VOLUME 2

 

CONTENTS

D.1       RECOVERY PROCESSES REMAINING AFTER INITIAL SCREENING

D.2       DETAILED EMISSION RATE CALCULATIONS FOR AQIA (UNMITIGATED)

D.2.1         Electronics – Fluorescent Lamp Recovery

D.2.2         Glass

D.2.3         Organic Food Waste

D.2.4         Non-ferrous Metals

D.2.5         Paper

D.2.6         Plastics

D.2.7         Rubber Tyres

D.2.8         Wood

D.2.9         Fuel Combustion Emissions for Scenarios 2 and 3

D.2.10       Emission Rate Calculations for Other Sources

Annex 1     Emission Factors from USEPA AP-42 and Other International References (Scenario 1)

Annex 2     Calculated Emission Rates (Scenario 1)

Annex 3     Emission Factors from USEPA AP-42 and Other International References (Scenario 2)

Annex 4     Calculated Emission Rates (Scenario 2)

Annex 5     Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References – Scenario 3

Annex 6     Calculated Emission Rate – Scenario 3

Annex 7     Total Energy Consumption Calculations

Annex 8     Comparison Table of Relevant BPMs and PM to Pollutant Ratio Calculations

Annex 9     Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References – Scenario 1

Annex 10   Calculated Emission Rate (Heavy Metals and Non-criteria Pollutants) – Scenario 1

Annex 11   Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References –Scenario 2

Annex 12   Calculated Emission Rate (Heavy Metals and Non-criteria Pollutants) – Scenario 2

Annex 13   References

Annex A    Recovery Efficiency of the Assessed Processes

D.3       DETAILED EMISSION RATE CALCULATIONS FOR AQIA SCENARIO 2 (MITIGATED)

D.3.1         Emission Factors from AP-42 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (without Demagging of Aluminium)

D.3.2         Calculated Emission Rates for Scenario 2 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (without Demagging of Aluminium)

D.3.3         Controlled Emission Rates of the Gaseous Heavy Metal and Toxic Air Pollutants for Scenario 2 (Mitigated)

D.3.4         Emission Factors from AP-42 (Non-Ferrous Metal) for Mitigated Scenario 2 (Uncontrolled Dust Emission Factors for Secondary Lead and Aluminium Recovery)

D.3.5         Calculated Emission Rates for Mitigated Scenario 2 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (Without Demagging Process, with SO2 Control Emission and Provided With up to 99.9% Dust Control Efficiency)

Annex 1     Uncontrolled Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References –Scenario 2 (Mitigated)

Annex 2     Calculated Emission Rate (Heavy Metals and Non-criteria Pollutants) – Scenario 2 with 99.9% Dust Control Efficiency

D.4       AQIA RESULTS (UNMITIGATED)

D.5       AQIA RESULTS FOR SCENARIO 2 (MITIGATED)

D.6       DUST IMPACT FROM ECOPARK FOR SCENARIOS 2 AND 3

D.7       CONTOUR PLOTS OF THE MAJOR  POLLUTANTS FOR MITIGATED SCENARIO 2

D.8       CONTOUR PLOTS OF THE MAJOR POLLUTANTS FOR SCENARIO 3

 

 


Appendix D.1

Recovery Processes Remaining

After Initial Screening

 


Material Type

Process

Potential Emissions

Available Control Equipment/ Measures

Level of impact

Included in Assessment ?

Batteries

Lead-acid

Mechanical / Physical separation of battery into separate components

Fugitive dust from the dust attached on the battery surface (not from the components)

·   Good site practice to minimise fugitive dust emission

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

Zinc-carbon / Alkaline

Shredding, Electromagnetic separation & neutralization (of electrolyte) – will be within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from discharge point of shredded material

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

Lithium

Shredding and Electromagnetic/ Physical separation/ Hydrosaline deactivation – will be within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from discharge point of shredded material

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

NiCd/ NiMH/ Li ion

Cadmium (13-22%); Cobalt (0.5-2%); Lithium Hydroxide (0-4%); Nickel (20-32%); Potassium Hydroxide (0-4%) and Sodium Hydroxide (0-4%)6; Others (assume polymers, metals; 32%)

Fugitive dust from discharge point of shredded material

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

Electronics

CRT Recovery

Separation and Testing

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

Shredding, electromagnetic and electrostatic sorting  – will be within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from discharge point of shredded material

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

Computer/ Electronics Recovery

Separation and Testing

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

Shredding and Separation (Electromagnetic and electrostatic) – will be within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from discharge point of shredded material

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

White Goods Dismantling

Separation and Testing

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

Manual Dismantling and Separation

CFC emitted from old type air conditioner and refrigerator

·   Good site practice to remove residual CFC before dismantling.  As the use of CFC for refrigerant is fading out, the white good with CFC will become less in the future.

Negligible

No

Fluorescent Lamp Recovery

Crush-and-Sieve/ Volatization/ Cyclone / magnetic separation in the enclosed mercury recovery machine for fluorescent lamp

Fugitive dust from any opening of the recovery machine

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

Negligible

No

Hg from the mercury recovery machine for fluorescent lamp

·   Cyclones, dust filter and carbon filter package as specified in the technical information of the mercury recovery machine for fluorescent lamp.

