1 April 16, 2009 Analysis of Multi-Pollutant Emissions Inventories for Key Industrial Sectors Anne Pope, U.S. EPA, [email protected] Linda Chappell, U.S. EPA, [email protected] Tina Ndoh, U.S. EPA, [email protected]
1
April 16, 2009
Analysis of Multi-Pollutant Emissions Inventories for Key Industrial Sectors
Anne Pope, U.S. EPA, [email protected] Chappell, U.S. EPA, [email protected]
Tina Ndoh, U.S. EPA, [email protected]
2
Multi-Pollutant Inventories Are Needed to Support Development of Multi-Pollutant Sector Strategies
EPA has initiated multi-pollutant analyses to explore the development of multi-pollutant sector-based approaches for managing emissions and air quality.
NAS report “Air Quality Management in the United States”, recommends: EPA take an integrated multi-pollutant approach to controlling emissions of pollutants posing the most significant risks
A “Sector” is a logical grouping of processes, emissions sources, and pollutants in a manner that maximizes environmental benefit while reducing costs and regulatory burden
The Approach:Considers multi-pollutant interactions and emission reduction options Relies on replicable and consistent emissions inventories and numerical metricsIncludes measurable environmental improvement
3
Benefits of Multi-Pollutant Sector Strategies
Benefits to PublicFocus on reducing emissions of greatest public health interestOptimization of tax $ spentAbility to address local concerns better
Benefits to IndustryMaximization of capital and operating environmental expendituresReduction in costs of control or over-control in the wrong areasAvoidance of “stranded” costs associated with piecemeal investment in control equipment for individual pollutantsIncreased flexibility Consolidated monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
Benefits to RegulatorsDevelopment of better emissions data and compilation tools for characterizing individual sectorsReduction in existing regulatory barriers to improve environmental performanceConsolidated requirements to reduce overall administrative burden
4
Emission Inventory Data Used in This Analysis
CAPs:Includes CO, NOx, PM10, PM2.5, SO2 and VOC Data source - 2005 NEI v2
HAPsIncludes 382 individual pollutantsData source - 2005 NEI v2
GHGs:Includes CO2, CH4, and N20Data sources:
Electric Utilities - CAMD Acid Rain Program & EGRID databasesIron and Steel Mills, Lime Manufacturing, Petroleum Refineries, and Portland Cement - GHG Reporting Rule Other categories - Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
5
Industrial GHG Emissions and Facility Count
0
50
100
150
200
250
Petr
oleu
m R
efin
erie
s
Lan
dfill
sC
emen
t
Iron
and
Ste
el
NG
Tra
nsm
issi
on C
ompr
esso
rsPu
lp a
nd P
aper
Petr
oche
mic
als
Nat
ural
Gas
Pro
cess
ing
Und
ergr
ound
Coa
l Min
esL
ime
Nitr
ic A
cid
Hyd
roge
n
Am
mon
ia
HC
FC-2
2 Pr
oduc
tion
SF6
from
Ele
ctri
cal E
quip
men
t
Und
ergr
ound
Gas
Sto
rage
O
ther
Che
mic
als
Off
shor
e O
il an
d G
asA
dipi
c A
cid
Oth
er M
etal
sA
lum
inum
Ele
ctro
nics
Fluo
rina
ted
Gas
Pro
d. (F
ugiti
ves)
Gla
ss
LN
G T
erm
inal
s and
Sto
rage
MM
TCO
2 e
02505007501,0001,2501,5001,7502,0002,2502,5002,7503,000
Num
ber o
f Fac
ilitie
s
7,800
EG
Us
2,661
6
Stationary Sources of CO, NOx, SO2*
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
CO Emissions NOx Emissions SO2 Emissions
Residential Energy andCombustion
Pulp and Paper
Petroleum Refining
Other
Oil & GasProducttion/Distribution
Non-Ferrous Metals
Iron and Steel
Electric Utilities
Crop Production
Chemical Manufacturing
Cement Manufacturing
Boilers & Process Heaters
*excludes fires, open burning and road dust.
