AP-42 Section Number: 1.8

Reference Number:

Title:

41

Source Test Report for Particulate Emissions Twin Impingement Wet Scrubbers Boiler Number 3

November 1991

i

>-

SOURCE TEST REPORT

PARTICULATE EMISSIONS for

TWIN IMPINGEMENT WET SCRUBBERS BOILER NUMBER 3

NOVEMBER 21, 1991

Prepared for:

SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE OF FLORIDA

AIRPORT ROAD BELLE GLADE, FLORIDA 33430-0666

Prepared by:

AIR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING, INC. 2106 N.W. 67TH PLACE, SUITE 4 GAINESVILLE. FLORIDA 32606

(9041 335-1889

236-91-03

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION - PAGE

1 . D INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1

2.0 SUHMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ............................. 2

3 .O PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION ............................. 4

4 . D SAHPLING POINT LOCATION ....................................... 5

5 . 0 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ............................... 7 5 . 1 PARTICULATE HATTER SAHPLING AND ANALYSIS--EPA HETHOD S . . . . . . . . 7

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A--COHPLETE EMISSION DATA

APPENDIX E--FIELD DATA SHEETS

APPENDIX C--LABORATORY ANALYSIS

APPENDIX D--PRODUCTION RATE CERTIFICATION

APPENDIX E--QUALITY ASSURANCE

APPENDIX F--PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

i

LIST OF TABLES

- PAGE

1 EMISSION SUMMARY ..................................... 3

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE FIGURE - 1 SAMPLING POINT LOCATION .............................. 6

2 EPA METHOD 5 SAMPLING TRAIN .......................... 8

ii

AIR CONSULTING & ENGINEERING. INC.

2106 N. W. 67th Place - Suite 4 . Gainesville, Florida 32606 (904) 335-1889 FAX (904) 335-1891

REPORT CERTIFICATION

To the best of my knowledge, all applicable field and analytical

procedures comply with Florida Department of Environmental Regulation

requirements and all test data and plant operating data are true and correct.

q m w 4 e C - e Uagmg,r"eck

/do / 9 / Date

.., 111

1 .O INTRODUCTION

On November 21, 1991, Air Consulting and Engineering, Inc. (ACE), conducted

particulate emission testing on the Wet Scrubber Outlet of Boiler 3 at Sugar

Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida (Sugar Cane Growers) located in Belle

Glade, Florida.

Testing was performed to demonstrate compliance with the current Florida

Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) operating permit.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 5 was utilized for

the emission testing.

Mr. Ken Tucker and Mr. Sterling Jordan of the FDER observed a portion of the

testing.

Mr. Blas Marin of Sugar Cane Growers coordinated testing and provided

production data.

1

2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Boiler Number 3 demonstrated compliance with the permit conditions.

Table 1 is a summary of the emission results and flue gas parameters.

Particulate emissions averaged 35.53 pounds per hour (IbslHr) and 0.181 pounds

per million BTU (IbslMMBTU) which is within the allowable emissions of 45.78

IbslHr and 0.233 Ibs/MMBTU.

Complete emission summaries, field data sheets and laboratory data are

presented in Appendices A, B, and C, respectively.

Production rate summaries are provided in Appendix D. This data was obtained

from control room recordings of steam flow, temperature, and pressure as

well as feed water temperature and pressure. Residue integrator and oil meter

readings were recorded a t the beginning and end of each particulate run.

I 2

Table 1 Emission Summary Boiler Number 3 Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida Belle Glade, Florida November 21, 1991 I

I Run Flow Rate Stack Stack Particulate Emissions Allowable Emissions

Number SCFMD Temp. Moisture lbs/Hr lbs/MMBTU lbs/Hr lbs/MMBTU I

OF %

1 58456 149 28.0 40.43 0.211 46.12 0.241

2 55686 157 27.1 30.79 0.159 44.16 0.228

3 54050 157 27.1 35.36 0.174 47.06 0.231

AVERAGE 56064 154 27.4 35.53 0.181 45.78 0.233

3

3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION

I The Number 3 Boiler at Sugar Cane Growers is a spreader stoker design used

primarily for residue fuel firing. Supplemental oil firing was also utilized

for the emission test. The boiler averaged 102,676 IbslHr steam production

over the three run test period.

Oil meters, steam integrators, and other production monitoring devices were

rigorously calibrated prior to the production season.

i

I

4

,

4.0 SAMPLING POINT LOCATION

The sampling point location (Figure 1 ) consists of dual scrubber outlet

stacks, each 64" in diameter. Each stack has two sample ports 90 degrees

apart. The ports on the south stack are located 126 from an upstream

disturbance and 64" from the outlet.

Twenty-four test points were sampled on each stack for each test run. The

traverse were located as shown below. The stack configuration is such that

there was no reason to evaluate the presence of cyclonic flow.

5

c

E

-

- 64'- ...

A

64.

c- - SAMPLING PORTS

126.

