Air Quality Impact Assessment Proposed Crematorium ......Air Quality Impact Assessment Proposed Crematorium Tuggeranong, ACT Canberra Cemeteries Heggies Pty Ltd Report Number 30-2443

HEGGIES PTY LTD ABN 29 001 584 612

REPORT 30-2443

Revision 0

Air Quality Impact Assessment

Proposed Crematorium

Tuggeranong, ACT

PREPARED FOR

Canberra Cemeteries PO Box 37

MITCHELL ACT 2911

9 DECEMBER 2009

Air Quality Impact Assessment Proposed Crematorium Tuggeranong, ACT Canberra Cemeteries

Heggies Pty Ltd Report Number 30-2443 Revision 0

(30-2443.doc) 9 December 2009 Page 2

Air Quality Impact Assessment

Proposed Crematorium

Tuggeranong, ACT

PREPARED BY:

Heggies Pty Ltd 2 Lincoln Street Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia (PO Box 176 Lane Cove NSW 1595 Australia) Telephone 61 2 9427 8100 Facsimile 61 2 9427 8200 Email [email protected] Web www.heggies.com

DISCLAIMER

Reports produced by Heggies Pty Ltd are prepared for a particular Client’s objective and are based on a specific scope, conditions and limitations, as agreed between Heggies and the Client. Information and/or report(s) prepared by Heggies may not be suitable for uses other than the original intended objective. No parties other than the Client should use any information and/or report(s) without first conferring with Heggies.

The information and/or report(s) prepared by Heggies should not be reproduced, presented or reviewed except in full. Before passing on to a third party any information and/or report(s) prepared by Heggies, the Client is to fully inform the third party of the objective and scope and any limitations and conditions, including any other relevant information which applies to the material prepared by Heggies. It is the responsibility of any third party to confirm whether information and/or report(s) prepared for others by Heggies are suitable for their specific objectives.

Heggies Pty Ltd is a Member Firm of the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants.

Heggies Pty Ltd operates under a Quality System which has been certified by SAI Global Pty Limited to comply with all the requirements of ISO 9001:2008 "Quality management systems - Requirements" (Licence No 3236).

This document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of that System.

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Reference Status Date Prepared Checked Authorised

30-2443 Revision 0 9 December 2009 Martin Doyle Tanya Henley

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY




Heggies Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Canberra Cemeteries to conduct an air quality impact assessment of the proposed crematorium located on Block 1676 Tuggeranong District on the southern side of the intersection of Mugga Lane and Long Gully Road, Canberra, ACT. The site has been selected from a number of options as the most suitable to proceed with further evaluation.

Dispersion model predictions indicate that all modelled pollutant concentrations will meet current air quality criteria at all modelled sensitive receptor locations surrounding the proposed site and at all locations across the 5 km by 5 km modelling domain. Predicted pollutant concentrations are between 2 and 15 orders of magnitude below the relevant assessment criteria. A conservative assessment has been undertaken which suggests that actual concentrations will be lower than those predicted under actual operation.

Due to the unknown stack height to be installed on the cremator, Canberra Cemeteries requested that an appropriate stack height be determined through the dispersion modelling exercise, with a lower stack height desirable for aesthetic reasons. A stack 1 m above the roof ridge line (4 m above ground level in total) was modelled with predictions showing negligible ground level impacts.

It is considered that the proposed operational activity at the crematorium will have insignificant impacts upon the surrounding environment.

TABLE OF CONTENTS




1 INTRODUCTION 6 1.1 Project Setting 6 1.2 Sensitive Receptors 7 1.3 Local Topography 8 1.4 Emissions of Air Pollutants from Crematoria 9 1.5 Existing Air Quality Environment 10 1.6 Ambient Particulate Matter Environment 10 1.7 Nitrogen Dioxide 12 1.8 Carbon Monoxide 13 1.9 Volatile Organic Compounds 14 1.10 Other Air Pollutants 14 1.11 Ambient Air Quality Environment for Assessment Purposes 14

2 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 15 2.1 ACT Government Environment Protection Policy (Air), 1999 15 2.2 NSW DECCW Impact Assessment Criteria 15

2.2.1 Goals Applicable to Individual Toxic Air Pollutants 16 2.3 Project Specific Air Quality Goals 17

3 CLIMATE AND DISPERSION METEROLOGY 19 3.1 Dispersion Model Selection 19 3.2 TAPM and CALMET Meteorological Modelling 19 3.3 CALMET Generated Meteorology 22

3.3.1 Wind Regime 22 3.3.2 Atmospheric Stability and Mixing Depth 23

4 DISPERSION MODEL CONFIGURATION 25 4.1 Emissions Data 25 4.2 Emission Rates 26

5 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT 27

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 31

7 REFERENCES 32 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Details of Sensitive Receptors Surrounding the Proposed Crematorium 8 Table 2 Ambient Air Quality Environment for Assessment Purposes 15 Table 3 Air Quality Impact Assessment Criteria specified by the NSW DECCW / NEPC 16 Table 4 Individual Toxic Air Pollutant Goals 17 Table 5 Project Ambient Air Quality Goals 18 Table 6 Meteorological Monitoring Station Details 19

TABLE OF CONTENTS




Table 7 Meteorological Parameters Used for this Study 21 Table 8 Description of Atmospheric Stability Classes 23 Table 9 Crematorium Emission Factors 25 Table 10 Proposed Crematorium Stack Parameters 26 Table 11 Calculated Emission Rates for Proposed Crematorium 26 Table 12 Examples of Scientific Notation 27 Table 13 Predicted Grid Maxima for Criteria Air Pollutants 28 Table 14 Predicted Grid Maxima for Individual Toxic Air Pollutants 29 Table 15 Predicted Incremental Concentrations of Criteria Air Pollutants at Identified Receptors 30 Table 16 Predicted Incremental Concentrations of Individual Toxic Air Pollutants at Identified

Receptors 30

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Blocks 1676 and 1677 Tuggeranong District 6 Figure 2 Sensitive Receptor Locations Surrounding the Proposed Crematorium 7 Figure 3 3-Dimensional Local Topography Surrounding Project Site 9 Figure 4 Maximum 24-hour PM10 Concentrations, Monash 2007 11 Figure 5 Maximum 24-hour PM10 Concentrations, Civic 2007 11 Figure 6 Maximum Hourly NO2 Concentrations, Monash 2007 12 Figure 7 Maximum Hourly NO2 Concentrations, Civic 2007 13 Figure 8 Maximum 8-hour CO Concentrations, Monash 2007 13 Figure 9 Maximum 8-hour CO Concentrations, Civic 2007 14 Figure 10 Regional Topography Surrounding the Project Site 20 Figure 11 CALMET-Predicted Annual Wind Rose for Project Site - 2008 22 Figure 12 CALMET-Predicted Annual Stability Class Distributions for the Project Site, 2008 24 Figure 13 CALMET-Predicted Diurnal Variation in Mixing Depth for the Project Site, 2008 24 Figure 14 Example of Pollutant Emission Distribution from Proposed Crematorium 31

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Annual Wind Roses – Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport – 2004 to 2008 and

CALMET Generated Seasonal Wind Roses – Project Site – 2008 Appendix B CALMET Generated Seasonal Stability Class Distribution – Project Site – 2008 Appendix C Calculation of Short Term Average Pollutant Concentrations




1 INTRODUCTION

The ACT Public Cemeteries Authority (Canberra Cemeteries) propose to construct a crematorium on Block 1676 Tuggeranong District (the Project Site), on the southern side of the intersection of Mugga Lane and Long Gully Road, Canberra, ACT (see Figure 1). The site has been selected from a number of options as the most suitable to proceed with further evaluation.