TBD

Yes

Glass

 

Manual/ Automated Sorting

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Crusher  – to reduce the glass to smaller size to improve the melting efficiency of glass will be within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from discharge of glass particles to the melting furnace

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

 

Melting furnace/ Moulding/ Forming and Finishing

Fugitive dust and VOC

·   Baghouse with 99% PM control efficiency

·   VOC control equipment such as condensation and/or activated carbon adsorption with 90% control efficiency

TBD

Yes

 

Fuel Combustion

PM, SO2, NO2, CO & VOC

·   Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with 0.005% by weight of sulphur

TBD

Yes

Organic Food Waste

In-vessel Composting

Handling/ delivery of organic food waste

Odour

·   All the containers should be covered

·   The handling and delivery area should be enclosed and equipped with odour control device such as bio filter or activated carbon filter to remove odour before discharge to the atmosphere. 

·   Negative pressure should be provided for the enclosed space to avoid any un-controlled odour emit to the atmosphere

Negligible

No

 

Curing : Organic waste will be placed in a sealed container with heat and moisture controlled.  Air is circulated through out the material to maintain the necessary porosity for even maturing.  When the air temperature rises above the optimal operating range, air is drawn off through the exhaust passes through bio-filter to remove odour.

Odour

·   Bio filter or activated carbon filter to remove odour before discharge to the atmosphere

Negligible

No

 

Fuel combustion

PM, SO2, NO2, CO & VOC

·   Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with 0.005% by weight of sulphur

TBD

Yes

Ferrous Metals

 

Sorting

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Baling

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Mechanical shearing and shredding

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

Non-ferrous Metals

 

Sorting – materials are sorted by visual inspection into various grades according to industry specifications

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Baling

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Processing (sweating, smelting, refining)

PM, SO2, heavy metals, halogens, TAP, Dioxin

·   Baghouse or ECP with 99.9% dust control efficiency, wet-scrubber with 80% SO2 removal efficiency

TBD

Yes

 

Fuel combustion

PM, SO2, NO2, CO & VOC

·   Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with 0.005% by weight of sulphur

TBD

Yes

Paper

 

Automated sorting via conveyors, optical sensors and chutes

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Baling

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Pulping (e.g. boiler and dryer) / Cleaning/ De-inking/ Flotation – based on the reference document on Best Available Technique in the Pulp and Paper Industry published by European Commission in December 2001, VOC emission from pulping process are very small

VOC

Nil

Negligible

No

 

Bleaching – generally oxygen, ozone, peroxide and peracetic acid will be used in the bleaching process.  

(ref: Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry, EU Directive, Dec 2001)

NIL

·   Non-chlorine bleaching agents include oxygen, ozone, peroxide and peracetic aicd.

NIL

No

 

Fuel combustion

PM, SO2, NO2, CO & VOC

·   Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with 0.005% by weight of sulphur

TBD

Yes

Plastics

 

Sorting

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Crushing and Baling

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Clean plastic flakes

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Blending – dried flakes and pellets (virgin material)

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Moulding/ Extrusion by electric moulding machine and extruder

Fugitive dust and VOC from moulding machine and extruder

·   Localised collection hood at point of moulding and extrusion in the moulding machine and extruder with control devices

·   Baghouse with 99% PM control efficiency

·   VOC control equipment such as condensation and/or activated carbon adsorption with 90% control efficiency

TBD

Yes

 

 

odour from moulding machine and extruder

·   Bio filter or activated carbon filter to remove odour before discharge to the atmosphere with 90% control efficiency

Negligible

No

Textiles

 

Sorting

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Baling

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

Rubber Tyres

 

De-beading

Fugitive dust from the dust attached on the tyre surface

·   Good site practice to minimise fugitive dust emission

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   enclosed facility with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

 

Shredding – enclosed mechanical shredding

Fugitive dust from discharge of shredded rubber

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

 

Mechanical Crumbing / Cryogenic Processing within the enclosed system

Fugitive dust from grinded fine rubber particles

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

TBD

Yes

 

Magnetic separation and air separator within the enclosed system/ Sieving

Fugitive dust attached on the tyre surface from sieving

·   Good site practice to minimise fugitive dust emission

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with dust control system

Negligible

No

 

Re-treading – within the enclosed system and electric heating will be used for vulcanisation/ autoclave

Fugitive dust, VOC and odour emissions are localised at the re-treading machine

·   To connect a collection system venting the fugitive dust and VOC from the enclosed re-treading machine to the control equipment before removing the re-treaded tyres out from the machine.

·   Localised collection hood with control devices (e.g. baghouse, with 99% dust control efficiency and activated carbon filter or bio-filter with 90% control efficiency to control odour and VOC or wet scrubber to control both the fugitive dust and VOC emissions)

·   VOC control equipment such as condensation and/or activated carbon adsorption with 90% control efficiency

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with control system

Negligible

No

Wood

 

Dismantling / Sorting

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Hydraulic compaction/ Mechanical shearing

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Pallet refurbishment

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Process – chipping within the enclosed machine

Fugitive dust from the discharge of wood chips

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   Enclosed system with active air extraction system with control system

Negligible

No

 

Bleaching – generally oxygen, ozone, peroxide and peracetic acid will be used in the bleaching process.  