7
Stationary Sources of PM*
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
PM 10 Emissions PM2.5 Emissions
Residential Energy andCombustion
Pulp and Paper
Petroleum Refining
Other
Mining
Livestock Production
Iron and Steel
Electric Utilities
Crop Production
Construction
Chemical Manufacturing
Boilers & Process Heaters
*excludes fires, open burning and road dust.
8
Stationary Sources of VOC*
*excludes fires, open burning and road dust.
3%
18%
3%
2%
3%
7%
14%10%1%
3%
2%
15%
18%
1%
Chemical Manufacturing
Consumer/ Commercial Products Use
Crop Production
Cutback Asphalt
Furniture Manufacturing
Oil & Gas Production/Distribution
Organic Products Distribution
Other
Petroleum Refining
POTWs
Printing
Pulp and Paper
Residential Energy and Combustion
Solvent Use
9
Stationary Sources of HAPs*
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Emissions Cancer Noncancer
Residential Energy andCombustionPulp and Paper
Other
Organic ProductsDistributionOil and Gas Production &DistributionNon-Ferrous Metals
Iron and Steel
Halogenated Solvent Use
Electric Utilities
Dry Cleaning Facilities
Crop Production
Consumer/CommercialProducts UseChemical Manufacturing
Boilers & Process Heaters
*excludes fires, open burning and road dust
10
Ranking of Sectors across Pollutant Emissions
27215051131411101610Mineral Processing33425853265315269Mining
108896910898Chemical Manufacturing
712512389677Pulp and Paper
1220145121925356Oil & Gas Production & Distribution
433738912141145Iron and Steel
31334449817137104Cement Manufacturing
2519152435272320203Solid Waste Landfills
30273015411159122Petroleum Refining21126124131Electric Utilities
Rank Non CancerTox Wt
Rank CancerTox Wt
Rank 188
HAP
Rank VOC
Rank SO2
Rank PM25
Rank PM10
Rank NOx
Rank CO
Rank GHG
Source Category
11
Correlation Matrix of HAPs & CAPs with GHGs
1-0.02134-0.171580.00668-0.05832-0.029840.282330.07782Lime Manufacturing
10.223800.631460.6150430.692550.644170.563660.72917Iron and Steel
10.382060.188410.382600.331090.288050.591790.09715Portland Cement
10.555320.581440.288900.646970.602400.705120.26306Petroleum refining
10.689560.056210.724680.695420.722120.862160.23756Electric Utilities
CO2Equivalent188 HAPsVOCSO2PM2.5PM10NOxCO
INDUSTRY
12
13
Electric Utility Summary
acetaldehyde, hexane, HCl, HF, methanol
HAPs with highest emissions
acrolein, As, HCl, HF, Mn, Ni
HAPs with highest Non-Cancer effect
As, Be, Cd, Cr VI, Ni
HAPs with highest Cancer risk
238 # HAPs (individual) reported
91111112007 Acid Rain SO2Nonattainment areas
302332340365# Facilities in PM2.5Nonattainment areas
591010# Facilities in CO Nonattainment areas
405478495524# Facilities in Ozone Nonattainment areas (8 hr standard)
48494949# U.S. States1111# Tribes
735769781799# U.S. Counties1194132813801440# Unique Facilities
HAPsCAPsGHGTotalParameter
15122810528469595265435666188 HAP
3329710827735380127155VOC
502072921231143731291687710722071SO2
242568114423825157008556963PM2.5
289407127114262188115687284PM10
122652619719370968201993887315NOx
5390166283816727831NH3
28838928392107309179924223CO
83953512317755617118963336591273312661336595GHG
PM2.5SO2COOzone
Nonattainment Area Emissions (tpy)Total Emissions
(tpy)
Pollutant
14
Electric Utility: Correlation of GHG Emissions to CAP and HAP Emissions
EGUs - HAPs & GHGs
y = 2822.9x + 1E+06R2 = 0.4755
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000
HAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
HAPs Linear (HAPs)
EGUs - SO2 and GHGs
y = 134.1x + 956806R2 = 0.5252
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000
