waste management study of foundries

8/8/2019 Waste Management Study of Foundries

1/64

Hazardous Waste Research and Information CenterOne East Hazelwood DriveChamoaian. Illinois 61820HWRIC TR-016 $5.00

Waste Management Study ofFoundries Major Waste Streams:Phase I I

byMarvin D. McKinley, lrvin A. Jefcoat,William J. Herz and Christopher L. FrederickThe University of Alabama

andAmerican Foundrymens Society, Inc.

-mH- April 1994m---Hwmw-D.pUamrolEn e r g y . n c r ~ l R . u wms r

Printed on recycle&recyclable paper


2/64


3/64

HWRIC TR-016

Waste Management StudyofFoundries MajorWaste Streams:

Phase I1

Prepared byMarvin D. McKinley, lrvin A. Jefcoat,

William J. Herz, and Christopher L. FrederickDepartment of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of AlabamaTuscaloosa, Alabama 3 5487-0203

andAmerican Foundrymen's Society, Inc.

Des Plaines, Illinois

Prepared forThe Illinois Hazardous Waste Research

and Information CenterOne East Hazelwood DriveChampaign, Illinois 61 820

HWRlC Project RRT-16

Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois 94/250

Front cover:From 2 to 3 cu. yards of dust and fume arising daily at 1 1 dust-producing points in the sand handling operations -- shakeout,conveyors and muller -- at B ay City Steel Castings Div. of American Hoist & Derrick Company are trapped in a WheelabratorTurbex w et collector .


4/64

This report is part of HWRIC's Technical Report Series. Mention of trade names orcommercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation fo r use.


5/64

CONTENTSPaae Number

...Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H IList of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv List of Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ivAbstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v1.0 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 Foundry Emission Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 Development of Emission Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.2 Organic Compound Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43.2.1 Core and Mold Making Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53.2.2 Pouring and Cooling Emissions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3.1 Metals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.2.3 Shakeout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74.0 Treatment Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4.1 Survey of Currently Available Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84.2 Treatment Equipment and Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84.3 Treatment Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94.3.1 Absorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4.3.2 Adsorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114.3.3 Combustion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124.3.4 Condensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134.3.5 Cyclone Separators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164.3.6 Fabric Filtration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174.3.7 Electrostatic Precipitators (ESP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194.3.8 Wet Scrubbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

5.0 Field Information on Potential Air Emissions of HAP'S from Iron and Steel Foundry Binders andOther Chemicals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225.1 Supplier Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225.2 Workshops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225.3 Foundry Visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

6.0 Other Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.1 USEPA Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.2 Questionnaire Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226.3 Papers and Presentations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

7.0 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Appendix: Vendors of Air Emission Control Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

...111


6/64

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Total Air Emissions from an Iron Foundry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Table 2. Summary of CAAA HAP Emissions from Foundry Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Table 3. HAP Emissions per Ton of Metal Poured for Common Binder Systems . . . . . . . . 6Table 4. HAP Emissions per Ton of Resin Used for Common Binder Systems . . . . . . . . . 7Table 5. Response to Survey on Current HAP Control Technology 8Table 6. Pure Component Vapor Pressures and Equilibrium Mole Fractions a tlOO'Fand200'F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BACTCAAAESPM E RHAPMACTMSDSNRPSDUSEPA

Best Available Control TechnologyThe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990Electrostatic PrecipitatorLowest Achievable Emission RateHazardous Air PollutantMaximum Achievable Control TechnologyMaterial Safety Data SheetNot ReportedPrevention of Significant DeteriorationThe United States Environmental Protection Agency

iv


7/64

ABSTRACTResearch on emission control and waste disposal is the number one priority within AFS. In anindustry survey conducted by AFS, ten top areas of concern were outlined, headed by sand systemwaste and emissions from molding, pouring, melting and shakeout in iron and steel green sandfoundries. The objective of the present program was to define the foundry waste streams andemissions, establish where the streams originate, and define their make-up. A primary driving forcefor this work is the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 which will set new regulations for airemissions from foundries for 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) by 1997.The focus of the research was on the nature of the foundry waste streams in the form of airemissions from processes of coremaking, molding, pouring, and shakeout and to establish theirorigin and their makeup. Binder chemicals are a major potential contributor to emissions fromcoremaking and subsequent processes.The Phase I report included a review of all available information. Sources were the technicalliterature, suppliers of chemicals to foundries, AFS workshops, USEPA Office of Air QualityPlanning and Standards, technical meetings, and visits to foundries.This Phase II report covers an extension of the research to include emission factors derived fromthe limited data available for the common binder systems. These data will be useful for makingorder-of-magnitude estimates of emissions. Also included is a brief discussion of treatmenttechnologies currently available for air emissions, along with a list of vendors for such equipment.

V


8/64


9/64

1 O BACKGROUNDUp to now, foundry waste emission concerns have emphasized sand, water, and particulate

emissions. Concerns about emissions of air toxics have largely been focused on occupationalhealth and safety. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) require the control ofemissions of toxic and hazardous materials to the air. The scope of a project which dealt wi th alltypes of emissions from foundries would be far too large for the current project. Therefore, thisproject dealt only with air emissions of toxic and hazardous chemicals subject to the CAAA.

This report does not address nonattainment area requirements. The preconstruction reviewrequirements for major new sources or major modifications locating in areas designatednonattainment differ from prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements. Theemissions control requirement for nonatttainment areas, lowest achievable emission rate (LAER), isdefined differently than the best available control technology (BACT). This report discusses onlythe HAP'S covered under Title Il l of the CAAA. Those foundries under LAER requirements will alsohave to look a t the requirements under Title I; SO,, NO,, and CO. In addition some states have setlower emission limits for some compounds to trigger MACT than the CAAA. Thus, a small foundry(


10/64

Table 1. Total Air Emissions from an Iron Foundry

***+**

****

Air Pollutant Emissions

METALSAluminumAntimonyArsenicBariumBerylliumCadmiumChromium

PLANT TOTAL(tons emissionkon metal poured)

4.4900e-051.41 76e-064.8824e-074.8235e-075.8824e-097.6471 e-081.1647e-06

Cobalt 1.0000e-07CopperIronLeadMagnesiumManganeseMercuryMolybdenumNickelSeleniumSilverTinTitaniumZinc

TOTAL METALSTOTAL CAAA METAL HAPSPARTICULATE

9.5000e-066.6826e-046.81 76e-065.3935e-053.5552e-04

c .6471 e-072.2941 e-074.1 765e-071.647 1e-077.647 1e-087.7706e-069.0588e-079.741 2e-061.1 621e-033-6634e-046.5067e-03

*HYDROGEN CHLORIDE 2.5465e-05

SULFUR OXIDESSulfur dioxideSulfur trioxideSulfuric acidTOTAL SULFUR OXIDES

6.9676e-052.7841 e-051.8008e-042.7759e-04

OXIDES OF NITROGEN 1.5081 e-04CARBON MONOXIDE 4.0428e-03

2


11/64

Table 1, Continued. Total Air Emissions from an Iron FoundryAir Pollutant Emissions PLANT TOTAL

(tons emission/ton metal poured)SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

**+*

Acenaphthene * *Acenaphthene * *Benzo (a) anthracene * *Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalateDibutylphthalateDiethylphthalateDi-n-octylphthalateFluoranthene * *Fluorene * *NaphthalenePhenanthrene * *Pyrene * *2,4-Dimethylphenol

** Phenol

Cresols* Methylnaphthalenes * +TOTAL SEMI-VOLATILESTOTAL CAAA SEMI-VOLATILE HAPS

***

*

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDSAcetoneBenzeneBromoform1,3-Butadiene2-Butanone (MEK)Carbon DisulfideChlorobenzeneChloroformChloromethane (Methyl Chloride)1,2-DichIoroethane (EDC)1 DichloroethaneDichloromethaneEthyl Butyl CellusolveEthylbenzeneFormaldehyde2-Hexanone4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIBK)StyreneTetrachloroethene (PCE)Toluene1, ,lTrichloroethane (TCA)Trichloroethene (TCE)Trichlorofluoromethane (F-11Trichlorotrifluoroethane (F-113)Vinyl AcetateXylenes

1 1765e-084.8824e-081.1 765e-099.3294e-071.9941 e-074.7941 e-076.4706e-091.7647e-095.1765e-081.4824e-066.8235e-081.7647e-091.61 06e-061.0541 e-061.8976e-061 1229e-068.971 2e-066.8747e-06

2.1 439e-058.2353e-092.4882e-076.5235e-072.1 871 e-061.2353e-085.8824e-101.5276e-065.8824e-104.1 765e-086.4353e-072.8824e-08


12/64

Table 1, Continued. Total Air Emissions from an Iron FoundryTOTAL VOLATILESTOTAL CAAA VOLATILE HAPs 1.7552e-041.51 68e-04FACILITY TOTAL CAAA HAPs 5.5036e-04

* Denotes CAAA HAP* *Denotes Polycyclic Organic Matter

Table 2. Summary of CAAA HAP Emissions from Foundry AuditAir Pollution Emissions PLANT AMOUNT OF METAL

TOTAL POURED TO TRIGGER(Tons emission/ton metal poured) MACT (tons)

TOTAL CAAA METALS HAPs 3.663e-04TOTAL CAAA SEMI-VOLATILES HAPS 6.875e-06TOTAL CAAA VOLATILE HAPs 1.5 17e-04FACILITY TOTAL CAAA HAPs 5.504e-04

6.824e +043.637e+061.648e +054.542e +04

3.0 DEVELOPMENTOF EMISSION FACTORSThe emissions of HAP's from iron and steel foundries can generally be classified as metals ororganics.

3.1 METALSEmissions from melting furnaces are primarily volatile metals, which are generally controlled

by particulate emission control devices. These emissions depend upon the type of scrap meltedand on th e type of melting furnace. The rate of metal emissions from electric and inductionfurnaces would be expected to be lower than from cupolas, for example. Many cupolas haveparticulate control devices on them, which reduces the net emission of metals. Any polymers,especially vinyl polymers, in the scrap may generate organic emissions, but the levels of organicemissions to be expected have not been quantified. Afterburners t o control CO emissions incupolas may also give sufficient control of many organic compound emissions. A study ofemissions from melting operations was beyond the scope of the present study. Metal emissionsfrom core and mold making, and shakeout are considered to be insignificant. Metal emissions frompouring depends on the alloy poured and the pouring temperature and are not included in thisstudy.