(ref: Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Pulp and Paper Industry, EU Directive, Dec 2001)

NIL

·   Non-chlorine bleaching agents include oxygen, ozone, peroxide and peracetic aicd.

NIL

No

 

Process – magnetic separation

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Plastic Wood Composite (PWC) Manufacturing – plastic and wood chips will mix together and heat up by electric power.  PWC will then form by extrusion

Fugitive dust and VOC from the point of PWC extrusion from the extruder

·   Localised dust/ particles collection hood with dust control device (e.g. baghouse, with 99% control efficiency)

·   VOC control equipment such as condensation and/or activated carbon adsorption with 90% control efficiency

TBD

Yes

 

 

odour from the point of PWC extrusion from the extruder

·   Bio filter or activated carbon filter with 90% control efficiency to remove odour before discharge to the atmosphere

Negligible

No

 

Fuel combustion

PM, SO2, NO2, CO & VOC

·   Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) with 0.005% by weight of sulphur

TBD

Yes

Spent Copper Etchant

 

Electrolytic Process

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

Chemical Treatment Process

Nil

N/A

Nil

N/A

 

 

 


Appendix D.2

Detailed Emission Rate Calculations for AQIA

(Unmitigated)

 


D.2.1    Electronics – Fluorescent Lamp Recovery

 

Total throughput of fluorescent lamp : 25,100 tpa x 25% = 6,275 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 6,275 tpa

 

Emission rate calculation

 

Weight of fluorescent lamp: 120g (extract from http://www.elcfed.org/lighting_material.html)

 

Total buffered throughput of fluorescent lamp : 6,275 ton/year

 

= 6,275 x 106 g/year

= 6,275 x 106 / 120 tube / year

= 6,275 x 106 / 120 / (300 x 12) tube / hour (assuming 1 year = 300 days and 12 hours /day)

= 14,525 tube / hour

 

According to the technical data of the fluorescent lamp recovery machine, up to 5,000 tubes per hour can be processes.  Therefore, 3 machines are required to cater the total throughput of 6,275 ton/year assuming the industry operating 300 days a year and 12 hours a day.

 

The Hg stack emission from the process is 0.001 mg/m3 and the flow rate of stack is 2000 m3/h. Therefore, the emission rate for one machine is:

 

   0.001 mg/m3 x 2000 m3/h

= 0.001 x 10-3 g/m3 x 2000 / (60 x 60) m3/s

= 5.5556e-7 g/s per machine

 

Total emission rate for 3 machines are = 5.5556e-7 g/s x 3 = 1.6667e-6 g/s

 

The fugitive Hg emission from the process : 0.003 mg/m3 (average of 0.001-0.005 mg/m3)

Volume of plant-room : 300 m3 (100 m2 x 3m)

Flow : 3 air changes per hour

 

Therefore, the emission rate for one machine is:

 

   0.003 mg/m3 x 300 m3 x 3 /hour

= 0.003 x 10-3 g/m3 x 300 x 3 / (60 x 60) m3/s

= 2.5e-7 g/s per machine

Total emission rate for 3 machines are = 2.5e-7 g/s x 3    = 7.5e-7 g/s

 

Total Emission from the process                                             = 2.4167e-6 g/s

Assumed Stack Height                                                 = 6m above ground

Stack Diameter                                                                        = 250mm

Stack Temperature                                                                  = 23.5°C

Efflux Velocity                                                                          = 16.41m/s

 

Reference

 

1.      MRT System AB, Technical Performance Data


D.2.2    Glass

 

Total throughput of glass : 42,680 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 88%

Total material produced from the process : 37,387 tpa

 

a. from fuel combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

 

Energy consumption of glass : 16 GJ/ton = 15.1651 MMBtu/ton (refer to Annex 7 for detailed calculations)

 

Unit

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

lb/ 1000 gal

2

0.785^

24

5

0.252

lb/ MMBtu*

0.0143

0.0056

0.1714

0.0357

0.0018

kg/ MMBtu

0.0065

0.0025

0.0778

0.0162

0.0008

kg/ Mg

0.0983

0.0386

1.1792

0.2457

0.0124

g/s

0.2835

0.1113

3.4018

0.7087

0.0357

 

b. from process (electric melting furnace)

 

Unit

PM

VOC

kg/ Mg

0.007@

0.1

g/s

0.0202@

0.0288#

 

c. from process (forming and finishing)

 

Unit

PM

VOC

kg/ Mg

(negligible)

4.4

g/s

-

1.2693#

^ 157 x 0.005% by weight of sulphur = 0.785 lb / 1000 gal

* lb/ 1000 gal / 140 = lb/ MMBtu

@ controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

# assumed all VOC are odorous and controlled emission by activated carbon filter with 90% control efficiency

 

References

 

1.      Fuel consumption 16 GJ/ton from EP Indicator & Benchmark Shortlist Document - Glass (Container), remas (http://remas.ewindows.eu.org)

 

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

 

3.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 11.15 Glass Manufacturing

 


D.2.3    Organic Food Waste

 

Total throughput of food : 19,750 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 19,750 tpa

 

Emission rate calculation

 

from fuel combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

 

