EcoPark EIA - Final Report Vol 2

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
CRT Recovery	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
Computer/ Electronics Recovery	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
White Goods Dismantling	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
Fluorescent Lamp Recovery		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

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	NO_x	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	NO_x	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	NO_x	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	1.12^a	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	NO_x	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	0.2701^c	-	-	-
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)	0.0139^c	-	-	-	-
Fugitive Emission (Smelting)	0.0934^c	-	-	-	-

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	1.2731^b	-	-	-	-
Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse	0.5015^b	-	-	-	-
Demagging w/ baghouse	19.2901^b	-	-	-	-

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)	0.2701^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0085^c	-	-	-	-
Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)	1.1574^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0100^c	-	-	-	-

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)	0.1235^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	4.9E-03^c	-	-	-	-
Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining	0.3434^c	-	-	-	-
Kettle pot	0.0004^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	1.9E-05^c	-	-	-	-
Muffle distillation	0.1736^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0091^c	-	-	-	-
Retort Reduction	0.1813^c	-	-	-	-

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	NO_x	CO	VOC

Lead	0.3104	7.7160	-	-	-
Sweating	0.0675^c		-	-
Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.2160^a	7.7160	-	-	-
Reverberatory Smelting	0.0965^ab	7.7160^a	-	-	-
Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.2160^ab	5.2083^a	-	-	-
Fugitive Emission (Sweating)	0.0035^c	-	-	-	-
Fugitive Emission (Smelting)	0.0233^c	-	-	-	-

Aluminium	5.2662	-	-	-	-
Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse	0.3183^b	-	-	-	-
Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse	0.1254^b	-	-	-	-
Demagging w/ baghouse	4.8225^b	-	-	-	-

Copper	0.3615	-	-	-	-
Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)	0.0675^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0021^c	-	-	-	-
Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)	0.2894^cb	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0025^c	-	-	-	-

Zinc	0.2090	-	-	-	-
Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)	0.0309^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0012^c	-	-	-	-
Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining	0.0858^c	-	-	-	-
Kettle pot	0.0001^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	4.8E-06^c	-	-	-	-
Muffle distillation	0.0434^c	-	-	-	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0023^c	-	-	-	-
Retort Reduction	0.0453^c	-	-	-	-

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)
2^nd Cu (controlled)¹	50	100	(Throughput = 10,000 tpa) 7.716e-8	(Throughput = 2,500 tpa) 1.929e-8
2^nd Al (controlled)²	35
2^nd Pb (controlled)³	8
2^nd 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	NO_x	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	NO_x	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	NO_x	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
ID	x	y	x	y	Length, m	Emission Rate, g/s/m	Area, m²	Emission Rate, g/s/m²
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)

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	1.12^a
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	0.0675^c
Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.2160^a
Reverberatory Smelting	0.0965^ab
Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.2160^ab
Fugitive Emission (Sweating)	0.0035^c
Fugitive Emission (Smelting)	0.0233^c

Aluminium	0.4437
Sweating Furnace w/ baghouse	0.3183^b
Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace) w/ baghouse	0.1254^b

Copper	0.3615
Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)	0.0675^c
- Fugitive Emission	0.0021^c
Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)	0.2894^cb
- Fugitive Emission	0.0025^c

Zinc	0.2090
Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)	0.0309^c
- Fugitive Emission	0.0012^c
Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining	0.0858^c
Kettle pot	0.0001^c
- Fugitive Emission	4.8E-06^c
Muffle distillation	0.0434^c
- Fugitive Emission	0.0023^c
Retort Reduction	0.0453^c

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 process^a Bolchem process^b Outokumpu process^c Sodium thiocyanate process^d Activated Carbon Filter^e Superlig Ion Exchange Process^f Added with Potassium Iodide^g Selenium Scrubber^h Selenium Filterⁱ Lead Sulphide Process^j	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	162^a	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	0.0068^b
Reverberatory Smelting/ Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.0313^ab	1.5432
Reverberatory Smelting	0.0313^ab	1.5432 ^a
Blast Smelting-Cupola	0.0295^ab	1.0417^a
Fugitive Emission (Sweating)	0.0003^b	-
Fugitive Emission (Smelting)	0.0023^b	-

Aluminium	0.0018	-
Sweating Furnace	0.0014^b	-
Smelting (Reverberatory Furnace)	0.0004^b	-

Copper	0.0361	-
Cupola Furnace (scrap copper and brass)	0.0068^b	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0002^b	-
Rotary Furnace (brass and bronze)	0.0289^b	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0003^b	-

Zinc	0.0209	-
Reverberatory Sweating (residual scrap)	0.0031^b	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0001^b	-
Sodium Carbonate Leaching Calcining	0.0086^b	-
Kettle pot	0.00001^b	-
- Fugitive Emission	4.8E-07^b	-
Muffle distillation	0.0043^b	-
- Fugitive Emission	0.0002^b	-
Retort Reduction	0.0045^b	-
Non-Ferrous Metal Emission Rate (Max)	0.0407	1.5432

^a maximum controlled emission rates (with 80% SO₂ removal) of reverberatory smelting and blast smelting cupola were adopted

^b controlled emission by baghouse or ECP with 99.9% control efficiency

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

5. Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, World Bank Group, July 1998

CONTENTS