t e s .
t o adjust the meteorological conditions of the study t o achieve the worst cases
tha t would be expected t o occur a t and near a k ra f t pulp mi l l .
I t was possible
Ambient concentrations of TRS due t o the a1 te rna t ive control techniques
and systems were calculated using s ta te -of - the-ar t modeling techniques.
calculat ions are assumed t o be r e l i ab le within about a f ac to r of two. The
following assumptions were applied for the analyt ical approach:
These
1 . There a re no s ign i f i can t seasonal o r hourly var ia t ions i n emission
ra tes f o r these mi l l s .
2 . The-mills a r e located in f l a t or gently ro l l i ng t e r r a in .
3. The meteorological regime i s unfavorable t o the dispersion of e f f luents .
This assumption introduces an element of conservatism in to the analysis .
Calculations were performed assuming the presence of aerodynamic downwash
e f f ec t s on the emissions.
mill such as:
stack;
and ( 3 ) a two-foot stack for the black l iquor oxidation tank atop a 50-foot
building will r e s u l t in downwash in most s i t ua t ions . Maximum ground-level
concentrations were estimated by assuming worst meteor01 ogical conditions.
The correlat ion of those estimates with observed concentrations a t any par t icu lar
k ra f t pulp mill would depend upon many f ac to r s , including the accuracy of the
emission data , the mill configuration, the distance from the mill a t which
Unfavorable design cha rac t e r i s t i c s o f the model
( 1 ) a 220-foot s t ruc ture adjacent t o a 250-foot recovery furnace
( 2 ) a 175-foot smelt dissolving tank stack next t o a 175-foot building;
9- 7
samples are obtained, the sampling period and the climatology o f the mill
location.
The estimated maximum ambient TRS concentration (10 second average)
i n a v ic in i ty of a 907 megagrams (1000 tons) per day p u l p mill resul t ing from
the individual affected f a c i l i t i e s w i t h and w i t h o u t controls a re l i s t e d i n
Table 9-3. The maximum concentrations occur a t 300 meters from the source.
Table 9-3 shows tha t the sources (excluding the condensate s t r ippe r s ) resul t ing
i n the greatest impact on ambient concentrations of TRS are , i n decreasing
order, the digester systems, multiple-effect evaporator systems, recovery
furnace, and the lime k i l n .
maximum ambient TRS concentration of 20,000 vg/m whereas an uncontrolled
brown stock washer system re su l t s in a maximum ambient concentration o f 370
vg/m . Table 9-3 also shows the percent reductions o f applying each control
technique on uncontrolled levels and the ambient levels a t various distances
under the control led case.
An uncontrolled digester system can r e s u l t i n a 3
3
Tables s imilar t o Table 9-3 showing the impact of applying controls t o
the various TRS sources on ambient TRS concentrations i n terms of one-hour and
24-hour averages and f o r 454 and 1350 megagrams (500 and 1500 tons) per day
kraf t pulp mil ls a re included i n Appendix C .
a l l averaging per iod maximum concentrations a re noted a t extremely close-in
distances (300 meters). This i s due to considerable aerodynamic e f f ec t
influencing the plume r i s e i n each case.
distances from the stack i n question.
the 300 meters given may be even higher.
the frequency of occurrence f o r the maximum ambient concentration due to each
source.
For the stacks of each mil l ,
The distances given i n the tables are
Concentrations closer to the stack t h a n
These tables a lso give an estimate of
The TRS concentrations w i t h low frequencies o f occurrence are the
TABLE 9-3
W I
(0
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING T t l i VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 907 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concentraifon: u g h 3 Frequency - % o f Concen t ra t i ons (10 second avera e
Uncon t ro l led D is tance f r%n Source (km) \Grea te r t han 1 /2 Percen t Source Con t ro l Techniques Leyel @ 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Reduct i ona
Recovery Furnace BLO (20 ppm)
D i g e s t e r Scrubber B L O ( 5 ppm)
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Mu1 t i p 1 e - E f f e c t Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n Evaporator
a ,030 320 210 120 50 28 96.0
a ,030 a0 50 30 13 28 99.0
20 ,000 15,290 5580 3550 3 23.5 20,000 Ob 100.0
3,750 310 200 120
3,750 Ob 4 91.7
100.0 - Lime K i l n 1 ) Process C o n t r o l s aoo 200 70 55 45 40 1 75.0
2 ) Process C o n t r o l s + aoo 50 20 15 11 10 1 93. a High E f f . Mud Washing
3) Process C o n t r o l s + High aoo 25 10 7 6 5 1 96.9 E f f . Mud Washing + Caus t i c Scrubbing
Srown Stock I n c i n e r a t i o n 37 0 25 9 6 34 93.2 Idasher System
B lack L i q u o r I n c i n e r a t i o n 310 60 20 9 5 3 25 ao. 6
31 0 OC 100.0 - Oxidation System Mo lecu la r Oxygen
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Fresh Water Tank
Condensate S t r i p p i n g Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n System
560 70 26 16 3 87.5
14,000 7,000 975 525
14,000 Ob
a Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d averape l e v e l
Gases a r e assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these aases.
C w r t aases.
25 50.0 100.0 -
10-second and 1-hour concentrations from the smelt dissolving tank, the
digesters , and the multiple-effect evaporators, along w i t h a l l three averaging
period concentrations from the lime kiln.
of the averages d u r i n g the year were above half the maximum value fo r the
respective averaging periods. These maxima, then, appear to be caused by
conditions of usually h i g h wind speed which b r i n g about aerodynamic downwash.
In each case, l e s s t h a n 5 percent
Table 9-4 shows the estimated maximum ambient TRS concentrations resulting
f r o m the various control systems. I f System No. 1 (bes t available control
technology) was applied t o each source, the estimated maximum ambient TRS
concentration would be 97 micrograms per cubic meter (10-second average).
Control Systems No. 2 and No. 6 would reduce the average ambient TRS concentration
around a kraft mfll to about 308 pg/m (10-second average).
Control Systems No. 3 and No. 5 m i l d result i n a maximum TRS ambient concentration
of about 487 pg/m3 (10-second average). These concentrations are mainly caused
by emissions from three f a c i l i t i e s : the recovery furnace, the smelt dissolving
tank, and the brown stock washer system.
concentration due t o emissions from the lime k i l n and black liquor oxidation
system are negligible i n a l l cases.
multiple-effect evaporators and condensate s t r ippers since i t i s assumed t h a t
the gases from t h e w systems would be burned i n the lime k i l n .
3 Application of
Contribution t o the maximum TRS ambient
No values are reported fo r the digesters ,
Averaging tines o f 10 seconds, one hour, and twenty-four hours were
selected f o r the TRS calculat ions, representing short and long-term exposures.
The 10-second average would be considered a " w h i f f " , and applicable to the
study of odorous emissions.
level of exposure experienced through casual contact, while the 24-hour average
shows the level of exposure of a person l i v i n g riear the mil l .
The one-hour average gives an indication of the
9-10
TABLE 9-4. ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE CONTROL SYSTEMS ON MAXIMUM AMBIENT TRS LEVELS AROUND AN E X I S T I N G (907 MEGAGRAMS PER DAY) KRAFT PULP MILL
Max mum Comb i ned CONTRIBUTION OF EACH SOURCE (ug/m 3 ) Control Averaging Concentration
- SYLtE! T i me pg/m3 RF S DT LK B LO 8SW
1
5
6
10 sec 1 h r
24 h r 10 sec
1 h r 24 h r 10 sec
1 h r 24 h r 10 sec
1 h r 24 h r
10 sec 1 h r
24 h r 10 sec
1 h r 24 h r
97
30 7
3 08 95
24
487
150
38
4 87
150
38 48 7
150
38 3 Q8
95
24
81 25
6
260 25
6
2 60 80
20
260
80
20
260
80
20 81
25
6
16 5
1
16 5
1
16 5
1
16 5
1
16
5
1
16
5
1
Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg. Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg .
-- Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neg . Neq.
Neg * Neg . Neg. Neg . Neg .
21 1 65
17
21 1 65
17
21 1 65
17
21 1 65
17
21 1 65
17
9.1.4 _- Changes 11--- in Solid and Liquid Wastes
Increased control of gaseous TCiS compounds will n o t change the amount o f
sol id waste generated by the kraf t pulp industry since none o f the control
techniques r e su l t in col lect ing sol ids t h a t can n o t be recycled t o the process.
Water e f f luent from a mill may increase, however, due t o the various TRS
controls. Controls requiring use of fresh water instead o f contaminated
condensate will r e su l t in an increase in the mill e f f luent of the amount of
the Condensate.
s t r ipper and reusing the stripped water.
prevent the TRS dissolved in the condensate from being emitted from the t r e a t -
ment pond during aeration. Increasing the mud washing eff ic iency t o control
TRS emissions from the lime kiln can also increase the m i l l ' s water e f f luent .
However, t h i s additional e f f luent from the mud washer can probably be recycled
back t o the process.
9.1.5 Energy Consumption
This increase could be eliminated by using a condensate
A condensate s t r ipper would also
The energy (fuel o r e l e c t r i c i t y ) required for each of the control techniques
mentioned in Chapter 6 are l i s t e d in Table 9-5.
resul t ing from a coal-fired power plant supplying the necessary power ( e l e c t r i c i t y )
fo r these control techniques are also l i s t e d in Table 9-5.
As indicated in Table 9-5, the additional par t icu la te , SO2 and NO emissions
The additional eniissions
X
t h a t will occur a t a coal-fired power plant due t o producing the e l e c t r i c i t y
t h a t will be required t o control emissions i s small compared t o the TRS
reduction tha t will be achieved a t the kraf t mil l .
As indicated by Table 9-5, the only control techniques requiring additional
fuel consumption a t a k raf t mill are incineration ( in a separate incinerator) of
the vent gases from the brown stock washer system and the black l iquor oxidation
system, and process controls used on the lime ki ln . Incineration of the
9-12
TABLE 9-5 COMPARISON OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES ON ENERGY IMPACT
FOR A 907 MEGAGRAMS PER DAY KRAFT PULP MILL
Emissions lblday
Fuel Electr ical Total Energy -Fired Power Plant Supplying TRS
lo9 Jlday (10 Btulday) Kwhlday lo9 J/day (10 Btulday) Par t . NO, SO,, Control T e c h n w The Elec t r ica l Energy a Reduction from
5.7 (12.6) 40 (88) 68 (150) 650 (1440)
Requ i remen t Requ i remen t Requirement Control Source Technique ,. L
. _ _
Recovery Furnace 8LOb 0 (0) 14,400 52 (49 1 Non-contact
evaporator 1150 (1 090) 0 1150 (1090) 0 (0)
Digester System Scrubbing 0 (0) 2,880 11 (10) 1.1 (2.5) 8 (18) 14 (30) 180 (400) Incineration 0 (0) 2,880 11 (10) 1.1 (2.5) 8 (18) 14 (30) 680 (1500)
Mu1 tip1 e -ef fec t Scrubbing Evaporator System Incineration
Lime Kiln
W A
w
Brown Stock Washer System
Black Liquor Oxi- dation System
d Smelt Dissolving Tank
Condensate Str ipper System
150 (142)
High Eff. Mud 150 (142) Washing
Process Controls, 150 (142) High Eff. Mud Washing & Caustic Scrubbing
Process Controls Process Controls 1
Incineration 234G (22201
Incineration Oxygen 0 (0) Fresh Water 0 (0)
Incineration 0 (0)
INCLUDED IN DIGESTER SECTION 420 (920) 450 (1000)
1,075' 154 (146) 0.5 (1.0) 3 (7) 5 (12) 270 (600) 1,075' 154 (146) 0.5 (1.0) 3 (7) 5 (12) 340 (750)
1,075' 154 (146) 0.5 (1.0) 3 (7) 5 (12) 350 (775)
5,376 2360 (2240) 2.1 (4.7) 15 (33) 25 (56) 140 (300)
INCLUDED IN WASHER SECTION 45 (100) 20,000 80 (68) 8.0 (17.5) 55 (122) 95 (210) 45 (100)
1.0 (2.1) 7 (15) 11 (25) 80 (175) 2,400 8 (8)
910 (2000) 840 3 (3) 0.3 (0.7) 2 (5) 4 (8)
6 6 Data a re based n the new source performance standards f o r coal-f i red power plants (Par t . - 0.1 lb/10 B t u ; NOx - 0.7 lb/10 B t u ; SO2 - 1.2 lb/10 B t u ) .
Requirements a r e f o r two-stage oxidation.
Electr ical requirement i s f o r operating a condensate s t r i p p e r t o TRS from scrubbing water, i f contaiminated condensate i s used.
Requirements a re for a scrubbing system, i f a scrubber is not already used to control p a r t i c u l a t e emissions
8 a
noncondensable gases (digester , multiple-effect evaporator, and condensate
stripper)would not require additional fuel i f the? a re burned in the lime kiln
as p a r t of the primary a i r feed.
Incineration of the vent gases from the brown stock washers and black
liquor oxidation system would require an additional fuel consumption of 2340
X lo9 joules/day (2,220 million Btu/day).
9 I t i s estimated tha t an additional 150 X 10 joules/day (142 million Btu/day)
o f fuel (without consideration of extra heat losses) will be required when process
controls (higher cold end temperatures and higher oxygen leve ls ) are used t o
control TRS compounds from a lime k i ln .
the normal fuel consumption of a lime k i ln .
This i s approximately f i v e percent of
The additional e l e c t r i c a l energy needed f o r each of these control tech-
niques i s estimated to be between zero and 15,000 kilowatt-hours per day.
Control System 1 would reauire about 23,500 kilowatt-hours per day of additional
e l ec t r i ca l energy.
kilowatt-hours per day of additional e l ec t r i ca l energy.
kilowatt-hour per day would be required f o r each system i f a condensate s t r ippe r
and a scrubber f o r the smelt dissolving tank a re needed.
Control Systems 2 through 6 would require about 18,125
An additional 350
Each contro system would r e s u l t i n an additional fuel requirement of 150
9 X 10
which would resu t i n an additional fuel requirement of 2482 X 10 joules/day
(incineration of BLO and washer gases).
e l ec t r i ca l requirement i n the order of 700 to 1400 kilowatt-hours per ton of
product.'
between one to three percent of the to t a l mill e l e c t r i c a l usage.
jouleslday ( f o r lime kiln controls) except f o r Control System No. 1 , 9
A pulp and paper mill requires an
Therefore, these control systems will r e s u l t i n an increase of
9-14
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 9
1. Incineration o f Malodorous Gases i n Kraft P u l p Mills, Burgess, T. L.,
Cater, D. N . , and McEachern, D. E . Pulp and Paper Magazine o f Canada.
