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