U

gCHES INSIDE C A C K WALL

I 2 3 4

S 6

7 8 9

10

I 1

12

~~

I .4

4 .3

7.6 11.3

16.0

22.8

' 4 1 . 2

48.0

52.7

S6.4

s9.7 62.6

UPSTREAM -0 ISTUR BANCE

FIGURE I.

SAMPLING POINT LOCATION BOILER N 0 . 3 SUGARCANE GROWERS COOP OF FLORIDA I

A I R CONSULTING and

ENGINEERING

6

5.0 FIELD AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

5.1 Particulate Matter Sampling and Analysis--EPA Method 5 (Glass Probe1

Particulate matter samples were collected by the particulate matter emission

measurement method specified by the United States Environmental Protection

Agency. A schematic diagram of the sampling train used is shown in Figure 2.

All particulate matter captured from the nozzle to, and including, the filter

was included in the calculation of the emission rate of particulate matter.

PREPARATION OF EQUIPMENT

1. FILTERS - Gelman type "A" filters were placed in a dr ing

a standard desiccator containing indicaring silica gel, allowed to cool for two hours, and weighed to the nearesi 0.1 mg. The filters were then re-desiccated for a minimum of six hours and weighed to a constant weight (less than 0.5 mg change from previous weighing). The average of the two constant weights was used as the tare weight.

2. NOZZLE, FILTER HOLDER, AND SAMPLING PROBE - The nozzle, filter holder, and sampling probe were washed vigorously with soapy water and brushes, rinsed with distilled water and acetone, and dried prior to the test program. All openings on the sampling equipment were sealed while in transit to the test site.

IMPlNGEilS - The Greenburg-Smith impingers were cleaned with a warm soaoy water solution and brushes, rinsed with distilled water and acetone, and dried. The impingers were sealed tightly during transit.

oven for t w o hours a t 105 degrees C. removed and p Y ' aced in

3.

'TEST PROCEDURE

Prior to performing the actual particulate matter sample runs, certain stack

and stack gas parameters were measured. These preliminary measurements

a Y c w 5 I

-I w W

e l w

t v)

W h a

w F

0 p

L L U -

included the average gas temperature, the stack gas velocity head, the stack

gas moisture content, and the stack dimensions a t the point where the tests

were being performed. The stack gas temperature was determined by using a

bimetallic thermocouple and calibrated pyrometer. Velocity head measurements

were made with calibrated type "S" pitor tube and an inclined manometer.

Velocity head measurements of 0.05 inches H20 or less were measured utilizing

a micromanometer.

The sampling traverse points were selected so that a representative sample

could be exrracred from the gas stream. The traverse points were located in

the center of equal areas, the number of which were dependent upon the

distance upstream and downstream from flow disturbances.

,

Each particulate matter test run consisled of sampling for a specific amount

of time a t each traverse point. The type "S" pitot tube was connected to the

sampling probe so that an instantaneous velocity head measurement could be

I

I

made at each traverse point while making the test run. The slack gas

temperature was also measured a t each traverse point. Nomographs were used to

calculate the isokinetic sampling rate a t each traverse point during each test

run.

1

The gases sampled passed through the following components: a stainless steel

nozzle and glass probe; a glass fiber filter: two impingers each with 100 ml

9

Of distilled deionized water; one impinger dry; one impinger with 200 grams of

silica gel; a flexible sample line; an air-tight pump; a dry test meter; and a

calibrated orifice. The second impinger had a standard tip, while the first,

third, and fourth impingers had modified tips with a 0.5 inch I.D. opening.

Sample recovery was accomplished by the following procedures:

1. The pre-tared filter was removed from its holder and placed in Container 1 and sealed. (This is usually performed in the lab.)

2. All sample-exposed surfaces prior to the filter were washed with acetone and placed in Container 2, sealed and the liquid level marked.

3. The volume of water from the first three impin ers was measured for the purpose of calculating the moisture in t a e stack gas and then discarded.

4. The used silica gel from the fourth impinger was transferred to the original tared container and sealed.

LAB0 RAT0 RY ANALYSIS

The three sample containers from each sample run were analyzed according to

the following procedures:

1. The filter was dried at 105 degrees C for three hours, desiccated for a minimum of one hour, and weighed to the nearest 0.1 mg. A minimum of two such weighings six hours apart was made to determine constant weight.

2. The acetone from Container 2 was transferred to a tared beaker and evaporated to dryness at ambient temperature and pressure, desiccated for 24 hours, and weighed to the nearest 0.1 mg. A minimum of two such weighings six hours apart were made to determine constant weight.

3. The used silica gel in its tared container was weighed to the nearest 0.1 gram.

10

The total sample weight included the weight of material collected on the

filter plus the weight of material collected in the nozzle, sampling probe,

and front half of the filter holder.

' DATA

The field data sheets, calculation sheets, and nomenclature definitions are

included in the appendices of this report.

11

APPENDIX A COMPLETE EMISSION DATA

FILTER iiz:. 113.1 WASH vtg. 7 1 . I:!