As part of this evaluation, Canberra Cemeteries have commissioned Heggies Pty Ltd (Heggies) to undertake an air quality impact assessment of the proposed crematorium. The air quality impact assessment has been requested to ensure that all surrounding sensitive receptors will not be adversely affected by emissions to air from the crematorium in addition to identifying the optimal stack height to be installed on the crematorium furnace to minimise impacts upon the surrounding environment.

Canberra Cemeteries has advised that approximately 400 to 600 cremations will be carried out at the Project Site each year, with a maximum of 8 cremations carried out per day between the hours of 7 am and 7 pm. An Austeng ‘Joule’ cremator has been selected to be installed onsite, fuelled by natural gas. Cremation times are expected to be approximately 75 minutes per body.

1.1 Project Setting

As discussed, the Project Site is situated in the Tuggeranong district of Canberra on the southern side of the intersection of Mugga Lane and Long Gully Road. Surrounding land use is primarily semi-rural and comprises of residential holdings and industrial activities.

Figure 1 Blocks 1676 and 1677 Tuggeranong District

Source: Canberra Cemeteries (2009)

Proposed Crematorium Site




1.2 Sensitive Receptors

Currently, the Project Site is a greenfield location however significant residential development exists with the suburbs of Macarthur and Fadden located to the southwest and west of the Project Site, respectively. Industrial developments are also located to the immediate north and east of the Project site, with isolated residences located within approximately 500 m to 2.5 km. An ACT Health facility is also located approximately 500 m to the south of the proposed crematorium.

Figure 2 displays the locations of the surrounding sensitive receptors with Table 1 detailing the land use and coordinates.

Figure 2 Sensitive Receptor Locations Surrounding the Proposed Crematorium

Project Site




Table 1 Details of Sensitive Receptors Surrounding the Proposed Crematorium

Coordinates (MGA 55) Receptor Description

Easting Northing

Distance/Direction from Project Site

R1 ACT Health Facility 694304 6080344 500 m / S

R2 Residence 694005 6083259 2500 m / N

R3 Mugga Landfill – Administration Buildings

694840 6080995 600 m / NE

R4 Commercial 695472 6080165 1200 m / SE

R5 Hume Industrial Estate

695813 6080522 1400 m / E

R6 Macarthur High Density Residential 1

693726 6080201 900 m / SW

R7 Macarthur High Density Residential 2

693360 6080503 900 m / WSW

R8 Residence 696584 6082587 1800 m / NE

Assessment of ambient air quality pollutants from a development is typically conducted at nearby sensitive receptors. The NSW DECCW identify sensitive receptors within the 2005 document The Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (DECCW, 2005 – hereafter the Approved Methods) as:

A location where people are likely to work or reside; this may include a dwelling, school, hospital, office or public recreational area. An air quality impact assessment should also consider the location of known or likely future sensitive receptors.

1.3 Local Topography

The topography of the area surrounding the proposed crematorium is relatively complex. The Project Site is located on land which increases in height from the southwest to northeast. Further afield, the area is marked by hills to the east, south and west. Figure 3 illustrates a three-dimensional representation of the surrounding topography.




Figure 3 3-Dimensional Local Topography Surrounding Project Site

NOTE: Topography shown with vertical exaggeration of 2

1.4 Emissions of Air Pollutants from Crematoria

Emissions of a number of air pollutants result from the cremation process. These emissions result from fuel combustion within the furnace, combustion of the funereal casket and combustion of the body itself.

A study of a propane fired incinerator in the US in 1992 found that in excess of 60 pollutants were emitted during the cremation process. These included a range of dioxins and furans, metals and combustion related pollutants (USEPA, 1992).

The EMEP (European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme) and EEA (European Environment Agency) Air Pollutant Emission Inventory Guidebook (2009) includes a dedicated chapter on Cremation. The following information is taken from Chapter 6.C.d of the 2009 Guidebook. It is noted that no detailed information on cremation emissions is available for the Australian context, although emission are not expected to differ significantly across the world.

The major emissions from crematories are nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulate matter (TSP, PM10 and PM2.5

1), mercury, hydrogen fluoride (HF), hydrogen chloride (HCl), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), other heavy metals, and some Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). Emission rates depend on the design of the crematory, combustion temperature, gas retention time, duct design, duct temperature and any control devices. Particulates such as dust, soot, ash and other unburned particles originate from the cremation container, human remains, and other contents of the container. Carbon-based organic particulates should be removed in the secondary combustion chamber and through proper adjustment and operation of the cremation equipment.

Mercury emissions originate from the dental fillings that may contain 5 to 10 grams of mercury depending on the numbers and types used. Mercury may be removed through the use of selenium salt in the cremation chamber (Hogland, 1994) or scrubbers. It should be noted that in some countries the use of plastic or other types of fillings are gaining popularity which will reduce the mercury emissions.

1 TSP (Total Suspended Particulate) describes particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 50 microns or less . PM10 and PM2.5 are used to describe particulate less than 10 microns and 2,5 microns (µm) in diameter, respectively.

Project Site




HF and HCl results from the combustion of plastics contained in the container and from stomach contents. These hydrogen compounds may be controlled through the use of wet scrubbers (Cremation Association of North America (CANA), 1993).

NMVOCs are produced from incomplete or inefficient combustion of hydrocarbons contained in the fuels, body, and casket. NMVOCs are reduced through the proper use and adjustment of the crematory.

Dioxins and furans result from the combustion of wood cellulose, chlorinated plastics, and the correct temperature range. Dioxins and furans may be reduced through reduction in the chlorinated plastics and with sufficiently high temperature and residence time in the secondary combustion chamber. Reformation of dioxins and furans can be avoided by good design of the flue-gas ducts, by reducing particulate deposition and avoiding the dioxin and furan reformation temperature window.