Volume 75, Number 5. May 1974.
2 . Energy and Air Emissions i n the P u l p and Paper Indust=. James E . Roberson,
J . E. S i r r ine Company. Greenville, South Carolina.
9-1 5
10. EMISSION GUIDELINES FOR EXISTING KRAFT PULP MILLS
Various a l te rna t ive control systems can be applied t o existing kraf t pulp
mil ls as described i n Chapter 6. This chapter will se lec t a system which i s
judged t o be the best for existing plants when costs a r e taken in to account,
and will specify emission l imitat ions t h a t r e f l ec t the application o f such a
system. Time requirements t o incorporate control techniques for each affected
f a c i l i t y a re discussed i n Section 6.3.
the other control systems were not selected as best r e t r o f i t technology.
10.1 GENERAL RATIONALE
Section 10.3 will b r ie f ly discuss why
The best r e t r o f i t control technologies fo r the reduction of TRS emissions,
t a k i n g into account the cost of this control , correspond t o a l te rna t ive control
system No. -4, as indicated i n Table 6-2.
f o r brown stock washers, lime ki lns , and black l iquor oxidation systems a re
less r e s t r i c t i v e than those tha t have been proposed by EPA for new kraf t pulp
The recommended control technologies
mills. The recommended control technologies fo r the recovery furnace, digesters ,
mu1 t i p l e e f fec t evaporators, smelt dissolving t a n k , and condensate s t r ipper
a re the same fo r b o t h new and existing sources.
considered in determining best r e t r o f i t control technology:
The following factors were
1 . The degree o f emission reduction achievable through the application
of various demonstrated control technologies.
2. The technical f e a s i b i l i t y of applying the various demonstrated tech-
nologies t o existing sources.
existing recovery furnace was evaluated.
In par t icu lar , more t h a n one basic design of
10-1
3 . The impact of the various control technologies on national energy
consumption, water pol lut ion, sol i d waste disposal , and ambient a i r concentrations
of TRS.
4. The cost of adopting the emission guidelines. Control costs were
estimated f o r each a l t e rna t ive control system f o r each r e t r o f i t model, taking
in to account the level of exis t ing controls.
Ident i f ica t ion of the best demonstrated control technology for new mills
was accomplished d u r i n g the development of NSPS fo r the kraf t p u l p industry.
A question t h a t must be answered by this study is whether or not i t i s technically
and economically feas ib le t o apply this technology t o existing sources. Where
this i s n o t feas ib le , best r e t r o f i t technology considering cost i s ident i f ied .
Evaluation of the technical problems and costs associated w i t h a r e t r o f i t
project i s complicated by the lack of actual data f o r some sources. For example,
only recently has an ex is t ing brown stock washer system and black l iquor o x i d a t i o n
system been r e t r o f i t t e d f o r control of TRS.
units have been ins t a l l ed w i t h control systems.
control systems was avai lable fo r the other process f a c i l i t i e s i n exis t ing mills.
Ret rof i t models were developed (see Section 6.2) t o evaluate the environmental and
cost impacts o f i n s t a l l i ng TRS controls on ex is t ing recovery furnaces, digesters,
multiple-effect evaporators, lime k i lns , brown stock washers, black l iquor
oxidation systems, smelt dissolving tanks, and condensate s t r ippers .
retrofit model approach presents the impacts on an e n t i r e kraf t p u l p mill of
applying control technologies t o individual sources of TRS. The major tech-
nical problem, aside from space l imi ta t ions , foreseen f o r the average mill i s
the a b i l i t y of exis t ing furnaces t o maintain good combustion fo r TRS control
Also, no new black l iquor oxidation
Ret rof i t information on
The
10-2
while b u r n i n g the vent gases from the pulp washer and the black l iquor oxi-
dation system.
Table 10-1 indicates the impact on annual TRS emissions from the kraf t
industry i f best r e t r o f i t control technology, ( i . e . a l te rna t ive control system
No. 4 ) was used. Adoption of best r e t r o f i t control technology would r e su l t i n
emission reductions ranging from 40 percent a t typical ly controlled mills
t o 95 percent a t uncontrolled mills. Total emissions from the industry would
be reduced by about 81 percent, result ing i n a national TRS reduct
60,900 megagrams per year (67,150 tons per year) .
Adoption of best r e t r o f i t control technology will result i n a
reduction of 95 percent i n ambient a i r concentrations a t uncontrol
on of about
maximum
ed mills.
Emission reductions, and likewise control costs , will be less f o r m i l l s which
have already instal led some control systems.
10.2 SELECTION OF BEST RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY AND EMISSION GUIDELINE
10.2.1 Recovery Furnace System
Emission Guideline - "Old Design" furnaces ( i .e. , furnaces without membrane
wall o r welded wall construction, or emission-control designed a i r systems) :
20 ppm of TRS as H2S (0.3 g/Kg A D P ) on a dry gas basis and as a f2-hour average,
corrected to 8 volume percent oxygen.
- "New Design" furnaces ( i . e . , furnaces with both membrane wall or welded
wall construction and emission-control designed a i r systems):
H2S (0.075 g/Kg ADP) on a dry gas basis and as a 12-hour average, corrected t o 8
volume percent oxygen. ( A "New Design" furnace will have stated in i t s contract a
TRS performance guarantee or tha t i t was desianed with a i r pollution control as an
objective. )
-
5 ppm of TRS as
Cross recovery furnaces ( i . e . , furnaces with green liquor su l f id i t i e s in
excess of 28 percent - and liquor mixtures of more than 7 percent NSSC on an a i r dry
ton basis) :
average, corrected to 8 volume percent oxygen.
25 ppm of TRS as H2S (0.6 a/Kg ADP) on a dry g a s basis and as a 12-hour
10-3
Table 10-1, BEST RETROFIT-CONTROL TECHNOLOGY AND IMPACT FOR INDIVIDUAL SOURCES IN THE EXISTING KRAFT PULP INDUSTRY
Resultant TRS reduction a t an average kraf t Resultant national
Best- Demonstrated TRS level mill (% o f total TRS reduction control technique achievable mill emissions) (tons/yezr) Source
Recovery furnace Process controls + 20 ppm*(Old Design) 44.2
13.0
BLO
Digester system Incineration 5 PPm
+ Paul t i p l e-effect Incineration 5 PPm I evaporator system 0 P
Lime k i 1 n Process controls 20 ppm** ( inc. h i g h e f f . mud washing)
. I Brown stock washer No control - system
8.6
11.9
0
36,500
10,700.
7,050
9,800
0
Black liquor No control oxidation system
- 0 0
Smelt d isso lv ing t a n k Fresh water 0 .OO84 g/kg BLS 3 . 7 3,100
' , Condensate s t r i p p i n g Incineration 5 PPm neg
Total % reduction = 81.4 system -
neg . 67,150
*One percent a f a l l twelve-hour TRS ayerages above the spectfied level aye not considered t o be excess emlsslons. **Two percent o f a l l twelve-hour TRS averages above 20 ppm are not considered t o be excess em-issions.
Discussion - The emission guidelines represent the levels t h a t can be
achieved by using a two-stage black liquor oxidation system together with
good furnace operation.
kraf t recovery furnaces re f lec t the dependence of TRS emissions on the design
of the furnace, which i n turn depends on the age of the recovery furnace.
the design of the furnace affects the TRS level t h a t can be achieved, the
reduction of TRS emissions from the direct contact evaporator necessary t o
reduce emissions t o the level of the guidelines requires the use of h i g h efficiency
black liquor oxidation systems regardless of the design of the furnace.
recovery furnaces constructed since 1965 are generally considered capable of
achieving 5 ppm TRS because the furnace design i s basically similar t o furnaces
presently being instal led which can achieve 5 ppm TRS.’
The two specified levels of TRS emissions f o r s t ra ight
While
Most
Approximately 40 percent
of the existing recovery furnaces were constructed a f t e r 1965.
which were constructed before 1965 generally do n o t have the appropriate design ( i . e . ,
membrane o r welded wall construction and f l ex ib i l i t y of a i r dis t r ibut ion) o r
instrumentation necessary for achieving 5 ppm.
manufacturers ,2y3 however, these older furnaces are generally capable of 1 imi t i n g
TRS emissions t o 20 ppm i f the furnace i s properly operated, uses high efficiency
black liquor oxidation, and i s not operated a t an excessive production rate.
Recovery furnaces
As confirmed by the two furnace
As mentioned in Chapter 6 , cross recovery liquors are somewhat different
Consequently, TRS emissions from a cross recovery than s t ra ight kraft liquors.
furnace are not controllable t o the same degree as are those from straight
kraft recovery furnaces. The reasons for th i s include higher sulfur-to-
soda ratios and lower BTU value of the liquor f i red.
nique of using excess combustion a i r (high oxygen levels) t o reduce TRS
emissions i s of limited u t i l i t y because i t reportedly results in a sticky
Furthermore, the tech-
10-5
d u s t which will foul the precipitator and render furnace operation d i f f i cu l t
o r impossible. Tests performed on a non-contact type cross-recovery furnace
indicate that TRS emission levels of 25 ppm (12-houraverage) can be achieved
from well controlled cross recovery furnaces.4
Appendix B presents TRS emission data for s t ra ight kraft recovery furnaces
and a cross recovery furnace.
Retrofit annualized costs for instal l ing a second stage of black liquor
oxidation are about $240,000 for a 907 megagramslday (1,000 tons ADP/day) mill.
Retrofit costs would 1,. double i f a mill does not presently have a single
stage of oxidation. Annualized costs, including capital charges, are estimated
t o be about $0.75 per ton ADP, or about 0.25 percent o f the p u l p price t o instal l
a second stage o f black liquor oxidation.
excess i ve.
These costs are not considered
I t appears that approximately 18 recovery furnaces may not be able to
achieve 20 ppm TRS because the furnace either does not have suff ic ient control
for proper combustion or is operated a t an excessive production ra te and cannot
supply suff ic ient oxygen t o achieve good combustion. Studies have demonstrated
that m i n i m u m TRS emissions are not achieved unless residual oxygen content of
the f lue gas i s i n the range of 2.5 t o 4.5 percent.
overloading o f the furnace can exis t regardless of the age of the furnace.)
these furnaces are required t o achieve the emission guideline, a new furnace
would have t o be installed ( a t an annualized cost of about $2.3 million for a
500 tons per day furnace) t o compensate for the cutback on production of an
existing furnace.
are a t l eas t 20 years old [ t h i s age i s near the normal l i f e (25 years) o f a
furnace, considering the compliance schedule u n d m Section 11 1 ( d ) ) and may be
near rep1 acement.
(Low oxygen levels due t o
I f
Many o f the recovery furnaces that would have to be replaced
10-6
An alternative t o replacing an old furnace would be to ins ta l l a scrubber
system, as mentioned i n Section 6.11, which i s capable of achieving less than
20 ppm TRS. Installation
and operation of such a system is expected t o be a much less expensive alternative
t h a n replacement of the furnace.
A scrubber system has been installed a t one mill.5
The emission guidelines for recovery furnaces are comparable t o the emission
levels which existing furnaces in Oregon and Washington are required to meet
as of July, 1975 (17.5 ppm).6 The 17.5 ppm level represents the level t h a t can
be achieved by most existing recovery furnaces, and the 1983 Oregon and Washington
level of 5 ppm represents the level achievable w i t h the newer design furnaces
and a1 lows time for the replacement o f older furnaces (non-membrane wall construction).
The estimated impact of adoption of the emission guideline on annual TRS
emissions from recovery furnaces i s 33,470 megagrams per year, an 85 percent
reduction. 'The predicted maximum ambient a i r TRS concentration due t o emissions
from an uncontrolled recovery furnace would decrease by 96 t o 99 percent w i t h
the recommended control technology.
10.2.2 Digester System
Emission Guideline - 5 parts per million of TRS as H2S on a dry gas basis
and as a 12-hour average.
Discussion - This TRS level i s the same as t h a t included i n the new source
performance standards for new digester systems.
by incineration of the noncondensable gases.
and several other s ta tes are required t o incinerate the noncondensable gases
from digester systems as of July, 1975.7 I t i s estimated t h a t adoption of th i s
control technology will resul t i n a reduction of 99 percent i n the uncontrolled
TRS emitted from a digester system.
The 5 ppm level i s achievable
Existing mills i n Oregon, Washington,
10-7
The TRS level achievable by incineration of noncondensable aases from
digester systems has been well-demonstrated as reported in Section 6 .1 .2 .
gases from the digester system can be handled in the lime kiln a s Dart of the
combustion a i r without requirinq extensive modification t o the diaester system
or lime kiln.
i s presently being accomplished by a t l eas t 60 mills.
inciperation systems were re t rof i t ted t o the existing mills.
The
Incineration of the gases in lime kilns o r in power boilers
Nearly a l l of these
Incineratim is so f a r the only control o p t i o n capable o f providing h i g h efficiency
TR3 reduction.
would result from control by white liquor scrubbers (see Chapter 6 ) .
scrubbers are effective i n controlling H2S and methyl mercaptan which comnrise
only approximately 20 percent of the TRS emissions from digester systems.
A thousand-fol d increase i n emi ssi ons t o approximately 7000 pDm
These
If the emission guide1 ines were increased moderately , incineration costs
would not vary greatly.
lime kiln i s essentially fixed regardless of the selected emission level.
existing kraft pulp mills incinerate these gases in the lime kiln and normal
kiln operation will oxidize the TRS compounds t o less t h a n 5 ppm.
The cost of collecting and burning the gases in the
Most
Retrofit annualized costs are estimated t o range from about $65,000 to
about $210,000 for a 454 megagram mill , or about $0.40 t o $1.25/T ADP. The
low value represents costs for piping only, while the h i g h value represents
costs for p i p i n a , blow heat recovery system, and a seoarate incinerator. These
costs are not considered excessive.
The estimated impact of adoption of best r e t r o f i t contro
annual TRS emissions from rlicester systems is sianificant, 11
year o r a 97 percent reduction from uncontrolled levels.
techno1 ocly on
800 meaarwams per
10-8
10.2.3 Multiple-Effect Evaporator System
Emission Guideline - 5 parts per million of TRS as H2S on a dry gas basis
and as a 12-hour average.