Energy consumption of organic food waste : 3.1353 MMBtu/ton (refer to Annex 7 for detailed calculations)

 

Unit

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

lb/ 1000 gal

2

0.785^

24

5

0.252

lb/ MMBtu*

0.0143

0.0056

0.1714

0.0357

0.0018

kg/ MMBtu

0.0065

0.0025

0.0778

0.0162

0.0008

kg/ Mg

0.0203

0.0080

0.2438

0.0508

0.0026

g/s

0.0310

0.0122

0.3715

0.0774

0.0039

^ 157 x 0.005% by weight of sulphur = 0.785 lb / 1000 gal

* lb/ 1000 gal / 140 = lb/ MMBtu

 

References

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

 

 

D.2.4    Non-Ferrous Metals

 

Assumed Material Throughput

 

Assessment Scenario

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Total throughput (tpa)

10,000

2,500

Nil

Recovery efficiency

100%

100%

Nil

Total material produced from the process (tpa)

10,000

2,500

Nil

 

Energy Consumptions

 

Non-Ferrous Metal

Energy Consumption (MMBtu/ton)

Al

11.3738

Pb

0.7483

Cu

7.0842

Zn

2.8999

 

Detailed calculations of energy consumptions for non-ferrous metal recovery are attached in Annex 7 of this Appendix.

 


Emission Factors from AP-42 (Non-Ferrous Metal)

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Factor (kg/ Mg material produced)

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

Lead

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0048

0.0019

0.0582

0.0121

0.0006

Sweating

35

ND

-

-

-

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

1.12a

40 a

-

-

-

Reverberatory Smelting

0.5 a

40 a

-

-

-

Blast Smelting-Cupola

1.12 a

27 a

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

1.8

-

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

12.1

-

-

-

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aluminium

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0737

0.0289

0.8844

0.1843

0.0093

Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse

1.65

-

-

-

-

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse

0.65

-

-

-

-

Demagging w/ baghouse

25

-

-

-

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copper

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0459

0.0180

0.5509

0.1148

0.0058

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

35

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.1

-

-

-

-

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

150

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.3

-

-

-

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zinc

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0188

0.0074

0.2255

0.0470

0.0024

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

16

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.63

-

-

-

-

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

44.5

-

-

-

-

Kettle pot

0.05

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0025

-

-

-

-

Muffle distillation

22.5

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.18

-

-

-

-

Retort Reduction

23.5

-

-

-

-

a maximum emission factors (controlled) of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.

 

For conservative approach, the maximum emission rates (g/s) of different air pollutants were adopted in the assessment.  The following tables detail the selection of emission rates.

 

References

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.11 Secondary Lead Processing

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.8 Secondary Aluminium Operations

3.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.9 Secondary Copper Smelting

4.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.14 Secondary Zinc Processing

 


Calculated Emission Rates for Scenario 1 (Non-Ferrous Metal)

 

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Rate (g/s)

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

 

Lead

1.2453

30.8657

0.0449

0.0094

0.0005

Fuel Combustion

0.0037

0.0015

0.0449

0.0094

0.0005

Sweating

0.2701c

-

-

-

 

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.8642 a

30.8642 a

-

-

-

Reverberatory Smelting

0.3858 ab

30.8642 a

-

-

-

Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.8642 ab

20.8333 a

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

0.0139c

-

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

0.0934c

-

-

-

-

 

Aluminium

21.1217

0.0223

0.6824

0.1422

0.0072

Fuel Combustion

0.0569

0.0223

0.6824

0.1422

0.0072

Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse

1.2731b

-

-

-

-

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse

0.5015b

-

-

-

-

Demagging w/ baghouse

19.2901b

-

-

-

-

 

Copper

1.4814

0.0139

0.4250

0.0886

0.0045

Fuel Combustion

0.0354

0.0139

0.4250

0.0886

0.0045

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

0.2701c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0085c

-

-

-

-

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

1.1574c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0100c

-

-

-

-

 

Zinc

0.8506

0.0057

0.1740

0.0362

0.0018

Fuel Combustion

0.0145

0.0057

0.1740

0.0362

0.0018

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

0.1235c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

4.9E-03c

-

-

-

-

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

0.3434c

-

-

-

-

Kettle pot

0.0004c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.9E-05c

-

-

-

-

Muffle distillation

0.1736c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0091c

-

-

-

-

Retort Reduction

0.1813c

-

-

-

-

 

Non-Ferrous Metal Emission Rate (Max)

21.1217

30.8657

0.6824

0.1422

0.0072

a  maximum emission rates of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.

b emission rates were calculated based on the controlled emission factors in USEPA’s AP-42

c controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

 

Total emission rates in bold and underlined are the maximum emission rates for each pollutant

 


Calculated Emission Rates for Scenario 2 (Non-Ferrous Metal)

 

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Rate (g/s)

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

 

Lead

0.3104

7.7160

-

-

-

Sweating

0.0675c

 

-

-

 

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.2160a

7.7160

-

-

-

Reverberatory Smelting

0.0965 ab

7.7160 a

-

-

-

Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.2160 ab

5.2083 a

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

0.0035c

-

-

-

-

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

0.0233c

-

-

-

-

 