3.2 ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONSThe potential emissions of HAP's from production of cores and molds are generally volatile

organic compounds that result from unreacted components of the resin, solvents, or catalysts.Forty-seven HAP's have been identified from the published literature on foundry air emissions, butmany of these are at very low levels. Excluding metals, 38 potential HAP's were reported to beemitted, but of these only 1 6 have been identified in this study as being potentially emitted in anyquantity larger than trace amounts in foundry operations. These HAP's have been identified by

4


13/64

type, but quantitative data on levels of emissions are very scarce and generally are not available.The previous lists of HAP's are inclusive of emissions which may occur in several different

locations in a foundry. It probably will be necessary to pinpoint more accurately which HAP's areemitted from each area of the plant. Therefore, some discussion will be made of the potentialemissions from several areas of the plant.

3.2.1 Core and Mold Making EmissionsActual published quantitative emission data taken in core rooms were not found. Emissionsof HAP's in core and mold making up to now have been of concern mainly for occupational health

and safety. The main reason for needing to know the level of emissions has been to determineventilation requirements. Mosher 11 1 recently has compiled data from suppliers and manufacturersof binder chemicals to determine the fa te of the ingredients put into the coremaking process. Thisdocument was prepared to assist foundries in filling out the EPA form R on emissions. The fate ofthe chemical ingredients was categorized as percent that was reacted and no longer existed aftercoremaking, percent unchanged in the process and remaining in the core, and percent evaporatedto give an airborne emission. Therefore, these data can be used to give estimates of emissionsfrom core and mold preparation areas. The Phase 1 report showed sample calculations of theamountof core sand usage that would result in 10 ons/year of emissions in core making for naphthalene,formaldehyde, and methanol evaporation emissions from three of the common binder systems thatwould be expected in the core room, when the binders are used a t typical binderhand ratios. Thisapproach can be used to estimate emissions of HAP's from other binder systems.

3.2.2 Pouring and Cooling EmissionsLaboratory data on emissions from pouring and cooling for one hour for most common

binder systems have been reported. Although the studies were made for workplace health andsafety considerations, quantities of the major organic compounds emitted can be calculated fromthe data. The experiments were made to give a comparison among binder systems, and noparameter studies were made. The experimental conditions were well presented by Scott, Batesand James t101. The casting was an irregular gear, which weighed approximately 40 kg with thegating system and riser. The sand weighed approximately 100 kg to give a sand-to-metal ratio of2.5, xcept for the shell mold which had a sand-to-metal ratio of 0.9. The pouring temperaturewas 1450 OC. Emissions data were reported in concentrations (ppm), but with the specified gasflow rate of 1000 L/min through the stack the mass of emissions of each component can becalculated. They made measurements on 10 hot-box and no-bake binders, as well as for greensand and dry sand. Emory et al [51used an identical setup to study nitrogen compound emissionsfrom three hot-box and three no-bake binder systems. A third set of experiments, again using thesame setup, was made by Archibald and Warren I21 on four cold-box binder systems. Their resultswere given in terms of milligrams of emission per gram of binder resin in the mold.

Tables 3 and 4 contain emission factors calculated from the data of Scott et al [lo1andArchibald and Warren 121. The factors are in terms of tons of emissions per ton of metal poured,and tons of emissions per ton of binder used. These factors should be used with a great deal ofcaution. First, the work of Scott e t al 1101 was published in 1977. The binders in use a t that timeare probably not the same as the binders carrying the same name today, and the normal usagelevel in a mold may also be quite different. The operating parameters were not varied In either ofthese studies. If the sand-to-metal ratios are different, the part being cast has a very differentconfiguration, or the metal temperature is different, the effects of these variable changes on theemission factors are unknown.

5


14/64

Table 3. HAP Emissions per Ton of Metal Poured for Common Binder SystemsEMISSIONS.Won metal poured

Binder System Acrolein Ammonia Formaldehyde Hydrogen Sulfide Hydrogen Cyanide NitrogenOxides

1. Alkyd Isocyanate 3.6Oe-062. Core Oil 2.40e-063. DrySand 1.05e-064. Furan Ho t Box 6.00e-075. Green Sand 1.50e-076. Lo w N2 Furan 1.05e-067. Med.N2 Furan 6.OOe-078. Phenolic Hot Box 4.50e-079. Phenolic No-Bake 1.50e-0710. Phenolic Urethanel.05e-0611. Shell 1.6oe-0612. Silicate-Ester 4.50e-0713. Ashland Process NR14. Phenolic Ester NR15. FRC Process NR16. SO2 Process NR

Binder System Phenol1. Alkyd Isocyanate 4.5Oe-062. coreoil 1.8Oe-063. DrySand 6.00e-064. Furan Hot Box 7.50e-075. Greensand 9.30e-066. LowN2Furan 9.00e-077. Med N2 Furan 3.75e-068. Phenolic Hot Box 1.01e-059. Phenolic No-Bake 3.00e-0510. Phenolic Urethanel.34e-0411. Shell 8.4oe-0512. Silicate-Ester 4.35e4613. Ashland Ptucess 4.4Oe-0414. Phenolic Ester 9.4Oe-0515. FRC Process 4.25e-0416. SO2 Process NR

1.50e-061.20e-061.95e-059.45e-044.65e-061SOe-067.5Oe-065.4oe-041.2Oe-062.85e-061.32e-046.00e-07

NRNRNRNR

sulfur Dioxide1.65e-063.60e-067.65e-054.2Oe-061.8Oe-052.25e451.8Oe-041.8-4.65e-042.10e-061.2oe-043.9oe-06NRm1.62e-053.6oe-04

4.35e-063.ooe-067.5Oe-074.50e-073.00e-079.90e-062.40e-063.00e-073.ooe-077.50e-071.20e-062.7Oe-061.91e-069.30e-05

NRNR

TotalAldehydes8.85e-052.4oeO51.2Oe-057.5Oe-064.50e-069.ooe-066.30e-041.35e-059.45e-057.5Oe-062.OOe-052.10e-05

NRNRNRNR

3.ooe-071.8Oe-064.35e-052.85e-065.9 3e-051.50e-051.8Oe-054.502-074.5Oe-051.95e-063.20e-063.15e-06

NRNRNRNR

Benzene2.19e-047.35e-054.35e-052.55e-054.35e-052.40e-051.68e-044.95e-053.45e-041.83e-042.28e-042.25e-05

NRNRNRNR

7.2Oe-M2.70e-063ooe-061.65e-048.40e-061.37e-052.25e-055.85e-059.00e-073.6oe-053.6oe-042.85e-06NRNRNRNR

Other Aromatics3.26e-043.3Oe-052.25e-056.OOe-069.ooGo61 . 1 M3.39e-041.8Oe-052.55e-054.95e-051 24-049.ooe-066 . M3.1 le-048.04~441.07e-04

1.46e-052.55e-067.65e-061.95e-054.01e-054.5Oe-071.16453.15e-059.00e-071.50e-063.40e-054.50e-07

NRNRNRNR

Total HAPS6.7 le 361.5Oe-042.36e-041.18e-031.97e-042.13e-041.38e-037.24-041Ole434.2Oe-04l.lle-037.1oe-051We434.98e-041.25e-034.67e-04

*NR Not Reported

6


15/64

Table 4. HAP Emissions per Ton of Resin Used for Common Binder Systems

EMISSIONS. t d o n resinBinder System Acrolein Ammonia Formaldehyde Hydrogen Sulfide Hydrogen Cyanide Nitrogen

Oxides1. Alkyd Isocyanate 7.62e-052. Coreoil 2.40e-053. D~ySand 2.43e-054. Furan Hot Box 1.OOe-055. Green Sand 4.62e-066. Lo w N2 Furan 2.15e-057. Med. N2 Furan 1.23e-058. Phenolic Hot Box 7.50e-069. Phenolic No-Bake 3.85e-0610. Phenolic Urethand.8Oe-0511. Shell 6.oOe-0612. Silicate-Ester 5.45e-0613. Ashland Process NR14. Phenolic Ester NR15. FRC Process NR16. SO2 Process NR

Binder System Phenol1. Alkyd Isocyanate 9.52e-052. coreoil 1.8Oe-053. DrySand 1.39e-044. Furan Hot Box 1.25e-055. Greensand 2.86e-046. Lo w N2 Furan 1.85e-057. Med.N2 Furan 7.69e-058. Phenolic Hot Box 1.68e-049. Phenolic No-Bake7.69e-0410. Phenolic Urethane3.56e-0311. Shell 3.15e-0412. Silicate-Ester 5.27e-0513. Ashland Process 1.174e-0214. Phenolic Ester 1.88Oe-0315. FRC Process 1.417e-0216. SO2 Process NR

3.17e-051.20e-051.58e-021.43e-043.08e-051.54e-049.00e-033.08e-057.60e-054.952-047.27e-06

4.5 le-04

NRNRNRNR

Sulfur Dioxide3.49e-053.6oe-051.77e-037.00e-055.54e-044.62e-043.69e-033.ooe-051.19e-025.60e-054.5Oe-044.73e-05

NRNR

5.4002-049.6ooe-03

9.21e-053.00e-051.73e-057.50e-069.23e-062.03e-044.92e-055.ooe-067.69e-062.OOe-054.50e-063.27e-055.10e-051.86e-03

NRNR

Total Aldehydes1.87e-032.40e-042.77e-041.25eM1.38e-041.85e-041.29e-022.25e-042.42e-032.00e-047.50e-052.55e-04

NRNRNRNR

6.35e-061.80e-051.01e-034.75e-051.82e-033.08e-043.69e-047.50e-061.15e-035.20e-051.2Oe-053.82e-05

NRNRNRNR

Benzene4.63e-037.35e-041O 1e 4 34.25e-041.34e-034.92e-043.45e-038.25e-048.85e-034.88e-038.55e-042.73e-04NRNRNR

NR

1.52e-042.7Oe-056.94e-052.75e-032.58e-042.80e-044.62e-049.75e-042.3 le-059.60e-041.35e-033.45e-05

NRNRNRNR

Other Aromatics6.89e-033.30e-045.20e-041ooe-042.77e-042.37e-036.95e-033.ooe-046.54e-041.32e-034.65e-041B9e-041.72e-026.21e-032.68e-022.85e-03

3.OSe-042.55e-051.77e-043.25e-041.23e-039.23e-062.37e-045.25e-042.3 le4 54.00e-05I .28e-045.45e-06

NRNRNRNR

Total HAPS1.42421.50e-035.46e-031.96e-026.06e-034.38e-032.84e-021.21e-022.59e-021.12e-024.16e-038.6Oe-042.90e-029.95e-034.15e-021.25e-02

* NR Not Reponed

7


16/64

3.2.3 ShakeoutNo emission factors were developed for shakeout. There were no adequate data in the

literature for making estimates of shakeout emission. Obviously operating parameters such asmetal temperature, cooling time, and sand-to-metal temperature will have an effect on shakeoutemissions.