Discussion - This TRS level i s also the same as tha t i n the new source
performance standards fo r new multiple-effect evaporator systems.
t h a t achievement of this level will require a reduction of 98 percent of the TRS
emitted from an uncontrolled mu1 t iple-effect evaporator system. Incineration
is capable of achieving this level. E x i s t i n g mills i n Oregon, Washington,
and several other States a re required t o incinerate these gases as of July, 1975.
I t is estimated
8
The TRS level achievable by incineration has been well-demonstrated as reported
i n the S t a n d a r d s Support and Environmental Impact Statement document fo r new
kraft pulp mills.
can easily be handled i n the lime kiln as par t of the combustion a i r without
requiring extensive modifications to be. made t o the multiple-effect evaporator
The non-condensable gases from the multiple-effect evaporators
system o r the lime k i l n .
boilers is presently being accomplished by a t l ea s t 59 mills.
these incineration systems were r e t ro f i t t ed t o existing mu1 t iple-effect evaporator systems.
Incineration of these gases i n lime kilns o r i n power
The majority of
Incineration is so f a r the only control option capable o f providing h i g h efficiency
TRS reduction.
(see Section 6.1.3) would be required t o allow the use of white liquor scrubbers.
scrubbers have only about a 90 percent TRS collection efficiency when used on the
noncondensable gases from a multiple-effect evaporator system.
A sixty-fold increase i n TRS emissions t o approximately 300 ppm
These
If the emission guidelines were increased moderately, incineration costs
would n o t vary greatly. The control costs are mainly fo r collecting and transferring
the gases to the control device whether incineration o r scrubbing i s practiced.
10-9
Most existing kraf t pulp mills incinerate the gases in the lime kiln along with
the digester gases, and normal lime kiln operations oxidize the gases to less
t h a n 5 ppm TRS.
Retrofit costs for incineration of the noncondensable gases from the
multiple-effect evaporators are included in the r e t r o f i t costs reported for
the digester system (Section 10.2.2).
Estimated impact of adoption of best r e t r o f i t technology on annual TRS
emissions from multiple-effect evaporator systems i s s ignif icant , 6,120
megagrams (6,750 tons) per year o r a 96 percent reduction.
10.2.4 Lime Kiln
Emission Guideline - 20 ppm of TRS as H2S on a dry gas bas is and as a
12-hour average, corrected to 10 volume percent oxygen.
Discussion - The specified level re f lec ts the dependence of TRS emissions
on the operation of the kiln.
level and cold-end temperature, and using water t h a t does n o t contain dissolved
sulfides in the particulate control scrubber. Existing mills will probably
need t o improve the i r lime mud washing efficiency (additional f i l t r a t i o n and
c l a r i f i e r capacity) t o reduce the sulfide level of mud fed t o the kiln.
This requires maintaining the proper oxygen
Additional
fan capacity may be necessary t o obtain the required oxygen 'levels i n existing
kilns and thereby provide dppropriate control over the combustion.
no apparent reasons why these changes cannot be made t o existing kilns.
instal la t ion of a condensate s t r ipper may be required t o remove sulfides from
the condensate i f i t is used i n the particulate control scrubber. Appendix B
presents TRS emission d a t a , which were obtained d u r i n g the NSPS program, f o r
several lime kilns t h a t achieve th i s level.
There are
Furthermore,.
10-10
Retrofit annualized costs for additional fan capacity ( t o achieve higher
oxygen levels) and instrumentation are a b o u t $55,000 for a 458 megagramslday
(500 t o n ADP/day) m i 11.
capacity are a b o u t $90,000.
incurred i f a condensate s t r ipper i s needed t o remove the sulfides from the
scrubbing water. These annualized costs , including capital charges, are estimated
t o be abou t $0.90 per ton ADP i f a condensate s t r ipper i s n o t needed and abou t
$1.50 per ton ADP i f one i s needed. These costs are n o t considered excessive.
Retrofit annualized costs for additional mud washing
An additional $90,000 in r e t ro f i t annualized costs would be
The impact o f adopt ion o f best demonstrated r e t r o f i t control technology
on TRS emissions from kraft lime kilns i s s ignif icant , an 84 percent reduction
(9,800 tonslyear) from existing levels. Maximum ambient TRS concentration due
t o an uncontrolled lime k i l n would be reduced by 83 percent.
Lower TRS levels than the emission guideline are achievable as stated
in Section 6.1.4 and a s reflected in the proposed standard for new lime k i l n s
( 8 ppm TRS).
scrubbing.
The lower TRS level i s achievable with the addition of caustic
Many existing lime kilns are operating in excess of design capacity,
and some of these ki lns , even with improved mud washing efficiency, may n o t
be able t o achieve TRS levels significantly lower t h a n 40 ppm because of the
inabi l i ty t o supply suff ic ient oxygen for good combustion.
between 20 and 33 lime kilns (corresponding t o a b o u t 20 percent of the existing
kilns) would have t o be replaced o r added in order t o achieve 20 D p m TRS by aDplyina
the best r e t r o f i t control technology discussed above (see Chapter 8 ) .
costs f o r a new lime kiln are $3 million, and annualized costs are $510,000.
I t appears t h a t
Capital
The lower TRS emission level of 8 ppm i s not recommended as an emiss on guideline
so t h a t the number of kiln replacements i s minimized. of those mills which cannot achieve 20 ppm from the lime kiln by applying process
The higher level a so allows some
10-1 1
controls and improved mud washing t o apply caustic scrubbing t o achieve the guideline
rather than replacing o r adding a new lime kiln.
pulp mill showed t h a t levels of 40 t o 50 ppm TRS could be reduced t o a level
less- than 20 ppm by using caustic a d d i t i ~ n . ~
i s technically achievable a t existing mills and can be imposed i f the location o f
the mill or lime kiln warrants additional controls.
The resul ts o f t r i a l s conducted a t one
Nevertheless, the lower TRS level
10.2.5 Brown Stock Washer System
Emission Guideline - No emission guideline i s recommended for existing
b r o k n stock washer systems.
Discussion - No TRS control i s recommended due t o the high costs associated
with hooding and collecting the gases and the possible effect the gases may have
on existing recovery furnace operation.
Incineration of the vent gases i s the emission control technique t h a t could
be used t o reduce TRS emissions from brown stock washer systems. Burning
these gases in an existing recovery furnace i s considered by furnace manufacturers
t o be technologically feasible.
been demonstrated on an existing furnace, and the TRS level t h a t can be achieved
from an existing furnace under these conditions has n o t been demonstrated.
control costs for incineration, therefore, have been based on the use of a separate
incinerator.
possibly with enclosed hoods, and ductwork would be necessary t o transfer the
gases t o the incinerator.
a t some mills i f the recovery furnace was used.)
separate incinerator would require r e t r o f i t annualized costs of abou t $900,000
for a 454 meqaqram mill or a b o u t $5.50/T ADP.
10 This control technique, however, has not yet
The
Incineration of the gases would require t h a t the washer be hooded,
(These gases would have t o be ducted over 1500 f ee t
Incineration of gases i n a
These costs are much more
10-1 2
a
severe t h a n r e t r o f i t costs for the other TRS sources and are considered t o be
excessive i n comparison with control of the other sources of TRS and with the
amount of TRS reduction achieved ( a b o u t 1 percent of total mill TRS emissions).
10.2.6 Black Liquor Oxidation System
Emission Guideline - No emission guideline i s recommended for existing
black liquor oxidation systems.
Discussion - No TRS control i s recommended due t o the expected cost impact
on the industry i f existing sources were required t o meet TRS levels achievable
for new systems.
uncontrolled level ) t han t h a t considered demonstrated for new sources.
There i s no less stringent control method possible (except for the
Achievable control technology involves incineration of the vent gases or
the use o f molecular oxygen instead of a i r t o eliminate the vent gases.
of controlling the low concentration/high volume gases from black liquor oxida t ion
systems i s considered more severe and excessive i n comparison with controlling
the largest sources of TRS a t kraft mills (see Section 10.3). The control costs
for incineration have been based on the use of a separate incinerator, since the
effect of these oxygen-deficient gases on furnace combustion and thus TRS
emissions from existing furnaces has n o t been determined.
costs are estimated t o be $230,000 for a 500 TPD kraft mil l , o r $1.50/T ADP.
These costs are considered excessive i n view of the amount of TRS reduction t h a t
would be achieved by incineration (abou t 0.4 percent of total mill TRS emissions).
10 .2 .7 Condensate Stripping System
The cost
Retrofit annualized
Emission Guideline - 5 parts per million of TRS as H2S on a dry gas basis
and as a 12-hour average.
10-13
Discussion - This emission guideline i s the same as tha t included i n the
new source performance standards fo r new condensate s t r i p p i n g systems. Only
five existing mills have condensate strippers, and only one i s not present
incinerating the off-gases. Incineration o f the off-gases i s necessary to
achieve this TRS level.
Retrofit annualized costs based on combining the stripper off-gases w
the noncondensable gas from the digesters and evaporators are estimated t o
Y
t h
be
about $6,500 for a 500-ton-per-day mill o r about $0.05/T ADP.
on the industry due t, control o f this f a c i l i t y i s expected t o be negligible.
The cost impact
Use of a white liquor scrubber, the only other control technique used,
would permit TRS emissions which are 100-fold higher than w i t h incineration.
These TRS levels from scrubbers could be highly odorous.
10.2.8 Smelt Dissolving Tank
Emission Guideline - 0.0084 g/kg BLS of TRS as H2S (approximately 8 ppm) , on a 12-hour average.
Discussion - This emission guideline is also the same as that included i n
the new source performance standards fo r new smelt dissolving tanks. Achievement
of this level would require the use of fresh water, o r possibly weak wash liquor,
i n the particulate control device (scrubber) t o ensure compliance.
The control costa fo r achieving this level are not considered excessive.
Adoption of this level is expected to resu l t i n an emission reduction of about
2720 megagrams (3000 tons) per year of TRS.
10.2.9 Excess Emissions
Excess emissions are defined as emissions exceeding the numerical
Continuous emission emission limit included in an emission guideline.
monitoring, however, will identify a l l periods G f excess emissions, including
those which are not the result o f improper operation and maintenance and
19-14
therefore are n o t t o be considered as violations. Excess emissions due t o
start-ups shutdowns and malfunctions f o r example, are unavoidable o r
beyond the control of an owner or operator and cannot be attributed
t o improper operation and maintenance.
result of some inherent variabil i ty or fluctuation w i t h i n a process
which influences emissions cannot be attributed t o improper oDeration
and maintenance, unless these fluctuations could be controlled by more
carefully attending t o those process operating parameters d u r i n g
routine operati on which have 1 i t t l e effect on operati on of the process ,
b u t which may have a significant effect on emissions.
Similarly, excess emissions as a
To quantify the potential for excess emissions due t o inherent
variabil i ty i n a process, continuous emission moni to r ing data are used
whenever possible t o calculate an excess emission allowance.
kraft pulp mills, th i s allowance i s defined as follows.
calendar quarter i s divided i n t o discrete contiguous twelve-hour time
periods, the excess emission allowance is expressed as the percentaqe of
these time periods excess emissions may occur as the result of unavoidable
vari abi 1 i ty w i t h i n the kraft p u l p i n g process.
allowance represents the potential for excess emissions under conditions
of proper operation and maintenance, in the absence o f start-ups
2nd malfunctions, and i s used as a guideline o r screening mechanism fo r
interpreting the d a t a generated by the excess emission reporting requirements.
The definitions of excess emissions fo r recovery furnaces and lime
kilns are discussed below.
For
I f a
Thus, the excess emissions
shutdowns ,
Recovery Furnace Systems - A p u l p manufacturer submitted six months
o f TRS emission d a t a from one of the i r new design recovery furnaces
and equested t h a t E P A consider the d a t a i n defining excess T!?S emissions
from recovery furnace f a c i l i t i e s .
deve o p i n g the d a t a upon w h i c h the new source performance standard i s
The furnace was tested by E P A i n
1r)-15
based. The submitted data, recorded by a continuous monitor, show t h a t
over the 6-month per iod, the percent o f t ime t h a t the TRS concentrat ion
exceeded 5 ppm dur ing each month ranged from 0 t o 4.9 percent and
averaged about 1 percent i n normal operat ion ( i n c l u d i n g load changes).
E P A has inves t i ga ted the furnace operat ion and the mon i to r ing system a t
t h i s m i l l and be l ieves t h a t the data are a t r u e i n d i c a t i o n o f normal ,
we l l c o n t r o l l e d operat ion f o r t h i s furnace.
For cross recovery furnaces s i m i l a r excess emissions can be predic ted.
For o l d d rs ign recovery furnaces, no such continuous mon i to r ing data are
ava i lab le . However, cons ider ing t h a t the excess emissions a1 lowance
must represent the p o t e n t i a l f o r excess emissions due t o inherent
r e l i a b i l i t y i n the process i t s e l f and t h a t the s t r ingency of the standard
f o r new design furnaces i s a t l e a s t comparable t o t h a t f o r o l d design
furnaces, i t appears reasonable t o use the same excess emissions
allowance. Therefore, based on t h a t in fo rmat ion , an allowance o f 1
percent o f the 12-hour averages has been given f o r excess TRS emissions
above the gu ide l ine .
Lime K i l n - Test data on a 4-hour bas is (see Appendix B ) were
supp l ied by a m i l l (Lime K i l n P) t h a t had r e t r o f i t t e d the l ime k i l n
system w i t h add i t i ona l fan capaci ty and mud washing capaci ty . These
data g i ve an i n d i c a t i o n o f t he v a r i a t i o n s i n the emission concentrat ions
over a l a rge number o f four-hour periods.
when the m i l l was main ta in ing good process cont ro ls (h igh c o l d end
temperatures, h igh oxygen leve ls , and h igh mud s o l i d s contents) on the
k i l n , t he four-hour average TRS concentrat ions exceeded 20 ppm f o r approxi-
mately 11 percent o f the time.” However, dur ing t h i s same pe r iod the mud
f i l t e r ( b e l t f i l t e r ) was i nopera t i ve f o r 0 percent o f the t ime. However,
process and emission mon i to r ing data obta ned on Lime K i l n E (see Appendix
B ) show excess TRS emissions o f 2 percent on a 4-hour average bas is over
The data show t h a t f o r the pe r iod
10-16
the 8 ppm l e v e l w i t h down t
percent.
From the comparison of
the mud f i l t e r on Lime K i l n
me on the mud f i l t e r (vacuum drum) o f on ly 1
those two se ts o f data, i t was f e l t t h a t had
P been opera t ing proper ly , as had t h a t o f
Lime K i l n E, there would have been excess emissions on ly 2 percent o f the
t i m e , i ns tead o f 11 percent, on a 4-hour average bas is .
averaging per iod, Lime K i l n E should have no excess emissions dur ing normal
operation.12
K i l n P.