Aluminium

5.2662

-

-

-

-

Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse

0.3183b

-

-

-

-

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse

0.1254b

-

-

-

-

Demagging w/ baghouse

4.8225b

-

-

-

-

 

Copper

0.3615

-

-

-

-

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

0.0675c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0021c

-

-

-

-

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

0.2894cb

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0025c

-

-

-

-

 

Zinc

0.2090

-

-

-

-

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

0.0309c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0012c

-

-

-

-

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

0.0858c

-

-

-

-

Kettle pot

0.0001c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

4.8E-06c

-

-

-

-

Muffle distillation

0.0434c

-

-

-

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0023c

-

-

-

-

Retort Reduction

0.0453c

-

-

-

-

 

Non-Ferrous Metal Emission Rate (Max)

5.2662

7.7160

-

-

-

a  maximum emission rates of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.

b emission rates were calculated based on the controlled emission factors in USEPA’s AP-42

c controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

 

Total emission rates in bold and underlined are the maximum emission rates for each pollutant

 

For scenario 2, because total fuel consumption rate was proposed for the whole Eco-Park, emission rates of non-ferrous metals due to fuel combustion are not presented in this section. 

 

References

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.11 Secondary Lead Processing

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.8 Secondary Aluminium Operations

3.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.9 Secondary Copper Smelting

4.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.14 Secondary Zinc Processing

 

Heavy Metals in PM (Non-Ferrous Metal)

 

For those emission factors for heavy metals and Non-Criteria Pollutants not available in AP-42, the emission rates will be determined based on the Particulate Matter (PM) to pollutant ratios as stated in the Best Practicable Measures (BPMs) for different related Specified Processes (SP) issued by EPD.  Moreover, the emission factors/rates for lead and tin are based on USEPA’s AP-42 on secondary lead processing industry. Furthermore, in accordance with USEPA 1990b, 2.2% of total chromium emission would be chromium VI (Cr6+).  Detailed calculations can be referred to the attached tables in Annexes 8 to 12.

 

Dioxin Emission  (Non-Ferrous Metal)

 

Process

Potential Release Route

(µg I-TEQ/t)

Max. Emission Factor

(µg I-TEQ/t)

Max. Emission Rate

(g I-TEQ/s)

(Worst-Impact)

Max. Emission Rate

(g I-TEQ/s)

(Clean)

2nd Cu (controlled)1

50

100

(Throughput =

10,000 tpa)

 

7.716e-8

(Throughput =

2,500 tpa)

 

1.929e-8

2nd Al (controlled)2

35

2nd Pb (controlled)3

8

2nd Zn (controlled)4

100

 

The dioxin emission factors were based on “Standardized Toolkit for Identification and Quantification of Dioxin and Furan Releases”, UNEP Chemicals Geneva, Switzerland, May 2003.  For conservative approach, the maximum emission factor of the four processes was adopted in the assessment, i.e., emission factor of secondary zinc of 100 mg I-TEQ/t was adopted.

 

Remarks

1.      thermal processing of scrap copper materials is carried out in furnaces which are well controlled and fitted with afterburners and fabric filters; the scrap should undergo some sorting and classification prior to processing to minimize contaminants

2.      controlled systems adopted using afterburners, scrap pre-treatment and gas cleaning with filters and lime injection

3.      furnaces fitted with fabric filters where PVC is excluded from battery separators.

4.      hot briquetting rotary furnaces are used with basic dust control such as fabric filter or electrostatic precipitator.

 


D.2.5    Paper

 

Total throughput of paper : 200,000 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 200,000 tpa

 

Emission rate calculation

 

a. from fuel combustion (for Scenario 1 only )

 

Energy consumption of paper : 6.5 GJ/ton = 6.1608 MMBtu/ton (refer to Annex 7 for detailed calculations)

 

Unit

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

lb/ 1000 gal

2

0.785^

24

5

0.252

lb/ MMBtu*

0.0143

0.0056

0.1714

0.0357

0.0018

kg/ MMBtu

0.0065

0.0025

0.0778

0.0162

0.0008

kg/ Mg

0.0399

0.0157

0.4791

0.0998

0.0050

g/s

0.6161

0.2418

7.3928

1.5402

0.0776

^ 157 x 0.005% by weight of sulphur = 0.785 lb / 1000 gal

* lb/ 1000 gal / 140 = lb/ MMBtu

 

References

 

1.      Fuel consumption 6.5 GJ/ton from EP Indicator & Benchmark Shortlist Document - Paper (Only), remas (http://remas.ewindows.eu.org)

 

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

 


D.2.6    Plastics

 

Total throughput of plastics : 102,740 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 102,740 tpa

 

Emission rate calculation

 

a. from extrusion

Unit

PM

VOC

kg/ Mg

0.0479

0.0353

g/s

3.7973e-3@

0.0280#

 

b. from moulding

Unit

PM

VOC

kg/ Mg

0.0651

0.0307

g/s

5.1608e-3@

0.0243#

 

Total emission rate

Process

PM

VOC

Extrusion

3.7973e-3

0.0280#

Moulding

5.1608e-3

0.0243#

Total

8.9580e-3

0.0523

@ controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

# assumed all VOC are odorous and controlled emission by activated carbon filter with 90% control efficiency

 

Reference

 

1.      Emission Calculation Fact Sheet - Plastic Production and Products Manufacturing, Environmental Science and Services Division of Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

 


D.2.7    Rubber Tyres

 

Grinding (cryogenic grinding)

 

Total throughput of rubber tyre for grinding : 16,558 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 16,558 tpa

 

Emission rate calculation

 

PM Emission Rate : 0.4 kg/hr = 1.1111e-3 g/s (with 2000 tpa)

PM Emission Rate : 1.1111e-3 g/s x 2000 / 16558 = 9.1986e-3 g/s (with 16,558 tpa)

 

Reference

 

1.      Technical Guidelines on the Identification and Management of Used Tyres, Technical Working Group of Basel Convention


 

D.2.8    Wood

 

Total throughput of wood : 41,260 tpa

Recovery efficiency : 100%

Total material produced from the process : 41,260 tpa

 

a. from fuel combustion (Scenario 1)

 

Energy consumption of wood : 3.1353 MMBtu/ton (refer to Annex 7 for detailed calculations)

 

Unit

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

lb/ 1000 gal

2

0.785^

24

5

0.252

lb/ MMBtu*

0.0143

0.0056

0.1714

0.0357

0.0018

kg/ MMBtu

0.0065

0.0025

0.0778

0.0162

0.0008

kg/ Mg

0.0203

0.0080

0.2438

0.0508

0.0026

g/s

0.0647

0.0254

0.7762

0.1617

0.0081

 

b. from extrusion

Unit

PM

VOC

kg/ Mg

0.0479

0.0353

g/s

0.0015

0.0112#

@ controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

# assumed all VOC are odorous and controlled emission by activated carbon filter with 90% control efficiency

 

References

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

 

2.      Emission Calculation Fact Sheet - Plastic Production and Products Manufacturing, Environmental Science and Services Division of Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

 

 


D.2.9    Fuel Combustion Emissions for Scenarios 2 and 3

 

Sulphur content of Ultra-Low Sulphur Diesel (ULSD): 0.005%

 

Total fuel (ULSD) consumption : 7,500 L/hour (Scenario 2)

Total fuel (ULSD) consumption : 3,500 L/hour (Scenario 3)

 

Emission rates calculation

 

Unit

PM

SO2

NOx

CO

VOC

lb/103gal

2

0.785^

24

5

0.252

kg/103L or g/L*

0.24

0.0942

2.88

0.6

0.0302

g/s (Scenario 2)

0.5000

0.1963

6.0000

1.2500

0.0630

g/s (Scenario 3)

0.2333

0.0916

2.8000

0.5833

0.0294

^ 157 x 0.005% by weight of sulphur = 0.785 lb / 1000 gal

* kg/103L or g/L = 0.12 x lb/103gal

 

Reference

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

 


D.2.10  Emission Rate Calculations for Other Sources

 

Temporary Mixed Construction Waste Sorting Facility (TMCWSF)

 

Particular matter (PM) emissions from the Temporary Mixed Construction Waste Sorting Facility (TMCWSF) (formerly referred as C&D material sorting facility or C&DMSF) based on the emission inventory extracted from the Attachment 1 Environmental Protection Measures Incorporated into the Design of the Fill Bank Project of the Project Profile entitled “Expansion and Extension of Fill Bank at Tuen Mun Area 38” (Application No. DIR-113/2005).

 

a. Emission from TMCWSF

 

Descriptions of TMCWSF

PM Emission Rate, g/s

Oversized material crushing

0.0012

Screening

0.0531

Material Handling – loading/unloading

0.0088

Total

0.0631

 

The emission area was assumed to be 1m x 1m and so the total PM emission rate = 0.0631 g/s/m2.

 

b. Emission from the access roads to TMCWSF (Road width = 2m)

 

ID

From

To

Length, m

Emission Rate, g/s/m

Area, m2

Emission Rate, g/s/m2

x

y

x

y

R1

811371

825618

811349

825592

34.06

0.000202

68.12

0.000101

R11

811349

825592

811476

825539

137.62

0.000202

275.24

0.000101

R12

811476

825539

811230

824959

630.01

0.000202

1260.02

0.000101

 

Owing to the restriction of ISCST3, the access roads were broken into several segments so that the length/width ratio was less than 10.

 


Annex 1     Emission Factors from USEPA AP-42 and Other International References (Scenario 1)

 


 

 

Annex 2     Calculated Emission Rates (Scenario 1)

 


 

 

Annex 3     Emission Factors from USEPA AP-42 and Other International References (Scenario 2)

 


 

 

Annex 4     Calculated Emission Rates (Scenario 2)

 


 

 

 

Annex 5     Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References – Scenario 3

 


 

 

Annex 6     Calculated Emission Rate – Scenario 3

 


 

 

Annex 7     Total Energy Consumption Calculations

 

+

 


 

 

Annex 8     Comparison Table of Relevant BPMs and PM to Pollutant Ratio Calculations

 


 

 

Annex 9     Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References – Scenario 1

 


 

 

Annex 10    Calculated Emission Rate (Heavy Metals and Non-Criteria Pollutants) – Scenario 1

 


 

 

Annex 11    Emission Factor from USEPA AP-42 and other References –Scenario 2

 


 

 

Annex 12    Calculated Emission Rate (Heavy Metals and Non-Criteria Pollutants) – Scenario 2

 


 

 

Annex 13    References

 

1.                MRT System AB, Technical Performance Data

2.                USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 1.3 Fuel Oil Combustion - 0.005% by weight of sulphur, no.2 oil fired (SCC1-01-005-01, 1-02-005-01, SCC1-03-005-01)

3.                Fuel consumption 16 GJ/ton from EP Indicator & Benchmark Shortlist Document - Glass (Container), remas (http://remas.ewindows.eu.org)

4.                USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 11.15 Glass Manufacturing

5.                Energy Consumption Calculations in Annex B of Appendix D

6.                USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.11 Secondary Lead Processing

7.                Fuel consumption 12,000 MJ/ton from EP Indicator & Benchmark Shortlist Document - Aluminium (Secondary), remas (http://remas.ewindows.eu.org)

8.                USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.8 Secondary Aluminium Operations

9.                USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.9 Secondary Copper Smelting

10.             USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.14 Secondary Zinc Processing

11.             Fuel consumption 6.5 GJ/ton from EP Indicator & Benchmark Shortlist Document - Paper (Only), remas (http://remas.ewindows.eu.org)

12.             Davis, W.T., 2000, "Air Pollution Engineering Manual", Air and Waste Management Associations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, N.Y.

13.             Emission Calculation Fact Sheet - Plastic Production and Products Manufacturing, Environmental Science and Services Division of Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

14.             Technical Guidelines on the Identification and Management of Used Tyres, Technical Working Group of Basel Convention

15.             Locating and Estimating Air Emissions from Sources of Dioxins and Furans, USEPA

a.                Particulate Matter (PM) will be collected and pass through a baghouse.  It is a normal practice for a baghouse with control efficiency of 99% to be installed to control PM emission.

b.                Details of Recovery Efficiency of the Material refer to Annex A


 

 

Annex A     Recovery Efficiency of Assessed Processes

 

 

 

 


Appendix D.3

Detailed Emission Rate Calculations for AQIA

Scenario 2 (Mitigated)

 

 


D.3.1    Emission Factors from AP-42 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (without Demagging of Aluminium)

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Factor (kg/ Mg material produced)

PM

Lead

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0048

Sweating

35

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

1.12a

Reverberatory Smelting

0.5 a

Blast Smelting-Cupola

1.12 a

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

1.8

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

12.1

 

 

Aluminium

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0737

Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse

1.65

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse

0.65

Demagging w/ baghouse

25

 

 

Copper

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0459

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

35

 - Fugitive Emission

1.1

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

150

 - Fugitive Emission

1.3

 

 

Zinc

 

Fuel Combustion (for Scenario 1 only)

0.0188

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

16

 - Fugitive Emission

0.63

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

44.5

Kettle pot

0.05

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0025

Muffle distillation

22.5

 - Fugitive Emission

1.18

Retort Reduction

23.5

a maximum emission factors (controlled) of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.

 

For conservative approach, the maximum emission rates (g/s) of different air pollutants were adopted in the assessment.  The following tables detail the selection of emission rates.

 

References

 

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.11 Secondary Lead Processing

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.8 Secondary Aluminium Operations

3.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.9 Secondary Copper Smelting

4.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.14 Secondary Zinc Processing


 

D.3.2    Calculated Emission Rates for Scenario 2 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (without Demagging of Aluminium)

 

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Rate (g/s)

PM

 

Lead

0.3104

Sweating

0.0675c

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.2160a

Reverberatory Smelting

0.0965 ab

Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.2160 ab

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

0.0035c

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

0.0233c

 

Aluminium

0.4437

Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse

0.3183b

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse

0.1254b

 

Copper

0.3615

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

0.0675c

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0021c

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

0.2894cb

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0025c

 

Zinc

0.2090

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

0.0309c

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0012c

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

0.0858c

Kettle pot

0.0001c

 - Fugitive Emission

4.8E-06c

Muffle distillation

0.0434c

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0023c

Retort Reduction

0.0453c

 

Non-Ferrous Metal Emission Rate (Max)

0.4437

a  maximum emission rates of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.

b emission rates were calculated based on the controlled emission factors in USEPA’s AP-42

c controlled emission by baghouse with 99% control efficiency

 

Total emission rates in bold and underlined are the maximum emission rates for each pollutant

 

For scenario 2, because total fuel consumption rate was proposed for the whole Eco-Park, emission rates of non-ferrous metals due to fuel combustion are not presented in this section.

 

References

1.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.11 Secondary Lead Processing

2.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.8 Secondary Aluminium Operations

3.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.9 Secondary Copper Smelting

4.      USEPA - AP-42 Chapter 12.14 Secondary Zinc Processing


 

D.3.3    Controlled Emission Rates of the Gaseous Heavy Metal and Toxic Air Pollutants for Scenario 2 (Mitigated)

 

Chlorine (Cl2), hydrogen chloride (HCl), Fluorine/Fluoride (F) and Mercury are gaseous pollutants arising from non-ferrous metal manufacturing.  According to the 1996 EU Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) – Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Non Ferrous Metals Industries, December 2001, chlorine, hydrogen chloride and fluorine/fluoride emissions can be controlled by wet or semi-dry alkaline scrubber.  Mercury emission can be abated by several control devices as listed below.

 

Pollutant

Controlled Emission Rates by IPPC*

Controlled Devices suggested by IPPC

Adopted Controlled Emission Rates

Chlorine

2 mg/m3

Wet or Semi-dry alkaline scrubber

2 mg/m3

Hydrogen chloride

0.1 – 40 mg/m3

40 mg/m3

Fluorine/ Fluoride

0.1 – 5 mg/m3

5 mg/m3

Mercury

0.02 – 0.1  mg/m3

Boliden/Norzink processa

Bolchem processb

Outokumpu processc

Sodium thiocyanate processd

Activated Carbon Filtere

Superlig Ion Exchange Processf

Added with Potassium Iodideg

Selenium Scrubberh

Selenium Filteri

Lead Sulphide Processj

0.1 mg/m3

Remarks:

a.       This based on a wet scrubber using the reaction between mercuric chloride and mercury to form mercurous chloride (calomel), which precipitates from the liquor.

b.       Mercury is oxidised by 99% sulphuric acid and the mercury containing acid is diluted to 80%.  The mercury is then precipitated as sulphide with thiosulphate and filtered off.

c.       The gas at, about 350 °C, is led through a packed bed tower where it is washed counter currently with an about 90% sulphuric acid at about 190 °C. The acid is formed in situ from the SO3 in the gas. The mercury is precipitated as a selenium-chloride compound.  The mercury sludge is removed from the cooled acid, filtered and washed.

d.       This process is used at a zinc roaster. The SO2 gas is washed with a solution of sodium thiocyanate and the Hg is removed as sulphide.

e.       An adsorption filter using activated carbon is used to remove mercury vapour from the gas stream.

f.        This process uses ion exchange to remove mercury from the product acid and achieves a concentration of mercury < 0.5 ppm (~0.1 mg/m3).

g.       Potassium iodide is added to the acid, which has to be at least 93% strength, at temperature of about 0 °C. Mercury iodide, HgI2, is then precipitated.

h.       This is based on a wet scrubber and uses the reaction between amorphous selenium in sulphuric acid and mercury to remove high concentrations of mercury vapour.

i.        A dry scrubbing process which uses amorphous selenium to react with mercury vapour to form mercury selenide

j.        A dry scrubbing process using lead sulphide nodules as the media removes mercury from the gas stream.

 

Controlled Emission rate (g/s) = max. PM emission rate of non-ferrous metal (g/s) ´ {average controlled emission rates (in mg/m3) / PM emission limit of BPM (i.e., 50mg/m3)}

 

Controlled Cl2 emission rate        =          0.4437 ´ (2 / 50)           =          0.0177 g/s

Controlled HCl emission rate       =          0.4437 ´ (40 / 50)          =          0.3550 g/s

Controlled F emission rate          =          0.4437 ´ (5 / 50)           =          0.0444 g/s

Controlled Hg emission rate        =          0.4437 ´ (0.1 / 50)         =          8.9 ´ 10-4 g/s

 

 

The calculation of the controlled emission rates for PM, SO2 and other heavy metals are presented in the following pages of this appendix.


 

D.3.4    Emission Factors from AP-42 (Non-Ferrous Metal) for Mitigated Scenario 2 (Uncontrolled Dust Emission Factors for Secondary Lead and Aluminium Recovery)

 

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Factor (kg/ Mg material produced)

PM

SO2

Lead

 

 

Sweating

35

ND

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

162a

40 a

Reverberatory Smelting

162 a

40 a

Blast Smelting-Cupola

153 a

27 a

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

1.8

-

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

12.1

-

 

 

 

Aluminium

 

 

Sweating Furnace

7.25

-

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace)

2.15

-

 

 

 

Copper

 

 

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

35

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.1

-

Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)

150

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.3

-

 

 

 

Zinc

 

 

Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)

16

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.63

-

Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining

44.5

-

Kettle pot

0.05

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0025

-

Muffle distillation

22.5

-

 - Fugitive Emission

1.18

-

Retort Reduction

23.5

-

a maximum emission factors of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted.


 

D.3.5    Calculated Emission Rates for Mitigated Scenario 2 (Non-Ferrous Metal) (Without Demagging Process, with SO2 Control Emission and Provided With up to 99.9% Dust Control Efficiency)

 

Description of Secondary Non-Ferrous Metals Manufacturing Process

Emission Rate (g/s)

PM

SO2

Lead

0.0407

1.5432

Sweating

0.0068b

 

Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.0313ab

1.5432

Reverberatory Smelting

0.0313 ab

1.5432 a

Blast Smelting-Cupola

0.0295 ab

1.0417 a

Fugitive Emission (Sweating)

0.0003b

-

Fugitive Emission (Smelting)

0.0023b

-

 

 

 

Aluminium

0.0018

-

Sweating Furnace

0.0014b

-

Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace)

0.0004b

-

 

 

 

Copper

0.0361

-

Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)

0.0068b

-

 - Fugitive Emission

0.0002b

-