4.0 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES4.1 SURVEY OF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIESIn order to assess the current commercial availability of pollution control equipment, a letter

was sent to each of 99 air pollution control equipment suppliers listed in the Foundrv Manaaement& Technoloay, October, 1992 WHERE-TO-BUY Directory Section. In the letter, the project wasidentified and information requested on equipment recommended for control of potential airpollutants from coremaking, pouring and shakeout, and sand reclamation processes. Specificrequests were made for methods used for sizing equipment, operating parameters, and otherfactors of importance. Some 26 responses were received, with the majority offering air filtrationand gas sampling equipment or services (Table 28). This information was reviewed in preparationof this report.

Table 5. Response to Survey on Current HAP Control Technology Recovery Technology Area

Number ofResponses

* 3 respa

Particulates Gas Hoods

13 4 2

ses dealt with sand reclamation proce

Other

7

ses

4.2 TREATMENT EQUIPMENT AND PROCESSESIn the past several decades, industry has directed its attention toward the protection of the

environment. There are five control strategies followed in order to reduce and/or eliminatepollutant emissions. They include elimination of the operation entirely or in part, recycling,modification of the operation, relocation of the operation, applications of control technologies, andcombinations of the above. This section deals solely with the use of control technologies.

Before selecting air pollution control equipment, several environmental, engineering, andeconomic factors must be considered. They are as follows:

Environmental, Economic and Engineering Factors1. Equipment location2. Available space3. Ambient conditions4. Availability of adequate utilities

8


17/64

5. Maximum allowable emissions6. Aesthetic considerations7. Contribution of air pollution control systems towastewater and solid waste.8. Contribution of air pollution control system to plantnoise level.

ENGINEERING1. Contaminant characteristics2. Gas stream characteristics3. Design and performance characteristics of th e particular

control system.ECONOMICS1. Capital cost2. Operating cost3. Expected equipment lifetime and salvage valueThe following section gives descriptions of several different control systems. The first

section deals with control of gaseous pollutants and the second with the control of particulates.4.3 TREATMENT PROCESSES

The objective in any treatment process is to bring the gas or liquid containing theparticulates or chemical species in contact with a medium (air, water, etc.) so as to remove thesespecies. Gas-liquid contacting processes that involve several components in the gas phase, similarto the foundry emissions, include transfer of one or more species from th e gas to a liquid(absorption or scrubbing) or vice-versa (stripping). Some important aspects concerning thebehavior of gas-liquid systems and relevant terms used to explain the state of such systems arenoted below:

1 . The gas in equilibrium with a liquid must be saturated with that liquid.2. A limited number of intensive system variables may be arbitrarily specified (Gibbs Phase

Rule) but the remaining variables must then be evaluated using equilibrium relationships for th edistribution of components between the two phases.

3. The partial pressure of a vapor at equilibrium in a gas mixture containing one or morecondensable components cannot exceed their respective pure component vapor pressures a t thesystem temperature. Any attempt to increase the partial pressure of the component (by addingmore vapor to the gas phase or increasing the total pressure) would lead to condensation of thatcomponent.

The techniques available for treating foundry emissions are abundant and the criteria that areimportant for such an operation should be based on the following:1. Particle size distribution (including shape and density).2. Efficiency of the equipment and emission reductions required.3. Allowable pressure drop vs. required flow rate of gas processed.

9


18/64

4. Capital and operating costs of equipment.5. Ease of treatment of dirty liquid or solids generatedAmong the various collection devices such as spray towers, condensers, cyclone scrubbers,

and electrostatic precipitators that are available - a venturi scrubber proves to be a good choice forthe treatment of foundry emissions. Inertial impact is the primary collection mechanism for thistype of removal. Water is injected upstream of the venturi throat and the curtain of water isbroken up by the gas stream into drops which collect the dust. Venturi scrubbers are considered tobe highly efficient for small particles similar to foundry emissions (between 0.001 to 100 microns)and there is no particle reentrainment. In spite of its higher efficiency scrubbers do not functionwell where plume rise is important since a wet plume has l i t t le buoyancy.

4.3.1 AbsorptionAbsorption is a process which removes one or more components from a gas stream by

treatment with a liquid [31. The necessary condition for the removal of components from a gasstream is the solubility of these components in the absorbing liquid. The two most commonly usedabsorbers are packed and plate towers. In packed towers, the gas moves up through the packingwhile the liquid flows down the tower. Plate towers, on the other hand, use trays for the liquid toflow across and then down to the next tray, while the gas moves up through perforations in thetray. The design of these towers must be based on the principles of diffusion, equilibrium, andmass transfer [31. The main objective of the design is to provide a large interfacial area to bringthe gas into contact with the liquid.

The efficiency of the tower depends on several factors including a) solubility of thecomponent in a given solvent, b) concentration, c) temperature, d) flow rates of the gas and liquidstreams, e) constant surface area, and f) efficiency of solvent regeneration (if the solvent isrecycled) t81. Under ideal conditions, efficiencies of 99 + % can be obtained with absorption.

Absorbers are commonly used for inorganic vapors [81. If used for organic vapors one maybe faced wi th the following problems. First, the solvent for a particular component may be hard tofind or identify. The component must be soluble in the solvent and the solvent should be easilyregenerated for recycling. Second, the effluent must be disposed of in an environmentally safeway. Finally, the outlet gas concentrations normally will be small which may lead to unrealistictower heights, contact times, and high liquid-gas flow rates t81.

This report will not go in to a discussion of design equations. They can be found in masstransfer books such as Treybal, Mass Transfer Operations; and Henley & Seader, Eauilibrium-StaaeSeDaration ODerations in Chemical Enaineering.

The following table is a l ist of some advantages and disadvantages of absorption towers[3l.

Advantages1. Relatively low pressure drop.2.3.4.

Standardization in fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP) construction permits operationin highly corrosive atmospheres.Capable of achieving relatively high mass-transfer efficiencies.Increasing the height and/or type of packing or number of plates can improve masstransfer without purchasing a new piece of equipment.

10


19/64

5. Relatively low capital cost.6. Relatively small space requirements.7. Ability to collect particulates as well as gases.

Disadvantages1.2. Product collected wet.3.4.5. Relatively high maintenance costs.

May create liquid disposal problem.Particulates deposition may cause plugging of the bed or plates.When FRP construction is used, it is sensitive to temperature.

4.3.2 AdsorptionAdsorption is a process in which certain components of a gas are transferred to the surface

of a solid adsorbent. Adsorption is useful in air pollution control because it concentrates gaseouspollutants, thus facilitating their disposal 11 11. It is used for industrial applications such as odorcontrol, or recovery of volatile solvents 141.

There are two types of adsorption, physical and chemical. Physical adsorption is th e resultof intermolecular forces of attraction between the solid and the substance being adsorbed 1121.This process is reversible, which allows recovery of the adsorbed material. When th e attractiveforces between the solid and the gas are stronger than those between the molecules of th e gasitself, th e gas will condense on the surface of the solid. This process is accompanied by th erelease of heat, which usually is larger than the latent heat of vaporization of the sorbed material.The forces holding the sorbed material to the solid can be overcome by the addition of heat orlowering the pressure, allowing regeneration of the adsorbent.

Chemical adsorption is th e result of chemical interaction between the gas and solid [121.Chemisorption is characterized by the following characteristics: a) energy released is greater thanthat of physical adsorption, b) the process is irreversible, c) the rate increases with a rise intemperature, d) it is more highly selective than physical adsorption, e) the capacity of theadsorbent is limited to that of the active sites on its surface. Chemical adsorption is not a feasibleprocess if the recovery of the material is desired or if the adsorbent is to be regenerated for re-use.

There are several different solid adsorbents. The most widely used are activated carbonand molecular sieves. Descriptions and physical properties of different adsorbents can be found inBuonicore & Davis, Air Pollution Enaineerina Manual; Cooper & Alley, Air Pollution Control A DesianAmroach, and Rao, Environmental Pollution Control Engineering.

Adsorption takes place in fixed, moving, and fluidized beds [31. A fixed bed adsorber isfitted with perforated screens to support the adsorbent 191. The moving bed adsorbers move theadsorbent in and out of the adsorption zone. Finally, the fluidized bed adsorbers contain a numberof shallow fluidized beds of activated adsorbent. Design equations for these different beds can befound in mass transfer books, such as Treybal, Mass Transfer ODerations and Sherwood, Pigfordand Wilke, Mass Transfer.

1 1


20/64

The following is a list of advantages and disadvantages of the adsorption process 131:Advantages1.2.3.4.5.

Recovery of the sorbed material may be possible.Excellent control and response to process changes.No chemical disposal problem when pollutant is recovered and returned to theprocess.Capability of systems to provide fully automatic, unattended operation.Capability to reduce gaseous vapor contaminants from process streams toextremely low levels.

Disadvantages1. Product recovery may require an exotic, expensive distillation (or extraction)

scheme.2. Adsorbent progressively deteriorates in capacity as the number of cycles increases.3. Adsorbent regeneration requires a steam or vacuum source.4. Relatively high capital cost.5. Prefiltering of gas stream may be required to remove any particulate capable of

plugging the adsorbent bed.6. Cooling of the gas stream may be required to get the usual range of operation (lessthan 120 OF ) .

7. Relatively high steam requirements to desorb high molecular-weight hydrocarbons.8. Generally applicable to the removal of small amounts of pollutants.

4.3.3 CombustionCombustion is a process in which organics are converted to carbon dioxide and water by

rapid oxidation. Combustion, also known as incineration, can be used for odor control, and todestroy toxic compounds 141. This process can achieve 95 to 99 percent efficiencies 181. Thereare three combustion processes used to destroy organic contaminants: 1) flaring, 2) thermalincineration, 3) catalytic incineration 171.

Time, temperature, and turbulence, the three T's, govern the speed and completeness ofcombustion 171. The oxygen must come into intimate contact with the combustible material a t asufficient temperature for a sufficient length of time for the reaction to be completed. Incompletereactions may result in the formation of aldehydes, organic acids, and carbon monoxide.

Flares and thermal incineration are characterized by a flame, while catalytic incineration isflameless. In catalytic incineration, a metallic catalyst is used to produce oxidation.

Flares are usually applied when the heating value of the gases cannot be recoveredeconomically 181. They are commonly used to control process upsets and accidental releases.They are most widely used to dispose of hydrocarbons 171. There are three common types offlares: 1) elevated, 2) ground level, 3) burning pits 191.

Thermal incineration is used for a wide but low range of organic vapor concentrations 131.They consist of burners, which ignite the fuel and organic vapor, and a chamber, which providesappropriate residence time for the oxidation process. The concentration of gas to be treated mustbe below the lower explosive limit. The feed is usually preheated since the reaction occurs a t

12


21/64

elevated temperatures. Following is a list of some operating ranges: Temperature-1200 to 1500O F ; Time-0.2 to 1.O seconds; and gas velocity-10 to 50 ft/s. High velocities are needed to preventsettling of particulates (if any) and minimize dangers of flashback and fire hazards. The advantageof thermal incinerators is that energy can usually be recovered in some form.

In catalytic incineration, the waste stream passes over a catalyst bed [71. For simplereactions, the effect of the presence of a catalyst is to 1) increase the reaction rate, 2) permit thereaction to occur, and 3) reduce th e reactor volume. Conditions for operation are lower than thoseof thermal incineration. Gas is delivered a t a velocity between 10 to 30 ft/s and a much lowertemperature, between 650 to 800 O F . Catalytic incineration is more sensitive to pollutantcharacteristics. The design is generally less expensive than thermal incinerators 181. Commonly,metals from the platinum family are used for the catalyst due to their ability to combust a t lowtemperatures [71.

Following is a list of advantages and disadvantages of combustion processes [31.Advantages1. Simplicity of operation.2.3.

Capability to provide steam generation or heat recovery in other forms.Capability for high destruction efficiency of organic contaminants.

Disadvantages1. Relatively high operating cost.2.3. Catalyst poisoning.4.

Potential for flashback and subsequent explosion hazard.Incomplete combustion can create potentially worse pollution problems (NOx, SOX).

4.3.4 CondensationCondensation is a process which changes a vapor into a liquid. It is frequently applied as a

preliminary air pollution control device to remove concentrated vapors from a gas stream before thegas reaches more expensive equipment, such as an absorber t81. Condensation is accomplished byeither lowering the temperature or increasing th e pressure. However, increasing the pressure isoften economically infeasible. Efficiencies of 50 to 90 percent can be reached using condensation[81, however, th e effectiveness depends directly upon the vapor pressure or volatility of thecompounds being condensed.

Metallurgical dusts and fumes have a range of particle diameters from 0.001 to 100microns. Particulate controls are used in many foundries, and condensible vapor components maycondense on solid particles and be trapped in these collection devices. Therefore, particulatecollection may reduce somewhat the emissions of low-volatil ity HAP'S. When considering th e levelof emissions from an air pollution control device, one should remember that th e partial pressure ofa component in a gas stream cannot exceed the vapor pressure of that component. Thus, if a gasstream is cooled, some of the less volatile components may condense.

There are two common types of condensers used for air pollution control: contact andsurface 171. Contact condensers bring the gas stream into direct contact with the cooling fluid,where the vapors condense and mix with the coolant. Three common types of contact condensersare spray, jet, and barometric, which are usually more flexible and have better efficiencies thansurface condensers. They also have the following advantages: 1 they can be used to produce a

13


22/64

vacuum, therefore, creating a draft to remove odorous vapors, 2) they are usually simpler and lessexpensive than surface condensers, and 3) hey usually have considerable odor-removing capacity.However, th e principle disadvantage is their large water requirement.

Surface condensers are used for recovery, control and/or removal of trace impurities orcontaminants 171. In th e surface-type condenser th e vapor does not contact the coolant. Thecoolant is placed in the tubes while the vapor condenses in th e shell portion of the condenser.Three types of surface condensers are the tube-and-shell, fin fan, and tubular. The advantages ofthe surface condenser are as follows: salable condensate can be recovered; water, used as thecoolant, can be reused; and surface condensers require less water and produce 10 to 20 times lesscondensate. On the other hand, they are more expensive and require more maintenance than thecontact condensers.

Design equations can be found in Kern, Process Heat Transfer; and Buonicore & Davis, AirPollution Enaineerina Manual.The following is a list of advantages and disadvantages of th e use of a condenser t33.Advantages1.2.

Pure product recovery (in the case of surface condensers).Water used in surface condensers does not contact the contaminated gas streamand can be used after cooling.

Disadvantages1 .2. Relatively low removal efficiencies for gaseous contaminants.Coolant requirements may be extremely expensive.Estimation of Vaoor Pressure:Because the effectiveness of condensation for removing components from an air stream is

directly related to th e volatility of the compounds, calculations of vapor pressures were made forcompounds of interest. The vapor pressures of the various chemical emissions from Foundry Moldswere estimated at two temperatures (I00 nd 200'F) by using an integrated form of the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. These temperatures were chosen because they should cover the range ofexpected temperatures for particulate treatment devices which treat ambient air from the variousparts of the foundry. Each species of the emissions has an appropriate form of equation whichestimates vapor pressure that agrees well with th e observed vapor pressures in literature. Thefollowing are the three forms of expressions used from The ProDerties of Gases & Liauids by Reidet ai:

14


23/64

where x = 1 - T/T,

BTLnP, = A - - + C LnT

BI:T+ ILnP, = A - ( 3 )- -

wherePvp = Vapor pressure, in barsP = Critical pressure, in barsT = Critical temperature, in degrees KelvinT = Temperature, in degrees Kelvin

A,B,C,& D = Constants

Listed below are the equations used for each of the chemical species.

Eauation 1 Eauation 2 Eauation 31. Benzene 11. Ammonia 16. Acrolein2. Toluene 12. Hydrogen Sulfide 17. Valeraldehyde3. m-Xylene 13. Hydrogen Cyanide4. o-Xylene 14. Sulfur Dioxide5. Naphthalene 15. Nitrogen Oxides6. Acetaldehyde7. n-Butyraldehyde8. Propionaldehyde9. Phenol10. Formaldehyde

15


24/64

Table 6. Pure Component Vapor Pressures and Equilibrium Mole Fractionsa t 1OO'F[ll and 20O'FI21

Component

1. Ammonia2. Hydrogen Sulfide3. Hydrogen Cyanide4. Sulfur Dioxide5. Nitrogen Oxides6. Total Aldehydes8. Acrolein9. Formaldehyde10. Phenol11 . Benzene12. Toluene13. m-Xylene14. +Xylene15. Naphthalene

Vapor[ 11(bar)46.99758.6688.315

22.765380.074

3.7883.8007.7430.0020.2220.0710.0220.0180.001

Vapor[2] Molfr[ll(bar)141.790 4.63844134.395 5.790e-0443.630 8.207e-0578.244 2.247e-04

486.480 3.751e-0324.360 3.7384524.370 3 . 7 W 529.939 7.64145

0.041 1.5-81.494 2.189e-060.601 6.999470.247 2.218470.209 1.796e-070.018 6.987e-09

Molfr[2]

1.399e-031.326434.306e-047.722e-044.801432.40-2.405e-042.955444.011471.474e-055.9364062.435462.061461.73147

While condensation has not been widely used as an air pollution control method in themetal casting industry, other equipment such as venturi scrubbers and bag houses are common.Compounds which are emitted in hot operations, such as pouring, cooling, and shakeout willcondense to form a smoke or fume that may be trapped in a bag-house or scrubber. The data onequilibrium partial pressures presented in Table 6can be used to estimate the emissions ofcondensible compounds from particulate collection devices. If th e mole fraction of a component isless than the listed values, the component will not condense. If, however, th e mole fraction of acomponent exceeds th e values listed, the component will condense and will be collected in aparticulate collection device if th e condensate has a large enough particle size. It is very commonfor condensate to collect on solid particles, so that the chance of collection of a fume inconjunction with other particulates is enhanced.

4.3.5 Cyclone SeparatorsCyclone separators are used for th e control of medium-sized and coarse particulates 131.

They have a low purchase cost, no moving parts, and can be made to withstand harsh conditions141. The efficiency of a cyclone is not as high as other particulate collection devices [31. For thisreason, cyclones are usually used as a precleaner for other particulate control devices.

16


25/64

Gas enters the cyclone near the top, then it is forced in a downward spiral because of itsshape and tangential entry 141. As the gas spirals down, centrifugal force and inertial forces causethe particles to move outward, collide with the wall and slide down to be collected. Near thebottom, the gas reverses its downward spiral and moves up in a tighter spiral and exits out the topof the cyclone. There are three categories of cyclones: high efficiency, conventional, and highthroughput.

The efficiency depends on the particle size and cyclone design t41. Efficiency may be 98%for particles greater than 5 microns but drops off to 90% for particles greater than 15 to 20microns. As the efficiency of the cyclone increases so does the operating cost due to a highpressure drop. When th e gas flow is high, several cyclones may be used in series or parallel 11 11.Using them in series will increase the overall efficiency, but there will be a significant pressuredrop. Cyclone separator design equations can be found in Buonicore and Davis, Air PollutionEnaineerina Manual; and Cooper and Alley, Air Pollution Control A Desian Amroach.

The following are the advantages and disadvantages of cyclones 131.Advantages1. Low cost of construction.2.3.4.5. Dry collection and disposal.6. Relatively small space requirements.

Relatively simple equipment with few maintenance problems.Relatively low operating pressure drop in the range of approximately 2 to 6 incheswater column.Temperature and pressure limitations imposed only by the materials of constructionused.

Disadvantages1 .2.3.

Relatively low overall particulate collection efficiencies.Inability to handle tacky materials.Operating cost increase with increasing efficiency.

4.3.6 Fabric FiltrationOne of the most frequently used technologies for airborne particulate control is fabric

filtration or baghouses. They operate by pumping the dirty gas into the baghouse, where theparticulates accumulate on the bags. The dust is allowed to build up on the bags until the pressuredrop begins to become excessive, then the bags are cleaned. The build up of the cake is usuallywhat determines the efficiency of the process.

Baghouses are least efficient for collecting particulates between 0.1 to 0.3 pm in diameter[81, however, particles larger or smaller than this can be collected with an efficiency of 99% orgreater. The efficiency is largely insensitive to the physical characteristics of th e gas and dust,and, depending on the fabric cleaning method, to the inlet dust loading.

There are three types of baghouses: 1 I reverse-air, 2.) shaker, and 3.) pulse-jet [41. Thereverse air baghouse feeds th e gaddust stream up through the bottom of the bags, in which thedusts collect on the inside of the bags. The dust builds up until the pressure drop gets too high,and then the clean gas flow is reversed back through the bags. This reversal knocks the filter cake

17


26/64

off the bags and the solid collects in the bottom in th e hopper. They are usually constructed withseveral different bag compartments to allow continuous running while some of the bags are beingcleaned. The reverse air cleaning process is gentle, therefore, the bags have a long l i fe span.

Shaker baghouses operate in the same way as the reverse air type. The difference comesfrom th e manner in which they are cleaned. The filter cake on the inside of the bags ismechanically shaken off the bags. The shaking motion can be vertical, horizontal, or a combinationof both [31. The one condition that absolutely has to be met during cleaning is that there be nopositive direction flow. For this reason, as with th e reverse air baghouses, they are designed withseveral compartments t o allow a continuous operation during cleaning. The shaking of the 'bagstend to decrease their life span.

The third type of baghouse, pulse jet, employs high pressure compressed air to back flushthe bags 131. This method creates a shock wave, that travels down the bag knocking dust off.This cleaning technique is fast, only lasting a fraction of a second. Therefore, this process doesnot require that the baghouse be divided into separate compartments. Another difference betweenthe pulse jet and the others is that the bags are closed at th e bottom and open a t top, hence, thedust collects on the outside of the bags. Internal frames, called cages, support the bags to preventthem from collapsing while they are in use. Once again th e pulse jet action is harsher on the bags,shortening their l i fe span.

The design equations for baghouses can be found in Buonicore and Davis, Air PollutionEnaineerina Manual, and Cooper and Alley, Air Pollution Control A Desian Amroach.

The following is a list of the advantages and disadvantages of baghouses [31.Advantages1 .2.

3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.

Extremely high collection efficiency on both coarse and fine (submicron)particulates.Relatively insensitive to gas stream fluctuation. Efficiency and pressure drop arerelatively unaffected by large changes in inlet dust loadings for continuouslycleaned filters.Filter outlet air may be recirculated within the plant in many cases (for energyconservation).Collected material is recovered dry for subsequent processing or disposal.No problems with liquid waste disposal, water pollution, or liquid freezing.Corrosion and rusting of components are usually not problems.There is no hazard of high voltage, simplifying maintenance and repair andpermitting collection of flammable dusts.Use of selected fibrous or granular filter aids (precoating) permits th e high-efficiencycollection of submicron smokes and gaseous contaminants.Filter collectors are available in a large number of configurations, resulting in a rangeof dimensions and inlet and outlet flange locations to suit installation requirements.Relatively simple operation.

Disadvantages1 .2.

Temperatures much in excess of 550 OF require special refractory mineral ormetallic fabrics that are still in the development stage and can be very expensive.Certain dusts may require fabric treatments to reduce dust seeping or, in othercases, assist in the removal of th e collected dust.

18


27/64

3. Concentrations of some dusts in th e collector may represent a fire or explosionhazard if a spark or flame is admitted by accident. Fabrics can burn if readilyoxidizable dust is being collected.Relatively high maintenance requirements (bag replacement, etc.).Fabric l i fe may be shortened by elevated temperatures and in the presence of acidor alkaline particulate or gas constituents.Hygroscopic materials, condensation of moisture, or tarry adhesive componentsmay cause crusty caking or plugging of th e fabric or require special additives.Replacement of fabric may require respiratory protection for maintenance personnel.Medium pressure-drop requirements, typically in the range of 4 to 10 inches watercolumn.

4.5.6.7.8.

4.3.7 Electrostatic Precipitators (ESP)ESP's induce a charge on the particle in the gas stream that causes t h e particles to

accumulate on collector plates. Once collected on the plates, the particulates are knocked off andtransferred to a hopper. They are less sensitive to the size of the particles but very sensitive toaerosol density and electrical resistivity of the particle [81. Drift velocity of the particle is influenceby this resistivity. The overall efficiency will experience a decrease if there is a low drift velocitydue to a high resistivity.

The operation of an ESP consists of forcing the particle through a corona to give them anelectric charge 131. A corona is an action in which the voltage applied to the electrodes cause thegas between the electrodes to break down electrically. Then an electric field, caused by highvoltage electrodes, force the particle to the collector plates. There are five common type of ESP's:1 I plate-wire, 2.) lat-plate, 3.) ubular, 4.) wet, and 5.) wo-stage.

In plate-wire ESP's, the gas flows between parallel plates of sheet metal and high voltageelectrodes, passing each wire in sequence as it flows through the unit 131. The units may be tall,however, they also allow many flow lanes to operate and are able to handle large volumes ofgasses. The electrodes are commonly given a negative polarity because a negative coronasupports a higher voltage than a positive corona before sparking. A charging zone is established byth e ions, generated in the corona, following electric field lines from th e wires to th e collectingplates.

Flat-plate ESPsoperate on the same principles as plate-wire ESPs [31. The difference isthat they use flat plates instead of wires. They are able to increase the average electric field,however, they are not able to generate coronas. Therefore, the coronas are generated usingelectrodes placed ahead of and sometimes behind the flat plate collecting zones.

Tubular ESPs have the electrodes running along the axis of th e tube 171. The tubes can beformed as circular, square, or hexagonal honeycombs, with the gas flowing either upward ordownward. The high voltage electrodes operate at one voltage for the entire length of th e tubeand the current varies along length as the particulates are removed from th e system.

Wet ESPs are any of th e above configurations with wet walls instead of dry 131. Watermay be applied intermittently or continuously to wash the walls. The advantages of a wet ESP arethere are no back coronas or problems with reentrainment when knocking the particulates off thewall.

A two-stage ESP is a series device while those described above are parallel in nature [31.The discharge electrode precedes the collector electrodes, and in indoor applications is operated

19


28/64

with a positive polarity to limit ozone production. They are usually used for gas flows of 50,000cfm and less. Two-stage ESPs are considered a separate and unique device as compared to largehigh gas volume single stage ESPs.

The design procedure and equations for an ESP can be found in Buonicore and Davis, AirPollution Enaineerinn Manual, and Cooper and Alley, Air Pollution Control A Desian ADDrOaCh.

The advantages and disadvantages of ESPs are listed below [31.Advantages1.2. Dry collection and disposal.3. Low pressure drop.4.5. Relatively low operating costs.6.7.8.

Extremely high particulate collection efficiencies can be attained.

Designed for continuous operation with minimum maintenance requirements.Capable of operation under high pressure (to 150 psi) or vacuum conditions.Capable of operation a t high temperatures (to 1300 O F ) .Relatively large gas flow rates can be effectively handled.

Disadvantages1. High capital cost.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.

Very sensitive to fluctuations in gas stream conditions ( flow rates, temperatures,particulate and gas composition and particulate loadings).Certain particulates are difficult to collect due to extremely high or low resistivitycharacteristics.Relatively large space requirements for installation.Explosion hazard when treating combustible gases and/or collecting combustibleparticulates.Special precautions required to safeguard personnel from the high voltage.Ozone is produced by the negatively charged electrode during gas ionization.Relatively sophisticated maintenance personnel required.

4.3.8 Wet ScrubbersWet scrubbers remove particulates from a gas stream by trapping th e particles in liquid

droplets and then separating the droplets from the gas stream 131. They can be used for thefollowing conditions: 1 I contaminant cannot be removed easily in a dry form, 2.) oluble gases arepresent, 3.) soluble or wettable particulates are present, 4.) contaminant will undergo somesubsequent wet process, 5.) pollution control equipment must be compact, 6.) contaminants moresafely handled wet than dry. The particulates are captured in the liquid droplets by one of thefollowing mechanisms: impaction, interception, and diffusion.

The goal of the scrubber is to cause the particle to become trapped in a water droplet andthen be removed from the gas stream [31. The size of the particle removed is determined by thesize of the liquid droplets. The smaller particles will be trapped in the smaller droplets. If thedroplets are densely packed, there will be higher probability of capturing the particles. Thescrubber must be designed properly to ensure that the droplets are densely packed with the properdroplet sizes. A successful scrubber will be able to create and control droplet dispersioneffectively. Commonly, there are five types of wet scrubbers in use: 1 I venturi, 2.)mechanicallyaided, 3.) pump aided, 4.) wetted filter type, and 5.) tray or sieve.

20


29/64

Venturi scrubbers consist of a converging section, throat, and diverging section 131. Thescrubbing liquid can be injected in a variety of ways including at the throat zone, at the gas inlet,and upward against th e gas flow. They are usually considered to be a high energy particulatecontrol device. They operate by converting th e static pressure to kinetic energy in order to shearthe scrubbing liquid into fine droplets.

Mechanically aided scrubbers create droplet dispersion by the use of a whirling mechanicaldevice (usually a fan wheel or disk) 131. The scrubbing liquid is injected into the mechanical deviceand mechanical energy is added to the system to break th e liquid into fine droplets. Typically, thescrubber itself uses lower fan energy but the collection energy comes from a supplemental, deviceequipment. Therefore, the entire system would have to be considered in deciding the energyrequirements.

Pump aided scrubbers introduce the liquid in a variety of ways including countercurrent tothe gas, in the same direction as th e gas, and at an angle [31. They use atomized sprays to controlthe dispersion of the droplets. The energy input comes from the pressurized liquid stream and theyare considered more efficient than fan aided scrubbers. Some different types of pump aidedscrubbers are spray chambers, cyclone spray chambers, and orifice scrubbers 141.

Wetted filter scrubbers force the liquid and gas to go through small openings where afil tration process occurs [31. The particulates temporarily stick to the filter. These type scrubbersare best suited for low particulate loadings.

Tray or sieve scrubbers accelerate the gas stream through small orifices on the tray [31.The kinetic energy is used to create a froth in the liquid and the particulate is injected into the liquidstream.

Once again, design equations can be found in Buonicore and Davis, Air PollutionEnaineerina Manual; and Cooper and Alley, Air Pollution Control A Desian Amroach.

The following are the advantages and disadvantages of wet scrubbers 131.

Advantages1. No secondary dust sources.2. Relatively small space requirements.3.4.5.6.7 .