Most contaminants (with the exception of heavy metals, HF and HCl) can be minimised through the proper operation of the crematory in conjunction with adequate temperature and residence time in the secondary combustion chamber.

Heavy metals (with the exception of mercury) may be removed through particulate control devices. Emissions may be further reduced through the use of different types of containers such as fibreboard and cloth-covered fibreboard instead of the traditional finished wood.

Further information on the emissions of these pollutants assumed for the proposed crematorium is provided in Section 4.1.

1.5 Existing Air Quality Environment

Air quality parameters are routinely monitored at the Monash and Civic air quality monitoring sites. It is noted that the Civic air quality monitoring station is significantly closer to the Project site than Monash (approximately 5 km as opposed to 15 km), although the Monash data may be more representative of the air quality environment at the Project Site. Data from the Civic monitoring station will show influences of combustion emissions from high traffic volumes within the city. Data from the Monash station may therefore be more representative of the air quality environment at the less urbanised Project Site. Nevertheless, data from both monitoring stations is presented in this report.

1.6 Ambient Particulate Matter Environment

PM10 is measured on an hourly basis by Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM) at the Monash monitoring station. Data for 2007 is presented in Figure 4. The maximum 24-hour concentration measured at Monash during 2007 was 117.7 µg/m3 on 15 April. In total, five exceedances of the 50 µg/m3 NEPM/DECCW criterion were observed at this station during 2007. The annual average concentration of PM10 at Monash during 2007 was 17 µg/m3.




Figure 4 Maximum 24-hour PM10 Concentrations, Monash 2007

PM10 (TEOM)

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

01/01

/2007

01/02

/2007

01/03

/2007

01/04

/2007

01/05

/2007

01/06

/2007

01/07

/2007

01/08

/2007

01/09

/2007

01/10

/2007

01/11

/2007

01/12

/2007

01/01

/2008

Date

Con

cent

ratio

n ( µ

g/m

3 )

PM 10NEPM Std

PM10 is monitored by High Volume Air Sampler (HVAS) at the Civic monitoring station. Results for 2007 are presented in Figure 5. HVAS monitoring generally occurs for a 24-hour period on a 1-in-6 day cycle. Results from Civic indicate that PM10 concentrations are lower than those monitored at Monash, with the maximum 24-hour concentration 50.1 µg/m3 measured on 12 January. The annual average PM10 concentration at Civic during 2007 was 18 µg/m3.

Figure 5 Maximum 24-hour PM10 Concentrations, Civic 2007

PM10 HiVol

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

01/01

/2007

01/02

/2007

01/03

/2007

01/04

/2007

01/05

/2007

01/06

/2007

01/07

/2007

01/08

/2007

01/09

/2007

01/10

/2007

01/11

/2007

01/12

/2007

01/01

/2008

Date

Con

cent

ratio

n ( µ

g/m

3 )

PM10NEPM Std




It is likely that the exceedances at the Monash monitoring station were as a result of an anomalous natural regional event, such as a dust storm or bushfire. Elevations in particulate matter concentrations can often occur in the area, especially during the winter months as a result of domestic wood combustion. All values have been included in the assessment as it is appropriate to demonstrate that no additional exceedances of the impact assessment criteria will occur as a result of the proposed Crematorium operation.

It is noted that PM2.5 monitoring data is not routinely available for the region at present.

1.7 Nitrogen Dioxide

NO2 is routinely monitored on an hourly basis at both Monash and Civic. Maximum hourly concentrations are presented in Figure 6 and Figure 7 respectively. Maximum hourly concentrations were measured to be 0.04 ppm and 0.06 ppm at Monash and Civic respectively. Assessment of the annual average concentrations was not possible with the data provided as only the maximum hourly concentration for each day was available. No exceedance of the NEPM hourly maximum criterion of 0.120 ppm was observed at either Monash or Civic during 2007.

Figure 6 Maximum Hourly NO2 Concentrations, Monash 2007

Nitrogen dioxide 1hr

0.000

0.020

0.040

0.060

0.080

0.100

0.120

0.140

01/01/2007

01/02/2007

01/03/2007

01/04/2007

01/05/2007

01/06/2007

01/07/2007

01/08/2007

01/09/2007

01/10/2007

01/11/2007

01/12/2007

01/01/2008

Date

part

s per

mill

ion

NO2 1-hrNEPM Std




Figure 7 Maximum Hourly NO2 Concentrations, Civic 2007

Nitrogen dioxide 1hr

0.000

0.020

0.040

0.060

0.080

0.100

0.120

0.140

01/01/2007

01/02/2007

01/03/2007

01/04/2007

01/05/2007

01/06/2007

01/07/2007

01/08/2007

01/09/2007

01/10/2007

01/11/2007

01/12/2007

01/01/2008

Date

part

s per

mill

ion

NO2 1-hrNEPM Std

1.8 Carbon Monoxide

Maximum 8-hour CO concentrations at Monash and Civic show no exceedances of the NEPM/DECC criteria during 2007. Data for Monash is presented in Figure 8 and for Civic Figure 9. Maximum 8-hour CO concentrations at Monash during 2007 were 2.63 ppm and at Civic were 2.80 ppm, well below the 9 ppm criterion.

Figure 8 Maximum 8-hour CO Concentrations, Monash 2007

Carbon monoxide 8hr

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

01/01/2007

01/02/2007

01/03/2007

01/04/2007

01/05/2007

01/06/2007

01/07/2007

01/08/2007

01/09/2007

01/10/2007

01/11/2007

01/12/2007

01/01/2008

Date

part

s per

mill

ion

CO 8-hr

NEPM Std




Figure 9 Maximum 8-hour CO Concentrations, Civic 2007

Carbon monoxide 8hr

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

01/01/2007

01/02/2007

01/03/2007

01/04/2007

01/05/2007

01/06/2007

01/07/2007

01/08/2007

01/09/2007

01/10/2007

01/11/2007

01/12/2007

01/01/2008

Date

part

s per

mill

ion

CO 8-hr

NEPM Std

1.9 Volatile Organic Compounds

No routine monitoring of VOCs is undertaken at either the Monash or Civic monitoring stations. Background concentrations of VOCs will largely be dictated by vehicle emissions and therefore can be considered to be negligible at the Project Site. Concentrations may be elevated at the more urbanised Civic and Monash stations, but as shown by CO concentrations, emissions of vehicular generated pollutants can be considered to be low.

1.10 Other Air Pollutants

As discussed in Section 1.4 a wide range of pollutants can be emitted during the cremation process. Many of these pollutants are not routinely monitored in the local area surrounding the Project Site, for example PM2.5. Therefore, except for those pollutants routinely monitored, the background concentrations of pollutants such as lead, mercury and arsenic, for example, will be assumed to be negligible for the purposes of this assessment.