.-.= ., . . ~- ~- -. -. -., , >:, r!'

. ~ . -.:z. . . . . - . . . . . , . . , - . . .i ....

. , . i ,'- , .. . . ~ - ' , i , : : _ _ - . ... ._

. . . . . . . . ~ I - ., , : , . - . . ,

I , , . . - ...... - . : &<.>

.... .-.r - -. , .. . . . . ....

. . . . . . . . . , . , , ~ , . , ' , t ~ , , . ,,I,.. .......... .......... . . . . / ; , '= h , - ~ I .......

- __ ________ .. _ _ ............ .. -__ :.,..> , ; :. .;.

I

FIELD DATA SHEETS

...

I

t- W W I v)

l- 0 0 -I W IL W z -J n z a

a

-

-

v)

Y 0

I- v)

a

N ,

- I I I

I

I v) a Q W Y Z - o w

i?- -

o a a a a m

..

...

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY ANALYSIS

c

i

a LL

1 d

'< i* . . , . E m

m 4,

W v)

f a m a a

W

0 W W ln

4

APPENDIX D

PRODUCTION RATE CERTIFICATION

_ _ _ _ _ _ ._

E:IJILER UPERATI01\1 PARAMETERS

I

I I - I I I I I I I I I 1 1

I

I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I

APPENDIX E

QUALITY ASSURANCE AND

CHAIN OF CUSTODY

I

STAXDARD METER CALIBRATION Meter Xumber 1040616

Air Consulting and Engineering. Inc. (ACE1 uses a dry gas meter for the calibration standard. This meter has been calibrated against a wet test meter in triplicate. This data was used to generate a standard meter calibration curve (see next page). Field meter calibrations are corrected to this curve using the following formula:

Y X Y s = Y a

Ya = actuai ratio of field meter to standard meter

Y = ratio of standard meter to wet test meter at a given S flaw rate (from Calibration Curve)

Y = corrected ratio of field meter

The dry standard meter was calibrated on June 11. 1991. and is checked and/or recalibrated at least annually.

STANDARD METER C A L I B R A T I O N AIR CONSULTING and CURVE

JUNE I I , 1991 ENGINEERING

2 m m '10 m r

0 0 W

0

p. N 3

0

w u3 \o

0

Ln u) W

3

u *3 5\

3

m N - d

LO w N

0

\o m u3

3

Io \o u1

r

r W r

W N r

r r r . . . 0 0 0 4 0 0 3 W e >

0 0 0

w I O u 3 : < ,o u3 u3 w - 3 )

. . .

3 3 3 \ o u 3 1 0 < u310\o bu1U

. . . P

.

c - 0

d m

a w I- w

5 E a Y - t u) ln -I 0

a

E c u)

\ u. a

I -

0 - r\3-

- J

. . - c c c c c

c c 3

3

N -5 c N

.. E < w E I QJ

4

1 I I I I I

1 -

I

I

I

I

I

a

-

-I 4

v 4

? %

-

a W c W z u) 4 W > U 0 ui 5 -I 0 > u) 4 W

-

a W c : 0 U 4 0 z 4 c m 6 E 3 -I 0 > VI 4 U

-

4 In

P;, M

m

J 4

V 4

2%

I I I I 1

I

I

I

I

1

3 1: K

3

k

W o

;E w a

0 0

o w

6 . W

4 Q

0 e

+ U. 0

LL

W I-

W I- LL 2 C a > a

I

a

-

I I ! I I I

I

I

I

I

W m I-

!-

a

e c

1 \

0 W I- a K

-1

0

W !-

0

m a

a

4: < m

w m I- !- 0 !-

a

- a E

Frcw :erncararum%

4IR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING, Inc. I S A M P L E RECOVERY AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY

R U N NO.

. I I

S A M P L E RECOVERY

CONTAINER LIQUID LEVEL COLOR C 0 M ME NTS NO. MARKED

35 12- - M d T 5- 7 J &

3513 4 L* 5-1 3 /l!L!xL& 3s-tv - 5- I 1 J

WATERBLANK 5- 3 Y FILTER BLANK 3 Y 7 3 c

SILICA GEL CONTAINER FINAL WT. INIT. W T N E T WT. COLOR

RUN NO. NO. (Q) ( 0 ) ( P )

200.0

200.0

200.0

200.0

200.0

APPENDIX F

PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

AIR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING, INC.

Stephen L. Neck, P.E. Project Manager

Gerard Gauthreaux Field Testing

Early McFarland Field Testing

Christy Neck Laboratory Analysis

Dagmar Neck Report Preparation

Candace V. Taylor Document Production

SUGAR CANE GROWERS

Jose Alvarez Test Coordinator

Blas Marin Test Coordinator

Ken Tucker Test Observer

Sterlin Jordan Test 8 bserver

PALM BEACH COUNTY

Jeffrey K. Koerner Test Observer

David Brown Test Observer