With a 12-hour
However, the data do no t support t h i s conclusion f o r Lime
Therefore, i t i s f e l t t h a t w i t h a r e l i a b l e mud f i l t e r i n g system
and main ta in ing good process con t ro l s on the k i l n , the 12-hour average
TRS concentrat ions w i l l exceed 20 ppm f o r no more than 2 percent o f the
time.
i s advised f o r excess TRS emissions above the guide l ine.
10.3 SUMFIARY OF THE RATIONALE FOR SELECTING THE BEST RETROFIT CONTROL SYSTEM
Hence, an allowance o f a maximum 2 percent o f the 12-hour averages
The proposed TRS emission l i m i t s f o r new k r a f t pu lp m i l l s are technolo-
g i c a l l y achievable a t e x i s t i n g k r a f t pu lp m i l l s when the bes t con t ro l
techniques discussed above are app l ied t o each o f the e i g h t coniponent
process operations.
are considered excessive f o r some e x i s t i n g m i l l s , i n p a r t because some
techniques i nvo lve rep1 acement o f recovery furnaces o r 1 ime k i 1 ns.
a l t e r n a t i v e con t ro l techniques which are e f f e c t i v e bu t less c o s t l y are
ava i l ab le f o r some process operations. Therefore, the cos t o f apply ing the
various con t ro l techniques had a considerable i n f l uence on the se lec t i on o f
the recommended best r e t r o f i t con t ro l technology ( a l t e r n a t i v e con t ro l
system No. 4 f o r an e n t i r e k r a f t m i l l ) .
However, the costs o f apply ing the best con t ro l techniques
Fur ther ,
Control of the brown stock washer system and black l i q u o r ox ida t ion
system ( a l t e r n a t i v e con t ro l system No. 1) are no t recommended because
i n c i n e r a t i o n o f these vent gases i n a separate i n c i n e r a t o r would r e s u l t
10-17
a
in excessive operating costs and fuel requirements i n comparison t o the
TRS reduction achieved by the control technique. Incineration o f these
gases in an existing recovery furnace i s n o t presently considered t o be
demonstrated re t rof i t technology.
t o handle these gases has demonstrated the abi l i ty t o b u r n these gases
and s t i l l maintain proper combustion for controlling TRS emissions from
No existing recovery furnace not designed
the furnace i t s e l f .
The emi ssi on gui del i ne recomnended for
20 ppm fo r "old design" furnaces, 5 ppm for
ppm f o r cross recov6,y furnaces. The older
achieving 5 ppm and a large number of exist
existing recovery furnaces i s
"new design" furnaces, and 25
furnaces are not capable of
ng furnaces would most likely
have t o be replaced i f such a level was required.
required f o r each type of furnace to meet the recommended levels i s
two-stage black liquor oxidation and process controls.
The control technique
Incineration of the noncondensable gases from the digesters, multiple-
effect evaporators, or condensate strippers in the lime kiln has been
demonstrated a t many existing mills. Therefore, since the control costs
are n o t excessive, the emission guideline recommended i s the same as the
new source perfonnance standard ( 5 ppm TRS) for new kraft pulp mills,
An emission guideline of 20 ppm TRS i s recommended for existing
lime kilns.
20 ppm can be achieved with proper kiln operation and sufficient mud
washing efficiency.
be necessary f o r most existing kilns. Lower TRS levels are achievable,
b u t several additional lime kilns would have t o be replaced o r added in
order t o achieve a level of 8 ppm TRS.
Emission d a t a obtained during the NSPS program show t h a t
Larger fans and additional mud washing capacity w i 11
The emission guideline recomnended f o r snl?l t aissolving tanks will
probably prevent the use of contaminated condensate in the t a n k and the
10-18
particulate control device, i f one i s used.
already for controlling particulates, one may have t o be installed t o
reduce TRS emissions from an existing smelt dissolving t ank t o the
recommended gui del i ne.
If a scrubber i s n o t used
The best r e t ro f i t technologies (a l ternat ive control system No. 4)
will produce a large reduction in national TRS emissions (67,15r3 tons/year)
and in ambient TRS concentrations around existing mills.
10.4 SELECTION OF THE FORMAT OF THE EMISSION GUIDELINES
Standards for kraft pulp mills could be expressed in terms o f e i ther
mass emissions per unit of production o r a concentration of p o l l u t a n t i n
the effluent gases. The most common format now used by the industry and
s t a t e control agencies i s pounds of pollutant per ton of air-dried
unbleached pulp produced (lb/T ADP) . This format offers the advantage of
preventing circumvention of the standards by the addition of dilution air
o r the use of excessive quantities o f a i r in process operations.
principal disadvantage i s t h a t a control agency cannot readily o r
accurately measure the pulp production over the short term.
storage capacity of the mil l , the recovery furnace, smelt dissolving t a n k ,
1 ime ki I n , condensate s t r ippers , bl ack 1 iquor oxidation tanks, and
The
Due t o
mal t iple-effect evaporators can be operating on accumulated inventories
when the digesters are off-stream ( n b pulp production). Similarly, the
above f a c i l i t i e s can be operating below capacity even t h o u g h the pulp
production may be a t design rates.
Concentration units are used as the format for the emissi'on guidelines
for the digesters, the mu1 tip1 e-effect evaporators
the lime ki ln , and the condensate stripping system.
selection of th i s format are outlined below:
the recovery furnace,
The reasons fo r the
a. Concentration units can be corrected for excess oxygen in the lime
10-1 9
k i l n and recovery furnace exhaust streams, p r e c l u d i n g c i rcumvent ion o f t h e
standards by d i l u t i o n .
b. The re fe rence t e s t method f o r TRS produces da ta i n concen t ra t i on
u n i t s .
compliance f o r t h e a f f e c t e d f a c i l i t i e s .
No convers ion f a c t o r s are t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e d i n de te rm in ing
c. Average concen t ra t i ons r a t h e r than instantaneous concen t ra t i ons
are proposed t o a l l o w f o r f l u c t u a t i o n s i n emissions which occur even d u r i n g
p e r i ods o f normal o p e r a t i on.
d. Commercial ly a v a i l a b l e cont inuous mon i to rs t h a t may be used t o
measure emissions from these f a c i l i t i e s i n d i c a t e concen t ra t i on d i r e c t l y .
A d i r e c t i n d i c a t i o n o f performance o f t he c o n t r o l systems would be a v a i l a b l e ,
and t h e r e f o r e t h e opera to r would be aware o f excess emissions t h a t r e q u i r e
c o r r e c t i v e ac t i on .
The emission g u i d e l i n e f o r smel t d i s s o l v i n g tanks i s expressed i n
grams p e r k i l o g r a m BLS (g/kg BLS).
c o r r e c t i n g f o r excess oxygen because t h e exhaust stream discharged from
t h e smel t d i s s o l v i n g tank i s mos t l y ambient a i r .
D i l u t i o n cannot be prevented by
10.5 RECO!+IENDED MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
M o n i t o r i n g requirements a r e necessary t o ensure proper ope ra t i on
and maintenance o f t h e a f f e c t e d f a c i l i t y and i t s assoc ia ted c o n t r o l system.
The volume concen t ra t i on o f TRS emissions can be monitored by use of
measurement systems (see Chapter 7) .
t r o l dev ice parameters t h a t are app rop r ia te i n d i c a t o r s o f concen t ra t i an o f
TRS emissions from recovery fu rnace systems and l i m e k i l n s , i t i s
recommended t h a t TRS cont inuous mon i to rs be r e q u i r e d f o r recovery furnaces
and l i m e k i l n s ; however, i t i s a l s o recommended t h a t those requirements
n o t become e f f e c t i v e u n t i l p romulga t ion of performance s p e c i f i c a t i o n s
f o r TRS mon i to rs .
Since t h e r e a r e no process o r con-
i o - z a
TRS concentrat ions i n the e f f l u e n t gases from an i n c i n e r a t o r t h a t
con t ro l s TRS emissions ( f rom t h e d iges ters , m u l t i p l e - e f f e c t evaporators,
and/or condensate s t r i p p e r s ) can be measured by a continuous mon i to r ing
system. An e f f e c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e method of mon i to r i ng TRS emissions from
an i n c i n e r a t o r i s continuous measuring and record ing o f t h e f i r e box
temperature o f 540°C (1OOOOF) and opera t ion a t a residence t ime o f a t l e a s t
one-ha l f second i n the f i r e box.
res idence t ime t h a t w i l l n o t be reduced i f t h e i n c i n e r a t o r i s n o t operated
above i t s design capaci ty .
and recorded.
the gu ide l i nes are i n c i n e r a t e d i n t h e recovery furnace o r t h e l ime k i l n , t he
TRS mon i to r i ng system on t h e furnace o r t h e l ime k i l n w i l l serve t o mon i to r
the sources t h a t a re be ing i nc ine ra ted .
I n c i n e r a t o r s are designed f o r a p a r t i c u l a r
The f i r e box temperature can be r e a d i l y measured
I f noncondensable gases from f a c i l i t i e s t h a t a re covered by
Since t h e gu ide l i ne f o r smel t d i s s o l v i n g tanks i s expressed i n a format
of p o l l u t a n t mass pe r u n i t o f feed t o the furnace, t he gas f l o w r a t e and
the feed r a t e t o t h e furnace would have t o be measured s imul taneously
t o reduce t h e TRS concentrat ions measured by the mon i to r t o u n i t s o f the
The inaccurac ies i nvo l ved i n cont inuous ly measuring
s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e
t d i s s o l v i n g tank
recommended gu ide l i ne .
emissions from t h e
t h a t no d i r e c t mon
i s recommended.
s me
t o r
t d i s s o l v i n g tank are f e l t t o be
ng o f TRS emissions from the sme
10-2 1
References fo r Chapter 10
1. Letter from J . W. Kesner of Babcock and Wilcox Company t o James Eddinger of E P A , dated May 27, 1975.
2. Presentation g i v e n by Ju l ius Gomni of Combustion Engineering a t the NAPCTAC meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, on March 3, 1977.
3. Op. c i t . , Reference 1 .
4. A Report on the Study of TRS Emissions from a NSSC - Kraft Recovery Boiler, Container Corporation of America, March 9 , 1977.
5. Considerations i n the Design f o r TRS and Par t icu la te Recovery from Effluents of Kraft Recovery Furnaces, Te l l e r , A. J . , and Amberg, h . r. , Preprint , TAPPI Environmental Conference, Hay, 1975.
6. Analysis of Final S t a t e Implementation Plans Rules and Regulations, prepared by the MITRE Corporation f o r the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Contract No. 68-02-0248, July, 1972.
7. Op. c i t . , Reference 6.
8. Op. c i t . , Reference 6.
9. Telephone conversation between Larry Weeks of Hoerner-Wal dorf Corporation and James Eddinger o f EPA on September 6 , 1977.
10. Op. c i t . , Reference 1 .
11. Letter from Richard C. Wigger of Champion International Corporation t o Don R. Goodwin of EPA, dated June 13, 1977.
12. Standard Support and Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 11: Promulgated Standards o f Performance fo r Kraft Pulp Mills, EPA-450/2c76-014b, December, 1977.
10-22
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF KRAFT MILLS IN THE UNITED STATES
A- 1
i
Company - - ~ A1 abamd
A l l i e d Paper
American Can
Champion
Container Corp.
Gerogia K r a f t
Gu l f States
Gul f States
Hainnermill
I . P .
Kimberly-C1 ark
MacMi 11 an Bloedel
Sco t t
Union Camp
Southwest Forest Arizona
Arkansas Georgia-Paci f i c
Great Northern
Green Bay
I . P .
I . P .
Weyerhaeuser
Locat ion I_ - - -. Jackson
Bul t e r
Court1 and
Brewton
Mahrt
Oempo 1 i s
Tuscaloosa
Selma
Mobi 1 e
Coosa Pines
Plne H i l l
Mobile
Mo n t gome r y
Snowflake
Crosset t
Ashdown
Mor r i 1 ton
Camden
Pine B l u f f
Pine B luf f
Mill S i z e Avp . Kraft Prod.
(Kraft (Cap.) -..:e. .. 500
( 408 ) 930
500 (500) 900
(850) 1000
(400) 500
( 500 1 1300 (1200) 585
(600)
1000 (975)
(900)
';;;I
(g )
1400 (1400)
870 (930)
600 (600)
1250
400
750 (750) 1220 (1 300) 200
(200)
Recovery Furnace control3 TRS , No. o f Rating Year Tech-
nique Units Manuf. t p d - I n s t a l . - ... . - - . 2
3
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
2
1
' CE
BkW
B6 W
Bk W
BkY
BkW
BkW
BkW
B6W C E
CE
BkW
CE
BLW
CE
CE
CE BkW BkW
BkW
CE
566 post-1965 BLO 350 post-1965
1959.1 956 390(each) 1965 BLO
600 1968 BLO
390 1962 BLO 600 1969 Low Odor 900 1965
330 1955 BLO
175 1947 BLO 250 1941 (oxygen) 450 BLO
7 00 1970 BLO
BLO 900 post-1965
932 post-1965 BLO
450;300 p re 1965 BLO
700 p re 1965 BLO aoo
250 1960 500 1969
2 006 5 00 850 540
665 250 500 2-275 1100 390 165
p re 1965 BLO pre 1965 PO s t - 1 965
post -1 965 1965 1966 1946 1966 1959
pre 1965
Leve 1' #/T ADP
0.5
0.5
0.11
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.E
0.5
0.5
15 .0
0.6
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
i i i n c - i n c i a e r a t i o n B - Batch
BLO - Black L iquor Oxidat ion 3C - Continuous
A-2
a
n i t s
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
4
1
2
2
1
1
1
Lime Kiln S i z e TRS
>.of Tons (Ca0)Level Per Day #lTADP-
127
157 each 181
123
120
130 75
125
225
1400 ( t o t a l ) 174
400
117
150
0.8
0.8
0.05
0.8
1 0.8
0.8
o.a 0.2
" 0 .
4
6
1
8
1
1
8
4
6 1
1
13
1
6
11
4
2
2
3
Type' Tech- (Size)
Batch
B
C
B
C
C
B (495)
B ( 600
B C
(250) C
(925)
B (910) C (500)
C
(500 tpd 1
(400 tpd 1
1870 I B
E (1276)
8 (4iO)
C
B
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Inc.