1.11 Ambient Air Quality Environment for Assessment Purposes

For the purposes of assessing the potential cumulative air quality impacts from the Project, an estimation of ambient air quality levels is required. The site-specific ambient air quality levels adopted for this assessment are summarised in Table 2.




Table 2 Ambient Air Quality Environment for Assessment Purposes

Air Quality Parameter Averaging Period Assumed Background Ambient Level

24-Hour maximum 117.7 µg/m3 PM10

Annual average 18 µg/m3

1-hour maximum 0.06 ppm NO2

Annual average Undetermined

CO 8-hour maximum 2.8 ppm

VOCs 1-hour maximum Negligible

All other cremation related pollutants

Various Negligible

2 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

2.1 ACT Government Environment Protection Policy (Air), 1999

In the ACT, the Environment Protection Act 1997 (the Act) is supported by a number of Environment Protection Policies (EPPs) which provide guidelines on how the legislation is administered by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). (It is important to note that EPPs are not legally binding.)

The main objectives of the Air EPP are:

To ensure air quality in the ACT meets national standards for ambient air.

To minimise environmental harm from local emissions of air pollutants in accordance with requirements and objects of the Act.

Air Quality within the ACT is generally reported to National Environment Protection Measure (NEPM) reporting standards.

2.2 NSW DECCW Impact Assessment Criteria

The NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) has established ground level air quality impact assessment criteria for key air pollutants to achieve appropriate environmental outcomes and to minimise associated risks to human health as published in the 2005 document, the Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in NSW (the Approved Methods). A summary of the impact assessment criteria is given in Table 3.

The impact assessment criteria are required to be applied as follows:

At the nearest existing or likely future off-site sensitive receptor.

The incremental impact (predicted impacts due to the pollutant source alone) for each pollutant must be reported in units and averaging periods consistent with the impact assessment criteria.

Background concentrations must be included using the procedures specified in Section 5 of the Approved Methods.

Total impact (incremental impact plus background) must be reported as the 100th percentile (maximum) in concentration or deposition units consistent with the impact assessment criteria and compared with the relevant impact assessment criteria.




Within this report, NEPM and NSW Department of Climate Change and Water (DECCW) standards are provided, with impacts of the Project assessed against the most stringent goals available.

Table 3 Air Quality Impact Assessment Criteria specified by the NSW DECCW / NEPC

Concentration Pollutant Averaging Period pphm µg/m³

Source

10 minutes 25 712 NHMRC (1996)

1 hour 20 570 NEPC (1998)

24 hours 8 228 NEPC (1998)

Sulfur dioxide (SO2)

Annual 2 60 NEPC (1998)

1 hour 12 246 NEPC (1998) Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

Annual 3 62 NEPC (1998)

1 hour 10 214 NEPC (1998) Photochemical oxidants (as ozone) 4 hours 8 171 NEPC (1998)

Lead Annual - 0.5 NEPC (1998)

24 hours - 50 NEPC (1998) PM10

Annual - 30 EPA (1998)

24 hours - 25 NEPC (2003) PM2.52

Annual - 8 NEPC (2003)

Total suspended particulates (TSP)

Annual - 90 NHMRC (1996)

Maximum Increase Maximum Total

Deposited dust (g/m2/month) Annual 2 4 NERDDC (1988)

ppm mg/m³

15 minutes 87 100 WHO (2000)

1 hour 25 30 WHO (2000)

Carbon monoxide (CO)

8 hours 9 10 NEPC (1998)

µg/m³ 1 µg/m³ 2

90 days 0.5 0.25 ANZECC (1990)

30 days 0.84 0.4 ANZECC (1990)

7 days 1.7 0.8 ANZECC (1990)

Hydrogen fluoride

24 hours 2.9 1.5 ANZECC (1990)

Note 1: General land use Note 2: Specialised land use which includes all areas with vegetation sensitive to fluoride such as grape vines and

stone fruits

2.2.1 Goals Applicable to Individual Toxic Air Pollutants

The NSW DECCW list impact assessment criteria for individual toxic air pollutants, defined on the basis that they are carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, highly toxic or persistent in the environment. Criteria of relevance to emissions from crematoria are presented in Table 4.

2 Advisory reporting standard only. Due to the lack of emissions data for PM2.5 from crematoria, a qualitative assessment of PM2.5 will be undertaken only.




Table 4 Individual Toxic Air Pollutant Goals

Pollutant Averaging Time Maximum Concentration

Arsenic and compounds 1 hour 0.00009 mg/m3

Cadmium and compounds 1 hour 0.000018 mg/m3

Chromium VI compounds 1 hour 0.00009 mg/m3

Dioxins and Furans (TEQ) 1 hour 0.000002 µg/m3 Antimony and compounds 1 hour 0.009 mg/m3

Barium 1 hour 0.009 mg/m3

Copper fumes 1 hour 0.0037 mg/m3

Hydrogen Chloride 1 hour 0.14 mg/m3

Mercury 1 hour 0.0018 mg/m3

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (as benzo[a]pyrene)

1-hour 0.0004 mg/m3

2.3 Project Specific Air Quality Goals

For the purposes of this assessment, the key pollutants of interest are:

SO2

NO2

CO

PM2.5 (advisory reporting standard only)

PM10

Lead

Hydrogen Fluoride

All compounds listed in Table 4

The air quality standards for pollutants relevant to this assessment are summarised in Table 5.




Table 5 Project Ambient Air Quality Goals

Pollutant Averaging Time Maximum Allowable Level

10 minutes 712 µg/m3

1 hour 570 µg/m3

24 hours 228 µg/m3

SO2

Annual 60 µg/m3

1 hour 246 µg/m3 NO2

Annual 62 µg/m3

15 minutes 100 mg/m3

1 hour 30 mg/m3

CO

8 hours 10 mg/m3

24 hours 50 µg/m3 PM10

Annual 30 µg/m3

24 hours 25 µg/m3 PM2.53

Annual 8 µg/m3

Lead Annual 0.5 µg/m3

90 days 0.5 µg/m3

30 days 0.84 µg/m3

7 days 1.7 µg/m3 Hydrogen Fluoride

24 hours 2.9 µg/m3

Arsenic and compounds 1 hour 0.00009 mg/m3

Cadmium and compounds 1 hour 0.000018 mg/m3

Chromium VI compounds 1 hour 0.00009 mg/m3

Dioxins and Furans (TEQ) 1 hour 0.000002 µg/m3 Antimony and compounds 1 hour 0.009 mg/m3

Barium 1 hour 0.009 mg/m3

Copper fumes 1 hour 0.0037 mg/m3

Hydrogen Chloride 1 hour 0.14 mg/m3

Mercury 1 hour 0.0018 mg/m3


1-hour 0.0004 mg/m3

3 Advisory reporting standard only.




3 CLIMATE AND DISPERSION METEROLOGY

To adequately characterise the dispersion meteorology of the study site information is needed on the prevailing wind regime, ambient temperature, rainfall, relative humidity, mixing depth and atmospheric stability. The climate and meteorology of the study area was characterised based on:

Hourly meteorological data from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Automatic Weather Station (AWS) located at Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport; and

3-Dimensional prognostic meteorological modelling datasets for the region surrounding the Project Site.