Abilities to collect gases as well as particulates.Ability to handle high-temperature, high-humidity gas streams.Low capital cost (if wastewater treatment system is not required).For some processes, the gas stream is already at high pressures (so pressure dropconsiderations may not be significant).Ability to achieve high collection efficiencies on fine particulates (however, at theexpense of pressure drop).

Disadvantages1.2. Product is collected wet.3.4.5.

May create water disposal problem.Corrosion problems are more severe than with dry systems.Steam plume opacity and/or droplet entrainment may be objectionable.Pressure drop and horsepower requirements may be high.

21


30/64

6.7. Relatively high maintenance costs.Solids build up a t the wet-dry interface may be a problem.

5.0 FIELD INFORMATION ON POTENTIAL AIR EMISSIONS OF HAP'S FROM IRON AND STEELFOUNDRY BINDERS AND OTHER CHEMICALS

Potential air emissions of HAP'S from binders and other chemicals used in iron and steelfoundries were assessed from information obtained from the technical literature, suppliers, MSDS's,foundry contacts, and from AFS educational workshops.

5.1 SUPPLIER CONTACTSSuppliers of chemicals to foundries were contacted by form letter and asked to submitinformation on binder chemical emissions. Phone calls to four major binder manufacturers also

yielded applicable information. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) were obtained from thesemanufacturers. One supplier provided information by binder type and process, while anotherprovided information wi th only by binder type. Two other suppliers did not respond. Several ironfoundries were also contacted for information but only a few responded.

5.2 WORKSHOPSOne of the investigators attended an AFS workshop on coremaking a t the AFS training

center in Chicago in April, 1992. The workshop provided valuable information from the instructorsand attendees. Notes taken from the school were used to make a chart with several differentbinders and their emissions. Much of this information was included in the binder processdescriptions discussed above.

5.3 FOUNDRY VISITSVisits have been made to six major foundries in Alabama to discuss current process

information and extent of data available on air emissions of hazardous air pollutants fromcoremaking, pouring, and shakeout operations.6.0 OTHER ACTIVITIES

6.1 USEPA COORDINATIONSeveral trips have been made to Durham, NC to coordinate activities with USEPA's Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards. James H. Maysilles, the EPA Project Officer, is ourdesignated contact for the project. The EPA contractor for developing the Background InformationDocument is Research Triangle Institute, also in Durham.

6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE DWELOPMENTA questionnaire was developed to help foundries t o begin to assess air emission potentials

for the different processes. Worksheets were prepared for scrap pretreatment, melt furnace, coreroom, molding, pouring, shakeout, and sand reclaiming. The questionnaire was tested on severalfoundries in Alabama, but contact wi th USEPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standardsindicated that their screening information request (the "short form"), and maximum achievablecontrol technology (MACT) standards development information request (the "long form" I , were to

22


31/64

be issued shortly. To prevent confusion between the documents, we suspended work on ourversion and concentrated on coordinating our efforts with the USEPA in developing thequestionnaire and in helping the foundryman understand and fill out the required forms.

6.3 PAPERS AND PRESENTATIONSThe following presentations have been made in conjunction with this project:

Jim Maysilles and Marvin D. McKinley, "Filling out EPA's Air Toxics Request Form", Proceedings,American Foundrymen's Society 5th Annual Environmental Affairs Conference, Dearborn, MI,1992.Marvin D. McKinley, "EPA's Information Request for Hazardous Air Pollutants", CMI Course No. 8-207-Environmental Paperwork (32-931, Des Plaines, IL, November 1992.Marvin D. McKinley, lrvin A. Jefcoat, William J. Herz, and Chris Frederick, "Air Emissions fromFoundries: A Survey of Currently Available Information from the Literature, Suppliers, andFoundrymen", Presented a t the 97th Casting Congress & CASTEXPO '93, Chicago, IL, April, 1993.Paper has been accepted for publication in AFS Transactions.William J. Herz, "Filling out EPA's Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) Information Request Form"Alabama Cast Metals Association Conference, Joe Wheeler State Park, Alabama, August 28, 19927.0 CONCLUSIONS

The data in the literature on organic HAP emissions are of two types: (11 identification ofchemical types and their concentrations in the workplace needed for worker health and safety, and(2) emissions during pouring and cooling. There are no emission data reported for shakeout. Thepouring and cooling emissions were made for a single type of casting using the same metal-to-sandratio and gray iron. Most data were reported either as concentrations in the gas or in milligrams ofHAP per gram of binder resin. Emission factors were calculated from the literature data in terms oftons emission per ton of resin or per ton of metal poured for 16 binder systems from pouring andcooling, but much of the data were taken a long time ago and do not reflect improvements inbinders or current usage levels. Even though some of the data may be out of date, they are theonly published data available. It is clear that many small and medium-sized foundries will not haveemissions a t levels which wil l trigger MACT. The numbers presented here can be viewed as"worst-case" for purposes of estimating the impact of the CAAA on a particular foundry. Whilethese emission factors allow calculation of order of magnitude estimates of emissions, they do notgive the effect of parameters on the emission level. It is not clear that reporting th e data as eitherton HAP/ton of resin or ton HAP/ton of metal poured is valid if the sand-to-metal ratio changes.There are no data a t different metal temperatures, so that emission factors based on this literaturecannot be used for steel casting. Since shakeout may occur a t a different part of the plant, andbecause pyrolysis products may be trapped in the sand before shakeout, the effect of cooling timeon shakeout emissions is needed. It is apparent that additional research is needed to determine theimportant parameters that control HAP emissions.

While laboratory data on emissions are needed for parameter studies, these data must besupplemented by plant measurements for validation. A research program which includes bothlaboratory data and plant testing is needed.

Treatment technologies currently available for reducing HAP emissions were briefly coveredin this report. There is a conflict between control of concentration of HAP'S in the ambient air in

23


32/64

the foundry for worker health and safety and the effective collection and treatment of emissions toth e air. For worker health and safety, a large volume of air is normally pulled through th e plant.This large volume of air makes concentrations low and amount of gas to be treated high, which isdetrimental to gas treatment for HAP emission control. It appears that most small (


33/64

BIBLIOGRAPHY1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.12.

American Foundrymen's Society and Casting Industry Suppliers Association, Form R:Reporting of Binder Chemicals Used in Foundries", 1992.Archibald, J., Warren, D., "Productivity and ecology considerations of gas cured bindersystems," The World Foundry Congress. Dusseldorf, Germany. May 19-23, 1989.Buonicore, A. and Davis, W. (ed), Air Pollution Ennineerina Manual. Van NostrandReinhold, New York, 1992.Cooper, C. and Alley, F., Air Pollution Control A Desinn Amroach. Waveland Press Inc.,Illinois, 1986.Emory, M., Goodman, P., James, R., and Scott, W., "Nitrogen containing compounds infoundry mold emissions," Industrial Hvaiene Association Journal. vol 39, July 1978, pp527-533.Euvrard, Roy and Jackson, Barry, "Case Study: Air Audit a t a Medium Size Gray IronFoundry", Proceedinas, American Foundrvmen's Societv Environmental Affairs Conference,Dearborn, Michigan, August, 1992.Perry, R., Green, D. and Maloney, J. (eds), Perrv's Chemical Enaineerina Handbook. 6thed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1984.Purcell, R., and Shareef, G., Handbook of Control Technoloaies for Hazardous AirPollutants. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York, 1986.Radian Corporation, "Final Report: Control Techniques For Volatile Organic Emissions FromStationary Sources," Radian DCN 77-200-1 87-23-08, EPA Contract No. 68-02-2608,Task12 and 23, Texas, 1978.

Scott, W., Bates, C., and James, R., "Chemical Emissions from Foundry Molds," AFSTransactions. vol 85, 1977, pp 203-208.Stern, A., Air Pollution. 3rd ed., vol IV, Academic Press, New York, 1977.Treybal, R., Mass Transfer Otierations. 3rd ed., McGraw- Hill, New York, 1987.

25


34/64

APPENDIX

VENDORS OF AIR EMISSION CONTROL EQUIPMENT

26


35/64

VENDORS:Listed under the same headings as found in the Thomas Register of American Manufacturers,82nd

Edition, Thomas Publishing Co., New York, 1992ABSORBERS: GAS1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.1 1 .12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.

Analytichem International Inc.--Hatbor City, CAAdsorbents & Dessicants Cop. of America--Los Angeles, CADivesified Vacuum Technology, Inc.--Colorado Springs, COUltrapure Systems Inc.--Colorado Springs, COMicrographic Technology, Inc.--Denver, COEntroleter, Inc.--New Haven, CTABB/ASEA Brown Boveri Inc.--Stamford, CTPatterson Process Equipment Div., Patterson Pump Co.-- Toccoa, GAFlex-Kleen Corporation--Chicago, ILTrema North America Inc.--Reisterstown, MDSphinx Adsotbents Inc.--Springfield, MAMonroe Environmental Corp.--Monroe, MIlroquis Industries Inc.--Muskegon, MIMissouri Boiler & Tank Co.--St. Louis, MOSigri Corporation--Bedminster, NJRaySolv Inc.--Bound Brook, NJAdvanced Industrial Technology Corp.--Lodi, NJAmbient Engineering Inc.--Matawan, NJAllied Group--Mendham, NJHydronics Engineering Corp,--Midland Park, NJYork, Otto H., Co. Inc.--Parsippany, NJErgenics Inc.--Ringwood, NJCroll-Reynolds Co. Inc.--Westfield, NJ (908-232-4200)Buffalo Forge Co., Machine Tool Div.--Buffalo, NYClean Gas Systems Inc.--Farmingdale, NY (516-756-2474 xt.91Ducaon Environmental Systems--Farmingdale, NYEmtrol Corp.--Hauppauge, NY (51 -582-9700)Zelcron Industries Inc. C/O Ducon Environmental Systems--Melville, NY (800-394-4990)

Chemipulp/Jenssen Div.--Watertown, NYHarrison Plastic Systems--Aurora, OHMidwest Filtration Co.--Hamilton, OHNutter Engineering Div., Patterson-Kelley--Tulsa,OKAir Products & Chemicals--Allentown, PAGE Company, GE Environmental Services--Lebanon, PACTC Industrial Servics, 1nc.--Memphis, TNBS & B Engineering Co., Inc.--Houston, TXErshings, Inc.--Belligham, WA

TOWERS: ABSORPTION1.2. Monroe Environmental Cop--Monroe, MI3.4. Anel industries, Inc.--Winona, MI

Ecodyne Cooling Tower Services--Santa Rosa, CADual1 Div. Met-Pro Corporation--Owosso, MI

27


36/64

5.6.7.8.9.10.1 1 .12.13.14.15.16.17.18.

Pullman Power Products Cop--Kansas City, MOMissouri Boiler & Tank Co.--St. Louis, MOSigri Corporation--Bedminster,NJNorth American Pollution Control Systems Inc.--Linden, NJAdvanced Industrial Techno ogy Corp. --Lodi, NJAmbient Engineering, Inc.--Matawan, NJHydronics Engineering Corp.--Midland Park, NJBelco Technologies Cop--Parisppany, NJYork, Otto H., Co., Inc.--Parisppany, NJCroll-Reynolds Co., Inc.--Westfield, NJ (908-232-4200)Mixing Equipment Co., Inc.--Rochester, NYCorflex International Inc.--Warren, OHSentinel Process Systems Inc.--Hatboro, PASmith Industries, Inc.--Houston, TX

(800-752-0237)

TOWERS: PACKED1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.

Jaeger Aerospace Engineering--Costa Mesa, CABohn Fiberglass Industries, Inc.--Louisville, KYFisher-Klosterman,Inc.--Lou sville, KYVendome Copper & Brass Works, Inc.--Louisville, KYTrema North America, Inc.--Registerstown, MD (800-833-2925)Process Systems International, Inc.--Westborough, MAMonroe Environmental Cow.--Monroe, MIDual1 Div. Met-Pro Corporation--Owosso, MIViron Intenational--Owosso, MIHydro Group Inc.--Bridgewater, NJDelta Cooling Towers, Inc.--Fairfield, NJAdvanced Industrial Technology 1nc.--Lodi, NJAmbient Engineering, Inc.--Matawan, NJHydronics Engineering Corp.--Midland Park, NJYork, Otto H., Co., Inc.--Parisppany, NJResearch-Cottrell Companies--Somerville, NJ (908-685-4000)Croll-Reynolds Co., Inc.--Westfield, NJ (908-232-4200)Beltran Associates, Inc.--Brooklyn, NY (71 -338-331)

Clean Gas Systems Inc.--Farmingdale, NYDucon Environmental Systems--Farmingdale, NYZelcron Industries Inc. C/O Ducon Environmental SystemsDiv.--Melville, NY (800-394-4990)Swemco, Inc.--New York, NYFabrication Engineering Service Company, Inc.-Charlotte, NCAir Plastics, Inc.--Cincinnati, OHSentinel Process Systems, Inc.--Hatboro, PALuftrol, Inc--Warminster, PAChemco Engineering Inc.--Belton, TXSmith Industries, Inc.--Houston, TXECO Equipment FEP Inc.--PQ, Anjou, Canada

28


37/64

SCRUBBERS: AIR1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.38.39.40.41.42.43.44.45.46.

Zurn Industries Inc., Air Systems Div. Air Quality ControlProducts-Clarage Fans-- Birmingham, AL (205-853-41 12)Beco Corporation-- Benton, ARTigg Cop.-- Heber Springs, AR (800-925-0011)Advance Fiberglass, Inc.-- Little Rock, AR (800-342-7367)Jaeger Aerospace Engineering-- Costa Mesa, CAACME Fibergalss, Inc.-- Hayward, CA (510-538-3440)Air Chem Systems Inc.-- Huntington Beach, CACampbell, J.A., Company-- Long Beach, CA (310-424-0455)Joy Technologies, Inc., Western Precipitation Div.--Monrovia, CACalvert Environmental-- San Diego, CA (619-272-0050)Aqua Craft, Inc.-- San Francisco, CA (415-637-0322)Environmental Corrections, Inc.-- Sun Valley, CATFI International-- Commerce City, COAir Sentry, Inc.-- Denver, CO (800-878-7897)lnterel Corp.-- Englewood, CO (303-773-0753 Ext.300)Quality Plating Services, Inc.-- Bristol, CT (203-582-751 )M & S Engineering & Mfg. Co., 1nc.-- Broad Brook, CTEntoleter, Inc.-- New Haven, CT (203-787-3575)ABB/ASEA Brown Boveri, Inc.-- Stamford, CT (800-626-4999)Industrial Plastic Systems, Inc.-- Lakeland, FL (813Andersen 2000, Inc.-- Peachtree City, GA (800-241 5424)Savage Industries-- Tucker, GAAmerex, Inc.-- Woodstock, GA (404-928-0970)Advanced Air Technology, Inc.-- Arlington Heights, IL (708-Bad Engineering Inc.-- Arlington Heights, ILFlex-Kleen Corporation-- Chicago, IL (312-648-5300)Bisco Enterprise-- Franklin Park, IL (708-671 4466)Nokorrode, 1nc.-- Mundelein, ILQuad Environmental Technologies Cop.-- Northbrook, ILARI Technologies, Inc.-- Palatine, IL (708-359-7810)Amquip Inc.-- Hammond, INSnodgrass, Brad, Inc.-- Indianapolis, INAAFBnydergeneral Corp.-- Louisville, KY (502-637-0011)Fisher-Klosterman, Inc.-- Louisville, KY (502-776-1505)Vanaire-- Louisville, KY (502-491 3553)Precision Industries Inc.-- Baton Rouge, LAEnvironmental Elements Corp.-- Baltimore, MDDanzer Metal Works Co., The-- Hagerstown, MDTrema North America, Inc.-- Reisterstown, M D (800-833-2925)Telpac Company, Ltd.-- Boston, MA (617-523-0948)Koby Incorporated-- Marlboro, MA (508-481 8348)Utilities Supply Co.-- Medford, MA (800-343-7555)Jet Air Technologies, A Div. of B & U Corp.-- Adrian, MI (517-263-0113)Clarkson Controls & Equipment Co.-- Detroit, MI (313-255-9110)Uni-Wash, Incorporated-- Harbor Springs, MI (616-347-5005 Ext.20)CMI-Schneible-- Holly, MI (313-634-8211)

-646-8551

394-9553 Ext.23)

29


38/64

47.48.49.50.51.52.53.54.55.56.57.58.59.60.61.62.63.64.65.66.67.68.69.70.71.72.73.74.75.76.77.78.79.80.81.82.83.84.85.86.87.88.89.90.91.92.93.94.95.96.

Centri-Spray Corp.-- Livonia, MIHaden Management Corp.-- Madison Heights, MIHaden Schweitzer Cow.-- Madison Heights, MIMonroe Environmental Corp.-- Monroe, MI (800-922-7707)Monroe Welding & Engineering Co.-- Monroe, MIDual1 Div. Met-Pro Corporation-- Owosso, MITri-Mer Corp.-- Owosso, MI (517-723-7838 Ext.77)Viron International-- Owosso, MI (517-723-8255 Ext.224)Beckert & Hiester Inc.-- Saginaw, MI (800-332-4031 Ext.12)CIL Incineration Systems, Inc.-- Blaine, MNAtlas Incinerators, Inc.-- Minneapolis, MNAnel Industries, Inc.-- Winona, MSMonsanto Enviro-Chem Systems Inc.-- St. Louis, MOWillow Springs Mfg., Ltd.-- Willow Springs, MO (417-469-2792)Bio Plex Environmental Inc.-- Englewood Cliffs, NJ (800-947-0025)Eastern Cyclone Industries, Inc.-- Fairfield, NJDR Technology, Inc.-- Freehold, NJEnvironmental Dynamics Corp.-- Kresson, NJ (609-768-11OO)]North American Pollution Control Systems, Inc.-- Linden, NJ (800-752-0237)Advanced Industrial Technology Corp.-- Lodi, NJAmbient Engineering Inc.-- Matawan, NJ (908-566-6866)Hydronics Engineering Corp.-- Midland Park, NJBioclimatic, Inc.-- Moorestown, NJ (800-962-5594)Mikropul Environmental Systems-- Morris Plains, NJ (201 606-5900)Belco Technologies Gorp.-- Parsippany, NJSonic Environmental Systems-- Parsippany, NJ (201 -882-9288)York, Otto H., Co., Inc. (World Headquarters)-- Parsippany, NJResearch-Cottrell Companies-- Somerville, NJ (908-685-4000)Omni Coil, Inc.-- Southampton, NJOmni Fabricators Inc.-- Southampton, NJ (609-859-3900)Aer-X-Dust Corp.-- Tennent, NJAirpol, Inc.-- Teterboro, NJ (201-288-7070)Advanced Oxidation Systems, Inc.-- Wayne, NJ (201 -628-0309)Croll-Reynolds Co., Inc.-- Westfield, NJ (908-232-4200)C 0 H Norcarb Inc.-- Brewster, NYWard Automation Inc.-- Buffalo, NYClean Gas Systems Inc.-- Farmingdale, NY (516-756-2474 Ext.91)Ducon Environmental Sytems-- Farmingdale, NY (516-420-4900)Heat Systems Inc.-- Farmingdale, NY (800-645-9846)Emtrol Corp.-- Hauppauge, NY (516-582-9700)Zelcron Industries Inc. c/o Ducon Environmental SystemsDiv.-- Melville, NY (800-394-4990)Swemco, Inc.-- New York, NY (212-645-0440)KCH Services, Inc. Dept. N-- Forest City, NCHarrison Plastic Systems-- Aurora, OHCeilcote, Air Pollution Control Div. Master Builders Inc.--Berea, OH (216-243-0700)Air Plastics, Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHEffox, Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHKleinfeldt, R.F., Co., Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHAquatech Inc.-- Cleveland, OHSly W.W., Mfg. Co.-- leveland, OH (216-238-2000)

30


39/64

97.98.99.100.101.102.103.104.105.106.107.108.109.110.111.112.113.114.115.116.117.118.119.120.121.122.123.124.125.126.127.128.129.130.131.

Barnebey & Sutcliffe Corp.-- Columbus, OH (614-258-9501)R. L. Industries, Inc.-- Fairfield, OH (800-846-2735)Volk Environmental Technology-- Mansfield, OHVolk, Mike, Co., Inc.-- Mansfield, OHACDC 1nc.-- Milford, OH (513-248-1820)Vorti-Siv Div. of M M Industries, Inc.-- Salem, OHApacs, Inc.-- Sylvania, OHEcolotreat Process Equipment Cop.-- Toledo, OH (419-729-5443)U.S. Waste Control-- Ardmore, OK (800-546-2182)Custom Fiberglass Mfg.-- Oklahoma City, OKTech-Mark Inc./Enviro-Pak Div.-- Clackamas, ORKetema Inc., Schutte & Koerting Div.-- Bensalem, PACeco Filters, Inc.-- Conshohocken, PA (215-825-8585)C & E Plastics-- Georgetown, PAGE Company, GE Environmental Services, Inc.-- Lebanon, PAJones & Hunt, 1nc.-- Orwigsburg, PAPennsylvania Engineering Corp., Engineering Construction Div.-- Pittsburgh, PAWheelabrator Air Pollution Control-- Pittsburgh, PA (800-394-0992)Global Environmental Corp.-- Plumsteadville, PA (800-220-1533)Plastic Ducting Systems, Inc.-- Pottstown, PA (800-457-0405)E S T Cop.-- Quakertown, PA (215-538-7000)Luftrol, 1nc.-- Warminster, PAHansen Engineering, Inc.-- West Alexander, PA (412-484-7551Augusta Fiberglass, Inc.-- Blackville, SC (803-284-2246)Spartan Tanks, Inc--Spartanburg, SCABB Environmental Systems (Industrial), Knoxville, TNChemco Engineering, Inc.-- BeRon, TX (817-771 1966)CJM Custom Steel Fabrication Environmental Tech.-- Oenton,Dyna-Therm Cop.-- Houston, TX (713-444-9759)Winston Mfg. Corp.-- Longview, TXUnisorb Corp.-- South Houston, TX (713-943-3753)Centrifix Corp.-- Woodlands, TX (713-363-4868)Tri Dim Filter Corp.-- Louisa, VA (703-967-2600)GPI Corp.-- Schofield, WI (715-359-6123 Ext.25)Vaportek, Inc.-- Sussex, WI

TX (800-548-2182)

31


40/64

SCRUBBERS: FUME1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.38.39.40.41.42.43.44.45.46.47.48.49.50.51.

Tigg Corp.-- Heber Springs, AR (800-925-0011)Pardee Engineering-- Berkeley, CA (51 0-845-4516)Jaeger Aerospace Engineering-- Costa Mesa, CAGold Shield-- Fontana, CAACME Fibergalss, Inc.-- Hayward, CA (510-538-3440)Joy Technologies, Inc., Western Precipitation Div.--Monrovia, CAParamount Fabricators-- Rancho Cucamonga, CACalvert Environmental-- San Diego, CA (619-272-0050)Environmental Corrections, Inc.-- Sun Valley, CATFI International-- Commerce Ctty, COlnterel Corp.-- Englewood, CO (303-773-0753 Ext.300)M & S Engineering& Mfg. Co., Inc.-- Broad Brook, CTEntoleter, Inc.-- New Haven, CT (203-787-3575)Spatz Fiberglass Products, Inc.-- New Castle, DEIndustrial Plastic Systems, Inc.-- Lakeland, FL (813-646-8551)Daniel & Jones Sheet Metal, Inc.-- Tampa, FLAdvanced Air Technology, Inc.-- Arlington Heights, IL (708-394-9553 Ext.23)Brule, C.E. & E., Inc.-- Blue Island, IL (708-388-7900)Cyclone Blow Pipe Co.-- Chicago, ILFiberbasin, Inc.-- Chicago, IL (312-622-4343)Flex-Kleen Corporation-- Chicago, IL (312-648-5300)Nokorrode, Inc.-- Mundelein, ILARI Technologies, Inc.-- Palatine, IL (708-359-7810)Snodgrass, Brad, Inc.-- Indianapolis, INAAFSnydergeneral Corp.-- Louisville, KY (502-637-0011Vanaire-- Louisville, KY (502-491 3553)Precision Industries Inc.-- Baton Rouge, LAEnvironmental Elements Cop-- Baltimore, MDDanzer Metal Works Co., The-- Hagerstown, MDTrema North America, Inc.-- Reisterstown, MD (800-833-2925)Telpac Company, Ltd.-- Boston, MA (617-523-0948)IPF Inc.-- Canton, MAEuro-Matic Ltd. c/o Leomass Ltd.-- Leominster, MA (508-537-8274)Walbert Plastics, Inc.-- Lowell, MAUtilities Supply Co.-- Medford, MA (800-343-7555)Koch Process Systems, Inc.-- Westborough, MAJet Air Technologies, A Div. of B & U Cow.-- Adrian, MI (517-263-0113)Clarkson Controls & Equipment Co.-- Detroit, MI (313-255-9110)Savard Corporation-- Detroit, MI (313-931 6880)Haden Schweitzer Corp.-- Madison Heights, MIMonroe Environmental Co p- - Monroe, MI (800-922-7707)Dual1 Div. Met-Pro Corporation-- Owosso, MITri-Mer Cop-- Owosso, MI (51 7-723-7838 Ext.77)Viron International-- Owosso, MI (517-723-8255 Ext.224)Beckert & Hiester Inc.-- Saginaw, MI (800-332-4031 Ext.12)Air Engineering Co.-- Warren, MI (800-594-5110)CIL Incineration Systems, Inc.-- Blaine, MNAtlas Incinerators, Inc.-- Minneapolis, MNAnel Industries, Inc.-- Winona, MSLabconco Cop- - Kansas Clty, MO

32


41/64

52.53.54.55 .56.57.58.59.60.61.62.63.64.65.66.67.68.69.70.71.72.73.74.75.76.77.78.79.80.81.82.83.84.85.86.87.88.89.90.91.92.93.94.95.96.97.98.

Monsanto Enviro-Chem Systems Inc.-- St. Louis, MOPlastic Engineered Products, Inc.-- Branchburg, NJ (908-534-6111)Environmental Dynamics Corp.-- Kresson, NJ (609-768-11OO)]North American Pollution Control Systems, Inc.-- Linden, NJ (800-752-0237)Advanced Industrial Technology Corp.-- Lodi, NJAmbient Engineering Inc.-- Matawan, NJ (908-566-6866)Hydronics Engineering Corp.-- Midland Park, NJFRP Corp.-- Millburn, NJBioclimatic, Inc.-- Moorestown, NJ (800-962-5594)Mikropul Environmental Systems-- Morris Plains, NJ (201 606-5900)Belco Technologies Corp.-- Parsippany, NJSonic Environmental Systems-- Parsippany, NJ (201 882-9288)York, Otto H., Co., Inc. (World Headquarters)-- Parsippany,Hollow Shapes, Inc.-- Pompton Plains, NJOmni Coil, Inc.-- Southampton, NJOmni Fabricators Inc.-- Southampton, NJ (609-859-3900)Aer-X-Dust Corp.-- Tennent, NJAirpol, Inc.-- Teterboro, NJ (201-288-7070)Plastinetics Inc.-- Towaco, NJ (800-627-7473)Advanced Oxidation Systems, Inc.-- Wayne, NJ (201 628-0309)Croll-Reynolds Co., 1nc.-- Westfield, NJ (908-232-4200)C 0 H Norcarb Inc.-- Brewster, NYBeitran Associates, Inc.-- Brooklyn, NY (718-338-3311)Cortech Plastics Inc.-- Buffalo, NYBrucar Process Systems, 1nc.-- Deer Park, NYPrimary Plastics Inc.-- Endwell, NYClean Gas Systems Inc.-- Farmingdale, NY (516-756-2474 Ext.91)Ducon Environmental Sytems-- Farmingdale, NY (516-420-4900)Heat Systems 1nc.-- Farmingdale, NY (800-645-9846)Emtrol Corp.-- Hauppauge, NY (51 6-582-9700)Leroy Plastics, Inc.-- Leroy, NY (716-768-8159)Descon International 1nc.-- Lindenhurst, NY (516-226-7766)Zelcron Industries Inc. c/o Ducon Environmental SystemsDiv.-- Melville, NY (800-394-4990)M.K. Plastics Corp.-- Mooers, NY (518-236-7949)Bayfield Enterprises Inc.-- New York, NY (212-684-3589)Swemco, Inc.-- New York, NY (212-645-0440)Burgess-Manning, Inc., Sub. of Nitram Energy, 1nc.--0rchard-Park, NYPKG Equipment Inc.-- Rochester, NY (716-436-4650)KCH Services, Inc. Dept. N-- Forest City, NCFiltajet Dust Control Dept. T-- Salisbury, NCKar-Del Plastics, Inc.-- Ashland, OHHarrison Plastic Systems-- Aurora, OHMagnum Plastics, Inc.-- Aurora, OH (216-562-9200)Ceilcote, Air Pollution Control Div. Master Builders Inc.--Berea, OH (216-243-0700)United States Manufacturers Resource of Pro-Fab Mfg. Inc.--Bedford, OH (216-232-3584)Interstate Plastics Div. of Westerman, Inc.-- Bremen, OHProtectoplas Co.-- Burton, OH

NJ (800-524-1543)

33


42/64

99.100.101.103.104.105.106.107.108.109.110.111.112.113.114.115.116.117.118.119.120.121.122.123.124.125.126.127.128.129.130.131.132.133.

Air Plastics, Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHEffox, Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHKleinfeldt, R.F., Co., Inc.-- Cincinnati, OHSly W.W., Mfg. Co.-- Cleveland, OH (216-238-2000)R. L. Industries, Inc.-- Fairfield, OH (800-846-2735)Harrison Machine & Plastics Corp.-- Hiram, OHUnited States Plastic Corp.-- Lima, OH (419-228-2242)Volk Environmental Technology-- Mansfield, OHVanguard Plastics-- Mantua, OHACDC Inc.-- Milford, OH (513-248-1820)Process Environmental Systems, Inc.-- North Ridgeville, OHVorti-Siv Div. of M M Industries, Inc.-- Salem, OHEcolotreat Process Equipment Corp.-- Toledo, OH (419-729-5443)Neundorfer Inc.-- Willoughby, OHKetema Inc., Schutte & Koerting Div.-- Bensalem, PACeco Filters, Inc.-- Conshohocken, PA (215-825-8585)C & E Plastics-- Georgetown, PAMet-Pro Corp. Systems Division-- Harleysville, PAGoodhart Sons, Inc.-- Lancaster, PA (717-656-2404)GE Company, GE Environmental Services, 1nc.-- Lebanon, PAKeystone Metal & Machine Co., Inc.-- Millersville, PA (717-464-2204)Beco Engineering Co.-- Oakmont,

waste management study of foundries

Documents