Inc .
Inc.
Inc .
Inc.
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Inc .
Leve l4 #/T ADP
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1.5
0.02
1.5
1.5
0.02
1.5
1.5
No.
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
4
1
2
4
1
1
1
Mu 1 t i p le-e f f ec t Evaporator
Control TRS Tech- Level' nique-. - T(T ADP
I n c . ' 0.02
i n c . 0.02
inc . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
scrub.
i n c .
Inc .
inc .
i n c .
i n c .
i n c .
Inc .
o .oa
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.92
0.32
1 .o
0.02
1 .o 1 .o 1 .o
100
1 .o
Brown Stock !dasher TRS Capacity gasher ~ e v e l '
No. - lWTPD Stazes # / T A D P
1 3 0.3
2 3 4
1 2
1 3
2 300 3 475 4
1 600 3
3
1 3
Uncontrol led f i gu res given are average uncon t ro l l ed f i gu res f o r the i ndus t r y unless actual l e v e l knwn, con t ro l l ed l eve l s g iven are actual f l gu res when known otherwise s t a t e standard i s given. s t a t e standard a 1 o r actua l l e v e l known a l e v e l o f .1 BIT (70 ppm) i s assu e!, ,aec;"p:;;i;: t ab le showlrg the corr'espondlnq einfss~on r a t e i n terms o f pp6 and g/Kg AD? 1s presented a t the en!
Furnaces con t ro l l ed w i t h BLO bu t f o r y h i c h no
A- 3
M i l l S i z e Avg . Kraft
1 : Prod. (Kraft) (Cap.)
Company Locat ion t pd L a i i - C r w n Slmpson Fa f rha ven 550
(550) f o r n i a 'F i breboard
Louislana-Pac.
Simpson Lee
F l o r i d a A l ton Box
Container Corp.
-Hudson P & P
I . P.
P roc to r 1 Gamble
S t . Joe
S t . Regis
S t . Regis
Georgia Cont inenta l Can
Cont inenta l Can
Brunswi ck
Georgia K ra f t
Georgia K r a f t
G i lman
Great Northern
I n t e r s t a t e
Itt Rayonier
Ant ioch
Samoa
AnderSW
Jacksonvi 1 l e
Fernandine Beach
Palatda
Panama C i t y
Fo 1 ey
P a r t S t . Joe
Jacksonvf 1 l e
Pensacola
Augusta
Por t b!entworth
Brunswi ck
Krannert
flacon
S t . Mary
Cedar Springs
Riceboro
Jesup
'8907
600 (700) 150
(160)
675 (650) 1500
(1 700) 950-
(950) 1400
(1400) 900
1300 (1 300) 1350
(1400)
( 920 800 (800)
(900)
625 ( 600 1550
(1 550) 1550
(1550)
900
1100
1780 (1 700)
525 (550) 1200
(1 250)
( 900 1 (1000)
Recovery Furnace contro l3 TRS No. o f Rating Year Tech- Level Units Hanuf. tpd I n s t a l . nique + i / T M P
1 $hh' 800 1964 BLO 0.5
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
1
3
BIW
CE
BIW
CE
Rkw
B8L' CF CE
BLY CF CE
CF
PRW
B1W
CE
B1U CF CE
CE
BhV t E
RhW RhIJ
BW TE
rF
400 1959 BLO 0.6
350(each)pre 1965 BLO 0.5
150 1962 EL0 6.5 300 1973 Low Odor
750 DOSt-1965 BLU 0.5
1000 1967 Low Odor 0.15 300 1955 PLO(0xvaen)
250(each)195081954 ~ .
900( each )pos t-1965 RLn
41 31550 1952L1956 500 ore 1965
2336300 ore 1965
300&383 ore-1965
800(each) 1973 Low ndor
400( each)l95961964 BL0
1200 DOS~-1965
1060 DOSt-1965
350(each)
1100 1970 Low Odor 450 ore 1965 EL0
3001550 pre 1965
300 pre 1965
500 1968 BLO 2-275 ore 1965
500 DOSt-1965
665 ore 1965 Lou Odor 1000 1072 Low Odor 450 1065
1100 . 1970 Lor Odor A658359 p re 1965 RLn
0.5 I
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.15
0.6
15.0
0.5
15.0
15.0
15.0
0.5
15.0
0.6
A-4
t
i t 2
b t
t
E
I I
0
f.0 E
f.0 E L
0 1
0 ' 1
80'0
I 0 ' 1
20'0
1.
0 ' 1
0 ' 1
80'0
20'0
20'0
L
2
2
t
0
2
2
0
E
E
E
E
t
2
S ' l 3
20'0 .'UL E
8 (005) 3'
( o o f t ) 8
8
(0001) 8 3
S ' L 8 ( O O L )
5 ' 1 8
92 9 t L 01
EL
8
tl
L l
6
2
81
2 1 1 01
61
EL L
L
9
1
1
1 D
2'0
8'0
8'0
50'0
21 '0
SO'O
E
1
2
L
1
E
E
L
1 1
E
E
E
E
E
2
2
L
1
2
Mill S i z e
I ' Avg . Kraft Prod.
(Kraft) (Cap. 1
Compaqy Location tPd - Georgia
Owens- I l l ino is
Union Camp
Po t la t ch Idaho
Kentucky Western K r a f t
Wes tvaco
Boise Cascade
Boise Cascade
Continental Carl
Crown Zel lerbach
Crown Zel lerbach
Georgia-Paci f i c
I . P .
I . P .
O l i n
P i n e v i l l e
Loui s i ana
Western K r a f t
.B iamnd I n t . Matrle
Georgia-Paci f ic
I . P .
L inco ln
Val dos t a 950
Savannah 2600 (2550)
Lewis ton 850 (900)
Hawesvi 1 1 e 300 (320)
Wick1 i f f e '600' (600)
(1050)
(325)
(1400)
DeRidder 1030
E l i zabeth 300
Hodge 1400
Bogal vsa '1 340' (1 350)
S t . F r a n c i s v i l l e 500 (500)
Por t Hudson 530 ( 640 1
Bustrop 1100
S p r i n g h i l l 1000 1650
West Monroe 1125 (1150)
Pinev i 1 l e 800 (750)
Campti 450
Old Town 350
Woodland
L inco ln '340. (400)
Recovery Furnace contro l3 TRS No. o f Rating 'fear Tech- ~ e ~ ~ l Units Manuf. tpd I n s t a . nique #/T ADP
--
3
6
4
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
4
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
CE
CE
CE Ba(W
B6W
CE
B6W
B6W
B6 W CE
CE B6W
B6 W CE CE
B&W CE B6 W B8 W CE
Baw
Baw
MY
Baw
BELW
Baw CE B&W
3506250 pre-196; BLO 2 . 1
1350 post-1965 EL0 2.1 p r e - 1 965
300 1954 BLO 400 1970 Low Odor
6 1508300 pre-1965 BLO 0.5
225 1968 BLO 0.15 300 1974 833 post-1965 BLO 0.5
1000 1968 BLO 0.6
BLO 2 . 1
300 1955 BLO 2.1
800 1963 BLO 2.1 350 pre-1965 600 1963 EL0 2.1
690 1965 BLO 0.6
1233 post-1965
1000 Dost-1965 300 pre-1965 BLO 2 .1
1100 1966 2-700;500 1973:66;62 BLO 0.6
350 pre-1965. 450 1963 BLO 2.1 800 1974 Low Odor 833 pre-1965 BLO 2.1
420 1972 Low Odor C.15
590 1969 Low Odor 0.15
350(each) 1963 EL0 0.5
800 1974 Low Odor 0.15 600 pre-1965 BLO '
386 1970 Low Odor 0.15
A-6
L i m e Kilns
).of Tons (CaG) Level Tits Per Oay 4 / T A D F
S i z e TRS
I
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
,. 0.8
525 0.8
400 0 .2
0.2
0 80
60 0.05
I o !
75 I I
471
150
200
200
I
0.2
0 1
150 0.8
0.05
100 0 1
1 : 1
4
No. ( S i z e ) nique i i ir t\DP
Diges ter Control Type Tech- Level
9 , B ! 1 .5
34 B tP%) 1.5
11, 6 (120) i n c . 0.02
1 C (600)
1 C
3 B inc . 0 .02
1 C i n c . 0.02
7 B 1 .5
(320)
(600)
6 B 1 .5
3 C i n c .
2 C (250) 1 C
0 .02 (300)
(1650) 34 B (1250) 1 . 5
i n c . 0.02
1 C i n c . 0.02
inc . 0.02 2 C (660)
1.5
4 C i n c . 0.02
i n c . 0 .02 2 1 c (1 290 1
1 (840)
I ,I=. 0.02 i -
1 I C
! c ' (600)
C ' (600) C
(400)
inc .
i n c .
inc .
0.02
0.02
0.02
Mu 1 t i p le -e f f e c t. Evaporator I
Control TRS 1, Tech- Level
No. nique ji/T ADP
3 1 .o 6 1 .o
4 inc . 0.02
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
2
1
1
1
i n c . 0.02
inc . 0 .02
1 .o 1 .o
inc . 0 -02
1 .o
inc . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
1 .n
1 .o
inc . 0 .02
i n c . 0.02
0.0
inc . 0 .0
i n c . 0.0
inc . . 0.0
Brown Stock IJasher TRS Capacity Washer Level
D . ADTPD Stages # / T ADP
3 4
1 3
1 2
1
4 '
1 2
4
2 2
1 4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
1 1
1 1 1 !
1
1
1 1 1
1
1
6.02
0 . 3
A- 7
Mill Size
1 : Avg . Kraft Prod. (Kraft) (Cap. )
Company Locat ion tPd - Ma? ne Oxford
S. 0. Warren
Maryland
M i ch i gan
Wes tvaco
Mead
Sco t t
Minnesota Boise Cascade
Pot1 a tch
M4s s i s s i ppi I.P.
I . P .
I.P.
S t . Regis
Hoe rne r - Wa 1 do rf Montana
New Hamps h i re
N. York
Brown
I . P .
N. Carol i na Champi on
Federal
Hoerner-Waldorf
Weyerhaeuser
Weyerhaeuser I
Rwnford
Wes tbrook
Luke
Escanaba
Mus kegon
I n t ' l F a l l s
Cloquet
Moss Po in t
Natchez
Vicksburg
Monticel l o
Missoula
Ber l in-Garham
Ti conderoga
Canton
R i ege 1 woad
Roanoke Rapids
New Bern
Plymouth
550 (560) 270
( 300
71 9 (647 1 600
(600) 240
(225)
320 (350) 400
(330)
71 5
1000 (1000) 1200
(1200) 1620
(1 650)
1150 (1200)
750 (750)
5 90 (460)
1360 (1 360) 1100
(1 050) 950
(950) 640
(625) 1350
( I 500)
. . .
3 4 Recovery Furnace Control
i o . of & Rating Year Tech- Level h i t s Manuf. tpd Instal. n i q u e P/TADP
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
2
2
1
2
3
2
1
2
CE 300&200 pre-1965 BLO 0.5
BLW 250 1962 BLO 0.5
CE 1150 post-1965 BLO 0.6
: BbW 800 1969 Low Odor 0.15
8 CE 240 pre-1965 BLO 2.1
CE 150 pre-1965 0.15 BBW 550 1973 BBW 400 1971 Low Odor
CE 330 pre-1965 BLO 2.1
CE 900 post-1965 2.1 BBW 6006250 1963B1954 B&W 1000 1965 BLO 2.1
CE 800(each)post-1965 BLO 0.6
523 post-1965
B&W 1000 1970 Low Odor 0.5 500 1965 Low Odor
BB W 467 1965 BLO 2.1 CE 225 pre-1965
B&W 5 00 1968 Low Odor 0.15
BBW 900(each)1)70&196? 2.1
CE 700 OS t - 1965 15.0 2-350 . we-1965
. BIW 709 1972 Low Odor 15.0 C E 500 pre-1965 C E 800 post-1965low Odor 0.15
CE 1500 post-1965Low Odor 0.15 -400 pre-1965
A-8
Lime Kiln S i z e TRS
No.of Tons (CaO) Level Units Per Day $ / T AD1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
I
2
2
1
1
3
120
90
220
70( F1 UO- sol i d s )
100
410
300
300
280
: 00
225
31 5
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.8
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.2
0.8
G.8
0.05
0.8
1
# ' 1
4
130. ( S i z e ) niqoe #IT ADP
Diges ter Control Type Tech- Level
6
7
10
6
1
5
8
2
2
3. 8
9
1
18
11
11
7
231
I inc; i 0.02
i n c . j 0.02
i nc . ' 0.02
inc . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
1.5
1.5
i n c . I 0.02
inc . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
inc . 0.02
i n c . 0.02
inc . 0.02 L . K
I i n c . 0.02
1.5
1.5
B 1 .5
B i nc . 0.02
B i nc . 1.5
(1 000)
(800)
(1 500)
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
2
3
3
2
1
5
Mult ip le -e f fec t . Evaporator ,'.
Control TRS T e a r - Level
No. n iqoes 4 / T ADP
i nc . . 0.02
i n c . 1 0.02
i nc . " 0.02
i n c .
i n c .
iw .
i i c .
inc .
i n c .
i n c .
i n c .
scrub
i n c .
inc .
0.02
0.02
1 .o
1 .o
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1 .o
0.02
0.08
1 .o 1 .o 0.02
3 . 1
Brown Stock !dasher TRS , Capacity !Jasher Level+
No. ADTPD Stages i ! /T ADP
2 4 0.3
1 3
1 3
1 3
2 3
3
5 3
1 2 0.02
3 3 0.3
A- 9
Mill S i z e Avg.' Kraft Prod.
(Cap. ) i : (Kraft )
Company Location tPd
Ohio G r f c f
Mead
Oklahoma lleyerhaeuser
Oregon American Can
Boise Cascade
Crown Z
Georgie-Paci f i c
I . P .
Western K r a f t
lleyerhaauser
Appleton
P.H. G l a t f e l t e r
Penna.