SO2 (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
SO2 Linear (SO2)
EGUs - NOx and GHGs
y = 553.7x + 387213R2 = 0.7433
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000
NOx (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
NOx Linear (NOx)
EGUs - PM2.5, VOCs, and GHGs
y = 2535x + 985357R2 = 0.4836
y = 488.86x + 2E+06R2 = 0.0032
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
PM2.5 or VOCs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
PM2.5 VOC Linear (PM2.5) Linear (VOC)
15
8Taconite2EAF and DRI
94EAF2Integrated Iron and Steel &EAF
11Integrated Iron and Steel6Coke Ovens & Integrated Iron and Steel
12Coke OvenNumber of FacilitiesType of Operations
16
Iron and Steel Summary
benzene, coke oven emissions, Cl2, HCl, Mn
HAPs with highest emissions
acrolein, As, Cl2, Mn, Ni
HAPs with highest Non-Cancer risk
As, Cr VI, coke oven emissions,
Ni, POM
HAPs with highest Cancer risk
185# HAPs individual reported
00002007 Acid Rain SO2Nonattainment areas
61535661# Facilities in PM2.5Nonattainment areas
0000# Facilities in CO Nonattainment areas
46434346# Facilities in Ozone Nonattainment areas (8 hr standard)
32303232# U.S. States0000# Tribes
99899799# U.S. Counties 135119128135# Unique Facilities
HAPsCAPsGHGTotalParameter
210014004410188 HAP
11213927517548VOC
583485622085551SO2
186971476427607PM2.5
252672077142039PM10
5219049787111566NOx
449113414523554502CO
652288515407518793862647GHG
PM2.5SO2COOzoneNonattainment Area Emissions (tpy)Total
Emissions (tpy)
Pollutant
17
Iron and Steel: Correlation of GHG Emissions to CAP and HAP Emissions
Iron and Steel - CAPs & GHG
y = 1774.9x + 267824R2 = 0.4796
y = 358.15x + 345031R2 = 0.3177
y = 328.78x + 450790R2 = 0.3783
y = 2093.9x + 373532R2 = 0.3987
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
CAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOCLinear (PM2.5) Linear (NOx) Linear (SO2) Linear (VOC)
Iron and Steel - HAPs and GHG
y = 2496.7x + 580132R2 = 0.0501
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000
HAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
HAPs Linear (HAPs)
18
19
Lime Summary
acetaldehyde, HCl, HF, methanol
HAPs with highest emissions
acrolein, As, HCl, Mn, Ni
HAPs with highest Non-Cancer risk
acetaldehyde, As, Cd, Cr VI, Ni
HAPs with highest Cancer risk
138# HAPs individual reported
22222007 Acid Rain SO2Nonattainment areas
16151618# Facilities in PM2.5Nonattainment areas
1111# Facilities in CO Nonattainment areas
12151415# Facilities in Ozone Nonattainment areas (8 hr standard)
32323234# U.S. States0000# Tribes
73697781# U.S. Counties 84788994# Unique Facilities
HAPsCAPsGHGTotalParameter
48339132762204188 HAP
259739913125VOC
6689132228272751526SO2
381641803969013PM2.5
91210823375115165PM10
10270751566597453151NOx
3041227814269338638CO
8475660116845417775517975328020714GHG
PM2.5SO2COOzone
Nonattainment Area Emissions (tpy)Total Emissions
(tpy)
Pollutant
20
Lime: Correlation of GHG Emissions to CAP and HAP Emissions
Lime Manufacturing - NOx, PM2.5, SO2 and GHGs
y = 114.35x + 246146R2 = 0.0797
y = -129.52x + 319055R2 = 0.0085
y = 1.6893x + 329042R2 = 4E-05
0200,000400,000600,000800,000
1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,0002,000,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000
CAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
NOx PM2.5 SO2 Linear (NOx) Linear (PM2.5) Linear (SO2)
Lime Manufacturing - VOCs, HAPs and GHG
y = -480.49x + 335876R2 = 0.0294
y = -105.52x + 300736R2 = 0.0005
-500,000
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200