The locations of the monitoring stations situated in relatively close proximity to the Project Site, from which data were obtained for analysis, are summarised in Table 6. Data from these monitoring stations for 2008 was used to characterise the regional surface meteorology and provide input datasets for the meteorological modelling undertaken. Annual wind roses of recorded data at each station between 2004 and 2008 are presented Appendix A. It can be seen that, based on comparison with the four closest calendar years, data recorded during 2008 at both the Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport AWS is representative of each location, with regards to wind speed and direction.

Table 6 Meteorological Monitoring Station Details

Location (m, MGA) Station Name

Easting Northing

Distance (km) / Direction From Project Site

Elevation (m, AHD)

Tuggeranong 690228 6078517 8.8 / WSW 586

Canberra Airport 700150 6090924 8.9 / NNE 577

3.1 Dispersion Model Selection

The pollutant dispersion modelling carried out for the proposed Crematorium utilises the CALPUFF Dispersion Model software. The choice of the CALPUFF modelling system for the current assessment is based on the high percentage of calm conditions (up to 29 %) experienced in the region surrounding the site (see Appendix A). The advantages of using CALPUFF (rather than using a steady state Gaussian dispersion model such as Ausplume) is its ability to handle calm (wind speeds less than 0.5 m/s) wind conditions.

Ausplume cannot handle calm conditions because of the inverse wind speed dependence within the Gaussian plume equation. Under calm conditions, Ausplume will assume a minimum wind speed which shoots the plume to the edge of the modelling grid, even though the plume may not have moved at all under actual dispersion conditions (DECCW, 2005). CALPUFF can handle these conditions and will grow a plume by diffusion alone under zero wind speed conditions.

3.2 TAPM and CALMET Meteorological Modelling

As stated, the current assessment utilises the CALPUFF modelling system. The CALPUFF modelling system comprises of three main components: CALMET, CALPUFF and CALPOST and a large set of pre-processing programs designed to interface the model to standard routinely available meteorological and geophysical databases.




CALMET is a meteorological model that develops wind and temperature fields on a three-dimensional gridded modelling domain (Scire et al, 2000). Associated two dimensional fields such as mixing height, surface characteristics, and dispersion properties are also included in the file produced by CALMET. The interpolated wind field is then modified within the model to account for the influences of topography, as well as differential heating and surface roughness associated with different land uses across the modelling domain. These modifications are applied to the winds at each grid point to develop a final wind field. The final wind field thus reflects the influences of local topography and land uses.

The regional topography surrounding the Project Site is illustrated in Figure 10. Due to the relative complexity of the terrain in the region, particularly to the south to southeast, the potential for complex flow meteorological conditions exists. It is considered that CALMET is appropriate to handle and replicate any potential complex meteorological conditions. The area presented in Figure 10 is the modelling domain used in CALMET.

Figure 10 Regional Topography Surrounding the Project Site

NOTE: Topography shown with vertical exaggeration of 2

The CALMET model requires hourly average surface meteorological data as input, including wind speed, wind direction, mixing depth, cloud cover, temperature, relative humidity, pressure and precipitation. Additionally, CALMET requires concurrent upper air meteorological data containing similar parameters in order to calculate conditions at heights above ground level.

As discussed, meteorological data has been obtained from the BoM Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport AWS locations. Direct measurements obtained by the AWS (hourly average wind speed, wind direction and temperature) have been used in creating a meteorological input file for modelling purposes. Cloud data was taken from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Canberra Airport AWS site.

Parameters not recorded by these AWS locations but required by the meteorological input file have been synthetically generated using The Air Pollution Model (TAPM) software.

Project Site

Canberra Airport AWS

Tuggeranong AWS




TAPM, developed by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), is a prognostic model which may be used to predict three-dimensional meteorological data, with no local data inputs required. The program allows the user to generate synthetic observations by referencing databases (covering terrain, vegetation and soil type, temperature and synoptic scale meteorological analyses) which are subsequently used in the model input to generate site-specific hourly meteorological observations.

Additionally, the TAPM model may assimilate actual local wind observations so that they can optionally be included in a model solution. The wind speed and direction observations are used to realign the predicted solution towards the observation values. This function of accounting for actual meteorological observations within the region of interest is referred to as “data assimilation”.

Thus, direct measurements for 2008 of hourly average wind speed and wind direction at the Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport AWS were input into the TAPM simulations to provide realignment to local and regional conditions.

TAPM was also used to generate upper air input files for the CALMET meteorological model.

Table 7 details the parameters used in the meteorological modelling.

Table 7 Meteorological Parameters Used for this Study

TAPM (v 3.0)

Number of grids (spacing) 5 (30km, 10km, 3km, 1km, 300m)

Number of grid points 25 x 25 x 30

Year of analysis 2008

Centre of analysis UTM 698265, 6082081

Data assimilation Meteorological data assimilation using wind data from Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport BoM AWS

CALMET (v 6.1)

Meteorological grid domain 25km x 25km

Meteorological grid resolution 0.2km

Vertical Resolution (Cell Heights) 9 (0m, 20m, 40m, 80m, 160m, 320m, 1,000m, 1,500m, 2,200m)

Surface meteorological stations Tuggeranong, Canberra Airport BoM with additional required parameters generated by TAPM

Upper air meteorological stations TAPM Generated Datasets at Tuggeranong, Canberra Airport and location to SE of Project Site

Land use data for the CALMET modelling process was generated for the area based on aerial photographs. Terrain data for the CALMET model was taken from the 90m resolution space shuttle recorded dataset collated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).




3.3 CALMET Generated Meteorology

3.3.1 Wind Regime

A summary of the 2008 annual wind behaviour CALMET-predicted for the Project Site is presented as a wind rose in Figure 11. This wind rose displays occurrences of winds from all quadrants.

Figure 11 indicates that winds experienced at the Project Site are predominately light to fresh winds (between 1.5 m/s and 10.5 m/s), typically from the southeast and northwest quadrants. Calm wind conditions (wind speed less than 0.5 m/s) were predicted to occur approximately 21.8% of the time throughout 2008.

The CALMET-predicted seasonal variation in wind behaviour at the Project Site is presented in Appendix A. The seasonal wind roses indicate that:

In summer, the prevailing wind directions are from the east-northeast to east-southeast and west-northwest.

In autumn, the prevailing wind directions are from the east to southeast and west-northwest to north.

In winter, the prevailing wind directions are from the west-northwest to north.

In spring, the prevailing wind directions are from the west-northwest to north.

Figure 11 CALMET-Predicted Annual Wind Rose for Project Site - 2008

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

>0.5 - 1.5>1.5 - 3>3 - 5.5>5.5 - 8>8 - 10.5>10.5

Annual(Calms = 21.8%)




3.3.2 Atmospheric Stability and Mixing Depth

Atmospheric stability refers to the tendency of the atmosphere to resist or enhance vertical motion. The Pasquill-Turner assignment scheme identifies six Stability Classes, “A” to “F”, to categorise the degree of atmospheric stability. These classes indicate the characteristics of the prevailing meteorological conditions and are used as input into various air dispersion models (Table 8).

Table 8 Description of Atmospheric Stability Classes

Atmospheric Stability Class

Category Description

A Very unstable Low wind, clear skies, hot daytime conditions

B Unstable Clear skies, daytime conditions

C Moderately unstable Moderate wind, slightly overcast daytime conditions

D Neutral High winds or cloudy days and nights

E Stable Moderate wind, slightly overcast night-time conditions

F Very stable Low winds, clear skies, cold night-time conditions

The frequency of each stability class at the Project Site, as predicted by CALMET, is presented in Figure 12. The seasonal stability class distributions for each station are included in Appendix B.

The results indicate a high frequency of conditions typical to Stability Class “F”. Stability Class “F” is indicative of very stable atmospheric conditions, conducive to a low level of pollutant dispersion due to mechanical mixing.

Diurnal variations in maximum and average mixing depths predicted by CALMET at the Project Site during 2008 are illustrated in Figure 13. It can be seen that an increase in the mixing depth during the morning, arising due to the onset of vertical mixing following sunrise, is apparent with maximum mixing heights occurring in the mid to late afternoon, due to the dissipation of ground-based temperature inversions and the growth of convective mixing layer.




Figure 12 CALMET-Predicted Annual Stability Class Distributions for the Project Site, 2008

A B C D E FPasquill-Gifford Stability Class

0

10

20

30

40

Freq

uenc

y of

Occ

uren

ce (%

)

Figure 13 CALMET-Predicted Diurnal Variation in Mixing Depth for the Project Site, 2008

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Mix

ing

Dep

th (m

)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24Hour of Day




4 DISPERSION MODEL CONFIGURATION

4.1 Emissions Data

As discussed in Section 1.4, a wide range of pollutants can be emitted during the cremation process. A monitoring study of a propane fired cremation furnace in the US in 1992 monitored in excess of 60 atmospheric pollutants and subsequently determined emission rates for each (lb of pollutant per body cremated) (USEPA, 1992) whilst a more recent EMEP/EEA emissions inventory identified emission rates for 14 pollutants (EMEP/EEA, 2009). Examination of the two emission factor databases shows a high level of variation and uncertainty in the emission rates which is due to:

The high variability in the operating temperatures.

The residence time in the secondary combustion chamber.

The fuels used.

Emission factors for pollutants identified as having ground level concentration criteria in Table 5 have been selected to be taken forward in this dispersion modelling assessment. The highest emission factor from either the US study or the EMEP/EEA inventory have been selected to ensure that worst case ground level concentrations are assessed.

Particulate matter is reported in the USEPA study as total PM. For the purposes of this study and in the interests of conservatism, 100% of the PM has been assumed to be PM10 or PM2.5.

Table 9 Crematorium Emission Factors

Pollutant Emission Factor (mg/body)1 Source

SO2 0.000000544 EMEP/EEA, 2009

NO2 0.000000309 EMEP/EEA, 2009

CO 0.000000141 EMEP/EEA, 2009

PM2 38555.351 USEPA, 1992

Lead 30.028 USEPA, 1992

Hydrogen Fluoride 297.103 USEPA, 1992

Arsenic and compounds 13.608 USEPA, 1992

Cadmium and compounds 5.035 USEPA, 1992

Chromium VI compounds 6.123 USEPA, 1992

Dioxins and Furans 0.0000168 EMEP/EEA, 2009

Antimony and compounds 13.698 USEPA, 1992

Barium 13.608 USEPA, 1992

Copper fumes 12.428 USEPA, 1992

Hydrogen Chloride 32658.651 USEPA, 1992

Mercury 1492.319 USEPA, 1992


0.013 USEPA, 1992

Note 1: Conversion from lb to mg for USEPA emission factors using multiplication of 453,592 Note 2: Total PM assumed to be 100% PM10

or PM2.5

The emission factors presented in Table 9 include the combustion of the furnace fuel, funereal casket and body. In the case of the USEPA emission factors, the fuel used was propane and for the EMEP/EEA emission factors, the fuel used has been assumed to be natural gas (EMEP/EEA, 2009).




It is understood that the fuel to be used in the proposed cremator is natural gas. It is not considered that differences in emission factors resulting from either propane or natural gas combustion in the furnace will result in significant differences in ground level concentration predictions. The selection of the worst case emission factor from the EMEP/EEA or USEPA results in a worst case assessment being undertaken and the minor difference in fuel use is not considered to require further assessment.

4.2 Emission Rates

Information provided by Canberra Cemeteries regarding the stack parameters of the proposed cremator are shown in Table 10.

Table 10 Proposed Crematorium Stack Parameters

Parameter Value Units

Stack Height1 4 metres

Stack Diameter 0.4 metres

Stack gas exit velocity 15 metres/second

Stack gas exit temperature 400 Kelvin

Note 1: Assumed to be 1m above roof ridge line – it is noted that no building wake effects were included in the dispersion modelling assessment, however, based on the insignificant impacts, it is not considered that this would influence the results significantly.

Based on the information provided in Table 9 and Table 10, information on the number of bodies to be cremated per day (maximum of 8) and the proposed hours of operation (7 am to 7 pm), the emission rates of each pollutant have been calculated and are presented in Table 11.

Table 11 Calculated Emission Rates for Proposed Crematorium

Pollutant Emission Rate (mg/s)

SO2 1.01E-10 NO2 5.72E-11 CO 2.61E-11 PM1 7.14 Lead 0.0056 Hydrogen Fluoride 0.055 Arsenic and compounds 0.0025 Cadmium and compounds 0.00093 Chromium VI compounds 0.0011 Dioxins and Furans (TEQ) 3.11E-09 Antimony and compounds 0.0025 Barium 0.002 Copper fumes 0.0023 Hydrogen Chloride 6.05 Mercury 0.28 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (as benzo[a]pyrene)

0.00032

Note 1: Total PM assumed to be 100% PM10 or PM2.5




5 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Concentrations of the pollutants identified in Table 11 have been predicted at the sensitive receptors identified in Section 1.2 and on a receptor grid approximately 5 km by 5 km, centred on the proposed crematorium. Predicted concentrations for the relevant averaging periods have been reported, or in the case of sub-hourly averaging periods (10 minute maximum SO2 and 15 minute maximum CO), the 1/5th power law ratio has been used to derive these values (see Appendix C).

Maximum predicted incremental concentrations of criteria air pollutants across the modelling domain, including all sensitive receptors, are presented in Table 13. The maximum predicted incremental concentrations of individual toxic air pollutants are presented in Table 14. Predicted concentrations are extremely low and therefore the values have been presented in scientific notation. Examples of scientific notation are provided in Table 12 for reference.

Table 12 Examples of Scientific Notation

Value Scientific notation

0.001 1.0E-03

0.01 1.0E-02

0.1 1.0E-01

1 1.0E+00

10 1.0E+01

1000 1.0E+02

For criteria air pollutants, the maximum predicted concentrations are at least 2 orders of magnitude lower than the relevant criterion with some pollutants, such as NO2, having predicted concentrations 15 orders of magnitude lower than the relevant criterion.




Table 13 Predicted Grid Maxima for Criteria Air Pollutants

Pollutant Averaging Period

Grid Maximum (mg/m3)

Criteria (mg/m3) Orders of Magnitude below Criterion

10 minutes 3.65E-07 7.12E-01 0.712 6

1 hour 2.55E-07 5.70E-01 0.57 6

24 hours 4.20E-08 2.28E-01 0.228 7

Sulphur Dioxide

Annual 6.33E-09 6.00E-02 0.06 7

1 hour 1.00E-15 2.46E-01 0.246 14 Nitrogen Dioxide Annual 2.48E-17 6.20E-02 0.062 15

15 minutes 2.70E-09 1.00E+02 100 11

1 hour 1.89E-09 3.00E+01 30 10

Carbon Monoxide

8 hours 7.16E-10 1.00E+01 10 11

24 hours 4.90E-04 5.00E-02 / 2.50E-02

0.05 / 0.025

2 PM10 / PM2.5

Annual 7.37E-05 3.00E-02 / 8.00E-03

0.03 / 0.008

3

Lead Annual 5.74E-08 5.00E-04 0.0005 4

90 days 6.28E-12 5.00E-04 0.0005 8

30 days 7.70E-12 8.40E-04 0.00084 8

7 days 1.26E-11 1.70E-03 0.0017 8

Hydrogen Fluoride

24 hours 3.26E-11 2.90E-03 0.0029 8

Table 2 provides details of the background ambient air quality in the surrounding region. Addition of the relevant incremental contribution from Table 13 for the relevant pollutants indicates that no elevation in the background concentrations of PM10, NO2 or CO will be experienced due to the proposed crematorium operation.

For the individual toxic air pollutants, the maximum predicted concentrations are between 1 and 7 orders of magnitude lower than the relevant criteria indicating that emissions of toxic air pollutants will have negligible impact upon the surrounding environment.




Table 14 Predicted Grid Maxima for Individual Toxic Air Pollutants

Pollutant Averaging Period

Grid Maxima (mg/m3)

Criteria (mg/m3) Orders of Magnitude below Criterion

Arsenic and compounds

1 hr 1.05E-06 9.00E-05 0.00009 1

Cadmium and compounds

1 hr 3.88E-07 1.80E-05 0.000018 2

Chromium VI compounds

1 hr 4.71E-07 9.00E-05 0.00009 2

Dioxins and Furans (TEQ)

1 hr 2.12E-10 2.00E-03 0.002 7

Antimony and compounds

1 hr 1.05E-06 9.00E-03 0.009 3

Barium 1 hr 8.38E-07 9.00E-03 0.009 4

Copper fumes 1 hr 9.57E-07 3.70E-03 0.0037 4

Hydrogen Chloride

1 hr 1.46E-08 1.40E-01 0.14 7

Mercury 1 hr 1.15E-04 1.80E-03 0.0018 1


1 hr 1.31E-07 4.00E-03 0.0004 4

Concentrations of pollutants have also been predicted at each of the receptors identified in Section 1.2 and are presented in Table 15 and Table 16. It is noted that none of the concentrations predicted are higher than those presented in Table 13 or Table 14. Results are presented at each receptor for completeness.




Table 15 Predicted Incremental Concentrations of Criteria Air Pollutants at Identified Receptors

SO2 NO2 Lead PM10 / PM2.5 CO HF Receptor

10 minutes 1 hr 24 hr Annual 1 hr Annual Annual 24 hr Annual

15 mins 1 hr 8hr

90 days

30 days

7 days 24 hr

R1 1.7E-07 1.2E-07 6.4E-09 1.0E-09 4.7E-16 4.1E-18 9.4E-09 7.4E-05 1.2E-05 1.3E-09 8.9E-10 1.1E-10 1.1E-12 1.7E-12 2.1E-12 6.4E-09








Table 16 Predicted Incremental Concentrations of Individual Toxic Air Pollutants at Identified Receptors

1 hr Receptor

Arsenic and Compounds

Cadmium and Compounds

Chromium VI compounds

Dioxins and Furans

Antimony and Compounds Barium

Copper Fumes

Hydrogen Chloride Mercury

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

R1 4.9E-07 1.8E-07 2.2E-07 1.0E-10 5.0E-07 3.9E-07 4.5E-07 6.8E-09 5.4E-05 6.2E-08

R2 7.4E-08 2.8E-08 3.3E-08 1.5E-11 7.5E-08 6.0E-08 6.8E-08 1.0E-09 8.2E-06 9.3E-09

R3 2.0E-07 7.6E-08 9.2E-08 4.1E-11 2.1E-07 1.6E-07 1.9E-07 2.8E-09 2.2E-05 2.6E-08

R4 9.3E-08 3.4E-08 4.2E-08 1.9E-11 9.3E-08 7.4E-08 8.5E-08 1.3E-09 1.0E-05 1.2E-08

R5 6.8E-08 2.5E-08 3.0E-08 1.4E-11 6.8E-08 5.4E-08 6.2E-08 9.4E-10 7.4E-06 8.5E-09

R6 1.3E-07 4.7E-08 5.8E-08 2.6E-11 1.3E-07 1.0E-07 1.2E-07 1.8E-09 1.4E-05 1.6E-08

R7 9.8E-08 3.6E-08 4.4E-08 2.0E-11 9.8E-08 7.8E-08 8.9E-08 1.4E-09 1.1E-05 1.2E-08

R8 2.0E-08 7.6E-09 9.2E-09 4.1E-12 2.1E-08 1.6E-08 1.9E-08 2.8E-10 2.2E-06 2.6E-09




Pollutant concentration isopleths have not been generated due to the significantly low concentrations predicted. However, for information on the distribution of pollutants from the cremator stack plume, a contour plot has been generated for predicted 1 hour maximum Mercury concentration, presented in Figure 14. All pollutants with hourly average criteria will show the same distribution.

Figure 14 Example of Pollutant Emission Distribution from Proposed Crematorium

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Heggies Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Canberra Cemeteries to conduct an air quality impact assessment of the proposed crematorium located on Block 1676 Tuggeranong District on the southern side of the intersection of Mugga Lane and Long Gully Road, Canberra, ACT. The site has been selected from a number of options as the most suitable to proceed with further evaluation.

Dispersion modelling was conducted for a number of criteria and individual toxic air pollutants. Emissions data was sourced from the USEPA and the EMEP/EEA with worst case emission rates calculated.

Project Site




The predictions indicate that all modelled pollutant concentrations will meet current air quality criteria at all 8 modelled sensitive receptor locations and at all locations across the 5 km by 5 km modelling domain. Predicted concentrations of pollutants are between 2 and 15 orders of magnitude below the relevant assessment criteria. A highly conservative assessment has been undertaken which suggests that actual concentrations will be lower than those predicted under actual operation.

Addition of a second cremator unit, for either back-up purposes or expansion, would result in a potential doubling of pollutant concentrations in the surrounding area. However, given the predicted low concentrations of pollutants generated, it is considered that the addition of a second unit would have a minimal impact upon the surrounding environment.

Due to the unknown stack height to be installed on the cremator, Canberra Cemeteries requested that an appropriate stack height be determined through the dispersion modelling exercise, with a lower stack height desirable for aesthetic reasons. A stack 1 m above the roof ridge line (4 m above ground level in total) was modelled with predictions showing negligible ground level impacts.

There is the potential for cumulative air quality impacts to be experienced in the area, given that a 500 MW gas-fired power station is proposed to be located on the Hume industrial area, approximately 1.4 km to the east of the proposed crematorium. However, the impacts resulting from the proposed power station would be orders of magnitude greater than those resulting from the proposed crematorium operation. Impacts resulting from the proposed crematorium can be viewed as being negligible.

7 REFERENCES

Canberra Cemeteries (2009). Proposed Southern Cemetery in the ACT, Consultation Report, August 2009.

Cremation Association of North America (CANA) (1993). Casket and Container Emissions Study, Paul F. Rahill, Industrial Equipment and Engineering Company, PO Box 547796, Orlando, Florida, United States.

Deslauriers, M. Niemi, D.R. and Woodfield, M. (2009), European Monitoring and Evaluation Program, European Environment Agency, Emission Inventory Guidebook 2009, Chapter 6.C.d Cremation.

Hogland, W.K.H. (1994), Usefulness of Selenium for the Reduction of Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 23, November-December 1994.

NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change (2005), Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in New South Wales.

Scire, J, Strimaitis, D and Yamartino, R. 2006. A User’s Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 6)

United States Environmental Protection Agency (1992), Emissions Testing of a Propane Fired Incinerator at a Crematorium. October 29, 1992. (Confidential Report No. ERC-39) – obtained from http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/index.cfm.

Appendix A Report 30-2443 R1

Page 1 of 2

Annual Wind Roses – Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport – 2004 to 2008




Figure A-1 Tuggeranong AWS Annual Wind Roses – 2004 to 2008

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2008(Calms = 18.4%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Wind Speed (m/s)

>0.5 - 1.5>1.5 - 3>3 - 5.5>5.5 - 8>8 - 10.5>10.5

2007(Calms = 18.8%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2006(Calms = 18.4%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2005(Calms = 18.4%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2004(Calms = 18.1%)

Appendix A Report 30-2443 R1

Page 2 of 2

Annual Wind Roses – Tuggeranong and Canberra Airport – 2004 to 2008




Figure A-2 Canberra Airport AWS Annual Wind Roses – 2004 to 2008

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2008(Calms = 8.9%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Wind Speed (m/s)

>0.5 - 1.5>1.5 - 3>3 - 5.5>5.5 - 8>8 - 10.5>10.5

2007(Calms = 7.6%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2006(Calms = 8.7%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2005(Calms = 8.6%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

2004(Calms = 7.5%)

Appendix A Report 30-2443-R1

Page 1 of 1

CALMET Generated Seasonal Wind Roses – Project Site – 2008




Figure A-3 CALMET Generated Seasonal Wind Roses – Project Site - 2008

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Spring(Calms = 9.8%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Wind Speed (m/s)

>0.5 - 1.5>1.5 - 3>3 - 5.5>5.5 - 8>8 - 10.5>10.5

Winter(Calms = 13.6%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Autumn(Calms = 29.1%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Summer(Calms = 13.8%)

NNNNENNE

NENE

ENEENE

EE

ESEESE

SESE

SSESSESS

SSWSSW

SWSW

WSWWSW

WW

WNWWNW

NWNW

NNWNNW

0% 4% 8% 12%

Annual(Calms = 21.8%)

Appendix B Report 30-2443-R1

Page 1 of 1

(30-2443.doc) Heggies Pty Ltd

Figure B-1 CALMET Generated Seasonal Stability Class – Project Site – 2008

AB

CD

EF

Pasquill-Gifford Stability C

lass

0 10 20 30 40

Frequency of Occurence (%)

Spring

AB

CD

EF


lass

0 10 20 30 40 50


Winter

AB

CD

EF


lass

0 10 20 30 40 50


Autum

n

AB

CD

EF


lass

0 10 20 30 40


Sum

mer

Appendix C Report 30-2443-R1

Page 1 of 1

(30-2443.doc) Heggies Pty Ltd

C1 1/5th Power Law Ratio

CALPUFF has been modelled at hourly time-steps for the pollutants of concern. To determine concentrations on a sub-hourly basis, based on the 1-hour concentrations, the 1/5th power law has been applied, as follows:

2.0

11

×=

ttCC O

O

where,

C1 is the concentration of desired averaging time (10 or 15 minutes)

CO is the concentration over original averaging time (60 minutes)

t1 is the desired averaging period (10 or 15 minutes)

tO is the initial averaging period (60 minutes)

from (Turner, 1969).

C2 REFERENCES

Turner, D.B. (1969), Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates. PHS Publication No. 999 AP-26. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Cincinnati, OH (NTIS No. PB-191482).

Documents

Air Quality Impact Assessment Proposed Crematorium ......Air Quality Impact Assessment Proposed Crematorium Tuggeranong, ACT Canberra Cemeteries Heggies Pty Ltd Report Number 30-2443