Penntech
Mass
Chi 1
Val1
1 on
icothe
ant
Hal sey
S t . hslens
C1 a tskmi e
Toledo
Card i ner
A1 bany
S p r i n g f i e l d
Roarinq Springs
Spr ing Grove
Johnsonburg
5. Caro- l i n a
Bowa t e r Catawba
I.P. Georgetown
5. Carol ina Florence
lles tvaco Charleston
(200) 600
(540)
1300 ( 1300)
300 (;;;I
(1150) 690
1075 (1075)
600
500
1150 ( 1050)
180 (180) 500
(500)
190 (130)
(916 j
(545)
(550)
940 (940) 1830
(1 750) 660
(675) 2occ
(1939)
control3 TRS Recovery Furnace: No. o f Ratin.: Year Tech- Level Units Yanuf. tpd I.iSta1. nique Q / T ADP -
4
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
4
CE
CE
EhW
BhW CE BLW
CE
BLW CE BLW
CE
BhW
CE
BLW
CE
MW
B&W
B&W
CE 66W
366 pre-1965 BLO 175 PW-1965
15.0
2.1
1500 post-1965 Low Odor 0.1:
400 1967 Low Odor
450 1966 BLO 7017 1975 Low Odor 800 1964 BLO
350(each)l -post1965 BLO 2-pre1965
420 1972 Low Odor 420 pre-1965 BLO 600 1969 Low Odor 165 1965
800(each)pre-1965 BLO post-1 965
122 1960 83 1950
40061 50 pre-1965 BLO
748 1969 Low Odor
160 pre-1965 BLO
600 1964 BLO 450 1957
900(each) 1966 BLO 1963
410 1962 1000 1972 Low Odor
1000 ore-1965 BLO 360 ' 1955 250 1948 250 1945
3.03
0.3 e:$: 0.1:
< 0.5
0.1:
0.15
15.0
2.1 : I
2.1 i
2.1 : !
0.5 '
I
::i5 I i
A-10
Lime Kilns S i z e TRS
. o f Tons (CaO) Level i t s Per Day # / T U P
TRS , Capacity !;asher Level-
No. ADTPD Stages a:/T ADP
Brown Stock Washer
-- - ----
! 0.8
250 0.8
0.8
0.15
0.2
250 0.05
260 0.05
0.05
0.2
0 ; l
0.8
I
, 0.05 luo- 01 i d )
2 50 0.8
1 0.8
0.8
1 150 0.8
4 665 0.8
a
3
2
3 2 2
1 1 1
6
7 1
5-
a
16
6
5
15 1
C inc. (1000)
(500) (100)
C inc.
inc. (3 io )
C C inc.
(916) B (650) inc. C (115)
inc.
B inc .
5 380 inc. c 177oj
B
B (285) C (250)
B (170)
B (940)
B (625)
B (1800) inc . C (700)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1.5
1.5
1.5
1 . 5
1.5
1.5
0.02
?tu 1 t i p 1 e -e f f ec t Evaporator
Control Tks Tech- Level
:qo. nique U P
2
1
1
2
1
3
1
2
1
2
1
4
A - 1 1
4
scrub
inc.
inc. L. K. inc.
inc.
inc.
inc.
inc.
inc .
inc .
1 .o 0.08
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1 .o 1 .o
1 .o
1 .o 1 .o 1 .o 0.02
inc. R.F. 3
scrubber
(2-3) (1-4)
inc. Power boiler '
4
3
3
4
(3.4)
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.02
0.3
002
02
13
1
C7
M i l l S i z e Avg . Kraft Prod.
( K r a f t ) (Cap. )
Company 1 d o c a t i o n t Pd __ - - -- Tennessee
Bowater
Packaging
Texas Champion
I . P .
@ v e n s - I l l i n o i s
South land
South1 and
Temple-Fos t e x
Chesapeake
Con t i nen t a l
Union Camp
Wes tvaco
Boise Cascade
Crown Zel l e r b a c h
Crown Ze l l e rbach
Longvi ew
S t . Regis
Weyerhaeuser
V i r g i n i a
Uashi ng ton
Cal houn
Counce
Pasadena
Texarkana
Orange
Houston
L u f k i n
Evadale
West P o i n t
Hopewell
Frank1 i n
Covington
d a l l o l a
Camas
P o r t Townsend
Longvi ew
Tacoma
E v e r e t t
500 (5001
(775)
850 (820) 61 0
1000 (900 1 650
(500) 400
(400 1 1250
(1200)
11 50 (1150)
896
1430 (1 500) 1048
(900)
(1000)
460 (460) 780
(760) 420
(420) 1600
(1 900) 1090
(1040) 360
(375)
c o n t r o l 3 TRS Recovery Furnace lo. o f Rat ing Year Tech- Level Jn i te i ianuf. t& I n s t a l . niGue ai/T ADP
-
2
i
2
1
2
1
2
3
3
2
3
1
2
2
1
3
2
1
CE 6006320 pre-1965 BLO 2.1 6
CE 420 DOSt-1965 2.1
B6W 550 1971 BLO 0.5
, B6W 750 1969 0.5 550 1955
’ B l l J 550(each) 1965 RLO 2.1
2.1 CF
CE 175 (each )ore-1 965 15.0
R6 lJ 534 1966 BLO 2.1 CE 1100 Dost-1965
(oxvaen) 500 DOSt-1965 BLO
530 ore-1965
4006200 ore-1965 CE 900 Dost-1965 BLO 0.5
CE 375(each)pre-1965 BLO 0.5
CE 580 post-1965 BLO 0.5
CE 1320 Dost-1965 BLO 0.5 5806350 me-1965
B6W 250 165
B6 W 350 CE 660 CE 725
CE 1100
CF. . 863 467
CE 365
2-700
1960 EL0 0.5 1957 1955 BLO 0.5
post-1965 Low Odor 0.5
Dost-1965 BLO 0.5 ore-1965 oost-1965 Low Odor 0.5 ore-1965 BLO 00S.t-1965 BLO 0.5
post -1 965
A - 1 2
L i m e Kilns S i z e TRS
No. of Tons (CaO) Level Units Per Day b/T A?
1
3
1
1
1
3
2
3
3
2
3
4
2
1
.0.8
0.8
351 0.05
-0 .2
261 . 0.8
13) , 0.8
85 ' 0.8
36 1 0.8
303 0.8
445 0.8
403 0.8
0.8
( t o t a l )
( t o t a l )
0.2
207 I 0.2 I I 0.2
507 ; 0.2
196 & 801 0 . 2
140 0.2
; : 1
4 NO. ( S i x ) pique +/T .~DP
Diges ter Control Type Tech- Level
6
5
9
5
2
1
6
9 1
8 1
13 2
12 2
10
5 1 9 1 9 1
18 4 4 2 6
8 ( 500 1
8
B 100 each
B
C ( 1000)
C ( 500 1
B (400 1
8i1200) (200)
8 (600) C (600)
B (950)
8
: [;::I c (800)
B C (150)
8 C
inc . 0.02
1 . 5
inc . 0.02
i n c - 0 . 0 2
1.5
1 .5
1 .5
1 .5
0.02
0.02
0.92
0.02
inc. 0.02
inc. 0.02
8 Power . 0.02 C inc . I
8 (1600) i n c . 0.02 C 600 8 -[240] inc . 0.02 C (690) B (550) i n c . 0.02
Mu 1 t i p 1 f f e-e eqt Evaporator *
Control TRS Tech- Level
No. pique #IT ADP
1
2 :
1
1
2
3
3
2
4
2
3
6
2
1
i n c .
inc .
inc .
inc .
i n c .
i n c .
i n c .
i n c .
inc .
0.02
1 .o
0.02
0.92
1 .a
1 .o
1 .0
1.0
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Brown Stock Washer TRS L,
NO. ADTPD S t s e e c : : f T ADP Capacity Washer Leve 1
1 4 0.3
1
4
3
3 3
A-1 3
Eii 11 S i z e Avg . Kraft Prod.
(Kraft: (Cap. )
ComDanv Locat ion tpd .
1 :
!dashin! - Meyerhaeuser t o n
'i k l i scons i n Consol ida ted
Great Northern
Hamnermi 11
Mos i nee
L o n g v i m 650 (306) NSSC
ch. rec p l a n t
Wisc. Rapids 400 (400)
ch. rec p l a n t
(330) ch. rec p l a n t
kukauna 400 (400)
Nekoosa 31 0
tbs inee -174. (175)
New M i l l s (Planned or under cons t ruc t i on )
Sco t t Paper - Skowhegan. % i r e - 750 TPD Po t la t ch Corp. - McGehee, Lrkansas - 500 TPD.
n 3 Recovery Furnace Control TRS
lo. of Racin ; '-'car Tech- Level ! n i t s ?lanuf. tpd I F S t a l . nique BIT ADP - -
2 ' B6W CE
2 CE
2 CE
1 BLY
1 66w
1201) 1972 Low Odor 350 pre-1965 BLO
400(each)post-l965 BLO
350 165
390
250
pre-1965 pre-1965
1960
1973
BLO
Lou Odor
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
I I 0.2
0.8
O . &
C 1 .1 scrubber
2.
9 6 1.5
6 - c 1.5
6 B (17s)
1.5
h l t i p l e - e f f e c t Evaporator
Control TRS Tech- Level
No. nique &IT ADP I
i n c . 0.02
i
1 .o
1
1 .o
1 .o 1 .o
Brown Stock Masher TRS
No. A W P D Stapes */T .E.?, Capacity Washer Level
0.15 7.075 5
0.6 0.3 20
15.0 7.5 550 Line K i l n 0.05 3.025 10
0.1 0.05 20 0.2 0.1 M
Recovery Furnac 1
0.5 9.25 17.5
2.1 1.05 70
Diges ter
-. .
0.8 3.4 0.01 0.05 1.1 0.55 1.5 9.75
0.08 . 0.04 0.01 0.05 4'
Mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t
Brown Stock Washer 0.01
Evaporator 1 .o 0.5
0.3 0.15 0.05.
1 iij <5
7000 9500
<5 350 6700 45
0 . 3
i 1
1-15
I
APPENDIX B
DATA SUMMARY
KRAFT PULP MILLS
Recovery Furnaces , Smelt Dissolving Tanks, Lime Ki Ins , and Incinerators
Results are summarized for t e s t s conducted by EPA a t 6 k r a f t p u l p mil ls .
A t these mills a t o t a l of 9 TRS t e s t s ; 3 recovery furnaces, 2 smelt dissolving
tanks, 3 lime k i lns , and one incinerator,were conducted by EPA. Emission
d a t a obtained from operators or s t a t e agencies are a lso reported f o r some
of the f a c i l i t i t s .
TRS EMISSION DATA
Incinerator :
The i nci nerator hand1 es the noncondensabl e gases from a conti nilous
d iges te r system and a mu1 t ip l e -e f f ec t evaporator system. The
continuous d iges te r was producing 670 tons o f pulp per day.
The inc inera tor was operating a t 1000°F w i t h a retention time
f o r the gases o f a t l e a s t 0.5 seconds. Natural gas is f i r e d i n
the i nci nera tor.
Recovery Furnaces :
A. Conventional type recovery furnace designed fo r an equivalent
pulp production r a t e of 657 tons per day. TRS emissions a re
control 1 ed by using black 1 iquor oxidation and maintaining proper
furnace operation. -
The furnace was operating near i t s design
capacity duri ng the EPA t e s t period. Continuous monitoring data
were also obtained frorn the operator.
B-1
B. low-odor type recovery furnace designed f o r an equivalent pulp
production of 300 toris per day.
furnace was operating a t a r a t e of about 345 tons of pulp per
day. TRS emissions a re control led by eliminating the d i r e c t corltact
evaporator and maintaining proper furnace operation. Noncondensabl e
gases from the b r o w n stock washer system a r e burned in thfs furnace.
Continuous monitoring data were a l s o obtained from the s t a t e agency.
During the EPA t e s t i n g , the
D. Conventional type recovery furnace designed fo r a n equivhlent pulp
TKS emissior?s a re controjlcd production r a t e o f 602 tons per day.
by black l iquor oxination a g d maintaining pmper Furnace opecatqon.
Low-odor type recovery furnace operatir:lj a t an equivalent pulp
production r a t e of a b o u t 200 tons per day.
control 1 ed by m a i ntai n-i ng proper furnace operati an.
obtained from the s t a t e agency.
Low-odor type recovery furnace designed f o r an equivalent p u l p
production r a t e of about 863 tons per day.
control led by maintaining proper furnace operation.
ob ta i ned from s t a t e agency.
H .
TRS emissions a re
Data were
K.
TRS emissions a re
Data were
Smel t Di ssol vi ng Tanks
D. A wet fan type scrubber is employed t o control the pa r t i cu la t e
emissions.
The associated recovery furnace operates a t an equi Val en t pulp
production r a t e o f 570 tons per day.
E . A wet fan type scrubber i s employed to control the pa r t i cu la t e
emissions. Fresh water i s used as the scrubbing medium. The
associated recovery furnace operates a t an equivalent pulp production
r a t e o f 770 tons per day.
Weak wash l iquor i s used as the scrubbing medium.
B-2
Lime K i l n s
D. Rota ry l i m e k i l n o p e r a t i n g a t an e q u i v a l e n t p u l p p r o d u c t i o n r a t e
of 570 tons pe r day.
p roper k i 1 n combus ti on and p roper 1 ime mud washing . gases f rom the m u l t i p l e - e f f e c t evapora tors a r e burned i n the k i l n .
Rotary l i m e k i l n o p e r a t i n g a t an e q u i v a l e n t p u l p p r o d u c t i o n r a t e
of about 770 tons pe r day. TRS emissions a r e c o n t r o l l e d by
m a i n t a i n i n g p roper combustion i n t h e k i l n , m a i n t a i n i n g proper
l i m e mud washing, and u s i n g a c a u s t i c s o l u t i o n i n t h e p a r t i c u l a t e
scrubber .
evapora tors , condensate s t r i p p e r , and miscel laneous s to rage tanks
a r e burned i n t h e k i l n .
f rom the opera to r .
Rotary l i m e k i l n o p e r a t i n g a t an e q u i v a l e n t p u l p p r o d u c t i o n r a t e
of about 320 tons p e r day. TRS emiss ions a r e c o n t r o l l e d by main-
t a i n i n g proper combust ion i n t h e k i l n and proper l i m e mud washing.
Noncondensable gases f rom t h e d i ges ters , mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t evapora tors ,
and t u r p e n t i n e system a r e burned i n t h e k i l n .
TRS emissions a r e c o n t r o l l e d by m a i n t a i n i n g
Noncondensabl e
E.
Noncondensable gases f rom the d i g e s t e r s , mu1 t i p l e - e f f e c t
Continuous m o n i t o r i n g da ta were a l s o o b t a i n e d
K.
0 . Rotary l i m e k i l n n o t t e s t e d by EPA. Continuous m o n i t o r i n g da ta
was ob ta ined f rom the l o c a l agency. TRS emissions a r e c o n t r o l l e d
by m a i n t a i n i n g precess combust ion i n t h e k i l n .
B -3
Table B - 1 - TRS and SO2 Emissions from Incineration
FACILITY - Incinerator
Sumarv o f Results
Run Number 1
Date - 1972 10/5
Test Time - minutes 240
Product ion Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
-
Flow r a t e - DSCFM (XlnflC) 2610
Flow r a t e - DSi;b/t irn
Temnerature - O F 80 5
Water vanor - Vol. % 6,3
CO2 - \dol. % d r y 2.6
02 - Vol. % dry 11.8
0 CO - Dpm
TRS Emissions
r m m
-
2.8
1 b /hr 1.5
lb/ton o f nul^ 0.06
2 Emissions
25 Dnm
9.4 1 b / h r
lb/ton of n U 1 D 0.4
2
10/6
240
-
2223
.. 805
4.3
2.4
12.0
0
0.4
0.2
0.007
306
96.9
3.8
3
10/7
240
c
2302
L
805
5.4
2.1
12.7
0
1.6
0.6
0.02
1050
358
13.9
4
12/13
240
-
- - - - 9.0
15.7
0
0.9
0.4
0.02
F
- -
6-4
Table B-2 - TRS and SO2 Emissions from Recovery Furnace A
FACILITY - Recovery Furnace A
Sumnarv of Results
Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Date - 1972 6/3 6/ 4 6/ 5 6/ 6 6/7 6/8
Test Time - minutes 240 240 240 240 240 240
Production Rate - TPH - - - - - - Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM (XlnWl) 142 L 145 148 - - ! -
Flow r a t e - DSCF/ton - c - - - - Temperature - O F 31 4 - 304 303 - -
25.5 - 25.3 21.9 - - Water vanor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dry 10.4 8.2 10.7 11.8 12.9 11.1
02 - Vol. % dry 10.7 11.4 11.4 10.1 10.1 9.9
CO - ppm 153 93 84 95 102 51
TRS Emi s s i ons
ppm 2.0 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.7 1.6
1 b/hr 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.6 1.2
itr/ton of nu111 - - - - - - SO7 Emi s s i ons
m m 45 116 79 118 50 119
1 b/hr 85.0 - - - - - l b / t o n Of n U l D - - - - - -
B -5
Table 8-3 - TRS and SO2 Emissions from Recovery Furnace B
FACILITY - Recovery Furnace B
Sumnarv o f Results
Run Number 1 2 3 4 5
Date - 1972 7/13
Test Time - minutes 240 240 240 240 240
Production Rate - TPH - c - - - Stack Effluent
7/14 7/15 7/18 7/19
Flow r a t e - DSCFM ( X l f V V l ) 85 84 86 - - Flow r a t e - DSCF/ton - - - - Temnerature - O F
Water vaDor - Vol. X
CO2 - Vol. % dr,y
02- - Vol. % dry
co - Dpl"l
TRS Emi s s i ons
DDm
1 b/hr
1b/ton o f n u l o *
SO7 Emissions
DDm
1 b/hr
lb/ton of nulo
39 5
- - .-.
0
1.6
.05
0.9
- -
400
12.3
8.T
0
0.2
0.7
.Ol
41 5
- 12.4
7,. 6
0
0.5
0; 1
.02
12.7 12.0
7.Y 8.0
0 0
0.3 0.4
0.2 0.2
.Ol .Ol
6
7/20
240
-
- - - -
12.4
8.0
0
0.3
0.2
.01 '.
* Based on 334.5 ATDPlday
B -6
Table 8-4- TRS an4 SO2 Emissions from Recovery Furnace D
FACILITY - Recovery Furnace D
Sumarv of Results
Run Number 1 2 3 4 5
Date - 1972 11/11 11/12 11/13 11/14 11/15
Test Time - minutes 240 240 240 240 240
- - - - Production Rate - TPH - Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM ( X l 000) 73.2 73.2 73.2 73.2 73.2
Flow rate - DSCF/ton
Temoerature - O F
Water vaoor - Vol. % 35 35 35 35 35
C02 - Vol. % dr.y
02 - Vol. % dry
CO - ppm
TRS Emissions
Dnm
1 b / h r
1 b/ton of D U l D
SO7 Emissions
DDm
1 b / h r
lb/ton of nulr,
3.1 2.8 3.9 7 .O 2.8 :* ':.
55.1 48.9 53.7 12.5 46.0
15.5 * 1.0 22.9 5.0 14.2
162' 10 239 52 149
- - - - -
B -7
Table B-5
ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA FOR RECOVERY FURNACES*
Recovery Furnace A T C o n c e n t r a t i on (ppm, daily average
Month Maximum Average basis)
July 1971
Aug . Sept . Oct.
Nov.
Dec . Jan. 1972
Feb . March .
April
May
June
July
Aug
Sept.
Oct .
6.0
20.0
5.0
10.9
- 4.4
9.8
5.5
3.3
2.5
5.3
' 5.5
8.2
9.8
9.0
4.9
6.1
3.1
2.4
9.5
2.8
1.3
1.8
1.6
1.3
1 .o 2.0
2.1
3.8
3.7
3.3
2.9
2.2
Recovery Furpace B S Concentration
(ppm, daily average
Month Maximum Average basis)
Apr i l 1972
May
June
July
Aug .- Oct.
Nov . DeC.
Jan. 1973
Feb.
March
Apri 1
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
1 . 4 .
2.3
2.8
4.6
5.0
1.9
0.7
1 .o 1.5
2.6
2.4
1.5
1.6
1.9
1.6
. 3.1
1.8
2.0
1.6
3.4
0.7
1.2
1.5
1.1
1.5
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.8
1 .o 0.9
0.8
1 .o 1.1
1 .o 1.2
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.6
*Tested by operators using barton t i t ra tors .
B-8
Table B-5 (cent..)
Recovery Furnace A TRS Concentrat ion (ppm, d a i l y average bas is )
- - . J Month Maximum Average
I
Recovery Furnace H TRS- Concen t r a t i on (ppm, d a i l y average
Month Maximum Average bas is )
A p r i l 1972 3 2.1
May 4 2.1
June 7 3.5
June 1972 8 3.1
July 4 2.4
Aug L 4 1.9 - Sept. 2 1.3
Oct. 6 1.8
ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA FOR RECOVERY FURNACES
Recovery Furnace B VRS Concentrat ion (ppm, d a i l y average bas is )
Month Maxi mum Averwe __- _.
Jan. 1974 1.4 0.8
Feb. 1.9 1.3
March 5.0 1.6
Apr i 1 2.4 1.2
May 1.8 1 .o June 1.5 1 .o
Recovery Furnace K 'FRS Concentrat ion (ppm, d a i l y average
Month Maxi mum Average
. .
bas i s)
Aug. 1973 6.2 1 .o Sept. 32 -0 5.2
Oct. 7.3 2.4
Nov. 17.0 4.1
Dec . 1.2 0.7
Jan. 1974 1.8 0.6
Feb. 2.4 1 .o March 9.7 2.3
Apr i 1 3.0 1.4
May 3.4 1.4
B-9
Table 6-6
TRS EMISSION DATA FOR A CROSS RECOVERY FURNACE*
Days TRS (4-hour) Sulf idi t y Average TRS Maximum 4-Hour Emissions Greater
Month Ranqe (%) Eriissions (ppm) TRS Emissions (ppm) than 25 ppm
Oct 76 22 - 36 12.5 54.5 2
Nov 76 28 - 33 24.3
Dec 76 28 - 34 9.5
Jan 77 27 - 36 7.7
Feb 77 27 - 35 8.0
51.2
43.2
36.5
48.0
* Tested by operator u s i n g barton t a t r a t o r .
B-10
TableB-7 - TRS Ev iss ions frorr Smelt D i s s o l y i n g Tank D FACILITY - Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Tank D
Sumnarv o f Resu l t s
Run Number 1 2 3
Date - 1973 10131 11/1 11/2
Tes t Time - minutes 240 240 240
Produc t ion Rate - TPH 25.1- 25.9 25.6
Stack E f f l u e n t
Flow r a t e - DSCFM 9000 8880 9400
Flow r a t e - DSCF/ton 21 51 4 20571 22031
Temnerature - OF
Water vaDor - Vol. % 37 . 41 40
C02 - Vol. % dr.y
02 - Vol. % d r y
CO - opm
TRS Emissions
m m
1 b / h r
1 b / t o n o f ~ y l o
8.1 8.8 6.9
0.43 0.44 0.38
0.01 7 0.017 .015
B-11
Table B-8- TRS Emissions f r o m Smelt Dissolv ing Tank E
FACILITY - Smelt Dissolv ing Tank E
Sumnarv o f Results
Run Number 1 2 3
Date - 1973 9/18 9/19 9/20
Test Time - minutes 240. 240 240
Production Rate - TPH 30.1 34.1 31.3
Stack E f f l u e n t
Flow r a t e - DSCFM 19542 18740 19100
Flow r a t e - DSCF/ton 389 54 32974 3661 3
T e m r a t u r e - OF
Water v m o r - Vol. % 26 26 23.3
Co;! - Vol. % dr.y
- Vol. X dSj
CO - ppm
TRS Emi s s i ons
2.4 1.9 2.7
0.27 0.20 0.28
0.009 .006 .009
. PDm
1 b/hr
1 b/ton of pu lp
8-12
Table B-’3 -T f6 Emissions from Lime Ki ln D
FACILITY - Lime Kiln D
Sumnary of Results
,n Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Date - 1973 11/5 11/7 11/7 1 1 / 7 . 11/8 11/8
Test Time - minutes 240 240 240 240 240 240
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM (X lnm)
Flow rate - DSCF/ton
Temnerature - O F
Water vaDor - Vol . % 43 35 40 38 41 31
CO2 - Vol. % dry
02 - Vol. % dry’
co - Dpm-
TRS Emi ssi ons
3.5 24.1 2.8 5.7 4.6 17.8 PDm
1 b/hr
l b / t o n o f p u l p
B-13
Table B-10- TRS Emissions from L i m e K i l n E
FACILITY - Lime K i l n E
S u n a r v of Results
Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Date - 1973 9/ 24 9/ 25 9/ 26 9/26 9/27 9/27
Test Time - minutes 240 240 240 240 240 240
Production Rate - TPH
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM (XlOOC))
Flow r a t e - DSCF/ton
TemDerature - "F # a t e r vaDor - Vol. %
C02 - Vol. % dr.y 9.4 10.2 10.0 9.8 8.2 9.8
9 - Vol. % d~ 13.2 11 .o 12.2 12.0 13.1 11.8
-
CO - ppm
TRS Emi ssi ons
PPm 1 b/hr
1.7 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5
lb/ton of p u l p
B-14
Table B-11-TRS and SO2 Emissions from Lime Kiln K
FACILITY - Lime Kiln K
Sumarv of Results
Run Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
Date - 1974 4/5 4/ 5 4/9 4/9 4/10 4/10
Test Time - minutes 240 240 * 240 240 240 240
Production Rate - TPH L .L - I - c
Stack Effluent
Flow rate - DSCFM (X1r)r)r)) 13.8 13.8 14.0 13.4 13.6 14.2
L - ). - - 0 Flow rate - DSCF/ton
TemPerature - O F 142 142 :.- 146 152 155 154
Water vaDor - Vol. % 21.8 21.8 22.9 26.0 25.8 26.8
C02 - Vol. % dr.y 13.0 13.0 14.2 14.2 14.6 14.2
02 - Vol. % dry 7.6 7.6 7.1 7.1 6.4 7.2
co - Dpm 0 0 . o 0 0 0
TRS Emissions
PPm . 4.6 12.0 4.5 4.8 4.0 5.2
1 b/hr 0.34 0.88 0.33 0.34 0.29 0.39 lb/ton of pulp 9 - 0 - - 9 -
. . SO7 Emissions
m m 52 42 25 18 16 37 :: 1 b/hr 7.2 5.8 3.5 2.4 2 -2 5.2 - c. - 9 lb/ton of pulp - . c
B - 1 5
Table 8-12
ADDITIONAL TRS EMISSION DATA FOR LIME KILNS*
Lime K i l n E TRS ConcentratTon (ppm, da i ly average)
’ Month Maxi mum Average
May 1973
June
%July
.Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov . Dec . Jan. 1974
.Feb . March
Apri 1
k Y
1.4
3.4
2.1
1 .?I
10.1
7.1
5.9
8.9
3.4
2.6
*
0.7’
3.1
2.9
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
1.5
1 .o 0.8
1 .o 0.6
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.7
Lime Kiln 0 S Concentration
(ppm, da i ly average) Month Maximum Average
Jan. 1973
Feb.
March
Apri 1
May
June
Ju ly
Aug . Sept.
Oct.
Nov . Dec . Jan. 1974
Feb.
March
Apri 1
May
14
20
14
32
16
10
99
12
17
6.8
9.3
7.6
9.6
4.7
3.4
4.5
3.8
5.0
34 8.2
12 5.7
22 9; 8
30 17.9
33 21 .1
30 19.3
40 16.2
25 12.3
Average = 9.7
*Tested by operators using barton t i t r a t o r s .
B-16
Table B-12 (CONTINUED)
Lime K i l n P
TRS Summary: 4-Hour Averages
4-Hour Averages Moni tored
% % % % % >5/ 4 0 ppm > l o / <20 ppm >20 ppm >40 ppm Month <5 PPm
February ‘75 45 26
March ‘75 65 25
A p r i l ‘75 63 16
May ‘75 53 25
9 20 12
7 7 2
12 9 5
13 8 2
B-17
.-
TABLE C-1
TMPACT OF CONTKCiLItiG THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES CN AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 907 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : vg/m3 Frequency - (One-hour average) I o f Concen t ra t i ons
Q n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom Source (km) Grea te r than 1 / 2 Percent Level @ 0.3 km 0 . 3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Reduct i ona Source Con t ro l Techniques -
Recovery Furnace BLO (20 ppm)
D i g e s t e r Scrubber
M u l t i p l e - E f f e c t Scrubber
BLO ( 5 ppm)
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Evaporator I n c i n e r a t i o n
2465 100 64 38 16 28 95.9
2465 25 16 10 4 28 99.0
6000 4680 1716 1090 3 22.0 6000 ob - 100.0
3 1175 96 ' 60 36 4 91.8 1175 ob -__3 - 100.0
Lime K i l n 1 ) Process C o n t r o l s 256 64 23 18 15 12 1 75.0
2 ) Process C o n t r o l s + 2 56 16 6 4 4 3 1 93.8
Hioh E f f . Mud Washing
3 ) Process C o n t r o l s + High 256 E f f . Mud Washing + Caus t i c Scrubbing
Yrown Stock I n c i n e r a t i o n
B lack L i q u o r I n c i n e r a t i o n
blasher System
O x i d a t i o n System M o l e c u l a r Oxygen
Sme 1 t D i ssol v i ng l a n k
Condensate S t r i p D i n g Scrubber Sys tern I n c i n e r a t i o n
Fresh Water
113
96
96
8 3 2 2 2 1 96.9
8 3 2
19 6 3 1 1
oc - > 172 22 8 6
306 165 4400 2200 4400 ob ______ ______+
a Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d averaae l e v e l
Gases arc! assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these gases.