VOC or HAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
VOC HAPs Linear (VOC) Linear (HAPs)
21
22
Petroleum Refinery Summary
benzene, hexane, methanol,
toluene, xylenes
HAPs with highest emissions
acrolein, 1,3-butadiene, Cl2,
Mn, Ni
HAPs with highest Non-Cancer risk
benzene, POM1,3-butadiene, Cr VI, naphthalene,
HAPs with highest Cancer risk
149# HAPs individual reported
55552007 Acid Rain SO2Nonattainment areas
31313131# Facilities in PM2.5Nonattainment areas
0000# Facilities in CO Nonattainment areas
53515353# Facilities in Ozone Nonattainment areas(8 hr standard)
34303535# U.S. States*000# Tribes
98879999# U.S. Counties*
151137151152# Unique Facilities*
HAPsCAPsGHGTotalParameter
*includes territories
1162256400010423188 HAP
15133347237158101823VOC
961419069121961242175SO2
61084831388630566PM2.5
67666811509834842PM10
38277123067750149426NOx
27509185662082134050CO
552650723624657122535731233117905GHG
PM2.5SO2COOzone
Nonattainment Area Emissions (tpy)Total Emissions
(tpy)
Pollutant
23
Petroleum Refinery: Correlation of GHG Emissions to CAP and HAP Emissions
Petroleum Refining -CAPs & GHG
y = 807.46x + 586469R2 = 0.4972
y = 3043.1x + 802971R2 = 0.4186
y = 116.07x + 1E+06R2 = 0.0835
y = 912.75x + 791841R2 = 0.3381
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
CAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
(tpy
)
NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOCLinear (NOx) Linear (PM2.5) Linear (SO2) Linear (VOC)
Petroleum Refining - HAPs & GHG
y = 6532.4x + 955473R2 = 0.3084
01,000,0002,000,0003,000,0004,000,0005,000,0006,000,0007,000,0008,000,0009,000,000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
HAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
HAPs Linear (HAPs)
24
Portland Cement Plant Locations
25
Portland Cement Summary
benzene, Cl2, formaldehyde, HCl, toluene
HAPs with highest emissions
acrolein, Cl2,HCl, Mn
HAPs with highest Non-Cancer risk
benzene, Be, Cr VI, POM
HAPs with highest Cancer risk
194# HAPs individual reported
00002007 Acid Rain SO2Nonattainment areas
28282828# Facilities in PM2.5Nonattainment areas
0000# Facilities in CO Nonattainment areas
24242424# Facilities in Ozone Nonattainment areas (8 hr standard)
36363737# U.S. States0000# Tribes
36363838# U.S. Counties 110110113113# Unique Facilities
HAPsCAPsGHGTotalParameter
91110526167188 HAP
257629638830VOC
2362341955155917SO2
5374441616804PM2.5
127481007938009PM10
5266851678217681NOx
1648819093154375CO
2601451127337283101412500GHG
PM2.5SO2COOzone
Nonattainment Area Emissions (tpy)Total Emissions
(tpy)
Pollutant
26
Portland Cement: Correlation of GHG Emissions to CAP and HAP Emissions
Portland Cement CAPs & GHG
y = 63.549x + 670541R2 = 0.0292
y = 1250.8x + 642510R2 = 0.1096
y = 69.802x + 739173R2 = 0.1464
y = 366.13x + 812033R2 = 0.0355
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000CAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)
NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOCLinear (NOx) Linear (PM2.5) Linear (SO2) Linear (VOC)
Portland Cement - HAPs & GHGs
y = 1749.4x + 736149R2 = 0.146
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,0002,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
HAPs (tpy)
CO
2 Eq
. (tp
y)Haps Linear (Haps)
27
High GHG Emitters Also Contribute to Poor Air Quality
28
29
Example Sector: Refinery
Large source of industrial emissions
152 refineries in all, refining 25% of the world’s oil production
Lots of emission points, some difficult to characterize