The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n
34
25 - 3
25 -
92.9
80.2
100.0
87.2
50.0
100.0
0 U
v) W m % W -0 v, m n 0 z
z
x If c 0 U l-4 m v)
NO vent gases.
TABLE C-2
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THF VARIOUS TRS SOURCES OH AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 907 MEGAGRAMSIDAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : vg/m3 Frequency - (24-hour average) % o f Concen t ra t i ons
a n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom Source (km) .Grea te r t han 1/2 Percent Level @ 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Reductiona Source Con t ro l Techniques
Recovery Furnace BLO (zo 'ppm)
BLO ( 5 ppm) D i g e s t e r Scrubber
643 26 16 9 4 29 96.0
580 450 150 68 48 22.4
643 6 4 2 1 29 99.0
I n c i n e r a t i o n 580 Ob -- 100.0
I n c i n e r a t i o n 115 Ob > -- 100.0
2 ) Process C o n t r o l s + 56 4 2 1 1 1 1 92.9
M u l t i p l e - E f f e c t Scrubber 115 10 6 3 55 91.3 Evaporator
Lime K i l n 1 ) Process C o n t r o l s 56 14 7 4 3 2 1 75.0
Hioh E f f . Mud Washing
E f f . Mud Washina + Caust ic Scrubbing
3) Process C o n t r o l s + High 56 2 1 1 1 1 1 96.4
Brown Stock I n c i n e r a t i o n
B lack L i q u o r I n c i nera t i on
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Fresh ldater
Condensate S t r i p p i n g Scrubber
Washer System
O x i d a t i o n System M o l e c u l a r Oxygen
Tank
System I n c i n e r a t i o n
30
25
25
2 1 1 26 93.3
5 2 1 1 1 20 80.0
> 100.0 OC -- 16 2 1 1 46 87.5
840 420 66 34 30 50.0
840 Ob - -- 100.0
a Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d averaoe l e v e l
Gases a r e assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f t hese gases.
No ven t gases, C
0 I w
TMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 454 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : ug/m3 Frequency -
Con t ro l Techniques Level Q 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum
(10 second average) % o f Concen t ra t i ons U n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom Source ( k m ) IGreater t han 1/2 Percent
Redu c t i on a Source
Recovery Furnace BLO (20 ppm) 5250 210 135 80 34 33 96.0
BLO ( 5 ppm) 5250 53 35 20 8 33 99.0
O i ges t e r Scrubber 9800 7645 2790 1775 3 22.0 Ob - 100.0
Ob - 100.0
> 9800 Mu1 t i p l e- E f f e c t ’ Scrubber 1950 156 98 58 4 92.0
I n c i n e r a t i o n 1950 Lime K i l n 1 ) Process Con t ro l s 440 110 40 30 25 21 1 75.0
2) Process C o n t r o l s + 440 28 10 8 6 5 1 93.6
3 ) Process C o n t r o l s + High 440 1 4 5 4 3 3 1 96.8
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Evaporator
Hiqh E f f . Mud Washinq
E f f . Mud Washin? + Ca 11 s t i c Sc r u bb i ng
Brown Stock I n c i n e r a t i o n
Black. L i q u o r I n c i n e r a t i o n Washer System
O x i d a t i o n System M o l e c u l a r Oxygen
Tank
System I n c i n e r a t i o n
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Fresh Water
Condensate S t r i p p i n g Scrubber
370 25 9 6 19 93.2
21 0 42 14 7 3 3 30 80.0
210 OC > -- 100.0
270 34 13 8 3 87.4
91 00 4550 635 340 16 50.0
100.0 91 00 Ob --
a Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d average l e v e l
Gases a re assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n of these gases.
No ven t gases. C
T A N € C-4
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCtS ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 454 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : pg/m3 Frequency - (One-hour average) X of Concen t ra t i ons
U n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom Source (km) Grea te r t han 1/2 Percent Con t ro l Techniques Level (a 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Redu c t i on a Source
Recovery Furnace BLO (20 ppm)
D i g e s t e r Scrubber BLO ( 5 ppm)
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Mu1 t i p 1 e - E f f e c t Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n Evaporator
Lime K i l n
Brown Stock
Black L i q u o r
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g
Condensate S t r i p p i n g
Washer System
Ox i da t i on Sy s tem
Tdnk
System
1610 64 41 24 10 33 96.0 1610 16 10 6 3 33 99.0 3000 2340 860 545 3 22.0 3000 Ob - 100.0 >
1 ) Process C o n t r o l s 136 2) Process C o n t r o l s + 136
Hiqh E f f . Mud Washing '
3) Process C o n t r o l s + High
E f f . Mud Washing + Caus t i c Scrubbing
1-36
I n c i n e r a t i o n 113
600 48 30 18 600 Ob
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Mo lecu la r Oxygen
Fresh IJater
Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
66 66 84
2800 28ao
34 12 9 8 7 9 3 3 2 2
5 2 1 1 1
8 3 2
13 4 2 1 1 ___, oc -. . - --
11 4 3
1400 195 105
a Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d a v e r a w l e v e l
Gases a r e assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s f r o t i t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these gases.
No vent gases.
I
C
4 92.0 - 100.0
1
19
30 - 3
16 -
75.0 93.4
96.3
92.9
80.3 100.0 86.9
50.0 100.0
TABLE C-5
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 454 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : u g h 3 Frequency -
Source C o n t r o l Techniques Level @ 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum
(24-hour average) % o f Concen t ra t i ons Uncontro I I ed Dis tance from Source (km) !Grea te r t han 1/2 Percent
Reduct i ona
Recovery Furnace
D i ges t e r
Mu1 t i p l e- E f f e c t
Lime K i l n
Evaporator
Brown Stock
B lack L i q u o r
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g
Condensate S t r i p p i n g
Washer System
O x i d a t i o n System
' Tank
System
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO ( 5 ppm) Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
1 ) Process C o n t r o l s
2) Process C o n t r o l s + High E f f . Mud Washing
3) Process C o n t r o l s + High
E f f . Mud Washing + Caus t i c Scrubbing
I n c i n e r a t i o n
I nc i nera ti on
Mo lecu la r Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
430
430
290
290
60 60
32
32
32
17
17 17 8
420
420
17 11 6 2
4 3 1 1
Ob * 5 3 2 Ob __1_3
8 4 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1
226 76 34
1 1 1
3 1 1 <1 <1
I
1 1 1
28 17 210
Ob h
Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d average l e v e l
Gases a re assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these gases.
NO vent gases.
a
27
27
48 -
55 - 4
4
4
52
19 -
46
37 -
96.0
99.1
22.1
100.0
91.7 100.0 75.0
93.8
96.9
94.1
82.4
100.0
50.0
100.0
TABLE C-6
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 1350 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : u g h 3 Frequency - (10 second average) % o f Concen t ra t i ons
U n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom Source Ikm) ,G rea te r t han 1 /2 Percen t Level @ 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Reduct i ona Source Con t ro l Techniques
Recovery Furnace
D iges te r
Mu1 t i p l e-Ef f e c t Evapora to r
Lime K i l n 0 1 m
Brown Stock
B lack L i q u o r
Smelt D i s s o l v i n g
Condensate S t r i p p i n g
Washer System
O x i d a t i o n System
. Tank
System
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO ( 5 ppm) Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Scrubber I n c i n e r a t i o n
1 ) Process C o n t r o l s
1 ) Process C o n t r o l s + H iah E f f . Mud Washing
3 ) Process C o n t r o l s + High
E f f . Mud Washing + Caus t i c Scrubbing
I n c i n e r a t i o n
I n c i n e r a t i o n
Mo lecu la r Oxygen
Fresh Water
Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n
11,785
11,785
29,000
29 , 000
5,750 5,750
1,280
1,280
1,280
555
490
490
840
21,000
21,000
470 305 180 75
120 75 45 20
22,930 8370 5325
1
470 295 175
Ob 320 115 88 73 62
80 29 22 18 16
40 14 11 9 a
37 14 9
98 33 1 4 7 5
OC 9
105 39 24
10,500 1460 780
ob * f
Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d averaae l e v e l
Gases a r e assumed burned i n t n e l i m e k i l n . The levels f rom t n e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these gases.
No vent gases.
a
C
28
28
3 - 4 - 1 1
1
34
25 - 3
25 -
96.0
99.0
20.9
100.0 91.8
100.0
75.0
93.8
96.9
93.3
80.0
100.0 87.5
50.0
100.0
TABL€ C - 7
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 1350 MEGAGRAMVOAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
0 I U
Maximum Ambient Concentration: vg/m3 Frequency -
Source Control Techniques Leyel 13 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2 .0 the Maximum
(One-hour average) % of Concentrations Distance from Source ( k m ) Greater t h a n 1 /2 Percent Uncontrolled
Reduct i ona
Recovery Furnace B L O (20 ppm) 3,750 150 97 57 24 28 96.0
BLO ( 5 ppm) 3,750 37 24 14 6 28 99.0
Digester Scrubber 9,000 7,020 2,575 1,640 3 22.0 Incineration 9,000 Ob - 100.0
Incineration 1,775 Ob 100.0
> Mu1 t ip1 e-Effect Scrubber 1,775 154 90 53 4 91.3
Lime Kiln * 1 ) Process Controls 385 96 34 27 22 19 1 75.0
385 24 9 6 6 5 1 93.8
Evaporator
2) Process Controls + Hiqh E f f . Mud Washing
Eff. Mud Washinu + Caustic Scrubbing
3) Process Controls + High 385 12 4 3 3 2 1 96.9
Brown Stock Incineration 175 12 4 3 34 94.8
Black Liquor Incineration 150 30 10 5 2 2 25 80.0
Smelt Dissolving Fresh Water 255 32 12 9 3 87.5
Condensate Stripping Scrubber 6,600 3,300 460 250 25 50.0
blasher System
O x i d a t i o n System Molecular Oxygen 150 oc - 100.0
Tank
System Incineration 6,600 Ob > - 100.0
a Reduction from uncontrolled averaae level
Gases a re assumed burned i n the lime ki ln . The levels from the l i r e ki ln include unburned TRS portion o f these gases. No vent gases-
C
0 I
W
IMPACT OF CONTROLLING THE VARIOUS TRS SOURCES ON AMBIENT TRS CONCENTRATION FROM A 1350 MEGAGRAMS/DAY
KRAFT PULP MILL
Maximum Ambient Concen t ra t i on : v9/m3 Frequency - (24-hour average) % o f Concen t ra t i ons
U n c o n t r o l l e d D is tance f rom source (km) 'G rea te r than 1/2 Percen t Source Con t ro l Techniques Level @ 0.3 km 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 t h e Maximum Reduct i ona
Re cove ry Fu r na c e
D i g e s t e r Scrubber
BLO (20 ppm)
BLO ( 5 ppm)
I n c i n e r a t i o n Mu1 t i p l e - E f f e c t Scrubber
I n c i n e r a t i o n Evaporator
965 40 25 15 5 29 95.9
965 1 0 6 4 1 29 99.0
870 Ob - 100.0 87 0 680 230 100 48 21.8
r 175 15 9 5 55 91.4 175 Ob - 100.0 >
Lime K i l n 1 ) Process C o n t r o l s 80 20 10 6 4 3 1 75.0
2) Process C o n t r o l s + 80 5 3 2 1 1 1 93.8
t i iqh E f f . Mud Washing
3) Process C o n t r o l s + High 80 E f f . Mud Washing +
3 2 1 1 1 1 96.3
Caus t i c Scrubbi na 45 3 1 1 26 93.3 Brown Stock I n c i n e r a t i o n
Black L i q u o r I n c i n e r a t i o n 40 8 3 1 1 1 20 80.0
25 3 1 1 46 88.0 Smelt D i s s o l v i n g Fresh Water
Condensate S t r i p p i n q Scrubber 1,300 650 87 53 30 50.0
Washer System
Oxidation System Mo lecu la r Oxygen 40 OC - 100.0 9
l a n k
System I n c i n e r a t i o n 1,300. Ob - 100.0 >
Reduct ion f rom u n c o n t r o l l e d averaqe l e v e l a
Gases a r e assumed burned i n t h e l i m e k i l n . The l e v e l s from t h e l i m e k i l n i n c l u d e unburned TRS p o r t i o n o f these gases.
No ven t gases. C
U
(Please read ItJrmictions on the reverse belore . RkPORT NO. 2.
. TITLE A N D SUBTITLE
K r a f t Pu lp ing - Con t ro l o f TRS Emissions from E x i s t i n g M i l l s
. AUTHOR(S)
. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME A N D ADDRESS
O f f i c e o f A i r Q u a l i t y P lann ing and Standards
Research T r i a n g l e Park, Nor th C a r o l i n a
DAA f o r A i r Q u a l i t y P lann ing and Standards
U. S. Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency Research T r i a n g l e Park, Nor th C a r o l i n a
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency 27711
2. SPCv%St2R::J.G AGE::CY i<AME A % 0 C;C=RESS
O f f i c e o f A i r , Noise, and Rad ia t i on
27711 5. SGi'PLEMENTARY NOTES
7. KEY WORDS A N D DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRl PTORS ib. IDENTI F I E RS/OPEN ENDED TERMS IC. COSATI Field/Group I I
completing) 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
5. REPORT D A T E March ___- 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
. . '11. CONCRACT/GRANT NO.
13. TYPE OF REPORT A N D PERtOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
A i r p o l l u t i o n P o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l K r a f t p u l p m i l l s T o t a l reduced s u l f u r P a r t i c u l a t e m a t t e r Emission g u i d e l i n e s
a. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
U n l i m i t e d
A i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReporr) 21. NO. OF PAGES
U n c l a s s i f i e d 210
U n c l a s s i f i e d 20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispuge) 22. PRICE