Lots of regs NSPS, NESHAP, ACTs, CTGs)
Many are located in SIP nonattainment areas
30
LandFarm
Transfer Racks
MarineVessel Loading
Tank Farm
WastewaterTreatmentProcess
Equipment Area
NearestResidences
Storm WaterLandfill
Land Farm
CoolingTowers
AdministrativeOffices
Plant’s Property Boundary Line
Parking Area
River
31
32
Petroleum Refineries RegsOriginal
Date Rule
1977Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds (ACT/CTG)
1977 Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks (ACT/CTG)1978 Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment (ACT/CTG)1978 Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks (ACT/CTG)1984 Refineries: Equip. Leaks (NSPS)1988 Refineries: Wastewater (NSPS)2008 Petroleum Refineries (NSPS)1984 Benzene Equipment Leaks (NESHAP)1989 Benzene Storage Vessels (NESHAP)1990 Benzene Transfer Operations (NESHAP)1990 Benzene Waste Operations (NESHAP)1995 Petroleum Refineries I (MACT)2002 Petroleum Refineries II (MACT)
33
Refinery Fired Source Requirements
Maybe UUU
Maybe UUU
250 ppmv for >20 ltpd
98% control of TOC;92/97% control of HCl or to 30/10 ppmv
500 ppmv (suurogate for organic HAP)
<=1.0 lb/1000 lb coke burn + PM for CO boiler – or-Ni<= .029 lb/hr –or-Ni<= 0.001 lb/1000 lb coke burn
2002
NESHAPUUU (MACT)HAP
Catalytic Reformer
OtherHAP
NSPS JaCAP
NSPS J CAP
CAPEmission Source
500 ppmv500 ppmvCO
Flare minimization
See fuel gas combustion above
40/60 ppmv for >40 MMBTU/hr
-20 ppmv (3-hour); 162 ppmv H2S (3-hou avg)-60 ppmv H2S long term limit
250 ppmv for >20 ltpd99% control < 20 ltpd
25 ppmv
0.5 lb/1000 lb coke burn
80 ppmv
25 ppmv
<=0.5 lb/1000 lb coke burn (new) and <=1.0 lb/1000 lb coke burn (M/R)
2008/2009
None
See Fuel gas combustion above
None
-20 ppmv (3-hour); 162 ppmvH2S (3-hou avg)
250 ppmv for >20 ltpd
None
None
None
50 ppmv
<=1.0 lb/1000 lb coke burn + PM for CO boiler
1978
Subpart CC
MACT for Boilers and Heaters;NSPS Db
MACT for Boilers and Heaters
AllFlares
SO2Boilers
NOxProcess Heaters
SO2Fuel Gas Combustion
SO2SRP
SO2
PMFluid Coker
NOx
SO2
PMFCCU
34
Refinery Non-Fired Source Requirements
References Subpart R
GasolineLoading
Gasoline Racks
Marine Vessels
Leak Detection and Repair
TOC/HAPCooling Towers
BWONReferences Benzene Waste Rule (BWON)
BenzeneWastewater
NSPS GGGa (more stringent leak definitions than VV/GGG)
NSPS QQQ VOC
Other Regs that ApplyNESHAP CCPollutantEmission Source
NSPS GGG
NSPS Kb
NSPS Kb
References NSPS VV or NESHAP H for components in HAP service
References NESHAP YGroup 1 controls for >10/25 TPY terminals
None
Group 1 Tank Controls
98% for VOC>33 kg/day (existing); >6.8 kg/day (new)
1995/2009
HAP/VOCEquipment Leaks
HAP
VOC
HAPStorage
VOC/HAPProcess Vents
35
36
Wastewater Systems
Collection Systems
API Separator DAF Activated Sludge
ClarifierSlop Oil Tank
Sludge to coker
37
CONCLUSIONS
Current GHG, CAP and HAP emission inventories are not sufficient to support development of multi-pollutant sector strategies
Data providers are strongly encouraged to integrate inventories across all pollutants at the unit/process level and to develop multi-pollutant sector strategies
Multi-pollutant sector strategies can result in a number of benefits including:
Focus on reducing emissions of greatest public health interestMaximization of capital and operating environmental expendituresReduction in costs of control or over-control in the wrong areasDevelopment of better emissions data and compilation tools for characterizing individual sectorsConsolidated monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting